Catholics and marriage licenses

  • Thread starter Thread starter ByWhatAuthority
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
That is very strong language.

Could you please better match up what I have said to your criticisms so that we can have a proper discussion. Thank you.
 
abucs said:
Which unfounded allegations and conclusions?
Click to expand...
These were YOUR words
If a couple wish to dedicate their lives in Holy matrimony the church will not allow it unless they go through a non Catholic ritual first. There seems something very wrong with that thinking. Almost a prostitution of the church to secular ideology.
Click to expand...
So I’ll say it again: Please do not jump to conclusions and make all kinds of unfounded accusations against the Church. There is enough of that in this thread already.

You are in no position to say it is “very wrong.”

And you certainly have no place accusing the Church of “prostitution to secular ideology.”

It’s insulting and it’s downright ignorant.
 
abucs said:
That is very strong language.

Could you please better match up what I have said to your criticisms so that we can have a proper discussion. Thank you.
Click to expand...
He’s listed cannon over and over and over.

The “soverign citizen” nonsense is just that…nonsense.
 
Look before we start there is no need to capitalise YOUR in ‘your words’. If they are my words then they are my words. There is no need to be aggressive during a discussion. Such an attitude gets us nowhere before we even begin. Thank you. Now I will read the rest of your post.
 
Last edited:
Well his aggressive reply was to me and I never mentioned sovereign citizen.
 
abucs said:
Look before we start there is no need to capitalise YOUR in ‘your words’. If they are my words then they are my words. There is no need to be aggressive during a discussion. Such an attitude gets us nowhere before we even begin. Thank you. Now I will read the rest of your post.
Click to expand...
Your attitude is what is unacceptable.
How dare you call the Catholic Church a prostitute? HOW DARE YOU!

Who or what do you think you are that you can use such a disgusting and insulting comparison?

Do not think that you have any place telling me how to react to such an appalling and revolting comment. Far from it.
 
Last edited:
FrDavid96 said:
Please do not jump to conclusions and make all kinds of unfounded accusations against the Church. There is enough of that in this thread already.

You are in no position to say it is “very wrong.”

And you certainly have no place accusing the Church of “prostitution to secular ideology.”

It’s insulting and it’s downright ignorant.
Click to expand...
Well you can see in my qualifiers ‘there seems to be’ and ‘almost a prostitution’ that this really cannot be described as jumping to a conclusion. It is a very weakly stated beginning statement that invites a reply from the poster I was talking to.

When you say I am in ‘no position to say something seems to be very wrong’ then I respectively disagree. I have a conscience which helps me to determine right and wrong. Especially in a forum, we each are using this God given ability to discuss issues in a respectful way to guide our thoughts. We are all in a position to articulate what we think ‘seems to be very wrong’. Unless you rewrite your comment I will have to respectfully disagree with your comment.

Similar with the phrase ‘almost a prostitution of the church to secular ideology’. I am having a conversation with another poster and we are articulating our thoughts. Respectfully, when someone else says I have ‘no place to do that’ then it means very little to me. I do not think in terms of people’s places, nor should a forum that is here for people to express their thoughts to each other. To be blunt about this. I have no interest in you trying to promote the idea of putting people in ‘places’ on a forum where people are conversing with each other.
 
Last edited:
FrDavid96 said:
Your attitude is what is unacceptable.

How dare you call the Catholic Church a prostitute? HOW DARE YOU!

Who or what do you think you are that you can use such a disgusting and insulting comparison?

Do not think that you have any place telling me how to react to such an appalling and revolting comment. Far from it.
Click to expand...
well you seem to be stuck in a mindset of categorising people to be in different places.

ok you think my attitude is very unacceptable. To be blunt, it means very little to me so if there is nothing else have a good day. God bless,
 
Last edited:
ByWhatAuthority said:
She has no problem with the legalization or state recognition of her marriage AFTER it takes place within the church.
Click to expand...
Newsflash – the state only recognizes the marriage AFTER it takes place in the church!

Maybe your friends need to get a little instruction in how these legal documents work. Getting a marriage license only means that the state recognizes you have no legal impediment to marriage. The Church handles the search for spiritual impediments, BTW.

The couple has the marriage license in hand the day of the wedding. They exchange their vows; they and the witnesses and priest/deacon sign the license. And then the signed license is filed with local authorities.

But the state does not recognize the marriage until the license is filed with them. They recognize the possibility that someone might get a license and then reconsider and not go through with getting married.

