"Thou shalt not follow the multitude to do evil: neither shalt thou yield in judgment, to the opinion of the most part, to stray from the truth." - Exodus 23:2. Take all the information here for what it is: A layman trying understand what has happened to the world and the Church. These are the conclusions I have come to and now follow in the hope of gaining salvation. DO YOUR OWN DUE DILIGENCE.
Apocalypse 13:16-18, 14:11: "And he shall make all, both little and great, rich and poor, freemen and bondmen, to have a mark [Greek charagma, or 'badge of servitude'] in their right hand [by deed], or on their foreheads [by intellectual agreement]. And that no man might buy or sell, but he that hath the mark [Greek charagma], or the name of [from] the beast, or the number of his name [that he got from the beast]. Here is wisdom. He that hath understanding, let him count the number of the beast. For it is the number of a man: and the number of him is six hundred, three score, and six. ... And the smoke of their torments shall ascend up forever and ever: neither have they rest day nor night, who have adored the beast, and his image, and whoever receiveth the mark [Greek charagma] of his name."
Disclaimer: Nothing contained herein should be construed as legal advice. All of the information contained below should be verified by the reader.
Your marriage "license" is an agreement in which the State is the third party partner with a plenary interest in all that your marriage produces -- from your wealth to your children.
Potter v. Potter, 101 Fla. 1199, 133 So. 94 (1931): "[T]he State is a party interest in every marriage contract ..."
Ritchie v. White, 225 N.C. 450, 35 S.E.2d 414 (1945): "There are three parties to a marriage contract -- the husband, the wife and the State. For this reason marriage is denominated a status, and certain incidents are attached thereto by law which may not be abrogated without the consent of the third party, the State."
Kasal v. Kasal, 227 Minn. 529, 35 N.W.2d 745 (1949): "Marriage is a civil contract, to which there are three parties: the husband, the wife, and the State."
Consider these statements in contrast to a private revelation given by God:
Revelations of St. Bridget of Sweden, Book 1, Chapter 26: "Those who unite with divine love and fear for the sake of procreation and to raise children for the honor of God are My spiritual temple where I wish to dwell as the third with them."
The State, then, seeks to usurp the place of God.
Blackman v. Iles, 4 N.J. 82, 89 (1950): "The legislature, in dealing with the subject of marriage, has plenary power, as marriage differs from ordinary common law contracts, and is subject to control and regulation by the state."
Pope Pius IX condemned this in his Syllabus:
Pope Pius IX, Syllabus of Errors, Condemned Proposition, #74: "Matrimonial causes and espousals belong by their nature to civil tribunals." -CONDEMNED
Understand that almost every state mirrors this precedent. They issue the licenses, and as such they propose to control the subject matter and behavior of the licensed activity. A light should have just gone on in your head. Did it?
What is your intention in marriage? Are you taking oath to let the State be a partner in your marriage, and to govern and control all of your actions, even to the point of restricting those actions that are intrinsically lawful in themselves (raising a family, providing Christian education for your children, providing for them, etc.) or are you taking oath to enter a life-long relationship with your spouse before Almighty God, the true Sovereign? The latter does NOT require a license from any State bureaucrat and it never has.
Pope Pius IX, Syllabus of Errors, Condemned Proposition 44, Dec. 8, 1864, ex cathedra: "The civil authority may interfere in matters relating to religion, morality and spiritual government: hence, it can pass judgment on the instructions issued for the guidance of consciences, conformably with their mission, by the pastors of the Church. Further, it has the right to make enactments regarding the administration of the divine sacraments[of which marriage among the baptized most certainly is], andthe dispositions necessary for receiving them." -CONDEMNED
Genesis 2:24: "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh."
Now consider the legal definition of the word license. Is this part of your charagma, or "badge of servitude" to the "Beast" system?
Black's Law Dictionary, Seventh Edition, 1999, Page 931: "license, n. 1. A revocable permission to commit some act that would otherwise be unlawful ... See SERVITUDE. 2. The certificate or document evidencing such permission."
Note: Marriage is INTRINSICALLY lawful, as is travelling (driving, boating, flying, etc.), hunting, etc. These activities, being LAWFUL in themselves, no license is required by LAW (Common Law, Natural Law, Divine Law or Ecclesiastical Law) in order to perform these activities. What is required for these and all lawful activities is an upright intention, prudence and due diligence.
Now consider the purpose of a license in the modern State:
Black's Law Dictionary, Seventh Edition, 1999, Page 1373: "servitude. ... The three types of servitudes are easements, licenses, and profits."
This is why the inheritance tax may (and used to) take up to one-third of your marriage assets upon death of your spouse. Certainly, today State statutes allow for much spousal property to be "exempt" from the estate tax, but this wasn't the way it always was, nor is guaranteed to be. Considering the following State of New Jersey statutory regulation. By no means is the State conceding lack of ownership interest in marital property. Most certainly, it claims the power to take or tax whatever property it so chooses. However, for the time being, the State of New Jersey is only giving the survivor of the marriage an "exemption" from this taxation, not acknowledging the right of the survivor to his or her marital property.
"New Jersey imposes a transfer Inheritance Tax, at graduated rates, on property having a total value of $500 or more which passes from a decedent to a beneficiary. ... Property passing to a decedent's surviving spouse, parents, grandparents, children, stepchildren or grandchildren is entirely exempt from the tax." (http://www.state.nj.us/treasury/taxation/transinher.shtml)
Black's Law Dictionary, Seventh Edition, 1999, Page 593: "exempt, adj. Free or released from a duty or liability to which others are held"
Black's Law Dictionary, Seventh Edition, 1999, Page 593: "exemption. ... 2. A privilege given to a judgment debtor by law, allowing the debtor to retain certain property without liability"
Consider the following State of California summary of recent statutory changes.
"The Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, phased out the state death tax credit over a four (4) year period beginning January 2002. Effective January 1, 2005, the state death tax credit has been eliminated." (http://www.sco.ca.gov/ardtax_estate_tax.html)
The State of California is not saying that as of January 1, 2005 they no longer possess the right to the marital property. No, very simply the State is saying, as the State of New Jersey says above, that the State of California will not -- at least for the time being -- exercise the right you and your spouse have given it through your marriage "license" agreement, to allow for the State to take its share of marital property belonging to it. Clearly, through your application for the marriage "license" and through the State's issuance of the marriage "license", a partnership is formed between the State and the spouses. And amazingly, this is all done by your consent, ignorant or not.
Similarly, this is exactly why Child Protective Services can come into your home with armed police officers and steal your children out of your home against your will. You agreed for the State to have these "rights" with your application for a marriage "license". Of course, the State never openly disclosed that it would permanently be acting as partner in the marriage, but under the UCC that is no longer a requirement. Under the UCC §1-201, the definition of an "agreement" includes that inferred by the course of conduct of the parties.
§ 1-201. General Definitions.
(a) Unless the context otherwise requires, words or phrases defined in this section, or in the additional definitions contained in other articles of [the Uniform Commercial Code] that apply to particular articles or parts thereof, have the meanings stated.
(b) Subject to definitions contained in other articles of [the Uniform Commercial Code] that apply to particular articles or parts thereof:
(3) "Agreement", as distinguished from "contract", means the bargain of the parties in fact, as found in their language or inferred from other circumstances, including course of performance, course of dealing, or usage of trade as provided in Section 1-303.
(12) "Contract", as distinguished from "agreement", means the total legal obligation that results from the parties' agreement as determined by [the Uniform Commercial Code] as supplemented by any other applicable laws.
In other words, your application for a marriage "license", knowing that countless others before you have made the same application and subjected themselves to an inheritance tax and subjected themselves to the tyranny of Child Protective Services, is sufficient. Your consent to the inheritance tax and the tyranny of Child Protective Services is "inferred" by your application and by paying of the inheritance tax and by your opening the door to the CPS workers. Why else did you apply for a marriage "license"? Has anyone ever gone to jail for being married before the eyes of Almighty God but not the State? No, you applied for a marriage "license" because you were told to do so by everyone else who has acquiesced to the "Beast" system. You were told by your parish so-called "priest" to apply for a marriage "license". This is just one more example of how every mainstream religion, including the "whore of Babylon" Vatican II sect religion, has sold itself to satan, deceiving you and billions of others, leading them all down the path to eternal ruin.
Leviticus 20:1-3: "And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Thus shalt thou say to the children of Israel: If any man of the children of Israel, or of the strangers, that dwell in Israel, give of his seed to the idol Moloch, dying let him die: the people of the land shall stone him. And I will set my face against him: and I will cut him off from the midst of his people, because he hath given of his seed to Moloch, and hath defiled my sanctuary, and profaned my holy name."
2 St. Peter 2:1-3: "But there were also false prophets [antipopes and other heretical clergy] among the people, even as there shall be among you lying teachers, who shall bring in sects of perdition [the Vatican II sect and other heretical sects], and deny the Lord who bought them: bringing upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their riotousnesses, through whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you. Whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their perdition slumbereth not."
No, you applied for a marriage "license" because you wanted certain societal benefits, such as a reduction in your income taxes. You wanted and received the "benefits", now the State "god" Moloch says you must own up to your obligations under the marital partnership "agreement": (1) paying your inheritance tax, if the State so chooses to collect and (2) submit your children to the State's rule.
You see, it's all done by and with your consent. So what can you do about it now? Some suggest that "the contract can be argued as fraudulent" or "cancellable by failure to disclose". Others suggest "making an Affidavit to that effect and record it in the County Records. Serve a copy on the STATE with Notice. If they fail to respond in 30 days plus 5 days for mail service, record a Notice of Non-Response and collateral estoppel. The STATE can then never (legally) raise the issue again. They are estopped."
More discussion of how to go about withdrawing from the Beast System will follow, as time allows, but at the very least, all who profess to be Catholic and who have submitted to the "marriage license" of the State must publicly repudiate their acceptance of such an agreement, and denounce the marriage license for what it is.
Clearly, the burden of proof of innocence that the couple only obtained the marriage "license" for secular "benefits" lies with the couple. Such an action in that case would still be evil, not only because of the scandal to all who had knowledge of their marriage "license", (but would not be heresy), but also because by doing so the couple has forfeited to the State legal power over their children. If the couple did not give any thought to the matter, then their guilt of denying the Natural Law must be assumed, because they acquiesced to an evil action and therefore must be considered as having the intent to formally cooperate with evil.
Whether necessity of abjuration under oath exists or not is dependent on the results of the inquiry outlined in the preceding two paragraphs. Nevertheless, no good-willed person would object to including this on his abjurations in order to remove the scandal caused by his (unknowing?) participation in a marriage "license" system that is totally corrupt and evil, one that so explicitly fulfills the prophecy given above by St. Peter, by making children the chattel property of the State. At the VERY LEAST he must remove the scandal by contacting those who know him to have been a part of such an evil fraud and alerting them to the true nature of the civil contract of marriage (if they will listen).
Apocalypse 18:4: "And I heard another voice from heaven, saying: Go out from her, my people; that you be not partakers of her sins, and that you receive not of her plagues."