|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Unequally yoked
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
O what a tangled web we weave.
The wisest words on the subject were said to me by a former (C of E) parish priest: the church ought to have nothing whatever to do with people's sexual relationships beyond telling them not to be unkind to each other.
It should be written into the 39 articles. And made a tenet of the creed.
Did I say I couldn't agree more? ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
--------------------
Irish dogs needing homes! http://www.dogactionwelfaregroup.ie/ Greyhounds and Lurchers are shipped over to England for rehoming too!
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zacchaeus
Shipmate
# 14454
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
O what a tangled web we weave.
The wisest words on the subject were said to me by a former (C of E) parish priest: the church ought to have nothing whatever to do with people's sexual relationships beyond telling them not to be unkind to each other.
It should be written into the 39 articles. And made a tenet of the creed.
Did I say I couldn't agree more?
An elderly priest once told me that he had been taught that you should preach once a year, on on each of:- money death and sex.
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
fortunately I haven't had a vicar who followed this.
Posts: 1905 | From: the back of beyond | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
quote:
I am really glad to hear that Zach is not a representative of the Roman Catholic church and that he feels no need to observe pastoral sensitivity as indeed he shows none.
You might want to drop the pompous little speech about pastoral sensitivity, since I am speaking as a person personally affected by these canons.
But call me insensitive, I am more offended by being classified as a fornicator in the Canon than the word fornicator. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
O what a tangled web we weave.
The wisest words on the subject were said to me by a former (C of E) parish priest: the church ought to have nothing whatever to do with people's sexual relationships beyond telling them not to be unkind to each other.
It should be written into the 39 articles. And made a tenet of the creed.
Did I say I couldn't agree more?
I disagree. Sex creates children, children create families, and families create tribes, then nations; since religions thrives or withers in these contexts it would be odd for the church to have no interest in the foundational act that starts it all!
Children are first introduced to religion in families, so it's unsurprising that churches take an interest in how people are 'getting together', and whether or not the circumstances are propitious for the transmission of faith. In Western culture, the children of mixed-faith, or faith+no faith couples tend not to be so likely to follow the Christian religion. Some parents (and some priests) won't be too concerned about that, which is fair enough. But churches that are keen to thrive and be viable in the future should be at least a little reflective about the realities that will face them later when they decide to relax their teachings on this issue....
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643
|
Posted
Hostly cappa magna ON:
Zach82 and Forthview. I appreciate that this is an Ecclesiantics thread, and therefore appropriate for robust discussion. BUT, it is also a thread for discussing the OP'er's wedding arrangements so I think some sensitivity in ones posting would be in order. If this were to continue, I could see it falling under what the Ten Commandments speak of as 'jerkish behaviour'. If there is a personal issue to be threshed out, then please feel free to continue doing so, but in Hell where it is appropriate.
I might particularly say that this is hardly the place to throw around accusations of 'filthy fornication', and claiming to be "quoting" the Roman Catholic church (again) hardly helps matters. I'm sure that our RC Shipmates do not appreciate being told what they believe, any more than the rest of us.
To everyone else, thanks for keeping a good discussion going on this somewhat delicate topic.
Hostly cappa magna OFF
[ 14. January 2013, 16:53: Message edited by: dj_ordinaire ]
--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...
Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Forthview
Shipmate
# 12376
|
Posted
My apologies.You can be sure that I do more than appreciate the difficulties which some people have in finding themselves unequally yoked and trying to maintain contact with the Roman Catholic church.
You can be sure that I also appreciate that these difficulties do not simply vanish if one decides to abandon either formal or indeed any contact at all with the Church.
Posts: 3444 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Squibs
Shipmate
# 14408
|
Posted
Thanks for the advice folks. The advice has been appreciated. There has been some interesting developments so I'll post an update when I know a little more.
Posts: 1124 | From: Here, there and everywhere | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Morgan
Shipmate
# 15372
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
In Western culture, the children of mixed-faith, or faith+no faith couples tend not to be so likely to follow the Christian religion.
