Found Alive CA - Sherri Papini, 34, Redding, 2 November 2016 - #22

[Gardener1850]

Wasn't she married before? You can't get married in the Catholic church if you have divorced and your ex spouse is still alive, unless you get an annulment, and those take time and can be difficult to get.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Her first husband was Jewish.

 

[EllieBee]

Her first husband was Jewish.

Still not cool in the Catholic church....

 

[JaneEyre]

Her first husband was Jewish.

That doesn't matter. You could marry an atheist at a courthouse, but divorce is divorce when it comes to the Catholic church.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[Gardener1850]

That doesn't matter. You could marry an atheist at a courthouse, but divorce is divorce when it comes to the Catholic church.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Even if Sherri was not Catholic at the time of the divorce? What if someone who is divorced wants to convert to Catholicism and get married in the Church? Are you saying it wouldn't be allowed?

 

[JaneEyre]

Even if Sherri was not Catholic at the time of the divorce? What if someone who is divorced wants to convert to Catholicism and get married in the Church? Are you saying it wouldn't be allowed?

Yup. It doesn't matter. If you were married by law, it doesn't make your marriage null and void simply because it wasn't Catholic.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[TTF14]

I found the blog. She did state that they were getting married in the Catholic church. Her first marriage had to be anulled, then. While this isn't as difficult as it once was, it's still not easy, not certain, and not common. I'm pretty shocked, actually. I have many divorced friends who have not been allowed to remarry in the Catholic church. Only one out of dozens I know even attempted to get an annulment.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

I only have one friend who got an annulment as well. It is not an easy or quick process!!

 

[JaneEyre]

Yup. It doesn't matter. If you were married by law, it doesn't make your marriage null and void simply because it wasn't Catholic.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

These are basically the big 4 that make an annulment possible in the Church. (Note that it's easier to get an annulment because one of you doesn't want children than if one of you is an ax murderer. I'm Catholic, by the way, so not bashing. But I know the reality of trying to get an annulment in the Church.)

1-At least one partner didn’t fully & freely consent.
2-Someone wasn’t mature enough to understand the full extent of what they were doing.
3-There was never intent to be faithful.
4-One or both partners did not intend to be open to children.

I would say that the two easiest ways to get an annulment are to prove either coercion or one person's lack of desire to have children. Openness to children in a marriage is a requirement in the Catholic church, and is the reason birth control is not allowed. Openness to children is actually in the Catholic vows. If her previous husband did not want kids and she could prove that, that would result in an annulment. But the process is long and most people do not bother with it.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[JaneEyre]

I only have one friend who got an annulment as well. It is not an easy or quick process!!

I have friends who grieve, truly grieve, for not being allowed the sacraments after divorce and remarriage. But they simply don't qualify for an annulment.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[JaneEyre]

Even if Sherri was not Catholic at the time of the divorce? What if someone who is divorced wants to convert to Catholicism and get married in the Church? Are you saying it wouldn't be allowed?

Here's what would happen in a situation like this without an annulment. The previously divorced person could remarry elsewhere, continue to practice Catholicism, but would not be allowed to partake in the sacraments. This, for Catholics, can be a sort of hell. The sacraments include things like the Eucharist, Marriage, and the Last Rights.

<modsnip>

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[Gardener1850]

These are basically the big 4 that make an annulment possible in the Church. (Note that it's easier to get an annulment because one of you doesn't want children than if one of you is an ax murderer. I'm Catholic, by the way, so not bashing. But I know the reality of trying to get an annulment in the Church.)

1-At least one partner didn&#8217;t fully & freely consent.
2-Someone wasn&#8217;t mature enough to understand the full extent of what they were doing.
3-There was never intent to be faithful.
4-One or both partners did not intend to be open to children.

