Do we need -

[asperity]

If I was you I would appeal because a civil ceremony is not recognised as a Catholic wedding. Fact. My wife was not Catholic but was married in a civil ceremony and then divorced. We could have had a wedding in a Catholic church no problem, but chose not to. Fact. Of course you may choose not to bother as, if the club you want to be in doesn't want you, what's the point of trying to join! I'm a born again atheist now by the way.

[inky pete]

Well, that's completely at odds with what they're saying now. Both on their website and in the meetings I've had with the Parish, the Diocese, the Bishop, and the Church Court itself over the past nine months or so.

 

Had I been a Catholic at the time of my first wedding, but still had a civil ceremony and had never had my first marriage blessed or otherwise celebrated in a Catholic church, then it would be different. But I wasn't, so it isn't - and I definitely can't marry my Catholic partner in a Catholic church without an annulment. Oh, and to get an annulment my ex-wife would have to support my application that our marriage was flawed from the beginning.

[Sha]

Inky Pete how can you say my post was incorrect and convoluted then post a web address proving I am right. {First paragraph}

Thats convoluted!!!!

[inky pete]

Not true. Camilla was not Catholic at the time of her first wedding.

 

The exception in the first paragraph applies only to Catholics who have non-Catholic weddings and who never celebrate that marriage in church. In these circumstances the marriage can be deemed not to have taken place.

 

Under the provisons of the second paragraph, however, since she was married to a Catholic in a ceremony which complied with the restrictions laid out in the first paragraph it could be discounted by the church IF it was never celebrated in or recognised by the church.

 

But, her and her first husbands children were brought up in the Catholic faith, including baptism, confirmation, and communion - which at the time would have required the non-Catholic parent to agree to be bound by Catholic law. This is taken as recognition of the marriage by the church, since it confers on the non-Catholic parent the full range of Catholic responsibilities towards the children.

 

The situation regarding children is slightly different these days. Nowadays it is the Catholic parent who commits to ensuring that the children are brought up in accordance with Catholic law. The non-Catholic parent gets pretty well sidelined.

[asperity]

Quote:

 

"The exception is when their first marriage took place outside a Catholic Church, such as in a Register Office or in a civil setting either here in the UK or abroad, or in a non-Catholic Church without permission being obtained for that, and where that marriage has not been subsequently celebrated in a Catholic Church. In these cases the Church does not recognise the first marriage as valid"

 

To me that says that the Catholic church does not recognise a civil ceremony as valid on its own. If you had your first marriage blessed, well that would be the reason. Sounds unreal to me.

[Sha]

Sorry InkyPete, but you are wrong again!

Not sure whether a marriage could actually be valid due to a baptism, that seems illogical.

But am sure that BigEars is Tom Parker Bowles godparent, so if it was a catholic baptism how did they manage that!

[observer]

Perhaps Jerremy Kyle could have them on his show and sort it all out; plus Harry and Chas could have a DNA test?!