Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So because the priest messed up, you can accompany your civil divorce with a church annulment, and that's ok, because it's following the rules, but the PP's sister-in-law shouldn't have expected a church wedding even though there was a baby on the way -- i.e., it was high time she got married -- because she didn't follow the rules.

A legalistic religion.

Yep. So is Judaism, which Christianity came from.

However, as I said, PP's sister-in-law could have applied for a dispensation from the pre-Cana classes. What probably happened is this?

SIL was not a practicing Catholic. If she was, she'd know the rules regarding the sacrament of marriage. That's right, marriage is considered a sacrament so there is a period of preparation before it. I had to take classes before my daughters were baptized. (When I get my annulment, it will state that due to an impediment that the priest didn't note, the sacramental marriage never occured.)

The Church wedding was to satisfy older relatives.

She got pregnant and needed to speed things up.

She expected a priest who didn't know her (Since she didn't attend Mass regularly) to break the rules for her.

She didn't know to go over the priest's head to ask the bishop because she probably had no idea of the bishop's power over those matters since she wasn't a practicing Catholic.

If the SIL is still interested in the sacrament of marriage (doubtful), she and DH can take classes to prepare for it. Our parish offers them every 4 months for couples who have civil or non-Catholic marriages but want to have them "regularized".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So because the priest messed up, you can accompany your civil divorce with a church annulment, and that's ok, because it's following the rules, but the PP's sister-in-law shouldn't have expected a church wedding even though there was a baby on the way -- i.e., it was high time she got married -- because she didn't follow the rules.

A legalistic religion.

No. She said because she did not complete precana.

Lots of people can't receive the sacrament of marriage. Why do you care so much?

For example, I can receive the sacrament of holy orders. I never will. So what.

We completed pre-cana. There was another impediment which I won't state here because it's a rare one and I don't feel like outing myself on DCUM.

That's the way the cookie crumbles. There are rules to receiving sacraments. I did not marry in the church and it never bothered me, why does it bother you so much?

Anonymous wrote:
No, she shouldnt act at all. She should use her education to inform her to oppose the media-driven brainwashing for abortion and homosexual "marriage". Then, believing the right and moral things, she wont need to "act" at all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:its 2014 people.

my daughter is a current junior at Visi. I have no idea what she does with her BF (I have had the sex talk with her several times). Anyways, if she were to get knocked up by her 18 year old boyfriend who attends Gonzaga, both my husband and I would be in favor of her having an abortion. Financially we just could not afford to take one another child into our family nor are they responsbile enough to take care of a new born.

Should I consider myself a bad Cathlic for believing this.

I don't think you'd be a bad Catholic. That's between you and God. However, they could have the baby and give it up for adoption, but your first thought is abortion.

Adoption solves the problem of having a child you don't want to, or feel you can't, raise. It doesn't solve the problem of being pregnant when you don't want to be pregnant, or giving birth when you don't want to give birth.

Not having unprotected sex does.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:its 2014 people.

my daughter is a current junior at Visi. I have no idea what she does with her BF (I have had the sex talk with her several times). Anyways, if she were to get knocked up by her 18 year old boyfriend who attends Gonzaga, both my husband and I would be in favor of her having an abortion. Financially we just could not afford to take one another child into our family nor are they responsbile enough to take care of a new born.

Should I consider myself a bad Cathlic for believing this.

I don't think you'd be a bad Catholic. That's between you and God. However, they could have the baby and give it up for adoption, but your first thought is abortion.

Adoption solves the problem of having a child you don't want to, or feel you can't, raise. It doesn't solve the problem of being pregnant when you don't want to be pregnant, or giving birth when you don't want to give birth.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^Calm down. The pps were saying that "openly advocating" for choice and gay marriage might not go over well. My DD learned to navigate how to answer questions on the religion test (the same way you do on most any test): write the best answer the way the teacher taught and what s/he wants to read. But she didn't start an after school club for Choice.

So basically she has to act one way in school to pass tests but because she isn't like the teachers that teach her, has a different belief outside of school. Sounds like a great school and not confusing to kids at all.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So because the priest messed up, you can accompany your civil divorce with a church annulment, and that's ok, because it's following the rules, but the PP's sister-in-law shouldn't have expected a church wedding even though there was a baby on the way -- i.e., it was high time she got married -- because she didn't follow the rules.

A legalistic religion.

No. She said because she did not complete precana.

Lots of people can't receive the sacrament of marriage. Why do you care so much?

For example, I can receive the sacrament of holy orders. I never will. So what.

We completed pre-cana. There was another impediment which I won't state here because it's a rare one and I don't feel like outing myself on DCUM.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So because the priest messed up, you can accompany your civil divorce with a church annulment, and that's ok, because it's following the rules, but the PP's sister-in-law shouldn't have expected a church wedding even though there was a baby on the way -- i.e., it was high time she got married -- because she didn't follow the rules.

A legalistic religion.

No. She said because she did not complete precana.

Lots of people can't receive the sacrament of marriage. Why do you care so much?

For example, I can receive the sacrament of holy orders. I never will. So what.

Anonymous wrote:So because the priest messed up, you can accompany your civil divorce with a church annulment, and that's ok, because it's following the rules, but the PP's sister-in-law shouldn't have expected a church wedding even though there was a baby on the way -- i.e., it was high time she got married -- because she didn't follow the rules.

A legalistic religion.

Anonymous wrote:So because the priest messed up, you can accompany your civil divorce with a church annulment, and that's ok, because it's following the rules, but the PP's sister-in-law shouldn't have expected a church wedding even though there was a baby on the way -- i.e., it was high time she got married -- because she didn't follow the rules.

A legalistic religion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Had she completed the 6 mos of Pre-Cana classes? If not, he couldn't without the Bishop's override (dispensation). She could have appealed directly to the bishop. My guess is that she and your family didn't follow the rules and now you hate the Church. People forget that there are actual laws and processes at work. Priests aren't autonomous. Not should they be. Our priest was sweet but I had an incorrectly done dispensation which is why I can annul my marriage.

Something to look forward to?

Anonymous wrote:
Had she completed the 6 mos of Pre-Cana classes? If not, he couldn't without the Bishop's override (dispensation). She could have appealed directly to the bishop. My guess is that she and your family didn't follow the rules and now you hate the Church. People forget that there are actual laws and processes at work. Priests aren't autonomous. Not should they be. Our priest was sweet but I had an incorrectly done dispensation which is why I can annul my marriage.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It amazes me people can say they are catholic but not follow their teachings. Why send them to a catholic school?

Catholics do not believe in sex before marriage, birth control, abortion, against gays/lesbians and their lifestyle and 100% against gay marriage. Start your own religion if you believe otherwise.

If we were to start that religion, we might be able to get the present pontiff to join. There is a difference in "believing" in something and "tolerating" something.

Who am I to judge?

Ironic no? That is all Catholics do is judge.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It amazes me people can say they are catholic but not follow their teachings. Why send them to a catholic school?

Catholics do not believe in sex before marriage, birth control, abortion, against gays/lesbians and their lifestyle and 100% against gay marriage. Start your own religion if you believe otherwise.

1. No. That is totally not true.

2. The whole thing about being Catholic is everything is a sin, everybody sins... No biggie.

Why won't they marry someone who is pregnant than, or a same-sex couple?

There are Catholic weddings with clearly pregnant brides quite often.

Maybe but most aren't. My SIL was 33, engaged for 2 years and her priest wouldn't marry her. She was 4 months along. This was 6yrs ago.