Marriage, the sacrement, but the civilties?

[Zehos]

Preface: Okay, I was going through some hoops, in my mind, today in some of my law studies, while filtering through the catechism I found no answer. So in a spur of hope, I joined this forum! Now to the actual question:

Since chruch and state are separate in the United States and several other countries, is it possible to be wed, that is to recieve the sacrement of marriage, without following the civil side of marriage? The civil side is usually the easier to settle, being a simple divorce vs. an annulment. Some people are civilly wed first then have it blessed after, is it possible the other way around?

Reasoning- I have a scholarship, but it requires me to be claimed as a dependent by my parents. I have a girlfriend, and we have been dating for 26 days short of two years. Now, we’d like to get engaged, but we’d also like to know when we could get married.

p.s. I pre-appologize for all of my spelling and grammar errors.

 

[EasterJoy]

The Church does not allow sacramental marriage without civil marriage (although I’m sure exceptions may be made under truly grave circumstances).

Let your “yes” be “yes” and your “no” be “no”, no matter what the law allows. Either get married or don’t get married, and take whatever your choice brings with it. Don’t take advantage of an offer that belongs to those who really are still dependents of their parents, either!

 

[Zehos]

Thank you! That reply was what I should have heard from my conscience, but it was silenced by happiness. Thank you again.

Now can we take it to hypotheticals? Where is there evidence that the church ensures that the wedding is both sacremental and civil?

 

[Phemie]

Thank you! That reply was what I should have heard from my conscience, but it was silenced by happiness. Thank you again.

Now can we take it to hypotheticals? Where is there evidence that the church ensures that the wedding is both sacremental and civil?

There are countries where the civil marriage must occur before the Church marriage (France, Germany, Mexico). The Church goes along with this because there is no hardship for the couple. They present a civil marriage certificate and the Church celebrates a religious marriage.

In other countries the Church ensures that marriages are both ‘sacramental’ (well, at least valid, not all marriages are sacramental even when celebrated in Church) and civil by ensuring that the priests/deacons/lay persons are licensed by the State to celebrate marriages, that it follows the State’s rules for marriage including requesting a marriage license from the couple, and doing any filing of papers that need to be filed with the State.

The Church will celebrate a secret, religious only marriage, where the laws of the land are unjust. That doesn’t apply to your scenario which, unfortunately, is out and out fraud – not something in which the Church would want to participate.

 

[1ke]

Now can we take it to hypotheticals? Where is there evidence that the church ensures that the wedding is both sacremental and civil?

It’s not a hypothetical at all. No priest or deacon will perform a marriage without the couple producing their marriage license. It’s as simple as that. The priest/deacon must complete the marriage license and file it with the state.

 

[Zehos]

Thank you Phemie!

And no, I’m not going to try this. It’s best to wait. I need to see if this could be elaborated into a finals project now. Thank you for the responses.

 

[notsmart]

Hello Zehos,

You know, just in case you did not hear about it before I wanted to tell you that in all the catholic parishes I have been to, they list what’s called Wedding Banns in their bulletins, and they have what’s called pre-canna classes that some parishes say need 6 months to a year to start before the scheduled date of the wedding (it may vary from place to place) but, I think that is another aspect to consider, as well as if there are complications (are both baptised validly, ect…)
Not to make this even more confusing for you, but just to give you something else to remember.

 

[Scottgun]

Just remember the three things necessary to contract a sacramentally valid marriage:

1. The matter–the consent of the man and the woman, expressed externally by words and signs.
2. The form–the man and woman conferring the sacrament upon each other as witnessed by the Church.
3. The “Electric Slide” is perfomed at the reception.

 

[notsmart]

Just remember the three things necessary to contract a sacramentally valid marriage:

1. The matter–the consent of the man and the woman, expressed externally by words and signs.
2. The form–the man and woman conferring the sacrament upon each other as witnessed by the Church.
3. The “Electric Slide” is perfomed at the reception.

You made me think of bart simpson and the catholic heaven and the protestant heaven because I was thinking of baptist receptions when you said that! (yes I know some can dance)

 

[joandarc2008]

I will have you know right now that my DF and I have expressly forbid the DJ from playing the “electric slide,” “hokey pokey,” “macarena,” or “chicken dance.” I believe our wedding still to be sacramental as we will throw the ceremonial garter with the ball and chain attached to it and make the poor guy wear it around his arm for the rest of the reception. Thanks guys for the hypothetical talk and just remember there are many countries where people are not as lucky as we are to have our freedoms.

God bless.

 

[cameron_lansing]

Just remember the three things necessary to contract a sacramentally valid marriage:

1. The matter–the consent of the man and the woman, expressed externally by words and signs.
2. The form–the man and woman conferring the sacrament upon each other as witnessed by the Church.
3. The “Electric Slide” is perfomed at the reception.

