Posted on 02/27/2011 8:24:18 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Though many Christians are going to try to deny "the obvious," evangelical leader Dr. Albert Mohler believes gay marriage is going to become normalized.
"I think it's clear that something like same-sex marriage is going to become normalized, legalized and recognized in the culture. It's time for Christians to start thinking about how we're going to deal with that," he said Friday on the Focus on the Family radio program.
Mohler, president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, was speaking in response to the Obama administration's decision this week to stop defending the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act – federal law that defines marriage as between a man and a woman – in the courts.
Conservative groups and Christians have criticized Obama for going against his duty as president to defend the law.
"When a president takes oath of office, he's upholding ... defending the laws of the United States of America," said Mohler, who also noted that DOMA had passed as a bipartisan effort.
"The White House has clearly made a calculation that it can do this now with far less political risk than it could even two years ago."
Though Obama has always expressed his desire to repeal DOMA, his personal view on marriage had been traditional.
While on the campaign trail, running as the Democratic presidential nominee, Obama asserted his belief that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. He added, while being interviewed by Pastor Rick Warren, that "for me as a Christian, it's also a sacred union. God's in the mix."
Recently, however, he has stated that his views on gay marriage are "evolving."
The Obama administration has been pro-gay since taking office two years ago and Mohler noted that there has been a long trajectory on the issue of gay marriage pointing to this day.
With the Justice Department now pulling its defense of DOMA, pending legal challenges against the federal law will likely result with the nullification of DOMA, Mohler predicted.
"You can say, the cards are pretty much stacked against DOMA," he illustrated.
He warned that when Christians feel threatened, they have to be careful not to lash out with a predictable response.
The Southern Baptist made it clear that he was not saying that they are giving up. Marriage is still an institution Christians need to save, particularly in their own community. But Christians also need to start learning how to deal with the shifting culture and even face the fact that they may lose a few from their flock.
"I think we're going to be surprised and heartbroken over how many people are going to capitulate to the spirit of the age," he noted. "We're going to find now that there may not be as many of us as we thought."
Nevertheless, Christians must be prepared to make marriage one of the many topics where parents have to have "the talk."
"It's interesting now that the world is so morally upside down that when we talk about marriage we have to make a distinction between natural marriage – heterosexual marriage – and this new thing that people are calling marriage," Mohler said.
"We have to prepare our children to be in a context in which they're going to be in a playground with children who have two dads or two moms or who knows what kind of combination will come."
Ultimately, the worldview or the belief that God designed marriage to be between a man and a woman only makes sense if one understands the Gospel, Mohler pointed out, which raises a critical point:
"This whole situation reminds us that we are, first of all, to be Gospel people who are fellow sinners ... saved by grace, with the responsibility to share the Gospel with others."
SeekAndFind, I think you’re right. (Pardon my tinfoil) I think that the left believes that this will be the lever to employ to co-opt/disable/threaten the religious communities in this country.
Look at it like this: the admin takes this as a cause celebre, presses (in the semi-licit at best way they know better than all) for a national homosexual marriage act, or better, some act that says the same thing, but in so many words, perhaps an act that will do something else explicitly, but in addition, covers homosexual unions. That could be the method (via penalties, loss of tax-related status, maybe jail time for noncompliance) for it.
I think that there are those on the left who feel that the Soviets had a good thing, with how they banned religion, and there are those who like what the Chinese do, by forcing priests and other clergy to be under their control. So if this is used against the religious, I’d say it’s a safe bet that it will include, eventually, all public institutions. Like you said, the ramifications go beyond simply “tolerant”.
Preparation is in order. And prayer. I don’t know my Archbishop super well, but based on some of his actions, I’ll happily stand with him in the clink if that’s what we have to do.
That's already taking place in western Europe. A Swedish pastor, or maybe he was Norwegian, I've forgotten which, who not too long ago preached a sermon condemning homosexual acts as sin was arrested and sentenced to one year in a penitentiary. Other pastors in the Netherlands and elsewhere in Europe have been arrested, but AFAIK not yet jailed, for the same "crime".
Give us Americans a few more years of legalizing every perversion known to mankind and it will become a felony offense to even mildly criticize homosexual acts, much less condemn it for being the capital crime against nature and nature's God that it really is. I say "capital crime" because God condemned the people of the ancient antediluvian world to death and hell thereafter for that same sin, see Romans ch 1, vv 24 through 32.
To make my belief about the issue clear, I believe that holy scripture condemns homosexual acts as sin, but having an inborn predisposition to practice homosexual acts is not in itself a sin. Homosexuality becomes sin when the homosexual individual acts on his or her predilection to practice homosexual perversion of God's design for the perpetuation of the human race by way of normal male-female sexual acts.
