Catholics and marriage licenses

  • Thread starter Thread starter ByWhatAuthority
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
abucs said:
I gave a likely scenario of the state allowing multiple marriages in accordance with Islam and pointed to the breakdown of secular marriage which might then follow. The way things are going people will be pushing for their right to be in multiple marriages. If this happens then no one can cast iron guarantee you what you like.
Click to expand...
No, this is not the case. The marriage licence by the state don´t say “you can marry catholic” but “you were married former/you were not”, right?
What the church does with the state information on the licence is another part. They can still decide to not spent the sacrament. But the basic information, if there are registrated marriages, stays the same
 
alice24 said:
No, this is not the case. The marriage licence by the state don´t say “you can marry catholic” but “you were married former/you were not”, right?

What the church does with the state information on the licence is another part. They can still decide to not spent the sacrament. But the basic information, if there are registrated marriages, stays the same
Click to expand...
I am sorry I am not understanding, could you please rephrase. (I’ll be logging off soon also).

Regards.
 
I´m not really understand what you are not understanding :roll_eyes:

The licence is still interpreted of the church, but the basic information, if there were previous marriages, comes from the state. No matter how the state thinks of marriage. If the state would give you a licence and there is a point like “was married to a rooster” before, the church can ignore it as you can´t marry a rooster catholic. The information itself is still neutral. For example.
 
alice24 said:
I´m not really understand what you are not understanding :roll_eyes:

The licence is still interpreted of the church, but the basic information, if there were previous marriages, comes from the state. No matter how the state thinks of marriage. If the state would give you a licence and there is a point like “was married to a rooster” before, the church can ignore it as you can´t marry a rooster catholic. The information itself is still neutral. For example.
Click to expand...
Yes but if a Muslim has had a religious wedding which is not registered by the state then according to the state he is not married. Also there is the example above by the other poster. In both circumstances the state is not giving you your cast iron guarantee.

If secular marriage is further redefined, the state may simply decide it is better to get out of marriage altogether. I have mentioned above to another poster the talk in Australia during the recent voting campaigns the wish by some secular people for the government to remove itself from marriage altogether.
 
Can you explain what some of these possible scenarios look like? How can an American legally withdraw himself from the incorporated US as the OP claims his friends have done?
 
It’s quite possible that they got married after publication of banns. I was.

I’m in Canada and in my province back in the 70s I did not need a marriage licence, banns were sufficient. Were I to get married there now I WOULD need a licence.
 
In Canada when same-sex marriage was being discussed, the Bishops Conference threatened to refuse to celebrate legal marriages. If they stopped it would be a hardship for the state because there are not enough officiants to take up the slack.

It’s more likely that the Church will refuse to act on behalf of the state than the state, which has a vested interest in “marriage” no matter how it defines it, will ever divest itself of marriage.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the info on Canada. There are some real crazies out there against marriage and traditional relationships so I don’t know if they get their way.

I hear in your country now you have a law which penalises citizens if they use the wrong pronoun against political correct orthodoxy.

The world is really topsy turvey at the moment. 🙂

 
Last edited:
This makes no sense. The license is part of the certificate.
This whole thing is nonsense.
Stop with the paranoia and just follow the rules like the rest of us.
Then, if you want to waste the time, start trying to legally change the rule.
 
The marriage license is nothing more than the form used register the marriage after the ceremony.
 
TheLittleLady said:
Ding Ding Ding Ding!

If I were guessing, the friend is your fiancee and he won’t marry you unless he can do it “under the table”.

Am I getting warm?
Click to expand...
Not even close. What have I said that makes you think that!?
 
1ke said:
Now at the moment people are adamant that the priest should not be forced to give his services but the florist must. In time this inconsistency in law will be challenged (at the most opportune time ) and under the secular concepts of equal rights, the church may lose. The time isn’t right now but in the future there will be pressure on priests.

The first amendment and the case law on non interference in Church matters makes this scenario not applicable in the US. Perhaps not in other places.
Click to expand...
This IS happening in the states! It is applicable! Christian bakers are being forced to bake rainbow wedding cakes for gay weddings now, for petes sake! Catholic priests act as government agents when they fill out and return Marriage licenses. Its only a matter of time before the state makes priests officiate at gay and other reprehensible weddings. And you know what? The state has ever right to force them as the church agree to work for the state in regards to this. I suppose the church can wait for things to get even worse before they decide to toss away their state official cards and no longer act as state agents. I hope things change before it comes to that. Doing this could but one way the church stands up for the sacrament of matrimony. By showing that they will not comply with a government that sees marriage as anything other than between a man and a woman.
 
sunandstars said:
Further, many of the posters on this posting are being very judgmental and insulting to the family the post is speaking about. This is certainly a huge change in the attitude of Catholic Answers and I detest it. I’ve seen this negative attitude on other posts as well. The difference between then, and now are quite startling, and go much deeper than format or web colors.
Click to expand...
Thank you @sunandstars for your helpful posts.

This is my first time on this forum so I don’t know what it was in the past. Many of the people here are as you said and that’s to bad but it doesn’t bother me as these Catholics are just a microcosm of reality, if you will. I didn’t come here to take a poll and I’m glad in the end that I did post here. You and @abucs and a few others have made it worthwhile with your thoughts and support of my thinking on this matter. I stepped into these thoughts because of my friends situation. ( Her family definitely challenges me to think, lol. ) That’s not a bad thing. We should never be afraid to challenge the norm if we think something is wrong, it is our duty to stand up and speak out even if the thing we are challenging is something everyone is doing.
Thank you again and have a great thanksgiving!
 
Last edited:
abucs said:
Posters above spoke in the American context of people being wed where one of them was already married. I think the poster mentioned that both marriages took part in the same state.
Click to expand...
Yes I did. But I failed to mention that he was committing a felony in the process. Had a complaint been filed by either my sister or the other woman he could have been arrested and prosecuted with the potential of prison time.
 
ByWhatAuthority said:
This IS happening in the states! It is applicable! Christian bakers are being forced to bake rainbow wedding cakes for gay weddings now, for petes sake!
Click to expand...
That is not what I referred to and you know it.
ByWhatAuthority said:
Catholic priests act as government agents when they fill out and return Marriage licenses. Its only a matter of time before the state makes priests officiate at gay and other reprehensible weddings.
Click to expand...
No, it isn’t. Not under our present constitution.
 
ByWhatAuthority said:
I suppose the church can wait for things to get even worse before they decide to toss away their state official cards and no longer act as state agents.
Click to expand...
That could certainly happen by choice of the church. If it did, your friend would be in no better shape at all because the civil ceremony would come first just as it does on other parts of the world. The US Church would not conduct “church only” marriages.
 
…
“1ke said:
the civil ceremony would come first just as it does on other parts of the world. The US Church would not conduct “church only” marriages.
Click to expand...
Why not? Why can’t the Catholic Church choose to conduct “church only” marriages if it wants to??? If the government is so corrupt as to redefine marriage then maybe the time has come for the church to do just that! Matrimony is a sacrament that the Catholic Church should be able to administer on it’s own terms.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top