 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
||||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
||||||
 |
 |
|
|||||||||||||
 |
 |
|
|||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
|
||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
|
||||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
|
||||||||||||
 |
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||
FR. THOMAS DUBAY, S.M.
SHARED VISION IN MARRIAGE
TAPE I
2004 OCDS Conference
Flint, MI
AUDIO FILES! CLICK TO LISTEN TO FR. DUBAY!!!!!
Audio files of Fr. Dubay's Shared Vision In Marriage Tape One(1) is divided into three(3) Tracks. SoTape 1 is composed of 3 seperate tracks.
If you wish to save the audio files to your computer just right-cllick on your move and click save as.
In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Lord, you have been our refuge, age after age. Before the mountains were born, before the earth or the world came to birth, you were God from all eternity and forever. Teach us to count how few days we have, and so gain wisdom of heart, Holy Mother of God. In the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.
I am using instead of a clock this morning, I am using a timer, and I am going to take the full forty-five minutes I am supposed to take, because we need every minute we can get, and so I want to say again, I am happy to be with you, and let's start doing what we have to do. Our title for these four lectures, I want to explain just very briefly "Shared Vision in Marriage", and what I want to say is that this applies also to other communities. It applies to convents, monasteries, dioceses, parishes, groups of priests, groups of bishops. If we have a gospel community, it had better have a shared vision as we shall be seeing, and it is just way beyond any other community. Nobody else ever taught this before that I know of, but the Lord himself, and therefore we are dealing with really all states in life, but since most of you here, are married, or have been, or will be, we are going to stress with examples the marriage situation.
Now, our lecture this morning, this first one, is introductory, and then the other three will be more precisely on 'Shared Vision' itself, but we are introducing our topic.
Preliminary Observations.
1. We are all of us hurting in different ways, from a number of sources, reasons. Namely our own mistakes and sins. They always carry a penalty in them. As Saint Augustan said, he knew from experience, as well as his brilliant mind, that every sin diminishes a person, and it diminishes a community too, and it diminishes marriage, a religious life, and parishes. Oh, yeah, mai oui. Okay, we are hurting, all of us, in different ways, of course, from others in unkindnesses, betrayals, perhaps verbal abuse. Some cases, I hope none here, physical abuse. We are hurting thirdly from wounds of lasting scars. We differ in the precise reasons we are hurting, I mean the specifics, but we are hurting in different ways, and in differing degrees. Some more, some less, some in this way, some in another. Fourthly, a little remark here, about our hurtings. We should offer and accept healing compassion from others, because we all need it, and therefore should give it to others, and gladly receive it. And the last remark is the most basic of all, the deepest healing of human wounds is intimacy with the trinity. We need other helps, yes, I just said that as a matter of fact with the point before this one, but the deepest wounding, ah, pardon me, the deepest healing of wounds is from a intimate, deep, contemplative prayer life. And the deep conversion that brings it about.
2. Now, our second preliminary. I do have to kind of go rapidly or we just won't finish what has to be done in our fore talks. Our second preliminary remark is that problems and hurts are not caused by states in life. Marriage is not a problem. It is husbands and wives who are the problems. The priesthood and celibacy are not problems. Celibacy is a great gift. It gets a bum rap from the scandals that are going on, but it is a most fulfilling life. The problem is people who are living celibate life and not living it, that is the problem. Same kind of thing in marriage. Okay. Problems in dioceses are not that the church has problems with its structure, its the people in the structures and the people who are not going to follow the teachings and the discipline of the church. That is the problem. Okay. Every state of life is of divine origin. It is good, it is beautiful, and it fulfills people, if the people live the state in life according to the owner's manual. The owner here is the Lord Himself. Now, what I am saying doesn't come from my head. It comes from the Lord Himself. Matthews gospel, chapter 10, verse 36. As a youngster, I mean teenager, I used to hear this every year, once a year, the liturgy, and I really couldn't connect with it, and I know now why I couldn't and didn't connect. The Lord says, I quote "A man's enemies will be those of his own household." And I'd say to myself, "Where is the enemy in our house?" and I couldn't find an enemy there. We had our little kiddie squabbles you know "I did the dishes last night" and yeah, mumm, but our parents never argued, never fight, at least I never heard them argue and fight, so I didn't know where the enemies were. Boy, I know where they are now. I've learned a few things. Yeah, indeed the enemies in the house are the people living in the house. That's the problem, okay.
