I
Ion
Guest
I was wondering about this possibility regarding the new law in Denmark about marriage.
Somehow they have to go around it.
Somehow they have to go around it.
Is it possible for a priest to declare civil but not religious unions?
- Status
A
Amandil
Guest
I don’t see how they can be compelled. But neither am I from Denmark.
It seems apparent that the mental disease known as “indiscriminateness” is deeply imbedded in the European psyche.
A philosophy which denies rational thought cannot be reasoned with.
It seems apparent that the mental disease known as “indiscriminateness” is deeply imbedded in the European psyche.
A philosophy which denies rational thought cannot be reasoned with.
V
Verbum
Guest
Hi Ion,
When civil marriage was not available in Québec, some dioceses permitted parishes to preside at civil unions. Not in church of course. In those cases the priest was acting as a civil servant and recorded the marriage only in the civil register. (Parishes still have two registers - a civil and a religious one. )
Verbum
When civil marriage was not available in Québec, some dioceses permitted parishes to preside at civil unions. Not in church of course. In those cases the priest was acting as a civil servant and recorded the marriage only in the civil register. (Parishes still have two registers - a civil and a religious one. )
Verbum
O
oldcelt
Guest
Germany requires two separate ceremonies if you wish to be married in a church. Perhaps that is a good model for the US.
A
Amandil
Guest
No, it is not.
As a former Catholic you ought to know what is involved in a marriage Mass. At the least it would be scandalous and sacrilegious.
O
oldcelt
Guest
You obviously have no idea what I’m talking about. The mass or whatever church ceremony is unchanged…but you still have to be married civilly. If you don’t want a church involved…it’s only a civil ceremony.
A
Amandil
Guest
The Mass is unchanged? Then you are advocating sacrilege.
Explain to me, according to a constitutional perspective, where the government has any authority over what constitutes a marriage or why “civil marriages” are necessarily its purview or responsibility?
O
oldcelt
Guest
The mass being unchanged is sacrilege? Whatever you say.
Since this is Germany I can’t address the constitutional issues, but they obviously have some place in a non-religious wedding. If nothing more than to record the marriage. Frankly, I don’t think either is needed.
A
Amandil
Guest
So it is your contention that the state has the right to compel the Church to give a gay couple the Eucharist, which is an essential component to Matrimonial Mass?
Or are you saying that the Church leave the Eucharist out of the Matrimonial Mass and marry a gay couple without it?
Either case is sacrilege. Period.
O
oldcelt
Guest
When did I say anything about gay marriage? I didn’t…but I understand that reading can be difficult when you are looking for something to disagree with…even when it’s not there.
A
Amandil
Guest
“Civil” marriages of any kind are not possible in the Church because there is no “marriage” in the Church beside a sacramental marriage.
Again, you ought to know this.
O
oldcelt
Guest
Check again. Some actual knowledge would be positive for you.
A
Amandil
Guest
Check again? How about you actually prove your assertion instead of simply saying things as if they are true?
Prove from Canon Law or the Catechism that “Civil marriages” or “civil unions” are licitly performed by the Church or her clergy.
O
oldcelt
Guest
Priests act as an agent of the government in the US when it comes to marriage. He signs your license. So, he is acting like any J.P., judge etc. in that capacity. It is a concept that I disagree with…and apparently, so do you, even though you had no idea what I was talking about.
A
Amandil
Guest
Whatever you say.I didn’t think that you would actually present something from Canon Law or the Catechism.
And how precisely is a priest an agent of the government? Do priests get paid by the government? No.
He simply signs as a witness just as any judge or J.P. does.
Now you’re clever enough to know that in the Catholic Mass that a priest does much more than merely witness to the sacrament of marriage.
In any case you haven’t provided anything which proves that “civil marriages” are licitly performed by the Church or her clergy.
O
oldcelt
Guest
What do you think a civil marriage is? In the US a priest serves both roles…in Germany, only the religious. Germans must first go to a civil servant and get married, then they can have their religious service. So a priest does perform civil marriages in the US, though not solely…it is combined with the religious.
I didn’t think that you would actually present something from Canon Law or the Catechism.
And how precisely is a priest an agent of the government? Do priests get paid by the government? No.
He simply signs as a witness just as any judge or J.P. does.
Now you’re clever enough to know that in the Catholic Mass that a priest does much more than merely witness to the sacrament of marriage.
In any case you haven’t provided anything which proves that “civil marriages” are licitly performed by the Church or her clergy.
Canon law has no legal standing, so why would I mention it? We are talking about civil marriages.
uscatholic.org/articles/201402/its-time-separate-church-and-state-marriages-28452
**It’s time to separate church and state marriages
**
A good article that explains precisely what I have been talking about.
A
Amandil
Guest
You managed to find someone who confirms your biases, how surprising.
O
oldcelt
Guest
Well, if you can contest anything said there, I’d sure like to see it. Those are the facts, not a bias. It really doesn’t matter to me…I just think the separation makes sense for religions. Adopt the German system…
A
Amandil
Guest
Its not “fact”, its an editorial piece by a layperson who thinks that it’s perfectly fine to compromise and water down the Catholic Faith to make it more palatable.
He’s no more an authority in the Church than you are.
It’s laughable that you’d use this as a basis for “fact”.
O
oldcelt
Guest
What is not laughable, but sad, is that you will continue to argue when the facts have turned against you. This situation is in the real world…the facts are there. If you choose not to accept them…oh well.
- Status