Today the Pope, Leo XIV (a pleasure to type that) gave a sermon for a Mass for the Jubilee of Families, Children, Grandparents and the Elderly.
In this sermon he directly contradicted something that Francis inspired in others through the still un-clarified document Amoris laetitia. You will recall that, years back in the buzz around and after the Synods (“walkings together”) on the family, marriage and continence were degraded as nearly impossible “ideals” which people can’t be expected to try to attain. Therefore, it would emerge from that starting point, just about anyone (except perhaps those who attend the Traditional Latin Mass), in any sort of relationship, adulterous, same-sex, etc., should be admitted to Communion, blessed, “accompanied”.
The situation was bad enough concerning marriage, divorce, adultery and Communion, that four cardinals submitted five questions (dubia) asking for clarification. Those questions were left, infamously, ignored, except through a strange response from the DDF
With that unpleasant chaos in the background, this is what Pope Leo said today:
In recent decades, we have received a sign that fills us with joy but also makes us think. It is the fact that several spouses have been beatified and canonized, not separately, but as married couples. I think of Louis and Zélie Martin, the parents of Saint Therese of the Child Jesus; and of Blessed Luigi and Maria Beltrame Quattrocchi, who raised a family in Rome in the last century. And let us not forget the Ulma family from Poland: parents and children, united in love and martyrdom. I said that this is a sign that makes us think. By pointing to them as exemplary witnesses of married life, the Church tells us that today’s world needs the marriage covenant in order to know and accept God’s love and to defeat, thanks to its unifying and reconciling power, the forces that break down relationships and societies.
For this reason, with a heart filled with gratitude and hope, I would remind all married couples that marriage is not an ideal but the measure of true love between a man and a woman: a love that is total, faithful and fruitful (cf. SAINT PAUL VI, Humanae Vitae, 9). This love makes you one flesh and enables you, in the image of God, to bestow the gift of life.
For all you young people out there, contemplating your vocation, your future, the married life… YES… it is possible to live holy lives in the sacred bond of matrimony and your contribution to wider society, to your extended family, and to your Church is immeasurable. It is hard to see up close and it is hard to see from afar, but there are, as Leo pointed out, saintly families of the past (but living in memory and in our honoring at the altar) which serve as exceptional models and there are many wonderful families – perhaps your own, and so I pray – close at hand with whom you can draw great strength and guidance.
Loading ...
I note that Pope Francis was a huge devotee of the straw man argument. Used it all the time.
It can be dangerous to attack straw men, especially if there is Holy Water at hand.
https://youtu.be/73VjyNPeW-Y?feature=shared
In the spirit of Staw Men Fighting Back (agere contra, as St Ignatius of Loyola put it), how about introducing your readers to the vesting prayers for priests, now that people in certain quarters have chosen to disparage them. Because the Missal “no longer requires them.”
Good for Pope Leo. He testifies to the love between his own parents, for one. It used to be expected that everyone would stay together, and now the world pretends that it’s the other way around.
It’s a shame that one of the Pope’s brothers is divorced. We don’t know what happened there. (Unfortunately it only takes one to break up a marriage, these days, but some times both parties have a hand in it.)
People I know have done some amazingly stupid things, giving up what they have for somebody who’s obviously not going to stick around. And then they’re surprised that it didn’t work out, and that untrustworthiness isn’t a sign of true love.
I imagine Pope Leo has a very long check list of things he needs to clarify or correct.
Very encouraging!
Thanks for posting this. It’s very encouraging.
The more I hear from and learn about our good Pope Leo, the more confident I am in his faithful, scholarly leadership abilities. I personally think he has the very finest qualities of the last 3 popes – the sympathy for the poor of Pope Francis, the mannerly scholarship of Pope Benedict (who always thought before he spoke or wrote, always in line with the teaching of the Church), and the joyful, fearless charisma of St. John Paul.
After nearly a month, I am still in shocked that my Pope is an American Midwesterner like me, leading 1.4 billion Catholics worldwide.
God is good indeed! God bless and protect our good Pope Leo and all here!
