Homily on Marriage

"Whether we like it or not, we have to admit we are already living in a post-Christian world, that is to say a world in which Christian ideals and attitudes are relegated more and more to the minority. It is frightening to realize that the facade of Christianity which still generally survives has perhaps little or nothing behind it, and that what was once called "Christian society" is more purely and simply a materialistic neopaganism with a Christian vaneer. And without identity, without compassion, without sense, and rapidly reverting to tribalism and superstition. Here spiritual religion has yielded to the tribal-totalitarian war dance and to the idolatrous worship of the machine (p.72). Not only non-Christians but even Christians themselves tend to dismiss the Gospel ethic on nonviolence and love as "sentimental" (p.94)¹

These words, written in 1962 by Father Louis Merton (a.k.a. Thomas Merton) remained unpublished until 2004, thirty-sex years after his death. He borrowed the phrase "Post-Christian world" from another Catholic author, C.S. Lewis, who coined the term in 1954 for his inaugural lecture at Cambridge University in England. That was fifty years ago! Now we find that these prophetic words "Post-Christian Era" have a new application in our own time.

Most of us were stunned by the actions of our parliament and Supreme Court concerning the matter of Same-Sex Union/'Marriage'. We have grown accustomed to the linguistic flip-flop of politicians but rarely have we seen an issue of such magnitude handled with such indifference to the sensitivities of the majority of Canadians. Can we expect or demand a reversal on the part of parliament or the coursts? Few if any are "sure" that this can be done effectively given the anti-discrimination ethics of our times. Having embraced the social value of absolute equality before the law, we now find ourselves caught in a maelstrom of litigious linguistic issues that baffle and confuse the religious sensitivities of the many who would not otherwise have given these matters a second thought. When last I celebrated a marriage, I noticed that the terms "bride" and "groom" had been deleted from the official civil marriage licence. In their place were the words "first applicant" and "second applicant". (For a few moments I chuckled at the thought of the parents of the bride and groom at the reception flipping a coin to see who would be the parents of the first applicant and who would have to be second) The use of words does matter and they do have consequences.

What we need to do is find the honey in the midst of the swarm of bees that are buzzing around in our legal neighbourhood. Let me give you an example of how words have consequences. Some years ago, Vatican II called for a more active participation by the laity in the decision making processes of the parishes. A new term appeared in Catholic documentation: "Parish Councils". Unfortunately, the term was already being used by the Catholic Women's League. This was the term used for their gatherings in the parochial setting. Since I am one who likes clarity in most things, I had the audacity to suggest that the CWL change their terminology to something like "CWL council of the parish". I soon found out that territoriality and ownership were preemptive values over clarity. The CWL said "No" and they still use the term today. OK ... where's the honey? We now use the term Parish "Pastoral" Councils to describe the body that sets the vision of the parish. This small change in our thinking reminds us that the pastoral nature of our deliberations is a value to be embraced at all times. The Catholic Women's League helped us to sharpen our vision of what our councils were all about.

In our post-Christian world, the term "marriage" has come to mean the legal and permanent conjugal union of two persons regardless of sexual orientation. The word "marriage" may be the same word that we use but our understanding is quite different. Since "marriage" is also the term used for unions both secular and religious, sacred and profane, political and economic, we now find ourselves in a situation where "marriage" lacks the clarity it once had. In fact, most pastors will tell you that many couples come to the church asking for "marriage" when they really only want a "wedding". The difference between a wedding and a marriage is obvious to those of us who still hold to the ethic of Christian teaching. Post-Christians haven't got a clue about the distinction. So ... were's the honey? This malevolent indifference is causing us to re-evaluate our understanding of Marriage as Sacrament.

According to the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, marriage is a sacrament when it is a conjugal union of one male and one female, who are baptized Christians, who are free of all impediments and are morally capable of embracing a life-long vocational union of mutual exclusivity for the sanctification of themselves and their children. Marriage as sacrament is God-given. It is God who makes them one not the courts of the land or the conventions of society.

When a man and a woman enter into marriage as a sacrament, there is an ontological change in their relationship that transcends the norm of the natural. It cannot be discerned or perceived except by faith. It is a Christ-centred covenant in the midst of the Church which changes them into a unity even as bread becomes the body and wine the blood of Christ in the midst of the Eucharistic Sacrifice. Marriage as sacrament en-fleshes, embodies, and makes Christ present in the union of the man and woman according to his priestly, prophetic and kingly ministries. Marriage as a sacrament calls the man and the woman to lay down their lives as individuals and rise up as the basic unit of the community who is Christ. This is why the Church asks clerics to embrace celibacy, to lay down their life for the whole community of faith even as Christ wedded his bride the Church, the people of God.

Unions of the capable which are not open to life are not sacramental. When a man and a woman deliberately choose not to have children, they do not have a sacrament. This is why the Church has taught consistently the sacredness of new life and opposed all unnatural means to prevent it. This is why the Church consistently teaches the value of life from conception to natural death.

Unions which seek to be sacramental marriages must be presented to the community of faith in witness to the faith of the bride and groom. Weddings do not become marriages simply because they happen in a church. Marriages are celebrated in a Chruch because they are sacrmanets and are integral to the life of grace in the married state. Those who choose civil marriage rather than marriage blessed by the Church lack the sacrament. Without the blessing of the marriage, the couple are not entitled to the other sacraments until their union is blessed.

Second marriages in the Church require preparatory actions in two sets of law. In order to marry again, Civil law must be satisfied that the parties are free to marry either by death or divorce of the original partners. Church law must be satisfied that the parties are free to marry according to civil law and that (if the original partners are still living) there never was a sacrament in the first marriage. This is to say, the first marriages must be annulled or declared to be non-sacramental.

I mention these variables only to make the point that the Church celebrates unions which are sacramental, or are supportive of the sacramental life of the Catholic party. This is to say that the Church discerns with the couple that their conjugal relationship is God-given and according to the will of God. There are some relationships that cannot be celebrated in the church simply because God does not choose or act with that which is contrary to His will. Not all unions have the same moral equivalence and to pretend that they do is to deny that God got it right the first time. This is nonsense.

So where do we go from here? We can express our displeasure with the state of things at the national and provincial level. This is our right and our responsibility. We can take action, as is our civil right, but we would be wise to acknowledge that we are now living in a post-Christian era. Things may not go the way we want or believe that they should. Morality is not a "fifty-plus-one" percent proposition and neither is justice. Our morality is based on the Word of God and the Word of God became flesh and dwelt among us. He lives still, in us, in the Church which is called to speak the truth whatever the cost.

The second thing that can-must be done, is for those with sacramental marriages to live as if their marriages are sacraments. The world cannot embrace that which it does not recognize in us first and God finally. Be bold in your sacramental life. Witness to the power of God in your lives and be all that God asks you to be. Only then will the world abandon its folly and seek faith in all things. Our government may be myopic in its consideration of conjugal unions but if we are not clear in word and deed, then we share the blame by not challenging others through faith and witness. St. John once said that perfect love casts out all fear. If we want to tame the bees, we have to claim the honey.

¹ Thomas Merton, Peace in the Post-Christian Era, Orbus Books, Maryknoll, NY 10545, 2004, ISBN 1-57075-559-0