A
Andruschak
Guest
To attend and say nothing would imply approval. “Silence gives consent”. I would stay away, but that is just for me. YMMV:coffeeread:
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Y
YipYupYep
Guest
Every word you have posted is straight from the fires of hell. Are you for real?the Church has been wrong many times in the past.
About the Roman Catholic Church. It is the Bride of Jesus Christ. Be careful what you say.
Y
YipYupYep
Guest
Hello Lynn,I must have misunderstood this site.
I guess things do get put on the table around here. Straight up.
A Catholic may not attend a gay marriage ceremony. There is no decision to be made. Its not a judgement call. It would be a grievous sin to do so. There would be a false gospel and evil prayers. A satanic ritual worshiping on an alter of lust and celebrating violence against God.
If Jesus Christ wont be there, how can any of us?
M
mtocalcutta
Guest
I agree completely! But, I’m trying to find something actually authoritative from the Church. This lady will listen to that! She loves the church but is being beguiled through her sentimentality. Thanks your your reply! Lynn
W
Windmill
Guest
Sentimentality is a very big problem in the Church right now because people in my generation were given mush for religious education, so I totally sympathize with your plight.
Your friend cannot disagree that the Church teaches the sanctity of Marriage between a man and a woman, and teaches that homosexuality is contrary to God’s law, that it is an objectively grave sin to commit homosexual acts, and that homosexuals are called to live chaste lives. The bishops in recent years have been very outspoken in the political realm on this issue. If she can get to that point in her deliberations, then she’s over halfway there.
The other maxim of Catholic moral theology is that we must not do evil so that good may come. Put another way, “the ends do not justify the means.” To attend this ceremony would, in the mind of the homosexual friend, give support and approval of this union. That’s the whole point of the occasion. By giving this false sense of assurance, she will be deepening this lady’s conviction that what she does is ok. I don’t care how much you try to tell the person beforehand that you don’t support it, you are contradicting yourself by simply being there to celebrate the union. It is even worse if this wedding guest is known to be a devout Catholic, because people will assume she did her due diligence, and, thus, conveys the idea that the Catholic Church really doesn’t disapprove of of this “all that much”. All of this (the ceremony, her attendance, her witness to the truth of God’s law, etc…) are objective evils.
She cannot do evil so that good may come. While she may feel that attending will keep the lines of communication open, she will be using scandal to acheive this “hoped for” end (keeping up communication).
Your friend cannot disagree that the Church teaches the sanctity of Marriage between a man and a woman, and teaches that homosexuality is contrary to God’s law, that it is an objectively grave sin to commit homosexual acts, and that homosexuals are called to live chaste lives. The bishops in recent years have been very outspoken in the political realm on this issue. If she can get to that point in her deliberations, then she’s over halfway there.
The other maxim of Catholic moral theology is that we must not do evil so that good may come. Put another way, “the ends do not justify the means.” To attend this ceremony would, in the mind of the homosexual friend, give support and approval of this union. That’s the whole point of the occasion. By giving this false sense of assurance, she will be deepening this lady’s conviction that what she does is ok. I don’t care how much you try to tell the person beforehand that you don’t support it, you are contradicting yourself by simply being there to celebrate the union. It is even worse if this wedding guest is known to be a devout Catholic, because people will assume she did her due diligence, and, thus, conveys the idea that the Catholic Church really doesn’t disapprove of of this “all that much”. All of this (the ceremony, her attendance, her witness to the truth of God’s law, etc…) are objective evils.
She cannot do evil so that good may come. While she may feel that attending will keep the lines of communication open, she will be using scandal to acheive this “hoped for” end (keeping up communication).
Y
YipYupYep
Guest
That is a very well written and well informed post. Good work.Sentimentality is a very big problem in the Church right now because people in my generation were given mush for religious education, so I totally sympathize with your plight.
M
mtocalcutta
Guest
Thank you, thank you and thank you! Your post is exactly what I was looking for. I have no idea why I didn’t write the exact same words. I have no idea why I was stumped. I have used the exact words in other instances! I know that we can’t do or participate in evil to bring about good.
Then, I have another question. I hope this poster reads it and responds!
