Church's Double Standard with Gay Marriage and Divorce and Remarriage

[antares1213]

My wife and I were discussing gay marriage tonight and she asked a question which I could not effectively discuss from the church’s perspective.

Does the church have a double standard with being so openly against gay marriage but not openly against divorce and remarriage (at least in the realm of law)? The church is against homosexual marriage being allowed by the law, but the church is not against banning divorce and remarriage. Obviously the Church does not recognize either gay marriage or divorce and remarriage without annulment. Why does the church not advocate against both.

Is this a double standard? What am I missing here? Thanks!

 

[converting2024]

My understanding of annulments is that they are given only when it can be proven that the marriage was not valid in the eyes of God. The Church does not condone divorce, which is basically when the married couple decides they can’t work things out and they give up on the commitment they took to love and honor each other for better or worse until death do them part.

 

[P_A_L]

They also don’t recognise civil marriages in the first place. I don’t understand what their beef is with ‘civil’ Gay marriage, so long as they aren’t compelled to marry Gay people.

 

[po18guy]

Civil marriages are fornication, which the Church rightly opposes. Homosexual activity is fornication, which the Church rightfully opposes. God ordained marriage as between one man and one woman.

The double standard is man’s not God’s.

 

[Santi2]

My wife and I were discussing gay marriage tonight and she asked a question which I could not effectively discuss from the church’s perspective.

Does the church have a double standard with being so openly against gay marriage but not openly against divorce and remarriage (at least in the realm of law)? The church is against homosexual marriage being allowed by the law, but the church is not against banning divorce and remarriage. Obviously the Church does not recognize either gay marriage or divorce and remarriage without annulment. Why does the church not advocate against both.

Is this a double standard? What am I missing here? Thanks!

Divorced and remarried couples do not lobby legislature to expunge the definition of marriage as between man and woman. On the other hand, you have a gay lobby which seeks to redefine marriage under the guise of equality.

 

[Phemie]

Civil marriages are fornication, which the Church rightly opposes. Homosexual activity is fornication, which the Church rightfully opposes. God ordained marriage as between one man and one woman.

The double standard is man’s not God’s.

Your comment requires qualification.

The Church doesn’t condemn civil marriage, she just requires that her members marry in the form she has established: two Catholics, in the Church, in front of a priest, deacon, or duly appointed lay person, in the presence of two witnesses. 3 of those requirements can be dispensed with the bishop’s approval.

Those who are not Catholic are free to contract civil marriages and, if there are no impediments, those civil marriages are valid and often sacramental.

 

[rossum]

Civil marriages are fornication, which the Church rightly opposes. Homosexual activity is fornication, which the Church rightfully opposes. God ordained marriage as between one man and one woman.

The double standard is man’s not God’s.

Divorce and remarriage is also fornication. The question is why the Church is much more vocal against one form of fornication than against another form of fornication. At the very least it gives the appearance of unfair discrimination, which hands ammunition to the gay rights lobby.

If the Church spent as much time and effort campaigning against divorce and remarriage as it did campaigning against homosexual marriage then this ammunition would be denied to the gay rights lobby.

$0.02

rossum

 

[Phemie]

They also don’t recognise civil marriages in the first place. I don’t understand what their beef is with ‘civil’ Gay marriage, so long as they aren’t compelled to marry Gay people.

They don’t recognize the civil marriage of a Catholic who didn’t obtain a dispensation from canonical form. They recognize the civil marriage of most others as long as there is no impediment to the marriage.

 

[Phemie]

Divorce and remarriage is also fornication. The question is why the Church is much more vocal against one form of fornication than against another form of fornication. At the very least it gives the appearance of unfair discrimination, which hands ammunition to the gay rights lobby.

If the Church spent as much time and effort campaigning against divorce and remarriage as it did campaigning against homosexual marriage then this ammunition would be denied to the gay rights lobby.

$0.02

rossum

The Church recognizes divorce and acknowledges that, even for Catholics, it may be the only legal way for one spouse to protect him/herself and any children from physical, mental or financial harm. She recognizes the end of the legal marriage but not of the spiritual marriage.

 

[rossum]

The Church recognizes divorce and acknowledges that, even for Catholics, it may be the only legal way for one spouse to protect him/herself and any children from physical, mental or financial harm. She recognizes the end of the legal marriage but not of the spiritual marriage.

But if the spiritual marriage is not ended then civil remarriage is going to result in fornication.

rossum

 

[Phemie]

But if the spiritual marriage is not ended then civil remarriage is going to result in fornication.

rossum

Yes, as long as the spouse is alive, remarriage would be adultery.

 

[Untruth]

I think that if the Church were more vocal about a lot of things the perception by the masses might be different than it is today. Most people are confused by Catholics being divorced then getting remarried and hearing how the Church is against “gay marriage” yet they seem to allow divorce/remarriage to happen.

First of all, for non-believers in the Church, I have no problem with them getting some kind of union to a gay partner. If that is what they’ve chosen, then so be it. Just don’t call it marriage as that is between a man and woman and it was created by God. Homosexuals seeking “gay marriage” are trying to just take only the good things from the Church while constantly screaming that the Church “hates” them.

Next, the Church needs to be more vocal about its stances on topics that pertain to the masses. It needs to make it clear to people that wouldn’t understand or would just listen to some late-night comedian rather than research it themselves that their views and stances are this, don’t let some other source deceive you. Which is what happens a lot, some popular person screams “the Church hates me because I’m gay!” then the whole gay community picks up on it and is totally against the Church.

