Scottish government to approve same-sex marriages

[Anna]

The Catholic church is still medieval. I have to say I do feel a bit sorry for the old CoE which is much more riven over these changes but which has moved considerably further than the Catholic church (who was that stocky Tory woman MP, btw, who left the CoE to become a Catholic because she wouldn't accept women priests?).

Blimey frenchie, wot a sexist remark!! Stocky! I think you are referring to the Sainted Ann Widdicombe!

I don't suppose anyone outside of Wales remembers the fuss about the nominations for the Bishop of Bangor? Jeffrey John (Dean of St. Albans) was tipped to be the new Bishop. The Archbish of Wales, Barry Morgan, said he was perfectly happy to have a gay Bishop. However, it got very murky and Jeffrey John withdrew. I do remember talking to some stalwarts of our local Church in Wales parish church and they announced that if "a homosexual was appointed then they would be going back to Rome"

[Lateralthinking1]

Religions are based on beliefs, and I don't think it's right to force people by law to accept, in carrying out their personal business (insofar as it does not affect the general public at large - and that it important) things that they don't believe or which they think are wrong. If that makes them progressively less relevant in society, so be it. Some things change very slowly, but they do change.

I think that I broadly agree with you if not necessarily on every detail. But what then about the devout Muslim couple who run a bed and breakfast establishment? Should there be a lesser requirement on them than everyone else?

[french frank]

I think that I broadly agree with you if not necessarily on every detail. But what then about the devout Muslim couple who run a bed and breakfast establishment? Should there be a lesser requirement on them than everyone else?

No, because that does affect the general public - anyone who might turn up at their place. Which is where others have recently fallen foul of the law. It's essentially the same for the 'devout' registrar who refuses to officiate at a civil wedding.

[french frank]

Blimey frenchie, wot a sexist remark!! Stocky! I think you are referring to the Sainted Ann Widdicombe!

Yes I was. But men can be stocky too

[Lateralthinking1]

No, because that does affect the general public - anyone who might turn up at their place. Which is where others have recently fallen foul of the law. It's essentially the same for the 'devout' registrar who refuses to officiate at a civil wedding.

I am still not understanding how this works in practice. John Corrigan mentioned that while many Catholic people support same sex marriage, the Catholic church isn't in sync. The permission by the Scottish Government to enable individual church leaders to officiate is surely pretty meaningless if those who officiate will be struck off.

Islam is even more complicated. The majority of Muslim people almost certainly don't support same sex marriage so their religious leaders can simply say "no" and not have pressure put on them by regulars in mosques. So at what point does the law intervene and say they must provide for the ceremony. I don't think that it will do.

[Anna]

I am still not understanding how this works in practice. John Corrigan mentioned that while many Catholic people support same sex marriage, the Catholic church isn't in sync. The permission by the Scottish Government to enable individual church leaders to officiate is surely pretty meaningless if those who officiate will be struck off.

Lat, Last week the leader of the Church in Scotland, Cardinal Keith O'Brien, broke off personal discussions on the issue with the First Minister, Alex Salmond. The Church has declared 26 August as National Marriage Sunday (ooh that's today! Does anyone want to marry me?)

The Scottish government says it is right to introduce same-sex marriage. But it has stressed no clergy would be forced to carry out the ceremonies.

The letter criticises the Scottish government for trying to change what Cardinal O'Brien considers to be the only legitimate definition of marriage - the lifelong union of a man and a woman.

No Catholic Priest is going to be struck off as no Catholic Priest will ever perform a marriage ceremony between gay couples. And, I agree with frenchie, Catholic gays should be fighting their Church for not allowing ordination of women priests. Unless they get equality in that, they will not get equality in anything else.

[Lateralthinking1]

Lat, Last week the leader of the Church in Scotland, Cardinal Keith O'Brien, broke off personal discussions on the issue with the First Minister, Alex Salmond. The Church has declared 26 August as National Marriage Sunday (ooh that's today! Does anyone want to marry me?)

The Scottish government says it is right to introduce same-sex marriage. But it has stressed no clergy would be forced to carry out the ceremonies.

