Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Are People Married In Non Catholic Ceremonies Really Married?  (Read 7908 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline BernardoGui

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 280
  • Reputation: +235/-37
  • Gender: Male
Re: Are People Married In Non Catholic Ceremonies Really Married?
« Reply #45 on: December 05, 2022, 12:23:14 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0

  • Ott says this:
    This ^^ is what I was getting at - initially, the Church regards all marriages as valid, and if they are not valid She needs to declare them invalid.

    I think there are probably some marriage minded trads out there who, having no luck finding another trad to marry, might start to think there is an open field of invalidly married potential spouses out there they can tap into. Or converts to tradition who married when they were prot or NO or whatever and think they see a way out of a bad marriage. But the Church always initially says the marriages are valid until She declares them invalid.
    That's exactly the reason I started this thread and the explanation I was looking for. Thank you

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46813
    • Reputation: +27672/-5138
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Are People Married In Non Catholic Ceremonies Really Married?
    « Reply #46 on: December 05, 2022, 12:42:58 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Simply, Catholics are not permitted to marry outside of the Church is because to do so is a mortal sin, but the marriage itself is still valid by virtue of the contract - provided both spouses were free to marry.

    Someone feel free to correct me, but because of the Marriage Contract, Catholics who are free to marry and marry before a justice of the peace or outside of the Church does not in and of itself automatically render the marriage null. Sinful but not null.

    This is not correct.  Such marriage would be invalid.  This is the same issue you have with attempting to reduce heresy / schism to mortal sin.

    Canon Law explicitly states that these marriages are invalid ... not merely illicit (i.e. sinful).


    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46813
    • Reputation: +27672/-5138
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Are People Married In Non Catholic Ceremonies Really Married?
    « Reply #47 on: December 05, 2022, 12:44:49 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Just out of curiosity, do these people just reject Pius IX, or all popes after him as well?  That would be a very long period of sede vacante. Shades of Richard Ibranyi!

    Not saying I embrace this WRT Pius IX --- I don't --- but couldn't any given pope just be an antipope in isolation, assuming that subsequent conclaves were able to elect valid popes?  Or if you maintain that one pope is an antipope, then does the papacy basically "die" until... until what?  The latter doesn't really make sense.

    This individual I mentioned merely limited this to Pius IX, but yes, there's no real theological backstop from there to declaring the every pope since then to be also invalid ... i.e. going Ibranyi, or, more recently, Pontrello.  Once you go there, it's a hop, skip, and a jump to either Old Catholicism or Orthodoxy (which is where Ponrello and some of his "followers" ended up).

    This was the central point of that "Pope-Sifting" letter (that The Angelus printed without my permissions as an article).  This phenomenon is precisely what I referred to as Pope-Sifting.

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46813
    • Reputation: +27672/-5138
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Are People Married In Non Catholic Ceremonies Really Married?
    « Reply #48 on: December 05, 2022, 12:56:25 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I dunno, you could be right, but I think Matrimony is a different case from Ordinations / Absolutions.

    Ott says this:
    This ^^ is what I was getting at - initially, the Church regards all marriages as valid, and if they are not valid She needs to declare them invalid.

    I think there are probably some marriage minded trads out there who, having no luck finding another trad to marry, might start to think there is an open field of invalidly married potential spouses out there they can tap into. Or converts to tradition who married when they were prot or NO or whatever and think they see a way out of a bad marriage. But the Church always initially says the marriages are valid until She declares them invalid.

    Your citation rejects the separation between the marriage and the Sacrament.

    Regardless, however, the Decree on Armenians simply referred to the fact that the couple actually contract the marriage, rather than the priest, at least in the Latin Rite (it's different in the Eastern).  This decree on the Armenians was referring to the schismatic Armenian Church, so the question was whether marriage contracted without the witness of a priest was valid for them (i.e. for these non-Catholics) or whether, upon being readmitted to the Church they would be considered valid.  This was to distinguish those couples among these schismatic non-Catholics who got officially married before a priest.   So the Church declares that these marriages among non-Catholics did not require the witness of a priest, i.e. not only did the Church accept as married those among them who had their marriages witnessed by a priest, but also those who did not, since the Church here declared here that 1) the couple contract the Sacrament of Matrimony and 2) the requirement for a priest to officiate or witness it does not apply to non-Catholics.

