Differences in how Church and society should behave - gay marriage etc

[Corki]

Thanks James. Here are a few examples:

• I watched some videos of a radio phone in on EWTN in which phrases such as ‘this is a war’, ‘we cannot let the gays win’, ‘this is our country - if they don’t like it go and move somewhere else’ and similar phrases were regularly used by the presenters. I asked myself the question" would this persuade a childhood friend of mine, who is gay, to change his life - or would it just entrench views further?
• Catholic Bishop links gay marriage to incest
• Anger as archbishop suggests MP died from organ failure ‘because he was gay’

For every social cause there are going to be some individuals that go over-board or who are too strident. It is always good to dial down the rhetoric and to remember, first and foremost, to speak the truth with love. We should always encourage everyone to be charitable in their discourse.

But this is different than what you asked in your opening post which was for the Church to spend her energies elsewhere and to effectively “give up” fighting for traditional marriage.

 

[Andre1000]

I just recently saw a “ten reasons why the church is wrong on gay marriage” list. Every point of this list was like: one “church argument” and a counter argument. No one of this church arguments was a actual Church teaching, every argument was “atheistic”. :doh2:
It is not right to try to trick the society to hold a Catholic law without true faith. The Church should preach the teachings of Jesus and convince people that the revelation of Jesus is the truth. Good work without faith is useless to save the souls.
We need a Catholic state not a atheist state with Catholic values.

 

[Bill_7154]

I, personally, have bigger fish to fry when it comes to me being a good Catholic. I’m new to the faith (raised Catholic and drifted away for 20 years) and believe that there are many other things I should be prioritizing in my life that telling gays what they should and should not do.

That’s just me and where I’m at. I’m not implying anyone else should take up my postion.

God Bless,
Bill

 

[SamH]

Some problems with your analysis.

1. No one is “imposing” traditional marriage onto an unwilling society. At worst, we are defending what is** already **the social construct against a radical redefinition.

Actually a minority of people are imposing their views of pro gay marriage upon the majority. I don’t believe “gay marriage” has won a majority ballot vote yet - but courts still impose it upon the people. And that is in states like California, Washington, and Minnesota.

 

[ianjmatt]

Actually a minority of people are imposing their views of pro gay marriage upon the majority. I don’t believe “gay marriage” has won a majority ballot vote yet - but courts still impose it upon the people. And that is in states like California, Washington, and Minnesota.

I cannot, for the life of me, see how the existence of same-sex marriage means it is imposed upon anyone.

 

[SamH]

I cannot, for the life of me, see how the existence of same-sex marriage means it is imposed upon anyone.

It is imposed upon society.

 

[ianjmatt]

It is imposed upon society.

How? Unless you are forced to marry someone of the same sex in what way is it immposed, even if it exists?

People are able to marry even though they are divorced. People are able to sex outside of marriage. People are able to have sex with multiple partners at once - but none of these things are imposed on society, they can be ignored by anyone who doesn’t wish to do it.

 

[JRKH]

I cannot, for the life of me, see how the existence of same-sex marriage means it is imposed upon anyone.

In the U.S. - I believe it was in Massachusetts - Catholic charities had to shut down their adoption services because when the state made Same sex marriage legal, they would not permit this Catholic organization to only allow adoption to heterosexual couples.

Would you call that an imposition?

Peace
James

 

[SamH]

People are able to marry even though they are divorced. People are able to sex outside of marriage. People are able to have sex with multiple partners at once - but none of these things are imposed on society, they can be ignored by anyone who doesn’t wish to do it.

And you think those are good examples?

How many thousands (millions?) of lives have been lost or ruined because of those actions? How many billions of dollars has society had to spend do to those actions?

 

[Corki]

I cannot, for the life of me, see how the existence of same-sex marriage means it is imposed upon anyone.

Let me count the ways…

It is imposed on children in school.
It is imposed on employers and co-workers.
It is imposed on people who want to practice numerous professions.

That’s just three off the top of my head.

 

[edwest2]

As someone about to embark on an RCIA course, I have been pondering a number of ethical questions - such as this one about gay marriage:

Is it right for the Church to seek to impose a morality upon a society that they majority of people in that society don’t want? For example, if the majority in a community want to legalize gay marriage, is it right for the Church to seek to prevent this? Or, is it more preferable to seek protections for the Church, or to take a stand of conscience if that is necessary (e.g. no longer performing the civil aspect of marriage at all, just performing the sacramental act and leaving it up to the couple to arrange the legal aspect separately)?

Would the Church’s energy be better spent seeking conversions and seeing a change of culture through the religious convictions of more converts rather than a ‘top down’ approach of circumventing the democratic process.

The Democratic process has worked quite well in the United States. In the states where it appeared on the ballot as a single issue, it has been voted down every time. There are those who seek to separate the Church from what it calls secular society. The Church teaches to all mankind, not just the faithful. The goal is the truth and the well-being of society.

Even if there are more converts, do you think they should ignore Church teaching on this matter?

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20030731_homosexual-unions_en.html

Not to belabor the point, but the Church does not teach us to go to Mass once a week and then get in our cars and drive home, and to stay out of issues involving the entire human family.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Faithdancer]

In the U.S. - I believe it was in Massachusetts - Catholic charities had to shut down their adoption services because when the state made Same sex marriage legal, they would not permit this Catholic organization to only allow adoption to heterosexual couples.

Would you call that an imposition?

Peace
James

Amen, James. And other church organizations have already been sued for refusing to allow their properties to be used for gay “marriages.” If same sex “marriage” is allowed in your state, folks, it’s only a matter of time before your Church gets sued for refusing to rent their hall or garden or retreat center or whatever for a gay “marriage.” The militant gays have an agenda, and that agenda includes forcing everyone, including the Roman Catholic Church, to sanction their “marriages.”