Boris Johnson in marrying as a "Catholic" has annulled his previous marriages and delegitimesed his children - these are the ethics of our current prime minister

[stumbledin]

On one level I dont care either way about this but thought it strange who could get married in a Catholic ceremony. But as ever our resourceful PM has "negotiated" a path that suits him - and insults his formes wives and their children. As someone on facebook said, this is how Etonians learn to rule the world! What an utter w*er!!

" ... Catholic canon law does not permit the marriage of a divorcee whose former spouse is still alive.

However, the church confirmed that as neither his six-year first marriage to Allegra Mostyn-Owen, nor his second 27-year marriage to Marina Wheeler were Catholic ceremonies they are not recognised in the eyes of the church.

... In order to marry in a Catholic church, Mr Johnson could have had his two previous marriages recognised as annulled.

(or) ... his previous marriages, for which he would have required special dispensation from the Catholic church, those marriages would have "had a lack of canonical form" and could therefore be considered invalid. ... "

Interestingly these comments are from a Telegraph article late yesterday www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/05/29/boris-wedding-did-prime-minister-marry-carrie-symonds-catholic/ which has now disappeared and been replaced with this much less questioning article www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/05/30/boris-johnson-carrie-symonds-catholic-church-wedding-married/

Wonder if some Telegraph Tory leaders got in touch and said dont be so mean!

As they say, one rule for the rich, one rule for the poor.

Ffs, worry about your own life, OP.
No one gives a fuck about how many times Boris Johnson has been married, or where the weddings took place.
Thankfully, people are allowed to get married and divorced nowadays without being judged about it.

No one gives a fuck about how many times Boris Johnson has been married, or where the weddings took place.

Except many people do care.

Anulling previous marriages indeed - the law of the land doesn't look at it like that.

It is possible to get an annulment rather than a divorce in civil law, though the requirements/circumstances differ.

I strongly doubt Johnson's exes care. The divorces have gone through. The annulment in church law is practically a "divorce" under another name, for church purposes.

It does matter where you were previously married.

If an Anglican marries an Anglican in an Anglican Church, their marriage is
valid in the eyes of the Catholic church and cannot be annulled.

If a Catholic married an Anglican in an Anglican Church, and the Catholic did not get the consent of the Catholic Church in advance then the marriage is not valid and can be annulled.

The annulment in church law is practically a "divorce" under another name, for church purposes.

Except it really isn’t.

A divorce ends a marriage. An annulment denies that the marriage ever existed.

I think this reflects really badly on the catholic church. I couldn't get remarried in the catholic church despite fleeing from my first marriage due to violence, and yet soeone whose multiple marriages fail because he keeps sticking his dick in people he's not married to can. Everyone knows his vows mean nothing to him and yet there he is churning them out in our place of worship making a mockery of our faith. Shame on whoever took the decision to allow this.

Having briefly googled Johnson, he was a Catholic who later became an Anglican, but as he has been baptised, had communion and probably been confirmed in the Catholic Church, he still remains Catholic in the eyes of the Catholic Church.

So any marriage he had outside of the church without their consent is invalid. It is a very standard case for annulment.

It’s not because he’s rich. It’s because his previous marriages weren’t in a Catholic Church. The Catholic Church doesn’t recognise his previous marriages but the state still does. Not all catholic priests take this view, some would take the view that any marriage that resulted in a divorce would be a reason not to get married in a Catholic Church.

DH is Catholic and I’m not. We didn’t get married in a Catholic Church but we’ve considered having a ceremony in the Catholic Church to recognise our marriage because if we divorce, I don’t want him pulling this card and pretending the vows he said weren’t real because they weren’t in a Catholic Church. This will probably make me petty but he agreed to the non-Catholic wedding and he doesn’t get to pretend it didn’t happen. At least in the eyes of the church. Some of this is probably left over resentment from his family (his dad) and how they felt about our wedding and comments that were made when BIL divorced after a non-Catholic wedding. Johnson’s previous weddings might not have occurred in the Catholic Church but he’s got 31 years of marriage to two women that resulted in multiple children and a Catholic priest has just said “ yeah, no problem, they weren’t real marriages anyway”.

I agree with @FatCatThinCat and @Redheadsturnheads this reflects badly on the Catholic church.

