Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Crisis in the Church => Topic started by: Viva Cristo Rey on June 21, 2022, 08:05:14 PM
-
https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/as-pope-francis-calls-for-more-marriage
-
Since when were marriage prep classes
required to receive the sacrament?
-
Good question.
The NO require it for Baptism too. Baptisms are down big time. Many parents never baptized their babies because they don’t want to go pay and attend classes.
Instead of sex grooming of children in Catholics school, CCD and universities, they should have been teaching about proper courting, chastity leading up to the sacrament of marriage.
-
Since when were marriage prep classes required to receive the sacrament?
1917 Canon (https://isidore.co/calibre#panel=book_details&book_id=7786) 1033 (1983 CIC 1063 (https://www.vatican.va/archive/cod-iuris-canonici/eng/docuмents/cic_lib4-cann998-1165_en.html#CHAPTER%20I.)):A pastor shall not omit, according to the varying conditions of persons, to instruct spouses on the sanctity of the sacrament of marriage and on the mutual obligations of spouses and of parents toward children; likewise he shall strongly exhort them to confess their sins diligently before the celebration of marriage and to receive piously the most holy Eucharist.
-
1917 Canon (https://isidore.co/calibre#panel=book_details&book_id=7786) 1033 (1983 CIC 1063 (https://www.vatican.va/archive/cod-iuris-canonici/eng/docuмents/cic_lib4-cann998-1165_en.html#CHAPTER%20I.)):
All that can be done in one meeting, as mine was done.
Since when were marriage prep classes required to receive the sacrament?
These days no priest, barring an independent priest, will marry you without these classes.
It goes along with what I have seen from the sspx, requiring their weekly catechism classes prior to receiving first holy communion or confirmation. We had to go to an independent priest/bishop who tested my children and then gave them the sacraments.
-
Good question.
The NO require it for Baptism too. Baptisms are down big time. Many parents never baptized their babies because they don’t want to go pay and attend classes.
Instead of sex grooming of children in Catholics school, CCD and universities, they should have been teaching about proper courting, chastity leading up to the sacrament of marriage.
Seems to me such is the job of the parent.
-
Yes. You are right. It is the parent’s job to teach about marriage and honeymoon
Not the church or any school.
On the east coast, Novus Ordo Catholic schools were teaching sex Ed in 1970’s. The local public schools started in the late 1980’s. All this is from Free masons of the United Nations.
Here is red flag: sex is sex.
Holy Sacrament of Marriage is about love and making babies.
I am upset that many babies aren’t being Baptized.
-
All that can be done in one meeting, as mine was done.
Did the priest who married you know you since you were a child? Otherwise, classes should be done.
-
Did the priest who married you know you since you were a child? Otherwise, classes should be done.
Since when are marriage classes required prior to receiving the sacrament?
-
Since when are marriage classes required prior to receiving the sacrament?
Since at least 1917:
https://1library.net/article/marriage-preparation-canons-in-the-code.y4mo5n9y
-
Since at least 1917:
https://1library.net/article/marriage-preparation-canons-in-the-code.y4mo5n9y
Marriage preparation is not the same as marriage classes.
-
Marriage preparation is not the same as marriage classes.
Nice try, moron.
-
Marriage preparation is not the same as marriage classes.
Marriage classes (instruction) is an integral part of Marriage preparation.
It is obvious that all the below could not be achieved in a simple interview, even if both prospective spouses were well known to the Parish Priest, who is ultimately responsible, even if he is not the celebrant.
The instruction is to ensure that the spouses may live out their future marriage life in a Christian fashion as opposed to the pagan marriages. Furthermore, the content of the instruction to the spouses is foreseen to include the sanctity of the sacrament, the mutual obligation of married people and the duties of parents towards their children470. Jones also suggested that the prospective couple must also be taught
to avoid Onanismus and in some cases the obligation of observing the weaning period of the mother (Stillepflicht der Mutter) in the marriage471. Though the canon did mention specific times when the personal instruction should occur, Gavin observes that the referral of canon 1019 to “antequam matrimonium celebretur and canon 1020 §1 to Parochus … opportune
ante tempore (assistendi matrimonio) diligenter investiget” suggest that the instruction should
take place well before the celebration of the marriage472.