 

[antares1213]

Divorced and remarried couples do not lobby legislature to expunge the definition of marriage as between man and woman. On the other hand, you have a gay lobby which seeks to redefine marriage under the guise of equality.

This is probably the best explanation thus far, but I don’t know if it’s quite there. My original question did not have to do with a double standard WITHIN the church but with an apparent double standard in what the Catholic church lobbies for IN politics.

I know and understand that marriage is to be of one man and one woman, and that marriage is created by God. If marriage is so important, why is the church not outspoken about both gay marriage AND divorce and remarriage. It is clear that marriage is to be between a man and a woman. But the Church does not recognize the second marriage unless it is annulled, just as the Church does not recognize a gay union.

This is such a difficult issue to debate, and I am just trying to formulate better debate points that speak to the secular world. Thanks for your help everyone!

 

[1ke]

but the church is not against banning divorce and remarriage. What am I missing here?

You are missing history here.

The Church is against permissive divorce laws, no fault divorce, and divorce used to be illegal (there were procedures whereby a person could be divorced from an abusive spouse). When these laws came under attack, the Chuch fought for the sanctity of marriage and against the change of these laws. The laws were changed despite the Church’s protests and attempts to influence the political discussion. In countries divorce laws are still restrictive, the Church still fights to keep these laws in place just as she fights against permissive abortion laws, same sex marriage, contraception, etc.

So, there is no double standard.

 

[centurionguard]

You are missing history here.

The Church is against permissive divorce laws, no fault divorce, and divorce used to be illegal (there were procedures whereby a person could be divorced from an abusive spouse). When these laws came under attack, the Chuck fought for the sanctity of marriage and against the change of these laws. The laws were changed despite the Church’s protests and attempts to influence the political discussion. In countries divorce laws are still restrictive, the Church still fights to keep these laws in place just as she fights against permissive abortion laws, same sex marriage, contraception, etc.

So, there is no double standard.

…

Correct if I’m wrong but being against “permissive divorce” laws; I assume your saying the Catholic Church allows divorce in the Church where there is proven grounds of a moral blemish or disgrace between either married couple?

Given the massive statistics rate of increasing divorce within the Catholic Church the last fifty years it seems to me Marriage has sadly lost its meaning.
And when one sees that there has been in the vicinity of over 60,000 divorces within the Church in the last fifty years something in the moral value of marriage is greatly amiss.

Sacrificial Love seems so misunderstood today and rarely re enforced.

Peace
Chris

 

[Santi2]

This is probably the best explanation thus far, but I don’t know if it’s quite there. My original question did not have to do with a double standard WITHIN the church but with an apparent double standard in what the Catholic church lobbies for IN politics.

Simply because society is not exclusively Catholic and Catholicism is not the established religion of most states (save for Vatican and Malta).

 

[Phemie]

…

Correct if I’m wrong but being against “permissive divorce” laws; I assume your saying the Catholic Church allows divorce in the Church where there is proven grounds of a moral blemish or disgrace between either married couple?

Given the massive statistics rate of increasing divorce within the Catholic Church the last fifty years it seems to me Marriage has sadly lost its meaning.
And when one sees that there has been in the vicinity of over 60,000 divorces within the Church in the last fifty years something in the moral value of marriage is greatly amiss.

Sacrificial Love seems so misunderstood today and rarely re enforced.

Peace
Chris

Do you mean annually, or in total? Catholics have pretty much the same divorce rate as non-Catholics and that’s in the vicinity of 50% of all marriages. 60,000 seems like a very low number spread over 50 years.

 

[white_sheep]

…

Correct if I’m wrong but being against “permissive divorce” laws; I assume your saying the Catholic Church allows divorce in the Church where there is proven grounds of a moral blemish or disgrace between either married couple?

Given the massive statistics rate of increasing divorce within the Catholic Church the last fifty years it seems to me Marriage has sadly lost its meaning.
And when one sees that there has been in the vicinity of over 60,000 divorces within the Church in the last fifty years something in the moral value of marriage is greatly amiss.

Sacrificial Love seems so misunderstood today and rarely re enforced.

Peace
Chris

You’re assumption is incorrect. The permissive divorce laws he was talking about were civil laws such as no fault divorce, not divorce within the Church. What he said was that the Church does fight against such civil laws in places where there is still a fight to be had, such as the U.S. many years ago. Even though the Church teaching is in no danger, there is still damage to be done to society when such laws are made.

 

[white_sheep]

Do you mean annually, or in total? Catholics have pretty much the same divorce rate as non-Catholics and that’s in the vicinity of 50% of all marriages. 60,000 seems like a very low number spread over 50 years.

You know this is one of those anti-marriage selective statistics we should really stop bandying about. Maybe it isn’t anything to be proud of, but 75% of people who get married never get divorced, not 50%. 50% of ALL marriages may well end in divorce, but that is not the same thing as saying that 50% of all married people will be divorced. 25% of people who get married getting divorced is still too high, but let’s try to keep the facts straight.

 

[Corki]

Do you mean annually, or in total? Catholics have pretty much the same divorce rate as non-Catholics and that’s in the vicinity of 50% of all marriages. 60,000 seems like a very low number spread over 50 years.

You know this is one of those anti-marriage selective statistics we should really stop bandying about. Maybe it isn’t anything to be proud of, but 75% of people who get married never get divorced, not 50%. 50% of ALL marriages may well end in divorce, but that is not the same thing as saying that 50% of all married people will be divorced. 25% of people who get married getting divorced is still too high, but let’s try to keep the facts straight.