Married outside the church

  • Thread starter Thread starter MrAugust
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

MrAugust

Guest
My wife and I were married years ago when I was not involved with the church and was still in the darkness so to speak.

We were married in a waterfront ceremony by a judge.

Now that I’ve become somewhat closer to God I’ve thought about this. Am I obligated to do this all over again in a church? The costs would be more than what we can afford, and to be honest it wouldn’t change anything with respect to our loving feelings towards God, along with our strong feelings against adultery and abortion.

Thanks in advance.
 
Were you or your wife baptised a Catholic? If so, your civil marriage is not considered valid by the Church.

You would need to go to confession (as you would be sinning to continue living as man and wife if not married by the Church), and then be married in the Church.

Don’t worry about costs. Usually these types of marriages are simple ceremonies and can even be done in the Priest office. If you wanted a simple ceremony in the Church, it wouldn’t cost more than a few hundred dollars. If you did it in the parish office, even less. Also, no one is denied the sacraments if they can’t afford to pay the fees/honoraria.

You should get this straightened out as soon as possible.

God Bless
 
You need to have your marriage convalidated. It doesn’t have to be a big deal like a wedding with guests, reception, etc. It can be just you, your wife, and your witnesses.

See americancatholic.org/Newsletters/CU/ac0604.asp for more information. It’s a Catholic Update article called “Bringing Your Marriage into the Church.”

At the same time you can go to confession and then you’ll be able to receive the sacraments again.
 
Who created these rules ? Is there a Biblical basis for this requirement ?

Thanks.
 
MrAugust said:
Who created these rules ? Is there a Biblical basis for this requirement ?

Thanks.
Click to expand...
The Church, to whom Jesus gave the power to “bind and loose”.

Matthew, Ch 18, Jesus speaking to his Apostles
15 But if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother.
Click to expand...
16 And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand. 17 And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican. 18 Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven.
Click to expand...
Also, Jesus made marriage a Sacrament

Matthew Ch 19.
Have ye not read, that he who made man from the beginning, Made them male and female? And he said: 5 For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they two shall be in one flesh.
Click to expand...
6 Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put asunder.
Click to expand...
He doesn’t say what the state has joined together, but what God has joined together. Therefore, a Christian marriage must be done in the Church in the presence of a Catholic clergyman (Priest or Deacon).

God Bless you, and I will say a prayer for you in your return to the Church.
 
None of those passages make it clear that getting married outside of a physical church makes it invalid. The closest thing is “What God hath joined together”, but word on the street is that God is everywhere.

I guess this is a big issue I’ve had with the Catholic Church - so many strict rules based on scriptural interpretations that were made during conferences and meetings many years after the death of Jesus.

And the “bind and loose” argument is hard to justify when many priests have their own interpretations and opinions on things (as is well documented on this board), some of which are in opposition to what Jesus taught. I’m concerned with what Jesus wants, not what the guy in the robe wants. Besides that, from reading the verse I get the impression that he was using the bind and loose directive specifically with the Apostles.

This is the exact same issue I have with confession. If I confess my sins sincerely and with no desire to ever commit that sin again, it’s supposedly meaningless unless I walk down the street and do it in front of a priest in a church.

Oh well - thanks for the replies and God Bless.
 
MrAugust said:
None of those passages make it clear that getting married outside of a physical church makes it invalid. The closest thing is “What God hath joined together”, but word on the street is that God is everywhere.

I guess this is a big issue I’ve had with the Catholic Church - so many strict rules based on scriptural interpretations that were made during conferences and meetings many years after the death of Jesus.

And the “bind and loose” argument is hard to justify when many priests have their own interpretations and opinions on things (as is well documented on this board), some of which are in opposition to what Jesus taught. I’m concerned with what Jesus wants, not what the guy in the robe wants. Besides that, from reading the verse I get the impression that he was using the bind and loose directive specifically with the Apostles.

This is the exact same issue I have with confession. If I confess my sins sincerely and with no desire to ever commit that sin again, it’s supposedly meaningless unless I walk down the street and do it in front of a priest in a church.

Oh well - thanks for the replies and God Bless.
Click to expand...
“The guy in the robe” is a representative of Christ on earth. The priesthood is a gift from God! Confession is grace-filled, it is a sacrament, a sign of God here on earth. It is another gift from God.

It only seems natural to me that if you are Catholic and desire to receive the Eucharist and other sacraments, that you would want the Church involved in your marriage. Since you did not “invite” the Church to your wedding, I think it only makes sense that you would want to have a small ceremony in your parish and go to confession to “apologize” for not inviting the Church in the first place.

The Church is the Body of Christ here on earth. Not inviting the Church to your wedding is like not inviting an important member of your family, except in this case it is not inviting your entire spiritual family.
 
MrAugust said:
None of those passages make it clear that getting married outside of a physical church makes it invalid. The closest thing is “What God hath joined together”, but word on the street is that God is everywhere.

