Why are churches against gay marriage?

[Vincent E.S.]

Not all churches are, just the extreme majority. In Christianity, nearly everything is based on tradition, and it takes a long time to change tradition.

[tekla]

Religion seems to follow science by two or three centuries

I don't think that we really have the luxury of waiting a couple, three centuries for these people to catch up.  I know I sure don't.

[bojangles]

violate the sacred institution of marriage

If it is so sacred, I wonder why Jesus didn't get married?

[Janet_Girl]

violate the sacred institution of marriage

If it is so sacred, I wonder why Jesus didn't get married?

Depends on which way you feel about the "Holy Grail".  Some think that it is refers to the child of Jesus and Mary Magdalene, whom these same people think was married to Jesus.

Of course the churches poo-poo this idea.

[Annah]

Hmm...not sure I agree. I've noticed that often modern, moderate christians attempt to water down many of the bible's (including the new testament) more extreme passages, passing off fundamentalists as "not true christians" or "interpreting the bible incorrectly." It's largely the result of trying to modernise a religion that was created by people living 2000 years ago, when it was culturally "ok" in certain areas of the world kill someone for being effeminate, an "adulterer" etc. What I think modern christians need to realise is that their holy book cannot really be taken out of its temporal context and really be applied to the modern day. If it is, then one must certainly pick and choose which passages are applicable to modern society, and which are not. If modern law were based on biblical law, we'd be in a lot of trouble as far as human rights are concerned.

Actually, progressive Christians are not watering down scriptures. They are pointing out the misinterpretations of scripture that conservative Christians have done so well.

For example every clobbering verse throughout the Bible was and is misinterpreted. For example, the passage in Romans, many conservatives assume Paul is declaring homosexuals do not have a place in heaven. In the original koine Greek language in which the book was written said nothing about homosexuality. It was discussing those who changes their will or convictions with the slightest of thought...a weak spine.

The levitical laws are highly misinterpreted and especially the story in Genesis about Sodom and Gomorrah.  The story of Sodom and Gomorrah is HIGHLY misinterpreted. 

Koine Greek and Ancient Hebrew have words that has many meanings and even when aligned within the text as a whole, the meanings still can be many things. 

Also, no one can interpret the cultures of 4 to 2000 years ago. We just cannot. To attempt to apply these same methods of law and instruction into today's society is foolhardy. It's like looking at a blue print of a Model T horseless carriage and saying we must stick to these plans. Society, culture, and religion has evolved and is continuing to evolve.

To practice these religions is fine and great but to try to impose civil and legal law based on centuries and millennial old laws is not a good idea.

As far as interpretation, I'm wondering which ones you mean? Corinthians 6:9, Paul is not telling Christians to kill homosexuals, but he is telling Christians that homosexuals and effeminate men will not enter the "kingdom of god." It'd be grasping at straws to really interpret this as any other way than looking down upon homosexuals and effeminate men as sinners. And it isn't an isolated reference, either. And if we take the perspective of needing to be "compassionate toward the sinner," then we also need to examine how that also implies fault or defect, or something inherently wrong with homosexuality (whether one has compassion toward homosexuals or not).

That would pose a problem, however, in the Koine greek the word does not mean homosexual. It means weak willed, easy to change convictions. It has nothing to do with sexuality.

Well...the bible. The problem is that the US claims to be a secular nation with clear separation between church and state. Unfortunately it doesn't often practice that separation when it comes to many issues (abortion, same-sex marriage, transgender rights etc. etc.)

I totally agree


Source: Took 4 years of undergraduate and graduate languages of Koine Greek, Classical Greek, Ancient Hebrew. Bachelor's of Arts in Theology and doing M.Div/Ph.D

[Lisbeth]

Anecdote: I just drove through Georgia and there was a huge billboard along I-75 that quoted the bible in huge letters declaring, Homosexuality is an abomination. It quoted the famous Leviticus passage. It was shocking and upsetting to see the oppression, hatred and warning to all drivers passing through Georgia.
Apparently there are enough folks agreeing with this that contribute to paying for an enormous billboard.

Due to the popularity of the Survivor show, Georgia is planning to do its own, entitled "Survivor, South GA Style". The contestants will start in Atlanta, travel to Macon, Warner Robins, Tifton, over to Enigma, Willacoochee and down to Hahira, Lake Park and Valdosta. They will then proceed to Homerville, Waycross, Blackshear, Hinesville and Nahunta. From there, they'll travel to Savannah, Loudowissi, Augusta and finally back to Atlanta. Each will be wearin' saggin' britches, driving a pink Volvo with a bumper sticker that reads, "I'm gay, vegetarian, voted for Al Gore, and I'm here to confiscate your guns." The first one to make it back to Atlanta alive wins.

That would pose a problem, however, in the Koine greek the word does not mean homosexual. It means weak willed, easy to change convictions. It has nothing to do with sexuality.

