Garry Wills
Palazzo Massimo alle Terme
Why do some people who would recognize gay civil unions oppose gay
marriage? Certain religious groups want to deny gays the
sacredeness of what they take to be a sacrament. But marriage is no
sacrament.
Some of my fellow Catholics even think that “true marriage” was
instituted by Christ. It wasn’t. Marriage is prescribed in Eden by YHWH
(Yahweh) at Genesis 2.24: man and wife shall “become one flesh.” When
Jesus is asked about marriage, he simply quotes that passage from
Genesis (Mark 10.8). He nowhere claims to be laying a new foundation for
a “Christian marriage” to replace the Yahwist institution.
Some try to make the wedding at Cana (John 1.1-11) somehow
sacramental because Jesus worked his first miracle there. But that was
clearly a Jewish wedding, like any other Jesus might have attended, and
the miracle, by its superabundance of wine, is meant to show the
disciples that the Messianic time has come. The great Johannine scholar
Father Raymond Brown emphasizes this, and concludes of the passage:
“Neither the external nor the internal evidence for a symbolic reference
to matrimony is strong. The wedding is only the backdrop and occasion
for the story, and the joining of the man and woman does not have any
direct role in the narrative.”
The early church had no specific rite for marriage. This was left up
to the secular authorities of the Roman Empire, since marriage is a
legal concern for the legitimacy of heirs. When the Empire became
Christian under Constantine, Christian emperors continued the imperial
control of marriage, as the Code of Justinian makes clear. When the
Empire faltered in the West, church courts took up the role of legal
adjudicator of valid marriages. But there was still no special religious
meaning to the institution. As the best scholar of sacramental history,
Joseph Martos, puts it: “Before the eleventh century there was no such
thing as a Christian wedding ceremony in the Latin church, and
throughout the Middle Ages there was no single church ritual for
solemnizing marriage between Christians.”
Only in the twelfth century was a claim made for some supernatural
favor (grace) bestowed on marriage as a sacrament. By the next century
marriage had been added to the biblically sacred number of seven
sacraments. Since Thomas Aquinas argued that the spouses’ consent is the
efficient cause of marriage and the seal of intercourse was the final
cause, it is hard to see what a priest’s blessing could add to the
reality of the bond. And bad effects followed. This sacralizing of the
natural reality led to a demoting of Yahwist marriage, the only kind
Jesus recognized, as inferior to “true marriage” in a church.
In the 1930s, my parents had a civil marriage, but my Catholic mother
did not think she was truly married if not by a priest. My non-Catholic
father went along with a church wedding (but in the sacristy, not the
sanctuary) by promising to raise his children as Catholic. My mother
thought she had received the sacrament, but had she? Since mutual
consent is the essence of marriage, one would think that the sacrament
would have to be bestowed on both partners; but my non-Catholic father
could not receive the sacrament. Later, when my father left and married
another, my mother was told she could not remarry because she was still
married to my father in the “true marriage.” When he returned to my
mother, and became a Catholic, a priest performed again the sacramental
marriage. Since my father’s intervening marriage was “outside the
church,” it did not count. What nonsense.
Those who do not want to let gay partners have the sacredness of
sacramental marriage are relying on a Scholastic fiction of the
thirteenth century to play with people’s lives, as the church has done
ever since the time of Aquinas. The myth of the sacrament should not let
people deprive gays of the right to natural marriage, whether blessed
by Yahweh or not. They surely do not need—since no one does—the blessing
of Saint Thomas. source: New York Review, Blog
No comments:
Post a Comment