I realize that although Newt Gingrich claims to be catholic, he is unfortunately not in the catholic church he is in the vatican 2 sect that poses to be the catholic church.

However, my question is, supposing Gingrich lived before Vatican 2 during Pius XII pontificate, could he be doing what he is doing? Could he come into the church with his third wife and receive communion? Even though his first marriage wasn't sacramental, wasn't it valid?

If Gingrich and his third wife lived before Vatican 2 wouldn't they have to seperate if they wanted to receive communion?

I ask this also because I have novus ordo/heretical/agnostic family members and friends who I will try to convert to the catholic faith using MHFM material (i.e. rejecting Novus Ordo, NFP, BOD, etc.) who are in this exact position. I know ppl who were:

-brought up novus ordo, married civilly, divorced, and re-married.

-brought up novus ordo, married civilly to another novus ordo who was married and divorced in the novus ordo

-brought up novus ordo, married a non catholic in a civil marriage, then spouse left and took off and demanded divorce

Keep in mind none of these people are really practicing catholics to my knowledge except for funerals, Christmas, and Easter....however there is a real chance they might be converted by MHFM material and the holy ghost.

Gingrich is a neo-Cath as he is a member of the CFR. I sure wouldn't vote for him.

SS im not asking about whether you would vote for him. Im asking if it is possible to be a non-catholic in your third marriage and then convert to the catholic church and keep your third wife.

The first time I saw Mr.Gingrich was in this movie he made about Pope John Paul II and the fall of Communism. I had no idea he planned to run for president of the US at the time.

It was disappointing to learn of his previous infidelities. But seriously, SS, did he actually obtain an annulment as curiouscatholic asks?  

How could using MHFM material ever convert anyone to the Catholic Faith since it departs from the Faith itself?

Throw that garbage away and start giving out information on the saints, or orthodox doctrine.

As far as the Newt situation, this an explosion waiting to happen, at least for the people that proclaimed him a Catholic.  And the rest of the world will laugh and say how goofy the Catholics are.

As far as the Newt situation, this an explosion waiting to happen, at least for the people that proclaimed him a Catholic. And the rest of the world will laugh and say how goofy the Catholics are.

Indeed. A far cry from the days the Pope refused to grant King Henry a divorce, even if it meant that England depart from the Faith and fall headlong into schism. That always reminded me of St.John the Baptist and Herod. It is so very wrong that annulments are given so easily and fraudulently. This isn't about forgiveness, of course God will forgive past sin. But remarriage after a civil divorce is living in adultery.

Party's Over:

Don't derail threads,

I've only commented on the matters that the OP set forth. How does that qualify as "thread derailing"?

unless you want to start a brawl in a perfectly peaceful place

"Perfectly Peaceful place".  Really?

don't start a war Son.  

Sounds like a threat.  I'm old enough that, if I'm somebody's son, my dad should be in that Guinness Book.

MHFM has much more truth about the teachings of the Catholic Church than either of those organizations/groups.

 In some few areas, yes.  Sad isn't it?

Do you attend SSPX or an indult mass?

Seems a bit irrelevant, but, no, I do not. I just do not believe that the road to truth lies through the land of the Dimond Bros..

No, not if you marry the woman you cheated with.

Got a citation for that? I know that you can't marry a woman who is an accomplice to you murdering your wife (as I understand it, the 1983 Code is actually stricter than the 1917 Code on this point, referring to "causing death," not just killing). But adultery? I don't know, I would have to see a reference.

I am not big on the whole annulment game BUT I am not surprised that a marriage between two Protestants would be declared null, since Protestants have a defective understanding of matrimony. Since they believe the marriage bond can be dissolved, then perhaps they are less able to contract a valid marriage.

One might risk falling into Donatist error here. That Protestants believe that marriage can be dissolved is a concomitant error and therefore, does not necessarily vitiate the validity of the sacrament.