It can also mean "soft" as in cloth, "fine" as in elegant, and "dulcet" as in music.

[xXRebeccaXx]

Fun fact: Up until the 14th century the catholic church had been routinly marrying same sex couples.

[Sarah Louise]

Do you have a reference for that statement Scarlet?

[ToriJo]

Do you have a reference for that statement Scarlet?

I don't know Sarah's/Scarlet's source, but it may be: John Boswell, Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe.

The rite/sacrament he typically cites is Adelphopoiesis - a rite involving two men that celebrates a bond stronger than friendship.   Many of those who participated are shown in paintings in the same way that a married couple would be (with Christ between them, uniting them).

I don't know enough about Catholic churches to really know for sure how accurate he is (many Catholics very strongly claim he is inaccurate).

[Kentrie]

What if Transgendered people want to marry someone. Say a FTM wants to marry a female, would they consider that gay marriage?

[ToriJo]

What if Transgendered people want to marry someone. Say a FTM wants to marry a female, would they consider that gay marriage?

In 2003, there was an official pronouncement that sex change operations are sometimes permitted (if they help with someone's inner turmoil or something to that effect), but that they don't change the person's gender - and that they felt it usually increased turmoil, so should generally not be done.  If it is done, priests are not to change the person's baptism records (sex), nor can the person marry, become a priest, or join a religious order.  They do officially see it as *somewhat* distinct from homosexuality, and as a very severe mental illness.

If they won't recognize gender for post-ops, they certainly wouldn't for a pre-op.

That said, I suspect in the Catholic church that there are all sorts of practices some individuals at the local level do that may not be approved by their bosses.  So there are probably pockets of acceptance - just not officially.

They are big on the "God created male and female" and that men and women have distinct roles.  Catechism 369-373.  That said, they do recognize God is neither male or female (which many protestants and evangelicals don't recognize).

[Lisbeth]

Fun fact: Up until the 14th century the catholic church had been routinly marrying same sex couples.

I think that falls into this category:

That said, I suspect in the Catholic church that there are all sorts of practices some individuals at the local level do that may not be approved by their bosses.  So there are probably pockets of acceptance - just not officially.

But, yes, it did happen in some parts of the church.

[Vincent E.S.]

That said, I suspect in the Catholic church that there are all sorts of practices some individuals at the local level do that may not be approved by their bosses.  So there are probably pockets of acceptance - just not officially.

Yup. The priest at my parents' church had never dealt with a transsexual person before me, but he is perfectly accepting.

The Catholic church is progressing very well, though. It actually states that people cannot change their sexuality and that all are made/loved by god regardless of what sex he/she prefers. With information about transsexuals/transgenders becoming easier to access, I wouldn't be surprised if the Catholic church begins embracing trans-people more some time in the next few decades.

[VeronicaLynn79]

I haven't read all of the replies, but I've read enough to get the gyst of the conversation.

I'd love to believe in a God that is all loving, that is all caring, and that is always there for us.  That knows us (the real us) inside and out, and cheers and cries along with us.

That being said, Organized Religion has also been the most efficient form of mind control the world has ever seen.

I'm still undecided on the issue, it's hard to throw away years of belief for non belief, because while my belief may be battered and tried at times, non belief doesnt seem like freedom to me, it seems like giving up.  In the end, I dont care what someone believes, so long as their beliefs dont include making others miserable, or telling others how to live (not including criminal law and all that). 

[Lisbeth]

That said, they do recognize God is neither male or female (which many protestants and evangelicals don't recognize).

What prevents that next step? If God is neither male nor female, and we are created in the image of God...

[justmeinoz]

You're not supposed to ask those sort of questions!

[xXRebeccaXx]

Do you have a reference for that statement Scarlet?

Google is our friend people!!!!
http://marriage101.org/history-of-marriage/

[Annah]

Fun fact: Up until the 14th century the catholic church had been routinly marrying same sex couples.

I am getting a M.Div and a Ph.D. in world religions. That's not a fun fact but an historical error and something I never heard before and was not practiced by the Catholic Church prior to the 14th century. Boswell tried to make this a historical fact but has little scholarly foundation. No reputable college will try to use his sources as a valid source of historical research.

However, internet pages love him.

[Annah]

Google is our friend people!!!!
http://marriage101.org/history-of-marriage/

don't believe everything you see on the internet.

Source: Former Priest

[Annah]

I don't know Sarah's/Scarlet's source, but it may be: John Boswell, Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe.

I don't know enough about Catholic churches to really know for sure how accurate he is (many Catholics very strongly claim he is inaccurate).

Correct it was coined through Boswell in the 1980s; however, his "scholarly" details at historical detail is lacking. His research has so many holes and inaccuracies as well as mistranslations that the Jesuits just love debating him. Boswell isn't a very good debater.

I'm all for same sex marriage but when people try to "add things" to history it will do more harm than good.