Gay Marriage (A Different Perspective)

  • Thread starter Thread starter jjdrury81
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
So, there are ways for gay people to live without being discriminated against in housing, at work, and in public. There are ways to get legal documents to visit each other in the hospital and to sign over property and possessions. But the black civil rights struggle is always brought up. The fact is – there is no comparison. Gay people were never slaves, never had to go through ‘gay only’ entrances to buildings or drink out of ‘gay only’ drinking fountains, or sit in the back of the bus.
Ed
The fact of the matter is race is NOT equivalent to sexual orientation. People are not inherently gay meaning they are not born with it, however, African-Americans ARE born that way because of certain physical characteristics. So homosexuals cannot make that argument. They may both be minorities, but they are not one in the same. Were both mistreated? Yes. But if only people knew the truth, that they are not born with it. And even if they were “born” with it, it’s the result of sin in the world. Would things be different if they realized this? Naw, probably not. Immorality would still be here because of hardened hearts. I can just pray for them…pray for healing of them and our nation…and that Christ may enter their hearts along with His truth…

“My son, do not forget my teaching, but keep my commands in your heart, for they will prolong your life many years and bring you prosperity.” Proverbs 3:1-2
 
LADYBRI, EDWEST2, AND OTHERS:

We need to do more than pray for people who are mistreated, we need to show love and kindness to them. That includes speaking hard truths, but also making sure that their basic needs are met, such as food, housing, and healthcare needs. The law may have always said “justice for all” but I know personally of 2 people who were murdered primarily because they were gay, one close friend who was brutally raped, and numerous others who have been denied housing or other basic needs.

I am not saying to change all of the laws and bring “special rights” to anyone–but existing law does need to be enforced, and it is not yet being done so in many regions of this great nation. In the past, although some in this forum seem to not realize it, it has been intentionally ignored by many who carried the attitude that “they brought it upon themselves anyway.”

When Harvey Milk was murdered, my own brother said “who cares he was just a fag.” If that was some uncommon or unusual attitude, I would not be concerned, but it seems yet very widespread. In our zeal for doing what is right let us not forget that we are to love people while yet still in their sins. Thankfully many years later that same brother accepted me “as I was” and his own wife was one of the catylists on my way back to the Faith. But it is not always so. I am just saying let’s be balanced here, and love others “as they are”, but also love them too much to leave them that way. And that takes committment, getting your hands dirty, and touching the lepers–even if they brought the “leprosy” upon themselves. Surely no one can disagree with that.
 
:Marriage as the Law of God states is only between a man and a woman… There is no place for homosexual marriages in the Catholic faith… You Either believe or you don’t …you either follow the rules or you don’t, and if you choose not to, then you alienate yourself from the Sacraments…
I am a Catholic. And I believe that Gay Marriage, as a civil institution, should be legal in the United States of America.

It is abundantly clear that secular society has a view of marriage that is vastly different than the Church. God is not brought into many marriages. People marry and divorce at will. People carry infidelity in their minds and bodies.

Marriage, as a civil institution, is a contract. It is no different than a contract between a labor union and employer. In other words, it often holds absolutely no spiritual value. God is rarely present. God is not required to be present.

In this context, it is discriminatory to not allow homosexuals to take part in this institution.

I support the Churches teaching on homosexuality. Even more so, I support the Churches teaching on marriage.

However, if same sex couples want to have a civil marriage that is their right. The Church should not concern itself.
 
I am speaking of the history in USA. When has the Church declared that civil licenses are morally wrong?
I have listed numerous times where the Church teaches it does not approve of licenses. It may not be “morally wrong” in the theological sense, but that does not make them approved, either
You need to reconcile that with the current understanding. We have a living magisterium and I would ask you where that postion is taught today?
Whoa, are you kidding!? Are you implying Pope Leo XIII’s teachings are not relevant due to a “living magisterium?”:eek:

Nowhere has any Pope contradicted this teaching. We in the US received a dispensation under Cardinal Gibbons to receive licenses, but the Church has never changed this view. We still live under the tenants of this indult, which has never been revised.

Catholic teaching does not need to be “reconciled” to the current magisterium. The current Holy Father does not approve of this view, and again emphasises that all teaching must be reconciled with the previous magisterium, not vice-versa. It is part of our Tradition, and cannot be dispensed with lightly.
 
