The answers on the AAA forum take the position that attendance at a presumptively invalid marriage is a question of prudential judgement, and not always sinful.Attending the ceremony is participation. . .As I mentioned above, I would argue that attending an invalid wedding is a sin (scandal)
Note that I’m not Catholic but here’s how I would approach it. Can you participate in the wedding from the standpoint of being there to celebrate the joining of the couple? Reading what you wrote, I think the answer is really no. That the ceremony would make you uncomfortable and really then you shouldn’t be there.My wife and I are contemplating whether we should go to a wedding. The wedding is for a friend of my wife’s, they have been good friends for nearly 30 years. The bride-to-be was raised marginally Hindu, but is non-practicing and effectively non-religious at this time. The groom-to-be is not religious to our knowledge.
The problem arises in that they have chosen to be married by a friend of theirs. In our state, you can only officiate a wedding if you are an ordained minister. Therefore, this friend has obtained an online minister ordination certificate through the Universal Life Church or a similar website. This creates the difficulty in our minds.
As practicing Catholics, we are wondering if it is appropriate to attend this wedding. We have no reservations about attending a non-Catholic wedding among believers of different faiths. Even had they merely gone with a justice of the peace for officiating a non-religious ceremony, we would likely be attending. However, the idea that they are getting married by someone passing themselves off as a minister, obtaining credentials through an on-line website, seems to be misdirected. Moreover, it almost seems to be an attempt to make a mockery of ministers and people of faith in general.
Would you attend this wedding? If so, how can we best live out our Catholic faith in such an instance? If not, why? Would our attendance be supporting the cultural trend at marginalizing true religious beliefs?
The Catholic understanding of marriage is that it is a sacrament effected by the man and woman, the “two” who become “one.” The priest is there as the official witness of the Church and the guests are also witnesses of the Church, which is why a dispensation as to cult or form must be obtained when entering into marriage with a non-Catholic or a non-Christian, respectively. As a guest, your role is not merely to wish them well and enjoy their happy day, free food and drink, but to be a witness before God to their sacrament. I don’t know that the question should be as much whether the marriage is “legal” according to the laws of the state, since that is not a question which requires the individual guest to make any moral decision and is beyond any individual’s capacity to decide anyway (other than a judge on an annulment petition). Whether it is licit is also not at issue for the guests, since it would appear that neither party is Catholic or Christian, and the Church does not pass on the “licitness” of a ceremony other than one in which a Catholic participates. Additionally, I don’t believe that there any moral obligation on the part of the witnesses to ascertain the intentions of the parties, though there may be a moral duty to act if we know an intention of a party which is contrary to their vows (e.g. the parties are practicing contraception and plan not to have children or to delay them indefinitely through contraception) in which case to attend the wedding as a witness would be to be complicit in their sacrilege. I suppose, then that the only question is whether you want to add your “witness” to the ceremony. I agree with a prior post that this is a question of prudent judgment. I don’t believe that you put your mortal soul in jeopardy by attending and being a witness, but if you do not feel comfortable about the ceremony, you should follow your conscience and not attend. Either way, you have acted in charity, which transcends feelings.Great point. We are going to discuss it tonight, but I believe we will be going, in charity.
Sorry to get off-topic but I could not let this go unnoticed. A previous post said that Canon Law 1083 permitted a “man” of 16 and a “woman” of 14 to marry???
Can. 1083 §1. A man before he has completed his sixteenth year of age and a woman before she has completed her fourteenth year of age cannot enter into a valid marriage.
§2. The conference of bishops is free to establish a higher age for the licit celebration of marriage.
Bishops can raise the age. I’m no theologian, but I assume the reason for those age ranges is to prevent marriage before the individuals have free will. A 14 year old girl may not be mature enough to maintain a marriage, but she’s mature enough to be able to say “no” to the wedding. Consider that in some countries, children are married at age 8 or younger (obviously against their will since they don’t know any better) to end family disputes or create a bond between two families.
There have also been times with a 70+% rate of mortality among children under 5, and formal schooling for only a very few. In some cultures, childhood doesn’t last very long, and maturity unknown to some in our times is required from an early age. In that kind of culture, a promise made by a 14 year-old is far more credible and meaningful than a promise from someone twice her age, raised under circumstances of extended infancy.Bishops can raise the age. I’m no theologian, but I assume the reason for those age ranges is to prevent marriage before the individuals have free will. A 14 year old girl may not be mature enough to maintain a marriage, but she’s mature enough to be able to say “no” to the wedding. Consider that in some countries, children are married at age 8 or younger (obviously against their will since they don’t know any better) to end family disputes or create a bond between two families.
Also, your comments forget that the canon law applies to everyone, not just Americans. While you might have a hard time imagining someone starting a family before a person turns 22 and has a college degree or is at least 18 and has a job, in some places around the world, schooling stops around 14 and people start their careers then. Their culture is less technology driven and more manual labor driven, so secondary education isn’t required for most careers.
Your dispensations are wrong:The priest is there as the official witness of the Church and the guests are also witnesses of the Church, which is why a dispensation as to cult or form must be obtained when entering into marriage with a non-Catholic or a non-Christian, respectively.
My wife and I are contemplating whether we should go to a wedding. The wedding is for a friend of my wife’s, they have been good friends for nearly 30 years. The bride-to-be was raised marginally Hindu, but is non-practicing and effectively non-religious at this time. The groom-to-be is not religious to our knowledge.
The problem arises in that they have chosen to be married by a friend of theirs. In our state, you can only officiate a wedding if you are an ordained minister. Therefore, this friend has obtained an online minister ordination certificate through the Universal Life Church or a similar website. This creates the difficulty in our minds.
As practicing Catholics, we are wondering if it is appropriate to attend this wedding. We have no reservations about attending a non-Catholic wedding among believers of different faiths. Even had they merely gone with a justice of the peace for officiating a non-religious ceremony, we would likely be attending. However, the idea that they are getting married by someone passing themselves off as a minister, obtaining credentials through an on-line website, seems to be misdirected. Moreover, it almost seems to be an attempt to make a mockery of ministers and people of faith in general.
Would you attend this wedding? If so, how can we best live out our Catholic faith in such an instance? If not, why? Would our attendance be supporting the cultural trend at marginalizing true religious beliefs?