Thy Word Our Law?

The Pope has endorsed same-sex civil unions.
Okay, now, on one level, at least he didn’t endorse same-sex “weddings”.  But you Papists:  show me any support, or even tolerance,  in the Bible—any at all—for homosexuality.
Take your time.

5+
avataravataravataravataravatar

81 thoughts on “Thy Word Our Law?”

  1. Oh, and being insulting with Catholics only works one way. I am insulting to them when I question the paganism of putting body parts into alters, but they are not insulting for saying my marriage does not count. I am not allowed to take offense at that.

    0

  2. If we’re going to play the blame game, there’s plenty of that to go around. I’ve been told by some Protestants that I’m not really a Christian or an American and that I worship statues.

    All false.

    But I don’t go around blaming the entirety of Protestantism for that.

    3+
    avataravataravatar
  3. Bryan G. Stephens:
    Sorry, Gang,  but I have had Catholics tell me my marriage is invalid because it was not done by a Catholic priest in front of an alter with a piece of a dead body in it. Please don’t try to tell me the ways of a 1000 years ago are over when the magic of a Saint’s body is being invoked to tell me God does not believe in my Marriage.

    Bryan, the Orthodox (and I’m sure the Catholics) don’t place a relic of a Saint in the altar because we believe it’s “magic.” We do believe it helps consecrate the altar, but the main reason is this: when the Romans persecuted the early Church, Christians celebrated the Divine Liturgy in the catacombs, and used the tombs of martyrs as altars.* We place bodily relics in the altar to remind us of those days.

    And I’ll note that the altar functiond perfectly well without the relics. Before my parish’s new building was consecrated, we still held the mysteries of the Divine Liturgy, Marriage, Funeral and Memorial Service, etc. Our bishop never said any of these were “invalid” because the building and altar had not yet been consecrated.

    *Nota Bene: I know there is disagreement among historians as to whether this actually happened. Nevertheless, it’s the Sacred Tradition of the Orthodox Church.

    4+
    avataravataravataravatar
  4. Mike LaRoche:
    If we’re going to play the blame game, there’s plenty of that to go around. I’ve been told by some Protestants that I’m not really a Christian or an American and that I worship statues.

    All false.

    But I don’t go around blaming the entirety of Protestantism for that.

    I explicitly took the approach that we were all Christians. It turns out, most of the Catholics I talked were not sure. I have spent 50 years with Protestants who think as I. This is a case of familiarity breeding contempt.  I cannot unread what I read.

    0

  5. “There are not one hundred people in the United States who hate the Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they wrongly perceive the Catholic Church to be.” — Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen

    4+
    avataravataravataravatar
  6. MJBubba:
    I think all the participants here can remember a handful of memorable posts at R>, which led to the Management telling us to knock it off with the Reformation.

    One of the difficulties there, and since then in my broader internet experience, is the problem of conflation.  Catholics tend to want to tar all Protestants with one brush, in which the Errors of Liberal Baptists are attributed to all Protestants.  Likewise, I have learned that Catholics do not speak with one voice, and that there are many orthodox Catholics who dissent from this or that teaching of the Church of Rome.

    And I have seen ill will expressed from both sides, or all the various sides.  I have experienced the same hostility that Bryan G.S. describes.  From both Catholics and Baptists, since, as a Lutheran, I have doctrinal differences on both fronts.

    On the whole it helps to have friends in multiple Christian communities who are willing to dive into doctrinal weeds.  ‘Iron sharpens iron’ and all that.

    Right I will remind all here that I have called Bubba my priest who is more than worthy of handing out Communion to me. The important thing is he is a Holy man not that he is Catholic. If that makes me a heretic then burn me at the stake.

    2+
    avataravatar
  7. Robert A. McReynolds:

    MJBubba:

    On the whole it helps to have friends in multiple Christian communities who are willing to dive into doctrinal weeds.  ‘Iron sharpens iron’ and all that.