Can you cite the evidence for this? It is not necessarily the case in my experience.
Posts: 111 | From: Canberra | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Nenuphar
Shipmate
# 16057
|
Posted
As Squibs' fiancée does not seem vehemently anti-Christian, it may well be the case that, after reading and discussing the vows, she feels able to make them.
What I feel you should be aware of, however, is that were she not to get the Catholic church's formal permission now, should she return to the Catholic faith and wish to marry in the Catholic church, she would have valid grounds for an annulment (and therefore a subsequent church marriage to someone else) - since, as others have said, she would not have a sacramental marriage in the eyes of the Catholic church. Heaven forbid this should happen, of course, but I think you should both be aware of the (Catholic) church law..
However, if she were formally to obtain church permission for her marriage outside the Catholic Church now, I don't think she would automatically qualify for a church annulment.
This has no effect on the civil validity of the marriage, of course, nor on the permanence of the vows of the non-catholic party.
Posts: 161 | From: UK | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Morgan
Shipmate
# 15372
|
Posted
Thanks SvitlanaV2, particularly for the link to the original research. Many interesting points made. These 'extras' are a great reason why I love it when people cite primary sources rather than secondary ones which can vary enormously in their quality and comprehensiveness.
Posts: 111 | From: Canberra | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
O what a tangled web we weave.
The wisest words on the subject were said to me by a former (C of E) parish priest: the church ought to have nothing whatever to do with people's sexual relationships beyond telling them not to be unkind to each other.
It should be written into the 39 articles. And made a tenet of the creed.
Did I say I couldn't agree more?
I disagree. Sex creates children, children create families, and families create tribes, then nations; since religions thrives or withers in these contexts it would be odd for the church to have no interest in the foundational act that starts it all!
Children are first introduced to religion in families, so it's unsurprising that churches take an interest in how people are 'getting together', and whether or not the circumstances are propitious for the transmission of faith. In Western culture, the children of mixed-faith, or faith+no faith couples tend not to be so likely to follow the Christian religion. Some parents (and some priests) won't be too concerned about that, which is fair enough. But churches that are keen to thrive and be viable in the future should be at least a little reflective about the realities that will face them later when they decide to relax their teachings on this issue....
I think the Church should teach us how to love one another non-abusively, unselfishly and kindly. Wedding prep should certainly not shy away from the more personal issues.
However, I personally don't think the church should be directing ordinary, decent consenting people of same-sex persuasion what not to do with their genitals and other body parts. I can only speak for myself when I say I've done a lot of reflecting on this. And the reflection that both the CofE and the CofI have done on this issue seems to be endless and not particularly helpful to date.
I know the 'let's keep sex straight for the sake of popping out more babies' argument. I'm just not terribly convinced that heterosexualism is so much under threat that the Church needs to panic about it quite yet!
--------------------
Irish dogs needing homes! http://www.dogactionwelfaregroup.ie/ Greyhounds and Lurchers are shipped over to England for rehoming too!
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
I personally don't think the church should be directing ordinary, decent consenting people of same-sex persuasion what not to do with their genitals and other body parts. I can only speak for myself when I say I've done a lot of reflecting on this. And the reflection that both the CofE and the CofI have done on this issue seems to be endless and not particularly helpful to date.
I suppose a lot of people will agree with your last sentence!
If most Anglican clergy are okay about interfaith marriages, then perhaps it should follow that they should be okay about gay relationships. The former surely involves far more people than the latter, and probably has far more practical consequences for the Church.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
venbede
Shipmate
# 16669
|
Posted
All of the C of E clergy at churches I've attended for the last thirty years have been accepting of my same sex relationship.
I've never heard of any opposing interfaith marriage. Most of them gladly (and sentimentally to my mind) conduct weddings for straight couples who haven't the remotest intention of church commitment and only want a nice church as the setting for their sentimental "special day".
A happy marriage is far more important than a happy wedding.
