Country Ham
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,314
Jun 25, 2014 19:32:08 GMT
|
Post by Country Ham on Aug 13, 2014 17:10:35 GMT
There is also a difference between a Catholic funeral and a Catholic Funeral Mass if I remember correctly.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 9, 2024 18:21:16 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2014 17:17:37 GMT
Just dipping my toes in here, but I am a Baptist church secretary in the south. I haven't read all of this thread but just the few posts above me. I know of possible wedding that was supposed to happen here last October. Our pastor met with the couple. He found out they were living together and he told them unless they lived apart before the wedding, he wouldn't marry them in our church. I also truly think he would not hold a service here if the person were gay. I do not think it is right. We are all sinners. I know people in this church who have been married, divorced and remarried spouses and continue to all go to church here. That's an odd one. BUT in the Bible divorce, adultery well, we all know what it is considered. Let me also say, that I remain silent on many things that go on here because I disagree with them. My pastor and I don't see eye to eye on many things. All this to say, that there are just some things that are to the bone beliefs in Baptist faith. Would I call it hate? I just don't think that it is. It is just a core belief dealing with what they believe right and wrong. Naby, if all sins/"rules" of religion were applied equally, I wouldn't find saying no to gay people by a church to be so distressing. It's the inequality of treatment that really bothers me. I also don't think that all cases of unequal treatment of gay people is motivated by hate, or that all people who believe that being gay is a sin hate gay people, too.
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Aug 13, 2014 17:27:39 GMT
I just wonder why anyone would want a funeral service in a church that they did not share a faith with. Every funeral I've ever attended that had a service in a church was because of that person's faith. They all had religious services. ETA - I'm just having trouble wrapping my brain around the request. It just seems so odd to me. But they did share the faith. And even if not they were having their own officiant run the service. I think there is a considerable variation in how different denominations consider this. Baptists in general want things done their own particular way and are not open to having other practices within their facilities. Weddings and funerals encompass the deepest beliefs of a congregation, and the church is where these beliefs are shared. The very idea of a Baptist church agreeing to any service outside of their brand is something I can't seem to come to terms with. It is that at odds with my own experience.
|
|
naby64
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,238
Jun 25, 2014 21:44:13 GMT
|
Post by naby64 on Aug 13, 2014 17:34:58 GMT
Oh, Ashley, I agree whole-heartedly!! There seems to be a pick and choose at times. That is just what kills me.
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Aug 13, 2014 17:36:47 GMT
This is where I am. I think it is sad that they made this choice. When I was choosing a church as an adult, I chose a church that supported my belief system for this reason. As an aside, don't Catholic and Jewish cemeteries forbid burial for people for different reasons? I know that was true in the past, but I don't know how much has changed. If divorced Catholics cannot take part in any of the sacraments, can't the Church refuse to do a funeral? But they tell you this up front. They don't say yes sure. And then the day before say oh he's gay. Nevermind find somewhere else. I think whoever originally made these arrangements stepped outside of their authority. This was a decision that should have been run through the church leadership and/or the congregation - not exactly a practical situation when planning a funeral. First times are always hard.
|
|
Country Ham
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,314
Jun 25, 2014 19:32:08 GMT
|
Post by Country Ham on Aug 13, 2014 18:04:00 GMT
I knew I should of stayed out of this discussion. It never was about wanting to understand why a church might not agree this funeral. When reasons were given people just high fived each other about wrong the reasons were. Both sides see things through clouded lenses though.
