Free Love True Love

Free Love, True Love

Free Love, True Love

Free Love True Love Rediscovering Love & Intimacy in John Paul II’s

Theology of the Body

FR. JOEL O. JASON

Nihil Obstat: Most Rev. Bernardino C. Cortez, D.D. Auxiliary Bishop of Manila Imprimatur: + Gaudencio Cardinal B. Rosales, D.D. Archbishop of Manila Free Love, True Love: Rediscovering Love and Intimacy in John Paul II’s Theology of the Body by Fr. Joel O. Jason © December 2007 2nd Printing April 2008 ISBN: 978-971-93992-0-9 Philippine Copyright by Fr. Joel O. Jason San Carlos Seminary, Edsa, Guadalupe Viejo, 1200 Makati City, Philippines Tel. No. (63 2) 8958855 Fax (63 2) 890 9563 e-mail: [email protected], [email protected] For information and inquiries, pls. contact: Ministry for Family and Life Archdiocese of Manila LAYFORCE: San Carlos Pastoral Formation Complex, EDSA, Guadalupe, Makati City, Philippines (63 2) 8906187; 8958855 loc 306 telfax: (63 2) 8960584 email: [email protected] Requests for information should be addressed to: SHEPHERD’S VOICE Publications, inc. #60 Chicago St., Cubao, Quezon City, Philippines 1109 Tel. No. (632) 411-7874 to 77 e-mail: [email protected] All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, except for brief quotations, without the prior permission of the publisher. Cover Design by Rey P. de Guzman Layout by Sem. Ser Allan G. Bodoraya

Free Love, True Love

This book is dedicated to my late father, Panfilo and my mother, Ligaya, the Jason, Collins and Trance families the seminarians at San Carlos Seminary Auntie Molly and Betty all my co-workers at the Ministry for Family and Life of the Archdiocese of Manila

Free Love, True Love

FREE LOVE, TRUE LOVE

Free Love, True Love

Contents Foreword by Cardinal Gaudencio B. Rosales, D.D. . . . . . . . . . . i Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii Laying the Foundation: A New Ethos of Love and Sexuality . . . . . . . . . . . 1 The Great Sacrament: A Marriage Made in Heaven . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 The Original Experiences of Man and Woman 23 The Experience of Original Solitude . . . . . . . . . . 25 The Experience of Original Unity . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 The Experience of Original Nakedness . . . . . . . . 32 Four: The Rediscovery of Love and Chastity . . . . . . . . 37 Five: The Redemption of Sexuality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Six: The Humanness of Love and Sexuality . . . . . . . 57 Seven: The Life-Giving and Love-Giving Significance of Sexuality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 Eight: With This Body, I Thee Wed: The Significance of the Body . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 Concluding Words . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .79 One: Two: Three:

Free Love, True Love

Foreword

E

ven before he assumed the papacy, Pope John Paul II had already pondered important themes concerning human sexuality and these reflections were eventually published in his book, Love and Responsibility. Given his keen interest on the topic, it is probably not surprising that in the early years of his pontificate, he devoted several general audiences to presenting and outlining his Theology of the Body. From 1979 to 1984, in about 130 talks delivered to crowds gathered for the Wednesday general audience at St. Peter’s Square, Pope John Paul II addressed several important issues about human sexuality. In the process, he highlighted the Church’s teaching that human beings, in their embodiment, i

Foreword

reflect the image of God and that the human body is indispensable to one’s vocation to love. In this book, Fr. Jason presents, in a clear and lively manner, the key points of Pope John Paul II’s theology of the body. He combines his firm grasp of the late pontiff’s thoughts on human sexuality with his stories and his own experiences of ministering to couples and families. The result is, thus, a work that speaks to men and women of today, a work that addresses many of their important concerns about love and intimacy. We live in a world where there seems to be a strong tendency to “commodify” human beings, that is, to see men and women — and their bodies — as commodities. It is hoped that through Fr. Jason’s engaging presentation of Pope John Paul II’s theology of the body, readers will rediscover and recover the true sense of their worth as embodied persons, and thus, be able to love — freely and truly.

+ GAUDENCIO B. CARDINAL ROSALES Archbishop of Manila 21 November 2007 Presentation of the Blessed Virgin Mary ii

Free Love, True Love

Introduction

F

ather, have you ever experienced how it is to be in love?” This is the one question people never miss throwing at me every time I give talks, preach at retreats or lead recollections. And I’ve heard that asked of me in varying tones and contexts. Sometimes in pity. (Ouch!) Sometimes seductively. (Hmmm….) But most of the time just out of plain curiosity. There is nothing really wrong with that question. But innocent though it may be, it carries with it certain assumptions. First, it implies that priests become priests because we don’t have any interest in love. Or if we do, our hearts have stopped loving the day the bishop laid hands on us at ordination. This also suggests that iii

Introduction

priests choose celibacy because love doesn’t attract us at all. (This celibacy issue is important to discuss but that will be the topic of another book.) Secondly, since love is supposed to be the territory of “non-priests” and “non-celibates,” they must know everything there is to know about love and sexuality. I agree... but then again, do they really? Let’s do a word association exercise. I will mention words at random and all you have to do is to remember, write down or draw if you want, whatever it is that immediately comes to your mind. No censorship, no editing. Ready? What comes to your mind when you hear these words: Man? Woman? Male? Female? Sex? Sexuality? Body? Love? I’ve done this often to countless numbers of people and I always get more or less the same reaction on their faces. Dumb question. Why do you even ask? But when I ask them for feedback, I receive more or less the same confusion and difficulty at identification. “Is there a difference between man and male, woman and female?” “Aren’t they just interchangeable words?” As for sex, sexuality and body, I get either a malicious or embarrassed smile or a dismissive, “Never mind. I wasn’t able to write anything,” which actually means, “What I wrote down is not fit for public consumption.” iv

Free Love, True Love

And as for love, it’s always the ever sublime, “Love is blind.” The words enumerated above are simple and commonplace. We use them every day when we talk of love and sexuality. But why the difficulty at identification and differentiation? Let me share with you an anecdote that I hope won’t scandalize you. (Remember, to the pure, everything is pure but to the impure, nothing is pure. See Titus 1:15.) An American missionary priest working in a province in the Philippines presided at a wedding. He wanted to deliver his homily in the vernacular, in this case in Tagalog. He wanted to stress the importance of prayer in married life but he couldn’t remember the Tagalog equivalent. He passed by a group of men who were drinking by the roadside and politely asked one of them, “Ano sa Tagalog ang prayer?” The man, a little intoxicated and quite surprised by the question, could not remember and could only mutter repeatedly, “Kuwan, kuwan.” So the priest went ahead thinking that prayer is kuwan in Tagalog.

1 2

“What is prayer in Tagalog?” “kuwan” – 1. Tagalog word used to designate something indeterminate. May be translated as “it” or “something like.” 2. In street parlance could also mean the sex act.

v

Introduction

So came the homily. The priest looked intently at the couple and plainly said in his perfect Tagalog: “Upang magtagal ang inyong relasyon, kailangan magkuwan kayo palagi.” The couple looked embarrassed. The priest continued, “Sa umaga pagkagising, mag-kuwan. Bago kumain, mag-kuwan. Bago matulog, mag-kuwan.” The bride remarked in embarrassment, “Father, mamamatay kami diyan sa pinagagawa niyo.”  The priest responded with greater emphasis, “Bago mamatay, mag-kuwan pa rin!” The priest was sincere and he meant well. He did not want to sound scandalous or to raise confusion and embarrassment. He simply didn’t know what he was saying. But more importantly, he didn’t know what he was saying because he learned the meaning of his words from a drunken bystander in the streets. Could it be that we also learned the meaning of the words we enumerated above “from a drunken bystander in the streets”?

He wanted to say, “If you want your marriage to last, pray always.” What he actually said in Tagalog was “If you want your marriage to last, do it always.” He wanted to say, “First thing in the morning, pray. Before eating, pray; before retiring at night, pray.” What he actually said was, “First thing in the morning, do it. Before eating, do it; before retiring at night, do it.” 5 “Father, if we do what you say, we will die.” 6 He wanted to say, “Before dying, all the more, don’t forget to pray.” What he actually said in Tagalog, “Before you die, do it still.” 3

4

vi

Free Love, True Love

No wonder we are confused. No wonder we smile with malice and embarrassment. No wonder we define love like it was taken straight from a slum book. For the late Pope John Paul II, an important question we could ask ourselves is, “What does it mean to be a man? To be a woman?” “What does it mean that I am created male or female?” “Why do I have a body and why is the male body different from the female body?” These are not dumb questions. The way we understand the meaning of these words determines the very meaning of our existence as persons called to love and be loved. And we do not derive our response to these questions from a drunken bystander. No. We take them from the words of Jesus as revealed in Sacred Scriptures. We get them from the God who is Love, from the God who became a man, from the God who took on a body and a human heart and loved humanity with that heart and that body. That’s why John Paul II speaks of a Theology of the Body. Theology (from theo – God; logos – science) simply means the study of God. In our bodies, in being male and female, God has inscribed His plan for man and woman and their call to be one flesh in marriage. The Theology of the Body is a series of 129 talks delivered by Pope John Paul II from 1979 to 1984 during his weekly Wednesday General Audiences in Rome. In 2006, it was compiled into a book entitled vii

Introduction

Man and Woman He Created Them: A Theology of the Body, translated and edited from the original Polish by Michael Waldstein. Quotations from the Holy Father will be taken from this work. The Pope’s Theology of the Body is a voluminous work of theology. I will not be presenting an academic treatment of the whole Theology of the Body here. (That will be the subject of another book.) This readerfriendly and popular presentation of the Pope’s thoughts will simply be a revisiting of love and human sexuality inspired by the truths presented by the Holy Father’s deep reflections on the words of Christ and the Genesis creation accounts as revealed in the Sacred Scriptures. My first serious encounter with the Pope’s Theology of the Body was in 1999 when I was asked to take graduate studies in Rome. Right there and then I knew I was holding in my hands a gold mine. The truths that spoke through the pages just resonated in my heart. I pray it will do the same in yours. Fr. Joel O. Jason, SThL 16 October 2007 29th anniversary of John Paul II’s election to the papacy

viii

Free Love, True Love

ONE

Laying the Foundations: A New Ethos of Love and Sexuality “Unless your righteousness exceeds that of the Scribes and the Pharisees, you will never enter the Kingdom of Heaven.” (Matthew 5:20) “You blind Pharisee! First cleanse the inside of the cup and of the plate, that the outside also may be clean.” (Matthew 23:26)

couple was celebrating their 50th wedding anniversary. They went to a priest friend to renew their vows. Edified by their fidelity to each other, the priest asked the man, “All these years, did separation ever enter your mind?” The man replied, “Separation? Never. Murder? Many times.” Imagine pushing that anecdote further. 1

