Do you think that the church will ever accept gay marriage?

[Charlemagne_II]

SugarMagnolia

I think extremism begets extremism. The rules of the Church are so strict that people who can’t live up to them swing to the opposite extreme of hedonism. I think a little tolerance for nonprocreative sex among married heterosexuals will go a long way.

And who are the extremists … the Christians or the sodomites?

A little tolerance breeds a great deal of tolerance. A great deal of tolerance breeds acceptance. Acceptance breeds indulgence. Indulgence breed practice. Practice paves a slippery slope into hell.

It is not intolerant to condemn homosexuality. Saint Paul did. It is no more intolerant to condemn homosexuality than it is to condemn the killing of unborn children. The moral chaos we are in today is at least partly because it is not politically correct to condemn anyone for anything … except maybe Catholics for being true to their faith.

 

[hellopeople]

Sailor Kenshin

Perhaps the pro-homosexual-marriage anti-Catholic crowd can lay out for the rest of us what their ‘utopia’ will be like.

Sodoms and Gomorrahs, I expect. Flee and don’t look back.

lol, because if you look back you will be a pillar of salt!!!

 

[hellopeople]

It is not intolerant to condemn homosexuality. Saint Paul did. It is no more intolerant to condemn homosexuality than it is to condemn the killing of unborn children. The moral chaos we are in today is at least partly because it is not politically correct to condemn anyone for anything … except maybe Catholics for being true to their faith.

Paul also condemned the speaking of women in church and basically women having any rights when it comes to church, but those rules don’t hold up any more. Weird how you selectively choose which of paul’s teachings to uphold.

What about head covers??

1 Corinthians 11:3-16

3Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. 4Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head. 5And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is just as though her head were shaved. 6If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head. 7A man ought not to cover his head,** since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. 8For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; 9neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. 10For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head.

11In the Lord, however, woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. 12For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God. 13Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? 14Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, 15but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering. 16If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice—nor do the churches of God.**

 

[Corki]

The direction about hair covering was a discipline. As the passage you quoted states, it was a “practice”. Disciplines change. Moral truths do not.

As for women speaking in Church, only ordained Deacons, Priests and Bishops are allowed to give homilies. Only men. That’s the way it is and has been for 2000 years. No changing here.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

hellopeople

Paul also condemned the speaking of women in church and basically women having any rights when it comes to church, but those rules don’t hold up any more. Weird how you selectively choose which of paul’s teachings to uphold.

Among the Protestants, you are right. But not among Catholics. You cannot be a Catholic or you would know that women in the Catholic Church are not allowed to preach. Even lay men are not allowed to preach. Only priests and deacons, who are all male.

The Church is consistent with Scripture. After all, the Church produced the Scriptures.

St. Paul’s censure of homosexuality holds true today as it did in his time.

You need to find a better example than women keeping quiet in the church.

 

[Newbie2]

Paul also condemned the speaking of women in church and basically women having any rights when it comes to church, but those rules don’t hold up any more. Weird how you selectively choose which of paul’s teachings to uphold.

What about head covers??

1 Corinthians 11:3-16

3Now I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God. 4Every man who prays or prophesies with his head covered dishonors his head. 5And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head—it is just as though her head were shaved. 6If a woman does not cover her head, she should have her hair cut off; and if it is a disgrace for a woman to have her hair cut or shaved off, she should cover her head. 7A man ought not to cover his head,** since he is the image and glory of God; but the woman is the glory of man. 8For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; 9neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. 10For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head.

11In the Lord, however, woman is not independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. 12For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman. But everything comes from God. 13Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? 14Does not the very nature of things teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a disgrace to him, 15but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For long hair is given to her as a covering. 16If anyone wants to be contentious about this, we have no other practice—nor do the churches of God.**

I must have missed the part about Paul saying that women who do not cover their heads will not achieve salvation. Can you show me where he says that? I’m pretty sure that what he says about fornicators, homosexuals, etc. is that they will not inherit the kingdom of heaven.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

“If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town. I tell you the truth, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.”
—Matthew 10:14-15

Christ will judge, and the Sodomites will only be judged less harshly than those who refuse to hear the Word. Sodomites can be saved if they repent. Non-believers cannot repent because they refuse to believe, will not even listen, and therefore cannot be saved.

