• God is the giver of life and gives the Law which guides how life is to be lived.
• God is pleased to give each human being a body for living one’s life.
Each human body is either male or female, created in God’s own image:
God said, “Let Us make humanity in Our image, according to Our likeness …”
• All human beings are called by God to give oneself over to God – this “self” includes one’s body.
• This obedient giving of oneself to God is an act of love exemplified perfectly in the life of Jesus.
• All human life is lived in the context of relationship with God and other human beings.
• The one God, who is Spirit, is revealed as a relationship of three persons: Father, Son, Spirit.
• The Son has been revealed as Jesus Christ:
Having existed in the form of God, Christ Jesus did not regard equality with God something to be grasped, but emptied Himself taking on the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of human beings. Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. For this reason, God highly exalted Him
[A virgin is a woman who has had no bodily intercourse with a man.]
Mary and Joseph, obeying the command of God’s angel, Gabriel, named their son Jesus.• Jesus, anointed by the Holy Spirit, lived wholly submitted to the will of his heavenly Father.
• While Jesus was still a child, His parents carried out for him all that was required of God’s Law; Jesus then continued in obedient subjection to his parents as he kept increasing in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and other human beings.
• All other human life has been bodily conceived through procreative intercourse between a person’s mother and father
[in whatever manner possible]
(except in the case of the first two human beings, both of whom were made directly by God)
– Adam, [called the son of God in the geneology of Luke’ Gospel] into whose nostrils the LORD God breathed the breath of life after forming him from the dust of the ground; and
- Eve, whom the LORD God made from a rib He had taken from the body of Adam.
– Adam, [called the son of God in the geneology of Luke’ Gospel] into whose nostrils the LORD God breathed the breath of life after forming him from the dust of the ground; and
- Eve, whom the LORD God made from a rib He had taken from the body of Adam.
• All human beings are embodied persons who have been given their body by God.
• All human beings are persons who, at birth, have no other material thing but a body.
• A person’s body is inviolate – no one can take a person’s body against that person’s will.
If a person is not pleased to give one’s body to another, the other cannot take that person’s body
[this would be rape]
• Marriage is God’s way of giving one’s body to another
(exemplified in Adam’s relationship with Eve).
• The giving of one’s body to another is appropriate only within the context of marriage.
• Sensation is all that a person can experience bodily – one senses either pleasure or pain.
• Any human activity will involve bodily pleasure or pain.
• Sexual activity is sensual experience focused on bodily pleasure.
• The pleasure of giving one’s body to another is open to life as one’s mind conceives what is in the mind of God.
• If one has given over one’s body to God,
[All human beings are called by God to give oneself over to God – this “self” includes one’s body]
then masturbation will be transgressive against God; this act takes for oneself that which belongs to God.
• Adultery transgresses the marriage relationship – this may be other than bodily transgression.
• Fornication is a transgression of the body – i.e., any inappropriate bodily interaction (including unfaithful fantasy).
3 comments:
One student, in responding to the posting of BODY & GIFT, wrote:
"I do believe ... that if any homosexual wants to give their entire being to another human, in love and with the understanding that those two individuals will be together for the rest of their lives, they should be able to engage in the act of sex."
My reply:
The question of same-sex relationships shares much in common with the question of human relationships in general. It bothers me when discussion focuses first on what is different about particular relationships, then allows those differences to determine the boundaries of understanding such relationships. I prefer to consider first what is similar for any human relationship, then keep such similarity in mind when discussing particulars.
This approach is beneficial especially when participants in the discussion represent particilar relationships being discussed. For example, one person who favors and even engages in same-sex relationships will have a point-of-view quite different from another person who finds same-sex relationships less than favorable. How are these two ever to agree if they begin disagreeing immediately?
All this to say, I hope to discover how we might agree before figuring out why we disagree. That is why I really appreciate how carefully the following statement was worded: "For those who are unable to engage in the sacrament of marriage, yet, still want to give themselves to their partner, who they are in love with, doing so is forbidden by the church."
