Denzinger EN 3346
[From a Decree of the Holy Office, August 21, 1901]
The Archbishop of Utrecht * relates:
3356 Dz 1977 "Many medical doctors in hospitals and elsewhere in cases of necessity are accustomed to baptize infants in their mother's wombs with water mixed with hydrargyrus bichloratus corrosives (in French: chloride de mercure). This water is compounded approximately of a solution of one part of this chloretus hydrargicus in a thousand parts of water, and with this solution of water the potion is poisonous. Now the reason why they use this mixture is that the womb of the mother may not be infected with disease."
Therefore the questions:
I. Is a baptism administered with such water certainly or dubiously valid ?
II. Is it permitted to avoid all danger of disease to administer the sacrament of baptism with such water?
III. Is it permitted also to use this water when pure water can be applied without any danger of disease?
The answers are (with the approbation of Leo Xlll):
To I. This will be answered in. II
To II. It is permitted when real danger of disease is present.
To III. No.
[From the Encyclical, "Mirae caritatis," May 28, 1902]
3361 Dz 1978 Away then with that widespread and most pernicious error on the part of those who express the opinion that the reception of the Eucharist is for the most part assigned to those who, free of cares and narrow in mind, decide to rest at ease in some kind of a more religious life. For this sacrament (and there is none certainly more excellent or more conducive to salvation than this) pertains to absolutely all, of whatever office or pre-eminence they are, as many as wish (and no one ought not to wish this) to foster within themselves that life of divine grace, whose final end is the attainment of the blessed life with God.
[From the Encyclical, "Ad diem," February 2, 1904]
3370 1978a As the result of this participation between Mary and Christ in the sorrows and the will, she deserved most worthily to be made the restorer of the lost world," * and so the dispenser of all the gifts which Jesus procured for us by His death and blood. . . . Since she excels all in sanctity, and by her union with Christ and by her adoption by Christ for the work of man's salvation, she merited for us de congruo, as they say, what Christ merited de condigno, and is the first minister of the graces to be bestowed.
[From the Response of the Biblical Commission, February 13, 1905]
The question:
3372 Dz 1979
Whether to solve difficulties that occur in some texts of Holy Scripture, which seem to present historical facts, it is permitted the Catholic exegete to state that it is a matter in these texts of the tacit or implicit citation of a document written by an author who was not inspired, all the assertions of which the inspired author does not at all intend to approve or to make his own, and which therefore cannot be held to be immune from errors?
The answer (with the approbation of Pius X):
In the negative, except in the case where, preserving the sense and judgment of the Church, it is proved by strong arguments: I) that the sacred writer really is citing the words or documents of another, and 2) that he does not approve the same nor make them his own, so that it is rightly decided that he is not speaking in his own name.
[From the reply of the Biblical Commission, June 23, 1905]
The question:
3373 Dz 1980
Whether the opinion can be admitted as aprinciple of sound exegesis, which holds that the books of Sacred Scripture which are held to be historical, either in whole or in part sometimes do not narrate history properly so called and truly objective, but present an appearance of history only, to signify something different from the properly literal and historical significance of the words?
The answer(with the approbation of Pius X) :
In the negative, except in the case, however, not readily or rashly to be admitted, where without opposing the sense of the Church and preserving its judgment, it is proved with strong arguments that the sacred writer did not wish to put down true history, and history properly socalled, but to set forth, under the appearance and form of history a parable, an allegory, or some meaning removed from the properly literal or historical significance of the words.
[From the Decree of the Congregation of the Holy Council, approved by Pius X December 20th, 1905]
3375 Dz 1981 The desire (indeed) of Jesus Christ and of the Church, that all the faithful of Christ approach the sacred banquet daily, is especially important in this, that the faithful of Christ being joined with God through the sacrament may receive strength from it to restrain wantonness, to wash away the little faults that occur daily, and to guard against more grievous sins to which human frailty is subject; but not principally that consideration be given to the honor and veneration of God, nor that this be for those who partake of it a reward or recompense for their virtues. Therefore, the Sacred Council of Trent calls the Eucharist, "an antidote, by which we are freed from daily faults and are preserved from mortal sins" [see n. 875 ]
3376 Dz 1982 Because of the plague of Jansenism, which raged on all sides, disputes began to arise regarding the dispositions with which frequent and daily communion should be approached, and some more than others demanded greater and more difficult dispositions as necessary. Such discussions brought it about that very few were held worthy to partake daily of the most blessed Eucharist, and to draw the fuller effects from so saving a sacrament, the rest being content to be renewed either once a year or every month, or at most once a week. Such a point of severity was reached that entire groups were excluded from frequenting the heavenly table, for example, merchants, or thosewho had been joined in matrimony.
