A reader writes:
I have a cousin who was baptized and raised Catholic. A couple years ago, she married her non-Catholic husband in a civil ceremony. From all that I understand, their marriage is invalid because she did not receive a dispensation to get married outside the Church and she has not formally left the Catholic faith.
Correct.
Recently they mentioned coming to visit my family and stay with my husband and child at our house. As lovingly as possible, we invited them to stay with us and tried to impart that they were very welcome here… BUT, having learned that they are in marriage not seen as valid by the Church, we asked that they not sleep in the same room in our house.
A reasonable request.
I’ve not gotten a response from my cousin, but have gotten a one from her husband – he’s not coming because of my comments on the validity of their marriage.
Understandable from his perspective. As a non-Catholic, he cannot be expected to understand these matters and feels insulted. Unfortunately, while he may not recognize the situation he is objectively in, he is in it, and it is a kindness to him to make him aware of this unpleasant fact.
We feel (and told them) it would be scandalous for us to allow them to sleep together in our home and not an example we would like to set for our son.
Excellent. I don’t know the age of your son (obviously a baby is not going to be scandalized by this the way a sixteen-year old is), but it is good parenting to be thinking in these terms.
My (Catholic) husband supports me and feels the same way. Were we in error in asking that they refrain from sleeping together in our house because of the concerns we have about the validity of their marriage? We mentioned they could stay in a hotel or with my parents (who support me, but don’t agree with asking them not to sleep together) but felt that would be avoiding an issue that is very important to all our souls and where they may end up for all eternity.
You didn’t do anything wrong. The fact is that your Catholic cousin has put not only herself and her husband but the rest of the family in a problematic situation by her actions and it sounds as if you have been very thoughtful and charitable in trying to deal with it.
It was very hard to ask them this as repercussions and strains are expected to erupt – maybe even broken relationships.
Understood. These things happen in life, and it sounds as if you have been trying to deal with the matter in a frank and charitable way, and God will reward you for your efforts to honor his law in this way. In particular, he will make it up to you (if not in this life then in the next) for crosses that you have had to bear while following him in this matter.
20
Understandable from his perspective. As a non-Catholic, he cannot be expected to understand these matters and feels insulted. Unfortunately, while he may not recognize the situation he is objectively in, he is in it, and it is a kindness to him to make him aware of this unpleasant fact.
The whole article was good, and I’d like to comment on this part. It’s a tough situation but perhaps letting this man know that his feelings are acknowledged and that you do see where he’s coming from–although you cannot agree with him–can help smooth things over. People who do not understand these things have a tendency to view people like the original writer as “holier than thou” types who look down on them and don’t even consider others’ feelings. Assurance and kindness may go a long way here, without giving in, of course. If I were in the situation, I might use what Jimmy said: “Your feelings are completely understandable from your perspective; I know you don’t understand these things in the same the way we do and so our decision leaves you feeling insulted. However, this is far from our intention. As practicing Catholics, this puts us in a predicament we’d rather not have to be in, but we are simply not able to reverse our decision and make this exception. Please understand how important it is to us, that we follow the teachings of the Church, because it really is that important to us.” Someone else could probably write this out better than I could, but that’s the gist.
It always amazes me, how some people are spooked at the idea of bringing alcohol to a Mormon family’s house, but expect devoted people of other religions to put their religions aside.
Excellent Catholic response.
Not so excellent relatives. I would never invite myself over to someone’s house….even a relative. I would wait to be invited.
Barbara is right. There are some failures in common courtesy here, before one ever gets to moral theology. Anyway, Jimmy, isn’t is great to reply to someone who got it right the first time, from top to bottom?
What if this response has rid them of the opportunity to evangilize? Furthermore, does the child even know the difference? Is it better to evangilize from this position, or perhaps from the position of these relatives coming into a good catholic home, seeing the happiness and joy, and then saying to themselves, “What do they have that I don’t have?” Where is the power of prayer in this, and allowing God to soften their hearts before being confronted with “the law?” These judgements are prudential. It is not the same thing as whether or not to attend the wedding. I don’t think this particular case is black and white. A possible scandal to the child should be a consideration, but if the child can’t possibly understand, it is irrelevant.
Jimmy, I thought all marriages were assumed to be valid until otherwise proven invalid by a marriage tribunal.
In this case, it sounds like judgement as to the validity of the marriage has been passed without any investigation as to the details or circumstances surrounding the marriage.
Great response from Reader, well done!
I think I’ve thrown a few people off guard since my conversion to Catholicism (I was a fairly liberal Christian pre-conversion).
Believe it or don’t, I was actually considering a similar (though hypothetical) scenario the other day …only with regard to a non-Catholic couple,staying over with us.
To cut a long story (or as short as you’re going to get it with me…which isn’t that short)…my brother recently got dumped by his wife (she wants ‘independence-forget-about-breaking-your-husband-and-childrens -hearts’)….distraught and confused, he seems to be listening to a lot of bad advice from work colleagues about dating other women to help him recover from this heartache….as I said…bad advice.
Distance between us physically, is a real bind. And his work committments mean that although we are speaking regularly on the phone, he is largely left to this kind of ‘sleep around mentality’ garbage talk from well meaning, low moralled, possibly well intentioned, ‘friends’.
Anyway, I said I’d keep the story short…so, he was telling me of how he was thinking that he couldn’t possibly be alone…that he can imagine that sometime, maybe in a year or so, he might meet someone and live with her and then they could visit and stuff…he finished up saying “I will never, ever, ever, get married again!!!” (but lot’s of us do that, don’t we?)
I know that my brother is not the kind to sleep around, he’s a faithful kind of guy. When I was dating boys at age 15 he was sat in his room studying for his exams at Sixth Form…but I also know that he has never led me to believe that he has had a single fleeting moment of belief in God…and I think it shook him up a bit when I told him that I don’t believe that co-habitation is morally correct…I knew what he was thinking (“Well, you’ve done it before!”…but that was a different me from a very long time ago).
Gosh, this is getting long. Sorry.
And I tried really hard not to sound all ‘holier than thou’ when I attempted to convey the reasons why I, as a convert to Catholicism, as someone who had experienced ‘metanioa’ (though I didn’t use that word -sounds pompous to an atheist, i’m sure) could no longer accept anything that conflicted with my attempts to live my life in accordance with and allegience to The Catholic Church…he laughed nervously. I don’t think he really wanted to hear that part of what I had to say. Please pray for him, if you feel so inclined.
God Bless.
Jimmy, I must say that I am rather uncomfortable with such a decision. Would you have given the same advice if the woman had married, say, a Jewish or a Muslim man in a Jewish or Muslim ceremony?
My own parents are both agnostics and they are not married in church (I am a recent convert to Catholicism). If I behaved in the same way as you are suggesting to these people, it would mean that I forbid my own parents, who have been happily married for 29 years, to sleep in the same bed because they only had a civil marriage… (Same thing for most of my other relatives, by the way.)
I agree with SQ that such a response is rather a failed opportunity to evangelize than anything else. It only creates antagonisms between the woman’s husband and her relatives. How on earth should an agnostic man gain a positive attitude to Christians and Christianity, if the first thing he ever hears from them is the statement that he is not considered the husband of his wife?!
JP and Petra have SIGNIFICANTLY changed the facts as given (whether they realize it or no), so obviously Jimmy’s answer could change.
SQ is 1) imposing an obligation (to evangelize) where NONE exists, and 2) proposing that one give tacit but real cooperation to others’ objective grave sin. The first is mistaken, the second evil.
Really, folks, Jimmy reads/answers these with a precision that makes it look easy, but it is not. Wish there were a better forum in which to show people what’s at stake, but blogging/comment baoxes is all we have.
