Let me begin with my most sincere thanks for giving me the opportunity to ask this question to people who are well versed inCatholicism, as I have spent the last year and a half pulsing every Catholic friend that I have only to find out that most have walked in similar shoes with little or no reprocussions from their families and spent many a night crying myself to sleep in my boyfriends arms over the rejection of his mother. I am a 35 year old divorced mother of 2 and I am not Catholic and I have not considered converting as I feel quite comfortable and very happy in my communion with Christ. A year and a half ago I met a wonderful man who is 13 years my junior. I realize that this is an exceptional age difference but we have been exceedingly happy together and virtually everyone who knows us has commented on this fact. His mother and I had met on several ocassions and it was always cordial. However after my children and myself attended Thanksgiving dinner last year, he was informed that she was no longer comfortable having us in her home because we lived together. I was so confused because Thanksgiving had been a wonderful event and all of her extended family was incredibly warm and open. However she had said that us living together was against everything that she beleived in. Everything she beleives in! Isn't the Catholic church about more than that, not to mention motherhood.I tell you honestly my boyfriend has 6 brothers and sisters and he feels a great love and devotion to them all and if it were not for them I beleive that he would never go to that house again. Please tell me where in scriptures of Jesus teachings of acceptance, love and tollerance are the parts about rejecting someone because they don't sucumb to his wishes, I honestly don't remember it that way. This all seems to be to be a very un-loving and un-godly way of approaching things and I just wish someone could please help me understand how a mother who is seeing her son truly happy and deeply loved and in love cannot be happy for him and maybe even a little bit grateful. By the way, his grandmother is and she's Catholic too.

Please Help me Understand,

-- Hope White (hope.white@avnet.com), April 16, 2002

Answers

Are you going to get married soon, or ????

Are the brothers and sisters fairly young? Could be Mom is thinking you (and son) are setting a bad example for them.

Also could be the age difference, 22 is awfully young to be saddled with SOMEONE ELSE's kids (I trust you are getting adequate child support, and that divorced Dad is not going to be a problem--if either of these is any kind of a problem, he would be well-advised to run, not walk, away). He would also be well-advised to get a pre-nuptual agreement signed with you as well.

And, a study was done recently that showed that many couples who live together before marriage don't stay married, because they carry over the "well, if it doesn't work out, I'll just leave" mentality with them into the marriage.

So, not meaning to offend in any way, but there are many other reasons why Mom is not happy, and she may just be falling back on religion as an excuse.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), April 16, 2002.

I appreciate the quick response on this, but I can see that there are a lot of unanswered questions that are going to be asked. First of all Yes, we have every intention of getting married, however it is our desire to wait until things are straightened out with his mother before we do this. Second, his siblings range in age from 4 to 20 years old, all of them are quite fond of me and my children and none of the small ones are privy to the fact that he lives with me. Third, in point of fact I have supported him for the past year and a half and quite well I might add. I have also nursed him back to health after third degree burns and a breif unemployment. My children are only a few years from being out of the house and they both adore and respect him tremendously. He has made it quite clear to me and to his mother prior to our getting together that he wants no offspring of his own. As far as child support and my ex-husband he lives in another state and has minimal contact with the children and I support my children quite well on my own. since my boyfriend makes a whopping 22K a year and has NO inheritance I don't think she has any reason to worry about him financially.

I hope that clears a few things up.

-- Hope White (hope.white@avnet.com), April 16, 2002.

Hope,
Why doesn't your conscience bother you? Do you really want to be known for shacking up with a man? I mean, you say that you -- ''feel quite comfortable and very happy in my communion with Christ.''

I realize you feel loved by the man you lay with and you have a right to fall in love. You are probably worried about age differences more than you ought to be. That is a trivial stumbling block. But to think you are ''in communion with Christ'' as long as you feel comfortable; HOPE-- it's a mortal sin! You will lose your immortal souls for it, both you and he.

Others will say, ''Everybody does it; and you're an adult, etc.,'' But they won't go to hell for your sins! You will!

And see it from the perspective of this man's mother: She also sees her son committing a mortal sin. But hey-- You feel comfortable! That means she has to feel comfortable, about the son she's brought up to be moral; now living with a woman outside marriage? She isn't STUPID, Hope.

We want to be charitable toward you. Forget about the age diff. and about being rejected by Mother. Forget about how all of her extended family was incredibly warm and open. Warm and open is good. No one has any right to JUDGE you. But your relations with this man are immoral. You can't break the commandments of God and be in communion with Jesus. It has nothing to do with how ''unfair'' the Church seems to be. --It is NOT ungodly or unloving to ask you to refrain from illicit sex. Get married!

See what can be done to have your last marriage anulled, if possible. DON'T live together at all until you've fixed the impediment to a Catholic marriage. Only after the problems are resolved do you and your boyfriend have relations in bed. Because you are offending God.

You don't have to offend people to offend God, Hope. Don't let the popular acceptance of sleeping with men give you the idea God won't care. He will never give you eternal life through His Son Jesus Christ, if you die in sin. Trust me; I would not make this up. Do what I advise for the salvation of your own soul!

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 16, 2002.

Well Now, thats all very hell fire and brimstone of you and I've seen some of your other reply's posted in here, but as I said I'm not Catholic and I don't see it that way.

What we are doing was declared a mortal sin by the Catholic church Not by God (there is a difference). Additionally my boyfriend had not attended a church service or Mass for over a year prior to our becoming involved so I don't see how I can be labled as harlot who brought down her son. My communion with God has nothing to do with my comfort level, it has everything to do with my devotion to him and my love of him, it has to with the conversations that I have with him,(which by the way I don't need someone else to mediate) it has to do with my relationship with him and it has to do with the lessons that I have learned from him which includes how to conduct my life and part of that lesson was learning how to treat people which something that my boyfriends overzelous mother could perhaps brush up on.

hw

-- Hope White (hope.white@avnet.com), April 16, 2002.