    Right I will remind all here that I have called Bubba my priest who is more than worthy of handing out Communion to me. The important thing is he is a Holy man not that he is Catholic. If that makes me a heretic then burn me at the stake.

    Robert, I appreciated your remark.  And it is clear that I am more Catholic than the Pope.

    But I am not ordained, even in a schismatic church.  I am an Elder, and assist with the Eucharist in my own church.   My LC–MS church practices a Eucharist that features the Doctrine of Real Presence, so our teaching on that particular is closer to your interpretation than it is to the Baptists.

    Nevertheless, don’t let your priest hear you saying such things.  You might hurt his feelings.

    2+
    avataravatar
  8. Bryan G. Stephens:

    Mike LaRoche:
    If we’re going to play the blame game, there’s plenty of that to go around. I’ve been told by some Protestants that I’m not really a Christian or an American and that I worship statues.

    All false.

    But I don’t go around blaming the entirety of Protestantism for that.

    I explicitly took the approach that we were all Christians. It turns out, most of the Catholics I talked were not sure. I have spent 50 years with Protestants who think as I. This is a case of familiarity breeding contempt.  I cannot unread what I read.

    There are Catholics who spend time on Catholic websites and consume Catholic podcasts that grind anti-Protestant axes.  They then take the anti-Protestant memes into social media to do battle against the “Enemies of God,” having been taught that schism is the “spirit of antiChrist.”

    There are Protestants who spend time on Protestant websites and consume Protestant podcasts that grind anti-Catholic axes.  They then take the anti-Catholic memes into social media to do battle against the “Enemies of God,” having been taught that Papism is the “spirit of antiChrist.”

    I think both extremes are in error.

    And, it is unfair to attribute to ordinary adherents of either side the vitriol that is dished out by the extremists in their camp.

    It is fair to examine the official teachings that any church pronounces.

    The problem is that Christians don’t all agree as to the appropriate Authority.

    Protestants generally claim to hold to “sola Scriptura,” but it is clear that many Protestant denominations have added to the Scriptures.

    Catholics have the Magisterium for their Authority.  The Magisterium consists of the Pope together will all the Cardinals and Bishops, plus a select group of theologians.  The Magisterium is charged with interpreting Scripture and Sacred Tradition.   Some elements of Catholic Sacred Tradition go beyond what is contained in Scripture.  Some Protestants say that some elements of Catholic Sacred Tradition contradict Scripture.

    These doctrinal differences are insoluble due to the differing views of Authority.

    (Also, there are straddle positions.  For example, the Anglicans (yes, including those heretical Episcopalians as well as orthodox Anglicans) and Methodists say they base their teachings on Scripture and Tradition and Reason.  There are differences of opinion among both Anglicans and Methodists, so, if you really want to know where any particular Anglican or Methodist comes down on any particular doctrine, you have to play “twenty questions.”)

    2+
    avataravatar
  9. Mike LaRoche:
    “There are not one hundred people in the United States who hate the Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they wrongly perceive the Catholic Church to be.”

    — Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen

    This is the crux of some of my old disputes (six or seven years ago) at R>.  There were a lot of misperceptions on both sides.  A lot of that derived from conflations, which were due to lazy partisans who did not bother to ascertain the actual positions of their opponents.

    1+
    avatar
  10. To the point of Hypatia’s Original Post, 25 years ago or so I had come around to the position of supporting civil unions.  Not because I accept them, but because the persons involved in Same-sex “marriages” deserved some measure of legal protection, and because I perceived civil unions as a strategy to avoid full embrace of “Same-sex Marriage.”

    I (and others) were unsuccessful in persuading other conservatives into going along with us, and the result was disastrous.

    To the point of civil unions, though, there are majority Catholic countries that still could enact civil unions.  That would be a good thing.   If that is what Pope Francis is saying, then he is making a political observation and not a doctrinal statement.

    3+
    avataravataravatar
  11. danok1:
    *Nota Bene: I know there is disagreement among historians as to whether this actually happened. Nevertheless, it’s the Sacred Tradition of the Orthodox Church.

