Validity of sacrament of marriage in latin right

[adrift]

Is there anything more provocative and off topic than this:

No it was not provocative

My comment, while provocative, is spot on to the post I replied to.

The post you replies to was on topic your remark was uncharitable and far from the topic. It was a snipe at the Church. You then twisted canon law to justify your nastiness. You insulted the Catholic Church. Your remark was not spot on it missed the mark and hit the lowest denominator of manners.

 

[adrift]

OP I am sorry for the off topic posting not to your question

Try
History of Marriage in Western Civilization

Roman Empire in the First Century

 

[Rawb]

OP I am sorry for the off topic posting not to your question

Try
History of Marriage in Western Civilization

Roman Empire in the First Century

These are two links to the same page describing Pagan marriage rites, not what the OP is asking for.

 

[ConstantineTG]

No it was not provocative

The post you replies to was on topic your remark was uncharitable and far from the topic. It was a snipe at the Church. You then twisted canon law to justify your nastiness. You insulted the Catholic Church. Your remark was not spot on it missed the mark and hit the lowest denominator of manners.

Snipe at the Church? Insult the Church? Missed the mark? Can you tell me how this:

That is until you go to a marriage tribunal and get an annulment.

is any different than this:

Can. 1060 Marriage possesses the favor of law; therefore, in a case of doubt, the validity of a marriage must be upheld until the contrary is proven.

What (name removed by moderator) said plus what I said is just that, Canon 1060. How is that a snipe at the Church who herself said that very exact same thing in one of her canons

 

[Vico]

Similar to the CCEO 832 for the eastern churches, for the Latin Church CIC Can. 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.

 

[5Loaves]

edit: Forget it, I’m tired of being baited into this uncharitable discussions.

To quote you – Who are you kidding?

 

[ConstantineTG]

To quote you – Who are you kidding?

I guess it’s obvious people here can’t stand people with another belief and gang up on them. Then they ask where all the other people in the past has gone.

 

[adrift]

Snipe at the Church? Insult the Church? Missed the mark? Can you tell me how this:

is any different than this:

Can. 1060 Marriage possesses the favor of law; therefore, in a case of doubt, the validity of a marriage must be upheld until the contrary is proven.

What (name removed by moderator) said plus what I said is just that, Canon 1060. How is that a snipe at the Church who herself said that very exact same thing in one of her canons

That is until you go to a marriage tribunal and get an annulment

This uncharitable remark is not what the canon says. It is your invalid interpretation.

guess it’s obvious people here can’t stand people with another belief and gang up on them. Then they ask where all the other people in the past has gone.

What can’t be tolerated is a dishonest post. No need to ask where they went, since it is obvious that they were banned.
Since this is not the topic of this thread, I will no longer address your comments.

 

[adrift]

These are two links to the same page describing Pagan marriage rites, not what the OP is asking for.

Here is the correct link

www2.hu-berlin.de/sexology/ATLAS_EN/html/history_of_marriage_in_western.html