Wilkie Au, S.J. 

CHAPTER SIX

SEXUALITY IN THE SERVICE
OF LIFE AND LOVE

"I tend to gaze quite closely at the faces of priests I meet on the street to see if a lifetime of love has marked them noticeably. Real serenity or asceticism I no longer expect, and I take far granted the beefy calm that often goes with Catholic celibacy, but I am watching for the marks of love and often see mere resignation or tenacity. (1) 
EDWARD HOAGLAND

ALL CHRISTIANS, not only celibates, are challenged to live a lifetime noticeably marked by love. Everyone is called to be chaste. Although that goal is accomplished differently in marriage, celibacy and the single state, it calls all of us to appreciate, integrate, and order our sexuality. Likewise, no way of life, whether religious or lay, is free from the pitfalls that produce lives marked more by mere resignation or tenacity than by love. Nevertheless, all Christians are calIed to imitate Jesus, whose love led him to lay down his life for his friends. The night before he faced death, Jesus told his intimate companions gathered together for a final meal: One can have no greater love than to lay down one's life for one's friends. "You are my friends" On 15:13-14). The gospel command to love as Jesus did requires us to commit ourselves seriously to the love of friendship. It challenges us to encounter our sexuality and to use our sexual energies to foster friendship and other relationships of love.

Traditionally, Christians have distinguished between two aspects of love, eros and agape. Eros refers to the sexual, passionate, sensual aspects of love. Agape links love to the kind of self-transcending and sacrificial commitment that roots life giving relationships. A holistic approach to sexuality seeks to affirm and integrate both these aspects of love. To use the biblical metaphors suggested by theologian James B. Nelson, holistic sexuality entails an appreciation for two gardens: the Erotic Garden that is depicted in the Song of Songs and the Garden of Eden that is described in the Yahwist creation account in Genesis 2-3. Employing these images, Nelson succinctly describes the context in which we as Christians must strive to love chastely.

The Erotic Garden represents sexuality before the Fall. In this garden there is no bodily shame and its inhabitants are thoroughly sensual.

The woman and the man delight not only in each other's embodiedness but also in the sensuous delight surrounding them-trees, fruits, flowers, fountains of living water. In this garden there is no sexist dualism, no hint of patriarchy, no dominance or submission. The woman is fully the equal of the man . . . Each exults in the body and beauty of the other, and together they embrace their sexuality without the guilt of exploitation! (2)

The image of the Erotic Garden reminds us of the radical goodness of human embodiment and the erotic. Christian philosopher John Giles Milhaven celebrates this goodness when he asks rhetorically: "Why then do lovers-spouses, for instance-happily and wisely will bodily excitement and satisfaction for its own sake, and not just for what it may express and serve? What is there in this turbulent, fleshy need and in this opaque, overwhelming pleasure that God sees is good?" (3)

The Garden of Eden, on the other hand, symbolizes the struggle that sexuality presents. The results of the Fall of our first parents manifest themselves in the shame that accompanies nakedness, the pain that marks childbirth, and the curse that turns human work into a burden. In short, Eden reminds us of our sexual alienation.

Realistically, we know that sexual alienation abounds. It is alienation from ourselves (bodies feel foreign, or bodies are used as pleasure machines). It is alienation from others (we fear intimacy and vulnerability; we use sexuality in patterns of domination and submission). It is alienation from God (sexuality seems alien to "true spirituality"). (4)

We Christians today, states Nelson, "live between the gardens." (5) To affirm the value of these two gardens is to acknowledge the beauty and possibilities of eros as well as to admit the challenge of ordering eros towards life-giving ends. We must renew our appreciation of eros because erotic love fuels our need for intimate communion with others and with God. Thus eros fosters authentic humanness which is achievable only in relationship. We must also creatively direct our sexual energies in ways that affirm our own and others' dignity and equality. In an age when so much suffering results from the misuse of sexuality - rape, incest, sexual abuses of all types, divorces and estrangements due to infidelity, diseases spawned by promiscuity - the virtue of chastity, which challenges us to love as Jesus did, must certainly be central to a holistic spirituality. As people living between both gardens, we need to be aware of both the promise and the challenge of sexuality. As Nelson puts it, "Sexual expression still needs ordering and discipline, yes, but that is quite different from the denial of the spiritual power of sexuality itself." (6)

CHASTITY AS A W A Y OF LOVING

Sexuality is a relational power because it bonds us with others in affection and mutual care. When it is repressed, so is the energy for relating and loving. Chastity, the virtue that affirms the radical goodness of human sexuality as a gift from God, frees us to use our sexuality to make intimate contact with others. Genuine chastity is the fruit of an honest encounter with our sexuality, and is not easily come by. It is the result of a strenuous struggle with the fierce forces of sexuality and comes only when the raw power of our sexual drive has been tamed and converted for loving use. Chastity seeks to produce lives that are noticeably marked by love.

Chastity means simply that sexuality and its physical expressions are viewed as good insofar as we put our sexuality at the service of love in our personal relationships. So much more than genital activity, sexuality lets us enter the lives of others as friends and encourages them to enter our lives. It can link us to others in ways that bring understanding and sensitivity, warmth and acceptance, compassion and mutual support. It can energize us and unleash human creativity. Causing us to be attracted and vitalized when others come near, sexuality is a source of life-giving power not only for procreation, but also for ordinary human relationships. We glorify God and become more like our creator when we create the loving, other-centered relationships which al so give us such human satisfaction and personal fulfillment.

But sexuality can al so be a destructive power. The sexual drive, like any of our powers, can tum into a disintegrating force due to lack of concern, weakness, or even well-intentioned error. Nevertheless, we should not fear our sexuality, but embrace it. What we should fear at times is our own inability to think as highly of the gift as does the creator who made us sexual beings. (7)

ENCOUNTERING THE EROTIC

When people spurn their sexuality, they become cut off from its vitalizing power. There are no simple shortcuts to a chastity that brings wholeness. A continuing process of development, mature love involves a lifelong struggle of becoming more and more chaste, of growing gradually in appreciating, integrating and ordering one's sexuality. It also necessitates a sometimes bruising encounter with the erotic. "Out of this encounter," states theologian John Courtney Murray, "comes life that is human" because "untamed life in the bones" is "disciplined unto integrity." (8) This integrity constitutes chastity, which is the freeing of all the forces of life by their coordination by a self that is governed by deeply held values and desires.

