The Catholic view of marriage is not some abstract, mystical concept. While a sacramental marriage as a vehicle for God’s grace does carry a mystical dimension, any valid marriage, whether sacramental or natural, is rooted firmly in mankind’s history and tradition. Moreover its very nature can be demonstrated both anthropologically and… scientifically.
During the marital act, the couple enter into a physiological union by engaging in the only physiological process that requires two individuals, where both become one one physiological entity for the purpose of procreation. It is without parallel in mammalian biology as no other physiological process requires two individuals to complete. Mankind naturally built an institution around this act in order to provide a stable environment to cater to the needs of its natural end: children.
Although this institution has known different forms over time, e.g. polygamy, there was always one necessary element: that at least a carnal union of a man and a woman be involved. If that carnal union did not take place, the marriage could be annulled, even in civil law.
No amount of “mysticism” can alter that fact. What has been proposed as SSM, really isn’t “marriage”. It is at best a pseudo-marriage or imitation of marriage, but it cannot be marriage. Just because both a plane and a car have wheels, does not mean a car can fly.
When I wrote to my government about 10 years ago when this debate was hot in Canada, I focused mostly on this aspect, knowing full well that the religious dimension would fall on deaf ears (even though our PM at the time was a practicing Catholic).
Since the word “marriage” has now been denatured by this debate, perhaps we need to invent a new word for what was once known as “marriage”.
While I disagree with SSM on philosophical and scientific grounds, on the other hand I don’t think that the sky will fall based on the SCOTUS decision. It didn’t in Canada. The institution of marriage was already undermined and made fragile by prior social tendencies such as divorce on demand and cohabitation. If anything divorce has done far more damage, as the number of people seeking SSM will necessarily always be a small proportion of the population. On the other hand, divorce, and its social fallout, is affecting around 50% of marriages and causing great damage to our children.
The important thing following this decision is to protect religious liberties so that those who disagree are not forced to officiate at SSMs. This is already an issue in Canada; although a Church cannot be forced to perform them, a Catholic Justice of the Peace must by law perform them even against the dictates of his or her conscience, or they they won’t, they must renounce their office. This is, IMHO highly discriminatory.
The mystical union with Christ is another matter altogether, and even though it has spousal connotations, it is open to male, female, homosexual or straight, and has to do with giving ourselves over to Christ.