    That is just one sort of problem that Protestants have complained about when discussing Catholic Sacred Tradition.

    1+
    avatar
  12. Robert A. McReynolds:

    MJBubba:
    I think all the participants here can remember a handful of memorable posts at R>, which led to the Management telling us to knock it off with the Reformation.

    One of the difficulties there, and since then in my broader internet experience, is the problem of conflation.  Catholics tend to want to tar all Protestants with one brush, in which the Errors of Liberal Baptists are attributed to all Protestants.  Likewise, I have learned that Catholics do not speak with one voice, and that there are many orthodox Catholics who dissent from this or that teaching of the Church of Rome.

    And I have seen ill will expressed from both sides, or all the various sides.  I have experienced the same hostility that Bryan G.S. describes.  From both Catholics and Baptists, since, as a Lutheran, I have doctrinal differences on both fronts.

    On the whole it helps to have friends in multiple Christian communities who are willing to dive into doctrinal weeds.  ‘Iron sharpens iron’ and all that.

    Right I will remind all here that I have called Bubba my priest who is more than worthy of handing out Communion to me. The important thing is he is a Holy man not that he is Catholic. If that makes me a heretic then burn me at the stake.

    Now THERE speaks an American!  Ya think they wouldn’t?   We may come to that again, times of plague are notorious for bringing out the religious fanatics.

    3+
    avataravataravatar
  13. Raymond Solar:
    “Also, go for it. Make fun of me. That is going to change my mind.”

    No changing is attempted.  Clear that you have all the knowledge you need.

    Knowledge.

    That is a key issue.  Look for my post tomorrow.

    0

  14. Raymond Solar:

    Bryan G. Stephens:

    “It is believable because the current Pope is a Leftist Commie. I am sure he believes it”

    And you are the latest entry in the “Media Sucker” column.  Thanks for playing!  Make sure you denounce Trump the next time CNN says so, because it must be true–the Media said so.

    Oh, I think Pope Francis has said plenty that indicate he favors Communism as an economic system.  His many ambiguous statements make it impossible to say more than that.

    But his many criticisms of Capitalism are telling.

    It is clear that the Argentine Bergoglio has a very defective understanding of capitalism.  Every criticism he levels at capitalism indicate that, when he says “capitalism,” he means “Peronist crony capitalism.”  He clearly has no understanding of how capitalism works in the Anglosphere, and it is also clear that he accepts and believes the deceitful characterizations of American capitalism that he sees in anti-American mass media.

    So, yeah, the Pope is a Commie.

    2+
    avataravatar
  15. MJBubba:
    To the point of Hypatia’s Original Post, 25 years ago or so I had come around to the position of supporting civil unions.  Not because I accept them, but because the persons involved in Same-sex “marriages” deserved some measure of legal protection, and because I perceived civil unions as a strategy to avoid full embrace of “Same-sex Marriage.”

    I (and others) were unsuccessful in persuading other conservatives into going along with us, and the result was disastrous.

    To the point of civil unions, though, there are majority Catholic countries that still could enact civil unions.  That would be a good thing.   If that is what Pope Francis is saying, then he is making a political observation and not a doctrinal statement.

    I’ve probably told Ratty this before: what the court shoulda done with obergefell  was say: we ( the government) are OUT of the wedding business.  From now on ,whether or not any two taxpayers file as a “domestic partnership” will determine how we tax them and whether they can visit each other in the ICU and claim each other’s dead bodies.  You want a wedding ceremony?  Lobby your denomination.

