Does the church consider a civil marriage a marriage?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Roxann
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Roxann

Guest
Help. My daughter who is catholic is married to a non catholic outside the church. We have discussed her getting married in the church, but she gives me excuses why that cannot happen. Recently, she sent me the statment and question below. Can you help me answer her?

1 The Catholic Church understands marriage between a baptized man and woman to be a sacrament, a visible sign of the grace that God gives them to help them live their lives here and now so as to be able to join him in eternity.2 For Catholics, marriage is social as well as religious, but its religious aspects are very important. The Bible repeatedly compares the relationship between man and wife to that between God and Israel (cf. Hos. 9:1) or between Christ and his Church (cf. Eph. 5:21-32). For Catholics, marriage is a holy vocation.
According to this quote Jim & I are not married. Since the Church doesn’t think of civil marriage as MARRIAGE how does a gay civil marriage affect the church?
 
The trouble is, that quote does not say the Church doesn’t recognize civil marriage as marriage. On the contrary. The Church recognizes any marriage outside the Church as valid until proven otherwise…except if that outside marriage involves a Catholic. To my understanding, the only marriages the Church does not presume valid are those involving a Catholic who gets married outside the Church without proper dispensation. Of course, a marriage can not be valid if it is blatantly invalid, such as a gay marriage, where the fundamental element of being between a man and a woman is violated.
 
Thank you so much for your reply to my question. I did not look at it the way you did.
 
If I understand this correctly, the Church has a subtle but important distinction. Civil marriages are presumed valid, but not sacramental.

Therefore, your daughter and her husband are indeed married, but their marriage is not sacramental. The only limitation is that they cannot receive Holy Communion until the marriage is convalidated by a priest.

Because the Church does indeed recognize civil marriages, the marriage between two people of the same gender is an abomination. Marriage can only be between one man and one woman.

Your daughter’s logic is based on an incorrect premise.
 
rpp said:
If I understand this correctly, the Church has a subtle but important distinction. Civil marriages are presumed valid, but not sacramental.
Click to expand...
That statement seems to contradict Canon Law:Consequently, a valid marriage contract cannot exist between baptized persons without its being by that very fact a sacrament.
So it’s seemingly impossible to have a marriage be valid without being sacramental. Furthermore, Canon 1108 states:Only those marriages are valid which are contracted in the presence of the local Ordinary or parish priest or of the priest or deacon delegated by either of them…
rpp said:
Therefore, your daughter and her husband are indeed married, but their marriage is not sacramental.
Click to expand...
Canon law seems to disagree.
rpp said:
The only limitation is that they cannot receive Holy Communion until the marriage is convalidated by a priest.
Click to expand...
The only limitation? Isn’t that a pretty huge clue that something is seriously wrong? The only reason people are denied Communion is because of grave sin.
 
rpp said:
If I understand this correctly, the Church has a subtle but important distinction. Civil marriages are presumed valid, but not sacramental.

No, if the civil marriage were contracted between baptized non-Catholics it would be both valid & sacramental.

Therefore, your daughter and her husband are indeed married, but their marriage is not sacramental. The only limitation is that they cannot receive Holy Communion until the marriage is convalidated by a priest.

No, their marriage is invalid because she is Catholic and under obligation to marry the way the Church deems obligatory. That means in the Church unless she is granted a dispensation for lack of canonical form.

Because the Church does indeed recognize civil marriages, the marriage between two people of the same gender is an abomination. Marriage can only be between one man and one woman.

The Catholic Church doesn’t recognize the marriage, civil or religious of two same-sex persons.
Click to expand...
 
Civil marriage is not Marriage. It is an official partnership recognised by the law of the land. More civil marriages end in divorce than those conducted in a religious framework.
 
MichaelMurphy said:
Civil marriage is not Marriage. It is an official partnership recognised by the law of the land. More civil marriages end in divorce than those conducted in a religious framework.
Click to expand...
That is not the teaching of the Catholic Church.
 
1ke said:
It is not a teaching of the Catholic Church because it is not true.
Click to expand...
Jesus also said that “except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter the kingdom of heaven.” Matthew 5:20
 
MichaelMurphy said:
Jesus also said that “except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter the kingdom of heaven.” Matthew 5:20
Click to expand...
I don’t know what you’re talking about, I was referring to your statement “Civil marriage is not Marriage.” This statement is not true.
 
The correct answer is “It depends”.

Unlike what a previous poster said, a civil marriage is not a contract or a partnership. That is not what the Church teaches.

A civil marriage is presumed valid (please correct me if I am wrong) when the couple, one man and one woman, are both baptized. However, the marriage must be convalidated by the Church if either of them want to receive Holy Communion.

