Now seriously.
My youngest daughter's marriage (in the Novus Ordo) was declared invalid by the Novus Ordo on the grounds of psychological immaturity of both her and her husband. Her husband and his parents lied under oath when they testified before the diocesan official in charge of the case, and he decided to listen to them.
We asked the SSPX to study the case and they said that the marriage was valid. My family accepted this decision of Bishop de Mallerey and my daughter lives with us since then. Her husband, of course, remarried in the Novus Ordo and has problems once again with his new "wife".
Now, Bowler, tell me. Should we just forget the decision of this "group of gangsters" in the SSPX and tell our daughter to marry again? Whose opinion should be ask?
Here you have another view of the issue, by Rev Fr Peter Scott. NOT a liberal this one! I trust Fr Scott and Bishop de Mallerey more than I could ever trust this perfect stranger Professor Fideli.
http://www.sspx.org/miscellaneous/canonical/Canonical_Commission/questions_re_canonical_commission.htmHow can the Society’s Canonical Commission grant valid annulments, and if it were to try to do so, would not this be a schismatic act?
Clearly marriage is not just an individual matter or sacrament. It is a social act instituted for the good of society and for the good of the Church. That is why the Church has the right to legislate and why marriages need to be public facts. This is also why an annulment can only be granted by a tribunal with jurisdiction from the Church, in order that the subsequent marriage be a public, juridical and unquestionable fact.
It would seem to follow from this that our tribunals could not grant annulments, for they do not have jurisdiction, and that the public juridical nature of the subsequent marriage could be questioned. What are we to do then? It is manifestly clear that we cannot refer the faithful to Novus Ordo tribunals, for they will almost always be given a decision in favor of an annulment, and that generally on the basis of Canon 1095, 3 which is thoroughly personalist and liberal and states that whoever is not able to understand and assume all the obligations of marriage (and how many young people are really able to do that when they are married?), cannot enter into a valid marriage. The marriage is valid if the couple mature together and the marriage succeeds. If not, it is invalid.
The problem is that the vast majority of people who receive such a judgment are unwilling to hear anything to the contrary. Once told by the Novus Ordo that they are not married, they are unwilling to accept our judgment or analysis of the case. Consequently, they enter into a putative marriage, which is really an adulterous union. To send the faithful to the modernist tribunals is to participate in this sacrilege.
What are we to do then? Nothing at all? Refuse them the Sacrament of Matrimony, which they have not yet received? Tell them that they have no choice but to live in sin, regardless of how good a case for an annulment they might have? The zeal for the salvation of souls forbids such a hard-hearted attitude to those who have already suffered a great deal and who desire the consolation of their religion.
The answer is contained in the principle given by Archbishop Lefebvre at the beginning of the Ordonnances:
Inasmuch as the present Roman authorities are imbued with ecuмenism and modernism, and as their decisions and the new laws are in their ensemble influenced by these false principles, we must provide authorities to supply for these defects, which authorities will adhere to Catholic principles of Catholic Tradition and of Catholic law. This is the only way to remain faithful to Our Lord Jesus Christ... (January 15, 1991).
Marriage tribunals are one of these institutions that we are obliged to erect for the salvation of souls, given the failure of the modernist hierarchy to fill these needs of souls. The marriage tribunal, as its principal objective, has to establish, with moral certitude, that two persons are free to marry. If we have the right to perform marriages (and hence the supplied jurisdiction), then it follows that we have right to determine with certitude who is free to marry. On occasion, this will necessitate the study of the validity of a previous marriage, due either to defect of canonical form, or defect of intention, or some other prerequisite for a valid marriage.
If it can be established, with moral certitude, that any Catholic tribunal would accept, from a study of the docuмents, that a marriage is and always was null and void, then a person is morally free to remarry. It is true that he is not juridically free in the most technical sense, being declared as such by a tribunal having jurisdiction. But since it is morally impossible to have recourse to the Novus Ordo tribunals, it is likewise morally impossible to obtain such a juridical freedom. Hence our duty to intervene, for the salvation of souls. The Society’s marriage annulment tribunal is thus supplied with jurisdiction in each particular case, both to make a statement of moral certitude for the good of souls (i.e., there never was a marriage in the first place), and to give a decree stating this fact.
Although this decree might lack the technical force of law, because of the fact that the Society’s tribunals do not have a regular canonical erection, it will nevertheless be a statement having authority amongst traditional Catholics, and one which would have authority amongst all Catholics, should the crisis in the Church come to an end. Furthermore, it will guarantee the validity of any subsequent marriages. For this validity does not depend upon the legal status of the decree. The reason for this is that a prior marriage is only a diriment impediment to marriage, when it is truly valid. A second marriage, entered into before the certitude of nullity of the first marriage has been established by authoritative judgment, is illicit but not invalid, presuming that it is later established that the first marriage was indeed null and void (cf. canons 1069, °2 & 1987 of the 1917 Code and canons 1085, °2 & 1684, °1 of the 1983 Code). It follows from this that, a second marriage is certainly valid when the certitude of nullity IS established by an authoritative judgment, even though such a judgment might lack the due legal form. Furthermore, given the present circuмstances in the Church, a subsequent marriage is not only valid. It is also licit.
Topic: SSPX Annulments? (Read 5025 times)