DOCTRINE AND PRINCIPLES OF THE CHURCH ON MARRIAGE

My very dear Brethren,

The agitation now being carried on from one end oi Country to the other on the question of marriage, the mor less violent articles appearing în several Protestant newspap against the wise and beneficient, vet evidentlv ill-understo

legt- lation of the Catholic Church and the deductions gatlh Le]

from a recent judgment of the civil courts, impose upon Ethink, the duty to raise my voice, not, however, for the

pose of discussing or trving to interpret the text of human | but in order once more to solemnly affirm the ever immut principles of our faith touching the august sacrament of :

riage, as well as the <acred legislation of the Church.

neither jurists" theses nor the findings of civil tribuna ever they may be, can ever abrogate or modiiv. When the nations. abandoning all notions of Christia:

introduced the law of divorce into their codes, thus arrog

to themselves the right to sever the « mjugal tie and pret ing to Separate man and wife who had been united for lit Church replied: * You may enact all the laws you wish before God and before conscience the indissolubilit

marriage tie can never be called into question for the r

that an older and superior law to vours wül continue ta

Ave lim nas 1 that Pet PL POP 4 SEE RUNQIE CAlS UNIT {O0 NC CTI Of Tite, ‘those whom Go

joined together let no man put asunder

lherefore, if governments make laws for the valid and legimate celebration of imarriage, and if these laws ontradict hose of the Church, the latter can in no way be à rected, for

the reason that the faithful and all those to whom the laws of

he Church apply will remain loval unless they want to be

eXcluded from her sacred juridiction It is true that the law the Church does not abrogate that of the state, but it is also rue that in no possible manner does the law of the State inringe upon the law of the Church. My very dear brethren, credit will be given that we Catho- S take the greatest care not to intertere in anv way with the soveérnment, the discipline and the internal direction of Protant churches, consequenté we have the right to ask those 4 ho do not share our religious belicf to respect our laws and Ur traditions and not to favor the action of Catholics carried Way by passion and Who forget their most sacre duties to the hurch. ave we ever seen à Catholic pricst, even if requestto do so, celebrate the marriage of two persons belonging other than the Roman Catholic faith? No, indeed. and this M never be seen. If Protestant ministers had acted in this anner and if they had declined te celebrated the Marriage of prudent and guilté Catholics upon the Simple presentation a CHNIT permit, often Without making enquiries as to age an M Ation, We would never have had to deplore these scandals. hich so greatlv trouble out socicty, excité popular passions il create the most déplorable dissensions in the community. We would never see couples, unitel in spite of the strict orlances of their Church, come when discord arises, admit ir error to the religious authority whose jurisdiction they ist claim, and ask that the law to which they have never sed to be submitted, hall be applied.

\Vhat is the case, my very dear brethern, around which so

many violent discussions are heard at the present time = |:

a verv simple one. Two Catholics attempt to contract tar rage in the presence of à Protestant minister. vet at the sum time they must have known the law of their Church on suc} matters. Flere is that law.

Only those marriages are valid which are contracted beton the parish priest, or the Ordinary of the place, or à prices delegated by either of these, and ai least two witnesses.

Fo be complete and in order to show ‘he <olicitude an th charts of the Church, in the exercise of her supreme authorits we must add what follows: "When danger of death is inuni nent, and where the parish priest, or the Ordinary of the plac or a priest delegated by either of these, cannot be had. in order to provide for the relief of conscience, and (should the ca require 11) for the legitimation of the offspring, a Mar riagn may be contracted validé and licitlé before am priest am EWO Witriesses,

“Should it happen that in any district the pari<h, priest or th Ordinarv of the place, or a priest delegated bv either of them. before whom marriage can be celebrated, is not to be had. ani that this condition of affairs has lasted for à month. IMATT AL ax be validis, and licitly entered upon by the formal deck ration of consent made by the contracting parties in the sence of tWo Witnesses, ”

But let it be noticed, my very dear brethren, that these lan

sacern Roman Catholics alone. * Non-Catholics. be baptized or not, in contracting marriage are in no war hell to observe the Catholic form of engagement and marriag:

So here is this Ve T'emere decree with hich a seare has bec:

rcated throughout the land, and which they represent attempt to destrov the peace of families and the libert

HISCICHICC, Aiarriage, therefvre, ceiebrated outside th

fl l t ha :

ni saine À n su E É betore # Fa bprics! L:

FA E | tlu à horits Hi pacte order À Le «is ä rriag Ë | È t ain] tu then 1, ati :

rrAgt !

CC Lu la

re

essential conditions is consequently null b the fact both as regards conscience and religion. It is a very easy thing, however, to render such a union valid. as they have only to present themselves before a compétent minister. They, however, refuse either one or the other or L th. and the case is submitted to the ordinary of the diocese. The latter has but one sentence to render, and that is to declare the marriage invalid according to the canon law. There is no question of annulling a contract, for this word is often err meously employed. It is the state which pretends to annul sometimes the sacred contract of marriage in Pronouncing à divorce, which the church reproves, and reprove she will always. In the present case there was no real contract for the reason that there was no sacrament. This, my very dear brethren. is the legislation of the Roman Catholie Church for ever, country in the world, and n6 bishop could rule otherwise.

That this legislation is reasonable. and that it finds support on motives of the vers highest order. no one can deny, for be t remembered that marriage is not a simple contract submittel as in the case of al other contracts to the jurisdiction of the civil Power.

