Case 14. Doubtful Baptism and Marriage

Titius and Titia, spouses and adherents of the religion of the Anglican sect, asked Caius, a priest, to receive them into the Catholic Church. Inquiring about their Baptism, Caius found that Titia probably had been baptized, but Titius certainly never had been; furthermore, they were joined in the third degree of consanguinity. Since, however, according to a certain recent theologian those probably baptized are certainly subject to the laws of the Church, Caius judged that a dispensation must first be sought so that at least now Titius and Titia might enter a valid marriage. Another priest, however, thought that the marriage had been valid from the beginning. Hence it is asked:

1. What is to be thought of the opinion of that recent theologian?

2. Who are subject to the matrimonial laws of the Church?

3. In doubt about Baptism, what must be pronounced concerning the validity of a marriage?

4. What is to be said of the case?

1. What is to be thought of the opinion referred to? The opinion is that of Lehmkuhl: “ Are those doubtfully baptized subject by divine law to the jurisdiction of the Church?”¹ Of this opinion Fr. Wernz writes: “ But such a principle does not seem hitherto to have been generally admitted by the doctors, nor do the reasons adduced seem effective to all. It is also difficult to understand how anyone is truly and objectively bound by the invalidating laws of the Church although only subjective doubts exist concerning his baptism, and he perhaps objectively lacks the baptismal character, which by divine law is the sole foundation of the dependence of any man as a subject upon ecclesiastical laws.”¹ Génicot says: “ We think it truer that a mere presumption is found there which the Church follows in adjudicating matrimonial causes.”²

1 Theol. Moral., vol. ii, 426 nota.

1 Jus Decretalium, iv, 508 nota (33).

1 Theol. Moral., vol. ii, 488 nota.

2 Wernz, Jus Decret., lib. iv, n. 507.

2. Who are subject to the matrimonial laws of the Church?

All those who are baptized, even schismatics and heretics, unless the Church has made an exception, as she has done with regard to the law of clandestinity.

3. In a case of doubtful baptism what is to be said about the validity of marriage?

The general rule is: “ A doubtful Baptism, whether from a doubt of law or of fact, is to be held valid in relation to the validity of a marriage contracted or to be contracted.”³ The rule, which has frequently been formulated and acted on by the Roman Congregations, more probably lays down a presumption which is followed as long as the doubt remains, but which must yield to the truth if it becomes manifest.

4. The case. Titia probably had been baptized; Titius certainly had not been baptized, and this fact we presume to have been publicly known at the time of their marriage, not to have been detected now for the first time. The marriage was invalid. “ Those who have been validly or doubtfully baptized are subject also to diriment impediments of ecclesiastical law. ... But it can happen that one party has been validly or doubtfully baptized, but the other invalidly. In this case their marriage will be null on account of disparity of worship ” (S. O.⁴ Feb. 1891. A. S. S. XXVI, 62). Titia was also subject to the impediment of consanguinity, and so the marriage was also invalid on this head. Caius should leave them in good faith about the validity of their marriage, apply for a dispensation from consanguinity in the third degree in the case of converts already married, and after he has received them into the Church and obtained the dispensation, get them to renew their consent before the parish priest and two witnesses.