Non-Catholic attended a wedding of a divorced Catholic?

[PRmerger]

As far as Catholics are concerned, if you or anyone in your “fundamentalist” (Christian?) religion had contracted a sacramental marriage and then divorced and remarried, that would be a sin.

God Bless

Yes.

One ought not take lightly what one has** vowed**, before God, as well as before friends and family.

Seriously, what does “vow” mean these days, anyway?

It would seem that it’s true that most don’t understand the meaning of the word “vow” and thus, when the marriage tribunal reviews the couple’s papers, it’s not unlikely to conclude that either/both parties hadn’t a clue what a vow means…and thus no commitment was ever really made before God.

Because if a vow were truly made, before God, one cannot dissolve it.

 

[Miriam1947]

In regards to baptism, you are incorrect. The CC recognizes all other denominations’ baptisms, provided they were done with water, using the Trinitarian formula.

And we do recognize others’ marriages as well.

Well except for Momons. The Church does not recognize their baptism even though they use the Trinitarian formula because their underlying belief is wrong.

 

[PRmerger]

Well except for Momons. The Church does not recognize their baptism even though they use the Trinitarian formula because their underlying belief is wrong.

What is the Trinitarian formula that Mormons use?

 

[Georgia]

What is the Trinitarian formula that Mormons use?

Somebody, anybody, please correct me if I am wrong, but I’ll write what I have read. If I am right, the Church does not recognize the Latter Day Saints’ baptism because, while it does contain the proper formula, refers to different beings than those referenced in a baptism recognized by the Catholic Church. That is the LDS refer to an exalted man who became a god and who had a son through the normal method as part of an endless progression, rather than an eternal one God with a begotten son. If there is an LDS member here, please help me out with this and please accept my apologies if I have this wrong.

As to the debate about marriage versus a wedding, I can make this point from my earlier days as a Fundamentalist. It may not apply to all Fundamentalist churches. The terms were without distinction in my church, essentially the same, different words with the same meaning. There was no thought that the wedding was the public ceremony and that marriage was the sacrament that the couple administered to one another, as I once heard a priest explain the Catholic position. I hope this helps.

 

[starsmurf]

I have also been to a wedding of a divorced Catholic in a Catholic Church. They were married before. Your church can and did declare there was not a marriage before. But that is a theological distinction. There was a wedding before. I sat through it. I bought a gift. You get the point. If someone wants to say it did not really happen, you cannot expect people to agree with you. We are not part of your church and what they say did not happen is not going to be persuasive to non-Catholics or the children of that “non-marriage”.

The Church did not declare that there was not a wedding, it does not declare that the children of the marriage are not legitimate, it does not declare that a legal marriage did not place. What it does declare is that the **Sacrament **of Marriage did not take place.

As a convert, even my friends at my old church agree that the Catholic Church has the right to say that what happened in its ceremony was or was not correct. Most of them saw the sense in being able to say that someone was not mature enough to make those vows or whatever the reason for the annulment. None of my Protestant friends have had a problem with annulment once it was explained to them. Therefore it is obviously persuasive to non-Catholics.

 

[Rightlydivide]

Mormon baptism
Being commissioned by Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit"

You guys are not any worse or better than another Christian who gets divorced. Its sin. Other churches just do not have a process to “take it back”. If they did, they would be fooling themselves as well. God does not allow divorce. God does not have a do over in regard to marriage.

 

[Miriam1947]

Mormon baptism
Being commissioned by Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit"

Mormons believe that Jesus Christ was created, they do not believe He is God. So they can say the words but since their underlying belief is incorrect, the baptism is not accepted in the Catholic Church and any Mormon who converts is baptized correctly.

You guys are not any worse or better than another Christian who gets divorced. Its sin. Other churches just do not have a process to “take it back”. If they did, they would be fooling themselves as well. God does not allow divorce. God does not have a do over in regard to marriage.

The Catholic Church teaches that marriage is a sacrament. The question for Catholics is whether it was sacramental, not whether it was legal.

