United Church of Christ Endorses Same Sex Marriage

  • Thread starter Thread starter justcatholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
TPJCatholic:
JKirk,

Now. either the Catholic faith is the full faith, or it is not. If it is the full faith, and if Jesus did give us that full faith, then every person on earth (including the continuing revolters known as Protestants) should be Catholic.

If everyone should be Catholic, then how are we helping that scenario by basically saying Protestants and other people of other faiths hold the truth(s) as well? I know the Catechism, I also know that the Church does not equate the religions…yet the net impact of what the Church currently teaches is that many people walk away feeling as if all faiths hold divine truths that can save and that all faiths are more or less equal to each other (example: scientology is more or less equal to the Roman Catholic faith).

I think it is important to recall that the current statements by the Church in the Catechism has NOT always been the spoken teaching of the Church…one can wonder why suddenly all other faiths have been elevated, or the Catholic faith has been lowered.

That is a very real problem with the notion of ever hoping for unity.
Click to expand...
I don’t think that it is a question of lowering or raising. What they have (elements of sanctification, “means of salvation,” etc.) are derived “from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church.” The Church’s teachings can be clarified. Should everyone become Catholic? Of course! Does not belonging formally to the Catholic Church mean you aren’t a Christian? Not according to the Catechism. Does it mean you’re headed for hell? Well, I know many genuinely holy Protestants that I do not believe (not know, but believe) are not going to hell. All I can say is that the safest place is in the Barque of Peter. But you mentioned the Scientologists. Surely we distinguish between these bizarre cults and our brethren who share Trinitarian Baptism and devotion to the Trinity, even as we distinguish between Protestants and the Orthodox, who hold the same valid orders as our bishops, priests, and deacons, and who celebrate the same sacraments as we do. As for the Catechism verses what’s come before, well, as I said, teaching can be clarified. When he promulgated it, Pope John Paul II called it a “sure norm for teaching the faith.”

As time passes, it will, of course, be possible for these ecclesial communities to depart further from the “faith once given.” I believe that we are seeing that now, in the Episcopal Church and now the UCC. It may be that with these ecclesial communities, we have nothing further to discuss, beyond acts of charity we can practice in common. As for unity, I quite agree, I don’t see what we are supposed to give over. The papacy? Hardly. It may be exercised differently (in the case of the Orthodox, we may well leave them to govern themselves with the Holy Father as a court of final appeal), but obviously it is essential, if we have interpreted the Petrine Covenant correctly.
 
40.png
TPJCatholic:
Lisa,

You might want to go here: ucc.org/faith/index.html

That link will give you a very good idea of what the UCC believes.
Click to expand...
Or don’t believe
The UCC has roots in the “covenantal” tradition—meaning there is no centralized authority or hierarchy that can impose any doctrine or form of worship on its members…>>>>>>

So it sounds like you can believe or not believe anything you choose. While they make some reference to the Bible being the word of God they don’t seem to take it too seriously.

I have several friends who were fellow board members of a local homeless shelter. Nice as could be but to them the church was more of a place for political activism than worship. So the recent decision doesn’t surprise me, nor does it surprise me that instead of looking to some kind of authority for the position taken, they simply voted. Good grief!

Lisa N
 
Your resident Methodist has to say: I am not that surprised. I am saddened, I am outraged, but I am not surprised. The UCC has for many years been drifting in the direction that has led them to this pass. They have a bunch of things that are “suggested” for belief, but there is no problem with them, if you don’t believe, & no problem if you don’t believe anything…They have no central teaching, really, but they also regard the Bible in the same light–as an historical relic, no more…The “Unitarians Considering Christ” is a pretty accurate description…
Which leads me to my next thought: there are no doubt good Christian people who are a part of this church who need our prayers…There are a lot of people everywhere who need our prayers, not least those who may be,because of this sort of thing, be decieved into thinking that their sinful behaviour is somehow OK…This is what happens when we let our pity overwhelm our Christian compassion: we end up spiritually hurting the very ones we are meant to call to repentance…
 
40.png
JKirkLVNV:
I don’t think that it is a question of lowering or raising. What they have (elements of sanctification, “means of salvation,” etc.) are derived “from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church.” The Church’s teachings can be clarified. Should everyone become Catholic? Of course! Does not belonging formally to the Catholic Church mean you aren’t a Christian? Not according to the Catechism. Does it mean you’re headed for hell? Well, I know many genuinely holy Protestants that I do not believe (not know, but believe) are not going to hell. All I can say is that the safest place is in the Barque of Peter. But you mentioned the Scientologists. Surely we distinguish between these bizarre cults and our brethren who share Trinitarian Baptism and devotion to the Trinity, even as we distinguish between Protestants and the Orthodox, who hold the same valid orders as our bishops, priests, and deacons, and who celebrate the same sacraments as we do. As for the Catechism verses what’s come before, well, as I said, teaching can be clarified. When he promulgated it, Pope John Paul II called it a “sure norm for teaching the faith.”

