Can Catholics attend same-sex marriage ceremonies?

[gcshapero]

With all due respect, your response was full of assumption and misunderstanding. It needs to be cleared up. I’ll try to avoid getting too detailed in some parts otherwise we’ll fall down a rabbit hole.

a. the act of homosexuality is a sin; celebrating life events with sinners? Not so clear.
b. Jesus modeled a life LIVED with sinners. Not dropping in on them, not putting them in the ghetto where He visited every so often. He lived and laughed and loved with these sinners. He evangelized to these sinners. He LOVED these sinners.
c. We have respected leaders of our Church who understand the gravity of both the sin and the relationship damage that occurs from selective shunning and have addressed it in various ways.

A) When you say celebrating life events, this does not mean we are to shun them out and ignore them. Be friends with them, go out to dinner with them, go to events, be a real friend to them during the good and bad times. I would never say to cast them out. HOWEVER, a marriage ceremony is not an average life event because it is transitioning into the religious realm. While we can and should do those other things, if something else mocks a religious sacrament, we are obligated to not participate. Not because we hate these people, but because we love God and know there is a line drawn.

B) See point A. I would never say we shun anyone. While Jesus did this, he never (not once) condoned sinful activity and when it become a mockery of the Father, he was very intense and made it clear that it was not OK (see the story of Christ driving out the market in the temple – they had made a mockery of a sacred place).

C) While we should have respect for the office of the clerics in the Church, if you are referring to clerics who are promoting things like the LBGT agenda, then we do not have to respect that and ought not. There is a difference and a clear distinction needs to be made there.

My experience has been that people will take a very firm and hard stand on a sin they find particularly egregious, or which doesn’t affect them personally, and then tells everyone else how wrong they are for participating in that sin. Meanwhile, there are areas of their lives (as everyone’s) where they are letting sin slide, or NOT taking that firm, loud, hard stand. IF we are being dogmatic and unyielding, this is hypocrisy. To be clear, we all do this,. I’m saying let’s acknowledge that we do sinful things when we accuse others of doing sinful things. Not sure why that equates to “everybody sins so let’s just do it anyway” as you seem to be saying.

I agree 100% we cannot let sin slide. We can’t. Not even venial sins. Confession, fasting, and making an actual effort to stop sinning is necessary.

We will always be sinners in this life. It’s a sad truth, but I agree we are not support to defend or promote them. Sometimes we are imprudent and find ourselves to be wrong, but this does not make one a hypocrite by default — not if he is working to find what is right and align himself to that.

 

[Augustinian]

In 1996 DOMA was signed into federal law by President Clinton.

Gay Marriage was very much the sphere of public debate in 2000 as it was a plot line on The West Wing episode “The Portland Trip” which first aired that year.

DOMA was passed by Congress overwhelmingly, its passage was considered to be a “no-brainer” and the idea of Gay Marriage was really out-there. The fact that the bill was signed by a President on the hard left, Bill Clinton, shows how much the societal viewpoints on this have changed. In media, in Hollywood, on shows like West Wing, the advancement of the Gay Lifestyle has been a theme for longer than in general society.

When I was a kid, homosexuality was looked at plenty different, and it wasn’t that long ago. CBS did a 60-minute type expose on the phenomenon of homosexuality in 1967- the year before 60 Minutes debuted.

CBS was always quite the liberal outfit, so this program really shows the progressive attitudes toward this when I was a youth.

 

[gcshapero]

Finally, my issue isn’t so much with choosing not to attend a SS ceremony or what part of the ceremony you choose to attend or not attend. It is with the issue of shaming those who are genuinely struggling to best love their loved ones. This includes telling people “You are delusional”, “You are going to Hell”, etc. I don’t believe this attitude honors Christ and I don’t believe it helps those who are sinning and I don’t believe it helps those who are trying to discern a difficult issue.

Please refer to my above post for examples of the difference between shaming vs expressing in love your views of SSM.

I’d never support shaming people. Not at all. That said, we should 100% reject sins — not sinners, SINS. We are required to.

It sounds like you agree based on your responses that we are to never participate or promote same-sex marriages even with attending. We agree. And we agree this is because we are required to work as hard as we can to be like Christ and align our will to God’s. Absolutely.

But I’m doing this, this doesn’t mean now we have license to shame people or accept other sins.

The reason why the subject of homosexuality is almost always talked about is because it is so often brought up by supporters of it. And because it is so heavily supported, the faithful are put in a position where they have to choose, and it means they themselves being vocal.

This is why perhaps homosexuality is talked about more than the sin of simony. If simony was so common and promoted at every hour, then it’d be discussed and argued nonstop. In this case, it’s homosexuality (not JUST homosexuality, but at least homosexuality).

 

[gcshapero]

No I say if you want to go you should without judgement from others, I personally think practising Christian gay people should be celibate but if they are not Christians what is there to stop them getting married and as long as they are not harming others

By celebrate, I don’t know what this means. We need to be sure we are speaking precisely on the subject of same sex marriage, not gay individuals.