Laying the Foundations: A New Ethos of Love and Sexuality

The priest asks, “So why didn’t you murder your wife?” “Oh, if only I could!” the man replies. “Why couldn’t you?” the priest insists. The man replies, “Hello? Haven’t you heard of prison?” That’s an imaginary anecdote but the message is real. There are men who, if not for the possibility of prison, would have murdered their wives long ago and vice-versa. There are men who, if not for the fear of sexually transmitted disease, would have long ago patronized prostitutes. I know of a religious priest who remains “chaste” for totally unchaste reasons. Friends, it’s not only about what the law (ethic) says. It is about what the heart (ethos) desires. When we hear the word moral or morality, what comes immediately into mind is a set of rules and norms that obligates a person to action or inaction. But while rules and norms are indispensable in regulating moral behavior, there is more to moral living than just the cold set of laws to follow. In fact, it can happen that behaviors that are actually immoral in character can hide behind the veil of “legality” if one is clever enough to play around the letter of the law. The new Catechism of the Catholic Church promulgated in the pontificate of John Paul II, introduced its section on Christian morality with the line: 2

Free Love, True Love

Christian, recognize your dignity and, now that you share in God’s own nature, do not return to your former base condition by sinning…. Never forget that you have been rescued from the power of darkness and brought into the light of the Kingdom of God. (CCC § 1691, italics mine) The Need for a New Ethos for Sexuality “Recognize your dignity,” says the moral section of the Catechism. Laws by themselves do not and cannot change human hearts. It is the reorientation of one’s set of values in one’s heart that brings about genuine conversion. How sterile morality will become when it is reduced to a set of rules and laws to follow! Moral action is more than simply following laws. It’s about recognizing our dignity. It’s about pursuing actions with the consciousness that one does this or that particular action because it promotes authentic human good. This is what John Paul II means with the “new ethos” of morality. Ethics refers to the external rules and norms that are meant to safeguard the ethos of morality. Ethos refers to one’s inner world of values — what attracts and repulses man. Ethos is recognizing man’s dignity not only from the force of external law 3

Laying the Foundations: A New Ethos of Love and Sexuality

(ethics) but from the interior attraction of the heart. John Paul II puts it succinctly: The new ethos is a “living morality,” in which we realize the very meaning of our humanity. Look at the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 57). It’s nothing else but an invitation to discover the new ethos of morality. Paraphrasing the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus, in effect, is saying, “You have heard the commandment and what it externally obligates you, ‘Thou shall not commit adultery.’ But now I tell you what it internally commands you, ‘He who looks lustfully at a woman has already committed adultery with her in his heart’”( Matthew 5:27-28). Simply put, Jesus is saying, “You have heard the ethic, but now I give you the ethos.” He who truly loves his wife has no need of the commandment, “Thou shall not commit adultery,” because there is no desire in his heart to commit it. He does not experience it as a command. This is what the Bible describes as freedom from the law (see Romans 7).

7



4

John Paul II, Man and Woman He Created Them: A Theology of the Body, Michael Waldstein, trans., (Boston: Pauline Books and Media, 24:3), p 227. For the sake of brevity, subsequent citations from the book shall henceforth be rendered “TOB” for Theology of the Body, followed by the date the Pope delivered the address.

Free Love, True Love

St. Paul in his letter to the Romans is not proposing anomy or the absence of laws (from the Greek a – without; nomos – law). He is proposing autonomy, i.e., the internalization of the law within oneself (auto – self; nomos – law). John Paul II calls it the ethos of redemption. It is where the objective norms (ethics) become one with subjective desires of one’s heart (ethos). When ethos and ethics become one, we understand that human freedom is not liberation from any external constraint that calls us to do good but liberation from the internal constraint that prevents us from choosing the good. Author and lay theologian Christopher West put it so insightfully, “True freedom is not liberty to indulge our compulsions, but liberation from our compulsion to indulge.” We need not fear the commandments of Christ. They do not rob us of our joy. Rather, they make true joy possible. Jesus assured His disciples, “If you keep my commandments, you will remain in my love…I have told you this so that my joy may be in you and your joy may be complete” (John 15:10-11). The words of Christ in the Sermon on the Mount are not words of condemnation. They are rather words of invitation for us to embrace and recognize our dignity.

5

Laying the Foundations: A New Ethos of Love and Sexuality

“I’m Only Human, Born to Make Mistakes” Cecilia has known of her husband’s womanizing even early on in their marriage. The guy also has three children with two other women. “What are you doing about this?” I inquired. “Father, as long as he comes home to me and my family, it’s OK,” she replied. Before I even managed a word, she quickly added with calm resignation, “What can you do? It’s normal nowadays right?” In a way, that’s true. It has become normal nowadays. Why, you can even be elected president of the country in spite of this. But then again, is it really normal… or just factual? It’s factual that men abuse their women. It is almost everyday news stuff. But it is not normal. That babies are left in garbage cans by their own mothers is factual but not normal. What am I saying here? Normal is a special kind of word. It comes from the root word norm. What is a norm? It is an ethical, moral standard. It refers to how things are intended to be. Therefore, we must be careful not to automatically “normalize” what is factual. Not everything that is factual is normal. Terence J. Keegan, O.P. said, “Christian moral behavior is distinctive precisely because it is Christian, i.e., what one does follows upon what one is (agere sequitur esse, i.e., action follows being). How we talk 6

Free Love, True Love

about what a Christian does will therefore depend on how we talk about what a Christian is.” The Need for an Adequate Vision of Man This is why John Paul II calls our attention to the three states of man (humanity). Original Man (see Matthew 19:3-9), Historical Man (see Matthew 5:27-28) and Eschatological Man (see Matthew 22:23-33). For the sake of simplicity and clarity, let us call the three states our Origin, our Present and our Destiny. Our Origin refers to man and woman prior to Original Sin, living out God’s plan for marriage “in the beginning.” Our Present refers to our fallen state, affected by sin but redeemed by Christ. Our Destiny refers to our vocation, what we are called to be in the Resurrection. Our origin refers to what is actually normal or normative. As the saying goes, “I’m only human, born to make mistakes.” Yes, our present is marked by sin but the echo of our origin remains in the human heart and still is operative. We are affected by sin but I dare say not infected by it. To be affected is to be weakened, to be stalled by something. To be infected means to be corrupted at the very root as to be helpless in the face of it. The original (from origin) experiences of the first man and woman, John Paul II insists, “are always at the root of every human experience” (TOB, Dec. 12, 1979). Sin has not 7

Laying the Foundations: A New Ethos of Love and Sexuality

totally destroyed God’s original plan. This means if we keep our origin in sight, there is a power available to us in Christ that will enable us to rise above our present state. And to the measure that we keep our origins in sight will decide how we will be able to reach our destiny. This is the same origin Jesus appealed to when He responded, “In the beginning, it was not so” (Matthew 19:8), as a correction to the Pharisees who have normalized lust and divorce in the man and woman relationship. We are not presenting an unrealistic ideal here. This doesn’t mean that the man who keeps his origin in sight will not fall. He will. But to paraphrase what one sneaker ad says, “If he falls down seven times, he will stand up eight.” It’s different with the man who has normalized his present. He is already fallen at the very beginning. And he has no desire to stand up. I remember an insightful anecdote that lay evangelist Bo Sanchez once shared. There was an elephant in a zoo named Jumbo who became an attraction to people. His foot was tied to a simple rope yet for some reason he never attempted to break free from it. The caretaker revealed a bit of history about the elephant. When he was still a tiny baby, little Jumbo pulled and pulled against the rope, to no avail. The rope was strong enough to hold him 8

Free Love, True Love

captive. Finally, after countless tries, the baby elephant became resigned to his fate. All effort was useless. Now Jumbo is big and strong. But while he could easily break free from the rope with a snap like all other elephants of his size and strength, he doesn’t. He has normalized his “weakness” and forfeited his identity as a strong and mighty animal. He was not bound externally. He was bound internally — in the mind, in the heart. Experts call that condition a learned helplessness. I’d like to call it the little Jumbo syndrome. And even people can be affected by this. That is why the Catechism encourages us, “Christians, recognize your dignity.” In Christ, we have great power and dignity in being human. That’s the reason why we need an adequate vision of man. By “adequate” here, I don’t mean the minimalist “that will do” mentality. On the contrary, adequate means an understanding and interpretation of man in what is essentially human. It is a reflection on man in his concrete and integral totality, based on that which, in the rich reality of the human person, is most characteristically human and thus worthy of man. An adequate vision of man frees us from the despair of normalizing our fallen state and enables us to have confidence in our origin. Unless we do this, we have lost the battle even before it has begun. We will 9

Laying the Foundations: A New Ethos of Love and Sexuality

forever be in chains, fastened by flimsy ropes. We will be nothing but Little Jumbos. The Need for an Adequate Vision of the Body Man is not only body. Neither is he only spirit. Man is not a spirit trapped inside a body. Neither is he a body invaded by an alien spirit. An adequate vision of the body recognizes man in the totality of his being, i.e., a unity of body and spirit. The Catechism § 365 teaches us, “The unity of soul and body is so profound…. Spirit and matter, in man, are not two natures united, but rather their union forms a single nature.” For John Paul II, “The body, in fact, and only the body, is capable of making visible what is invisible…. It has been created to transfer into the visible reality of the world the mystery hidden from eternity in God, and thus be the sign of it” (TOB, Feb. 20, 1980). The body therefore is not a mere instrument that is incidental and has nothing to do with the interiority of the person. It is called to make visible the invisible reality of the human soul. This is important because the way we understand who the human person is will decide the way we understand what love and sex is. Look at the human person as a pure spirit, and you fall into hyper-spiritualization, a repression of anything and everything sexual.

10

Free Love, True Love

Look at the human person as a pure matter and you succumb to hyper-sexualization, characterized by excess and indulgence. But see the human person in the unity of body and spirit and we discover the beauty of sublimation. Sublimation comes from the word sublime, something that is sacred, holy. Sex is sacred and holy because it is a sacrament of something far greater than itself. What does it symbolize? That brings us to our next chapter.