    That we still give civil recognition to ANY religious ceremonies, including weddings, is anachronistic.  What if we said we won’t recognize any child as a citizen until someone has dribbled some kinda liquid on its head? Oh, it doesn’t have to be in church, you can do it in the fountain outside City Hall, but until you return an affidavit that it has been done, our government does not record or recognize the birth?  Or what if we wouldn’t let anyone’s estate be distributed until some kinda speech has been made over the remains?  Doesn’t have to be a prayer, but we require proof of some kinda “solemnization”.  It’s archaic, and so is the solemnization requirement for marriage.
    But as I’ve probably pointed out, the one and only place in my state’s statutes where the word “holy” is used in an unqualified sense is in the phrase “holy matrimony”.  Traditionalist were desperate to keep that hallowedness for themselves, and gays were desperate to get it for themselves.

    2+
    avataravatar
  16. I used to support civil unions as a matter of practicality, but it is surprising to hear coming from the Pope. I also doubt now that they would work anywhere to preserve the legal institution of natural family based marriage. The move for marriage redefinition was not rooted in practicality, it was rooted in resentment and aggressive destructiveness- much like BLM and Antifa.

    Obergefell did accomplish your wish, Hypatia. The government got out of the marriage business and instituted civil unions instead. They just kept the name. The new institution arbitrarily excludes many people from participation but those people don’t have a political voice, or perhaps they don’t care.

    There is plenty of valid non- “religious” reason to treat opposite sex intimate relationships differently in law than same sex intimate relationships. That was never discussed honestly or logically before Obergefell and at this point it never will be. I was married in a civil ceremony only and the two genders required by law at the time were integral to the meaning and purpose of my marriage. They were not an incidental artifact of bigotry against homosexuals. Obergefell actually reversed the meaning and purpose of marriage. It not only instituted civil unions, it erased natural family marriage from law…and not by accident.

    Some gays  indeed yearned to have their  relationships blessed by law as holy.  They didn’t get that.  They got marriage with no moral meaning and nearly no social meaning – they got civil union.  Apparently as long as that’s all that’s available to opposite sex couples too, it’s good enough.

    4+
    avataravataravataravatar
  17. Bryan G. Stephens:

    MJBubba:

    Hypatia:
    the heresy of “Americanism”?

    The quintessentially American quality of individualism brought into religion, in which every person is expected to “roll their own” religion, adopting or discarding elements of doctrine as if selecting a wardrobe.

    Yes; this way of thinking fueled a multiplicity of Protestant churches, heretical churches, and launched a number of “movements” within Catholicism.

    In a way it is bad, because it Balkanizes Christians.  In a way it is good, because it encourages everyone to examine what they believe.

    We see America as a spiritual marketplace.

    If you want the spiritual marketplace of America to continue to be “free market” you have to vote for Donald Trump.  The Anti-America party opposes religious liberty and would soon empower the thought police to start putting priests and pastors in jail.

    Pretty sure it is Catholic to say I am headed to Hell for this, because I DARE to think I might have a direct relationship with Him and figure things out for myself.

    You know Bryan it cuts both ways. I’ve been told by many Protestants that I’m going to hell. That Catholics aren’t really Christians or that my faith is an abomination. Or that all priests are child molesters and how I can support a church full of perverts. Even more traditional Catholics can get pretty nasty about the New order of the mass. I don’t get a bug up my butt about it, or paint Protestants with a broad brush. Just because some Catholics said some uncharitable things to you, that isn’t all of them . Also Catholics do believe marriage is a sacrament, merely pointing that out is a form or evangelization and you can take it or leave it but if we are told to spread the good news than that is what they are doing. Could people be nicer about it? Sure, but like I said before I’ve gotten really nasty comments from Protestants but I don’t really care.

    2+
    avataravatar
  18. In my opinion, a government that has the power to change the definition of marriage, is a government who has way too much power. The government never defined marriage in the first place and has no right to change that definition. This is the main problem cause now the state is also changing the definition of man and woman. We are in dangerous territory

    1+
    avatar
  19. Mate De:

    Bryan G. Stephens:

    MJBubba:

    Hypatia:
    the heresy of “Americanism”?

    The quintessentially American quality of individualism brought into religion, in which every person is expected to “roll their own” religion, adopting or discarding elements of doctrine as if selecting a wardrobe.

