Marriage as in civil law and marriage as in sacrament
Roman Catholic doctrine teaches that there is natural marriage (marriage by
civil law) and sacramental marriage.
Only the man and woman can give marriage to each other. The law only recognises
that they have done this. It thus cannot have any real power to bind a couple in
marriage. So the Catholic argument that there must be a ceremony is odd
considering that a couple totally dedicated to each other are married without a
ceremony and far more married than those who undergo a ceremony. It is
commitment that makes a marriage not a rite.
If a Catholic marries an unbaptised person or if two unbaptised persons marry,
the result is a true marriage but it is only a natural marriage. If the Church
gives you a full Catholic marriage ceremony without realising that you are not
baptised then it follows that though it looks like a sacramental marriage has
taken place it has not.
A sacramental marriage only happens between two baptised men and women and is
blessed in a special way by God who turns it into a means by which the man and
wife get closer to God and prepare each other for Heaven. So you have in other
words, natural marriage and supernatural marriage.
Catholics teach that sacramental marriage is only ended by death and that if
even the Church attempts to end it by divorce, the divorce will be invalid and
useless and unreal.
The Church says marriage is holy - that is it must be devoted to God and lived
the way he wants it lived. It is also a sacrament - a sacrament is a rite that
pictures the life and soul transforming power of God that really does what it
pictures. For example, baptism represents God washing away sin and actually does
this to those who undergo the rite.
If marriage is as sacred as the Church says, then it is far worse for a
blissfully unaware couple in a fake marriage to produce children than for a
couple who are just fornicating without any interest in being the centre of a
wedding ceremony to do it. Counterfeits of the good are worse than brazen evil -
and the Church certainly thinks the latter couple are brazen evildoers. The
latter know they can have the sacrament of marriage to take them to Heaven but
the former is under the illusion that they have the sacrament already!
The Church likes to say that it believes marriage is the bedrock of society and
the Christian society. That is a half-truth. What the Church believes is that
only sacramental marriage is the bedrock of society. It should admit this though
it does not care to. The Church allows non-sacramental marriages to be annulled
or to result in divorce with the right to remarry sacramentally. In other words,
the Catholic Church is saying that the Catholic Church is the bedrock of society
for it facilitates and regulates sacramental marriage. This is vile intolerance.
The Church believes that you cannot properly or truly love others without loving
God and believing in him. Thus a person who doesn't have much faith in God and
receives the sacrament of marriage is blocking its power to unite with the wife
or husband. They don't understand their obligations well. Thus near-unbelief and
unbelief is in the Catholic system a ground for claiming that if a pair wed and
they didn't believe or barely believed, then they didn't undertake the
obligations of marriage properly. So the Church uses that as an excuse for
declaring their marriage invalid if they part ways. Religious believers have no
right to tamper with marriage on religious grounds. Society cannot function if
all start doing things that hurt others in the name of faith. Such actions may
include refusing to pay taxes on spiritual grounds or if men start raping
children believing this rape gives them grace etc. In the real world we have to
live as if the real world is the only world. With so many different spiritual
doctrines and claims abounding we have no choice.
The Church unduly and disastrously encourages marriage with the false notion
that marriage is a sacrament – a magical ceremony that fortifies the union. It
makes naïve people or people who are not ready for marriage decide to marry for
what better helper in marriage could there be than God? The Church says there
are three partners in marriage, the husband, wife and Jesus. When a couple want
to wed the most important thing is, if marriage is indeed a sacrament, that they
ensure that their marriage will be valid and filled with God’s grace which is
his supernatural help that unifies the woman and man. The grace of the sacrament
will not work if the man and woman both stubbornly adhere to mortal sin for
mortal sin is the total rejection of God and his ways. So that means it is a sin
to marry anybody you suspect is in mortal sin. Though some say you cannot judge,
there is nothing that will stop you suspecting – that is human nature. So if you
see that a person could be in mortal sin then it is a sin – a mortal sin – to
marry them. If you do not know enough about the mortal sins until after the
marriage, you would be entitled to an annulment for it means the partner married
you while blocking out God who alone can keep you one in marriage. The partner
then would have been insincere in making the vows even if he kidded himself that
he was genuine. So you can get an annulment then when that happens if your
partner approves or believes in tolerating abortion, contraception,
homosexuality, divorce, atheism all of which are considered to be very serious
sins by the Church that cut off God’s influence and grace.
The idea of marriage being a sacrament is madness for a sacrament requires a
symbolic action that really does what it pictures. Marriage is not symbolic. In
baptism, water is used to picture God cleansing sins away. In communion, bread
and wine are taken as emblems of the body and blood of Christ and give you his
body and blood. But God left no fixed form for marriage at all. If the Church so
chose it could change the way marriage is done entirely. Marriage then is not a
sacrament. Also, no sacrament can bind a man and woman together. They are still
two people legally bound together. A sacrament can give them the strengths and
influences they need to maintain this union. In that case, there is no power
causing the union but only a power helping the union to be maintained. So to
speak of marriage as a sacrament is foolish. The union itself cannot be a
sacrament. Divine grace may help you be a good employee to your boss but that
doesn't mean it causes the union between you and the boss and this union is a
sacrament! The Church desired to interfere in marriage and to do that it had to
lie that Jesus made it a sacrament and so something the Church must look after.
