Article — Marc, Institutiones Morales
Article I: On Prohibiting Impediments
- Besides mortal sin and excommunication, which render matrimony illicit, FOUR prohibiting impediments are numbered, comprehended in these little verses:
Prohibition of the Church, time, betrothals, vow,
Impede it from being made, permit what is made to stand.
To these impediments TWO others were formerly numbered, namely: - 1. The impediment of Catechism, which was contracted by him who answered for an infant, when the ceremonies were supplied after Baptism conferred in necessity; or, according to others, by him who recited the profession of faith in the name of the one to be baptized before Baptism. This impediment was removed by the Council of Trent (sess. 24, de reform. Matrim., cap. 2). - 2. The impediment of Crime, under which name were comprehended certain delicts, e.g. incest with one's own mother or daughter, abduction of another's bride, wife-murder, priest-murder, public penance as long as it endured, etc.; but this impediment has become obsolete by desuetude.14 - By others also the dissent of parents is reckoned among prohibiting impediments. See what was said n. 1951 and 1973, qu. 6.
(14) Book VI, 985; H. A., XVIII, 53.
I. Prohibition Of The Church
- By PROHIBITION OF THE CHURCH, in the strict sense, is understood an interdict from man, and it is defined: A prohibition by which an ecclesiastical Superior forbids, for a just cause, matrimony to be contracted between certain persons, until that cause or reason has been removed. But under the name of ecclesiastical Superior here comes not only the Pontiff for the universal Church, and the Bishop for his diocese, or the vicar general; but also the pastor, who, although he does not judicially see to matrimonial causes as to other causes, nevertheless can place an INTERDICT as pastor, until namely the cause is discussed and decided by the ordinary judge.
The CAUSES of the prohibition can be: either betrothals entered with another, or suspicion of a latent impediment, or fear of disturbances, ignorance of the elements of faith, or another thing of this sort.15 If the prohibition was made on account of a grave cause, the contracting parties sin gravely in contracting matrimony; but lightly, if the prohibition is on account of a light cause, e.g. on account of the veneration of some feast.16
In a broader sense, PROHIBITION OF THE CHURCH comprehends moreover certain general prohibitions noted in law, such as: that matrimony not be celebrated when proclamations have been omitted; that it not be entered into clandestinely, which prohibition everywhere constitutes an impedient impediment, but where Trent has been promulgated, is a diriment impediment. Concerning these it will more conveniently be said below, where proclamations and clandestinity are treated (n. 2056 and 2040).
Among these prohibitions noted by law, the first place must be assigned to that by which MIXED MARRIAGES are forbidden, concerning which one must speak more fully.
(15) De Angelis, lib. 4, tit. 16, n. 3. (16) Book VI, 982.
On Mixed Marriages
- MIXED matrimony, or matrimony of mixed religion, is called that which is contracted between baptized persons, of whom one is Catholic, but the other non-Catholic.
Principles. I. "MIXED marriages are detestable unions, which Holy Mother Church has perpetually CONDEMNED and interdicted." - Thus Benedict XIV, in the Decree concerning marriages of heretics in Holland.17
But why they are to be detested Our Most Holy Lord Pope LEO XIII explains in a few words in the Encyclical Arcanum, saying: "This also must be guarded against, namely that marriages not easily be desired with those alien to the Catholic name: for it can scarcely be hoped that souls dissenting about the discipline of religion will be otherwise concordant in other things. Indeed, it is chiefly from this that one perceives that marriages of this sort must be abhorred, because they furnish occasion for forbidden association and communication in sacred things, create danger to the religion of the Catholic spouse, are an impediment to the good instruction of children, and very often impel souls to become accustomed to having equal regard for all religions, the distinction between true and false having been removed."
(17) Cf. Book VI, 1044 and H. A., XIV, 6, end.
- II. Mixed marriages sometimes CAN BECOME LICIT, namely from pontifical dispensation conceded on account of a grave cause, with due cautions moreover being employed and certain conditions being observed. Thus it has been declared many times by the Supreme Pontiffs, and by name by Pius IX in the Instruction promulgated on 15 Nov. 1858.18
PONTIFICAL DISPENSATION is required, since it pertains to the Apostolic See alone to dispense in the general law of the Church.19 - This dispensation, if at times it concedes it through the Congregation of the Holy Office, it concedes only unwillingly, and solely for grave causes, e.g. on account of hope of gaining the non-Catholic family for the faith, or for avoiding scandals.
