|
INTERNATIONAL THEOLOGICAL COMMISSION
PROPOSITIONS ON THE DOCTRINE OF CHRISTIAN MARRIAGE
This document was approved by the Commission “in forma specifica”
1. MATRIMONY AS AN INSTITUTION
1.1. The Human and Divine Views of Matrimony
The matrimonial pact is founded upon preexistent and permanent structures that
constitute the difference between man and woman and is “instituted” by the
spouses themselves, even though in its concrete form it is very subject to
different historical and cultural changes as well as, in a certain sense, to the
particular way in which the marriage is carried out by the spouses. In this,
marriage shows itself to be an institution of the Creator himself, both from the
point of view of mutual help in conjugal love and fidelity as well as through
the rearing of children born in marriage within the heart of the family
community.
1.2. Marriage in Christ
As is easily shown in the New Testament, Jesus confirmed this institution which
existed “from the very beginning”, and cured it of its previous defects (Mk
10:2-9, 10-12) by restoring all its dignity and its original requirements. He
sanctified this state of life (GS 48, 2) by including it within the
mystery of love, which unites him as Redeemer to his Church. This is the reason
why the task of regulating Christian marriage (1 Cor 7:10f.) has been entrusted
to the Church.
1.3. The Apostles
The Epistles of the New Testament say that marriage should be honored in every
way (Heb 13:4) and, in response to certain attacks, they present it as a good
work of the Creator (1 Tim 4:1-5). Rather, they exalt matrimony among the
faithful because it is included in the mystery of Covenant and love that unites
Christ and the Church (Eph 5:22-23; GS 48, 2).
They ask, therefore, that marriage be contracted “in the Lord” (1 Cor 7:39) and
that matrimonial life be lived in accordance with the dignity of a new creature
“ (2 Cor 5:17), “in Christ” (Eph 5:21-33), putting Christians on guard against
the pagans’ habits (1 Cor 6:12-20; cf. 6:9-10). On the basis of a “right
deriving from faith” and in their desire to assure its permanence, the Churches
of apostolic times formulated certain moral orientations (Col 3:18ff.; Tit
2:3-5; 1 Pet 3:1-7) and juridical dispositions that would help people live
matrimony “according to the Faith” in different human situations and conditions.
1.4. The First Centuries
During the first centuries of Church history, Christians contracted marriage
“like other men” (Ad Diognetum 5, 6) with the father of the family
presiding, and only with domestic rites and gestures, as, for example, uniting
hands. Still they didn’t lose sight of the “extraordinary and truly paradoxical
laws of their spiritual society” (ibid., 5, 4): they eliminated from the home
liturgies every trace of pagan cult. They placed special importance on the
procreation and education of offspring (ibid., 5, 6), they accepted the bishops
vigilance over matrimony (St. Ignatius of Antioch, Ad Polycarpum 5, 2),
they showed in their matrimony a special submission to God and a relationship
with their Faith (Clement of Alexandria, Stromata 4, 20), and sometimes
at the marriage rite they enjoyed the celebration of the eucharistic sacrifice
and a special blessing (Tertullian, Ad uxorem 2, 9).
1.5. The Eastern Traditions
From very ancient times in the Eastern Churches the shepherds of the Church
themselves took an active part in the celebration of marriages in the place of
the fathers of the family or even along with them. This change was not the
result of a usurpation but was brought about to answer the requests made by the
family and with the approval of civil authority. Because of this evolution, the
ceremonies formerly carried out within the family were little by little included
within liturgical rites. As time passed the idea took shape that the ministers
of the rite of the “mystery” of matrimony were not only the couple alone but
also the shepherd of the Church.
1.6. The Western Traditions
In the Western Churches the problem of what element constituted marriage from a
juridical point of view arose with the encounter between the Christian vision of
matrimony and Roman law. This was resolved by considering the consent of the
spouses as the only constitutive element. The fact that, up until the time of
the Council of Trent, clandestine marriages were considered valid is due to this
decision. Still, the blessing of the priest and his presence as witness of the
Church, as well as some liturgical rites, had already been encouraged by the
Church for a long time. With the decree Tametsi, the presence of the
pastor and witnesses became the ordinary canonical form of marriage necessary
for validity.
1.7. The New Churches
According to the desires of Vatican Council II and the new rite for celebrating
matrimony, it is to be hoped that new liturgical and juridical norms will be
developed, under the guidance of ecclesial authority, among peoples who have
recently come to the Gospel, to harmonize the reality of Christian marriage with
the authentic values of these peoples’ own traditions.
This diversity of norms, due to the plurality of cultures, is compatible with
basic unity and therefore does not go beyond the limits of legitimate pluralism.
