Nun marrys cpl in ft good hope

[Dale_B]

I heard this from my mother this afternoon and I had hoped she had gotten some of it wrong. However It appears to be acurate acording to CBC news. Here is the adress of the story. north.cbc.ca/regional/servlet/View?filename=marriage-woman-03082005
Hope that works not really sure how to do this

 

[Scott_Waddell]

But Liss says given the Vatican’s current leadership, her niece’s wedding, overseen by a woman and blessed by the Church, is likely to remain a rare northern phenomenon.

More secular thinking applied to the Church as if the male-only priesthood is merely a policy of the leadership.

Scott

 

[Dale_B]

I didnt think bishops had the power to allow nuns to administer sacrements. Any opinions or should i post this in ask an apologetic?

 

[Ani_Ibi]

Dale B:

I didnt think bishops had the power to allow nuns to administer sacrements. Any opinions or should i post this in ask an apologetic?

Hhhhmmm. Why don’t you ask the question in Ask an Apologist? I have a strange feeling that the Church might permit it. Without doing any looking up, I seem to remember that history has it that the couple themselves marry with the priest ‘looking on.’ But let’s get the Church’s teaching on this.

 

[geezerbob]

Too much information is missing. It could be that the bishop requested and received permission from the Vatican due to the remoteness of the area. Again, it’s hard to tell if any or all of this is legitimate without more information. You might try emailing the diocese with your questions and see if you get a response.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Dale B:

I didnt think bishops had the power to allow nuns to administer sacrements. Any opinions or should i post this in ask an apologetic?

This is an odd one becuase in the Latin rite it is the couple who administer the Sacrament of Marriage, the priest or deacon are only witnesses.

 

[JimG]

Yes, the nun performing the ceremony is not conferring a sacrament upon the couple. The bride and groom confer the sacrament upon each other.

This is the case with any marriage in the Latin Rite. The priest or deacon is only the official witness of the Church. In this case, the nun is the official witness of the Church.

 

[Brendan]

Dale B:

I didnt think bishops had the power to allow nuns to administer sacrements. Any opinions or should i post this in ask an apologetic?

The Sacrament is Adminsiterd by the Couple themselves, the priest or deacon is ordinarily the official witness, but the Bishop, may appoint lay person to witness the Sacrament. The Bishop would have the authority to do this if the Bishop’s Conference of Canada has approved a policy to allow this, and Rome has approved the Conferences policy.

Below is the relevant Canon.

Can. 1112 §1 Where there are no priests and deacons, the diocesan Bishop can delegate lay persons to assist at marriages, if the Episcopal Conference has given its prior approval and the permission of the Holy See has been obtained.

§2 A suitable lay person is to be selected, capable of giving instruction to those who are getting married, and fitted to conduct the marriage liturgy properly.

Based on the article, a number of conditions seem to have been met.

The article stated that there is no regular clergy in the area and the Bishop has delegated this privlidge to the nun.

In any case, the Sacrament is NOT adminsiterd by the priest, deacon or other witness, but each person confers the Sacrament of Marriage upon the other. The priest, deacon or other acts only as a witness.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Brendan:

The Sacrament is Adminsiterd by the Couple themselves, the priest or deacon is ordinarily the official witness, but the Bishop, may appoint lay person to witness the Sacrament. The Bishop would have the authority to do this if the Bishop’s Conference of Canada has approved a policy to allow this, and Rome has approved the Conferences policy.

Below is the relevant Canon.

Based on the article, a number of conditions seem to have been met.

The article stated that there is no regular clergy in the area and the Bishop has delegated this privlidge to the nun.

In any case, the Sacrament is NOT adminsiterd by the priest, deacon or other witness, but each person confers the Sacrament of Marriage upon the other. The priest, deacon or other acts only as a witness.

This is one of those things that confuse me between the East and the West. In the Byzantine rite it is the priest who confers the Mystery (Sacrament), that is why a deacon can not do marriages.

I wonder how the differences came about and how they are reconciled.

 

[cameron_lansing]

I wonder how the differences came about and how they are reconciled.

The two forms developed independently due to differences of geography and history. Canon law in the West was influenced by Roman law which viewed marriage in terms of contract.

As long as parties did something in public to make a contract, that was sufficient. (Clandestine marriages were always a problem, and another aspect of the issue.)

However, there was a debate in the twelfth century about what the efficient cause of marriage was. Theologians in the “Paris school,” such as Peter Lombard held to a principle of Roman law, Nuptias non concubitus, sed consensus, facit. In Italy, the “Bologna school,” including jurists such as Gratian, held to a principal of German law, that consumation made the marriage. A former canonist Rolando Bandinelli, who came from the school of Paris, “resolved” the issue as Pope Alexander III (1159-1181). He held consent makes marriage, but it may be dissolved for a just cause (e.g., religious vows) before consummation; only a marriage ratum (rightly made) et consummatum (consummated) is totally indissoluble.

However it was the Council of Trent (1545-1563) which began to specify the form of marriage in Tametsi, requiring marriages to be contracted before one’s own pastor, or another priest delegated by him, and at least two witnesses. Before that, such weddings were valid but illicit (in general, I am simplying). Subsequently, the required form went through some permutations until the present.

The Eastern Churches took a different journey with the focus on the blessing which an Eastern Catholic could detail much better and more correctly than I.

The imposition of a form of marriage is by ecclesiastical law and not by divine law. Hence the legislator (the Supreme Pontiff) provides for the proper traditions of the different Churches sui iuris to diverge. Respect for the patrimonies of West and East, I think, reconciles the differences. It’s not entirely dissimilar from the use of unleavened bread in the West but leavened bread in the East. But that’s just a rough use of analogy on my part.