For instance, if my gay buddy Andrew has a birthday party, I’ll be there for him. Or if he graduates from law school, I’ll be there to celebrate.

But when you say celebrate them, I’d this means in the form of something that is intended to be a sacrament, then a line is drawn there and the Church (not me—the CHURCH) says we must step back from that.

The concern with this individualist thinking of “if they do this in private, it hurts no one” is that this is also not divine moral teaching. Just as we don’t always see the good that is done when we do good in our own privacy, we don’t see the negative in private sins. Technically, no sin is private, and this is why sin in itself hurts the body of Christ.

 

[therese1998]

if something else mocks a religious sacrament,

I hear your statement about my assumptions. However, this is also s eems to be an assumption. There are plenty of gay marriages which are sanctioned by religious clergy (although, not to my knowledge, Catholic clergy) and the couple themselves have been taught and truly believe that God approves their marriage. To say they are “mocking” a religious sacrament is to pass an assumption. It is judging their intentions, assuming you understand their motives.
Even if you believe, as I do, that no SSM can be a true marriage, only an imitation of one it is a. a poor choice of words and b. NOT a mockery, or an attempt at imitation in any way on the part of the marrying couple…rather, it is in their eyes as letitimate as a heterosexual marriage performed in a Catholic church.

I would never say we shun anyone.

Then we disagree. When you tell someone “I will not attend this important event in your life because I believe it is wrong”, we are shunning the event, if not the people. And event vs people is, IMO, too much of a splitting hairs difference to argue about. IMO, it is the act of a Pharisee and not Jesus.

clerics who are promoting things like the LBGT agenda

So, do you believe the Pope is promoting the LGBT agenda? I don’t. I believe he is clear that he regards homosexual behavior as sinful, while still calling us to act gently towards others who sin. There is a time, a place and a way to let LGBT people know how you view alternate sexuality and why…all within the context of your love for them and His love for them. The question on the table is: does everyone have to act the same way or make the same decision about attending any SSM ceremony. My answer to that is, I don’t know but I think we should consider it in light of original sin, our own sin, the sin of homosexuality, the Scriptures, the discussions of the Church laity and leadership and prayerful discernment. If every sin is individual in terms of matter, knowledge and consent, then how we approach situations of near occasion of sin may also need to be individual.

this does not make one a hypocrite by default

Agreed. What I meant was that those who take a dogmatic stand against attending an SSM ceremony would do well to take as much time to consider where there own sin lies as they take to vocalize against others who are trying to discern. Forgive me if I was unclear. I don’t see this humility expressed in many of the “no, never” comments re: SSM. Obviously, I do realize that omission is not necessarily exclusion.

 

[therese1998]

But I’m doing this, this doesn’t mean now we have license to shame people or accept other sins.

Agreed…and I also think that we are called to re-examine not the sin of homosexuality/SSM so much as our perspective on it. It is, and will remain, intrinsically disordered, but how we publicly denounce homosexuality, treat people in the LGBT community and how we bring them to Christ and the healing that we all need may need to be re-visited in light of advanced understanding on the neurology, nature and psychology of homosexuality, sin in general, the mistakes of the Pharisees and the efficacy of evangelization (not that I’m promoting ignoring sin to get converts, because I’m not). An example would be the issue of addiction. We used to treat those with addiction as those who were deliberately disordered, weak of character and spirituality and uncaring of themselves or others. As we have grown in understanding the neurology, nature and psychology of addiction, our response is much more supportive, not of the addiction but of the person both outside of and within the Church. I believe we need to make a similar effort with homosexuality.

t is so often brought up by supporters of it.

True. It is endless and a systematic, calculated campaign and advertisement. And I understand where it can make the faithful dig in their heels and/or feel defensive. But I’d love it if we (I) could get over that and deal with the issue in a less “take sides” way.

 

[JimG]

So, how many same sex weddings did Jesus attend? How many did St. Paul attend? St. James? St. Therese of Lisieux? St. Catherine of Siena? How far should we go in our acceptance of events? Should we attend the ordination ceremony of a woman who claims to being ordained a Catholic priestess? Of a church of Satan marriage ceremony?

 

[Augustinian]

Gay Marriage was unheard of during the time of St. Therese, or those from previous times. None of those people ever attended demolition derbys, professional wrestling events or the Super Bowl either.

 

[JimG]

True, it took thousands of years for us to come up with the idea of same sex marriage. Either our current era is more enlightened or more degenerate.

 

[QwertyGirl]

Fr. Mike Schmidt’s suggestion is to skip the ceremony so that you are not a witness to the actual event and go to the reception to show your love as a family member or friend. I think that’s a good way to go about it

I can tell you this is definitely not the way to go. I was on the receiving end of such treatment. My family is Catholic and wanted me to have a Catholic wedding, despite the fact that I was never a believer and my husband isn’t either (in the Catholic faith; we have our own ideas of faith and God which we adhere to). Nevertheless, my parents thought they weren’t coming to the wedding but that they would be at the reception. They were sorely mistaken.

