Rules regarding Marriage?

[Aramis]

As to the issue of “Pro-choice and Catholic”… reading the last page of Humane Vitae makes it clear that the entire document is required to have at least assent of will… and in that context, it is impossible to be openly pro-choice without sin.

 

[Seatuck]

Have I ever said otherwise?

Maybe I missed it later in the thread. Sorry if I jumped to a conclusion. It just seemed to be omitted in the earlier post.

 

[adrift]

Have I ever said otherwise?

Your answer led me to believe that the marriage was valid. Perhaps you would explain more. The Church, you said, regards it as civil marriage. So why than would it need to be a convalidation? I have been taught that such an attempt at marriage is invalid and can be used as an annulment. So as to your question the answer is yes.

 

[benedictgal]

[Edited]

The Church does not recognize civil marriages. In order for the Church to recognize the marriage, it must be contracted under her norms and regulations. In other words, it must follow the guidelines set forth in the Nuptial Rite. That is why civil marriages are declared invalid and must be convalidated in order to restore the couple (or, at least the Catholic party involved in the marriage) into full communion with the Church.

A marriage officiated by a JP may be recognized by the state, but, not by the Church.

Let me give you this example. I live in Texas, just across the Rio Grande from Mexico. In Mexico, the state does not recognize marriages contracted by the Church. Therefore, the couple must have both a civil and religious ceremony. Some couples would marry first in the Church and then by the state. Had they done it the other way around, then they would need a convalidation in order to have their marriage recognized by the Church.

Cross the border back into Texas and the same marriage would only need to be contracted by the Church to gain recognition from the state. The priest signs the marriage license.

 

[benedictgal]

Just some technical housekeeping:

I do not know how to delete the quote from adrift that I posted onto my post. I need to remove it since adrift deleted the post. Would someone be so kind as to help me with this?

I have exceeded my 20 minute edit time frame and need to honor adrift’s request. If any moderators are viewing, please help me.

 

[Jean_Anthony]

Please take discussions about Church teachings to the Apologetics forum. Thank you all.

 

[Aramis]

On the matter of the form of the wedding: here’s what canon law requires:

THE FORM OF THE CELEBRATION OF MARRIAGE

Can. 1108 §1. Only those marriages are valid which are contracted before the local ordinary, pastor, or a priest or deacon delegated by either of them, who assist, and before two witnesses according to the rules expressed in the following canons and without prejudice to the exceptions mentioned in cann. ⇒ 144, ⇒ 1112, §1, ⇒ 1116, and ⇒ 1127, §§1-2.

§2. The person who assists at a marriage is understood to be only that person who is present, asks for the manifestation of the consent of the contracting parties, and receives it in the name of the Church.

Can. 1109 Unless the local ordinary and pastor have been excommunicated, interdicted, or suspended from office or declared such through a sentence or decree, by virtue of their office and within the confines of their territory they assist validly at the marriages not only of their subjects but also of those who are not their subjects provided that one of them is of the Latin rite.
[snip of details on the minister’s status]

Can. 1115 Marriages are to be celebrated in a parish where either of the contracting parties has a domicile, quasidomicile, or month long residence or, if it concerns transients, in the parish where they actually reside. With the permission of the proper ordinary or proper pastor, marriages can be celebrated elsewhere.

Can. 1116 §1. If a person competent to assist 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 only:

1/ in danger of death;

2/ outside the danger of death provided that it is prudently foreseen that the situation will continue for a month.

§2. In either case, if some other 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.

Can. 1117 The form established above must be observed if at least one of the parties contracting marriage was baptized in the Catholic Church or received into it and has not defected from it by a formal act, without prejudice to the prescripts of ⇒ can. 1127, §2.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P40.HTM

It’s pretty darned explicit. If they the OP and their betrothed do not get married in the presence of a Catholic Cleric, they are not married validy; an invalid marriage is automatically also illicit. And sex outside a valid marriage is grave matter.

There is dispensation from 1108 available, but they are baptized and confirmed… and thus bound by Canon Law.

 

[Ruthie]

I don’t know if the OP is still reading this thread, but if you are…

But those of you who have been laying on the “my way or the highway” lines… you should be ashamed that you are not tolerant, kind, and forgiving people.

