Officiating a Civil Wedding

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cabeelibob
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
That was the kind of clarification I was looking for because I’ve performed a few weddings.
The younger generation seems to be very fond of getting a friend or family member to officiate at their weddings. Sorry, but it is obvious when a friendly amateur is officiating at a wedding, and not in a good way. On the other hand, it isn’t as bad as most of the vows that couples write for themselves. This is a bad place for DIY. As one guest at this kind of wedding said afterwards: “Well, now they’re married…I guess.”

For a Catholic, though, it is totally unacceptable.
 
Last edited:
Flaunt

display (something) ostentatiously, especially in order to provoke envy or admiration or to show defiance.
 
I don’t think anybody leaves the Church and marries thinking, “Sweet! If I want to go back to the Church, my marriage won’t be recognized, so I have a freebie on divorce!” No, I don’t think people do that. What sane person presumes that they need to be in the Church in order to be “right with God” and yet lives outside the Church with the idea that they can come back any time they like and don’t have to be concerned that the Almighty will of course care that this person cyncially used someone else in a marriage they knew suffered from lack of the intention to remain faithful for life? No, God will not be mocked. Someone would have to be a bit crazy or deluded to think that way.
No, that’s not what I meant. I don’t think anybody would have that sort of mindset. I think it would go something like this: Someone leaves the Church and starts attending, say, a Lutheran or Baptist church. They become convinced that they are doing the right thing, or that God doesn’t care what church they go to as long as it is “Christian”, or they just don’t care what church they go to, they just do it for social reasons or to please a spouse. They get married in that church. Obviously people in that church don’t give two hoots for what Catholics think of a fallen-away Catholic getting married in their church, nor whether Catholics think it is “valid” or not.

Then the fallen-away Catholic gets to thinking — maybe they feel drawn to watch EWTN or something, and they hear something that pricks at their conscience. They doubt that they are “right with God” and the doubt won’t go away. Finally they take the plunge — “I’m going to go to a priest and straighten this all out”. They realize that this will mean breaking with their newfound church, but they don’t care. Good for them.

But then there is the small matter of the spouse. The spouse doesn’t want to convalidate the marriage in the Catholic Church, and in fact wants to remain in their present church, and makes life very difficult for the Catholic spouse. The Catholic spouse is at a crossroads — either they can go for a sanatio in radice and continue to stay with the non-Catholic spouse, or they can say “you know what, my leaving the Church, and taking up with this person, was displeasing to Almighty God in the first place, I’m going to pack my bags, accept the difficulties of divorce as my temporal punishment for having betrayed Our Lord, and start anew — and maybe even find a Catholic spouse who will help me save my soul”. Admittedly this becomes more difficult if children are involved. But my point should be clear. Under the 1983 CIC which made allowance for “leaving the Church by a formal act”, the Catholic is stuck in a valid marriage, and annulment might not be possible. Under Benedict’s revision to the 1983 CIC, they’re home free. They can either convalidate their marriage or not. But what they cannot do is continue to live in an invalid marriage. Time either to fish or to cut bait, as the saying goes.
 
Last edited:
Under Benedict’s revision to the 1983 CIC, they’re home free.
You mean free to go home, and not held back by a marriage to a spouse who never made a formal recognition of and consent to the responsibilities of the Catholic spouse prior to giving their own consent. Yes, exactly. Had the same couple married according to canonical form, the Church would have confirmed that the non-Catholic spouse had been informed of and accepted the responsibilities of the Catholic spouse.
 
As a genuine question, what would you call someone who claims that they no longer believe in the Church’s teachings?
I think Catholic-by-baptism is a fairly neutral term. It describes the position of how the Church considers them based on their rules. If you’re talking to a person who has left the Church, they might find it impolite to be referred to as Catholic without adding any qualifications. Terms like lapsed Catholic or fallen away Catholic can come off as patronizing, as if to say to that person we know what you think you want, but we know that you’re empty without the Church.
 
I am on my way back to the Church and will need a radical sanation – which, for various reasons, will not be an easy thing to sell to my husband.
Your husband need not be involved at all in a sanation.
Can. 1164 “A sanation can be granted validly even if either or both of the parties do not know of it; nevertheless, it is not to be granted except for a grave cause.”
Chapter X The Convalidation of Marriage including radical sanation with footnotes from Apostolic Letter issued “Motu Proprio” Omnium in mentem, modifying some canons of the Code of Canon Law (October 26, 2009) and Apostolic Letter issued ‘Motu Proprio’ “De concordia inter Codices” modifying some norms of the Code of Canon Law (31 May 2016) LITTERAE APOSTOLICAE MOTU PROPRIO DATAE DE CONCORDIA INTER CODICES Quibus nonnullae normae Codicis Iuris Canonici immutantur. FRANCISCUS (Spanish, Italian & Latin)

Spouse unwilling to seek convalidation of marriage. Fr Z blog
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top