3. Now, the third little preliminary remark: Psychology and counseling can be somewhat helpful. They can do good, on occasion at least, certainly with people who are deeply wounded psychologically. They need psychiatric help, but psychology can't solve the deepest problems, the root problems. It can't get to root causes. What we need is deep conversion and living the gospel well. That is the root problem about hurts in human life. No doubt about it. I had in my hand here a little article from Time Magazine, rather recent, January 19, 2004, talking about marriage problems and so on, and counseling, psychologists, and all kinds of theories that they have, what's wrong with marriages, and all that sort of thing. Very common theme in the press, the secular press even. And they have all kinds of models of what, how troubled marriages should be handled and healed and so on. All kinds of theories. Let me just quote you a little bit from this article.
The therapy model, namely the model of what to do about troubled marriages. They need therapy. The therapy model is quote "I'll treat you and 'voila' your marriage will work". Then there is another model, the education model, its not the therapeutic model. People don't need therapy according to this model, they need to just be educated. And when they get educated then they'll have a happy marriage. So, the education model is much more respectful, it assumes there is nothing wrong with you. You are not sick. You just need better information and assumes you can apply it to your situation. See, those are two models. Every system sounds great until you ask other marriage specialists about it. When experts start comparing claims and statistics you hear the cacophony of rival used car salesmen. I find this exciting this year, its really funny in a way. Is it the therapists who need educating or is it the marriage ed folks who need therapy? And then, just a little remark. At a time when America's married, married people, and soon to be's married are eager for mediation, the bickering between the two sides is unhelpful. And boy, that's an understatement if anything. Okay.
Now, we are still doing with preliminaries here. There are four main roots. Roots of hurts and conflicts. Suffering in various states in life, and human relationships. The four main reasons we suffer so much in our human relationships, including marriage, including religious life, including priesthood, including everybody. We are all human and wounded. Four main roots. The first one is egocentric selfishness. In plain English, and its expressed in many ways, minor and major. For example: I am quoting concrete illustration here of egocentric selfishness. And there are dozens of examples possible. I am sure that everyone of you could add your own. For instance "I won't be patient with your ways of doing things, and your faults, but you must be patient with mine". Expressed in actions...they don't word it so nicely. You must accommodate my desires and preferences, but I need not accommodate yours. When we disagree, I need not be gentle, and amiable, and open minded, but you must be all of these things. See it is all egocentric. I am this, and this, and this and too bad about you, you see. You are not that, that, and that. Okay. So that is the first source of all kinds of woundednesses and states in life.
The second source, a little bit technical, at least many people don't know about it, some of you do I am sure, maybe many of you. Illuminism. Illuminism is an age old malady, by which a person is convinced that he, and that means she too, that he has light and other people don't. There are two forms of illuminism. There is a natural illuminism by which one person is just convinced that "I just know better. And the reason I know better than you is, well, I am I, after all, and you are you". I'll give you an illustration in just a moment. The second kind of illuminism, is kind of a pseudo, pseudo supernatural sort. Name me the person who is convinced that he has got a special pipeline to the Holy Spirit, and he has divine light and you don't. Its a real malady. If you hadn't ever met it, you would think I am exaggerating, making it up, but it is true. There are people who are convinced that they are listening to the Holy Spirit. And just too bad you know, the Pope isn't. And the Pope is the one that has got the promise. He who hears you hears me, and the Bishops with him, you see. And the Lord made it as clear as day, that their the ones that have the light of the Holy Spirit, when they teach with full authority, etcetera, etcetera, okay? But there are people ? to convinced there is no doubt that I have light of the Holy Spirit. Too bad about you, dear, but you don't.
Let me give you a fast little story. I was coming back from a trip on the road. I was taking the metro system in Washington. Got on the train, on the car. And there were very few in that particular coach, or that subway train, ah coach. There was a man, and the seats face each other because they go in both directions, you know, so I was sitting here, and there was another man faced toward us, and he saw this priest there, so he came over, he had a little son with him, a little boy eight or nine years old. So he wanted to talk about religion, so we did, and we had an amiable talk, there is no nastiness at all, but he said something, and I pointed out that really is not so, you know, and I gave reasons why it is not so. Didn't have any affect on him at all. No answer to the reasons I gave at all, but just sure of it, just like I had said nothing at all. No effect. That looks very much like illuminism. I have got light, I am sure of it. I don't have to give any reasons for it, any evidence for it, you're just wrong pal. I know that sounds kookie...it is kookie. You see, it is, I call it a malady, its an illness, but its a reality through the centuries. If you want a long study of it read Ronald Knotses book "Enthusiasm" six hundred pages about of the whole history of this illuminism. That's the second source of conflicts in community, including marriage, including religious life, including parishes.
