Reasoning behind Catholics living in invalid marriage?

[QwertyGirl]

Mmmmm…. That isn’t sounding right. That knowledge isn’t required to do any of those things. I think sometimes as human beings we are just curious about things. And that is fine. It is the way it should be. Except we should respect privacy.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

I imagine he wants to know their reasons bc:
1.) He desires them to receive all the divine grace that will surely be poured forth if they validate their marriage.
2.) He wants to encourage them and knowing their reasons might assist him. Even if he just prays for them.
3.) In short he wants to know bc he loves them.

All of the above, as well as

• wishing for them to avoid hell
• wishing to see God glorified in all things, and for Him not to be offended by sin

There is also another thing. One of the themes, for lack of a better word, in what we have come to call the “Sacrament of Reconciliation”, is that the sinner has not only offended God, but he has injured and offended the community. Therefore the penitent seeks to be reconciled to both. Implicit in this is that everybody’s sin is, in some way, everybody else’s business — not that we need to know the secret sins of others, but that all sin injures the Body of Christ, of which we all are a part.

 

[Nmc]

I was including your 2 bullet points in loving them.
God bless you! He has given you the grace of holy zeal for the salvation of souls.

 

[Nmc]

That is true, but no member of the body has not injured it.
I think taking another’s sin as an injury to oneself is a trap. Bc the true victim is Our Lord who was crucified for us.

 

[Nmc]

Scandal is of course injurious to the faith.

 

[Psalm30]

There is a fifth reason:

• Know and agree with the Church’s teaching, and gamble that they will either live long enough for the sinful situation to resolve itself (e.g., the original spouse to die), or that they will have enough advance notice of their death to set things right with God before they die. I have known of both of these scenarios. There could be great temporal advantage in their entering into, or remaining in, an invalid marriage — the self-actualization of both partners through romantic love, temporal happiness, wealth, prestige, sexual compatibility, and so on — and they could hope to “have their cake and eat it too”, gaining these advantages and having an eventual way out of the sinful situation.

I’d say that fits at least one of the other four broad categories I mentioned.

But in any case…you know this how? Did they tell you this? And even so, could this be your interpretation of what they actually said? Which may or may not be correct…

My own son (age 12) may one day choose, despite everything I’ve ever taught him, to attempt an invalid marriage. Knowing how to reach him would be very, very important.

I’m still finding this whole thread a little bit odd. Your son is 12 and already you are preparing yourself to intervene if he one day attempts an invalid marriage. That is a minimum of six years down the road, probably more. Why not focus on teaching him the faith at each stage of his development. Do the best you can to instill good values in him and make sure he understands Church teaching. Then, after he is eighteen and on his own, you’re going to have to make peace with the fact that he will be free to make his own decisions, some of which you may not agree with. But you will know you did the best you could to teach him.

 

[Nmc]

If he really digs in now on why someone remains in an invalid marriage he may avoid the need for intervention down the road.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

But in any case…you know this how? Did they tell you this? And even so, could this be your interpretation of what they actually said? Which may or may not be correct…

Nobody “told” me this. at least not directly. In one case, I observed outward phenomena based upon my knowledge of the situation. In the other case, the spouse’s priest told me that she repudiated her marriage on her deathbed. (I am assuming that she did this outside of the confessional seal. He pointed her out by name in explaining to me that such a thing can happen.)

Your son is 12 and already you are preparing yourself to intervene if he one day attempts an invalid marriage. That is a minimum of six years down the road, probably more. Why not focus on teaching him the faith at each stage of his development. Do the best you can to instill good values in him and make sure he understands Church teaching. Then, after he is eighteen and on his own, you’re going to have to make peace with the fact that he will be free to make his own decisions, some of which you may not agree with. But you will know you did the best you could to teach him.

Be assured that I do precisely this. He learns his faith, and he learns it at a deep level. We have studied the concept of valid sacramental marriage versus invalid marriage. I have already told him that if he marries invalidly, it will be a mortal sin, and that I will not come to the wedding. I have told him that I would love him no less, I would not shun him or his wife, and that I would treat them with Christian charity and kindness — but that I will not attend a sinful, invalid wedding. He understands this.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

If he really digs in now on why someone remains in an invalid marriage he may avoid the need for intervention down the road.

Quite right. “Nipping problems in the bud” is a very good way of avoiding problems in the first place.

 

[Psalm30]

In one case, I observed outward phenomena based upon my knowledge of the situation.

