[UK] Church 'does not own marriage'

LemonAndLime · #1 Feb 25, '12, 8:53 am

he Church does not "own" marriage nor have the exclusive right to say who can marry, a government minister has said.

Equalities minister Lynne Featherstone said the government was entitled to introduce same-sex marriages as a "change for the better".

The Liberal Democrat was responding to comments by Lord Carey, a former Archbishop of Canterbury, who said that "not even the Church" owns marriage.

But Lord Carey accused her of putting an "unwarranted slant" on his words.

Ms Featherstone's comments come as ministers prepare to launch a public consultation on legalising gay marriage next month.

Traditionalists want the law on marriage to remain unchanged.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17162442

Pfaffenhoffen · #2 Feb 25, '12, 8:58 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by LemonAndLime

he Church does not "own" marriage nor have the exclusive right to say who can marry, a government minister has said.

Equalities minister Lynne Featherstone said the government was entitled to introduce same-sex marriages as a "change for the better".

The Liberal Democrat was responding to comments by Lord Carey, a former Archbishop of Canterbury, who said that "not even the Church" owns marriage.

But Lord Carey accused her of putting an "unwarranted slant" on his words.

Ms Featherstone's comments come as ministers prepare to launch a public consultation on legalising gay marriage next month.

Traditionalists want the law on marriage to remain unchanged.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17162442

The fellow forgot that the Church owns Catholic Marriage.
Now, you may say that the Church does not own Polygamy or Gay-so-called-marriage, does not own adultery, divorce and so on.
The thing is that people love Catholic Marriage, a monogamous love for life, but wanted to change it. And they become irritated when the Church does not allow them to put their dirty nails on it....
Their problem...

Jim Dandy · #3 Feb 25, '12, 10:22 am

Marriage was under the purvue of the Catholic Church until Martin Luther and his minions made it a matter for the State. Homosexual "marriage," polygamous "marriage," and other abberations can ultimatelyly be credited to Luther, along with all his other "benefits" like denominationalism. Unintended consequences? Though Luther said he could not prove that plural marriage was wrong from Scripture, and in fact approved a bigamous marriage, believing it was preferable to divorce, so who knows what Luther would have approved?

Tenofovir · #4 Feb 25, '12, 12:24 pm

Religious marriage and secular marriage. There are two. The state can decide what the secular marriage is but it can't say who can get married in a religious ceremony. The secular marriage is also a marriage for the people, as is the religious marriage. If the people want to keep traditional marriage, no state has a right to force this on them. The state is supposed to be the servant of the people, hence ministers and MPs are civil servants. This reminds me of a Russian anti-Putin song "You're not a god or a king, but a civil servant." This is what this minister needs to remember. She is not a little Tsar but a mere civil servant.

The State should do the peoples' bidding. The peoples' will should be influenced and informed by the Church.

gamewell45 · #5 Feb 25, '12, 2:01 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by LemonAndLime

he Church does not "own" marriage nor have the exclusive right to say who can marry, a government minister has said.

Equalities minister Lynne Featherstone said the government was entitled to introduce same-sex marriages as a "change for the better".

The Liberal Democrat was responding to comments by Lord Carey, a former Archbishop of Canterbury, who said that "not even the Church" owns marriage.

But Lord Carey accused her of putting an "unwarranted slant" on his words.

Ms Featherstone's comments come as ministers prepare to launch a public consultation on legalising gay marriage next month.

Traditionalists want the law on marriage to remain unchanged.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17162442

If I read the post correctly then I think the church has an absolute right to say who can get married or not in their church (ownership if you will). Anything outside the church should be up to the individual

Nine_Two · #6 Feb 25, '12, 2:11 pm

I agree with the statement, but probably disagree with the minister.

Marriage is a religious rite that predates Catholicism, Christianity, Judaism, etc, and exists outside these circles, therefore no Church, or religion can claim to have ever owned "marriage".

What is new is the state trying to regulate marriage. Throughout the history of marriage this doesn't happen before the Reformation, and even then, it was still churches that regulated it for some time.

Clearly, the Catholic Church does not own marriage, as the minister helpfully pointed out, but it does have a vested interest in it.
The state meanwhile, also does not own marriage, but unlike the church doesn't have a vested interest in marriage.

Therefore it is clear that one of these entities should butt out and leave the other to administer it's marriages as it sees fit.

**Dale_M** · #7 Feb 25, '12, 2:40 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pfaffenhoffen

The fellow forgot that the Church owns Catholic Marriage..

Hmm... I'm not sure that Lord Carey's position is any different than that of the Catholic Church.

Quoting from the BBC article:

Quote:

But Lord Carey told the Telegraph: "When I said that not even the Church owns it (marriage), I meant that the Church has no authority to change the definition of marriage as far as Christian thinking is concerned - there is a givenness to it.

Since, in the Catholic view, marriage is a sacrament and was created by God for the purpose of uniting a man and woman, the Church wouldn't have the power to change marriage. In that sense, the Church doesn't own marriage....God does.

I think that is pretty much the same as what Lord Carey was saying. He was rejecting the notion that the Church of England can change marriage.

Pfaffenhoffen · #8 Feb 26, '12, 1:42 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dale_M

Hmm... I'm not sure that Lord Carey's position is any different than that of the Catholic Church.

Quoting from the BBC article:

Since, in the Catholic view, marriage is a sacrament and was created by God for the purpose of uniting a man and woman, the Church wouldn't have the power to change marriage. In that sense, the Church doesn't own marriage....God does.

I think that is pretty much the same as what Lord Carey was saying. He was rejecting the notion that the Church of England can change marriage.

Sorry, I do not know the fine details...

Tenofovir · #9 Feb 26, '12, 4:12 am

The Church should patent marriage. That way the greatest powers of the law can be brought against those who abuse it.

**rlg94086** · #10 Feb 26, '12, 9:59 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tenofovir

The Church should patent marriage. That way the greatest powers of the law can be brought against those who abuse it.

Nah...the Chinese would just do some reverse engineering and start issuing "marrije" licenses, hoping no one would catch the misspelling.

Scott_Lafrance · #11 Feb 27, '12, 3:27 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Dandy

Marriage was under the purvue of the Catholic Church until Martin Luther and his minions made it a matter for the State. Homosexual "marriage," polygamous "marriage," and other abberations can ultimatelyly be credited to Luther, along with all his other "benefits" like denominationalism. Unintended consequences? Though Luther said he could not prove that plural marriage was wrong from Scripture, and in fact approved a bigamous marriage, believing it was preferable to divorce, so who knows what Luther would have approved?

Actually, the state sanctioning of marriage is another one of the fruits of the French Revolution. Why "conservatives" still hold on to the ideal that the state should be in the business of marriage is beyond me.

stevegravy · #12 Feb 27, '12, 5:30 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott_Lafrance

Actually, the state sanctioning of marriage is another one of the fruits of the French Revolution. Why "conservatives" still hold on to the ideal that the state should be in the business of marriage is beyond me.

It is something the busy bodies in the state can regulate and from which the the divorce lawyers can make money.

valient Lucy · #13 Feb 27, '12, 7:02 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott_Lafrance

Actually, the state sanctioning of marriage is another one of the fruits of the French Revolution. Why "conservatives" still hold on to the ideal that the state should be in the business of marriage is beyond me.

That's a good point. Many people unjustly blame Martin Luther for the system of civil marriage that we have today, but as you said, that actually traces back to the French Revolution.

Leo XIII was against the idea of civil marriage, I believe, so I certainly think an argument could be made for removing state control over marriage.