Skip to comments.The Newt Evangelization: Gingrich to become Catholic
Posted on 03/03/2009 1:15:09 PM PST by NYer
Buried deep inside this long and wonkish profile of Newt Gingrich in Sunday's New York Times, was this little nugget that, I suspect, went largely unnoticed:
PHOTO: by Nigel Parry for the New York Times.
At a moment when the role of religious fundamentalism in the party is a central question for reformers, Gingrich, rather than making any kind of case for a new enlightenment, has in fact gone to great lengths to placate Christian conservatives. The family-values crowd has never completely embraced Newt, probably because he has been married three times, most recently to a former Hill staff member, Callista Bisek. In 2006, though, Gingrich wrote a book called “Rediscovering God in America” — part of a new canon of work he has done reaffirming the role of religion in public life. The following year, he went on radio with the evangelical minister James Dobson to apologize for having been unfaithful to his second wife. (A Baptist since graduate school, Gingrich said he will soon convert to Catholicism, his wife’s faith.)
Let’s pray for a sincere conversion for Newt Gingrich. It is none of our business how the Church handles his personal matters.
I think the man is brilliant. I would love it if he had such clarity on personal issues that he has on political issues. Everyone is a work in progress, I guess. I know I am!
But more than anything, it seems to me that the man never had a real beliefs; and I thought he did. Sad.
Deinde, ego te absolvo a peccatis tuis in nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti.
Become a Catholic! That should finish his chances to be the GOP candidate - never happened.
Newt - John 3:3
Hey looky here.
See your heart is in the right place having the Govt/Obama Conversion Prayer thread. : )
Prayers up. New Catholics need all the prayers they can get. (Us old ones, too.) Welcome to the Ark -— ‘cause it’s already raining.
I know we all can think of a Preist we admire/respect who would be a great Adult Catechism teacher for Newt. : )
LOL! Let’s go for broke and sign up Fr. Z!!!! (I think BXVI is too busy . . . )
I'm assuming the Church will set things strait. But being a public figure the Church will probably have to make some kind of public statement that things have been properly settled regarding his former marriage/marriages.
Praise the Lord!
But how would he get around that little inconvenience of marriage being a Sacrament?
I pray that it is a true conversion, not just to placate his wife. My wife stuck by me for 19 years before I converted. Never pushed, never nagged, nothing overt. I’m so glad I did it because it was my choice, my decision, and came from a real conversion of the heart and mind.
I heard the Pope is going to give him all of Scotland if he converts?
I agree with you completely.
A lot of pieces everywhere starting to fall into place.
?? He authored the Contract With America. He led the revolution against 40 years of rat control in the House of Representatives. Real beliefs.
He may have never had a sacramental marriage.
And then he sold out. Did you fall asleep?
He wasn’t married in a Roman Catholic Church, so the sacrament wasn’t violated.
We should pray for his continuing conversion and for him being able to order his private life accordingly.
He is a brilliant man.
It is said that facts are stubborn things. I add that they are reserved for those who think. Try it someday.
Newt won the House. He did it with real beliefs.
Actually it also depends on the denomination and whther there had been a valid baptism performed.
How many of those were accomplished?
This is completely wrong. Gingrich has a very real problem with his several marriages, despite them being contracted, presumably, not in a Catholic church (Roman or otherwise).
The Catholic Church presumes every apparent marriage to be sacramentally valid. In order to proclaim a marriage invalid, a civil divorce is not enough: a defect should be found in how the putative marriage was contracted. But for a Protestant to marry in a Baptist or any other church, or by a civil ceremony is not a defect. He may have a great difficulty annuling either former marriage, and regularizing the present one.
It is in fact the opposite: if a Catholic (Roman, Melkite, Maronite, or what have you) contracts a marriage outside of the Catholic Church without a dispensation from his bishop, that already invalidates it. Not so when no party is Catholic, then the marriage is harder to invalidate because there is no canonical form for non-Catholics.
Remember St. Augustine had “personal” issues as well, but he made a wonderful addition to the Church.
My wife works at the local diocesan office and works in the tribunal office that handles annulments and the like. What you wrote sounds a lot of what she has told me from time to time. She’s a Roman Catholic convert herself and loves being one.
Please pay attention.
He should have provided a better photo. He looks like Hannibal Lector in is cell.
And 1 John 2:19.
Which brings us back to the question: how does he get around the little inconvenience of marriage being a Sacrament?
My wife and me were at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception several years ago and as we were walking through the cafeteria we recognized a voice...it was Newt in all his glory.
This is no surprise to me.
The marriages do pose a problem, but without knowing the baptismal status of his former spouses; it is possible he could apply for a Pauline or Petrine privilege, and then marry within the church.
Amazing how some of the Baptists think Gingrich belonged to them. LOL
It’s not just a question of baptismal status. If it can be documented that the marriages were not entered into with full consent (most Protestant marriages, upon inspection, prove to be deficient in some sense, because the participants almost always have mental reservations knowing they have recourse to divorce) then they can be annulled and his current marriage can be regularised.
