Ask a Question - or - Return to the Faith and Spirituality Forum Index

Question Title	Posted By	Question Date
Marriage as covenant	PJ	Wednesday, May 5, 2010
Question: I've been wondering about this one for a while. The Church teaches that marriage is a covenant. Also, biblical theology shows us that there are two essential components to covenants, oath and consummation, both of which are freely consented to. The consummation is the actual union in the form of a blood sacrifice, for the initiator or masculine principal of the covenant breaks open the receptive or feminine principal and fills her with His life. This covenantal union is fruitful. In the New Covenant the Father breaks Jesus' human nature on the cross through the instrumentality of the Romans and Jews, and His union with the bloody Jesus results in the resurrected glorified Jesus 3 days later. Abraham's bloody consummation replacement in His OT covenant with God is an animal, as is Moses', and all of the high priests' of the OT, vicariously substituting for themselves as the receptive principle of the blood covenant that is sacrificed. The blood of the receptive principal (Jesus' w/ the Father, OT animals as replacement, etc.) is what saves and nourishes the tertiary principal that are the result of the covenantal union, which are Christians (in the Eucharist), the OT Jews with Moses sprinkling it on the people as well as the lamb’s blood saving the Israelites in the Exodus, etc. Even ancient pagans practiced similar covenantal rites that would attempt to cause union and fruitfulness with the same pattern. In human marriage, which is a reflection of the covenant between Christ and His Church and ultimately between the Father and the glorified Son, also reflects this pattern: The masculine principal proposes, the feminine accepts; the masc. breaks the fem. and unites with her, filling her with his life. And this union at times creates a child (the tertiary principal) that is nourished by her blood. So in understanding the nature of covenant, here is my question: Since the feminine principle of the covenant must be broken as the blood sacrifice that seals the covenant, how can we call human marriage that includes a non-virgin female a covenant? That essential sacrifice of self and sealing of the covenant would be missing from the equation. I think pre-modern man understood this problem intuitively, for the death penalty was the norm and policy for women who were non-virgins before marriage in the OT and still is in many non-Christian cultures today. They didn’t yet know the new order of grace but perhaps they did understand the meaning of covenant more clearly than does modern man. I understand everything the Church teaches in her theology and canon law regarding marriage, but please explain how marriage can truly be a covenant without this essential component in the marriage of a man to a non-virgin woman.
Question Answered by Bro. Ignatius Mary, OLSM Dear P.J. Before dealing with your question there are two things to remind you about. One, this forum is not designed to take question after question from the same person in rapid succession. This is not a discussion board. So, you need to wait at least six weeks before asking another question. Two, again and again, you indulge in speculations rather than accept the plain and simple teachings of the Church on these matters. This is intellectual pride. Stop it. As for your question, all that you have described is imagery and has NOTHING to do with the Sacramentality of Marriage. To begin with there is remarriage of widows in the Bible. Obviously they are not virgin, so the idea you propose is nonsense from the git-go. Read the Catechism, P.J. 1601 "The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament." The paragraphs following this one describe the Sacrament of Marriage. Marriage is not a blood Sacrifice. And besides all blood sacrifices of the Old Testament were done away with by Christ. The Sacrament is effected by the "consent" of two baptized persons. A requirement of virginity is not required. Again, you are allowing your mind to wonder away from the Church, and from common sense. The notion of physical virginity of the woman is nonsense anyway when that definition of virginity requires the woman to be intact. Such physical integrity can be broken in a thousand ways that has nothing to with sex. Stop this speculation and read what the Church says about these matters and leave it at that. You are straying from the faith in your thinking. God Bless, Bro. Ignatius Mary Footer Notes: This forum is for general questions on the faith. See specific Topic Forums below: Spiritual Warfare, demons, the occult go to our Spiritul Warfare Q&S Forum. Liturgy Questions go to our Liturgy and Liturgical Law Q&A Forum Liturgy of the Hours (Divine Office) Questions go to our Divine Office Q&A Forum Defenfing the Faith Questions go to our Defending the Faith Q&A Forum Church History Questions go to our Church History Q&A Forum