3378 Dz 1983 In these matters the Holy See was not remiss in its proper duty [see n. 1147 ff. and1313]. . . . Nevertheless, the poison of Jansenism, which had infected even the souls of the good, under the appearance of honor and veneration due to the Eucharist, has by no means entirely disappeared. The question about the dispositions for frequenting communion rightly and lawfully has survived the declarations of the Holy See, as a result of which it has happened that some theologians even of good name rarely, and after laying down many conditions, have decided that daily communion can be permitted the faithful.
Dz 1984 . . . But His Holiness, since it is especially dear to him that the Christian people be invited to the sacred banquet very frequently and even daily, and so gain possession of its most ample fruits, has committed the aforesaid question to this sacred Order to be examined and defined.
[Hence the Congregation of the Holy Council on the 16th day of December, 1905] made the following decisions and declarations:
3379 Dz 1985 I. Let frequent and daily communion . . . be available to all Christians of every order or condition, so that no one, who is in the state of grace and approaches the sacred table with a right and pious mind, may be prevented from this.
3380 Dz 1986 2. Moreover, right mind is in this, that he who approaches the sacred table, indulges not through habit, or vanity, or human reasonings, but wishes to satisfy the pleasure of God, to be joined with Him more closely in charity and to oppose his infirmities and defects with that divine remedy.
3381 Dz 1987 3. Although it is especially expedient that those who practice frequent and daily communion be free from venial sins, at least those completely deliberate, and of their effect, it is enough, nevertheless, that they be free from mortal sins, with the resolution that they will never sin in the future. . . .
3382 Dz 1988 4. . . Care must be taken that careful preparation for Holy Communion precede, and that actions befitting the graces follow thereafter according to the strength, condition, and duties of each one.
3383 Dz 1989 5. . . Let the counsel of the confessor intercede. Yet let confessors beware lest they turn anyone away from frequent or daily communion, who is found in the state of grace and approaches (it) with a right mind. . . .
Dz 1990 9. . . Finally, after the promulgation of this decree, let all ecclesiastical writers abstain from any contentious disputation about dispositions for frequent and daily communion.
[From the Decree of Pius X, "Provide sapientique," Jan. 18, 1906]
3385 Dz 1991 1. In the entire German Empire today let the chapter, Tametsi, of the Council of Trent [see n. 990 ff.], although in many places it has not yet been definitely promulgated and introduced by manifest publication or by lawful observance, nevertheless henceforth from the feast day of Easter (i.e., from the 15th day of April) of this year 1906, bind all Catholics, even those up to now immune from observing the Tridentine form, so that they cannot celebrate a valid marriage between one another except in the presence of the parish priest and two or three witnesses [cf. n. 2066 ff.].
3386 Dz 1992 2. Mixed marriages, which are contracted by Catholics with heretics or schismatics, are and remain firmly prohibited, unless, when a just and weighty canonical reason is added, and lawful cautions have been given on both sides, honestly and formally, a dispensation has been duly obtained from the impediment of the mixed religion by the Catholic party. These marriages, to be sure, although a dispensation has been procured, are by all means to be celebrated in the sight of the Church, in the presence of a priest and two or three witnesses, so much so that they sin gravely who contract them in the presence of a non-Catholic minister, or in the presence of only a civil magistrate, or in any clandestine manner. Moreover, if any Catholics in celebrating these marriages seek and accept the service of a non-Catholic minister, they commit another sin and are subject to canonical censures.
3387 Dz 1993 Nevertheless, mixed marriages in certain provinces and localities of the German Empire, even in those which according to the decisions of the Roman Congregations have thus far been subject to the definitely invalidating force of the chapter Tametsi,already contracted without preserving the Tridentine form or (and, may God forbid this) to be contracted in the future, provided no other canonical impediment stands in the way, and no decision of nullity because of the impediment of clan destinity has been lawfully passed before the feast day of Easter of this year, and the mutual consent of the spouses has persevered up to the said day, these mixed marriages we wish to be upheld as entirely valid, and We declare, define, and decree this expressly.
