Interfaith Group

membership approval of contraceptives as a long running and well documented example that the members have no pull to change church doctrine on really any matter at all. It does not resemble a democratic, bottom-up power/voting structure.

The only 'vote' I can see that seems to matter at all, is a loss of membership, either through schism into a whole new church, or individuals leaving. But even that hasn't always changed RCC doctrine.

That's why I specified in the following language:

"And if someone supports legal recognition of SSM AND also belongs to a church like the RCC, I don't think it's wrong to suggest they re-evaluate whether they are in the right place."


I didn't say they must leave, or they are bad people if they don't leave, or they are implicit in the church doctrine if they don't leave. I chose my words very carefully, yet it came across as, apparently, a very controversial thing, because I got back something very vehement in response that I essentially had no business suggesting it.

Yet here, in this thread, I see 'no one can fault them' for leaving.

It's unquestionably acceptable they leave, but verboten that I suggest they might leave? This does not compute, for me. I sought clarification. I will, apparently, not receive it.