Catholic Church has no problem with marriage between gay man, lesbian

MANILA, Philippines — Two homosexual men cannot marry but a gay man and a lesbian can tie the knot, according to the head of the Catholic Church’s matrimonial court.

Archbishop Oscar Cruz, judicial vicar of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines-National Appellate Matrimonial Tribunal, all but ruled out any chance of the Catholic Church agreeing to same-sex unions in the Philippines but said a lesbian and gay man might be allowed to marry.

“May a lesbian marry a gay man? My answer is ‘yes’ because in that instance the capacity to consummate the union is there. The anatomy is there. The possibility of conception is there,” Cruz told a church forum on Tuesday.

“I ask this question to myself and I have thought about it for a long time and the answer is ‘yes’,” he said.

Cruz was explaining the Church’s opposition to gay marriage or same-sex civil unions.

Several European church leaders — including Godfried Cardinal Daneels, the former Archbishop of Mechelin-Brussels, and the Vatican spokesman, Fr. Federico Lombardi SJ — recently made statements that were seen as hinting of eventual Church approval for gay civil unions.

But Cruz said gay advocates would have a difficult job getting legal approval for gay civil unions in the Philippines, a predominantly Catholic country.

“That will be against the Constitution and against the Family Code of the Philippines. So, they have to revise the Constitution for that,” he said.

“The law says marriage is between a man and a woman and for raising a family,” he said.

Cruz said the Catholic Church would oppose gay civil unions and other related proposals if these were filed in Congress.

“For the Church, even if you turn it upside down and call it by another name, it would still not be marriage. For the Church, even if a hundred (judges) bless a same-sex wedding, it would still not be effective,” he said.

The Church earlier warned that after the passage of the controversial Reproductive Health Law, similar proposals for same-sex marriage, divorce and euthanasia would follow.

However, gay groups have denied actively pushing for gay marriage in the country. They accuse the Church of using the issue to block other gay civil rights legislation proposals.

“They always use that as a specter to block any other piece of LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered) rights legislation,” said Jonas Bagas, executive director of the TLF Share Collective.

“So, even with the anti-discrimination bill, they would frame it as a gay marriage bill,” he said.

Cruz said homosexuality would be a valid ground for the annulment but has been seldom used as a reason in annulment petitions.

“More often, it’s is about psychological problems, meaning there is some kind of mental impairment or emotional disturbance,” he said.

Read more: newsinfo.inquirer.net/428951/catholic-church-has-no-problem-with-marriage-between-gay-man-lesbian#ixzz2WamIyNkD
Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook

As far as I know being gay is not in and of itself immoral. It is the act of being homosexual as is physical contact with same sex that is immoral. Hope that helps you.

Breaking news: Catholic Church says it is okay for man to marry woman.

Are we supposed to be surprised at this? :shrug:

Having same-sex attraction is not a sin but acting on that attraction is a sin.

But why would a lesbian want to marry a gay man and vice versa? As far as a sacramental marriage is concerned, I would think that the basis for the union would be less than honest from the beginning if they each identify themselves as having a disordered sexual inclination. Just saying…

Has this world now become the Twilight Zone?

This is what I wanted to say. You stated it very well. It doesn’t make much sense to me if a “gay” man marries a “lesbian” woman. It seems if they are homosexual there is no attraction for each other in the first place. They are same sex attracted. Or they are not homosexual, either anymore or never were. The whole premise of the argument makes no sense to me. :confused:

Attraction is not a requirement for a sacramental marriage.

Attraction for each other (regardless of whether the husband and wife are heterosexual or homosexual in orientation) is not a requirement for a sacramental marriage.

Well… consumation is a requirement for sacramental marriage, is it not? If a man is legally married to a woman whom he is not attracted to and she is not attracted to him, how’s the consummation going to happen?

How do I keep getting suckered into these threads?? :slight_smile:

I don’t think it’s really all that uncommon for people who are homosexual in orientation to marry, and successfully consummate their marriages. I’ve personally known a few.