3388 Dz 1994 3. Moreover, that a safe norm may be at hand for ecclesiastical judges, We declare, decide, and decree this same (pronouncement), and under the same conditions and restrictions, with regard to non-Catholic marriages, whether of heretics or of schismatics, thus far contracted between themselves in the same regions without preserving the Tridentine formula, or hereafter to be contracted; so that, if one or both of the non Catholic spouses should be converted to the Catholic faith, or controversy should occur in an ecclesiastical court regarding the validity of the marriage of two non-Catholics, which is bound up with the question of the validity of the marriage contracted or to be contracted by some Catholic, these same marriages, all other things being equal, are similarly to be held as entirely valid.
[From the Encyclical, "Vehementer nos.,, to the clergy and people of France, February 11, 1906]
Dz 1995 We, in accord with the supreme authority which We hold from God, disprove and condemn the established law which separates the French state from the Church, for those reasons which We have set forth: because it inflicts the greatest injury upon God whom it solemnly rejects, declaring in the beginning that the state is devoid of any religious worship; because it violates the natural law, international law, and public trust in treaties; because it is contrary to the divine constitution of the Church and to her essential rights and liberty; because it overturns justice, by suppressing the right of ownership lawfully acquired by manifold titles and by the Concordat itself; because it gravely offends the dignity of the Apostolic See and Our own person, the ranks of bishops, the clergy, and the Catholics of France. Consequently, We protest most vehemently against the proposal of the law, its passage, and promulgation; and We attest that there is nothing at all of importance in it to weaken the laws of the Church, which cannot be changed by the force and rashness of men. *
[From the Decree of the Holy Office, April 25, 1906]
3391 Dz 1996 It has been decreed that in the case of true necessity this form suffices: "By this holy unction may the Lord forgive you whatever you have sinned. Amen."
[From the Response of the Commission on Biblical Studies, June 27, 1906]
3394 Dz 1997 Question 1. Whether the arguments accumulated by critics to impugn the Mosaic authenticity of the Sacred Books, which are designated by the name of Pentateuch, are of such weight that, in spite of the very many indications of both Testaments taken together, the continuous conviction of the Jewish people, also the unbroken tradition of the Church in addition to the internal evidences drawn from the text itself, they justify affirming that these books were not written by Moses, but were composed for the most part from sources later than the time of Moses?
Reply:No.
3395 Dz 1998 Question 2. Whether the Mosaic authenticity of the Pentateuch necessarily demands such a redaction of the whole work that it must be held absolutely that Moses wrote all and each book with his own hand, or dictated them to copyists; or, whether also the hypothesis can be permitted of those who think that the work was conceived by him under the influence of divine inspiration, and was committed to another or several to be put into writing, but in such manner that they rendered his thought faithfully, wrote nothing contrary to his wish, omitted nothing; and, finally, when the work was composed in this way, approved by Moses as its chief and inspired author, it was published under his name.
Reply: No, for the first part; yes, for the second.
3396 Dz 1999 Question 3.Whether without prejudice to the Mosaic authenticity of the Pentateuch it can be granted that Moses for the composition of the work made use of sources, namely written documents or oral tradition, from which, according to the peculiar goal set before him, and under -the influence of divine inspiration, he made some borrowings, and these, arranged for word according to sense or amplified, he inserted into the work itself?
Reply:Yes.
3397 Dz 2000 Question 4.Whether, safeguarding substantially the Mosaic authenticity and the integrity of the Pentateuch, it can be admitted that in such a long course of ages it underwent some modifications, for example: additions made after the death of Moses, or by an inspired author, or glosses and explanations inserted in the texts, certain words and forms of the antiquated language translated into more modern language; finally false readings to be ascribed to the errors of copyists, which should be examined and passed upon according to the norms of textual criticism.Reply:Yes, the judgment of the Church being maintained.
[From the Decree of the Holy Office, "Lamentabili" July 3, 1907]
3401 Dz 2001 1. The ecclesiastical law which prescribes that books dealing with the Divine Scriptures be submitted to a previous censorship does not extend to critical scholars, or to scholars of the scientific exegesis of the Old and New Testaments.
3402 Dz 2002 2. The Church's interpretation of the Sacred Books is not indeed to be spurned, but it is subject to the more accurate judgment and the correction of exegetes.
3403 Dz 2003 3. From the ecclesiastical judgments and censures passed against free and more learned exegesis, it can be gathered that the faith proposed by the Church contradicts history, and that Catholic teachings cannot in fact be reconciled with the truer origins of the Christian religion.