I wonder if this guy will be deeply in love five years from now? You talk about being unloving and ungodly...frankly I think you are the one who is emotionally using a kid that probably doesn't know any better. You asked for it, so here it is:

"Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor sexual perverts,nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God."

Sometimes love means telling the truth. I don't know how else to say this honey, but you really need to get a clue.

-- FGT (ohplease@duh.com), April 16, 2002.

Dear Hope:
We understand you aren't a Catholic. But the Catholic Church is where this man will have to marry you, unless he abandons his own faith.

As for you, you are immoral anyway, if you live outside marriage with a man. It's breaking the 7th commandment of God: ''Thou shalt not commit adultery.'' Catholic teaching follows the commandments. Your comfort level is irrelevant, and you know you have broken the commandment; your divorce from a first marriage didn't give you license to have affairs.

In the Bible it's referred to as fornication; and sure, you're not a ''harlot''. That's a common prostitute. But I hate to make the parallel-- prostitutes have sex with men who aren't their husbands, Hope. Why are you different? Because you LOVE the man!

OH? Well, then marry him; don't do it like a harlot. Give the old lady SOME peace of mind. Don't only think of yourself.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 16, 2002.

So Hope...what do you think?

Is this a warm and loving place. Is this Godde who is preached here a godde of love, inclusivity, gentleness and peace? Do you think many converts will flock here to the open arms of a failure to follow the biblical quote: "judge not, lest ye be judged"?

Scary place isn't it? And....so very sad. My apologies for the abuse you have stumbled upon.

Sometimes folks don't have a life, sometimes folks have so much anger tormenting their souls they need to project it outward. Sometimes folks have so little power in their lives they need to claim it in an artificial medium. Sometimes folks are just human and in pain.

I wish you and your fiance' the best. Love is what matters, all the rest is someone elses need to control. Take care.

Joan

-- Joan Storey (godessss@mindspring.com), April 16, 2002.

I wonder who is controlling whom in this situation. You speak of love like it is some sort of syrupy goop. You know what love is? Love is not a thing, but a person, and he died on a cross.

-- frt (stillme@not.net), April 16, 2002.

Love...is not a feeling ..it is a choice and it is an action. I don't think I mentioned anything about syrup. ;-)

-- Joan Storey (godessss@mindspring.com), April 16, 2002.

>Love...is not a feeling ..it is a choice and it is an action.

Exactly. And you can choose to manipulate, or you convince yourself that lie is truth, and sin is good. Where is the self-sacrifice? Where is the challenge? Where the total self-giving?

I suppose this is off the subject, but somehow I wandered onto the CTA webpage the other night. The saddest thing wasn't that they looked like a bunch of rabid radicals, but that for the most part they looked relatively normal. Ms Joan, I am sure (or at least I hope) you have no clue how far you have wandered from truth. Try sitting in quiet sometime and talking not to godde or she-goddess or whatever, but ask HE WHO IS to really speak in the depths of your being. You might be surprised. It might help if you go to a tabernacle in a Catholic Church, btw, He waits for you there. You'll know it by the red lamp burning, in case you have forgotten. Ciao

-- frt (m3too@no.net), April 16, 2002.

It is not only the Catholic Church who is against people living together, all churches who believe in Jesus, and follow His word will agree that it is a grave sin to live together.

But, Jesus did forgive Mary Magdelene, didn't he? and Jesus will forgive you to if you do the right thing. Let your conscience be your guide.

-- cathy colarusso (marlborocat@yahoo.com), April 16, 2002.

Hope~I do know how you feel. I was there once. :) A mother's first instinct, as I'm sure you well know, is to protect her child from harm. A divorced mother of two is not such a rarity these days...I was one once. But a mother worries about her child. And to think that said child might be overly burdened by the weight of a ready made family, a mother's first response is defense. It's natural. Especially when the child is still young. We don't always know what is best for our children......we just think we do. :) If your BF's mother is devout in her faith, and I'm not just saying in her religion but her faith in Jesus and the scriptures, then her response to the two of you living together is to be expected. This is a sin to her and she is entitled to her opinion, as you are to yours. We not only care for our children physically, we care for them spiritually, too. And if he was raised Catholic, then his mother not only worries about what is going to happen to him in this life but also, what will happen to him when he dies. My advice to you is have patience and respect. Good luck to you and your family, Hope and God bless.

-- Jackiea (sorry@dontlikespam.com), April 16, 2002.

Hope,

May I ask a question? You state that you are not interested in Catholicism. You state that your boyfriend stopped practicing his faith (going to church) a year ago. Why do you care what Catholicism thinks of you two living together? If your boyfriend's mother thinks what you are doing is immoral, what can you do if you don't believe that there's anything wrong with what you are doing?

You don't seem to believe what you are doing is wrong. What's the problem?

I don't think that you're looking for advice on avoiding sin; but I have seen a number of red-flags in what you've already written that show potential problems for your relationship (religion or no religion).

My $0.02,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 16, 2002.

The whole annullment thing is not as simple as some make it out to be-- it takes time, for one thing, and I am not sure how uniform the procedure is--would your first marriage be annulled in say, CA, but not in NY? Not to mention that at least as far as I've read, I've never seen the term "annullment" in the Bible, so that may be of concern to you (since you mentioned Mortal Sin being a Church thing as opposed to a Bible thing).

Imho, there isn't much difference between an annullment and a divorce except the terminology, and that one is okay with the Church and the other is not. It's not like they do a brain wipe so you don't remember the first marriage.... If you got divorced over say, spousal abuse, that's a lot different than "oh, I just got tired of him/her" (just an example), and an annullment panel would probably look at it differently. You might want to look through some of the older threads on this issue too.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), April 16, 2002.

Dear GT,
That's not the point. You may mean well, but you don't face the responsibility which the Church places on her faithful, to keep the commandments. Marriage is a SACRAMENT, and co-habiting is a sin. Whether or not annulments ''take time'' or if --''in your humble opinion there's not much diff'' between divorce and annulment-- your words to Hope give her no spiritual values. No apprehension of God's Will, or the true meaning of Holy Matrimony.