The Christian and ecclesial character of the union and of the mutual donation of
the spouses can, in fact, be expressed in different ways, under the influence of
the baptism that they have received and through the presence of witnesses, among
whom the “competent priest” occupies the prime post. Today various canonical
adaptations of these various elements may seem to be opportune.
1.8. Canonical Adaptations
In the reform of canon law there should be a global view of matrimony according
to its various personal and social dimensions. The Church must be aware that
juridical ordinances must serve to help and develop conditions that are always
more attentive to the human values of matrimony. Nevertheless it must not be
thought that such adaptations can bear on the total reality of matrimony.
1.9. Personalistic View of the Institution
“The beginning, the subject and goal of all social institutions, is and must be
the human person, which for its part and by its very nature stands completely in
need of social life” (GS 25). As an “intimate partnership of life and
conjugal love” (GS 48), matrimony is a suitable place and way to improve
the welfare of persons in line with their vocation. Therefore marriage can never
be thought of as a way of sacrificing persons to some common good extrinsic to
themselves, since the common good is the sum of “those conditions of social life
that allow people, either as groups or as individuals, to reach their
fulfillment more fully and more easily” (GS 26).
1.10. Structure and Not Superstructure
While marriage is subject to economic realities at its beginning and for its
entire duration, it is not a superstructure for private ownership of goods and
resources. While, in fact, the concrete ways in which the marriage and the
family subsist may be tied to economic conditions, still the definitive union of
a man with a woman in a conjugal covenant responds to human nature and the needs
that the Creator put in them. This is the reason why matrimony is not only no
obstacle to the personal maturation of couples but rather is a great help to
them.
2. SACRAMENTALITY OF CHRISTIAN MARRIAGE
2.1. Real Symbol and Sacramental Sign
Jesus Christ disclosed in a prophetic way the reality of matrimony as it was
intended by God at man’s beginnings (cf. Gen 1:27; 2:24; Mk 10:6, 7-8; Mt 19:4,
5) and restored it through his death and Resurrection. For this reason Christian
marriage is lived “in the Lord” (1 Cor 7:39) and is also determined by elements
of the saving action performed by Christ.
Already in the Old Testament the matrimonial union was a figure of the Covenant
between God and the people of Israel (cf. Hos 2; Jer 3:6-13; Ezek 16 and 23; Is
54), In the New Testament, Christian marriage rises to a new dignity as a
representation of the mystery that unites Christ and the Church (cf. Eph
5:21-33). Theological interpretation illuminates this analogy more profoundly:
the supreme love and gift of the Lord who shed his blood and the faithful and
irrevocable attachment of his Spouse the Church become models and examples for
Christian matrimony
This resemblance is a relationship of real sharing in the Covenant of love
between Christ and the Church. From its own standpoint, Christian marriage, as a
real symbol and sacramental sign, represents the Church of Christ concretely in
the world and, especially under its family aspect, it is called rightly the
“domestic Church” (LG 11).
2.2. Sacrament in a Real Sense
In such a way matrimony takes on the likeness of the mystery of the union
between Jesus Christ and his Church. This inclusion of Christian marriage in the
economy of salvation is enough to justify the title “sacrament” in a broad
sense.
But it is also at once the concrete condensation and the real actualization of
this primordial sacrament. It follows from this that Christian marriage is in
itself a real and true sign of salvation, which confers the grace of God. For
this reason the Catholic Church numbers it among the seven sacraments (cf. DS
1327, 1801).
A unique bond exists between the indissolubility of marriage and its
sacramentality, that is, a reciprocal, constitutive relationship.
Indissolubility makes one s grasp of the sacramental nature of Christian
matrimony easier, and from the theological point of view, its sacramental nature
constitutes the final grounds, although not the only grounds, for its
indissolubility.
2.3. Baptism, Real Faith, Intention, Sacramental Marriage
Just like the other sacraments, matrimony confers grace in the final analysis by
virtue of the action performed by Christ and not only through the faith of the
one receiving it. That, however, does not mean that grace is conferred in the
sacrament of matrimony outside of faith or in the absence of faith. It follows
from this—according to classical principles—that faith is presupposed as a
“disposing cause” for receiving the fruitful effect of the sacrament. The
validity of marriage, however, does not imply that this effect is necessarily
fruitful.
The existence today of “baptized nonbelievers” raises a new theological problem
and a grave pastoral dilemma, especially when the lack of, or rather the
rejection of, the Faith seems clear. The intention of carrying out what Christ
and the Church desire is the minimum condition required before consent is
considered to be a “real human act” on the sacramental plane. The problem of the
intention and that of the personal faith of the contracting parties must not be
confused, but they must not be totally separated either.
In the last analysis the real intention is born from and feeds on living faith.
