Alright...am I illegitimate?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Slayer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Slayer

Guest
I tried asking this question to one of the “Ask an Apologist” members but he has not replied to my follow up questions.

I was told that it is only a civil matter if you are determined to be illegitimate or not. But this seems wrong.

Speaking from a traditional point of view I would like to know if I am considered illegitimate. Here is my story…

My dad is Catholic and my mom is Lutheran. I was conceived outside of marriage. My parents were married civilly before I was born and they were also married in a non-Catholic church before I was born. I know that if a Catholic gets married in a non-Catholic Church then that marriage is not valid, but the civil marriage is, right? - Meaning that in God’s eyes my parents were married? Also, I would like to point out that my parents did try to get married in a Catholic Church but were denied because they were too young, apparently. Anyways, if this makes a difference or not, my parents are now divorced. My dad has remarried in a Catholic Church, but later got that marriage annulled and he is currently married to another woman through the Catholic Church.

Now according to this:
The law as laid down in the Decretals of Gregory IX (I, X) mentions only the offspring of clerics and those begotten in fornication. But in the sixth book of the Decretals all persons of illegitimate birth are expressly included. These may be ranged in the following classes: (1) Natural illegitimates, or the offspring of parents who at the time of the birth or conception of such offspring, were capable of contracting Christian marriage. (2) Spurious illegitimates, or those born of a known mother and an unknown father — unknown because the mother had carnal relations with several men. (3) Adulterine illegitimates, those begotten of parents, one or both of whom, at the time of conception and birth of such offspring, were lawfully married to a third person. (4) Incest illegitimates, or persons whose parents could not marry because of an invalidating impediment of consanguinity or affinity. (5) Sacrilegious illegitimates, or the offspring of parents who are restrained from marriage because of the impediment of Holy orders or solemn religious vows. The practice of the present day also holds as illegitimates abandoned children of unknown parentage. Legitimacy may not be presumed or established by negative proof. Positive documentary evidence must be adduced.
Click to expand...
Source

It seems I am illegitimate. Am I?

BTW, my last thread was locked (I do not know why), but if you know if the SSPX ordains illegitimate sons then please PM me.
 
All children are presumed legitimate.

Those born of a marriage that is later annulled are STILL legitimate.

It used to be an impediment for some things, but the 1983 CCL removed it, and there had been liberal dispensations before hand.

Why are you so worried about what SSPX thinks?
 
bpbasilphx said:
All children are presumed legitimate.

Those born of a marriage that is later annulled are STILL legitimate.

It used to be an impediment for some things, but the 1983 CCL removed it, and there had been liberal dispensations before hand.

Why are you so worried about what SSPX thinks?
Click to expand...
Why are you telling him something that is not true?

While it’s true that those born of a marriage that is ‘annulled’ are still considered legitimate, the Church certainly doesn’t teach that all children are presumed legitimate.

Canon Law says:
Can. 1137 The children conceived or born of a valid or putative marriage are legitimate. (This is the Canon that means that children of a marriage that is annulled are legitimate.)
Click to expand...
Can. 1138 §1. The father is he whom a lawful marriage indicates unless clear evidence proves the contrary.
Click to expand...
§2. Children born at least 180 days after the day when the marriage was celebrated or within 300 days from the day of the dissolution of conjugal life are presumed to be legitimate.
Click to expand...
Can. 1139 Illegitimate children are legitimated by the subsequent valid or putative marriage of their parents or by a rescript of the Holy See.
Click to expand...
As he tells it, his parents were never validly married to each other.

As for SSPX, they probably follow the 1917 Code of Canon Law and they won’t go to the Pope for dispensation of the illigitimate impediment against ordination.
 
Illegitimacy is a status governed by civil, not church law. In most if not all states in the US it is no longer used. earlier canon law versions that did make distinctions on this basis depended on civil law in times and places where either the church was the entity who recorded births as well as marriages, or where the church assumed other functions now reserved to civil law in most countries. the distinction is obsolete under current cannot law. what SSPX thinks or rules is irrelevant.
 
puzzleannie said:
Illegitimacy is a status governed by civil, not church law. In most if not all states in the US it is no longer used. earlier canon law versions that did make distinctions on this basis depended on civil law in times and places where either the church was the entity who recorded births as well as marriages, or where the church assumed other functions now reserved to civil law in most countries. the distinction is obsolete under current cannot law. what SSPX thinks or rules is irrelevant.
Click to expand...
How then do you explain the present canons on legitimacy?

Why does the present code define legitimacy and indicates that in everything the illegitimate & the legitimate child are equal in everything except where particular law is in place.
 
