Spiritual Marriage

[Bergon]

I am in the US. However I am referring to the entire world.

It may not apply throughout the entire world. You inform me, as I already believed to be the case, that in the USA the Church and civil marriage take place simultaneously. That happens too here in England. I’m sure it happens too in other countries.

there is a penalty period of a year (?) then they can be sacramentaly married.

I don’t understand what you mean.

I just find it odd that you can’t get married Anywhere sacramentally first.

Because the civil law says you must have the civil ceremony first. The Church recognises the right of civil governments to do this. It is not unjust or contradicts Church teaching on marriage. The Church, therefore, has no objections to this. Marriage isn’t simply a private matter between two individuals. It is a public institution. Marriage is the bedrock of society. That is why civil governments too have laws regulating marriage. Unless the Church considers a law unjust or contrary to the Church’s teachings it “canonises” civil laws and accepts them.

If I had the money I would set that up …

I’m not sure how you think you could achieve this.

 

[Bergon]

hmmmmm. Whether it is just or unjust really depends on the situation at hand.

Once upon a time a man and woman met and fell deeply in love. He had been married previously civilly but not sacramentally, his wife had kicked him out and divorced him years before. In time the new couple decided to get married. So they went and talked to a priest, taking marriage prep tests, they were very excited and still very much in love. When the priest asked for divorce paperwork, they found out at the court house that his paperwork was not complete due to a minor paperwork glitch, and had just been sitting there for years. Due to the slowness of the court system, and lack of money to get a lawyer to speed things up, it took another year for this paperwork to be completed and the divorce to civilly be finalized. During this year, things grew more and more difficult for the couple - in love, but unable to be sacramentally married. The man, being a man, and with no lack of testosterone, wanted to be close. The woman, trying to be devout, did not want to sin. Thus the tension grew, and many frustrations and fights grew out of this…

Who really lost in this case, I believe, was the womans child. The child’s father had died several years before. And I believe that if this couple could have been sacramentally married, then the man’s need to be close would have been met, and the woman’s spiritual desires would have also been met. Their financial situation would have vastly improved as they would have been together in one house rather than maintaining two. The child would have had a new father here on earth. Many, many things that became problems because of separateness would not have become problems.

…

When the man married civilly the Church recognised his marriage. The Church expects the same from civil marriage as from a Church one: they remain married until one of them dies. If he divorced he would also need the Church to evaluate his marriage in a tribunal. It would need to declare its nullity before he could marry a Catholic.

To marry a Catholic he would need both (1) a civil dissolution of his marriage (commonly called ‘divorce’) and (2) a degree of nullity of his marriage from the Church. The Church will not begin no. 2 until he has no. 1.

Without the Church’s decree of nullity the Church considers him still married. Thus he would be prevented from marriage because of the diriment impediment of prior bond.

Consequently, there is no way they could have been “sacramentally” married prior to his divorce.

 

[Phemie]

hmmmmm. Whether it is just or unjust really depends on the situation at hand.

Once upon a time a man and woman met and fell deeply in love. He had been married previously civilly but not sacramentally, his wife had kicked him out and divorced him years before. In time the new couple decided to get married. So they went and talked to a priest, taking marriage prep tests, they were very excited and still very much in love. When the priest asked for divorce paperwork, they found out at the court house that his paperwork was not complete due to a minor paperwork glitch, and had just been sitting there for years.
…

He could not be legally married to her since he was still married to his first wife and bigamy is against the law. The Church will not witness a marriage that is not legally allowed unless the law is unjust. In this case, it isn’t.

 

[Starrsmother]

When the man married civilly the Church recognised his marriage. The Church expects the same from civil marriage as from a Church one: they remain married until one of them dies. If he divorced he would also need the Church to evaluate his marriage in a tribunal. It would need to declare its nullity before he could marry a Catholic.

To marry a Catholic he would need both (1) a civil dissolution of his marriage (commonly called ‘divorce’) and (2) a degree of nullity of his marriage from the Church. The Church will not begin no. 2 until he has no. 1.

Without the Church’s decree of nullity the Church considers him still married. Thus he would be prevented from marriage because of the diriment impediment of prior bond.

Consequently, there is no way they could have been “sacramentally” married prior to his divorce.