Gay marriages are just not right, they are totally wrong, morally and according to the teachings of Christ…
Yes Mr. Obama is 1/2 african american, but why does everyone seem to forget that he DID have a white Mother… we always hear the first African President, and to that I say no he is not totally African, he is 1/2 white. And lets not forget it…

Being Gay is a choice people make, it is not something you are born with such as a handicap, it is a wrong choice people make, and homosexuals like to be in your face, well God loves everyone, but not the choices people make… The fires of hell are very real and eternity is for a long long time… I hope all homosexuals will repent before they die, because, once you are dead… it’s too late.
 
I am a Catholic. And I believe that Gay Marriage, as a civil institution, should be legal in the United States of America.

It is abundantly clear that secular society has a view of marriage that is vastly different than the Church. God is not brought into many marriages. People marry and divorce at will. People carry infidelity in their minds and bodies.

Marriage, as a civil institution, is a contract. It is no different than a contract between a labor union and employer. In other words, it often holds absolutely no spiritual value. God is rarely present. God is not required to be present.

In this context, it is discriminatory to not allow homosexuals to take part in this institution.

I support the Churches teaching on homosexuality. Even more so, I support the Churches teaching on marriage.

However, if same sex couples want to have a civil marriage that is their right. The Church should not concern itself.
First of all, GOD IS REQUIRED TO BE PRESENT IN A MARRIAGE. If God is not present, there is no real marriage - hence the 50/50 divorce rate.

Second, answer this question - How would you feel about the legalization of civil unions between father and daughter, or better yet, father and son?
 
EDWEST2–

I find it odd that I have been totally supportive of your posts, as well as the Church position on this issue, and yet you at least appear to not notice that at all, but rather pick apart my words instead. If you will reread everything I have posted, you will find that I never once have said that the Church supported discrimination or that gay marriage was needing to be supported by the hierarchy.

I said we needed dialogue with those we disagree with. I don’t think that is unreasonable, nor does the Church have to pretend to agree with radical agendas in order to do so. From your description of your childhood, you and I were raised in the same era
(1960s/70s) and in those days I would not have dared to mention my SSA struggle to a single soul–not a priest or pastor,not a family member, and certainly no one in my circle of friends. That is a hard burden for an 11-12 year old to bear alone.

Technically even then the laws supposedly “protected” all, but I was personally at times mercilessly persecuted by other boys in my class for not being athletic, for not fitting in, and for being, as some called me a “fem.” I was chased home from school for 2 years by a neighbor boy who hated me and to this day I do not know what I ever did or said that caused him to bully me. I didn’t choose those things, because I didn’t even know what sex or homosexuality was at that time in my life. I simply knew I was different and was hated because of it. You absolutely have the right to disagree with the gay lifestyle–so do I. However to minimize the pain within the gay community as you at least appear to be doing is not based on the facts. The gay world is a hurting one, and we are supposed to “weep with those who weep.”

I for one am not asking for “gay marriage–” I am as I have stated several times a CELIBATE CATHOLIC CHRISTIAN who is in love with the Church just as you are. I am willing to obey to the best of my ablity what each and every official Church document teaches on homosexuality and any other topic, for that matter. But we DO need to reach out to one another, and many, not few, individuals in the Church are right now so busy being angry at the homosexual community that I do not often see love or even a listening ear offered. That is what I have said several times, and all I have said.

Please do not misquote me further.
I apologize for misquoting you, and obviously, for not being clear. Tell me, why are many people in the Church angry at the homosexual community? What do you think can be done? I mean, do you have specific ideas?

Once again, sorry.

Ed
 
I apologize for misquoting you, and obviously, for not being clear. Tell me, why are many people in the Church angry at the homosexual community? What do you think can be done? I mean, do you have specific ideas?

Once again, sorry.

Ed
I am not angry with homosexuals. Quite the contrary, I think homosexuals are pretty angry with us Catholics who keep putting the kibosh on their wedding plans. I can sit calmly and without anger and tell why I think homosexuals are called to a celibate life, the same as single people and the religious, without any anger whatsoever.

I’m also not angry with priests for having to live a celibate life. But if they want to get married, I’ll also sit calmly and tell them why it is not God’s will.
 
EDWEST2 thank you so very much. Your words help me today. I think that, without in any way excusing my own past, I for one felt very pushed aside by the Church–when I went into the gay lifestyle people who were my “friends” were no longer such, or said that they would pray for me but kept their distance, and the like. It happened enough times that I do think that there is a real problem on BOTH sides, and maybe that is a place to start. When Jesus said to take the plank out of our own eye before we tried to remove the splinter from the other person’s eye, He certainly was talking to us all, and that may be a starting point right there.

The GLBT people I know (and including myself at times still) tend to EXPECT rejection, so then we come off as defensive and that only compounds the issue. My one sister in law, when I was wearing a pro gay marriage T shirt (which I have since destroyed!) to a family reunion said, rather loudly and clearly, that she didn’t agree. But you know what else she did? She hugged me, over and over, told me that she loved me and wanted me to go to heaven. It brings tears to my eyes now. All the years I knew her I do not recall her EVER telling me how much she loved me, and she knew that the whole family was watching and likely thought she was “crazy and overboard.”

After I came back to the Church she told me she had been praying the Rosary for me for years, and that she knew some of the family thought she was “nuts.” She didn’t care. She cared about MY SOUL. But she showed it in what I now would call an “incarnational” way–by touching me, by letting me FEEL that she cared, and by speaking truth to me when I did not want to hear it.

Maybe that is a starting point. We are loud about our oppostion to gay marriage. We need to be. We need to be equally loud and clear about our love for GLBT people, who so often feel ostracized and rejected.

I do not know why I am SSA. There are a million theories but no scientifically conclusive studies on it at this point. But I do know I grew up feeling less masculine, unloved by men particularly, and by people in general. I tried hard to fit in by pleasing others and married, believing that my faith in God would keep me from ever “acting out.” In the process I hurt and damaged a very good Christian woman and many others, and it didn’t lead to the happiness and fulfillment I hoped for.

Maybe, even though you or others who are straight cannot even CONCEIVE of why a man would wish to be with another man, and the same with women who wish to be with other women, you need to just say “okay I don’t get it but I am still going to realize that there are those who feel this way and need my love and acceptance as humans with the dignity of God within them.” And don’t be afraid to allow yourself to be close to someone who lives in that world. They may come on strong but most are deeply hurt and insecure, just like most straight people are in one area or another. I guess those would be starting points in my mind that may have helped me along the way, and in fact did help me when I needed it and was finally ready for it. Sometimes seeds are sown today that don’t come to fruition for years, but never give up on anyone, gay or straight. It may seem like a political battle, and it is, but it is also a spiritual one, and believe me the blindness goes very deep for those who have lived in that world for many years.

Ironically, the more “liberal” side of the family is now having some difficulty now with me being celibate! They “tolerated” me becoming Catholic again, but when they found out I was going to actually attempt to follow the Church teachings it became another story. But Jesus in the Eucharist is worth every bit of struggle any of us have, no matter our sexual inclinations or other sin areas. And He is truly the Healer of broken hearts. And I for one am still being healed.

Again Edwest2 or anyone else, I was not attacking you and certainly agree with your views. But those views can be presented with LOTS of “incarnational love.” It goes a long way. God bless. Your apology is not only accepted but deeply appreciated. We are on the same team here.
 
Stephenfrancis, I find your loving and respectful manner wonderful. Two of my family members are gay. I’ve known these individuals since birth, and believe me, they did not “learn” to be gay; they just were.

This is an interesting thread, and I’m looking forward to more respectful and interesting posts.

Alisa
 
Stephenfrancis, I find your loving and respectful manner wonderful. Two of my family members are gay. I’ve known these individuals since birth, and believe me, they did not “learn” to be gay; they just were.

This is an interesting thread, and I’m looking forward to more respectful and interesting posts.

Alisa
Thanks Alisa, you truly just made my day. God bless each person who reads or interacts on this thread. There are so many good people here and all over this website. And (shameless plug) my story of returning to the Church is located on this site as well, for anyone who may not have read it yet.

I owe so very much to Tim Staples, one of the truly great Catholic apologists at Catholic Answers, for believing in me enough to send my story on to This Rock magazine who then graciously asked me to write it up for the September 2008 issue.

The link is catholic.com/thisrock/2008/0809dr.asp. It will even tell you why my screen name is StephenFrancis!

God bless you all.
 
StephenFrancis:

Welcome home! and may God bless your faithful efforts to live His word, will and your faith (which is obviously very precious to you).

This may not be pertinent to anyone here, but I just want to add my 2 cents worth on the celibacy / difficulty of it / fairness of it / etc., that so many tout. I am a heterosexual woman, divorced /annuled and currently single. I live a celibate lifestyle, as do you, and for the same reasons! It would never occur to me to try to oppose the teaching of the Church regarding my “options” (given my situation) in the name of fairness, hatred of others, civil rights, or any rights for that matter. The most important ‘right’ I have is the ‘right’ to choose what is good and right, according to the natural law and God’s will.

On the issue of hatred / dislike / anger re homosexuals and the homosexual community, I do not feel that way but know those who do and am aware, certainly, that it IS a problem. I know it probably has many causes (based on the feelings/motivations of different people) and I sure don’t have all the answers, but I wondered about your opinion on one possibility for at least some of the resistance and anger towards SSA persons…

Do you think it’s at least possible that some (or maybe a lot) of this attitude is misdirected anger at the in-your-face way so many pushing the ‘gay agenda’ deal with the heterosexual segment of society? I don’t know anyone who wouldn’t agree that many, many of these people are outrageously angry in their own right (at percieved anger at them, and on and on) and that they push, push, push in ways that can alienate people.

I just wonder if all perceived ‘anger’ and so called ‘hatred’ is really about the persons, themselves, and may be more about the WAY the homosexual community ‘comes at’ those of us who don’t share their beliefs or agenda.

As someone who has an unusually in-depth and objective view of all this, what is your opinion on this idea? :cool:
 
StephenFrancis:

Welcome home! and may God bless your faithful efforts to live His word, will and your faith (which is obviously very precious to you).

This may not be pertinent to anyone here, but I just want to add my 2 cents worth on the celibacy / difficulty of it / fairness of it / etc., that so many tout. I am a heterosexual woman, divorced /annuled and currently single. I live a celibate lifestyle, as do you, and for the same reasons! It would never occur to me to try to oppose the teaching of the Church regarding my “options” (given my situation) in the name of fairness, hatred of others, civil rights, or any rights for that matter. The most important ‘right’ I have is the ‘right’ to choose what is good and right, according to the natural law and God’s will.

On the issue of hatred / dislike / anger re homosexuals and the homosexual community, I do not feel that way but know those who do and am aware, certainly, that it IS a problem. I know it probably has many causes (based on the feelings/motivations of different people) and I sure don’t have all the answers, but I wondered about your opinion on one possibility for at least some of the resistance and anger towards SSA persons…

Do you think it’s at least possible that some (or maybe a lot) of this attitude is misdirected anger at the in-your-face way so many pushing the ‘gay agenda’ deal with the heterosexual segment of society? I don’t know anyone who wouldn’t agree that many, many of these people are outrageously angry in their own right (at percieved anger at them, and on and on) and that they push, push, push in ways that can alienate people.

I just wonder if all perceived ‘anger’ and so called ‘hatred’ is really about the persons, themselves, and may be more about the WAY the homosexual community ‘comes at’ those of us who don’t share their beliefs or agenda.

As someone who has an unusually in-depth and objective view of all this, what is your opinion on this idea? :cool:
I think for me, the fact that people become hateful and angry about any matter is puzzling. Of course, we are all called to proclaim truth and higher ideals, but to get angry and insulting, I do not know, I cannot imagine losing that much cool with another human.

Stephen, your story reminds me of my relationship with my cousin. She thought she was homosexual (youthful hijinks, apparently) and acted out and is still very outspoken regarding very left-wing and homosexual issues. I, on the other hand, am a member of the John Birch Society, ultra-ultra right wing politically, and extremely traditionalist religiously(graphic enough?). However, I also take the words of Christ literally, and embrace sinners. We rarely agree, but my cousin admits she has grown to admire many of my views for being consistant and principled. I never belittle her or insult her, but I do express my feelings when asked and explain why I feel that way. Because we can be so tolerant, she and I often talk at length on personal views, and suprisingly can find common ground. I think this has helped her to a have a more positive image of the Church and she thinks of my family as being “true Catholics,” unlike her conservative parents who can unfortunately be condescending and intolerant, which I think keeps her away. I hope my family’s approach can be a seed for her eventually finding her way back to the Church. With Christ with us who can be against us?

If we do all things with love, as St. Teresa of Avila says even “Picking up a pin, for the love of God, can save a soul.”
 
I just read your story, Stephenfrancis, and it was amazing.

May God bless you on your path as you strive to follow Him.

Love, Alisa
 
StephenFrancis:

Welcome home! and may God bless your faithful efforts to live His word, will and your faith (which is obviously very precious to you).