Of course, it interests, the civil authority, for in founding the family it maintains and perpetuates that society of which the state is the natural representative, but it interests above all the ecclesiastical power. for. as Leo XIII has said

Marriage has God for its author. It has been from the first ! tepresentation of the Incarnation of the Word. There exists, therefore, in Marriage a religious character not added, but inborn, and which is not the effect of human conventions ‘hich flows from its VCTY nature since also in the case of

Christians, it has been raised bv Jesus Christ to the dignity af

4 sacrament,

As marriage, adds the same Pontiff, is in the essence of it nature and in itself sacred, its government shall necessarily be regulated, not by the authority of secular princes, but by tin divine authority of the cherch, which alone possesses, tin direction of sacred things.

For Christians to make a distinction between the contract an

the sacrament would be à grave error, The sacrament is ms

a simple religious ceremony performed in order to sanctifv th contract. The contract and the sacrament constitute but on act : the sacramental contract. Marriage, therefore lik. all the other sacraments, belongs to the church and consequen tly it belongs to the chureh to direct everv thing that concern the validity of marriage. fix the conditions by which it tak: place, to preside at its celebration to legislate upon the impeil: ments thereto and to judge as to its nullitv. Such was the do trine of the Catholic chureh 5e: the Protestant reformatio and such will it be for all time. If, however our separat brethren have rejected it, 5f they have made marriage a simpi contract submitted Hike all others to the civil power which ma be dissolved or governed at its will, let them at least allow to remain faithful to our traditions and in the name of th hberty which they claim for themselves, let them permit u: : act according to the convictions of our faith.

And now returning to a point touched upon a moment ag What effect can the ecclesiastical law have with regard tot civil laws pronouncing null from à religious point of vie marriage which these laws. holding canonical impediment: be of no account, consider as being legal as it happens in ma countries and in the greater part of Canada? Of no eft whatever. The Catholics declared free, in conscience w: always be on account of à guilty or thoughtless act, under :

effect of the civil law and its consequences, This, of cour

San Unfortunate conflict but one in which the church shares no responsibility. Such a conilict may present itself and with Ntreme gravitv when two Catholics who. validly married before the church, would dare demand à divorce from the civil power and should afterwards contract a second union according to the formal exXacted and recognized as sufficient bv the state. Could & e church accept a second marriage as valid and legitimate? Most certainly not, In the province of Quebec, my dear brethren, we possess civil laws on the question of Marriage and we know the origin, the history and the spirit which inspired these laws. Their authors, in framing them, evidentiv desired while respecting the beliefs of the several religious denominations established here, to protect the belief and the laws of the Catholie church, In fact the generally admitted jurispurdence gave to us this conviction. We believe that these law la for Catholic citizens the impediments = considered Li the Catholic church, and as a secret marriage is one of these impediments we deduced naturally that a clandes- Une Marriage between Catholics. viz., contracted otherwise than before their proper priest would be null from a religious point of view and equally so in the eves of the civil law. The tribunals have, however, decided otherwise. That decision lolowing others in à contrary sense i4 not final of course, but it brings to our knowledge the fact that we are exposed to sceimg the articles of our civil code inter preted diverselv. Be this

it may time will throw light on the exact sense of these wtücles. Some would like à umiform law on the marriage juestion and the law which thev would like to see enacted

ould absolutelv ignore th prescriptions of the Catholic

hurch. Whatever happens my very dear brethren, the holy

£ Fe 1:51 iws of the church, an the marri C ft, iiKe O

points of doctrine, will always continue to bind the conscience

PU ci eee LT)

mi es

of its children and these alone in the eves of the church will be worthy of the title of husband and wife who will have con. tracted a marriage according to her forms and rulings. In a word, all the parliaments in the world will be powerless against the work of God and for us marriage will never cease keep its venerable and sacred character and as such will remain subject to the direction and decisions of the church. When St. Paul wrote to the faithful in Galatians in order t

strengthen their faith which certain doctrinaires were attemp

ing to shake, he said: * [f any man preach any other gospel

unto you besides that which vou have received let him be ana thema. For T give vou to understand that the gospel which 1: preached by me is not according to man. For neither did | receive it of men, nor did 1 learn it but by the revelation oi Jesus Christ.

My very dear brethren, 1 also can affirm to you that the teaching which F give vou does not comme from men but from the church of Christ and her infallible direction. Receive it. therefore, with faith and respect and be penetrated with thi. faith in your every thought and act; if the occasion requires constitute vourselves its courageous defenders because thi< is the truth of which the Scripture speaks to us. ‘* Th truth of the Lord is eternal, ”

CTRCULATRE

DE

C0 CES | AD l A »

A Le :

MG: L'ARCHEVÈQUE DE MONTRÉAL d st AU toy 7 ‘ # CLERGÉ DE SON DIOCËSE ll E a E { Archevêché de Montréal.

? : | le 28 février 1912.

el 4 1 Mes chers collaborateurs, É 1- % . . . . , .

Les discussions soulevées dans la presse à la suite d’un jugement de la Cour civile, demandaient, sans retard, une affirma t . , . . FEES .

4 tion solennelle de la doctrine et des principes de l'Eglise ca- 4 tholique sur le mariage, : É C'est la raison de l'allocution que j'ai prononcée dimanche n 4 > à dernier dans la cathédrale, t. 4 ne À Fe à Je crois répondre à votre désir en vous adressant cette allo- LS # :

E cution.

LA

Quoique les journaux l'aient publiée, vous pouvez, cepen-

dant, en faire le sujet d'une instruction à vos fidèles qui ne

sauraient être trop éclairés sur cette importante question.

4 Agréez, mes chers collaborateurs, l'assurance de mes senti- 4 ments les plus dévoués en Notre-Scigneur.

ŸT PAUL, aRCH. DE MONTRÉAL.