Croatian Catholics Defeat the Enemies of Natural Marriage

Vice Vincent Batarelo of Croatia

Not yet published on their website, but Steven Mosher of Population Research Institute relates a very powerful account of how Catholic activists in Crotia successfully led a national campaign to defend natural marriage. I'm not so sure that such an approach would work here in Canada but the strategy used should be studied well and any appropriate techniques employed. We need every advantage possible in fighting the culture of death. I hope something in this account will inspire others to successful action.

UPDATE: link now available on PRI's website.
___________________________________

One of the best talks at our Australia conference was given by Vice Vincent Batarelo (pronounced Vee-che), who led the fight in Croatia to defend natural marriage.

Dr. Batarelo was also a natural to invite to our conference, since he was born in Sydney to Croatian immigrants and grew up Down Under. After he completed a BA and MA at Macquarie University, however, he decided to return to the country of his ancestors, which had just won its freedom from Serbian domination in communist Yugoslavia. He earned a Ph.D. there and went to work as the director of the Family and Life Office of the Archdiocese of Zagreb.

The sexual libertines were on the march, having convinced a sympathetic left-wing government to start moving towards the legalization of homosexual unions. They had the support of the major media, and even many of the larger Croatian businesses.

But Dr. Batarelo decided they would not win. He said, “This is not going to happen in my country, which has a Catholic culture and which throughout history has been the eastern frontier of Christianity.” He could draw upon the fact that 90 percent of Croatia’s population of 4.2 million is Catholic, of whom some 30 percent attend Mass weekly. Indeed, more than half are in Mass at least once a month, one of the highest percentages in any European country.

He knew it would be a David vs. Goliath struggle. After consulting with other pro-life, pro-family leaders in Croatia, such as Marijo Zivkovic, he decided that it would be better to take the fight to the liberal-left opposition in a popular referendum. This had a greater likelihood of succeeding than trying to defeat the homosexual juggernaut in the legislature, where gay activists, supported by the government and the media, could threaten and suborn elected representatives.

When they first announced that they were gathering signatures for a referendum, the reaction of the Left was simply to dismiss the effort to preserve traditional marriage. “You are from the Middle Ages,” they said. “You’re so backward. You will never succeed.”

The law required that the supporters of the marriage referendum gather 145,000 signatures in a mere 15 days. The media kept reporting, falsely, that they were far from their goal. In fact, with the support of 6,000 volunteers they gathered more signatures than were required. A referendum was automatically triggered.

“We knew that, in order to win the referendum, we needed to think strategically and act boldly,” remarked Dr. Batarelo. “We were in a chess match and we needed to think many moves ahead.”
The first thing that Dr. Batarelo and the other organizers did was to meet with the Catholic bishops. They wanted to asked for their support—they did, and they got it—but they also wanted the bishops to stay in the background. They didn’t want to give the opposition the advantage of dismissing their concerns as religious. In religious settings they used arguments based on Catholic doctrine as well as natural law arguments, but in public they relied solely on the latter.

“In the public setting we used only natural law arguments,” Dr. Batarelo recalled. “We reminded people that marriage has been around for 5,000 years, and that it is found in every culture, in every place and in every time.”

They said that the battle over the definition of marriage had nothing to do with homosexuals per se, but had to do with defeating radical leftist ideology. This approach worked very well in Croatia, where people remember the bad old days of Communism. It also reminded people that the liberal-Left government was supporting a redefinition of marriage.

They also were very careful to adopt a positive tone in their public pronouncements, as well as in private conversations with friends and neighbors. “We didn’t want to portray homosexuals as the enemy,” said the good doctor. “We called them our friends on the Left. But we did want to make clear the advantages to society and children of protecting natural marriage.”

They were relentlessly positive, crafting their arguments for natural marriage based on the natural law, arguing the positive benefits of marriage between a man and a woman. They actively avoided talking about the negative consequences for society and children of legally recognizing homosexual liaisons. Natural Marriage = a Woman and a Man, their flyers read. Everything else is something else.

They also were able to reduce the media bias in favor of homosexual unions by carrying out a study of the media broadcasts, which showed that there was a bias against natural marriage. After the study came out, the major media were somewhat fairer in their reporting.

Finally, they were able to neutralize the media bias in another way as well, by turning to the social media. “If you don’t have the mass media on your side,” says Dr. Batarelo, “then use the social media.” By Twittering, Tweeting, Facbooking, and YouTubeing, they were able to create a media presence in the social media that won over large numbers of people to their cause.

At the end of the day, the referendum succeeded. A majority of those who voted—voting is not compulsory in Croatia—voted in favor of natural marriage.

The next big challenge, according to Dr. Batarelo, will come over the Life issue. Abortion is still legal in Croatia, having been introduced in the Communist era. But with the organization they have built in defending natural marriage, says the good doctor, “We will succeed in protecting Life from conception.”

The marriage victory in Croatia is a model for such grassroots movements in other countries. It proves that the homosexual lobby can be defeated by a well-planned, well-organized campaign.

Divorce Is The Suicide Of A Family

Published today to SignOfContradiction.Blogspot.ca

Read an outstanding piece by Phil Lawlor on divorce, the breakdown of marriage and the breakdown in a Church that permits it. It’s really not rocket science. One wonders when Priests and Bishops will take the teaching of Christ seriously.

------------------------------------------------

Needed: Speed-Bumps On The Road To Divorce

By Phil Lawler

The “empty-nest divorce” threatens to become a familiar rite of passage in American life. During the first few years after graduation from college we are regularly invited to the weddings of our classmates and friends. A few more years pass, and we hear about the birth of their children. Another decade or two, and we may receive invitations to those children’s weddings. Then, sadly, we hear that the couples, our old friends, are breaking up.

Every divorce is a tragedy. Lawyers and legislators may speak glibly of “no-fault” divorce, but in practice there is plenty of fault on both sides. Except in the most unusual circumstances—those rare cases when a civil divorce is the proper response to legal problems—a divorce is a public proclamation that two people have failed at the most important business in their lives. Divorce, as Peter Kreeft has observed, is the suicide of a family. But in this case the suicide may claim innocent victims: the children, if there are any; the unwilling partner, if only one spouse wants to end the life of the marriage.

Yet as sad as divorce always is, it is even more heartbreaking to watch the disintegration of a marriage that has endured for 20 or 30 years, and produced a handful of children. How is it possible that a couple could live together for decades, appearing to all the world like the happy heads of a healthy family, and then suddenly abandon the project they had been working on together?

It happens even among Catholic couples, even among active church-goers and model parishioners. Something goes terribly wrong, the couple cannot fix the problem, and a family is destroyed. Ordinarily, I fear, the pastor does not know about the problem until the lawyers have already drawn up the divorce documents.

As the world’s Catholic bishops gather for their Synod meeting in October on the family, the hottest topic in public discussions has been pastoral care for Catholics who are divorced and remarried. No doubt that is a valid concern, but another question should take precedence: What can the Church do to prevent the tragedy of divorce?

Yes, yes, I know that there are times when a civil divorce is the best solution to an intractable problem. I know that divorce, taken by itself, is not necessarily sinful. But surely we should not presume, in each case, that divorce is a wise choice, that the parties are blameless. Catholics, who see the marital bond as a reflection of Christ’s love for his Church, should do everything possible to preserve that bond.

When a marriage breaks down, someone (in all likelihood both spouses) has done something (probably some things, plural) seriously wrong. Pastors should remind married couples frequently that they have a solemn obligation, incurred by their vows, to preserve and strengthen their relationship. The failure to work on a marriage, to act with love toward one’s spouse, may be a gravely sinful matter. Regular homilies about marriage, including some practical advice, might help keep couples together.

Of course the best opportunity for dispensing advice comes before the wedding, and the Church can certainly show greater diligence in preparing couples for Christian marriage. Church tribunals now routinely find that young people married in the Catholic Church did not adequately understand the commitment they were undertaking. Those findings should be understood as a scathing indictment of our marriage-prep courses.

