Am I Married in the eyes of God?

[Rau]

I’m not sure that anyone noticed that the phrase “in the eyes of God” was used.

My question to you was about validity - a concept defined by the Church. Evidently - the marriage is not valid. As to how God feels about that - who knows.

 

[OddBird]

I’m not a canon lawyer or a priest, so yes I’m uncertain. Even without reading it I wouldn’t answer this person’s question about their marriage because of the way they asked it. I’m not sure that anyone noticed that the phrase “in the eyes of God” was used. Apparently, many people here feel comfortable speaking for God when condemning someone’s marriage. So yeah, hubris.

Maybe I should know better by now than posting on threads about marriage validity on CAF, but still, here goes :

I’m in the exact same position as the OP, assuming she didn’t ask for a dispensation of canonical form. I didn’t care for a long time, but I do now that I want back to the full communion.

In the eyes of the Church, clearly and unambiguously, my marriage is invalid.

In the eyes of God, whatever that means, I do not know how we stand. I do believe that Canon law is probably the closest thing we have to the “eyes of God”. At the same time, I like to think that the promises we exchanged before Him during our wedding ceremony, with the full knowledge of what we were doing and the firm intent of keeping them, were heard. Sometimes I even wonder if these promises are one of the reasons I felt gently led back to the Church, so that our marriage may become sacramental.

But what I wanted to say is that, in my interactions with various Catholics, including several priests and one bishop, never have I feel condemned. The attitude I encountered was more, “yep, there was a glitch here, but let’s work together so that the reality of your marriage coincides with the spirit in which you’ve lived your union since more than a decade.”

 

[1ke]

I thought a marriage like this was considered valid but illicit.

A marriage attempt involving a Catholic that marries outside Catholic form without dispensation is invalid not merely illicit.

Which if I’m not mistaken makes it an ecclesiastical violation, not a divine violation so to speak.

While it is an ecclesial law, not a divine law, it is still binding. And the Church says these marriage are invalid.

Anyway, I wouldn’t presume to say that someone who intended to get married is in fact not married in the eyes of God.

What the Church binds on earth, God binds too. It’s an invalid marriage, period. God and Church are in one accord.

Subjectively that Catholic might lack culpability if they were unaware of their obligations, but the marriage is not valid.

 

[DeniseNY]

@Amandaamaral1996 please speak to a priest about your specific situation.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

So my question is if I’m legally married am I married in the eyes of god as well?

Please talk to your priest about this. We are not in a position to be able to figure this out for you.

 

[TomH1]

I do not understand why some people are having difficulty with this. This ought to be part of basic Catholic knowledge.

If a Catholic gets married in anyway contrary to canonical form the marriage is invalid. That is a fact and not up for debate.

What, of course, we cannot be sure of is whether the OP was granted a dispensation from canonical form. I think the context of her question suggests that dispensation from canonical form was not granted.

Obviously, the OP cannot resolve her situation here. She does need to schedule a meeting with her priest to sort out her situation.

 

[Gorgias]

You have just judged someone’s marriage, which you know nothing about, to be invalid in the eyes of the Church, and did so without any authority to do so.

This is a black-and-white determination, 1L1F. “Lack of form” is easy to discern, and the OP’s own statement indicated that this is the present case.

Taking us to task for answering her question is not only inaccurate, but also is bad form. Moreover, the OP has received good advice – “please follow-up with your priest.”

 

[TMC]

I recently got married but did not get Married in church nor was I married by a priest. My husband is not catholic he’s Christian but he respects my beliefs. So my question is if I’m legally married am I married in the eyes of god as well?

Rather than asking a bunch of strangers on the internet to speak for God (which many are obviously happy to do), why not ask your priest? Or any priest if you are not close to one, or even ask a priest here to give you some advice - there are a couple that post here regularly. The Church wants to welcome your new family, and a priest can help you help the Church do that.

