Intergender

[sunofmysoul]

Originally Posted by Columcille

thanks for commenting. My post is a long one. So it is harder to break down.

I'll have to be more thoughtful next time. At any rate, it is rare. It is not the same as ****sexuality.

Guess it depends on the type of syndrome. I am not as educated as far as specifics in this area. In general, I would say such abnormalities would fit Jesus's description for those celebates that were "born in" p***age and celibacy more favorable. Since marriage in the bible is used specifically between male and female, regardless of its procreative nature, it is prefered to not allow such intergender marriages. Seems strange that I start with a maybe and end with a no. But again, I think the particular syndrome's capabilities to be corrected accurately comes into play with modern scientific medical practices and advances. It is unfortunate for intergender people, just as unfortunate for accidents, crippling deseases, and so on and so forth. This question should be more reserved for the priests that encounter in their parish such instances rather than to me. I should think that since the priest himself is celibate on a voluntary basis to please the Lord, that his example might be viewed more efficient to the Catholic intergender. It is a tough question to be sure, but one not imminent to the normal routine due to the various syndrome's rarity. I think the intergender, upon receiving communion and living a life of virtue will see a clearer path that God wants them to lead within the confines of the Catholic Faith.

the part highlighted in blue, I would like to discuss further if possible.

Without factoring in reason, and medical scientific knowledge, we are left with the conclusion, (using the stipulated guidelines you have place on marriage here) that an old guy having sex with a young girl, (pedophilia)
is okay, as long as they get married. (and as of yet can be legal in many states as long as they have parental signatures on the underage party).

And what of polygamy? Does the Bible ever say it is wrong or a sin?

And if you own a slave, (that's permissible too according to the scriptures)
by biblical law that ownership of the slave, trumps "marital vows"

If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself. And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free: Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever. Ex.21:2-6

[GiGi]

Originally Posted by sunofmysoul

If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself. And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free: Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever. Ex.21:2-6

That's awful! The price of freedom is his family.

[Columcille]

You highlighted my comment in blue.

Since marriage in the bible is used specifically between male and female, regardless of its procreative nature, it is prefered to not allow such intergender marriages.

Now, it seems quite clear that in the N.T. that bride Strong's #3565 and bridegroom #3566 numphios. Is only between female and male. The Scriptures, like in Revelations 21.9 "..., Come, I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb," clearly shows an ****ogy of the marriage between husband and wife. The p***age as an ****ogy is oblivious to procreation. And even Paul in describing a husband's role to his wife uses the ****ogy of Christ and the Church in Ephesians 5.22-33. I suppose what set you to highlight this aspect is my reference about procreativity.

[Columcille]

Originally Posted by sunofmysoul

And what of polygamy? Does the Bible ever say it is wrong or a sin?

And if you own a slave, (that's permissible too according to the scriptures)
by biblical law that ownership of the slave, trumps "marital vows"

If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself. And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free: Then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an aul; and he shall serve him for ever. Ex.21:2-6

In regards to age requirements, the N.T. is clear that we must obey the laws of the land. Secondly, that if the laws of the land are unjust, we are to practice the higher law of God. Hence, a bishop is to be the husband of one wife in the N.T. standards states. Also, what concerns "appearance of evil" should it come down to the age difference, even though it might be lawful in a civilian status does not mean it is acceptable to practice by the Church, just as the Catholic Church does not allow "****sexual marrages." It is the perogative of the Faith in doctrine and morals to practice within their own limits. If the secular law makers take issue with it, it is better that the Church suffer the same persecution that it did in Pagan rome in the first four centuries and overcome by p***ive martyrdom than to always be chasing after every whim of the world.

In regards to O.T. law, as you suggested from Exodus 21, the law is based on prudence. The master cannot give what is not his own. The laws laid afterwards in regards to woman servants is concerned with the honor due every woman to be chaste. That is just the way in which that society operated and for the most part it worked for them. You should continue on with the p***age until verse 11. However, if male servant should be the master's servant for life, that is his own choice. It is not much different than a priest who takes holy orders, with the exception that he is celibate forever; the servant at least has a wife and children. I think it is a matter of prudence for the females under that society to find it more agreeable to be taken care of for life. Hence, when that care is not given by the master, as demonstrated in verse 11 "Should he cheat her of these three things (Food, Clothing, and Conjugal Rights v.10) she may leave, freely, without having to pay any money." This is of course related to the woman servant as a concubine, but as a matter of prudence, the spirit of the law, a master's care being unjust in any circumstance could be made aware of to the judges.

[TRiG]

Originally Posted by Columcille

If the secular law makers take issue with it

Are you seriously trying to suggest that anyone, anywhere, would like to force the RCC or any other church to perform same-sex marriages?

There are plenty of churches around that refuse to perform interracial marriages. That's fine. A religion can be as restrictive as it wants to be. But those restrictions should not be encoded into civil law.

TRiG.