|
|
grinningcat
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,663
Jun 26, 2014 13:06:35 GMT
|
Post by grinningcat on Aug 13, 2014 18:11:11 GMT
I knew I should of stayed out of this discussion. It never was about wanting to understand why a church might not agree this funeral. When reasons were given people just high fived each other about wrong the reasons were. Both sides see things through clouded lenses though. But there really is no good reason for a church to book and then cancel a funeral. There really isn't. If they didn't want a gay person to darken their church doors, then they should have done a thorough investigation before making the booking. I have no problem with a church saying that they cannot host a funeral for someone who is not a member of said church. To me, that makes total sense, even if it's not the most sympathetic or Christian thing to do. But I think they should have that right. If they wanted to be viewed as a sympathetic and loving Christians, the deceased sexuality should have been irrelevant, considering Christians constantly say "love the sinner, hate the sin". And they are hypocritical if they recind this funeral and not all the other funerals hosted there considering that Christians claim that all sins are equal and all people are sinners. If one person's sin pisses the church off so much that they say no to one funeral, then they have to say no to all funerals. Sin is either equal as Christians claim, or it's not. Unfortunately, this proves that not all sins are equal. So yes, it's about a church acting hypocritical. Either they suck it up and act like Christians who love the sinner and hate the sin or they don't. It's pretty damn simple.
|
|
|
Post by scrapqueen01 on Aug 13, 2014 18:15:46 GMT
It's pretty much impossible to apply the same rules/what is and isn't sin across the board because we all have our own ideas and read something different in scripture. That is not just in Christianity. This is why there are so many different religions and denominations. As humans we sometimes just don't agree or get along so we set off to be with people who share the same beliefs/philosophy.
|
|
|
Post by Skypea on Aug 13, 2014 18:21:25 GMT
As an aside, don't Catholic and Jewish cemeteries forbid burial for people for different reasons? I know that was true in the past, but I don't know how much has changed. If divorced Catholics cannot take part in any of the sacraments, can't the Church refuse to do a funeral? But they tell you this up front. They don't say yes sure. And then the day before say oh he's gay. Nevermind find somewhere else. Catholics aren't barred from all sacraments because of divorce. Many get an annulment and remarry. And I think I read that divorced Catholics can take communion (per a more recent pope). You could ask on a Catholic forum (like Catholic Answers). As for the funeral, most likely being divorced doesn't matter. From what I read on CA they still hold to the once a C always a C. (that isn't Biblical but most likely is in their CCC)
Would a Catholic ask to have a svc in a Jewish temple / buried in a Jewish cemetery? Would a Jewish person ask to have a funeral svc/burial in a Catholic church/cemetery?
Do you know as a fact that the minister said this or are you making it up?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 9, 2024 18:21:16 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2014 18:37:26 GMT
"there was no misunderstanding... just deception"
Skybar, do you know this as a fact or are you making it up?
|
|
|
Post by Skypea on Aug 13, 2014 18:49:18 GMT
The very same could be asked of you on many, many topics.
By the way, what is the CC and the CCC? Is it something you're making up because I've never heard either of those and I was raised Catholic.
so was I
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Aug 13, 2014 18:52:14 GMT
I knew I should of stayed out of this discussion. It never was about wanting to understand why a church might not agree this funeral. When reasons were given people just high fived each other about wrong the reasons were. Both sides see things through clouded lenses though. But there really is no good reason for a church to book and then cancel a funeral. There really isn't. If they didn't want a gay person to darken their church doors, then they should have done a thorough investigation before making the booking. I have no problem with a church saying that they cannot host a funeral for someone who is not a member of said church. To me, that makes total sense, even if it's not the most sympathetic or Christian thing to do. But I think they should have that right. If they wanted to be viewed as a sympathetic and loving Christians, the deceased sexuality should have been irrelevant, considering Christians constantly say "love the sinner, hate the sin". And they are hypocritical if they recind this funeral and not all the other funerals hosted there considering that Christians claim that all sins are equal and all people are sinners. If one person's sin pisses the church off so much that they say no to one funeral, then they have to say no to all funerals. Sin is either equal as Christians claim, or it's not. Unfortunately, this proves that not all sins are equal. So yes, it's about a church acting hypocritical. Either they suck it up and act like Christians who love the sinner and hate the sin or they don't. It's pretty damn simple. Again, I disagree. There is a very good reason to cancel the arrangements if the service violates the deepest beliefs of the people the church represents. Whether *you* think their reasons are ridiculous, hypocritical or unChristian is irrelevant to what *they* believe. Sexuality is always relevant. If this man was homosexual and abstinent, this would not have been an issue. His choice - his very human choice - to have a same sex partner is a condition that could not be swept aside by this church. You're talking about a human construct - a church - built so humans of similar beliefs could freely assemble. The entire purpose of a church is to support and nurture these shared beliefs. Change on such a dramatic level - the normalization of homosexuality after thousands of year of considering it immoral - will not happen overnight and it will not happen in every church. That does not make them unChristian. It makes them human.