--------------------
Man was made for joy and woe;
And when this we rightly know,
Thro' the world we safely go.
Posts: 3201 | From: An historic market town nestling in the folds of Surrey's rolling North Downs, | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
I personally don't think the church should be directing ordinary, decent consenting people of same-sex persuasion what not to do with their genitals and other body parts. I can only speak for myself when I say I've done a lot of reflecting on this. And the reflection that both the CofE and the CofI have done on this issue seems to be endless and not particularly helpful to date.
I suppose a lot of people will agree with your last sentence!
If most Anglican clergy are okay about interfaith marriages, then perhaps it should follow that they should be okay about gay relationships. The former surely involves far more people than the latter, and probably has far more practical consequences for the Church.
As a minor quibble, Svitlana2, about your last sentence. It would depend where you are: I would think that my personal circle (western Québec and eastern Ontario) features roughly as many interfaith marriages as it does gay partnerships. As only a minority of gay partnerships will raise children, and a majority of the interfaith marriages will, these marriages will have greater practical consequences for churches are greater. Two footnotes: 1) a quick roladex survey gives me twelve gay partnerships, of which two have produced children and two-three more likely will; and ten interfaith marriages, five of which have produced spawn to date, and I think another two will); 2) terminologically, I used partnerships as four of the twelve gay partnerships are married (as takes place under Canadian law) but not all are, and all of the interfaith pairings are married. As a sub-footnote, one of the gay partnerships has three individuals involved (and they're not Mormon).
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Augustine
I expressed myself rather clumsily, but I was actually agreeing with you; I think that interfaith marriages have had and will have more immediate practical consequences for the church than SSM. The impact of SSM will be more insiduous and probably less immediate, primarily because it's simply a later development, and also, of course, because gay couples are less likely to have children. Speaking personally, interfaith marriages are far more a part of my world than same sex couples. (In the UK, of course, we don't have SSM, but civil partnerships.)
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
seasick
...over the edge
# 48
|
Posted
Let's steer clear of the Dead Horse. You can reference same-sex marriages as an example, but debate of the merits of same-sex marriage as such is off-limits.
For the avoidance of doubt, this is a ruling made in my hostly discretion for the purposes of this thread only.
seasick, Eccles host
--------------------
We believe there is, and always was, in every Christian Church, ... an outward priesthood, ordained by Jesus Christ, and an outward sacrifice offered therein. - John Wesley
Posts: 5769 | From: A world of my own | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
Seasick-- Quite so, and I agree. I was only intending to reference in passing, rather than to delve into it, otherwise I would have headed to the Dead Horses swamp. My digression into details was perhaps not the best.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
As a sub-footnote, one of the gay partnerships has three individuals involved (and they're not Mormon).
!!?? Does Canadian law allow polygamy. That's a step towards multiculturalism that ours hasn't taken and I suspect isn't likely to. It occasionally gives some recognition to the financial obligations people may have incurred in multiple marriages entered into elsewhere, but whatever your culture or religion may allow you in your home culture, it's bigamy plain and simple if you do it here.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
As a sub-footnote, one of the gay partnerships has three individuals involved (and they're not Mormon).
!!?? Does Canadian law allow polygamy. That's a step towards multiculturalism that ours hasn't taken and I suspect isn't likely to. It occasionally gives some recognition to the financial obligations people may have incurred in multiple marriages entered into elsewhere, but whatever your culture or religion may allow you in your home culture, it's bigamy plain and simple if you do it here.
I suspect this isn't about multiculturalism in a religious minority sense, but about polyandry, which is more to do with sexual freedom.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
As a sub-footnote, one of the gay partnerships has three individuals involved (and they're not Mormon).
!!?? Does Canadian law allow polygamy. That's a step towards multiculturalism that ours hasn't taken and I suspect isn't likely to. It occasionally gives some recognition to the financial obligations people may have incurred in multiple marriages entered into elsewhere, but whatever your culture or religion may allow you in your home culture, it's bigamy plain and simple if you do it here.
