Why the double standard? Marriage and all the other sacraments - validity seems to be a double standard

[lizaanne]

I was thinking about this over the weekend, and I’m interested in what others think about this.

On this forum alone, there are countless discussions regarding the validity of the sacraments. Do you think this Mass was valid? Do you think my confession was valid? I don’t think this priest is validly ordained. I don’t think my child’s baptism was valid.

On and on - we question and nit pick apart the matter, form, and intent of the sacraments. We debate the validity of these points until our eyes bleed. And it’s all good and part of understanding what is valid, licit, illicit, invalid.

But ---- when it comes to applying the same level of scrutiny to the sacrament of marriage, it is suddenly sneered at by many, and called things like “Catholic divorce”, not living up to one’s vows, etc.

I would like to know why you think so many are very ready to scrutinize the validity of the sacraments, but when it comes that one sacrament, there just does not seem to be that same measuring stick applied.

And please — do not turn this into a "the Church grants too many “annulments” " rant - that is not the point of this discussion, and is a topic which can already be found in many existing threads.

~Liza

 

[anp1215]

I was thinking about this over the weekend, and I’m interested in what others think about this.

On this forum alone, there are countless discussions regarding the validity of the sacraments. Do you think this Mass was valid? Do you think my confession was valid? I don’t think this priest is validly ordained. I don’t think my child’s baptism was valid.

On and on - we question and nit pick apart the matter, form, and intent of the sacraments. We debate the validity of these points until our eyes bleed. And it’s all good and part of understanding what is valid, licit, illicit, invalid.

But ---- when it comes to applying the same level of scrutiny to the sacrament of marriage, it is suddenly sneered at by many, and called things like “Catholic divorce”, not living up to one’s vows, etc.

I would like to know why you think so many are very ready to scrutinize the validity of the sacraments, but when it comes that one sacrament, there just does not seem to be that same measuring stick applied.

And please — do not turn this into a "the Church grants too many “annulments” " rant - that is not the point of this discussion, and is a topic which can already be found in many existing threads.

~Liza

Oh, it will be turned into a “Church grants too many annulments” thread. Some can’t resist the urge and feel the need to turn every single thread that contains the word “annulment” into this.

 

[figs]

My guess is because it IS thought of as a divorce, where it is issued because of a breakdown within the marriage.
Not an examination, checking that all elements are present to make it a marriage to begin with.

To see a blessing as invalid because the priest was wearing the wrong color or didn’t make the correct hand gesture just doesn’t translate into a marriage cerimony on these discussion boards.
Instead of a sacriment it is viewed with the reasoning of a contract, if you signed it, it’s valid, kind of thought.

It’s as if some are of a mind that someone (who gets an annulment) is “getting away” with something

 

[KostyaJMJ]

What would happen if what you proposed became a rule? How many catholics would stay married their entire lives if there were offered an easy way out?

 

[joanofarc2008]

I think the difference is those that have seen the checklist that gets answered when doing an evaluation of one’s marriage after it has broken down irrevocably and gone through the gut wrenching process of answering those questions will almost never look at it as a Catholic divorce. Those that haven’t have no idea. I once posted a sampling of a few Canon’s worth of those questions as my Diocese have those broken down and it shocked and awed even some of the more staunch nay-sayers. I no longer have that booklet as I gave it to my father who was not a well-catechized Catholic as he needed some help with his statement and I did not wish to unduly influence his testimony. To this day I still have no idea what he wrote. When the publications of the acts comes about in a couple of weeks I can go look but honestly I have no desire to relive it. My advocate will be looking to make sure nothing is out of place and that I do not need to answer anything but at this point since my xh did not choose to participate it is what it is. I think part of the issue is that process is almost shrouded in mystery to some - as it should be. They have only the words of us that go through it and for some people that will never be good enough.

