At least according to Wikipedia this schism comes from 1964. My understanding of the hereditary succession earlier is similar to Fr Ambrose's.


Yes, but I think we're not sure whether they were not obliged to continence.

Rev. Father,

The Roman Deacon has faculties to bless; so do some non-byzantine EC deacons. It's an automatic faculty in the Roman church; it's a specific additional faculty in some EC churches.

In the case you extracted, the deacon isn't appointed on a case-by-case, but has general and standing faculties to perform weddings.

If no priest (Catholic or Orthodox) is available, however, it's licit, since any two witnesses can stand in, but still not blessed. Next priest they see, it gets blessed, that gets annotated, and the sacrament is fulfilled in completeness and fully licit.

I personally know of a case of where 2 Bezpopovtsy were received back into the Church, their marriage by their Starosta was regularized by the priest with a simple prayer and blessing at the front of the Church after Liturgy.

Alexandr

The CCEO which speaks of a bishop or priest being "present" and "blessing" a marriage is using weasel words since it quite obscures the fact that the priest is the minister of the marriage. Perhaps the intention is the eventual eradication of the Eastern theology which requires a priest not as a witness nor as a "blessor" but as the necessary minister? Thus Eastern matrimonial theology would be displaced by Western.

A deacon can no more officiate at a marriage than he can change bread and wine at a Eucharist or give absolution in Confession.

Goodness, the Eschaton is upon us! Father Ambrose and I agree.

The CCEO is a general canonical text written by the Roman Church generalizing for ALL Eastern Churches - Byzantine, Oriental, Assyrian, etc.

The particular autonomous Catholic Churches are supposed to come up with their own Canons which pertain to their specifics, which update, correct, or omit the generalizations within the CCEO.

That is very gracious of you, Stuart, but let's not make it a precedent!!

When an Eastern Catholic and a Roman Catholic are "married" by a deacon, an annulment will issue, as there is not a valid marriage.

However, those in an invalid marriage are not generally seen as fornicators.



Given that the marriage by a Roman Catholic deacon wouldn't be valid, I don't see how this possibly could be . . .




China

hawk