Question Title

Posted By

Question Date

Marriage as covenant

Wednesday, May 5, 2010

Question:

I've been wondering about this one for a while. The Church teaches that marriage is a covenant. Also, biblical theology shows us that there are two essential components to covenants, oath and consummation, both of which are freely consented to. The consummation is the actual union in the form of a blood sacrifice, for the initiator or masculine principal of the covenant breaks open the receptive or feminine principal and fills her with His life. This covenantal union is fruitful. In the New Covenant the Father breaks Jesus' human nature on the cross through the instrumentality of the Romans and Jews, and His union with the bloody Jesus results in the resurrected glorified Jesus 3 days later. Abraham's bloody consummation replacement in His OT covenant with God is an animal, as is Moses', and all of the high priests' of the OT, vicariously substituting for themselves as the receptive principle of the blood covenant that is sacrificed. The blood of the receptive principal (Jesus' w/ the Father, OT animals as replacement, etc.) is what saves and nourishes the tertiary principal that are the result of the covenantal union, which are Christians (in the Eucharist), the OT Jews with Moses sprinkling it on the people as well as the lamb’s blood saving the Israelites in the Exodus, etc. Even ancient pagans practiced similar covenantal rites that would attempt to cause union and fruitfulness with the same pattern.

In human marriage, which is a reflection of the covenant between Christ and His Church and ultimately between the Father and the glorified Son, also reflects this pattern: The masculine principal proposes, the feminine accepts; the masc. breaks the fem. and unites with her, filling her with his life. And this union at times creates a child (the tertiary principal) that is nourished by her blood.

So in understanding the nature of covenant, here is my question: Since the feminine principle of the covenant must be broken as the blood sacrifice that seals the covenant, how can we call human marriage that includes a non-virgin female a covenant? That essential sacrifice of self and sealing of the covenant would be missing from the equation. I think pre-modern man understood this problem intuitively, for the death penalty was the norm and policy for women who were non-virgins before marriage in the OT and still is in many non-Christian cultures today. They didn’t yet know the new order of grace but perhaps they did understand the meaning of covenant more clearly than does modern man.

I understand everything the Church teaches in her theology and canon law regarding marriage, but please explain how marriage can truly be a covenant without this essential component in the marriage of a man to a non-virgin woman.

Question Answered by Bro. Ignatius Mary, OLSM

Dear P.J.

Before dealing with your question there are two things to remind you about. One, this forum is not designed to take question after question from the same person in rapid succession. This is not a discussion board. So, you need to wait at least six weeks before asking another question.

Two, again and again, you indulge in speculations rather than accept the plain and simple teachings of the Church on these matters. This is intellectual pride. Stop it.

As for your question, all that you have described is imagery and has NOTHING to do with the Sacramentality of Marriage. To begin with there is remarriage of widows in the Bible. Obviously they are not virgin, so the idea you propose is nonsense from the git-go.

Read the Catechism, P.J.

1601 "The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament."

The paragraphs following this one describe the Sacrament of Marriage. Marriage is not a blood Sacrifice. And besides all blood sacrifices of the Old Testament were done away with by Christ. The Sacrament is effected by the "consent" of two baptized persons. A requirement of virginity is not required. Again, you are allowing your mind to wonder away from the Church, and from common sense.

The notion of physical virginity of the woman is nonsense anyway when that definition of virginity requires the woman to be intact. Such physical integrity can be broken in a thousand ways that has nothing to with sex.

Stop this speculation and read what the Church says about these matters and leave it at that. You are straying from the faith in your thinking.

God Bless,
Bro. Ignatius Mary

Footer Notes: This forum is for general questions on the faith. See specific Topic Forums below:
Spiritual Warfare, demons, the occult go to our Spiritul Warfare Q&S Forum.
Liturgy Questions go to our Liturgy and Liturgical Law Q&A Forum
Liturgy of the Hours (Divine Office) Questions go to our Divine Office Q&A Forum
Defenfing the Faith Questions go to our Defending the Faith Q&A Forum
Church History Questions go to our Church History Q&A Forum