The Independent News Source
NCR on Kindle - NCR classifieds - YouTube - Twitter - Facebook - Email Alerts - RSS
Printer-friendly version
PDF versionRigali's new old time religion
by Eugene Cullen Kennedy on Aug. 19, 2010
The theology of the body or how to keep catholics feeling guilty
Paralleling Groucho Marx’s famous line, "either this man is dead or my watch has stopped," Cardinal Rigali either doesn’t know that Pope John Paul II is dead or his watch has stopped and he doesn’t know that he can stop running for a red hat. The old clerical gag during his time in Rome was that his cassock was always rain spotted from standing in St. Peter’s Square during the ambition storms that are to the Vatican what tsunamis are to the South Seas, waiting for the lightning strike that would transform him into a cardinal archbishop.
He certainly sounded as if he were still trying to please John Paul II in his enthusiastic endorsement of a congress on the Pope’s discourses on sex and marriage given early in his papacy at his weekly audiences. Consistent with John Paul II’s earlier writings, these talks, published as the "Theology of the Body," were the inspiration for the recent meeting praised by Rigali as well as the foundation for an apparently enthusiastic new movement to preach these papal reflections as the Catholic ideal of sex and marriage. Rigali senses that supporting John Paul II’s atavistic ideas about sex fits right into Benedict’s James Cameron-like obsession with bringing an alternate world into being. The big difference is that in Avatar Cameron offers a three-dimensional universe while Benedict, in Reform of the Reform, is pushing his one-dimensional vision of the paradise of the pre-Vatican II church.
Although Pope John Paul II’s meditations on human sexuality seem as tortured as he sometimes did, Rigali is betting that the new big thing will be the old big thing. You remember, that period in which Catholics were made to feel guilty just for being healthy human beings and having sexual feelings. Rigali is putting all his chips on the red by saying that the recent National Theology of the Body Congress, including its lectures, seminars, and artistic performances, "must become a campaign of human and catechetical formation."
Pope Benedict, Cardinal Rigali, and every church official clinging to the Vatican power line strung between them might well pause and reflect on the impact of this proposed full court press of John Paul II’s convictions on love and human sexuality. While nobody can doubt the world’s need for a renewed sense of Catholic values, with their generous pastoral understanding of the human condition, one can wonder whether the church, slipping deeper into the quicksand with each new response to the worldwide sex abuse crisis, can begin a crusade wisely or well on the basis of the theology of sex that the brooding ascetic John Paul seems to have torn out of his own soul in a form that is not only beyond humans but that will dumbfound most of them.
Subscribe to NCR
Want to read more about important issues in the life of the Church? A subscription to NCR will keep you up to date and informed.
Pope John Paul II, for example, follows St. Augustine in believing that before the Fall in the Garden of Eden procreation was accomplished by a lofty means — a "disinterested" love that transcended pleasure — that included none of the disordering elements attributable to Adam and Eve who brought about "cosmic shame." For the Pope, as with Augustine, original sin brought concupiscence into the world — tainting every sexual act and leaving human beings plagued by the morally unacceptable desire that lay at the root of sexual activity and was so problematic that it could only be tolerated as a means of bringing children into the world.
"Desire," or the erotic pull of lovers toward union with each other, remains the unacceptable element that must be overcome in the "total giving" that Pope John Paul II defines as the essence of sexual love. Love can, as it were, keep company with desire as long as the latter is subordinated to the former and does not do what healthy human passion does: "overwhelm all else." As he had previously written, John Paul states that the will "combats" the sexual urge and also "atones" for the desire to possess and be possessed by the beloved. The "Theology of the Body" endorses the Pope’s contention that real love is the antithesis of emotional desire and that a couple "must free themselves from those erotic sensations which have no legitimation in true love." Are you following me so far?
John Paul believed that any use of the other for pleasure goes against the proper order of creation so that "the desire of the body" is stronger than "the desire of the mind." Only self-control allows us to overcome the desire that he believes "limits" and "reduces" his idealized control, leaving us "ashamed" of our bodies. John Paul’s highly abstract ruminations, based on a divided model of the human person, reveal much about him: the depth of his sincerity, his own spiritual struggle, and his seeming exile from the give and take relationships that go with freely living life rather than spending it agonizing strenuously over the presence of desire in human love.
