As of the writing of this post, Pope Francis' encyclical 'Laudato Si' had just recently come out. It is the Pope's first encyclical that he fully prepared himself (his first official encyclical was Lumen Fidei, but this was prepared mostly by Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI before he retired). An encyclical, as Catholic Apologist Jimmy Akin described it, is 'a teaching document issued by the pope. Encyclicals are among the more solemn and thus more authoritative papal documents.' In other words, an encyclical is important and should be taken seriously.
This particular encyclical focuses 'on care for our common home', the Earth. What are we doing that is damaging our planetary ecosystem? What needs to happen in order to change this and start caring more for nature? It is these types of questions that Pope Francis seeks to answer.
If you have not read it yet then please do so. It focuses on an issue that is seldom addressed at all in the public square, much less in the Church.
There is a lot that could be discussed from this encyclical, but I am only going to address 5 points that I picked up on when I read 'Laudato Si''. These are not the only important takeaways, and they are not even the most important takeaways, but they are important enough to be discussed.
1. IT IS ADDRESSED TO EVERYBODY
When an encyclical is written it is addressed to a particular body of people. Sometimes that body of people consists of the bishops, other times it is the clergy, sometimes to the laity, etc. That is not to say that those outside that group cannot read it or learn something from it. It simply means that the Pope wrote that encyclical with the intention of focusing on and reaching out to that them for one reason or another. For example, the previous encyclical put out by Pope Francis, 'Lumen Fidei', was addressed to 'the bishops, priests, and deacons, consecrated persons, and the lay faithful' (Lumen Fidei).
'Laudato Si'' is the first encyclical in history to address every single person on the planet. This is made obvious by the lack of an address made at the very beginning of the encyclical as well as by the language used throughout.
This might not seem like a big deal, but it is actually the first clue that we are given of Pope Francis' goal of the encyclical. He is telling us not that this is something that merely the Bishops and priests focus on or even that Catholics in general should focus on; he is saying that this is something that the entire human population needs to be concerned about. Whether you are Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Muslim, Agnostic, Atheist, that is irrelevant for Pope Francis' point. This makes perfect sense because what he argues we need most of all right now in order to protect the environment is "a new dialogue about how we are shaping the future of our planet. We need a conversation which includes everyone, since the environmental challenge we are undergoing, and its human roots, concern and affect us all" (Laudato Si, 14). All the technological innovations in the world, he says, are not enough when there is a " lack of interest", or a "nonchalant resignation or blind confidence in technical solutions" (14).
An interest must be developed, which can only come about through constant dialogue and discussion over the issue of care for our planet. And such a discussion can only be effective in curing the damages we have committed to the environment if everybody participates in it, since "all of us can cooperate as instruments of God for the care of creation, each according to his or her own culture, experience, involvements and talents" (14).
2. MINCING WORDS IS NOT HELPFUL
The very first sentence in this encyclical that took me aback simply because of the way it was phrased was when Pope Francis, in talking about pollution and waste, said, "The earth, our home, is beginning to look more and more like an immense pile of filth" (21).
That is how you make it personal and then display the truth of a horrible situation all in one sentence.
The language used throughout the encyclical reveals what Pope Francis has become known for: being blunt and not holding back the truth. Of course he always couples it with love for his neighbor and for God, but he clearly knows that all true love requires both care and truth, not one or the other. And especially when it comes to the damage that we human beings have done to the earth, it is apparent that Pope Francis finds it more helpful to call it as it is then to attempt to dress it up in political correctness and niceties. And he is right. Bluntness in this situation can help open peoples eyes to problems within society and themselves that they may otherwise not come to see.
That is why Pope Francis calls out those "who possess more resources and economic or political power [who] seem mostly to be concerned with masking the problems or concealing the symptoms, simply making efforts to reduce some of the negative impacts of climate change" (26). It is also why he laments that it is "because of us [that] thousands of species will no longer give glory to God by their very existence, nor convey their message to us" due to their extinction (33).
Pope Francis recognizes the seriousness of our relationship, or lack thereof, with nature and seeks to make others aware of it. A problem cannot be fixed if the people who are supposed to be fixing it are not aware that a problem exists in the first place.
Speaking of relationships...
3. RELATIONSHIP IS KEY
Pope Francis has pointed out on numerous occasions that a relationship is necessary for a respect for nature to develop. Obviously a relationship between man and nature is necessary for man to care for nature at all, but we must not have merely a relationship with nature in order to protect it. "...human life is grounded in three fundamental and closely intertwined relationships: with God, with our neighbor and with the Earth itself" (66). (sidenote: Pope Francis is well aware that not everybody believes in the existence of God. But he discusses God and Scripture at great length in chapter 2 so as to bridge the supposed divide that some people think exists between science and religion, as well as to remind Christians of what should be important to us)
If, as Pope Francis says, our relationship with God is broken, as it was from the Fall, then that naturally (pun unintended) affects our relationship with other people and with nature, for God created both humanity and nature; humans are a part of nature as every other living thing is.
That is why even in a discussion about caring for the earth Pope Francis continuously brings up the necessity to care for the poor and others who are downtrodden (52). Having dominion over the earth means respecting all things that have life, including all plants and animals, and attributing to them the worth that any God-given thing must by definition have (67). But that also entails caring for those in our own race that live in conditions that they should not be living in, for "the earth is essentially a shared inheritance, whose fruits are meant to benefit everyone. For believers, this becomes a question of fidelity to the Creator, since God created the world for everyone. Hence every ecological approach needs to incorporate a social perspective which takes into account the fundamental rights of the poor and the underprivileged" (93).