It might *sound *like we are intolerant. I’ll grant you that! But please, read between the lines.

All the “rules” in the Church are there for one reason - to get you to Heaven. All the posters on this thread want that, too. We do not want you to be in mortal sin at the hour of your death.

We want you to be in a sacramental marriage because the sacrament gives you graces to help keep your marriage strong, and because to be Catholic and marry outside the norms is to be in grave sin.

Some of us are a bit curmudgeonly in how we put it. Some of us have made the same points, so often, to so many different people, that we tend to hone it down to the essentials and forget to be charitable about it. Plus, we’ve seen our Church trashed by those who claim to be Catholic but don’t follow her teachings, so we may be a bit testy, to say the least!

It is Christ, through His Church, that says “my way or the highway.” He put it this way: “Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. ****For the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few.” (Matt 7:13-14 RSV)

The “highway” leads to Hell, which is not where you want to spend eternity. The Church is not trying to turn us into unthinking zombies. (In fact, as a convert, I thought my way *into *the Church.)

All of her teachings are based in love, the kind of love that wants you in Heaven above all else. I researched the “rules” I had a problem with (same as yours, by the way), and found the love behind them.

I am very sorry that you have met people that have made you think the Church is “intimidating and self-righteous.” We are not saints, not even the Pope.

Not even me!

God bless you,

Ruthie

 

[Pax_Vobiscum_57]

I am the bride.
**
I have mixed feelings about raising children in ANY religion. **I feel like I wasn’t given a choice in the matter, and I feel that my children should have one. My fiance (groom) does know how I feel about the church, he knows my apprehension to marry in it. Like I said, **neither of us is a practicing Catholic, but he told me just the other day that he was attending church regularly up until he met me. And I felt just horrible about that.
**
Like I said, just because I don’t agree with everything the church teaches doesn’t mean I don’t believe in some of it, or most of it, actually. So, its not like I’m anti-catholic, and pretending. It would mean something to me to be married in the Catholic Church, I just don’t know that it’s all THAT important to me, but want everyone to be happy, as I’ve said over and over. And the other part of me wants it to all be easy, and just have a simple outdoor wedding, which a priest won’t perform… so that’s why I’m asking questions about Convalidation. But, I’ve been researching on other sites, and some of the sites are saying that you can’t get the marriage Convalidated if you simply “chose” not to have a Catholic wedding to begin with… which would be our case.

I’m just so confused about it all… so many rules!

Bold emphasis mine.

My opinion (everybody’s got one!) is that you should not be married in the Catholic Church if you do not intend to practice your faith. Regardless of whether you had just the rite of Holy Matrimony or a whole Mass, if you get married in the Church, you promise to raise your children Catholic.

If you are not practicing, and only want the rite for traditional reasons, you are making a mistake.

May I ask why it’s so important to you to have a Catholic wedding but not a Catholic marriage?

 

[jeanannemarie]

I am the bride.
I think that you should straighten out your issues on the Church before you even think of planning a wedding. This sounds like a recipe for disaster.
I have mixed feelings about raising children in ANY religion. I feel like I wasn’t given a choice in the matter, and I feel that my children should have one. My fiance (groom) does know how I feel about the church, he knows my apprehension to marry in it. Like I said, neither of us is a practicing Catholic, but he told me just the other day that he was attending church regularly up until he met me. And I felt just horrible about that.

Like I said, just because I don’t agree with everything the church teaches doesn’t mean I don’t believe in some of it, or most of it, actually. So, its not like I’m anti-catholic, and pretending. It would mean something to me to be married in the Catholic Church, I just don’t know that it’s all THAT important to me, but want everyone to be happy, as I’ve said over and over. And the other part of me wants it to all be easy, and just have a simple outdoor wedding, which a priest won’t perform… so that’s why I’m asking questions about Convalidation. But, I’ve been researching on other sites, and some of the sites are saying that you can’t get the marriage Convalidated if you simply “chose” not to have a Catholic wedding to begin with… which would be our case.

I’m just so confused about it all… so many rules!

I think you should address your issues about the Church before you even think of planning a wedding. It sounds like a recipe for disaster.