Q: While doing journalistic research recently, I was shocked to discover that even in this day and age, there are some countries and cultures where parents still arrange their children’s marriages. The bride and groom don’t know each other, and often haven’t spoken to each other or even seen each other before the wedding ceremony.
The practice seems to constitute a chronic human-rights violation in the civil arena. I understand that if the two families involved are not Catholic, then canon law can’t declare that the arranged marriage is invalid, but what about those arranged marriages where at least one spouse is Catholic? I don’t see how a Catholic priest can officiate at such a wedding, and yet I have found that it does happen! … What is going on here, and has the Vatican tried to stop it? –Jonathan
A: If you understand the Church’s teachings about marriage, and try to apply them to the notion of an arranged marriage, you might find yourself scratching your head much like Jonathan did. How can an arranged marriage possibly be celebrated validly in the Catholic Church?
Before tackling the question, we first have to define our terms, starting with the most obvious one in this particular case: what is (and what isn’t) an arranged marriage? It might be surprising to discover that depending on where in the world we live, and on our cultural backgrounds, our understanding of this phrase can actually vary widely. Let’s make sure we are all on the same page about what the term really means.
When many readers hear the phrase “arranged marriage,” they might immediately think of a 2003 case in Romania which received international attention at the time. A marriage was arranged by the gypsy parents of 15-year-old boy, and those of a girl who was even younger (her age is disputed, but she might have been as young as 12). The marriage was celebrated even though the bride was openly opposed to the wedding—even running away during the ceremony, only to be brought back by force.
If your understanding of an “arranged marriage” involves underage children like these, the Catholic Church’s position on marriage validity couldn’t be clearer. As was discussed in “Can a Catholic Ever Elope?” and “What Does it Mean to Have Your Marriage Blessed? (Part II),” canon 1083.1 declares unambiguously that a man before he has completed his sixteenth year of age, and a woman before she has completed her fourteenth year of age, cannot enter into a valid marriage. The willingness (or not) of underage spouses, and the insistence (or not) of their parents, have absolutely no bearing on the invalidity of such a marriage. Thus the tragic real-life scenario that played out in Romania in 2003 could not knowingly occur in a Catholic parish. Catholic theological teaching about marriage completely accords with the statement made at the time by a member of the European Parliament, that “this constitutes flagrant violation of the human rights of children … who are not asked whether and whom they wish to marry but are compelled by force to comply with the choice of their … relatives.”
Returning to our search for a correct definition of “arranged marriage,” and speaking of force, some readers may equate arranged marriages with marriages that are celebrated against the will of one or both of the spouses. In other words, you might think that an arranged marriage is a forced marriage.
If so, the Catholic Church’s position on the non-validity of a forced marriage is once again unequivocal—because the Church holds that consent makes a marriage (c. 1057.1). This consent is defined in the code as “an act of the will by which a man and a woman mutually give and accept each other through an irrevocable covenant in order to establish marriage” (c.1057.2). The pivotal importance of the free exchange of consent of the spouses during their wedding ceremony was addressed at length in “Marriage and Annulment,” as well as in “Sacraments and Personal Identity.”
A person who is getting married against his/her will—even if he/she mouths the necessary words during the wedding and generally appears to go along with it—does not marry validly. Period. Note that the Church holds this position not just with regard to Catholics, either! On the contrary, the Church’s theological understanding of the human person, and of free will, leads her to conclude that anybody who marries involuntarily has not entered a real marriage. This is why, if a non-Catholic who had been a party to a forced marriage later seeks an annulment from the Catholic Church (see “Why Would Non-Catholics Get an Annulment?” for more on this common occurrence), and can provide adequate proof that the marriage was indeed entered by force … the Church will recognize the forced marriage as invalid. Consequently, if we return for a moment to the 2003 Romanian child-marriage mentioned previously, the Catholic Church would undoubtedly consider their marriage invalid even if the spouses had been old enough—because running away during the ceremony is pretty solid evidence that the bride did not consent!