As time passes, it will, of course, be possible for these ecclesial communities to depart further from the “faith once given.” I believe that we are seeing that now, in the Episcopal Church and now the UCC. It may be that with these ecclesial communities, we have nothing further to discuss, beyond acts of charity we can practice in common. As for unity, I quite agree, I don’t see what we are supposed to give over. The papacy? Hardly. It may be exercised differently (in the case of the Orthodox, we may well leave them to govern themselves with the Holy Father as a court of final appeal), but obviously it is essential, if we have interpreted the Petrine Covenant correctly.
Click to expand...
It’s like the Pope, you know, he said all grace flows from the Holy Mother Church, then they get grace too so we can’t be that hard on them, because they have grace in their life too. They have grace and maybe we have more grace or something and that’s not the same thing as saying we are lower or they are higher stuff.
 
jkirk,

The statements in the Catechism regarding other faiths has not always been the position of the Church. There were many statements through history that condemned anyone who said a person is not required to be a Catholic, yet in today’s Church it seems fully acceptable to not be Catholic.

I agree with nearly all you wrote…I will only say that we cannot create desire in the hearts of people from other faiths if we tell them they do not need to be Catholic (which is essentially what the Catechism implies). It is either the truth that all people should be Catholic, or else all faiths can lead a person towards salvation (albeit, perhaps less fully or safely). If all faiths can lead a person to salvation, then there is not impetus for a Protestant/Jew, etc. to become Catholic.

I think we need to remember that Jesus said the path to life is narrow, and the path to destruction is wide. As Roman Catholics we need to personally discern the path “we” are on, yet we should also be concerned about the path all humanity is on.
 
Lisa,

I agree, my point is the UCC claims to follow the true faith…they do not imo, but they make that claim.
 
Lisa N:
I’m not jkirk but I’ll respond. The UCC is not Christ centered despite their name. The term “Unitarians Considering Christ” is a good description. While both Unitarians and UCC’s admire Jesus and accept some of his teachings, they do not necessarily see him as divine or God and Savior. I don’t know if they really consider themselves Christians based on your definitions.

The UCC is a church trying to find itself. As so many have commented on this forum, as the various Protestant groups splinter and break apart over various issues, they lose their reason for being. It’s a very liberal, socially active group, long on passion and short on theology.

Lisa N
Click to expand...
So, please, clear something up for me. This thread is about the UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST, which is apparently not the CHURCH OF CHRIST. I follow so far. Then all of a sudden the “Unitarians Considering Chirst” enter the discussion. Is someone just trying to be cute and refering to the UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST as “Unitarians Considering Chirst” or are they different orgainizations? If you’re using slang, be a little more clear about it. Also, you might want to be sure it follows the rules of the forums.
 
Jabronie,

What did Lisa say that was objectionable in your opinion?
 
40.png
TPJCatholic:
Jabronie,

What did Lisa say that was objectionable in your opinion?
Click to expand...
Nothing objectionable. I’m just confused. Are we talking about the UCC or the Unitarians? Or are they the same?
 
40.png
TPJCatholic:
jkirk,

The statements in the Catechism regarding other faiths has not always been the position of the Church. There were many statements through history that condemned anyone who said a person is not required to be a Catholic, yet in today’s Church it seems fully acceptable to not be Catholic.

I agree with nearly all you wrote…I will only say that we cannot create desire in the hearts of people from other faiths if we tell them they do not need to be Catholic (which is essentially what the Catechism implies). It is either the truth that all people should be Catholic, or else all faiths can lead a person towards salvation (albeit, perhaps less fully or safely). If all faiths can lead a person to salvation, then there is not impetus for a Protestant/Jew, etc. to become Catholic.

