68. Marriage as a Natural Institution
87. Introduction
The intimate partnership of life and the love, which constitutes the married state, has been established by the Creator and endowed by him with its own proper laws … this sacred bond no longer depends on human decision alone.1
Therefore, when Christians get married, through that very act, they receive a sacrament. Any study on the sacraments must, then, include the Sacrament of Marriage.
God has also placed in our body the power to generate, which is a participation in his own creative power. He has wanted to use love to bring new human beings into the world and to increase the body of the Church. Thus, sex is not a shameful thing; it is a divine gift, ordained to life, to love, to fruitfulness.
This is the context in which we must see the Christian doctrine on sex.2
To understand marriage, we must first examine the married state, just as to understand a contract, one must first study the terms of the agreement. The married state, however, is not a sacrament in itself.
On the other hand, both the married state and the way to enter into it are essentially the same for Christians and non-Christians. The only substantial difference is that the act of getting married produces supernatural effects in Christians: These are the effects proper to the sacrament.
The above implies that to understand marriage, we will have to study matters concerning natural ethics. Therefore, all that is said in the following pages about the married state and marriage applies to all persons unless the context clearly indicates that it refers only to Christians. We will consider several closely connected aspects:
· Natural ethics aspects, like the ends and properties of marriage
· Sacramental aspects, like the essence of the sacrament, its institution, effects, and its minister
· Indirect consequences of the sacrament, like the jurisdiction of the Church over the marriage of Christians
Before going into a systematic study of the topic, we will discuss some important background considerations.
Compared to that of animals, the development of human beings is remarkably slow. Since humans also have an immaterial element, that development is both spiritual and material: Development consists of the affective life, language, and moral conscience. All these are developments of the potentialities that the new being possessed from the beginning.
The purpose of education is to foster this development. The word education comes from educere, “to draw out of,” to help draw out and develop what is inside. Therefore, when we say that the primary purpose of marriage is the offspring (as well as the good of the spouses), we must specify that it covers both procreation and education of the offspring.
This truly human and spiritual aspect of the education of the child is made possible by the spiritual faculties that the child already has. However, the quality of this education greatly depends on the human and spiritual level of his environment, which is essentially created by the parents. We must then consider the fundamental element that makes this atmosphere conducive to the education of a new being: the true love of the parents and its projection into the family environment.
Human sexual love is in itself directed to reproduction within the family. Its two characteristics, naturally resulting from the purpose of marriage, are usually called essential properties of marriage:
· Unity (one man with one woman)
· Indissolubility (lasts throughout life)
This truly human, faithful love creates the family atmosphere that is needed for the proper human—therefore spiritual—development of the children.
Further, the spiritual growth of the parents themselves—their truly human behavior—also depends on this faithful love. Any other sexual union would hinder it. Faithful love is also the foundation of what is usually called the mutual help and the remedy of concupiscence. Therefore, fidelity to the unity and indissolubility of marriage is still needed after the children have grown up, or in the case of childless couples.
This chapter and the next will be devoted to marriage. We will first study it as a natural institution: its nature and ends, its essential properties (unity and indissolubility),3 and the obligations of the spouses regarding conjugal relations. In the next chapter, we will study it as a sacrament: the celebration of marriage, its impediments, and the validation of invalid marriages.
88. Natural Marriage and Civil Law
Civil law should protect marriage--as it does other human realities--in order to foster truly human behavior. However, this behavior ultimately depends on human freedom.
One of the most pernicious consequences—which often goes unnoticed—of the legalization of divorce and the remarriage of divorcees is the trivialization of love and marriage. Legal divorce harms the whole civic community by creating a general state of opinion adverse to marriage: There is a more or less vague belief that one marries with the intention of making it last, but if it turns awry, there is always the possibility of ending it and trying again. This trivialization of love and marriage negatively affects all couples—not only those who divorce—and fosters less-than-human behavior.
This is a valid reason that those who do not intend to get a divorce have the right to oppose its legalization, just as those who do not want to steal can validly oppose the legalization of theft. This does not mean that they are only trying to preempt future dalliances of their spouses (or the danger of being robbed); it is a matter of public interest.
89. The Church and Marriage of Christians
The Church has a certain jurisdiction over the marriage of Catholic faithful, since, for them, the act of entering the married state constitutes a sacrament. Still, the act in itself—the mutual consent—is essentially the same as for non-Christians.
Since the sacrament cannot be separated from the natural marriage, and no other institution can have any power over the sacraments, the Church has exclusive jurisdiction over the marriage of the faithful, except for its merely civil effects.
It is, then, up to the Church to establish the procedures for Christians to get married, and only the Church can determine the obstacles to marriage (impediments), the way to remove them (dispensations), or judge concrete situations, like the validity or nullity of specific marriages.
The pronouncements of the Church on aspects of marriage belonging to natural law (unity, indissolubility, or improper use of marriage) neither apply only to Catholics nor are exclusively addressed to them. These are authoritative declarations of a universal nature and apply to all marriages, Catholic or not.
Thus, the doctrine of the Church on the indissolubility of marriage or the immorality of contraception is not, as some claim, “only for Catholics.” Natural law applies equally to everyone, even to those who deny its existence. Catholics know that breaking natural law necessarily brings evil consequences on the natural level. The authentic interpretation of the Magisterium of the Church does not add anything new to a pre-existent law and obligation, which are implicit in the judgment of a non-deformed conscience.
With the help of the Church’s authentic interpretation of natural law, the faithful can act according to the requirements of human dignity or rectify their mistaken opinions. When a Catholic, enlightened by the authentic interpretation of the Magisterium, follows natural law, he or she is also acting in obedience to the Church. Still, in the final analysis, he is obeying natural law.
Some of the doctrinal principles on marriage, its nature, and its ends may at times seem too demanding. When this happens, we should not forget that God is the author of nature, and he does not impose harmful or unrealistic laws. All people without exception are called to a difficult goal: sanctity. Further, within each individual’s own state, all receive the necessary graces. Additionally, Catholic spouses receive the additional graces of the Sacrament of Marriage.4
90. The Nature of Marriage
Marriage is “the conjugal union of man and woman, contracted between two qualified persons, which obliges them to live together throughout life.”5 Significant points in this definition are the following:
· Union: This refers to the internal and external consent by which marriage is contracted (marriage in fieri [“in its making”], which, for Catholics, is a sacrament) and also to the permanent bond arising from that contract (marriage in facto esse [“already done”], the bond itself is not a sacrament).
· Conjugal: Man and woman get married in order to lead a legitimate conjugal life by mutually giving and receiving the right to the marital act, which is in itself open to procreation.
· Of a man and a woman: This shows its unity and the evident distinction of sexes.
· Of two qualified persons: Natural or positive law bars some people from either marrying or marrying a certain person.
· To live together throughout life: Marriage is indissoluble. This undivided communion requires union of home life (roof, board, and bed), union of wills through charity, and the desire to act in agreement.
91. The Essence of Marriage
91a) Marriage in fieri: The Consent
The essence of marriage in fieri is the legitimate manifestation of mutual consent, that is, the marriage contract. For Catholics, this is also the essence of the Sacrament of Marriage.
“A marriage is brought into being by the lawfully manifested consent of persons who are legally capable. This consent cannot be supplied by any human power.”6 Consequently, marriage in fieri is essentially a contract. The material objects of this contract are the very persons of those who get married. The formal object is the marital way of life. Those who get married should intend—or at least should not exclude—the mutual, exclusive, and perpetual right over the body of the other party for the marital act directed to procreation. Since that right is the formal object of the contract, its exclusion renders the contract null and void. Its eventual exercise, however, is not essential for the validity of the contract.
Marriage in fieri is a very special type of contract, since only some accidental aspects of the terms are left to the discretion of the parties.
91b) Marriage in facto esse: The Permanent Bond
The consent that the spouses give and receive is sealed by God (cf. Mk 10:9). The covenant of the spouses is integrated into God’s covenant with mankind: “Authentic married love is caught up into divine love.”7 Established by God, this bond is an irrevocable reality. It is the origin of a covenant that is guaranteed by God’s fidelity. Thus, the essence of marriage in facto esse is the permanent bond created by a legitimate marriage contract. The act of entering the contract is transitory, but the bond it creates is permanent in itself. Not even the Church has power to challenge this disposition of divine wisdom.
92. The Divine Institution of Marriage
Natural marriage is not a human invention—it was instituted by God. Much has been written about evolutionary interpretations of marriage. A summary of these theories can be found in some moral theology manuals.
