St. Josemaria Escriva

  • Thread starter Thread starter barnestormer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

barnestormer

Guest
In the spirit of honest inquiry, I am posting this quote by St. Josemaria Escriva because I am genuinely curious about his point. Feel free to enlighten me as to his meaning here.

“Marriage is for the rank and file, not for the officers of Christ’s army. For, unlike food, which is necessary for every individual, procreation is necessary only for the species, and individuals can dispense with it.” (From ‘The Way’)

I guess I don’t understand how this meshes with Church teaching on the holiness of marriage, how marital love is an important exterior expression of God’s love for humanity.

I’m not criticizing Escriva by any means (I am quite fond of his writings), but I don’t see all of what he’s getting at here.
 
40.png
barnestormer:
In the spirit of honest inquiry, I am posting this quote by St. Josemaria Escriva because I am genuinely curious about his point. Feel free to enlighten me as to his meaning here.

“Marriage is for the rank and file, not for the officers of Christ’s army. For, unlike food, which is necessary for every individual, procreation is necessary only for the species, and individuals can dispense with it.” (From ‘The Way’)
Click to expand...
“Some are eunuchs for the sake of the Kingdom.” Jesus Christ.

What’s the question? The Church has always taught and still teaches that celibacy is a higher way than marriage and that it is a charism for the building up of the Church.
 
I would also ask, who says officers are better than privates? We all must be content with where God places us.
 
I dunno. Didn’t St. Paul make some suggestion that marriage was only for those who were unable to conquer their base urges… or some such thing… that staying unmarried or unremarried was a better state???
 
I’m not sure I agree with celibacy being better. Those who aren’t celibate offer up things that a non-celibate doesn not. Marriage is a sacrament, not a dispensation. Any better ways of explaining this?
 
Don’t be chagrined or deluded. Before Vatican II everyone knew that the call to the priesthood or the call to a vowed state was a higher calling than marriage. Since then we have become used to placing everyone on the same plane. That does not mean that marriage is bad and for bad people, but only the other calls are of a higher nature. The idea of holiness is a whole nother question that is more dependant on how one lives out ones vocation no matter what it is.
 
Honestly, I think all ST. Josemaria was trying to say was the “Enouch for the Kingdom” line.

I know that its harder to maintain a prayer life in a marriage. When you are single, its much much easier. You don’t have the home things to distract an atmosphere of prayer and contemplation in your home life.
 
40.png
bknebel:
I know that its harder to maintain a prayer life in a marriage. When you are single, its much much easier. You don’t have the home things to distract an atmosphere of prayer and contemplation in your home life.
Click to expand...
That was my sense of Escriva’s statement. Marriage is a vocation and any vocation requires commitment and sacrifice. For a married person, caring for one’s family is a responsibility that comes before spiritual adventures.

I belong to a mail list for Benedictine Oblates and the monk who gives us the daily reading from the Rule (along with a commentary) continually reminds us that we shouldn’t let our desire for spiritual practices become an obstacle in our family life.

I think Escriva’s comment simply means that unmarried persons are free of family obligations, and can devote more of their life to spiritual concerns.
 
I’m sounding off for the explanation that the Church has traditionally taught that following the evangelical counsels of poverty, chastity, and obedience is “holier” than not. In this sense, priesthood and religious life are, indeed, higher callings and holier ways of life. This is not to impugn the holiness of matrimony, it just shows that there is an even holier way of living to which some are called for the sake of the kingdom.
 
Yes, but if everyone followed this higher calling, would not the human race be extinct in a generation? Wouldn’t that be the logical end to that mentality? Is that part of God’s plan?
 
40.png
knute:
Yes, but if everyone followed this higher calling, would not the human race be extinct in a generation? Wouldn’t that be the logical end to that mentality? Is that part of God’s plan?
Click to expand...
What would be logical would be to understand that the call to the Evangelical Counsels of Perfection is for the few, and not for the many as Jesus himself states:

Mt. 19:11 – “Not all men can receive this saying, but only those to whom it is given.”
 
40.png
knute:
Yes, but if everyone followed this higher calling, would not the human race be extinct in a generation? Wouldn’t that be the logical end to that mentality? Is that part of God’s plan?
Click to expand...
As mercygate kind of points out, that’s probably why not everyone receives this higher calling.

I am not ashamed to be living out a less holy vocation than that of a brother or priest because I know my marriage is the state to which I was called.

While I understand the emotional hang-ups that may come with having to admit that one’s calling is less holy than another’s, what logical reason is there for excluding the possibility that certain states in life are holier than others?
 
Andreas Hofer:
While I understand the emotional hang-ups that may come with having to admit that one’s calling is less holy than another’s, what logical reason is there for excluding the possibility that certain states in life are holier than others?
Click to expand...
Jesus said, “let all accept this teaching who can.” I take this to mean all should strive for this state in life. This means that it is possible for all who put their minds to it. This then, logically, leads to termination of the human race. It is a completely puzzling statement and I don’t think the Church has ever quite expounded upon it much it because she recognizes the ramifications of such a statement for humanity.
 
40.png
knute:
Jesus said, “let all accept this teaching who can.” I take this to mean all should strive for this state in life. This means that it is possible for all who put their minds to it. This then, logically, leads to termination of the human race. It is a completely puzzling statement and I don’t think the Church has ever quite expounded upon it much it because she recognizes the ramifications of such a statement for humanity.
Click to expand...
Knute, I don’t know what translation you are using but the Greek clearly says that not all can receive this saying but only those to whom it is given. So you can relax. As with any other calling, it is *given, ***and it is not something we can do of ourselves without divine assistance in the charism of our vocation. It is not possible “for all who put their minds to it.” The human race is in no danger of immediate extinction because of this counsel.
 
But can one ever really be sure of his “calling” ? We often hear that many youth today are not listening carefully to the call of God to be priests. A man may think he has a calling, then decide he wants to get married. Does that mean he didn’t have the calling? Maybe he rejected it for selfish reasons. It just seems as if Jesus and Saint Paul hold up celibacy as an ideal for those who can “accept it” but no one can can ever be quite sure if he should “accept it” or not. face it, it’s a paradox.
 
40.png
knute:
But can one ever really be sure of his “calling” ? We often hear that many youth today are not listening carefully to the call of God to be priests. A man may think he has a calling, then decide he wants to get married. Does that mean he didn’t have the calling? Maybe he rejected it for selfish reasons. It just seems as if Jesus and Saint Paul hold up celibacy as an ideal for those who can “accept it” but no one can can ever be quite sure if he should “accept it” or not. face it, it’s a paradox.
Click to expand...
You’re dealing with catch-22 at best. There’s nothing paradoxical about the subject. Some people are called. This is objectively true. It is fact. Some people properly discern the calling. Others do not. So what? Say you and your siblings are playing a good distance from the house. You hear your mother calling, but can’t be entirely sure whom she is calling. You think you’ve been engulfed in a paradox, I think you’re faced with having to make a decision based on your best guess at what you heard. No human act is backed by 100% certitude. That’s hardly grounds for crying “Paradox!”
 
I have no qualms about saying it may be impossible to know for sure the meaning of a particular saying from Jesus. In his book “The Everlasting Man” Chesterton points to Jesus’s many confusing paradoxical statements.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top