Catholic2003:
Trent changed a few things about marriage, but they’ve changed even since then. Several popes have exceptions–especially in the case of
mixed marriages–and issued declarations of validity for different localities:
“Pope Benedict XIV, choosing the lesser of two evils, issued a declaration concerning marriages in Holland and Belgium (Nov. 4, 1741), in which he declared mixed unions to be valid, provided they were according to the civil laws, even if the Tridentine prescriptions had not been observed. A similar declaration was made concerning mixed marriages in Ireland by Pope Pius, in 1785, and gradually the “Benedictine dispensation” was extended to various localities. The object of the Council of Trent in issuing its decree had been partly to deter Catholics from such marriages altogether, and partly to hinder any communion in sacred things with heretics. By degrees, however, the Popes felt constrained to make various concessions for mixed marriages, though they were always careful to guard the essential principles on which the Church found her objections to such unions. Thus Pius VI allowed mixed marriages in Austria to take place in the presence of a priest, provided no religious solemnity was employed, and with the omission of public banns, as evidence of the unwillingness of the Church to sanction such unions. Similar concessions were later made, first for various states of Germany, and then for other countries.”
The
Catholic Encyclopedia says this about the subject:
“However, it has been likewise emphasized that marriage must be contracted with the blessing of the priest and the approbation of the Church, for otherwise it would be a source not of Divine grace, but of malediction. Hence it might easily be inferred that the sacerdotal blessing is the grace-giving element, or form of the sacrament, and that the priest is the minister. But this is a false conclusion…
…As we have several times emphasized, not even marriage is a true sacrament, but only marriages between Christians. One becomes and remains a Christian in the sense recognized here through valid baptism…
…Hence not only the marriage between Catholics, but also that contracted by members of the different sects which have retained baptism and validly baptize, is undoubtedly a sacrament. It matters not whether the non-Catholic considers marriage a sacrament or not, or whether he intends to effect a sacrament or not. Provided only he intends to contract a true marriage, and expresses the requisite consent, this intention and this expression are sufficient to constitute a sacrament.”
And
James Akin has this to say…
“However, merely because a marriage is between two non-Catholics does not mean it is invalid. If two baptized non-Catholics marry each other then they can have a valid sacramental marriage. This is because a priest is not necessary to perform the sacrament of matrimony. It is formed by the two partners, who create the sacrament between them by giving valid matrimonial consent to the other and then consummating the union. In Catholic churches the priest serves as the Church’s witness and overseer of the event, but he is not necessary for the sacrament itself to be performed.”
) give valid consent to be married. A priest is not necessary for a valid marriage because the Sacrament is conferred by the two consenting adults.
