Minister [of Ecclesiastical Affairs]: Gay weddings by next year [in Denmark]

In just a few months, homosexuals will get the right to marry in the Church of Denmark – they will, in any case, if the new church minister has his way.

The government plans to introduce a bill just after the New Year that will allow same-sex couples to hold weddings in the Church of Denmark and be ‘married’ under Danish law. Same-sex couples are currently allowed to have ‘registered partnerships’, a civil status, but are barred from marriage and church weddings.

“The first same-sex weddings will hopefully become reality in Spring 2012. I look forward to the moment the first homosexual couple steps out of the church. I’ll be standing out there throwing rice,” the new church minister, Manu Sareen, a Social Liberal, told Jyllands-Posten newspaper.

cphpost.dk/component/content/52363.html?task=view

The appointment of Manu Sareen to the position of Minister for Ecclesiastical Affairs for the newly elected government was considered controversial

I cant believe how a Christian can support gay marriage.

I heard it said in Australia if they allow gay marriage to pass that the Church may renounce its ability to have civilly recognised marriages so it does not become forced to marry same sex couples.

I thought the Bible was pretty explicit about homosexual acts… apparently not for some

The great “falling away” is transpiring before our very eyes. Keep your eyes peeled for the Antichrist.

Even so. Come, Lord Jesus!

I’m in a liberal University with ‘progressive’ Catholics and Christians alike. You won’t believe the kind of twisting and turning they have to go through. The most obvious one is the Mosaic Law and how it has “passed away and was replaced by love”. That one can keep me ranting for hours! Another one I recently discovered is that Jesus Himself sancationed gay-marriage. Remember the story of the Centurion and his sick servant? Apparently, key word apparently, the Greek makes it clear the servant was actually a male-lover - the Centurion was asking Jesus to “bless” them and the ‘sickness’ of the servant was metaphor for cultural homophobia. Something like that.

Bit off topic - but yeah, Christians can and do try to justify a whole bunch of unChristian things.

This is interesting! The Church in Denmark must have done the theological review and come to the conclusion that it fits within their belief system. Good on them. I think that much of the anti-gay rhetoric in Catholic circles not only minimizes the dignity and teaching of the church with respect to the “whole” teaching (and I emphasis it is a non-homophobic, loving and holistic position with respect to those who are gay) many of whom have fallen in love with as friends, co-workers and so forth…plus they have a wicked sense of humour - but I digress :slight_smile:

I firmly believe in the separation of church and state. Thomas Jefferson clearly talks about the wall and the first amendment is pretty clear in my mind as well as the language in latter court cases that gave the amendment substance. There is a separation of church and state and I support same sex civil unions, same sex marriages because I really am not concerned about what the state defines as marriage. I am though against the idea of same sex “sacraments” of marriage…that would be an infringement on the freedom of religion stuff and it currently does not exist in our church…one day we may be able to understand where the Anglicans (Episcopaleans) and create some sort of blessing ceremony within the church that does not change the doctrine, but respectfully accepts that there are those within our midst that are of the same sex, fallen in love with each other and declared that relationship in our community…what’s wrong with acknowlegding that we will respect their choice?

The Church of Denmark takes it to the next step however in creating a same sex sacrament…and I don’t believe there is a strong enough theological case for that…I will end by empahsising the balance that Canada has achieved with a ten year history of national legalized gay marriage…Canada will define for itself what has constituted marriage in our country, but through our charter and the wording and intent of the legislation the sacramental nature and “rights of free association” in our charter protect the churches from having to do gay marriage, and/or provide abortion services in our “socialist and universal” health care system…

Back to you guys…cheerz all.

Bruce Ferguson
Trickster (Aboriginal concept for Transformation)

Is this Newspeak for : The “church” [not a Church in the proper sense] in Denmark decided to go against Christian teaching and disregard the message of Christ in order to appeal to the masses and accommodate sin?

What is good about that?

I think that much of the anti-gay rhetoric in Catholic circles

You think preaching about the reality of sin is mere rhetoric? And you think it’s anti-gay? Homosexual acts are gravely sinful - the Heavens cry out when these heinous things are done.

