Shock and awe are the ingredients for this “service.”
In a previous blog, I decided that I could support the concept of civil unions, because civil unions are strictly legal, secular services. They make no pretense towards calling upon God. Instead, they call upon the Constitution, which guarantees our freedom (in a non-spiritual sense). Since I’m more libertarian minded anyway, I think this works. Note, I don’t consider this a support for their “intimate actions.” While those actions are prohibited by the Church, its not like a civil union ensures that it will happen…its probably been happening already. Let them have this legal right, I say.
[Editors Note: But isn't abortion a right? My response- No, murder in any sense of the word, at any stage of life, is not a right. The question is, are fetuses, under the Constitution, granted equal protection? Under God, yes, but under the Constitution, this is debated...though certainly not by Obama.]
I also said it’s up to the churches themselves to decide upon the protocol for “marriage,” but I explicitly said that they, because of the nature and definition of marriage and its inherently religious basis, shouldn’t allow these “marriages.” Now that I’m a Roman, I’m more against the idea of “gay marriage,” via religious services.
Of course, two Anglican priests, of all people, have had their first gay wedding, against the wishes of the Bishop of London. As the Anglican commune demonstrates, when you lack sufficient ecclesiastic power from above, anything can happen “down below.” Also, as the reaction to this act demonstrates, there is hardly consensus, even among the liberals and conservatives, on this issue.
Strictly speaking, from my view, let the Anglicans do what they want…its of no consequence to Rome. Our position is fairly clear, and the Anglican’s problems in this area only make the contrast more stark. Those members of the Anglican commune who wish to leave are more than welcome back to Rome (which, given their traditionalist character, should make it easy in terms of assimilation). It only goes to show: when your church is founded in protest, expect that revolutionary spirit to swallow you in turn. Or better: to live by the Protest, is to die by the Protest.
Posted by T. Ambrose Nazianzus 