 

[ddarko]

Mormon baptism
Being commissioned by Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit"

You guys are not any worse or better than another Christian who gets divorced. Its sin. Other churches just do not have a process to “take it back”. If they did, they would be fooling themselves as well. God does not allow divorce. God does not have a do over in regard to marriage.

Whose disagreeing?

The Annulment is NOT a divorce. It merely says that a marriage never took place in sacramental form. ONLY sacramental marriages are indissoluble.

You’ve misunderstood sacramental marriage as being merely a physical thing that involves a ceremony or couple begetting children. Once you realize what the SACRAMENT of MARRIAGE actually is, then you will understand everything clearly.

Btw, in the mean time, better think about why you are “fundamentalist” and not Catholic. Objectively speaking, “fundamentalist” are in error. So it’s not a surprise that you will have some incorrect ideas which are best corrected by discovering the true and complete Faith.

So no, Catholic teaching is the complete truth. Mormonism and “fundamentalist” are just people who still haven’t thought about how they rationally arrived at their faith to begin with. But as I said before, this is a discussion for another thread.

God Bless

 

[Rightlydivide]

Whose disagreeing?

The Annulment is NOT a divorce. It merely says that a marriage never took place in sacramental form. ONLY sacramental marriages are indissoluble.

You’ve misunderstood sacramental marriage as being merely a physical thing that involves a ceremony or couple begetting children. Once you realize what the SACRAMENT of MARRIAGE actually is, then you will understand everything clearly.

Btw, in the mean time, better think about why you are “fundamentalist” and not Catholic. Objectively speaking, “fundamentalist” are in error. So it’s not a surprise that you will have some incorrect ideas which are best corrected by discovering the true and complete Faith.

So no, Catholic teaching is the complete truth. Mormonism and “fundamentalist” are just people who still haven’t thought about how they rationally arrived at their faith to begin with. But as I said before, this is a discussion for another thread.

God Bless

I sometimes find it comforting as well to think that people who disagree with me are irrational. I don’t usually call them irrational though because often people get defensive. I consider that further evidence of the obvious lack of rational thought…

 

[Nicea325]

Mormon baptism
Being commissioned by Jesus Christ, I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit"

You guys are not any worse or better than another Christian who gets divorced. Its sin. Other churches just do not have a process to “take it back”. If they did, they would be fooling themselves as well. God does not allow divorce. God does not have a do over in regard to marriage.

Okay,but do Mormons baptize with water? If I am correct,they do not.

 

[rinnie]

I have also been to a wedding of a divorced Catholic in a Catholic Church. They were married before. Your church can and did declare there was not a marriage before. But that is a theological distinction. There was a wedding before. I sat through it. I bought a gift. You get the point. If someone wants to say it did not really happen, you cannot expect people to agree with you. We are not part of your church and what they say did not happen is not going to be persuasive to non-Catholics or the children of that “non-marriage”.

Excuse me, She CAN declare a Marriage never existed if an annulment was granted.

According to the Church in the eyes of God if there is proof that it was not a true marriage in the eyes of the Church it never existed.

 

[Nicea325]

The point I am making Nicea is it is not realistic for people outside of your church to not recognize this as a divorced Catholic getting married again in a Catholic Church. Yes, married by Catholic Church, in a Catholic Church, and then an annulment and another marriage.
I understand your system and beliefs. I do. But why should we, or anyone, see it as anything other than a marriage and divorce and a marriage? The Catholic Church makes that distinction, not anyone else. I can give several examples. Lets take any of the other sacraments that other churches use…holy orders, baptism. Churches do these. But Catholics do not recognize them. Thats fine. But it works both ways. When Catholics are joined in holy matrimony but then a few years later the same guy is joined in holy matrimony AGAIN in a Catholic Church…from our perspective, the states etc…he is divorced. I hope I am being clear. I understand your beliefs. But you cannot realistically expect other people to recognize a theological distinction (ie the concept of marriage not really occuring).
I am saying your not personally Nicea but a big collective Catholic “your”!

I understand what you are saying.

 

[Rightlydivide]

Excuse me, She CAN declare a Marriage never existed if an annulment was granted.