11

12

Free Love, True Love

TWO

The Great Sacrament: A Marriage Made in Heaven “God has revealed his innermost secret: God himself is an eternal exchange of love, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, and he has destined us to share in that exchange.” (Catechism of the Catholic Church § 221)

Y

ears ago, I was blessing the house of a friend. Their family was very religious. At every corner was a religious painting or image. There was even a mini chapel where they do their family devotions. When I entered to bless the masters’ bedroom, right beside the couple’s bed was a table converted into a mini altar, with a big Bible and the image of the Sacred Heart of whom the wife was a devotee. 13

The Great Sacrament: A Marriage Made in Heaven

I have a confession to make. (I hope they’re not reading this.) With a half-smile on my lips, I blessed the bedroom with a not-so-holy thought running through my mind. I wonder how they manage to do the marital act with Jesus looking nearby. Then I continued on with the Lord’s Prayer… If you are smiling and thinking the same naughty thought with me, welcome to our fallen world where we say, “Here is my sex life and there is my spirituality and never the twain shall meet.” We have taken God out of our bedrooms. But Scripture says, “God is love and he who abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him” (1 John 4:16). If God is not there, then what is it that is happening in our bedrooms? How often have we heard it said, “Why can’t the Pope just speak on religious matters?” Friend, the Church speaks passionately about sex precisely because sex is a religious matter. Can I say something bold here? God does not blush at the sight of a husband and wife in the marital act. He will not look away — unless something else, someone else or something different is actually happening in the marital bed. When God said in Genesis, “Be fertile and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it“(Genesis 1:28), He was practically telling Adam and Eve to have sex. But not just sex the way our fallen world knows it. 14

Free Love, True Love

Let’s Get Physical I cannot forget a line from the 2002 film Frida which depicted the life of the surrealist painter Frida Kahlo played by Salma Hayek. Painter Diego Rivera, Frida’s lover who eventually became her husband, was a womanizer. Frida caught him in bed with one of his nude models and she confronted him. He retorted, “What’s the matter with you? It’s just a fuck. I give more meaning to a handshake.” That last line still rings in my ears. The problem with our world is not that it overvalues sex. It undervalues it. We are totally clueless. No wonder a handshake gets more serious treatment. If Diego’s remark is any indication of how the world appreciates sex, then sex is nothing but recreation, a stress buster after a day’s work, a contact sport, a physical activity. Why do we understand sex this way? Here’s my theory: because we learned about sex from a “drunken bystander in the street.” Now here’s a proposal. How about hearing from the One who invented it? Let’s Get Metaphysical God is love. He is love not only because He loves us but more precisely because His inner life is a life of love and communion between the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. 15

The Great Sacrament: A Marriage Made in Heaven

The quote from the Catechism above calls it an eternal exchange of love and we are called to participate in that eternal exchange. If we look at the beginning and end of the Bible, we will discover that both books speak of a marriage. Genesis speaks of the marriage of Adam and Eve (Genesis 1 and 2). The Book of Revelation speaks of another marriage — the marriage of the New Adam and the New Eve, i.e., Christ the Bridegroom’s marriage to His bride the Church (see Revelation 19). The marriage of the new Adam and the new Eve describes the end of history when all of humanity will have been united with Christ. Quite plainly, God’s eternal plan is to marry us. The prophets foretold, “On that day, says the Lord, she shall call me ‘My husband,’ and never again ‘my Baal.’… I will espouse you in fidelity, and you shall know the Lord” (Hosea 2:18-22). And to make that plan clear, visible and so plain to us, He created humanity male and female so that in the difference but complementarity between masculinity and femininity, we will be moved into a communion and establish that one flesh unity. “For this reason,” the Bible says, “a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh” (Genesis 2:24). This is what sex, or the one flesh unity in marriage, witnesses to. That’s why the Bible describes marriage 16

Free Love, True Love

as “a great mystery.” St. Paul, speaking of marriage, quotes Genesis and adds, “‘For this reason, a man shall leave father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.’ This is a great mystery, and I mean in reference to Christ and the Church” (Ephesians 5:31-32). Sex, that one flesh unity spoken of in the first marriage in Genesis 2:24 is a sacrament on earth of the heavenly one flesh unity which all humanity is called to. That is why sex is not just any kind of act. It is a special kind of act. In fact, it is the only act in marriage we call marital. We do not call dishwashing or cleaning house marital. Even a handshake is not called marital. There are many things couples do together in marriage but only sex is properly called the marital act. Why? Because God intended it to be an icon, a sacrament of the heavenly marriage which all of us are called to. It goes beyond the physical. It is metaphysical. No wonder lovers speak of heaven as a place on earth. Whenever couples celebrate their one flesh unity in free, total, faithful and fruitful love, they proclaim in their body the heavenly one flesh unity that awaits all of us. That’s why John Paul II speaks of a “language of the body.” The body speaks a language. It becomes prophetic i.e., proclaiming a truth. Not only is it prophetic, the Pope even calls it liturgical (see TOB, July 4, 1984). What is liturgy? An act of worship! 17

The Great Sacrament: A Marriage Made in Heaven

But just as we can speak the truth with our bodies, we can also speak lies with it. Look at the kiss of Judas. It is the same with the sexual act and our bodies. Honesty, not prohibition, is the essence of the Christian sexual ethic. And so we must continuously discern between false and true prophets — that what is sacred does not become sacrilege, what is true does not become a lie, what is liturgical does not become blasphemous. Remember the story I began this chapter with? If I did the house blessing now, the half-smile will not be there. The naughty thought will be not be there too. In their place will be the conviction: “This is holy ground. God should have a place in every bedroom.” Just a word of caution here. John Paul II speaks of a “limit of the analogy” (see TOB, Sept. 29, 1982) regarding the earthly one-flesh unity and the heavenly one-flesh unity. We must not confuse the analogy. We should look at sex in terms of heaven and not heaven in terms of sex. Sex in marriage reveals something about God and His eternal plan to marry us. It is not God who reveals something about sex. Therefore, we must not think of heaven as an eternal sexual encounter. Heaven remains “transcendent” says John Paul II. St. Paul in his epistle could only describe it as ”eye has not seen, and ear has not heard… what God has prepared for those who love him” (1 Corinthians 2:9). We must not confuse the symbol and the symbolized. When we do so, we turn the icon into an idol. 18

Free Love, True Love

When an Icon Turns into an Idol Johnny has always wanted to join a cruise but he couldn’t afford it. By a stroke of luck, he won an economy ticket for a cruise at a company raffle. So off he went. Every meal time, he would ease his hunger with the coffee and biscuits offered for free at the entrance of the grand buffet hall. How he longed to use the fine silver and feast lavishly with the rest of the cruise passengers. But he eventually got used to his crackers and biscuits; after all, they tasted good. At the end of the cruise, a passenger who often saw him with his frugal meal remarked, “I’m impressed by your self-control. Are you on a diet?” A little embarrassed, he admitted nonetheless, “Oh no, mine was just an economy ticket.” Shaking his head, the man volunteered, “Didn’t you know the buffet meal is included in an economy ticket?” Just like Johnny’s story, the one flesh unity in sex is a foretaste of the heavenly one flesh unity we are called to. We are actually called to partake in the “buffet table” and not be content with the crackers and biscuits, palatable as they can be. Have you ever wondered why the Bible gives a stern warning against sexual sinners? Paul’s letter to the Galatians is very plain, “Now the works of the flesh are obvious: immorality, impurity… drinking bouts, orgies, and the like. I warn you… that those 19

The Great Sacrament: A Marriage Made in Heaven

who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God” (Galatians 5:19-21; see also Ephesians 5:5-7). It is not because sex is bad. No. God made sexual desire and it is good. The warning is for those who have made an idol out of the icon. When we do this, we are saying we don’t want the real thing — what it symbolizes. We are content with the symbol. If sexual desire is to be an icon pointing us to yearn for heaven, we forfeit our place in heaven because we have confined the satisfaction of our yearnings to its earthly symbol. Remember what Jesus told the Sadducees: “At the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage but are like the angels in heaven“(Matthew 22:30; see also Luke 20:34-36). Why? Because we are now in the heavenly marriage where Christ is the Groom and all of us are His bride. The symbol ceases to be because we are now face to face with what is symbolized. In heaven, faith will no longer be needed because we are already face to face with the object of our faith. Hope, too, will no longer be of use because that which we hope for is fulfilled. St. Paul in Corinth wrote, “So faith, hope, love remain, these three; but the greatest of these is love” (1 Corinthians 13). Only love will remain, because in heaven, we will revel in that eternal marriage where Christ “may be all in all” (1 Corinthians 15:28; see also Colossians 3:11). 20

Free Love, True Love

G.K. Chesterton was known to have said once these words to the effect, “Every man who knocks at the door of a brothel is actually looking for God.” Think of the girl who shops compulsively for shoes despite having 300 pairs already. She is actually looking for something money cannot buy. Think of the bulimic guy who gorges on food, induces vomiting, so he can eat again. He is actually longing for the “bread that will nourish him unto life eternal” (see John 6). Remember the woman who has had seven husbands (see John 4)? She was actually looking for the love that truly satisfies. How can we avoid making an idol out of the icon? Going back to the plan of God might help. Let’s travel back in time…

21

The Great Sacrament: A Marriage Made in Heaven

22

Free Love, True Love

THREE

The Original Experiences of Man and Woman “If you want to know what lies on the road up ahead, ask those who are on their way back.” (Anonymous)

friend of mine sent me an anonymous anecdote entitled “Things Mama Taught Me.” Let me share with you some lines from it. Mom taught me about... ANTICIPATION. “Just wait ‘til your father gets home.” Mom taught me about... RECEIVING. “You’re going to get it when we get home.” Mom taught me about... GENETICS. “You’re just like your father.” Mom taught me... to meet a CHALLENGE. 23

The Original Experiences of Man and Woman

“What were you thinking? Answer me when I talk to you. Don’t talk back at me.” Mom taught me... the WISDOM OF AGE. “When you get to be my age, you will understand.” And my all time favorite... JUSTICE. “One day you will have kids, and I hope they turn out just lke you, then you’ll see what it’s like.” You can’t miss the writer’s wit and sense of humor. Neither can you miss the clever sarcasm and subtle resentment of the young against traditional values and parental authority that he poked fun at. It can be difficult at times to look back at what was in the beginning. Sometimes we assume that everything that is past is no longer valid and that which is present is what counts. The late bishop Fulton Sheen calls this assumption the “chronological arrogance of the modern age.” But as we saw in Chapter 1, going back to our Origin is not simply a sentimental trip back to the years gone by. Our Origin brings us back to what actually is normative or normal, what is expressive of God’s original plan. In speaking of the original experiences of man, the Pope begins the reflection with the words of Christ Himself in His dialogue with the Pharisees who questioned Him about divorce. Jesus, in His reply, brought them back to our origin when He said, “Because of the hardness of 24

Free Love, True Love

your hearts Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so” (Matthew 19:8). What can we learn from the beginning? Read on… THE EXPERIENCE OF ORIGINAL SOLITUDE “Man… is the only creature on earth that God willed for its own sake.” (Gaudium et Spes § 24) All By Myself After the creation of the world and everything in it, God created man from the dust of the earth. Then we read that crucial divine affirmation. God Himself observed, “It is not good that man should be alone. I will make him a helper fit for him” (Genesis 2:18). So God created all the animals to accompany Adam but none proved “suitable for him” (Genesis 2:20). The man was still lonely because there was nobody to love. This is the first experience of original solitude. Note that the man was not really physically alone. He was surrounded by countless creatures. But man was “alone” because he alone was a person in the visible world. After naming all the animals, all he discovered was what he was not. Note here that the word used for man in Genesis 2:18 is the Hebrew adam, meaning, humanity. This tells us something. Original solitude is not only a sentimental experience of loneliness by a man without a woman. 25