I support same sex civil unions

You are supporting something straight from Satan and opposed to God.

I really am not concerned about what the state defines as marriage.

Your statement above contradicts this. You can’t say you’re not interested and then say but you support the state changing the definition of marriage. You support how the state defines marriage.

C’mon NewstheMan… gosh, I would describe myself as “progressive”…but yeah…the fact that Jesus sanctioned gay marriage has me thinking…Jesus never spoke of homosexuality in any shape, place of form. There is some legitimacy to the wording in the old texts that when all factored into it is reasonable to assume that the Centurion was gay…and Jesus act in the Catholic way towards homosexuality…in a loving, responsive and holistic manner that supports the strengthening of any gay person based on the dignity of that persons life.

What are you taking at this liberal catholic university? Are you taking theology? I took one year of my masters at Vancouver School of Theology which focuses on post-modern theology where we re-incorporate the human experience as a valid and equal too for the production of theological ideas along side with the more traditional anchors of tradition and teaching authority of the church…so I might have an opinion or two offered in respectful difference to you…look forward to your thoughts…

Cheerz/Blessings

Bruce Ferguson
Trickster (Aboriginal Concept for Transformation).

Classic example of eisegesis :rolleyes:

I might have an opinion or two offered in respectful difference to you…look forward to your thoughts.

I’m not at a Catholic university. I don’t think I’d have to stomach to be in a university which professes to be Catholic but is also ‘liberal’ or ‘progressive’. In any case, with all due respect I don’t wish to get into any opinion swapping. I only do as the Church traditionally teaches and I have to tell you that from the get-go I don’t tolerate anything but orthodox, traditional Catholicism. Discussions with me in that regard will be unfruitful I think :slight_smile:

Hi NewstheMan…yeah I misread that…I assumed it was a Catholic unversity…I stand corrected… :slight_smile:

Your orthodox opinions, well I respect them…so no worries there…I am orthodox too in the sense of following the catechism and listening to our Holy Father and local bishop but I really work to make sure that the orthodoxy is applied in the real struggles people have on the street…when we provide narrow interpretations, it has the effect of excluding people…and that is not Christ like for sure…we need to have open hearts to our brothers and sisters who are gay…and we need to be supportive of them on a holistic basis that involves a respect for their human dignity… to attach labels of “satan” etc., is dramatic for sure…but it doesn’t address or engage the human spirit, it if anything, drives people away from the church thereby accomplishing the objectives of Satan…

Bruce Ferguson
Trickster (Aboriginal Concept for Transformation)

Why would the Australian bishops say that, Australia has the same basis as law as Canada, we are both commonwealth countries and set up constitutionally in the same manner (I THINK -not sure though) and Canada’s bishop - because of the balance act in the Canadian legislation that created a state defined marriage as including same sex marriage AND the rights of the church’s not to bless it…or perform gay marriages at the sacramental as opposed to the state level…

Hmm? Interesting…

Bruce Ferguson
Trickster (Aboriginal Concept for Transformatoin

This puts you at odds with Church teaching. The Church does not limit it’s definition of Sacramental marriages to only those conducted in the Catholic Church. As such she must be concerned with the sanctity of all marriages.

I am though against the idea of same sex “sacraments” of marriage…that would be an infringement on the freedom of religion stuff and it currently does not exist in our church…

But non-Catholics contract valid sacramental marriages through purely civil cermonies. Keeping same-sex marriage out of the Church proper isn’t much of a protection.

one day we may be able to understand where the Anglicans (Episcopaleans) and create some sort of blessing ceremony within the church that does not change the doctrine, but respectfully accepts that there are those within our midst that are of the same sex, fallen in love with each other and declared that relationship in our community…what’s wrong with acknowlegding that we will respect their choice?

I’d be fine with that as long as one of the promises made in the blessing is to love each other chastely and to avoid turning their disordered tendencies into gravely immoral actions.

The Church of Denmark takes it to the next step however in creating a same sex sacrament…

No, it doesn’t. Declaring it doesn’t make it so.