I don't think anyone on this site disagrees with you on this. But every homo-activist is the type who advocates forced affirmation of this sin in society. The others, we don't even know about.
Mohler shows he has capitulated to the “spirit of the age” by capitulating to the language of the age. He freely uses the terms “same-sex marriage,” “two dads,” “two moms,” as if they have some kind of meaning in a Christian worldview. When you start taking like the demon-possessed, you show yourself as partaking a little of this influence with them.
That’s why I put “remarried” in quotation marks. These kind of people got “remarried” civilly or in another denomination. Often they were not practicing Catholics when they divorced and “remarried.” No, they cannot have “remarried” in the Church, sacramentally. In the eyes of the Church they are still married to the original spouses. So they are living in adultery. If they remain living together and abstain from sex, they may receive Communion. But if they are active sexually,they are in adultery and even if they were to confess this as a sin, they cannot be absolved as long as they still live together sexually because you can’t be absolve of a sin you intend to commit again.
So they can benefit from the Sacrifice of the Mass but not receive Communion.
For those who were lapsed when their marriages broke up and they “remarried” but who later had a conversion and now attend Mass, this is a painful thing.
The rules are winked at and ignored by many but not by all. The teaching remains Church teaching and some pastors teach it. The Catholic Church has not simply thrown in the towel.
You made assertions about us before you really knew much about the whole complex of practices, laws, principles.
You might be somewhat pleasantly surprised to learn more about it all.
And on abuses—well, it’s far better to have abused rules but still to have the rules than to simply throw in the towel, as everyone else has done. Orthodox do require the divorced and remarried person to receive Communion, if they have confessed the serious sin and are contrite—at least that is my understanding, subject to correction.
The principle that abuse does not remove the goodness of the use is lost on most Protestants. It underlies the crucial mistake of the Reformation.
We’ve come through a period of great abuses and scandal and sins by Catholics. It isn’t the first and won’t be the last.
But the Catholic Church today is the only Christian group that still even has a coherent teaching on the relationship of procreation and marriage and sex. The separation of procreation and sex, made practicable by widespread contraception, which was accepted by Protestants without even much consideration of the issue,is the root of our divorce and homosexuality problem.
Catholics are often confused and messed up on these issues but no one can say that we don’t have a clear teaching on it—John Paul II’s Theology of the Body and Paul VI’s Humanae Vitae. And it may surprise you to know that the younger generation is increasingly aware of them and embracing them.
There are, sadly, a lot of marginal Catholics who have, in part through malfeasance of bishops and catechism, sloughed off and are CINOs. This has always been a problem but it’s an abuse, not the use. And the purifying persecution headed our way will clarify matters. You will wake up some day to see that the Catholic teaching on sexuality, marriage, and procreation will be a beacon in the trial by fire that the remnant of believing Protestants and Catholics will undergo.
Don’t knock what you don’t yet understand. Inform yourself about Catholic marriage and sexuality teachings and then, if you still find them wanting, start knocking.
But it’s clear you don’t yet know much about them.
I agree.
I have read extensively on the subject of marriage, divorce, and annulment on catholic websites and other sources. But your first paragraph just proves the angles that are worked to remain “legal.” You can get civilly remarried and receive communion if you are living with your new “spouse” but are not having sex? Please!
Look, we’re on the same side on the subject of this thread. Your other posts are right on the money. I only hope we have many more FReepers of your unwavering position on this matter.
In the ideal world, yes. The Christians in the catacombs in ancient Rome didn’t need tax breaks.
But I fear the weak-kneed Christian church of today will cave in once its tax exemption is threatened. The modern church use any excuse to abandon its basic precepts, one by one, until the church is gone.
Homosexual “marriage” will most probably eventually be legalized. As a Christian, I will do what I do when confronted with any other person who is doing the wrong thing... try to love and serve them. In the meantime, I will advocate AGAINST homosexual marriage because I believe that children need a mother AND a father.
I believe homosexuality is a disorder. Like alcoholism. It could be genetic like alcoholism, no one knows. But I do not shun nor hate alcoholics. I try to be loving and serve them. That is the only way they will be drawn to Christ, and their only hope for deliverance.
Also, the legalization of homosexual “marriage” will be a true slippery slope... after all, if two people of the same gender may marry, why can’t three people be married? Or brother and sister, father and daughter? Etc., etc., etc.....
We need to advocate FOR marriage and DOMA now on the basis that traditional marriage has always been the foundation for raising future citizens (with, ultimately, the influence of a mother AND father in the home) for the good of civilization.
“I still think that they should ... allow the pastors and priests, rabbis and others to say no if someone wants to get married in the church as a gay couple.”
Ya think? Well that would require real religious liberty—something the homosexual lobby is sworn to destroy...
