Part 9

Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more. And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband; and I heard a great voice from the throne saying, "Behold, the dwelling of God is with men."

Sex and the celibate vocation? Isn't that a contradiction of terms? More aptly, it's a paradox.

We can't understand the Christian mystery without facing the tension A paradox. We must affirm the truth of one God in three Persons; of the Man who is also God; of the Virgin who is also Mother. In marriage, two become one flesh. In our walk with God, we must die to live, surrender to be free, lose our life to find it.

These are not the teachings of a schizophrenic God or a Church gone mad. If they strike us as "double-speak," it's because we don't yet think with the mind of God.

Marriage, sex, and the celibate vocation are much more interrelated than we might first think. They're also interdependent. When each is given proper esteem and respect, the delicate balance among them is maintained.

On the other hand, if any of the three (marriage, sex or celibacy) is devalued, overvalued, or otherwise disrespected, the others inevitably suffer. It's no coincidence, for example, that the sexual revolution brought both a dramatic rise in divorce and a dramatic decline in vocations to the priesthood and religious life. Nor is it any coincidence that historical misinterpretations of the celibate vocation have led to a disparagement of sex and marriage.

All such error stems from failure to deal with the tension of paradox. There's something mentally torturous about reconciling the (seemingly) irreconcilable poles of paradox. So to avoid the discomfort we focus on one aspect of a truth and end up denying others.

But it's precisely by pressing into the tension of paradox that we discover the fullness of truth. We must find our home in that tension. Only then can we properly understand the profound interrelationship among marriage, sex, and the celibate vocation.

l. If the call to "nuptial love" is the fundamental truth of our existence and the way we fulfill ourselves as human beings, why does the Church promote celibacy?

At first glance it seems as if the Church's promotion of celibacy is a contradiction of everything we've said about the dignity and importance of sex and marriage. Upon further investigation, however, we discover that the celibate vocation is actually the ultimate fulfillment of everything we've discussed.

As a sacrament, the "one flesh" union of marriage is only a sign and foreshadowing of things to come. We're created for nuptial union with God. That's what sexual desire ultimately points us to - our desire for heaven.

There, Christ will make a gift of himself to humanity in a beatifying experience completely beyond anything proper to earthly life. Our reciprocal gift of self will be our response to the gift of the Bridegroom.[2] The marriage of divinity and humanity will be eternally consummated. (See chapter three, question 16.)

Only by looking toward this heavenly reality can we properly understand the celibate vocation. As we read in the gospel, Christ calls some of his followers to embrace celibacy, not for celibacy's sake but "for the sake of the kingdom" (Mt 19:12). "The kingdom" is precisely the heavenly marriage. In short, those who choose celibacy are "skipping" the sacrament in order to participate in the real thing. By expressing the "I do" of a marriage commitment directly to God, celibates step beyond the dimension of history - while living within the dimension of history - and dramatically declare to the world that the kingdom of God is here (Mt 12:28).

Both vocations, then, in their own particular way, are a fulfillment of the call to "nuptial love" revealed through our bodies. As John Paul II says: "On the basis of the same nuptial meaning of being as a body, male or female, there can be formed the love that commits Man to marriage for the whole duration of his life, but there can be formed also the love that commits Man to a life of continence for the sake of the kingdom of heaven."[3]

We can't escape the call of our sexuality. Every man, by virtue of the fact that he's a man, is called to be both a husband and a father; and every woman, by virtue of the fact that she's a woman, is called to be both a wife and a mother - either through marriage or through the celibate vocation. Celibate men become an "icon" of Christ; their bride is the Church. Celibate women become an "icon" of the Church; their bridegroom is Christ. And both bear many spiritual children.

Thus the terms father, mother, brother, and sister are applicable to marriage and celibacy. Both vocations are indispensable in building the family of God. Each vocation complements the other and demonstrates the other's meaning. Marriage reveals the nuptial character of celibacy, and celibacy reveals that the ultimate purpose of marriage is to prepare us for heaven.

2. Does the Church still teach that celibacy is a "higher" calling than marriage?

Yes, but this must be carefully qualified. History has seen some grave distortions of St. Paul's teaching that he who marries does "well," but he who refrains does "better" (see 1 Cor 7:38). It's led some to view marriage as a second-class vocation for those who can't handle celibacy. It's also solidified people's erroneous suspicions that sex is inherently tainted, and that only those who abstain can be truly "holy." Such errors have led John Paul II to assert firmly: "The 'superiority' of continence to matrimony in the authentic Tradition of the Church never means disparagement of marriage or belittlement of its essential value. It does not mean any shift whatsoever in a Manichean direction."[4]

Celibacy is "better" or "higher" than marriage in the sense that heaven is better or higher than earth. Remember that celibacy is not a sacrament of heaven on earth. It is heaven on earth. But this shouldn't lead those who are called to marriage to devalue their vocation.

