Morality does not start and end with ourselves, gay marriage, and more on the NC Marriage Amendment…

… I’m not just making up stuff here.

Let’s look at the Eucharist as an example. I believe with every fiber of my being that the Eucharist is the Body of Christ. Christ truly present, not a symbolic gesture of His last meal. Now a non-Catholic reading that may completely disagree with me and say that’s ludicrous. Fine, but know just because you don’t believe doesn’t make it any less so. Absolute truths are still truths rather you agree with them or not. Truth and morality does not start and end with ourselves.

Catholics believe in the sanctity of marriage. This isn’t something we made up yesterday, folks. God established this, not some intolerant politicians and stodgy conservatives. Here let’s take a look…

What the Church says…

Basing her teaching on God’s revelation in Scripture and the meaning of the human person, created male and female in the image of God, the Catholic Church teaches that marriage is the lifelong partnership of mutual and exclusive fidelity between a man and a woman ordered by its very nature to the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of children (see CCC, no. 1601; CIC, can. 1055.1; GS, no. 48). The bond of marriage is indissoluble – that is, it lasts “until death do us part.” At the heart of married love is the total gift of self that husband and wife freely offer to each other. Because of their sexual difference, husband and wife can truly become “one flesh” and can give to each other “the reality of children, who are a living reflection of their love” (FC, no. 14).

And here is what God say…

[Matthew 19:4-6] He said in reply, “Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female’ and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, no human being must separate.”

[Leviticus 20:13] If a man lies with a male as with a woman, they have committed an abomination. [Leviticus 18:22] You shall not lie with a male as with a woman;o such a thing is an abomination.

[Genesis 19:5-13] They called to Lot and said to him, “Where are the men who came to your house tonight? Bring them out to us that we may have sexual relations with them.” Lot went out to meet them at the entrance. When he had shut the door behind him, he said, “I beg you, my brothers, do not do this wicked thing! I have two daughters who have never had sexual relations with men. Let me bring them out to you,* and you may do to them as you please. But do not do anything to these men, for they have come under the shelter of my roof.”

They replied, “Stand back! This man,” they said, “came here as a resident alien, and now he dares to give orders! We will treat you worse than them!” With that, they pressed hard against Lot, moving in closer to break down the door. But his guests put out their hands, pulled Lot inside with them, and closed the door;
they struck the men at the entrance of the house, small and great, with such a blinding light* that they were utterly unable to find the doorway. Then the guests said to Lot: “Who else belongs to you here? Sons-in-law, your sons, your daughters, all who belong to you in the city—take them away from this place! We are about to destroy this place, for the outcry reaching the LORD against those here is so great that the LORD has sent us to destroy it.”

[1 Corinthians 6:9] Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor sodomites.

But you know better right? Because you have gay friends or a gay family member.

The Church has had a lot of time to think about the topic, as you can see. But please, feel free to call me a homophobic bigot, gay-basher, whatever, based on your own personal interpretation of the Bible and church teaching and some emotionally charged hypothesis on how you think Jesus would vote. Because someone is going to be deep in error and you can bet your sweet aunt sally is isn’t that 2,000 year old institution, the Church, and God Himself.

Moral rights and wrongs exist and are not relative on whether we agree with them or not. Sin is sin whether you chose to acknowledge it. Homosexual attraction is disordered and we do no favor to those suffering with same sex attraction having them believe otherwise.

More resources; Why Marriage Matters and U.S. Bishops on Marriage

And in case you need pictures and diagrams illustrating that morality comes from God not us, go here.

About Katrina Fernandez

Mackerel Snapping Papist

  • http://twitter.com/moderncomments Modern Comments

    I think this is a well-articulated argument. This is something the Church is focused on, not because the Church is obsessed with sex, but because this is a major moral issue of the present day.  It also poses a challenge to religious liberty and freedom, and therefore is worthy of our attention.  When my state had a marriage amendment, it passed by significant numbers, and I voted for it.

    0

  • Metropolis_247

    So the bible is yet to be proven wrong? The American Civil War was fought in vein then. The fact that the church has held these views for a long time is not an argument. To a Hindu or Muslim, there are irrefutable facts that you as a Catholic live in complete indifference to. You are labelled a bigot when you champion the government to codify discrimination into the law and rightly so.

    • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/thecrescat Katrina Fernandez

      Which vein was the Civil War fought in?  Hepatic, Iliac , Ulnar… I forget. 

      • tcn

         According to this dingbat, one that circles his backside.

        And I say that in all Christian charity.

    • http://twitter.com/moderncomments Modern Comments

       All laws, on some level, discriminate.  Heck, tax law and welfare laws discriminate against the married…so should we do away with tax law or marriage?

  • http://twitter.com/dferg David Ferguson

    Good post.   Interesting point: note the reaction of the homosexuals in the city of Sodom.  

    “They replied, “Stand back! This man,” they said, “came here as a resident alien, and now he dares to give orders! We will treat you worse than them!” With that, they pressed hard against Lot, moving in closer to break down the door. ”

    What are the Sodomites complaining about?  They are complaining that Lot is “judging” them.   Lot had lived a life of compromise and cowardice the entire time that he dwelt in Sodom.  Yet the one time Lot opens his mouth to defend his guests, the irate (defensive?  guilty?) homosexuals of Sodom accuse Lot of being intolerant.

    Just goes to show you that no matter how much ground you yield to progressives, it is never enough.

    • ds


      Just goes to show you that no matter how much ground you yield to progressives, it is never enough.

      But did you offer them your virgin daughters?

    • Michael

      Huwah?  Please, if you’re going to quote the Bible, at least get right:

      1) The men in Lot’s house weren’t homosexual.
      2) God didn’t destoy the city because of homosexuality — the sins of the twin cities are enumerated many times in thruout the O.T. and same-sex anything is not mentioned.
      3) Sodomites is a word invented (I believe) by the British.

      • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/thecrescat Katrina Fernandez

        Unless there were Brits in biblical times… 

        [1 Corinthians 6:9] Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor sodomites. 

        • Michael

          The verse you’re quoting is not original scripture.    The original Greek is a little-used compound word that uses the components “bed” and “man” and since it is only found in docs referring to crimes with an economic meaning, “boy prostitute” is rendered.  And no one has a clear idea of the second word (in your Bible, sodomites), because that word has an opposite problem in that it was too common and was used in various contradictory colloquialisms.   So this verse is not useful to condemn homosexuals.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Sally-Forth/100003341739166 Sally Forth

    Catholics may live according to their own” truths”, although in fact, even most Catholics don’t.  Why do Catholics want to force all others to live by their truths as well.

    Even the nuns aren’t good enough for the Catholics anymore. They must be disciplined and remediated by the sodomite fathers of the Church. The rest of us don’t even stand a chance. No Gay marriage for us, I guess 

  • Michael

    “The Church has had a lot of time to think about the topic…”

    Much of the problem is Christians shirking their duty to question if teachings are good or bad.  By their bad fruits that these arguments have produced we should be realizing we are on the wrong track.  Christians would have gays live celibately, without their having been called to celibacy? 

    There’s too much at stake here for a Christian to be condemning his brother (I daresay Christian gay brother) without being absolutely sure.  And by absolutely sure, I mean making some effort to first learn about how some Christians think differently about the 6 Bible verses used to condemn gays.

    • http://twitter.com/moderncomments Modern Comments

       It’s not just the Bible, it’s Tradition and Natural law, two things that are inherent in Catholic Christian thought.

      Much of the problem is Christians shirking their duty to question if teachings are good or bad.

      Christianity is not open for debate.  Either Christ (and God) are the Truth, or they aren’t.  There isn’t wiggle room in Natural law.

      • Cielosaltador

        Christ and God are the Truth and you don’t get it.  There is no wiggle room for man to add their 2 cents to color the Bible the way they want it.  There is nothing in the Word that should be used to outright condemn our gay Christian brothers and sisters.  Being gay is an anomaly that carries a certain “ick-factor” with it and man has colored the teachings over time to exploit that.  And the bad fruit that those teachings have borne is clear now that the world populate is enormous..because that small % of gays has grown to have a voice, and that voice is saying stop hurting us, because we’re your always your gay Christian brothers and sisters.

        • Shawn

          The Holy Church is not condemning homosexuals, see 2358 in the Catechism.  However, the homosexual acts are clearly condemned in sacred scripture as the author demonstrated above in the blog post.  You can try to fight it all you want, but being Christian and homosexual is calling to chastity, see 2559 in the Catechism, and that teaching will never change.

          • http://twitter.com/moderncomments Modern Comments

             True enough. See my other comment above.

        • http://twitter.com/moderncomments Modern Comments

           There is no wiggle room for man to add their 2 cents to color the Bible the way they want it.

          Unless, of course, we’re coloring it in favor of politically correct topics, etc.

          There is nothing in the Word that should be used to outright condemn our gay Christian brothers and sisters.

          Except all those passages, and Natural Law, that say otherwise.

  • Dougsense

    But you do realize that your religious argument has no weight in a discussion of Americans’ rights under the Constitution?  Just as your religious argument favoring racial segregation had no validity in the 1960′s?  Do you have a practical reason why an American who is not a Christian should not be able to marry a consenting adult?  There are no reasons.  I don’t give a rat’s patootie what you do in response to the voices in your head as long as it doesn’t interfere with other people’s Constitutional rights.  Gays and lesbians make great parents; allowing them to form committed relationships strengthens families and thereby the country as a whole. 

    • http://twitter.com/moderncomments Modern Comments

       Yes. Before the Constitution, before America, and even today in countries without many Christians or the Constitution, marriage is traditionally between a man and a woman.

      • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/thecrescat Katrina Fernandez

        George Clooney hearts Obama. You can do SO much better. 

        • http://twitter.com/moderncomments Modern Comments

           You totally owe me a new keyboard.  He was the first celebrity that popped into my head.

      • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

        Marriage is traditionally between a man and a woman….and women’s property was traditionally the property of their husband’s. And marital rape was traditionally not a crime. Do you see why some of us don’t think tradition alone is reason enough for any law to stand?

        • http://twitter.com/moderncomments Modern Comments

           Abuse does not negate use.  Repeat that until it sinks in.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            My point is just that not all time-tested traditions are good, and worth continuing. Some are worth fighting to change. 

      • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/thecrescat Katrina Fernandez

        Your post was flagged for approval bc I guess someone’s delicate sensibilities were offended. I approved the comment, hence the “(Edited by a moderator)” notation at the bottom.  

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Inara-Howard/1229293869 Inara Howard

    Also the end of Romans, Ch. 1:  
    They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and revered and worshiped the creature rather than the creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.26Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural,27and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity.28And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper…29Although they know the just decree of God that all who practice such things deserve death, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Inara-Howard/1229293869 Inara Howard

      I often lament that these scriptures are not part of the cycle of readings for Mass.  It would be harder for priests to avoid teaching about them…people need to hear that sexual attraction does not equal love, that men and women are equal in dignity but complementary in design (2 nuts or 2 bolts don’t hold anything together), that humans are not animals & that our sexuality is not merely an instinctive itch we must scratch, etc. 

      • Serwaa7492

        So tell me why a man’s sexual organ is looked inside close to the anus and a female is on the outside.

        • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/thecrescat Katrina Fernandez

          What is this? Is English not your primary language? 

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Inara-Howard/1229293869 Inara Howard

          So you’re saying the prostate gland is man’s sexual organ? Hmm…never noticed men bragging about the size of their prostate, or hanging a giant one from their trailer hitch…

          (By the way, women have prostates too.)

  • Serwaa7492

    Ok again that chapter was dealing with idolatry….

    • http://twitter.com/moderncomments Modern Comments

       And what is idolatry?  At it’s most fundamental roots, idolatry is putting something else before God.  It doesn’t have to be another god, it can be a thing — material possessions — or it can be a particular behavior (vice) that becomes the “god.”

      • Michael

        Str8s have a sexuality to0.  They’re just not forced to examine it.  Picking on gay sexuality as being idolatry is unfair unless you also lump str8 sexuality in there too.  Paul recognized that lust can get in the way of devotion and therefore suggested pairing-up as a good compromise to celibacy. 

        • http://twitter.com/moderncomments Modern Comments

           They’re just not forced to examine it.

          Really?  We’re most certainly asked to examine our sexuality, and we are called — just like those with same sex attraction — to reserve our sexuality for the sacrament of marriage (an important part of which is creating new life).  If we cannot, for whatever reason, enter into that married state, our vocation is to be celibate.

          Picking on gay sexuality as being idolatry is unfair unless you also lump str8 sexuality in there too.

          I absolutely do “lump” it in there.  Sexuality is sexuality.  Even the Catechism says same sex attraction is no more or less sinful than heterosexual attraction; it does, however, say that acting on our sexual desires — straight or gay — outside of marriage is a sin.  See?  Catholic teaching regarding sexuality is perfectly equal.

          • Michael

            Good, then we’re agreed.  Since I’m not called to celibacy as Paul describes, and it’s likely you aren’t either, our option is to marry according to his suggestion.  Because if you’re truly my Christian sister then you’re not suggesting that I’m condemned to live a life of loneliness as a gay Christian.  In Genesis everything was good or very good until God noticed Adam was al0ne.  So he made a suitable partner, Eve.  But a suitable partner for a gay man is another gay man, and likewise a gay woman for gay woman.

          • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/thecrescat Katrina Fernandez

            We are called to celibacy if we are not married. I am single but that doesn’t mean just because I am  not married I am alone.  Just because I am not having sex means I am doomed to a lonely loveless life. I have my friends and my family. No one wants homosexuals to close themselves from the love of others and live in quiet misery. 

            But sexual relations does not equal fulfillment. I can understand your frustration though. I have written about it in the past – dealing with sexual frustration without an outlet. But it’s a cross I offer up and I find other, healthy, outlets for my energies that won’t compromise my dignity.   

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            You are free to make your choices based on your values, and you clearly have a lot of self-discipline to back up your words with your actions. Not all of us believe as you do about the role of sexuality in our lives. You would like society to reflect your deeply-held beliefs, and so would we, and we are therefore actively pushing for different laws. (And I don’t say “we” as a Catholic, because when it comes to sexuality, I separate myself from Rome.)

          • http://twitter.com/moderncomments Modern Comments

             Then you separate yourself from Rome on everything.  Cafeteria Catholicism is not Catholicism at all.

            Society has reflected your beliefs for the better part of 40 years (after the “Summer of Love” and all that).  What do we have?  Millions of abortions, rampant STDs, broken homes, depressed lives.

            I’m often reminded of the Sheryl Crow song, “If It Makes You Happy.”  Clearly, pushing for societal acceptance of your “deeply-held beliefs” has not made anyone advocating for a  freer sexual expression one iota happier.

            That leads the logical person to conclude the Catholic Church was, gasp!, right about sexuality.

          • http://thehomesickhome.blogspot.jp/ L.

            My deeply held-beliefs make me, my family and my community happier, and that’s enough proof of their goodness for me.  Individual results may vary.

          • http://twitter.com/moderncomments Modern Comments

             Not having a sexual relationship is not akin to loneliness.  I didn’t have a sexual relationship with anyone until I met and married my husband.  I was far from lonely or desperate for sex.  And I say this as someone who did not date in high school or college.

            And yes, God made a suitable partner for Adam, a man.  He made a woman.

            Even in evolution, heterosexuality is the norm.

          • Michael

            Is your irony intentional?

          • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/thecrescat Katrina Fernandez

            Approved by moderator. 

  • Serwaa7492

    Somebody pls tell me if John3:16-17. Condemns a group of ppl.

    • http://twitter.com/moderncomments Modern Comments

      If everything was a-okay, why did Jesus have to come?  He came to save, but as Jesus says to the woman: “Go and sin no more.”  There were things His followers were called and asked to do that they didn’t like. 

      Do you really think God sent Jesus down here to die a horrible, humiliating death to affirm us in our okay-ness?

      Bonus: It’s always rich when the same people who get their knickers in a twist about Biblical basis for sexual morality are suddenly all sola scriptura when it comes to condemnation and salvation.

  • Robert Feranandez

    Getting back to the subject of communion: John 6:25-59. These verses clearly explain the message. Jesus ahd finished feeding the multitudes and the Apostles headed to Capernaum. Jesus walked on the water to meet them in the boat. The crowds had followed the Apostles and Jesus to Capernaum. Jesus told them that they had follwed Him because he had fed them. He said, ” Do not work for food that spoil…s, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of man will give to you. On Him God has placed His seal of approval.” They asked what was required of them. To this He naswered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one He has sent.” They asked him for a miracle or a sign and spoke of the manna that God had provided from heaven while they were in the desert. Jesus said (and here is the key to understanding this verse) He said, “I tell you the truth, it is not Moses who has given you the bread from heaven, but it is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven. For the bread of God is he who comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.” “Sir,” they said, “from now on gives us this bread.” Then Jesus declared, ‘I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will never be hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty…. I wrote this to continue the forum on the Lord’s Supper/ Holy Communion in an effort to respond to the verse used by one reader on the Katrina Fernandez page. The page was taken down. Such a shame. It had a growing number of responses and people with questions and verse quotes to try explain their views. Jesus said “I am the Bread of Life”…, not the other way around. If you believe on Him, you will have eternal life. The body of Christ (His followers) can now come together to cellebrate and remember His deasth trought the breaking of bread and the drinking of wine. Read the verses for yourself. Don’t take my word or anyone else’s word for it. If you want to research it, do it from God’s true Word.  If you’d like to continue it here, be my guest.

    • http://www.patheos.com/blogs/thecrescat Katrina Fernandez

      This has nothing to do with the topic, dad.  I took it down so we can talk about it later.

  • nitnot

    Thank you, Kat, you courageous warrior woman, you :-)

  • Fatamphibian

    and i thought all the negative anti-Catholic bashing existed only in the old fashioned chat rooms…lol

    Think i will continue to follow the Church teachings in Obedience, as best i can, its the only way i can figure out to gain Humility. Why? because what they teach isnt always what i want for myself. But then, my Parents were wise enough not to let me do what i want too.  I want to worship God and love Him, and i can love my brothers and sisters in Christ and not condone their actions. Believe itor not, living with someone you love in a celibate relationship is possible, and in fact, in many ways, brings love to the forefront. I know that isnt what society would like to hear, because then it would have to find some other reason to justify sinful actions.  The other question i have to ask is , if the sex act is the expression of true love, how do you love the other 23 hours 55 minutes of the day? ( THAT was a joke, in part).


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X