Did Catholics go after AOL about Kidman marriage?

I just signed on and the welcome page is announcing a news article that states that Kidman and Cruise were never married.

The little blurb goes on to say that their "Union was never recognized by the church."

The you are supposed to click on a line that says, "loophole explains it."

But when you click on that line, the story has been removed and replaced with this statement"

The requested URL /2006/06/26/nicole-kidman-wasnt-married-to-tom-cruise was not found on this server.

I had clicked onto the line because I really wanted to know what the "loophole" was but someone does not want it exposed or explained.

Why would anyone make such a big deal about whether the Kidman/Cruise marriage was recognized by the church?
They were allowed to adopt children together. That must mean something.

It's not that I really care anything at all about Kidman, Cruise or Urban. The two Aussies can stay home and make movies if they are waiting for me to arrive breathless at the movie theatre to see them,
I don't give a rats ass what Cruise does either. But why is it necessary for the Church to claim that divorced people cannot remarry and then drop that rule when it comes to the rich and famous?

in the eyes of the Catholic Church, the marriage never happened

and not only the rich and famous take advantage of this

So don't hold me to this 100%.

My understanding is that if you were never married 'in the Church' or with the Catholic Church's blessing in the first place it's as if the first marriage didn't exist. All that is required is an "absence of form" which is a fancy way of annulling a marriage that wasn't really a marriage in the Church's eyes anyway. :shrug: My guess is that Kidman/Cruise were not married in a Catholic ceremony making her and Urban free to marry in the Church this time.

(And their being able to adopt children has nothing to do with Catholicism - those are legal matters not church matters).


Here's one possible answer:

http://www.americancatholic.org/Messenger/Feb2004/Feature2.asp

Q. What is the procedure if the previous marriage for a Catholic person was outside the Church?

A. The Church requires that a baptized Roman Catholic marry before one of its representatives, usually a priest or deacon, unless special permission was granted otherwise. When a Catholic does not observe this requirement and marries out of the Church (for example, before a justice of the peace) and eventually divorces, the tribunal process involves two steps.

The first step requires securing the Catholic’s baptismal record, a copy of an official document indicating the location of the marriage and the name of the person who performed the ceremony, as well as the divorce decree.

The second step involves completing a relatively brief form that seeks the above information and asks a few additional questions about circumstances concerning the celebration of the marriage.

This form and the supporting documents showing who witnessed the wedding are sent to the diocesan tribunal, which ordinarily processes that application in a few days and returns to the petitioner a declaration of nullity based on what is called a “lack of canonical form.”

The individual is now free to pursue a subsequent marriage within the Church or to have the Church convalidate a civil marriage which has already taken place.

from his first wife.

Queen Catherine had been married to his brother Arthur and under church law at the time...it meant that Henry and Catherine were "brother and sister" in the eyes of the church... When Arthur died of consumption...Catherine's dowry was to return back to Spain...but her greedy father in law got a dispensation from the pope...allowing Catherine to marry her brother in law Henry....

When he wanted to be rid of her...saying that a match with his "sister in law" was unnatural...the Pope..said.."no" because he had been granted special permission to do it in the first place...add to that the fact that Catherine's nephew had the pope's nuts in a vice and that was the reason for Henry's switching religion...

a civil ceremony. Therefore she is able to marry in the church.

by a group of priests with canon law degrees.

basically this...When a Roman Catholic marries ...it must be officiated in a Roman Catholic church for it to be recognized.

My husband's ex was a catholic who married him in a protestant ceremony...according to the rules of the Catholic church...it never happened.

We married in the Catholic Church I grew up worshipping in...

church, with a priest officiating, you are not "married" according to the catholic church.. I have been living in sin for 36 years since I was married in a Presbyterian church.. The divorce would not preclude her from a catholic wedding this time, since her first marriage was never really recognized by them anyway..

Loopholes abound...and if you have BIG BUCKS you can "buy" an annulment even if you have kids :)

I bet they were never married in a Church (may not have actually been legally married, either!), but had a contract, as has been much-talked-about in the tabloid entertainment press. I think their marriage was a sham. And they, of course, have adopted children. So there is also no proof that the marriage was consummated. All of this would matter in the eyes of the Church. I would think it's a sin in the Church's eyes to pretend to be married to someone for ten years for monetary reward or notoriety, but it WOULD provide a loophole, either in that Nicole is still free to marry, having never really been married before (though I should add here that the Catholic Church does recognize any legal marriage, and holds that it is valid for a Catholic - i.e. you cannot have a strictly civil ceremony, then get a civil divorce, and have the Church marry you the second time because the first one was outside the Church), OR the marriage was easily annulled, Ted Kennedy style.

I also have a friend whose mother recently remarried, having gotten a divorce and then an annulment, even though she had THREE kids with her Catholic husband. :eyes:

ALSO, remember Tom was raised Catholic, and actually entered a seminary intending to become a priest, if I remember correctly.