It’s the same with purchasing or transferring of property – until the deed of conveyance is filed with the county, the land/home remains the property (and responsibility) of the original owner.
 
abucs said:
well you seem to be stuck in a mindset of categorising people to be in different places.

ok you think my attitude is very unacceptable. To be blunt, it means very little to me so if there is nothing else have a good day. God bless,
Click to expand...
Or…

You might consider the possibility that your post did, in fact, say some pretty horrible and inappropriate things about the Church and her leaders.

Or do you think I’m also categorizing you (whatever that means) by being disgusted with your comment?
 
I’m with Fr. David on this. Your comments are inappropriate and disrespectful to the Holy Catholic Church.
 
Catholic Matrimony is not always a sacrament.
Thats why we speak of “the Sacrament of Matrimony” to distinguish those that are.

How would you ask if someone has a non secular marriage?
Are you matrimonialised perhaps?
 
Last edited:
Gertabelle said:
Or…

You might consider the possibility that your post did, in fact, say some pretty horrible and inappropriate things about the Church and her leaders.

Or do you think I’m also categorizing you (whatever that means) by being disgusted with your comment?
Click to expand...
I did consider the possibility. Because I don’t agree with someone, rationally it doesn’t mean I didn’t consider his post. Implicitly you are suggesting I didn’t consider his post and you are incorrect.

If you state that you don’t know what ‘categorizing me’ means, why would you then hypothesise that I might think this is what you are doing? That is not really a rational comment.

To answer your question, no, I do not think you are categorising me. But since you say you don’t know what this means anyway, I don’t know that we have gotten anywhere.

It seems like a strange overreach from you with both of your comments.

But thanks for your post anyway.
 
Last edited:
and I strongly disagree with you but that is llife.

Thanks for giving your thoughts.
 
Hello ByWhatAuthority.

In Australia also the state marriage is usually after the ‘sacrament of matrimony’. The secular state also recognises two people living together as a de facto marriage. When I get back to Australia I will look more fully into the situation there and post back here if the thread is still open. There is little desire for me to go through secular marriage and less so after the redefinition of marriage will be introduced. Polygamy will be the next redefinition in Oz but marriage now belongs to the state so they can do what they like with it.

Because in Australia a de facto marriage (living together) is treated in law similar to a state marriage (can’t discriminate) then there is little reason to go through with a secular marriage and people in their millions are not bothering to.

Of those who do, many are simply wanting a form of the traditional ceremony with little thought of God.

If millions of secular people are not really interested in secular marriage then of course many non secular people have no interest either.

As mentioned before, this is a great evangelising time to draw the distinction between the two. God bless.
 
Last edited:
Hi bluerose,

I am not sure of the civil practises in your neck of the woods. It is a ritual here to stand before a state registrar and pledge your commitment in accordance with and with respect to the secular understanding of marriage.

I suppose this pledge could be done by participating in writing or done verbally. The last time I checked there was no Catholic sacrament for buying a car but there is one for matrimony.

In the same way people do not look to the church to counter bless a house loan, I can understand why people will not look for the state to do the same for a marriage, especially when their view of marriage is not Catholic. As I mentioned, increasingly secular people are having this view in Australia about secular marriage. They don’t look to the state to ‘validate’ their union in a secular ceremonial process and I don’t blame them. I think virtually everyone agrees (at least here) it means very little.

Thanks for your question.
 
Last edited:
ByWhatAuthority said:
And there is nothing wrong with wanting this sacrament without the states consent.
Click to expand...
  1. A marriage license is not the “state’s consent”. It is the universally accepted proof to both the state AND the church that there are no legal impediments to marriage, which IS a requirement to prove under canon law.
  2. This is not new. Previously this proof of no impediment was established through reading the banns, which was a long and often complicated process. Marriage licenses were accepted in their stead because they were more efficient and effectiv0e and reasonable people are able to accept that.
  3. There is no non-Catholic ritual to go through, unless you consider filling out forms and filing them a ritual. In which case I recommend avoiding the DMV.
Frankly, these positions are ridiculous.
 
ByWhatAuthority said:
^This! @abucs, I could not agree with you more and I think your words are spot on! Getting a marriage license is NOT canon law and as such seeing an error in regards to the church making this demand on couples who want to receive the sacrament of matrimony, should be very much a subject of our scrutiny. There is nothing wrong with saying that ‘something is very wrong’. And there is nothing wrong with wanting this sacrament without the states consent.
Click to expand...
There are many of us. Let us spread this message to our families and friends. I think the way things are going there will be no choice but to take this approach. God bless.
 
Last edited:
casslean said:
There is no non-Catholic ritual to go through, unless you consider filling out forms and filing them a ritual. In which case I recommend avoiding the DMV.
Click to expand...
We are not receiving a sacrament when we receive a drivers license. Or any other state issued document for that matter.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top