"Let's Talk about Sex" Sells Better than "Let's Talk about Marriage"

The word "marriage" occurs 597 times in the online translation of JP2's Theology of the Body.  The word "nuptial" occurs 126 times: that's 723 references to marriage by name alone, not counting the overall context, for the concept marriage permeates this work, even when the word "marriage" or "nuptial" is not being used.  In fact, the official title of John Paul II's Wednesday Audiences is The Redemption of the Body and Sacramentality of Marriage.

By contrast, the word "sex" occurs 161 times, and the vast majority of those times the word "sex" is used to mean "gender", "sex" in the sense of "male" or "female".

When it comes to "sexual activity", the phrase "conjugal act" or "marital act", meaning sexual intercourse between spouses, are used a combined 42 times.  The contrasting concept, sex which violates the bond of marriage, is "adultery", and this word appears 233 times, with most of these occurrences being either JP2 quoting Jesus on "adultery in the heart" (Mat. 5:28), or talking about "adultery" as an Old Testament metaphor for lack of fidelity to God.  "Fornication" (sexual activity outside of marriage) occurs 12 times, and all of those times either as direct quotations of St. Paul, or used in reference to Paul's use of the word.  In all occurrences, sexual activity is referred to in relation to the sacrament of marriage.

And so by word frequency alone we can see that The Real Theology of the Body is about MARRIAGE, not about SEX.

***

Here is one of the key sentences in all 129 Theology of the Body lectures given by John Paul II over a five year period ...

It can be said that marriage is the meeting place of eros with ethos and of their mutual compenetration in the heart of man and of woman, as also in all their mutual relationships.

Translation: the longing of man for something greater, a longing which includes sexual desire (both elements constitute eros) and the realm of proper behavior informed by a selfless love (which JP2 calls ethos, the foundation of which he calls agape) are joined in this life in one remarkable place: Marriage.  Not, as Christopher West and the Westians would have it, in "mature purity" that proudly gawks at naked bodies, not in bravely challenging your lust by engaging it, not in a strange "new ethos" that can be found only by picking up on hidden codes in the Wednesday Audiences.

The Real Theology of the Body is about the very thing its pop-Catholic popularizers almost never mention: not SEX, but MARRIAGE.

THE SACRAMENT OF MARRIAGE.

And more than that, it's about  THE SACRAMENT OF MARRIAGE WHICH BECOMES IN THE NEXT WORLD ETERNAL VIRGINITY.

***

Marriage permeates the Real Theology of the Body.  It is the teleos, the natural and supernatural end or goal of the body, so much so that the lifelong renunciation of it (for priests, religious and consecrated virgins) is a kind of "marriage to Christ" (which, of course, can also be the case spiritually for those who are single or widowed).  Marriage is the key that unlocks the mystery of the body.  Not sex.  Marriage.  Marriage includes sex, but it is much more than sex: in fact it gives sex meaning.  Sex only makes sense within the confines of a lifelong relationship of love that includes babies: a family.  Sex creates an institution, as Chesterton noted, and that institution is the not-so-sexy thing that sustains us all: the family.

Marriage is the sacrament of love.  More than that: it is, in John Paul II's words, the "primordial sacrament"!  It is "primordial" both because it was given "in the beginning" (thereby, in a sense, completing creation), but also because it affects the very heart of what it means to be human: it addresses the first thing about us.  It is primordial in both senses.

When John Paul does address sex and sexual desire in these lectures, he often acknowledges how dangerous sexual desire is for fallen man, how easily simple libido becomes outright lust - disordinate desire.  And lust is a problem that needs to be dominated.  John Paul II is very clear about this.  Lust gets in the way of marriage; lust disturbs the proper relationship of man and woman.  This is because lust seeks to appropriate or possess the other person.  Lust seeks not to give, but to take.

If this "world passes," and if with it the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes and the pride of life which come from the world also passes, marriage as a sacrament immutably ensures that man, male and female, by dominating concupiscence, does the will of the Father. And he "who does the will of God remains forever." (1 Jn 2:17)

"Marriage .... ensures that man ... by dominating concupiscence does the will of the Father" and "remains forever".

