Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

[Catholic Caucus] Mel's marriage is annulled ... by his own dad
Woman's Day (Australia) ^ | 8/3/2009

Posted on 08/04/2009 5:43:44 AM PDT by markomalley

No wonder Mel Gibson is giving the thumbs-up. Full time has been called on his 28-year marriage to Robyn Moore. The Pope didn't give the order, though. That edict came from Mel's 90-year-old father Hutton Gibson, and it paves the way for his son to marry his pregnant Russian girlfriend Oksana Grigorieva by Christmas.

Having had his request turned down by Catholic bishops, Mel, 53, pleaded his case in front of a tribunal of members from the Church of the Holy Family, his breakaway Catholic church in Malibu.

Hutton, who once studied for the priesthood only to leave before he was ordained, presided over the hearing. He granted Mel's annulment request after his son presented evidence that his union to Robyn, 53, was never a true marriage — even though they wed in a Catholic ceremony in Australia in June 1980.

"Especially important was Mel's description of how he felt pressured into the marriage in the first place because Robyn was pregnant," a family insider says.

"Those feelings indicated to Hutton that it couldn't have been a true marriage, and so he felt it must be invalid.

"After the discussion ended, Hutton pounded his fist on the table and said, ‘It is true that this union did not have what it takes to be a true marriage.'"

The family are at pains to keep the annulment, which took place a month after Robyn filed for divorce in April, a secret — but maybe not too secret.

"Mel hopes some of the bishops he has befriended recently can be persuaded to give him a proper Catholic annulment," the insider says.

Either way, Mel is forging ahead with plans for a Christmas wedding to Oksana, 39, despite her cold feet over his recent behaviour, which includes gambling escapades in Las Vegas.


TOPICS: Catholic; Current Events; Ministry/Outreach; Religion & Culture
KEYWORDS: adulterer; apostate; catholic; kennedyesque; melgibson; sedevacanist; toldyouso
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-144 next last
Amazing what pops up with search engines...

As much as I enjoy his movies (and believe "Passion" was inspired), the more I hear about him, the less impressed I become.

1 posted on 08/04/2009 5:43:45 AM PDT by markomalley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Seven kids and he had the marriage annulled? Mel has gone off his rocker....


2 posted on 08/04/2009 5:45:48 AM PDT by Rummyfan (Iraq: it's not about Iraq anymore, it's about the USA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rummyfan

Either that or this Ukrainian bombshell has caused all the blood to rush from his head to his pe**s and he ain’t thinking straight!


3 posted on 08/04/2009 5:47:03 AM PDT by Rummyfan (Iraq: it's not about Iraq anymore, it's about the USA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
Henry VIII comes to mind.
4 posted on 08/04/2009 5:49:55 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Islam is a religion of peace, and Muslims reserve the right to kill anyone who says otherwise.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rummyfan
I guess his 7 kids weren't ‘real’ either. Are they going to be ‘annulled’ too?
5 posted on 08/04/2009 5:50:51 AM PDT by Travis McGee (---www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
I don't think his actions now make his movies any less good or less great. I just think he's going through a mid life crisis and has gone mildly insane.

As for the annulment he's basically removed himself from The Church anyway so hey...why stop there!

6 posted on 08/04/2009 5:52:07 AM PDT by Artemis Webb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

The church made their own rules. A friend of mine got her marriage annulled....All you gotta do is PAY!!


7 posted on 08/04/2009 5:54:46 AM PDT by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

“I guess his 7 kids weren’t ‘real’ either. Are they going to be ‘annulled’ too?”

Yes, in his case and in every other annullment.

I don’t get it.

This guy is such a train wreck.


8 posted on 08/04/2009 5:55:43 AM PDT by Joann37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Rummyfan

That’s what I heard.


9 posted on 08/04/2009 5:55:53 AM PDT by fatima (Free Hugs Today :))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
"Especially important was Mel's description of how he felt pressured into the marriage in the first place because Robyn was pregnant," a family insider says. "Those feelings indicated to Hutton that it couldn't have been a true marriage, and so he felt it must be invalid.

