I had a
discussion this week with a young man who wants to marry his fiancé in a quiet
ceremony attended only by family and friends. To facilitate this he has chosen
to have a civil ceremony at a local hotel, but asks if I will bless his
marriage the next day before Mass so as to keep God involved from the beginning
of the honeymoon.
The desire to
keep God involved is praiseworthy but as I pointed out, there is no such thing
as the ‘blessing’ a civil marriage; what the Church provides is the Sacrament
of Matrimony over and above the civil marriage. I also pointed out that matrimony,
being a holy gift from God and belonging to Him, should really be celebrated in
God’s house and not a hotel, garden or Register Office. I then had the delicate
task (the task of finding prudential but clear words) to say that until the civil marriage is raised to the dignity of the Sacrament
by the Church, engaging in the ‘benefits’ of marriage (copulation) is gravely sinful
and puts the soul in jeopardy. Having noted that a Church ceremony need not be
any more complicated or guest-laden that a civil ceremony, I added that he and
his fiancé would still have undergo the usual pre-nuptial formation and enquiry
before proceeding to the Sacrament, and affirm that they understand matrimony
to be a life-long, exclusive union open to life.
Having given the
young man this information and asked him to reconsider, I found myself wondering
if his idea of a civil ceremony followed by a Church ceremony might not be a
good way forward for the Church in today’s secular world. If we left the State to
provide civil marriage with the Church supplying the Sacrament of Matrimony to
practicing Catholics after their civil ceremony, we could avoid conflict with
the State over the issue of homosexual pairings and serial spouses (those who
enter a second, third or more civil marriages after divorce).
Delineating the
Sacrament of Matrimony from Statutory Marriage in this way may mean –sadly- that
some couples decide not seek out the sacrament at all, “just in case the
marriage doesn’t work out and we need to divorce”. This would leave the couple
in the sad position of being unable to receive Holy Communion. However, those
for whom the sacramental life is important would still be likely to seek out
the Sacrament after their civil ceremony. Should a civil marriage indeed break
down, the absence of the sacrament would make pastoral care much easier when
one or other seeks out that sacrament after divorce, and would take a lot of work
off our marriage tribunals.
Would requiring
a civil ceremony before a Sacramental celebration (which is already the case in
Germany) not be something the German Church should propose to the October Synod
as a useful way forward for the Church universal? It could be something the Synod
might usefully consider, rather than simply admit all and sundry to Holy
Communion for ‘pastoral reasons’.
I believe in the UK no sacramental/ church celebration of marriage can take place unless it includes or is preceded by a civil marriage registration so there never arises the difficulty of someone having a religious marriage also not recognised in law. I believe this is written into civil law, maybe also E&W directives.
ReplyDeleteThank you Fr John.
DeleteYes, that is the case in the UK. That is why if the Church in the UK did not seek to have its ordained ministers registered as Authorised Persons for the Registering of Marriages but officiated only at Sacramental celebrations after the civil ceremony had taken place elsewhere, we could avoid conflict with the State over same-sex pairings.
God bless you and your ministry.
Civil “marriage” before Sacramental Marriage in Church is the practise in some continental countries where I have lived and I have no doubt this will be pushed by some factions at the Synod on the Family.
ReplyDeleteThe principle of no sex outside of a valid marriage between a man and a woman still applies. The Church requires such a couple under pain of mortal sin to behave themselves. I am surprised Father you find explaining this sort of thing “ delicate”. It’s pretty straightforward.
Now as to how many will pay attention, well, that’s another matter, but the important thing is that if they don’t, they may not receive Holy Communion, for sure, and possibly not a sacramental marriage, without Confession?
As for active homosexuals and divorced and remarried, well what they do is between them and God, but they have the same duty to attend Mass as we all do. However, they must not receive Holy Communion, under pain of Mortal Sin, and Sacrilege if they persist.
Now if I may be a bit delicate here, priests have a duty to ensure such people understand this and to discipline any attempt on their part to sacrilegiously receive Holy Communion. Not easy I know, but there you are.
One subtle little trick if I may. You could stand in the pulpit, before Mass and say to the whole congregation that only those in a state of Grace, who have observed the required fast and are otherwise properly disposed may receive Holy Communion, and that does not include anyone having sex outside of a valid marriage between a man and a woman!