Everyone is called to a life of holiness by responding to the call to "nuptial love" stamped in his or her body. But not everyone is called in the same way: "Each has his own special gift from God, one of one kind and one of another" (1 Cor 7:7).

Each of us should respond to the gift we've been given. If we're called to celibacy, then we shouldn't choose marriage. If we're called to marriage, then we shouldn't choose celibacy. Hence the important need to discern our vocation prayerfully.

Actually, some Catholic priests are allowed to be married. We often forget in the West that there are many Eastern rite Catholic Churches (that is, Churches of the East in full communion with the pope) that have married priests. They are no less Catholic priests than priests of the Roman rite, which maintains a celibate priesthood. Furthermore, in some cases, married priests from other denominations (Anglican, for example) who convert to the Catholic faith are able to be ordained as married priests in the Roman rite.

Thus celibacy isn't essential to a valid priesthood. It's simply a discipline upheld in the Western Church in order to conform more closely to the example of Christ.

Christ was not married to one particular woman because he came to marry the whole human race. The Church is his eternal Bride. Ordained priests become a sacrament of Christ. They make the love of the heavenly Bridegroom efficaciously present to the Church, particularly in the Eucharistic sacrifice. Acting in the person of Christ, priests also marry the Church.

This important symbolism is better retained when a priest is not also married to a particular woman. As St. Paul said, the celibate is not "divided" in his service, but is able to devote himself entirely to the service of the Church (see 1 Cor 7:32-34).

I think it's unfortunate in some ways that we define celibacy with a word that points to what it has given up rather than defining it in terms of what it has embraced. Much confusion could be avoided if we described the celibate vocation as the "heavenly marriage," for instance. This is the marriage in which priests and all consecrated celibate persons participate.

4. Celibacy is simply unnatural. It's no wonder that so many priests have sexual problems. This type of scandal would end if priests were allowed to marry.

In some sense you're right to say celibacy is un-natural. As Christ reveals, celibacy is super-natural. It's celibacy for the sake of the kingdom. By calling some to renounce the natural call to marriage, Christ established an entirely new way of life, and in doing so, he demonstrated the power of the cross to transform lives.

For those who are stuck in a fallen view of sex with no concept of the freedom to which we're called in Christ, the idea of lifelong celibacy is complete nonsense. But for those who have experienced the transformation of their sexual desires in Christ, the idea of making a complete gift of our sexuality to God not only becomes a possibility; it becomes very attractive. The celibate vocation is not a rejection of sexuality. If some approach it this way, according to John Paul II, they're not living in accord with Christ's words.[5]

Celibacy is a grace, a gift. Only a small minority of Christ's followers are given this gift. But those who are given this gift are also given the grace to be faithful to their vows, just as married couples are given the grace to be faithful to their vows.

In both vocations people can and do reject this grace and violate their vows. Certainly there's a need in the typical Catholic diocese for greater openness about sexual woundedness and for development and promotion of ministries that bring Christ's healing to those in need, including priests. But the solution to marital and celibate infidelity is not to concede to human weakness and redefine the nature of the commitments. The solution is to point to the cross as the font of grace that it is, a font from which we can drink freely and receive real power to live and love as we're called.

Furthermore, the statistical rates of sexual misconduct among celibate priests is no higher than that of clergy in Christian denominations who are allowed to marry. There is absolutely no evidence that allowing priests to marry would solve or even alleviate this problem.

There's also a dangerously misguided approach to marriage inherent in the idea that marriage is the solution to the sexual scandal of priests. As has been stressed throughout this book, marriage does not provide a "legitimate outlet" for disordered sexual desire. Celibacy does not cause sexual disorder. Sin does. Getting married does not cure sexual disorder. Christ does. If a priest, or any other man, were to enter marriage with deep-seated sexual disorders, he would be condemning his wife to a life of sexual objectification. The only way the scandal of sexual sin (whether committed by priests or others) will end is if people experience the redemption of their sexuality in Christ.

