"In the Beginning..."

" "Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator created them male and female and said, for this reason a man will leave his father and his mother and unite with his wife, and the two will be one flesh?" So it is that they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined let man not separate." They objected, "Why then did Moses order to give her a certificate of divorce and send her away?" Jesus answered, "Because of the hardness of your heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so." Mt 19: 3 - 8

Clearly Jesus is saying a lot here. But JP2 focuses on "the beginning". In the beginning, before sin was in the world, everything was perfect. Everything was how God made it to be. What can we learn from this?

I took the verse directly from the book because I thought the italics were Jesus quoting Genesis. That may be true for the first part, but I'd have to check my Bible. Or leave you wondering in suspense until you pick up your own Bibles to find out? Yeah, I think I'll do the second.

But can you picture Jesus talking to people of today, people in a society where about half of marriages end in divorce? His words, the words from 2000 years ago, still apply to us today. There will be more talk on divorce later, but for now I'll just say this. Jesus tells us that the man and his wife become one flesh. And when the flesh is severed through a divorce, what happens? Intense pain. Pain in the family. Pain between the former lovers. Any of you who have been through or know someone who has gone through divorce knows this. Even if the other person is not good, it's hard to leave.

Jesus tells us that "what God has joined let man not separate". For college kids, my age group, how does that apply? We need to be careful who we date. At this point, we need to think "this man (or woman) is someone I could potentially marry." Is that a good thing or a bad thing? Is the person you're with going to love you through sick and suffering? While there is no way to know, if you cannot see yourself marrying the person you're with, get out. Don't date just to date. It's not worth it.

Alright, so I'm done there. Back to the beginning. I'd recommend reading the book of Genesis sometime this week. Time to go all the way back and see what God created... and see how JP2 says it reflects our relationship with God and others.

Lord, help us all have an amazing week. Bless us as we begin our reading, and help us to learn a little more how to truly be human! I'd like to offer a prayer for all those who are victims of divorce, and all those marriages that are really struggling. Bless them, Lord and please help them to discover and want to do your will. Amen

Happy Advent Ya'll!!!

Why Theology of the Body?

You know what, I'm just going to quote straight from the book here. I think Michael Waldstein says it better than I ever could: "To conclude, the purpose of theology of the body is to defend the body against its alienation from the person in Cartesian rationalism. Put positively, the purpose is to show the divine plan for human spousal love, to show the goodness and the beauty of the whole sexual sphere against its cheapening in the "objective, scientific" way of looking at nature" (page 105). Waldstein also talks about how only through doing God's will are we happy.

What does this mean for humanity, specifically for me and my age group? First of all, our bodies and sex are amazing things. I mean, wow! We are able to work with members of the opposite gender to make a baby. Think about it. We could reproduce asexually. God could have put Adam and Eve in the garden and said: "Alright guys, now if you want to continue the human race you need to chop off a part of the body, so get going!" But no, a married man and a married woman can come together and have a baby, a visible sign of their love.

Now, I know most college kids don't see things this way. Lots of times, sex just becomes something that two people do when they love each other. Or even worse, something to do for fun. To fling around at parties after the alcohol is served. But that's not God's plan for us. God's plan is for man and woman to unite through the sacrament or marriage, and then have sex, bringing them together on a whole new level. Then have babies! :)

And you know what? God's plan is what will make you happy. Like really happy. I can't say I'm the best Catholic. I can't say that I've always had admirable faith in God. But for a long time, I've known that God has a plan. And following that plan is what will bring us joy. True joy.

And now, unless I say otherwise, I'm going to read the actual Theology of the Body all the way through from cover to cover. I'm going to go in whatever order the book has.

Just a note (which you will know if you have the same book I have), there is a section in the introduction I'm not going to blog on. But it's basically about the structure of the book, and I don't see the necessity. That said, I hold the right to completely change my mind and have a 100,000 page summary of that next week.

Lord, please bless us all in this week! And please help us accept your will. More than that, please give us the desire to do whatever you want. If we're not ready for that, give us the desire to want to do your will. Amen

Day... Let's call this -10

Well, after a long day, I'm finally posting! What can I say? I got busy. But I guess that happens a lot in life. You get busy and have to choose: am I too busy for God or will I make time for him? Today, I choose to make time for God. It's a resolution that we all really have to renew each day.

Well, there's a lot in here, but what this part of the book talked most about was faith. We all need it, but what is it based on? This sort of reminds me of the part of the Gospel when St. Thomas told his fellow apostles that unless he touched the wounds of Jesus, and put his hand in Jesus's side, he would not believe. A week later, Jesus appeared and told him to touch his wounds. Thomas knelt down and said "my Lord and my God." Jesus then told him (and this is NOT a direct quote): "You believe because you have seen. But Blessed are those who have not seen, and yet believe."

I feel like Jesus is talking directly to us. From two-thousand years ago, Jesus is speaking directly to his church today. None of us have seen him directly, but we believe. But even with us, is our faith based on experience? Have we had something happen, and now we say "I believe". Honestly, that can go away. But deep faith, internalized faith, it won't just leave when things are tough. Does this mean we have blind faith? No. But at a certain point we do have to acknowledge that we do, in fact, believe.

This section also mentioned works of Bl. John Paul II, one of which being Love and Responsibility. I can say that I read somebody's summary of it, the book by Edward Sri. Basically, it goes a lot into how love is a gift, and for love to be real you have to be able to give and receive it. But that's not just in a marriage. Any relationship.

