Prompting the Young and Reminding the Elderly: What Officiating Ministers of Mixed Marriage should Keep in Mind
By Rev Fr. Cyriacus Maduawuchukwu Elelleh JCD
This write-up is informed by a telephone call from a younger brother-priest seeking an opinion regarding his younger sister who planned to marry an Anglican. The young man had “for the sake of this priest” “agreed” to wed in the Catholic Church. This “concession” did not assuage the vexed feelings in this deeply catholic family and they decided to send a few family members to their parish priest who is a senior priest. The priest told them that there was no problem because things have changed and that the only thing important was that they wedded in the Catholic Church. Not convinced, the young priest whose sister was in the middle of all this called to seek my opinion. The challenges posed by the situation of this young priest got me into a deeper look at what the Church expects of her minister at a marriage involving a catholic and a non-Catholic party.
Writing this, we are not unaware of the talks being initiated by the Supreme Pontiff on reforms particularly in the field of marriage. Until anything changes, it is important for church ministers especially parish priests or their delegates to remember what the church expects of them as they witness at mixed marriages. It is actually for this reason that an article on mixed marriage may not be considered misfit in an ordination brochure/magazine. Moreover, we cannot overlook the fact that mixed marriage has remained a pastoral problem on top burner.
What is Mixed Marriage
Understanding what the church means when she discusses mixed marriages is a good starting point at knowing what to do when a catholic man or woman falls in love with a non-Catholic. The expression “non-Catholic” has a strict and a loose application in canon law. In a strict sense, a mixed marriage refers to a marriage between a catholic partner and another who is baptized but in and by a church or ecclesial community that is not in full communion with the Catholic Church: the Orthodox Church, Anglicans and Presbyterians, Methodists, and their likes. In a loose sense, it includes also a marriage between a catholic partner and an unbaptized person. For quick reference, the current code of Church laws (1983) treats the question of mixed marriages in its book IV, Part 1, chapter IV.
We will concentrate on marriage between a catholic and a baptized non-Catholic (this is mixed marriage in the strict sense) and strongly advice that in other cases, that is, marriages between Catholics and non-baptized (disparity of cult) or others whose conditions are not clear, recourse be made to the local ordinary or at least the judicial vicar. However, suffice it to say that marriage between a catholic and a non-baptized is invalid in the Church of Christ (can. 1086 §1), notwithstanding that marriage possesses the favour of the law (cann. 1060, 1086 §3) when there is doubt. This diriment impediment is, as we have noted, called disparity of cult and aimed to protect the catholic party against apostasy, heresy and schism and has as its font St. Paul’s letter to the Corinthians (2Cor.6:14-16). In everything, the salvation of the soul is the Church’s supreme law and so always opens a window to deal with particular cases. Hence, there is the possibility of obtaining a dispensation in this case (cann. 1078, 1086 §2,) when the dispositions of strictly mixed marriage in can. 1125 are met. This canon states that the local Ordinary can grant this permission if there is a JUST and REASONABLE cause. He is not to grant it unless the following conditions are fulfilled:
1° the catholic party is to declare that he or she is prepared to remove dangers of defecting from the faith, and is to make a sincere promise to do all in his or her power in order that all the children be baptized and brought up in the catholic Church;
2° the other party is to be informed in good time of these promises to be made by the catholic party, so that it is certain that he or she is truly aware of the promise and of the obligation of the catholic party
3° both parties are to be instructed about the purposes and essential properties of marriage, which are not to be excluded by either contractant.
Meanwhile, we reiterate that marriage between a catholic and a non-baptized is not a mixed marriage in the strict sense of the term. This is because the difference between them is not mere nomenclature. There are theological and juridical differences. The most outstanding being that mixed marriage is a sacrament while that of disparity of cult, while retaining some signs of the sacred, is not a sacrament.
Pentecostals:
We picked out this group because of the peculiar challenges associated with them and the fact that most of our priests encounter regularly partners of our catholic members who belong to this group. We termed the challenges they pose peculiar because here we are dealing with a group that has been as amorphous as it is real and remains a conundrum. So defined because Pentecostals are all around us, yet, it is not often easy to identify or define them: some of them are being established as we are writing; some of them use the Trinitarian formula while others use the Unitarian formula in their baptisms; some of them change forms and modes with ease and so may have had valid baptisms only at some points in their history. These and many more make dealings with Pentecostals more polemic and problematic. It seems therefore that the best thing to do in the circumstance of a wedding between a Catholic and a Pentecostal member is to have recourse to the local ordinary or the diocesan judicial vicar. In some countries like the United States, most dioceses, following the resolutions of her Episcopal Conference, have identified some Pentecostal churches whose baptism may be considered valid and those not.
