VANITY: Searching for sainthood through marriage.

VANITY ^ | 4/5/04 | VANITY

[dangus]

0:^D>+

Et tu, Debbie?!

[conservonator]

St.'s Mary and Joseph. I think that's a pretty strong endorsement of marriage as a vocation.

[dangus]

>> I don't see much joy in their lives now nor in the past. They seem either terribly burdened or were corrupted by the world. <<

I think a priest who remembers he is alter christi is about as rare as a married couple who do not lust even for each other.

[Aliska]

married couple who do not lust even for each other.

I don't see all lust as such a terrible thing. It is normal for most people, a biological drive. I do understand when you throw real love into the mix, which is rare for a lot of people, the lust element is diminished. But biologically, I don't know if you can perform sexually without sexual desire. There is probably a slight distinction, but where the line is drawn I do not pretend to know.

I refuse to get too hung up on it either way.

[dangus]

I don't mean to sound like a sexual ascetic. You are right, a man cannot make children without having um..., and it helps the egg receive the healthiest sperm if the woman has um...

But that's not necessarily "lust," anymore than the desire to eat is "gluttony." That's sort of why I made the reference to calling out to God... atheists don't do that unless it's really good sex* (or they're faking). Just like one can eat delicious food and not be a glutton.

* And please, no more inferences about my um, history!

[Maximilian]

One name that I didn't see mentioned in the "Married Saints" list is St. Monica. Also, unlike some of the other saints, she gained her sanctity through her married life, not by leaving it. She had a very difficult marriage, and the well-known problems with her son, St. Augustine.

As to the more general question, I think it is the wrong approach to say, "The Church is at fault by not canonizing more married people." Isn't it much more likely that married people are generally just not candidates for sainthood?

There are 3 levels of holiness: Level 1 is living in a state of grace; Level 2 is the habitual practice of virtues like charity, patience, humility, obedience; Level 3 is practicing the heroic virtues that we associate with canonized saints. How many married people ever ascend to Level 3? The evidence indicates very few.

The evidence of today indicates that only a very small percentage is making it even to Level 1. The vast vast majority are living in mortal sin. Then of the small number who at least rise above Level zero, how many of them ever become truly humble, truly mortified, truly immune to the temptations of the world. I find that even among the "good Catholics" that I know, there is a pervasive worldliness that would preclude them from being considered even for Level 2.

And then of that number, how many ever approach to Level 3? How many married people ever experience mystical union with Christ, how many are given the gift of miracles or of reaching thousands of hardened hearts? Canonized saints are not just people who squeaked under the bar. They must possess unusual heroic virtues that are attested to by supernatural events. This virtually never happens with married people. Right now the Church is rushing to canonize some married people for reasons that are open to question, but I have yet to hear that any of them possessed miraculous spiritual powers such as we associate with Padre Pio.

Lest we married people feel discouraged, there are other categories of Catholics that are even more under-represented, such as parish priests. The devil himself, while tempting St. Jean Vianney the Cure of Ars, told him that he was wasting his time since no parish priest had ever become a canonized saint. St. Jean Vianney proved the devil wrong in his own case, but I'm not sure whether there have been any others since then.

[dangus]

OK, I decided to amend my last comment in person, because I'm getting to the point where I don't want to broadcast permanently my record here:

But, don't you think that worshipful ecstasy is even more pleasurable than ecstasy apart from God?

The issue is not whether or not the sex is enjoyed and desired, but whether or not people keep in mind, even as they do it, that they are doin something that God has called them to do it. People say grace before eating, but how many people make worship a part of their sex?

[dangus]

Yipes! That was not supposed to be public! That was supposed to be a letter!

[Aliska]

And please, no more inferences about my um, history!

Fair enough :-).

Jesus seemed concerned when the natural desire in marriage, which may or may not have an element of lust in it, was directed outside the marriage. To do that in one's heart was considered sinful.

Beyond that, I don't know how anybody can really judge it objectively as it is such a subjective thing.

Unbridled lust or persons incapable of healthy emotional attachment and fulfillment are not a desirable thing imo and bring much heartache to individuals and society.

