BORIS JOHNSON was able to be married in a full Roman Catholic marriage in Westminster Cathedral because the RC does not recognise the marriages of a baptised Catholic outside a Catholic church.
Johnson was baptised a Catholic but later joined the Church of England and was confirmed there.
This is all “How many angels can fit on the head of a needle” claptrap.
The RC did not get much involved in marriages until the 12 th century.
And when it did get involved it did so to control men and women and their sex life and bodies.
A typical nonsense of canon law is called the Petrine Privilege.
Petrine privilege, also known as the privilege of the faith or favor of the faith, is a ground recognized in Catholic canon law allowing for dissolution by the Pope of a valid natural marriage between a baptized and a non-baptized person for the sake of the salvation of the soul of someone who is thus enabled to marry in the Church.
In essence, it is an extension to marriages between a baptised and a non-baptized person of the logic of the Pauline privilege, the latter being dissolution of a marriage between two non-baptized persons to enable one of them, on becoming a Christian, to enter a Christian marriage.
According to Canon 1150 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law, the privilege of the faith “possesses the favor of law.” In other words, whenever it is possible that the privilege is applicable, the law favors its granting. Nevertheless, dissolution of a marriage in favor of the faith, which is seen as having a biblical precedent in Jews putting away their non-Jewish wives recounted in Ezra 10:1–14, is rarely used.
Boris does not strike me as a man who is overly interested in religion at all.
I imagine he went through the Catholic ceremony for his partner’s sake as she takes her religion more seriously.
Mind you, I don’t think either of them will be practising the RC method of contraception – THE RHYTHM METHOD 🤯
As my father used to say “Where would you get a jazz band at three in the morning”. 🤣
MY ADVICE TO COUPLES
When I meet couples who want to marry and have a “complication” like a divorce I tell them not to waste their time on annulments.
I advise them to look after all their responsibilities from the first marriage, especially with regard to children.
I then tell them to get a civil divorce and advise them that they can marry “in the eyes of God” and in the eyes of the law of the land.
I tell them it does not matter a jot what a pope or bishop or priest thinks.
Its what God thinks that matters.
And, as God is LOVE he is very pleased with every genuine expression of love between his children – whether that is someone who made a mistake before – or two men or two women who love each other.
And why should supposedly celibate men, who spend their evenings in gay saunas, dictate to genuine couples grappling with the challenges of life, family, finances etc?
103 replies on “BORIS’ CATHOLIC WEDDING IN WESTMINSTER CATHEDRAL – CANON LAW MUMBO JUMBO.”
You managed to get in a mention of Vatican Roulette! Which literally only has the useful purpose of helping people having difficulty conceiving to know when to do it.
Serious question though, do priests get away with so much shagging, cruising, wanking and grindring because they think at least it’s not a valid marriage so it doesn’t matter?
Yes, priests do get away, at least in their own heads, with those things for that reason. One priest on this blog recently rationalised as a non-breach of his celibacy promise Fr Ger Fitzgerald ‘s habitual ducking a female parishioner.
These guys have self-convenient, elastic consciences.
Magna, in a situation like that, any woman has a choice to set an ultimatum on the priest; leave the priesthood and commit to a relationship with her or else adhere to his vow of celebacy.
If any woman does not set an ultimatum in that situation, she must feel it is too much to ask. She is also opening herself to the possibility that should the relationship end, the priest has not fully committed to her and through forgiveness can continue his priesthood.
Priests with feelings of vocational anxiety should speak to their bishop or religious superior as suggested on this blog a few weeks ago. Being dishonest of the vow of celebacy is not the solution.
Seamus thank you for acknowledging that priests are incapable of acting like adults with consciences and are completely dependent on others to tell them about morals. This is of a par with the sisters who are incapable of running a children’s home without social workers standing by to tell them when their treatment of the children crosses over into torture.
6:06, any priest with vocational anxiety isn’t going to be in a clear frame of mind to decide shall he stay or shall he go. In a healthy relationship, both speak about their feelings and plans for the future. A priest who is still a priest has not committed to a relationship. Any woman would be completely mistaken to think otherwise surely?
