Fab1b;713145 wrote:Just get married on a beach somewhere, better yet don't get married!

j_crazy;713223 wrote:person a shouldn't force person b to convert.

j_crazy;713223 wrote:person a shouldn't force person b to convert.

1. a person believes what they believe, converting for love is silly.

ZWICK 4 PREZ;712936 wrote:Person A is Catholic. Person B is Protestant. Person B wants to convert to Catholicism but probably won't until after the marriage.

LJ;713069 wrote:A nice 15 minute marriage ceremony like we are getting at the Methodist church we are members of

sherm03;713237 wrote:You aren't required to have a full mass for a wedding. They prefer that you do. But when I got married, we had the readings, a quick sermon, the ceremony, and then we were out. I think our ceremony itself took about half an hour.

dave;713118 wrote:You have to do the classes regardless, even if both are catholic. If only 1 is, often you won't be allowed to have a full catholic mass.

THE4RINGZ;713664 wrote:Most churches do charge more for non members to rent their churches for weddings. That isn't Just a Catholic thing.

How is one religion requiring both people being married under their believes requiring both people to have the same beliefs such a bad thing?

password;713611 wrote:I know when me and my wife were getting married, we wanted to have our wedding in the local Catholic church because it was very nice. When I contacted the church and asked to be married there I was told that we both would have to be Catholic, so that would mean that my wife would have to convert to the Catholic religion as she was not Catholic. I was baptized Catholic and attended Catholic school my whole life and we were told that we would have to attend classes and she would have to pay more for the church because she was not a member of the church but I was and she would still have to convert before we could marry. I said no and married in her church and I wonder why I have problems with the religion.

krambman;713684 wrote:This is pretty much standard practice for most churches, not just Catholic churches. At the very least, most churches require that at least one of the people being married be a member of the church. The main reason that churches do this is because they want to make sure that other church activities and church member's weddings take precedence over non-member's weddings. Non-members are also usually charged more for the building usage because typically members would already be contributing to the church. Besides, if you dislike organized religion, why would you get married in a church? I'll never understand why so many people who don't attend church want to get married in a church and have an overtly Christian wedding service.

sherm03;713237 wrote:You aren't required to have a full mass for a wedding. They prefer that you do. But when I got married, we had the readings, a quick sermon, the ceremony, and then we were out. I think our ceremony itself took about half an hour.

justcompete;713797 wrote:I am Catholic and have been to at least 10 weddings where one of the two have not been Catholic. I have never heard of someone NEEDING to convert to get married in the Church. My parents were married in the 50's and were not both Catholic. There are classes to take which explains the Catholic view on this Sacrament, but forcing someone to convert makes absolutely no sense. If this is not your cup-of-tea, that is fine, but don't bad mouth someone who wants to be united in front of God.

WebFire;713824 wrote:I've always found it odd that a person has to "convert" from being a Christian to a Christian.

krambman;713911 wrote: Technically official Catholic doctrine says that only Catholics are Christians, since salvation comes from Christ through the church. Their belief is that outside of the church (and by church I mean Catholic church) that you cannot be saved. Now, most Catholics probably don't believe this and wouldn't tell people this, but that is the official doctrine, though the church has become more ecumenical in recent years.

WebFire;713933 wrote:Sounds like a crock of shit to me.

krambman;713955 wrote:Why? For 1500 years the Catholic church was the only Christian church, and Protestant denominations were largely founded (at first) by people who had been excommunicated for preaching what at the time was deemed to be heresy. Besides, basically every major world religion claims exclusivity on salvation.

Tiernan;713954 wrote:You will go to Hell if you are not married "in the church" but that is redundant becuz you're already in Hell for getting married in the first place.

krambman;713955 wrote:Why? For 1500 years the Catholic church was the only Christian church, and Protestant denominations were largely founded (at first) by people who had been excommunicated for preaching what at the time was deemed to be heresy. Besides, basically every major world religion claims exclusivity on salvation.

jmog;713994 wrote:Come on as a Baptist minister you should know that this isn't true of a lot of Protestant churches. Many Protestant denominations believe you are saved by accepting Christ's sacrifice for you sins and confessing them.

That has nothing to do with which denomination you happen to attend.

I attend a Baptist church and I can tell you that while Baptists believe their beliefs are the closest to what the Bible actually says, we do not preach that you have to be a Baptist to be saved.

O-Trap;713997 wrote:...

Actually, even many of those who were excommunicated were not intent on breaking off from the Church, but instead reforming the Church.