And by the - Congratulations!! I hope you are your husband are embarking on a long and happy journey together. Best of luck sorting out what is hopefully a minor bump on that happy road!

 

[Gorgias]

I’m sorry this is embarrassing for you.

It’s embarrassing for you, friend, not me.

Did the word “invalid” in your post appear by autocorrect?

Nope. Did “illicit” in yours appear by mistake?

Are you the OP’s priest?..if so I apologize.

No. I’m the person who replied to her definite question in an internet forum with a definite answer in an internet forum. (Let’s recall that you, too, answered, but with an incorrect opinion. Maybe that’s why you’re so worked up?)

Or do you actually know more about the OP’s marriage than the rest of us?

I know enough to make a determination that’s sufficient for an internet forum. You seem to be missing that the tenor of this whole thread is “here’s the situation; please see your priest for more details and resolution.”

You seem to be angry that we understand the situation and canon law in a way that’s more thorough and accurate than you do. I’m sorry you’re angry. The intent in answering the OP’s question was obviously… to answer her question! The intent was not to make you angry… although clearly it has upset you. Sorry for that.

Rather than asking a bunch of strangers on the internet to speak for God (which many are obviously happy to do)

So, here’s the thing, and maybe some posters here aren’t picking up on it: the phrase “in the eyes of God”, in this context, is a circumlocution of sorts. It means “is my marriage valid in the Church?”.

This whole tempest in a teapot, getting worked up over “the hubris of speaking for God!”, is just silly.

 

[Rau]

You have just judged someone’s marriage, which you know nothing about, to be invalid in the eyes of the Church, and did so without any authority to do so.

What has been done is to read the Canon, understand plain English, and find in those words the straightforward answer to a straightforward question.

 

[His_helpmeet]

As per canon law, Catholics are required to be married before a member of the Catholic clergy authorized to perform marriages. (This does depend on the Catholic rite. In the Latin rite, priests and deacons are permitted to perform the marriage ceremony. This is because in the Latin rite, the husband and wife confer the sacrament on each other. In eastern rites, only the priest is permitted to perform marriages, because the priest confers the sacrament on the couple. Generally, a Latin rite Catholic who marries an eastern rite Catholic must be married before a priest for the marriage to be valid, due to this requirement.)

Now, if one party is not Catholic, there are one or two dispensations that are required. If one party is Catholic and the other is not, a dispensation for disparity of cult is required. If the parties want a valid marriage but do not want to marry in a Catholic ceremony, they need a dispensation from canonical form. Both of these must be approved by the chancery office for the diocese, at least where I live.

If these dispensations are not sought or granted, the marriage is invalid. Now, in order to have the marriage declared valid, the OP needs to speak to his/her priest. Assuming there are no impediments, there are usually two options. One is to have a simple convalidation. This is the Catholic marriage ceremony. It should not be a repeat wedding; the couple can simply make an appointment with their priest, ensure they have valid witneses, complete the required marriage preparation (depending on the situation and recommendations of the priest), complete the prenuptial investigations required (again, determined by the priest), and have a simple wedding ceremony. The second option is a radical sanation. This translates as “healing at the roots”, and may be preferred in cases where one spouse does not wish to have a second ceremony and/or believes their original consent was valid. In this case, the marriage is retroactively made valid as of the date of the wedding, through paperwork. (In the case of a simple convalidation, the couple’s marriage date is the date of the convalidation. It’s a Catholic wedding, although it should not be celebrated with the usual grandeur of a wedding.)

 

[1ke]

You have just judged someone’s marriage, which you know nothing about, to be invalid in the eyes of the Church, and did so without any authority to do so.

Nope. I said “it depends”.

I reiterated the conditions under which a valid marriage is contracted or not contracted. Those are factual statements, not judgments about a specific person or marriage.

And, then ended with “go talk to your priest.”

