Confronting the Unreality of Same Sex 'Marriage'

By Andrew M. Greenwell, Esq.
1/14/2013
Catholic Online (www.catholic.org)

The sacrament of marriage does not destroy the original, natural institution, but perfects it. But it also presupposes it.

When the natural institution of marriage suffers what the poet David Jones called "the Break," something we are witnessing even now, its natural symbolism is destroyed. There is no natural significance or symbol left in same sex "marriage." That's why it is no marriage at all, but a mockery of marriage, an ape of marriage, a travesty of marriage. It is an equivocal, an unreal marriage.

Facebook Delicous MySpace

Twitter Stumble Digg

More Destinations

CORPUS CHRISTI, TX (Catholic Online) - Marriage may be said to be an art, but an art built upon nature, specifically, the complementarity of the human sexes--male and female--and the natural desire humankind has for the procreation and education of children.

Marriage, like human nature, is first something given, then something worked with. So marriage viewed as art is something-God-given-worked-with, not something we make from nothing. Marriage is not ours to create, to define, to make out of nothing as if we are gods, or what modernly is more powerful than the ancient gods . . . social engineers.

The "raw materials" so-to-speak of marriage are given to us; we are not the ones who make the raw materials of marriage. We do not will the "raw materials"; rather, they are willed for us by nature and nature's God as part of the fundamental parts of our human nature.

As the Catechism of the Catholic Church puts it: "'The intimate community of life and love which constitutes the married state has been established by the Creator and endowed by him with its own proper laws. . . . God himself is the author of marriage.' The vocation to marriage is written in the very nature of man and woman as they came from the hand of the Creator. Marriage is not a purely human institution despite the many variations it may have undergone through the centuries in different cultures, social structures, and spiritual attitudes. These differences should not cause us to forget its common and permanent characteristics." (CCC � 1603)

Since marriage is part of creation, a work of the Lord, it follows that it is a great good. It can be praised, as can any work of the Creator:

"Praise the name of the Lord. For he spoke, and they were made (facta sunt): he commanded, and they were created (creata sunt). He hath established them for ever, and for ages of ages: he hath made a decree, and it shall not pass away." (Psalm 148:5-6)

Recruiting the insights of Psalm 148:5-6 and applying them to marriage, we might say: "Marriage is something spoken of by God, made by God, commanded by God, created by God. He has established marriage for ever, and for ages of ages. God has made a decree, and it shall not pass away."

This, of course, is something that moderns--particularly the advocates of same sex "marriage"--are loath to recognize. That marriage is a natural institution, something of God's handiwork, is an affront to them and their false philosophies, since, like anything with a form, it imposes limits beyond which they may not go.

In his interpretation of the Psalm quoted above, Cassiodorus distinguished between creare (to create) and facere (to make). The former (to create), strictly construed, is reserved to God alone, Cassiodorus says. The latter (to make) is allowed to man. It is, in a sense, a limited participation in creation.

"Facere enim possumus etiam nos, qui creare no possumus," Cassiodorus wrote. For we to whom it is given not to create, are able yet to make.

Marriage is first creatio, a created thing, then, building upon that which is given, a factitio, a thing worked at, a thing made from the prior given. It is both God's handiwork and man's handiwork, but first God's handiwork. That's why Archbishop Fulton Sheen famously said that it takes three to get married: God and the two spouses.

It is this distinction which completely eludes those who advocate same-sex "marriage." They view marriage as something over which they have the power of creation, of definition, when they only have the power of "factition," of working with what is a given.

The advocates of same sex "marriage" suffer from a convention that arises from a psychic disease. In fact, modernity is characterized by a chronic psychic disease. It is the disbelief in creation, in created nature, a nature which is the handiwork of God and therefore bears within it the logos or reason of God, the supreme Artist. Moderns reject the notion that nature has within it a sort of residual meaning, a sign or symbol, which must be respected.

If nature has no meaning, it cannot be a sign, a symbol, a thing of wonder, a source of morals. Instead, it becomes a thing to be used. Wonder in nature is lost. Nature no longer speaks to us of real things, of true things, of good things because we no longer wish to listen. We moderns only understand nature by its utility to us, which means we use nature as we want, and not as it might have been intended by its Creator.

Modern man's rejection of God as Creator and nature as his gift allows him to assume (or think he can assume) the powers of creation over created ...