|
|
|
Post by moveablefeast on Aug 13, 2014 19:02:42 GMT
The very same could be asked of you on many, many topics.
By the way, what is the CC and the CCC? Is it something you're making up because I've never heard either of those and I was raised Catholic.
I believe those mean Catholic Church and Catechism of the Catholic Church.
|
|
|
Post by Skypea on Aug 13, 2014 19:08:49 GMT
"there was no misunderstanding... just deception" Skybar, do you know this as a fact or are you making it up?
I also wasn't posting something specific being said by anyone at the church.
do you (or any other peas) know who contacted the church? were they authorized to do this? did they call the church or go to the offices? who did they talk to at the church? once those were answered, there'd be more questions to be asked and answered.
And from what I read here not many have even a fairly basic understanding of Christianity or the Bible - yet are quick to say what this church and minister should believe, should say, should do...
|
|
~Lauren~
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,876
Jun 26, 2014 3:33:18 GMT
|
Post by ~Lauren~ on Aug 13, 2014 19:10:20 GMT
Standing ovation. I'm always amazed at people here who feel that religious institutions should function according to the rules the posters believed should be followed.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 9, 2024 18:21:16 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2014 19:52:58 GMT
It's pretty much impossible to apply the same rules/what is and isn't sin across the board because we all have our own ideas and read something different in scripture. That is not just in Christianity. This is why there are so many different religions and denominations. As humans we sometimes just don't agree or get along so we set off to be with people who share the same beliefs/philosophy. I didn't say -- or mean -- that the rules and interpretation of sin should be applied across the board for an entire religion. But I expect a single denomination or church to have a pretty good understanding of what they believe to be sin and not? So, if a church wants to not permit a funeral of a gay man because "being gay is a sin" they better not allow any other sinner's funeral there, either. That was what I meant.
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Aug 13, 2014 20:20:34 GMT
Conjecturing a list of possible topics that may be offensive to a clergy person, as a reason why a gay person shouldn't have a funeral in a church is nothing more than a list of excuses to justify homophobia (an extreme and irrational aversion to homosexuality and homosexual people). Because, I've never heard that fat people should be denied having church funerals because the pastor may be asked to speak about their love of food: gluttony is a sin. The sheer amount of mental loops people go to in order to justify their intolerance and continual denial of equal treatment for gays must be absolutely exhausting. If the same amount of effort was put into being a loving, caring person, I think the world would be a tiny bit better. I have to agree with this. There are plenty of sins. Why focus on this perceived sin? I truly don't understand why there is a pecking order of sins.
|
|
~Lauren~
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,876
Jun 26, 2014 3:33:18 GMT
|
Post by ~Lauren~ on Aug 13, 2014 21:05:15 GMT
I guess my response to the question of why focus on this perceived sin is to once again state that it is not up to us to determine which sins a particular church feels are not acceptable or or worse than others. In the end, if this is how this particular church feels or believes, then that's the way it is. Don't like it; don't go there. Don't like an entire denominations beliefs; don't join that denomination. In the end what any one of us thinks of their actions or beliefs is irrelevant. They don't owe us explanations or justifications.
