Catholic Church gives D.C. ultimatum over gay marriage

[Col Hogan]

Another mj drive-by...

I take my cues from that bastion of conservatism known as Fox News.

So you're one of the nimrods watching that crap...I won't...

[andy7171]

Wait a tic. I didn't think you could get remarried or receive communion without getting an annulment.

You can't Andy...

I think it's just perception issues...that the Church makes exceptions for some and not others...when they have really been pretty straight in taking a line and keeping to it...

We have strayed, I'm afraid...because we are human...show me one institution run by humans that hasn't...

So everytime DBJ spews his religious hate, due to his cause, towards the Catholics, because we are vonerable to open descrimination, just for the sake of making his case public?

I love you Jon but

[D1B]

You can't Andy...

I think it's just perception issues...that the Church makes exceptions for some and not others...when they have really been pretty straight in taking a line and keeping to it...

We have strayed, I'm afraid...because we are human...show me one institution run by humans that hasn't...

So everytime DBJ spews his religious hate, due to his cause, towards the Catholics, because we are vonerable to open descrimination, just for the sake of making his case public?

I love you Jon but

I don't blame Dback. The Catholics are fucking over gays big time with their shenanigans. Dback hit the nail on the head when he said it was not in the spirit of jesus christ. Jesus would be appauled at the behavior of the church, on the gay stuff especially.

[catamount man]

thank God I'm protestant.

[andy7171]

So everytime DBJ spews his religious hate, due to his cause, towards the Catholics, because we are vonerable to open descrimination, just for the sake of making his case public?

I love you Jon but

I don't blame Dback. The Catholics are **** over gays big time with their shenanigans. Dback hit the nail on the head when he said it was not in the spirit of jesus christ. Jesus would be appauled at the behavior of the church, on the gay stuff especially.

I agree. And I'm not blaming dbj. But his recent posts have been very agressive, and unappropriate. Though, I understand his anger. The Catholic Church doesn't recognise my brothers marriage, what's the difference with what he wants? Nothing. Same should apply.
It's a governmental problem. Non-church marriages should be called "civil-unions". But you can't erase everything else. So. What? You can't undo anything so let it go, but leave the religious aspect out.

I'm cool with that.

[andy7171]

inappropriate...

[dbackjon]

I don't blame Dback. The Catholics are **** over gays big time with their shenanigans. Dback hit the nail on the head when he said it was not in the spirit of jesus christ. Jesus would be appauled at the behavior of the church, on the gay stuff especially.

I agree. And I'm not blaming dbj. But his recent posts have been very agressive, and unappropriate. Though, I understand his anger. The Catholic Church doesn't recognise my brothers marriage, what's the difference with what he wants? Nothing. Same should apply.
It's a governmental problem. Non-church marriages should be called "civil-unions". But you can't erase everything else. So. What? You can't undo anything so let it go, but leave the religious aspect out.

I'm cool with that.

Is the Catholic Church trying to get the government NOT to recognize your brother's marriage? If not, why not? Why are some marriages ok to oppose, but others fair game? Is the Catholic Church spending millions of dollars to make any straight marriage they don't approve of illegal? NO

Does the Catholic Church provide spousal benefits to people that they would not recognize the marriage? YES. That is the issue. They are picking and choosing what "sins" to be outraged by.

If Gay marriage is legal, it does not affect the Catholic Church one iota. But yet they pour millions, and have their priests threaten members with excommunication for supporting it.

Why not have CIVIL MARRIAGE for all. IF someone wants to get married in a church, mosque, etc - that is their business.

[JoltinJoe]

Is the Catholic Church trying to get the government NOT to recognize your brother's marriage? If not, why not? Why are some marriages ok to oppose, but others fair game? Is the Catholic Church spending millions of dollars to make any straight marriage they don't approve of illegal? NO

jon, the Catholic Church itself isn't spending money on the issue, but Catholic groups are. Other than that, this is the home run point, from my perspective. Two divorced persons cannot get married in the church, but the church does not say that their civil union recognized by the state (also called marriage) should not be allowed. I know many Catholics who feel the same way and believe, at the very least, the church should simply stay neutral on the question of who may marry under civil law.