DUE CAUTIONS must be employed, "namely that a) not only can the Catholic spouse not be perverted by the non-Catholic;20 indeed b) the Catholic spouse himself knows that he is bound, according to his powers, to draw the non-Catholic back from error; but also c) that all offspring of either sex to be procreated from these mixed marriages must altogether be educated in the holiness of the Catholic religion. These cautions indeed can never be remitted or dispensed, since they are founded in the natural and divine law itself, which the Church and the Holy See strive with every zeal to guard whole and intact."21 The required cautions formerly had to be confirmed in writing or even by oath; but today it suffices that there be "such a promise, reduced to an agreement, as furnishes a moral foundation concerning the truth of the execution, so that such execution can prudently be expected;" from the decision of the Holy Office, 30 June 1842.22 - But if, in some places, diocesan Statutes prescribe writing or oath, or even other cautions besides those enumerated, they must be obeyed.
CERTAIN CONDITIONS must be observed, which regard the celebration of matrimony, namely "that these mixed unions be celebrated outside the church, and without the blessing of the pastor, and without any other ecclesiastical rite." - Hence, only passive presence of the pastor is permitted; which ought to be such that he does not assist at the matrimony in a sacred place, nor with vestments which display a sacred rite. Moreover, he ought not recite liturgical prayers over the contracting parties, nor bless them in any way. - Yet it is right for him to question them concerning the will of entering matrimony. But it is not licit to make proclamations of such marriages, as is clear from the Letter of Pius VI to Cardinal de Frankenberg, 13 July 1782.23
But the Church does not urge the observance of these conditions with the highest rigor; for, "if in some places the sacred Prelates know that the same CONDITIONS cannot be fulfilled without graver damages and evils arising from it: in this case only His Holiness commits it to the prudent judgment of the same sacred Prelates, for avoiding greater damages and evils of this sort, that they themselves, with the cautions always saved and firm and most diligently observed..., judge when the commemorated conditions concerning these mixed nuptials to be contracted outside the church and without the blessing of the pastor can in no way be fulfilled; and when, in entering these promiscuous marriages, the custom of employing the rite legitimately prescribed in the diocesan Ritual for marriages to be contracted can be tolerated; yet with the celebration of Mass always excluded, and all the circumstances of things, places, and persons most diligently weighed, and with the conscience of the Prelates themselves burdened concerning the truth and gravity of all the circumstances."24
If ACTIVE assistance of the pastor is judged to be permitted, it can also be tolerated, when circumstances advise it, that the customary PROCLAMATIONS be made, with mention of the religion of the parties to be married being omitted, and that TESTIMONIAL LETTERS be conceded concerning the facts, which state only that nothing, besides the prohibition of the Church, stands in the way of arranging the matrimony, all words being omitted from which suspicion of consent or of any approval could arise.25
And let these things have been said concerning MIXED marriages which have become licit. But since pastors are accustomed to be especially anxious concerning illicit mixed marriages, it comes aptly here to be inquired what must be done in such circumstances.
(18) Acta S. Sedis, vol. VI, 456; and Collect. S. Sed., n. 907. (19) When danger of life is urgent, the Bishop probably can dispense. Cf. Resp. S. Off., 3 Aug. 1873 (Nouvelle Revue theol., XV, 400). (20) Cf. St. Alphonsus, in Trent, sess. 24, n. 18; and Book VI, 56. (21) Cited Instruction of Pius IX. (22) Cf. Feije, n. 568, p. 439, Note. (23) Cf. Bangen, IV, 21; Text ap. Roskovany, de matr. mixt., tom. II, p. 61, docum. 66. (24) Cited Instruction of Pius IX. (25) De Angelis, lib. 4, tit. 1, n. 22.
- Questions. Q. 1. Whether the pastor CAN ASSIST at a mixed matrimony which, on account of defect of dispensation, remains illicit?
