Can I be a best man at a non-Catholic wedding?

[ThyKingdomCome]

I didn’t read the links that were posted to the AAA forum, but this is my understanding of the situation: As far as anyone on earth knows, the bride and groom are already married to other people - not in the legal sense, or even according to their religious understanding, but as you know it from what your faith teaches you, they are married in the most real, spiritual sense (at least as far as you know, because no tribunal has spoken on the matter). A Catholic is BOUND not to be the witness to a wedding that is in-valid, and naturally if you understand a current marriage already in existence, this marriage can not be valid. So you really CAN’T be the best man, even though you might want to. If you haven’t already sent your letter (or if you have the opportunity for follow up), maybe you can phrase it that way, to let your friend know that this is not about you rejecting him as a friend, but merely you following the rules of your church. However, you are NOT bound to stay away from the wedding altogether. Whether it would better for you to attend or not is a matter of prudence. In general, one wouldn’t want to support an invalid wedding even with attendance, but if not attending would lose you a friend, and attending the wedding might keep you in the life of the couple, and might allow you to be a witness to Christ to them, then attending might be the right thing. So you could say that to your friend, “I can’t be IN the wedding, but I can GO TO the wedding as a guest” - if in fact, you decide that that is the right move to make. I think you are doing your best to show understanding to your friend. I hope he understands and respects your need to follow your conscience.

 

[jesuspsr]

I was best man to my best friend.

 

[kage_ar]

Matthew 5:31-33 (NIV)

Divorce
"It has been said, 'Anyone who divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.'But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.

.

You have a bad translation there.

The actual word was except for “an unlawful marriage” - that means invalid, and validity can only be determined by the tribunal.

May you find the full Truth in the Holy Catholic Church.

 

[dunscotus]

Please forgive my bluntness, but this conversation seems quite absurd. The only theological reason not to participate in the wedding as best man would be to avoid “scandal”. As one poster already pointed out, the real question there is whether the marriage would be valid. Since nobody here knows that, all this discussion boils down to is breast-beating about the permanancy of marital bonds. That’s all well and good but quite beside the point.

By staying away, do you mean to convey that you disapprove of the couple’s decision to marry? It sounds like it. But the bride is pregnant wihthe groom’s child. What would you have them do? Go back to their prior spouses? And, assuming those prior spouses haven’t themselves remarried, who would raise the new child? And how? And where? And with whom?

Being Catholic or Christian does not mean engaging in moral posturing that’s as hurtful as it is empty. Or at least it shouldnt. Such attitudes are much closer to those of the Pharisees who fetishized the law than they are to those of Christ.

 

[Rascalking]

Please forgive my bluntness, but this conversation seems quite absurd. The only theological reason not to participate in the wedding as best man would be to avoid “scandal”. As one poster already pointed out, the real question there is whether the marriage would be valid. Since nobody here knows that, all this discussion boils down to is breast-beating about the permanancy of marital bonds. That’s all well and good but quite beside the point.

By staying away, do you mean to convey that you disapprove of the couple’s decision to marry? It sounds like it. But the bride is pregnant wihthe groom’s child. What would you have them do? Go back to their prior spouses? And, assuming those prior spouses haven’t themselves remarried, who would raise the new child? And how? And where? And with whom?

Being Catholic or Christian does not mean engaging in moral posturing that’s as hurtful as it is empty. Or at least it shouldnt. Such attitudes are much closer to those of the Pharisees who fetishized the law than they are to those of Christ.

I don’t agree with your delivery at all, but I pretty much agree with your point.

It DOES matter how you say things, so don’t go overboard. You sound a bit judgemental about being judgemental!

And the conversation isn’t absurd. It’s actually quite interesting

 

[grace_singh]

the issue of their remarriage after divorce is the most concerning… to attend that marriage would be to stand up for a situation which is, in God’s eyes, adultery.

the bonds of marriage between a man and woman are God-ordained and binding, no matter what background one is coming from. “from the beginning” God made us male and female, instituted marriage, and expects us to keep that marriage vow.

it may come across as hard-nosed or unfriendly to some, but i’d say you’re doing the right thing. your letter was gracious-yet-firm, and well-written.

You have a bad translation there.

The actual word was except for “an unlawful marriage” - that means invalid, and validity can only be determined by the tribunal.

May you find the full Truth in the Holy Catholic Church.