However, the Book of Genesis clearly shows that the institution of marriage is closely related to the creation of man (cf. Gn 1:26–30; 2:18–24). From the very beginning, marriage was part of God’s design for the world and for humanity. The author of human nature (God) and its redeemer (Christ) have protected, strengthened, and elevated marriage through laws that are not merely human arrangements, but are divine laws.
The Gospels also attest to the divine institution of marriage. One passage adds a particularly interesting interpretation, directly attributing the words of Genesis right after the creation of Eve to God: “Have you not read that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one’?” (Mt 19:4–6; cf. Gn 2:23–24).
Our Lord manifested his right to legislate marriage when he referred to its indissolubility in the Sermon on the Mount (cf. Mt 5:31–32).
Matrimony was neither established nor restored by man but by God. It has been protected, strengthened, and elevated not by the laws of men, but by those of God; he is the author of human nature, and of Christ who restored that same nature. Consequently, these laws cannot be changed according to men’s pleasure, nor by an agreement of the spouses themselves that is contrary to these laws. This is the teaching of Sacred Scripture (cf. Gn 1:27ff; 2:22ff; Mt 19:5ff; Eph 5:23ff); this is the constant, universal tradition of the Church; this is the solemn definition of the Holy Council of Trent, which in the words of Sacred Scripture teaches and reasserts that the permanent and indissoluble bond of matrimony, its unity and strength, have their origin in God.8
92a) The “Legitimate” Marriage of Non-Christians
The strength and greatness of the grace of Christ are extended to all people, even those outside the Church, because of God’s desire to save all mankind. Grace shapes all human marital love and strengthens both created nature and 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 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.9
93. The Purpose of Marriage
By its own natural character, the matrimonial covenant is ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and upbringing of children.10 These two aspects are not unrelated; there is a close connection and complementarity between them.
Divine revelation explicitly affirms this principle of natural law. This allows us to clearly determine the purpose of marriage. After the creation of man and woman, the Book of Genesis manifests the purpose of the difference of sexes: “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth” (Gn 1:28). Also, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him” (Gn 2:18).
93a) The Procreation and Upbringing of Children
The expression “be fruitful and multiply” clearly shows the immediate and principal intention of God when he instituted marriage: the procreation and upbringing of children.
The procreation and upbringing of children should give unity and consistency to the marital society. This not only de facto, but also de jure. It follows that the whole conjugal life—not just love and the “right to the body” (the ius in corpus), but the common life and mutual help as well—should be completely ordered to that end.
The Magisterium has often declared and recalled that “Christian marriage is not only ordained to the spiritual union and material welfare: it is primarily ordained by God to procreation, so that mankind increases and fills the earth according to the divine command.”11
93b) Parents’ Responsibility in the Education of Children
Bringing up the offspring is one aspect of the purpose of marriage. This is a very important responsibility of parents, and it cannot be abdicated: “The parents are the first persons responsible for the education of their children, in human as well as in spiritual matters.”12
This topic is discussed in another treatise in connection with the virtue of piety, which is part of justice. However, we should recall that parents have the inescapable obligation of choosing the teachers or the schools of their children, and watching over what they do, read, and learn. Since this is a duty, civil law should recognize and protect the parental rights needed to fulfill it: among others, the rights to choose, establish, and operate schools.
93c) The Good of the Spouses
The Church has never undervalued the importance of the good of the spouses. She has always accorded this due relevance, which stems from its ordination to the good of the offspring.
Pius XII stressed that one should not act “as if the secondary end [the good of the spouses] did not exist, or at least as if it were not a finis operis established by the very architect of nature.” However, he also warned against considering “the secondary end as equally principal, depriving it of its essential subordination to the primary end [the procreation and upbringing of children], which would necessarily and logically lead to nefarious consequences.”13
Marriage is, in itself, directed to procreation. Still, this does not mean that procreation must always be the purpose of those who get married, or that the end of marriage depends on the motivations of the contracting parties. Whatever the motives of those who marry, be it convenience or love, the purpose of marriage itself is still the same. Marriage is not dissolved when convenience disappears or love fades out. It is also not dissolved when there is no offspring, because the basic ordination to procreation still remains. Pope Pius XII warned:
By virtue of the Creator’s will, marriage as a natural institution does not have for its primary end the personal perfection of the spouses, but the procreation and upbringing of new life. All the other ends, even if they are included in the nature of marriage, are not there in the same degree as, and even less in a higher degree than, the primary end. They are essentially subordinated to the primary end. This applies to all marriages, even barren ones, just as all eyes are made and destined for seeing, even though in some abnormal cases, due to external and internal conditions, a particular eye cannot see.14
94. Blessings and Demands of Conjugal Love
Pope John Paul II outlines the properties and characteristics of marriage:
Conjugal love involves a totality, in which all the elements of the person enter - appeal of the body and instinct, power of feeling and affectivity, aspiration of the spirit and of will. It aims at a deeply personal unity, a unity that, beyond union in one flesh, leads to forming one heart and soul; it demands indissolubility and faithfulness in definitive mutual giving; and it is open to fertility. In a word it is a question of the normal characteristics of all natural conjugal love.…15
We will now study these essential properties and characteristics in detail.
95. Unity (Monogamy)
By its own nature, conjugal love demands the unity and indissolubility of the communion of persons, which encompasses the entire life of the spouses.
“The unity of marriage, distinctly recognized by our Lord, is made clear in the equal personal dignity that must be accorded to man and wife in mutual and unreserved affection.”16 The marriage bond is exclusive, so much so that simultaneous polygamy is absolutely forbidden by natural and divine positive law. The only legitimate and true spouse is the first wife or husband.17
Some authors explain the polygamy of the Old Testament patriarchs as a divine dispensation. It was probably granted after the Deluge to foster the growth of the people of God. Therefore, it also may have been granted to other peoples.
This was possible because the union of one man with several women, unlike the opposite case, only secondarily infringes natural law. It does not essentially frustrate the ends of marriage.
Polygamy was formally abolished in the New Law when Christ restored marriage to its original purity, thereby abolishing the law of repudiation (cf. Mt 19:3–9; Mk 10:1–12).18
After the bond has been dissolved by the death of one spouse, a second marriage is possible. This is clear from St. Paul’s letters:
· It is better for the celibate and widowers not to marry again, but they may do it (cf. 1 Cor 7:8–9).
· A woman does not commit adultery if she marries again after the death of her husband (cf. Rom 7:3).
· In some cases, young widows should marry again (cf. 1 Tm 5:14).
96. Indissolubility
By divine institution, the marriage bond is perpetual and indissoluble.
With the words of Holy Scripture, the Magisterium of the Church affirms that God instituted marriage, giving it a perpetual and indissoluble bond that no human law may break.
Christ’s teaching solemnly confirmed this law of human nature by instituting the sacrament that sanctifies marriage. As we will see in the next chapter, this action of Christ infuses a specific sacramental grace into the souls of those who receive the Sacrament of Marriage. Christ invites them to follow him by changing their conjugal life into a divine path on earth. Thus St. Paul says, “This is a great mystery, and I mean in reference to Christ and the Church” (Eph 5:32). Actually, marriage is a truly divine vocation for those persons who are meant for this state, as St. Josemaría Escrivá untiringly taught at a time when this doctrine had been practically forgotten.19
By divine law, a marriage that is ratified (legally contracted) and consummated (the spouses have performed the conjugal act ordained to procreation at least once) is indissoluble.20
Although the sacramental element may be absent from a marriage as is the case among unbelievers, still in such a marriage, inasmuch as it is a true marriage there must remain and indeed there does remain that perpetual bond which by divine right is so bound up with matrimony from its first institution that it is not subject to any civil power. And so, whatever marriage is said to be contracted, either it is so contracted that it is really a true marriage … or it is thought to be contracted without that perpetual bond, and in that case there is no marriage, but an illicit union opposed of its very nature to the divine law, which therefore cannot be entered into or maintained.21
Any union that excludes the perpetuity of the bond cannot be considered a marriage. This is the case of temporal marriage, trial marriage, or marriage with right to eventual divorce, just to mention a few such aberrations. In this regard, the Second Vatican Council teaches:
The intimate partnership of life and the love, which constitutes the married state, has been established by the Creator and endowed by him with its own proper laws; it is rooted in the contract of its partners, that is, in their irrevocable personal consent. It is an institution confirmed by the divine law and receiving its stability, even in the eyes of society, from the human act by which the partners mutually surrender themselves to each other; for the good of the partners, of the children, and of society this sacred bond no longer depends on human decision alone.… The intimate union of marriage, as a mutual giving of two persons, and the good of the children demand total fidelity from the spouses and require an unbreakable unity between them.22
96a) Divorce
The matrimonial vocation was engraved in the very nature of man and woman as they came out from the hands of the Creator. Unfortunately, evil entered the relations between man and woman in the forms of discord, spirit of dominion, infidelity, jealousy, and conflicts. The origin of these disorders is not in man’s nature, but in sin. The first sin cut off human relations with God and resulted in the rift between man and woman. Nevertheless, the order of creation subsists, although it is gravely damaged. To heal the wounds of sin, man and woman need the help of God’s grace, which God never denies (cf. Gn 3:21; Heb 4:16). Without this help, man and woman cannot accomplish the union of lives for which God created them “in the beginning.”23
Our Lord insisted on the original intention of the Creator, who planned indissoluble marriage (cf. Mt 5:31–32; 19:3–9; Mk 10:9; Lk 16:18; 1 Cor 7:10–11) and disavowed the tolerance introduced during the Old Law (cf. Mt 19:7–9). Thus, divorce, the dissolution of the marriage bond granted by civil authority, is in itself null and void before God. Any civil law that allows divorce (separation of the spouses and dissolution of the bond so that they can marry again) is grievously wrong. Divorce does not just violate sacramental marriage, as some people claim, but even violates natural marriage.24
The existence of a divorce law implies that nobody can get married forever. Those who get married easily develop the idea that it is not a definitive commitment. They will not try hard enough to overcome difficulties that otherwise could be solved. Such a law encourages extramarital flirtations, since the possibility exists for them to grow into formal relations. There is no need to say anything of the effects of a broken marriage on the children, which are the most evident of all the effects.