The Original Experiences of Man and Woman

Original solitude is humanity’s realization of his dignity and superiority among the rest of the animals. In the words of the Pope, man (humanity) “gains the consciousness of his own superiority, that is, that he cannot be put on a par with any other species of living beings on the earth” (TOB, Oct. 10, 1979). Humanity is all by himself. This is from the beginning. This is what is normal. This makes us wonder why, in our present world, we hug trees and outlaw cruelty to animals but legalize the killing of human infants and the elderly. It’s something to think about… To Love SOMEBODY Because humanity alone is created in God’s image (see Genesis 1:26), humanity alone is called to a special relationship with God. This is the first meaning of original solitude. In his “solitude” in the world, man discovers not only who he is but also whose he is. Man apart from his Creator will be a lonely creature. There is something in man that man alone cannot fulfill. No wonder the saints proclaim, “Our hearts are restless unless they rest in Thee” (St. Augustine). This explains why earthly marriage is an icon of the heavenly marriage to which all of us are called. Man is called to love not only somebody but also, and more so, Somebody. 26

Free Love, True Love

To Love Somebody… Not Some Body There is a second meaning to that solitude spoken of in Genesis 2:18. Indeed Adam, the male, was also lonely because Eve was not yet there. He could have happily mingled with the rest of the animals in the garden. He could have found warmth and companionship with the kangaroos and the elephants. But he was still lonely. Why? Adam was not only looking for a body. Any body would not suffice. Adam was looking for somebody, a person just like him. This explains his joyful outburst after a futile search. At the sight of Eve, Adam exclaimed, “This at last is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh” (Genesis 2:23). In the plan of God, that somebody was not just any body, nor was it just anybody; it was somebody who was Adam’s perfect complement — bodily, psychologically, spiritually. Adam was a “body among bodies” prior to the appearance of Eve but there is something different and awe-inspiring with a person’s body. A person’s body reveals a spiritual reality — personhood (see TOB, Oct. 24, 1979). That’s why Adam would not settle for just any body. It had to be a body that reflects personhood. This brings us to the second original experience. THE EXPERIENCE OF ORIGINAL UNITY Sometime, somewhere, I read this story. There was this husband who was very quiet. While the wife treasured 27

The Original Experiences of Man and Woman

conversations, he treasured reading the papers. One time, the man left a note on the bed saying, “Wake me up at 5 a.m. Thanks!” The wife was furious but the man was already asleep. The next morning the husband woke up… at 10 a.m. Angry that his wife didn’t wake him up, he turned to her but saw a note on the bed board saying “Honey, wake up. It’s 5 a.m.” Men and women are different — in many ways. In our fallen world, this difference is the subject of many jokes on the “war of the sexes.” But in the beginning, it was not so. In the beginning, the recognition of the difference and complementarity between man and woman afforded an experience of original unity. The Bible says, “For this reason, a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh” (Genesis 2:24). Put it this way. If I have a sandwich and you also have the same one, would I bother sharing with you what I have? Probably not. But if I have a sandwich and you have a drink, I would probably share with you my sandwich in the hope that you would share your drink with me. The recognition of our “difference” paves the way for our “communion.” Similarly, the recognition of the physical difference but complementarity between 28

Free Love, True Love

male and female becomes the vehicle for establishing the communion of the one flesh unity spoken of in Genesis 2:24. As we have seen before, the body expresses spiritual realities. The physical difference and complementarity between male and female made them realize that they are called for communion, to be a gift for one another. Man exists, “with someone” and “for someone” (see TOB, Jan. 9, 1980). John Paul II calls this the discovery of the nuptial meaning of the body: “the power to express love and by this love, become a gift for the other” (see TOB Jan. 16, 1980). Were it not for that physical difference and complementarity, the two would have been content in their own individual worlds. John Paul II says, “Man becomes the image of God not only through his own humanity, but also through the communion of persons, which man and woman form right from the beginning” (TOB, Nov. 14, 1979). Just as God is a communion of Father, Son and Holy Spirit, man and woman image that communion here on earth. If there is one thing that two male bodies cannot do, it is to be truly united in one flesh. At best they could only be beside one another but not united in one flesh. It is the same with two female bodies. The body as male and female plays a crucial role here. It is not incidental in the marriage analogy. Consider the anatomy of the marital act. The male 29

The Original Experiences of Man and Woman

“initiates” the gift of self, the female “accepts” the gift. If our bodies speak theology, isn’t that what God’s gift of Himself is all about too? God initiates the gift of salvation. But that gift is not forced. Humanity has to accept that gift. That’s why Christ is the Groom and we are His bride. Take away the male and female and you take away also the image of Bridegroom and the bride. Without forgetting the “limits of the analogy” (see p. 18), the earthly union of the sexes (made possible by physical difference but complementarity between male and female), is a sacrament on earth of the heavenly one flesh unity all of us are called to in the end times. Original unity points to the ultimate unity with God who is our destiny. The Bone of Contention An aged couple, both 60 years old, was walking along the beach. The husband stumbled upon an ancient bottle and released the proverbial genie inside. In gratitude, the genie offered to grant the man three wishes. The cunning and greedy husband wished for a fleet of cars and real estate and, voila, he got them. Then he asked for a truckload of money, and there it was. 30

Free Love, True Love

(By this time, the genie was already irritated by his selfishness and materialism.) Then he asked for a wife 40 years younger than him and, alas... he became a hundred years old! The Genesis story of the woman created from the rib of man (see Genesis 2:21-22) has always been the bone of many contentions. Some interpret it as symbolic of the natural superiority of the male species over the female and thus explains the perpetual “disunity” between man and woman. This is a gross misreading of the text. The creation from the rib signifies that “woman is created… based on the same humanity” (TOB, Nov. 7, 1979). The “image of the rib,” taken from the side of man, means that only woman can and should stand side by side with man because she too is God’s image and likeness. Furthermore, the deep sleep spoken of in Genesis 2:21 is tardemah in Hebrew. Tardemah can be likened to being in a general anesthesia, a state induced so that the physician can work without disturbance on the patient. Similarly, when Adam awoke and found Eve, it signifies that he had nothing to do with the creation of the woman. That is why it was God who “brought her to the man” (see Genesis 2:22). The woman is wholly God’s creation and shares the same humanity and dignity as God’s image. 31

The Original Experiences of Man and Woman

THE EXPERIENCE OF ORIGINAL NAKEDNESS “The man and his wife were both naked, yet they felt no shame” (Genesis 2:25). The original experience of nakedness free from shame is the key to understanding God’s intention for the man and woman relationship. But this is difficult in our times because of extreme exaggerations we have fallen into. One culture covers the woman from head to toe because she is a temptress. The other extreme virtually strips her naked and exposes her every erogenous zone. But in the beginning it was not so. The Naked Truth about Nakedness “The man and his wife were both naked, yet they felt no shame” (Genesis 2:25). Why were Adam and Eve free from shame? Because they did not experience the other’s look as a threat to their nakedness. In all naturalness, they experienced real intimacy as intome-see. In her nakedness, Adam saw Eve as a person expressed through a body and not simply a body of a person and vice versa. Therefore, there was no compulsion to lust and to use the other. In the words of the Holy Father, “they see and know each other… with all the peace of the interior gaze” (TOB, Jan. 2, 1980). This is sexual desire in the purity of its origins. It is no less exciting and definitely more meaningful 32

Free Love, True Love

because it does not reduce the other to a thing for one’s sexual pleasure. Why is it that couples do not feel the need to cover themselves in front of each other? Because the spouse has no intention to objectify the other. At least that’s what we expect to be happening. Later on, we will see that even in marriage, it could be otherwise. With the entrance of sin, the first couple “realized that they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made loincloths for themselves”(Genesis 3:7). When sin entered the picture, they covered themselves and felt shame in their nakedness (see Genesis 3:810). When we allow lust to enter the picture, the other’s look becomes a threat to one’s nakedness. The desire to bless the other becomes a desire to grab and to possess, to gratify oneself. Sexual desire is corrupted. Notice that Eve covered herself from her husband Adam and vice versa. Lust can distort love even within marriage. The Naked Truth about Shame So the solution to recovering nakedness free from shame is to throw away all our clothes, right? Well, it’s not that simple. Recovering it requires a progressive transformation of the heart and covering up is a necessary step in that direction. Shame as an experience is not altogether negative. 33

The Original Experiences of Man and Woman

The instinct to cover up or the need to put on clothes can play a positive function in our present world. Why do we cover ourselves almost automatically when we are exposed to a stranger? It’s not because our bodies are bad or shameful. On the contrary, it’s because it’s beautiful, so beautiful as to be sacred. We only veil that which we consider sacred. That’s why we veil the Blessed Sacrament. We secure our private journals from the prying eyes of others. We veil our bedrooms because what goes on in there is private and sacred. Because the echo of nakedness without shame remains in us, we remember our innate dignity. Shame as covering up is not prudery. It serves as a form of natural fear or self-defense against the possibility of being treated as a sexual object by an anonymous third party (see Love and Responsibility p. 179). At the same time, it is an instinctive expression of our positive desire to be treated as persons and not as objects. John Paul II calls this instinct positive shame. Positive shame is actually synonymous with the value of modesty. The Shameless Truth about Shamelessness Nakedness without shame (Genesis 2:25) is not the same as shamelessness (see Love and Responsibility, p. 186 ff). Shamelessness is actually a distortion of nakedness without shame. Shamelessness is the irresponsible baring of the human body and exposing it to the 34

Free Love, True Love

possibility of being treated as an object. The nakedness of shamelessness is the willful reduction of the person to his or her body parts. Shamelessness is imprudently exposing the naked human body to the “degradation of the lustful look.” This is the philosophy behind all forms of immodesty, exhibitionism, voyeurism, lewdness and pornography. Here, the human person becomes nothing more than a commodity for another’s sexual pleasure. No, the problem with pornography is not that it shows too much of the human person. The problem with pornography is that it shows too little of the greatness of the human person and of the body.

35

The Rediscovery of Love and Chastity

36

Free Love, True Love

FOUR

The Rediscovery of Love and Chastity

“God created man in His own image and likeness; calling him to existence through love, He called him at the same time for love.” John Paul II, Familiaris Consortio § 11 Man “cannot fully find himself except through the sincere gift of himself.”(Gaudium et Spes §24)

L

et me share with you some of my “love encounters.”

