Anyway, my point here this evening is to make a short-and-to-the-point statement on how the many crises facing marriage today can be traced back to the tragedy of history commonly known as the Protestant Reformation, though I’m one of those who believes “revolt” and “rebellion” to be more accurate terms. After reading this, I suspect readers will be able to understand why I hold the position that a return to a universal recognition of marriage as a Sacrament is the only way it will survive the current socio-political climate, not just here in the United States, but everywhere.

Prior to the Reformation, all Christians shared the proper understanding of marriage as one of the seven Sacraments established by Christ Himself. (That starts one issue I take with the, “We all worship the same Jesus!” approach to ecumenism: the Jesus that Catholics and Orthodox Christians believe in, the real Jesus and the Jesus of history, established SEVEN Sacraments, not one, two, or none, depending on which Protestant sect you follow.) The Church managed the Sacrament, not the State, and the State obediently let the Church “do Her thing” as regarded it.

Then comes the Reformation.

By diminishing marriage as a Sacrament, the rebels, intentionally or not, regulated it to a mere civil contract. (Anglicans, anyone?) As we’ve clearly seen, especially in the past half-century in the US, marriage that is merely a civil contract can be dissolved for any reason whatsoever. The State now regulates marriages and it sets its own rules regarding it. Furthermore, the “Reformation” encouraged a arrogant level of autonomy, one example being in the individual’s “right” to “interpret” Scripture however he sees fit, (the incomplete canon they have to interpret is another problem all together.) This autonomy is further shown in how Christians now think they “own” their own bodies, so of course contracept and abort all you want! No Church has the right to tell you what to believe! If YOUR interpretation of Scripture says you can close your womb of your own volition, and you’ve “really” prayed for the guidance of the Holy Spirit on this one, then that’s fine! I do believe it worth noting, though, that it is unlikely that the “reformers” themselves would like where their thought has gone today. I doubt Luther would look at the ecclesial community, (NOT!!! Church,) that bares his name today and recognize it as anything he wanted to achieve. When marriage is merely a civil contract, who is the State to deny it to two men, or two women, or one man and several women? The atheistic state has no grounds for doing so, but the Christian faith does.

Anyway, my point is that the “reformation” shifted the “responsibility” for marriage from the Church, where it rightfully belongs, to the State. Never mind Christ’s instruction, “What God has joined together, let no man tear asunder!” If you want to know what the greatest threat to Satan is at any given time in history, look at what the fiend attacks most viciously. Right now, it’s marriage, so imagine the power that a strong, Catholic family has, the “domestic Church,” modeled after the Holy Family, has to turn this culture AGAINST Satan’s wishes for it!

As a disclaimer, I know full well not every last Protestant accepts or likes divorce. My boyfriend came from such a home and he views divorce as a non-option for any professed Christian.

Aaaaand…I’m being summoned. I might elaborate on this further later, if Java homework doesn’t kill me first! =-S

That said, onto the main point of this post.

I already posted last week about the immature vandalism of part of the display for Pro-Life Awareness Week here.  Well, the campus paper today ran an editorial that made me positivly livid.  (By “editorial,” I mean an official position statement of the paper itself, no name assigned to it.)  The “Cliff’s Notes” version is that the paper does not think our yearly pro-life week should be allowed to happen.  They even twist the words of our Holy Father to implicate his disagreement!  Sick!  >_<  Furthermore, they claim the week is a violation of the “Dominican heratige” of the college.  (Quotes used because that “heretage” is almost always a perversion thereof whenever the school mentions it.)  The article also implied that our cross display was “threatening” to pregnant students.  ばかだよ！

Besides the expected Letter to the Editor, I’m starting to contemplate writing the Bishop of the Diocese.  Do I think it’s going to do a scrap of good?  Crud no; this Bishop is as spineless as the horror stories you hear about no-knees Bishops.  However, I can at least say I “put my money where my mouth is.”  Blah.

Is there anything I should know for writing a Bishop?  Terms of address or other such things?  Comments appreciated.

God Bless!  ^_^