Obviously, if Catholics are convinced that a divorce law is harmful to society, they have the right to oppose it by all legal means. Claiming that “just because they don’t want to get a divorce, they should not hinder those who want one,” is a fallacy: One should oppose the legalization of murder even if one does not plan to kill anybody.
Those divorced persons who contract a new civil marriage while the legitimate spouse is still alive contradict the Law of God taught by Christ. Still, they are not completely separated from the Church. They may live their Christian life (above all by educating the children in the faith), but they cannot receive Holy Communion.
96b) Dissolution of the Marriage Bond in Some Cases
The pope has the ministerial power to dispense, for a just cause, some obligations of divine law contracted by a free human act. He can, thus, suspend or dispense members of the faithful from formal vows and positive or negative oaths.
A traditional example of this principle is that the pope can dissolve a marriage that is ratified (contracted) but not consummated (no marital act has been performed yet).25 Two other cases are particularly relevant in mission lands:
i) The Pauline Privilege is based on a text of St. Paul (cf. 1 Cor 7:12–15). Ratified and even consummated marriage among non-Christians can be dissolved if, after the baptism of one spouse, the unbaptized party refuses to continue common life in peace and without offense to God. The unbaptized party is considered to refuse if common life implies danger of sin for either the converted party or for the children, if the baptized party cannot practice religion or instruct the children in the faith, if the unbaptized party tries to keep other wives or in some way violate the sanctity of marriage.26
ii) The second case is sometimes called the Petrine Privilege. When an unbaptized man with several likewise unbaptized wives receives Baptism in the Catholic Church, he may keep one (but not necessarily the first) as his legitimate wife. The same applies in the much less frequent case of a woman with several husbands.27
96c) Separation of the Spouses
The spouses must maintain their common conjugal life—which implies sharing a bed and house as is necessary for the attainment of the ends of marriage—unless a lawful reason excuses them.28 Separation of the spouses, while maintaining the marital bond intact, may be legitimate in some cases. A separation of bed and house can lawfully be done for proportionate reasons:
· Mutual consent:
o As regards the bed, both temporary and perpetual separation are possible.
o As regards the house, a temporary separation is allowed for proportionately serious reasons (e.g., travel), but it is not advisable to maintain this situation for a long time.
· In other cases, separation of the spouses united by a Christian marriage is lawful only when the causes considered by canon law are present and after the local bishop has issued a sentence. In some special cases, the innocent spouse can sever common life on his or her own authority. These are the legitimate causes of separation:
o The formal adultery of the spouse, in certain conditions (this separation is in itself perpetual)29
o That one spouse occasions grave spiritual or bodily danger to the other or to the children, or otherwise makes conjugal life too difficult (this separation is temporary, and, in principle, common life should be reestablished when the cause for separation disappears)30
In both cases, “the innocent spouse may laudably readmit the other spouse to the conjugal life.”31
As for the recourse to civil courts, only an ecclesiastical court can grant separation to Catholics. However, after that has been granted, Catholics can file a petition for a civil separation in order to obtain the merely civil effects of the sentence already pronounced by the ecclesiastical judge: alimony and child custody.32
97. Conjugal Fidelity
Conjugal love, by its own nature, demands an unbreakable fidelity from the spouses. This is a result of giving oneself to the other spouse in marriage. Genuine love is definitive, not fleeting.33
98. Fertility: Openness to Life
Fertility—openness to life—is one aspect of the purpose of marriage. It is also a blessing. Conjugal love tends by itself to be fecund. A child does not come from outside to be added to the spouses’ love; rather, the child rises up from the mutual love and giving of the spouses. Thus, the Church is in favor of life, teaching that “every marital act should be open to the transmission of life.”34 “This doctrine, often explained by the Magisterium, is founded on the inseparable connection—that God wanted and man cannot break by his own initiative—between the two aspects of the marital act: the unitive aspect, and the procreative aspect.”35
98a) The Marital Act
The marital act is lawful and even meritorious, provided it does not go against the purpose of marriage.36 Equally lawful are the actions accompanying the marital act.
This is merely logical, since it is included in the plan of God. It is the only way—positively wanted by God—to fulfill the commandment given in Genesis: “Be fruitful and multiply” (Gn 1:28).
However, the marital act was rejected as unlawful by heretics who considered the body—and, hence, its perpetuation—evil. Among these are some Gnostic and Manichaean sects of the early centuries and the medieval Cathari.
With regard to chastity in married life, I can assure all married couples that they need not be afraid of showing affection for each other. On the contrary, this inclination is at the root of their family life. What our Lord expects from them is that they should respect each other and that they should be loyal to each other; that they should act with refinement, naturalness, and modesty. I must also tell them that the dignity of their conjugal relations is a result of the love that is expressed in them. And there will be love if those relations are open to fruitfulness, to bringing children into the world.…
A married couple should build their life together on the foundation of a sincere and pure affection for each other, and on the joy that comes from having brought into the world the children God has enabled them to have. They should be capable of renouncing their personal comfort; and they should put their trust in the providence of God.37
These words lead us to relate the marital act to new life. The marital act must be open to the possibility of a new life. There is no need to directly intend the procreation of a new life every time; it is enough that no voluntary obstacle to conception is raised. Thus, the marital act is lawful for sterile couples, during pregnancy, or during the woman’s infertile period.
This openness to the possibility of a new life must be present in every single marital act, not just in conjugal life as a whole.38 Thus, any action before or during intercourse that attempts to prevent conception is immoral. This is so whether that result is sought as an end or as a means.39 This, of course, includes the use of contraceptive hormones. Their use can be accepted only for therapeutic purposes, provided the medicinal effect sought is not a result of contraception.
The state is responsible for the well being of its citizens. It may intervene to guide the demography of the population by objective and respectful information, but never by authoritarian decisions or coercion. No authority can supplant the initiative of the spouses. The state is not authorized to recommend the use of immoral contraceptive means.40
98b) The Marital Debt
Marital debt is what is due to the other spouse, that is, the right the other spouse has to the marital act.
Both spouses are bound by justice to render the marital debt when the other spouse seriously and reasonably asks for it (cf. 1 Cor 7:5).
This is, in itself, a serious obligation, since it constitutes the proximate matter of the marriage contract. It admits small matter, for instance, when it is not denied but postponed, provided no danger of incontinence or serious quarrel is caused by the postponement.
If the request is unreasonable or not serious, there is no obligation. Further, there is no obligation toward the still unforgiven adulterous spouse.
In itself, there is no obligation to ask for the marital debt. Still, it may be necessary on some occasions: to prevent the incontinence of the other spouse or to strengthen mutual love.
98c) Periodic Continence
Periodic continence is the limitation of sexual intercourse to the infertile days of the woman.
Birth control by periodic continence is lawful only under specific circumstances and for serious reasons (physical or psychological health or financial problems).