Theologian Karl Rahner spoke of concupiscence as natural so that being free of it is not a requirement of human nature. That is a simple and healthy way to begin to understand something that is a simple and healthy aspect of human personality. The church’s difficulties always arise when it puts aside its gift of understanding human persons and tries to make them into angels. There is an old French saying that "the man who tried to be an angel ends up as a beast." Cardinal Rigali might just want to think that over before he endorses a movement that could indeed lead the church back to the pre-Vatican II world. At Vatican II the church rediscovered its traditions of understanding rather than over-controlling the human person. The notion that this Rigali endorsed movement will bring back the old days is the scary part for it means a return to the constricted and repressive attitudes toward human sexuality that caused so much suffering for so long for so many good people. That world of confused thinking about human sexuality was also the incubator for the sex abuse crisis from which so many still suffer. The possibility of going back to that age of misunderstanding is the most ominous part of the Reform of the Reform now underway. As for the cardinal, he may be the preacher who talked on sex, moving an elderly Irish lady to say, "I wish I knew as little about it as he does."
[Eugene Cullen Kennedy is emeritus professor of psychology at Loyola University, Chicago.]
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Editor's Note: We can send you an e-mail alert every time Kennedy's column, Bulletins from the Human Side," is posted to NCRonline.org. Go to this page and follow directions: E-mail alert sign-up. If you already receive e-mail alerts from us, click on the "update my profile" button to add Kennedy to your list.
John Paul II's Theology of
John Paul II's Theology of the Body was a naked attempt to take us back to the pre-Vatican II sense of shame. Mr. Kennedy left out John Paul II's teaching that husband and wife should attain simultaneous climax. If ever there was proof that a celibate clergy simply do not have what it takes to teach on this issue, that is it.
cashelguy Really? Is that
cashelguy Really? Is that why JPII wrote about female orgasm, and the husband's obligation to take responsibility for his wife's satisfaction?
"Mr. Kennedy left out John
"Mr. Kennedy left out John Paul II's teaching that husband and wife should attain simultaneous climax".
It never ceases to amaze and amuse how old men in white dresses , supposedly without "impure thoughts", sell themselves as paragons of chastity and purity with presumably no sex lives of their own,and are forever pontificating on what OUR sex lives should be like. All of this while seminaries around the world under the tutelage and spiritual direction of the late John Paul II and his guy Friday, now Pope Benedict, reported all is well. A public image of all sweetness and light.
They could see no evil, hear no evil, and pretended there was no evil occurring in the priesthood or in the hierarchy. Had we never known the extent of sexual abuse going back as far it does and going as deep as it does in the Church, not a scintilla of an indication that anything was amiss anywhere would have emanated from the Vatican. There would have been no feeble explanations, no apologies leaving us incredulous, no appeals for forgiveness, NOTHING!!!
The Vatican sweeping every position it takes under the carpet of the Church's "teaching magisterium" is a model of a broken Church polity that has run it's course. It is being dismissed entirely by Catholics everywhere as credibility and moral authority continues to drain from Rome and from the local chancery office.
Durwood Not everything is
Durwood Not everything is the spirit of VII, 1960s/1970s sexual crisis
Sorry, not every jot/tittle can be reduced to those sins, that were so much of the world and its time.
Elderly Irish lady says it
Elderly Irish lady says it all.
Doesn't she just!!!
Doesn't she just!!!
Is this for real? I'm ashamed
Is this for real? I'm ashamed to be Catholic when I read/hear things like this?
Don't be ashamed Mom. Be REAL
Don't be ashamed Mom. Be REAL and use your substantial influence to talk openly about such repressive and frankly totally immature thinking. Sad if it weren't such a tragedy that emminent members of an outdated hierarchy could claim to represent the views of Christ on this earth. Challenge and increase your chances tenfold of raising healthy youngsters!
And don't let it into your
And don't let it into your parish!!!!
Theologian Karl Rahner spoke
Theologian Karl Rahner spoke of concupiscence as natural so that being free of it is not a requirement of human nature. That is a simple and healthy way to begin to understand something that is a simple and healthy aspect of human personality. The church’s difficulties always arise when it puts aside its gift of understanding human persons and tries to make them into angels. There is an old French saying that "the man who tried to be an angel ends up as a beast."
