On another note, if Boris's first two wives were never baptized, canon
law would allow him to be legally married in the Catholic Church.
Posted on 06/01/2021 6:03:42 PM PDT by marshmallow
Church authorities said that “all necessary steps were taken, in both church and civil law,” ahead of twice-divorced British Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s wedding at a Catholic cathedral in London on Saturday.
Johnson married Carrie Symonds, the mother of his one-year-old son Wilfred, in a small ceremony at Westminster Cathedral on May 29.
A Westminster Cathedral spokesperson told the Sunday Times newspaper: “The bride and groom are both parishioners of the Westminster Cathedral parish and baptized Catholic.”
“All necessary steps were taken, in both church and civil law, and all formalities completed before the wedding. We wish them every happiness.”
News of the ceremony provoked debate among Catholics about how the prime minister was eligible to marry at the mother church of Catholics in England and Wales.
Fr. Mark Drew, a priest serving in the Archdiocese of Liverpool, asked how the wedding would be perceived by Catholics seeking a second marriage in church.
Writing on his Twitter account, he said: “Can anyone explain to me how ‘Boris’ Johnson, who left the Catholic Church while at Eton and is twice divorced, can be married at Westminster Cathedral, while I have to tell practicing Catholics in good faith who want a second marriage in Church that it’s not possible?”
He told CNA he accepted that the marriage was not contrary to canon law.
“But in decisions of this kind the need to avoid scandal is paramount in Catholic tradition. In such high-profile cases, rather than showing herself more accommodating, the Church should set the bar higher,” he commented.
He added that he was concerned about the kind of image that the Church was projecting.
(Excerpt) Read more at catholicnewsagency.com ...
Things are a bit looser on this sort of thing than in the Tudors’ day. LOL.
Church Law can be easily accessed online, but annulments can be granted for a range of issue’s to consent, from extreme imbecility to outright lying on the day of the wedding.
Boris is a politician, you tell me whether he falls into those categories or not.
All formalitie$
If he never had a church wedding in his first two marriages, then he can remarry in the Church.
On another note, if Boris's first two wives were never baptized, canon
law would allow him to be legally married in the Catholic Church.
Where will he have his next wedding? Synagogue? Mosque? Hindu, Buddhist, Shinto or Jewish Temple? Or maybe city hall? He was mayor of London for a while. In a pinch, he could even marry himself.
As the article explains and I have explained in previous posts on this gossipy topic, there were no annulments.
I think it’s most likely that neither of his former marriages was in the RC Church. If they were not it is basically like they never happened. Although, obviously they are not going to marry you if you are currently married, even if that was an official atheist ceremony in Las Vegas, or whatever.
Boy, they are making a big deal out of this, no? Meanwhile nobody had a problem with RC girl-killer and wife-dumper (by “annullment”) Ted Kennedy.
File under: nobody’s business but theirs, the priest, and maaaaaybe the Bishop. There is not currently a pope, so never mind him!
Westminster Cathedral is quite beautiful by the way. Worth a stop if you’re ever in London. Not 10% as grand as the formerly-Catholic Westminster Abbey but somehow a more powerfully spiritual place.
While the so called Catholic democRAT baby killers receive communion.
Yes, they are, and they’re exact. People get all jumbled up about Catholic marriage definitions because they confuse legal marriage (civil) with the Church’s sacramental marriage.
Thats not how annulments or matrimony works in the Catholic Church.
Catholics and non-Catholic’s would have to get their prior marriage declared null if they want to be married in a Catholic Church to someone.
All marriages are putative until a declaration is granted.
Even Baptized non-Catholics have to get an annulment from the Catholic Church for a prior marriage if they are to marry a Catholic.
That is Church law.
Fixed it.
They may describe it as “not an annulment” in the UK, but that’s not how it’s described on this side of the pond. It’s an annulment on the basis of lack of canonical form. Both his previous marriages were in the Church of England, although Johnson himself was a Catholic.
Yes, well that’s fine, they may have to be declared null. But basically, from the view of the RC Church they ARE null, so this is not a huge hurdle.
Full disclosure: I chose not to marry my husband in the RC Church (I’m the Catholic). And I was right, we did get divorced. Happy ending: we got re-married in Vegas and it was great and we are still together, for life. But, pretty sure the Church sees us as never married. That was certainly their attitude 35 years ago when we sought to have our daughter bapitized. (And we weren’t divorced then, sorry if this is confusing!) So they did not get to perform that sacrament for her.
Correct, a simple lack of Form annulment is still an annulment. Its way easier to obtain because it is easy to prove or disprove.
Correct, you were never married. Since the Church speaks as with the authority of Christ on matters pertaining binding and loosing, a Catholic is bound to Canon Law norms for matrimony.
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.