Dear Francis,

I'll start out with Baptism:  I'm pretty confident that the use of a name other than the person's legal name would NOT invalidate the actual sacrament.  All three requirements would still be present, they are form (I baptize you...), matter (water) and minister (with intent)

However canon law requires that a record be kept of the baptism, and of course these records would require the person's real name.  So MY question would be, what is the person's REAL name.  I suppose it's simplest to just say that the legal name is the real name, but I also think that it doesn't absolutely HAVE to be the legal name.  That is, a person can go by a name other than their legal name.  As far as I know, no priest asks for legal identification before administering a sacrament.  I know they certainly don't for the sacrament of confession.  :-)  The only issue I can think of here is that many times baptismal certificates are used as proof of BOTH baptism as well as identification..  if the name is falsified or is for any other reason different, there may be problems.  In your case though, it seems the woman is using the same name for both baptism and matrimony.

Strictly speaking though from the point of view of sacramental validity, I don't think there's an issue with baptism.

Now things get a lot more complicated with marriage, which also requires form, matter and minister.  Part of the minister requirement is an "intent" requirement that causes a lot of problems for many couples.  There are a LOT of impediments to the validity of marriage that could fall under the intent category.

It seems that in your case the person is using the same name, so it should be simple enough to prove that she was baptized.  She would also need to prove that she was not previously married: so if she used another name to hide a fact such as that, then the marriage would certainly be invalid.  (assuming the previous marriage was not declared null)

Again though it seems that for your friend none of this is the case, she simply goes by a name other than her legal one.  This in itself I don't think is enough to invalidate either sacrament, canon law never makes a reference to a "legal" name or "civil" name.  Like I said, a "name" is required for record keeping, and it seems that your friend has supplied one.

Let me know if I can be of further help, or if there are any canon lawyers reading this that could verify what I've said  :-)

Mr. Slavek

NOTE: just for clarification purposes, baptism is not a requirement for marriage as long as the local bishop is notified and has given permission.