Pope Warns Church Courts About Marriage Rulings

ZENIT - The World Seen From Rome ^ | January 30, 2005 | ZENIT News Services

[DBeers]

Pope Warns Church Courts About Marriage Rulings

Tribunals 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."

[verity]

Married almost 30 years with three adult children and the Church says there was never a marriage.

If the annulment is a retroactive act, does that mean that children born during the marriage are now retroactively considered ba******? :0

[Hope you have a sense of humor.]

[DBeers]

As a matter of fact, the late Marcel DID open the floodgates to the modern practice of annulment mills which flourish in the US more than anywhere when Marcel presided over the Rota...

Interesting, I did not know this. In my opinion, the errant US tribunals are just as big a problem within the Church as sex abuse and homosexuality... This topic is one I am interested in and research. I will see what I can find on Marcel -If you have any specifics I would appreciate them.

[murphE]

Interesting, I did not know this.

No one else that has checked has been able to verify this statement, and no source of information has be offered to back it up. There may well be a very good reason you did not know this, since it seems to be false.

[DBeers]

Annulments should be rare. I think the general perception is that as long as you are willing to make your "donation" to the Church, your annulment will be granted.

This perception may wrongly exist; however, the reality is much worse. Donations are not really necessary... The 'pastoral' helpers are more than willing to foot the bill to give themselves license to distribute their measure of perverted truth...

[sinkspur]

No. An annulment has no effect on civil marriage, which is why a civil divorce is required before an annulment can be pursued.

[AlbionGirl]

On 23 January 1962 he resigned his archbishopric in favor of a native African, now His Eminence Cardinal Hyacinthe Thiandoum, who had been ordained by Mgr. Lefebvre, who regards himself as his spiritual son, and who did all in his power to effect a reconciliation between the Archbishop and Pope Paul VI.

I wonder how many times in the History of the Church a resignation such as this took place? Also, why was a reconciliation between him and Pope Paul VI needed?

[BlackElk]

The problems with the American tribunals are the next generation of poblem but Marcel is supposed to have allowed the initial liberalization. Given and inch, AmChurch bishops took a mile to the point where I believe that the US has about 6% of the world's Catholics and 67% or more of the world's Catholic annulments. That cannot all be attributed to Marcel BUT in earlier days, every annulment granted was automatically appealed to the Rota in Rome by the Defender of the Bond and parties had to be available on short notice in Rome for hearings on appeal before Marcel.

I don't know the name of book or author (I believe he has an Italian name) but there is a book by a Notre Dame architecture professor which may well be an accurate starting point. He was very uspet at his wife attaining an annulment in South Bend because he felt very strongly that there were no legitimate grounds. The book was published in the 1990s. I borrowed it from a public library. The author displayed a very good grasp of Canon Law and annulment procedure. I wish I could be more helpful.

[marshmallow]

Address of John Paul II to the Tribulal of the Roman Rota, February 1979

Third paragraph from the end:

I wish at this time to recall Cardinal Boleslaw Filipiak who was summoned to his heavenly home during the past year. I also wish to pay homage to our esteemed Monsignor Charles Lefebvre for his example of diligence and unselfishness. The Holy See continues to benefit by his valuable experience, now that he has ended the service he was rendering to the Sacred Roman Rota until a few months ago.

It's the "other" Lefebvre. Marcel was not a canon lawyer, I don't believe.

[murphE]

I think this is where you are getting your misinformation from:

ADDRESS OF JOHN PAUL II TO THE TRIBUNAL OF THE ROMAN ROTA, 17 February 1979

"I wish at this time to recall Cardinal Boleslaw Filipiak who was summoned to his heavenly home during the past year. I also wish to pay homage to our esteemed Monsignor Charles Lefebvre for his example of diligence and unselfishness. The Holy See continues to benefit by his valuable experience, now that he has ended the service he was rendering to the Sacred Roman Rota until a few months ago."

It was a Lefebvre, but not the Archbishop, who never served the Roman Rota.

You and ninenot have once again committed calumny, against a deceased Archbishop. This is your Michael Moore method of Apologetics. Throw any outright lies, half truths and misstatements out there with an attitude like you actually know what you are talking about, and hope some poor ignorant sap buys it. Your methods are the same as all the enemies of the Church, you have no concern for truth, you are frauds who give scandal to the ignorant.

[murphE]

sorry, didn't see your post.

[Gerard.P]

Let's see: JPII says, " I also wish to pay homage to our esteemed Monsignor Charles Lefebvre for his example of diligence and unselfishness. The Holy See continues to benefit by his valuable experience, now that he has ended the service he was rendering to the Sacred Roman Rota until a few months ago."