4. THE ROLE OF BUSINESSES
Pope Francis brings up an aspect of the role of business with the environment that I, a store manager, related to strongly. And that is the importance of labor.
"We were created with a vocation to work," he says. "Work is a necessity, part of the meaning of life on this earth, a path to growth, human development and personal fulfilment. Helping the poor financially must always be a provisional solution in the face of pressing needs" (128).
Pope Francis then goes on to say that "business is a noble vocation, directed to producing wealth and improving our world. It can be a fruitful source of prosperity for the areas in which it operates, especially if it sees the creation of jobs as an essential part of its service to the common good" (129). Making sure that those in our society have a job is a must for everybody who has a calling to work in business management. It is one of the major ways that we can contribute both to the environment and to other people simultaneously. Remember that helping people, who are by definition part of the environment (128), is helping to cultivate the environment, and that is especially the case, but not limited to, when the work is geared towards helping others or lessening the harm done to the planet.
5. THE NEED FOR DRASTIC CHANGE
Many encyclicals that focus on an issue or bring up a pervasive problem in our world today oftentimes come up with practical solutions that can and should be done in order to eliminate said problem. This is necessary and needed. However, Pope Francis, while scattering various practical methods here and there to address environmental concerns, offers a significantly more difficult and drastic solution: the need for radical and deeply-rooted change within the individual, the town, the city, the nation, and the world on how it thinks, teaches, interacts with, and discusses our environmental home.
"Many things have to change course," he starts, "but it is we human beings above all who need to change. We lack an awareness of our common origin, of our mutual belonging, and of a future to be shared with everyone. This basic awareness would enable the development of new convictions, attitudes and forms of life. A great cultural, spiritual and educational challenge stands before us, and it will demand that we set out on the long path of renewal" (202).
Pope Francis acknowledges that the environmental problems we currently have cannot be solved with some fundraising and a few social actions; the source of the problem is deeply rooted in the sinful nature of man. Because man betrayed God we weakened our relationship with Him and by virtue of that we weakened our relationship with each other and with nature (66). Thus the problem is so deeply ingrained into us that any process that would seek to remedy it will be, at best, a long and arduous journey.
But this does not weigh down Pope Francis' hopes, and it should not weigh ours down, either. "All is not lost" after all (205). "Human beings, while capable of the worst, are also capable of rising above themselves, choosing again what is good, and making a new start, despite their mental and social conditioning. We are able to take an honest look at ourselves, to acknowledge our deep dissatisfaction, and to embark on new paths to authentic freedom. No system can completely suppress our openness to what is good, true and beautiful, or our God-given ability to respond to his grace at work deep in our hearts" (205).
A 'universal awareness' (207) that does not yet exist needs to develop in the hearts and minds of every person and every society. Without that, protection of the environment will be impossible. But such an awareness can be attained, for all things are possible with the grace of God. and God will give His grace through education (210), a change in habits (209), an 'ecological conversion' (217) and a 'deep enjoyment free of the obsession of consumption' (222), to name a few.
I end this by reiterating that it does not matter what your faith is in regards to this responsibility. We all live here, along with other creatures and plants that inhabit this earth. It does not make sense to destroy the home that provides us with what we need to live and thrive. Whether you believe in God or not, we all have a stake in protecting and caring for our home; this is made evident through common sense reasoning as well as through deep and thoughtful reflection.
And it is all the more important for those who know of the God that created us and this planet that we care for it and take responsibility for it. God has given this place over to us. Instead of doing what we have been doing we must change our very hearts and minds completely toward God's will. By doing so each and every day we will slowly but surely be changed and renewed in our very being by His grace. And when we, the source of most of nature's woes, sustain such a change then the same change will occur throughout the whole world.
"A prayer for our earth
All-powerful God, you are present in the whole universe
and in the smallest of your creatures.
You embrace with your tenderness all that exists.
Pour out upon us the power of your love,
that we may protect life and beauty.
Fill us with peace, that we may live
as brothers and sisters, harming no one.
O God of the poor,
help us to rescue the abandoned and forgotten of this earth,
so precious in your eyes.
Bring healing to our lives,
that we may protect the world and not prey on it,
that we may sow beauty, not pollution and destruction.
Touch the hearts
of those who look only for gain
at the expense of the poor and the earth.
Teach us to discover the worth of each thing,
to be filled with awe and contemplation,
to recognize that we are profoundly united
with every creature
as we journey towards your infinite light.
We thank you for being with us each day.
Encourage us, we pray, in our struggle
for justice, love and peace" (246).
Sunday, June 28, 2015
Monday, June 15, 2015
I Know Too Much
Elizabeth Scalia, a Catholic blogger over at Patheos.com, recently called all Catholic writers and bloggers to explain why they are and plan to remain Catholic. I am answering that call in this post.
I initially found it very difficult, however, to figure out how to write my response, not because I do not know the reasons for my faith, but because I never put it down into words for others before; I have kept those reasons to myself without even thinking of how they might benefit somebody else who wishes to understand the Catholic faith more, or even just to get to know me more. Thus I feel that, in order to explain why I remain a Catholic today, I must explain a bit about my growth through my faith, making this both an answer to Elizabeth's call and a personal testimony as well.
I am a cradle Catholic, which to me is interesting in and of itself given my parents faith. My father grew up a cradle Catholic as well, but did not practice the faith that much. My mother grew up a Presbyterian. Yet it was my mother, who was a Methodist even after I was born, that deeply desired to raise me and any other children my parents had in the Catholic faith. Thus my mother took the reigns in my Catholic upbringing despite not being Catholic herself...at first.
