The Old Testament offered various marriages as symbolic of God’s relationship with his Chosen People (as with Hosea and Gomer). While Israel was constantly unfaithful, he would bring her forgiveness and seek to woo her back to himself. This understanding becomes more serious in the New Testament in that marriage signifies the relationship between Christ and his Church. It is not for man to redefine marriage or its parameters. It is entirely of God’s design (see Genesis). It points to something beyond itself. Catholics would appreciate this mystery as a sacrament.
There are a number of significant marriages detailed in the Old Testament:
- Adam and Eve;
- Abraham, Sarah and Hagar;
- Isaac and Rebekah;
- Jacob, Rachel and Leah;
- Boaz and Ruth;
- David, Michal, Ahinoam, Abigail, Maachah, Haggith, Abital, Eglah and Bathsheba; and
- Hosea and Gomer the harlot.
Polygamy was sometimes practiced early in the Old Testament but as with the Muslims today it was probably rarely practiced due to the expense. The Jews practiced a two-tiered marriage, as with see with Mary and Joseph. Jesse Jackson got into some trouble years ago for saying at a Democratic Convention that Mary was an unwed mother. According to Jewish law, however, she was married already. The first stage was betrothal and the second was when the woman came to live in the husband’s house. A dowry was paid to a woman’s father making her his property. The problem with this set up was that it might bypass the woman’s consent. When the man brought the woman to his house, there will be a big celebration or feast in the community.
The Song of Songs celebrates the joys of physical love. Following a terrible curse, we have the poignant night prayer of Tobiah and Sarah. From profane to profound, we see the whole gambit of human love. The old marriage prayers stressed the married life was among the greatest joys not forfeited by original sin or washed away by the flood. The joy and fruitfulness of married life was deemed as a sign pointing to God’s favor and the promise of redemption. A good marriage was thus a taste of heaven.
The new dispensation of Christ would build upon God’s plan seen in Genesis and creation. Further, since the Church was the new People of God, the marriage analogy would refer to Christ and his Church.
Filed under: Bible, Catholic, Marriage, Sacraments | Leave a comment »
Marriage is a natural right. However, the Church reasonably asks couples to refrain from this right until they have obtained adequate psychological maturation. This coming-of-age is indicated by comprehending marriage as a life-long, complete commitment between a man and woman. They would also have to understand that this relationship is orientated toward mutual love and help (fidelity) and to the procreation and education of children. The background to this awareness is a realistic appreciation of the various difficulties in marriage and how they might handle them. They must be free from coercion in making this promise of a shared life and possess integrity of intention or will, resolved to endure any hardship.
Many younger men shared the Pauline preference for both celibacy and the single life. They were distinguished from the married men upon whom special rules were given. One might wonder as well if Paul did not already infer something of his marriage analogy in the life of celibate ministers. Christ was the bridegroom and the Church was his bride. The man ordained to Christ’s priesthood was called to regard the Church as his spouse. He embraced our Lord’s spousal love. He had to be willing as was our Lord to lay down his life for her (see 2 Corinthians 11:2 and Ephesians 5:22-32). Over time, there was a tendency to see a priest’s wife as “the other woman.” While it was not strictly the case, the Western Catholic sentiment came to regard the priest with an earthly wife as living in spiritual adultery. One must be very careful about promoting such views today in that they unfairly malign good married priests in the East and Anglican returnees in the West.
Some have assumed, usually those desirous of a change today in discipline, that priestly celibacy was only of later manufacture by the Church. Despite growing evidence to the contrary, they still resist the fact that it is of apostolic origin. Legislation in its favor appears in the fourth century; but, this merely confirmed or codified what was a practice and growing preference in ministry. Hebrew priests of the Old Covenant embraced a periodic celibacy or abstinence during the time of their service. Given that the office and service of New Covenant priests is permanent and perpetual, it would logically make sense that their celibate lifestyle should also never know compromise. This hints to a practice in biblical and patristic times that critics in our sexually addicted society might find unfathomable: that many if not most married Christian priests practiced perpetual continence. As they sought to be new Christs for their communities, they imitated the chaste (dare I say virginal) love of Joseph and Mary. Two themes permeate the Catholic appreciation of celibacy: first, that it is an eschatological sign for the sake of the kingdom (Matthew 19:22) and two, that it should allow us an undivided joyful heart (1 Corinthians 7:32-35).
Given the new pastoral provision for Anglicans who desire to join the Catholic Church, there is a revised focus upon the question of priesthood and celibacy. Episcopalian priests will be ordained (absolutely, if not conditionally) and this will include those who are married men. While bishops must be celibate, some of the married priests (former Episcopalian bishops) will be given authority much like that given abbots of religious houses. Further, while future aspirants from their ranks would be asked to embrace celibacy; it has been assured that the Pope could make exceptions for their seminarians on an individual basis and that he would be generous in doing so. Okay, there is the rub. It seems to some conservative critics, that an accommodation is being given these “new” Catholics which continues to be denied to those with long-standing and family ties to Roman Catholicism. Intellectually, many of us are pleased and excited that there is this reciprocal motion: their movement in faith toward Catholic unity and the Church’s willingness to take them into the fold. Of course, we are not merely creatures of intellect; but, like all people, in possession of emotions and passion. That is one of the reasons that few dioceses, if any, would ever assign a celibate priest to live in the same household with a married clergyman and his family. Celibacy is a sacrifice where a man can know joy and a single-hearted love of God. Nevertheless, the sacrifice is real and like the Cross, it can be painful at times. Many good men have had their heart-strings pulled and yet they remained faithful to their promises. They made distance when necessary and cried their tears in silence. As we make room in the Western Church for married priests, we must be mindful of these wounded celibate men. I would not say that we should feel sorry for them, although I am often tempted to feel such for married men who suffer with the tension between their family needs and ministerial commitments. I suppose in that sense we could say that married priests are also wounded healers. How could any man be “another Christ” to his people if he has not embraced our Lord’s Cross? There is a mystery here: the man commissioned to heal and to bring Christ’s mercy to others must himself be like a bread broken and a cup poured out.
In England, doctors would like to make the choice between life and death. Here is a report from back in 2006. It is still relevant today:
Blogger Priest 