Or else, perhaps, those findings are an indictment of the tribunals themselves. Is it really likely that more than 90% of the American Catholics who apply for annulments were never validly married? Have diocesan officials become infected with the thoroughly un-Christian belief that ordinary people are not capable of lifelong commitments? Still more puzzling, to me, is the willingness of tribunals to annul marriages that have lasted for years and produced multiple children. If someone was too immature to form a lasting bond in his 20s, and never acquired the necessary maturity through his 30s and 40s, he should not need an annulment in his 50s, since he is unlikely ever to be mature enough for marriage!

Should the Church be demanding, in questioning couples who want a Catholic wedding? If they show no sign of understanding what Christian marriage entails, no interest in doing more than going through the motions, should they be advised against marriage? That sort of rigorous approach would be effective only if all pastors adopted it. Too often, when a couple is discouraged by one conscientious pastor, they find another priest, in another parish, who will officiate as long as all the forms are properly filled out.

And before we leave the subject of preparation for marriage, it is vitally important to stress that young couples should be presented with the full, uncensored teaching of the Church regarding the integrity of marital love. A love that is open to life is the best insurance against marital breakdown; among married couples who do not use artificial contraceptives, the rate of divorce is statistically insignificant. The Catholic Church has the antidote to a disease that is plaguing our society; it is not charitable—it is certainly not pastoral-- to keep that remedy secret.

Priests might be better equipped to help save marriages—to intervene before problems became irreversible—if they heard more about marital difficulties in the confessional. Regrettably, many Catholics rarely or never approach the sacrament of reconciliation. By encouraging more frequent confession, and probing carefully for signs of domestic friction, priests might find new ways to encourage couples to help each other.

The willingness to ask forgiveness and the readiness to start anew are keys to overcoming marital difficulties. They are also, not coincidentally, virtues that are nourished by sacramental confession. Moreover, someone who has recently been absolved of his own sins should be more disposed to forgive his spouse’s offenses.

”The family that prays together stays together,” runs the old adage. A household founded on faith has a better chance of absorbing shocks, an insurance policy that protects against the inevitable setbacks that mark family life. Pastors should encourage families to pray together in their homes: to pray for each other’s needs, to pray as a family, for the family.

In a society in which half of all marriages end in divorce, the enduring love of a married couple is a powerful form of evangelization. The Church should do everything possible to highlight the witness of faithful married couples—and to ensure that there are more of them.

IMFC Studies The Cost Of 'Choice'

Published today to SignOfContradiction.Blogspot.ca

A new report by the Institute of Marriage and Family Canada examines the impact of abortions on women and their families. Andrea Mrozek is interviewed by Brian Lilley on Sun News.

The Economics Of Sex And How Sex Functions In Our Society

After all, it's Valentine's Day.

Aleteia featured the video below.

This challenging video from the Austin Institute for the Study of Family and Culture is deeply flawed in its understanding of human sexuality, reducing the nature of sex to a mechanical relationship of supply and demand. Still, it uncovers a lot of important truths about how sex functions in our society--in particular what the Pill has done to destroy the institution of marriage.

And still the connections between contraception and the institution of marriage are practically ignored by all of society, including Catholic Bishops, who have the teaching of natural law and the Magisterium at their fingertips.

Which Came First: Cohabitation Or Contraception?

As you probably know, a debate in the Catholic Church over divorce and remarriage is heating up.

The recent Vatican questionnaire really brought the full extent of the rebellion in focus. All according to plan, I feel sure.

What sparked the title of this blog posting was this quote:  

The responses to the questions showed that cohabitation before marriage and contraception are almost universally accepted. As they are not considered “sinful”, they are therefore not usually considered something to be confessed.

It came from a story in last week’s The Tablet about the results of the Vatican questionnaire from England and Wales.

I have recently noticed that Catholic Priests and Bishops seem to be placing more and more focus on the phenomenon of cohabitation than ever before. Have you noticed too? I think it’s a convenient cover for them since they can now point to cohabitation as one of our greatest challenges rather than ever have to bring up contraception. Of course, nobody ever cohabitates without fornication (or adultery). And nobody fornicates without some kind of contraception.