The suggestion of Gavin and other commentators that the instruction should not be deferred to the days just before the wedding (as a kind of addendum or obnoxious necessity - Nadir's emphasis -) but that it should rather take place immediately before the proclamation of the banns or at least before the period of the banns has elapsed473
The addendum to c.1033 addresses itself to the spiritual preparation of the prospective spouses. It is recommended that the parish priest must exhort the parties to receive the sacraments of penance and holy Eucharist before the celebration of the marriage. This admonition becomes necessary because marriage is a sacrament of the Church and to receive it one must be worthy and be in the state of grace. However, the lack of these of sacraments do not make the celebration of the marriage illegal or invalid since it is only a strong exhortation rather than a rule. According to Jones, the parish priest can demand that the prospective spouses must receive absolution especially in cases where its omission would cause public scandal. For instance, if it is known publicly that the man was living in concubinage or did not fulfil his Easter obligation
might seem to be a more possible solution to the timeframe. Nevertheless, it is not clearly untenable if enough time could have been available between the investigations or the banns and the actual date of the wedding for the priest to have allowed any composite instruction.
-
Marriage classes (instruction) is an integral part of Marriage preparation.
It is obvious that all the below could not be achieved in a simple interview, even if both prospective spouses were well known to the Parish Priest, who is ultimately responsible, even if he is not the celebrant.
Thank you.
While I agree that the Church says instruction should be given by a priest to engaged couples, "instruction" is not the same as "classes". That is my only point.
-
Thank you.
While I agree that the Church says instruction should be given by a priest to engaged couples, "instruction" is not the same as "classes". That is my only point.
:facepalm:
-
Thank you.
While I agree that the Church says instruction should be given by a priest to engaged couples, "instruction" is not the same as "classes". That is my only point.
I agree. There's a balance to be had. I had a relative by marriage who wanted very much to be a Catholic. He had the faith and knew a lot about it, since he was married to a Catholic. He had been raised by a Protestant preacher, and his wife put a green scapular under his mattress, and he just woke up one day and decided he would become a Catholic. In any case, they went to the NO and were told he'd have to take a YEAR of classes before being accepted into the Church. Since his wife wasn't amenable to Traditional Catholicism, I told them to speak with an Eastern Rite priest. That priest interviewed him a couple times and then conditionally baptized him and received him into the Church a couple weeks later.
When my wife and I were getting married, we had one hour-long meeting with the priest. This priest knew me (and my wife) and just said, "You know all this as well as I do, so this instruction isn't really necessary, but I'm required to go over this with you." So it was just one meeting.
So it depends on a case by case basis. If there was a person ardently desiring to become Catholic and it could be determined from a single interview that he knew the faith and accepted the teaching authority of the Church, there's absolutely no reason to delay a long time or to go through a year of classes. On the other hand, sometimes you have these situations where a prospective spouse is seeking to be Catholic just because their prospective spouse is Catholic, and you just don't know if they truly have the faith and are sincerely inclined to be Catholic or, rather, are doing it for the social reasons. In that case, you probably want to draw it out a bit to discern if they really have the faith. I've known Trad Catholic priests to readily accept these "spousal" conversions (IMO too hastily) only for the "converted" to "revert" soon after marriage after things get a bit rocky. They went on to use Traditional Catholicism against their spouse in subsequent divorce proceedings, referring to it as a cult that was harming the children.
-
The reason for instructions/classes/teaching on marriage is to outline the requirements of the sacrament, the duties involved, and the purposes why God created it. In theory, then the couple can't come back a few years later and claim an annulment. The Church should respond - "Barring an extraordinary case, your reason for an annulment is insufficient, as both of you had detailed marriage instruction/classes on the sacrament and you cannot now claim ignorance."
Classes also protect the priest/diocese who check baptismal records and with local authorities to make sure that potential-spouse-A is who they say they are and no fraud is involved.
Real-life example from my family: My Great Grandfather was Irish but his family had immigrated to the US. My Great Grandmother's family was still in Ireland. My Gr Grandfather went back to Ireland to meet my Gr Grandmother and they decided to get married and the priest in Ireland (my Gr Grandmother's pastor) had to call my Gr Grandfather's pastor in the US to check everything out. Once both priests were satisfied that the couple was a) baptized, b) free to marry, etc, the couple had to take 2 different ships to America because it was too much of an occasion of sin/potential scandal had they traveled together.
-
The reason for instructions/classes/teaching on marriage is to outline the requirements of the sacrament, the duties involved, and the purposes why God created it.
It's been inadequate for those purposes. That's why I've long held that the prospective couple should be required to sign a statement/declaration to the effect that they understand and accept all of the Church requirements for marriage.