Resp. Negatively, speaking regularly: because such assistance is material cooperation toward an illicit act, and therefore prohibited of itself.26 "Nevertheless, if it is recognized that it can yield to the utility of the Church and the common good of souls that nuptials of this sort, however illicit and forbidden, be celebrated before a Catholic pastor rather than before a heretical minister, to whom the parties could easily flee: then the Catholic pastor himself, or another priest acting in his place, will be able to be present at the same nuptials only by material presence, every ecclesiastical rite being excluded, just as if he performed only the parts of a merely qualified witness, as it is commonly called, or one able to authorize."
That is, so that, after hearing the consent of each spouse, afterward according to his office he may record the act validly performed in the book of marriages.1 Likewise, proclamations can be made and testimonial letters conceded, in the manner in which it was said above.2 But the pastor, in this matter, should do nothing without consulting the Bishop.3
Q. 2. What if the spouses also wish to contract before a HERETICAL MINISTER?
Resp. 1. "When civil law commands it, it is not disapproved that the Catholic party together with the heretical party present themselves, before or after matrimony contracted according to the form of Trent, also before a minister addicted to heresy, only to fulfill the civil act, namely that they may be held civilly as honorable spouses, and that the offspring may be judged legitimate."4
"But truly, whenever the heretical minister is regarded as one devoted to sacred things and as performing the office of a pastor, it is NOT LICIT for the Catholic party together with the heretical party to furnish matrimonial consent before such a little minister; because he would be employed to complete a certain religious ceremony, and the Catholic party would associate himself with a heretical rite: whence there would arise a certain implicit adherence to heresy, and consequently an altogether illicit communication in divine things with heretics."5 Wherefore the PASTOR, if the spouses nevertheless wish to express consent before a heretical minister, should abstain from every intervention. - But in these most miserable circumstances, if every scandal can be removed, and a most grave cause accedes, e.g. the danger of concubinage, in those places where the impediment of clandestinity prevails, it seems that passive assistance of the pastor can be permitted.6
"Pastors should know moreover that, if they are questioned by the contracting parties, or if they know certainly that these are going to a heretical minister devoted to sacred things, to furnish matrimonial consent, they cannot be silent; but they are bound to admonish the same spouses concerning the most grave sin which they commit, and concerning the censures which they incur"7 (see n. 1314, 3). - "Nevertheless, for preventing grave evils, if, in some particular case, the pastor has not been questioned by the spouses whether it is licit now to go to the heretical minister; and no explicit declaration is made by the same spouses concerning going to the heretical minister; yet he foresees that they perhaps are going there to renew matrimonial consent, and moreover from the circumstances occurring in the case he foresees that admonition certainly will not be profitable, indeed that it will be harmful, and from this that a material sin is to be turned into formal fault: then LET HIM BE SILENT, scandal however being removed, and provided the other conditions and cautions required by the Church have been duly placed, especially concerning the free exercise of religion to be conceded to the Catholic party, and also concerning all offspring to be educated in the Catholic religion."8 Matrimony in such a case becomes licit, and the spouses, on account of good faith, sin only materially by going to the heretical minister.
"But if finally consent wishes TO BE RENEWED before the pastor after it has already been furnished before a heretical minister, and this is publicly known, or is notified to the pastor by the spouses themselves: the pastor will not be present at this matrimony unless, other things to be observed having been observed as is supposed, the Catholic party, repentant of the deed, after salutary penances have been premised, has first duly obtained absolution from the censures contracted."9 But cautions must be furnished by the spouses also in the external forum, and for this end recourse to the Bishop is required.10
Finally, when the spouses refuse to stand by the prescriptions of the Church, it must be said as concerning the case in which they pertinaciously intend to contract before a heretical minister (see above n. 2).