The Bishops have doomed the West to a moral and demographic collapse due to their failure to uphold Catholic teaching on artificial contraception. They avoid the subject like a plague. Their chickens are coming home to roost in a big way in the USA with the HSS mandate and same sex “marriage” tsunami.

But let’s not be confused about the real culprit here and which came first.

UPDATED: Perhaps Henry VIII Was Right After All!

There's a battle brewing in the Catholic hierarchy over marriage, divorce, remarriage and Holy Communion. This video provides some context.



There's more context here.

UPDATE: Some Canadian perspective from National Post.

Your Life Is Over When You Have Kids: Now I Believe It

Interesting blogger. Interesting post.

No matter what anyone else says, THIS is why we’re experiencing historically low birth rates. It’s got nothing to do with an economic crisis, and everything to do with a selfishness crisis. This is why we dehumanize children, kill them, exterminate them. This is why we have less of them, and why we call birth control a “preventative medication.” It’s why couples who choose (note: I said CHOOSE) not to have kids will often refer to themselves as “child-free” — much like a recovering patient might call himself cancer-free.

I found this blog site via DUMB OLD HOUSEWIVES

Catholic Church Teaching on Contraception and Sexuality

Dr. Pia de Solenni (STD), Catholic theologian and ethicist, makes her presentation at the American Life League “The Pill Kills” conference.

The Tragic Cover-Up of Catholic Moral Teaching Continues UPDATED

UPDATED: See my update at end of posting.

Most assuredly, souls are being lost to Hell because the truth of Holy Mother Church on sexuality continues to be denied by those very persons who have been ordained for the task of protecting and passing on the Faith. Their judgment will be greater.

The video above appeared on a recent posting by Msgr. Pope of the Archdiocese of Washington entitled Four Factors That Fuel the Crisis in Marriage and Family. The video itself is quite excellent. I usually think well of his posts too but this one was plain awful. In light of my own latest posting What I Would Say To Those Reviving Marriages In A Catholic Diocese, and taking into account Msgr. Pope’s carefully crafted article, I understand a little better the subterfuge that has taken place on every level in Catholic teaching touching on sexuality and the Moral Law.

I had to immediately submit a quickly constructed comment to Msgr. Pope’s posting because I was so troubled by his omissions. As a Catholic I understand why the Church teaches that one may lose their soul through sins of omission as well as commission. I truly hope that Msgr. Pope publishes my comment along with the hundred or so other ones. My comment to Msgr. Pope was as follows:

Monsignor Pope, I really appreciate your postings but I am very disappointed that you could manage to write a piece like this on marriage without once mentioning contraception. It’s the elephant in the room and it forces every other factor into its own small corner. Are you following the lead of Bishops in avoiding the use of the word? Is it because Cardinal O’Malley failed altogether in his duty as Bishop to include it in his remarks? Truly, this is a disgraceful treatment of the subject at hand and serves only to further denigrate and marginalize Church teaching on fertility in marriage, the evil of contraception and the mortal danger to souls who practice sterile sex. Contraception itself altogether re-defines and perverts the marriage act and sows the seeds for such perversions as same-sex “marriage” yet the silence on this is deafening in your article.

The open sexual sin which you noted and the accompanying unchastity which you noted could not exist in present form without the practice of contraception. Divorce was simply a symptom and natural outcome of the widespread use of contraception, and very little, if any, of these factors would have touched Catholic marriages if the Bishops had firmly promoted the traditional teaching of the Church, as reiterated in Humanae Vitae, and provided the discipline to their flocks that protection from this evil deserved. But here we are now, in the devastated vineyard, afraid to face the horror—yes, I said horror—of our rejection of God’s truth on human sexuality.

Out of wedlock children are hardly possible on any noteworthy scale without contraception; epidemics of cohabitation, pre-marital sex, promiscuity likewise. 

It’s wonderful to talk of chastity and extol the beauties and precious fruits of that virtue but it’s absolutely disingenuous to altogether avoid the topic of contraception! God help us! The spiritual blindness is breathtaking!

