A true marriage is in the Catholic church?

Now I plan to get married a Catholic church, but I was wondering how this came about. I've been taught that you have to be married in the church for it to be a true marriage under God's eyes.

Statements from American Bishops.
usccb.org/laity/marriage/marriagefaqs.shtml

Your statements are a bit confusing. I assume you are a Catholic.

A Catholic is bound by Catholic canon law as to the form of marriage, witnesses, etc. A Catholic must be married according to Catholic form unless they receive a dispensation from their bishop to be married elsewhere-- for example, if they are marrying a non-Catholic they can get a dispensation to marry in the non-Catholic's church.

Non-Catholics marrying each other are not bound by Catholic Church law. They marry validly when they marry in their own denomination or civillly.

I was taught you had to be married in a Catholic church to be truely married in God's eyes, but guess I was taught wrong.

:confused:

Depends… if the Church is God.

For a Catholic to be validly married, it must be done in a Catholic church (unless the bishop gives a dispensation). Non-Catholics are not held to the same requirement.

[quote="SANxJONERO, post:4, topic:177562"]
I was taught you had to be married in a Catholic church to be truely married in God's eyes, but guess I was taught wrong.

[/quote]

If you're Catholic, that's true -- unless you got permission from your bishop to get married elsewhere.

That said, 2 Anglicans married in the Anglican Church or two Hindus married at the temple or two of any religion/no religion married by the judge are just as married in God's eyes as two Catholics in the Catholic Church as long as there were no impediments to their marriage.

[quote="SANxJONERO, post:4, topic:177562"]
I was taught you had to be married in a Catholic church to be truely married in God's eyes, but guess I was taught wrong.

[/quote]

You are a Catholic (according to your profile). You were not taught "wrong." Catholics are bound by Canon Law to marry in the Catholic form. And, if they do not it is invalid.

You were simply not taught everything-- such as dispensations for certain situations, non-Catholics, etc. You were not taught "wrong" you were simply taught the basics that apply to all Catholics rather than all the exceptions.

The priest instructs couples preparing for marriage and would go over all the details and exceptions if there were circumstances necessitating such exceptions.

[quote="Phemie, post:8, topic:177562"]
If you're Catholic, that's true -- unless you got permission from your bishop to get married elsewhere.

That said, 2 Anglicans married in the Anglican Church or two Hindus married at the temple or two of any religion/no religion married by the judge are just as married in God's eyes as two Catholics in the Catholic Church as long as there were no impediments to their marriage.

[/quote]

You're saying it's true in God's eyes that you have to be married in a Catholic church, but you are still married in God's eyes if you're not?

[quote="SANxJONERO, post:10, topic:177562"]
You're saying it's true in God's eyes that you have to be married in a Catholic church, but you are still married in God's eyes if you're not?

[/quote]

Was it your understanding then that only Catholics could ever be married 'in the eyes of God'?

The Catholic Church says that anyone who is validly married is married in the eyes of God.

It also says that a Catholic can only be validly married by marrying in the Catholic Church unless he/she has received permission to marry elsewhere. Anyone who is not Catholic and has no impediments can get validly married anywhere that their Church approves and most Churches approve civil marriages.

So God sees any marriage as valid, but Catholics have to marry in a Catholic church unless given permission? That don't make much sense to me, but ok.. So if I got married in the court house w/o the churches consent, my marriage would be invalid right?

No.

God has given Catholics laws, or precepts. One of those laws is that in order to be sacramentally valid (as well as legal in the eyes of the state), Catholics marry in a Catholic Church. For a good and sufficient reason they may be dispensed from that with the permission of their bishop (for example, if their spouse was the child of a Protestant minister and wished the minister to perform the ceremony). Reasons which would not be 'good' would be wanting to get married 'on a beach', or 'parasailing'. These are frivilous reasons which put the focus of the marriage on the scenery or the 'theme', and not on the sacred (the inside of the Church, which is a consecrated building).

But nonCatholics marrying other nonCatholics are obviously not bound to marry in a Catholic church as they are *not members OF a Catholic Church. *. And the presumption iss', they can marry in whatever way their denomination allows and if they are otherwise free to marry and give free consent, then they are validly married. . .( though not sacramentally married for the most part).

Let's take You (Catholic) and your friends. . . Anne (Catholic), James (Protestant), Marsha (Protestant), Ashley (pagan), Jerry (Jewish) and Roger (agnostic, baptized Catholic).

Of this group: YOU are bound to marry in a Catholic church. So is Roger. So is Anne.

James, Marsha, Ashley and Jerry can marry in a church, in a temple, in city hall . .. wherever their faith 'permits'.

If you marry James. . .he must marry you in a Catholic church, not a Protestant one, not in a meadow, or in city hall, UNLESS for example James's dad is a minister and he wants to perform the ceremony in which case you must ask your bishop for a dispensation in order to marry James validly with his father performing the ceremony.