Note. In certain regions, Bishops obtain the faculty of dispensing their subjects over the said impediment of mixed religion, except Italians, concerning whom it is not established that they have altogether abandoned an Italian domicile.11
(26) Cf. Decr. S. Off., 17 June 1829 (apud Roskovany, IV, p. 87, n. 734). (1) Instruction to the Bishops of Bavaria, 12 Sept. 1834 (ap. Roskovany, de matrim. mixtis, tom. II, p. 291, docum. 205). (2) Konings, II, p. 395. (3) Cf. Council of Prague, year 1860, tit. IV, cap. 12 (Coll. Lacen., V, col. 522). (4) Instr. S. Off. to the Bishop of Hannover, 17 Feb. 1863 (apud Vecchiotti, III, p. 174). (5) Ibid. (6) Feije, de imped. matr., n. 574. (7) Cf. Nouv. Rev. theol., XV, 595. (8) Cited Instr. to the Bishop of Hannover. (9) Ibid.; cf. also Collect. S. Sed., n. 908. (10) Congr. S. Off., 9 March 1881 (apud Konings, edit. 5, tom. 2, p. 425, note 39). (11) Instr. S. C. de Prop. Fide, 30 April 1865 (Acta S. Sed., vol. 2, p. 672).
II. Forbidden Time
- FORBIDDEN or closed TIME, as they say, is an impediment by which "from the first Sunday of Advent up to the day of Epiphany, and from Ash Wednesday up to the Octave of Easter inclusive, the solemnities of nuptials are prohibited."12 The reason of the prohibition is that these solemnities vehemently draw souls away from spiritual things, to which the Christian faithful ought to attend especially in this sacred time: whence it obliges under grave sin of itself (cf. n. 1217, 5).13
But under the name of solemnities are understood: - 1) The blessing of nuptials, which is had in the Mass For the groom and bride: this solemn blessing is prohibited under grave sin. - 2) The solemn leading of the bride into the house of the groom, which namely is done with great pomp and great preparation: in this matter one can also sin gravely, if the solemnities are too immoderate: which is to be judged according to the customs of places, from common sense. - 3) More solemn banquets; but "these are not prohibited under grave sin, unless the excess is great: indeed, if they are done moderately, there will be no fault."14
Therefore by universal law there are NOT PROHIBITED either betrothals, or proclamations, or the celebration of matrimony, with only that blessing employed which is had in the Ritual; nor the leading of the bride itself without solemnities.15 Nevertheless, in some places, the celebration of matrimony, although not solemn, is prohibited by customary law or diocesan law, by which one must stand under grave sin, unless a dispensation of the Bishop intervenes.16 But it is not licit for him, without a special faculty, to permit the solemnities of nuptials, because he cannot dispense, by his own authority, in the universal law of the Church.17
(12) Rit. Rom.; cf. Trent, sess. 24, de ref. matr., cap. 10. (13) Sanchez, De Matrim., L. VII, disp. 7, n. 1. (14) Book VI, 983; H. A., XVIII, 53. (15) Ibid., 984. (16) S. R. C., 14 Aug. 1858 (cf. Gardellini, n. 5275 ad 3). (17) Cf. Benedict XIV, Instit. 80, n. 14, 15.
III. Betrothals
- BETROTHALS validly entered and not legitimately dissolved induce a true and mutual obligation, so that it is no longer licit for either party, against the faith given, to enter another matrimony; although once celebrated, this would be valid. - Recall what was said n. 1952 and 1953.
IV. Simple Vow
- Under the name of VOW, which constitutes a prohibiting impediment of matrimony, comes a simple vow, whether of not marrying, or of preserving chastity, or of entering Religion, or of receiving sacred Orders.
Principles. I. A simple vow is an impediment prohibiting the celebration of matrimony UNDER GRAVE SIN. - The reason is that one contracting with such a vow either directly transgresses it, namely if it is a vow of not marrying, or exposes himself to the proximate danger of transgressing, as is evident: and therefore, since it is a question of a grave obligation, without doubt he sins gravely against the vow. Besides, he sins against justice, because the counterpart not admonished is gravely deceived. To these there is also added the positive declaration of law.18
(18) Cap. Rursus, Qui Clerici vel voventes.
- II. The OBLIGATION of the vow, after matrimony has been illicitly celebrated, IS NOT REMOVED, except insofar as its fulfillment has been made morally impossible. - The reason: because on the one hand no one ought to report advantage from his own malice, but on the other no one can be held to the impossible.
