Comments on: Yes to Family, No to Marriage

By: Abelard Lindsey

Abelard Lindsey — Sat, 22 Sep 2012 20:59:34 +0000

This is funny because its the other way around for me. I said yes to marriage, but no to family, and have been married for more than 12 years.

By: Charles R. Williams

Charles R. Williams — Thu, 13 Sep 2012 22:18:36 +0000

Marriage is not the creation of the state nor is it the creation of the Church. The Roman Catechism speaks of natural marriage contracted by the parties and sacramental marriage contracted by two parties who are baptized and free to marry and witnessed by the Church as a matter of policy.

Many of these people in free unions are married to each other in the natural sense.

We are fast approaching a situation in the US and Europe where civil marriage as defined by law is an optional legal framework for a relationship that has no intrinsic connection to natural marriage.

By: gentlemind

gentlemind — Thu, 13 Sep 2012 19:16:50 +0000

I enjoyed the article but…there is an error running through it. Marriage exists on two levels: the (natural) physical relationship, and the (artificial) legal institution. We ( perhaps understandably) think of people as being married only if they have legally registered their relationship. But a co-habiting couple raising children are in fact physically married. Marriage makes no sense as the sole moral context for sex if by marriage we mean a legally registered relationship – how can manmade law create morality? Whereas it does make sense if by marriage we mean a faithful lifelong sexual relationship between one man and one woman.