The Magisterial documents dealing with this subject use expressions like “grave reasons,” “serious reasons,” “force majeure,” “sufficient and safe moral reasons,” “serious causes,” “proportionate and serious reasons,” “just causes,” and “just reasons.” Obviously, this does not apply to light reasons, to just any reason, or to circumstances found in most or even in many cases.41
In the absence of serious reasons, periodic continence is immoral. The seriousness of the causes must be proportionate to the time that this method will be used. A few months use is not the same as an indefinite period or even forever.
When there is no sufficient reason and one of the spouses insists on using periodic continence, the other spouse may materially cooperate according to the rules explained below.
98d) Cooperation in the Sin of the Spouse
When one of the spouses tries to abuse marriage by preventing procreation in the marital act, the other spouse:
· must try to dissuade him or her,
· is not obliged to render the marital debt,
· cannot formally cooperate with the erring spouse, that is, cannot be in agreement with him or her, which would be the case if the sin were internally or externally approved.
Passive and material cooperation, however, may be lawful in some circumstances:
· Cooperation is material when the innocent party disapproves of the contraceptive action, often manifests his or her opposition, and tries to dissuade the other party.
· Cooperation is passive when the innocent party is not the cause of the other’s sin in the final analysis (for instance, by complaining about the inconveniences of another pregnancy).
For material and passive cooperation to be lawful:
· there must be a proportionately serious cause: for example, to avoid serious quarrels, to prevent the adultery of the other party, or to avoid proximate danger of incontinence;
· the merely material and passive cooperation of the wife to the onanism of the husband, intercourse with a temporarily or permanently sterilized spouse, or intercourse with a preventive device (condom) to impede conception may be lawful for very grave reasons.42 However, the material and passive cooperation in the sin of sodomy (or with some instrument) is never lawful because of the lack of proportion between the gravity of the sin and any evil that the innocent party may seek to avoid. In these cases, the innocent party must forcibly resist the act, as if it were a rape.
These causes never justify the cooperation of the husband when the wife has taken abortifacient drugs (for example, drugs preventing the implantation of the fertilized ovum). This is not only cooperation in a marital act that is a serious sin for the wife, but also cooperation to a possible provoked abortion. Such an awful, grievous crime bears no proportion at all to the evils that would be avoided by passive and material cooperation.43
We should recall that “human love—pure, sincere, and joyful—cannot subsist in marriage without the virtue of chastity, which leads a couple to respect the mystery of sex and ordain it to faithfulness and personal dedication.”44
Footnotes:
1. GS, 48.
2. St. Josemaría Escrivá, Christ is Passing By, 24.
3. Cf. CIC, 1056.
4. Cf. Paul VI, Enc. Humanae Vitae, 21, 25.
5. Cf. CCC, 1601–1666; Roman Catechism, 2.7.3; John Paul II, Enc. Familiaris Consortio, Nov. 22, 1981; St. Josemaría Escrivá, Christ is Passing By, 22–30; Conversations with Msgr. Escrivá de Balaguer, 87–112.
6. CIC, 1057
7. GS, 48.
8. Pius XI, Enc. Casti Connubii, Dec. 31, 1930: DS 3700.
9. Cf. International Theological Commission: Texts and Documents 1969–1985, 8A Propositions on the Doctrine of Christian Marriage, p. 169.
10. Cf. CIC, 1055. The terms primary end and secondary end have been used to designate these two aspects of the purpose or end of marriage (cf. Codex Iuris Canonici of 1917, c. 1213). These terms were relatively new in the Magisterium’s texts, but the reality they stood for was not. The present Code does not use them. This silence does not seem to imply that they should necessarily be rejected. However, one must keep always in mind—as it was done before its publication—the close connection and complementarity between both ends. The first time the expressions primary end and secondary end appeared in a magisterial document was in the 1917 Codex Iuris Canonici. Until then, the Magisterium had referred to these ends as goods or blessings of marriage, of which they are a part.
The term goods of marriage goes back to St. Augustine. It comprises the good of offspring (with all that refers to procreation and education), the good of fidelity (with all that refers to conjugal fidelity and the marital debt), and the good of the sacrament (with all that refers to the sacramental grace and the indestructible bond that is created by their mutual consent).
The Scholastics started a separate study of the ends, creating a more precise terminology that found great acceptance. Its use in the 1917 Code was a novelty as regards the official terminology, but not the concepts themselves.
The Second Vatican Council did not use these terms. The reason given for this omission was that the document dealing with marriage (Gaudium et Spes) was a pastoral document intended for a wide audience, and it was not proper to use specialized juridical terminology. Besides, the priority that was given to the good of offspring by the wording and context of the document was deemed sufficient. This was the answer given by the authors when the issue was brought up during the preparation of numbers 48 and 50 of Gaudium et Spes, as recorded in the acts of the meetings.
The present Code of Canon Law neither uses the term ends nor sets any formal priorities. “The marriage covenant,” says canon 1055, “of its own very nature is ordered to the well-being of the spouses and to the procreation and upbringing of children.” [In the Latin original, bonum seems to have a deeper meaning than mere well being.] However, since the new Code basically follows the doctrinal orientation of the Vatican II documents, this canon should be understood in the same sense as the two points of Gaudium et Spes mentioned above and, certainly, in continuity with the previous Magisterium. Cf. CCC, 1643–1654.
11. Pius XI, Motu Proprio Qua Cura, Dec. 8, 1938.
12. St. Josemaría Escrivá, Christ is Passing By, 27.
13. Pius XII, Address of Oct. 3, 1941. The expression finis operis refers to the purpose of the action considered in itself, independently of the intention of the agent (which is called finis operantis). Thus, the proper end of alms is helping the needy neighbor, even though the finis operantis may be different: atoning for one’s own sins, for example.
14. Pius XII, Address to the Italian Association of Catholic Midwives, Oct. 29, 1951: AAS 43 (1951) 835–54.
15. John Paul II, Ap. Ex. Familiaris Consortio, 13.
16. GS, 49.
17. Cf. Pius XI, Enc. Casti Connubii: DS 3176; ST, Suppl., q. 59, a. 3, ad 4.
18. Cf. CCC, 2387.
19. Cf. St. Josemaría Escrivá, Christ is Passing By, 22–30; The Way, 27, 360.
20. Cf. Pius XI, Enc. Casti Connubii.
21. Ibid., 34.
22. GS, 48.
23. Cf. CCC, 1606–1608.
24. Cf. Ibid., 1650, 2382–2386.
25. Cf. CIC, 1142.
26. Cf. Ibid., 1143–1147.
27. Cf. Ibid., 1148.
28. Cf. Ibid., 1151; CCC, 1649, 2383.
29. Cf. CIC, 1152.
30. Cf. Ibid., 1153.
31. Ibid., 1155.
32. In the exceptional case when civil law does not provide for a separation without dissolution of the bond, Catholics could apply for a divorce if these civil effects are especially necessary. However, some precaution must be observed: Relatives and acquaintances must be plainly told that one is against divorce and certainly has no intention to marry again while the spouse is alive. Scandal must be avoided by not spreading the news or by explaining the necessity of that measure.
33. Cf. CCC, 1646–1651, 2364.
34. Paul VI, Enc. Humanae Vitae, 11.
35. Ibid., 12; cf. Pius XI, Enc. Casti Connubii; CCC, 2366–81.
36. Cf. GS, 49.
37. St. Josemaría Escrivá, Christ is Passing By, 25.
38. Cf. Paul VI, Enc. Humanae Vitae, 11.
39. Cf. Ibid., 14.
40. Cf. CCC, 2372.
41. Cf. Ibid., 2368–2371.
42. In the case of a husband who uses a preventive device (condom) to avoid procreation, for example, the wife must put forth a resistance relative to the evil of contraception that she must also avoid. She must roundly manifest her disagreement with the husband and try, with supernatural and human means, to lead him to the upright use of marriage. But, it does not mean that she can never allow the union through her marital cooperation when there are grave reasons and she actively manifests her opposition.
43. Most contraceptive drugs have three main effects, achieved in different ways: preventing ovulation, preventing fecundation of the ovum, and preventing the survival of the fertilized ovum. Since practically all contraceptive drugs now in use have abortive effects (primarily or as a side effect), we must affirm as a general criterion that in these cases, the passive cooperation of the male is illicit. Only in some specific cases, when the abortive effect is known to be impossible or extremely improbable and truly accidental, could the lawfulness of cooperation be considered. This must be certified by a specialized doctor with sound Christian moral views. Further, all the other conditions mentioned in the text must be fulfilled.