 

[Janet1983]

I need the Catholic Church, together with its “arrogance” of knowing the difference between sin and virtue.

What I don’t need is a non-Catholic church that doesn’t claim to know anything about what sin is, because that would be “judgmental.”

If you don’t mind me asking… what is the objective difference?
2 claims to know what sin is and what sin is not and you prefer one over the other? (Or am I getting this wrong?)
We are not supposed to judge, true. But we can be discerning and we do not need to be tolerant of sin… we shouldn’t be tolerant of sin.

 

[Janet1983]

So where is my second mouth, or am I seeing double?

rossum

In a normal case a woman has one or two children (with a few exceptions)… Well then you might actually think you’re seeing double… God thought about that one too.

 

[SheilaPgh]

another way of looking at gay marriage and the catholic church . . .

Doesn’t success leave clues? Then . . .what about following God, our Father’s, lead?

I believe Jesus taught us to love and protect children. And isn’t that what marriage was intended to be in the first place . . .the best environment to love, protect and raise children? If I remember correctly, God provided Mary with a male husband - Joseph - as the best choice as a foster father for His Son. Do you think God knew what He was doing then, or not?

It’s also been proven statistically over-and-over-again that the best possible environment for a child growing up is in a 2 parent, male-female environment. If you look at these past successes, no one would benefit from the Catholic Church accepting gay marriage. So why would we, as a society, want to consider anything else?

Another thing that concerns me about this discussion, though, is this . . . homosexuals seem to have lost sight of themselves and their values so much that they now choose their primary identity to be the expression of their sexuality. How sad! They choose not to be identified by their gender, which is a natural expression of who they are, but by their sexual preferences outside of the union God intended for the procreation of the human race. . . that does not seem to be natural, biblical, or healthy to me.

Jesus and the Church teach us that we should love ourselves, all of ourselves! I believe that once we love and appreciate ourselves for who we were created to be . . .and not just the sexual “feelings” we’re capable of . . . we’ll see the value of God’s natural order and abide by His natural laws.

Just think about it . . .you do know that sodomy is un-natural, don’t you? In addition: we were naturally created male and female, we were naturally created so that when we came together sexually there was at least the possibility of being blessed with children . . .this is how the human race was designed to continue via God’s natural laws. Anything outside of that is outside of God’s natural order.

I believe we should all support the Church’s teachings and I applaud the Church for taking a stand . . .especially for the sake of the children. I know not every marriage is a good marriage, but a gay marriage is always worse. A gay marriage states to the world, by its existence, that the gay partners chose to not follow God’s natural laws (for whatever reason) and they decided to make up their own . . .to me, that’s denying God’s omnipotence and it’s just plain wrong. Let me explain.

If a gay couple does not have children, they still send their message to the world that un-natural behavior (like sodomy) is acceptable behavior. And that indoctrination affects all of society. If the gay couple has children, then the effect is worse . . .teaching children that sodomy is acceptable is an unnecessary burden and confusing for any child, especially when their healthy instincts will tell him/her otherwise. And teaching children to identify themselves by their sexual “feelings” is also wrong. Children are much more than that! What about their other God-given talents and blessings? Limiting anyone with such an unbalanced view of themselves and the world cannot be good for humanity.

I do not think the Catholic Church will ever accept gay marriage, but the Church will always love the participants and try to help the individuals see themselves as whole and complete as God created them to be . . .and that the individuals will actually be more fulfilled when following God’s natural (as well as spiritual) laws. I, for one, do believe that God, the Father Knows Best!

 

[jmcrae]

So where is my second mouth, or am I seeing double?

rossum

By nature, you would have had a sibling either a year older or a year younger, taking the second one.

