Archbishop Cordileone's Comments on Yesterday's DOMA Ruling

[Dale_M]

I suggest you re-read some of the threads here on CAF and the Church documents on Marriage. It is about the family and the raising of children. It has to be, because if it is NOT about family and the raising of children then there would be no salient argument against same sex marriage. if it were only about the couple “serving each other”, then there would be no barrier to two people of the same sex living together in service to each other.

The teachings of the Catholic Church were not developed to address political issues.

The natural institution of marriage is to bring our nature to fulfillment. It unites male and female, who have complementary natures and are incomplete without the other. Children are a natural fruit of this union. But the unitive function of marriage precedes procreation and child-rearing., and is independent of those things.

 

[catholicanne]

I suggest you re-read some of the threads here on CAF and the Church documents on Marriage. It is about the family and the raising of children. It has to be, because if it is NOT about family and the raising of children then there would be no salient argument against same sex marriage. if it were only about the couple “serving each other”, then there would be no barrier to two people of the same sex living together in service to each other.

Please re-read what I said. I said marriage isn’t ALL about children. Yes, having children is a huge part of marriage and for those lucky couples that get to have children marriage can seem all about the children but that’s not the ONLY thing marriage is about.

 

[RobbyS]

Of course we open to the possibility but I am infertile. If God wants me to have a child, He will send me one. No, marriage is not all about children, it’s about serving each other as we would serve Christ. They call it a vocation for a reason.

Marriage is not primarily about feelings. It is an institution that has developed over the centuries around the personal relationship of men and women. That relationship grows out of the sexual differences between men and woman, and originates in the human need to reproduce and rear children so as to perpetuate society. The ideal embodied in our laws governing that relationship is found in the New Testament, e.g. Matthew 19, which quoting Genesis says that our creator intends we should mate for life and enoy the same intimacy that exists between Christ and His Church. To be sure, that is an ideal is as much obeyed in the breech as in the observance, and it has been much diluted by our divorce laws, which treat marriage as just another kind of contract, one almost as impersonal as a business partnership, and to be ended at will by either party. Only when the marriage is fruitful are the parties held to a stricter standard. Looked as as a mere contract, no wonder it excites the envy of the homosexual. And so they have used easy divorce as an argument that it is no more than a liason recognized by the law which still enjoys benefits conferred in a day when marriage was supposed to be a life-time matter and ended only with difficulty.

 

[Crescentinus]

Archbishop Cordileone is stirring up a fire ant nest. Perfect. It means that he’s doing his job.

 

[Dale_M]

Marriage is not primarily about feelings. It is an institution that has developed over the centuries around the personal relationship of men and women.

Yes, that accords with Catholic teaching.

That relationship grows out of the sexual differences between men and woman, and originates in the human need to reproduce and rear children so as to perpetuate society

Yes and no.

Yes, the sexual differences between male and female are important, particularly for reproduction. But the differences between male and female are much more than our bodies. Our fundamental natures are different, and only in the communion between male and female (such as in marriage, but also in the consecrated life) are we complete as persons.

You might want to take a look at Pope John Paul’s speeches which are collectively referred to as * Theology of the Body*…
ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/jp2tbind.htm

That list of speeches looks pretty formidable at first, but each speech is fairly short and the translation fairly accessible (unlike some Vatican documents)

Starting at the beginning is a good idea, because he develops his ideas. But if you are in a hurry, skip to Original Unity of Man and Woman and the speech which followed it, Man Becomes the Image of God by Communion of Persons, You will then want to read the next speech, Marriage One and Indissoluble in First Chapters of Genesis

The short of it is that Adam was originally both male and female. Not in the physical sense, but in his nature. It was with the creation of woman that male and female were separated, and only in communion are we made whole.

Only when the marriage is fruitful are the parties held to a stricter standard.

Maybe I am wrong, but I don’t think Catholic teaching makes such claim.

 

[Lucky7]

Very interesting question about imposing the will of the Church onto a society.

This is fraught with problems.

Unfortunately no one is answering the question. They are more interested in telling an infertile woman how wrong she is about Church teaching on the importance of having childen in a marriage…when in reality is she is not wrong in what she states.

Per Catechism paragraph 1643:

*"Conjugal love involves a totality, in which all the elements of the person enter - appeal of the body and instinct, power of feeling and affectivity, aspiration of the spirit and of will. It aims at a deeply personal unity, a unity that, beyond union in one flesh, leads to forming one heart and soul; it demands indissolubility and faithfulness in definitive mutual giving; and it is open to fertility. In a word it is a question of the normal characteristics of all natural conjugal love, but with a new significance which not only purifies and strengthens them, but raises them to the extent of making them the expression of specifically Christian values."152 *

 

[Lucky7]

To be sure, that is an ideal is as much obeyed in the breech as in the observance, and it has been much diluted by our divorce laws, which treat marriage as just another kind of contract, one almost as impersonal as a business partnership, and to be ended at will by either party. Only when the marriage is fruitful are the parties held to a stricter standard. Looked as as a mere contract, no wonder it excites the envy of the homosexual. And so they have used easy divorce as an argument that it is no more than a liason recognized by the law which still enjoys benefits conferred in a day when marriage was supposed to be a life-time matter and ended only with difficulty.