God, please help us learn how to love like you! You want us to be perfect in love, so give us that grace! And help us believe. For those of us who struggle, give us the grace to continue in the easy times as well as the difficult. For those who do not, give the grace and reveal your love to them!

special announcement and day -14

Hey guys! I just wanted to let you know that for November (and perhaps the beginning of December) I will only be posting on Sundays. I just have a lot going on right now with school and NaNoWrimo, so I'm going to stick with once a week for a while.

Now... about Scheler....
From what I understand, JP2 liked him in some aspects. He was different than Kant. But there are two problems with Scheler's philosophy:
1. It says that religious acts are done because they make you feel good.
2. It objectifies humans.
Hopefully, you all reading this see the problems without me going into them.

Objectifying humans if one of the basic "no no's" of theology of the body. We were made in the image and likeness of God himself. That means all of our bodies are beautiful and deserve respect. That's one of the biggest issues with pornography. It makes the human body just a sex object. It does not make that woman (or man) beautiful and respected. It does not glorify the human body.

The glory of the human body is actually seen through the Sistine Chapel. For anyone who does not know, that's where Michelangelo painted the famous Creation. And Adam and Eve were naked. For years they covered the private parts with fig leaves, but JP2 actually said not to. He said that it brings out the beauty and glorifies the human body. We'll all see that later in this blog, whenever I get to the part where he talks about "naked without shame".

As for the happiness, that reminds me of a retreat I went on my freshman year of high school. It was called "More Than a Feeling". I don't remember much, but I do remember the basic message was that a relationship with God is based on more than feelings. And how true it is! Think about it: how many people would be Christian if it was just based on how happy you were? I mean, in the first few centuries I could get capital punishment for being Christian. Even now, Christians (especially Catholics) seemed to be mocked by the media. It's hard! But we know we can do it because Jesus warned us. He told us that we need to learn to pick up our cross. Yes, sometimes it feels amazing to go to mass. Sometimes you're happiest when serving the poor. But not all the time. There are definitely days that I don't want to act like a Christian. But I choose to, even if it doesn't feel good.

Dear Jesus, please bless us all! Please give us all the strength to respect each others' bodies as well as our own. And teach us that the path to Heaven is the same path you took: the path to the cross.

"Wojtyla and Kant" part 2

Okay, I finished. And it was interesting to say the least.

The two main points I remember are how Kant believed in total autonomy, which meant not needing a connection with a person much less a God. I don't think I really need to go into how Christianity in general is different here, but it's funny. This is actually one of the topics for an essay I'm working on right now. In order for religious worship to be real, you have to put yourself into it. You NEED to relationship with God. Kant just does not see that.

Then sex (gasp!). It's funny, both Kant and JP2 say that 1) sex should not be just using the other person and 2) it is a total gift of self. But it's interesting to see how the two completely diverge from there. Kant says that there is no way to not use the other person in sex. Not to use them for pleasure. But John Paul II says that it does not have to be that way. Sex can be a beautiful thing that not only images God's love, but also makes babies. It's special, and not necessarily useful of the other person.

But it's interesting that both philosophers agreed that using another person for personal pleasure is just wrong. But think. How often do I do that? Not just in a sexual way, but do I use another person for his or her abilities? Do I have this one friend that I really only talk to when I need something? I think we all need to think about this, and make a commitment to love each other not for what we do, but who we are. Not for what we get, but for the sake of that other person.

"Wojtyla and Kant" part 1

Just before I read, I want to say this: I'll be very interested to see the comparisons between JP2 and theology of the body and Immanuel Kant. I remember learning briefly about him in history of psychology. And you know, when you're in college and still learning about the social sciences, you can be very... what's the world I want... moldable I guess? You're just soaking in a whole lot. That's how I felt, and sometimes feel about my psychology class. This is what these people teach, but what is truth?

Well, I have now reached the half-way point (?) in the section, and I'm ready for bed. Which I guess is good int he way of there's a lot to take in. First of all: what I know. Descartes, who was a philosopher who had a lot of influence on Kant's ideas, believed in mechanism and dualism. Mechanism is where the body is pretty much completely mechanical. Dualism is where the body and soul are separate, but sometimes interact. Now there are a few things here, some of which I read and some of which I just don't think I've gotten to yet. First of all, humans are body and spirit. We were never meant to be separated, but a certain person had to eat a certain apple and now we're in a fallen world. In fact, if you look at a dead person at a funeral, they look strange. It's as if something important is missing. Also with mechanism: that can often lead to reductionism which is a person is just blood and tissue and bones. It really demeans the human person. And that can lead to Eugenics (I am skipping a few steps), which is more or less breeding people like you would breed dogs. On the less severe side, you get rewards for marrying someone "genetically superior". On the severe side, you get Nazi Germany and concentration camps.

And with Kant, one big thing I have is that he said that he had to abandon his reason to keep his faith. I have not gotten to what JP2 says on that yet, but I know that's not necessary. St. Thomas Aquinas wrote on logical faith, and I have been in several religion classes and youth group sessions where we have gone over it. Here's my thing: God created the world. So science and religion should be compatible. If there is something that seems to deny God, either you don't understand it completely or it is wrong. And honestly, there is nothing wrong with admitting that you will never understand everything. But that's the beauty of life, and I think specifically the Catholic Church. I could spend my whole life studying the Bible, church doctrine, and Theology of the Body and never finish. It's because God is so immense... so real that we just can't wrap our little minds on him. We can't just put him in a box and label him. God is just way too big for that.

Yeah, I guess this sounds a little more academic... I think I'm going to blame the 10 page paper on philosophy and physiology that I had to write for History of Psychology. Anyway, hopefully I'll finish up on Kant tomorrow and we'll get to see what JP2 says about Kant's philosophies.