Category: Saskatoon marriage conference
Posted: 2010-03-24 01:36
Saskatoon marriage conference, March 19-20, 2010
The keynote address (Saturday evening after the banquet) by Richard Gaillardetz, was titled provocatively:
Why We Always Marry ‘The Wrong Person’! New Hope for Marriage in Tough TimesI won’t elaborate on any recent
controversies involving this speaker. You may
research him online if you wish to know any details.
However, here is just one example of what some have found problematic about
his opinions.
Beyond that you have "authoritative doctrine"-binding teachings of the church that Catholics must give a presumption of truth to. But since they've not been taught infallibly, there's at least a remote possibility of error. An example of that would be the church's condemnation of in vitro fertilization or the prohibition of artificial contraception. These are binding teachings. You're not allowed just to blow them off.
[…]
To use the birth control issue, I think there are a lot of Catholics who don't withhold assent, they simply ignore it. I don't think that's legitimate.
Catholics are obliged to do their best to give the presumption of truth to such teachings, to try and assimilate them. But if in doing so, Catholics at the end of the day say: "I simply cannot internally assent to that," I would argue they have genuinely done all the church has asked of them. I will argue to my last breath that it is possible for a Catholic to be in good standing and not be able to give internal assent to every teaching and practice and discipline of the church. Anyway, on to his presentation. He is certainly a very lively fellow, although this might be interpreted in a variety of ways. A woman I spoke to after his talk said she thought he came across as "full of himself." (But then we writer-types so often do.)
In his opening remarks, Gaillardetz declared that he was committed to a theology of marriage that “speaks to married couples where they live.”
Well, aren't we all.
But I happen to believe that Catholic theology and moral teaching does precisely that.
However, Gaillardetz quickly went on to juxtapose the “lofty theology” of the Church to the “nitty gritty” of marital reality for most people.
Well, any half-witted Catholic (and I certainly count myself among their number) can read between the lines: that the Church’s teaching is all very nice (nudge, wink) --perhaps even wonderful-- (certainly lofty) but people shouldn’t actually have to
live it. The Church should ‘meet us where we’re at,’ and we can all live comfortably with our self-formed consciences based on our personal lived experience.
Gaillardetz made references to a conference he had once attended where a young priest was “attempting” to explain church teaching about conjugal love. In relating the story, Gaillardetz’s language and tone were condescending and patronizing, to the accompanying tittering of the Saskatoon banquet crowd. Implicit in his words and attitude was the well-worn cliché: ‘what can a celibate male possibly know about sex?’
Gaillardetz then openly mocked the Church’s language of the nuptial meaning of the body, specifically that conjugal relations represent “an icon of Christ and the Church.” “No one really talks that way,” he insisted, especially when they are “feeling frisky.” His deprecatory remarks were met with uproarious laughter from many in the banquet hall.
Nor (I would offer as an aside) is the word “transubstantiation” daily fare in the conversation of most Catholics, but that doesn’t make the reality of Christ’s presence in the Eucharist any less true. But then what do I know? I am not a theologian with a Ph.D. I am just a
Dumb Old Housewife. Gaillardetz related his own experience of early marriage, when the exhaustion of caring for newborns and other major career and life stresses filled him and his wife with resentment and fear. He wondered if his marriage would “fly”, joking that he and his wife were both too highly educated (theologically speaking) to qualify for an annulment (more hearty laughter).
“Looking into the abyss,” he noted, there was “no delight, no witty conversation, no spontaneity, no sex.”
He said that almost every couple at one point or another in their marriages “looks into the abyss,” and in this he is absolutely correct. Also correct was what came next: “We’ve got to make a connection between lofty ideals [ie. Church Teaching] and the abyss.” But then he said something very strange: “…and the Roman Catholic Church doesn’t always do a good job of this.”
Excuse me?
The Catholic Church has been connecting the dots between lofty ideals and the abyss ever since before there
was a Catholic Church. Indeed, when the 'church' was only an itinerant preacher and a rag-tag band of apostles, a guy named Jesus spelled it out (in Luke 9:23, and many other places in Scripture):
"And he said to all: If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me."It is called the Doctrine of the Cross, and it is at once as sublime and as nitty-gritty as you can possibly get.
Gaillardetz went on to say that he feels we need a “practical theology of marriage,” as if to imply that the Church does not already have one. He said we must consider the “cultural context” in which we live out our marriages. “Our culture has created an obsession with romance,” adding that there is a “disconnect” between unrealistic ideas about romantic love and the real, mundane daily life of the average Catholic couple.
“Even Celine Dion cannot make that look romantic,” he joked.
Ah yes, but Incarnational Spirituality
can. Has this man, for all his education and erudition, never read G.K. Chesterton’s writings on the wild romance of the domestic; St. Therese of Lisieux’s “Little Way”, Servant of God Catherine Doherty’s Little Mandate; Christopher West’s “
Everyday Mysticism”; John Paul II’s
Familiaris Consortio?
Over the years, entire apostolates have been founded to aid Catholic couples to achieve (and celebrate) the ‘connection’ between the lofty ideals and the dirty diapers:
Familia, Nazareth Family Apostolate, the Cana Movement, One More Soul, Opus Dei, Families of Nazareth (yes, it’s different), Catholic Family Ministries, The Theology of the Body Institute...the list goes on and on. Each philosophy, apostolate, or teaching brings home the reality and possibility of achieving sanctification –and joy—in and through the ordinariness and suffering of daily life.
Regrettably however, ‘sanctification’ was not part of Gaillardetz’s presentation. In fact, I didn’t hear that word once all weekend. But I digress.
Gaillardetz poked fun at the secular idea of the “ideal soulmate” that is entrenched in our culture, noting that Catholics underwrite it with a “really bad theology,” which he calls the “Theology of Providence.” In other words, the idea that God chooses our spouse for us and/or has our life mapped out “like a movie script,” and we have only to labour and pray for its completion and fulfillment. Instead, he said, “We make choices, and God walks beside us,” no matter what those choices are.
In one of the ironies of the evening, Gaillardetz criticized the “consumer culture” of our age, which tries to “manipulate desire” in us. He noted that the “comparison shopping” ethos of consumer culture makes marital commitment very difficult today. He ridiculed a consumer culture that tells us constantly to modernize and upgrade, not only in our material purchases, but also in relationships.
Enter irony: he wants a theology of marriage that is not “lofty” but one that meets us where we live. If he does not accept that Catholic marital theology is sufficient unto the daily grind, then he must want it changed, modernized, upgraded. I can’t see how that is different from consumerism (a.k.a. Cafeteria Catholicism) but then, I am only a DOH, not an M. Div. or a PhD.
Make no mistake: he said some good things too. In seeking compatibility, potential couples must look for common vision, not necessarily common interests, and this common vision must be based on faith. He maintained that since people’s interests change over time, and spouses mature (spiritually and psychologically) at different times in life, it is not enough to base marriage on interests alone. When profound change happens, or couples face the “abyss”, they may be tempted to think they married the wrong person. Citing the difference between adultery and infidelity, he said all of us are tempted to be unfaithful “in small, socially acceptable ways,” and sometimes in greater ways.
This can cause profound loneliness within marriage. He then (inexplicably) asserted that the Catholic Church “doesn’t prepare married couples for loneliness,” citing St. Augustine’s famous “Our hearts are restless until they rest in You,” quotation . I found this baffling, as the quotation does not support, but rather refutes his claim. Indeed, with and through contemplative spirituality, the Church encourages us (as my banquet table-mate said to me) “to live the mystical tradition. We are all called to live a deep, personal relationship with Christ.” Gaillardetz did not touch on this aspect of individual spirituality, but I would maintain that it is necessary to know Christ personally before you can hope to form a solid Catholic marriage.
He maintained that Catholic couples must think about living marriage in a non-consumerist way. Conversion in marriage is the call to come back to the spouse. Our differences and habits can become an invitation to conversion. We need to progress from the notion of divinely pre-ordained “soulmate” to chosen “companion.” Companionship means asking, “What are the gifts he/she has been giving me that I haven’t been noticing because they weren’t what I was looking for?” Companionship is “a decision, a discipline.”
Mr. Gaillardetz’s secret to a happy marriage? Don’t ask “Did I marry the wrong person?” but ask “Are we sharing a vision where we can love each other and be of service to the world?”
At the end of the talk, he said there must be a shift (in ethos) from “consumption to conversion,” and that conversion must be “ongoing.”
Hear, hear!
A good start might be to stop asking for a theology of marriage that doesn’t call us beyond ourselves, and embrace the fullness, the beauty, and yes, even the loftiness of the Catholic theology of sacramental marriage.
