Kaycee9242:


That was before not this modern time, you have to speak up on time during the bans of marriage calling or remain silence for life. When you go to church listen carefully or you can ask your priest.

There's is no such thing as before, its a doctrine and still practised till date. Catholic doctrine remains sacrosanct until there's a publicised change.

If a spouse previously married or Separated comes on the D day of a wedding Mass and brings with him/her evidence of previous marriage to any of the intending couple, the priest WILL NEVER CONTINUE, he moves to the next couple. Most spouse do come with witnesses/ sponsors to their marriage ,pictures and documents to the church to prove their case, in other to stop the wedding mass.

There's no such thing as old days.

LadyRosa2:


There's is no such thing as before, its a doctrine and still practised till date. Catholic doctrine remains sacrosanct until there's a publicised change.

If a spouse previously married or Separated comes on the D day of a wedding Mass and brings with him/her evidence of previous marriage to any of the intending couple, the priest WILL NEVER CONTINUE, he moves to the next couple. Most spouse do come with witnesses/ sponsors to their marriage ,pictures and documents to the church to prove their case, in other to stop the wedding mass.

There's no such thing as old days.

If its still practiced now how come during wedding they don't ask the audience if they have anything against the couple that will make the wedding not to continue?

Though i agree with you that if you have a concrete evidence that can be proven within minutes beyond every reasonable doubts the wedding wont continue. But what we are saying now is about coming with pregnancy there is no time for such investigation and You cannot conclude that the man is the owner of the pregnancy. The wedding must go on.

Kaycee9242:



If its still practiced now how come during wedding they don't ask the audience if they have anything against the couple that will make the wedding not to continue?

Though i agree with you that if you have a concrete evidence that can be proven within minutes beyond every reasonable doubts the wedding wont continue. But what we are saying now is about coming with pregnancy there is no time for such investigation and You cannot conclude that the man is the owner of the pregnancy. The wedding must go on.

If you read through my initial post, I made an exception where I noted the lady didn't come at the right time,and for that its unlikely she'd be listened to. I only pointed out that in Catholic Church, the marriage may he put on hold to run a background check first before the marriage proceeds.

See, If that lady had come with more reasonable persons, and I mean not those young touts around her, that marriage if its in the Catholic Church will be placed on hold or may be annulled if investigation reveals the child is his, and his bride isn't aware.But then its the bride that will decide if she wants it annulled or not.

Kenneth4u205:
The honest truth was that she wanted to trap the man into marriage with pregnancy.That method no longer works in this generation.if you can't close your leg as a lady,then insist on using condo.m always

You cant't say with certainty