44. St. Josemaría Escrivá, Christ is Passing By, 25.
The intimate partnership of life and the love, which constitutes the married state, has been established by the Creator and endowed by him with its own proper laws … this sacred bond no longer depends on human decision alone.1
Therefore, when Christians get married, through that very act, they receive a sacrament. Any study on the sacraments must, then, include the Sacrament of Marriage.
God has also placed in our body the power to generate, which is a participation in his own creative power. He has wanted to use love to bring new human beings into the world and to increase the body of the Church. Thus, sex is not a shameful thing; it is a divine gift, ordained to life, to love, to fruitfulness.
This is the context in which we must see the Christian doctrine on sex.2
To understand marriage, we must first examine the married state, just as to understand a contract, one must first study the terms of the agreement. The married state, however, is not a sacrament in itself.
On the other hand, both the married state and the way to enter into it are essentially the same for Christians and non-Christians. The only substantial difference is that the act of getting married produces supernatural effects in Christians: These are the effects proper to the sacrament.
The above implies that to understand marriage, we will have to study matters concerning natural ethics. Therefore, all that is said in the following pages about the married state and marriage applies to all persons unless the context clearly indicates that it refers only to Christians. We will consider several closely connected aspects:
· Natural ethics aspects, like the ends and properties of marriage
· Sacramental aspects, like the essence of the sacrament, its institution, effects, and its minister
· Indirect consequences of the sacrament, like the jurisdiction of the Church over the marriage of Christians
Before going into a systematic study of the topic, we will discuss some important background considerations.
Compared to that of animals, the development of human beings is remarkably slow. Since humans also have an immaterial element, that development is both spiritual and material: Development consists of the affective life, language, and moral conscience. All these are developments of the potentialities that the new being possessed from the beginning.
The purpose of education is to foster this development. The word education comes from educere, “to draw out of,” to help draw out and develop what is inside. Therefore, when we say that the primary purpose of marriage is the offspring (as well as the good of the spouses), we must specify that it covers both procreation and education of the offspring.
This truly human and spiritual aspect of the education of the child is made possible by the spiritual faculties that the child already has. However, the quality of this education greatly depends on the human and spiritual level of his environment, which is essentially created by the parents. We must then consider the fundamental element that makes this atmosphere conducive to the education of a new being: the true love of the parents and its projection into the family environment.
Human sexual love is in itself directed to reproduction within the family. Its two characteristics, naturally resulting from the purpose of marriage, are usually called essential properties of marriage:
· Unity (one man with one woman)
· Indissolubility (lasts throughout life)
This truly human, faithful love creates the family atmosphere that is needed for the proper human—therefore spiritual—development of the children.
Further, the spiritual growth of the parents themselves—their truly human behavior—also depends on this faithful love. Any other sexual union would hinder it. Faithful love is also the foundation of what is usually called the mutual help and the remedy of concupiscence. Therefore, fidelity to the unity and indissolubility of marriage is still needed after the children have grown up, or in the case of childless couples.
This chapter and the next will be devoted to marriage. We will first study it as a natural institution: its nature and ends, its essential properties (unity and indissolubility),3 and the obligations of the spouses regarding conjugal relations. In the next chapter, we will study it as a sacrament: the celebration of marriage, its impediments, and the validation of invalid marriages.
88. Natural Marriage and Civil Law
Civil law should protect marriage--as it does other human realities--in order to foster truly human behavior. However, this behavior ultimately depends on human freedom.
One of the most pernicious consequences—which often goes unnoticed—of the legalization of divorce and the remarriage of divorcees is the trivialization of love and marriage. Legal divorce harms the whole civic community by creating a general state of opinion adverse to marriage: There is a more or less vague belief that one marries with the intention of making it last, but if it turns awry, there is always the possibility of ending it and trying again. This trivialization of love and marriage negatively affects all couples—not only those who divorce—and fosters less-than-human behavior.
This is a valid reason that those who do not intend to get a divorce have the right to oppose its legalization, just as those who do not want to steal can validly oppose the legalization of theft. This does not mean that they are only trying to preempt future dalliances of their spouses (or the danger of being robbed); it is a matter of public interest.
89. The Church and Marriage of Christians
The Church has a certain jurisdiction over the marriage of Catholic faithful, since, for them, the act of entering the married state constitutes a sacrament. Still, the act in itself—the mutual consent—is essentially the same as for non-Christians.
Since the sacrament cannot be separated from the natural marriage, and no other institution can have any power over the sacraments, the Church has exclusive jurisdiction over the marriage of the faithful, except for its merely civil effects.
It is, then, up to the Church to establish the procedures for Christians to get married, and only the Church can determine the obstacles to marriage (impediments), the way to remove them (dispensations), or judge concrete situations, like the validity or nullity of specific marriages.
The pronouncements of the Church on aspects of marriage belonging to natural law (unity, indissolubility, or improper use of marriage) neither apply only to Catholics nor are exclusively addressed to them. These are authoritative declarations of a universal nature and apply to all marriages, Catholic or not.
Thus, the doctrine of the Church on the indissolubility of marriage or the immorality of contraception is not, as some claim, “only for Catholics.” Natural law applies equally to everyone, even to those who deny its existence. Catholics know that breaking natural law necessarily brings evil consequences on the natural level. The authentic interpretation of the Magisterium of the Church does not add anything new to a pre-existent law and obligation, which are implicit in the judgment of a non-deformed conscience.
With the help of the Church’s authentic interpretation of natural law, the faithful can act according to the requirements of human dignity or rectify their mistaken opinions. When a Catholic, enlightened by the authentic interpretation of the Magisterium, follows natural law, he or she is also acting in obedience to the Church. Still, in the final analysis, he is obeying natural law.
Some of the doctrinal principles on marriage, its nature, and its ends may at times seem too demanding. When this happens, we should not forget that God is the author of nature, and he does not impose harmful or unrealistic laws. All people without exception are called to a difficult goal: sanctity. Further, within each individual’s own state, all receive the necessary graces. Additionally, Catholic spouses receive the additional graces of the Sacrament of Marriage.4
90. The Nature of Marriage
Marriage is “the conjugal union of man and woman, contracted between two qualified persons, which obliges them to live together throughout life.”5 Significant points in this definition are the following:
· Union: This refers to the internal and external consent by which marriage is contracted (marriage in fieri [“in its making”], which, for Catholics, is a sacrament) and also to the permanent bond arising from that contract (marriage in facto esse [“already done”], the bond itself is not a sacrament).
· Conjugal: Man and woman get married in order to lead a legitimate conjugal life by mutually giving and receiving the right to the marital act, which is in itself open to procreation.
· Of a man and a woman: This shows its unity and the evident distinction of sexes.
· Of two qualified persons: Natural or positive law bars some people from either marrying or marrying a certain person.
· To live together throughout life: Marriage is indissoluble. This undivided communion requires union of home life (roof, board, and bed), union of wills through charity, and the desire to act in agreement.
91. The Essence of Marriage
91a) Marriage in fieri: The Consent
The essence of marriage in fieri is the legitimate manifestation of mutual consent, that is, the marriage contract. For Catholics, this is also the essence of the Sacrament of Marriage.
“A marriage is brought into being by the lawfully manifested consent of persons who are legally capable. This consent cannot be supplied by any human power.”6 Consequently, marriage in fieri is essentially a contract. The material objects of this contract are the very persons of those who get married. The formal object is the marital way of life. Those who get married should intend—or at least should not exclude—the mutual, exclusive, and perpetual right over the body of the other party for the marital act directed to procreation. Since that right is the formal object of the contract, its exclusion renders the contract null and void. Its eventual exercise, however, is not essential for the validity of the contract.
Marriage in fieri is a very special type of contract, since only some accidental aspects of the terms are left to the discretion of the parties.
91b) Marriage in facto esse: The Permanent Bond
The consent that the spouses give and receive is sealed by God (cf. Mk 10:9). The covenant of the spouses is integrated into God’s covenant with mankind: “Authentic married love is caught up into divine love.”7 Established by God, this bond is an irrevocable reality. It is the origin of a covenant that is guaranteed by God’s fidelity. Thus, the essence of marriage in facto esse is the permanent bond created by a legitimate marriage contract. The act of entering the contract is transitory, but the bond it creates is permanent in itself. Not even the Church has power to challenge this disposition of divine wisdom.
92. The Divine Institution of Marriage
Natural marriage is not a human invention—it was instituted by God. Much has been written about evolutionary interpretations of marriage. A summary of these theories can be found in some moral theology manuals.