 

[jmcrae]

If you don’t mind me asking… what is the objective difference?
2 claims to know what sin is and what sin is not and you prefer one over the other? (Or am I getting this wrong?)

Uh - the Protestants claim not to know, which is why they don’t “judge.” Which is why Protestantism is a great religion for people who want to make it up as they go along.

The Catholic Church doesn’t allow you to make it up as you go along - it provides actual standards of morality.

we shouldn’t be tolerant of sin.

My point, exactly.

 

[SugarMagnolia]

*Unless there is a compelling secular argument against gay marriage, the gays will win. *

---

There is a compelling secular argument: the parts don’t fit. Even atheists can’t dispute that.

Then this is the strategy Catholics should take. What everyone seems to be forgetting is that they’re quoting the Catechism of the Catholic Church to non-Catholics. This is a political issue. Catholics aren’t the only ones voting. If you want non-Catholics to vote against gay marriage don’t quote the cathechism to them; offer them a secular argument. That’s why I keep saying that this political issue will be lost unless a better strategy is developed.

Everyone here can hate premarital sex and ABC all you want to; these things are not illegal. Gay marriage is. If you want to keep it that way, focus on the issue. There’s no hypocrisy in that. If you take the all-or-nothing approach (make it all illegal) the result will be nothing (nothing illegal: not gay marriage and not the next step after gay marriage which will certainly be polyamorous marriage).

 

[Charlemagne_II]

SugarMagnolia
*
Then this is the strategy Catholics should take. What everyone seems to be forgetting is that they’re quoting the Catechism of the Catholic Church to non-Catholics. This is a political issue. Catholics aren’t the only ones voting.** If you want non-Catholics to vote against gay marriage don’t quote the cathechism to them; offer them a secular argument**. *

When discussing this with non-Catholics, that’s what I do. I don’t bother with the Catechism, except to the extent that I repeat what the Catechism says, which is common sense: the parts don’t fit. That is, homosexuality is against the natural law.

Any atheist can see that, and so we have a common ground.

But the reason I would quote the Catechism (or Scripture) to other Catholics or Protestants would be to affirm that the Church teaches what is already self-evident … just in case there are cafeteria Catholics among us who want to go about making up their mind to the contrary for some nefarious reason.

Paul is very emphatic about homosexuality … and that is why he fell into disfavor among some Christians when homosexuals were coming out of the closet back in the 60s.

 

[Janet1983]

You cannot be a Catholic or you would know that women in the Catholic Church are not allowed to preach. Even lay men are not allowed to preach. Only priests and deacons, who are all male.

Hold on. In the Roman Catholic Church as it is in Germany, Austria, Switzerland and the Netherlands there is a position called “Pastoralreferent” (if you wanted to translate it directly it might be something like a pastoral advisor).
These are men and women who have the equivalent of at least a masters degree in theology. They take over a lot of the priestly tasks apart from the sacraments in regions where the priests are just overwhelmed with work and several parishes at once.
They are allowed to preach in the liturgy of the word if there is no liturgy of the Eucharist. I have worked with a woman in that kind of a position while I was a catechist 8 years ago. She did preach once in a while.

 

[Janet1983]

Uh - the Protestants claim not to know, which is why they don’t “judge.” Which is why Protestantism is a great religion for people who want to make it up as they go along.

The Catholic Church doesn’t allow you to make it up as you go along - it provides actual standards of morality.

Well we are not supposed to judge anyways… “Judge not, that ye be not judged.” (Matthew 7:1) Remember?
We are supposed to be discerning, to “reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine.” (2 Timothy 4:2)

 

[crazzeto]

Hold on. In the Roman Catholic Church as it is in Germany, Austria, Switzerland and the Netherlands there is a position called “Pastoralreferent” (if you wanted to translate it directly it might be something like a pastoral advisor).
These are men and women who have the equivalent of at least a masters degree in theology. They take over a lot of the priestly tasks apart from the sacraments in regions where the priests are just overwhelmed with work and several parishes at once.
They are allowed to preach in the liturgy of the word if there is no liturgy of the Eucharist. I have worked with a woman in that kind of a position while I was a catechist 8 years ago. She did preach once in a while.