3404 Dz 2004 4. The magisteriumof the Church, even by dogmatic definitions, cannot determine the genuine sense of the Sacred Scriptures.
3405 Dz 2005 5. Since in the deposit of faith only revealed truths are contained, in no respect does it pertain to the Church to pass judgment on the assertions of human disciplines.
3406 Dz 2006 6. In defining truths the learning Church and the teaching Church so collaborate that there is nothing left for the teaching Church but to sanction the common opinions of the learning Church.
3407 Dz 2007 7. When the Church proscribes errors, she cannot exact any internal assent of the faithful, by which the judgments published by her are embraced.
3408 Dz 2008 8. They are to be considered free of all blame who consider of no account the reprobations published by the Sacred Congregation of the Index, or by other Sacred Roman Congregations.
3409 Dz 2009 9 They display excessive simplicity or ignorance, who believe that God is truly the author of the Sacred Scripture.
3410 Dz 2010 10 The inspiration of the books of the Old Testament consists in this; that the Israelite writers have handed down religious doctrines under a peculiar aspect which is little known, or not known at all to the Gentiles.
3411 Dz 2011 11. Divine inspiration does not so extend to all Sacred Scripture that it fortifies each and every part of it against all error.
3412 Dz 2012 12. The exegete, if he wishes to apply himself advantageously to Biblical studies, should divest himself especially of any preconceived opinion about the supernatural origin of Sacred Scripture, and should interpret it just as he would other merely human documents.
3413 Dz 2013 13. The Evangelists themselves and the Christians of the second and third generation have artificially distributed the parables of the Gospels, and thus have given a reason for the small fruit of the preaching of Christ among the Jews.
3414 Dz 2014 14, In many narratives the Evangelists related not so much what is true, as what they thought to be more profitable for the reader, although false.
3415 Dz 2015 15. The Gospels up to the time of the defining and establishment of the canon have been augmented continually by additions and corrections; hence, there has remained in them only a slight and uncertain trace of the doctrine of Christ.
3416 Dz 2016 16. The narrations of John are not properly history, but the mystical contemplation of the Gospel; the discourses contained in his Gospel are theological meditations on the mystery of salvation, devoid of historical truth.
3417 Dz 2017 17. The Fourth Gospel exaggerated miracles, not only that the extraordinary might stand out more, but also that they might become more suitable for signifying the work and glory of the Word Incarnate.
3418 Dz 2018 18. John, indeed, claims for himself the character of a witness concerning Christ; but in reality he is nothing but a distinguished witness of the Christian life, or of the life of the Christian Church at the end of the first century.
3419 Dz 2019 19. Heterodox exegetes have more faithfully expressed the true sense of Scripture than Catholic exegetes.
3420 Dz 2020 20. Revelation could have been nothing other than the consciousness acquired by man of his relation to God.
3421 Dz 2021 21. Revelation, constituting the object of Catholic faith, was not completed with the apostles.
3422 Dz 2022 22. The dogmas which the Church professes as revealed are not truths fallen from heaven, but they are a kind of interpretation of religious facts, which the human mind by a laborious effort prepared for itself.
3423 Dz 2023 23. Opposition can and actually does exist between facts which are narrated in Sacred Scripture, and the dogmas of the Church based on these, so that a critic can reject as false, facts which the Church believes to be most certain.
3424 Dz 2024 24. An exegete is not to be reproved who constructs premises from which it follows that dogmas are historically false or dubious, provided he does not directly deny the dogmas themselves.
3425 Dz 2025 25. The assent of faith ultimately depends on an accumulation of probabilities.
3426 Dz 2026 26. The dogmas of faith are to be held only according to a practical sense, that is, as preceptive norms for action, but not as norms for believing
3427 Dz 2027 27. The divinity of Jesus Christ is not proved from the Gospels; but is a dogma which the Christian conscience has deduced from the notion of the Messias.
3428 Dz 2028 28.When Jesus was exercising His ministry, He did not speak with this purpose, to teach that He was the Messias, nor did His miracles have as their purpose to demonstrate this.
3429 Dz 2029 29. It may be conceded that the Christ whom history presents, is far inferior to the Christ who is the object of faith.
3430 Dz 2030 30. In all the evangelical texts the name, Son of God, isequivalent to the name ofMessias;but it does not at all signify that Christ is the true and natural Son of God.