Where there is no trace of faith (in the sense of “belief”—being disposed to
believe), and no desire for grace or salvation is found, then a real doubt
arises as to whether there is the above-mentioned general and truly sacramental
intention and whether the contracted marriage is validly contracted or not. As
was noted, the personal faith of the contracting parties does not constitute the
sacramentality of matrimony, but the absence of personal faith compromises the
validity of the sacrament.
This gives rise to new problems for which a satisfactory answer has yet to be
found, and it imposes new pastoral responsibilities regarding Christian
matrimony “Priests should first of all strengthen and nourish the faith of those
about to be married, for the sacrament of matrimony presupposes and demands
faith” (Ordo celebrandi matrimonium, Praenotanda, 7).
2.4. Dynamic Interconnection
For the Church, baptism is the social basis and the sacrament of faith through
which believers become members of the Body of Christ. The existence of “baptized
nonbelievers” implies problems of great importance in this respect as well. A
true response to practical and pastoral problems will not be found in changes
that subvert the central core of sacramental doctrine and of matrimonial
doctrine, but only with a radical renewal of baptismal spirituality.
We must view and renew baptism in its essential unity and dynamic
interconnection with all its elements and dimensions: faith, preparation for the
sacrament, the rite, profession of faith, incorporation into Christ and into the
Church, moral consequences, active participation in Church life. The intimate
connection between baptism, faith, and the Church must be stressed. Only in this
way will it be clear that matrimony between the baptized is “in itself” a true
sacrament, that is, not by force of some sort of automatic process but through
its own internal nature.
3. CREATION AND REDEMPTION
3.1. Marriage as Willed by God
Since all things were created in Christ, through Christ and in view of Christ,
marriage as a true institution of the Creator becomes a figure of the mystery of
union of Christ, the groom, with the Church, the Bride, and, in a certain way,
is directed toward this mystery. Marriage celebrated between two baptized
persons has been elevated to the dignity of a real sacrament, that is,
signifying and participating in the spousal love of Christ and the Church.
3.2. The Inseparability of Christ’s Actions
Between two baptized persons, marriage as an institution willed by God the
Creator cannot be separated from marriage the sacrament, because the sacramental
nature of marriage between the baptized is not an accidental element that could
be or could just as well not be, but is rather so tied into the essence of it as
to be inseparable from it.
3.3. Every Marriage between Baptized Persons Must Be Sacramental
Thus between baptized persons no other married state can exist really and truly
that differs from that willed by Christ, in which the Christian man and woman,
giving and accepting one another freely and with irrevocable personal consent as
spouses, are radically removed from the “hardness of heart” of which Christ
spoke (cf. Mt 19:8) and, through the sacrament, really and truly included within
the mystery of marital union of Christ with his Church, thus being given the
real possibility of living in perpetual love. As a consequence the Church cannot
in any way recognize that two baptized persons are living in a marital state
equal to their dignity and their life as “new creatures in Christ” if they are
not united by the sacrament of matrimony.
3.4. The “Legitimate” Marriage of Non-Christians
The strength and the greatness of the grace of Christ are extended to all
people, even those beyond the Church, because of God’s desire to save all men.
They shape all human marital love and strengthen created nature as well as
matrimony “as it was in the beginning”. Men and women therefore who have not yet
heard the Gospel message are united by a human covenant in a legitimate
marriage. This legitimate marriage is not without authentic goodness and values,
which assure its stability. These goods, even though the spouses are not aware
of it, come from God the Creator and are included, in a certain inchoative way,
in the marital love that unites Christ with his Church.
3.5. Union of Christians Who Pay No Heed to the Requirements of Their Baptism
It would thus be contradictory to say that Christians, baptized in the Catholic
Church, might really and truly take a step backward [and be] content with a
nonsacramental marital state. This would mean that they could be content with
the “shadow” when Christ offers them the “reality” of his spousal love. Still we
cannot exclude cases where the conscience of even some Christians is deformed by
ignorance or invincible error. They come to believe sincerely that they are able
to contract marriage without receiving the sacrament.
In such a situation, on the one hand, they are unable to contract a valid
sacramental marriage because they lack any faith and lack the intention of doing
what the Church wishes. On the other hand, they still have the natural right to
contract marriage. In such circumstances they are capable of giving and
accepting one another as spouses because they intend to contract an irrevocable
commitment. This mutual and irrevocable self-giving creates a psychological
relationship between them that by its internal structure is different from a
transitory relationship.
Still this relationship, even if it resembles marriage, cannot in any way be
recognized by the Church as a nonsacramental conjugal society. For the Church,
no natural marriage separated from the sacrament exists for baptized persons,
but only natural marriage elevated to the dignity of a sacrament.
3.6. Progressive Marriages
It is therefore wrong and very dangerous to introduce within the Christian
community the practice of permitting the couple to celebrate successively
various wedding ceremonies on different levels, even though they be connected,
or to allow a priest or deacon to assist at or read prayers on the occasion of a
nonsacramental marriage that baptized persons wish to celebrate.