 

[Cristiano]

I think that it is easy to verify form, matter and intent for most of the sacraments because the questioning is done almost immediately. I also think that there is more understanding and thus control on the other sacraments respect to marriage. I honestly do not doubt the lack of validity of those annulled marriages because to me it is quite clear that most of Catholics do not have an understanding of what marriage is about. Sadly I have the impression that a lot of marriages among Catholics are as valid as the “rite” of some atheist teenagers that play “baptism” just to annoy the old Catholic lady that lives next door.

 

[Luna_Lovecraft]

And please — do not turn this into a "the Church grants too many “annulments” " rant - that is not the point of this discussion, and is a topic which can already be found in many existing threads.

~Liza

That’s a tall order, my friend.

Luna

 

[lizaanne]

What would happen if what you proposed became a rule? How many catholics would stay married their entire lives if there were offered an easy way out?

Who is proposing anything? I’m just looking for some discussion.


~Liza

 

[Joe_5859]

Because nitpicking the validity of other sacraments allows us to be critical of our priests while not nitpicking the validity of marriage allows us to be critical of other people (and also of our priests for being too lax).

All in all, it is the most efficient way for us to keep being critical of everyone.

Okay, so maybe that response is a little tongue-in-cheek. There’s probably no simple answer to the question. I do wonder how much of it is a general fear that things have gotten too lax (in our society and even in our Church). Certainly, that fear is not altogether unjustified when looking at the shifting social mores of the last 50 years. But an unhealthy skepticism seems like it would make it easy to swing too far in the other direction.

That’s just my off-the-cuff appraisal. I look forward to any other insights.

 

[jilly4ski]

My guess is because it IS thought of as a divorce, where it is issued because of a breakdown within the marriage.
Not an examination, checking that all elements are present to make it a marriage to begin with.

To see a blessing as invalid because the priest was wearing the wrong color or didn’t make the correct hand gesture just doesn’t translate into a marriage cerimony on these discussion boards.
Instead of a sacriment it is viewed with the reasoning of a contract, if you signed it, it’s valid, kind of thought.

It’s as if some are of a mind that someone (who gets an annulment) is “getting away” with something

I am going to agree and add. It comes from both a misunderstand of an “annulment” and of marriage itself.

I would say there is a certain lack of seeing marriage as a sacrament, or its sacramental nature. You see the same thing with baptisms, except then people subscribe an almost a superstitious quality, that it will get the baby to heaven even though they don’t have to do anything. But with marriage there is no ‘visible’ or easily suscribable supernatural grace that comes with marriage. It is there, but it isn’t going to ‘presto’ get me into heaven. The grace itself is hard to describe, and show, which makes it unlikely that some people will even know about it.

The Church’s understanding of marriage and how it was ordained by God and that everyone can enter into it, whether sacramentally or not play a role. Non-Christians can be validly married non sacramentally, and non-Catholics can be married sacramentally, this sort of throws otherwise well informed Catholics for a loop and messes with their understanding of what is a sacrament and how sacraments work.

 

[Evan]

The biggest difference I see is that all the sacraments except marriage are done by ordained clergy who have years of theological training. They know what they are doing, what the church intends.

Marriage is conferred by one spouse on the other, so the sacrament is dependent upon the understanding of the man and woman. Did they know what they were doing, what the church intends, was one or the other hiding something from the other, do their beliefs conform with the words?

So it would stand to reason that a marriage would be much more often defective due to lack of proper preparation that any sacrament performed by a deacon, priest, or bishop.

 

[lizaanne]

The biggest difference I see is that all the sacraments except marriage are done by ordained clergy who have years of theological training. They know what they are doing, what the church intends.

Marriage is conferred by one spouse on the other, so the sacrament is dependent upon the understanding of the man and woman. Did they know what they were doing, what the church intends, was one or the other hiding something from the other, do their beliefs conform with the words?

So it would stand to reason that a marriage would be much more often defective due to lack of proper preparation that any sacrament performed by a deacon, priest, or bishop.