    Yes; this way of thinking fueled a multiplicity of Protestant churches, heretical churches, and launched a number of “movements” within Catholicism.

    In a way it is bad, because it Balkanizes Christians.  In a way it is good, because it encourages everyone to examine what they believe.

    We see America as a spiritual marketplace.

    If you want the spiritual marketplace of America to continue to be “free market” you have to vote for Donald Trump.  The Anti-America party opposes religious liberty and would soon empower the thought police to start putting priests and pastors in jail.

    Pretty sure it is Catholic to say I am headed to Hell for this, because I DARE to think I might have a direct relationship with Him and figure things out for myself.

    You know Bryan it cuts both ways. I’ve been told by many Protestants that I’m going to hell. That Catholics aren’t really Christians or that my faith is an abomination. Or that all priests are child molesters and how I can support a church full of perverts. Even more traditional Catholics can get pretty nasty about the New order of the mass. I don’t get a bug up my butt about it, or paint Protestants with a broad brush. Just because some Catholics said some uncharitable things to you, that isn’t all of them . Also Catholics do believe marriage is a sacrament, merely pointing that out is a form or evangelization and you can take it or leave it but if we are told to spread the good news than that is what they are doing. Could people be nicer about it? Sure, but like I said before I’ve gotten really nasty comments from Protestants but I don’t really care.

    I came to the n discussion with the idea we were all Christians. It is very clear that is not the take of the your Church. It is mine.

    ButnI get it. This is another one of those times where I am not supposed to get offended.

    WhenI get to talk to God, I am going to ask him why other people were allowed to be offended but not Bryan.

    0

  20. Bryan G. Stephens:

    Mate De:

    Bryan G. Stephens:

    MJBubba:

    Hypatia:
    the heresy of “Americanism”?

    The quintessentially American quality of individualism brought into religion, in which every person is expected to “roll their own” religion, adopting or discarding elements of doctrine as if selecting a wardrobe.

    Yes; this way of thinking fueled a multiplicity of Protestant churches, heretical churches, and launched a number of “movements” within Catholicism.

    In a way it is bad, because it Balkanizes Christians.  In a way it is good, because it encourages everyone to examine what they believe.

    We see America as a spiritual marketplace.

    If you want the spiritual marketplace of America to continue to be “free market” you have to vote for Donald Trump.  The Anti-America party opposes religious liberty and would soon empower the thought police to start putting priests and pastors in jail.

    Pretty sure it is Catholic to say I am headed to Hell for this, because I DARE to think I might have a direct relationship with Him and figure things out for myself.

    You know Bryan it cuts both ways. I’ve been told by many Protestants that I’m going to hell. That Catholics aren’t really Christians or that my faith is an abomination. Or that all priests are child molesters and how I can support a church full of perverts. Even more traditional Catholics can get pretty nasty about the New order of the mass. I don’t get a bug up my butt about it, or paint Protestants with a broad brush. Just because some Catholics said some uncharitable things to you, that isn’t all of them . Also Catholics do believe marriage is a sacrament, merely pointing that out is a form or evangelization and you can take it or leave it but if we are told to spread the good news than that is what they are doing. Could people be nicer about it? Sure, but like I said before I’ve gotten really nasty comments from Protestants but I don’t really care.

    I came to the n discussion with the idea we were all Christians. It is very clear that is not the take of the your Church. It is mine.

    ButnI get it. This is another one of those times where I am not supposed to get offended.

    WhenI get to talk to God, I am going to ask him why other people were allowed to be offended but not Bryan.

    I didn’t see anyone say you aren’t allowed to get offended. I tend not to get offended by much but that is just me, but everyone is allowed to be offended.

    2+
    avataravatar
  21. Mate De:

    Bryan G. Stephens:

    Mate De:

    Bryan G. Stephens:

    MJBubba:

    Hypatia:
    the heresy of “Americanism”?

    The quintessentially American quality of individualism brought into religion, in which every person is expected to “roll their own” religion, adopting or discarding elements of doctrine as if selecting a wardrobe.

