I've skimmed dozens of articles both before and after the Supreme Court's decision on Obergefell v. Hodges was handed down last week. Most of them I'd begin to read, then grow bored and end up scanning paragraphs to see if there was anything truly new or intriguing or interesting. For the most part, the articles I read seemed to miss the fundamental issues in the case, those lying more deeply than the demise of democracy in America.
But fortunately, I clicked on a new article this morning -- "Creation and the future of marriage" by Los Angeles' Archbishop Jose Gomez. It is very much worth reading and sharing.
If I could, I would paste the entire column here, but instead I will share a piece or two, and send you on your way to Angelus: The Tidings Online to read it in full. Bookmark it. Share it. Reread it. Archbishop Gomez has really found the pulse of the problem, digging far deeper to find a remedy than most everyone else.
But the opinion of the five justices in the Court’s majority reflects the passions and priorities of many who lead and shape our society in the areas of law, government, education, science, industry and the media.
In fact, Obergefell expresses the same “anthropocentric” and “technocratic” mentality that Pope Francis warns about in his new encyclical, Laudato Si’ (“Praised Be”).
At the heart of this mentality is a rejection of the idea of creation and human nature. Everything — the natural world, our social institutions, our physical bodies, even our very “selves” — everything becomes a kind of “raw material” that we can engineer according to our will, using technology, psychology and even law and social policy.
This “technocratic” mindset explains the audacious tone of the Obergefell ruling. The Court expresses noble thoughts about the “transcendent” purposes of marriage and its importance as a “keystone” of our social order. It acknowledges that marriage has existed “for millennia and across civilizations.”
But the five justices in the Court’s majority do not accept that human sexuality and marriage are part of the order of creation. For them, these are just “constructs” that we are free to “re-construct” according to our preferences.
That is why these justices can assume they have the wisdom to “recreate” this institution that has been the foundation of human civilization. That is why they can presume the power to discard the definition of marriage that has existed since the beginning of history — as the lifelong union of one man and one woman.
Be sure to read the entire piece here.
One of the resources people ask me for are articles or pamphlets about cohabitation. Why not live together before marriage? It's virtually assumed today that two people planning on marriage will share the same address before exchanging rings.
There are quite a few articles and summaries of the problems with cohabitation, but today's IBelieveinLove.com article, "Why I Don't Live With My Fiance" was one of the best, simple explanations I have seen.
I don’t want to live with my fiancé because his title says it all. He’s still my fiancé. He’s not my spouse. He’s not the man I married—he’s the man I will marry. And when we’re married, we will move in together. Why then?
Because then I will know it won’t be a decision based on finances or split rent. It won’t be a decision based on the desire to sleep with each other. It won’t be a decision based on a trial run to see how things go and with an easy out when the going gets tough.
Rather, our decision to move in together will be based on a public profession to love each other in good times and bad, in sickness and health, until death do us part. It will be a decision based on mutual self-respect in a way that says, “You are worth more to me than a split rent check. You are worth more to me than any self-gratification. I don’t need a trial run of living together because I already know I want to spend the rest of my life with you,” that’s what dating is for!
Read the rest of the article here. It's worth bookmarking and sharing when you need a handy answer to a common question.
Just last night I was having a conversation about vocations discernment in which I recalled the words of Matt Maher during a concert at Franciscan University ten years ago. He said, "Sometimes people make finding their vocation their god." It becomes this all-encompassing thing to obsess over and spend every waking moment contemplating.
Exhibit A: "An attractive guy/girl sat in front me during Mass today. Maybe I'm called to marriage! Or, maybe it was an invitation from God to give up this good for the greater good of priesthood/religious life."
So, it was rather good timing that The Culture Project reposted an article from July entitled, "Your Vocation is Not About You." Benjamin Mann has some thought-provoking insights into how we view our vocation (whether in the future or the present).
Our expectations are wrong. Consciously or not, we sometimes expect a vocation to solve all of our problems, answer all of our questions, and satisfy all of our desires. But these are not the purposes of a vocation. Discernment, likewise, does not consist in finding the choice that will meet those expectations.
Your vocation will not live up to these unrealistic hopes. Nothing in this world will answer all your questions, solve all your problems, or satisfy all your desires. These are impossible, immature ambitions, and the spiritual life consists largely in realizing that they are impossible and immature.