If you marry Jerry, you must petition your bishop to marry a nonChristian and you will not necessarily marry in the church building itself, but you may not simply go to Jerry's temple and let the rabbi marry you without getting permission from the bishop.

If Roger thinks because he doesn't practice Catholicism that he doesn't have to follow the rules, Roger may marry outside the church but his marriage will not be sacramentally valid, as Roger was baptized Catholic.

If Ashley is a non-baptized pagan, and marries Roger, they will not have a nuptial MASS as Ashley is not baptized, but they must still marry 'in the church'. (Marrying 'in the church' does not mean you have to have the entire nuptial mass. You can be married quietly just reciting your vows in the context of any normal Mass.)

And if you think this is confusing. . .it might be. But after all, it wasn't the CATHOLICS who split off into a few dozen different churches with all sorts of different doctrines. . . they're just trying to make sure that Catholics understand the importance and the sacramental nature of marriage, especially if they are marrying nonCatholics for which marriage is NOT seen in the same way. Many Protestant churches for example permit divorce and then allow the divorced persons to marry other people in big old church weddings. . .part of the reason that we have so many 'situations' that Catholics need to look at is so that both they and the nonCatholic partner know that Catholic marriage is for LIFE.

San,
It’s all in the paperwork. Traditions, traditions, traditions. :shrug:

[quote="SANxJONERO, post:4, topic:177562"]
I was taught you had to be married in a Catholic church to be truely married in God's eyes, but guess I was taught wrong.

[/quote]

Or maybe you understood things wrong?

It's not uncommon that what people hear and remember is NOT what was actually said.

[quote="bpbasilphx, post:15, topic:177562"]
Or maybe you understood things wrong?

It's not uncommon that what people hear and remember is NOT what was actually said.

[/quote]

If someone told me you have to be married in the church for it to be valid in the guys of God, how could I have misunderstood something? You still have a good point tho..

[quote="SANxJONERO, post:16, topic:177562"]
If someone told me you have to be married in the church for it to be valid in the guys of God, how could I have misunderstood something? You still have a good point tho..

[/quote]

I don't want to belabor the points already made...

But I believe that you were not mistaken about needing to be married in a Catholic Church. What you may have misunderstood was was the significance of the word "you".

If you were alone, were in a group of Catholics, or were with a group of non-Catholics wishing to marry Catholics then "you" was valid for all those in the room.

But it would be pointless for "you" to refer to anyone who is not Catholic and/or not marrying a Catholic since such people are not able to be married "in the Catholic Church", (which is a way of saying "according to the rules of the Catholic Church".) That would mean that such people are incapable of validly marrying unless they become Catholic. For many years I believe that was the common opinion of Catholics. Being married according to the rules of the Catholic Church is not part of the inherent *nature *of marriage but Christ gave the Church the authority to make rules binding on members of the Church.

The thing to understand about marriage is that it predates the Catholic Church. Now sacramental marriage was not possible prior to the coming of Christ. (I believe that sacramental marriage is often traced back to the wedding feast of Cana.) But Old Testament marriages were just as valid as those of Catholics today. And valid, but non-Sacramental, marriages occur today between two persons when at least one of them is not baptized. And sacramental marriages can occur between two baptized non-Catholics. (A marriage has to be valid if it is to be sacramental.)

[quote="SMHW, post:17, topic:177562"]
I don't want to belabor the points already made...

But I believe that you were not mistaken about needing to be married in a Catholic Church. What you may have misunderstood was was the significance of the word "you".

If you were alone, were in a group of Catholics, or were with a group of non-Catholics wishing to marry Catholics then "you" was valid for all those in the room.

But it would be pointless for "you" to refer to anyone who is not Catholic and/or not marrying a Catholic since such people are not able to be married "in the Catholic Church", (which is a way of saying "according to the rules of the Catholic Church".) That would mean that such people are incapable of validly marrying unless they become Catholic. For many years I believe that was the common opinion of Catholics. Being married according to the rules of the Catholic Church is not part of the inherent *nature *of marriage but Christ gave the Church the authority to make rules binding on members of the Church.

The thing to understand about marriage is that it predates the Catholic Church. Now sacramental marriage was not possible prior to the coming of Christ. (I believe that sacramental marriage is often traced back to the wedding feast of Cana.) But Old Testament marriages were just as valid as those of Catholics today. And valid, but non-Sacramental, marriages occur today between two persons when at least one of them is not baptized. And sacramental marriages can occur between two baptized non-Catholics. (A marriage has to be valid if it is to be sacramental.)

[/quote]

Thanks & yes I guess who ever told me that rule probably meant Catholics, since it was around Catholic circles when I would hear it.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.