Can laity marry themselves sacramentally in EXTRAORDINARY circumstances and a cohabitation question?

[fish90]

Hello,

From what I remember, the two sacraments that do not need an ordained cleric in extraordinary circumstances are baptism and marriage. Am I correct? Please rebuke me if I am wrong. I also assume that the laity must reach the local priest/deacon/bishop when he becomes available to make sure the sacrament was conferred.

Also, can I begin a discussion about why cohabitating couples have not sacramentally married themselves? Finally, have they excommunicated themselves?

fish90

 

[Chris258]

Hello,

From what I remember, the two sacraments that do not need an ordained cleric in extraordinary circumstances are baptism and marriage. Am I correct? Please rebuke me if I am wrong. I also assume that the laity must reach the local priest/deacon/bishop when he becomes available to make sure the sacrament was conferred.

As far as I have learned about the form and matter of the sacrament, theologically-speaking, the priest is not the one who is conferring the sacrament. The man and the woman are conferring the sacrament on each other. So, yes, in theory it’s possible for a man and woman to become married without a priest.

Of course things get a bit more complicated when we get out of theory-land.

fish90:

Also, can I begin a discussion about why cohabitating couples have not sacramentally married themselves? Finally, have they excommunicated themselves?
fish90

I see what you mean. This is a good question. A lay Catholic might baptize someone in an ordinary circumstance and would receive some kind of penalty because it was illicit (who knows, it might be excommunication), but as long as the Catholic intended to baptize and used the correct form, it would be very hard to dispute that the person was actually validly baptized.

So (presumably) why doesn’t this happen with cohabitating couples? Maybe they’ve even promised themselves to each other with informal vows. Hm.

I’m not sure if they’d be excommunicated or what kind of penalty they would receive if the Church actually recognized that they were validly bound in the marriage sacrament, which the Church probably wouldn’t do if the “sacrament” was illicit. Again, we see some kind of distinction between the sacramental workings of marriage and baptism here, or at least the way the Church views them.

 

[Kelly1601]

Again, we see some kind of distinction between the sacramental workings of marriage and baptism here, or at least the way the Church views them.

Slight side track, what’s the difference between the ‘sacramental workings of marriage and baptism’ and ‘the way the Church views them’?
I’m somewhat new to this theology lark, but I’d assumed that they meant the same thing.

 

[JRKH]

Hello,

From what I remember, the two sacraments that do not need an ordained cleric in extraordinary circumstances are baptism and marriage. Am I correct? Please rebuke me if I am wrong. I also assume that the laity must reach the local priest/deacon/bishop when he becomes available to make sure the sacrament was conferred.

I don’t know the particulars on this other than, as previously mentioned, the two people are marrying each other and the priest is witnessing their vows before God. Likewise the public ceremony makes known their marriage in the community. So - depending on just what the “extraordinary circumstances” were I suppose that two people could “marry themselves”…

Also, can I begin a discussion about why cohabitating couples have not sacramentally married themselves? Finally, have they excommunicated themselves?

fish90

Co-habitating couples have not sacramentally married themselves because this is NOT an extraordinary circumstance. So long as means exist for a normal, “ordinary”, public declaration of mariage, this is the form to be used. I cannot think of any reason that would justify trying to circumvent the form if that form is readily available.

Peace
James

 

[1ke]

From what I remember, the two sacraments that do not need an ordained cleric in extraordinary circumstances are baptism and marriage. Am I correct?

Canon law makes provisions for this, but it would be very rare. Catholics must contract marriage beore the local ordinary or pastor. Or, a priest or deacon delegated to assist. Or, a lay person delegated by the bishop to assist. They may contract in front of witnesses only when there is danger of death or a situation in which no representative of the Church can be called to witness and that situation will persist for more than one month.

Can. 1108 §1. Only those marriages are valid which are contracted before the local ordinary, pastor, or a priest or deacon delegated by either of them, who assist, and before two witnesses according to the rules expressed in the following canons and without prejudice to the exceptions mentioned in cann. ⇒ 144, ⇒ 1112, §1, ⇒ 1116, and ⇒ 1127, §§1-2.

