Let's first of all be clear about canonical form. A Catholic is normally obliged to celebrate their marriage before a priest and two witnesses, according to the rites of the Church. There are exceptions and dispensations. If a Catholic wishes to marry in a non-Catholic Christian Church, a dispensation from canonical form can be granted. In such a case, the non-Catholic minister solemnises the wedding. A Catholic priest may be present and say a prayer or whatever, but the wedding cannot be a joint celebration with two ministers solemnising it. (There is also provision for exceptions: when there is no priest available, a lay person can be deputed to solemnise marriage, and under certain conditions, if a Catholic cannot have recourse to an appointed minister, the marriage can be contracted before witnesses alone. These cases would not normally occur in England.)
Now if a Catholic marries without observing the canonical form, without a dispensation, and without it being one of the (rare) cases of necessity, the marriage is invalid in the eyes of the Church, according to current canon law. (Remember that it is the defined teaching of the Council of Trent that the Church can impose diriment (invalidating) impediments to marriage.) The most common cases of invalid marriages happen when a Catholic has married in a Register Office and not solemnised the marriage according to the rites of the Church. People in such cases often ask the priest "Can I have a blessing for my marriage?" The answer is "No, but we can put the marriage right." (though see my caveat at the end of the post.)
The two ways of putting the marriage right are convalidation and sanation. Convalidation, canonically the ordinary route, is where the couple come to the Church, and take their vows anew in the form required by the Church. Beforehand, the priest has to prepare the usual paperwork for marriage and obtain permission from the Bishop. The service can be a quiet and discreet one - there simply need to be two witnesses present in addition to the priest. With convalidation, the couple must make a new act of consent to the marriage.
Often it happens that one spouse (in practice, usually the husband) says that they do not want to go through such a ceremony. I such a case, an application may be made for a sanation - sanatio in radice ("healing in the root"). What happens is that the various details and documents are obtained and an application is made to the Bishop for him to validate retrospectively the consent that was already given. Even though it was given without the proper canonical form, the Church can retrospectively validate that consent. This reminds us of the principle that it is consent that makes the marriage, not the priestly blessing.
So is the priest acting contrary to the civil law when he does a convalidation? Relying particularly on the guidance given by Neil Addison, I would argue that he is not. In the combox of the post Luther, Trent and getting out of state marriage, Neil highlighted a legal problem with my suggestion of having the wedding in Church first, and then going to the Register Office if desired. He advised that this would contravene the Marriage Act (1949) and then added:
If however the Church were to say that the couple can only have a Church marriage after they have been through a Civil Marriage ceremony in the Registry Office then that would be legal because the ceremony would be regarded in law as simply a private religious blessing.Now it is not my point here to argue concerning the rightness of such an arrangement - simply to observe that it seems to be a fairly clear reassurance that the celebration of a convalidation is not contrary to English law as is often suggested. (In the case of a sanation, it is certainly not against the provisions of the Marriage Act because there is no additional ceremony.)
In pastoral practice, the convalidation or sanation of marriage is increasingly important. I often find, when booking the baptism of a baby, that the parents have married in a Register Office, on a hotel, on a beach in America or whatever. I gently point out to the Catholic party that the marriage is not valid in the eyes of the Church and that it is important to have he marriage put right because they they can return to Holy Communion. It is very often a surprise to the Catholic spouse to discover that they are not actually allowed to receive Holy Communion. The convalidation can often be fixed on the occasion of the anniversary of the wedding - this is a help in persuading non-Catholic spouses to co-operate.
(A pastoral note for priests - which most experienced priests will already be well aware of - is that before giving any encouragement about convalidation, it is essential to enquire whether either spouse was married before. If that is the case, then of course the second marriage cannot be convalidated except in the case that the first marriage is investigated by a tribunal and a decree of nullity is granted.)
19 comments:
Good post. And of course, Father, we shouldn't forget the role that deacons often have in respect of this particular matter.
Of course this raises the importance of sound catechesis regarding marriage from an early age.
