Forsaking Father, Mother and Children

4. Whoever  has left his home, or his brothers, or his sisters, or his father, or his mother, or his wife, or his children or his lands for my name shall receive a hundredfold and shall have eternal life as an inheritance. (Mt. 19:29)

5. Then Peter said to him, “As for us, you can see that we have left everything and followed you.” Jesus said to them, “Verily I say to you that no one will leave his home, his father, his mother, his brothers, his wife or his children for the kingdom of God, who will not receive much more in this world, and in the time to come, eternal life. (Lk. 18:28-30)

6. Another said to him, “Lord, I will follow you, but first allow me to dispose of what I have at home.” Jesus answered  him, “Anyone who has put his hand to the plow and looks back is not fit for the kingdom of God. (Lk. 9:61-62)

Without arguing over words, here we must look for the thought, which was obviously this: The interests of the future life should be placed above all human interests and considerations, because such thought is in accord with the substance of Jesus’ doctrine, whereas the idea of renouncing one’s family would be its negation.

Moreover, do we not have before us the application of these maxims in the sacrifice of our interests and family affections for our homeland? Would anyone blame a son for leaving his father, mother, siblings, wife and children to march in defense of his country? On the contrary, would he not be worthy of merit for leaving the sweetness of home and the warmth of affections in order to fulfill a duty? Hence, there are duties that are placed above others. Does not the law make it an obligation for the daughter to leave her parents in order to join her husband? The world is replete with cases in which the most heartbreaking separations are necessary; however, affections are not broken because of it. Distance does not lessen the respect or the solicitude that is owed to parents, nor the tenderness toward children. Thus, one can see that even if taken literally (except for the term hate) these words would be neither the negation of the commandment that orders the honoring of father and mother, nor the sentiment of parental affection – even more so if taken according to their spiritual meaning. These words had the purpose of using a hyperbole to show how imperative the duty was to concern oneself with the future life. Furthermore, they must have been less shocking in a culture and time in which, as a result of customs, family ties had less strength than in a morally more-advanced civilization. Such ties, weaker in early cultures, become strengthened with the development of sensibility and moral sense. Separation itself is necessary for progress; it occurs in families as well as in cultures, which would degenerate if there were no intermingling, and if they did not incorporate one another. It is a law of nature, as much in the interest of moral progress as in the interest of physical progress.

These matters are examined here solely from the earthly point of view. Spiritism enables us to see them from higher up by showing that the true bonds of affection reside in the spirit and not in the body; that such bonds cannot be broken by separation, or even by the death of the body; and that they are strengthened in the spirit life through the spirit’s purification: a comforting truth that provides much strength for bearing life’s  vicissitudes.