Skip to main content

View Diary: Could The Great Stone Wall Of Catholicism Be Cracking? (37 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  And what he's saying does NOT go against doctrine. (9+ / 0-)

    He's only talking about "legal arrangements".

    NOT marriage.

    As we all know, "civil union" is code for "separate but equal".

    "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." --M. L. King "You can't fix stupid" --Ron White -6.00, -5.18

    by zenbassoon on Sun May 25, 2014 at 04:11:03 PM PDT

    •  I know that but it is a political (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      gffish, allie4fairness, Ahianne

      shift. I am pretty certain that Francis is not interested in making any head on doctrinal changes.

      I have about as negative opinion of the official order of the RCC as anybody. What interest me is the situation of people with general progressive views who remain affiliated with it. I am presently trying to step back from my protestant upbringing and get a better grip on that.

      •  Why are progressives affiliated with the Church? (7+ / 0-)

        Social Justice and Labor.

        Read Rerum Novarum.

        It was written during the height of the Gilded Age

        "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." --M. L. King "You can't fix stupid" --Ron White -6.00, -5.18

        by zenbassoon on Sun May 25, 2014 at 04:29:46 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  There are some significant differences (6+ / 0-)

          between to conservatism of the RCC and fundamentalist like the SBC. The latter are fundamentally anti-intellectual about most things, evolution, the biological realities of LGBT makeup, etc. The RCC attempts to balance science and doctrine. In doing so they often wind up making convoluted arguments that are reminiscent of trying to count how many angles can dance on the head of a pin, but it does give a different flavor.  

        •  That's one reason (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          The other is to ensure the church isn't taken from us and handed over to people like SSPXers without firing a shot. A lot of our fore bearers left when Vatican II didn't pan out. But some of us held in, because we're still here, and if we linger, they can't take the church from us.

          Rick Perry - the greatest scientist since Galileo!

          by Bobs Telecaster on Sun May 25, 2014 at 07:32:17 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  "written during the height of the Gilded Age" (0+ / 0-)

          And look at how effective it's been.... actually, it might as well have never been written at all. It certainly didn't put much of a dent in the Gilded Age.

          Perhaps progressives would progress a little bit faster without this sort of "support."

          This is the landscape that we understand, -
          And till the principle of things takes root,
          How shall examples move us from our calm?

          (Mary Oliver, "Beyond the Snow Belt.")

          by sagesource on Mon May 26, 2014 at 02:25:33 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  But Marriage is a Legal Institution. It Is Civil. (8+ / 0-)

      Neither Jesus nor the Pope can marry anyone in any state of the US or territory without a government license. And anyone married with a government license, neither the Pope nor Jesus can do anything about them.

      And they can jump up and down all afternoon on the surface of the sea and they still can't marry anybody without the government license.

      If he's willing to take his club out of the business of blocking governments from opening their institutions to all their citizens, who cares what his club decides about its members?

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Sun May 25, 2014 at 04:30:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's both (0+ / 0-)

        Civil and religious recognition of marriage aren't the same.  This is much more obvious when it comes to divorce.  The Catholic Church still doesn't recognize civil divorce when it comes to its own rules for allowing Catholics to remarry in the Catholic Church.  If you don't care to marry in the Church that doesn't matter oh but it sure does matter to families many, many times and the disputes go on as they have for hundreds of years.  

        It's an absurd expectation to think the Catholic Church is going to have a simple answer to gay marriage when it is still requiring people who have been married and had children to annul a previous marriage before they can remarry.

        The Catholic Church never recognized my grandmother's marriage and she was married over 50 years, had two children who were themselves married over 50 years and are now still devoutly Catholic into their 90's nearly 100 years after the marriage the Catholic Church has still never recognized as a valid marriage.

        •  Actually it looks like this Pope (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          karmsy, Rashaverak, Ahianne

          might be looking at changing the rules on divorced Catholics who remarry:

          I've seen several refugees from the Catholic Church join the Episcopal Church for this very reason.

