Catholics and marriage licenses

[ByWhatAuthority]

I don’t think they have a problem with the marriage becoming legal or recognized by the state. The problem lies with them being required to contract with the state before the sacrament can take place.

 

[Xanthippe_Voorhees]

ByWhatAuthority:

Do you hear the obsurdity in what you are saying?

A priest is breaking the law if he presides over the sacrament without them getting the states permission??? All they want is a sacramental marriage.

This ridiculous law has to change! Sorry for the inconvenience.

Why don’t they want a legal marriage?? That doesn’t make sense.

Why does the Church follow the law of the land in this? Because it’s not an unjust law (unlike, say, a law prohibiting an interracial marriage). If you’re willing to be in a sacramental marriage you should be willing to be in a legal marriage. It’s very suspicious that they don’t want to be and I don’t buy that they can’t get a marriage license.

Phemie—its because they belong to a dangerous group of the fringe of the fringe who believes that the US government is no longer valid/tenable for Christian (and apparently Catholics) believers. They tend to claim that their whatever number of acres is now a sovereign nation (NOT legal) They tend have “legal” reasons based on training in not-so-legit schools of law. They do not recognize any civil authority. They do not pay taxes. They do not vote. They do not accept any sort of aid. They pay cash for everything. They do not have the right to drive on public roads (yet the OP’s friends are doing it anyway).

It’s a sad group of people…it really is.

 

[Phemie]

No. It isn’t. That is a common misconception. The same canon law applies universally; parish membership is determined by residence. Registration has no effect in the law. None whatsoever. It is irrelevant as far as canon law is concerned.

Please note my earlier comment. I’m sure that whatever permission or delegation the priest needed, he obtained it. It’s a simple thing that happens all the time.

Most folks don’t have a clue about all paperwork routinely done by the priest who is preparing them for marriage. They call and say “we want to be married in parish Z because it’s easier for overseas guests to get to.”
Father says, “Ok, have you found a priest in that parish, what’s his name, and what’s the parish address?” Then the flurry of paper begins between our Pastor, our Bishop, the priest of Parish Z, his Bishop, and finally back to us after the marriage. Folks never see that and say “Oh, you can get married anywhere, we did.”

 

[Xanthippe_Voorhees]

I don’t think they have a problem with the marriage becoming legal or recognized by the state. The problem lies with them being required to contract with the state before the sacrament can take place.

Or…

…the Church chooses to USE the state to gather all necessary documents regarding age, identity, and citizenship, agreeing to unilaterally apply this decision so as to ensure the marital sacrament is as open as possible.

Becuase I’m sure if they changed the rules tomorrow (as both of the priests on here allude to) they would still want to verify basic identity. This would be much more time-consuming and costly…but they could do it. Yet there is no reason to at this point in history because the burdan would be immense.

 

[Phemie]

It means that the person wrote a post but chose to delete it. Since, unlike the old system, you can’t simply “delete message” and have it disappear, you just delete what you wrote and leave the post empty, as it were. After 24 hours the post disappears.

 

[1ke]

Anyway, my friends situation has really opened my eyes to this. I never knew the US Catholic Church needed the states permission to perform the sacrament of Marriage. I am more convinced then ever that this should change and at the very least, it should be optional for couples.

You have the wrong impression if you believe this to be a US thing. In countries where the priest does not represent the state (for example in Europe) the civil marriage comes FIRST and the couple must produce those documents before the priest will perform the Church marriage.

 

[ByWhatAuthority]

…and if the priest doesn’t work for the state and make the couple get a marriage license, he will be breaking the law and be charged with a felony!!! I trust the Catholic Church to be able to decide without the states help, who qualifies to receive the sacrament.

 

[Xanthippe_Voorhees]

…and if the priest doesn’t work for the state and make the couple get a marriage license, he will be breaking the law and be charged with a felony!!! I trust the Catholic Church to be able to decide without the states help, who qualifies to receive the sacrament.

You still are looking at this backward.

The church cares about civil permissions and authority. Even in states where marriage is purely a spiritual thing they first require a civil marriage.

The priest does this because they agree to terms and conditions. The terms and conditions of having the state do the legwork to find the documents regarding identity is that a priest must adhere to this under all circumstances.

You seem to have this idea that the church is held captive. It is not. It is using the simpler, less onerous way of doing things and thus AGREES to do this in all circumstances. It’s a basic case of “you abide by my rules, I’ll abide by yours”. Both parties agree to accept the consequences if they do not behave accordingly. In America, this means that ministers cannot be forced to marry two persons for any reason they choose—immaturity, age, gender…etc. The state cannot force a minister to perform. The minister accepts that he must use the state to gather documents. It’s a mutual agreement for the benefit of both.