Actually, you would more accurately describe yourself as a dissident Catholic. You are dissenting from the clear Church teaching that we must vigorously fight attempts to legalize same-sex marriage or any civil unions that simulate marriage.

The human spirit is addressed by the Church and Jesus Christ. Our ‘human spirit’ is towards sin. We need the Church. Your approach: sacrifice truth and legitimate Christianity for numbers. Gotcha!

Ahem.

[quote=CCC]Chastity and homosexuality

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a6.htm
[/quote]

[quote= Pope Benedict XVI][It is true that homosexuals have] their problems and their joys, that as human beings they deserve respect, even though they have this inclination, and must not be discriminated against because of it."

“At the same time, though, sexuality has an intrinsic meaning and direction, which is not homosexual,” he said. “The meaning and direction of sexuality is to bring about the union of man and woman and, in this way, to give humanity posterity, children, a future.”

[Even though this will present a great trial] this does not mean that homosexuality thereby becomes morally right. Rather, it remains contrary to the essence of what God originally willed.

catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1004842.htm

[/quote]

[quote=USCCB]The Catholic Church makes an important distinction between actions and inclination. While the Church is ardently opposed to all unjust discrimination on the grounds of sexual inclination, whether homosexual or heterosexual, it does teach that all sexual acts outside of a marriage between one man and one woman are morally wrong.

The USCCB continues to oppose “unjust discrimination” against people with a homosexual inclination, but we cannot support a bill – such as ENDA in its current form – that would legally affirm and specially protect any sexual conduct outside of marriage.

americamagazine.org/blog/entry.cfm?entry_id=2923

[/quote]

I think the teaching of the Pope, the bishops, and the Catechism is clear. The teaching of Scripture is clearer: Paul says pretty explicitly that those who engage in homosexual activity will not inherit the kingdom of God.

Anyway, back to what you said:

[quote=trickster]but I really work to make sure that the orthodoxy is applied in the real struggles people have on the street…
[/quote]

Admirable, but the correct way of doing this is to help people with their struggles, not to pretend the specific sin they have trouble with is not a sin.

when we provide narrow interpretations, it has the effect of excluding people…and that is not Christ like for sure

Excluding behavior. If a person cannot separate their behavior from themselves, then that person needs help whatever the behavior is. Look up things like the Courage thing, you can easily welcome the people without welcoming their actions.

…we need to have open hearts to our brothers and sisters who are gay…and we need to be supportive of them on a holistic basis that involves a respect for their human dignity… to attach labels of “satan” etc., is dramatic for sure…but it doesn’t address or engage the human spirit, it if anything, drives people away from the church thereby accomplishing the objectives of Satan…

Bruce Ferguson
Trickster (Aboriginal Concept for Transformation)

Also true, but again, open hearts and such does not mean that we pretend their sins are not sins, any more than we pretend that pornography, masturbation, or even actions stemming from pedophilia are ok for the people addicted to those things.

Sin is sin. Sinners (ie everyone) need compassion and help with whatever struggles they may have. Sinners do not need to be told that their sins are ok. This is not compassion, this is wicked dishonesty that will in the long run be harmful to them and us. Love and open hearts and all that wish that people be happy, but it doesn’t stop there, it desires the best for people, irregardless of whether this best is what their drives and desires immediately ask for.

Glad to hear it. So, I am sure you will retract your support for homosexual civil unions in light of the following teaching:

In those situations where homosexual unions have been legally recognized or have been given the legal status and rights belonging to marriage, clear and emphatic opposition is a duty. One must refrain from any kind of formal cooperation in the enactment or application of such gravely unjust laws and, as far as possible, from material cooperation on the level of their application. In this area, everyone can exercise the right to conscientious objection.

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20030731_homosexual-unions_en.html

This is not one of those areas where Catholics of good faith can have an honest disagreement. Church teaching is very clear.