For many women, the fact that the Catholic Church reserves priestly ordination to men stirs a caldron of intense emotion fired by the "historical consciousness" of women's oppression. Only in recent years, it seems, has the Church been willing to acknowledge and ask forgiveness for the fact that, as John Paul II expressed in his Letter to Women, "objective blame [for this oppression], especially in particular historical contexts, has belonged to not just a few members of the Church. May this regret," he continues, "be transformed, on the part of the whole Church, into a renewed commitment of fidelity to the Gospel vision."[6]

This gospel vision is precisely what we've been discussing throughout this book: the great "nuptial mystery" of Christ's union with the Church symbolized from the beginning by our creation as male and female. Fidelity to this vision calls us to uphold woman's dignity at every turn and to resist the ways in which gender roles have been exaggerated to favor men. But it also calls us to resist the other extreme that views men and women as interchangeable.

As mentioned previously, equality between the sexes doesn't mean sameness. It's the fundamental difference of the sexes that reveals the great "nuptial mystery." It's the fundamental difference of the sexes that quite literally brings life to the world.

A culture that levels this difference is a culture committing suicide, a culture of death. Professor Stanislaw Grygiel, vice-president of the John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family, aptly described the danger of a "unisex" world in the quote that begins the previous chapter. As a preface to that statement, he said that to understand "the miracle of sexual difference ... is the beginning of a path in which we discover the ultimate and fundamental difference for human beings: the difference between God and [humanity]."[7] To blur sexual difference is to blur the great nuptial mystery: the call to life-giving communion between man and woman, and between God and humanity.

Men and women have different callings in this life-giving communion. It's the bridegroom who gives the seed, and the bride who conceives life within her. One role isn't better than the other. Both are equally dignified and indispensable.

We must receive the calling we've been given as a gift from God if we are ever to be at peace with ourselves. Should men complain that God hasn't given them the privilege of being mothers? For a woman to want to be an ordained priest is similarly misguided.

We call priests father for a reason. Priests efficaciously symbolize Christ's giving up his body for his Bride so that she can conceive life "in the Holy Spirit." Only men can do this. As John Paul It reminds us: "It is the Eucharist that above all expresses the redemptive act of Christ the Bridegroom towards the Church, the Bride. This is clear and unambiguous when the sacramental ministry of the Eucharist, in which the priest acts 'in the person of Christ,' is performed by a man."[8]

If the ministry of the Eucharist were performed by a woman, the symbolism would become that of bride to bride. There would be no possibility of effecting nuptial union, and thus no possibility of new life coming to the Church. Here we see again how intimately united the marital embrace is with the Eucharist. John Paul II sums it up this way: "The Eucharist is ... the sacrament of the Bridegroom and of the Bride."[9]

6. If even men become the "bride of Christ" as members of the Church, why can't women become the bridegroom as a priest?

First, a brief discussion of the masculine and feminine principles in each of us. If it's male and female together that encompasses what's human, and if every man and woman is not merely half human but fully human, then it's proper to conclude that every man and woman is an interior "marriage" of masculinity and femininity. Thus in some sense we can speak of feminine principles in men and masculine principles in women.

Still, this interior marriage manifests itself as essentially male in men and female in women. The Church, in turn, as a "corporate person," is a marriage of men and women that manifests itself essentially as feminine, as Bride. There are masculine and feminine principles in this Bride in which both men and women partake. As much as men become "bride" as members of the Church, women become "priest" as members of the priesthood of all believers (see 1 Pt 2:9). Every baptized man and woman participates in Christ's priesthood by living a sacrificial life in union with him.

But we enter a different realm as soon as we talk about an individual person becoming a sacrament of Christ. For sacraments to be efficacious, the physical reality must properly symbolize the spiritual reality. For instance, if a priest said the words of baptism over someone while pouring motor oil over his head, there would be no sacrament because the cleansing symbolism of water is necessary to bring about the spiritual cleansing from sin. Without an accurate symbol (motor oil symbolizes making dirty), nothing happens.[10]

Similarly, if a bishop laid hands on a woman and proclaimed the words of ordination, nothing would happen because a woman is not an accurate symbol of the Bridegroom. So it's not a matter of the Church's stubborn unwillingness to ordain women to the priesthood. It's a matter of impossibility.

7. Didn't St. Paul say there is no longer male or female, but all are one in Christ Jesus?

Yes (see Gal 3:28). But how do we become one in Christ Jesus? Specifically through the difference of the sexes. Sexual union symbolizes union in Christ. Husband and wife are no longer two (male and female) but one. Yet the only way they can become one is by being male and female first. Thus St. Paul is not leveling sexual difference but showing where it leads - to unity in Christ.