Kage, does this mean, basically, that divorce is only allowed in the case of one’s marriage being invalid to begin with? e.g. you find that you are actually married to a sister, of you find that your wife is already married to another man? this is what i have read, that the better translation of the word “adultery” or “fornication” would actually be “an invalid marriage”.

 

[The_Bucket]

It is pretty interesting, and a quandary. I think that as best man you’d be testifying to the validity and sanctity of this marriage when you well know that both parties didn’t get annulments from their previous marriages. The unborn child in this case is immaterial to the validity even with the annulments, provided that the child isn’t basically forcing these individuals to be wed. You know, shotgun wedding style. But you can’t possibly know THAT.

So the issue is then that you’d be tacitly endorsing divorce by being the best man. That’s tough, but I think that’s definitely a potential message, especially if other people know how you stand on the issue. “Well hey, Rob is OK with it, he’s the best man! I guess everything is a-ok here.” Rough situation since you don’t want to lose the friend and opportunity to witness to the truth to him.

I think the suggestion to back out as best man but ask if you could be a guest instead is probably the best one. But I’d talk to your priest about that first before sending that letter if you haven’t sent it already. I’d also ask some folks about how to do it with the most grace and tact possible so as to avoid undue offense to your friend should you choose to back out.

 

[lutherlic]

…
And the conversation isn’t absurd. It’s actually quite interesting

That is a very good point. It is always a good exercise to examine things like this to determine (at least try to determine) if they are sinful or not. It seems unavoidable if we truly do wish to avoid sin and helps to build a well formed conscience.

 

[ThyKingdomCome]

The only theological reason not to participate in the wedding as best man would be to avoid “scandal”. As one poster already pointed out, the real question there is whether the marriage would be valid. Since nobody here knows that, all this discussion boils down to is breast-beating about the permanancy of marital bonds. That’s all well and good but quite beside the point.

Actually, I don’t see scandal as the primary issue here. Really it’s the questionable validity of the marriage.

Imagine a scenario if you will: Let’s say the bride and groom are actually still married, even legally. They’re not living with their spouses, but they never got divorced. Everyone, religious and non-religious, understands that they are still married. Now let’s say that couple goes to a chapel somewhere, finds a minister who doesn’t know better, invites a bunch of friends, and says marriage vows to each other. Remembering that they are still actually married, could you stand there and be the best man at that wedding? Of course not. It would be completely ridiculous, in fact ,for anyone to stand up at a “wedding” for a person who was already married - that’s bigomy, and 99% of Americans understand that it is wrong. It’s not primarily about scandal (although the situation would be scandalous), it is about pretending that a farce is real, and having no respect for marriage as we all know it.

Ok, outside of my imaginary scenario…this situation, from the Catholic perspective is exactly the same. Secularly, legally, the couple has received their divorces. But nothing has changed spiritually. And the spiritual is the actual truth - not the legal. So for a Catholic who knows this (because the Church has taught us so well), being the best man at this wedding is just as farcical (and disrespectful) as it would be in the pretend scenario. And that’s why the issue of scandal is secondary to the issue of validity.

 

[Rascalking]

That is a very good point. It is always a good exercise to examine things like this to determine (at least try to determine) if they are sinful or not. It seems unavoidable if we truly do wish to avoid sin and helps to build a well formed conscience.

Thanks. Even though I’m on the opposite side from some posters, I think they raise very interesting points.

I don’t like it when someone says an argument is “absurd”. Unless your trying to say something truly absurd, like “I talk to hamburgers and they tell me what to do. We should all worship them.” Now THATS absurd!

 

[kage_ar]

Kage, does this mean, basically, that divorce is only allowed in the case of one’s marriage being invalid to begin with? e.g. you find that you are actually married to a sister, of you find that your wife is already married to another man? this is what i have read, that the better translation of the word “adultery” or “fornication” would actually be “an invalid marriage”.

Divorce may be the only way to protect the health and saftey of a person or the financial saftey of a person. See CCC below.

It is attempted remarriage after a civil divorce that is public adultery.

scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a6.htm#2383

2383 The *separation *of spouses while maintaining the marriage bond can be legitimate in certain cases provided for by canon law.177
If civil divorce remains the only possible way of ensuring certain legal rights, the care of the children, or the protection of inheritance, it can be tolerated and does not constitute a moral offense.