I was given Baptism shortly after birth, and attended CCD once a week (my younger sister did the same when she became older). I found out later in life (because I do not have a memory of this) that the my mom was received into the Catholic Church long after I was baptized. It turns out that her love for the Catholic faith eventually led her to desire for herself what she wanted her children to experience as well. And all the while my dad, while not personally seeking to deepen his faith, supported his wife and children in our faith journey. My mom's love for the faith and my dad's encouragement for us to follow it was, in hindsight, a big part of how I got to where I am now.
With this I received all of my Sacraments growing up and went to all of my CCD classes. More often then not I did not particularly enjoy going because I did not like any sort of school in general, but I never questioned it; I knew it was important and I knew I needed to go.
As I got older and got into high school I attended a youth group at my parish. This was a big step in my journey towards God because it was here that I first developed really close relationships with deeply Catholic people outside of my immediate family. From that stemmed a growth in my desire to know God more, especially when we did our annual retreats. If my parents began my journey in my Catholic identity, I would say that it was this that cemented me in my desire to persist in that journey.
That being said, I was still far from having what I would consider to be a devout commitment to God and his Church; I would say that I became more conscious of my relationship with God, but not completely. I was still very much going through the motions a lot with my faith and involved in worldly and material things in a way that was very much neutral or detrimental to my relationship with God.
This changed when I went to college.
Ultimately it was my time spent at Ramapo College of New Jersey that led me to that level of spirituality where I try to seek God in everything that I do; it was also during this time that I sought more from my Catholic identity by seeking to know how to defend my faith, know why we believe what we believe, and know how I am to live as a Catholic man devoted to Christ. I grew a lot in my knowledge of the faith, which God was clearly using to help me draw closer to Him.
There were 3 groups of people in particular, though, that sealed what few cracks may have remained in my devotion to my faith. One was the Catholic group on Ramapo campus. Friendships within that group helped strengthen my faith in an intellectual, prayerful, and practical way.
The second was the FOCUS missionaries that we had on campus through most of my college experience. Having a mentorship with a couple of them in particular has led to a level of spiritual development that I would have otherwise not attained. The personal accountability that we had with each other and all that I have learned from these warriors for Christ has been astronomical.
The third was, ironically, in a Protestant non-denominational group called Intervarsity Christian Fellowship. While they may not have set out to teach me about my Catholic faith, the people I met and befriended in IVCF have guided me in seeking a personal and heartfelt love for God above all others and all else, which up until this point of my life was not nearly as important to me.
All of these, as well as more, have helped lead me to becoming the person and the Catholic follower of Christ that I am today.
So now we come back to the original question: Why do I remain a Catholic? Everything that I mentioned above, my parents, CCD, the youth group, college, all of it and more is part of the reason, as anybody's life experiences help shape that person into who they currently are and who they will be. But what is also always a part of that life experience are the daily choices that we make in responding to those experiences; events in one's life impact who we are to a degree, but we are always able to make a choice in how we handle them. I could have chosen any number of responses in reaction to everything that came across my plate of life, but by the grace of God I chose the path that brings me closer to Him and His Church.
So why, then? Why did I, and on a daily basis continue to, make the choice to be and remain Catholic rather than one of a number of any other choices?
The answer boils down to one simple statement: it is the choice that makes the most sense; it is the only object of belief and faith that is and contains the full and complete truth.
Studying my own faith in detail as well as numerous other faiths and beliefs has led me to conclude that there is no other system of belief that is as unimpaired in its rightness and veracity then that of the Catholic Church. Philosophy shows that God exists. History shows that Jesus sacrificed himself for us and rose from the dead. Scripture and Tradition show that Jesus established Peter and his successors as head of Jesus' Church here on earth, that he presents his body, blood, soul, and divinity to us in the Real Presence, that the Magisterium must be the interpretive authority in all matters of faith and morals, and so so much more.
What all of this essentially boils down to is this: I know too much to not be Catholic. There is an incredible amount of evidence that reveals that the Catholic Church is the spiritual home that Christ intended for all of humanity. Christ's presence in all that is Catholic is just too obvious for me to ignore.
This might appear to be too 'scientific' of an approach in determining what faith or belief to uphold, but to me there is nothing more beautiful then a faith that is complete in its truth and how that truth is discovered. It is a necessary condition for the Church that Christ created: if the Christian worldview is correct then any faith that falls under the umbrella of that worldview that contains any amount of falsehood in its teachings cannot be fully united with God because God IS Truth in His very being.
Catholicism does not fall prey to such a conundrum. It is nothing less than the fulfillment of God's promise to lead us closer to Him. I know that, both through what I have experienced and what I have learned.
And that is why I remain, that is why I make my daily conversion to Christ and His One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.
I initially found it very difficult, however, to figure out how to write my response, not because I do not know the reasons for my faith, but because I never put it down into words for others before; I have kept those reasons to myself without even thinking of how they might benefit somebody else who wishes to understand the Catholic faith more, or even just to get to know me more. Thus I feel that, in order to explain why I remain a Catholic today, I must explain a bit about my growth through my faith, making this both an answer to Elizabeth's call and a personal testimony as well.
I am a cradle Catholic, which to me is interesting in and of itself given my parents faith. My father grew up a cradle Catholic as well, but did not practice the faith that much. My mother grew up a Presbyterian. Yet it was my mother, who was a Methodist even after I was born, that deeply desired to raise me and any other children my parents had in the Catholic faith. Thus my mother took the reigns in my Catholic upbringing despite not being Catholic herself...at first.
