Squashed wedding announcement disappoints gay couple - Page 5

SaintPatrick333 · #61 Jul 23, '12, 7:08 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Catya

Whoa, wait, stop, think.

Does this same newsletter publish the weddings of alumnae who marry outside of the church? Most likely it publishes notices about civil and non-Christian weddings. If it does so, there's no reason to single out same sex unions. If it has a policy to only publish notices about weddings that are recognized by the Catholic Church, then, they have a right to refuse in this case.

I'm getting mightily tired of Catholics who seem to think that living a homosexual lifestyle is somehow a graver sin than any other. I think if the Catholic Church expects people who are attracted to their own gender to live a celibate life, the the onus is on Catholics to treat these people (who are being asked to make a huge sacrifice) with the utmost respect. Dialogue and civilized debate is what's required, not the drawing of battle lines.

So, if you've never masturbated, had extra or premarital sex, looked at porn, go ahead and cast the first stone (in the eyes of the Church all of these things are no less sinful than having a same sex partner). By all means, engage with this issue, but please do so with love & respect.

You are missing the point my friend. We are called to challenge ALL sins. You would have us turn a blind eye to this immoral relationship (that should they not repent will lead to their damnation) simply because we are all sinners? That reasoning is flawed. The only reason the sins of homosexuals and abortions are challenged so much in the public square is because they are so prevalent to our society today. No sin is greater than another, but when one type of sin is pushing against Christ and His Church more than others, then that sin must be challenged and addressed first and foremost.

**JimG** · #62 Jul 23, '12, 8:46 pm

I'm guessing that if an alum sent in an announcement of her abortion, or her extra-marital affair, or her most recent menage a trois, they wouldn't publish that either.

Tigg · #63 Jul 24, '12, 7:53 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaddyGirl

Just re-read the articles, and saw in one that the couple wasn't approached by the newsletter writers, but a friend of theirs, to ask if they wanted their photo, etc, submitted. So the OP (and in turn, I as well) was incorrect on that point--good to clear that up.

But I'm wondering about this part in the Huffington Post story link posted by the OP. This was kind of shocking and I don't think anyone on this thread has commented on it unless I missed it.....the gay Catholic priest who is supporting gay marriage?:

And some Catholic clergy members have even come out in support of gay marriage.

Father Bob Pierson, who said he knew he was gay when we was ordained, recently asked church members in Minneapolis to vote "no" on a proposed anti-gay marriage amendment that will be put to a vote in November.

"Too many of us have been thought to think of God in terms of God's judgement, rather than God's tremendous love and mercy," he said. "I do not believe the church has the right to force its moral teaching on others outside our fold."

Here's another article on him with his full speech:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1589996.html

So...he is "permitted" to feel this way and be vocal about it?

Ya gotta admit, the logic is lopsided...that a Catholic priest can give public speeches and be quoted in mainstream media in support of gay marriage...and yet, this couple cannot quietly have their wedding photo in their little, rinky-dink, high school alumni newsletter?

I've noticed on other threads you are quick to point this out, and I'll admit, it is very serious and leads the faithful astray. That there are, unfortunately, some within the Church who attempt to undermine doctrine is fact. That faithful Catholics may NOT subscribe to their error is also fact. All we can do is cling to the Deposit of Faith and know what the Magisterium (the teaching authority of the Church comprised of the Pope and bishops) are saying on matters of faith and morals.

Crescentinus · #64 Jul 24, '12, 8:28 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by lerapt78

Slow down, Tiger.....I can't form a coherent reply when you get all "Computer Geek / Gamer" on me.

Here's another one.:P
Fourth order of business - all computers are property of the archdiocese and are only to be used for watching anything lesbian like The L Word or yuri

I enjoy poking some fun at the idea.

Elizabeth502 · #65 Jul 24, '12, 8:36 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaddyGirl

But I'm wondering about this part in the Huffington Post story link posted by the OP. This was kind of shocking and I don't think anyone on this thread has commented on it unless I missed it.....the gay Catholic priest who is supporting gay marriage?:

And some Catholic clergy members have even come out in support of gay marriage.

Father Bob Pierson, who said he knew he was gay when we was ordained, recently asked church members in Minneapolis to vote "no" on a proposed anti-gay marriage amendment that will be put to a vote in November.

"Too many of us have been thought to think of God in terms of God's judgement, rather than God's tremendous love and mercy," he said. "I do not believe the church has the right to force its moral teaching on others outside our fold."

Here's another article on him with his full speech:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1589996.html

So...he is "permitted" to feel this way and be vocal about it?

Because priests, like laity, live in a free country where free speech is supported, he is "permitted" in a secular sense to "feel this way" and to "be vocal about it." I'm not sure why you would find that "shocking" or unusual.

In terms of his profession, however, he has gone rogue, clearly. Again, I'm not sure why that should be so "shocking" to you, given that every occupation tends to include members with agendas of their own, who only titularly seem to belong to the institution. There are rogue Cabinet members of many countries who are at cross-purposes with the government they are representing. Eventually, such people either undermine their own governments (causing the collapse of a party or even a system), or are shown the door.