Thanks, Ed! It is often hard to sort out the relevant facts and then present the information in a way that will be clear both to the original reader and everyone reading the blog. In order to keep things simple, one must frequently take certain knowledge for granted.
In the case of a newcomer, who may not have that knowledge, questions naturally arise. Thus Petra naturally wonders about cases of his (or her) own parents, who are non-Catholic and had a civil ceremony. The fact that they are not Catholic means that they are not bound by the obligation to observe the Catholic form of marriage and so their marriage will be presumed valid by the Church.
This was not the case in the original example, where one of the parties is Catholic and is bound to observe the Catholic form of marriage or obtain a dispensation to have a non-Catholic wedding.
As far as SQ’s concern goes, evangelization means more than being nice to people. It also means being honest with them about their situation.
Incidentally, Petra and SQ as newcomers need to check out Da Rulz and in particular note Rule 20.
This is only tangentially related, but…might the invalidly married couple pursue the possibility of having their marriage convalidated? Or of obtaining a “sanatio”? It might be worthwhile consulting their diocese’s Canon Lawyer re this. I imagine the non-Catholic husband would object–but it could be presented as “for the sake of the rest of the family” or “for the sake of the kids.”
Blessings,
Diane (who obtained a sanatio some years ago and who therefore knows the drill :D)
The couple can indeed take steps to rectify their marital situation, a convalidation being the normal one at this point. However, I violate Rule 3 enough myself, so as much as possible I try to stick to answering the questions put to me. If I answered every ancillary question I could imagine, the posts would never end! =:-o
Jimmy, thanks as always for your wonderful blog and your comments on this subject.
I wanted to comment on Diane’s comment about having the marriage convalidated. That’s of course a wonderful idea, but I cringe at the idea of presenting it to the spouse that he should do it “for the sake of the kids”.
I’ve always felt that it is inappropriate to convince people to make professions of a Catholic nature (whether that be marrying in the Catholic Church or converting to the Faith or what have you) to pacify others. Aren’t we saying “Yeah, we know you don’t really believe this, but get up there and say you do for our sake.”? Isn’t that not only a disservice to our Faith but to the integrity of the person we are asking this of?
I would encourage this couple to get their marriage convalidated in the Church but to be honest with them about the commitment that they are making, its longevity and finally its sacredness/sacramental nature. Hopefully they can both (remember that it wasn’t important to the young lady to get married in the Church) be convinced of the value/importance of a sacramental marriage.
In my opinion, to encourage them to have their marriage convalidated in the Church for any less lofty reasons only cheapens our Faith.
Hearing the truth in this situation will be painful and disconcerting for the couple who want to come and stay. But if the truth is told firmly but tactfully, that is an excellent example of real evangelisation – speaking the truth in love.
In a somewhat different context, Jesus told the Samaritan “you have had five husbands, and he whom you now have is not your husband.”
Jimmy,
I’m female.
My mother is baptized a Catholic, my father is baptized a Lutheran. None of them had any religious upbringing whatsoever. Where is the limit then? Baptism? First Communion? And what about people who were baptized Protestants? Are they to be held to the same moral standards as Catholics? Or to others?
Just to clarify things: I am a faithful daughter of the Church and that I fully comply to her teachings in all matters, including all her teachings on sexual morality. But I just can’t see why people who have never heard the Gospel should be treated in such a way. Do you know if the cousin was actually brought up a Catholic? And do you know if her husband was baptized (in whatever denomination) or not?
Otherwise, an older female friend of mine (who only got baptized at age 60) told me that the Church has stated on her baptism certificate that her previous civil marriage (to a lapsed Presbyterian) was deemed valid. I don’t really know how and why they did that, but it was stated on her papers she received upon Baptism.
Petra – She was baptized Catholic and attended Catholic school through 8th grade. I am not aware if her husband was baptized or not, but I believe he was raised in some Christian denomination. He was previously married and divorced without an annulment. That also puts the validity of their marriage into question because he is still considered married to his first wife.