|
Cato76
|
|
« Reply #30 on: February 25, 2012, 12:22:PM » |
|
Just so I know, what is the difference between the Church and the Novus Ordo? The Church doesn't grant invalid annulments, because that would be an unholy practice. If the Novus Ordo does then that should tell you something.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Vincentius
Gold Fish
Location: Now in actual "exile" in the Pacific islands
Posts: 2,530
|
|
« Reply #31 on: February 25, 2012, 12:24:PM » |
|
"such as supplied to a non Catholic schismatic priest with valid orders, where a Catholic can approach in the event of imminent death and there is no Catholic priest available"
Wrong. The canon also says if it is "morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister" as well. This goes much further than what you were implying Can. 976 Even though a priest lacks the faculty to hear confessions, he absolves validly and licitly any penitents whatsoever in danger of death from any censures and sins, even if an approved priest is present. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
http://www.alcazar.netAnything we do without offering it to God, is wasted.” -- St. John Vianney, The Curé of Ars When next you hear some attack called an idle paradox, Ask after the dox. Pursue the dox; persecute the dox. In short ask the dox whether it is orthodox. ---G.K. Chesterton, Daily News, October 28, 1911 God Himself does not propose to judge a man until he is dead. So why should you? In thee, O Lord, have I hoped, let me never be confounded: deliver me in thy justice. The world was to be saved by the preaching of the Cross and on the Eucharist, and not by human wisdom or eloquence
|
|
|
Stubborn
Member
Gender: 
Posts: 5,017
|
|
« Reply #32 on: February 25, 2012, 12:32:PM » |
|
Just so I know, what is the difference between the Church and the Novus Ordo?
The poster was referring to the Church as in the holder and defender of the true faith and sacraments. The NO as the compromiser at every opportunity. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
It is the Mass that matters.
But because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold, not hot, I will begin to vomit thee out of my mouth. -Apocalypse 3:16
|
|
|
JMartyr
Member
Gender:
Posts: 1,611
|
|
« Reply #33 on: February 25, 2012, 01:37:PM » |
|
"such as supplied to a non Catholic schismatic priest with valid orders, where a Catholic can approach in the event of imminent death and there is no Catholic priest available"
Wrong. The canon also says if it is "morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister" as well. This goes much further than what you were implying Can. 976 Even though a priest lacks the faculty to hear confessions, he absolves validly and licitly any penitents whatsoever in danger of death from any censures and sins, even if an approved priest is present. I thought you were referring to canon 844. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
" When I think that we are in the building of the Holy Office, the outstanding witness of Tradition and defender of the Catholic Faith, I cannot help thinking that I am on my own territory and that it is I whom you call ' the traditionalist' who should be judging you." - quote from Archbishop Lefebvre when questioned by the CDF
"Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Bishop Antonio de Castro Mayer are the two great saints of the modern Church. Once this catastrophe ends they will be instantly canonized." - Father Malachi Martin
|
|
|
joe17
Member
Gender:
Location: New England
Posts: 860
|
|
« Reply #34 on: February 25, 2012, 05:33:PM » |
|
Advising a couple to seperate due to whatever reason(abuse, adultery, etc) is one thing. To have the non-Ordinary set up a tribunal is another thing. If the Society was just setting one up for the fun of it so to speak, not telling or trying to enforce their findings on the couple and Church, well, that might be one thing. But they go beyond that.
To say that the SSPX, or other similiar outfit can put out binding findings the same as what we got before VII is an assertion and is not an arguement.
I personally know a priest who left the SSPX soon after they set this thing up "officially" after the Archbishop died. He knew others uneasy with it as well.
Epikeia deals with supplied jurisdiction when recourse cannot be had to the lawgiver. I know most have heard that. While I think the Society's arguement for using it suffers when the men they recognise as Ordinaries are available. as well as canonical pastors, it is a far cry from hearing Confessions and witnessing Marriages to declaring that such and such a marriage never was a true, valid marriage. It is beyond them. Just because every properly trained priest back in the day was capable of witnessing a marriage, the typical priest was not on a tribunal. Moreover, they were assigned the position, having sufficient studies in Canon law, by the Ordinary, who alone in the diocese has the right to set this up. The Society cannot usurp this, even in these times.
Also, if one accepts the SSPX's opinion in this area over that of the Vatican's and one's Diocesan tribunal, than what good are the later two to the Catholic in question?
Support your priest in whatever way you can, but please recognise that some things today Catholics just have to put up with, things that were able to be resolved years ago.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stubborn
Member
Gender:
Posts: 5,017
|
|
« Reply #35 on: February 25, 2012, 06:10:PM » |
|
Also, if one accepts the SSPX's opinion in this area over that of the Vatican's and one's Diocesan tribunal, than what good are the later two to the Catholic in question?
Support your priest in whatever way you can, but please recognise that some things today Catholics just have to put up with, things that were able to be resolved years ago.
There are some things you're not taking into account - foremost would be the fact that the NO is full of modernists who grant annulments by the bucket full since V2. An "official" declaration of nullity does not nullify a valid marriage - yet we are supposed to simply put up with that? I don't think so. Again, I have no idea if this is fact or a figment of my imagination, my personal guess is that most official annulments are granted wrongfully. I am also of the opinion that most (not all) people who seek an annulment do so because they not only want a divorce, they want to remarry - they (and seemingly most everyone) have no idea how easy it is to verify validity *in most cases* even without any tribunal whatsoever. Suppose one spouse discovered after 8 years of marriage that the other spouse was previously married, had 3 children then divorced? Does one need any tribunal to state the obvious? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
It is the Mass that matters.
