SSPX marriages

[parvenu74]

I’ll lodge a friendly wager.

If the Vatican ever reconciles with the SSPX, and agrees to denounce Modernist error, then, at that time there will be zero marriages from SSPX chapels being re-done, and zero confessions being re-heard.

You don’t even need to wait that long. Couples who were married in the SSPX and then go to “recognized” indult Masses don’t have to have their marriages re-done. I forget which African country it was, the bishops conference asked Rome what to do with the marriages performed by SSPX priests: are they valid and do they get logged in the Sacramental registers? The answer on both counts was in the affirmative. I reckon Deacon Ed’s going to want a citation for that… I’ll see if I can dig one up.

 

[ctos]

That does it! Double or nothing! :bounce:

 

[Thursday1]

I’ll lodge a friendly wager.

If the Vatican ever reconciles with the SSPX, and agrees to denounce Modernist error, then, at that time there will be zero marriages from SSPX chapels being re-done, and zero confessions being re-heard.

I’ll take you up on the bet. I am certain I will win. The Church is not in heresy, so therefor they can never renounce it.
Would you like to pay up now or later?

 

[Aurelio]

Hola! Hi!

Gee, I don’t know about all you other good people, but as I recollect from my “traditional” Catechism According to Mom, “marriage is basically between a man and woman. Period!”

Aurelio:thumbsup:

 

[childofmary1143]

Just because I don’t want to be accused of anything…what part of this is “bull”? BTW, I don’t think I quoted any canon law in this thread. I posted a direct quote from the protocol that Lefebvre signed which actually showed that the marriages were considered invalid even before the excommunications. Do you have something from the 1918 canon that contradicts this? I believe the 1918 code also calls for priests to have jurisdiction to confer this sacrament.

And what exactly in my post/posts do you think contains modernist thinking?

Your post contains no modernist thinking. Its just that to sede**** they don’t like to be told that their sacraments are invalid

 

[Deacon_Ed]

Hola! Hi!

Gee, I don’t know about all you other good people, but as I recollect from my “traditional” Catechism According to Mom, “marriage is basically between a man and woman. Period!”

Aurelio:thumbsup:

Aurelio,

Is there no room for God in the marriage?

Deacon Ed

 

[ctos]

Marriage is a sacrament instituted by Jesus Christ in order to unite, by an indissoluble bond, two souls whom God has made for each other, and who will love and be devoted to each other “as Christ also loved the Church and delivered himself up for it”.

The Holy Eucharist in which Christ makes ever more and more perfect His union withour souls is a sacrifice and a sacrament; and the same is true of marriage, in which a man and a woman unite their lives for ever.

St. Andrew Daily Missal.

Marriage is both a sacrifice and a sacrament. And the scandalous and truly stupefying Novus Ordo tendency to annul marriages is one of the clearest signs that Catholics are being led to expect that it really is ‘the cult of man’, and that private judgment supersedes the rule of law.

 

[bear06]

I’ll lodge a friendly wager.

If the Vatican ever reconciles with the SSPX, and agrees to denounce Modernist error, then, at that time there will be zero marriages from SSPX chapels being re-done, and zero confessions being re-heard.

Sigh! Did you read the document provided? The marriages of the SSPX would be radically sanated. This is what has been historically done for mass reunifications. As far as confessions…From what I understand, they will undergo a similar procedure that is essentially sealed upon their next confession. So, you are right in the fact that nobody will have to go through the marriage ceremony again nor will they have to confess all sins already confessed to an SSPX priest. One would be wrong to say that they are valid as stands.

 

[bear06]

St. Andrew Daily Missal.

Marriage is both a sacrifice and a sacrament. And the scandalous and truly stupefying Novus Ordo tendency to annul marriages is one of the clearest signs that Catholics are being led to expect that it really is ‘the cult of man’, and that private judgment supersedes the rule of law.

It’s not the “Novus Ordo” tendency. It’s a modernist tendency. The two are not, despite one some think, synonymous.

It seems we’ve gotten to pointing fingers at another to take the light off the SSPX. If you want to talk annullments, start another thread. Better yet, how about the SSPX granting them without jurisdiction? This thread is about SSPX marriages.

 

[UKcatholicGuy]

Just curious:

Since the Church seems to so easily grant dispensations for marrying protestants (and even for Catholics to get married in protestant churches), I wonder if one could request a dispensation to get married in an SSPX chapel? Has anyone ever tried? What would the response be?

 

[bear06]

Just curious:

Since the Church seems to so easily grant dispensations for marrying protestants (and even for Catholics to get married in protestant churches), I wonder if one could request a dispensation to get married in an SSPX chapel? Has anyone ever tried? What would the response be?

Dispensation wouldn’t be necessary. I’m pretty sure that the bishop would just have to grant faculties. Just a note…At the very least in my diocese, I haven’t seen dispensations to marry in a protestant church in anyway easily granted.

 

[leahleah]

What if you go to a diocesan parish but your fiance goes to an SSPX chapel and you get married in the diocesan church. Do you have to get dispensation or is it ok as long as he is a registered member of a diocesan parish (even though he doesn’t attend there)?

 

[Megan7]

Since this often comes up, I thought I’d post something that I ran across today. I’m not sure why I didn’t remember this earlier. This is from the protocol Lefebvre signed and reneged on before the illicit ordinations. If you’ll notice, the “marriages” were problematic even before the excommunications. Certainly they are still so because they have no jurisdiction.

fssp.org/en/protoc5mai.htm

 

[Tomdstone]

Canonically one requires an official witness from the Church (bishop, priest, deacon as ordinary witnesses and, under certain special conditions, the bishop can appoint a lay person). Catholics are bound to canonical form (and have been since before the 1917 codex iuris under the laws of Justinian). As such, they do require an official witness, and that witness must have competence to be a witness. That competence is granted by the local ordinary or the pastor of the church where the marriage is to take place. If this is missing the marriage is invalid due to lack of canonical form.

I don’t think that this is true as stated. For example, I have been told that a Roman Catholic and an Eastern Orthodox may marry validly in an Eastern Orthodox Church and it is not necessary from the Roman Catholic point of view for a Catholic priest to be an official witness to the ceremony which is conducted by an Eastern Orthodox priest.

 

[GloriaMaria]

What if you go to a diocesan parish but your fiance goes to an SSPX chapel and you get married in the diocesan church. Do you have to get dispensation or is it ok as long as he is a registered member of a diocesan parish (even though he doesn’t attend there)?

Hi! Because the SSPX is still considered Catholic, it’s not as though you will have what they call a “mixed marriage”. You two will be validly married if you get married in your diocesan church, regardless of where he goes to Mass.

Just don’t get married in his SSPX chapel. Your marriage then would not be valid, and the graces from the sacrament would be absent. Trust me, those graces are absolutely vital!

Congratulations on your upcoming marriage! God Bless You both!

 

[Usige]

I don’t think that this is true as stated. For example, I have been told that a Roman Catholic and an Eastern Orthodox may marry validly in an Eastern Orthodox Church and it is not necessary from the Roman Catholic point of view for a Catholic priest to be an official witness to the ceremony which is conducted by an Eastern Orthodox priest.

Okay, old thread, but that depends on if you are talking about validity versus liceity. Canon 1127§1 states that with regard to mixed marriages to a non-Catholic of oriental rite “the canonical form of the celebration must be observed for liceity only; for validity, however, the presence of a sacred minister is required and the other requirements of law are to be observed.”

In essence a Catholic is still required to marry in the Catholic form for the marriage to be licit. If A Catholic and Eastern Orthodox are married in the Orthodox Church without dispensation it would still be valid, but not licit.