My Mormon wife says she would attend gay wedding

Would you attend a gay wedding of your children? My Mormon wife says she would as did one of her friends in the local ward. I wouldn’t attend such a marriage even if my children were involved since I would feel I was accepting such behavior.

Are you likely to have to deal with this situtation in real life yourself?

Or are you simply announcing what you would not do?

No, I would not attend a gay wedding. I don’t care who is in it, it is an abomination. Christ would not approve of it.

Well, if that gay person was my good friend I would attend. Why would I want to insult my friend? And of course, some protestant churches do marry gay people. So it would probably be a church wedding.

For example, if ellen degeneres invited me to her wedding, I would have attended. :slight_smile:

I doubt my children will have a gay wedding. But I do have gay friends who might invite me to such a wedding. I would have to turn them down because I can’t approve of such a ceremony.

Then you approve of gay marriage?

Attending a “gay wedding” is the showing your support of “gay weddings.” You are showing people that you support this behaviour and that you endorse homosexuality. Any practicing Catholic who attends these functions would be guilty of committing scandal.

It depends. If it were a church wedding, I would not attend. If it were a justice of the peace wedding, I would attend. But that would only be to congratulate them for having legal protections on their relationship.

The parents in such a situation would know not to invite me, would know I would not want to attend and would not attend, and would know such an invitation would be deposited directly in the round file where it would belong.

I would not attend a gay wedding…if it were an actual marriage that is recognized by the state. However, I would attend an event celebrating a civil union. I have no right to impose my beliefs upon those who believe differently than I do.

I do not believe that the word ‘marriage’ should be used when describing contractual relationships between gays, even when those contractual relationships include all the legal protections and rights that heterosexual married people have.

It’s a fine line, certainly, but that’s where I draw it.

My children, thank heaven, are not gay so I don’t have to make that decision…and yes, I know it’s avoiding that question, sort of. I love my kids, and finding out that one of them was gay–and willing to leave the church and act on those feelings–would break my heart. I could never ‘not love’ them, or disown them. So I don’t know exactly what I would do.

I see this a little differently. My friends and family know how I feel about the subject. It is nothing against anyone or any type of person, but I am opposed to it totally. If someone invited me to a gay wedding, either they did not really know me (and as such i would not go) or they did it KNOWING that I would be bothered by it.

Someone who does something knowing that it would offend me or put me into a bad spot is not someone that I want to associate with.

The bible says not to associate with things of this world. Of course we can’t leave the world. What it is saying is that as Christians we should not associate with individuals or group that are counter to Christian values. Doing so would put a seal of approval on the sinful activity and cause scandal. Even if it is a friend or even family it would be wrong. Remember that Christ said to leave our family for him. Some have more love for family and friends and just cannot leave the world.

The irony of this statement is pretty telling.

How many times have people been excoriated and called “cults” because they would, supposedly, throw family members out of fellowship and shun them if they didn’t march in step with the proclaimed doctrine? This is considered a BAD thing to do, y’know?

…and now I see that some of the very people who have criticized such behavior are now supporting it. I guess that it’s a case of:

“You shun, I follow Christ’s admonition to leave our family for Him and not associate with sinners.”

"You are a cult. I am a believer in truth. "

From where I sit the hypocrisy shines like a nova in the night, here.

It’s just…ironic.

If it were a family member, I would seek the advice of a priest. If it were not, I’d send a gift but not attend.

I guess it’s far more preferable to insult God.

Well, Diana, for once we agree on something. :stuck_out_tongue:

if god is up there … do you really think humans can insult him? Doesn’t your religion say that god created homosexuals (just as he created everyone else). Doesn’t your religion say that god is omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent? Therefore, god must have known (eternally) that homosexuals would be homosexual.

The whole point expressed by Paul was that Christians cannot blame the sinner or regenerate for their state (anymore than a bird can be blamed for flying). It’s god who has mercy on whom he chooses, and it’s god who denies mercy … all according to his good pleasure (and NOT according to our personal merit).

Can the homosexual be blamed for his or her sexual preference and refusal to struggle against their passions? If they’re denied grace isn’t the only choice they can freely make perdition?

This concept is critical in the matrix Paul wove in his theology. Acknowledging divine mercy and providence lies behind regeneration takes away the impetus to judge others (since if Christians understand that they would be the same as any heathen but for the grace of god then how could they harshly judge the reprobate). Moreover, within that matrix is the idea that god’s choices are not based on human merit. The importance of this is it strips man of any cause to boast or judge.

If Christians think god chose them because they (through their own volition) merited his selection, then they have cause to boast of themselves (and to judge others for not making the same wise choice).

It’s a tapestry that fits together fairly well if you have a good grasp of it. However, alter one piece of Paul’s theology and it falls apart. It’s complex because obviously Paul never dissuaded people from good behavior (in fact he enumerates it as a witness of grace). To Paul within our mind (the only way humans can quantify things) good behavior, charity, and so on is the result of our will and effort. However, he simply wanted Christians to understand … to spite the fact that within their own cognition it is their will and effort which gives them the impetus to behave well, love others, perform good / charitable works, and so on … it’s still god behind it all. The credit belongs to god alone in Pauline theology, and man was never capable of any goodness through our own volition (and devoid of grace). For Paul that grace was an all encompassing grace (that not only assists our will, but irresistibly so, and not only prods us to obey god, but causes us to obey).

The bible says not to associate with things of this world. <<

Even heterosexual marriage is just for this world.

After all, Jesus Himself said that in the world to come, there is “neither marrying nor giving in marriage.”

And what do you do with your divorced and remarried friends?

Many of them, whether Catholic or not, are cohabitating in invalid marriages.

Is a same-sex marriage so much worse?

with any luck the after life will be like the garden of Eden. We’ll all be running around naked with only one rule (don’t bite the apple). Cool … I don’t really like apples much anyway (but I do like naked women :D:D:D). Oops … sorry!

Perhaps you should try reading that again.

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