Category: Marriage & Family

Back in the Spring, a number of our readers asked me to post excerpts from a talk I gave to a regional CUF conference in Tucson, AZ. In this talk, I had contrasted the Rosary and contraception as far as their effects on marriage is concerned. I had mentioned at the time that this talk was being edited into an article for CUF’s magazine The Lay Witness, and I would let everyone know once it was out. For those who are interested, CUF has now made this piece available on their website under the title The Battle of the Bond. Here’s an excerpt:
Take the Joyful Mysteries, for example. In the Annunciation, we recognize Mary’s complete and total self-gift in consenting to be the tabernacle of the Incarnate Word. Her simple fiat—“let it be to me according to your word”—would change the course of human history. Because she humbly consented to the beginning of the divine life within her womb, man was to find redemption and salvation. Yet, in contraception, we find man frustrating the beginning of life in such a way that he becomes a self-contradiction by being opposed to (“contra”) his own conception. He becomes the arbiter of life and sets himself up as a god.

“For every 10 births in Russia, there are still nearly 13 abortions.” –Steven Myers, NY Times
Yet Russia’s new law is a step in the right direction: it restricts the permitted grounds for mid- and late-term abortions to:

…rape, imprisonment, the death or severe disability of the husband or a court ruling stripping a woman of her parental rights. Being a single mother or a refugee [or divorced or in poor housing…–RC] is no longer reason enough to abort a pregnancy after the 12th week.
As before, pregnancies can still be aborted after 12 weeks on medical grounds, including severe disabilities of the fetus or a threat to the mother’s life.

It won’t have a big effect on the raw numbers, and it leaves several obviously immoral reasons undisturbed, as well as all abortions up to the 12th week — but removing some of the “reasons” is a good step that will save a few lives.

My latest piece concerning the homosexualist threat to the institution of marriage is up at Enter Stage Right. Given ESR‘s strongly libertarian bent, I’m grateful that they allowed me to publish paragraphs like the following:

As previously mentioned, marriage is no mere private contract between individuals. It concerns the good of the individual, the good of the family and for the good of society as a whole. While the marital contract is entered into as an exclusive relationship between a man and a woman, marriage nevertheless possesses a social dimension into which children are born, nurtured and educated. Subsequently, marriage is unequal to other to other contracts between humans; by its very nature, its effects are not merely restricted to those who contract the marriage. Rather, marriage both profoundly and directly impacts upon the lives of others, namely, the children born into the relationship. For this reason, a society can never exclusively define marriage in terms of individual rights without placing its stability at great risk. Unlike other relationships that merely concern private individuals, marriage cannot be left to succeed or fail upon the merits of the individuals who contract it.

Also, please keep John Pacheco (who helped me with the above piece) in as he is one of the key promoters. of today’s pro-marriage gathering on Parliament Hill.

Bishop Victor Galeone, the new ordinary of St. Augustine in Florida, has written an admirable summary of Catholic doctrine on marriage and sexual ethics in his pastoral letter, “Marriage: A Communion of Life and Love”.
The bishop knows that the Gospel of Life runs counter to secular thinking, and he makes a point of saying so:

The vast majority of people today consider contraception a non-issue. So much so that to label it a disorder sounds like a gross exaggeration. And to revisit it seems analogous to studying a treatise from the Flat Earth Society. But contraception is an issue, an absolutely vital issue. To comprehend why it is wrong, it’s first necessary to understand what God originally intended marriage to be. In the opening chapters of Genesis we learn that God himself designed marriage for a twofold purpose: to communicate life and love.

(Thanks to Jeff and Alicia for the link.)

A mathematician and a psychologist have devised a 94% reliable method for predicting whether couples will divorce.

[…] the couple’s ability to communicate was marked using a scale that gave positive points for good signals and negative points for bad signals.
For example, jokes, a positive tone of voice, smiles and affectionate gestures all resulted in positive scores. Bad signals such as rolling of the eyes, criticism, mocking and coldness led to a negative score.

Rolling of the eyes, criticism, mocking, and coldness? Uh-oh: going by what’s in this blog, I don’t think I have any other modes of communication!