However, the Book of Genesis clearly shows that the institution of marriage is closely related to the creation of man (cf. Gn 1:26–30; 2:18–24). From the very beginning, marriage was part of God’s design for the world and for humanity. The author of human nature (God) and its redeemer (Christ) have protected, strengthened, and elevated marriage through laws that are not merely human arrangements, but are divine laws.
The Gospels also attest to the divine institution of marriage. One passage adds a particularly interesting interpretation, directly attributing the words of Genesis right after the creation of Eve to God: “Have you not read that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one’?” (Mt 19:4–6; cf. Gn 2:23–24).
Our Lord manifested his right to legislate marriage when he referred to its indissolubility in the Sermon on the Mount (cf. Mt 5:31–32).
Matrimony was neither established nor restored by man but by God. It has been protected, strengthened, and elevated not by the laws of men, but by those of God; he is the author of human nature, and of Christ who restored that same nature. Consequently, these laws cannot be changed according to men’s pleasure, nor by an agreement of the spouses themselves that is contrary to these laws. This is the teaching of Sacred Scripture (cf. Gn 1:27ff; 2:22ff; Mt 19:5ff; Eph 5:23ff); this is the constant, universal tradition of the Church; this is the solemn definition of the Holy Council of Trent, which in the words of Sacred Scripture teaches and reasserts that the permanent and indissoluble bond of matrimony, its unity and strength, have their origin in God.8
92a) The “Legitimate” Marriage of Non-Christians
The strength and greatness of the grace of Christ are extended to all people, even those outside the Church, because of God’s desire to save all mankind. Grace shapes all human marital love and strengthens both created nature and 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 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.9
93. The Purpose of Marriage
By its own natural character, the matrimonial covenant is ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and upbringing of children.10 These two aspects are not unrelated; there is a close connection and complementarity between them.
Divine revelation explicitly affirms this principle of natural law. This allows us to clearly determine the purpose of marriage. After the creation of man and woman, the Book of Genesis manifests the purpose of the difference of sexes: “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth” (Gn 1:28). Also, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him” (Gn 2:18).
93a) The Procreation and Upbringing of Children
The expression “be fruitful and multiply” clearly shows the immediate and principal intention of God when he instituted marriage: the procreation and upbringing of children.
The procreation and upbringing of children should give unity and consistency to the marital society. This not only de facto, but also de jure. It follows that the whole conjugal life—not just love and the “right to the body” (the ius in corpus), but the common life and mutual help as well—should be completely ordered to that end.
The Magisterium has often declared and recalled that “Christian marriage is not only ordained to the spiritual union and material welfare: it is primarily ordained by God to procreation, so that mankind increases and fills the earth according to the divine command.”11
93b) Parents’ Responsibility in the Education of Children
Bringing up the offspring is one aspect of the purpose of marriage. This is a very important responsibility of parents, and it cannot be abdicated: “The parents are the first persons responsible for the education of their children, in human as well as in spiritual matters.”12
This topic is discussed in another treatise in connection with the virtue of piety, which is part of justice. However, we should recall that parents have the inescapable obligation of choosing the teachers or the schools of their children, and watching over what they do, read, and learn. Since this is a duty, civil law should recognize and protect the parental rights needed to fulfill it: among others, the rights to choose, establish, and operate schools.
93c) The Good of the Spouses
The Church has never undervalued the importance of the good of the spouses. She has always accorded this due relevance, which stems from its ordination to the good of the offspring.
Pius XII stressed that one should not act “as if the secondary end [the good of the spouses] did not exist, or at least as if it were not a finis operis established by the very architect of nature.” However, he also warned against considering “the secondary end as equally principal, depriving it of its essential subordination to the primary end [the procreation and upbringing of children], which would necessarily and logically lead to nefarious consequences.”13
Marriage is, in itself, directed to procreation. Still, this does not mean that procreation must always be the purpose of those who get married, or that the end of marriage depends on the motivations of the contracting parties. Whatever the motives of those who marry, be it convenience or love, the purpose of marriage itself is still the same. Marriage is not dissolved when convenience disappears or love fades out. It is also not dissolved when there is no offspring, because the basic ordination to procreation still remains. Pope Pius XII warned:
By virtue of the Creator’s will, marriage as a natural institution does not have for its primary end the personal perfection of the spouses, but the procreation and upbringing of new life. All the other ends, even if they are included in the nature of marriage, are not there in the same degree as, and even less in a higher degree than, the primary end. They are essentially subordinated to the primary end. This applies to all marriages, even barren ones, just as all eyes are made and destined for seeing, even though in some abnormal cases, due to external and internal conditions, a particular eye cannot see.14
94. Blessings and Demands of Conjugal Love
Pope John Paul II outlines the properties and characteristics of marriage:
Conjugal love involves a totality, in which all the elements of the person enter - appeal of the body and instinct, power of feeling and affectivity, aspiration of the spirit and of will. It aims at a deeply personal unity, a unity that, beyond union in one flesh, leads to forming one heart and soul; it demands indissolubility and faithfulness in definitive mutual giving; and it is open to fertility. In a word it is a question of the normal characteristics of all natural conjugal love.…15
We will now study these essential properties and characteristics in detail.
95. Unity (Monogamy)
By its own nature, conjugal love demands the unity and indissolubility of the communion of persons, which encompasses the entire life of the spouses.
“The unity of marriage, distinctly recognized by our Lord, is made clear in the equal personal dignity that must be accorded to man and wife in mutual and unreserved affection.”16 The marriage bond is exclusive, so much so that simultaneous polygamy is absolutely forbidden by natural and divine positive law. The only legitimate and true spouse is the first wife or husband.17
Some authors explain the polygamy of the Old Testament patriarchs as a divine dispensation. It was probably granted after the Deluge to foster the growth of the people of God. Therefore, it also may have been granted to other peoples.
This was possible because the union of one man with several women, unlike the opposite case, only secondarily infringes natural law. It does not essentially frustrate the ends of marriage.
Polygamy was formally abolished in the New Law when Christ restored marriage to its original purity, thereby abolishing the law of repudiation (cf. Mt 19:3–9; Mk 10:1–12).18
After the bond has been dissolved by the death of one spouse, a second marriage is possible. This is clear from St. Paul’s letters:
· It is better for the celibate and widowers not to marry again, but they may do it (cf. 1 Cor 7:8–9).
· A woman does not commit adultery if she marries again after the death of her husband (cf. Rom 7:3).
· In some cases, young widows should marry again (cf. 1 Tm 5:14).
96. Indissolubility
By divine institution, the marriage bond is perpetual and indissoluble.
With the words of Holy Scripture, the Magisterium of the Church affirms that God instituted marriage, giving it a perpetual and indissoluble bond that no human law may break.
Christ’s teaching solemnly confirmed this law of human nature by instituting the sacrament that sanctifies marriage. As we will see in the next chapter, this action of Christ infuses a specific sacramental grace into the souls of those who receive the Sacrament of Marriage. Christ invites them to follow him by changing their conjugal life into a divine path on earth. Thus St. Paul says, “This is a great mystery, and I mean in reference to Christ and the Church” (Eph 5:32). Actually, marriage is a truly divine vocation for those persons who are meant for this state, as St. Josemaría Escrivá untiringly taught at a time when this doctrine had been practically forgotten.19
By divine law, a marriage that is ratified (legally contracted) and consummated (the spouses have performed the conjugal act ordained to procreation at least once) is indissoluble.20
Although the sacramental element may be absent from a marriage as is the case among unbelievers, still in such a marriage, inasmuch as it is a true marriage there must remain and indeed there does remain that perpetual bond which by divine right is so bound up with matrimony from its first institution that it is not subject to any civil power. And so, whatever marriage is said to be contracted, either it is so contracted that it is really a true marriage … or it is thought to be contracted without that perpetual bond, and in that case there is no marriage, but an illicit union opposed of its very nature to the divine law, which therefore cannot be entered into or maintained.21
Any union that excludes the perpetuity of the bond cannot be considered a marriage. This is the case of temporal marriage, trial marriage, or marriage with right to eventual divorce, just to mention a few such aberrations. In this regard, the Second Vatican Council teaches:
The intimate partnership of life and the love, which constitutes the married state, has been established by the Creator and endowed by him with its own proper laws; it is rooted in the contract of its partners, that is, in their irrevocable personal consent. It is an institution confirmed by the divine law and receiving its stability, even in the eyes of society, from the human act by which the partners mutually surrender themselves to each other; for the good of the partners, of the children, and of society this sacred bond no longer depends on human decision alone.… The intimate union of marriage, as a mutual giving of two persons, and the good of the children demand total fidelity from the spouses and require an unbreakable unity between them.22
96a) Divorce
The matrimonial vocation was engraved in the very nature of man and woman as they came out from the hands of the Creator. Unfortunately, evil entered the relations between man and woman in the forms of discord, spirit of dominion, infidelity, jealousy, and conflicts. The origin of these disorders is not in man’s nature, but in sin. The first sin cut off human relations with God and resulted in the rift between man and woman. Nevertheless, the order of creation subsists, although it is gravely damaged. To heal the wounds of sin, man and woman need the help of God’s grace, which God never denies (cf. Gn 3:21; Heb 4:16). Without this help, man and woman cannot accomplish the union of lives for which God created them “in the beginning.”23
Our Lord insisted on the original intention of the Creator, who planned indissoluble marriage (cf. Mt 5:31–32; 19:3–9; Mk 10:9; Lk 16:18; 1 Cor 7:10–11) and disavowed the tolerance introduced during the Old Law (cf. Mt 19:7–9). Thus, divorce, the dissolution of the marriage bond granted by civil authority, is in itself null and void before God. Any civil law that allows divorce (separation of the spouses and dissolution of the bond so that they can marry again) is grievously wrong. Divorce does not just violate sacramental marriage, as some people claim, but even violates natural marriage.24
The existence of a divorce law implies that nobody can get married forever. Those who get married easily develop the idea that it is not a definitive commitment. They will not try hard enough to overcome difficulties that otherwise could be solved. Such a law encourages extramarital flirtations, since the possibility exists for them to grow into formal relations. There is no need to say anything of the effects of a broken marriage on the children, which are the most evident of all the effects.
