Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
A simple No Comment would have sufficed.
The guy is a positive moron.
I can understand that he might not want to speak critically about the royal couple in the media right after they got married, but there are various ways that he could have simply dodged the question, if he didn’t want to make an example of them.
But saying that premarital cohabitation is a good idea is NOT something that the head of the Anglican Church should be doing.
What a moron. It’s not only completely wrong in Christian teaching, statistical analysis has repeatedly shown that on average people who live together before marriage are LESS likely to stay married than people who wait.
But it’s hardly a surprise from this gay-loving, Muslim-loving jerk who was chosen for his job by Tony Blair, who wanted someone who would normalize gay bishops.
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
There was a thread about a bishop speaking out against this co-habitation habit......pun inteneded.
And there is the problem with non-Catholic, protestant denominations that feel compelled to comply with the times. Their statements do not follow scripture.
The Archbishop of York backed Prince William and Kate Middleton’s decision to live together before marriage, saying that many modern couples want to “test the milk before they buy the cow”.Wow how sleazy is that? If this marriage lasts more than ten years (without the prince cheating with a younger Guernsey, or Kate grabbing herself a shiny new Stallion), I'll be pretty surprised.
It's a good think this inartful man has someone else writing his sermons for him.
While they shouldn't have been cohabiting, the right choice for cohabitants is to get to the church and take the vows. So Bravo for making the right choice in the end. There are quite a few folks who started out on the wrong foot but did well. The Archbishop should not have given his approval, he should have looked forward, praised them for making their commitment, and left it at that.
A good example of why I thought the who to do about the royal wedding was sad.
It was a farce. A funeral for a great nation and people played out on a world stage.
The church of what’s happening now.
Well, from seeing the problem from my patients I can tell you: the problem with living together is that the woman sees it as a prelude to marriage, and the guy sees it as...living together.
And, of course, often the girl is stuck doing the housework etc. and changing her life to fit his desires (and alas too many are so stupid as to be the one who not only does the housework, but works and supports the guy).
So when the couple would come into my office, and I asked their relationship, the woman would often say “My fiance” and the man “My girlfriend”.
In a lot of cases, the girl is abandoned when she “accidentally” gets pregnant...
This insecurity, knowing the guy wants you but not enough to care for you in pregnancy or times of trouble, leads the girl to be insecure, so when they marry, all the anger she has hidden inside (for fear he’s leave) comes out and voila, divorce.
Older couples who are divorced often live together because they don’t trust marriage and want to stay independent...both in money and life.
Often for these folks, it’s the woman who is in no hurry to marry, for fear of being stuck in a passive relatsionship where she has to sacrifice her hard won freedom (money and emotional) to his good. Not sure what happens when he gets old and sick...I have not run into a lot of heterosexual unmarried couples who nurse each other through a long debilitation final illness.
I’m old enough, however, to see one advantage to living together: I’m old enough to remember when a lot of closet gays married to cover up their attraction to the same sex. Often the spouse ended up depressed and not understanding why the spouse didn’t find them attractive.
This is the best argument I can see for “gay marriage”: That “religioius” gays will marry each other, not exploit a naive young woman to get cured. Yes, “gay marriage” is a “sin”, but what about the women and children who suffer in such a loveless marriage, the woman (or in one case, a man) often blaming herself for the problem, and the children soured on marriage.
What do you want from a church born out of adultery?
I agree. I had not followed them much and had no idea they were shacking up. William must have had a hard time making up his mind whether or not to marry Kate.
Was this the same one that was doing the cartwheels?