The Church says that only two baptised Catholics getting married can be
sacramentally married. It says there are marriages that are valid but not
sacramental and such marriages are not binding under certain circumstances and
divorce is permitted. For example, a woman is really married to her husband if
both of them were never baptised and if she becomes a baptised Catholic she may
remarry and repudiate her marriage.
If marriage is a sacrament it must be a sin for a Catholic to contract a
marriage with an unbaptised person even with the permission of the Church. It is
turning your back on a sacrament.
The teaching of the Church that divorce is permitted for non-sacramental
marriage contradicts the Church teaching that sex in marriage expresses
life-long commitment.
A couple who lived together up to the wedding could not be really married in the
eyes of God for cohabitation is a serious sin. The Church says that if you are
willing to take the Church’s word for it that marriage is a sacrament, then
logically you should take its word for it that its teaching about what is mortal
sin is right. Therefore it would be impossible for the Church to even partly
excuse. It would be suspicious and therefore unable to proceed with the wedding
until its suspicions are lifted which can only be done if the couple confess to
a priest that they lived in sin and get absolution. If you contracted a marriage
in mortal sin yourself you would be entitled to an annulment. The Church would
have to take your word for it like it does in confession so an annulment should
be very easy to get. But this would mean that every marriage could be annulled
just because the husband or wife said they married in sin. True. But the Church
says conscience is the final guide. The Church says there are many marriages out
there that are invalid but there is no evidence for this invalidity just like
there are many thieves who are guilty but who have to be let off by the courts.
Courts and rules can’t deal with everything. The Church would have to let you do
your own thing and walk out on your husband or wife and get married again if you
believe you did not marry right as long as you do this for godly motives.
A Church annulment need not be recognised by the civil law. If the two agreed it
would be. You must decide which of these is to be trusted: the Church or the
courts. If the law of the land comes first – and it does for it is not the Church
that sends the police around and holds law cases and feeds the people - then the
Church has no right to annul marriages outside of the law. The Church is
obviously laying claim to come first.
If marriage must be taken before God to be valid as the Catholic Church claims
then clearly the state has no business annulling marriages at all! It should
leave this job to the Church and recognise the annulments granted by the Church
as valid.
Sinners cannot contract a valid marriage for they have turned their backs on
goodness by rejecting the Lord. To get married, you have to intend to be good to
your partner. But when you have set your face against the God who is best for
her or him you cannot mean your vows. The Church says that you can really be
married in a state of sin but the sacrilege will draw down the anger of God on
you (Question 308, A Catechism of Christian Doctrine).
The Church says that if a marriage is contracted in a state of mortal sin then
the grace of the marriage will not be activated until the mortal sin is given
up. How then could it be a sacrament to take marriage vows? How could there be a
real marriage until the mortal sin is abandoned? If you really take your woman
as your wife in a strong and lifelong commitment you will not refuse to have God
and his grace involved for they are needed to ensure that this commitment has a
good chance. The Church doesn’t say marriages can only be annulled if at least
one of the partners meant nothing he or she said in the marriage vows. It’s
enough if he or she didn’t mean them more than he or she meant them. Obviously
such a law enables the Church to annul any marriage it wants.
The Church proclaims itself to be a great protector of marriage and family and
yet it likes to conceal its real attitude towards marriage so it follows then
that every married couple has been misled and entitled to an annulment. The
marriage cannot be binding when you have a faith in annulments that prevents a
valid marriage. A non-religious wedding in a register office would have more
hope of validity. It would be more sincere and more respectable. Christian
marriage cannot be real which makes its stern condemnation of adultery seem very
unfair.
The Catholic Church says the Catholic who gets married contrary to the laws of
the Church after he gets a divorce will rot in Hell forever even though this
“sin” does no harm at all and what about all the venial sins all Catholics
commit that build up to make more damage? It is impossible to avoid the
conclusion that the Church is spiteful regardless of how well it covers it.
Venial sinners are invited to communion though one will not repent of them all
meaning that taking the communion is a venial sin for Jesus is received with
some antagonism towards him in your heart. Publicans are welcome to communion
though they provide a service that leads to people getting drunk.
Rather than helping marriage, we see that sacramentalist faith actually destroys
it replacing it with something that resembles it. Moreover, there is no reason
why the state cannot annul Catholic marriages on the basis that mortal sin
prevented the vows from being sincere for even the state cannot recognise a
marriage that the vows were made insincerely for. The state should come first
and should discourage Catholic belief if it really wants to protect marriage.
Religion and supernatural beliefs should not be impinging on marriage or
marriage law if marriage is really the foundation of society or at least very
important to social cohesion and order. We have to put what we see first and not
worry about fairies and gods and angels who we don't see. Nicole Kidman was
permitted to marry in a Catholic Church for her previous marriage to Tom Cruise
was considered to be void as they were Scientologists at the time. They were not
marrying for the Catholic God but for another faith. This contradicts the idea
that if you are an atheist and a good person the goodness you touch is really
touching God as long as you are sincere. It is totally out of sync with modern
attitudes. The liberal theologian would say that Nicole and Tom though they
didn't bother with God in their marriage ceremony were still getting in touch
with him and finding him in their love for one another though they didn't see
it. If this theologian was a liberal Anglo-Catholic or anti-papal Catholic etc
he would say they received a sacramental marriage.
If marriage is precious it does not need to be turned into a circus by religious
superstition.