3431 Dz 2031 31. The doctrine about Christ, which Paul, John, and the Councils of Nicea, Ephesus, and Chalcedon hand down, is not that which Jesus taught, but which the Christian conscience conceived about Jesus.
3432 Dz 2032 32. The natural sense of the evangelical texts cannot be reconciled with that which our theologians teach about the consciousness and the infallible knowledge of Jesus Christ.
3433 Dz 2033 33. It is evident to everyone, who is not influenced by preconceived opinions, that either Jesus professed an error concerning the immediate coming of the Messias, or the greater part of the doctrine contained in the Synoptic Gospels is void of authenticity.
3434 Dz 2034 34. The critic cannot ascribe to Christ knowledge circumscribed by no limit, except on the supposition which can by no means be conceived historically, and which is repugnant to the moral sense, namely, that Christ as man had the knowledge of God, and nevertheless was unwilling to share the knowledge of so many things with His disciples and posterity.
3435 Dz 2035 35. Christ did not always have the consciousness of His Messianic dignity.
3436 Dz 2036 36. The resurrection of the Savior is not properly a fact of the historical order, but a fact of the purely supernatural order, neither demonstrated nor demonstrable, and which the Christian conscience gradually derived from other sources.
3437 Dz 2037 37. Faith in the resurrection of Christ was from the beginning not so much of the fact of the resurrection itself, as of the immortal life of Christ with God.
3438 Dz 2038 38. The doctrine of the expiatory death of Christ is not evangelical but only Pauline.
3439 Dz 2039 39. The opinions about the origin of the sacraments with which the Fathers of Trent were imbued, and which certainly had an influence on their dogmatic canons, are far different from those which now rightly obtain among historical investigators of Christianity.
3440 Dz 2040 40. The sacraments had their origin in this, that the apostles and their successors, swayed and moved by circumstances and events, interpreted some idea and intention of Christ.
3441 Dz 2041 41. The sacraments have this one end, to call to man's mind the ever beneficent presence of the Creator.
3442 Dz 2042 42. The Christian community has introduced the necessity of baptism, adopting it as a necessary rite, and adding to it the obligation of professing Christianity.
3443 Dz 2043 43. The practice of conferring baptism on infants was a disciplinary evolution, which was one reason for resolving the sacrament into two, baptism and penance.
3444 Dz 2044 44. There is no proof that the rite of the sacrament of confirmation was practiced by the apostles; but the formal distinction between the two sacraments, namely, baptism and confirmation, by no means goes back to the history of primitive Christianity.
3445 Dz 2045 45. Not all that Paul says about the institution of the Eucharist (1Co 11,23-25) is to be taken historically.
3446 Dz 2046 46. There was no conception in the primitive Church of the Christian sinner reconciled by the authority of the Church, but the Church only very gradually became accustomed to such a conception. Indeed, even after penance was recognized as an institution of the Church, it was not called by the name, sacrament, for the reason that it would have been held as a shameful sacrament.
3447 Dz 2047 47. The words of the Lord: "Receive ye the Holy Ghost; whose sins ye shall forgive they are forgiven them, and whose sins ye shall retain they are retained" (Jn 20,22-23) , do not refer at all to the sacrament of penance, whatever the Fathers of Trent were pleased to say.
3448 Dz 2048 48. James in his Epistle (Jc 5,14 f.) does not intend to promulgate some sacrament of Christ, but to commend a certain pious custom, and if in this custom by chance he perceives some means of grace, he does not accept this with that strictness with which the theologians have accepted it, who have established the notion and the number of the sacraments.
3449 Dz 2049 49. As the Christian Supper gradually assumed the nature of a liturgical action, those who were accustomed to preside at the Supper acquired the sacerdotal character.
3450 Dz 2050 50. The elders who fulfilled the function of watching over gatherings of Christians were instituted by the apostles as presbyters or bishops to provide for the necessary arrangement of the increasing communities, not properly for perpetuating the apostolic mission and power.
3451 Dz 2051 51. Matrimony could not have emerged as a sacrament of the New Law in the Church, since in order that matrimony might be held to be a sacrament, it was necessary that a full theological development of the doctrine on grace and the sacraments take place first.
3452 Dz 2052 52. It was foreign to the mind of Christ to establish a Church as a society upon earth to endure for a long course of centuries; rather, in the mind of Christ the Kingdom of Heaven together with the end of the world was to come presently.
