Skip to comments.New papal decree clarifies role of deacons and result of defections on marriage
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.
I missed the last canon, but yeah, you are correct I think.
LOL. Well, it doesn't need the money, but it's always nice to pad the coffers.
Funny how the papacy presumes it controls people's lives even after they've fled the interview, by the grace of God.
Yes, and another one would be Glenn Beck — baptized as a Catholic, but now practicing the Mormon mindset.
I don’t really know what to say to that except it’s pathetic.
I suppose it’s a way to pull the naive back into their cult.
I'm not sure how you think something that makes it easier to get an annulment would make the church more money, but I guess in the upside-down world of "Rome is always wrong," it must make sense.
You get the idea that a lot of people have no clue just what an annulment involves. The money is the least of it.
(Actually, you could have just stopped after “clue”. ;-))
I know from 1st hand experience annulments are not to be taken lightly. Still, I am VERY thankful to Gof for the decree of nullity I received.
Actually, I think it's a way to keep marriage tribunals from having to reconstruct whether Joe was really a Lutheran when he married Sarah, or whether he was still a Catholic.
But, whatever floats yer boat.
Anyway, I think all that labeling stuff is passe and inane. It serves a very limited function.
Funny definition I heard tonight: Charismatic Catholicism = Pentecostalism with sacraments.
Most Catholics received several more Sacraments along the way, after their Baptisms, and the others were as older children or young adults, when they knew what was going on. The Church has always taught that civil marriages are invalid, because they are not Sacramental. I don't see anything new in this statement.
And, as I'm sure you probably well know, the Church doesn't do annulments for the money. Any fee charged for an annulment is for the administrative costs of the process.
“The church doesn’t do annulments for the money”
This is true. But it provides a good item for more skewering of the Church by those who hold Catholicism in contempt (which gets tiresome and repetitve on these threads and is counter-productive to changing the minds of practicing Catholics).
And we should be thankful, therefore, for that little cross.
No, I'm not there yet either.
Why do they do them? By what authority??
As for cost..of course they make money..the people often have too hire "lawyers "( through the church of course) to make their argument or to fight the proceedings
“the people often have too (sic) hire “lawyers”
Hmmm, this is true....simply because you say so?
“Few Americans hate the Catholic Church, but millions hate what they THINK is the Catholic Church”. —Bishop Fulton Sheen
Not to worry, Mark. I’m not afraid of crosses, big or small, for “I can do all things in Him who strengthens me”.
And this is the problem, the Roman Catholic Church teaching that it is the provider and distributor of the Grace of God.
It is merely the avenue. It is built upon Jesus Christ’s commission to the Apostle Peter.
The marriages are irregular. They can be regularized validated retroactively if the parties wish by returning to the Church and retracing their steps to have a valid marriage cermeony to make up for what was lacking in the form and minister of the first ceremony. Otherwise, the marriage remains invalid.
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.