The letter criticises the Scottish government for trying to change what Cardinal O'Brien considers to be the only legitimate definition of marriage - the lifelong union of a man and a woman.

No Catholic Priest is going to be struck off as no Catholic Priest will ever perform a marriage ceremony between gay couples. And, I agree with frenchie, Catholic gays should be fighting their Church for not allowing ordination of women priests. Unless they get equality in that, they will not get equality in anything else.

You mean that none of the six offers you received before breakfast were acceptable?

Everything else you have said in your post suggests that the law is agreeably progressive but not very workable.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Yes I was. But men can be stocky too

In Filey, humans of both genders can be seen roaming the streets on bank holiday weekend who instantly remind me of Jabba the Hut. I'm writing a book about it.

[Anna]

You mean that none of the six offers you received before breakfast were acceptable?

Unfortunately Lat - they were all stocky Catholics!

[french frank]

I am still not understanding how this works in practice. John Corrigan mentioned that while many Catholic people support same sex marriage, the Catholic church isn't in sync.

Well, the thing about firm Catholics, at least in the countries where Catholicism has been long established, is that they're quite good at coming up with workarounds to accommodate their immediate requirements, while concurring with the official beliefs (isn't this why they have regular confession?). If it's the principle rather than the practice that's important to them, they can expend their energy fighting it if they wish. But I think most would weigh up the effect on their own lives and if alternatives present themselves that will be good enough.

An argument in the case of the Catholic church would be that it has fixed doctrines on many matters and full members of the church have accepted those doctrines in entering into membership of the church. They are not obliged as human beings to respect that teaching, but merely as Catholics. Other choices are open to them if they can't accept those practices and beliefs. But Catholicism is, fundamentally, little else but the practices and beliefs laid down by the church. And, the argument would go, it is your beliefs that have changed, not the church's.

Perhaps ...

[vinteuil]

Well, the thing about firm Catholics, at least in the countries where Catholicism has been long established, is that they're quite good at coming up with workarounds to accommodate their immediate requirements, while concurring with the official beliefs
:

... I suspect French Frank has probabilist or probabiliorist tendencies.

I know I do...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_probabilism

[Anna]

... I suspect French Frank has probalist or probabiliorist tendencies.

Indeed. probabilism provides a way of answering the question about what to do when one does not know what to do. Probabilism proposes that one can follow a probable opinion regarding whether an act may be performed morally, even though the opposite opinion is more probable. It was first formulated in 1577 by Bartholomew Medina, who taught at Salamanca
In other words, havering on the fence!

[french frank]

... I suspect French Frank has probabiliorist tendencies.

Oh, I don't know, I think I might incline towards "minus probabilissimus" (which means, I think, if Flossie says it's okay, I'll believe him, even if everyone else says he's wrong).


(Is that right?)

[vinteuil]

Oh, I don't know, I think I might incline towards "minus probabilissimus" (which means, I think, if Flossie says it's okay, I'll believe him, even if everyone else says he's wrong).


(Is that right?)

...ahh, the old old question... do we side with Pascal, or do we side with the Jesuits :

"A more radical view, "minus probabilissimus", holds that an action is permissible if a single opinion allowing that action is available, even if the overwhelming weight of opinion proscribes it. This view was advanced by the Spanish theologian Bartolomé de Medina (1527–1581) and defended by many Jesuits such as Luis Molina (1528–1581). It was heavily criticised by Blaise Pascal in his Provincial Letters as leading to moral laxity."

[french frank]

...ahh, the old old question... do we side with Pascal, or do we side with the Jesuits :

"A more radical view, "minus probabilissimus", holds that an action is permissible if a single opinion allowing that action is available, even if the overwhelming weight of opinion proscribes it. This view was advanced by the Spanish theologian Bartolomé de Medina (1527–1581) and defended by many Jesuits such as Luis Molina (1528–1581). It was heavily criticised by Blaise Pascal in his Provincial Letters as leading to moral laxity."

Mmmm, Pascal - never much fancied that "pari pascalien" thing. I got dumped with teaching that once, for which reason I have a handsome edition of the complete works. Little used.