The third source of conflict hurts, and suffering. The third source is a lack of perspective, proportion. I may have said to some of you in a homily, in past years, or whenever I have been here, I don't know if I have or not, but let me give you a concrete story to illustrate the lack of perspective. Its very hard, especially when one is angry to see big things as big, and little things as little. It is very hard, and if I am not petty about this sort of thing, I can easily be petty about that sort of thing, and make a big deal out of it, when it is not a big deal.
Little story, real life. There is a particular place I go, Metropolitan area. I've been there over twenty times. A monastery. And ah, so and for about eight or nine years, one layman would pick me up and bring me to the monastery. And so, about the eighth or ninth year, he wasn't at the airport, and I found out later that he was ill. So I go to that place two weeks, each time, and so, during the first well maybe the second week, I gave him a call just to check in. We were friends, you know, somewhat friends, and to you know say "Hi" to him, and how are you doing and all that sort of thing. And his wife answered the phone. I didn't know her well, just met her once, and she knew I wanted to talk to him. So, after just a few words she put the receiver down and went off to fetch him, and I heard, I think as clearly as you are hearing me now, which I hope is clear, I heard clearly a nasty little fight between the two of them. I don't remember what it was about. I think if it were a big deal I would certainly remember it. I am quite sure of that. It was some petty little nonsense and it was mean. It doesn't matter for our purpose who started it and all the rest, but the one would just say something not simply disagree darling with that, but a mean little remark, every back and forth, and I was treated to the whole thing, you know. And that's the end of the story.
Now, the point of the story is pretty plain. Notice I am not judging their consciences, I don't know, I am just saying it is very hard to see things in perspective. The big things is big and the little ones is little, especially when your angry, and even when your not angry its hard, for me. Unless your a saint. The saints do see things, the big ones as big, and the little ones as little, which is one reason their saints. But anyhow, in this instance, what was big, in that encounter, you see, was that they should love each other, and be gentle in manner and in speech, and listen to each other. Maybe I've got something to learn from her...or him. That's the big thing. Its the second greatest commandment 'that we love one another' but that apparently wasn't on their radar at all. Now, that's the big thing. What was little was whatever they disagreed about, that was tiny, and doesn't begin to compare with the big thing. But they had it jug backwards. I repeat, it is very hard, unless you are a saint, you don't have to raise your hands on that, whether you are or not. It's very hard to see things in perspective, as they really are. Okay.
Now the fourth reason for conflicts and hurts in human societies. Marriage, religious life, priesthood, etcetera, parishes, dioceses, countries, is a lack of shared vision. And that is our subject. A one mind about basic things. Agreement about important things. Two people have a shared vision and that is when they both see some important, we're not talking about little petty things. If somebody likes vanilla ice cream more and the other one likes chocolate, that is not a lack of shared vision.
In important things the gospel requires that we have one mind about them. And that is our subject. What does that mean? How does it come about? It's not going to be forced, it can't be forced, and nobody should try to force it. It can't be done. Okay.