I was given Baptism shortly after birth, and attended CCD once a week (my younger sister did the same when she became older). I found out later in life (because I do not have a memory of this) that the my mom was received into the Catholic Church long after I was baptized. It turns out that her love for the Catholic faith eventually led her to desire for herself what she wanted her children to experience as well. And all the while my dad, while not personally seeking to deepen his faith, supported his wife and children in our faith journey. My mom's love for the faith and my dad's encouragement for us to follow it was, in hindsight, a big part of how I got to where I am now.
With this I received all of my Sacraments growing up and went to all of my CCD classes. More often then not I did not particularly enjoy going because I did not like any sort of school in general, but I never questioned it; I knew it was important and I knew I needed to go.
As I got older and got into high school I attended a youth group at my parish. This was a big step in my journey towards God because it was here that I first developed really close relationships with deeply Catholic people outside of my immediate family. From that stemmed a growth in my desire to know God more, especially when we did our annual retreats. If my parents began my journey in my Catholic identity, I would say that it was this that cemented me in my desire to persist in that journey.
That being said, I was still far from having what I would consider to be a devout commitment to God and his Church; I would say that I became more conscious of my relationship with God, but not completely. I was still very much going through the motions a lot with my faith and involved in worldly and material things in a way that was very much neutral or detrimental to my relationship with God.
This changed when I went to college.
Ultimately it was my time spent at Ramapo College of New Jersey that led me to that level of spirituality where I try to seek God in everything that I do; it was also during this time that I sought more from my Catholic identity by seeking to know how to defend my faith, know why we believe what we believe, and know how I am to live as a Catholic man devoted to Christ. I grew a lot in my knowledge of the faith, which God was clearly using to help me draw closer to Him.
There were 3 groups of people in particular, though, that sealed what few cracks may have remained in my devotion to my faith. One was the Catholic group on Ramapo campus. Friendships within that group helped strengthen my faith in an intellectual, prayerful, and practical way.
The second was the FOCUS missionaries that we had on campus through most of my college experience. Having a mentorship with a couple of them in particular has led to a level of spiritual development that I would have otherwise not attained. The personal accountability that we had with each other and all that I have learned from these warriors for Christ has been astronomical.
The third was, ironically, in a Protestant non-denominational group called Intervarsity Christian Fellowship. While they may not have set out to teach me about my Catholic faith, the people I met and befriended in IVCF have guided me in seeking a personal and heartfelt love for God above all others and all else, which up until this point of my life was not nearly as important to me.
All of these, as well as more, have helped lead me to becoming the person and the Catholic follower of Christ that I am today.
So now we come back to the original question: Why do I remain a Catholic? Everything that I mentioned above, my parents, CCD, the youth group, college, all of it and more is part of the reason, as anybody's life experiences help shape that person into who they currently are and who they will be. But what is also always a part of that life experience are the daily choices that we make in responding to those experiences; events in one's life impact who we are to a degree, but we are always able to make a choice in how we handle them. I could have chosen any number of responses in reaction to everything that came across my plate of life, but by the grace of God I chose the path that brings me closer to Him and His Church.
So why, then? Why did I, and on a daily basis continue to, make the choice to be and remain Catholic rather than one of a number of any other choices?
The answer boils down to one simple statement: it is the choice that makes the most sense; it is the only object of belief and faith that is and contains the full and complete truth.
Studying my own faith in detail as well as numerous other faiths and beliefs has led me to conclude that there is no other system of belief that is as unimpaired in its rightness and veracity then that of the Catholic Church. Philosophy shows that God exists. History shows that Jesus sacrificed himself for us and rose from the dead. Scripture and Tradition show that Jesus established Peter and his successors as head of Jesus' Church here on earth, that he presents his body, blood, soul, and divinity to us in the Real Presence, that the Magisterium must be the interpretive authority in all matters of faith and morals, and so so much more.
What all of this essentially boils down to is this: I know too much to not be Catholic. There is an incredible amount of evidence that reveals that the Catholic Church is the spiritual home that Christ intended for all of humanity. Christ's presence in all that is Catholic is just too obvious for me to ignore.
This might appear to be too 'scientific' of an approach in determining what faith or belief to uphold, but to me there is nothing more beautiful then a faith that is complete in its truth and how that truth is discovered. It is a necessary condition for the Church that Christ created: if the Christian worldview is correct then any faith that falls under the umbrella of that worldview that contains any amount of falsehood in its teachings cannot be fully united with God because God IS Truth in His very being.
Catholicism does not fall prey to such a conundrum. It is nothing less than the fulfillment of God's promise to lead us closer to Him. I know that, both through what I have experienced and what I have learned.
And that is why I remain, that is why I make my daily conversion to Christ and His One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.
Thursday, June 4, 2015
Marriage As It Was, Is, and Will Be
In my last post I discussed the reasons for the Church's stance against divorce and remarriage, particularly from a biblical perspective as to how Jesus and St. Paul were against such an idea themselves. However, I only briefly touched upon an even stronger reason against divorce and remarriage, which is the strength of Matrimony as a Sacrament instituted by Christ himself and how it connects to God's eternal plan for each and every one of us since the beginning of time and space.
In particular I stated: 'All of this points back to the original intent of the indissoluble unity. This is not done to be cruel, or to make it hard for those who have had difficult relationships with their spouses. It is meant to be a calling to the original intent of Matrimony, going back all the way to the beginning when God bound the first people into the first marriage as husband and wife in eternal Love-filled sacrifice and servitude to each other (Genesis 2); it is meant to be a symbol of Christ's union with his Church (Ephesians 5: 21-30), for He is the head and the Church is the body (1 Colossians 1: 18), one flesh (1 Corinthians 12: 12-26). It is hard to imagine that Marriage can be a proper symbol of such things when it is acceptable for the ties of marriage to be split. Can a head be removed from its body and still live? Can Jesus truly be separated from His Church?'