2384 *Divorce *is a grave offense against the natural law. It claims to break the contract, to which the spouses freely consented, to live with each other till death. Divorce does injury to the covenant of salvation, of which sacramental marriage is the sign. Contracting a new union, even if it is recognized by civil law, adds to the gravity of the rupture: the remarried spouse is then in a situation of public and permanent adultery:

If a husband, separated from his wife, approaches another woman, he is an adulterer because he makes that woman commit adultery, and the woman who lives with him is an adulteress, because she has drawn another’s husband to herself.178

2385 Divorce is immoral also because it introduces disorder into the family and into society. This disorder brings grave harm to the deserted spouse, to children traumatized by the separation of their parents and often torn between them, and because of its contagious effect which makes it truly a plague on society.

2386 It can happen that one of the spouses is the innocent victim of a divorce decreed by civil law; this spouse therefore has not contravened the moral law. There is a considerable difference between a spouse who has sincerely tried to be faithful to the sacrament of marriage and is unjustly abandoned, and one who through his own grave fault destroys a canonically valid marriage.179

 

[Gabriella_San_S]

Thank you for posting from the Catechism on the Church’s teaching. We must always consult this vast resource when we are conflicted about such matters. We too easily can tend towards emotional “posturing” or **misguided **compassion. The Gospels are clear-Jesus NEVER condemns the sinner-and NEVER condones sin. The Church teaches us what Jesus taught in this regard. SPEAK THE TRUTH WITH LOVE!!! If we love each other authentically(not seeking human respect by making ‘popular’ decisions) then we want their greatest good…and that is HEAVEN!! If we fear losing friends or alienating family members to the point that we are willing to violate our consciences (which should be formed in TRUTH) then we are guilty of degrading those relationships and leading others AWAY from TRUTH!

You did the right thing, friend! And you have become an even BETTER friend to them! If you are rejected for your actions, then pray for them… that is the*** greatest gift ***they can receive from you anyway! God bless you.

 

[Rascalking]

Thank you for posting from the Catechism on the Church’s teaching. We must always consult this vast resource when we are conflicted about such matters. We too easily can tend towards emotional “posturing” or **misguided **compassion. The Gospels are clear-Jesus NEVER condemns the sinner-and NEVER condones sin. The Church teaches us what Jesus taught in this regard. SPEAK THE TRUTH WITH LOVE!!! If we love each other authentically(not seeking human respect by making ‘popular’ decisions) then we want their greatest good…and that is HEAVEN!! If we fear losing friends or alienating family members to the point that we are willing to violate our consciences (which should be formed in TRUTH) then we are guilty of degrading those relationships and leading others AWAY from TRUTH!

You did the right thing, friend! And you have become an even BETTER friend to them! If you are rejected for your actions, then pray for them… that is the*** greatest gift ***they can receive from you anyway! God bless you.

Manners and tact still have a place in the church. Being blunt and then feeling good about yourself because you spoke the, “truth” makes you , well-rude.

 

[Gabriella_San_S]

Manners and tact still have a place in the church. Being blunt and then** feeling good about yourself** because you spoke the, “truth” makes you , well-rude.

[emphasis mine]

from your previous post…
"***I don’t agree with your delivery at all, but I pretty much agree with your point.

It DOES matter how you say things, so don’t go overboard. You sound a bit judgemental about being judgemental!***"

Maybe you need to take a closer look at your own tendencies in this regard, my friend!
I know, being*** nice*** is easier than speaking the** Truth** in LOVE, but the Holy Spirit is very generous to those who ask! (especially “irritated” Catholics)
+Peace be with you+

 

[robdaddyf]

robdaddyf

I think your letter is great, except one thing.

What’s the most hopeful outcome of the whole situation? Meaning, by your decision to stand up for marriage, you are hoping that they might see it too. What if they are humble enough to make the connections that their first marriages were valid and they need to fix the situation?

I think you should add something like “If you understand what I’m saying here and would like help in fixing this situation, I’d love to talk to you more about it”.

Give them hope that all is not lost.

Thanks for this. His response was very moving though I feel funny posting his words to me on here…he basically said that he was saddened by my response but mostly because of the choices he had made in the past…and that he fully understands why I can’t “stand up” for the marriage. He used words like, warm, loving and compassionate to describe my letter which I honestly believe is the hand of God. They are still going forward with it at this point however the contact we’ve had will leave the door open after all is said and done.