A Love to Lust a Lifetime I was once counseling a young husband. He had been married for three years and he was having intimacy problems with his wife. “Do you love your wife?” I asked. “Yes Father,” he mumbled. “So what’s the real problem?” I inquired. In anger, the guy blurted out, “I’m frustrated sexually. My wife is not good in bed. Why can’t she be like my ex?” 37

The Rediscovery of Love and Chastity

That man is frustrated because he goes into the sexual encounter not intending to seek the good of his wife. His primary goal is his orgasm. A Love to Last a Lifetime I was talking to a young couple wanting to learn Natural Family Planning. In one of the sharing sessions, the husband good-humoredly but honestly shared that during their honeymoon night, his bride felt a little shy and inhibited. She was a virgin and saved herself for marriage. “So did you get frustrated?” I asked innocently. Almost surprised by my question, he said, “Of course not, Father, I love my wife. “ That man went into that encounter not looking for his orgasm. If at all, it was only secondary. He went into that encounter to seek the good of his bride. Pope John Paul II has a term for it. He calls this “selfdonation, the sincere gift of oneself.” Looking back at my encounter with those “lovers,” I discovered a nugget of wisdom. I’m going to sound like a sex guru here but I’ll say it anyway. Good sex does not necessarily lead to love. Any man, or woman for that matter, can visit a paid sex worker and have the best sex he has ever had, but no relationship is necessarily built. In most cases, one doesn’t even bother asking for the other’s name. 38

Free Love, True Love

I recall a story of a woman named Sarah in the book of Tobit. She was a very beautiful woman. Men desired her beauty. But for some reason, all her husbands would die on the wedding night. Seven men had already suffered the same fate in the bridal chamber (see Tobit 7:11). Without probing into an investigation on why all the men die, could this be Scriptures’ way of telling us that a loveless sexual encounter is as good as a lifeless sexual encounter? No wonder all seven men died. But Tobiah was different. He was a decent man. He wanted not only the beauty but the person of Sarah. His prayer during the wedding night gives us a clue into his real intentions. “Lord, you know that I take this wife of mine not because of lust, but for a noble purpose. Call down your mercy on me and on her, and allow us to live together to a happy old age” (Tobit 8:8, italics mine). They did grow old happy together. A love-filled sexual encounter is a life-giving sexual encounter. Now if good sex does not necessarily lead to love, love always leads to “good” sex (i.e., “not-alwaystechnically-good-but-qualitatively-getting-there”). In the case of guy #2 above, genuine love made up for shy and inhibited sex. And as a matter of fact, genuine love can even make up for sometimes absent sex. Read on… 39

The Rediscovery of Love and Chastity

I Wanna Know What Love Is I read the story of Wawel and Mila Mercado in a major daily. I’ve actually met them once. Back in 1997, their lives changed forever when an amniotic fluid embolism in the brain after Mila gave birth to their only daughter, Therese, left her forever paralyzed and unable to speak. The damage to her brain also caused Mila to lose much of her motor functions. She has to be fed and cared for by two caregivers. Wawel was devastated but not frustrated. He still takes Mila out in public and even brings her to join fun runs — with Wawel pushing Mila on her wheelchair. They actually won a 2nd place medal once. A line in the newspaper article struck me. Wawel said, “I’ve never felt ashamed to take Mila out in public.” What he said next struck me more. “I tried my best at first for us to live as husband and wife, but I found it so unhealthy,” he said. “By its very nature, romantic love is conditional. It expects something back in return. We have had no sex life since Mila became mentally handicapped.” Despite all that, Wawel remained passionate about his wife. What a contrast to Guy #1 who’s frustrated at his wife because she doesn’t perform like his ex. Behold the difference between true love and its counterfeit. Genuine love longs not only for the good that the other can give. Guy #1 wanted something from 40

Free Love, True Love

his wife and the wife could not give it according to his specifications. So his “love” drifted somewhere else. Genuine love longs to promote the other’s good. And promoting the other’s good brings the greatest of fulfillment. I once read a definition of love which I paraphrased. Love is when the other’s good, well-being and concerns become as important and, if need be, more important than my own good, well-being and concerns. True lovers are not masochists; they also take pleasure in the good that the other brings. But that’s only secondary. Ultimately, the pleasure of a genuine lover does not consist in the presence of pleasant feelings or sensations. It can even persist in their absence. A genuine lover’s pleasure is simply the good of his beloved. John Paul II goes on to say that authentic love does not say, “I long for you as a good” but rather ,“I long for your good” (Love and Responsibility, pp 83-84). When a “Man” Loves a Woman What is marriage? Marriage is when a man loses his “bachelors” and a woman earns hers “masters.” Joke. It’s typical of the fallen world to measure manhood in the capacity of the male to stay on top (no pun intended), to dominate. In some cultures, manhood is achieved when a boy makes his first “hunt” in the forest. In the economic world, a man 41

The Rediscovery of Love and Chastity

must “make a killing” in the business world because it’s a dog eat dog world out there, a rat race. Sadly, the same violent mentality pervades our understanding of sex and the male-female relationship. Listen to our sexual vocabulary and the vulgar designations given to the male sex organ: a “weapon,” a “rod,” a “tool.” When a guy fancies a girl, he says, “I want to bang her.” I know of some fathers who initiated their sons into “manhood” by their first sexual conquest. It is no coincidence that most curse words are also words associated to the sexual act. (I need not put them here otherwise my work might get censored!) Love is self-donation and the sincere gift of oneself. But why do we have these “violent” and dominating images for sex and the man-woman relationship and consider them normal? I’d like to volunteer an explanation. It is part of the symptoms of our “little Jumbo syndrome” (see p. 9). Love without the Spines Have you ever seen a porcupine? Porcupines are rodents with a coat of sharp spines, or quills, which defend them from predators. In some species, the whole body is covered by as much as 30,000 spines that are poisonous. There is only one area where the porcupine is vulnerable because of the absence of spines — the genital area. 42

Free Love, True Love

This says a lot. The porcupine cannot “love” with its violent spines. The porcupine can only love with its non-violent side. It can only “love” when it is vulnerable. If this is true with porcupines, all the more is it true with humans. Our culture’s idea of a man is one who conquers, one who dominates. This is why we cannot understand St. Paul and his letter to the Ephesians. In that epistle, he wrote something that may make women label him as a male chauvinist. He said, “Wives should be subordinate to their husbands as to the Lord…. As the church is subordinate to Christ, so wives should be subordinate to their husbands in everything” (Ephesians 5:22-24). If we interpret this call to submission with the world’s vision of man as one who conquers and dominates, then women are right in condemning St. Paul. But what is the meaning of that submission? Author Christopher West in his book Theology of the Body for Beginners (p. 84) explains the meaning of that submission. Wives are to put themselves under (sub) the mission of their husbands. And what is that mission? It is given in the next verse: “Husbands, love your wives as Christ loved the Church” (v. 25). And how did Christ love the Church? He died for her. Paul, in effect, is saying, “Husbands, be ready to die for your wives. Wives, allow your husbands to die for you.” Counterfeit men would kill just to satisfy their lust. Real men would rather die than to satisfy their lust. 43

The Rediscovery of Love and Chastity

When Jesus was presented to the angry mob bloodied after being scourged, Pilate declared, “Behold, the man” (John 19:5). Unknowingly, Pilate presented to us God’s vision of what a man should be. For the biblical man, love is self-donation for the sake of the other. Lust, on the contrary, is self-indulgence at the expense of another. “Four” This Reason… The Bible speaks of a love that drives man to become one flesh with his wife: “For this reason, a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh” (Genesis 2:24). We can identify four qualities of this love which are characteristic of the love of Christ. Here I once more refer to Christopher West’s Theology of the Body for Beginners (p 91). First, Christ’s love is free. John 10:18 says, “No one takes my life from me; I lay it down of my own accord.” Second, it is total — until the end. “He loved them to the last,” says John 13:1. Third, it is faithful. Jesus said, “I am with you always till the end of the world” (Matthew 28:20). And, lastly, it is fruitful. “I came that they may have life” (John 10:10). If human love is to mirror the love of Christ, it has to be free, total, faithful and fruitful. 44

Free Love, True Love

Any couple who remembers their wedding day will easily recognize that the free, total, faithful and fruitful love of Christ is the very vow they committed to in marriage. Standing at the altar before God, the priest asks the bride and the groom, “Do you come here freely (free) and without reservation (total) to give yourselves to each other in marriage? Do you promise to be faithful until death? Do you promise to receive the children (fruitful) which God may give you in this marriage?” To all of these the bride and groom say “I do.” The free, total, faithful and fruitful love of Christ is what the body is called to proclaim in the sexual encounter. With their bodies, husband and wife actualize the meaning of their words, “I take you as my wife/as my husband ” (see TOB, Jan. 5, 1983). The marital act is a renewal of the meaning of the vows of marriage. This is why the sexual act is fittingly called the marital act. It’s not only something that men and women do; it’s something that married people do — people committed in free, total, faithful and fruitful love. These four qualities stand as the key to interpreting the honesty of all our sexual expressions. Let’s Wait a While… Before We Go Too Far I once presented this free, total, faithful and fruitful love paradigm to a group of young adults. After the presentation, one guy approached me. He wasn’t 45

The Rediscovery of Love and Chastity

confrontational but he wanted to know how this concept stood with his desire to “go all the way” with his girlfriend. “I can’t wait, Father. Why do I have to?” he asked. “If you cannot wait,” I replied, “what does that say about your freedom? If you cannot say ‘no’ are you really free? If you cannot say ‘no’ to sex, you are not having sex, sex is having you. Even within marriage itself, there are times when couples must say ‘no’ to themselves and to others. But that doesn’t make them any less loving. In fact, it makes them more.” The young guy countered, “Well, you said love is total. Sex is the fullest expression of love, right?” I said, “Are you telling me she is the person you want to spend the rest of your life with?” “I’m only 17, Father,” he reasoned, “nobody is talking about marriage here. We just met three months ago.” “Precisely, you have your life ahead of you,” I continued. “You don’t even know if you’ll still be together next year, or next month. So what are you doing thinking about an act which is the ‘fullest’ expression of love, which has a lifetime of consequences?” “But I’m not seeing anyone else. At least I’m faithful,” he replied. “For now, yes, but after her, what (or who)? Do you know that right now you are telling me that you find nothing wrong in sex between people who just 46

Free Love, True Love

met three months ago? What does that say about your capacity for faithfulness?” “Well it’s different once you’re married,” he retorted. “Don’t you see the contradiction?” I asked. “Right now you’re telling me that you find nothing wrong in having sex with someone who is not your wife or who you’re not even considering to be your wife. What makes you think that will change once you are married?” Honesty, not prohibition, is the essence of the Christian sexual ethic. To Chase or to Be Chaste Chastity comes from the Latin castigare, that is, “to castigate or to tame.” We need to tame our passions and instincts not because they are bad but because, left to themselves, they can bring us in the direction we do not want to go. Eating, for example, is good but without temperance, we can fall into unhealthy eating habits that may eventually ruin our health. The sexual instinct is good, but of itself, it has the tendency to reduce the other for my sexual satisfaction. True love cannot grow without the virtue of chastity. But what is chastity? A man came home vowing to be renewed after his Life in the Spirit Seminar. On the road, he saw his 47

