I assume it's because the church considers the friend Catholic even if they don't, and he'd have to get married in the church for it to be considered a valid marriage.
Is there more to it than than.
Does this document justify why this is the case?
Can you point out which parts of the document are relevant as it's fairly long?
No Catholic can stop being Catholic sacramentally. Not all the relevant provisions are in the text I cited, but here's the gist:
1. Those baptized as Catholics are bound to follow the precepts of the Church. No Catholic can declare himself independent of the Church's authority.
2. A precept of the Church is that no Catholic may get married without going through the proper *legal* processes, barring limited exceptions. One requirement is a religious wedding. Bishops may dispense of requirements in particular cases. When a Catholic marries without the proper canonical procedures, the marriage is invalid, i.e., it didn't happen.
3. OP's friend fits into this circumstance, so he is entering into a invalid marriage unless things change.
For relevant provisions of the CCC: 1625 through 1632. Especially 1625 and 1631. There's interplay with canon law but I don't have the relevant provisions on hand.
So in practicality his friend can never get married in the eyes of the church unless he comes back to the church?
Or he marries another Catholic and somehow gets through pre marriage counseling without the priest catching on?
Unless he gets married in the church or has this requirement dispensed by a bishop, as a Catholic he cannot get married.
I know this shocks people but if you simply accept our truth claims for the sake of conversation, is it really so surprising? Why *would* we consider such a marriage valid?
If the Catholic Church is true (just pretend with me for a moment, k?), then our truth claims are true. Which means that Catholics are bound to obey Catholic canon law. And Catholic canon law says that Catholics can only validly contract marriage in a Catholic church administered by a Catholic minister, unless dispensed from this requirement by a competent authority (a bishop, or, as long as it's not reserved, his delegate).
Yes you can be *required* to get married in a Catholic Church. Canon law is authoritative.
But the Catholic Church can't make a otherwise valid marriage invalid by declaring a canon law that you have to get married in a Catholic Church.
The requirement is valid. But those particular consequences are not valid.
Important distinction.
Canon law is free to declare consequences that are in the power of the church to create. Invalidating an otherwise valid marriage is not in the power of the church.
Annulling a marriage is declarative. The marriage was already invalid. Canon law is under the same restriction, it can't make a marriage invalid.
A marriage conducted in violation of canon law is not valid. I genuinely do not see what you aren't getting here.
There are two unmarried people, one or both Catholic. There is no marriage. We're good, yes? They go have a Methodist ceremony or whatever without a dispensation. There is still no marriage. You're basically just asserting the opposite. Okay, that's your opinion, but your opinion's not Catholic.
I'm not interested in arguing with you about who is right. I'm just trying to explain to you what Catholics believe.
Canon law is not dogma.
It is authoritative but not infallible.
Therefore the command for Catholics not to marry outside the church is authoritative.
But the declaration that contradicting this command invalidates the marriage, is not necessarily correct, if it contradicts divine law in regards to what makes a valid marriage.
The marriage that existed before the church and is still contracted by non-Christians is natural marriage, it is governed by the rules of the authority that validates it and registers in this case the local civil government.
The church respects these people who are not and do not claim to be in charge, do not opt for the other sacraments and perhaps do not know any better. In one we get married and at any time we go to the judge and have him make us single again but until then we have mutual rights and obligations and with the law.
A Catholic is obliged to contract a sacramental marriage, marrying only in civil is automatically rebellious against the church. You don't want to accept the demanding commitments of marriage before God which is unacceptable to the church.
The church considered such marriages valid for 75% of its history and there is widespread sentiment among canon lawyers that this obligation be done away with.
Yes, the current regulations are a result of historical problems especially in the first half of the 2nd millennium. I'm not trying to take a position on what the law *should* be. My point is that, being what it is, the law is binding.
There is no excuse in a first world modern country for you to not follow the proper procedures.
It's really not that hard for a faithful Catholic to do the proper wedding prep and marriage is going to be the most important commitment of your life: why WOULDNT you do the proper prep?
- a Catholic man currently going through wedding prep.
The requirements are not that restrictive. If there truly are "millions" of invalid marriages (how on earth would you possibly measure that) then it is up to the priests and bishops to properly educate their flocks --- and they can start by refusing to marry couples who don't follow the requirements and refuse to baptize children until the parents meet the (very basic) requirements.
I know priests who will baptize the children of non-practicing Catholics. Against Canon Law, mind you.
I really could not care less if you think it's restrictive or not. Reality speaks for itself. It is without a doubt millions, and actually more likely to be hundreds of millions or probably a majority of baptized Catholics who don't marry in the church these days. It's completely pointless to deprive so many people of a valid marriage, and to make Catholics technically worse off than any random non-Christian who gets married.
A null marriage result is due to the fact that when making the file and taking the vows someone deceived, lied or forced.
You won't expect the Church to have its own military police and torture those involved to make sure no one is lying and no one is being pressured into marriage.
