I have mentioned, occasionally, that St. Valentine did flout the edicts of Rome, and marry young couples. For his troubles St. Valentine got beheaded by the Old Rome, and by the New Rome, had his real story smothered under gobs and gobs of heart shaped crap.
The face of marriage is fast being destroyed, and not by overt affronts to it, like homosexual unions being recognized by marriage.
No, the destruction of the father as an actual parent, who could actually parent, regardless of the whims of his wife or the state.
The destruction of the meaning of marriage, given that a man can no longer expect nor presume consent from a woman who explicitly gave her consent before God, family, friends, community- etc... By current leftist logic even I have been raped, though most feminists like to pretend men always consent. I don't know why. I have seen some of them and know they have been rejected.
The destruction of marriage via courts. There isn't even a decent pretext of what is good for the family- it is mainly about extracting from the wealthier spouse the most money possible, since this is the best way for the lawyers to get paid. Thus the courts tend to favor women regardless of their actions, though I think there have been a few cases of wealthy women finding out the bias in favor of them is not as powerful as the bias in favor of lawyers making money.
To date, as the game plan of lawyers continue to play out- for they are the ones really behind gay 'marriage' (homosexuals tend to be upper middle class, and they have assets, so they are targets), we don't see very many clergy at all making a noise about how maybe we ought to marry people without reference to the state.
If I have to guess, the best of them are about ten years behind me in realizing the state of affairs. I occasionally hear one of them saying something I would have said ten years ago.
Maybe you can out group me and pretend I am extreme, but St. Valentine, not to mention the people who canonized him?