Reflection on March 31, 1982

https://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/jp2tb75.htm

Marriage for the kingdom has a “fundamental, universal and ordinary value”. We have seen this throughout this talks in looking at what we learn through the union in marriage and how it relates to us our relationship to God. Continence for the kingdom “possesses a particular and exceptional value”. It is chosen “for supernatural reasons”. Choosing this continence chooses “a particular participation in the mystery of the redemption”. I have never heard it explained this way or expressed in such a manner. Whenever I have heard of the celibacy of priest, it has always been in the sense of a sacrifice, of what they are giving up to be priest. I have never heard it explained as an attempt to reach closer to that state we will be in after the Resurrection, when our unity will be with God, when they will be neither husbands nor wives. Then, our unity will be with God. Here on earth, those that choose continence for the kingdom are choosing that union while on earth to be an example for us and a gift to God.

I thought it was very interesting to think of the “supernatural motives” to choose a life of continence for the kingdom. Whenever I have talked to a priest or listened to them talk about their choice of celibacy, I have never found their reasoning motivational at all. I have never felt convinced by their arguments or understood their choice. After reading about the idea of “supernatural motivation”, that makes perfect sense. I have not been given the supernatural motivation to choose that life and so I will never understand their motivations. It made me think about the couple of people I have known that went to seminary and left early and are married. That supernatural call was not there. They may not be able to explain why they left other than someone came into their lives, or maybe it happened earlier than meeting someone, but it makes so much more sense that there is a supernatural motivation to choose that life.

I have heard, and I don’t know how reliable it is, that Mary had chosen to remain a virgin for life. She had made a commitment to that before she ever met Joseph and the even though betrothed, they would never consummate the betrothal. If that is true, such a choice would have had a negative reaction when we see how the Old Testament looked upon the lack of children in a person’s life. But Christ wants to change our perception of that choice. First, by choosing it Himself. Second, by being born from a virgin, possibly being born someone that would always be a virgin by choice. He shows us, by this choice the fruitfulness that can come from choosing continence for the kingdom, as Mary may have.

Kind of off topic, but there are many that do not believe Mary was “ever virgin” but that Jesus had other brothers and sisters. Just realistically speaking, does this make sense at all? How would St. Joseph approach Mary after God came forth from her body? He can show love and affection without the sexual act (a lesson the world could use) and it doesn’t follow at all from the humble obedience that we see from Joseph that he would deem himself worthy to consummate their marriage after she has Christ. Second, how could Christ have siblings without them feeling completely and utterly resentful of all He was? The “brothers and sisters” (cousins and kin) of Christ did not believe in Him and were surely jealous, how much more a sibling? Would God really put a person in the situation of being sibling to Christ? That doesn’t seem a likely position God would put them in.