The election. I will be honest here. I have never voted for Bush. I have always voted for Alan Keyes. I never admit it because immediately I’m told that I actually helped the opponent, such as Obama get elected because I voted for someone with no chance to win.
My problem was that McCain strongly supports embryonic stem cell research which is a very grave evil and in some ways more to our society than abortion. I know that is hard to imagine, but due to the ignorance about it and what it entails people take it lightly.
So, I felt voting for McCain, so called choosing the lesser of two evils was a false answer to the dilemma. I had to vote for the one that had no evil or guile. Grant it, many don’t even know his name. So, I’m not talking about them. But, those that did know, and those that withheld his name in their reporting are culpable of massive evil in my opinion. I also wonder about the others.
I LOVE Fr. Pavone! But, who did he vote for. Why do our priests, etc. have to leave out the name Alan Keyes? The only reason I can think of is that they also are of the mind of choosing the lesser of two evils because perhaps they fear causing the church to loose the tax exempt status. I don’t know.
I’m willing to admit I made a bad, wrong or misguided decision but at this time I have a clear conscience in following what our church teaches, the saints lived and our theologians, philosophers, moral theologians have beautifully taught us! If not, show me why I’m wrong.
I know this changes the topic, but I specifially want Windmill to answer this post! Thanks so much, Abby
Then, I have another question. I hope this poster reads it and responds!
The election. I will be honest here. I have never voted for Bush. I have always voted for Alan Keyes. I never admit it because immediately I’m told that I actually helped the opponent, such as Obama get elected because I voted for someone with no chance to win.
My problem was that McCain strongly supports embryonic stem cell research which is a very grave evil and in some ways more to our society than abortion. I know that is hard to imagine, but due to the ignorance about it and what it entails people take it lightly.
So, I felt voting for McCain, so called choosing the lesser of two evils was a false answer to the dilemma. I had to vote for the one that had no evil or guile. Grant it, many don’t even know his name. So, I’m not talking about them. But, those that did know, and those that withheld his name in their reporting are culpable of massive evil in my opinion. I also wonder about the others.
I LOVE Fr. Pavone! But, who did he vote for. Why do our priests, etc. have to leave out the name Alan Keyes? The only reason I can think of is that they also are of the mind of choosing the lesser of two evils because perhaps they fear causing the church to loose the tax exempt status. I don’t know.
I’m willing to admit I made a bad, wrong or misguided decision but at this time I have a clear conscience in following what our church teaches, the saints lived and our theologians, philosophers, moral theologians have beautifully taught us! If not, show me why I’m wrong.
I know this changes the topic, but I specifially want Windmill to answer this post! Thanks so much, Abby
W
Windmill
Guest
I’m not exactly sure what the question is. Can you paraphrase so I can answer?
M
mtocalcutta
Guest
Would voting for McCain fall under the same category as doing something (voting) that is evil (since he strongly supported embryonic stem cell research) to achieve a good such as prohibiting Obama ( a rabid abortion supporter) although knowing that a candidate ( Alan Keyes) was a completely good moral choice?
Also, how does choosing the lesser of two evils fit in when there is a third choice ( Alan Keyes) that is perfectly moral?
Thanks, Abby
Also, how does choosing the lesser of two evils fit in when there is a third choice ( Alan Keyes) that is perfectly moral?
Thanks, Abby
B
Bob_Byrnes
Guest
I am for real and I am very careful what I say ?Every word you have posted is straight from the fires of hell. Are you for real?
About the Roman Catholic Church. It is the Bride of Jesus Christ. Be careful what you say.
B
Bob_Byrnes
Guest
I am for real and I am very careful what I say !!!Every word you have posted is straight from the fires of hell. Are you for real?
About the Roman Catholic Church. It is the Bride of Jesus Christ. Be careful what you say.
W
warpspeedpetey
Guest
in light of the destruction of sodom and gommorrah for their open homosexuality, and lots wife, being turned to stone for sympathizing homosexuals, what argument do you have that the churches position is wrong?The Church’s position on homosexuality is just WRONG!!!
The woman should attend the ceremony and support the union.