This forging of integrity from the untamed life in the bones requires a holistic form of knowing that goes beyond cold rationality. To embody eros and agape in a mature way, we must rely on an awareness that comes from the integration of thinking, feeling, and sensing. This mode of knowing is reflected in the Hebrew verb yadah, signifying the kind of knowledge that results from the unification of intellect, feeling, and action. The disciplining of sexuality for the sake of integrity relies on this kind of holistic knowing that enables people to "listen to the messages from all the self's aspects: the mind, the heart, the genitals, the viscera, the spiritual sensitivities." (9) The awareness that results from this process of listening will allow people to direct their sexual energies along the lines of freely chosen values and deeply felt desires.

The marriage of knowing and valuing with the forces of life is the process by which our sexual passions are shaped for love and integrated into our personalities. Some people so fear their sexual feelings that they endeavor to cap them through denial. For them, erotic feelings are like P9tential terrorists threatening to hijack the ship of self and steer it uncontrollably into dangerous waters. Consciously or unconsciously, they feel that the best way to avoid this danger is to pretend that these potentially disruptive forces are not present. When this denial is done unconsciously, it is called repression. Through the defense mechanism of repression, individuals block from their consciousness unwanted feelings and impulses. But both denial and repression are ineffective ways of coping with sexual feelings because they exclude awareness. Knowing what we are experiencing enables us to bring some order and harmony to passion which relies on personal awareness and choice for direction. Thus, denial of the sexual and erotic ironically destroys the control it seeks.

Those who seek to achieve purity by denying their sexuality and avoiding the erotic endanger themselves psychologically and spiritually. Psychologically, they run the risk of becoming rigid, listless, or angry people, whose frustrated sexual drive leads more often to neurotic symptoms than to loving behaviors. (10) Spiritually, they run the risk of pride. A person who copes with his or her sexual urges through denial or repression, as Murray points out, risks "becoming a disembodied head, that fancies itself a whole thing when it is not; when it denies its dependence on the body and all that the body stands for; and therefore risks denying its dependence on God who made it dependent on the body. The pure spirit can readily be the proud spirit." This conceit consists in "a certain hardness of spirit, a withdrawal of reason into a world of unreality because it is isolated from the facts and forces of life, and therefore unable to be integral.'' (11) Purity based on the denial of sexuality is specious. Sexual denial hardens the heart and makes it arrogant. It closes the heart to mercy, renders it incapable of understanding the weak, and powerless to pronounce the words of Jesus to the woman caught in adultery. Such a purity is too glacial to be compassionate. Thus, the denial of sexuality leads to a hardness that is poor material for fostering the kind of friendship that Jesus hoped would exist among his followers.

Those who flee from their sexuality to avoid being overwhelmed and tyrannized by it need to stop running. Only by encountering the erotic directly can they hope eventually to overcome their sexual fears. Direct confrontation of their worst fears can have the beneficial result of allowing them to see these erotic forces in real life proportions rather than in the exaggerated dimensions fashioned by the imagination. Then they will know what they are really up against and not succumb so easily to panic. This confrontation is like that of the young boy walking home alone at night, growing increasingly frightened by a clinking sound that seems to be following him. The sound grows progressively menacing as his imagination fuels his fear with terrifying images of the danger that is catching up to him. If he runs blindly off, his fear will increase. If he turns to confront the threatening sound, he may discover it is only a lost puppy following him home, dragging a chain in its mouth. When we encounter our sexuality directly, we too may be pleasantly surprised that it is not as intimidating or omnipotent as we feared. Even those who experience a self-destructive addiction to sex find themselves able to control their sexuality and restore harmony to their lives, often with the help of a twelve-step program called Sex and Love Addicts Anonymous (SLAA). SLAA support groups function very much like Alcoholics Anonymous groups in their encouragement of individuals to face their problems squarely and to rely on God's power to bring about wholeness and recovery.

Freud's influence has so permeated modern thought that sex is sometimes perceived to be larger than life, a despotic determiner of alI things, a tyrannical tail wagging the dog. Parodying this reductionistic notion of human motivation as sexual sublimation, John Barth states:

The dance of sex: If one had no other reason for choosing to subscribe to Freud, what could be more charming than to believe that the whole vaudeville of the world, the entire dizzy circus of history, is but a fancy mating dance? That dictators burn Jews and businessmen vote Republican, that helmsmen steer ships and ladies play bridge, that girls study grammar and boys engineering all at behest of the Absolute Genital? When the synthesizing mood is upon one, what is more soothing than to assert that this one simple yen of humankind, poor little coitus, alone gives rise to cities and monasteries, paragraphs and poems, foot races and battle tactics, metaphysics and hydroponics, trade unions and universities? who would not delight in telling some extragalactic tourist, "On our planet, sir, males and females copulate. Moreover they enjoy copulating. But for various reasons they cannot do this whenever, wherever, and with whomever they choose. Hence all this running around that you observe. Hence the world"? A therapeutic notion! (12)

In reaction to Freud, humanistic psychology emphasizes that human beings are multi-motivated and that sex, while a strong influence on human behavior, is not always the pivotal, decisive factor. In calling for a demythologizing of the omnipotence of the id, humanistic psychologists argue that meaning, values, and goals can outweigh the desire for sexual gratification in influencing people's choices and actions. Neither repression nor denial of the erotic is necessary for maintaining order in one's life. The desire for fidelity to a spouse or the pursuit of meaningful goals, for example, can govern sexuality and provide some discipline without doing violence to the person and without denying sexuality its important place. Then, instead of being an incorrigible part that disturbs the equilibrium of the whole, sexuality becomes integrated with the rest of one's personality and works for the well-being of the total person.

Suppression is the term used to describe this kind of conscious control over one's sexual appetite for the sake of clearly chosen goals and values. Psychologist William Kraft puts it succinctly when he says: "Suppression is a 'no' that is based on a more fundamental 'yes.' " (13) A wife who is experiencing erotic feelings toward a coworker at the office, for example, suppresses her desire by first acknowledging her feelings as a natural part of her sexuality and then choosing not to act on them. Suppression differs from repression because it entails conscious awareness and personal choice. Unlike repression, it allows us to affirm our sexual feelings and to decide how we want to respond to them. By enabling us to have more alternatives for action, it expands our freedom.