The Rediscovery of Love and Chastity

former drinking buddies. He prayed hard, “Lord, cover my eyes.” He passed right by them. A few meters after, he saw his former gambling buddies. Summoning strength, he prayed once again, “Lord, cover my eyes.” He passed right by them. Then at the end of the road, he saw a very beautiful woman. Without second thoughts, he prayed, “Lord, cover Your eyes.” Chastity is not just “covering our eyes“ or “looking away.” I’m not saying that we can imprudently look at what can be occasions of temptations. Yes, “looking away” has a legitimate value. The Book of Sirach teaches, “Avert your eyes from a comely woman; gaze not upon the beauty of another’s wife” (Sirach 9:8). It’s what we classically call custody of the eyes or avoiding the possible occasions of temptation. But that is not yet true chastity. John Paul II calls that a “negative chastity.” We need to mature from that. Otherwise, we will forever be looking away, looking at the ground or looking at women’s foreheads instead of their eyes (and not to mention looking at pornography when no one is looking). True chastity (“positive chastity”) requires the transformation of the heart so that one may reach the point when one can actually look and not be easily swayed by the tendency to reduce the other into body parts. This is what John Paul II means when he said that chastity “frees love from the utilitarian attitude” after a “sustained long term integration of sexual 48

Free Love, True Love

values with the value of the person” (see Love and Responsibility, pp. 170-71). Continuing on, John Paul II writes that emotions, feelings and physical attractions constitute the “raw materials for love”(pp. 146 ff) but may not necessarily mature into love. If not oriented properly, they may even grow into its direct opposite — use. The opposite of love is not hate but use. A man who knows how to say all the right words and how to push the right buttons doesn’t hate the women he entices. He is using them. Chastity is that virtue that integrates the raw materials of love with the dignity of the person. That’s why chaste love is always faithful and exclusive: its object is the person who is “unique and unrepeatable.” When love reaches the person, it is forever. Lust, on the contrary, has the qualities of a person as its object. And because qualities are repeatable and are found in varying degrees in many other persons, it’s always drifting and unfaithful. The battlefield of love and lust is in our hearts. Chastity is not about loving less. It is about loving more. We should not fall into the mistake of calling lust as love. Unless we discover this, we will forever be on a chase, missing out on what one chastity writer called the real thrill of the chaste.

49

50

Free Love, True Love

FIVE

The Redemption of Sexuality

“The one who lives...‘according to the flesh’… ceases to be capable of this freedom for which ‘Christ has set us free’; he also ceases to be suitable for the true gift of self…” (Pope John Paul II)

O

ne of the first books I read in the seminary was something I chose, not because I liked it, but because I was intrigued by the title. It was called Being Sexual and Celibate by Keith Clark. I wondered how one could be sexual and, at the same time, celibate. I finished reading the book but I don’t think I really understood the message. Today I am a professor in the same seminary. I teach Moral Theology, Social Doctrines, Theological Virtues, Bioethics, and Sexuality and Integrity. 51

The Redemption of Sexuality

I always get teased about that last course. Some even ask what we need that for in the seminary. But I understand the teasing and the curiosity. When we hear the word sexuality, we immediately equate it with sexology. Let’s make some clarifications. Sexology is all about the science of sex, the Big “O” and locating the G-spot. Well, I am not a sexologist and the only G-spot I know and propose to locate is the spot that God has to have in human sexuality. That’s why it is taught in seminaries — and everywhere else, I believe. A Radical Understanding of Sexuality Warning: I am going to make a radical definition of sexuality here. “Radical” comes from the Latin radix meaning “root.” So I will look at sexuality based on its Latin roots. See why it is radical? Sex comes from the Latin secare. It means “to divide, to separate.” This is why we separate the sexes according to male and female. But secare also means “to cut, to wound, to sever.” Fittingly, human sexuality can be understood as one’s willingness to be cut, to be wounded, to sacrifice for the sake of one’s beloved. Now this is not JP II. This is JOJ (those are my initials if you don’t know). Could this be one of the reasons why, in God’s covenant with Israel, the wounded genital (i.e., circumcision) was the symbol of the covenant? 52

Free Love, True Love

Remember the terms of the covenant: “I will be your God, and you will be my people” (Exodus 6:7)? Could God be also telling His people, “If you want to be my people, you have to love as I love — with a love that is sacrificial?” The “wounded” genital therefore, would be for the male, the physical reminder of his readiness to be wounded for his beloved. For women, the onset of womanhood is signaled by the shedding of blood (menstruation). Besides the biological and medical reason, could this be understood also as the physical symbol reminding a woman that love will hurt at times? That to love genuinely will sometimes entail, figuratively and literally, the shedding of one’s blood? If we understand sexuality this way, being sexual would cease to be confined to the level of genital activity. That’s why Jesus is very much a sexual person. That is why we speak of being sexual and celibate. Not all of us are called to be genital in our loving but all of us are called always to be sexual in our acts of loving — genital or otherwise. Close Encounters of the “Sexual” Kind I was in an immersion seminar on the Theology of the Body in Quarryville, Pennsylvania, USA. A Franciscan brother who lives in the Bronx in New York shared this story. I took the liberty of changing some details. He was driving and it was raining hard and so 53

The Redemption of Sexuality

he stopped by the side of the street. From nowhere, a woman jumped into his car. She was beautiful, wet, scantily clad and smiling at him. He knew right there and then what she was doing for a living. He smiled back, reached to the back of his truck and handed the woman a jacket. He said, “You’re wet. You’ll need this. I’m Bro. Charles.” “Oh my God, I’m sorry. I didn’t know…” The woman wanted to leave. “It’s OK. You didn’t know. Here’s an orange. And keep the jacket,” said the brother. Touched by the gesture, the woman said, “You’re a kind man,” and, after a rather long pause, she added, “You know, I would do you for free.” We all laughed when we heard the punch line. Except that it wasn’t a punch line of a joke. It was a real story. I Don’t Know How to Love Him John Paul II spoke of the so-called “masters of suspicion” (see TOB, Oct. 29, 1980). These are people afflicted with the little Jumbo syndrome. They are suspicious that a pure encounter between man and woman is possible. They cast suspicion on the capacity of the human heart to long for and bestow love that goes beyond the physical. They are those where lust holds sway in their hearts and so they project the same onto everyone else. 54

Free Love, True Love

Why do we have the likes of Dan Brown of The Da Vinci Code who think that the man-Jesus is too good to be true? “Jesus must have something going on with the women he encountered in the Gospels,” they suspect. They don’t know any better. Going back to our story, I don’t think the woman with Bro. Charles was trying to be vulgar or insulting. Maybe she was serious and sincere. Maybe she simply didn’t know any better. Poisoned by her trade and the men who patronize her, maybe that was the only thing she knew that men wanted from women. Maybe that was the only thing she knew that women could offer men. In the Scriptures, there’s a similar story of a woman named Mary of Magdala. She has “loved” countless men. She was a professional in the trade. As a Broadway song about her goes, “I’ve had so many men before, in very many ways. He’s just one more.” But Jesus was different. He offered her something unlike the others and He wanted something else from her. He was not “just one more” man. After her encounter with Jesus, the pro — all of a sudden — was an amateur. She was singing a different tune: “I’ve been changed, yes really changed… I don’t know how to love him.” Didn’t she really know how to love him, or was it the first time that she encountered true love and was invited to truly love? 55

The Redemption of Sexuality

Like Mary and the woman with Bro. Charles, their experiences of love have been the grabbing kind of love. Their later encounters with genuine lovers were a welcome invitation for them to love again, or maybe, for the first time.

56

Free Love, True Love

SIX

The Humanness of Love and Sexuality

Man is called “to be the authentic master of his own innermost impulses, like a watchman who watches over a hidden spring, and… draw from all these impulses what is fitting for ‘purity of heart.’” (Pope John Paul II)

I

n the Genesis story of creation, a constant biblical refrain that accompanies each and every completed creative act of God is the affirmation, “God looked at what He has created and it was good” (see Genesis 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25). But after the sixth day was completed, after God created male and female in his image and likeness, He looked at what He had created “and it was very good” (see Genesis 1:31). Creation was no longer just good. It was very good. Some argue that “very good” referred to all of creation and not exclusively to the male and female. 57

The Humanness of Love and Sexuality

Could be, but it’s unlikely. The first five days had their own refrain: “Good.” Whether it was to all of creation or exclusively to the male and female, no one can argue that it was only after the appearance of male and female that creation was rendered “very good.” They must have something uniquely theirs to make the world qualitatively better. They must be special. They are. They are human persons. They are alone (original solitude) in the world as persons, as image of God. Girls Gone Wild One early morning I was browsing the internet and I stumbled upon this news article entitled “UK woman Sharon marries Cindy.” “Another point for the same-sex union activists,” I said to myself. Until I read the rest of the article to discover that it was a different kind of same-sex union. Cindy was a female… dolphin. I’m not making this up. Google it and you will find the article complete with photos of British woman Sharon Tendler in her white wedding gown, vowing, “This is not a perversion. I simply love her. I’m a onedolphin woman.” This could be the ultimate edition of Girls Gone Wild. There are several things that humans share with the rest of the animal kingdom. One of them is the instinct of self-preservation. Like the animals, we feel 58

Free Love, True Love

the need to eat in order to keep ourselves in existence. When life is threatened, we naturally defend ourselves. We also have the instinct of self-propagation, the longing to keep the human race in existence. But there is something we humans uniquely have. It is the capacity for self-reflection and self-consciousness. Why do animals charge at their own image in the mirror? Because they do not recognize themselves. They simply see an image that they suppose to be another. It’s different with the human person. He has an inner world, a world of values by which he interprets the visible world and casts meaning upon it. Because we have the power of self-reflection, we regulate our instincts by reason, not by season. Take the instinct of self-preservation. When it’s time for the animals to eat, they eat. You will never see a dog giving up a bone for Lent. Animals don’t fast, not because they’re anti-religion. They don’t fast simply because they don’t have the capacity to go beyond their instincts. Only humans have the capacity to fast. When it’s time for the animals to mate, they do it. We don’t really call mating in the animal kingdom as sex. As we have seen in the preceding chapter, sex is a special kind of term. Mating in the animal kingdom is properly called copulation, because they “couple” in response to an instinct. I don’t think animals consciously mate thinking, “What we are doing right now will have an adverse effect on the 59