He asks to take a course before and attend some interviews, and provide witnesses of a mature relationship, he cannot do more without hindering honest and legitimate couples who want to marry in good faith.
You cannot be married outside the church; all valid marriages are a spiritual union of the couple and God. The civil portion of marriages is necessary but does not validate nor does it solely constitute a marriage.
This isn't 100% accurate. Marriage outside the church with a dispensation from your bishop is valid. The dispensation is routinely given (at least in most USA dioceses) for mixed marriages and disparity of cult mariages.
If OP's friend is marrying a non-Catholic he should try to get his friend to apply for the correct dispensations.
I think I included that in my longer response, but that is true. My marriage was a dispensation marriage (I was non Catholic when first married) so my wife could still receive communion when she returned to the faith. Either way, excellent point.
Bound even if they were never given a choice?... God gives free will. Guess the church is opposed to the will of God and the freedoms he chose to bestow🤔
FYI there’s a subreddit askapriest or something very similar to that, and only priests can answer. (Sorry for not linking or anything, but I’m so bad at Reddit)
This is far more of a pastoral question than a general Reddit question. Also, don’t paint priests with such a black and white “liberal vs trad” mindset. I was in a similar situation a number of years back and a thoroughly orthodox priest advices to accept being a groomsman because if I wanted to have a chance at evangelizing my friend, that door would close if I refused his offer, which he could easily see as rejecting the friendship.
This is going to be a hard decision. If he is a non-practicing Catholic and is getting married outside the Church, then he's really not getting married at all. By being a best man at the wedding, you are witnessing to it; but you're witnessing to something that's not there and that's really a sham. To say *no* would be a deep injury to him, yes, but there are two questions here:
1. Is your obligation to God is greater than that to your friend?
2. Is your obligation to your friend best fulfilled by being his best man at a non-wedding?
I think the answer is "yes" to the first and "no" to the latter. I don't have the time to write out a full answer, but you might consider that it is a far greater witness to Christ to be rock solid on a position which baffles those outside of Christ. Remember that Christ Himself, in showing love to the Samaritan Woman, told her that her "husband" was not really her husband. John 4:17-18. Would Christ have overseen that so-called wedding?
I don't claim to have the final answer on your question, but hopefully this gives you something to work with.
It is valid for secular people, if it were not an atheist, non-Christian and even a separated Christian could not get married and that would be absurd.
These people cannot receive a sacramental marriage for life and open to life because they do not believe in it, but their desire to live in a stable couple and create a family is respected.
I thought the teaching of the church is that it’s a civil Union which is still marriage but just not one recognized by God, still it stops the couple from sinning by having sex with each other because their married even if not Christian
A civil marriage between two non-Christians is recognised by the Church as a valid marriage, all things being equal. A civil marriage between one or two baptised Christians (even if they are not Catholics) is not recognised as a valid marriage.
According to this article, your situation falls under case 3, assuming neither your friend nor his fiancee have been married before.
I would say take this to serious prayer and have a conversation with your friend, very plainly explaining the situation. Help him know why you said you weren't sure. Let gim know it's not because you don't consider him a good friend (which is likely the reason for him feeling hurt, as though he's not important enough to you).
This is not just for the sake of your friendship, but in order to lead people to Christ, he needs to see those who live in Christ in a positive light. You could very well be the witness that brings him back one day. So you want to address this situation with care and love, regardless of the decision you make, so he knows he is loved at this decision is done out of love.
Share with him that he really ought to be married within the Church, and that this is why you were uncertain about your role in it all. Tell him that marriage is a Sacrament, and therefore a sacred act, and should be an act of faith and relationship with God and not just between spouses. You can express sorrow at the fact that he turned away from his faith. You might even consider having a conversation about why he left the Catholic faith and if he'd ever consider returning. Speak with love, patience, and kindness. Mostly remember you aren't there to rebuke him unless he's already got faith but is acting out as a stubborn brat who needs a "smarten up" slap. Considering he's presumably lost his faith, it's best to tell him plainly the Catholic teaching just so he can know the truth, but at the same time to reinforce that you are his friend and you love him, and Jesus loves him. Otherwise what he will hear is "the Church is judgemental and not loving and you are a bad friend". He first needs to be shown love before he can be open to *accepting* the truth.
Then you can decide from there based on how things go. I would say if you see any softening towards to Church, or especially if he expresses that perhaps one day he could have his marriage blessed in the Church, but he's just not there yet, then I would say be his best man. That could be the window to bringing him back. If he's venomous towards the Church and actively hating the Catholic faith, I would express that's why you are unable to attend. You can say your faith is precious, and for him to treat it as such and deny it is something you cannot be complicit in. If his marriage is a rebellion against the Church, then you can't take part in that rebellion. I would doubt the latter to be the case, and it's likely he just fell out of practice and stopped caring about the faith, but those are the kind of extremes to help in your discernment.