§2. The person who assists at a marriage is understood to be only that person who is present, asks for the manifestation of the consent of the contracting parties, and receives it in the name of the Church.

Can. 1109 Unless the local ordinary and pastor have been excommunicated, interdicted, or suspended from office or declared such through a sentence or decree, by virtue of their office and within the confines of their territory they assist validly at the marriages not only of their subjects but also of those who are not their subjects provided that one of them is of the Latin rite.

Can. 1110 By virtue of office, a personal ordinary and a personal pastor assist validly only at marriages where at least one of the parties is a subject within the confines of their jurisdiction.

Can. 1111 §1. As long as they hold office validly, the local ordinary and the pastor can delegate to priests and deacons the faculty, even a general one, of assisting at marriages within the limits of their territory.

§2. To be valid, the delegation of the faculty to assist at marriages must be given to specific persons expressly.

If it concerns special delegation, it must be given for a specific marriage; if it concerns general delegation, it must be given in writing.

Can. 1112 §1. Where there is a lack of priests and deacons, the diocesan bishop can delegate lay persons to assist at marriages, with the previous favorable vote of the conference of bishops and after he has obtained the permission of the Holy See.

§2. A suitable lay person is to be selected, who is capable of giving instruction to those preparing to be married and able to perform the matrimonial liturgy properly.

Can. 1113 Before special delegation is granted, all those things which the law has established to prove free status are to be fulfilled.

Can. 1114 The person assisting at marriage acts illicitly unless the person has made certain of the free status of the contracting parties according to the norm of law and, if possible, of the permission of the pastor whenever the person assists in virtue of general delegation.

Can. 1115 Marriages are to be celebrated in a parish where either of the contracting parties has a domicile, quasidomicile, or month long residence or, if it concerns transients, in the parish where they actually reside. With the permission of the proper ordinary or proper pastor, marriages can be celebrated elsewhere.

**Can. 1116 §1. If a person competent to assist according to the norm of law cannot be present or approached without grave inconvenience, those who intend to enter into a true marriage can contract it validly and licitly before witnesses only:

1/ in danger of death;

2/ outside the danger of death provided that it is prudently foreseen that the situation will continue for a month.

§2. In either case, if some other priest or deacon who can be present is available, he must be called and be present at the celebration of the marriage together with the witnesses, without prejudice to the validity of the marriage before witnesses only.**

Can. 1117 The form established above must be observed if at least one of the parties contracting marriage was baptized in the Catholic Church or received into it and has not defected from it by a formal act, without prejudice to the prescripts of ⇒ can. 1127, §2.

Also, can I begin a discussion about why cohabitating couples have not sacramentally married themselves?

Why do you think they have? See canons above, plus other canons pertaning to valid exchange of consent. Does cohabiting meet these requirements? No.

Finally, have they excommunicated themselves?

Cohabitation is not listed as an offense that incurs Latæ sententiæ excommunication. So, no.

They are, however, in a state of grave sin against the Sixth Commandment. They have separated themselves from the Eucharist. They should cease cohabiting and go to Confession as soon as possible.

 

[tafan]

In extraordinary circumstances, when priests and deacons are not available, the Bishop can designate lay people to perform marriages, and they are valid and sacramental. But the national Bishops conference (yes they do have some formal powers in Church governmence) must approve it and the Vatican must approve it. So while the ministers of a marriage are the couple, it must be performed by clergy or a lay person validly designated. I wonder if this has ever happened in modern times, in a non-mission area?

Can. 1112 §1. Where there is a lack of priests and deacons, the diocesan bishop can delegate lay persons to assist at marriages, with the previous favorable vote of the conference of bishops and after he has obtained the permission of the Holy See.

§2. A suitable lay person is to be selected, who is capable of giving instruction to those preparing to be married and able to perform the matrimonial liturgy properly.

