Could a Catholic bake a cake for a gay wedding?

[sainteriksrose]

Jesus kept company with sinners and said to sin no more…

He in NO way encouraged the sins.

 

[Teek]

That was basically in response to anyone who thinks a Catholic defending their religious beliefs is in some way attacking people who identify as homosexual. It’s not about the “homosexual” people. It is about the inherent nature of sexuality and in particular, about what the Sacrament of Marriage is.

And people “defend” because they are being attacked.

Freedom of religion means the right not to have your religious beliefs attacked.

 

[sainteriksrose]

We have to remember that lukewarm fence sitting is a precarious position for one’s soul to be in.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Was not aware anyone outside the Church nixed using condoms.

You weren’t reading what I said very closely. I said a person who had NO problem with condoms, but had a problem with homosexual sex. There are plenty of people like that.

 

[Teek]

I was talking about a person that presumably had no moral objection to condoms, but objected to homosexual activity.

The problem with the cake baking is not homosexual activity. It is that, for Catholics, marriage is a sacred Sacrament, defined by God to be between a man and a woman for unity and procreation. It is not even a problem with homosexual people. It is a problem with a redefined sacrament that we have no right to define because it was defined by God. We don’t get to recognize a gay wedding and still be Catholic, because Catholics don’t tell God how to run things. We obey his law.

So this works if you said “a person that presumably had no moral objection to condoms, but objected to homosexual marriage.”

That person has to sell the condoms because they aren’t a part of celebrating a false Sacrament.

 

[Teek]

How then can it be right to refuse to provide services on the grounds of sexuality?

That is not what is being done. It is about what the Sacrament of Marriage is. For a Catholic, marriage as defined by God is between a man and a woman. We cannot celebrate a marriage that is not between a man and a woman because it is not a marriage. That isn’t to judge the people. It is to have a definition of what marriage is that was defined by God.

 

[sainteriksrose]

Then it sounds more like you’re asking your question as to what - specifically - Protestantism teaches…

But we should keep in mind that Jesus told an adulteress to sin no more. That is God’s answer to your question.

 

[sainteriksrose]

And we should also keep in.mind that Jesus built a Church (singular) to - among other things - bind and loose and forgive or retain sins; whether we belleve it and/or like it or not, because we can read EXACTLY THAT in Matthew 16 and John 20.

So, for those of us who will not deny this truth, we know that Jesus’s said it therefore it is true.

Point? If anyone wants to know what is and isn’t a sin, the Catholic Church is that which has been authorized by Jesus to define and inform us of them, along with the sacraments which of course includes how to receive our Lord’s life giving Body and Blood worthily, as He ALSO SAID we must do to have life in us.

 

[Arkansan]

It’s a difficult case, but I think two general rules could be laid down (though I am by no means an expert):

1. The wedding cake itself will not be used directly in any evil acts, so it is probably remote material co-operation with evil, and thus justifiable in itself, this will especially be the case when one must co-operate or face serious inconvenience (such as having one’s business shut down by a tyrannical government).
2. If making the cake would cause grave scandal, or be construed as support for gay marriage, then it must not be baked. This will especially be the case if a Christian baker is deliberately targeted by gay activists for the purpose of getting the baker to compromise his Christian beliefs. In this case, one might be obliged even to refuse at the price of extremely grave harm, since this compliance could constitute an implicit denial of the faith.

While these are my personal (and tentative) conclusions, I’m using Fr. Prummer’s once widely used Handbook of Moral Theology as a reference for the basic principles involved:

Handbook Of Moral Theology : Dominic M. Prummer OP : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Handbook Of Moral Theology : Dominic M. Prummer OP : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

 

[Prodigal_Son]

The problem with the cake baking is not homosexual activity. It is that, for Catholics, marriage is a sacred Sacrament, defined by God to be between a man and a woman for unity and procreation. It is not even a problem with homosexual people. It is a problem with a redefined sacrament that we have no right to define because it was defined by God. We don’t get to recognize a gay wedding and still be Catholic, because Catholics don’t tell God how to run things. We obey his law.

You are also misunderstanding what I was saying. I was talking about a generic case. It doesn’t matter what the person has a moral objection to – I could have had the case be about racism, and refusing to sell condoms to an interracial couple. My point is that, when someone has a moral objection to something, we can take that objection seriously without telling them they can pick and choose who they sell a pre-prepared product to. I think it is different for customized products or when people demand you sell a product specifically for people like them. I would not say that a cake company has a duty to sell interracial cake toppers.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Point? If anyone wants to know what is and isn’t a sin, the Catholic Church is that which has been authorized by Jesus to define and inform us of them…

OK, but where does it say that serving a person who is doing something immoral food is a sin? My point is not that a baker shouldn’t be allowed to refuse, but rather that the Church doesn’t teach that baking such a cake is wrong. As I said above, it is neither formal nor material cooperation with evil.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

If making the cake would cause grave scandal, or be construed as support for gay marriage, then it must not be baked.