There is so much beauty and richness in these truths that I feel compelled to expound on it even more. In particular, it is in my being drawn closer each and every day to marriage with my fiancé Maria that I continue to see the depth of the Sacrament of Matrimony in its holiness and sacredness. Maria and marriage with her embodies for me everything that the Sacrament is all about: love as complete and indissoluble self sacrifice for the other, unity to the point of being one flesh, and a symbol of God's original and intended plan for all of humanity and their salvation.
What sticks out to me most of all is the everlasting presence of Marriage in theology, both in its past, its present, and its future. Its visibility throughout all of Christian thought, especially as represented in Scripture, points to Marriage's true intention in our faith as it was always meant to be.
As it Was
As stated in the previous post Jesus refers back to 'the beginning' when talking to the Pharisees about divorce and marriage: "Because of the hardness of your hearts [Moses] wrote you this commandment [to write a bill of divorce and dismiss the wife]. But from the beginning of creation, 'God made them male and female. For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother [and be joined to his wife], and the two shall become one flesh.' So they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together no human being must separate" (Mark 10: 5-9).
This phrase that is stated in numerous Gospels, 'from the beginning', obviously points to Genesis 2, when Eve was created from the side of Adam and is referred by Adam to be 'bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh' (Genesis 2: 23); Scripture then states that this is the reason why a man 'leaves his father and mother and clings to his wife, and the two become one flesh' (Genesis 2: 24). It is a very interesting phrase in part because it hearkens back to the first marriage in existence. But even more importantly, it reflects upon the original intent and nature of marriage in the first place. It is no accident that Jesus quotes Genesis 2: 24 in particular; it is the very foundation of his argument against the concept of divorce that the Pharisees were accustomed to. Man and wife become one flesh upon marriage, and one flesh, one body, cannot divide itself.
As God is the one that formed the flesh unity between Adam and Eve, so He forms each and every unity between man and wife into one flesh. The language used in Genesis 2 cannot be more intimate than that; and the very intimacy of the language itself also points to the very nature of marriage as well: two people cannot be closer to each other than by being united in one flesh with each other.
Jesus' reflection of 'the beginning' points not just to what God originally wanted for us and marriage but to our very nature and the very nature of marriage itself. If God has an original intent for something then it does not simply mean that it is something that God would have liked to have happened with that thing, it means that that thing is designed by God for a specific purpose, it is in their nature to be that way. Thus, that thing should exist in accordance with that nature; to act contrary to it would be detrimental to itself.
For example, God designed the human body to require oxygen in order to continue to live. If we were to stop breathing oxygen and start breathing purely nitrogen for instance than we would die; it is in our very nature as human beings to breathe oxygen and to act contrary to that nature would kill us.
So it is with all things made by God, whether physical or spiritual. The very nature of Marriage is one of the most intimate of unions and was designed by God to persist that way. That is Jesus' point in continuously referring back to 'the beginning' when Adam and Eve were of one flesh.
As It Is
It is a fair question to ask, after recognizing the above, why God originally intended Marriage to be a unifying intimate union between a man and a woman. Ultimately, as with all of God's plans, we cannot fathom entirely why He does anything. That being said, we are made in His image and as a result we are capable of grasping truths about God and His plans to a certain degree, especially from sources such as Sacred Scripture. And we can see from Sacred Scripture that at least part of the original intention of Marriage is geared towards a fulfillment of Jesus' mission in being united to the Church.
We can see this most clearly in Ephesians 5. Here is the passage in its entirety:
"Be subordinate to one another out of reverence for Christ. Wives should be subordinate to their husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of his wife just as Christ is the head of the church, he himself the savior of his body. As the church is subordinate to Christ, so wives should be subordinate to their husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ loved the church and handed himself over for her to sanctify her, cleansing her by the bath of water with the word, that he might present to himself the church in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. So [also] husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one hates his own flesh but rather nourishes and cherishes it, even as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body. 'For this reason a man shall leave [his] father and [his] mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.' This is a great mystery, but I speak in reference to Christ and the church. In any case, each one of you should love his wife as himself, and the wife should respect her husband."
There is not enough space to unpack here the depth of meaning that this passage contains, so I will simply mention a few things that are important to mention.
First, it is important to note that St. Paul does the same thing Jesus does in referencing back to the beginning of marriage in Genesis 2: 24. This just further establishes the fact that marriage in its very nature is unifying and intimate.
Second, St. Paul uses this along with a bit of logic to establish another point, which is what the very nature of the man and the woman, when married to one another, is. He assumes from Genesis 2: 24 that husbands and wives are of one flesh and argues that as a result of this the husband and wife should take care of the other; after all, who does not want to take care of their own body? Who hates their own body?
St. Paul clearly takes the words of Genesis 2: 24 to heart, otherwise his argument would be nonsensical. With husband and wife being of one flesh the husband must take care of his body and the wife must take care of her head, just as any other body naturally does of its own accord.
Third and most importantly, St. Paul not only shows a connection between husband and wife with Christ and the church, he reveals that Christ loving and sacrificing for the church is the fulfillment of Genesis 2: 24 and, thus, the very fulfillment of all marriages.
Indeed, the husband is clearly connected to being the head as Christ is the head of the church, and the wife is clearly connected to being the body as the church is the heavenly body of Christ. But if you also notice, immediately after he quotes Genesis 2: 24 St. Paul states that he speaks 'in reference to Christ and the church.' This is an admission that Paul feels that Christ is a fulfillment of Genesis 2: 24, for he is the Messiah and did exactly what He came to do: to unite himself entirely to his church by sacrificing himself for it.