As I see it, the issue with current Catholic leadership in the Vatican is that most of them grew up in an environment where there was virtually no wall between the affairs of church and state, and witnessed time and again in their youth, the state impose the dictates of civil law on the church. So what they fear is that the state, if it allows gay marriage, will require churches to recognize it too. Benedict XVI may be a brilliant man, but he simply does not appreciate the respect in the US between the "freedom of religion" and non-establishment concepts. He simply has no personal frame of reference. Nor did John Paul II, as great as he was. In fact both grew up under totalitarian states where there was absolutely no respect for religious freedom, especially for Catholicism. And the US bishops must support the Vatican.

There is another generation of leadership on the horizon, younger and more familiar with the US model of non-establishment, which also took root in Europe too since the end of World War II. I doubt that they will support gay marriage, but I suspect that they will take a neutral stanceon what civil unions should be recognize by the state.

[D1B]

Is the Catholic Church trying to get the government NOT to recognize your brother's marriage? If not, why not? Why are some marriages ok to oppose, but others fair game? Is the Catholic Church spending millions of dollars to make any straight marriage they don't approve of illegal? NO

jon, the Catholic Church itself isn't spending money on the issue, but Catholic groups are. Other than that, this is the home run point, from my perspective. Two divorced persons cannot get married in the church, but the church does not say that their civil union recognized by the state (also called marriage) should not be allowed. I know many Catholics who feel the same way and believe, at the very least, the church should simply stay neutral on the question of who may marry under civil law.

As I see it, the issue with current Catholic leadership in the Vatican is that most of them grew up in an environment where there was virtually no wall between the affairs of church and state, and witnessed time and again in their youth, the state impose the dictates of civil law on the church. So what they fear is that the state, if it allows gay marriage, will require churches to recognize it too. Benedict XVI may be a brilliant man, but he simply does not appreciate the respect in the US between the "freedom of religion" and non-establishment concepts. He simply has no personal frame of reference. Nor did John Paul II, as great as he was. In fact both grew up under totalitarian states where there was absolutely no respect for religious freedom, especially for Catholicism. And the US bishops must support the Vatican.

There is another generation of leadership on the horizon, younger and more familiar with the US model of non-establishment, which also took root in Europe too since the end of World War II. I doubt that they will support gay marriage, but I suspect that they will take a neutral stanceon what civil unions should be recognize by the state.

Funny Joe, how your leadership is shaped more by the affairs of state or former totalitarian states than it is by the gospel values exemplified (in myth) by jesus christ.

Joe, what does gay marriage have to do with what you were talking about before - "The What Is"?

Oh, good post BTW.

[D1B]

I don't blame Dback. The Catholics are **** over gays big time with their shenanigans. Dback hit the nail on the head when he said it was not in the spirit of jesus christ. Jesus would be appauled at the behavior of the church, on the gay stuff especially.

I agree. And I'm not blaming dbj. But his recent posts have been very agressive, and unappropriate. Though, I understand his anger. The Catholic Church doesn't recognise my brothers marriage, what's the difference with what he wants? Nothing. Same should apply.
It's a governmental problem. Non-church marriages should be called "civil-unions". But you can't erase everything else. So. What? You can't undo anything so let it go, but leave the religious aspect out.

I'm cool with that.

It's so good to hear from young catholics. It will be nice, as Jolt mentioned, when they take over the church, kinda like Obama. I

I'm obviously pissed about certain attitudes (birth control, gays, cultural genocide) but the catholics do some mighty fine work helping out the poorest of the poor. It's sad to see this wonderful legacy of public service, workers rights fights and attempts to lift the quality of life in the 3rd world tainted by stupid shit like gay marriage, female priests and condom use - shit jesus didn't give a flying fuck about.

[JoltinJoe]

jon, the Catholic Church itself isn't spending money on the issue, but Catholic groups are. Other than that, this is the home run point, from my perspective. Two divorced persons cannot get married in the church, but the church does not say that their civil union recognized by the state (also called marriage) should not be allowed. I know many Catholics who feel the same way and believe, at the very least, the church should simply stay neutral on the question of who may marry under civil law.

As I see it, the issue with current Catholic leadership in the Vatican is that most of them grew up in an environment where there was virtually no wall between the affairs of church and state, and witnessed time and again in their youth, the state impose the dictates of civil law on the church. So what they fear is that the state, if it allows gay marriage, will require churches to recognize it too. Benedict XVI may be a brilliant man, but he simply does not appreciate the respect in the US between the "freedom of religion" and non-establishment concepts. He simply has no personal frame of reference. Nor did John Paul II, as great as he was. In fact both grew up under totalitarian states where there was absolutely no respect for religious freedom, especially for Catholicism. And the US bishops must support the Vatican.