The Church and those who follow the perverted position that homosexuality is a disorder will have much to answer for some day in the future. The pain and violence perpetrated in the name of the Church’s position is considerable. If you do not want to accept homosexual unions, then, by all means do not attend the ceremonies, but don’t be so judgmental as to tell others who disagree with you how to behave. It is a civil right, not a religious ceremony. Get over it !!!
further in light of Matthew 16:18 where authority to bind and loose are promised by Christ, how do you believe that the Church does not have the authority make these decisions?
further how is it a civil right? no marriage of any kind is enshrined as a civil right, as far as i know.
is polygamous marriage a civil right? is bestial marriage a civil right? what about child marriage?
either we are allowed as a society to decide our common morals, as we currently do, or anything that is not physically harmful goes.
from your profile you seem quite educated and mature, please respond with an argument in keeping with an intellectual, or in other words provide some proof of your assertion
W
Windmill
Guest
No Catholic voter was strictly obliged to vote for McCain. Catholics were seriously warned by bishops about voting for Obama, who is clearly one of the most pro-abortion Senators in our time. The question comes as to whether or not you have formal or material cooperation in promoting the Culture of Death by voting for McCain. I have taken the time to read many different viewpoints on this topic, and my mind is swimming with all these arguments from ivory-tower theologians. Every one of them agree that there is no perfect candidate between the front runners. I did not read anyone saying that a Catholic had a moral obligation to vote third-party.Would voting for McCain fall under the same category as doing something (voting) that is evil (since he strongly supported embryonic stem cell research) to achieve a good such as prohibiting Obama ( a rabid abortion supporter) although knowing that a candidate ( Alan Keyes) was a completely good moral choice?
Also, how does choosing the lesser of two evils fit in when there is a third choice ( Alan Keyes) that is perfectly moral?
Thanks, Abby
FWIW, I took my lead by an article by an overtly-traditional periodical, The Remnant, which is unabashedly pro-life. Whether or not you agree with all that is written by this newspaper, it gives you an idea as to what those even on the far right were thinking when it came time to vote. The author, Christopher Ferrara, is a lawyer who understands the complexities of Catholic moral principles, and he uses his abilities as a lawyer to defend pro-lifers who are persecuted for their actions/beliefs.
remnantnewspaper.com/Archives/2008-0915-ferrara-mccain-palin.htm
I hope this helps.
M
mtocalcutta
Guest
I appreciate you sharing your thoughts and your honesty.
I still can’t get past that one reason we are in the shape that we are is for decades we have been voting the lesser of two evils rather than the better third party candidate because we have no faith that doing the “right” thing will be blessed some how by God.
Maybe I’m a simpleton but in good conscience I haven’t been able to vote the lesser of two evils due to the fact there was a much better third party candidate that doesn’t offend God!
Where is our witness? Our culture needed to see God’s people choose right! Alan Keyes is completely morally legit.
Anyway, I"m seeing there is no easy, pat answer at this time of history. I’m seeing that all we can do is pray, make a decision, and then trust God.
Again, thanks for your time and replies! Abby
I still can’t get past that one reason we are in the shape that we are is for decades we have been voting the lesser of two evils rather than the better third party candidate because we have no faith that doing the “right” thing will be blessed some how by God.
Maybe I’m a simpleton but in good conscience I haven’t been able to vote the lesser of two evils due to the fact there was a much better third party candidate that doesn’t offend God!
Where is our witness? Our culture needed to see God’s people choose right! Alan Keyes is completely morally legit.
Anyway, I"m seeing there is no easy, pat answer at this time of history. I’m seeing that all we can do is pray, make a decision, and then trust God.
Again, thanks for your time and replies! Abby
A
AndyF
Guest
mtocalcutta:
Christ warned us that because of Truth, division will rise even in our immediate families. What you did is proper fraternal correction, not politically correct in this age however, but the catholic is above political correctness. You did good and now let it be.
“God is not going to mentioned” should be a heads up for her. This is the proof she is looking for. If Satan is presiding over this ritual, we can understand why he wouldn’t want the mention of God in it, and he instructs the weak willed to accept this.
God’s good is everywhere. Remove a good and evil will take it’s place. Marriage is a Sacrament from God, which God says involves a man and woman. If it disobeys God, then it follows that it is not a marriage by that definition. If it is something else, it can be nothing more than a cult ritual, and the god presiding is the prince of this world.
