Case 24. Marriage Before the Registrar

Patrick, an inhabitant of Dublin, after entering betrothal with Bridget, a non-Catholic, asked the parish priest to obtain a dispensation and celebrate the marriage. He, however, denied that he would do anything in the case. When Patrick heard that priests in England conducted themselves more leniently with regard to mixed marriages, he went with his betrothed to a celebrated place of pilgrimage in England and asked the missionary exercising the care of souls there to celebrate the marriage. The missionary, however, doubts whether he can do anything for Patrick, and while he delays, Patrick contracts marriage before a civil official. Hence it is asked:

1. What is it to contract marriage “in fraud of the law”?

2. What is the impediment of clandestinity, and does it bind in England, Ireland, Belgium, and France?

3. What ought the missionary to have done in the case if he judged that the marriage was to be celebrated?

4. What is to be said of the validity of the marriage in the case?

1. What is the meaning of contracting marriage “ in fraud of the law?”

Theologians are not agreed on the precise meaning of the phrase which occurs in the celebrated decree of Urban

VIII issued Aug. 14, 1627. Some hold that only those who depart from their parish with the principal intention of contracting marriage otherwise than before their parish priest, act in fraud of the law. Others maintain that the mere fact of contracting marriage otherwise than before the parish priest defrauds him of his rights, and so is in fraud of the law which wishes to safeguard them.¹

1 Gasparri, De Matrim., vol. ii, 985.

2. What is the impediment of clandestinity, and does it bind in England, Ireland, Belgium, and France?

Clandestinity is the celebration of marriage otherwise than in the form prescribed by the Church. Clandestine marriages were always held to be unlawful by the Church. The Council of Trent made marriage contracted otherwise than before the proper parish priest of one of the parties or his delegate, invalid in places where the decree was published. It was published for all baptized persons in Belgium and France, for Catholics in Ireland, but it was never published in England. The decree Ne temere, Aug. 2, 1907, binds Catholics throughout the Western Church, and annuls marriage contracted otherwise than before the parish priest of the place.

3. What should the missioner in the case have done if he judged that the parties were to be married?

He could validly and lawfully have assisted at the marriage if he had procured delegation for himself from the ordinary or parish priest of one of the parties. Otherwise one of them would have had to make himself his subject by acquiring a domicile or at least a quasi-domicile in his parish.

4. What about the validity of the marriage in the case?

If the marriage was celebrated before April 19, 1908, it was unlawful but valid if we presume that Bridget was baptized. For Bridget was not subject to the decree Tametsi in Ireland, and might have contracted a valid though clandestine marriage with Patrick there. She kept her freedom when she came to England where the decree was never published.

If the marriage was celebrated after April 19, 1908, it was invalid by the terms of the decree Ne temere.