Could a Catholic bake a cake for a gay wedding?

[NiceIsAsNiceDoes]

This is about cakes. The line is drawn with life and death situations.

That is where you might like to see the line drawn. Others may have different ideas about where it should be drawn. Society decides these things.

 

[AlNg]

If you truly love a person you would tell them “no” because its grave sin

Same with gay-marriage; it is an insult to the natural law and of what God intended marriage and human sexuality to be.

However, I read that on or about Sept, 23, 2015, Pope Francis met with a SS couple and kissed and hugged them ?

 

[ATraveller]

That is where you might like to see the line drawn. Others may have different ideas about where it should be drawn. Society decides these things.

That is the case because those activists have nothing better to do than to be as intrusive as possible and then you have ordinary people who believe we can disagree and move on and be civil without the constant threat of lawsuits.

 

[TommyT1]

He was showing them Catholic charity which must be given to all people straight or gay. Just because we show charity to a SS couple does not mean that their actions are licit or dare I say “good”. Think about John 8:1-11 when Jesus saved the adulteress from being stoned, He did not condone nor excused her actions, he showed her charity and encouraged her to “sin no more”. We must follow His example of showing charity to sinners (yes, homosexual acts are sins) and encourage them to stop sinning and follow God.

 

[Rau]

The teacher may feel that by educating the child of a homosexual couple, he is complicit in something he believes to be sinful.

And a doctor may feel that to heal disease equips and encourages the man to sin again. Sounds reasonable.

You’ve suggested the tasks of educating innocent children and healing disease could be compared with being compelled to cooperate with acts sincerely believed to be immoral. I think the line needs to be drawn in a different place than the one you appear to propose.

 

[NiceIsAsNiceDoes]

Gay people have been oppressed in a lot of ways for a really long time. The pendulum is swinging in their favor now. This is what can happen with extreme views in society.

 

[NiceIsAsNiceDoes]

Morality is subjective. What is moral to you may not be to someone else. Society decides what it will tolerate, as a whole.

 

[Rau]

Gay people have been oppressed in a lot of ways for a really long time. The pendulum is swinging in their favor now.

And that is very good. The only question is what compulsions are imposed on others to act contrary to conscience.

 

[Rau]

Morality is subjective. What is moral to you may not be to someone else. Society decides what it will tolerate, as a whole.

Society determines the law. I have no wish to compel a person to act contrary to their conscience. If they cannot work on their sabbath, I will not demand to hire them if work on that Day is what I require. This same simple accommodation is what I propose in the context of this thread.

 

[ATraveller]

Essentially, you’re suggesting the mistreatment of the past justifies forcing bakers, photographers and others out and bankrupting them. This is ‘love’ from the ‘equality’ mob and you’re justifying it.

Many Christians didn’t mind the civil law on marriage being redefined because they hold a libertarian attitude. They thought they would be free to continue as normal and their religious freedoms wouldn’t be infringed. Instead, what they got in return is the constant threat of lawsuits.

 

[TommyT1]

Morality is subjective. What is moral to you may not be to someone else. Society decides what it will tolerate, as a whole.

This is simply false. Society is not the authority of the natural law. By your argument you are justifying racism in the southern states of America in the past just because it was what the “law”

There are three levels of law:

1. _The Divine Law_ ex. Remember to keep holy the Sabbath day
2. The Natural/Moral Law ex. murder is wrong
3. Positive Law ex. the speed limit

Morality is sometimes referred to as the “natural law” and it states what humans ought to do. This can be reasoned by individuals and has an objective ground. Look up Aristotelian ethics for evidence. He had no affiliation with Jews or Christians, yet with the help of those who came before him he was able to rationalize a framework of morality that is extremely similar to Christian ethics. He rejected what Greek society had taught him about what is right and wrong and rationalized objective standards without the help of Christianity. It is a testament to the very fact that morality is NOT subjective and that we can come to reason what we _ought to do for Aristotle was not the only one who came to these conclusions. Other men such as Plato and Socrates believed in true ethics, but Aristotle was the one who perfected them.

Society decides what the positive law requires, but even this must correspond to the natural/moral law. The reason why we have a speed limit is to help keep people from being injured or killed on the road due to a disunity in driving habits. This corresponds with the natural law for it helps keep the fundamental principle of human life from being heavily endangered.

The positive law can change with the times, but the natural law cannot. Once we come to understand what we ought to do then we understand a part of our essence and the essence of what defines a species cannot change.

 

[NiceIsAsNiceDoes]

This is simply false. Society is not the authority of the natural law

I didn’t say society is the authority of natural law. I said society decides what it will and will not tolerate, as a whole.