The purpose of life is the unitive devotional service of God, which includes the love of our neighbor (in whom God dwells). This is the real purpose of any vocation. Some forms of life, such as monasticism, are ordered directly to this end; other states of life are oriented toward it indirectly. But these are only different versions of the one human vocation: to love and serve God, and become one with him in Christ.
A vocation – any vocation – is a school of charity and a means of crucifixion. Your vocation is the means by which your self-serving ego will die in order to be resurrected as the servant and lover of God. This is all that we can expect; but this is everything – the meaning of life, all there really is.
My vocation is where I will learn to let go of my questions, carry the cross of my problems, and be mysteriously fulfilled even when I am not happy. We have some choice as to how we will undergo that process; we do not – so long as we abide in the grace of God – get to choose whether we will undergo it.
Read it all here.
It isn't too often one has the opportunity to partake in a Vatican conference. Fortunately, the event occurring right now -- the Humanum conference focusing on the complementarity of men and women -- is open to all of us. The conference features the presentation of short films on a number of topics, followed by live witnesses and brief presentations from people of various faiths. The short films and the presentations are available on the Humanum website and are being posted soon after they occur live in Rome.
Be sure to take a look ... and to be truly authentic, perhaps you'd like to watch with a cappuccino or gelato in hand.
OK, so let's get this straight ... Clark and Valerie want to protect their son Jonah from divorce, so their solution is to host an "uncoupling ceremony" on a California beach, live in the same home together and date other people. For Jonah.
Apparently seeing Mom with her boyfriend ... or not seeing her while she spends "private time" with him at another location is not damaging. And, I guess knowing that Dad doesn't want a third divorce but that Mom is keeping her options open doesn't hurt either.
What is it about divorce that is damaging for children? A broken covenant, a love that has "ended," a break in fidelity ("if you promised to love Daddy forever and didn't, then do you really mean it when you tell me you will love me forever?), a turbulent, unknown rollercoaster where there should be a secure foundation.
So, what about Jonah's situation is supposed to be different? His parents are dating other people and divorce is still a viable option, at least for Valerie. Clark doesn't want to get married a fourth time, but he has trouble convincing other women to see where their place will be in the relationship. Apparently, Mom's boyfriend Joseph has no problems with greeting Valerie for a date ... and then Valerie's husband. And apparently Jonah is "fine" with it. Why would he say otherwise? Does this little boy feel like weight of his parents' happiness is squarely on his shoulders? And might be feel that he shouldn't say a word because this odd little arrangement is being done "for him"?
It's just so sad! Who does "uncoupling" benefit? It would seem it benefits no one. In the end, while Clark and Valerie say they want what is best for Jonah, it would seem that this uncoupled, "open relationship" is hardest on Jonah. Splashing in the waves together after returning wedding rings can't possibly convey the same security and love that lifelong fidelity (even if clearly sacrificial) could give a little boy who just wants (and deserves) to know authentic love.
“Matrimony is a Gospel in itself, a good news for the world of today, especially the de-Christianized world.” -- Pope Benedict XVI
Now that the Extraordinary Synod has come to a close (and we have another year to wait until the Ordinary Synod), there are plenty of articles circulating with commentaries, interviews and summaries of the event. Here are a few that I have found particularly interesting:
- "Archbishop Kurtz on synod and next steps" (video)
- Fr. Raymond de Souza, "Never too late to listen to Pope Benedict XVI"
- Fr. Raymond de Souza, "Eleven Ways the Synod Failed Pope Francis' Vision"
- George Weigel, "An extraordinary Synod, indeed"
- Mark Brumley, "Synod Suprise"
Despite depressing news headlines daily, there seems to be a rise in headlines announcing the death of couples married for decades, within hours of one another. The stories are always touching, but the most recent one to grab my attention is from a local couple -- Cincinnati natives Helen and Joe Auer. The two were married for 73 years ...
When Helen Auer died on Wednesday, she was sitting in her chair. Her husband of 73 years came into the room and knew right away. Joe leaned over, gave her a kiss goodbye, and whispered in her ear: “Helen, call me home.”
Just 28 hours later, Helen did. Joe Auer died at the age of 100. His children figured he could manage one night without her, but not two. Wednesday they will have a funeral mass in front of the same altar where they were married in 1941.
Read more of their beautiful story here. Many more pictures of the couple are available through Meyer Funeral Home's site.