3.7. Civil Marriage
In a pluralistic society, the public authority of the state can impose on the
engaged a public ceremony through which they publicly profess their status as
spouses. The state can furthermore make laws that regulate in a precise and
correct manner the civil effects deriving from marriage, as well as rights and
duties regarding the family.
The Catholic faithful ought to be adequately instructed that these official
formalities, commonly called civil marriage, do not constitute real matrimony
for them, except in cases when—through dispensation from the canonical form or
because of a very prolonged absence of a qualified Church witness—the civil
ceremony itself can serve as an extraordinary canonical form for the celebration
of the sacrament of matrimony (cf. canon 1098). For non-Christians and often
even for non-Catholic Christians, this civil ceremony can have constitutive
value both as legitimate marriage and as sacramental marriage.
4. INDISSOLUBILITY OF MARRIAGE
4.1. The Principle
The early Church’s Tradition, based on the teaching of Christ and the apostles,
affirms the indissolubility of marriage, even in cases of adultery. This
principle applies despite certain texts that are hard to interpret and examples
of indulgence—the extension and frequency of which are difficult to judge—toward
persons in very difficult situations.
4.2. The Church’s Doctrine
The Council of Trent declared that the Church has not erred when it has taught
and teaches, in accordance with the doctrine of the Gospel and the apostles,
that the marriage bond cannot be broken through adultery. Nevertheless, because
of historical doubts (opinions of Ambrosiaster, Catharinus, and Cajetan) and for
some more-or-less ecumenical reasons, the Council limited itself to pronouncing
an anathema against those who deny the Church’s authority on this issue.
It cannot be said, then, that the Council had the intention of solemnly defining
marriage s indissolubility as a truth of faith. Still, account must be taken of
what Pius XI said in Casti connubii, referring to this canon: “If
therefore the Church has not erred and does not err in teaching this, and
consequently it is certain that the bond of marriage cannot be loosed even on
account of the sin of adultery, it is evident that all the weaker excuses that
can be, and are usually brought forward, are of no value whatsoever. And the
objections brought against the marriage bond are easily answered” (cf. DS 1807).
4.3. Intrinsic Indissolubility
Intrinsic indissolubility of matrimony can be considered under various aspects
and grounded in various ways:
— From the point of view of the spouses.
Their intimate conjugal union as a mutual donation of two persons, just as their
very marital love itself and the welfare of the offspring, demands that
indissoluble unity. From this is derived the spouses’ moral duty to protect,
maintain, and develop the marital covenant.
— From God’s vantage point. From the human act by which the spouses give and accept each other rises a bond,
based on the will of God and written in nature as created, independent of human
authority and removed from the sphere of power of the spouses, and thus
intrinsically indissoluble.
— From a Christological perspective.
The final and deepest basis for the indissolubility of Christian matrimony lies
in the fact that it is the image, sacrament, and witness of the indissoluble
union between Christ and the Church that has been called the bonum
sacramenti. In this sense indissolubility becomes a moment of grace.
— From the social perspective. Indissolubility is demanded by the institution of marriage itself. The spouses’
personal decision comes to be accepted, protected, and reinforced by society
itself, especially by the ecclesial community. This is for the good of the
offspring and for the common good. This is the juridico-ecclesial dimension of
matrimony.
These various aspects are intimately tied together. The fidelity to which the
spouses are held and which ought to be protected by society, especially by the
ecclesial community, is demanded by God the Creator and by Christ who makes it
possible through his grace.
4.4. Extrinsic Indissolubility and the Power of the Church over Marriages
Hand in hand with the practice, the Church has elaborated a doctrine concerning
its powers over marriages, clearly indicating its scope and limits. The Church
acknowledges that it does not have any power to invalidate a sacramental
marriage that is concluded and consummated (ratum et consummatum).
For very serious reasons and with concern for the good of the Faith and the
salvation of souls, all other marriages can be invalidated by competent Church
authority or—according to another interpretation—can be declared
self-invalidating. This doctrine is nothing more than an individual example of
the theory, today more or less generally accepted by Catholic theologians, on
the evolution of Christian doctrine in the Church.
Neither is it to be excluded that the Church can further define the concepts of
sacramentality and consummation by explaining them even better, so that the
whole doctrine on the indissolubility of marriage can be put forward in a deeper
and more precise presentation.
5. THE DIVORCED WHO HAVE REMARRIED
5.1. Gospel Radicalism
Faithful to the radicalism of the Gospel, the Church cannot refrain from stating
with Saint Paul the apostle: “To those now married, however, I give this command
(though it is not mine; it is the Lord’s): a wife must not separate from her
husband. If she does separate, she must either remain single or become
reconciled to him again. Similarly, a husband must not divorce his wife” (1 Cor
7:10-11). It follows from this that new unions following divorce under civil law
cannot be considered regular or legitimate.