 

[jfz178]

For the record, making a cake for a gay wedding is permissible. Making the icing is clearly a mortal sin!

 

[ConstantLearner]

For the record, making a cake for a gay wedding is permissible. Making the icing is clearly a mortal sin!

I’m glad that is finally straightened out!

 

[AlNg]

The positive law can change with the times, but the natural law cannot.

Has the natural law argument against artificial birth control changed? It seems like non-Catholics and even many Catholics think so? How many American Catholic married couples use artificial birth control today?
Also it was against the natural law for men to have long hair, but that has been changed with time:
1 Corinthians 11:14
“Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears his hair long it is a disgrace to him,”

 

[daverod]

I’m sure they can… they do for other ‘weddings’… The New Testament does not mention gay marriages but it does mention fornication… Fornication, either hetero or homo, is still fornication… As far as the Established paper work that comes with ‘legal marriages’ are concerned, I don’t think Gentiles need to follow Jewish ‘marriage’ Laws.

If a Gentile has the desire to follow God more Lawfully, according to God’s Laws, then being indoctrinated into the Jewish life, through the baptism into Christ Jesus, who was Jewish, could help the Gentile receive The Law of God which was handed to Moses and then to The Sons of Jacob, more easily and conveniently.

If a Gentile is ‘baptized’ into The King of The Jews, the Gentile would become part Jew.

Where did baptism come from? The Jews or the Gentiles? I mean, don’t find it strange that Jesus Christ followed The ‘Sacrament’ of Baptism that God established through John the Baptist. Jesus Christ was only following what God desired.

Unto the Gentiles these commandments were given: Acts 15:13-29

"13And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying, Men and brethren, hearken unto me: 14Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. 15And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written,

16After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:

17That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things.

18Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. 19Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: 20But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. 21For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.

The Letter to the Gentile Believers
22Then pleased it the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas, and Silas, chief men among the brethren: 23And they wrote letters by them after this manner; The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia: 24Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment:…

 

[Benadam]

Gay people have been oppressed

I think this statement is at the heart of the matter.
Because the people and the act were not differentiated, the rights that should have been limited to people were given to the act.

 

[theCardinalbird]

Because the people and the act were not differentiated, the rights that should have been limited to people were given to the act.

Too true. I see this Canadian law where the Human Rights commission has included in sexual orientation, gay marriage, which we can’t discriminate

 

[daverod]

25It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men unto you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, 26Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who shall also tell you the same things by mouth. 28For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; 29That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well."

If their own hearts, within whom God has written His Laws, cannot discern between the ‘good and the not good’, then they are calling God a liar by declaring that HE never wrote His Law(s) within their hearts.

Jeremiah 31:33
“But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.”

How can the house of Israel, all of a sudden, have God whom they have known, to become their God?

Perhaps because the World is shouting that they believe that Jesus Christ is The Only Begotten Son of God, God is going to give them time to show their proper belief. Do they know respect and honor and uprightness? Do they know elders, and authorities and keeping to law? Do they know shame and modesty? If their parents haven’t taught them, the Laws written within their hearts, should. If they are not being disrespectful to their own biological parents by not showing proper modesty in public by their parents not seeing anything immodest with their dress or behavior, then maybe that family can be justified as truly not seeing nor thinking that their behavior is immodest… And such cases can be judged by God’s Saints who do know the differences between modesty and immodesty. And if The Saints of God ask for them to dress and behave in a more ‘modest’ way, more fitting even to The Saints of God, and if they willfully disobey after the request was weighed as Just, in line with God’s Holy Word, then that act of refusal could be seen as a willful disobedience.

I mean, keep in mind The Saints are going to Judge the world… The Saints ARE going to help God in HIS Day Reign, or the 1000 years. To work with God and His Ordained and Saints would be the submitting to the higher powers as mentioned in Romans 13.

Romans 13:1-2
“Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. 2Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God:…”

1 Corinthians 6:2
“Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?”

Some people have been beaten down by the immodest’s daily and constant immodesty in ways of flaunting and vaunting immodesties. Those persons need to rest and regain soundness of all the chaos they’ve been through… Which would part of the ‘higher powers’ Judgments. They need to also judge properly with the

 

[Rau]

Has the natural law argument against artificial birth control changed? It seems like non-Catholics and even many Catholics think so? How many American Catholic married couples use artificial birth control today?

Also it was against the natural law for men to have long hair, but that has been changed with time:

1 Corinthians 11:14

“Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears his hair long it is a disgrace to him,”

The quote you provide here is not a reference to natural law, but to custom. See a Bible Commentary, such as Barnes.