Will the Catholic Church be damaged by yesterday's wedding at Westminster Cathedral?

When my uncle was dying the Catholic priest who came to give him the last rights told my aunt that he was going to burn in Hell because they hadn't been married in church. Apparently the rules are different if you are PM.

deedaa what a terrible thing for a priest to say !

that sounds really damaging and upsetting ginny and really bloody CRUEL

sorry, I have just realised you were quoting someone else, still horrible!

Maybe the catholic church based their decision on Carrie's status. She is a catholic and this is her first marriage.

Galaxy

I dont think there is any guarantee it will be changed for other people.

and that is indeed the crux of the matter - it does not and will not.

Surely the Catholic church will now be unable to refuse to marry any other couple in identical circumstances wishing to be married in the Catholic church of their choice. The precedent is now set.

Very many couples have been denied the marriage ceremony enjoyed by the PM and his now wife.

As a practicing Catholic I do not think the Catholic church will be damaged by yesterdays wedding. The church has survived more than a high profile wedding which happened yesterday.

Carrie is a baptized Catholic and has never been married, they have been having Catholic instruction prior to the wedding, in preparation to follow the religion.
I would think that the priests had something to say about baby Wilfred and his status as they were unmarried but wanted him baptized in the Catholic church, so it is better all round that Boris wanted to marry Carrie in the church.
I am not judging their unmarried status however it may be more beneficial to Wilfred now they are tied together in Holy Wedlock. Amen to all.

And amen from me.

(Just a thought; the marriage of Henry viii and Ann Boleyn may have had more affect on the Catholic Church than that of Boris and Carrie.)

That's very true.

A Catholic priest is quoted in one of the papers saying 'its one rule for the rich'. Quite.

There are Constitutional implications too. Another thread started on the subject.

I understand that as BJ's previous marriages x 2 were not in a Catholic church, they are not recognised by the Catholich church. Boris was baptised as a Catholic but became Anglican at Eton, he's since been taking instruction with Carrie prior to the marriage so has presumably become Catholic again but actually doesn't need to. Carrie is unmarried and a Catholic and BJ is legally free to marry. What's the problem?

Peasblossom

If people think they’ve been hurt in the past by a rigid approach, surely they’d be glad to see things had changed.

If they changed for everyone. Changing the rules for a serial liar/adulterer but not for people who were the innocent party in a divorce does not sit well with many people.

seems to me you pick and choose
thats how it often is. no problem

foxie48

I understand that as BJ's previous marriages x 2 were not in a Catholic church, they are not recognised by the Catholich church. Boris was baptised as a Catholic but became Anglican at Eton, he's since been taking instruction with Carrie prior to the marriage so has presumably become Catholic again but actually doesn't need to. Carrie is unmarried and a Catholic and BJ is legally free to marry. What's the problem?

The problem is that many Catholics who had previously married in a civil ceremony or another church have been refused permission to marry. I don't think it is that difficult to understand why they might not be happy that it is one rule for Johnson and another rule for them.

Boris's latest marriage in a RC cathedral shows the Catholic Church disrespects Boris's previous two marriages.

The Catholic Church once again protects itself and its dogma .

It is all sophistry. Perfectly ridiculous.

It's been explained fairly well why they were allowed to marry in church. Church weddings have been falling in popularity for decades now. Maybe it's time to stop worrying about previous marriages. As for "illegitimate" children. I thought those days were long gone. Birth certificates used to list "illegitimate", "bastard child' of whoever. Surely it's good that we've moved on from that.

To be honest, I don’t think most people care one way or another whether they got married in a Catholic Church or whether they got married at all.

It always puzzles me how people get so worked up and dogmatic about manmade “rules” in religion and completely ignore the central truths that should guide their lives.

Talullah

It's been explained fairly well why they were allowed to marry in church. Church weddings have been falling in popularity for decades now. Maybe it's time to stop worrying about previous marriages. As for "illegitimate" children. I thought those days were long gone. Birth certificates used to list "illegitimate", "bastard child' of whoever. Surely it's good that we've moved on from that.

On Call the Midwife last night it said that 11% of babies born in 60s London were "illegitimate".
The Catholic sister expressed horror at the term, saying the order did not want to part of that shaming.
60 years later we have moved on for good.

Because they impact on peoples lives and are being taught to children in schools.

Good grief!

Looking at the Catholic church and all the scandals it has survived over centuries, this is barely a blip on the radar!

Tomorrow's fish and chip paper as another poster said.

???

It's interesting that people are getting agitated about it being discussed

Kali2

I certainly hope many Catholics will write to Oramus, the Magazine for Westminster Cathedral, and His eminence Nicholls who is in charge and probably made the decision.

Are you Catholic Kali2?
You sound very upset by this, but, as I and others have said, this scarcely makes a ripple compared to some of the dreadful scandals which the Catholic church has survived.