Archive for the ‘Marriage’ Category

Aphorism XCVI

Tuesday, June 28th, 2016

Sodomy is not a sacrament.

A sacrament is an outward sign, instituted by Christ, to give grace.

“The sacraments are efficacious signs of grace, instituted by Christ and entrusted to the Church, by which divine life is dispensed to us.” Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1131

Sodomy was not instituted by Christ, and does not give grace or divine life.

Sodomy does not participate in God’s act of creation of new human life. Nor does sodomy engender human life.

Because sodomy is not life-giving, it expresses a substantially lesser intimacy than that sexual intimacy expressed in sacramental, heterosexual matrimony.

Sodomy may only give pleasure to one or both of the participants.

Sodomy will always be an expression, if of love, of a lesser love than in sacramental heterosexual matrimony. Sacramental matrimony joins body, soul, and spirit. Sodomy does not.

No Catholic pope or bishop or clergy can ever make sodomy a sacrament.

© Copyright 2016, Albert J. Schorsch, III
All Rights Reserved

The views posted at are those of Albert J. Schorsch, III, alone, and not those of any of his employers, past or present.


The Wit of St. John Fisher

Wednesday, June 22nd, 2016

St. John Fisher, 1469-1535, who was executed on this June 22nd date, wrote several documents defending the marriage of Henry VIII to Catherine of Aragon. In one, the Licitum fuisse matrimonium Hen: 8: cum Catharina relicta fratris suj Arthurj, probably written in 1529, Fisher displays particular wit. According to the late scholar Edward Surtz SJ, Fisher employed the Latin adage or proverb “quite effectively”:

In striving to discover a basis for the invalidity of Henry and Catherine’s marriage in the Levitical prohibition (Lev. 18:16, 20:21), his adversaries are engaging in an activity as futile as seeking wool on a donkey (“lanam ab asino quaerunt”), or hunting a hare outside its burrow (“Inanis est venatio leporis extra sedem suam”), or shaking a bush from which the bird has already flown (“frustra dumus excutitur, in qua non residet avis”). By failing to reconcile the prohibition in Leviticus with the leviratic precept in Deuteronomy (25:5), they are keeping the two farther apart than treble and bass (lit. than a double octave: longius quam bis diapason). Nevertheless it is plainer than any sun (omni sole clarius) that the wife whose husband has died childless is exempt from the Levitical prohibition against marriage to one’s brother’s wife. Yet Fisher can apply a proverb to himself also. In trespassing on the territory of canon lawyers, he realizes that he must face the criticism: The cobber should not go beyond his last (Ne ultra crepidam sutor).

From: Surtz, E. L. (1967). The works and days of John Fisher; an introduction to the position of St. John Fisher (1469-1535), Bishop of Rochester, in the English Renaissance and the Reformation. Cambridge, Harvard University Press, pg. 352.

For more on St. John Fisher, and why he should be named a Doctor of the Church, please see my previous posts.

© Copyright 2016, Albert J. Schorsch, III
All Rights Reserved

The views posted at are those of Albert J. Schorsch, III, alone, and not those of any of his employers, past or present.


Refuting Abortion Ideology’s Core Idea

Thursday, January 14th, 2016

Those who oppose abortion on grounds that are –

1) moral (abortion as the unjustified killing, ergo, murder of the innocent and defenseless) and

2) demographic (abortion in worldwide practice disproportionately eliminates females through sex selection, thus causing population imbalance leading to male immaturity/lack of commitment and thereby to pornography addiction, rape, human trafficking, and sex slavery, causing therefore even more oppression of women)

– sometimes omit going to the philosophical heart of the matter by refuting abortion ideology’s Core Idea: that abortion is the ultimate answer to Freud’s famous dictum that “Biology is Destiny.”

The Core Idea of Abortion Ideology can also be restated: In order for a woman to be truly free of biological destiny, that is, her role as a mother, the baby must die as subject to the woman’s will to power. Woman’s right to choose becomes woman’s right to kill, a moral equivalent of a war of independence for woman. Killing the baby, in the minds of the abortion ideologists, as ugly as it is, definitively counters the destiny of biology.

The Core Idea that “Biology is Not Destiny” unites Abortion Ideology and Gender Ideology, and will lead ineluctably to what I have called the “Reduction of Motherhood.”