When I went back to my Catholic Faith I had to work for a year in study and take a test on what I was taught.
Also Confession was a must do before being confirmed and I had some serious sins to be absolved from my youth.
General Abrams, John Wayne, Robert Bork, Tony Blair, Clarence Thomas...just one more in a long line...
I agee that it is a very real question. We don’t know how is he going to “get around” that.
He may give up on trying to legitimize his current civil marriage, separate from the civil spouse and become celibate.
He may succeed in annuling both prior marriages, and if his present civil spouse had any on her own, she might likewise succeed annuling those, at which time they are free to regularize their civil marriage as Catholics.
It is a standing joke how, supposedly, annulments are granted to prominent people easily. No one really knows since the proceedings are private. However, given the present serial marriage, easy divorce and plentiful contraception, the fact is that very many marriages are on shaky sacramental ground. Lack of committment to a lifelong, mutually faithful, oriented to parenthood marriage is not that uncommon; quick trial marriages that end barely after they are consummated are also frequent. Imagine that one spouse insisted on contraception and left no offspring; imagine the other spouse had been previously married for whole one month right out of high school, and bingo, both marriages are invalid, one for lack of fruitfullness, another by impediment of prior bond.
It was Salvations Catholic threads that was one of the things that led KV an me back to the Church and we both received our Confirmation.
The humans and such of our local Parish turned KV away as a teen when he was entering the year to be Confirmed...they moved the class up a flight of stairs and said it was the other kids choice.
That Priest should never have allowed the parents to turn KV away and as the rest of the story goes he himself ended up losing his to his own demons and left the Priesthood. Sad.
We went South to a very Conservative Priest whom I respect and look up to as a teacher that cuts right to the chaste in his opinions. Not everyone can take his non progressive ways.
We feel fortunate to have him as part of our lives.
And due KVs circumstances Father received permission to be the one to Confirm us and a few others in the class that he formed after our request to be educated and receive confirmation.
Very cool and now a never ending mind/intellect to soul journey.
The other thing that led me back was a dream about seeing Marys appearance in the wet of the Ocean rocks and she was crying.
I had been Praying for peace in my heart and she spoke to my heart in the dream to seek the Church and return to my faith.
I will never forget that dream and on the rare occasion I go to the beach/cliffs that are running wet with rain I think about that wonderful dream.
I would love to see Joy Baher from the View come back home to the Catholic Church.
Obama too. It would be a global change we could all get with. : )
Yeah, that too.
I agree that many people (not just Protestants) enter marriage thinking "Hey, if it doesn't work out, I can always get a divorce."
Having said that, I see no where in scripture that says "Well, the marriage was never valid because one of the parties harbored some doubts on the day of the wedding or wasn't committed enough."
Sadly, too many churches, the Catholic church included, have compromised when it comes to the issue of marriage.
I don’t mean to throw stones at Protestants, but it’s undeniable that two generations of no-fault divorce have radically changed many Protestants’ understanding of marriage from the lifelong commitment that the Church teaches.
Full consent means full consent to what the Church teaches marriage is, not just consent to the current secular understanding.
Also, seeking proof-text in Scripture is not the final argument in matters of Canon law—but we could, for instance, start with Jesus’ admonition to the Samaritan woman at the well—none of her marriages were valid because she had no enduring commitment to any of them.
Also, I should make clear I mean “defective” in the sense of validity in the eyes of the Church according to Canon law, not any absolute judgement about the Christian marriage of Protestants who do commit to what the Church teaches marriage is.
Will he ever be able to recieve Holy Communion with his past marry/divorces?
Wonder if Pelosi is ever going to put a cork in her drunk with Power trip and come back to her faith as the Church teaches like in Mr. Sperm meets Mrs. Egg and that is conception 100% not to be aborted for any inconveinance to the Parents to be.
We could sure use those in the Political position to speak out for the faith like Alan Keyes does that could turn around alot of those Catholics who do not undestand the Churches teaching on issues such as abortion.
If he had been supported even half as much as Clinton was by his side of the aisle we would have a much different America than we do today.
This is nothing more than my personal opinion. I was a Newt supporter and followed his triumph and subsequent travails pretty closely. 99 percent of what I read about him now simply never happened. BS like the Contract was never carried through, etc.
What makes marriage a sacrament is the three of you (you, spouse, and God) all completely committed to the union. If you or your spouse entered into the union with serious mental/emotional/spiritual issues, God may not have united Himself with you in your marriage. He cannot be part of something deeply flawed. That is why people can get Catholic marriages annulled. The Church studies the marriage and determines there were deep flaws in the commitment of either party. God would not have been united in the sacrament of marriage with such a couple. So, it wasn’t a sacramental marriage.
You have to take it on a case by case basis. If someone is deeply dishonest about who he is or what he believes, commits adultery, or has personality disorders, then he can’t possibly make a real commitment to someone. If he can’t make a real commitment, God wouldn’t participate in uniting an innocent person to him. The couple would have had a valid, legal marriage but not the sacrament of Marriage.
That’s my understanding.
Now, why did the image of Fr. John Corapi come to my mind when I read this??
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.