To keep this in perspective, using contraception is also an intrinsically evil and sinful act, and, therefore, a mortal sin.
There are some that like to play games and will wait until the Church dogmatically declares that marriage is between one man and one woman before they stop supporting same sex unions. If they receive Holy Communion while they wait, they will die having committed a mortal sin as this will never happen. God will judge just how culpable they are due to their ignorance.
The Church has dogmatically declared enough concerning marriage, particularly at the Council of Trent, and in those declarations, the word that was used was matrimony. Now it seems that as some changed their definition of the word marriage, they also changed their definition of the word matrimony. However, to understand a dogmatic declaration, you have to use the specific definition of the specific words used in that declaration.
I suppose there will be some that try to justify themselves by using their “new and improved” definition, but what if you were to do this with, say, the Declaration of Independence? Women are not created equal to men? Personally, I think women, and any men that can think rationally, would appreciate that all documents be interpreted using the definitions of words used by the drafters of those documents.
What definition of the word matrimony does the Church use in all her dogmatic declarations on marriage? Matrimony is a Latin word with the root mater and suffix mony. Mater means “mother,” and mony means “the act” or “state.” So matrimony is the state in which a person becomes a mother. (Incidentally, the word marriage comes from the Latin words maritus and marita, which mean “husband” and “wife”; the necessary moral ingredients to make a person become a mother.)
To deny that matrimony is the state that one becomes a mother (please think scientific here, i.e. biology) is to deny the dogmatic declaration of the Church on marriage. To deny a dogma of the Church is heresy, and not only can heretics not receive Holy Communion, in the strictest sense, they are not even considered Catholic. And if you haven’t made the connection yet, this would apply to contraception just as much as it would apply to same sex unions. I guess Humanae Vitae wasn’t really necessary, but if you prefer an encyclical rather than using etymology in understanding a dogmatic declaration, there is Arcanum by Pope Leo XIII, which says:
From the Gospel we see clearly that this doctrine was declared and openly confirmed by the divine authority of Jesus Christ. He bore witness to the Jews and to His Apostles that marriage, from its institution, should exist between two only, that is, between one man and one woman; that of two they are made, so to say, one flesh; and that the marriage bond is by the will of God so closely and strongly made fast that no man may dissolve it or render it asunder. "For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they two shall be in one flesh. Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. What, therefore, God hath joined together, let no man put asunder."It takes something really major to be officially declared a heretic, so most persons that accept heretical teachings often continue receiving Holy Communion, which is a mortal sin.
Looking at etymology is not the normal process of reasoning out heresy, but then, there’s only one iota of difference between ὁμοιούσιος and ὁμοούσιος. The first is a heresy and the second is in the Creed (Latin: consubstantiálem; English: consubstantial).
If you’re considering the situation of a married man and woman that are infertile, the people that use such arguments are usually the same people that support killing people through starvation and dehydration because they are unable to eat due to a medical condition. I’m sure you can figure out the parallels of these two scenarios, so I’ll let you do it with some logic and reason. Just remember that being born a male or being born a female is perfectly normal and not a medical condition.
I'm really not be sarcastic or condescending here. Some people actually use such illogical and irrational arguments.
We really shouldn’t have to get into terms like heresy on this topic, the Church has always made it very clear that homosexual acts are mortal sins. I just figured I’d go a bit of the way into explaining the bigger picture to those that like to get away on technicalities. Of course there are many more technicalities, but people trying to get away on technicalities is a major reason why the Church has to spend so much time writing detailed rules. God is infinitely beyond any technicality you can ever dream up.
"For a Catholic to receive holy Communion and still deny the revelation Christ entrusted to the church is to try to say two contradictory things at once: 'I believe the church offers the saving truth of Jesus, and I reject what the church teaches.' In effect, they would contradict themselves. This sort of behavior would result in publicly renouncing one's integrity and logically bring shame for a double-dealing that is not unlike perjury."
Archbishop Allen Vigneron, Archdiocese of Detroit
Detroit Free Press