Catholica Commentary by Tom McMahon: Sacraments for a Technological Age! Part 33

TOM McMAHON...

Historically, marriage seems to have been more to do with property and procreation than about love, sexuality and human relationship. Tom McMahon today looks at the changes taking place in society today in our societal attitudes towards marriage. The issue of same-sex unions is where the changing perceptions and tensions have been brought to a new focus. Is the institutional Church interested in the search for ultimate truth (what is God's intention)? Or in not upsetting "the little people", challenging the comforting social mores and shibboleths that have developed over time, and preserving the controls it acquired over human relationships?

No snowflake is like another and so too the human being...

My father, as a boy of five in 1866, hiked from Virginia City, Nevada to Butte, Montana, a distance of nearly a thousand miles. I have often attempted to picture the route, the dangers, the deprivations, the family loneliness, motivation, and family determination and hardiness. I sense my father's genes in me, passed down from grandfather to son to grandson, the desire to pioneer and look beyond limited boundaries, to lead and defy fear while acknowledging healthy caution with the unknown. As I am putting together the 6th commentary on MARRIAGE I realize a burning desire to explore, surprised at what I am finding, and a healthy respect for what I will discover. I am a simple human being now meshed in an investigation of a worldwide and easily experienced human relationship; no snow flake is like another and so too the individual human being … then add the complication that develops as two human beings unite, especially for a long time and as each matures and changes. Our generation is writing a chapter on marriage-unions for older people in the age of technology; by our very existence we are writing the future rules of the marriage state and what the Creator may have intended when creating us male and female. We are equipped with sacred knowledge that is unknown to the present Roman institution and its clergy.

We ended Commentary #5 with a challenge to openness: a Middle Ages' history of same sex unions thrust their way into the mainstream of our modern consciousness. For some in our modern world this will bring to an end to any further exploration.; there is only one idea of marriage and those who offer differently are simply wrong. For others the quote from The Nation will spur them on to integrate the teachings of Jesus our Christ (Saviour) into a complex mystery. (Just to refresh your memory here's the quote from The Nation on the back of John Boswell's book with which I ended the last commentary: "…challenging a number of cherished assumptions about the nature and history of Christianity".) When a middle-aged woman rang my doorbell last November soliciting my vote to defeat Proposition 8, the gay marriage initiative, her first question to me was "do you know anything about marriage?"

I assumed she was one of the many Mormons canvassing neighborhoods providing emotional fodder for the political bonfire. I asked if she knew when modern marriage got societal approval and her answer was: "of course two thousand years ago". When I gently countered with the Roman concept of consortium suggesting modern marriage began no earlier than the 1800's her head shook and her reply was "that's no matter for me". I got much the same response when I read one of my marriage commentaries to a select group of friends … so what if the church says Joseph was a virgin. We had just finished reviewing Michael Morwood's FROM SAND TO SOLID GROUND; the consensus was: a great book, chapter 10 on God was super, and the chapter on Mary was terrible! I had a sense that people are not ready to investigate the sexuality of Mary and Joseph. Sainthood was achieved in the early church by the peoples' acclaim. I wonder if early Christians saw Joseph and Mary as uniquely different from the rest of society? Did Mary tell her neighbors of her immaculate conception? And the virgin birth? More than likely Mary never went to school … Who in real life was this woman? Was she attractive? Did Joseph possess, or love, her?

Consortium…

Consortium is the practice of a father of a woman handing over his daughter to another man for the purpose of her bearing the second man's children. The father hands over property and the woman becomes property of the "husband ". I find the word husband interesting; Webster offers: hus=house and bonda=master, and "head of family", "directs economy of the family" and far down the line "an agent employed by an owner to manage a ship, purchasing stores etc. while in port". As a verb it means to cultivate the soil, which with no stretch of the imagination can be seen as planting human seed in a woman's womb. "Husband" speaks of domination, possession, and utilitarian use of property; as father of children he owns them, having the right under Roman law to sell and kill. There are cultures today that still traffic in the buying and selling of women and children. What was the position of the Roman Catholic church as consortium was the major portal thru which the average woman of the Middle Ages entered into union with a man, aka "marriage" or dare we use the word as we appreciate it today. I prefer the word "mate" (yet sounds masculine) in my own marriage. I wonder how you Australian readers will go with my using "mate".

Concerning marriage of ordinary people the church of the Middle Ages had the same attitude as Rhet Butler as he says to Scarlett: "Frankly, my dear I don't give a **damn". (The Irish tinker's **damn is a cheap piece of metal to mend a hole in a pot) 15% of women of the Middle Ages, such as Eleanor of Acquataine, saw a ceremonial wedding, while the remaining 85 % were handed off in a consortium agreement, not only property of the feudal lord but as well their husbands. The privileged, where the money is, have an edge; money and power talked to the issue of same-sex unions and the church looked askance … or did it look askance?. I am reminded of the old pastor of All Souls Church, South San Francisco in 1959 who charged $150 and up for young couples to marry, using his church and his magic services. The old monsignor died with one and a half million bucks to his name in 1961; let me tell you a story, one of many many, days of my early priesthood…

A South San Francisco, Italian-Catholic story…

A.P. Gianni, founder of the Bank of Italy, later to become the Bank of America, offered to select Italian priests of San Francisco sums of money to go publically in and out of Gianni's bank in Roman collar to entice the old Italians to deposit.

