What a Carry on
by Fr Ed Tomlinson:
I have been inundated with people asking for clarification regarding the marriage of Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister. How, they ask, was this man granted sacramental marriage in a Catholic church given an infamous colourful past? This being, according to civil law, wife number three…
The official answer resides in the nitty gritty of canon law. Because the previous marriages were not held in a Catholic Church they were annulled on grounds of form. In the eyes of the church then this was actually his first sacramental marriage. Otherwise it would not have been possible.
Do remember that the annulment process is not about judging the worth or the past of candidates but rather looking at the cold hard facts regarding the legitimacy of previous unions. And the simple fact is that annulling marriages conducted outside the Catholic Church has always been more straightforward than annulling those conducted by her. Regardless of the personal lives of those involved.
Is this fair? Well not always. Which brings us to the real issue in this case. A neat use of canon law might satisfy ecclesial lawyers but it doesn’t satisfy the questions of the scandalised. And whatever this marriage was or wasn’t in the eyes of the law- many felt it proved bad optics on behalf of the faith. How can the church claim to uphold marriage as a life long union when marrying a notorious womaniser for the third time according to civil law?
The question is fair. Many people feel the granting of a church marriage in this case was unfair; on the wives and children he has abandoned and on Catholics unable to take communion, week by week, despite a less colourful past than Boris, because they too are divorced and in a new relationship. Is it one rule for the privileged but another for everyone else?
As for my take?
Please right-click links to open in a new window.
Related Posts
Tags
Share This