    Offline Mithrandylan

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4617
    • Reputation: +5361/-466
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Are People Married In Non Catholic Ceremonies Really Married?
    « Reply #49 on: December 05, 2022, 01:14:19 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • If a person baptized in the Catholic Church does not observe the correct form, they marry invalidly. However-- and this is a BIG however-- the form of Catholic marriage is the exchange of vows before a lawfully appointed minister of the Catholic Church. It is not the wedding mass, nor even the prescribed nuptial rite itself. It has everything to do with who is witnessing the marriage on behalf of the Church.
    .
    An even bigger "however" is the fact that canon 1098 allows a couple to marry in front of non-appointed witnesses if it is foreseen that their pastor will not be available within a month. I believe that due to the crisis of the Church, canon 1098 applies more or less wholesale to Catholic marriages today, rendering many marriages which would otherwise be invalid, valid.
    "Be kind; do not seek the malicious satisfaction of having discovered an additional enemy to the Church... And, above all, be scrupulously truthful. To all, friends and foes alike, give that serious attention which does not misrepresent any opinion, does not distort any statement, does not mutilate any quotation. We need not fear to serve the cause of Christ less efficiently by putting on His spirit". (Vermeersch, 1913).


    Offline DecemRationis

    • Supporter
    • ****
    • Posts: 2327
    • Reputation: +876/-146
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Are People Married In Non Catholic Ceremonies Really Married?
    « Reply #50 on: December 05, 2022, 01:21:54 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • What's interesting is that when Pope Pius IX condemned the Old Catholics, he accused them of rejecting the indefectibility (not infallibility) of the Church.  He realized that it was a bit of a circular argument to say that they were rejecting an infallibly-defined dogma when it was the ability of a pope to infallibly define dogma that was being defined.  So he teaches that the Old Catholics are heretical because their conclusion would mean that the Catholic Church had "gone off the rails" ... which is not possible given her indefectibility.  That's why I keep saying that the core problem here really is indefectibility.  People can quibble to a certain extent regarding the precise limits of "infallibility in the strict sense" (as Msgr. Fenton called it), but with the Conciliar Church we're not talking about a problematic statement in an Encyclical Letter, but the establishment of an entirely new theological system, system of worship ... in short, a new religion that, were this change attributed to the Catholic Church, it would be tantamount to a substantial corruption of the Catholic Church, making it unrecognizable as a religion to Catholics who lived and died before Vatican II, and therefore lacking the notes or marks of the One True Church founded by Christ.  That is the problem here more than the precise legal disposition of a heretic pope.

    So the Old Catholics would have been theologically sound on indefectibility if they had declared Pius IX a heretic and therefore not a pope since not Catholic, and therefore the true Catholic Church, which is only governed by legitimate, non-heretical, Catholic popes, was still somewhere present and indefectible post-Vatican I? That church under Pius IX, perhaps the First Conciliar Church, whatever it was, wasn't the Catholic Church - so would go an Old Catholic who had his argument tightened. 

    That's basically your argument: the Conciliar Church is not the Catholic Church because its "popes" and bishops who accept their doctrine and governance are heretics and the true Catholic Church remains among us and indefectible despite those four or five or whatever non-popes sitting on the see of Peter for some 60 years running and no visible governing body for that entire period. 


    You're an Old Catholic with the benefit of about 150 or so years of theological refinement. 
    Rom. 3:25 Whom God hath proposed to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, to the shewing of his justice, for the remission of former sins" 

    Apoc 17:17 For God hath given into their hearts to do that which pleaseth him: that they give their kingdom to the beast, till the words of God be fulfilled.