And therefore, with a shared vision, two people or more are in touch with reality together. Because that's what truth is. Truth is a conformity of ones mind with reality. And in marriage a couple have a shared vision about something when they both have, they are both in touch with some important reality about marriage, and about human life, and about human destiny. Immensely important. For example, that husband and wife, and this goes for members of a monastic community, again I am talking about all states of life really. That they have a common vision in touch together about God, and they agree about that, there is nothing compares with it in importance. Okay? They agree about the purpose of life. That it is not found in this life. The purpose is hereafter. We are only pilgrims here for a very short time. They agree about the nature of marriage, or religious vows. It might surprise you but there are religious that disagree with one another and with the teaching church about what the three vows mean, poverty, chastity, and obedience. You would think we would have one mind about it. We don't. At least a lot of them don't. So, it means that the members of the community then are out of the very vows they took, and they are out of touch with each other, about the very nature of their life. The same with husband and wife. If they don't agree about marriage and what it is, its privileges, obligations and so on, they are out of touch with what they are living. How could they have a successful marriage, that is successful in the sense that how could it be other that they are in pain constantly, even if they mean well. They agree about the place of religion and especially the one, the one religion that the Lord founded. There is only one that He founded, and they have to agree about that. Have to in the sense that if they want to be in touch with reality, the basics of reality together, they have to have a shared vision about it. The raising of children, the first purpose of marriage. The begetting, and nourishing children. Educating them for eternal life. They need to agree about what real love is. And certainly a Hollywood vision of love is very different from the real definition of love. Vastly different, okay, not just rather a little bit. You have to have a shared vision about these things. Now all of that is introductory to our theme. The next thing I want to say. I'm just gonna kind of wave something at you. I'd like to spend fifteen minutes on it but we don't have the time. I'm quite sure we don't. I have in my hand here a sheaf of papers, and they are newspaper clippings and magazine clippings about the tragic lack of unity in states in life. Most of the clippings deal with marriage, and I'd love to just give them to all the conflicts that are in marriage. By the way there are excellent and beautiful marriages. I happen, no credit to me in the least, to have first hand experience with happy marriages in our family, beginning with Mom and Dad. Okay? So I know what that is like from experience. Okay? And brothers and sisters, siblings. So I do know there are happy marriages, and not only in our family, but there are happy marriages elsewhere. So I am not generalizing and saying that they are all catastrophic. I am not saying that. But I can tell you the press...I got all kinds of ...yipe..it would curl your hair, some of these examples of what goes on pretty commonly...its not simply the exception, all these little articles I've got. Eighty percent of all marriages are troubled says the professor. That's just one of the clippings. Eighty percent of them are troubled. Okay. But to save time I am not going to share these with you, because we have a lot of other things we have to get to. Okay? But just lets realize that. If you have been attentive to the press for the last ten, fifteen or twenty years, you know, you've read the same kinds of things that are all kinds of examples. Okay.
Now, what I want to do next is to take up the question of shared vision, and the first thing that I want to explain, let's call this little next section here, Sharpening up the Concepts. We have to know what we are talking about, when we talk about something that is important. And I want to just...lets get the concepts right. One of the reasons that people disagree so much is they don't know what the word means, actually. They know how it is used to some extent in society, but often they are talking about things that they hardly have a clue about the thing. That is some people, I'm not saying its all. Okay.
Let's talk about shared vision. What does that mean? What does vision mean in these titles of these lectures? Vision here does not refer to sense vision, obviously. It refers to intellectual knowing. A being in touch with reality, so that husband and wife, and this goes again for other states of life. Husband and wife are in touch with the major realities about their existence on this earth, God, the church, place of religion, and so on. The begetting of children, the nourishing of children, of educating them and so on, they agree about these things, which means they see these realities and are in touch together.
So, a shared vision is a seeing reality. Seeing truth, because truth is being in touch with reality as it is. So that, shared vision means that together they have one mind. Together they are in touch with the important aspects of human life, and including their vocation. Notice the important aspects. We don't have to agree about every little detail. That's for sure, also. Now, second concept to be discussed a few moments. There are several levels of shared vision. We are especially talking, as I have already said about basics and fundamental principals and realities about matters of our human situation. That's the most basic level. I just sketch it.
Now, there is a question, do we have to have a shared vision about things like finances? Well, it would help a lot in marriage, if they had a shared vision about the use of money, and gospel frugality, and a sparing, sharing lifestyle. That would be wonderful if they have it, and to some extent that is a basic. How we use material goods. But there is a level of shared vision that is not necessary. Mainly practicalitys. So if husband and wife disagree about color schemes for painting the walls of the house, it is not a big deal and it should not become a big deal. There is room for compromise. So, if somebody likes it done in this way, and the other one likes it done in that way, its not a basic, and you don't have to have a shared vision about that. Or when to replace the vacuum cleaner.
Let me just sketch the areas where there must be a shared vision, say in marriage. The views they have of marriage itself, for instance, the sexual morality in marriage. They must agree about that. That the children are the main purpose in marriage. And they must agree about the religious and moral formation, the spiritual formation of children. Their children especially. About abortion and contraception. About the indissolubility of marriage. About honesty toward each other. About forgiveness. We all slip here or there. Have adverseness or momentary weakness but forgiveness. And then of course, if somebody has (447 slipped the ?) and get it corrected and don't do it again. Okay. But they have to agree that there is such a thing as forgiveness, and they should agree about amiable discussion. That nagging and quarreling are out of bounds in this marriage. Because they are not gospel. And so those are some basics that they have to agree on. And again, I repeat, in religious life there are these basics, somewhat different, but somewhat the same too, that have to be agreed upon. When I say have to, I don't mean they are going to be forced.