It’s really hard not to see this as you judging someone when you don’t necessarily have all the information.

In the other case, the spouse’s priest told me that she repudiated her marriage on her deathbed. (I am assuming that she did this outside of the confessional seal. He pointed her out by name in explaining to me that such a thing can happen.)

This seems extremely inappropriate for a priest to do. Did he really need to mention her by name?

decisions, some of which you may not agree with. But you will know you did the best you could to teach him.

This is all you can do. You have done your job. If he enters into an invalid marriage after you have done what you describe, there’s really nothing more you can do — for your son or anyone else. Everyone has free will. You can’t force them not to commit sin. Even God doesn’t do that.

 

[babochka]

What are some of the ways that Catholics might attempt to defend their choice to live in an invalid marriage (and thus live in the sin of ongoing fornication or adultery)?

I am not asking anyone to condone or justify this choice — I know I certainly don’t — but I would like some insight as to the psychology going on in these situations.

Some possible rationales I’ve thought of:

• The Church is wrong, behind the times, and out of touch with people.
• Celibate males don’t understand marriage.
• Love is more important than doctrine.
• The Church will eventually change to allow this, it just hasn’t happened yet.
• It’s not a big enough sin to worry about, certainly not bad enough to go to hell.
• Everybody else does it, so it can’t be wrong.
• I don’t feel like I’m doing anything wrong.
• Being in good standing with the Church doesn’t have anything to do with my relationship to God.
• I’ll settle things up with God before I die.

Any other ideas?

A person was already in an invalid marriage upon converting to or returning to Catholicism and leaving such a marriage would destroy an intact family.

For example: A fallen away Catholic woman marries a divorced man outside of the church. Fifteen years and three children later, she feels a strong pull to return to the Church of her childhood. She goes to confession, only to discover that her marriage is not recognized recognized in the church. She and her husband are raising three children together. Her husband, not being Catholic, cannot wrap his mind around the idea that they should live as brother and sister. It seems to him that the church desires to tear apart his happy marriage of 15 years. What does she do?

 

[babochka]

QwertyGirl:

The Catholics I know who do it, do it because of family relations. They have children and sometimes grandchildren and they believe God will judge them based on the way they looked out for the well-being of others (emotional, physical, etc) before He judges that they weren’t married in the Church. They don’t really worry about it. Perhaps they are more cultural Catholic, but they seem pretty faith-filled in all other areas.

You can be the most benevolent, self-sacrificing person in the world, and if you die with one unconfessed, unrepented mortal sin on your soul… you’re toast.

And yet, the church teaches that there are mitigating factors that can significantly reduce or eliminate culpability for a sin that is objectively a grave matter.

 

[Emeraldlady]

There is also another thing. One of the themes, for lack of a better word, in what we have come to call the “Sacrament of Reconciliation”, is that the sinner has not only offended God, but he has injured and offended the community. Therefore the penitent seeks to be reconciled to both. Implicit in this is that everybody’s sin is, in some way, everybody else’s business — not that we need to know the secret sins of others, but that all sin injures the Body of Christ, of which we all are a part.

I don’t think this is a good principle to adopt. There is a sinful curiousity that serves to subconsciously feed our sense of superiority in comparing our holiness to their sinfulness. It’s probably not a healthy activity.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

In one case, I observed outward phenomena based upon my knowledge of the situation.

Friends of the family. I know the circumstances. I am judging no one.

There is such a thing as being careful about who you allow yourself to fall in love with in the first place. If it will lead you into sin, don’t let it begin.

A fallen away Catholic woman marries a divorced man outside of the church. Fifteen years and three children later, she feels a strong pull to return to the Church of her childhood. She goes to confession, only to discover that her marriage is not recognized recognized in the church. She and her husband are raising three children together. Her husband, not being Catholic, cannot wrap his mind around the idea that they should live as brother and sister. It seems to him that the church desires to tear apart his happy marriage of 15 years. What does she do?

Not to sound cruel, but she created this situation when she chose to fall away and marry outside the Church. The Church does everything she can to accommodate people in situations like this (annulment, lack of form procedure, sanatio in radice), but sad to say, sometimes it can’t be fixed. There are consequences to sin, and sometimes those consequences don’t stop to ask whether you were in “good conscience”, whether you had sufficient reflection, whether you had full consent of the will, and so on. That’s just reality.