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda or moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
If Christians or any people of faith who refuse to accept vile perversion as normal and natural are supposed to "accept" same sex marriage, Le Chien Rouge has a list for other evils we will be forced to "accept". "Gay" marriage is a line in the sand that no Christian or person of faith, or any rational human, can surrender. How about "Just Say No"?
It doesn’t really matter whether the Church is “forced” into doing sodomite “marriage” or not, as the rights of every citizen will be infringed over our religious conviction with any sort of “gay rights.”
-If you’re a small time landlord you’ll be forced to house homosexuals (already true in many municipalities).
-If you own a small company you’ll be forced to do away with any kind of morals clause for your employees—at risk of being shut down by the EEOC—being forced to hire and work with sexual perverts.
-If you work as a manager in a larger corporation or government you will be giving extra privileges to the sexual perverts under your supervision—at risk of a discrimination lawsuit.
-Due to favoritism, homosexuals will rise to middle and upper management—and make a living hell for Christians under their supervision.
-Churches and Christian schools will be forced under EEOC measures to employ homosexuals (as they already are in the UK)—rape and sodomy of children and adolescents will increase.
-More adolescents will be seduced/raped into the deadly homosexual lifestyle as all forms of protection from perverts are lessened...all in the name of “gay rights.”
-Pastors and other Christians will be sued, and even arrested, for “hate speech” for condemning homosexual behavior (this is already happening in Western Europe, the UK and Canada). Tax exempt status will be used as a weapon to silence faithful Churches.
Make no mistake about it, “homosexual rights” and religious liberty are on a collision course—we cannot have both.
If the Executive Branch of the federal government can simply choose to ignore laws it doesn’t like and federal court rulings that do not please it (ie, Obama can do wtf he wants), then I can choose not to acknowledge homosexual marriage. Whatever disastrous choices Obama and his flock of idiots might make, it will not influence my religious understandings one iota.
1 Man + 1 Woman + God = Marriage.
And nothing the Half-Blood Muslim or the Fruitcake Brigade do will change that. However, until we have no recourse, there is a need to fight this at every level we can, short of committing crimes and choosing sin ourselves.
Probably too late to be in before the gay defenders....
Sir, it’s not working angles. It’s recognizing that some people are trapped in situations they created in the past but now regret. If a “remarried” couple are abstaining from sex, they are making a serious statement about trying to make the best of a bad situation: providing a home for the sake of the children but doing penance every day for their mistake. Yeah, they could just abandon their children and split up and live celibately separately. Even you would admit that a divorced person who has not “remarried” and abstains from sex is not sinning?
It’s just a tad insulting when you dismiss Church laws as so much chicanery.
No, we are not on the same side. You despise my Church, dismiss it as hollow and insincere on the divorce issue.
For all the abuses, scandals, failure to live up to the Church’s laws, we have laws and they are designed to uphold marriage in a chaotic situation.
And the best you can do is call our rules a scam. We are the only ones with any rules left at all.
Take your well-wishing and direct it to your fellow Protestants who have thrown in the towel. You deserve each other. (Hyperbole and snark tastes good when what you dished out comes back to you, doesn’t it”?)
“You can get civilly remarried and receive communion if you are living with your new “spouse” but are not having sex? Please!”
Oh, and one more thing. Since you have read so widely on Catholic websites, you might have noticed that one can’t get “civilly remarried” under Catholic rules. The couple who, having been divorced, is living together under a civil “marriage” certificate IS NOT MARRIED under Catholic law. That’s the reason why they can’t receive Communion. They aren’t married but they are having sex.
If they live under the same roof but abstain, they, not being married, also are not committing adultery anymore. Their situation is bad, tragic, but not as bad as if they were constantly committing and intending to continue to commit adultery.
But perhaps distinctions are lost on you. So far you certainly have refused to make them.
Throwing in the towel shows LITTLE faith and utter disobedinece. It’s no wonder God is NOT blessing this country. They are caving all over the place.
Look at what ONE mere mrotal, Chris Christie is doing from a SECULAR view point. He’s getting NJ bakc on track. How much MORE could a TRUE Christian do with God on his side and doing HIS work? Hmmm?
If they do marry gays, they will lose their parishioners. I would not give a dime to a Church that married gays.
Hence, Church destroyed.
Not at all. When the Church was persecuted in the Roman times, what did they do? The same thing believers in China, Egypt, Somalia, the old Soviet Union, or any number of anti-God hellholes do and did....
They take it underground. If true believers can't practice the true Word of God in society and believe what the Bible tells them is truth, then we do it privately.
Hiding in the catacombs in ancient Rome, secret 'house churches' in the Soviet Union and China...it's all the same. True Christianity and those who believe the perfect and trustworthy Word of God cannot and will never be stamped out, no matter what 'society' does....and you can take that to the bank.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.