.- In a new column on Catholic Womanhood, writer Jennifer Uebbing explains that a common problem in arguing against a redefinition of marriage is implicitly accepting the idea that such as redefinition is possible.
“Marriage is not a human invention or a cultural construct, but rather, the revealed truth of something written into our very beings,” she writes.
Entering into the argument “for” or “against” the redefinition of marriage, she says, generally ignores the question of “What is the point of marriage?”
If we fail to define that, it is fairly easy to understand why many “good-hearted and well-intentioned” people have thrown their support behind something that has been presented as fight for the “equality” and “dignity” of all people.
Marriage, Uebbing explains, is not a way to “publically celebrate your commitment” or a way to achieve “lifelong happiness.”
“While marriage is filled with tremendous opportunities for happiness, it does not exist specifically to deliver mutual feelings of goodwill to the spouses,” she says.
Instead, the point of marriage is the “profoundly counter-cultural view” of seeking the good of “the other” in the form of the spouse and any children who may come from the union, whether they are biological, adopted or “spiritual.”
Therefore, a redefinition of marriage is impossible, she explains, because “unlike a cultural trend or technological advance, (it) isn’t subject to innovation or alteration as the tides of change sweep through a culture.”
“Marriage is, at its core, a vocation, a call to unite one man and one woman in the untiring pursuit of the good of the other, for the love and service of the children it produces.”
Laws, therefore, cannot define marriage because “they did not create it” in the first place.
“Marriage is not a human invention or a cultural construct, but rather, the revealed truth of something written into our very beings,” Uebbing clarifies.
As men and women, marriage exists as a “reveled truth of something written into our very beings” – that is, it is a reflection of the physical, biological, psychological and spiritual complementarity of the two sexes.
Therefore, she stresses, although two individuals of the same sex can enter into a relationship – even a legally binding one – that relationship is not a marriage because it goes against the very nature of the institution. No matter how great the “force of will” or “manipulation of law,” a union between two members of the same sex is not marriage.
To read Uebbing’s full column, visit Catholic Womanhood.