St. Paul also referring to Christ as the head and the Church as the body serves to further illustrate the notion that Christ has become one body with his church and thus is in a sense married to her. I say 'in a sense' because it is marriage here that is clearly a symbol of the union Christ and the church have, not the other way around.
This is further corroborated in 1 Corinthians 12: 12, where St. Paul says, "As a body is one though it has many parts, and all the parts of the body, though many, are one body, so also Christ." He then goes on a lengthy diatribe describing how a body's parts cannot ever act against one another because they by their very nature act in accord with one another, for no part is the body itself but only together can they be the body. He establishes his point by recognizing that it is the same with the body of Christ.
So if the body of Christ, of which Christ is the head, cannot act contrary to itself and a man and a woman in marriage represents the body of Christ, then it must be the case that man and woman in marriage cannot act contrary to one another; they cannot separate from one another and are called to act as one because they are one. This is the point I touched upon before in my other post about divorce: with marriage of husband and wife being representative of Christ and his Church and with Christ and his Church being of one body and mind, it shows that Christ cannot and will not be separated from his church and, as such, husband and wife cannot be truly separated from each other.
Thus, to go back, If Jesus' being unified to his church is the ultimate fulfillment of Genesis 2: 24 and Genesis 2: 24 has historically and traditionally been connected to the very nature of marriage between man and woman, then logically the marriage between husband and wife is reflective of the very real, unifying, and unceasing love that Christ has for the church and the church has for Christ.
As It Will Be
As stated earlier, the above is certainly part of the original intention of marriage. There is another part, however, of that original intention that is not often discussed, and that is the connection between marriage on earth and the final Marriage that all of the faithful will participate in at the end of days.
If we go to Revelation 19, we will see that this particular section of the book focuses on celebration and joy. All of the battles and bloodshed mentioned earlier in Revelations has already come to pass at this point, and now we see the fruit of it all, for we read, "Alleluia! The Lord has established his reign, [our] God, the almighty. Let us rejoice and be glad and give him glory. For the wedding day of the Lamb has come, his bride has made herself ready" (v. 7,emphasis mine). A little later on the angel says to John, "Write this: Blessed are those who have been called to the wedding feast of the Lamb" (v. 9, emphasis mine). After that John says, "Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth. The former heaven and the former earth had passed away, and the sea was no more. I also saw the holy city, a new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband" (21: 1-2, emphasis mine). And then, shortly after, "One of the seven angels who held the seven bowls filled with the seven last plagues came and said to me, 'Com here. I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb'" (v. 9, emphasis mine).
Why do we have all of these references to marriage mentioned during a time that is supposed to be describing the glorious reign of Christ at the end of days? Didn't Jesus say in Matthew 22: 30, Mark 12: 25, and Luke 20: 35 that when we die and go to heaven we will not be 'married nor given in marriage'?
What Jesus was referring to in those passages was earthly marriage between a man and a woman; such a marriage with sexual acts will not exist nor need to exist in eternal life.
What Revelations seems to imply, however, is that earthly marriage is meant to represent this 'marriage feast' mentioned in chapter 19, between the Lamb and his 'bride'; if it did not imply this then it would not use terms like 'wedding', 'bride', and 'husband' to describe what will be occurring.
As we have already established above, the bride of Christ is the Church, for it is the Church that Christ sacrificed himself for and who Christ is the head of and one body with. So when Revelations mentions the 'bride' and the 'wife of the Lamb' ('Lamb' being a symbol of Christ) it is most certainly referring to the Church. However, these passages are focused on a different period of time, namely, the end of days when all are resurrected, Satan and those who follow him are cast aside, and those who have followed and do follow Christ enter into in a 'new heaven and a new earth'.
Thus, this language of being part of the 'wedding feast' refers to an event in the future in which sin and depravity are vanquished and Christ's body is made new, with 'radiance like that of a precious stone' (21: 11).
This shows us that husband and wife, as one unified body, are a symbol of the marriage feast that will take place at the end of time, the final completion of the Divine Plan for all of humanity. Jesus the Lamb is the head and his body, the Church, are united but also completely cleansed, for the Lamb makes 'all things new' (21: 5). This making of all things new in our resurrected bodies, in eternal bliss and holiness, united to God, is the absolute fulfillment of Christ's sacrifice for his people, for his very body. As such, it is intimately united to those called to married life.
This is why marriage is one of the most glorious callings that we can receive from God. We, as Christians, are first and foremost called to live a holy and saintly life in praise and glory to God our Father, our Lord Jesus Christ and the most Holy Spirit. Matrimony, as with all vocations, is given to us by God entirely to give us the grace to fulfill that first and primary of vocations. What makes Matrimony stand out, though, is its existence throughout all of human history and its being implemented by God from the very origin of Man as the path towards a union with God himself.
This is what makes me excited for Marriage. Maria and I work together in love and charity to bring each other closer to God and His will for us. We both truly believe that God brought us together in order to bring each of us closer to Him.
For this is what makes Matrimony truly special: it symbolizes and points to something that is infinitely more amazing. Marriage cannot be an end in itself because it is not designed to be; it is designed to represent Christ's love for us and the love that we should have for Him. That is what marriage always was, is, and will be.
