When is a person considered a spouse?

[sophie71]

I have been wondering when is a spousal relationship formed because there are many moral precepts that revolve around the relationships between spouses and between spouses and other people. Is there a spousal relationship- as understood by the Catholic church- in the examples below. Any reference to valid or invalid is assuming a Catholic tribunal‘s decision.

1-A marriage between a man and woman in a religious ceremony. For discussion sake, the marriage is valid.

2-A marriage between a man and woman in a religious ceremony. For discussion sake, the marriage is invalid.

3-A marriage between a man and woman in a civil ceremony. For discussion sake, the marriage is valid.

4-A marriage between a man and woman in a civil ceremony. For discussion sake, the marriage is invalid.

5-A marriage between two men or between two women in a religious ceremony. This is obviously an invalid “marriage.” However, is there a spousal relationship? For example, would a man commit adultery against his “husband” if he dated a woman while he was “married.”?

6-A marriage between two men or between two women in a civil ceremony. Same comments as no. 5.

I am particularly interested in responses to numbers 3-6. Thanks.

 

[thistle]

I have been wondering when is a spousal relationship formed because there are many moral precepts that revolve around the relationships between spouses and between spouses and other people. Is there a spousal relationship- as understood by the Catholic church- in the examples below. Any reference to valid or invalid is assuming a Catholic tribunal‘s decision.

1-A marriage between a man and woman in a religious ceremony. For discussion sake, the marriage is valid.

2-A marriage between a man and woman in a religious ceremony. For discussion sake, the marriage is invalid.

3-A marriage between a man and woman in a civil ceremony. For discussion sake, the marriage is valid.

4-A marriage between a man and woman in a civil ceremony. For discussion sake, the marriage is invalid.

5-A marriage between two men or between two women in a religious ceremony. This is obviously an invalid “marriage.” However, is there a spousal relationship? For example, would a man commit adultery against his “husband” if he dated a woman while he was “married.”?

6-A marriage between two men or between two women in a civil ceremony. Same comments as no. 5.

I am particularly interested in responses to numbers 3-6. Thanks.

You are missing a key point and that is if the two are baptised or not.

The marriage of a baptised man to a baptised woman is both valid and sacramental even if it is a civil marriage.

 

[Monte_RCMS]

You are missing a key point and that is if the two are baptised or not.

The marriage of a baptised man to a baptised woman is both valid and sacramental even if it is a civil marriage.

Absolutely correct.

Good point.

I think, also, the Church recognizes a marriage between two unbaptized persons, if done in their own religion, such as a Hindu man and a Hindu woman getting married in a proper Hindu ceremony.

 

[markomalley]

I have been wondering when is a spousal relationship formed because there are many moral precepts that revolve around the relationships between spouses and between spouses and other people. Is there a spousal relationship- as understood by the Catholic church- in the examples below. Any reference to valid or invalid is assuming a Catholic tribunal‘s decision.

1-A marriage between a man and woman in a religious ceremony. For discussion sake, the marriage is valid.

2-A marriage between a man and woman in a religious ceremony. For discussion sake, the marriage is invalid.

3-A marriage between a man and woman in a civil ceremony. For discussion sake, the marriage is valid.

4-A marriage between a man and woman in a civil ceremony. For discussion sake, the marriage is invalid.

5-A marriage between two men or between two women in a religious ceremony. This is obviously an invalid “marriage.” However, is there a spousal relationship? For example, would a man commit adultery against his “husband” if he dated a woman while he was “married.”?

6-A marriage between two men or between two women in a civil ceremony. Same comments as no. 5.

I am particularly interested in responses to numbers 3-6. Thanks.

#5 and #6 are easy: any sexual act outside of a valid marriage is fornication, the first cousin to adultery. Since it is simply nonsensical to consider that there is even the possibility of a “marriage” between two members of the same sex, it is not possible for a man to have licit sex with a man or a woman with a woman.

Likewise, if a partner in such a “marriage” was to date another person, regardless of the sex of the other person, it would be spending social time with another person. If, as part of that dating, there was a sexual relationship, it would still be fornication.

Let’s take it one step farther, though. If a participant in a homosexual “marriage” was to then fall in love with and desire to marry a member of the opposite sex, the participant in the homosexual “marriage” would need to confess incidents of fornication, but there would be no “marriage” to annul, as such a marriage couldn’t exist in the first place.