Suppression may be appropriate in many situations when sexual urges can disrupt what is going on. A student studying for an exam, a therapist attending to an attractive client, or a lonely minister counseling a recently divorced person may need to suppress their sexual fantasies and feelings in order to function effectively. This suppression entails placing them on the back burner until they can be dealt with more reflectively. Sometimes treating these distracting thoughts with benign neglect naturally defuses the sexual tension, because they seem to recede when they are met with inattention. Because sexuality invoIves an appetite as strong as the need for food and sleep, it is natural that fleeting sexual fantasies are daily customers queuing up at consciousness's counter. Suppression permits us to give them the attention that is their due, but does not allow them to cut in line and disrupt the business of life.

In an ironic way, when we try to escape a direct encounter with the erotic, we can become preoccupied with it. Denial, in other words, can lead to fixation. As with other kinds of fixation, sexual obsession causes a myopia which blinds people to the broad purposes of sexuality which have to do with giving life and building relationships. Some Christians are unconsciously ashamed of their sexuality. Embarrassed by sexual feelings, they are incapable of integrating them in ways that promote their overall health and development. Such people suffer from a form of Puritanism that requires the projection of unwanted sexual desires and urges onto others. Sex is then seen to be "out there" and everywhere! Acceptance of sexuality as a natural part of life fosters harmonious development; denialleads to distorted preoccupation with sex.

The story is told of two monks-one young and one old-walking through a forest in medieval France. Upon reaching a river, they encountered a shapely young maiden with golden hair stranded on the bank, unable to ford the river by herself. Without a moment's hesitation, the old monk lifted the young lass into his arms and carried her across. Miles Iater, as they continued their trek through the forest, the young monk confronted the old one. Recalling the incident with the girl at the river, the young monk confessed his utter disillusionment with his supposedly more experienced brother in religion. Complaining, the young monk asked in righteous indignation, "How could you, a religious bound to the vow of chastity, be so casual and unguarded in your contact with such a beautiful woman?" The wise old monk responded calmly, "Yes, but I Ieft her back there at the bank of the river. You are still carrying her with you."

AVOIDING EROTICISM

Fixation leads easily to eroticism. The impersonal use of others for the sake of one's own gratification, eroticism is sexuality severed from relational concerns and isolated from interpersonal love. It is a corruption of the gift of sexuality because it leads to interpersonal alienation rather than interpersonal intimacy. It diminishes persons by treating them as objects to be used for selfish pleasure rather than as irreducible subjects to be loved.

That eroticism runs rampant in today's society is manifested by the fact that sex is big business, whether it takes the form of prostitution, pornography, or advertisement. The Christian challenge to live chaste lives takes on greater import when seen in the context of this exploitation of sex for profit. Jesuits were reminded of this when they were told by their governing body meeting in Rome in 1974 that chastity "has a special apostolic value in our time, when [people] tend to put whole classes of their fellow human beings beyond the margins of their concern, while at the same ti me identifying love with eroticism. In such a time, the self-denying love which is warmly human, yet freely given in service to all, can be a powerful sign leading [others] to Christ who carne to show us what love really is: that God is love."'4 The chaste love of Christians today, therefore, must witness to Christ's universal love and stand as a prophetic condemnation of the eroticism of our times.

Chaste love challenges us to be like the old monk who carried the woman across the river. Without inhibiting self-consciousness, we ne ed to reach out to others in care and service. Chastity should free us to engage women and men without fear, viewing them as total persons and not as sexual objects. Due to fear, many of us allow our sexuality to separate, rather than to unite, us with others. Some of us have been trained to keep our distance, lest being too warm and friendly gets us into destructive entanglements. The story of a priest whose ministry to a dying AIDS patient became an experience of having his own fractured sexuality healed into greater wholeness illustrates how fear can condemn us to superficial relationships devoid of intimacy. Approached by Bobby, darkly handsome and dying of AIDS at 25, the priest was asked to stand by him as he broke the news to his parents, who knew neither that he had AIDS nor that he was an active homosexual. In the course of many hours of conversation, the priest carne to some painful realizations:

We talked many hours o o . and I managed to pry open, with his help, a steamer trunk of past regrets-of relationships I had run away from because my training taught me that any relationship could become sexual. It also taught me to fear homosexual men, and so I dealt with them as non persons; I did the same with women . o o I always suspected that drawing dose to a man or a woman would automatically lead to sexual involvement. One learned to avoid involvement o o o In his pajamas, with tubes running into his body, Bobby became a healer for me o . o Bobby helped me to realize that I was starving even as he lost more weight than he could possibly afford. (15)

The story of Bobby and the priest helps us to understand that the essence of chastity is loving people. Chaste persons are those who appreciate what it is to be sexual and have learned, with time and effort, how to put their sexuality at the service of love and integral development. The more chaste people are, the more capable they are of establishing and maintaining good relationships with others, without having them damaged by disordered and unruly sexual instincts. As a result, they are capable of greater commitment and openness towards others. Viewing others as irreducible wholes, they find themselves increasingly incapable of abusing others for their own selfish sexual interests. Chastity is the measure of one's capacity as a woman or a man to love others as women and men. To gauge how chaste we are, a good practical guideline is the depth and quality of our friendships. To remain at a safe distance from others is not a sign of chastity. On the contrary, it is a kind of unchastity if it prevents us from involving ourselves deeply and caringly in others' lives.

THE HUMAN EXAMPLE OF JESUS

Jesus exemplifies chastity as responsible engagement rather than flight from interpersonal involvements. Throughout the gospels, Jesus' stance towards others is not aloof, cold, or indifferent, A truly chaste person, he is loving, warm, and affectionate. He is capable of responding sensitively to both men and women, without fearing tenderness or being overwhelmed by sexual passion.