Seamus I really must commend you for your honesty (rare on this blog) in admitting that you think priests should be able to dip their sausage anywhere they feel like as long as they don’t commit themselves, and blame the other partner for this. Bravo!
No doubt you would wish to extend the indulgence you show to anyone else experiencing vocational anxiety. No doubt many a bricklayer would benefit from a months reflection at one of these clinics priests go to.
lol 8:14, if that’s how you want to misrepresent what I have written, enjoy the spin! 😉
Seamus, since you first appeared on this blog I have to commend your consistecy, …….in spouting sanctimonious shite, day after day. While you intersperse some smatterings of biblical utterances, your comments continually demonstrate a narrow fixated religiosity of the cathbots mentality, boringly repetitive,……….and annoying for their incessant frequency. I hope you soon disappear from the blog like others of similar disposition in the past.
To Regular Reader: I have to agree. He’s worse than Bella!
2 plus 2 is not 5. Some people are open to conversations about what is right. Catholics, people of all faiths and people of no faith have flaws. I’m not aware of anyone on the planet who has a monopoly on always being right.
Seamus: words from your last sentence certainly apply to you, “I’m just not aware.”
Petrine? I thought it was Pauline.
Peter: Petrine ( or Daisy: Daisyline lol 🤣).
And; Paul: Pauline ( pro’nounced: Paul-ine ).
I used to say Pauline in college and the lads would pi55 themselves laughing lol.
The Petrine and the Pauline epistles…
— The Daisyline epistles and appendices of CPR Rules 🤣 x
Why isn’t the Church honest enough to say that annulments are Catholic divorces? When couples are happy they don’t claim they were never married in the first place.
It is only when they start to hate each other’s guts or one of them is unfaithful that they start to talk about there never being a marriage.
The number of annulments, especially in the US, exploded after the Council.
Are any other sacraments annuled?
I think there is a recent parallel when it was found a US deacon was baptising babies saying ‘we baptise you…’. Obviously not precisely the same but similar because it was found they hadn’t been baptised. One of them was a priest 😂
It wasn’t found out they hadn’t been baptised. A Roman curial office decided according to criteria which would have been appropriately applied to a superstitious practice. Anyone giving any heed to such bureaucratic niceties is daft.
Sheer clericalism for an individual permanent deacon to take it on himself to change the words. The liturgy and the sacraments are not the property of the clergy but they often forget that.
Not necessarily clericalism, it may purely be poor formation in the liturgy? I mean, we have Seamus posting here who sees himself as free to decide what is in the deposit of faith and this poor formation is repeated world wide.
I agree with comments. I disagree with comments. I am open to conversations about what is right. Can you tell us why you hide away from conversations about what is right?!
There’s a brilliant article saying that the message this farce puts out is that it’s ok for Catholics to have trial marriages outside the Church and if they don’t work out they can get married in the Church, because their non-Catholic marriages were just bits of rubbish and don’t count.
I met a Polish lady yesterday who did this in the 1960s and then had a church wedding 10 years later as she wanted to test him out as he was English.
Pat, could you please do an article tomorrow with your reflections on Fr. Jeffrey Steel, formerly of Westminster Diocese?
There is so much information on this guy scattered on the internet as it is.
I agree with you that somebody like Pat needs to gather everything together an expose him.
The Romanists had no problem recognising the validity of non- sacramental marriages for the first millenium; then a pope, not God, decided, in a highly arbitrary way, that these marriages were no longer valid.
I truly don’t understand any couple’s seeking the approval of an institutional Church that has a such a history of moral fickleness, inconsistency, and duplicity as the Roman Catholic Church. Why would anyone seek the blessing of such Pharisees?
You know why, Magna. Baaaaaaa!
Which pope allegedly made that decision, Magna carta?
Who cares what you think. The Anglicans have Canon Law too. Go and research. You have a lot to learn. Idiot.
Anglican canon law cannot declare a lawful civil marriage as invalid. Magna is correct – marriages in facie ecclesiae, were regarded as validly married by the king’s courts, the ecclesiastical tribunals and the church, and by society. However, so-called common law marriages contracted without benefit of clergy, entered into by the parties were also generally regarded as being on a plane of parity with church marriages.