The man and woman’s situation–if it truly happened— is indeed sad. However, many things in life are indeed sad. The man apparently couldn’t have been married even civilly when the new couple started wanting to, as his divorce paperwork had been setting somewhere unfinished for many years. The Catholic church takes marriage seriously–as Jesus said to do. It’s God who has issues with people divorcing and remarrying–the church simply acknowledges and follows God’s law in this. It really isn’t the church’s fault for insisting that certain criteria be met before they grant an annulment. The message here is really not the unfairness of the church in not rapidly processing and granting a marriage annulment. It is, rather, that any couple of any age who enters into any marriage should give deep thought to it prior to doing so. Hollywood–where people marry and divorce with the same frequency and ease as they change clothes–is not real life. In real life, there are consequences to each person’s actions. Frankly, while the above situation is sad–I don’t find it to be unfair or wrong. One other thing–and this is only my personal approach and certainly not a church law or such—but if my marriage broke up because my husband kicked me out or left or whatever, and if I felt that I wanted to ever date again in the future with the prospect of possible remarriage, I’d start the annulment process immediately–not after I finally found someone that I wanted to marry yesterday! Both the man and woman in question were presumably Catholic. They both knew the rules from the get-go. It’s a shame that life was so harsh for them–but what did they truly expect?

 

[Bergon]

The man and woman’s situation–if it truly happened— is indeed sad. However, many things in life are indeed sad. The man apparently couldn’t have been married even civilly when the new couple started wanting to, as his divorce paperwork had been setting somewhere unfinished for many years. The Catholic church takes marriage seriously–as Jesus said to do. It’s God who has issues with people divorcing and remarrying–the church simply acknowledges and follows God’s law in this. It really isn’t the church’s fault for insisting that certain criteria be met before they grant an annulment. The message here is really not the unfairness of the church in not rapidly processing and granting a marriage annulment. It is, rather, that any couple of any age who enters into any marriage should give deep thought to it prior to doing so. Hollywood–where people marry and divorce with the same frequency and ease as they change clothes–is not real life. In real life, there are consequences to each person’s actions. Frankly, while the above situation is sad–I don’t find it to be unfair or wrong. One other thing–and this is only my personal approach and certainly not a church law or such—but if my marriage broke up because my husband kicked me out or left or whatever, and if I felt that I wanted to ever date again in the future with the prospect of possible remarriage, I’d start the annulment process immediately–not after I finally found someone that I wanted to marry yesterday! Both the man and woman in question were presumably Catholic. They both knew the rules from the get-go. It’s a shame that life was so harsh for them–but what did they truly expect?

I am at a complete loss to understand why you should write this in response to my post.

I was pointing out to the OP the Church’s laws. Nowhere did I disagree with the Church. Nowhere did I say the situation was unfair. I don’t believe it’s unfair.

You have read into the situation the man was Catholic. If he was that would make things simpler and easier. It would be a lack of fom case.

I strongly suspect that your comments would be better addressed to the OP.

 

[Phemie]

I am at a complete loss to understand why you should write this in response to my post.

I was pointing out to the OP the Church’s laws. Nowhere did I disagree with the Church. Nowhere did I say the situation was unfair. I don’t believe it’s unfair.

You have read into the situation the man was Catholic. If he was that would make things simpler and easier. It would be a lack of fom case.

I strongly suspect that your comments would be better addressed to the OP.

Note that the OP said that the man’s DIVORCE was not final. He was still legally married.

The fact that the priest was moving ahead with marriage preparation until that came to light led me to assume that the man was indeed Catholic with no need for a decree of nullity due to his previous lack of form marriage.

 

[Starrsmother]

I am at a complete loss to understand why you should write this in response to my post.

I was pointing out to the OP the Church’s laws. Nowhere did I disagree with the Church. Nowhere did I say the situation was unfair. I don’t believe it’s unfair.

You have read into the situation the man was Catholic. If he was that would make things simpler and easier. It would be a lack of fom case.

I strongly suspect that your comments would be better addressed to the OP.

I apologize–I think I somehow posted my response onto the wrong post–I’m still a little new at this forum. I was responding to the poster who told the story about the couple who couldn’t obtain a rapid annulment due to his previous civil marriage. Again, I apologize if it was posted as a response to the wrong post.