The evangelist Luke portrays Jesus as a person comfortable with his humanity and capable of relating deeply with others. The gospel contains an incident that is very instructive about the nature of chaste love. It is the story of Jesus' intimate encounter with the woman "who had a bad name in the town" (Lk 7:36-50). Hearing that Jesus had been invited to dine at a Pharisee's house, she crashed the party bringing with her an alabaster jar of ointment. "She waited behind at his feet, weeping, and her tears fell on his feet, and she wiped them away with her hair; then she covered his feet with kisses and anointed them with the ointment." At the sight of this, the Pharisee grumbled to himself, "If this man were a prophet, he would know who this woman is that is touching him and what a bad name she has."

This well-known story has been used traditionally to illustrate the relationship between forgiveness and love: that a person who has been forgiven much loves much. But if we consider the intimate contact between Jesus and the woman, it also reveals a dramatic example of two people loving each other chastely. (16) The physical contact was highly sensual: the woman anointed Jesus' feet with oil, covered them with kisses, and wiped away her tears with her hair. Although intensely sensual, there was not the slightest indication of anything sexually inappropriate. What the Pharisee objected to was not the nature of the contact, but that Jesus allowed the sinner any contact at alI. The intimacy between Jesus and the woman was also affective, since the woman bared her soul to Jesus by crying. Jesus too was direct in communicating his feelings to the woman and the Pharisee.

What does this passage tell us about chaste love? The woman was able to be open and emotionally vulnerable because she discovered in Jesus a chastity that could be trusted. Possessing a peaceful acceptance of his embodiment as a person, Jesus seemed at ease with a woman who showed her feelings in such sensuous ways. Not put off by her reputation, Jesus was comfortable with letting her come dose to shed her tears of sorrow. By allowing her to show her love in the way that she knew how, Jesus respected her integrity and enabled her to feel whole and good about herself. In contrast to the Pharisee who disdained the woman who had "a bad name in town," Jesus' love was shown to be universaI and available to anyone seeking it. For her part, the woman was chaste in her treatment of Jesus. Despite her profession and reputation, she revealed no trace of seductiveness or manipulation. Confronting the condemning Pharisee, Jesus was eloquent in her defense.

"Simon," he said, "you see this woman? I carne into your house, and you poured no water over my feet, but she has poured out her tears over my feet and wiped them away with her hair. Y ou gave me no kiss, but she has been covering my feet with kisses ever since I carne in. Y ou did not anoint my head with oil, but she has anointed my feet with ointment" (Lk 7:44-47).

What might have been an awkward situation for someone uncomfortable with physical contact and the show of feelings was for the chaste Jesus a moment of successful ministry. Through this intimate interaction, he achieved his goal of mediating the forgiving love of God. By focusing on his mission, Jesus was undeterred by the social complications of the situation, and communicated to the penitent woman through word and touch that her sins were forgiven. "Y our faith has saved you; go in peace."

The encounter of Jesus with the penitent woman was sensual, but not unchaste. Sensuality is the appreciation of our bodily existence, an enjoyment of the pleasures of earthly life and the beauty of the body. When linked exclusively to lust, as in certain periods of the past, sensuality is seen as a negative aspect of life, something to be eliminated through bodily mortification and ascetical practice. Yet sensuality, in and of itself, is not negative. It is a natural part of being human; its source is the very fact of our embodiment. Full acceptance of our humanity requires that we accept our ability to delight in sensible reality. However, sensuality can become negative when we are preoccupied with pleasure for pleasure's sake, no matter what the cost-even if it involves the exploitation or neglect of others and their needs. Sensuality militates against chastity when it makes sexuality a depersonalized source of personal pleasure.

Trying to live chastely in imitation of Jesus requires discipline, honesty, and awareness. All of our interactions with others contain a sexual element because we are embodied beings. As Jesuit psychiatrist James Gill states, "It is impossible for us to be non-sexual in anything we think or say or do - even in our communication with God! All of us in the church owe it to ourselves and to . . . our creator, to accept the maleness or femaleness [God] has given to us, and to accept the reality of the presence of a sexual aspect in alI that goes on within and among us, especially within the context of our interpersonal relationships. '''71t is not surprising that at times we can become sexually stimulated or that genital feelings spontaneously arise. Such moments are inescapable for anyone-whether married, celibate or single-trying to be open, warm, and loving. However, this should not scare us off from dose involvement with others. As Gill counsels, at times like this "W e strive to gain, with the help of God's grace, such deep convictions about the value of our chastity and such strength of motivation to observe it, that we can withstand the attractiveness of whoever or whatever might strongly appeal to our genitality." (18)

Honest awareness and discipline at these moments can help us to do what is appropriate for ourselves as well as for others. If we pay attention to our emotional and physiological reactions to sexual stimuli, we will know when we are getting aroused and when we need to retard our actions for the sake of reflection. Reflection allows us the chance to decide what we want to do about our growing sexual arousal and what behaviors would bring about what we want. We need to be knowledgeable about our patterns of sexual arousal and of responsible ways of responding, if we are to love chastely. We need to know how our sexual arousal is influenced by such factors as our moods and fantasies, or alcohol and other drugs. Feeling aroused, a bored office worker for example, might need to stop fantasizing sexually about his married colleague at the next desk, or a marriage counselor attracted to a client may decide that it is inappropriate to imagine him as a potential sexual partner. Awareness brings about "response-ability." And the greater our response-ability, the greater our ability to live according to our values as Christians.

FROM FOOT WASHING TO FRIENDSHIP

The centrality of friendship in Christian life is emphasized in another foot washing scene in the New Testament. In the solemn context of the last supper, Jesus explained to his followers the meaning of his life and death, as well as the nature of Christian community and service. In a dramatic gesture, he got up from table, rolled up his garment and, taking a towel and a basin of water, he washed the feet of his disciples.

The significance of that action is lost if it is viewed solely as a lesson in humility. What Jesus did in the foot washing was of far greater significance than that, for by it he defined the meaning of service in the Christian community. Theologian Sandra Schneiders provides an exegetical explanation of John 13 that supports this view . (19) Jesus' intention in the foot washing was to introduce a model of service that would speak neither to the superiority of the giver nor to the inferiority of the recipient. What Jesus desired was a mode of service that involved the mutual sharing of gifts among friends. By washing the feet of his disciples, Jesus did something beneath his dignity as master that jarred established sensitivities. That this was the case is verified by the sharp protest of Peter who cried out, "You shall never wash my feet." His protest, however, was met with an equally strong response from Jesus: "If I do not wash you, you can have nothing in common with me." The strength of the Lord's response is understood when we grasp the full meaning of his words. Jesus is saying to Peter: "If you refuse to go along with this action of mine, you can have nothing further to do with me. Our relationship would be forever severed."