This domination does not come through "thought experiments" with sexual situations, it does not come by daring yourself to stare at naked ladies so that you reach the esoteric way of the "illuminative life", it does not come from having "new eyes" that can visually perceive the "good" that's in pornography, it does not consist in lauding the Prodigal Son not for his repentance but for his indulging in the sin that led to his repentance (all of which are things West and his followers are saying) ... the domination of concupiscence comes from Marriage - not just marriage as a way of putting out the fire, but marriage as a Sacramental gift that fulfills our destiny and that helps us do the will of the Father.

As the primordial sacrament, and at the same time as the sacrament born in the mystery of the redemption of the body from the spousal love of Christ and of the Church, marriage "comes from the Father." It is not from the world but from the Father.

Thus the Sacrament, and even its renunciation for the sake of the virginity that will be all of ours in the Kingdom, helps lead us (by the grace of God, which it communicates) to eternal life.

The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and My Little Pony

Jeff Ostrowski of Corpus Christi Watershed not long ago published this in one of his posts ...

COMPOSER DAN SCHUTTE, formerly a Jesuit priest, published a musical setting in 2012 of the Glory To God which has been widely criticized because it changes the words.

To me, however, something else is even more problematic. Please listen to these brief excerpts and see if you can guess what I’m getting at:

      * *  “Glory To God” • Refrain by Dan Schutte

      * *  “My Little Pony” • Mp3 Audio Excerpt

Am I crazy, or is this resemblance jarring?

 Readers, click on the two links.  GLORY TO GOD IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS THE MY LITTLE PONY THEME, ONLY WORSE!

Jeff goes on to say, "I have absolutely nothing against Schutte, who is incredibly accomplished and literally world-famous."

Well, I have quite a lot against Dan Schutte.  Anyone who would write a setting of the Gloria that is indistinguishable from the "My Little Pony Theme" is not a man I'd introduce to other adults, much less a man whose music I would sing.  Nor should the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass be blasphemed by the music of this "former Jesuit priest".

When the most important activity in our lives is dumbed down to "My Little Pony" - "dumbed down" to a point that makes you want to "throw up" - then it's no wonder men and young people and normal human beings are leaving the Church in droves.

Theology of the Body Isn't about Sex: It's about Identity

Another in my series: The Real Theology of the Body, continued.

That is to say, what is the Theology of the Body according to Bl. John Paul II and not according to the pop-Catholic peddlers of skewed interpretations of it?

The pop perversion of TOB errs not only in focusing exclusively on sex, but in focusing on a very narrow image of man.  The kind of man in the Westian view of the Theology of the Body is a man who lives on the level of appetite, and who spends a lot of time spiritualizing an appetite that remains, in the end, a mere appetite, a base hunger dressed up in church robes.

But JP2's vision of man is of a man much more whole and complete than that.

This is what is impressing me most about JP2's TOB.  Man is a whole in John Paul's vision.  He is a complex, mature, complete and multi-layered being, for whom lust is a sin, but that sin does not define him; a man for whom sex is part of his destiny, but not the whole of his destiny.  JP2's man has sexual desire, but his sexual desire is part of his Eros, and his Eros is a hunger for the True, the Beautiful and the Good, a bridge to the transcendent, which must be held up by the pillars of the Law perfected by Christ.  JP2's man passes toward the fulfillment of the "nuptial meaning of the Body" through an Ethos that renounces lust and that seeks the "redemption of the Body" so that the fullness and complexity of his being has its proper end: an end built into the language of the Body by God Himself.

This is a far cry from the cosmic orgasm and the overwrought sensual indulgence the pop-Catholics seem to be seeking in their version of TOB.  And it has absolutely nothing to do with a license to stare at naked ladies if you feel you possess "mature purity".

The difference between the Real Theology of the Body and the Pop Theology of the Body is not so much a difference in their views on sex but a difference in their views on Man.