October 15, 2008
Civilly
Married Couples
And More on the Use of Hands at Elevation of Host
ROME, OCT. 14, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ
Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina
Apostolorum university.
Q: Bishop Philip Boyce of Raphoe, Ireland, once said that cohabiting
couples must not receive Communion (see ZENIT, Jan. 23, 2006). I
have two related questions: 1) Are civilly married couples
considered cohabiting if not married in church? 2) If a civilly
married couple, never married in church, divorce and one or both
eventually want to get married in church with a different partner,
will they be allowed to? -- F.N., Coquitlam, British Columbia
A: The answer would depend on several circumstances and on the
religious status of the couple.
If at least one member of the couple is Catholic, then the Church
would not recognize the civil marriage as valid and the couple's
status would be practically the same as a cohabiting couple.
This is because positive Church law ties the validity of a Catholic
wedding to following the proper canonical form. Since this is
positive and not divine law the local bishop has the authority to
dispense from the canonical form. This is usually granted if for
some serious reason a Catholic wishes to marry according to a
non-Catholic religious ritual. The dispensation is rarely, if ever,
accorded when a Catholic wants to marry according to a civil
ceremony.
If a couple of civilly married, baptized non-Catholics were to
become Catholic, then their status would depend on whether their
former community recognized the validity of civil marriage or not.
If their civil marriage was recognized as valid, then, in the eyes
of God and the Church, that marriage would also be sacramental. This
is because the Church considers that all valid marriages between
baptized persons are automatically sacramental even in those cases
where the particular religious community does not number matrimony
among the sacraments.
If a civilly married couple receive baptism, then the baptism itself
transforms their valid civil marriage into a sacramental marriage
and this fact is noted on the baptismal register.
In both of the above cases if there is some well-grounded doubt as
to the validity of the original bond (for example, if the terms of
the civil wedding created a presumption against making a lifelong
commitment), then the couple should be wed on entering the Catholic
faith.
Addressing the second question, we can say that if a Catholic had
entered into an invalid civil wedding, and later divorced, in
principle he or she could marry someone else in the Church.
It is possible that the same rule would apply in the second
situation mentioned, but each case would have to be examined on its
own merits to determine the sacramental validity of the previous
Christian marriage. In general the law presumes the validity of such
a marriage until the contrary is proven (Canon 1060).
The previous civil bond of someone who divorced before baptism would
not usually constitute an obstacle to being married in the Church.
If necessary, the previous marriage could be dissolved in virtue of
the Pauline privilege (Canon 1143).
It is important to note, however, that marriage in all of the above
cases require the permission of the local bishop, especially if the
person has civil obligations toward the spouse and children arising
from a previous bond (Canon 1071).
Likewise, before any of these weddings can take place, Canon 1085.2
requires that "the nullity or dissolution of the prior marriage is
established legitimately and certainly."
* * *
Follow-up: Both Hands at Elevation of Host
After our comments on the importance of the priest using both hands
for raising the host after the consecration (see Sept. 30), a
distinguished reader commented on a possible variant.
He wrote: "Thank you for making your point so clearly about using
both hands in the raising of the host and the other pertinent points
you made. They are important and [...] give a proper decorum to the
mystery being celebrated.
"There may be a case for using one hand when the other hand holds
the vessel beneath the raised host, as I often do. In other words,
at the consecration the whole paten which is usually large and flat
is raised slightly and after the consecration the big host is raised
above the paten or dish and shown to the people. Then the dish is in
the left hand and the raised host in the right."
I would agree with our reader that this particular form would not
lack reverence and decorum.
The only caveat I would have is that raising the paten is not
foreseen at this moment. The rubrics, in directing the priest to
take the bread ("accipit panem") and deposit it upon the paten after
showing it to the faithful, seem to presuppose that he physically
handle the bread itself and not the paten. This would be in
continuity with the Roman tradition as exemplified in the
extraordinary form of the Roman rite.
Likewise, raising the paten during the showing of the host, while
not forbidden, is not mentioned at this point, whereas the rubrics
specify two other moments when the paten should be or may be raised.
Although the showing of the host and chalice after the consecration
are central moments of the Eucharistic Prayer, liturgically
speaking, the elevation of paten and chalice during the concluding
doxology until the people have finished the final amen is of more
importance. This is because it makes explicit the whole mystery of
the sacred sacrifice's giving glory to the Father, through, with and
in Christ in the unity of the Holy Spirit, whereas the symbolism
behind the showing after the consecration emphasizes above all the
mystery of transubstantiation.
Raising the paten at the consecration might possibly make it harder
to catechize the faithful regarding the full meaning of this moment
of the Mass.
The other moment when the paten may be raised is during the "This is
the Lamb of God." At this moment the celebrant has a choice as to
present the remaining fragments of the large host to the faithful
above the raised paten, or above the raised chalice. In this case it
should never be simply presented to the people without the paten or
chalice as is usually done in the consecration.
Several other readers pointed out that the celebrant's reverence, or
lack thereof, toward the Eucharist at Mass is very often reflected
in the behavior of other ministers and of some of the faithful.
Above all they pointed out the effects on the liturgical and
spiritual formation of children.
* * *
Readers may send questions to liturgy@zenit.org. Please put the word
"Liturgy" in the subject field. The text should include your
initials, your city and your state, province or country. Father
McNamara can only answer a small selection of the great number of
questions that arrive.