Lol this is such a funny reappearance of the silly ‘look at them’ argument the cathbots apply to abuse. ‘Our church law is ridiculous – look they’ve got church law too!’ 🤣
Love and marriage, love and marriage
They go together like a horse and carriage
This I’ll tell you brother
You can’t have one without the other…
The blog story and comments, the blog story and comments
They go together like a horse and carriage
This I’ll tell you brother
You can’t have one without the other…
A preceding comment merely offered balance to today’s blog story. 11:40, can you please tell us why you hide from a conversation about what is right?
The idea behind Bois’ previous marriages being invalid was that he had not defected because such an act was not forseen in law at the time and that he was bound by church law in marriage which he did not fulfil in either case (canon 1059). If the form is defective then it is as if the consent wasn’t given. Therefore according to the logic of canon law he was still free to marry.
I make this comment not as a defense of the law but merely to highlight the jurisprudence at play. People have a natural right to marry and anything which hinders them from doing so, or allows them to play hard and fast with such a sacred bond, is clearly an unjust legal structure.
Thank you for this comment. Your first sentence rather proves Pat’s point.
Pope Francis has ordered the biggest changes to the Catholic Church’s penal code in four decades, which will force bishops to take action against clerics who abuse minors and vulnerable adults or else lose office.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Any bishop worth his salt should cleanse the church of those who are not fit to be in clerical state. Monks elect an abbot. Popes are chosen by the College of Cardinals. Is it for better or for worse that priests of a community do not get to elect their bishop?
Have you seen some of the messes that result from chapters of monks electing their abbot?
I have sympathy for any diocese of priests lamenting the many more years of flawed leadership that they must endure. Had they a say in their appointed shepherd, could it have been for better or would it have been for worse?
I think it depends who is doing the voting! Say in a diocese where you have a lot of jack the lad priests or a diocese with a large group of priests determined to push a particular agenda, it could have disadvantages.
My own preference would be to decide by lot from either everyone eligible or a shortlist of nominations. This has an apostolic precedent of course.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The year is 2021. That is something which should have been happening all along but they’ve been happy to get away with it for centuries.
Canon law permits a girl to marry at 14 whIch is seriously messed up. All the priests I know who have studied canon law are a bit odd. Two of the canon lawyers from Liverpool were nonces – Frs Tom Wood and Anthony McCaffery.
The Commandment says; “Thou shalt not commit adultery”
“The RC did not get much involved in marriages until the 12 th century.”
Marriage is marriage, whether that is before or after the 12th century and whether that is inside or outside the church.
“God is LOVE he is very pleased with every genuine expression of love between his children”
The church to be fair baptise children whose parents are not married, marry parents of children and advocate intimacy within committed relationships while their ideal is within marriage. You use the words “genuine expression of love”. The church uses the words “committed relationship”.
This blog had a story about an abusive priest in Australia. The priest’s father was abusive of his wife. The wife stayed in the unhealthy marriage because of her religious faith. Noone should be abused like that. Where someone is wronged by their spouse be that adultery, abuse or abandonment, the person who has been wronged should be freed.
Another commandment forbids having other gods before the Lord. A Stark warning to Romanists.
You are absolutely right, + Pat, this is a bit of mumbo jumbo. It only comes about because by chance BJ is able to tick that “baptised Catholic” box that invalidates any marriage or relationship he has previously been in. Complete nonsense. Even my 93 your old mother, a staunch Catholic and fvery aithful, thinks it very strange and remembers so many family members and friends who fell foul of the Catholic Church and its canon law in respect of their relationships and marriages even though they were good people and were trying to do their best in faithful and loving families and relationships. And they were turned away by the Church. Because they didn’t tick the right box. As the Church has done to me, telling me still that I am “intrinsically disordered” and holding me at arm’s length because I have been in a faithful loving same sex relationship for decades – which is far longer than BJ was faithful to anything ! I think this little box ticking canonical exercise has made people think about what really does constitute faithfulness, love, goodness and the validity of a relationship / marriage. And, many of them will conclude that just happening to have been lucky enough to be baptised a Catholic and able to use that to jump over a barrier and be embraced in Westminster Cathedral is – well, as you say, mumbo jumbo !