The birth of babies often reawakens a latent faith and it can be devastating to learn that not only is one's marriage invalid but also that convalidation and sanation are impossible.
Thank you, Father, for clarifying these points. Would the changed nature of civil marriage (presuming the SSM legislation goes through)add any difficulties to convalidation or sanation? I suppose I'm thinking principally here about the change from a union open to procreation (current 'state' marriage) to one where this is irrelevant (because it is open to same sex couples). Would this affect the nature of the consent that is being given in the original state ceremony and thus cause difficulties particularly with sanation (where, if I've understood you, there is no new act of consent)?
Interesting and timely reminder of Canon Law in this matter.
In Ireland our problem with marriages is often in the last mentioned category - one (or both) spouses were previously married. There has been an increase in Registry Office marriages but again they are largely to do with divorcees and those who have no religious affiliation.
In Ireland the Government brought in civil unions for homosexuals and cohabiting heterosexual couples without too much debate - no one opposed it in the Dail vote. It's similar to civil marriage without being entirely the same - they don't have all the rights under all. I wonder how long that will last.
Lazarus - you raise an important point which I am not qualified to answer. My guess would be that the original consent could still be accepted on the assumption that the heterosexual couple did intend the marriage to be open to procreation.
Currently one of the questions on the form for applying for a sanation asks "Does the consent originally given still exist?" It might be prudent for a further question to be added concerning the nature of the original consent but again, that is not my field.
The point made by Lazarus is one which was raised with me the other day. We tend to presume that Catholics who were uninformed about the canonical form of marriage know about the nature of Catholic marriage. I often have doubts doing convalidations, in that the fact that they excluded the Church and God from their marriage ceremony in the first place does not bode well for their understanding of the nature of sacramental marriage. The fact that the vote on the nature of marriage in parliament with have a detrimental effect on the common understanding of the nature of marriage, it will likely become more difficult to assume, and more necessary to enquire, about the couples' understanding of the nature of their marriage.
A further consideration with convalidations and sanations is the question of consent. In a convalidation, it is deemed by the Church to be the beginning of the marriage. If - as is no doubt the case with many marriages these days - couples have a few children and then adopt artificial contraception, and intend to have no further children, then it invalidates the convalidation, as there is no intention to procreate present at the point at which the marriage bond comes into being. This is a real problem with convalidations when children are in their teens, for example. With sanations, this problem is overcome, but one has to presume that the consent to marriage is still there at the point at which the sanation takes place. With both convalidations and sanations, it is often the case that, where they are requested, the couple may be going through a rough patch, and either or both parties are seeking something that will cement the breaking relationship together. Indeed, this - I believe - happens a great deal with cohabiting couples, who seek to get married in order to shore up a breaking relationship. It usually does little other than to hasten the split, and leave the couple in difficulties.
All in all, the whole area of marriage is a problematic one, and these pastoral considerations underline the growing chasm between the secular or commonly held understanding of marriage and the teaching of the Church about the nature of marriage.
On the other hand, to report some better news. I have had a couple of cases recently where - in preparing couples for marriage or convalidation - my simply talking about the beauty of marriage in God's plan has brought brides, and even on one occasion a groom, to tears because of the beauty of what they were hearing. The Church's teaching on the nature of marriage does have a power to satisfy the longings of the heart, and the ability to move the hearts of those who are seeking what they do not understand.
What is the position if (1) two Catholics are validly married (2) they undergo a civil divorce and remarry civilly (3) the spouses of those marriages die and (4) they wish to resume married life.
It must have happened!
Can they just remarry civilly and from a religious point of view treat the intervening divorce and remarriages as non-events?
Fr. Thanks so much again. Most of these points have come up in conversation with people in the past two months or so in my life.
I am glad I had it all right.
I wish priests in GB would be a bit more directive about the dangers of "mixed-Marriage" and how hard these can be until death.
I worked in RCIA for years in the States and these questions came up constantly, as well as the time I worked in England in RCIA in the 1990s. Some priests are more clear than others. God bless you.