To sum up thus far, an arranged marriage is not necessarily an underage marriage, nor is it synonymous with a forced marriage. So what is it, then?
Envision a marriage that is arranged by the parents of the spouses, who are legally old enough to marry and who willingly agree to marry whomever their parents choose for them. This is what constitutes an arranged marriage in some parts of the world, even in the 21st century.
To get a better handle on this notion, it’s necessary to recognize the distinction between (1) Catholic teaching and (2) cultural norms. If you’re brought up as a Catholic in a culture where it’s quite common for people to marry the spouse chosen for them by their parents, there’s no reason why you would necessarily be unable to give your consent. On the contrary, you might sincerely think to yourself, “My mother and father think this is a good match for me. They are older and wiser than I, so I agree with whatever they’ve decided is best!”
Under such circumstances, it is absolutely possible to celebrate an arranged marriage validly. Catholics who consent to marry whoever is chosen by their parents—even if they don’t really know him/her!—are indeed giving consent to a marriage that is valid in the eyes of the Church, assuming of course that all other aspects required for the celebration of a valid Catholic marriage are met.
Let’s bear in mind that for many generations, western royalty arranged their children’s marriages for political reasons—and as a rule, those children acquiesced, having been 
taught that it was their duty to accept a (usually foreign) spouse whom they often had never met. French Queen Marie Antoinette (1755-1793) is a good example of this. Raised at the court of her devoutly Catholic mother, Empress Maria Theresa of Austria, she was sent to France at the age of 14 to marry the future King Louis XVI, whom she did not know. Nevertheless, there is no evidence whatsoever that she did not consent to the marriage—and the same can be said of her husband. Theirs was a valid, arranged Catholic marriage.
Needless to say, those in the West today who find this scenario utterly inconceivable in their own lives have some difficulty comprehending this. They want to choose their own spouses, and have control over the entire decision-making process themselves. Culturally, that’s entirely understandable; but as we can see, this is not the only way to enter a valid marriage!
As this Indian Catholic reasonably points out, arranged marriages still take place today, among Catholics—but in her culture nowadays it is always possible for a potential spouse to refuse to agree to the arrangement of his/her parents. In that case, of course, the marriage cannot take place. She makes yet another great point when she observes that many Catholic marriages which are not arranged are subsequently annulled … so why should our western way of choosing our own spouse be considered automatically superior to the system of parental arrangement? Surely it’s worth pondering.
It’s not just Indians whose culture has traditionally embraced the concept of arranged marriages. Here’s a Muslim website describing what is fundamentally the same practice—note the requirement that the spouses-to-be freely consent to the arrangement. At the same time, the same website flounders when it attempts to address the Catholic Church’s perspective on such arranged marriages, because it conflates arranged marriages with forced marriages. As we’ve already seen above, the Church does not (because theologically it cannot) accept the notion of a forced marriage; but an arranged marriage does not automatically involve force.
If we return now to Jonathan’s original question, we can now not only understand how to resolve his confusion, but we should also be able to spot a couple of inaccuracies in his assumptions. For one thing, the practice of arranged marriage doesn’t have to “constitute a chronic human-rights violation in the civil arena,” although a forced marriage like the heart-breaking 2003 Romanian case we looked at surely meets this description. For another, the Catholic Church certainly can, in certain circumstances, hold that a particular marriage is invalid even “if the two families involved are not Catholic,” because the Church’s fundamental understanding of what marriage is applies to everyone. As we’ve seen above, the Church teaches that a valid marriage requires (among other things!) free consent from both spouses; and in the case of a marriage arranged by the parents of two spouses who are old enough and willing to exchange consent, it is indeed possible for an arranged marriage to be a valid marriage.
Why is Google hiding the posts on this website in its search results? Click here for more information.
Canon lawyers are not responsible for the content of canon law. The Supreme Legislator is. Only Pope Francis can change the Code of Canon Law, so if you're not happy with what the law says, please take it up with him.