See canon 1057 for some clarification on points 2 and 3 that we should keep in mind.

1. If even one is Catholic, they must follow the lawful form of marriage of the Catholic Church or be dispensed. If neither is Catholic, they must follow another lawful form of marriage to which they may be obliged.
2. Both parties must be qualified by law to marry.

Then we would have a valid marriage, and if both are baptised, then we would have a valid and sacramental marriage.

The observance of civil requirements is a matter of canonical lawfulness rather than validity. As correctly noted, the Church expects the just laws of society to be followed, but does assert the priority of a divine natural right to marry for those who are qualified when those laws are offensive to divine law.

 

[EasterJoy]

Just remember the three things necessary to contract a sacramentally valid marriage:

1. The matter–the consent of the man and the woman, expressed externally by words and signs.
2. The form–the man and woman conferring the sacrament upon each other as witnessed by the Church.
3. The “Electric Slide” is perfomed at the reception.

Eeek!..and to think that for all these years, we assumed we had a valid marriage!

Maybe we can have a convalidating reception for our 20th anniversary.

 

[Digitonomy]

It’s not a hypothetical at all. No priest or deacon will perform a marriage without the couple producing their marriage license. It’s as simple as that. The priest/deacon must complete the marriage license and file it with the state.

Nonsense. As both Phemie and cameron_lansing pointed out, if both parties are properly disposed to receive the sacrament, the Church may allow it even if it is contrary to local law.

 

[Phemie]

Nonsense. As both Phemie and cameron_lansing pointed out, if both parties are properly disposed to receive the sacrament, the Church may allow it even if it is contrary to local law.

I’m pretty sure that 1ke was referring to the US and not really thinking globally. I can’t think of any law existing in North America at the moment that would cause the Catholic Church to celebrate a religious only wedding.

 

[Zehos]

Okay cameron, thank you for the ccc help!

Okay ladies and gentlemen, I need to discuss another situation. This time hypothetical, simply for an essay. All resemblances to real life are unintented and quite frankly this is pure fiction.

Setting, U.S.A., because these are the laws I know. Two illegal immagrants, neither planning to become naturalized citizens, for some unknown reason, but we assume it is benign. Under the circumstances could they recieve the sacrement of matrimony, without the civilties?

Once again, not my case, but I need a case for an LPS term paper. Because if people can get married in the church alone, that might skew census information, slightly.

Thank you all again!

 

[cameron_lansing]

Okay cameron, thank you for the ccc help!

Okay ladies and gentlemen, I need to discuss another situation. This time hypothetical, simply for an essay. All resemblances to real life are unintented and quite frankly this is pure fiction.

Setting, U.S.A., because these are the laws I know. Two illegal immagrants, neither planning to become naturalized citizens, for some unknown reason, but we assume it is benign. Under the circumstances could they recieve the sacrement of matrimony, without the civilties?

Once again, not my case, but I need a case for an LPS term paper. Because if people can get married in the church alone, that might skew census information, slightly.

Thank you all again!

See canon 1071 §1, 2º but note that the permission pertains to the local ordinary. He would have to make the determination about any justifying circumstances.

Given the nature of the action, do not expect to find public statements or discussion about possible justifications. The matter is highly individualized and considered very discretely. It is best just to simply note that the law makes such a provision.

Those who know about such cases are not in a position to discuss them. Those who can speculate about them are generally not in a position to know them.

 

[Zehos]

Okay, so I should stop in, see if my local priest would do this? Or should I ask my grandfather, who is a deacon?

Thank you cameron! You’re keeping me on my toes!

 

[Digitonomy]

I’m pretty sure that 1ke was referring to the US and not really thinking globally. I can’t think of any law existing in North America at the moment that would cause the Catholic Church to celebrate a religious only wedding.

I heard a story a few months ago about a situation where priests were in a difficult position because state law where they were located prohibited weddings in which one party was in the country illegally. The priest explained the situation, where he was a representative of the state in officiating at weddings, but at the same time the couples in question were properly disposed and thus entitled to the sacraments according to canon law. He said in some cases couples would go to neighboring states. He went no further than that in his comments, but one can guess that in some situations where travel out of state was impractical, a priest might grant the sacramental marriage and ignore the state law.

And now I see that while composing that post, the issue has already been discussed.

 

[cameron_lansing]

Okay, so I should stop in, see if my local priest would do this? Or should I ask my grandfather, who is a deacon?

Thank you cameron! You’re keeping me on my toes!

Apart from the exception in the canon I cited, either would be required to obtain the permission of the local ordinary.

Keep in mind that the civil consequences of witnessing a marriage that would be civilly illegal or could not be civilly recognized would fall on the local ordinary and could be damaging to the Church. So some discernment at that level is required.