So, what is a real marriage?

[Kelfa28]

Which countries? You can’t buy alcohol when you’re 14 but can make a commitment that lasts a life-time? Makes sense.

A huge majority of them if you allow for parental consent through the courts. Even in the US…it can go as young as 16 with parental consent.

So…if the parents say yes…and the couple is baptized as Catholic…the Church can marry them.

 

[Cat]

Why is it that in the U.S., people are not maturing until they are in their 20s? Why is it that most 14-16 year olds are not mature? Maybe we should think about that? I personally see a lot of parents who, IMO, are holding their children back from growing up. I don’t think this is a good thing.

I’m not sure that I think “maturity” is all that important in a marriage. All of us who marry are immature at first, even if we think we’re mature. We become more mature as the years pass (and then when we get older, we start de-maturing again!)

I think that “commitment” is more important in a marriage. and I think that immature people are capable of making a strong commitment. I know young children in the figure skating world who are not mature at all–they’re just fun little kids–but they are utterly committed to their sport. These kids set their alarms and are up with the birds so that they can get to the rink by 6:00 a.m. and put in a few hours of practice before school. Then after school, they come back to the rink for more practice, or they go to dance/ballet or music lessons, or some other activity that will help them to skate better.

I know a lot of young children who are “immature” (not capable of living on their own, not capable of making all of the decisions of life), but they are committed to music. I know third graders who are learning two instruments, and have achieved advanced levels in both instruments, even though they are still very immature.

I think that in the U.S., it’s difficult nowadays for young people to be married because they are generally unable to support themselves, and it seems that the Bible makes it clear that a man is supposed to leave his mother and father and cling to his wife. If the man has to live at home and/or accept lots of financial and other help from his parents, then he really isn’t ready for marriage because he can’t leave his parents and cling to his wife.

Of course, only a few generations ago, a man could get a good-paying job at age 15, and actually support a wife and children. But not nowadays, unless he is clever enough to do something like web-design. (I know a man who made a hundred thousand dollars in his freshman year of college doing web design from his dorm room. No college loan/debts for that guy!)

 

[JackieMom]

The problem is that this is a Catholic forum, and as Catholics we don’t get to have an opinion about this. The Church outlines what we must think. Sometimes it’s really hard for me to get on-board with Catholic teaching when it seems to defy my internal sense of right and wrong. Having said that, Church law is Church law - and a foolish youthful first marriage is the “real” marriage unless it is nullified.

Having said that, personally speaking, my opinion is that when children are involved one must go above and beyond to keep the second/false marriage together until the children are adults.

I think some of the posters on this board can be unduly harsh. I doubt very much that people go into a marriage assuming it will end in divorce. But this is a tough world, and many young adults have come from broken homes where there was a poor example of lifelong marital fidelity and happiness. They have not been taught virtue and chastity. Many young adult marry to escape a poor home life or because of an urgent “need” to create a stable place in the world. And they do not choose their spouses wisely. With so few healthy marital examples available, is it any wonder our 20-somethings are doing it wrong?

 

[Kelfa28]

I actually went through lists of legal ages to marry throughout the world just now.

What surprised me was how many western nations allow young marriage…even if it’s tough to obtain…it’s doable.

In the US, for example, you can get a court order and parental consent to marry as young as 15 in many states (New York, the Carolinas, Utah, New Hampshire) and as young as 13 if the girl is pregnant. I understand this is not normal or common…but it isn’t illegal at all.

My argument is if these conditions are met…and the conditions for a Catholic marriage are met…the Church can marry that young. It’s not impossible. It can absolutely happen.

In Mexico…parental consent goes as young as 15. Same with a few South American countries.

 

[1ke]

Let us remember, too, that the thread that sparked this one was not about a 14, or 16 or even 18 year old. She was 20, he was 23.

 

[Kelfa28]

Let us remember, too, that the thread that sparked this one was not about a 14, or 16 or even 18 year old. She was 20, he was 23.

Well, there you go.

They are practically elderly in comparison…

 

[Usige]

Why is it that in the U.S., people are not maturing until they are in their 20s? Why is it that most 14-16 year olds are not mature? Maybe we should think about that? I personally see a lot of parents who, IMO, are holding their children back from growing up. I don’t think this is a good thing.

I tend to agree. My wife and I started dating when she was 15. We knew we would get married by the time she was 16 (I was 18), but waited until she finished high school. We had already discussed by her 16th birthday that when we married it was for life. No trials; no lets see if it works out.Here we are 19 years later and are still married.