Poor Carrie ! Now that she, a Catholic, has tied the knot with Boris Johnson, when it comes to having to extricate herself from her adulterous, philandering, untrustworthy husband, she will have to undergo the annulment process in order to free herself and move on. As she inevitably will. Come back in 5 years and see where they are. This marriage is doomed. Because of Johnson who is plain and simply a liar and cannot be trusted. Even to take marriage vows.
Isn’t his infidelity before they were married the cause of the massive row they had that ended up in the papers.
This box-ticking marriage is doomed. A man who on three separate occasions says “till death us do part” shouldn’t be getting married in Westminster Cathedral.
The upshot of this is that any nominal Catholic proposing to marry a non-Catholic should have the wedding in a registry office or Proddy church. If love grows cold they can abandon the non-Catholic spouse and any children, dust themselves down and start again with new spouse and have a Catholic wedding, or keep on marrying Protestants, cos they don’t count.
I agree and also from the point of view of the non catholic, because who the hell would want that bunch of freaks involved in your marriage or family life. If you really want a church wedding, in England the church of England may oblige. Failing that there are always the unitarians.
Or me 😁
LikeLiked by 1 person
Father Humphreys consulted Canon Lawyers and also the Cardinal and the media also had it wrong as Father Humphreys has not been Cathedral Administrator for a long time.
I see all the Christian values on the blog today again.
Can you not even offer up a prayer for the successful success of this couple in Happiness.
It is Good to have people in High places welcome back Boris. 🙂
Imagine – now, according to Canon Law clerical child abuse is to be treated as a crime – no shit Sherlock and who knew?
The Catholic Church couldn’t safeguard a bag of crisps let alone the deposit of faith and no parent in their right mind could think a child was safe around anything where a Catholic priest was present.
This ‘meme’ – the one they have been trying to silence for years – Roman Catholic Priest is a by word for paedophile – is well and truly out there in the Zeitgeist.
Programme makers even weave in a Catholic clergy paedophile thread – check out Mare of Eastwood and its positively de rigeur for a Stand Up Comedian to take the piss out of kiddy fiddler clergy.
Nice one lads – a right cock up if ever there was one! And my o my do they like a cock up!!
I guess +Elsie Garnet has a lot of explaining to do, Bp Pat.
Could some one explain how you can be confirmed into the Church of England, as Bojo was, and still remain a Roman Catholic?
Most Christian churches recognize one another’s baptism. Confirmation is the final sacrament of initiation. It stands to reason that since RCc recognizes Christian baptism in the Anglican Church it would also recognize confirmation.
I’m not so sure that is true ???
It’s not true. If you convert to RC they recognise any baptism using the approved form but not Anglican confirmation.
No the RCC as part of the Ecumenism accept Baptism / Christening in all religions.
But not confirmation as you would need to go through the Canonical procedure because you are a confirmed member of another Religious community.
But how can Clergy find out if they are Confirmed in another Faith only if the person tells them as GDPR does not allow it.
You cannot even ask if someone is in hospital because of GDPR.
Clergy are not going to the criminal courts for no one.
I think the RC regard you as a baptized Catholic no matter what you do later.
Crazy. These people should be allowed nowhere near human relationships.
Once a Catholic always a Catholic they all return 😉
My Lord and My God
If you Google debaptism you get interesting results. Of course the church wouldn’t recognise it.
As commented yesterday it is important to put your requirements for funeral etc in your will and there is also the practice of advance directives if you are worried your religious family may take matters into their own hands.
Are you not a baptised Catholic then?
That is true about Baptism but the problem the RCC has is lack of registers so post covid there is suppose to be a RRC Parish questionnaires being done.
Also the National census is happing next year however it came back in 2011 and there were far more RCC Catholic than was registered to nearly 450000 in the UK so Parish records were well wrong.
There is the big problem of non attendance but the number of people saying they are RCC is shocking due to the lack of Good parish records.
Given the ‘scandal’ which was to be occasioned by the marriage of a known and apparently unrepentant sinner, should the priest have insisted on allowing them only the bare minimum (eg 8am on a Monday morning in the crypt with no guests and no mass)?
In England and Wales executors can ignore funeral instructions. So probably best to appoint a professional executor who will ensure your wishes are fulfilled. I suppose you could always make a conditional legacy to your executors – that they will only receive a legacy if they carry out your funeral wishes.
