If all proclaiming Christ are accepted to baptism, one might wonder, then why not all to marriage?
I think it comes down to offices, and the equality to be found therein. We talk about vocations and “one’s state in life,” but I wonder if we would not better serve both clarity and charity by considering that beyond baptism we are called to an Office. Since all Offices are callings, then all servants are equal within them and each office is lived within the fundamental calling of all baptized people, which is to chastity, first and foremost.
This brings home the barely-recognized fact that, except for those called to the Office of Marriage””who are themselves meant to be chaste within that Office””the rest of the world, the majority of humanity walking about, gay or straight, are meant to resist sexual concupiscence, whether within the Office of Singleness or Religious Consecration.
Much as I appreciate the analogy and apology therein, one of the best – if not the best replies to “inclusivity” arguments is to simply read further.
Acts 11:18c “The to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance that leads to life.” Repentance is while not explicit is implicitly assumed as an integral part of the experience recounted. And provokes the question: “repentance from what?”. Or to continue your analogy – there are qualifications for the Office, one of which must be a recognition of the purposes for which the Office exists.