Even in the past 20 years I have seen a huge shift in the life readiness of teenagers.All of my brothers and sisters had jobs right after they turned 16 (some when they were 15). We knew that we had to have a plan to transition out of the house after graduation. It was just a given so my parents prepared us for it early on. For instance I had a checkbook at 16 and had to pay for car insurance, gas, entertainment, etc out of my paycheck. My parents didn’t pitch in to help. If I ran out of money guess I was walking to work. My 25 year old niece didn’t even think of getting a job until she was almost 22. She got out of college and had zero plan for how she was going to live, find a job, or pay her student loans.

I get that the economy sucks and it’s hard for kids to get a job, but that doesn’t mean they can’t be prepared. Both my teenagers learned to handle a checking account by 15. They know how to make a budget, plan for living expenses, etc. Why? Because my wife and I want them to be able to be independent and make adult decisions. BTW did I mention that they have more life skills then my niece, yet both have learning disabilities?

I read an article a while back that part of that is because in the US we have made everything risk free for kids. Parents drive their kids 4 blocks to Jr. High; playgrounds are designed so that kids have nearly zero chance of getting hurt; kids expelled for minor dust ups because of “zero tolerance” to fighting; etc. Because of that kids never have to learn to make calculated risks (if I jump off the monkey bars, I might get hurt). That stunts their ability to make decisions and judge consequences.

Too often parents now don’t let their kids fail and don’t help them gain the tools to become adults. Is it no wonder we have growing numbers of 30 year olds living in their parents’ basements. That cannot solely be an issue of the economy.

 

[Usige]

Another thread got me thinking. Which is the real marriage? The one entered into by two young, dumb people “in love”, which results in no children and a quick divorce, or the one entered into later by two mature people who have the same goals/ideas about marriage/consider it seriously and results in children?

My personal opinion is that all marriages like the first should be declared null in favor of the second marriage.

The first marriage is the real marriage, as in the valid marriage, unless there was an impediment. Being young and in love does not equate to nullity.

Have to agree with 1ke (like there is any other option ). Making stupid choices isn’t a get out of jail free card. One might say the young, dumb kids weren’t aware of the true nature of marriage and therefore there was a defect of consent, but that has nothing to do with their age, maturity, or lack of kids.

The general issue is poor catechesis on what marriage is. When my wife and I prep couples for marriage some years half of them think adultery is a reason to bail; failing out of love is a reason to get divorced; their spouse becoming someone else is a reason to leave. Interesting thing is those answers tend to come more often from our couples in their 30s and 40s or that already have been divorced. As we tell them “know that one of you will live to bury your spouse.” Our couples in their early 20s overwhelmingly get it.

If we want people to have successful and valid marriages it’s not by lowering the “standards” for what is valid; it is preparing kids in their early teens to understand what marriage is. Too often the sacrament of marriage is not address to high-schoolers because they are “too young; it will be 10 - 15 years before they are ready.”

In my opinion we need to prepare our kids for the reality of true sacramental marriage early rather than late if we don’t want the trend to continue.

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

Saying “it never took place” is the unfortunate way someone described once it and it took hold. Whether it was verbal shorthand or someone was trying to explain it another way, I don’t know but it isn’t accurate.

Regardless, it is still not true (as was suggested) that being married to someone who has received a decree of nullity means you are also “married” to that other person.

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

Another thread got me thinking. Which is the real marriage? The one entered into by two young, dumb people “in love”, which results in no children and a quick divorce,

That sounds like my first marriage, and this

or the one entered into later by two mature people who have the same goals/ideas about marriage/consider it seriously and results in children?

sounds like my second marriage.

My personal opinion is that all marriages like the first should be declared null in favor of the second marriage.

In my case, the Tribunal agreed.

I don’t want to make it sound so cut and dry, though, because it is a serious matter. Permanent intention against children is reason to declare a marriage invalid.

 

[BettyBoop416]

[A]s Catholics we don’t get to have an opinion about this. The Church outlines what we must think. Sometimes it’s really hard for me to get on-board with Catholic teaching when it seems to defy my internal sense of right and wrong.