Yes that’s what I meant.
To save money just write or email the parish priest of the parish you are in and he will note it on your records.
Although it is a Corporal work of mercy NO clergy would want to give someone a funeral Mass that they did not want however you can now have a Funeral Service in our Churches again if you do not want that inform the PP.
You never know the minute or the hour you will be called into Paradise.
I would imagine it would be Bishop Michael for Bishop Pat when he takes over the Dioceses of Larne in many years to come.
Wonder if Boris and Carrie had marriage instruction from the priest who married them?
The notion of a celibate Roman Catholic priest instructing a young couple about a state or vocation he knows about is risible – furthermore he may well be giving marriage instruction by day gay sauna at night – it’s beyond parady and if it wasn’t so tragic it would be hilarious.
I’ve noticed the younger clergy get off on the power dynamic – and overreach on the teaching and preaching – you know Father knows best about everything (birth control (natural obvs, resolution/conflict, etc).
Truth be told you are probably the one visiting the guy sauna 4.06pm.
There is an obsession in some quarters about priests preaching to married couples when priests themselves have not been married. In society, if people have a problem, they might speak with a psychologist though the psychologist has not gone through the experiences they have. That doesn’t exclude the psychologist from being able to carry out his/her work.
Priests will have experiences in life from their parents, family, friends and the many couples they meet through their ministry etc.. Priests are quite entitled to offer advice from their experiences through their ministry and the university of life.
Saying priests cannot give advice because they have not been married is just a cheap lazy shot.
I imagine Fr Marsden would give couples a copy of ‘The Theology of the Body for Beginners.’
4.06: The reason we have pre marriage preparation courses is precisely because “Farher” doesn’t know best. Your information is totally wrong. A priest meets couples simply to fill out the necessary documentation, help the couple prepare their ceremony and to do a rehearsal with them. Our pastoral duty and care to couples is carried out caringly and professionally. We are of assistance in whatever way possible. Usually the Catholic teaching in areas of sexuality is given as part of the Pre Marriage Course. Thankfully these courses are run by professionally trained counsellors, therapists, medics and others with expertise in relationships, finances and relationship anger management and resolution. The priest’s role is a pastoral one and as a member of the Preparation Team gives the Church’s teaching on a wide area of topics. Thereafter the couple decide their own personal experiences re: faith, sacrament of marriage, children’s religious upbringing etc….No forcing anything on anyone, just there to help caringly and pastorally. Please get your information correct before spouting untruths. Most priests are aware of their responsibilities and rely on the Preparation Team to prepare couples best.
LikeLiked by 1 person
2021 is the centenary of Marie Stopes setting up the UK’s first family planning clinic. Contrary to popular belief she was dead against abortion.
She also corresponded with Hitler and advocated the compulsory sterilization of those considered unfit to have children.
One of the reasons the pro-choice find the RC church sooo distasteful is that its views chimed completely with mid-century fascism, including encouraging ‘the fit’ to have lots of children and we’ve all seen the pictures of RC bishops seig heiling away.
Anyone with a sense of history will see the irony of claiming the church has changed in the past decade.
Pat why is Yvonne telling many in Ennis that you asked her to personally thank you on your own blog. Many questions being asked here.
Yvonne did thank me. I never asked her to. In helping her I’m simply doing my Christian and priestly duty.
You need to be asking the right questions – about Ger, Fintan etc.
I would like to be a fly in the wall tomorrow at Killaloe meetings and they will hear the real Fintan.
Council of Priests followed by Diocesan Pastoral Council and that is been monthly since Ger and Gerry started to disgrace his dioceses
I have no clue really as regards to Canon law and its nuances. To be honest with you, I had no religious education at all whatsoever just barely skimming above the surface. Most of us as deaf boys were confirmed without any education in catechism or religious education. For instance didn’t know how to say our father or hail Mary until age 16.
Does it make our conformations invalid? Cos it was said in the past that kids needs to know the answers to questions being asked by Bishop in question as regards to their confirmations.
I did google on debaptism as I never heard of that terminology until you mentioned it. It seems to me that all churches irrespective of their religion, recognised baptism as such.
