But I have not seen this issue addressed in any significant manner in any of the other myriad threads on this subject.
For the life of me, I cannot understand how any Catholic with a passing knowledge of the Bible, the Catechism, Papal directives like Humane Vitae and the corporal and spiritual works of mercy could ever support gay marriage.
Yet here we are.
In Illinois, my home state, gay marriage was recently signed into law.
It could not have reached this end without the assistance of some so-called Catholic legislators. It was signed into law by our Governor, who also claims to be Catholic.
If we, as Catholics, truly believe that unconfessed mortal sin will place at risk of losing our salvation, isn’t supporting gay marriage akin to telling someone that you couldn’t care less about their soul?
To begin with, we have a large number of “cradle Catholics in the US. These are people who were born of Catholic parents and Baptized, but that was the last time they saw the inside of a Catholic Church. For whatever reason, their parents were not very observant and they were not brought up as Catholics and were never instructed in the Catholic Faith, yet these people claim themselves as Catholic. Then you have fallen away Catholics. These are people who were raised and educated in the Faith, but have become non-practicing for whatever reason, it could be everything from simple laziness (not wanting to get up on Sunday mornings) to having got a divorce and everything in between. Then, ever since Vatican II, you have your Cafeteria Catholics” who have become so seculaizednd deluded, that they think they can pick and choose what they believe.
As for politicians who vote for abortion and other such like abominatins, they delude themselves in thinking that they can separate their public life from their private life…They tell themselves: “well Kennedy did it”. In many of these cases, these politicians value their jobs, (i.e. holding public office) than they do their souls. They feel they could not be elected if they took a public stand against these abominations.
Why don’t the Bishops take steps against these people? The answer is too complex for any discussion on this site because books could easily be written on the subject.
First of all,** I think many of us don’t have adequate formation**. For example, I believe many Catholics have never even heard of “Humane Vitae” or if they have, don’t really know what it is or what it implies. For example, I’ve heard the words, “Humane Vitae” on Catholic radio but don’t know what it’s about. It’s one of those things I’ve wanted to research, but there are so many other things in that category. Wish I had a summary of it!
I doubt most Catholics know the list of the corporal and spiritual works of mercy, the part about sometimes our having even an obligation of fraternal correction.
I didn’t even realize what the Catechism of the Catholic Church even really WAS until fairly recently. I heard it referred to but had never seen a copy, didn’t realize it was in book and computer form.
I thought the “catechism” was only that class I took in school, nothing more.
One priest here in Mexico was the first one who mentioned the Catechism of the Catholic Church, saying it was a book that he thought EVERY Catholic family should have. He recommended we all go out and get a copy. Eventually, I did. The forum has actually helped me a lot.
I also saw CCC referenced on the forum, PMed someone saying, “What’s that?”. I asked what CCC was and began to see it referenced on questions of faith. I kept seeing it again and again!
Years ago, I once got into supporting such things as gay marriage, and considered myself a good practicing Catholic! Why? Well, incredible as it might be to believe, I went to a Newman Center, and there, a Catholic priest, was VERY liberal, let all kinds of things be accepted.
We had a guy in our folk group, who was openly gay, even had a pink triangle on his guitar strap. In fact, I didn’t even know what a pink triangle WAS until then…when I saw it…in a CATHOLIC Church!!!
This same guy eventually got elected an officer!
We were all encouraged to “accept” him as he was. Nobody ever said anything to him. So that, in combination with other things, probably helped put me over the edge.
I have noticed this (acceptance of homosexuality) is a very important issue for people. I have also noticed a lot of folks who attempt to marginalize the concerns of those people who deliberate over this topic. It is painfully apparent this strikes at the human psyche on levels we are barely able to understand; therefore, we should not dismiss it at simple prejudice or phobia.
It seems to me only those who are serious about their faith are able to perceive the long term effects of such acceptance and resist against its normalization, as we are instructed. This topic is a recurring discussion (as is abortion, another subject of contention for people of the Christian faith). Thankfully, the Catholic Church is extremely clear on the matter.
I don’t think so. I think they have drunk the “koolaid”. I think people really believe this, think they are being inclusive, loving, accepting, non-judgmental.
We are being SURROUNDED 24/7 by all kinds of negative propaganda, and it takes tremendous knowledge of the faith, courage, strength, everything…to first realize the truth, and secondly, stand up for it.
As I’ve said, where I went to Church, even a Catholic** PRIEST** fell into this, bringing down his entire flock! He was very charismatic. We listened to him, hung on his every word!