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Aug 13, 2014 21:42:49 GMT
I think it is absolute garbage. That said, I suspect the pastor of the church was put in a position where he felt he had to do this. I would guess he already knew the deceased was gay and wasn't particularly concerned but the parishioners got wind of it and created an uproar. Churches are supported by and 100% dependent on tithes, offerings, and gifts from parishioners. Without this support, there is no money to pay the pastor or keep and maintain the church. If a bunch of the "supporters" are threatening to leave your church and/or withdraw financial support, it would leave you in a very uncomfortable position. I think caving was the wrong decision because as previous posters have mentioned, this is not showing love, compassion, or caring...things that we are taught Jesus found very important. Maybe you should find out what 'power' a minister has in a church? Not all are the same. Some ministers don't make the 'rules' - they follow what the denomination sets forth. Some have to answer to a church board. The board votes on what can be done or not done. Ministers have to follow the policies of the church. They are employees, not Kings.
|
|
|
Post by scrapqueen01 on Aug 13, 2014 21:43:11 GMT
Thanks for that clarification, Ashley. Your right. Every church and denomination should be solid and not wishy washy in what they believe. Unfortunately it isn't as easy as saying if being gay is a sin then no sinner should be allowed a funeral in the church. If that were the case then no one could have a funeral in the church as all Christians are sinners.
Why focus on this perceived sin? Because it is the topic of the day. With states legalizing gay marriage and it becoming more accepted in society it's challenging many people's belief systems. Some people are probably afraid of what it might mean for us as a society or how it could affect churches. In God's eyes there isn't a pecking order of sins. We humans are the ones who categorize sins into not that bad, bad and really bad. To God lying is the same as stealing is the same as murdering. If we have broken one commandment then it's as if we have broken all of them. Homosexuality is just one sin among many. And it's no worse than the others. It's just the prevalent topic of our time right now. Eventually homosexuality will be more accepted. The furor will die down and replaced by something else.
|
|
|
Post by gar on Aug 13, 2014 21:52:21 GMT
Thanks for that clarification, Ashley. Your right. Every church and denomination should be solid and not wishy washy in what they believe. Unfortunately it isn't as easy as saying if being gay is a sin then no sinner should be allowed a funeral in the church. If that were the case then no one could have a funeral in the church as all Christians are sinners. Why focus on this perceived sin? Because it is the topic of the day. With states legalizing gay marriage and it becoming more accepted in society it's challenging many people's belief systems. Some people are probably afraid of what it might mean for us as a society or how it could affect churches. In God's eyes there isn't a pecking order of sins. We humans are the ones who categorize sins into not that bad, bad and really bad. To God lying is the same as stealing is the same as murdering. If we have broken one commandment then it's as if we have broken all of them. Homosexuality is just one sin among many. And it's no worse than the others. It's just the prevalent topic of our time right now. Eventually homosexuality will be more accepted. The furor will die down and replaced by something else. Actually, I doubt that will happen. I believe that homosexuality will always be a bigger sin than say stealing in the eyes of many humans despite acknowledging that in God's eyes there is no pecking order and therein lies the hypocrisy.