You want PROOF from the Bible, that she is in MORTAL SIN/???

There's plenty of it in the Bible. I didn't invent it, nor did the Church. God calls it MORTAL: He says to us, ''I place before you life and death. --CHOOSE therefore LIFE.'' It's Hope's choice. God said it.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 17, 2002.

Mateo,

Your words, where my thoughts, exactly, on this! Just wanted to mention, that! David S

-- David (David@excite.com), April 17, 2002.

The bible also promotes slavery. Do you also endorse that. J

-- Joan Storey (godessss@mindspring.com), April 17, 2002.

Eugene, I was not arguing about the cohabitation being a sin (although it's not the brightest thing to do for a TON of other reasons), I was pointing out the difference (or rather) non-difference between an annulment and a divorce (provided the divorce was for a valid reason, such as spousal abuse, not wanting kids, etc.). "Annulment" is not in the Bible is what I was saying.

Annulments have become a Church-approved divorce, nothing more, nothing less. Whether they're granted or not depends on lots of factors, one of them possibly being money. And yes, I've read the threads--annulment is merely a way to assuage the guilt of a divorce--it's a moot point whether "you knew what you were getting into" or a more honest assessment, "when I was young and dumb". I don't think anyone would marry a person if they KNEW he was going to turn into say, a wife beater 5 years down the road, or that she'd change her mind about wanting children. So why relive the divorce through an annulment?

It might make one "feel better" if they get an annulment, or might please the future MIL (although why that should matter is beyond me, you're not marrying her), etc., but it doesn't change anything--namely, that the first marriage didn't work out for some reason. That is what I was trying to convey to Hope.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.ocm), April 17, 2002.

Hi GT,

You wrote:

"Annulments have become a Church-approved divorce, nothing more, nothing less."

If you believe this to be true, do you believe that the Church should stop granting any anullments?

GT wrote:

"Whether they're granted or not depends on lots of factors, one of them possibly being money."

What do you think the "money factor" is: the couple's financial situation or how much the couple pays the church?

Thanks,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 17, 2002.

Sad Sister:
Nowhere in the Holy Bible is slavery ''promoted''.

You want to dismiss the ten commandments as a concession to the ''comfort level'' of your choice? By throwing out all that the Bible teaches us? Your true colors ren't even discreet anymore!

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 17, 2002.

Mateo, I think that people should put real (as in verifiable) reasons in their divorce papers (in other words, no more "irreconcilable differences", and leaving it at that), and the local pastor can look at the divorce papers/decree itself, instead of the current process, if people want to go the annulment route.

I'm also saying that the annulment (maybe I'm spelling it correctly now) is perhaps a non-issue at best. I mean, people make mistakes--should someone live with a wife beater or an adulterer for the rest of their life because "divorce" is wrong, or separate and still cannot go on with their lives because of this? You can be forgiven for murder, but not a mistake in getting married?

Is there a values difference between getting a divorce because your trophy wife is getting old and getting one because someone is beating you or cheating on you (and putting your life at risk with STDs)? You don't need an annulment to tell you which one is a more valid reason.

As to the money issue, I was referring to donating to the church, of course. I'm not saying it happens in all cases, but I'm sure it is a factor in at least a few.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), April 17, 2002.

Dear GT:
First --Consider the questions Mateo is asking. They are very meaningful as we discuss this --annulments.

You're very wrong about divorce and nullity being equal in the eyes of God. In your eyes they may be. But you can't send a soul to eternal punishment and God can and WILL, souls that God sees in adultery.

I hesitate to suggest, but you just don't believe adultery is a sin. Divorce and remarriage in most circumstances becomes the sin of adultery. God forbids adultery as a mortal sin, GT. Not me-- not the Church; GOD.

Your description of Church law is the typical cynicism we see in non-Catholics. As if the church could in a any way benefit from a SACRAMENT, Matrimony! The Catholic faith teaches me simply: Matrimony (VALID) is for life! For better or for worse-- life.

You make ''spousal abuse'' or another disappointment a basis for changing that sacramental bond into a ''comfort level'' adjustable mortgage marriage; which is NOT God's view of this. Face it; some marriages are valid, even if the spouses can't stand each other. It's sad, but life is sometimes sad. Christians have to cope. My own mother coped; and she absorbed a lot of abuse. But now she recalls the holy death of my Dad. He died in her arms! They never rejected each other, through all the storms of marriage. That is what God commands for each one of us. If you can't cope, stay single; or get a civil separation, and live apart from your spouse. It can be done. It has to be according to God's will.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 17, 2002.

Spousal abuse is not "another disappointment" to be put in the same category as "I just got tired of him/her." Would you say the same about child beating/child sexual abuse by a parent, and the spouse should just look the other way, you married him, too bad? Oh, just cope with it--it's just another disappointment. Divorce if you must, but you can't look for a nice, decent man to be a good father for your children. You're not saying that too, are you?

And, priests (in other words, the Church) take honorariums for private baptisms (instead of going through the mass group ones), and they do for weddings and funerals as well, so yes, they might for annulments too.

Just because the Church says "we find your reasons to be valid for asking for this annulment" doesn't change the valid reason in the first place if you only have a divorce, and not an annulment. You, and God, know if your reasoning was valid, not necessarily some Church panel, although talking it over with your parish priest (if they ever allowed them to be granted at that level) would certainly define the issues, if nothing else.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), April 17, 2002.

I can speak from personal experience on this one. Yes, you do have to pay to get an annulment through the church. 200 dollars, in the case I speak of. Why? Couldn't tell ya that one. And if you have children from that previous marriage, in granting the annulment, the previous marriage is considered null and void...never happened. Therefore, your children never happened. Therefore, they are asking you to say your children are bastards. Those two reasons right there, along with the asking of VERY personal questions, are the main reasons why quite a few people I know haven't gone ahead with the annulment process through the church.

Say what you will but believe me...like I said...I speak from experience.

-- Jackiea (sorry@dontlikespam.com), April 17, 2002.