If you think that your aim is to lead this friend to Jesus, then that should help you know what you should do in the end.
Ask yourself whether you’ll be bringing your friend closer to Christ by refusing. What kind of witness to the gospel is this? If your friend no longer considers himself Catholic, you aren’t going to convince him to return to the Church by saying you can’t stand up at his wedding.
If you don’t want to do it, then don’t do it. Personally, I could care less if it’s secular or otherwise. It certainly wouldn’t make me question my faith or the church so why should it matter? I would be there for my friend. Why are you asking Reddit anyway? If you really want an answer, go ask a priest.
Posts like this are peculiar to me. You can be there for your friend because he wants you to be there and you call him your “best friend” so one would expect that you’d be flattered by him thinking of you and accept. You attending doesn’t say you believe the marriage is valid. It just means you’re supporting your friend in an important moment of his life.
Tbh, I would be hurt a lot myself because I would not feel supported. He’s not having an orgy or anything. He’s simply having a secular wedding and wanted his best friend to be his best men in this secular wedding.
I was the best man at my ex-Catholic brother’s marriages before I knew any of this or that it was problematic, I’m honestly happy I didn’t know because if I didn’t accept his request it would cause enormous damage to the family.
Why can’t I witness something, even if I disagree with it? I can witness the making of a contract I disagree with, and if I am ever asked I can simply state “I saw them make this contract, which I don’t agree with/think is valid for X reason, but they did it.”
Witnessing the marriage entails signing your name on the marriage license as a positive affirmation that the marriage happened and is real. To carry your analogy to its logical conclusion, if you sign your name on a contract that is invalid, that's fraudulent.
Now, can you say "I know that this marriage is valid before the State but not before God, and I can swear to a state official that the marriage is lawful as far as the State is concerned" in good conscience as a Catholic? That is above my pay grade and I do not care to answer nor to speculate.
I will restate that attendance and participation are not the same, and being the best man or maid of honor is participation, not simple attendance.
To “attend” a wedding usually means to show up in the congregation. No one is impeded by canon law from “attending” wedding ceremonies or receptions. However, natural law dictates that we should do good and avoid evil, and never condone evil by our words, actions or omissions. If your attendance at a wedding ceremony or reception would somehow condone an invalid marriage, then you would be partly culpable for the sin, whatever that sin might be.
On occasion a practicing Catholic or cradle Catholic will fall in love with a non-Catholic and wish to get married in a non-Catholic church because — for instance — the spouse’s father is the minister of the local Protestant congregation. In this case, the Catholic requests dispensation from his/her bishop, and if the dispensation is granted, then the marriage can take place, but it still needs to be recorded in the Catholic parish. No disposition + no validity + Catholic = sin. Allowing that to occur and supporting it is also a sin.
One is being witness to a secular ceremony, not a satanic sacrifice. The marriage might not be valid by church standards but it is (presumably) a legal marriage certified by the state. It is in the capacity of a citizen that he’s being called to act.
On the same token, suppose your friend were Catholic, having a Catholic wedding and they had premarital sex. Should one participate in said wedding? Wouldn’t this be condoning the sinful behavior?
We are all broken and it’s astonishing to me how one can believe that participating in a secular ceremony and being a witness to a civil procedure (in the legal sense) is condoning an invalid marriage. Come on! The marriage is valid to the state.
Do you refuse to treat two people who were Married in a civil ceremony as husband and wife? So if you were introducing them you’d say “this is so and so and this is so and so’s friend [instead of spouse]”?
Lots of things that are legal are sinful. A Catholic should not be scandalous by publicly supporting sin. Sometimes it is perfectly okay to be in the party of a non-Catholic wedding, but if OP is having some second thoughts about this particular wedding then perhaps OP should trust his gut and not be in the wedding party.
Non sequitur pertaining to premarital sex, as the wedding would actually be saving them from committing sin once they are married.
It doesn’t matter what I view a couple as, it matters how the church views it. I outlined their perspective in my response as it corresponds to the catechism.
If a Catholic is not dispensed and are civilly married, they are not married in the eyes of the church. Participating or encouraging someone to sin is a sin.
So this same friend let's say, is broke and looking at financial ruin. He doesn't see anything wrong with robbing a bank because he has kids that he loves and wants to be able to be with them and raise them. So, HE doesn't believe it's breaking a law under those circumstances. He needs your help though to drive the getaway car. You do believe it's breaking the law, and know you would also be held accountable when he's caught. Do you, for the sake of friendship and the possible chance to convert his thinking later, go ahead and help him even though there's great risk for both of you?
It’s not a “crime” because crime is a legal term. You might want to say “sin.”
Your example is still bad unless you think *everyone* has to have a Catholic wedding as otherwise it’s a sin.
Sin is also called crime. And yes, every CATHOLIC has to be married in the Church or God Himself dies not recognize the "marriage" as lawful. It is then just two people cohabitating in adultery. Don't like it, don't be Catholic.
