The Sacrament of Matrimony

[phil19034]

There was a side bar discussion going on in another thread about Catholic Marriage.

So I suggested moving this conversation to another thread, as to not continue to sidebar the the other thread.

a poster stated the below:

1ke this will be my last post since I have other things to do…when a person gets a dispensation… it does not automatically mean that they will get a Catholic SACRAMENTAL wedding… it may just be a catholic BLESSING

Just because a marriage is considered VALID by the CHURCH does not make it SACRAMENTAL

for example: a civil wedding is VALID in the eyes of the Church meaning it respects the laws of the STATE but it is not SACRAMENTAL and it is not VALID in the eyes of the LORD

If a catholic wants to marry in a wedding officiated by a non-catholic minister and gets dispensation, that may be VALID in the eyes of the Church but it is not SACRAMENTAL meaning not valid in the eyes of the Lord ( common grounds for annulment)

SORRY for the Capital Letters, I’m just trying to highlight the important terms… God bless!

I wanted to address what the Sacrament is Matrimony is:

Two baptized people who are validly married are entered into the Sacrament of Matrimony. The Catholic Church views that Protestants have two valid Sacraments:

Baptism & Matrimony.

Whenever two baptized people are validly married, they enter into the Sacrament of Matrimony.

**Dispensation **was also addressed. Dispensation (in layman terms) is required when Catholics marry outside the Catholic Church. Dispensation is required to insure that the Catholic and his/her spouse understand the Catholic teaching regarding the Sacrament.

The Church views all marriages as valid unless there is reason to doubt it. When a Catholic marries outside the Church without a dispensation, the said Catholic is breaking canon law. This act indicates either (a) a defiance of the Church or (b) a lack of understanding the Catholic truths regarding the Sacrament of Matrimony. Therefore, when a Catholic marries without dispensation, it places the validity of the marriage in doubt.

**Convalidations **were addressed as well. A convalidation is when two people who are legally married but NOT validly married get married inside the Catholic Church. Convalidations typically only happens when a couple is in an invalid marriage. Typically this is when husband and/or wife is a baptized Catholic and they were married outside the Catholic Church withoutdispensation.

When two baptized protestants convert to the Catholic Church, they do NOT receive a convalidation because the Church already views them as Sacramentally Married.

Furthermore, if a Baptized person is validly married to a non-Christian (for example a Catholic validly married to a Jew and received permission from the Church to do so), and then the non-Christian becomes Baptized years after the “natural marriage,” it automatically becomes a Sacramental Marriage. The couple does not need to get remarried in the Church.

Natural Marriages are valid marriages, which are NOT Sacramental. These are marriages between two non-Christians or one baptized and one unbaptized.

One thing that was not mentioned is a Radical Sanation. A Radical Sanation (which I have) is when a couple is invalidly married and then receives “retroactively” receive dispensation from the Bishop after an interview by the bishop and/or priest. The Radical Sanation typically takes place when one spouse for one reason or another, views that their initial vows were 100% valid and therefore does not consent to re-exchanging their vows. So the Church interviews at least the Catholic (if both are not Catholic) to determine that their intent to marry was in line with the truth of the Sacrament of Matrimony. Once the Radical Sanation is granted, the Church then recognizes the marriage to be valid. And if both husband & wife are validly Baptized, then the marriage is considered to be Sacramental.

Finally, the **Annulment **process is a process where a Church Tribunal determines that a marriage was not valid. A valid natural marriage is not eligible for an annulment. The only time a non-sacramental marriage can be voided is via the Petrine Privilege or Pauline Privilege.

BTW - I would also like to point out that two Catholics cannot receive a dispensation to be married outside the Catholic Church, except for very rare and dyer circumstances.

God Bless!

 

[Usige]

I didn’t see the original side bar, but you have summarized Church teachings fairly well.

Really a dispensation has zero to do with the sacramental nature of marriage. All a dispensation does is exempts a specific marriage from an ecclesiastical impediment. A dispensation only deals with the validity, not the sacramentality of a marriage.

If the Church considers a marriage valid it is also sacramental between two baptized people. It is actually impossible for two baptized Christians to have a valid marriage that is not sacramental. This is because Christ raised marriage to the dignity of a sacrament between the baptized and it is therefore a matter of divine law not ecclesiastic law.

As for the quoted situation where a Catholic receiving a dispensation from canonical form later receives an annulment because they were not married in the Church? That should not happen. If a couple received a dispensation it cannot (or atleast should not) be the basis for future annulment petitions. Why? Because once an impediment is dispensed it no longer effects the validity of that marriage. It is possible that a marriage with a dispensation is later found to be invalid for other reasons, but the dispensated impediment should not be the basis.

Long and short, if the marriage is valid it is automatically sacramental if both parties are baptized. As your correctly state, even a valid natural marriage automatically becomes sacramental when one or both parties later become baptized. That is exactly what happened to my wife and I when she was baptized 10 years after we married. The first 10 years were a natural marriage and the last 11 were sacramental. This understanding has been confirmed by both our judicial vicar and diaconal formation director.

 

[Gorgias]

**Dispensation **was also addressed. Dispensation (in layman terms) is required when Catholics marry outside the Catholic Church.

BTW - I would also like to point out that two Catholics cannot receive a dispensation to be married outside the Catholic Church, except for very rare and dyer circumstances.

Not “outside the Catholic Church”, per se, but married “in a building that isn’t a Catholic church building”. As was mentioned, it is rare to the point of non-existence for two Catholics to be given permission to marry in a place other than a church.

The Church views all marriages as valid unless there is reason to doubt it.

“Lack of form” marriages aren’t given this benefit of the doubt.

Convalidations typically only happens when a couple is in an invalid marriage.

“Typically”? The only reason for a convalidation – that is, a valid marriage ceremony – is that the couple is, in fact, in an invalid marriage…!

The Radical Sanation typically takes place when one spouse for one reason or another, views that their initial vows were 100% valid and therefore does not consent to re-exchanging their vows. So the Church interviews at least the Catholic (if both are not Catholic) to determine that their intent to marry was in line with the truth of the Sacrament of Matrimony.

Important point: the “view that the initial vows were valid” isn’t the canonical reason for the sanation, but just the practical reason that this approach is utilized.

More importantly: the sanation doesn’t take place if “intent to marry” was present at a single point in time – in fact, it’s consent, not intent, that’s what is in play – rather, it’s that, at some point, consent was present and did not cease. From that point, the sanation ‘takes effect.’

The only time a non-sacramental marriage can be voided is via the Petrine Privilege or Pauline Privilege.

Natural marriages may be dissolved, not ‘voided’.

 

[1ke]

Forget it Phil.

First this poster is not coming over here to continue the discussion.

Second, the ideas espoused contradict Church teaching and even though provided citations from CCC and Canon Law the poster rejects this documentation.

So, what’s the point of this conversation?

So far, the only people on this thread are people who understand the correct teaching.

 

[phil19034]

Forget it Phil.

First this poster is not coming over here to continue the discussion.

Second, the ideas espoused contradict Church teaching and even though provided citations from CCC and Canon Law the poster rejects this documentation.

So, what’s the point of this conversation?

So far, the only people on this thread are people who understand the correct teaching.

I thought it was worth a shot.

 

[phil19034]

Your initial advise to the OP was that it was ok to marry with the non-catholic minister officiating it…we are not talking about deacons… I really do wonder why there are so many annulments in america. Most of this annulments are cases like this… you just cannot advise people to marry on protestant grounds with a non catholic minister…very uncalled for as a catholic…It is not me promoting error because it is not me throwing canon law and catechisms of the catholic church just like what protestants do with bible verses…things can be interpreted in various ways and the most qualified people are the priest. Only them can tell the OP that it is ok to marry outside the church or with a non-catholic minister… It is not your calling to do that.

I believe the reason why we have so many annulments in America is a complex issue. But we first need to understand why so many Americans divorce.

1. Number one reason fornication. When couples fornicate, they allow sex to influence their marriage discernment process. They feel so connected to their partner because that’s what sex does (there is a reason it’s called “making love.”). Then, they enter into marriage with someone who may or may not be actual fit for them. Typically, they don’t even realize it until they have children.

When a couple is chaste, they can’t use sex as a way to tell if they are compatible. The only thing they have is examination of what kind of parent the potential spouse will be. Do they agree on fundamental issues regarding child rearing? What is the extended family like, etc.