Hi GT,

You wrote:

"As to the money issue, I was referring to donating to the church, of course. I'm not saying it happens in all cases, but I'm sure it is a factor in at least a few."

Though there may be an administrative fee, it does not cover the Church's cost for the annulment. One's weekly contributions to the church is totally independent of an investigation. To be sure, the Church doesn't look at annulments as a profit center. :-)

If you suspect that people you know are using annulment to get out of a valid marriage, it is your right to let your voice be heard. It seems to me that you see how annulment has an appropriate use; but you are contesting the possible misuse of annulment. Is that accurate?

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 17, 2002.

" They are asking you to say your chidren are bastards"

I disagree with that, in a very respectful way. We just did a thread on that, I will send to the top! I hope you get achance to read it!

God bless you.

David

-- David (David@excite.com), April 17, 2002.

Jackiea writes:

"I can speak from personal experience on this one. Yes, you do have to pay to get an annulment through the church. 200 dollars, in the case I speak of. Why? Couldn't tell ya that one."

Hi Jackiea,

I'm getting married, and I can tell you two things:

(1) I'm paying more than $200 to be married in the church. I don't know of anyone who questions the appropriateness of this fee.

(2) The money that I pay to the church is barely a blip on the screen when compared with all of the other expenses. I think that the cake alone will cost more!

Jackiea writes:

"And if you have children from that previous marriage, in granting the annulment, the previous marriage is considered null and void...never happened. Therefore, your children never happened. Therefore, they are asking you to say your children are bastards."

Whoever represented this position to you has misinformed you. Please refer to this link. The annulment never questions the legitimacy of the children.

Jackiea writes:

"Those two reasons right there, along with the asking of VERY personal questions, are the main reasons why quite a few people I know haven't gone ahead with the annulment process through the church."

I guess this begs the question: how could a judgment of nullity be made without asking personal questions? Should the Church simply take a person's word that the marriage is not valid?

Here is a link on why the church has tribunals.

Here is a link on common misconceptions about annulments.

Jackiea writes:

"Say what you will but believe me...like I said...I speak from experience."

I hope you will consider the Church's teaching on annulment. I don't doubt that some people try to abuse the annulment process. But remember, even believers in the time of Moses were called "hard of heart" by Jesus. Matthew 19:6-8

What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder." They said to him, "Why then did Moses command one to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?" He said to them, "For your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so.

The people of Moses' time sound a bit like people today.

In Christ,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 17, 2002.

GT is like a number of others and Jackie too, who've come to this forum and argued about this. I learn more about the non-Catholic mind-set from them than they ever learn about the Catholic faith, it seems.

Why insist before experienced Catholics that, YES, the motives for granting annulments are MONETARY, for the Church? As if the Church NEEDED annulments for her cash register! The Church always has forbidden divorce. Would Christ's own Church circumvent the Holy Will of God, by giving out ''divorces disguised as annulments''-- and still hope to be blameless in God's eyes???

You must think so. It's the heighth of cynicism, to play the role of a ripped-off Christian because your annulment cost $200 to secure. Last time I looked, nobody works for nothing! A fee to cover all the costs of investigation, correspondence, clerical help and office space seems like chump-change at only $200, to me.

We know for a fact the Church could just plain turn down the appeals of many for nullity decrees; and save money. But, in order to SERVE the faithful, she keeps these channels OPEN; in case there may be merit in many cases.

Spousal abuse is NOT grounds for dissolving a valid marriage. Say what you want, but our faith is in GOD, not in the U.S. divorce courts.

To GT I'll simply reply to: ''[If a non-Catholic feels he or she must] but you can't look for a nice, decent man to be a good father for your children. You're not saying that too, are you?''

YES. That's how it is, that's what God commands. NO remarriage in consequence of divorce, for whatever grounds. Any problem with that, a Catholic can take it up with his own conscience and God. Don't blame the Catholic Church for upholding the commandments.

If you're a non-Catholic, this should not bother you at all. But, Hope thinks her rights as a non-Catholic supercede the will of God; and goes as far as to suggest the Catholic she wants for her mate is under no obligation to anyone except herself. Which is a presumption, any way you read it.

I really hope she, HOPE --will consider what God is saying to her. Not her own spiritual comfort level. That has little to do with God's commandments.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 17, 2002.

Hope,

Speaking from one non-Catholic Christian to another, I'm really confused how you can believe that sex with anyone other than your current spouse is anything but fornication and is scripturally stated as sin.

This is not just a Catholic Church standard, ALL denominations believe the exact same thing. And while we non-Catholic Christians don't use the term "mortal sin", it certainly fits, because it leads to death - the eternal kind! If you continue in your sin, you cannot inherit Heaven, that's according to scripture, not just Catholic doctrine/dogma.

In case you question that, here's one of the verses, 1 COR 6, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God ? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals , nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God."

So you can see for yourself that Eugene may be giving you the fire and brimstone message (as am I), but it is an accurate and loving warning. He's more concerned with your eternal soul, than resolving your present situation.

The bottom line is, you need to worry about obeying God first, and if you will do that, you will wind up pleasing his mother as well. Repent from your sin, move out of the house and stop having sex until you get married, then you can enjoy the fruits of marriage. Your eternal soul depends on it.

David

-- non-Catholic Christian (dlbowerman@yahoo.com), April 17, 2002.

I do not think annulments are moneymakers for the Church per se. I do think that perhaps money is given "under the table" or perhaps in the form of a big contribution to expedite matters at times.

And going back to some of the annulment threads, I don't see how spousal abuse could not fall under the guidelines for granting one-- abuse is all about not being mature enough to handle your anger (in which case you're certainly not mature enough to get married, and certainly is contrary to marriage contributing to the well-being of both spouses.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), April 17, 2002.

I would like to thank all of you for your opinions and most especially I would like to thank Joan and Jackie for their love and understanding which was what I thought that fellowship with Christ was all about in the first place.

