I am the "Lady Friend" of Russell Mazoch.. I must clarify something first. I was raised with a Faith/Religion I just was not Baptized. Ok.. let me ask this.. Russ and I live together and have been for 6 months and he is not worried about losing his rights right now. However now that we are engaged and getting ready for the marriage he has decided that he will lose everything unless I follow the church rules and have my marriage annuled. My question.. Should he not have already been worried about losing his rights?? Should he have already lost that right? We go to church ( and I do go with him ) every sunday.. And every Sunday he goes up and gets his sacrements. That is what I dont understand is that we can co-habitat and have premartial sex and that is OK - but when we want to become one - then he will lose everything?! Why is that??

-- Dawn Burris (dejavue282002@yahoo.com), May 02, 2003

Answers

Dear Dawn,

A very valid question, and that indeed would be an obvious double standard, IF it were true. But it isn't! If you are living in a sexual relationship without the benefit of marriage, he should NOT be receiving the sacraments! Receiving the sacraments (specifically receiving the Eucharist, as he does at Mass) in an unrepentant state of serious sin denys a person the graces he would otherwise have received from the sacrament, and is an additional seriously sinful act in itself.

Also, should he marry you without the benefit of making sure you are not already married to another, he would not "lose everything". He would simply be unable to receive the sacraments until such time as the irregularity was corrected one way or another.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), May 02, 2003.

Paul,

Thank you for your response. I am sorta lost on your comment though. the Way that I read that it that: If we live together and thought of marriage .. then it is ok for him to continue . But if we live together and no thought of marriage then that is where it wrong.. Please explain and help me understand this..

Thank you

-- Dawn (russ.n.dawn@att.net), May 02, 2003.

Dear Dawn,

No, you misread my response; I guess I wasn't clear enough. The phrase "without the benefit of marriage" does not mean "without the intent of marriage". It means "without actually being married". If two people are living in a sexual relationship without actually being husband and wife, they should not receive the sacraments until the situation is brought into proper order.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), May 03, 2003.

Dear Dawn,

I believe Paul's advice is correct. I would suggest you purchase or borrow a copy of the Catechism of the Catholic Church and read the sections on marriage and related topics it will be a real help for you in understanding the very important sacrament and it reception.

-- Karl (Parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), May 03, 2003.

Dear Dawn,

Please forgive me if I am beating this horse to death but... The real point is not your rights or Russell's rights. All people have rights which need to be protected AND obligations which are exercized in ways that respect others rights. These days that is quite complicated. The acts which are reserved for marriage, especially within a catholic christian context, are exercized appropriately only within the setting of marriage. This protects everyone's rights, most especially the children who result from these acts. Were it only so, what a different world we would have. Thank you.

Karl

-- Karl (Parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), May 03, 2003.

Well excuse the HELL out of me for thinking that there really were people out there that went through or are going through the same situation and could give some good advice. Sorry for thinking that maybe just maybe there were some decent people out there in this world and being that "catholics" are suppose to be these "GOD" like creatures that maybe they could help... Well obviously it was truly a mistake to come here and maybe ask for a little advice.

-- Dawn (dejavue282002@yahoo.com), May 05, 2003.

Ok it all begans.. I wish the immature people would grow up.. Anyhow.. Seriously though.. For those who I have talked to directly via email.. Thank you... I am starting to understand alot more.. that is all I needed is to understand.. So for those who really did help.. I thank you very much!!

-- Dawn Burris ( the real one) (russ.n.dawn@att.net), May 05, 2003.

Here is what I know and can contribute here...

When a Catholic husband and wife divorce both can still receive sacraments.

If no annulment takes place and either the husband or wife remarry in a justice of the peace wedding, the JOTP wedding concludes sacraments for the applicable party.

If either the husband or wife without an annulment and remarriage decide to have a sexual relationship then the applicable party should not receive communion without first confessing to the adultery.

But consider commiting adultery Monday through Friday, going to confession Saturday and receiving communion on Sunday and repeating the process over and over. That pattern should render confession useless and communion should not be received.

-- Lester Morgan (e5airforce@yahoo.com), May 05, 2003.

No Dawn, some dudes will never learn. You seem to be one of them. Good lack with your future shaped on this forum! Dude!

-- Joachim Marble (Marb49J@yahoo.com),

Joachim,

First off.. I am not basing my life off the forum.. I thought that this was a place that people could come and ask questions.. You know get other peoples opinions.. Guess I was wrong.. My bad...

Secondly.. I am NOT a dude.. So please calling me Dude.. My name is DAWN .. I am a female..

Good LACK to you too.. ERr.. LUCK...

-- Dawn (russ.n.dawn@att.net), May 05, 2003.

Speaking about the immature people, Dawn - you are one of them in the first place. Mature people goes to a priest to hear what is the correct procedure in a matter of my marriage in church. Not you! You go behind the priest's back to ask here. Something to hide? Something to be afraid of? Something you want to know ahead so that you could speak ahead prepared answers? Good, that's what a priest saw hundred times, over and over again. Speaking about the immature people - do it in front of a mirror, to speak to them directly!

-- Ken Shroeder (Kensh@hotmail.com), May 05, 2003.

Ken,

My future husband and I have been to the Father.. And our Annulment paper work was filed last week. We are going through Classes starting next week. So please do not jump the gun and think I have not done my research.. Or talked to church.. I have asked two different fathers questions like the Co-habitations and the sacramental rights.. One of them Said " Hey Times are changing " the other told us.. IF my future husband and I wanted to get married before all the paper work and sorts was finished to go ahead and then after the wedding to go to him and he will bless the marriage. So I dont know where you get off saying I am the immature one.

-- Dawn (russ.n.dawn@att.net), May 05, 2003.

