Last month Cardinal Carlo Caffarra of Bologna issued a bold doctrinal note about Catholic faith and same-sex unions. "This note," he opened, "is addressed primarily to the faithful so that they will not be troubled by media-generated confusion. But I dare to hope that it will also be taken into account by non-believers who intend without any prejudice to make use of their own reason."

 

That's just what Caffara proceeded to do - make use of reason (rather than an appeal to Christian faith) to demonstrate the deeply problematic nature of the State equating same-sex unions with marriage. "Equating the two," Caffara convincingly argues, "would have consequences I'm not afraid to call devastating, at first in the legal system and then in the ethos of the people."

 

For the State to equate homosexual unions and marriage "would objectively mean that the connection of sexuality to procreation and the raising of children is a fact of no interest to the state since it has no relevance to the common good." But what is more relevant to the common good than the very survival of civilization? Caffara is only stating what should be obvious when he observes: "Society owes its survival not to homosexual unions, but to the family based on marriage." This is why "the state must not be neutral regarding marriage and homosexual unions, since it cannot be neutral regarding the common good."

 

"While the legitimate union between a man and a woman ensures the benefit - not just the biological benefit!" the Cardinal exclaims, "of procreation and the survival of the human species, homosexual unions have no intrinsic capacity to generate new lives. The possibilities offered today by artificial procreation, besides not being exempt from serious violations of human dignity, do not substantially alter the inadequacy of homosexual couples in bringing about life.

 

"Furthermore, it has been shown that the absence of exposure to both sexes can create serious obstacles to the development of a child who could be adopted by homosexual couples. This would fit the profile of violence committed against the smallest and the weakest, forced to grow up in an environment not suitable for harmonious development."

 

These are "difficult truths" for the world to hear, at least in the current climate. Still, these truths must be spoken - in love, with tenderness and compassion, of course, for all involved. For much more is at stake in the debates about same-sex "marriage" than is usually thought. Indeed, what is at stake is not only the foundation of civil order - this is certainly reason enough for all to be concerned - but the foundation of the sacramental order is also threatened.

 

The following dense statement from John Paul II's Theology of the Body takes us to the heart of the matter: "One can say that the visible sign of marriage ‘in the beginning,' inasmuch as it is linked to the visible sign of Christ and the Church on the summit of God's saving economy, transposes the eternal plan of love into the ‘historical' dimension and makes it the foundation of the whole sacramental order" (TOB 95b:7).

 

It's no exaggeration to say that theologians will be unpacking this incredibly dense statement for centuries. Here are some initial thoughts. John Paul II is saying that the original union of man and woman in marriage - inasmuch as it points us to Christ's love for the Church - is the foundational way in which God reveals his plan of love to the world. If Christ's love for the Church is the summit of the mountain, we could say that God's original plan for marriage is the trail-head.

 

Spousal union is a "great mystery" that points to the spousal relationship of Christ and the Church (see Eph 5:31-32). So profoundly related is the one-flesh mystery of marriage with the Mystery of Christ and the Church that to confuse one is to confuse the other. In other words, when our understanding of marriage is off, so too is our understanding of Christ and the Church. "The entire Christian life bears the mark of the spousal love of Christ and the Church," says the Catechism (1617). And this is what's at stake when we confuse marriage - the entire Christian life.

 

It's in this context that Caffara concludes: "It is impossible for anyone to consider themselves Catholic if . . . they recognize the right to marriage between persons of the same sex." To do so is to miss in a very serious way the very meaning of marriage, which - tragically! - is to miss the very meaning of Christ's love for the Church.