Now I know that I am not, nor ever will be, an invited guest at the Synod. There are married couples present in the discussions right now from around the world. Most, if not all, of the couples have been married for decades and lead various marriage preparation or enrichment programs across the globe. They have all been given a few minutes to speak to the Holy Father and the 200 or so bishops in attendance. Their statements have also been disseminated to the public through the Vatican Press Office.
Knowing that I am not a national or world marriage leader, nor a veteran of a marriage spanning decades, as the Synod unfolds, there are still a few things I wish I could say -- that someone would say -- to the Synod fathers. It would be something like this ...
Holy Father Pope Francis, Cardinals and Bishops of the world -- thank you for making marriage and the family such a priority that you are dedicating two Synods -- an "extraordinary" and an "ordinary" -- to these topics. Thank you for wanting to bring the beautiful truth of these teachings to the world. Thank you for recognizing the struggles and graces of family life and seeking to better understand so as to articulate the incredible identity of the family.
It is certainly no secret that marriage and the family are under great attack in our world. This is manifested in differing ways by continent, country and region. I believe, however, that all of these attacks have one thing at heart. It is what St. John Paul II referred to in his encyclical letter, "Evangelium Vitae" as the "eclipse of the sense of God and of man."
The crisis of marriage and family is fundamentally, I believe, a crisis of anthropology. We do not know who we are. Formed strongly by the industrial, sexual and technological revolutions, we think we are what we do, the pleasure we obtain and the speed at which we can obtain objects and pleasure. We, as a culture, as a world, are massively confused about what it means to be human; what love, freedom, sacrifice, truth, suffering, conscience, sexuality, our very bodies are and mean.
It's a common misconception that the Church's "rules" are arbitrary and perhaps even vindictive sentences from a group of celibate men. It is widely believed that Church teaching is not rooted in anything, is not valid or thoughtful or for our own good.
This is what we need you to teach and preach and live and encourage. The world needs to know that because of who we are -- and because of who God is -- we are called and invited to live accordingly. We need to know that the Church doesn't give us arbitrary rules but a beautiful plan to be authentically human. We need to know that openness to life isn't something we should grit our teeth and bear, but something we are blessed to receive. We need to know that same-sex attraction doesn't make a person evil or undermine their dignity, but that same-sex sexual encounters cannot fulfill us. We need to know that cohabitation isn't "test driving" commitment, but instead that we are capable of the radical risk of giving our life to our spouse.
We don't just need to hear about controversial teachings, though these are important. We need to hear that marriage is a Sacrament, a vocation, a path to holiness. We need to hear that marriage is a privileged way of revealing God's love to the world. We need to hear the stories of married saints whose family life was heroically lived. We need to hear Mass petitions for families. We need to be sent forth with confidence that God's grace makes love possible.
We need to be challenged. We live in a culture of mediocrity. We are told consistently not to strive for higher things -- in fact, that we are incapable of higher things. The Church is the lone voice stating confidently, "You are called to be more!" This is a compliment, not an insult. We need to hear it, to know it, to believe it.
We need mercy, yes, but we also need truth. In fact, the two belong together. To receive both of these, we need to know who we are. And this brings us back to the beginning (literally, to the beginning of these thoughts and to the "beginning" of Genesis). Holy Father, Cardinals and Bishops, you have been entrusted with so much goodness and beauty -- promoting and safeguarding the Catholic faith in the world today. We need you to remind us of who we are, who the family is, who God is, and what He is calling each of us to live. We don't need the truth to be watered down; we need it to be lovingly expressed.
Please don't forget that the Church's teaching on marriage and family is beautiful. What a gift to the world if you could remind us of that, encourage us to embrace that beauty and renew our confidence that this beauty is possible.
Everyone is talking about it (or so it seems). The Extraordinary Synod, which begins this weekend, is a topic making its rounds in newspapers, magazines, online commentaries, blogs and casual conversations. To hear most people tell it, we'll be looking at a radically different Church in a couple of weeks, come the Synod's end. For some, this is welcome news. For others, Armageddon has arrived.
So with all of the controversies, conflict and confusion, where can we learn about what is going on in Rome? There isn't going to be a CSPAN channel dedicated to bringing us the proceedings live from the Vatican. We won't be permitted to listen live via iTunes. Where can we hear something of the Synod that isn't a manipulation of the truth? How will we know what is happening?