As to the other four, you don’t give enough detail…

But, in general (with the facts you’ve given), if a marriage is invalid, it means there is no marriage. If there is no marriage, there can be no adultery. On the other hand, any sexual acts committed outside of a valid marriage are fornication. If, in the case of #2 and #4, the detail I would want would be if either of the parties who attempted the invalid marriage were ever in a valid marriage (thus the reason for the invalidity of the marriage). If they were, then they would be guilty of adultery against the spouse with whom they were validly married.

 

[o_mlly]

From the Catholic Code of Canon Law:

Canon 1061.1 A valid marriage between baptised persons is said to be merely ratified, if it is not consummated; ratified and consummated, if the spouses have in a human manner engaged together in a conjugal act in itself apt for the generation of offspring. To this act marriage is by its nature ordered and by it the spouses become one flesh.

 

[puzzleannie]

the definition of a spouse is a married person, so if someone is not validly married, they are not a spouse. Is this a trick question?

 

[Seatuck]

the definition of a spouse is a married person, so if someone is not validly married, they are not a spouse. Is this a trick question?

It seems like it doesn’t it? Not sure what the purpose is…

 

[sophie71]

But, in general (with the facts you’ve given), if a marriage is invalid, it means there is no marriage. If there is no marriage, there can be no adultery. On the other hand, any sexual acts committed outside of a valid marriage are fornication. If, in the case of #2 and #4, the detail I would want would be if either of the parties who attempted the invalid marriage were ever in a valid marriage (thus the reason for the invalidity of the marriage). If they were, then they would be guilty of adultery against the spouse with whom they were validly married.

I appreciate all of the thoughtful answers. I included the same sex “marriage” questions to see if there would be any difference in the responses based on the genders involved. Perhaps even with an invalid marriage between a man and a woman certain moral obligations could still be in play. I do not mean to pose any tricks.

I would like to ask a follow-up question.

Following the logic of the above quoted statement I ask:

If a woman was in a marriage that would very likely be deemed invalid for clear, objective reasons (for example, invalidity for lack of proper canonical form as when a Catholic marries in a civil setting), would she be committing a sin if she dated (chastely and not fornicating) while in the process of getting a divorce from her husband? She would be emotionally but not physically involved with the third party.

Could the person she dates be violating the commandment that forbids coveting another’s spouse? (Which goes back to the original question: Is there a spousal relationship?) Thank you.

 

[markomalley]

Following the logic of the above quoted statement I ask:

If a woman was in a marriage that would very likely be deemed invalid for clear, objective reasons (for example, invalidity for lack of proper canonical form as when a Catholic marries in a civil setting), would she be committing a sin if she dated (chastely and not fornicating) while in the process of getting a divorce from her husband? She would be emotionally but not physically involved with the third party.

Could the person she dates be violating the commandment that forbids coveting another’s spouse? (Which goes back to the original question: Is there a spousal relationship?) Thank you.

I am not a Canon Lawyer. So my opinion is just that: an opinion.

But I would refer you to Canon 1060:
Can. 1060 Marriage possesses the favor of law; therefore, in a case of doubt, the validity of a marriage must be upheld until the contrary is proven.
In light of that Canon, I would think the prudent thing to do would be to avoid emotional entanglements until invalidity of the existing marriage is confirmed.

It would be a shame if the person got wrapped up emotionally and then found that the marriage that was to be invalidated was ruled, in fact, a valid marriage. I think that this would be a whole bunch of heartache for the poor woman and might lead to a situation where her emotions overruled her spiritual “common sense.”

 

[Zatzat]

You are missing a key point and that is if the two are baptised or not.

The marriage of a baptised man to a baptised woman is both valid and sacramental even if it is a civil marriage.

So a Catholic can marry a Mormon in a Mormon Church and your suggesting that the Catholic Church views their marriage as sacramental?

Or a Catholic marrying another Catholic, but they get legally married in a Las Vegas Casino…are you suggesting that that is also a sacramental marriage in the eyes of the Church?

