A rather quirky phenomenon is taking root in Malta. Couples who cannot get married in church - because either or both had gone down the aisle with someone else before - are getting divorced abroad, then getting married civilly here and finally having their rings 'blessed' by a priest in a church or somewhere else. It is this third step which is confusing.
Presumably, once local divorce legislation kicks in shortly, the bee line will be from the divorce court to the civil court for the signing of the civil marriage contract and then straight to the rings blessing ceremony.
What is going on here? Is this ring blessing taking place with the curia's blessing? How can the Catholic church bless the relationship of divorced people who remarry? Did the Curia just write a €300,000 cheque for an anti-divorce campaign only to host divorced and remarried couples in the house of god?
I don't get it.
12 comments:
Nothing much to get. The blessing of the rings is not equivalent to a marriage ceremony.
Manuel, I did not say that it is equivalent. The question has to do with what this blessing amounts to in canonical and theological grounds.
It's all a question of conscience.
If a priest can help to put a believer's conscience at rest, why shouldn't he bless the marriage rings?
Priests bless everything under the sun: they bless cars, pets, furniture, doorsteps - as long as the fee or donation is made, that is.
@ Anonymous - can the Curia approve the blessing of what it consider to be a life of sin?
Note: Your comments are most welcome. Ideally, you'd sign in your real name. But if you choose to remain anonymous, please use a pseudonym and stick to it. This will avoid the confusion caused when different people signing 'Anonymous'.
Ok, point taken, Lou. Pseudonym applied.
Have you ever heard of a parish priest who doesn't bless the house of cohabiting couples during Lent?
Probably the Curia lives and lets live, unless challenged, presumably.
Are you challenging the Church to declare its position, hence forcing its hand to stop ring blessing? That's where my concept of conscience comes in.
Like you, I'm separated and cohabit. If I divorce, and if I eventually remarry, I won't seek to have my ring blessed by a priest.
However, there might be others who might want to put their conscience at ease by meeting the Catholic Church half-way and instead of having it sanction their marriage, at least they're expressing the wish that their god is keeping an eye on them.
No priest will ever refuse to bless anyone who's living in sin.
The church doesn't consider itself the holder of divine grace.
When it tried that, it very nearly self destructed. As for the paradox, that's what makes it a phenomenal institution, concerned with that which is not of this world.
Blessing rings is not quite like administering the sacrament of holy matrimony ,any more then blessing someone's pet is baptizing it!And unlike what someone else said earlier on, one does not have to give a fee or donation. You are mistaking the church for Joe Muscat's new labour who is forever begging for donations of ftit from the hafna to help pay the bills day in day out on ONE media.
@ Ing.Lupp.Man etc
"No priest will ever refuse to bless anyone who's living in sin"
Are you sure? I've heard of priests who refused to baptise babies born to cohabiting couples, in a situation were the babies were - to all intents and purposes - totally blameless. I wouldn't put it past some priests refusing to bless rings they do not view as legit.
@ Bunny Rabbit: "Blessing rings is not quite like administering the sacrament of holy matrimony ,any more then blessing someone's pet is baptizing it!" The comparison doesn't quite work. Blessing rings amounts to giving approval to a couple's commitment to live in sin. Unless a rabbit which is about to be blessed had violating the same or a comparable canonical law, there should be no objection :)
@anon2
I've heard of that too, the priest in question was promptly instructed to refrain from such behaviour. To be fair, he had simply put across the idea that maybe the couple should marry first. Taf int, it's a bit contradictory baptising your children, to then bring them up in a family which isn't as enthused for the sacraments.
Cardinal Lefevre was excommunicated for upholding this strain of fundamentalism, refusing to acknowledge the evolution of the church following Vatican II.
What has to be clarified is that the church, made of individuals, has its conservatives and progressives as well.
I do have some reservations to the blessing of the rings. Isn't that what Camilla and Charles did?
Explains a lot of the confusion.
@ Ing. Lupp:
Not only Charles and Camilla, who had their marriage blessed by the Archbishop of Canterbury in a chapel at Windsor Castle after their civil wedding ... blessing of marriages (as opposed to just the rings) is very common-place within the Anglican Church, where a divorce has been obtained yet permission has not been given for a church wedding to take place.
I guess the Catholic Church might just be following suit - only, reserving the blessing for the rings rather than the marriage.
@ Anon 2 - a very interesting insight. I shall look into it. Thanks.
Post a Comment