Friday, 8 February 2013

The New Difference in future Civil Marriage - Can we Co-operate?



Civil marriage has systematically contravened the sacred principles of Catholic Sacramental marriage to the extent that in order to marry we have had recourse to the double effect - for the greater good of the Marital Contract we committed remote material co-operation with a process that 'falsely/impossibly' allowed divorce and remarriage.

But:
Heretofore the co-operation was remote, material and permissible because the offence involved bearing false witness against an immutable reality - it was merely definition/redefinition/denial of an ontological reality or non-reality - or it was pretence or assumed dominant control in regard to a reality it could not alter - childish tilting at windmills with neither authority or efficacy...

Previously we could 'co-operate' under the principle that 'the state can say or do what it wants - it cannot change the underlying reality no matter what it thinks it's doing" - no reality was altered - the people who were 'divorced' by the state - were not, the 'remarried' were not etc.

And baptised non-Catholics undergoing a civil ceremony were - by principles of non-intervention and non contrariety - still able to do what the Church does - swear a solemn, mutual, exclusive binding contract - and become validly married.

So yes previously the State's 'fiddling with marriage' didn't interfere with Tridentine precepts or the sacramental reality

- it lied, scandalised and dishonoured marriage, it endorsed extra-marital sexual licence, it endowed those who were not married with the title and secular/social benefits of being married...

...but it didn't thwart marriage!!




It didn't prevent those eligible to marry and willing to marry from going through a ceremony with the intention to marry and ultimately really marrying.

Therefore we could co-operate.
There was injustice and scandal - but it was verbal straw in the wind - and the double effect could apply.

But after this vote - and once the ECHR has introduced 'equality' within heterosexual and homosexual 'marriage' legislations and all principles like consummation, fidelity, commitment etc have been eliminated...

Like someone waving a fiver in front of the coin-operated drinks machine - the baptised non-Catholic couple willing and able to get married in the eyes of the Church - are being deliberately thwarted and prevented from making those promises they wish to make in a civil ceremony which denies those promises exist and proscribes them from being made.

The State is now intervening and acting in ways contrary to the Church.
Deliberately preventing a couple from making declarations which could have been previously [albeit arbitrarily] recognised by the state.
The state is saying 'we do not recognise - we do not permit - we will neither hear nor acknowledge nor publicly record - any oath to exclusive mutual fidelity..."

The couple are saying 'we want to make real marital promises' and the state has its fingers in its ears declaring "la-la-la, I'm not listening"

The State is now standing in Heaven's way - deliberately forbidding entrance to the Holy Spirit - like cutting out a sorcerer's tongue so he cannot say the final words of the spell.

Whereas previously the state position was 'well it's up to you what you mean by those promises'
The new state position is 'you are not allowed to make those promises - to the extent that if you make any attempt to act in ways contrary to our definition of your relationship - we will exert the full force of the law upon you'

People are now going to be prevented from marrying - their state marriage intrinsically thwarting the possibility.

That's the new difference- and that's why there is a new set of issues upon the discernment table.

Does the new 'civil marriage' with its 'redefinition of marriage' [i.e. its abolition] and its thwarting of marriage - wilful prevention of those eligible to marry from marrying...

Does it change from an unjust law with which one may co-operate
into an 'intrinsically unjust' law with which one is absolutely forbidden to co-operate?





And here enters the principle of solidaritism and the duty of care afforded to all the baptised - the real oecumenical spirit if you will.
Can a Catholic conspire with that which deliberately prevents/thwarts a baptised non-catholic from marrying?

We need a intense CDF scrutiny of the rubrics, principles and aims and corresponding consequences of this new legislation to determine whether or not in the eyes of the Church it is merely unjust or intrinsically unjust.

Because if it is intrinsically unjust - and nobody's given reassuring assertions as to why it is not and cannot be...?
Evangelium Vitae 73 & 74 & The CDF's 'considerations' tell us we are forbidden from co-operating with civil marriage...and thus in order to marry we become criminals.

Technically we might be at war...and I'd like someone to tell me with some authority that we're all ok and can go back to bed without the worry of disappearing in the night.

No comments: