E
ERose
Guest
K, you need to supply links to your assertions. Just referencing what an antiCatholic website (I am guessing) claims is not enough.
- Status
L
LittleSoldier
Guest
Forcing anyone to believe is pretty nigh impossible!!
If you put a gun to my head and tell me to believe in God I will probably say “OK” but I will be lying.
L
LittleSoldier
Guest
Wow, Seeker! I looked at that website for one second before discovering it is a Bapist church (I didn’t bother to see if it is affiliated with other Baptist churches).
The Catholic Church does not teach that God hates fags (oh, what an ugly word!)
The Church teaches that God loves everyone and that we are to love everyone, too. Homosexuality is not a sin. Homosexual activity may be a sin.
L
Leela
Guest
I’d be interested to see the Vatican’s official position on criminalizing adultery and the legality of no-fault divorce. That way we can see whether the notion that the Catholic view of marriage needs to be imposed upon everyone applies only in the case of homosexuality as it certainly seems to.
K
kenofken
Guest
You would think a movement to outlaw adulterous hetero marriages would be a no-brainer IF their bottom line really was morality and the sanctity of marriage. It turns out though that “moderation in all things” sometimes applies to moral absolutes too. Gays don’t carry any water in the Church.
Divorced people, well, that’s another story. Lot’s of the well-to-do guys who keep the donations flowing and the politicians who vote the Catholic interests happen to be divorced. They certainly don’t want to alienate these folks by “getting all puritanical” about immorality. The last time push came to shove with the wealthy heteros over divorce, the Church lost England and gained a few hundred years of trouble for it. Sometimes with this whole morality thing, the Church figures, you have to go along to get along. Sure, civil sanctioning of adultery isn’t ideal but it’s a private matter between the sinner and God, and anyway, at least they have the physical capacity to breed, so it can’t really be an “objective evil,” can it?
Now the gays, that’s a whole different ball of wax. Those buggers gross us out to no end, and since we’re God-fearing people, God must be of the same mind on that point. Since they don’t bear us any kids or revenue, morality isn’t private here. It’s our job to make civil government enforce Church Law (oops, did I say that, I meant “Natural Law”). We have to bring the mountain down on these perverts because they’re the only thing that stands to threaten our sacred institution of temporary hook-ups and adulterous cohabitation.
S
SwizzleStick
Guest
Is the Vatican pushing to outlaw homosexual acts?
S
SwizzleStick
Guest
Your entire post is erroneous spewing. Learn what the Church teaches before venting nonsense. And, your last sentence in the post is completely out of line.
C
CradleCath
Guest
L
LittleSoldier
Guest
Ya know what? When you joined CAF you agreed to treat the Catholic Church with respect. You’re obviously breaking that rule and rather blatantly, too.
You don’t understand what Church teaching is and you’re making stabs against her in the dark. Why don’t you actually learn about the Church before you write posts such as the one quoted here?
E
ERose
Guest
So you come to this forum to challenge Catholic belief and yet you do not know what you are challenging? Interesting
The Catechism of the Catholic Church which is the official teaching of our Church has the following entries that you may be interested in:
IV. OFFENSES AGAINST THE DIGNITY OF MARRIAGE
Adultery
2380 Adultery refers to marital infidelity. When two partners, of whom at least one is married to another party, have sexual relations - even transient ones - they commit adultery. Christ condemns even adultery of mere desire.170 The sixth commandment and the New Testament forbid adultery absolutely.171 The prophets denounce the gravity of adultery; they see it as an image of the sin of idolatry.172
2381 Adultery is an injustice. He who commits adultery fails in his commitment. He does injury to the sign of the covenant which the marriage bond is, transgresses the rights of the other spouse, and undermines the institution of marriage by breaking the contract on which it is based. He compromises the good of human generation and the welfare of children who need their parents’ stable union.
Divorce
2382 The Lord Jesus insisted on the original intention of the Creator who willed that marriage be indissoluble.173 He abrogates the accommodations that had slipped into the old Law.174
Between the baptized, "a ratified and consummated marriage cannot be dissolved by any human power or for any reason other than death."175
2383 The separation of spouses while maintaining the marriage bond can be legitimate in certain cases provided for by canon law.176
If civil divorce remains the only possible way of ensuring certain legal rights, the care of the children, or the protection of inheritance, it can be tolerated and does not constitute a moral offense.
2384 Divorce is a grave offense against the natural law. It claims to break the contract, to which the spouses freely consented, to live with each other till death. Divorce does injury to the covenant of salvation, of which sacramental marriage is the sign. Contracting a new union, even if it is recognized by civil law, adds to the gravity of the rupture: the remarried spouse is then in a situation of public and permanent adultery:
If a husband, separated from his wife, approaches another woman, he is an adulterer because he makes that woman commit adultery, and the woman who lives with him is an adulteress, because she has drawn another’s husband to herself.177
2385 Divorce is immoral also because it introduces disorder into the family and into society. This disorder brings grave harm to the deserted spouse, to children traumatized by the separation of their parents and often torn between them, and because of its contagious effect which makes it truly a plague on society.
2386 It can happen that one of the spouses is the innocent victim of a divorce decreed by civil law; this spouse therefore has not contravened the moral law. There is a considerable difference between a spouse who has sincerely tried to be faithful to the sacrament of marriage and is unjustly abandoned, and one who through his own grave fault destroys a canonically valid marriage.178
A
Abu
Guest
This is an interesting statement about divorce outside of Christ’s Church.
lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/sep/10093002.html
Thursday September 30, 2010
“Evangelical Christians are gravely concerned about the family, and this is good and necessary. But our credibility on the issue of marriage is significantly discounted by our acceptance of divorce. To our shame, the culture war is not the only place that an honest confrontation with the divorce culture is missing.
Divorce is now the scandal of the evangelical conscience.”
With the disinformation being penned about the Catholic Church, divorce and the homosexual disorder, it should be obvious that She has always been faithful to Christ in Her refusal to allow such as the above.
Readers can access the facts on the Church and slavery at:ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/POPSLAVE.HTM (Fr Joel Panzer)
“The pontifical decree known as *The Sublime God *has indeed had an exalted role in the cause of social justice in the New World. Recently, authors such as Gustavo Gutierrez [liberation theologian] have noted this fact: 'The bull of Pope Paul III, Sublimis Deus (June 2, 1537), is regarded as the most important papal pronouncement on the human condition of the Indians.’ It is, moreover, addressed to all of the Christian faithful in the world, and not to a particular bishop in one area, thereby not limiting its significance, but universalizing it.
“Eugene IV and Paul III did not hesitate to condemn the forced servitude of Blacks and Indians, and they did so once such practices became known to the Holy See. Their teaching was continued by Gregory XIV in 1591 and by Urban VIII in 1639.”
lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/sep/10093002.html
Thursday September 30, 2010
“Evangelical Christians are gravely concerned about the family, and this is good and necessary. But our credibility on the issue of marriage is significantly discounted by our acceptance of divorce. To our shame, the culture war is not the only place that an honest confrontation with the divorce culture is missing.
Divorce is now the scandal of the evangelical conscience.”
With the disinformation being penned about the Catholic Church, divorce and the homosexual disorder, it should be obvious that She has always been faithful to Christ in Her refusal to allow such as the above.
Readers can access the facts on the Church and slavery at:ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/POPSLAVE.HTM (Fr Joel Panzer)
“The pontifical decree known as *The Sublime God *has indeed had an exalted role in the cause of social justice in the New World. Recently, authors such as Gustavo Gutierrez [liberation theologian] have noted this fact: 'The bull of Pope Paul III, Sublimis Deus (June 2, 1537), is regarded as the most important papal pronouncement on the human condition of the Indians.’ It is, moreover, addressed to all of the Christian faithful in the world, and not to a particular bishop in one area, thereby not limiting its significance, but universalizing it.
“Eugene IV and Paul III did not hesitate to condemn the forced servitude of Blacks and Indians, and they did so once such practices became known to the Holy See. Their teaching was continued by Gregory XIV in 1591 and by Urban VIII in 1639.”
L
Leela
Guest
HI ERose,So you come to this forum to challenge Catholic belief and yet you do not know what you are challenging? Interesting
The Catechism of the Catholic Church which is the official teaching of our Church has the following entries that you may be interested in:
IV. OFFENSES AGAINST THE DIGNITY OF MARRIAGE
Adultery
2380 Adultery refers to marital infidelity. When two partners, of whom at least one is married to another party, have sexual relations - even transient ones - they commit adultery. Christ condemns even adultery of mere desire.170 The sixth commandment and the New Testament forbid adultery absolutely.171 The prophets denounce the gravity of adultery; they see it as an image of the sin of idolatry.172
2381 Adultery is an injustice. He who commits adultery fails in his commitment. He does injury to the sign of the covenant which the marriage bond is, transgresses the rights of the other spouse, and undermines the institution of marriage by breaking the contract on which it is based. He compromises the good of human generation and the welfare of children who need their parents’ stable union.
Divorce
2382 The Lord Jesus insisted on the original intention of the Creator who willed that marriage be indissoluble.173 He abrogates the accommodations that had slipped into the old Law.174
Between the baptized, "a ratified and consummated marriage cannot be dissolved by any human power or for any reason other than death."175
2383 The separation of spouses while maintaining the marriage bond can be legitimate in certain cases provided for by canon law.176
If civil divorce remains the only possible way of ensuring certain legal rights, the care of the children, or the protection of inheritance, it can be tolerated and does not constitute a moral offense.
2384 Divorce is a grave offense against the natural law. It claims to break the contract, to which the spouses freely consented, to live with each other till death. Divorce does injury to the covenant of salvation, of which sacramental marriage is the sign. Contracting a new union, even if it is recognized by civil law, adds to the gravity of the rupture: the remarried spouse is then in a situation of public and permanent adultery:
If a husband, separated from his wife, approaches another woman, he is an adulterer because he makes that woman commit adultery, and the woman who lives with him is an adulteress, because she has drawn another’s husband to herself.177
2385 Divorce is immoral also because it introduces disorder into the family and into society. This disorder brings grave harm to the deserted spouse, to children traumatized by the separation of their parents and often torn between them, and because of its contagious effect which makes it truly a plague on society.
2386 It can happen that one of the spouses is the innocent victim of a divorce decreed by civil law; this spouse therefore has not contravened the moral law. There is a considerable difference between a spouse who has sincerely tried to be faithful to the sacrament of marriage and is unjustly abandoned, and one who through his own grave fault destroys a canonically valid marriage.178
What I’m wonderring is why teh Catholic Church finds it important that civil law be used to enforce some aspects of Christian marriage and not others. Why is it important that homosexual marriage be illegal but divorce is not to be made illegal or adultery criminalized? It sounds to me like homosexuals are being singled out as a threat to marriage when their are far graver threats that the the Church takes no public interest in. Where is the Catholic movement to make divorce illegal? Where is the Vatican statement that says that divorce ought to be forbidden not just by Cannon law but by civil law?
K
kenofken
Guest
I know the Catholic position on divorce and homosexuality quite well. That’s not the issue here. It’s not about whether the Church “approves” divorce. Clearly is does not and never has. The issue is in how people translate belief into action, or in this case, fail to do so. If the drive to outlaw gay marriage really was rooted in a sincere concern about the sanctity of the institution and in Catholic moral law, there would be a similar move to protect the institution in civil law from abuse by adulterous re-marriage. There is no such movement of any substance, and there is no basis in doctrine for the huge gap in the handling of two issues which are not identical, but are substantially equivalent in terms of their moral implications. To make matters worse, divorce is not one of those fourth-tier moral laws worked up from the conjecture or debates of theologions in contemporary times. This is one of those areas where Jesus himself is on record. You would think that would make divorce, Canonically speaking, “a big deal” and at least on par with gay marriage in legislative priority.So you come to this forum to challenge Catholic belief and yet you do not know what you are challenging? Interesting
The Catechism of the Catholic Church which is the official teaching of our Church has the following entries that you may be interested in:
IV. OFFENSES AGAINST THE DIGNITY OF MARRIAGE
Adultery
2380 Adultery refers to marital infidelity. When two partners, of whom at least one is married to another party, have sexual relations - even transient ones - they commit adultery. Christ condemns even adultery of mere desire.170 The sixth commandment and the New Testament forbid adultery absolutely.171 The prophets denounce the gravity of adultery; they see it as an image of the sin of idolatry.172
2381 Adultery is an injustice. He who commits adultery fails in his commitment. He does injury to the sign of the covenant which the marriage bond is, transgresses the rights of the other spouse, and undermines the institution of marriage by breaking the contract on which it is based. He compromises the good of human generation and the welfare of children who need their parents’ stable union.
Divorce
2382 The Lord Jesus insisted on the original intention of the Creator who willed that marriage be indissoluble.173 He abrogates the accommodations that had slipped into the old Law.174
Between the baptized, "a ratified and consummated marriage cannot be dissolved by any human power or for any reason other than death."175
2383 The separation of spouses while maintaining the marriage bond can be legitimate in certain cases provided for by canon law.176
If civil divorce remains the only possible way of ensuring certain legal rights, the care of the children, or the protection of inheritance, it can be tolerated and does not constitute a moral offense.
2384 Divorce is a grave offense against the natural law. It claims to break the contract, to which the spouses freely consented, to live with each other till death. Divorce does injury to the covenant of salvation, of which sacramental marriage is the sign. Contracting a new union, even if it is recognized by civil law, adds to the gravity of the rupture: the remarried spouse is then in a situation of public and permanent adultery:
If a husband, separated from his wife, approaches another woman, he is an adulterer because he makes that woman commit adultery, and the woman who lives with him is an adulteress, because she has drawn another’s husband to herself.177
2385 Divorce is immoral also because it introduces disorder into the family and into society. This disorder brings grave harm to the deserted spouse, to children traumatized by the separation of their parents and often torn between them, and because of its contagious effect which makes it truly a plague on society.
2386 It can happen that one of the spouses is the innocent victim of a divorce decreed by civil law; this spouse therefore has not contravened the moral law. There is a considerable difference between a spouse who has sincerely tried to be faithful to the sacrament of marriage and is unjustly abandoned, and one who through his own grave fault destroys a canonically valid marriage.178
Arguments against gay marriage from a morality standpoint don’t hold any water in the real world if you don’t at least try to uphold that morality on a consistent basis. There’s no getting around the fact that the Church, and more broadly, the Prop 8 movement, tolerates a massive abuse of marriage via adultery in civil law. The fact that they may vehemently oppose it on paper means nothing. Not opposing it actively in civil law means you tolerate it.
People here have NO good answer to this obvious and glaring inconsistency. They get mad at me and impugn my motives for bringing it up. They try to lose it in the noise and smoke of broader culture war issues. Now and again someone offers a feeble excuse for the inconsistency, usually one rooted in moral relativism. Some intimate that gays are a “real” threat to marriage while adultery and no-fault divorce on demand are not. No one’s been able to articulate any intelligent, believable basis for why that is so.
Since the divine moral law argument against gay marriage so obviously rings hollow, that only leaves more profane and unfortunate motives. Some of that is quite obviously hatred of gay people. The rest is, at best, seriously confused moral reasoning or at worst, deliberate and cynical misapplication of that moral reasoning.
D
davidv
Guest
C
CradleCath
Guest
You compare a law that gives women the right to leave husbands who beat them to the movement to give those who practice SSA a title for their disordered sex???
