THE TRUTH OF MARRIAGE
Marriage in its flesh and blood realities can be gleaned from cases submitted to a Church court for resolution. From this perspective, the truth of marriage is to be ferreted out from the messy, if not unknown, elements of the contested matrimonial bond. The judge has much to say on the matter. As a minister of ecclesiastical justice, he is supposed to know the real meaning of marriage, to be faithful to the application of the law to the case at bar, as well as true to the standard practices of the Tribunals of the Holy See.
In the recent Papal Allocation to the Tribunal of the Roman Rota delivered last 27 January 2007, Pope Benedict XVI strongly reminded the judges of their serious mission to always uphold the truth of marriage as handed down by the revered Tradition and Magisterium of the Church in the resolution of matrimonial cases. He said: “In this perspective, the love of truth emerges as a point of convergence between procedural research and the pastoral service of the person. We must not forget, however, that in causes of the nullity of marriage, the legal truth presupposes the “truth of the marriage” itself” (“Address of His Holiness Benedict XVI to the Members of the Tribunal of the Roman Rota, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2007).
Needless to say any Church judge is to approach every case with a pastoral bias. But this pastoral concern of the judge for the parties under litigation should not in any way compromise the objective truth of marriage. In judging the minister of justice should be reminded of the Church doctrine that states: “The indissolubility of marriage does not derive from the definitive commitment of those who contract it but is intrinsic in the nature of the “powerful bond established by the Creator” (John Paul II, Catechesis, General Audience 21 November 1979, n. 2; ORE, 26 November 1979, p, 1). People who contract marriage must be definitively committed to it because marriage is such in the plan of creation and of redemption. And the essential juridical character of marriage is inherent precisely in this bond which represents for the man and for the woman a requirement of justice and love from which, for their good and for the good of all, they may not withdraw without contradicting what God Himself has wrought within them.”
In contested marriage, the judge is confronted with a matrimonial bond that is lived out in flesh and blood by the man and woman who freely bound themselves as husband and wife. Christian marriage is indissoluble. This is a property that is essential to marriage; without it there will be no genuine Christian marriage. It is lived out by the husband and the wife who effected the matrimonial bond by the acts of their will. Faced with the traditional doctrine of the Church on marriage and the realities at hand, the judge who is a minister of justice of the Church, should take into account that the totality of the truth of marriage, indissolubility of marriage included, is something given. It has to be defended at all cost.
Meantime, the Pope observed that within the modern cultural context which is marked by relativism and juridical positivism, marriage can conveniently be manipulated by the couple. In fact, there are groups who arbitrarily declare that the union of husband and wife is a mere social formalization of emotional ties. As such marriage is believed to be based on the subjective will of the couple. After all marriage, so they say, as established by the Church as an intima communitas vitae et amoris”, the intimate partnership of life and love (cf. GS 48), is an “ideal” to which “normal Christians” are not bound to follow. Eventually the theory leads to a denial of the existence of an indissoluble conjugal bond.
The Pope raised his fears that such a dangerous trend may influence the attitude of Church judges. In the name of , if not in the guise of, pastoral concern, the judge may be led to the false assumption that for the good of the persons concerned the process of the declaration of matrimonial nullity is merely a legal means to achieve subjective claims, a sort of “regularization” of an irregular relationship of a given husband and wife. With that assumption the judge can easily be misled to that posture of not considering anymore the objective validity or nullity of his/her/marriage which seriously look into the truth of his/her personal status . As the Pope himself put it: “We must not forget, however, that in causes of the nullity of marriage, the legal truth presupposes the “truth of the marriage” itself.
In truth, it is God who created man as male and female. As such He gave them the power to unite forever those natural and complementary dimensions of their persons. As Jesus put it: “What therefore God has joined together, let no man put asunder”. St. Augustine in his commentary on St. Paul’s instruction regarding the juridical relationship between husband and wife, made this bold declaration: “The Apostle attributes so much of a right to this fidelity (of the covenant of marriage) that he calls it a power, saying ‘a wife does not have power over her own body but rather her husband does, likewise a husband does not have power over his body, but rather his wife does’] (De Bono Coniugali, 4, 4).
Hence, the indissolubility of marriage is not based on the subjective commitment of those who contract it. It is intrinsic in the nature of marriage bond itself as established by the Creator” (John Paul II, Catechesis, General Audience 21 November 1979, n. 2; ORE, 26 November 1979, p, 1).
