Kiddy Catechesis–Marriage (for Adults)

After the recent Federal Court ruling on California’s Proposition 8, we thought Gianna could remind some of the adults about the Church’s requirements for a valid marriage.  Warning:  this is not for young children who can read!

And for those who disagree, please bear in mind that this is a Catholic website that, like Gianna, intends to adhere wholeheartedly to every doctrine of the Holy Catholic Church.

  • Mary Alice

    I'll take the bait…I think Gianna's explanation of Canon Law is right on, and I do not in any way dissent from the teaching of the magisterium, but my question continues to be, what legal right (or moral obligation) do we have as Catholic Americans to impose the Catholic definition of marriage on the civil institution of marriage and to deny others the civil rights conferred therein?

  • rightsaidred

    The institution of marriage between a man and a woman engenders respect for the inherent capacity to transmit human life. Procreation and future generations are only possible through the union of man and woman.If the only purpose of marriage was an intimate bond between two people, supporters of same sex marriage would be correct to call the current state of affairs discrimination. But the purpose of marriage is not only intimacy (cultural trends try to tell us that is the only purpose!), but also the creation of human life. For society to survive and flourish, it must protect the relationship that transmits human life (the union of a man and woman). We don't allow siblings to marry (even if they are opposite sex) because that relationship cannot properly transmit human life. Protecting the procreative capacity of the couple is at the heart of the institution of marriage. Given the technological and legal attacks against the creation of human life, I think the issue of same sex marriage is greater than just the “civil right” to have benefits conferred on your relationship. Rights w/o responsibilities is very in vogue, but when it comes to the “benefits” of marriage, society should be structured to protect the inherent procreative ability of a man/woman marriage.

  • Kevin

    Mary Alice,A good read on this is the USCCB statement on our obligation in political life. When Jesus said to “render unto Caesar” he did mean for us to withdraw and let society sink into depravity. We are obliged as Catholics to promote a moral order in society. We are obliged to suport and promote the Church's teaching on marriage. If we do truly love the sinner we must speak the truth and not hide the church teachings under the bushel of moral relativism.

  • Kevin

    Oops. I meant Jesus did NOT mean for us to withdraw.

  • rightsaidred

    Great NYT Op Ed today by Ross Douthat:http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/09/opinion/09dou…Here's a snipit–”So what are gay marriage’s opponents really defending, if not some universal, biologically inevitable institution? It’s a particular vision of marriage, rooted in a particular tradition, that establishes a particular sexual ideal.This ideal holds up the commitment to lifelong fidelity and support by two sexually different human beings — a commitment that involves the mutual surrender, arguably, of their reproductive self-interest — as a uniquely admirable kind of relationship. It holds up the domestic life that can be created only by such unions, in which children grow up in intimate contact with both of their biological parents, as a uniquely admirable approach to child-rearing. And recognizing the difficulty of achieving these goals, it surrounds wedlock with a distinctive set of rituals, sanctions and taboos.The point of this ideal is not that other relationships have no value, or that only nuclear families can rear children successfully. Rather, it’s that lifelong heterosexual monogamy at its best can offer something distinctive and remarkable — a microcosm of civilization, and an organic connection between human generations — that makes it worthy of distinctive recognition and support. “

  • JurisMater

    Gianna's gestures and expressions are absolutely fabulous. Are you teaching public speaking over there?My kids love this, I don't think any of this (including the written part) is inappropriate for children. If the other side is using kindergarten curriculums to normalize homosexual “families”, I want my 4 and 5 year old to know the truth about marriage, including why.

  • readingmama

    MA- this leaflet from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith answers your question directly. It is called “Considerations regarding proposals to give legal recognition to unions between homosexual persons.” http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations…P.S. I was wondering if anyone else was having trouble with getting more junk mail since signing in as a commentator on this site? I never had any trouble with the old site and using my google account but as soon as I started commenting I started getting junk mail. Maybe it is just a coincidence but nothing else changed for me.

  • Rachael

    I don't believe that the government should have any role in the term marriage. Everyone who wants to receive tax, insurance, and other aspects of being married should receive a civil ceremony/partnership. It's not the government's role to employ or administer a religious ceremony. Leave that to citizen's religious institutions. So in essence, if you want the benefits of being on your spouse's insurance or able to file joint tax returns, you get a civil partnership and also have your religious ceremony.

  • BeChaste1

    Classic……Her face at the end was hilarious….We just kept watching that part over and over.

  • Tim

    Classic….Her face at the end was hilarious….We just kept watching that over and over.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X