By Darren Smith, Weekend Contributor
With all constituencies reporting, the Irish citizenry approved a constitutional amendment recognizing gay marriage: Yes 1,201,607; No 734,300.
The Constitution of Ireland permits amendment only by popular vote. A vote of the people for such amendments can provide more legitimacy and acceptance by the public and judging by the margin gay marriage will probably gain acceptance more readily. Nevertheless it does not necessarily engender full acceptance of such partnerships as over seven hundred thousand voters chose otherwise. Some institutions in Irish society will struggle to come to terms with the new direction Ireland is pursuing.
Change has been underway with the Irish government’s approach to the issue. Ireland decriminalized homosexuality twenty two years ago and later in 2010 the state voted to permit same sex civil unions to have same legal status as heterosexual couples. Yet there existed considerable debate as to whether a full marriage would be permitted. In 2013 a constitutional convention formed to explore the possibility of amending the Irish Constitution to allow the right to marriage regardless of gender of either party. In 2014 a referendum was drafted to be posed to the people. Voting occurred yesterday.
Probably the most visible unresolved question will be that of the Catholic Church which is not legally bound presently to perform gay marriages by its clergy or within its facilities. The vast majority of Irish are of the Catholic religion which might put more tradition minded church leaders against a younger demographic which sided with the Yes camp in greater proportions. The higher age demographic was more likely to belong to the No camp.
The issue has the potential to cause a schism within the church because doctrine disallows such marriages and the church’s hierarchy answers to the Vatican which ultimately could set policy contrary to that of Catholic Church in Ireland. The issue of gay marriage has caused fragmentation of protestant churches in the United States.
It is likely that in the afterglow of the passage of the referendum Ireland will experience strong debate while it tries to understand and embrace this change. Time will be ultimately the deciding factor. The younger generation embraces gay marriage. Eventually it will not be a significant matter for controversy but like most controversies first generation likely will be the one to struggle the most.
By Darren Smith
The views expressed in this posting are the author’s alone and not those of the blog, the host, or other weekend bloggers. As an open forum, weekend bloggers post independently without pre-approval or review. Content and any displays or art are solely their decision and responsibility.
the Catholic Church does not have ceremonies or liturgical celebrations for excommunication dave, or it’s apostates
The Great Stanton wrote: “… the Catholic Church does not have ceremonies or liturgical celebrations for excommunication dave, or it’s apostates…”
I understand that is the case today, but they used to have it. Like I said, the Catholic Church no longer keeps the doctrine of the apostles and that is why they are not the true church of Jesus Christ. The churches established upon the foundation of the apostles excommunicated fornicators. The modern Catholic Church does not. Therefore, Catholics are false to claim apostolic succession, because they no longer abide in the teachings of the apostles.
Regarding ceremonies for excommunication, here is an excerpt from one historian:
“In the Middle Ages, formal acts of public excommunication were sometimes accompanied by a ceremony wherein a bell was tolled (as for the dead), the Book of the Gospels was closed, and a candle snuffed out — hence the idiom “to condemn with bell, book, and candle.” Such ceremonies are not held today.”
one more thing dave…lay-persons who often seek to interpret scripture, often wind up more fouled up, than before they started…that’s why we have 20,000 flavors of protestantism in the world…all claiming to go strictly by the Bible…your understanding of the Catholic Church’s teaching on excommunication is wrong…as is your understanding of Church history.
As far as I can tell they don’t have a separation of Church and State in Ireland, which doesn’t bode well the Catholic church there. OTOH, they also don’t have the weird rule by lawyers that the USA has. I can’t imagine the Irish putting up with 5 judges deciding important issues like Abortion or who can vote.
Ireland is also part of the EU – this could another point of attack on the Church.
“…my Church is the ONE, TRUE Church, Catholic, Universal and will stand for all time, all others are man-made inventions.”
Stanton,
Your idolatry of the Catholic Church belies a weakness in your faith. If you cannot see how you are placing the Church above Jesus Christ then you have much to learn about Christianity.
cut off from the community of believers dave?….that is more JW speak…look up what constitutes excommunication in the Catholic Church dave…fornication does not constitute excommunication nor adultery…remember dave, we are all sinners including you…heretics and those who promulgate heresy incur excommunication…a doctor who aborts a baby in utero has just incurred ipso facto excommunication…jw’s cannot excommunicate…they are heretics…are you a jw dave?