I will make that point again. That nobody is trying to force a shared vision on anybody. You might say than how do they get it? We are going to get to that later on, you see, but it is not forced. As the Holy Father put it the church proposes, she does not impose. We are not terrorists, and we are not going to persecute people. And so nobody is forcing anything.
So those are a few comments on the levels of shared vision. Now, let me say next we are sharpening concepts, still. What shared vision is not. I can be kind of rapid here, because each of these what its not, very clear. First, it is not a dictatorial imposition from on high. That is not what we are talking about. Shared vision. Nobody is dictating, and nobody is trying to force a conformity about all kinds of incidentals. The second what it is not. I realize I just said it. Its not a fine rigidity in details of human life. So nobody is saying when we must have a shared vision, we are not saying we have got to be detailed about all kinds of little matters of human life.
Thirdly it is not a lock-step conformism. That it sometimes has been somewhat interpreted that way in religious life in the past. That was a mistake. And like a lot of mistakes it triggers an opposite reaction, of no kind of unity. We tend, we human beings are wounded, and we tend to go to one extreme or another, so that's why I want to be clear about the concepts. That is one reason for clarity about concepts what we are not talking about. So its not a lock-step conformism. Fourthly, it is not an infringement on human freedom. Human thought. Creativity. Our best contemporary theologians, (479 spelling?) Von Balazar, Henry Deleubach, and so on, completely faithful to scripture, and the teaching of the church, and most creative minds. And there is no class between the two. And the last, what shared vision is not, will surprise you I guess, but on a moments thought it won't. It is not humanly possible. Let me just put a little parenthetical remark there, which I am pretty sure is why nobody else on the planet requires shared vision. Many people, seculars, do admire it you see, and say how wonderful it would be if the United States community were of one mind. But nobody seriously tries to bring it about because it is impossible, merely on the human level. But you see we are not dealing with the human level merely. We are dealing with the divine level. And with God's grace and we will see how it comes about...indeed it happens, when we live the gospel fully. And nobody's imposing anything on anybody. Okay. But humanly speaking it just can't happen. Once you look at history it doesn't happen in history, except among saintly people. Very holy people, that's where it happens. The fourth thing, clarifying concepts here. I want to say a few things about pluralism and diversity. And that we have to be a little bit academic here because it would save us a lot of grief if we would get things rightly defined. Now, we all know what pluralism is in this sort of thing, or we don't, somebody is saying she doesn't know. Pluralism here means that there are different kinds of thinking about things. So one group thinks this, and another group thinks that. Well, look at the Presidential campaign we just finished. That is pluralism, and its diversity. They were at odds about a lot of things. Okay?
Pluralism may mean that husband and wife, may disagree about some things, you see. As indeed they may, they do. Even an ideal marriage. We are very different people, all of us are. And you can have an ideal marriage, and again, I do know of some ideal marriages first hand. And they are different people and have different ideas about things, okay? Now, that's diversity then. Alright? In the marriage situation. Now here is where we get a little bit technical, but its not difficult. There are two kinds of diversity pluralism, and especially where about truth, and ever, and so on. The first kind of diversity we will call complementary. Complementary diversity means that about some matter they have different insights into the matter, but the insights don't contradict one another, they are all true. An example makes it clear. In the New Testament there are at least four Christologies, which means four kinds of truths about the Lord. The incarnation, Jesus. The incarnation, redemption and so on. There are four Christologies. Scripture scholars talk about the synoptic Christologies, Matthew, Mark and Luke gospels. Then there is a Christology, the (519 ? Johnin, the John's gospel Christology. Then there is the Pauline Christology, Saint Paul's teaching about the incarnation, and then there is a Christology and a priesthood of Christ, especially in Hebrews. The letter to the Hebrews. So there are four Christologies in the New Testament but they all beautifully compliment, that is fill out, complete one another, and there is no class between them. That is a healthy diversity, and we should find it in marriage. We should find it in a monastery, and we do, because every single member of a monastic community is a different personality, and husbands and wives are different people, even when they are beautifully living the gospel. Okay? That complimentary diversity is good. Necessary. It enriches society and it enriches the marriage, and it enriches the episcopy and so on. Its very good.