Quote:

Ya gotta admit, the logic is lopsided...that a Catholic priest can give public speeches and be quoted in mainstream media in support of gay marriage...and yet, this couple cannot quietly have their wedding photo in their little, rinky-dink, high school alumni newsletter?

And are Catholic publications part of the MSM? Do you seriously think that orthodox Catholic press would publicize the heterodox views of an unfaitfhful priest, let alone in a positive or celebratory way? No, there is zero "logic" to the connections you are making here. The relationship does not exist. Period.

Rence · #66 Jul 24, '12, 8:56 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Catya

Whoa, wait, stop, think.

Does this same newsletter publish the weddings of alumnae who marry outside of the church? Most likely it publishes notices about civil and non-Christian weddings. If it does so, there's no reason to single out same sex unions. If it has a policy to only publish notices about weddings that are recognized by the Catholic Church, then, they have a right to refuse in this case.

I'm getting mightily tired of Catholics who seem to think that living a homosexual lifestyle is somehow a graver sin than any other. I think if the Catholic Church expects people who are attracted to their own gender to live a celibate life, the the onus is on Catholics to treat these people (who are being asked to make a huge sacrifice) with the utmost respect. Dialogue and civilized debate is what's required, not the drawing of battle lines.

So, if you've never masturbated, had extra or premarital sex, looked at porn, go ahead and cast the first stone (in the eyes of the Church all of these things are no less sinful than having a same sex partner). By all means, engage with this issue, but please do so with love & respect.

You are so right! They absolutely should post that marriage announcement, along with an excerpt out of the Catechism about the Church's teaching.

However, you're a bit confused about marriage and the Church, which is why I think they should post something about the Church's teaching under all the wedding announcements. The Church recogizes as valid other religions' marriages, and other non-Catholic marriages. What they don't recognize is civil marriages for Catholics. So it's perfectly acceptable for them to post about civil marriages (for non-Catholics) and other religion's marriages.

Rence · #67 Jul 24, '12, 9:00 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimG

I'm guessing that if an alum sent in an announcement of her abortion, or her extra-marital affair, or her most recent menage a trois, they wouldn't publish that either.

Well you can't have it both ways Jim. If they're going to insist that a Catholic insitutution must announce one Catholic event that clearly goes against Catholic teaching, then they really should announce them all. There's no reason to discriminate

FromTheAshes777 · #68 Jul 24, '12, 9:04 am

signed.

This is a simple matter of religious freedom. Any religious group has the right to refuse to celebrate, condone, or promote something that they find morally reprehensible.

WhatMeWorry · #69 Jul 24, '12, 9:30 am

Signed!

BlueSapphire · #70 Jul 24, '12, 2:33 pm

Signed, Face-booked and tweeted!

**JimG** · #71 Jul 24, '12, 2:48 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rence

Well you can't have it both ways Jim. If they're going to insist that a Catholic insitutution must announce one Catholic event that clearly goes against Catholic teaching, then they really should announce them all. There's no reason to discriminate

Marriage doesn't go against Catholic teaching. Catholic canon law applies to Catholic marriages. However one is unlikely to send in an announcement stating the religion of one's spouse, or information about whether, for example, approval was obtained from the bishop, or whether in fact the alumnus might have formally defected from the Catholic Church. But announcing a same sex marriage would be rather like announcing that the circle has been squared. It would be ignored by a Catholic publication.

oneofmany · #72 Jul 24, '12, 11:33 pm

No wonder our children are so confused and messed up now a days. Their parents have no roots that are strong anymore.

Spencer3096 · #73 Jul 25, '12, 12:42 am

Signed and posted to Facebook. Now just to unsubscribe from their pesky mailing list.

DaddyGirl · #74 Jul 25, '12, 4:53 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by JimG

I'm guessing that if an alum sent in an announcement of her abortion, or her extra-marital affair, or her most recent menage a trois, they wouldn't publish that either.

I'm guessing you're right.
But...they probably would report on an alum's second marriage...even if she did not get an annulment of her first one.

DaddyGirl · #75 Jul 25, '12, 5:07 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tigg

I've noticed on other threads you are quick to point this out, and I'll admit, it is very serious and leads the faithful astray. That there are, unfortunately, some within the Church who attempt to undermine doctrine is fact. That faithful Catholics may NOT subscribe to their error is also fact. All we can do is cling to the Deposit of Faith and know what the Magisterium (the teaching authority of the Church comprised of the Pope and bishops) are saying on matters of faith and morals.

Not sure about other threads...but I do notice when there is an incongruency (sp?) in "rules" and conduct and feel compelled to point them out, because there is often an unfairness happening that I think many are not seeing

What I'm not understanding here is...
I assume that if the Bishop or Archdiocese (I can't remember now who it was) wants to and is able to stop this unknown couple from having their wedding photo in a high school newsletter--something that no one would have known about except their alum--then this, or another, Bishop would also want and be able to stop this priest from publicly undermining doctrine?

In the grand scheme of things--and even in the little scheme of things--I'd imagine what the priest is doing is much more serious than this little couple and their small-town school letter.

S then...if the gay couple is banned from having their wedding photo published in their school newsletter...why isn't this priest not "fired" or...dethroned or...banished...or...whatever the right word is, for promoting gay marriage?

Has he been?

It's a no-brainer, is it not?