ST PAUL ON MARRIAGE: WAIT—WHAT?

This essay is actually a “step-back” to the 2nd reading from last weekend.  The “Teacher of the Gentiles” is focusing on folks remaining in whatever state they find themselves in, either married or unmarried.  Of course, he’s painting too selectively in his comments.  I think a better (more honest) way would have been to say that unmarried men/women may well be anxious only for the Lord, and that married men/women might find themselves so caught up in “the world” that they are divided in their loyalties to the Lord and to “life.”  But where is St Paul coming from?  He is convinced that singleness of purpose is the way to be prepared for the Second Coming, and that this entails absolute fidelity to teachings like (especially) the Sermon on the Mount, and that this is necessary because “the time [left before the End] is very short (I Corinthians 7:29).  So what should we make of the rigorous teachings Jesus presents us with in Matthew 5-7?

    There have been four traditional approaches to this.  One is represented by 19th century theologians (especially but not exclusively Albert Schweitzer), who argued on the basis of St Paul’s statement above that Jesus, too, expected the imminent End, and so His teachings were “interim”—not intended to be adhered to for the long haul.
    Then there was the understanding especially of Martin Luther, who taught that the purpose of the Sermon on the Mount was precisely to prove to us that we are incapable of fulfilling Jesus’ precepts and so must turn to Him and throw ourselves on His mercy—in faith alone.
    Historically, the Catholic Church has taught that these teachings were really admonitions intended only for “religious”—monks, nuns, clergy—and not for the great majority of believers.  They came to be referred to as “counsels of perfection.”  
    Number four is the position of some Protestants of the “Free Church” tradition (Mennonites, Amish, Swiss and Bohemian Brethren…) who believe that Jesus taught these principles because He actually intended His followers to live by them.  So, for example, when the horrible shooting took place in the Amish school in Pennsylvania in 2006, the Amish quickly forgave the shooter (who himself died), comforted his parents, and were the majority at the shooter’s funeral service.   “Blessed are the merciful”?  “Love your enemies”?  “Turn the other cheek”?  This is Christianity in its most radical form.

    It was commented on multiple times in the media; it was marked as the most remarkable example of mercy.  This attention was actually (I believe) counterproductive.  It made the Amish “heroes” rather than folks who were simply living out what the rest of us Christians give lip-service to.  Making them extraordinary takes us off the hook for living Jesus’ words.  It seems to me that this is a risky business.

    Back to St Paul.  The real question is our focus on the Lord—can it be in propriety and without distraction (I Corinthians 7:35)?  Married or not, the answer is not in our state of life but in the state of our adherence to Christ.  Does the Lord matter?  How does the Lord matter?  After all, if I’m single I can still be caught up in desires for the “fast lane,” and if I’m married my spouse and I can work jointly to keep the Lord as #1 in a 3-way relationship.  I know many couples/families who do just this.  How about us?  Let’s take the Lord’s words more seriously than perhaps we’re accustomed to, even if we don’t quite measure up to Amish mercy.