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Aug 13, 2014 21:52:52 GMT
I went to a funeral today at a church that was not of my denomination and I have a few new thoughts. Funerals are not for the deceased, they are for those left behind. The deceased is beyond caring about his/her send-off and I don't recall much in the way of funeral instruction in the Bible. Because funerals are for the ones left behind, they can be a tool for the church's ministry and outreach. There are many people who only go to churches for weddings and funerals. This is the time to preach compassionately about God's grace and forgiveness. This is not the time to preach hellfire and damnation. (I don't think preaching hellfire and damnation ever works to bring people to Christ anyway.) By cancelling the funeral, this pastor missed an opportunity to share God's love. Instead, the controversy serves to reinforce non-believers' negative opinions of Christianity. When the Bible talks about approaching our brothers and sisters about sinful behavior, it is talking about believer-to-believer communication. I don't think it's ever loving, right, or effective to tell a non-believer that they are going to hell. Even between believers, it's tricky. In Matthew chapter 7, Jesus says: Jesus was pretty consistent in telling people not to judge others unless they could self-examine and find themselves perfect. He consistently told people to forgive, not condemn. When he healed someone or forgave someone, he would tell them to go and sin no more, but I'm sure that was with the realization that everyone does sin. When he tells his disciples to forgive not seven, but seventy-seven times, that indicates that he knows the cycle of repentance and forgiveness is constant. What a shame the pastor missed a golden opportunity based on making one sin greater than any other. He should count his blessings that God will forgive him for not loving his neighbor as himself. Jesus also tossed the sellers and their goods from the Temple. Maybe it should be expected that within the walls of any denomination's Temple, the way they believe most honors the will of the most Holy will be their top priority. ETA - I'm not trying to argue with you. I think that this funeral should never have been arranged at this church without the full knowledge and consent of the leadership and the congregation since it represents what for them could be an enormous change.
|
|
|
Post by leftturnonly on Aug 13, 2014 22:10:14 GMT
Actually, I doubt that will happen. I believe that homosexuality will always be a bigger sin than say stealing in the eyes of many humans despite acknowledging that in God's eyes there is no pecking order and therein lies the hypocrisy. I don't know. A few years ago, I would absolutely agree with this. But with this younger generation? So many of them understand homosexuality differently than people of my generation were taught to understand it. One has only to see the dominoing legalization of same sex marriage to see this different perception at work. As these people take their seats in church leadership positions and in the congregations in general, there will be changes throughout many churches. I am glad to see it, even if it means new denominations will form and old ones will end.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 9, 2024 18:21:16 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2014 22:16:26 GMT
Conjecturing a list of possible topics that may be offensive to a clergy person, as a reason why a gay person shouldn't have a funeral in a church is nothing more than a list of excuses to justify homophobia (an extreme and irrational aversion to homosexuality and homosexual people). Because, I've never heard that fat people should be denied having church funerals because the pastor may be asked to speak about their love of food: gluttony is a sin. The sheer amount of mental loops people go to in order to justify their intolerance and continual denial of equal treatment for gays must be absolutely exhausting. If the same amount of effort was put into being a loving, caring person, I think the world would be a tiny bit better. I have to agree with this. There are plenty of sins. Why focus on this perceived sin? I truly don't understand why there is a pecking order of sins. There isn't a "pecking order" of sins. Sin is sin. For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it. 11 For he who said, “You shall not commit adultery,” also said, “You shall not murder.”[c] If you do not commit adultery but do commit murder, you have become a lawbreaker. (James 2:10) Ironically enough, I found this because judgment without mercy will be shown to anyone who has not been merciful. Mercy triumphs over judgment. (James 2:13)
MERCY TRIUMPHS OVER JUDGMENT. I love this! I know MANY Christians who would benefit greatly from that verse.
EDITED TO ADD...pay no heed to the bolding...I guess it's the way the characters were when I pasted the verse in...the bolding was not done by me so if you're trying to figure out why those specific words are bolded...don't ask me. LOL
|
|
|
Post by gar on Aug 13, 2014 22:29:22 GMT
Actually, I doubt that will happen. I believe that homosexuality will always be a bigger sin than say stealing in the eyes of many humans despite acknowledging that in God's eyes there is no pecking order and therein lies the hypocrisy. I don't know. A few years ago, I would absolutely agree with this. But with this younger generation? So many of them understand homosexuality differently than people of my generation were taught to understand it. One has only to see the dominoing legalization of same sex marriage to see this different perception at work. As these people take their seats in church leadership positions and in the congregations in general, there will be changes throughout many churches. I am glad to see it, even if it means new denominations will form and old ones will end. I hope you're right
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Aug 13, 2014 23:02:38 GMT
I have to agree with this. There are plenty of sins. Why focus on this perceived sin? I truly don't understand why there is a pecking order of sins. There isn't a "pecking order" of sins. Sin is sin. For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it. 11 For he who said, “You shall not commit adultery,” also said, “You shall not murder.”[c] If you do not commit adultery but do commit murder, you have become a lawbreaker. (James 2:10) Ironically enough, I found this because judgment without mercy will be shown to anyone who has not been merciful. Mercy triumphs over judgment. (James 2:13)
MERCY TRIUMPHS OVER JUDGMENT. I love this! I know MANY Christians who would benefit greatly from that verse.