That's the question that's been on my mind of late, and one that was answered (at least in part) this afternoon. I came across Archbishop Joseph Kurt's latest blog post, which mentioned his arrival in Rome and his thoughts on the upcoming Extraordinary Synod.
Here, in part, is what he said:
Of course this is the week of preparation for the Synod on the Family. The formal beginning of the Synod is on Sunday, with Mass celebrated by Pope Francis. I have come to Rome with great support and insights from many and with the rich tradition of Church teaching. I have three intentions, which I brought to the altar this morning:
- To appreciate the beauty of marriage, family, and the vision of sexuality given by Sacred Scripture and Church teaching.
- To restore the confidence of the faithful in their ability to form and sustain Christian families.
- To respond to the great need to walk with – to accompany as Pope Francis has said so often – those families who struggle and whose wounds need healing.
(See more at: http://www.archlou.org/2014/09/30/synod-blog-september-30-2014/#sthash.RgrG2lVr.dpuf) 
That clarity and simplicity assured me that Archbishop Kurtz's daily blogging from Rome about the Synod will be the place to turn for information. Sure, it might not detail what Cardinal Kasper just said or which position Pope Francis seems to be advocating. There won't be play-by-plays available. But Archbishop Kurtz, as a passionate defender and promoter of the family will bring his love of the family into his reflections about what is occurring, and perhaps we will catch a glimpse of how the family is served at the Extraordinary Synod.
To read Archbishop Kurtz's blog reports about the Extraordinary Synod, click here.
On Wednesday, a court room in Cincinnati will be the scene of arguments and a decision about the definition of marriage in four different states, including Ohio. It's time to pray for the lawyers, judges and all those involved, that the sanctity of marriage will be upheld. Let's not give into thoughts of inevitability, but instead be hopeful that marriage's authentic meaning will be affirmed.
Update: The link now works!
What I should do is share my own post for NFP Awareness Week, but with the likelihood that I will not have time to pen my thoughts before the week is out, I want to share this post by Rita Buettner, which beautifully articulates why NFP is not birth control ... in fact, that it's not about being "in control" at all.
NFP says to God, "We recognize that we are not in control. We are going to do the best we can to make what we feel are the best decisions for our family, but we are also leaving this in Your hands. You are the giver of life, the One who knows better than we do what we can handle, what lies ahead, what plans you have for us."
NFP says, "Jesus, we place our trust in You. And we will be grateful for any gift you give, especially the gift of life."
God sent our children to us in a different way. And we endured years of infertility before we started down the road to adoption.
- See how God worked in the Buettners' lives here: http://www.catholicreview.org/blogs/open-window/2014/07/23/nfp-is-not-just-birth-control-how-infertility-deepened-my-appreciation-for-natural-family-planning#sthash.CiyEaStq.dpuf
“The mutual love of Christian spouses is enfolded within Christ’s love, which reinforces the bond of fidelity that is already an integral part of natural marriage. Indeed, by lifting human love into his relationship with the Church, Christ the Bridegroom transforms that love’s innate promise of eternity into an expression of his total yes of unconditional faithfulness to his Bride. In exchanging their marriage vows, the spouses receive the Holy Spirit, who seals their mutual self-giving within the indestructible, or indissoluble, love between Christ and the Church. Just as the unbreakable bond of natural marriage is rooted in the Creator’s love, the indissolubility of Christian marriage (which reinforces the bond of natural marriage) is rooted in the love of Christ. The husband and wife share in the indestructible union between Christ and the Church, which is the real basis of their fidelity” --“Called to Love” (180-181) by Fr. Jose Granados and Carl Anderson
With all of the recent hype and speculation about the upcoming Extraordinary Synod on the Family, you would think the doctrines of the Catholic Church are about to change. Reading the just-released "Instrumentum Laboris" -- a summary of the world's bishops' reflections on the status of marriage and the family today -- gives a different picture. Here's my take at Aleteia.
Just to get you started:
The world’s bishops have taken stock of today’s cultural landscape with respect to marriage and the family and have found a serious lack of understanding–and therefore, living–of the Church’s teaching. It comes as no surprise to those in the trenches, (or even to those who just pick up a newspaper occasionally). We’ve all seen headlines about the legalization of same-sex “marriage.” We’ve all observed a blasé attitude toward marriage among family, friends, neighbors or colleagues, attitudes that non-judgmentally condone contraception, cohabitation and divorce. But for the Church’s hierarchy to acknowledge the difference between the faith and how it’s lived is an important admission.
