Catholic Marrage vs Gay Marrage

[exnihilo]

Adoption is a function of the State. Adoption is a civil and legal arrangement. Adoption agencies act as brokers to match children with families with certain personnel of that adoption agency being designated to file the appropriate paperwork with the state. Since adoption is a function of the state, the rules are set forth by the state, and all adoption agencies are subject to those rules and laws.

That is true today in modern American. But it might not be entirely true historically. The power of the state has constantly grown over the years. At one time the family had certain powers that the state later took. The parents had certain powers and the husband even more. If you go back to Roman times the father in a family had ownership of his children. In fact if I recall they could even kill their children.

I mention this because we tend to think of the world as always having worked like it does in our time. But the truth is power has been accumulating into the hands of the state over time. Power that once was held by individuals, families and the church have been absorbed into the state. There is no reason to think the state will also not absorb marriage powers more than they already have. In fact using our recent history there is every reason to believe we face some outrages inflicted on us by the state. Of course many will not be outraged because the last outraged has dulled their senses.

 

[roads152]

Don’t worry, exnihilo. The state cannot take over all the powers that it may wish to take. No state in the United States of America, I believe, will ever be presumptuous enough to claim powers that pertains, properly, to the Church. No state, for instance, will presume to administer anyone of the sacraments, including Matrimony. No state official can presume to be a minister of a channel of sanctifying grace as our priests do.
The power of the state in Matrimony is limited to its being a contract and nothing more. It cannot be beyond that.

 

[Keith_W_OR_USA]

Is it possible this Gay marrage could end the church marrage. With Laws about to pass in new york, and probably san fransisco, Would we be sued because we refused to Marry a Gay couple? or if a church rents out a building and would not rent to a Gay couple?

We have seen in some cities Catholic charities had to end adoptions, because we would not put children into Gay homes. So would this happen with marrage as well? And I hear of worse stories in Canada.

Well in California civil rights advocate organizations want to create laws so that any non-profit group or church that discriminates against any person based on sex, race, sexual identity or religion would no longer be able to have tax exempt status. So if a Jewish couple wanted to marry in a Methodist church because they liked it’s look the Methodist Church would lose tax-exempt status in the State of California if it refused to accomodate the Jewish couple.
This is just proposed legislation by these groups and no legislation has been introduced at this date in the States House or Senate.
This would be legal since the Church or non-profit would still have the right to deny the couple the right to marry at the Church, but would have to file and pay taxes in the State of California.

 

[exnihilo]

Don’t worry, exnihilo. The state cannot take over all the powers that it may wish to take. No state in the United States of America, I believe, will ever be presumptuous enough to claim powers that pertains, properly, to the Church. No state, for instance, will presume to administer anyone of the sacraments, including Matrimony. No state official can presume to be a minister of a channel of sanctifying grace as our priests do.

The power of the state in Matrimony is limited to its being a contract and nothing more. It cannot be beyond that.

Strictly speaking it most certainly can take that power. Who would stop it?

If you told someone 200 years ago some of the things the state does today they would think it impossible. These things happen gradually. Even in the US we had state churches under the current constitution. In North Carolina you had to be a Protestant to serve in government.

 

[Eloh]

Is it possible this Gay marrage could end the church marrage. With Laws about to pass in new york, and probably san fransisco, Would we be sued because we refused to Marry a Gay couple? or if a church rents out a building and would not rent to a Gay couple?

Religious institutions are still allowed to refuse gay marriage. All that changed is now gays can get a legal government document saying they’re married.

We have seen in some cities Catholic charities had to end adoptions, because we would not put children into Gay homes. So would this happen with marrage as well? And I hear of worse stories in Canada.

I live in Canada, trust me, the world has ended now that we put kids in gay homes.

 

[roads152]

Oh, I agree with you, exnihilo. But it would be very close to, if not yet, insanity on the part of an official of a civil government in a democracy to presume to do a job that only ordained priests have the power to do.
Communist countries, in the past, took over church buildings and other properties. That was all they could do. The Blessed Sacrament was brought by the priest, as he left, and no Mass nor any other sacrament was celebrated there for as long as the communist government held the church. This would not happen in America unless it turns to be communist, a very very very far away possibility.

 

[oneGODoneCHURCH]

Oh, I agree with you, exnihilo. But it would be very close to, if not yet, insanity on the part of an official of a civil government in a democracy to presume to do a job that only ordained priests have the power to do.
Communist countries, in the past, took over church buildings and other properties. That was all they could do. The Blessed Sacrament was brought by the priest, as he left, and no Mass nor any other sacrament was celebrated there for as long as the communist government held the church. This would not happen in America unless it turns to be communist, a very very very far away possibility.

I would maybe take out one or two of those very’s. I truely wonder how far we are from becoming what what fought against.

You know your in trouble when a man comes to your door and says " I’m form the goverment and I am here to help." at that point shut and lock your door.

 

[exnihilo]

This would not happen in America unless it turns to be communist, a very very very far away possibility.

America will never be communist because its leaders are wise enough to realize the carrot produces more to be taxed than the stick. That is the essential difference. The American state will make use of what helps it. The illusion of private property keeps the people producing.

The reason I would not be so optimistic is that the state has less and less need for religion. Religion has been helpful in rallying people. As long as Christians would feel the government was Christian the state was happy to have Christianity. With less and less Christians there is no need to have the people associate Christianity with the state. There is nothing to be gained from Christianity for the state. So there is no need to allow the institution to have any independence from the state. The saving grace might be that since so few people view the church as having any real authority the state might not be concerned with it. Of course that should itself concern any Christian.

 

[roads152]

oneGODoneCHURCH, you are absolutely right if that happens in a dictatorial regime. That may mean exactly the opposite if it happens in the land of the free and the brave