You’ve declared that the Church speaks for God,

I reiterated what the Church teaches about binding and loosing.

and that you speak for the Church

I did not make that claim.

Or are you the competent authority who is declaring that there is no marriage in the eyes of God?

I made no such claim. I told the OP to go talk to her priest about her marriage.

 

[Gorgias]

(In the case of a simple convalidation, the couple’s marriage date is the date of the convalidation. It’s a Catholic wedding, although it should not be celebrated with the usual grandeur of a wedding.)

Awesome post!

One (fairly pedantic) addition: when you talk about “the couple’s marriage date”, you’ve stepped into a snakepit. Folks are very sensitive to their wedding date, and we don’t want to give the impression that we’ve “changed” it. Their wedding date is their wedding date. Period. (Let’s not forget that this has the implication of also being their anniversary date, too, right?)

So, when I’m asked about it, I merely reply that the date in the sacramental register is the date of the convalidation. The wedding date for their civil ceremony is not modified in any way. They can celebrate either (or both!) dates with as much hoopla as they wish!

(And, sometimes I even ask whether it would be possible for them to schedule the convalidation ceremony on their anniversary!)

 

[1ke]

Yes you do when you declare someone’s marriage invalid when they never even asked about the validity of their marriage.

I was responding to your hypothetical where you said “I thought a marriage like this was considered valid but illicit.” A marriage “like this” (i.e. one where a person did not marry in Catholic form) is invalid, not valid but illicit.

That is what i was referring to. I didn’t make any judgment on anyone’s actual marriage.

 

[1Lord1Faith]

Well excuse me then.

 

[Matthew25]

Yes…maybe not in the eyes of the church. You are in the eyes of God.

 

[TMC]

This whole tempest in a teapot, getting worked up over “the hubris of speaking for God!”, is just silly.

Perhaps, and perhaps I over reacted a bit. Its just that one of my pet peeves is making judgments about real people’s lives on anonymous forums. It is too easy to inadvertently discourage someone, or to inadvertently give bad advice. At the end of the day, the best thing is for the OP to consult her priest. I think we probably agree on that.

 

[Gorgias]

And you responded incorrectly.

You’re the only one in this thread with that opinion.
1Lord1Faith":

Let’s recall that you, too, answered, but with an incorrect opinion.

Actually I didn’t. Feel free to reread the thread though.

Sure. Let’s take a look:

I thought a marriage like this was considered valid but illicit.

That’s the wrong answer.

After reading some of the canons I’m fairly convinced you don’t know it very well.

I’d advise you to continue studying canon law, then.

And that their phrasing of “in the eyes of God” may indicate that they might not be interested in your legalistic determination, but something deeper?

It’s a phrase commonly used. In this context, it means “according to the Church”.

I wonder if it occurs to you that marriage is deeply personal.

I wonder if it occurs to you that giving an incorrect answer to a deeply personally felt question is neither helpful nor pastoral nor – at its core – loving.

Yes, and it was done by people who have no competence or authority to do so.

Says you. How do you know that this is the case?

A lot of people have gotten this “straightforward” question wrong.

Yes. At least one has.

 

[Rau]

I thought a marriage like this was considered valid but illicit. Which if I’m not mistaken makes it an ecclesiastical violation, not a divine violation so to speak.

So - on the basis of some (don’t know what) information, you reached this conclusion and presumably felt you had both the competence and the authority to reach it.

You’ve since been presented with the applicable Canon which contradicts your prior understanding and makes the question of validity clear. But now you feel you possess neither the competence nor the authority to address the matter.

Do you at least feel able to withdraw your initial position as incorrect? Or does that too require competence and authority that you feel you don’t possess?

 

[Gorgias]

Do you at least feel able to withdraw your initial position as incorrect? Or does that too require competence and authority that you feel you don’t possess?

Maybe the best approach at this point is to let the thread just go quiet. The question has been asked and answered, and appropriate advice has been given. Maybe we should all just walk away now…