Obviously, if Catholics are convinced that a divorce law is harmful to society, they have the right to oppose it by all legal means. Claiming that “just because they don’t want to get a divorce, they should not hinder those who want one,” is a fallacy: One should oppose the legalization of murder even if one does not plan to kill anybody.
Those divorced persons who contract a new civil marriage while the legitimate spouse is still alive contradict the Law of God taught by Christ. Still, they are not completely separated from the Church. They may live their Christian life (above all by educating the children in the faith), but they cannot receive Holy Communion.
96b) Dissolution of the Marriage Bond in Some Cases
The pope has the ministerial power to dispense, for a just cause, some obligations of divine law contracted by a free human act. He can, thus, suspend or dispense members of the faithful from formal vows and positive or negative oaths.
A traditional example of this principle is that the pope can dissolve a marriage that is ratified (contracted) but not consummated (no marital act has been performed yet).25 Two other cases are particularly relevant in mission lands:
i) The Pauline Privilege is based on a text of St. Paul (cf. 1 Cor 7:12–15). Ratified and even consummated marriage among non-Christians can be dissolved if, after the baptism of one spouse, the unbaptized party refuses to continue common life in peace and without offense to God. The unbaptized party is considered to refuse if common life implies danger of sin for either the converted party or for the children, if the baptized party cannot practice religion or instruct the children in the faith, if the unbaptized party tries to keep other wives or in some way violate the sanctity of marriage.26
ii) The second case is sometimes called the Petrine Privilege. When an unbaptized man with several likewise unbaptized wives receives Baptism in the Catholic Church, he may keep one (but not necessarily the first) as his legitimate wife. The same applies in the much less frequent case of a woman with several husbands.27
96c) Separation of the Spouses
The spouses must maintain their common conjugal life—which implies sharing a bed and house as is necessary for the attainment of the ends of marriage—unless a lawful reason excuses them.28 Separation of the spouses, while maintaining the marital bond intact, may be legitimate in some cases. A separation of bed and house can lawfully be done for proportionate reasons:
· Mutual consent:
o As regards the bed, both temporary and perpetual separation are possible.
o As regards the house, a temporary separation is allowed for proportionately serious reasons (e.g., travel), but it is not advisable to maintain this situation for a long time.
· In other cases, separation of the spouses united by a Christian marriage is lawful only when the causes considered by canon law are present and after the local bishop has issued a sentence. In some special cases, the innocent spouse can sever common life on his or her own authority. These are the legitimate causes of separation:
o The formal adultery of the spouse, in certain conditions (this separation is in itself perpetual)29
o That one spouse occasions grave spiritual or bodily danger to the other or to the children, or otherwise makes conjugal life too difficult (this separation is temporary, and, in principle, common life should be reestablished when the cause for separation disappears)30
In both cases, “the innocent spouse may laudably readmit the other spouse to the conjugal life.”31
As for the recourse to civil courts, only an ecclesiastical court can grant separation to Catholics. However, after that has been granted, Catholics can file a petition for a civil separation in order to obtain the merely civil effects of the sentence already pronounced by the ecclesiastical judge: alimony and child custody.32
97. Conjugal Fidelity
Conjugal love, by its own nature, demands an unbreakable fidelity from the spouses. This is a result of giving oneself to the other spouse in marriage. Genuine love is definitive, not fleeting.33
98. Fertility: Openness to Life
Fertility—openness to life—is one aspect of the purpose of marriage. It is also a blessing. Conjugal love tends by itself to be fecund. A child does not come from outside to be added to the spouses’ love; rather, the child rises up from the mutual love and giving of the spouses. Thus, the Church is in favor of life, teaching that “every marital act should be open to the transmission of life.”34 “This doctrine, often explained by the Magisterium, is founded on the inseparable connection—that God wanted and man cannot break by his own initiative—between the two aspects of the marital act: the unitive aspect, and the procreative aspect.”35
98a) The Marital Act
The marital act is lawful and even meritorious, provided it does not go against the purpose of marriage.36 Equally lawful are the actions accompanying the marital act.
This is merely logical, since it is included in the plan of God. It is the only way—positively wanted by God—to fulfill the commandment given in Genesis: “Be fruitful and multiply” (Gn 1:28).
However, the marital act was rejected as unlawful by heretics who considered the body—and, hence, its perpetuation—evil. Among these are some Gnostic and Manichaean sects of the early centuries and the medieval Cathari.
With regard to chastity in married life, I can assure all married couples that they need not be afraid of showing affection for each other. On the contrary, this inclination is at the root of their family life. What our Lord expects from them is that they should respect each other and that they should be loyal to each other; that they should act with refinement, naturalness, and modesty. I must also tell them that the dignity of their conjugal relations is a result of the love that is expressed in them. And there will be love if those relations are open to fruitfulness, to bringing children into the world.…
A married couple should build their life together on the foundation of a sincere and pure affection for each other, and on the joy that comes from having brought into the world the children God has enabled them to have. They should be capable of renouncing their personal comfort; and they should put their trust in the providence of God.37
These words lead us to relate the marital act to new life. The marital act must be open to the possibility of a new life. There is no need to directly intend the procreation of a new life every time; it is enough that no voluntary obstacle to conception is raised. Thus, the marital act is lawful for sterile couples, during pregnancy, or during the woman’s infertile period.
This openness to the possibility of a new life must be present in every single marital act, not just in conjugal life as a whole.38 Thus, any action before or during intercourse that attempts to prevent conception is immoral. This is so whether that result is sought as an end or as a means.39 This, of course, includes the use of contraceptive hormones. Their use can be accepted only for therapeutic purposes, provided the medicinal effect sought is not a result of contraception.
The state is responsible for the well being of its citizens. It may intervene to guide the demography of the population by objective and respectful information, but never by authoritarian decisions or coercion. No authority can supplant the initiative of the spouses. The state is not authorized to recommend the use of immoral contraceptive means.40
98b) The Marital Debt
Marital debt is what is due to the other spouse, that is, the right the other spouse has to the marital act.
Both spouses are bound by justice to render the marital debt when the other spouse seriously and reasonably asks for it (cf. 1 Cor 7:5).
This is, in itself, a serious obligation, since it constitutes the proximate matter of the marriage contract. It admits small matter, for instance, when it is not denied but postponed, provided no danger of incontinence or serious quarrel is caused by the postponement.
If the request is unreasonable or not serious, there is no obligation. Further, there is no obligation toward the still unforgiven adulterous spouse.
In itself, there is no obligation to ask for the marital debt. Still, it may be necessary on some occasions: to prevent the incontinence of the other spouse or to strengthen mutual love.
98c) Periodic Continence
Periodic continence is the limitation of sexual intercourse to the infertile days of the woman.
Birth control by periodic continence is lawful only under specific circumstances and for serious reasons (physical or psychological health or financial problems).
