Posted on 12/15/2009 3:47:50 PM PST by NYer
.- This morning the Vatican published a Motu Proprio from Pope Benedict called “Omnium in Mentem” and dated October 26. According to J.D. Flynn, a canon lawyer for the Archdiocese of Denver, the new document clarifies the nature of a deacon's orders and the impact of defections from Catholicism on the validity of a marriage.
“Omnium in Mentum,” roughly translated as “Everything in Mind,” deals with two unrelated topics, a fact that caused Flynn to observe that it's probably easier to publish one Motu Propio than two.
Writing in an explanatory note for the Motu Proprio, Archbishop Francesco Coccopalmerio, president of the Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts, commented on the modified canons (1008, 1009, 1086, 1117 and 1124). These variations, he said, "concern two separate questions: adapting the text of the canons that define the ministerial function of deacons … and suppressing a subordinate clause in three canons concerning marriage, which experience has shown to be inappropriate."
The first issue addressed by the Motu Propio is the role of the diaconate.
Part of the current canon “describes sacred orders as participating in the headship of Christ,” Flynn explained. “The Motu Proprio clarifies that priests and bishops participate in the headship of Christ 'in persona Christi,' whereas deacons serve the Church, the people of God, through the ministry, services, or 'diaconias' of liturgy, word, and charity.” Thus, Flynn said, the document emphasizes that there is a “clear distinction between the diaconate and the presbyterate.”
“The distinction is between the deacon who acts “in imago Dei” and the priest who acts 'in persona Christi,'” Flynn explained.
What this means in layman's terms is that “we see the diaconate as a unique ministry unto itself and not simply a step along the way to the priesthood,” he added.
The second item considered by the Motu Propio is an obscure clause regarding a dispensation in canon law.
The reason for this allowance under the 1983 Code of Canon Law was to attempt to support the institution of marriage, even for Catholics who had renounced the Faith, Flynn said. Catholics who defect from the faith, or formally renounce it, must do so by writing a letter to their bishop stating their defection.
The only consequence of a defection prior to “Omnium in Mentem” was that the defector would subsequently be able to “get married validly without observing canonical form,” noted Flynn. This would mean that a defecting Catholic could validly be married in a civil ceremony, for example, without a dispensation.
“This Motu Proprio eliminates the impact of defections on marriage and requires that defectors follow canonical form for marriage,” he stated.
Stressing that “this idea that you can defect from the church by formal act for the purposes of marital validity has always been a sort of anomaly to our theology,” Flynn explained that the document abolished the anomaly.
He also noted that, “in the United States, we get very, very few defections by formal act.”
“What this really is, is an affirmation of our theology. Theologically we understand that what makes us Catholic is our Baptism or our reception in to the Church. Whether we want to be Catholic is not germane to the question of whether we are Catholic. Whether we follow the teachings of the Church or not is not germane to the question of whether or not we are Catholic. The thing that the church says is that all Catholics are bound to the teachings of the Catholic Church.”
Thus, at the theological level, the document establishes “that the Church does not participate in a congregational ecclesiology,” said Flynn. “Our ecclesiology is sacramental.”
About 3/4 of the baptized receive first communion, 2/3 are confirmed, and just 1/2 get married in the Church.
To ensure the flock of the faithful is in regular marriages and not committing adultery/bigamy/fornication, and because it is a Sacrament (Ephesians 5.32).
Authority - Matthew 16.16-18, 18.17-18, 1 Cor. 7.12-15, etc.
Does the Church tell people born to two Protestant parents, who were married in a Protestant church wedding, that they are illegitimate if one of their parents was baptized as a Catholic as a baby? Logically, they should, but most people don’t like to be called bastards.
If one party opposes making their vows being made invalid, the annulment procedure and the defense of the marriage must be presented to the church...for this people need representatives that know the procedures and the church law
So the church does not have a direct hand in the "distribution of graces??
BTW that "commission was given to all the apostles
If the couple NEVER seeks an annulment and they continue in the marriage, and there are "irregularities" are they living in a state of fornication??
I think the right answer is,”Possibly.” I know some disagree with me but I tend to have the paradigm that if you want to KNOW your marriage is valid, you play by the rules. But one can’t be sure that one undertaken otherwise is invalid.
Of course the one who “defected” is probably in a state of mortal sin anyway, if only because he’s not going to Mass on Sundays and Holy Days of Obligation.
They are only bastards if the parents realize they must retroactively validate their marriage, but don’t do it.
I did not ask you is Peter is the rock, I asked where the authority to dissolve a marriage calling it "irregular" exists in scripture.
Where is the scriptural precedent to say that vows taken are not "regular"
Mark :10:9 Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."
Mat 19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except [it be] for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.
Hbr 13:4 Marriage [is] honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.
Nowhere does the bible say unless there are any vows that are "irregular" and can be declared so by the church..
It was not until the middle ages that the church claimed authority over marriage when it was an "economic unit" or one that secured treaties and kingdoms.
So then they assumed the ability to regulate it
So there is no biblical precedent for the church to make the determination that any marriage is invalid
What are the rules????
So the legitimacy of a child does not depend on God but on what the parents believe?
They are legitimate if the parents never suspect the marriage is invalid, but if they later believe the marriage is invalid, then suddenly the children move from legitimate to bastard?
What is your source on this??
What if the parents believe the marriage is invalid but it is valid are the children still bastards based on their parents beliefs?
I think the applicable rule is don’t have another spouse living. But I don’t know the rules because I’m married already and if I were unmarried and a Catholic I’d go ask my pastor what the rules were.
Lousy answer. In haste.
But maybe your marriage is "irregular" and you need to know if God considers you married or a fornicator????
And the simple answer is in the power of binding and loosing conferred upon the Apostles in St. Matthew 16.19, and 18.18. The judgements of the leaders of the Church are the judgements of heaven and are confirmed by heaven by the very fact of their being exercised.
Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.
The leaders of the Church are the judges of what God has ACTUALLY joined together. That is the point of declarations of nullity. It is a declaration that God never joined this man and this woman, because they failed to follow the requisite form, or did not intend to actually contract a Christian marriage.
"That you may eat and drink at my table, in my kingdom: and may sit upon thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel." (St. Luke 22.30, also St. Matthew 19.28) and "Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood." (Acts 20.28)
Nowhere does the bible say unless there are any vows that are "irregular" and can be declared so by the church.
So if a polygamous pagan man converts to your reformed Church, does he get to keep all of his wives because he made a marriage vow to all of them?
It was not until the middle ages that the church claimed authority over marriage
The Nuptial Mass is present in the very earliest Sacramentaries of the Roman Church (Leonine, Gelasian, and Gregorian, all dating from the time of the late Roman Empire).
St. Ambrose, from the 4th century, writes: "Since the contracting of marriage must be sanctified by the veiling and the blessing of the priest, how can there be any mention of a marriage, when unity of faith is wanting?" (Epistle 19.7, To Vigilius).
Tertullian, in the 3rd century writes: "How can we describe the happiness of those marriages which the Church ratifies, the sacrifice strengthens, the blessing seals, the angels publish, the Heavenly Father propitiously beholds?" (To His Wife, 2.9)
St. Ignatius of Antioch in the very early 2nd century writes to St. Polycarp: "But it becomes both men and women who marry, to form their union with the approval of the bishop, that their marriage may be according to God, and not after their own lust." (Epistle to Polycarp, 5)
The Middle Ages are not commonly thought of as including the time period from AD 100 to AD 600, when those statements ceom from. But it is clear that the Catholic Church has claimed authority over marriage from its very beginning.
So there is no biblical precedent for the church to make the determination that any marriage is invalid
What then is this instruction from St. Paul? "If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she consent to dwell with him, let him not put her away. And if any woman hath a husband that believeth not, and he consent to dwell with her, let her not put away her husband. ... But if the unbeliever depart, let him depart. For a brother or sister is not under servitude in such cases. But God hath called us in peace." (1 Corinthians 7.12-13, 15)
If the pagan marriage was always valid after the conversion of one of the parties if the other party now wishes to seperate, St. Paul could not give such an instruction.
Do you really think that God cares about the "legitimacy" of a child? I think, in God's eyes, all children are "legitimate".
As an aside, the concept of "legitimacy" doesn't carry any sort of disability in current canon law. It's mentioned only in passing IIRC, and that mention is only there for the sake of inheritance law in countries where civil divorce doesn't exist.
Are you a Catholic who understands anything about how the Tribunal operates?
You misread that scripture..try again
It is a declaration that God never joined this man and this woman, because they failed to follow the requisite form, or did not intend to actually contract a Christian marriage.
What is the "required " form..and who required it..
What was the required form when Christ lived?
I think He cares cares about all sin
Deuteronomy 23:2 and 3 A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.
Isa 57:3 But draw near hither, ye sons of the sorceress, the seed of the adulterer and the whore.
Hbr 12:8 But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons.
God DOES care, that is why there are so many genealogies in scripture.
As an aside, the concept of "legitimacy" doesn't carry any sort of disability in current canon law. It's mentioned only in passing IIRC, and that mention is only there for the sake of inheritance law in countries where civil divorce doesn't exist.
Well the church may find it of only "passing interest", but seems God takes it seriously..
Are you saying I am wrong?
“Are you saying I am wrong?”
I made no statement at all. I posted questions.
Are you a Catholic and what do you know about the Tribunal process?
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.