Thank you, Jacobi.
DeleteI am not sure how the young man will respond to what I said to him about copulation outside of marriage putting his soul in jeopardy and that a civil wedding without a church wedding does the same and puts him outside the sacraments. he hasn't gotten back to me yet... Sadly, I think many of my peers would just let the issue go as long as the couple are legally 'married'.
God Bless.
PS I mean 'delicate' in the sense that one has to say things in a way that keeps listening rather than walk off in anger; perhaps I should have said 'the task of saying, with a prudential use of words...'. maybe i will edit the text a bit...
Congratulations Father, I am sure that young man will never darken the door of a catholic church or approach a priest for advice ever again.
ReplyDeleteThank you for commenting Paul.
DeleteI think the young man will; I'm sure his Faith is strong enough to overcome a temporary emotional disappointment, and his intellect sharp enough to know that the Church has the salvation of his soul foremost in mind. I think he was more shocked and irritated by the fact that he has never been given the Church's teaching on these issues before.
God Bless.
Fr. Dickson,
Delete"Fornication" is not only a word which has virtually disappeared from the English vocabulary, but an act of which people are often shockingly ignorant. I commend you for telling this young man the truth. Please do remind him of the grace one receives through the Sacrament of Matrimony. It's enough to get a couple through the roughest of times. And don't forget to mention that blessed wedding rings become sacramental objects. It might seem trivial, but details such as these are constant reminders of God's presence in married life. Pax et bonum!
Thank you, Matthew.
DeleteI know a young Catholic man who thought the sixth commandment only applied to those who are married; that prior to marriage one could have sex as much as one wanted without it being a sin -and another young Catholic man who thought that if a condom was used it was not sex "because no body fluids are exchanged". Both of these men attended Catholic schools into sixth form. I once had a couple in their fifties complain to me for rebuking cohabitation in a homily; they were cohabiting because they were intending to marry and had been told by their own priest that at their age and with their intent to cohabit was fine...
As for the young couple, I have spoken to the young man again and explained the graces of marriage and its beauty, but because it is a convalidation being offered and not a simple blessing, he is a bit, well, angry. His impression from everyday parlance is that "marriages can be blest; you don't have to take vows again". Oh the dangers of imprecise language...
God Bless.
Dear Father
ReplyDeleteThank you for caring for the souls of this young couple and for sharing the objective truth to help them. We pray that this will bear fruit for them and for you.
In the love of Christ
Alan and Angeline
Thank you both for your comment and your wonderful website.
DeleteI think the Church's preparation requirements were the real factor in seeking a civil marriage; it is though, possible that the young man and his fiancée will seek the Church's ceremony at a later date. It's disturbing to me that I had to explain to a Catholic in their mid twenties that marriage outside the Church means they cannot receive Holy Communion; it speaks to the poor quality of Catecheis in our schools and parishes over the last thirty years.
God Bless.
Father, the young man asked for a wedding blessing but this was probably because he didn't know the correct terminology or options available. You could have offered him a low key convalidation ceremony following the civil registration and I'm wondering why you didn't explain these options? The couple or family obviously have their reasons for not wanting a big church wedding but were keen to have their union sacramentalised and recognised by the church which is admirable. From what you have said, I think you failed in your pastoral duties.
ReplyDeleteThank you, Dean.
DeleteI did indeed offer a very low key convalidation (ceremony, as I called it I the post). It would have been just the couple, their families and whichever friends they wanted, and it was to have been either after the civil wedding on the day itself, or the following morning. I think it is that there is still the dispensation needed to marry a non-Christian and the pre-nuptial enquiry form that deters them.
God Bless.
Father
ReplyDeleteI hope you pointed out that a Church wedding might also prove less costly than a civil wedding. I write that only partly in jest.
I suspect the English law approach is unique in its details in relation to the Catholic Church and marriage. It is of course different from the European model in the couple being civilly married in Church under licence from the state.
I hope the young man comes back with a positive response.
Thank you, quoniamtosolus.
DeleteI too hope the young man comes back with a positive response, but I think the legality is more on his mind than the sacramentality.
God Bless