BTW., our founder, Jesus Christ, gave the circumstances that allow for divorce. Even Christ did not expect someone to continue living with a spouse who abused them. it’s the remarriage thing that He forbid. You really need to read the Bible if you want to discuss gay “marriage” with Catholics.
RSA 645:3, is the law which made adultery a class B misdemeanor. However, society found this law almost impossible to prosecute.
For instance, I’ve never seen an “adulterer pride” parade, nor have I seen anybody lobby for the “rights” of adulteres.
In England, Henry VIII introduced the first legislation under English criminal law against sodomy** with the Buggery Act of 1533, making buggery punishable by hanging, a penalty not lifted until 1861.**
Following Sir William Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England,[5] the crime of sodomy has often been defined only as the abominable and detestable crime against nature, or some variation of the phrase. This language led to widely varying rulings about what specific acts were encompassed by its prohibition.
After the publishing of the Wolfenden report in the UK, which asserted that “homosexual behaviour between consenting adults in private should no longer be a criminal offence”, many western governments, including the United States, have repealed laws specifically against homosexual acts. In June 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Lawrence v. Texas that state laws criminalizing private, non-commercial sexual activity between consenting adults at home on the grounds of morality are unconstitutional since there is insufficient justification for intruding into people’s liberty and privacy.
However, that just wasn’t enough, was it??
L
Leela
Guest
In understand the Catholic teaching on divorce and what women who are abused by their husbands are expected to do. I wish you would read my posts clearly before responding. Nowhere did I say that there ought to be a law which says that abused women can’t leave their husbands. But if Catholics are concerned about marriage and not just offended by those icky homosexuals, then it seems to me that it ought to be at least as important for a Catholic pro-marriage political agenda to outlaw divorce and forbid remarriage as it is to forbid gay marriage.
L
Leela
Guest
Let me put it another way and throw this out to all the Catholics out there.
(1) Do you personally think that homosexuals should be able to marry (outside the church of course) and have those marriages recognized by the state?
(2) Do you personally think that divorcees ought to be able to remarry (outside the church) and have those marriages recognized by the state?
If you say “no” to both, at least you are consistent. If you say “no” to (1) but “yes” to (2), I think you have some explaining to do.Why is it that it is important to enforce a Catholic view of marriage upon the rest of society in the one case but not the other?
(1) Do you personally think that homosexuals should be able to marry (outside the church of course) and have those marriages recognized by the state?
(2) Do you personally think that divorcees ought to be able to remarry (outside the church) and have those marriages recognized by the state?
If you say “no” to both, at least you are consistent. If you say “no” to (1) but “yes” to (2), I think you have some explaining to do.Why is it that it is important to enforce a Catholic view of marriage upon the rest of society in the one case but not the other?
E
ERose
Guest
Leela,
What country does the Catholic Church have complete control of the civil law? Not in the US. The only law it can fully control is Canon law. Concerning civil law, it can only lobby, teach its beliefs to those willing to listening and do its part in improving the overall moral framework of a society.
It does what it can do, but the facts are its hands are tied because it isn’t like it can take a state or this country to court to fix the divorce and adultery laws in this country. You can only take someone or some entity to court in this country if you are being directly damaged by a law, person or entity.
E
ERose
Guest
K, you really do not have a clue do you? Look back in history and you will find that the Church of England split off from the Catholic church because a pope would not allow a king to divorce his wife. If that is not conviction I do not know what is.
Here are some links that do show that were it is being battled the Catholic church is in the mix. Also the last link shows some statistics on divorce but there is one point it makes specific to the Catholic church and that is the premarital counselling required by a couple to be married in the Catholic church.
flag.blackened.net/revolt/ws/div47.html
timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20100829/local/bishops-warn-against-divorce-crusades
sanctepater.com/2010/09/defending-families-against-forced-no.html
religioustolerance.org/chr_dira.htm
The problem with your assertions are that you are trying to smell smoke where there isn’t nothing burning. I have advised you in the past that you need to start supporting your accusations with proof but you have failed to take the advice. Again smoke and mirrors don’t prove anything.
- Status