§ 1. On The Revalidation Of Matrimony Through New Consent

2083. Rule 1. If the impediment obstructing validity is known to EACH party, the matrimony must be revalidated through consent to be expressed in act by each party. For in this case, there is had not so much a revalidation as a simple celebration, although secret.

Rule 2. If the impediment is known to only ONE party, and cannot be REVEALED to the other without danger of grave damage, the party conscious of the impediment is to be admonished concerning consent necessarily but secretly to be renewed with the putative spouse, the other party having been made more certain concerning the nullity of the prior consent, but so cautiously that this one's delict is nowhere detected. This Manner furnishes every security concerning the value of the Sacrament, since both parties, now made capable through dispensation, knowingly emit a new consent, and one independent from the prior consent: wherefore this is especially to be desired.

But renewal of consent can be sought by the conscious party speaking thus to the coparty: "when I married, I did not have true consent; now I wish to furnish it: do you also wish to furnish it?" or: "the confessor told me that my consent was not duly furnished; come, let us now renew it mutually."⁶ No one does not see that the aforesaid making-more-certain generally has much difficulty and is full of dangers. And hence it is why the S. Penitentiary, a great difficulty standing, no longer urges the matter, as is gathered from the following rule.

Rule 3. If the impediment is known to only ONE party, and the other party cannot be MADE MORE CERTAIN concerning the nullity of the matrimony without grave danger, this making-more-certain can be omitted, and the matrimony revalidated, "consent having been renewed, according to the rules handed down by approved authors." - Thus from the style which today the S. Penitentiary commonly observes in conceding faculties.⁷

A manner of this kind is if the conscious party says: "I am troubled by scruples concerning the value of our matrimony, and therefore let us renew consent"; or: "for my consolation I wish to contract anew; come, let us contract"; or: "out of my love toward you I take you as spouse, do you not also in turn?"

Indeed, if none of these manners seemed to have to be employed, the consent of the conscious party expressed through conjugal intercourse would suffice, with the consent of the other virtually enduring. For that consent furnished with an impediment was naturally valid, and lacked its proper effect only on account of the obstacle; therefore, the obstacle having been removed and the consent of the other acceding, the consent becomes mutual, and the matrimony is convalidated.⁸

Nor does it obstruct that here use is made of a probable opinion concerning the value of the Sacrament; for: 1) in a case of urgent necessity, this is licit according to the things said in n. 82 and n. 1407; 2) there is question here of matter in which the Church can supply, and, a just cause standing, certainly supplies: which will be clearer from the things soon to be said.