          There's only one rule that I know of, babies -- goddammit, you've got to be kind. -- Kurt Vonnegut

          by Cali Scribe on Sun May 25, 2014 at 06:06:55 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  But are they also refugees from their own mothers? (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            LordMike, Ahianne

            I swear I couldn't recognize my mother the tizzy she went into over getting my brother's fiancé to annul a starter marriage that hadn't lasted 2 years and brother was nearly 40 at the time!  It's the family stuff that makes it all insane.  But I always say the Catholic Church is horrible at weddings but wonderful at funerals.  So there you go.  Ritual and tradition link us together and tear us apart.  This is not all taken care of by the civil law which come to think of it doesn't do funerals however busy it gets probating estates.  

    •  Maybe not in Brazil (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      WineRev, Ahianne

      In France every one has a civil marriage then if they wish the one in the Church. What if Brazil went to a similar arrangement?

      There's only one rule that I know of, babies -- goddammit, you've got to be kind. -- Kurt Vonnegut

      by Cali Scribe on Sun May 25, 2014 at 06:03:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Back to the Future! (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Ahianne, Cali Scribe

        In the early centuries of the Christian church, couples wishing to marry would do so in front of a minor Roman official (think "justice of the peace.")
        According to Roman law they were now married.

        If said couple were also members of that new-fangled religion called "Christianity" (as opposed to ALL the other religions running around the Roman Empire), they would inform the presiding/convening person in their community.
        (Sometimes done publicly, sometimes done secretly, depending on whether a given Emperor was persecuting the early Church or tolerating it). Said convening/presiding person (not yet called a priest/bishop or ordained) at the next gathering of the community would announce said marriage (in the past tense) and, upon request, offer a blessing upon the new couple.

        End of "Sacrament" of Marriage, ca. 200 A.D.

        This pattern continued far into the Middle Ages. Couples would get married in front of the local authorities, then have the union blessed by the Church. Sometimes the wedding would take place on the front steps of the church (since the Church was legal now and was allowed to own property and build buildings) on a Sunday morning as the congregation was gathering. After the local magistrate "pronounced them man and wife" the couple would walk in for the morning worship service and receive a blessing.

        Finally the Church took over the whole wedding business ("thars money to be made there!") and converted the whole thing into a "sacrament" (to establish more or less a monopoly position).

        Given its administrative/legal roots rather than its Scriptural/religious roots, this accounts (because religious bodies preserve everything just the way it was, until it isn't anymore) for the very formal and LEGALISTIC language of the wedding ceremony. A couple examples:

        "Who gives this woman in marriage?" means "What male relative (father/brother/cousin) who has legal standing (since only men had any legal rights at all) by public declaration in front of everybody here RENOUNCES all legal claim and authority over this woman?"
             After Daddy/Bro/etc. said "I do" he, having led in the bride, would hand the bride's hand into the hand of the priest. This male personage would then hand her hand into the hand of the groom, showing this female person with no legal position at all and who was utterly dependent (legally) on a male in her life, never stood alone and had such a male in her life.
        (This also shows also the desperate situation of widows, particularly if they were past middle age. They had no legal standing and no legal protector. It accounts for several letters of St. Paul (New Testament) that call on the church community to remember and support the widows among them.)

               "If anyone (male) know of any (legal lien or claim) reason this man or woman should not be married (move into a new legal status) let him (someone with legal rights) speak now or forever hold his peace." This meant anyone who had a legal claim (e.g. term of apprenticeship yet unfulfilled/ existing but perhaps secret marriage in another place) had this last, public chance to assert their claim on their contracted person. Otherwise, the claim was nullified for good. (This accounts for lots of eloping.)

        So, if at a very traditional wedding, you thought you suddenly entered a gathering of lawyers for a reading of a contract, your thinking and recognition skills are correct.


        "God has given wine to gladden the hearts of people." Psalm 104:15

        by WineRev on Mon May 26, 2014 at 05:17:05 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (127)
  • Community (55)
  • Memorial Day (31)
  • Culture (29)
  • Environment (26)
  • Republicans (21)
  • Civil Rights (20)
  • Media (18)
  • Rescued (18)
  • Labor (17)
  • Education (17)
  • Elections (17)
  • Science (17)
  • Bernie Sanders (16)
  • Law (16)
  • GOP (16)
  • 2016 (15)
  • Climate Change (15)
  • Marriage Equality (14)
  • Health Care (13)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site