Oh. Wow. I’ve never heard anthing so insane. You must enjoy your university and its progressive ideas :rolleyes:

Hi Corki…I am not up to speed on how the church views state marriages…however, would you agree that state marriage happens with or without the church? The church’s role then is to accept the state marriage if it is consistent with catholic teaching and standards…(and if it does, it kind of sacramentalizes it doesn’t it?) do you know of any case where the church has not accepted a state marriage (well obviously we can agree that our church would not accept gay state marriages, right) and that proves my point that the church can protect marriage as understood in Catholic teaching that is an amendemtn in the American constitution and a charter issue in Canada… I haven’t had the opportunity to delve into Canon Law, because the law of the church is so complicated and it does make a lot of consessions to the basic ideas that it teaches…can you figure out why Celine Dion was cleared by the church to marry her husband who was divorced? I am not up to speed on that…

The point I was making though is that the State is not Catholic…the state should not be dictated what to do by the church, nor should the state submit to the teachings of the Catholic Church cause its job is to legislate for all citizens of all religions and those legislations must meet the constitutional tests of the country, etc…so all I am saying is that I don’t have problems with the state as defining marriage between gay people as legal…the church does not have to accept that marriage as valid adn I don’t think it will…is that closer to what you are saying?

So perhaps we can simplify and focus our conversation on this point and then build from there…

Bruce Ferguson|
Trickster (Aboriginal Concept of Transformation)

Too funny! I agree…I tend to love postmodern theology and consider myself a progressive…but I have to tell you that some theology is pretty stretched and I think it deserves an honourable place in creative writing…“the Jesus of the postmodern”…anyways, am enjoying this thread…keep it up and I will keep trying my best to put my left leaning progressive stuff out there and we’ll have fun, but hopefully we all learn and draw closer as a catholic community…
B

Bruce Ferguson
Trickster (Aboriginal Concept for Transformation)

Thanks Corki, I will check out that documentation because within it should be a good arguement because it is also weakening the separation of church and state and one must think about Pope Leo XIII (I think) and his instituiton of Christ the King feast day… but again, as Catholics we are allowed to follow our conscience on this as long as we don’t say that we are right and the church is wrong…I think it is being an honest person to say that he or she cannot fathom all of the church’s teaching, nor the levels and complexities of the teaching…at what level under magisterium it is stated and so forth…I still need to address the fact that the church being agressive against civil union and other human right decisions for America’s gay community is somehow a weakening of the separation of in Thomas Jefferson’s word the “wall” between church and state…is the Catholic Church politically being too aggressive where they are limiting state power…or are they simply advising that for Catholics to be consistent within their own faith, it is very difficult for Catholics to support state legislation which is against church teaching?

Bruce Ferguson
Trickster (Aboriginal Concept of Trickster)

Hello Corki, I had a chance to quickly read through the article you quote written by Ratzinger…and yes he states that a Catholics obligation (as in we are ordered by the church) to oppose state gay marriages, so I read it the same way you do…

I think when you are a Catholic politician and “claim to be catholic” then you ought to act in a manner that is consistent with the official teaching of the church within the state context…that is normal because politicians should be running for office on their beliefs right and they ought to be honest to voters prior to getting elected about how their catholic faith will impact how they vote and work as a catholic politician.

The document was targeting politicians and the only thing it says about Catholics like me (and I could of missed some stuff) is that we are “obliged” to oppose state definition of marriage to include same sex marriages…it does not address my central arguement and that is to act upon our obligation as Catholics we are working against the idea of separation of church and state…so I am sure the church has an explanation or paper on how it understands church and state…and that’s where I need to read and learn…so if you know what documents say about that from the Vatican that would be very helpful and I look forward to reading them…all that good stuff…thank you for forwarding this to me…

Bruce Ferguson
Trickster (Aboriginal Concept for Transformation)

Hey Corki! I just noticed that you live in Texas - I LOVE TEXAS…I had the honour of living in El Paso for about a year and now I am working on a business plan to bring Canadian tourism to the American Southwest via El Paso and Americans to the Southcost of British Columbia…

Where abouts in Texas (by that I mean mid or east texas or the “panhandle” I went to Lubbok, and Dallas but that is far east that I got there…met many great Latino or Mexican American Catholics in my travels in Texas…and boy are they ever Catholic… I was never so proud of my church as when I learned of how our church stands with Mexican Americans and their families around the immigration issues…

Texas! That is so cool.

Bruce Ferguson

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.