I would say that the two easiest ways to get an annulment are to prove either coercion or one person's lack of desire to have children. Openness to children in a marriage is a requirement in the Catholic church, and is the reason birth control is not allowed. Openness to children is actually in the Catholic vows. If her previous husband did not want kids and she could prove that, that would result in an annulment. But the process is long and most people do not bother with it.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Thank you for the detailed explanation. I'm not Catholic but I had a Catholic neighbor who was divorced and remarried (her first marriage was not in the Church and I guess I always thought that was why it was an easy process for her). I didn't realize it was that big of a deal. As for Sherri, perhaps her first marriage was easily annulled for other reasons. He was also in the military so they might not have lived together at all or for very long. IIRC, her first married lasted less than a year. Not sure what the relevance is of any of this now however. There are wedding pictures of the Papinis at the Church on the photographer's blog. Unless we are going down some odd "their marriage is fake" rabbit hole theory now... :thinking:

 

[Gardener1850]

There is a picture from their wedding at the front with a priest in the video here: http://www.krcrtv.com/community/prayer-service-held-for-missing-shasta-co-mother/146325491

Also from that link, a Catholic church held a prayer service while Sherri was missing:

Father George Snyder said mass and led the rosary for Sherri's safe return in the chapel at St. Joseph Parish in Redding. The prayers in the chapel were heartfelt.

"We ask God, the Holy Spirit, to touch the heart of whoever has done this to Sherri, and that Sherri will come back to us and be with her family once again, so that is my prayer for her and we're going to continue to storm heaven with our prayers for Sherri." said Father Snyder.

Several family members were there, including aunt and uncles, who told me they feel and appreciate the support and concern of people far and near.

ETA that if you google images of St. Joseph Parish in Redding you can tell that it is the same church from the Papini wedding photos. Here is another MSM source with photos from a different event that took place there in 2014: http://reddingvoice.com/2014/11/23/thanksgiving-interfaith-service/

 

[JaneEyre]

Thank you for the detailed explanation. I'm not Catholic but I had a Catholic neighbor who was divorced and remarried (her first marriage was not in the Church and I guess I always thought that was why it was an easy process for her). I didn't realize it was that big of a deal. As for Sherri, perhaps her first marriage was easily annulled for other reasons. He was also in the military so they might not have lived together at all or for very long. IIRC, her first married lasted less than a year. Not sure what the relevance is of any of this now however. There are wedding pictures of the Papinis at the Church on the photographer's blog. Unless we are going down some odd "their marriage is fake" rabbit hole theory now... :thinking:

For me, a person's religious beliefs (or lack of) help paint a clearer picture of the person. But I think initially it was brought up because it was suggested she may have been part of the Bethel Church, which is quite different. And the guy who put up the money was connected to that church, I believe. The Daily Beast did a story on it.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[Elle*Bee]

That doesn't matter. You could marry an atheist at a courthouse, but divorce is divorce when it comes to the Catholic church.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Even if Sherri was not Catholic at the time of the divorce? What if someone who is divorced wants to convert to Catholicism and get married in the Church? Are you saying it wouldn't be allowed?

We discussed this quite a bit in the previous threads so I&#8217;ll try to keep it brief.

I don&#8217;t know where Sherri and her first husband were married, but if a Catholic has a civil ceremony, an annulment is not as lengthy or as difficult as we often might think. It would come under the concept of &#8220;lack of proper form&#8221; (or defect of form). A Catholic is required to marry in a Catholic Church with a priest as a celebrant. Beach wedding, Justice of the Peace lacks the proper form. Not saying it&#8217;s guaranteed, but I know several people who have received annulments this way, after remarrying. If and when the annulment is granted, the second marriage is then &#8220;validated&#8221; in the Catholic Church.

Regarding a previously married non-Catholic who wants to convert to Catholicism and marry within the Catholic Church, yes, that person would be required to get a Catholic annulment because the Catholic Church recognizes other faith&#8217;s marriages (particularly if the person followed the rules of his or her faith at the time of the marriage). How complicated it is depends on the other faith, whether the party was baptized, a lot of factors.

 

[Gardener1850]

For me, a person's religious beliefs (or lack of) help paint a clearer picture of the person. But I think initially it was brought up because it was suggested she may have been part of the Bethel Church, which is quite different. And the guy who put up the money was connected to that church, I believe. The Daily Beast did a story on it.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Thanks, that makes sense. The VI answered twice about Bethel. My previous post in this thread quoting and linking to those VI posts:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...ng-2-November-2016-22&p=13726259#post13726259

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

I&#8217;m not hearing anything about &#8220;chunks&#8221; of hair on the 911 call. Just that it looked like hair had been &#8220;ripped out.&#8221; But I do remember &#8220;chunks&#8221; being mentioned at the beginning of the case. Did Keith say that in an interview? Where are the &#8220;chunks&#8221; coming from? Not the 911 call. LE said early on that it was strands of hair IIRC.

http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/10/25/sherri-papini-abduction-911-audio-sketches-released/

ETA: Here&#8217;s a post from the first thread with a flier from &#8220;Missing Pieces&#8221; saying that a neighbor said that chunks of hair were found. This is not an official flier, however.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...ing-2-November-2016-1&p=12910937#post12910937

Lilibet, thanks for catching that. I could've sworn I heard him say "chunks of hair" in that taped call...but I must've been conflating it with what I'd read elsewhere (eg. on the flyer).

