By Josh Noem
On Nov. 4, the state of California passed Proposition 8, which amends the state constitution with the following simple statement: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."
The Roman Catholic Church stood in support of Proposition 8 because it aligned with what the Church believes to be true about marriage. There are two lines of reasoning that guide the Church's support of Proposition 8: The ideal of opposite-sex marriage must be upheld and same-sex unions would diminish society's understanding of marriage.
Catholic Christians believe that marriage is not a merely human institution. God is the author of marriage and the calling to give one's self in marriage to another person comes from God. So, marriage is a gift from God that is written in our natures as men and women - it is not something that we are at liberty to redefine.
The Catholic understanding of marriage is a vision for a healthy, happy culture and society. Marriage, seen as a sacramental union as opposed to a simply civil or legal marriage, is intended to help spouses attain holiness and to raise their children in the ways of Christ. These two purposes are mutually dependent - spouses attain holiness through mutual love and sacrifice for one another and for their children, and this mutual love is the most important way in which children come to know the love of God. This ideal of mutual love between husband and wife and children, then, stands as a witness and example of God's love for the world.
Ever wonder why good families are so fun to be around? They are in the business of attaining holiness and they've been cultivating it with disciplined self-giving love. And that fun that you feel when you are with them is the witness that they are providing to the world. It is a taste of the joy God intends for all of us.
This vision of marriage is different from how our society understands marriage and its purpose. And, of course, in a pluralistic society, we cannot expect everyone to have a sacramental vision of marriage. We can, however, strive to protect the fundamentals that ground the understanding of marriage found in both our faith and in our society - the mutual and creative love between a man and woman in a life-long relationship that is open to children.
In essence, same-sex unions would change what we mean when we talk about marriage. Same-sex unions diminish the word "marriage" to the equivalent of "partnership," which is a contractual arrangement between and for adults. The bearing and raising of children would no longer have a central role to play in what we would understand as marriage.
Now, when I married Stacey 10 years ago, we did not get married to one another because we wanted to have children. We decided to marry because we loved one another and wanted to live our lives together. Children have come along the way, though, and we have always had a generous welcoming attitude to children. Children, in our marriage and in the ideal of Christian marriage, are an outgrowth and an outpouring of our love for one another.
Same sex unions would define marriage for everyone - not just for homosexuals - as a partnership that has no fundamental relationship to children. Yes, homosexual couples can bear and raise children. And yes, some married couples suffer from infertility. But the ideal that the Church upholds defines marriage to protect the integration of creative sexuality within the marriage covenant. Separating sex from marriage and family life impoverishes the gift that it is.
There is a whole philosophy of sexuality that underlies this position, which I do not have the room to explain here. The essential point of it, however, is that the Church always contextualizes the creative gift of sexuality within the life-long committed relationship of marriage.
The well-being of individuals and society is closely bound up with the healthy state family life. And the well-being of children is best served when they are born into a traditional marriage and raised by both a mother and a father. This is a crucial way in which same-sex unions are not the same as opposite-sex unions. The marriage of a man and a woman complements their distinctive gender and their ability to procreate. When men and women consummate their marriage, they offer themselves to God with the possibility of the creation of a new human being. There is a biological and organic reality to the way we understand marriage that is incompatible with same-sex unions.
Finally, and this is the most important part of what I write, we need to remember that we are all children of God, created with inherent dignity, each one an image of God. Protecting the traditional understanding of marriage should not in any way disparage others. We need candor and respect in our dialogue with others and we must ensure that our compassion extends especially to our homosexual brothers and sisters.
Marriage, history shows us, is intrinsic to stable, flourishing and hospitable societies. Although cultural differences have occurred, what has never changed is that marriage is the ideal relationship between a man and a woman for the purpose of procreation and the continuation of the human race. Any other pairing - while possibly offering security and companionship to the individuals involved - is not marriage.
