Washington Archdiocese says vote legalizing gay marriage regrettable

The Washington Archdiocese expressed regret that a District of Columbia bill to legalize same-sex marriage was approved despite church opposition and without protecting religious freedom.

“Since this legislation was first introduced in October, the Archdiocese of Washington opposed the redefinition of marriage based on the core teaching of the Catholic Church that the complementarity of man and woman is intrinsic to the definition of marriage,” said an archdiocesan statement Dec. 15.

However, the archdiocese said that because “the City Council was committed to legalizing same-sex marriages,” it had advocated for a bill that would balance that action with protecting religious freedom.

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Culture-Watch, * Religion News & Commentary, --Civil Unions & Partnerships, Law & Legal Issues, Other Churches, Religion & Culture, Roman Catholic, Sexuality

5 comments on “Washington Archdiocese says vote legalizing gay marriage regrettable

  1. Alta Californian says:

    [blockquote] …the Archdiocese of Washington opposed the redefinition of marriage based on the core teaching of the Catholic Church that the complementarity of man and woman is intrinsic to the definition of marriage. [/blockquote]

    One of the things that I do so love about the Catholics is that they seem to get it. For many of us this is not about Leviticus (or even Paul) and never was. It is about the countless scriptural references to that complementarity, and its correlation to the relationship between Christ and the Church. This is a framework that SSUs do not fit easily into, at least not beyond the vaguest symbolism. What the revisionists do not see is that for many of us it has nothing to do with who we hate (homosexuals), but about what we love (our ancient and very beautiful theology of the union of two complementary halves) and who we love (the One we believe to be the author of it).

  2. Marcus Pius says:

    Alta: I don’t think many young heterosexual European women are very keen on the complementarity view of marriage: it is that which was used to justify depriving their mothers and grandmothers of equal opportunities in life.

  3. NoVA Scout says:

    Beautifully stated, No.1.

  4. Alta Californian says:

    Marcus, then that is the fault of European society, not the Gospel. I’m with N.T. Wright, who has argued that where the Church has been complicit in racism and misogyny, it has missed both the point of the Gospel and the examples of equality in the New Testament itself and particularly in the Acts of the Apostles. What Christian marriage requires is mutual submission…mutual. That Christians in the past have forgotten the mutuality is a tragedy. But that the modern world overreacts by rejecting the very concept of submission, may end up being equally so.

  5. Marcus Pius says:

    Alta: the Church hasn’t yet reached the point of stopping its complicity in misogyny. I think it will take a few generations of penitence on that score before it can begin to trumpet to society that it has anything useful to offer it on that subject: a long silence from church leaders would perhaps be their best contribution until then.