Beautiful, and so simple, yet so far from the understanding of far too many theologians, apologists, and current acting members of the Church hierarchy, who have been taught the opposite is true.
Great article, thanks for this.
Perfect. Kennedy, as usual,
Perfect. Kennedy, as usual, hits the nail right on the head. For the Church, it's time for God to save us from ourselves, as it were.
Having read both "The
Having read both "The Theology of the Body" and "The Theology of the Body Explained" I so no mention of body parts only philosophical ideas.
That's the problem I believe
That's the problem I believe - it's esoteric, not real lived experience speaking to lived experience. Rigali has taken the "philosophy" and tried to extract a practicum. Just because a Pope writes something doesn't make it Scripture! In this day and age of knowing that the WHOLE person has to be developed and made healthy from day one of existence, that all needs are to be addressed - physical, emotional and spiritual - to become the trinitarian human being that God created he or she to be, we CANNOT be led back to only living in our heads!!! Ever read "Trinity"? The disaster in one Irish family from repressive ideas re marital love...
I'm not sure who is more
I'm not sure who is more confused the author of this rant or Cardinal Rigali.
If you're attempting to claim that the Theology of the Body is an example of repressive theology then I'm afraid to say that your theological arrogance and pride are obviously preventing you from understanding what it is all about and you have just spewed out your stock prepackaged formula in reaction to anything about JP2 and sex.You should get out more,not everyone who has experienced a faith renewal through studying the Theology of the Body is racked by guilt and repressed.You're stuck in your past the sell by date theological categories.
TOTB
Ray, perhaps you don't know
Ray, perhaps you don't know some of Professor Kennedy's life experience. You may have noted he's Professor Emeritus of Psychology (Loyola U, Chicago). In that capacity and in a few other capacities he certainly understands "what it is all about", from personal, psychological, moral and theological perspectives. Among other things, Dr. Kennedy was one of the people who gave early warning (ignored of course, by those who wanted to keep things quiet) regarding sexual abuse by clerics.
I didn't find "theological arrogance or pride" in this article. Nor do I think it necessary to intimate Dr. Kennedy needs to "get out more" and that he's making universal statements as your comment does. Nowhere do I see him arguing that everyone who studies Theology of the Body (and experiences a "faith renewal" as a result) is repressed and guilt-ridden. What I do understand is that, in general, this theology is bad psychology (that's Professor Kennedy's field of experiential expertise).
Love, which created us,
Love, which created us,
is what we are.
And we REMAIN
as God created us.
The opposite of love is fear,
but what is All-Encompassing can have no opposite.
Nothing real can be threatened.
Nothing unreal exists.
Herein lies the peace of God.
Remember to laugh.
:)
Ah, a reference to the Course
Ah, a reference to the Course in Miracles with "remember to laugh" at the end ... I like that! When you keep it simple (Marianne Williamson's interpretation), it rings so true. Love on one side of the coin, fear on the other. Fear is instinctive; it's our lizard brain trying to keep us safe from danger. But we are capable of so much more than instinct and can CHOOSE the higher consciousness of love. We all need to work on this sad, misguided propensity for fear-mongering and guilt in the Catholic church. It truly is the opposite of love and in fact, undermines and obstructs what we're really supposed to be doing here on this earth.
I really wish the author
I really wish the author would cite something here instead of giving a summary, because yeah you can get this tone from reading it, but I really don't like your solution any better which is to simply shove it aside for something "more practical". Because what's more practical does tend to be utilitarian. Is JPII's approach to marriage too focused on sexuality? Possibly, but it's at least a start to building a better theology of marriage which includes the selves of the marriage but also the community with which they interact. My only recommendation is that you cite something next time, it'll strengthen your arguments and prevent the strawman problem.
Maybe if John Paul The Less
Maybe if John Paul The Less had felt less guilty about his normal sexual desires he wouldn't have had to self flagellate so often.
As far as the "reform of the reform", well, it will die a hasty death after the next conclave and be put back in the closet will all the lace, frill and magna cappas. The SSPX will be packed and sent on their way to minister to their neo facists and skinhead "think alikes" in Europe.
Yawn....the data show that
Yawn....the data show that demographic trends favor tradition.