1. redefinition of marriage. Due to fornication and “no fault divorce” marriage has been redefined by the culture as a bond or contract between two people who love each other and want to share a life together. Which sounds peachy, but it’s forgetting the number one reason for marriage: the CREATION of new life. The fundamental purpose of marriage is the creation of new life and the care of the children. Love and happiness are important, but they are not the main reason for marriage. People can have love and happiness without marriage. But it takes a man & a woman to naturally bring a new life into the world.
2. American is a Protestant country with a historically Protestant culture. While American does have one of the largest Catholic populations in the world, Catholic are still outnumbered by Protestants. Most Catholic parishes no longer have a steady influx of orthodox Catholics from orthodox Catholic nations moving into their parishes to help combat the protestant culture.
3. America is becoming quickly becoming, thanks to a mis-understanding of the separation of Church and State, a secular nation.
4. Finally, due to the the wars of the 20th century and the confusion after Vatican II (mainly thanks to the media and dissent Catholics), many Catholics no longer are well Catechized nor evangelized. Parents depended on child faith formation classes to teach their children about the Faith because they didn’t understand the changes and what was Catholic teaching and what wasn’t. Catholics during the 40s and 50s were very well Catechized, but they often didn’t understand the theology behind the teachings of the Church. So when the changes came after Vatican II and more importantly the anti-establishment subculture during the 60s and 70s, parents were not able to properly explain the faith to the kids of the 60s and 70s. Then, those kids had their own children and they weren’t able to teach their kids either, leading us to today.

The above reasons (and I’m sure there are more) greatly contribute to the divorce rate in America.

So why does that impact annulments? Because if person enters into marriage, not believing in the sanity of marriage and believing that divorce is OK, then it raises this question: Did the sacrament take place? If the husband or wife doesn’t really believe in the sanity of marriage while taking his/her vows and believes that the vows are really just some kind of cultural tradition, then how are they conducting the sacrament? If they are stilling there consciously or subconsciously thinking “hey, if this doesn’t work we can always get a divorce,” then they are not really consenting to their vows.

Because the Latin Church view is that the Sacrament is ministered by the couple and that the Church witnesses and vouches for the marriage; a bride or groom not believing in their vows is a theological problem.

Additionally, in America, the Church has developed more inefficiencies to speed up the annulment process by eliminating some red tape by better using technology and project management techniques (not by taking short cuts or blindly giving our annulments).

Now, to one of your subtle points: does mixed marriages play a part? Yes they can play apart in divorces, but this doesn’t mean the marriage wasn’t valid and isn’t sacramental.

However, sometimes when people enter into mixed marriages, they may not have had a strong foundation in their faith (again sometimes, not always). So if a mixed marriage is annulled, it is not invalid because it is mixed. It is deemed invalid because proper intent/consent during the marriage ceremony didn’t exist.

God Bless

 

[His_helpmeet]

I believe the reason why we have so many annulments in America is a complex issue. But we first need to understand why so many Americans divorce.

1. Number one reason fornication. When couples fornicate, they allow sex to influence their marriage discernment process. They feel so connected to their partner because that’s what sex does (there is a reason it’s called “making love.”). Then, they enter into marriage with someone who may or may not be actual fit for them. Typically, they don’t even realize it until they have children.

When a couple is chaste, they can’t use sex as a way to tell if they are compatible. The only thing they have is examination of what kind of parent the potential spouse will be. Do they agree on fundamental issues regarding child rearing? What is the extended family like, etc.

1. redefinition of marriage. Due to fornication and “no fault divorce” marriage has been redefined by the culture as a bond or contract between two people who love each other and want to share a life together. Which sounds peachy, but it’s forgetting the number one reason for marriage: the CREATION of new life. The fundamental purpose of marriage is the creation of new life and the care of the children. Love and happiness are important, but they are not the main reason for marriage. People can have love and happiness without marriage. But it takes a man & a woman to naturally bring a new life into the world.
2. American is a Protestant country with a historically Protestant culture. While American does have one of the largest Catholic populations in the world, Catholic are still outnumbered by Protestants. Most Catholic parishes no longer have a steady influx of orthodox Catholics from orthodox Catholic nations moving into their parishes to help combat the protestant culture.
3. America is becoming quickly becoming, thanks to a mis-understanding of the separation of Church and State, a secular nation.
4. Finally, due to the the wars of the 20th century and the confusion after Vatican II (mainly thanks to the media and dissent Catholics), many Catholics no longer are well Catechized nor evangelized. Parents depended on child faith formation classes to teach their children about the Faith because they didn’t understand the changes and what was Catholic teaching and what wasn’t. Catholics during the 40s and 50s were very well Catechized, but they often didn’t understand the theology behind the teachings of the Church. So when the changes came after Vatican II and more importantly the anti-establishment subculture during the 60s and 70s, parents were not able to properly explain the faith to the kids of the 60s and 70s. Then, those kids had their own children and they weren’t able to teach their kids either, leading us to today.

