Posted on 06/16/2008 6:16:35 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
President Bush may follow in the footsteps of his brother Jeb and convert to Catholicism, several European papers are reporting.
In the wake of the president’s visit to see Pope Benedict XVI at the Vatican, Italian newspapers, citing Vatican sources, said Bush was open to the idea of converting to Catholicism.
The Italian newspaper Il Foglio referred to such talk about Bush’s possible conversion and stated that “anything is possible, especially for someone reborn like Bush.”
Noting that Tony Blair converted to Catholicism after leaving office as Britain’s prime minister last year, the paper also stated that “if anything happens, it will happen after he finishes his period as president, not before. It is similar to Blair’s case, but with different circumstances.”
President Bush welcomed Pope Benedict XVI warmly when he visited the U.S. in April. And Vatican watchers noted that Bush met privately with the pontiff in the private gardens of the Vatican last Friday — an unprecedented place for the Pope to meet a head of state. Typically, the Vatican gardens are used by the Pope for private reflection.
A Vatican spokesman said the Pope used the unusual locale to reciprocate for the “warmth” Bush showed when the two met in Washington.
Though the Catholic Church has criticized the U.S. war in Iraq, Bush has been an ardent supporter of pro-life issues; he has staunchly opposed stem-cell research; and he opposes gay marriage — all issues important for Rome.
Currently Bush belongs to a Methodist church in Texas and attends an Episcopal church in Washington, D.C.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
PING!
After hearing about how they refuse to marry people who are paralyzed I have lost all respect for the Catholic Church. Canon does not trump the Bible.
if Newsmax is reporting it...ugh.. I just wished they hadn’t.
I read once about a high school classmate of mine who was wheelchair-bound. She got married. I don’t see the problem here (but the Church does, for some reason).
whaaaa?
If a person cannot perform the physical act of sex, the church will not marry you.
I've never heard this... looking for detail on this please.
That would be so sad. But it can’t be ruled out; with his “we all worship one God” garbage, and his un-Biblical optimism about unredeemed human nature, you know W’s grasp of the Bible is (to be charitable) uneven.
Never heard that before. Have a link?
Whoever told you this was terribly mistaken, it is totally false.
Right, this makes sense as he is preparing to have his presidential library located at Southern METHODIST University.
One has to admit that he has always been a bit of a follower.
Canon 1084.1 of the Code of Canon Law of the Catholic Church states that "antecedent and perpetual impotence to have sexual intercourse, whether on the part of the man or on that of the woman, whether absolute or relative, by its very nature invalidates marriage." However, Canon 1084.2 adds that "if the impediment of impotence is doubtful, whether the doubt be one of law or one of fact, the marriage is not to be prevented nor, while the doubt persists, is it to be declared null."
It would have been wise for the priest not to raise the question at all, but once the answer is there and is an objective fact, indeed the couple should not marry as they cannot consummate the marriage.
It is no different than any other impediment to marriage, for example, a prior marriage not dissolved in the eye of the Church, or a vow of celibacy, or marrying a close relative.
I never heard of such a thing. Are you sure?
To put it delicately, women who have spinal cord injury do not suffer from the same malady that prevents men with the injury from having a church marriage. The question is whether or not the marriage can be consummated. Women with SCI are still able to consummate the marriage, wheras some men with the injury (depending on where the lesion falls) are often not able to consummate the marriage.
The inability to consummate a marriage is one of the primary grounds for annullment within the church. The church does not want to be in the position of officiating in a marriage where the grounds for annullment exist from the onset.
We may not agree with it, but that is the rationale.
Sometimes you gotta wonder if lawyers weren’t writing these laws.
This is actually pathetic, IMHO. Why shouldn’t they marry? There are instances when a couple marries and later on through illness, a tragic accident, or whatever, one of the two could certainly become paralyzed or impotent and it doesn’t matter THEN, so why should is matter before?
Oy!
See Wikipedia. It is by the way, identical to the list of reasons when an existing marriage can be nullified. Not all can.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.