That doesn’t seem right…

catholic.com/thisrock/1995/9504qq.asp

Q: I am a Catholic who was married outside the Church without a dispensation, so my marriage is invalid before God–a fact I very much want to correct. My non-Catholic spouse is unwilling to be married in the Catholic Church. Is there anything I can do?

A: Assuming that there is nothing like a previous, putative marriage that needs to be taken care of first (through a decree of nullity), and assuming that you both still have valid matrimonial consent, your marriage can be rendered valid using a canon law procedure known as radical sanation.

 

[onmyknees]

You are missing a key point and that is if the two are baptised or not.

The marriage of a baptised man to a baptised woman is both valid and sacramental even if it is a civil marriage./QUOT

thistle, I thought that a civil marriage between a baptized man and a baptized woman was valid but not sacramental. If they are Catholic, baptized and then married in the Catholic Church then it becomes sacramental. No?

I had my marriage convalidated by a very traditional priest. My husband was not Catholic but we were both baptized. I asked my priest whether my marriage was sacramental and he said partly.

 

[davidv]

thistle;6375611:

You are missing a key point and that is if the two are baptised or not.

The marriage of a baptised man to a baptised woman is both valid and sacramental even if it is a civil marriage.[/QUOT

thistle, I thought that a civil marriage between a baptized man and a baptized woman was valid but not sacramental. If they are Catholic, baptized and then married in the Catholic Church then it becomes sacramental. No?

I had my marriage convalidated by a very traditional priest. My husband was not Catholic but we were both baptized. I asked my priest whether my marriage was sacramental and he said partly.

If neither is Catholic, thistle is correct. Baptised individuals in a valid marriage have a sacramental marrige. Couples, one of whom is Catholic who do not follow the norms of the Church, without dispensation, are not validly married.

[/quote]

 

[Janet1983]

I have been wondering when is a spousal relationship formed because there are many moral precepts that revolve around the relationships between spouses and between spouses and other people. Is there a spousal relationship- as understood by the Catholic church- in the examples below. Any reference to valid or invalid is assuming a Catholic tribunal‘s decision.

1-A marriage between a man and woman in a religious ceremony. For discussion sake, the marriage is valid.

2-A marriage between a man and woman in a religious ceremony. For discussion sake, the marriage is invalid.

3-A marriage between a man and woman in a civil ceremony. For discussion sake, the marriage is valid.

4-A marriage between a man and woman in a civil ceremony. For discussion sake, the marriage is invalid.

5-A marriage between two men or between two women in a religious ceremony. This is obviously an invalid “marriage.” However, is there a spousal relationship? For example, would a man commit adultery against his “husband” if he dated a woman while he was “married.”?

6-A marriage between two men or between two women in a civil ceremony. Same comments as no. 5.

I am particularly interested in responses to numbers 3-6. Thanks.

As you already pointed out whether or not the marriage is valid I will not go into it disputing the validity… Let’s see…

1- You said it is a valid marriage starting in a religious ceremony… That’s already settling it. Any relationships outside of that marriage would be adultery.

2- As you said it is an invalid marriage even though there was a religious ceremony. Any sexual relationships between said man and woman or even between either of them and somebody else would be fornication as it would not happen within marriage.

3- You said it is a valid marriage starting in a civil ceremony… That’s already settling it. Any relationships outside of that marriage would be adultery.

4- As you said it is an invalid marriage even though there was a civil ceremony. Any sexual relationships between said man and woman or even between either of them and somebody else would be fornication as it would not happen within marriage.

5- As you said it is an invalid marriage even though there was a religious ceremony. Any sexual relationships between these homosexual partners or even between either of them and anybody else would be fornication as it would not happen within marriage.

6- As you said it is an invalid marriage even though there was a civil ceremony. Any sexual relationships between these homosexual partners or even between either of them and anybody else would be fornication as it would not happen within marriage.

 

[onmyknees]

onmyknees;6378621:

If neither is Catholic, thistle is correct. Baptised individuals in a valid marriage have a sacramental marrige. Couples, one of whom is Catholic who do not follow the norms of the Church, without dispensation, are not validly married.

davidv,

I meant that after my priest had convalidated our marriage I asked then if our marriage was sacramental and he said partly. I know that our marriage was not valid that is why we had it convalidated.

