Communion or Disunion

I don't think my marriage to Isabel would work if we weren't on the same page about the Eucharist.

This isn't to say that I have some kind of special insight into transubstantiation or that I have a superior understanding of Communion, but I do believe in it.

While I'm sure Isabel would still "respect" my belief if she weren't Catholic, I doubt she would "get it." There would be a very central part of my self that was completely closed off to her. It would be like having police tape wrapped around a section of my soul.

This would perhaps be true on some level for any religious sentiment that wasn't shared by a couple -- a Jewish couple made this point at our Pre-Cana class (and it could be true for any activity, interest, or passion), but it is particularly true for the Eucharist.

Mass isn't just an activity -- the Eucharist is surrendering one's essential being to God so that He might become part of it and change it.

A non-Catholic...or perhaps just a disinterested Catholic...either wouldn't get the significance of this, and therefore be distanced from me, or they would have to resent it. After all, the union with Christ in Communion is closer than the union of marriage could ever be.

Without a mutual understanding of the Eucharist, it seems to me that the Eucharist could easily drive a wedge between a couple (he came to divide, after all).

However, when a couple does have the same, Catholic, understanding of the Eucharist, it becomes a strengthening bond in practical and spiritual ways. In practical terms, it's a bit like Christ sending the Apostles out in pairs. I've always imagined this had to do with watching each other's back. When one of the Apostles would feel tempted or disheartened, he could always fall back on the buddy system (even if he didn't avoid sin for his own sake, he might be apt to save face for the other guy).

But on a more spiritual level, I've always considered the Eucharist as a kind of transitive property of theology. For instance, I, as a selfish individual, have plenty of barriers that interfere with my relationship with Isabel. And even Isabel -- as perfect as she may be -- no doubt must have some psychological hang-ups that interfere with her relationship with me. There is, shockingly, always work to be done to get around these obstacles.

Certainly, these obstacles (in this case, we can call them sins) also impede my relationship with Christ.

All sorts of spiritual gunk block the channels to grace. But in the case of Christ, the interference is all one-sided on my part. Christ doesn't bring any baggage to the relationship. Therefore, one assumes that my relationship with Christ will always be more complete than with Isabel.

But it also is assumable that Isabel's relationship with Christ is always more complete than with me. I hope so for her sake, at least.

Now here comes the paradoxical algebra...if I am in Communion with Christ and Isabel is in Communion with Christ, then, by transitive property, shouldn't we be in Communion with each other by way of Christ?

And if that union to Christ is more complete, our union to each other via Christ is more complete than our union with each other could be sans Christ. Or, to put it another way, Peter + Isabel.

Comments

[Isabel]

What psychological hang-ups? Pah. I obviously don't have any psychological hang-ups.