The Humanness of Love and Sexuality

demographic balance of our species,” or “We have to do this otherwise we will vanish into extinction.” Mating in the human world (besides “sex”) is called sexual intercourse. Intercourse means communication. It is a communication of a sexual nature. This gives sex its humanness, its human character. In the usual course of things, only humans naturally unite face to face. (That’s why Natural Family Planning, the most scientifically accurate way of planning the family, is most compatible to our human practice of sexuality because the main character of NFP is shared responsibility and communication between couples.) No wonder Scriptures call the marital act an act of knowledge. The older versions of the Bible have Genesis 4:1 saying, “And Adam knew his wife Eve. And she had a son and bore Cain.” In the New Testament, older versions of the Bible also have Mary saying, “How can this be since I do not know man?” (Luke 1:34). The marital act is not a response to an instinct. It is a response to a person. When animals feel the instinct to mate, they mate. For us, humans, if it is not the opportune time, we wait. Or do we really? When Mammals Rule the World Want to hear some rap? Here’s a sample. “You and me, baby, we ain’t nothin’ but mammals; So let’s do it like they do in Discovery Channel.” 60

Free Love, True Love

This is from a song by a group named Bloodhound Gang. If we’re looking for poster boys of the little Jumbo syndrome, they’re it. They have sold over five million records. Their songs could be in the iPods of your kids right now. Read the title of some of their other songs: A Lap Dance Is Better When the Stripper Is Crying. Are you shocked? It gets worse: I Hope You Die, Kiss Me Where It Smells Funny, I Wish I Was Queer So I Could Get Chicks, Screwing You on the Beach at Night. Oh the wounds of our little Jumbo syndrome. They have gone very deep. If it’s true that “we ain’t nothin’ but mammals,” I’m not surprised that women would rather marry a dolphin these days. There’s a great crisis of manhood and womanhood in our times. As they say, “Girls rule, men drool.” But there is hope in the transforming power of the Gospels. We need not fear the words of Jesus against lust or adultery in the heart (see Matthew 5:27-28). John Paul II encourages, “Are we to fear the severity of these words or… have confidence in their salvific… power?” (TOB, Oct. 8, 1980). Jesus will not call us to do something we are not capable of. His call reminds us of the “interior possibilities” of the human heart. We are not “accused” or “condemned” by the words of Jesus. We are rather “called.” We only have to get out of our “suspicions” on our capacities and believe and reclaim our humanity. 61

The Humanness of Love and Sexuality

I Want to Break Free One time my brother visited me with my nephews and niece. Instinctively, my little nephew ran across the room and headed to my guitar. With much gusto he strummed it, or more like banged against the strings, and produced the noisiest heavy metal music I’ve heard in my life. He was very sincere, spontaneous, free. But he was also noisy. When I take hold of that guitar, I can also be sincere, spontaneous and free. But I don’t produce noise. I can play beautiful music. What is the difference between my nephew’s spontaneity and mine? My nephew’s is a reckless spontaneity. Mine is a disciplined spontaneity. Reckless spontaneity is sincere but without direction. It is spontaneity without boundaries. It is energy spent for one’s own pleasure. That’s why it produces noise, chaos and pain (in the ears). Disciplined spontaneity is just as sincere but purpose-driven. I want to produce music and not just strum away at the strings. Disciplined spontaneity is comfortable with boundaries. I had to endure years of learning the chords. I had to train my fingers coordination and rhythm despite initial pain and blisters. Disciplined spontaneity is energy spent for another’s pleasure. My pleasure derives from the listening pleasure of my hearers. 62

Free Love, True Love

Reckless spontaneity degrades our passions (eros) to lust. Disciplined spontaneity elevates our passions (eros) into genuine love (agape). Pope Benedict XVI also developed this well in his latest encyclical Deus Caritas Est (God is Love). The reason why we are “suspicious” of the words of the Gospel is because we fear that God’s words will take away the spontaneity of our passions. That’s the farthest from the truth. We think of God as a killjoy. If we open ourselves to the invitation of the Gospel and believe in the interior possibilities of the human heart, we will discover that God will not delete our passions. He will complete them. Jesus assures us, “I have told you this (his commandments) so that my joy may be in you and your joy may be complete”(John 15:11, emphasis added). When that happens, we will finally let go of our biscuits and crackers and feast on the buffet banquet available for us from the very beginning (remember Johnny in p. 19?). When the Saints Come Knocking In If I reach a checkpoint and see a sign saying, “Stop: Train Approaching,” am I free to move forward? Yes, but maybe not for long, when I get run over and become a corpse. Sometimes we think we are free when we can barge in without meeting any resistance. That is not 63

The Humanness of Love and Sexuality

freedom, that is license. Could this explain why people behind the wheel create their own traffic rules since they have their driver’s license? License is doing what you want, whenever, wherever and with whomever. Freedom is doing what one ought to do. Is a pilot free to ignore his coordinates? Is the train free to break away from the railroad tracks? A pilot’s freedom is in his coordinates. A train’s freedom is in its tracks. Freedom is the power to do what one ought to do. In an undelivered address, John Paul II expounded on a section in The Song of Songs. It has something interesting to teach us about the exercise of freedom in the area of human sexuality. Warning: the following image could be sensitive. But then again, to the pure, everything is pure. To the impure, nothing is pure (see Titus 1:15). The lover says to his beloved, “You are an enclosed garden, my sister, my bride, an enclosed garden, a fountain sealed” (Songs 4:12). The image of “a garden closed, a fountain sealed” speaks of the freedom inherent in both the female and the male. Because she is “a garden closed, a fountain sealed,” the biblical woman is one who is “a master of her own mystery” (TOB, p 568 ff). Woman is not weak and gullible as our culture presents her to be. She holds the key to her own mystery. She is not easily enticed, 64

Free Love, True Love

swayed or duped by chocolates, romantic dinners and threats of abandonment or peer pressure. She keeps her mystery. She does not crave undue attention for “my hump, my hump, my hump.” Our culture calls it “girl power” or “confidence in one’s body.” “Girls rule, men drool,” we often hear it said. But for real men, a woman who flaunts what she has looks more like she’s begging, craving, crying for attention. The biblical man is one who respects a woman’s mystery. He doesn’t barge in or abuse his strength because the woman holds the key. At most he could only “knock.” He joyfully waits. And he does not frown if the garden remains closed. He has no secret agenda to get the doors open beyond the woman’s wishes. He respects the “inviolability of her person” (TOB, undelivered, p. 548ff). And because he respects “the inviolability of her person,” he will not take advantage even if the woman becomes careless with the key. To the women reading this, if your boyfriend tells you that tired, old, cliché, ”If you love me, you will do this,” he’s not the man you would want to stay with. Avoid him like a plague. That guy has a little Jumbo syndrome (no pun intended).

65

The Humanness of Love and Sexuality

66

Free Love, True Love

SEVEN

The Life-Giving and Love-Giving Significance of Sexuality

The marital consent that “binds the spouses to each other finds its fulfillment in the two ‘becoming one flesh.’” (Catechism of the Catholic Church §1627)

H

ere are some figures regarding the state of world populations taken from the most recent UN World Population Prospects 2006 Revision report.*

1. In Europe as a whole, the percentage of the aged outnumbers the youth by 20.6% vs 5% of the whole population. 2. In France, the ratio of the old against the youth is 20.8% vs. 6.3%. 3. In Germany, it’s 25.1% vs. 4.4%. 4. In Italy, it’s 25.3% vs. 4.6%. 5. In Asia, particularly in Japan, it is 26.4% vs. 4.5%.

*Source: http://esa.un.org/unpp/

67

The Life-Giving and Love-Giving Significance of Sexuality

All of the countries above have a negative population growth prospect in the period 2005 to 2010 and their Total Fertility Rate is just a little over 1, which is way below the 2.1 accepted birth replacement rate. What can we learn from these numbers? That the world is not really overpopulated. It is mis-populated. From the data above, it is clear that in years to come, these countries whose birth rate is way below the accepted replacement level will be in danger of collapse and eventual extinction. There will simply be no more young people who will replace the aging population. Fertility in these countries is no longer appreciated as a gift and a blessing. Many factors explain this: the culture of death promoted by the contraceptive mentality; the misguided feminism that sees motherhood and pregnancy as a hindrance to women’s place in society; and the same-sex union advocates that long to alter the natural character of marriage as the union of one man and one woman open to the gift of parenthood. You’ve Got Male… and Female In the book of Genesis we read, “God created man in his image; in the divine image he created him; male and female he created them” (Genesis 1:27). Have you ever wondered why the Genesis author used “male” and “female”? He could have used “man” and “woman” or their proper names Adam and Eve. Is this simply a 68

Free Love, True Love

random linguistic choice or is there a theological point being raised? I believe it is the latter. “Male” and “female” are special terms with specific meanings. First of all, they point to the physical difference which distinguishes one sex from another. When we fill up application forms and see the item sex, we do not put “man” or “woman.” We put either “male” or “female” to emphasize the physical sexual distinction. Why is there a need to emphasize the physical sexual difference in Genesis 1:27? The reason can be seen in the next verse. In Genesis 1:28, it reads, “God blessed them, saying: ‘Be fertile and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it.’” The physical sexual difference is emphasized to highlight the purpose of that difference — the ability to procreate. This is the life-giving or procreative significance of the marital act. The Primal Blessing Genesis 1:28 does not only emphasize the ability to procreate. It also emphasizes the blessing of fertility. “God blessed them… be fertile.” Fertility was the first thing on earth that God Himself blessed. Fertility is part of the plan of God. It is not an unfortunate thing that God “overlooked” when he created male and female. When a woman gets pregnant, it doesn’t mean “something went wrong.” Something is right because it means your 69

The Life-Giving and Love-Giving Significance of Sexuality

body is functioning properly. What is “wrong” is how we used what is originally and inherently right. Sin is not only about committing something wrong. Sin is also using something that is inherently good and holy in a wrong way. Do the countries above experience or value fertility as a blessing? Notice that these are countries and people who can well afford to take care and nourish new human lives. The wounds of the culture of death have cut deep. We are not advocating mindless and irresponsible procreation. That has never been the Church’s teaching. What the Church teaches is “openness to the possibility of parenthood” (see Love and Responsibility, p. 227, also Humanae Vitae §12, §14 and Familiaris Consortio § 32). Openness to the possibility of parenthood means regulating the number of children in a way that is not a direct attack on the gift of life. Natural Family Planning (NFP), the most scientifically accurate way of regulating the number of children, satisfies this. Contraception cannot claim the same.

There are many areas to cover to show how NFP is morally and essentially different and better than contraception. But that is not the main thrust of this book. Perhaps that would be the subject of another book. 8

70

Free Love, True Love

He’s Leaving Home In Genesis 2:24 we read, “For this reason, a man shall leave father and mother and cling to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” Now the “male” becomes “man” and “female” becomes “wife.” “Man” and “wife” are special terms. They connote relationship, fidelity and commitment. This is the love-giving or unitive significance of the marital act. The “male” becomes a “man” because only a man is capable of sacrifice (“…a man shall leave father and mother…”). Only a man can be committed, faithful and true to his word (“…a man… clings to his wife…shall become one flesh”). We never call an oath “a male’s word.” We call it “a gentleman’s word.” “Man” expresses the need to complement maleness with manhood. “Wife” expresses the need to complement femaleness with womanhood. In concrete terms, every “male” with a genital can become a father. But it takes a man to be a spiritual father. Every female can become a mother but only a dedicated wife can become a spiritual mother. St. Joseph is considered the patron saint of all fathers. We know that he was not the biological father of Jesus. But knowing of his sacrifice for Mary and Jesus, he was more father than any other biological father of his time.