The statement acknowledges that marriage, especially as taught by the Church, has certain bounderies that will exclude a number of persons. These persons then have to cope with certain desires that could otherwise be fulfilled in a valid marriage relationship. The question that is implied is, "How is one to love another in the context of desires that will not be fulfilled if one follows Church teaching?"
Denying such desire may seem the simple answer, but dealing with sexual desire is never so simple. The concluding statement claims, "if any homosexual wants to give their entire being to another human, in love and with the understanding that those two individuals will be together for the rest of their lives, they should be able to engage in the act of sex." If marriage is the only proper place for full sexual expression, then it would be improper for any other relationship to involve that sort of sex. Wanting is not needing, so one must be careful to distinguish between what one wants and what one needs. Is it possible for persons to initmately love others apart from sexual expression? Of couse it is! Intimacy is not necessarily sexual. Consider the very intimate relationship between David and Jonathon, or between Jesus and John (or Mary Magdalene).
Intimacy is the knowing of another person. The more one knows another, the more intimate the relationship between the two becomes. The sexual act is called "knowing" in reference to this, and must be understood with this reference in mind. The need for intimacy is too often mistaken for sexual desire. Failure to find intimacy often forces a person to substitute sexual activity for intimacy; i.e., a person engages in sexual acts without truly knowing one's sexual partner. Marriage is the consumation of knowing another. What can be known in marriage, however, is reserved only for a husband and wife.
Human sexuality is a vital part of being human, but being human is more than being sexual. When one begins to define oneself according to one's sexuality, then one diminishes the fuller meaning of being human, which the Church defines in terms of being created in the image of God. The greatest commandment sets the priority for how one begins to be fully human: "Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength, then love your neighbor as yourself." This priority puts sex into the proper perspective - knowing another follows best from being fully known. Intimacy knows what is true about another, therefore, truth and intimacy are inextricably related. Loving God first accepts the Word of God as Truth. Acting apart from Truth is to live a lie.
The Truth is, God created us in his image and He, the Creator, knows us more fully than any other person can ever know us. Being known by God fulfills our deep human need for intimacy. Loving God first recognizes that God first loved us. We are able to love others best when we first respond to God's intial act of love in Christ by loving God in Christ with all that we are - heart, soul, mind and strength. Our first desire must be to love God - all other desire must follow, including especially sexual desire.
[This wordy but brief answer touches on a number of issues that need to be discussed further, especially in regard to "failiure to find intimacy" and "dealing with sexual desire." There is also the issue of citing references which support what has been presented here. I will continue to consider what I have written, but will post it as is so to provide a timely response to this student's thoughtful reply in regard to marriage.]
Another student responded with a question concerning masturbation. My reply:
The difficulty with masturbation is not the physicality but the ideation that accompanies the physicality. Unfaithful fantasy is fornication. The logic of sex in the context of Christian faithfulness demands that one be careful in self-indulgent behavior. There can conceivably be a way to masturbate without unfaithful fantasy and without being overly self-indulgent, but one too often is too little concerned with being faithful when it comes to sexual behavior.
My objection to any sexual behavior is always based on whether or not such behavior is faithful. Sometimes the answer is obvious, such as whether one may engage in sex with a person not one's spouse; other times the answer is much less obvious, such as "how far it too far?"
Christian Ethics demands that one submit all one does to the Lordship of Jesus Christ. Faithful behavior manifest such submission; unfaithful behavior denies it. Thank God that His grace is sufficient to help us live our lives faithfully; because of God's grace, forgiveness is always available should we fail to faithfully follow the way of Christ. It is our responsibility to consider all we do in light of Christian truth, being always ready to repent should we realize any transgression.
The question of toleration comes up often in class discussion. My reply:
Toleration is the allowance of something which one does not otherwise find acceptable. One's toleration occurs in lieu of preventing that which contradicts one's own preference. To accept something is not the same as tolerating something.
I may tolerate some behavior for the sake of compromise, but I need not agree that what is tolerated should be accepted as appropriate behavior. To voice one's disagreement does not contradict toleration; in fact, voicing disagreement substantiates that one is tolerating rather than accepting something. To inhibit disgreement is itself intolerant.
Post a Comment