There's a difference, I'd say, between a person who chooses to remain single in the world in order to devote him or herself to worthy causes and a person who is single not by choice but by circumstance. The former has made a vocational choice in some ways parallel to the celibate vocation and, by living a life in service to others, is fulfilling the call to make a sincere gift of self in imitation of Christ. The latter is, in some sense, still waiting to make that definitive gift of self.

This doesn't mean that the latter person's life need remain on hold. He or she can live a very fruitful life as a gift to others while maintaining the hope of one day finding a spouse and making a definitive vocational choice.

In any case, no one should think his or her life is meaningless without a spouse. The ultimate meaning of life is heavenly marriage. This is the gift Christ offers everyone - the gift of his very self.

Accepting this gift and giving ourselves back to Christ is how we all fulfill our call to nuptial love, whether we're married or not. In fact, if we're seeking our ultimate fulfillment in earthly marriage, we're setting ourselves up for serious disillusionment. As the saying goes, never hang your hat on a hook that can't bear the weight.

Ah! A great question with which to conclude this chapter and this book. In fact, in some ways Joseph and Mary's marriage provides a summary of everything I've tried to say.

Joseph and Mary's marriage is a paradox within a paradox, a "double mystery," so to speak. Marriage is itself a mysterious paradox in that the two become one through sexual union. But the marriage of Joseph and Mary is doubly mysterious and paradoxical because they never had sexual union. What could this possibly mean? To the extent that we can know it, the great "nuptial mystery" of the universe is actually revealed through this virginal marriage.

God gave Joseph and Mary an exceptional calling: to live the marital vocation and the celibate vocation at the same time. Remember what the celibate vocation is? It's the heavenly marriage. Joseph and Mary's marriage is the union of earthly marriage and heavenly marriage. It's the marriage of heaven and earth.

And what's the fruit of this celibate marriage? The Word made flesh. The fruit of their heavenly and earthly marriage is the wedding of the divine and human in one flesh Jesus Christ, the center of the universe and of history.[11]

This is why the Church's teaching on sex is good news. From the beginning, the "one flesh" union of Adam and Eve was a foreshadowing of the Incarnation. God created sex as the fundamental revelation in creation of his plan of life and love - his plan to share his eternal life and love with us by becoming one in the flesh with us.

This is the great "nuptial mystery" of the universe in which we're all called to participate. This is why we crave sexual union: because we crave union with God. This is why the devil so often tempts us to distort sexual union: because he wants to keep us from union with God.

Don't fall for his lies. Live according to the truth of your sexuality, and you'll fulfill the very meaning of your being and existence. Live according to the truth of your sexuality, and you'll one day live forever in the eternal climax of the nuptial union of Christ and the Church.

I pray this book has been of service to you in your journey toward this eternal embrace.

This a very successful program designed to help heal troubled marriages through frank and open dialogue.

Naked Without Shame. Audiotape series on John Paul II's Theology of the Body. Contact The Gift Foundation. Call 800-421-GIFT

Contact Our Father's Will Communications for a list of several other audio and video presentations by Christopher West. Call 252-429-9266. For access to various articles and other resources visit www.giftfoundation.org/resources/west.html

Phone Numbers for Ordering Materials Recommended in This Text Baker Book House: 616-957-3110

Catholics United for the Faith: 800-MY-FAITH Couple to Couple League: 800-745-8252 Daughters of Saint Paul: 800-876-4463

[1] Revelation 21:1-3.

[2] See Body, December 16, 1981.

[3] Body, April 28, 1982.

[4] Body, April 7, 1982. Manicheanism is an ancient dualistic heresy that views bodily things as evil, placing all emphasis on spiritual realities.

[5] See Body, April 28, 1982.

[6] John Paul II, Letter to Women, n. 3. I highly recommend this brief letter, as well as John Paul's more thorough treatment of the dignity and vocation of women in his Apostolic Letter Mulieris Dignitatem (hereafter referred to as Mulieris). To order both from the Daughters of St. Paul, see the contact information in the Resources section.

[7] John Paul II, "The Church Must Guide the Sexual Revolution" (Zenit International News Agency, August 31, 1999)2, retrieved from www.ewtn.com/library/Theology/ZSEXREV.HTM .

[8] Mulieris, n. 26.

[9] Mulieris, n. 26.

[10] Thanks to Mary Rousseau for this example. See her excellent article "Eucharist and Gender," Catholic Dossier, September/October 1996, 19-23, for a wonderful treatment of the issue of reserving priestly ordination to men.

[11] See John Paul II, Redemptor Hominis, n. 1.