 

[Bergon]

Note that the OP said that the man’s DIVORCE was not final. He was still legally married.

The fact that the priest was moving ahead with marriage preparation until that came to light led me to assume that the man was indeed Catholic with no need for a decree of nullity due to his previous lack of form marriage.

It wasn’t your post to which I was responding. I hoped this was clear by my quoting the poster to whom I was responding.

It seems to me to be a little unclear what religious affiliation the man has. I’m not even sure whether the OP is writing about a real situation or one from her imagination. The man’s religious affiliation will effect the procedure required.

 

[Bergon]

I apologize–I think I somehow posted my response onto the wrong post–I’m still a little new at this forum. I was responding to the poster who told the story about the couple who couldn’t obtain a rapid annulment due to his previous civil marriage. Again, I apologize if it was posted as a response to the wrong post.

Thank you for clearing this up. I did think you’d posted in response to another post even though you quoted mine. I couldn’t see how your response was generated by my post.

 

[Starrsmother]

Thank you for clearing this up. I did think you’d posted in response to another post even though you quoted mine. I couldn’t see how your response was generated by my post.

Again–sorry I upset you–I promise I’ll get this forum thing figured out. I’m ashamed to admit that this is the second time that I’ve posted to the wrong post–please forgive and have a wonderful day!

 

[Bergon]

Again–sorry I upset you–I promise I’ll get this forum thing figured out. I’m ashamed to admit that this is the second time that I’ve posted to the wrong post–please forgive and have a wonderful day!

Thank you for the apology Once was enough; there’s no need to keep apologising. It’s all sorted now. Thanks!

 

[GenosFutureWife]

Yes, it was a real situation.

The man was Catholic, but as the marriage wasn’t sacramental, the churches paperwork requirement would have just been a “lack of form” which takes like 1 day as opposed to an annulment which can take years.

And yes, it is / was very sad.

People keep tying sacramental marriage to civil marriage. I see that they are as different as a birth certificate and a baptismal certificate.

Just because you have both certificates doesn’t mean that there are two babies.It means two different things happened… one that the state is concerned with and has implications with taxes and social security and civil matters, the other spiritual that has implications with spiritual life and your relationship with God.

The other sacraments are not tied to civil paperwork, the church performs the sacrament with it’s own paperwork. (You need to have one sacrament before another one - that makes sense).

You don’t need medical records saying that you’re going to die before you get the last rites.

What was expected? Well, since a civil marriage before and independent of a sacramental marriage caused a bunch of problems yet was allowed. Why not allow a sacramental marriage before and independent of a civil marriage, which would solve a bunch of problems.

 

[Bergon]

Why not allow a sacramental marriage before and independent of a civil marriage, which would solve a bunch of problems.

Marriage is different.

Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist, Penance, Anointing of the Sick and Holy Orders are Christian sacraments. The state has no interest in them.

Marriage is a Chrisitan sacrament; however, it is not unique to Christians. That is why the state is concerned with marriage.

In some countries the sacramental marriage and civil marriage take place at one ceremony. In some countries the laws of that country require civil marriage first irrespective of what religious marriage might take place afterwards. This is NOT contrary to divine law. It is NOT contrary to the natural moral law. It is NOT contrary to ecclesiatical positive law. It is NOT unjust. Consequently, the Church has NO objections to this.

Even though you might continue to repeat the question the answer will not change.

 

[GenosFutureWife]

I don’t understand what you mean.

I’m not sure how you think you could achieve this.

Forgot to answer these, sorry:
If two people in my diocese decide to get married by a judge, rather than going through the 6 months of preparation & marriage with a priest, then the church (here) makes them wait a year before the church will bless their marriage and consider them sacramentally married. Since the couple go against the church’s wishes in the first place, it’s the churches way of trying to get the people to think about the importance of the church.

Meanwhile, if two people live together before marriage, some priests refuse to let them have a big / fancy wedding. But since priests (in this area) don’t all agree on that point, people who are living together and want a big wedding just go down the road to a different church.

With enough money, people achieve all kinds of things…

 

[Starrsmother]

Forgot to answer these, sorry:
If two people in my diocese decide to get married by a judge, rather than going through the 6 months of preparation & marriage with a priest, then the church (here) makes them wait a year before the church will bless their marriage and consider them sacramentally married. Since the couple go against the church’s wishes in the first place, it’s the churches way of trying to get the people to think about the importance of the church.

