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

  • Thread starter Thread starter hellopeople
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
AngelaB39 said:
…I really am torn on this issue as I have gay friends in committed relationships and believe they deserve the benefits of marriage as much as anyone else…
Click to expand...
Any children yet, that is the primary benefit. Or will they ship in some kids, maybe ordered from a catalog. See the problems just get deeper when you go down that road. I wish them happiness however I do not believe they are married.
 
Hellopeople, to understand what Jesus thinks of homosexuality, we must look to those He called to preach in His name.
Jesus said of St Paul
he is a chosen instrument of Mine, to bear My name before the Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel;
Click to expand...
St Paul condemmed homosexual acts (as opposed to a mere atraction) multiple times.
Since Jesus gave this man teaching authority, I think we can be clear of His stance.
 
Texas_Roofer said:
Any children yet, that is the primary benefit. Or will they ship in some kids, maybe ordered from a catalog. See the problems just get deeper when you go down that road. I wish them happiness however I do not believe they are married.
Click to expand...
Any children yet, that is the primary benefit

No, children are not the primary benefit. This weak argument is what will ultimately cause many people to start siding with the gays.

I can give a specific example to prove my point. I attended a Catholic wedding ceremony. The groom was a Catholic widower in his 80s and the bride was a Catholic widow in her 80s. Trust me, no one thought their marraige was going to be producing children. The primary benefit is the unitive benefit that results from sexual complementarity with or without children. If that were not so this couple would not have been able to have a Catholic wedding.

So, it is not about whether gays can produce children; many heterosexuals cannot produce children. It is about sexual complementarity.
 
hellopeople said:
You are the one that is making the definition of marriage a man and a woman.
Click to expand...
This depends on whether you believe the word is a description of a real thing or is simply a generic term that can mean whatever we want it to mean. If you contend that marriage is not limited to one man and one woman then you have quite literally no basis on which to limit it at all, at least I can think of none. If marriage is not defined as between a man and a woman then what is its definition? Is it even possible to say that it could have any definition that is not completely arbitrary?

Ender
 
hellopeople said:
To be honest, with the way society is going, I think they will eventually accept gay marriage.
Click to expand...
An Adult faith does not follow the waves of fashion and the latest novelties.
Pope Benedict XVI

Having a clear faith, based on the creed of the church is often labeled today as fundamentalism. Whereas relativism, which is letting oneself be tossed and swept along by every wind of teaching, look like the only attitude acceptable to today’s standards.
Pope Benedict XVI

… that’s a big negatory there, buddy.
 
hellopeople said:
The church has made MANY wrong decisions. I could talk about recently trying to cover up the sex scandal and worrying more about the reputation of the church than molested children. Or I could talk about the inquisition or the crusades or the sale of indulgences or all sorts of things that have not been very Christ like in the Church’s history.

.
Click to expand...
You really need to learn the difference between individuals making mistakes or committing sins and the Church as an entity.

The Church, the Pope and the Magusterium, cannot err in teaching Faith or Morals.

Individuals can make mistakes, the Church does not teach doctrinally in areas that are not of Faith or Morals.
 
hellopeople said:
To be honest, with the way society is going, I think they will eventually accept gay marriage. The new generation is taught that everyone is equal including different races, sexes, and people of different sexualities. This is the message that is being taught to our young, and before long the church is going to lose significant numbers of people if they don’t change their views. Even now, the church gets a bad rap for being anti-homosexual. In 20 years it will be much worse. I predict that the church will keep their teachings on abortion, but will ease up on gay marriage. I believe that within the next 25 years, the church will, at the least, stop their fight against same sex marriage at a secular and government level.
Click to expand...
First of all. in the fall of Soddom and Gamorrha the church teaches that sodomy and sexual conduct that is not life producing is a sin in the eyes of God. Forenication is highly frowned upon by God in that God destroyed those who would not follow His commandments. Adultery, fornicating with animals or persons of the same sex is tempting God’s anger toward the person who disobeys Gods laws. And it is with this understanding that God will not bless homosexual acts or adulterous acts, sodomy, rape or incest. It is something that makes God angry at us because God commanded that no man waste his seed in masturbation and fornication. Therefor God will not bless homosexuality its acts of, let alone gay marriage. It is not about what is popular in mans eyes but what God gives as His commandment to follow that the Catholic church bases its decisions. No the church will not eventually bless gay marriage.
 
