Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Recently Pulled Thread
Me ^ | 10-15-04 | Me

Posted on 10/15/2004 8:58:28 AM PDT by johniegrad

A Washington Times article was just pulled because the poster violated the copyright rules for our website. I was in the process of typing a response to the article and it was pulled prior to my posting. I went to the Times website and could not find it. There was something about his marriages that would be of interest to a number of Freepers, i.e., the article said he married Theresa Heinz BEFORE his first marriage was annulled. I think that may be new information. Is there a way to get this article, appropriately excerpted, back on the site.


TOPICS: Politics/Elections; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: annulment; catholicism; juliathorne; kerry; marriages
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-62 next last
To: johniegrad

I tried to read the original at the source and could not find it either.


41 posted on 10/15/2004 9:28:00 AM PDT by ChadsDad (If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #42 Removed by Moderator

To: Rebelbase

"Where in the Bible does God reveal that annulment is acceptable?"

It doesn't.

NO WHERE!

That's why Catholic often give you distasteful remarks that actually shows their true colors when confronted. It's a scam for money and allows them to day they do NOT "divorce" people - LOL! It's the same thing with a different label.


43 posted on 10/15/2004 9:32:45 AM PDT by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: nmh

In a three year span, every single word of the Bible is spoken at Mass. Your ignorance is disgusting.


44 posted on 10/15/2004 9:33:16 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever ("...upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: nmh

Where does it state that abortion is wrong?


45 posted on 10/15/2004 9:34:17 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever ("...upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: nmh
Sorry I don't accept urine or jars with a cross in it filled with urine.

Why not? After all, the cross you speak of in that heinous display was a CATHOLIC CRUCIFIX.

Think before you post.

46 posted on 10/15/2004 9:37:12 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever ("...upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: latina4dubya

"he annulled his first marriage, even though he had children from that marriage? i know people (mainly wealthy men) do this, i just don't understand how the Catholic Church allows it..."


Guess it depends on how large a donation the person wanting an anullment gives to certain catholic churches (?)


47 posted on 10/15/2004 9:37:31 AM PDT by SunnySide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever

"Where in the Bible does God reveal that annulment is acceptable?"

You didn't answer my question.


48 posted on 10/15/2004 9:38:34 AM PDT by Rebelbase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: nmh
Don't get me wrong... I am not advocating any particular positon on this.

I was simply addressing the issue of Kerry, potentially being married to two women at the same time.

See, according to the state, he wan't (he got the divorce first, then got re-married)

According to the Church he wasn't (he was still married to his first wife at the time and thus simply shacking up with Teresa, so he is a sinner)

I have been mystified for years as to how the Catholic Church recognizes the dissolution of marriages many years old, with the issuance of children, and yet decree that "no marriage took place".

Problematically, the Catholic Church is currently recognizing "no fault" mechanisms for the declaration that no marriage took place. For example, if I didn't believe at the time I got married that my marriage would presuppose marital fidelity, then, no marriage took place....pretty thin rationalization, if you ask me.

49 posted on 10/15/2004 9:42:38 AM PDT by steve in DC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Rebelbase

It doesn't. There also isn't anything that says abortion is wrong. It doesn't say that slavery is wrong. There's nothing in it about altar calls or Reformations or embryonic stem cells, either.

Perhaps your faith is "Biblical", but it's certainly not complete.


50 posted on 10/15/2004 9:51:46 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever ("...upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever

"Perhaps your faith is "Biblical", but it's certainly not
complete."

I haven't mentioned one word about my faith. What would cause you to make a comment like that?


51 posted on 10/15/2004 10:13:00 AM PDT by Rebelbase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Rebelbase

That's what I thought.


52 posted on 10/15/2004 10:16:58 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever ("...upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever

"that's what I thought"

You are making no sense. Please don't be cryptic.

Why would you state that my faith wasn't complete?