Should this change, I’m sure the Church will, too. Even if the church moved to sacramental marriage in the countries where this is the case, they STILL use the state as a means-test for identity and validity. Should the state ever become unreliable in that the Church would still require civil documentation.

Which, I suppose in your view, would still be them “giving” authority. Which is backward because the church has the duty to protect the sacraments and establishing basic identity is key in that.

 

[angel12]

I have to wonder when the OP says that they do not have to pay property taxes, so, how does one do THAT?

They do that by risking the loss of their property for non-payment of taxes. And then they’ll play the poor victims being squashed by the big mean government.

 

[TheLittleLady]

What they are doing is not “loving their country”.

You love your country, you follow its reasonable rules. Just like if you love your parents, you follow their reasonable rules.

You are not building any sympathy for your friends by constantly going on about what “good people” they are because their behavior is showing the opposite. They think they are special and don’t have to follow the rules, and then you expect us all to support that. This is exactly the attitude that is causing a lot of trouble on many levels in the USA right now.

Your friends are not special.

Quoting because this is very important.

Disobedience to the laws is sinful, beginning with the Decalogue and more fully revealed in Christ’s teaching.

The duties of citizens is laid out in the doctrine of the Church. I would advise you and your friend to do a study of the section of the Catechism on “Duties of Citizens” and then to move on to studying “The Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church” and the source documents that are footnoted in these two resources.

Beautiful words from the Catechism:
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a4.htm#2240
2240 Submission to authority and co-responsibility for the common good make it morally obligatory to pay taxes, to exercise the right to vote, and to defend one’s country:

Pay to all of them their dues, taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due.
[Christians] reside in their own nations, but as resident aliens. They participate in all things as citizens and endure all things as foreigners. . . . They obey the established laws and their way of life surpasses the laws. . . . So noble is the position to which God has assigned them that they are not allowed to desert it.

The Apostle exhorts us to offer prayers and thanksgiving for kings and all who exercise authority, "that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way."

 

[alice24]

I don´t see the wrong on the church side here. I can´t speak for the american chruch-state connection, but some points in general:

1. It´s based in the NT to follow the rules of your state, until they won´t except you to do something heavy against the faith. Getting a driving license is really nothing that makes you a worse catholic, so there is no issue.
2. I know cases in which priests can marry a couple even in the home of secular marriage tradition (I mean germany, irony off) if there is a real reason they won´t get documents - I know a case where one spouse has lost everything because of fire (it would had taken months to get all the documents again from the state office), other spouse wants to marry before he was sent in a war area. Sorry, THIS is an issue, not a “general problem with authority”
3. I would advise to carefully discuss if both spouses really get the meaning of authority or the relation to the state in general. Not saying that you need to follow your gouvernement in every circumstance, but the decision of the parents to live with no documents at all seems a bit selfish to me - now the children have to face the consequences, as seen in this marriage problem.
4. Have you ever imagined what huuuge bureaucratic job the churches have to do as people ar far more mobile today? In 1750, many people didn´t moved that often and a simple sign in the local baptism register would be enough to verify the identity of someone. And today? Be glad there is a state who checks the people before they see the priest with documents that say he or she is single, not searched for a crime etc. Imagine the costs the church would have to bear if they would work alone.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

…and if the priest doesn’t work for the state and make the couple get a marriage license, he will be breaking the law and be charged with a felony!!! I trust the Catholic Church to be able to decide without the states help, who qualifies to receive the sacrament.

If you want to understand the basis for the Church’s recognition of civil authority in matters that are appropriate to it, please read the Catechism of the Catholic Church, PART THREE, SECTION TWO, CHAPTER TWO, ARTICLE 4, “The Fourth Commandment”, linked here. Read especially paragraphs 2234-2246. There is nothing inherently wrong with the Church abiding by reasonable rules set down by civil authority regarding civil marriage. And despite your claims to the contrary, it is my guess that your friends’ situation is unreasonable. But since you won’t tell us what it is, we can’t know for sure, can we?

 

[nearlycatholic]

Please find out what he did and how he did it! It’s just about time to leave now that they legalized “recreational” dope. Day after day I spend with drunks in withdrawal and drug addicts and with out exception, they all smoke pot and or started out enjoying weed. “It’s my body” mentality.

 

[casslean]

What they did was create a fiction and declare it to be the way the world operates. It has absolutely no basis in reality. I don’t recommend it. If you dislike or disagree with laws, there are legitimate ways to protest those laws.

 

[stinkcat_14]

What they did was create a fiction and declare it to be the way the world operates. It has absolutely no basis in reality. I don’t recommend it. If you dislike or disagree with laws, there are legitimate ways to protest those laws.

And they want everyone else to play their game. Solution seems simple, since they are in a pretend country, let them hire a pretend priest.

 

[TheLittleLady]

Makes one ponder, will they accept the help of the tax funded fire department if their property is going up in smoke?

 

[alice24]

What they did was create a fiction and declare it to be the way the world operates. It has absolutely no basis in reality. I don’t recommend it. If you dislike or disagree with laws, there are legitimate ways to protest those laws.

…or simply move

What they did was create a fiction and declare it to be the way the world operates. It has absolutely no basis in reality. I don’t recommend it. If you dislike or disagree with laws, there are legitimate ways to protest those laws.

And they want everyone else to play their game. Solution seems simple, since they are in a pretend country, let them hire a pretend priest.

This. We have a problem with so calles “Reichsbürger” here in Germany who burn their documents and declaring independence from state and law. It´s always funny that the “leave us alone” wish ends in most cases with the wish of participating in state-finaced services as ifrastructure, healthcare etc.

 

[casslean]

Obtaining a marriage license is not contracting with the state, no matter how much your friends choose to believe it is. You also don’t get to consent to a law before being bound by it. If you don’t want to be bound by a law, you get to exercise your lack of consent by leaving the jurisdiction in which it operates.

So, if your friends don’t like the fact that the Catholic church requires a state marriage license, they are free to be married in some other way.

 

[FrDavid96]

I never asked anyone to ignore canon law. It’s not canon law for a couple to have to get a license.

Yes. It is. Canon Law requires that the couple have a marriage license. The canons state that a priest is prohibited from witnessing a marriage that does not comply with civil law. Civil law says the couple needs a license.

What I am asking for on behave of my friends should not be so threatening to you. …

Do not try to play the innocent victim here. Do not even try. YOU launched a long string of verbal attacks against the Church, the hierarchy, and priests. You spewed forth numerous posts filled with baseless accusations against them, all because they won’t do what you want.

I never suggested anyone break the rules of our Holy Church.

That is PRECISELY what you are suggesting.

You were the one who asked “Does anyone know of a priest who would be willing to take off his state hat and preside over their marriage as a sacrament only?”

That is offensive because it implies that we priests are nothing more than minions of the state who do the state’s bidding. Doing what you asked in that sentence is a violation of canon law, plain and simple. You cannot come back later and say you were not asking for something when you plainly did ask for exactly that.

You are asking for help finding a Catholic priest who will violate canon law in at least 2 significant ways:

1. Marriage without a marriage license.
2. Marriage without proper jurisdiction (a rogue priest)

Making couples get permission from the state to marry ( a marriage license) is not canon law.

So now you think you’re going to teach me what canon law says?
Again, it is certainly in canon law that a priest is prohibited from officiating at a marriage unless the requirements of civil law (in this case a license) are met.

You’d think we could have a semi grown up conversation about this without people becoming so defensive…

Yes, I am going to defend the Church’s laws, Her reputation, and that of Her clergy. You bet I am.
I am especially going to defend it against what is obviously a hate-filled rant and whining session because you think that you know better than the Church and you want and expect the Church to do your bidding. Well, again I’ll tell you “this aint Burger King.”

… I would never ask you or any priest to break or bend a rule of the church.

Do I need to post a count of how many times you’ve done exactly that in this thread?

…I think it’s absurd that a priest can be charged a felony …

It is perfectly reasonable for the state (all 50 + territories) the require marriage licenses. State governments need to know who is married. This is just plain common sense. Without a marriage license system (of one kind or another) any 2 people can just claim to be married and there would be no way of verifying the truth of it. People could claim that they were married 10 years ago, and there would be no way of knowing if a marriage happened or not.

 

[casslean]

It is perfectly reasonable for the state (all 50 + territories) the require marriage licenses. State governments need to know who is married. This is just plain common sense. Without a marriage license system (of one kind or another) any 2 people can just claim to be married and there would be no way of verifying the truth of it. People could claim that they were married 10 years ago, and there would be no way of knowing if a marriage happened or not.

^This. I was trying to obtain a divorce for a client a few years ago, and as it happened, their marriage had never been registered with the appropriate civil authorities (the step AFTER obtaining the license and performing the ceremony). However, as our laws (like the US) require the clergy to have a marriage license in hand before performing the ceremony, we could use the evidence of the Protestant minister who had married them and the church register to prove the marriage in order to obtain the divorce.

These are not meaningless formalities. Marriage brings with it rights and obligations, and it may be necessary to prove (or disprove) that marriage in order to obtain one or avoid the other.