Posted on 10/18/2012 6:14:56 AM PDT by rhema
Thanks, Archbishop!
John Nienstedt, who leads the Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis, has been subjected to much disrespectful criticism -- from members of his flock, and even from a Lutheran bishop -- regarding his lead role supporting the marriage amendment. He stands accused of forcing his religion on everyone, and of forcing the consciences of his fellow Catholics. Though not unexpected, the charges are unfair.
What is the dispute about? One side holds that marriage is a vow of a man and a woman before the community to engage in a project that is greater than the couple, and that the community should hold them to it. This has been the universal view of marriage since time immemorial. The other side thinks that marriage (or civil union) is an expression of the desires of two people (their gender doesn't matter), and that the community must support them whatever they choose -- to have sex (and perhaps children) within marriage or not. To accept one definition, one must reject the other.
Due to the encroachments of the revisionist view of marriage into law, typically by judicial fiat, the institution is in some danger. Thus, those who wish to protect that time-honored institution seek to define it in the state Constitution.
This essentially is their argument. There is only one reason the community is interested in the friendships and sexual arrangements of human beings: When a man and a woman are united sexually, the natural (and frequent) result is children. Children on the whole do best, by any measure, when they are united with their biological parents, who are themselves united before the community to each other.
(Excerpt) Read more at startribune.com ...
Another name to add to our prayer list! May God bless him and give him favor!
“...marriage is a vow of a man and a woman before the community...”
Wrong Mr. Heaney. Marriage has always been a vow a man and a woman before God. Here is the problem: if we accept Mr. Heaney’s definition of marriage, which has already been redefined, it is a simple step to further redefine it. We must insist upon the correct scriptural definition of marriage.
God bless the good Archbishop, a true shepherd to his flock.
Which, no doubt, includes many priests. That these reprobate heretics are not summarily excommunicated tells me more about the Catholic Church than it does about the reprobates.
Our form of American government itself makes foundational reference to "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God". The truth being expressed here, is that Nature itself proclaims God's law, because He created it; and particularly Human Nature, since we are rational beings created in His image. St. Paul says we find God's law written in our hearts (Romans 2).
In a culture like ours, people have different Scriptures (Torah, Tanakh, Gospels, Book of Mormon, Qu'ran, the Gita; some say "All of the above," and more say "None of the above") but they still have one human nature.
I'll repeat: one human nature.
So it is very truthful, as well as politically wise, to justify civil law in terms of Natural Law. It is accessible to anyone who has the use of their intellect and who can look around and profit from human experience.
And marriage as the union of a man and a woman is fully defensible in terms of Natural Law. You can see it supports human flourishing, no matter whether you want to go back in time to Leviticus or the Odyssey, or whether you want to go around the world to the Hopis or the Mandarins or the Irish.
It is entirely possible to make a case for marriage using evidence from sociology, anthropology and psychology. That's a preferred rationale for public policy,built around evidence we can all reason about, rather than Holy Writ which is not shared by all of our fellow citizens.
Remember that God's Law and Natural Law, correctly understood, cannot ultimately contradict each other. They constitute One Law, since they both have the one and the same Author.
My and my neighbor’s “Vote Yes” marriage-amendment signs were filched from our front yards last night, so I went to the Catholic church in my neighborhood this morning for replacements.
did everyone notice that romney said we need Moms and Dads during the issue of children and schools?
Then he coupled that with the herritage foundation study that said poverty is reduced for children in marriage. IOW where there is a mother and a father.
Hard to believe Mzzzzzz. Vegitarian Crowly missed that one.
I think it is past time for the conservative religions to begin a long term plan to “take back” marriage from the state.
This amounts to establishing some basic ground rules among themselves of what marriages they will all accept as legitimate, and that they will *not* recognize other forms of marriage.
Given the large and often radicalized Muslim populations in some states, including Minnesota, how long will it be before there is a push to allow polygamy? If Joe and Bruce have a right to be married why can’t Achmed have four wives as the Koran allows?
Deo Gratias.
Deo Gratias.
WELCOME TO FREE REPUBLIC’S MINNESOTA PING LIST!
151 MEMBERS AND GROWING...!
FREEPMAIL ME IF YOU WANT ON OR OFF THIS LIST!
Rhema, I’m sorry to hear that. Unfortunately, I’m also not surprised. The pro-perversion element in this state (remember, they claim to be the “tolerant” ones) have been stealing, defacing and destroying lawn signs all over the state - Even in culturally conservative areas like the Red River Valley!
Move the signs closer to your front door. The closer the sign is to your house, the less likely it is to be stolen.
Also, if you’re feeling really devious, smear some lithium grease on the sign, particularly the metal prongs that stick the sign into the ground. The person who grabs this sign will be very sorry they did it. The clean-up is a huge mess!
At least someone is!!
Good for the archbishop!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.