BUT a committed and mature relationship to each other is! That’s why Pre-Cana is necessary in some diocese’. Marriage prep programs try to identify the psychological problems in order to minimize the risk of divorce.

I just cannot imagine…

Wouldn’t that person be BIsexual then? I guess I don’t get it. Personally, I can’t imagine a scenario where another guy could get me aroused and I assumed a gay guy would feel the same way about women. No?

I don’t get it either… and frankly, I don’t want to!

Curiosity I guess, just like me. They could be bisexual. Prayers for all. God Bless. Memaw.

I have trouble believing this. I searched it out on lifesite news but they had nothing on this.

The reasoning for this is incredibly suspect. Just because you have a man and a woman doesn’t automatically make it a marriage. The way it sounds is that they don’t love each other. Its not like they are recovering from their SSA the way the article sounds.

Also if there is no love between them, can the Sacrament be administered?

Also how does gay civil unions fit into this article? It was my understanding that gay civil unions are when gay couples get all the benefits of marriage in civil society but without the “title” of being married.

I don’t know why this case is stumping so many people. I guess it only goes to show that our mindsets can’t separate the attraction from the relationship.

If an SSA man and SSA woman marry, they will likely have no attraction towards each other. But they may still possess the spiritual and mental maturity to actually love each other and consummate the marriage. Given that love is an act of the will and not of the attraction, this is entirely possible and the marriage can be indeed valid, sacramental and consummated.

Yes, loving sexual intercourse can still take place even without attraction, which eventually fades anyway. But love, being an act of the will, never has to.

From the OP:

Archbishop Oscar Cruz, judicial vicar of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines-National Appellate Matrimonial Tribunal, all but ruled out any chance of the Catholic Church agreeing to same-sex unions in the Philippines but said a lesbian and gay man might be allowed to marry.
“May a lesbian marry a gay man? My answer is ‘yes’ because in that instance the capacity to consummate the union is there. The anatomy is there. The possibility of conception is there,” Cruz told a church forum on Tuesday.
“I ask this question to myself and I have thought about it for a long time and the answer is ‘yes’,” he said.
Cruz was explaining the Church’s opposition to gay marriage or same-sex civil unions.

It appears to me that he was either:

a) answering a hypothetical question

or

b) indicating that marriage is, by definition, between a man and a woman…period.

Well, as we all know, there are competing viewpoints regarding the moral issues on this subject.

Immorality is typically defined as one person hurting another, a harmful activity deserving of social sanction. This definition has broad support in pretty much every human community.

Homosexual acts don’t meet this definition of immorality, assuming of course that we’re referring to consenting adults. There are millions of gay couples who have stayed together for decades, and we can presume they would not continue together for so long if they felt they were being victimized by their partner.

On the other hand, Biblical interpretations which define homosexuality as a sin have historically been a substantial part of the rationalization system for the unjust oppression of gay individuals. Literally millions of completely innocent people have endured significant suffering over centuries due to this philosophy.

After all, if homosexuality is declared a sin against God deserving of punishment in the form of eternal torment in hell, then it’s only a small step to justifying beating up gay people on the streets, denying them jobs, housing, civil rights, etc.

It’s a trickier question as to whether it’s immoral to be unconcerned with the unjust suffering of millions of innocent people. This probably describes most of us.

We know of the oppression and suffering of millions of gay people over centuries, but because we ourselves are probably not actively involved in that oppression in an explicit manner, we may feel it has nothing to do with us.

If one witnesses a crime, but does nothing about it, is that immoral?

That was my first thought.

As always, we have to be careful of what is really being said. It simply comes down to “Can a man marry a woman?” And the answer to that is obviously “Yes.”

Now whether or not they will be permitted to marry is an entirely different subject. It’s like asking if a gay person can become a priest. If the parties involved are upfront and honest, the sexual orientation will become a major issue that will have to be addressed, and they might not be permitted to marry because of it.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.