This may not be pertinent to anyone here, but I just want to add my 2 cents worth on the celibacy / difficulty of it / fairness of it / etc., that so many tout. I am a heterosexual woman, divorced /annuled and currently single. I live a celibate lifestyle, as do you, and for the same reasons! It would never occur to me to try to oppose the teaching of the Church regarding my “options” (given my situation) in the name of fairness, hatred of others, civil rights, or any rights for that matter. The most important ‘right’ I have is the ‘right’ to choose what is good and right, according to the natural law and God’s will.

On the issue of hatred / dislike / anger re homosexuals and the homosexual community, I do not feel that way but know those who do and am aware, certainly, that it IS a problem. I know it probably has many causes (based on the feelings/motivations of different people) and I sure don’t have all the answers, but I wondered about your opinion on one possibility for at least some of the resistance and anger towards SSA persons…

Do you think it’s at least possible that some (or maybe a lot) of this attitude is misdirected anger at the in-your-face way so many pushing the ‘gay agenda’ deal with the heterosexual segment of society? I don’t know anyone who wouldn’t agree that many, many of these people are outrageously angry in their own right (at percieved anger at them, and on and on) and that they push, push, push in ways that can alienate people.

I just wonder if all perceived ‘anger’ and so called ‘hatred’ is really about the persons, themselves, and may be more about the WAY the homosexual community ‘comes at’ those of us who don’t share their beliefs or agenda.

As someone who has an unusually in-depth and objective view of all this, what is your opinion on this idea? :cool:
Thank you so much, Alisa, for your thoughts, and I would tend strongly to agree with you. In fact I alluded to several of your points in my last post when I talked about feeling at times defensive, even here on this forum, although I have chosen to live, as you, according to Church teaching. I can only imagine how defensive some of the comments could make a person feel who is struggling silently but not feeling that they could turn to anyone face to face, coming here to a forum such as this for help, and then reading some of the perceived anger poured out against them, whether valid or not.

I think that there is at times a severe lack of understanding (not just on the forum but in general) of how it really feels to be emotionally alienated from others, whether the Church, family, or the like. So many GLBT folks are still kicked out of their own churches, disowned by their families, and hear people say comments such as “well it’s their own fault” as they may be dying of AIDS, and those statements are being made by some over-cholestroled person who has a heart condition that is “their own fault” too! It (or similar)has happened far too many times.

We all have the capacity to be judging and hypocritical, and neither group owns the rights to those particular sins unfortunately. I see much the same “action/reaction/action to my reaction,” and on and on, on either side of this hot button issue. Both have taken off the gloves and blame the other constantly. Unfortunately that is much of what cuts off the dialogue we need so desperately between us.

Again, love and truth together are really the only answers to personally reach someone, and even then it may not happen overnight or even for years. I understand that Pat Boone went to the hospital and personally prayed with Rock Hudson shortly before he died of AIDS–did Rock Hudson repent, only God knows, but at least a loving effort was made to reach out to him. And only eternity will show what that effort will have meant.

As I have said probably 10 times now I am not for “gay marriage” or its equivalent. But I am also against blaming others for their sins, when I have so many to deal with myself! We all can learn from one another, including those we vehemently disagree with.

God bless!
 
Sorry, the wonders of techology!!! My email said the response was from Alisa, but it was from Alaqoque, so I thanked the wrong person. However Alisa had a wonderful response too as did several others, so I again apologize for that error. God bless each of you. I am glad we are family here!
 
I have listed numerous times where the Church teaches it does not approve of licenses. It may not be “morally wrong” in the theological sense, but that does not make them approved, either
The Church would not ask us to illicitly cooperate with evil. Marriage licenses, as used in our society, certainly do not violate any moral law and the Church cooperates with the state.
Whoa, are you kidding!? Are you implying Pope Leo XIII’s teachings are not relevant due to a “living magisterium?”:eek:
I am implying any so-called contradiction is not in Church teaching but in your understanding of it. 🙂
Nowhere has any Pope contradicted this teaching. We in the US received a dispensation under Cardinal Gibbons to receive licenses, but the Church has never changed this view. We still live under the tenants of this indult, which has never been revised.
Catholic teaching does not need to be “reconciled” to the current magisterium. The current Holy Father does not approve of this view, and again emphasises that all teaching must be reconciled with the previous magisterium, not vice-versa. It is part of our Tradition, and cannot be dispensed with lightly.
I find no contradiction in what the Church asks of us.