So baptism can’t be reversed say if someone wants to become an aethist, just asking my question 🙄
One can though, repudiate the faith or church one was baptized into.
Recently a man wrote to Amy Martin to repudiate his baptism. Amy had it noted in the baptism register.
Thanks pat for that clarification. Think it might be useful for MMM and some aethists out there.
Its the first time that I heard it here that baptism can be reversed. Its news to me. Thought it was nigh impossible to reverse it.
Another question : does it invalidate my confirmation cos I hadn’t the foggiest idea of what means to be rcc and had no religious education nor had any catechism at all whatsoever
Er, truth be told, I’m not a Roman Catholic priest giving marriage instruction – so visiting a gay sauna would present no moral contradiction for me whatsoever- but for a Roman Catholic priest who is giving marriage instruction by day but cruising in a gay sauna at night, it does, because it smacks of hypocrisy, double speak and a double life.
Good one 4:29. 🛀
D.G. I feel no need to repudiate a meaningless ritual imposed over me as an infant, despite whatever significance others may attach to it. To request the RCC to “de-baptise” me would be to recognise it as having any significance or ‘power’ concerning me.
Thankfully the Church has moved on this pass decade and now there is the amazing SPRED teams who do fantastic work in nearly every parish or dioceses.
Many Churches have the Mass in sign language and that is excellent and to see the Joy of the Spirit pouring through.
Sadly many of the things you speak about Thank God are in the past and really the Church has moved on.
You call Our Pope “Fanny the Gas lighter” well we are eco friendly now so it is electronic lighters 🙂
You gotta be joking re many churches have mass in sign language. It’s very few I know one up in the North which is regular BSL. Other one is in Dublin where PP(suppoter of pride as he’s one of them) used to work as chaplain to the deaf. Please note that not that many churches show it just maybe 2 or 3 & that’s it.
In USA, its very popular among the evangelicals/pentecostalists as I was amazed to see it live. They came from St Mark ex Dublin and few places from Europe.
Now we come to frankie the gaslighter, he was lauded all over re new and revamped Canon law on abuses. But the devil is in the detail which I realise Marie collins was right.
Have a good look on here (which makes me wonder that was he gaslighting us re new Canon law on abuses(😉👅)
Didn’tthe teaching staff in Cabra teach any catechism?
Nope, not at all whatsoever just mainly small and simple bible stories. That was it.
Heard they used to teach catechism until 1960’s then stopped it all together then 20 years later I came in.. Never knew what catechism was until older deaf man well over his 80s explained to me how he was taught in 1940 and 1950s. I was shocked…… Zero knowledge of catechism when he asked me. I was quite embarrassed, nada, nil, zilch etc etc.
Beautiful weather in the North!
Bored! Just ticking off items from my list of things to do this Summer.. getting there!
A bit of gardening maybe! Old branches and leaves need collecting.. a barbecue even!
Anyway, must fly! There are only so many hours in the day..
Ooh interesting… The traditio site refers to Johnson as a bigamist and says his latest marriage is invalid. So they’re obviously taking the view that his first marriage was valid.
My apologies as I should refer it to poster 6.54pm, not at 5.44pm
The Church does not teach the catechism as you would think like in the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s you would need to go to the Latin Mass Brigade for that.
The church teaches the sacraments which are most important.
If the church was to start to lecture on the catechism then it would be totally empty sadly some clergy would need to go and look it up.
I think you would struggle to find many in this millennium who know the catechism.
And now the Irish Bishops have decided the Sacraments will be taught in the home most parents are not going to lecture their children on the catechism.
Pat, I would advise not publishing the sad and obsessive thoughts of the poster who gets off on naming two former seminarians in the context of sexual activity.
Given you thought my last post cheap and lazy allow me to give you a richer more vigorous ‘shot.’
The majority of Roman Catholic clergy are emotionally, psychologically and sexually immature and dysfunctional.
The majority of Roman Catholic clergy are active or repressed homosexuals.
The majority of Roman Catholic clergy are bachelor’s devoted to a selfish and self-serving lifestyle.
The Roman Catholic Clergy as a profession, say as opposed to Psychologists, Psychiatrists, or any profession you can think of, is identified with the crime of the sexual abuse of children and perverting the course of justice.
