City Council Demands Churches Conduct Same-Sex Weddings

 

 

Here’s the wash-up of “gay marriage”. No matter how much they promise freedom of religious practice for churches, no matter how much churches are promised to be exempt under the law, the pressure to buckle under just keeps increasing. It’s happening in the U.S. and now the U.K. If they win in Australia it will happen here too.

City Council Demands Churches Conduct Same-Sex Weddings

gay marriage
(Stefano Bolognini/Creative Commons)

A local council in the U.K. has been forced to apologize after issuing a letter that incorrectly demanded churches be licensed to perform same-sex marriages.

Essex County Council wrote to all churches in the county registered as wedding venues telling them that with “immediate effect” they “must” be licensed to “conduct same sex marriages.”

The words immediate and same were bold and underlined, with the latter also capitalized.

Simon Calvert of the Christian Institute says the council’s letter shows the need for churches to know their legal rights.

He says, “There is no legal reason whatsoever for churches to stop holding marriages in the ways they always have. They are free to do so.”

The Christian Institute has produced a new free legal guide, which gives reassurance that churches are well within their rights to say no to same-sex marriages.

“The behavior of Essex County Council goes to show why churches need to know their legal rights, because bureaucrats who want to push for gay marriage will try and go beyond the law,” warns Calvert.

He adds, “We want to be clear that Christians still have the right to express their belief that marriage is between a man and woman. Christians have every reason to be confident and bold in upholding the truth about marriage.”

“This is just the kind of thing we feared would happen,” says Colin Hart, campaign director of the Coalition for Marriage, which spearheaded opposition to the introduction of same-sex marriage.

“If this has already happened in Essex, there is a real danger that this kind of pressure will be applied by unelected officials across the country,” he warns.

The letter “lifts the lid on the Orwellian future that this ill-thought-through law creates,” Hart says.

Read the full story here

Hey gay rights fascists: in spite of your Mozilla victory, you will still lose- Matt Walsh

Matt Walsh writes:

Hey gay rights fascists: in spite of your Mozilla victory, you will still lose

imagesCAKM5P4C
Dear gay rights militants, dear progressive tyrants, dear liberal fascists, dear haters of free speech, dear crusaders for ideological conformity, dear left wing bullies:

You will lose.

I know you’ve got legions of sycophants kowtowing to you these days, and the rest you’ve set out to destroy — but you will lose.

So, you’ve tracked another dissident and skinned him alive. You’ve made an example ofBrendan Eich, and now you dance joyously around his disemboweled carcass. You have his head on a spike, and you consider this a conquest in your eternal crusade to eradicate diversity and punish differing opinions. You launched your millionth campaign of intimidation, and now another good man has been dragged through the mud, to the sounds of taunting and jeering and death threats.

You found out that the CEO of Mozilla gave a few dollars to support a pro-traditional marriage ballot measure several years ago, and you proceeded to publicly tar and feather him until he was forced to ‘resign’ in disgrace.

You again chose to forgo debate, in favor of coercion and bullying.

You again attempted to end the ‘gay rights’ argument by defrocking your opponent.

Hey, good for you.

Enjoy the spoils of your cowardice.

It won’t last.

Read the rest of the article here

Ray Ortlund- What is Marriage, According to the Bible?

What is marriage, according to the Bible?

paradise_lost_21

Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.  Genesis 2:24

It is not true that the Bible teaches multiple views of marriage, and therefore the Bible’s clarity is diminished on this question.  The Bible does record, for example, that “Lamech took two wives” (Genesis 4:19).  But the Bible is not thereby endorsing polygamy, but indeed is casting doubt on polygamy.  The role of Lamech in the text is to show “a progressive hardening in sin” (Waltke, Genesis, page 100).  We invented polygamy, along with other social evils.  But God gave us marriage.

The Bible defines marriage in Genesis 2:24, quoted above.  Here is what this very significant verse is saying:

Therefore.  This word signals that Moses is adding an aside to his narrative.  It’s as if we are sitting in Moses’ living room, watching his DVD of the creation of the universe (Genesis 1) and of man and woman (Genesis 2).  At this point he hits the pause button on the remote, the screen freezes, he turns to us post-fall people watching these amazing events and he says, “Now let me explain how what God did so long ago is normative for us today.  Amazingly, we still retain something beautiful from the Garden of Eden.”

A man shall leave his father and his mother.  In a culture of strong bonds between the generations, this is striking.  A man’s primary human relationship is no longer with his parents or ancestors.  He breaks away from them for the sake of a more profound loyalty.