Its not fair on all those practicing Catholics who were denied a church ceremony on a second marriage for one of the parties. The Johnson get out doesn't apply to the hoi polloi.

One of my friends couldn't get married in her church because her fiance was onto his second marriage (he wasn't Catholic). Another friend was married in a civil ceremony then divorced but wasn't allowed to marry her staunchly Catholic now H in his church. She said she was made to feel like damaged goods. No one said "Oh that doesn't count, you're free to marry!"

It makes us look hypocritical, unprincipled, unjust.

I very much doubt that Boris and Carrie give a flying fuck about the faith although I hope that it might come to mean something to them both rather than just a photogenic place to get married.

They're epic hypocrites anyway so I've not got high hopes.

I was surprised to discover that Carrie was Catholic and felt strongly enough about the faith to insist on a church wedding. If only she had cared more about her faith before she had an affair with a married man.

Absolutely stunned that Bozza is Catholic. Are we quite sure he doesn't smoke at the touch of holy water or a cross?!

Wish, if you are not a Catholic and didn’t want a Catholic marriage, why should you want to prevent your husband having one in the event of a divorce?

It isn’t about the church saying your vows weren’t real. It is about saying that your marriage wasn’t a sacramental one, because sacramental marriages cannot be ended. In the same way baptism cannot be ended.

Goodness it is hypocritical of the church. Even if they can square it with their canon laws because the first marriages weren’t Catholic, it surely is against their laws in spirit.

Isn’t there a cad in a Graham Green story who uses a rule like this to his advantage?

@Redheadsturnheads

I’m a Catholic and I personally know quite a few people who were not permitted to have a marriage or even blessing in the Catholic Church because they were divorced - it didn’t matter where they were married previously- whether a civi marriage or other church. I appreciate if you aren’t Catholic and don’t know anyone refused a Catholic marriage you probably don’t care. No idea what his previous wives might think about it - I suppose it depends if their marriage was annulled or not.

Totally agree. I know the same. This does matter and Boris and Carrie are being treated differently.

@LibertyMole

Wish, if you are not a Catholic and didn’t want a Catholic marriage, why should you want to prevent your husband having one in the event of a divorce?

It isn’t about the church saying your vows weren’t real. It is about saying that your marriage wasn’t a sacramental one, because sacramental marriages cannot be ended. In the same way baptism cannot be ended.

Because if DH was that concerned about having a sacramental marriage, then he should have insisted on it for his first marriage with me. It was a joint decision where we got married.

Well presumably he wasn’t concerned but perhaps will feel differently in the future.

I did not mean to imply B Johnson is a cad.

Some get-out like this was used by a Catholic cad in the story.

Wish, I believe the Catholic Church will marry you to each other anyway, so you won’t have to worry about it.

It isn’t about the church saying your vows weren’t real. It is about saying that your marriage wasn’t a sacramental one, because sacramental marriages cannot be ended.

But that is saying that the first marriage wasn’t a proper marriage because it wasn’t a sacramental marriage.

In the circumstances (Johnson’s recent and past adultery with Symonds and others) that is particularly offensive.

To pretend now that at 56 he is finally taking marriage seriously (neatly coinciding with so many news stories about his lack of integrity) is ridiculous.

I don’t think proper marriage and sacramental marriage are the same thing.

I mean, many people wouldn’t want a sacramental marriage because they want divorce to mean the end of their marriage in every sense.

A lot of people don’t want to be told that they have been married in a way that can never be ended.

The clear implication is that from the church’s point of view the previous marriages didn’t exist. By marrying in the church Johnson is agreeing.

Obviously legal and religious definitions of marriage are different.

They are not saying it didn’t exist. They are saying it is a. Invalid and b. Not a sacramental marriage. They recognise it is a legal marriage.

Why would his Anglican ex wife care that the Catholic Church consider her marriage invalid. The Catholic Church also considers Anglican communion invalid!

That's so rude, to the Anglican church isn't it?!

Quite goady.

I'd find it a bit annoying tbh. If you got married in a Christian church and one branch of the church has rendered your marriage a state marriage but not a church marriage 25 years afterwards, I don't know if I'd be upset exactly but it's just so insensitive.

What's got to do with you ?.

What's it got to do with you ?.