3453 Dz 2053 53. The organic constitution of the Church is not immutable; but Christian society, just as human society, is subject to perpetual evolution.
3454 Dz 2054 54. The dogmas, the sacraments, the hierarchy, as far as pertains both to the notion and to the reality, are nothing but interpretations and the evolution of the Christian intelligence, which have increased and perfected the little germ latent in the Gospel.
3455 Dz 2055 55. Simon Peter never even suspected that the primacy of the Church was entrusted to him by Christ.
3456 Dz 2056 56. The Roman Church became the head of all the churches not by the ordinances of divine Providence, but purely by political factors.
3457 Dz 2057 57. The Church shows herself to be hostile to the advances of the natural and theological sciences.
3458 Dz 2058 58. Truth is no more immutable than man himself, inasmuch as it is evolved with him, in him, and through him.
3459 Dz 2059 59. Christ did not teach a defined body of doctrine applicable to all times and to all men, but rather began a religious movement adapted, or to be adapted to different times and places.
3460 Dz 2060 60. Christian doctrine in its beginnings was-Judaic, but through successive evolutions it became first Pauline, then Johannine, and finally Hellenic and universal.
3461 Dz 2061 61. It can be said without paradox that no chapter of Scripture, from the first of Genesis to the last of the Apocalypse, contains doctrine entirely identical with that which the Church hands down on the same subject, and so no chapter of Scripture has the same sense for the critic as for the theologian.
3462 Dz 2062 62. The principal articles of the Apostles' Creed did not have the same meaning for the Christians of the earliest times as they have for the Christians of our time.
3463 Dz 2063 63. The Church shows herself unequal to the task of preserving the ethics of the Gospel, because she clings obstinately to immutable doctrines which cannot be reconciled with present day advances.
3464 Dz 2064 64. The progress of the sciences demands that the concepts of Christian doctrine about God, creation, revelation, the Person of the Incarnate Word, the redemption, be recast.
3465 Dz 2065 65. Present day Catholicism cannot be reconciled with true science, unless it be transformed into a kind of nondogmatic Christianity, that is, into a broad and liberal Protestantism.
3466 2065a Censure of the Holy Pontiff: "His Holiness has approved and confirmed the decree of the Most Eminent Fathers, and has ordered that all and every proposition enumerated above be held as condemned and proscribed" [See also n. 2114].
[From the Decree Ne temere of the Holy Council, August 2, 1907]
3468 Dz 2066 Betrothal.--I. Those betrothals alone are held valid and carry canonical effects, which have been contracted in writing signed by the parties, and either by the pastor or ordinary of the place, or at least by two witnesses.
3469 Dz 2067 Marriage.III. The above marriages are valid, which are contracted in the presence of the pastor or ordinary of the place, or a priest delegated by either of the two, and at least two witnesses. . . .
3470 Dz 2068 VII. If the danger of death is imminent, when the pastor or ordinary of the place, or a priest delegated by either of the two cannot be had, out of consideration for the conscience (of the betrothed) and (if occasion warrants) for legitimizing offspring, marriage can be validly and licitly contracted in the presence of any priest and two witnesses.
3471 Dz 2069 Vlll. If it happens that in some region the pastor or ordinary of the place or priest delegated by them, in the presence of whom marriage can be celebrated, cannot be had, and this condition of things has lasted now for a month, the marriage can be validly and licitly entered upon after a formal consent has been given by the betrothed in the presence of two witnesses.
3472 Dz 2070 Xl. Sec. I. All who have been baptized in the Catholic Church and have been converted to her from heresy or schism, even if one or the other has afterwards apostasized, as often as they enter upon mutual betrothal or marriage, are bound by the laws above established.
3473 Sec. 2. They also hold for the same Catholics mentioned above, if they contract betrothal or marriage with non-Catholics, whether baptized or not baptized, even after having obtained dispensation from the impediment of mixed marriage, or of difference of worship, unless it has otherwise been established by the Holy See for some particular place or region.
3474 Sec. 3. Non-Catholics, whether baptized or not baptized, if they make contracts between themselves, are nowhere bound to keep the Catholic form of betrothal or of marriage.
Let the present decree lawfully published and promulgated be kept by its transmission to the ordinaries of places; and let what has been disposed in it begin to have the force of law everywhere, from the solemn day of the Pasch of the Resurrection D.N.I.C. [April 19] of next year, 1908.
Denzinger EN 3346