Why have "disparity of cult" impediment if dispensation is always granted?

[HomeschoolDad]

It seems as though dispensations from “disparity of cult”, that is, permission for “mixed” or “interfaith” marriages, are always granted these days. Put another way, you never hear of a situation where an engaged couple, one Catholic, one not, goes to the Church for a dispensation, and it is not granted. I knew of one such situation, a friend of mine, but it was in the Philippines several decades ago. I do not know for sure, but if I had to guess, the bishop may have said “no, I’m not going to dispense you, this is a Catholic country, you can easily find a Catholic wife if you want to get married”, or possibly “you’re not strong enough in your faith to deal with a mixed marriage, it will be bad for your soul”. (They went ahead and got married outside the Church.)

Therefore, why even have the impediment to begin with?

It seems like the Church is saying one of two things, depending upon the couple — “you [the Catholic party] are strong enough in your faith that you will be able to live in a mixed marriage and remain a faithful Catholic”, or on the other hand, “you are so weak in your faith that we know you’d attempt marriage outside the Church, or leave the Church entirely if we didn’t allow you to marry this person, so we’ll dispense you from the impediment”. (That is kind of the “tail wagging the dog”, but I digress.) That leaves only the “mushy middle” — not strong enough in the faith to live in a mixed marriage without possibly falling away, yet not weak enough in the faith that they’ll marry outside the Church or even leave the Church if they don’t get the dispensation. And is there anyone who would actually fall into the “mushy middle”?

If the Church isn’t saying this, then what is the Church saying, by retaining the impediment but pretty much rubber-stamping any and all dispensations from it?

 

[po18guy]

Well, thinks me, why have reconciliation if forgiveness is nearly always granted?

It is intended to be something asked for, something sought after, something to be evaluated and scrutinized by the Church, something to be pondered by those involved.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

It is intended to be something asked for, something sought after, something to be evaluated and scrutinized by the Church, something to be pondered by those involved.

So is it more like saying “we’ll almost certainly grant the dispensation, but we want to take a look at the situation, give you some time to think the matter over, and guide you to do God and the Church the courtesy of acknowledging that you have to ask permission, instead of simply going ahead and doing it”?

A secular analogy might be the state requiring you to get a driver’s license, instead of just buying a car and starting to drive it — in the United States, getting a driver’s license is very easy (easier than it should be, if you ask me), and pretty much anyone who applies for one eventually gets it, but you still have to get one, to be allowed to drive on public roads. Or possibly like a background check for buying firearms, with the presumption being you will be allowed to buy the firearm, but the government wants to take a look at the request and see if there is any reason you shouldn’t be allowed to?

 

[1ke]

It seems as though dispensations from “disparity of cult”, that is, permission for “mixed” or “interfaith” marriages, are always granted these days.

Mixed marriage is with a baptized non Catholic. It doesn’t require a dispensation, it requires permission.

Disparity of cult is marriage to an unbaptized person, and requires dispensation.

The dispensation isn’t granted when there is doubt regarding the Catholic’s ability to practice their faith or the ability to raise children Catholic.

Marriage is a natural right. It isn’t impeded without good cause. Valid marriage doesn’t have as high a hurdle as some would like to insist. If the couple has valid intent and consent, no impediments, and no danger to the Catholic, then it is incumbent upon the bishop to grant the dispensation.

In the US, true danger to the Catholic’s freedom to practice their religion is pretty rare. So it probably does seem like they are “all” granted. But this isn’t true in many parts of the world, where they are more likely to be denied.

 

[TARRAT]

I’m not a first hand witness to what I am about to say. In the organization that has just began in our local catholic community called “That Man Is You” shortened to TMIY, there is lots of evidence presented about such marriages and the majority are not good. Of course everybody knows a story of the successful couple that are in these matchups. But I think po18guy has some real wisdom in his answer. Ask the question of yourselves and of the church. Another thing possibly many people actually answer questions asked of them in a way they think they should be answered. I think po18guy is onto something.

 

[1ke]

It seems like the Church is saying one of two things, depending upon the couple…

No you’ve misunderstood.

It isn’t about the Catholic being strong or weak in faith. It is about their ability to freely practice their faith and danger of defection— such as when a Muslim is involved. In some Muslim countries non-Muslims must convert to Islam to marry a Muslim.

 

[babochka]

HomeschoolDad:

It seems as though dispensations from “disparity of cult”, that is, permission for “mixed” or “interfaith” marriages, are always granted these days.

Mixed marriage is with a baptized non Catholic. It doesn’t require a dispensation, it requires permission.

Disparity of cult is marriage to an unbaptized person, and requires dispensation.

The dispensation isn’t granted when there is doubt regarding the Catholic’s ability to practice their faith or the ability to raise children Catholic.