There is another generation of leadership on the horizon, younger and more familiar with the US model of non-establishment, which also took root in Europe too since the end of World War II. I doubt that they will support gay marriage, but I suspect that they will take a neutral stanceon what civil unions should be recognize by the state.

Funny Joe, how your leadership is shaped more by the affairs of state or former totalitarian states than it is by the gospel values exemplified (in myth) by jesus christ.

Joe, what does gay marriage have to do with what you were talking about before - "The What Is"?

Oh, good post BTW.

I think, in the end, they are men who like all of us are shaped by our experiences.

During World War II, John Paul II entered an underground seminary in Krakow. The seminary was underground because the Nazi occupiers had outlawed the study for the priesthood in Poland and made it a capital crime. The Nazis discovered the seminary and raided it. The seminarians tried to hide in the basement of their building, but all but John Paul were discovered. John Paul continued to hide in the basement, and as the Nazis soldiers walked past, he was sure that he would be discovered.

The seminarians were taken away and never heard from again. Only John Paul survived.

Don't you think that experience would shape your perceptions about the relationship between government and religion?

In 1979, John Paul returned to Poland for the first time as Pope. The country was then under Soviet domination, and it was illegal to display the Catholic Church flag, or the Polish nationalist flag. Everywhere he went, however, people began displying both flags, first cautiously, then more openly, and then brazenly. At his last appearance in Poland on that trip, the display of both flags was so open and brazen that commentators began observing that a movement was under foot in Poland. The Polish people began to realize their numbers and strength. The fall of Communism, first in Poland and then throughout Easten Europe, was underway.

In any event, John Paul's outlook of government being hostile to religious freedom, I think, was readily understandable.

[D1B]

Funny Joe, how your leadership is shaped more by the affairs of state or former totalitarian states than it is by the gospel values exemplified (in myth) by jesus christ.

Joe, what does gay marriage have to do with what you were talking about before - "The What Is"?

Oh, good post BTW.

I think, in the end, they are men who like all of us are shaped by our experiences.

During World War II, John Paul II entered an underground seminary in Krakow. The seminary was underground because the Nazi occupiers had outlawed the study for the priesthood in Poland and made it a capital crime. The Nazis discovered the seminary and raided it. The seminarians tried to hide in the basement of their building, but all but John Paul were discovered. John Paul continued to hide in the basement, and as the Nazis soldiers walked past, he was sure that he would be discovered.

The seminarians were taken away and never heard from again. Only John Paul survived.

Don't you think that experience would shape your perceptions about the relationship between government and religion?

In 1979, John Paul returned to Poland for the first time as Pope. The country was then under Soviet domination, and it was illegal to display the Catholic Church flag, or the Polish nationalist flag. Everywhere he went, however, people began displying both flags, first cautiously, then more openly, and then brazenly. At his last appearance in Poland on that trip, the display of both flags was so open and brazen that commentators began observing that a movement was under foot in Poland. The Polish people began to realize their numbers and strength. The fall of Communism, first in Poland and then throughout Easten Europe, was underway.

In any event, John Paul's outlook of government being hostile to religious freedom, I think, was readily understandable.

Joe, I agree. JPII was a good pope.

[JoltinJoe]

The next Pope is likely to come from Africa, and will bring a world-view previously unknown to the Vatican. I think he will be more inward looking in matters of faith; and more determined to be concerned with matters of social justice when conducting business with the world as a whole. Benedict XVI has been a very pleasant surprise as Pope, not nearly as authoritative as many speculated. But the next Pope is likely to be off the charts, and will cause enormous reflection (and perhaps some chaos) within the Church -- which may be divisive in the short term for many traditionalists, but benefical in the long term.

Under the next papacy, you can expect Liberation Theology to make a come back. The papacy tends to lag behind contemporary outlooks, in that the men who control the Vatican are older men whose life expriences were formed decades ago. The current leadership tends to be guarded and often secretive: a result of an experience of growing up in an environment in which the church was threatened and repressed. But even as the current leadership remains guarded, the college of cardinals is filling up with members from Latin America and Africa with much different life experiences. Their choice for the next Pope could reflect a significant departure from prior papcies. The next Pope will build on the outreaches of John Paul II and Benedict XVI in dramatic and possibly historic ways.