In particular I stated: 'All of this points back to the original intent of the indissoluble unity. This is not done to be cruel, or to make it hard for those who have had difficult relationships with their spouses. It is meant to be a calling to the original intent of Matrimony, going back all the way to the beginning when God bound the first people into the first marriage as husband and wife in eternal Love-filled sacrifice and servitude to each other (Genesis 2); it is meant to be a symbol of Christ's union with his Church (Ephesians 5: 21-30), for He is the head and the Church is the body (1 Colossians 1: 18), one flesh (1 Corinthians 12: 12-26). It is hard to imagine that Marriage can be a proper symbol of such things when it is acceptable for the ties of marriage to be split. Can a head be removed from its body and still live? Can Jesus truly be separated from His Church?'
There is so much beauty and richness in these truths that I feel compelled to expound on it even more. In particular, it is in my being drawn closer each and every day to marriage with my fiancé Maria that I continue to see the depth of the Sacrament of Matrimony in its holiness and sacredness. Maria and marriage with her embodies for me everything that the Sacrament is all about: love as complete and indissoluble self sacrifice for the other, unity to the point of being one flesh, and a symbol of God's original and intended plan for all of humanity and their salvation.
What sticks out to me most of all is the everlasting presence of Marriage in theology, both in its past, its present, and its future. Its visibility throughout all of Christian thought, especially as represented in Scripture, points to Marriage's true intention in our faith as it was always meant to be.
As it Was
As stated in the previous post Jesus refers back to 'the beginning' when talking to the Pharisees about divorce and marriage: "Because of the hardness of your hearts [Moses] wrote you this commandment [to write a bill of divorce and dismiss the wife]. But from the beginning of creation, 'God made them male and female. For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother [and be joined to his wife], and the two shall become one flesh.' So they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together no human being must separate" (Mark 10: 5-9).
This phrase that is stated in numerous Gospels, 'from the beginning', obviously points to Genesis 2, when Eve was created from the side of Adam and is referred by Adam to be 'bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh' (Genesis 2: 23); Scripture then states that this is the reason why a man 'leaves his father and mother and clings to his wife, and the two become one flesh' (Genesis 2: 24). It is a very interesting phrase in part because it hearkens back to the first marriage in existence. But even more importantly, it reflects upon the original intent and nature of marriage in the first place. It is no accident that Jesus quotes Genesis 2: 24 in particular; it is the very foundation of his argument against the concept of divorce that the Pharisees were accustomed to. Man and wife become one flesh upon marriage, and one flesh, one body, cannot divide itself.
As God is the one that formed the flesh unity between Adam and Eve, so He forms each and every unity between man and wife into one flesh. The language used in Genesis 2 cannot be more intimate than that; and the very intimacy of the language itself also points to the very nature of marriage as well: two people cannot be closer to each other than by being united in one flesh with each other.
Jesus' reflection of 'the beginning' points not just to what God originally wanted for us and marriage but to our very nature and the very nature of marriage itself. If God has an original intent for something then it does not simply mean that it is something that God would have liked to have happened with that thing, it means that that thing is designed by God for a specific purpose, it is in their nature to be that way. Thus, that thing should exist in accordance with that nature; to act contrary to it would be detrimental to itself.
For example, God designed the human body to require oxygen in order to continue to live. If we were to stop breathing oxygen and start breathing purely nitrogen for instance than we would die; it is in our very nature as human beings to breathe oxygen and to act contrary to that nature would kill us.
So it is with all things made by God, whether physical or spiritual. The very nature of Marriage is one of the most intimate of unions and was designed by God to persist that way. That is Jesus' point in continuously referring back to 'the beginning' when Adam and Eve were of one flesh.
As It Is
It is a fair question to ask, after recognizing the above, why God originally intended Marriage to be a unifying intimate union between a man and a woman. Ultimately, as with all of God's plans, we cannot fathom entirely why He does anything. That being said, we are made in His image and as a result we are capable of grasping truths about God and His plans to a certain degree, especially from sources such as Sacred Scripture. And we can see from Sacred Scripture that at least part of the original intention of Marriage is geared towards a fulfillment of Jesus' mission in being united to the Church.
We can see this most clearly in Ephesians 5. Here is the passage in its entirety:
"Be subordinate to one another out of reverence for Christ. Wives should be subordinate to their husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of his wife just as Christ is the head of the church, he himself the savior of his body. As the church is subordinate to Christ, so wives should be subordinate to their husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ loved the church and handed himself over for her to sanctify her, cleansing her by the bath of water with the word, that he might present to himself the church in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and without blemish. So [also] husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no one hates his own flesh but rather nourishes and cherishes it, even as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body. 'For this reason a man shall leave [his] father and [his] mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.' This is a great mystery, but I speak in reference to Christ and the church. In any case, each one of you should love his wife as himself, and the wife should respect her husband."
There is not enough space to unpack here the depth of meaning that this passage contains, so I will simply mention a few things that are important to mention.
First, it is important to note that St. Paul does the same thing Jesus does in referencing back to the beginning of marriage in Genesis 2: 24. This just further establishes the fact that marriage in its very nature is unifying and intimate.
Second, St. Paul uses this along with a bit of logic to establish another point, which is what the very nature of the man and the woman, when married to one another, is. He assumes from Genesis 2: 24 that husbands and wives are of one flesh and argues that as a result of this the husband and wife should take care of the other; after all, who does not want to take care of their own body? Who hates their own body?
St. Paul clearly takes the words of Genesis 2: 24 to heart, otherwise his argument would be nonsensical. With husband and wife being of one flesh the husband must take care of his body and the wife must take care of her head, just as any other body naturally does of its own accord.
Third and most importantly, St. Paul not only shows a connection between husband and wife with Christ and the church, he reveals that Christ loving and sacrificing for the church is the fulfillment of Genesis 2: 24 and, thus, the very fulfillment of all marriages.