But if people are well-instructed about moral theology, it won’t cause any scandal at all.

 

[Teek]

My point is that, when someone has a moral objection to something, we can take that objection seriously without telling them they can pick and choose who they sell a pre-prepared product to.

I completely agree.

If you wanted to buy a pre-maid wedding cate for a Halloween party, for example, go right ahead.

But if a person wanted you to design a wedding cake for a Halloween party, and you for any reason whatsoever didn’t fell That was an appropriate application of your work, you could say “no.” They might get mad, or belligerent, or feel violated. But it is not against what you have stated you are in the business to do: make custom wedding cakes for marriages.

If you don’t care either way, you can make one for whatever you want. Because it is Your Business. There is a reason people say, “Mind your own business.”

 

[BoomBoomMancini]

Full disclosure: haven’t read this whole thread. It’s huge, sorry.

Anyway, I’m not sure, but my tentative answer is “yes”. Certainly, I don’t think a Catholic (or anyone else) should be forced to, but I’m not sure one couldn’t do it with a clear conscience.

I’m not sure that I buy the idea that by a baker decorating a cake to certain specifications, the baker is necessarily endorsing the contents of the cake. I think we as a society understand that when we order something custom, the message is from the person ordering it, not the person who physically makes it.

For example, if a baker makes a custom cake for a Little League team’s end of the season party that says, “Congratulations, Wildcats! You had a great season!” I think we all understand that the baker is not personally congratulating the team or giving his or her opinion on the season. In all likelihood, the baker has no idea what the team’s record was and could not care less. It’s understood that the message is actually coming from the coach or whoever ordered the cake.

Similarly, if someone is dictating a letter while another person actually types it out, we understand that the contents expressed in the letter come from the person dictating them, not the typist.

I’m just not sure it’s accurate to say that a baker making a cake for a same-sex wedding is saying “I approve of same sex marriage.” What it’s actually saying is “The person who placed this order approves of same-sex marriage.”

 

[sainteriksrose]

Baking a cake isn’t evil…

Decorating it with ANYTHING that offends God is. If someone was a thief and wanted to celebrate and depict that on top of a cake, one shouldn’t have anything to do with that, either.

 

[Teek]

I’m just not sure it’s accurate to say that a baker making a cake for a same-sex wedding is saying “I approve of same sex marriage.” What it’s actually saying is “The person who placed this order approves of same-sex marriage.”

I love that perspective! I think that rings very true.

I do think that if a person feels like it would be an endorsement of something they don’t believe, they should be free to abstain from participating.

You might think they are ridiculous for feeling that way, but they have that right. And they also have the right to lose your business for it, and the business of people who think they are wrong, etc.

You can’t force a person to bake a cake against their will. Just like you can’t force a person to choose a baker they don’t like for any reason whatsoever to bake their cake.

I want a girl to bake my cake. Not discriminating against boys.

I want an experienced professional. Not because you have hatred for new cake makers, even though it excludes them from consideration.

I want a Catholic to bake my Cake.

I want a person with my ancestry or ethnic heritage to bake my cake. That gets problematic in the United States if you are of European ancestry. But it is not really problematic if you are Asian American, African American, Mexican American, etc.

I want a person who identifies as homosexual to bake my cake. Not discriminating against heterosexual cake-bakers.

You have the right to choose to buy a cake based on whatever criteria you want to use, and it isn’t always a motive that we would consider acceptable.

It might not make you a great person by other people’s standards, but you have that right. Until recently, so did the person offering the service.

 

[Teek]

Baking a cake isn’t evil…

Decorating it with ANYTHING that offends God is. If someone was a thief and wanted to celebrate and depict that on top of a cake, one shouldn’t have anything to do with that, either.

I agree with that. But people have the right to do it if they want to. They have to excercise their free-will to work out their own salvation.

I think that is why it is dangerous to condone it as a good thing, though. It might be offensive to people if you don’t want to decorate the cake that way. What if it is offensive to God if you do? There are things that God has defined as immoral. Who are we to judge God?

 

[sainteriksrose]

People choose to sin in many different ways that are not against man’s laws.

However if a person decides NOT to offend God, they should not be forced to go against their conscience and do otherwise.

 

[Prodigal_Son]

Decorating it with ANYTHING that offends God is. If someone was a thief and wanted to celebrate and depict that on top of a cake, one shouldn’t have anything to do with that, either.

OK, well that’s something broader than what other people are arguing. No one here has claimed – and few people, however liberal, have claimed – that bakers should be forced to sell same-sex wedding toppers.

 

[sainteriksrose]

So then…

If a person has a bakery and (wisely) does not offer pornographic decorations among its goods, they should say we don’t carry those items.