5.2. Prophetic Witness
This severity does not derive from a purely disciplinary law or from a type of
legalism. It is rather a judgment pronounced by Jesus himself (Mk 10:6ff.).
Understood in this way, this harsh norm is a prophetic witness to the
irreversible fidelity of love that binds Christ to his Church. It shows also
that the spouses’ love is incorporated into the very love of Christ (Eph
5:23-32).
5.3. “Nonsacramentalization”
The incompatibility of the state of remarried divorced persons with the precept
and mystery of the Paschal love of the Lord makes it impossible for these people
to receive, in the Eucharist, the sign of unity with Christ. Access to
eucharistic Communion can only be had through penitence, which implies
detestation of the sin committed and the firm purpose of not sinning again (cf.
DS 1676).
Let all Christians, therefore, remember the words of the apostle: “Whoever eats
the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily, sins against the body and
blood of the Lord. A man should examine himself first; only then should he eat
of the bread and drink of the cup. He who eats and drinks without recognizing
the body eats and drinks a judgment on himself” (1 Cor 11:27-29).
5.4. Pastoral Care of the Divorced Who Have Remarried
While this illegitimate situation does not permit a life of full communion with
the Church, still Christians who find themselves in this state are not excluded
from the action of divine grace and from a link with the Church. They must not,
therefore, be deprived of pastoral assistance (cf. Address of Pope Paul VI, 4
November 1977).
They are not dispensed from the numerous obligations stemming from baptism. They
ought to be concerned about the Christian education of their offspring. The
paths of Christian prayer, both public and private, penitence, and certain
apostolic activities remain open to them. They must not be ignored but rather
helped, like all other Christians who are trying, with the help of Christ s
grace, to free themselves from sin.
5.5. Combating the Causes of Divorce
The need for a pastoral action to avoid the multiplication of divorces and of
new civil marriages of the divorced seems ever more urgent. It is recommended
that future spouses be given a living awareness of all their responsibilities as
spouses and parents. The real meaning of matrimony must be ever more adequately
presented as a covenant contracted “in the Lord” (1 Cor 7:39). In such a way
Christians will be better disposed to observe the command of God and to witness
to the union of Christ and the Church. And that will redound to the greater
personal advantage of the spouses, their children, and society itself.
CHRISTOLOGICAL THESES ON THE SACRAMENT OF MARRIAGE
This document was approved by the Commission “in forma generica”. Sixteen
theses on the sacrament of marriage are presented in this paper, which was
approved in substance by the members of the Commission.
1. SACRAMENTALITY OF MARRIAGE AND THE MYSTERY OF THE CHURCH
The sacramentality of Christian marriage appears much more clearly if one does
not separate it from the mystery of the Church. “Sign and means of intimate
union with God and of the unity of the whole human race”, as the Council said (LG
1), the Church rests upon the indefectible relationship that Christ
reestablished with her to make her his Body. The identity of the Church does not
then depend just on the power of men but on the love of Christ that the
apostolic preaching increasingly announces and to which we adhere through the
outpouring of the Spirit. Witness of this love that makes her live, the Church
is then the sacrament of Christ in the world because it is the visible Body and
the community that proclaims the presence of Christ in the history of men.
Certainly, the Church—sacrament whose greatness Paul declared (Eph 5:32)—is
inseparable from the mystery of the Incarnation because it is the mystery of a
body; it is inseparable also from the economy of the Covenant because it rests
upon the personal promise that the risen Christ made to remain “with” her “all
days, even to the end of the world” (Mt 28). But the Church sacrament depends
further on a mystery that one can describe as conjugal. Christ is bound to her
in virtue of a love that makes the Church the Spouse of Christ in the energy of
only one Spirit and the unity of one Body.
2. UNION OF CHRIST AND THE CHURCH
The marital union of Christ and the Church does not destroy but, on the
contrary, accomplishes what the conjugal love of man and woman announces in its
own way, what it implies or already realizes, as regards communion and fidelity
In effect, the Christ of the Cross accomplishes the perfect oblation of himself
that the spouses desire to accomplish in the flesh without, however, ever coming
to realize perfectly He accomplishes in regard to the Church he loves as his own
body what husbands should do for their spouses, as Saint Paul said. On his part,
the Resurrection of Jesus in the power of the Spirit reveals that the oblation
he made on the Cross bears fruit in this same flesh in which it is accomplished,
and that the Church loved by him so much he would die for it can initiate the
world into this total communion between God and men from which it benefits as
the Spouse of Jesus Christ.