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3162
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Are People Married In Non Catholic Ceremonies Really Married?
    « Reply #51 on: December 05, 2022, 02:07:59 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • An even bigger "however" is the fact that canon 1098 allows a couple to marry in front of non-appointed witnesses if it is foreseen that their pastor will not be available within a month. I believe that due to the crisis of the Church, canon 1098 applies more or less wholesale to Catholic marriages today, rendering many marriages which would otherwise be invalid, valid.

    Hello Mithrandylan-

    Do you say 1098 applies wholesale amidst this crisis because there are no more church pastors holding legitimate office (which wouls satisfy sedes, but not R&R)?

    or

    Do you say 1098 applies because the moral impossibility of a trad summoning a conciliar priest satisfies the "grave inconvenience" exception clause of 1098 (which would satisfy both sedes and R&R)?
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Mithrandylan

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4617
    • Reputation: +5361/-466
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Are People Married In Non Catholic Ceremonies Really Married?
    « Reply #52 on: December 05, 2022, 02:15:29 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • Hello Mithrandylan-

    Do you say 1098 applies wholesale amidst this crisis because there are no more church pastors holding legitimate office (which wouls satisfy sedes, but not R&R)?

    or

    Do you say 1098 applies because the moral impossibility of a trad summoning a conciliar priest satisfies the "grave inconvenience" exception clause of 1098 (which would satisfy both sedes and R&R)?
    .
    I do not hold that there are no more church pastors, but I do hold that it is extraordinarily difficult to determine who they are, and would concede that most Catholics are without pastors for all intents and purposes due to the difficulty in sorting the proverbial wheat from the chaff. So between the two options you gave, my position would be closer to the latter.
    "Be kind; do not seek the malicious satisfaction of having discovered an additional enemy to the Church... And, above all, be scrupulously truthful. To all, friends and foes alike, give that serious attention which does not misrepresent any opinion, does not distort any statement, does not mutilate any quotation. We need not fear to serve the cause of Christ less efficiently by putting on His spirit". (Vermeersch, 1913).


    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3162
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Are People Married In Non Catholic Ceremonies Really Married?
    « Reply #53 on: December 05, 2022, 02:18:38 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • .
    I do not hold that there are no more church pastors, but I do hold that it is extraordinarily difficult to determine who they are, and would concede that most Catholics are without pastors for all intents and purposes due to the difficulty in sorting the proverbial wheat from the chaff. So between the two options you gave, my position would be closer to the latter.

    Much appreciated; thank you.
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Mithrandylan

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4617
    • Reputation: +5361/-466
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Are People Married In Non Catholic Ceremonies Really Married?
    « Reply #54 on: December 05, 2022, 02:22:01 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Much appreciated; thank you.
    For what it's worth, I think marriages officiated by the SSPX, CMRI, and other independent clergy are valid marriages by virtue of canon 1098 rather than by virtue of any particular supplied jurisdiction. or at least, I think the argument from canon 1098 is a much stronger, more airtight argument than an argument from supplied jurisdiction or common error.
    .
    "Be kind; do not seek the malicious satisfaction of having discovered an additional enemy to the Church... And, above all, be scrupulously truthful. To all, friends and foes alike, give that serious attention which does not misrepresent any opinion, does not distort any statement, does not mutilate any quotation. We need not fear to serve the cause of Christ less efficiently by putting on His spirit". (Vermeersch, 1913).

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15060
    • Reputation: +10006/-3162
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Are People Married In Non Catholic Ceremonies Really Married?
    « Reply #55 on: December 05, 2022, 02:29:04 PM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • For me, this excerpt from the protest of the seven French SSPX deans (one of which -Fr. Gaudray- was a professor of mine in Winona) says all I need:

    "...we reply that the state of necessity which legitimates our way of doing things is not canonical, but dogmatic, and that the impossibility of having recourse to the current authorities is not a physical, but a moral one."

    In other words, I'm fine with canonical arguments, insofar as they are applicable (e.g., the moral imposibility of obtaining a conciliar delegation satisfying the "grave inconvenience" clause of 1098), but they often will close off avenues of survival -contrary to their purpose- precisely because as St. Thomas says, laws are written for ordinary times, and necessarily leave out of consideration circuмstances which happen only rarely.