EDITED TO ADD...pay no heed to the bolding...I guess it's the way the characters were when I pasted the verse in...the bolding was not done by me so if you're trying to figure out why those specific words are bolded...don't ask me. LOL
I guess that's why I will never understand religion. Because I am sure that church has had services for adulterers, liars and thieves, to name a few. But not gays, apparently. Lauren is right; it's their church, and they have a right to decide who uses their building, whether I agree with it or not. I just think that elevating homosexuality as a sin, above other sins, is peculiar.
|
|
AmeliaBloomer
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,842
Location: USA
Jun 26, 2014 5:01:45 GMT
|
Post by AmeliaBloomer on Aug 14, 2014 0:57:14 GMT
The answer is yes. My mother was divorced and no longer a practicing Catholic at the time of her death and we had her funeral at a Catholic church, no questions asked. they would consider her a Catholic. once a Catholic, always a Catholic. "Once baptized, always baptized" is the more apt phrase. And divorce has nothing to do with eligibility for a Catholic funeral or burial. Neither does sexual orientation - usually. (See bolded below.) Under Canon Law there are three reasons to deny a Catholic funeral: 1. Heresy or schism (joining another denomination, formally leaving the Catholic Church by informing a bishop, or rejecting Catholic doctrine in a public way), 2. Choosing cremation for non-Christian reasons, 3. Being a "manifest sinner" whose funeral could cause public scandal among the faithful (e.g. Mafia lord, genocidal dictator, abortionist). Note: Interestingly, gay men have been denied Catholic funerals in the US at least twice in the last ten years - both times by San Diego priests, and both times the family received a subsequent apology and offer of a funeral mass.
Also: the family of a non-Catholic can request a funeral mass, as long as the deceased's own minister is unavailable (or, presumably, non-existent), and as long as the deceased would not have objected to the idea.
|
|
AmeliaBloomer
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,842
Location: USA
Jun 26, 2014 5:01:45 GMT
|
Post by AmeliaBloomer on Aug 14, 2014 2:05:00 GMT
Just curious - what is cremation for non-Christian reasons? My mother was cremated but it was after her funeral mass, as was her sister. Is that the difference? The idea is cremation shouldn't be chosen for a reason that is contrary to Christian teaching, i.e, as a way to deny belief in the resurrection of the body. (The Catholic Church believes Christians should be buried or entombed, as Jesus Christ was. Cremation is no longer forbidden, but it's not encouraged. They prefer the deceased to be present at the funeral mass, but it's not required.)
|
|
|
Post by jonda1974 on Aug 14, 2014 3:31:00 GMT
and has anyone confirmed that skypea really is skybar? The intent is there but the linguistics just don't sound true to her style. I've come around. I was unconvinced before but I think it sounds just like her now. Welcome home, skybar.I'm not quite convinced Lucy - there are some tells that just aren't skybar and some that are missing for her approach. I hope all is well with the real skybar.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Oct 9, 2024 18:21:16 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2014 3:46:50 GMT
Jonda, I'm convinced now, due to the following;
Excessive quoting Selectively answering questions posed to her Answering questions with questions Run-on one-liners Referencing bible passages as answers Frequent lack of proper capitalization and punctuation
That's a lot to remember if you're faking it.
|
|