The Great Stanton wrote: “cut off from the community of believers dave?….that is more JW speak…”
Actually, that language was used by Saint Thomas Aquinas. Thomas Aquinas was a Dominican friar and Catholic priest. He has been honored by the Catholic church as a Saint and is held to be a model teacher for those studying for the priesthood. Following is what this Catholic saint said:
, “237. – To deliver this man to Satan can also be understood as referring to the sentence of excommunicating by which a person is cut off from the community of believers and from partaking of the sacraments and is deprived of the blessings of the Church.”
Super I Epistolam B. Pauli ad Corinthios lectura, Commentary, On the First Epistle to the Corinthians by Saint Thomas Aquinas, Translated by Fabian Larcher, O.P., (987-1046 by Daniel Keating)
237
“The only religion that will be exempt will be the Muslims as the gays are afraid of them. ”
And the Orthodox Jews, no one is going to mess with them either.
dave…are you a mormon…or jw?…or have you left these cults, but still retain some beliefs in their teaching?
The Great Stanton wrote: “are you a mormon…or jw?”
No, as I have said before, I am not religious; meaning, I do not belong to any religion. I have never been a member of any mormon or jw sects. I have no idea why you want to associate me with those false religions.
I. Annie is the Protestant Christian here. There are a few other Roman Catholics here, but they are not as vocal as you are. Darren has mentioned that he is a Methodist. I guess I represent the heathen Gentile that you are supposed to try to save. 🙂
I view myself as a rationalist, but like John Locke, I also accept the idea of revelation. I believe God is spirit. Therefore, I think logic coupled with spiritual sensitivity to God is the path to truth.
I think you miss the point Dave. Either the Church excludes those who are in same sex marriages or it accepts them and withers away like the Presbyterian are doing on their way to dissolving. There really is no way that living in perpetual sin can be tolerated. Not if they trumpet it to the heavens and demand total surrender of Catholic doctrine.
I think it will work the same way as it works with divorced couples or people living together in sin. These groups are all over the church but they keep quiet. The local parish priest will not seek them out to punish them because they are concealing their status. It could certainly work the same way for same sex married couples.
So do you think they could ever be humble enough to do that or will they demand to be accepted or they will destroy the Church?
as Christians we are not to associate with evildoers and sinners…we are all sinners though…I have enough problems without running around with active adulterers…aren’t you a sinner dave?
Stanton,
Don’t we have a natural right to sin? For those of us that believe in God and his salvation, we are guided by our lifelong challenge to live our lives in accordance with Holy Scripture so that we have eternal life in heaven. We are also guided by secular law so that we live our lives according to the principles of our founding. I’m concerned with my conduct in this life because I will be judged twice. Those that don’t have a belief in God only believe they are judged once. Having a concern for where one spends eternal life is a great motivator to abide by secular law. Removing that consequence from a culture puts an enormous burden on the state to maintain a civil society. Our current events are a testament to that.
I focus a great deal of my attention on natural rights because theists and secularists can find harmony around them. One can believe they come from their Creator and the other simply because they exist. We don’t all have to believe in a God, the same God or any God to believe in natural rights. I am passionate about God for my next life and I’m passionate about natural rights for this life.
dave confuses St. Paul’s teaching and admonition to mean formal excommunication…it does not…this is daves erroneous interpretation of this passage of sacred scripture
it does dave…does yours?…which is it JW or Mormon dave…i don’t associate with adulterers…do you?…all men are sinners…and all can be reconciled, just like the woman caught in adultery…Jesus said to forgive 70×7…this means that God will continue to forgive, as many times we screw up…
one more thing dave…i don’t associate with adulterers…nor fornicators…do you?…I had a friend once, who was in an adulterous relationship…I counseled him, he made a good sacramental confession, and walked away from his adulterous affair…he has been reconciled to the bosom of Holy Mother Church, after making a good act of contrition
that passage of scripture mentions nothing of excommunication dave…
The Great Stanton wrote: “that passage of scripture mentions nothing of excommunication dave…”
The United States Conference of Bishops has a footnote on verse 5, calling it an “excommunication ceremony.”