Before I say what I am about to say, for the benefit of any forum moderators who are feeling the urge to moderate, or any of my fellow posters who feel a (well meaning, I’m sure) urge to report me,I do not mean this to be disrespectful to the Church or to anyone who believes that the Church teaches The Truth. What follows is my personal opinion, expressed as respectfully as I can, and nothing else. OK…with that said…

In all honesty…and with all due respect…I simply do not understand this line of thinking. We’re not allowed an opinion? We are told what to think? Every fiber of my being is repelled by this. My sense of logic, common sense, and like JackieMom, my internal sense of right and wrong, tells me that the second marriage is the real one. (When I say “the second marriage,” I am referring to some hypothetical second marriage where a family is being raised in a hypothetical happy, harmonious home following a disastrous hypothetical first marriage that was entered into while passing through an immature stage of life. I am not referring to any marriages that were referred to in any threads, living or dead, that were removed by any forum moderator because in his/her wisdom, which far exceeds my level of wisdom, they were contrary to the peace and order situation of the Catholic Answers Forum, because to mention those removed threads would probably be in violation of The Rules.)

Edit to add: When I mention JackieMom’s internal sense of right and wrong, I am speaking in general - that Catholic teaching sometimes conflicts with my internal sense of right and wrong. I’m not suggesting that JackieMom shares my opinion about the validity of any marriages, real or imaginary.

 

[rayne89]

Some young people are mature enough to handle marriage. However, many people today don’t really mature until their mid to late twenties. These “starter marriages” are far too common. One mistake and that’s it- you’re bound to some dude for life? Almost better for people to get married civilly if this is the result.

The original thread that started this was the husband wasn’t ambitious enough for her liking and just wanted to take over his father’s deli. Her second husband is well educated and they have a lovely home. A husband working at a deli is not a reason for annulment. I married at 18, we don’t have a lot of money. I realize this is a consequence of not going to college and getting married young. That was our decision and we live with that. We are still very happily married.

 

[Kelfa28]

In all honesty…and with all due respect…I simply do not understand this line of thinking. We’re not allowed an opinion? We are told what to think? Every fiber of my being is repelled by this. My sense of logic, common sense, and like JackieMom, my internal sense of right and wrong, tells me that the second marriage is the real one. (When I say “the second marriage,” I am referring to some hypothetical second marriage where a family is being raised in a hypothetical happy, harmonious home following a disastrous hypothetical first marriage that was entered into while passing through an immature stage of life. I am not referring to any marriages that were referred to in any threads, living or dead, that were removed by any forum moderator because in his/her wisdom, which far exceeds my level of wisdom, they were contrary to the peace and order situation of the Catholic Answers Forum, because to mention those removed threads would probably be in violation of The Rules.)

You are allowed to feel this way. It is a difficult concept to accept.

We put God first…in every aspect of our lives. That is the first thing that happens and we recognize that the Church is the bride of Christ and the representation of God on earth.

The Church knows best…humans don’t and I don’t need to go out there and prove to you how flawed human beings are. You can’t turn a corner without running into that fact.

The thing is…we must recognize that the first marriage is for life. That is where the mistake lies and that is what must be fixed.
The Church doesn’t need to change it’s teaching to reflect our infallible nature. It won’t change it’s teaching to make us happy. It’s something we need to recognize and accept.

You should never go into a marriage lightly without seriously understanding that even when it comes to adultery, even when it comes to financial fraud and other difficult times…you can’t just go out and get a divorce and “start over.”
There is no do-over with marriage.

We aren’t saying that someone must live in an abusive marriage or put up with numerous adulterous relationships…that is what separation is for. DIvorce doesn’t exist within the church.

You have to recognize that the Church doesn’t take into account immaturity and will “feel bad” when something like this happens. It has it’s teachings and it won’t change them.

That is why annulments are difficult to get because they need to prove that the first marriage never happened and it doesn’t exist.

It’s a different mindset…but you can’t just arrive at this mindset right away. It takes time, prayer and reflection on what is Truth and why it’s true. Once you arrive, it makes perfect sense.

 

[JackieMom]

The original thread that started this was the husband wasn’t ambitious enough for her liking and just wanted to take over his father’s deli. Her second husband is well educated and they have a lovely home. A husband working at a deli is not a reason for annulment. I married at 18, we don’t have a lot of money. I realize this is a consequence of not going to college and getting married young. That was our decision and we live with that. We are still very happily married.

You must not have read that whole thread.