And how is that different from his upcoming marriage to his pregnant girlfriend?

10 posted on 08/04/2009 5:57:15 AM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

I dont know why Mel would worry about getting a farcical annullment. He knows and we know it isnt a true annullment so his conscience cannot be clear with it. Why seek it?

He probably would have gotten a real annulment from the Catholic Church if his name had been Ted Kennedy.

We all know Ted’s conscience is clear.

Do I believe even the Church’s real annulments are sometimes farcical??? Yeah , I do.


11 posted on 08/04/2009 5:58:51 AM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb

I used to be a fan of Mel’s because of this convictions. No more. Now he is now an irrelevant nutcase. I feel for his kids.


12 posted on 08/04/2009 5:58:51 AM PDT by growingpains
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Joann37
Very few people, even brilliant people, can survive a life of fame, great wealth, and constant adulation. This cocktail is potent enough to intoxicate almost anybody.
13 posted on 08/04/2009 5:59:07 AM PDT by Travis McGee (---www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic
And how is that different from his upcoming marriage to his pregnant girlfriend?

Wink wink. Setting up Annulment Two, when he meets another starlet he wants to bed.

14 posted on 08/04/2009 6:00:23 AM PDT by Travis McGee (---www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com---)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: fatima
I remember James Caviezel, on an interview once saying, You don't expect to make a movie on the Passion and not get some of it handed to you.

Mel has the demons working on him overtime.

Sad.

15 posted on 08/04/2009 6:01:43 AM PDT by mware (F-R-E-E, that spells free. Free Republic.com baby.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Venturer

I agree. I am Catholic and the annulment is just the Catholic Church’s way of getting around a divorce. If you have the money, you get one.


16 posted on 08/04/2009 6:01:45 AM PDT by growingpains
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: mware

It is sad.Pray for him .He is still looking to do a movie that I would like to see done.


17 posted on 08/04/2009 6:04:00 AM PDT by fatima (Free Hugs Today :))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: growingpains

Evidently, you did not read the article. He was refused an annulment by the Catholic Church, so he pulled a Henry VIII.


18 posted on 08/04/2009 6:04:34 AM PDT by dangus (I am JimThompson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

I have lost all respect for Mel.............. oh wait.... Mel is Hollywood.... typical Hollywood behavior.


19 posted on 08/04/2009 6:05:35 AM PDT by Ditter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

where did you come up with that idea? :)


20 posted on 08/04/2009 6:05:42 AM PDT by MissDairyGoodnessVT ("Economy is the method by which we prepare today to afford the improvements of tomorrow"C.Coolidge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: growingpains
I am Catholic and the annulment is just the Catholic Church’s way of getting around a divorce. If you have the money, you get one.

Only in the US - something like 90% of the American annulments which are appealed to Rome get overturned. The tribunals here are annulment mills, but not in the rest of the world.

21 posted on 08/04/2009 6:06:29 AM PDT by nina0113
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau
The church made their own rules. A friend of mine got her marriage annulled....All you gotta do is PAY!!

Don't comment on something (church annulment) you obviously don't understand. A church annulment is not the same as a civil annulment. Same goes for the comments from others on this thread that he had his "kids annulled".

That is not what church annulment does. The children are legitimate. A church annulment (and don't count Mel's breakaway church as representative of the Catholic church) says that one, or the other,or both, parties to the marriage had an impediment (mental or physical) that made a true marriage impossible.

An annulment is granted only after a Church Tribunal hears and studies all the evidence, and it's a lengthy process. The party seeking the annulment has to gather the evidence, including written testimony from parents and others who knew the couple before and after the marriage took place.

The money you talk about is NOT a bribe as many imply. The money pays for copies of all the paperwork and the associated court costs and can be very little. My daughter's annulment cost around $250 in Seattle about 16 years ago. The Tribunal appointed an attorney to represent her. In her case, her husband was mentally ill and had not disclosed that fact before the marriage. He also had undergone a vasectomy before he met her and had not disclosed that fact either.