**Why are you telling him something that is not true? **

**Your quote of Canon 1137 said what I was trying to say, and more precisely and authoritatively.

Thanks! 👍 **
 
Phemie said:
As for SSPX, they probably follow the 1917 Code of Canon Law and they won’t go to the Pope for dispensation of the illigitimate impediment against ordination.
Click to expand...
And why on earth would that matter, since they can’t validly ordain priests, anyway? :confused:
 
jmcrae said:
And why on earth would that matter, since they can’t validly ordain priests, anyway? :confused:
Click to expand...
The bishops in the SSPX can validly ordain priests. They just can’t do so licitly. IOW, the men who present themselves at ordination leave the ceremony a true priest. However, since the bishops are under the penalty of excommunication, they are legally forbidden to exercise their charism. This means that they, as well as the ordinands, incur an ecclesial penalty (a materially grave sin). This is a big mess that the Vatican is trying to mop up.

I’d point out this: if I was considering becoming an SSPX priest, I’d be a heck of a lot more concerned about participating in an illicit ordination than the legal status of my birth. One affects my civil “definition”, one affects my immortal soul. Whether or not it is damnable is not my call, but it’s very hard to justify the SSPX claims of an “emergency situation in the Church” anymore. This makes their illicit use of the sacraments very shady. I wouldn’t bet my eternal soul on this gamble.
 
Phemie said:
How then do you explain the present canons on legitimacy?

Why does the present code define legitimacy and indicates that in everything the illegitimate & the legitimate child are equal in everything except where particular law is in place.
Click to expand...
because there are jurisdictions where the civil law differs, and canon law has to cover the whole church, and make it clear that in place where civil law makes this distinction, it has no effect on the particular canonical principal at issue.
 
Windmill said:
I’d point out this: if I was considering becoming an SSPX priest, I’d be a heck of a lot more concerned about participating in an illicit ordination than the legal status of my birth. One affects my civil “definition”, one affects my immortal soul. Whether or not it is damnable is not my call, but it’s very hard to justify the SSPX claims of an “emergency situation in the Church” anymore. This makes their illicit use of the sacraments very shady. I wouldn’t bet my eternal soul on this gamble.
Click to expand...
It seems things are worse now then what they were back when the SSPX was created.

Case in point:

youtube.com/watch?v=NsC4wRPybpA&NR=1

youtube.com/watch?v=WadbbxPoBlk&NR=1
 
Slayer said:
It seems things are worse now then what they were back when the SSPX was created.

Case in point:

youtube.com/watch?v=NsC4wRPybpA&NR=1

youtube.com/watch?v=WadbbxPoBlk&NR=1
Click to expand...
I haven’t been able to watch these videos, as I can’t watch YouTube from work, but I’m guessing you’ve linked to a clown mass or a Barney mass or something similar.

I don’t think it’s fair or accurate to take two extreme examples and paint them as the norm. If you can demonstrate that this type of thing happens in *every *diocese, in *every *parish, then maybe you have a point.

But you can’t, because the two examples above are not typical of Catholic masses across the country – or even across the world.

It’d be like me linking to the website of the Ku Klux Klan and the Aryan Nation, and claiming that there’s still no equality for African-Americans in the United States. You can’t define the state of a movement by its extreme elements.
 
Slayer said:
My dad is Catholic and my mom is Lutheran. I was conceived outside of marriage. My parents were married civilly before I was born and they were also married in a non-Catholic church before I was born.
Click to expand...
I’m no expert in this area, but recall reading somewhere recently that if the parents were married in a civil ceremony, even it was technically an invalid marriage, the child is considered legitimate. I can’t remembner the source, so I can’t say how acuarate this is, but perhaps it’s worth pursuing.
 
jmcrae said:
Yeah, everyone knows all about scandalous YouTube Masses. (Probably staged.) How about something from real life, though? Has anyone you know in person ever seen a “clown Mass”? 🤷
Click to expand...
I did not attend, but somewhere in the crazy 70’s they did have a clown mass in my parish. Happened once and never happened again. I can’t speak for other parishes or for what happens somewhere else in contemporary times. 🙂
 
Slayer said:
I tried asking this question to one of the “Ask an Apologist” members but he has not replied to my follow up questions.

I was told that it is only a civil matter if you are determined to be illegitimate or not. But this seems wrong.

Speaking from a traditional point of view I would like to know if I am considered illegitimate. Here is my story…

My dad is Catholic and my mom is Lutheran. I was conceived outside of marriage. My parents were married civilly before I was born and they were also married in a non-Catholic church before I was born. I know that if a Catholic gets married in a non-Catholic Church then that marriage is not valid, but the civil marriage is, right? - Meaning that in God’s eyes my parents were married? Also, I would like to point out that my parents did try to get married in a Catholic Church but were denied because they were too young, apparently. Anyways, if this makes a difference or not, my parents are now divorced. My dad has remarried in a Catholic Church, but later got that marriage annulled and he is currently married to another woman through the Catholic Church.

Now according to this:

Source

It seems I am illegitimate. Am I?

BTW, my last thread was locked (I do not know why), but if you know if the SSPX ordains illegitimate sons then please PM me.
Click to expand...
No human being is ‘illegitimate’ in the eyes of God. That’s an exclusively human label and perspective. In Christianity, it has no meaning.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top