Difference between marriage, matrimony

I, for one, am pleased with the Supreme Count's decision in the DOMA case, allowing same-sex civil marriages to have federal recognition. I know there are some in my Roman Catholic Church who are not pleased - I would like to give them a different perspective from which to look at the issue.

This decision and the discussion around it give us an opportunity to come to a better understanding of marriage and matrimony and the differences between them, and maybe look at some other issues as well. There are few social institutions with such varied and fascinating histories.

Modern marriage is a relationship stemming from a civil contract made between two people and recognized by civil government. Marriage determines many things such as financial issues, legitimacy of children, inheritance rights, etc. It is a contract which begins with a government-issued license and can end with the government-issued writ of divorce.

Matrimony is a permanent covenant relationship between two people witnessed by the church. It includes the concept of purpose, which is not present in marriage. In the Catholic church it is a sacrament. Matrimony may or may not overlap with civil marriage.

The difference between these two types of relationships is easier to see in much of the world, including most of Europe, where a civil marriage must be contracted by a government official and in a separate ceremony matrimony can be celebrated by a church official. Many of these countries have state-sponsored religions. But church officials cannot be civil officials for marriage. It is ironic that in the United States we allow these to take place in one ceremony by naming the church official also a civil official. It is the exact opposite of the separation of church and state.

As a Catholic priest, most of the weddings I do are both matrimony and marriage. Civil law sets down the criteria which must be met for a civil marriage. Canon law sets down the criteria which must be met for matrimony. They are mostly the same but not totally. I can only do a wedding which is both a marriage and matrimony when both the civil and canonical criteria are met. I have done matrimony weddings which were not civil marriages, and rarely (and with permission from church authorities) done civil marriage weddings without matrimony.

Civil authorities determine and change the criteria for civil marriage. Over the centuries and in various countries they have allowed or forbad polygamy, determined ages, race, consanguinity, divorce, etc. The phrase "traditional marriage" - meaning it has always been one man and one woman - is historically absurd. The issue of gender is just one more item to include in the civil criteria.

Matrimony criteria have also changed. But the bottom line is that matrimony has its own criteria and we do not do matrimony which does not meet that criteria.

The DOMA decision and the civil recognition of same-sex marriages simply have no effect on matrimony. No church can be required to do same-sex marriage. But it does give us the chance to do some serious reflection.

I propose some items for discussion:

1. Why are church officials in the United States compelled to be civil marriage officials? Should that change?

2. Is matrimony and/or marriage necessary for sexual activity to be morally acceptable? Why or why not?

3. Do civil same-sex marriages damage different sex marriages? If so, how?

4. What is/are the purpose or purposes of civil marriage and/or matrimony?

5. What is the proper role of religion in any discussion of civil marriage?

The Defense of Marriage Act decision can indeed be a true teachable and learnable moment.

Father Faucher is a Catholic priest in Boise with family in North Idaho.