As for the balance of the responses that I have received on here, I have appreciated your honesty and directness, however as I can see that our spiritual lives have completely different motivations and I will never understand or agree with my future mother in law. However I did find it more than a little amusing that when left to yourselves without my input you were so hungry to tear somthing apart that you turned on each other. So for now I think I'll stick with Joan and Jackie's input as it seems to come from a much higher place within the human spirit.

Thank you all and if you can accept it from a hethan such as myself, God Bless.

hw

-- Hope White (hope.white@avnet.com), April 17, 2002.

Dear Hope:
First, you thought we had called you a ''harlot''. In this last post, you think we see you for a ''heathen''.

Don't put words in anybody's mouths. You have a right to your own opinion. But you entered the forum asking for this opportunity, except it hasn't been so flattering.

I explained all that is at the base of your problems, the whys and wherefores. I didn't do it to attack you; but--you're right, I was direct.

Let me say, I led off with a question: isn't your conscience telling you anything? In the concluding parts, I said to you, JUST MARRY HIM. I even said sincerely, ''Forget about your age differences.'' Was this uncharitable? I realise you'd rather skip the Church package. But, why do you think that's how a Catholic would see it? You expected it all to fall in your lap; with no strings attached. How sweet that would be!

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 17, 2002.

Eugene~You said "GT is like a number of others and Jackie too, who've come to this forum and argued about this. I learn more about the non- Catholic mind-set from them than they ever learn about the Catholic faith, it seems". It seems. Well, Gene, looks can be deceiving, can't they?

You went on to say "Why insist before experienced Catholics that, YES, the motives for granting annulments are MONETARY, for the Church?". So, from these two statements, am I safe in saying that you somehow think I'm of a non Catholic mind-set and an inexperienced Catholic? Why would that be? Because I occasionally ask questions and sometimes don't understand Church policy? Because I've not been a Catholic as long as you have? Is it because you're a cradle Catholic and I'm not? And, by the way, I never said the motives for granting annulments were monetary.

But since you brought up expenses and what not, I'll ask a question. What expense is incurred by asking the church to pray for someone else? Why exactly do I need to pay twenty dollars to have my loved one mentioned during the intentions? The only paperwork involved is writing a name down on a piece of paper. The only other work involved is the priest saying a name. Other than that, it's just prayer. So, where does the twenty bucks come into play?

Mateo~I appreciate the way you answer a question. Meant to tell you that earlier but slipped my mind, I'm afraid. I had to laugh when I read about the cost of the cake. :) In reply to what you said~as far as the legitimacy of children.....this was not just one instance I was speaking of. There are two members of my family and one friend of mine that had the same experience. All from different parishes. So, you tell me. *shrugs* And I can see what you're saying on the idea of needing to ask questions as far as validity but some of these questions had NOTHING to do with the marriage, Mateo. Like I said before, I can appreciate what you're saying and the way you're saying it.

Hope~you're very welcome. I hope things work out for you and your family.

-- Jackiea (sorry@dontlikespam.com), April 17, 2002.

Jackiea,

Thank you for the kind words.

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), April 17, 2002.

Dear Jackie--
If I've maligned you forgive me. I'm talking about a need for the faithful's charity to her priests; to GT and any who claim they're entitled to act like bean-counters. I know you have many other expenses, and I do too. Let Saint Paul explain:

''Are you not my work in the Lord? For you are the seal set on my apostleship in the Lord. My defense against those who question me is this-- Have we not a right to eat and to drink? --What soldier ever serves at his own expense? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat of the fruit? Who feeds the flock and does not eat of the milk of that flock? Do I speak on these things of human authority?

Or, doesn't the Law also say these things? For it is written in the Law of Moses, ''Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treads out the grain,'' Is it for the oxen that God has care? Or does He say this simply for our sakes? For he who plows should plow in hope; and he who threshes, in hope of partaking of the fruit. If we have sown for you spiritual things, is it a great matter if we reap from you carnal things?'' --Some verses down, ''So also the Lord directed that those who preach the Gospel should have their living from the Gospel.'' -- --- 1 Cor. Chapter 9 / / /

Please understand jackie. I knew without your saying it that you're generous to the church. Probably more than I. I simply wanted it expressed for you; that you should never feel cheated for any goods you offer the priests of your Church. Everything we have or ever will have is God's first. He gives it to us. We have it on trust; so we should be pleased to offer it back to Him. He will only return blessings to us, and more abundance.
God be with you, and with GT too--

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 17, 2002.

GT,

I was going to leave this thread alone, but your posts finally got to me. First off, a decree of nullity (that was for John's benefit) is NOT a Catholic divorce. If there is spousal abuse that crops up after x number of years of marriage, then the abused spouse should seek a divorce. But they then must live a chaste (unmarried!) life. If they seek a decree of nullity, they must prove that there was a problem AT THE TIME of the marriage.

I have actually had discussions with my wife where we have discussed infidelity. I have told her if she ever committed adultery, it would automatically mean divorce. And I told her I would want her to do the same. I then told her how hard that would be because it would mean I would have to live the rest of my life in celibacy. Why? Because I KNOW we had a valid marriage.

So, once again, a decree of nullity is NOT the same as a Catholic divorce. Please quit stating this misconception so newcomers to the forum are not confused.

-- Glenn (glenn@excite.com), April 17, 2002.

Glenn, I read the links that Mateo thoughtfully provided on the subject, and perhaps the term "Catholic Divorce" is not the most precise, but it is somewhat discriptive, seeing as how one does not attempt to get one until after a civil divorce. So yes, I do know the difference.

I did understand why the Church charges for the investigation (after reading about all the people involved), but don't understand why you need all the lawyers for it. The definitions (that they use to determine the validity of the marriage) seem pretty self-explanatory, so why can't any pastor make the determination alone?

But the article made me curious, it would be interesting to see the actual questionnaire used for this.

-- GT (nospam@nospam.com), April 17, 2002.

