THE CHURCH ON MARRIAGE

A reader reminds me of what the Catechism says about marriage in the Catholic Church. It’s only half about procreation, however the theocons are now trying to spin it:

Can a Catholic marriage ceremony take place if the couple knows conclusively that they can not conceive?

The short answer is, Yes. Marriage has a two-fold purpose: the unity of the spouses and the procreation and education of children. Even when the latter purpose is not physically possible, the former purpose is still possible and the perpetual, faithful, and exclusive love of the spouses is a great joy and a sacramental sign of God’s love for the world.

Any other defects which may result in the inability to have children, such as simple sterility or infertility, do not pose an obstacle to Christian marriage. Such unions are as much the cause of sacramental joy as any other.

Here, the Church specifically rebutts the notion that procreation is the sole point of marriage. The “union of the spouses” is equally important. So why not in civil law?

SELF-PARODY WATCH: “The Friday NY Post had a front-page story on the fellow who killed a NY city councilman at city hall. “HIV and failure fueled his rage,” said the subhead. This brought the letter-writers out in force. Today’s Post publishes a number of letters from outraged readers protesting that HIV has nothing to do with “fueling rage.” Well, not directly, perhaps. However, the drugs usually given to control HIV make you listless and depressed, and it is common to counter these effects by giving testosterone injections. These shots in turn have a number of side effects, including bursts of fierce anger. Body-builders and other steroid users call this “‘roid rage.” Whether this particular guy was getting this particular treatment I do not know; but the fact that he was HIV positive is not irrelevant to his having killed a man in (apparently) rage. I don’t think that justifies the wording of the Post subhead, which would be justified only if they knew the guy was on steroids as part of his HIV treatment, a thing not mentioned in the story. Still, his having HIV is not irrelevant, as the protestors claim.” – John Derbyshire, National Review Online.