Marriage and the Catholic Tradition

I want to be extremely, perhaps even painfully, clear at the start of this post about two things: my perspective, and my intent. First, I am posting this as a Catholic theologian, from the perspective of Catholic tradition. This article is aimed at a Catholic audience, and it discusses the issue of marriage accordingly in the context of what a properly Catholic worldview ought to be. I put the word "Catholic" in there four times: this paper is about the Catholic Church's idea of what marriage fundamentally is. Second, the purpose of this paper is to draw a distinct line between the Church's ancient understanding of what marriage is, and the modern, secular, non-Catholic understanding. This division goes deeper than the permission of same-sex marriage, and in fact includes a radical, irreconcilable difference in the concept of the purposes, justifications, and culture of marriage. This article will then, in depth, take a look at the Church's understanding of marriage first in the thought of the Fathers, then from a few contemporary sources.

I will start with a look at what we, as Western culture, think marriage is today. The best place to start is with a Disney quote, from Aladdin:
ALADDIN: Jasmine, I'm sorry I lied to you about being a prince.
JASMINE: I know why you did.
ALADDIN: Well, I guess...this... is goodbye?
JASMINE: Oh, that stupid law. This isn't fair--I love you.
This quote, innocuous as it may seem, serves as an example of what we assume marriage fundamentally is. For those of you who haven't seen the movie, I'll fill you in on what's going on: Jasmine (the princess) wants to marry Aladdin (who isn't a prince), even though it's against her country's law. The law, here, is a silly, old, arbitrary rule which is preventing the true, good, and authentic relationship between Aladdin and Jasmine from taking its course. No stupid rule should keep them apart: they are in "love."

Love, then, is both the defining characteristic and the necessary prerequisite for marriage according to modern, American (and more broadly Western) society. This is evident in more places than in Disney movies. For instance, the gay advocacy site "Why Marriage Matters" states in its "Just the Facts" page in answer to the question "Why do gay and lesbian couples want to get married?"
For similar reasons as anyone who wants to marry. To stand in front of friends and family to make a lifetime commitment to the person they love. To share the joys and the sorrows that life brings. To be a family, and to be able to protect that family.
Once again, we see that marriage is about the relationship between two people, a relationship founded upon "love." What, precisely, love is doesn't really matter in this context. Regardless of a finer definition, love in the context of marriage, be it heterosexual or otherwise, refers to the warm and fuzzy stuff that leads to a desire for union with the other. Something to note about this operative definition of marriage: it is fundamentally isolationist. This reason for getting married, provided by "Why Marriage Matters," is that the couple wants to. No outside consideration is made, no wider appeal to society is attempted. Marriage, according to modern society, is about two people, regardless of anyone else.

The Church holds that marriage is not fundamentally about two people loving each other, but rather existentially about human society and the existence of the human race in God's overarching plan. The purpose and definition of marriage according to the ancient Church was fundamentally social. St. Augustine is very clear in his foundational De Bono Coniugali,
Every human being is part of the human race, and human nature is a social entity, and has naturally the great power and benefit of friendship. For this reason, God wished to produce all persons out of one, so that they would be held together in social relationships not only by similarity of race, but also by the bond of kinship. The first natural bond of human society, therefore, is that of husband and wife (Prima itaque naturalis humane societatis copula vir et uxor est).
Without me having to say anything, it should be readily apparent that this definition of marriage is worlds away from Disney's. There is, in fact, no mention of love. The closest we get is the "amicitia" (friendship) relationship which Augustine cites as the foundation for marriage, and also broader human relationships. There is no warm and fuzzy here, no room for "but they really love each other," and no ambiguity about purpose. According to Augustine, the purpose and nature of marriage is tied directly, intrinsically, and inseparably with God's continued creation of the human race and human society. This is simultaneously a statement on both a earthy, corporeal level and existential, spiritual level. Human beings are meant to be tied together by the bonds of kinship: by coming from the same womb, by sharing the same genetic material, and by growing up in the primary human society of a family - that is the purpose of marriage. Human beings, by marriage, can contribute to the continued existence of humanity: by participating in God's continued creation and by organizing society into a structured, rational entity according fundamentally to kinship - that is the purpose of marriage. Marriage is thus the spiritual and physical means by which God creates the human race and forms it according to and for the sake of his ultimate plan of salvation. That is the Church's definition of marriage: one which does not, can not, and will not ever have room for a same-sex union due to the obvious biological inability of two same-sex people to even have the capacity to procreate.

This language of marriage is not restricted to ancient times. Karol Wojtyla, prior to becoming Pope John Paul II, wrote in his Love and Responsibility,
If we are thinking of the human species as a whole, we can speak of necessity, and hence of a measure of determinacy, in connection with the sexual urge. The existence of the whole species Homo depends directly on it. The species could not exist if it were not for the sexual urge and its natural results. So that a sort of necessity is clearly discernible. Human kind can be maintained in being only so long as individual people, individual men and women, human couples, obey the sexual urge.
And later in the same chapter:
A man and a woman, by means of procreation, by taking part in bringing a new human being into the world, at the same time participate in their own fashion in the work of creation. They can therefore look upon themselves as the rational co-creators of a new human being.
JP II is here talking about the purpose specifically of the sexual urge, and not of marriage, but the relevance to our current discussion is nonetheless obvious. The Church clearly holds, and has held through the ages, that the sexual act is only fully realized within marriage and that the sexual act is necessarily only in its proper form when viewed existentially as part of God's continued creation of the human race. This language is also not foreign to the Catechism, which states,
The vocation to marriage is written in the very nature of man and woman as they came from the hand of the Creator. Marriage is not a purely human institution despite the many variations it may have undergone through the centuries in different cultures, social structures, and spiritual attitudes. These differences should not cause us to forget its common and permanent characteristics. Although the dignity of this institution is not transparent everywhere with the same clarity, some sense of the greatness of the matrimonial union exists in all cultures. "The well-being of the individual person and of both human and Christian society is closely bound up with the healthy state of conjugal and family life." (The Catechism is there quoting Gaudium et Spes, a Vatican II document.)

So, there you have it. Despite the isolationist, romantic notion of modern culture which permits gay marriage because "hey, they love each other too," the Church sees marriage as something fundamentally different. Because of the existential significance of the institution of marriage, it is not possible for the Church to ever permit the union of a man and a man or of a woman and a woman as equivalent sacramentally and institutionally to that of a man and a woman. Whatever the Supreme Court, sociologists, or gay pride activists might say, marriage is fundamentally social, and allowing homosexuals to "marry" fundamentally changes society. This is the Catholic position, to which I obediently, enthusiastically, joyfully, rationally, and (God-willing) perpetually submit.

For further reading on this issue, of what the Church actually teaches, I suggest you look at CCC paragraphs 1601-1620, as well as 2331-2391, especially 2357-2359.

I hope that this writing was clear and enlightening. It is honestly difficult to write this, because I know that I have friends who disagree for deeply personal reasons and hold their dissent from the Church's teaching as a testament to their conviction and love. I hope that, in this writing, I have not hurt anyone by my explication of Church doctrine: such was not my intention. As I said, this is an analysis of the Catholic Church's position on what marriage fundamentally is, according to the Fathers, as exemplified by Augustine, and contemporary thought. As usual, I encourage thoughtful, charitable, and honest discussion in the comments. I will answer any questions to the best of my ability.

~Ambrose