My thought of helping him/them “fix” the situation is first to be there as the best friend I can be to him. I know his situation is going to be difficult to say the least and I fully intend to help him when things get tough in whatever way he’ll let me. I know I’ll need to take some time and really feel things out as I don’t want to be perceived merely as a “threat” to them by any means. This calls for prayers for discernment as I desire to love them as fully as I can which cannot leave truth out of the picture. May the Lord grant me to speak gently, in love and truth!

 

[Gabriella_San_S]

Thanks for this. His response was very moving though I feel funny posting his words to me on here…he basically said that he was saddened by my response but mostly because of the choices he had made in the past…and that he fully understands why I can’t “stand up” for the marriage. He used words like, warm, loving and compassionate to describe my letter which I honestly believe is the hand of God. They are still going forward with it at this point however the contact we’ve had will leave the door open after all is said and done.

My thought of helping him/them “fix” the situation is first to be there as the best friend I can be to him. I know his situation is going to be difficult to say the least and I fully intend to help him when things get tough in whatever way he’ll let me. I know I’ll need to take some time and really feel things out as I don’t want to be perceived merely as a “threat” to them by any means. This calls for prayers for discernment as I desire to love them as fully as I can which cannot leave truth out of the picture. May the Lord grant me to speak gently, in love and truth!

You and your friend are exemplary in living out the true meaning of friendship! Now this is how God blesses us as we live out our Christian mission-Truth sets us FREE!
“If the Lord does not build the house, then in vain do the builders labor…”
If only every conflict could be resolved with these results! Thank you for your witness to the Faith!

 

[Rascalking]

[emphasis mine]

from your previous post…
"***I don’t agree with your delivery at all, but I pretty much agree with your point.

It DOES matter how you say things, so don’t go overboard. You sound a bit judgmental about being judgmental!***"

Maybe you need to take a closer look at your own tendencies in this regard, my friend!
I know, being*** nice*** is easier than speaking the** Truth** in LOVE, but the Holy Spirit is very generous to those who ask! (especially “irritated” Catholics)
+Peace be with you+

Do you want to get people to convert to the Church? I hope so. I do too. The best way to do so is to spread the love with Christ with a non-judgmental and polite attitude. We need to hate the sin, love the sinner-be nice and mannerly.

My own tendencies is not to preach and act holier than thou to anyone. Simply put-your not going to win souls if people hate you. They won’t even listen to you.

 

[Gabriella_San_S]

Do you want to get people to convert to the Church? I hope so. I do too. The best way to do so is to spread the love with Christ with a non-judgmental and polite attitude. We need to hate the sin, love the sinner-be nice and mannerly.

My own tendencies is not to preach and act holier than thou to anyone. Simply put-your not going to win souls if people hate you. They won’t even listen to you.

Dear friend,
The** Truth** is, that Jesus Christ, the founder of the Church had*** many*** enemies.(who not only hated Him-they ***killed ***Him!) And that hatred has continued down through the centuries to the present day attack on our beloved Holy Father, the Vicar of Christ. “Niceness” is a warm and fuzzy notion, and manners are pleasant traits, but neither of them actually wins souls for Holy Mother Church like Faith Hope and Charity.
Just ask the martyrs. In fact, a good ‘litmus test’ of our faithfulness, is whether or not we are being persecuted for our beliefs in one way or another. Jesus own words were, “if they persecuted Me, they will persecute you…”
But take heart! “…your reward will be great in Heaven…” :grouphug:

 

[Rascalking]

Dear friend,
The** Truth** is, that Jesus Christ, the founder of the Church had*** many*** enemies.(who not only hated Him-they ***killed ***Him!) And that hatred has continued down through the centuries to the present day attack on our beloved Holy Father, the Vicar of Christ. “Niceness” is a warm and fuzzy notion, and manners are pleasant traits, but neither of them actually wins souls for Holy Mother Church like Faith Hope and Charity.
Just ask the martyrs. In fact, a good ‘litmus test’ of our faithfulness, is whether or not we are being persecuted for our beliefs in one way or another. Jesus own words were, “if they persecuted Me, they will persecute you…”
But take heart! “…your reward will be great in Heaven…” :grouphug:

I think it’s best that you and I agree to disagree. We clearly won’t see eye to eye on this.

 

[PaschalCatholic]

It is often said that the first step in good evangelization is being a good friend. Tolkein anyone?
God bless,
B