Are we doing enough to promote true marriage?

[HerCrazierHalf]

One thing I think is missing is that there needs to be more discussion and dare I say “shouting from the mountain tops” about the good and happiness of marriage. There needs to be mute effort to explain what is so good about marriage not only for society but more importantly for the individuals in the marriage.

As it is now, the low and upper income couples have incentives not to marry. Low income couples may lose certain benefits and upper income still endure a “marriage penalty” if both have high wages. In the middle is danger of a failed marriage breaking a person not just fiscally, but just breaking a person .

So, there must be something concrete and truly wonderful that needs to be proclaimed loudly of you are too encourage marriage, let alone traditional marriage. You can’t pretend it isn’t an extremely risky endeavour.

 

[LongingSoul]

One thing I think is missing is that there needs to be more discussion and dare I say “shouting from the mountain tops” about the good and happiness of marriage. There needs to be mute effort to explain what is so good about marriage not only for society but more importantly for the individuals in the marriage.

I think that aspect is the major key as well. People long for happiness in this life. Ironically, one of the hardest crosses to endure in life is a bad marriage and in the past many couples stayed together out of respect for the tradition and Christian teaching on marriage, regardless of the happiness factor.

In my observation and experience with a Catholic counselling organisation who did lots of marriage and family counselling… there is a whole new growing emphasis on happiness in marriage and the physical reality of human bonding in the happiness chemicals. The 5 Love Languages has made a huge difference to the marriage counselling approach and has reaped proven results. It’s these types of approaches ie. Christian approaches that are responding to the new sciences of physical bonding and the natural appreciation of fidelity in marriage… that are turning the tide in divorces rates from what I observe.

 

[Andre1000]

Basically: The Church has stop being to lukewarm and indifferent to the faith and realize the Catholic ideal inside of the Church, then we have it easy to convert the hole world. There is a reason why the Church converted complete countries in the first 1000 years, but not today.

I think we should first start to stop behaving improper in front of God at holy mass. We claim to believe in God, but at mass we trow the particles on the floor like trash and it is all about being together but no focus at God anymore. The mass how it is done today rejects all old apostolic concepts of the mass. No stranger who enters it would think it is a sacrifice, it looks like some kind of party.

Second, we Catholics are no better than anyone else. It is embarrassing how self centered and sinful Catholics are. Instead of fighting sin in our own, our bishops try to allow to go to the Eucharist after divorce. It is stupid that this is even a discussion!

Also, today the conservative Catholics are all about SSM. As if this would be the worse of our society. SSM is only a symptom of a godless society, bringing the truth and faith to the people would stop all this sins at once.

 

[GreyWings]

1. I think it’s time for a more clear separation between “civil” and “sacramental.” I think priests should no longer “officiate” marriages on behalf of the state. It’s clear that the “state” no longer marries people with the same intent that the Church does when the Church marries people. We don’t view baptisms as valid when they aren’t done for the same intention that the Church does them, and I think in this social climate we should stop the practice of Church-state overlap when it comes to marriages as well. This distinction will strengthen the Church’s internal meaning of marriage without making it seem like it only becomes legitimate if the “state” officiates it.
2. I think we should call it “Holy Matrimony” more exclusively. The term “marriage” in the wider culture that we live in has lost the meaning that Church gives it, and using the word confuses people these days as to what you mean. If we say “Holy Matrimony”… they know we’re for carrying out our faith as people married in the eyes of God and not necessarily needing the government to sanction such a union in order to make it legitimate. By using “marriage,” we make people think we mean the “social contract of two people to share their resources and receive benefits from the government”… which is not what we mean. We may have to concede the word “marriage” in order to further distinguish what it is we practice.

Well said, Mark! :clapping:

 

[1990Domer]

The very first thing my husband told me after the ruling was for the two of us, along with our son, to set an example of a loving Christian family. He also says the Devil attacks the weakest institutions, of which I think marriage falls into.

 

[Arandur]

1. I think it’s time for a more clear separation between “civil” and “sacramental.” I think priests should no longer “officiate” marriages on behalf of the state. It’s clear that the “state” no longer marries people with the same intent that the Church does when the Church marries people. We don’t view baptisms as valid when they aren’t done for the same intention that the Church does them, and I think in this social climate we should stop the practice of Church-state overlap when it comes to marriages as well. This distinction will strengthen the Church’s internal meaning of marriage without making it seem like it only becomes legitimate if the “state” officiates it.

Regarding this, just saw an interesting article that brought up even more points than I had considered as to why we need to be very careful about anything that would lead down the road to “privatizing” marriage. While distinctions between “civil” and “sacramental” can be important, we must be very careful not to abandon the field on “civil” marriage, as if anything should go and we shouldn’t be concerned about it.

Also, the more we separate sacramental marriage from civil, the more we weaken civil marriage and the perception of marriage in general. We run the risk of the argument to “get the government out of the marriage business” running its course, too, leading to this:

“Getting Government Out of the Marriage Business” Won’t Work