Dear Hope,

I'm not going to repeat what many others have said, but after reading your last response I was quite troubled. You see, you've asked us to help you understand. Jackiea's post I think does explain it quite well, especially from a mother's point of view. You are a mother yourself, as am I, and I'm sure you want the best for your children, as do I, and Jackiea, and your boyfriend's mother. She believes that what you and her son are doing is NOT the best. And she is right because it IS (whether you agree or not) sin.

As David and Eugene, among others, have explained, what you are doing directly contradicts God's commandments in the Old Testament, and Jesus' (God's Son) teachings in the New Testament. You say that you are devoted to God. If you are devoted to Him, how can you call right, what God calls wrong? God calls it sin! This isn't about annullments right now, or divorce or whatever, it's about a man and a woman living together, having sex, and they are not married. Simple as that.

Hope, being loving does mean being truthful. Go back and read David's post. (I see we have both David's replying here, the post I'm specifically recommending was posted by David, a non-Catholic Christian, for lack of a better descriptor). He's presented the truth in a loving way. I know that right now you probably don't agree with him, but that does not mean that he is not telling you the truth in love.

I was reminded today in my Bible Study that we are to hate the sin, but love the sinner. I'm sorry that your boyfriend's mother is not loving you better; she sees what you are doing (and what her son is doing) as sin, which it is, and she is reacting. I'm not trying to make excuses, just looking at it from a mother's perspective.

I highly advise you not to listen to Joan. She has presented many, many unchristian and new age beliefs here. She is not a credible spokesperson for this forum at all.

Hope, you signed your orginal post, "Please Help me Understand." If you truly have come to this forum to understand, then please, take the time to prayfully read the responses you have received. If you have come here simply to find validation for what you are doing, then I'm so sorry, but this is not the right place, for what we speak is from God's Word, God's commands.

Love in Jesus,

cksunshine

-- cksunshine (cklrun@hotmail.com), April 17, 2002.

Hope White,

I understand if some of what is said here makes you feel uncomfortable; I've been there (or whereabouts) myself. But I hope you can understand somewhat when I say that even those who use the language of eternal fire are expressing a kind of love, though by the time it reaches your ears, you might say it's "lost something in the translation." The Catholics here really care about you, really! Indeed, far from rejecting you, they've embraced you, evaluated your circumstances, and invited you to join them--us--in an understanding of Jesus's love and command that upholds human sexuality as holy and deserving of Jesus's special sacramental blessing, in Catholic Matrimony.

Catholic Christianity is a great deal more than a kind of spiritual political party, with a specific platform of arbitrary morals. For example, the Mass. The Mass is not an obligatory Sunday service to soothe our consciences. Rather, it is the heartbeat of the Catholic Church, the thriving life of the faithful, pulsing with God's Word Made Flesh, where we daily "Do this, in remembrance of" Jesus.

Jackiea has said some good things in this thread, though I respectfully disagree with her concerns about anullment.

And Joan, whose true character I can't evaluate in any way because I do not know her, has frequently behaved in a manner that I can only call most unloving, taunting and teasing good Catholics for their deeply held faith in the teaching authority of the Catholic Church, ridiculing us and advocating abortion. For a Catholic, such talk is intellectual terrorism, you see, and often the response is empassioned and angry.

But of course you know, Jesus experienced anger too, sometimes.

By way of approaching your questions, I should begin by noting that you are looking for the "the opportunity to ask this question to people who are well versed in Catholicism." Some writers here are more well-versed in Catholicism than others. We understand that, if Joan's writings truly represent her belief, she has voluntarily seperated herself from this community, and remains only to incite anger and hurt other Catholics.

Joan may write things that make you comfortable in your current position. However, as an honest Catholic who genuinely cares for you and embraces your plight, I can tell you that she is the least well- versed in Catholicism of anyone here.

But I wouldn't want to incriminate myself immediately by implying that genuine Catholic teaching would make you despair. Quite the contrary; you are young yet and certainly mature. Consider this post as an opportunity to learn. I write this only for your edification.

I'll quote the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which is the authentic source of doctrine for the common faithful:

First, on marriage:

"1603: 'The intimate community of life and love which constitutes the married states has been established by the Creator and endowed by him with its own proper laws ... God himself is the author of marriage.' The vocation to marriage is written in the very nature of man and woman as they came from the hand of the Creator. Marriage is not a purely human institution despite the many variations it may have undergone through the centuries in different cultures, social structures, and spiritual attitudes. These differences should not cause us to forget its common and permanent characteristics. Although the dignity of this insitution is not transparent everywhere with the same clarity, some sense of the greatness of the matrimonial union exists in all cultures. 'The well-being of the individual person and of both human and Christian society is closely bound up with the healthy state of conjugal and family life.'

1604: God who created man [humankind] out of love also call him to love--the fundamental and innate vocation of every human being. For man is created in the image and likeness of God who is himself love. Since God created him man and woman, their mutual love becomes an image of the absolute and unfailing love with which God loves man. It is good, very good, in the Creator's eyes. And this love which God blesses is intended to be fruitful and to be realized in the common work of watching over creation: 'And God blessed them, and God said to them: 'Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it''."

Now, on cohabitation:

2390: "In a so-called 'free union,' a man and a woman refuse to give juridical and public form to a liaison involving sexual intimacy.

The expression "free union" is fallacious: what can "union" mean when the partners make no commitment to one another, each exhibiting a lack of trust in the other, in himself, or in the future?

The expression covers a number of different situations: concubinage, rejection of marriage as such, or inability to make long-term commitments. All these situations offend against the dignity of marriage; they destroy the very idea of the family; they weaken the sense of fidelity. They are contrary to the moral law. The sexual act must take place exclusively within marriage. Outside of marriage it always constitutes a grave sin and excludes one from sacramental communion [a note for your boyfriend if he were ever to attend a mass with the family; out of respect for the family and Catholicism in general, it would be good to abstain from taking the communion bread].

2391: Some today claim a 'right to a trial marriage' where there is an intention of getting married later. However firm the purpose of those who engage in premarital sexual relations may be, 'the fact is that such liaisons can scarcely ensure mutual sincerity and fidelity in a relationship between a man and a woman, nor, especially, can they protect it from inconstancy of desires or whim.' Carnal union is morally legitimate only when a definitive community of life between a man and woman have been established. Human love does not tolerate 'trial marriages.' It demands a total and definitive gift of persons to one another."