I do find this:
The scope of the civil law is certainly more limited than that of the moral law,(11) but civil law cannot contradict right reason without losing its binding force on conscience.(12) Every humanly-created law is legitimate insofar as it is consistent with the natural moral law, recognized by right reason, and insofar as it respects the inalienable rights of every person.(13) Laws in favour of homosexual unions are contrary to right reason because they confer legal guarantees, analogous to those granted to marriage, to unions between persons of the same sex. Given the values at stake in this question, the State could not grant legal standing to such unions without failing in its duty to promote and defend marriage as an institution essential to the common good…
  1. Because married couples ensure the succession of generations and are therefore eminently within the public interest, civil law grants them institutional recognition. Homosexual unions, on the other hand, do not need specific attention from the legal standpoint since they do not exercise this function for the common good…
Please show us where the Church holds the state should not be involved in marriage as you claim.
 
Sorry, the wonders of techology!!! My email said the response was from Alisa, but it was from Alaqoque, so I thanked the wrong person. However Alisa had a wonderful response too as did several others, so I again apologize for that error. God bless each of you. I am glad we are family here!
Hi Richard, I wondered if you thought my last post sounded angry. I don’t know if you read it, but right after Amy first posted, back a few pages in a couple of posts, I gave her some what I thought was helpful advice and invited her to accept Jesus into her heart.

I speak the Truth in love and sometimes that may sound harsh, but I didn’t intend it to be that way. I have tried to insert compassion and love in a few of my posts. Having struggled with this myself, I can understand it in others, and I understand your point that we have to offer gay identified people love and compassion since that’s the only way they may open their heart to God and come to know the Truth. But I think speaking the Truth without using offensive words or harsh language is very loving in itself. I know that you can say things but if you don’t have love, you are just making a lot of noise. I hope that my posts might convey His love to some degree, if not, please let me know. Thanks.
 
But if you read 2-3 posts before that, I actually did make some nice comments to you too, Stephenfrancis, so maybe you were answering that!

In any event, I wish you very well, and you sound like a very loving and decent person –

Alisa
 
The Church would not ask us to illicitly cooperate with evil. Marriage licenses, as used in our society, certainly do not violate any moral law and the Church cooperates with the state.

Please show us where the Church holds the state should not be involved in marriage as you claim.
Thank you for your response.

I am not sure if you read my posts in their entirety, because nothing you quoted from Rome contradicts what I said. I said I felt that government only has the power to recognize marriage as it already exists, and to confer the legal rights it has due to any other contract arrangement, nothing more.

This is not the current system. The government defines marriage in a license and then decides if you fit their definition to get married. This is not a power they rightfully have. Only the Church (by extension, any private institution) can decide if you are fit for marriage. Read from the quote you put here:

"Because married couples ensure the succession of generations and are therefore eminently within the public interest, civil law grants them institutional recognition. "

Not the same as regulation, definition, or permission. Government, as the document points out, cannot define what does not exist, that is, homosexual marriage. I cannot make what never was. Equally, it cannot give permission or regulate an act over which it has no such power. The fact that this definition currently coincides more or less with the Church’s is by coincedence, not intent. This is Pope Leo XIII’s point.

I quote Arcanum :
“Hence are owing civil marriages, commonly so called; 'hence laws are framed which impose impediments to marriage; hence arise judicial sentences affecting the marriage contract, as to whether or not it have been rightly made. Lastly, all power of prescribing and passing judgment in this class of cases is, as we see, of set purpose denied to the Catholic Church, so that no regard is paid either to her divine power or to her prudent laws…Nevertheless, the naturalists, as well as all who profess that they worship above all things the divinity of the State, and strive to disturb whole communities with such wicked doctrines, cannot escape the charge of delusion.”

Again, I quote:
“The scope of the civil law is certainly more limited than that of the moral law, but civil law cannot contradict right reason without losing its binding force on conscience. Every humanly-created law is legitimate insofar as it is consistent with the natural moral law…”

Again, in line with Pope Leo in Arcanum, the State can only recognize what the moral law already recognizes, and nothing more. More than this and the State is playing God, and we know where that gets us! I am not reading anything more into Church teaching than what is there in plain words, and the State should not either.

Arcanum again:
“As, then, marriage is holy by its own power, in its own nature, and of itself, it ought not to be regulated and administered by the will of civil rulers, but by the divine authority of the Church, which alone in sacred matters professes the office of teaching.”

Seems pretty straightforward to me!

Hope this helps! 👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top