And again, God help us, but of all the bafflegab about factors fuelling the marriage and family crisis, finances should be the very last item to make such a list. Again, it must be difficult only for the blind to not see that the subject of finances only begs the question of a choice to use contraception. Which came first, the chicken or the egg? How then can finances make it to no. 3 spot?

The Cardinal has no problem talking about the “cohabitation mentality” and I suppose that’s because we didn’t have a Humanae Vitae on the subject of cohabitation. We did, however, have one about contraception. You noted, “Cardinal O’Malley says, The whole notion of family is so undercut by the cohabitation mentality.” How is it possible that the Cardinal could not bring himself to mention the contraceptive mentality? God have mercy!

It is no wonder the Church is practically irrelevant to our society at large. We refuse to share with the world one of God’s most precious truths about sexuality, the very truth that could help them grasp one of the major evils of our time and repair a gaping wound in society. We keep it a secret so the world will not condemn us for our own unbelief!

 And then how is it possible to bring up the subject of catechesis and not mention the reformation we truly need in our thinking regarding the role that Church teaching on contraception should take? Yes indeed, “People struggle to figure all this out” but I’m afraid most of the struggles are of our making because we refuse to address the elephant sitting next to us. How shameful and pathetic.

Monsignor you are a priest of some influence in America and your posting has done a shocking disservice to Catholics and to the truth. In my opinion the proper penance would be at least one posting, if not a full series, correcting and amending this posting. Your posting only gives cover to 40 or more years of rebellion by church leaders—and the sheep that follow them—to  the truth of Church teaching.

If you would care to take the time to see what an honest discussion on this subject is like, why not read this article?

http://signofcontradiction.blogspot.ca/2013/12/what-i-would-say-to-those-reviving.html

UPDATE: Msgr. Pope did publish my comment, along with his own reaction. He thought my remarks were "nasty" and accused me of Bishop-bashing as well as fellow Christian-bashing. He suggested I take my note to my confessor, see what he thinks and do the required penance. I replied in brief but he did not publish what I sent along. I told him that I stand by my remarks and that Bishops and Priests were not above criticism if they denied or perverted the Faith since their actions in such cases sent people to Hell and corrupted society. I also asked him if he would be so kind as to respond to my charges in a thorough rational manner rather than a simple outright dismissal of my entire remarks. Finally, I advised him that my confessor is well aware of all my positions as outlined in my comments to his posting and I undertake all penances prescribed (joyfully!).

What I Would Say To Those Reviving Marriages In A Catholic Diocese

I was pleased to see a recent notice on the Archdiocesan website indicating that a local couple was advancing an apostolate on the Sacrament of Marriage, named “Marriages For Mary”, imploring the intercession of the Blessed Virgin Mary and endeavouring “to lead couples to live out fully and joyfully the vocation of marriage.”

Immediately I was curious as to whether these retreats, talks and teaching specifically and deliberately promote official Church teaching, as found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 2366-2372, on the matter of contraception. I wondered whether, in their efforts to restore and strengthen marriages and help spouses onwards in holiness, did they emphasize the importance—and obligation—of  each and every conjugal act being open to the gift of life, as outlined and set forth in the papal encyclical Humanae Vitae? Did they point couples to Natural Family Planning whenever serious reasons existed to limit family size at a particular moment in time?

Reading through some of the apostolate’s material, I noticed that sessions were offered on Pope John Paul II’s Theology of the Body, which would seem to indicate recognition of the urgency and truth of Church teaching in this matter. Far too many Church leaders today either ignore or outrightly deny the teaching of Christ and His Church on this subject, or carefully avoid the subject and follow the “safe” route of silence.

I recently blogged on this very alarming reality after a recent conversation with a priest:

A Canadian Priest Questions The Sinfulness of Contraception And Its Linkage To Abortion

Naturally, given this local response and the history of Humanae Vitae in Canada, I would be hesitant to assume official Church teaching was being promoted in our Archdiocese in connection with this apostolate. Unfortunately, and this is one very sad aspect of the reality of our present day Catholic Church crisis, I cannot help but wonder (doubt) whether Catholics attending such marriage seminars are hearing the fullness of truth possessed by Holy Mother Church, more especially since dissent and denial in this area of theology is rampant today in the Canadian Church.