As a married (going on 18 years) father of 6, this statement from our Holy Father is the kind of “accompaniment” I have been longing and hoping for from Holy Mother Church. Pope Leo concisely calls to mind the married Saints and Blesseds who have been recently beatified as a witness to the possibility of living this call faithfully, and he at the same time reiterates or underscores the importance of the prophetic Humanae Vitae, which remains a crucial bullwark of the truth of what marriage, the family, and sex are all for. May Sts. Paul VI and John Paul II pray for our Holy Father!
I think Pope Leo needs to clarify that CHRISTIAN (sacramental) marriage is not only the ideal but also the measure of true love.
Marriage is something that has been independently invented over and over again in human societies. It has taken on many different forms with different customs and rules in different places and different times.
Today, the single fundamental necessary function of marriage has been taken away. Since marriage can’t do the one thing is was invented to do, men stop getting married. Men still have children with women. Some men still live together with a woman and make a family. Men still support women and their children, but the marriage part is gone.
In the time of Augustus the previous custom of marriage had lost his necessary function and so pagan men were not getting married. Christian marriage offered an alternative that still included the necessary function of marriage.
Marriage is invented to solve a problem that arises in human society. A woman can consent to sex in private but then in public after the fact she can change her mind and accuse the man. That man is then punished because society can not tolerate a rapist. It is necessary for women to be able to accuse a man who has actually harmed them. The problem comes in that other women make false accusations. So men invent marriage. Marriage is the woman’s public declaration that she consents to sex with a particular man. Once it is stated in public, now she can’t accuse the man. Pagan Roman marriage used to be that way but then later the protection against accusation part of the contract was removed and pagan marriage no longer made sense.
Today, many jurisdictions in the world have removed the protections a spouse has against accusations from the other spouse. As Christians we need to reject these attempts to alter the sacramental marriage. If we don’t, then marriage loses it’s core function and men will refuse to do it.
@quomodocumque
Since I am a manualist, I will recommend the “Brevior Synopsis Theologiae Dogmaticae.” Caput 8, Art. 1.I.
The history of marriage you have given is the error of ‘Evolutionism.’ (Juxta evolutionismi fautores, Matrimonium, antequam formam contractus indueret, fuit succesive promiscuitas sexuum, etc.)
Marriage, even considered outside of the Sacrament, is derived from natural law, and the positive will of God. (Matrimonii institutio et contractus originem duxit tum a jure naturali, tum a voluntate positiva Dei) Marriage is no more an invention than virtue, even if people choose to ignore it.
@TheCavalierHatherly
I’m not sure what you want to say but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt. Every human society does have marriage and so that is a strong argument that God was given it to us for our benefit.
However, I’m not sure I came across to you with what I meant to say since it seems that you think I was saying something I was not saying.
I don’t think that marriage evolves. What we see from the study of human history and culture is that there are two problems that exist in society. The first problem is rape. This is not exclusive to humans actually. The second problem arises from the solution to the first problem. A woman has intellect and speech and so she can understand what has happened and she is able to communicate what has happened. And so Tamar tells her brother Absolam and her father David that her half brother Amnon has raped her. Absolam then kills Amnon.
The problem with the system is that a woman can also lie just as Pontifar’s wife lied about Joseph.
Some societies today and most societies in ancient times came to view all sex as rape. The old law said that if a woman was with a man in the countryside then the man was punished because there would been no one around to help her. The law assumes that she was raped. If she was with the man in the city where she could have called out for help and didn’t, then the man was not punished. So all sex was viewed as first being a possible rape. Basically, a man could not rely on the private consent of a woman. She could say something different later on. So men then required a woman to announce to witnesses that she will be with him. It is no longer a private matter. Others are not involved. This is the basic fundamental function, and without it, marriage no longer words and men will not rely on it.
The other rules of marriage vary from time and place. If we look at Sampson, it seems odd to us that he was married but his wife did not live with him. Instead, he went to visit her at her family home from time to time. In modern times we see the example of places in Africa where the women largely control the economic activity and most men are unemployed. In those societies some men are popular and end up being married to multiple women who don’t mind sharing him. Other men are not popular and have to make their way alone, often living with a sibling.