There is also another thing. One of the themes, for lack of a better word, in what we have come to call the “Sacrament of Reconciliation”, is that the sinner has not only offended God, but he has injured and offended the community. Therefore the penitent seeks to be reconciled to both. Implicit in this is that everybody’s sin is, in some way, everybody else’s business — not that we need to know the secret sins of others, but that all sin injures the Body of Christ, of which we all are a part.

It could be. Catholics typically don’t compare their spiritual state to anyone else’s. In fact, it is very un-Catholic to go around praising other people’s goodness or holiness, or to talk about one’s own. I would very much like to see the emphasis of the Sacrament of Penance be upon restoring the state of one’s soul with God, not on some communitarian sentiment.

 

[Emeraldlady]

Catholics typically don’t compare their spiritual state to anyone else’s.

On the contrary, sadly it is a common vice and the first of the seven deadly sins. Pride.

 

[Psalm30]

Friends of the family. I know the circumstances. I am judging no one.

Do you know every single thing that goes on in their heart, soul, and intellect regarding the situation? Have all three conditions of mortal sin been met?

Not to sound cruel, but she created this situation when she chose to fall away and marry outside the Church. The Church does everything she can to accommodate people in situations like this (annulment, lack of form procedure, sanatio in radice ), but sad to say, sometimes it can’t be fixed. There are consequences to sin, and sometimes those consequences don’t stop to ask whether you were in “good conscience”, whether you had sufficient reflection, whether you had full consent of the will, and so on. That’s just reality.

This is quite cruel, and I think you know that, or else you wouldn’t have prefaced it the way you did. I would advise you to walk a mile in the shoes of such a person before saying what you’ve said here.

And, honestly, you’ve contradicted yourself in this very paragraph. You pointed out all the accommodations the Church makes, at least one of which (annulments) is contingent on being in good conscience, sufficient reflection, and consent of the will at the time of the marriage vows.

There is such a thing as being careful about who you allow yourself to fall in love with in the first place. If it will lead you into sin, don’t let it begin.

This is far less simple than you’re making it out to be. Really…you have an answer for everything. Can you not at least acknowledge that people in these situations are human, have made mistakes, still love God and want to do the right thing, and maybe deserve a little bit of mercy and compassion rather than have every one of their faults and mistakes thrown back in their face?

 

[HomeschoolDad]

Not to sound cruel, but she created this situation when she chose to fall away and marry outside the Church. The Church does everything she can to accommodate people in situations like this (annulment, lack of form procedure, sanatio in radice ), but sad to say, sometimes it can’t be fixed. There are consequences to sin, and sometimes those consequences don’t stop to ask whether you were in “good conscience”, whether you had sufficient reflection, whether you had full consent of the will, and so on. That’s just reality.

What I am saying is the unvarnished truth. A priest — which I am not — could and should phrase it in the most diplomatic way he can. I will never be in the position of telling someone that nothing can be done for their marriage, and that they must live as brother and sister. The priest may. As I said, the Church will do everything for the couple that they can. In fact, they bend over backwards. Many more annulments are granted than denied.

Still, though, sometimes people have to face up to awful, horrible truths that they’d rather not face up to. Let’s say that I am in an accident and my ability to perform the marital act is forever destroyed. My wife and I must “live as brother and sister” for the rest of our lives. Or taking it away from the sexual realm: people get injured, or have strokes, and are rendered paraplegics. This happened to my own grandmother as well as to a friend of mine, as well as actor Christopher Reeve and baseball player Lou Gehrig. It wasn’t right, it wasn’t fair, but it happened.

Likewise, the fact that a marriage situation might not be able to be resolved is an awful, horrible truth. People sometimes have to make great sacrifices, suffer injustices, and even see suffering caused for others in the name of doing the right thing and avoiding sin. There is such a thing as martyrdom, and there is such a thing as temporal punishment for sin. I don’t have a way to change that. Again, the Church does everything she can, for precisely these reasons.

Life is short and these sufferings will soon be over. If we have died in God’s friendship, we will never suffer again. If we have died at enmity with God, and this is the most awful truth imaginable, our sufferings will be just beginning.

 

[Psalm30]

What I am saying is the unvarnished truth. A priest — which I am not — could and should phrase it in the most diplomatic way he can. I will never be in the position of telling someone that nothing can be done for their marriage, and that they must live as brother and sister. The priest may. As I said, the Church will do everything for the couple that they can. In fact, they bend over backwards. Many more annulments are granted than denied.