I understand all this, so I’m not sure you actually read my post. I’m not asking how invalid marriages happen - I’m asking why Catholics in general apply different standards to the necessity of judging validity from one sacrament to another.

~Liza

 

[dixieagle]

I understand all this, so I’m not sure you actually read my post. I’m not asking how invalid marriages happen - I’m asking why Catholics in general apply different standards to the necessity of judging validity from one sacrament to another.

~Liza

I think that it all boils down to something simple: many Catholic just aren’t well catechized as to what a valid marriage entails, and also don’t understand what a decree of nullity is.

I suspect also that just about everyone has ups and downs in their own marriages, and that some folks are a bit envious when they hear of other Catholics leaving a problem “marriage” behind.

 

[KostyaJMJ]

Who is proposing anything? I’m just looking for some discussion.


~Liza

I know. I responded that it is because people will apply those scrutinizing standards in their own lives. There isn’t a marriage in the US that can’t be annulled if you just look hard enough.

And maybe having your marriage scrutinized to the tiniest detail for validity makes it easier to imagine escaping the drudgery of everyday life and setting out to find yourself as you travel across India, Italy, and Indonesia. Maybe you might even end up in the arms of a handsome catholic divorcee and get to write a book about it.

 

[Cristiano]

I understand all this, so I’m not sure you actually read my post. I’m not asking how invalid marriages happen - I’m asking why Catholics in general apply different standards to the necessity of judging validity from one sacrament to another.

~Liza

You keep talking about different standards but you do not real give give clear examples for both cases. I am sure that you have something specific in your mind and it would make it easier if you were to share it.

There are only three causes for a sacrament to be invalid lack of form, lack of matter, or lack of intent. Usually in the case of marriage the problem is with lack of intent while for the other sacraments the problem is usually with lack of form or lack of matter. If the causes are different it is normal than the “standards” will be different. I have not seen any discussion of invalid marriages to to the lack of form, some because because of lack of matter, and a lot because lack of intent. On the other side I have seen a lot of discussions for the other sacraments because of lack of form. Form, matter, and intent cannot be addresses or treated in the same manner.

 

[Luna_Lovecraft]

On and on - we question and nit pick apart the matter, form, and intent of the sacraments. We debate the validity of these points until our eyes bleed. And it’s all good and part of understanding what is valid, licit, illicit, invalid.

But ---- when it comes to applying the same level of scrutiny to the sacrament of marriage, it is suddenly sneered at by many, and called things like “Catholic divorce”, not living up to one’s vows, etc.

I’m just the average pew potato, so take my thoughts with a tablespoon of salt.

But, speaking very generally and simply, all the sacraments are conferred on us by a priest or bishop. Except marriage.

Unless we’re in extraordinary circumstances, we’re not the ones doing the baptizing. We receive it.

Absolution of sins is something done for us. Yes, we examine our conscience, confess, and perform of penance, but we receive absolution.

We attend Mass and some of us are even EMHCs, but we’re not the ones who turn the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ. We receive it from someone who has.

We undertake study and preparation for Confirmation, but we receive the sacrament from a bishop.

We receive the Anointing of the Sick.

Young men who aspire to the priesthood attend a seminary and meet a whole host of requirements to be ordained, but they receive Holy Orders from a bishop

(An aside: as an anxiety sufferer myself, I think the fact that Confession and the Eucharist are done for us is at the heart of much of the angst surrounding those two sacraments. If we (the OCD crowd) could just re-do them ourselves if we didn’t think they were done right the first time, we wouldn’t be half as worried about it.)

Marriage is the only lay people’s sacrament we’ve got. The priest acts as a witness for the Church; he doesn’t marry the couple. We (the couple) stand in front of the altar before God and everybody and marry ourselves. I think, therefore, it’s easier to be dismissive of the notion that marriages could be invalid by simply saying the couples didn’t try hard enough, didn’t respect the permanency of marriage, etc. It’s easier to sneer at a fellow pew potato than it is to sneer at a deacon, priest, or bishop.

