Affinity (canon Law) - Affinity No Longer Begets Affinity

Affinity No Longer Begets Affinity

Affinity also, in the ancient law, arose between the children of a woman from a deceased husband and the children of her husband from a previously deceased wife. Hence a father and a son could not marry a mother and a daughter. Affinity begot affinity. But the Fourth Council of Lateran took away all but the first kind of affinity; hence the axiom that "affinity does not beget affinity".

There was some discussion in the eighteenth century as to whether a stepfather could marry the widow of his deceased stepson; but it was authoritatively decided, as Benedict XIV states (De Syn. Dioec., IX, xii) that there was no impediment to their marriage, it having been done away with by the Fourth Council of Lateran.

The impediment to marriage from affinity arises from ecclesiastical law. This is clearly recognized today by theologians with regard to collateral affinity. The Church grants dispensation in all the degrees of this affinity. In regard to affinity in the direct line, there was a serious discussion whether in the first degree it arose from a natural, Divine, or ecclesiastical law; by what law was a stepfather forbidden to marry his stepdaughter? The Church refrains from granting the dispensation, but does not disclaim the right to do so. Indeed, a decree of the Holy Office (February 20, 1888) implies that this affinity arises from ecclesiastical law: "The Holy Father permits bishops to dispense from all public impediments diriment of marriage derived from the ecclesiastical law, except from the order of the priesthood, and affinity, in the direct line, arising from lawful intercourse." Craisson states (Man. Jur. Canon, Lib. II, De affin., n. 4285) that "Collator Andegavensis" quotes (394) Sanchez and Pontius as asserting that "the Pope dispenses converted infidels married within this first degree of affinity, if they had contracted marriage in accord with the law of their country." This supposes that this affinity in the first degree of the direct line is not an impediment of the natural or Divine law. An additional argument may be drawn from the dispensation which the Church grants in this case where there has been occult unlawful intercourse. Any repugnance of nature would hold then, as where the intercourse proceeded from marriage.

If a married person should have intercourse with the marriage-partner's blood-relative of the second degree, in the direct or collateral line, a penalty is placed upon the one so sinning of forfeiting the right to ask for marital intercourse from the marriage-partner, though the innocent party does not forfeit the right to claim it. If the wrong had been done through fear, the common teaching is that the penalty is not incurred, and this is also probably so if done without knowledge of the penalty. If incurred, a dispensation from the penalty may be obtained from the bishop. The affinity would become more complicated, and add new bars to marriage, if the person had intercourse with several persons of varying degrees of affinity. By the Roman law, the affinity ceased at the death of the one from whom it originated. Thus when a remarried father died, his second wife was no longer akin to the children of his former wife. By canon law a marriage not consummated does not beget affinity. By a marriage null through a diriment impediment, the affinity probably does not extend beyond the second degree. By the French code the affinity in the direct line, and in the first degree of the collateral line, is a bar to marriage, though the privilege was given to the king to dispense in the second case.

Can. 109

1. Affinity arises from a valid marriage, even if not consummated, and exists between a man and the blood relatives of the woman and between the woman and the blood relatives of the man.

2. It is so computed that those who are blood relatives of the man are related in the same line and degree by affinity to the woman, and vice versa.