Meanwhile, if two people live together before marriage, some priests refuse to let them have a big / fancy wedding. But since priests (in this area) don’t all agree on that point, people who are living together and want a big wedding just go down the road to a different church.

With enough money, people achieve all kinds of things…

It’s really pretty futile for the Catholic church–or any church–to try to punish people for a prior sin if the folks don’t want to accept the punishment. I totally agree–and always have— with the 6 month waiting/training/learning period for prospective Catholic marriages. People need to really be sure before they enter marriage–especially a Catholic marriage where if they end up divorcing it is going to be a major hassle (and that’s being simplistic about it). As I always say, the Catholic church is not Hollywood–and no Catholic bride can expect the church to treat her like Elizabeth Taylor nor should a groom think his Catholic marriage will be approached as if he were Richard Burton! So if the couple can’t face the “inconvenience” of a 6 month wait–probably they should either opt for a civil ceremony or not be married at all!

Having said that, while I totally understand that the priest is trying to make a point that living together as a married couple before marriage is a sin, in this day and age it’s actually a surprising and a good and novel thing for any young couple to actually choose the sacrament of marriage over the ease and current social acceptability of simply living together. Marriage is fast becoming a minority set-up in our culture–sadly! If I had been living with someone (unlikely–I’ve been married 45 years–LOL!) or it were my child who had been living with someone and they decided to marry but wanted all the fancy dress, glitter and fan fare stuff of a big wedding–but a certain parish and priest wouldn’t co-operate— I’d hop on down the road too! I wouldn’t be mad–I guess a priest and parish have the right to set their own rules for such–but since the idea of only being allowed a certain “style” of wedding if a couple has been living in sin is not church law–I’d not feel a bit guilty to head on down the road to get what I preferred!

 

[Bergon]

Forgot to answer these, sorry:
If two people in my diocese decide to get married by a judge, rather than going through the 6 months of preparation & marriage with a priest, then the church (here) makes them wait a year before the church will bless their marriage and consider them sacramentally married. Since the couple go against the church’s wishes in the first place, it’s the churches way of trying to get the people to think about the importance of the church.

Meanwhile, if two people live together before marriage, some priests refuse to let them have a big / fancy wedding. But since priests (in this area) don’t all agree on that point, people who are living together and want a big wedding just go down the road to a different church.

With enough money, people achieve all kinds of things…

Money will buy you anything. For example, if I was a wealthy drugs trafficker I can afford to pay a murderer to kill my rivals to put them out of business and increase my income. An example that may appear to be inappropriate given the topic of discussion. I gave this example, though, to strongly emphasise the point that while we might be able to do something it doesn’t mean that we should.

We are all given free will by God. It is up to us about how we exercise that free will. One can choose to follow the path that God wants us to take, which includes being obedient to the Church.

 

[GenosFutureWife]

Money will buy you anything.

“anything” is giving money too much power. It can buy alot, but not anything.

… the point that while we might be able to do something it doesn’t mean that we should.

very true… like living together.

it was mentioned by Starrsmother about ‘young’ people… however I think it is even harder for ‘older’ people to not live together, as they are used to the closeness plus have often been burned by a previous relationship.

We are all given free will by God. It is up to us about how we exercise that free will. One can choose to follow the path that God wants us to take, which includes being obedient to the Church.

A prayer for those in disordered lives, and those struggling to be obedient to the church even though society taunts them not to be at every turn:

Dear God, please help these lonely and alone people people who want so badly to be physically close to an alive human being. People who for whatever reason can’t marry, yet yearn to be close. Help them to resolve these reasons, whether due to paper work or emotional baggage, or fear. Help them to do what is truly jut in the eyes of God and the church.
Blessed Mary our Mother, untie the knots that hold them back, and guide them towards the fulfillment and deepness of love that can only be felt within the bonds (both civilly and sacramentally) of marriage.
Jesus and all the Saints, guide our world, toward restoring marriage to the place of dignity and respect that the union deserves. Amen

 

[GenosFutureWife]

Tears and tears and more tears for those hurt by disordered lives and actions.