Pope Leo XIII wrote the following back in 1880:
Now, since the family and human society at large spring from marriage, these men will on no account allow matrimony to be the subject of the jurisdiction of the Church. Nay, they endeavor to deprive it of all holiness, and so bring it within the contracted sphere of those rights which, having been instituted by man, are ruled and administered by the civil jurisprudence of the community. Wherefore it necessarily follows that they attribute all power over marriage to civil rulers, and allow none whatever to the Church; and, when the Church exercises any such power, they think that she acts either by favor of the civil authority or to its injury. Now is the time, they say, for the heads of the State to vindicate their rights unflinchingly, and to do their best to settle all that relates to marriage according as to them seems good.
18. Hence are owing civil marriages, commonly so called; hence laws are framed which impose impediments to marriage; hence arise judicial sentences affecting the marriage contract, as to whether or not it have been rightly made. Lastly, all power of prescribing and passing judgment in this class of cases is, as we see, of set purpose denied to the Catholic Church, so that no regard is paid either to her divine power or to her prudent laws. Yet, under these, for so many centuries, have the nations lived on whom the light of civilization shone bright with the wisdom of Christ Jesus.
19. Nevertheless, the naturalists,[32] as well as all who profess that they worship above all things the divinity of the State, and strive to disturb whole communities with such wicked doctrines, cannot escape the charge of delusion. Marriage has God for its Author, and was from the very beginning a kind of foreshadowing of the Incarnation of His Son; and therefore there abides in it a something holy and religious; not extraneous, but innate; not derived from men, but implanted by nature.
Is It Time to Legalize Heterosexual Marriage? NEVER
Where did the writer come up with this? Divorce is unilateral. If one party wants it, the wishes of the other party are not considered.
The lib judges can legalize it all they want. I sure as sh*t ain’t recognizing it.
As there are no longer any laws against having sex outside of marriage, it is pointless for the state to recognize marriage. Why should I purchase a state licencse to conduct an activity that is not illegal without the license? It defies logic.
People can say they are married to their dog for all I care, as long as I don’t have to be forced to agree with them, or pay for their dog’s benefits.
The religious will continue to marry as a sacrement, and the irreligious can pretend whatever they want.
I don’t think this country can ever be ready to end no-fault divorce, even if it kills the country - which it’s doing now.
take away the freebies and start peeling back the state. Then you will see traditional morality make a comeback. All of this idiocy runs rampant because it’s on somebody else’s dime. If you want to live like a heathen, live with the consequences.
Yup, Leo XIII saw the danger 130 years ago, in the context of civil divorce, and the conditioning of folks to think that marriage comes from and is defined by the state. It’s just a contract between any parties the state recognizes, and can be broken and resumed with the state’s leave.
If someone would have told him about state recognized ‘gay marriage’ his mitre would have shot off his head like a rocket. In another 130 years? It’s only limited by what judges, pols, or a majority think marriage can be at any one time.
Freegards
Some say homosexuals are making a mockery of marriage, but heterosexuals started it.
“Till death do us part” has become “Till I feel like doing something else.”