 

[JackieMom]

Before I say what I am about to say, for the benefit of any forum moderators who are feeling the urge to moderate, or any of my fellow posters who feel a (well meaning, I’m sure) urge to report me,I do not mean this to be disrespectful to the Church or to anyone who believes that the Church teaches The Truth. What follows is my personal opinion, expressed as respectfully as I can, and nothing else. OK…with that said…

In all honesty…and with all due respect…I simply do not understand this line of thinking. We’re not allowed an opinion? We are told what to think? Every fiber of my being is repelled by this. My sense of logic, common sense, and like JackieMom, my internal sense of right and wrong, tells me that the second marriage is the real one. (When I say “the second marriage,” I am referring to some hypothetical second marriage where a family is being raised in a hypothetical happy, harmonious home following a disastrous hypothetical first marriage that was entered into while passing through an immature stage of life. I am not referring to any marriages that were referred to in any threads, living or dead, that were removed by any forum moderator because in his/her wisdom, which far exceeds my level of wisdom, they were contrary to the peace and order situation of the Catholic Answers Forum, because to mention those removed threads would probably be in violation of The Rules.)

Edit to add: When I mention JackieMom’s internal sense of right and wrong, I am speaking in general - that Catholic teaching sometimes conflicts with my internal sense of right and wrong. I’m not suggesting that JackieMom shares my opinion about the validity of any marriages, real or imaginary.

This has been my biggest stumbling block with The Church by far. Agreeing with her when my gut and innate sense of right and wrong tells me otherwise. It is surely always going to be a work in progress for me, because I am a strong-willed person with firm opinions. It’s hard!

 

[The_Bucket]

Since when did the teaching that marriage is for life become controversial or “heartless”? Pretty sure everyone was in agreement on this for centuries.

 

[The_Bucket]

This has been my biggest stumbling block with The Church by far. Agreeing with her when my gut and innate sense of right and wrong tells me otherwise. It is surely always going to be a work in progress for me, because I am a strong-willed person with firm opinions. It’s hard!

I’ll agree with that; being a relatively smart person has its burdens when that intellect is coupled with pride. And Iv’e got pride in spades.

 

[jmcrae]

Well, there you go.

They are practically elderly in comparison…

Most 20 year olds are heading into the final year of their first University degree. The important decisions that will determine the rest of their lives have already been made.

As Cat has pointed out, many people already know their life’s passion at the age of 4 or 5, and are already committed to a sport or a craft.

In everything else except marriage, we expect people to adhere to their commitments - even if they were only four years old at the time that they first entered into them. This doesn’t mean that we expect every four year old to know what his passion is and follow it night and day - but then again, neither do we expect every 23 year old to get married.

But those who do have set up an expectation for themselves to follow through and keep their commitments.

As someone else pointed out, an 18 year old can buy a house, and is expected to make mortgage payments every month until the house is paid for, and we would not excuse them on the basis of their immaturity if they were to miss a payment - an 18 year old is bound to any legal or financial commitments that he or she makes, and suffers the same penalties as any other adult if they don’t follow through.

People need to understand that marriage is an even more serious commitment than that - it’s until death - which, with longer life expectancies, can mean something like 80 years, in the case of a 20 year old.

 

[90Domer]

Marriage lasts a lifetime. Period

Why not skip the semantics and just BE the two mature people entering into the first marriage? The End.

There is no second marriage.

This is my gripe with people’s view point on marriage. Everyone still thinks that divorce is perfectly fine…and that, hey…we can just get an annulment if it doesn’t work out.

That should NEVER cross a couple’s mind. Separation is one thing…divorce is something entirely different.

If a priest has any inclination that a couple isn’t ready for marriage…he shouldn’t feel obligated to marry them.
Sadly…I think many priests fail to take on uncomfortable confrontations.

The annulments shouldn’t be made easier to get…marriage in the first place should be harder to get.
No one should ever go into a marriage bypassing the “till death” vow. You take your vows and you mean them.

Agree. And it is also a big failure of the marriage prep ministry. This makes me sad.

FYI: All my aunts and uncles, my parents and grandparents god married at young ages…18 or 19. Of course their marriages were tough, but divorce was never an option. And they are still going strong celebrating 50-60 yrs of marriage.

 

[90Domer]

Some young people are mature enough to handle marriage. However, many people today don’t really mature until their mid to late twenties. These “starter marriages” are far too common. One mistake and that’s it- you’re bound to some dude for life? Almost better for people to get married civilly if this is the result.

The sacrament of matrimony shouldn’t be taken lightly. And I disagree that people today don’t mature as early. If anything, they have a lot more resources available to them than previous generations.

It has simply become too convenient to say that they were young and immature.