Another little known fact. The Church does not deliberate on an annulment until the couple already has been granted a civil divorce. And another complication is that the Church will not consider an annulment unless BOTH parties file their paperwork, or at least sign off on the process. In my daughter's case signing off was merely that her ex returned teh papers with "Don't bother me about this" scrawled across them and his signature at the bottom. That proved that he had received the papers and that was enough to start the process.

And she sought the annulment on the advice of several different priests. It was a bad situation.

22 posted on 08/04/2009 6:15:28 AM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau
Didn't Teddy Kennedy get an annualment at some time?
23 posted on 08/04/2009 6:15:55 AM PDT by quikdrw (Life is tough....it's even tougher if you are stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic

IN MY OPINION, The whole process is a farce!!!! My friend’s was over $1000. She said she wouldn’t do it again!!


24 posted on 08/04/2009 6:26:28 AM PDT by Sacajaweau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: mware
I remember James Caviezel, on an interview once saying, You don't expect to make a movie on the Passion and not get some of it handed to you. Mel has the demons working on him overtime.

My thoughts exactly.

25 posted on 08/04/2009 6:36:34 AM PDT by marshmallow ("A country which kills its own children has no future" -Mother Teresa of Calcutta)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb

It’s funny, that on many other threads, when people talk about wanting to see a movie and then finding out something about the producer/director/actor’s personal life or political leanings, they consider the movies no good, won’t even watch them, and actually hope they fail.


26 posted on 08/04/2009 7:00:00 AM PDT by stuartcr (Everything happens as God wants it to...otherwise, things would be different.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

The number of children has nothing to do with the validity of the marriage.

I don’t assume Acorn is a legitimate enterprise just because they get millions of signatures and voter registration cards every election.


27 posted on 08/04/2009 7:07:19 AM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

You wrote:

“The church made their own rules. A friend of mine got her marriage annulled....All you gotta do is PAY!!”

False. The court costs are low. If you can’t pay them, you don’t have to. I know someone who was so financially strapped by her divorce that she paid NOTHING for the annulment court costs.

Also, some people have taken cases all the way to Rome...and have been turned down flat. Most people throughout history were turned down as a matter of fact.


28 posted on 08/04/2009 7:09:18 AM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: growingpains

You wrote:

“I agree. I am Catholic and the annulment is just the Catholic Church’s way of getting around a divorce.”

No, that’s logically impossible.

“If you have the money, you get one.”

Nope. If you have a legitimate case you’ll get one. Can you name a recent case where money clearly made the difference? Joseph P. Kennedy II had money - lots of it. It apparently did him no good. Napoleon couldn’t even get a legitimate annulment from the Church and had or forced clergy to him make one up with no authority. And decades ago, Princess Chalotte of Monaco? Turned down. Count de Castellane? Turned down. James Walker, one time mayor of New York? Turned down. I know there are other famous, rich people who’ve been turned down.

Every case of annulment I have ever learned the facts about seemed like a legitimate case to me.


29 posted on 08/04/2009 7:24:29 AM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: mware

Mel has the demons working on him overtime.

He sure does.....Jim Cavziel has manged to keep it sall together, but Mel was addicted to the *Drink* that allows Satan to do some terrible things to you...


30 posted on 08/04/2009 7:35:04 AM PDT by TaraP (*Religion* is Man trying to reach GOD.Christ is GOD reaching out to Man.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau
Perhaps it is time for an honest discussion about the annulment process.

Why can we not admit that once healthy marriages can for whatever reason die?
Why can't we let go of the ghost of Henry VIII and allow a divorce.
Why can we not admit that in many cases, not all, the current Church annulment process is dishonest. True or false, many if not most people think it is a “pay to play” scheme. As well intentioned as were the original efforts, it has not worked in all too many instances.