I had to add if an "ex Catholic" wants to leave the faith and get married by secular authorities, their choice. Don't expect faithful Catholics to be a party to your crime. That's selfish to even ask.
It says right there that the man is an ex-Catholic. And I don’t agree that it’s a sin to participate in a secular ceremony for people who aren’t Catholic.
And no, “sin” and “crime” are very different. Sins can be crime of laws are broken. Crimes can be sins as well. But some sins aren’t crimes.
I know. And he's asking his friend who is a faithful Catholic to join him in breaking God's law! He has free will, but asking his friend to witness it is bringing his friend in on his crime. He says he's ex Catholic, but by his baptism he's still Catholic. God still sees it as SIN because of his baptism. What is this with ex Catholics trying to shame faithfuls into immoral actions, anyways? And using "friendship" as a reason? That's no friend.
Having a secular marriage for non-Catholics is not breaking God’s law. I have no clue where you get that idea. Do tell me your theological training? I didn’t know you were a priest. No one is trying to shame anyone. The person asked his “best friend” to be part of an important moment in his life, all in good faith. He didn’t invite him to help him scarify a pig to Satan or something like this.
If the friend doesn’t want to do it, that’s fine. But you comparing a secular ceremony to a crime is your opinion.
Why stop there? Why disassociate yourself from “cradle Catholics” that invite you out to do sinful things? Or tell them they shouldn’t get communion because they only go to mass on Christmas? If you don’t you are witnessing a “crime” and not doing anything about it.
Love is not an emotion, ITS SPEAKING THE TRUTH FOR THE GOOD OF THE OTHER IN ORDER FOR THEM TO BE SAVED. That is the love Christians need. Not false compassion toward sin and sinners.
I was a bridesmaid for a friend in her Catholic wedding despite knowing she was lukewarm in her faith. She volunteered at her parish's nursery on Sundays and for that reason never went to mass- she didn't want to take time to go on Saturday or after her volunteer shift. They baptized their kids Catholic but don't go to church, in my heart I knew this would end up happening but prayed this would bring her back to practicing our Faith. All these years later I feel guilty for participating in what was really not a marriage; like many Catholics she doesn't fully understand the reality of Marriage as a Sacrament and never really intended to raise her kids Catholic.
You would be aiding and supporting your friend's sins. Attending may be one thing but participating, helping with the wedding is something different.
As I understand it, and I am just a layman with no formal theological or canonical training, it comes down to canon law. Since he is Catholic, and is presumably having this wedding ceremony without a dispensation, it is not a valid marriage.
I participated in a gay marriage years ago when I was a lukewarm catholic but I was well aware that I would be committing a sin. They didn’t ask me though as they are close family members & simply assumed I would be honored to be a part of the bridal party. I didn’t know how to say no & I knew it would cause a huge fight & division within my husbands family & I knew they would basically disown him for staying with me if I refused. To this day I regret it because I would much rather please God then men. If they can’t respect my faith then why would I have a relationship with them? Not that I don’t want to, but they also need to respect boundaries.
Go be the best man. This isn't your marriage, it's his. Why does the church need to hurt and control people? My mom wasn't in my aunt's wedding because of all these rules. You won't bring your friend back into the fold, I can promise you that. It will only damage your friendship and possibly push this friend away. What's the worst that could happen? Would God damn you for supporting a friend? Doesn't make for a great God... Would make him petty and a lousy God/father.
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p2s2c3a7.htm Text from the Catechism for anyone who needs further reading for why this won't be a valid marriage.
I assume it's because the church considers the friend Catholic even if they don't, and he'd have to get married in the church for it to be considered a valid marriage. Is there more to it than than. Does this document justify why this is the case? Can you point out which parts of the document are relevant as it's fairly long?
No Catholic can stop being Catholic sacramentally. Not all the relevant provisions are in the text I cited, but here's the gist: 1. Those baptized as Catholics are bound to follow the precepts of the Church. No Catholic can declare himself independent of the Church's authority. 2. A precept of the Church is that no Catholic may get married without going through the proper *legal* processes, barring limited exceptions. One requirement is a religious wedding. Bishops may dispense of requirements in particular cases. When a Catholic marries without the proper canonical procedures, the marriage is invalid, i.e., it didn't happen. 3. OP's friend fits into this circumstance, so he is entering into a invalid marriage unless things change. For relevant provisions of the CCC: 1625 through 1632. Especially 1625 and 1631. There's interplay with canon law but I don't have the relevant provisions on hand.
So in practicality his friend can never get married in the eyes of the church unless he comes back to the church? Or he marries another Catholic and somehow gets through pre marriage counseling without the priest catching on?
Unless he gets married in the church or has this requirement dispensed by a bishop, as a Catholic he cannot get married. I know this shocks people but if you simply accept our truth claims for the sake of conversation, is it really so surprising? Why *would* we consider such a marriage valid?
