Let me hasten to add that I am NOT referring to the so –called
same sex marriage. I am referring to the many marriages that are performed in
the Catholic Church which very often includes the civil part of the ceremony
performed by an authorised person who is frequently the priest or deacon
officiating. I also include those where the local registrar is present in the
absence of any other authorised person.
I am not referring to convalidation which is often a sign of faith.
I am not referring to convalidation which is often a sign of faith.
I have always had difficulty with the non-sacramental
marriages which we conduct, i.e. where one
party is not Baptised. I question the argument often advanced that such is an opportunity in respect of
evangelisation when one party , if not both, are merely taking part in the preparation
talks on sufferance!
I have seen a non baptised person seek conversion later as a result of , or at least after, (post hoc rather than propter
hoc ?) the marriage course, though such are few and far between.
I also think there is usually a serious lack of faith where a Catholic marrying a baptised non Catholic opts for a marriage service without Mass.
I also think there is usually a serious lack of faith where a Catholic marrying a baptised non Catholic opts for a marriage service without Mass.
In many nations the couple have to undergo a separate civil
ceremony BEFORE the marriage in the Church.
If we separated the religious ceremony from the civil ceremony
we might have more authentic marriages and
fewer who seem to go through the ceremony in Church for “appearances”
sake. I realise that a Church which often appears to play “ the numbers game”
will not take kindly to recording fewer marriages in the Catholic Church, and I
realise that there would have to be a change, possibly, in Canon Law which at present requires conformity to civil law. It
would also mean that those to whom the
Church grants a decree of annulment would not have to go through the civil
courts for a divorce before celebrating
a sacramental marriage in Church.
There would also be the advantage of knowing that those who
come for sacramental marriage are
earnest and sincere, and their preparation could take a different and deeper
form.
It would also mean that church buildings would no longer
have to be registered by the State for marriage. Sacramental marriage would then be solely a
matter for the Church, Better to pre-empt any further trouble stemming with the
ECHR.
As Marriage will no longer be legally defined as having anything to do with love, a relationship of mutual reciprocity, sexual consummation, sexual fidelity, cohabitation etc – let alone the rearing of children.
ReplyDeletemarriage is being abolished.
Replaced with an eidolon which contains neither the intention nor the form of any heretofore understanding of marriage.
To the extent that what were once recognised as valid marriages among non-Catholic baptised baptised couples – will not be validated by this ‘new marriage’ ‘non-contract’
So is this disastrous new legislation merely an unust law – or an intrinsically unjust law?
If it is intrinsically unjust [and I have yet to hear or see any informed Catholic argue it isn't] – we have major problems.
Because we may be forbidden from engaging in the civil marriage process in any way.
It might get to the farcical situation where Catholics marrying in a Church are forbidden from going through a civil marriage ceremony as it scandalises and conspires against the very vows they’d made in the Nuptial Mass
Catholics being deprived of/proscribed from civil marriage with all its legal/socio-economic benefits/safeguards…
http://onthesideoftheangels.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/can-catholics-in-full-conscience-enter.html
"I have always had difficulty with the non-sacramental marriages which we conduct, i.e. where one party is not Baptised." Ditto, Pater.
ReplyDelete