Frank Sinatra & the Catholic Church

  • Thread starter Thread starter Michael_C
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Michael_C

Guest
Conversation came up at Thanks giving dinner. A relative criticized the Church because Frank Sinatra was allowed to be married 7 times in a Catholic Church. I asked for evidence but was given none. The relative told me if I could prove otherwise he would stand up and apologize at the next gathering.

Does anyone know where I could find out if Mr.Sinatra was married with the Churches blessing on 7 different occasions? Thanks for any help you may be able to provide.

Peace.
 
Michael C:
Conversation came up at Thanks giving dinner. A relative criticized the Church because Frank Sinatra was allowed to be married 7 times in a Catholic Church. I asked for evidence but was given none. The relative told me if I could prove otherwise he would stand up and apologize at the next gathering.

Does anyone know where I could find out if Mr.Sinatra was married with the Churches blessing on 7 different occasions? Thanks for any help you may be able to provide.

Peace.
Click to expand...
First he was only married 4 times.(Ava Gardner, Mia Farrow,Nancy Barbato,& Barbara Marx)

He got married to Mia Farrow at the Sands…his first marriage(Nancy) was in the Church and was annulled. HE married Gardner in PA at a friends house. As to the rest of his marriages I do not know.
 
Michael C:
Conversation came up at Thanks giving dinner. A relative criticized the Church because Frank Sinatra was allowed to be married 7 times in a Catholic Church. I asked for evidence but was given none. The relative told me if I could prove otherwise he would stand up and apologize at the next gathering.

Does anyone know where I could find out if Mr.Sinatra was married with the Churches blessing on 7 different occasions? Thanks for any help you may be able to provide.

Peace.
Click to expand...
How typical. This relative makes a slanderous comment as if it were fact and then when called on it tries to shift the whole thing onto you by saying that YOU have to find the proof. The onus of proving a claim falls on whoever makes it not on the person who was challenged by it.

But, finding proof that Sinatra or anyone else’s marriage(s) were sacramental or not might be impossible to prove. That’s not the kind of information a secular biographer or journalist is likely to record. If Sinatra’s marriages were all sanctioned by the Church, his diocese would have the records, but they would be very unlikely to give them out to the public. If he didn’t have a Catholic priest or deacon witness his wedding vows with any of the women he married after he got his annulment, then none of those marriages were sacramental.

And his having a church funeral and burial would have depended on his priest or his bishop. The Vatican rarely overrules its bishops in such matters but trusts that they are doing what is proper under the circumstances. In any case, simply throwing out an accusation is not proof nor does it make any comment or opinion the truth. You should remind you relative of that little fact. 😉
 
Apparently your friend believes in “Guilty until proven innocent.”
 
Tell your relative that if he is going to put the Catholic Church on trial, then he should understand that in a trial the burden of proof is on the prosecution, not the defense.

Can he prove his case beyond a reasonable doubt? Or should his case be thrown out for lack of evidence?
 
Well today is a slow day… soooo…

Marriage #1: Nancy - in the Church, married 1939, divorced 1951

Marriage #2: Ava- married 10 days after his divorce was final from Nancy. Ava was twice divorced prior to marrying Frank. Married 1951, separated 1953, divorced 1957.

Marriage #3: Mia- married in 1966 in the Sand’s hotel w/o annulment. Divorced in 1968.

Marriage #4: Barbara Marx- 1976. She converted to Catholicism to marry him.

His first marriage was annuled. His second and third were invalid due to lack of form. Then, his last marriage was apparently in the church.

If you want sources, I googled a couple of combinations including “frank sinatra barbara marx marriage”, “frank sinatra annulment”, “frank nancy sinatra marriage”, “frank sinatra catholic marriage”.

Have fun looking some of this up online-- maybe a Sinatra biography would have more info.
 
I really appreciate the help. I have a habit of challenging people when they throw out inuendos, misunderstandings and rumors as facts about the Church I love. I did put him on the spot and he will squirm further Christmas Eve when he has to apologize.
 
Whoa.

I guess he really did do it his way.

P.S. Someone asked the same question about Tony Mottola… third marriage in the Church.
 
40.png
1ke:
Well today is a slow day… soooo…

Marriage #1: Nancy - in the Church, married 1939, divorced 1951

Marriage #2: Ava- married 10 days after his divorce was final from Nancy. Ava was twice divorced prior to marrying Frank. Married 1951, separated 1953, divorced 1957.

Marriage #3: Mia- married in 1966 in the Sand’s hotel w/o annulment. Divorced in 1968.

Marriage #4: Barbara Marx- 1976. She converted to Catholicism to marry him.

His first marriage was annuled. His second and third were invalid due to lack of form. Then, his last marriage was apparently in the church.