AndyF
Christ warned us that because of Truth, division will rise even in our immediate families. What you did is proper fraternal correction, not politically correct in this age however, but the catholic is above political correctness. You did good and now let it be.
“God is not going to mentioned” should be a heads up for her. This is the proof she is looking for. If Satan is presiding over this ritual, we can understand why he wouldn’t want the mention of God in it, and he instructs the weak willed to accept this.
God’s good is everywhere. Remove a good and evil will take it’s place. Marriage is a Sacrament from God, which God says involves a man and woman. If it disobeys God, then it follows that it is not a marriage by that definition. If it is something else, it can be nothing more than a cult ritual, and the god presiding is the prince of this world.
AndyF
M
mtocalcutta
Guest
Thank you Andy, I appreciate your phrase “fraternal correction”. I fight guilt because there are times I find it too difficult to remain quiet, silent or passive when in conversation with a fellow Catholic. It’s not popular. Even the truly devout seem to find it difficult to receive correction.
I’m as rebellious as the next I’m sure, BUT, if I’m wrong concerning especially the Catholic Church/Faith, please tell me! Advise me, direct me, etc.!
This is scarcely welcomed in our day. Not only are hearts growing cold but necks are becoming stiff! Thanks, Abby
I’m as rebellious as the next I’m sure, BUT, if I’m wrong concerning especially the Catholic Church/Faith, please tell me! Advise me, direct me, etc.!
This is scarcely welcomed in our day. Not only are hearts growing cold but necks are becoming stiff! Thanks, Abby
W
warpspeedpetey
Guest
any more as a devout Catholic in todays society, i feel the rebel, James Dean aint got nuthin’ on me!Thank you Andy, I appreciate your phrase “fraternal correction”. I fight guilt because there are times I find it too difficult to remain quiet, silent or passive when in conversation with a fellow Catholic. It’s not popular. Even the truly devout seem to find it difficult to receive correction.
I’m as rebellious as the next I’m sure, BUT, if I’m wrong concerning especially the Catholic Church/Faith, please tell me! Advise me, direct me, etc.!
This is scarcely welcomed in our day. Not only are hearts growing cold but necks are becoming stiff! Thanks, Abby
A
Aramis
Guest
the sin is not the impulse, but in giving in to it.Yes, I understand. And I understand the Church is only being consistent in Her teachings. But the “natural law” argument is lost to me, since as a gay man, I have always found it very natural to find members of the same sex attractive.
Attending a civil union of homosexuals is supporting their choice to live a life of wallowing in mortal sin.
As is advocating for any form of active homosexual sexuality.
Under the Hebrew law in Leviticus, (18:22-23) and the punishment for male homosexual intercourse is to be cut off from the people (Lev. 18:29). In Lev 20:13, it specifies death as the means of punishment for a man laying with a man.
W
Windmill
Guest
I think I should clarify about what I said about Obama. I would find it hard to justify voting for him at all given his track record on life issues. I would say that voting for Obama would be a serious issue to explain on Judgment Day before God and all the souls of the Innocents lost to abortion in this country as a direct result of his presidential policies. What I said about there not being any perfect candidate should not be misconstrued as giving license to vote for a pro-abort candidate. I’m sure that was understood, but I felt it needed clarification.
B
Bob_Byrnes
Guest
from your profile you seem quite educated and mature, please respond with an argument in keeping with an intellectual, or in other words provide some proof of your assertion
Sodom & Gomorrah were about promiscuity, not homosexuality.
The Church does have the authority to make these decisions but that doesn’t necessarily say it is always right.(Be careful of creeping infallibility!)
Socities do have the right to determine morality but do so by consensus, not law. Clearly, there is not a consensus that homosexuality is wrong. There is a consensus about polygamy, bestiality and child marriage.
So far as marriage as a civil right and institution, try to get married without a civil marriage license.
Sodom & Gomorrah were about promiscuity, not homosexuality.
The Church does have the authority to make these decisions but that doesn’t necessarily say it is always right.(Be careful of creeping infallibility!)
Socities do have the right to determine morality but do so by consensus, not law. Clearly, there is not a consensus that homosexuality is wrong. There is a consensus about polygamy, bestiality and child marriage.
So far as marriage as a civil right and institution, try to get married without a civil marriage license.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.