The above reasons (and I’m sure there are more) greatly contribute to the divorce rate in America.

So why does that impact annulments? Because if person enters into marriage, not believing in the sanity of marriage and believing that divorce is OK, then it raises this question: Did the sacrament take place? If the husband or wife doesn’t really believe in the sanity of marriage while taking his/her vows and believes that the vows are really just some kind of cultural tradition, then how are they conducting the sacrament? If they are stilling there consciously or subconsciously thinking “hey, if this doesn’t work we can always get a divorce,” then they are not really consenting to their vows.

Because the Latin Church view is that the Sacrament is ministered by the couple and that the Church witnesses and vouches for the marriage; a bride or groom not believing in their vows is a theological problem.

Additionally, in America, the Church has developed more inefficiencies to speed up the annulment process by eliminating some red tape by better using technology and project management techniques (not by taking short cuts or blindly giving our annulments).

Now, to one of your subtle points: does mixed marriages play a part? Yes they can play apart in divorces, but this doesn’t mean the marriage wasn’t valid and isn’t sacramental.

However, sometimes when people enter into mixed marriages, they may not have had a strong foundation in their faith (again sometimes, not always). So if a mixed marriage is annulled, it is not invalid because it is mixed. It is deemed invalid because proper intent/consent during the marriage ceremony didn’t exist.

God Bless

I think you’re quite right. I think that generally the people looking for declarations of nullity fall into one of about 3, possibly 4, groups:

1. People who have divorced and remarried and wish to become Catholic.
2. People who are Catholic but have either “fallen away” or were poorly catechized and are divorced and either remarried or wanting to remarry and have returned to the Church.
3. Divorced non-Catholics wishing to marry Catholics.

Possible 4:
People who were not initially Catholic and married outside the Church, then converted, had the marriage fail, and wish to remarry a Catholic. (My DH falls into this category.)

 

[jupiter2]

Could someone please explain the difference between a valid natural marriage (Catholic-to-be-after-RCIA married to an unbaptized non-Catholic, no prior marriages on either side) and a sacramental marriage? I know that it is baptism that separates the two definitions, but what is the actual difference in terms of Catholic living (receiving Eucharist, etc.)?

I’m new to all of this and trying to get my head around what I’m getting into.

 

[dans0622]

Could someone please explain the difference between a valid natural marriage (Catholic-to-be-after-RCIA married to an unbaptized non-Catholic, no prior marriages on either side) and a sacramental marriage? I know that it is baptism that separates the two definitions, but what is the actual difference in terms of Catholic living (receiving Eucharist, etc.)?

I’m new to all of this and trying to get my head around what I’m getting into.

Hello,

For a Catholic in a legitimate marriage (aka, “natural marriage”), compared to a Catholic in a Sacramental marriage, I can think of no “actual difference in terms of Catholic living.”

Dan

 

[jupiter2]

Thank you for responding to my post Dan. That is VERY reassuring.

 

[agapewolf]

Could someone please explain the difference between a valid natural marriage (Catholic-to-be-after-RCIA married to an unbaptized non-Catholic, no prior marriages on either side) and a sacramental marriage? I know that it is baptism that separates the two definitions, but what is the actual difference in terms of Catholic living (receiving Eucharist, etc.)?

I’m new to all of this and trying to get my head around what I’m getting into.

Sacraments bring grace. So, its going at it without the sacramental grace.

 

[jupiter2]

Thank you, agapewolf. I don’t really understand what “sacramental grace” is though when it comes to marriage. Is it a supernatural help? Our marriage is okay, pretty good by most standards, but it could be better. If this means a supernatural dimension (protection from temptation, for example) it sure is something I would like to have.

 

[thistle]

Thank you, agapewolf. I don’t really understand what “sacramental grace” is though when it comes to marriage. Is it a supernatural help? Our marriage is okay, pretty good by most standards, but it could be better. If this means a supernatural dimension (protection from temptation, for example) it sure is something I would like to have.

Two baptised Protestants (e.g. Methodists, Lutheran etc) who marry are both validly and sacramentally married.