According to the Church in the eyes of God if there is proof that it was not a true marriage in the eyes of the Church it never existed.

Well you CAN and you DO…as far as the eyes of God…we just will not agree. I do understand your view. Its not complicated…I just do not agree.

 

[Rightlydivide]

Okay,but do Mormons baptize with water? If I am correct,they do not.

Yes, full immersion. 99 percent positive

 

[rinnie]

The Church did not declare that there was not a wedding, it does not declare that the children of the marriage are not legitimate, it does not declare that a legal marriage did not place. What it does declare is that the **Sacrament **of Marriage did not take place.

As a convert, even my friends at my old church agree that the Catholic Church has the right to say that what happened in its ceremony was or was not correct. Most of them saw the sense in being able to say that someone was not mature enough to make those vows or whatever the reason for the annulment. None of my Protestant friends have had a problem with annulment once it was explained to them. Therefore it is obviously persuasive to non-Catholics.

You are exactly right. In the RCC the Sacrament of marriage means that God has joined a man and women the same as he is joined to his Church.

What GOd has joined together let no MAN separate. If a marrriage is a true Sacrament it is forever until death do us part.

 

[rinnie]

Well you CAN and you DO…as far as the eyes of God…we just will not agree. I do understand your view. Its not complicated…I just do not agree.

You don’t have to agree. Actually neither do I for that fact. But as the Church teaches I just must Obey.

But God gave you free will to do whatever you choose. But God also gave Peter the keys to the Kingdom and said what you bound on earth is bound in heaven and what you loose on earth is loose in heaven.

So the RCC the Bishop and the Pope have that right. Rather you agree with it or not does not make a difference to what is truth.

I do not see scripture that tells us we must agree with the ten commandments. I see that we must OBEY. I do not see scripture that states we must even agree with the word of GOd actualy. Only that we MUST OBEY.

We do not have the mind of God, so there is much we will never come to understand, only with his Grace if he wills it.

 

[kimmielittle]

http://forums.catholic-questions.org/picture.php?albumid=1072&pictureid=9997

adherents.com/largecom/baptist_divorce.html

 

[Monica4316]

I have also been to a wedding of a divorced Catholic in a Catholic Church. They were married before. Your church can and did declare there was not a marriage before. But that is a theological distinction. There was a wedding before. I sat through it. I bought a gift. You get the point. If someone wants to say it did not really happen, you cannot expect people to agree with you. We are not part of your church and what they say did not happen is not going to be persuasive to non-Catholics or the children of that “non-marriage”.

but did they get an annulment? if they did, their first marriage wasn’t valid… well assuming that the annulment was given properly for real reasons

 

[ddarko]

I sometimes find it comforting as well to think that people who disagree with me are irrational. I don’t usually call them irrational though because often people get defensive. I consider that further evidence of the obvious lack of rational thought…

Haha well NO.

I am saying a person is objectively IRRATIONAL in being “Fundamentalist” the same way I would say one is irrational in claiming that “1 = 2 in arithmetic”. I wasn’t going for a relativist claim before.

The lack of reason in the fundamentalist position can be easily seen if you try to answer the following:-

What reasons do you have to be a fundamentalist?
Do you believe in the Bible?
If so then why?
Do you know that you are interpreting the Bible properly?
If so then how?

God Bless

 

[ddarko]

Well you CAN and you DO…as far as the eyes of God…we just will not agree. I do understand your view. Its not complicated…I just do not agree.

What you are saying here is really illogical.

Look at the following example:-

Let us say it looks like Person X killed Person Y to everyone.
But in the eyes of God, Person X has not committed any sin and it is in-fact someone else that killed Person Y.
Do you think Person X has not sinned JUST BECAUSE it appears like he killed Person Y to everyone?

That is exactly the same case with marriage and annulments. Just because EVERYONE thought there was a marriage DOES NOT make it a sacramental marriage if the requirements were never met. Annulments basically check if these requirements were fulfilled and if not, an annulment is granted.

So I am afraid this is not that complicated for someone to understand but you are making a big fuss out of it to advance your personal agenda.

God Bless