Still, though, sometimes people have to face up to awful, horrible truths that they’d rather not face up to. Let’s say that I am in an accident and my ability to perform the marital act is forever destroyed. My wife and I must “live as brother and sister” for the rest of our lives. Or taking it away from the sexual realm: people get injured, or have strokes, and are rendered paraplegics. This happened to my own grandmother as well as to a friend of mine, as well as actor Christopher Reeve and baseball player Lou Gehrig. It wasn’t right, it wasn’t fair, but it happened.

Likewise, the fact that a marriage situation might not be able to be resolved is an awful, horrible truth. People sometimes have to make great sacrifices, suffer injustices, and even see suffering caused for others in the name of doing the right thing and avoiding sin. There is such a thing as martyrdom, and there is such a thing as temporal punishment for sin. I don’t have a way to change that. Again, the Church does everything she can, for precisely these reasons.

Life is short and these sufferings will soon be over. If we have died in God’s friendship, we will never suffer again. If we have died at enmity with God, and this is the most awful truth imaginable, our sufferings will be just beginning.

I think the point many of us are trying to make — and that you are missing — is that you don’t know who is in God’s friendship and who isn’t. Even with people and situations you know personally, it is impossible to know where they stand with God. Many of us have attempted to answer your original question and have pointed out that there are mitigating factors that reduce a person’s culpability, but you continue to insist that there is something they can and should have done differently, when in reality, it’s really not that simple.

I appreciate your concern for people’s immortal souls, but regardless of why people are in invalid marriages, all you can do is explain what the Church teaches and why, and then pray for them. There isn’t anything you can do beyond that. We all have free will and no one can stop a person from living in a sinful marriage, or from committing any other sin.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

I think the point many of us are trying to make — and that you are missing — is that you don’t know who is in God’s friendship and who isn’t. Even with people and situations you know personally, it is impossible to know where they stand with God. Many of us have attempted to answer your original question and have pointed out that there are mitigating factors that reduce a person’s culpability, but you continue to insist that there is something they can and should have done differently, when in reality, it’s really not that simple.

I appreciate your concern for people’s immortal souls, but regardless of why people are in invalid marriages, all you can do is explain what the Church teaches and why, and then pray for them. There isn’t anything you can do beyond that. We all have free will and no one can stop a person from living in a sinful marriage, or from committing any other sin.

You concede that these marriages are invalid and sinful. That is good. That is a far cry from saying “the Church is wrong” — you didn’t say this, but others might. Assigning a level of culpability is another thing entirely, and I do not profess to do this.

The Church moves heaven and earth to accommodate difficult marriage situations. Some procedural norms have recently been streamlined. For that matter, even as much of a traditionalist ogre as I am, I would take things further than that. I would go so far as to allow couples filing for annulments simply to file affidavits, sworn under the pain of mortal sin of perjury, that they did not have due discretion, or freedom from grave fear or duress, or what have you — no corroboration from third parties, no proofs needed, no second-guessing their honesty, just word of honor. If they are lying, then it is on them, not on the Church. (A good dose of “come to Jesus” about the malice of perjury and the eternal punishments it merits would be in order.) That is about as liberal as you could possibly make it, short of saying “sacramental marriages may be dissolved”.

This has been a good discussion, but there is really nothing beyond this that I can add to it. Thank you.

 

[Psalm30]

Assigning a level of culpability is another thing entirely, and I do not profess to do this.

Some of your posts, in my humble opinion, came extremely close to assigning culpability. Maybe you did not intend it, but that’s how it came across.

The Church moves heaven and earth to accommodate difficult marriage situations. Some procedural norms have recently been streamlined. For that matter, even as much of a traditionalist ogre as I am, I would take things further than that. I would go so far as to allow couples filing for annulments simply to file affidavits, sworn under the pain of mortal sin of perjury, that they did not have due discretion, or freedom from grave fear or duress, or what have you — no corroboration from third parties, no proofs needed, no second-guessing their honesty, just word of honor. If they are lying, then it is on them, not on the Church. (A good dose of “come to Jesus” about the malice of perjury and the eternal punishments it merits would be in order.) That is about as liberal as you could possibly make it, short of saying “sacramental marriages may be dissolved”.

Far more people get annulments than not. I agree the Church is generous.

This has been a good discussion, but there is really nothing beyond this that I can add to it. Thank you.

Peace be with you.