Another question. Do couples who are not Christian or Catholic and are in a valid civil marriage have a sacramental marriage? If yes, why when they don’t believe in the sacraments?

 

[Elizium23]

So a Catholic can marry a Mormon in a Mormon Church and your suggesting that the Catholic Church views their marriage as sacramental?

Mormons do not have a valid baptismal rite and, as such, are not considered to be Christians by the Catholic Church.

 

[Digitonomy]

#5 and #6 are easy: any sexual act outside of a valid marriage is fornication, the first cousin to adultery. Since it is simply nonsensical to consider that there is even the possibility of a “marriage” between two members of the same sex, it is not possible for a man to have licit sex with a man or a woman with a woman.

Likewise, if a partner in such a “marriage” was to date another person, regardless of the sex of the other person, it would be spending social time with another person. If, as part of that dating, there was a sexual relationship, it would still be fornication.

Many seem to be focused on the sexual aspect. I don’t think the OP mentioned that at all. In addition to physical intercourse, adultery can be committed by lesser acts. A validly married spouse commits adultery according to the standard Christ stated, when he dates another person without engaging in intercourse. This behavior is a little more grave than just “spending social time.”

The next question would be how do we view such behavior when involved in an invalid marriage or non-marital relationship. I would say consider how such acts would be classified if one were dating (in more than a casual manner), and then dated another person. Cheating is betraying a promise that’s been made to another, whether the promise is explicit or implicit. That doesn’t mean one has to stay with his steady date forever - it’s not marriage. But if one is no longer able to keep his end of a contract, he is obliged to explain this to his date.

If we are talking about a marriage that’s been ruled invalid, the whole annulment process has probably done the trick of breaking the news to the “spouse”. But I would also suggest that while a gay marriage may not be valid, it is a legal and moral commitment. We may not agree with the motive or the act, but if a party to that act comes to the same conclusion, he has an obligation to end it honorably with respect for the other party. It would be the same way if you went into business with your best friend.

 

[Janet1983]

Many seem to be focused on the sexual aspect. I don’t think the OP mentioned that at all. In addition to physical intercourse, adultery can be committed by lesser acts. A validly married spouse commits adultery according to the standard Christ stated, when he dates another person without engaging in intercourse. This behavior is a little more grave than just “spending social time.”

You are right… though most actually focus on whether or not a marriage is valid though those were already given.
I should have explained that I meant more than just physical sexual relationships in my answer… it’s kind of hard to describe because a mere relationship can be between friends as well…

 

[mswood]

davidv,

I meant that after my priest had convalidated our marriage I asked then if our marriage was sacramental and he said partly. I know that our marriage was not valid that is why we had it convalidated.

Another question. Do couples who are not Christian or Catholic and are in a valid civil marriage have a sacramental marriage? If yes, why when they don’t believe in the sacraments?

IF both you and your spouse have been validly baptized and your priest has convalidated your marriage then you are in a Sacramental marriage.

A valid marriage between two baptized Christians is always considered a sacramental marriage by the Catholic church even if the non-Catholic party does not view it as sacramental. Also if both parties are not Catholic then they are not required to marry according to cannon law in order for the marriage to be considered valid.

From the Catechism

1601 “The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament.”[84]

 

[kage_ar]

davidv;6378717:

davidv,

I meant that after my priest had convalidated our marriage I asked then if our marriage was sacramental and he said partly.

That is like being “partly pregnant”.

Marriage is sacramental or it is not.

 

[EasterJoy]

the definition of a spouse is a married person, so if someone is not validly married, they are not a spouse. Is this a trick question?

Well, actually, it is more of a tricky question than it might appear. Because defects preventing validity may not make themselves felt until after the attempted marriage fails, in the big picture it is not always so black-and-white as “married” and “unmarried.”

There is the middle ground of having valid consent but invalid form, of having silent impediments in an attempted marriage, and so on. For instance, if a couple enters in good faith into a marriage that later turns out to be invalid due to a defect that was present from the beginning but not apparent except in retrospect, their children are not considered to have been concieved outside of marriage. The couple’s marital relations are not retroactively declared to have been morally forbidden. Likewise, if a couple gives valid consent but their marriage lacks canonical form, the marriage can be convalidated retroactively, back to the time consent was validly given.