Now the other kind of diversity. The name we will give it is an accurate name. is contradictory diversity. Now, we get the logic here. The study of logic. Formal logic it is called. A contradiction is the affirming of some principal 'X is Y' its an affirmation, a proposition we call it, and a denial of exactly what was affirmed. So if somebody says 'X is Y' that's a statement, its a proposition. If somebody says 'X is not Y' meaning in the same use of the terms, and the same meaning, somebody denies that. Its not true. That's a contradiction. Now logic points out in that diversity one must be wrong. They can't both be right. Okay? So, if husband and wife have a contradictory diversity about something, one affirms something and the other denies exactly what was affirmed in the same sense, in the same meaning, at the same time. Husband or wife is wrong. That goes for two priests. That goes for everybody. Its logic. Alright. And its good to realize that. So that if there is a contradictory diversity in the state in life, in case of most of you, marriage. Husband and wife are not in touch with reality together. One of them is out of touch. If it is that kind of diversity, it is bad news. And if the matter is very important it can be tragic being out of touch. Okay? Now, this is very important. You know. I remember some, two or three decades ago, one of the very prominent theologians, a dissenter, wrote an article, in theological studies it appeared, on how great it is that we have diversity in theology. And the guy, he's got a Ph.D, and he didn't even make this distinction that I am making now. Yike! How could he be so, so, so...I'll use a gentle word...unknowing. I have thought of a less gentle word!
To have a contradictory diversity about something important can be tragic. Let's use an example. Suppose you are going to take a jet. Where are we anyhow? We're near Detroit. So you are going to take a jet from Detroit to London, alright? And you are getting ready for boarding and you are in the boarding area, and the airline, Northwest would say "Well ladies and gentlemen, we want to be very honest with you. We are ready to board this plane for London, this 474 Jet...I think they fly to London, don't they, from Detroit? Um, but there is a disagreement among the cockpit crew, and the ground crew. The ground crew says that there is not enough fuel in the tanks of this jet to get to London, but the cockpit crew says there is, but we have cheery good will and we're going as is. Now, we are ready to board the plane so rows 75 to 82 will board, and of course nobody will board the plane. There is a contradictory diversity between the two crews about something important. One says "Yes, there is enough fuel left to get to London", notice the affirmation, proposition. The other one says "No, there is not enough", about the same thing and the same meaning. One of them is wrong for sure. Okay. That is a contradictory diversity.
Okay, now, we have only one minute and eighteen seconds to go...let me take one more point. I might take two minutes instead of one, but I must make this point. So we are introducing our subject remember. Human beings are made for union. We are incomplete each one of us by ourselves. God made us social beings, who radically need to know, love, and embrace one another, and most of all, know, love, and embrace Supreme Beloved, who is God. We just don't make it by ourselves alone.
______________________________________________________________________________
Tape 1 - Side 2
That is why truth is absolutely indispensable. You and I must be in touch with reality. Otherwise, we become cabbages. And I am not opposed to cabbage. So that we need to be in union with other people. Now, its not only bodily union in marriage, the physical union between husband and wife, yes, but there is a much more deeper union. There I am...now, this is just a little bit overtime. Not much. So, husband and wife need a deeper union between themselves that they be in touch with reality together in all the ways, the important ways we have mentioned. The physical union is not enough, of course. Nobody makes it in life on simply bodily matters. No human being does, of course. And so the more vibrant, and alive, and innerly rich that a person is, the more that person yearns for a deep union of heart, mind and will. In marriage included, this is one of the problems when they are not united in heart, mind and will. There is a physical relationship, and even that fades away, and well anyhow you know all that as well as I do. But anyhow, but there has to be the mind and heart union as well. And this goes for people in other states in life, but I'm not talking to them now, directly, on this point. So that all of us, no matter what our state of life is, must be in union first of all with God himself. Father, Son and Holy Spirit. And a deep prayer union, or we don't make it fully at least, in life. We might survive like prunes survive, but we don't want to be human prunes. Okay, okay, okay. And consequently, we need and in marriage, you need, and in parishes we need to be united with others in mind, and heart and will. And that is very much shared vision we are talking about. Now, this is a natural breaking point and we will stop here, and we will take up in minutes, fifteen minutes as a matter of fact, at that point. So, fifteen minutes. So listen, so try to be here sitting in your seat so we don't have to kind of demonstrate to get going. Okay.