What do you call it when a person is cut off from the community of believers and from partaking of the sacraments and is deprived of the blessings of the Church? Sounds like excommunication to me.
1 Cor. 5:13, from the Catholic Bible: God will judge those outside. “Purge the evil person from your midst.”
no dave…you have lost your way…my Church is the ONE, TRUE Church, Catholic, Universal and will stand for all time, all others are man-made inventions…you are either a JW or Mormon…in either event a heretic and member of a cult religion,
The Great Stanton wrote: “… my Church is the ONE, TRUE Church, Catholic, Universal and will stand for all time, all others are man-made inventions…”
Then why does your church not obey the teaching of the apostle Paul that I quoted?
homosexuality is a grave mortal sin…a sin so grave and disordered, “it cries to Heaven for vengeance”…
phillyT,
You seem to believe the PURPOSE for government should evolve as our culture changes. Many people might want to say “sure”, that’s why we have the amendment process. Is there a statement that we can point to that identifies the unchanging PURPOSE for government? Absolutely. You will find it in the Declaration of Independence;
“That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the
consent of the governed,.”
Our constitution, including the Bill of Rights points back to the self-evident truths of the Declaration. The constitution is designed to be changeable as we move along towards “forming a more perfect union” but the purpose for government DOES NOT change. This makes the purpose timeless. You might not want to acknowledge the existence of inalienable rights but the formation of our government is centered on them. If you are unclear as to what an inalienable right is then there are plenty of sources available to find out. It is quite frankly in your best interest to know. I reference constitution.org for such matters;
“Under the theory of the social contract, those rights which the individual brings with him upon entering
the social contract are natural, and those which arise out of the social contract are contractual. Those
contractual rights arising out of the constitution are constitutional rights. However, natural rights are also
constitutional rights.”
http://constitution.org/soclcont.htm
Being straight or gay is a natural right. The right of conscience is a natural right. Marriage however is not a natural right. So when the SC rules that gay marriage is legal, it should be of no consequence to anyone that opposes it because no law can legitimately be made to force anyone violate their own conscience.
Olly wrote: “Being straight or gay is a natural right. The right of conscience is a natural right. Marriage however is not a natural right. So when the SC rules that gay marriage is legal, it should be of no consequence to anyone that opposes it because no law can legitimately be made to force anyone violate their own conscience.”
I would argue that marriage when coupled with a vehicle for the orderly propagation of oneself to future generations is a natural right. In other words, it is a self-evident truth than a man has the natural right to bond with a female and produce children and a family to carry on his family name and legacy.
Therefore, governments cannot forbid marriage if we are talking about traditional marriage of a man and a woman.
On the other hand, same sex unions are not a natural right. They have the natural right to associate together, as friends, roommates, even lifelong buddies, but they have no natural right to sexual relations with one another. The biological purpose of sex is to reproduce. It is no more natural for a man to stick his penis into another man’s anus for the purpose of pleasure than it is for him to stick it into a woman’s anus or into a plastic doll. These are perversions of nature.
You speak about the SCOTUS ruling gay marriage legal, but that is not really what is happening. In the majority of States, so-called gay marriage already is legal. What SCOTUS will do is force all the States to acknowledge gay marriages in other States. That way, if a gay couple gets married in Massachusetts, then they can go to Alabama to get a divorce. Furthermore, the State of Alabama will have to perform gay marriages, even though the State might consider it unhealthy to put their imprimatur on that civil union. Can you imagine Justice Roy Moore, the Chief Justice of the State of Alabama, being forced to marry a gay couple? Talk about forcing a man to violate his conscience! This gay marriage issue is forcing a great immorality upon the nation.
I would love to see his miracle as part of the beatification process. Turning a steak into horseshit?
if stupidity were a virtue, phillyt would be a saint…
fornication is a “mortal sin”…a Catholic must go to confession if he/she commits this grave sin…