People who contract marriage must be definitively committed to it because marriage is such in the plan of creation and of redemption. And the essential juridical character of marriage is inherent precisely in this bond which represents for the man and for the woman a requirement of justice and love from which, for their good and for the good of all, they may not withdraw without contradicting what God Himself has wrought within them.
In the recent Papal Allocation to the Tribunal of the Roman Rota delivered last 27 January 2007, Pope Benedict XVI strongly reminded the judges of their serious mission to always uphold the truth of marriage as handed down by the revered Tradition and Magisterium of the Church in the resolution of matrimonial cases. He said: “In this perspective, the love of truth emerges as a point of convergence between procedural research and the pastoral service of the person. We must not forget, however, that in causes of the nullity of marriage, the legal truth presupposes the “truth of the marriage” itself” (“Address of His Holiness Benedict XVI to the Members of the Tribunal of the Roman Rota, Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2007).
Needless to say any Church judge is to approach every case with a pastoral bias. But this pastoral concern of the judge for the parties under litigation should not in any way compromise the objective truth of marriage. In judging the minister of justice should be reminded of the Church doctrine that states: “The indissolubility of marriage does not derive from the definitive commitment of those who contract it but is intrinsic in the nature of the “powerful bond established by the Creator” (John Paul II, Catechesis, General Audience 21 November 1979, n. 2; ORE, 26 November 1979, p, 1). People who contract marriage must be definitively committed to it because marriage is such in the plan of creation and of redemption. And the essential juridical character of marriage is inherent precisely in this bond which represents for the man and for the woman a requirement of justice and love from which, for their good and for the good of all, they may not withdraw without contradicting what God Himself has wrought within them.”
In contested marriage, the judge is confronted with a matrimonial bond that is lived out in flesh and blood by the man and woman who freely bound themselves as husband and wife. Christian marriage is indissoluble. This is a property that is essential to marriage; without it there will be no genuine Christian marriage. It is lived out by the husband and the wife who effected the matrimonial bond by the acts of their will. Faced with the traditional doctrine of the Church on marriage and the realities at hand, the judge who is a minister of justice of the Church, should take into account that the totality of the truth of marriage, indissolubility of marriage included, is something given. It has to be defended at all cost.
Meantime, the Pope observed that within the modern cultural context which is marked by relativism and juridical positivism, marriage can conveniently be manipulated by the couple. In fact, there are groups who arbitrarily declare that the union of husband and wife is a mere social formalization of emotional ties. As such marriage is believed to be based on the subjective will of the couple. After all marriage, so they say, as established by the Church as an intima communitas vitae et amoris”, the intimate partnership of life and love (cf. GS 48), is an “ideal” to which “normal Christians” are not bound to follow. Eventually the theory leads to a denial of the existence of an indissoluble conjugal bond.
The Pope raised his fears that such a dangerous trend may influence the attitude of Church judges. In the name of , if not in the guise of, pastoral concern, the judge may be led to the false assumption that for the good of the persons concerned the process of the declaration of matrimonial nullity is merely a legal means to achieve subjective claims, a sort of “regularization” of an irregular relationship of a given husband and wife. With that assumption the judge can easily be misled to that posture of not considering anymore the objective validity or nullity of his/her/marriage which seriously look into the truth of his/her personal status . As the Pope himself put it: “We must not forget, however, that in causes of the nullity of marriage, the legal truth presupposes the “truth of the marriage” itself.
In truth, it is God who created man as male and female. As such He gave them the power to unite forever those natural and complementary dimensions of their persons. As Jesus put it: “What therefore God has joined together, let no man put asunder”. St. Augustine in his commentary on St. Paul’s instruction regarding the juridical relationship between husband and wife, made this bold declaration: “The Apostle attributes so much of a right to this fidelity (of the covenant of marriage) that he calls it a power, saying ‘a wife does not have power over her own body but rather her husband does, likewise a husband does not have power over his body, but rather his wife does’] (De Bono Coniugali, 4, 4).
Hence, the indissolubility of marriage is not based on the subjective commitment of those who contract it. It is intrinsic in the nature of marriage bond itself as established by the Creator” (John Paul II, Catechesis, General Audience 21 November 1979, n. 2; ORE, 26 November 1979, p, 1).
People who contract marriage must be definitively committed to it because marriage is such in the plan of creation and of redemption. And the essential juridical character of marriage is inherent precisely in this bond which represents for the man and for the woman a requirement of justice and love from which, for their good and for the good of all, they may not withdraw without contradicting what God Himself has wrought within them.
posted by leonardo medroso @ 11:28 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home