Fidei Defensor Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 For the record, I am a strong advocate against hypocrisy. If one doesn't believe the tenants of the Catholic Church, one shouldn't be or claim to be a Catholic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kateri89 Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 And quite honestly, the original purpose of this thread wasn't to debate how laws are made and which morality is acceptable. We are disappointed in a Cardinal of the Church who not only gave communion to a pro-abortion politician but also gave him special attention. That goes against the laws of the Church and secular society has no say in that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 I view it as an "in addition to" rather than "instead of." Traditional marriage is between a man and a woman. Two members of the same sex getting married is not traditional marriage. What does it matter to anyone what other people do between themselves? You have to right to believe and act according to your own conscious but not the right to restrict others from doing the same. It is not traditional, and based upon tradition it is not possible. The people pushing for the change know in the end that this will alter our society and will probably lead to the persecution of individuals who dissent from the change, and I think many of them are looking forward to that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fidei Defensor Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 And quite honestly, the original purpose of this thread wasn't to debate how laws are made and which morality is acceptable. We are disappointed in a Cardinal of the Church who not only gave communion to a pro-abortion politician but also gave him special attention. That goes against the laws of the Church and secular society has no say in that. Sorry, it's my fault for derailing the thread :pinch: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 For the record, I am a strong advocate against hypocrisy. If one doesn't believe the tenants of the Catholic Church, one shouldn't be or claim to be a Catholic. I respect you for that, and I agree, if a person rejects the tenets of the faith they should have the decency to leave the Church. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fidei Defensor Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 It is not traditional, and based upon tradition it is not possible. The people pushing for the change know in the end that this will alter our society and will probably lead to the persecution of individuals who dissent from the change, and I think many of them are looking forward to that. Based on your tradition. Again, its not replacing something, its allowing something to co-exist. Its not your business to prevent others from free exercise of their own beliefs. No one is attempting to take away the sacrament of marriage. Allowing same-sex couples to be legally recognized with secular marriage licenses has no bearing on your religious and institutional marriages. And let me know when heterosexual married couples start getting persecuted and everyone is forced to marry someone of the same sex. I'd like to observe that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kateri89 Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 Sorry, it's my fault for derailing the thread :pinch: It's all right, it happens all too often here. I've been guilty of it myself :proud: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 Based on your tradition. Again, its not replacing something, its allowing something to co-exist. Its not your business to prevent others from free exercise of their own beliefs. No one is attempting to take away the sacrament of marriage. Allowing same-sex couples to be legally recognized with secular marriage licenses has no bearing on your religious and institutional marriages. And let me know when heterosexual married couples start getting persecuted and everyone is forced to marry someone of the same sex. I'd like to observe that. Actually it is not just my tradition, although I thank you for making me seem more important than I am; instead, it is the common Western tradition in which America participates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4588686 Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 Thanks for the responses everyone, and for keeping this a low-key discussion. Out of curiosity, it seems to me that on Facebook and elsewhere, Catholics and non-Catholic Christians are the ones bearing the brunt of "you're a hater" via gay marriage supporters - I wonder why Jewish and Islamic faiths (that also speak against gay marriage) are being ignored? Because they aren't nearly as powerful. At least within those issues. Islamic organizations have very little clout in the US to begin with as very few politicians are eager to be linked to them. Those that have the ,ost clout that I can think of deal with non-discrimination issues. They are reasonably powerful Jewish organizations but most of the ones that I can think of either focus on issues regarding Israel or issues regarding the plight of Jewish minorities in hostile nations which is a pretty non-controversial issue. At least in the US. When Hungarian officials try to compile a list of Jewish residents I think most people in the US agree that the US should use it's clout to tell them to knock that the duck off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luigi Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 Based on your tradition. Again, its not replacing something, its allowing something to co-exist. Its not your business to prevent