3. CONJUGAL SYMBOLISM IN SCRIPTURE
Thus the Old Testament rightly used a conjugal symbolism to express the
inexhaustible love that God feels toward his people and which he intends,
through the people, to reveal to all mankind. In the prophet Hosea notably, God
is presented to us as the Spouse whose tenderness and fidelity without measure
will finally win over Israel, who is, from the start, unfaithful to the
measureless love with which it is graced. The Old Testament in this way opens us
to an uninhibited understanding of the New Testament in which Jesus is many
times called the Spouse par excellence. He is called that by the Baptist in John
3:29; Jesus calls himself that in Matthew 9:15; Paul calls him Spouse in the
same way in two places, 2 Corinthians 11:2 and Ephesians 5; Revelation does it
also in 22:17-20, not to mention the many explicit allusions to this title that
one finds in the eschatological parables of the Kingdom in Matthew 22:1-10 and
25:1-12.
4. JESUS THE SPOUSE PAR EXCELLENCE
Ordinarily neglected by Christology, this title should once again find all its
meaning for us. Just as he is the Way, the Truth, the Life, the Light, the Gate,
the Shepherd, the Lamb, the Vine, the Man himself, because he receives from the
Father “the primacy in everything’’ (Col 1:18), Jesus is also truly and
rightfully the Spouse par excellence, that is, the “Master and Lord”, when one
thinks of someone who loves the other, who is different from himself, as he
loves his own flesh. It is then from this title of Spouse and from the mystery
it evokes that a Christology of marriage should begin. In this domain, as in
every other, “no one can lay any foundation except the one that has been laid,
namely, Jesus Christ” (1 Cor 3:11). However, the fact that Christ is also the
Spouse par excellence is not to be separated from the fact that he is “the
second” (1 Cor 15:47) and “the final Adam” (1 Cor 15:45).
5. ADAM, FIGURE OF HIM WHO IS TO COME
The Adam of Genesis, who is inseparable from Eve and to whom Jesus refers in
Matthew 19 when he treats the question of divorce, is not fully identified
unless one sees in him “the figure of him who is to come” (Rom 5:14). The
personality of Adam insofar as it is the initial symbol of all humanity is not,
then, a narrow personality closed upon itself. It is, like that of Eve, of a
typological order. Adam is related to him to whom he owes his final meaning and
to us also: Adam cannot be thought of without Christ, but Christ in his turn
cannot be thought of without Adam, that is, without all mankind, without all the
humans also, whose appearance Genesis salutes as willed by God in a very
singular way. This is because the conjugality that constitutes Adam in his
nature as man is attributed also to Christ, who fulfilled it by restoring it.
Ruined by a lack of love before which Moses himself had to bow, it finds again
in Christ the truth that belongs to it. With Jesus there appears in the world
the Spouse par excellence who can as the “second” and “last Adam” save and
reestablish the true conjugality that God does not cease to wish for the benefit
of the “first Adam”.
6. JESUS, RENEWER OF THE PRIMORDIAL AUTHENTICITY OF THE COUPLE
Discerning the Mosaic law on divorce as the historical result of “the hardness
of their hearts”, Jesus dares to present himself as the renewer who is resolved
to restore the primordial authenticity of the couple. In the power that he has
to love without limit and to realize by his life, death, and Resurrection,
unparalleled union with all mankind, Jesus reestablishes the true meaning of the
thought of Genesis, saying “man should not separate what God has united”. In his
eyes, man and woman can love each other from now on as God, from all time,
desires that they should love, because in Jesus is manifested the source of that
love, which establishes the Kingdom. Also, Christ leads all the couples of the
world to the initial purity of promised love; he abolishes the prescription in
which duty contributed to their misery, lacking the power to suppress its cause.
In Jesus’ view, the original couple become what they should always have been in
the eyes of God: the prophetic couple beginning with whom God reveals the
conjugal love to which mankind aspires, for whom it is made but which it can
only attain in him who teaches divinely to men what it is to love. From then on,
faithful, lasting love, the conjugality that the “hardness of heart” transforms
into an impossible dream, finds again in Jesus the status of a reality that he
alone, as the last Adam and as Spouse par excellence, is capable of giving to it
once again.