Indeed, the husband is clearly connected to being the head as Christ is the head of the church, and the wife is clearly connected to being the body as the church is the heavenly body of Christ. But if you also notice, immediately after he quotes Genesis 2: 24 St. Paul states that he speaks 'in reference to Christ and the church.' This is an admission that Paul feels that Christ is a fulfillment of Genesis 2: 24, for he is the Messiah and did exactly what He came to do: to unite himself entirely to his church by sacrificing himself for it.
St. Paul also referring to Christ as the head and the Church as the body serves to further illustrate the notion that Christ has become one body with his church and thus is in a sense married to her. I say 'in a sense' because it is marriage here that is clearly a symbol of the union Christ and the church have, not the other way around.
This is further corroborated in 1 Corinthians 12: 12, where St. Paul says, "As a body is one though it has many parts, and all the parts of the body, though many, are one body, so also Christ." He then goes on a lengthy diatribe describing how a body's parts cannot ever act against one another because they by their very nature act in accord with one another, for no part is the body itself but only together can they be the body. He establishes his point by recognizing that it is the same with the body of Christ.
So if the body of Christ, of which Christ is the head, cannot act contrary to itself and a man and a woman in marriage represents the body of Christ, then it must be the case that man and woman in marriage cannot act contrary to one another; they cannot separate from one another and are called to act as one because they are one. This is the point I touched upon before in my other post about divorce: with marriage of husband and wife being representative of Christ and his Church and with Christ and his Church being of one body and mind, it shows that Christ cannot and will not be separated from his church and, as such, husband and wife cannot be truly separated from each other.
Thus, to go back, If Jesus' being unified to his church is the ultimate fulfillment of Genesis 2: 24 and Genesis 2: 24 has historically and traditionally been connected to the very nature of marriage between man and woman, then logically the marriage between husband and wife is reflective of the very real, unifying, and unceasing love that Christ has for the church and the church has for Christ.
As It Will Be
As stated earlier, the above is certainly part of the original intention of marriage. There is another part, however, of that original intention that is not often discussed, and that is the connection between marriage on earth and the final Marriage that all of the faithful will participate in at the end of days.
If we go to Revelation 19, we will see that this particular section of the book focuses on celebration and joy. All of the battles and bloodshed mentioned earlier in Revelations has already come to pass at this point, and now we see the fruit of it all, for we read, "Alleluia! The Lord has established his reign, [our] God, the almighty. Let us rejoice and be glad and give him glory. For the wedding day of the Lamb has come, his bride has made herself ready" (v. 7,emphasis mine). A little later on the angel says to John, "Write this: Blessed are those who have been called to the wedding feast of the Lamb" (v. 9, emphasis mine). After that John says, "Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth. The former heaven and the former earth had passed away, and the sea was no more. I also saw the holy city, a new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband" (21: 1-2, emphasis mine). And then, shortly after, "One of the seven angels who held the seven bowls filled with the seven last plagues came and said to me, 'Com here. I will show you the bride, the wife of the Lamb'" (v. 9, emphasis mine).
Why do we have all of these references to marriage mentioned during a time that is supposed to be describing the glorious reign of Christ at the end of days? Didn't Jesus say in Matthew 22: 30, Mark 12: 25, and Luke 20: 35 that when we die and go to heaven we will not be 'married nor given in marriage'?
What Jesus was referring to in those passages was earthly marriage between a man and a woman; such a marriage with sexual acts will not exist nor need to exist in eternal life.
What Revelations seems to imply, however, is that earthly marriage is meant to represent this 'marriage feast' mentioned in chapter 19, between the Lamb and his 'bride'; if it did not imply this then it would not use terms like 'wedding', 'bride', and 'husband' to describe what will be occurring.
As we have already established above, the bride of Christ is the Church, for it is the Church that Christ sacrificed himself for and who Christ is the head of and one body with. So when Revelations mentions the 'bride' and the 'wife of the Lamb' ('Lamb' being a symbol of Christ) it is most certainly referring to the Church. However, these passages are focused on a different period of time, namely, the end of days when all are resurrected, Satan and those who follow him are cast aside, and those who have followed and do follow Christ enter into in a 'new heaven and a new earth'.
Thus, this language of being part of the 'wedding feast' refers to an event in the future in which sin and depravity are vanquished and Christ's body is made new, with 'radiance like that of a precious stone' (21: 11).
This shows us that husband and wife, as one unified body, are a symbol of the marriage feast that will take place at the end of time, the final completion of the Divine Plan for all of humanity. Jesus the Lamb is the head and his body, the Church, are united but also completely cleansed, for the Lamb makes 'all things new' (21: 5). This making of all things new in our resurrected bodies, in eternal bliss and holiness, united to God, is the absolute fulfillment of Christ's sacrifice for his people, for his very body. As such, it is intimately united to those called to married life.
This is why marriage is one of the most glorious callings that we can receive from God. We, as Christians, are first and foremost called to live a holy and saintly life in praise and glory to God our Father, our Lord Jesus Christ and the most Holy Spirit. Matrimony, as with all vocations, is given to us by God entirely to give us the grace to fulfill that first and primary of vocations. What makes Matrimony stand out, though, is its existence throughout all of human history and its being implemented by God from the very origin of Man as the path towards a union with God himself.
This is what makes me excited for Marriage. Maria and I work together in love and charity to bring each other closer to God and His will for us. We both truly believe that God brought us together in order to bring each of us closer to Him.
For this is what makes Matrimony truly special: it symbolizes and points to something that is infinitely more amazing. Marriage cannot be an end in itself because it is not designed to be; it is designed to represent Christ's love for us and the love that we should have for Him. That is what marriage always was, is, and will be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)