I wondered also about the full import of claiming the motto "Do whatever He tells you" if leaders were not at the same time boldly proclaiming the fullness of Catholic doctrine which Christ committed to His Church. If they were equivocating—as a great many are doing today—on this most crucial aspect of the truth of God's plan for marriage, they were risking a great deal, not only in their own relationship with Christ and Mary, but also in the very marriages they sought to strengthen, and which might be hinging on that exact truth.

I am happy to report that after contacting the leaders, Gerard and Rita McCarthy, of this bold initiative, I have been assured that all that they do is “in line with the truth of Church teaching”. They indicate they are supported and guided by several Holy Priests and the Archbishop. Daily Mass, Adoration, Sacrament of Reconciliation and the Rosary are included at all retreats. I have committed to keep these folks and their apostolate in my prayers.

I was very happy to hear these affirmations. Archbishop Currie has indicated his support for the work of this Apostolate by way of notice on the Archdiocesan website.

Unfortunately, there is much confusion in my mind where Archbishop Currie stands in regard to the Church’s teaching on contraception. The majority of Bishops in Canada since Humanae Vitae have hardly taken that encyclical seriously, many of them dismissing its truths as too radical and difficult for the average Catholic. In fact the Bishops Conference in 1968 wrote a dissenting response to the papal encyclical and it has never been withdrawn.

For the record, I have NEVER EVER heard a homily or any other preaching-teaching reference to contraception or to Humanae Vitae since I became a Catholic in 2003 and returned to Newfoundland. References even to abortion have been very rare indeed, especially from priests; not surprising, given the connection between the "two fruits of the same tree" (according to Pope John Paul II). Even prayers for an end to abortion seem to be relegated to the backrooms and private prayer. Taking the matter one step further, even references to other aspects of the Moral Law, such as non-marital sex, masturbation, adultery, homosexuality are also extremely rare, if not non-existent, depending on the parish.

My recent blog article, noted above, illustrates the shocking truth of what one local priest said to me in regard to church teaching on contraception, and, incidentally, I have a great deal of respect for this otherwise outstanding priest. However, he denied altogether that it was a grave sin, let alone intrinsically evil and contrary to married love. As far as he knew other priests of the diocese and in Canada believe likewise and see absolutely no connection whatever between contraception and abortion. To him, there really wasn’t such a phenomenon as the “contraceptive mentality.” In the confessional he did not treat contraception as a sin.

It’s difficult to imagine then that Archbishop Currie adheres in heart and mind to Church teaching on contraception. It appears that he would rather allow Catholics to persist in routine, copious actions which are objectively evil than make any public statements or inform his priests how they should handle the truth of Church teaching regarding the moral law. A search on the archdiocesan website for the term “contraception” yields no results. A search for “Humanae Vitae” finds no results, even though other encyclicals can be found. The page on marriage reads like a how-to manual on the sure steps to take to end a marriage and secure an annulment. The majority of the information is NOT about marriage but about getting out of a marriage with the blessing of the Church. Not a word is mentioned about what is perhaps the greatest evil that destroys marriages today, i.e. contraception, or not a word about how adherence to Church teaching on marriage as outlined by Humanae Vitae ought to be the Catholic norm. I am not aware of any related statement on the subject by Archbishop Currie which might warn the faithful or set them on the straight and narrow road.

To my knowledge, Catholics in our diocese are quite typical of Catholics elsewhere, in that the rates of contraception, divorce, homosexuality, pre-marital sex, and yes, even abortion, are approximately equal to that of the general population. Isn’t this a crisis of epidemic proportions that needs urgent addressing? Yet no record of one letter, such as this one, from the shepherd of the diocese to guide the sheep. Perhaps he is too timid and greatly fears controversy but if that is the case, then our Lord cannot be pleased, but rather provoked, given the grave and destructive consequences of remaining silent, some of which are linked to the terrible holocaust in Canada of unborn children. Evil actions must be exposed and condemned for what they are.