So why isn’t the Church fighting to make divorce illegal? Why aren’t those fighting to keep gay marriage illegal also fighting to make divorce illegal?

 

[fix]

So why isn’t the Church fighting to make divorce illegal? Why aren’t those fighting to keep gay marriage illegal also fighting to make divorce illegal?

Civil divorce is not always a moral offense. Pretend marriage is always a moral offense and very bad for society.

 

[Seeker1961]

Civil divorce is not always a moral offense. Pretend marriage is always a moral offense and very bad for society.

It used to be a moral offense, but as more and more people-even Catholics- got divorced the Church spoke less and less about it. 40 years ago, “good” Catholics would never divorce and those folks that did were spoken of in whispers. How many annulments were there 40 years ago? How many are there now?

Some of this is a good thing. Women no longer stay with abusive husbands because “the Church says” no divorce ever. I remember my aunt being told by “Father” that she had to stay with the man who hit her so hard he broke her eardrum because if she divorced him she’d go to Hell.

In 40 years, civil same-sex marriage will be legal pretty much everywhere and the Church will still not be allowing it. We also probably will be talking about it as much as we talk about divorce-which is nowhere near as much as we talk about gay marriage.

 

[Lucky7]

Civil divorce is not always a moral offense. Pretend marriage is always a moral offense and very bad for society.

Although I am not advocating for divorce to be illegal, last I checked, divorce hasn’t been all that great for society either.

 

[RobbyS]

Yes, that accords with Catholic teaching.

Yes and no.

Yes, the sexual differences between male and female are important, particularly for reproduction. But the differences between male and female are much more than our bodies. Our fundamental natures are different, and only in the communion between male and female (such as in marriage, but also in the consecrated life) are we complete as persons.

You might want to take a look at Pope John Paul’s speeches which are collectively referred to as * Theology of the Body*…
ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/jp2tbind.htm

That list of speeches looks pretty formidable at first, but each speech is fairly short and the translation fairly accessible (unlike some Vatican documents)

Starting at the beginning is a good idea, because he develops his ideas. But if you are in a hurry, skip to Original Unity of Man and Woman and the speech which followed it, Man Becomes the Image of God by Communion of Persons, You will then want to read the next speech, Marriage One and Indissoluble in First Chapters of Genesis

The short of it is that Adam was originally both male and female. Not in the physical sense, but in his nature. It was with the creation of woman that male and female were separated, and only in communion are we made whole.

ewtn.com/library/papaldoc/jp2tb10.htm

We are male and female, both in the original act of creation but also in the second act of creation, which separated our male and female natures so that we might unite them.

Maybe I am wrong, but I don’t think Catholic teaching makes such claim.

I was speaking about the natural institution and its place under our laws. The wit once said”Man embraces woman.” Humanity is both masculine and feminine, two different sides of the same coin. a fruitful relationship is one in which male and female aspects of humanity are realized in the outcomes of their partnership. I once heard a priest say of a bride and groom: they are each others’ saviors.” I take this to mean a sacramental marriage, in which each minister to the other,leading both to Christ. But in any true marriage, the natural ought to follow a like course and do God’s work. Our law presently does not do its job and require people to do their duty, but allows them to split when they reach the slightest obstacle. To remain childlish instead of growing to maturity.

 

[RobbyS]

So why isn’t the Church fighting to make divorce illegal? Why aren’t those fighting to keep gay marriage illegal also fighting to make divorce illegal?

Gay marriage is a concept far more radical then no fault divorce. Plus there is some chance of stopping it, since is most places where it has been proposed, the voters have rejected it. This is like Roe v. Wade. a top down initative aimed at radically changing existing law.

 

[fix]

It used to be a moral offense, but as more and more people-even Catholics- got divorced the Church spoke less and less about it. 40 years ago, “good” Catholics would never divorce and those folks that did were spoken of in whispers. How many annulments were there 40 years ago? How many are there now?

This depends on how we use the word divorce. The Church says quite specfically that civil divorce is not always a sin. As for decrees of nullity the increase has been criticized by this Pope and the last Pope.

Some of this is a good thing. Women no longer stay with abusive husbands because “the Church says” no divorce ever. I remember my aunt being told by “Father” that she had to stay with the man who hit her so hard he broke her eardrum because if she divorced him she’d go to Hell.

Those stories only show that some priest gave bad advice.

In 40 years, civil same-sex marriage will be legal pretty much everywhere and the Church will still not be allowing it. We also probably will be talking about it as much as we talk about divorce-which is nowhere near as much as we talk about gay marriage.

So, you mean evil will still be seen as banal by too many.

 

[fix]

Although I am not advocating for divorce to be illegal, last I checked, divorce hasn’t been all that great for society either.

That does not mean all divorce is evil. Same sex so called marriage is always wrong no matter the time or context.