    Yes; this way of thinking fueled a multiplicity of Protestant churches, heretical churches, and launched a number of “movements” within Catholicism.

    In a way it is bad, because it Balkanizes Christians.  In a way it is good, because it encourages everyone to examine what they believe.

    We see America as a spiritual marketplace.

    If you want the spiritual marketplace of America to continue to be “free market” you have to vote for Donald Trump.  The Anti-America party opposes religious liberty and would soon empower the thought police to start putting priests and pastors in jail.

    Pretty sure it is Catholic to say I am headed to Hell for this, because I DARE to think I might have a direct relationship with Him and figure things out for myself.

    You know Bryan it cuts both ways. I’ve been told by many Protestants that I’m going to hell. That Catholics aren’t really Christians or that my faith is an abomination. Or that all priests are child molesters and how I can support a church full of perverts. Even more traditional Catholics can get pretty nasty about the New order of the mass. I don’t get a bug up my butt about it, or paint Protestants with a broad brush. Just because some Catholics said some uncharitable things to you, that isn’t all of them . Also Catholics do believe marriage is a sacrament, merely pointing that out is a form or evangelization and you can take it or leave it but if we are told to spread the good news than that is what they are doing. Could people be nicer about it? Sure, but like I said before I’ve gotten really nasty comments from Protestants but I don’t really care.

    I came to the n discussion with the idea we were all Christians. It is very clear that is not the take of the your Church. It is mine.

    ButnI get it. This is another one of those times where I am not supposed to get offended.

    WhenI get to talk to God, I am going to ask him why other people were allowed to be offended but not Bryan.

    I didn’t see anyone say you aren’t allowed to get offended. I tend not to get offended by much but that is just me, but everyone is allowed to be offended.

    I am not sure I understood just how angry the thread made me back then, and I discovering that now.

    I did not come as a hostile Protestant, but as a Christian saying that the Reformation helped the Church which needed it, and gave us more ways to understand God, so that the Faith was better overall. Basically, for that I was attacked like I was a heretic.

    Maybe the Catholics in the thread don’t care. Maybe they felt good about their defense of their faith. What they wrought, though, was a permanent change in my approach to all Catholics until I die. My wife was raised Catholic and it put her even more off Catholics. No doubt, it will impact my kids.

    But hey, those highly intelligent people at Ricochet who are Catholics, they got their “win” and sure put this heretic in his place.

    0

  22. Well, I’m sorry you felt attacked by the Catholics on Ricochet. If they were uncharitable then I am sorry for that. But it is interesting to make such a broad statement based on Some bad conversations. I mean, it’s like saying because the Westboro Baptist Church behave in an horrible way than ALL Christians are bad.  Or back in the 80’s with all the scandals involving televangelists, making those who are dubious of Christianity dig their heels in the point to them as a reason to not be Christian. Because all Christians are hypocrites. I’ve had horrible things said to me by my own brother who is Protestant, along with others because I remain Catholic but I hold no ill will. I actually credit him for forcing me to learn more about Catholicism and Protestantism. I like to know both sides of an argument so I wanted to understand why the animosity. Charity Is needed In more ways than one in this culture and I would implore you to show more charity to Catholics than has been shown to you.

    3+
    avataravataravatar
  23. Jojo:
    I used to support civil unions as a matter of practicality, but it is surprising to hear coming from the Pope. I also doubt now that they would work anywhere to preserve the legal institution of natural family based marriage. The move for marriage redefinition was not rooted in practicality, it was rooted in resentment and aggressive destructiveness- much like BLM and Antifa.

    Obergefell did accomplish your wish, Hypatia. The government got out of the marriage business and instituted civil unions instead. They just kept the name. The new institution arbitrarily excludes many people from participation but those people don’t have a political voice, or perhaps they don’t care.