Needless to say, I was very encouraged to hear the leaders of “Marriages For Mary” maintain that they were permitted to teach the fullness of Catholic truth on marriage. However, the blatant dichotomy presented I find quite astounding.

And so what remains to be said at this point? What would I say to any leader who hopes to help couples repair and strengthen their vocation of marriage and live out a fulfilling and God-glorifying marriage? I am no expert myself in this area although after 40+ years of married life I have learned a little. But personal experience aside, as a serious-minded, faithful Catholic, I must affirm that no marriage can be truly successful without coming into conformity to the standards of God as revealed in the teachings of Christ entrusted to Holy Mother Church. Granted, everyone fails at some point to live up to these objective standards in one way or another but the grace of God is given to assist us in our efforts to make our marriages reflect the love that Christ has for His Church, making them “an efficacious sign or sacrament of Jesus’ presence.”

Clearly then, it is not sufficient to emphasize only the easier aspects of our duties to God and to our spouse in the Sacrament of Matrimony. We must move on to the weightier—sometimes more basic—aspects as well if we expect, and rightly so, that marriage will help conform us to the image of Christ, again, only by the grace of God. Even more important is it to move on to the hard—but soul-satisfying—teachings of the Church on marriage if we hope to lift couples out of the quagmire of self-indulgence and relativism that is about to, or will ultimately, destroy their marriage.

What are these hard but indispensable teachings that are essential to bring renewal and new life to all married couples seeking help?

1.  Every marriage must possess openness to fertility.

CCC1652 By its very nature the institution of marriage and married love is ordered to the procreation and education of the offspring and it is in them that it finds its crowning glory.

CCC2366 Fecundity is a gift, an end of marriage, for conjugal love naturally tends to be fruitful. A child does not come from outside as something added on to the mutual love of the spouses, but springs from the very heart of that mutual giving, as its fruit and fulfillment. So the Church, which is "on the side of life," teaches that "it is necessary that each and every marriage act remain ordered per se to the procreation of human life." "This particular doctrine, expounded on numerous occasions by the Magisterium, is based on the inseparable connection, established by God, which man on his own initiative may not break, between the unitive significance and the procreative significance which are both inherent to the marriage act."

2. Contraception is forbidden by the Church.

CCC2370 Periodic continence, that is, the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality. These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom. In contrast, “every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible” is intrinsically evil:

Thus the innate language that expresses the total reciprocal self-giving of husband and wife is overlaid, through contraception, by an objectively contradictory language, namely, that of not giving oneself totally to the other. This leads not only to a positive refusal to be open to life but also to a falsification of the inner truth of conjugal love, which is called upon to give itself in personal totality. . . . The difference, both anthropological and moral, between contraception and recourse to the rhythm of the cycle . . . involves in the final analysis two irreconcilable concepts of the human person and of human sexuality.

[NOTE: Hard truths numbers 3 and 4, which follow, are not exclusive to marriage but are rather the standard battle gear of the Catholic for dealing with sin and forgiveness. Given the current crisis in catechesis in Canadian parishes due to the failure of priests and Bishops to teach the Moral Law, a great number of Catholics are either ignorant of these teachings or have been subtly programmed to avoid taking them seriously. A strong argument can be made, I believe, for attributing the pervasive breakdown in marriage to failures by ordinary Catholics to recognize and deal with the everyday dynamics of sin in their lives through traditional (Magisterial) directives. Marriage seminar leaders are first of all Catholics and have a duty to watch out for the souls of fellow Catholics, which makes it imperative that they be discerning with their audience and deal thoroughly with fundamentals, wherever warranted, before moving on to enrichment topics. The most potent resolution to moral failures by a Catholic is a new found respect for the Church’s wisdom in helping sinners save their souls. However much might be the temptation or pressure to avoid any of the hard truths, the truth cries out to be heard, to the salvation of souls.]