Marriage is a natural right. It isn’t impeded without good cause. Valid marriage doesn’t have as high a hurdle as some would like to insist. If the couple has valid intent and consent, no impediments, and no danger to the Catholic, then it is incumbent upon the bishop to grant the dispensation.

In the US, true danger to the Catholic’s freedom to practice their religion is pretty rare. So it probably does seem like they are “all” granted. But this isn’t true in many parts of the world, where they are more likely to be denied.

This is an excellent point. I have a friend from a middle-Eastern (Muslim) country who was granted a disparity of cult dispensation. It required a personal meeting with her bishop, who assessed her situation before granting the dispensation. She was marrying a nominally Christian American who was unbaptized. The bishop met with her for over two hours, educating her in the reality that Christianity in America is varied and different from her region, where nearly all Christians are of an Apostolic faith. At the end of their conversation, he somewhat reluctantly granted her the dispensation.

 

[TheLittleLady]

It is not always granted. I personally know two cases where it was not granted.

There are good reasons when it is not granted, sometimes it is because the pastor/Bishop find the people need more preparation/maturity.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

It is not always granted. I personally know two cases where it was not granted.

There are good reasons when it is not granted, sometimes it is because the pastor/Bishop find the people need more preparation/maturity.

If you don’t mind saying, what happened then? Did the Catholic party say “oh, well, I can’t get married, too bad”? Find another partner? Break up with their fiance(e)?

 

[TheLittleLady]

The both married outside of the Church.

One couple has since had their marriage convalidted, the other has divorced.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

Mixed marriage is with a baptized non Catholic. It doesn’t require a dispensation, it requires permission.

Disparity of cult is marriage to an unbaptized person, and requires dispensation.

OK, I was conflating the two. But the end result is the same: you have to ask the Church’s permission, and they may or may not grant it.

Marriage is a natural right. It isn’t impeded without good cause. Valid marriage doesn’t have as high a hurdle as some would like to insist. If the couple has valid intent and consent, no impediments, and no danger to the Catholic, then it is incumbent upon the bishop to grant the dispensation.

So it is more like “you will get the dispensation unless there’s some good reason you shouldn’t”?

It isn’t about the Catholic being strong or weak in faith. It is about their ability to freely practice their faith and danger of defection— such as when a Muslim is involved. In some Muslim countries non-Muslims must convert to Islam to marry a Muslim.

As I inadvertently do from time to time — and I pride myself, I hope never in a bad way, in being an American who actually realizes there are other countries, people have a good life in those countries, they are happy there, and they are not “all wanting to get to the United States” — I was looking at this through “American goggles”. Of course there are places where Catholics might get themselves into a real mess by marrying a non-Catholic or non-Christian.

I would just remind that somewhat of the same thing can happen in this country, when a Catholic wants to marry someone who is deeply involved in a non-Catholic Christian religion. This happened to a relative of mine and she left the Church over it. She didn’t bother asking for a dispensation, she just married in her husband’s church, and raised her children in it.

 

[runningdude]

If the Church isn’t saying this, then what is the Church saying, by retaining the impediment but pretty much rubber-stamping any and all dispensations from it?

As 1ke and others have said, you are looking at this requirement from a modern, western perspective. With little impediment to practicing the faith in a free society, the church will grant dispensation as a matter of course.

There is also the need to document the ceremony. When two Catholics marry, the church where each party’s baptism was performed is notified so that the marriage can be documented in their sacramental records. When a non-Christian marries a catholic, a new record must be created. The promises of the Catholic to take all reasonable measures to raise any children Catholic must be recorded.

The bishop’s satisfaction with the Catholic’s promises must simply also be recorded; that is what this dispensation is.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

The both married outside of the Church.

One couple has since had their marriage convalidted, the other has divorced.

OK, thanks, sorry to know about the latter.

I wonder if there are ever cases where a dispensation/permission is denied, and the Catholic party says “you know, the Church is right, this wouldn’t work out, we weren’t thinking straight, we need to break the engagement and I need to concentrate on finding a Catholic partner instead”. (Obviously they would only elaborate this to themselves, not bash the non-Catholic over the head with the fact that the marriage was going to be a bad idea for religious reasons.)

And do people just turn on and turn off their feelings like that?

 

[Phemie]

HomeschoolDad:

If the Church isn’t saying this, then what is the Church saying, by retaining the impediment but pretty much rubber-stamping any and all dispensations from it?

As 1ke and others have said, you are looking at this requirement from a modern, western perspective. With little impediment to practicing the faith in a free society, the church will grant dispensation as a matter of course.

There is also the need to document the ceremony. When two Catholics marry, the church where each party’s baptism was performed is notified so that the marriage can be documented in their sacramental records. When a non-Christian marries a catholic, a new record must be created. The promises of the Catholic to take all reasonable measures to raise any children Catholic must be recorded.

The bishop’s satisfaction with the Catholic’s promises must simply also be recorded; that is what this dispensation is.

I don’t know what other dioceses do but in ours the diocese provides each parish with coil-bound booklets containing everything for the Prenuptial Inquiry. It includes the bride and groom’s questionnaires, all the necessary forms for permission for mixed-marriage (including the signed promises by the Catholic and the signed “I was informed…” by the non-Catholic), dispensation for disparity of cult, application for dispensation from form, application/permission to have the marriage celebrated in another parish/diocese, forms to inform the baptismal parishes of the marriage, etc.

The promises are recorded in the Prenuptial inquiry. The permission/dispensation is noted in the notations in the marriage register.

 

[1ke]

OK, I was conflating the two. But the end result is the same: you have to ask the Church’s permission, and they may or may not grant it.

However, a mixed marriage without permission would be illicit, but not invalid.

A marriage with disparity of cult is invalid without a dispensation.

So it is more like “you will get the dispensation unless there’s some good reason you shouldn’t”?

More like what the Canon says: invalid.

Canon 1086 §2. A person is not to be dispensed from this impediment unless the conditions mentioned in cann. 1125 and 1126 have been fulfilled.

If they are fulfilled, then the bishop can dispense.

I would just remind that somewhat of the same thing can happen in this country, when a Catholic wants to marry someone who is deeply involved in a non-Catholic Christian religion.

You don’t have to remind me. I always advise against mixed marriage or disparity of cult. I’ve taken a beating over that stand here at CAF the entire time I’ve been here.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

OK, I was conflating the two. But the end result is the same: you have to ask the Church’s permission, and they may or may not grant it.

Eh? I thought that a marriage between a Catholic (who is bound by the marriage laws of the Church) and a non-Catholic Christian, celebrated without the Church’s permission, was both illicit and invalid. If I’m not mistaken, even the marriage of two Catholics is invalid if there is defect of form (e.g., marrying before a magistrate, a non-Catholic minister, or even a priest who has not been given faculties to witness the marriage).

There are exceptions for those Catholics who marry in the Orthodox Church.

I would just remind that somewhat of the same thing can happen in this country, when a Catholic wants to marry someone who is deeply involved in a non-Catholic Christian religion.

I am with you on that 100%. The ideal is that Catholics marry Catholics, within the Church, according to the Church’s marriage laws.

 

[1ke]

Eh? I thought that a marriage between a Catholic (who is bound by the marriage laws of the Church) and a non-Catholic Christian, celebrated without the Church’s permission, was both illicit and invalid. If I’m not mistaken, even the marriage of two Catholics is invalid if there is defect of form (e.g., marrying before a magistrate, a non-Catholic minister, or even a priest who has not been given faculties to witness the marriage).

I wasn’t talking about a marriage outside Catholic form.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

Eh? I thought that a marriage between a Catholic (who is bound by the marriage laws of the Church) and a non-Catholic Christian, celebrated without the Church’s permission, was both illicit and invalid. If I’m not mistaken, even the marriage of two Catholics is invalid if there is defect of form (e.g., marrying before a magistrate, a non-Catholic minister, or even a priest who has not been given faculties to witness the marriage).

So are you referring to a Catholic who marries a non-Catholic Christian without permission, and somehow gets a priest to perform the Catholic rite without having gotten that permission? No priest would do that unless he were some sort of maverick, e.g., a vagus priest who has left his bishop and performs wedding ceremonies on his own. And even then the marriage would be both illicit and invalid.

I’m confused.

 

[babochka]

1ke:

Eh? I thought that a marriage between a Catholic (who is bound by the marriage laws of the Church) and a non-Catholic Christian, celebrated without the Church’s permission, was both illicit and invalid. If I’m not mistaken, even the marriage of two Catholics is invalid if there is defect of form (e.g., marrying before a magistrate, a non-Catholic minister, or even a priest who has not been given faculties to witness the marriage).

So are you referring to a Catholic who marries a non-Catholic Christian without permission, and somehow gets a priest to perform the Catholic rite without having gotten that permission? No priest would do that unless he were some sort of maverick, e.g., a vagus priest who has left his bishop and performs wedding ceremonies on his own. And even then the marriage would be both illicit and invalid.

I’m confused.

Mistakes happen. Sometimes people are sloppy with paperwork.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

Eh? I thought that a marriage between a Catholic (who is bound by the marriage laws of the Church) and a non-Catholic Christian, celebrated without the Church’s permission, was both illicit and invalid. If I’m not mistaken, even the marriage of two Catholics is invalid if there is defect of form (e.g., marrying before a magistrate, a non-Catholic minister, or even a priest who has not been given faculties to witness the marriage).

This is starting to sound like a Catholic spin on the old joke about the couple who found out they were never legally married. Their sons came for Christmas dinner and didn’t bring gifts. The father announced the news to the sons. One of the sons said “do you know what that makes us?”. The father replied, “yeah, and cheap ones at that!”