Sorry!
and that demographic is
and that demographic is shrinking...
If by that you mean that as
If by that you mean that as those Catholics who favor the post-Vatican II changes leave the Church to the "traditionalist" minority, you may be on to something.
See James Davidson & Dean
See James Davidson & Dean Hoge's "Mind the Gap: The Return of the Lay-Clerical Divide" in COMMONWEAL. While these sociologists do not address, if I recall, attitudes on sexuality per se, they do point out that we are witnessing a growing divide between older *and* younger laity, on the one hand, and so-called "JPII priests", on the other hand.
Humourless... That's because
Humourless...
That's because the young are leaving the church in droves, ie Austria is bleeding to death, just leaving behind lots of old conservatives.
Munich where the pope was archbishop for years is DEAD. When they all die out they will leave behind an empty church.
Now go to bed early, take all your meds and drink your warm milk. You sound like you need your bedrest.
...and the church of
...and the church of Jesus-the-dim-dark-distant-rarely-to-be-mentioned-mythological-precursor-of-Carl-Rogers will drown in the sea of its own inanity.
Oh, the church won't
Oh, the church won't die.
Watch the next conclave.
when conservative cardinals like Shoenborn talk about reform you know that change is in the air.
Everybody knows what the retired Vatican exorcist stated recently about atheist curial cardinals and those involved in the occult:
"Father Gabriele Amorth, 85, who has been the Vatican's chief exorcist for 25 years said that the consequences of satanic infiltration included power struggles at the Vatican as well as "cardinals who do not believe in Jesus, and bishops who are linked to the Demon". He added: "When one speaks of 'the smoke of Satan' [a phrase coined by Pope Paul VI in 1972] in the holy rooms, it is all true – including these latest stories of violence and paedophilia."
(http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article7056689.ece)
Oh, change will come. We've had enough of this stupidity.
The National Religious
The National Religious Vocations Conference did a survey along w/ Georgetown's CARA on American life. Their data explores some 'myths', that will explode the grey heads of the Establishment:
Religious institutes that have a focused mission, who live in community, who have regular prayer and sacramental life, and who wear a habit show a higher proportion of newer members. The study indicates that men and women are also drawn to other types of religious life.
Both men and women seem to be drawn to habited communities. About two thirds of the newer members say they belong to a religious institute that wears a habit.
Newer members have ranked highly daily Mass as very important to them.Their prayer style also expresses a strong preference for Liturgy of the Hours, faith-sharing, nonliturgical common prayer, Eucharistic adoration, and common rosary and meditation. (Sorry, Fr McBrien, about the Eucharistic adoration part!)
Fifty eight percent of newer religious are white Anglo, compared to 94 percent of the finally professed men and women religious in the US. Nearly 20 percent of newer entrants were born in a country other than the United States. Hispanic/Latino vocations make up 21 per cent of the newer religious while 14 per cent are Asian/Pacific and 6 per cent are African or African American.
Newer members are coming to religious life not just for ministry, but also for common prayer and community living as well. Respondents were much more likely to indicate a preference for living in a large (8 or more) or medium-sized (4 to 7) community than living in a small community and especially living alone. This is especially true of younger members
....
Comments, Progressives?
You present the data from the
You present the data from the studies you cite very well, Scrantonian. But let's look a little further so that we can discuss the larger picture. Do you mind?
In looking only at the religious communities you mention - the more traditional, habit-wearing ones - it was also found that they have the same problem as other orders, that many members leave before final profession of vows. And, of course, no community is bringing in more members than those that are retiring from active ministry or due to health, and those members that die. It is hoped that this will, somehow, reverse itself - though it looks pretty grim at this point.