Just my two cents.

Luna

 

[Evan]

I understand all this, so I’m not sure you actually read my post. I’m not asking how invalid marriages happen - I’m asking why Catholics in general apply different standards to the necessity of judging validity from one sacrament to another.

~Liza

I did find it a bit confusing. I haven’t really seen any sneering on this website. Thinking that the ‘decree of nullity’ is a ‘catholic divorce’. Any time anullments are brought up, someone clarifies the issue quite nicely.

The standards of most sacraments are pretty obvious so one can question if it was done right
proper matter: wine, bread, water, oil, words
proper minister: deacon, priest, bishop
proper intent: what the church wants to do
So we ask, were all these met?

but when it comes to marriage:
proper matter: man & woman
proper minister: man & woman
proper intent: lifelong bond between two people with a variety of promises to be made.
So the question on this last thing is so complex that a tribunal is formed to consider the question. THEN it is AUTOMACALLY appealed so it must be reviewed by a 2nd tribunal.

So there is a different standard. Noone can really give enough info on the web site for any of us to venture a solid opinion. Only thoughts yea or nae.

On the other sacraments it is more cut and dried. The most difficult is always: proper intent.

 

[Joe_5859]

There isn’t a marriage in the US that can’t be annulled if you just look hard enough.

I disagree. My wife and I had both studied Catholic theology prior to our marriage and our wedding Mass was con-celebrated by four priests. I would have a difficult time making the case that we didn’t understand what we were getting into. Like it or not, we’re stuck with each other.

 

[ValPal]

But ---- when it comes to applying the same level of scrutiny to the sacrament of marriage, it is suddenly sneered at by many, and called things like “Catholic divorce”, not living up to one’s vows, etc.

I would like to know why you think so many are very ready to scrutinize the validity of the sacraments, but when it comes that one sacrament, there just does not seem to be that same measuring stick applied.

Marriage is very different from the other sacraments. It is unique in that it is the only sacrament where the laypersons are the ministers of the sacrament AND does not leave an indelible mark on the soul. Another thing is that unlike other sacraments, marriage is ubiquitous to the human race. The Church divides these marriages in sacramental and natural, but nonetheless it is ubiquitous.

The reason it is scrutinized is simply because it is the sacrament that has the most reason to be scrutinized. Baptism typically only needs to be scrutinized when one converts to Catholicism. Confirmation and Communion rarely has a reason to be scrutinized.

On the other hand, marriage has about a zillion reasons to be scrutinized. People don’t want to live alone, never have sex again, and possibly denied children solely because of the unilateral actions of a “spouse.” This is inherently disordered.

 

[SMHW]

Marriage is the only lay people’s sacrament we’ve got. The priest acts as a witness for the Church; he doesn’t marry the couple. We (the couple) stand in front of the altar before God and everybody and marry ourselves. I think, therefore, it’s easier to be dismissive of the notion that marriages could be invalid by simply saying the couples didn’t try hard enough, didn’t respect the permanency of marriage, etc. It’s easier to sneer at a fellow pew potato than it is to sneer at a deacon, priest, or bishop.

I think this is a big part of the issue.

There are really two (and probably more) kinds of problematic “Catholic” views on marriage:

1. It is a sacrament and annulments are given for frivolous and/or convenience reasons.
2. It’s a sacrament for which the validity is transitory (like being in a state of grace or something); if a couple cannot reconcile then an annulment officially restores them to the state of “unmarried”.

WARNING: Western Christian thinking ahead…

If one thinks that the Church bestows the sacrament of matrimony on a couple then one is likely to come up with a mistaken view of annulments. One may think the Church has the power to “un-confer” marriage. One is not likely to consider that the parties to a marriage had the power and authority to withhold bestowing the sacrament on the other (even though it was likely withheld unknowingly). One is likely to think that marriages are not valid unless performed by clergy – even if the parties to the marriage are not Catholic.