Catholic Writer Promoting Homosexual Marriage

[N/A Gone]

https://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0BzkXYY_Brc7YMTMxNzU5ZTQtMGFhMS00YTM1LTkzMTQtM2Y3ODE1YjE3NWVl&hl=en

Let me know what you think of this article. It has been passed around by many of my friends.

[Brother Adam]

tldr. Though I am curious about the arguments. Could you summarize?

[MithLuin]

Yeah, seriously! It's 28 pages of text. Something other than a bare link would be appreciated.

I read the first six pages, in which the author is setting up the argument. Basically, the question being raised is whether a homosexual relationship is a deviation from Christian marriage, or rather an anomaly within it. If a deviation, a homosexual relationship should be considered as something 'other' than marriage. For instance, a polygamous relationship is not Christian marriage. But if an anomaly, it would simply be something outside the norm, but still within the basic framework. For instance, a childless couple may be sterile and unable to have children, but they can still live out their marriage within the framework. Both the unitive and procreative purposes of marriage can be expressed by this couple, who may choose to adopt and raise a family that way. A spouse who is unfaithful may have violated the marriage covenant, but that does not make them 'not married.'

The author starts with homosexual relationships (and families) as a [i]fait accompli[/i] - they already exist in our Church, so we have to figure out how to classify them, not argue about whether or not they can exist at all. There are homosexual couples who are attending church and raising children. They are living in the community as a stable family unit, and asking to be accepted as the same as other families.

Personally, I do not see anything novel about this approach. Lots of situations 'already exist' that are not compatible with a Christian view of marriage. How many couples do you know who are not married (and have no intention of getting married), but live together indefinitely and even raise children together? There is a reason there is a notion of a 'common law marriage' - it's because this scenario is nothing new. Some live together without any intention of making a commitment, and then, as time goes on, the arrangement becomes comfortable/acceptable/somewhat permanent. Others make a private commitment to one another, and see no need for public recognition of their personal choices. People can (and will) do whatever they want. But that does not make their choices 'marriage.'

Commitment and fidelity are certainly part of the marriage vows, but not any or every committed and faithful relationship is thus marriage. Marriage is between a man and a woman, and any other arrangement is something else. Can a homosexual couple love one another and raise children together? Sure, it happens. But are they then automatically participating in a Christian marriage? No.

The author raises/discusses three objections to homosexual marriage, and presumably deals with them in light of the teaching of the Church. I have not read them, so I have no idea what arguments he makes. They are: The Public Good, the Act, and Scripture.

His conclusion is that while some aspects of homosexual unions are wrong (abusive relationships in particular), a committed homosexual couple trying to live out a marriage relationship and lacking 'only' the complementarity of male and female should not be viewed as outside the idea of Christian marriage when they are living out their lives just like many other married couples, albeit imperfectly.

I'm not convinced.

Granted, I haven't read the arguments - just the set up and the conclusion. But it would take a [i]lot[/i] to convince me that the Church is somehow mistaken in her consistent interpretation of Genesis 2:

[quote]Then the LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him." Out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called a living creature, that was its name. The man gave names to all the cattle, and to the birds of the sky, and to every beast of the field, but for Adam there was not found a helper suitable for him. So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place. The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man. The man said, "This is now bone of my bones, And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man." [b]For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.[/b] And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed.[/quote]

The man + woman aspect is [i]fundamental[/i] and [i]integral[/i] to a Christian understanding of marriage. It is neither incidental nor optional. Other family units may exist in our society, but they are not Christian marriages.

[HopefulBride]

[quote name='MithLuin' timestamp='1287341618' post='2180190']

The man + woman aspect is [i]fundamental[/i] and [i]integral[/i] to a Christian understanding of marriage. It is neither incidental nor optional. Other family units may exist in our society, but they are not Christian marriages.
[/quote]

I totally agree with this statement.

[CatherineM]

I tried to get through all of it. What it seemed like to me, is an elaborate lie that a child might tell to get out of some serious trouble. It's like trying to take something you know is wrong, and twist it, obscure it, or in some way take our attention off the wrongness of it, to influence us to forget the wrongness.

[Winchester]

I can feel the stupidity leaking through the link.

I needn't say that homosexual marriage is not a sacramental marriage, therefore it is not a Christian marriage.

I win, the author is a dumbass.

Stupid doesn't mention sacrament at all, but proposes to discuss marriage. I suspect Martin Luther tactics, here.

Edited October 17, 2010 by Winchester