How can we explain the severity of Jesus' reaction to Peter? Peter's refusal is symbolic insofar as it pertained to more than the simple action of having his feet washed. It represented Peter's attachment to the status quo and to a model of service in which the strong give to the weak, the rich give to the poor, and the intelligent give to the ignorant. This way of viewing service is based on domination because service here expresses the superiority of the server, while reinforcing the inferiority of the one served. By behaving as an inferior, Jesus upset the established order to which Peter was strongly attached. Hence, Peter's stubborn resistance. Schneiders concludes:

Peter was not merely objecting to having his feet washed by another but specifically to the reversal of service roles between himself and Jesus . . . his protest was not simply an embarrassed objection to Jesus' action but a categorical refusal to accept what this reversal of roles implied . . . In some way, Peter grasped that complicity in this act involved acceptance of a radical reinterpretation of his own life world, a genuine conversion of some kind which he was not prepared to undergo. (20)

Jesus assumed a posture of inferiority, claims Schneiders, not to advocate it, but as a way of introducing another notion of service-one based on the mutuality of friendship, not on superiority or inferiority. "Do you understand," he said, "what I have done to you? You call me Master and Lord, and rightly; so I am. If I, then, the Lord and Master, have washed your feet, you should wash each other's feet. I have given you an example so that you may copy what I have done to you. I tell you most solemnly, no servant is greater than his master . . ." On 13:12-16).

The kind of service inaugurated by Jesus calls for the free sharing of gifts among equals in a community of friends. In his eyes, the desire for first place has no function in friendship. This teaching was a bitter pill to swalIow for Jesus' disciples, whose desire to dominate one another and establish their superiority over others was frequently reproached by Jesus (Mt 20:20-28; 23:1-12; Mk 9:38-41; 10:33-37; Lk 18:14; 22:24-27). The foot washing account, Schneiders argues, is a dramatic interpretation of this theme of equality among friends in the Christian community. According to her:

In the Johannine perspective what definitively distinguished the community which Jesus calls into existence from the power structures so universal in human society is the love of friendship expressing itself in joyful mutual service for which rank is irrelevant. By the foot washing Jesus has transcended and transformed the only ontologically based inequality among human beings, that between himself and us. Peter's refusal of Jesus' act of service was equivalent, then, to a rejection of the death of Jesus, understood as the laying down of his life for those he loved, and implying a radically new order of human relationships!'

When as Christians we gather together at church, we represent this new order established by Jesus. In the Eucharist, we celebrate his gift to us, his freely laying down his life for our sake. The meaning of eucharistic service requires Christians today to be the body and blood of Jesus for others in the world; it requires that one's body be broken and one's blood be poured out for the sake of friends. The symbolism of this commitment is translated into concrete actions in many ways. While some people literally give their lives up for others, as in the martyrdom of the four American women in EI Salvador in 1980, or the assassination of Archbishop Oscar Romero, most Christians dedicate themselves to others in the quiet routine of work and domestic life. Whether dramatic or mundane, the service of Christians must be modeled on Jesus, who commanded us to love each other as he loved us, that is, as friends among whom the desire for first place has no room.

HONORING FRIENDSHIP

Jesus' commandment of love takes on special importance today. At a time when eroticism so often masquerades as love, friendship needs to be honored anew. Chaste love needs to stand up in prophetic witness to a genitally-fixated culture that prizes orgasm over intimacy, performance over sharing. Author Jane Redmont, who is at work on a book about American Catholic women, argues eloquently for the importance of honoring friendship in her critique of the first draft of the bishops' pastoral letter on women, Partners in the Mystery of Redemption: A Pastoral Response to Women's Concerns for Church and Society. "Friendship belongs everywhere in this document," she states, "especially in the section on relationships. I want the bishops to honor friendship and call it sacred, to give it not an ancillary place but a fundamental one.""

Friendship must be valued because it "sustains women's lives-in neighborliness in local communities, in the women's movement, in relationship with men."

Redmont's call for a greater emphasis today on friendship is cogent and convincing because it is rooted in the heart of Jesus' teaching. In fairness, it cannot be seen merely as a sentimental, privatistic request. "To lift up friendship as the standard against which to measure other relationships," states Redmont, "is a profoundly political act and a religious one as well." With the words, "I no longer call you slaves, rather, I call you friends" On 15:15), the gospel challenges our understanding of both power and holiness. As a result, both divine and human reality look different. "Surely," suggests Redmont, "this has implications for the lives of women." Indeed, the gospel challenge of chaste love as friendship among equals has important implications for both men and women.

Although the need for intimate friends is deeply felt, it is very often frustrated in today's mass society. Starving on a diet of superficial relationships, many people seek deeper interpersonal contact in encounter groups, prayer groups, support groups for the recently divorced and separated, as well as in a wide variety of twelve-step programs dealing with addiction. Ironically, some become addicted to group meetings because their everyday lives lack the support of intimate friends. Other people find intimacy in interminable therapy, paying for the presence of someone who can offer them understanding and acceptance. Many factors reinforce our sense of isolation in today's mass society. The frenzied pace of our lives and the frantic pressures to get ahead militate against closeness. The frequent need to move because of work also makes it difficult for families to be rooted and involved in the local community. And the anonymity of megalopolis where people do not know the names of even those in adjoirning apartments feeds the bitter loneliness of many. It seems the more we live in a mass society, the more important are intimate friendships.

Yet, the fostering of intimate friendships is more complicated than many think. Social philosopher Erich Fromm contends that many misunderstand the nature of love when they place too much emphasis on the object of love rather than on the process of loving!3 People think that to love is easy. It comes naturally; the big problem is to find the right person to love. Frequently, those who have never loved anyone are convinced that they will immediately know how to love as soon as the right person comes along. This attitude, argues Fromm, is both naive and untrue. Love is an art that has to be cultivated through a lifetime of practice. Having intimate friends has more to do with our capacity for giving and receiving love than with waiting with romantic expectation for that special someone to appear.