I do think people having a spiritual bond in their relationship are better off. The others are missing something important, but that is their problem and they have to deal with it.

[Aliska]

but how many people make worship a part of their sex?

I have no idea. There are certain barriers there, probably as a result of conditioning.

[dangus]

>> I do think people having a spiritual bond in their relationship are better off. <<

Of course! How good is it if people are widly, madly, passionately in love with each other! But it is not good if their desire for one another is greater than their desire for God, or if they become an idol to each other. (Looking to get what they need in life from each other, rather than from God through each other.)

[Aliska]

I think you nailed that one.

[Maximilian]

I'm not saying this out of any partisan or sectarian spirit, and in fact you'll find that any discussion of the SSPX comes not from me but from those who want to accuse me of schism, but the most inspiring story of a holy married couple I have ever read were articles in back issues of The Angelus magazine that related the story of Archbishop Lefebvre's parents. They truly lived lives of heroic virtue. Of their 8 children, 2 sons became priests and 3 daughters became nuns. His mother lived a very saintly life, both early in her marriage when she was struggling to raise a large family and later after her husband died and she struggled to keep the family business going. All the while she practiced an intense spiritual life and was the local director of a 3rd order group. Archbishop Lefebvre's father was also a model of sanctity who served in the French underground in both WWI and WWII (their region of northern France was occupied both times). Eventually he was arrested by the Nazis and executed.

[dangus]

Thanks for your answers, all, but do any of you have a Catholic list you could ping?

[dangus]

I wouldn't blame Abp. Lefebvre's parents just because his kid was a schismatic. :) Only teasing.

But to your first posting: I know what you are saying about there being a lack of holiness among the married vocations. And that's my point: we need guidance into holiness, not just into spiritual mediocrity! But all our examples are virgins and martyrs... precious few providers, lovers and parents.

Choose any other form of worship, and you'll find libraries expounding on it. But try finding how one goes about making the consummation of a marriage into a worshipful act, and you're pretty much left to personal revelation!

[SoothingDave]

But try finding how one goes about making the consummation of a marriage into a worshipful act, and you're pretty much left to personal revelation!

The consummation of marriage is a worshipful act.

SD

[dangus]

Yes... not what I meant.

[Maximilian]

we need guidance into holiness, not just into spiritual mediocrity! But all our examples are virgins and martyrs... precious few providers, lovers and parents.

Maybe there is a good reason for that. One must be a saint before one can be declared a saint. There is no "affirmative action" in the canon of saints. God does not have an obligation to spread holiness around equally. As Christ said to the rich young man, "If you wish to be perfect, you must sell everything you have, give it to the poor, and come follow me." St. Paul reiterated that the vocation to the consecrated life is a higher calling. This has likewise been the teaching of the Catholic Church for 2000 years. If one is looking for Hall of Fame ballplayers, one doesn't look in the minor leagues.

But try finding how one goes about making the consummation of a marriage into a worshipful act, and you're pretty much left to personal revelation!

Again, one should assume that there is a good reason for that. When has it ever been said that the consummation of a marriage is a worshipful act? I think you're looking for something in Catholic theology that just isn't there -- at least it was never there until the innovations of the last couple decades. Like Sherlock Holmes' "dog that didn't bark," we can learn a lesson from traditional Catholic theology that didn't ever teach that consummation of the marriage act was "worshipful."

What Catholic theology has taught instead is that the marriage act must be subordinated to a higher purpose, which is the procreation and education of children. Thus any glorification of the act for its own sake is going to be counter to traditional Catholic theology.

[dangus]

>> St. Paul reiterated that the vocation to the consecrated life is a higher calling. <<

So, if I'm not called to a vocation of fatherhood, you're saying, I'm only called to the "minor leagues"?

>>When has it ever been said that the consummation of a marriage is a worshipful act?<<

So you're asserting, through rhetorical question, that the consummation of a marriage is *not* supposed a worshipful act.

[dangus]

Let me state that better: I mean to subordinate it to a higher calling. Don't I do that by bringing God into the act itself?