SugarMagnolia said:
Any children yet, that is the primary benefit

No, children are not the primary benefit. This weak argument is what will ultimately cause many people to start siding with the gays.

I can give a specific example to prove my point. I attended a Catholic wedding ceremony. The groom was a Catholic widower in his 80s and the bride was a Catholic widow in her 80s. Trust me, no one thought their marraige was going to be producing children. The primary benefit is the unitive benefit that results from sexual complementarity with or without children. If that were not so this couple would not have been able to have a Catholic wedding.

So, it is not about whether gays can produce children; many heterosexuals cannot produce children. It is about sexual complementarity.
Click to expand...
You may want to brush up on your catholicism, children have always been the primary benefit of marriage. Everyday 20 somethings want to marry and contracept to receive the benefit you speak of, and the church considers their actions invalid and grounds for annulment. By the way I hope you know the 80 somethings are expected to have relations at less once in a manner oriented toward children, otherwise the marriage can be annuled at anytime. It is all in the rules.
 
hellopeople said:
I think the gay marriage issue is a human rights issue and the majority of the children being born now will either be for gay marriage or labeled a bigot and a homophobe. I think the church will change their stance on it.
Click to expand...
The church fathers were martyred for their beliefs, I wouldn’t count on name calling turning the tide.
 
SugarMagnolia said:
So, it is not about whether gays can produce children; many heterosexuals cannot produce children. It is about sexual complementarity.
Click to expand...
Exactly. The fifth chapter of the Epistle to the Ephesians lays out the Nuptial Mystery beautifully, in my opinion.
 
1601
"The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament."84
  • catechism of the catholic church
 
Texas_Roofer said:
1601
"The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament."84
  • catechism of the catholic church
Click to expand...
:thumbsup:Thank you for the information!
 
No pope has ever gone against the Bible, not even most corrupt ones. In the Good Book, it is clearly stated that homophilia is evil, both in the Old and New Testaments. There can be no “reinterpretation.”
 
Texas_Roofer said:
You may want to brush up on your catholicism, children have always been the primary benefit of marriage. Everyday 20 somethings want to marry and contracept to receive the benefit you speak of, and the church considers their actions invalid and grounds for annulment. By the way I hope you know the 80 somethings are expected to have relations at less once in a manner oriented toward children, otherwise the marriage can be annuled at anytime. It is all in the rules.
Click to expand...
You may want to brush up on your catholicism, children have always been the primary benefit of marriage. Everyday 20 somethings want to marry and contracept to receive the benefit you speak of, and the church considers their actions invalid and grounds for annulment.
Keep arguing like this and all those 20-somethings and 30- and 40-somethings are going to vote for gay marriage.
**
By the way I hope you know the 80 somethings are expected to have relations at less once in a manner oriented toward children, otherwise the marriage can be annuled at anytime**

It’s impossible for an 80 year old woman to get pregnant. Therefore a completed act of coitus between two 80 year old people cannot possibly be “oriented toward children.”
 
Texas_Roofer said:
1601
"The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament."84
  • catechism of the catholic church
Click to expand...
👍 Thank you for that.
SugarMagnolia said:
So, it is not about whether gays can produce children; many heterosexuals cannot produce children. It is about sexual complementarity.
Click to expand...
That is a lot of it, but not all of it. Like everyone has been saying: PROCREATION.

Sure, some people can’t have children. That doesn’t mean they aren’t fulfilling God’s will or going against natural law. Homosexuals are.
 
hellopeople said:
To be honest, with the way society is going, I think they will eventually accept gay marriage. The new generation is taught that everyone is equal including different races, sexes, and people of different sexualities. This is the message that is being taught to our young, and before long the church is going to lose significant numbers of people if they don’t change their views. Even now, the church gets a bad rap for being anti-homosexual. In 20 years it will be much worse. I predict that the church will keep their teachings on abortion, but will ease up on gay marriage. I believe that within the next 25 years, the church will, at the least, stop their fight against same sex marriage at a secular and government level.
Click to expand...
really…show me one shred of evidence from the holy see that the catholic catechism will change in regards to the sin of an a active gay lifestyle or adultery ect.To be honest if you are not in full communion with the church then why are you Catholic? you think you are more enlightened than Catholic doctrine? do you oppose catholic teachings? have you considered converting to the episcopal gay version of their church? we are not to hate gays or anyone else however we should not accept sin.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top