Good friendships cannot happen overnight. Unfortunately, the desire for an instant cure for loneliness often results in problematic rushed-into-relationships. Based more on egotistical need than mutual love, these relationships are a pseudo-remedy for loneliness. More often than not, they end in frustrating failure. Loneliness can strike any one of us, driving us at times to search desperately for someone to remove our pain. Knowing when we are vulnerable to these rushed-into-relationships can save us much needless suffering. We are extremely vulnerable, for example: when we have recently lost a loved one through death, divorce, or a move; when we experience ourselves as sexually less attractive because of physical changes as in mid-life; when we have had a recent experience of rejection or failure; when we feel a deep emotional void within due to past experiences of physical, emotional, or sexual abuse; when we experience deep anxiety in the midst of a major career or lifestyle change. Insecure moments such as these can drive us into the arms of another. Such neediness and desperation, however, are poor conditions for building lasting relationships of intimacy. Instead, we need to learn how to foster friendships based on mutual love.

Both lay Christians and religious can be vulnerable to rushed-into-relationships because no one is immune from anxiety attacks based on feelings of insecurity, helplessness, and abandonment. The following analysis of the complexities involved in fostering friendships within religious life contains insights readily applicable to the lives of lay Christians. Many parallels exist between lay and religious life in terms of the dynamics of forming close and satisfying relationships. These parallels are real because they reflect common psychological factors that impinge on us all.

PARTICULAR FRIENDSHIP REVISITED

The love of friendship as a gospel value certainly has implications for the lives of professed religious and celibate priests. Living the vow of chastity in a healthy and growthful way does not preclude friendship, but in fact requires it. Friendship, the most accessible of relationships, can bind any one of us to any other, regardless of age, gender, race, sexual preference, physical ability, or socioeconomic class. Hence, it should be highly valued by religious and priests, whose vow of chastity is meant to symbolize and embody Christ's universal love. The collar and the habit, for example, are meant to communicate that those who don them wish to belong to all. Friendship allows two human beings -or a group of them-to experience genuine emotional and spiritual intimacy, whether or not the relationship also includes sexual intimacy.

Making and keeping friends are among the most important things people can do for themselves. Statistical research by behavioral scientists is unnecessary to verify that friendship is a major, indeed crucial, factor in emotional health and happiness. Sympathetic understanding between close friends often decreases the pressures and strains of their lives. Since friendship contributes significantly to growth and survival, one might wonder why some religious do not value and foster deep friendships.

The priest who befriended Bobby, the dying AIDS patient, points to his protective seminary training and asks, "Is it any wonder some of us became depersonalized?"

The world we lived in was impersonal, a long black line of marching heads bent at the same angle . . . we were forbidden to visit anyone else's room without the door being ajar. Aside from the sniggering and unspoken fear of homosexuality, such arrangements al so precluded intimacy. The preclusion was worse than the fear; how does one grow as a person without intimacy? We were al so warned about the danger of having a "particular friendship." Particular friendships became the altar upon which intimacy was sacrificed. (24)

Persons who entered religious life even as recently as twenty years ago recall the frequent novitiate caveats against forming "particular friendships." Recreating in assigned groups, calling each other by tide rather than by first names, and limiting time given to free association were some of the structures used to prevent relationships that might be detrimental to living religious life to its fullest. It was argued that these particular friendships impeded community life because they were exclusive and divisive. They threatened to impair individual growth and development because they tended to foster over dependence and emotional immaturity. It was also feared that these relationships could lead to compromises in chastity. This guarded attitude towards closeness in the novitiate made friendships at best an ambiguous value for many who sincerely wished to embrace the religious life with total commitment.

Following the Second Vatican Council, however, novitiate formation has encouraged a more unambiguous and positive view of friendships in religious life, while at the same time heeding the traditional wisdom and concerns of the past. Just as friendship needs to be honored and given a fundamental place in human life in general, so must it be honored anew among religious. For this to happen the notion of particular friendship needs to be revisited. (25)

After many years of working in novitiate formation, I have come to the realization that emotional entanglements can form very rapidly, creating so much preoccupation that the novices find it very difficult to invest in the program. Thus, I have found it helpful to discuss the topic of relationships early on in the year, even as soon as the second week after their arrival. Our discussion helps them realize that friendships are valued and respected in religious life, while at the same time enabling them to understand how to foster friendships that will help, rather than hinder, their living community life and apostolic chastity in a fruitful way.

Interpersonal bonding among our novices occurs rapidly. The first week involves a rather intense orientation program, highlighted by two to three full days of faith sharing. In the course of this faith sharing, they reveal something of their life's story-the struggles and joys of growing up in their families, dealing with personal issues, discerning their vocations-often on a very intimate and deep level. A strong feeling of camaraderie and closeness results from this intense personal sharing of their experience of the Lord's loving and merciful presence in their lives. I have always seen this as a very positive step in the process of forming the community of "friends in the Lord" called for by our recent documents. Yet, at the same time, I have come to realize that such interpersonal intensity occurring so soon after entrance also makes certain individuals extremely vulnerable to the pain and complications that come with rushed-into-relationships and instant intimacy. Before sketching my understanding of the dynamics which lead to sudden rupture and hurt feelings in these cases, I would like to discuss three factors which often account for the quick emergence in the novitiate of such friendships. I present them as my own hypotheses as to what often motivates people, either consciously or unconsciously, to rush into these unpromising relationships. I have witnessed people plunging into these relationships as an attempt: (1) to seek security in the midst of an unsettling and stressful major new beginning in their lives; (2) to fill the affective void created by the recent separation from family, friends, and native soil upon entrance into the novitiate; and (3) to compensate for severe affective deprivations and wounds from the past.