For example, the Roman Catholic Church does not permit divorce, because in its eyes, a marriage is forged by God. The Church states that what God joins together, humans cannot sunder. As a result, although acknowledging civil divorce may be required to protect one spouse or the children, people who get a civil divorce are still considered married in the eyes of the Catholic Church, which does not allow them to remarry, even if the state they live in allows a civil re-marriage. The Catholic Church recognizes marriages between non-baptized people as "good and natural marriages" and even in the event that one partner is baptized, does not allow their being divorced if the non-baptized person is willing to live peaceably with the Christian. However, if the non-baptized person refused to live with the Christian, or to do so peaceably -- as, for instance, interfering with the Christian's practice of religion -- the marriage can be broken. Currently, under some circumstances, Catholics can be permitted an annulment. With a nullity, religions and the state often apply different rules, meaning that a couple, for example, could receive a divorce from the state and not have their marriage annulled by the Catholic Church because the state disagrees with the church over whether an annulment could be granted in a particular case. This produces a situation of Catholics getting Church annulments simultaneously with state divorces, allowing the ex-partners to marry other people in the eyes of both the Church and the State.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriage

Catholics don't recognize "The Church of Scientology" as a real church.

Frankly I see their point. Scientology is more of a cult or a best self help group IMO.

Nonetheless, I thinks its undisputed that Kidman and Cruise CONSIDERED themselves married and certainly the state and courts did as well throughout their divorce.

I do think its a bit disengenious for the Catholic Church to not consider them married.

What I do wonder is if they apply this rule to everyone, or did they "find" the "cult loophole" through extra effort for the rich and famous.

The Catholic Church understands marriage as a sacrament that images God's covenant with His people, a covenant of love and for a lifetime. Once a valid marriage covenant is made, it is a commitment for life to faithfulness and the good of the spouse and children.

But for a marriage to be truly valid (with the Catholic understanding of covenant) both parties must be capable of such a commitment, fully aware and freely giving consent. Sometimes one of these conditions is not present and therefore something is wrong from the beginning, something is lacking. In such a case there never was a valid marriage bond from the beginning. One or both parties may not have been capable of full consent for a number of personal reasons. Or there may have been undue external pressure.

An annulment process is aimed at establishing that the marriage bond was invalid from the very beginning. Something was missing from the marriage commitment, something was lacking with the consent or one or both of the parties lacked capability for unconditional commitment to a community of love



In these cases where the first marriage was either a Catholic wedding or a non-Catholic wedding with special permission to be married before someone other than an ordained Catholic minister, the annulment process is more involved.

The annulment process in these circumstances, termed a formal case, examines not so much where the marriage took place, but what happened in the marriage. The procedure takes longer (six months to a year, or more, depending upon the diocese) and is more complex than the “lack of form” annulment mentioned in question seven above. The Church in these cases researches not merely the location of a wedding, but also the relationship between spouses before and during the marriage. That’s a bit more complicated.

The marriage was probably deemed not valid because of Cruise's affiliation with Scientology. There are other reasons that she may have used, but I can see the Church granting an annulment on that fact alone.

And anyone can apply for an annulment; it's not exclusive to the rich and famous. Getting one can take forever, but many Catholics who do want to remarry in the faith pursue it.

may have sped up the process! :crazy:

:rofl:

because what I heard (before I changed the station FAST) was that her marriage to Cruise had been annulled.

I believe the procedure for people married outside the church is far easier than that for people married within it.

So yes, it's legal marriage versus religious marriage all over again, but it appears she dotted the "I do's."

Okay, that was not nice but it was my first thought. :evilgrin:

And I concur with the previous posts about her first marriage not being in the Church as the basis for the allowing of this marriage to be a Catholic Church wedding. (Was that grammatically correct???) :)

Bet both Cruise and Kidman were raised Catholic. So in the eyes of their god, they fooled no one but the tabloids. How many days in purgatory is that? They better start praying. :scared:

married before her? Was Cruise's first marriage in the Catholic Church? That means the Church doesn't recognize the marriage to Kidman, but that doesn't mean it wasn't legal otherwise. If this is the case, then she is able to marry in the Church if she wants to in the future. Of course she will have to confess to her sin and do penance first.

For four years. She is a fellow Scientologist

http://www.idontlikeyouinthatway.com/2006/06/tom-cruise-doesnt-count.html




Despite divorcing Tom Cruise in 2001 after being married to him for 10 years, many people are wondering exactly how Kidman was allowed to marry Keith Urban in a Catholic ceremony over the weekend. The Catholic church does not condone divorce, but according to them, Kidman's marriage to Cruise never happened. Why? Their wedding was performed by the Church of Scientology and therefore was not recognized by the Catholic faith.


The Catholic Church sets down requirements to have a valid Catholic marriage. In the case of Nicole's first marriage, those requirements were not fulfilled," said Father Coleman, who married Kidman and Urban.

Well, of course it wasn't recognized. It's Scientology. You'd have an easier time getting a Catholic marriage license if you got divorced after being married by a donkey at Chuck E. Cheese.