So you see, Hope (What a lovely name, by the way), your current living situation appears to have damaging elements, according to your boyfriend's mother's Catholic beliefs (which you may observe are grounded in some good reason). She loves you and her son, but she fears the element of sin within the cohabiting relationship. Given the holiness of marriage, it is not surprising that she might feel uncomfortable by your presence. It is not you she fears, but that you and your boyfriend represent a modern repudiation of marriage, an unpleasant aspect of modern moral decay that she wants no part of.

Joan would have you believe that love is a very simple thing. We smile all the time, we celebrate our differences and have a party. But no, love is not simple--our love for family, our love for Jesus, our love for marriage; all these different loves come together and, where priorities differ, fights happen. You said her behavior was unloving and ungodly, but it is her immense love and God together which can not permit her to ignore her son's parting further and further with his destiny as a baptized Catholic.

I hope you can forgive his mother for any time when she might have hurt your feelings. I also hope that you continue to ask questions and learn more about the faith of your boyfriend's family. The Catholic Church is loving and holy but also human, and it is precisely her humanity that gives her her strength.

Hope, in love and joy, I pray for your happiness, and for God to give you the gifts he--not I--knows you need.

-- Jeffrey Zimmerman (jeffreyz@seminarianthoughts.com), April 17, 2002.

WOW Jeffrey!!

Well said and beautifully put! If I had just waited a few more minutes and you posted before me, well let's just say I wouldn't have posted at all, because you said everything that was on my heart. Thank you.

Actually I would have posted to say, "Well said and beautifully put!"

cksunshine

-- cksunshine (cklrun@hotmail.com), April 18, 2002.

Mateo, you're very welcome. :)

Gene, thank you. It meant alot to me, what you said, and I'm sorry if I snapped. Sometimes, I get a little on the defense without meaning to.

CK~Thanks to you, as well. You said it quite well, yourself. :)

Jeffry~That was one of the kindest, most loving, intellectual posts I've ever seen. You speak like a loving father.

On my thoughts on money and annulments~let me say this. Perhaps I judge too quickly...too harshly. I'm afraid the gimme, gimme attitude in my particular parish has left quite a sour taste in my mouth. Sad but true. I should try not to be blinded by this, however.

God be with you all

-- Jackiea (sorry@dontlikespam.com), April 18, 2002.

You know the Pope says that modern man can accept an abstract idea of "God" but it refuses to accept the reality of the "scandal of the cross".

-- frt (not@thisone.com), April 18, 2002.

Thank you Jackea and CKSunshine--although, I just noticed, I got so caught up in my ecumenical frame of mind that I called it "communion bread," which I'm sure John would catch right away, so I better catch myself first! It is the body and blood, soul and divinity of Christ. Heh. Thanks again. God love.

-- Jeffrey Zimmerman (jeffreyz@seminarianthoughts.com), April 18, 2002.

Jeffery,

I didn't realize you were a seminarian, but let me give a few thoughts, from the perspective of a single guy, who has no plans on entering a seminary. :) Ms White says this young man is 13 years her junior, essentially she is paying for a large part of his living expenses. ("He earns a whopping 22k"). I'm sorry, I don't see how the young man's mother needs to be forgiven, except perhaps that she wasn't firm from the beginning. This woman has other children to worry about, in addition to this unfortunate fellow. At 22, I don't see why he should be saddled with taking responsibility for someone else's mistakes. Talk about marriage in the church can only come from the perspective of breaking off the situation now. So, this whole thing is becoming a bit like "Oprah" and I have no intention of going any further down this road. Ms. White, with all due respect, if you really want to show love to this guy, send him out on his own and let him get his head and his life straight, and see if you still love him. This is my humble opinion.

-- frt (hopesprings@eternal.com), April 18, 2002.

We never intended to treat his thread as a Dear Abbey or Oprah show. The facts are, Hope and her boyfriend are adults. Whatever they may think of this forum and the responses they got from us, they're not beholden to us at all. They can just tell me to shove it. I would never presume to judge; I merely explained the way our Church teaches us to obey God.

One item I didn't mention to Hope; for what it's worth is, the mother of her mate is a good lady following her conscience. But Hope seemed to insinuate that by rejecting her, the lady showed the inhumanity of our Church.

''Everything she believes in! Isn't the Catholic Church about more than that, not to mention motherhood?''

I want to remind Hope, the Catholic Church has not done anything to her or her boyfriend. What she's reporting is the action of ONE woman, who is in the Catholic faith. I notice when anything negative happens, the first to take a hit is our Church. Hope could have just said, ''What a narrow-minded lady!'' No --'' Look at that awful Church,'' she insinuated.

''--Where in scriptures of Jesus teachings of acceptance, love and tolerance are the parts about rejecting someone because they don't succumb to his wishes, I honestly don't remember it that way. This all seems to be to be a very un-loving --ungodly.''

And thus, Hope ends up correcting the perceived faults of the Catholic faith; not addressing her own. The truth is, Catholicism is open to Hope and all who come in humility. Jesus Christ came to save sinners. No one is ''rejecting'' you, Hope. You need the information we've offered you; it's all for your own good.

Whether your boyfriend's mother ever comes to accept you or not, let the Church offer you a hand. You will never be rejected by the Church Jesus Christ Himself founded to save you and me.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 18, 2002.

It off.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 18, 2002.

Use of the term "mate" is generous, I think. I have read some of your posts Eugene, I am sure you are well intentioned, but I think you ought to be more sure of your footing before wading into the debate so emphatically--ie gays in the priesthood etc. My 2 shekels. A dios

-- frt (no@talk_show.org), April 18, 2002.

Don't quibble about the word, please. I am generous.

Saying ''boyfriend'' is asinine, I think. Sex and boyfriends don't necessarily follow. Animals have mates; it's a good enough analog.

