Sacramental marriage or not?

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Sure.

1. Many (not sure of a percentage) cases before Tribunals involve marriages that are certainly not Sacramental. At least one party is not baptized.

Even for the cases that involve two baptized people, the question is about validity, not Sacramentality. That being said, if a marriage between two baptized people is declared invalid, it was also, necessarily, not a Sacrament.

1. When a person presents a case to a Tribunal, he is alleging that his marriage is invalid because of some reason or other. The Tribunal’s answer is either “yes, it is invalid because of that reason” or “No, it hasn’t been proven invalid because of that reason.” The latter answer is not the same as “the marriage is valid.” A Tribunal can’t go beyond the presumed validity of the marriage and declare that the marriage is valid. For this reason, a person can present a case and “lose” but then present it again on different grounds and “win.”
2. … I don’t remember why I said that…and it was just this morning that I said it… The fact of divorce does not prove a marriage was invalid or make it invalid. If it was valid in the beginning, it will always be valid. If it was invalid, divorce can’t make it more invalid.

Dan

1. Yes, but many are sacramental
   2)Yes all of that is true.
2. ok

 

[EasterJoy]

Its more than that EJ, As Catholics we have sacraments. And these sacraments are instruments God has given His Church to dispense His Grace. I know many troubled marriages where one wonders if the sacramental aspect is not there the couple could be missing out on some Graces that would help not hurt the situation. So, one would think that there would be a way to check the sacramental nature of the marriage without giving authority to the state. This is troublesome with the idea that the state could and almost certainly will come back and say "You have given us precedent in the past and power over this one sacrament so, we now have say in the “new marriage” of today. By getting in bed with the state in regards to paperwork, divorce and annulments, the Church has conceded power. Imagine this type of intrusion with other sacraments. Say if one had to provide proof of membership in the Democratic party to revoke baptism…

Not only that but as we can see from the massive divorce rate of Catholics and skyrocketing annulment numbers the Church has many marriages that are not sacramental and are being left out of graces that may indeed help a couple who is struggling. But there is no way to check this…

Please note that any tone of frustration is not directed at you personally or even your post. I am sure you and I have similar views on what marriage is and should be. And you are not saying anything I really disagree with too much.

The Church has always “conceded” that all civil authority ultimately comes from God, giving the Christian the duty to obey civil authority unless doing so would violate divine precepts. I do not think I have to point out that there was no such thing as a civil government ultimately run by Christians at the time the New Testament was written. Whatever we have to fear from our civil government pales in comparison to the powers wielded by the governments that Rome had given to rule over the Christians who first heard these words:

Maintain good conduct among the Gentiles, so that if they speak of you as evildoers, they may observe your good works and glorify God on the day of visitation. Be subject to every human institution for the Lord’s sake, whether it be to the king as supreme or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the approval of those who do good. For it is the will of God that by doing good you may silence the ignorance of foolish people. Be free, yet without using freedom as a pretext for evil, but as slaves of God. Give honor to all, love the community, fear God, honor the king. 1 Pet. 2:12-17

and

Let every person be subordinate to the higher authorities, for there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been established by God. Therefore, whoever resists authority opposes what God has appointed, and those who oppose it will bring judgment upon themselves. For rulers are not a cause of fear to good conduct, but to evil. Do you wish to have no fear of authority? Then do what is good and you will receive approval from it, for it is a servant of God for your good. But if you do evil, be afraid, for it does not bear the sword without purpose; it is the servant of God to inflict wrath on the evildoer. Therefore, it is necessary to be subject not only because of the wrath but also because of conscience. This is why you also pay taxes, for the authorities are ministers of God, devoting themselves to this very thing. Pay to all their dues, taxes to whom taxes are due, toll to whom toll is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due.
Owe nothing to anyone, except to love one another; for the one who loves another has fulfilled the law. ** Rom. 13:1-8**

Again: The Church cannot forbid marriage to Catholics who have a right to marry. That is not disrespect for the sacrament, but rather respect for it. I’m sorry to say it, but it is naïve to believe that “truth, especially when both parities agree to find out the Truth, cannot be a bad thing.” If that is true, dear friend, why is there an inviolate seal on the sacrament of confession? Why do we not go back to the days when confession was always made in front of the assembly? We do not do that because we sinners are weak, and unfortunately we often make bad use of the truth. When we find that those who are closest to us have wronged us–I mean not only our spouse, but those close to us who are needed to testify in an investigation like this–by saying things unflattering to us, we usually don’t see that as a service to the truth. We see it as a betrayal.

These are policies, yes. From a pastoral care perspective, it is probably safe to say there is not one single best way to handle these things. For instance, I’m sure that back in the days when everyone knew that they’d have to confess their sins in front of everyone and would undoubtedly have to do a lengthy period of penance before being re-admitted to the sacraments, there was a greater horror of committing a sin than there is now. The Church has decided that the possible loss in the horror of sin that might come from strictly private confession is worth the benefits. There are undoubtedly princes of the Church who are more in agreement with you than with the current policy. I’m saying that the duty and authority of forming opinions and deciding these matters have been given to them.

*Obey your leaders and defer to them, for they keep watch over you and will have to give an account, that they may fulfill their task with joy and not with sorrow, for that would be of no advantage to you. Pray for us, for we are confident that we have a clear conscience, wishing to act rightly in every respect. * Heb. 13:17-18