Posted on 01/31/2005 3:00:00 AM PST by DBeers
Pope Warns Church Courts About Marriage RulingsTribunals Not Above Temptations in Annulment Cases, He Says
VATICAN CITY, JAN. 30, 2005 (Zenit.org).- John Paul II warned against the temptation, which can also entice ecclesiastical judges, to consider failed marriages as automatically invalid.
The Pope gave this warning Saturday when he received in audience the judges and lawyers of the Roman Rota, the Church's central appellate court.
The greatest number of appeals are petitions for the declaration of nullity of the marriage. The Catholic Church, while holding that marriage is indissoluble and therefore excluding the possibility of divorce, recognizes that in certain situations the celebration of a marriage is invalid. Such cases include weddings that took place under threats.
In his address, the Holy Father spoke about the "moral dimension" of all those involved in the ecclesiastical juridical processes, which as in the case of civil ones, might be influenced by "individual or collective interests," inducing "the parties to take recourse to forms of falsehood or even corruption."
Such pressures might be aimed to obtaining "a favorable decision," namely, that the ecclesiastical courts declare the nullity of the marriage, the Pope said.
"From this risk, not even canonical processes are exempt, in which an effort is made to know the truth about the existence or nonexistence of a marriage," he noted.
"In the name of alleged pastoral needs, voices have been raised to propose that unions that have totally failed be declared invalid. To obtain this result it is suggested that recourse be taken to the expedient of maintaining the procedural appearances," the Holy Father said.
These proposals or pressures, he stressed, are against "the most elementary principles of the normative and magisterium of the Church."
John Paul II in particular addressed the bishops who name the ecclesiastical judges, and the judges themselves, to remind them that "the deontology of the judge has its inspirational criteria in the love of truth."
"Therefore, he must be convinced first of all that the truth exists," the Pope said. "One must resist fear of the truth, which at times might stem from fear of wounding persons. The truth, which is Christ himself, frees us from all forms of compromise with prejudiced lies."
No, but you probably mistake yourself for a Catholic while proving otherwise conclusively by your adherence to the schism of Marcel.
Besides this topic is the abuse of annulments that you and your lying modernist friends have allowed to happen. It is not about the good Archbishop, so try to stay on topic OK?
There is no obligation of humility before the schism and its mouthpieces and adherents. I have already indicated that any error (I am not certain there has been one and I will look elsewhere than the scism itself for proof) but ONLY error is withdrawn. The SSPX schism is still a schism and its ringleaders are STILL EXCOMMUNICATED (as they well ought to be until they have publicly repented and groveled and done penance appropriately) which does not render them or their gullibles trustworthy.
Marcel was excommunicated for his crimes. That does not seem to mark him as "the good Archbishop." Whomever may you be referencing?????
Make sure that God does not mistake you for Marcel L.
Marcel was not much of a Catholic either as noted by his excommunication.
Keep trying. Your one trick pony is getting real old. Rank Amatuer. Incredibly, You were right just to stick with the venom, because when it comes to facts. Face it pal, you just suck.
It boils down to LeFebvre and his saintly priests weren't going to allow the post-conciliar debacle to put the Church down the drain and Christ raised them up in direct defiance to them.
ps. you don't know squat about Chesterton, if you'd think he would've put up with the post conciliar garbage that you swim in.
There is no schism. Just as JPII can't change the weather. But I know, I know, you just make it up as you go along.
As I said, keep trying.
Right... you get publically caught slandering someone and it's OK. Sounds like...Michael Moore. Your defense is, "I may have accused someone falsely, but I believe he's guilty of something altogether different too, so that makes it OK."
So back to the topic, how do you and your modernist friends plan to clean up this mess you've caused with annulments? Never mind don't answer, I don't trust known liars.
Even is the excommunication were valid (which it is not) you would be guilty of a non-sequitur when considering Origen
Let's put JPII to the Catholic Test shall we? It'll be a shameful history lesson in the Church that an archbishop had to do the work to hold the Church together while the Pontiff tried to tear it apart.
MurphE,
Is that REALLY Micheal Mooreish or is it Dan Ratherish?
What mess? The grounds for annulment are clearly outlined in Canon Law. Canon Law, approved by the Pope himself.
Do you deny that MARCEL AND EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOUR BISHOPS are excommunicated?
Do you deny that the SSPX is a schism?
Marcel and his episcopal rebels were excommunicated. They fail the Catholic test. Case closed unless and until JP II says otherwise. He is pope. You are not and neither was the nefarious Marcel.
I apologize for your thread getting off topic. I saw lies being propagated about a deceased Archbishop and felt that I needed to defend his good name. I will not carry on anymore with the culprits of the calumny, and disrupt your thread anymore.
Actually JP II issued the judgments that Marcel and his bishops were excommunicated and that your movement is a schism. We are not a democracy. You don't get to decide. The pope does that.
Take it up with black elk.
If you want Michael Moore, you can find him in the tons of lies heaped upon the person and office of His Holiness by the modern-day Luthers of the Marcellian schism. You are a relative newcomer to these wars on FR.
It's so sad. He revealed he is not in communion with JPII by his criticisms of JPII's favored man. I hope he returns to the Church.
Pray for him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.