The Form to Be Observed in Marriage Between a Catholic Party and a Non-Catholic Party

I. Juridic form. Marriages between a Catholic party and a non-Catholic party are subject to the same juridic form as marriages between Catholics, not excluding the interrogation concerning consent (n. 735).

The disposition introduced by the Decree issued by the Holy Office on January 21, 1912, approved by Pius X on June 23, 1912, and promulgated in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis on July 1 of the same year - that disposition, I say, by force of which the request and reception of consent could sometimes be omitted by the assisting minister in some places - has been removed; and indeed by canon 1102 compared with canon 1095, § 1. So also a private response of the Holy Office¹ and the Pontifical Commission.²

¹ November 26, 1919 (in Linzer Quartalschrift, p. 249).

² March 10, 1928 (A.A.S. 1928, p. 120).

II. Liturgical form, or sacred rites, must be entirely omitted. Yet the Ordinary can, for forestalling graver evils, permit some one of the customary ecclesiastical ceremonies, always excluding the celebration of Mass (canon 1102, § 2). Therefore:

1. Among other things there are prohibited: 1° the use of sacred vesture, for example, surplice and stole, but not the cassock, silk cincture, and vestments customary for prelates; 2° a sermon, but not certain hortatory words in the manner of a mere address; 3° the blessing of the ring; 4° the blessing of the nuptials.

2. The Ordinary can permit some ceremony for avoiding graver evils, for example if otherwise it were to be feared that the spouses would go to a heretical minister, neglect the cautions, or that the Catholic party would pass over to a heretical sect.¹ But the celebration of Mass must always be excluded. Under the name of celebration of Mass comes not only the Mass "for Bridegroom and Bride" with its prayers and blessings, but also a private Mass which, after the marriage, is so celebrated before the spouses and their companions, even if no distinct seat is given to the spouses, that it must be held as a complement of the marriage ceremony.²

¹ Sacred Congregation of Propaganda Fide, December 4, 1862.

² Holy Office, January 17, 1872 (Collectanea, n. 1379); Pontifical Commission, November 10, 1925, ad VIII (A.A.S. 1925, p. 583).

“It remains now to speak about one further point concerning which, although We have not been expressly questioned, We nevertheless do not believe that it ought to be passed over in silence, since it can occur all too frequently in practice, namely: whether a Catholic contracting party who afterward wishes to become a participant in the Sacraments ought to be admitted to them? To this We say that, when that same person demonstrates that he repents of his sinful union, this can be granted to him, provided that before the concession he sincerely declares that he will procure the conversion of his heretical spouse, renews his promise concerning the education of the offspring in the orthodox religion, and will repair the scandal given to the other faithful. If such conditions concur, We do not object to the Catholic party becoming a participant in the Sacraments.” Rescript of Pius VI, 13 July 1782, to the Cardinal Archbishop of Mechelen.

“...The aforesaid spouses must make satisfaction to the Church, whose most holy law has been violated, and must furnish to the same Church, even in the external forum, cautions concerning the removal from themselves and their offspring of the danger to eternal salvation; and for this purpose recourse to the bishop is to be required.” Holy Office, 12 March 1881, to a Vicar Apostolic; A. S. S., vol. 16, p. 235.