If we take the First Reading, we may have come full circle especially when we consider the pervasiveness of broken marriages. Both the Sacraments of Matrimony and Holy Orders can be said to be complementary in a sense when one fails, the other fails too. These days, it is such a rarity to be able to celebrate a golden anniversary of a marriage. The same can be said also of a 50th anniversary of a priestly ordination. It could be that couples are getting hitched much older or that seminarians are taking the cloth at a more mature age. Closer to reality and more likely, the scarcity of anniversary celebrations may come from divorce and defection. The ease of divorce and the prevalence of failed relationships show how similar we are to the experience that Moses had with the Jewish community in his time.
Polygamy and divorce was common and since the Israelites were incapable of living up to the demands of conjugal life, Moses had to derogate from the initial mandate of God for marriage. In a way, Jesus reinstates the Father’s original intention for mankind. Our reflexion on discipleship takes us right into the heart of a political and cultural maelstrom.
The institution of marriage serves two purposes. God intended that marriage should provide companionship for man and woman and through their intimacy to ensure the survival of the human race. “It is not good for man to be alone and I will make him a helper suited to him”. The creation of Eve made possible the responsibility to “Go forth and multiply”.
However, the institution of marriage no longer rests on the foundation of who we are. Nature does not determine what shape marriage should take. Instead, by law, in some places we have begun to redefine marriage in terms of desire and consent. A plausible explanation for this fluidity comes from our ability to “manipulate” nature. Can one imagine the push for the redefinition of marriage, say, 40 years ago? The moment Dolly the Sheep skipped into pasture, a slew of other possibilities opened up. Surrogacy is a good example. The love between a man and a woman that is open to new life, now no longer requires the context of marriage to conceive.
In the process, we are “enabled” or “empowered” by “reproductive technologies”—contraception, in vitro fertilisation and surrogacy. Through the test-tube, man has found new methods of ensuring the continuity of the human race. With this latest development, the duo directive from God has been reduced to the sole or singular expression of intimacy. In other words, pleasure has been stripped of its purpose. Technology gives us the freedom even to determine how and what manner of our intimacy is to be like. Better still, “Rent-a-womb” makes it viable for mankind to conceive of new matrices of relationship. Two people in love should never be restricted to the hitherto accepted heteronormative worldview. In effect, we have removed “procreation” for the survival of our species and taken it out of the context of marriage.
This poses an enormous challenge for the disciple. In terms of discipleship, Marriage ranks together with Holy Orders as the two Sacraments of Service through which a Christian bears witness to the world. What happens to the institutions of Marriage (and Holy Orders) has far reaching consequences for the Church and for salvation. Sacraments save but not without our cooperation. Through living fully our vocations of Marriage and Holy Orders, we cooperate with God who saves us
What is happening to the institution of marriage that couples today appear to give up more easily? What are couples bringing into their partnership or more pertinently, what have they left out that only weakens it? A noticeable trend in marriage is how couples enter into it bringing with them an assumption that the other is a fulfilment one’s expectations. It is true that Adam was not complete until God created Eve. Nevertheless, this expectation can be better explained from the perspective of “self-actualisation”. What is it?
Broadly speaking, it refers to the need for the realisation of one’s potential or the full development of one’s abilities. So, when a man or a woman has unrealised expectations, then the need for self-actualisation will create rifts in relationships. The partner is expected to be the condition for the fulfilment of one’s potential. Cinematic art is replete with examples of how a person should look after “Nr 1”, suggesting that meaning in life is defined by self-fulfilment. It is not difficult to detect the plaintive cry of “What about me?”.
In itself self-actualisation is not a bad thing and this is not a criticism of self-fulfilment. However, in the context of marriage, when the concern is only focused on one’s self-realisation, then it begs the question where the element of self-transcendence is. Marriage thrives in self-sacrificing, a virtue easily forgotten. Meaning is derived not entirely from self-fulfilment but also in renunciation. The concept of “till death do us part” embraces the Christian epitome of “no greater love a man (a woman) has than to lay down his (her) life for his (her) friends”. To lay down one’s life for a friend is noble but in marriage, a spouse is more than just a friend. Love is most powerfully expressed by self-giving to the point of sacrificing one’s life. Jesus is the prime example. He loved the Church so much that He died for her.
We certainly have a standard to live up to. But we also have a reality to attend to. It is extremely challenging. On the one hand, it calls for compassion for those who may have tried and failed. On the other hand, the Church needs to uphold the teachings of her Lord and Saviour.
In this regard, the spirituality of the “nones”, in which they believe in a transcendence minus the baggage of organised religion is a good starting point for the disciples especially when we consider that the premium today is personal freedom, self-actualisation and self-fulfilment. It might be good to note that transcendence does not refer only to a “higher” supernatural authority. It could mean to go further or to venture beyond oneself. Here we dive into the domain of discipleship. Oblation belongs to the language of self-transcendence (and of the Eucharist too) which brings us right into the heart of what Christian marriage is about. Perhaps, we could fast a little from the honey-trap of self-actualisation and instead feed more on the milk of self-transcendence. What this means is that when a man or a woman enters into the partnership of marriage, then both must be ready for self-sacrifice.
If the institution of marriage is under siege today, the defence is less to be found in definition than in discipleship.[1] This correlates with the sentiment today that the authenticity sought by the “nones” is bound more to credibility than to truth. They are looking for “believability” more than for “dogmas”. St Paul VI stated in 1975 that “(m)odern man listens more willingly to witnesses than to teachers, and if he does listen to teachers, it is because they are witnesses” (Evangelii nuntiandi, 41). In a world craving for authenticity and meaning, the Christian disciple has his or her mission cut out. If he or she embraces the Sacrament of Matrimony, then the Christian ideal of marriage becomes more credible when it is live with love and self-sacrifice.
__________
[1] While the definition of what a marriage is, is important, nevertheless so too the living of it. The next statement is not a judgement of couples whose marriage has failed. But when a substantial percentage of our Christian couples divorce, how is marriage as a Sacrament not weakened? What is more when couples are not open to life, again the attack against marriage is not mounted from without but within. Poor Christian discipleship plays a prominent role in why marriage has come to mean nothing for secular society.