And in making the correction for Black Elk: "Charles DID open the floodgates to the modern practice of annulment mills which flourish in the US more than anywhere when Charles presided over the Rota but apparently his nicknames are more important to you than his blunders and their consequences. Just one more abuse of actual "tradition" from Charles."

So it appears that Black Elk is no longer in communion with Peter, with the Supreme Pontiff, the Patriarch of the West, the Servant of the Servants of Christ, the Vicar of Christ, God's hand-picked successor to Peter, the Leader of the Church against which the Gates of Hell will not prevail!!


Black Elk is a schizzie! Black Elk is a schizzie! Black Elk is a schizzie! Black Elk is a schizzie! Black Elk is a schizzie! Black Elk is a schizzie! Black Elk is a schizzie! Black Elk is a schizzie! Black Elk is a schizzie! Black Elk is a schizzie! Schizzie! Schizzie!Schizzie!Schizzie!


oh...this is rich....good times..

[BlackElk]

An ecclesiastical annulment also does not render as bastards the progeny of what had APPEARED to be a valid marriage but was later annulled.

[sinkspur]

Dim.

[BlackElk]

If you have some evidence that it was another Lefebvre who ran the Rota, then consider any charge of mine against Marcel ON THAT SCORE ONLY withdrawn.

That does not alter his status as one who was declared schismatic as adhering to his schism and excommunicated for his ecclesiastical crime of consecrating bishops in direct defiance and disobedience to the pope.

[Canticle_of_Deborah]

This is unfortunate. I hope you return to communion with JPII.

[BlackElk]

Actually, it appears that you have lost more than your Faith. Your mind is also gone with the wind. No surprise really. Once you stop believing the Truth, as Chesterton observed, you will believe ANYTHING. Thanks for proving Chesterton's wisdom yet again.

[Gerard.P]

I wonder how many times in the History of the Church a resignation such as this took place? Also, why was a reconciliation between him and Pope Paul VI needed?

Paul VI was a very disobedient bishop when he was secretary to Pius XII. He opened up channels of communication with Metropolitan Nikodim against Pius XII's wishes. Pius XII threw him out and denied him a cardinals hat. John XXIII gave him the Cardinal's hat. He was intellectual and political but not interested much in theology as far as Popes go. He was superior to both John XXIII and JPII but well below Pius X, XI , XII. He set the Church on an unprecedented path that had never before been done. He had a rite of Mass drawn up by a committee with Protestant input and no Apostolic roots. (Every other rite in the Church went back to at Least the 1400s and had a root with one of the Apostles. The Novus Ordo has no such connection.

He also allowed Bugnini to attack every other form of every other Sacrament. Paul VI stated in 1972 that "somehow" (incredibly) the smoke of Satan had entered the Church. Then he did nothing about it. Archbishop LeFebvre simply stayed exactly where he was when he was ordained and trained. He refused to aid in the destruction of the Church. As has been pointed out by others, what Pius XII lauded LeFebvre for, he was condemned by those in love with the spirit of Vatican II.

[murphE]

That does not alter his status ...

Oh but it alters yours. You have no credibility.(And no humility when found to be guilty of calumny). Your attitude is, "oh well this lie didn't stick, I'll just keep trying some others." You spread lies with no concern for truth, why would anyone believe or even listen to what you have to say again?

[Gerard.P]

You must have me mistaken for Charles.P not Gerard.P

[BlackElk]

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre consecrated bishops at Econe in direct defiance of and disobedience to Pope John Paul II.

Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre was, along wit the sorry excuses for priests whom he consecrated unlawfully as bishops, accordingly excommunicated by John Paul II who has the authority and exercised it to do so.

Additionally, John Paul II declared the disobedient movement in defiance of the papacy and of the pope of the said Marcel Lefebvre known as the SSPX (an insult in and of itself to the memory of yet another pontiff who has been raised to the honors of the altar) to be a schism.

Those decisions were promulgated and published by John Paul II in 1988. They have not (at least in respect to Marcel) been withdrawn or altered in any way.

Marcel's loyal sycophants have been as mad as vampires doused in Holy Water ever since at John Paul II for meting out punishment to their patron in anti-papal defiance. No Catholic who IS a Catholic is likely to have the slightest degree of sympathy for Marcel or for his poisonous little cult.

Nonetheless, the cult compulsively and relentlessly advertises its shameless and hysterical attacks upon pope and Church to no particular avail other than picking off poorly catechized weaklings and thereby improving the gene pool in the actually Catholic pews which the weaklings then avoid.

That is a curious post of yours in the last paragraph given that you apparently join the other schizzies in regarding JP II as an enemy of the Church.

Whatever you may say, I did no give you scandal. The Marcellian cult embodies scandal.