Martinis, Persistence, and a Smile

December 2008


































All Archives by Title

Recent Entries

Liza's Still Got It
Nice Tie
Thanks For Clearing That Up
Christie Hefner Steps Down
PETA's Coming For You
Caroling, Caroling, Now We Go
Eat a Burger, Rachel
Meet Bret's New "Ladies"
Troll Baby?
Thank God
Even Skankier Than Paris
Vote or Die!
TRL Cancelled
J.Lo Finishes Triathlon
Pregs and Broken Up?

Monthly Archives

December 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003


My Blogroll

The WeatherPixie

Giving Credit

Powered by:
Moveable Type 2.63
Template by:
Elegant Webscapes


« Ashlee Says "No" | Main | Liar, Liar, Pants On Fire »

June 28, 2006


Nicole Kidman wasn't married to Tom least according to the Catholic Church in Australia.

Many around the world were scratching their heads this past weekend, trying to figure out exactly how Kidman was able to get married as a Catholic in a Catholic ceremony, as the Church does not allow for a second marriage (in the Church) after a divorce. Many assumed that Kidman had gotten her marriage to Tom Cruise annulled, which would technically have paved the way for a second marriage in the Church.

Well, not so fast. Kidman's marriage to Cruise lasted 10 years -- a little long to plead temporary insanity -- and considering how notoriously difficult it is to have the Church grant an annulment (they're not handing them out like communion wafers), Kidman may have figured out how to get around the requirement -- she reportedly didn't need an annulment at all.

The BBC is reporting that Kidman's 10-year union to Cruise wasn't recognized by the Catholic Church of Australia. The service was seen only as a legal ceremony and not a spiritual one. In other words, according to the Catholic Church anyway, it never happened. All Kidman had to prove was that it was dissolved legally and she was free to marry any country crooner she wanted. A loophole to be sure, but one that allowed Kidman to reconnect her Catholic faith with Keith Urban, the man she loves.

Source: TMZ

Posted by Lawren at June 28, 2006 08:36 AM | Trackbacks (0)

You Said

Does that make her adopted children illegitimate??

Just asking??

Says: Isabel at June 28, 2006 12:28 PM

Doesn't that make her children illegitimate?

Says: isabel at June 28, 2006 12:33 PM

ten years of 'non-marriage'... it's a good thing that there was no sex involved. The catholic church frowns on that sort of thing outside the confines of marriage. Imagine being a virgin at 39.

Says: at June 28, 2006 03:36 PM

I wondered about this - thanks for posting this article, Lawren.

Says: Aubrey at June 28, 2006 09:29 PM

My understanding is that they would be considered legitimate if she had them baptized and agreed to raise them in the faith. Being that their nutjob father is raising them in his "church," this isn't happening. I have no idea if she ever got them baptized.

Says: Cynde at June 28, 2006 10:29 PM

Today the words "legitimate and illegitimate" are haphazardly and incorrectly used and most often incorrectly referred to as though it is a ruling made by the Church about the details of someone's birth. This is false. (And there is no secret "Da Vinci Code", or Easter Bunny either. Sorry.)

Legitimacy is solely a lawful judgement of the state. The term "Legitimate" has as it's root, the word "Legal". It is a decision made by courts of state law, about the rights of support and inheritance of children or dependants.

The law courts of government make that declaration about each and every one of us. The courts declare someone "legitimate" or "illegitimate" via the details printed on every birth certificate, every adoption certificate, and every divorce decree that involves dependents.

To be ruled "Legitimate" means ONLY that a person has the right to inherit from someone, or to be supported by someone, usually a parent or lawfully recognized caretaker, and the decisions are made in courts of law, not at Sunday Mass.

Both Tom and Nicole's children were legally adopted by both parents, in the State of California, and therefore both childen are considered by the Courts to be legitimately entitled to inherit (and to be supported by) both parents. The correct terminology would be to say that they are "legitimate inheritors" not merely "legitimate" or "illegitimate" children.

None of this has anything to do with the Church. The Church recognizes everyone as a child of his/her Creator, therefore, in eyes of the Church, no one is illegitimate. God made everyone, fathers everyone, loves everyone and wants everyone to inherit His Kingdom. God doesn't make mistakes. No one is unwanted by God.

Says: Constance Adams at June 30, 2006 02:10 AM

Post a comment

Remember personal info?