others from free exercise of their own beliefs. No one is attempting to take away the sacrament of marriage. Allowing same-sex couples to be legally recognized with secular marriage licenses has no bearing on your religious and institutional marriages. And let me know when heterosexual married couples start getting persecuted and everyone is forced to marry someone of the same sex. I'd like to observe that. It's based on more than his tradition, or mine, or yours. It's based on anthropology - on the way that human beings have lived on all continents throughout all time. Homosexuality has also existed, but has seldom been approved - it was fairly widespread in a few cities in ancient Greece and Rome, but it was never condoned by law. Governing bodies can change the law just because they're able to, but it won't change the way human nature, or human society. A change in the law won't necessarily force hetrosexuals to marry homosexuals, but it will impact heterosexuals who are opposed to homosexual marriage - Will a Catholic justice of the peace have to marry two homosexuals? Will my tax dollars pay survivor benefits to a homosexual widow? Will my tax dollars be spent on any kind of government-provided spousal benefits? Then I am being forced to support homosexual marriage in ways that I oppose. It would be the same as forcing me to support chattel slavery, to which I am also opposed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fidei Defensor Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 Actually it is not just my tradition, although I thank you for making me seem more important than I am; instead, it is the common Western tradition in which America participates. Yes, yes. The point I'm trying to make, however, is that your issue ought to be less to do with same-sex couples marrying and more to do with the changing attitude towards marriage by society in general. The Church views marriage as principally an institute for procreation while on the other hand, society does not. That is why it is important to realize that secular marriages and sacramental marriages are not one in the same. You can have one without the other. I respect defense of sacramental marriage, but when it comes to secular marriages, you have no right to dictate what is acceptable. Both can co-exist and you can still retain your disapproval of life choices of others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 (edited) That is why it is important to realize that secular marriages and sacramental marriages are not one in the same. You can have one without the other. I respect defense of sacramental marriage, but when it comes to secular marriages, you have no right to dictate what is acceptable. Both can co-exist and you can still retain your disapproval of life choices of others. Marriage and sacramental marriage are both marriage. The only difference is that the latter has supernatural graces added to it because it is configured to Christ's eschatological kingdom in a peculiar fashion. Grace builds on nature, it does not destroy it or alter it essentially. Edited March 28, 2013 by Apotheoun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fidei Defensor Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 It's based on more than his tradition, or mine, or yours. It's based on anthropology - on the way that human beings have lived on all continents throughout all time. Homosexuality has also existed, but has seldom been approved - it was fairly widespread in a few cities in ancient Greece and Rome, but it was never condoned by law. Governing bodies can change the law just because they're able to, but it won't change the way human nature, or human society. A change in the law won't necessarily force hetrosexuals to marry homosexuals, but it will impact heterosexuals who are opposed to homosexual marriage - Will a Catholic justice of the peace have to marry two homosexuals? Will my tax dollars pay survivor benefits to a homosexual widow? Will my tax dollars be spent on any kind of government-provided spousal benefits? Then I am being forced to support homosexual marriage in ways that I oppose. It would be the same as forcing me to support chattel slavery, to which I am also opposed. Romans 13:1-2 "Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 (edited) Romans 13:1-2 "Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves." And yet the Christians during the first three centuries of our era refused to be subject to the emperor when it came to worshipping him as a god, and yet I suppose they were still subject to him in some sense for they went to their deaths by his command. That may be what is coming for Christians again, because as Pope John Paul II indicated in Evangelium Vitae Christians cannot assent to "laws" that are contrary to the moral law. I guess persecution by state authorities is coming whether we like it or not. Edited March 28, 2013 by Apotheoun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fidei Defensor Posted March 28, 2013 Share Posted March 28, 2013 Marriage and sacramental marriage are both marriage. The only difference is that the latter has supernatural graces added to it because it is configured to Christ's eschatological kingdom in a peculiar fashion. Grace builds on nature, it does not destroy it or alter it essentially. According to the Church, If a marriage does not follow the proper canonical form, it is not considered valid. Secular marriages do not follow canonical form and are not valid unless the parties are baptized Christians, in which case, the marriage is assumed to be valid per the guidelines they follow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now