And hold fast to his wife.  A man, in marrying, enfolds his wife into his heart.  He rejoices to identify with her: “This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh” (verse 23).  At every level of his being, he becomes wholeheartedly devoted to her, as to no other.

And they shall become one flesh.  “One flesh” is essential to the biblical view of marriage.  It means, one mortal life fully shared.  Two selfish me’s start learning to think like one unified us, sharing one everything: one life, one reputation, one bed, one suffering, one budget, one family, one mission, and so forth.  No barriers.  No hiding.  No aloofness.  Now total openness with total sharing and total solidarity, until death parts them.  Moreover, Jesus explained that, behind the word “become,” God is there: “What therefore God has joined together . . .” (Matthew 19:6).  Marriage is not a product of human social evolution.  Marriage came down from God.  And he defined it for us.  He has the right to.  It belongs to him.

One mortal life fully shared between a man and a woman — this is marriage, according to the Bible, because Genesis 2:24 is not a throw-away line.  Its very purpose is to define.

What’s more, the apostle Paul quoted Genesis 2:24 to take our understanding a step further — an amazing step: “We are members of [Christ’s] body.  ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’” (Ephesians 5:30-31).  Did you notice his logic?  “We are members of Christ’s body.  He loved us.  He chose us.  He gave himself up for us.  He embraced us.  He is with us.  He will present us someday in splendor.  All of this glory is ours, because we are united with him now and forever.  Therefore, this is why, our union with Christ is the reason why, a man and women get married and live united as ‘one flesh.’  Human marriages are miniature social platforms on which the gospel is to be displayed.”

Marriage is a gospel issue.  That is the ultimate reason why clarity about its definition matters.  People who depart from, or fail to stand up for, the biblical view of marriage are taking a step away from the gospel itself.  The whole Bible is the story of the marital love of God, as I demonstrate in this book.  Our whole lives are that story, if we have eyes to see.

Marriage is more than human romance, wonderful as that is.  Marriage is the display of Christ and his Bride in love together.  A beautiful, tender, thriving, Ephesians 5-kind of marriage makes the gospel visible on earth, bringing hope to people who have given up believing there could be any love anywhere for them.  That is why biblical marriage deserves our courageous loyalty today.  And that is why, in our increasingly secular times, biblical marriage is under pressure.  Its true meaning is understood and embodied and sustained only by the power of the gospel.

We can’t turn the clock back to the days of the Christian social consensus the West has foolishly thrown away.  But we who say we believe the gospel can and must stand up for the biblical definition of marriage.  We must cultivate beautiful marriages ourselves.  We must suffer social rejection bravely.  We must pray for revival.  We must wait for the inevitable collapse of every false view of marriage.  We must lovingly serve all who suffer for their foolish attempts at false “marriages.”  And we must go to church this Sunday and worship the living God with all our hearts, so that we ourselves are sustained for faithfulness over the long haul, because this isn’t going to be easy.

Daily Prompt: The Luckiest People

Image

For almost every day for the last 33 years, this has been the first person I see each day.

We love each other with the kind of fierce commitment that comes from doing life together, standing by one another when times are tough as well as in the good times. Our relationship has been tested at times but we always emerge stronger.

Margaret is an extrovert and just loves talking to people, finding out how they think and experience life. She wasn’t always this way, but when we moved to Narrabri 20 or so years ago, she came out of a box she had lived in for a long time.

There are many things I love about my wife but one of the most special things is her generosity. She just loves to buy things to give away. She is always thinking of what she can do to help other people.

Waking up to start my day with her is a real blessing.

I am the “luckiest” of people.

Good News From the High Court

I don’t suppose this will deter those people who think they have the right to redefine marriage to the detriment of the nation, but it is very good news.

From the ABC:

High Court throws out ACT’s same-sex marriage laws

Updated 6 minutes ago

Same-sex couples who wed in the ACT will have their marriages annulled after the High Court ruled against the laws.

A total of 27 couples, including some from interstate, used the law to tie the knot after it came into effect last weekend.

But today the High Court in Canberra unanimously ruled that the laws were inconsistent with the Federal Marriage Act, and were therefore unconstitutional.

The ruling is a victory for the Commonwealth, which had launched the appeal against the laws.

The ACT had argued that its laws could sit beside the federal legislation because it had defined a different type of marriage between same-sex couples.

The High Court delivered its decision early to give certainty to those wanting to use the law, but said it might be some time before a full judgement was released.