"Legal fiction" is not a disparaging term. It's a term from common law. There's nothing disedifying about it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_fiction
Another such legal fiction is treating children from putative marriages, later declared null, as being legitimate. If the marriage never existed, then of course they are bastards (another term that is merely a neutral statement of fact, viz. a child born out of wedlock, but that has become disparaging in common parlance), but for many reasons, the Church declares them to be considered legitimate. Aside from the social stigma attaching to bastardy, there could be some secular jurisdictions that would look to the Church, in the case of Catholics anyway, to decide whether a child is legitimate or not. (And it's never the child's fault.)
A sanatio in radice is another example of a legal fiction in ecclesiastical law.
Sorry, I assumed that you meant it in a disparaging way. For the record, this is from the source you cited:
The term legal fiction is sometimes used in a pejorative way. Jeremy Bentham was a famous historical critic of legal fictions.
[3][4] Proponents of legal fictions, particularly their use historically (for example, before DNA evidence could give every child the ability to have both genetic parents determined), identify legal fictions as "scaffolding around a building under construction".
[5]I’m always very hesitant in questioning the wisdom of the Church and Her laws. Actually, when I question it, it’s only because I want to understand Her reasoning behind it.
Topic: Are People Married In Non Catholic Ceremonies Really Married? (Read 9667 times)