Witnessing a Catholic same-sex wedding

Catholic faith condemns their commitment,and they show that they have chosen their commitment over Catholic faith,rather than celebrate that faith.

You say, Michael K, this marriage "is not a body and soul union." By what authority can you make such a statement? It is a committed, binding union of two persons who choose to commit to each other a "body and soul union". In Marriage the couple give the sacrament to each other; they make the union. not the State or any other institution.

I am shocked by the furious venom of other Catholic Christians on this case, even to falsely quoting passages from Scripture to justify the ferocity of their fear, hatred, and self-righteous disgust. There are often fierce attacks in this newspaper, but on same gender marriage and homosexuality the meanness of wording is scandalous. Yet they raise not a cry or protest against the evil "collateral damage"[the slaughtered carnage of bodies of children, women and men along the roadsides in Afghanistan and Iraq,etc] and babies and mothers "nutritionally stressed" [dying of starvation] in Somalia and Kenya. We even create softer language to hide and deny the evil we do daily. Yet we can choose to froth at the mouth over two people loving each other and wanting to spend the rest of their lives together in a holy union of body,mind and spirit! God forgive us the damage we do to our sisters and brothers, fellow members of the Church who share the very same Baptismal Birthright as we do.

yes, and there was no priest or deacon to witness is--thus no marriage!

Jesus was a jew, he died a jew, he was never ordained, never ordained anyone and did not invent the Roman Catholic CHurch. that is reality.

Read on, Jamie 72.

not so, as this barefooted one well knows what to expect here, in the face of her courage in commenting.

is not your own comment, 72, the proof of this bitter pudding?

How so Jamie 72? In order to have pre-judged I would have had to make a judgement against actual, specific persons. I am merely stating a fact - on this website we often see very dogmatic and hate-filled people spout all kinds of rigid, unkind and often homophobic comments about gay marriage, gay sexuality and gay people in general. That is a fact, not a judgement. There is no hate in my words.

In theory this is true, but in practice it's more about self righteous holier than thou pride.

Please take a scripture class so you can know that these quotes do not refer to same-sex love but rather to same sex rape, the lowering of a man to the status of a woman (notice that Leviticus only speaks of man on man and says nothing of women) and to the list of sins that christians said of pagans in the first century. Also, the translation many scripture scholars believe should be pedophiles instead of effeminate and homosexual.

Prejudices were alive and well "back in the day". God's love is all encompassing and does not exclude. Yes, it is in the Bible but written by mortal men who were not immune to prejudices. My prayers are for those of you who choose to be "so sure".

"He" kscrawler writes. "He?"

God is Love.
This we believe. This we live.

Does love know gender specificity?

We both know that there are other passages in Leviticus, Corinthians, and other books of both the Old and New Testament that we pay no attention to whatsoever, and that's because the book was written by humans, prone always to error. For instance, the Old Testament actually glorified the male taking several wives, including by some of our most exalted spiritual leaders, like Abraham. Why don't you insist that marriage must be between a man and several women?

Why quote just the gay issues from Leviticus? Equal abominations are eating shell fish, lying with a woman when she is "unclean" --- having her period, touching pork (a football), putting a child to death who curses their parent....

Why enforce just one rule from Leviticus?

Pray and think about your obvious prejudice, ask God to bless you with love, understanding and acceptance of ALL HIS CHILDREN. Get the hate and bigotry from your heart and you will be a much happier person.

You are in my prayers,

Brother Luke

C'mon kscrawler, we've had the Leviticus stuff ad nauseam now. If you're just going to single out those two verses, then that truly is a la carte or cafeteria religion. What about eating shellfish, and what about the amount you can seek when you sell your daughter into slavery? All or nothing, y'know.

I'd love to know what translation of Corinthians you are using. I have read three different versions and I can't find the word 'homosexual' anywhere. The concept, as apart from the practice of homosexuality did not exist in St. Paul's time anyway. The Corinthians and Romans passages are, thanks to modern scholarship, generally believed to refer to pagan prostitution.

Beware of throwing tags of Holy Writ about in an attempt to back up an argument; angels fear to thread there, and, as Antonio in Shakespeare's 'Merchant of Venice' says: The devil can cite scripture for his purpose.

Have you noticed, kscrawler, that your Scripture citations do not include even ONE from the words of Jesus in Matthew, Mark, Luke or John?

You offered two quotes from the laws in Leviticus. Are you willing to to keep all the other laws in Leviticus?

As pointed out in another Comment, you really should consider a Scripture class.

Recall also, that the New Testament was NOT written in English! How's your Greek?

________________________________________________

And now a word to Jamie Manson: THANK YOU for the beautiful description of the Catholic Same-Sex Wedding. As I read your inspiring words, I had a distinctive sublime experience as I pictured the two women fulfilling a dream that they have dreamed for a very long time. -- A GIFT FROM GOD and the State of New York!

Do you eat pork?

For once we more or less agree on something. I tend to believe that the government should get out of the "marriage business" altogether. The government should not issue marriage licenses, nor declare who may marry whom. The most the government should do is to pass a general law stating that, so long as evidence can be submitted that a marriage took place, the couple is eligible for all appropriate rights, protections and privileges under the law.

With the government out of the way, churches and religious organizations would be free to marry whom they will in accord with their own doctrines and traditions.

As to the rest of your comments, I must confess to being baffled. First, certain documents are required to prove identity and nearly every nation on earth issues some form of those documents (birth certificate, driver's license, passport) so that not every document issued by the government is invalid or bears little to no relationship to reality. Second, I have no clue how any of this relates to Captain Nowak's court-martial, though I do know that if she is discharged from the military in any manner other than honorably, she will forfeit most, if not all, of her benefits as a veteran, including retirement, etc. So, it is far from a cozy retirement plan.

Finally, there is no military occupation in the United States, so I must confess to not understanding at all the reference to "life under military occupation".

Oops, should read:

"or strawberries in heaven."

(maybe subconscious --- don't want strawberry juice on my cloud & wings)

I'm really sorry to have to tell you this, but this is not love, it is sin, pure and simple. I say this as someone who is more than conscious of my own sinfulness, not as some "dogmatist" sitting around thinking he is better than everyone else.

As Catholics we have the obligation to provide fraternal correction to our brothers and sisters when we see them engaging in acts of overt and obvious sin; to do otherwise would be to commit the sin of omission and we would be failing in our filial duty to our brothers and sisters in Christ.