In modern developed countries, the state has taken it upon itself to try to force people to accept alterations to the marriage contract. They try to force us to accept divorce. They want us to accept that a spouse can accuse another spouse. The state tries to adjudicate how much financial support a husband owes to his wife.
One thing about the Gospel that seems very clear to me is Jesus telling us to keep things real. Oh, you have this really weird, overly elaborate ritual for washing your hands before you eat. Ha. I have good news for you. You don’t have to do that. Oh, the state allows you to divorce your wife. Well, you can ignore that. The state doesn’t have the authority to say that.
As Christians we need to be firm about this. The marriage rules of others that do not come from the sacrament we need to reject.
Another thing from the Gospels that is very important to remember is that there are things that we need to opt out of. If marriage isn’t going to work for someone, they need to opt out. It isn’t wrong to opt out.
All humans will eventually die. We are mortal. When we die our souls go to the land of the dead and in the land of the dead everyone gets exactly what they deserve. They get exactly what they have earned. Nothing more. Nothing less. Nothing different. Jesus told us of the rich man and the poor man. The rich man had earned torments and the poor man was being comforted. God’s justice was at work. But let us remember that they were both still dead. Death is not one way for everyone.
Then Jesus tells us that we can opt out of death. Because Jesus is divine he is immortal. As an immortal he doesn’t belong in the land of the dead. Jesus will go and be with his Father. Jesus gave us the sacraments so that we can be joined to him, adopted into God’s family, and be gifted immortality. When we do this we opt out of death. Jesus becomes our elder brother and we go to be with him and be alive. And our Father is generous. He gives more than what anyone deserves, just as the workers in the vineyard who only worked part of the day were gifted an entire days wage.
So I want to say again, as Christians, we need to reject and opt out of any outside forces trying to diminish or alter the marriage sacrament. We have the right to opt out of their rules. It is clear that there is a break. A separation. Marriage in the church and marriage outside the church are not the same thing. We can not rely on the state to administer marriage because they can change the rules at any time, even after someone is married. If we want to get the real benefits of marriage we have to keep it real.
I could also add that out in California, because state marriage no longer means anything we now see the consequences. Everyone is divorced. There’s MeToo with so many attention seekers wanting the spotlight that they drown out legitimate victims. When a man and a woman go on a date the men are now asking women to do the following. And no I am not making this up.
1: Sign a document listing out all the things she is consenting to do
2: Have witnesses see her sign the document and say she understands
3: Make a video of herself holding up her ID card where she says her name, date of birth, the man she is with, the fact that she consents, and the fact that no one is making her do anything she doesn’t want to do
Men in California do this not just because they fear jail but because for an innocent man to be accused of something like rape, it is a terrible thing. Even if no one believes the woman, it is still a severe moral outrage that damages the man, not only in reputation, but also internally.
It is easy for us Catholics, if we live in a bubble, to think that everyone else has lives that are like ours. They don’t. Catholic sacramental marriage is better than whatever foolishness people come up with next.
@quomodocumque
I was saying, merely, that marriage is not “invented to solve a problem” but occurs by natural law. No amount of abberation proves the contrary.
None of the abberations you mentioned are properly part of the “marriage covenant.” They are all violations of the natural law or canonical legislation by the state. (The state doesn’t possess that authority, but modernity is about power dynamics, not rightful authority.)
I think there is merit in speaking well (or rather, rightly) of the natural institution, just as it is good to engage in philosophical acts of natural philosophy in order to fulfill our natural end; as our natural end is virtually contained within our supernatural end, so natural marrige is virtually contained within Christian Sacramental marriage.
Gratia non tollit naturam, sed perficit.
My Wife and I are seniors. Married for decades. What has gotten us through the years is Our Marriage Vow.
We made Vow before God. Keeps us together through the good times and the bad.
I would also add that marriage is natural because, as animals, humans have an obligation under the natural law to reproduce and rear offspring and, as rational, to so in the context of an indissoluble bond. No human positive law can change this and any law that treats marriage as dissoluble is no law at all. The added character of sacramental marriage is that Catholic spouses are raising their children for a supernatural end and so require supernatural help
“Marriage is not an ideal, but the canon of true love..” Leo XIV
“True love” is an ideal, therefore so is marriage..