Posted on 06/17/2008 5:49:16 AM PDT by NYer
Bishops in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles Archdiocese have reiterated that they "cannot approve of redefining marriage" as anything but the union of "a man and a woman in a committed relationship" as same-sex couples prepare to marry in California.
The brief statement, signed by Cardinal Roger Mahony and his six auxiliary bishops, was issued hours before California counties were to begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples under a ruling of the California Supreme Court. The court ordered the ruling to become final on June 16 at 5pm.
Condemning "all forms of violence, scorn and hatred - whether subtle or overt - against men and women who are homosexual," the bishops said some of the benefits sought by same-sex couples "can already be obtained without regard to marital status".
Among those they cited were joint property ownership and designation as a beneficiary in a will or as a health care decision-maker for a person who is declared incompetent.
"Other desired benefits such as sharing in a partner's health insurance could be made available without the drastic step of a cultural or legal redefinition of marriage," the bishops added.
The statement quoted from the Catechism of the Catholic Church and documents of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops.
"When marriage is redefined so as to make other relationships equivalent to it, the institution of marriage is devalued and further weakened," they said, quoting the US bishops' 2006 document, "Ministry to Persons With a Homosexual Inclination: Guidelines for Pastoral Care."
A measure on the California ballot this November would amend the state constitution to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Twenty-six states have constitutional amendments or similar prohibitions on same-sex marriage.
The bishops' statement did not comment on the initiative but concluded: "Let us strengthen our resolve to respect the dignity of each human being and to protect the sanctity of marriage, asking God's guidance in our efforts to promote the common good central to a free and democratic society."
Homosexual unions are totally lacking in the biological and anthropological elements of marriage and family which would be the basis, on the level of reason, for granting them legal recognition. Such unions are not able to contribute in a proper way to the procreation and survival of the human race. The possibility of using recently discovered methods of artificial reproduction, beyond involving a grave lack of respect for human dignity,(15) does nothing to alter this inadequacy.
Well, here we go. Which state is next to OK legal perversion?
For unrepentent perverts there can be no reward in Heaven.
Issuing marriage certificates and performing the actual marriages places those who do the issueing and performing clearly on a path to eternal damnation.
It seems they do not understand that homosexuality is inherently disordered. They are not a people as an identity, they are individuals with a disorder.
Next if they can figure out engaging in homosexual practices is a sin they might be accused of reading the catechism and the Bible.
mcphony’s always bitching.
why should the state reinforce his religion?
A couple of observations (for whatever they’re worth):
1) It is always irritating when our bishops do not take the opportunity to clearly annunciate the Church’s teachings on homosexual acts. It’s all well and good to preach against intolerance and against injustice (as well they should), but failing to pastorally address the sins of sex outside of marriage (indeed, to fail to even mention it in this context) is akin to a wink and a nod to those who live out their homo-erotic desires.
2) As for marriage being solely a “state issue” - if those in the libertarian and states’ rights factions of the Republican Party are still towing that old line after these recent developments, they REALLY need to wake up. I think there is a real and present danger that we will soon see (a) same sex couple(s) married in MA or CA before a federal court b/c their marriage isn’t recognized in the state to which they’ve moved. It IS coming and, quite honestly, I don’t know that there is any current constitutional protection against the federal courts forcing states to recognize the “marriages” of such couples.
**Bishops in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles Archdiocese have reiterated that they “cannot approve of redefining marriage” as anything but the union of “a man and a woman in a committed relationship” as same-sex couples prepare to marry in California.**
Hooray for the bishops of California. Especially those in the LA Archdiocese.
Why bother electing Executive and Legislative representatives? Why not dispense with them and be ruled by the Judiciary?
Why should judicial tyrants replace the cultural imperatives of all of mankind since our beginning with their own whims?
I didn’t see anywhere in that statement that God says it’s an abomination.
“I didn’t see anywhere in that statement that God says it’s an abomination.”
Using a sledgehammer is always preferable when making policy statements for the news. Bring on the au-de-fe!
/s
Darn: auto-de-fe
Sometimes stating the obvious makes little or no difference.
So far, the only statement issued has come from the Catholic Church. Have any of the non-Catholic Churches issued statements? What about the Jews or Muslims?
Yea, I'd like to hear their statements.
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.