FRIENDSHIP AS A REMEDY FOR INSECURITY

Moving to a new location, separating from one's network of affective support, and initiating a major change in one's direction in life can cause stress. Because entering religious life entails all these factors, it is difficult. The shift from the lay to the religious state is still a drastic and hard transition, despite the many external changes brought to novitiate formation since Vatican II. In former times, the radical discontinuity experienced between the life of a lay person and that of a religious was dear1y marked by the traditional symbols of a clerical/religious subculture: wearing distinctive religious garb, keeping silence in the house, listening to readings at meals, adhering strictly to a daily schedule which regulated one's activity from rising in the morning to retiring at night. While the disappearance of many of these practices in the modern novitiate may have lessened the initial discomfort and culture shock of entering into a new way of life, the transition can nevertheless be overwhelming.

Soon after the excitement of entrance day and orientation recedes, the novices start to be bombarded with some basic personal questions: Who am I in this group? Do I want to belong? Did I make a mistake in joining? Will I fit in? How dose do I want to be with others in this group? How do I go about relating affectively and physically with the others, now that I am committing myself to a life of celibate chastity? What is the place of friendship and relationships in this new life? The literature on the psychology of small groups indicates that such questions concerning one's identity and affiliation are inevitable whenever one joins a new group. To lessen the novices' anxiety, I try to validate their experience as normal and understandable by discussing the findings of group psychologists regarding entry-level issues and anxieties. I then, suggest that they give the process time, since only interaction within the group and extended reflection can settle their concerns. People eventually either find their place in the group or leave.

Most novices are able to live with the temporary ambivalence created by the these entry-level concerns and to continue the process without excessive anxiety. However, certain personalities, insecure in new and ambiguous situations, may latch on to a friend as a quick remedy for feelings of disequilibrium and insecurity. Based on desperation and dependence, these relationships usually result in problems and call for clarification.

FRIENDSHIP AND AFFECTIVE SUPPORT

The ability to make friends to satisfy one's legitimate need for affective support is a sign of maturity and should be encouraged in the novitiate. When people leave their family and friends to join religious life, they naturally feel the. pain of loss or experience homesickness, especially if this is the first such move for them. So it is not uncommon that novices sometimes experience an affective void. Reaching out and investing in new relationships as ti me goes on will usually alleviate this initial feeling of emptiness. Nevertheless, there are certain individuals who continue to be troubled by a deep, persistent loneliness. This aching emptiness drives them into a desperate search for someone who will be the final answer to their loneliness. Such relationships are doomed to fail because they rest on false assumptions and unreasonable expectations.

First, there is the false belief that a single individual can satisfy all the affective needs which formerly were met by a network of parents, relatives, friends, and associates. Marriage counselors often advise clients that no one individual can wholly fulfill the affective needs of another. To demand this of a spouse is to demand the impossible and to risk rupturing the relationship. The same is true for friendships in religious life. Failure to recognize this fact leads some individuals to move serially from one frustrating and stormy relationship to another.

Closely related to this search for that special friend who will provide for all of one's emotional needs is an often unconscious attempt to turn a friend into a surrogate spouse. Aspirants to religious life enter the novitiate having made a conscious decision to give up a life mate in order to live and love in a celibate fashion. Yet, on an unconscious and emotional level, a need to have a deeply intimate and intense relationship which will substitute for what one forgoes in not having a spouse sometimes exists. The psychological phenomenon at work here is called displacement. Originally part of Freud's theory, displacement involves the shifting of emotional energy from its original connection with an unacceptable idea into connection with an acceptable idea. In the context of the novitiate, spousal affection and intimacy are sometimes displaced onto a friend in the community. This displacement obstructs healthy friendship because it entails the redirection of romantic, and sometimes erotic, feelings that are appropriate when directed to a spouse or lover, but inappropriate when directed to a fellow religious. To expect a member of the community to be the center of one's affective universe as a spouse might be is unrealistic and unworkable. The dynamics of celibate love, symbolizing the universal love of Christ, ideally move toward ever greater inclusiveness of others. While characterized by exclusiveness, a marital relationship that is deeply loving also provides the foundation for greater openness to others. The ideal of celibate love is stated well in a work commissioned by the Bishops' Committee for Priestly Formation, entitled Spiritual Renewal of the American Priesthood:

Celibacy promotes a radical Christian style of interpersonal relationships, namely, one that rests on the universal character of charity. The charism of celibacy allows the individual to love deeply and warmly yet without finding it necessary to move toward exclusivity . . . If marital love is characterized as a focus on the one, while being open to the many, celibate love is characterized as a focus on the many, while being open to everyone . . . The priest wishes to be brother to everyone and spouse to no one. (26)

Thus, a friendship that consciously or unconsciously seeks to find a spouse surrogate in a fellow religious is doomed to frustration. It can also lead to an obsessiveness that makes it very difficult for the novice involved to participate fully and peacefully in the training program.

A third factor that threatens the establishing of healthy, long-lasting friendships is the illusion that there is someone who can eradicate the essential aloneness or ontological loneliness that is part of the human condition. According to spiritual writer Henri Nouwen, people operating out of the illusion that the final solution to their loneliness is to be found in human togetherness tend to lay heavy messianic expectations on their friends. The end result is always disappointment and collapse of the friendship. In his words:

when our loneliness drives us away from ourselves into the arms of our companions in life, we are, in fact, driving ourselves into excruciating relationships, tiring friendships and suffocating embraces. To wait for moments or places where no pain exists, no separation is felt and where all human restlessness has turned into inner peace is waiting for a dream world. No friend or lover, no husband or wife . . . will be able to put to rest our deepest cravings for unity and wholeness. And by burdening others with these divine expectations, of which we ourselves are often only partially aware, we might inhibit the expression of free friendship and love and evoke instead feelings of inadequacy and weakness. Friendship and love cannot develop in the form of an anxious clinging to each other. (27)

When these "divine expectations" become obvious, people generally experience an urgent need to renegotiate or to terminate the relationship for fear of disappointing or hurting the other. Those who are experienced in interpersonal relationships can generally articulate precisely where the problem lies and try to bring about a gradual and gentle realignment based on more realistic expectations. However, those who are inexperienced will bolt in panic and confusion. This sudden rupture of the relationship is then experienced by the other, who is often just as confused, as rejection. Thus occurs the mental suffering referred to by Nouwen. Rejection triggers a variety of negative feelings: hurt, anger, resentment, jealousy, possessiveness, and depression. Star-struck infatuation quickly gives way to negative-fixated disillusionment. The pain at this point can be so preoccupying that the persons involved can concentrate on little more than their relational difficulties.