1 | 2 | 3 Next Page

Rate This Article

Was this helpful to you? Very Helpful Somewhat Helpful Not Helpful at All

Would you be interested in more articles like this? Yes, I am Interested No, I am not Interested

Rate Article

1 - 5 of 5 Comments

DLL
4 months ago
Same sex attraction is to have enough respect for the same sex as to never have same sex sex.This also applies to children as well. Never have sex same or otherwise with children and certainly never babies. Opposite sex attraction is enough respect for the opposite sex so that sex is procreative and relations are saved until after the couple is married. That is what love and respect for each others sexuality means. That is true for every human being not just members of the Catholic Church. This is common sense. This sense of a common sense is the basis for the common law,now common law is being destroyed by the GBLT agenda. Gay,lesbian,bisexual,trans-sexual,excludes the rights of all heterosexuals,that is discrimination for those who wish to be obedient to the laws of God and the rules of common law,which is simple common sense. The law is becoming an impediment unto itself because it is losing its definition. The law should never be proposed and inacted on some principal of an agenda that has its basis in the kind of reasoning that basically proposes that the ultimate point of view is one where there is none at all. The church teaches right from wrong and so does all math and science which strives to to this as well. Even in training a dog their is a right and wrong way to do it. Their is a right and a wrong way in the way human beings relate to each other. The Catholic Church as well as any human resource department in any employment situation teaches right from wrong. The author of this article writes from a standpoint of love for others and that there is a right and wroong way in human relationships,not in disdain for others.
vance
4 months ago
Thank you Andrew for a great article. You touch on all the major points. The greatest point is that God created marriage and modern man is loath to accept it. I've made the point in the past that we can step outside religion and look at it in a pure scientific view. All of creation is heterosexual both organic and the inorganic. All organisms, save single cells, require a male-female component to reproduce. The laws of electricity works on positive-negative charges to function. When we try to put two magnets together at their same polls, they repulse. The opposite polls attract. This is why God says that sodomy ( Homosexuality ) is a rebellion against him. Because it is a rebellion against his creation which is the "Natural Order". Same sex attraction ( Homosexuality ) is a mental and spiritual disorder and should be treated as such.
Andrew M. Greenwell
4 months ago
@Tom McGuire: Thanks for your comments. You suggest that I am not compassionate, but I think that compassion must be built on truth, or it is false compassion. I am quite familiar with the struggle for purity and the difficulties of living an authentic human and Christian life, though mine have not happened to be involved in same-sex attraction. But it's not like those struggles are not part of my life, either, and I always ask for God's grace in the matter of chastity. I assure you by common consent that heterosexual persons suffer every bit as much a struggle for chastity as homosexual persons.

With respect to your question: your question is framed improperly. You ask "How does [a person born with an attraction for the same sex] enter into a relationship of love"?

By "relationship of love" you mean one of three things, I suppose.

First, let us suppose you mean by "enter into a relationship of love," love in the sense of "love your neighbor" or love of friendship, i.e., one without conjugal component. Then the answer to that question is that such a person must do so under the same restrictions and same conditions as any other person. Same sex attraction--supposing it is "a given, and not an opinion" as you dogmatically state--does not in any way change the patterns of love of neighbor or the love of friendship. It must be chaste, as it must be for any other human person.

If by "relationship of love" you mean a relationship involving conjugal sex, then a person with a same sex attraction has to have conjugal sex in the same way everyone else should: within a life-long marriage between a man and a woman that is exclusive and that is ordered to the procreation of children.

If by "love" you mean homosexual sexual activity, then you are playing games with words because homosexual genital activity is intrinsically disordered and cannot be, and never can be, and is always and in each instance opposed to, authentic love of the other person or authentic love of one's self. It cannot be the basis of a "relationship of love." It makes the mistake of equating (any kind of) sex with love. In such a case, the question itself is an oxymoron and is unanswerable (love is not equal to homosexual genital activity), is a loaded question by its implied assumptions (love equals homosexual genital activity), or collapses into a silly question, such as "How does [a person born with an attraction for the same sex] enter into homosexual genital activity"?
Tom McGuire
4 months ago
In your passion, I find no compassion for the person born with an attraction for the same sex. That is a given, not an opinion. How does that person enter into relationship of love?
abey
4 months ago
There is the difference between the Contract & the Covenant, where the former is to the convenience, the latter is to the truth by the reproduction, where the former is not anointed the latter is & hence Holy unto the Creator. Contracts are broken but not Covenants 'cause it is with the Lord. In terms of religion where is come the clash between the Pagan belief to the contracts & the True belief to the Covenant , the former is to the beliefs & ways of men whereas the latter is to the will of God which is the way of life, for that which is not to life is to death. So chose between life & death irrespective of what the Majority feels, for feelings are often deceptive & in this case sure is, to the Biblical words of the manner "Heaven & Earth may pass away but the word will remain" for in the beginning was the word & the word was with God & the word was God- The light of men for without it is darkness symbolized by these half naked protestors in the path to the nakedness -before God where contracts & contacts turn to dust like it happened in the very beginning.

Comments submitted must be civil, remain on-topic and not violate any laws including copyright. We reserve the right to delete any comments which are abusive, inappropriate or not constructive to the discussion.

Though we invite robust discussion, we reserve the right to not publish any comment which denigrates the human person, undermines marriage and the family, or advocates for positions which openly oppose the teaching of the Catholic Church.

This is a supervised forum and the Editors of Catholic Online retain the right to direct it.

We also reserve the right to block any commenter for repeated violations. Your email address is required to post, but it will not be published on the site.

We ask that you NOT post your comment more than once. Catholic Online is growing and our ability to review all comments sometimes results in a delay in their publication.

Name *

Email *

Comment *

Send me important information from Catholic Online and it's partners. See Sample

Post Comment