A rather tangled situation affects a Catholic woman I know.
She married a twice-divorced non-Catholic man in a register office. The first wife later died.
The man's second marriage was legal, but invalid in Catholic terms, because the first wife was still living.
His third marriage to the Catholic woman was also invalid because it took place while the first wife was still living.
I've been asked what the present position might be. If the second marriage was invalid, is the way now clear for a properly solemnised Catholic marriage?
My husband and I were given the choice of convalidation or sanation after his first marriage was annulled in 2010. Our parish priest did his best to explain the difference but it really wasn't clear to me whether, as two practising Catholics keen to put things right, one option was any better than the other. We opted for sanation in the end.
Great review about Convalidation and sanation and the civil law. Because as i did not know lot about this. But you clarify all things about this.
Richard Mooney Lawyer
Joseph Shaw on LMS Chairman blog has written a critique of the position that we should split marriage between Church and State.
OTSOTA - "divine law" is spoken of in contrast to human (ecclesiastical) law. Natural law is also divine law, not just a human enactment. Galatians does not say that "after death" there is no male or female - St Paul is referring to life in Christ. But yes, it might be that someone could make the argument you suggest.
Tonia - the priest should have explained that convalidation is the normal thing and that sanation is only meant to be used when one or other spouse refuses to take part in convalidation. It should not be presented to a couple as something to "choose". But that's not your fault and the sanation means that your marriage is properly validated.
Andrew T - probably so, but I would take expert advice on a case like that.
Genty - ditto. The priest should contact his chancery and ask for advice in all such complex cases.
Karla on ProtectthePope.com has drawn our attention to a crucial statement by UKIP. According to UKIP there is an EU report due to be adopted later this year whereby any SSM in one country has to be recognised in every other country of the EU. This is what is behind Cameron's attempt to introduce SSM here.
It can be read at:
http://www.ukip.org/content/latest-news/2928-ukip-statement-on-the-same-sex-marriage-bill
@ Lazarus, Fr Julian:
Your concern over people's understanding of marriage may be largely addressed by canon 1099: "Error concerning the unity or indissolubility or sacramental dignity of marriage does not vitiate matrimonial consent provided that it does not determine the will." If we accept, mutatis mutandis, that believing in SSM is an error of the unity or sacramentality of marriage, then it does not invalidate the marriage if an individual (opposite sex!) couple happen to believe in SSM, as long as that belief is not part of their reason for marrying.
@ Fr Tim:
When convalidating on the anniversary of the civil wedding, is there not an increased danger that one or both of the parties will see that as merely a 'blessing' or 'renewal of vows', rather than intending to form a marriage ab initio as the Church understands a convalidation?
I work in a tribunal. Once a saw a case where the 'convalidation' took place at a Retrouvaille weekend. The couple convalidating their civil, invalid, exchanged vows simultaneously with the couples renewing their original, vaild, vows. The judges were able to accept without too much difficulty that the couple did not intend to enter a new marriage at that point.
I must say that, if I saw that a convalidation had taken place on the anniversary of the civil wedding, I would be more inclined to accept a petitioner's claim that she thought the convalidation was merely a 'blessing' or 'renewal of vows.'
Nicolas: a same-sex marriage in Spain or the Netherlands is already recognised as a civil partnership in the UK - I don't think UKIP (not an impartial source of information where the EU is concerned!) are right about Cameron's motives.
Fr Tim
As an admirer of sincere blogs in particular that of Dylan of the Reluctant Sinner I am puzzled why you should include the Eccles and Bosco site in your blogroll.
Though sometimes humorous, the laughter is often malicious and at the expense of fellow Catholics.
Supertradmum, what are these dangers please. I have been married to a practising Anglican for 30 years. In fact, our six closest friend couples are mixed marriages, who married at the same time as us.
We'll need to be aware please.
Father,
Thank you for this piece.
We have some friends who were married by SSPX priests and have many children now.
Are their marriages invalid?
Thank you
Post a Comment