3. Intrinsically evil actions, such as contraception, constitute objectively grave, or mortal, sin. All Catholics need to be educated, if they have not been already, on the nature and conditions of mortal sin. Any understanding which is less than Catholic and less than complete on this subject places the soul of the Catholic in an extremely precarious position. Discussing and educating on the keys to a successful marriage while avoiding a full treatment of the possibility of grave sin is utter folly, similar in recklessness to teaching a driver to keep within the speed limit, all the while driving on the wrong side of the road!

CCC1861 Mortal sin is a radical possibility of human freedom, as is love itself. It results in the loss of charity and the privation of sanctifying grace, that is, of the state of grace. If it is not redeemed by repentance and God's forgiveness, it causes exclusion from Christ's kingdom and the eternal death of hell, for our freedom has the power to make choices for ever, with no turning back. However, although we can judge that an act is in itself a grave offense, we must entrust judgment of persons to the justice and mercy of God.

4. All mortal sins must be confessed to a priest in the Sacrament of Reconciliation, outside of which there can be no absolution of sin. Mortal sin is a state of definitive self-exclusion from God, which is a sure pathway to Hell if not dealt with properly.

CCC1456 Confession to a priest is an essential part of the sacrament of Penance: "All mortal sins of which penitents after a diligent self-examination are conscious must be recounted by them in confession, even if they are most secret and have been committed against the last two precepts of the Decalogue; for these sins sometimes wound the soul more grievously and are more dangerous than those which are committed openly."

    When Christ's faithful strive to confess all the sins that they can remember, they undoubtedly place all of them before the divine mercy for pardon. But those who fail to do so and knowingly withhold some, place nothing before the divine goodness for remission through the mediation of the priest, "for if the sick person is too ashamed to show his wound to the doctor, the medicine cannot heal what it does not know."

CCC1033 We cannot be united with God unless we freely choose to love him. But we cannot love God if we sin gravely against him, against our neighbor or against ourselves: "He who does not love remains in death. Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him." Our Lord warns us that we shall be separated from him if we fail to meet the serious needs of the poor and the little ones who are his brethren. To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God's merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. This state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God and the blessed is called "hell."

These teachings are in no way debatable or subject to an argument of “conscience.” Any attempt to avoid or minimize the seriousness of the sin of contraception in marriage is fatal to both marriage and to the faith. In rare teaching situations today where the Church teaching, as outlined above, is presented, there is immense pressure to cite these statements as ideal, controversial, perhaps unrealistic, goals which everyone may not agree with. Furthermore, the listener may be left with the impression that marriage partners must work this teaching out between themselves over time, coming to a suitable agreement. Is the underlying message heard too often that you needn’t worry about contraception right now; you’ve got bigger things on your plate? Dangerous subtleties such as these negate the urgency and non-negotiable nature of this vital truth of the marriage covenant and place souls, as well as marriages, at risk.

As Bishop Galeone cautioned in his pastoral letter to the faithful “Marriage: A Communion of Life and Love”:

Many Catholics who make use of contraceptives claim that they are doing nothing wrong since they are merely obeying the dictates of their conscience. After all, doesn’t the Church teach that we must follow our conscience to decide if a behavior is right or wrong? Yes, that’s true provided that it’s a properly formed conscience. Specifically, we must all conform our individual consciences to the natural law and the Ten Commandments, just as we have to adjust our clocks to sun time…

Not until married couples understand the basic demands of marriage, as a whole entity, along with the Catholic dynamics of sin and forgiveness, will they be able to respond in complete obedience to the Lord’s command regarding this mysterious Sacrament. Only after such obedience will they discover the truly heavenly dimension of marriage, that is, its “sacramental character as a fountain of grace.”

To sell marriage short of the “hard” truths is to deny the grace of God to those souls whose very joy in marriage depends upon it. More basic and thus more important than praying together, conflict resolutions, renewal of marriage vows, talking together, intercessions, practicing love languages, eating together, playing together, etc. is individual adherence to essential Catholic teaching which instructs us in our “Life In Christ” and the maintenance of a healthy relationship with God, free from sin and other earthly encumbrances.