But because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold, not hot, I will begin to vomit thee out of my mouth. -Apocalypse 3:16
|
|
|
joe17
Member
Gender:
Location: New England
Posts: 860
|
|
« Reply #36 on: February 25, 2012, 06:41:PM » |
|
Stubborn,
I think we are closer in thought then we are apart. I agree with you, the Vatican/Diocesan annulments are pretty much worth zero in my book, conceding that they are bound to be right here and there. Who knows, there might actually be a higher percentage of invalidly-entered unions these days through the lack of catechisis since Vatican II. Our Lord only knows that one.
My point in this is that the Society, notwithstanding the crisis we are living through today, (The Mystical Body of Christ is in the Tomb at this stage), they do not have the authority to undertake the review of marriage cases and give a binding decision. \
For instance, if back in the day, my friend whose marriage I witnessed, some years later, got a declaration of nullity through the proper channels, I, and every other Catholic, would have to say"Aye aye sir", no valid marriage existed, inspite of the actual appearance of there having been one. I would not be able to doubt the finding, or put another way, I could not go out into the neighborhood, or even to my friends and say, w/o serious repercussions, that "John" who just got an official declaration of nullity, is still really married to "Jane" and that if he starts courting another woman, that he is committing adultery. If I were to do such a thing, anyone hearing it would be bound to defend John and what the Church has permitted.
I humbly submit hear that the SSPX and others cannot hold you and I, Joe Catholic, to that same standard. They do not have the power to bind our consciences. The Catholc Church, through her official pastors, does have the power to bind our consciences in the public realm.
What should be explained to any unfortunate soul who does not have a clear cut case that is blatantly invalid is that God's grace will have to suffice. Fidelity to the laws of God cannot be put aside. If small children are involved, then the couple with a problematic 2nd marriage could live as brother and sister, or separate. Those who cannot go back to their true spouse for a justifiable reason must go on living as a single person, with a chaste lifestyle of course, and with no company keeping with those of the opposite sex. It may sound tough but without such defined guidelines society in general would have gone down the tubes a lot sooner than it has.
I hope that helps.
Joe
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Vincentius
Gold Fish
Location: Now in actual "exile" in the Pacific islands
Posts: 2,530
|
|
« Reply #37 on: February 26, 2012, 12:26:AM » |
|
"such as supplied to a non Catholic schismatic priest with valid orders, where a Catholic can approach in the event of imminent death and there is no Catholic priest available"
Wrong. The canon also says if it is "morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister" as well. This goes much further than what you were implying Can. 976 Even though a priest lacks the faculty to hear confessions, he absolves validly and licitly any penitents whatsoever in danger of death from any censures and sins, even if an approved priest is present. I thought you were referring to canon 844. By "non-Catholic schismatic" I was referring to the Orthodox, Old Catholics, SVs, Fr. "Independent," et al., who have valid orders, and who a Catholic can approach for the Sacrament of Penance in imminent death (point of dying). Sorry for not being more clear. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
http://www.alcazar.netAnything we do without offering it to God, is wasted.” -- St. John Vianney, The Curé of Ars When next you hear some attack called an idle paradox, Ask after the dox. Pursue the dox; persecute the dox. In short ask the dox whether it is orthodox. ---G.K. Chesterton, Daily News, October 28, 1911 God Himself does not propose to judge a man until he is dead. So why should you? In thee, O Lord, have I hoped, let me never be confounded: deliver me in thy justice. The world was to be saved by the preaching of the Cross and on the Eucharist, and not by human wisdom or eloquence
|
|
|
|
wsxyz
Member
Posts: 164
|
|
« Reply #38 on: February 26, 2012, 12:32:AM » |
|
Joe, as I already mentioned, the SSPX has an internal requirement for their own quasi-tribunals.
You are correct that the decision of an SSPX quasi-tribunal cannot require our assent, but you cannot expect the SSPX to rely on diocesan tribunals when it is necessary to decide on the validity of someone's putative marriage. You wouldn't, for example, expect the SSPX to accept a diocesan decree of nullity for a man who wishes to enter an SSPX seminary would you?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Phillipus Iacobus
Blue Fish
Gender:
Posts: 11,297
|
|
« Reply #39 on: February 26, 2012, 01:07:AM » |
|
"such as supplied to a non Catholic schismatic priest with valid orders, where a Catholic can approach in the event of imminent death and there is no Catholic priest available"
Wrong. The canon also says if it is "morally impossible to approach a Catholic minister" as well. This goes much further than what you were implying Can. 976 Even though a priest lacks the faculty to hear confessions, he absolves validly and licitly any penitents whatsoever in danger of death from any censures and sins, even if an approved priest is present. I thought you were referring to canon 844. By "non-Catholic schismatic" I was referring to the Orthodox, Old Catholics, SVs, Fr. "Independent," et al., who have valid orders, and who a Catholic can approach for the Sacrament of Penance in imminent death (point of dying). Sorry for not being more clear. Vince, I know it's nitpicking, but I don't think you should include SV's as "non-Catholic schismatics," due to what Wernz-Vidal and others have said. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
