Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    The church-state connection goes both ways, if the church can influence the state, then I see no problem with the other way round.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sophistress)
    Make up its own rules?
    Well, sacraments work on something called "propers" There are five of them.

    "Proper Minister" is one example. In the Anglican tradition a deacon can baptize someone (interestingly so could I in an emergency - seriously!!) but only a priest can give communion. If a deacon administered commuinion it would be invalid because the "Proper Minister" wasn't administering the sacrament.

    "Proper Matter" (stuff you use!) is another example. The "proper matter" for communion is bread and wine....you can't use pepsi and cookies.....and the "proper matter" for baptism is water.....again, you couldn't dunk babies head in lucazade!

    Now, there are two dominical sacraments. They're called dominical because they were commanded by the Lord. They are baptism and holy communion. It's jolly difficult to change the "propers" when their use it the express instruction of JC.

    The remaining five sacraments (confirmation, matrimony, extreme unction, ordination) are not dominical and the propers can be more easily changed.

    The "Proper Object" for the sacrament of marriage is an unmarried women and an unmarried man who are both baptized (although many churches now only insist on one member being baptized....depends on the denomination") However, there's nothing to stop the church changing it's law in the synod to make the proper object for marriage an unmarried man and woman or same sex couple. And this is what the UU would have done.

    Of course, other Church branches would cite the scriptures ans say this is bollox but that's why the Church is continually fragmenting and reforming.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    Well, sacraments work on something called "propers" There are five of them.

    "Proper Minister" is one example. In the Anglican tradition a deacon can baptize someone (interestingly so could I in an emergency - seriously!!) but only a priest can give communion. If a deacon administered commuinion it would be invalid because the "Proper Minister" wasn't administering the sacrament.

    "Proper Matter" (stuff you use!) is another example. The "proper matter" for communion is bread and wine....you can't use pepsi and cookies.....and the "proper matter" for baptism is water.....again, you couldn't dunk babies head in lucazade!

    Now, there are two dominical sacraments. They're called dominical because they were commanded by the Lord. They are baptism and holy communion. It's jolly difficult to change the "propers" when their use it the express instruction of JC.

    The remaining five sacraments (confirmation, matrimony, extreme unction, ordination) are not dominical and the propers can be more easily changed.

    The "Proper Object" for the sacrament of marriage is an unmarried women and an unmarried man who are both baptized (although many churches now only insist on one member being baptized....depends on the denomination") However, there's nothing to stop the church changing it's law in the synod to make the proper object for marriage an unmarried man and woman or same sex couple. And this is what the UU would have done.

    Of course, other Church branches would cite the scriptures ans say this is bollox but that's why the Church is continually fragmenting and reforming.
    Thank you, that's pretty interesting.

    Although, the UU aren't necessarily Christian, though some churches have a Christian bend. Yes, they're very liberal.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sophistress)
    Thank you, that's pretty interesting.
    Not a lot of people (apart from priests...obviously) know that.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    Not a lot of people (apart from priests...obviously) know that.
    Are you a priest, or somebody with far too much spare time?

    No, but you're right, I didn't know, and am glad I do now.

    Sheeet, I'd better piss off to bed. My first exam tomorrow; English, wish me luck!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I totally standfor civil marriages for ays people and access to the same rights, tax breaks, benefits and stuuf that striaght people get through marriage but you cant force the church to dot he marriages.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sophistress)
    Are you a priest, or somebody with far too much spare time?

    No, but you're right, I didn't know, and am glad I do now.

    Sheeet, I'd better piss off to bed. My first exam tomorrow; English, wish me luck!
    Bon chance!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    Well, let's clarify. When you say "marriage" do you mean "civil marriage"? That shouldn't really alarm anyone, not even the most fundamentalist Christians. However, if you mean the "sacrament of matrimony" then that'd obviously wind up the "bible thumpers"
    I suppose what I meant was that from a personal viewpoint, I'd like something which would give me the rights of a married heterosexual couple, but not a name which will antagonise others.

    Also, sorry if my use of the phrase 'bible bashers' offended anyone... I guess I wouldn't like it if someone called me a big poof, so I shouldn't insult others.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by benji_flavs)
    I suppose what I meant was that from a personal viewpoint, I'd like something which would give me the rights of a married heterosexual couple, but not a name which will antagonise others.

    Also, sorry if my use of the phrase 'bible bashers' offended anyone... I guess I wouldn't like it if someone called me a big poof, so I shouldn't insult others.
    Well, I agree. I think you should have something which would give you the rights of a married heterosexual couple, and I wouldn't even care very much if we actually called it "marriage" you big fairy.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    I'm going to marry my best friend at her gay wedding.
    For a second, I was so confused!

    I agree with civic marriages. I think in a decade we will see a divorce rate like that in Swededn, 3x as high as heterosexual marriages.

    For anti-homosexual websites, just go to www.bnp.org.uk Or not if their biggotry sickens you.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Nice to see the poll represents everyones view.
 
 
 
Poll
“Yanny” or “Laurel”
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.