    There is plenty of valid non- “religious” reason to treat opposite sex intimate relationships differently in law than same sex intimate relationships. That was never discussed honestly or logically before Obergefell and at this point it never will be. I was married in a civil ceremony only and the two genders required by law at the time were integral to the meaning and purpose of my marriage. They were not an incidental artifact of bigotry against homosexuals. Obergefell actually reversed the meaning and purpose of marriage. It not only instituted civil unions, it erased natural family marriage from law…and not by accident.

    Some gays  indeed yearned to have their  relationships blessed by law as holy.  They didn’t get that.  They got marriage with no moral meaning and nearly no social meaning – they got civil union.  Apparently as long as that’s all that’s available to opposite sex couples too, it’s good enough.

    I don’t understand this.  In the first place, there were plenty of leftist Christians, and anybody with much experience with “High” Episcopalians will hardly deny that they had their own equivalent of te Lavender Mafia—who bought into the “love is love” mantra.  But, pre Obergefell, states did NOT have to give civil recognition to such ceremonies.  Now, they do.
    if you’re expressing your personal belief that a same-sex ceremony can never be a “wedding” as every human society has understood that word, I totally agree.  It’s like “pregnancy”. The Supreme Court might/just as well have said that everyone MUST refer to prospective adoptive couples as “pregnant”. No matter what convoluted arrangements have ensued, the only person who is “pregnant “ is the female whose womb has been seeded.  “Wedding” has a biological component, too: the public declaration of a mate in the biological sense. That is the ceremony.  We are definitely in Humpty Dumpty territory.

    And it is the ceremonial aspect which caused all the dissent.  It’s like the Siege of Muenster, when a buncha Anabaptists rejected infant baptism which Was subversive because the state was then using It as a marker of citizenship.  In America , nobody cares with whom you want to establish a household.  We never hear about a baker refusing to sell a gay couple a sack of bagels for a brunch they’re planning.  It does not happen.  It’s always that someone doesn’t want to bake a cake or take photos or create a ring for a CEREMONY which they believe is a travesty. And based on my study of many human cultures, they are 100% correct.  That’s why I say the Court shoulda just eliminated the “solemnization” requirement.  Leave weddings to the folk.  They always have done them, and they always will.  Not only need the gov’t  not enforce  a ceremonial requirement, it can even proscribe and persecute those who insist on it, and it STILL doesn’t go away.  Witness the great persecution of priests in Mexico.   Witness the “priest holes” in many of the great houses of England after Henry VIII.

    3+
    avataravataravatar
  24. Okay I think I figured out why the Pope’s innocuous seeming comment is..not innocuous.  The “civil union“  ship sailed a looooong time ago.  It was long ago overtaken by the “gay wedding” cutter.  The civil union issue is now no more relevant than whether or not we should permit racial discrimination in public accommodations.   That’s been a dead issue for over 60,years.

    But this was THE POPE. Whether or not he was speaking ex cathedra,  he is Supreme  Pontiff still, as the world sees it, wherever he goes and whatever he says. The fact that he IS Pope is the only reason anybody even reported on what he said.  Right?  So: What kind of shift in Catholic orthodoxy is he signaling by making this statement  which, I agree, would seem almost quaint coming from anybody else?

    2+
    avataravatar
  25. Mate De:
    I’m sorry you felt attacked by the Catholics on Ricochet.

    I thought only a couple of them were overly hostile.  The others were dishing out about equivalent strong language as they had received.

    I have seen really very bad and hostile things from both sides on other social media platforms.

    So, I don’t blame R> for that; they had a couple of bad actors, on both sides.  It would be unfair to tar all the R> Catholics or all of the R> Protestants with that brush.

    [I do, however, fault the management of R> for their inability to tolerate the discussions of the Reformation topics.  There were only four or five posts, with two of them going way over 500 comments each.  There was plenty of interest, and lots of passion, and mostly very civil engagement, with the exceptions as outliers.]

    Now, out on the world wild web, social media is less civil.  I see really toxic comments flying in both directions.

    1+
    avatar

Leave a Reply