That’s really not a Mass though is it? You can’t call it that with out the Eucharist, as the whole point of the Mass is the celebration of the Eucharist. More over I don’t know whether or not this would be appropriate for a prayer service being conducted in the Church it’s self.

With regard to the mass, it doesn’t appear as a woman would be able to read the Gosple reading:

usccb.org/liturgy/current/chapter2.shtml#sect3b

1. By tradition, the function of proclaiming the readings is ministerial, not presidential. The readings, therefore, should be proclaimed by a lector, and the Gospel by a deacon or, in his absence, a priest other than the celebrant. If, however, a deacon or another priest is not present, the priest celebrant himself should read the Gospel. Further, if another suitable lector is also not present, then the priest celebrant should also proclaim the other readings.

With regard to the Homily durring the Mass
usccb.org/liturgy/current/chapter2.shtml#sect3b

1. The Homily should ordinarily be given by the priest celebrant himself. He may entrust it to a concelebrating priest or occasionally, according to circumstances, to the deacon,** but never to a lay person**.65 In particular cases and for a just cause, the homily may even be given by a Bishop or a priest who is present at the celebration but cannot concelebrate.

A woman would never be able to offer a homily durring any form of Mass, and I doubt durring a prayer service. Could you please provide documentation for what you’re posting here? Perhaps that will make the point your trying to make clearer.

 

[mangy_dog]

I ask all the Saints, Martyrs, Archangels and Angels to intercede for all the souls in the world,

That the hearts of all may be turned to God and His Commandments… before the Warning comes to pass.

May the hearts of many be converted by the time the Permanent Miracle comes to pass…

I hope and pray that by the time of the Chastisement, the souls of many will have returned to the truth of Jesus Christ - true God and true Man.

Amen.

 

[Charlemagne_II]

Janet 1983

*They are allowed to preach in the liturgy of the word if there is no liturgy of the Eucharist. I have worked with a woman in that kind of a position while I was a catechist 8 years ago. She did preach once in a while. *

This is not preaching as in a homily. In the absence of a priest, laity (including a woman)are allowed to provide “reflections” before the distribution of Holy Communion. I do it myself in the prison ministry when we bring the Eucharist into the prison. We sing a hymn, do the readings for the day. I offer a 10 minute reflection, not homily, on the readings, and then we distribute Communion. But that is not the same as a church Mass. No layman or woman can provide a homily during a Mass.

If I’m wrong, please show me the canon law that allows women to preach during a Mass.

 

[Janet1983]

Could you please provide documentation for what you’re posting here? Perhaps that will make the point your trying to make clearer.

Well as you saw I had to translate from German into English. My documentation therefore would be in German. I once thought about doing that job and studying theology for that reason. This position only exists in Germany, Austria, Switzerland and the Netherlands. That is why you can only find the Wikipedia pare in German and Dutch for example.
If you trust my translations tell me…
In Germany there is a possibility of having a liturgy of the word without a liturgy of the Eucharist. This is especially prominent in cases where German public schools have a service at the end of the year as it is considered ecumenical.
Proof of existence (German), Federal German Agency for Work
Wikipedia (German)
“teilweise Predigtdienst (nur in Wortgottesdiensten)” - partly sermon service / preaching (only in the liturgy of the word) For further explanation: “Wortgottesdienst” is a specification on the liturgy of the word without the liturgy of the Eucharist. Only in connection with explanations on the Mass this means the first part of the Mass.
Diocese of Speyer (German) in the job description:
“in Wortgottesdiensten zu predigen” - to preach in the liturgy of the word (concerning the “Wortgottesdienst” it is the same as above)

Google translations:
Agency for Work
Wikipedia
Diocese of Speyer