I think we need to remember that Jesus said the path to life is narrow, and the path to destruction is wide. As Roman Catholics we need to personally discern the path “we” are on, yet we should also be concerned about the path all humanity is on.
Click to expand...
I don’t think the Catechism implies anything…I think it trumpets it! I must, however, respectfully disagree with your assessment about what draws people to the Catholic Church. I don’t know anyone who converted because they were threatened with hell, but I know lots of people who converted because of the sheer and overwhelming evidence of the truth of the claims which Holy Mother Church makes about Herself (in my own instance, I was a Catholic long before I was a Catholic). Her depth, Her breadth, Her height, Her dignity, Her love, Her compassion, and Her Truth are far more than sufficient to draw people to Her. And Her Lord! Well, we are promised by Jesus, “If I be lifted up, I will draw all men unto myself.” I think if we faithfully do this, then those around us will come to Him and to His Bride.

Please, make no mistake, the statements I quoted from the Catechism do not mean that there is nothing wanting in the faith communities of our sep. brethren. Domine Jesus cleared up any misunderstanding on that score. They are deficient. I assume the gravity of the deficiency varies, as we’ve seen this week. The ECUSA and the UCC have moved further away and into graver deficiency, ie. “rougher water” than, say, the Southern Baptists or the Missouri Synod Lutherans (who would probably be appalled that a Catholic had anything good to say about them, but, hey, they’re not attempting to sanctify gay “marriage.”). I also do not buy into any sort of ecumenism that attempts a “well, here’s what we can let go of, what can you let go of?” Unity is something Christ’s Church already has in its fullness. Let us pray for our brothers and sisters in all their degrees of seperation, that all may be united under the Servant of the Servants of God.
 
JKIrk,

I know what the Catechism says, which is precisely my point. If you read the teaches of the Church through history, it was a condemnable offense for a person to say that people were not required to be Catholic…one could be excommunicated teaching such things…yet the Catechism appears to be opposed to Church history on this matter.

I agree, people do not convert under the threat of going to hell…I never said that was the way. What I am saying is that the Church must proclaimed boldly and loudly that there is on true faith…and that ALL people who desire salvation will be the safest in the Ark of Holy Mother Church. IMO, the Church is encouraging people to NOT become Catholic.
 
40.png
TPJCatholic:
JKIrk,

I know what the Catechism says, which is precisely my point. If you read the teaches of the Church through history, it was a condemnable offense for a person to say that people were not required to be Catholic…one could be excommunicated teaching such things**…yet the Catechism appears to be opposed to Church history on this matter. **

I agree, people do not convert under the threat of going to hell…I never said that was the way. What I am saying is that the Church must proclaimed boldly and loudly that there is on true faith…and that ALL people who desire salvation will be the safest in the Ark of Holy Mother Church. IMO, the Church is encouraging people to NOT become Catholic.
Click to expand...
I think that the key to this is to remember that Church teaching can be clarified (in fact, this is, admittedly, the ONLY way I can reconcile the two!). The Catechism serves to clarify who is in and who isn’t, ie, that line about “certain, though imperfect” union with the Catholic Church. We cannot pitch the Catechism any more than we can pitch EENS. We have to find the point of reconcilliation in the two. I think the Catechism manages it ably and frankly, I’m comforted by it, as I’m the only Catholic in a family of committed Protestants.
 
jkirk,

I applaud the fact that you stand happily as a Catholic in a family of Protestants. I stand in a very large family of aetheists and fallen away Catholics…

Keep in mind that not everything in the Catechism is founded on infallible teachings. I do not see how the Church can think one thing up until the 1960s and then suddenly change that in the last 30-40 years. IMO, the Church properly teaches that no person can say with absolute certainty who God will save…so all people on earth have at least a small hope of receiving salvation. However, the Church (imo) is supposed to teach that the safest and surest route to Heaven is to be tucked safely in the Ark of Holy Mother Church. Anything outside that Ark is far less safe, though not impossibily so. IMO, the current Church is NOT doing a very good job of enticing people into that Ark.
 
40.png
TPJCatholic:
IMO, the current Church is NOT doing a very good job of enticing people into that Ark.
Click to expand...
No argument from me. In Africa and Asia, it’s a different story, but in the tired, jaded, far-too-sophisticated-for-its-own-good West (Europe and North America), you are correct. Some of our bishops and priests seem far too worried about offending people than they are about “preaching Christ and Him Crucified.” I trust that will change as more and more of the “new orthodox” rise up and are ordained. HHPBXVI has said that he is most worried about this secularism in esp. Western Europe. Let’s hope his papacy will help to turn the tide against the latest trend of nicey-nice psychobabble which will eventually show its teeth against the Church in these country as is happening in Canada. Which takes us in a big circle back to the original topic. As Lisa N observed, these ecclesial communities that are making accomodations with the spirit of the age are hemoraging their members right and left. I can hardly think of what we have to say to them in ecumeniacal talks or with the Anglican Communion outside a few North American pockets and the Southern Hemisphere.
 
