Is there an age limit for Catholics to marry in a church?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Huh? No

The church will marry faithful Catholics who belong to the church and will pay the church for performing the ceremony.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I west to college in the 1990 with a guy whose mom was 50 when she had him back in the early 1970s. (No IVF).

She did not have him at age 50. Don’t be so naive.

Haha Yes, my friend James in the 70s was born when his mom was in her 50s. It was really his older sister's baby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I west to college in the 1990 with a guy whose mom was 50 when she had him back in the early 1970s. (No IVF).

She did not have him at age 50. Don’t be so naive.

Haha Yes, my friend James in the 70s was born when his mom was in her 50s. It was really his older sister's baby.

You call your friend James an “it?”

Explains the multiple laughing emojis as you laugh about your it friend’s family issues. You don’t sound like a very nice friend or human being.

You phrased your comment oddly, as well. Besides calling your friend “it,”you say “it” (he) was his older sister’s baby.


People are not called it. James is James, or he, or him, or my friend. James is not it.

James had an older sister, and she became pregnant and gave birth to him. His grandmother raised him (not it, James is not an it) as her son. His bio mother was rebranded as his sister. (Of course she would be much older than James, as she gave birth to him.)

I find it very sad that you laugh so heartily at the life of James. Why do you think his life was a very funny joke? If his real mother/sister gave James to her mother/his grandmother to raise, how did James and how did you find out that his sister was actually his mother, and his mother was actually his grandmother? Was it a comical situation? James wasn’t at all surprised or concerned or confused about his life? You typed hahaha and added 3 laughing emojis, so James must have been laughing a lot about his situation!

My aunt gave up her only child by choice, she said had no desire to be a mom. My grandfather’s youngest sister adopted her baby. (She was the youngest of her siblings and never married or had bio kids.) My aunt was adamant that she never be identified as bio mom. She was very sure of her decision.

Baby born happy and healthy, goes home with adoptive mom/great aunt and real mom/aunt goes back to her pre-pregnancy life no issues. Baby and adoptive mom are great. Years pass. Baby grows up happily and (secret adoptive) mom is truly enamored of their family life and chance to be a mom. It actually worked out great!

Except when my aunt changed her mind. The child was 13 years old and real mom/my aunt decided she had made a terrible mistake and wanted to be mom to “her baby.” I am not going into detail but I believe my aunt to be one of the most selfish and bitter women on earth after the pure destruction she caused in the life of her bio-child. She didn’t even give the adoptive mom a chance to work with her for the best interests and mental health of the child.

So yeah, people sometimes have babies and the situation is not normal and families sometimes allow kids to be raised by family.

I just think your comment is insensitive and icky, and it struck a nerve with me because of the situation I witnessed within my own family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Huh? No

The church will marry faithful Catholics who belong to the church and will pay the church for performing the ceremony.

Incorrect. The Church does not levy a charge for performing a sacrament and marriage is a sacrament. Depending on the nature and size of the event they may want a facility fee, cleaning fee, organist fee, etc., but if a priest is conditioning a sacrament on receipt of a “stole fee” you need to complain to the Bishop forthwith.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Huh? No

The church will marry faithful Catholics who belong to the church and will pay the church for performing the ceremony.

Incorrect. The Church does not levy a charge for performing a sacrament and marriage is a sacrament. Depending on the nature and size of the event they may want a facility fee, cleaning fee, organist fee, etc., but if a priest is conditioning a sacrament on receipt of a “stole fee” you need to complain to the Bishop forthwith.

So the church does charge a fee. What you give the priest is an offering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Huh? No

The church will marry faithful Catholics who belong to the church and will pay the church for performing the ceremony.

Incorrect. The Church does not levy a charge for performing a sacrament and marriage is a sacrament. Depending on the nature and size of the event they may want a facility fee, cleaning fee, organist fee, etc., but if a priest is conditioning a sacrament on receipt of a “stole fee” you need to complain to the Bishop forthwith.

So the church does charge a fee. What you give the priest is an offering.

The post asserted that the Church will marry people who will “pay for the ceremony.” The essential “ceremony” of matrimony is the sacramental exchange of consent before witnesses including the priest or deacon who is the official witness.” There can never be a charge for this. So, no, the Church does not charge a fee for matrimony, and that is the point of my post, notwithstanding your puerile quibbling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I west to college in the 1990 with a guy whose mom was 50 when she had him back in the early 1970s. (No IVF).

Was he the 13th kid?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I west to college in the 1990 with a guy whose mom was 50 when she had him back in the early 1970s. (No IVF).

She did not have him at age 50. Don’t be so naive.

Sounds like you're the dummy here. My great grandmother had babies from her teens through to her 50s. My father has uncles that are younger than him. Just because something isn't typical in the U.S. and other western nations, doesn't mean it's not totally normal in other parts of the world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I west to college in the 1990 with a guy whose mom was 50 when she had him back in the early 1970s. (No IVF).

She did not have him at age 50. Don’t be so naive.

Haha Yes, my friend James in the 70s was born when his mom was in her 50s. It was really his older sister's baby.

You call your friend James an “it?”

Explains the multiple laughing emojis as you laugh about your it friend’s family issues. You don’t sound like a very nice friend or human being.

You phrased your comment oddly, as well. Besides calling your friend “it,”you say “it” (he) was his older sister’s baby.


People are not called it. James is James, or he, or him, or my friend. James is not it.

James had an older sister, and she became pregnant and gave birth to him. His grandmother raised him (not it, James is not an it) as her son. His bio mother was rebranded as his sister. (Of course she would be much older than James, as she gave birth to him.)

I find it very sad that you laugh so heartily at the life of James. Why do you think his life was a very funny joke? If his real mother/sister gave James to her mother/his grandmother to raise, how did James and how did you find out that his sister was actually his mother, and his mother was actually his grandmother? Was it a comical situation? James wasn’t at all surprised or concerned or confused about his life? You typed hahaha and added 3 laughing emojis, so James must have been laughing a lot about his situation!

My aunt gave up her only child by choice, she said had no desire to be a mom. My grandfather’s youngest sister adopted her baby. (She was the youngest of her siblings and never married or had bio kids.) My aunt was adamant that she never be identified as bio mom. She was very sure of her decision.

Baby born happy and healthy, goes home with adoptive mom/great aunt and real mom/aunt goes back to her pre-pregnancy life no issues. Baby and adoptive mom are great. Years pass. Baby grows up happily and (secret adoptive) mom is truly enamored of their family life and chance to be a mom. It actually worked out great!

Except when my aunt changed her mind. The child was 13 years old and real mom/my aunt decided she had made a terrible mistake and wanted to be mom to “her baby.” I am not going into detail but I believe my aunt to be one of the most selfish and bitter women on earth after the pure destruction she caused in the life of her bio-child. She didn’t even give the adoptive mom a chance to work with her for the best interests and mental health of the child.

So yeah, people sometimes have babies and the situation is not normal and families sometimes allow kids to be raised by family.

I just think your comment is insensitive and icky, and it struck a nerve with me because of the situation I witnessed within my own family.

You have issues.

[Anonymous]

I was a bridesmaid in Catholic wedding where my friend was 48 and knew they probably weren't going be able to have children.

The service was really creepy, because all the priest seemed to talk about was having kids. She was only getting married in the Catholic church because of her dh's family, and she didn't care. Neither of them ever set foot in another Catholic church again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I west to college in the 1990 with a guy whose mom was 50 when she had him back in the early 1970s. (No IVF).

She did not have him at age 50. Don’t be so naive.

Haha Yes, my friend James in the 70s was born when his mom was in her 50s. It was really his older sister's baby.

You call your friend James an “it?”

Explains the multiple laughing emojis as you laugh about your it friend’s family issues. You don’t sound like a very nice friend or human being.

You phrased your comment oddly, as well. Besides calling your friend “it,”you say “it” (he) was his older sister’s baby.


People are not called it. James is James, or he, or him, or my friend. James is not it.

James had an older sister, and she became pregnant and gave birth to him. His grandmother raised him (not it, James is not an it) as her son. His bio mother was rebranded as his sister. (Of course she would be much older than James, as she gave birth to him.)

I find it very sad that you laugh so heartily at the life of James. Why do you think his life was a very funny joke? If his real mother/sister gave James to her mother/his grandmother to raise, how did James and how did you find out that his sister was actually his mother, and his mother was actually his grandmother? Was it a comical situation? James wasn’t at all surprised or concerned or confused about his life? You typed hahaha and added 3 laughing emojis, so James must have been laughing a lot about his situation!

My aunt gave up her only child by choice, she said had no desire to be a mom. My grandfather’s youngest sister adopted her baby. (She was the youngest of her siblings and never married or had bio kids.) My aunt was adamant that she never be identified as bio mom. She was very sure of her decision.

Baby born happy and healthy, goes home with adoptive mom/great aunt and real mom/aunt goes back to her pre-pregnancy life no issues. Baby and adoptive mom are great. Years pass. Baby grows up happily and (secret adoptive) mom is truly enamored of their family life and chance to be a mom. It actually worked out great!

Except when my aunt changed her mind. The child was 13 years old and real mom/my aunt decided she had made a terrible mistake and wanted to be mom to “her baby.” I am not going into detail but I believe my aunt to be one of the most selfish and bitter women on earth after the pure destruction she caused in the life of her bio-child. She didn’t even give the adoptive mom a chance to work with her for the best interests and mental health of the child.

So yeah, people sometimes have babies and the situation is not normal and families sometimes allow kids to be raised by family.

I just think your comment is insensitive and icky, and it struck a nerve with me because of the situation I witnessed within my own family.

You have issues.

Of course they have issues. and they explained them. Maybe "it" pp will be more sensitive the next time a similar situation comes up. Pp obviously wasn't thinking that this could be personal to someone. Now they know. It's not a laughing matter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I was a bridesmaid in Catholic wedding where my friend was 48 and knew they probably weren't going be able to have children.

The service was really creepy, because all the priest seemed to talk about was having kids. She was only getting married in the Catholic church because of her dh's family, and she didn't care. Neither of them ever set foot in another Catholic church again.

The priest may have been giving his usual wedding sermon, completely insensitive to the age of the couple, or anything else about them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Huh? No

The church will marry faithful Catholics who belong to the church and will pay the church for performing the ceremony.

Incorrect. The Church does not levy a charge for performing a sacrament and marriage is a sacrament. Depending on the nature and size of the event they may want a facility fee, cleaning fee, organist fee, etc., but if a priest is conditioning a sacrament on receipt of a “stole fee” you need to complain to the Bishop forthwith.

So the church does charge a fee. What you give the priest is an offering.

Our priest refused the offering. Careful, it can be viewed as offensive to make that offer.