I suspect this isn't about multiculturalism in a religious minority sense, but about polyandry, which is more to do with sexual freedom.
SvitlanaV2 is correct-- it is a matter of polyandry, not polygamy or bigamy (the latter two of which are against Canadian law-- the former is an informal arrangement of which the law takes no notice). I should not have thrown in the Mormon reference -- it was more a sign of my spiritual immaturity at taking a crack at the Mormons than a serious contribution to the discussion. One of the three, in case anybody is interested, is a practising RC and I have no idea what her confessor says about her situation.
Enoch's point is also valid. As with English law dealing with the aftermath of empire, Canadian courts have occasionally recognized judicially some obligations stemming from marriages legal elsewhere but not in Canada. One of my swimming buddies has a legal practice which occupies itself with such questions from time to time.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
bib
Shipmate
# 13074
|
Posted
I think there can be real difficulties in marrying someone with different faith practices. I am a very strongly practising Christian and when I married my nominally Christian husband, I did not realise how significant differences in beliefs can become. As the years go by, differences become more important. My husband tends to look on church as only to be used for weddings and funerals whereas regular worship is a significant part of my life. He finds this odd and isn't very supportive of my worship practices. Although it is fine for partners to have differences, it creates problems in a marriage when these are in fundamental beliefs and practices. These differences should be talked over and resolved before marriage, not down the track as I discovered too late.
Posts: 1307 | From: Australia | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Bib
This is usually a problem faced by Christian women, isn't it? My own mother has found it difficult to be in a marriage with a man who seems distant from Christian spirituality. The alternative is faced by many Christian women who are waiting to find a committed Christian man to marry, and will probably never find one. Some go against the teachings of their churches to 'marry out', but then have to face the problems that we've mentioned.
I've heard that at some churches, there's a lot of pressure on Christian men to pick a wife from the many women available. In such a situation, I suppose it must happen that some of the men decide to turn their backs on the pressure and look elsewhere instead. It reminds me of John Wesley, who deliberately chose a non-Methodist wife. (It didn't work out too well, though!)
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
Funnily enough, we have more men in the church choir whose partners don't come to church, than women.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378
|
Posted
A little background on my part. I was still single when I was finishing my fourth year at a conservative Lutheran Seminary and about to be ordained in a conservative Lutheran Synod (LCMS). I was single. That Easter I was invited to a dinner at one of my friend's uncles, and I met a woman who just flipped me head over hills. We had such an entertaining dinner and afternoon. I found out she liked the out of doors as did I, and before the day was out I invited her on a canoe trip.
My friend's uncle's mother in law was also there. She kept talking about her Roman Catholic faith, so I assumed everyone there, other than my friend and I, were Roman Catholic. It was not until late in the afternoon, when my new interest was about to leave, that she mentioned she was Christian Scientist.
This threw quite a wrench in ordination plans. The LCMS would not allow anyone to become ordained if the spouse was not LCMS too. While we had just met, I did not want to pass up the opportunity to see where this relationship might go.
After four dates, I popped the question. And it surprised me she did not hesitate to say yes. But I had to tell her there was just one problem, she would have to convert. She agreed to taking Christian instruction. Six months later she was baptized into the Christian faith. Six months later we were married and I placed my name onto the call process.
I actually learned a number of things from her as we came together. She introduced me to the feminine side of God. She also introduced me to a form of positivism that she still exudes today.
After she became Lutheran she became Lutheran all the way. We have raised four children in Lutheranism. One is about to start the seminary process himself, but it will be under the ELCA. We became ELCA about 20 years ago.
I really think having been married 30 years to each other, having the common connection through our shared faith helped us get through some very difficult times.
I know she has developed some close friendships with people in our Lutheran community that have become like an extended family for her.
This is very important to consider. Marriages need support of family, church and community. It is like a three legged stool. But if one of those legs is not fully developed, it can be a very tough go for the couple. IMHO
Posts: 2193 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