The Magisterial documents dealing with this subject use expressions like “grave reasons,” “serious reasons,” “force majeure,” “sufficient and safe moral reasons,” “serious causes,” “proportionate and serious reasons,” “just causes,” and “just reasons.” Obviously, this does not apply to light reasons, to just any reason, or to circumstances found in most or even in many cases.41
In the absence of serious reasons, periodic continence is immoral. The seriousness of the causes must be proportionate to the time that this method will be used. A few months use is not the same as an indefinite period or even forever.
When there is no sufficient reason and one of the spouses insists on using periodic continence, the other spouse may materially cooperate according to the rules explained below.
98d) Cooperation in the Sin of the Spouse
When one of the spouses tries to abuse marriage by preventing procreation in the marital act, the other spouse:
· must try to dissuade him or her,
· is not obliged to render the marital debt,
· cannot formally cooperate with the erring spouse, that is, cannot be in agreement with him or her, which would be the case if the sin were internally or externally approved.
Passive and material cooperation, however, may be lawful in some circumstances:
· Cooperation is material when the innocent party disapproves of the contraceptive action, often manifests his or her opposition, and tries to dissuade the other party.
· Cooperation is passive when the innocent party is not the cause of the other’s sin in the final analysis (for instance, by complaining about the inconveniences of another pregnancy).
For material and passive cooperation to be lawful:
· there must be a proportionately serious cause: for example, to avoid serious quarrels, to prevent the adultery of the other party, or to avoid proximate danger of incontinence;
· the merely material and passive cooperation of the wife to the onanism of the husband, intercourse with a temporarily or permanently sterilized spouse, or intercourse with a preventive device (condom) to impede conception may be lawful for very grave reasons.42 However, the material and passive cooperation in the sin of sodomy (or with some instrument) is never lawful because of the lack of proportion between the gravity of the sin and any evil that the innocent party may seek to avoid. In these cases, the innocent party must forcibly resist the act, as if it were a rape.
These causes never justify the cooperation of the husband when the wife has taken abortifacient drugs (for example, drugs preventing the implantation of the fertilized ovum). This is not only cooperation in a marital act that is a serious sin for the wife, but also cooperation to a possible provoked abortion. Such an awful, grievous crime bears no proportion at all to the evils that would be avoided by passive and material cooperation.43
We should recall that “human love—pure, sincere, and joyful—cannot subsist in marriage without the virtue of chastity, which leads a couple to respect the mystery of sex and ordain it to faithfulness and personal dedication.”44
Footnotes:
1. GS, 48.
2. St. Josemaría Escrivá, Christ is Passing By, 24.
3. Cf. CIC, 1056.
4. Cf. Paul VI, Enc. Humanae Vitae, 21, 25.
5. Cf. CCC, 1601–1666; Roman Catechism, 2.7.3; John Paul II, Enc. Familiaris Consortio, Nov. 22, 1981; St. Josemaría Escrivá, Christ is Passing By, 22–30; Conversations with Msgr. Escrivá de Balaguer, 87–112.
6. CIC, 1057
7. GS, 48.
8. Pius XI, Enc. Casti Connubii, Dec. 31, 1930: DS 3700.
9. Cf. International Theological Commission: Texts and Documents 1969–1985, 8A Propositions on the Doctrine of Christian Marriage, p. 169.
10. Cf. CIC, 1055. The terms primary end and secondary end have been used to designate these two aspects of the purpose or end of marriage (cf. Codex Iuris Canonici of 1917, c. 1213). These terms were relatively new in the Magisterium’s texts, but the reality they stood for was not. The present Code does not use them. This silence does not seem to imply that they should necessarily be rejected. However, one must keep always in mind—as it was done before its publication—the close connection and complementarity between both ends. The first time the expressions primary end and secondary end appeared in a magisterial document was in the 1917 Codex Iuris Canonici. Until then, the Magisterium had referred to these ends as goods or blessings of marriage, of which they are a part.
The term goods of marriage goes back to St. Augustine. It comprises the good of offspring (with all that refers to procreation and education), the good of fidelity (with all that refers to conjugal fidelity and the marital debt), and the good of the sacrament (with all that refers to the sacramental grace and the indestructible bond that is created by their mutual consent).
The Scholastics started a separate study of the ends, creating a more precise terminology that found great acceptance. Its use in the 1917 Code was a novelty as regards the official terminology, but not the concepts themselves.
The Second Vatican Council did not use these terms. The reason given for this omission was that the document dealing with marriage (Gaudium et Spes) was a pastoral document intended for a wide audience, and it was not proper to use specialized juridical terminology. Besides, the priority that was given to the good of offspring by the wording and context of the document was deemed sufficient. This was the answer given by the authors when the issue was brought up during the preparation of numbers 48 and 50 of Gaudium et Spes, as recorded in the acts of the meetings.
The present Code of Canon Law neither uses the term ends nor sets any formal priorities. “The marriage covenant,” says canon 1055, “of its own very nature is ordered to the well-being of the spouses and to the procreation and upbringing of children.” [In the Latin original, bonum seems to have a deeper meaning than mere well being.] However, since the new Code basically follows the doctrinal orientation of the Vatican II documents, this canon should be understood in the same sense as the two points of Gaudium et Spes mentioned above and, certainly, in continuity with the previous Magisterium. Cf. CCC, 1643–1654.
11. Pius XI, Motu Proprio Qua Cura, Dec. 8, 1938.
12. St. Josemaría Escrivá, Christ is Passing By, 27.
13. Pius XII, Address of Oct. 3, 1941. The expression finis operis refers to the purpose of the action considered in itself, independently of the intention of the agent (which is called finis operantis). Thus, the proper end of alms is helping the needy neighbor, even though the finis operantis may be different: atoning for one’s own sins, for example.
14. Pius XII, Address to the Italian Association of Catholic Midwives, Oct. 29, 1951: AAS 43 (1951) 835–54.
15. John Paul II, Ap. Ex. Familiaris Consortio, 13.
16. GS, 49.
17. Cf. Pius XI, Enc. Casti Connubii: DS 3176; ST, Suppl., q. 59, a. 3, ad 4.
18. Cf. CCC, 2387.
19. Cf. St. Josemaría Escrivá, Christ is Passing By, 22–30; The Way, 27, 360.
20. Cf. Pius XI, Enc. Casti Connubii.
21. Ibid., 34.
22. GS, 48.
23. Cf. CCC, 1606–1608.
24. Cf. Ibid., 1650, 2382–2386.
25. Cf. CIC, 1142.
26. Cf. Ibid., 1143–1147.
27. Cf. Ibid., 1148.
28. Cf. Ibid., 1151; CCC, 1649, 2383.
29. Cf. CIC, 1152.
30. Cf. Ibid., 1153.
31. Ibid., 1155.
32. In the exceptional case when civil law does not provide for a separation without dissolution of the bond, Catholics could apply for a divorce if these civil effects are especially necessary. However, some precaution must be observed: Relatives and acquaintances must be plainly told that one is against divorce and certainly has no intention to marry again while the spouse is alive. Scandal must be avoided by not spreading the news or by explaining the necessity of that measure.
33. Cf. CCC, 1646–1651, 2364.
34. Paul VI, Enc. Humanae Vitae, 11.
35. Ibid., 12; cf. Pius XI, Enc. Casti Connubii; CCC, 2366–81.
36. Cf. GS, 49.
37. St. Josemaría Escrivá, Christ is Passing By, 25.
38. Cf. Paul VI, Enc. Humanae Vitae, 11.
39. Cf. Ibid., 14.
40. Cf. CCC, 2372.
41. Cf. Ibid., 2368–2371.
42. In the case of a husband who uses a preventive device (condom) to avoid procreation, for example, the wife must put forth a resistance relative to the evil of contraception that she must also avoid. She must roundly manifest her disagreement with the husband and try, with supernatural and human means, to lead him to the upright use of marriage. But, it does not mean that she can never allow the union through her marital cooperation when there are grave reasons and she actively manifests her opposition.
43. Most contraceptive drugs have three main effects, achieved in different ways: preventing ovulation, preventing fecundation of the ovum, and preventing the survival of the fertilized ovum. Since practically all contraceptive drugs now in use have abortive effects (primarily or as a side effect), we must affirm as a general criterion that in these cases, the passive cooperation of the male is illicit. Only in some specific cases, when the abortive effect is known to be impossible or extremely improbable and truly accidental, could the lawfulness of cooperation be considered. This must be certified by a specialized doctor with sound Christian moral views. Further, all the other conditions mentioned in the text must be fulfilled.
44. St. Josemaría Escrivá, Christ is Passing By, 25.