7. THE SACRAMENTALITY OF CHRISTIAN MARRIAGE, APPARENT IN FAITH
The sacramentality of Christian marriage becomes apparent in faith. Christ draws
into his energy the conjugal love of the baptized, visibly part of the Body of
Christ that is the Church, in order to communicate to it the authenticity that
outside of him this love would lack. He does it in the Spirit, in virtue of the
power that he has, as second and final Adam, of appropriating and of making the
conjugality of the first Adam succeed. He does it also in accord with the
visibility of the Church in which conjugal love, consecrated to the Lord,
becomes a sacrament. The spouses attest within the Church that they are
committed to a conjugal life and expect from Christ the force to accomplish this
form of love that without him would perish. For this reason, the mystery proper
to Christ, as Spouse of the Church, radiates and can be radiated within the
couples that are consecrated to him. Their conjugal love is deepened and not
disfigured because it refers back to the love of Christ who sustains and
establishes them. The special outpouring of the Spirit, as the grace proper to
the sacrament, makes it possible that the love of the couples becomes the very
image of the love of Christ for the Church. However, this constant outpouring of
the Spirit never dispenses the Christian couple from the human conditions of
fidelity, because the mystery of the second Adam has never supplanted or
suppressed in anyone the reality of the first Adam.
8. CIVIL MARRIAGE
As a consequence, then, entrance into Christian marriage could not be
accomplished by the sole recognition of a purely “natural” right to marriage,
whatever may be the religious value that one recognizes in this right or that it
possesses in fact. No natural right can ever, in fact, define by itself the
content of a Christian sacrament. If one claims that in the case of marriage,
one would falsify the meaning of the sacrament, which has as its end to
consecrate to Christ the love of the baptized spouses so that Christ may realize
the transforming effects of his own mystery in them. In this light, then, there
is a basic difference between the secular states, which see in civil marriage an
act that is sufficient to establish the conjugal community from the social point
of view, and the Church, which, while not denying value to such marriage for the
nonbaptized, questions whether it can ever suffice for the baptized. Only the
sacrament of marriage is appropriate for them, and this supposes on the part of
the future spouses the will to consecrate to Christ a love whose human value
depends finally on the love that Christ himself bears us and that he
communicates to us. It follows, then, that the identity of the sacrament and of
the “contract”, on which the apostolic Magisterium formally pronounced in the
nineteenth century, must be understood in a manner that truly respects the
mystery of Christ and the life of Christians.
9. CONTRACT AND SACRAMENT
The act of conjugal union, often called a contract, which acquires the reality
of sacrament in the case of baptized spouses, does not become so by the simple
juridical effect of baptism. The fact that the conjugal promise of a Christian
husband and wife is a true sacrament flows from their Christian identity,
renewed by them on the level of the love that they vow to each other in Christ.
Their conjugal pact, in free giving to each other, consecrates them also to him
who is the Spouse par excellence and who will teach them to become, themselves,
perfect spouses. The personal mystery of Christ penetrates, then, from the
interior, the natural human pact or “contract”. This becomes sacrament only if
the future spouses freely consent to enter into the conjugal life, pronouncing
their vows in Christ, into whom they were incorporated by baptism. Their free
integration into the mystery of Christ is so essential to the nature of the
sacrament that the Church intends to be assured, by the ministry of the priest,
of the Christian authenticity of this commitment. The human conjugal alliance
does not become sacrament by reason of a juridical statute that is efficacious
by itself, independent of ones having freely consented to baptism. It becomes
this in virtue of the publicly Christian character that fundamentally affects
the mutual commitment and that makes it possible, moreover, to specify in which
sense the spouses are themselves ministers of such a sacrament.
10. THE SPOUSES, MINISTERS OF THE SACRAMENT IN AND THROUGH THE CHURCH
Since the sacrament of marriage is the free consecration to Christ of a
beginning conjugal love, the couple are evidently the ministers of a sacrament
that concerns them in the highest way. However, they are not ministers in virtue
of a power that one can call “absolute” and in the exercise of which the Church,
strictly speaking, has no right to intervene. They are ministers as living
members of the Body of Christ in which they exchange their vows without ever
making of their decision, which is irreplaceable, just the pure emanation of
their love. The sacrament as such flows entirely from the mystery of the Church
in which their conjugal love makes them share in a privileged way. No couple,
then, can bestow the sacrament on themselves without the consent of the Church,
nor can they do this in a form different from that which the Church has
established as the most expressive of the mystery into which the sacrament
introduces the couple. It belongs, then, to the Church to examine the
dispositions of the future couple to see if they really correspond to the
baptism that they have received. It is her duty, moreover, to dissuade them, if
there is need, from performing an action that would be derisory in relation to
him to whom it witnesses. In their exchange of consent that makes the sacrament,
the Church remains the sign and the guarantee of the gift of the Spirit that the
spouses receive in committing themselves to each other as Christians. The
baptized couple are never ministers of the sacrament of the marriage without
the Church, or even less, beyond the Church; they are ministers in
the Church and by the Church, without ever leaving in the background the
Church whose mystery governs their love. A sound theology of the minister of the
sacrament of marriage has not only great importance for the spiritual
authenticity of the couples, but also important repercussions for our
relationship with the Orthodox.
11. INDISSOLUBILITY OF MARRIAGE
In this context the indissolubility of marriage also appears in fresh light.