But it is as it should be, that the more "conservative" orders should be getting the bulk of new vocations. The reason is simple but often overlooked by many commentators: since religious life is, for Catholic women, no longer one of only a very few options for their life's work (as well as due to other social developments of the 50's, 60's and 70's) the number of entrants will be the very few among people seeking a life of service to the Church. For decades now, men and women have been drawn to other forms of committed association with the Church, such as the Permanent Deaconate, lay Institues, Third Orders, Sodalities, and so on, which do much of the same work now that other "progressive" orders had done before them. These options were by and large not available in decades past, so those pusuing religious committment had to enter seminary or religious life. Now is not the same as the past. A range of ways to live a life in dedicated services take many of those who would have gone to the religious orders. It should be viewed with joy, just as the religious orders will continue to be more specialized in their style and methods of living the Gospels. None should be disparaged - it is mocking of the ways the Holy Spirit moves among the faithful. Where would we be today in making Christ's presence known in so much of the world, without the orders of men and women who went out and did the real work? Where would we be without the orders of men and women who made a life of prayer and devotion apart from the world? Doesn't the Church need it all? The labels don't really fit....there is nothing progressive or conservative about any life devoted to Christ. All of them - and us, by extension - are blessed.
Othor Check what I wrote.
Othor Check what I wrote. That was a survey from NCRV/CARA on ALL religious communities. And habits are not associated solely w/ traditional communities:
Myth #3: Conservative/traditional communities are the only communities attracting new members. Fact: Religious institutes that have a focused mission, who live in community, who have regular prayer and sacramental life, and who wear a habit show a higher proportion of newer members. The study indicates that men and women are also drawn to other types of religious life.
....
The question remains: What is wrong w/ the 'progressive' orders that they are incapable of gaining new members?
Scrantonian...what is wrong
Scrantonian...what is wrong with the clergy of our dioceses the seminaries
are close to empty...are they "incapable of gaining new members?"
The Diocesan clergy bottomed
The Diocesan clergy bottomed out about 10 years back.
In fact, the total number of diocesan clergy is the same as it was in 1980 (CARA data).
And some of the things you
And some of the things you are leaving out:
Those entering women's religious communities seeking larger communities generally are not as well educated, tend to stay for a short period and then leave. Some I have met are just getting their BA degrees as late as in their forties and have limited capabilities for ministry. Some are so focused on getting new members, they become fixated and out of touch.
My experience has been that many in conservative, habited communities are very socially immature, "hide" in their habited lives, and child-like as they act out. And some of those behaviors unfortunately are similar to those of seminarians who later exhibited tendencies of pedophiles.
All that glistens...
Well, b/4 rolling out your
Well, b/4 rolling out your comforting myths, check the web site and the data:
New members to religious life report having rich options available to them—in terms of career, education, and personal life choices. Seventy percent of respondents had at least a bachelor’s degree before entering, with one third of these respondents also having degrees in higher education. Nine out of ten respondents said that they were employed prior to entering their institutes.
...
70% is much more than the share in the public at large.
As for being older:Our study indicates that the average age of men who entered religious life since 1993 was 30. For women the age was 32. The data also shows that 71 percent of those in initial formation are under 40. Although there always has been, and always will be a place for older or second career candidates in religious life, our study results have confirmed what we have tracked in our Vocation Match Annual Trends Survey, which is that an increasing number of younger people are looking at religious life as a possible life option.
We have a long way to go to
We have a long way to go to completely understand human sexuality and, at the
present time in a society so wrapped up in sex, we need to learn more healthy
ways both in mind and body but Rigali, Pope John Paul II and Benedict XVI certainly do not get it right. What a bunch of noddleheads!
Betty Apparently, you are
Betty Apparently, you are ignorant of what JP the Great actually wrote on teh topic. Read Karol Wojtyla on the Song of Songs and then read this drivel, and you'll see how a bitter fellow is trying to pull the wool over your eyes.
the only bitterness found
the only bitterness found here is continually within your own comments scrantonian
I find the reflections by Eugene Kennedy as fresh now as they were some forty years ago, and brilliant, and humorous, and true
never bitter, while you always are
why is that, scrantonian, and how can we get past it so you enjoy life and the life of our Faith?
like to make an appointment with Dr. Kennedy?
might help
Mr Scanlon As a child of
Mr Scanlon As a child of VII, at times I do submit to bitterness about how the mythical spirit of VII destroyed our vibrant communities. I do feel bitterness about 'leaders' like Mahoney or Weakland or Bernardin enabled the sexual abuse crisis. I am bitter about the rubble we have strewn around us as a result.
But rebuild we will, and for the most part I do it with a smile. Join us in the restoration; we certainly could use all the help we can get. We've been left a ponderous amount of work.