    For me, the stronger argument is always dogmatic and doctrinal (e.g., necessity, epikeia).

    I realize nobody is denying this, but just wanted to bring it into the conversation, unless people paint themselves into a corner by only entertaining canonical considerations.

    PS to Mith: Looks like we were typing at the same time.
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."


    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14765
    • Reputation: +6099/-908
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Are People Married In Non Catholic Ceremonies Really Married?
    « Reply #56 on: December 05, 2022, 03:18:33 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • This is not correct.  Such marriage would be invalid.  This is the same issue you have with attempting to reduce heresy / schism to mortal sin.

    Canon Law explicitly states that these marriages are invalid ... not merely illicit (i.e. sinful).
    Which canon law?
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46813
    • Reputation: +27672/-5138
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Are People Married In Non Catholic Ceremonies Really Married?
    « Reply #57 on: December 05, 2022, 03:27:25 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Apologies for the length of the proceeding post, but it seems highly relevant. Copied and pasted from a thread from a few years ago, this table describes the lawfulness and validity of all possible marriages. Please be sure to read the "other notes" below, which argue that due to Canon 1098, marriages that violate the Catholic form of marriage are still valid due to the crisis in the Church and the inability of marrying before one's pastor.

    Yes, that's a different question of course, since Traditional Catholics don't marry before their "pastor" as we don't actually have pastors (that we feel we can go to).

    Conciliar Church of course considers Trad marriages to be invalid on these grounds.

    So it all boils down to whether you believe that we live in a Crisis that renders this impossible.

    Offline Stubborn

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 14765
    • Reputation: +6099/-908
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Are People Married In Non Catholic Ceremonies Really Married?
    « Reply #58 on: December 05, 2022, 03:28:26 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Your citation rejects the separation between the marriage and the Sacrament.

    Regardless, however, the Decree on Armenians simply referred to the fact that the couple actually contract the marriage, rather than the priest, at least in the Latin Rite (it's different in the Eastern).  This decree on the Armenians was referring to the schismatic Armenian Church, so the question was whether marriage contracted without the witness of a priest was valid for them (i.e. for these non-Catholics) or whether, upon being readmitted to the Church they would be considered valid.  This was to distinguish those couples among these schismatic non-Catholics who got officially married before a priest.  So the Church declares that these marriages among non-Catholics did not require the witness of a priest, i.e. not only did the Church accept as married those among them who had their marriages witnessed by a priest, but also those who did not, since the Church here declared here that 1) the couple contract the Sacrament of Matrimony and 2) the requirement for a priest to officiate or witness it does not apply to non-Catholics.
    I don't have a clue what you're babbling on about. Reject what separation? - Canon law 1012 I posted says there can be no separation in a valid marriage. Why bring in the Armenians, what about the Irish? Plenty of posters from Ireland here you know.

    Whatever it is your babbling on about, what Ott says simply makes sense....
    "According to the teaching of the Council of Trent, those clandestine marriages contracted without the co-operation of the Church by the free declaration of will of the contracting parties are valid  marriages so long as the Church does not declare them invalid."
    "But Peter and the apostles answering, said: We ought to obey God, rather than men." - Acts 5:29

    The Highest Principle in the Church: "We are first of all under obedience to God, and only then under obedience to man" - Fr. Hesse

    Offline Ladislaus

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 46813
    • Reputation: +27672/-5138
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Are People Married In Non Catholic Ceremonies Really Married?
    « Reply #59 on: December 05, 2022, 03:32:22 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Which canon law?

    1917 Code 1070 and 1098 in particular.  I cited it above, but I deleted the cross-references to the 1983 Code, but the latter upholds the same standards ... EXCEPT that at some point that I not yet researched, one of the Conciliar papal claimants made an exception for those who formally renounced their Catholic faith.  But that caused so much confusion that in 2009 Ratzinger rolled it back.