The elderly priest was partly correct to say that things have changed:
Before the Vatican II, the concepts of heresy and schism over-coloured the church’s relationship with non-Catholics. This also was evident in the theme of mixed marriages. Canon 1060 of the 1917 code for example states: “Most severely does the Church prohibit everywhere that marriage be entered into by two baptized persons, one of whom is Catholic, and the other belonging to a heretical or schismatic sect; indeed, if there is a danger of pervasion to the Catholic spouse and the children, that marriage is forbidden even by divine law.” This is not hard to understand as the Church at that time, faced with threats of theological errors and disciplinary misconducts of some of her members, sought to preserve her faithful against false teachings. From Nestorianism, monophysitism, to the great schism of 1054AD and to Lutheranism and Anglicanism that opened the door to Pentecostalism, the Church has been concerned more with the salvation of souls of people and so takes strict measures to ensure the validity of the most basic sacrament: Baptism. Apart from its primacy in time, it is also an indispensable sacrament for salvation. Therefore, the church’s position on mixed marriages has followed on one hand her perception of the validity of the baptism of these other Churches and ecclesial communities and on the other hand, the protection of the catholic faith and her faithful.
It is not then strange that mixed marriage according to the 1917 code needed dispensation from mixed religion before it can be celebrated and that dispensation could not even be granted if certain conditions were not fulfilled: there had to be just and grave causes, the non-Catholic spouse had to give precaution in writing to remove the danger of perversion from the Catholic spouse and then the two parties would promise that the children were baptized and educated Catholics and finally the legitimate authority needed at least moral certitude that the cautions or promises would be implemented.
Much of these, as our elderly priest said have since changed. In the new code for instance, the parallel canon (1124) does not use the words heretical and schismatic sects but recognizes them as churches and ecclesial communities. Another very remarkable shift is that mixed marriages do not anymore need dispensation but permission. The earlier change in nomenclature makes this later change understandable and it is not a slight shift. Against permission which the law views positively, the law views dispensation negatively. This is because it is an exception, it is not the usual thing that the Church does; when she does so, it is case by case considering certain unique factors. It serves to note that the obligation to obtain permission is generally in cases where the church feels certain risks may exist and so she restricts those areas so as to be sure those risks are reduced as minimally as possible.
In spite of the above, the priest could not be more correct in his willingness to witness the marriage than not. In fact, the Apostolic Exhortation, Familiaris Consortio favors the marriage of two baptized persons and would only discourage it when and only when the couples are the only obstacles to the union they seek and not the church or his minister. This is when “in spite of all efforts, engaged couples show that they reject explicitly and formally what the Church intends to do when the marriage of baptized persons is celebrated, the pastor of souls cannot admit them to the celebration of marriage” (No. 68). Added to this is the Church’s affirmation of religious liberty in Dignitatis Humanae that it is the right of every human person, founded on the very fact of his nature. Recognizing it then as a right from God, the church noted that everyone has to be immune against coercion in such a way that no one is constricted (or even conscripted) to act against his own belief privately or publicly, alone or in association with others, or should anyone be impeded to work in conformity to his conscience (n.2).
Dispensation and Permission:
We might end up thinking that there is no difference after all between dispensation and permission since all is in some concrete way an appeal to a competent authority. We have said a few things already about the differences between the terms. We clearly note here that when we need dispensation in a case, we are talking about getting a competent authority to attenuate the binding force of law. In other words, dispensation is an act of a competent ecclesial authority that renders what would have been an invalid act valid. Hence a dispensation allows an act that is contra legem (against the law) in a particular situation.
On its part, permission is understood better when we use its other synonym: license. Therefore we need a license for lawfulness of an act not for its validity. The act is secundum legem (according to law). Ministers of mixed marriages have to be concerned not just with the validity but also of the lawfulness of the marriages they celebrate and make sure they obtain dispensation or permission where they should.
Marriage and Canonical form:
We bring this up here as we have just talked about dispensation and permission. Can. 1108 §1 states “Only those marriages are valid which are contracted in the presence of the local Ordinary or parish priest or of the priest or deacon delegated by either of them, who, in the presence of two witnesses, assists, in accordance however with the rules set out in the following canons, and without prejudice to the exceptions mentioned in Cann. 144, 1112 §1, 1116 and 1127 §§2&3.” This is called canonical form. Every catholic (except one who has left the Church through a formal act) who contracts marriage is bound by canonical form without which the one’s marriage is null and void. However, there is in this case also the possibility of dispensation by a local ordinary. Here we note that the church gives room for a possibility of a Catholic marrying a baptized non-Catholic and celebrating the marriage in a church other than catholic and before a non-Catholic minster. Because the necessary dispensation was granted, the marriage is valid even though the wedding may have taken place in a non-Catholic Church. We note the important fact that permission for a mixed marriage by a competent authority does not automatically remove the obligation to canonical form, so that, one particular case may require a permission for mixed marriage and also a dispensation from canonical form to result in a valid marriage. This is an area our priests have not paid deserved attention. In this case most Catholics who have gone to celebrate their marriages in the other churches and ecclesial communities may be living just in good faith.
Pastoral care of couples in a mixed marriage:
Even this sub-topic summarizes the point that the Church does no longer contend mixed marriage but looks for ways to ensure that the parties are guided in love and the faith preserved without dangers that are not inherent. However, the main duty a priest has regarding a catholic party intending to marry a non-Catholic is to make the inherent dangers known to the catholic partner. This is not done at the marriage celebration but long before. This can be done in catechetical instruction to both parties. The difficulties in mixed marriages must never be underestimated and the priest helps the catholic party appreciate this fact. It will be more productive if the catholic minister does not do this work by proxy. Even if he has lay catechists who normally prepare couples for marriages, extra-ordinary care must follow extra-ordinary situations.
On his own part, the catholic minister, as we have implied already, must avoid the risk of getting obsessed with the validity or otherwise of the marriage and forgetting that the Church is also concerned about the lawfulness and the fruitfulness of the marriages she celebrates. This can be decidedly dealt with by saying no to an atmosphere of ‘hurry’ that characterizes most of the marriages we witness. This might have been the main factor that led our elderly brother to his conclusion.
Consideration for the fruitfulness in marriage will then assist the priest/deacon to take note of other important facts. For example, the priest must let the catholic party know that such a union as he/she seeks has a higher disposition to the danger of reliving in a family unit the disunity in Christianity which has not been overcome till date. This can constitute a serious tension in marriage and pose a great difficulty in the upbringing of children who might in turn be very susceptible to religious indifferentism. The danger exists mainly because there is a substantial difference in perception of the sacramental nature of marriage (for example consent or matrimonium in fieri, which for the catholic partner is perpetual), of some moral principles relating to marriage and family life and of association with or obedience to church authority and discipline.
In these areas, we can take a cue from an accord reached between the Catholic Church and the Waldensian and Methodist churches in Italy regarding mixed marriage. The Common Norms that emanated from that agreement recognized the dangers that mixed marriage can pose to the couple but went on to note that “On the other hand, the interfaith couple can contribute to bring together the community, creating opportunities for interaction, dialogue, exchange and, if possible, moments of communion” (n. 1.9). Propagating this spirit in a mixed marriage is a constant and appealing pastoral role of the catholic minster to the catholic party and indeed also the other.
Procreation and Education of Children:
This is one significant factor in the consideration that should be made of the fruitfulness of mixed marriage and is one of the reasons our elderly brother is not entirely correct. The end of every marriage in the church is the good of couples and the procreation and education of children. None of these is a light matter. In fact, the second might bring conflicts in a mixed marriage or increase existing ones. There is the tendency for each partner to assume that the child, for instance, would be baptized in his/her own church. We recall again that infant baptism, for example, remains a contested issue. This tension goes on with the continuous education of the child. Interestingly, the church relates the importance of the education of the child to his baptism. The current code of canon law states “For an infant to be baptized lawfully it is required:
1° that the parents, or at least one of them, or the person who lawfully holds their place, give their consent;
2° that there be a well-founded hope that the child will be brought up in the catholic religion. If such hope is truly lacking, the baptism is, in accordance with the provisions of particular law, to be deferred and the parents advised of the reason for this.” We recall that the same has already been promised by the catholic party during marriage.
We will not have all the space here to deal deeply on this although the conditions are for lawfulness and not validity. Suffice it to say as Fadeyi Emmanuel Olankunle noted that “matrimonium in facto esse, that is, the actual conjugal life of the spouses in the family presents other challenging issues” (Pastoral Care of Families in Mixed Marriages [can.1128], p. 135). Some particular churches, for example the Catholic Archdiocese of Boston and the Dioceses of Fall River, Springfield and Worcester, Massachusetts have in union with other Churches and ecclesial bodies developed an ecumenical document that has addressed this issue locally under the Commission on Christian Unity of the Massachusetts Council of Churches. This simply means that in this area, the catholic minister should be in communication with the local ordinary.
Mixed Marriage and Mass:
Perhaps this is an area most of us would find an urgent and necessary nudge. Today, the church treats marriages between Catholics as she does those between Catholics and baptized non-Catholics. However, for certain reasons that dwell mainly on consideration for the feelings of the other partner and to avoid scandal in the local community, mixed marriage, as a rule, is celebrated with a RITE WITHOUT MASS. If the priest considers it opportune or circumstance nonetheless warrants that it be celebrated within the Mass, permission is to be obtained from the local ordinary. In this case, the non-Catholic party is not to take part in the Holy Communion unless the other general conditions of can. 844 are fulfilled.
Conclusion:
It is not surprising if any of us is already counting the number of invalid or illicit marriages he may have witnessed. We are doing the same. What is important is to avail ourselves the tools and instruments of pastoral solicitude of the Holy Church to convalidate (cc. 1156, 1161) those still possible but more importantly to begin to pay closer attention to the validity, the lawfulness and fruitfulness of the marriages especially mixed-marriages that we celebrate.