Abortion Ideology represents only yet another instance in history that the oppressed kill not their oppressor, but another totally dependent on the oppressed, yet redefine this killing of the dependent one as an act of freedom, despite all the while not altering their own predicament of oppression. Abortion Ideology, like all ideologies, is thus subject to Gödel’s proof of eventual logical self-contradiction.

Freedom is not gained by destroying someone dependent on you, no matter how one may dress up the killing – unless you define freedom as being alone with your oppressor, keeping in mind that sometimes, your oppressor becomes yourself – the very definition of Hell.

The definitive answer to Abortion Ideology, and thereby Gender Ideology, flows from the continual rediscovery of motherhood, and of fatherhood in relation to motherhood. As a practical matter, unless human reproduction is moved to Brave New World laboratories exclusively, women and men will continue to discover the meaning of motherhood and fatherhood through their loving relationships.

This loving force cannot be stopped, except by a police state beyond any known to human civilization that would be needed to limit reproduction to laboratories. It is not likely that gender ideology will choose or succeed in establishing such a police state, although such a police state would be their own “Ultimate Solution” against natural motherhood. Gender ideology will therefore attempt to place laboratory reproduction on the same legal, moral, and social par with natural reproduction, and continue to reduce the status of natural motherhood, as I wrote earlier, to the status of the hoarding of pets.

The alternative to such a grim future is the transformation of human society into a loving community, in which no woman is forced to be a mother, but motherhood and its great goods are freely chosen, without resorting to abortion. This transformation can grow – one loving couple, one man and one woman – at a time.

Gender Ideology will therefore ultimately fail, because it lacks the means to destroy embodied reproducing gender itself. Gender Ideology is the societal metastasis of higher education political correctness, an unsustainable canon of self-contradiction: therapy to change gender attraction is very wrong but sex-reassignment surgery is very right. Gender theory is the antithesis of embodied gender in fact.

Embodied gender complementarity of females and males continually reinvigorates the human race, and continually reinvents loving intimacy. It just takes one fertile woman and one fertile man to restart human society and culture, despite all the efforts of Abortion and Gender Ideologues bent on dystopian sterility and eugenic fantasy, the latter being the centuries’ old panacea of the super-rich.

Abortion remains, and should always be seen as, a tragic act of desperation and weakness: powerless to eliminate her oppressor or to free herself from a terrible constraint, a mother kills her child. A whole culture of art, literature, religion, statecraft and philosophical special pleading has grown up trying to decorate and sanctify this tragic act, but the fact remains, abortion is the tragic killing of the innocent and defenseless. Abortion ideologues sometimes attempt to reduce abortion to a banal act, like blowing one’s nose, but few take such exaggeration seriously. Abortion is a killing.

The “Commonweal Catholic” has never forgiven St. John Paul II for coining the phrase “the Culture of Death.” Despite the hostility of Abortion Ideology to Catholicism, there are some Catholics who still would like to embrace the culture Abortion Ideology produces rather than step away from it.

For the sake of those wishing to embrace the culture, I offer another tack: One can choose the destiny of Creation, instead of simply negating the destiny of biology. When motherhood and fatherhood are gifts freely accepted, the need for Abortion Ideology recedes.

Many Catholic thinkers smugly dismiss the thought of St. Edith Stein without doing a fraction of the work necessary to probe its challenging difficulty. They do so at their peril, because her thought has the capacity to make their thought irrelevant. The essays of St. Edith Stein on woman, like the Theology of the Body of St. John Paul II, not only undermine Abortion and Gender Ideology, but show another – much more happy – way of living and loving.

© Copyright 2016, Albert J. Schorsch, III
All Rights Reserved

The views posted at are those of Albert J. Schorsch, III, alone, and not those of any of his employers, past or present.


Aphorism LXXXV

Saturday, January 3rd, 2015

Jesus Christ transformed the family by making the marital relationship permanent in Matthew 19: 3-12, and by drawing all to spiritual kinship by calling all, including families, to hear and to keep the Word of God in Mark 3:31-35 and in Luke 11:27-28.

A family joins Christ’s family, becoming His brothers and sisters, when they do the will of God. A family may be a wonderful family, but they might not be joined to Christ’s family unless they hear His Word and keep it.

Christian families are therefore called not only to be family to each other, but to be members of Christ’s family.

