Redeeming Qualities in Same-Sex Relationships

[estesbob]

As a Lutheran, you have no say as to what a valid marriage is in the Catholic Church. If your Church is OK with same sex “marriage”, that is its problem.

Well actually they didn’t approve of same-sex marriage or even homosexual behavior until very recently. I’m still waiting for someone to explain what basis they used for throwing out their teachings on homosexuality? Of course are separated bretheren do come up with all sorts of novel new doctrines depending on what the current culture deems as best .

 

[Rau]

Well actually they didn’t approve of same-sex marriage or even homosexual behavior until very recently. I’m still waiting for someone to explain what basis they used for throwing out their teachings on homosexuality? Of course are separated bretheren do come up with all sorts of novel new doctrines depending on what the current culture deems as best .

Well, their “approval” is kind of ambivalent. The ELCA has multiple positions regarding homosexuality, some largely indistinguishable from the Catholic position. They freely admit that their leaders are not all in agreement. Thus, ministers are free to refuse SSM requests, or accede to them, as a personal choice.

 

[Thorolfr]

I cannot believe you just mocked the Blessed Virgin Mary in a Catholic forum . How very very disgusting. You should be ashamed of yourself

I never mocked anyone nor did I say that Joseph and Mary were not married. And why do you assume that only Catholics would be offended if someone mocked Joseph and Mary? Us Lutherans would as well. I just pointed out the logical conclusion of Zoltan’s comment in #186 about an unconsummated marriage not being valid. Also, catholic1seeks made the same point in #177:

A person is married as soon as he/she says “I do.”

Comsummation is not required. Look at Mary and Joseph.

The point I was making earlier was that a gay couple could be IN LOVE* but decide not to have sex. After all, several heterosexual couples’ sex lives often end up dwindling.

 

[Thorolfr]

Well actually they didn’t approve of same-sex marriage or even homosexual behavior until very recently. I’m still waiting for someone to explain what basis they used for throwing out their teachings on homosexuality? Of course are separated bretheren do come up with all sorts of novel new doctrines depending on what the current culture deems as best .

The ELCA has not reached any consensus on the issue of homosexuality or same-sex marriage. There is a whole spectrum of beliefs in the ELCA on this issue with some members believing that both are sinful and some believing they are not sinful. It has all been left up to the conscience bound belief of individual Lutherans, including individual ELCA pastors. Each pastor can decide based on his or her conscience bound belief whether to marry a same-sex couple. Unlike the Catholic Church, the ELCA is much more democratic and individual ELCA Lutherans, pastors and congregations have much more autonomy on such issues than is the case in the Catholic Church.

What the ELCA says about this issue can be seen in the 2009 ELCA document “A Social Statement on Human Sexuality: Gift and Trust” (starting on page 18):

This church recognizes that, with conviction and integrity:

• On the basis of conscience-bound belief, some are convinced
that same-gender sexual behavior is sinful, contrary to biblical
teaching and their understanding of natural law. They believe
same-gender sexual behavior carries the grave danger of unrepentant
sin. They therefore conclude that the neighbor and the
community are best served by calling people in same-gender
sexual relationships to repentance for that behavior and to a
celibate lifestyle. Such decisions are intended to be accompanied
by pastoral response and community support.

• On the basis of conscience-bound belief, some are convinced
that homosexuality and even lifelong, monogamous, homosexual
relationships reflect a broken world in which some
relationships do not pattern themselves after the creation God
intended. While they acknowledge that such relationships may
be lived out with mutuality and care, they do not believe that the
neighbor or community are best served by publicly recognizing
such relationships as traditional marriage.

• On the basis of conscience-bound belief, some are convinced
that the scriptural witness does not address the context of
sexual orientation and lifelong loving and committed relationships
that we experience today. They believe that the neighbor
and community are best served when same-gender relationships
are honored and held to high standards and public accountability,
but they do not equate these relationships with marriage.
They do, however, affirm the need for community support and
the role of pastoral care and may wish to surround lifelong,
monogamous relationships or covenant unions with prayer.

• On the basis of conscience-bound belief, some are convinced
that the scriptural witness does not address the context of
sexual orientation and committed relationships that we experience
today. They believe that the neighbor and community are
best served when same-gender relationships are lived out with
lifelong and monogamous commitments that are held to the
same rigorous standards, sexual ethics, and status as heterosexual
marriage. They surround such couples and their lifelong
commitments with prayer to live in ways that glorify God, find
strength for the challenges that will be faced, and serve others.
They believe same-gender couples should avail themselves of
social and legal support for themselves, their children, and other
dependents and seek the highest legal accountability available
for their relationships.