That’s fair enough. So do you think why is because the Church teaches they were made members of the Church when they received the Sacrament of Baptism in the Catholic Church? I’m not sure but George Stegmeir’s post might have suggested that as a possible reason. Granted they should probably be clearer that they are non practicing or dissenting, lapsed or fallen away Catholics.
I used to fully support gay marriage before I was Catholic. After I converted to Catholicism - I do not support it any longer, but I would like to bring up a small point.
The only marriage that is valid in the eyes of a Catholic is a marriage under the Catholic church. Homosexuals are not attempting to be married under the church, they are attempting to be married under the state. So really - it’s not much of a marriage at all. it’s legal and social recognition, but has nothing to do with the sacrament of matrimony.
Since America is a secular country, we cannot constitutionally deny people the right to be married under the state, no matter what gender they are. Religion is not allowed to influence politics.
So that’s one argument in favor of gay marriage, and I’m guessing that’s probably a good deal of the logic behind these Catholic votes. After all, if the marriage is not a marriage, does it really become more sinful depending on the genders participating? Maybe it does.
Another point is - well, outlawing gay marriage won’t really stop sin. Sin is in the heart, not the deed. If gay marriage is illegal, the act of sin can still be performed in one’s heart. So it’s possible to think, since we can’t stop sin with laws, why not just go with the flow and support gay marriage?
Personally, I don’t support it. We all know that the law of the Church is stronger than the law of the land. And I think that regardless of whether or not it is actually stopping sin, to oppose gay marriage is a way to show that the true Church is not swayed by social pressure; we hold our views and ideologies regardless of politics and the ways of the majority. Not to mention that I do worry, if we begin to support secular gay marriage, in the future what if that influences overall views on homosexuality within the Church; I worry a lot that it is a slippery slope.
I agree that supporting gay marriage is not very good for a Catholic. However, I do see some of the logic behind it, especially as I did use that logic a lot before I joined the Church and changed my views.
These are some of the reasons why a sizable portion of Christians still support the legality of gay marriage. Before getting enchanted by the Church, I held a libertarian view on the marriage issue as well. I accepted the moral evil of homosexual behavior but I thought this could be reconciled with a hands-off approach in the political and public sphere.
Of course, a supporter of gay marriage is still one less person that ought to be on board with the Magisterium, but in my mind, a person that has adopted a libertarian view is perhaps more hopeful to persuasion than someone that has deemed homosexuals acts to be ethical (and, perhaps, sexual behavior outside of rape in general to be ethical), and these same people that adopt a libertarian view will almost surely still reliably defend religious freedoms.
The point being, the statistics are frustrating, but they aren’t as bad as what you might think. When it’s all said and done, only a minority of gay marriage supporters are the kind of belligerent demagogues that veil their bloodlust behind an obfuscating wall of alleged progress and civil rights. The rest of the crowd are either libertarian on the issue, or apathetically compliant.
For this statement to be accurate, marriage must be a constitutionally protected right in the first place. The problem is, marriage is not. This is why we must submit for a marriage license in each respective state, which can say no. Like a drivers license. Everyone claims infringement of rights, but few actually know what their rights really are.
I would ask a person, “what about the rest of American history prior to the last few recent years?” It certainly, absolutely, undoubtedly did influence politics until those recent years. The current understanding of the imaginary separation of Church and State is horribly skewed and inaccurate. People are simply wrong.
That’s right. I phrased it badly: Religion is not allowed to influence the state’s view on marriage.
Yes, it absolutely does - but the idea is that it’s not supposed to. That was my thinking on why some people might be saying things that contradict their religion while working with politics.
It’s true, church and state are not separate. But America does still generally maintain that in a perfect society, they would be; and many many still try to make their own contributions to that
Everybody seems to kind of take their own stance on separation of church and state. Since it’s such a subjective things, it is pretty much only upheld by those who believe in it So whether or not that policy can explain these Catholic’s actions really depends on what sort of views they take on politics and on their religion
To be fair, the Supreme Court decision in Loving v. Virginia actually has declared marriage to be a constitutional right. This does not make it a human right, but it is a constitutional right as determined by the Supreme Court. Thus, we should not oppose it by claiming they have no constitutional right to it but rather on the basis that they are gravely harming their souls by “entering into” a gay “marriage.”
Human beings are not ideal thinkers. We are thinking bodies, influenced from outside in every way.
Someone can easily form opinions without thinking them out (unwilling to spend the effort). Or they might be swayed by the opinions around them (herd instinct). Or they may be conflicted in their mind because of someone in their life who is gay. Or…
Yes, I am suggesting that the government should protect its citizens, even if it means from themselves. We ban people from having free access to methadone for the health of their physical bodies, so what’s wrong with banning access to a mockery of a Sacrament for the health of their spiritual bodies?