-- eugene c. chavez (chavezec@pacbell.net), April 18, 2002.

frt,

Feelings can be hurt even though people haven't sinned or done anything wrong. Indeed, I know that Christ would be pleased with the young man's mother being firm in her faith, even when her relationship with her son is at stake. But I think Hope needs to find some reconciliation with her boyfriend's mother, and that entails setting aside past perceived offenses (whether they were sinful or not) and learning more from his Catholic family.

I believe Hope is searching for genuine assistance here, and I think that the best way to move forward is a reconciliation between her and her boyfriend's mother. A renewed relationship in love and trust, and some premeditated decisions with regard to a healthy and loving marital lifestyle, would surely be the work of the Holy Spirit.

-- Jeffrey Zimmerman (jeffreyz@seminarianthoughts.com), April 18, 2002.

OK Jeffrey, but if I were the mom, (or if this guy was my brother friend, whatever) I would say that a reconcilliation with the mom is not the main point, but that he needs to get his act together. If he wants to go to confession and lead a life of grace, he needs to get out of there right now! What happens in the future, well that is a long way away. Is that likely to happen, probably not, but that is what I would be praying for if I were his relative/freind. Ms White wants the truth, there it is. So, thats all for me on this thread, I dont see any point in beating this dead horse. :) Best wishes in your studies, pray pray pray!

-- frt (bbbbb@thatsalll.folks), April 18, 2002.

Jeffrey, Thank You, I will be praying about it.

hw

-- Hope White (hope.white@avnet.com), April 18, 2002.

Jmj

Folks,
I just had a chance to read this thread from top to bottom.
I really thank and commend so many of you for presenting many great truths and clear ideas to Hope White. You were so thorough that there is hardly anything for me to add -- but I did find one thing that was apparently overlooked.

In what I am about to write, for the sake of simplicity, I will refer to Hope's young friend as "Pete."
Now, all of us who are orthodox Catholics here must desire the following:
(1) that, if her first union was invalid, Hope obtains a Decree of Nullity ...
(2) and that Pete returns to the active practice of his Catholic faith ...
(3) and that Pete and Hope spend their six months' period of Catholic marriage preparation chastely, in separate abodes ...
(4) and that they enter into a happy, valid, sacramental, and fruitful marriage one day.

However, Hope revealed at least one major obstacle to the above scenario. In her second post, explaining more about the situation involving Pete, Hope wrote:
"He has made it quite clear to me and to his mother prior to our getting together that he wants no offspring of his own."

As part of his reversion to Catholicism, Pete will have to undergo a change of mind on this subject. For it is impossible for a Christian to enter into a valid marriage with his/her mind closed to welcoming any children whom God may choose to entrust to the couple. And even when a couple is generally open to children, they are not permitted to thwart God's will by resorting to contraception or (horrors!) abortion.

God bless you.
John
PS: I caught those cute remarks, Glenn and Jeffrey.

-- (jfgecik@hotmail.com), April 19, 2002.

Thank You for your last input, but once again I feel a need to clarify. Pete as we'll now refere to him as I had said before does not want any children which has been his decision since his late teens apparently due to coming from such a large family. However one of the things that has made our relationship easier despite our age diference is the fact that due to medical conditions beyond my control I am no longer able to have children so on this issue we have been compatable. So you see If we are to be married their will be no children in our future other than the ones from my first marriage. Again thank you for your input.

-- Hope White (HOPE.WHITE@AVNET.COM), April 19, 2002.

We do it out of love, John. :)

-- Jeffrey Zimmerman (jeffreyz@seminarianthoughts.com), April 19, 2002.

My two pence... It's my understanding that Mom is just fulfilling her duty as a Catholic mother and standing up for what she believes in. She's probably worked very hard raising her children in the faith, and it isn't about her picking on anyone--or "not loving" anyone. I'm not a parent, but it's probably very heartbreaking to diligently raise your child in the faith and see them walk away from it. I know it was a frustration to my parents (my dad was certainly angry about my oldest brother not attending church anymore, cohabiting with his non-Catholic wife to be, and living a relationship that is not even remotely Catholic.) There's not much more I could say that's been said--though one thing can never be said to much... [b]pray, pray, pray![/b]

-- Susan Doe (Anon@noemail.com), April 21, 2002.

Argh!!! *blush* I wish I could edit posts -- rather I should say Mom is, out of love, standing up for the Church's upholding of the sanctity of a true marriage and what love and marriage should be.

-- Susan Doe (Anon@noemail.com), April 21, 2002.

Dear Hope -

It seems to me that you are looking for approval rather than answers. If that is true, why did you ask your question of conservative Catholics rather than Ann Landers or Dr. Laura? I'm sure that Ann Landers, at least, would give you a pat on the head and say you're OK.

If you want persmission to do your own thing, you're not going to get it here, or from any conservative Christian.

-- Bonnie (stichart@plix.com), April 21, 2002.

In case no one has mentioned this before (it was such a long thread, and I didn't want to lose my train of thought - so I skipped to the end), but it wasn't the Catholic Church that some how "made up" the rule not to sleep with your boyfriend prior to the sacrament of matrimony. If you don't think God Himself had that in mind then you better re-visit the Bible. (Specifically Genesis - Adam and Eve were one flesh, Exodus - the little commandment about adultery). You are fooling yourself when you say that you are in communion with Jesus, but do not live by His Fathers Commandments. The Catholic Church merely enforces and supports Gods will, to use this against the Church is a cop-out.

You obviously believe in heaven. Then you would agree that it is the best place to be. Well, if you loved you boyfriend with the Love of God, you would do anything and everything to get him to heaven. True love is not self seaking (that's in the Bible too). If you had any idea of where you were sending your boyfriends soul, and if you truly loved him, then you would be more than willing to wait a few months or years till you can marry. Mother has true love for her child, and it is appearant in her efforts to get her son to heaven!

Hope this helps.

In Christ

-- jake huether (jake.huether@lamrc.com), May 13, 2002.