53 posted on 10/15/2004 10:22:06 AM PDT by Rebelbase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Rebelbase
You assume annulments are "unbiblical" because they do not appear in the Bible, yet the Protestant faith was born out of the "unbiblical" Reformation. Christianity obviously believes slavery is wrong, but there is nothing "biblical" to support this. There is also nothing "biblical" about embryonic stem cells or abortion, yet they are cause celebres in many sect of Christianity. By your reasoning, none of the above positions are valid and are illogical since they are not "biblical". Faith is formed not only in word (specifically 'The Word') but in reason as well. Reason dictated abortion as an evil not because it says so in the Bible but because abortion was considered a secular evil even before Christianity, and was reasoned to be an outgrowth of "Thou shalt not kill" and Isaiah's declaration of God having "knitted him in the womb." Jesus was downright biblically indifferent to slavery (except for spiritual slavery to sin), yet no one would dare believe that He would find human ownership as acceptable to God.

Let's not forget the entirely "otherly-Gospel-like" Catholic Crusades which only managed to spare the entire continent of Europe from being under the thumb of Sharia since the 11th century. Better yet, the un-acceptance (followed by the acceptance) of Galileo's theory of the sun as the center of the universe which, as most Catholic-haters would like to say, is proof that the Church is bad, yet cannot state on what Biblical grounds they would speak differently of Galileo's theory at that point in time.

Without Reason, you've put God in a lockbox. Thomas Aquinas wrote his masterpiece on the Catholic faith based on a combination of scripture and reason. When someone makes a stupid, imbecilic comment like "[Catholicism] is illogical and from another Gospel", I guarantee you someone like me is going to come along and set them straight.

The reasoning behind anullment is that a marital commitment did not exist when the vows were made. I could be a philandering bisexual who can father ten kids in the next twenty years, and at the same time regard my wife as a spiritually unequal piece of meat, separate in God's eyes instead of united as a reflection of Christ's union with the Church. I could be a bigamist. I could marry with the unspoken intent of divorcing my wife when I hit my middle-age crisis. I could marry without intending to be faithful. I could pretend to believe in Christ for the sake of participating in a family-sponsored wedding, have my vows mean nothing when they spill from my lips, and become a Sunday school teacher later in life - but it doesn't make my marriage valid. If there is an ongoing pattern of physical or emotional or verbal abuse, the marriage is stands a good chance of being annulled, with or without kids.

There may not be anything "biblically" chapter-and-verse about annullment but the same can be said for any of the above scenarios with regards to "valid" marriage.

54 posted on 10/15/2004 10:53:51 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever ("...upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: maryz

As I understand it, lots of prominent Catholics have been through this process, including several Kennedys. The first marriage can be annulled, even when several children have resulted from it, and the second marriage then be declared valid in the eyes of the Church.

To the non-Catholic, such as myself, the entire process looks like a hypocritical end-run around the no-divorce stance of the Church, as it it time-consuming and expensive and therefore not readily available except to the rich and well-connected.


55 posted on 10/15/2004 11:05:22 AM PDT by Restorer (Europe is heavily armed, but only with envy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever

Those were well written paragraphs, but you dodged the question again. Why do you think my faith is not "complete"?

Answer the question directly, please.


56 posted on 10/15/2004 11:06:52 AM PDT by Rebelbase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Rebelbase

Your faith is not complete if you are not receiving the sanctifying grace of the Sacraments in conjunction with knowing, living, and understanding the Word of God. The Sacraments are based in Scripture and tradition. If one's faith is reliant solely on Scripture, that faith is incomplete.


57 posted on 10/15/2004 11:23:19 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever ("...upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: nmh
With a Catholic there are two separations. The first is the civil separation; divorce or annulment. The second is the divorce or annulment under church law. Usually you get the civil action handled first and then work on the church aspect which takes a lot longer. Once you have been civilly divorce or had the marriage annulled you are free to marry again under civil law, however, you can't marry under cannon law until the Church takes action.
58 posted on 10/15/2004 11:29:44 AM PDT by airedale ( XZ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Rutles4Ever

Please tell me what a sacrament is. Is that communion?


59 posted on 10/15/2004 11:30:02 AM PDT by Rebelbase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Restorer

The Church has nothing to gain by granting annullments. Strong families are an important part of the foundation of the Church. Agreeably, there has been abuse of this by politically corrupted clergy, and there have been some flimsy cases to be sure, but it doesn't make the concept an enemy of Christian theology. If the Church decides the marriage didn't exist in the spiritual sense, then it didn't exist. There was a union, but not a marriage.


60 posted on 10/15/2004 11:32:30 AM PDT by Rutles4Ever ("...upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-62 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson