- Status
A
AlexL
Guest
In the old days, man & wife just started living together and were presumed married by “common law”. This is the way it remains in many countries around the world.
Unfortunately, this system was abused by bigamists and philanderers, so a medieval Church council (the Lateran maybe?) made requirements for a marriage to be considered valid (at least 2 witnesses, priest officiating, in a church, minimum ages of spouses, etc.)
Long story short: the couple marries each other by making the vows & consummating. The priest celebrates/officiates, and the witnesses witness it.
Unfortunately, this system was abused by bigamists and philanderers, so a medieval Church council (the Lateran maybe?) made requirements for a marriage to be considered valid (at least 2 witnesses, priest officiating, in a church, minimum ages of spouses, etc.)
Long story short: the couple marries each other by making the vows & consummating. The priest celebrates/officiates, and the witnesses witness it.
D
DoGodsBidding
Guest
The couple are the ministers because they are the ones who make a sacred covenant, that being the vows that they make with each other.
DGB
V
Vico
Guest
The absolute minimum east or west per canon law, assuming no impediments, is that the couple celebrate marriage in the presence of two witnesses, with approval of the Church per the canon laws. The extreme case illustrates this.
CCEO Canon 832§1. If one cannot have present or have access to a priest who is competent according to the norm of law without grave inconvenience, those intending to celebrate a true marriage can validly and licitly celebrate it before witnesses alone:
1° in danger of death;
2° outside the danger of death, as long as it is prudently foreseen that such circumstances will continue for a month.
§2. In either case, if another priest, even a non-Catholic one, is able to be present, inasmuch as it is possible he is to be called so that he can bless the marriage, without prejudice for the validity of a marriage in the presence only of the witnesses.
§3. If a marriage was celebrated in the presence only of witnesses, the spouses shall not neglect to receive the blessing of the marriage from a priest as soon as possible.
CIC Canon 1116 §1. If one who, in accordance with the law, is competent to assist, cannot be present or be approached without grave inconvenience, those who intend to enter a true marriage can validly and lawfully contract in the presence of witnesses only:
1° in danger of death;
2° apart from danger of death, provided it is prudently foreseen that this state of affairs will continue for a month.
§2. In either case, if another priest or deacon is at hand who can be present, he must be called upon and, together with the witnesses, be present at the celebration of the marriage, without prejudice to the validity of the marriage in the presence of only the witnesses.
T
thenobes
Guest
It was only translated that way. The actual Latin was
mea culpa
(from wiktionary)
peragitur Latin Verb
third-person singular present passive indicative of peragō
perago Latin Verb
present active peragō, present infinitive peragere, perfect active perēgī, supine peractum.
per = through
- pierce or transfix
- traverse
- harass
- execute, finish, accomplish or complete
agere = to drive; drive, urge, conduct
So literally we have “to drive through, to conduct through (to the end)”
Or basically “to conduct from the start to the end”
apologies to dshix as well.
peace
steve
E
Elizium23
Guest
No we do not. The priest celebrates the Mass, presides at Mass, and the people assist at Mass, hear Mass, attend Mass, participate in the Mass.
The term “celebrate” is used in Canon Law: see cann. 902-909 and others. It always refers to the action of the priest.
- Status