40.png
TPJCatholic:
jkirk,

I applaud the fact that you stand happily as a Catholic in a family of Protestants. I stand in a very large family of aetheists and fallen away Catholics…

Keep in mind that not everything in the Catechism is founded on infallible teachings. I do not see how the Church can think one thing up until the 1960s and then suddenly change that in the last 30-40 years. IMO, the Church properly teaches that no person can say with absolute certainty who God will save…so all people on earth have at least a small hope of receiving salvation. However, the Church (imo) is supposed to teach that the safest and surest route to Heaven is to be tucked safely in the Ark of Holy Mother Church. Anything outside that Ark is far less safe, though not impossibily so. IMO, the current Church is NOT doing a very good job of enticing people into that Ark.
Click to expand...
I thank you for your kind remarks. I must respectfully disagree a bit with you. I think the wording used by HHJPII, in his intent to promulgate the Catechism, does render it protected by the Holy Spirit. He was not speaking as a private person, or even a private theologian, when he said it was a “sure norm” for teaching the faith. He promulgated it as Pope and he promulgated it for the whole of the Church and it is a document most definitely concerned with faith and morals as opposed to merely order. That’s why we HAVE to reconcile the passages I cited with EENS, for example. At the very least, it cannot be said to teach error at all. Can it be abused or misinterpreted so as to lead to indifferentism? I certainly think it has in this country. It does, however, mean at least what its words say it means (I ripped that off from Bolt’s A Man for All Seasons).

As for the job the Church is doing in terms of evangelism, no argument from me. In Africa and Asia, it’s a different story, but in the tired, jaded, far-too-sophisticated-for-its-own-good West (Europe and North America), you are correct. Some of our bishops and priests seem far too worried about offending people than they are about “preaching Christ and Him Crucified.” I trust that will change as more and more of the “new orthodox” rise up and are ordained. HHPBXVI has said that he is most worried about this secularism in esp. Western Europe. Let’s hope his papacy will help to turn the tide against the latest trend of nicey-nice psychobabble which will eventually show its teeth against the Church in this country as is happening in Canada. Which takes us in a big circle back to the original topic. As Lisa N observed, these ecclesial communities that are making accomodations with the spirit of the age are hemoraging their members right and left. I can hardly think of what we have to say to them in ecumeniacal talks, or with the Anglican Communion outside a few North American pockets and the Southern Hemisphere.
 
40.png
Jabronie:
So, please, clear something up for me. This thread is about the UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST, which is apparently not the CHURCH OF CHRIST. I follow so far. Then all of a sudden the “Unitarians Considering Chirst” enter the discussion. Is someone just trying to be cute and refering to the UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST as “Unitarians Considering Chirst” or are they different orgainizations? If you’re using slang, be a little more clear about it. Also, you might want to be sure it follows the rules of the forums.
Click to expand...
Sorry Unitarians Considering Christ (UCC) is a joke, one that an Episcopal told me and they have their own set of issues. At any rate my atheist parents would allow us to attend a Unitarian Church and UCC was OK too so they are perhaps both at the liberal end of the Christian tradition As several have suggested, calling the United Church of Christ the Unitarians Considering Christ is not that far off the mark.

Lisa N
 
40.png
justcatholic:
I couldn’t believe my eyes, today, as I read the front page of my newspaper this morning. The United Church of Christ Synod has formerly endorsed same sex marriage. And by a whopping 80 % vote! :eek:

First it was the Anglicans and now the Church of Christ. Will more denominations follow in the same path out of fear of civil suits? And what of our church? Will she someday allow same sex marriage as well? I tell you, churches in America have hit rock bottom in being apathetic to the immorality being allowed and not forcefully speaking out.
Click to expand...
Another sad chapter in Protestant disintegrstion.

www.veritas-catholic.blogspot.com
 
Lisa N:
Sorry Unitarians Considering Christ (UCC) is a joke, one that an Episcopal told me and they have their own set of issues. At any rate my atheist parents would allow us to attend a Unitarian Church and UCC was OK too so they are perhaps both at the liberal end of the Christian tradition As several have suggested, calling the United Church of Christ the Unitarians Considering Christ is not that far off the mark.

Lisa N
Click to expand...
Makes sense to me 🙂
 
Jkirk,

I agree, the Catechism is a sure norm. I also hope that a new breed of Priest and Bishop takes hold.

I think the topic centering on the need for people to be in the Catholic Church would take a very long thread, and it is likely not appropriate here. 🙂

If you are interested, start a thread and I will join. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top