I guess this is a big issue I’ve had with the Catholic Church - so many strict rules based on scriptural interpretations that were made during conferences and meetings many years after the death of Jesus.
Click to expand...
Just wondering how you know how those verses were interpreted when Christ was walking the earth?
 
MrAugust said:
None of those passages make it clear that getting married outside of a physical church makes it invalid. The closest thing is “What God hath joined together”, but word on the street is that God is everywhere.

It’s not the outside part, it’s that a judge presided not a Priest or Deacon. If a Priest had gotten a dispensation to perform a wedding outside, it would be valid.

I guess this is a big issue I’ve had with the Catholic Church - so many strict rules based on scriptural interpretations that were made during conferences and meetings many years after the death of Jesus.

And the “bind and loose” argument is hard to justify when many priests have their own interpretations and opinions on things (as is well documented on this board), some of which are in opposition to what Jesus taught. I’m concerned with what Jesus wants, not what the guy in the robe wants. Besides that, from reading the verse I get the impression that he was using the bind and loose directive specifically with the Apostles.

Well, many Priests make mistakes, that is why we rely on the authority of the Church as a whole, not individuals interpretations.

This is the exact same issue I have with confession. If I confess my sins sincerely and with no desire to ever commit that sin again, it’s supposedly meaningless unless I walk down the street and do it in front of a priest in a church.

Its not meaningless, it may be meaningful, if you have “perfect contrition” (you’re sorry out of pure love of God) but to be absolved by a Priest is the only way of being sure.

Oh well - thanks for the replies and God Bless.
Click to expand...
God Bless you as well. I encourage you to study the Faith more. Many things about Catholicism used to seem arbitrary and unecessary to me, but when I actually studied them, the reasoning became very clear.
 
MrAugust said:
The costs would be more than what we can afford, and to be honest it wouldn’t change anything with respect to our loving feelings towards God, along with our strong feelings against adultery and abortion.
Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...
Mine cost us a total of $20. That was to pay the cantor. My parents made a donation to the priest.

And no it didn’t change anything about how I felt about my husband or how he felt about me. It didn’t change our feelings about adultery or abortion.

What it changed was God’s feelings about me. By having the blessing of His Church, I made things right with God.
 
Just so its clear, the position of the church is that its members have the follow the rules it has set up regarding marriage. If either party to the marriage is catholic, the rules apply.

If two baptised Protestants marry, their marriage is presumed to be both valid and sacremental. If they later join the Catholic church, they don’t need to do anything special.

Each church has its own disciplines and rules. For example, the baptist church I grew up in would only accept a baptism performed by another church if the person was above the age of reason at the time and the baptism was done by full immersion.

Is it really any different?
 
Every religion has very specific rules about marriage. Try getting married in an Eastern religion without a dowry from the wife or arranged marriages in India. Don’t let a simple statement about where the marriage takes place throw you.

Talk to your Catholic priest and he can explain why getting married in the church is part of the form of that sacrament and its blessings. Costs should be minimal for a convalidation.

Good luck and God Bless.
 
MrAugust said:
My wife and I were married years ago when I was not involved with the church and was still in the darkness so to speak.

We were married in a waterfront ceremony by a judge.

Now that I’ve become somewhat closer to God I’ve thought about this. Am I obligated to do this all over again in a church? The costs would be more than what we can afford, and to be honest it wouldn’t change anything with respect to our loving feelings towards God, along with our strong feelings against adultery and abortion.

Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...
if either of you is Catholic, yes you are obligated to obey church laws on marriage. That includes having your marriage convalidated (exchanging vows again witnessed by a priest or deacon). There need be no cost involved whatever. If you don’t plan on having a ceremony where you reserve the church, invite guests etc., but elect to do this privately only with the other witnesses, it can be done before or after a regular daily or weekend Mass, or even in the priest’s office. There would be no cost except a voluntary stipend or donation to the priest or deacon.

Yes, it will work a marked change on your love, feelings for each other, and marriage and family in general because you will be gifted with the sacramental graces of matrimony, Christ truly present in your marriage as he wishes to be. This grace will be a profound blessing to you. Besides that you will of course be able to confess any sins since your last confession and return to the Eucharist, with the incalculable blessings this sacrament has for you. Do not delay any longer in seeking out this immense grace Christ is waiting to give you. See your priest today.

If neither of you was Catholic when you married, and otherwise free to marry, you marriage is already valid. See your priest if you have questions about your status.
 
Jeepers people,

A guy comes on here asking for simple advice and gets blasted. I think, after re-reading his original post, this could have been handled a little more hospitably, given his original disposition and openness to the whole thing. It’s a wonder he hasn’t become Mormon by now.

August, congratulations on responding to God’s grace in your life! I’d seek the advice of a good priest in this matter. He will guide you where you need to go. The situation is easily rectified, and will start you on the journey of returning to full participation in the life of the Church.