Although at this time this church lacks consensus on this matter, it encourages
all people to live out their faith in the local and global community of
the baptized with profound respect for the conscience-bound belief of the
neighbor. This church calls for mutual respect in relationships and for guidance
that seeks the good of each individual and of the community. Regarding
our life together as we live with disagreement, the people in this church
will continue to accompany one another in study, prayer, discernment,
pastoral care, and mutual respect.

elca.org/Faith/Faith-and-Society/Social-Statements/Human-Sexuality

 

[estesbob]

The ELCA has not reached any consensus on the issue of homosexuality or same-sex marriage. There is a whole spectrum of beliefs in the ELCA on this issue with some members believing that both are sinful and some believing they are not sinful. It has all been left up to the conscience bound belief of individual Lutherans, including individual ELCA pastors. Each pastor can decide based on his or her conscience bound belief whether to marry a same-sex couple. Unlike the Catholic Church, the ELCA is much more democratic and individual ELCA Lutherans, pastors and congregations have much more autonomy on such issues than is the case in the Catholic Church.

What the ELCA says about this issue can be seen in the 2009 ELCA document “A Social Statement on Human Sexuality: Gift and Trust” (starting on page 18):

elca.org/Faith/Faith-and-Society/Social-Statements/Human-Sexuality

Are there absolute truths ? Should what is sin change according to the whims of the current culture? What is the rationale for each individual pastor to determine what is sin and what is not?

 

[estesbob]

Well, their “approval” is kind of ambivalent. The ELCA has multiple positions regarding homosexuality, some largely indistinguishable from the Catholic position. They freely admit that their leaders are not all in agreement. Thus, ministers are free to refuse SSM requests, or accede to them, as a personal choice.

How strange.

 

[estesbob]

I never mocked anyone nor did I say that Joseph and Mary were not married. And why do you assume that only Catholics would be offended if someone mocked Joseph and Mary? Us Lutherans would as well. I just pointed out the logical conclusion of Zoltan’s comment in #186 about an unconsummated marriage not being valid. Also, catholic1seeks made the same point in #177:

I would suggest that you and Catholic1 leave the Blessed Virgin Mary out of the conversation no matter how pertinent t you think it might be

 

[Thorolfr]

Are there absolute truths ? Should what is sin change according to the whims of the current culture? What is the rationale for each individual pastor to determine what is sin and what is not?

The ELCA is basically in the same position on this issue as the Episcopal Church:

The U.S. Episcopal Church has voted to change the church’s rules governing marriage and to authorize their clergy to perform same-sex weddings, days after the U.S. Supreme Court ruling to legalize gay marriage for all Americans.

In two of the resolutions adopted at the General Convention meeting in Salt Lake City this week, the denomination made a canonical change eliminating language defining marriage as between a man and a woman as well as authorized two new marriage rites with language allowing them to be used by same-sex or opposite-sex couples.

The terms “man and woman” have been replaced with “couple.”

However, both resolutions say that clergy retain the canonical right to refuse to officiate at any wedding.

“The compromise means that same-sex weddings may occur after Nov. 1, 2015, with the full blessing of the church in places like Washington, Los Angeles and New York, but likely won’t take place in more conservative parts of the church, like Dallas, Albany and Orlando,” writes George Conger, an Episcopal priest in a parish in Florida, in an article in The Washington Post.

christianpost.com/news/us-episcopal-church-approves-same-sex-marriage-replaces-terms-man-and-woman-with-couples-141163/

The structure of both the Episcopal Church and the ELCA is fairly democratic and changes are made in their policies based upon a vote by delegates (both clergy and lay) from individual parishes. Of course, there is trust that the outcome of such votes is guided by the Holy Spirit. As the article says about the recent vote in the Episcopal Church:

After the passing of the resolutions, 20 bishops signed a “minority report” that was appended to the text of one of the resolutions.

“The nature, purpose, and meaning of marriage are linked to the relationship of man and woman,” the report said. “The promises and vows of marriage presuppose husband and wife as the partners who are made one flesh in marriage. This understanding is a reasonable one, as well as in accord with Holy Scripture and Christian tradition in their teaching about marriage.”

The bishops said they disagree “openly and transparently and – with the Spirit’s help – charitably,” adding, “We are grateful that Resolution A054 includes provision for bishops and priests to exercise their conscience.”

 

[Thorolfr]

Well, their “approval” is kind of ambivalent. The ELCA has multiple positions regarding homosexuality, some largely indistinguishable from the Catholic position. They freely admit that their leaders are not all in agreement. Thus, ministers are free to refuse SSM requests, or accede to them, as a personal choice.

Just as is true in the Episcopal Church, I think that individual pastors in the ELCA also need the approval of their bishop to perform same-sex marriages. As a result, pastors in some of the 65 ELCA synods where the bishop does not allow such marriages would not be able to perform same-sex marriages. But I know for sure that the bishop in my own synod has given his approval.