There are plenty of questions regarding who might be to blame–Are parents catechizing their children? Were the parents ever formed? Are priests preaching or advising properly in confession? Are bishops promoting defense of the family as a priority? Are marriage preparation programs adequate?
The tone of the document, however, is not to find a scapegoat; it is to acknowledge that something must be done. The victims of our marriage-destructive culture are many and are identified in the document–children of divorce, single mothers, spouses remaining faithful to wedding vows though separated, abused women and children, those living in canonically irregular situations and so forth. The document reveals that the bishops are aware of the grave challenges now facing the world and of the way these challenges converge and relate to the family, the fundamental cell of society.
Read the rest here.
A divorce can bring a variety of reactions, depending upon each person affected, one's attitude toward marriage and the situation at hand. In a Marriage in the News column I recently wrote for the USCCB's "For Your Marriage" site, I focus on the contrast between lavish "divorce parties" and an adult child of divorce who isn't sure the best way to handle childhood family photographs. Read about it here.
I'm not a daily Matt Walsh reader, but when his articles have been passed my way, I often find myself shaking my head in agreement. This one really hits the nail on the head. It's a response to the divorce-friendly culture, the oft-heard excuse, "My spouse changed." It's one man's fierce loyalty to a person and to an institution, a Sacrament, a place that has the spouses instead of the spouses having "it."
So, Matt Walsh has a few things to say on the subject. To get you started:
“People sometimes change,” says the wise sage.
No, people always change. They never stop changing. Life is change.
Everything is moving, everything is transforming. Everything is changing, all of the time. Life is more of a river than a stagnant, mosquito-infested puddle.
(Dear Lord, look at what this guy has done. He’s got me so worked up that I’m speaking in country-pop lyrics. “Life is a river.” God help me.)
The fact is that you can leave the room for ten seconds, come back, and everything will be slightly different. That’s true of the furniture, the curtains, the carpet, and yes, the people. Especially the people.
Divorcing someone because they change? You might as well divorce them because they breathe.
I’m not making light of it. I know that sometimes people change in a painful and inconvenient manner. I know that my wife could change in ways that don’t cooperate with my projections of how she should be and feel and think.
I guess that’s what people really mean when they say they want a divorce because their spouse “changed.” It’s not change itself they oppose, but changes that challenge them and make them uncomfortable. What they should say is: “I want a divorce because she changed in a way that doesn’t fit inside my comfort zone.”
It’s hard, I know. Every day I’m relearning this one basic truth: my wife has her own brain, her own feelings, her own soul. We are linked now through the bond of matrimony, but she is still her and I am still me. She is a force, a hurricane, a wildfire. She is not a puppet dancing on a string. She is a self — her own self — powerful and mysterious.
Read more at http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/05/29/wifepersonmarried/#9VscMhc3Bwpd6ksE.99.
I've really enjoyed the new "I Believe in Love" initiative begun by young adults who wish to discuss love, fidelity, sacrifice, marriage and relationships. An article by Carolyn that appeared today gave a great insight into what is better -- and more lasting -- than butterflies in one's stomach at the start of a relationship.
Jonathan was handsome, well liked, smart, funny, and serious about his faith. But I was having doubts about this relationship. I couldn’t remember why I had started to date this guy in the first place. I knew a lot about him, because we spent all of our time talking, but I didn’t know much about what it was like to simply be with him, in person. Where were all of those giddy feelings of lovesickness that I was supposed to be having? I was entitled to those feelings, right?
But those were my fears three years ago. Today, I’m getting ready to marry that guy I started dating over Skype. Did I reclaim the butterflies? No, not permanently, but I discovered something even better than that.
Find out what happened and what Carolyn learned here.
How can couples be prepared for marriage, learning relationship skills to assist them in remaining faithful for life? One research team from the University of Rochester found a creative option. Newlyweds who watched a movie once a week for a month that focused on an intimate relationship, and then discussed the film couple for about 45 minutes were less than half as likely to divorce.
Check out more information about the study, as well as information about the film list and discussion questions here.
Just in time for Christmas, it's the "I Married Me -- Self-Wedding in a Box" kit. Truly, you can't make these things up. Learn more about the phenomenon and how it misses the mark of what marriage is at the "Marriage in the News" column on ForYourMarriage.org.