I’d highly recommend listening to Catholic Answers Live, reading books by Scott Hahn, and, above all else, praying that God will open your heart to all that He has in store for you. There are, indeed, some “rules” that you will find, but they are there to safeguard the sacredness of marriage, which, by your post, you seem to highly value.
 
It’s just funny to me that the two of us and a priest standing there in his back office with his desk, papers, filing cabinet, etc. is so much more meaningful of a service to God than the beautiful ceremony we had by the waterfront, with the sunset and many other views of God’s beauty beside us.

I don’t fault anyone for their beliefs and adherence to Catholic teachings, but this goes back to a basic notion I have that a LOT of stuff in the Bible, not only the most beautiful piece of literature ever but also easily the most symbolic, is taken wayyyy too literally sometimes. And somewhere along the way there became more bureaucratic rules and regulations than our current NY state government, and that is saying a lot.

I am just asking folks to consider the possiblity that some of the foundation of what we have been taught for hundreds of years has been misrepresented to us in some areas by the Catholics who developed these rules. I’m speaking specifically of the couple hundred years after Christ when all of these other things came out such as Lent, priests no longer allowed to marry, the actual date of Christmas, etc.

I’m still looking for something in the Bible that states that all weddings must take place in the church. With all due respect, “What God hath joined together” doesn’t really cement that.
 
MrAugust said:
It’s just funny to me that the two of us and a priest standing there in his back office with his desk, papers, filing cabinet, etc. is so much more meaningful of a service to God than the beautiful ceremony we had by the waterfront, with the sunset and many other views of God’s beauty beside us.

I don’t fault anyone for their beliefs and adherence to Catholic teachings, but this goes back to a basic notion I have that a LOT of stuff in the Bible, not only the most beautiful piece of literature ever but also easily the most symbolic, is taken wayyyy too literally sometimes. And somewhere along the way there became more bureaucratic rules and regulations than our current NY state government, and that is saying a lot.

I am just asking folks to consider the possiblity that some of the foundation of what we have been taught for hundreds of years has been misrepresented to us in some areas by the Catholics who developed these rules. I’m speaking specifically of the couple hundred years after Christ when all of these other things came out such as Lent, priests no longer allowed to marry, the actual date of Christmas, etc.

I’m still looking for something in the Bible that states that all weddings must take place in the church. With all due respect, “What God hath joined together” doesn’t really cement that.
Click to expand...
As Catholics, we are not “Bible only” Christians. We believe that Tradition is just as important as Scripture, and that the Church has the authority to interpret both. Remember the Bible didn’t come until 300+ years after Christ. The Catholic Church came before the Bible. The marriage only in Church, is a discipline of the Church. It could be changed, and it can be dispensed. It also wouldn’t apply in a country where Catholics were persecuted (a marriage performed in the Gulag by a Priest or Deacon would be valid). But since we as Catholics believe the Church has the power to “bind and loose” it has the power to enforce such disciplines. Likewise, Priestly celibacy is a discipline of the Roman Rite, not doctrine. Eastern Catholics have married priests.
The Church could change it tommorrow, but it is up to the Church.

God Bless
 
MrAugust said:
Now that I’ve become somewhat closer to God I’ve thought about this. Am I obligated to do this all over again in a church?
Click to expand...
40.png
MrAugust:
I am just asking folks to consider the possiblity that some of the foundation of what we have been taught for hundreds of years has been misrepresented to us in some areas by the Catholics who developed these rules. I’m speaking specifically of the couple hundred years after Christ when all of these other things came out such as Lent, priests no longer allowed to marry, the actual date of Christmas, etc.

I’m still looking for something in the Bible that states that all weddings must take place in the church. With all due respect, “What God hath joined together” doesn’t really cement that.
Click to expand...
40.png
Windmill:
Jeepers people,
A guy comes on here asking for simple advice and gets blasted. I think, after re-reading his original post, this could have been handled a little more hospitably, given his original disposition and openness to the whole thing. It’s a wonder he hasn’t become Mormon by now.
Click to expand...
This doesn’t sound like a guy coming on asking for simple advice. It sounds like someone trying to tell us about our faith. And how wrong it is.
 
maryjk said:
This doesn’t sound like a guy coming on asking for simple advice. It sounds like someone trying to tell us about our faith. And how wrong it is.
Click to expand...
His initial post seemed innocent enough, but the first response points out that he is living in sin. While that may be true in the eyes of Christ’s Church, it is not the very first thing I would bring up. There are foundational principles that a person needs to embrace in order to receive this type of statement constructively. Issues like the validity of Church authority, the cautions that are necessary to safeguard the sacrament, the reason the Church requires these types of arrangements…all these things underly the answer, and they are obviosuly not espoused (yet) by the OP.

Yes, the truth is pastoral, but you need a little charity and prudence with the delivery. The goal is to help someone back into the fold, not tick them off by immediately condemning them … especially when they are honestly seeking God’s will in their life. A committed Catholic would respond differently to a plea to Church authority than one who does not embrace this authority.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top