Are Bishops and Cardinals
Are Bishops and Cardinals hatched in a big gilded cave some where and raised on Papal worms? What is with these guys?
Thank you, thank you, Barb
Thank you, thank you, Barb Monda. I love it!
Rigali with B16 may want a
Rigali with B16 may want a return to the good old days. Fortunately the world wont regress with them
I think I must have read and
I think I must have read and been taught a different Theology of the Body...
I took the exaltation of donative love over desire for pleasure as an example of virtue standing in the middle. Pleasure is good and desirable but it cannot be the overriding goal of sex, it is a necessary good to be sure but not the prime end of the act. As for the Adam and Eve thing, my understanding is that John Paul does not say they engaged in sex with utter disinterest (though Augustine might, to a degree), but that they were not overwhelmed and ruled by passions that seek possession for oneself; rather they had desire to the appropriate degree and with the proper motives (since their intellect, will, passions, and body were in perfect harmony). No, WE don't experience sexual dynamics that way, but that is because of the Fall. No, TOB does not advocate that we should or can return to that perfect state of Eden (we have a better destiny in store) but that we look to the way it was in the beginning and try to use that knowledge to be the best of a fallen humanity, so far as possible.
This position is far more liberating than the utter ambivalence to unity and focus only on reproduction that reigned before Pius XI's Casti Connubii, and has since been elaborated upon. Some of the popularizers have made errors, sure, but they have been corrected by scads of their colleagues.
Now, I know TOB was just a series of Wednesday audiences, which are really low on the papal authority scale, but it has become popular and viewed as an important theological contribution because it is so attractive; it is not a binding set of doctrines, but an excellent articulation and clarification of our moral theological patrimony; it resonates with the experiences and desires of many people and indeed does liberate them from a legalistic guilt or immoral libertine-ism or woefully confused misuses of the sexual power.
Kudos, Brian, on your
Kudos, Brian, on your intelligent comment of AUG 19! Your comment and only a few others address and explain the issue. The majority of the comments seem simply to be jumping on the Kennedy bandwagon and condemning JP II and B XVI. How sad! And, by the way, JP II's Theology of the Body is enjoying favor and acceptance by many young people today who are serious about learning of true love. The truth is that true love is more about giving than getting. This will never change! Or, as St. Francis of Assisi put it: "It is in giving that we receive."
Peter says: And, by the way,
Peter says: And, by the way, JP II's Theology of the Body is enjoying favor and acceptance by many young people today who are serious about learning of true love.
Really?
Document, document, document this please.
What kills me are the
What kills me are the inconsistencies with which we teach as an institutional Church.
The Church teaches that the story of Adam and Eve is not an historical account. They JP II goes and bases his theology of the body on an Adam and Eve having perfect "Catholic" sex in Eden.
The tragedy is that they are banking on the ignorance of most Catholics. Getting you to swallow this drivel is much easier because they know you don't know any better.
You nailed it right on the
You nailed it right on the head. One myth supporting more myths. Before you know it, you have "infallible" doctrine.
This is spot on, funny and so
This is spot on, funny and so pathetic because it is true. May God help us all.
This is not a serious
This is not a serious discussion of the "Theology of the Body." It's really the sort of stuff that gets shovelled up in stables. I'm sorry that Kennedy continues to write such bitter columns.
I have been married for over thirty years, and I believe John Paul's insights into sexuality and human relationships are very insightful.
This is way beyond "confused
This is way beyond "confused thinking about human sexuality". Following JPII's Theology of the Body, is the fastest way for the Roman Catholic Church to become extinct, if I followed the gist of what Mr. Kennedy was explaining. Who in their right mind would want to get married given these constraints. Marriage is tough enough especially now given how long most of us live. This elderly lady agrees with what the elderly Irish lady said, about her wishing to know as little about it (sex) as he (Rigali) does.....I think that also applies to JP II and the present pope as well.
WOW! Expect a boatload of
WOW! Expect a boatload of responses!
The idea that the life of the
The idea that the life of the body needs to be sublimated to the life of the spirit derives, not from Augustine, but from Scripture -- both the gospels and the Pauline corpus -- and has been a consistent part of church teaching ever since. Rahner recognized "concupiscence" as natural, but understood the human person as "spirit in the world" and focused on the transcendence we all experience (according to Rahner, Lonergan, etc.) in the act of knowing ourselves and others (through the "conversio ad phantasma"). Throwing Rahner's name into the mix as if he supported a different Christian anthropology is patently dishonest. Since Dr. Kennedy apparently doesn't understand Karl Rahner, we're left to wonder how well he understands Augustine or Pope John Paul.