Hence: 1. He who enters matrimony, disregarding a vow of NOT MARRYING, or consummates matrimony, disregarding a vow of virginity alone, indeed sins gravely; but now he is held to nothing further, since the vow has been made simply impossible.
He who, after spurning a vow of CHASTITY, contracts matrimony, is held to all those things which can be observed in the conjugal state, namely: - 1) He cannot ask the debt, unless charity toward the counterpart placed in danger of incontinence advises it; but generally he can render it, because the right of the spouse asking prevails. But - 2) He cannot render when the counterpart does not have the right of asking, namely in the first two-month period, unless the matrimony has already been consummated: for once it has been consummated, he is bound to render, provided the spouse has not lost the right of asking for another cause, e.g. on account of adultery or incest. - 3) When the counterpart has died, he cannot hasten to new nuptials. But if, during matrimony, he commits adultery, by this very fact he also becomes guilty of violation of the vow.19
He who after emitting a vow of ENTERING RELIGION contracts matrimony, is held to the following: - 1) Within the first two-month period conceded for deliberating, he cannot consummate the matrimony, either by asking or by rendering the debt, but is bound to enter Religion. - 2) After the two-month period has elapsed, the obligation of the vow still endures, if the counterpart, whose will must be seriously explored, is willing to consent to its execution; but if the counterpart does not consent, he can not only render the debt, but also ask it. - 3) If the counterpart loses the right of asking perpetually, or consents to the observance of the vow, or has died, the obligation of the vow revives, unless perhaps the circumstances have been so changed that the vow now ceases intrinsically, e.g. if the one vowing has now grown old. If the vow had been of entrance into an Institute where simple vows are emitted, the obligation would comprehend only those things which we have just said under 3).
He who enters matrimony after emitting a vow of RECEIVING SACRED ORDERS can use matrimony, both by asking and by rendering the debt; but he is bound to fulfill the vow, if the counterpart consents, or if she has died, or if she has lost the right of asking perpetually.
Note. The things said concerning the fulfillment of a vow after contracted matrimony indeed hold of themselves, and in the rigor of law; but IN PRACTICE, for the most part, it will be more advisable that recourse be had to DISPENSATION.
(19) Feije, n. 559.
- IT IS ASKED. Who can DISPENSE from the aforesaid vows?
Resp. 1. If the vow is not reserved to the Pope, e.g. a vow of not marrying or of receiving sacred Orders, the Bishop, by ordinary right, can dispense for a just cause.
Resp. 2. If the vow is reserved to the Pope, as is a vow of perfect chastity and a vow of entering Religion strictly so called, provided all the conditions for reservation are verified, one must distinguish: - 1) Before matrimony, the Bishop cannot dispense by ordinary right, unless there is danger in delay, and easy recourse to the Pontiff is not open (cf. n. 645, q. 2). - 2) After matrimony has been contracted, he can dispense from a vow of chastity, in order to asking the debt, since this faculty is conferred on Bishops by force of custom, which furnishes jurisdiction, from cap. Cum contingat, de foro competenti.20 - Nevertheless, in a vow of chastity which spouses have emitted by mutual consent, the Pope alone can dispense, as Authors commonly teach.21
What Regular Confessors can do from privilege, see n. 2191, 2.
Note. There is a sufficient CAUSE for obtaining dispensation or commutation in a vow of chastity, or in a vow of entering religion, "if someone on account of grave temptation is in probable danger even of one fall, because through one fall chastity is already lost."22 - Likewise, if someone has violated a girl by force, or seduced a woman by promise of matrimony; if a girl, bereft of her father, has been left with a very poor mother, and can lead life only from her own labor and with difficulty; if the same, bereft of her mother, has a father who vehemently presses, grows angry, and impels her to nuptials, so that to live with him, unless she obeys, becomes most hard; if the one vowing labors under a disease which, by the counsel of physicians, cannot be met by other medicines, and it is more certain to use the remedy of matrimony, etc.23
(20) Book VI, 987; H. A., XVIII, 54. (21) Ibid., 986. (22) Ibid., 1143. (23) Planchard, Disp. matrim., n. 429.