[catamount man]

The next Pope is likely to come from Africa, and will bring a world-view previously unknown to the Vatican. I think he will be more inward looking in matters of faith; and more determined to be concerned with matters of social justice when conducting business with the world as a whole. Benedict XVI has been a very pleasant surprise as Pope, not nearly as authoritative as many speculated. But the next Pope is likely to be off the charts, and will cause enormous reflection (and perhaps some chaos) within the Church -- which may be divisive in the short term for many traditionalists, but benefical in the long term.

Under the next papacy, you can expect Liberation Theology to make a come back. The papacy tends to lag behind contemporary outlooks, in that the men who control the Vatican are older men whose life expriences were formed decades ago. The current leadership tends to be guarded and often secretive: a result of an experience of growing up in an environment in which the church was threatened and repressed. But even as the current leadership remains guarded, the college of cardinals is filling up with members from Latin America and Africa with much different life experiences. Their choice for the next Pope could reflect a significant departure from prior papcies. The next Pope will build on the outreaches of John Paul II and Benedict XVI in dramatic and possibly historic ways.

And when this happens, you will see MANY conservative Catholics bolt to the Orthodox and Anglican churches, the conservative branches. In fact, within the next 100 years JJ(unless the Second Coming occurs first), look for the conservative Anglican movement to become the top religious branch in the world. There have already been rumors of a split with the AB of Canterbury and the setting up of a new Archbishop out of Australia, where the conservative Anglican movement is huge. Traditional Catholics will NOT tolerate a liberal African Pope, just will not. I as a member of PCUSA look to see where we head. PCUSA has gotten extremely liberal and many smaller conservative congregations, such as the one I belong to, are sitting back and watching.

I enjoyed the short stay in the Episcopal Church, but left due to the liberalism, but would not hesitate to give the conservative anglican movement a look. RCC? Nope, done, but still hold very much respect for it. Just cannot get past all the "traditions of men" which are nowhere ordained by Holy Scripture. Peace!

[JoltinJoe]

I didn't say I expected the next Pope to be "liberal" -- just inward looking on matters of faith and less concerned with whether civil law mirrors Church doctrine on all issues.

With respect to relations with the civil law, the next Pope is more likely to be concerned with social issues and will try to use church influence to address issues like hunger, poverty, etc. Unlike present leadership, the next Pope may not fear civil government as a potential tool for repression of religious freedom, and this will allow him to be more outward reaching on matters of social justice.

[D1B]

The next Pope is likely to come from Africa, and will bring a world-view previously unknown to the Vatican. I think he will be more inward looking in matters of faith; and more determined to be concerned with matters of social justice when conducting business with the world as a whole. Benedict XVI has been a very pleasant surprise as Pope, not nearly as authoritative as many speculated. But the next Pope is likely to be off the charts, and will cause enormous reflection (and perhaps some chaos) within the Church -- which may be divisive in the short term for many traditionalists, but benefical in the long term.

Under the next papacy, you can expect Liberation Theology to make a come back. The papacy tends to lag behind contemporary outlooks, in that the men who control the Vatican are older men whose life expriences were formed decades ago. The current leadership tends to be guarded and often secretive: a result of an experience of growing up in an environment in which the church was threatened and repressed. But even as the current leadership remains guarded, the college of cardinals is filling up with members from Latin America and Africa with much different life experiences. Their choice for the next Pope could reflect a significant departure from prior papcies. The next Pope will build on the outreaches of John Paul II and Benedict XVI in dramatic and possibly historic ways.

[dbackjon]

Given the state of Christian persectution of Gays in Africa, I highly doubt an African Catholic Pope, unless from a progressive state like South Africa, would be any more friendly to gay rights.

I hope there is a laity uprising in the Catholic Church, and the Vatican follows.

[D1B]

Given the state of Christian persectution of Gays in Africa, I highly doubt an African Catholic Pope, unless from a progressive state like South Africa, would be any more friendly to gay rights.

I hope there is a laity uprising in the Catholic Church, and the Vatican follows.

There is Jon, white people in America and the industrialized west are leaving the catholic church in droves.


Their only salvation to retain membership/power is in Africa and Latin America. There are studies showing that numbers are beginning to slow or decline in emerging major Latin American countries - Brazil, Argentina....