Author Topic: Are People Married In Non Catholic Ceremonies Really Married? (Read 9616 times)

SeanJohnson · « **Reply #55 on:** December 05, 2022, 02:29:04 PM »

For me, this excerpt from the protest of the seven French SSPX deans (one of which -Fr. Gaudray- was a professor of mine in Winona) says all I need:

"...we reply that the state of necessity which legitimates our way of doing things is not canonical, but dogmatic, and that the impossibility of having recourse to the current authorities is not a physical, but a moral one."

In other words, I'm fine with canonical arguments, insofar as they are applicable (e.g., the moral imposibility of obtaining a conciliar delegation satisfying the "grave inconvenience" clause of 1098), but they often will close off avenues of survival -contrary to their purpose- precisely because as St. Thomas says, laws are written for ordinary times, and necessarily leave out of consideration circuмstances which happen only rarely.

For me, the stronger argument is always dogmatic and doctrinal (e.g., necessity, epikeia).

I realize nobody is denying this, but just wanted to bring it into the conversation, unless people paint themselves into a corner by only entertaining canonical considerations.

PS to Mith: Looks like we were typing at the same time.

Stubborn · « **Reply #56 on:** December 05, 2022, 03:18:33 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on December 05, 2022, 12:42:58 PM

This is not correct. Such marriage would be invalid. This is the same issue you have with attempting to reduce heresy / schism to mortal sin.

Canon Law explicitly states that these marriages are invalid ... not merely illicit (i.e. sinful).

Which canon law?

Ladislaus · « **Reply #57 on:** December 05, 2022, 03:27:25 PM »

Quote from: Mithrandylan on December 05, 2022, 11:31:57 AM

Apologies for the length of the proceeding post, but it seems highly relevant. Copied and pasted from a thread from a few years ago, this table describes the lawfulness and validity of all possible marriages. Please be sure to read the "other notes" below, which argue that due to Canon 1098, marriages that violate the Catholic form of marriage are still valid due to the crisis in the Church and the inability of marrying before one's pastor.

Yes, that's a different question of course, since Traditional Catholics don't marry before their "pastor" as we don't actually have pastors (that we feel we can go to).

Conciliar Church of course considers Trad marriages to be invalid on these grounds.

So it all boils down to whether you believe that we live in a Crisis that renders this impossible.

Stubborn · « **Reply #58 on:** December 05, 2022, 03:28:26 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus on December 05, 2022, 12:56:25 PM

Your citation rejects the separation between the marriage and the Sacrament.

Regardless, however, the Decree on Armenians simply referred to the fact that the couple actually contract the marriage, rather than the priest, at least in the Latin Rite (it's different in the Eastern). This decree on the Armenians was referring to the schismatic Armenian Church, so the question was whether marriage contracted without the witness of a priest was valid for them (i.e. for these non-Catholics) or whether, upon being readmitted to the Church they would be considered valid. This was to distinguish those couples among these schismatic non-Catholics who got officially married before a priest. So the Church declares that these marriages among non-Catholics did not require the witness of a priest, i.e. not only did the Church accept as married those among them who had their marriages witnessed by a priest, but also those who did not, since the Church here declared here that 1) the couple contract the Sacrament of Matrimony and 2) the requirement for a priest to officiate or witness it does not apply to non-Catholics.

I don't have a clue what you're babbling on about. Reject what separation? - Canon law 1012 I posted says there can be no separation in a valid marriage. Why bring in the Armenians, what about the Irish? Plenty of posters from Ireland here you know.

Whatever it is your babbling on about, what Ott says simply makes sense....
"According to the teaching of the Council of Trent, those clandestine marriages contracted without the co-operation of the Church by the free declaration of will of the contracting parties are valid marriages so long as the Church does not declare them invalid."

Ladislaus · « **Reply #59 on:** December 05, 2022, 03:32:22 PM »

Quote from: Stubborn on December 05, 2022, 03:18:33 PM

Which canon law?

1917 Code 1070 and 1098 in particular. I cited it above, but I deleted the cross-references to the 1983 Code, but the latter upholds the same standards ... EXCEPT that at some point that I not yet researched, one of the Conciliar papal claimants made an exception for those who formally renounced their Catholic faith. But that caused so much confusion that in 2009 Ratzinger rolled it back.

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: Are People Married In Non Catholic Ceremonies Really Married? (Read 9616 times)

SeanJohnson

Re: Are People Married In Non Catholic Ceremonies Really Married?

Stubborn

Re: Are People Married In Non Catholic Ceremonies Really Married?

Ladislaus

Re: Are People Married In Non Catholic Ceremonies Really Married?

Stubborn

Re: Are People Married In Non Catholic Ceremonies Really Married?

Ladislaus

Re: Are People Married In Non Catholic Ceremonies Really Married?