So, what may appear to you as a cheap and lazy shot, set against this backdrop sheds light on why I (and millions upon millions of others) think the notion of a Roman Catholic clergyman giving them instruction about marriage utterly risible.
Consider, for a brief moment, if your clerical mindset affords you the elasticity, that Cardinal Alfonso Trujillo, would have pronounced on condoms and the sanctity of marriage, as the President of the Pontifical Council for Marriage and Family Life, whilst at the same time sadisticaly whipping and beating the rent boy (s) he had just copulated with.
I’m not saying that Roman Catholic Clergy can’t give advice – God knows they love doing that, what I’m saying is no one is listening!!!!
6:58, thanks for your detailed comment. It’s like a warning from the Bible; “But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.”
People have real friends in life but unfortunately fake friends come along in life too. Their have been true prophets but also false prophets. Sadly there are false priests in clerical state. There are also many good priests. Many parishioners are very grateful.
And just imagine – there are even people who make up fake profiles on the internet and troll people with them!
Bishop Pat this last few months has helped the SSPX and he even helps RCC employees.
Very kind despite the way he is treated by the RCC.
A good Priest lost because of a nasty Bishop however we will pray for Cahal Daly but I would not liked to be him in front of Our Lord and the same with Sean Brady.
I’ll do my best to ignore the rather pompous/self-righteous tone of your post.
The scenario of a multi-team approach to Pre-Marriage courses etc is a fiction which simply isn’t the lived experience in most parishes around the world – your rose tinted view of Father being ‘simply’ part of a team (because he’s such a team player) there simply to helpfully assist in the filling in of documents etc is pure Disney – Father is invariably immature and out of his depth and liturgically not even a benign dictator.
Not sure what playbook your following but it sure ain’t planet get real.
I agree. I think the scenario 6:08 describes is more likely in the US for example, but is nowhere universal.
7.14: You should indeed Keep “it” Real: THE TRUTH. I am speaking of the Diocese which I belong to and having participated in Pre Marriage Preparation Courses, purely at the level of imparting Church teachings on marriage and sexuality. My role was a pastorally caring role. The majority of couples, mostly in their early 30’s nowadays, enjoy partaking in these courses. They are helped by professionals in various areas as I already mentioned. I have no idea why you think my post is pompous or arrogant!! Guess you’re a priest hater. Your problem, not mine!! Your comments is bordering on the silly, idiculous and utterly stupid. There’s not one thing I said that warrants your petty, imbecilic response. I really think you need to GET REAL …😂😂😁😁😁…
Keep it Real : 7.14: You moron. How did you arrive at those ridiculous conclusions about 6.08? Did he annoy you about your crap posting at 4.06? You, sir, are the pompous fool. You plonker. What shite!!
7.14: Do you actually know any of the procedures attached to couples requesting The Sacrament of Marriage? Do you know anything about civil notification, establishing of freedom to marry, relevant documentation? I think you need a crash course in Catholic Church Marriage requirements. Try to be intelligent, not a lazy arse, sound byte f*****g cynic.
Re Boris & Carrie: I do hope the Fr Humphreys had the good sense to put a note in the margin of the marriage register that the groom has a consistent history of being a f**king adulterous philandering c**t who has never been truthful, honest and faithful and probably does not know what those virtues are, and that even though he mouthed the words of the marriage vows there is almost zero chance of his understanding them or being prepared to keep them. That will make Carrie’s future annulment of her marriage to Boris easier. Or better still, Humphreys could just have not married them. That would have been honest and decent and respectful of the rest of us who have to put up with mumbo jumbo nonsense canon law and pastoral practice that is thrown at us by priests.
I’m guessing your over twenty years of age – if you were under twenty it would be forgivable but trust me when you have to resort to emojis and capital letters (like your shouting) any case or point your trying to make isn’t just weakened it’s completely lost.
ONG I love this blog – the image of you coughing, spluttering, spitting out invective, incandescent with faux rage and indignation, your vocabulary stretched to breaking point, your very best response to my post, a tirade of mixed expletives: rather tepid if I may say so; moron, crap, pompous, fool and plonker.
Honestly, is that the best you can do?
Is that all you got?
Anyway thank you for reminding me why I enjoy this blog so much.