If the wedding isn’t good enough for you, neither is the reception. Why would I want them there as salt in the wound that they missed the wedding??? Anyhow, fast-forward many years and they never apologized. From time to time they intimated they regretted that decision, though. I, however, chose to forgive and move on. Many people have told me most wouldn’t have been so generous with their heart. I feel lucky and blessed that I was able to.

If you can’t go to the wedding, don’t be a dark shadow for the happy couple at the reception. Stay home.

 

[TheLittleLady]

Somewhere upthread someone stated that 20 years ago, same sex marriage was considered a joke.

My point is, “they” don’t pass laws against jokes. This has been a serious issue, considered by serious people, for more than 20 years.

 

[SeriousQuestion]

This will probably never happen to me, so I guess I’ll just speculate.

 

[Learner1969]

By celebrate, I don’t know what this means

CELIBATE not celebrate, I mean abstaining from sex.

 

[gcshapero]

Haha, whoops — I read celebrate. My mistake.

 

[gcshapero]

Keep in mind there is only one true Church. While the Episcopal Church, the Methodists, the Lutherans, the AME, and all the rest of the mainline churches may promote things, the Catholics Church is the one true Church, so we’re talking about it from a Catholics perspective.

To not attend is not shunning. I know this may hurt the couple who invited you, and that’s an unfortunate product of it, but as Catholics, we have divine law to abide by first and foremost. Christ never intentionally offended, but by promoting the truth and teaching it, it was merely what happened (which is why so many went against him and turned their backs).

It is not a Pharisee move to do this — being devout does not make one a Pharisee because it’s not being legalistic, it’s being faithful because we know the reason for this, where as for them it was about appearance and only appearance.

I’ll keep this response simple. I wasn’t referring specifically to the pope on this, but clerics like Fr. James Martin of Cdl. Cupich have blurred the lines on it and have been promoting it in a subtle way.

In short, yes — we should draw a hard line against all things we know to be clear offenses against God. This doesn’t mean hate those engaged in it, but we should not involve ourselves in any of the activity.

Just so I understand, because you did say being a hypocrite was absolutely wrong (which I agree), does this mean as a Catholics you agree that if the Church reaches officially against SS marriage and the official sacrament then we ought not engage in it as participants?

If you do thinks we ought not, why not? And if you think it is alright regardless of Church teaching, how would this not be hypocritical?

 

[exnihilo]

Somewhere upthread someone stated that 20 years ago, same sex marriage was considered a joke.

My point is, “they” don’t pass laws against jokes. This has been a serious issue, considered by serious people, for more than 20 years.

The reason for the law wasn’t that most people thought same sex marriage was a real thing. People were rightly afraid that usurper judges would inflict same sex marriage on people. That is exactly what they did. The law turned out to be useless in the face of unelected judges.

Even California outlawed SSM as late as 2008. Obama in his first presidential campaign was against SSM.

A lot happened in the last six years. The homosexualists were able to seduce a significant number of Americans over to their side. But most importantly they were able to get a corrupt judiciary to invalidate the will of the people.

 

[tweedlealice]

Let me say this: Look where we are today. Transgender Dysphoria w mutilation surgery. In the wings is Pediophilia trying to be respected. In 1967, I was in psych nursing. My book stated that homosexuality is a perversion. Its status was changed by a group of doctors, of whom 7, out of 10, were gay. Who sent us off, on this journey!! 
 Christians are to speak truth w love. What we are thinking, being brainwashed w Political Correctness, is to comfort the flesh, by not saying the truth. It will make them feel unloved. It will challenge them to hear the truth. They may not want your friendship after you speak God’s truth. But, their SOUL/SPIRIT is lost, if they continue in that life style. What do we measure? Flesh or Spirit?

 

[Thorolfr]

In 1967, I was in psych nursing. My book stated that homosexuality is a perversion. Its status was changed by a group of doctors, of whom 7, out of 10, were gay. Who sent us off, on this journey!!

Homosexuality was not removed from the DSM by a small group of gay doctors. The issue of removing homosexuality was put to a vote by the members of the American Psychiatric Association and passed by 5854 to 3810. I don’t think that 7 out of 10 psychiatrists are gay.

 

[Norseman82]

Well, in one of the old Baltimore Catechism print versions (I could not find a link to the version online), it stated that regarding Catholics married by protestant pastors, Catholics could not attend the wedding nor should they give gifts to the couple. If we see the reasoning behind that as those weddings being invalid (perhaps because they involved a person or two people who were divorced and thus ineligible to marry in the Catholic Church, so they would have to go the non-Catholic route), then we can extrapolate from that source that the answer is a clear and resounding “NO!”. Additionally, according to CCC 1868, we share in the sin of others when we do anything to show approval of their actions (not an exact quote, but that is the sense that the CCC 1868 was trying to convey; also see sections regarding scandal).

 

[SeriousQuestion]

It is better for the patient to feel discomfort and pain than to be left to die with their disease.