Marriage On An Island

[dal11]

I had a person ask me at work the other day a question that I couldn’t answer. If the church dosen’t reconize the marriage of a catholic that gets married outside the church then how would two catholics that are stranded on a desert with no hope of ever getting rescued, get married? Is there anything they could do that would morally allow them to have relations with one another?

 

[VociMike]

I can’t help but wonder if it would be morally justified for them to bring children into such a situation. Recognizing, of course, that you have not fully described their plight.

 

[spauline]

well, yeah, just as a person can obtain intial sanctifying grace in extra-sacramental way through baptism by desire, I believe the Church recognizes the possibility of marriage by desire, in the circumstance in which, if two persons are able to enter a valid marriage, and the cirrumstances are such that no reasonable access to a priest is possible, they may be joined in marriage. Remember, it is the man and the woman themselves that confer the sacrament on each other. The priest is but a witness. He does not confer it. But, of course, in like 999,999 cases out of a million, the formal ceremony of the Church, with a priest present, is required.

Keep in mind, not that it would ever happen, but even if all priests and bishops were murdered in the world, we would still have the sacraments of baptism and marriage, and it is for this reason that most heretical communities (Protestants) have , and can only have up to, 2 sacraments, baptism and marriage.

 

[Verbum]

Hi Dal11,

Valid marriage ceremonies are deal with in Canons 1108 and following.

The most extreme circumstance contemplated is : no ecclesiastical or lay celebrant but one witness.

But if two people foresaw living isolated for the rest of their lives, in my view, natural law would take precedence over positive law. Like Adam and Eve, they could, by themselves, contract a valid marriage and “multiply”…

Verbum

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

I had a person ask me at work the other day a question that I couldn’t answer. If the church dosen’t reconize the marriage of a catholic that gets married outside the church then how would two catholics that are stranded on a desert with no hope of ever getting rescued, get married? Is there anything they could do that would morally allow them to have relations with one another?

Yes, they could celebrate the Sacrament of Marriage in an extraordinary manner. Assuming that both are free to Marry. If they die before being rescued, God will be the judge of their intent. If they are rescued, their Bishop can grant them a dispensation from Catholic Form that would be retroactive.

 

[Randy_Carson]

I had a person ask me at work the other day a question that I couldn’t answer. If the church dosen’t reconize the marriage of a catholic that gets married outside the church then how would two catholics that are stranded on a desert with no hope of ever getting rescued, get married? Is there anything they could do that would morally allow them to have relations with one another?

God told Adam and Eve to “be fruitful and multiply”. I’m not sure they were married in the sense that we use the word, but clearly they were obedient to God by producing offspring.

There is probably a canon law answer to this question, and it may have been given already since I have not read the entire thread. However, I’m willing to bet that if they are rescued from the island, they would need to be married in a Church once they had gotten some clothes on.

 

[cameron_lansing]

The answer is in one of the canons cited in canon 1108 which was mentioned earlier. It is canon 1116 §1. If a person competent to assist at marriage 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 alone only: 1º in danger of death; 2º outside the danger of death provided that it is prudently foreseen that the situation will continue for a month. §2. In either case, if another 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.

Several points should be made to clarify the situation.

The couple would not need to undergo another ceremony later intending to exchange matrimonial consent, since this would be sufficient to constitute a valid and licit marriage. A couple would need to attend to any civil requirements, however.

The marriage would simply be recorded by the testimony of the witnesses. Note that the canon speaks of witnesses. One would be insufficient for a valid marriage.

No subsequent “dispensation” from form is needed because this method is itself a canonical form of marriage, although the extraordinary one.

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

The answer is in one of the canons cited in canon 1108 which was mentioned earlier. It is canon 1116 §1. If a person competent to assist at marriage 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 alone only: 1º in danger of death; 2º outside the danger of death provided that it is prudently foreseen that the situation will continue for a month. §2. In either case, if another 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.

Several points should be made to clarify the situation.

The couple would not need to undergo another ceremony later intending to exchange matrimonial consent, since this would be sufficient to constitute a valid and licit marriage. A couple would need to attend to any civil requirements, however.

The marriage would simply be recorded by the testimony of the witnesses. Note that the canon speaks of witnesses. One would be insufficient for a valid marriage.

No subsequent “dispensation” from form is needed because this method is itself a canonical form of marriage, although the extraordinary one.

The original post seems to say it’s just the two of them, no other people “witness(s)”. Does that change anything?