This is incorrect. The Archbishop of Melbourne went on 3AW (a radio station) and clarified that this was not correct, he never said anything about sackings.
The link I posted is directly from the Archdiocese’s website, where he clarifies this was never the case. He also speaks a great deal on compassion.
No need to shout it. Marriage is defined by the state, at present 24 countries define marriage as a legal and civil right between two adults. Australia is likely to become the 25th country and others will follow. I have no problem respecting your church to define marriage the way it does just as I have no problem with Islamic countries that allow polygamous marriages.
Marriage is defined by God first and foremost!
Its good that you believe what your church believes. My church (UCC) and many other denominations and religions believe God blesses SSM.frobert:
Marriage is defined by God first and foremost!
Then you worship a false god made in your own image.
I would be careful with using the “defined by the state” clause here, because all it takes is for the state to enshrine or define something you don’t like for that to be an issue. If you are in favor of something, then promote it on it’s own merits rather than rely on the state.
I really like the reality that a person does not need to go to a church for a marriage license.
Should the UCC be otherwise? I guess if you believe ssm and polygamy are the same you are likely to think that the the UCC should be for polygamy.
From what I have read, I believe the citizens of Australia are doing that very thing right now.
And you call yourself Catholic?
Why? Because the Church teaches marriage as between a man and a woman for the procreation and rearing of children and that the sexual acts of homosexuality (sodomy) is a sin?
Any woman who has killed or sadly been deceived or coerced into allowing her child(ren) to be killed and is not sorry or repented through the sacrament of confession should absolutely not be receiving communion.
If you have read my posts you would know that I argue no such thing. Give into your every temptation and desire does not work either, and is certainly not Catholic, “Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil”
Of course it is.
Those who vote and advocate for same sex marriage, are not people who have made ‘a wrong choice once in their life’ they are people who are in protest to the teachings of Christ and His Church.
I have seen this kind of emotional blackmail used before in these debates, anyone who has actually read my posts or knows me personally knows what a lie this is.
You are in public protest and an enemy of the good news if you advocate and vote for same sex marriage.
Yes, actually. :+1:t2:
No, because of the lack of fine feeling and compassion towards them as people.
I never said that they didn’t confess. I said that what you have written can cause many to feel ostracised.
It is not about changing church doctrine. You are severely mislead if you believe so.
Alas, we don’t know you personally. It isn’t emotional blackmail to state that what you have written could be harmful for those bearing heavy burdens as you are not writing in a dignified manner. You should probably have the Lifeline phone number under each of your posts.
Again, no.
To reinforce what was already and has always been understood and originally intended. Fortunately he was wise enough to see this revolution on marriage and the family coming on the horizon.
Doesn’t matter whether they should or not, they will, we live in a democracy.
To think that once Christianity is done away with, those such as Islam or Atheistic Communist Governments will provide us with the same freedoms is terribly naïve.
If pastafarianism becomes the stronghold, then they will be able to do what they like given a majority vote, and all your appeals to separation of Church and State and freedom of religion will be as worthless as the paper it’s written on unless pastafarianism calls for that itself like Christianity does.
The very term ‘marriage equality’ is not only a fallacy, but a loaded question, which presupposes that the Church are unjustly discriminating (Hateful, homophobic and bigoted). Safe Schools will be rolled out even through Catholic Schools which will corrupt kids and teach them to hate the Church and her teachings. Good luck then.
Honestly though, we are failing the flock (even as part of the flock) in more than one way. We are still reeling from the Royal Commission, we have a former Archbishop in front of the courts, and many are bewildered.