71

The Life-Giving and Love-Giving Significance of Sexuality

This is the essence of the apostolic letter Redemptoris Custos, The Custodian of the Redeemer (from the Latin redemptoris, meaning “redeemer” and custos, meaning “custodian”). John Paul II proposed that Joseph was specially chosen by God for a no less important mission. Sometimes because of the scarcity of Joseph’s biblical appearances we think that he was called by God only to complete the figures of our Nativity sets. Joseph’s special vocation was to witness to the call to spiritual fatherhood. Joseph’s special vocation was to witness to the call to spiritual fruitfulness.

72

Free Love, True Love

EIGHT

With This Body, I Thee Wed: The Significance of the Body

“It is the body itself that ‘speaks’; it speaks with its masculinity or femininity, it speaks with the mysterious language of the personal gift.” (Pope John Paul II)

W

hen John Paul II became Pope, one of the significant changes he made in the world famous Sistine Chapel is to have the fig leaves, which some prudish cardinals ordered painted over the private parts of Michelangelo’s nudes, removed. Afterwards he rededicated the Sistine Chapel and called it the Shrine of the Theology of the Body. As we have been developing throughout this book, the body is not only biology. It is a theology. Man does not only have a body, he is a body. Everything man does with his body involves a whole network 73

With This Body, I Thee Wed: The Significance of the Body

of meanings: physical, psychological, emotional and spiritual. Consequently, sex is not only a matter of anatomy. It is a matter of theology. Brother-Husband, Sister-Wife As a young priest, I once was talking to a parishioner when his wife arrived. The way he introduced his wife left a deep impression on me. “Father, meet my sisterwife,” he said. Both of them were members of a worldwide ecclesial community for wedded couples. “Sister-wife, brother-husband.” I wasn’t used to hearing that until I discovered through John Paul II that it is very biblical. A quote from the Song of Songs goes, “You have ravished my heart, my sister, my bride, you have ravished my heart with one glance of your eyes…. How sweet is your love, my sister, my bride!” (Song 4:9-10). When we see “sister” and “brother” attached to “wife” and “husband,” we see incest. But John Paul II, the mystic that he was, saw a “particular eloquence” in the sequence of the lover calling his beloved “sister” before calling her “bride” (see TOB, undelivered, p. 558 ff). The term “sister” indicates deep friendship and kinship. It indicates the recognition that the one before me shares the same humanity with me. We belong to the same father (in heaven) and I have nothing but 74

Free Love, True Love

respect for her. It is unthinkable for one to consider “using” or “lusting” after his sister. “Bride” connotes someone for whom I am passionate, someone with whom I consummate my love. Recognizing a woman as my “sister” before she is my “bride” eradicates the possibility of my passion for her degenerating into lust. On the contrary, “sister” propels my passion into the heights of genuine love (agape). Seeing one as sister enables a man to love the woman with what John Paul II calls “a disinterested tenderness” (TOB, p. 566). Disinterested doesn’t mean he has no passionate interest in his bride. It means he longs to promote her interests without ulterior selfish motives. This recognition of the woman as sister must accompany the recognition of the woman as bride. All these are true not only for the man but also for the woman. Note that in Songs 8:4, the bride responds by calling the bridegroom “my brother.” And this was so from the very beginning. How do we know? Isn’t this the same with the experience of Adam with his bride Eve? How did he first acknowledge her? When he saw her body, he recognized her as “bone of bones, and flesh of my flesh” (Genesis 2:23). They share the same humanity. They both originated from the same Creator. Adam beheld Eve with a “disinterested tenderness.” Adam saw Eve as a person expressed through a body and not simply a body of a person. 75

With This Body, I Thee Wed: The Significance of the Body

Only after that acknowledgment was Eve given to Adam as a bride, “and the two of them shall become one flesh… man and wife” (see Genesis 2:24-25). I believe it’s important to recognize a woman as sister first and then as bride because when the fires of passion ebb, the woman “ceases” to be a bride (in terms of passionate intensity) and she becomes a sister, a friend. I have never been married but I have enough common sense to understand what lay preacher Bo Sanchez wrote in his book: “I found out that in my marriage, my wife and I are sexual partners less than 1% of the time… but you’re supposed to be friends 99% of the time”(How to Find Your One True Love, p. 76). When your wife’s waistline evolves from 24 inches to 42, the excitement of “bridehood” will wane. When the knight in shining armor you married “shines” only because of baldness, the embers of passion die out. Then he becomes a brother, a friend. “Sisterhood,” “brotherhood” brings stability to the fleeting nature of “bridehood.” “My sister, my bride” is Scriptures’ way of telling us that the best preparation for marriage is a chaste friendship. When one builds a house or any structure, one begins with the foundation, that part of the house which will and must last. It’s the same in our relationships. If courtship and going steady are in 76

Free Love, True Love

view of a possible preparation for marriage, then we have to build on that which will outlive the fleeting nature of passion. In our “hook-up” world, where dating is almost synonymous with sexual experimentation, we have become sexual experts but relational idiots. “My sister, my bride” is an invitation to take the first step to making that great paradigm shift. A bride excites the emotions. A sister captures the heart. “You have ravished my heart, my sister, my bride.”

77

78

Free Love, True Love

Concluding Words

I

n one Catholic parochial school, two boys were brought to the principal’s office suspected of stealing items from the school bookstore. The guidance counselor, who also happened to be the Religion teacher of the boys, was also called. Disappointed, the teacher said to the principal, “I can’t believe it. They’re very good in my Religion class….” Then sounding defensive and wishing to exonerate the boys, he added, “Just to prove to you, I’ll ask them a simple religion question.” 79

Concluding Words

Then he turned to the boys and asked, “Where is God?” One of the boys turned to the other and whispered, “We’re in big trouble. God is missing and they think we’re the ones who took Him.” Poor boys, they felt accused of something they were not capable of doing. If you saw yourself anywhere in this book, I hope you don’t feel accused. Rather, I hope you feel challenged and called. The Christian life is positive and the call of Jesus liberating. The message of the Gospel explained by the Holy Father’s Theology of the Body is indeed bold but it is not something we are not capable of. Christ’s words on the Sermon on the Mount are not words of accusation but invitation. Christ does not call us to something beyond our capacity. We only need to restore confidence in our humanity and the empowering invitation of the words of Christ and His Gospel. In the Theology of the Body, a morally good action is not only one in which man pursues something good. A morally good act is an act where man pursues something truthfully good, and he pursues it in a truthful, honest and good way. A truly good moral act is one where there is an integration of purpose and action. The body, in its actions, is indispensable in such integration. The most common error of our times lies 80

Free Love, True Love

in our pursuance of the good in a false and evil way. The body is not a value-free, value-neutral reality that man disposes of instrumentally. Today, there is a difficulty in grasping this. Perhaps owing to the advancement of technology, by which man can utilize things for his purpose with such ease, the body too is seen as a raw material, manipulable according to man’s whims and caprices. In his Theology of the Body, John Paul is proposing that if men and women would resist this tendency, and recover once more a true sense of their worth as embodied persons, as male and female, then they would also be able to see more the beauty of their vocation to love in a new and grander light. Perhaps, they would also discover that the Church is actually one with them all along in all the things their hearts hold dear. In just several pages, I’ve attempted to share the glorious message of the Theology of the Body. I must admit, I barely scratched the surface here and, in that light, I still feel I have not given justice to John Paul II’s message. Quite literally, a groundswell of interest is currently brewing among theologians and lay people alike regarding this theology. Papal biographer George Weigel in his book on Pope John Paul II, Witness to Hope, calls the Theology of the Body as “one of the boldest reconfigurations of Catholic theology in centuries… a kind of theological time bomb set to go 81

Concluding Words

off with dramatic consequences… perhaps in the 21st century.” When that bomb finally explodes, I hope to draw satisfaction from the knowledge that this book would have contributed a little to set it off. So if your interest on the Theology of the Body was aroused (I’m getting very “bodily” in my vocabulary now) in any way, please take hold of many other resources much more comprehensive than what I’ve done here. Or, wait for my next book. (God help me.) Now, let me end with how I started this book. What comes to your mind when you hear the words man, woman, male, female, sex, sexuality, body, love? Don’t keep the answers to yourself. Share it. Live the theology of your body.

82

Free Love, True Love

Some Theology of the Body Resources John Paul II. Man and Woman He Created Them: A Theology of the Body, Michael Waldstein, trans., Boston, MA: Pauline Books and Media, 2006. Wojtyla, Karol. Love and Responsibility, H.T. Willets, trans., San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1993. West, Christopher. Theology of the Body for Beginners: A Basic Introduction to Pope John Paul II’s Sexual Revolution, Pennsylvania: Ascension Press, 2004. West, Christopher. Theology of the Body Explained: A Commentary on John Paul II’s “Gospel of the Body,” Boston, MA: Pauline Books and Media, 2003.

83

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS To Gaudencio Cardinal B. Rosales, D.D., the Father of the Archdiocese of Manila, for his solicitous support and encouragement. To Fr. Regie Malicdem, private secretary to the Archbishop of Manila, for the patience and accommodation of my many requests. To Fr. Ramil R. Marcos, my friend and classmate, for the editing work and the inspiration. To Ms. Maricor de Villa and Ms. Bernadette Abrera, for the additional editing work for the second printing of this book. To Auntie Molly and Betty, for everything. To my staff at the Family Life Ministry: Rene, Lily, Francis, Marilyn and all our vicariate coordinators and coworkers in the archdiocese. To Sem. Ser Allan G. Bodoraya, for his talent, creativity and generosity and for the new layout. To Ms. Virgie Dinglasa, for the follow up of the many documentary requirements.

84

Free Love, True Love

To my library staff: Kuya Pete Diaz, Jr., Rey Cruz, Cesar Aguillon and Arniel Velasco. It would be nice to know how this work has helped you in any way. Please send your comments to: Rev. Fr. Joel O. Jason San Carlos Seminary EDSA, Guadalupe Viejo, Makati City 1200, Philippines (63 2) 8958855; fax (63 2) 8909563 [email protected] Ministry for Family and Life LAYFORCE, San Carlos Pastoral Formation Complex EDSA, Guadalupe Viejo, Makati City 1200, Philippines (63 2) 8906187; 8958855 loc 306 telefax: (63 2) 8960584 [email protected]

85