If you want sources, I googled a couple of combinations including “frank sinatra barbara marx marriage”, “frank sinatra annulment”, “frank nancy sinatra marriage”, “frank sinatra catholic marriage”.

Have fun looking some of this up online-- maybe a Sinatra biography would have more info.
Click to expand...
If I were going to explain this to somebody, I would first point out there is a difference between civil law and canon law. What is valid under one may not be valid under another.

That’s how I managed to explain divorce, annulment, and re-marriage to a pair of my Protestant friends.
 
Kay Cee:
If I were going to explain this to somebody, I would first point out there is a difference between civil law and canon law. What is valid under one may not be valid under another.

That’s how I managed to explain divorce, annulment, and re-marriage to a pair of my Protestant friends.
Click to expand...
As Frank would say "I did it my way’’.,because it doesn,t count. 😃 God Bless
 
40.png
SPOKENWORD:
As Frank would say "I did it my way’’.,because it doesn,t count. 😃 God Bless
Click to expand...
Because *what *doesn’t count? Could you be more clear?
 
I think my wifes uncle was trying to make the point that because Frank Sinatra was famous with money he received special treatment. he was allowed to be married 7 times on the altar with no problem.

Today I learned he was wrong. he was married 4 times. the first was annulled. The next to were invalid and not recognized by the Church and the last one was valid because his wife converted.

He wasn’t married in a church 7 times. The first time he was, the second time was at a private home and the thrid was at the Sands. The fourth I have no ide where but it probably was in a Catholic church validly.

Before the meal prayer I’ll have him apologize loudly.
 
40.png
SPOKENWORD:
His marriges by the law of the land. :confused: God Bless
Click to expand...
Well, that depends on what you mean.

Under civil law, of course his marriages count.

Under canon law, a covenant must exist for a marriage to exist. No covenant, no marriage. If there was no covenant in the first three weddings, then under canon law, those were not marriages. That doesn’t mean they weren’t marriages under civil law.

Look at it this way:

Suppose there are two countries. Country X and Country Y. Let’s say that in Country X, you have to be 21 to get married. Furthermore, Country X only recognizes those marriages that occur according to their law.

Now suppose a young man and a young woman from Country Y get married at age 18. Under Country Y’s law, they are married. Under Country X’s law they are not.

When it comes to civil and canon law, you must remember that these are *two different systems *of law. What is legal for one may not be legal for the other.
 
Michael C:
… and the last one was valid because his wife converted.
Click to expand...
was really necessary her conversion to Catholicism to have a valid marriage? i don’t think so.
 
I tried doing a Google search to find the data to back this up, but I didn’t come up with anything. (I didn’t look really hard - maybe others can find something.) However, there was a CA Live episode (maybe a month after his funeral) where someone asked why Sinatra was allowed a Catholic Funeral. In that episode, the host (I believe James Akin) read from a news clipping where Sinatra had repented and returned to the church. He had his first marriage annulled, his 2nd and 3rd were already invalid, and his 4th he had recognized by the Church. By all appearances, he was active in his Faith, attending Mass regularly and even organizing some special devotions. At the time of his death, he was fully reconciled with the Church and there was no reason to keep him from having a Catholic funeral.

So the answer to your question is: 1) he was not married 7 times in the Church. 2) officially he was married once in the church (which was later determined to be invalid) was married 3 times out of the Church, and the last of these marriages was later consecrated in the Church. 3) yes he was a big sinner, but he repented - is the Church supposed to ostracize him even after he repented? I think they would agree that the whole purpose of the Church is to welcome the repentant - especially the big sinners (read the gospels).

I’d try searching for a site or book that gives details to his later life - after he started have major health problems and transplants.
 
People have voiced to me their complaint that some people get a “free pass” with multiple marriages, but some who had a bad first marriage, if they follow the laws of the Church, are out of luck… no more “chances” for them, as it were.

I know Catholics who would be able to get their secular marriages validated inside the Church, but are bitter about the “legalism” needed. [Not sure if that’s the right word.] Maybe it’s pride. But they feel so “burned”…

And then a high-profile “case” like Sinatra or Mottola comes along and … nothing in public from the Sinatra or the Mottola… no statement of gratitude to God for getting a messy marriage and divorce history regularized. No articles explaining the mechanics and whys and wherefors of annulment or of marriage validity.

Boy, you know, if your faith has the slightest weakness, these “cases” are almost enough to push you away from the Church…

The way these things are handled are really a scandal… they give people the wrong notion and mislead people who aren’t canon lawyers.
 
A little late weighting in on this topic, but I’m a lapsed Catholic who has just returned, and I wanted to see about others in my situation. I remember reading, about a year or so before Sinatra died, that he had returned to the Church and in fact attended daily mass and received communion. I read this in a supermarket tabloid, so I took it with a grain of salt, but it may in fact be true after all. It’s good to know.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top