Egisto Tozzi was born in Italian poverty coming to America in the 1910's to make his fortune. A.P. Giannini, founder of the Bank of Italy, later to become the Bank of America, offered to select Italian priests of San Francisco sums of money (perhaps $200?) to go publically in and out of Giannini's bank in Roman collar to entice the old Italians to deposit. Giannini warned Tozzi of the forthcoming 1929 crash and Toz had his in gold coin which traded soon into stock that became priceless. Once monthly I would take the old man to the elite Olympic Club, where he entrusted a stack of unopened dividend envelopes to Fr. Bandini, his executor for reinvestment. My heart still aches as I recall the number of unfortunates who were unmercilessly rejected from the priest house as they sought a bite to eat.

The old man had been made a monsignor viva voce by Pius the 12th and was untouchable; those were dreadful days for me as we dealt with the chancery office power brokers in crimson robes … but the people were great! An Italian ghetto South San Francisco, a city independent of San Francisco near the International Airport, had a simple funeral parlour run by Amos Larson (an assistant coroner) who during my term insisted on a Mass for derelicts, often Amos and I being the only two present at an unfortunate's funeral. When Egisto died I arranged his funeral, calling Amos who told me he was so privileged to bury the monsignor and would give me a good price. I recall, 46 plus years later, my exact words: "Amos, I want to see the biggest bill you have ever written up, the most expensive casket, the works and just keep your mouth shut." I was keeping the money at home as the old man had willed it to rich Italian relatives; our government took over 60% for back taxes and the Italian government got 20%. There is more to the story but maybe I'll tell such when I come down to Aussieland. (End for now.)

My motive in telling the above story is this: Pre-Vatican Two the people heard from the pulpit that no marriage existed for them outside that performed by the priest; for Catholics a sinful life and the pit of hell was their lot for not being married by the priest. (I dare not bring this up in our family gatherings as the old monsignor witnessed my wonderful mother-in-law's wedding.) But they had to pay dearly for these blessings. From my early days in priesthood I refused to accept money for sacraments. Sacramentum propter hominem which translates "sacraments are for human beings", early church theology. When I came to the parish in 1959 only two young women of All Souls Parish had gone off to University studies; by 1963 three dozen women were enrolled in higher education and a new era was coming to life in South City … and then came Vatican 2.

Human sexuality a major issue in socoety today...

The United States is on fire with issues and questions about human sexuality. Our Silicon Valley Mercury News, 4/9/09, carries "GAY MARRIAGE GETS BOOST IN D.C. VOTE", this following on an article 4/8/09 "VERMONT IS 4TH STATE TO APPROVE GAY MARRIAGE". Vermont started the ball rolling in 2000 c.e. with Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Iowa having first moved thru the courts to approve of gay marriage. New York, New Hampshire, Maine, and New Jersey have same sex-marriage before their legislatures, while California is back in its courts over the legality of Proposition 8. A mean spirit underlies the attacks on gay persons as well as their want to unite; the Catholic bishops spent a great deal of money to overturn the law allowing gay marriage in California (Proposition 8), using the outdated Knights of Columbus as disguised financers. I suggest that Jesus never addressed the issue and would have passed no judgment. I encourage the volume of money spent politically go to food for starving children in Africa. The code that directs the bishops and the knights is surely not the 8 Christian beatitudes. There seems to be much sense in the Nation's encouragement "challenging a number of cherished assumptions about the nature and history of Christianity".

Next week we move on, festina lente, in the Camelot days, like the wedding of Maria in Sound of Music. Dad, you better get out your Visa card … and where is the church in all this? We will look at intimacy.

Tom in outpost San Jose, Ca. 11/04/2009

“I wonder if early Christians saw Joseph and Mary as uniquely different from the rest of society? Did Mary tell her neighbors of her immaculate conception? And the virgin birth? More than likely Mary never went to school … Who in real life was this woman? Was she attractive? Did Joseph possess, or love, her?” ...Tom McMahon

Image Credits: The image used in the headline is adapted from an image available from AllPosters entitled "Tender Passion" available at: www.allposters.com. Clicking on the images in the body of the article will take you to the original source.

Tom McMahon, ordained in 1954 and now married, lives a very fulfilled life in San Jose and continues to contribute voraciously to several Catholic discussion lists in the States. He has been an enthusiastic supporter and encourager of the Catholica initiative from the very beginning.

What are your thoughts on this commentary?
You can contribute to the discussion in our forum.

Share |

[Index of Commentaries by Tom McMahon]

Catholica
34 Martin Place, LINDEN NSW 2778, Australia
editor: Brian Coyne | tel: +612 4753 1226
email: editor@catholica.com.au