Since Christ is the true Spouse of the Church, Christian marriage cannot become
and remain an authentic image of the love of Christ for the Church without
entering in its way into the fidelity that defines Christ as the Spouse of the
Church. Whatever may be the suffering and the psychological difficulties that
can result from fidelity, it is impossible to consecrate to Christ—in order to
make it a sign or sacrament of his own mystery—a conjugal love that involves the
divorce of one or of both the parties whose first marriage was truly valid,
though in some cases this is not clear. But if the divorce, as is its intent,
declares a legitimate union is already destroyed and permits, on that account, a
person to contract another, how can we claim that Christ would make of this
other “marriage” a real image of his personal relationship with the Church? Even
if it can claim some consideration under some aspects, above all when we deal
with a case of the party who is unjustly abandoned, the new marriage of the
divorced cannot be a sacrament, and it creates an objective incapacity to
receive the Eucharist.
12. DIVORCE AND THE EUCHARIST
Without refusing to examine the attenuating circumstances and even sometimes the
quality of a second civil marriage after divorce, the approach of the divorced
and remarried to the Eucharist is plainly incompatible with the mystery of which
the Church is the servant and witness. In receiving the divorced and remarried
to the Eucharist, the Church would let such parties believe that they can, on
the level of signs, communicate with him whose conjugal mystery they disavow on
the level of reality. To do so would be, moreover, on the part of the Church to
declare herself in accord with the baptized at the moment when they enter or
remain in a clearly objective contradiction with the life, the thought, and the
being itself of the Lord as Spouse of the Church. If the Church could give the
sacrament of unity to those who have broken with her on an essential point of
the mystery of Christ, she would no longer be the sign of the witness of Christ
but rather a countersign and a counterwitness. Nevertheless, this refusal does
not in any way justify any procedure that inflicts infamy and that contradicts
in its own way the mercy of Christ toward us sinners.
13. WHY THE CHURCH CANNOT DISSOLVE A MARRIAGE THAT IS “RATUM ET CONSUMMATUM”
This Christological vision of Christian marriage allows one to understand why
the Church cannot claim for herself the right to dissolve a marriage ratum et
consummatum, i.e., a marriage that is sacramentally contracted in the Church
and ratified by the spouses through the marriage act. In effect, the entire
communion of life, which humanly speaking defines the marriage, evokes in its
own way the realism of the Incarnation in which the Son of God becomes one with
mankind in the flesh. In committing themselves to each other without reserve,
the couple signifies by this act their effective transition to the conjugal life
in which love becomes a sharing as absolute as possible of each other. They thus
enter into the human behavior whose irrevocable character was recalled by Christ
and which he made an image that reveals his own mystery. The Church cannot have
any power, then, over the reality of a conjugal union that has passed into the
power of him whose mystery she must announce and not hinder.
14. PAULINE PRIVILEGE
What we call Pauline privilege does not in any way contradict what we have just
stated. In the light of what Paul explains in 1 Corinthians 7:12-17, the Church
recognizes the right to annul a human marriage that is revealed Christianly
unlivable for a party who is baptized, on account of the opposition that the one
who is not baptized makes to the baptized party. In this case, the “privilege”,
if it truly exists, plays a role in favor of the life of Christ, whose
importance can prevail in a legitimate way in the eyes of the Church over a
conjugal life that cannot and could not be effectively consecrated to Christ by
such a couple.
15. CHRISTIAN MARRIAGE CANNOT BE ISOLATED FROM THE MYSTERY OF CHRIST
Whether we treat, then, of the scriptural or dogmatic, moral, human, or
canonical aspects of marriage, Christian marriage can never appear isolated from
the mystery of Christ. This is because the sacrament of marriage to which the
Church testifies and to which she educates, and which she permits couples to
receive, is not really livable except in a constant conversion of the spouses to
the very Person of Christ. This conversion to Christ is, then, an intrinsic part
of the nature of the sacrament, and it directly governs the meaning and scope of
such a sacrament in the life of a couple.
16. A VISION THAT IS NOT TOTALLY INACCESSIBLE TO NONBELIEVERS
However, this Christological vision is not in itself totally inaccessible to
nonbelievers themselves. Not only does it have its own coherence, which points
to Christ as the sole foundation of what we believe, but it also reveals the
greatness of the human couple who can speak to a conscience, even to one that is
a stranger to the mystery of Christ. Moreover, the human point of view as such
can be explicitly integrated into the mystery of Christ under the heading of the
first Adam, from whom the second and last Adam is never separable. To show this
clearly in the case of marriage would open the present reflection to other
horizons that cannot be treated here. We have wished to recall above all how
Christ is the true foundation, often ignored by Christians themselves, of their
own marriage insofar as it is a sacrament.
|