Very well written. The
Very well written. The problem is, like Rahner, anyone who speaks the truth on this issue is gong to get slapped silly. Kennedy's zeroed in on the thought process that proves the Vatican's claim of guidance by the Holy Spirit to be a mirage.
Isn't it call Narcissism when one thinks their own thought process is superior to anyone else's? And isn't it called mortal sin when insistence of a false notion causes harm to billions of people?
As sad as Rigalli's presence
As sad as Rigalli's presence is in Rome, he was the Archbishop of St. Louis,Mo. long enough to screw things up there.
The reason for the strong
The reason for the strong attraction & pleasure of sex is to keep the human race going. That's the bottom line here. The Creator knew what He was doing. If sex were a chore, would humans be bothered with it? No! I'm sure the same thing applied to Adam & Eve but they, before the Fall, would not have been unduly pre-occupied with the topic. This unhealthy pre-occupation with sex & pleasure in general as with eating & drinking is concupiscence.
So the infertile and the post
So the infertile and the post 50 crowd are wasting their time?
No, obviously the pleasure
No, obviously the pleasure can still be still be enjoyed regardless of the outcome. And it is quite licit provided it is kept within the marriage bond.
One has to wonder why these
One has to wonder why these cardinals/bishops/priests hate the human body so much...afterall, it was created by God...all creation is good! How would any parent feel if, having given their child the best gifts possible (e.g., body & sex), the child concludes the gifts are "dirty" and sticks them in the back of the closet and never takes them out to enjoy...
Most of us have recognized by
Most of us have recognized by this time that the body is holy, that sex is pleasurable, and I don't remember a time ever when I was told that sexual feeling per se was sinful -- and I am of (Dr. or Mr. or Fr.) Kennedy's vintage.
My question is what body theology has he to propose that is better than the Church's (which I understand to be that the body is holy, as is sex).
Most of us have left our hangups behind years ago, and recognize that the world's view of sex has not inspired happiness for too many people, and that the church--even with its archaic view that our sexuality is somehow related to giving life and is thus a responsibility as well as a pleasure--has the most radical and loving attitude.
I am very tired of Eugene Kennedy. Wasn't he ever able to find a job outside of Catholic auspices?
No.
No.
Somehow, we've distorted,
Somehow, we've distorted, even in our religious approaches to life, the meaning of our sexuality. We have inherited remnants of Gnosticism, Puritanism and Jansenism; all of which saw sex as lower nature, concupiscence, animal instincts, base appetites and other negative euphemisms. These attitudes can be traced back to the ritual purity requirements of the Jewish priesthood, and perhaps beyond. Similar attitudes are found in certain Oriental religions, and we are told that the married Gandhi took a vow of celibacy toward the end of his campaign for the freedom of India.
Today's distortions are the overreactions to yesterday's. If you hold a light object under water, then let go, it will not simply rise to the surface, but beyond it, then fall back. It takes some time to reach equilibrium, and makes a lot of waves in the meantime.
In promulgating Humane Vitae, Pope Paul VI predicted a decline in morality, which he linked causally with the acceptance of artificial birth control. History would seem to have proven him correct; but has the causal relationship been established? Can we say that God' s creation of sex is the cause of pornography, rape, adultery, etc. ? Or did the acceptance of artificial birth control simply become another development to be abused?
We need to recognize all aspects of our sexuality as sacred gifts from the CREATOR, which give us a role in the mystery CREATION.
Our first identity is sexual: "It's a boy!" or "It's a girl!"
And Motherhood, which we all claim to honor and respect, begins with conception in a sexual communion. It is the wonder of new life and love which ought to be the basis of our sexual values. When else do we come so close to participation with GOD? Conception is the means God uses to begin an Eternal Life. It is only from such a value level that we can realize the evil in its distortion or abuse.
Fatherhood, which Jesus used as the analogy of God, begins with this same communion.
We are back to the source of our first images, from which we draw our pictures of God.