 

[estesbob]

The ELCA is basically in the same position on this issue as the Episcopal Church:

christianpost.com/news/us-episcopal-church-approves-same-sex-marriage-replaces-terms-man-and-woman-with-couples-141163/

The structure of both the Episcopal Church and the ELCA is fairly democratic and changes are made in their policies based upon a vote by delegates (both clergy and lay) from individual parishes. Of course, there is trust that the outcome of such votes is guided by the Holy Spirit. As the article says about the recent vote in the Episcopal Church:

So morality is determined by popular vote?

 

[Thorolfr]

So morality is determined by popular vote?

A popular vote guided by the Holy Spirit…

 

[catholic1seeks]

That’s right. And thus the OP clouds the question at hand whenever he talks about homosexual relationships which might not be sexual relationships.

I have made it abundantly clear what I am referring to.

A homosexual relationship simply implies that sexual activity is part of the relationship. That is what we are talking about here: A homosexual relationship that is a romantic one, one where two people want to share a life of love with each other. If I meant friendship, I would have said friendship.

At times in this thread, I have also made clear that such a relationship could possibly be embraced as a pastoral solution if those two persons decided not incorporate sexual activity. They would still have a relationship in a “romantic sense” – they would not be mere friends. They still want to share a life of love in mutual support and commitment.

 

[catholic1seeks]

Consummation IS required.

Can. 1061 §1. A valid marriage between the baptized is called ratum tantum if it has not been consummated; it is called ratum et consummatum if the spouses have performed between themselves in a human fashion a conjugal act which is suitable in itself for the procreation of offspring, to which marriage is ordered by its nature and by which the spouses become one flesh.

Without consummation, a Catholic marriage is invalid. Therefore any couple who intends to NOT have sex…would be entering into an invalid marriage.

A homosexual couple, by extension, cannot consummate a Catholic marriage and therefore cannot be validly married.

Let’s put this to bed…

You are mistaken.

**But what about those who choose a pure Josephite marriage? What about virgins who marry with the intent of never consummating the marriage? **The status of their valid marriages is clear under canon law.

When is a couple really married? When they give consent during the wedding: “The consent of the parties, legitimately manifested between persons quali-fied by law, makes marriage.” When vows are exchanged a couple is married. They are not in some state of limbo prior to consumation, they really are married.

See more at: catholic.nowealthbutlife.com/valid-consummated/#sthash.gwfdGwBs.dpuf

 

[estesbob]

A popular vote guided by the Holy Spirit…

Then the Holy Spirit must be the Roman god Pan who delights in tricking people.

 

[catholic1seeks]

So even if Joseph and Mary had been subject to Catholic canon law, they would still be considered to have a valid marriage even without consummation if they did not seek to dissolve it.

I find it odd that, if consummation was required for a valid marriage (which it is not), Mary and Joseph would have been exempt simply because they were not Catholic at the time. I thought we are talking about a definition of marriage that is universal and pertinent to all cultures, no?

 

[catholic1seeks]

As a Lutheran, you have no say as to what a valid marriage is in the Catholic Church. If your Church is OK with same sex “marriage”, that is its problem.

Thoroflr,

I am sorry it seems that people on here are especially harsh on you – just because you are Lutheran. It is unfortunate there is this attitude on this thread and others. But please, being Lutheran has nothing to do with whether or not you can speak for or express what the Catholic Church teaches. You can.

 

[catholic1seeks]

I cannot believe you just mocked the Blessed Virgin Mary in a Catholic forum . How very very disgusting. You should be ashamed of yourself

How in the world did Thoroflr mock the Blessed Virgin Mary? How is using her marriage as an example of a marriage that existed without consummation disgusting???

 

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

This is actually not true. As the website, “Canon Law Made Easy,” points out, a marriage which is ratum sed non consummatum (ratified but not consummated) is still a valid marriage in the eyes of the Church although not an indissoluble one:

Remember, Thorofr we are not talking about ratum sed non consummatum.

This is a marriage in which, after the wedding, one or both of the couples discovers that they are physically incapable consummating the marriage.

So even if Joseph and Mary had been subject to Catholic canon law, they would still be considered to have a valid marriage even without consummation if they did not seek to dissolve it.

…if they were physically incapable consummating the marriage.

 

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

It’s not a question of having no fear of God. I was just making a point that Zoltan is mistaken to say that a marriage in the Catholic Church must be consummated for it to be a valid marriage in the eyes of the Church.

Zoltan is mistaken…???

 

[Zoltan_Cobalt]

I never said I did. But I can read about Catholic canon law and point out what it has to say about what makes a valid marriage in the Catholic Church. Even Lutherans can do that.

Lutherans can read, but obviously have no understanding of Canon Law.