 

[puzzleannie]

He

Also, can I begin a discussion about why cohabitating couples have not sacramentally married themselves? Finally, have they excommunicated themselves?

fish90

what is extraordinary about cohabiting in this culture?
are they on a desert island with no cleric or marriage laws? no? then they are simply living in sin (unless they are non-Catholics living in a common law state that recognizes their union). Is it an automatic formal excommunication? No but like every mortal sin if they know, understand and fully consent and intend to defy God’s law, if they are Catholics they have separated themselves voluntarily from the sacraments, refused God’s grace, and rejected the Church law as well so certainly are not in communion with her.

 

[Chris258]

Slight side track, what’s the difference between the ‘sacramental workings of marriage and baptism’ and ‘the way the Church views them’?
I’m somewhat new to this theology lark, but I’d assumed that they meant the same thing.

Sorry, that was vague wording.

By ‘the way the Church views them’ I more meant how the Church ‘deals’ with them via Canon Law and such, i.e. strictly speaking the sacraments may work similarly but only by force of Canon Law are they treated so distinctly.

But interestingly, according to the Canon Law citations 1ke has brought, it seems like the Church is also making a tacit theological statement about the validity of a “marriage” sacrament attempted in ordinary circumstances. So it seems the Church not only deals with the two sacraments differently, but seems to think there is some real theological distinction between their workings, since a baptism, assuming proper form and matter, is indisputably valid – though illicit – in ordinary circumstances whereas the very validity of a marriage is highly questioned if attempted in ordinary circumstances, that is to say, illicitly.

 

[ConstantineTG]

Hello,

From what I remember, the two sacraments that do not need an ordained cleric in extraordinary circumstances are baptism and marriage. Am I correct? Please rebuke me if I am wrong. I also assume that the laity must reach the local priest/deacon/bishop when he becomes available to make sure the sacrament was conferred.

Also, can I begin a discussion about why cohabitating couples have not sacramentally married themselves? Finally, have they excommunicated themselves?

fish90

Like if you get trapped on a deserted island, like “Lost”. Yes, the Church would accept that, given if you two would make vows to one another and keep it. Then probably when you return to civilization, you can present yourselves to a priest for blessings.

 

[tafan]

Like if you get trapped on a deserted island, like “Lost”. Yes, the Church would accept that, given if you two would make vows to one another and keep it. Then probably when you return to civilization, you can present yourselves to a priest for blessings.

I don’t know if there is anything in Canon law that covers the desert island scenario. I think the Church would not recognize that, but I could be wrong.

 

[Ponyguy]

Like if you get trapped on a deserted island, like “Lost”. Yes, the Church would accept that, given if you two would make vows to one another and keep it. Then probably when you return to civilization, you can present yourselves to a priest for blessings.

This sort of situation occasionally occurred back in the American frontier days out west. A couple might meet, court and then marry before the local authority, and when the missionary priest came by on his next round, which might have been several months, would sacramentally marry the couple.

However, those days have long since gone, and have been gone for more than a century.

 

[Phemie]

In extraordinary circumstances, when priests and deacons are not available, the Bishop can designate lay people to perform marriages, and they are valid and sacramental. But the national Bishops conference (yes they do have some formal powers in Church governmence) must approve it and the Vatican must approve it. So while the ministers of a marriage are the couple, it must be performed by clergy or a lay person validly designated. I wonder if this has ever happened in modern times, in a non-mission area?

Not necessarily ‘mission’ areas but areas with a shortage of priests, like my large diocese, this has occurred in the last 10 years. Sisters who are the administrators of parishes have also given the responsibility for preparing couples for marriage and receiving their consent.

 

[Phemie]

I don’t know if there is anything in Canon law that covers the desert island scenario. I think the Church would not recognize that, but I could be wrong.

Canon 1116 allows for declaring your consent publicly, in front of witnesses if there is no expectation that a priest/deacon/appointed lay person will be available within 30 days. I don’t see any provision for private vows if you happen to be the only 2 people there.