However, this has more to do with what procedures a diocesan tribunal must use when evaluating the validity of a marriage after it has ended.

Rather than make generalizations, it is best to presume a marriage is valid then discuss the particulars of the situation with a priest.
 
rpp said:
A civil marriage is presumed valid (please correct me if I am wrong) when the couple, one man and one woman, are both baptized. However, the marriage must be convalidated by the Church if either of them want to receive Holy Communion.
Click to expand...
No rpp, this is not correct.

For any two non-Catholics with no requiremtn in their own faith community to marry in a certain form-- baptized or not-- their civil marriage is valid. If they are baptized non-Catholics, their civil marriage is both valid and a sacrament.

If either or both of them later become Catholic, there is no action required.

Convalidation is only necessary when a marriage is invalid. This would be in the case where one of the two who married civilly is a **Catholic **. Only Catholic are bound to marry under the rules of Canon Law regarding form, not non-Catholics.
 
1ke said:
No rpp, this is not correct.

For any two non-Catholics with no requiremtn in their own faith community to marry in a certain form-- baptized or not-- their civil marriage is valid. If they are baptized non-Catholics, their civil marriage is both valid and a sacrament.

If either or both of them later become Catholic, there is no action required.

Convalidation is only necessary when a marriage is invalid. This would be in the case where one of the two who married civilly is a **Catholic **. Only Catholic are bound to marry under the rules of Canon Law regarding form, not non-Catholics.
Click to expand...
Thanks. Maybe one of these days I will get this right. 🤷

In any case, in the unlikely even that I get married again, it will most certainly be in the Church to a nice Catholic lady. :yup:
 
rpp said:
If I understand this correctly, the Church has a subtle but important distinction. Civil marriages are presumed valid, but not sacramental.

.
Click to expand...
this is simply not true.

the marriage between two baptized persons is recognized as sacramental and valid, presuming both are free to marry, whether it is witnessed by a civil authority like a judge, or a religious minister. In addition, Catholics are further bound to observe Catholic Church law on marriage, which means they may not marry non-Catholics or in a location other than a Catholic Church without the proper dispensation, and the wedding must be witnessed by an ordained Catholic clergyman, except in certain extraordinary circumstances which also require a dispensation from Catholic form. The marriage of a Catholic who does not follow Church law is invalid.

By definition two men (or two women) are not free to “marry” each other because there is no such thing as marriage except between one man and one woman. This is ordained by God in the manner in which he created the sexes and marriage, and neither the Church, still less any civil authority, has the power to change that, nor do they have the power to dissolve a valid marriage.
 
MichaelMurphy said:
Civil marriage is not Marriage. It is an official partnership recognised by the law of the land. .
Click to expand...
wrong again.
a civil marriage between two non-Catholics, whether or not they are baptized, is a valid natural marriage, presuming both are free to marry. you would have to provide statistics for your other claim. If both are baptized, it is both valid and sacramental.

A Catholic who has attempted marriage outside the law and form of the Church is not validly married and is in the old-fashioned term but exquisitely accurate term, living in sin. The remedy is confession with absolution and speedy convalidation of the marriage, a rather simple and painless process.

Gay marriage is an oxymoron and a non-issue in this discussion because by virtue of natural law it cannot exist. The government or lobbying group can apply any nomenclature they want to two human beings who happen to reside together, but that does not make it marriage, a state whose conditions are set by God, not man.
 
puzzleannie said:
A Catholic who has attempted marriage outside the law and form of the Church is not validly married and is in the old-fashioned term but exquisitely accurate term, living in sin. The remedy is confession with absolution and speedy convalidation of the marriage, a rather simple and painless process.
Click to expand...
In this situation — if the two Catholics who married outside the law and form of the Church --obtained a civil divorced—are they free (without some form of annulment) to marry another in the Church – since the first marriage was not valid?
 
This topic has been covered many times in Ask an Apologist.

The gist of it is:

A civil marriage of any kind is valid under civil law. It takes a divorce under civil law to make it invalid.

A civil marriage between a Catholic and a non-Catholic, or between two Catholics, is **not **a valid marriage in the Catholic Church unless a dispensation was obtained first. Such an invalid marriage can be validated and made sacramental by a ceremony in the Church - assuming each partner is single by the Church’s rules. (I.e. any previous weddings must be determined to be null, by the Marriage Tribunal.)

A civil marriage between two non-Catholics who later enter the church is valid in the Church’s eyes (assuming an annulment is not needed), but not sacramental. The same ceremony I mentioned above will make it sacramental.

Been there, done that!

Ruthie
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top