Of course, long processes of attraction, selection and growth in familiarity lead to the love which should precede this communion, the "This is my body." which bride and groom say to each other, "it is now also yours." in a Sacrament which includes the presence of God, and witnesses: "Sex is sacred. In God, it is the source of LIFE!"
Bravo Walter!! Very well
Bravo Walter!! Very well said, I agree Sex is a very necessary part of life in general and specifically in the Sacrament of Marriage!! Without the desire we could not truly be present in the act of marital sex and I believe what JPII was saying was we can not let that desire or lust be the only reason for sexual intercourse. I love the imagary of the light object in water, that is a great way to explain what it is we are going through right now. I do not and have never felt that the church taught the body was dirty, no I was not alive back in pre vatican II days, so that might be why, but that the body and the spirit were to live together in equilibrium. It was once one got more power or was listend to more is when we get into trouble and perhaps sin or become judgemental people.
Thanks for your imagary, I will use that.
No wonder the Catholic Church
No wonder the Catholic Church is shrinking. The Vatican and most clergy are hung up on sex. They think it is evil. I wonder sometimes if they do that because they instinctively know that if they control the sex, they control the person! Look at all the psychologically messed up clergy.
I couldn't agree more. This
I couldn't agree more. This hierachy IS absolutely obsessed with sex. God loves us in a magnificently wholistic way. He does not split body and soul. It is we humans who get ourselves into trouble, because we tend to do just that. In terms of sexuality, we seem to divide into two separate and distinct camps. Though both camps have completely opposite views on sexuality, they both, actually have more in common than they realize.
In the first, say secular camp, sex is viewed as an appetite, just like sustanance. "I hunger,I eat. I thirst,I drink. I desire, I sex.
Over in the religious camp, sex is thought as a dirty, shameful, but occasionally necessary function, where if one absolutely has to discuss the subject, better to do it in hushed tones.
If both camps were to be told that they actually had something in common with the other, they would treat it as fighting words, and yet it is true. BOTH camps kill, because they try to separate body and soul. Did I need to read JP II's dissertation in T.O.B. to understand this? NO!.
As to the question of why is the Magisterium so obsessed with sex? Let me put it another way. It's a bit like food. Most people enjoy many different types of food. They usually are found to delight in a variety of food, in reasonable quantities. The only people I have ever known who appeared to be absolutely obsessed with food have been the anorexic and the morbidly obese.
Consider the source.
Wonderful Creator, God of
Wonderful Creator,
God of Being, Life and LOVE;
God of Justice Mercy and Forgiveness;
God of Knowledge, Understanding and Wisdom.
Help us to see all things and people as you see them,and to act accordingly.
Amen
The hierarchy's fear of women and sexuality has led to distortions in several areas. Reaction to those distortions has led to many of the problems we see today, in both the Church and the world.
A bouyant object, released from being held under water, will not simply float to the surface, but will bouce around for some time, continuing to make waves.
Thank God for John XXII.
John XXIi was an anti-pope.
John XXIi was an anti-pope.
Typo: Meant John XXIII.
Typo: Meant John XXIII.
Since Pope John Paul II
Since Pope John Paul II beatified the "anti-pope" John XXIII, he too must be a pretty disreputable character in your book?
I HAVE BEEN to meetings where
I HAVE BEEN to meetings where the "Theology of the Body" was touted and it is all mumbo-jumbo. There are plenty of platitudes spoken that make no sense as anything teachable and learnable as a way of living. It is rehash of bad theology as "something new." Ugh.
Thanks for giving it a good, critical analysis.
I couldn't agree with you
I couldn't agree with you more. In order to understand the theology of the body, one must distance themselves from one's body and emotions, and enter into it totally with the mind. When you separate it just into concepts divorced from experience, it can make sense. But, I'm not an angel, I'm an embodied man who lives on earth. When you add emotion and experience, it makes no sense. But, the prideful JPII always thought he was correct.
We need a married clergy, these celebates are too obsessed about sex.
If my may interject, they are
If my may interject, they are not obsessed about sex. The are obsessed with OTHER PEOPLE'S sex!
Why not just rename this
Why not just rename this column "Bulletins from the Bitter Sarcastic Side" and get it over-with already?
Post new comment