"One of them Said " Hey Times are changing " the other told us.. IF my future husband and I wanted to get married before all the paper work and sorts was finished to go ahead and then after the wedding to go to him and he will bless the marriage."

USAmerican Catholic Church Classic. hahaha... it's sad that I laugh, ah cynicism...

I'm sorry Dawn. Good for you to look for a second opinion. Best advice would be to just check the ole chatechism...

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 05, 2003.

OperaDiva,

Yea all I wanted was some opinions and see what everyone elses thoughts were on that.. I guess how wrong of me to ask other people. Well I guess I will have my man pull out all of his stuff and we will go through and come up with more questions for the father for our next meeting next week.. Actually we are going to go to a different Church in a different town to ask questions.. Well like I said earlier.. Thank you to those of you who are Kind and helpful..

USAmerican Catholic Church Classic. hahaha... it's sad that I laugh, ah cynicism...

I'm sorry Dawn. Good for you to look for a second opinion. Best advice would be to just check the ole chatechism...

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 05, 2003. +++++++++++++++++

-- Dawn (russ.n.dawn@att.net), May 05, 2003.

Well Ken,

Its a shame then.. When people look for sites like this for opinions and then to find out it just a game for the people on it.

Well its my fault for thinking that that there were decent people out there. All I was trying to do find answers.. And everywhere I go I get different answers..

Oh well.. Thank you!!.. I hope that everyone has a wonderful afteroon and evening!!

-- Dawn (russ.n.dawn@att.net), May 05, 2003.

No, just the opposite - if you didn't laugh it would be cynism! Laugh it off, why not?

-- Mathew Solovjev (MSolo5@yahoo.com), May 05, 2003.

It's the cynicism that causes me to laugh. ;)

-- OperaDiva (solosoprano@juno.com), May 05, 2003.

Jmj

This thread -- with people quoting others in an unusual way (within messages), and with an impostor pretending to be someone else -- has me somewhat confused. But, never mind. Two things are certain, in my mind:

(1) Dawn, you got bad advice from both priests. That is terribly unfortunate. There are some "dioceses" (bishoprics), especially in the "Western" world, in which priests have been poorly taught in seminaries -- or (worse) have fallen away from true Catholicism. Even in troubled dioceses, though, there are some great priests --- suffering souls who are mocked (like Jesus) because they do what is right.

(2) The following is an improper reaction from a Catholic:
"USAmerican Catholic Church Classic. hahaha... it's sad that I laugh, ah cynicism..."
We can't afford to laugh at what is tragic ... or to be cynical. Not only that, but there is too much good news out there to despair or to generalize in this unfair way. I live in a diocese in which at least 95% of the priests would never dream of telling Dawn the thingst that two priests in a row told her. And my diocese is definitely not the only one.

Moreover, the situation in the U.S. has been improving slowly over the last 25 years, during the pontificate of John Paul II. The dioceses that have lots of newly ordained priests are the best ones, and they send their men to the reliable seminaries. The dioceses that have few new priests are the worst ones, and they have almost nobody to send to the unreliable seminaries. That is why the tide is turning. Be hopeful and confident! No more cynicism!

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), May 06, 2003.

Dear John,

The situation is improving too slowly and the situations were factual canonically criminal clerical acts have been shown should be dealt with openly, especially with the knowledge of those who have been injured by these acts. Nothing of the sort is done. It is NOT justice when only future acts are dealt with. Past wrongs MUST be addressed. They are not.

You are fortunate indeed if your diocese is as you say.

Mine is not. With the guilty still on top where they do not belong.

It is difficult to see your five children torn apart by a situation that the Church encouraged then when the Church has begun to understand that the marriage it "condemned", after the wife was told to divorce her husband because the Church would give her an annulment ( by priests with knowledge of the local ordinary and his encouragement), IS A SACRAMENT it does NOTHING to address the LITANY of its errors. That is my FACTUAL experience. Not my made up situation.

A Church that does not address public wrongs with public penance and public restitution is RIGHTLY condemned. ANY who defend what I have described are PART OF THE SINS THE CHURCH CONTINUES TO CARRY OUT!

John, there are signs of good things happening in the Church regarding these situations in general, but not enough and certainly not fast enough for those who are being destroyed.

Karl

-- Karl (Parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), May 06, 2003.

Damn the Church if it thinks it is enought to tell me my marriage is a sacrament. I told that arrogant institution that BEFORE it encouraged my wife to divorce me and to seek to annul a sacrament 14 years ago!

Now it has the nerve to say, oops this is a sacrament. I am not impressed.

Karl

-- Karl (Parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), May 06, 2003.

"I live in a diocese in which at least 95% of the priests would never dream of telling Dawn the thingst that two priests in a row told her. And my diocese is definitely not the only one." Quoted by John,

John,

Morning hope all is well.. Well the one Priest that told us "Times are changing" is the one that is on the Tribunal. And the one that has helped us with the paperwork and final got it filed. The other one we talked to is the Priest of the Church that we go to on Sunday.. We are planning on going to another Church to speak to a priest.. One that my Future Hubby does not know. I think it is better that way.

-- Dawn (russ.n.dawn@att.net), May 06, 2003.

Karl, did you post both of the messages just above Dawn's?
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), May 06, 2003.

Dear John,

Yes, but I deeply regret the anger that overtook me, in my pain, for the beginning of the second post and I apologize to you and all whom I have hurt by that foolishness. Please forgive me and pray for me. Thank you.

Karl

-- Karl (Parkerkajwen@hotmail.com), May 06, 2003.

All right, Karl. Let's pray for each other -- for various reasons, including the need to remember that the Church is not an "arrogant institution," but the Body of Christ.
JFG

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), May 07, 2003.