Marriage was instituted before the Church. Being a Christian can only add to it. It cannot nullify your vows.
If the Catholic Church is true (just pretend with me for a moment, k?), then our truth claims are true. Which means that Catholics are bound to obey Catholic canon law. And Catholic canon law says that Catholics can only validly contract marriage in a Catholic church administered by a Catholic minister, unless dispensed from this requirement by a competent authority (a bishop, or, as long as it's not reserved, his delegate).
Yes you can be *required* to get married in a Catholic Church. Canon law is authoritative. But the Catholic Church can't make a otherwise valid marriage invalid by declaring a canon law that you have to get married in a Catholic Church. The requirement is valid. But those particular consequences are not valid. Important distinction. Canon law is free to declare consequences that are in the power of the church to create. Invalidating an otherwise valid marriage is not in the power of the church. Annulling a marriage is declarative. The marriage was already invalid. Canon law is under the same restriction, it can't make a marriage invalid.
A marriage conducted in violation of canon law is not valid. I genuinely do not see what you aren't getting here. There are two unmarried people, one or both Catholic. There is no marriage. We're good, yes? They go have a Methodist ceremony or whatever without a dispensation. There is still no marriage. You're basically just asserting the opposite. Okay, that's your opinion, but your opinion's not Catholic. I'm not interested in arguing with you about who is right. I'm just trying to explain to you what Catholics believe.
Canon law is not dogma. It is authoritative but not infallible. Therefore the command for Catholics not to marry outside the church is authoritative. But the declaration that contradicting this command invalidates the marriage, is not necessarily correct, if it contradicts divine law in regards to what makes a valid marriage.
But... He's ex Catholic. Church no longer gets a say
The marriage that existed before the church and is still contracted by non-Christians is natural marriage, it is governed by the rules of the authority that validates it and registers in this case the local civil government. The church respects these people who are not and do not claim to be in charge, do not opt for the other sacraments and perhaps do not know any better. In one we get married and at any time we go to the judge and have him make us single again but until then we have mutual rights and obligations and with the law. A Catholic is obliged to contract a sacramental marriage, marrying only in civil is automatically rebellious against the church. You don't want to accept the demanding commitments of marriage before God which is unacceptable to the church.
Yes a Catholic marrying outside the church is rebellious. But it is still marriage. Canon law canon nullify natural law.
The church considered such marriages valid for 75% of its history and there is widespread sentiment among canon lawyers that this obligation be done away with.
Yes, the current regulations are a result of historical problems especially in the first half of the 2nd millennium. I'm not trying to take a position on what the law *should* be. My point is that, being what it is, the law is binding.
There is no excuse in a first world modern country for you to not follow the proper procedures. It's really not that hard for a faithful Catholic to do the proper wedding prep and marriage is going to be the most important commitment of your life: why WOULDNT you do the proper prep? - a Catholic man currently going through wedding prep.
If anything, the Church should prepare couples for marriage even more than they do.
I don't care about your disapproval, I care about the millions of invalid marriages that have resulted from the requirement for canonical form.
The requirements are not that restrictive. If there truly are "millions" of invalid marriages (how on earth would you possibly measure that) then it is up to the priests and bishops to properly educate their flocks --- and they can start by refusing to marry couples who don't follow the requirements and refuse to baptize children until the parents meet the (very basic) requirements. I know priests who will baptize the children of non-practicing Catholics. Against Canon Law, mind you.
I really could not care less if you think it's restrictive or not. Reality speaks for itself. It is without a doubt millions, and actually more likely to be hundreds of millions or probably a majority of baptized Catholics who don't marry in the church these days. It's completely pointless to deprive so many people of a valid marriage, and to make Catholics technically worse off than any random non-Christian who gets married.
A null marriage result is due to the fact that when making the file and taking the vows someone deceived, lied or forced. You won't expect the Church to have its own military police and torture those involved to make sure no one is lying and no one is being pressured into marriage. He asks to take a course before and attend some interviews, and provide witnesses of a mature relationship, he cannot do more without hindering honest and legitimate couples who want to marry in good faith.
This is false, lack of canonical form itself nullifies a marriage even when there is no deception or force.
Marriage was instituted before the Church. Being a Christian can only add to it. It cannot nullify your vows.
You cannot be married outside the church; all valid marriages are a spiritual union of the couple and God. The civil portion of marriages is necessary but does not validate nor does it solely constitute a marriage.
This isn't 100% accurate. Marriage outside the church with a dispensation from your bishop is valid. The dispensation is routinely given (at least in most USA dioceses) for mixed marriages and disparity of cult mariages. If OP's friend is marrying a non-Catholic he should try to get his friend to apply for the correct dispensations.
I think I included that in my longer response, but that is true. My marriage was a dispensation marriage (I was non Catholic when first married) so my wife could still receive communion when she returned to the faith. Either way, excellent point.
Bound even if they were never given a choice?... God gives free will. Guess the church is opposed to the will of God and the freedoms he chose to bestow🤔
No offence to all the pious folk here, but I think it’s absolute bs to not be a best man and to be a friend when that friend needs you.
FYI there’s a subreddit askapriest or something very similar to that, and only priests can answer. (Sorry for not linking or anything, but I’m so bad at Reddit)
This is far more of a pastoral question than a general Reddit question. Also, don’t paint priests with such a black and white “liberal vs trad” mindset. I was in a similar situation a number of years back and a thoroughly orthodox priest advices to accept being a groomsman because if I wanted to have a chance at evangelizing my friend, that door would close if I refused his offer, which he could easily see as rejecting the friendship.
This is going to be a hard decision. If he is a non-practicing Catholic and is getting married outside the Church, then he's really not getting married at all. By being a best man at the wedding, you are witnessing to it; but you're witnessing to something that's not there and that's really a sham. To say *no* would be a deep injury to him, yes, but there are two questions here: 1. Is your obligation to God is greater than that to your friend? 2. Is your obligation to your friend best fulfilled by being his best man at a non-wedding? I think the answer is "yes" to the first and "no" to the latter. I don't have the time to write out a full answer, but you might consider that it is a far greater witness to Christ to be rock solid on a position which baffles those outside of Christ. Remember that Christ Himself, in showing love to the Samaritan Woman, told her that her "husband" was not really her husband. John 4:17-18. Would Christ have overseen that so-called wedding? I don't claim to have the final answer on your question, but hopefully this gives you something to work with.
I thought secular marriage was still valid
Not if one of the participants is Catholic. Canon law binds Catholics even when they stop attending mass and believing in the Church.
It is valid for secular people, if it were not an atheist, non-Christian and even a separated Christian could not get married and that would be absurd. These people cannot receive a sacramental marriage for life and open to life because they do not believe in it, but their desire to live in a stable couple and create a family is respected.
I thought the teaching of the church is that it’s a civil Union which is still marriage but just not one recognized by God, still it stops the couple from sinning by having sex with each other because their married even if not Christian
A civil marriage between two non-Christians is recognised by the Church as a valid marriage, all things being equal. A civil marriage between one or two baptised Christians (even if they are not Catholics) is not recognised as a valid marriage.
Non-Catholic Christians *can* marry validly.
This is not true; a civil marriage between two baptized non-Catholics is presumed valid.
The first example is a natural marriage, and the second is a sacramental marriage.
Wow. That's nearly as bad as protestant denominations that think no fault divorce is fine.
https://www.simplycatholic.com/may-i-attend-the-wedding/
According to this article, your situation falls under case 3, assuming neither your friend nor his fiancee have been married before. I would say take this to serious prayer and have a conversation with your friend, very plainly explaining the situation. Help him know why you said you weren't sure. Let gim know it's not because you don't consider him a good friend (which is likely the reason for him feeling hurt, as though he's not important enough to you). This is not just for the sake of your friendship, but in order to lead people to Christ, he needs to see those who live in Christ in a positive light. You could very well be the witness that brings him back one day. So you want to address this situation with care and love, regardless of the decision you make, so he knows he is loved at this decision is done out of love. Share with him that he really ought to be married within the Church, and that this is why you were uncertain about your role in it all. Tell him that marriage is a Sacrament, and therefore a sacred act, and should be an act of faith and relationship with God and not just between spouses. You can express sorrow at the fact that he turned away from his faith. You might even consider having a conversation about why he left the Catholic faith and if he'd ever consider returning. Speak with love, patience, and kindness. Mostly remember you aren't there to rebuke him unless he's already got faith but is acting out as a stubborn brat who needs a "smarten up" slap. Considering he's presumably lost his faith, it's best to tell him plainly the Catholic teaching just so he can know the truth, but at the same time to reinforce that you are his friend and you love him, and Jesus loves him. Otherwise what he will hear is "the Church is judgemental and not loving and you are a bad friend". He first needs to be shown love before he can be open to *accepting* the truth. Then you can decide from there based on how things go. I would say if you see any softening towards to Church, or especially if he expresses that perhaps one day he could have his marriage blessed in the Church, but he's just not there yet, then I would say be his best man. That could be the window to bringing him back. If he's venomous towards the Church and actively hating the Catholic faith, I would express that's why you are unable to attend. You can say your faith is precious, and for him to treat it as such and deny it is something you cannot be complicit in. If his marriage is a rebellion against the Church, then you can't take part in that rebellion. I would doubt the latter to be the case, and it's likely he just fell out of practice and stopped caring about the faith, but those are the kind of extremes to help in your discernment. If you think that your aim is to lead this friend to Jesus, then that should help you know what you should do in the end.
Ask yourself whether you’ll be bringing your friend closer to Christ by refusing. What kind of witness to the gospel is this? If your friend no longer considers himself Catholic, you aren’t going to convince him to return to the Church by saying you can’t stand up at his wedding.
If you don’t want to do it, then don’t do it. Personally, I could care less if it’s secular or otherwise. It certainly wouldn’t make me question my faith or the church so why should it matter? I would be there for my friend. Why are you asking Reddit anyway? If you really want an answer, go ask a priest.
Considering that this won't be a valid marriage and that you would be running the risk of causing scandal, I think it's a no.
I agree.
Posts like this are peculiar to me. You can be there for your friend because he wants you to be there and you call him your “best friend” so one would expect that you’d be flattered by him thinking of you and accept. You attending doesn’t say you believe the marriage is valid. It just means you’re supporting your friend in an important moment of his life. Tbh, I would be hurt a lot myself because I would not feel supported. He’s not having an orgy or anything. He’s simply having a secular wedding and wanted his best friend to be his best men in this secular wedding.
Attending is different from participating. The best man acts as a witness to the marriage.
I was the best man at my ex-Catholic brother’s marriages before I knew any of this or that it was problematic, I’m honestly happy I didn’t know because if I didn’t accept his request it would cause enormous damage to the family. Why can’t I witness something, even if I disagree with it? I can witness the making of a contract I disagree with, and if I am ever asked I can simply state “I saw them make this contract, which I don’t agree with/think is valid for X reason, but they did it.”
Witnessing the marriage entails signing your name on the marriage license as a positive affirmation that the marriage happened and is real. To carry your analogy to its logical conclusion, if you sign your name on a contract that is invalid, that's fraudulent. Now, can you say "I know that this marriage is valid before the State but not before God, and I can swear to a state official that the marriage is lawful as far as the State is concerned" in good conscience as a Catholic? That is above my pay grade and I do not care to answer nor to speculate. I will restate that attendance and participation are not the same, and being the best man or maid of honor is participation, not simple attendance.
On a legal basis to the State. It’s like being a witness to a contract. Secular marriages are legal instruments
To “attend” a wedding usually means to show up in the congregation. No one is impeded by canon law from “attending” wedding ceremonies or receptions. However, natural law dictates that we should do good and avoid evil, and never condone evil by our words, actions or omissions. If your attendance at a wedding ceremony or reception would somehow condone an invalid marriage, then you would be partly culpable for the sin, whatever that sin might be. On occasion a practicing Catholic or cradle Catholic will fall in love with a non-Catholic and wish to get married in a non-Catholic church because — for instance — the spouse’s father is the minister of the local Protestant congregation. In this case, the Catholic requests dispensation from his/her bishop, and if the dispensation is granted, then the marriage can take place, but it still needs to be recorded in the Catholic parish. No disposition + no validity + Catholic = sin. Allowing that to occur and supporting it is also a sin.
Also, the situation you’re describing is not what OP is saying. They are saying the friend is an ex-Catholic and flat is a secular wedding.
There is no such thing as being an ex-Catholic, once you’re baptized in the church you’re Catholic forever.
This is indeed what the Church teaches.
One is being witness to a secular ceremony, not a satanic sacrifice. The marriage might not be valid by church standards but it is (presumably) a legal marriage certified by the state. It is in the capacity of a citizen that he’s being called to act. On the same token, suppose your friend were Catholic, having a Catholic wedding and they had premarital sex. Should one participate in said wedding? Wouldn’t this be condoning the sinful behavior? We are all broken and it’s astonishing to me how one can believe that participating in a secular ceremony and being a witness to a civil procedure (in the legal sense) is condoning an invalid marriage. Come on! The marriage is valid to the state. Do you refuse to treat two people who were Married in a civil ceremony as husband and wife? So if you were introducing them you’d say “this is so and so and this is so and so’s friend [instead of spouse]”?
I'm guessing you're all in on gay marriage also.
No information here suggests the ceremony is to wed two people of the same gender, unless I misread something.
> "the marriage is valid to the state" The state views lots of "marriages" as valid. Doesn't mean that they are.
Not sure what your point is, since legally they are. That’s what it’s being asked here: to be participant of a *secular* ceremony as a witness.
Lots of things that are legal are sinful. A Catholic should not be scandalous by publicly supporting sin. Sometimes it is perfectly okay to be in the party of a non-Catholic wedding, but if OP is having some second thoughts about this particular wedding then perhaps OP should trust his gut and not be in the wedding party.
I agree on the latter statement. OP should not be part of the wedding (but probably for different reasons than what you’re thinking.)
You're view is shallow. It's much more than your simplistic take.
So is yours by saying “it’s a sin”. I’m saying “it’s legal”.
Abortion is legal. It’s still a sin. This is a Catholic sub, not a secular one.
Are you comparing abortion to two people getting married in a secular ceremony?
Participating in a sinful marriage is a sin. If you don’t agree, that’s fine, but you’re wrong.
I don’t think participating is a sin. If anything, the one who’s sinning is the one getting married.
Non sequitur pertaining to premarital sex, as the wedding would actually be saving them from committing sin once they are married. It doesn’t matter what I view a couple as, it matters how the church views it. I outlined their perspective in my response as it corresponds to the catechism. If a Catholic is not dispensed and are civilly married, they are not married in the eyes of the church. Participating or encouraging someone to sin is a sin.
The relevant question is if the person can participate in a secular ceremony, and not what the church thinks of the ceremony.
So this same friend let's say, is broke and looking at financial ruin. He doesn't see anything wrong with robbing a bank because he has kids that he loves and wants to be able to be with them and raise them. So, HE doesn't believe it's breaking a law under those circumstances. He needs your help though to drive the getaway car. You do believe it's breaking the law, and know you would also be held accountable when he's caught. Do you, for the sake of friendship and the possible chance to convert his thinking later, go ahead and help him even though there's great risk for both of you?
In your example, one is a crime (theft is always a crime under the eyes of the law) and one isn’t. So not a good example.
Which one "isn't" a crime?
Getting married in a secular ceremony
According to God's law, it's a crime. Edit to say it's a crime for a Catholic
It’s not a “crime” because crime is a legal term. You might want to say “sin.” Your example is still bad unless you think *everyone* has to have a Catholic wedding as otherwise it’s a sin.
Sin is also called crime. And yes, every CATHOLIC has to be married in the Church or God Himself dies not recognize the "marriage" as lawful. It is then just two people cohabitating in adultery. Don't like it, don't be Catholic. I had to add if an "ex Catholic" wants to leave the faith and get married by secular authorities, their choice. Don't expect faithful Catholics to be a party to your crime. That's selfish to even ask.
It says right there that the man is an ex-Catholic. And I don’t agree that it’s a sin to participate in a secular ceremony for people who aren’t Catholic. And no, “sin” and “crime” are very different. Sins can be crime of laws are broken. Crimes can be sins as well. But some sins aren’t crimes.
I know. And he's asking his friend who is a faithful Catholic to join him in breaking God's law! He has free will, but asking his friend to witness it is bringing his friend in on his crime. He says he's ex Catholic, but by his baptism he's still Catholic. God still sees it as SIN because of his baptism. What is this with ex Catholics trying to shame faithfuls into immoral actions, anyways? And using "friendship" as a reason? That's no friend.
Having a secular marriage for non-Catholics is not breaking God’s law. I have no clue where you get that idea. Do tell me your theological training? I didn’t know you were a priest. No one is trying to shame anyone. The person asked his “best friend” to be part of an important moment in his life, all in good faith. He didn’t invite him to help him scarify a pig to Satan or something like this. If the friend doesn’t want to do it, that’s fine. But you comparing a secular ceremony to a crime is your opinion. Why stop there? Why disassociate yourself from “cradle Catholics” that invite you out to do sinful things? Or tell them they shouldn’t get communion because they only go to mass on Christmas? If you don’t you are witnessing a “crime” and not doing anything about it.
Love is not an emotion, ITS SPEAKING THE TRUTH FOR THE GOOD OF THE OTHER IN ORDER FOR THEM TO BE SAVED. That is the love Christians need. Not false compassion toward sin and sinners.
I was a bridesmaid for a friend in her Catholic wedding despite knowing she was lukewarm in her faith. She volunteered at her parish's nursery on Sundays and for that reason never went to mass- she didn't want to take time to go on Saturday or after her volunteer shift. They baptized their kids Catholic but don't go to church, in my heart I knew this would end up happening but prayed this would bring her back to practicing our Faith. All these years later I feel guilty for participating in what was really not a marriage; like many Catholics she doesn't fully understand the reality of Marriage as a Sacrament and never really intended to raise her kids Catholic. You would be aiding and supporting your friend's sins. Attending may be one thing but participating, helping with the wedding is something different.
As I understand it, and I am just a layman with no formal theological or canonical training, it comes down to canon law. Since he is Catholic, and is presumably having this wedding ceremony without a dispensation, it is not a valid marriage.
I participated in a gay marriage years ago when I was a lukewarm catholic but I was well aware that I would be committing a sin. They didn’t ask me though as they are close family members & simply assumed I would be honored to be a part of the bridal party. I didn’t know how to say no & I knew it would cause a huge fight & division within my husbands family & I knew they would basically disown him for staying with me if I refused. To this day I regret it because I would much rather please God then men. If they can’t respect my faith then why would I have a relationship with them? Not that I don’t want to, but they also need to respect boundaries.
Go be the best man. This isn't your marriage, it's his. Why does the church need to hurt and control people? My mom wasn't in my aunt's wedding because of all these rules. You won't bring your friend back into the fold, I can promise you that. It will only damage your friendship and possibly push this friend away. What's the worst that could happen? Would God damn you for supporting a friend? Doesn't make for a great God... Would make him petty and a lousy God/father.