Catholics and Mormons file brief in 10th circuit court

"According to the Council of Trent this dogma has always been taught by the Church, and is thus defined in canon i, Sess. XXIV: “If any one shall say that matrimony is not truly and properly one of the Seven Sacraments of the Evangelical Law, instituted by Christ our Lord, but was invented in the Church by men, and does not confer grace, let him be anathema.”

Course from the Canon you can trace its history.

This is an on-going issue destined for court. The teacher above, the student below. They have a brilliant case above.

That doesn’t get around the fact that for the 1st millennium the Church left marriage to the state. Read some of writings of Joseph Martos on the subject.

I read the history and have been following the argument from Mass, Harvard, MIT and BC forward. The MIT argument was brilliant also. . The Church claim is grace/sacrament-Jesus Christ. In which these people and now in particular all of the above not just the Catholic Church are part of the whole which is now also a voice of the people as a whole.

I don’t understand why you believe these people shouldn’t have equal rights also?

Which people:confused:

These and all the people as above now with the Mormons etc.

"Catholic churches would not recognize gay marriages. Orthodox Jewish synagogues would not recognize a marriage between a Jew and a non-Jew who did not wish to convert to Judaism. And those religious institutions that chose to recognize gay marriages could do so. It would be entirely a religious decision beyond the scope of the state.

The solution is to unlink the religious institution of marriage — as distinguished from the secular institution of civil union — from the state. Under this proposal, any couple could register for civil union, recognized by the state, with all its rights and responsibilities.

Religious couples could then go to the church, synagogue, mosque or other sacred institution of their choice in order to be married. These religious institutions would have total decision-making authority over which marriages to recognize."

I still don’t understand why they can’t have the same equal rights as the others from your understanding?:confused:

I don’t understand what you are asking.:confused::confused:

Your point of contention is you think the people in the brief above should conform their understanding of marriage to the states. The above is suggesting the state can do as it may in this regard in defining civil union, which has nothing to do with the sacrament in which case they would like their equal rights acknowledged.

The easiest way to end the entanglement of religious and civil marriage is for churches to quit performing civil marriages. They can do this without waiting for any action by the state, as I said the Catholic church and the LDS church already do this when members have married outside the church. The state would have it’s own definition and criteria which churches would be free to reject instead imposing their own definitions and requirements.

I still don’t know who the, they, is in this statement “which has nothing to do with the sacrament in which case they would like there equal rights acknowledged”

They is the people in the brief who all have a slightly different understanding of traditional marriage as does the state and government in this case.

If you are married in a civil marriage and would like to have your marriage brought into the Catholic Church you will have to follow the Catholic rules and beliefs on what constitutes a marriage. .

This is what I’ve said all along let the state marry who it will and let churches marry who they will. The state never performs a marriage for a church, though some accept a civil marriage as valid it is entirely up to the church to make that call, churches should follow suit and not perform marriages for the state.

In initial 42 page brief is a bit different in that they are shooting for an out right victory. Or as Cruz is saying and here.

The underlying implications are equal rights and separation of church and state.

I’m still a bit confused about our conversation here, are we agreeing or disagreeing?

We agree, I don’t know that they won’t win outright though. I seen the Cruz polling nationwide, he has 87% support. I imagine as usual the country is pretty split though.

Why is Cruz polling nationwide, he’s a congressman from TX right?

To get an idea where the general thinking resides as to his own support on the issue. Looks like he’ll be doing some speaking on the topic.

Polling is odd, he gets 87% yet when polled Americans support same sex marriage at about 50% if I remember right.
I thought maybe it was a presidential thing. Maybe I’ll look at him deeper tomorrow.

I’m sure how much I’m willing to listen to Dershowitz. . . he also advocated for torture warrants (aka making it so torture is “safe,” “rare” and “legal.” Sound familiar?).

Yes, OK has the right idea. This makes it fair and equal for everyone. Why shouldn’t a brother and sister living together for mutual support be excluded from the same benefits a married couple receive automatically under the law? Why can’t there be plural spouses?

This way OK doesn’t have to deal with any of those questions.

How about the children growing who will see and hear of this perverted mockery of marriage and perhaps think of it as an option for themselves when it is not? A secular entity has no authority in regards to marriage. If they want to create something else and call it something else, fine, but marriage is not something they created so therefore is not something they can define. Those who don’t believe in marriage for what it is don’t need a peice of paper from the state declaring them “married,” and if they want it it’s for selfish reasons. At any rate Christians can never and will never condone or recognize such a thing. If we sit back and say nothing now we’re only setting ourselves and our children up to be persecuted in the future. Read the handwriting on the wall.

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