Posted on 03/09/2009 11:02:24 AM PDT by pissant
Buried in an large New York Times Magazine profile of Newt Gingrich is a little nugget of information: A Baptist since graduate school, Gingrich said he will soon convert to Catholicism, his wife’s faith.
At a moment when the role of religious fundamentalism in the party is a central question for reformers, Gingrich, rather than making any kind of case for a new enlightenment, has in fact gone to great lengths to placate Christian conservatives. The family-values crowd has never completely embraced Newt, probably because he has been married three times, most recently to a former Hill staff member, Callista Bisek. In 2006, though, Gingrich wrote a book called “Rediscovering God in America” — part of a new canon of work he has done reaffirming the role of religion in public life. The following year, he went on radio with the evangelical minister James Dobson to apologize for having been unfaithful to his second wife.
(Excerpt) Read more at blog.christianitytoday.com ...
Not necessarily... A valid marrigage can happen in ANY church.
but if he sacrafices himself to Moloch, that would be a good thing.
That’s fitting. Especially after today.
He’s too old. Moloch demands children.
Laura is pro-abortion; she will enter the Church the same day as Gloria Steinem.
And W will not join a Church that Laura couldn’t endorse as well.
So, not expecting W to swim the Tiber any time soon.
You mean "make it official?"
If Newt is twice divorced how can he get married Catholic?
Did he get married in the Church? Somehow I doubt it.
Because his first marriage was of questionable validity, it may be annulled.
The fact that his second and third marriages occurred while his first marriages were putatively valid takes them out of consideration right off the bat—they’re both nullities in the eyes of the Church.
I understand “an old man in a white dress” wants a raise.
You do understand that Catholics are perfectly satisfied with their interpretation of Bible doctrine—having published the Books in question for a few millennia and all?
With Open Arms - Catholics, Divorce & Remarriage
Hosie, S.M., John
The truth is, the terminology trips up those who do not understand the concepts.
A Catholic with a valid “civil” marriage can later receive another valid “civil” marriage, and have that new marriage respected by the Church.
In the eyes of Church, even if BOTH Weddings were held in a Catholic Church, or otherwise witnessed by a Catholic Priest, It is possible to have the second Marriage WITHIN the Church, even if both of the original partners are still alive.
-— It requires only the sincere belief by the person seeking marriage in the Church that the original marriage was not “sacramental” -— this does not even require the official “annulment” of the original Catholic marriage.
I am sure this post will create a firestorm, among Catholics and non-Catholics, alike.
But it is the truth.
It is not “remarriage” because the “conscience” loophole or the formal annulment process would both require that the first “Marriage” was invalid in the eyes of the Catholic involved, and therefore invalid in the eyes of the Church.
Huh?
.....another “thankfully Converted Catholic!” How wonderful. :0)
I don’t think the conversion will help him politically: evangelical Protestants, who form an important part of the Republican base, will now not support him. While most Protestants would not have an issue with voting for a lifelong Catholic (though some still have trouble with it), a convert is a different matter. My guess is that it will put him in the same unelectable category as the Morman Romney.
Rush had some unflatterng cvomments about Noot today - the RINOs are being exposed and, hopefully, expunged.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.