 

[agapewolf]

The Catechism is a great resource

2003 Grace is first and foremost the gift of the Spirit who justifies and sanctifies us. But grace also includes the gifts that the Spirit grants us to associate us with his work, to enable us to collaborate in the salvation of others and in the growth of the Body of Christ, the Church. There are sacramental graces, gifts proper to the different sacraments. There are furthermore special graces, also called charisms after the Greek term used by St. Paul and meaning “favor,” “gratuitous gift,” “benefit.”53 Whatever their character—sometimes it is extraordinary, such as the gift of miracles or of tongues—charisms are oriented toward sanctifying grace and are intended for the common good of the Church. They are at the service of charity which builds up the Church.54 (1108, 1127, 799-801)

 

[phil19034]

Thank you, agapewolf. I don’t really understand what “sacramental grace” is though when it comes to marriage. Is it a supernatural help? Our marriage is okay, pretty good by most standards, but it could be better. If this means a supernatural dimension (protection from temptation, for example) it sure is something I would like to have.

When in a natural marriage where only one spouse is Baptized (like I am) the sacramental graces (which are unlocked by Baptism) are only coming to the marriage via half of the couple.

When both are baptized, the graces can come from both sides (of course, assuming that both spouses are living in a state of grace).

Make sense?

 

[agapewolf]

When in a natural marriage where only one spouse is Baptized (like I am) the sacramental graces (which are unlocked by Baptism) are only coming to the marriage via half of the couple.

When both are baptized, the graces can come from both sides (of course, assuming that both spouses are living in a state of grace).

Make sense?

This isn’t correct. When only one is baptized, it isn’t a sacrament, which means there is no sacramental grace. You can’t have half a sacrament.

 

[Vico]

Could someone please explain the difference between a valid natural marriage (Catholic-to-be-after-RCIA married to an unbaptized non-Catholic, no prior marriages on either side) and a sacramental marriage? I know that it is baptism that separates the two definitions, but what is the actual difference in terms of Catholic living (receiving Eucharist, etc.)?

I’m new to all of this and trying to get my head around what I’m getting into.

Each of the seven sacraments has the potential to bring sanctifying grace. It is potential, because the recipient must be properly disposed. Also there must be validity. There are seven Holy Sacraments, but some do not receive a sacrament in the celebration of matrimony, because both are not baptized, or because it is flawed somehow, so is only putative.CIC

Can. 1061 §3. An invalid marriage is called putative if at least one party celebrated it in good faith, until both parties become certain of its nullity.

Can. 1055 §1. The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life and which is ordered by its nature to the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring, has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament between the baptized. §2. For this reason, a valid matrimonial contract cannot exist between the baptized without it being by that fact a sacrament.

A natural marriage has natural goals for the good of life on earth whereas sacramental marriage has, in addition, the purpose of the spouses helping each other and children to attain heaven through the sacramental graces. Also the natural marriage may be dissolved, just as a non-consummated sacramental marriage may be dissolved.

 

[Gorgias]

For a Catholic in a legitimate marriage (aka, “natural marriage”), compared to a Catholic in a Sacramental marriage, I can think of no “actual difference in terms of Catholic living.”

Spoken like a true (canon) lawyer!

(Just teasing… )

Dan,

You’ve addressed the words in the question, and in a very specific way. Yes, there is no difference in terms of externals. Yet, one suspects that’s not the heart of the question (my apologies if I’m wrong). If the question were simply “is there an actual difference?”, the answer would have to be ‘yes’…

 

[dans0622]

Spoken like a true (canon) lawyer!

(Just teasing… )

Dan,

You’ve addressed the words in the question, and in a very specific way. Yes, there is no difference in terms of externals. Yet, one suspects that’s not the heart of the question (my apologies if I’m wrong). If the question were simply “is there an actual difference?”, the answer would have to be ‘yes’…

Hello,

I understood the question to be a practical one (the notion of “Catholic living” with the example of receiving Holy Communion) and so I gave a practical answer: that person would live his life just as a Catholic in a sacramental marriage would, with the same rights and responsibilities.

The other question in that post (the difference between legitimate and sacramental marriage) is one that would have a different answer–yes, there is a difference. I didn’t feel like answering that one…I don’t consider myself competent to say much other than a basic remark or two.

Dan

 

[jupiter2]

I’m going with your first answer Dan, since my mind is getting boggled by the whole thing. I’ll have to take one step at a time and worry about the finer points later. As long as I can function practically as a Catholic, that’s okay for now.

Unless that just opened up something else that is all complicated . . .