FRIENDSHIP AND PAST AFFECTIVE DEPRIVATIONS

Another potential pitfall to building healthy friendships stems from severe affective deprivations experienced in the past. Some people enter the novitiate starving for affection and affirmation because of a long history of deprivation often traceable to early childhood. According to psychiatrists Conrad Baars and Anna Terruwe, these individuals suffer from what they label "deprivation neurosis." "The mere fact that a child is frustrated in its natural need for love, tenderness, and unconditional acceptance," they suggest, "is sufficient to produce a neurosis." (28) Whenever the unmet need occurred in the past, such neurotics continue "to search restlessly for the gratifications that are rightfully theirs for they feel a deep-seated dissatisfaction and unrest which affect their enti re psychic being. " (29)

Those who enter religious life with such a history of neglect often experience huge emotional gaps that cry out to be filled. They feel imprisoned in the pain of past hurts. Such persons may have been sexually abused, physically brutalized, emotionally suppressed or abandoned outright as children. In the supportive environment of a novitiate community of attractive peers, they frantically search out friendships that will compensate for the deprivations of the past. Unfortunately, these relationships are fragile and frustrating because they originate, not out of freedom and mutuality, but from compulsion and self-centeredness. The help they seek in a friend would be better sought in a therapist.

Those who insist that celibates should be intimate with everyone, but with no one person in particular, misunderstand the nature of human intimacy. It is impossible to be intimate in general without first experiencing the intimacy of friendship with one person. For religious, however, relationships with particular persons should be deepened in such a way that will enable them to relate more authentically with all of the people they encounter. The exclusive coupling of two friends is incompatible with the stance religious are called to have toward others. The boundaries that set off their relationships should be permeable by all who enter their lives so that more and more people can come to find a place in their hearts. The love between husband and wife must be equally permeable so that children and others can partake of that love. As psychiatrist Sr. Anna Polcino notes, "Coupling cannot be the model for religious and clergy. For us, the model must be intentional friendships, whereby the two establish an open bonding, relinquishing possessiveness . . . The friendship is always open to others; it is not exclusive, but rather inclusive. . . . " (30)

REAFFIRMING FRIENDSHIP'S VALUE

It is important to assert unambiguously the value of friendships in religious life. By giving flesh and blood reality to God's love and care, friends enable us to believe more strongly in a God who refuses to love us at a distance, but is incarnately involved in all that we do. Without doubt, life-giving friendships must be counted as part of the hundredfold promised those who leave everything to follow Christ (Mk 10:30).

Healthy friendships should be actively fostered in the novitiate for a variety of reasons. Some reasons relate to the nature of religious life in general and others flow from the dynamics of the formation process itself. Religious life by its very nature is communitarian. Men and women join religious communities because they feel called to work for the kingdom of God with collaborators in companionship rather than in isolation. Moreover, religious are being challenged these days to go beyond colleagueship to friendship. The Thirty-Second General Congregation of the Jesuits directed these words to its members:

From the union with God in Christ flows, of necessity, brotherly love. Love of the neighbor, which union with Christ implies, has for its privileged object in our case, the companions of Jesus who compose our Society. They are our companions; and it is our community ideal that we should be companions not only in the sense of fellow workers in the apostolate, but truly brothers and friends in the Lord. (31)

Therefore, an enlightened understanding of the vow of chastity affirms the importance of friendships for the full living of celibate love. Only a truncated and narrow view of the vow would see deep friendships as inimical to religious life. Celibates are not exempted from Christ's commandment to love their neighbor as they love themselves. Thus, the celibate way of life can only be justified if it is seen as a way of loving. Religious are not exempted from the lifelong human process of learning how to love with integrity, fidelity, and care. Like all human beings, they must be committed to learning from their interpersonal experiences. It is in their intimate relationships that they come to know the meaning of what is involved in loving as Jesus did. In this sense, friendships serve as a school of love because friends can help one another grow as loving persons. Living integrated and vibrant celibate lives is not simple, but involves a lifelong process of learning. Good friends can support, encourage, and sustain the sometimes ambivalent commitment of those struggling to live out the ideals of apostolic celibacy.

Finally, religious formation is most effective when it is experiential. I believe strongly that learning is most lasting and significant when it comes through personal experience and trial and error. While the path to integrated and authentic celibate love entails risks, it is mainly through personal experience that lifelong lessons will be appropriated. An effective formation program must create an environment in which religious: (I) can feel free to learn from their experiences; (2) can feel hopeful that much can be learned from their mistakes; and (3) can experience deeply the faithful love and unconditional acceptance of God made manifest in the enduring love of good friends. Good friends, like good wine, can only develop at a natural pace over time.

A LIFE MARKED BY LOVE

Chastity is a way of loving that belongs to all Christians. Its goal is to produce lives that are noticeably marked by love. This broad understanding of chastity stands in contrast to a view that restricts chastity's function to the control of sexual passion. This narrower understanding has prevailed in the church and in secular society for many centuries. It is a negative notion insofar as it emphasizes chastity's role of regulating our sexual appetite, particularly our appetite for sexual pleasure. This is a one-sided understanding and needs to be complemented by a fuller view of chastity in line with a renewed appreciation of sexuality as the God-given power for the sake of loving others and forming fruitful relationships.

Positively, chastity is the virtue that helps us appreciate our own and others' sexuality in all its aspects. Chastity seeks to integrate sexuality and to place it at the service of love in personal relationships. An important function of chastity is to order our sexual activity in such a way that it will promote our own welfare as well as those with whom we are in relationship. Thus, chastity goes far beyond the physical. If we are not reaching out to others in friendship in imitation of Jesus, we cannot really be chaste in the full sense, no matter how successful we may be in avoiding selfish sexual behavior. Genuine chastity should allow all Christians-married, celibate, and single-to live lives of passionate love, not resignation. Carmelite William McNamara remarks that "Married lovers are not sexual and passionate enough. And what's more, neither are celibate lovers, who should be at least as sexual and passionate as married people. There is no other way to be a really great lover. And if religious men and women are not great lovers, what hope is there for Christianity?" (32)