In any case, in the 911 call he does clearly indicate that the hair tangled up with those earbuds was alarming to him; apparently there was a substantial enough amount that it somehow indicated to him force--that "she'd been grabbed." Here are the two sections from the transcript about the hair:

I just drove down there and I saw her phone with her headphones, because she started running again, and it’s — I found her phone, and it’s got like hair ripped out of it, like in the headphones, so I’m like totally freaking out thinking like somebody grabbed her.

...

I found her phone on the ground. [Unintelligible] telling me that something happened to her, is the way I’m looking at it.
There’s like hair in the headphones. Like it got ripped off, like they grabbed — http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/10/25/sherri-papini-abduction-911-audio-sketches-released/

(BBM)

 

[gitana1]

Thank you for the detailed explanation. I'm not Catholic but I had a Catholic neighbor who was divorced and remarried (her first marriage was not in the Church and I guess I always thought that was why it was an easy process for her). I didn't realize it was that big of a deal. As for Sherri, perhaps her first marriage was easily annulled for other reasons. He was also in the military so they might not have lived together at all or for very long. IIRC, her first married lasted less than a year. Not sure what the relevance is of any of this now however. There are wedding pictures of the Papinis at the Church on the photographer's blog. Unless we are going down some odd "their marriage is fake" rabbit hole theory now... :thinking:

Nope. It got started by me. I was wondering I she and KP had a Bethel connection. But talk about rabbit holes. Bethel church. I'm fascinated. My BA is in American Studies and anything about new American religious movements is super interesting to me.

 

[Gardener1850]

Nope. It got started by me. I was wondering I she and KP had a Bethel connection. But talk about rabbit holes. Bethel church. I'm fascinated. My BA is in American Studies and anything about new American religious movements is super interesting to me.

I believe the only connection to Bethel is the hostage negotiator. IIRC, they have a mutual friend with him. Mutual friend either suggested to KP that he should contact CG or mutual friend encouraged CG to contact the Papinis.

 

[G.Keelie]

Re. Marriage/divorce....if the first marriage was not in the Catholic Church, then that divorce doesn&#8217;t mean anything in the church. It&#8217;s only if the couple is married in the Catholic Church and then divorce that there is an issue, I.e. the non church marriage &#8220;doesn&#8217;t count&#8221; if you have not been married in a Catholic service to begin with. The first marriage is not &#8220;blessed&#8221; by a priest, there has been no Catholic mass, receiving sacraments, etc. They would still have to do pre-Cana (or whatever the church is calling it these days), have the banns read, etc., it is their &#8220;first&#8221; Catholic wedding.

 

[Pamela_Brewer]

My question is assuming one of the abductors was killed why release 2 photos?
The he/she no longer lives/so why would the FBI even post a photo looking for her/him?
Sherri said her captor was allegedly shot hence ceases to exsist. Why would she mention a warning shot in the air or the wall. IMO this person was dead and couldn't participate in her "release". Yet SP was alive with bruises and a shoulder length hair cut.
Did she have 3 weeks of root growth when found?
Did the kidnappers "do her roots" for her after they chopped off her hair into a shoulder length style?
GMAFB!
She is alive because her captor wanted to belittle her and had no intention of killing her. Possibly promising a Thanksgiving release. Some surface bruising. No broken bones other than her nose.
She was allowed showers,
She came back half undressed according to a source and in gray sweatshirt and pants in another.
.MOO

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[Liadan]

I don't think we need to make out to much about this Catholic marriage deal. All you have to do is find a 'flexible' minister and whammo you have a wedding. How you want to get married is as much the individuals choice as the church's. So maybe they shopped around - I know my Mother in Law had to - cause she wanted her kids married in a Cath church even if the spouses weren't Catholic.