31 posted on 08/04/2009 7:53:49 AM PDT by VidMihi ("In fide, unitas; in dubiis, libertas; in omnibus, caritas.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: afraidfortherepublic
While you did not indicate how long your daughter was married, ( I suspect it was a short time )from what you say there is little question your daughter's marriage was properly annulled by the Church. The problem does not arise in such cases as yours, but in marriages of many years, many children, and much parish involvements. (CFM, CCD etc)
32 posted on 08/04/2009 8:04:43 AM PDT by VidMihi ("In fide, unitas; in dubiis, libertas; in omnibus, caritas.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

I heard some grumbling about Kerry’s annulment during the 2004 campaign. According to you it sounds like there could have been good reasons — and I may have been impugning the man.

Do you know what the facts were behind his annulment? I’m curious as to why he was granted one. I guess I could just go to Google but I’m lazy. LOL.


33 posted on 08/04/2009 8:05:26 AM PDT by rom (Israel got Saul before they got David. Where's our David?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

LOL. If she has to get *another* annulment in another marriage, she probably has bigger problems than money.


34 posted on 08/04/2009 8:07:44 AM PDT by rom (Israel got Saul before they got David. Where's our David?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
“Antisemitic loon has long term marriage with seven children “annulled” by holocaust denier dad”

If he felt pressure to marry his first wife because she was pregnant, and that was the reason it wasn't a “real” marriage; what about the pregnant girlfriend he is in a rush to marry before she births? Will that one not be “real” after a few decades because of the “pressure”?

I guess you cannot expect crazy people to start making sense.

35 posted on 08/04/2009 8:12:46 AM PDT by allmendream (Income is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be redistributed?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

Is this informal church “tribunal” authoritative under ecclesiastical law?


36 posted on 08/04/2009 9:36:26 AM PDT by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: VidMihi

5 years. She did not give up on him easily. He was a sociopath. When she finally threw in the towel (after he said he really didn’t want to be married) his parents said, “We’re surprised that you didn’t give up on him a long time ago. We’re amazed that it lasted this long.” No children for the reasons stated above.


37 posted on 08/04/2009 9:52:25 AM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Lucky

There is no such thing as an “informal church tribunal”. It’s very formal and is operated by the Diocese under the authority of Rome. They appoint Dioscesan attorneys to represent the plaintiff. If the defendent wants an attorney, I’m sure they would appoint one for the defendent too. Of course, that increases the cost.

The only time the decision goes to Rome is when there is a dispute, and one of the parties does not want the annulment. Then the decision can be appealed to Rome, whether the Tribunal decided yes, or no.

The Diocesan marriage tribunal uses lay people to decide the case. There are psychologists involved and attorneys and transcriptionists and notaries. Lots of paper work. It’s a big deal.


38 posted on 08/04/2009 10:02:24 AM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

From observations on someone close to me, the process asks some very uncomfortable and probing questions that forces people to face things about themselves and their life. It requires those seeking the annulment and those near to them to fill very long questionnaires. It was not a burden financially either.

It may vary from diocese to diocese too. The person I knew was in St. Louis right around the end of Bishop Regali’s term there and as bishop he is very faithful in his duties.


39 posted on 08/04/2009 10:13:04 AM PDT by Flying Circus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Never trust a man who becomes his own pope. Mel’s “Church” sounds like Petoria.


40 posted on 08/04/2009 10:15:50 AM PDT by Clemenza (Remember our Korean War Veterans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VidMihi
Why can we not admit that once healthy marriages can for whatever reason die? Why can't we let go of the ghost of Henry VIII and allow a divorce?

Perhaps because marriage annulments have nothing to do with what happens after the marriage begins. They are concerned with determining whether or not the marriage was valid at the time it occurred. They are fundamentally different from a civil divorce, most people's perceptions notwithstanding.

41 posted on 08/04/2009 10:20:16 AM PDT by ELS (Vivat Benedictus XVI!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: markomalley; Salvation; narses; SMEDLEYBUTLER; redhead; Notwithstanding; nickcarraway; Romulus; ...
"Especially important was Mel's description of how he felt pressured into the marriage in the first place because Robyn was pregnant," a family insider says.