© Copyright 2015, Albert J. Schorsch, III
All Rights Reserved


Talk on Thursday, 11/6/14, at St. John Paul II Newman Center on Leo XIII and his On the Rights & Duties of Capital & Labor (Rerum Novarum)

Tuesday, October 28th, 2014

I’ll be presenting a free talk entitled “Leo XIII and his On the Working Classes (Rerum Novarum),” for the School of Catholic Thought at the St. John Paul II Newman Center at 6PM Thursday, November 6, 2014, after evening Mass at the St. John Paul II Newman Center Library, 700 S. Morgan St. Chicago,, 312-226-1880. Here’s the announcement in PDF format.

Here’s a png version —


A podcast of the now completed talk is posted here. Here’s the link for Rerum Novarum, the great 1891 encyclical of Leo XIII.

© Copyright 2014, Albert J. Schorsch, III
All Rights Reserved


The Social Doctrine of the Catholic Church: A Noncredit Course

Tuesday, January 28th, 2014

At the Blessed John Paul II Newman Center at UIC, I’ll be offering a free noncredit course on The Social Doctrine of the Catholic Church, as part of the work of the School of Catholic Thought, which was scheduled to begin today, 1/28/14.

However, due to the cold in Chicago, the JPII Center will be closed on 1/28/14, so the first class will be at 6PM next Tuesday, 2/4/14. I’ll post my first lecture here in a few days.

© Copyright 2014, Albert J. Schorsch, III
All Rights Reserved


Springfield, IL Bishop Thomas Paprocki’s 11/20/13 Homily

Sunday, November 24th, 2013

There has been much distortion and controversy about Springfield, IL Bishop Thomas Paprocki’s homily on same-sex marriage on 11/20/13. Here is the link for what Bishop Paprocki said.

© Copyright 2013, Albert J. Schorsch, III
All Rights Reserved


A Lesson from Lincoln’s 1860 Cooper Union Speech

Saturday, August 24th, 2013

From a speech given by Abraham Lincoln on February 27, 1860, at the Cooper Institute (alternatively called Cooper Union) in New York:

“These natural, and apparently adequate means all failing, what will convince them [pro-slavery advocates]?

This, and this only: cease to call slavery wrong, and join them in calling it right. And this must be done thoroughly – done in acts as well as in words.

Silence will not be tolerated – we must place ourselves avowedly with them.

Senator Douglas’ new sedition law must be enacted and enforced, suppressing all declarations that slavery is wrong, whether made in politics, in presses, in pulpits, or in private. We must arrest and return their fugitive slaves with greedy pleasure.

We must pull down our Free State constitutions.

The whole atmosphere must be disinfected from all taint of opposition to slavery, before they will cease to believe that all their troubles proceed from us.”

From, accessed 8/24/13.

Lincoln aptly described the absolute attitude of advocates of slavery in 1860, and this absolute stance is mirrored by advocates of abortion and of same-sex marriage today. From the point of view of advocates for these modern positions, no one, in the end, must be allowed to stand against them. These advocates will never be satisfied until all stand with them, and until all laws, curricula, and social practices reflect their advocacy for abortion and for same-sex marriage.

Perhaps, then, readers might ponder the rest of Lincoln’s Cooper Union Speech.

© Copyright 2013, Albert J. Schorsch, III
All Rights Reserved


Aphorism LXIV

Wednesday, July 24th, 2013

Elite forces driving the changes on marriage laws in societies across the world could care less for marriage as an equality issue than for the destruction of traditional marriage as the principal mediating institution standing against absolute state power.

Statist utopians don’t want marriage changed, they want it destroyed completely. With marriage safely out of the way, their utopia would appear to them to be inevitable.

Nineteenth century radicals thought the revolution would erase marriage. Twenty-first century radicals think erasing marriage will instead bring the revolution.

Christian progressives who support same-sex marriage equality apparently have little idea that such marriage equality is but a step in the formation of an almighty state.

Today’s changes to marriage are therefore not so much about love and intimacy and human equality, but about raw power and who is to wield it.

© Copyright 2013, Albert J. Schorsch, III
All Rights Reserved


Aphorism LXIII

Sunday, June 30th, 2013

A core dumb idea of our age: that somehow the parental love of two men can substitute for the love of one natural mother for her child, complementing the love of one natural father.

Two men can never be a mother.

A century of needless folly and suffering will be spent revealing the truth of this statement.

© Copyright 2013, Albert J. Schorsch, III
All Rights Reserved