ROFL!!!! Following his father's thinking on this matter .. this marriage should not take place because the future bride is also pregnant. That renders the future marriage invalid before it even takes place.

Mel is in serious need of prayers! He has lost his way.

42 posted on 08/04/2009 10:35:00 AM PDT by NYer ("One Who Prays Is Not Afraid; One Who Prays Is Never Alone"- Benedict XVI)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
his breakaway Catholic church

******************

Correct me if I'm wrong, but imho, there is nothing "Catholic" about this church.

43 posted on 08/04/2009 10:39:41 AM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ELS
Permit me to clarify.

Why can we not allow that once healthy and valid marriages can die for reasons other than the physical death of one or the other. Baptism and Orders are permanent - where does it say marriage is. The physical death of one party will end the marriage, though some would like to hold that it continues in heaven. A marriage can morally die. Slaves separated from their spouses were allowed to marry another. Leave marriage to the consciences of the people, not to the control of ecclesiastical tribunals.

44 posted on 08/04/2009 10:39:46 AM PDT by VidMihi ("In fide, unitas; in dubiis, libertas; in omnibus, caritas.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

this poor guy and his poor family and this poor pregnant...whatever she is. ugh, what a disaster.


45 posted on 08/04/2009 10:42:05 AM PDT by the invisib1e hand (The revolution IS being televised.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

It’s all about the alcohol.


46 posted on 08/04/2009 10:58:29 AM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VidMihi
where does it say marriage is.

In the Bible. Which the Church has received the authority to interpret (it being her book and all).

Human conscience is where the concept of marriage for life was first recognized. There is no such thing as the "moral death" of a marriage, any more than there could be the moral death of someone's human nature. The practice of people degraded to conditions of slavery can hardly be considered normative or consistent with human nature, I'm thinking. So your example is meaningless.

47 posted on 08/04/2009 11:12:30 AM PDT by Romulus ("Ira enim viri iustitiam Dei non operatur")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: VidMihi
What about Jesus Christ at the wedding feast at Cana: "What God has joined together, let no man put asunder." The question in annulment is whether God put the marriage together in the first place and not whether Suzy or Johnny has found a more desirable main squeeze subsequent to the marriage and rationalized him/her self into thinking the original marriage invalid since the spouse seeking annulment soooooo wants a new spouse. Or, in Henry VIII Tudor's case, a desire for a male heir and for Anne Boleyn (his probable illegitimate daughter according to his contemporary biographer Nicholas Sandler who was executed for saying so) and six others.

What do you think? Was old Henry's sixth marriage legitimate???? Or his fifth? Or his fourth? Or his third? Or his second? Do you think it was OK for him to execute bishops like St. John Fisher for refusing to become accomplices in his adulteries? Or St. Thomas More?

Will we also leave abortion, homosexuality, etc., to "the consciences of the people" whatever that may mean (individualist anarchy??? Democracy on moral theology in the pews???)? We are discussing the Roman Catholic Church which is not some windtunnel self-esteem movement.

Jesus Christ said to Peter: "What you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven and what you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. I give you the keys of the kingdom." Pursuant to that grant of authority, Peter and his successors are the source of those ecclesiastical tribunals that you demean.

48 posted on 08/04/2009 11:42:23 AM PDT by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: growingpains

That’s entirely untrue.

Payment is made so that the Church can facilitate the tribunal/paperwork/internal costs that go into granting annullments. The Church doesn’t make a profit of any kind off of annulments. The payments, in fact, are more than justifiable. If I come to you to resolve a problem of my own making, and expect you to use your time/resources/personnel to address and resolve this problem of my making, shouldn’t I pay for the costs you incur?


49 posted on 08/04/2009 12:13:18 PM PDT by Rutles4Ever (Ubi Petrus, ibi ecclesia, et ubi ecclesia vita eterna!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

Comment #50 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-144 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson