(Christopher West) Theology of The Body Explained PDF

THEOLOGY OF THE BODY
EXPLAINED
A Commentary on John Paul II's
"Gospel of the Body"
Christopher West
With a Foreword by
George Weigel
~line
BOOI(5 & M EDIA
Boston
Nihil Obstat: Rev. Msgr. Lorenzo M. Albacete, S.T.D.
Censor Deputatus
Imprimatur: +Most Reverend Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap .

Archbishop of Denver
February 27,2003
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

West, Christopher, 1969-
Theology of the body explained: a commentary on John Paul II 's
"gospel of the body" / Christopher West.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references.
ISBN 0-8198-7410-8 (pbk.)
1. John Paul II, Pope, 1920- Theology of the body. 2. Body,
Human-Religious aspects-Catholic Church. 3. Catholic
Church-Doctrines. I. Title.
BT741.2.J643 W47 2003
233',5-dc21
2003004876
The Scripture quotations contained herein are from the Revised Standard Version
Bible: Catholic Edition, copyright © 1965 and 1966 by the Division of Christian
Education of the National Council of Churches of Christ in the U.S.A. Used by
permission. All rights reserved.
English translation of the Catechism of the Catholic Church for the United States of
America copyright © 1994, United States Catholic Conference, Inc.-Libreria
Editrice Vaticana. Used with permission.
Cover design by Helen Rita Lane, FSP
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any
form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying,
recording or by any information storage and retrieval system without permission in
writing from the publisher.
Copyright © 2003, Christopher West

Printed and published in the U.S.A. by Pauline Books & Media, 50 Saint Paul's
Avenue, Boston, MA 02130-3491 .
www.pauline.org
Pauline Books & Media is the publishing house of the Daughters of St. Paul, an
international congregation of women religious serving the Church with the
communications media.
123 45 6 789 11 10 09 08 07 06 05 04 03
F or my brother,
Nathan Paul Gardner West
CONTENTS
Acknowledgments ..................................................... .. .. ........................................ xiii
Foreword .................. ... ...................... ............................................................... ......... xv
Preface ....... ...... ... ... ............. ...................................................................... .. .... ........... xvii
Prologue: The Human Body, Catholicism, and John Paul II ..... ... ... ..... I
l. The Gospel of the Body? .............. ........................ .. ........... ............... ,............ ...... ......... 2
2. Defining "Theology of the Body" ................................................................................ 4
3. The Link Between Theology and Anthropology ..... ......... ........................................... 8
4. The Nuptial Mystery ................................................................................................... l2
5. The Great Divorce .............................. .. .............. ........ ... ............................................. 19
6. The Deepest Substratum of Ethics and Culture ..... ............................... .. .................... 24
7. Healing the Rift ......................................... ...................................... ........................... 27
8. Wojtyla's Philosophical Project .................................................................................. 32
9. The Humanae Vita e Crisis .......................................................................................... 46
Prologue- In Review ......................................... ........... ,.. ,.............,........................,...... 53
PART I
WHO ARE WE?
ESTABLISHING AN ADEQUATE ANTHROPOLOGY
Cycle 1: Original Man
10. Christ Directs Us Back to "the Beginning" .............................................................. 61

11. Echoes of Our Original Experiences ................ .. .................................. .................... 64
vii
viri Contents
12. Solitude Prepares Man for Communion ......... ........ ,.....................,................ ........ ... 70
13. The Creation of Woman ............................ .. ..... .............. " ...................................... .. 74
14. Male-Female Communion: Icon of the Trinity .. ........................ ....................... .. .. .. 77
IS . Relationality and the Virginal Value of Man ............................ .................. ............. f( I
16. The Key to Biblical Anthropology .... .... ..... ......... ............. ............................. " ........ 8S
17. The Body: Witness to Gift and Love ................. .. ... " ...... ....... .. ................................ 93
18. The Nuptial Meaning of the Body ...... ............. .................... ..... ............................... 97
19. Chosen by Eternal Love ................................ ...................... " ................................ lUI
20. The Grace of Original Happiness ... ..... .................................................................. 104
21. Subjectivity and the Ethos of the Gift ................ .............. ..... .. ........ ...................... 109
22 . The Primordial Sacrament ....... ... ............................... ............. ,...... ........................ 11 3
23. The Deepest Essence of MaITied Life ................... ,................................... ............ 117
24. Life Refuses to Surrender ..................................... ...................... .. ......................... III
Original Man-In Review ....... .. ... .......... ................................................................ 125
Cycle 2: Historical Man
25. The New Ethos: A Living Morality .................................................. .. ............... .... 132
26. Original Sin and the Birth of Lust ............ ...... ............. .... ........ ...... ............. ........... 138
27 . The Dimensions of Shame .... .................................................. ....... .. ...................... 144
28. Lust Shatters the Original Communion of Persons ..... .......................................... 151
29. Living the Body Flows from the Heart .... .. .. ............. ............ ....... ......................... 155
30. Maintaining the Balance of the Gift ..................... .. ............ ,..... .. ..............,............ 160
31. Christ's Words and the Old Testament Ethos ................. ..................... .................. 163
32. Concupiscence and the Wisdom Literature .... ............... ........................ ................ 167
33. Lust and the Intentionality of Existence ......... ..... .. ....................... .... ..................... 172
34. Adulterating Sexual Union within Marriage ............. .. ....... .. ........................ ......... 176
35. Lived Morality and the Ethos of Human Practice ................................................. 181
36. The Interpretation of Suspicion .......... ......................... .......................................... 186
37. Grace, Faith, and Man's Real Possibilities ... .. ..... .. ...... ....... .......................... ...... ... 192
38. Longing for the True, Good, and Beautiful ............ .................... ........................... 194
39. Drawing Pure Waters from a Hidden Spring .......................................... .. ............. 199
40. The Perspective of the Whole Gospel ............................ " .................... ........ ... ..... . 20 I
41. Purity of Heart and Life According to the Spirit ......................... .. ..... ............ ....... 205
Contents ix
42. The Freedom for which Christ Has Set Us Free ........... ......................................... 211
43. An Adequate Image of Freedom and Purity ............ ........ .. .................................... 215
44. Purity Stems from Piety as a Gift of the Holy Spirit .......................... ....... ............ 217
45 . God's Glory Shining in the Body .............................. ....................................... ..." 222
46. The Most Suitable Education in Being Human ......... .................... ................ ........ 225
47 . Portraying the Naked Body in Art ...... .. ..... ..... .... .................. .... ... .......................... 231
Historical Man-In Review ......... .... ............................................. ...... .................. 236
Cycle 3: Eschatological Man
48. An Infinite Perspective of Life ................ ............." ......... ......." .............. ...... ......... 242
49. Anthropology of the ResUlTection .................................... " ................................... 245
50. Penetration of the Human by the Divine ............................................................... 249
51. The Body: Witness to the Eschatological Experience ..... ...................................... 253
52. The Eschatological Authenticity ofthe Gift ................ ...................................... .... 256
53. Fulfillment of the Nuptial Meaning ofthe Body ..................................... .............. 259
54. A Development of the Truth about Man .......... _.................................................... 263
55. St. Paul's Teaching on the Resurrection ..... .................................. .. ........ ......... ...... 265
Eschatological Man- In Review ..................................................... ...................... 270
PART II
How ARE WE TO LIVE?
ApPLYING AN ADEQUATE ANTHROPOLOGY
Cycle 4: Celibacy for the Kingdom
56. Some Make Themselves Eunuchs .. ............................... .. ........ .............................. 278

57. Continence, Spiritual Fruitfulness, and the Ethos of Redemption .... .. ............ ...... 28 1
58. Celibacy for the Kingdom Is an Exceptional Calling ....................... ...... ............... 285
59. Marriage and Celibacy Explain and Complete Each Other ............................. ...... 288
60. Celibacy Anticipates the Maximum Fullness of God's Bounty ............................ 292
61. Analysis ofSt. Paul's Teaching on Celibacy ....................................... .................. 295
62. Why Celibacy Is "Better" According to St. Paul .................... ............................... 298
63. The Redemption of the Body and the Hope of Every Day ......... .. ......................... 302
Celibacy for the Kingdom-In Review .. .............................._....... ............ ...... ...... 306
x Contents
Cycle 5: The Sacramentality of Marriage
64. Marriage and the "Great Mystery" of Ephesians ....... .......... ........ ......................... 310
65. The Body Enters the Definition of Sacrament ....................................................... 313
66. Reverence for Christ Must Inform the Love of Spouses ....................................... 317
67 . Carnal Love and the Language of Agape .............................................................. 321
68 . Baptism Expresses Christ's Spousal Love for the Church .................................... 325
69. Spousal Love and the Recognition of True Beauty ............................................... 328
70. Mystery, Sacrament, and the Climax of the Spousal Analogy ............................ .. 334
71. The Foundation of the Whole Sacramental Order ................................................. 337
72 . Christ Reveals the Mystery of Divine Love ........ ......................... ......................... 340
73. The Spousal Analogy Helps Penetrate the Essence of the Mystery ....... ..... .......... 343
74. Original Unity: A Fruit of Eternal Election in Christ ....................................... ..... 347
75 . Marriage Is the Central Point of the Sacrament of Creation ... ........ ...................... 349
76 . Marriage: Platform for the Actuation of God's Designs ....................................... 352
77. Sacrament of Creation Fulfilled in Sacrament of Redemption .............................. 355
78. Marriage: Prototype of All the Sacraments ........................................................... 359
79. An Adequate Anthropology and an Adequate Ethos ..... ...... .................................. 362
80 . Marriage Reveals the Salvific Will of God ............................................................ 366
81. Conjugal Union According to the Holy Spirit ..... ................................. ... .............. 369
82. The Fusion of Spousal and Redemptive Love .. .............. ............... ........................ 374
83. The Language of the Body and the Sacramental Sign .......................................... 378
84. The Prophetism of the Body ......................................... ......................................... 382
85 . Constituting the Sign in Love and Integrity .......................................................... 385
The Sacramentality of Marriage- In Review ... .................................................... 388
Cycle 6: Love and Fruitfulness
86. The Biblical Ode to Erotic Love ..... ...................................... ........ ....... .. .......... ..... 396
87. Integrating Eros and Agape ................................................................................... 398
88 . Mutual Entrustment and the Truth of the Person ..... ................. ............................ 40 I
89. Sacrificial Love Conquers Death ........................................................................... 406
90. Conjugal Life Becomes Liturgical ... _.... .................................... ........................... 408
91 Humal1ae Vitae and the Truth of the Sacramental Sign .......................................... 413
Contents xi
92. The Harmony of Authentic Love with Respect for Life ............... ................ ......... 419
93. Humanae Vitae: A Call to Liberation and Responsible Parenthood ...................... 425
94. The Natural Regulation of Births ................................................................. ......... 429
95. The Integral Vision of Natural Fertility Regulation .............................................. 435
96. Outline of an Authentic Marital Spirituality .......................................................... 439
97. The Role of Conjugal Love in the Life of Spouses .._..................... ...................... 442
98. Continence Is a Virtue Essential to Conjugal Love ............................................... 445
99. Continence Authenticates and Intensifies Marital Affection .................... .......... ... 449
100. The Church Is Convinced of the Truth of Humanae Vitae .. ........... .......... _ ........ 453
101. Chastity Lies at the Center of Marital Spirituality .......... ................. .................. 455
102. The Exceptional Significance of the Conjugal Act... ........................................... 458
103. Humanae Vitae and the Authentic Progress of Civilization .......................... ...... 464
Love and Fruitfulness-Tn Review .............. .... ................................................... 469
Epilogue: The Gospel of the Body and the New Evangelization .......... 475
104. The Antidote to the Culture of Death .................................................................. 476

105. Incarnating the Gospel Message ........................................................................... 479
106. The Church's Response to Modem Rationalism .................... ,............................ 484
Epilogue-In Review .......................... ........... ...... ............ ................... ....... ......... 492
Bibliography ................................. ............................... ...................... ..................... 495
Index ................................................... ....................................................................... 501

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I am grateful to the following men and women who have helped make
this book a reality:
Pope John Paul II, for the tremendous gift of his theology of the
body;
Mary Jane Rice, for first introducing me to the Pope's catechesis

on the body;
Steve Habisohn, for his steadfast moral support and for helping fi-
nance the sabbatical that enabled me to write this book;
all the staff at Pauline Books and Media, especially Sister

Marianne Lorraine, FSP, for her dedication to this project and for
her expert editing;
Monsignor Lorenzo Albacete, for all the wisdom he has passed on

to me, for his affirmation of my work, and for bringing his theo-
logical genius to bear in reviewing my manuscript;
Dr. David Schindler, for helping me better articulate the nature of

the spousal analogy and for providing various references for this
work;
George Weigel for writing the foreword;
Archbishop Chaput, for his support and encouragement of my "mis-

sion";
Jeanne Monahan and Jay Wonacott, for critiquing early drafts;
Father Richard Hogan, for critiquing the Prologue;
xiii
xiv Acknowledgments
Eric Scheidler, for his extensive help reviewing and restructuring

the initial manuscript;
Nathan West and Jessica Wunsch, for their research;
and Wendy West, for proofing the original text, adding feminine
insight, and for all her sacrifices during the three years it took me
to complete this project.
FOREWORD
Future generations will remember Pope John Paul II for many

things: his great personal witness to the truths of Christian faith; his epic
role in the collapse of communism; his ecumenical initiatives; his heal-
ing the wounds of centuries between Catholics and Jews. The list could
go on and on.
In writing Witness to Hope: The Biography oj Pope John Paul II, I
came to the conclusion that John Paul's longest-lasting theological contri-
bution to the Church and the world might well be something that very few
people have ever encountered: his innovative "theology of the body,"
which he laid out in 129 general audience addresses between 1979 and
1984. In my biography of the Pope, I described the "theology of the body"
as a bit of a theological time bomb, something that would explode within
the Church at some indeterminate point in the future with tremendous ef-
fect, reshaping the way Catholics think about our embodiedness as male
and female, our sexuality, our relationships with each other, our relation-
ship with God-even God himself. I also wrote that the dense, compact
audience addresses that make up the "theology of the body" needed ex-
plication for those who weren't specialists in biblical studies, theology,
or philosophy.
I am delighted that Christopher West has taken up that challenge in
Theology oj the Body Explained. With intellectual care, with the experi-
ence bred of long years of teaching this material in the classroom and the
parish, and taking account of his own experiences as a husband and father,
he explains each of lhe Pope's 129 addresses, showing how the meaning of
each address fits into a coherent whole. Christopher West also demon-
strates how the "theology of the body" is readily applicable to the quotid-
ian realities of marriage and family life. Teachers and students, priests and
pastoral workers, couples preparing for marriage, couples looking to
xv
xvi Foreword
deepen their marriages, and couples reflecting back on the meaning of their
venerable marriages will all find much here to think about and pray over.
In his great encyclical, Veritatis Splendor, John Paul II takes the story
of Christ's dialogue with the rich young man (Mt 19: 16-22) as the para-
digm of the Christian moral life. What good must I do, the young man
asks, in order to have eternal life? For that is the purpose of the moral life:
to fit us for beatitude, to make us the kind of people who can live with God
forever. It takes a special kind of people to do that-in a word, it takes
saints. And saints are what we all must become, if we are to realize our
baptismal destiny. The "theology of the body" shows us how sexual love
within the bonds of faithful and fruitful marriage is a path to sanctity-and
thus a path to God and to eternal life.
A sex-saturated culture imagines that the sexual revolution has been
liberating. The opposite is the truth: men and women chained to their ap-
petites and passions are not free. What can liberate us from that kind of
bondage? The "theology of the body" answers the question: loving truly,
loving chastely, loving in ways that are radically life-giving and life-af-
firming rather than life-avoiding or life-denying. Some will, no doubt, find
it odd that the Catholic Church takes human sexuality far more seriously
than the editors of Playboy and Cosmopolitan. But that's the plain truth
of the matter. And the "theology of the body" shows why and how that's
the case.
Catholics should remember that the "theology ofthe body" is notfor-
Catholics-only. John Paul II has made a tremendous contribution to human
thought, and to the possibility of human happiness, with these ground-
breaking audience addresses. So I wish for Christopher West's book the
widest possible audience. Catholics should share it with other Catholics, to
be sure. But Catholics should also share it with Protestant, Orthodox, Jew-
ish, Muslim, and even agnostic friends. The responses, especially among
women, may be surprising-happily surprising.
The great struggle of the twenty-first century, like the twentieth, will
be the struggle to defend and promote the dignity of the human person.
John Paul II's "theology of the body" is a tremendous resource for all
those who fight that good fight. Christopher West has put us in his debt by
making the "theology of the body" available to a wide-and, I hope, ap-
prec iati ve-readershi p.
George Weigel
PREFACE
I remember October 16, 1978 very clearly. I was in the third grade at
Sacred Heart School in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. The Bishop had given a
holy card of the "smiling Pope" (John Paul I) to all the students in the dio-
cese just two weeks earlier. Now, after the pope's sudden death, we were
sitting in class awaiting news of his successor.
The following scene is seared in my memory. Our teacher's aid, Sis-
ter Eugene-a quiet, elderly nun who must have had some Slavic blood in
her-had been keeping vigil in front of the television across the hall. In a
loud flurry, she burst into our classroom with eyes and hands raised to
heaven screaming at the top of her lungs, "He s Polish! He s Polish! He s
Pooooo/-ish! "
Little did I know then what an impact this Polish Pope would have on
my life. Although I would not discover it for another decade and a half, a
series of talks that John Paul began within the first year of his pontificate
would forever change the way I view the universe and my place within it.
During the same time John Paul II presented his catechesis on God's
glorious plan for the body and sexuality, I was being groomed in the
sexual lies promoted within our culture. After several years of unchaste
living, I returned to my faith with multiple questions about God's plan for
man and woman's relationship. Looking for answers, I began a prayerful
study of the Scriptural texts on marriage and sexuality. Over the course of
about two years of intense study, a grand "nuptial vision" began to emerge.
The spousal imagery of the Scriptures brought my faith to life, shedding
light on thc cntirc mystery of man and woman's creation, fall, and redemp-
tion in Christ. Moreover, this "nuptial vision" was setting mefree from the
lies that had formed me growing up. I was on fire. Expecting an enthusias-
tic response, I began sharing this vision with others. Instead, Christians I
considered more learned than I often responded with blank stares or worse.
xvii
xviii Preface
In early fall of 1993, a committed Catholic woman who taught at my

sister's high school came to dinner, and I hesitantly decided to test some of
my "nuptial vision" on her. To my surprise, she immediately replied, "You
must have read the Pope's theology of the body." "What's that?" I probed.
"Gosh, I thought you'd already read it. What you're saying sounds like the
Pope." I pressed her, "What is this theology of the body? Where can I get
it?" She told me that the Daughters of st. Paul published it in four vol-
umes (since 1997 it has been available in one volume).
I devoured the entire catechesis in a matter of weeks. Not only did I
find abundant confirmation of what I had learned in my own study, the
Pope's reflections took me to a new level altogether. I intuited that these
four little volumes contained a revolution for the Church-the answer to
the crisis of our times. I knew then I was going to spend the rest of my life
studying the Pope's thought and sharing it with others. When I learned that
the Pope had established a theological institute for the specific purpose of
exploring the "nuptial mystery," there was no question where I would go
for graduate studies.
Today, more and more people are hearing about the theology of the
body. Still, for the vast majority of Christians, the actual content of the
Pope's catechesis remains an untapped treasure. Why? As papal biogra-
pher George Weigel observes, "The density of John Paul's material is one
factor; a secondary literature capable of 'translating' John Paul's [theology
of the body] into more accessible categories and vocabulary is badly
needed."1 This book attempts just that. However, as you can tell from its
size, this is not a Reader s Digest version. While smaller-scale efforts are
also needed, my goal is to unpack the entire catechesis from start to finish.
After setting the stage in the prologue, I follow the 129 addresses
very closely, explaining the Pope's method, his train ofthought, his schol-
arly vocabulary, and his original ideas and concepts. Points of interest and
application are set aside in gray boxes to distinguish them from my exposi-
tion of the actual catechesis. I also reference the Catechism of the Catholic
Church extensively to demonstrate the organic relationship of the theology
of the body with the whole of Catholic Faith. Furthermore, while I de-
signed this book to stand alone, I encourage those with the aptitUde to read
it in tandem with the Holy Father's addresses, weighing all that I say
against the actual text.
By design, and by necessity of my own limitations, this is not the
work of a stellar, academic theologian. Rather, it is the work of a teacher
and a catechist trained in theology with an ardent desire to extend the lib-
I. Witness to Hope (New York, NY: Harper Collins, 1999), p. 343 .

Preface xix
erating message of the Pope's catechesis beyond the realms of academia.

Some scholars, too, seem to have difficulties understanding John Paul II's
project. If this book is of service to them, I will be delighted. But scholars
will forgive me, I hope, if I am not always as rigorous as they might be in
my exposition of the Pope's thought. At the same time, those not trained in
theology will forgive me, I hope, if at any point I fail to bring John Paul's
dense teaching down to their level. Popularizing the Pope's theology ofthe
body is virtually uncharted territory. Finding the best language, images,
and anecdotes with which to do so remains a process of trial and error.
Readers should also know that, while deeply rooted in the tradition,
John Paul's catechesis on the body brings an authentic and sometimes
even daring development of thinking. Such developments always afford a
creative tension in the Church as scholars, catechists, and laity alike seek
to understand them and apply them in Christian life. Differences in interpre-
tation and the debates they engender are a healthy part of this process. I, like
every interpreter of the Pope's thought, bring my own personal perspectives,
gifts, and shortcomings to the table. As St. Paul says, "test everything; hold
fast to what is good" (1 Thess 5:21).
Ultimately, no human words can do justice to the sacred mystelY re-
vealed by the human body and by man and woman's communion in "one
flesh." As St. Paul says, this is a "great mystery" that refers to Christ and
the Church (see Eph 5:31-32). If the human words contained in this book
provide only a glimmer into the "great mystery" of that one divine Word,
they will have served their purpose. Glimmers are all we get on this side of
eternity. But they are enough to light a burning fire of hope within us for
the consummation of the "Marriage of the Lamb." Let it be, Lord, accord-
ing to your Word. Amen.
Christopher West
Prologue
The Human Body, Catholicism, and John Paul II
Theological reflection on the human body and sexuality has a check-

ered past. On the one hand, throughout history Christian thinkers have
contributed extensively to an integral understanding ofthe goodness of the
body and valiantly fought heresies to the contrary. On the other hand, one
can find unflattering and even contemptuous treatments of the body and
sexuality in the writings of numerous churchmen. John Paul II's "theology
of the body" builds on the positive foundations of the past and definitively
corrects the "suspicion toward the body" that has plagued many sons and
daughters of the Church.
The fact that it has taken two thousand years of Christian reflection to
arrive at such a winning theology of the human body attests to the diffi-
culty of the task. Only now has history provided the right soil for such a
revolutionary theology to take root and blossom. The turbulence of the
twentieth century itself marked the beginning of a "new passover" of sorts
for the Church and humanity. Passover implies new life, but it also implies
death. The century that began with the hope of unlimited progress ended
as the bloodiest of all centuries. Its first half produced two world wars and
the deadliest totalitarian regimes in history. Its second half spawned fears
of global destruction by nuclear war and saw the West jettison the sexual
mores that-by upholding marriage and the family-place human society
on its only firm foundation. Without doubt, the sexual revolution's subse-
quent "culture of death" brought far more carnage than the warfare and
death camps that reddened the landscape of the bloodiest century.
The "signs of the times" show that we stand at a critical moment in the
human drama. The many negative factors of today's world can breed pessi-
mism. But John Paul II insists that "this feeling is unjustified: we have faith
in God our Father and Lord and in his mercy.... God is preparing a great
springtime for Christianity, and we can already see its first signs."1 Human-
1. Redemptoris Missio, n. 86.

2 THEOLOGY OF THE BODY EXPLAINED
ity must now cross the "threshold of hope." We must now "passover" from a
culture of death to a culture of life. Only in this context can we understand
the full significance of John Paul II's theology of the body.
1. The Gospel of the Body?

We are familiar with the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.
What does it mean to speak of the "Gospel of the body"? It means that in
some way the human body is a sign and instrument of the same message
of our salvation in Christ. From the first pages of Genesis, human embodi-
ment and the call of man and woman to unite in "one flesh" signifies and
foreshadows the mystery of Christ (see Eph 5:31-32).
A. Encounter with the Living, Incarnate Christ

Christ's body, above all, justifies the expression "the Gospel of the
body." Christ's body conceived of a virgin, born in a stable in Bethlehem,
circumcised on the eighth day, raised by Mary and Joseph, baptized in the
Jordan river, transfigured on the mountain, "given up for us" in his passion
and death, risen in glory, ascended to the Father and participating eternally
in the life of the Trinity-the story of this body and the spiritual mystery it
points to is the Gospel,2 And everybody that comes into the world is destined
to share in this Gospel by becoming "one body," one spirit with Christ.
This is the deepest meaning of our creation as sexually embodied
persons-we are destined for union with the God who, himself, has taken
on a body. For the body is meant for the Lord, and the Lord is meant for
the body (see 1 Cor 6: 13). As the Second Vatican Council teaches: "The
truth is that only in the mystery of the incarnate Word does the mystery of
man3 take on light. For Adam, the first man, was a figure of him who was
to come, namely Christ the Lord. Christ, the final Adam, by the revelation
of the mystery of the Father and his love, fully reveals man to himself and
makes his supreme calling clear."4 This is John Paul II's anthem. And his
theology of the body, one might say, is nothing but an extended commen-
2. See Catechism of the Catholic Church eCCC), n. 515.

3. For the sake of consistency with the Pope's catechesis and other magisterial docu-
ments, "man" is to be understood as inclusive of the entire human family throughout this
book unless the context indicates only the male. Understanding "man" in this sense sheds
important light on John Paul's biblical exegesis and on the equal dignity he accords the
sexes.
4. Gaudium et Spes, n. 22.
Prologue 3
tary on this fundamental truth: Christ fully reveals man to himself through
the revelation-in his body-of the mystery of the Father and his love.
"The richest source for knowledge of the body is the Word made
flesh."5 Therefore, from start to finish, John Paul's theology of the body
calls us to encounter the living, Incarnate Christ and to ponder how his
body reveals the meaning of our bodies. Yet, if we are to do so, we need
more than ever to hear the Lord's words, so often repeated by John Paul II
-"Be not afraid!"
B. Perfect Love Casts Out Fear

In our fallen world, the naked body has become a symbol of licen-
tiousness and indignity. Guided by Christ's words, John Paul challenges us
to realize that "from the beginning it was not so" (Mt 19:8). Before sin, the
naked body witnessed to "the glory of God," which, according to St.
Irenaeus' familiar expression, "is man fully alive." After sin-having ac-
cepted the perennial deception that God is not to be trusted, that God is not
love-embodiment and nakedness is now linked to a crippling fear: "I was
afi'aid, because I was naked; and I hid myself' (Gen 3:10).
As St. Francis recognized in his slogan "Nudus sequi nudum Chris-
tum" ("Naked to follow the naked Christ"), the Gospel calls us to a relation-
ship with the Father liberated from Adam's fear. Naked before the Father in
his birth and death, the New Adam witnesses to the Father's "perfect love"
which "casts out fear" (1 Jn 4: 18). The "naked Christ" vanquishes the lie
that spawns fear. As St. Cyril of Jerusalem triumphantly proclaims, Christ
"was nailed naked to the Cross, and by his very nudity defeated the princi-
palities and powers, dragging them into his triumphal cortege."6
Adam's fear marks an utter tragedy: the loss of original holiness, the
loss of God's "full life" in man. Yet "Jesus came to restore creation to the
purity of its origins."7 He came so that we might again have life, and have
it to the full (see Jn 10: 10). This does not mean that Christian men and
women are suddenly empowered to be naked without shame. Even after
Baptism the effects of sin remain, as the ongoing battle for purity point-
edly attests. s This inner struggle will not cease until the resulTection. Yet,
as the Catechism teaches, "The Holy Spirit enables one whom the water of
Baptism has regenerated to imiLaLe Lht: puriLy uf ChrisL. "9 Therefore, "Even
5. Letter to Families, n. 19.

6. Mystagogical Catechesis, 2:2.
7. CCC, n. 2336.
8. See CCC, nn. 978, 1226, 1426.
9. CCC, n. 2345.
now [purity of heart] enables us to see according to God ... ; it lets us per-
ceive the human body-ours and our neighbor's-as a temple of the Holy
Spirit, a manifestation of divine beauty."lo
Helping men and women understand, live, and experience their bod-
ies as "a manifestation of divine beauty" is the goal of John Paul's cate-
chesis. The body not only speaks to the mystery of man. It also speaks to
the mystery of God. The body is a theology. This is the "good news," the
gospel of the body.
2. Defining "Theology of the Body"

Since Pope Pius IX began the custom in the 1870s, the weekly "gen-
eral audience" has provided one of the main platforms for the pope to ad-
dress his flock. John Paul II was the first pope, however, to use his
Wednesday general audiences to develop a systematic catechesis on a
given topic. Based on his extensive pastoral and ecclesial experience, he
saw that the most pressing catechetical need was to develop an extended
biblical theology of marriage and sexual love. Hence, on September 5,
1979 John Paul began the first and perhaps most important catechetical
project of his pontificate. Over five years later, on November 28, 1984, he
delivered the 129 1h and final address" in the catechesis he gave the work-
ing title "theology of the body. "12
10. CCC, n. 2519.

11. Papal travels and the assassination attempt in May 1981 interrupted the series
which was also suspended from February 9,1983 to May 23,1984 during the Holy Year
of the Redemption.
12. These 129 addresses were first published weekly in the Vatican newspaper
L 'Osservatore Romano. The official English translation was subsequently published by
the Daughters of St. Paul in four volumes: Original Unity of Man and Woman (1981);
Blessed Are the Pure of Heart (1983); The Theology of Marriage and Celibacy (1986);
and Reflections on Humanae Vitae (1984). These are no longer in print. However, the
Daughters of St. Paul later published a one-volume edition under the title The Theology of
the Body: Human Love in the Divine Plan (1997). This edition was copyedited to address
some awkwardness in the Vatican translation. It makes for easier reading overall, but I
prefer the "feel" of the original, which retains the Pope's signature use of quotation marks
and italics, so in this work I will quote from that version. For ease of reference, quotes
will be cited by the date of the audience and by the page numbers of the one-volume work
(abbreviated TB). However, readers should be aware that differences exist when referring
to the copyedited edition.
Prologue 5
One of the Pope's main goals in his catechesis was to provide a bibli-
cal defense of the Church's sexual ethic that would resonate with the mod-
em world. Inadequate, legalistic formulations of moral theology coupled
with the disparaging treatment of sexual matters by some previous church-
men had led many people to reject the Church's teaching. John Paul
thought the entire question needed to be reframed. Instead of asking:
"How far can I go before I break the law?" we need to ask, "What does it
mean to be human?" "What does it mean to love?" "Why did God make
me male or female?" "Why did God create sex in the first placeT'
Thus, through an intense reflection on the Scriptures, specifically the
words of Christ regarding human embodiment and erotic desire, John Paul
set out in the first half of his catechesis to develop an "adequate anthropol-
ogy"-that is, a thorough understanding of who man is as God created
him to be. Embodiment as male and female is the basis of this anthropol-
ogy which is also theological since man is made in God's image as male
and female. The term "theology of the body" does not refer to "part" of a
theological anthropology, as if we needed to add to this a "theology of the
soul." The novelty of the Pope's project lies in the assertion that an "ad-
equate anthropology" must be a theology of the body. As the Pope says,
"When we speak of the meaning of the body, we refer in the first place to
the full awareness of the human being."I)
In the second half of his catechesis John Paul specifically applies his
theological anthropology to the moral questions of how man is to live the
truth of his own embodiment. He examines this first in terms of life-voca-
tion and then provides a new, affirming context for understanding the
Christian sexual ethic.
A. The Pope s Thesis

The length of this catechesis and its place as the inaugural teaching
project of John Paul II's pontificate points to its fundamental significance.
In fact, the theological vision detailed in these addresses informs all his
subsequent papal teachings. We have not fully penetrated the teachings of
John Paul II if we have not penetrated his theology of the body.
This is a formidable task. These 129 catechetical addresses constitute
a dense tome. While this does not mean that only the elite can understand
John Paul's teaching, it does mean that those who wish to understand it
and those who present it must make a diligent effort if the Pope's words
are to become bread broken for all.
13.6/25/80, TB 124.
For starters, many people feel unfamiliar and even uncomfortable

with the Pope's emphasis on the human body. They expect religious in-
struction to emphasize the "spiritual" realm. For John Paul, this is a false
dichotomy. Without question, the spirit has an ontological priority. Yet, as
the Catechism relates, "As a being at once body and spirit, man expresses
and perceives spiritual realities through physical signs and symbols. As a
social being, man needs signs and symbols to communicate with others .
... The same holds true for his relationship with God."'4
The human body is the pre-eminent and primordial "sign" of the ulti-
mate spiritual reality. John Paul wants to study the human body from this
perspective- not as a biological organism, but as a theology, as a sign of
the spiritual and divine mystery. In the Christian sense, "mystery" does not
indicate a puzzle to be solved. It indicates the hidden reality and plan of
God. Although man is forever seeking this mystery, he cannot discover it
on his own. The divine mystery is invisible, intangible, incommunicable,
ineffable. It is so far "beyond" man that the only way man can possibly
encounter it is if the Mystery chooses to reveal himself. This is what
Christianity is. If man desires to find God, God also desires to reveal his
mystery to man. IS He initiates this revelation from the beginning by cre-
ating us as embodied persons, as male and female in his own image. Em-
bodiment itself-as the Incarnation will attest- is, therefore, a kind of
divine revelation.
The Pope's entire catechesis hinges on this fundamental truth. So it is
important from the start to clarify what we mean (and do not mean) by
speaking of the human body as a "sign" of the divine mystery. A sign is
something that points us to a reality beyond itself and, in some way, makes
that transcendent reality present to us. Words themselves are nothing but
signs. When the letters a-p-p-I-e are put together, they signify a reality
which exceeds and transcends those letters. Yet, in signifying that tran-
scendent reality, those letters "present" that reality to us. We cannot reduce
the apple to the letters which signify it. Yet we need the word "apple" in
order to speak about the reality this word signifies.
Similarly, the human body is a sign of a spiritual and divine reality
which infinitely exceeds and transcends the body itself. Yet, in signifying
that transcendent reality, the body in some way "presents" the spiritual and
divine reality to us. As John Paul says, "In this sign-and through this
sign-God gives himself to man in his transcendent truth and in his love."'6
14. CCC, n. 1146.

15. See CCC, nn. 35, 50.
16.7/28/82, TB 306.
Prologue 7
We cannot reduce the spiritual and divine mystery to its bodily sign. Nor
does the body afford a total clearing of the mystery it signifies. Yet, as hu-
man beings, we need the sign of the body in order to speak about the mys-
tery of God's self-revelation.
"The body, in fact, and it alone," John Paul says, "is capable of mak-
ing visible what is invisible: the spiritual and divine. It was created to
transfer into the visible reality of the world, the mystery hidden since time
immemorial in God, and thus to be a sign of it."17 This is the Pope's thesis
statement, the brush with which he paints his entire catechesis. This is
why he speaks of a theology of the body. Through the veil of a sign, the
human body makes visible the invisible, makes touchable the intangible,
communicates the incommunicable. The human body "speaks" of the in-
effable, whispering to us something of the deepest secret hidden in God
from all eternity.
What is this secret? It is the mystery of Trinitarian Life and Love-of
Trinitarian Communion-and the plan "hidden for ages in God" (Eph 3:9)
that man is destined in Christ to share in this eternal exchange. I S This is
what the body stammers to proclaim; this is the body's mysterious "lan-
guage." According to John Paul's catechesis, it is specifically the visible
beauty and mystery of sexual difference and the call of man and woman to
communion that enables us to understand the human body in this way.
"The sacrament, as a visible sign, is constituted with man," the Pope says,
"by means of his 'visible' masculinity and femininity." In this context "we
understand fully the words that constitute the sacrament of marriage,
present in Genesis 2:24 ('A man leaves his father and his mother and
cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh')."'9 From the beginning,
the "great mystery" of man and woman's communion in "one flesh" fore-
shadows the infinitely greater mystery of Christ's communion with the
Church (see Eph 5:31-32). Communion with Christ-to which every hu-
man being is destined-is a pre-eminently spiritual mystery. Yet this spiri-
tual mystery has literally taken on flesh.
B. Epiphany of the Body

Because of sin, we all have blurred vision when it comes to reading
this theological language of the body. We know the body says sumething,
something we all have a deep hunger to know, understand and experience.
17. 2/20/80, TB 76.

18. See CCC, ll. 221.
19.2/20/80, TB 76.
But we need an epiphany to realize that that "something" is the "great

mystery" of Christ and his Church.
The following experience brought this home to me. I had always
been drawn to a beautiful old chapel at the seminary in the Archdiocese of
Denver where I teach. One day I overheard a tour guide explain the rich
symbolism of the architecture. The chapel, built in the shape of a cross,
has an elaborate chandelier representing Christ as "light of the world,"
which hangs at the place of Jesus' head on this cross. Twelve pillars in the
nave represent the twelve Apostles, and seven arches between these pillars
represent the seven sacraments. Every detail has a meaning. The architect
had designed this chapel in the lines and curves of its bricks and mortar to
proclaim the "great mystery" of Christ and the Church. Although this had
drawn me to it, I needed to have someone who understood the chapel's
meaning explain it. When he did, it was like putting on a new pair of
glasses. When he did-epiphany!
The analogy with the chapel is more pertinent than one might first
think. The human body itself is a chapel of sorts-a "temple of the Holy
Spirit." The divine Architect designed our male and female bodies in the
very lines and curves of our flesh and bones to proclaim the mystery of
Christ and his life-giving union with the Church. This, ultimately, whether
we realize it or not, is why we are all drawn to the human body-why we
are deeply stirred by the mystery of its masculine and feminine beauty and
why we all yearn for intimacy and communion. Sin has blurred our vision.
We are dyslexic and sometimes even illiterate when it comes to reading
this "language." We are even prone at times to desecrate this holy temple
because of our blindness. In some sense, each one of us is the blind man in
the Gospel who must cry out, "Jesus, son of David, have mercy on me! I
want to see!" John Paul's theology of the body is like a pair of reading
glasses that brings the Word proclaimed by the body into focus. With these
glasses, we are able to see the body for what it is-a proclamation of the
"great mystery" of Christ and the Church.
3. The Link Between Theology and Anthropology

John Paul II's theological vision of the body can seem almost too
grand. How could something so "earthy" and human be meant to reveal
something so heavenly and divine? As the phrase "theology of the body"
indicates, John Paul wants to help us embrace the profound link between
theology (the study of God) and anthropology (the study of man). John
Paul observes in one of his early encyclicals that many currents of thought
both in the past and at the present tend to separate theology and anthropol-
Prologue 9
ogy and even set them in opposition. The Church, however, "seeks to link
them up in human history in a deep and organic way."20 In fact, the Holy
Father states that a renewed emphasis on this theology-anthropology link
is perhaps the most important contribution of the Second Vatican Council.
Hence, he insists that "we must act upon this principle with faith, with an
open mind and with all our heart."21
A. The Sacramentality of the Body

John Paul does precisely this throughout his catechesis on the body.
By virtue of the Incarnation, the human body is the link between theology
and anthropology. As the Holy Father says, Christ's body is "a tabernacle
of glory... where the divine and the human meet in an embrace that can
never be separated."22 By pressing into this link "with faith, an open mind,
and all his heart," John Paul pushes the Catholic sacramental imagination
to new heights. He demonstrates that a courageous biblical reflection on
the body not only enables us to penetrate the essence of the human, but
also to glimpse the mystery of the divine. By embracing our embodiment,
we become poised and ready to receive the eternal and utterly gratuitous
gift of divine life. For in Christ "the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily"
(Col 2:9). In the Incarnate Christ we see "the human face of God and the
divine face of man. "23
Therefore John Paul II's treatment of the body as a theology should
not surprise us. As he puts it: "Through the fact that the Word of God
became flesh the body entered theology... through the main door."24 Else-
where the Pope writes: "The mystery of the Incarnation lays the founda-
tions for an anthropology which, reaching beyond its own limitations and
contradictions, moves toward God himself, indeed toward the goal of
'divinization. "'25 Because of the Incarnation, St. John can proclaim it is
that "which we have heard," that "which we have seen with our eyes," that
"which we have touched with our hands" that we proclaim to you concern-
ing the Word of life. And that life was made visible (see 1 Jn 1-3).
This making visible of the invisible is what the Pope means by
speaking of the sacrament, or "sacramentality," of the body. This is obvi-
20. Dives in Misericordia. n. 1.

21. Ibid.
22. Orientale Lumen, n. 15.
23. Ecclesia in America, n. 67.
24.4/2/80, TB 89.
25. Novo Millennia Ineunte, n. 23 .
ously a broader meaning of the word than the sense in which we speak of
the seven sacraments (we will clarify this distinction later). The body, in
this broader sense, is the "sacrament" of the person because it makes the
invisible reality of the person visible. Furthermore, in Christ, his body be-
comes the "sacrament" of the divine person of the Word. 26 The Catechism
teaches that "in the body of Jesus 'we see our God made visible and so are
caught up in love of the God we cannot see.' The individual characteristics
of Christ's body express the divine person of God's Son."27 "In his soul as
in his body, Christ thus expresses humanly the divine ways of the Trin-
ity."28 God "has made himself visible in the flesh."29 Therefore, as Christ
himself tells us, with the help of the Holy Spirit, those who have seen
Christ have seen the Father (see Jn 14:9).
God's Trinitarian mystery revealed in human flesh; theology of the
body-this is the very "logic" of Christianity. It is also the particular scan-
dal of Christianity.
B. The Scandal of the Body

The paradox and implications of an enfleshed God never fail to con-
found the human heart. If God himself took on a body, this would imply
not only a blessing of the highest degree upon the whole physical world; it
would also imply the divinization in some sense of human flesh-which
necessarily includes human sexuality. This may seem like too much to ac-
cept. A phantom deity is much more tenable and, let us be honest, much
more becoming than a God with a human body-a male body which was,
as the patristic saying goes, "complete in all the parts of a man."
A suspicion toward the physical world and discomfort with all things
sexual is by no means a neurosis induced by Christianity. It hangs like a
dark shadow over all human experience. 3o Like the rest of humanity,
Christians have been and still are affected and even infected by it. Through
the centuries the Church has defended the goodness of the physical world
and the sacredness of the human body against many heresiesY The
26. See CCC, n. 515.

27. Ibid., n. 477.
28. Ibid., n. 470.
29. Ibid., n. 1159.
30. For an excellent treatment of this, see the chapter entitled "Flight from Sex" in
Christopher Derrick's book Sex & Sacredness (San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 1982).
31. See CCC, n. 299.
Prologue 11
Church still struggles today to counter the heretical "spirit good-body bad"
dichotomy which many people assume to be orthodox Christian belief.
Christianity does not reject the body! Quite the contrary-Christian-
ity acknowledges that God has raised human flesh to the highest heights of
heaven, and Christians believe this to be God's plan for everybody. Chris-
tians are those who face squarely the implications and the scandal of an
incarnate God and proclaim: "I believe" (credo). The Catholic Church re-
mains forever immersed in wonder at this paradox, honoring and praising
the womb that bore him and the breasts he sucked (see Lk 11:27). In fact,
Catholics believe that Jesus' male body and Mary's female body are al-
ready dwelling in those heavenly heights. 32 In a virtual "ode to the flesh,"
the Catechism proclaims: "'The flesh is the hinge of salvation. ' 33 We be-
lieve in God who is creator of the flesh; we believe in the Word made flesh
in order to redeem the flesh; we believe in the resurrection of the flesh, the
fulfillment of both the creation and the redemption of the f1esh."34
Suspicion toward the body, sexuality, and the material world is not
only alien to authentic Catholic belief, but is its very antithesis. 35 Catholics
(and members of other sacramental Churches) encounter God not through
some super-spiritual reality, but through their bodies and the elements of
the material world: through bathing the body with water; anointing the
body with oil; eating and drinking the body and blood of Christ; confess-
ing with one's own tongue; laying on of hands; and yes, through that real-
ity by which a man and woman join their lives together so intimately as to
be "one flesh."36
According to John Paul, marriage is not just one of the seven sacra-
ments. Insofar as marriage points us "from the beginning" to the infinitely
greater and transcendent mystery of Christ's union with the Church, it is
the foundation of the entire sacramental order.37 Marriage is the prototype,
in some sense, of all of the sacraments 38 since each has as its aim to unite
us with Christ our Bridegroom in a fruitful and indissoluble union of love.
This earthy, nuptial symbolism is imbedded in the Catholic imagination
and permeates John Paul's theology of the body.
32. See CCC. nn. 648,659, 966.

33. Tertullian, De res. 8,2: PL 2, 852 .
34. CCC, n. 1015 .
35. See 10/29/80, TB 168.
36. See CCC, nn. 1084, 1113 .
37. See 9/29182, TB 332-333.
38. See 10/20/82, TB 339.
4. The Nuptial Mystery

Scripture uses many images to describe the mystery of God's rela-
tionship with humanity: father and son, king and subjects, bridegroom and
bride, shepherd and sheep, vine and branches, head and body. Each has its
own valuable place. But only one of these images constitutes a sacrament
that efficaciously communicates the mystery it signifies: the nuptial im-
age. 39 The Scriptures use this image more than any other. The greatest
mystics also favor it. John Paul, deeply imbued with Carmelite mysticism,
shares this nuptial favoritism .
Without intending to undermine other theological traditions in any
way (they are all vital to the universality of the Church), the Holy Father
says that nuptial imagery "contains in itself a characteristic of the mystery
which is not directly emphasized ... by any other analogy used in the Bi-
ble."40 Of course, as John Paul also points out, "analogy" always indicates,
at the same time, both similarity and substantial dissimilarity.41 "It is obvi-
ous that the analogy of earthly... spousal love cannot provide an adequate
and complete understanding of that absolute transcendent Reality which is
the divine mystery.... The mystery remains transcendent in regard to this
analogy as in regard to any other analogy, whereby we seek to express it in
human language."42 Hence, all analogies limp in their attempts to commu-
nicate the incommunicable. Yet, speaking of marriage and the family, John
Paul states, "In this entire world there is not a more perfect, more com-
plete image of God, Unity and Community. There is no other human real-
ity which corresponds more, humanly speaking, to that divine mystery."43
In other words, if all analogies are inadequate, John Paul believes the
spousal analogy is the least inadequate because within "the very essence
of marriage a particle of the mystery is captured. Otherwise the entire
analogy would hang suspended in a void."44
Throughout his catechesis, the Pope wants to explore this "particle"
of the mystery found in the nuptial relationship. He wants to break it open,
penetrate it, and unfold it. Yet even if we focus on the similarity within the
spousal analogy, we must carefully maintain the greater dissimilarity be-
39. See CCC, nn. 757, 772, 796, 808, 823, 867, 1089.
40. 9/29/82, TB 331.
41. See 7/30/80, TB 129.
42. 9/29/82, TB 330.
43. Homily on the Feast of the Holy Family, December 30,1988.
44.8/18/82, TB 313.
Prologue 13
tween human-spousal communion and divine-Christian communion.

Without this recognition, there is a danger of moving too continuously
from creaturely life to divine life. This does not mean the analogy is ex-
trinsic. It only means that throughout our analysis of the spousal analogy,
we must always respect the mysterious and infinite difference between
God and his creatures. 45 We must avoid every tendency to reduce the ulti-
mate divine reality to its bodily sign. In fact, the human-spousal analogy is
always a matter ultimately of a divine-Christian "katalogy." This means
that the movement upwards ("ana") from the creature to God implies a
prior downward ("kata") movement from God to the creature. In other
words, theology can be linked with anthropology only because God can
(and in the Person of the Word did) humble himself and "come down" to
our level. Without this divine-Christian "katalogy," we could not cross the
infinite abyss and "go up" to God's level. In such case it would be almost
meaningless to apply the human-spousal analogy to divine life. 46
A. Nuptiality Embraces the Universe

In a word, nuptial love indicates the total gift of self. Penetrating fur-
ther, the mystery of "nuptiality" rests on three interrelated dynamisms: the
complementarity of sexual difference or "otherness"47; the call to com-
munion through the self-giving love to which this summons us; and the fe-
cundity to which this communion leads. 48 According to God's original
plan, the paradigmatic expression of this nuptiality is found in Genesis
2:24-"the two shall become one flesh." This union, in tum, in some way
sheds light on all genuine expressions of love. As the Pontifical Council
for the Family expresses, "Every form of love will always bear this mas-
culine and feminine character. "49
Nuptiality is a permanent dimension of love since all love entails
some sort of complementarity ("otherness"), mutual self-giving, and fruit-
fulness. The eternal prototype is found in the Trinity itself: in the God who
45. See CCC, nn. 42, 43, 212, 300, 370, 2779.
46. My thanks to Dr. Uavid Schindler for helping me articulate this important point.
47. Since the body reveals the interior mystery of the person, sexual complemen-
tarity cannot be reduced to biological complementarity. It refers to the whole mystery of
man and woman as incarnate persons.
48 . See Angelo Scola, "The Nuptial Mystery at the Heart of the Church," Communio
(Winter 1998): pp. 631-662.
49. The Truth & Meaning ofHuman Sexuality, n. 10.
is love, in the God who is an eternal life-giving Communion of Persons.

Of course we cannot speak of sexual difference and communion in the in-
finitely transcendent, Uncreated mystery of God. As the Catechism ob-
serves, "In no way is God in man's image .... God is pure spirit in which
there is no place for the difference between the sexes. But the respective
'perfections' of man and woman reflect something of the infinite perfec-
tion of God. "50 We might say that male-female "otherness" and the call to
fruitful communion is an "echo" in the created order of the transcendent
mystery of "otherness," communion, and generous fruitfulness found in
the Trinity. It is in this image that we are made as male and female. The
divine Love is so generous that it bears fruit in the gift and mystery of
our creation.
According to John Paul II, the term "nuptial" manifests in a word
"the whole reality of that donation of which the first pages of the Book of
Genesis speak."51 Nuptiality, he says, is inscribed in the mystery of cre-
ation and redemption so profoundly that in some way it "embraces the uni-
verse. "52 When we glimpse the full implications of this nuptial mark that
is stamped upon reality, we realize that we cannot adequately understand
the inner "logic" of the Christian mystery without understanding its pri-
mordial revelation in the nuptial meaning of our bodies and that biblical
vocation to become "one flesh." As John Paul stresses, "The 'great mys-
tery,' which is the Church and humanity in Christ, does not exist apart
from the 'great mystery' expressed in the 'one flesh' ... reality of marriage
and the family."53
In short, to ask the question about the meaning of human embodi-
ment and nuptial union begins an exhilarating journey that-if we stay
the course-leads us to the heart of the mystery of the cosmos, the mys-
tery of our humanity, and even allows us to glimpse something of the
eternal mystery of God. John Paul's theology of the body goes far be-
yond a catechesis on sex and marriage. According to the Pope, it is a
specific, evangelical, Christian education-and the most suitable and
fundamental method of education-in the meaning of being a body, in
the meaning of being human. 54
50. CCc, n. 370.

51. 1/16/80, TB 66.
52.12/ 15/82, TB 354.
54. See 4/8/81 and 9/8/84, TB 215 and 396.
Prologue 15
Therefore, the theology of the body should not be considered merely

a minor or peripheral discipline. According to the Holy Father, what we
learn in his catechesis on the body and nuptial union "concerns the entire
Bible"55 and plunges us into "the perspective of the whole Gospel, of the
whole teaching, in fact, of the whole mission of Christ."s6 John Paul's
theological examination of the body, though it focuses primarily on ques-
tions of sexuality, affords "the rediscovery of the meaning of the whole of
existence, the meaning of life."57 Papal biographer George Weigel pointed
to the scope ofthe Pope's catechesis when he wrote that "John Paul's por-
trait of sexual love as an icon of the interior life of God has barely begun
to shape the Church's theology, preaching, and religious education. When
it does, it will compel a dramatic development of thinking about virtually
every major theme in the Creed."58
B. Spousal Theology Rooted in the Scriptures

While the Holy Father's catechesis takes the nuptial paradigm to a
new level, this kind of "spousal theology" has strong roots in Scripture
and the Catholic theological tradition. Both Old and New Testaments re-
veal God's love for his people as the love of a husband for his bride. The
Bible begins and ends with stories of marriage- the marriage of the first
Adam and Eve and the marriage of the New Adam and Eve, Christ and
the Church.
Spousal theology looks to the nuptial "book ends" of Genesis and
Revelation as a key for interpreting what lies between. From this analogi-
cal perspective we come to understand that God's mysterious and eternal
plan is to espouse us to himself forever (see Hos 2:19)-to "marry" US. 59
As John Paul writes in his Letter to Families, "By describing himself as
'bridegroom,' Jesus reveals the essence of God and confirms his immense
love for mankind."60 Respecting our freedom, the Bridegroom proposes
55. 1113/82, TB 249.

56. 12/3/80, TB 175.
57. 1O/29/~U, TH 16~.
58 . Witness to Hope, p. 853.

59. Of course, the nuptial mystery is not the only lens through which to view the
truths of the faith, even if the Pope believes that it is fundamental. As already stated, there
are other vital theological traditions and the Holy Father's thought is not intended to un-
dermine them. A comparative study of the theology of the body with these other tradi-
tions would be helpful, but is beyond the scope of this project.
60. Letter to Families. n. 18.
this marital plan to man and awaits the bride'sjiat. Furthermore, a theology
of the body illuminates that this eternal plan is not "out there" somewhere. It
could not be any closer to us. It is right here, mysteriously recapitulated in
our very being as male and female. The Gospel mystelY is inscribed sacra-
mentally in our bodies and in the call of man and woman to become "one
flesh" in a life-long, life-giving communion. This mystery was lived by man
and woman "in the beginning," was lost through original sin, and is restored
in Jesus Christ.
The spousal analogy, then, is not extrinsic. It is not merely a happy
coincidence. This is the fundamental manner in which God chose to reveal
his own covenant of life and love to the world-by creating us in such a
way (as male and female) that we could image this covenant and partici-
pate in it. When God establishes his covenants with man, whether it is
with Adam (Gen 1:28), Noah (Gen 9: 1), Abraham (Gen 17:5 - 6), Jacob
(Gen 35: 10 - 12), or Moses (Lev 26:9), we always see the call of bride-
groom and bride to signify this covenant in fruitful nuptial union. And at
the beginning of the New Covenant, Mary'sjiat marks a new virginal ex-
pression of nuptial love and fruitfulness. In offering her "yes" to God's
malTiage proposal, she stands as "the archetype of humanity."(lI In turn,
this biblical "woman" becomes the guarantor of realism in the life-giving
communion of God and man. With her fiat she quite literally conceives
eternal life within her. She is impregnated with the fulfillment of all God's
promises and the realization of man's eternal destiny. As the Catechism
states, "The spousal character of the human vocation in relation to God is
fulfilled perfectly in Mary's virginal motherhood."62
• In due time we will examine the Holy Father's profound insights re-
garding the meaning of consecrated celibacy. Its esteem in the Christian
life lies not in a dualistic separation of "spiritual values" over the values of
the body and sex. Although lived out differently, celibacy, too, John Paul
insists, is a bodily expression of nuptial love---{)f total self-giving. As we
will see, far from devaluing sexuality, the celibate vocation points to its
greatness by revealing the sexual body's ultimate purpose and meaning.
We will also learn that before sin there was no opposition between a true
unity of persons and virginity. The "loss of virginity" which results from
man and woman's union in "one flesh" is a result of the rupture caused
within man and between man and woman as a result of original sin.
61. See Mulieris Dignilatem, n. 4.

62 . CCc. n. 505.
Prologue 17
C. Signs of the Covenants

In order to understand better the fundamental importance of the
"nuptial mystery" in revealing the hidden plan of God, all we need do is
look to those physical signs which God established in order for man to
perceive the spiritual mystery of the Old and the New Covenants. Think
for a moment about the promise given to Abraham: "Behold my covenant
is with you, and you shall be the father of a multitude of nations ... .I will
make you exceedingly fruitful" (Gen 17:4, 6). God then demanded that a
sign of this covenant be carved into Abraham's flesh: "You shall be circum-
cised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it shall be a sign of the covenant
between me and you .... So shall my covenant be in your flesh an everlasting
covenant" (Gen 17:11, 13).
Male circumcision is a central element of Old Testament revelation.
Despite a common reluctance to do so, we must ponder this oddity: Why
would the Heavenly Father demand of his people that the most intimate
part of the male genitalia be perpetually relieved of its natural covering?
Why did the Lord of the Universe institute this to set his chosen people
apart and identify them as his followers? How is this physical symbol an
effective sign of God's spiritual, covenant love in the world?
While scholars of Scripture and Jewish history can answer these
questions more fully, I will offer the following plausible musings. Who
would most often see this sign and when? Every time a male descendant
of Abraham consummated his marriage, he and his wife would be re-
minded of God's promise of fruitful nuptial love. Circumcision "speaks"
in some way of the mystery of fatherhood, and of the price required of
men if they are truly to image God's Fatherhood in the world. By inflicting
this wound upon the male, it appears as if the Heavenly Father is saying
that men must come to learn something that women already seem to know.
Namely, participation in God's generous love involves the shedding of
blood and the sacrifice of one's own flesh .
Is this not precisely what Christ the Bridegroom teaches us? Circum-
cision foreshadows his ultimate sacrifice of flesh and blood. 63 The promise
of fruitful nuptial love given to Abraham is definitively consummated in
Christ's body "given up for us." The cross, in tum, John Paul tells us, be-
comes "a fresh manifestation of the eternal fatherhood of God."64 Here we
gain insight into why it was the Heavenly Father's will, as Karol Wojtyla
(the future John Paul II) once reflected, for Christ to allow himself to be
63 . See CCC. n. 1150.

64. Redemptor Hominis, n. 9.
"stripped naked" in the hour of his passion. 65 What might the spectators
have noticed about the man crucified in the middle? He was a son of
Abraham, a Jew-a "chosen one." Yet this was not simply any Jew. This
was "King of the Jews." This was the Chosen One. Those gathered at the
foot of the cross-Jews and Gentiles alike-were eyewitnesses to the de-
finitive and most intimate revelation on earth of the mystery of the Fa-
ther's love unveiled in Christ's (circumcised) flesh.
In the "naked Christ" and his body "given up for us," do we not see
how the sign of the Old Covenant-circumcision-is fulfilled in the sign
of the New-Eucharist? The Eucharistic sacrifice, in fact, effects the most
fruitful "nuptial" communion of the cosmos. John Paul II describes Holy
Communion as "the sacrament of the Bridegroom and the Bride. " Thus,
the Eucharist serves in some way "to express the relationship between
man and woman, between what is 'feminine' and what is 'masculine.' It is
a relationship willed by God in both the mystery of creation and in the
mystery of Redemption. "66
D. This Is a "Great Mystery"

This great nuptial mystery is revealed and confirmed in that marvel-
ous passage of Ephesians where St. Paul links the "one flesh" union of
Genesis with the union of Christ and the Church. '''For this reason a man
shall leave his 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" (Eph 5:31-32). Christ left his Father in heaven; he
left the home of his mother on earth-to give up his body for his Bride, so
that we might become "one body" with him.67 This we do whenever the
Eucharistic sacrifice is offered by the Bridegroom and faithfully received
by the Bride. This is obviously not a "sexual" encounter, but the consum-
mation of a mystical marriage. It is a physical sign that effects the pro-
found spiritual mystery it symbolizes. And that mystery is the mystery of
life-giving communion between God and man and among all men.
The nuptial mystery reveals this beautifully. God himself is a life-
giving Communion of Persons and we are destined to share in that Com-
munion as the Bride of Christ. Everything God wants to tell us on earth
about who he is, who we are, the meaning of life, the reason he created us,
how we are to live, why evil exists, as well as our ultimate destiny can be
illumined through the lens of the "great mystery" of nuptial communion. 68
65. See Sign of Contradiction (New York: Seabury Press, 1979), p. 192.
66. Mulieris Dignitatem, n. 26.
67. See CCC nn. 790, 791,1396, 1621.
68. See Letter to Families, n. 19.
Prologue 19
In his theology of the body John Paul takes upon himself the formi-
dable task of unfolding this cosmic drama from origin to eschaton. And
what a burning need there is to reunite the modem world with this nuptial
mystery! The further man is from this mystery, the less he knows who he
is and who he is meant to be. The Pope observes that as "the result of es-
trangement from the 'great mystery' spoken of by the apostle" in Ephe-
sians 5, "contemporary man remains to a great extent a being unknown to
himself. "69
But why is it-and how is it-that man has become so detached from
the truth of his own body and the nuptial mystery it proclaims? The ulti-
mate answers to these questions are found only by returning to "the begin-
ning." For, as Karol Wojtyla tells us, the first pages of Genesis contain
"the key to understanding the world of today, both its roots and its ex-
tremely radical-and therefore dramatic-affirmations and denials."70
5. The Great Divorce

In the beginning, God created everything through his Word-the
Word that is love, the Word that is "gift." If all of creation involuntarily
echoes this Word, God gave man and woman their own voices with which
to recite it freely. As the Second Vatican Council expresses, this "freedom
is an exceptional sign of the divine image within man. For God has willed
that man remain 'under the control of his own decisions '" (see Sir
15:14).71 Man is the only creature on earth that God created for "its own
sake." However, man is not meant to live for his own sake. He can only
find himself "through the sincere gift of himself."72 This key teaching of
the Council is the divine Word inscribed in the nuptial meaning of the hu-
man body. In the beginning, at the sight of each other's nakedness, the
truth of this Word welled up in the heal1s of man and woman as a sponta-
neous love song, sung in the original harmony of what Genesis calls "one
flesh." This is why the Scriptures present them as being naked without
shame- because they lived the truth of "the gift," at least initially.
Between the experience of original nakedness and the entrance of
the fig leaves, man and woman would have their first encounter with "the
69. Ibid.
70. Sign a/Contradiction, p. 24.
72. Ibid., n. 24.
father of lies." His goal was to get them to deny the gift of God's love,
to deny the divine Word. Hence, Wojtyla/John Paul II describes Satan
as the "anti-Word. "73
A. Plagiarizing the Primordial Sacrament

Tertullian, an early Christian writer, insightfully observed that Satan
seeks to counter God's plan by plagiarizing the sacraments. 74 In the sacra-
ments God accomplishes his plan for man and in them we find the mean-
ing of life and true happiness. By commandeering the sacraments for his
purposes, the deceiver markets his counterfeit version of man's path to
happiness. In the beginning, there was only one sacrament, what John Paul
calls the "primordial sacrament"-the union of Adam and Eve in mar-
riage. This is where Satan attacks. Thus, we can conclude with John Paul
that "Sin and death entered man's history, in a way, through the very heart
of that unity which, from 'the beginning,' was formed by man and woman,
created and called to become 'one flesh. "'75
God revealed himself to the first man and woman as the God of love,
the God of the covenant. This was the Word inscribed in the sacramen-
tality oftheir bodies and their call to become "one flesh." Soon thereafter,
however, the anti-Word entered the scene purveying his own counterfeit
version of reality. In a retreat preached to Pope Paul VI in 1976, the future
Pope John Paul II observes that if Satan's ultimate goal is to have man
deny God's existence, such a denial was not possible "in the beginning."
God's existence was all too obvious to the first man and woman. Hence,
the first "lap" in the devil's scheme was to "aim straight at the God of the
covenant. "76 In other words, Satan sets out to convince man that God is not
to be trusted; that he is not a loving Father, but a tyrant, an enemy, against
whom man has to defend himself. The Holy Father later emphasizes in
his international best-seller, Crossing the Threshold of Hope, that this "is
truly the key for interpreting reality.... Original sin attempts, then, to
abolish fatherhood. "77
The truth and meaning of this gripping statement will come to light
throughout our analysis of the theology of the body. For now, if we are to
73. See Sign o/Con/radiction, pp. 29- 34 and Dominum et Vivificantem. n. 37.
74. Prescription Against Heretics, Book 40, cited in Father Gabriele Amorth, An Exor-
cist Tells His Story (San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 1999), p. 182.
75. 3/5/80, TB 77.
76. Sign o/Contradiction, p. 30.
77. Crossing the Threshold o/Hope (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1994), p. 228.
Prologue 21
understand the nature of the weed which John Paul is trying to uproot in
his catechesis, it is important to understand the method by which the de-
ceiver constructs this counterfeit world-view. The devil cannot create out
of nothing. As a creature himself, all he can do is take what God created to
reveal the mystery of his own Fatherhood and twist it, distort it-or, more
aptly, tempt us to do so. So if we are looking for that which is most sacred
in this world, all we need do is look for that which Satan most often pro-
fanes : the gift of the body and sexuality.
B. The Symbolic and the Diabolic

In our culture's violent attack on God's plan for the body and sexual-
ity, we see a great clash between the "symbolic" and the "diabolic." In the
Greek, symballein means to bring together, gather up, unite. Diaballein
means to scatter, break apart, rupture. God's etemal plan for man as sym-
bolized through the body is union, communion, marriage-this brings life.
The deceiver's counter-plan for man as diabolized through the body is
separation, fracture, divorce- this brings death.
In a word, Satan aims to make the symbolic diabolic. God created the
body and the mystery of sexuality with a sacramental language that speaks
his own Word. The deceiver incessantly commandeers this holy ground in
order to scramble the body's language so that it contradicts the divine Word.
Confronted by a culture that so gravely distorts the meaning of the
body and sexuality, Christians can be tempted to eschew these divine gifts .
Indeed, one of the main threats facing the Church today is a "super-spiritu-
alism" in which people disembody their call to holiness. Yet if we respond
to the lies in this way, we have not conquered those lies; we have inadvert-
ently bought into them. The body proclaims the Word. The spirit that de-
nies this "incamational reality" is none other than that of the anti-Word
(see 1 Jn 4:2-3).
How, then, do we conquer these lies and live an integrated life, an
embodied spirituality? We must first reclaim what Satan has plagiarized.
John Paul's entire catechesis on the body is a clarion call to do just that.
The very title-theology of the body-calls us to the integration of the
spiritual and the material. Without this integration we inevitably suffer
from a kind of "split personality."
C. "Angelism" and "Animalism"

The spiritual has an ontological priority over the physical. Yet, with-
out blurring the distinction, God united spirit and matter by creating man
from the dust of the ground and from the breath of his own life (see Gen
2:7). In this way, man is similar to both angels and animals, but also remark-
ably different. Angels are spiritual persons, but they do not have bodies
and, hence, are not sexually differentiated. Animals have bodies and are
sexually differentiated but they are not persons. Human beings, however,
are a strange combination of the two. We are "angimals," so to speak;
spiritual and physical creatures; we are sexually differentiated bady-per-
sans. n This means that man can be neither reduced to the material world,
nor divorced from it. Although the "invisible" determines man more than
the "visible," the visible expresses the invisible. 79
This original harmony of body and soul, sexuality and spirituality
was sustained by the harmony between God and man and was manifested
most pointedly in the original harmony of man and woman. Like nothing
else, the primordial sacrament-that indissoluble union of two persons in
one flesh-speaks to the original alliance of spirit with flesh. Yet when
man accepted the anti-Word, his sin shattered these harmonies introducing
a "great divorce" into the order of the cosmos. A fallen world, then, is a
world of estranged spouses: estrangement between divinity and humanity;
heaven and earth; soul and body; spirituality and sexuality; sacredness and
sensuality; masculinity and femininity. According to its own diabolic log-
ic, such alienation leads to death. When such estrangement becomes em-
bedded in the fabric of society, that society can be nothing but a "culture
of death."
Those who perpetuate such a culture tend to live that "great divorce"
within their spiritual/material nature as if it were completely normal.
Lacking the reintegration of spirit and flesh to which we are called in
Christ, they inevitably lean toward one side of the divide or the other, to-
ward what we could call "angelism" and "animalism." One manifests a
spiritual value deprived of earthiness while the other manifests an earthi-
ness blind to spiritual value. so Both contribute equally to the disintegration
of man and culture.
Angelism promotes a "spiritual life" divorced from the body. Failing
to uphold the body's personal dignity, it tends toward prudishness and pu-
ritanism. Because it considers the body and all things sexual inherently
tainted and "unspiritual," it leads to repression of sexual feelings and de-
sire. The angelistic moral code is rigorism; it condemns even some of the
most natural manifestations of sexuality as impure. Many Christians
78. See CCC, nn. 327, 362-368.

79 . See 10/31179, TB 42.
80. See Rocco Buttiglione, Karol Wojty/a: The Thought a/the Man Who Became Pope
John Paull! (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdman's Publishing, 1997), p. 25.
Prologue 23
throughout history have fallen prey to this distortion. Even today people
make the calamitous mistake of considering this "holiness."
Animalism, on the other hand, springs from a materialistic world
view and promotes a "camal" life divorced from the spirit. Since in this
outlook the body and sexual matters are not informed by man's spiritual
dignity, animalism tends toward the indecent and the shameless. s, It en-
courages men and women to indulge their fallen sexual impulses without
restraint and promotes bodily pleasure as man's ultimate fulfillment. The
animalistic moral code is permissiveness; it condemns any manifestation
of temperance as a hindrance to freedom. All we need to do is tum on the
television or walk through the check-out line at a grocery store to see how
prevalent this distortion has become.
D. The Crucial Need of Balance

Cultural trends tend to oscillate between these two extremes. The
twentieth century, for example (at least in much of the West), began with a
widespread prudishness in which the mere sight of a woman's ankle could
cause scandal. Yet it ended with a widespread shamelessness that has "nor-
malized" even the most base sexual perversions. In this way we see how
angelism and animalism each contain the seeds of the other. There is no
"pure" angelist just as there is no "pure" animalist. Each is trying unsuc-
cessfully to suffocate an indomitable aspect of his own nature which, re-
sisting the weight of repression, will eventually explode with a force that
propels the person (and the culture) to the other extreme. Pendulum swing
is understandable, but John Paul II teaches another way-the path of rein-
tegrating spirit and flesh.
The need for man to discover his true (integrated) self could not be
any more pressing. The stakes are incredibly high. Karol Wojtyla knows
well that a dualistic anthropology leads to the gas chamber, to the abortion
mill, to the culture of death. According to Wojtyla's read on "the signs of
the times," it seems the ancient clash between the "nuptial mystery" and
the "great divorce," between the "symbolic" and the "diabolic" is coming
to a head. In the retreat given to the Roman Curia in 1976, Cardinal
Wojtyla boldly stated that we may now be "experiencing the highest level
of tension between the Word and the anti-Word in the whole of human his-
tory." He even went so far as to suggest that this may be "the last lap along
81. Shamelessness is not to be equated with the experience of nakedness without

shame as in Genesis 2:25. In fact, these two experiences are antithetical (see §16 for a
further discussion of this point).
that way of denial which started out from around the tree of the knowledge
of good and evil. "82
The attack on God's Fatherhood-on the truth that "God is love"-
was only the first lap in "a very long process that winds its devious way
throughout history." The deceiver has worked in stages, patiently awaiting
the opportune time to induce man toward the ultimate denial of God's very
existence. In "the first stage of human history this temptation was not only
not accepted but had not been fully formulated. But the time has now
come," Wojtyla tells us; "this aspect of the devil's temptation has found
the historical context that suits it." Man is now prepared to deny the very
existence of God. This is not the atheism of the skeptics or the despairing
that has dotted history. This is a planned, systematic attempt at "liberation
from the very idea of God in order to bolster man."83 This is the idea that
to believe in God-especially the Christian God-is inherently dehuman-
izing. The French Jesuit theologian Henri de Lubac described this as
"atheistic humanism."84 In Karol Wojtyla he would find a voice of agree-
ment that this radical denial of God is at the heart of all the man-made
hells of the twentieth century.
6. The Deepest Substratum of Ethics and Culture

John Paul II champions human life, dignity, and freedom precisely
because of the crucible of death, degradation, and tyranny in which he was
formed. The Nazis invaded his beloved Poland when he was nineteen.
Death and degradation surrounded him. The stench ofbuming bodies from
nearby Auschwitz hovered in the air. He would have been sent there, too,
or shot on the spot, had his role in the underground resistance or his clan-
destine seminary studies been discovered. Several brushes with death, and,
at times, his inexplicable survival, seem to indicate that providence had
special plans for Karo1. 85 The Nazis left Poland six years later, but another
totalitarian power took control. As a young man Wojtyla mounted a cul-
tural resistance to Communism that would continue throughout his life as
priest, bishop, cardinal, and pontiff, ultimately playing an essential role in
the collapse of the Iron Curtain.
82. Sign o/Contradiction, pp. 34-35.

83. Ibid., pp. 31, 34.
84. See Henri de Lubac, The Drama ofAtheistic Humanism (San Francisco: Ignatius
Press, 1995). See also CCC, n. 2124.
85. See Witness to Hope, pp. 69- 72.
Prologue 25
A. The Root of Evil

While many of his contemporaries concluded that life was absurd,
Wojtyla wrestled with God, searching for answers to life's hardest ques-
tions. How? Why? What could lead man, who is bestowed with God-
like dignity, to drink from the dregs of raw evil? Surface solutions did not
interest Wojtyla. He wanted to go to the root of it all and find the first
event in the chain reaction that led humanity to embrace the evils that flow
from "atheistic humanism." What is that root? Summarizing John Paul's
thought, it is our rejection of God's revelation of love that he inscribed in
our bodies by creating us male and female.
The Holy Father is convinced that the call to nuptial love and com-
munion inscribed in our masculine and feminine bodies is "the fundamen-
tal element of human existence in the world,"86 "the foundation of human
life,"87 and, hence, "the deepest substratum of human ethics and culture."88
This is the root of it all. John Paul's quest for answers to the enigma of
human existence has led him to the firm conviction, as he himself states,
that the dignity and balance of human life depend always and everywhere
on the proper ordering of love between the sexes. Who will woman be for
man? Who will man be for woman? The human project stands or falls on
the answer to these questions. 89 For if we live according to the true nuptial
meaning of our bodies we fulfill the very meaning of our being and exist-
ence. 90 But if we reject the true meaning of the body, we forfeit the tran-
scendent, spiritual truth of love and separate ourselves from God-and
civilization ultimately implodes.
While this dynamic is played out primarily in marriage and family
life, it applies to all men and women, whatever their state in life. For every
man and woman, the answers to the most basic questions about human life
pass by way of human sexuality. "What does it mean to be a man?" is the
most important question a man can ask himself. Likewise, "What does it
mean to be a woman?" is the most important question a woman can ask
herself. These are inherently sexual questions because, created as male and
female, we are inherently sexual beings. As John Paul affirms, "sexu-
ality.. .is by no means something purely biological, but concerns the in-
86. 1116/80, TB 66.

87. Ecclesia in America, n. 46.
88. 10/22/80, TB163.
89. See 10/8/80, TB159.
90 . See 1116/80, TB 63 .
nermost being of the human person as such."91 Thus, the way men and
women answer the above questions determines whether the entire edifice
of culture and society rests on solid rock or shifting sands.
B. The Wellspring of Culture

We can appreciate the vital role of the sexual relationship in shaping
ethics and culture in the simple truth that the family is the fundamental
cell of society. As the family goes, so goes culture.92 But, pressing further,
what is the origin of the family if not the "one flesh" union of spouses?
Wojtyla describes the conjugal union of man and woman, then, not only as
"the natural foundation" but also as "the ontological core of the family. "93
In this sense conjugal union is also the fountainhead of civilization, the
wellspring of culture. Open to God's inspiration and ordered toward love
and life, it builds families and, in turn, a culture of love and life. Closed to
divine inspiration and ordered against love and life, sexual union not only
disorients and disintegrates marriage and the family, it ultimately leads to
a culture of utility and death. In short, the relationship of the sexes be-
comes the meeting place of God and man and the origin of a truly human
culture, or it becomes man's point of closure to God and the first step in
the disintegration of civilization.
Is this not why fruitful nuptial union was so strongly emphasized
throughout salvation history, beginning with the Creator's first instruction
to man and woman to "Be fruitful and multiply" (Gen I :28)? This is not
merely an injunction to propagate, but in some way holds the key to hu-
man flourishing. For it calls us to live in the image in which we are made.
It calls us to love as God loves, by first receiving that love and then shar-
ing it in life-giving communion with the "other." This sums up the Gospel
and is the key to human happiness. Hence, the "new" commandment
Christ gives us to love as he loves (see In 15: 12) is nothing but an echo
and reformulation of the original human vocation outlined in Genesis-
and, as we learn in a theology of the body, this vocation is stamped in our
flesh. The family relationships founded on the union of the sexes provide
the most basic school in which we learn the law of life which is God's
self-giving love. The nuptial meaning of the body proclaims the basic truth
upheld by the Church's teaching on sexual morality, that man can only
find himself through the sincere gift of himself.
91. Familiaris Consortia, n. 1J; See CCC, n. 2332.

92. See CCC, n. 2207.
93. "Parenthood as a Community of Persons," in Person & Community: Selected
Essays, trans. Theresa Sandok (New York: Peter Lang, 1993), p. 339.
Prologue 27
Hence, confusion about sexual morality, as Karol Wojtyla wrote in

his 1960 book Love & Responsibility, "involves a danger perhaps greater
than is generally realized: the danger of confusing the basic and funda-
mental human tendencies, the main paths of human existence. Such confu-
sion," he concluded, "must clearly affect the whole spiritual position of
man. "94 Because human life itself passes by way of sexual union, the
choices and actions of men and women "take on all the weight of human
existence in the union of the tWO."95
This is why John Paul II devoted 129 general audiences to develop-
ing a theology of the body. If his goal is to show the world the path for
building a culture of life, the only adequate starting point is to return to
God's original plan for the body and sexuality. As the Holy Father states, it
"is an illusion to think we can build a true culture of human life if we do
not.. .accept and experience sexuality and love and the whole of life ac-
cording to their true meaning and their close inter-connection."96 Unless
we regain an incarnate theological vision of man and woman and their call
to communion, we will remain divided at the deepest level of the interac-
tion of body and soul, and the "great divorce" will reign supreme over the
"nuptial mystery."
7. Healing the Rift

The first sentence of John Paul II's first encyclical serves as the lode-
star for his entire pontificate: "The Redeemer of man, Jesus Christ, is the
center of the universe and ofhistory."97 This radical "Christo-centrism"-a
specific rebuttal to modem atheistic ideologies-reveals John Paul II's
deepest conviction: Only in the mystery of the Word made flesh does the
enigma of the universe, of history and of humanity come to light. "Christ
fully reveals man to himself and makes his supreme calling clear" specifi-
cally by revealing the love of the Father, poured out to heal the rift in us
caused by original sin.
A. Reintegration in the Word Made Flesh

The very dynamism of the Incarnation effects this healing. The Word
made flesh is the reconciliation of the "great divorce" between God and
94. Love & Responsibility, p. 66.

95.6/27/84, TB 376.
96. Evangelium Vitae, n. 97.
man, heaven and earth, soul and body, sacredness and sensuality, spiritual-
ity and sexuality, man and woman. All is made one, all is summed up, all
that had been fractured is brought back together in Christ (see Eph l: lO).
Through the "redemption of the body" and the "life in the Spirit" afforded
by Christ's death and resurrection, man is re-created in the unity of flesh
and spirit (see Rom 8).
Of course, talking about this reintegration in Christ is one thing. Ex-
periencing it is another. The effects of original sin and the temptations of
the fallen world weigh on man like the leverage of a crowbar continually
trying to pry flesh and spirit apart. How, then, is one to experience this
healing? Above all, it requires faith.
If original sin leads us to doubt the benevolent love of the Father and
to close our hearts to the free gift of his life, John Paul tells us that "faith,
in its deepest essence, is the openness of the human heart to the gift: to
God s self-communication in the Holy Spirit. "98 This life is poured out for
us in Christ's self-gift to his Bride on the cross. In essence, Christ's self-
gift says to us: "You don't believe in the Father's love? Let me make it
real for you; let me incarnate it for you so that you can taste and see. You
don't believe that God wants to give you life? I will bleed myself dry so
that my life's blood can vivify you. You thought God was a tyrant, a slave-
driver? You thought he would whip your back if you gave him the chance?
I will take the form of a slave; I will let you whip my back and nail me to a
tree; I will let you lord it over me to show you that the Father has no desire
to lord it over you. I have not come to condemn you, but to save you. I
have ·not come to enslave you, but to set you free. Tum from your disbe-
lief. Believe and receive the gift of eternal life I offer you."
This is Christ's "marriage proposal." He entrusts himself as a gift to
our freedom. Faith, then, is the human heart's openness to the gift of di-
vine love. It is man's freely given "yes" to heaven's marriage proposal. 99
Understood in this way, faith is the only path to reconciling the "great
divorce" and to that holiness which gradually heals man's internal split.
John Paul tells us that "holiness is measured according to the 'great mys-
tery' in which the Bride responds with the gift of love to the gift of the
Bridegroom."loo Holiness, in other words, is Love loved. Each time a hu-
man heart receives and reciprocates God's love, the reconciliation of di-
vinity and humanity, body and soul, man and woman takes root. Bringing
98. Dominum et Vivificantem, n. 51.

99. See CCC, nn. 14, 142, 166.
100. Mulieris Dignitatem, n. 27 (see also CCC, n. 773).
Prologue 29
about this reconciliation is the meaning and purpose of the Incarnation

and Redemption. As the Holy Father says, the man who opens himself to
Christ's gift
... finds again the greatness, dignity and value that belong to his own hu-
manity. In the mystery of the redemption, man becomes newly "ex-
pressed" and, in a way, is newly created. He is newly created! ... The man
who wishes to understand himself thoroughly-and not just in accor-
dance with immediate, partial, often superficial, and even illusory stan-
dards and measures of his being-must with his unrest, uncertainty and
even his weakness and sinfulness, with his life and death, draw near to
Christ. He must, so to speak, enter into him [Christ] with all his own self,
he must "appropriate" and assimilate the whole reality ofthe Incarnation
and Redemption in order to find himself. If that profound process takes
place within him, he then bears fruit not only of adoration of God but
also of deep wonder at himself. 101
If atheistic humanism claims to be the "religion" that humpets man's
greatness, the Pope insists that "the name for that deep amazement at
man's worth and dignity is the Gospel, that is to say: the Good News. It is
also called Christianity.",o2 Christianity is the religion that upholds man's
dignity and calls him to embrace his own greatness. But there is a "catch"
of sorts, a rub. To embrace his own greatness, Christianity teaches that
man must also embrace his own death. He must follow Christ the whole
way to the cross if he is to be re-created (resurrected) in the unity of flesh
and spirit.
Coping with the pains of our disintegration (whether we tend toward
angelism or animalism) can seem like a fine alternative to being nailed to a
tree. Even for those who "take up their crosses and follow," the path to
integrating body and soul remains arduous. The deceiver is always at work
plagiarizing the Word and lying to us about the meaning of our bodies and
our sexuality. Yet the "reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the
works of the devil" (l In 3:8). Christ appeared bodily to restore the body's
original symbolic meaning; to enable us once again to read the "language"
of the body in truth and to enter into holy communion- within ourselves,
with one another, and with God. This theological language of the body, as
exemplified in Christ, proclaims that God is "gift," he is love, he is be-
nevolent Father. This is the body, John Paul tells us, "a witness to
Love."I03 It is this same divine love which our bodies invite us to partici-
pate in as male and female by becoming "one flesh."
10 1. Redemptor Hominis, n. 10.

102. Ibid.
103. 119/80, TB 62.
B. Need for a Paradigm Shift

To reckon with the mystery of Christ crucified is to recognize the need
for a radical reorientation of the basic premises with which most men and
women view the universe. Contemplating the "naked Christ" a~d his body
"given up for us" compels a radical paradigm shift both in the way we view
God (theology) and in the way we view ourselves (anthropology), especially
with regard to our own sexual embodiment. Christ crucified is the divine re-
buttal to the deceiver's lies. Here the true Word inscribed in human flesh
(self-donation) definitively trumps the anti-Word (self-gratification).
In the beginning the evil one had placed in doubt the truth that God is
Love, leaving man with the sense of a master-slave relationship . Ever
since, as John Paul says, man has felt "goaded to do battle against God,"lo4
even to the point of murdering his incarnate Son. Yet in this moment-
when the Son of God allowed us to nail him to a tree-we realize, as the
Holy Father states, that "the paradigm of master-slave is foreign to the
Gospel. "105 It is a paradigm drawn from a world in which God is an absent
father, not a loving Father. It is a paradigm drawn from a lie, a paradigm
constructed by the "father oflies."
This revelation changes everything. We live under friendly skies. We
can put our defenses down and open to the heavens without fear. When we
do, we find our posture straightening as the weight of a universal decep-
tion falls from our shoulders. When we "repent and believe in the good
news" (Mk 1: 15), we realize, perhaps for the first time, that life is "very
good" (Gen 1:31) and that our existence is nothing but a sheer, gratuitous
gift. Life, then, becomes thanksgiving offered to God (eucharistia) for so
great a gift. In tum, we desire to become the same gift to others that life is
to us. The real epiphany comes when we realize that these transcendent,
spiritual truths-God is love; life is good; "the gift" of life and love is
meant to be experienced and shared- have been stamped in our bodies all
along. "Be fruitful and multiply." "Therefore a man leaves his father and
his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh." These
texts of Genesis already contain in some way the fundamental truth of who
God is and who we are made in his image and likeness. These texts reveal
that Love-divine love, the generous Love of the eternal Father, the Love
of the life-giving Trinity-is the Word implanted in our souls and in-
scribed in our flesh . To read this Word in truth and to put it into practice is
to discover "the very meaning of our being and existence."
104. Crossing the Threshold o/Hope, p. 228 .

105. See ibid., p. 226 .
Prologue 31
C. Man Cannot Live without Love

The truth that we are made in the image of life-giving love explains
why the body and sexuality fascinate us and make us crave intimacy,
touch, and union. Yes, in our fallen world this fascination expresses itself
in gross distortions which destroy lives. But once we learn with Christ's
help to "untwist" all of our confusions and lusts, we discover in the mys-
tery of human sexuality man's basic hunger for the God who is Love. As
John Paul so eloquently states: "Man cannot live without love. He remains
a being that is incomprehensible for himself, his life is senseless, if love is
not revealed to him, if he does not encounter love, if he does not experi-
ence it and make it his own, if he does not participate intimately in it.
This .. .is why Christ the Redeemer 'fully reveals man to himself"',o6-be-
cause his body "given up for us" reveals the truth about incarnate love.
We need not be conformed to the lies that assail us. We can be trans-
fOlmed by the renewal of our minds if we, like Christ, offer our bodies as a
living sacrifice to God. This bodily offering, St. Paul tells us, is our spiri-
tual act of worship (see Rom 12: 1-2). If we are truly willing to die with
Christ, we too can live a new life, an incarnate life, an embodied spiritual-
ity. Only then do we feel at home in our own skin. Only then do the deep-
est desires of our hearts for intimacy and union make sense. Only then do
we know who we are, why we exist, how we are to live, why there is evil
in the world (and how to overcome it), and what our ultimate destiny is
(and how to reach it). Christ does not cancel our humanity; he restores it to
its original glory. Christ does not nullify our deepest desires and aspira-
tions; he fulfills them superabundantly.
This is the Church's proposal to the world. Unfortunately, even in
traditionally Christian nations, the vast majority of modern men and
women have not yet heard the Christian proposal in its full glory. Hence,
John Paul II has incessantly spoken about the need for a "new evan-
gelization." The epilogue of this book will seek to show how the theol-
ogy of the body undergirds this new evangelization. Before we unpack
the Pope's catechesis, however, we need to understand how it imbues
Karol Wojtyla's life-long philosophical and theological project and how,
through this project, he attempts to engage the modern world with the
truth about Jesus Christ.

8. Wojtyla's Philosophical Project

Why does the modern world seem almost programmed to tune out
the Church's proposal? Along with revolutions in economics, politics,
science and technology, the complex process of change in Western civili-
zation called "modernization" has brought with it a critical shift of con-
sciousness, a new rationalist mind-set that has no place for the "great
mystery" of Christ and the Church. While neither of the following can be
blamed for modernity's abandonment of Christianity, the lives and work
of two great men have come to symbolize in some way the Western
world's break with the Church. One is credited by many as the founder
of modern experimental science; the other as the father of modern phi-
losophy. Galileo Galilei- or, more aptly, the "Ga1ileo affair"-and Rene
Descartes' dictum, "I think, therefore I am," would leave an indelible
mark on the way "modern" men and women understand themselves.
A. The Church and the Modern World

Nothing has done more to instill in the modern mind the image of a
Church opposed to freedom, human progress, and scientific inquiry than
the Galileo affair. Tragically, the churchmen who opposed the Copernican
revolution Galileo promoted could not disassociate their faith from an age-
old cosmology. Three hundred and fifty years after Galileo's death, the
commission which John Paul II established to re-examine the Galileo case
finally acknowledged that those who condemned Galileo had been seri-
ously mistaken. 107 Unfortunately, a rift between religion and science had
long since been seared into the historical consciousness.
The philosophy of Rene Descartes, one of Galileo's contemporaries,
also contributed significantly to this rift. In fact, John Paul II describes his
dictum "Cogito, ergo sum" as "the motto of modern rationalism."108
Descartes turned his back on metaphysics and inaugurated the "anthropo-
logical turn" in philosophy. Modern philosophy starts with man. In other
words, rather than starting with the objective realm of "being" and "exist-
ence," modern philosophy begins with man's subjective and conscious expe-
rience of being and existing-"I think, therefore I am." John Paul exclaims:
"How different from the approach of St. Thomas, for whom it is not thought
which determines existence, but existence... which determines thought! "109
107. See Cardinal Paul Poupard, "Galileo: Report on Papal Commission Findings,"
Origins (November 12, 1992), pp. 374- 375.
lOS. Crossing the Threshold ofHope. p. 51.
109. Ibid., p. 3S.
Prologue 33
A philosophy of being acknowledges that I think because there is an ob-

jective reality beyond me-an Uncreated Being that is existence-that
created me as I am (to think). My subjective thoughts are therefore an-
swerable to this objective reality. A philosophy of pure consciousness,
on the other hand, reduces reality to what man can think about it, be-
cause only "that which corresponds to human thought makes sense. The
objective truth of this thought is not as important as the fact that some-
thing exists in human consciousness."llo Man, then-not God-becomes
the measure of the real. We see here the roots of modern rationalism and
moral relativism.
Both the Galileo affair and Descartes' "turn to the subject" help us to
understand the importance of Karol Wojtyla's philosophical project. Mo-
dernity has rejected so much of the Christian view of man, especially in
the field of ethics, because traditional explanations of the faith were based
on a metaphysics (the Aristotelian-Theistic philosophy of being) which de-
pended on a physics (philosophy of nature) that modern science has shown
faulty. In light of the Galileo affair, it seemed that reason had trumped
faith. In turn, the blunder of certain churchmen greatly contributed to the
mass allegiance shift from religion to science.
Yet truth can never contradict truth. I I I If the Christian faith teaches
truth, there must be a way to reconcile it with what science has shown to
be true. From Wojtyla's perspective, if the Church was to climb out of its
credibility crisis and proclaim Christ convincingly to the modern world,
Christian scholars would need to forge a new philosophical path. This new
approach would need to reclaim the metaphysical truths St. Thomas taught
in a manner that not only freed Christian argumentation of elements op-
posed to science, but also appealed to the way modern people think. 112 By
boldly setting out to engage modern philosophy on its own terms, Wojtyla
would seek to demonstrate that objective reality could be affirmed and re-
claimed through a careful but nonetheless explicit appeal to subjective hu-
man expenence.
The "problem," however, is that objective reality calls man to objec-
tive morality. Modern man has embraced a notion of freedom that chafes
11 O. Ibid., p. 51.
Ill. See CCc. n. 159.
112. See Rocco Buttiglione, Karol Wojtyla: The Thought of the Man Who Became
Pope John Paul fJ, p. 74.
under anything other than a "morality of personal preference." One of the

greatest challenges for the Church today is to recover the inherent link be-
tween freedom and truth taught by Christ (see In 8:32). Wojtyla seeks to
do so by placing the moral life on the foundations of an "adequate anthro-
pology." The question of the times, in Karol Wojtyla's mind, is "Who is
man?" "What does it mean to be a human person?" Answering these ques-
tions is indispensable if men and women are to realize that the Gospel's
demands are not against them; they are not an imposition. These demands
instead correspond to the deepest longings and desires of the human heart.
But what are the deepest desires of the human heart? And how do the
moral demands of the Christian life correspond to them? Such questions
demand a penetrating reflection on man's self-experience. Why do I long
for "something more" than this life can offer? Why do I suffer? Why do I
intuitively realize that I am created for freedom? Why am I taken by
beauty? By love? By lust? Why are peace and happiness so illusive?
As alluded to previously, the rich and often pained texture of Karol
Wojtyla's life (particularly under Nazi occupation and Communist Poland)
made him uniquely suited to press into these questions. Wojtyla has not
reflected on the human condition through binoculars or dodged the tough
questions. He is a man with calloused hands who has been personally in-
volved in the greatest tragedies and triumphs of the twentieth century. Far
from abstract musings, Wojtyla's thought is the fruit of a constant confron-
tation of doctrine with lived experience. I 13 While it is beyond the scope of
this book to trace in detail how Wojtyla's thought developed, it is impor-
tant to sketch an overview. I 14
1) 3. See Love & Responsibility, p. ) 5.

114. Many books have been written on the history and development of Wojtyla's
anthropology. For the serious student, I would especially recommend Kenneth Schmitz's
At the Center of the Human Drama: The Philosophical Anthropology of Karol Wojtyla/
Pope John Paul II (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 1993); Mary
Shivanandan's Crossing the Threshold ofLove: A New Visioll ofMarriage ill the Light of
John Paul II's Anthropology (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press,
1999); Rocco Buttiglione's Karol Wojtyla: The Thought of the Man Who Became Pope
John Paul II (Grand Rapids, MJ: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1997); and
laroslaw Kupczak's Destined for Liberty (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of
America Press, 2000).
Prologue 35
B. How Wojtyla s Thought Took Shape

Behind his high-profile life as the 26yd successor of St. Peter is the
life of an orphan (his mother and brother died when he was a boy, and his
father when he was twenty), a quarryman, factOlY worker, athlete, avid
outdoorsman, actor, mystic, poet, playwright, patriot, parish priest, confes-
sor, spiritual director, philosopher, theologian, author, university professor,
bishop, father of the Second Vatican Council, and cardinal.
He began to express his thoughts, questions, and yearnings in the po-
etryll5 and plays 116 he wrote as a young man. Already in these earliest
works we see Wojtyla reflecting on the themes of human experience that
will mark his most developed anthropology. His vision of man subse-
quently evolved through two doctoral dissertations. In the first, he exam-
ined the lived experience of faith according to St. John of the CrosS.11 7
Faith, he concluded, is not merely an intellectual assent to objective truths.
The intellect cannot grasp God, for God is not merely a concept or an ob-
ject. In the "dark night of the soul" the emotions are purified and the intel-
lect gives way to love. Through this love the believer experiences God in
the mutual exchange of self-donation. The insights Wojtyla gained in his
study of the Spanish mystic-the possibility of authentic purification (re-
demption) of the inner man, faith as the experience of love, love as self-
donation-would permeate the rest of his life's work.
This insight into faith as an experiential reality also provided an im-
portant foundation for Wojtyla's second dissertation on the thought of Ger-
man philosopher Max Scheler. 118 Scheler was a disciple of Edmund Hus-
serl (1859- 1938), the founder of a modem philosophical method called
"phenomenology" which begins with human experience. In an effort to
counter Immanuel Kant's ethics of pure duty,119 Scheler developed a rich
115. A complete collection of Karol Wojtyla's poems can be found in The Place
Within: The Poetry o/Pope John Paul II (New York, NY: Random House, 1982).
116. See Karol Wojtyla, The Collected Plays & Writings on Theater (Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press, 1987).
117. See Faith According to St. John of the Cross (San Francisco, CA: Ignatius
Press, 1981).
118. Unfortunately, this has not been published in English. The Spanish edition is
Max Scheler y fa etica cristiana (Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos, 1982).
119. In Kant's ethics of pure duty, man must detach himself from any subjective or
emotionally-felt value. An ethical action is purely a willing of the law. The only relevant
"feeling" is that which arises from duty for duty'S sake.
ethical system based on the emotional experience of values. However, if

Kant ignored the emotional life in favor of duty, according to Wojtyla,
Scheler fell prey to the opposite problem. He failed to make clear that the
human person not only feels value, he also aspires to value. Until a
person's internal world of values is entirely purified, duty continues to
play an important role in the ethical life. Thus, Wojtyla concluded that
Scheler's approach could not be considered a self-sufficient basis for
Christian ethics. Nonetheless he recognized that a reformed phenomeno-
logical approach could be integrated with the faith and would greatly aid
in bringing the much-needed stamp of subjective experience to the norma-
tive science of ethics. This is what Wojtyla set out to do.
Wojtyla would further develop the themes of experience and ethics,
person and nature, freedom and law, value and duty, subjectivity and ob-
jectivity in the lectures and essays he delivered as a professor at the
Catholic University of Lublin. 120 During these years (beginning in 1954
and diminishing throughout the sixties and seventies as his ecclesial duties
increased) Wojtyla would sharpen his ideas against the minds of other
great scholars in the "Lublin School of Philosophy." By engaging in a
bold philosophical initiative that sought to link the three great fields of
metaphysics, anthropology, and ethics, the Lublin School believed their
work-if given proper exposure-could redirect the entire course of mod-
ern philosophy. Stefan Swiezawski, one of Wojtyla's colleagues in the
School, would later write: "In the work and discussions of our group ... we
were deeply convinced that our efforts ... had crucial significance not just
for our university, for Poland, and for Europe, but for the whole world."
The exposure they needed came when one of their own was elected pope.
Swiezawski comments that their work had "suddenly found a simply un-
precedented opportunity to reach all parts of the world and influence the
development of the spiritual face of the coming age in every corner of
the globe."121
Karol Wojtyla wrote his first book, Love & Responsibility, 122 in the
late 1950's, based on years of intense pastoral work with young people
120. See Person & Community: Selected Essays, trans. Theresa Sandok (New York:
Peter Lang, 1993). Other volumes of his essays are in production.
121. Ibid., pp. xiii, xvi.
122. This was first published in English in 1981 (New York, NY: Farrar, Straus, and
Giroux) and reprinted in 1993 (San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press). Citations in this book
from Love & Responsibility are taken from the Ignatius Press edition.
Prologue 37
and engaged and married couples. This philosophical treatise (we might
even call it a "philosophy of the body") scrutinizes the way men and
women experience the sexual urge, emotion, sensuality, shame, etc., and
shows how these can and must be integrated with an "education in love."
Wojtyla argues that failure to accept "responsibility for love" turns people
into objects to be used. Furthermore, he convincingly demonstrates that
Catholic moral teaching on sex and marriage corresponds perfectly with
the dignity of the person and the desires of the heart for betrothed love.
The Second Vatican Council was the next major force to shape
Wojtyla's thinking. The young bishop from Krakow would serve as one of
the main protagonists at this pre-eminently "pastoral" Council, which
sought to engage an ever-changing modern world with the unchanging
truth of Jesus Christ. George Weigel reports in his biography of the Pope
that Wojtyla had prepared a prescient essay for the Ante-Preparatory Com-
mission of the Council. In it he stressed that the question of a humanism
adequate to the aspirations of today's men and women should be the epi-
center of the Council's concerns. The Church needed to furnish her twenty
centuries-old answer to the human question in a way that would "ring
true" in late modernity. With two thousand bishops from around the globe
proposing and debating the best way to do so, the Council would become
a kind of postdoctoral school of philosophy and theology for Wojtyla. '23
It would also spawn two more books from the Polish bishop before his
ideas on implementing the Council would forever shape Church history as
papal documents.
Wojtyla wrote The Acting Person l24 in his "spare time" following the
Council to explore the philosophical foundations of the conciliar documents.
This extremely dense work of philosophical anthropology is Wojtyla's most
elaborate effort to wed a traditional realist philosophy with the modem tum
to the subject-in other words, to wed the visions of "person" found in St. Tho-
mas and Max Scheler. His thesis, as the title indicates, is that the irreducible
core of the person is revealed through his actions. Experience confirms that,
while some things passively happen to us, we are also free to determine our
own actions. We are not only passive objects, but acting subjects. We expe-
123. See Witness to Hope, pp. 158- 160.

124. The Acting Person was first published in Polish in 1969. It was published in
English in 1979 (Analecta Husserliana 10; Dordrecht, Holland: Reidel). For a discussion
of the controversy surrounding the English translation, see Witness to Hope, pp. 174- 175.
For an excellent summary of The Acting Person, see Gerard Beigel's Faith and Social
Justice in the Teaching ofPope John Paul II (New York, NY: Peter Lang, 1997), chapter 2.
rience our actions as "our own" and "no one else's." Here "action" is in-
corporated into subjectivity. In this experience of freedom and subjectivity
(what Wojtyla calls "efficacy") man begins to experience his own tran-
scendence as a person. Wojtyla believes there is a law of self-giving that
defines the person objectively. And in the experience of his own freedom,
his own ability to act, man comes to experience this truth of his person-
hood subjectively.
One of the main tasks of the Council was to make the objective truths
of faith an experience of life, to bring about their SUbjective appropriation.
If The Acting Person seeks to provide a philosophical basis for this task,
Wojtyla's book Sources of Renewal seeks to facilitate its pastoral imple-
mentation. This concems not so much "how" but "what" is to be imple-
mented. According to Wojtyla, this is the more important question. 125 The
sources of the Church's renewal are found in the Holy Spirit's work in the
Council and its teachings. Renewal itself, however, comes only when the
work of the Spirit is incarnated through a vibrantly lived and personally
appropriated faith in Jesus Christ. The "proof of the realization of the
Council," Cardinal Wojtyla wrote, will be manifested when "the doctrine
of faith and morals" that the Council presented resounds in "the con-
sciousness of Christians." The Council therefore afforded "an enrichment
offaith in the objective sense, constituting a new stage in the Church's ad-
vance toward 'the fullness of divine truth.'" But what is more hoped for as a
fruit of the Council-and what Sources of Renewal seeks to facilitate-"is
an enrichment [of the faith] in the subjective, human, existential sense."126
The next milestone in our brief retracing of the development of
Wojtyla's thought was the lenten retreat he preached to Pope Paul VI and
the Roman Curia in 1976. The full text of the twenty-two conferences he
delivered is published under the title Wojtyla assigned: Sign of Contradic-
tion.127 Based on these words which Simeon addressed to Mary (see Lk
2:34), Cardinal Wojtyla wove a broad tapestry of uplifting, sobering, and
even daring reflections on what he considers to be the question of the day:
"Who is man and how does Christ fully reveal man to himself?" Through
his insightful reading of the "signs of the times," he envisioned "a new
Advent for the Church and for humanity.... A time of great trial but also of
great hope." He concluded, "For just such a time as this we have been
given the sign: Christ, 'sign of contradiction' (Lk 2:34). And the woman
125. See Sources of Renewal (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1979), p. 420.
126. Ibid., pp. 17-18.
127 . Sign of Contradiction (New York : Seabury Press, 1979).
Prologue 39
clothed with the sun: 'A great sign in the heavens' (Rev 12:1)."1 28 Here
again we see the way signs serve to communicate transcendent, spiritual
realities. The signs Wojtyla spoke of are those of a man and a woman- the
New Adam and the New Eve.
Nowhere is the Church, following her Bridegroom, more of a "sign
of contradiction" than in her teaching on man and woman's relationship.
Similarly, nowhere is there more of a disconnection between Church doc-
trine and the consciousness of Christians than in the Church's sexual ethic.
Wojtyla knew that if the renewal the Council envisaged was to take root, a
bridge had to be built that would enable Christians to appropriate person-
ally and live vibrantly God's plan for human sexuality. In a 1974 essay on
marriage and the family, he emphasized the need for "a special theological
synthesis," in this regard, "a special theology of the body, so to speak."129
Sometime later Cardinal Wojtyla began working on one of the most no-
table projects of his life-a biblical, theological reflection on the human
body and sexuality founded upon and imbued with the philosophy of the
human person he had developed throughout his academic and pastoral ca-
reef. Little did he know, however, that he would complete his "theology of
the body" as Pope John Paul II and bring it to the world-stage as his first
major papal catechetical project.
• The Holy Spirit works with the gifts, talents, and experiences of the
men He chooses as successors to the Apostle Peter. Thus, a necessary con-
tinuity links the work of Karol Wojtyla and of Pope John Paul II. Even so,
it is important to recognize and maintain a specific discontinuity. Although
general audiences rank lower than other fonns of papal teaching, the "the-
ology of the body" falls somewhere under the umbrella of papal and mag-
isterial teaching. This gives it a different "status" than if it had been
delivered by the philosopher/theologian Karol Wojtyla. This has advan-
tages and disadvantages. Academic proposals receive helpful academic cri-
tiques. John Paul's catechesis on the body might have benefited from this
had it been a proposal of Wojtyla's. Nonetheless, the Holy Spirit's choice
for pope of a man who was developing a comprehensive, biblical theology
of the body based on a life-time of unique experiences and philosophical
reflection seems to be a divine endorsement of the project.
128. Ibid., p. 206.

129. Persoll & Community: Selected Essays, p. 326.
C. What is Phenomenology?
John Paul's theology of the body echoes and contains in some way
the entire history of his thinking about man. It may be his most critical at-
tempt to forge a link between objective reality and subjective human expe-
rience, between truth and freedom, ethics and anthropology, God and man.
While plunging its roots deep into the theological tradition, the Pope's the-
ology of the body also presents "one of the boldest reconfigurations of
Catholic theology in centuries."'3o Its novelty, as well as its genius, lies in
the Holy Father's philosophical method and approach. Just as Augustine in-
tegrated his synthesis of the faith with the philosophy of Plato, and Aquinas
with Aristotle, Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II inaugurates a new era for the
Church by integrating his synthesis of the faith with phenomenology.
It is difficult to define "phenomenology." As a philosophical method,
it has many variants. Though the word "phenomenology" can sound in-
timidating, Wojtyla's use of the method is not threatening but is quite re-
freshing. He uses phenomenology to retrieve the ordinary experiences of
everyday life and study these phenomena as we experience them. By pen-
etrating such phenomena he seeks to approach the reality of things-as-
they-are. With human experience as a point of departure, Wojtyla gains a
much needed and traditionally neglected perspective on the interior life of
the human person. He discovers in the subjectivity of man's inner world a
unity with the objectivity of man's outer world. By analyzing this unity he
can confirm objective truths while avoiding "objectivizing" abstractions.
He demonstrates that the Church's vision of man is not foisted upon him
from "the outside," but corresponds to his self-experience as a person on
"the inside."
With full knowledge that the Church's message "is in harmony with
the most secret desires of the human heart," 13 I Wojtyla does not need and
does not attempt to force assent to his proposals. Rather, he invites men
and women to reflect honestly on their self-experience to see if it confirms
his proposals. In doing so, Wojtyla shows remarkable respect for and trust
in the freedom of the person and a bold confidence in the ability of each
person's conscience to recognize-and desire-the truth when it presents
itself. His presentation of the faith, therefore, is never an imposition, but
always and only a proposition-an appeal to each person's freedom. 132
130. Witness to Hope, p. 336.

131. CCC, n. 2126.
132. As the Council teaches, "The truth cannot impose itself except by virtue of its
own truth, as it makes its entrance into the mind at once quietly and with power"
(Dignitatis Humanae, n. 1).
Prologue 41
Wojtyla/John Paul II's vision of man and of the ethical life cannot be un-
derstood apart from his passion and respect for human freedom. There is
no place for a tyranny of truth in the life of a personal subject created for
"his own sake." Truth can only have meaning in a person's life if he freely
embraces it. If freedom for Wojtyla is inviolable within just limits, it also
entails a particular responsibility to search for the truth and adhere to it
once found. 133
Modem philosophy has focused on subjectivity to the neglect of ob-
jectivity, and thus has erred by divorcing freedom from truth. At the same
time modem philosophy has challenged men like Wojtyla to recognize that
traditional fonnulations of the faith may well have focused on objectivity
to the neglect of subjectivity. In this vein some in the Church have tended
toward a presentation of truth which lacked respect for the freedom of
peoples and individuals. Hence, Wojtyla believes modem philosophy's de-
sire to begin with the subjective themes of experience, consciousness, and
freedom can enrich the faith, even if Catholic thought generally opposes
this to a philosophy of being and of objective truth. As a Thomist, Wojtyla
would certainly side with the philosophy of being if forced to choose be-
tween the two. But he does not see it as an either/or proposition. His philo-
sophical project has been to find the both/and-to give proper recognition
to the discoveries of phenomenology without renouncing the philosophy
of being; to "make room" for subjectivity within a realist philosophy.
• Developments in theological reflection invariably meet with some

resistance. Karol Wojtyla's project is no exception. Some modem students
of St. Thomas, for example, see Wojtyla's acceptance of modem philoso-
phy more as a departure from the Church's heritage than an authentic de-
velopment. Yet St. Thomas himself encountered similar criticism when he
built on Augustine's work and integrated his thought with Aristotelian phi-
losophy. Thomism remains Wojtyla's intellectual foundation, but when the
need arises, foundations must be built upon. ll4 Those who are classically
trained may find themselves a bit uncomfortable with Wojtyla's new ap-
proach, but there is room to go beyond St. Thomas' understanding of who
man is as a person. This Pope can take us there precisely because he is a
Thomist who uses all the good aspects of phenomenology.
133. See CCc. 11. 2467.

134. See Witn ess to Hope, p. 87. For a fine summalY of the need for John Paul's new
synthesis, how this need developed, and how John Paul's new synthesis addresses this
need, see Father Richard Hogan's Dissent ji "0 111 the Creed (Huntington, IN: Our Sunday
Visitor, 200 I), chapter 6.
Contrary to some criticisms, Wojtyla/John Paul II's respect for and

use of modem philosophy in his presentation of the faith does not by any
means imply a yielding of Catholicism to relativism. Rocco Buttiglione
assures us that "John Paul II could repeat the words of his predecessor,
Pius X, who refused to accept the errors of modem times. But the rejection
of the errors of modem times does not mean that we should not correct the
one-sidedness of the exposition of sound doctrine, which furnished the oc-
casion for the rise of these errors."135 How often is the Church's doctrine
rejected because it is thought to be hopelessly removed from "real life" ex-
perience? How often have children educated in the faith rejected it as
adults because their teachers-whether parents, pastors, or others-tended
to impose religion upon them without respect for and education in authen-
tic human freedom? The Church's reconciliation with freedom, Buttigli-
one concludes, is "of central importance in order to understand both Karol
Wojtyla's pontificate and Vatican II and the contemporary crisis of the
Church."136 Freedom must be challenged to submit itself to truth, but no
one can be forced to accept the truth without doing violence to the dignity
of the person. When truth is presented in its full splendor, it does not need
to be imposed. It has its own appeal which naturally attracts men and
women. When Christians witness joyfully to the "splendor of the truth,"
others seek it out and embrace it freely.
In coming to embrace truth, Wojtyla distinguishes between "knowl-
edge" and "consciousness." "According to Classical tradition, 'knowl-
edge' is a receptive faculty, and receives the given. 'Consciousness' is
rather the faculty which either interiorizes the given or rejects such an
interiorization, and by doing these things constitutes the inward world of a
person."137 Knowledge of reality-and a willingness to accept that reality
exists independent of me-is, of course, the first step . But this is not
enough. If knowledge passively accepts objective truth, consciousness ac-
tively works to give it a subjective context and meaning in one's own life.
This is extremely important. For one can know reality, but remain at odds
with it by failing to interiorize it. In such case the incongruity eventually
becomes too painful and the person will often deny reality in favor of a
counterfeit that promises "relief." But such a person lives an illusion in
which peace eludes him. For a person to be at peace with himself and the
135. Karol Wojtyla: The Thought o/the Man Who Became Pope John Paul II, p. 372.
136. Ibid.
137. Ibid., p. 354.
Prologue 43
world, he must not only know the truth, he must interiorize it, feel it, expe-
rience it, and freely embrace it as his own. To do so, he must trust the truth
wholeheartedly, have an impassioned love for the objective good and
abandon himself to it fearlessly. This is only possible if truth is perfect
love, which is only possible if truth itself is a perfect person. Truth is.
Truth's name is Jesus Christ.
Here Wojtyla's philosophy opens itself to theology, to divine love.
Wojtyla's phenomenology (echoing what he learned from St. John of the
Cross) ultimately calls us to an awareness of objective truth through the
experience of divine love-through an experience of reality as the good,
beatifying, gratuitous gift that it is. In Crossing the Threshold of Hope,
John Paul observes that classical philosophy recognizes that "nothing is in
the intellect that was not first in the senses." Nevertheless, he then empha-
sizes that "the limits of these 'senses' are not exclusively sensory." Man
can "sense" the transcendent. He has a "religious sense."138 "It is therefore
possible," the Pope affirms, "to speak from a solid foundation about hu-
man experience, moral experience, or religious experience. And if it is
possible to speak about such experiences, it is difficult to deny that, in the
realm of human experience, one also finds good and evil, truth and beauty,
and God."139
This interior experience of God is gained not only by intelligent dis-
cernment and technical knowledge (although these are important), but also
through the engagement of the deepest impulses of one's person-through
the meeting of one's freedom with the God who gave us freedom as the
capacity to meet him. In short, if the traditional philosophy of being ad-
dresses the "God question" by providing rational proofs for his existence,
Wojtyla's philosophical project addresses the same question by inviting
each person to "taste and see"- engage your freedom in self-donation and
experience God's love for yourself. In this way "proof' of God's existence
is verified not only in the mind but even more so in the heart. People un-
derstand a concept with the mind, but people love persons with the heaI1.
Ultimate Reality is much more than a concept. It is a Person. "And we find
ourselves by now," John Paul asserts, "very close to St. Thomas, but the
path passes not so much through being and existence as through people
and their meeting each other, through the 'I' and the 'Thou.' .. .In the sphere
of the everyday man's entire life is one of 'coexistence'-'thou' and '1'-
138. For an in-depth study of this idea, see Luigi Giussani, The Religious Sense
(Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press, 1997).
139. Crossing the Threshold ofHope, pp. 33 - 34.
and also in the sphere of the absolute and definitive: T and 'THOU. '" And
so John Paul concludes that our 'faith is profoundly anthropological,
rooted constitutively in coexistence, in the community of God's people,
and in communion with this eternal' THOU. "'140
• The following image may help to distinguish between "knowledge"

and "consciousness." If it is raining outside, metaphysical knowledge
would accept this as a given-as an objective reality outside oneself and
not determined by oneself. But if it is raining, our experience can and
should confirm this. Not only could we look outside and see it, but we
could step outside and feel it. Applying the image, if the Church's doctrine
on faith and morals is true, our experience can and should confirm this.
John Paul's goal is to get us to step into the rain, to experience it, get
soaked, and to spend our lives joyfully playing in the rain like a child. Tak-
ing this image a step further, we can recognize the need of childlikeness if
we are to experience the objective truth as a liberating good ("unless you
turn and become like children"-Mt 18:3). Some might have a (meta-
physical) knowledge of the rain, but be at odds with it internally. If such a
person fails to become like a child, he will either live in a state of continual
resentment toward the rain, or he will deny its existence and create his own
illusory world "unhindered" by "undesirous" weather. But herein lies the
devil's perennial deception-reality (God) is not a hindrance, it is not
undesirous. Submission to reality (God) is ultimate freedom and the
fulfillment of every desire. But only a "child" can see this. Only children
like to play in the rain.
D. Wedding Objectivity and SubjectiviZv

By wedding the objective and subjective world views, John Paul TI
provides a "total vision of man" that avoids the pitfalls of abstraction and
subjectivism. Here again we encounter the great "nuptial mystery." At the
crux of the marriage of objectivity and subjectivity is the union of God
and man in the person of Christ. In Christ, our humanity-body and
soul-embraces ultimate reality without any incongruity. From Wojtyla's
perspective, the moral relativism that has resulted from the modern "turn
to the subject" is only the product of an anthropological stagnation in the
absence of faith. In other words, man turns to himself and "stays" there,
failing to see that his own humanity points him beyond himself. To use the
nuptial image, moral relativism results from the Bride (man) looking in a
mirror without recognizing the nuptial meaning of her own body which
140. Ibid., p. 36.

Prologue 45
opens her to union with her Bridegroom (Christ). In the absence of this
openness to the "Other"-that is, in the absence of faith (recall John Paul's
definition of faith as "openness to the gift of God")-the Bride opts for a
sterile, narcissistic self-focus. At this point the "subjective turn" erodes
into subjectivism.
But when the Bride recognizes the nuptial meaning of her humanity
and opens to Christ, human subjectivity is gradually purified and ulti-
mately becomes completely objective. 141 Human subjectivity becomes in-
formed by Truth himself. In the marriage of subjectivity and objectivity,
the subjective "ethic of feeling" (the imbalance of Scheler) and the objec-
tive "ethic of duty" (the imbalance of Kant) become integrated in the per-
fectly subjective and objective "ethos of redemption" (the balance of
Wojtyla/John Paul II) .
• As we shall see, prior to sin, the subjective experiences of Adam

and Eve completely accorded with objective reality. The hannony of sub-
jective experience with objective reality becomes tenuous only as a result
of having lost "purity of heart." Redemption in Christ, however, offers us
the possibility of gradually regaining the purity of our origins. The har-
mony of subjective and objective reality, then, solidifies in our experience
of the efficacy of redemption- that is, in the real power of redemption to
restore "purity of heart." Because of the strong tendency to impurity,
people often hold the subjective experiences of the heart in suspicion, fear-
ing they can never come in tune with objective reality. This is understand-
able. But, as John Paul stresses, "Man cannot stop at putting the 'heart' in a
state of continual and irreversible suspicion .... Redemption is a truth, a re-
ality, in the name of which man must feel cal\ed, and 'called with
efficacy. "'142
Therefore, John Paul's Christo-centric theological anthropology

saves the modem desire to "start with man" from ending in subjectivism.
If it is true, as faith teaches, that man is made in the image of God and is
created for eternal union with him, then starting with man- if we stay the
course-will ultimately end with God. Starting with the subjective per-
spective will ultimately lead to objective reality i(we follow John Paul and
press into that link between theology and anthropology "with faith, an
open mind, and all our heart."'43
141. See Mary Shivanandan, Crossing the Threshold of Love (Washington, DC:
Catholic University of America Press, 1999), p. 21.
142.10/29/80, TB 167.
143. Dives el Misericordia, n. I .
If modem rationalism makes man the measure of all things, theologi-

cal anthropology discovers that the God-man is the measure of all things.
Jesus Christ "is the center of the universe and of history." The Word made
flesh "fully reveals man to himself'-not by tyrannically asserting his di-
vine prerogatives (this would contradict the dignity of a creature made for
"its own sake"), but by making the humble and sincere gift of himself to
man. Man, in tum, discovers his rightful place in the universe when he
freely receives this gift and makes a "sincere gift" of himself back to God
and to others. 144 As we shall see more clearly through our study of the
Pope's catechesis, these profound truths are stamped in the "great mys-
tery" of masculinity and femininity and in our call to become "one flesh ."
Rationalism fails man right here. It "does not accept the mystery of
man as male and female, nor is it willing to admit that... Christ reveals man
to himself. In a certain sense this statement of the Second Vatican Coun-
cil," John Paul II proclaims, "is the reply, so long awaited, which the
Church has given to modem rationalism."145 The epilogue will revisit this
"reply to modem rationalism" in light of all that we learn from the Pope's
theology of the body. As an extended commentary on Gaudium et Spes,
n. 22, the theology of the body is perhaps Wojtyla's most important, pro-
vocative, and challenging engagement with modernity because it takes us
to the crux of the crisis: the relationship of man and woman and the mean-
ing of their union in "one flesh."
9. The Humanae Vitae Crisis

In the first year of his papacy, John Paul II, with his distinctive Chris-
tian humanism, had already challenged Marxist ideology in Latin America
and Communism in his native Poland. In early September, 1979 he began
challenging another modem revolution with the "full truth" of the human
person-the sexual revolution. Based on our previous discussion about the
roots of ethics and culture, and as history attests, this revolution was
144. These passages from Gaudium et Spes, n. 22 ("Christ fully reveals man to him-
self') and n. 24 (man is created for "his own sake" but can only find himselfthrough "the
sincere gift of self') summarize the essential theological and philosophical proposals of
the Second Vatican Council regarding who man is and how he is to live. They are so
pivotal in the work of John Paul II that one would be hard pressed to find any significant
catechetical project of his that did not use these texts.
Prologue 47
bound to bring disaster. But where sin abounds, grace abounds even more.
If the Holy Spirit grants the Church what she needs when she needs it, the
gift the Holy Spirit has given to the Church in our day is John Paul II's
theology of the body.
A. The Point of Contention

Wise men and women throughout history, and certainly not just
Christians, have recognized that respect for the procreative function of
sexual union is the linchpin of sexual morality.146 Hence, if the modem
brand of sexual "liberation" was to flourish, this linchpin had to be re-
moved. Here lies the main point of contention in the clash between the
Church and the modem world-the Church's insistence that God estab-
lished an inseparable link between sex and procreation, a link that man
cannot break. This clash involves two irreconcilable anthropologies-
two irreconcilable concepts of the human body and of human sexual-
ity.147 Rationalism sees the body only as a biological reference point
while the Church has always taught that the body is an integral part of the
human person.
These disparate anthropologies collided when Pope Paul VI's encyc-
lical Humanae VItae-which reaffirmed the Church's constant teaching on
the immorality of contraception-fell like a bomb on the Church in 1968.
If it was understandable that people outside the Church might dismiss the
papal pronouncement as antiquated gibberish, the uproar the encyclical
caused within the Church showed how far the rationalist view of man had
seeped into the minds of Catholics. Yet when the Humanae VItae crisis
broke, Karol Wojtyla was already well prepared to dialogue with the mod-
em world on this issue. In 1978, after the whirlwind of two conclaves
within seven weeks- the second of which ended with the election of this
Polish philosopher and theologian-it seemed God was saying that Wojty-
la's new ethical synthesis had great import for the universal Church.
146. Even Sigmund Freud observed in his IntroductOlY Lectures in Psychoanalysis

(New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 1966) that the "abandonment of the reproduc-
tive function is the common feature of all perversions. We actually describe a sexual ac-
tivity as perverse," he wrote, "if it has given up the aim of reproduction and pursues the
attainment of pleasure as an aim independent of it" (p. 392).
147. See Familiaris Consortio, n. 32.
B. The Need for a Personalist Ethic

One thing is certain about the complex ecclesial crisis that followed
Humanae Vitae: the old-style ethics of the moral manuals-often legalis-
tic, impersonal, and authoritarian-proved woefully inadequate to stem
the cultural tide pushing for contraception. John Paul was confident, how-
ever, that the philosophical project he and his colleagues from the Lublin
school had so carefully nUliured could make a difference. By bringing this
project to bear in full force, John Paul courageously believed he could
demonstrate that Humanae Vitae was not against man but unstintingly for
him; that Humanae Vitae was not opposed to conjugal love and sexual
pleasure, but called men and women to the most spiritually intense expres-
sion of them. In light of the virtual catechetical failure of Paul VI's encycli-
cal, John Paul knew he had to make a compelling case for Humanae Vitae.
For the newly elected pope understood well that contraception effectively
disorients "the deepest substratum of human ethics and culture." It alters
humanity'S course at its foundations-away from a culture of love and life
and toward a culture of utility and death.'48 The Humanae Vitae crisis is
anything but peripheral. Just two and a half months before taking the chair
of Peter, on the tenth anniversary of Humanae Vitae, Karol Wojtyla de-
scribed the issue of contraception as a "struggle for the value and meaning
of humanity itself."'49 As the title of the encyclical indicates, the integral
truth of human life is at stake-the integral truth of the human person. The
discussion had to be framed accordingly.
The cry that the Church "just isn't 'in touch' with real life experi-
ence" especially targets her sexual ethic. Prior to the mid-twentieth cen-
tury, Church pronouncements on sexual matters had focused mainly on the
exterior "duties" of spouses, and the objective "ends" of the sexual act-
formulated in a strict hierarchy as procreation, the mutual help of spouses,
and the remedy for concupiscence. Attention seemed almost fixated on the
"primary end" of procreation with little or no attention given to the mean-
148. For a detailed discussion of the destructive sequellae of contraception, see

Christopher West, Good News About Sex & Marriage: Answers to Your Honest Questions
About Catholic Teaching (Ann Arbor, MI: Servant Publications, 2000), pp. 118-125. See
also Patrick Fagan, "A Culture ofInverted Sexuality," Catholic World Report, November
1998, p. 57.
149. Cited in Crossing the Threshold a/Love, p. 113 .
Prologue 49
ing and experience of conjugal love. 15o Objectively speaking, the tradi-
tional formulation on the ends of marriage is true. But for most people to-
day, focusing merely on the objective reality tends to create a "disconnect"
with the interior experience of the persons involved. As John Paul says,
"We cannot consider the body an objective reality outside the personal
subjectivity of man." Hence, questions of sexual morality are closely
bound up "with the content and quality of the subjective experience" of
the persons involved. 151
C. The Personalistic Norm

Personalism treats ethical questions from this "insider's" point of
view. In his book Love & Responsibility, Wojtyla seems to reproach anti-
quated explanations of sexual ethics, insisting that the "personal order is
the only proper plane for all debate on matters of sexual morality."152 Ac-
cordingly, students of theology will recognize a new focus in the Pope's
analysis. For example, John Paul speaks much more about the interior
meaning of sexual union as self-donation for the sake of the communion
of persons than about the objective end of sexual union as procreation.
However, as the Pope himself asserts, "In this renewed formulation, the
traditional teaching on the purposes of marriage (and their hierarchy)" is
not done away with, but "is reaffirmed and at the same time deepened
from the viewpoint of the interior life of the spouses."153 John Paul's per-
sonalism, therefore, does not separate us from objective truth as some
think. Rather, through his explicit appeal to personal experience, the Holy
Father provides "subjective resonance" for objective norms.
Applying his philosophical project, the Pope recognizes that as a per-
son, man is conscious of his acts. This means he can experience the objec-
tive good that fulfills him and the evil that harms him. When he does, the
objective norm no longer feels imposed from the outside, but wells up
from within. People no longer feel forced to conform to truth. They want
to conform to truth. John Paul maintains that, despite sin, an "echo" of
God's original plan remains deep within every human heart. In his theol-
150. Some have tried to find a place for conjugal love among the traditional ends of
marriage by equating it with the "mutual help of spouses." Love, however, is not an
"end" of marriage at all. It is the governing form of marriage from which the ends flow
(see §97).
151. 4/15/81, TB 218.
153. 10/10/84, TB 407.
ogy of the body, the Pope aims to help people peel away the layers of de-
bris that cover the true desires of their hearts so that this "echo" can re-
sound. The more it does, the more our subjective experience harmonizes
with objective reality. The more that echo resounds, the more we can read
the "language of the body" and the desires of our hearts "in truth." People
who come to understand the Pope's theology of the body cannot help but
recognize the inner movements of their own hearts being laid bare. It rings
true. "I can identify with this," they respond. "I experience life this way. I
desire this."
This "insider's view" of the ethical life crystallizes in what Wojtyla
calls the personalistic norm. In its negative form, it states that a person
must never be used as a means to an end. We know from our experience
that this violates our dignity. In its positive form, it states that the only
proper response to a person is love. 154 We know also from experience that
the deepest desire of our hearts is to love and be loved. The opposite of
loving, then, for Wojtyla, is not hating, but using. Such using often mas-
querades as love. Since the sexual revolution dawned, at least two gen-
erations of men and women have now been groomed in the "art" of
sexual utility.
But the human heart cannot feign solace in a world of sexual utilitari-
anism for long. As more and more people experience the self-inflicted
wounds of a counterfeit sexual liberation, the world is fast becoming a
mission field ready to soak up John Paul's message. By rei inking the de-
sires of the human heart with the truth, the theology of the body offers true
sexual liberation-the freedom for which Christ has set us free, the free-
dom to love in the image of God as male and female. In fact, the Pope's
theology of the body has already sparked an ever-growing "sexual coun-
ter-revolution." It resembles the revolution that toppled the iron curtain-
starting slowly and quietly in human hearts that welcome the truth that this
Polish Pope proclaims about the human person. Then it spreads from heart
to heart, gathering a great multitude who glimpse their true dignity and
will not rest until the shackles of dehumanizing ideologies (political,
sexual, or otherwise) break.
This revolutionary quality of the Pope's catechesis led George Wei-
gel to describe the theology of the body as "a kind of theological time
bomb set to go off, with dramatic consequences ... perhaps in the twenty-
first century." Since Karol Wojtyla has taken modem philosophy's "tum to
the subject" so seriously, Weigel believes that when this time bomb ex-
plodes, "the theology of the body may well be seen as a critical moment
154. See Love & Responsibility, p. 41.

Prologue 51
not only in Catholic theology, but in the history of modern thought."1 55

Looking at the subject alone turns us into navel-gazers. In this environ-
ment, an idolatrous, self-indulgent cult of the body trumps the "abstrac-
tions" of theology. However, a theology of the body-which links the
modern turn to the subject with objective and ultimate reality- provides
the necessary bridge for the modern world to reconnect with Christ.
Christ-the theological Word made flesh-is the link between the
human person and the ultimate reality. Christ himself is ultimate reality. In
his body "given up for us," we come to see the ultimate meaning of our
own bodies revealed. In this way "Christ fully reveals man to himself."
John Paul II's theology ofthe body, then, is nothing but an incarnate meet-
ing with the Incarnate Christ. As such, it is not only a dramatic "time
bomb," but also a gentle, whispering affirmation of the truth every per-
son intuits-we are made as male and female for a love that never ends.
The "revelation of the body" is that that love is God: Father, Son, and
Holy Spirit.
D. Structure of the Catechesis

Modern rationalism presents only partial truths about man and effec-
tively divorces him from the nuptial mystery the body reveals. Paul VI
recognized this "disconnect" when he stated that the problem of birth
regulation, like every problem regarding human life, must be considered
beyond partial perspectives. It must be seen in light of a "total vision of
man" and his vocation, not only his natural and earthly, but his supernatu-
ral and eternal vocation. 156 Herein lies the main inspiration for John Paul
II's catechesis. 157
Through an in-depth reflection on Christ's "key words" about human
embodiment and erotic desire, John Paul provides this "total vision of
man," or what he calls an "adequate anthropology. " These "key words" re-
fer to Christ's discussion with the Pharisees about God's plan for maniage
"in the beginning" (see Mt 19:3-9), his words in the Sermon on the Mount
regarding lust and adultery committed "in the heart" (see Mt 5:27- 28),
and Christ's discussion with the Sadducees regarding the body 's resur-
rected state (see Mt 22:23-33). We call these "key words," John Paul
says, "because they open for us, like a key, the individual dimensions of
theological anthropology."158 By constructing this theological anthropol-
155 . Witn ess to Hope, p. 343.

156. See Humanae Vitae, n. 7.
157. See 4/2/80, TB 87.
158 . 1126/83, TB 365.
ogy based on Christ's own words about the body, John Paul not only
places the Church's sexual ethic in its proper anthropological context, but
he also shows that the teaching of Humanae Vitae is rooted in divine Rev-
elation- in the words of Christ himself.
In short, John Paul's catechesis seeks to tackle the Humanae Vitae
crisis by addressing two questions: "Who is man?" and, based on this,
"How is he supposed to live?" These questions frame the two main parts
of the catechesis, what we will call "Establishing an Adequate Anthropol-
ogy" and "Applying an Adequate Anthropology." In turn, each of these
two parts of the catechesis contains three "cycles."' 59
The first three cycles are known as the "triptych" of the theology of
the body and are based on those three "key words" mentioned above. To
understand adequately who man is, we must look at the three "levels" or
"stages" of the human drama: Cycle 1, Original Man, concerns man's
experience of sexual embodiment before sin; Cycle 2, Historical Man,
concerns man's experience of sexual embodiment affected by sin yet re-
deemed in Christ; and Cycle 3, Eschatological Man, concerns man's ex-
perience of sexual embodiment in the resurrection. The order of the
cycles is part of the proposed theological methodology for an adequate
anthropology.
• The clear boundaries between these "stages" of human experience

(original sin delineates original man from historical man and Christ's sec-
ond coming delineates historical man from eschatological man) speaks of
the discontinuity between them. Yet, as we shall see, a profound continuity
also marks the human drama. Christ is this continuity, for he-as the eter-
nal One and as the center of the universe and of history-is "present" in all
three states as in one moment. We must separate this eternal moment into
different stages within time, but they all refer to Christ and in him they are
one.
The final three cycles of the Pope's catechesis address how man is to
live by applying "the triptych" to the issue of vocation and to "the deepest
substratum of ethics and culture." Cycle 4 addresses Celibacy for the
Kingdom; Cycle 5, The Sacramentality of Marriage; and Cycle 6, entitled
Love and Fruirfidness, re-examines the teaching of Humanae Vitae in light
159, Some expositions of John Paul's theology of the body are not clear on its basic
two-part, six-cycle structure, The fact that the English texts were originally published in
four volumes may have caused some confusion, The proper structure is important for un-
derstanding the Pope's overall project and approach,
Prologue 53
of the entire preceding analysis. The Holy Father even describes all that he
has said in his catechesis "as an ample commentary on the doctrine con-
tained in the encyclical Humanae Vitae." Questions come from this encyc-
lical, he says, that "permeate the sum total of our reflections." Hence, the
contents of the final cycle are also found in the first cycle and throughout
the catechesis. "This is important," John Paul says, "from the point of
view of method and structure."160
With regard to this method and structure, some people find the
Pope's talks annoyingly repetitive. He repeats himself not only to recap
the previous week's themes, but also because of his circular style ofreflec-
tion. Linear thinking starts from point A and goes straight to Z. But this is
not as conducive for a mystical phenomenologist seeking to penetrate the
"great mystery." Rather than a straight line, John Paul's catechesis is more
like a spiral that takes us deeper and deeper into its basic themes. Each
time he revisits a theme, he brings us another revolution deeper into the
spiral, drawing us ever closer to the "heart" of that mystery that reunites
God and man in an eternal embrace.
Prologue-In Review
1. Christ's body justifies the expression "the Gospel of the body."
The story of Christ's body-from its conception in the womb of a Virgin
to its crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension into heaven- is the Gospel.
And everybody that comes into the world is destined to share in the Gos-
pel that is Christ's body by becoming "one body" with Christ. We seek to
ponder this mystery in our study of John Paul II's theology of the body.
2. Remaining "naked" before the Father, the New Adam presents the
specific antidote to Adam's fear: "I was afraid, because I was naked; and I
hid myself." Christ reveals the perfect love of the Father which casts out
fear. In this way the Incarnate Christ "fully reveals man to himself."
3. Physical signs convey transcendent, spiritual realities. The Pope
speaks of a theology of the body because the human body is the original
"sign" of God's own mystery in the world. The divine mystery certainly
cannot be reduced to its sign. Yet the sign is indispensable in the revelation
of the mystery. Only the body is capable of making visible what is invisible.
In fact, according to the Pope's thesis, the body "was created to transfer into
160. 11128/84, TB 420, 422 .

the visible reality of the world, the mystery hidden since time immemorial
in God, and thus to be a sign of it."
4. John Paul's catechesis on the body seeks to link theology and an-
thropology in a deep and organic way. The body reveals as in a "sacra-
ment" the mystery of the person. Christ's body is a sacrament of a divine
Person and thus reveals the divine ways of the Trinity. The scandal of this
"divinization" of the flesh never fails to confound the human heart.
5. All analogies are inadequate in their attempts to communicate the
divine Mystery. Yet the spousal analogy appears as the least inadequate
because it captures a particle of the Mystery itself. In focusing on this par-
ticle, we must always be careful, however, to respect the mysterious and
infinite difference that exists between human-spousal communion and di-
vine-Christian communion.
6. The "nuptial mystery" provides a lens through which to view and
penetrate the most important theological and anthropological truths of our
faith. Hence, John Paul's theology of the body is not merely a catechesis
on sex and marriage, but a specific, evangelical, Christian education in the
meaning of being human. It concerns God's entire plan for man in creation
and redemption.
7. We can see the fundamental importance of the nuptial mystery
by looking at the signs of the Old and New Covenants. The sacrifice of
Abraham's flesh and blood in the sign of circumcision seems to fore-
shadow Christ's sacrifice of flesh and blood in the Eucharistic/paschal
mystery. Both of these signs indicate in their own respective ways the
mystery of fruitful love and communion-the mystery of God's gener-
ous Fatherhood.
8. If the primordial sacrament of nuptial communion enabled the first
man and woman to participate in God's life and love, the deceiver-intent
on divorcing man from God's life and love-mounted his counter-plan by
attacking this sacrament. John Paul's theology of the body is a clarion call
for Christians to reclaim what Satan has plagiarized.
9. The original temptation attacked God's benevolent love. "Origi-
nal sin, then, attempts to abolish fatherhood." In man and woman's heart,
the primordial sign of God's covenant love became, in some way, a
counter-sign. In other words, by accepting the devil's lie, the "symbolic"
became "diabolic."
10. Man and woman must now contend with the "great divorce" that
ruptured the original harmony of body and soul. Without reintegration in
Christ, people either lean toward a "spiritual" life cut off from the body
Prologue 55
("angelism") or a "carnal" life cut off from the spirit ("animalism"). This
body-soul split lies at the root of the "culture of death."
11. The call to nuptial love and communion revealed by our sexual
bodies "is the fundamental element of human existence in the world," "the
foundation of human life," and, hence, "the deepest substratum of human
ethics and culture." Indeed, the human project stands or falls based on the
proper ordering of love between the sexes. Thus, it "is an illusion to think
we can build a true culture of human life if we do not...accept and experi-
ence sexuality and love and the whole of life according to their true mean-
ing and their close inter-connection."
12. Christ heals the "great divorce" and reunites us with the nuptial
mystery through the very dynamism of the Incarnation. If man is to find
himself, "he must 'appropriate' and assimilate the whole reality of the In-
carnation and Redemption." He must be willing to die with Christ in order
to be resurrected in the unity of flesh and spirit. Man cannot live without
Christ because man cannot live without love. Christ's body-and every
body-is a witness to Love.
13. The "subjective turn" in modern philosophy and the West's mas-
sive shift from religion to science demand a new synthesis of the faith to
which the contemporary world can relate. Reading the "signs of the
times," Karol Wojtyla set out on a bold philosophical project to integrate
the faith with the insights of the modem philosophy of consciousness,
without sacrificing anything essential to the traditional philosophy of being.
14. Wojtyla uses the philosophical method of phenomenology to re-
trieve the ordinary experiences of everyday life and study these phenomena
as we experience them and, in this way, approach the reality of things-as-
they-are. In tum, Wojtyla gives the mark of subjective experience to the
objective science of ethics. He shows that the demands of the Gospel are
not imposed from the "outside," but well up from "within" man.
15 . Wojtyla shows an unstinting respect for persons and their free-
dom. A tyranny of truth has no place in the life of a personal subject cre-
ated for "his own sake." Truth only has meaning for a person when he em-
braces it freely. The Church's reconciliation with freedom in this regarci is
essential if we are to understand John Paul II's pontificate, the Second
Vatican Council, and the contemporary crisis in the Church.
16. By "making room" for subjectivity within an objective or realist
philosophy, Wojtyla avoids the pitfalls of objectivizing rigorism and
subjectivizing relativism. In this marriage of objectivity and subjectivity
we encounter again the "nuptial mystery" of God's union with humanity in
Christ. A theological anthropology prevents the "subjective turn" from

stagnating on man. It enables man (the Bride) to remain open to Christ
(the Bridegroom).
17. The ecclesial crisis surrounding the encyclical Humanae Vitae
points to the crucial need for a new context in which to understand the
Christian sexual ethic. Nowhere does Wojtyla's philosophical project
prove more fruitful than right here. As a corrective to antiquated explana-
tions of sexual ethics that were often impersonal, legalistic, and authoritar-
ian, John Paul II's theology of the body provides a winning personalistic
affirmation of Humanae Vitae.
18. Paul VI stated that the teaching of Humanae Vitae must be
viewed in light of a "total vision of man." John Paul II's catechesis on the
body provides this "adequate anthropology" in its first three cycles: Origi-
nal Man, Historical Man, and Eschatological Man. In the final three
cycles, the Pope applies this "total vision of man" to the question of voca-
tions-Celibacy for the Kingdom and The Sacramentality of Marriage-
and then concludes with a reflection on Humanae Vitae.
PART I
WHO ARE WE?

ESTABLISHING AN ADEQUATE ANTHROPOLOGY
Cycle!
Original Man
This first cycle consists of twenty-three general audiences delivered

between September 5, 1979 and April 2, 1980. Although in this cycle John
Paul primarily reflects on the creation accounts in Genesis, he explicitly
begins with the words of Christ. By basing the three cycles of his "ad-
equate anthropology" on the words of the Incarnate Word, he makes a de-
liberate anthropological statement. If his goal is to meditate on the human
body in order to discover who man is as male and female, the "richest
source for knowledge of the body is the Word made flesh. Christ reveals
man to himself. "I
John Paul finds a source of great hope for all men and women in
Christ's discussion with the Pharisees about maniage. If conflict, tension,
jealousies, and divisions have tarnished the relationship of the sexes
throughout history, Christ challenges his listeners to recognize that "from
the beginning it was not so" (Mt 19:8). With these words, Christ calls all
men and women burdened by the heritage of sin to a radical paradigm
shift by reestablishing the original unity of the sexes as the norm for all
who become "one flesh."
As the Catechism teaches, "According to faith the discord we notice
so painfully [in the relationship of the sexes] does not stem from the na-
ture of man and woman, nor from the nature of their relations, but from
sin. As a break with God, the first sin had for its first consequence the rup-
ture of the original communion between man and woman."2 Yet the "good
news" that Christ came to reconcile God and man means he also recon-
ciles man and woman. "By coming to restore the original order of creation
I. Letter to Families, n. 19.

2. CCC, n. 1607.
59
disturbed by sin, [Christ] himself gives the strength and grace to live mar-
riage in the new dimension of the Reign of God." Therefore, "by follow-
ing Christ, renouncing themselves, and taking up their crosses ... spouses
will be able to 'receive' the original meaning of marriage and live it with
the help of Christ."3 Even if the heritage of sin carries with it the entire
history of discord between the sexes, the roots of man and woman's rela-
tionship go deeper, and Christ enables us to tap into that deeper heritage.
The Church's teaching on marriage and sexuality can never be ad-
equately understood apart from God's original plan, our fall from it, and
our redemption in Christ. Many modem men and women find the Church's
teaching on marriage and sexuality untenable because they remain locked
in a fallen view of themselves and the world. This narrow horizon makes it
easy to "normalize" disordered patterns of thinking and relating. The pain
and conflict that inevitably ensue may lead people to yearn for something
more, and such pain shows that we are created for something more. But
without any reference to God's original plan and the hope of its restoration
in Christ, people tend to accept the discord between the sexes as "just the
way it is."
The following image may help frame our discussion. When we nor-
malize our fallen state, it is akin to thinking it normal to drive with flat
tires. We may intuit that something is amiss, but when everyone drives
around in the same state, we lack a point of reference for anything differ-
ent. In Christ's discussion with the Pharisees, he points them back to man
and woman's "fully inflated" state. In tum, through his penetrating exege-
sis of the Genesis texts, John Paul seeks to reconstruct the experience of
"full inflation." Just as tires are meant to be inflated, we know that we long
for the original unity of man and woman. Pushing the analogy, the good
news is that Christ did not come into the world to condemn those with flat
tires. He came in love to fill our tires once again with air. To the degree
that we experience this "re-inflation" (which is never perfect in this life),
the Church's teaching on marriage and sexuality is no longer viewed as a
rigid ethic imposed from "without." It is experienced as a liberating ethos
welling up from "within."
3. CCC, n. 1615.
Original Man 61
10. Christ Directs Us Back to "the Beginning"

September 5, 12, 19, 1979 (TB 25-30j4
Men and women of all times and cultures have raised questions about
the nature and meaning of marriage. As John Paul observes, such ques-
tions are raised today "by single persons, married couples, fiances, young
people, but also by writers, journalists, politicians, economists, demogra-
phers, in a word, by contemporary culture and civilization" (87). The
questions of modem men and women are charged with problems unknown
to the Pharisees who questioned Jesus about the lawfulness of divorce.
Even so, Jesus' response to the Pharisees is timeless. In it John Paul finds
the foundation for establishing an adequate vision of who men and women
are-or, more so-who they are called to be and, thus, how they are called
to live when they join in "one flesh."
According to the Gospel of Matthew, the dialogue between Christ
and the Pharisees took place as follows:
And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, "Is it lawful to
divorce one's wife for any cause?" [Jesus] answered, "Have you not read
that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female,
and said, 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be
joined to his wife and the two shall become one flesh'? So they are no
longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no
man put asunder." They said to him, "Why then did Moses command one
to give a certificate of divorce and to put her away?" He said to them,
"For your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives,
but from the beginning it was not so" (Mt 19:4-8, see also Mk 10:2-9).
A. Unity and Indissolubility

Moses allowed divorce as a concession to sin, but Christ can re-es-
tablish the original unity and indissolubility of marriage because he is "the
Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world" (In 1:29). Moses' rea-
son for divorce, therefore, no longer holds sway. As the Holy Father says:
"That 'let no man put asunder' is decisive. In the light of these words of
4. The dates of the audiences from which the content of a section is drawn will ap-
pear under each section heading along with the page numbers from the TB volume. The
exact page from the TB volume will also follow each quote for quick reference. When
quotes are pulled out of sequence from a future or previous audience, they will be refer-
enced with a footnote. Recall that quotes are taken from the original Vatican translation
and the one-volume copyedited version may vary slightly.
Christ, Genesis 2:24 [the two become 'one flesh'] sets forth the principle
of the unity and indissolubility of marriage as the very content of the Word
of God, expressed in the most ancient revelation" (26).5 But as the Pope
also points out, Christ does not merely use his authority to re-establish an
objective norm. He invites his questioners to reflect on the beauty of God's
original plan in order to awaken their consciences. This original plan is
stamped in them. "The hardness of their hearts"6 has obscured it, but it is
still within them. Christ knows that if they traced the "echoes" of their
hearts back to "the beginning," this norm would well up from within. They
would understand subjectively the reason for the objective indissolubility
of marriage. And if they lived from this deeper heritage of their hearts,
they would desire nothing else.
The same holds true for the many people today who question the
meaning of man and woman's relationship. If we are to provide adequate
answers to contemporary questions, we too must take Christ up on his in-
vitation to reflect on God's plan "in the beginning." Thus John Paul begins
his investigation of the Genesis texts.
B. Two Creation Accounts

Many have been surprised by John Paul's concern to show that his
biblical interpretation harmonizes with contemporary methods. For ex-
ample, he seems to take for granted the view of many modem scholars that
the two creation accounts in Genesis were written at different times by dif-
ferent authors (see 27-28).1 The so-called "Elohist" account of Genesis 1
derives from "Elohim," the term used for God in this account. The
"Yahwist" account of Genesis 2 and 3 (believed to be a much older text
than the Elohist account) is so named because it uses the term "Yahweh"
for God.
The Elohist account is loaded with a "powerful metaphysical con-
tent," defining man "in the dimensions of being and existence" (29). In
fact, man is the only creature defined in relation to Being itself. He is the
only creature defined theologically-not with a likeness to the other crea-
5. See ccc, n. 1644.

6. In the Hebrew, what we translate "hardness of heart" actually meant "non-cir-
cumcision ofthe heart." Since circumcision was the sign of the old covenant, John Paul
notes later in his catechesis that non-circumcision meant "distance from the covenant
with God" and "expressed unyielding obstinacy in opposing God" (8/6/80 first
endnote, TB 184).
7. See also CCC, n. 289.
Original Man 63
tures, but with a likeness to God. "In the seven-day cycle of creation ... the
Creator seems to halt before calling [man] into existence, as if he were
pondering within himself to make a decision: 'Let us make man in our im-
age, after our likeness '" (28). John Paul elaborates by saying that the first
phrases of the Bible make it clear that man cannot be reduced to the ele-
ments of the world. He is certainly a physical creature, but he is also more
than that; man is spiritual. The creative tension of the unity of body and
soul defines him. This latter point is decisive for a theology of the body.
"Man, whom God created 'male and female,' bears the divine image im-
printed on his body 'from the beginning."'8 This establishes an "unassail-
able point of reference" in order to understand who we are (anthropology)
and how we are to live (ethics).
Deeply imbedded in the truth of anthropology and ethics is man and
woman's call to "be fruitful and multiply." This original divine blessing
corresponds with their creation in God's image. As the prologue noted, the
capacity to "pro-create" (not as a response to biological instinct but by the
free choice proper to persons) enables them to participate in the creative,
covenant love of God. Precisely in this context it is necessary to under-
stand the reality ofthe good or the aspect of value. With God's affirmation
that everything he created is "very good" (Gen 1:31), we can conclude that
"being and the good are convertible" (29). This means that everything that
exists is good in itself. Nothing that exists is evil in itself. Evil, by definition,
is always and only the deprivation of what is good. Therefore, to exist-just
to be-is very good. More specifically, to exist as male and female and to
bring more males and females into existence ("be fruitful and multiply") is
very good. To think otherwise is unbiblical. This philosophy of value
(axiology) lies at the foundation of every Christian discussion about cre-
ation, and about human existence in particular.
In describing man's creation and his call to be fruitful and multiply,
John Paul points out that the Elohist account contains only the objective
facts and defines the objective reality. On the other hand, the Yahwist ac-
count seeks to penetrate man's psychology. In doing so it presents the cre-
ation of man especially in its subjective aspect. As the Pope states: "The
second chapter of Genesis constitutes, in a certain manner, the most an-
cient description and record of man's self-knowledge, and together with
the third chapter it is the first testimony of human conscience" (30). With
such explicit attention paid to man's "interiority," John Paul says that the
Yahwist account provides "in nucleo" nearly all the elements of analysis
of man to which contemporary philosophical anthropology is sensitive.
8. 112/80, TB 58; emphasis added.

Here the Holy Father is referring to the modem "tum to the subject" of
which we previously spoke.
Significantly, Christ referred to both creation stories when he di-
rected the Pharisees back to "the beginning." In this way Christ's words
confirm that both the objective and the SUbjective elements of the "one
flesh" union are indispensable in establishing a proper understanding of
man and woman's relationship. As an exegete seeking to penetrate man's
"interiority" in order to confirm objective truth, John Paul will spend most
of his time examining the subjective experiences of Adam and Eve from
the Yahwist text. By doing so, he brings a dramatic development of think-
ing to our understanding of the Elohist teaching that man is made in the
divine image.
11. Echoes of Our Original Experiences

September 19.26; October 10,24,31, 1979 (TB 30-40)
The tree of the knowledge of good and evil marks the "boundary"
between the state of original innocence (integral nature) and the state of
historical sinfulness (fallen nature). Without any direct experience of it,
"historical" men and women find it difficult to imagine what life was
like on the other side of this boundary. Although we cannot actually
cross this boundary, Christ orders us "in a certain sense to go beyond the
boundary" (31).
A. An Essential Continuity
John Paul emphasizes that there is "an essential continuity and a link
between these two different states or dimensions of the human being." The
historical state "plunges its roots, in every man without any exception, in
his own theological 'prehistory,' which is the state of original innocence"
(32). Elsewhere he explains that there is imprinted in the experience of
fallen man "a certain 'echo' of original innocence itself: a 'negative,' as it
were, of the image, whose 'positive' had been precisely original inno-
cence."9 Although the negative of a photograph reveals something of the
positive image, it needs to be "flipped over" for the colors to take on their
true light. Thus even though we have no experience of original innocence,
we can reconstruct it to a certain degree by "flipping over" our experience
of innocence lost. If we listen, we can still hear the original experience
9. 2/4/81 , TB 204.
Original Man 65
echoing in our hearts. In fact, John Paul describes this echo as a "co-inher-
itance" of sin. Sin is only intelligible in reference to original innocence. If
sin means literally to "miss the mark," the word implicitly refers to the
mark we are missing: original innocence.
When that echo of innocence resounds in us, we experience a deep
awareness of our own fallenness, of grace lost. But this should not cause
us to despair, because it also opens us to the possibility of redemption, of
grace restored. How tragic it would be if upon (re )discovering the beauty
of God's original plan, we found no way to overcome sin in order to live
it. Christ is the way! As we take up Christ's invitation to ponder our "be-
ginning," we must keep in mind that there is real power in him to regain
what was lost. Yes, we will always struggle with sin in this life because we
have left the state of innocence irrevocably behind. Nonetheless, through
"the redemption of the body" (Rom 8:23) won by Christ, we can come
progressively to live as we were called to in the beginning. John Paul will
continually return to this Pauline concept. By "redemption of the body"
John Paul does not mean to single out one of the results of redemption.
Rather, he intends to summarize the entire reality of Christ's Incarnation
and paschal mystery. For John Paul, "the redemption of the body" is re-
demption itself. Man is always embodied man. Thus, just as a theological
anthropology must be a theology of the body, so too must man's redemp-
tion be a redemption of the body.
"It is precisely this perspective of the redemption of the body that
guarantees the continuity and unity between the hereditary state of man's
sin and his original innocence" (34). In other words, if we could not begin
reclaiming what was lost, the historical state would be hopelessly cut off
from man's original vocation and destiny. The deepest longings of the
heart would lead only to despair. But John Paul insists on this hopeful
point: Historical man "participates not only in the history of human sinful-
ness as a ... personal and unique subject of this history." He "also partici-
pates in the history of salvation, here, too, as its subject and co-creator"
(33). Herein lies the meeting point of the remarkable gift of God with the
mystery of human freedom. In the face of grace lost, God presents us with
the sheer gift of salvation, but it remains up to us to accept the gift. As free
agcnts, that is, as persons, we must cooperate with God in our own salva-
tion. Through faith ("openness to the gift"), then, we become subjects and
"co-creators" in salvation history.'o From this perspective, historical man
comes to view the "beginning" (original man) as his true fullness. The gift
10. See CCC. nn. 306,2008.

of salvation gives birth to the hope of returning in some way to the begin-
ning at the end (eschatological man) as a sort of homecoming.
B. Revelation and Experience

John Paul observes in an endnote that many people see a line of
complete antithesis between God's revelation and human experience.
The Holy Father readily recognizes that human experience is inadequate
for understanding revelation. But he still affirms it as a legitimate means
of theological interpretation and a necessary reference point. "In the in-
terpretation of the revelation about man, and especially about the body,
we must, for understandable reasons," the Pope stresses, "refer to experi-
ence, since corporeal man is perceived by us mainly by experience"
(34). In the second endnote of this same address, John Paul asserts that
we have a right to speak of the relationship between experience and rev-
elation. Without this we ponder only "abstract considerations rather than
man as a living subject" (94).
John Paul wants to unearth the "deep roots" of the Church's teaching
on marriage and sexuality. Those deep roots are found in human subjectiv-
ity. Throughout his biblical exegesis, John Paul tries systematically to
show how the dimension of man's personal subjectivity is an indispens-
able element in outlining a theology of the body. He says that "not only the
objective reality of the body, but far more, as it seems, subjective con-
sciousness and also the subjective 'experience' of the body, enter at every
step into the structure of the biblical texts." Therefore, both subjective
consciousness and experience must be considered and find their reflection
in theology. I I Here again John Paul seeks to justify his use of the phenom-
enological method in presenting the faith. We need not be suspicious of
the philosophy of consciousness so long as we remain rooted in objective
truth. Indeed, the original subjective experiences of man and woman prior
to sin completely accorded with objective truth. By penetrating their con-
sciousness we find reality reflected there. We find reality experienced and
given its proper subjective resonance.
When John Paul speaks of "original human experiences," he has in
mind not so much their distance in time but their basic significance. These
original experiences did not take place in history as we understand it. As
John Paul uses the word, "history" begins only with the "knowledge of
good and evil," whereas the original experiences the Pope reflects on refer
to a mysterious "prehistory." Furthermore, he attempts to reconstruct these
experiences not so much to determine precisely who man and woman
1l. See 4/15/81, TB 218.

Original Man 67
were "then," but to help us better understand who we are now-more so,
who we are meant to be. In the final analysis, we cannot know the events
and experiences of our "prehistory" with any "historical" certainty-that
is, not as we understand history today. We know that the human race
sprang from one man and one woman, and that through "a deed that took
place at the beginning of the history of man, "12 they disobeyed God and
fell into sin. However, we approach these primeval events and experiences
only by pondering "the symbolism of the biblicallanguage."13
Explicitly appealing to the contemporary philosophy of religion
and of language, the Holy Father states that this biblical language is
mythical. He clarifies that the term "myth," however, "does not desig-
nate a fabulous content, but merely an archaic way of expressing a
deeper content."14 Thus, John Paul is not conceding to the idea that the
biblical creation stories are merely human fabrications. By describing
these divinely inspired stories as "mythical," he is simply acknowledg-
ing that our "theological prehistory" is shrouded in mystery. Myth, sym-
bol, and metaphor are the only means at our disposal if we wish to enter
into the mystery of our "beginning."
Mysterious as our prehistory is, the original experiences of man and
woman remain at the root of every human experience. "They are, in fact,
so intermingled with the ordinary things of life that we do not generally
notice their extraordinary character."15 John Paul focuses on three such ex-
periences: original solitude, original unity, and original nakedness. His
analysis takes us to the extraordinary side of the ordinary. The first ex-
traordinary thing we recognize is the depth of original insight that John
Paul extracts from one of the most familiar stories in the Bible. The Holy
Father brings the Scriptures to life- to each and every human life. By pen-
etrating these original human experiences, John Paul enables us to see that
the story of Adam and Eve, far from being abstract, is a story about each
of us. His insights resound in us. This is the gift afforded by John Paul's
incorporation of the modem "tum to the subject."
C. Original Solitude
"It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper
fit for him" (Gen 2:18). These words of God-Yahweh form the basis of the
Pope's reflections on original solitude. As we shall see, original solitude
12. eee, n. 390.

13 . eee, n. 375.
14. 1117179, TB 43.
15. 12/12/79, TB 51.
will have an ample perspective in John Paul's reflections. To begin with, it

has two basic meanings. The most obvious meaning derives from the
male-female relationship. Man is "alone" without woman. But John Paul
insists that this solitude has a more fundamental meaning, one derived
from man's nature. He is "alone" in the visible world as a person.
It is significant that the first man ('adam in Hebrew), is not defined as
a male {'ish} until after the creation of woman {'ishshah} . So Adam's soli-
tude is not only proper to the male. It is proper to "man" as such, to every
human person. As John Paul says, this solitude is "a fundamental anthro-
pological problem, prior, in a certain sense, to the one raised by the fact
that this man is male and female" (36). It is prior not so much in the chro-
nological sense but "by its very nature," since it is man's first discovery of
his own personhood. In this way, being a body- being somebody, a body-
person-"belongs to the stmcture of the personal subject more deeply than
the fact that he is in his somatic constitution also male or female." 16
In other words, the "first" human experience is one of simply "being
a body," not of being as a body male or female. Experience of sexuality, of
being male or female, is in some sense "secondary" to this primary experi-
ence. The essential point is that, although sexual difference is fundamental
to the meaning of our humanity, each human being (each body-person)
stands with his own dignity as a subject prior to his call to live in com-
munion with an "other" person via the gift of sexual difference. If one is to
give himself away in an incarnate communion with an "other," he must
first be the kind of creature capable of doing so; he must first be a "body-
person." This is the essential significance and "priority" of original solitude.
Acknowledging Adam's need for a helper, God first creates the ani-
mals and brings them to the man to see what he will call them. Naming the
animals is certainly to be seen as preparation for the creation of woman;
however, John Paul demonstrates that it has a profound significance in it-
self. By naming the animals, Adam realizes he fundamentally differs from
them. He looks for a "helper fit for him," but fails to find one among the
animals. The experience only confirms his solitude. Adam's capacity to
name the animals speaks of his fundamental difference from them. He has
dominion over the earth and all its creatures. Adam's capacity to "till the
earth" also reveals this. Tilling is a specifically human activity that seems
to belong to the definition of man since no other living being is capable of it.
Adam realizes his unique capacity to "name" and to "till" through his
experience of embodiment-through the unique relationship between his
soul and body. In this psycho-somatic relationship, John Paul says "we
16. 1117179, TB 43.

Original Man 69
touch upon the central problem of anthropology" (40). Through the expe-
rience of the body we penetrate man's self-consciousness, his experience
and "discovery" of being a person. Adam is aware of himself; the animals
are not. He has self-determination; the animals do not. He can consciously
choose his acts; the animals cannot. He can consciously choose to till and
to name; "and whatever the man called every living creature, that was its
name" (Gen 2: 19).
Thus, in naming or identifying the animals, he actually discovers
his own "name," his own identity, his own freedom. "For created man
finds himself, right from the first moment of his existence, before God as
if in search of... his own 'identity'" (36). And man's self-knowledge "de-
velops at the same rate as knowledge ... of all the living beings to which
man has given a name to affirm his own dissimilarity with regard to
them" (37). In other words, to the extent that Adam realizes he differs
from the animals, he realizes who he is as a person. Solitude, therefore,
signifies man's subjectivity.
John Paul observes that naming the animals is a "test" of sorts
through which man gains self-awareness. "Analyzing the text of...Genesis
we are, in a way, witnesses of how man 'distinguishes himself' before
God-Yahweh from the whole world of [animals] with his first act of self-
consciousness." In this way Adam comes "out of his own being"; "he re-
veals himself to himself and at the same time asserts himself as a 'person'
in the visible world" (37). Here it seems we already find a foreshadowing
of the new Adam, Jesus Christ, who, according to the familiar passage
from Vatican II, will fully reveal man to man himself. Later John Paul will
say that the first Adam already bore the capacity and readiness to receive
all that would become the second Adam, Jesus Christ. 17 From the begin-
ning man was created as a Bride for Christ. Adam is already discovering
this in his solitude, that he is made for communion.
Thus, human "dominion" over creation is essential not only to man
in solitude, but also to man in the unity of male and female . In the Yahwist
text, man needs a "helper" in his vocation to "till and keep" the garden. In
the Elohist account, man and woman's vocation to fruitful union is
coupled with their call to "subdue the earth" and to have "dominion over
the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over every living thing
that moves upon the earth" (Gen I :28). In fact, man's experience of sexual
difference and the call to communion will detemline the way man exer-
cises his dominion over creation. The loving communion of man and
woman will facilitate a "loving" care of and for creation. But if love were
17. See 2/3/82, TB 253 .

denied in the male-female relationship, responsible dominion over cre-

ation would lead to abuse of the visible world. IS
12. Solitude Prepares Man for Communion

October 24, 31, 1979 (TB 38- 42)
In just a few sentences from the creation narrative in Genesis 2, we

can perceive with great depth the subjectivity of the human being. The
Yahwist text makes it clear that man's creation as a person "is revealed not
on the basis of any primordial metaphysical analysis, but on the basis of a
concrete subjectivity of man" (40). This demonstrates the objective-sub-
jective complementarity of the two creation stories. Adam's experience of
solitude in the Yahwist narrative is his subjective realization of being cre-
ated in God's image, as objectively described in the first creation account.
In other words, what the Elohist account only observes externally (man is
a person made in God's image), the Yahwist account confirms by penetrat-
ing man's interiority-his consciousness, his psychology, his experience.
In fact, the Holy Father says that without understanding Adam's
subjective experience of solitude, we cannot understand who man is as a
creature made in God's image. Recognizing this objective-subjective
harmony is crucial to John Paul's entire project. Through this harmony,
the anthropological definition of the Yahwist text approaches the theo-
logical definition of man from the Elohist text. Here, right from the start,
we are pressing into the link between theology and anthropology. If in the
Yahwist text solitude is the frontier of communion, communion too will
shed light on the image of God in man that the Elohist text speaks of.
A. Partner of the Absolute

From the beginning, man was created to be, as John Paul describes, a
"partner of the Absolute." As a personal subject, he was called to enter a
covenant with God, a relationship of eternal communion. Above all, as
"subject of the covenant," man's solitude "means that he, through his own
humanity, through what he is [i.e., a person], is constituted .. .in a unique,
exclusive, and unrepeatable relationship with God himself" (38). We can-
not understand who man is apart from his supreme call to enter a covenant
of love with his Creator. Of course, this call to communion with God is not
man's due. It is a sheer, gratuitous gift,19 but a gift that reveals man's great-
18. See eee, n. 373; see also Evangelium Vitae, n. 42.

19. See eee, n. 367.
Original Man 71
ness. "The dignity of man rests above all on the fact that he is called to com-
munion with God."20 Our call to receive this gift explains who man is and
why he aspires to "something more." St. Augustine said it well: "You have
made us for yourself, 0 God, and our hemi is restless until it rests in yoU."21
This call to be "partner of the Absolute" hinges on man's freedom,
his ability to determine his own actions. For John Paul, the term "self-de-
termination" encapsulates a lifetime of philosophical reflection. It enables
us to approach the kernel of the human person, of what distinguishes man
from the other "bodies" in the world. God did not command the animals
not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, only Adam.
Why? God's command presents a choice, and only persons have the free
will necessary to choose. Human beings are the only creatures in the vis-
ible world that can disobey God. A squirrel cannot commit a sin. Nor can a
squirrel choose to open itself to an eternal covenant of love with God.
Love presupposes freedom. In other words, if God gives us as human be-
ings the choice of entering an eternal covenant with him (and one an-
other), we also have the choice of rejecting that covenant. If Adam
chose to eat the forbidden fruit, he would die. This "death" differs from
the possibility of death for the animals, because human death reveals
human personhood.
The Holy Father says that based on man's experience of his own
freedom, he should have understood that the forbidden tree had roots not
only in the garden of Eden, but also in his own humanity. "He should have
understood, furthermore, that the mysterious tree concealed within itself a
dimension of loneliness hitherto unknown" (41 - 42). This is not the loneli-
ness of original solitude that confirmed man's personhood. This is the
loneliness of alienation from God that would be man's death. 22
B. Liable to Non-Existence
John Paul poses an interesting question. Could Adam even have un-
derstood the words "you shall die," since he had no experience of death,
only life? He concludes that man, "who had heard these words, had to find
their truth in the very interior structure of his own solitude" (41). In his
solitude betore God, Adam was totally aware of his dependence on God for
20. Gaudium et Spes, n. 19; CCc, n. 27 .

21. See CCc, nn . 27 , 30, 1718, 1024.
22. Mary Shivanandan describes this alienation as the third meaning of solitude. See
Crossing the Threshold 0.( Love, p. 10 I. See also §22.
his existence. In tum, he would have known that he was a limited being, by
nature liable to nonexistence. Hence, he could have understood "death" in
contrast to his original experience of having received life as a gift from his
Creator. Here, just as historical man can envision original man's experi-
ence by contrasting it with his own, so too could original man envision the
experience of "death" by contrasting it with his own experience of life.
In this way "the alternative between death and immortality enter,
right from the outset, the definition of man and belongs 'from the begin-
ning' to the meaning of his solitude before God himself'( 42). One might
say that man's solitude as a free creature suspends him, in some sense, be-
tween the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. He
alone can choose his own destiny: death or immortality. No one can
choose for him. And he must choose. Freedom, then, is man's capacity for
eternity. It is his capacity for eternal life in communion with God and his
capacity for eternal death in alienation from God.
In this way, original solitude enables us to understand that man is
constituted in his very being by a relationship of dependence and partner-
ship with God: dependence because man is a creature; partnership because
man is a person created by a personal God who always extends to him a
covenant of love. As we will learn, Satan's temptation to eat from the for-
bidden tree attacks this relationship of partnership and dependence. If God
is not a God of love who extends a relationship of partnership to man, then
dependence on this God comes to be seen as a threat to man's subjectivity.
As a subject, man earnestly resists enslavement, and rightly so. Thus, the
moment man perceives God as a domineering tyrant, he will shirk his de-
pendence on him. Thus Satan attacks God's benevolent Fatherhood, as the
prologue noted.
John Paul tells us that this original meaning of solitude, permeated
by the alternative between death and immortality, has a fundamental
meaning for the whole theology of the body. It already sums up man's
fundamental vocation: love of God and love of neighbor (see Lk 10:27).
Furthermore we shall see even more clearly in future reflections how
original solitude already points man to his eschatological destiny of eter-
nal communion with God. It already outlines the cosmic struggle in-
volved if man is to claim that eternal destiny, a struggle that is always
lived out in man's body.
C. The Body Expresses the Person

We might be tempted to think that man's knowledge of himself and
his relationship to God was purely spiritual. But man was constituted as a
specific unity of spirit and body. The Yahwist narrative expresses this by
saying: "The Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed
Original Man 73
into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being" (Gen
2:7). In the original language, the word "breath" is the same word for
"spirit." Through his body (his "dust"), then, man lives "in the spirit"-his
own spirit, and according to the Holy Spirit. Through the experience of his
own body man comes to understand who he is and who God is.
The human body is so similar to animal bodies (especially other
mammals) that, as John Paul observes, we might think that Adam would
have reached the conclusion, based on the experience of his own body,
that he was substantially similar to animals. However, while the animals
were also created from the ground, the Yahwist text does not state that
God breathed his Spirit into them. Hence, while in naming the animals, the
man certainly realized that he was a "body among bodies," he also reached
the conviction that he was alone.
The important point here is that everything we have been discussing
about man's solitude-about his difference from the animals, his subjec-
tivity as a person, his call to eternal communion with God, etc.-is re-
vealed and experienced through the body. "This consciousness," the Pope
says, "would be impossible without a typically human intuition of the
meaning of one's own body" (40). If it is true that the "invisible" deter-
mines man more than the "visible," it is also true that the visible expresses
the invisible. John Paul insists that "the body expresses the person. It is,
therefore, in all its materiality, almost penetrable and transparent, in such a
way as to make it clear who man is (and who he should be)" (41).
This is a remarkable assertion since we tend to think of personhood
as a merely spiritual reality, not a material one. Human personhood is al-
ways a materialized-spiritual reality. Man's original solitude (the first real-
ization of personhood) is revealed through the body: The body reveals that
it is "not good for the man to be alone." The body reveals man's call to
communion with "a helper fit for him." This is the more familiar meaning
of original solitude. In naming the animals, Adam found many other "bod-
ies." But none of these bodies revealed a person, as did his own body.
Here we can sense Adam's deep longing for an-other body that reveals an-
other person who is called to communion with him.
Man's experience of original solitude,23 then, paves the way for the
creation of this "other" and already anticipates the experience of original
unity. In John Paul's mind, all this has deep implications for the meaning
of our being created in the image of God.
23. CCC, n. 357 offers a concise summary of original solitude.

13. The Creation of Woman

November 7, 1979 (TB 42-45)
Man is not fully human-his creation is not complete-until he

emerges in his "double unity" as male and female. Double unity speaks of
a "two-in-oneness," which is man's completeness. Everyone knows the
experience of "incompleteness." It drives us to seek communion with oth-
ers. Not only do we want to be with others; we want to know another per-
son and have our persons known by another person. Thus, we can all relate
to the biblical expression that "it is not good to be alone." If man is to be
fully himself, he needs a "helper."
Although only a few words describe woman's creation, John Paul
shows that each one carries great weight. He remarks that the "mythical"
language of the ancient narrative of Genesis leads us to that deep and mys-
terious content of woman's creation with ease. With the enthusiasm of a
man in love with God's word, he adds that the text of woman's creation "is
really marvelous as regards the qualities and the condensation of the truths
contained in it" (43).
A. The Meaning ojAdam s "Sleep"

We read in Genesis 2, "So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall
upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs, and closed up its
place with flesh; and the rib which the Lord God had taken from the man
he made into a woman and brought her to the man." John Paul comments
that contemporary men and women might immediately associate this
"deep sleep" with a Freudian analysis of dreams and the subconscious,
which, in Freud's mind, were always sexual. But "deep sleep" (tardemah
in Hebrew) indicates not so much a passing from consciousness to sub-
consciousness, as a passing from consciousness to un-consciousness. For
Adam, this deep sleep is "a specific return to non-being," since sleep al-
most annihilates man's conscious existence. As John Paul states in an
endnote, this "emphasizes the exclusivity oj God s action in the work of
the creation of woman; the man had no conscious participation in it" (95) .
• Tardemah, John Paul notes, "is the term that appears in Holy Scrip-
ture when, during sleep or immediately afterwards, extraordinary events
are to happen" (95). Interestingly, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old
Testament translates tardemah with ekstasis-"ecstasy" in English. While
John Paul only makes passing reference to this, it is worth posing a pos-
sible meaning of Adam's sleep understood as a state of "ecstasy." Not only
can we infer that Adam was "ecstatic" upon discovering the woman, but
ecstasy literally means "to be outside oneself." And what is it that comes
Original Man 75
"outside" of the man? Woman. To go "outside oneself' also seems to con-

note the "sincere gift of oneself."
If by way of the analogy with sleep we can speak also of a dream, the
content of Adam's dream, according to John Paul, is certainly that of find-
ing a "second self' (in other words, someone who experiences solitude as
a person and longs for communion). Yes, John Paul muses that Adam fell
asleep dreaming of the perfect lover, you might say. Of course, we must
not project onto Adam the way a fallen man might dream about an ideal-
ized and depersonalized body to suit his enjoyment. No, Adam dreamed in
the purity of original innocence. He dreamed of an "other" body that re-
vealed an "other" person, a person he could love as God loves. When he
awoke, his dream had came true.
There "is no doubt," says the Holy Father, "that man falls into that
'sleep' with the desire of finding a being like himself. .. .In this way the
solitude of the man-person is broken, because the first 'man' awakens
from his sleep as 'male and female'" (44). In this "sleep" the generic man
is "recreated" to be sexually differentiated as a unity in two ("double
unity"). Even if it is fraught with difficulties and confusion now due to sin,
does not everyone come, in some sense, to a stage of sexual "awakening"?
B. The Meaning ojAdam s Rib

The Holy Father observes that being fashioned from Adam's rib is an
"archaic, metaphorical, and figurative way" of expressing woman's creation
(44). While some have thought this demeans women, John Paul stresses that
the biblical author intends to affirm the indispensable equality of the sexes
and place it on a sure foundation. As the Pope expresses it, Eve's creation
from Adam's rib indicates "the homogeneity of the whole being of both"
(44). In other words, man and woman are made from the same "stuff." They
share a common humanity. Later in his catechesis, John Paul states that "rib"
also seems to indicate the heart-yet another affirmation that man and
woman share the same humanity and the same dignity.24
Masculinity and femininity, then, are two "incamations" of the same
solitude before God and the world- two ways, in other words, of being a
body-person made in God's image. Masculinity ann femininity "complete
each other." They are "two complementary dimensions ... of self-conscious-
ness and self-determination and, at the same time, two complementary
ways of being conscious of the meaning of the body."25
24. See 5/23/84, TB 369.

25. 11121/79, TB 48.
Recall that in naming the animal-bodies Adam realized he was

"alone" in the world as a person. But upon sight of the woman-body he
proclaims ecstatically, "This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my
flesh." With this exclamation the Holy Father explains that he seems to
say: "Here is a body that expresses another person. "26 For the Jews, bones
meant simply "the human being."27 "Bone of my bones," John Paul states in
an endnote, "can therefore be understood in the relational sense, as 'being of
my being'; 'flesh of my flesh' means that, though she has different physical
characteristics, the woman has the same personality as the man" (96).
John Paul considers Adam's declaration the biblical prototype of the
Song of Songs. The words of Genesis 2:23 are the original love song.
They express "for the first time joy and even exaltation" (45). Later in his
catechesis the Pope says that Adam's words "express wonder and admira-
tion, even more, the sense of fascination."28 "And if it is possible to read
impressions and emotions through words so remote, one might also ven-
ture to say that the depth and force of this first and 'original' emotion of
the male-man in the presence of the humanity ofthe woman ... seems some-
thing unique and unrepeatable" (45). In short, the gift of woman enthralls
Adam. At last, having named animal after animal only to remain "alone,"
he has found one who is like himself (yet also different in very important
ways). He has found another person whom he can know as a person and be
known by as a person. This is the rich significance of God creating woman
from Adam's rib.
Because Adam's "awakening" entails the discovery of another per-
son, John Paul says that the sense of original solitude becomes part of the
meaning of original unity. In other words, the self-discovery of person-
hood enabled by man's solitude carries over into the experience of original
unity. In fact, original unity will be, in some sense, the definitive discovery
of what it means to be a person. The Holy Father says that the "key point"
of original unity "seems to be precisely the words of Genesis 2:24 .. .'the
two shall become one flesh.' If Christ, referring to the 'beginning,' quotes
these words, it is opportune for us to clarify the meaning of that original
unity which has its roots in the fact of the creation of man as male and
female" (42).
26. See 1/9/80, TB 61.

27. See Psalm 139:15, for example.
28. 5/23/84, TB 369.
Original Man 77
14. Male-Female Communion: Icon of the Trinity

November 14, 1979 (TB 45-48)
In its primary meaning, the word "sex" refers to the differentiation of

male and female, not to what they do together in becoming "one flesh."
Thus, in the Yahwist account, prior to man's sexual "awakening" as male
and female, man is in some sense "sexless" because he still lacks the
"other." According to God's words, this "is not good," so sexual difference
has an axiological meaning. In other words, masculinity and femininity
have a specific value both before God and for each other. If it is "not good
for man to be alone," it is good-very good-to exist as male and female,
one for the other, and to join in the original unity of "one flesh."
A. Original Unity Overcomes and Affirms Solitude

The beauty and mystery of sexual difference specifically reveals man
and woman's call to union. And sexual difference specifically allows that
union to pass from an objective calling to an incamate, subjective reality.
"In this way, the meaning of man's original unity.. .is expressed as an over-
coming of the frontier of solitude, and at the same time as an affirmation-
with regard to both human beings-of everything that constitutes 'man' in
solitude" (45).
What does the Pope mean by this? Recall that original solitude has
two meanings. Original unity overcomes man's solitude without woman
(and we can also speak of woman's solitude without man). But the experi-
ence of original unity affirms their solitude in the sense that they differ
from the animals because their union also differs essentially from that of
animals. As persons both man and woman have self-knowledge and self-
determination. They are both subjects in the world and are conscious of
the meaning of their bodies. This is the heart of the experience of man's
solitude as a person in the visible world. Because this is common to man
and woman, John Paul speaks not only of a "double unity," but also of a
"double solitude." Only two persons are capable of rendering to each other
that biblical "help." Only two persons are capable of love. "Double soli-
tude," then, is the indispensable foundation of original unity. It is also the
sure foundation of the true equality of man and woman.
In keeping with the Second Vatican Council, the Pope defines this
unity as communio personarum-a "communion of persons."29 John Paul
says that the term "community" could also be used here if it were not ge-
29. See Gaudium et Spes, n. 12.

neric and did not have so many meanings. "Communio" expresses more
and describes their unity with greater precision, he says, "since it indicates
precisely that 'help' which is derived, in a sense, from the very fact of ex-
isting as a person 'beside' a person" (46). "In this communion of persons
the whole depth of the original solitude of man .. .is perfectly ensured and,
at the same time, this solitude becomes in a marvelous way permeated and
broadened by the gift of the 'other. "'30 In other words, their uniqueness as
persons is not diminished in becoming "one" with the other. Instead,
through communion, man and woman live together, with, and for each
other in such a way that they rediscover themselves, affirming all that it
means to be a person, affirming "everything that constitutes 'man' in soli-
tude." John Paul says that this opening up to the other person (original
unity) is perhaps even more decisive for the definition of man than his re-
alization that he differed from the animals (original solitude).31
B. A Dramatic Development of Catholic Thought

Here we find ourselves at the threshold of a dramatic and long-
needed development of Catholic thought in regard to how we image God.
The function of this image, according to John Paul, "is to reflect the one
who is the model, to reproduce its own prototype" (46). The model of
course is the Trinity. Hence, traditional formulations posited man's imag-
ing of God in various trinitarian breakdowns of an individual's soul (e.g.,
memory, understanding, and will). The divine model, however, is not one
person divided in threes. The prototype of the image is, as John Paul de-
scribes it, "an inscrutable divine communion of Persons" (46).
Notice that God even refers to himself in the plural: "Let us make
man in our image, after our likeness" (Gen I :26). We "can then deduce
that man became the 'image and likeness' of God not only through his
own humanity, but also through the communion of persons which man and
woman form right from the beginning" (46). In other words, not only as a
rational individual does the human person image God (not only in the ex-
perience of original solitude), but also in the communion formed by man
and woman (the experience of original unity).
This marks a bold theological move on the Pope's part. Positing the
divine image in the male-female communion has not been the traditionally
held perspective. But John Paul clearly affirms that "man becomes the im-
30. 2/13/80, TB 74.

31. See CCC, nn. 371-372 for a concise summary of the themes of original solitude
and unity.
Original Man 79
age of God not so much in the moment of solitude as in the moment of

communion." He even states that this "Trinitarian concept of the 'image of
God' ... constitutes, perhaps, the deepest theological aspect of all that can
be said about man." Furthermore, he makes the deliberate point of stating
that on "all of this, right from 'the beginning,' there descended the bless-
ing of fertility linked with human procreation" (47). This will forever
mark a critical development in Christian anthropology. Through his
Wednesday audiences, and even more authoritatively in later statements,32
John Paul brings the previously dismissed idea33 that man and woman im-
age God in and through their communion into the realm of official magis-
terial teaching.
C. Incarnate Communion
Man's experience of solitude and unity as male and female brings us
almost to the core of the anthropological significance of the body. The
body reveals the mystery of man. But because man, even in his corporeal-
ity as male and female, is "similar to God," the body also reveals some-
thing of the mystery of God. Thus, the Pope explains that this core of the
meaning of the body is not only anthropological, but also essentially theo-
logical. This is why he speaks of a theology of the body. The body reveals
man and woman's call to communion and enables them to enter into it,
thus imaging in some way the communion in God.
As John Paul stresses, this is an "incarnate communion"; it is from
the beginning a communion in "one flesh" (Gen 2:24). Therefore, the "the-
ology of the body, which right from the beginning is bound up with the
creation of man in the image of God, becomes, in a way, also the theology
32. See, for example, Mulieris Dignitatem, nn. 6-7. See also eee, nn. 357, 1702,
2205.
33. Although they framed the question somewhat differently, both Augustine and
Aquinas (among others) rejected the idea that male-female unity and fruitfulness imaged
the Trinity. See St. Augustine, On the Trinity, book 12, chapter 5 and St. Thomas Aquinas,
Summa Thenlngir.a, q1lestion 93, article 6. However, Michael Waldenstein argues that,
when read carefully, St. Thomas' and John Paul II's positions are not irreconcilable. He
states that "according to both St. Augustine and St. Thomas one can speak, and speak
properly, of a union of love between the divine persons in terms that are drawn from
interpersonal love between human beings. This conclusion shows that the teaching of
John Paul II about the image of God is implicitly contained in St. Augustine and St. Tho-
mas, even though they do not state it explicitly" ("Pope John Paul II's Personalist Teach-
ing and St. Thomas Aquinas: Disagreement or Development of Doctrine?", lecture pre-
sented at Thomas Aquinas College, January 12, 2001).
of sex." It becomes "the theology of masculinity and femininity" (47). A

"deep consciousness of human corporeality and sexuality," the Pope even
says, "establishes an inalienable norm for the understanding of man on the
theological plane" (48). In other words, we cannot understand man theo-
logically without understanding the meaning of sexual difference and our
call to sexual communion. This call touches upon the core anthropological
reality. As already stated, this core is also theological. From this perspec-
tive, sexual communion is an icon in some sense of the inner-life of the
Trinity. Of course, this does not mean that God is sexual. When using this
analogy we must always recall the infinite dissimilarity between God and
his creature. But this does not mean the analogy is extrinsic. Sexual differ-
ence and the call to union intrinsically reveals something of the perfect
distinction, unity, and fruitfulness within the Trinity.34
As such, John Paul says that Genesis 2:24 ("the two shall become
one flesh") is a perspective text; that is, it "will have in the revelation of
God an ample and distant perspective" (47). In fact, we can even recog-
nize that in some sense the original unity of the sexes contains "in nucleo"
all that God has to reveal to man about who God is (an eternal Commun-
ion of Persons), who we are (male and female in the divine image), and
how we are to live (in a similar communion of persons). It even provides a
glimpse into the nature of our ultimate destiny (the communion of saints in
communion with the Trinity). We will learn that man and woman's incar-
nate communion right from the beginning foreshadows God's definitive
revelation in Christ and his incarnate communion with the Church. This is
why God created us as sexual beings-to prepare us as an eternal Bride
for Christ.
Indicating the course of his future reflections, John Paul mentions
two of the dimensions of the "one flesh" union that will demand attention:
the ethical dimension and the sacramental dimension. These two "dimen-
sions" are also interrelated. For we cannot understand the Christian sexual
ethic unless we understand what the union of the sexes means as a sacra-
mental sign of Christ's union with the Church (see Eph 5:31 - 32) .
• The whole reality of married life is, of course, a sacrament of sexual

unity-the unity of male and female in a life-long bond. But as John Paul
states, the "one flesh" union "is the regular sign of the communion
of...husband and wife."35 It serves as the sign that summarizes (or consum-
34. See CCC, nn. 42, 239, 370.

35.9/27/80, TB 141.
Original Man 81
mates) the whole reality of the giving of husband and wife to each other.
As the Pope also says, "All married life is a gift; but this becomes most
evident when the spouses, in giving themselves to each other in love, bring
about that encounter which makes them 'one flesh. '''36 Thus, John Paul af-
firms that by means of the "one flesh" union, the body "assumes the value
of a sign, in a way, a sacramental sign."37 Cycle 5 will further explore the
multiform reality of the "sacramental sign" of marriage.
15. Relationality and the Virginal Value of Man

November 21, 1979 (TB 48- 51)
We are trying to understand man, as John Paul says, in the "entire en-
dowment of his being, that is, in all the riches of that mystery of creation,
on which theological anthropology is based" (48). In this quest, the Pope
affirms that the laws of knowing man correspond to those of his being. 38
And knowledge of man in the deepest essence of his being must always
pass from solitude to communion.
Man is not fully himself when he is "alone." He can only find himself
in relation. Thus, for John Paul, relationality enters the definition of the
human person. As he says, to be a person "means both 'being subject' and
'being in relationship. "'39 This starkly contrasts with the radical individu-
alism promoted in the West today.
A. Relational Definition of Person

Mary Shivanandan notes that while "medieval philosophers did de-
velop a relational notion of the Persons in the Trinity," they "did not trans-
late this to their anthropology. "40 This had to wait for the insights of
phenomenologists like Wojtyla. His theological anthropology makes this
neglected translation with ease. It is precisely "as image of God [that] we
live in relation."41 Philosophical anthropology cannot ascertain the divine
explanation of man's call to exist "in relation." John Paul bases his devel-
opment on the following teaching of the Second Vatican Council:

37.10122/80, TB 163.
38. See 9/26179, TB 32.
39. 5/30/84, TB 371.
40. Crossing the Threshold a/Love, p. 143 .
41. eee, n. 2563.
... the Lord Jesus, when praying to the Father "that they may all be
one .. .even as we are one" (In 17:21-22), opened up new horizons closed
to human reason by implying that there is a certain parallel between the
union existing among the divine persons and the union of the sons of
God in truth and love. It follows, then, that if man is the only creature on
earth that God has wanted for its own sake, man can fully discover his
true self only in a sincere giving of himself. 42
This teaching brings us to the heart of the mystery of what it means

to be a human "person." God creates us not for his sake. He does not need
us for himself. God is totally complete in his own Trinitarian Communion.
Nonetheless, love diffuses itself; it wants to share and give its own good-
ness, ever enlarging the circle of participation and communion. Hence,
God creates us for our own sake, out of the sheer gratuitousness of his
love. He creates us so that we might have the opportunity to participate in
his own eternal goodness, in his own mystery of Communion. It is true
that the world was made for the glory of God. However, as the Catechism
(quoting St. Bonaventure) explains, this means that "God created all
things 'not to increase his glory, but to show it forth and communicate it,'
for God has no other reason for creating than his love and goodness."43
This is Gods' gift to us-his own love and goodness. But he does not
force it on us. To do so would contradict the reality of "gift." It would con-
tradict the reality of our being created for our own sake. Respecting us as
persons, God leaves us in the freedom and power of our own counsel. We
can participate in the gift of love and communion only by opening our-
selves to receiving it as a gift (faith) and by making a sincere gift of our-
selves in return. When we engage our freedom to open to "the gift," life
itself becomes thanks-giving (eucharistia) for having been given so great a
gift (see §7).
This clarifies the logic of the Council's teaching. Created for his
"own sake," man can only fulfill himself through the "sincere gift" of self.
In other words, man can only fulfill himself in authentic relation to and
with other persons. A theology of the body shows us that this "rela-
tionality" is fundamentally revealed by sexual differentiation. Every hu-
man being-"with all his spiritual solitude, with the uniqueness, never to
be repeated, of his person"-is either a "he" or a "she." Sex, then, and thus
the call to communion, is "not just an attribute of the person," but is in this
sense a "constituent part of the person" (49).
42. Gaudium et Spes, n. 24, emphasis added.

43. CCC. n. 293.
Original Man 83
If men and women are to "find themselves," the solitude of every

"he" or "she" must lead to the communion of a human "we" through the
mutual self-giving of one to the other. The original unity and mutual en-
richment of the sexes, therefore, marks "the whole perspective of[man's]
history, including the history of salvation" (49). This, however, does not
mean that everyone is called to the married state. It does mean that we are
all called to live in communion with others through the sincere gift of self.
According to God's original plan, marriage is the most fundamental ex-
pression of that call to communion, the paradigm or model in some sense
of all human communion and self-giving. But in the context of his dis-
cussion about marriage with the Pharisees, Christ will reveal another
way to live the fullness of the call to incarnate self-giving as male and
female (see Mt 19:12).
In its course, John Paul's theology of the body will profoundly enrich
our understanding of the celibate vocation, the basis of which we find al-
ready in man's solitude before God and in his call to be "partner of the
Absolute." In the final analysis, the human desire for communion with an
"other" can only be satisfied in union with the "Other" (God). Sexual love
and communion is only a temporal response to man's yearning for an eter-
nallove and communion. Wojtyla places all of this in its proper perspec-
tive in the following passage from Love & Responsibility:
It is not sexuality which creates in a man and a woman the need to give
themselves to each other, but, on the contrary, it is the need to give one-
self, latent in every human person, which finds its outlet...in physical and
sexual union, in matrimony. But the need ... to give oneself to and unite
with another person is deeper and connected with the spiritual existence
of the person. It is not finally and completely satisfied simply by union
with another human being. Considered in the perspective of the person's
eternal existence, marriage is only a tentative solution of the problem of
a union of persons through love. 44
B. The Original Conjugal Act?

We find this "tentative solution" to man's yearning for communion
revealed from the beginning in Genesis 2:24, in the two becoming "one
il~sh." A<.;wrding to John Paul, this unity "is undoubtedly what is ex-
pressed and realized in the conjugal act" (49). But, contrary to what some
might imagine, this phrase is not a euphemism due to the biblical author's
discomfort with sex. "One flesh" is an expression infused with meaning. It
44. Love & Responsibility, pp. 253-254.

goes far deeper than any surface understanding of sex, leading us into
the depths of the "profound mystery" (see Eph 5 :32) of interpersonal
communIOn.
Several Greek Fathers (e.g., Gregory of Nyssa, John Chrysostom,
Theodoret, and later John Damascene45 ) advanced the idea that in Paradise
man and woman would not have joined in "one flesh." Following this line
of thinking, the bodily union of the sexes almost seems to have resulted
from sin. Not so for John Paul. The Pope stresses repeatedly throughout
his catechesis that the "one flesh" union spoken of in Genesis 2:24 was in-
stituted by the Creator in the beginning. The "words of Genesis 2 :24 bear
witness," the Holy Father says, to the "original meaning of unity." This
unity, he continues, "is realized through the body [and] indicates right
from the beginning ... the 'incarnate' communion of persons- communio
personarum-and calls for this communion right from the beginning.'>4(,
Of course this "beginning" refers to our "prehistory," which remains
shrouded in mystery. Therefore, as John Paul's carefully nuanced state-
ments indicate, the precise manner or mode of their original "incarnate
communion" is inaccessible to us. We must avoid projecting our historical
experience of bodily union on to the "beginning." Even so, the Holy Fa-
ther affirms that man and woman "created in the state of original inno-
cence [were] called in this state to conjugal union. "47
• If John Paul's statements on the original unity of the sexes leave

room for interpretation, one could argue that he only affirms that conjugal
union was part of the original plan and not that man and woman actually
engaged in it prior to their knowledge of good and evil. In fact, John Paul
states at one point that the man knows the woman for the first time in the
act of conjugal union only in Genesis 4: 1.48 This is, of course, the first time
they join together "in history" as we know it. John Paul always carefully
distinguishes man's history from his theological prehistOlY Again, original
innocence would have afforded a manner of union beyond our comprehen-
45. See (as cited in Lawler, Boyle, and May, Catholic Sexual Ethics, second edition
[Huntington, IN: Our Sunday Visitor, 1998], p. 266) Gregory of Nyssa De Opijicio
Hominis, 17 (PG 44.187); John Chrysostom, De Virginitate, 17 (PG 48.546); Homilia in
Genes i. 18 (PG 80.136); Damascene, De Fide Orthodoxa, 2.30 (PG 94.976).
46. 11114/79, TB 47, 48 .
47. 10113/82 , TB 338.
48. See 3112/80, TB 80.
Original Mall 85
sion. Whatever the "mode" of that union, John Paul wants to affirm that the
experience of original unity was an incarnate, bodily experience and not
merely a "spiritual" experience. Of course, in properly distinguishing be-
tween the spiritual and the physical, we must affirm that a spiritual unity
takes precedence. A bodily union that was not preceded and infonned by a
spiritual union would be "animalistic." But, for the human person, spiritual
love cannot (and must not) be divorced from the body. "In marriage, the
physical intimacy of the spouses becomes a sign and pledge of spiritual
communion."4Y John Paul speaks to this when he observes that "the most
profound words of the spirit-words of love, of giving, of fidelity-de-
mand an adequate 'language of the body.' And without that, they cannot be
fully expressed." Man "cannot, in a certain sense, express this singular lan-
guage of his personal existence and of his vocation without the body."50
By balancing the proper relationship of prehistOlY and history and of

spiritual and physical unity, we approach the original, incarnate union of
the sexes, which John Paul affinns is witnessed to by Genesis 2:24 (the
two become "one flesh"). For John Paul it seems important to affinn the
prehistorical existence of such bodily communion if only to shed light on
that from which historical man has fallen and, therefore, to provide a mea-
sure for that to which Christ calls him. Remember that John Paul seeks to
reconstruct what may have happened "then" specifically for our benefit
now.
Despite John Paul's repeated affirmation that God instituted the

union of the two in "one flesh" from the beginning, an important truth
must be upheld in the thought of those who insisted on Adam and Eve's
virginity prior to sin. In John Paul's mind it seems virginity is not first to
be understood as the absence of a bodily union, but as the integrity of
body and soul. In fact, the Pope states explicitly that when a couple unites
in the conjugal act, they are meant to be "reliving, in a sense, the original
virginal value of man" (49). What could this possibly mean? The Holy Fa-
ther does not elaborate, so I offer the following interpretation. 51
In the beginning man and woman experienced a perfect psychoso-
matic (soul-body) integration. They were "untouched" by the rupture of
49. CCC, 11. 2360.

50. 1112/83, TB 359.
51. In what follows, I am relying on the insights of a former professor, Monsignor
Lorenzo Albaeetc.
body and soul that would defile them as a result of original sin. In this
sense, the experience of original unity remained virginal (untouched by
the disintegration of sin). Not only was this unity not a loss of personal
integrity (virginity), it was the deepest possible affirmation of it. Sin, how-
ever, marks the loss of man's virginity (body-soul integrity) in the sense
that it mptured his psychosomatic unity. Thereafter, the lust that so often
attends sexual union serves to accent and even exacerbate this body-soul
rift. Lustful sexual union is always a dis-integrating experience, and, thus,
a loss of virginity .
• This sense of virginity helps us understand the virginity of the New

Eve at a new level. Mary's title as the "Blessed Virgin" should not first
bring to mind her choice to refrain from sexual intercourse. It is true, of
course, that she never experienced sexual union. However, her particular
blessing lies not in this fact per se, but in that she never experienced the
rupture of body and soul. So it seems the title "Blessed Virgin" should first
call to mind her Immaculate Conception. Being spared of all taint of origi-
nal and personal sin, she is peifectly integrated in body and soul.
If lustful union effects a loss of virginity, are men and women now
bound to lust? Even the holiest men and women must still contend with
concupiscence, that disordering of the passions which resulted from origi-
nal sin. Yet even if Baptism does not remove concupiscence, Christ "came
to restore creation to the purity of its origins."52 In Christ it is possible for
husbands and wives progressively to conquer lust and thus relive in a real
sense that original "virginal" experience of unity. In a certain sense this is
the goal of Christian marriage-for husbands and wives to recover their
"virginal value," not by foregoing sexual union, but by allowing it to be
taken up and "recreated" in Christ's redeeming sacrifice. Quoting John
Paul: "Man and woman, uniting with each other (in the conjugal act) so
closely as to become 'one flesh' rediscover, so to speak, every time and in
a special way, the mystery of creation. They return in that way to that
union in humanity ('bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh') which al-
lows them to recognize each other and, like the first time, to call each
other by name." The Pope concludes that this "means reliving, in a sense,
the original virginal value of man which emerges from the mystery of his
solitude before God" (49).
52. CCC, n. 2336.

Original Man 87
Thus, for spouses who-by continually surrendering their sexuality

to Christ-experience a "real and deep victory" over lust,53 sexual union
becomes not a "loss" of anything, but a tremendous gain. They come fully
to discover their true selves through the sincere gift of themselves to each
other. Their communion confirms each of them in their virginal unique-
ness, in the unrepeatability of their persons. Hence, to become "one
flesh" returns in some sense to the "one reality" of the humanum- the
"one reality" of man, which is the mystery of his solitude before God and
all creation. Through "sex" (it seems we can take this to mean both
sexual difference and sexual union) John Paul says that man and woman
not only "surpass" their own solitude, but they assume the solitude of the
other (the personhood of the other) as their own. If the body reveals the
person, by becoming "one body" male and female become in some sense
"one man" (almost "one human person") before God as in original soli-
tude. In this way-in the sense that the experience of original unity also
returns us in some way to the experience of original solitude-we can
speak of the sexual act as an expression of or even a reliving of the "origi-
nal virginal value of man."
To speak of male and female becoming in some way "one man," of
course, implies a unity-in-distinction through which neither person is
blurred as an individual, but becomes more fully him or herself. As John
Paul observes: "The fact that they become 'one flesh' is a powerful bond
established by the Creator, through which they discover their own human-
ity, both in its original unity, and in the duality of a mysterious mutual at-
traction" (49). Unity-in-duality, a two-in-oneness, is the key. This real
unity and this real distinction is maintained in proper balance, however,
only when man and woman's "mutual attraction" is integrated first with
one's own subjectivity as a person and, in turn, is informed by an unwa-
vering respect for the subjectivity of the other as a person.
Sexual attraction "in the beginning" summoned them to become a
sincere gift for each other. It did not operate on its own, compelling a
selfish indulgence at the expense of the other. Sexual attraction and desire
was intimately bound up with choice and, therefore, with human subjec-
tivity. Their ability to choose distinguished them from the animals. Human
sexual activity, therefore, radically differs from the copUlation of animals.
If joining in "one flesh" was only a response to instinct and not the result
of self-determination, their experience of unity would have indicated that
53. All of cycle 2 is devoted to discussing how Christ empowers us in just such a
"real and deep victory" over lust. This phrase is taken from the audience of 10/22/80,
TB 164.
they were similar to the animals rather than affirming their solitude. If his-
torical man experiences sexual desire as an "instinct," this is the result of
original sin. Therefore, ifmen and women of history are to become a "sin-
cere gift" to one another, they must regain the integrity of self-mastery.
The freely chosen, personhood-affirming communion of the first man and
woman "must constitute the beginning and the model of that communion
for all men and women who, in any period, are united so intimately as to
be 'one flesh'" (50). This is what Christ confirms in his challenge to the
Pharisees. Anything less does not correspond to our dignity as men and
women made in the divine image. Anything less substitutes a counterfeit
for the love and intimacy we long for.
C. The Vital Power of Communion

One of John Paul's goals in his theology of the body is to place the
teaching of Humanae Vitae within the context of biblical anthropology.
Man and woman's communion is not closed in on itself. When they be-
come "one flesh," men and women submit their whole humanity to the
original blessing of fertility.
As stated above, love diffuses itself. It seeks to increase its own
circle of communion. God, who is love, is a life-giving Communion of
Persons. We are made in this image as male and female. Thus, the original
call to "be fruitful and multiply" is a call to live in the divine image. "Pro-
creation," as John Paul expresses it, "is rooted in creation, and every time,
in a sense, reproduces its mystery" (51). The mystery of creation is the
mystery of God's overflowing Trinitarian Love, which shot us and the
whole universe into being. When a man and woman become "one flesh"
they renew this mystery "in all its original depth and vital power" (50). Or,
at least, they are meant to do so. What might contraception, the deliberate
sterilization of sexual union, do to this picture? In due time, John Paul will
provide a startling answer.
16. The Key to Biblical Anthropology

December 12, 19, 1979 (TB 51-57)
The human experiences the Yahwist text speaks of have a basic sig-
nificance for every man and woman in every age. Yet John Paul observes
that these experiences so intermingle with the ordinary things of life that
we tend to take them entirely for granted. Penetrating God's "revelation of
the body" helps us to discover the extraordinary side of the ordinary. We
discover that these experiences provide an interpretive key for understand-
ing human existence.
Original Man 89
A. Original Nakedness
Having examined the experiences of original solitude and original
unity, we tum now to the third "fundamental human experience": original
nakedness. As we read in Genesis 2:25, "the man and his wife were both
naked and were not ashamed." In light of the biblical text analyzed so far,
John Paul recognizes that, at first glance, this verse may seem misplaced,
adding nothing more than a cursory detail. Of course, based on the riches
he has already mined from the Yahwist narrative, we would not expect
John Paul to stop at first glance. Far from being peripheral, John Paul
shows us that the meaning of original nakedness is "precisely the key" for
the "full and complete understanding" of the first draft of biblical anthro-
pology (52). In other words, if we do not understand what it meant for the
first man and woman to be naked without shame, we do not understand the
original biblical meaning of our humanity.
Some might consider man's creation in the image and likeness of
God as the more appropriate key to biblical anthropology. Original naked-
ness is nothing but the subjective reverberation and conscious reflection of
this objective truth. As John Paul says, nakedness without shame "de-
scribes their state of consciousness; in fact, their mutual experience of the
body...with the greatest precision possible." Thus, Genesis 2:25 "makes a
specific contribution to the theology ofthe body... that absolutely cannot be
ignored" (52).
The Pope observes that it is first necessary to establish that the expe-
rience of original nakedness involves a real non-presence of shame, and
not a lack or underdevelopment of it. Original nakedness cannot be com-
pared to the experience of young children, for example, who have yet to
develop a sense of shame. Much less can nakedness without shame be
compared to shamelessness. These are polar opposites. A shameless na-
kedness is immodest. It involves a lack or suppression of shame when
shame is rightly called for (see Jer 3:2- 3). Shame in one's nakedness is
called for when nakedness poses a threat to the dignity of the person. The
original experience of nakedness completely lacked shame because being
naked posed no threat to the first couple's dignity. They saw the body as
the revelation of the person and his (her) dignity. "Only the nakedness that
makes woman an 'object' for the man, or vice versa, is a source of shame.
The fact that 'they were not ashamed' means that the woman was not an
'object' for the man nor he for her."54
54. 2/20/80, TB 75 .
On this side of the fig leaves, we can hardly imagine the experience
of original nakedness. Original sin radically changed our experience of
nakedness. Shame entered with sin, the shame that marks the "bound-
ary" between original man and historical man. So how can we recon-
struct the experience of original nakedness?
• Karol Wojtyla provides a detailed, extremely rich, and well-bal-

anced presentation of the problems of nakedness, shame, shamelessness,
modesty, etc. in Love & Responsibility Of particular interest is Wojtyla's
discussion of "the law of the absorption of shame by love." He writes:
"Shame is, as it were, swallowed up by love, dissolved in it, so that the
man and the woman are no longer ashamed to be sharing their experience
of sexual values. This process is enormously important to sexual moral-
ity."" He clarifies that this does not mean shame is eliminated or destroyed
as in the case of shamelessness. Shame also has a positive role that is es-
sential to love, for it protects the dignity of the person. Thus, the "swallow-
ing of shame by love" does not mean removing the reserve or reverence
that the inner mystery of the other person ,calls for. Still, Wojtyla writes
that where there is genuine love, shame (in the negative sense) "as the
natural way of avoiding the utilitarian attitude [toward the body] loses its
raison d'etre and gives ground. But only to the extent that a person loved
in this way-and this is most important-is equally ready to give herself or
himself in love."56 In other words, nakedness does not offend nor elicit
shame in relationships in which the persons are "consciolls of the gift"
given and have "resolved to respond to it in an equally personal way." In-
stead, in this situation, John Paul says, "The human body in its nakedness
[becomes] a sign of trust and ...the source of a particular interpersonal
'communication. "'57
B. Penetrating Their Experience

Some would claim we cannot know much about the interior experience
of original nakedness. They say we can only use an objective approach (via
traditional metaphysics) to anive at an "exterior" understanding. An exte-
rior perception of the world ce11ainly gives us crucial insight. Thus, the Pope
agrees that this dimension cannot be ignored. But he maintains that the "bib-
lical expression 'were not ashamed' directly indicates the 'experience' as a
55. Luve & Re5pul1sibility, p. 1RI.

56. Ibid. , p. 183.
57.4/29/81, TB 224.
Original Man 91
subjective dimension."s8 Hence, we cannot arrive at the full meaning of

original nakedness "without going down into the depths of man. Genesis
2:25 introduces us specifically to this level and wants us to seek there the
original innocence of knowing" (56).
Here we see John Paul discussing the relationship between the tradi-
tional philosophy of being and the modem philosophy of consciousness.
Original nakedness can be examined using metaphysical categories. In
other words, it can be looked at from the perspective of "the truth of being
or of reality," as the Pope puts it. This is indispensable and comes prior to
any subjective investigation. However, if we stop at this level, we face the
danger of abstraction. Phenomenological analysis allows us to penetrate
the conscious, experiential reality of original nakedness, not in opposition
to an objective view, but in tandem with it. For those who are skeptical of
this approach, John Paul takes "the liberty of pointing out that the very
text of Genesis 2:25 expressly requires that the reflections on the theology
of the body should be connected with the dimension of man's personal
subjectivity" (52).
Despite our state of hereditary sinfulness, our roots still lie in the gar-
den of innocence (see § 11). As John Paul states, by referring historical man
to the beginning, "Christ indirectly establishes the idea of continuity and
connection between those two states, as if allowing us to move back from
the threshold of man's 'historical' sinfulness to his original innocence"
(53). Our experience of shame connected with nakedness is the "flip side"
of original nakedness. We have lost the full consciousness of the meaning
of the body afforded by the state of original holiness. But by examining our
own experience of shame and "flipping it over," we can see the "shape" of
that fullness we lack. In this way we can "reconstruct," at least to some
degree, the interior content of the experience of original nakedness.
C. The Phenomenon of Shame

John Paul begins his audience of December 19, 1979 with an impor-
tant question: "What is shame and how can we explain its absence in the
state of original innocence, in the very depth of the mystery of the creation
of man as male and female?" First, we must recognize that shame is an
inter-personal reality. Although John Paul will eventually demonstrate that
shame has a meaning within each person (he will call this "immanent
shame"; see §27), shame is generally experienced in relation to and with
other persons. A person has no reason to be ashamed of his own nakedness
when he is alone (so long as he is doing nothing shameful with his naked-
ness). But suppose a stranger were to walk in on you while you were get-
58. 1116/80, TB 65.

ting out of the shower. Most people would instinctively feel a need to
cover their nakedness. The phenomenologist cannot help but ask: Why?
According to John Paul, this "instinct" manifests a deep need of affir-
mation and acceptance as a person, and, at the same time, a fear that the
"other" will not recognize and affirm the full truth of my person revealed
by my nakedness (remember that the body reveals the person). We cover
up to protect ourselves for fear that our dignity as "selves" (i.e., as per-
sons) will not be upheld otherwise. Everyone, it seems, can attest to this
phenomenon. If we can manage to take this fear of not being affirmed in
the presence of another and "flip it over," we find ourselves at the thresh-
old of the experience of original nakedness. We can almost enter in. We
can almost "taste" it.
Original nakedness is precisely the experience of full consciousness
of the meaning and dignity of the body. Based on this, there is no fear of
standing naked before the other because, in doing so, both the man and the
woman receive from the other the affirmation and acceptance they long
for-the affirmation and acceptance that correspond perfectly with their
dignity as persons. The Pope calls this experience the "original innocence
of knowledge" (56). Such knowledge is based on a profound experience of
intimacy and interpersonal "communication." John Paul notes that we
have lost the deeper meaning of this word. True "communication," accord-
ing to the Holy Father, is the experience of a "common union." Hence, to
"communicate" means to establish a communion through the mutual and
sincere gift of persons to each other.
• Surveys of married couples and even clinical studies consistently re-

port "poor communication" as a leading cause of marital breakdown. Most
marriage preparation and/or enrichment programs, therefore, place heavy
emphasis on teaching "communication skills." Typically these consist of
various speaking and listening techniques that enable spouses to converse
more effectively. They are certainly beneficial. However, the countless
marriage preparation and enrichment programs I have surveyed pay little if
any attention to teaching the skills necessary for this deeper and more es-
sential meaning of communication. The essence of matTiage consists in es-
tablishing a "common union" through the free and sincere gift of self. Lust
is the prime enemy of the self-giving that affords authentic marital com-
munication. Hence, among the many important "communication skills" in
married life (and life in general), learning to overcome lust is most impor-
tant. Without this liberation from lust we cannot express the "freedom of
the gift," which is "the condition of all life together in truth."59
59. I O/R/80, TB 159.

Original Man 93
The experience of original nakedness testifies to their authentic

"communication," to the purity of their mutual self-giving. Such purity al-
lows them to know one another via their nakedness since their nakedness
itself "communicates" an intimate knowledge of the person. And it is a
knowledge of each other's great dignity and goodness as male and female
created in the image of God. As John Paul affirms: '''Nakedness' signifies
the original good of God's vision. It signifies all the simplicity and fullness
of the vision through which the 'pure' value of humanity as male and fe-
male, the 'pure' value of the body and of sex, is manifested."60 The more
we ponder the meaning of this original vision of nakedness-this "original
innocence of knowledge"-the more the reality of sin and lust will make
us want to weep. Those "garments of our misery" (Gregory of Nyssa's de-
scription of the fig leaves) constantly remind us of the tragedy of having
lost sight of what God created our bodies to reveal-the spiritual mystery
of our humanity and also, in some way, the mystery of his divinity.
When we realize the scandal of our blindness, we are led to our knees
to beg God's mercy. And mercy has been revealed through the body of
Christ. From the pulpit of the cross, Christ's naked body proclaims re-
demption to every man and woman who has ever lived under the inherit-
ance of shame. "Fig leaves" will always be necessary in a fallen world.
But as John Paul will demonstrate, even now we can regain something of
the original good of God's vision. 61 Further analysis of original nakedness
will enable us to understand the content of this vision more thoroughly.
17. The Body: Witness to Gift and Love

December 19, 1979; January 2,9,16, 1980 (TB 56-66)
According to St. Augustine, the deepest desire of the human heatt is

to see another and be seen by that other's loving 100k. 62 This sums up well
the experience of original nakedness. Of course we are talking about more
than the mere sensory experience of seeing a naked body with the eyes.
We are talking about an interior "look" manifested through the eyes that
knows and affirms the other as a person. As John Paul expresses it, in the
experience of original nakedness "man and woman see each other even
60. 112/80, TB 57.

61. See CCC. nn. 1264, 1426,2519,2715.
62. See St. Augustine, Sermon 69, c. 2, 3.
more fully and distinctly than through the sense of sight itself.. .. They
see and know each other, in fact, with all the peace of the interior gaze,
which creates precisely the fullness of the intimacy of persons" (57).
Original nakedness, then, indicates a total defenselessness before the
other, a total absence of barriers, because of a total trust in the sincerity
of their mutual exchange.
A. Exterior and Interior Nakedness

Total peace suffused the first man and woman's intimacy-their re-
ciprocated interior gaze-precisely because, prior to sin, there was no rup-
ture between the spiritual and the sensible. Gender difference and unity
highlighted the spiritual-sensible difference and unity; it was where the
spiritual-sensible difference and unity was most keenly "felt" and experi-
enced. In this experience, it was as if the body was transparent. Exterior
nakedness revealed an interior nakedness. As John Paul observes: "To this
fullness of 'exterior' perception, expressed by means of physical naked-
ness, there corresponds the 'interior' fullness of man's vision in God, that
is, according to the measure of the 'image of God'" (57). Man's perception
of the world was in perfect harmony with God's. In beholding each other's
nakedness, they saw not just a body, but somebody-another person who
radiated God's glory through his masculinity and her femininity. Seeing
this and knowing this, they experienced no shame, only a deep peace and a
profound awareness oftheir own goodness. In this way John Paul says that
the human body acquires a completely new meaning that cannot remain
"external." The body expresses the person, which is something more than
the "individual." The body expresses the personal human "self" through
an exterior reality perceived from within.
To look at a body and see only an "individual" is to perceive merely
the exterior reality. The seeing of original nakedness is very different. It
"is not just a participation in the' exterior' perception of the world." It "has
also an interior dimension of participation in the vision of the Creator him-
self-that vision [in which] 'God saw everything that he had made, and
behold, it was very good' (Gen 1:31)" (57). The experience of the body,
then, follows and indicates the experience of the heart .
• I once heard the word "intimacy" defined as "into-me-see." This ex-

plains well that experience of original nakedness. There is no fear in being
seen externally because there is no fear of being seen internally. In lectures
when I discuss how the nakedness of Adam and Eve reveals the original
good of God's vision, I often ask: "How many of you can stand naked in
front of a mirror and say 'behold, it is very good'?" The laughs and bewil-
Original Man 95
dered looks point clearly to how far we have fallen from that original vi-
sion and experience of the human body. In some way, this reaction seems
to indicate the extent to which we have normalized our "flat tires." Of
course, our bodies do not look entirely the same as Adam and Eve's. Every
grey hair, every blemish, every wrinkle reminds us that our bodies are on
the road to decay. Prior to sin, Adam and Eve's bodies were not. They
shone transparently with the glory of God. Even so, the corruption of sin
has not triumphed; our bodies are "very good." We cannot live an authentic
human life if we do not overcome those obstacles that keep us from em-
bracing the fundamental truth of our own goodness.
B. The Reality of Gift

In these words of Genesis ("God saw everything that he had made,
and behold, it was very good"), we glimpse not only the character of man
and woman's interior gaze, but the divine motive behind creation itself,
and behind our creation as male and female, in particular-Love. As the
Pope points out, "only love, in fact, gives a beginning to good and delights
in good. Creation, therefore, as the action of God, signifies not only calling
from nothingness to existence, ... but it also signifies ... a fundamental and
radical giving" (59).
Self-giving and love are synonymous in the mind of the Holy Father.
Of course, "the concept of 'giving' cannot refer to a nothingness. It indi-
cates the one who gives and the one who receives the gift, and also the
relationship that is established between them" (59). God gives the gift of
creation and man receives it. This establishes a "nuptial" relationship be-
tween them. In fact, the term "nuptial," according to the Holy Father,
"manifests in a word the whole reality of that donation of which the first
pages of the book of Genesis speak to us" (66). All creation has a nuptial
character because it constitutes the original and fundamental gift. But in
the visible world this gift can only be fully realized in and received by
man because man alone is made in God's image. Only a person endowed
with freedom and self-detelmination can receive "the gift" of God, which
is love, and reciprocate that gift (i.e., loving God in return). This is the
original covenant God establishes with man in creation.
How did man realize this gift? How did he experience this call to
"nuptial" relationship with God (covenant) and enter into it? God stamped
it in his body by creating man as male and female and calling them to be a
nuptial gift to one another. John Paul says that the human body in all the
original truth of its masculinity and femininity expresses the gift of cre-
ation. "This is the body: a witness to creation as a fundamental gift, and so
a witness to Love as the source from which this same giving springs. Mas-
culinity-femininity-namely, sex- is the original sign of a creative donation
[by God] and of an awareness on the part of man, of a gift lived so to speak
in an original way" (62).
We cannot understand human existence if we do not understand this
reality of "gift." All is gift. God initiates the gift and creates man to re-
ceive the gift, which is God's divine Life and Love. This understanding of
gift provides the interpretive key of the Pope's anthropology. Through this
"hermeneutic of the gift" we approach "the very essence of the person."
Man is created as a person first to receive the gift of God's gratuitous love,
and then to recapitulate that love by being gift to others. In fact, this call to
be gift is "the fundamental element of human existence in the world" (66).
God inscribed it in the mystery of human sexuality. The complementarity
of the body itself as male and female, as the revelation of the innermost
being of man, of his subjectivity and freedom, summons man and woman
to freely recapitulate the giving and receiving of the divine gift. Now the
words of Genesis 2:24 take on their meaning: For this reason- to reca-
pitulate the divine gift-"a man leaves his father and his mother and
cleaves to his wife and they become one flesh." This, as John Paul says, is
"the meaning with which sex enters the theology ofthe body" (62).
C. The Original Way of Living the Gift

When John Paul speaks of the "original way" of living the gift of
God's love, he means precisely what we have been discussing regarding
the experiences of original solitude, unity, and nakedness. In fact, "the di-
mension of the gift," according to John Paul, "decides the essential truth
and depth of meaning of the original solitude-unity-nakedness" (58).
In its first meaning, that man is "alone" in the world as a person,
original solitude reveals that man is a being capable of receiving creation
as a gift of God's life and love. In its second meaning, original solitude
reveals the need for a "helper," someone with whom the man can live in a
relationship of mutual gift. Original unity reveals that this relationship of
mutual gift has been established. And original nakedness reveals the genu-
ineness of the gift given-that they are living with a full consciousness of
the meaning of the body as gift. In this way, John Paul says that the two
words "alone" and "helper" hold the key to understanding the essence of
"the gift" as it manifests itself in man. The gift is first the human being's
own creation as a person (original solitude; "alone"). Then, in receiving
his own life as a gift, the person desires to become the same gift to an
"other" that life is to him (original unity; "helper"). In turn, those two
Original Man 97
words reveal the essential content of man's existence as a creature made in

the divine image. For man images God both as an individual ("alone") and
in the male-female communion ("helper").
Hence, the w ord s ",llo IlC and ' helper" summarize and reveal " th e
n'Orlll or existence as a person by showing thal the rc l<l ti n ltip of mutual
gill: fulfill s mall 's original s Iilude. Not on ly lhat, but J hn Paul will say
that the relationship or mutual gift ruIfiUs lhe deepest meaning of man s
being and exi tence. AI! of this is revealed through awarenes. of the mean-
ing of the body and of ex, a meallillg that .Iohn Paul will call ' nupti a l. '
18. The Nuptial Meaning ofthe Body

January 9, 16, 1980 (TB 60-66)
The verses of Genesis 2:23- 25 overflow with anthropological mean-

ing. They express the joy of man's coming to be as male and female (v. 23),
establish their conjugal unity (v. 24), and finally testify to the nakedness of
both without shame (v. 25). This significant confrontation of man and
woman in their nakedness allows us to speak of "the revelation and at the
same time the discovery of the 'nuptial' meaning of the body in the very
mystery of creation" (62).
The nuptial meaning of the body is one of the most important and
synoptic concepts of the Pope's entire catechesis. From this point forward
he will weave it throughout his addresses. But it is not simply a "concept"
or intellectual idea. The nuptial meaning of the body speaks of man and
woman's conscious experience of their bodies as a gift and symbol of
God's love-and, in turn, their sharing this Love with one another in and
through their bodies, their masculinity and femininity.
A. Incarnate Love
1'11 is incoma(e concept of love points to th ~ ori gina l integration and
harmony of the interior and exleri r t1im cns i ns of the hUl1'lan pcrson. Man
ex peri ence his ca ll to love from lIIi/hill. But th e nuptial meaning of the
bodyal 0 onfirm s thi s exleriv/,ZV preci 'ely because man is a unity ofb dy
and soul. Based on this anthrop lo/:;ri a l trulh l ) t' body-soul integrati on
peaking or tb human person means sirnt1ltaneo us'ly speaki.ng of the hu -
man body and sexualilY. "Thi s ::;imu ltaneOllsness is essential, ' the Pope
r
ays. For i we dealt with ex without the pel's 11' - mlcl we could also
say i r we deall wilh the p r.-on w ithout sex- 'the w hole adequacy or the
anthropology.. .would be destroyed" (61).
The whole truth of the body and of sex, John Paul affirms, "is the
pure and simple truth of communion between persons" (61). This com-
munion is established through an integrated, incarnate love. Hence, John
Paul defines the nuptial meaning of the body as the body's "capacity of
expressing love: that love precisely in which the man-person becomes a
gift and-by means of this gift-fulfills the very meaning of his being and
existence" (63).63 Here John Paul echoes that key text from the Second
Vatican Council: "It follows then, that if man is the only creature on earth
that God willed for its own sake, man can fully discover his true self only
in a sincere giving of himself."64 John Paul establishes here that this teach-
ing of the Council is rooted not only in the spiritual aspect of man's na-
ture, but also in his body, in the complementary difference of the sexes and
their call to become "one flesh."
• Of course, this does not mean that everyone is called to marriage

and the "one flesh" union. Nor could it possibly mean that sexual union is
required in order to understand and live the meaning of life. It does mean,
however, that we are all called to some expression of "nuptiallove"-to an
incarnate self-giving. As Cycle 3 will explain, everyone, regardless of
earthly vocation, finds the ultimate fulfillment of the nuptial meaning of
the body in the "marriage of the Lamb," that is, in union with Christ. And
everyone's journey toward this heavenly reality, regardless of earthly voca-
tion, passes by way of our experience of sexual embodiment.
This interior law of the gift manifested in the exterior truth of the
body is missed altogether by a purely naturalistic (or cosmological) view
of man and his body. Since it does not penetrate the personal dimension,
such an evaluation can only conclude that procreation is the primary end
of sexual union. Without denying this truth, John Paul insists that the lm-
man body "is not only the source of fruitfulness and procreation, as in the
whole natural order, but includes right 'from the beginning' the ... capacity
of expressing love" (63) . John Paul holds the two meanings-love and
procreation-in a fruitful togetherness. If traditional formulations have
erred by stressing procreation to the neglect of nuptial love, many modern
theories stress nuptial love to the neglect of procreation. If we seek to have
an integral view of man, the two cannot be separated. Man loves through
his body, which God blessed with the gift of fertility.
63. See CCC, n. 2331.

64 . Gaudium et Spes, n. 24.
Original Man 99
B. Revelation and Discovery oj the Meaning ojLife

Let us reflect for a moment on a particular aspect of the Pope's above
quoted words. He says that if we live according to the true meaning of our
bodies we fit/fill the very meaning oj our existence. How? The meaning of
life is to love as God loves, and this is stamped in our sexuality. Anyone
looking for the meaning of life has nowhere else to go. It is revealed in
everyone's body-in masculinity and femininity. There lies the answer to
the universal question: "What does it mean to be human?" There we find
the law of the gift inscribed in our humanity. This is why misunderstand-
ing and misuse of sexuality have such dire consequences for man and for
society. A "culture of death" grows out of a world of people estranged
from the nuptial meaning of their bodies. In fact, original sin marks pre-
cisely the subjective loss or obscuring of the nuptial meaning of the body.
As a result, for many people the experience of their body and sexual-
ity-far from revealing life's meaning- seems inseparable from a gnaw-
ing sense of life's meaninglessness. Even many Christians who claim to
have discovered life's meaning in a "spiritual" sense do not realize that
that meaning is inscribed in their bodies as male and female, in their sexu-
ality. Such persons may see the body as an annoying distraction, or even
an inherent obstacle to living a Christian life. Not so! We cannot live an
authentic Christian life apart from the body. God's revelation teaches us
this. But we can also discover (or rediscover) it in our own experience if
we surrender our bodies to the grace poured out in the death and resurrec-
tion of Christ's body.
In his exegesis of Genesis 2, John Paul speaks repeatedly of the rev-
elation and discovery of the nuptial meaning of the body. He does this to
emphasize that the theological thread of the Yahwist text is also anthropo-
logical. In other words, prior to sin complete hmIDony reigned between
God's revelation and human experience. God revealed the body's nuptial
meaning, and man and woman discovered it and consciously lived it. Gen-
esis 2:25 highlights this: "And the man and his wife were both naked and
were not ashamed." As the inspired word of God, this is not only divine
revelation. It speaks directly and specifically of man and woman's full and
conscious experience of the nuptial meaning of their bodies. Even though
we have lost this conscious experience of the original meaning of our bod-
ies through sin, by taking on flesh the eternal Word reveals this meaning to
us again. In his body given up for us, Christ offers us the redemption of
our bodies, and with it the possibility of (re)discovering the body's nuptial
meaning. Conscious experience of redemption in Christ leads precisely to
this (re)discovery of life's meaning through the revelation of the nuptial
meaning of the body of Christ.
C. The Freedom of the Gift

In the general audience of January 16, 1980, particularly rich in con-
tent, John Paul introduces another key concept: the freedom of the gift.
If men and women are created for their "own sake," they cannot be
possessed by another. They cannot be owned or taken-hold-of by another.
They are "incommunicable." Thus, a problem arises: How can men and
women communicate themselves to each other without violating the
other's dignity as an incommunicable person? The answer lies in the free-
dom of the gift. Adam was under no compulsion to satisfy mere "instinct"
at the sight of woman's naked beauty. As the Pope points out, such a con-
cept implies an interior constraint, similar to the instinct that stimulates
copulation in animals. Instead, Adam was free with the freedom of the
gift. This means the sight of Eve's nakedness inspired nothing but the de-
sire to make a "sincere gift" of himself to her. He could freely choose her
for who she was. This is an experience far from merely succumbing to an
instinctual attraction toward a generic nakedness. This is a desire and love
for another person inspired by the genuine recognition of that person's au-
thentic value-that person's unrepeatability.
Furthermore, recognizing that she is a person made for "her own
sake," Adam knew he could not "take" Eve or "grasp" her. He had to trust
that she- in her freedom-would desire to open herself to the gift he initi-
ated and would respond freely with the gift of herself to him, which she
did. In doing so, she also chose him. This is how incommunicable persons
communicate their persons-by freely bestowing the mutual and sincere
gift of self. In this way, John Paul says that the human body and sex are
raised "to the level of 'image of God,' and to the level of the person and
communion between persons" (63).
Freedom lies at the very basis of the nuptial meaning of the body and
the experience of original nakedness. Man and woman can only be naked
without shame, according to the Holy Father, when "they are free with the
very freedom of the gift." The entrance of shame, therefore, indicates the
loss of the freedom of the gift. Here John Paul means freedom as self-mas-
tery or self-control. Such freedom "is indispensable in order that man ...
may become a gift, in order that (referring to the words of the Council) he
will be able to 'fully discover his true self' in 'a sincere giving of him-
self'" (64). For man cannot give himself away if he does not first possess
himself, ifhe is not in "control" of himself and his desires.
Self-control for original man, however, did not mean dominating un-
ruly desires in order to keep them "in check." Such a concept can only
stem from the projections of fallen man. In the beginning, man and woman
Original Man }()}
experienced sexual desire as God created it, as the power and desire to
love as God loves. Thus, they had no unruly desires to control. Free with
the freedom of the gift, man and woman reveled in each other's goodness,
in each other's beauty, according to the whole truth of their being as God
revealed it to them in the mystery of creation. This reveling in each other's
goodness enabled them to be naked without shame. This experience "can
and must be understood as the revelation-and at the same time rediscov-
ery-of freedom" (64). And precisely this freedom affords the revelation
and the discovery of the nuptial meaning of the body. Hence, historical
man's task will be to recover the truth of the body that sets him free. For
this freedom, Christ has set us free (see Gal 5: 1).
19. Chosen by Eternal Love

January 16, 1980 (TB 63-66)
That key anthropological statement of the Council (taken from

Gaudiunl et Spes, n. 24) which we have been discllssing ha two main em-
pha.se . First, man is t he only creature created "for hi own sake.' 'Se ond
man call on ly find himself' through the ' incel'c giving of self ."
God created tbe rest of cr:eati.ol.1 for ow' sake. We arc f..ee to use (but
not ab-use) creation for our benefit. The human person, however, since he
exists "for his own sake," must never be used as a means to an end. He is
an end in himself. Nonetheless, having been created for his own sake, man
is not meant to live for his own sake, but to live for others. The human
heart cannot find happiness in self-indulgent isolation. Hence, the second
emphasis of the Council's statement: Man, if he is to find himself, must
become a "sincere gift" to others. As Christ said, if you lose your life, you
will find it (see Mk 8:35) .
• Secular humanism may seem to promote the idea that man is made
for his own sake. However-and here it makes its tragic eITor-it con-
cludes that he is meant to live for his own sake. This results in a radical
individualism that actually denies the initial premise. Individualism inevi-
tably treats others not as persons in their own right, but as a means or as an
obstacle in the every-man-for-himself quest for fulfillment. Secular hu-
manism does not believe in the reality of gift because it denies God who is
Gift. But the selfless call to be gift to others is the only path to true com-
munion and solidarity among persons, starting with the most fundamental
communion of all, that of man and woman in maITiage. As we shall learn,
the denial of the gift is the essence of original sin. Hence, as George
Weigel keenly observes, through the original temptation the serpent "is the
first and most lethal purveyor of a false humanism. "65
The two emphases of the Council's statement ("own sake" and "self-
gin") contain all the concepts 11Hit shed light 11 mAD's "bcginn in g"~o ll1 -
mUllion of persons; original solitude, wlity, and nakcdnc:s; the gill; the nup-
tia l meaning oftbe body; and the freed m fthe gift. tn the first meaning of
soli/lttil! (i.e., man eli ffers from the animals), Adam discovers h(lt he is tbe
only creature willed "for h.L own snke.' In the second meaning of solitude
(i.e., man is alone without the pp site sex) be rcaUzes that he can only
fulfill himself by giving himself away to un tber creatw'e also willed "for his
own sake" (or shall we say her own sake). Original IInity is the "sincere giv-
ing" of man and woman to each other that fonDs the commllnion o/J (trsons.
This call to be gift is revealed through th ir experi ence of f/okedw!ss. Our
anatomy as male and female persons reveals the body s nuptial meaning
which is fulfilled in the jYeedom of the gift of man and woman to each other.
A. Completing the Nuptial Meaning of the Body

In their first "beatifying meeting," man and woman discover their
own selves in the gift of the other. In the purity of his love-in the purity
of his sexual desire-man accepted woman as God willed her "for her
own sake" in the mystery of her femininity. And in the purity of her love
and desire, woman accepted man as God willed him "for his own sake" in
the mystery of his masculinity. This purity affords the perfect integration
of the interior and exterior dimensions of the person. The pure of heart see
that the exterior b auty of th e hUl11an body is "orien ted interiorly by the
, incere gi It of the person.' They sec "such a value and such a beauty a
t go beyond the pmcly physica l dil11ensions of ·scx.uality ' (65). h
b ely be 'olnes the llu'e hold lo tbe lr(ms endent reality of the spirit and
even in . ome way to Lhe ultimate mystery fth e divine.
John Paul says that in this manner, awareness of the nuptial meaning
of the body is in a way completed. Not only do the man and woman each
become a sincere gift for the other, but the gift is completed when each
receives the gift of self made by the other. The nuptial meaning of the
body reveals both the call to become a gift, and "the capacity and deep
availability for the 'affirmation of the person' [which] is nothing but ac-
ceptance of the gift" (65). It is precisely this reciprocal giving and accept-
ing of the gift which creates the communion of persons. This communion
65. Witness to Hope, p. 33~ .

Original Man 103
is constmcted from within, from man's "interiority." But John Paul affirms
that it also comprises "the whole 'exteriority' of man, that is, everything
that constitutes the pure and simple nakedness of the body in its masculin-
ity and femininity" (65).
John Paul also explains that this "affirmation of the person" means
"living the fact that the other-the woman for the man and the man for the
woman-is ... someone willed by the Creator for his (or her) own sake."
This someone is "unique and unrepeatable: someone chosen by eternal
Love" (65). Is there any man or woman who does not ache in the depths of
his or her being for such affirmation? And, according to John Paul, in
God's plan this is all revealed and lived "by means of the body." This does
not mean that everyone must experience sexual union to be affirmed as a
person. But it does mean that sexual union is supposed to be this: the deep
affirmation of our goodness as persons through the sincere giving and re-
ceiving of the gift of selves.
This is the language of the nuptial embrace: "I give myself totally to
you, all that I am without reservation. Sincerely. Freely. Forever. And I re-
ceive the gift of yourself that you give to me. I bless you. I affirm you. All
that you are, without reservation. Forever." This is an experience of being
chosen by eternal Love. If sexual union does not say this, it does not corre-
spond to the nuptial meaning of the body. It does not correspond to the
dignity of the person and can never satisfy the longings of the heart. If
sexual union does not say this, it is not an expression of love but only a
cheapened counterfeit.
B. The Theme of Existence

John Paul says that man can never avoid this indispensable "theme"
of his own existence. Man is made for nuptial love. It is stamped in his (and
her) being, interiorly and exteriorly. Therefore, John Paul affirms that the
nuptial meaning of the body is "the fundamental element of human exist-
ence in the world" (66). This means we can only find the happiness we seek
if we discover this love, if we discover (or rediscover) the nuptial meaning
of the body. Only their pure experience of the nuptial meaning of their bod-
ies explains man and woman's original happiness. In the whole perspective
of each person's history, man searches for happiness. In this quest John
Paul says that man will not fail to confer a nuptial meaning on his own
body. Even if many things distort his experience of sexuality, the desire for
nuptial union will always remain at the deepest level of the person. John
Paul cannot emphasize this point enough: "This 'nuptial' meaning of the
human body can be understood only in the context of the person" (66).
Animals can copulate and reproduce, but their bodies do not have a
nuptial meaning because they are not persons and they cannot love. We
can also observe in this context that animals also cannot experience
shame. We are the only "bodies" in the world that wear clothing. Why?
Because our capacity for shame is the "flip side" of our capacity for love.
Animals have neither capacity. Thus, what may seem somewhat similar in
the copulation of animals and the copulation of humans is seen to be
worlds apart when we consider the interior dimension of the person. This
is why the nuptial meaning of the body "demands to be revealed in all its
simplicity and purity, and to be shown in its whole truth, as a sign of the
'image of God'" (66).
Because of sin, we may feel far removed from experiencing the body
as our first parents did in the state of original innocence. But only through
that revelation of the original experience of the body can we understand
that from which we have fallen and that to which we are called. In the full-
ness of time Christ took on flesh and was born of a woman so that we
might experience the redemption of our bodies. In Christ we are called-
and called with power-to recover that happiness that comes from living
according to the full truth of our bodies.
20. The Grace of Original Happiness

January 30; February 6, 1980 (TB 67-72)
We have been trying to "reconstruct" the first man and woman's ex-
perience of the body in the state of original innocence before shame. As
"historical man" we do this almost by means of a contrast with our own
experience of shame. John Paul defines original innocence as that which
"at its very roots excludes shame of the body in the man-woman rela-
tionship, radically eliminat[ing] its necessity in man, in his heart, that is,
in his conscience" (68). This prompts a question: What in original man
radically eliminates any experience of shame? John Paul has a one-word
answer: grace. "The first verses of the Bible ... speak not only of the cre-
ation of the world and of man in the world, but also of grace, that is, of
the communication of holiness, of the radiation of the Spirit, which pro-
duces a special state of 'spiritualization' in man" (67). Of course, this
state of "spiritualization" does not imply a distancing from the body. It
means the "in-spiration" of our bodies with the gift of the Holy Spirit.
It means the complete integration and original unity of soul and body,
spirituality and sexuality.
Original Man 105
A. The Radiation of Grace

John Paul states that if creation is a gift to man, then grace deter-
mines man's fullness and deepest dimension as a creature. Grace is God's
self-gift to man; it is God's Spirit breathed into the dust of our humanity.
The state of original innocence speaks above all of this gift of grace that
God gives and man receives. This grace made it possible for human per-
sons to experience the meaning of the world as God's primary gift or do-
nation, and this grace enabled them to experience the mutual donation of
masculinity and femininity as a recapitulation of this gift. Their original
communion of persons, then, was a participation in grace. And grace, John
Paul tells us, is "palticipation in the interior life of God himself, in his ho-
liness" (67). It is "that mysterious gift made to the inner man-to the hu-
man 'heart' -which enables both of them, man and woman, to exist
from the 'beginning' in the mutual relationship of the disinterested gift
of oneself' (68).
"Disinterested" obviously does not mean that man and woman lacked
interest in each other. They were deeply interested in each other, but not
selfishly so. Their experience of "the radiation of God's love" (i.e., grace)
enabled them to love one another sincerely, as God loves. In this we can
understand the beatifying experience of the beginning connected with the
awareness of the nuptial meaning of the body. This blissful awareness of
the body's meaning speaks of their conscious experience of God with
them and within them-of God's Spirit (i.e., his love) radiating through
their bodies. "Happiness," John Paul says, "is being rooted in love. Origi-
nal happiness speaks to us of the 'beginning' of man, who emerged from
love and initiated love .... This 'beginning' can also be defined as the origi-
nal and beatifying immunity from shame as the result oflove" (67).
If we allowed our healts to enter into this "beatifying experience,"
we would taste the love for which we all long and the interior peace it
brings. Perhaps we hesitate to imagine the experience of original happi-
ness for fear of discovering that we cannot attain what we so earnestly
long for. Why tantalize ourselves with false hopes? Is it not more realistic
just to "make do" with the inheritance of our sinfulness?
Although we have left our original innocence irretrievably behind,
John Paul stresses that the love God gave to man in the mystery of cre-
ation and in the grace of original innocence he gave irrevocably. In the
fullness of time, Christ will bear witness to this irreversible love of the
Father. His mission will be to proclaim that the grace of the mystery of
creation was not lost forever, but becomes for anyone open to receiving it,
the grace of the mystery of redemption. 66 "Where sin increased, grace

abounded all the more" (Rom 5:20). This means that in Jesus Christ we
can attain the happiness we long for. Even if we will always know suffer-
ing and tears in this life, we are alive with hope that in the end God will
wipe away every tear from our eyes (see Rev 7: 17). This is why we call
the Gospel good news!
B. Purity of Heart and Man s Fidelity to the Gift

John Paul closes his address of January 30, 1980 by stating that origi-
nal innocence can be understood as "purity of heart." Purity of heart mani-
fests "a tranquil testimony of conscience" precisely because it "preserves
an interior faithfulness to the gift according to the nuptial meaning of the
body" (69). Preserving this "faithfulness to the gift," is the key to man and
woman's happiness (beatitude).
In his following address, John Paul explains what original man's ex-
perience of fidelity to the gift looked like. Once again, he does it by way of
contrast with historical man's experience of shame. He says that shame
corresponds to a threat inflicted on the personal intimacy of man and
woman's relationship and thus bears witness to the interior collapse of in-
nocence. This "threat to the gift" results from a radical interior alteration
of the content of sexual desire. When void of God's love, sexual desire
seeks to appropriate the other rather than be a gift to the other. John Paul
describes this appropriation as the "antithesis of the gift" and "the extor-
tion of the gift." These vivid images ex-press the in-terior "content" oflust
with pointed accuracy. To "extort" literally means "to twist" or to "tum
out." Sexual desire "twisted" by sin does not trust in the freedom of the
gift and refuses to risk becoming a gift. Instead it grasps at the gift and
even seeks to snatch it by force or manipulation. This effectively and ut-
terly drains the gift of its meaning. It is the antithesis of the gift and the
antithesis of the nuptial meaning of the body.
But if we "untwist" this experience or "flip it over," we rediscover
the content of the original experience of sexual desire. If shame expresses
the above lack of fidelity to the gift and the nuptial meaning of the body,
then we can conclude that nakedness without shame expresses an experi-
ence of total fidelity to the gift and the nuptial meaning of the body. If
shame indicates "the extortion of the gift," nakedness without shame indi-
cates total freedom in man and woman's self-giving. We have already de-
scribed this as "the freedom ofthe gift."
66. See 10/29/80, TB 167.

Original Man 107
Therefore, according to John Paul, fidelity to the gift consists in a

moral participation in the eternal and permanent act of God's will that
each should be loved and received for his or her own sake, and never re-
duced interiorly to a mere "object for me." This means that if man and
woman are to find the happiness they desire in their relationship, they
must freely give themselves to each other in the whole truth of their mas-
culinity and femininity as the Creator wished them to be. Furthermore, at
the same time they must fully accept and "welcome" each other, receiving
each other precisely in the whole truth of their masculinity and femin-
inity-body and soul-as the Creator wished them to be. In other
words, sincere self-giving has no conditions or reservations . Since it par-
ticipates in the love of God, the giving and receiving of nuptial love is
total and irreversible.
C. Giving and Receiving Interpenetrate

John Paul adds: "These two functions of the mutual exchange are
deeply connected in the whole process of 'the gift of self': the giving and
the accepting of the gift interpenetrate, so that the giving itself becomes
accepting, and the accepting is transformed into giving" (71). This obser-
vation provides an important window into the dynamism of sexual
complementarity.67 We previously quoted John Paul saying that the reality
of "gift" implies that there is one who gives and one who receives, and a
mutual relationship is established between them (see § 17). This giving and
receiving, which established the original covenant between God and man,
finds a symbolic reflection in the covenant relationship of man and
woman. The male, by virtue of the specific nuptial dynamism of his body,
is disposed toward giving or initiating the gift. The female, by virtue ofthe
specific nuptial dynamism of her body, is disposed toward accepting or re-
ceiving the gift. Nonetheless, "giving" does not belong exclusively to the
male, nor "receiving" exclusively to the female. They interpenetrate so
that in giving the male receives and in receiving the female gives.
67. The work of Sister Prudence Allen, RSM on sexual complementarity is of spe-
cial import. See "Integral Sex Complementarity and the Theology of Communion,"
Communio (winter 1990): pp. 523- 544. For greater depth of philosophical foundations
on the issue of sexual complementarity, see the introduction to her books The Concept of
Woman: The Aristotelian Revolution (750 BC-1250 AD) (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans,
1997) and The Concept of Woman : The Humanist Reformation (1250-1500) (Grand Rap-
ids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002).
J08 THEOLOGY OF THE BODY EXPLAINED
In fact, in the order of creation, it seems to John Paul that the man,
before giving himself to the woman, first receives her from the hand of
God. This seems to indicate that every human being's first posture as a
creature is one of receptivity to the gift of God. Indeed, it is impossible for
a creature to give anything if he has not first received. Hence, only by re-
ceiving woman as a gift from God can the man then initiate the gift of
himself to her. As John Paul says, "'From the beginning' the woman is en-
trusted [by God] to his eyes, to his consciousness, to his sensitivity, to his
'heart.' He, on the other hand, must, in a way, ensure the same process of
the exchange of the gift, the mutual interpenetration of giving and receiv-
ing as a gift, which, precisely through its reciprocity, creates a real com-
munion of persons" (71).
In this intimate communion, man and woman discover their true
selves in the other through the sincere gift of themselves to each other and
in the sincere acceptance of each other's gift. When the whole dignity of
the giving and receiving is ensured, both man and woman experience the
"specific essence" of their masculinity and femininity. At the same time
the Pope says they reach the deep recesses of the "possession of self." This
authentic self-possession enables them to give and receive each other in a
way that cOlTesponds to the essence of the gift. Furthermore, the Pope ob-
serves that this giving and receiving grows ever deeper and more intense.
It grows as the finding of oneself in giving oneself bears fruit in a new and
more profound giving of oneself. Here we approach the manner in which
the sincere giving of male and female to each other reproduces in created
form the Uncreated and Eternal spirating exchange of the Persons of the
Trinity (keeping in mind, of course, the infinite difference between Creator
and creature).
By living in the Trinitarian image, man and woman fulfill the mean-
ing of their being and existence; they reach beatitude. As we shall see, this
"beatifying communion" points us in some way right from the beginning
to the beatific communion of heaven. There the created sign of Trinitarian
Life will give way to its divine prototype, and man will participate in
Trinitarian Life itself. Here we see the continuity between the experiences
of original man and eschatological man. The experience of incarnate com-
munion in the resurrection will be completely new. Yet John Paul also af-
firms that "at the same time it will not be alienated in any way from what
man took part in 'from the beginning. "'68 In this way we see that our ori-
gin foreshadows our destiny. Even if historical man will lose sight of this
vision, the Anointed One will come preaching "recovery of sight to the
blind" (Lk 4: 18).
68. 1/13/82, TB 248.

Original Man 109
21. Subjectivity and the Ethos of the Gift

February 13,20, 1980 (TB 72-75)
John Paul devotes the audience of February 13, 1980 to a review of

the main concept he has outlined thus far. He poinLs Lo the novelty or his
project w hen he sLates that theology has traditional ly "constructed the g lo-
bal image of man s origina l innocence ... by applying the method of objec-
livization proper to metaphysics and mClaphysjcal aothrop logy. In this
nnaly is, ' he continu es •• we are tTying r~lt.her to take into cons ideration the
aspect of human subjectivity" (72).
John Paul knows that much of the Church's moral teaching (about
sexuality in p31iicular) seems "abstract" to modem man. People today do
not think of the world in objective, metaphysical categories. They under-
tand the world primarily through their own experiences. By penetrating
the eXf7€l'iell ces of the first man and woman, John Paul wants to demon-
strate that the hurch's objective norms (ethics) actually correspond to the
deepest subjective desires ofthe human heart (ethos). He wants to demon-
strate that the Church's teachings are not hopelessly removed from real
life experience. Nor are they imposed from "outside" of man, but, when
properly understood, they actually well up from "within" him. John Paul
believes that this approach to the Scriptures is actually more in keeping
with the original texts.
A. The Future of the Human Ethos

Man and woman entered the world with complete knowledge of the
nuptia l meaning of their bodies ami what that Ca ll ed lhcm to cthically-
that is t participate in God's mystery by loving ea.ch other as God lo ve.
They did not need an objective n I'm commanding them l I. ove. Fil.led
with the grace or creation, they desired nothing eiRe. Th is was the ethos
(the interior experience of the go I) by whi h they rreely li ved. In facl ,
the Holy Father says that original innocence manifests and ::It the ::Ime
time constitutes the perfect etho.. of'the girt-til perfect etho' oi'love.
Having lost the original grace of creation, historical man also lost
this experience of the good. Deceived by a lie, he has become "discoll-
nected" in his heart from what will make him truly happy. This is why
John Paul insists that we must construct this theology of the body "from
the beginning," carefully following Christ's words. Historical man must
follow the trail of his heart back to the beginning in order to "reconnect"
with God's original plan for his happiness-and this means reconnecting
with the ethos of the gift inscribed in his body and in his heart. As we have
stressed throughout, rediscovering the truth about the body and sexuality
is no side issue. John Paul observes that man and woman were given to
each other as a gift in the whole perspective of the existence of mankind

and of the human family. He says that the "fundamental fact of human ex-
istence at every stage of its history is that God 'created them male and
femal .... In th is way a great creative persp Clive is opened : preci e ly the
perspect iv e of mao's existence wh ich is c ntil111uJiy renewed by means of
procreation 74). M an 's existence and future obv i usly dep el/d on th e
call of man and woman Lo becum 'one fl esh. 1
This call is deeply rooted in the consciousness of humanity. Although
"the man and the woman ... emerge from the mystery of creation in the first
place as brother and sister in the same humanity," John Paul also remarks
that, according to Genesis 2:24, "man and woman were created for mar-
riage."69 Hence, understanding "the nuptial meaning of the body (and the
fundamental conditionings of this meaning) is important and indispensable
in order to know who man is and who he should be, and therefore how he
should mold his own activity. It is an essential and important thing for the
future of the human ethos" (74). Stated simply: If we do not understand
the nuptial meaning of our bodies, we do not know who we are and, there-
fore , we do not know how to live. Ethics is rooted in anthropology. How
we are to live is rooted in who we are as God created us to be. When we
interiorize the truth of who we are, we (re)experience "the ethos of the
gift," that is, we come more and more to desire subjectively only that
which is objectively good.
If we fail to realize this, living a moral life will inevitably become an
attempt to follow what seem like arbitrary and imposed "rules." Without a
deep interior knowledge and understanding of the "why" behind the
"ought," we become unconvinced of the "ought" and sooner or later aban-
don it. A morality that fails to recognize and respect man as a living sub-
ject inevitably leads to this crisis.
B. Ethos and the Subjectivity of Man

Through the ethos of the gift we can outline the "subjectivity" of
man . "Subjectiv.ily' refers 10 the self-experience of per ·onhood . A person
knows that he is 110'1 something bu l someone. In other word s, a subject
knows he cannOI be reduced to an object. Man is n subjec t prec ise ly be-
cause he i.s made ill the image of t he Divine Subj ect, G d.
69. In a lal er re Hccti n on the Song of Songs. John Paul will clarify what he means
by say ing ma n and woman aI" fi rst brothe.1' (Uld sister in the same humanity (see §88). He
wili alsl) Cillri fy lhat ur creation tor ma rrillgc does not mean marriage is the only path to
f ul fi ] I the lluptiall11cnning orLh • body (sec 'ycle 4).
Original Man ill
• Traditional theological formulations often referred to God as "the

divine object." As George Weigel reports in Witness to Hope, the young
Father Wojtyla resisted using this phrase in his doctoral dissertation on
John of the Cross. The renowned Father Garrigou-Lagrange, who directed
young Wojtyla's dissertation, criticized him for his lack of conformity, but
Wojtyla insisted that there was a danger in a formula that "objectivizes"
God. For Wojtyla, God should not be thought of primarily as "the divine
object," but as "the divine Subject. " As Weigel wlites, "We do not come to
know God as we come to know an object (a tree, a baseball, an automo-
bile). Rather, we come to know God as we come to know another person,
through mutual self-giving."70 Young Wojtyla's insistence on this point
with the formidable Garrigou-Lagrange showed his determination and
readiness as a young man to forge new paths in the Church's theological
reflection.
A subject has the richness of an interior life that affords the freedom
to act, to choose this or that-in a word, to love. A person feels stripped of
his dignity when his freedom as a subject is denied and he is forced to act
in a given way. Even if he is forced to act in a way that is objectively
good, he will not experience it as good unless he makes that good his own
by choosing it freely as a subject. Here we encounter the creative interplay
of divine and human subjectivity. God does not force his will on us; we
are not pawns in a cosmic scheme. God respects us entirely as the subjects
he created us to be. He wants us to want for ourselves to participate in his
plan. God initiates the gift-he proposes his loving plan-and invites us
to participate. Then we, as subjects, must choose. This divine "respect"
God shows toward his own creature defines man as "partner of the Abso-
lute" (see § 12).
Because the first man and woman interiorized the objective good by
making God's will their own, they experienced the objective ethic as a
liberating ethos. This is how the original ethos of the gift is to be under-
stood. The first man and woman experienced the objective good as good
precisely because they freely chose it in accord with their dignity as sub-
jects. They desired nothing else. In this way John Paul says that "the
subjective profile of love" was "objective to the depths" because man's
subjective desires were nourished by the objective truth of the nuptial
meaning of the body. And this interior orientation toward the good is
precisely purity of heart.

C. Subjectivity and Purity

At this point we can recall what we stated previously: When it is
pure, subjectivity is completely objective (see §8). Purity of heart connects
a person's subjective desires (ethos) with the objective order of love (eth-
ics). We know this link was established in the hearts of the first man and
woman-in other words, we know they were pure-because of the experi-
ence of original nakedness. "The fact that they 'were not ashamed' means
that they were united by awareness of the gift; they were mutually con-
scious of the nuptial meaning of their bodies, in which the freedom of the
gift is expressed and all the interior riches of the person as subject are
manifested" (75). The Holy Father explains that in a way purity of heart
made it impossible for them to reduce each other to the level of a mere
object. Shame enters precisely when man and woman lose purity of heart.
Because of this loss, they fail to respect "the interior riches of the person
as subject" and come to look upon the person as an object to be used. Be-
cause of this loss of purity, the demands of love no longer spontaneously
well up from "within" man. In fact, they often appear now as a burden im-
posed from "without."
To use our previous image, when man is deceived by the "great lie,"
he actually prefers his flat tires and views any norm that calls him to in-
flate them as a burdensome imposition.
For historical man the discovery of the nuptial meaning of the body
will cease to be a simple reality of revelation and grace. Nonetheless, the
Holy Father maintains that the original nuptial meaning of the body "will
remain as a commitment given to man by the ethos of the gift, inscribed in
the depths of the human heart, as a distant echo of original innocence"
(75). Even though he must now look through "the veil of shame," histori-
cal man must continually rediscover himself as "the guardian of the mys-
tery of the subject" so as to defend every subject from being reduced in
any way to a mere object.
This flows from "purity of heart," which is the fruit of being filled
with grace. So if we are to live and love as we are called and thus fulfill
the meaning of our being and existence, our only hope is to be filled again
with grace. And grace has been poured out. When we open our hearts to it,
we come gradually to (re)experience the ethos of the gift. Then, to the ex-
tent that we (re )experience this ethos, living according to the full truth of
the nuptial meaning of the body becomes our deepest desire and longing-
not imposed from the "outside" but welling up from "within." Then we
recognize that our "tires" are made for air, we repent of ever thinking oth-
erwise, and we allow Christ to inflate us.
Original Man Jl3
22. The Primordial Sacrament

February 20, 1980 (TB 76-77)
Prior to their "knowledge of good and evil," man and woman "are
immersed in the mystery of creation; and the depths of this mystery hid-
den in their hearts is innocence, grace, love, and justice" (76). They expe-
rience innocence, grace, love, and justice precisely through the awareness
of the meaning of their bodies, their masculinity and femininity and their
call to become "one flesh." Seeing themselves with God's own vision,
they know they are good, very good (see Gen I :31). With this lived aware-
ness of the meaning of their bodies, John Paul says that both man and
woman enter the world as subjects of truth and love. This means that, prior
to sin, the first man and woman freely chose to act with their bodies only in
truth and in love.
A. The First Feast ofHumanity

n i hard to imagine the freedom and pure delight taken in the experi-
11e of origina l nak dness and unity. John Paul, pOC l that b is seelrs to fire
our imagination when be describes the original fullness of the experience
of the l1upti a lmcaning of the body as ' the firsl fea st of humanity' (77) . lL is
it feast of pure love of Tod s and man's good ness. It is a feast of dclight in
lhe facl tbal "being and thl,; g d are convertible" ( ee § 10). To be ali ve is
good.. To be created male and ~ ma le is good. T become "one Aesh" is
very good. Even if historical. man wi ll find thi s 'original feast" largely
spoi led by Sill and death, " right from the mystery of creatio n we already
draw II first hope: lhat is that the fru it of the divine economy of truth and
lov ·, wruch was revealed' at the beginning, is 110t death but Ii fe, and not so
mu.ch the destTuctioll of the body... as rather the cn ll to glory (5 Rom
8:30)' (77). 'Glory' Wojtyla te lls liS ' i. the irradiation of good, III
ref! cling of all perfe 'tion. And in one way it i al 0 the Loner 3LI110sphere
of the deity the godhead .... In a very special way 0 d t:rrll1smits Lbi glory
to man. The g lory of cl i li ving man; the gll)l'Y of ad is man alive.' 71
TLlls " call to glori is st, mped in our body-persons a male and fe-
male. Sin and death CO I/I/,ot overcome it. God extends to man ./01' )IeI' tbj
divine gLfl of li¥! Glnd love. We em reject th e gift but God wUI never witb-
draw it. 'ven if we have rej cled the g ift, we can still ' repent and believe
in the g ad news' (Mk I: 15 . We can always r djscover the divine gin.
Despite sin a 'spa rk" orthe divine gift a lways remains w ithin man. As lh.e
I-Ioly Father says "Man uppears in the visible world a lhe highest cxpres-
71. Sign of Contradiction, p. 181 .

sion of the divine gift, because he bears within him the interior dimension
of the gift" (76). With this statement, we approach the heart and essence of
what John Paul means when he speaks of a "theology of the body." Man
bears within himselfthe call to "be gift," that is, to love as God loves. This
call to be gift is made visible through his body as male and female and
through the call to life-giving communion in marriage.
B. John Pauls Thesis Statement

"Thus, in this dimension, there is constituted a primordial sacrament
understood as a sign that transmits effectively in the visible world the invis-
ible mystery hidden in God from time imm morial. And this is the mystelY
of truth and love, the mystery of diviw life, in which man rea lly partici-
pates" (76). This statement requiTes a carefu l exp lanati n because it can be
misunderstood. The Holy Father is speaking of marriage as a "sacra-
ment"-a theological term that refers to the mediation of grace-in the
context of the state of original innocence. Is there such a thing? Do not the
sacraments as such begin wiLh C hri st and the Church? In what way can we
speak of a "primordial sacram enL" -3 sacramental mediation of grace
from the "beginning' before Lhe Inca.rnation and before the seven sacra-
ments Christ instituted?
Let llS jump abead for a momen t to where John Pau l s ever-deepen-
ing pint I f rellcctions wil.1 eventually take us. III hi , analysi Qr phe-
s ians ( ycle 5), the Holy Father take. SL. Paul's w rds seriously that we
arc chosen in hri "before the foundation of the world' Eph I :4). Based
on this. J 11n Paul 'ays that "one must deduce that lhe reality of man s cre-
ation was already imbued by the perennial election of man in Chri st. ' The
primordial sacrament can only be properly understood in reference to
Christ. The grace in which original man participated "was accomplished
precisely in reference to him [Christ]' .. while anticipating chronologically
his coming in the body."72
Therefore, the primordial sacrament, one might say, is a primordial
preview of "the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God" (Eph 3:9),
which comes to fruition and is definitively revealed in Christ. St. Paul
makes this explicit when he links the "one flesh" union of Genesis with
the union of Christ and the Church. This is a "great mystery," he says
(other translations say this is a "great sacrament"), and it refers to Christ
and the Church (see Eph 5:31- 32). John Paul says that Ephesians 5, in par-
72. 10/6/82, TB 335.

Original Man Jl5
ticular, authorizes us to speak of "sacrament" in the wider and perhaps

also more ancient and fundamental meaning of the term.73 If sacrament in
its restricted meaning refers to the seven signs of grace instituted by
Christ, in this broader meaning "sacrament signifies the very mystery of
God, which is hidden from eternity, however, not in an eternal conceal-
ment, but above all, in its very revelation and actuation."74
But what is this "great mystery" hidden in God? As the Catechism
says, the "innermost secret" of God is that "God himself is an eternal ex-
change of love, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and he has destined us to
share in that exchange. "75 This eternal plan is already set in motion
through the primordial sacrament, which John Paul understands as a sign
that transmits effectively in the visible world that innermost secret of God.
How is the divine mystery made visible and effective in man's life? "The
sacrament, as a visible sign, is constituted with man as a 'body' by means
of his 'visible' masculinity and femininity" (76). Through their bodies-
and through their call to become "one body"-man and woman in some
way participate in the divine exchange of Trinitarian Life and Love .
• "Participation" was an important theme in Wojtyla's book The Act-

ing Person and was also developed in various essays published in Person
and Community. By "participation" Wojtyla means "acting together with
others."76 But this does not simply mean "doing things" in conjunction
with others. For Wojtyla, the essence of the person is revealed in the free-
dom of truly human action. Thus, when we truly act with others we partici-
pate in "the velY humanness of others. "77 Participation takes place when
subjects, acting together, experience "inter-subjectivity." This means living
in communion with others (comrnullio personarum) and in the broader
sense building community. When John Paul speaks about "participating in
the mystery of divine life," he is talking about sharing in the very divinity
of God. He means participation in the divine nature (see 2 Pt I :4); parti-
cipation in the eternal Communio Personarum. 7R In fact, John Paul will
73. See endnote of9/8/82 (TB 380-382) for a detailed discussion of the term "sacra-
ment."
74. 10/20/82, TB 341.
75. CCC, n. 221.
76. The Acting Person, p. 261.
77. Ibid., p. 294.
78. See CCc. n. 2780.
eventually describe the communion of saints as the experience of the "per-

fect intersubjectivity of all."79 In this way we can understand why Wojtyla
concludes one of his essays with this striking statement: "The central prob-
lem of life for humanity in our times, perhaps in all times, is this: pm-tici-
pation or alienation? "80
Here we encounter John Paul's thesis statement that the "body, in

fact, and it alone is capable of making visible what is invisible: the spiri-
tual and divine. It was created to transfer into the visible reality of the
world the mystery hidden since time immemorial in God, and thus to be a
sign of it" (76). This is why the Pope speaks of a theology of the body.
Recalling all that we said earlier about the proper understanding of "sign"
(see §2), the body, in the full beauty and mystery of sexual difference and
the call to communion, is a sign-the primordial sign-of God's very own
mystery. As the Catechism teaches, God "impressed his own form on the
flesh .. .in such a way that even what was visible might bear the divine
form."81 Upon this incarnational mystery hinges the deepest essence of the
humanum-of what is human. Upon this incarnational mystery hinges the
incomparable dignity of every human being. Upon this incarnational mys-
tery hinges everything that John Paul II proposes to the Church and the
world about who man is and who he is called to be.
All of creation is sacramental, in that it reveals something of the
mystery of its Creator. But John Paul tells us that this "sacramentality of
the world" reaches its fulfillment in man created in the image of God as
male and female. 82 Man, in turn, reaches his fulfillment through the sincere
gift of self, which was realized in an original way through the incarnate
union of Genesis 2:24. According to John Paul, in view of the sac-
ramentality of the human body we fully understand those words of Gen-
esis 2:24, "For this reason a man leaves his father and his mother and
cleaves to his wife and the two become one flesh." The Pope says that
these words "constitute the sacrament of marriage" (76). John Paul later
states more explicitly that "the mystery hidden in God from all cternity
... became a visible reality through the union of the first man and woman in
the perspective of marriage."83 The union of man and woman, consum-
79.12/16/81, TB 245.
80. Person & Community: Selected Essays, p. 206.
81. CCC, n. 704.
82. See CCC, nn. 41, 288, 315.
83. 10113/82, TB 338 (emphasis in original).
Original Man 117
mated according to the words of Genesis 2:24, in some way sums up or

consummates the "sacramentality of creation."
The Holy Father explains that against this vast background we come
to understand the rich significance of original nakedness. The words of
Genesis 2:25 ("they were both naked and not ashamed") "express the fact
that, together with man, holiness entered the visible world" (76). Holiness
enabled man and woman to see the mystery of God revealed in and
through each other's naked body. Through the original experience of the
nuptial meaning of their bodies, man and woman gained awareness of the
"sacrament of the body" (77). They were immune from shame because
they were full of grace; that is, they were holy. It is "in his body as male or
female," John Paul says, that "man feels he is a subject of holiness." He
further explains that holiness "enables man to express himself deeply with
his own body... precisely by means of the 'sincere gift' of himself' (76-
77). In other words, holiness enables us to love with our bodies as God
loves. It enables us to realize that our bodies bear the stamp of God's mys-
tery oflove. Holiness enables us to see, live, and experience God's plan of
love and communion in our bodies.
23. The Deepest Essence of Married Life

March 5,12, 1980 (TB 77-83)
In his closing remarks on original man, John Paul shifts gears in or-
der to reflect on Genesis 4: I, "Adam knew Eve his wife, and she con-
ceived and bore Cain, saying, 'I have gotten a man with the help of the
Lord. '" Even though this takes place after original sin in the chronology of
the Yahwist account, John Paul includes this in his reflections on original
man. He does so because "the term 'knew' synthesizes the whole density
of the biblical text analyzed so far" (80). Furthermore, he wants to stress
the continuity and connection between original man and historical man.
Finally, in closing his reflections on original man, John Paul wants to em-
phasize that sexual union, procreation, and moral choosing are intimately
linked with man's creation in the image of God.
A. The Meaning of "Knowledge"

As John Paul notes, our contemporary language, although precise,
often deprives us of the opportunity to reflect on the deeper meaning of
things. The biblical word "knew," on the contrary, takes us beyond the sur-
face of the sexual act to penetrate the rich experience of inter-personal
unity. John Paul goes so far as to say that by speaking here of knowledge,
"the Bible indicates the deepest essence of the reality of married life" (79).
"Knowledge" clearly distinguishes the sexual union of man and

woman as persons from the copulation of animals. Animals do not "know"
each other. Animals cannot "know" each other. Their mating and repro-
ducing are determined by biological instinct, "by nature." For man, sexu-
ality is not a passive biological determinant, but reaches "the specific level
and content of self-conscious and self-determinant persons" (82). The term
"knowledge" indicates that human sexuality decides man's concrete
personal identity. Biblical knowledge "arrives at the deepest roots of
this identity and concreteness, which man and woman owe to their
sex. This concreteness means hoth the uniqueness and unrepeatability of
the person" (79) .
• A word on this "unrepeatability" of the person: A husband and wife

who tmly "know" each other have arrived at the irreducible core of the
person, and each loves this person-not merely physical or spiritual at-
tributes of the person, but the person himself (herself). At this level, they
continually recognize and affirm the unrepeatability of the other; he (she)
is utterly unique and cannot be repeated or replaced. When the "one flesh"
union expresses a love at this level-and it is always meant to do so--it
becomes impossible to imagine replacing one's spouse with someone else,
whether in thought or in deed. To do so would be adultery committed in
action or in "the heart." However, if becoming "one flesh" only expresses a
love for certain pleasing attributes or characteristics of the other, these can
be easily recognized and desired in someone else, and often to a "more
pleasing" degree. Thus, the intuition that one is only valued at the level of
certain pleasing characteristics casts a permanent shadow of doubt over the
relationship. Only when love reaches the level of the unrepeatability of the
person is it built on a stable foundation. This foundation lasts "forever" be-
cause the value of the person itself is infinite. This is why marriage is in-
dissoluble and why adultery is such a grave violation, because marriage is
meant to be a relationship based on a love that reaches the unrepeatability
of the person.
Although the text speaks only of the man's knowledge of the

woman, it is clear that in becoming "one flesh" man and woman share a
mutual knowledge of each other through the mutual gift of themselves.
John Paul points out that according to the book of Genesis, datum
(knowledge) and donum (self-gift) are equivalent. Man and woman are
given to each other in order to be known by each other. They "reveal
themselves to each other with that specific depth of their own human
'self' ... by means oftheir sex" (79).
Original Man 119
This mutual "knowledge" (which can only be freely given and re-
ceived, never grasped) is so intimate and unifying that man and woman
become "almost the one subject of that act and that experience, while re-
maining, in this unity, two really different subjects" (79). Biblical knowl-
edge, then, speaks of unity in plurality, a two in oneness, or, in John Paul's
personalist language, an "inter-subjectivity." In this unity neither person is
lost or absorbed in the other, but discovers his or her true self through the
sincere gift of self, that is, through the experience of knowing the other
and being known by the other.
• This gives us an accurate test of authentic love: In giving yourself to

another, do you become more yourself or less yourself? Do you discover
your true self, or do you feel absorbed by the other, lost in the other? True
love always leads to self-discovery, never self-abasement. We see this real-
ity of perfect unity and perfect distinction pre-eminently in the Trinity, the
ultimate model of all love. Each Person of the Trinity is unique,
unrepeatable, and distinct from the others. Yet each "is" himself in virtue
of his relation to the others, that is, in virtue of the eternal mystery of self-
giving and Communion at the heart of the Trinitarian Life. 84
In view of this "knowledge," the Pope says that their conjugal union
contains a new, and in a way, a definitive discovery of the meaning of the
human body. The knowledge man gained of himself through naming the
animals (i.e., he differed from the animals, he was a person called to love,
he had self-awareness and self-determination), comes to its fulfillment in
his knowledge of woman. "Knowledge, which was at the basis of man's
original solitude, is now at the basis of this unity" (80). Since everyone
must pass from solitude to unity through the sincere gift of self, John Paul
can say: "Everyone finds himself again, in his own way, through that bibli-
cal 'knowledge'" (81). He adds "in his own way," because even if the one
flesh union of marriage is the primary way, it is not the only way to enter
into that biblical knowledge. Christ will call some men and women to
forego sexual union "for the sake of the kingdom" (Mt 19:12).
B. Knowledge Leads to "a Third"

As we read in Genesis 4: 1, man and woman also come to know each
other in the "third," which springs from them both. Eve conceived and
bore a son "with the help of the Lord." John Paul observes that fatherhood
84. See eee, nn. 254-255, 689.

and motherhood manifests and completely reveals the mystery of human

sexuality. Joining in "one flesh" always involves a particular conscious-
ness of the meaning of the human body, bound up with fertility and pro-
creation. In tum, the human power to generate new life-even if human
generation remains radically "other"-is indissolubly bound up with the
mystery of eternal generation in the Trinity. Through the mystery of pro-
creation the embrace of man and woman is most clearly seen also as the
embrace of God and man. John Paul says elsewhere that through their bib-
lical "knowledge" man and woman share "in the great mystery of eternal
generation. The spouses share in the creative power of God!"85
Fatherhood and motherhood point in some sense to the crowning of
all that John Paul has said about the mystery of man and woman as per-
sons made in the divine image. Recall that in discussing how man and
woman image God in and through their communion, John Paul specifi-
cally stated that on "all of this, right from 'the beginning,' there descended
the blessing of fertility linked with human procreation."86 Now the Pope
says that every time a man and a woman join in that communion of per-
sons that makes them "one flesh," thereby opening themselves to the
"blessing of fertility," it "confirms and renews the existence of man as the
image of God" (83) .
• With good reason, John Paul never defines how the fruitful com-
munion of man and woman images the Trinity in terms of who might rep-
resent whom. While it may be a legitimate question for speculative
theology, lining up spouses and their offspring with specific persons of the
Trinity must be approached cautiously lest we move too continuously from
the gendered creature to the Uncreated (and un-gendered) God. Further-
more, the Trinity has not revealed itself as Husband, Wife, and Child, but
as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. This obviously has great import. 87
Although hereditary sinfulness deprives man of God's likeness, he

remains in God's image. 88 Thus, every time man and woman conceive a
child "with the help of the Lord," they reproduce another image of God.
The divine image constitutes a basis of "continuity and unity" between
original man and historical man. Furthermore, man and woman not only
reproduce another image of God, they also reproduce their own living im-
85. Mulieris Dignitatem, n. 18 (see also n. 8).

86. 11114179, TB 47.
87. See CCC, nn. 42, 239, 370.
88. See CCC, nn. 705, 2566.
Original Man 121
age. They again recognize themselves, their own humanity, in the birth
of "the third." With these profound reflections, John Paul concludes that
the "words of the Book of Genesis, which are a testimony of the birth of
man on earth, enclose within them at the same time everything that can
and must be said about the dignity of human generation" (83). As the Pope
observes, within this mystery, the Creator accords a particular dignity to
the woman.
C. Eulogy ofFemininity
John Paul is a man who loves woman with a purity as close to the
beginning as it seems possible to reach in this life. It can even be said in
light of the above analysis that he is a man who knows woman (in a celi-
bate way, of course). He knows her distinctive beauty and dignity, and he
stands in awe of the mystery of God's creative love revealed in her.
The Holy Father does not intend merely to state the obvious when he
notes that the "constitution of the woman is different as compared with the
man" (81). He believes it is of great significance, and of particular credit
to woman, that God has chosen her body to be the place of conception, the
shrine of new life. The whole constitution of woman's body is made for
motherhood. Since the body reveals the person, John Paul believes that
this speaks volumes, not only about feminine biology, but about the dig-
nity and nature of woman as a person. This is why he takes special care to
note that the Bible (and subsequently the liturgy) "honors and praises
throughout the centuries 'the womb that bore you and the breasts you
sucked' (Lk 11 :27). These words," he continues, "constitute a eulogy of
motherhood, of femininity, of the female body in its typical expression of
creative love" (82).
In her joyous proclamation, "I have gotten a man with the help of the
Lord," woman expresses the whole theological depth of the function of be-
getting and procreating. Furthermore, in giving birth the first woman is
fully aware of the mystery of creation- of everything we have been dis-
cussing about man's "beginning" -which is renewed in human generation.
Yes, according to the Holy Father, the entire mystery, dignity, goodness,
vocation, and destiny of man as revealed "in the beginning" is reproduced
in some sense evelY time a child is conceived under the heart of a woman.
24. Life Refuses to Surrender

March 5, 12, 26; April 2, 1980 (TB 77, 80- 90)
John Paul drops the following dramatic statement in his audience of

March 5, 1980 without any commentary: "Sin and death entered man's
122 THEOLOGY OF THE BODY EXPLAlNED
history, in a way, through the very heart of that unity which, from 'the be-
ginning,' was formed by man and woman, created and called to become
'one flesh'" (77). We quoted this statement previously in the context of
discussing the serpent's scheme to make the symbolic diabolic (see §5).
Satan aims to alienate man from the life-giving Communion of the Trinity.
As we have learned, the original unity of the sexes was to be a sign (or
symbol) that would "effectively transmit" the Trinity's inner life to them.
So Satan attacks "through the very heart of that unity which, from 'the be-
ginning,' was fonned by man and woman, created and called to become
'one flesh. ",
If Satan can convince man to distort this "primordial sacrament" (i.e.,
marriage, including the marital embrace), it will no longer effectively
communicate God's life and love. It could even become a counter-sign of
God's life and love. In such a case the symbolic would become diabolic.
In other words, what was meant to unite God and man (and man and
woman) would instead divide them. We already see the importance of the
first chapters of Genesis for a proper understanding of the encyclical
Humanae Vitae. For contraception is a specific attempt to defraud that bib-
lical knowledge of its potential to generate a "third." It becomes a falsifi-
cation of creative love and a marked affront to what John Paul calls the
knowledge-generation cycle.
A. The Knowledge-Generation Cycle

Knowledge always precedes generation and remains intimately
linked with it. The rich significance of the word "knowledge" indicates
that "the third" who springs from their union is also "known" as a person
who shares the same humanity as his parents. Bestowing the name "man"
on the child ("I have gotten a man"), then, greatly differs from the experi-
ence of naming the animals. They know what the name "man" expresses:
this "third" is "bone of their bones and flesh of their flesh" (see 84). He is
a body that expresses a person. In this way John Paul says that the biblical
cycle of "knowledge-generation" comes to a close.
In the experience of this knowledge in which they give rise to another
person, man and woman "are almost 'carried off' together," the Pope says,
"by the humanity which they... wish to express again" (84). They wish to
express their humanity again (in "the third") in order to affirm the good-
ness of life and to overcome, in some sense, the inevitable prospect of
death which now is part of their horizon due to sin. Man's awareness of
the nuptial and generative meanings of his body comes into contact right
from the beginning with awareness of death. Yet John Paul says that the
fact that "Adam knew his wife and she conceived and bore" is like "a seal
impressed on the original revelation of the body at the very 'beginning' of
Original Man 123
man's history on earth" (85). This seal ensures that God's original plan of
life-giving communion has not been overcome by original sin.
In fact, as John Paul proclaims, "there always returns in the history of
man the 'knowledge-generation' cycle, in which life struggles ever anew
with the inexorable perspective of death, and always overcomes it" (85-
86). What words of hope! We must all reckon with the reality of death. But
man and woman's "knowledge" manifests the good news that life refuses
to surrender. This is the "gospel of the body."
B. Affirming the Goodness ofLife

"It is as if the reason for this refusal of life to surrender, which is
manifested in 'generation,' were always the same 'knowledge' with which
man goes beyond the solitude of his own being, and, in fact, decides again
to affirm this being in an 'other'" (86). Man and woman affirm the good-
ness of life in their openness and readiness to beget a man with the help of
the Lord. John Paul continues: "Man, in spite of all the experiences of his
life, in spite of sufferings, disappointment with himself, his sinfulness,
and, finally, in spite of the inevitable prospect of death, always continues,
however, to put 'knowledge' at the 'beginning' of 'generation.' In this way
he seems to participate in that first vision of God himself: God the Creator
'saw... and behold, it was very good.' And ever anew, he confilms the truth
of these words" (86).
Historical man will find it difficult to confirm the truth of these
words. Due to sin and the difficulties now inherent in human life, men and
women often teeter between hope and despondency, between the "risk" of
communion and the "safety" of solitude, between affirming life's good-
ness and cursing existence. This can bring them to prefer not to bring an
"other" into the world. It can even lead to them to consider the original
blessing of fertility (see Gen 1:28) as a curse.
Yet the man and woman who take that risk of love, surrendering their
bodies to each other in knowledge and potential generation, stare death in
the face and boldly proclaim: "Life is good. Communion is better than
solitude. Life is better than death. Life, in fact, conquers death. Where, 0
death, is your victory? Where, 0 death, is your sting?" (see 1 Cor 15 :55)
Everyone must take his stand. Everyone must choose his posture. This will
have far-reaching implications, particularly for John Paul's reflections on
Humanae Vitae.
C. Christ s Words Remain Pertinent Today

Modern men and women have many pressing questions about the na-
ture of marriage, much like the Pharisees who approached Jesus to ask
him about divorce. Although many current problems were unknown to
Christ's contemporaries, John Paul believes that Christ's response remains

just as pertinent today as it was two thousand years ago. In the last cen-
tury, man has gained tremendous knowledge about his body from a scien-
tific point of view. However, such knowledge has led man in many cases
to reduce the human body to the level of an "object" to be manipulated.
This greatly differs from the biblical "knowledge" that recognizes the hu-
man body as the revelation of a personal subject with inviolable dignity.
By pointing to the beginning, Christ "wishes man, male and female,
to be this subject, that is, a subject who decides his own actions in light of
the complete truth about himself' (88). John Paul seeks to help modem
man do this through the theology of the body-to understand fully who
man is so that he can decide on his actions in that light. To move beyond
partial perspectives of man's being and construct a "total vision of man,"
we must return to the "beginning." There we find the first inheritance of
every human being in the world. There we find the first proclamation "of
human identity according to the revealed word, the first source of the
certainty of man's vocation as a person created in the image of God him-
self' (86).
The archaic text of Genesis is completely "pre-scientific." Yet in the
simplest and fullest way it reveals the truth so important for the "total vi-
sion of man." It is the truth of human subjectivity and "inter-subjectivity,"
that is, the communion between persons. The objective science of human
sexuality is not inherently bad, and, as John Paul notes, we need not de-
prive ourselves of its results. Nonetheless, if a "science of the body" is to
serve man, it must be informed by a "theology of the body." Without this
John Paul insists that no adequate answer can be given to contemporary
questions connected with marriage and procreation.
Modem man may find the idea of constructing a theology of the body
incongruous. However, as John Paul points out, it should not surprise any-
one familiar with the Incarnation. "Through the fact that the Word of God
become flesh, the body entered theology," the Pope muses, "through the
main door" (88-89). John Paul also adds that the Incarnation became the
definitive source of the sacramentality of marriage.
D. Questions of Human Life

Questions about the body, marriage, and human sexuality, therefore,
have a distinct religious and theological quality. They "are not only the
questions of science, but, even more, the questions of human life" (89).
We can observe here the title of Pope Paul VI's watershed encyclical, Of
Human Life (Humanae Vitae). The problems of marriage and procreation
which Paul VI addressed in this encyclical take uS to the heart of the mys-
Original Man . 125
tery of human life. Here John Paul II recalls that Paul VI himself spoke of
the need for a "total vision of man" if we are to understand the teaching of
Humanae Vitae. Herein lies one of John Paul's main inspirations for devel-
oping the theology of the body.
So many men and women seek in marriage the way to salvation and
holiness. If they are to find the fulfillment for which they are looking, John
Paul maintains that they "are called, first of all, to make this 'theology of
the body' ... the content of their life and behavior. In fact, how indispens-
able is thorough knowledge of the meaning of the body, in its masculinity
and femininity, along the way of this vocation!" This is so, the Holy Father
continues, "since all that which forms the content of the life of married
couples must constantly find its full and personal dimension in life together,
in behavior, in feelings! And all the more so against the background of a
civilization which remains under the pressure of a materialistic and utilitar-
ian way of thinking and evaluating" (89).
By pointing back to "the beginning," Christ wishes to tell men and
women of every age that true fulfillment in the relationship of the sexes
comes only through the "redemption of the body." This means regaining
"the real meaning of the human body, its personal meaning, and its mean-
ing 'of communion'" (89). Only by understanding this personal and com-
munal meaning of the body revealed "in the beginning" can we even begin
to see the serious privation of a materialistic and utilitarian view. How-
ever, to give an exhaustive answer to our questions about marriage and
sexuality, we must not stop only at man's beginning. We must also look at
his history and ultimate destiny. We must look to Christ's words about lust
in the "heart" (Mt 5:8) and about marriage in the resurrection (Mt 22:24-
30). These words will fonn the basis of John Paul's subsequent reflections
first on historical man and then on eschatological man.
Original Man-In Review

1. Christ's discussion with the Pharisees about marriage is John
Paul's point of departure. Moses allowed divorce because of men and
women's "hardness of heart." But in the beginning "it was not so." Thus,
we must look to God's original plan for marriage as the model and nonn
of every relationship in which man and woman become "one flesh."
2. The Elohist account presents the seven-day story of creation. It de-
fines man objectively in the dimensions of being and existence as the only
creature of the visible world made in God's image and likeness. The
126 'THEOLOGY OF THE BODY EXPLAINED
Yahwist account presents the subjective complement to the Elohist account.

It penetrates man's psychology and defines him in the subjective dimensions
of consciousness and experience.
3. The "redemption of the body" won for us by Christ guarantees the
continuity between original man and historical man. The man who lives
with the inheritance of sin cannot return to innocence, but neither is he en-
tirely cut off from his origins. Each person, in fact, experiences a certain
"echo" of original innocence. Christ calls us back to "the beginning" with
the living hope that his gift of redemption has the power to restore what
was lost.
4. Human experience is an indispensable element in constructing a
theology of the body. John Paul examines three fundamental human expe-
riences: original solitude, original unity, and original nakedness. He at-
tempts to "reconstruct" these experiences of man's "prehistory" not so
much to determine precisely who man and woman were "then," but to help
us better understand who we are now-more so, who we are meant to be.
5. Original solitude is based on the words of Genesis: "It is not good
that the man should be alone." This solitude means not only that man is
"alone" without woman (and woman without man), but that man is "alone"
in the visible world as a person. Adam discovers in naming the animals that
he alone is aware of himself and is able to determine his own actions.
6. In his solitude man discovers that he is a "partner of the Absolute"
and a "subject of the covenant" with God. This realization hinges on man's
freedom, which is most fully revealed in the alternative between death and
immortality. In short, solitude determines that man stands alone in the vis-
ible world as a creature made in God's image.
7. Man's spiritual solitude is discovered through the experience of his
body. The body expresses the person. The body expresses man's difference
from the animals, his subjectivity, and his call to communion with God
and with an "other" like himself.
8. Genesis describes the creation of woman in archaic, metaphori-
cal, and "mythical" language. Adam's deep sleep indicates his return to
non-being and God's "re-creation" of man as male and female. Woman's
creation from Adam's rib indicates that male and female share the same
humanity. They are "bone of the same bone and flesh of the same flesh."
9. The experience of original unity is based primarily on the key text
of Genesis 2:24-the two become "one flesh." Original unity overcomes
original solitude (in the sense of being alone without the opposite sex) and
affirms everything about man's solitude (in the sense that he is a personal
Original Man 127
subject made in the divine image). The union of the sexes in "one flesh,"
then, is worlds apart from the copulation of animals.
10. John Paul defines the original unity as a "communion of persons"
(communio personarum). He brings a dramatic development of thinking to
the Church by positing the divine image not only in man's humanity as an
individual, but also in the communion of persons which man and woman
form right from the beginning. The marital embrace itself is an icon in
some sense of the inner life of the Trinity.
11. For John Paul, relationality enters the definition of the person. To
be a person means "being subject" and "being in relationship." The beauty
and mystery of sexual difference fundamentally reveals this relationality.
12. By joining in "one flesh" according to God's original plan, man
and woman rediscover their "original virginal value." The virginity of "the
beginning" cannot simply be equated with an absence of sexual union, but
is more properly understood as the original integrity of body and soul. The
grace of the sacrament of marriage allows husbands and wives progres-
sively to rediscover the original integrity of the "one flesh" union.
13. Original nakedness is the experience of nakedness without
shame. As the clearest subjective indication of their creation in the di-
vine image, it is the key to understanding biblical anthropology. Original
nakedness indicates a full consciousness of the original meaning of the
body as the revelation of the person. It indicates a pure and transparent
spiritual communication between the man and the woman "prior" to
communication in the flesh.
14. The tranquility of original nakedness derives from "the peace of
the interior gaze," which apprehends "the original good of God's vision"
in the nakedness of the other. In God's declaration of the goodness of cre-
ation, we recognize that the motive of creation itself is love. Love and
self-giving are synonymous. God initiates his own self-gift by creating us
in his image. Man receives this gift and reciprocates it. In this way, the
covenant of love between God and man is itself a relationship akin to nup-
tial self-giving and communion.
15. Man and woman recapitulate the gift of God in creation by be-
coming a gift to each other. This call to be gift is inscribed in the nuptial
meaning of their bodies. The nuptial meaning of the body is the body's ca-
pacity of expressing love, that love in which the person becomes a gift and
thus fulfills the very meaning of his being and existence.
16. Sexual desire was not experienced as an autogenous force.
Rather, it was experienced as the desire to make a sincere gift of self, that
is, to love as God loves. The freedom of the gift indicates that man and
woman respected one another as persons who were created for their "own
sakes." They could not grasp or possess one another. Ifthey were to live in
communion, they had to bestow the gift of self freely.
17. The nuptial meaning of the body reveals both the capacity to be-
come a gift to the other and the capacity for the deep affirmation of the
other. Affirmation of the person means receiving the gift the other offers
and respecting the other as a person created for his (her) own sake.
18. Man can never avoid the nuptial meaning of his body. It is the
fundamental element of his existence in the world. Even if the nuptial
meaning of the body undergoes many distortions because of sin, it will al-
ways remain at the deepest level of the person.
19. Man's fullest and deepest dimension is determined by the radia-
tion of grace-that is, by God's gratuitous love poured into the human
heart. Grace is participation in the interior life of God himself, in his holi-
ness. And the original unity ofthe sexes was itself a participation in God's
life and holiness. Grace enabled them to be naked without shame, which
attests to the sincerity of the mutual gift of self.
20. Original happiness refers to the original beatifying experience of
man and woman's communion with God and with each other. Original
happiness is being rooted in love. It speaks of man's emergence from love
and his participation in love. It is manifested by the experience of original
nakedness.
21. The gift is lived through the complementarity of the sexes. Man,
having first received woman as a gift from God, is disposed toward initiat-
ing the gift of himself to the woman. In tum, the woman is disposed to-
ward receiving his gift. But the giving and receiving interpenetrate so that
the giving becomes receiving and the receiving becomes giving. This is an
ever-deepening exchange which in some way reflects the eternal exchange
within the Trinity.
22. The ethos of the gift enables us to penetrate the subjectivity of
man. It refers to the inner orientation of the first man and woman toward
the objective good. They did not need an external ethic enforcing the law
of the gift. They desired nothing else. God's law was not imposed from
"outside" but welled up from "within" each of them.
23. Through the visibility of masculinity and femininity and their call
to communion, the invisibility of the divine mystery of Love and Com-
munion is made visible. In this way we understand marriage as the "pri-
mordial sacrament." The body, in fact, and it alone is capable of making
Original Man 129
visible the invisible mystery of God. This is the mystery of truth and love
in which man, male and female, really participates.
24. Original nakedness helps us understand that the primordial sacra-
ment was efficacious; it truly communicated God's grace, his holiness, to
man and woman. Holiness enabled them to be naked without shame. Holi-
ness enabled man and woman to express themselves deeply with their
bodies through the sincere gift of self.
25. "Knowledge" indicates the deepest essence of married life and
synthesizes the whole depth of the original experiences of solitude, unity,
and nakedness. Knowledge brings such a unity that spouses almost be-
come the one subject of that act, while remaining two different subjects.
Hence, knowledge speaks of a unity in plurality. Everyone finds himself,
in his own way, through this biblical knowledge.
26. Knowledge leads to a "third." In her exaltation, "I have gotten a
man with the help of the Lord," woman expresses the whole theological
depth of procreation and begetting. The Bible and the liturgy express a eu-
logy of femininity by honoring and praising the womb that bore Christ and
the breasts he sucked.
27. The "knowledge generation cycle" speaks to the goodness of hu-
man life that persists and continues to assert itself despite the tragedy of
sin and death. Through knowledge and procreation, life struggles with the
prospect of death and always overcomes it.
28. Questions about the body, marriage, and sexuality have a distinc-
tive religious quality. They are not only questions of science but more so
they are the questions about the meaning of human life. This is why we
must reconstruct God's original plan for the body according to the words
of Christ.
Cycle 2
Historical Man
Historical Man is the second of the three cycles that establish John
Paul's "adequate anthropology." In forty general audiences delivered be-
tween April 16, 1980 and May 6, 1981, John Paul reflects on the reality of
embodiment and erotic desire as man and woman experience them in his-
tory affected by sin. As we venture into these reflections, let us "be not
afraid" to face honestly how far we have fallen from God's original plan.
For only if we first realize how bad the "bad news" is, do we then realize
how good the "good news" is. The "good news" is that historical man is
not merely the man influenced by sin. He is also redeemed in Christ, who
gives us real power to regain progressively-if arduously-what was lost.
We must keep this in the forefront of our minds as we reflect on the effects
of sin on our experience of the body and sexuality. Without this hope, we
will be tempted to despair, or to minimize and even normalize sin.
Once again the Pope bases his reflection on Christ's own words, this
time from the Sermon on the Mount regarding lust and adultery committed
"in the heart." Many throughout history have seen in Christ's admonition a
universal prohibition against eros. Yet John Paul demonstrates that Christ's
words do not condemn the heart. Instead, they call us to reflect on the
original meaning of sexual desire, our fall from it, and how Christ restores
God's original plan through the "redemption of the body." If men and
women have been driving with flat tires, Christ's words invite them to
open their hearts to life "according to the Holy Spirit" so that they might
come to experience eros according to its original "inflated" meaning.
Christ's words appeal to that "echo" in each of us of God's original
plan. The more we tap into that echo, the more we realize that lust not only
radically betrays authentic eros; it also radically betrays our authentic hu-
manity. As the primordial plagiarization of love, lust can never satisfy our
desire for communion with an "other." Love and all life together in truth,
requires liberation from lust. Faced with the incessant and magnetic pull of
131
lust, man seems helpless to overcome it. Based on his own resources, he is.
But the good news of the Gospel is that "Jesus came to restore creation to
the purity of its origins." "His grace restores what sin had damaged in us."!
Man cannot return to the state of original innocence. The redemption
he experiences in Christ is more aptly a partial participation in the future
resurrection. Historical man-that is, fallen and redeemed man-lives in
the constant tension of "already, but not yet."2 Regarding the "not yet,"
historical man will always battle with concupiscence. Regarding the "al-
ready," John Paul insists that historical man can experience a "real and
deep victory" in this battle. Since Christ rose from the dead within history,
we can affirm with Wojtyla that "the 'redemption of the body' is already
an aspect of human life on earth. This redemption is not just an eschato-
logical reality but a historical one as well. It shapes the history of the sal-
vation of concrete living people, and, in a special way, of those people
who in the sacrament of matrimony are called as spouses and parents to
become 'one flesh' (Gen 2:24), in keeping with the intent of the Creator
announced to the first parents before the fall.") This is the "good news" of
Christ's words in the Sermon on the Mount. They announce that Christ
came to liberate eros from the distortion of lust. As the Pope says in
Veritatis Splendor. Christ's words are "an invitation to a pure way oflooking
at others, capable of respecting the spousal meaning of the body" (n. 15). So
John Paul asks: "Are we to fear the severity of these words, or rather have
confidence in their salvific content, in their power?,,4
25. The New Ethos: A Living Morality

April 16, 23, 1980 (TB 103-107)
John Paul says that an adequate anthropology tries to understand and

interpret man in what is "essentially human." It rests on essentially human
experiences, as opposed to the "naturalistic reductionism" which often
goes hand in hand with the theolY of evolution concerning man's origin. s
1. CCC, nn. 1708, 2336 .

2. See CCc, nn. 1002-1004.
3. "The Family as a Community of Persons," Person & Community: Selected Es-
says, p. 326.
4. 10/8/80, TB 159.
5. See 1/2/80, TB 58 and the first endnote of the same address (TB 97) .
Historical Man 133
Not all theories of evolution contradict Catholic faith. 6 But theories of

evolution that reduce man to a chance occun'ence of nature no different
than any other living thing certainly do. Such an interpretation of man
misses altogether what is "essentially human" and contradicts human ex-
perience. Despite some modem propaganda to the contrary, we know we
differ from the animals. Chickens do not look up at the stars with awe and
wonder. Chickens do not question the meaning of their existence; they do
not write music or poetry; they do not build cathedrals. Chickens do not
have freedom and self-determination. Thus, they cannot love; nor can they
sin. Only persons can sin. It is the "flip side" of our capacity to love. 7 In
this sense, sin is an essentially human experience.
A. Adultery in the Heart

In the Sennon on the Mount, Christ says, "You have heard that it was
said, 'You shall not commit adultery.' But I say to you that everyone who
looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his
heart" (Mt 5:27-28). John Paul points out that this is one of those pas-
sages that fundamentally revises the way of understanding and of carrying
out the moral law of the old covenant. Like Christ's words that pointed us
to the "beginning," John Paul says that the Lord's words about lust are
pregnant with theological, anthropological, and ethical content. 8 They
have "a key meaning for the theology of the body," a "global context," and
an "explicitly nonnative character" (103 -104). These words, then, are not
only directed toward those who heard the Sennon on the Mount with their
own ears. They are directed toward "every man" (male and female) of the
past and of the future.
John Paul observes that adultery "in the heart" concerns a desire for
sexual knowledge of someone who is not one's spouse. Although Christ's
words apply just as much to women as they do to men, for the sake of ex-
ample Christ speaks of the lust of a man toward woman and describes it as
adultery committed "in the heart." As an interior act, this desire is ex-
pressed through the sense of sight, with mere looks. John Paul cites the
case of David looking at Bathsheba as a prime example (see 2 Sam 11 :2).
How are we to understand this "new level" of the traditional commandment
against adultery? In other words, why does Christ posit the immorality of
6. See John Paul II, "Truth Cannot Contradict Truth," Address to the Pontifical Aca-
demy of Sciences, October 22, 1996.
7. See CCC, n. 186l.
8. See 10/15/80, TB 160.
adultery first "in the heart" before and even without an act of adultery being
physically committed?
B. Ethic and Ethos

Christ summarizes his teaching in the Sermon on the Mount by say-
ing, "You, therefore, must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect"
(Mt 5:48). As the Catechism observes, "It is impossible to keep the Lord's
commandment by imitating the divine model from outside; there has to be
a vital participation, coming from the depths of the heart, in the holiness
and the mercy and the love of our God."g Christ's words about committing
sin "in the heart" call us to enter this "vital participation" in God's holi-
ness, in his mystery of love and self-giving. They inaugurate the fulfill-
ment of God's promise to Israel: "I will make a new covenant with the
house of Israel.... I will put my law within them, and I will write it upon
their hearts" (Jer 31 :31-33).10
Living a mature moral life as a Christian does not mean begrudgingly
submitting oneself to an external code of ethics. Scripture and our own ex-
perience attest that it is possible to live in strict accordance with laws yet
never attain holiness. It is called "legalism" or "moralism." In such case,
people keep to legalistic observance of the formula, but the spirit of the
law does not abound in their hearts. Christ calls us to something very dif-
ferent. He appeals to the interior man. II "First cleanse the inside of the cup
and of the plate, that the outside also may be clean" (Mt 23 :26). With these
words Christ proclaims the "new ethos" of redemption. Ethos refers to a
person's inner-world of values-what attracts and what repulses him. It
embraces in its content "the complex spheres of good and evil, depending
on human will and subject to the laws of conscience and the sensitivity of
the human heart."12 Ethos, therefore, "can be defined as the interior form,
almost the soul, of human morality... To reach it, it is not enough to stop 'at
the surface' of human actions, it is necessary to penetrate inside" (104-105).
We must penetrate the human "heart" where moral value is connected with
the dynamic process of man's interior life-his "intimacy."
In the Sermon on the Mount, Christ speaks "about a certain human
interpretation of the law which negates ... the correct meaning of right and
9. CCc, n. 2842.
10. See CCc, n. 1965.
11. See CCC, nn. 1430-1432.
12. J1/5/80, TB 169.
Historical Man 135
wrong as specified by the will of the divine Legislator. "13 The typical inter-
pretation of the law came to be "marked by an objectivism" which was
"not concerned directly with putting some order in the 'heart' ofman."14 In
fact, a faulty interpretation of the law had led the Israelites, in many cases,
to compromise with lust. IS Christ appeals to the interior man (ethos) in or-
der to recover the original meaning of the law (ethic). In effect, Christ's
teaching in the Sermon on the Mount expresses thi s: "YOli have beard the
bjeclive law and interpreted it ex/emally. Now I tell you the ubjective
meaning of the law-what it ails YOli to infernally. " ill other words "You
bave hea rd the ethi " 'Now I SI eak to you of its proper ethos, "III
• Here we clearly see John Paul, as he himself states, drawing from

the phenomenology of Max Scheler. For morality to be "real" to man, it
must be connected with an experienced value. In emphasizing (or perhaps
over-emphasizing) this valid point, however, Scheler failed to recognize
man's responsibility toward objective moral values when his perceptions
of value are misguided. In Christ's words in the Sermon on the Mount, we
see the call to purity in one's subjective values. For when man's heart is
purified, his subjective vahle corre pond to that which is objectively hue,
good, and beautiful. But even lh impure man ha a duty toward the objec-
tive good. If Kant's ethical, ystem was based on mao'S" duty to the moral
norm and Scheler's was based on man's experience of value, Wojtyla/John
Paul II wants to draw the proper balance between duty and the experience
of value.
C. Fulfillment of the Law

This emphasis on the subjective dimension of "ethos" does not do
away with objective norms. On the contrary, the new ethos "makes us en-
ter the depths of the norm itself' from the perspective of the personal sub-
13.8113/80, TB 133.
14, Ibid, TB 137.
15, See 8/20/80, TB 136.
16, There remains an organic relationship between the Law and the teaching of
Christ which must be maintained while any sharp contrast between them avoided, The
Christian ethos is certainly "new," but there is also a continuity with the Old Testament
understood as "fulfillment." See Vatican Commission for Religious Relations with the
Jews, Notes on the Correct Way to Present th e Jeyvs and Judaism in Preaching and
Cafechesis in the Roman Catholic Church, See also Pontifical Biblical Commission, The
Jewish People alld Their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible (Boston: Pauline Books
and Media, 2002),
ject and his experience of morality. As Christ himself said, "Think not that
1 have come to abolish the law and the prophets. 1 have come not to abol-
ish them, hUI I.o/u(/ilf tlpm" (Ml 5: J 7). "According to Irristian tradition ,
the Law is holy, spiritual, and gOt d yet sti ll imperfect. Like a tutor it
shows what must be done, but does not of itself give the strength the
grace oC-lhe SI ifit, to fulfill it."17 In this sense, the law is sterlle. By itself'it
cannot give man Life. But Christ arne that we might have life and have it
to the ./illl (. ee In 10: 10). He cam to fi ll -us-full with the Spirit of Hfc and
love that enab les tiS not only to meet the law's demands but to fitlfWlhe
law. Thus, Jesus ' 'message is new but it does not des troy what w l1t be-
rore; it leads what went before to its full.est potential."l ~
Man fulfills the law through • the 'superabounding' f ju tice' in the
human hearl which re-orients the person 's "interior percept ion of values"
(105). This interior c nver i Jl c.:reates a "subjective vitaliry" -lbal is, a
heart alive (through lhe indweUing of lhe Holy Spirit) with the truth Ibuut
what is good, what is just, what is holy. In effect, Christ is saying in the
Sermon on the Mount: "You have heard the commandment not to commit
adultery, but the problem is you desire to commit adultery." In turn,
"Christ's faithful [are those who] 'have crucified the flesh with its passions
and desires' (Gal 5:24); they are led by the Spirit and follow his desires."1 9
When a person is led by the Spirit in this way, the law no longer constrains
him. In other words, such a person no longer needs an objective norm con-
straining him (or her) from committing adultery. Led by the Spirit, he does
1701 de 'ire to col11J])j( adultery. Lust-even if he is still capable of it-no
longer holds sway in his heart:.
When a persan experience ' litis 'subjective vitality," not only is his
will set on what i true, good, and beautiful but his "upright will orders
the movements of the senses ... to the good and Lo beatitude"20 as well. For
such a person, avoiding adultery no longer means that the will has to over-
power the des ires of the heart. The very idea ofeommil.ling adultery repels
the senses and tbe inner movements r the he<lr\'. Su(;b a person under-
stand , as th Catechism teaches , U1at the " p(;rfection of the moral good
consists in man 's bing moved to the go d not onJy by his wi ll but also by
his ' heart. ' '11
17. eee, n. 1963.

18. John Paul II, "Homily on the Mount of Beatitudes, Galilee," March 24, 2000.
19. eee, n. 2555.
20. eee, n. 1768.
21. eee, n. 1775 .
Historical MCIII 137
Certainly the road to such perfection is long and arduous. Even the
holiest of men and women will always retain a remnant of their disordered
passions (concupiscence 22 ) on this side of the resurrection. Nonetheless a
person alive with the truth about good is not fooled by the devil's plagiar-
izations. He sees them for what they are- the twisting of what God cre-
ated to be true, good, and beautiful. And when we see the true, good, and
beautiful with our own eyes, the counterfeits lose their allure . At this point
the moral norm is not external. It is not "imposed" from without but wells
up from within. This is "a living morality," the Pope says. It is a new ethos
in which the subjective desires of the heart come in harmony with the ob-
jective norm. Such a lived understanding of morality is essential if man is
to discover himself. As John Paul affirms, this is "the morality in which
there is realized the very meaning of being a man" (lOS) .
• John Paul repeatedly stresses that this is a "new" ethos with regard
to the Old Testament. 2J Of course this "living morality" which abounds in
man's hemi through the Holy Spirit was not entirely inaccessible to the
people of the Old Covenant. Nor, as one can plainly recognize, is it "auto-
matic" for those baptized into the New Covenant. As St. Thomas observed,
"There were .. .under the regime of the Old Covenant, people who pos-
sessed the ... grace of the Holy Spirit.. .. Conversely, there exist carnal men
under the New Covenant, still distanced from the perfection of the New
Law."2~ When Christians remain distanced from the "new ethos," they tend
either toward rigoristic "angel ism" or permissive "animalism" (see §5).
While the "animalist" in particular might deny it, both poles, in fact, are
working from the same faulty rule-obsessed morality. For rigorously ad-
hering to the law and rebelliously breaking it are two sides of the same le-
galistic coin. The "new ethos" that Christ establishes-when it is truly
lived-contains the truths that both of these poles are seeking to protect:
freedom from the law on the one hand and the fulfillment of the law on the
other. If you are led by the Holy Spirit, you are not under the law. You are
free with the freedom for which Christ has set you free. But this freedom is
not license. This freedom desires the good, only chooses the good, and thus
fulfills the law (see GalS).
22. See CCC, n. 2515.

23. See 12/3/80, TB 174, for example.
24. Cited in CCC, n. 1964.
26. Original Sin and the Birth of Lust

April 23, 30; May 14,28, 1980 (TB 107-116).
Christ's statement about adultery committed "in the heart" indicates

something much more profound Ulan one might first think. It has not only
an ethical m.eaning but also a profollml anthropological meaning. If we
"follow its trace" we learn w ho historic·,l man is, or who he has become
as a result of original sin. Christ's words call us back to who man was be-
fore sin. They "demand so to speak, that man enter his full imag" 107).
lIen e we can understand why the ethical and anthropo logical meaning of
hrist's word, remain in a mutual rclali~)I1ship. By 'lmdersl'anding b w we
a1' to live ethics) we learn who we a re (antbrop logy). onverscly by
understanding who we are, we learn how we are to live.
A. The Heart
Christ's words in the Sermon on the Mount invite us to recognize
that the demands of love are stamped in our hearts. "The heart is the seat
of moral personality."H John Palll says that the 'h e~llt' is ill a way, the
equivalent of r> ronal ubjectivity.2(, ' With Lhe category of the ' hCUli, ev-
eryone is characterized individually even more than by name." Each per-
son' is reached in what delermine b..iln in a uniqu e and unrepeatabl e
way.' Thr ugh the "heart' man "j defined ill his humanity from
'w i. I'bin .' ' 21 W.ill emotion, thoughts and affections originate in the heart.
The heart, then, is where we know and experience the tru meaning of the
body or, because of the hardn.ess of oW' hearts, fail 1'0 do so. As John Paul
says, "The heart has become a battlefield between love and lust. The more
lust dominates the heart, the less the [heart] experiences the nuptial mean-
ing of the body. "28
Lust results from the breaking of the first covenant with the Creator.
St. John speaks of a threefold lust: the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes,
and the pride of life. These are not "of the Father" but "of the world" (1 Jn
2:16).29 St. John's words also hold great importance for the theology of the
25. CCC. n. 2517.

26. See 12/3/80, TB 177.
27.8/6/80, TB 132.
28.7/23/80, TB 126.
29. Sexual lust obviously has particular importance for the theology of the body.
However, the "man of lust" should be understood in the wider context of the "three-
fold lust."
Historical Man 139
body. The Holy Father carefully points out that "the world" St. John
speaks of is not the world the Father created which is always "very good"
(Gen 1:31). It is the world man deformed by casting the love of the Father
from his heart.
In order to understand what lust is, or rather, who the "man of lust"
is, we must return to Genesis and "linger once more 'at the threshold' of
the revelation of 'historical' man." The mystery of sin marks the begin-
nings of human history. But this also marks the beginning of salvation
history. Returning to Genesis "is all the more necessary, since this
threshold of the history of salvation proves to be at the same time the
threshold of authentic human experiences" (109). Through these experi-
ences we establish an "adequate anthropology," including the experience
of original sin. Original sin is certainly a mystery, but this does not mean
it is abstract. There is perhaps no mystery of our faith confirmed more by
human experience than the reality of sin. And, as John Paul will master-
fully demonstrate, we can even reconstruct Adam and Eve's experience of
original sin through a phenomenological examination of the Yahwist text.
B. Questioning the Gift

How did the "man of lust" take the place of the "man of original in-
nocence"? Without completely analyzing the temptation and sin,30 John
Paul points to the "key moment" of the serpent's dialogue with the
woman: "You will not die. For God knows that when you eat of it your
eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil"
(Gen 3:4-5).
According to John Paul, this key moment "clearly includes the ques-
tioning of the Gift and of the Love from which creation has its origin as do-
nation" (110). Man's existence, along with all of creation, was a gift of gra-
tuitous love God gave to man. Created in the divine image and likeness,
man could receive creation as a gift and reciprocate the gift of himself to
God. Through this original covenant, God granted man the opportunity to
participate in his very life, to be "like God" as a free gift (see §§15, 17).
This is the deepest yearning of the human heart, to be "like God," to par-
ticipate in his happiness (beatitude), in God's life. But Satan wants to keep
this from us. One could read the serpent's temptation like this: "God does
not love you. He does not want you to be like him, nor does he intend to
make a gift of his life to you. In fact, he is specifically withholding it from
you by forbidding you to eat from this tree. If you want life (happiness), if
30. See CCC, nn. 396-401.

you want to be 'like God,' then you have to reach out and grasp it for
yourself because God won't give it to you."
Man determines the intentionality of his very existence by one of two
fundamental and irreconcilable postures: receptivity or grasping.] I The
posture each person assumes depends upon his concept of God. If God is
Love and the giver of all good things, then to attain the happiness we long
for, we only need to receive. If God is a tyrant, then we will see him as a
threat to our happiness, turn from our natural posture of receptivity, and
seek to grasp life for ourselves. Certainly man also has the task of imaging
God by taking the initiative and developing the world ("till [the earth] and
keep it," Gen 2: 15). But, as a creature, man becomes "like God" only by
first receiving this likeness./imn God. In other words, as a creature, man's
proper initiative always proceeds from his receptivity to the gift.
As the Catechism explains, "Constituted in a state of holiness, man
was destined to be fully 'divinized' by God in glory." Man need only open
himself to receive this as a gift. "Seduced by the devil, he wanted to 'be
like God,' but 'without God, before God, and not in accordance with
God. "'32 Herein lies the denial of the gift and, in turn, the denial of man's
receptivity before God. Man sets himself up as the initiator of his own ex-
istence and grasps at what God desired to give him freely .
• The tendency to question the gift and "grasp" seems built-in to our
fallen nature, as we can observe even in little children. For example, when
my son asks for a cookie for dessert, before I can even gct the cookie out
of the box to present it to him as a gift, what does he do? He grasps at it.
So I say to him, "Thomas, you're denying the gift. If you believed in the
gift all you would need to do is hold your hands out in confidence and re-
ceive the cookie as a gift." When we believe in the gift and receive it as
such, the natural response is to say "thank you" for the gift. The problem
with man in his relationship with God is that he does not believe in the gift.
So he grasps at it. "If you knew the gift of God ... you would have asked
him and he would have given you living "vater" (1n 4: 10). Not only is
Christ the gift given, but he is also our example: "Have this mind among
yourselves, which was in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of
God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped" (Phil 2:5-6).
31 . For an excellent article on the nature of sin in relation to receptivity and grasping
see lean-Pierre Baput's "The Chastity of Jesus and the Refusal to Grasp" (Col11l11ul1io,
Spring 1997, pp. 5 13).
32. CCc. n. 39g.
Historical Nlal1 141
Going further, the nuptial imagery of the Scriptures provides particular

insight into this dynamic of original sin. It is of the bridegroom's mascu-
line constitution to initiate the gift and of the bride's feminine constitution
to receive the gift. Hence, in the spousal analogy of the Scriptures, God is
symbolically "masculine" as the Heavenly Bridegroom, and man (male
and female) is symbolically "feminine" as the Bride (this spousal analogy
will come to fulfillment, of course, in the relationship of Christ and the
Church). Using this nuptial imagery, it can be said that original sin consists
in the rejection of the Bride's (man's) receptivity in relation to the Bride-
groom (God). Do we not perhaps see in this reality why, according to the
author of Genesis, the serpent approached the woman? He wanted man to
reject his receptivity to the gift. As the one who embodies the "receptivity
of the gift," woman stands as the archetype of all humanity.33
In succumbing to Satan's grievous lie, we detect the mystery of man

who turns his back on "the Father." Man questions in his heart the deepest
meaning of his existence as a gift from God; he doubts that Love was the
origin of creation and the covenant. Conceiving God instead as a jealous
tyrant goads man to do battle against him so as not to be enslaved. Thus,
man turns his back on Love, casting "the Father" out of his heart.
At this point we penetrate the meaning of that gripping statement of
John Paul's quoted earlier: "This is truly the key for interpreting reality....
Original sin, then, attempts to abolish fatherhood. "34 In its essence, origi-
nal sin denies the Fatherhood of God, God's benevolent love that origi-
nates (i.e., "fathers") all of creation. We cannot understand who man is in
creation, who he has become in history, and who he is destined to be in the
eschaton-we cannot understand reality-unless we understand the mys-
tery of God's Fatherhood and its denial. This is why "Christ, through the
revelation of the mystery of the Father and his love, fully reveals man to
himself and makes his supreme calling clear."35
• This "key" for interpreting reality-that original sin attempts to

abolish fatherhood-gives us the "key" for understanding the impOltance
of the prayer Christ taught us. Is not the "Our Father" the specific antidote
to the original lie of the deceiver? Does it not restore the truth about God
and man denied by original sin? In the face of the devil's attack on God
33. See Mulieris Dignitatem, nn. 4, 27, 30. See also Edith Stein, Essays Oil Woman
(Washington, D.C.: res Publications, 1987), pp. 62 - 63.
34. Crossing the Threshold oj'Hope, p. 228 (emphasis in original).
35. Gaudilll1l et Spes, n. 22 (emphasis added).
and his love, the first man and woman should have proclaimed that God is
"our Father-hallowed be his name!"36 In the face of Satan's temptation to
break away from God's reign and set their will in opposition to God's, the
first man and woman should have proclaimed: "God's Kingdom come. His
will be done on earth as it is in heaven!"37 In the face of Satan's temptation
to deny the gift, they should have proclaimed: "Our Father will give us our
daily bread. We need not grasp at it!"38 Finally, in this intense battle with
the anti-Word, had the first man and woman only cried out in faith to the
Father, "Spare us from yielding to temptation and deliver us from the evil
one!"39 God would surely have saved them. Perhaps we now understand
more clearly why the Catechism asserts that the "Lord's Prayer 'is truly the
summary of the whole gospel. '''40 By denying the Fatherhood of God
through original sin, man cut himself off from the original Covenant and
lost sight of his own dignity and calling. Yet the "Lord's Prayer brings us
into communion with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ. At the
same time it reveals us to ourselves."41
By resisting the "rays of fatherhood," man almost cuts his heart off
from what is "of the Father" so that all that remains in him is what is "of
the world." In this moment John Paul says we are witnesses in a sense of
the birth of human lust and the subsequent de-construction of man and
woman's humanity. Recall that man and woman realized the gift of God's
love precisely through the body and the experience of original nakedness.
"This is the body: a witness to creation as a fundamental gift, and so a wit-
ness to Love as the source from which this same giving springs."42 In this
experience John Paul says that the human body bore in itself an unques-
tionable sign of the image of God. In fact, the original experience of the
body provided the certainty that the whole human being was created in the
divine image. In turn, the original acceptance of the body provided the ba-
sis for the acceptance of the whole visible world as a gift of God's love.
What, then, would happen to their experience of the body if they ques-
tioned the gift and cast God's love from their hearts? Would they-could
they-still experience the body as a "witness to Love"?
36. See CCC, nn. 2779-2815 .

37. See CCC, nn. 2816-2827 .
38. See CCC, nn. 2828-2837.
39. See CCC, nn. 2846-2854.
40. CCC, n. 2671.
41. CCC, n. 2799.
42.1/9/80, TB 62 (see §17).
Historical Man 143
C. The Entrance of Shame

Lucifer promised Adam and Eve sight: "your eyes will be opened"
(Gen 3:5). Yet all along that fallen "angel of light" desired to darken their
vision. God had already freely given them not only sight, but the original
good of his own vision. Satan dupes man into believing that God had cre-
ated them blind and did not want them to see. Far from gaining anything
by eating the forbidden fruit, man and woman lose what they had already
been freely given. The Holy Father observes that, due to sin, man in some
way loses the original certainty of the "image of God" expressed in his
body. In fact, the body as a sign of the person and of the mystery of God's
love "collapses," as the following words attest: "Then the eyes of both
were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig
leaves together and made themselves aprons" (Gen 3:7).
These words express the "frontier" between the man of original inno-
cence and the man of lust. Shame is the boundary experience. Nakedness
originally revealed the gift of God's love and enabled them to participate in
it. It "represented full acceptance of the body in all its human and therefore
personal truth" (113). Now nakedness reveals that they have been deprived
of God's gift and are alienated from God's love. It reveals that they have
lost sight of the body as the revelation of the person and of the divine mys-
tery. A rupture and opposition now divide the spiritual and the sensible.
This is what spawns shame. As John Paul expresses, shame enters when man
"realizes for the first time that his body has ceased drawing upon the power
of the spirit, which raised him to the level of the image of God" (115).
Since gender difference highlights man's spiritual-sensible (soul-
body) polarity in a particular way, gender difference itself is now
"blamed" in a sense for the rupture sin caused. This is where the rupture
of sin is immediately "felt" and experienced. John Paul observes that
man is ashamed of his body because of lust. Then he clarifies that man is
ashamed not so much of his body as precisely of lust. In other words,
man may attribute shame to the body and to gender difference, but this is
almost always an excuse not to contend with the disorder of his own
lustful heart.
The Pope explains that lust indicates the state of the human spirit re-
moved from "the original fullness of values" that man possessed in the di-
mensions of God. Thus lust is a lack-the lack of God's love in the human
heart. In the sexual realm (what St. John calls the "lust of the flesh"), lust
refers to un-inspired sexual desire: sexual desire no longer informed by the
Spirit, by God's love and grace. 43 In the Genesis text, shame rises because
43. See CCC, n. 2351.

even after sin man and woman still know they are called to love-to be a
sincere gift for each other. They have not forgotten what they experienced
before sin. But their ability to bring about that love has been shaken at its
very foundations. Love no longer spontaneously wells up through their
bodies as the expression of the heart. The heali, lacking the in-spiration of
God's love, now tends to lust-to treating the other as an object created
for "my sake" (i.e., for the sake of my own self-gratification), rather than
as a subject created for his or her "own sake." Shame announces the un-
easiness of conscience connected with this "new" experience.
Historical man experiences the lust of the flesh in two related ways.
First, lust asserts itself almost as a predisposition resulting from original
sin. When left to itself, man's fallen nature inclines him to treat others as
objects of enjoyment rather than as subjects to love. This basic disorder-
while it comes from sin (original sin) and inclines man to sin-is not itself
a sin. Sin, in the proper sense, demands the engagement of the will. This is
the second "experience" of lust. Only when a person engages his or her
will to foster and follow that intemal concupiscent impulse can one speak
oflust as an "interior act," and therefore as a sin.44
If concupiscent desire is a "given" of man's fallen nature, does this
mean that historical man is bound by his lusts? No! As John Paul boldly
proclaims, "Christ has redeemed us! This means he has ... set our freedom
free from the domination of concupiscence. And if redeemed man still
sins, this is not due to an imperfection of Christ's redemptive act, but to
man's will not to avail himself of the grace which flows from that act."45
27. The Dimensions of Shame

May 14, 28,1980 (TB 111-117)
As he continues his analysis, the Holy Father wants to penetrate the

phenomenon of lust by examining the first man and woman's experience
and their state of consciousness. "The Yahwist text," he says, "expressly
enables us to do so" (112). The revelation of man and woman's first expe-
rience of shame takes us to the depths of man's "new" discovery of him-
self as a body in the world. Yet this time the Pope states that it is as if the
man of lust felt that he had just stopped being above the animals. It is as if
his experience of the body and sex was "driven back to another plane."46
44. See 10/8/80, TB 157.

45. Veritatis Splendor, n. 103 (emphasis in original).
46. See 7/23/80, TB 126.
Historical Man 145
What distinguished man from the animals? Man could freely deter-
mine his own actions. He was not led by instinct but was master of him-
self. For the person to live according to his own dignity requires such
mastery. Because of sin, however, John Paul says that the structure of
self-mastery is, in a way, "shaken to the very foundations" (115). Man
suddenly realized that he had lost control of his body and its impulses.
"It is as if he felt a specific break of the personal integrity of his own
body, particularly in what determines its sexuality" (116).
Because of the rupture of the original covenant with God, man expe-
riences almost a rupture of his original spiritual and material unity. Here
we touch upon that "great divorce" spoken of previously (see §5). The per-
fect integration between the "breath" of the spirit and the "dust" of their
bodies was now lost. Hence, the Pope observes that man not only lost the
supernatural (and preternatural) gifts of grace which were part of his en-
dowment before sin. He also "suffered a loss in what belongs to his nature
itself, to humanity in the original fullness 'of the image of God'" (112).
That "original fullness" is man's "natural" state. 47
A. Shame Shakes the Foundations of Existence

The perfect integration of body and soul enabled the first man and
woman to live in the perfect freedom of the gift. Since we tend to normal-
ize our experience of disintegration, we can hardly imagine the "shock" of
their new experience of having lost that freedom. Returning to our image,
this would be akin to the shock of having driven with inflated tires and
then having all four tires blow at the same time. Driving would be a totally
different experience. As the Pope intuits, at the moment the first man and
woman ate from the tree and fell from the original state of grace, "shame
reaches its deepest level and seems to shake the very foundations of their
existence" (111). So the man and his wife hid themselves from the pres-
ence of the Lord when they heard him walking in the garden (see Gen
3:8). The precision of the dialogue that then ensues between God and man,
along with the whole narrative of the fall, is "overwhelming," the Pope
says. "It manifests the surface of man's emotions in living the events in
such a way as to reveal at the same time their depth" (112).
The "Lord God called to the man and said to him, 'Where are you?'
And he said, 'I heard the sound of you in the garden, and I was afraid be-
47. See John Paul's endnote (TB 182-183) for an excellent summary of the
Magisterium's treatment of various issues regarding nature and grace. Notice, too, that
the Pope observes that these statements must be viewed according "to the needs of the
age" in which they were made.
cause I was naked; and I hid myself'" (Gen 3:9-10). A certain fear always
belongs to the essence of shame, but this is more than a fear of being
physically naked. The experience of nakedness speaks of the interior
movements of the heart. Nakedness before the Lord first indicated the
unity established between God and man by the original covenant. Now,
having eaten from the tree, man's own heart condemns him. He knows that
he has broken the original covenant with God. He already feels the conse-
quences in his body. In his state of fear and confusion, he can only "hide"
in a fruitless attempt to escape the consequences of his actions. Here we
have history's first "cover-up." As John Paul states, "Man tries to cover
with the shame of his own nakedness the real origin of fear, indicating
rather its effect, in order not to call its cause by name" (112). The real ori-
gin of man's fear is his "closing of his heart" to God's gift. Shame, there-
fore, keenly manifests the betrayal of the trust that God extended to man in
the original covenant. But Adam refuses to admit this to himself or to God.
This new experience of his body not only indicates that sin shat-
tered his original relationship with God and with the woman. It also re-
veals that sin ruptured his original and harmonious relationship with the
rest of creation. "Original acceptance of the body was, in a way, the ba-
sis of the acceptance of the whole visible world" (113). Now, however,
even the earth resists man and his task of "tilling the soil." The ground
itself is "cursed" because of him (see Gen3:17). Here we see that man's
experience of his own gendered embodiment affects questions of ecol-
ogy and questions of a society's work and economic structures. These is-
sues are inseparable from sexuality, marriage, and family life. We must
first reclaim the true meaning of these if we are to establish harmonious
relationships with the environment, within the workplace, within culture
at large, and between nations .
• We see here the false dichotomy between the typically labeled "lib-
eral" concern for social justice and the "conservative" concern for Church
doctrine on sexual morality. John Paul is viewed as a man of contradiction
because of his staunch support for both. Yet the contradiction does not lie
in him. Social justice and sexual morality flow from the very same vision
of the human person's dignity as a subject made in God's image and called
to live in a communion of persons. 48 Furthermore, since man and woman's
relationship is the deepest substratum of the social structure, there can be
no social justice without a return to the full truth of the Christian sexual
ethic.
48. See CCC, n. 2419.

Historical Man 147
Indeed, sin, injustice, and death entered the scene upon the denial
of the gift revealed through masculinity and femininity: "You are dust
and to dust you shall return" (Gen 3:19). Hence, the first man's fear also
expresses "the sense of insecurity of his bodily structure before the pro-
cesses of nature, operating with inevitable determinism" (114). In this
way, John Paul suggests that man's fear in his nakedness implies a "cos-
mic shame." Man's sin disrupted the whole world order (see Rom 8:20-21).
Man was created in God's own image as the crown of creation. He was
called to have dominion over the earth and subdue it. Yet rather than the
earth being subject to him, he is now subject to the earth. And all of this
is felt in his body. The body represents man's "transcendent constitu-
tion." Man's body, which once shone with the glory of God, must now
return to the earth. Man will either maintain hope and strive in his body
to reclaim his transcendence, or he will surrender his body to decadence
and decay. This is the battle for man that has raged in him and all around
him since "the beginning."
B. Shame Is Immanent and Relative

Shame in relation to the cosmos makes way for the shame that is pro-
duced in humanity itself. Lust threatens man's dignity as a person made in
God's image. John Paul affirms again that man was God's image both in
his "personal ego" (original solitude) and in the interpersonal relationship
of man and woman together (original unity/communio personarum). The
shame that results from lust, then, is both immanent and relative.
Here we venture into the finer points of John Paul's analysis. Imma-
nent shame refers to the shame experienced within oneself due to the loss
of freedom (self-mastery) that resulted from the rupture of body and soul.
This is the "flip side" of the experience of original solitude, in which man
discovered his unique dignity as an integrated body-person. Immanent
shame seems to indicate that man knew that the disintegration of body and
soul threatened the value and dignity of his own personhood. The Pope re-
marks that this self-shame reveals a "specific humiliation mediated by the
body." The person now finds it very difficult to embrace his own body, and
he fails to perceive how essential his body is in understanding and embrac-
ing his own humanity. John Paul concludes that this shame is so acute "as to
create a fundamental disquiet in the whole of human existence" (115).
Relative shame refers to the shame experienced in relation to the
other. This is the "flip side" of the experiences of original unity and naked-
ness. Relative shame manifests a fear for one's own self in the presence of
the other. This fear "obliges them to cover their own nakedness, to hide
their own bodies, to remove from the man's sight what is the visible sign
of femininity, and from the woman's sight what is the visible sign of mas-
culinity" (114). Of course, this "visible sign" of masculinity and feminin-
ity refers most specifically to the genitals .
• From all this we see that lust shatters the peace of the three original
experiences of solitude, unity, and nakedness. Void of the gift, each experi-
ence is twisted into its negative form. Solitude becomes an experience of
alienation. When the freedom of the gift is removed from communion,
"commun-isl11" is the only possibility- a coerced and, therefore, false
unity that does not respect the dignity of the person as a self-determining
subject. Finally, when lust is full-blown, nakedness without shame is
twisted into shamelessness.
The negative form of the origina I experiences of solitude-unity-naked-

ness can also be understood in the following way. The person still desires
to express his own "self' (original solitude), but void of the gift deforms
this into an egotislical and alienating self-assertion (radical individualism).
The person still desires others (original unity), but void of the gift deforms
this into a "using" of others (radical exploitation). The person still desires
to see and be seen by another (original nakedness), but void of the gift de-
fOims this into voyeurism and exhibitionism (radical perversion). If the
original experiences led to thanksgiving, worship, and beatitude, the de-
formed experiences lead to self-gratitude, idolatry, and despair. As we shall
see, by the revelation of "the Gift" (of the mystery of the Father and his
love), Christ will fully restore man to himself by restoring the grace that
afforded the original experiences. This will be fulfilled definitively in the
eschaton, but we also can begin to reclaim this restoration in the here-and-
now.
Both immanent and relative shame have a sexual character. John

Paul observes that the sphere of sexuality seems to highlight the interior
imbalance connected with immanent shame. In a way, man feels lust
within himself' even before he experiences it in relation to the "other."
When he actually directs this lust toward the other, we see the sexual
character of relative shame. In this way, as John Paul observes, imma-
nent and relative shame overlap. Just as the experience of solitude leads
to unity, on the "flip side" lust does not merely stay within, but is always
directed toward an "other." When this happens, even if it is only a lustful
look as Christ indicates, the other feels threatened and instinctively
wants to hide. This is why we cover our bodies-specifically those parts
of our bodies that distinguish us from the opposite sex: to protect our-
selves from the threat of lust. This is the "experience" of shame.
Historical Man 149
As John Paul indicates, we see here that shame and lust explain one
another. Lust "explains" shame because lust gives rise to shame. Shame
"explains" lust by revealing the injury caused by lust, both within the per-
son lusting (immanent) and in regard to the person toward whom that lust
is directed (relative). In this way, as the Pope tells us, we understand better
why- and in what sense-Christ speaks of lust as adultery committed in
the heart. Adultery is inherently non-marital. So is lust. Adultery is con-
trary to the dignity and value of the person. So is lust. Adultery is a
counter-sign of the communion of love within the Trinity. So is lust.
C. Shame Has a Double Meaning

The need to cover the body in the presence of the other indicates
that man and woman have lost "the peace of the interior gaze" (see § 17).
In a word, they have lost purity. They no longer see the other's body as a
revelation of God's mystery. They no longer see the other's body as the
revelation of the person. Instead, they see the other's body more as a
"thing" to be used for their own selfish gratification. Sexual desire, void
of the in-spiration of God, has become inverted, self-seeking .
• It seems true, generally speaking, that men tend to experience their

fallen sexual desires as geared toward physical gratification at the expense
of a woman, while women tend to experience their fallen sexual desires as
geared more toward emotional gratification at the expense of a man. We
have all heard the expression that men will use love to get sex and women
will use sex to get love (Wojtyla's book Love & Respollsibility offers an in-
depth analysis of these dynamics). It should also be mentioned here that
some men and women experience sexual desires toward members of the
same sex. While same-sex attractions-since they are almost never freely
chosen-are not in themselves sinful, they are part of the disorder of the
sexual appetite caused by original sin. In other words, if the men and
women of history sometimes experience erotic desire toward their own
sex, we can certainly say that "in the beginning it was not SO."49 The good
news is that, whatever our individual distortions, we are all called to expe-
rience the ethos of redemption which has real power to restore God's origi-
nal plan for sexuality in our hearts . This does not come easily nor
completely in this life. Furthermore, the more deeply wounded a person is
in his or her sexuality, the more time and effort it requires to experience
49. For a more thorough discussion of homosexuality in light of John Paul's theol-
ogy of the body, see Christopher West, Good News About Sex & Marriage: Anslvers to
YOllr Honest Questions about Catholic Teaching. chapter 8.
healing. Indeed some, like St. Paul, may experience a particular "thorn in
the flesh" that, despite every sincere effort, is not removed in this life (see
2 Cor 12:7-10). On this point, we can observe that, through humble accep-
tance of one's cross, holiness can be compatible even with deep
woundedness. That being said, we must also affirm that no one is exempt
from what John Paul describes as the "task" Christ gives us of reclaiming
God's original plan for the body and sexuality. As the Catechism states,
"All Christ's faithful are to 'direct their affections rightly, lest they be hin-
dered in their pursuit of perfect charity. "'50 John Paul affirms that this task
"can be carried out and is really worthy ofman."51 As we take up this task,
our hope lies in knowing that "he who began a good work in [us] will bring
it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ" (Phil 1:6).
Despite their "shock" at having lost their original purity, they did not
completely lose a sense of their own dignity. They still realized that they
were created "for their own sakes," and were never meant to be used. Con-
trary to the Lutheran idea, men and women are not "utterly depraved" as a
result of original sin.52 If they were, we could expect that they would have
reveled shamelessly in their lusts. Instead, they clearly experienced lust as
a threat. Thus, the Holy Father observes that shame has a double meaning,
negative and positive. It indicates a threat to the value of the person (nega-
tive) and at the same time seeks to preserve this value interiorly (positive).
In other words, shame indicates that man and woman have lost sight of the
nuptial meaning of the body. But it also indicates an innate need to protect
the nuptial meaning of the body from the threat of lust. This is precisely
why they cover those parts of the body that reveal its nuptial meaning. The
visibility of the sexual values of the body once revealed the truth of the
person. In this new state of affairs, the sexual values of the body, ironi-
cally, are covered to ensure the value ofthe person.
This deeper penetration of shame as something positive and "protec-
tive" (this could also be called modesty) indicates a proper reverence for
the mystery of the person in his or her "otherness." In this way, although
the experience greatly differs, the Pope suggests that shame enables man
and woman almost to remain in the state of original innocence. 53 This
positive sense of shame, then, must always inform the relationship of the
50. CCc, n. 2545.

5l. 11112/80, TB 172.
52. See CCc, nn. 405,406.
53. See 6/25/80, TB 122.
Historical Man 151
sexes. Even in marriage when the body is unveiled, a couple must main-
tain a proper reverence and respect for the value of the person, otherwise
such unveiling would involve a celiain shamelessness. The grace of mar-
riage empowers couples to rediscover something of the original experi-
ence of nakedness without shame- a nakedness that does not elicit shame
(in the negative sense) because the couple trusts in each other's pure inten-
tions of love. But marriage in no way justifies shamelessness. That would
involve degrading one's spouse without a corresponding experience of
shame for having done so.
Understanding the positive sense of shame also helps us realize that
lust is not of the essence of the human heart. It is not of the essence of the
sexual relationship and sexual desire. Lust, rather, is a grave distortion of
all these things. The heart goes deeper than these distOliions, and still de-
sires what is deeper. Shame indicates that the heart still senses an "echo"
of God's original plan for sexuality and longs for it. Indeed, this distant
memory of "the beginning" keeps shame alive in man's heart.
Hence, even though man's capacity for self-mastery has been "shak-
en to the very foundations," John Paul says that man still identifies himself
with self-mastery and is always ready to "win" it. He is always ready to
fight the distortions of lust in order to regain that freedom that was lost. Of
course, lust fights back and, at times, man can be easily lured away from
the truth (see Rom 7:22-23). But in the deeper part of his heart, man still
desires the truth. 54 If we keep this in mind, the Pope tells us that we can
understand better why Christ, speaking of lust, appeals to the human heart.
Lust, no matter how base, can never snuff out the spark of goodness that
always remains deeply imbedded in the human heart. In the Sermon on the
Mount, Christ appeals to that spark, and through the gentle "breath" of the
Holy Spirit, seeks to fan that spark into flame.
28. Lust Shatters the Original Communion of Persons

June 4, 18, 25; July 23, 1980 (TB 117-127)
John Paul continues his analysis by taking us to the further stage of

the study of lust which he calls the "insatiability of the union" (117). The
original unity the first couple experienced brought with it an explicit
peace. But in man's heart lust distorted that original beatifying conjugal
union of persons. After sin, the original capacity of communicating them-
54. See CCC, n. 1707.

selves to each other has been "shattered." Man and woman's relationship
undergoes "a radical transformation." It no longer satisfies the longings of
the heart as it once did, because they are crippled in their ability to love
each other as they once did.
John Paul says that, as persons, man and woman are "called from
eternity to exist in communion." This call defines us and reveals the deep
meaning of our sexuality. We still desire communion even after sin. Yet we
experience a "failure to satisfy the aspiration to realize in the 'conjugal
union of the body' the mutual communion of persons" (121). This is
sexual shame's deep meaning, what John Paul means by the "insatiability
of the union."
A. The Second Discovery of Sex

The radical change in their experience of nakedness leads us to pre-
sume negative changes in the whole interpersonal man-woman relation-
ship. Once again, the experience of the body gives us a window into the
human heart. The role of the body, which was once the trustworthy foun-
dation of their communion, is now "called in question" in man and
woman's consciousness. Sexual difference, which had proclaimed and en-
abled the original communion of persons, "was suddenly felt and under-
stood as an element of mutual confrontation of persons" (118). The Pope
points out that they obviously did not stop communicating with each other
through the body and its movements, gestures, and expressions. However,
the simple and direct communion that flowed from the purity of original
nakedness "disappeared."
The Pope calls this new experience "the second discovery of sex"
and emphasizes that it differs radically from the first one. In this new situ-
ation, rather than finding themselves united by their sexual differences, the
man and the woman are divided and even opposed because of their mascu-
linity and femininity. In short, what was once the experience of male and
female is now the experience of male or female. The Pope contends that in
this new situation sexuality almost impedes their true inter-personal com-
munion. Sexuality had once made visible the other's subjectivity and en-
abled a full communion of persons. Now it has become objectified. As the
Pope expresses it, "The subjectivity of the person gives way, in a certain
sense, to the objectivity of the body" (127). This means the body ceases to
be incorporated into subjectivity. Now, ifthe man bound by lust is to retain
a regard for the subjectivity of the other-and at the same time for his own
subjectivity-he must cover the body; he must hide his nakedness to avoid
being objectified by the other. This results from a new and fundamental
lack of trust, which indicates the collapse of the original relationship of
man and woman's communion.
Historical Mall 153
This objectification leads men and women to seek "the sensation of

sexuality" apart from a true communion of persons. This happens pre-
cisely because sexuality is now detached from the person and his call to
image God through communion. This is the tragedy of lust: It exchanges a
self-seeking gratification for the sincere gift of self; it uses the other as an
object made for my sake, rather than loving the other as a subject made for
his or her own sake. Yet, historical man often views this way of thinking
and behaving as "normal."
B. Sin s Effect on Woman

At this point John Paul shifts his reflection to the words of Genesis
3: 16 in which God says to the woman: "I will greatly multiply your pain in
childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children, yet your desire shall
be for your husband and he shall rule over you." These words, like previ-
ous ones already analyzed, are loaded with content that can be mined
through phenomenological analysis. The Pope says in typical form that
these words reveal to us not only the exterior situation of man and woman,
but enable us also to penetrate the deep mysteries of their hearts.
These words also have a "perspective character" that impacts all hu-
man history. As John Paul expresses, "The history of human consciences
and human hearts will contain the continual confirmation of the words
contained in Genesis 3: 16" (120).55 Because of sin, woman now has a par-
ticular "disability" as compared with man. Her special giftedness as
woman-the fact that she embodies receptivity in relation to God, the
man, and the gift of new life-will no longer be experienced as a gift but
more as a burden, at times even a curse. The Pope clarifies that "there is no
reason to understand [this] as a social disability or inequality." Instead,
throughout history woman will experience a form of inequality manifested
as "a lack of full unity precisely in the vast context of union with man, to
which both were called according to Genesis 2:24" (120).
Has history not told an ongoing tale of male domination and preju-
dice against women? To varying degrees this has even manifested itself in
some cultures as an explicit hatred of woman, a hatred of what is "femi-
nine" (misogyny). It must be stated emphatically-if Genesis did not
make it obvious enough-that male domination violates God's plan and is
the specific result of sin .
• It seems misogyny stems from the way woman constantly reminds

the whole human race of what we have all rejected about ourselves through
55. For further development of these themes, see Mulieris Dignitatem , nn. 10, 24
and Letter to Women.
original sin-our receptil'it1' in relation to God. Woman's pat1icular recep-

tivity to love and to life is her special "genius." Tragically, as a result of
sin, woman's great blessing has come to be seen as a curse. Once again,
nuptial imagery helps reveal the mystery. Because of Satan's deception, we
have come to see God's "masculine-bridegroom" initiative as that of a ty-
rant with a will-to-rule over us. Hence, we reject our posture of receptivity
as "feminine-bride" in favor of being our own "masculine" lords. We want
to be "like God" but without God. '" In this situation, we come to see the
"feminine"-which symbolizes our true humanity-as a weakness to be
dominated and controlled, even snuffed out. Does this not explain, per-
haps, why there has been a tendency to favor "masculinity" over "feminin-
ity" throughout history? But this conception of God as tyrant-lUler-and in
tum, this symbol of what is "masculine"-is a gross distortion. Where is
this distortion lived out? Primarily in the relationship of the sexes. The
man, rather than imaging the true initiative of God-rather than loving his
wife "as Christ loved the Church" (Eph 5:25)--comes to image the gross
distortion of the tyrant-ruler: "He shall rule over you" (Gen 3: 16). In hnn,
the woman, under the weight of male domination and history's discrimina-
tion against her, is tempted to reject her own femininity and take to herself
the distorted "masculine" will-to-power simply in order to survive. Are
these not some of the deepest reasons behind the women's liberation
movement and the gender confusion so prevalent in our world today? John
Paul shows implicit respect for all that is good and just in the feminist
movement. But he also calls women "to promote a 'new feminism' which
rejects the temptation of imitating models of 'male domination,' in order to
acknowledge and affirm the true genius of women in evelY aspect of the
life of society, and overcome all discrimination, violence, and exploita-
tion."57
C. Both Are Subject to Lust

The man's "rule" over the woman changes the whole dynamic ofthe
original communion of persons . It indicates that lust has distorted the
original masculine initiation of love. The man of lust seeks not to make a
gift of himself to woman, but he seeks to dominate and control her, to pos-
sess her and use her for his own ends. As John Paul expresses it, "The rela-
tionship of the gift is changeJ into the relationship of appropriation" (127).
Love "gifts ." Lust "appropriates."
56. See CCC, n. 3911.

57 . Evollgelium Vitae, n. 9Y .
Historical Mall 155
Yet woman still "desires her husband." If the distortions of a man's

heart lead him to disregard woman's dignity and use he,; the distortions of
a woman's heart can lead her, at times, to disregard her own dignity and
allow herself to be used. Yet at other times the Pope notes that the instincts
that the woman directs to the man precede his desire or even aim at arous-
ing it and giving it impetus. In this way, woman also uses man for her own
ends, treating him as an object and not as a person .
• This dynamic in women is often lived out in an understandable re-

taliation against men and their lustful domination. A dramatic example of
this was told to me by a counselor who had been working with a woman
who was once a stripper in a "men's club." When the counselor asked her
why she did it, she responded without hesitation: "Control." This woman,
like the majority of women who compromise themselves in similar ways,
had been sexually abused by older men as a child. Causing men to "lose
control" by inciting their lusts was her way of "gaining control" over them.
As she described it, "Every night I was able to put hundreds of desperate
men at my mercy begging for more. And I'd very easily walk away each
night with over one thousand of their hard-earned dollars."
Although the biblical texts seem to indicate the man's lust more spe-
cifically, John Paul clearly states that both the man and woman have be-
come subject to lust. Shame, therefore, "touches the innermost recesses
both of the male and the female personality, even though in a different
way" (123). It is precisely this mutual lust that causes the opposition be-
tween the sexes. Obviously this "opposition does not destroy or exclude
conjugal union, willed by the Creator (Gen 2:24), or its procreative ef-
fects; but it confers on the realization of this union another direction"
(121). This direction is very different from that of "the beatifying begin-
ning." Hence, if men and women are to rediscover what it means to be a
sincere gift for each other and thus fulfill the very meaning of their being
and existence,58 they must overcome lust. Civilization itself depends on it.
29. Living the Body Flows from the Heart

June 25; July 23, 1980 (TB 124 -127)
John Paul has been trying to reconstruct the original experience of

shame and lust; the experience that clearly indicates the crossing over
from the state of original innocence to the state of historical sinfulness. We
5S. See 1116/S0, TB 63.

can penetrate the experience of both "states" by contrasting them with

each other.
The Holy Father says that Genesis 2:24 speaks of the "union of bod-
ies" in the sense of the authentic "union of persons." Becoming "one
flesh," then, does not merely express the joining of two bodies. According
to the Pope, this is a "sacramental expression" which corresponds to the
communion of persons. "Where the flesh is one, one also is the spirit."59
Living this, experiencing this, left no need for shame in their nakedness.
The entrance of shame, therefore, indicates the loss of the original com-
munion of persons in the image of God. Fear and shame replaced the abso-
lute trust that man and woman had in each other in the state of original
innocence. Fear and shame indicate the beginning of lust in man's heart,
which John Paul describes as a "limitation, infraction, or even distortion of
the nuptial meaning of the body" (124).
A. Living the Body

When the Holy Father speaks of the meaning of the body, he is refer-
ring in the first place to "the full awareness of the human being" (124). The
body reveals the person. The body reveals, as in a "sacrament," the meaning
and mystery of human life itself. But as John Paul stresses, the meaning of
the body is not just something conceptual; it is not abstract. In gaining a full
awareness of the human being through the body, we must include the actual
lived experience of the body in its masculinity and femininity.
John Paul says that the meaning one attributes to his body determines
that person's attitude in his way of "living the body." In other words, how
we live as bodies-in particular, how we live out our sexuality-will flow
from the attitude of our hearts regarding the meaning of our bodies, the
meaning of our sexuality, the meaning of life itself. The body has an ob-
jective meaning, of course, which does not change based on subjective
feelings. However, the Pope observes that this purely objective signifi-
cance of the body and of sex is in a certain sense "a-historical." He means
that, due to sin, historical man often experiences the objective meaning of
the body as being "outside the system of real and concrete interpersonal
relations between man and woman" (124). The Church's teaching, specifi-
cally regarding sexual morality, then comes to be seen as abstract and re-
moved from real-life experience.
In Christ's words in the Sermon on the Mount, he appeals specifi-
cally to the experience of historical man. There is nothing abstract about
"looking with lust." We all know immediately what that means in our own
59. CCc, n. 1642.

Historical Man 157
experience, in our own "hearts." This is why Christ's words sting so much.
We know we are guilty. But Christ wants us to penetrate more deeply into
our hearts where that "echo" of God's original plan still resounds. Tapping
into that deeper heritage gives us the key to reconnecting the objective
meaning of the body and sex with how we experience the body and sex
subjectively. It gives us the key to "living the body" according to its true
meaning and thus fulfilling the very meaning of existence.
Through the previous analysis of man and woman's experience be-
fore sin, we have discerned the body's nuptial meaning and rediscovered
what it consists of as "a measure of the human heart." The heart is still
measured by this objective meaning of the body, that is, by the call to sin-
cere self-giving. Lust, however, attacks this sincere giving, depriving man
and woman of the dignity of the gift inscribed in the beauty and mystery
of sexual difference. So when the man of concupiscence "measures" his
heart by the nuptial meaning of the body, he condemns himself. At this
point he has three choices: normalize sin; fall into despair; or turn to
Christ who came not to condemn, but to save (see In 3: 17). As the Pope
will repeatedly stress, Christ's words about lust do not so much condemn
us but call us . They call us not just to force a subjectively lustful heart to
submit to an objective ethic. They call us efficaciously to let the new ethos
of redemption inform and transform our lustful hearts.
B. We Have Almost Lost the Capacity to Love

Due to concupiscence, the human body "has almost lost the capacity
of expressing this love in which the man-person becomes a gift" (126).
The Pope adds the word "almost" because a spark of God's plan remains
in us. As he says, "The nuptial meaning of the body has not become com-
pletely suffocated by concupiscence, but only habitually threatened"
(126). The Pope carefully maintains this essential point. Without this
"almost" we would fall into Martin Luther's erroneous belief that man is
"utterly depraved" due to sin .
• The Lutheran idea of "utter depravity" may seem to diverge only

slightly from the Catholic belief that man is tragically fallen, yet in some
way retains his basic goodness. However, a notion of utter depravity has
dangerous and far-reaching implications. For example, "dying to one's sin-
ful nature" does not mean rooting out the weeds in one's soul so that the
wheat can flourish . If we are utterly depraved, we are all weeds. This
means all of our aspirations and desires are suspect. One who "dies to him-
self' in sllch a fashion will end up nullifying the unique mystery and gift-
edness of his own personhood. He will end up "dying" not only to sin, but
158 TH EOLOGY OF THE BODY EXPLAINED
also to the person God created him to be. Furthelmore, if the human heart
goes no deeper than its distortions, how can we hope to desire , let alone
come progressively to experience, the restoration of God's original plan?
In this case, the heart only desires cOlTuption. Without the Pope's "almost,"
we come to see ur elv . • l u. e one ot'Lqlhcr' images. as a 'dung heap."
I\lisl may oover u. wit h a blankel of white snow. But even s , according
to Luther's logic we rem ail1 impure intcmally, ath lic al1lhrop I gy in-
sists that in did not trump our" ery good" creation . Hence John Paul
maintains that the heritage of the human heart "is deeper than the sinful-
ness inherited."{,1) Christ appeals to that deeper heritage of our hearts in or-
der to reactivate it. Through the power of the Holy Spirit, he transforms us
fr 11l wi th in. Ttli means that through ong ing IlV rSiotl l hri t.
lhroltgh ongoing Illlctincati n,' e a tllally become pure as snow through-
out. 11istoriC<t1 ruM has 1hi lif; I ng task: to give voice to the decpe. I aspi-
rations of hi heart by accepting the grace of ongoing conversi n.
We must now battle against lust if we are to reclaiJl1 lhe freedom that
enables us to makc the sincere gift of self. This is difficult enough when
lust m anifests itself clearly. It is all the more difficult since lust "is not al-
ways plain and obvious; sometimes it is concealed, so that it passes itself
off as 'love'" (126). Note John Paul's realism here. At times only a fine
line divides authentic love and lust. When fooled by lust, the heart can
even mistake it for love. John Paul asks: "Does this mean that it is our
duty to distrust the human heart'?" Then he responds without hesitation:
"No! It only means that we must keep it under control" (126) .
Far too many people, upon recognizing the distortions of their own
.h . arts, 'uccumb l th e deyi l's trap by tlu'owing Ollt the baby with Lbe batb
water. Wc ruu t certain ly reckon wilh the forces of con upiscence within
Lt '. But concupiscence does not definc the human bearl. The hea rl goes
deeper Lhan its distortions . What then does the Pope I.l1C8Jl by aying we
mllst k.eep our heart · under ontT I? We need to p netratc the dynamic,' of
concupiscence to answer that question ,
C. Regaining Selj:MastelY
In short, John Paul tells us that concupiscence entails the loss of the
interior freedom of the gift. Sexual desire is now "manifested as an almost
autogenous force, marked by a certain 'coercion of the body,' operating
according to its own dynamics" (126) . In this way we have lost "control"
60. 10/29/8 0, TB J 68.

Historical Man 159
of our own bodies and of the desires of our hearts. In a certain sense, this
makes the interior freedom of self-giving impossible. "Concupiscence, in
itself, is not capable of promoting union as the communion of persons. By
itself, it does not unite, but appropriates" (127). Thus, concupiscent desire
draws us away from affirming the person "for his or her own sake" and
makes of that person an object of selfish gratification.
This also obscures our perception of the beauty that the human body
possesses as an expression of the spirit. For the man of lust, "beauty" is now
determined not by the visibility of the person in and through his or her body,
but by what type or kind of body satisfies or appeals to concupiscence. This
concept of beauty is often totally divorced from the person. 61
For John Paul, keeping our hearts under control means regaining
self-detelmination. It means controlling sexual impulses instead of being
controlled by them. We should not conceive of this control, however,
merely as the caging of a wild horse. While this approach may control the
horse, it does not change it. If you opened the cage even for a moment, the
horse would run wild. Caging the horse may be a necessary first step, but
the ultimate goal is to tame (transform) the horse so that it no longer re-
quires a cage. Applying this image, in regaining self-mastery it may well
be necessary at first to "cage" concupiscent desire by force of will. But
this is only afirst step. Ifwe remain here, the moral norm still operates as
a constraint. Christ calls us to progress from constraint to freedom-from
merely meeting the demands of the law to Jul-filling those demands (see
§25). As John Paul says, "This is a still uncertain and fragile journey as
long as we are on earth, but it is one made possible by grace, which en-
ables us to possess the full freedom of the children of God (see Rom
8:21)."62
For the Holy Father, the ultimate role ofthe will is not for it to tyran-
nize or repress the passions, but to direct them, with the transforming
power of grace, toward the truth of self-giving love. "The upright will or-
ders the movements of the senses it appropriates to the good and to beati-
tude." Within the ethos of redemption, "emotions and feelings can be
taken up into the virtues. "63 In other words, Christ calls us to experience a
real and deep victory over concupiscence so that what we desire subjec-
tively becomes progressively more in tune with the objective meaning of
61. John Paul II will provide an intriguing and redeeming analysis of physical
beauty in his cycle of reflections on the sacramentality of marriage.
62. Veritatis Splel1dO/~ n. 18.
63. CCC, n. 1768.
the body and sex. To the degree that we experience this transformation, we
no longer need the "cage"; we come freely to desire the good. This is the
freedom for which Christ has set us free (see Gal 5). This freedom enables
us to live our bodies in holiness and honor liberated from lust's domina-
tion (see 1 Thess 4:4).
John Paul II's proclamation that the redemption of the body truly af-
fords such freedom is one of the most important contributions of his entire
catechesis on the body. It also seems to cause the most contention. An im-
pulse-oriented view of the sexual appetite seems to have dominated tradi-
tional evaluations of sexuality. Without a personalistic understanding of
human (and Christian) freedom, virtually all one can do to "manage" his
sexual appetite is "cage" it. Christians who take on this view almost inevi-
tably view maniage as a legitimate opportunity to allow the "caged horse"
an occasional run. In tum, if a person thinks this way and constructs his or
her life of "holiness" accordingly, it becomes almost impossible to imag-
ine true freedom from the domination of concupiscence.
As Wojtyla observed in a pre-papal essay, the "very manner in which
maniage [and the relationship of the sexes in general] is conceived must
be from the start, to the greatest extent possible, freed from purely im-
pulse-oriented, naturalistic presuppositions and shaped personalistically."64
Within this deterministic, impulse-oriented view of sexuality, Wojtyla
wrote elsewhere, "There seems to be a tendency to limit the possibility of
virtue and magnify the 'necessity of sin' in this sphere. Personalism, with
its emphasis on self-determination, would entail the opposite tendency." It
"would perceive the possibility of virtue, based on self-control and subli-
mation."65 For John Paul II, this possibility of real virtue in the sexual
realm is an integral part of the "good news" afforded by the redemption of
our bodies in Christ.
30. Maintaining the Balance of the Gift

July 30, 1980 (TB 128-130)
We have already observed that the difference between authentic love

and lust, although at times subtle, can be understood as the difference be-
tween "gift" and "appropriation." We see precisely this contrast in the
Yahwist texts that describe man and woman's experience before and after
original sin. Genesis 2:23-25 expresses their experience ofliving the body
64. "Parenthood as a Community of Persons," Person and Community, p. 330.

65. "The Problem of Catholic Sexual Ethics," Person and Community, p. 286.
Historical Man 161 .
as gift. Genesis 3:7 and 16 express their experience ofliving the body as
appropriation.
John Paul points out that the words of Genesis 3: 16 ("he shall rule
over you") "seem to suggest that it is often at the expense f the w man
that thi happens, and that in any ca c, she fee ls it more than man' (128).
Experience seems to con firm lhis. Ev n so, it i a two-way street. As John
Paul tales, "If man in hi. relatiollship with woman considers her nly as
an object to ga ill possession f and not as a gift he ondcl11Tls himself
thereby to b come also f'or her only an object of appropriation and n01 a
gi ft' 128). Yet even this statement seems 10 indicate a priority of acti n
on the man' 11arl. This does not mean woman i mere ly passive; she too
acts. The masculine 'priority of action," as we have iescribed il. simp ly
means that the man typically acts first. Ifwoman embodies the "receptivity
of the gift," it seems man embodies the "initiation of the gift" (note: these
phrases are not found in the Pope's catechesis).
A. Man s Special Responsibility

Thi is why John Paul believe that right frum the beginning, man
was harged with the pmti ula!' responsibility of bei.ng "the guardian of
the reciprocity or douation and its true balance" (128). As w discovered
in the Yahwist text, tlth woman is entrusted to his eye, to his con cious-
ness, to his sensitivity, to his 'heart.' He, on the other hand," the Pope con-
tinues, "must, in a way, ensure ... the mutual interpenetration of giving and
receiving as a gift, which, precisely through its reciprocity, creates a real
communion of persons. "66
All the man can do, according to John Paul, is "borrow" femininity
as a gift, and only when the woman freely gives it. He cannot take hold of
woman as his own possession. He can only take the "risk" of initiating the
gift of himself. It is a risk because he puts his gift of self in the hands of
her freedom without fully knowing how she will respond. To be true to the
gift, he can only wait and trust that the woman, sensing the genuineness of
the gift he initiated, will receive his gift and respond freely with the gift of
herself to him (see §18).
ncupisccn e wreaks hay on thi!'; mutual exchange. Taint d by
lust what the man initiates is often 110t the" incere gift of self" but the
d 'sire to appr priate the woman and gratify hims elf.. ensing this, the
woman freq uen tly recoil. and rig htl y so ince she knows she i nev er
meant to be u ·cd. The man thell wi ll often be tempted t extort n- 11)
66. 2/6/80, TB 71 (see §20).

woman her own gift. But this openly contrasts with the truth of love.
Hence, although "the maintenance of the balance of the gift seems to have
been entrusted to both, a special responsibility rests with man above all, as
if it depended more on him whether the balance is maintained or broken or
evcn- il' a lready br ken- re-established' 128- 129). tn other words, be-
cause Lhe man embodi es the "i nitiation ofth gift," he has a pcll'ticular re-
sponsibi lity t enS\.lre (hal he initiates a genuine gift. He must ensure
wilhin his own hear! and show the woman that he desires l make the s in-
cere gift of himself and not to appropriate her. In other words, he must
demonstrate that he has acquired an integral self-mastery. For if a man
cannot control himself, he will inevitably seek to control woman in order
to satisfy his own impulses and desires (we could also speak of a similar
dynamic in women toward men).
John Paul recognizes that when discussing the diversity of men and
women's roles, one has to realize that these have been conditioned to some
degree by tbe social eillargioatioll of WOlTILUl. He c en says that the Old
and th · ew Te. tament give us suHicient proofs of Ll 'h em, rginati n.
Nevertheless, the divcu;ity ormles in man and woman relati n hip is not
mere ly tbe result of historical condi tionings. Even when all exaggerations
are pu rifi ed (and we IIIl1st seek to purify these), a fundamelHill <Jnd indis-
pemlflble diversity of rol es remains in th e male-remale rel ationship. On is
not better than lhe Olher. They Clre merel. y different: different in a way [hal
enab les a tru communion. Without the d!llerellc ' of Lhe sexes, an incar-
nate lite-givi ng commurlion wou ld b impo!;sible.
B. Personal Analogy of Belonging

If a person ca n never be appropriated or possess d without offen.dillg
human dignity, is it wrong, then, ft r lover to speak of "belonging" LO one
an tber? Not if they understand th proper lim its of using such language.
Tn fact John Pau l recognizes that the [lossessive pronoull "my ' has ctlways
belonged to the language of human 1 ve and cites nea rly thirty e ample
of it in tbe ng of Songs. But when true lovers uch as in the ong or
Songs refer to each other as 'mine" this certa inly dot:s not denote posses-
si on in th se n ~e or appropriating and lIsing. Rath er, John Pau l say t hat in
Lhc etern al language f human love. the teul] " my" indictlLes lhe reciproc-
ity f the donation and the equal balance I' the gi f't tllrollg h wh ic h the mu-
tual 'O/,/Ulllm;o p l'SOIlU/,WII is estab li "heel.
Thus, man and woman c~m speak of belonging LO each olher only by
way of analogy. When the roan or tile WOman seeks to " posse s" the other
in tbe sense in which an ob'ect bc.lon g to a person, the analogy ofb long-
ing brea ks eI WI1 and the eoml11.ulJion of per 'OllS i ' il11pos ible. Lust leads
Historical Man 163
precisely toward this demeaning sense of possession. "From possessing a

further step goes toward 'enjoyment': the object I possess acquires a cer-
tain meaning for me since it is at my disposal and I avail myself of it, I use
it" (130). This radically violates the other's creation for his or her "own
sake." In this case, the "other" only has value so far as she (from the male
perspective) is "useful" for me. As soon as she is not, she is no longer
"loved." At this point another more "useful" person will be sought-that
is, another person from whom I can more easily get the enjoyment I seek.
In short, this is the underlying sickness of a divorce culture. John
Paul states that because of concupiscence, this way of seeing, evaluating,
and "loving" almost constantly threatens us. But this way of "loving" is
not really loving at, all since selfish enjoyment excludes disinterested giv-
ing. Generally speaking, a divorce-mentality results from a counterfeit
love that never reaches the great dignity and unrepeatability of the person
(see §23), but only values those diminishable and repeatable attributes that
bring self-gratification.
From John Paul's analysis we learn that if men and women are to
"belong" to each other in the full expression of the communion of persons,
they must first belong to Christ. They must first be in communion with
him. The road to restored communion between the sexes passes by way of
the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. And there is no detour.
31. Christ's Words and the Old Testament Ethos

August 6, 13,20,27, 1980 (TB 131-142)
Christ's words about lust in the heart have both an anthropological

foundation and a directly ethical character. So far John Paul has been
sketching the anthropological foundation of Christ's words. In the address
of August 6, 1980, he announces that the following stage of his analysis
will develop their ethical meaning.
Before that, however, he devotes the five audiences between August
6 and September 3, 1980 to placing Christ's words from the Sennon on the
Mount in the context of what he calls "the Old Testament ethos." The
ethos of the Israelites was, of course, drawn from the law and the prophets.
These provide the necessary frame of reference for understanding the na-
ture of "the new ethos" Christ announced in the Sermon on the Mount.
This "new ethos" is nothing other than the fulfillment of the law and the
prophets (see §2S). The interpretation of the law had become influenced
by that "hardness of heart" Christ spoke of with the Pharisees. This
brought about a situation contrary to God's original plan for the "one
flesh" union. As John Paul says, only in the perspective of this break from
the ethos of creation do we find the key to interpret the legislation of Israel
regarding marriage and male-female relations as a whole. In the Selmon
on the Mount, Christ also refers to the heart-to the "interior subject"-
precisely because of man and woman's "hardness of heart."
A. Compromise in Legislation
Christ begins his teaching about lust with a reference to the law of
Moses: "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall not commit adultery. '"
As Christ indicates, all those gathered on the mount to hear his words were
certainly familiar with this norm. However, Christ's further words, "But I
say to you ... ," show that the norm alone was not enough. The nOlm itself
could not change the lustful heart. 67
John Paul points out with various examples that in the interpretation
of the Old Testament, the prohibition of adultery was balanced by compro-
mising with concupiscence. For example, while most people were ex-
pected to be monogamous, the lives of men like David and Solomon show
the establishing of real polygamy, which, the Pope says, "was undoubtedly
for reasons of concupiscence." In fact, "Old Testament tradition indicates
that the real need for monogamy as an essential and indispensable implica-
tion of the commandment, 'You shall not commit adultery,' never reached
the conscience and the ethos of the following generations of the chosen
people" (134).68
Of course, the historical failures of the Jewish people in this regard
are more of a commentary on fallen human nature than on the Jewish reli-
gion as such. God's revelation to Israel "endures forever."69 Christ, how-
ever, as John Paul observes, does not accept the flawed interpretation of
the law that became common in Israel. Men had subjected the law to hu-
man weakness and the limits of human willpower deriving precisely from
the distortions of concupiscence. Hence, a compromised version of the
law became superimposed on the original teaching of right and wrong
connected with the law of the Decalogue.
When men compromise with concupiscence, a basic principle comes
into play. Stated simply, the less the heart conforms to truth, the more the
need arises for laws which must corral the people into maintaining some
semblance of order. So we find numerous and detailed precepts in the Old
67 . See CCC, n. 1963 .

68. See CCC, n. 1610.
69 . CCC, n. 1963 .
Historical Man 165
Testament that evaluate sexual conduct in a particular and even peculiar

way.70 John Paul admits that it is "difficult to avoid the impression that
such an evaluation was of a negative character," and often judged "the
woman with greater severity" (137, 136). These laws were "not concerned
directly with putting some order in the 'heart' of man, but with putting or-
der in the entire social life, at the base of which stands, as always, mar-
riage and the family" (137). However, some of these laws, while intending
to maintain social order, actually protected the social dimension of sin.
Christ wants to rectify this situation. By appealing to men's hearts in
the Sermon on the Mount, Christ indicates that the "discernment between
what is right and wrong engraved on the human conscience can show itself
to be deeper and more correct than the content of a norm" (135). The way
to the "new ethos" passes through the rediscovery ofthe ethos of creation,
which had been lost in the general Old Testament understanding and in the
application ofthe commandment against adultery. 7I
B. Israel as the Adulterous Wife

If Israel's legislation at times obscured the correct content of the
commandment against adultery, the prophets point to the true content of
the norm when they denounce Israel's unfaithfulness to Yahweh by com-
paring it with adultery.72 The legislative texts describe adultery as the vio-
lation of the right of ownership. Moreover, in keeping with the mentality
of the time, this referred primarily to the man's legal "ownership" of his
wife-often one of many-and the "right" he had to her body. However,
John Paul demonstrates that in the text of the prophets, the background of
real and legalized polygamy does not alter the ethical meaning of adultery.
Nor do the prophets speak of adultery as a violation of rights over the
body. For the prophets, adultery is a sin because it constitutes the break-
down of man and woman's covenant. 73
The prophets recognize that monogamy is the only correct analogy or
symbol of the "marital" covenant between God and the chosen people.
Adultery then becomes "the antithesis of that nuptial relationship" and
70. For example, see Leviticus 18 and Deuteronomy 22:13-30; 25:11-12.

71. See 10/1/80, TB 153.
72. See Hosea 1-3 and Ezekiel 16, for example. In the text of the Pope's
catechesis, he quotes Ezekiel 16 almost in its entirety because, as he says, "The analogy
between adultery and idolatry is expressed therein in a particularly strong and exhaustive
way" (139).
73. See CCC, n. 1611.
"the antinomy of marriage." In this way, the prophets paved the way for
Christ and what he would teach about the foundations of sexual morality.
It is true that a man and woman who have established a marital cov-
enant have a legal "right" to sexual union, and adultery violates this right.
But sexual union in marriage is not merely a legal "right." John Paul's rich
personalism will not allow him to stop at this juridical description. "Such
bodily union," he says, is "above all ... the regular sign of the communion
of the two people" (140 -141). It is the bodily expression of a covenant
"born from love." Only such love establishes the proper foundation of that
union in which man and woman become "one flesh." The Pope adds that it
is precisely this nuptial love which gives a fundamental significance to the
truth of "covenant"-both in the man-woman relationship, and, analo-
gously, in the Yahweh-Israel (God-man) relationship. Adultery not only
violates a legal right; John Paul describes it as a radical "falsification of
the sign" of man and woman's covenant love. The prophets express pre-
cisely this aspect of adultery in describing the infidelity of the Israelites to
their covenant with Yahweh.
C. Anthropology and Ethics of the Sign

John Paul bases his understanding of the bodily union as "the regu-
lar sign" of the communion of persons in marriage on his previous
reflections from Genesis. He will also develop this idea more fully in
cycle five when he reflects on Ephesians 5:31-32. For now he simply
adds that this understanding of bodily union as the "sign" of married
love is essential and important for the theology of the body, both from an
ethical and an anthropological point of view.
From an anthropological point of view, understanding the one flesh
union as the regular sign of the marital covenant helps us understand who
man and woman are as incarnate persons called, in the mystery of cre-
ation, to exist in the communion of persons in the image of God. 74 From
an ethical point of view, John Paul asserts that we "can speak of moral
good and evil according to whether in this relationship there is a true
'union of the body' and whether or not it has the character of the truthful
sign" (141-142). This key statement gives shape to the Holy Father's new
context for understanding marriage and sexual morality. We will return to
this statement several times.
The Pope is trying to help us see that Catholic teaching on sexuality
is not rooted in arbitrary legislation. It is not based merely on the mainte-
74. See 7/23/80, TB 125.

Historical Man 167
nance of juridical rights and duties, as has been emphasized in the past. 75
Catholic sexual ethics rest on the firm foundation of anthropology. They
rest on who we are and who we are called to be as men and women created
in God's image. For John Paul, sexual morality is most clearly understood
through the logic of "the truthful sign." In other words, in order to deter-
mine what is good, we only need to ask a simple question: Does this
sexual attitude, thought, or action truly image God's free, total, faithful,
and fruitful love? If it does not, it can never bring beatitude. It can never
fulfill us. It is contrary to who we are and who we are called to be. This
question transfers the discussion from legalism to liberty, from the prohi-
bition and restriction of legislation to the empowerment and freedom of
love. The question then shifts from, "How far can I go before I violate the
law?" to, "What is the truth that sets me free and empowers me to love in
God's image as male and female?" To this latter question John Paul gives
a one-word answer: Christ!
32. Concupiscence and the Wisdom Literature

September 3, 10, 1980 (TB 142-146)
In the Sermon on the Mount, Christ established the "new ethos" by

transferring the significance of adultery from the "body" to the "heart."
Christ knows man's heart; "for he himself knew what was in man" (In 2:25).
Although cultural conditions affect men and women of different times and
places, the condition of man's heart-the "echo" of his original holiness and
the tragedy of sin-remains the same in every time and place. As the Pope
points out, the man of our time feels called by Christ's words about lust no
less than the man of that time, whom the Master addressed directly.76
Even so, John Paul believes it is important to understand the context
in which Christ's actual listeners received his revolutionary words. Thus,
having looked briefly at the law and the prophets, John Paul points us now
to the Wisdom literature of the Old Testament. Presumably Christ's listen-
ers, upon hearing his words, would have related them to these books since
they contain repeated admonitions about lust and also advice as to how to
75. One can note the difference in language between the 1917 Code of Canon Law
and the new code of 1983. Canon 1081 in the 1917 Code speaks of marriage as a contract
of yielding rights, first among them the right to the body (the ius ad corpus). Canon 1055
ofthe 1983 Code speaks of marriage in more personalist terms. It does not avoid the word
contract, but it views maniage also as a "covenant" and "partnership of the whole oflife"
which is "ordered to the good of spouses and the procreation and education of children."
76. See 8/6/80, TB 132.
preserve oneself from it. 77 John Paul logically concludes that these books
paved the way in a certain sense for Christ's words.
A. Wisdom, Experience, and True Salvation

True to their name, these books contain great wisdom. They reveal an
intimate knowledge of the human heart and even develop a specific moral
psychology. In this way, the Wisdom books "are close to that call of Christ
to the 'heart' that Matthew has handed down to us" (144). Even so, John
Paul says that with "one-sided" admonitions that often make woman out to
be "a downright seducer of whom to be aware," the Wisdom texts do not
change man's ethos in any fundamental way. "For such a transformation it
is necessary to wait until the Sermon on the Mount" (144). For example,
whereas the Wisdom texts offer understandable admonitions such as "Tum
away your eyes from a shapely woman" (Sir 9:8), John Paul says that in
the Sermon on the Mount Christ invites us "to a pure way of looking at
others, capable of respecting the spousal meaning of the body."78
As experience attests, the battle with lust remains fierce. For the man
bound by lust, "Tum away your eyes" retains all its wisdom. Christ, how-
ever, "speaks in the context of human experience and simultaneously in
the context of the work of salvation." In the new ethos, these "two con-
texts are in a certain way superimposed upon and pervade one another"
(143). This means that, although we all experience lust, we can also expe-
rience a real transformation of our hearts through the salvation Christ of-
fers us. As the Catechism teaches, in the "Sermon on the Mount ... the spirit
of the Lord gives new form to our desires, those inner movements that ani-
mate our lives."79
Christ did not die on a cross and rise from the dead merely to give us
coping mechanisms for sin (we already had plenty of those without a sav-
ior). Christ died and rose again to set us free from sin. The man whose
heart has been transformed and vivified by the Spirit of the Lord need not
merely "cope" with lust by turning his eyes away from a woman. Through
continual death and resurrection, his desires take on "new form." As mas-
ter of himself, he becomes empowered to look at others purely, with eyes
of love, because-living from what the Pope calls "the deeper heritage of
his heart"8°-he does not desire to lust. This deeper place in his "heart"
77. See the endnotes of this general audience for a list of examples from Proverbs,
Sirach, and Ecclesiastes (TB 185).
78. Veritatis SplendO/; n. 15.
79 . CCC, n. 2764.
80. See 10/29/80, TB 168.
Historical Man 169
will not let him lust. Lust, itself, although he still feels its "pull," becomes
ever more distasteful to him.
To the degree that a man lives the ethos of redemption, he under-
stands, as Karol Wojtyla says, that chastity "is not a matter of summarily
'annihilating' the value 'body and sex' in the conscious mind by pushing
reactions to them into the subconscious." If chastity "is practiced only in
this way, [it creates] the danger of...'explosions. '" Rather, the "essence of
chastity consists in quickness to affirm the value of the person in every
situation, and in raising to the personal level all reactions to the value of
'the body and sex. "'81
The truly pure man experiences a profound integration of sexuality
and personality. From the male perspective, what he is attracted to and
what he sees in a woman's feminine beauty is the dignity of her person.
Her femininity becomes a sign that makes visible the invisible mystery
hidden in God from time immemorial. He sees her body as a theology, a
"theophany" of sorts-a revelation of the mystery of God. Such a man has
"passed over" from the Old Testament ethos to the New Testament ethos.
He is empowered not only to meet the law's demands, but to fulfill the law.
Attaining this level of purity is a task given to every man and
woman. 82 It is certainly a fragile joumey demanding a lifetime of diligent
effort and arduous struggle. Victory does not come ovemight, nor can one
ever claim to have accomplished a permanent victory in this life. 83 Be-
cause lust will always be a reality in a fallen world, we will always need
God's mercy. But the grace of his mercy enables us to attain a mature level
of purity. No matter how deep our wounds and distortions go, the cross of
Christ goes deeper, and John Paul continually insists that real power flows
from Christ's death and resurrection to restore in us the purity that was lost
through sin. Our struggle with concupiscence will only cease in the
eschaton, but as the Catechism teaches: "Even now [purity of heart] en-
ables us to see according to God." It "lets us perceive the human body-
ours and our neighbor's-as a temple of the Holy Spirit, a manifestation of
divine beauty."84 The more we gaze with faith upon Christ, the more "his
gaze purifies our heart." In turn, "the light of the countenance of Jesus
illumines the eyes of our heart and teaches us to see everything in light
of his truth."85
81. Love & Responsibility, pp. 170 -171.

82. See CCC, nn. 2013, 2545; see also Veritatis Splendor. n. 18.
83. See CCC, n. 2342.
84. CCC, n. 2519.
85. CCC, n. 2715.
17(} THEOLOGY OF THE BODY EXPLAINED
• Although Christ did not come to give us coping mechanisms for sin,
so long as we live in the historical tension of the "already, but not yet" of
redemption, we still need them. But if traditional Christian wisdom seems
to have focused on the "not yet," it seems John Paul wants to balance this
with the "already." The more we tap into this "already," the more the
beauty of the body rouses praise of God, not lust. As John Climacus wrote
in The Ladder of Divine Ascent, "Someone, I was told, at the sight of a
vety beautiful body, felt impelled to glorify the Creator. The sight of it in-
creased his love for God to the point of tears. Anyone who entertains such
feelings in such circumstances is already risen ... before the general resur-
rection. "R~ The following story illustrates what mature Christian purity
looks like. Two bishops walked out of a cathedral just as a scantily clad
prostitute passed by. One bishop immediately turned away. The other
bishop looked at her intently. The bishop who turned away exclaimed,
"Brother bishop, what are you doing? Tum your eyes!" When the brother
bishop tumed around, he lamented with tears streaming down his face,
"How tragic that such beauty is being sold to the lusts of men." Which one
of these bishops was vivified with the ethos of redemption? Which one had
passed over from merely meeting the demands of the law to a super-
abounding fulfillment of the law?
As an important clarification, the bishop who turned his eyes did the
right thing. since he knew that if he had not done so he would have lusted.
We classically call this "avoiding the occasion of sin" by "gaining custody
of the eyes." This is a commendable and necessaty first step on the road to
a mature purity. But it is only a first step. We are called to more. The
bishop who hlmed away desired the good with his will, but his need to him
away in order to avoid lusting demonstrates that concupiscence still domi-
nated his heart. As the Catechism teaches, the "perfection of the moral
good consists in man's being moved to the good not only by his will but
also by his 'heart. "'R7 To the degree that our hearts are transformed through
ongoing conversion to Christ, our purity mahires, enabling us to see the
body for what it is: a sign that makes visible the invisible mystery hidden
in God from time immemorial. To the degree that we cannot see this, the
distOliions of sin still blind us. I am not suggesting the average man should
look for opporhinities to "test" his purity by gazing upon scantily clad
women. Indeed, the large majority of men must heed the Old Testament
admonition to "him away your eyes." But for anyone who doubts that the
86. The Ladder of Divine Ascent, 15 th step. 58, p. 168.

87. CCC. n. 1775.
Historical Man 171
purity of the "bishop who looked" is possible, I must add that the above
example is adapted from the story of Bishop St. Nonnus of Edessa and the
harlot Pelagia. Stories of their encounter differ and the details are sketchy.
But it is generally reported that upon seeing the half-naked Pelagia parad-
ing through the streets of Antioch while his brother bishops turned away,
Bishop Nonnus looked upon her with love and great delight. She noticed
his look of love and was eventually converted through his counsel and
preaching. She is known as st. Pelagia of Antioch. 88
B. The Phenomenon ofLust

The Pope points out that the Wisdom literature offers some "classic"
descriptions of carnal concupiscence. Sirach 23, for example, describes
concupiscence as a "burning fire" that heats the soul and "will not be
quenched until it is consumed." The man of lust "will never cease until the
fire burns him up." John Paul develops this description with a remarkably
keen phenomenological analysis of lust. This "flaring up in man," the
Pope says, "invades his senses, excites his body, involves his feelings, and
in a certain sense takes possession of his 'heart'" (145). It also causes the
"external man" to reduce the "internal man" to silence. In other words, be-
cause passion aims at satisfaction, "it blunts reflective activity and pays no
attention to the voice of conscience" (146).
Once the "external man" has suffocated the voice of conscience and
given his passions free reign, he remains restless until he satisfies the in-
sistent need of the body and the senses for gratification. One might think
that this gratification should put out the fire, but on the contrary, as experi-
ence attests, it does not reach the source of internal peace. Since it only
touches "the outermost level" of the person, the man who commits his will
to satisfying the senses finds neither peace nor himself. On the contrary, as
Sirach points out, he "is consumed."
John Paul can describe the phenomenon of lust with such vivid preci-
sion because he himself, no doubt, has battled it in his own heart. Lest any-
one think that popes are exempt, this Pope would be the first to admit that,
like the rest of us, he is a man of concupiscence. But unlike so many of us,
he is also a tremendous witness to the fact that "where passion enters into
the whole of the most profound energies of the spirit, it can also become a
creative force" (146). If we allow our passions to "undergo a radical trans-
formation," they can become, once again, the desire to love as God loves.
88. For an account of Nonnus and Pelagia see Helen Waddell, The Desert Fathers
(Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1957), pp. 181-196.
C. External Modesty
Without this radical transformation of our passions we can only ex-
hibit an "external modesty." The Holy Father relates that a merely external
modesty provides an appearance of decency, but is really more a fear of
the consequences of indecency rather than a fear of the evil in itself. In
other words, the heart is not changed. The externally modest person still
desires to gratify his (or her) disordered passions without regard for con-
science. However, he might manage to refrain from acting on his disor-
dered desires when he fears the consequences of doing so.
Here is a common example from the male point of view. Men of lust
often seek to gratify their passions by looking lustfully at women. How-
ever, a man speaking to a woman at whom he would like to look lustfully
will usually muster up the willpower to refrain from doing so in order to
avoid getting caught. However, he will immediately shed this veneer of
modesty as soon as she turns around and can no longer see the manner of
his look. He will then allow lust to "flare up" in his heart since he is no
longer in danger of being caught. In doing so, even though he does not
commit adultery in the body, he commits adultery in his heart. Further-
more, according to a different translation, he makes that woman an adul-
teress in his heart. 89 Such an external modesty points all the more to the
importance of allowing Christ's words in the Sermon on the Mount to pen-
etrate our hearts and transform us.
33. Lust and the Intentionality of Existence

September 10,17,24,1980 (TB 146-152)
Christ does not explain the meaning of lust in the Sermon on the
Mount. He seems to presuppose knowledge of it in his listeners. John Paul
says that if a person really does not know what lust is, then Christ's words
do not apply to him. Yet everyone (male and female) knows these words
apply to him because everyone experiences lust in his heart. We know it as
an interior act that can express itself in a "look" even without expressing
itself in a bodily act. Christ appeals to this common experience.
A. Behind the Lustful Look

John Paul wants to penetrate the significance oflooking lustfully. In a
fallen world, and particularly today in our media culture, temptations to
89. John Paul seems to favor this more ancient translation (see 4/16/80 and 9/3/80,
TB 105, 142).
Historical Man 173
lust besiege man. Christ is not saying that a mere glance or momentary
thought makes one guilty of adultery. Only when lust "sweeps the will
along into its narrow horizon" can we speak of committing adultery in the
heart. Concupiscence itself is not a sin. It comes from sin (original sin)
and inclines us to sin, but merely recognizing its tug within us does not
mean we have sinned. On this side of heaven, we will always be able to
recognize the pull of concupiscence. It is what we do when we recognize it
that matters. If we choose with Christ's help to struggle against concupis-
cence, we enter into the paschal mystery and grow in virtue and holiness.
If, on the other hand, we choose to indulge concupiscent impulse, we
choose to sin. Sin requires that man acts and is not merely acted upon. In
other words, sin involves the subjective dimension of self-determination.
Only then-that is, from that subjective moment and its subjective prolon-
gation-can we say that a person has "looked lustfully" and, thus, com-
mitted adultery "in his heart."
When a man, having experienced the inclination to lust, activates his
will (self-determination) to "look" at another in this way, he expresses
what is in his heart; he expresses "the man within." "Christ in this case
wants to bring out that the man 'looks' in conformity with what he is"
(147). These are powerful words. In his theology of the body, John Paul
wants to outline who man is . We gain crucial insight into this question by
understanding how man looks at his own body and, even more so, how he
looks at the bodies of others. The character of his look determines the way
he formats or understands reality itself. According to John Paul, Christ
"teaches us to consider a look almost like the threshold of inner truth" (147).
"In the beginning" man looked at the world as the gift that it was:
He looked with respect toward all of creation and gratitude toward the
Creator. Having distinguished himself from the animals, man looked at
himself with deep awe and wonder, knowing that as a "partner of the Ab-
solute" he was the crown of creation and was called to love (see § 12).
Man's respect for creation and deep wonder at himself crystallize, final-
ly, in the peace of the original naked gaze of man and woman at each
other. This gaze, this look, not only reveals that they know each other's
worth, dignity, and goodness. It also reveals the deepest intention of
their hearts with regard to existence. Their naked bodies witnessed to the
truth that all of creation was a gift, and that Love was the source of that
giving (see § 17). This is what they saw when they "looked" at each
other. Life, then, meant offering themselves-their bodies-to God and
to each other in thanksgiving for so great a gift.
The entrance of lust in the heart affects everything. It changes, as
John Paul says, "the intentionality of man's very existence" (150). Ifit did
not concern such a deep change, Christ's words about the possibility of
committing grave sin "in the heart" would have no meaning. The man who
lives from lust no longer sees life as a gift to receive in thanksgiving from
the hands of the Creator. Instead, lust indicates that man has denied the
gift of God. From this perspective, life- if one is to attain it-must now
be grasped (see §26).
The grave evil committed by the lustful look is precisely this : the de-
nial of the gift expressed in the dignity of sexual difference. The man who
lives "the gift" recognizes woman as a gift to be received both from the
hands of the Creator and through the freedom of her own self-determina-
tion as a personal subject. But the man who denies the gift does not wait to
receive woman as a gift. Instead, he extorts her gift; he grasps at her in-
stead of receiving her. By doing so John Paul tells us that the man deprives
the woman of her attraction as a person. He focuses merely on the attrac-
tion of her body as an object to satisfy the sexual need inherent in his
fallen masculinity (we could say something similar with regard to the way
a woman under lust's influence treats a man).
Lust, then, primarily has an axiological nature. In other words, it
indicates a fundamental change in the value that man (male and female)
assigns not only to sexuality, but to the whole universe. The man ab-
sorbed by lust no longer views creation with a sense of awe and wonder
nor respects it as a gift from the Creator. Rather, creation and its goods
are exploited and abused for selfish gain. They are grasped at rather than
received with thanksgiving. In this way lust alters the intentionality of
man's entire existence at its roots. We can recall here our previous dis-
cussion regarding the effects of man's new attitude toward his body on
ecology and societal structures of labor and the economy (see §27).
B. Lust as Reduction
The Holy Father points out that the biblical/theological meaning of
lust differs from the psychological meaning. The science of psychology
speaks of lust as a desire for or intense attraction toward the sexual value of
another person. It places no ethical meaning on the word. The biblical use
of the word, however, has great ethical significance since it means a value
is being impaired. This "value" is the value of the person revealed by the
nuptial meaning of the body. Lust is sexual desire divorced from the nuptial
(and procreative) meaning of the body. Lust has the internal effect of ob-
scuring the true significance of the body, and hence, of the person itself.
But the full value of the body-person can only be understood in light of the
original call of man and woman as revealed in Genesis. Psychology by it-
self, then, does not have the context to understand lust as an impairment. It
just seems "normal." Even ifmen and women can intuit that lust is contrary
to their dignity, they cannot fully know why without the aid of revelation.
Historical Man /75
When we compare lust with what revelation tells us about the origi-
nal mutual attraction of the sexes, we realize that lust is actually a rejec-
tion of true sexual desire. It involves an intentional "reduction" of God's
original plan. In other words, lust entails a restriction or "closing down of
mind and heart" to the full truth of the person and the perennial call to
communion. Sex is part of all "the rich storehouse of values" with which
man and woman relate to one another. In fact, the body in its sexuality is
meant to reveal this rich storehouse of values. It is one thing to recognize
this, and we must come to recognize this through the integration of sexual-
ity and personality. But it is another thing altogether, the Pope points out,
to reduce all the personal riches of the other's sexuality to an object of
selfish enjoyment.
C. "Eternal" Sexuality
Sexuality provides an "invitation" and issues a "calling" to commun-
ion by means of mutual giving. John Paul states that this "dimension of
intentionality of thought and heart" is so fundamental to humanity that it
constitutes one of the main streams of universal human culture. In this uni-
versal sense John Paul speaks of the "eternal masculine," the "eternal
feminine," and the "eternal attraction" between them. When man taps into
this "eternal" dimension of sexuality, John Paul proclaims that it can free
in him an entire gamut of spiritual-physical desires of an especially per-
sonal and "sharing" nature-all of which correspond to a proportionate
pyramid of values regarding the person. This is mature, redeemed sexual
attraction. Lust, on the other hand, does not have its sights on this "eter-
nal" dimension. It seeks immediate gratification and thereby obscures the
rich pyramid of values that marks the perennial attraction of the sexes.
Lust turns from the man and woman's personal-sexual call to communion
and pushes sexual attraction toward utilitarian dimensions, within which
men and women use one another merely to satisfy their own needs.
In this utilitarian mode, sexuality "ceases being a specific language
of the spirit; it loses its character of being a sign. It ceases," John Paul con-
tinues, "bearing in itself the wonderful matrimonial significance of the
body 90 .. .in the context of conscience and experience" (149). In other
words, while the body retains its nuptial meaning objectively speaking,
man no longer readily experiences it. His conscience has become dulled to
it. Using a precise, vivid image, John Paul says that lust "passes on the
90. In the English translation of the original Italian texts, the Pope's phrase
"sigl1!ficato sponsale del co/po" is variously translated as "nuptial meaning of the
body," "matrimonial" or "conjugal significance of the body," and "spousal meaning of
the body."
ruins of the matrimonial significance of the body" and "aims directly at an

exclusive end: to satisfy only the sexual need of the body, as its precise
object" (149). The man of lust is not concerned with the body's nuptial!
procreative meaning. In fact, he often sees it as a nuisance since it impedes
him from satisfying concupiscence. To his own demise, the man of lust
will continually seek ways of eliminating this obstacle in his insatiable de-
sire for gratification. John Paul stresses again that such an intentional and
axiological reduction is completely contained in the way man "looks."
34. Adulterating Sexual Union within Marriage

October 1, 8, 1980 (TB 153 -159)
John Paul II's revolutionary catechesis on the body garnered little

media attention "in the beginning," so to speak. That all changed, how-
ever, with the general audience of October 8, 1980. Therein John Paul
shows us "how deep-down it is necessary to go" if men and women are to
adhere to Christ's words. In his prior address, John Paul states there is no
doubt that, according to Christ, a man commits adultery in his heart when
he looks with lust at a woman who is not his wife. However, the Pope says
we can and even must ask whether or not Christ approves of a man look-
ing with lust at his own wife. It was John Paul's answer to this question
that immediately caught the attention of the international media.
A. The Typical Interpretation Requires a Deepening

Basic logic, when initially applied to this question, finds no problem
with a man looking lustfully at his own wife. John Paul even stated early
on in this cycle of reflections that "this lustful look, if addressed to his
own wife, is not 'adultery in the heart,' precisely because the man's inte-
rior act refers to the woman who is his wife, with regard to whom adultery
cannot take place."91 If we stop at the surface, this reasoning seems en-
tirely sound. However, as we have learned by now, John Paul II never
stops at the surface. A deeper look at Christ's words indicates that "there
remain good grounds for doubt whether this reasoning takes into account
all the aspects of revelation, as well as of the theology of the body" (155).
As John Paul will explain, this interpretation of Christ's words (i.e.,
that it is acceptable to lust after one's own wife) fails to take into account
91. 4/23/80, TB 107.

Historical Man 177
the subjective dignity of the persons involved. John Paul's personalist un-
derstanding of ethics will not allow him to reduce the illicit to the illegal.
As Christ insists, we must penetrate the heart. Hence, John Paul believes
this typical interpretation requires "a deepening" in light of the anthropo-
logical and theological insights gained from his study of Christ's words. In
classic personalist fOlID, John Paul states that Christ not only considers the
legal status of the man and woman in question. He also makes the moral
evaluation of sexual desire depend above all on the personal dignity of the
man and the woman. The Holy Father concludes, therefore, that the moral
evaluation of sexual desire "has its importance both when it is a question
of persons who are not married, and-perhaps even more-when they are
spouses" (156).
When Christ speaks of committing adultery in the heart, it is signifi-
cant that he does not refer to a woman who is not the man's wife. He sim-
ply refers to woman generically. As John Paul states, "Adultery 'in the
heart' is committed not only because man 'looks' in this way at a woman
who is not his wife, but preCisely because he looks at a woman in this
way." He thus concludes: "Even if he looked in this way at the woman
who is his wife, he could likewise commit adultery 'in his heart'" (157).
This statement evoked a fire storm of criticism from the international
media. Accusations flew that John Paul had such a negative evaluation of
sex that he was condemning it even within marriage. The reaction was so
widespread and severe that it prompted the Vatican newspaper L 'Osser-
vatore Romano to publish a response.92
Claudio Sorgi, the author of the Vatican response, suggested that cer-
tain media reports reflected "superficiality, lack of respect, and absence of
attention" to what the Pope was saying, which led to "misunderstandings,
we hope in good faith." Unfortunately, some comments were "so impro-
vised and absurd as to be stupefying." Hence, the "suspicion arises," he
concluded, "that not all the mistaken interpretations are in good faith."
Furthermore, Sorgi pointed out that to adulterate a relationship simply
means to distort it as compared with its original meaning. "Now what is
it," he asks, "if not adultery, to reduce the conjugal relationship to a mere
satisfaction of sexual need?" Appealing to modern sensibilities, Sorgi sub-
mits, "has it not been said and written plainly in recent years that marriage
92. See L 'Osservatore Romano, October 12, 1980. The full text of this article was
printed in Blessed Are the Pure ofHeart, the second volume in the original four published
by the Daughters of Saint Paul in 1983 (its inclusion immediately following the audience
of October 8 has led some to mistakenly attribute 41 general audiences to this cycle of the
theology of the body). It does not appear, however, in the one-volume edition of 1997.
often becomes a condition of slavery especially for the woman; that she is
reduced to an erotic object or even that in cel1ain cases the conjugal rela-
tionship is only masked prostitution?"
B. Clarion Call to Uphold Woman s Dignity

John Paul's statement about adulterating sexual union within mar-
riage is nothing but a clarion call for men to uphold the dignity of their
wives and vice versa. Both sexes are called to exist "for" the other sex
through the free and sincere gift of self. Yet lust-in this case of the hus-
band toward his wife-fundamentally changes the way in which woman
exists "for" the man. It reduces the deep riches of her attractiveness as a
female person to the mere satisfaction of the husband's need and thereby
robs her of her dignity as a subject made in God's image. A man who uses
woman's femininity to satisfy his own "instinct" has assumed this attitude
"deep down," inwardly deciding to treat a woman in this way. This is pre-
cisely "adultery committed in the heart." So a man "can commit this 'adul-
tery in the heart' also with regard to his own wife ifhe treats her only as an
object to satisfy instinct" (157).
Simply getting married does not suddenly justify a man and woman
using one another as a means of selfish gratification. For John Paul, using
is the antithesis of love. Sexual union is only justified (i.e., made just,
right, good, and holy) when- inspired by the love of God-man and
woman give themselves to each other loving as God loves. Marriage,
while an absolute prerequisite, does not automatically guarantee that this
will happen. Spouses must commit themselves all the more to living ac-
cording to the logic of "the truthful sign" (see §31). They must therefore
guard against any thought or action that would make their union a counter-
sign of God's love. Indulging concupiscent desire (like adultery) is just
such a counter-sign .
• How does this fit in with the traditional teaching that the "relief of
concupiscence" is an end of marriage? This has often been interpreted to
mean that marriage provides a legitimate outlet for indulging concu-
piscent desire. Such an interpretation all but gives men carte blanche to
use their wives for their own selfish gratification. Because of this seriously
misguided mindset, confessors and spiritual directors have often counseled
wives that they are obligated to submit to their husbands' sexual needs
upon request. But such "common wisdom" cloaks a terribly distorted an-
thropology. As Dr. John Crosby insists, "It is not too much to say that John
Historical Man 179
Paul abhors any such interpretation" of the relief of concupiscence. 9 ) Such

a misguided view fails entirely to take into account the new ethos to which
Christ directs men and women in the Sermon on the Mount. A look at the
Latin provides a window into understanding John Paul's perspective on the
issue. Remedium concupisccl/tiae is actually better translated "remedy for
concupiscence." While "relief' implies mere indulgence of concupiscent
desire, "remedy" implies that the grace of marriage offers a healing of
concupiscent desire. Through the healing power of the redemption of the
body, men and women can progressively (re)experience sexual desire as
God created it to be-the desire to love as he loves in the sincere gift of
self. Only this understanding of remedium cOllcupiscentiae is compatible
with a personalist understanding of sexual ethics. As Cardinal Wojtyla
wrote in a 1974 essay on marriage, "If it is true that marriage may also be a
remedium concupiscenliae (see St. Paul: 'It is better to marry than to
burn'-l Cor 7:9), then this must be understood in the integral sense given
it by the Christian Scriptures, which also teach of the 'redemption of the
body' (Rom 8:23) and point to the sacrament of matrimony as a way of
realizing this redemption."94
C. The Cause ofMisunderstanding

For those who have understood John Paul's thought up to this point,
his teaching about the possibility of committing "adultery in the heart"
within marriage makes complete sense. However, for those who are locked
in a fallen view of sex John Paul's statement seems to disqualify all sexual
expression- hence, the media's barrage of criticism. Indeed, John Paul af-
firms that it is impossible to arrive at the second interpretation of Christ's
words if we confine ourselves to the purely psychological interpretation of
lust. Christ's words in the Sermon on the Mount call us to a theological un-
derstanding of lust as a reduction of God's plan "in the beginning."
A psychological understanding of lust sees the selfish sting of con-
cupiscence as "normal." Yet, as John Paul insists in this crucial statement,
Christ's words in the Sermon on the Mount demonstrate that "Christian
ethos is characterized by a transformation of the conscience and attitudes
93. See The Legacy oj"John Puul II, ed. Geoffrey Gneuhs (New York, NY: Cross-
roads, 2000), p. 57.
94. "The Family as a Community of Persons," Person & Community: Selected Es-
says, p. 327.
of the human person, both man and woman, such as to express and realize
the value of the body and sex according to the Creator's original plan,
placed as they are in the service of the 'communion of persons. "'95 Psy-
chology knows nothing of this "original plan" or the real hope of trans-
forming the heart in this regard. Psychology knows only the reduction of
lust. If that is wrong-if that is "adultery in the heart"- then men and
women, husbands and wives, have no hope. They can only fear the sever-
ity of Christ's words and clamor against the Pope's interpretation of them.
In this sense, the Pope's critics understood John Paul correctly. Left
solely to the forces of (fallen) nature, there is no hope for husbands and
wives not to adulterate their own relationship, at least to some degree. But
certain media reports completely missed that Christ's words (and John
Paul's interpretation of them) are deeply imbued with the hope and the
real possibility of redemption from lust. As John Paul expresses in the
concluding comments of this most contentious address, "Are we to fear
the severity of [Christ's] words, or rather have confidence in their salvific
content, in their power?" (159)
• The Washington Post article which reported on this address shows

how much the secular media missed the "good news" of John Paul's call to
sexual redemption. Judy Mann, in her article "A Lesson on Lust for the
Vatican," grants that the Pope's remarks on lust were "motivated only by
the best of intentions." However, she then goes on to infonn the Pope that
"he may not be familiar with the role lust plays in the American
family .. .. From the time Americans reach adolescence, lust is the life force."
Mann seems to favor malTiage and family life, but she seems blind to the
real possibility of any alternative to lust as the foundation for malTiage.
She reports that in her day "one of the first things you learned at your
mother's knee was that boys had only one thing on their minds-which
was you-know-what-and that the road to the altar was paved with firm
denials. I know for a fact," Mann says, "that in my generation lust led to
hundreds of thousands of American malTiages." Not only does lust lead to
malTiage, according to Mann, it can also aid marital fidelity. She concludes
that "the Pope might want to bear in mind" that if "a man has lust in his
heart for his wife, chances are he won't have adultery on his mind for
somebody else."96 These are the sad conclusions of a merely psychological
95. 10/22/8 0, TB 163.

96. Judy Manll, "A Lesson on Lusl for the Vatican," Washington Post, October 10,
1980, pp. B- 1 and B- 2.
Historical Man 181
interpretation of lust. Not only does it normalize lust, it asserts it as a good.

Interestingly, however, Mann's tone hints that she may wish things were
different. Unfortunately, she has resigned herself to the lesson (and atten-
dant world-view) learned at her mother's knee: Lust is just the way it is. In
light of this "lesson on lust for the Vatican," John Paul boldly calls Mann
(and her mother) to "another vision of man's possibilities."97
35. Lived Morality and the Ethos of Human Practice

October 8, 15, 22. 1980 (TB 158 -165)
We have already devoted many pages to John Paul's analysis of

Christ's words about lust, yet the spiral continues to deepen. Christ's
words are exacting, to say the least. To fulfill them, we must undergo a
radical paradigm shift with regard to the way we think of and experience
sexuality and sexual desire. We must allow "the recesses of the heart" to
be thoroughly revealed. We must come to perceive anew the lost fullness
of our humanity, and want to regain it. In other words, we must perceive
the true, liberating meaning of "purity of heart" and open ourselves to re-
ceive it as a gift of grace flowing from Christ's death and resurrection.
Of course, virtue does not come to fallen man without toil. If a per-
son desires authentic liberation from lust, he must work in tandem with
grace and finnly reject everything that stems from lust. As Christ figura-
tively states, he must "pluck out his eye" and "cut off his hand" if these
cause him to stumble. For "it is better that you lose one of your members
than that your whole body go into hell" (Mt 5:29-30). Why are Christ's
words so harsh and foreboding? One might observe in this context that lust
and hell can both be defined with the same five words: the absence oj
God's love. This is why lust is so serious. If God's love constitutes man's
origin, vocation, and destiny, then lust constitutes the antithesis of man's
very existence.
A. The Pure and Simple Fabric ofExistence

Christ takes such a finn stand against lust because lust is the first and
most tenacious obstacle to an authentic communion between the sexes-
and man and woman's call to fonn a communion of persons "is the deep-
est substratum of human ethics and culture" (163). Humanity stands or
falls on this point since all moral disorder, according to John Paul, comes
97.10/29/80, TB 168.
from the impurity of a lustful heart. Such impurity "distorts both sexual
life and the operation of social and economic life and even culturallife."9R
• This statement certainly contradicts the idea that a person's "pri-

vate" sexual behavior has no bearing on anyone outside the bedroom. Jour-
nalist Philip Lawler confirmed the Pope's statement when, writing in 1997,
he observed that "the public consequences of 'private' sexual behavior
now threaten to destroy American society. In the past thirty-five years the
federal government has spent four trillion dollars-that is, $4,000,000,
OOO,OOO-on a variety of social programs designed to remedy ills which
can be attributed, directly or indirectly, to the misuse of human sexual-
ity."99 Along the same lines, a Jewish proverb recounts the story of a man
on a boat drilling a hole beneath his seat. When the man sitting next to him
protests, he replies, "Why should you care what I'm doing? It's under my
seat."
John Paul observes that human life is by its nature "co-educative."

This means that the common life of men and women "constitutes the pure
and simple fabric of existence." Thus, the dignity and balance of human
life "depend at every moment of history and at every point of geographical
longitude and latitude on 'who' she will be for him and he for her" (159).
In short, a culture of lust degenerates into a culture that does not respect
life-a culture of death. Only when men and women are freed from the
grip of lust that strangles the spirit can they fulfill themselves "in the free-
dom of mutual giving." And this freedom in giving "is the condition of all
life together in truth" (159). Only in freedom can men and women realize
"the sacramental unity" that the Creator himself willed (see Gen 2:24).
Without this internal liberation from lust, a life together in truth cannot ex-
ist. And the new dimension of ethos, John Paul says, "is always connected
with the revelation of that depth, which is called 'heart,' and with its lib-
eration from 'lust,' in order that man, male and female in all the interior
truth ofthe mutual 'for,' may shine forth more fully in that heart" (158).
B. Ethos and Praxis

In his audience of October 15, 1980, John Paul shifts to a more prac-
tical analysis of Christ's words. If humanity stands or falls on purity of
heart, how do we live so that we might stand? Ifwe accept Christ's words,
how are we to think? How are we to feel regarding sexuality, sexual attrac-
tion, and desire? Can anything in us reliably guide our thinking, feeling,
98. 12117/80 third endnote, TB 230-23J.

99. "The Price of Virtue," Catholic World Report, July 1997, p. 58.
Historical Man 183
and acting in this regard? If Christ's words do not merely accuse the hu-
man heart but also call us to good-what, exactly, is that good? "These
questions are significant for human 'praxis,' and indicate an organic con-
nection of 'praxis' itself with ethos. Lived morality is always the ethos of
human practice" (160). In other words, as Christ himself indicated (see Mt
15: 19), human actions (praxis) flow from the orientation of the human
heart (ethos). "Lived morality," then, is a morality beyond mere duty. It
flows from the super-abounding love in one's heart. With John Paul's shift
to a more practical analysis, he wants to show the way to attain that proper
orientation of heart so that what flows from our hearts in practice will be a
fulfillment of Christ's words.
The "how to 's" of living according to Christ's words in the Sermon
on the Mount have found multifonn expressions throughout history. Cur-
rents of thought have drawn nearer to or moved further from the tlUe ethos
of Christ's words based on various historical factors. They have passed
"from the pole of pessimism, to the pole of optimism, from puritan sever-
ity, to modem permissiveness. It is necessary to realize this," according to
John Paul, "in order that the ethos of the Sermon on the Mount may always
have due transparency with regard to man's actions and behavior" (161).
With this statement, John Paul sets the stage for the proper interpreta-
tion of Christ's words in the field of human praxis. Having learned from
the currents of history that have swung the pendulum from rigorism to li-
cense and back, it seems we can now penetrate Christ's words with more
balance and accuracy. It seems we are now better prepared to establish the
proper "ethos of human practice" in this vexing field of morality.
C. The Grave Error of Manichaeism

John Paul knows that if we are to understand the proper sense of
Christ's words, we must contend with the "Manichaean demon" that has
plagued Catholic moral theology throughout much of Christian history. In
its original form, Manichaeism saw the source of evil in matter, in the
body, and therefore condemned everything corporeal in man. Since our
bodiliness, as John Paul notes, "is manifested in man mainly through sex,"
Manichaeism particularly devalues all things sexua1. 100
John Paul knows that-like a wolf in sheep's clothing- such hereti-
cal thinking has seeped into many Christians' minds and hearts and must
be uprooted. Some would even claim that the harshness of Christ's words
in the Sennon on the Mount harmonize with a Manichaean devaluation of
100. John Paul offers a further expl anation of the Manichaean ethos in the endnote
of this address (see TB 185 -186).
sex. Hence, the Holy Father firmly and repeatedly stresses that "the
Manichaean way of understanding and evaluating man's body and sexual-
ity is essentially alien to the Gospel" (165). Therefore, anyone who wants
to see in Christ's words a Manichaean perspective would be committing
an essential error. "The appropriate interpretation of Christ's words," as
John Paul unambiguously affirms, "must be absolutely free of Manichaean
elements in thought and in attitude" (163).
While the unaccustomed ear might equate the severity of Christ's
words with the severity of Manichaeism, the essential difference lies in
the assignment of evil. Manichaeism assigns evil to the body and sex it-
self. Christ assigns evil to man's heart, and not even to man's heart itself,
but only to the distortion of lust. Lust devalues the body. Christ's state-
ment in the Sermon on the Mount, then, springs "precisely from the affir-
mation of the personal dignity of the body and of sex, and serves only this
dignity" (165). Thus, Christ's words in no way condemn the body and sex
or deny their value. Instead they express a deep and mature affirmation of
the body and sex. Christ calls his listeners to understand the body's divine
dignity and value both objectively and subjectively. John Paul poetically
observes that Christ impresses this mature dimension of ethos on the
pages of the Gospel in order to impress it subsequently in human life and
human hearts. Only when the truth about good penetrates the heart-that
is, only when ethic becomes ethos-can we speak of a "real" and a "hu-
man" morality.
D. Irreconcilable Difference in Mentality

John Paul summarizes the irreconcilable difference in mentality this
way: "Whereas, for the Manichaean mentality, the body and sexuality con-
stitute, so to speak, an 'anti-value'; for Christianity, on the contrary, they
always constitute a 'value not sufficiently appreciated'" (163 -164). Far
from devaluing the body and sex, Christianity assigns to the body and sex
a value beyond compare. Recall John Paul's thesis that the "body, in fact,
and it alone, is capable of making visible what is invisible: the spiritual
and divine. It was created to transfer into the visible reality of the world,
the mystery hidden since time immemorial in God, and thus to be a sign of
it."'o, Now, in the context of countering Manichaeism, John Paul returns to
his thesis and states that the "body, in its masculinity and femininity, is
called 'from the beginning' to become the manifestation of the spirit. It
does so also by means of the conjugal union of man and woman when they
unite in such a way as to form' one flesh. '" In this way the body "assumes
the value of a sign-in a way, a sacramental sign" (163).
101. 2/20/80, TB 76 (see §22).

Historical Man 185
This is the value that the Manichaean mentality "insufficiently appre-

ciates" (or fails to appreciate altogether): The body and sex are sacramen-
tal-in some way through the veil of a sign they make the divine mystery
visible. Christ calls men and women to rediscover this value and live ac-
cording to the logic of "the truthful sign" both in thought and in action.
Hence, the Pope insists that Christian praxis in this regard only concerns
detaching oneself from the evil of lust. It never means transferring the evil
of lust to its object. "Such a transfer would mean a certain acceptance-
perhaps not fully conscious-of the Manichaean 'anti-value.' It would not
constitute a real and deep victory over the evil of the act...; on the contrary,
there would be concealed in it the great danger of justifying the act to the
detriment of the object" (164).
In other words, in seeking to live according to Christ's words in the
Sermon on the Mount, we must be sure that we are battling the true evil-
lust. We must never project the evil in question onto the body and sexuality
of the person toward whom our lusts are directed. Christ certainly demands
detachment from the evil oflust, but John Paul insists that this never means
that the object of that desire, that is, the woman who is "looked at lust-
fully," is an evil. 102 In fact, so long as man redirects the assignment of evil
from his own lusts to the woman, he exempts himself from any need to
overcome the evil in his heart. We can see, then, that the Manichaean con-
demnation of the body "might-and may always be-a loophole to avoid
the requirements set in the Gospel" (162).
John Paul reproaches those who condemn the body and sexuality in
the name of holiness, when, in fact, such "holiness" stems from a resis-
tance of the demands of holiness. Mature holiness demands of men and
women "a real and deep victory" over the evil of lust. It demands transfor-
mation of the deep impulses of the heart. It demands purity of vision,
which is not only the ability to tum away from a potential object of lust.
Even more so it is the ability, through the ongoing maturation of purity, to
affirm positively with one's look that "object," which is always also a sub-
ject, a person .
• This assignment of the Manichaean "anti-value" to the body can be

seen in the tendency to describe sex or certain body parts as "dirty." No
body part is "dirty." Nor is it ever accurate to call sex itself dirty. For God
looked at all he had made and called it very good. What may be unclean or
impure is the human heart and its view of certain body parts or its manner
of engaging in sex. It would be misguided, for example, for a mother who
102. John Paul notes that this important clarification seems to be lacking in some
Wisdom texts. See, for example, Proverbs 5: 1- 6; 6:24 - 29 and Sirach 26:9 -12.
catches her son with a Playboy magazine to scold him for looking at "dirty
pictures." While it may be unconscious and unintentional on the mother's
pali, the assignment of evil is then on the body (since they are pictures of
the body) instead of on the evil of lust behind the production and the view-
ing of pornography. As John Paul says, pornographic portrayals of the
body "arouse objection ... not because of their object, since the human body
in itself always has its inalienable dignity-but because of the quality or
way of its reproduction,",m which is intended to incite lust. This distinction
is not just a matter of semantics but has to do with the proper assignment
of evil. It has to do with confonning our language to authentic Christian
teaching on the body. Consider also the common question asked when
knocking on someone's bedroom door before entering: "Are you decent?"
In light of the above, the only propcr rcsponsc to such a question--even if
one is entirely naked- is an unequivocal "yes!" The body is alwa)'s de-
cent. Only the manner of another's "look" may lack decency. Thus, we
cover the body out of reverence for its goodness, its decency-not to hide
any supposed indecency.
36. The Interpretation of Suspicion

October 22,29, 1980 (TB 163-168)
For those who desire purity, the sexual body is not the evil with
which we must contend. The Holy Father insistently repeats this point be-
cause he knows many Christians have fallen prey to this grave Manichae-
an error. Far from being evil or even tainted, the body, and sexual union
itself, contain a value and dignity that we can barely fathom. But we must
fathom this value and dignity if we are to live according to the true ethos
of Christ's words.
A. True Victory Over Lust

Sexuality is "deeply penetrated" by the mystery of the "redemption
of the body" (see Rom 8:23) . Only in this light can we properly under-
stand Christ's words. If Christ accuses the heart of lust, he also calls man
to experience a "real and deep victory" over the evil of lust in order that
man may rediscover and live according to the true value of the nuptial
meaning of the body. On the other hand, John Paul says that the Mani-
103. SIM)J, TB 228.

Historical Man 187
chaean attitude leads to "annihilation" and "negation" of the body and of

sex, or at best to their "mere toleration" because of the necessity of pro-
creation .
• The idea that the Church thinks sex is bad, even if she grants the
one reluctant exception of condoning it for procreation, is widespread.
Many people, Catholics and non-Catholics alike, might actually believe
that such heretical thinking is official Church teaching! Even some of the
Church's otherwise esteemed thinkers have said things that lend credence
to these ideas. In these addresses, John Paul II's ardent desire to set the
record straight almost seems to leap off the page.
John Paul says that in trying to overcome lust, man must contend
with the "inveterate habits" springing from Manichaeism in his way of
thinking and eva.luating things. A mall struggling with lus.t, for example
C,Ul easily blame the woman after whom he is lusting ra ther than look
deeply into his own heart. As John Paul observes true viet ry vel' tust in
this case would stem from the man's effort LO " rediscover the true values"
of the woman's body and sexuality and "to reassert them" so that the
Manichaean "anti-value" does not take root in his conscience and in his
will. This means much more than simply turning away in order to avoid
10 king with lusL ontaining lustful impulse is tile essenlia l first step . Bu!
if a person s purity top here il is on ly a ' negative" purilY, so to speak. It
is oh ly a Lurnirlg away. ' As such it carries [he danger of slipping into the
Manichaean error fa igning an "anti-value' to that from which a man i '
continually turnjng, that is a woman, a person.
To gain a tItle victory over lust, John Pau I says that purity must ma-
ture hom the "negati,ve' turning away, t the more po itive' recognition
ancl assertion f the real beauty dignity, and value f the b ely and of
sex . 10" Ttli can on ly bappen tlnough the concerled effort, in this a. e, of
the rU<ll1 , guided by grace t ee the woman pel" ol/hood revea leo
th rough her feminin e b ely. Through the indwelling or the Holy Spirit,
such 'se ing ' bee mes I) I only a concep1 a eept d by the mind but a Ii -
ing reality fclt' by the heart. [nde d the ethos r r derupliol1 enable man
to be "moved to the good not on.ly by his wil l alone, but also by his sensi-
tive appetite."lo5 This is the task that Christ gives us and this is what the
"redemption of the body" affords: the gradual reintegration of body and
104. John Paul speaks of the "negative" and "positive" dimensions of purity more
explicitly in his audience of 1128/81 , TB 200-201.
105. CCC, n. 1770.
soul , of personality and sexuality, and the ability to see this and experience
it- n I perfec Ll y in Ihis life, but more and more effectively as we allow all
of li t' d iseased ways of thinking about the body and sexuality to be cruci-
fied with hrist .
• From the moment of the very first sin, men have tended to blame
women for their own disordered hearts (see Gen 3:11-12). Certainly
women have a responsibility not to play on men's weaknesses. But
whether women live responsibly in this regard or not, men have their own
prior responsibility to battle Lust and continually mature in purIty l the
point that [hey can ee and a ert vel;l' woman ' true value and dignity. llll'
Tr men d not take lhi re pon ibjliiy eriously, (hey will almost inevitably
pr jc 1 an air of blame toward women for Ulcir own lust '. And women, it
seems, have antennas for picking up on this. This dynamic was exempli-
fied in the comments of a young person who heard a talk of mine on
woman's dignity. She attended a Catholic college where students, for the
most paIi, gcnuinely desire to grow in holiness. She shared with me the
emotional effects of having men for three years continually tum away or
look at the sidewalk whenever she walked across campus. Those men may
have needed to do this in order to avoid lusting. But was there not one man
on that campus pure enough to look at her, and in so doing affirm her dig-
nity rather than lust after her? Every human being is clying out to be seen
and loved-to be acknowledged positively as a person of value and worth.
One can easily imagine that over time a woman in such circumstances
might come to believe that there was something wrong with her-that size
was responsible for causing men to stumble simply by being a woman.
This woman said that what shuck her most about the talk was that she was
good; that she, herself, as a woman was not the problem. For she had a
God-given dignity that shone in her femininity, whether the men on cam-
pus could see that or not. This is obviously a delicate situation since it is
better for a man not to look at a woman than to look at her with lust. But it
is better yet to mature to the point where a man can look at a woman and,
keeping his heart under control, asseli in positive affirmation the true dig-
nity and value of the person.
B. Masters olSuspicion
We are approaching the crux of the matter for historical man: the
crux of human practice. How is man to live? He is to live according to the
purity of his origins. That is the norm; that is the standard; that is man's
106. See the concluding paragraphs of Mlilieris Dignitatem, nn. LO and 14.
Historical Man 189
task. Through the ethos of redemption, he is called to regain what was lost.
As Christ's words indicate in both his discussion with the Pharisees and in
the Sermon on the Mount, man and woman are called progressively to re-
claim the nuptial meaning of the body as it was revealed "in the beginning."
This may sound a bit unrealistic. After all, in the state of original in-
nocence- which, as the Church teaches, man has left irrevocably be-
hind-man and woman did not need to contend with concupiscence. In the
experience of historical man, however, the lust of the flesh always weighs
him down and casts a shadow on all things sexual. Given that, it seems the
best a man can hope for in this fallen world is to learn somehow to manage
his unruly impulses and avoid the near occasion of sin. We have become
so wounded and twisted that lust, as common experience attests, will al-
ways have the upper hand in man's heart-at least in this life.
Will it? Those who believe that lust inevitably determines man's ex-
perience of the body and sexuality can count themselves among those
whom John Paul labels "the masters of suspicion." A master of suspicion
is a person who does not know or does not fully believe in the transform-
ing power of the Gospel. Concupiscence holds sway in his own heart, so
he projects the same onto everyone else. In his mind the human body will
always rouse concupiscence, especially if it is partially exposed, and all
the more so if it is totally naked. It can do nothing else. So he holds the
human heart in a state of continual and in-eversible suspicion .
• The story of the two bishops previously mentioned (see §32) illus-
trates the interpretation of suspicion. The bishop who turned away readily
assumed that his brother bishop was looking with lust. Having never expe-
rienced a real and deep victory over lust, he could not imagine any other
way to look at the woman and he immediately accused his brother bishop
of indulging lust. In this way, he held his brother's heart in a state of suspi-
cion.
The Protestant scholar Paul Ricoeur coined the phrase "masters of

suspicion" in describing the thinking of Freud, Marx, and Nietzsche. As
John Paul points out, these thinkers have significantly influenced the way
modem man understands himself and interprets morality. John Paul admits
that we see a significant convergence in each of their systems of thought
with a Scriptural analysis of man, but we see also a fundamental and un-
mistakable divergence. Like Christ in the Sermon on the Mount, these
men also "accuse" the human heart. The Holy Father even sees a particular
con-espondence in each of these thinkers' systems with one of the three
forms of lust described by St. John. John Paul suggests that Nietzschean
thought corresponds in some sense with "the pride of life"; Marxist
thought with "the lust of the eyes"; and Freudian thought, of course, with
"the lust of the flesh."
But convergence ends here because these men make lust "the abso-
lute criterion of anthropology and ethics"; they place lust at the core of
their interpretation of man. The Pope stresses that biblical anthropology
does not allow us to stop here, but opens us to the ethos of redemption.
This is the fundamental divergence: the "masters of suspicion" see no
hope of redemption from lust. "This interpretation is very different, it is
radically different from what we rediscover in Christ's words in the Ser-
mon on the Mount. These words reveal not only another ethos, but also
another vision of man's possibilities" (168).
It is certainly true, as John Paul observes, that if man leaves himself
at the mercy of the forces of fallen nature, he cannot avoid the influence of
lust. But it is equally true that man is not merely at the mercy of the forces
of his fallen nature. The Pope insists that in Christ, fallen nature is always
at the same time redeemed nature. With full confidence in the power of
Jesus' death and resurrection to free us from sin, the Vicar of Christ as-
serts: "Man cannot stop at putting the 'heart' in a state of continual and
irreversible suspicion due to the manifestations of the lust of the flesh ....
Redemption is a truth, a reality, in the name of which man must feel
called, and 'called with efficacy'" (167). Yes, real power gushes forth
from Christ's crucified and risen body to set us free from the domination of
concupiscence. As the Holy Father proclaims, we are "called to rediscover,
nay more, to realize the nuptial meaning of the body [through] that spiri-
tual state and that spiritual power which are derived from mastery of the
lust of the flesh" (167).
Again it must be emphasized that the mature form of such mastery is
not akin merely to reigning in a wild horse (see §29). Certainly to the degree
that concupiscence seeks to rear its ugly head, it must be "caged." But as
one's mastery over lust matures, grace operatively transforms the horse so it
no longer needs the cage. Mature self-mastery enjoys the fruits which grace
has wrought by transforming the content and character of sexual desire from
lust to love, making one truly free with "the freedom of the gift."
C. The Meaning ofLife Is at Stake

Perfect freedom from concupiscence is reserved for the eschaton
when we will be forever united with Christ in his resurrection. Until then
we remain on the difficult and fragile pilgrimage of "becoming."lo7 Yet "in
I 07. See Veritatis Splendor, n. 18.

Historical Man 191
a certain way... by virtue of the Holy Spirit, Christian life is already now on
earth a participation in the death and Resunection of Christ.",08 If we do
not believe that men and women-even while still on the journey toward
perfection-can die to lust and be raised to a new life of victory over it,
then it seems that we do not fully believe in (or are not fully aware ot) the
good news of Christ's death and resurrection and how it can effectively
operate in our lives.
Sin has wounded us deeply. Even so, as the Pope stresses, the origi-
nal meaning of our humanity is "indestructible," and the "new man" risen
with Christ is called with power to rediscover it. Hence, a continuity is es-
tablished between "the beginning" and the perspective of redemption. 109
Christ does not invite man to return to the state of original innocence,
since humanity has left it irrevocably behind. Nevertheless, in Christ, we
can live and love as God intended in the beginning. But a key difference
exists between the original and historical state: Living the truth came natu-
rally to original man, while historical man must engage in an arduous
spiritual battle in order to see the body as God created it to be. But if we
are willing to die with Christ, we too can come to share his victory over
sin. We can experience and know this victory deep within our hearts-not
easily, and not overnight, but progressively through suffering for the truth,
we are purified inwardly and the lies lose their power over us.
Doubt in this regard comes easily. Doubt, after all, takes us off the
hook. If we consider Christ's appeal in the Sermon on the Mount hope-
lessly unrealistic, we do not have to challenge ourselves to grow or to
change. It gives us a quick and easy detour around the cross (if such a
thing exists). John Paul wams us not to detach Christ's appeal from the
context of concrete existence. The expectation that Christ places on us in
the Sermon on the Mount (i.e., that we would not lust) is entirely realistic
in light of who he is, who we are, and what he came to do for us. If it
seems hopelessly unrealistic, we need to ask ourselves what we really be-
lieve about who Christ said he is and what his death and resunection mean
in our lives. We must not fall into the trap of "holding the form of reli-
gion" while "denying the power of it" (2 Tim 3:5).
Much is at stake. In fact, even though Christ's appeal to overcome
lust refers to a limited sphere of human interaction, within this sphere it
always means "the rediscovery of the meaning of the whole of existence,
the meaning of life" (168). Ifwe close ourselves to the possibility ofa real
108. eee, n. 1002.

109. See 12/3/80, TB 175.
transfonnation of our hearts, we lock ourselves into "the interpretation of

suspicion." And, as John Paul clearly states, "The meaning of life is the
antithesis of the interpretation 'of suspicion'" (168).
37. Grace, Faith, and Man's Real Possibilities

October 29,1980 (TB 165-168)
Above we quoted John Paul saying that Christ's words in the Sennon
on the Mount "reveal not only another ethos, but also another vision of
man's possibilities" (168). Most people who contest Christ's teaching
about lust in the Sennon on the Mount (and Christian teaching on sexual-
ity in general) do so specifically because they do not believe it corresponds
with the concrete possibilities of man. John Paul responds:
But what are "the concrete possibilities of man"? And of which man are
we speaking? Of man dominated by lust or of man redeem ed by Christ?
This is what is at stake: the reality of Christ's redemption. Christ has re-
deemed us! This means he has given us the possibility of realizing the
entire truth of our being; he has set our freedom free from the domina-
tion of concupiscence. And if redeemed man still sins, this is not due to
an imperfection of Christ's redemptive act, but to man's will not to avail
himself of the grace which flows from that act. God's command is of
course proportioned to man's capabilities, but to the capabilities of the
man to whom the Holy Spirit has been given; of the man who, though he
has fallen into sin, can always obtain pardon and enjoy the presence of
the Holy Spirit. I 10
This bold papal proclamation brings us to the heart of the matter. John
Paul, Christ's modem-day apostle, echoes the words of the Apostle Paul:
"Do not empty the cross of its power!" (see 1 Cor 1: 17) If we accept the
Pope's challenge to ponder the full power of Christ's death and resurrection,
we come to realize that this "other vision of man's possibilities" opens be-
fore us vistas of freedom and joy of which few men and women ever dream.
Returning to our image of the flat tires-despite the dysfunction of
driving through life with the rubber shredding off the rims, many of us
have become so accustomed to this that life with inflated tires might seem
threatening. Such a vision demands that we re-evaluate perhaps an entire
lifetime of the diseased ways of thinking and relating we had grown accus-
tomed to and may even have assimilated into a "deflated" notion of holi-
ness. "Be not afraid!"
11 o. Veritatis Splendor, n. 103 (emphasis in original).

Historical Man 193
A. Grace Restored
As John Paul indicates above, only grace-life in the Holy Spirit-
enables us to experience true liberation from lust and the joy that freedom
brings. In the beginning, the grace given to man and woman constituted
them in a state of original holiness and justice. This "beatifying gift" en-
abled them to see each other as God saw them, as evidenced by original
nakedness (see §20). In the redemption, grace is given first for the remis-
sion of sins, yet it abounds in such a way that man can gradually reclaim
God's original plan for human life. Christ's words in the Sermon on the
Mount "bear witness that the original power (therefore also the grace) of
the mystery of creation has become for each of [us] power (that is, grace)
of the mystery of redemption" (167). Recall that grace is "participation in
the interior life of God himself, in his holiness." It is "that mysterious gift
made to the inner man-to the human 'heart'-which enables both of
them, man and woman, to exist from the 'beginning' in the mutual rela-
tionship of the disinterested gift of oneself."111 To be full of grace, then,
means to be full of the Holy Spirit, of the very Love and Life of the Trin-
ity, who in-spires the dust of our humanity with the capacity to love ac-
cording to the image in which we are made.
The first Adam rejected this gift at the prompting of the deceiver. The
New Adam restores this gift in fidelity to the Father. To experience this res-
toration we need faith. For 'faith, in its deepest essence," according to John
Paul II, "is the openness of the human heart to the gift: to God s self-commu-
nication in the Holy Spirit."112 We must open our hearts-yes, those same
hearts accused and found guilty of lust-to Christ our Bridegroom. With ut-
ter trust and genuine humility we must submit our hearts to his judgment, to
his justice. When we do, Christ returns to us a heart not condemned, but re-
stored. The more we surrender our hearts in this way, the more we experi-
ence the Holy Spirit impregnating our sexual desires "with everything that is
noble and beautiful" with "the supreme value which is love" (168).
The need for this transformation wrought by grace is essential. Ac-
cording to John Paul it "concerns the very 'nature,' the very substratum of
the humanity of the person, the deepest impulses of the 'heart'" (167). To
be filled with God's grace is-in a less strict sense of the term-man's
"natural" state, the way God created man to be "in the beginning." With-
out this transformation, without this grace, we cannot live according to the
ethos of the Gospel. Without this transformation, the best we can do is
"cope" with our lusts. Christ's words call us to so much more!
Ill. 1/30/80, TB 67- 68.

112. Dominum et Vivificantem, n. 51.
B. Christ s Call Wells Up from Within

Furthennore, as John Paul states, "The words of Christ uttered in the
Sennon on the Mount are not a call hurled into emptiness" (167). They
find a home in man's heart precisely because man is not completely ab-
sorbed by the lust of the flesh. He can seek another fonn of mutual rela-
tions in the sphere of the perennial attraction or I'h sex '. ill fact, evcn
when experiencing lust, man feels within his Own heart a deep need to pre-
serve the dignity of the mutual relations of the sexes. The word f the Gos-
pel calls him to this, so man experiences this call from "outside" himself.
Yet at the same time the Holy Father insists that man also experiences this
call from "inside" himself. This is what he means by saying Christ's words
are not hurled into empliness. When we let Christ '8 words act in us, they
tap into that "echo" of our b ginnin g deep within om hen lis- l h ~lt begin-
ning that was "very good"; tha t b ginning in which mUll :md woman knew
and lived the full truth of the body and, hence, were naked and felt no
shame.
The more a person allows Ihe echo of thaI good beginning to resound
in hi s hearl the more he will realize as John Pau l ays Ihat the heritage
or hi heart is deeper than the sinfulness inherited; it is dep "r Ihan ILlSf.
What calise f r rejo'icing! Lus1 i not the tinal word on man. Lust is n t at
man'. core. The h ritage of the hLlman heart is deeper lhan all ils di stor-
tions. And the "words of 'hrisl, set in the who le rea lity of creation and
reucrnplion, re-aclivale lhat deeper heritage and g ive it r ' al p wer in
man'5 life' (I M~).
To use an image, if the heart is a "deep well," the water-having
been cut off from its source-often appears stagnant and murky. But be-
yond the mud and mire remains a remnant of the grace of our creation-a
spring with the capacity of yielding crystal clear waters. Christ reactivates
that spring! Tapped into, these waters well up in us to purify our whole
hearts. Indeed, they well up in us to eternal life (see In 4: 14). Despite our
many sins and distortions, at our core, behold: we are very good!
38. Longing for the True, Good, and Beautiful

November 5; December 3,1980 (TB 168-171,176-177)
In his audience of November 5, 1980, John Paul begins an analysis

of the relationship between "ethos" and "eros," that is, between the ethical
and the erotic. Do the words of Christ in the Sennon on the Mount con-
demn the erotic? Do they warn severely against eros? To answer these
questions, we must clarify what we mean by "eros."
Historical Man 195
The Holy Father recounts that the Greek term "eros" passed from
mythology into Plato's philosophy, then into romantic literature, and fi-
nally into its common usage today. He acknowledges that eros has a vast
range of meanings according to its usage in different periods and cultures.
Each of these shades of meaning points in its own way to the "complex
riches of the heart" to which Christ appealed in the Sermon on the Mount.
Yet the sensual and sexual nature of eros forms the common thread woven
in all these meanings.
John Paul defines "erotic phenomena" as "those mutual actions and
ways of behaving through which man and woman approach each other and
unite so as to be 'one flesh'" (170). The main point of the Pope's cate-
chesis is to analyze these "erotic phenomena" and understand them in light
of biblical revelation. John Paul wonders if the term "eros" leaves room
for the ethos Christ announced. Does eros merely refer to the lust which
Christ condemns? Or can eros also refer to that good and beautiful attrac-
tion of the sexes revealed "in the beginning" by the nuptial meaning of the
body?
A. Plato s Definition ofEros

Ever determined to establish the fundamental goodness of sexual
desire and sensuality, John Paul refuses to surrender the term eros to the
distortion of lust. He creatively rehabilitates eros by appealing to Plato's
philosophy. In Platonic usage, eros means the interior force that attracts
man to the true, good, and beautiful. Within this sphere, the way opens
toward what Christ expressed in the Sermon on the Mount. The Pope be-
lieves that people often see Christ's words about lust merely as a prohi-
bition against eros without trying to discover "the really deep and essen-
tial values" that this prohibition covers and ensures. If we would open
our hearts to the deeper meaning of Christ's words, we would find that
Christ desires to liberate us to experience the true meaning of eros.
The Holy Father never tires of explaining that Christ not only ac-
cuses the heart of lust, but also appeals to the heart to rediscover the good-
ness of God's original plan for sexuality. The ethos of redemption, then,
"means the possibility and the necessity of transforming what has been
weighed down by the lust ofthe flesh" so that we might experience eros as
the desire for "what is true, good, and beautiful" (170 - 171). John Paul
firmly establishes that eros and ethos do not differ from each other. They
are not opposed to one another as many presume. Instead, through the
transforming power of redemption, eros and ethos "are called to meet in
the human heart, and, in this meeting, to bear fruit" (171). When eros and
ethos meet, they bear fruit in purity. Pure sexual desire leads us in truth.
Those with a mature purity of heart simply do not "look with lust." Even if
concupiscence still tugs at us, the pure of heart can recognize it, resist it,
and allow grace to "untwist" it. In this way man and woman come to par-
ticipate to a significant degree in the original good of God's vision. Perfec-
tion in this regard comes only in the eschaton. Yet even now purity enables
us to see with God's vision, to view the body as a manifestation of divine
beauty.113 Men and women, husbands and wives, who acquire this purity
actually "taste" something of that experience of original nakedness. Yes,
for the pure of heart, the erotic is true. It is good. It is beautiful.
The more we come to see this, the more the cloud of negativity and
shame that tends to hover over all things sexual dissipates in our hearts.
We no longer tend to condemn manifestations of sexuality with a sense of
suspicion. Instead, we experience the very meaning of life and understand
the fundamental place of sexuality in it. And we know it is very good.
B. Growing in Holiness
Experiencing this mature kind of purity is not theory for John Paul; it
manifests an aspect of true holiness. And such holiness is truly attainable.
But as already stated, a mature purity of heart does not come automati-
cally. It is a gift of grace to be sure, but we must diligently cooperate with
this grace. The Holy Father observes that when a person often yields to the
lust of the flesh, turning from it is not only difficult, but may give the im-
pression of suspending sexual desire "in emptiness." This is especially
true, he says, when a person must make up his mind to deny lust for the
first time. "However, even the first time, and all the more so if he then ac-
quires the capacity, man already gradually experiences his own dignity."
He "bears witness to his own self-mastery and shows that he is carrying
out what is essentially personal in him. And, furthermore, he gradually ex-
periences the freedom of the gift" (176).
Notice John Paul's emphasis on experience. Man is capable of experi-
encing his own dignity. He does so precisely when he exercises his freedom
to choose the good, true, and beautiful. When someone acts against lust
rather than allowing lust to act against him, he activates his self-determi-
nation and, hence, "what is essentially personal in him." This is the battle
for the dignity of our own personhood: will we act for the good; or will we
forfeit our self-determination and let evil act upon us? Lust is always
ready to invade our hearts, dominate our senses, and assault our self-deter-
mination. We can acquiesce. Or we can act from our essence. This is the
quintessential moment of truth. Much is at stake here, for in this moment
113. See CCC. n. 2519.

Historical Man 197
man determines the intentionality of his very existence (see §33). Do

man's passions determine what is good, or is there an objective reality
(God) outside him to which he must submit himself and toward which he
must, with the help of grace, direct his passions?
If in this moment man conquers the enticing illusion of lust and
acts in conformity with who he is as a creature made in God's image, he
regains his original dignity as a person. In fact, John Paul says that over-
coming lust is a "reminiscence" of original solitude. The man who does
so experiences his transcendence, his subjectivity, his freedom, and his
call to live in a communion of persons (see §§1l, 12). The more we over-
come lust, the more we can be a real gift to another. And we come to
desire nothing else.
C. Redemption, Not Repression

This greatly differs from begrudgingly conforming one's behavior to
an external norm. Of course, one only acquires this freedom in stages. If a
person begins with the deception that views lust as a "good" to be pursued,
the first essential stage of conversion is to recognize lust as an evil to
avoid. The objective nOlm serves its essential purpose here. As St. Paul
says, a man engrossed in sin does not know what sin is without the law
(see Rom 7:7). Such a man will avoid lust only begrudgingly at first out of
obedience to the law. If he perseveres, however, lust itself becomes more
and more distasteful to him. His subjective desires come more and more in
tune with the true, the good, and the beautiful. In this way, the negative
and prohibitive ethic of Christ's words in the Sermon on the Mount be-
comes a positive and liberating ethos.
This is how we appropriate the gift of our redemption. It is very dif-
ferent than repressing our lusts or merely seeking distraction from sexual
temptations. John Paul's anthropological vision seeks to reclaim every-
thing that is authentically human-everything that God created man to be
"in the beginning." But this cannot happen if man ignores or represses his
sexual desires. 114 Lust is the deceiver's plagiarization of the original power
to love, the "twisting" of the fundamental drive within man to become a
sincere gift to another. Man's sexual desires must be reclaimed according to
this truth, "untwisted" and integrated within an adequate vision of the dig-
nity and meaning of the human person. This means not running from our
desires, but facing them and continually surrendering them to Christ-right
at the moment lust flares up in us- so that he might set our desires aright.
114. See Love & Responsibility, pp. 170-171.

198 THEOLOGY OF THE BODY EXPLAiNED
• When a person struggling with lust seeks guidance, he will often

hear from spiritual directors, confessors, and even otherwise sound chastity
educators something like: "Just try to distract yourself from lustful
thoughts. Try to ignore them. Do something constmctive. Take a walk.
Take a bike ride. If need be, take a cold shower." While such advice may
offer a helpful starting point-indeed, in the heat of a powerful temptation
an immediate distraction is often essential-this approach offers only a
temporary solution at best. Even when a person successfully distracts him-
self, that lust still lies "within" him. It will come back, and probably with
more intensity. The Pope's anthropology of redemption offers us a way of
getting to the root of the problem. If we surrender our lustful desires to
Christ, he can transform them by the power of the Holy Spirit. The Cat-
echism proclaims that in the Sermon on the Mount "the Spirit of the Lord
gives new form to our desires, those inner movements that animate our
lives. Jesus teaches us this new life by his words; he teaches us to ask for it
by prayer. The rightness of our life in him will depend on the rightness of
our prayer."II) As I wrote in my previous book, "When sexual feelings, de-
sires, and temptations present themselves, as they inevitably do, instead of
trying to ignore them or 'stuff' them by pushing them down and under, we
need to bring them up and out. Not up and out in the sense of indulging
them, but up and out and into the hands of Christ our Redeemer. You might
simply say a prayer like this: Lord Jesus, I give to you my sexual desires.
Please undo in me what sill has done, so that I might knowfreedoll1 in this
area and experience sexual desire as you intend. Amen. "116
The man who continues diligently on this road of redemption- not

repression- eventually sees lust for what it is: a cosmic tragedy that
masks and even dismantles the very meaning of existence. At this point,
lust no longer has "hold" of him. He begins to experience the freedom for
which Christ has set him free (see Gal 5: 1). Even if he continues to feel
the pull of concupiscence, it does not deceive him or lure him away. He
knows concupiscence is a cheap counterfeit for authentic eros. And he
knows that it can never satisfy.
115. CCC, n. 2764.

116. Good News About Sex & Marriage, p. 81 .
Historical Man 199
39. Drawing Pure Waters from a Hidden Spring

November 12; December 3, 1980 (TB 171-176)
We have been discussing the "how to's" of growing in holiness ac-

cording to the ethos of the Sermon on the Mount. Christ clearly indicates
that the way to attain this holiness must be the way of temperance and mas-
tery of desires. As John Paul explains, if we are to achieve "an adequate
way of being and acting," we must first allow our hearts to be transformed
from "within." Caught up in our society's non-reflective, results-oriented
mentality, we are often tempted to modify externals without addressing the
deeper issues of the heart. Yet the only path to holiness is to open one's
deepest self to grace and accept the slow and often painful process of inner
transformation. It is called taking up the cross daily and following Christ
(see Lk 9:23). That alone produces "results."
A. Discerning the Movements of Our Hearts

If we are to progress on the road to holiness, if eros and ethos are to
meet in our hearts and bear fruit, John Paul says that we must succeed in
being an "interior man." We must "be able to obey correct conscience; to
be the true master of [our] own deep impulses, like a guardian who
watches over a hidden spring" (172) Only then are we free to draw from
all those impulses what is fitting for purity of heart. In this way we con-
tinually "rediscover in what is 'erotic' the nuptial meaning of the body and
the true dignity of the gift. This is the role of the human spirit," John Paul
says, and it is "a role of an ethical nature. If it does not assume this role,
the very attraction of the senses and the passion of the body may stop at
mere lust, devoid of ethical value." If man stops here, he "does not experi-
ence that fullness of 'eros'-which means the aspiration of the human
spirit toward the true, good, and beautiful-so that what is 'erotic' also be-
comes true, good, and beautiful" (171).
John Paul shows himself to be a true "interior man" with the pen-
etrating insight he offers those who wish to watch over their "hidden
spring" and draw pure waters from it. Paraphrasing a lengthy passage, he
says that we must learn with perseverance and consistency the meaning of
our bodies and of our sexuality. We must learn this not only in the abstract
(although this, too, is necessary), but above all in the interior reactions of
our own "hearts." This is a "science," he says, which cannot be learned
only from books, because it concerns deep knowledge of our interior life.
Deep in the heart we learn to distinguish between what, on the one hand,
composes the great riches of sexuality and sexual attraction, and what, on
the other hand, bears only the sign of lust. Although these internal move-
ments of the heart can sometimes be confused with one another, Christ
calls us to acquire a mature and complete evaluation. And, as the Pope

concludes, "it should be added that this task can be carried out and is re-
ally worthy of man" (172).
We have already noted the Pope's realism in this regard (see §29).
Sometimes we can easily confuse love and lust. To be sure, on this side of
perfection we will always recognize mixed motives in our hearts. This
should not stifle us, however. In fact, the Holy Father affirms that the dis-
cernment we are speaking of has an essential relationship with spontane-
ity. It is often thought, as the Pope points out, that living according to
Christ's words in the Sermon on the Mount puts a serious dent in the spon-
taneity of man and woman's relationship. Spontaneity is here understood
as "doing what comes naturally" or acting immediately on what moves
and attracts a person. Someone moved and attracted by lust views the
moral path as a real impediment to eros. "But this opinion is erroneous
and, in any case, superficial. Obstinately accepting it and upholding it, we
will never reach the full dimensions of eros" (172).
The full dimension of eros comes when men and women are free
with the freedom of the gift; when they are free from the chains oflust that
compel them to indulge concupiscence and degrade the true, good, and
beautiful. One experiences this full dimension of eros, therefore, when he
is moved and attracted by that which is true, good, and beautiful-by the
rich storehouse of values contained in sexuality as a God-given path to an
authentic gift of self and communion of persons. Such a person chooses
the truth spontaneously. The moral norm no longer acts as a constraint be-
cause his heart is in conformity with the truth. Here we encounter the
transforming power of Christ's words about lust. They do not only pro-
hibit. As John Paul says, whoever accepts Christ's words about lust "must
know that he is also called to afull and mature spontaneity of the relations
that spring from the perennial attraction of masculinity and femininity.
This very spontaneity is the gradual fruit of the discernment of the im-
pulses of one's own heart" (172).117
B. Mature Spontaneity and Noble Gratification

Sexual excitement derived from concupiscence flares up in the im-
mediate reactions of the heart with a "subjective intensity" which extends
its dominion over man's emotional sphere and involves his whole body. liS
Such a flaring up of lust demands immediate or "spontaneous" gratifica-
tion. But this type of "sexual excitement is very different from the deep
emotion with which not only interior sensitivity, but sexuality itself reacts
117. See eee, n. 1972.

118. See 1115/80, TB 170.
Historical Man 201
to the total expression of femininity and masculinity" (173). Through the

gift of redemption, through the meeting of eros and ethos, the character of
sexual excitement is transformed and integrated with the dignity of the
person and the supreme value of love. The more we experience this trans-
formation, the more the desire to make a sincere gift of ourselves wells up
from within us- and with an intensity much more refined and grand than
mere lust can ever rouse .
• The image of the burning bush can illustrate the difference between
lust and redeemed sexual desire. When lust flares up in us, it consumes us
with such an intense heat that it devours any fuel we supply it. The heat not
only chars the bush but reduces it to ash. Christ wants to raise us up from
our ashes! He wants to impregnate our sexual desire with the fire of his
own passionate love. When we experience the fire of redeemed sexual de-
sire, we "bum" but are not consumed. Indeed we rediscover our own hu-
manity. We rediscover our primordial call to love and communion. We
rediscover that we are made in the image of a God who revealed himself to
Moses in a blazing bush that was not consumed.
Genuine erotic spontaneity actually leads, as John Paul says, to "a

noble gratification" of sexual desire. It taps into that original beatifying ex-
perience because it forms man and woman in a true communion of per-
sons. This deep and mature spontaneity is virtually unknown to the man
who indulges concupiscence. Such a man refuses to pay the price of gain-
ing self-control. And, paradoxically, the authentic spontaneity to which
Christ calls us all comes precisely at the cost of self-control. Only by exer-
cising such control can the human hemt rediscover "the spiritual beauty of
the sign constituted by the human body in its masculinity and femininity"
(173). This is the epiphany of the body refened to previously (see §2).
When we see and experience the body as a sign of God's etemal mystery
of communion, this conviction comes to permeate our conscience and our
very being. The value of the sign then spontaneously guides both our
choices and our desires. Hence, John Paul concludes that this mature spon-
taneity of the human heart does not suffocate its noble desires and aspira-
tions, but, on the contrary, it frees them, and even facilitates them.
40. The Perspective of the Whole Gospel

December 3, 10, 1980 (TB 174 - 180)
In the audience of December 3, 1980, John Paul begins drawing his

reflections on Matthew 5 :27 - 28 to a close. He recaps the context in which
Christ is speaking and summarizes some of the previous themes. He opens
by stressing several times that this is a new ethos. It is new not only in
regard to the Old Testament, but new in regard to every man of every pe-
riod and culture. By stressing this "newness," it seems as though he is
challenging us to recognize that even after 2,000 years of Christian history,
the new ethos still has not firmly established itself in human hearts. People
are still relying on their own resources in trying to live a Christian life. We
have only two options in this case: repress our disordered desires in a mis-
guided attempt to attain "holiness" (this leads to "angelism" and rigorism),
or abandon the real demands of the Gospel for a watered-down version
that allows us to indulge our disordered desires ("animalism" and laxity).
The new ethos fundamentally differs from both approaches. It de-
mands a radical paradigm shift from typical perspectives and manners of
living. Radical, of course, means "to the root." The new ethos is meant to
do precisely this: return us to our roots , to the purity of our origins. As
John Paul says, in the new ethos "the original ethos of creation will have to
be taken up again" (175). This is why Christ refers to the beginning in dis-
cussing the problems surrounding man and woman's relationship. The new
ethos, then, is "the' ethos of redemption' and, more precisely, the ethos of
the redemption of the body" (174). Only the perspective of redemption
justifies Christ's reference to "the beginning." Without this perspective, we
have only our own resources. We have only lust in its three forms. Even if
a spark of God's original plan still remains in us, without the perspective
of redemption, we have no hope of fanning that spark into flame.
A. The Whole Mission of Christ

By calling the man of lust back to "the beginning" through the re-
demption of the body, Christ establishes a continuity between original man
and historical man. Moreover, as we shall learn, the redemption of the
body will be fully revealed only in the final resurrection, of which Christ
speaks on another occasion. Hence, life in the body for historical man not
only calls him to live in continuity with his origins. Life in the body here
and now is meant to lead him in continuity (while maintaining the impor-
tant discontinuity) to his ultimate destiny: the consummation of all things;
the resurrection of the body.
What John Paul is speaking about in terms of experiencing the resto-
ration of God's plan for the body and sexuality is no footnote in the Chris-
tian life. Indeed, it pertains to the whole spectrum of God's plan for us.
According to the Holy Father, this redemption of the body "is, in fact, the
perspective of the whole Gospel, of the whole teaching, in fact of the
whole mission of Christ" (175). Of course we will never open ourselves to
the gift of redemption if we do not first have a profound realization of our
Historical Man 203
need for redemption. John Paul reminds us that to aspire to virtue, purity
of heart, and Christian perfection requires an awareness of our own sinful-
ness as a necessary starting point and an indispensable condition.
To grow in this perfection, we must "enter into an alliance" with the
new ethos. We must give our entire selves to it. We must sell everything
(see Mt 13:44), put our hands to the plow, and never look back (see Lk
9:62). When we do that, our "deepest and yet most real possibilities" are
manifested and "the innermost layers of [our] potentialities acquire a
voice" (176). John Paul points out that a person who surrenders to lust, to
suspicion, and/or to the Manichaean anti-value has no knowledge of those
innermost layers of his own heart. The ethos of redemption, on the other
hand, is based on a close alliance with those layers of the human heart. It
is those layers of the heart that can recognize the value of the nuptial
meaning of the body. Those layers can see in the body "the value of a
transparent sign." This sign, in tum, reveals "the gift of communion, that
is, the mysterious reality of [God's] image and likeness" (176).
This is precisely the manner by which we experience "the whole mis-
sion of Christ" according to the call of the Sermon on the Mount. It means
rediscovering and living according to the dignity and value of the human
body as a sign of (and calling to) communion. And communion is man's
origin, vocation, and destiny. This is the perspective of man's whole life,
of Christ's whole teaching and mission. Those who have the purity to see
it realize that this "whole perspective" is contained in and revealed through
the human body in its creation and redemption.
B. Analysis of Purity
John Paul concludes his analysis of Christ's words in the Sermon on
the Mount with a closer analysis of purity of heart. Such an analysis is "an
indispensable completion" of Christ's words. Purity is a requirement of
love; it is the dimension of love's interior truth in man's heart. Hence, pu-
rity concerns the innermost layers of man's being. It concerns his subjec-
tivity and his realization in solitude of his call to communion-his call to
love. Thus, as the Pope states, "purity of heart is explained, finally, with
regard for the other subject, who is originally and perennially 'co-called'"
(177). Purity of heart enabled Adam to recognize Eve as the one who was
called with him ("co-called") to live in a communion of persons. This
same purity enabled them to experience nakedness without shame. Purity,
then, is what man and woman lost due to sin, and it is what Christ came to
restore in our hearts.
John Paul points out that when we speak of purity as a moral virtue,
we use the word in an analogous sense with physical cleanness. Something
pure contrasts with something unclean or polluted. The Old Testament tra-
dition greatly valued physical cleanliness, as the abundance of ritual
cleansings demonstrates. Many of these rituals concerned the cleansing of
the body in relation to sexual impurity (see Lv IS). However, sexual im-
purity was understood almost exclusively in relation to physiology and
its organic processes. John Paul suggests these may have corresponded
to hygienic prescriptions according to the state of medicine at that time.
But such heightened attention to physical purity led to an erroneous way
of understanding moral purity, which was often taken in the exclusively
exterior and material sense.
Christ radically opposes this. His words indicate that none of the as-
pects of sexual uncleanness in the strictly physiological sense falls by it-
self into the definition of purity or impurity in the moral sense.ll~ As .Tohn
Paul stresses, referring to Christ's words from Matthew 15: 11, "Nothing
from 'outside' makes man filthy, no 'material' dirt makes man impure in
the moral, that is, interior sense. No ablution, not even of a ritual nature, is
capable in itself of producing moral purity. This has its exclusive source
within man: it comes from the heart" (178) .
• We can observe here the meaning of the rich symbolism of the wed-
ding feast of Cana (see In 2: I - II). This is one of the few pertinent Scrip-
ture passages John Paul does not discuss in his theology of the body.
Briefly we can recognize that, if wine is a symbol of grace, running out of
wine speaks of the married couple's need for new life in Christ. If they are
to love one another purely, they must drink deeply of the "new wine" that
Christ gives and allow it to change them interiorly. The water Christ
changed to wine was intended for the Jewish rites of purification. Christ's
miracle symbolizes the fulfillment of Israel's ritual ablutions. Christ's
"new wine" has the ability to purify Ollr hearts. Furthermore, Christ, in re-
ferring to his "hour," points us to the marriage consummated on the
crosS.1 2U There he will give himself up for his Bride to make her holy and
without blemish (see Eph 5:25- 27). The water and wine at Cana, therefore,
prefigure the blood and water that flow from Christ's side on Calvary. Like
the first Adam, Christ is put into a "deep sleep" on the cross. As figures of
Baptism and Eucharist, the water and blood symbolize the life of God
flowing from the side of the New Adam as the birth of the New Eve (re-
member that the "rib" symbolized the common life shared by the first
119. For example, a woman's menstrual flow does not make her "unclean" in any
moral sense (sec Lev 18:19).
120. See CCC, nil. 1335,2618.
Historical Man 205
Adam and Eve ).121 Like the first Adam, the New Adam calls the New Eve
"woman" (compare Gen 2:23 and In 19:26). This evokes the re-creation or
"resurrection" of man and woman's original relationship. And it is all
prefigured at a wedding feast that takes place on the third day . All those
who are "born again" through the waters of Baptism become the spiritual
children of the New Adam and the New Eve-born not of a husband's
seed, but born of God (see In 1: 13). And all those who drink the "new
wine" of the Eucharist are purified and empowered from within to love
others according to "the new ethos of redemption." In
Christ's shift of focus from external purity to "purity of heart" marks

the turning point to the new ethos. Here we encounter the crux of the mat-
ter both for Christ and his Vicar. This is why John Paul II places so much
emphasis on the subjectivity of man. This is why he uses the phenomeno-
logical method in coming to an adequate understanding of man. Purity cer-
tainly places objective demands on us. But to fulfill those demands, we
must be purified from within. When we are, sUbjectivity becomes com-
pletely objective (see §§8, 21). That suspicion toward the human heart
previously mentioned tends also to oppose John Paul II's emphasis on
"subjectivity." If the heart is always suspect and can never be transformed,
a gulf will always remain between objective truth and subjective human
desire. But to remain locked in this perspective is to empty the cross of its
power. It is the antithesis of the meaning of life (see §36).
41. Purity of Heart and Life According to the Spirit

December 17, 1980; January 7, 1981 (TB 191- 194)
John Paul devotes nine of his final audiences on historical man to a

Scriptural analysis of purity of heart. Most of his reflection examines vari-
ous passages from the Pauline Letters important for understanding purity.
However, in typical form, he begins with the words of Christ: "Blessed are
the pure in heart, for they shall see God" (Mt 5:8). Here, as in Matthew
5:27 - 28, Christ appeals to the human heart, to the "interior man." His
words remind us of that "beatifying beginning" in which man and woman,
in beholding each other "naked without shame," saw the uniqueness and
121. See Ccc. nn . 766,1067, 1225.

122. For an excellent discussion of the Cana account in light of nuptial symbol-
ism, see Mmy in the Mystery of the Covenant, (Alba House, 1992), pp. 157- 208.
nIEOLOGY OF THE BODY EXPLAINED
unrepeatability of the person from "within" (see § 17). Not only that, but in
the visibility of their naked bodies they saw a sign that revealed the invis-
ible mystery of God. Purity of heart specifically enabled them to see the
body in this way, as a theology.
If we have been following the Pope's train of thought, we can say
this: Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God's mystery re-
vealed in the human body. For, according to the Pope's thesis, the body,
and it alone, is capable of making God's invisible mystery visible to us.
And "in the beginning" nakedness manifested "the 'pure' value of human-
ity as male and female, the 'pure' value of the body and of sex."123 The
Pope tells us that purity "is the glory of the human body before God. It is
God's glory in the human body, through which masculinity and femininity
are manifested."124 Of course, Christ's words do not limit purity merely to
sexual morality. The Pope expresses that all moral good manifests purity,
and all moral evil manifests impurity. Nonetheless, in a way sexual purity
lies at the basis of all moral good since all moral disorder, according to
John Paul, stems from the impurity of a lustful heart. 125
A. The Flesh and the Spirit

To recover the beatifying experience of purity, we must contend with
the tension and conflict between the flesh and the Spirit that St. Paul out-
lined: "The desires of the flesh are against the Spirit and the desires of the
Spirit are against the flesh" (Gal 5: 17). As the Holy Father says, "It is not a
question here only of the body (matter) and of the spirit (soul)." These
"constitute from the beginning the very essence of man" (191). Their
union and integration make man "very good" (Gen 1:31). As John Paul
says elsewhere: "From the context it is clear that for the Apostle it is not a
question of discriminating against and condemning the body, which with
the spiritual soul constitutes man's nature and personal subjectivity."126
What St. Paul is talking about in the opposition between the flesh and the
Spirit is that disposition of forces formed in man with original sin. 127
John Paul is careful to use a capital "S" for Spirit to indicate that the
real opposition we experience "in the flesh" is with the Holy Spirit and
what he desires for us. In an endnote, the Pope also points out that "flesh"
for St. Paul "is not to be identified with sex or with the physical body"
123. 1/2/80, TB 57.

124.3118/81, TB 209.
125. See 12117/80 third endnote, TB 230 - 231.
126. Dominum et Vivi/icantem, n. 55 (see also eee, n. 2516).
127. See eee, nn. 2525-2516.
Historical Man 207
(229). In Pauline terminology, "flesh" seems almost to coincide with the

threefold lust of which St. John speaks. Thus, for Paul, the flesh indicates
not only the "exterior" man, but also the man who is "interiorly" cut off
from what is of the Father so that he lives according to what is of the
world. To live according to the flesh, then, means to live according to our
"un-inspired" desires. It means to live according to the "dust" of our hu-
manity not filled with God's Spirit. John Paul says that the same idea is
expressed in modern ethics and anthropology by terms like "humanistic
autarchy" (man unto himself), "secularism," and "sensualism."
The person who lives "according to the flesh" lives almost at the op-
posite pole as compared to how the Spirit would lead him. The Spirit of
God wants a different reality from the one that the flesh desires. The Holy
Spirit, who is the "Person-Love" and the "Person-Gift" within the Trin-
ity,128 wants to fill our bodies with himself so that we might be a sincere
gift in love to others. In other words, the Spirit wants to in-spire us to live
according to the nuptial meaning of our bodies. We could even say that by
virtue of the Holy Spirit in-spiring our flesh, our bodies acquire a nuptial
meaning. In respect for our freedom, however, the Spirit never forces his
own gift. We are free to reject the Spirit. If we do (and we have in some
sense through the inheritance of original sin), we live according to our un-
inspired "flesh." In this state we become bent on our own selfish gratifica-
tion even at the expense of others. This is the antithesis of the nuptial
meaning of the body; it is the antithesis of love, and the antithesis of life.
As St. Paul expresses, "to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the
mind on the Spirit is life and peace" (Rom 8:6).
B. Justification by Faith
The Holy Father observes that Paul's words regarding "life according
to the flesh" and "life according to the Spirit" are at the same time a syn-
thesis and a program. They synthesize very realistically the "fight" in
man's heart between good and evil. But they do not simply leave man at
the mercy of these interior forces. They provide a program for victory. "In
this struggle between good and evil, man proves himself stronger, thanks
to the power of the Holy Spirit" (194).
St. Paul speaks of the interior battle between flesh and Spirit in the
context of his discussion of justification by faith (see Rom 7, 8; Gal 5).
Man cannot justify himself by observance of the law. If he seeks to, Christ
is of no advantage to him and he misses altogether the necessity and pur-
pose of redemption. "You are severed from Christ, you who would be jus-
128. See Dominum et Vivificantem, n. 10.

tified by the law; you have fallen away from grace" (Gal 5:4). Condensing
Paul's teaching, the Catechism says:
The law entrusted to Israel never sufficed to justify those subject to it; it
even became the instrument of "lust" (see Rom 7:7). The gap between
wanting and doing points to the conflict between God's Law which is the
"law of the mind," and another law "making me captive to the law of sin
which dwells in my members" (Rom 7:23).
"But now, the righteousness of God has been manifested apart
from law, although the law and the prophets bear witness to it, the righ-
teousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe" (Rom
3:21-22). Henceforth, Christ's faithful "have crucified the flesh with its
passions and desires"; they are led by the Spirit and follow the desires of
the Spirit (Gal 5 :24 ).129
Justice super-abounds in man's heart by faith in Jesus Christ. This is

man's victory. This is how he experiences the power of the Holy Spirit-
by faith. We have previously quoted John Paul's definition of faith:
"Faith, in its deepest essence, is the openness of the human heart to the
gift: to God's self-communication in the Holy Spirit."130 Therefore, "'justi-
fication by faith' is not just a dimension of the divine plan of man's salva-
tion and sanctification, but is, according to St. Paul, a real power that oper-
ates in man and is revealed and asserts itself in his actions" (193). It is "the
power of Christ himself operating within man by means of the Holy
Spirit" (192).
St. Paul speaks of this justification when he says: "He who raised
Christ Jesus from the dead will give life to your mortal bodies also
through his Spirit which dwells in you" (Rom 8:11). This "life" given to
our mortal bodies does not just refer to the eschaton. It is also intended for
"historical man"-for every man of "yesterday, today, and tomon-ow," in
the history of the world and of salvation. History, even if it remains the
domain of struggle and ambiguity, is also the domain in which salvation is
given and received. This means that historical man can truly be vivified by
the Holy Spirit; he can begin to live a resun-ected life even now. 131
In this way the Pauline theology of justification expresses faith in
"the anthropological and ethical realism" of redemption. In other words,
Christ's redemption bears real fruit in changing man's heart (anthropologi-
cal realism) and, consequently, changing his behavior (ethical realism). As
the Catechism teaches, "Justification is not only the remission of sins, but
129. CCC, nn. 2542, 2543 .

130. Ibid, n. 51.
l31. See CCC, n. 1092.
Historical Man 20e)
also the sanctification and renewal of the interior man .. .It frees from the
enslavement to sin, and it heals."'32 In this way, justification, carried out by
the Holy Spirit, enables justice to abound in man and in his behavior "to
the extent that God himself willed and which he expects" (194). This di-
vine expectation is not only that man would meet the law's demands, but
that he would "fulfill" them through the super-abounding justice poured
into his heart through the Holy Spirit. This justification "is essential for in-
terior man, and is destined precisely for that 'heart' to which Christ ap-
pealed, when speaking of 'purity' and 'impurity' in the moral sense" (193).
Through the justification of the Holy Spirit, man "becomes himself' and
enters his authentic ethos. Through the indwelling Spirit, objective reality
enters human subjectivity and what was once felt as an external law wells
up as an intimate demand of the person. In this way, the Christian "incar-
nates" the Gospel; logos-that which is objective Truth- becomes ethos.
C. Fruits and Works

In his Letter to the Galatians, St. Paul says that "the works of the
flesh are plain: fornication, impurity, licentiousness, idolatry, sorcery, en-
mity, strife, jealousy, anger, selfishness, dissension, party spirit, envy,
drunkenness, carousing, and the like" (5:19-21). "But the fruit of the
Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,
gentleness, self-control" (5:22 - 23). John Paul points out, as have many
biblical scholars, that Paul distinguishes "works" of the flesh from "fruits"
of the Spirit. For Paul, "works" are the specific acts of man, whereas the
term "fruit of the Spirit" emphasizes God's action in man. As John Paul
says in an endnote, "This 'fruit' grows in him like the gift of a life whose
only Author is God; man can, at most, promote suitable conditions, in or-
der that the fruit may grow and ripen" (231). In other words, everything
that comes from "the flesh" is not of the Father but of the world. The
goodness that springs from man's heart, on the other hand, is of the Father
and not of the world. It is the fruit of the indwelling Holy Spirit. Only
from this perspective can we clarify fully the nature and structure of the
ethos of redemption.
Reclaiming the purity of our origins does not mean pulling ourselves
up by our boot straps. We "are speaking of a possibility opened up to man
exclusively by grace."133 The ethos of redemption is born in man when he
forms an alliance with the Holy Spirit, allowing him to guide all his
thoughts and behaviors. Behind each of the moral virtues that St. Paul out-
132. CCC, nn. 1989- 1990.

133. Veri/atis Splendor. n. 24.
lines as a fruit of the Spirit lies a specific choice, an effort of the will,
which is the fi'uit of the human spirit pemleated by the Spirit of God. This
cooperative action of the divine and human is always manifested in choos-
ing that which is true, good, and beautiful. Again we see how this differs
from merely following an external norm or law. "Healing the wounds of
sin, the Holy Spirit renews us interiorly through a spiritual transformation.
He enlightens and strengthens us to live as 'children of the light' through
all that is 'good and right and hue. "'134 In other words, the Holy Spirit, op-
erating deeply within man's heart, orients his desires rightly so that he
comes to desire freely what the law demands of him. This is why St. Paul
can say that "if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law" (Gal
5: 18). You naturally live in love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness,
faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. As St. Paul points out, no law
forbids these things (see Gal 5 :22 - 23) .
• In my lectures, to demonstrate what "freedom from the law" looks

like, I will often ask a married man in the audience if he has any desire to
murder his wife. A man with no desire to murder his wife does not need the
commandment "Thou shalt not murder thy wife," because he has no desire
to break it. He is free from this law. Similarly, men and women who have
attained a mature level of sexual purity do not need a laundry list of sexual
"thou shalt nots." They freely fulfill the law with the freedom for which
Christ has set them free. Christ did not die and rise from the dead to give
us more laws to follow. His purpose was to purify our hearts so that we
would no longer need the law. As the Catechism states, "The Law of the
GospeLdoes not add new external precepts, but proceeds to reform the
heart, the root of human acts, where man chooses between the pure and the
impure."135
42. The Freedom for which Christ Has Set Us Free

January 7, 14, 1981 (TB 194-197)
As we have already seen, John Paul will at times drop a statement of

great significance into his text with little or no comment. Evidently he
thought it important to insert these points even if he could not elaborate on
them in a brief general audience. One such example is his passing reference
to the "cosmic dimension" of the redemption of the body in his address of
134. CCC, n. 1695.

135. CCC, n. 1968.
Historical Man 211
January 7, 1981. This seems to represent another lap in his previous

reflection on the cosmic dimension of shame (see §27). Is it too much to
say that the way we live our bodies has ramifications for the entire uni-
verse? St. Paul does not think so. He says that the whole creation has been
groaning in travail since the beginning, awaiting the redemption of our
bodies (see Rom 8:22-23). Implication: The whole universe is affected
when we live, or fail to live, according to the truth of our bodies. This per-
spective stands as the biblical antithesis to the notion that "private" sexual
behavior has no bearing on anyone or anything outside the bedroom. But
onto other themes.
A. Impurity and the Death of the Spirit

We have been reflecting on the opposition between the body and
the spirit (or Spirit in reference to the Holy Spirit) in relation to reclaim-
ing purity of heart. Of course, this antagonism between body and spirit is
not "natural" to man. It results from the interior rupture caused by origi-
nal sin. 136 When we turned our backs on God, the breath of God's life
died in us. We only had recourse to our un-inspired dust, what St. Paul
calls "the flesh." The Apostle tells us that if we live according to the
flesh we will die. But if by the Spirit we put to death the deeds of the
body we will live (see Rom 8: 13). According to the Pope, this putting to
death the deeds of the body expresses precisely what Christ spoke about
in the Sermon on the Mount, appealing to the human heart and exhorting
it to control lustful desires. This mastery, this putting to death the deeds
of the flesh is an indispensable condition of the "life according to the
Spirit." In other words, we must die with Christ if we are to live with
him in the power of the resurrection.
Life according to the flesh, as St. Paul describes it, effects the
"death" of the Spirit in man. So, as John Paul explains, the term "death"
means not only the death of the body, but also the reality of mOlial sin.
Mortal sin is that which "kills" God's life, his Spirit, within us. Those who
live according to the flesh (unless they repent and are filled once again
with the Spirit) "shall not inherit the Kingdom of God" (Gal 5:21). Else-
where, as the Holy Father points out, St. Paul says that no fornicator or
impure man has any inheritance in God's Kingdom (see Eph 5:5). Only
the pure man is capable of seeing God. That is the very definition of pu-
rity. Hence, impurity can be defined as the inability to see God. God de-
sires to reveal his mystery in and through the mystery of our humanity as
male and female, but the impure man cannot see it. The sexual sinner
136. See 112/80, TB 57; 5/28/80, TB 115.

closes his eyes to it. It is not that God will throw him into hell because of
his sin. It is more accurate to say that because of his impurity he is ipso
facto incapable of the beatific vision.
How then does the impure man become pure? How does the blind
man regain his sight? By opening his flesh once again to the life of the
Holy Spirit. As much as lust blinds man and woman to the truth of the
body and deprives the heart of genuine desires and aspirations, so much
does "life according to the Spirit" permit man and woman to regain the
freedom of the gift and recover purity of heart. 13 7 Regaining purity, then,
is not first a matter of "doing," but a matter of "letting it be done." Like
the Immaculate one-that is, the woman totally pure of heart- we must
offer our fiat to the Holy Spirit. Only then will Christ be "conceived" in
our flesh.
John Paul concludes that justification comes "from the Spirit" (of
God) and not "from the flesh." In other words, it comes from God's action
in us as a fruit of the Spirit, not as a work of our own. Those who seek
justification in following laws (in "doing" rather than "letting it be done")
have been alienated from Christ. They have cut themselves off from the
grace given by the Holy Spirit that empowers us to fulfill the law (see Gal
5:4-5). St. Paul therefore exhorts the Galatians to free themselves of the
erroneous "carnal" concept of justification, and to follow the true one, the
"spiritual" one. In this sense he exhorts them to consider themselves free
from the law, and even more to be free with the freedom for which Christ
"has set us free."
B. Freedom and Purity

According to John Paul, we experience true purity of heart according
to the measure that we experience the freedom for which Christ "has set us
free." This is the crux of the new ethos: freedom! The Pope states that St.
Paul touches the essential point right here, revealing the anthropological
roots of the Gospel ethos. The "dimension of the new Gospel ethos is
nothing but an appeal to human freedom, an appeal to its fuller imple-
mentation and, in a way, to fuller 'utilization' of the potential of the hu-
man spirit" (197).138 We have the potential to be free from sin. We have
the potential to be free to desire and choose only what is good. We
have the potential to be free with the freedom of the gift-not perfectly
in this life, but progressively and substantially.'39 "For freedom Christ
137. See 12/ 1/82, TB 349.

138. See CCc, nn. 1730-1748.
139. See Veritatis Splendor, n. 17.
Historical Man 213
has set us free; stand fast therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke
of slavery" (Gal 5: 1).
For St. Paul, freedom is inextricably linked with love. "For you were
called to freedom, brethren; only do not use your freedom as an opportu-
nity for the flesh, but through love be servants of one another" (Gal 5: 13).
Notice, too, that St. Paul knows that the freedom necessary for love also
provides the opportunity to indulge "the flesh." This is a key point. In our
attempts to live the Gospel, we often seek to eradicate sin by eradicating
our freedom to commit it. We must not remove the freedom we have to
sin. For in the same stroke we eradicate the freedom necessary to love. To
squelch freedom in order to avoid sin is not living the Gospel ethos of
freedom at all. This approach knows not the freedom for which Christ has
set us free. If we must chain ourselves in order not to commit sin, then we
are just that-in chains. A person in this state remains bound in some way
to his desire to sin and has yet to tap into the mature ethos of redemption. L
He has yet to experience in a sustained way life according to the Holy

Spirit. For "where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom" (2 Cor 3: 17).
Here we put our finger on the pulse of the human mystery. Freedom
is God's gift to man, a gift given as the capacity to love. But the flip side
of the capacity to love is the capacity to sin. God respects our freedom.
This means he respects our freedom to sin. He did not stay Adam and
Eve's hands when they reached out to eat the fruit ofthe tree of the knowl-
edge of good and evil. He told them what would happen, and then en-
busted that to their freedom. Had God stayed their hands, he would have
denied them the dignity he had bestowed on them. As the Catechism
states, "God does not want to impose the good, but wants free beings."
Thus, the "right to the exercise offreedom , especially in moral and reli-
gious matters, is an inalienable requirement of the dignity of the human
person."140 We inevitably sense the compromise of our dignity when we
are forced to conform to the will of others. Even if the will of others is
good, it can never be imposed. We must engage our freedom in choosing
good if we are ever to experience that which is good as good .
• This dynamic operates pointedly in the relationship of parents and

children, especially when the children come of age. Parents have the deli-
cate task of promoting the good without forcing it on their children. This
means that, within appropriate limits, parents (like God the Father) must
allow their children to choose wrongly, to sin. If parents "force" their chil-
dren not to sin, they set up an unfortunate dynamic in which their children
140. CCC. nn. 1738,2847.

may feel compelled to rebel against what is good in order to assert their
own dignity as self-determining persons. In such situations, the Church
calls parents to "recognize the fragment of truth that may be present in
some forms of [their children's] rebellion."'41 A valuable lesson can be
leamed in this regard from John Paul II's struggle with Communism. Not
all of the goals of Communism are evil. For John Paul, it seems the pri-
malY evil of Communism (and all totalitarian systems) lies in the way it
annihilates human freedom to achieve its goals. Papal biographer George
Weigel reports a conversation between John Paul II and General Pinochet
(Chile's dictator) as follows: "Pinochet pressed the Pope: 'Why is the
Church always talking about democracy? One method of govemment is as
good as another.' John Paul pol itely but firmly disagreed. 'No,' he said,
'the people have a right to their liberties, even if they make mistakes in ex-
ercising them. "'1~2 In other words, according to John Paul's read on the
dignity of the person as a self-determining agent, a higher value is main-
tained when one exercises his freedom wrongly, than when one is forced to
do something objectively good. '43 In human affairs, the greatest good is the
realization of the person, and this cannot come about without a steadfast
respect for human freedom, which always implies (within due limits) re-
specting the freedom of others to choose wrongly. This deeply personalist
affiImation of freedom, as expressed primarily in Digllitatis HlIInanae, is
one of the main contributions of the Second Vatican Council.
43. An Adequate Image of Freedom and Purity

Janumy 14,28, 1981 (TB 198-202)
Society has much to say about sexual liberation. But society gener-
ally views it as the freedom to indulge one's lusts without restraint. It
means never having to say no. This does not promote genuine freedom.
This promotes bondage to libido. John Paul observes that the antithesis
and, in a way, the negation of freedom occurs when freedom becomes a
pretext for man to live according to the flesh. Man chooses to indulge lust
because he feels bound by lust. The man of lust cannot not lust. Hence, in
his view the moral law that condemns lust oppresses him. He must be
141. The Truth & Meaning of Human Sexuality, n. 50.

143. See Karol Wojt)'la: The Thought orthe Man Who Became Pope john Puu/ 11,
pp.181 - 182.
Historical Mall 215
"liberated" from it so he can live in his bondage to lust unhindered. 1"4 In

essence, he wants to be free Fom freedom in order to embrace slavery
without retribution.
A. Authentic Freedom
The man described above is utterly deceived. To him. good is evil
and evil good. Slavery is freedom and freedom slavery. Such a man will
never find the happiness he seeks. As John Paul says, he "ceases to be ca-
pable of that freedom for which 'Christ set us free' ; he also ceases to be
suitable for the real gift of himself which is the fruit and expression of this
freedom . He ceases, moreover, to be capable of that gift which is organi-
cally connected with the nuptial meaning of the human body" (198).
Therefore, so long as he lives in his bondage to lust, he can never fulfill
the meaning of his being and existence.
Oh, the tragic deception of thinking Christ is against LIS! If the man of
lust would but open himself to the gift of redemption, through ongoing
conversion Christ would liberate his liberty from the oppression of lust.
He would free him with a freedom so real that he would be free indeed. He
would free him with the freedom of the gift-the freedom of receiving the
gift of God (the Holy Spirit) and, in turn. the freedom of being a real gift
to others. This is the meaning of life. This is the freedom for which we all
long. This is the freedom for which Christ has set us free. To attain it, we
must die to the lusts of the flesh and be raised to the love of the Spirit.
• I will never forget the first time I realized that 1 was truly free. Prior
to returning to my faith as a young adult, I had dated a girl for four years. I
could not not lust after her. Whenever I was with her I was a man on a mis-
sion-not to love her as Christ loves, but to "get" what J wanted. Of
course, I thought this was liberation because I had thrown off the oppres-
sive "rules" of my Catholic upbringing and was indulging my lusts unhin-
dered. I was utterly duped: even more so because, like everyone elsc. I
called this love. I started dating my now-wife Wendy after about five years
of deep purgation and healing from the indulgences of my past (discover-
ing John Paul's theology of the body was instrumental in this healing). One
day, early on in our relationship, Wendy and I were sitting on a mountain-
ous ledge overlooking a river in Pennsylvania. Holding her in my arms, T
had a flashback to my previolls "mode of operation." And it dawned on
me: I was free. 1 lVas truh ' Fee.! My freedom had been set free from the
144. See Ve,.ifalis Sp!e/7(!O!; n. 18.

domination of lust. I did not desire to "get" something from Wendy or to

use her for my own gratification. I desired to be a gift to her, to bless and
affirm her. Oh, what a feeling to be free with the freedom of the gift! I was
flying. I was walking on water! I knew the power of redemption. I knew the
power of the death and resurrection of Christ. I knew the power of the Holy
Spirit. I felt his breath vivifying my flesh and impregnating my desires with
everything noble and beautiful, with the supreme value of love.
B. Purity and Self-Control

S1. Paul contrasts fornication, impurity, and licentiousness as works
of the flesh with the self-control that is a fruit of the Spirit. According to
John Paul, this self-control is closely linked with purity of heart. This be-
comes more explicit in Paul's First Letter to the Thessalonians: "For this is
the will of God, your sanctification : that you abstain from unchastity; that
each one of you know how to control his own body in holiness and honor,
not in the passion of lust like the heathens who do not know God" (4 :3- 5).
"God has not called us for uncleanness [i.e., impurity], but in holiness.
Therefore, whoever disregards this, disregards not man, but God, who
gives his Holy Spirit to you" (4:7-8).
According to John Paul, every word in this formulation has a particu-
lar meaning. It is a "deeply right, complete, and adequate" image of the
virtue of purity, which emerges from the eloquent comparison of the func-
tion of "abstaining from unchastity" with that of "controlling one's body
in holiness and honor." The Pope further observes that these two func-
tions-abstention and control-are closely connected and dependent on
each other. One cannot control his body "in holiness and honor" if he can-
not abstain from lust and that which leads to it. In turn, that recognition of
the "holiness and honor" of the body gives adequate meaning to abstention
from lust.
John Paul shows his Thomistic foundations when he draws from the
Angelic Doctor's teaching on virtues in order to compare it with St. Paul's
image of purity. For Thomas, purity is a form of the virtue of temperance.
Rooted in the will, it consists primarily in containing the impulses of sen-
sitive desire, which has as its object the corporeal and sexual in man. But,
as John Paul observes, the same Pauline text turns our attention to another
"more positive" role of the virtue of purity. The task of purity is not only a
"turning away" from unchastity. This is a "negative," less mature purity.
As St. Paul describes it, purity is also, and even more so, a "turning to-
ward" the holiness of the body-a holiness that calls for our honor, admi-
ration, and respect (see §36). Only when we have such honor for the body
Historical Man 217
are we empowered from within to control the impulses of concupiscence

that, if left unchecked, would degrade the nuptial meaning of the body.
As John Paul expresses, "The honor that arises in man for everything
that is corporeal and sexual, both in himself and in any other person, male
and female, is seen to be the most essential power to control the body' in
holiness'" (201). When this honor toward the body imbues us, we immedi-
ately sense when impulses of concupiscence rise up in us. And precisely
that honor toward the body and sexuality makes us ready and willing to
submit our disordered desires to Christ, so that he might continually order
them rightly. The Pope believes that this concept of honor is perhaps the
essential thread of the Pauline doctrine on purity. So, in search of a more
thorough understanding of what Paul means by honor, the Holy Father
turns his attention to Paul's description of the body in 1 Corinthians
12:18-25.
44. Purity Stems from Piety as a Gift of the Holy Spirit

February 4. 11; March 18.1981 (TB 202-209)
Although Paul's description of the human body in 1 Corinthians 12 is

intended to outline an image of the Church as the Body of Christ, it also
has a fundamental meaning for the Pauline doctrine on purity. There St.
Paul says:
God arranged the organs in the body, each one of them, as he
chose ... [T]he parts of the body which seem to be weaker are indispens-
able, and those parts of the body we think less honorable we invest with
the greater honor, and our unpresentable parts are treated with greater
modesty, which our more presentable parts do not require. But God has
so adjusted the body, giving the greater honor to the inferior part, that
there may be no discord in the body, but that the members may have the
same care for one another (vv. 18-25).
Paul's description here is obviously pre-scientific. His goal is not to
present a biological study on the human organism. In fact, the Pope says
that such a description cannot be adequate since it is not just a question of
the body as an organism but of the human person who expresses himself
through that body and in this sense "is" that body. All descriptions of the
body must take this into account. Portraying the body is, in fact, "one of
the tasks and one of the perennial themes of the whole of culture: of litera-
ture, sculpture, painting, and also of dancing, of theatrical works, and
finally of the culture of everyday life, private or social" (203). The Pope
believes it is necessary to say how right it is to evaluate and portray the
body in these various ways. However, all portrayals of the human body
must have a proper spiritual attitude of reverence and respect, recognizing

its holiness which, as Christians know, springs from the mysteries of cre-
ation and redemption.
A. Restoring Harmony in the Body

John Paul observes that St. Paul's description of the body seems to
correspond perfectly with the analysis of our creation, fall, and redemption
that he has been outlining in the theology of the body. God's atTangement
of the body and all its parts is "very good." The experience of original na-
kedness was a participation in this original good of God's vision. Hence,
prior to sin, man and woman experienced no discord in the body whatso-
ever, but a perfect harmony. The Pope adds that this harmony is precisely
"purity of heart." Adam and Eve readily bestowed the "greater honor" on
those pal1s of their bodies that revealed their call to communion. Naked-
ness, therefore, was entirely modest. Furthermore, this purity "enabled
man and woman in the state of original innocence to experience simply
(and in a way that originally made them both happy) the uniting power of
their bodies." This uniting power of their bodies was "the 'unsuspected'
substratum of their personal union or communio personarum" (204). In
other words, the whole dynamic of attraction and arousal that led them to
become "one flesh" was so integrated with their dignity as persons as to be
taken for granted. There was no question of using one another. They had
no need to hold one another in a state of "suspicion" when it came to the
arousal of the body. For they lived their bodies "in holiness and honor."
Hence, they were naked and felt no shame.
St. Paul observes that we now consider some parts of our bodies
"weaker," "less honorable," and "unpresentable." This corresponds to the
shame Adam and Eve experienced after they ate from the forbidden tree.
However, the Pope quickly affirms that in this same description of man's
experience of shame, Paul indicates the path which leads to the gradual
victory over that "discord in the body"- a victory which John Paul insists
can and must take place in man's heart.
The key to rediscovering purity is to recognize that there is imprinted
on our experience of shame "a certain 'echo' of man's original innocence
itself: a 'negative,' as it were, of the image, whose 'positive' had been pre-
cisely original innocence" (204). We have already compared this concept
to the negative of a photograph (see § 11). The negative provides a clue of
the positive image. Similarly, that shame which leads us to consider our
genitals "less honorable" and "unpresentable" is the negative. But shame's
direct relation to our genitals provides a clue for understanding the true
meaning and profound dignity of our creation as male and female. If we
Historical Mal1 219
develop this negative or "flip it over," we realize that these parts of our
bodies-far from being "less honorable"-deserve all "the greater honor."
For these parts of our bodies distinguish the sexes and thus reveal our call
to image God in life-giving communion.
B. The Needfor a Pure Purity

Therefore, for St. Paul, purity and modesty must be centered on the
dignity of the body-on the dignity of the person who is always expressed
through the body, through his masculinity and her femininity.145 Thus, if
one's "purity" is based on anything but a sincere appreciation for the value
and dignity of the body, it is not authentic purity. Likewise, if one's mod-
esty is based on a fear or devaluation of all things sexual, it is not authen-
tic modesty. What, then, is the path to a pure purity and an authentically
modest modesty? As we have been stressing all along, it is openness to the
gift of redemption. As John Paul says, the man of lust must be "entirely
enveloped by the 'redemption of the body' carried out by Christ." He
"must open himself to 'life according to the Spirit...in order to rediscover
and realize the value of the body, freed through redemption from the
bonds of lust." 141>
• As the future pope observed in Love & ResjJol1sibili(v, modesty is

certainly connected with the way people dress, but the connection is not
what most people tend to think. The following question can help us assess
whether we have a proper understanding of purity and modesty in dress. If
covering the sexual values of the body in public is a virtually universal
manifestation of modesty, are we led to do so out of a sense that these pmis
of our body are "dishonorable",? Or do we cover our sexual values out of a
profound sense of "the greater honor" they deserve because of the dignity
God bestowed on them? Do we cover our sexual values because we at-
tribute to them an "anti-value," or because we realize they manifest "a
value not sufficiently appreciated" (see §35)? Understanding this distinc-
tion is essential for an authentic modesty and for our purity to be just
that-pure. Tapping into some of the confusions regarding modesty, Karol
Wojtyla clearly states that accenting sexual values by dress is inevitable,
and it can remain compatible with sexual modesty. Immodesty in dress, he
says, is that which displaces the dignity of the person and aims deliberately
to elicit lust in others. He also observes that partial and even total naked-
ness cannot simply be equated with immodesty. "Immodesty is present
145. See CCC, nn. 2517--2527.

146.4/1/81, TB 213.
only when nakedness plays a negative role with regard to the value of the
person, when its aim is to arouse concupiscence, as a result of which the
person is put in the position of an object of enjoyment." What happens
then he calls "depersonalization by sexualization." But he adds that this is
not inevitable. 147 Only a "master of suspicion" would conclude that the na-
ked body always and illevitably leads to lust. In summary, authentic mod-
esty is a natural flUit of a proper-that is, a pure-understanding of the
divine dignity God has bestowed on the body and sexuality. It cannot sim-
ply be equated with a certain manner of dress or lack thereof. As the Cat-
eellism states: "Teaching modesty to children and adolescents means
awakening in them respect for the human person. "148 If a mother and father
were concemed about the way their teenaged daughter was dressing, rather
than focusing only on the clothes, they would do better to instill in her a
sense of awe and wonder for the divine dignity of her body and the gift of
her sexuality. A person who consciously understands this does 110t want to
be cheapened by llist. A woman who consciously understands this, for ex-
ample, will (aided with a little education in male psychology) come to
know interiorly when the attention she draws by her dress invites lust, and
she will naturally want to dress in a way that protects her dignity.
As with all virtues, attaining purity certainly requires a personal ef-

fort. Ultimately, however, a man cannot make himself pure. Purity is also a
gift to which a person must open himself. The Holy Father describes pu-
rity as "a new capacity of the human being, in which the gift of the Holy
Spirit bears fruit" (206). Thus, purity has not only a moral dimension as a
virtue. Purity also has a charismatic dimension as a gift of the Holy
Spirit. 149 These two dimensions of purity are present and closely connected
in Paul's message. Among the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit (see Is 11:1-2),
John Paul points out that the one most compatible with purity is piety. ISO Pi-
147. See Love & Responsibilitv, pp. 186-193.

148. CCC, n. 2524.
149. See CCC, n. 1810.
150. Piety, the Pope says, "is a part of the theology of the body which is little
known, but which deserves particular study" (209). He will later devote a portion of his
catechesis to explaining the role of piety in living out the truth of the body, specifically in
relation to living the truth of sexual union.
Historical Man 221
ety is the gift of respect for what is a work of GOd. 151 Piety, then, "seems to
serve purity in a particular way, making the human subject sensitive to that
dignity which is characteristic of the human body by virtue of the mystery
of creation and redemption" (208).
St. Paul is trying to awaken in us a sense of awe and respect for the
great dignity that God has bestowed on our bodies when he says:
The body is not meant for immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for
the body... Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ?
Shall I therefore take the members of Christ and unite them to a prosti-
tute? Never! ... Shun immorality. Every other sin which a man commits is
outside the body; but the immoral man sins against his own body.... Do
you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you,
which you have from God? You are not your own; you were bought with
a price (1 Cor 6: 13-20).
These words "stigmatize" unchastity as the sin against the holiness of
the body, the sin of impurity. They are severe words, "even drastic," ac-
cording to John Paul. But St. Paul, full ofthe Holy Spirit and, hence, alive
with the gift of piety, knows whereof he speaks. He knows that the "re-
demption ofthe body involves the institution, in Christ and through Christ,
of a new measure of holiness of the body" (207). By virtue of the Incarna-
tion the human body has been admitted, together with the soul, to union
with the Person of Christ, and, in tum, to union with the Father through
the Holy Spirit.
John Paul says that the Holy Spirit dwells in man-in his soul and in
his body-as fruit of the redemption carried out by Christ. Through the
gift of redemption, every man has received himself and his own body
again from God as a new creation. So in redemption we receive a "double
gift"-the gift of the Holy Spirit and the gift of our own restored human-
ity. Sins of the flesh (or "carnal sins") not only entail a "profanation of the
body"-of our own humanity-but a "profanation of the temple" of the
Holy Spirit. As St. Paul's tone indicates, this is very serious. Some might
be tempted to see in the sternness of Paul's words a devaluation of the
body and sexuality. Quite the contrary, his austere tone stems from his de-
sire to protect and ensure the incomparable dignity which God has be-
stowed on the body and sexuality. By vi11ue of the Incarnation, the human
body obtains "a new supernatural elevation, which every Christian must
take into account in his behavior with regard to his 'own' body and, of
course, with regard to the other's body: man with regard to woman and
woman with regard to man" (207).
151. See 11121/84, TB 417.

45. God's Glory Shining in the Body

February 11; March 18, 1981 (TB 205-210)
"Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit
within you, which you have from God? You are not your own; you were
bought with a price" (1 Cor 6: 19- 20). It is precisely a living awareness of
our redemption, a living awareness that we were "bought with a price"
that enables us to "control our bodies in holiness and honor." St. Paul calls
us to "shun immorality." We must certainly do so if we are to learn how to
control our bodies. Yet St. Paul calls us to so much more. Tapping into that
"holiness and honor" of which he speaks "always bears fruit in deeper ex-
perience of that love which was inscribed 'from the beginning,' according
to the image and likeness of God himself, in the whole human being and
therefore also in his body" (209). Thus, Paul's words "acquire the elo-
quence of an experience of the nuptial meaning of the body and of the
freedom of the gift connected with it" (208).
Let us recall that freedom is the crux of the new ethos (see §42).
We only know true purity of heart to the extent that we are free from the
domination of lust. But freedom in Christ is not so much freedom from
as freedom for-freedom for love. Only in freedom is the profound as-
pect of purity and its organic link with love revealed. As we have already
quoted John Paul saying, "Purity is a requirement ofiove." Purity "is the
dimension of [love's] interior truth in man's 'heart."" 52 And love is im-
possible if we are not free with the freedom to be a sincere gift to others .
• Since the freedom to which Christ calls us is so rarely proclaimed,

we may think it impossible. Take a sincere engaged couple who honestly
wants to save sexual intimacy for marriage. They will often think that in
order to stay "chaste," they should never spend any extended time alone
together. They fear, of course, that if they were alone, they could not re-
frain from sex. This may be the case, but this is not a mature experience of
the freedom for which Christ has set us free. Attaining Christian freedom is
obviously a process. A couple with a proper awareness of their own weak-
nesses will certainly act in respect for those weaknesses. To do so is com-
mendable.
However, if the only thing that kept a couple from having sex before
marriage was the lack of opportunity, what does that say about the desire
152. 12/3/80, TB J 77.

Historical Man 223
of their hearts?15J Are they free to choose the good? Are they free to love?
To use an image, if a man and woman need to chain themselves to two dif-
ferent trees in order to avoid sin, they are not free; they are in chains. As
stated previously, if we chain our freedom to sin, with the same stroke we
chain the freedom necessary to love (see §42). All the more dangerous in
such an approach is the implicit attitude that marriage will somehow "jus-
tify" the couple's lack of freedom. The wedding night then becomes the
moment when the couple are supposedly "allowed" to cut the chains loose,
disregarding their previous need for constraints. Yet if this couple were not
free to choose the good the day before they got married, standing at the
altar will not suddenly make them free.
As John Paul has already made abundantly clear, marriage does not
justify lust, and lust is precisely sexual de ir void of the freedom of the
gift. For most people, to live as the free men and women we are called to
be demands a radical paradigm shift in way ofthinking, Living, and evalu-
ating. Trusting our own freedom to control concupi cence and t chao e
the good can be very threatening. It is much easier to di tru t lIf. el e ' and
hold our hearts in continual suspicion. But this is the anliLhesis of l'he
meaning of life. We are called to set our eyes on Christ, get out of the boat,
and walk on water. Many Christians, it seems, stay in the boat for fear of
sinking if they were to get out. This may seem like a "safer" approach. We
can't sink if we never leave the boat. But neither can we walk on water.
The truth of human life does not reside in the boat! It can only be found on
the water amidst the wind and the waves-in the drama of putting faith to
the test and learning to walk with our eyes set on the Lord. Learning to
love always involves risk. There is nothing "safe" about it. But it is better
to get out of the boat and accept the risk of sinking than to lock up our
freedom and throwaway the key. As with Peter, Christ says, "Come!" Yes,
we might sink. Ifwe do, we have a merciful Savior ready to save liS, as did
Peter.
A. GlorifY God in Your Bodies

After stating, "You are not your own; you were bought with a price,"
St. Paul ends his passage in 1 Corinthians 6 with a significant exhortation:
"So glorify God in your bodies" (v. 20) . John Paul states that purity- in
both its dimensions as a virtue and as a gift of the Holy Spirit-brings
about in the body such a fullness of dignity in interpersonal relations that
God himself is thereby glorified. Hence, purity "is the glory of the human
153. See CCC, nn. 1768, 1770, 1775, 1968, 1972.

body before God. It is God's glory in the human body" (209). Men and
women who relate with one another purely truly glorify God in their bod-
ies. Far from stifling their relationship, purity enables them to enter that
authentic communion they both long for-a communion that images the
divine communion. They experience that "extraordinary beauty" which
permeates evcry sph er ' or their mutu a l and common life. Til is b "lily
mal es it possible to eXI ress themselves in 'simplicity and depth, co rdi al-
ity. and lbe unrepealab le 8uti1en(i 'ily of per onal trust" (209). 1n this way
pu ri ty enab l.es men and women, husbands and wives, to redjscover . omc-
thing of that "beatifying beginning" in which the first man and woman
were both naked and felt no shame.
Everything tinted by sin beoomes pu re wben we are entirely envel-
oped by the redemption of the body can'ied out by hrist. When puri ly
swaJl ws tbat sense of slis picion with which we so often co nsign our own
h arts lO irre versible lust , we see the entire 1I11iverse wi lb new eyes. We
significa ntly regain Lhat ori ginal good of God 's vi sion and L'calize that ev-
erything God has made is "very good."
B. To the Pure All Things Are Pure

St. Paul demonstrates that Christ's words about purity as the ability
to "see God" not only have an eschatological meaning, but bear fruit al-
ready in time. As he writes in his Letter to Titus: "To the pure all things are
pure, but to the eorrupt and unbelieving nothing is pure; their very minds
and consciences are corrupted. They profess to know God, but they deny
him by their deeds" (Ti 1: 15 -16). The Pope points out that these words
can refer to purity in the general sense of all moral good, but also to the
more specific sense of sexual purity. Either way, in these two short sen-
tences, St. Paul shows that our view of the whole universe shifts according
to our purity of heart or lack thereof.
Impurity causes blindness. It prevents us from seeing God's glory in
his creation-least of all, it seems, in manifestations of sexuality and the
nakedness of the body. In tum, blindness can lock us into such suspicion
toward the heart that purity seems impossible. When we see the freedom of
those who are pure, we condemn it outright as an indulgence in sin. It
could be nothing else. For, according to this mindset, sin can only be
avoided when we chain freedom. To let freedom "loose" is ipso facto to fall
into sin. This approach toward the body may seem consonant with Chris-
tian holiness. But it denies what John Paul calls "the supernatural realism
of faith" (208) and "the anthropology of rebirth in the Holy Spirit" (210).
Such blindness shows a lack of wisdom that fails to recognize reality.
As John Paul says, "Purity is, in fact, the condition for finding wisdom and
Historical Man 225
following it" (209). The Pope then quotes from the Book of Sirach: "I di-
rected my soul to her [that is, to Wisdom], and through purification, I
found her" (51 :20). The pure see reality as it is-as very good. This instills
in them a deep sense of awe and wonder toward the Creator. This instills
in them that wholesome "fear of the Lord," which, as that famous line
from Proverbs expresses, is the beginning of all wisdom (see Prov 1:7).
In this manner, John Paul points out that the Wisdom Books of the
Old Testament prepare in some way for the Pauline doctrine on purity of
heart. In fact, the double meaning of purity as a virtue and as a gift of the
Holy Spirit already takes shape in the Wisdom texts. The virtue of purity is
in the service of wisdom, and wisdom is a preparation for receiving the
gift of the Holy Spirit. This divine gift strengthens a person's virtue and
makes it possible for that person to enjoy, in wisdom, the fruits of a pure life.
46. The Most Suitable Education in Being Human

April 1, 8,1981 (TB 210-217)
In the 3udi -nc'e or April I, 1981 John Pa ul recaps hi ' refl e tions up
to this point. Chri t's word about God plan for marriage "in the begin-
ning," as well as hi words about lust in the Sermon 011 the Mount have
enabled u to utline the true theol gy of the body. We have lenll1.cd that
LII' humanity has a tbeologicaJ basis. It is founded on t he truth about God
and, 111 re spe ifically tbe truth about Goel made man in Jesus hri t. An
adequate anthropol.ogy, then, l11ust ultimately be a 'Ulco [ogical antbJop l-
ogy. An ad · quate anthropo logy I11l1st be a "theology of Lhe body." For only
in thc mystery f Ihe Word theo logy) made/ies/z (of the body) does the
my tery of man take on light. IS '. As John Paul says man's vocation
"springs frol11 lh eternal myslclY of tJle pel's n: the image or God incar-
nate in the visible and cO I]Jorea l fact of the masculinity or feminin-ily of
the human person" (211). This is the body's great dignity: it incarnates
God's mystery, which is love. Man's vocation is to love as God loves, and
it is revealed through the nuptial meaning of his body.
A. The Joys of Purity

Su mm arizi ng hi rC'flection, on purity John Paul. says that purily
co nsti tutes t he opposite f adultery com mitted in the heart. It constitutes
the deep rec0gniti 11 and ai'fiD11ation of the g 000 s .f lhe body and of
sexuality according to the origina l g od of Ood s vision. hris!' words
154. See Gaudium et Spes, n. 22.

about man and woman's union in "the beginning" and his words about
"looking lustfully" recall to the man oflust the original experience of the
body with an "expressive evangelical eloquence." The Pope affirms that
Christ's words are entirely realistic. They do not try to make the human
heart return to the state of innocence, but they indicate the way to a pu-
rity of heart that is possible and accessible to man even in the state of
hereditary sinfulness.
The purity Christ calls us to is not just abstention from unchastity
(temperance). At the same time, Christian purity opens the way to an ever
more perfect discovery of the original dignity of the human body. If purity
is first manifested as temperance, it eventually "matures in the heart of the
man who cultivates it and tends to reveal and strengthen the nuptial mean-
ing of the body in its integral truth. Precisely this truth must be known in-
teriorly; it must, in a way, be 'felt with the heart,' in order that the mutual
relations of man and woman-even mere looks-may re-acquire that au-
thentically nuptial content of their meanings" (213). In mature purity man
experiences the "efficacy of the gift of the Holy Spirit," which enables him
to reach the mystery and subjectivity of the person through his or her
body. He thus enjoys the fruits of the victory won over lust. This victory
restores to our experience of the body "all its simplicity, its explicitness,
and also its interior joy" (213).
Such joy is very different from any momentary satisfaction that
comes by indulging lust. John Paul compellingly expresses this reality in a
passage that seems to summarize all his reflections on Christ's words
about lust. He writes: "The satisfaction of the passions is, in fact, one
thing, and the joy that man finds in mastering himself more fully is another
thing, since in this way he can also become more fully a real gift for an-
other person. The words spoken by Christ in the Sermon on the Mount
direct the human heart precisely toward this joy. We must entrust our-
selves, our thoughts and actions to them, in order to find joy and give it
to others" (213 - 214).
B. Pedagogy of the Body

In his audience of April 8, 1981, John Paul closes his reflections on
historical man. We have been reflecting on the human heart, in which there
is inscribed, John Paul says, "the most interior and, in a way, the most es-
sential designs of history. It is the history of good and evil... and, at the
same time, it is the history of salvation, whose word is the Gospel and
whose power is the Holy Spirit, given to those who accept the Gospel with
a sincere heart" (214).
Historical Man 227
John Paul has been constructing an adequate anthropology which he

calls the "theology of the body." His catechesis provides an education or a
pedagogy in being human. Pedagogy aims at educating man, setting be-
fore him the requirements of his own humanity and pointing out the ways
that lead to the fulfillment of his humanity. This is precisely the goal of the
theology of the body. The words of Christ that John Paul has analyzed
(concerning the man of innocence and the man of lust) contain a pedagogy
of the body, expressed in a concise and also extremely complete way. By
analyzing Christ's words "to their very roots," we have learned that the
Creator has assigned the body and the gift of sexuality to man as a task. It
is the task of discovering the truth of our humanity and the dignity of the
person. It is the task of embracing our redemption and growing in purity
so that we can fulfill ourselves and bring joy to others through the sincere
gift of ourselves- the sincere gift of our bodies which affords a true inter-
personal communion. This is lived out particularly in marriage, but mar-
riage is not the only way to live the sincere gift of self.
The task of the body and sexuality is, in fact, the task of discovering
the truth and meaning of life and living it. It is the task of embracing "the
perspective of the whole Gospel, of the whole teaching, in fact of the
whole mission ofChrist."'55 As we have learned, if we follow through with
this "task" of the body, if we follow all the traces of our hearts and all the
stirrings of our sexuality to their source, we find ourselves at the edge of
eternity catching a glimpse of the Mystery of the Trinitarian God. By way
of this journey men and women discover who they are. Ultimately, there is
no other way but via God's revelation in the body. This is why John Paul
asserts that "it is this theology of the body which is the basis of the most
suitable method of the pedagogy of the body, that is, the education (in fact,
the self-education) of man" (215).
Here we encounter one of those key quotes that demonstrates the
scope and purpose of the Pope's catechesis. It is not "just" a catechesis on
sex and marriage. The truth about sex and marriage, in fact, provides the
key for understanding what it means to be human. John Paul says that the
pedagogy of the body, understood as "theology of the body," speaks not
only of the sacramentality of married life, but of human life itself. How-
ever, we cannot understand and live the truth about life if lust fills our
hearts and our behavior contradicts the dignity of the person. A pedagogy
of the body, therefore, must provide an anthropology that adequately ex-
plains the moral order regarding human sexuality. John Paul's catechesis
heads precisely in this direction.
155. 12/3/80, TB 175.

C. Spirituality of the Body

Perhaps the greatest threat facing man today is the ideology of
disembodiment. As a person, man is spiritual. But the body must be under-
stood "as a sign of the person, a manifestation of the spirit" (215). The
body, in fact, in the full truth of its masculinity or femininity is given as a
task to the human spirit. This is why John Paul speaks of a specific "spiri-
tuality of the body." Living a "spiritual" life never implies disparagement
for the body. Instead, growing in spiritual maturity always means becom-
ing more and more integrated with the gift of one's masculine or feminine
body. It means growing closer and closer to that original, rich, and far-
reaching experience of holiness evidenced, as John Paul says, by the fact
that the man and woman were both naked without shame. Holiness is cer-
tainly spiritual, but it is "felt" in the body. 156 Spiritual maturity, then, is in-
timately connected with rediscovering the nuptial meaning proper to the
body. The spiritually mature person comes to see the nuptial meaning of
the body, to know it, to feel it in his heart, and to live it. This is how men
and women-and not only man-ied men and women-incarnate the Gos-
pel message.
This radical embodiment starkly contrasts with the modem view of
things. An interior divorce between body and spirit is virtually taken for
granted in our world today. In fact, the Pope points out that the whole de-
velopment of modem science, despite its many contributions to human
welfare, is based on the separation in man of body and spirit. This deprives
the body of its personal meaning and dignity, and man, in tum, ceases to
identify himself subjectively with his own body. In this milieu, the human
body comes to be treated as an object of manipulation.
In this context, John Paul makes a statement applicable to sex educa-
tion. He says that purely biological knowledge of the sexual functions of
the body can help people discover the true nuptial meaning of the body
only if an adequate spiritual maturity of the person accompanies this
knowledge. Otherwise, as experience attests, it can have quite the opposite
effect. We can gain two main points from this. First, the Holy Father does
not condemn outright instruction in the sexual functions of the body. But it
would be unwise to inundate those who are not spiritually mature with
purely biological knowledge. Second, helping those who are not spiritu-
ally mature grow in such maturity requires that we help them discover the
nuptial meaning of the body. Thus, true education in sexuality is always an
education in the theology of the body, which is always the most suitable
education in the meaning of being human.
156.2/20/80, TB 76.
Historical Man 229
D. The Church Applies Christ s Words Today

The Pope says that precisely in these divergent views of the body we
touch upon the crux ofthe modem controversies surrounding the Church's
teaching on marriage and sexual morality. And the controversy grows
most pointed in the teaching of the encyclical Humanae Vitae. The
Church's teachings aim at applying Christ's words to the here and now.
Hence, "it is necessary to consider prudently the pronouncements of the
modem Church. Their adequate understanding and interpretation, as well
as their practical application (that is, precisely, pedagogy) demands that
deep theology of the body which, in a word, we derive mainly from the
key words of Christ" (216).
With this statement, the Pope reveals the essence of his project: to
provide an adequate understanding of the Church's teaching on sexuality,
particularly her teaching on contraception, which is the linchpin of all
sexual morality.'57 Furthermore, he makes the explicit point that this ad-
equate understanding derives from the words of Christ. It is rooted not
only in natural law, on which the traditional emphasis has been placed in
understanding sexual morality. It is rooted also in divine revelation. In this
way, as John Paul says in an endnote from a previous audience, "the con-
cept of natural law also acquires a theological meaning." 158
But the above statement on the importance of the theology of the
body not only reveals the essence of the Pope's project. It also outlines
John Paul's great commission for the Church. The Church must plumb the
depths of "that deep theology of the body" if she is practically to apply
Christ's words and help the world incarnate the Gospel in a new evangeli-
zation. At the heart of the new evangelization, at the heart of building a
civilization of love and a culture of life, is marriage and the family. And at
the heart of marriage and the family is the truth about the body and sexual-
157. While this might seem like an exaggeration to many modern minds, wise men
and women throughout history have recognized the fact that once sexual pleasure is di-
vorced from its intrinsic link with procreation, any sexual behavior can be justified. We
previously noted Sigmund Freud's statement that the "abandonment of the reproductive
function is the common feature of all sexual perversions" (Introductory Lectures in Psy-
choanalysis, p. 266). The inner logic is clear. If sexual relations need not be inherently
related to procreation, why should sexual climax be limited to genital intercourse be-
tween a husband and wife? The logic that accepts intentionally sterilized intercourse, if it
is to remain consistent with itself, must end by accepting any and every means to orgasm:
from masturbation, to fornication and adultery, to sodomy, etc.
158. 4/23/80 first endnote, TB 181. As exemplified in his encyclical Veritatis Splen-
dor (see especially n. 19), one of John Paul's seminal contributions to moral theology has
been to reunite moral doctrine with faith in Christ. This reunion has been termed by some
"a Christo logical approach to natural law."
ity. John Paul made the theology of the body the first catechetical project
of his pontificate because it is the only adequate starting point for the re-
newal of the family, the Church, and the world. As he knew so well in
starting here, such renewal cannot possibly happen if we do not go to the
"deepest substratum of human ethics and culture," if we do not embrace
the truth of sexual morality, particularly the truth taught in the encyclical
Humanae Vitae.
Plumbing the depths of the theology of the body means reconnecting
with our own embodiment. It means living the very dynamism of the In-
carnation by allowing the Word of the Gospel to penetrate our flesh and
bones. It means realizing that our bodies are sacramental, that they reveal
the mystery of our humanity and also point to the infinitely greater mys-
tery of God's divinity. When this incarnation of the Gospel takes place in
us, we see the Church's teaching on sexual morality not as an oppressive
list of rules, but as the foundation of a liberating ethos, a call to redemp-
tion, a call to rediscover in what is erotic the original meaning of the body
which, in tum, reveals the very meaning of life. This is the first step to
take in renewing the world.
47. Portraying the Naked Body in Art

April 15, 22, 29; May 6, 1981 (TB 218-229)
In his encyclical Humanae Vitae, Pope Paul VI speaks of the need of

creating an atmosphere favorable to education in chastity.159 John Paul II
closes his cycle on historical man by devoting four audience addresses to
this need in relation to what he calls "the ethos of the image" (228). By
this he means the portrayal of the human body in art and in the culture of
the mass media. When dealing with such portrayals, he says that we find
ourselves continually within the orbit of the words Christ spoke in the Ser-
mon on the Mount.
Is it possible to portray the naked body artistically without offending
the dignity of the person? This is a very delicate problem, the Pope says,
which intensifies according to various motives and circumstances. In the
first three of these four audiences, as John Paul outlines the problem he
seems so apprehensive at times that one might think he condemns naked-
ness in art altogether. Not so! In the restoration of the Sistine Chapel, he
insisted on removing several of the loincloths that prudish clerics had had
painted over Michelangelo's original nudes. In tum, when he dedicated the
159. See Humanae Vitae, n. 22 .

Historical Man 231
restored Sistine Chapel he described it as "the sanctuary of the theology of

the human body. " It seems Michelangelo, he said, had been guided by the
evocative Word of God in Genesis 2:25, which enabled him, "in his own
way," to see the human body naked without shame. For "in the context of
the light that comes from God, the human body also keeps its splendor and
its dignity. If it is removed from this dimension, it becomes in some way
an object, which depreciates very easily, since only before the eyes of God
can the human body remain naked and unclothed, and keep its splendor
and beauty intact."16o The question then becomes: Is it possible to see the
human body with the eyes of God? The perfect vision is reserved for the
eschaton. But, quoting again from the Catechism in this regard: "Even
now [purity of heart] enables us to see according to God ... ; it lets us per-
ceive the human body-ours and our neighbor's-as a temple ofthe Holy
Spirit, a manifestation of divine beauty."161
John Paul says that just because portraying the body in art raises a
very delicate problem, it does not mean that the naked human body cannot
become a subject of works of art. It only means that this problem is not
purely aesthetic, nor morally indifferent. Therefore, John Paul does not in-
tend to question the right to this subject in art. He aims merely at demon-
strating that its treatment is connected with a special responsibility.
A. A Perennial Object of Culture

The Pope notes first that the human body is a perennial object of cul-
ture. Sexuality and the whole sphere of love between man and woman has
been, is, and will continue to be a subject of art and literature. Indeed, the
Bible itself contains that wonderful narrative of the Song of Songs which
celebrates the intimate love of man and woman without shame. 162 The
body and sexuality's frequency in art and literature indicates their funda-
mental importance in each person's life and within culture at large. It
speaks of that deep yearning we all have to understand the nuptial mean-
ing of masculinity and femininity which is inscribed in the whole inte-
rior-and at the same time visible-structure of the human person.
Herein lies the challenge for artists. If they are to portray the visible
structure of the person (i.e., the human body), they must do so in a way
that does not obscure but brings to light the interior structure of the per-
160. Homily preached by John Paul II at the Mass celebrating the restored Sistine
Chapel, April 8, 1994 (published in L 'Osservatore Romano, April 13, 1994).
161. CCC, n. 2519.
162. The Song of Songs will be the subject of future audiences in the Pope's
catechesis.
son. In other words, art must integrate the body and soul ofthe person por-
trayed by bringing to light the body's nuptial meaning. "The human body-
the naked human body in the whole truth of its masculinity and feminin-
ity-has the meaning of a gift of the person to the person" (220). Artists
must work within this "nuptial system of reference" if they are not to of-
fend the dignity of the body, which is always the dignity of a person. The
ethical norms that govern the body's nakedness are therefore inseparable
from the personal truth of the gift.
John Paul affirms that this norm of the gift is even deeper than the
norm of shame-understood as the need for privacy regarding the body.
Therefore, so long as the norm of the gift is properly and diligently re-
spected, the body can be uncovered without violating its dignity. A person
of "developed sensitivity" can overcome the limits of shame, but the Pope
observes that this is accomplished only "with difficulty and interior resis-
tance" (222). In other words, even if this demands overcoming the interior
pull of concupiscence, a mature person can see the body in its nakedness
and not violate the dignity of the gift. But the Holy Father carefully distin-
guishes "overcoming" the limits of shame from "overstepping" the limits
of shame. In the latter case, concupiscence is not conquered, but shame-
lessly indulged. Nakedness then entails a violation of the personal dignity
of the body.
B. The Danger ofAnonymity

A real danger exists of objectifying the naked body through artistic
portrayal. John Paul describes this as the danger of anonymity, which is a
way of "veiling" or "hiding" the identity of the person reproduced.
Through photography in particular, the Pope observes that the body very
often becomes an "anonymous" object, especially when the images of a
person's body are diffused on the screens of the whole world. Despite their
similarities, John Paul notes an important difference between photograph-
ing the naked body and portraying it in the plastic arts. In painting or
sculpture, the body undergoes a specific elaboration on the part of the art-
ist, whereas in photography an image of an actual, living person is repro-
duced. Thus photography has even greater need of ensuring the visibility
of the interior person. When this fails to happen, "the human body loses
that deeply subjective meaning of the gift and becomes an object destined
for the knowledge of many" (221). Hence, both the artist who portrays the
body and those who view the artist's work must be aware of their obliga-
tion to uphold the dignity of the body as a sign of the gift of persons. From
this perspective, John Paul speaks not only of the "ethos of the image," but
also the "ethos of the viewing" (226).
Historical Man 233
reating an atmosphere ravorable to chastity in the media a nd the

arts, then, invol ves recognizing ' a reciprocal circuit" wltich takes place
between tb image and the see ing. This can be exp lained by the rccipr city
found in, actual interp r nal relatiollShips. in genuine relationship John
Paul says tbat the human body in its nakedness becomes the source of a
particular inicl]Jcrsona l communication ." It is " unders tood as a maniies-
tali n of the pCI' on and as hi gift"- as '<a sign or Lrust and donation to the
other p ron. " bu's, we call conclude with the Holy Falher tbat nakedness
does not offend nor elicit sham when man and wom'll1 are 'consciou s of
the giJt" given and have resolved to respond to it in an equally persum!
way" (224) .
• This dynamic can be keenly observed within a loving marriage, but

also in other rare situations. For example, I once heard the following story
of a woman who m deled f r art tudcnts. Ha ing disrobed beti re Lhe tu-
den'll , he immadiately cov red ber eU' when 'h noti ed that the 'hade
mid not been drawn on Ihe wind w. When the teacher ap logiz d and drew
the hade she again disrbbed. Thidemon trate that her nakedncss before
the tudent was not ' ham les ." but a form of "nakcdne . with ut
hame. ' She trusted the student to r' pe<::t ber "gi ft' and to r spond to it
in all equally per (:>na! way. However, bame immediately manife led it If
(Md rightly . ) when he realized ber oakedne s was being potentially c '-
posed to an unkn wn (and, therefore, untru ·ted) audience.
A furtJler problem ari es however. Even when an artist portrays the

human body intending t ill um inate its true nuptial meaning, he cannot
always know how the recipient of hi work will respond. '1n fact, that ele-
mcnt of the gift is, so to speak, suspended in the dil1~,ens iOI1 or al1 uo-
kn wo reception and an unfore eell response' (225). In th is Wily it is
threatened in the ense lhat il may become an anonymous object of al pro·
pJiation and abuse. "H cannot be forgotten a . .J bn Paul reminds u S "that
the fundamental inLerior si tuation of ' historica l man is the tate of lhree-
fi ld lust" (222). Througb the Ihos of redemplion U1is lust can be gradu-
al ly overcom.c. Unloltunately, however, not everyone emb races the ethos
f redelnpLion . In our fallcn world, th~lt 'original shame, known already
from th first chapte rs of the Bib le, i a permanenl element of c'u ltme and
m rals' (222). Furthermore even inhe negative sense of haOle cao, with
fervent effort, be graduall y overcome, wc must not forget th positive
functioJlof hame which always mainlains a certain veil of resp ect for the
dignity and mystery of others as persons.
C. True Art Versus Pornography

Some works of art portray the naked body in a manner that does not
arouse lust but "makes it possible to concentrate, in a way, on the whole
tmth of man, and the dignity and beauty-also the 'suprasensual' beau-
ty-of his masculinity and femininity" (227). The Pope says that such
works of art "bear within them, almost hidden, an element of sublimation"
(227). A masterful artist can lead us through the naked body to the whole
personal mystery of man and allow us to comprehend the nuptial meaning
of the body in purity of heart. 163 In contrast to these, other works of art-
and perhaps even more often photographic images-epitomize man's deg-
radation rather than sublimation. The Pope insists that this is not because
of their object, since the human body in itself always has its inalienable
dignity, but because of the quality or way of its reproduction and portrayal.
The difference between an authentic portrayal of the naked body in
art and a pornographic 164 portrayal, then, lies in the artist's intention. Since
the body itself always maintains an objective dignity, John Paul observes
that the body can only be violated in the intentional order. An artist's work
manifests "his interior world of values" (227). The artist who not only un-
derstands the nuptial meaning of the body in the abstract, but also lives it
himself interiorly, can transfer this reality to his work. As experience con-
firms, the intentions of an artist are usually easy to ascertain. However, we
must be careful not to project our own impurity onto artists whose inten-
tions are pure. Those who subscribe to the "interpretation of suspicion"
will tend to question the intentions of any artist who portrays the naked
body. They will tend to label any portrayal of the naked body as obscene.
Such was the case when various clerics, upon viewing Michelangelo's
work in the Sistine Chapel, accused him of obscenity and subsequently
covered his nudes with awkward drapes and loincloths. Doing so only
demonstrated in some sense their own impurity; that is, their own inability
to see the body as a theology, a revelation of the mystery of God. 165
163. For a fascinating and provocative study of nakedness in Renaissance art

that strove to reveal a theology of the body, see Leo Steinberg's The Sexuality of
Christ in Renaissance Art and in Modern Oblivion (Chicago, IL: University of Chi-
cago Press, 1996).
164. John Paul actually distinguishes between "pornography" which refers to litera-
ture and "pornovision" which refers to images. In common English usage, of course, the
term pornography usually refers to both.
165. A documentary on the restoration of the Sistine Chapel reported this story: Ap-
parently, Michelangelo liked to use the faces of actual people in painting his figures. It
was already known that Michelangelo used the face of a cleric who condemned his nude
Historical Man 235
Michelangelo's nudes are not pornographic because he intended to

reveal the nuptial meaning of the body as a revelation of the Trinitarian
Mystery. It is quite clear, however, that this is not the intention of pornog-
raphers, who portray the naked body with the explicit intention of rousing
lust in men. By doing so, they explicitly violate "those deep governing
rules of the gift and of mutual donation" which are inscribed in the human
being (223) .
• The juxtaposition of the nudity on the billboards just outside the

Vatican and the nudity portrayed in the art inside the Vatican vividly illus-
trates the difference between pornography and a respectful portrayal of the
body in art (shall we call it "nuptial-ography"?). On this point, those who
subscribe to the "interpretation of suspicion"-and think it holy or "Catho-
lic" to do so-simply cannot justify their position after touring the Vatican.
It would be virtually impossible to count the number of depictions of the
body that prudery would quickly label "obscene" in St. Peter's Basilica
and the Vatican museum.
As the Pope says, pornographers will retort that they act in this way
in the name of the realistic truth about man. Furthermore, they demand the
right to "everything that is human" in works of art. But, as John Paul in-
sists, the problem with pornography is precisely that it fails to portray ev-
erything that is human. Precisely this truth about man-the whole truth
about man-makes it necessary to condemn pornography. The Holy Fa-
ther confirms that this condemnation "is not the effect of a puritanical
mentality or of a narrow moralism, just as it is not the product of a thought
imbued with Manichaeism. It is the question of an extremely important,
fundamental sphere of values, before which man cannot remain indifferent
because of the dignity of humanity [and] the personal character and the
eloquence of the human body" (225). For John Paul, we could say that the
problem with pornography is not that it reveals too much of the person,
but that it reveals far too little. Indeed, it portrays the naked human body
without revealing the person at all.
With these refreshingly balanced reflections, John Paul closes his
cycle on historical man. We have reflected on man's origins and on the
paintings as the model for the demon in the lower right-hand corner of the Last Judgment.
However, only when the loincloth on this demon was removed during the restoration did
the modern world glimpse the full extent of Michelangelo's disdain for this cleric's prud-
ery. What may have seemed like a vine coiled around this demon was actually revealed to
be a serpent. Not only that-it was taking a generous chomp out of his genitals!
historical drama of sin and redemption. Now, in order to complete the out-
line of an "adequate anthropology," we must look to the reality of embodi-
ment and sexuality in the dimension of man's eternal destiny.
Historical Man-In Review

1. Christ's words, which equate "looking lustfully" with committing
"adultery in the heart," announce the "ethos of redemption." Merely fol-
lowing an external ethic is not enough. It is necessary to penetrate inside
the human heart (ethos) where man experiences the truth about good or
fails to do so.
2. Fulfilling the law cannot be equated only with meeting the law's
demands. It involves a super-abounding justice in man's heart that readily
goes beyond the demands of law out of genuine love for the truth. This is a
"living morality" in which we realize the very meaning of being human.
3. The "heart" defines our humanity from "within." In a way it is
equivalent with personal subjectivity. The heart is where we come to know
and live the true nuptial meaning of the body or fail to do so. For historical
man, the heart is a battlefield between love and lust.
4. John Paul describes original sin as the "questioning of the gift."
Man denies that "God is love" and therefore casts the Father from his
heart. When the heart is un-inspired by God's love, it gives birth to lust.
Lust, then, is sexual desire devoid of God's love. Shame rises in the heart
because man realizes that his body has ceased drawing from the power of
the spirit.
5. Shame is cosmic (experienced in relation to all creation), imma-
nent (experienced within oneself), and relative (experienced in relation to
the "other"). Shame also has a double meaning. It manifests that man and
woman have lost sight of the nuptial meaning of the body, and it also indi-
cates an inherent need to protect the nuptial meaning of the body from the
degradation of lust.
6. In the "second discovery of sex," what had once enabled man and
woman's communion was suddenly felt to impede communion. It seems
that the woman bears a particular disability in this new situation. Both
man and woman are subject to lust, but the male tendency to dominate and
control woman now places her in an apparent position of inequality.
Historical Man 237
7. The nuptial meaning of the body continues to serve as the "mea-

sure of the heart" for historical man. This means that through the grace of
redem ption, 'll1ist gives man [he task of reclaiming the truth of Lhe body
and sex-ua lity. Lust has not completely s Llffocated the nuptial m.ean!J1g f
the body. on ly hab itually threatened it. Recognizing the distortions of our
hearts s11 uld not I actus to distrust ours Jves, but should pur us 11 to re-
claim self-mastery.
8. Maintaining the balance of the gift has been entrusted to both men
and women, but it seems the man has a particular responsibility in this re-
gard. If he is ca ned in s me sense to initiate the gift he must ensure that
the gift he initiates is genuine. He cannot ' eek to "possess' the woman 's
femininity, only borrow" it. If men and women are to ' belong" to each
other this can on ly come abo ut through the sin ere gift of self and never
through lustful desire.
9. Old Testament legislation compromised with concupiscence, but
the prophets point to th illtegrity of the covenant of marriage and to its
sign. T he bodily unioL1 of spouses is the regular sign of married I ve. Un-
derstan.ding this i.s essential for lhe enti re theology oftbe body, both ii'om
all ethica l and an anthropological pint of view. For John Paul cxu::d mo-
rality is understood through the logic of "the truthful sign."
1O. The Wisdom literature of the Old Testament contains classic de-
scriptions of carnal concupiscence and admonitions to avoid indulging it.
However, it does not change ethos in any fundamental way. For such a
change, we must wait for the gift of redemption in Christ.
11. A man "looks" in conformity with what he is. A "look" determines
the intentionality of man's very existence. If a man looks with lust, he
confirms his denial of the gift of God's love, the gift of the other person,
and the gift of life itself. He reduces the value of the person to an object of
sel f-gratifi cation.
12. Mclrriagc in no way 'justifie " lu st. Thus. a mao can commit
ad ultery in Iri s healt with hi s own wife if be treats her as nothing but an
object to satisty his own inslillct. A merely psychological definition of tu l,
however, annal ~'\I1'iv e at this conc lu sion s in 'C it does not take man and
woman's beginning as the normative point of reference.
13. The common life of men and women "constitutes the pure and
simple fabric of existence." Their call to communion "is the deepest sub-
stratum of human ethics and culture." Hence, the freedom of the gift af-
forded by liberation from lust "is the condition of all life together in truth."
14. To understand Christ's words about lust properly, we must OD-

tend with the "inveterate habits" of Maul hacism in ollr ways of thinking
and evaluating. While the beresy of Manichaeism assigns to the body and
sex aD "anti-valuc,' . hristianity recognizes in the body and 'e a value
not sufficiently appreciated. The Manichaean condemnation of the body
often serves as a loophole to avoid the demands of Christian purity.
15. Ifwe are to gain a hue victory over lust, purity must mature from
the "negative" turning away to the more "positive" asseliion of the value
and dignity of the body and sex. The "masters of suspicion" do not believe
in the power of redemption to transform the heart in this way. But we must
not stop at putting the heart in a state of irreversible suspicion. Redemp-
tion is a truth that calls man with efficacy to transformation of heart. The
meaning of life, then, is the antithesis of the interpretation of suspicion.
16. Christ's call to overcome lust is not "hurled into emptiness" but
taps in to that "echo" of our beatifying beginning that remains within each
of us. The heart is deeper than lust, and Christ's words reactive that deeper
heritage giving it real power in our lives. The grace of creation becomes
renewed for each of us in the grace and gift of redemption.
17. The erotic and the ethical do not differ from each other. Eros and
ethos are not inherently opposed. In fact, they are called to meet in the hu-
man heart and bear fruit. Eros is meant to be redeemed, transfonned, sanc-
tified-not repressed or snuffed out. Through purification the erotic be-
comes true, good, and beautiful.
18. Like a "guardian who watches over a hidden spring," we are
called to discern the deep impulses of our hearts so we can draw forth
what is fitting for the dignity of the gift and the communion of persons.
Living this ethos of redemption, far from stifling eros, affords a mature
spontaneity and a noble gratification.
19. Christ spoke bis word s about lust in the perspective ofth' re-
dempti n of tbe body, which is "the persp ctivc of the who le ospel, the
whole teaching, ,in fact the whole mission r CbrisL.' Christ's emphasis 011
purity of beart brings the Id Testament elh t f'uUlllmelll in the New.
20. "Blessed are the pure of heart, for they shall see God." The pure
can see the body as a making visible of God's mystery. Yet to attain this vi-
sion we must contend with the system of forces within us, which St. Paul
describes as a battle between the flesh and the Spirit. The "flesh" does not
refer to the human body, as such, but to the man of lust-the man who has
cut his heart off from the love and vision of God.
21. Justification by faith is not just a dimension of the divine plan of
salvation, but is a real power at work in man to free him from the bonds of
Historical Man 239
sin and, in this case, lust. Justification by faith enables man to experience
the power of "life according to the Spirit," which bears fruit in purity of
heart and of action.
22. We experience purity of heart to the measure that we experience
the "freedom for which Christ has set us free." The ethos of redemption is
nothing but an appeal to the full flowering of human freedom. Freedom to
sin is the "flip side" of freedom to love. If we seek to eradicate sin by
eradicating our freedom to commit it, we also eradicate the freedom that is
necessary to love.
23. Freedom is negated when it becomes a pretext for indulging "the
flesh." Such a man is not free, but enslaved by his disordered passions.
Freedom and purity come as we learn to refrain from unchastity and, more
so, when we control our bodies "in holiness and honor."
24. Authentic purity recognizes that those parts of the body we may
think are "less honorable" actually deserve greater honor. Purity has a
moral dimension as a virtue, but it also has a charismatic dimension as a
gift of the Holy Spirit. It is connected with piety, which is respect for the
work of God. Unchastity is a violation of piety because the body is a
temple of the Holy Spirit.
25. St. Paul exhorts us to glorify God in our bodies. Purity is God's
glory radiated in the human body. Christ's words about purity as the abil-
ity to "see God" have not only an eschatological meaning but bear fruit
here and now. "To the pure all things are pure, but to the corrupt and unbe-
lieving nothing is pure." The latter deny the "supernatural realism of faith"
and the "anthropology of rebirth in the Spirit."
26. This theology of the body is at the basis of the most suitable educa-
tion of man in the meaning of his own humanity. It calls him to an authentic
Christian spirituality, which is always a spirituality of the human body. Fur-
thermore, understanding and practically applying the pronouncements of the
Church's Magisterium regarding marriage and sexuality demand that deep
theology of the body which we derive from the words of Christ.
27. Portrayal of the naked body in art is connected with a special re-
sponsibility. It demands respect for the "nuptial system of reference,"
which reveals the body as an intimate gift of the person. The body can be
portrayed in its nakedness in a way that elicits awe and respect for the
mystery of our humanity, but it can also be portrayed in a way that de-
grades our humanity. Pornography does not reveal too much of the person.
It reveals far too little.
Cycle 3
Eschatological Man
In our quest for a "total vision of man" we have looked at our origin
and our history, now we must look to our destiny. We must reflect upon the
experience of embodiment for the man of the eschaton. As the Catechism
affirms, "'On no point does the Christian faith meet with more opposition
than on the resurrection of the body.' It is very commonly accepted that
the life of the human person continues in a spiritual fashion after death.
But how can we believe that this body, so clearly mortal, could rise to ev-
erlasting life?" I Christ's resurrection is the definitive word on the subject.
Thus St. Paul attests that he who raised Christ from the dead will give eter-
nallife to our mortal bodies as well (see Rom 8: 11).
John Paul bases this cycle on Christ's discussion with the Sadducees.
The Lord announces that men and women "neither marry nor are given in
marriage" in the resurrection (see Mt 22:30; Mk 12:25; Lk 20:35). At the
surface, Christ's assertion may seem to undermine all that the Pope has al-
ready said about the surpassing dignity of nuptial union and the "eternal
attraction" between the sexes (see §33). Certainly we know by now that
John Paul's exegesis never remains at the surface. As we shall learn,
Christ's words reveal a completely new dimension of the human mystery,
and thus point to the crowning glory of all the Pope has said.
Eschatological Man is the shortest cycle-only nine addresses deliv-
ered between November 11, 1981 and February 10, 1982. But it is perhaps
the most profound cycle and, thus, the most difficult at times to follow. Yet
it is well worth every ounce of mental energy it requires. If we could but
take in what this pontiff tells us about the joys to come, it would set us
ablaze! John Paul weds his Carmelite mysticism with his phenomenologi-
cal insights for an unsurpassed vision of the eschaton. To be sure, reflect-
ing on the resurrection of the body stretches the Pope's philosophical
method to the limit. How can we possibly talk about subjective experience
1. CCC, n. 996.
241
in relation to the final resurrection when we have no experience of it what-

soever? We can do so in the same way we talk about original innocence-
based on the principle of continuity. Christ, in his "revelation of the body,"
calls historical man to look in two directions. In Christ's conversation with
the Pharisees, he calls us to look to the beginning. In his conversation with
the Sadducees, Christ calls us to look to the future resurrection.
Even if a "discontinuity" separates the experience of original man,
historical man, and eschatological man, as John Paul says, "What the hu-
man body is in the sphere of man's historical experience is not completely
cut off from those two dimensions of his existence, which are revealed
through Christ's words." Hence, these two "extensions of the sphere" of
the experience of the body "are not completely beyond the reach of our
understanding." Based on the principle of continuity, "we can make a cer-
tain theological reconstruction of what might have been the experience of
the body on the basis of man's revealed 'beginning,' and also of what it
will be in the dimension of the 'other world. "'2
Applying this principle, we can say that if our origin and our history
have something to do with the experience of Trinitarian love in the human
reflection of nuptial union, then our destiny will also have something to do
with that same experience. Of course, this "will be a completely new expe-
rience," as the Pope says. Yet "at the same time it will not be alienated in
any way from what man took part in from 'the beginning' nor from what,
in the historical dimension of his existence, constituted in him the source
of the tension between spirit and body, concerning mainly the procreative
meaning of the body and sex."3
Returning to our image of the tires: If in his discussion with the
Pharisees and in the Sermon on the Mount, Christ calls historical man to
reflect on "the beginning" when our tires were fully inflated-then in his
discussion with the Sadducees, Christ calls us to reflect on the future when
tires will lose their raison d 'etre and will give way to flight.
48. An Infinite Perspective of Life

November 11, 18, 1981 (TB 233-237)
Like the Pharisees who approached Jesus to question him about di-
vorce, the Sadducees also tried to trap Jesus. The Sadducees did not be-
2. 12/16/81, TB 245.
3. 1/13/82, TB 248 .
Eschatological Man 243
lieve in the resurrection. Appealing to the levirate law (see Deut 25:5-10),
they brought a case to Jesus to prove their position. '''There were seven
brothers; the first took a wife, and when he died left no children; and the
second took her, and died, leaving no children; and the third likewise; and
the seven left no children. Last of all the woman also died. In the resurrec-
tion, whose wife will she be? For the seven had her as wife'" (Mk 12:20- 23).
The Pope remarks that the Sadducees unquestionably treat the question of
resurrection as a theory or hypothesis that can be disproved. Furthermore, as
John Paul adds in an endnote, the Sadducees insinuate "that faith in the res-
urrection of the body leads to admitting polyandry, which is contrary to
God's law" (258).
A. The Power of God

The Sadducees considered themselves highly educated experts in the
Scriptures. But Jesus-an "uneducated," renegade prophet- responds:
You are wrong, for you know neither the scriptures nor the power of
God. For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in mar-
riage, but are like angels in heaven. And as for the resurrection of the
dead, have you not read what was said to you by God, 'I am the God of
Abraham, and the God ofIsaac, and the God ofJacob?' He is not God of
the dead, but of the living (Mt 22 :29- 33).4
John Paul says that Christ's response is "stupendous in its content." It
forms the third element of "the triptych" of Christ's words which are es-
sential for the theology of the body. His response, in fact, completes "the
revelation of the body" and "is one of the answer-keys of the Gospel." It
reveals "another dimension of the question [which] corresponds to the
wisdom and power of God himself" (234).
Christ will eventually answer all doubts about the resurrection with
the miracle of Easter. For now, however, he wants to demonstrate the truth
about resurrection from the testimony of the Old Testament. Mark's ac-
count reports more details: '''And as for the dead being raised, have you
not read in the book of Moses, in the passage about the bush, how God
said to him, "I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God
of Jacob"? He is not God of the dead, but of the living; you are quite
wrong'" (Mk 12:26- 27). John Paul mentions in an endnote that the im-
mortality of their souls could seemingly explain why the Patriarchs are
still "living." In other words, it need not prove the resurrection of the
body. But Jesus was addressing himself to the Sadducees who accepted
4. See CCC, nn.988 - 1008.

"only the biblical psycho-physical unity of man who is 'the body and the
breath of life.' Therefore, according to them the soul dies with the body"
(259). For the Sadducees, Jesus' affirmation that the Patriarchs were
"alive" could only have been understood in reference to the resurrection of
the body.
Each of the synoptic accounts of the discussion "contains two essen-
tial elements: 1) the annunciation about the future resurrection of the
body; 2) the enunciation about the state of the body of the risen man"
(235). The Holy Father examines each element. Regarding the simple truth
of the resurrection, Jesus first shows the Sadducees "an error of method:
they do not know the Scriptures." Then he shows them "an error of sub-
stance: they do not accept what is revealed by the Scriptures-they do not
know the power of God, they do not believe in him who revealed himself
to Moses in the burning bush" (236). Jesus demonstrates that mere literal
knowledge of the Scripture is not enough. In other words just to be a
Scripture scholar does not suffice. "The Scriptures, in fact, are above all a
means to know the power of the living God who reveals himself in them,
just as he revealed himself to Moses in the bush" (236). If we "know" the
Scriptures inside and out but have not encountered the mystery of the liv-
ing God within them, we have missed the whole point.
B. The God ofLife

To reread the Scriptures correctly "means to know and accept with
faith the power of the Giver of life, who is not bound by the law of death
which rules man's earthly history" (236). As John Paul says, "He who is-
he who lives and is Life-is the inexhaustible source of existence and of
life, as was revealed at the 'beginning' in Genesis" (237). Although we
have turned our backs on Life by breaking the original covenant, and thus
lost access to the "Tree of Life," John Paul affirms that throughout the
Scriptures the living God continually extends his covenant of Life to man
and desires to renew it. "Christ is God's ultimate word on this subject," the
Pope says. The covenant which Christ establishes between God and man-
kind "opens an infinite perspective of life." In Christ, "access to the Tree
of Life-according to the original plan of the God of the covenant-is re-
vealed to every man in its definitive fullness. This will be the meaning of
the death and resurrection of Christ; this will be the testimony of the Pas-
chal Mystery" (237).
More than that, as we shall learn, the sacrament of marriage testifies
to this, that sacrament which is consummated when husband and wife be-
come "one flesh." If husband and wife are faithful to the truth of the sign
of their covenant, they image and participate in that definitive covenant
between Christ and the Church. Then their marriage too opens to "an infi-
nite perspective of life." Tragically, spouses can, like the Sadducees, close
themselves to this perspective of life. They can, like the Sadducees, "de-
prive" God of his life-giving power. Then, rather than becoming a truthful
sign of the covenant of life, they (knowingly or unknowingly) become a
counter-sign of it. And God, as in the case with the Sadducees, becomes
"the God oftheir hypotheses and interpretations" rather than "the true God
of their fathers" (237).
49. Anthropology of the Resurrection

December 2, 1981 (TB 238-240)
John Paul defines marriage as "that union in which, according to the

words of Genesis, 'a man cleaves to his wife and they become one flesh. '"
He further states that if this union is "characteristic of man right from the
'beginning'" it does not "constitute, on the other hand, the eschatological
future of man" (238). Indeed, Christ's words about the resurrection affirm
that the "one flesh" union of marriage belongs exclusively to "this age"
(Lk 20:34).
Many have thought Christ's words disparage sexuality and marital
love. Some have seen his statement as proof positive that sexual love is
inherently tainted and unfit for the holiness of heaven. Others have feared
that it means an eternal sadness of separation from their spouses. s But, like
the Sadducees, those who accept these interpretations "know neither the
scriptures nor the power of God" (Mt 22:29).
A. The Fulfillment ofMarriage

The resurrection will not eradicate marriage. Rather, marriage will be
brought to its ultimate fulfillment in "the Marriage of the Lamb" (Rev
19:7). From the beginning, the "great mystery" of nuptial union was given
to us to anticipate and prepare us for the "great mystery" of eternal union
with Christ. This is why John Paul describes marriage as the primordial
sacrament. But precisely as a sacrament-an earthly sign of a heavenly re-
ality-marriage is not the final word on man. Man's ultimate end is
heaven. Sacraments will not exist in heaven because they will have come
to fruition. 6 When Jesus says men and women will not be given in mar-
riage in the resurrection, it is as ifhe is saying, "You no longer need a sign
5. See St. John Chrysostom's quote in CCC, n. 2365.

6. See CCC, n.671.
to point you to heaven when you are in heaven." This is why the Pope says
that in the resurrection, marriage and procreation "lose, so to speak, their
raison d'etre" (238). The reason they exist is to prepare us for heaven as
the fruitful Bride of Christ.
In John Paul's vision of the resurrection, nothing essentially human is
mitigated or eliminated. Everything we have learned about who the human
person is as a subject (original solitude) and his perennial call to live in an
incarnate communion of persons (original unity) reaches its ultimate real-
ization. As the Pope says, the future age "means the definitive fulfillment
of mankind." At the same time, however, this entails "the quantitative
closing of that circle of beings, who were created in the image and like-
ness of God" through conjugal union (237).
In other words, man's destiny is fulfilled only when the age in which
men and women multiply through the union of their bodies comes to a
close. This "closing" must never be perceived as a loss over which to la-
ment. What a tragic misconception! This closing opens to the fulfillment
of every human desire which from the beginning was written in man's
heart and stamped in his body as male and female. In fact, as John Paul
points out, Christ reveals the new condition of the human body in the res-
urrection precisely by proposing a reference and a comparison with the
condition in which man had participated since the beginning.
B. Like the Angels?

The Pope carefully clarifies that when Christ says we will be "like
angels in heaven" (Mt 22:30) he does not mean that we will be dis-incar-
nated or otherwise dehumanized. The context in which Christ is speaking,
John Paul says, "indicates clearly that man will keep in 'that age' his own
human psychosomatic nature. If it were otherwise, it would be meaning-
less to speak of the resurrection" (239). Unfortunately, Plato's belief that
the body is the earthly prison of the soul has significantly influenced the
thinking of some Christians. As the Pope insists, "The truth about the res-
urrection clearly affirms, in fact, that the eschatological perfection and
happiness of man cannot be understood as a state of the soul alone, sepa-
rated (according to Plato: liberated) from the body." This idea is essen-
tially alien to orthodox Christianity. Instead, man's ultimate beatitude
"must be understood as the state of man definitively and perfectly inte-
grated through such a union of the soul and the body, which qualifies and
definitively ensures this perfect integrity" (240). 7
7. See CCc. n. 650 .

• Philosopher Peter Kreeft writes: "A soul without a body is exactly

the opposite of what Plato thought it is. It is not free but bound. It is in an
extreme form of paralysis." The human soul needs the body to express it-
self-not only on earth but in heaven as well. "The body is the matter of
the soul, and the soul is the form of the body. That is why the resurrection
of the body is internal to the immortality of the soul, not a dispensable ex-
tra. When death separates the two," Kreeft continues, "we have a freak, a
monster, an obscenity. That is why we are terrified of ghosts and corpses,
though both are harmless: they are the obscenely separated aspects of what
belongs together as one. That is why Jesus wept at Lazarus' grave: not
merely for his bereavement but for this cosmic obscenity."8
John Paul mentions that faith in the resurrection of the body played a
key role in the formation of theological anthropology. In fact, he says that
theological anthropology could be considered simply as the "anthropology
of the resurrection." For only in light of the resurrection of the body do we
fully understand who man is theologically and what he is destined for as a
body-person. In fact, the Pope says that St. Thomas' reflections on the res-
urrection led him to draw closer to the conception of Aristotle. Unlike
Plato, Aristotle taught that, together with the soul, the body constitutes the
unity and integrity of the human being. Christian belief in the resurrection
of the body confirms this.
But another question arises: Will we be raised as male and female?
Some, granting the resurrection of the body, envision a sexless heaven
based on St. Paul's teaching that in Christ "there is neither male nor fe-
male" (Gal 3:28). The Pope believes that our bodiliness belongs to our hu-
manity more deeply than the fact that in our bodiliness we are either male
or female. In other words, the experience of being a body-person (original
solitude) is deeper than and "prior" to the experience of sexual differentia-
tion and the call to communion (original unity).
That being said, John Paul mentions three times in his audience of
December 2, 1981 (and on other occasions throughout this cycle) that in
the resurrection we reacquire our bodies in their masculinity and feminin-
ity. Sexual difference is the perennial sign and summons of the human
race to communion. The resurrection fulfills not only the bodily experi-
ence of solitude, but also the bodily experience of communion. As John
Paul expresses it, in the resurrection we rediscover not only "a new, per-
8. Peter Kreeft, EvelY thing You Ever Wanted to Know about Heaven (San Francisco:
Ignatius Press, 1990), p. 93.
feet subjectivity of everyone" as individuals. At the same time we redis-

cover "a new, perfect intersubjectivity of ail,"'! that is, communion with
other persons.
Based on the Pope's modern philosophical language, we come to un-
derstand that sexual difference is not only retained, but is in some way es-
sential to the communion of saints. Of course the resurrection means a
completely new state of human life. Both the reality of sexual difference
and the mystery of communion will be experienced in an entirely new
way. As the Catechism says, "This mystery of blessed communion with
God and all who are in Christ is beyond all understanding and descrip-
tion."lu We must not, therefore, conceive of the eternal communion that
awaits us as an expansion into infinity of the earthly reality of the male-
female communion. Nonetheless, nothing genuinely human will be done
away with or annihilated. All that is essentialiy human in the original ex-
periences o[ solitude-unity-nakedness will be brought to ultimate fulfill-
ment. Heaven, therefore, will be the experience of a great multitude of
solitudes living in perfect unity without any fear of being seen and known
by each and by all .
• Does this mean we will we be naked in heaven? Those who claim to

have caught glimpses of the blessed report that it is hard to classify them as
either clothed or naked. I I The experience is simply "other" than we can
imagine. If clothed, the blessed wear a "nuptial garment."12 If naked, there
is no fear because the original raison d'etre of shame (in the negative
sense) has ceased utterly. Interestingly, both the Gospel of Luke (24: 12)
and of John (20:5-7) mention that Christ's burial coverings were left be-
hind in the tomb after his resurrection. The Catechism teaches that, to-
gether with the empty tomb, this signifies that "Christ's body had escaped
the bonds of death and corruption."" Michelangelo sought to convey this
truth by portraying his famous Risen Christ naked without shame. It seems
fitting that the New Adam would come forth from the ground just as the
first Adam did. It also seems significant that Christ would come fOlih from
the virgin tomb (see Jn 19:41) just as he came forth from the virgin womb.
Yet in doing so, Christ's risen body was mysteriously "different," so much
so that his own disciples did not immediately recognize him.
9.12/16/81, TB 245.
10. CCC, n.I027.
II. See EvelY thing Ycm Ever Wanted to Know ahout Heaven, p. 43 .
12. See CCC, n. 1682.
13. CCC, n.657.
Eschatological Mall 249
• The Book of Revelation speaks of the saints in heaven wearing

"white robes" (Rev 7:9). White is the color of light. When Christ was
transfigured, his garments "became white as light" (Mt 17:2). Light reveals
rather than conceals. In heaven, all is revealed by the light of Christ. "For
nothing is hid that shall not be made manifest, nor anything secret that
shall not be known and come to light" (Lk 8: 17). Many Church Fathers
speak both of Adam and Eve in paradise and of the blessed in heaven as
being clothed in glory. "They shall have no need of woven raiment," says
Ignatius of Antioch, "for they shall be clothed in eternallight."14 John Paul
II describes purity as "the glOly of the human body before God. It is God's
glory in the human body, through which masculinity and femininity are
manifested."15 White robes and nakedness are both symbols that the
Church has used to convey Christian purity and new birth in Christ. St.
Cyril of Jerusalem describes the symbolism of the once common practice
of nude Baptism as follows: "As soon as you entered [the baptismal font]
you divested yourself of your garment; this gesture symbolized the divest-
ing yourself of the old man in you with all his practices .... 0 marvelous
thing, you were naked before everyone and yet you did not blush for
shame. Truly you represented in this the image of the first man, Adam, who
in paradise was naked but was not ashamed."16 The resurrected state will
recover whatever was essentially human in Adam's original experience of
nakedness, but in an entirely new dimension "beyond all understanding
and description."17
50. Penetration of the Human by the Divine

December 2, 9, 1981 (TB 239-243)
If the resurrection signifies man's perfect realization, the Pope af-

firms that this cannot consist in a mutual opposition of spirit and body, but
only in a deep harmony between them. Of course, according to the "sys-
tem of forces" within man, the spirit has primacy over the body. But origi-
nal sin disrupted this system of forces in man, and the body often rebels
against the spirit. St. Paul expressed this so well: "I see in my members
another law at war with the law of my mind" (Rom 7:23). However, in the
14. Epistle to th e Philippians. series 2, v. 13 .

15. 3/ 18/81 , TB 209.
16. Mystagogica/ Catech eses. 2:2.
17. CCC, n. 1027.
"other world," the primacy of the spirit will be realized and manifested in
a "perfect spontaneity" without any opposition from the body.
John Paul carefully points out that this must not be understood as a
definitive "victory" of the spirit over the body. That would imply some re-
maining tension: an extrinsic domination of the spirit and a reluctant sub-
mission of the body. In the resurrection, however, no tension will exist.
The body will return to perfect unity and harmony with the spirit. Thus,
opposition between the spiritual and the physical in man will cease. John
Paul says, "We could speak here also of a perfect system of forces in mu-
tual relations between what is spiritual in man and what is physical" (241).
A. Divinizing Spiritualization of the Body

Christ's comparison of men and women to angels points to a perfect
"spiritualization" of the body. This means that the spirit "will fully perme-
ate the body, and that the forces of the spirit will permeate the energies of
the body" (241). Man and woman knew something of this in the beginning
(see §20). Indeed, the rupture of the hannony of body and spirit specifi-
cally caused the entrance of shame (see §27). Furthermore, through the re-
demption of the body, historical man "can, as the result of persevering
work," regain that harmony and "express a personality that is spiritually
mature" (241). Even so, Christ's words about the resurrection refer to a di-
mension of spiritualization different from that of earthly life. John Paul
adds that this is a spiritualization even different from that of the "begin-
ning" itself. 18
One of the main differences, John Paul says, is that the eschatologi-
cal spiritualization of the body precludes any opposition between body
and spirit. Original man, although fully integrated, had the possibility of
disintegration (as original sin attests). Historical man can progressively re-
gain integration, but he can still and often does fall prey to concupiscence.
Eschatological man will experience a "perfect spiritualization," which
makes it impossible that "another law" would be at war with the law of the
mind (see Rom 7:23). Hence, this state "is differentiated essentially (and
not only with regard to degree) from what we experience in earthly life"
(241).
18. Here we gain insight into the soteriological principle (principle of salvation) that
through Christ's redemption we gain even more than what we had in the state of original
innocence. Hence, in the liturgy of the Easter Vigil, the Church exults in the "happy fault"
of Adam.
Furthermore, the spirit that will totally permeate the body is not only
man's own spirit. It is the Holy Spirit. So the Pope speaks of a "divinizing
spiritualization."1 9 For "the sons of the resurrection" in Luke 20:36 are not
only "equal to angels." They are also "sons of God." This is why "the de-
gree of 'spiritualization' characteristic of 'eschatological' man will have its
source in the degree of his 'divinization'" (242). This means man's destiny
is to participate in the very divinity of the Trinity through the in-spiration
of his body by the Holy Spirit's power. And this is all revealed in our
corp orality and sexuality. In the beginning, man's creation as male and fe-
male and his call to conjugal communion "constituted a primordial sacra-
ment understood as a sign that transmits effectively in the visible world
the invisible mystery hidden in God from time immemorial. And this is the
mystery of truth and love, the mystery of divine life, in which man really
participates." 20
Through their experience of original unity, man and woman partici-
pated in the very humanness of each other. This was an effective sign of
their call to participate in the very divinity of God (see §22). But the
divinization to come will not be mediated by an earthly signY Hence, the
future divinization is "incomparably superior to the one that can be at-
tained in earthly life." It "is a question not only of a different degree, but,
in a way, of another kind of 'divinization '" (242).
This means that the consummate union of earth is consummated, so
to speak, only in the consummate union of heaven. As the Catechism
teaches, "For man, this consummation will be the final realization of the
unity of the human race, which God willed from creation ... Those who are
united with Christ will form the community of the redeemed, 'the holy
city' of God, 'the Bride, the wife of the Lamb."'22 In the Lamb's gift of
self to his Bride, John Paul says that "penetration and permeation of what
is essentially human by what is essentially divine, will then reach its peak
so that the life of the human spirit will arrive at such fullness which previ-
ously had been absolutely inaccessible to it" (242). This is man's ultimate
"participation in divine nature." It is man's ultimate "participation in the
interior life of God himself." It is his ultimate participation in grace (see
§§20, 37). This grace is "the communication of God in his very divinity,
not only to man's soul, but to his whole psychosomatic subjectivity"
19. 1/13/82, TB 248 .

20. 2/20/80, TB 76.
21. See, CCC, nn. 1023, 1136.
22. CCC, n. 1045.
(242). By virtue of this grace, man will "conceive" divine life within him
and bear it continually in the Holy Spirit. Of course the spousal analogy is
ultimately inadequate in conveying the mystery. Nonetheless, we see
something of the mystery "stamped" in our very being as male and female
and in our call to nuptial union .
• How can we not, at this point, be reminded of Mary as the model of

the Church and the archetype of humanity? She is the one who in this life
was impregnated with divine life! She is the one who in this life allowed
her entire person-body and soul-to be permeated by the Holy Spirit.
Hence, she is our eschatological hope. For in her, the redemption of the
body is already brought to completion.
B. Nuptial Meaning of the Beatific Vision

John Paul speaks of this divine communication to man's "psychoso-
matic subjectivity" (his soul-body personhood) and not only to a generic
"human nature" in order to emphasize the personal and communal dimen-
sion of God's heavenly gift. Heaven is a "union with God in his Trinitarian
mystery and of intimacy with him in the perfect communion of persons.
This intimacy-with all its subjective intensity-will not absorb man's
personal subjectivity, but rather will make it stand out to an incomparably
greater and fuller extent" (242). In other words, each person's uniqueness
will not be lost or absorbed into the Trinity. Each person will shine in the
full glory of his or her unrepeatability.
Once again, all of this was foreshadowed in some way through that
original, beatifying union of man and woman who, full of grace, did not
know shame in their nakedness. By sunendering themselves to each other,
each person was not lost or absorbed in the other but, in fact, discovered
his (her) true self through the sincere gift of self (see §23). In an infinitely
greater dimension- in the definitive fulfillment of every human longing
for union- we will discover our true selves in the resunection when we
respond to the gift of God with the sincere gift of ourselves to him.
From the beginning, human embodiment-connected as it is with
erotic desire for union with an "other"-was meant to be a sign of and a
preparation for that ultimate union with the ultimate Other. John Paul con-
cludes that in "this 'spiritualization' and 'divinization' in which man will
pmticipate in the resunection, we discover-in an eschatological dimen-
sion-the same characteristics that qualified the 'nuptial' meaning of the
body" (243). This time, however, all those characteristics (the com-
plementarity of the sexes; the call to life-giving communion; the desire to
see another and be seen by that other) are fulfilled "in the meeting with the
mystery of the living God, which is revealed through the vision of him
'face to face'" (243). The Catechism speaks of this fulfillment when it says
that the Church "longs to be united with Christ, her Bridegroom, in the
glory of heaven" where she "will rejoice one day with [her] Beloved, in a
happiness and rapture that can never end. "23
John Paul asks whether it is possible to think of this eschatological
experience of the nuptial meaning of the body above all as the "virginal"
meaning of being male and female-of the "virginal" experience of nup-
tial union and communion. To answer this question, the Holy Father says
we must first penetrate more deeply into the "very essence" of the be-
atific vision. 24
51. The Body: Witness to the Eschatological Experience

December 9, 16, 1981 (TB 241-244)
"Divinization" in the future world, the Pope says, "will bring the hu-
man spirit such a 'range of experience' of truth and love such as man
would never have been able to attain in earthly life." Ifwe are to penetrate
"into the very essence" of this divinization, into the very essence of the
beatific vision, it is "necessary to let oneself be guided by that 'range of
experience' of truth and love which goes beyond the limits of the cognitive
and spiritual possibilities of man in temporality" (242). With these words,
John Paul shows himself to be a mystic. Only a mystic can let himself be
guided by "a range of experience" beyond time while still living in time.
In other words, beyond the principle of continuity (see §48), a phenom-
enological analysis of man's destiny can only be attempted by someone
who has mystically experienced something of life beyond the veil. It
seems John Paul has. He stretches words and ideas to their maximum ca-
pacity in his attempt to communicate to us something of an "escha-
tological experience."
A. The Eschatological Experience

As stated previously, from the beginning man was created to be a
"partner of the Absolute" (see § 12). He was called to enter a covenant with
God-a relationship of eternal communion analogous to the union of
spouses (see § 17). Man broke this original covenant with God by eating
from the forbidden tree. Yet God's gift of himself to man is irreversible
(see §20). Christ's coming is the ultimate testimony of God's irreversible
23. CCC, n.1821.

24. See CCC, n. 1028.
gift. If historical man is willing to pass by way of the cross, not only can
he recover that original communion with God, but he opens himself to the
living hope of the eschatological fulfillment of this communion.
In this eschatological fulfillment, we will know "in a deep and expe-
riential way, the' self-communication of God' to the whole of creation." In
pat1icular, we will know and experience the self-communication of God to
us. This "is the most personal self-giving by God in his very divinity" be-
cause we are "that being who, from the beginning, bears within himself
the image and likeness of God" (243). We are that being who bears within
him the interior dimension of the gift (see §22). In this eschatological ex-
perience, the interior dimension of the gift in man-expressed and made
visible "in the beginning" through the nakedness of the body-will meet
its divine prototype "face to face." All our energies will be concentrated on
receiving the Gift of the living God and reciprocating that love by giving
ourselves back to him. This "eschatological communion (communio) of
man with God," the Pope says, "will be nourished by the ... contemplation
of that more perfect communion-because it is purely divine-which is
the trinitarian communion of the divine Persons in the unity of the same
divinity" (243).
In other words, our union with the living God springs from the be-
atific vision of his unity and Trinitarian Communion. Beholding the total,
perfect, and incessant reciprocal giving of the Trinity will inspire us to
give ourselves incessantly to God in response to his eternal gift to us. In
this way, the object of the beatific vision "will be that mystery hidden in
the Father from eternity, a mystery which in time was revealed in Christ,
in order to be accomplished incessantly through the Holy Spirit" (243).
B. The Body as a Witness to Love

In a word, that mystery we shall behold "face to face" is love (see 1
Jn 4:8). Love is gift; and gift is grace; and grace received is communion-
with the divine. Recalling John Paul's thesis, this mystery of love and gift
(and grace and communion) hidden in God from all etemity and defini-
tively revealed in Christ was made visible from the beginning by the sign
of the body in its masculinity and femininity (see §22). Man and woman
embody the reality of gift. Hence, the body has a nuptial meaning. As pre-
viously quoted (see §17), John Paul says, "This is the body: a witness to
creation as a fundamental gift, and so a witness to Love as the source from
which this same giving springs. Masculinity-femininity- namely, sex-is
the original sign of a creative donation [by God] and of an awareness on
the pat1 of man, of a gift lived so to speak in an original way. "25
25. 1/9/80, TB 62.

This "original way" of living the gift of God's love (grace) was re-
vealed in the experiences of original solitude, unity, and nakedness. The
"historical way" of living the gift seeks to recover the grace of creation
through the redemption of the body. Finally, the "eschatological way" of Iiv-
ing the gift not only fully recovers the original purity, but takes us infinitely
beyond to an entirely new dimension-to an immediate bodily participation
in the Trinitarian mystery of love and gift. This Trinitarian mystery of love
and gift will become "the content of the eschatological experience and the
'form' of the entire human existence in the dimension of the 'other world'"
(243). Therefore, the Pope says that eternal life in the resurrection must be
understood as the full and perfect experience of grace.
Our first parents experienced the original dimension of this grace in
the beginning. We participate in it as well through faith and the sacra-
ments. However, this grace will only "reveal itself in all its penetrating
depth to those who partake in the 'other world. '" There, the grace already
given in creation and restored in redemption will "be experienced in its be-
atifying reality" (243).
C. The Peliection of Subjectivity

This ultimate participation in grace, in the very life and love of God,
is what enables all that is physical in man to participate perfectly in all that
is spiritual in him. At the same time this experience will consist in the per-
fect realization of what is personal in man. According to the great "nuptial
mystery," we are created to be Bride of Christ. In giving ourselves totally
to Christ, we do not lose ourselves. We discover ourselves (see Mk 8:35).
In submitting ourselves as a Bride to our eternal Bridegroom, we are not
dominated; we are not abased. We are loved (see Eph 5:25). We are served
(see Mt 20:28). We are filled to the full with life (see Jn 10:10). If we
doubt that surrendering totally to God provides the key to our freedom and
the fulfillment of our personal subjectivity, we are still duped by the father
of lies. We are still "questioning the gift" (see §26). If we only knew the
gift of God and who it is that offers it to us (see Jn 4: 10)!
Not only will participants in the other world rediscover their authen-
tic subjectivity, but the Pope repeatedly affirms that they will acquire it to
a far more perfect extent than in earthly life. By living in "perfect com-
munion with the living God," they will enjoy a perfectly mature subjectiv-
ity. This confirms what John Paul calls "the law ofthe integral order ofthe
person." According to this law, as a personal subject, man is created for his
own sake (solitude), but he is not called to live for his own sake. He can
only perfect his subjectivity through the sincere gift of self, that is, through
a perfect experience of inter-subjectivity (unity). In tum, the perfection of
communion is conditioned by the spiritual maturity of the subjects who
enter that communion. We can see this clearly in the case of marriage. A
marriage is only as healthy as those who enter it. However, at the same
time, and according to the same law of the integral order of the person, the
perfection of communion determines the perfection of the participants in
that communion. In marriage, as the spouses' communion grows in perfec-
tion, so do the spouses.
Man and woman knew the earthly model (the primordial sacrament)
of this perfect communion in the beginning. To the extent that we allow
the ethos of redemption to permeate us, we can rediscover and live accord-
ing to this original earthly model. But in the resurrection, the earthly
model will give way to the divine prototype, and human subjectivity will
be perfected through an immediate experience of inter-subjectivity with
the divine Subject who, himself, lives an eternal mystery of divine inter-
Subjectivity. This is why men and women are no longer given in marriage
in the resurrection. Their call to communion will be fulfilled in an eternal
communion with the Eternal Communion.
52. The Eschatological Authenticity of the Gift

December 16, 1981; January 13,1982 (TB 244-249)
In his exchange with the Pharisees, Christ speaks of the state of mar-
riage "in the beginning." In his exchange with the Sadducees, he speaks of
the state of marriage in the future. These two "words" of Christ are linked
together almost as bookends in John Paul's "total vision of man."
A. A New Threshold for Understanding Man

John Paul says that Christ's words about the resurrection enable us to
understand the meaning of that original "one flesh" unity in a whole new
dimension. Recall that John Paul described Genesis 2:24 ("the two shall
become one flesh") as a perspective text, indicating that it "will have in the
revelation of God an ample and distant perspective."26 Here the Pope says
that Christ's words about the resurrection and the state of male and female in
the resurrection are of decisive importance "not only as regards the words of
the book of Genesis," but "in what concerns the entire Bible" (249).27
Christ's words on the resurrection "enable us, in a certain sense, to
read again-that is, in depth-the whole revealed meaning of the body,
26. 11114/79, TB 47.

27. Recall that what we learn in the theology of the body is no side issue. It concerns
"the perspective of the whole Gospel, of the whole teaching, in fact, of the whole mission
of Christ" (see §§9, 40).
the meaning of being a man, that is, a person 'incarnated,' of being male or
female as regards the body" (249). In the beginning, the meaning of our
creation as male and female was revealed as "gift." Man and woman were
created first to receive the gift of God's gratuitous love, and then to reca-
pitulate that love by being gift to each other (see § 17). "Therefore," as
Genesis 2:24 proclaims, "a man leaves his father and his mother and
cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh." This was the consummate
expression of the gift in the beginning, which established that incarnate
communion of persons (see §14).
The words of Genesis 2:24 refer "especially to this world," the Pope
says, but "not completely" (249). These are "the words that constitute the
sacrament of marriage. "28 Hence, like all sacraments, the "one flesh" unity
of marriage points in some way to the "other world." There, the gift will
be consummated in an eternal, eschatological dimension of "incarnate
communion" inclusive of all who respond to the wedding invitation of the
Lamb. If, as John Paul says, the words of Genesis (and from the context it
seems the Pope is speaking specifically of Genesis 2:24) "were almost the
threshold of the whole theology of the body," Christ's words about the res-
urrection present almost "a new threshold of this complete truth about
man, which we find in God's revealed Word. It is indispensable to dwell
upon this threshold," the Pope says, "if we wish our theology of the
body-and also our Christian 'spirituality of the body'- to be able to use
it as a complete image" (249).
B. Divine-Human Communion
John Paul explains the absence of marriage in the resurrection not only
with the end of history, but also-and above all-with what he calls the
"eschatological authenticity" of man's response to God's self-giving. In the
consummation of the gift in the resurrection, the divine Subject (God) will
give himself to the human subject (man) in a beatifYing experience "abso-
lutely superior to any experience proper to earthly life. The reciprocal gift of
oneself to God ... will be the response to God's gift of himself to man" (244).
By virtue of the eternal Word made flesh, this too will be an incarnate gift,
an incarnate communion.
Keeping in mind the ever greater dissimilarity in the analogy while
also focusing on the intrinsic similarity, we are talking about the ultimate
consummation of the marriage of divinity and humanity. We are talking
about the eternal, beatifying experience of a perfect divine-human inter-
subjectivity; a perfect divine-human communio personarum. We are talk-
28. 2/20/80, TB 76.

ing about the eschatological fulfillment of that "perspective text" of Gen-

esis 2:24. As St. Paul says, the union in one flesh is a "great mystery," and
it refers to the union of Christ and the Church (see Eph 5:31 - 32). Christ
left his Father in heaven; he left the home of his mother on earth-to give
up his body for his Bride so that we, the Bride of Christ, might become
"one flesh" with him. What was foreshadowed from the beginning in the
incarnate communion of man and woman (marriage) and definitively re-
vealed in the incamate communion of Christ and the Church (Eucharist)
will be lived etemally in the resurrection.
This is the ultimate meaning of "being a body"; of being male and
female in the divine image. Sexual difference and our longing for union
reveal that we are created for etemal communion with the eternal Com-
munion: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Pat1icipation in this etemal Com-
munion will be a completely new experience, but it will not be alienated
from the earthly experience of communion. The earthly communion, then,
will not be eradicated-it will be definitively fulfilled.
Again, we can see Satan's reason for attacking man and woman's
communion in the beginning and throughout history. It is the primordial
sign in creation of God's plan to take on flesh and be one with us. This is
precisely what Satan wants to thwart. But all he can do in his attempts to
counter God's plan is plagiarize the sacraments. All he can do is twist what
God created to be true, good, and beautiful. This means all of the sexual
confusion in our world-and in our own hearts-is simply the human de-
sire for heaven gone berserk. Untwist it and we rediscover the image of
God in every human being; we rediscover the deep human longing-that
God put there-for union with him. G. K. Chesterton expressed the same
idea when he wrote: "Every man who knocks on the door of a brothel is
looking for God. "29
C. Knowledge of God
John Paul speaks of the beatific vision as "a concentration of knowl-
edge and love on God himself." This knowledge "cannot be other than full
participation in the interior life of God, that is, in the very trinitarian real-
ity" (244). We can recall at this point our previous discussion of biblical
"knowledge" (see §23). Through their knowledge of each other in Gen-
esis, man and woman came to know "a third." In some sense they came to
participate in a created version, so to speak, of the uncreated relations of
the Trinity (see §20).
29. Dooley, David, ed. The Collected Works of G. K. Chesterton Volume I (San
Francisco: Ignatius, \986).
The entire cosmos, in fact, bears the mark of its Creator; the mark of
trinitarian relations. JO John Paul says the knowledge of God in heaven will
be at the same time the discovery, in God, of "the whole world of rela-
tions" that are part of God's perennial order in the cosmos. In other words,
the eschatological experience will not only be man's full participation in
the uncreated world of relations (the Trinity). It will also be a full partici-
pation in the created world of relations. This includes a full participation
in man's original harmony with creationJ' and a full participation in the
original created communion of persons.
This means that created relations will not be annulled or overridden
by participation in the uncreated relation. As John Paul says, "The con-
centration of knowledge and love on God himself in the trinitarian com-
munion of Persons can find a beatifying response in [man] only through
realizing mutual communion adapted to created persons. And for this
reason," he says, "we profess faith in the communion of saints" (244).32
53. Fulfillment of the Nuptial Meaning of the Body

December 16, 1981; January 13,1982 (TB 244-249)
Christ's words do not fall in a void, whether he speaks of the beginning

or of the future resurrection. If we experience an "echo" of our beginning
deep within our hearts, we also experience a kind of "premonition" of our
destiny. In fact, the earthly experience of the body "supplies the substratum
and the base" of the heavenly experience of the body (246). Although "it is
difficult to construct a fully adequate image of the 'future world,' ... at the
same time there is no doubt that, with the help of Christ's words, at least a
certain approximation to this image is possible and attainable" (248).
30. See ccc. n. 237 . See also Dominum et Vivificantem, n. 50 for a concise state-
ment of the cosmic dimensions of Trinitarian relations as manifested by the Incarnation.
31. See CCc. nn. 1047- 1048. As St. Paul says, "We know that the whole creation
il a~been g l'oun in ~ in trava il [awaiting] thc n.: dcmplion of our bod ies" (Rom 8:22- 23).
De, pi te lhe exaggerations of some environmentali sl and "a nim II rights' gro\IPS, there is
ntlllclhclcs$ a f Ulld!ll11enLOI r.i ghtn ess in mun's concern mId love for creat ion {see , nn .
24 15- 24 1II). When we untwist the distortions, we redl cover tI fundament:\1 longing tor
harmo ny wi lll crea tion lin t WiI:; part of God's origiIJ81 pl(llL .I o11n Paul prev iously de-
scrib ed th e "cosmic SIUlIllC" lh ~ l. munii'e s ts th e breaking llf this barmony w ith crea tion
(see §27).
32. See CCc. nn . 1474 - 1477.
The nuptial meaning of the body gives John Paul the key for con-
structing an image of the "future world." The call to be gift (to love as
God loves) is inscribed in the interior and exterior structure of the human
person from "the beginning." This primordial truth finds its eschatological
realization in the reciprocal gift of God and man to each other in an eternal
divine-human communion of persons. However, as mentioned above,
man's participation in the uncreated Communion of the Trinity is also a
perfect realization of the created communion of persons. Not only will we
be "one" with God; we will be "one" with everyone who responds to the
wedding invitation of the Lamb.
A. A Union of Communion
Paraphrasing John Paul, the communion of saints consists of many
created communions united with each other by contemplating the vision of
that Uncreated Communion (the Trinity). In turn, man's beatific vision of
the Trinity constitutes a real communion with this Uncreated Communion.
This "union of communion," as the Pope describes it (244), is an eternal
and mysterious unity of created communions with the Uncreated Com-
munion. In this ultimate reality we will see all and be seen by all. We will
know all and be known by all. And God will be "all in all" (Eph 1:23).
If you find yourself lost in the communion of these communions,
drawing from the logic of the nuptial meaning of the body, we can say
this. In the eschatological experience, we who are many as male and fe-
male will form one body (see 1 Cor 10: 17). In a manner beyond our
present comprehension,3) all that is masculine in humanity will be in union
with all that is feminine in humanity. In tum, this "one body" will form the
one Bride of Christ who, through eternal union with her Bridegroom, will
live in eternal communion with the Trinity. As the Pope says, and we have
already quoted, we must think of this reality in terms of "the rediscovery
of a new perfect SUbjectivity of everyone and at the same time of the redis-
covery of a new perfect intersubjectivity of all." This reality, the Pope con-
tinues, "signifies the real and definitive fulfillment of human subjectivity,
and, on this basis, the definitive fulfillment ofthe 'nuptial' meaning of the
body. The complete concentration of created subjectivity, redeemed and
glorified, on God himself, will not take man away from this fulfillment; in
fact-on the contrary-it will introduce him into it and consolidate him in
it." Finally, the Pope concludes that "in this way, eschatological reality
will become the source of the perfect realization of the trinitarian order in
the created world of persons" (245).
33. See ccc, nn. 1000, 1027.

When the Pope speaks of "the trinitarian order," he is speaking of

unity-in-plurality, oneness-in-multitude, a communion-of-solitudes. In the
beginning, biblical "knowledge" signified a communion so intimate and
unifying that man and woman became "almost the one subject of that act
and that experience, while remaining, in this unity, two really different
subjects."34 In a similar way, the great multitude of subjects that form the
communion of saints in communion with the Trinity will be almost the one
subject of that act and experience of eternal self-giving, while remaining,
in this unity, a multitude of different subjects (both human and divine).
Human participation in the "trinitarian order" means a participation in the
perfect unity and distinction found within the Trinity itself.35 "That nuptial
meaning of the body will be realized, therefore," according to John Paul,
"as a meaning that is perfectly personal and communitarian at the same
time" (247-248).
B. Virginal Communion
Harkening back to that original "virginal value of man," John Paul
says that in man's beatifying gift of himself to God, "as a response worthy
of a personal subject to God's gift of himself, 'virginity,' or rather the vir-
ginal state of the body will be totally manifested as the eschatological ful-
fillment of the 'nuptial' meaning of the body" (244). Recall that virginity
in the state of innocence was not first to be understood as the absence of
bodily union, but as the integrity of body and soul-as the state of man in
"solitude" before God. Hence, the original incarnate communion of man
and woman did not rob them of virginity, but affirmed it, because it also
affirmed man in "solitude" before God (see § 15).
Therefore, ifman's destiny is to be understood as the definitive fulfill-
ment of his origin, the incarnate communion of saints in union with the
Trinity must be understood as a virginal communion. For, as we have al-
ready quoted John Paul saying, man's ultimate beatitude "must be under-
stood as the state of man definitively and perfectly integrated through [the]
union of the soul and the body. "36 According to the Pope, virginity is "the
specific sign and the authentic expression of all personal subjectivity" (244)
because it is the specific sign of man's psychosomatic integration. "In this
way, therefore, that eschatological situation in which they 'neither marry
nor are given in marriage' has its solid foundation in the future state of the
personal subject" (244); that future state of perfect "virginal" integration.
34. 3/5/80, TB 79.

35. See CCC, nn. 254-255, 689.
36. 12/2/81, TB 240.
Again, this does not mean absence of union but, rather, perfection of
union. The '''nuptial' meaning of the body in the resurrection to the future
life will correspond perfectly both to the fact that man, as male and fe-
male, is a person created 'in the image and likeness of God,' and to the
fact that this image is realized in the communion of persons" (247). And
the Pope affirms that this will be a "union which is proper to the world of
[human] persons in their psychosomatic constitution" (244).
C. Perfect Freedom of the Gift

"This will be a completely new experience," the Pope says. Yet "at
the same time it will not be alienated in any way from what man took part
in from 'the beginning' nor from what, in the historical dimension of his
existence, constituted in him the source of the tension between spirit and
body, concerning mainly the procreative meaning of the body and sex. The
man of the 'future world' will find again in this new experience of his own
body precisely the completion of what he bore within himself perennially
and historically" (248). In the beginning the body was a sign of the person
and his call to communion. Throughout history, the original meaning of
that sign has been obscured. John Paul observes that the heritage of
concupiscence has weighed us down with endless limitations, struggles,
and sufferings. In the resurrection, however, that original sign will not
only be restored; it will be fulfilled. The body, as it was created to do from
the beginning, will reveal the eternal mystery hidden in God and enable us
to participate in it.
"The perennial meaning of the human body... will then be revealed
again, and will be revealed in such simplicity and splendor when every
participant in the 'other world' will find again in his glorified body the
source of the freedom of the gift" (248). What was the source of the free-
dom of the gift in the beginning? Grace, the indwelling of God's breath in
the dust of our humanity, the spiritualization of the body, the perfect integ-
rity of body and soul (see §§ 18, 20). Therefore, the "glorification of the
body, as the eschatological fruit of its divinizing spiritualization, will
reveal...the perfect 'freedom of the sons of God' (see Rom 8: 14)." This
"freedom lies precisely at the basis of the nuptial meaning of the body"
and "is indispensable in order that man ... may become a gift."37 Thus, in
the eschatological fulfillment of the nuptial meaning of the body, the per-
fect freedom of the gift will nourish "each of the communions which will
make up the great community of the communion of saints" (248).
37. 1116/80, TB 63, 64.

54. A Development of the Truth about Man

January 13; February 3, 1982 (TB 247, 254)
Man and woman's call to marriage and procreation is fundamental in

the mystery of creation. It touches upon the core anthropological reality
(see § 14). Christ presents "a development of the truth about man himself"
when he explains that in the resurrection we neither marry nor are given in
marriage. Yet, according to the Pope, "man will always be the same, such
as he came from the hands of his Creator and Father" (247). Christ does not
state that eschatological man will no longer be male and female as he was
"from the beginning." He merely indicates that the meaning of being male
or female in the eschaton must be sought outside marriage and procreation.
However, John Paul affirms that "there is no reason to seek it outside that
which ... derives from the very mystery of creation and which subsequently
forms also the deepest structure of man's history on earth, since this history
has been deeply penetrated by the mystery of redemption" (247).
A. Communion Is Fundamental
What is it that derives from the very mystery of creation, forms the
deepest structure of man's history on earth, and will, therefore, also form
the basis of the meaning of the body in the resurrection? Man is created as
male and female to form a "unity of the two." The Pope says that in his
solitude, man is revealed to himself as a person in order to reveal, at the
same time, the communion of persons. In both states (solitude and com-
munion) the human being is constituted as an image and likeness of God.
In the purity of original nakedness, man discovered his fundamental
call to communion in the nuptial meaning of the body. Throughout history
the primary way man has entered into this communion is through the call
to marriage and procreation. However, as those crucial words of Christ
make clear, this will not be the case in the resurrection. Summarizing his
previous reflections, John Paul says that this "indicates that there is a con-
dition of life without marriage in which man, male and female, finds at the
same time the fullness of personal donation and of the intersubjective
communion of persons, thanks to the glorification of his entire psychoso-
matic being in the eternal union with God."38 He also summarizes his vi-
sion of the eschaton when he says that "the divinizing profundity" of the
vision of God "face to face" will enable men and women to live the nup-
tial meaning of their bodies in a simultaneous experience of "perpetual
38.3110/82, TB 262 .
'virginity'" and "perpetual 'intersubjectivity'" (254). The Holy Spirit

dwelling in our flesh will be "the inexhaustible source" of this perfect,
eternal, virgin-union.
For historical man, this means that earthly marriage is not his end-all
and be-all. It is given only to prepare for and anticipate the "marriage" to
come. John Paul expresses the same idea in this striking statement: "Mar-
riage and procreation in itself did not determine definitively the original
and fundamental meaning of being a body, or of being, as a body, male
and female. Marriage and procreation merely give a concrete reality to that
meaning in the dimensions of history" (247). If historical man has lost his
bearings due to sin and has been adrift on a meaningless sea, this state-
ment guides him back to shore. Even more, disembarking from his way-
ward vessel, the truth contained in this statement is the terra firma on
which man stands in ordcr to bc rightly oricntcd in his-story bctwccn thc
echoes of his origin and the premonitions of his destiny.
• It is entirely human to yearn for marital love. Yet we must be careful

never to "hang our hats on a hook that cannot bear the weight." Anyone
who looks to marriage as his ultimate fulfillment is setting himself up for
serious disillusionment. Realizing that earthly marriage is only a sign of
the heavenly marriage to come, and that the union to come is a gift ex-
tended to everyone without exception, takes a tremendous burden off
people's expectations for ultimate happiness through marriage in this life.
Only within this perspective does marriage even take on its authentic pur-
pose and meaning. Only within this perspective will a person who enters
marriage be able to avoid suffocating his spouse with his expectations and
hopes for ultimate fulfillment. Then and only then can marriage bring the
true measure of happiness and joy it is intended to bring. As a married
man, I will be the first to extol the joys of married life. But these are only a
foretaste, only a foreshadowing of the eternal joys to come.
B. Icon or Idol?
As soon as man steps off this terra firma , he forgets that marriage is
only a temporal icon of an eternal reality. Then the "one flesh" union be-
comes an idol. When this happens, paraphrasing St. Paul, God gives us
up in the lusts of our hearts to impurity. We dishonor our bodies, wor-
shiping them instead of the Creator. Claiming to be wise, we become
fools, exchanging the glory of the immortal God for its mere image (see
Rom 22-25).
The image is only that-an image, an icon. Icons are meant to point
us to something far greater than themselves. When we lose sight of this,
we worship the icon itself. To use another image, that deep spiritual-physi-
cal craving that man experiences for union in "one flesh" is like the energy
of a rocket that, when rightly directed, launches us into the stars and even
to the edge of eternity itself. When nuptial union is understood and lived
in this way, even the beatifying joys of the marital embrace are experi-
enced as a kind of earthly foreshadowing of the eternal joys of heaven. 39
But what would happen if we inverted the rocket's engines, aiming them
away from the stars and back upon ourselves? The rocket could only back-
fire in a blast of self-destruction. And we would be left trying desperately
to make sense out of the charred remains of our lives and our deepest aspi-
rations.
In many ways, it seems this icon-idol distinction summarizes the cul-
tural crisis that the sexual revolution ignited. The greater the gift (human
sexuality), the greater the temptation to idolize it. However, when we ex-
change the truth for a lie-that is, when we exchange the icon for an
idol-love becomes lust and we experience all the tragic consequences sin
brings.40 As we shall learn, viewing the "one flesh" union of marriage in
light of the celibate vocation is the sure remedy for the world's false,
idolatrous cult of the body and sex.
55. St. Paul's Teaching on the Resurrection

January 27; February 3, 10, 1982 (TB 249-257)
John Paul concludes his reflections on eschatological man by devot-

ing three audience addresses to what he calls "the anthropology of the res-
urrection according to St. Paul" (255). St. Paul expresses his faith in the
resurrection throughout his letters, but primarily in chapter fifteen of First
Corinthians. Christ's response to the Sadducees was "pre-paschal." He ap-
pealed only to the truth of the Old Testament to demonstrate the resurrec-
tion-to the truth that the living God "is not the God of the dead, but of
the living" (Mk 12:22). Paul, however, in his "post-paschal" argumenta-
tion refers above all to the reality of Christ's own resurrection. In fact,
Paul defends this truth as the foundation of the Christian Faith in its integ-
39. See CCC, n. 1642.

40. Who cannot think in this context of the self-inflicted proliferation of sexually
transmitted diseases (some fatal, such as AIDS), the abortion holocaust, and the social
plague of divorce that has resulted from the idolatry of lust promoted incessantly by the
culture of death? And these are only some of the measurable consequences. Although we
see the symptoms all around us, the havoc wrought on the souls of hundreds of millions
of people cannot be quantified.
rity: "If Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your
faith is in vain .... But, in fact, Christ has been raised from the dead" (1 Cor
15:14,20).
A. God s Reply to Death

John Paul describes Christ's resurrection as "the reply of the God of
life to the historical inevitability of death." It "is the last and the fullest
word of the self-revelation of the living God as 'not God of the dead, but
of the living' (Mk 12:27)" (250). St. Paul presents Christ's resurrection as
the beginning of our own eschatological fulfillment, our own victory over
death. Paul, in fact, following the other Apostles, experienced the state of
Jesus' glorified body in his meeting with the risen Christ on the road to
Damascus (see Acts 9). When Paul proclaims resurrection, he knows of
what he speaks. Ifwe are to live according to the full truth of our bodies-
to live according to the image in which we are made-we too must have
our own "meeting with the risen Christ." Indeed, the road to human happi-
ness begins and ends in this meeting.
Admitting that it is difficult to sum up here and comment adequately
on Paul's "stupendous and ample argumentation" (249), the Pope focuses
primarily on the following passage:
What is sown is perishable, what is raised is imperishable. It is sown in
dishonor, it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in
power. It is sown a physical body, it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a
physical body, there is also a spiritual body. Thus it is written, "The first
man, Adam, became a living being"; the last Adam became a life-giving
spirit. But it is not the spiritual which is first but the physical, and then
the spiritual (I Cor 15:42-46).
This teaching is essentially consistent with Christ's words on the res-
urrection. However, whereas Christ called us to reflect on the resurrected
state of the male-female communion, Paul's teaching seems to remain in
the sphere of the individual person's interior structure. Paul focuses on that
interior "system of forces"; that tension between the flesh and the spirit
well known to him (see Rom 7: 17-25). However, through the "divinizing
spiritualization" of the body, he demonstrates that this "system of forces"
will undergo a radical change in the resurrection.
Taking account of various misinterpretations, John Paul carefully
points out that Paul's seemingly pejorative description of the body cannot
be interpreted in the spirit of dualistic anthropology. This would imply an
inherent dishonor to man's bodily constitution contrary to the original
good of God's vision. When Paul writes that the body is "weak," "perish-
able," and "in dishonor," he speaks from the experience of historical man
whose body is weighed down by concupiscence. These descriptions, as John
Paul says, indicate what revelation describes as the consequence of sin-

what Paul himself will call elsewhere "bondage to decay" (Rom 8:21).
However, according to St. Paul, this "bondage to decay" also con-
ceals within itself the hope of resurrection, just as a woman's labor pains
portend the hope of new life (see Rom 8:22). Paul can make this connec-
tion between "decay" and "hope" because he understands that the Holy
Spirit has been poured out upon us for the redemption of our bodies (see
Rom 8:23). As John Paul says, "Redemption is the way to resurrection.
The resurrection constitutes the definitive accomplishment of the redemp-
tion of the body" (252).41
B. The First Adam Bears Potential for the New Adam

It is quite significant that Paul unites man's eschatological perspective
with reference to the "first Adam" as well as a deep awareness of man's
historical situation. As the Pope points out, by doing so St. Paul synthesizes
all that Christ had announced in his three "key words" about "the begin-
ning," about lust in the "heart," and about the "resurrection of the body."
Paul's synthesis "plunges its roots into the revealed mystery of creation and
redemption as a whole." Man's creation is "the enlivening of matter" or
"the animation of the body" by the Spirit (251). In this way, as St. Paul
says, "Adam became a living being" (1 Cor 15:45). Man's redemption-res-
urrection is to be understood in the same way. If the Spirit "died" in us due
to sin so that we return to dust (see Gen 3: 19), our redemption-resurrection
must be the (re)quickening of our dust with the breath of the Spirit. Hence,
we see again that St. Paul does not negate the body but speaks of its ulti-
mate dignity as the temple of the Holy Spirit (see 1 Cor 6: 19) .
• Notice that in the New Adam's resurrection he, like the first Adam,
comes forth from the ground at the moment of the Spirit's in-spiration. De-
scribing the earth as a "mother" has a definite element of truth. Signifi-
cantly, both John and Luke mention that Christ was put in a tomb not
previously used (see Jn 19:41 and Lk 23:53). As stated earlier, Christ was
born of a virgin womb and "born again" of a virgin tomb. Similarly, on the
last day, at the moment of the Spirit's in-spiration, the earth will in some
sense "give birth" virginally to all those who have returned to dust in joy-
ful hope of the coming of their Savior, Jesus Christ. 42
The re-quickening of the body by the Spirit does not only restore
man's original state before sin. According to the Pope, that would not "cor-
41. See CCC, n. 1026.

42. See CCC, n. 1683.
respond to the intemal logic of the whole economy of salvation, to the most
profound meaning of the mystery of the redemption." The re-inspiration of
the flesh in the redemption-resurrection "can only be an introduction to a
new fullness" (see §50). "This will be a fullness that presupposes the whole
of human history, formed by the drama of the tree of the knowledge of good
and evil" (255 - 256).
In contrasting the first Adam with the last Adam (Christ), Paul tries to
show that historical man has been placed in a sort of tension between two
poles. John Paul says that between these two poles-between the first and
the second Adam-takes place the process that St. Paul expresses as fol-
lows: "As we have bome the image of the man of earth, so we will bear
the image of the man of heaven" (1 Cor 15 :49). Yet the Pope stresses that
the "man of heaven" is not an antithesis and negation of the "man of
earth." He is above all his completion and confirmation. Already in our
creation, our humanity "bears in itself," the Holy Father says, "a particular
potential (which is capacity and readiness) to receive all that became the
'second Adam,' the Man of heaven, namely Christ: what he became in his
resurrection" (253).
Viewing this through the lens of the "nuptial mystery," we can say
that just as a bride is made in her very being as a woman to receive her
bridegroom, so too is man (male and female) made to receive Christ. John
Paul observes that among all the bodies in the cosmos, the human body
bears in itself the "potentiality for resurrection"-that is, it bears the aspi-
ration and capacity to become definitively "incorruptible, glorious, full of
dynamism, spiritual." This is possible because right from the beginning
man is made in the image of God as male and female, body and soul. In
this way John Paul says that man "can receive and reproduce in this
'earthly' image and likeness of God also the 'heavenly' image of the sec-
ond Adam, Christ" (254).
Since "every man bears in himself the image of Adam," it can be said
that "every man is also called to bear in himself the image of Christ, the
image of the risen One." This reality will only be consummated in the
other world. "But in the meantime it is already in a certain way a reality of
this world, since it was revealed in this world through the resurrection of
Christ" (254).
C. The Spiritual Body

Christ's resurrection is a reality "ingrafted" in our humanity. Even
though our bodies are sown "in weakness" and are "perishable," we bear
in ourselves at the same time, the Pope says, "the interior desire for glory"
(253). God put it there "in the beginning"-not to frustrate us by dashing
our hopes, but to lead us to fulfillment in him. All hopes, therefore, must
be placed in our resurrection. Then the body that we experience as perish-

able will be raised imperishable. The body that we experience as weighed
down in dishonor and weakness will be raised in glory and power. For
what is sown a physical body is raised a spiritual body.
"Body" in this sense refers to the whole person in his psychosomatic
subjectivity. Thus, Paul is not contrasting a material reality with a non-ma-
terial reality. The "physical body" is the whole person inasmuch as he re-
sists and opposes the Holy Spirit. It is the man who lives "according to the
flesh" (see §41). The "spiritual body" is the whole person inasmuch as he
remains under the influence of the vivifying Spirit of Christ. As the Pope
states in an endnote, in contrast to any dualistic notion of the person, St. Paul
"insists on the fact that body and soul are capable ofbeing ... spiritual" (261).
While spirituality has a just supremacy over sensuality, we must not think
that the sensual life fundamentally opposes the spiritual life. 43 If we expe-
rience sensuality as "a force prejudicial to man," this is due only to sin.
Man's senses are "often attracted and, as it were, impelled toward evil"
(256) only because of concupiscence.
At the same time he denies the lustful cravings of disordered sensual-
ity, the man of concupiscence must open sensuality to the total penetration
and permeation of the Spirit. Then he experiences the "fundamental func-
tion of the senses that serves to liberate spirituality" (256). This is what
Paul means by the "spiritual body." It is, as the Holy Father expresses,
"precisely the perfect sensitivity of the senses, their perfect harmonization
with the activity of the human spirit in truth and liberty" (256). Thus, as
the Catechism says, "The virtuous person tends toward the good with all
his sensory and spiritual powers."44 For those who have entered an alliance
with the Holy Spirit, this spiritual-sensual unity is a reality already devel-
oping in them toward final completion .
• With the dualistic worldview we have inherited from Descartes, it is

very difficult for modem men and women to understand the Pauline con-
cept of a "spiritual body." As Peter Kreeft observes: '''Spiritual' to
premodern cultures did not mean 'immaterial.' Pre-Cartesian cultures did
not divide reality into two mutually exclusive categories of purely immate-
rial spirit and purely nonspiritual matter. Rather, they sawall matter as in-
43. As Wojtyla said in Love & Responsibility. "An exuberant and readily roused sen-
suality is the stuff from which a rich-if difficult-personal life may be made. It may
help the individual to respond more readily and completely to the decisive elements in
personal love" (p. 109).
44. CCc. n. 1803.
formed, in-breathed by spirit." Kreeft elaborates: "Descartes initiates

'angelism' when he says, 'My whole essence is in thought alone.' Matter
and spirit now become 'two clear and distinct ideas.' ... This is our common
sense; we have inherited these categories, like nonremovable contact
lenses, from Descartes, and it is impossible for us to understand pre-Carte-
sian thinkers while we wear them. Thus we are constantly reading our
modem categories anachronistically into the authors of the Bible. "45 Proof
of Kreeft's assertion is that St. Paul's "spiritual body" seems like a pure
contradiction in terms to most modems.
D. In Conclusion
Having reflected on the triptych of Christ's words about man's expe-
rience of embodiment and erotic desire in his origin, history, and destiny,
John Paul concludes his outline of an adequate anthropology. But how is
this total vision of man meant to inform the vocational path of men and
women in this life? How can historical man respond to the truth of his cre-
ation as male and female in God's image? How is historical man to live
out the redemption of the body as he awaits its final consummation? As
John Paul will continue to demonstrate in his next cycles, there are two
basic ways of doing so: celibacy for the kingdom and marriage. Each in its
own way is an adequate response to an adequate anthropology.
Eschatological Man-In Review

1. When the Sadducees questioned Jesus about the resurrection with
a marriage case which they thought would lead to the admission of poly-
andry, Christ responded by saying that in the resurrection, men and
women "neither marry nor are given in marriage." This stupendous re-
sponse is the third element in the "triptych" of Christ's words which con-
stitute and, in this case, complete "the revelation of the body."
2. God is the God of the living, not of the dead. He is the God oflife!
Christ's resurrection is the ultimate word on the subject. Marriage and its
consummate expression also testify to God as the God of life. But in the
resurrection, marriage and conj ugal union lose their raison d' etre. They
exist "from the beginning" to point us to the Marriage of the Lamb. When
45. Everything You Ever Wanted to Know about Heaven. pp. 86 - 87.
this maniage is consummated, the primordial sacrament will give way to

the divine prototype.
3. When, in refening to the resunection, Christ says we will be "like
angels in heaven," this does not mean we will be disincarnated. Since man
was constituted "from the beginning" as male and female in a unity of
body and soul, his eschatological perfection cannot be understood as a
state of the soul alone. His body will be raised and glorified in an infinitely
perfected masculinity and femininity.
4. In our resunected integration, the mutual opposition between body
and soul that resulted from original sin will cease utterly. The forces of the
spirit will fully permeate the energies of the body. This eschatological
"spiritualization of the body" will differ essentially (and not only in de-
gree) from what we experience in earthly life. It is different even from
what man and woman experienced "in the beginning."
5. The spirit totally permeating the body is not only man's spirit, but
the Holy Spirit. Hence, the eschatological "spiritualization" is also a "divini-
zation." In the Maniage of the Lamb, "penetration and permeation of what
is essentially human by what is essentially divine, will then reach its
peak." God will communicate himself in his very divinity not only to
man's soul, but to his whole embodied personhood. This will be man's ul-
timate participation in grace, in the divine nature.
6. In the "divinizing spiritualization" of the resunection, we redis-
cover-in an eschatological dimension-the same nuptial meaning of the
body in the beatific vision, which is a meeting with the mystery of the liv-
ing God "face to face." This "is the most personal self-giving by God in
his very divinity." All of our energies will be concentrated on receiving
this divine gift and reciprocating it through the gift of ourselves to God.
7. Christ's words about the resunection enable us to reread with new
depth the meaning of that perspective text of Genesis 2:24 (the two be-
come "one flesh"). These words refer especially to "this world," but they
also point in some way to the "other world"-to the eschatological dimen-
sion of communion. The ultimate meaning of our creation as male and fe-
male is found in our call to incarnate communion with the Trinity in and
through the Incarnate Christ.
8. If in the eschaton we are to participate in the Uncreated relations
of the Trinity, this participation must be adapted in some way to the com-
munion of created persons. For this reason we profess belief in the com-
munion of saints. Not only will we be "one" with the divine Persons. We
will also be "one" with every human person who responds to the wedding
invitation of the Lamb.
9. We must think of the resurrection in terms of "the rediscovery of a

new perfect subjectivity of everyone" (fulfillment of original solitude) and
at the same time "of the rediscovery of a new perfect intersubjectivity of
all" (fulfillment of original unity). This reality "signifies the real and de-
finitive fulfillment of human subjectivity, and, on this basis, the definitive
fulfillment of the 'nuptial' meaning of the body."
10. The eschatological state "will become the source of the perfect
realization of the trinitarian order in the created world of persons." This
implies a participation in the perfect unity and distinction found within the
Trinity itself. Thus the nuptial meaning of the body will be experienced in
a way that is "perfectly personal and communitarian at the same time."
11. In the resurrection, the body will be experienced in its perfect
"virginal" state due to the perfect integration of body and soul. As in the
beginning, there will be no contradiction between virginity and commun-
ion. The resurrected nuptial meaning of the body will correspond perfectly
both to man and woman's creation in the image of God as individuals and
to the fact that this image is realized through the incarnate communio per-
sonarum.
12. The eschatological communion of persons will be a completely
new experience, yet it will not be alienated in any way from the original
and historical dimension of the procreative meaning of the body and sex.
The perennial meaning of the human body will be revealed in an eschato-
logical splendor when men and women rediscover in their glorified bodies
the perfect freedom of the gift. In tum, this freedom will nourish "each of
the communions which will make up the great community of the commun-
ion of saints."
13. Christ's response to the Sadducees presents a profound develop-
ment of the truth about man. It teaches us that marriage "did not determine
definitively the original and fundamental meaning of being a body, or of
being, as a body, male and female. Marriage and procreation merely give a
concrete reality to that meaning in the dimensions of history." In other
words, earthly marriage is not man's end, but only preparation for the
heavenly marriage yet to come.
14. In St. Paul's teaching on the resurrection in First Corinthians
15, he unites the "last Adam" with the "first Adam" in the context of a
deep awareness of the effects of sin. By doing so the Apostle synthesizes
all that Christ said in his three "key words" about man's origin, history,
and destiny.
15. Historical man lives in a sort of tension between the poles of the
first and the last Adam. Since every man bears the image of the first Adam,
every man is called to bear the image of Christ. Already in creation our
humanity bears the potential to receive Christ, just as a bride bears in her-
self the potential to receive her bridegroom.
16. According to St. Paul, the body that historical man experiences as
perishable will be raised imperishable. What we experience as weighed
down in dishonor and weakness will be raised in glory and power. For
what is sown a physical body is raised a spiritual body. Paul is not con-
trasting a material reality with a non-material reality. He is speaking of the
spiritualizing divinization of the whole man, body and soul. In the resur-
rection, the dust to which we have returned will be re-quickened by a new
fullness of the breath of God which is the Holy Spirit.
PART II
How ARE WE TO LIVE?

ApPLYING AN ADEQUATE ANTHROPOLOGY
Cycle 4
Celibacy for the Kingdom
We are shifting gears now to part two of John Paul's Wednesday

catechesis on the body. Having outlined a "total vision of man" based on
the words of Christ, the Holy Father now seeks to apply that anthropology
to the Christian vocations. In other words, having thoroughly answered the
question "Who are we?" he now addresses the question "How are we to
live?" He wants to demonstrate how his "adequate anthropology" is actu-
alized in the Christian vocations.
The human mystery is one of love and gift. The Creator gives man
his very being as a gratuitous gift of love. He is created in the image of
God as male and female and endowed with freedom (self-detennination)
in order to recapitulate the mystery of love and gift. "Therefore a man
leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become
one flesh" (Gen 2:24). Yet in the same discussion in which Christ reestab-
lishes God's original plan for malTiage, he also invites some to sacrifice
malTiage "for the sake of the kingdom of heaven" (Mt 19: 12). Thus, as
John Paul says in Familiaris Consortia, "Christian revelation recognizes
two specific ways of realizing the vocation of the human person, in its en-
tirety, to love: malTiage and virginity or celibacy. Either one is in its own
proper fonn an actuation of the most profound truth about man, of his be-
ing 'created in the image of God. "'1
This cycle on celibacy for the kingdom consists of fourteen general
audiences delivered between March 10, 1982 and July 21, 1982. For good
reason John Paul reflects on the celibate vocation prior to his cycle on the
marital vocation. As we shall learn, only by understanding the meaning of
Christian celibacy can we understand the sacramentality of malTiage. For
celibacy is a more immediate participation (even if only by way of antici-
pation) in what malTiage signifies sacramentally-the eternal "virgin-
union" of Christ and the Church.
l. F amiliaris Consortio, n. 1l.
277
Using our former image, Christians called to the marital vocation

are in some way meant to reclaim the "inflated tires" of the beginning as
a sacramental sign of man's ultimate end. In a sense, Christians called to
the celibate vocation move in the other direction. They look to the fu-
ture, anticipating in the here-and-now the life of flight "beyond tires." In
this way they shed light on God's ultimate plan right from the beginning.
Recall the Pope's provocative statement that marriage "in itself did not
determine definitively the original and fundamental meaning of being a
body, or of being, as a body, male and female. Marriage and procreation
merely give a concrete reality to that meaning in the dimensions of his-
tory."2In a way, men and women who are celibates "for the sake of the
kingdom of heaven" step outside the dimensions of history- while liv-
ing within its dimensions-and proclaim to the world that "the kingdom
of God is here."
56. Some Make Themselves Eunuchs

March 10, 17,24,31, 1982 (TB 262-272)
The "call to an exclusive donation of self to God in virginity and in

celibacy thrusts its roots deep into the Gospel soil of the theology of the
body" (262). Based on our reflections on the resurrection, we can see
clearly that this vocation "is a charismatic orientation toward that
eschatological state in which men 'neither marry nor are given in mar-
riage'" (263).3 However, as John Paul demonstrates, it is very significant
that Christ does not refer to celibacy in his discussion with the Sadducees
about the resurrection. Instead, he refers to it in his conversation with the
Pharisees about God's plan for marriage "in the beginning."
When Christ firmly established the indissolubility of marriage, his
disciples said: "If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is not expedi-
ent to marry" (Mt 19: 10). Christ does not respond to their line of reason-
ing. Instead, he takes the discussion to a new level by introducing an even
more radical way of living according to God's plan for creating us male
and female. He replies:
2. 1113 /82 , TB 247.

3. See CCC, nn. 1618, 1619.
Celibacy for the Kingdom 279
Not all men can receive the precept, but only those to whom it is given.
For there are eunuchs4 who have been so from birth, and there are eu-
nuchs who have been made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who
have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven.
He who is able to receive this, let him receive it (Mt 19 : 11-12).
A. Christ's Words Mark a Turning Point

As concise as these words are, John Paul states that they are "admira-
bly rich and precise, rich with a number of implications both of doctrinal
and pastoral nature" (276). At the same time, it is hard to overestimate
how incomprehensible these words would have been to the Israelites. In
the tradition of the Old Testament, marriage was a religiously privileged
state, privileged by revelation itself. Marriage had acquired a "consecrated
significance" because of God's covenant with Abraham and the promise of
countless offspring. The Pope observes that only persons with physical im-
potence could constitute an exception. Such people (eunuchs) were seen as
outcasts, accursed by God because they could not participate in fulfilling
the promise given to Abraham. In such a climate it would have been in-
conceivable for someone actually to choose to "make himself a eunuch."
And for the kingdom of heaven? Outlandish!
Christ certainly acknowledges this difficulty in the way he introduces
the idea to his listeners. As John Paul puts it, it is as if Christ wished to
say: "I know that what I am going to say to you now will cause great diffi-
culty in your conscience, in your way of understanding the significance of
the body. In fact, I shall speak to you of continence, and, undoubtedly, you
will associate this with the state of physical deficiency, whether congenital
or brought about by human cause. But I wish to tell you that continence can
also be voluntary and chosen by man 'for the sake of the kingdom'" (266).
John Paul says that from the viewpoint of theology- that is, of the
revelation of the body's significance-Christ's words mark a decisive
turning point for historical man and his call to marriage. However, they
"do not express a command by which all are bound, but a counsel which
concerns only some persons" (263). Therefore, the Holy Father says that
continence is a kind of exception to the general rule of this life, which is
to marry.
4. A eunuch is a person who, either by birth defect or acquired malady, is physi-

cally incapable of engaging in sexual intercourse. Definitive and perpetual impotence is
to this day a canonical impediment to marriage (see canon 1084). See Christopher West,
Good News About Sex & Marriage, pp. 54-57 for an explanation of this.
B. Voluntary, Supernatural, Virginal Communion

The Pope stresses that celibacy is a "personal choice" empowered by
a "particular grace." Hence, this vocation must be understood as voluntary
and supernatural. Without these two specific characteristics, it does not
fall within the scope of Christ's words. On the one hand, this means conti-
nence for the kingdom can never be imposed on anyone. It is a gift given
by God that must be received and freely chosen. 5 On the other hand, even
if freely chosen, if continence is not "for the kingdom" it would not corre-
spond to Christian celibacy. Thus, Christ's phrase "for the kingdom" ex-
presses not only the objective orientation of this vocation. It also indicates
the need for a subjective motivation "that corresponds adequately and
fully to [this] objective finality" (270). For example, if a person were to
choose celibacy out of a fear of marital intimacy or a disdain for sexuality,
this would not be celibacy for the kingdom.
At the same time, while Christ stresses the supernatural dimension of
this vocation, he wishes to root the vocation to such continence "deep in
the reality of earthly life" (264). In some sense the celibate person steps
beyond the dimensions of history into that state of the body where men
and women are no longer given in marriage. But all the while he remains
grounded within the dimensions of history and, in this way, becomes a
prophetic witness in his body to the future resurrection. In other words, the
celibate man or woman witnesses to the definitive accomplishment of the
"redemption of the body" while still awaiting its ultimate consummation.
Christian celibacy, therefore, exists in the heart of that tension of "al-
ready, but not yet." For, as the Holy Father points out, this vocation is a
question "not of continence in the kingdom of heaven, but of continence
'for the kingdom of heaven'" (264). It is an anticipation and "escha-
tological sign" of the life to come. Thus, an essential difference exists be-
tween celibacy for the kingdom as an earthly vocation and that glorified
state of the body in which all men and women will "neither marry nor be
given in marriage." Because in this world marriage remains part of man's
normal and noble inclination, the celibate choice "is joined to renunciation
and also to a particular spiritual effort" (267). However, if celibacy antici-
pates the future world, the virginal state of the future world does not indi-
cate an absence of real interpersonal communion. Virginity and bodily
communion are not opposed to one another. Rather, in the eschatological
reality- as in the beginning-they are fulfilled in each other (see §§15,
53). Thus, the celibate vocation- while renouncing the genital expression
of incarnate communion- does not renounce the human vocation to live
in a communio personarum.
5. See ccc, n. 1599.

Celibacy Jo r the Kingdom 281
Continence for the kingdom is "a charismatic sign [that] indicates

the eschatological 'virginity' of the risen man, in whom there will be re-
vealed," the Pope says, "the absolute and eternal nuptial meaning of the
glorified body in union with God himself through the' face to face' vision
of him." At the same time the body will be "glorified also through the
union of a perfect intersubjectivity, which will unite all who 'participate in
the other world,' men and women, in the mystery of the communion of
saints" (267). In this way "that continence 'for the kingdom of heaven'-
as an unquestionable sign of the 'other world'-bears in itself especially
the interior dynamism of the mystery of the redemption of the body"
(271). Through that dynamism we will all recover our "original virginal
value" in an eschatological dimension through the perfect integration of
body and soul in union with the Word made flesh. All the saints will live in
the eternal "virginal" communion of one body. This is what the celibate
vocation anticipates.
57. Continence, Spiritual Fruitfulness, and the Ethos of Redemption

March 24, 31; April 7, 1982 (TB 267- 275)
Earthly continence for the kingdom "is a sign that the body, whose
end is not the grave, is directed to glorification. Already by this very fact,"
John Paul says, "continence 'for the kingdom of heaven' is a witness
among men that anticipates the future resurrection" (267). In this state,
men and women no longer marry- not because the deep truth of marriage
is eradicated, but because it is eternally fulfilled in the union of Christ and
the Church. In this sense, those who are celibate for the kingdom are "skip-
ping" the sacrament in anticipation of the real thing. They wish to partici-
pate in a more direct way-here and now-in the "Marriage of the Lamb."
• The term "celibacy" speaks more about what this vocation is not
rather than what it is. It seems that some of the confusion and negativity
surrounding this vocation could be avoided if it were defined more in terms
of what it embraces-the heavenly marriage-instead of what it gives up.
John Paul says that he "who consciously chooses such continence,

chooses, in a certain sense, a special paJticipation in the mystery of the re-
demption (of the body). He wishes in a particular way to complete it, so to
say, in his own flesh (see Col I :24)." In doing so, the celibate person finds
a distinctive "imprint of a likeness to Christ" who himself was continent
for the kingdom (271). The Pope observes that the departure from the Old
Testament tradition, in which marriage and procreation were a religiously
privileged state, had to be based on the example of Christ himself. From

the moment of his virginal conception, Christ's whole earthly life, in fact,
was a witness to a new kind of fruitfulness. This mystery, however, re-
mained hidden from those to whom Christ first spoke about continence for
the kingdom. The Pope points out that only "Mary and Joseph, who had
lived the mystery of his conception and birth, became the first witnesses
of a fruitfulness different from that of the flesh, that is, of a fruitfulness
of the Spirit: 'That which is conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit' (Mt
1:20)" (268). The miracle surrounding Christ's virgin birth would only
gradually be revealed to the eyes of the Church on the basis of Matthew
and Luke's Gospels.
A. Joseph and Mary s Virginal Marriage

John Paul remarks, "Though [Christ] is born of her like every other
man,oo.nonetheless Mary's maternity is virginal. To this virginal maternity
of Mary there corresponds the virginal mystery of Joseph" (268). Joseph
and Mary's virginity is certainly in keeping with that continence for the
kingdom which Christ will one day announce to his disciples. However, at
the same time, they were a legitimate husband and wife. 6 As John Paul
says, "The marriage of Mary and Joseph conceals within itself, at the same
time, the mystery of the perfect communion of the persons, of the man and
woman in the conjugal pact, and also the mystery of that singular conti-
nence for the kingdom of heaven: a continence that served, in the history
of salvation, the most perfect 'fruitfulness of the Holy Spirit.' Indeed," the
Pope continues, "it was in a certain sense the absolute fullness of that
spiritual fruitfulness, since precisely in theoo.pact of Mary and Joseph in
marriage and in continence, there was realized the gift of the Incarnation
of the Eternal Word" (268) .
• It seems John Paul II may be developing the Church's understand-

ing of St. Joseph's role in the Incarnation. For John Paul, St. Joseph is not a
kind of "tack-on" provided to lend some legitimacy in the public eye to
what would have been perceived as Mary's single motherhood. For John
Paul, it seems Joseph's virginal "yes" to God (and virginal love for Mary)
played an essential role in the mystery of the Incarnation. Mary responded
to the Annunciation with her fiat. John Paul writes in Redemptoris Custos
6. For those interested in the finer points of canon law, the Church teaches that a
couple must be capable of consummating their marriage at the time they enter marriage
(see canon 1084), but they are not absolutely obligated to consummate their marriage.
Celibacyjor the Kingdom 283
that "at the moment of Joseph s own 'annunciation' he said nothing; in-
stead he simply 'did as the angel of the Lord commanded him' (Mt 1:24)."7
This typically masculine "doing" could be considered the nuptial counter-
part to Mary's feminine "let it be done." And this virginal complementarity
of Joseph and Mary expressed the absolute fullness of spiritual fruitful-
ness. Although we typically refer to Joseph as Jesus' "foster father," John
Paul insists that Joseph's fatherhood is not less real because of his virgin-
ity. In a way, it is even more real. The Pope writes: "In this family, Joseph
is the father: his fatherhood is not one that derives from begetting off-
spring; but neither is it an 'apparent' or merely 'substitute' fatherhood.
Rather, it is one that/itlly shares ill authentic human fatherhood. "R Human
fatherhood becomes all the more authentic to the degree that it becomes a
transparent sign of God's Fatherhood. Joseph's fatherhood is the most
transparent sign of God's Fatherhood and is, therefore, all the more real.
In a profound paradox which simultaneously embraces the heavenly

marriage (i.e., continence for the kingdom) and the earthly marriage, Jo-
seph and Mary's virginal-communion of persons literally effected the mar-
riage of heaven and earth. This is the grace of the hypostatic union-the
marriage of the human and divine natures in the Person of Christ. And this
grace is connected precisely with the absolute fullness of the spiritual
fruitfulness that comes from embracing continence for the kingdom. John
Paul concludes that every man and woman who authentically embraces
continence for the kingdom in some way participates ill this super-abound-
ing spiritual fruitfulness.
B. Marriage and Celibacy Steln/i'om the Same Ethos

The marriage of Joseph and Mary sheds a bright light on both Chris-
tian vocations. The Pope observes that it helps us to understand the pro-
found sanctity of marriage and a certain personal "disinterestedness" in
marriage on the part of those who prefer to remain continent for the king-
dom. John Paul will go to great lengths reflecting on the sanctity of mar-
riage in his next cycle. For now let us linger on this question, posed from
the common perspective of our day: "Why would a Christian be 'disinter-
ested' in marriage? After all, for the Christian, this is the only legitimate
opportunity for sex, right? Who in his right mind would actually prefer a
life without sex?"
7. Redemptoris Custos, n. 17.

8. Ibid, n. 21.
This widespread perspective can only stem from a failure to under-

stand the redemption Christ won for us. So much confusion about the
Church's teaching-not just on sex, but on the whole economy of salva-
tion-stems from the tunnel vision that results from normalizing concu-
piscence. For those whose hearts are bound by lust, the idea of choosing a
life of total continence is absurd. But for those who have been liberated
from lust by the ethos of redemption, the idea of sacrificing the genital ex-
pression of their sexuality "for the sake of the kingdom of heaven" not
only becomes a real possibility-it becomes quite attractive.
When authentically lived, the Christian call to life-long continence
witnesses dramatically to the freedom for which Christ has set us free. Of
course, a truly chaste marriage witnesses to the same freedom. Contrary to
the tunnel vision perspective mentioned above, marriage does not provide
a "legitimate outlet" for indulging one's lusts (see §34). Thus, whoever
has an authentic Christian understanding of marriage at the same time
gains an authentic Christian understanding of life-long celibacy. Such an
understanding comes from the ethos of redemption. As John Paul says, be-
hind the call to continence in Matthew 19 and the call to overcome lust in
Matthew 5 "are found the same anthropology and the same ethos" (274).
In other words, both vocations (marriage and celibacy) flow from the same
vision of the human person and the same call to experience the redemption
of our bodies, which includes the redemption of our sexual desires.
In the invitation to celibacy for the kingdom, John Paul says that the
prospects of the ethos of historical man are "enlarged upon" in light of the
future anthropology of the resurrection. This does not mean that the an-
thropology of the resurrection replaces the anthropology of historical man.
Men and women who choose celibacy for the kingdom, just like those
who choose marriage, must contend with concupiscence. But historical
man is also redeemed man. "Redemption is a truth, a reality, in the name
of which man must feel called, and' called with efficacy. "'9 Only the man
or woman living this efficacy is prepared to embrace a life of continence
for the kingdom. Lest we fall into the trap of thinking marriage legitimizes
concupiscence, we must insist that living the efficacy of redemption is also
required of those who embrace marriage. The Holy Father expresses this
when he says that the person who chooses continence for the kingdom
"must put this decision into effect, subjugating the sinfulness of his
[fallen] nature to the forces that spring from the mystery of the redemption
of the body. He must do so just as any other man does ... whose way re-
mains that of matrimony. The only difference," the Pope says, "is the type
9. 10/29/80, TB 167.
of responsibility for the good chosen, just as the type of good chosen is
different" (275).
The difference between marriage and continence for the kingdom
must never be understood as the difference between having a legitimate
outlet for concupiscence on the one hand and having to repress concu-
piscence on the other. Christ calls everyone to overcome the domination of
concupiscence through the redemption of the body. Only upon experienc-
ing a true level of freedom in this regard do the Christian vocations (celi-
bacy and marriage) make sense. For both flow from the same experience
of the redemption of the body and of sexual desire. Both flow from the
same nuptial meaning of the body and the call to become a gift in and
through masculinity and femininity. Without experiencing the freedom of
the gift for which Christ has set us free (see §§42, 43), celibacy is seen as
hopelessly repressive and marriage as legitimately indulgent. How far
from the Gospel ethos these perspectives are!
58. Celibacy for the Kingdom Is an Exceptional Calling

March 31; April 7, 14,28, 1982 (TB 270-278,282-284)
History has seen some serious distortions of the Church's teaching

that celibacy is a "higher" calling than marriage. Tragically, many Catho-
lics have thought that this means marriage is only a second-class vocation
for those who "can't handle" celibacy. The sentiment often goes like this:
"If celibacy is so good, marriage must be so bad. If refraining from sex
makes one pure and holy, having sex must make one dirty and unholy."
Yet nothing could be further from the mind of the Church in promoting the
value of celibacy. Such a belief smacks of the Manichaean heresy.
A. Celibacy Does Not Devalue Marriage

In response to such distOltions, John Paul stresses that the '''superior-
ity' of continence to matrimony in the authentic Tradition of the Church
never means disparagement of marriage or belittlement of its essential
value. It does not even mean a shift, even implicit, on the Manichaean
positions, or a support of ways of evaluating or acting based on the Mani-
chaean understanding of the body and sexuality, matrimony and procre-
ation" (275). He continues by saying that Christ's words about celibacy
point to a "superiority" of this vocation only by virtue of its motive "for
the kingdom of heaven." We may admit only this superiority. In Christ's
words "we do not find any basis whatever for any disparagement of matri-
mony" (275).
In Christ's words about continence "there is no reference to the 'infe-

riority' of marriage with regard to the 'body,' or in other words with regard
to the essence of marriage, consisting in the fact that man and woman join
together in marriage, thus becoming 'one flesh'" (276). This is God's good
and holy design. Hence, the "superiority" of continence does not rest on
the mere fact of abstinence from sexual union. The Pope insists that
"Christ's words on this point are quite clear." Christ proposes continence
not "with prejudice against conjugal 'union of the body,' but only 'for the
sake of the kingdom of heaven'" (276).
How, then, are we to understand the exceptional value of celibacy in
relation to the marriage vocation? John Paul points out that if marriage "is
fully appropriate and of a value that is fundamental, universal, and ordi-
nary," then it makes sense that continence for the kingdom "possesses a
particular and 'exceptional' value" (270). From the context of Christ's
words, John Paul says that "it can be seen sufficiently clearly that here it is
not a question of diminishing the value of matrimony in favor of conti-
nence" (273). Marriage certainly has a great value as an earthly sacrament
of the eternal communion of heaven. But celibacy is not a sacrament of
heaven on earth. Because it directly anticipates the eschatological reality,
it is (if only in this anticipatory sense) "heaven on earth." It is a sign that
the kingdom of God is here. Celibacy could be understood as "higher"
than marriage, then, in the same way that heaven is higher than earth. In
this way Christian celibacy "is particularly efficacious and important for
'the kingdom of heaven.' And so should it be," John Paul says, "seeing
that Christ chose it for himself' (270).
Those who choose celibacy as their Christian vocation must do so,
the Pope says, not because of "a supposed negative value of marriage, but
in view of the particular value comlected with this choice" (263). Those
men and women to whom this calling is given must discover and welcome
this value as their own personal vocation. Marriage with its own value al-
ways remains the normal calling in this life. It is in this sense that the
value of celibacy is exceptional; it is the exception to the rule.
B. A True Sacrifice, But Not a Rejection of Sexuality

As our study of the Genesis texts revealed, men and women are
"made" for marriage according to the normal and noble inclinations of
their nature. The Pope describes continence as a conscious decision to
"break away from" these noble inclinations in anticipation of their
eschatological fulfillment. Because of the great good that marriage entails
as a divine institution, choosing to renounce marriage demands real self-
sacrifice. As John Paul expresses: "That break also becomes the beginning
of successive self-sacrifices that are indispensable if the first and funda-

mental choice [is to] be consistent in the breadth of one's entire earthly
life" (274).
The Pope remarks that Christ, in calling some men and women to re-
nounce marriage, has no desire to "conceal the anguish" that continence
and its enduring consequences can bring. In some sense, those who choose
continence are choosing to remain in the "ache" of man's original solitude
before God. They are choosing to devote their yearning for communion di-
rectly toward God. As John Paul says, "continence must demonstrate that
man, in his deepest being, is ... 'alone' before God, with God" (273). Never-
theless, John Paul stresses that "what is an invitation to solitude for God in
the call to continence for the kingdom of heaven at the same time respects
both the 'dual nature of mankind' (that is, his masculinity and femininity)
and the dimension of communion of existence that is proper to the person"
(273). Recall that the eschatological reality is not only man's perfect com-
munion with God. It is also the perfect communion of all men and women
with each other (see §§52, 53). Thus, John Paul says that the continent per-
son, anticipating the perfect communion of saints, "is capable of discover-
ing in his solitude ... a new and even fuller form of intersubjective commun-
ion with others" (273).
Christ, therefore, while calling some to renounce marriage, does not
thereby call the continent person to renounce his nature as a sexual being.
As John Paul says, the continent person, like everyone else, remains
"'dual' by nature (that is, directed as man toward woman and as woman
toward man)." We recognize this in the "trinitarian meaning" of our cre-
ation as male and female in God's image. Whoever properly "compre-
hends" Christ's call to continence "preserves the integral truth of his own
humanity without losing along the way any of the essential elements of the
vocation of the person created in 'God's image and likeness'" (273). And
this trinitarian image is always fulfilled in man through the nuptial mean-
ing of the body, which calls man to the sincere gift of self and establishes a
true communion of persons.
Far from renouncing this most fundamental meaning of sexuality, the
celibate person is able "to fulfill himself 'differently' and, in a certain way,
'more' than through matrimony, [by] becoming a 'true gift to others'"
(273-274). Differently in that the celibate person does not become a gift
via the one flesh union; and "more" in that the celibate person can partici-
pate to a higher degree in the "intersubjectivity of all." Hence, John Paul
says that celibacy for the kingdom "comes about on the basis of full con-
sciousness of the nuptial meaning which masculinity and femininity contain
in themselves. If this choice should come about by way of some artificial
'prescinding' from this real wealth of every human subject, it would not
appropriately and adequately correspond to the content of Christ's words"
(284). In fact, the Holy Father insists that only in relation to a "profound
and mature knowledge ofthe nuptial meaning of the body... does the call to
voluntary continence 'for the sake of the kingdom of heaven' find full war-
ranty and motivation." Then he adds: "Only and exclusively in this per-
spective does Christ say, 'He who is able to receive this, let him receive it'
(Mt 19:12)" (283).
59. Marriage and Celibacy Explain and Complete Each Other

April 14, 21, 28; May 5,1982 (TB 276-286)
Papal biographer George Weigel has described John Paul as a clergy-

man with a "lay soul."IO He also observes that perhaps no more priestly
priest has sat in the chair of Peter than Pope John Paul II. Yet Weigel's
point is that in some sense this Pope has the heart of a layman. For John
Paul, the focal point of the Church's life is not found inside the Vatican.
The focal point of Christian life resides where lay men and women live
out their call to holiness : in the home, the family, the streets, the fields, the
factory, the office.
A. Perfection Is Measured by Charity

Having internalized his own call to holiness as a layman, Wojtyla
was one of the main forces behind the Second Vatican Council's emphasis
on the universal call to holiness. Prior to this renewed emphasis, many
Catholics thought that only priests and nuns were called to sanctity. Since
those who bound themselves by the evangelical counsels (poverty, chas-
tity, and obedience) embraced what is traditionally called "the state of per-
fection," lay people often felt consigned to "the state of imperfection."
John Paul's "lay soul" shows itself in his efforts to transcend this false di-
chotomy. He insists that marriage and celibacy do not "divide the human
(and Christian) community into two camps [as if there were] those who
are 'perfect' because of continence and those who are 'imperfect' or 'less
perfect' because of the reality of married life" (276). Perfection in the
Christian life is not measured by whether or not one is celibate. Instead,
the Pope asserts that it "is measured with the rule of charity"(277).
This means that "perfection is possible and accessible to every man,
both in a 'religious institute,' and in the 'world'" (277) . The Holy Father
10. George Weigel, "The Soul of John Paul II." Lecture delivered at Oxford, March
6,2001.
even says that a person who does not live in "the state of perfection" can
nonetheless "reach a superior degree of perfection-whose measure is
charity-in comparison to the person who does live in the 'state ofperfec-
tion' with a lesser degree of charity" (277). Far from being opposed to one
another, John Paul demonstrates at great length the profound com-
plementarity between these vocations which is essential to the life and
health of the Church. Marriage and continence, the Pope says, are meant
to "explain and complete each other" (276). Marriage reveals the nuptial
character of the celibate vocation just as the celibate vocation reveals the
sacramentality of marriage. He even says that in "the life of an authenti-
cally Christian community the attitudes and values proper to one and the
other state .. .in a certain sense interpenetrate each other" (277).
B. Marriage Reveals the Nuptial Character of Celibacy

John Paul says that the conjugal fidelity of spouses and the irrevo-
cable gift they make to each other provide the foundation of celibacy for
the kingdom. Marriage, in fact, reveals the very nature of the love ex-
pressed by the person who is continent for the kingdom. Thus "the nature
of one and the other love is 'conjugal,' that is, expressed through the total
gift of oneself" (277).
Christ is the ultimate example of conjugal love lived in a celibate way.
While remaining celibate, Christ revealed himself as Spouse ofthe Church
by giving himself "to the very limit" in the paschal and Eucharistic mys-
tery. In this way, Christ gave the ultimate revelation of the nuptial meaning
of the body. Through the light which marriage sheds on this vocation, we
come to realize, as John Paul says, that celibacy for the kingdom "has ac-
quired the significance of an act of nuptial love." Continence for the king-
dom is "a nuptial giving of oneself for the purpose of reciprocating in a
particular way the nuptial love of the Redeemer" (282). Furthermore, since
conjugal love is ordered by its nature toward fatherhood and motherhood,
the Pope says that continence for the kingdom must lead in its normal de-
velopment to fatherhood and motherhood in a spiritual sense. Thus the famil-
ial telIDS husband, bride, father, mother, brother, and sister are applicable to
marriage and family life and to the celibate vocation.
This means that the choice of marriage and the choice of celibacy for
the kingdom require and suppose "the leaming and the interior acceptance
of the nuptial meaning of the body, bound up with the masculinity and
femininity of the human person" (284). For both vocations flow from the
true meaning of human sexuality and the deepest meaning of sexual de-
sire. To the degree that sexual desire is freed from the distortion of
concupiscence, it becomes the desire to make a sincere gift of one's body
(one's very self) to another. As the Holy Father expresses it: "On the basis
of the same disposition of the personal subject and on the basis of the
same nuptial meaning of being, as a body, male or female, there can be
formed the love that commits man to marriage for the whole duration of
his life, but there can be formed also the love that commits man to a life of
continence 'for the sake of the kingdom of heaven'" (284). According to
John Paul, this is the significance of Christ's words in Matthew 19 where
he speaks of marriage according to God's original plan and celibacy for
the kingdom.
The point is that no one can escape the nuptial meaning of his or her
body. Every man, by virtue of the nuptial meaning of his body, is called in
some way to be both a husband and a father. And every woman, by virtue
of the nuptial meaning of her body, is called in some way to be both a wife
and a mother. This is lived on earth either through marriage or, in a differ-
ent way, through the celibate vocation. I I But, according to Christ's words,
John Paul says that anyone who chooses marriage must do so just as it was
instituted by the Creator "from the beginning." Similarly, anyone who pur-
sues continence for the kingdom of heaven must seek in it the proper val-
ues of this vocation .
• What about the place of the single person in living out the nuptial
meaning of the body? Many more people are in this situation today than
was typical in the past. This "new" reality calls for a pastoral response
from the Church that has yet to be adequately developed. In brief, I would
say that there is a difference between one who is single by choice in order
to devote himself to worthy causes l2 and a person who is single not by
choice but by circumstance. I) The fanner has made a definitive vocational
choice in some ways parallel to the celibate vocation. The latter is still
waiting to make a definitive vocational choice. This does not mean such a
person's life need remain "on hold." He or she can live a very fruitful life
serving others while maintaining the hope of finding a spouse or continu-
ing to discem a call to consecrated celibacy.l~ In every way that single men
and women give and receive the "sincere gift of self'-through prayer,
work, leisure, service of friends, families, neighbors, the poor, etc.-they
II. See CCC, n. 923.

12. See CCC, n. 2231.
13. See CCc. n. 1658.
14. See Good News Ahout Sex & Marriage, p. 166.
Celibacy f or the Kingdom 291
are living the truth of the nuptial meaning of their bodies. In any case, the
ultimate fulfillment of the nuptial meaning of the body for everyone is to
be found, not in any earthly vocation, but in the heavenly marriage of
Christ and the Church.
C. Celibacy Reveals the Sacramentality ofMarriage

Christian celibacy is not a sacrament. Why? Sacraments mediate
heavenly realities on earth. But in the future world the sacraments lose
their raison d'etre because we will participate in the divine mystery imme-
diately (without sacramental mediation) . 15 Celibacy is not a sacrament be-
cause it is a more direct participation (if only by way of anticipation) in
the life to come. It anticipates the life beyond sacraments. It is precisely
"with regard to this dimension and this orientation," John Paul says, that
"continence 'for the kingdom of heaven' has a particular importance and
special eloquence for those who live a married life" (277). Because celi-
bacy is not a sacrament, it demonstrates why marriage is a sacrament. It
demonstrates that marriage's ultimate purpose is to point men and women
toward their eschatological destiny-toward the consummation of the
Marriage of the Lamb, which immeasurably exceeds anything possible in
e31thly life. John Paul says we must "not forget that the only key to under-
standing the sacramentality of marriage is the spousal love of Christ for
the Church" (286). This is the primordial value and meaning of man and
woman's call to become "one flesh" (see Eph 5:31-32).
Hence, the Holy Father says that renouncing conjugal union at the
same time affirms the deepest meaning of conjugal union because it "high-
lights that meaning in all its interior truth and personal beauty" (285). The
Pope admits that this may seem paradoxical. Yet many truths of the Gospel
are paradoxical- and these are often the most profound truths. The per-
sonal beauty and interior truth of conjugal union lies in its establishment
of a true communion of persons so intimate and profound as to image
something of the interior life of the Trinity and the marriage of Christ and
the Church. This is what celibacy-as a more direct participation in the
heavenly marriage-affirms about the union of husband and wife.
Celibacy's affirmation of marriage arises when we discover the di-
mension of "gift" proper to each vocation. In this way, the Pope says that
the celibate gift of self indirectly serves to highlight what is most lasting
and most profoundly personal in the marriage vocation. It highlights the
15. See CCC, n. 1023.

fact that conjugal union-in its totality and in its consummate expres-
sion- is the temporal manifestation of the eternal reality of "gift." Fur-
thermore, the spiritual fruitfulness of celibacy even reveals something
about the physical fruitfulness of marriage. John Paul says that physical
procreation fully responds to its meaning only if it is completed by father-
hood and motherhood in the spirit. This spiritual counterpart to physical
procreation is expressed in all that the parents do to educate the children
born from their conjugal union.
For all these reasons, as John Paul says, continence "is in a certain
sense indispensable, so that the very nuptial meaning of the body can be
more easily recognized in all the ethos of human life and above all in the
ethos of conjugal and family life" (286). Without the eschatologica:l re-
minder of the celibate vocation, the call to become "one flesh" easily turns
in on itself and loses its orientation toward the eternal union yet to be con-
summated. In this way, celibacy provides an essential remedy for the
world's false, idolatrous cult of the body (see §54).
60. Celibacy Anticipates the Maximum Fullness of God's Bounty

April 21, 28; May 5,1982 (TB 278-287)
Before he begins reflecting on St. Paul's teaching on the celibate vo-

cation, John Paul offers some concluding remarks on Christ's words about
eunuchs for the kingdom. In his audience of April 21, 1982, the Pope re-
views and summarizes previous themes. He reiterates that Christ wants to
impress on his disciples that because continence entails renouncing a great
good, it demands great sacrifice. But in this instance John Paul nuances his
statement by adding that celibacy is a renunciation only when "viewed in
the light of temporal categories" (281). We must remember that celibacy
makes no sense apart from those key words of Christ: " ..for the sake of
the kingdom of heaven. "
A. Man s Definitive Fulfillment

Christ established the kingdom of heaven in time and also foretold its
eschatological fulfillment. All are called to participate in and prepare for
the coming of the kingdom (the Pope points to the parable of the wedding
banquet in Matthew 22 as an illustration of this). Yet John Paul concludes
that those who are continent for the kingdom are called "to participate in a
singular way in the establishment of the kingdom of God on earth, through
which the definitive phase of the 'kingdom of heaven' is begun and pre-
pared" (279).
Taking up one's cross every day and following Christ can reach the
point of renouncing marriage and raising a family of one's own. If Christ
calls some to sacrifice so great a good-a good which God established
from the beginning as a sign of his own Covenant Love-this sacrifice
must involve an even greater realization of the same great good which
marriage and family life serves. It must involve a supernatural potential
for realizing the kingdom of God both in its earthly dimension and in its
ultimate consummation. Masculinity and femininity reveal that the human
person is created "for" another-to be a gift "for" the other. Christ's words
about celibacy "consequently show that this 'for,' present from the begin-
ning at the basis of marriage, can also be at the basis of continence 'for'
the kingdom of heaven" (284).
Being "for" another always implies a nuptial relationship of sorts.
Thus, "in order to clarify what the kingdom of heaven is for those who
choose voluntary continence for the sake of it, the revelation of the nuptial
relationship of Christ with the Church has a particular significance" (280).
A decisive text for John Paul in this regard is Ephesians chapter 5. The
Pope says that the "profound mystery" of nuptial union outlined there by
St. Paul (see vv. 21-32) is equally valid both for the theology of Christian
marriage and for the theology of Christian celibacy. The kingdom of
heaven is the consummation of Christ's union with the Church. As John
Paul reminds us, this is "the definitive fulfillment of the aspirations of all
men, to whom Christ addresses his message: it is the fullness of the good
that the human heart desires beyond all that can be his lot in this earthly
life; it is the maximum fullness of God's bounty toward man" (280).
When viewed in this light, celibacy is not a renunciation at all (and it
must be viewed in this light if is to concur with Christ's words). It is em-
bracing in the here and now- if only by anticipation-the ultimate reality
of communion, that maximum fullness of God's bounty toward man. As
previously mentioned, we live in the tension of "already, but not yet" in
relation to the coming of the kingdom. One could say that Christian celi-
bacy emphasizes the "already," whereas Christian marriage emphasizes
the "not yet." In order for a person to discern properly if he is called to
celibacy (and, equally so, to discern the call to marriage), he must have a
mature understanding of this "tension" emphasized by the complementar-
ity of celibacy and marriage in the life of the Pilgrim Church.
In view of the "already," celibacy is not a renunciation. In view of
the "not yet," however, celibacy demands not only a real sacrifice but also
a weighty responsibility. Even so, the Pope says, "Undoubtedly through-
out all this, through the gravity and depth of the decision, through the se-
verity and the responsibility that it bears with it, love appears and shines
through: love as the readiness to give the exclusive gift of oneself for the
sake of 'the kingdom of God'" (281).
"It is natural for the human heart to accept demands," the Pope ob-
serves, "even difficult ones, in the name of love for an ideal, and above all
in the name of love for a person." Then he adds that "love, in fact, is by its
very nature directed toward a person" (281). And for those who choose
celibacy for the kingdom, that person is Christ himself.
B. Liberation from Concupiscence

The Holy Father recognizes that a proper examination of the way in
which the celibate vocation is formed, or rather "transformed" in a person
would require an extensive study beyond the scope of his analysis. Suffice
it to say that it is impossible to receive the "gift" of this vocation if one
accepts the modern view that man has a sexual instinct akin to animals.
Applying this naturalistic concept to man, John Paul says, "is not at all ap-
propriate and adequate." It greatly limits the full truth of human subjectiv-
ity revealed and expressed through the nuptial meaning of the body. The
nuptial meaning of the body, deduced from the first chapters of Genesis
(especially Gen 2:23 - 25) is the "only appropriate and adequate concept"
in which to discover man's personhood and subjectivity in the sphere of
sexuality. As revealed in the experience of original solitude, man, even
when he is understood from the viewpoint of species, "cannot even basi-
cally qualify as an animal, but a rational animal" (283).
Man is a subject because he is free to determine his own actions. He
is not bound by instinct like an animal. If he feels that he is, then he does
not experience the truth of his own humanity, but the domination of
concupiscence that greatly diminishes the truth of his humanity. Only
when a person has experienced a significant liberation from con-
cupiscence-and is, thus, in possession of his own sexual subjectivity-
can he properly receive the vocation of celibacy as a gift. This is why John
Paul says that the celibate vocation is a matter not only of formation but of
transformation.
Anyone who has doubts or reservations about God's plan for sexual-
ity and marriage should not undertake the vocation of celibacy. For only
when a person adequately understands the beauty and sacredness of Gods'
plan for sex and marriage can he fully understand what it means to re-
nounce them for the kingdom. John Paul concisely expresses this when he
says: "In order for man to be fully aware of what he is choosing (conti-
nence for the sake of the kingdom), he must also be fully aware of what he
is renouncing." He adds parenthetically that "it is a question here really of
knowledge of the value in an 'ideal' sense; nevertheless," he concludes,
"this knowledge is after all 'realistic'" (285).
The Holy Father stresses that Christ explicitly requires this full and
mature understanding when he says, "He who is able to receive this, let
him receive it" (Mt 19: 12). Only with this full understanding do Christ's
words convey what John Paul calls their "convincing mark and power"
(281). Only with this full understanding do we comprehend why John Paul
says that the call to continence "has a capital significance not only for
Christian ethos and spirituality, but also for anthropology and for the
whole theology of the body" (287).
61. Analysis of St. Paul's Teaching on Celibacy

June 23,30; July 7, 14, 1982 (TB 287-297)
John Paul devotes four of his final five audiences of this cycle to a
reflection on St. Paul's teaching on celibacy as outlined in chapter seven of
his First Letter to the Corinthians. Paul answers some concrete questions
that troubled the first generation of Christians in Corinth regarding the re-
lationship of celibacy and marriage. The Pope reflects that he might have
been responding to the concerns of a young man who wanted to marry, or
a newlywed who wanted to give direction to his married life. It might also
have been a father or guardian who asked Paul for counsel regarding
whether or not his daughter should marry. As the Pope reminds us, Paul
was writing in a time when marriage decisions belonged more to parents
than to young people. He also notes that a particular asceticism then ex-
isted in Corinth that may have been influenced by dualistic currents of
thought that devalued the body. This may have led some to question
whether marriage itself was a sin. If such ideas were circulating in the
Corinthian community, this certainly would have led to troubled con-
sciences for the married and for those who wished to marry.
Understanding this context helps us better appreciate not only the
content of Paul's response but also his manner and style. He demonstrates
a keen understanding of the human condition and counsels his audience
with the greatest realism. Furthermore, Paul presents the truth proclaimed
by Christ in all its authenticity, yet at the same time, the Pope says, "he
gives it a stamp of his own." He offers opinions and accents "totally his
own" while carefully distinguishing them from the Lord's commands. Al-
though moralists often turn to Paul's teaching in 1 Corinthians 7 seeking
resolutions to difficult questions, the Pope reminds us that ultimate resolu-
tions must be sought in the life and teaching of Christ himself. This is
significant since, as we shall see, Paul seems to make concessions which
we do not find in the life and teaching of Christ. Paul's letter to the
Corinthians certainly demands full respect as the word of God. Nonethe-
less, the life and words of Christ in the Gospels hold pre-eminence,16 and
Paul's teaching must be interpreted in light of Christ's teaching.
A. Paul Does Not Devalue Marriage

It can appear as though Paul paints a rather negative picture of mar-
riage in this passage from First Corinthians. Based on some of the Apos-
tle's statements, John Paul himself asks at one point if Paul might not
express a personal aversion to marriage. "I wish that all were [celibate J as
I myself am" (v. 7). "Do not seek marriage" (v. 27). "[LJet those who have
wives live as though they had none" (v. 29). The married man's "interests
are divided" (v. 34). Admittedly, it can seem difficult to reconcile John
Paul II's personalist vision with statements like these. It can even appear
as though St. Paul were leaning toward a Manichaean view of marriage.
But John Paul asserts that in a thoughtful reading of the whole text "we
find no introduction to ... 'Manichaeism'" (297).
Paul obviously wants to spare his flock the "troubles in the flesh" that
marriage brings with it (see v. 28). But the Holy Father maintains that
Paul's desire is not based on any supposed negative value of marriage. It is
a "realistic observation," the Pope says, in which "we must see a just
warning for those who-as at times young people do-hold that conjugal
union and living together must bring them only happiness and joy. The ex-
perience of life shows that spouses are not rarely disappointed in what
they were greatly expecting" (290). The Holy Father rightly observes that
conjugal love-that love precisely by virtue of which the two become
"one flesh"-is a difficult love. It places serious moral demands on the
couple. If this is what St. Paul intends to say, John Paul argues that "he
certainly remains on the grounds of evangelical truth and there is no rea-
son here to see symptoms oLManichaeism" (290).
The Pope finds a personalist key to interpreting Paul 's teaching in
verse seven. There the Apostle states in relation to the choice of vocation
that "each has his own special gift from God, one of one kind and one of
another." The Holy Father places great weight on this statement. He be-
lieves that it leads us to see differently St. Paul's teaching as a whole. With
this assertion as our interpretive key, we realize that, according to st. Paul,
both celibacy and marriage stem from a special grace given by God. 17
While Paul clearly encourages abstention from marriage to the Co-
rinthians, this most definitely does not stem from a view that marriage is
16. See CCC, nn. 125 - 127.

17. See CCC, n. 1620.
somehow evil. Paul explicitly wants to counter the idea seemingly circu-
lating in Corinth that marriage is a sin (see vv. 28, 36). To this end he
states explicitly, as the Pope repeatedly reminds us, that in both vocations
"there is operative that 'gift' that each one receives from God" (297). This
gift is the grace that makes the body a "temple of the Holy Spirit," as St.
Paul stated in the previous chapter of his letter (see 1 Cor 6:19). This gift
remains in both vocations (celibacy and marriage) if the person remains
faithful to his gift and, according to his state, does not "dishonor" this
temple of the Holy Spirit, which is his body.
B. Outlet for Concupiscence?

Various dist0l1ions were prevalent in the Corinthian community that
dishonored the temple of the Holy Spirit. St. Paul writes "fully aware of
the weakness and sinfulness to which [they were] subjected, precisely by
reason of the concupiscence of the flesh" (297). It even seems he is willing
to concede to some weakness for the sake of avoiding a greater dishonor
to the body. For instance, he says that couples should "come together
again, lest Satan tempt you through lack of self control." And then he
adds: "I say this by way of concession" (v. 6). And also: "But if they can-
not exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than
to be aflame with passion" (v. 9).
John Paul asks if Paul, based on these words, might not view mar-
riage as an ethical outlet for concupiscence. To this legitimate question,
the Pope, in my opinion, fails to give an altogether satisfying answer. Do
we not find here the basis of that traditional understanding that one of the
ends of marriage was "relief of concupiscence" in the sense of indulging
lustful desire? (see §34) Again it may seem difficult to reconcile John
Paul's teaching with St. Paul's. The Holy Father has insisted throughout
his entire catechesis that there is "real power" in Jesus Christ's death and
resurrection to set men free from the domination of concupiscence. Based
on the ethos of redemption which Christ preached in the Sermon on the
Mount, John Paul has held out this freedom as the norm and the task for
all Christians and stressed that marriage does not justify indulging
concupiscence.
This, it seems, is why John Paul reminds us that we must look to the
teaching of Christ himself for ultimate resolutions to these difficult ques-
tions. He also rightly cautions against making judgments about what the
Apostle was thinking or teaching about marriage solely based on his state-
ments in 1 Corinthians 7. For example, we can recognize that indulging
concupiscence at the expense of one's wife would blatantly contradict
Paul's call for husbands to love their wives "as Christ loved the Church"
in Ephesians 5. Recall John Paul's pre-papal statement quoted previously:

"If it is true that marriage may also be a remedium concupiscentiae (see St.
Paul: 'It is better to marry than to burn' - 1 Cor 7:9) then this must be un-
derstood in the integral sense given it by the Christian Scriptures, which
also teach ofthe 'redemption of the body' (Rom 8:23) and point to the sac-
rament of matrimony as a way of realizing this redemption."'x
Despite the qualifications the Pope offers, the reader of his exegesis
is left desiring more explanation for the apparent incongruity between the
Sermon on the Mount (and John Paul's interpretation thereof) and Paul's
teaching that it "is better to marry than to burn." The Pope does say that
Paul certainly characterizes marriage "on the human side" based on the
particular struggles with concupiscence found among the Corinthians. But
John Paul believes, based on the Apostle's statement about the "gift" in
verse seven, that "he at the same time, with no less strength of conviction,
stresses ... also the action of grace in every person- in one who lives in
marriage no less than in one who willingly chooses continence" (295).
This statement seems to indicate that John Paul believes there is no incon-
gruity in what he has been teaching and in what Paul says to the Corinth-
ians. In the final analysis, there may not be. Unfortunately (although the
Pope does revisit this issue in cycle 5), John Paul does not take us to that
stage of the discussion .
• It does not seem to me that Paul holds out the power of grace to set
the Corinthians free from the domination of concupiscence with equal
strength of conviction. It seems more plausible to me that Paul offers some
concessions to human weakness (specifically, lack of self-control caused
by the domination of concupiscence) without a bold proclamation of the
full power of redemption because, as he said earlier in his letter, they were
not ready for it. He could only feed them with milk, not with solid food,
because they were still "babes in Christ"; they were still "of the flesh" (see
1 Cor 3: 1-3).
62. Why Celibacy Is "Better" According to St. Paul

June 23,30; July 7.14, 1982 (TB 289-299)
As previously noted, Paul is responding to various questions and er-

roneous ideas found among Christians in Corinth. Paul counters the idea
18. "The Family as a Community of Persons," Persoll & Community: Selected Es-
says, p. 327.
that marriage is itself sinful by stating explicitly that he who marries "does
well." But he encourages celibacy because he believes that "he who re-
frains from marriage will do better" (v. 38). To clarify any confusion on
this point, John Paul stresses that Paul is not speaking ofthe difference be-
tween good and evil, but only between good and better. But why does he
say that refraining from marriage is "better"? While he affirms the reasons
we already discussed (see §58), he adds some personal insights.
A. Anxious About the Affairs of the Lord

First, Paul clearly states that celibacy is better than marriage only
given the appropriate circumstances. In keeping with the words of Christ,
celibacy must be a voluntary response to a special grace (see v. 7), and it
must be chosen because "the form of this world is passing away" (v. 31).
In other words, it must be chosen for the sake of the kingdom (which does
not pass away).
The Holy Father spends much time reflecting on the following
words as the basis of Paul's teaching that celibacy is "better" than mar-
riage. "The unmarried man is anxious about the affairs of the Lord, how
to please the Lord; but the married man is anxious about worldly affairs,
how to please his wife, and his interests are divided" (vv. 32-34). John
Paul says this passage indicates the spousal nature of the celibate voca-
tion. We try to please the people we love, especially a spouse. A form of
spousal love, then, is at the foundation of the celibate's desire to "please
the Lord." Of course, as the Pope notes, every Christian who lives his
faith is anxious to please the Lord. But the celibate person, free from the
obligations of marriage and family life, can devote himself to the affairs
of the Lord in an exclusive or "undivided" way. Furthermore, John Paul
observes that people can "be anxious" only about what occupies their
hearts. The "affairs of the Lord" occupy the hearts of those who are celi-
bate for the kingdom. They have chosen the "better part," the "one thing
necessary" (see Lk 10:41).
What are the "affairs of the Lord"? John Paul says they signify in the
first place the building up of Christ's Body, the Church. But they also sig-
nify "concern [for] the whole world" (291). For, as st. Paul says, "the
earth is the Lord's and everything in it" (1 Cor 10:26). According to John
Paul, this love that Paul has for the Lord, his Church, and his whole
world-and his ability to devote himself totally to their service-moti-
vates him to write that "I wish that all were as I myself am" (v. 7).
The Holy Father says that a celibate person with such love and devo-
tion to Christ is marked by an "interior integration"-a unification that al-
lows him to dedicate himself completely to the service of God's kingdom
in all its dimensions. Do we not see here, perhaps, an echo of that "origi-
nal virginal value of man" who was characterized by a perfect interior in-
tegration (see § IS)? In any case, it is not celibacy per se that enables such
"virginal" integration. John Paul notes that an unmarried person can also
experience an interior "division." When a celibate lacks a clear goal for
which to sacrifice marriage, he often faces a certain emptiness. At the
same time, as John Paul has already affirmed, a married couple devoted to
Christ can rediscover in some sense that original "virginal" integrity.
B. Both Vocations Are a Call to Holiness

Paul mainly desires to help the Corinthians live in "undivided devo-
tion to the Lord" (v. 35). Marriage in itself is no obstacle to Christian de-
votion. But, as experience attests, married men and women can easily get
distracted by the "affairs of the world." As John Paul says, ''The Apostle
seems to know all this very well, and takes pains to specify that he does
not want to 'lay any restraint' [v. 35] on one whom he advised not to
marry" (293). His overall point is to call the Corinthians to holiness in
body and spirit (see v. 34).
"In order to grasp adequately the whole depth of Paul's thought,"
John Paul says, "we must note that 'holiness,' according to the biblical
concept, is a state rather than an action. It has first of all an ontological
character and then also a moral one" (294). In other words, holiness is not
first a matter of "doing." It is first a matter of "being." Holiness is first a
gift that we must receive, not a commodity that we must produce. The
moral goodness of our actions then flows forth as a fruit of and response to
the gift we have received .
• Recall John Paul's statement that "holiness is measured according to

the 'great mystery' in which the Bride responds with the gift of love to the
gift of the Bridegroom."19 Holiness is a gift of love given by the Bride-
groom to which we give our consent, our ':fiat." This is why the Catechism
teaches that "Mary goes before us all in the holiness that is the Church's
mystery as 'the bride without spot or wrinkle. "'20
Furthermore, as St. Paul states and John Paul emphasizes, both celi-
bacy and marriage are a special gift from God. When received as such,
both are vocations to holiness. However, as the Apostle to the Gentiles
stresses, in a sense the married person finds it more difficult to understand
19 . Mulieris Dignitatem. n. 27.

20. CCC. n. 773.
and live this. As Christ affirmed in his discussion with the Sadducees, mar-
riage is part of what Paul calls "the form of this world [which] is passing
away" (v. 31). And if man is to be holy, he cannot become too attached to
the goods of a perishable world. "Desire for true happiness frees man from
his immoderate attachment to the goods of this world"-including mar-
riage-"so that he can find his fulfillment in the vision and beatitude of
God."21 Thus, for marriage to lead to holiness, the Christian must live it in
light of his definitive vocation. In other words, he must not let it tie him
down to "earthly affairs." He must live it as a sacrament of the life to
come. This is what St. Paul means when he says "let those who have
wives live as though they had none" (v. 29). Obviously, a celibate for the
kingdom is not locked in the world's transience in the same way a married
person is. "It is for this very reason," John Paul asserts, "that the Apostle
declares that one who chooses continence 'does better'" (296).
C. The Grace Operative in Married Life

John Paul closes his reflections on Paul's First Letter to the Corinthi-
ans with some comments on the operation of grace in the conjugal union.
The Pope observes that Paul writes about it with the same realism that
marks the advice he gives throughout the seventh chapter of this letter.
"The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the
wife to her husband. For the wife does not rule over her own body, but the
husband does; likewise the husband does not rule over his own body, but
the wife does" (vv. 3-4).
John Paul notes that this language of "rights" and "ruling over the
body" has passed from Paul's vocabulary into the whole theology of mar-
riage. Unfortunately, these phrases have not always been understood in a
way that upheld the dignity of the spouses and the personal nature of the
one flesh union. The contractual "rights" and "duties" of spouses have
been emphasized at times to the neglect of the love proper to a personal
covenant. Hence, ever on guard against anything that obscures the dignity
of the person, John Paul insists that these Pauline phrases "cannot be ex-
plained apart from the proper context of the marriage covenant" (297). In
his catechesis up to this point, the Holy Father has tried to clarify precisely
this deeply personal nature of conjugal relations. And he will clarify it
even more fully in his next cycle of reflections.
John Paul also has an intriguing and original way of applying the fol-
lowing passage from St. Paul's letter: "Do not refuse one another except
21. CCC, n. 2548.

perhaps by agreement for a season, that you may devote yourselves to

prayer; but then come back together again" (v. 5). According to the Holy
Father, "St. Paul clearly says that conjugal common life and the voluntary
and periodic abstinence by the couple must be the fruit of this 'gift of God'
which is their' own. '" By knowingly cooperating with this gift, the couple
"can maintain and strengthen that mutual personal bond and also that dig-
nity conferred on the body by the fact that it is a 'temple of the Holy Spirit
who is in them' (see 1 Cor 6:19)" (298). With these statements, the Holy
Father is clearly laying the foundation for his future reflections on the
value of periodic abstinence to an authentic marital spirituality (see cycle 6).
Furthermore, he interprets Paul's call to periodic abstinence as an in-
dication of "the need to take into consideration all that in some way corre-
sponds to the very different subjectivity of the man and the woman" (298).
All the subjective richness of man and woman is expressed differently,
John Paul indicates, according to their different levels of sensitivity. If
these differences are to produce harmony rather than discord, they must
remain under the influence of that particular gift (grace) given to married
people. Based on the subject matter of the Pauline passage, the Pope's
statements seem a clear reference to the different rise in sexual arousal in
man and woman of which he (as Karol Wojtyla) wrote in detail in Love &
Responsibility. Because the man typically experiences a more rapid rise in
sexual arousal than the woman, the virtue of continence is necessary if the
man is to respond tenderly and lovingly toward his wife. 22 Such tenderness
is aided by the practice of periodic abstinence and prayer, of which St.
Paul spoke. Here again we see John Paul applying familiar Scripture pas-
sages in excitingly innovative ways.
63. The Redemption of the Body and the Hope of Every Day
July 14, 21, 1982 (TB 299-302)
John Paul closes his cycle on celibacy in his audience of July 21,
1982 with a summary of his reflections up until this point. "Everything we
have tried to do in our meditations in order to understand Christ's words,"
the Pope says, "has its ultimate foundation in the mystery of the redemp-
tion of the body" (302). Historical man can begin to reclaim God's origi-
nal plan for his humanity only in this context. And it is the only basis for
man's hope to attain ultimate fulfillment in his eschatological destiny.
The Holy Father reminds us that St. Paul speaks of the redemption of
the body in both an anthropological and a cosmic dimension. It is anthro-
22. See Love & Responsibility, p . 275.

Celibacy /or the Kingdom 303
po logical because "it is the redemption of man." It is cosmic because, at

the same time, the Pope says, "it radiates, in a certain sense, on all cre-
ation, which from the beginning has been bound in a particular way to
man and subordinated to him (see Gen 1:28 - 30)" (299-300). According
to John Paul, "All visible creation, all the universe, bears the effects of
man's sin" (299). As St. Paul writes, "creation was subjected to futility."
But it was subjected "in hope: because the creation itself will be set free
from its bondage to decay and obtain the glorious liberty of the children of
God" (Rom 8:20-21). The hope of man and the hope of the entire uni-
verse, then, rests on the redemption of the body.
A. Christ Fulfills the Proto-evangelium

Recalling the proto-evangelium (i.e. , the first announcement of the
Gospel) in Genesis, John Paul says that the hope of the body's redemption
was planted in man's heart immediately after the first sin. The Lord said to
the serpent, "I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between
your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his
heel" (Gen 3: 15). The Church sees in these words a foreshadowing of the
New Adam and the New Eve, of Jesus and Mary.23 Satan will continue to
attack the woman and her call to bear life (e.g., see Rev 12). The devil will
wound the woman's offspring (Jesus). Yet in the very process of what
seems like a victory for Satan, Christ will deal a fatal blow to his head and
restore man and woman (and all creation) to the purity of their origins .
Through John Paul's theology of the body we come to realize that this
cosmic battle between good and evil, while fought on a spiritual plane (see
Eph 6: 12), is always a battle for the truth of the body. It is an attack on the
nuptial meaning of the body. This is why "the redemption of man" is the re-
demption of his body. In fact, what the proto-evangelium announces is the
nuptial meaning of the body's restoration. For Christ defeats the devil and
fully reveals man to himself precisely through the nuptial gift of his body on
the cross and the "rebirth" of his body in the resulTection.
The triptych of Christ's words upon which John Paul has been re-
flecting (i.e., Christ's words about the beginning, about the man of lust,
and about the resulTection) flow "from the divine depths of the mystery of
redemption." And this redemption "finds its specific 'historical' subject
precisely in Christ himself [because] the redemption of the body has al-
ready been accomplished in Christ" (300). Christ fulfills the hope of the
proto-evangelium "not only with the words of his teaching, but above all
with the testimony of his death and resulTection" (300).
23. See CCC, n. 411; for the Marian interpretation see Lumen Gentium, n. 55 and
Redemptoris Mater, nn. 7, 11 , 24.
B. The Hope of Every Day

St. Paul indicates that the redemption of the body is something we
"wait for ... with patience" (Rom 8:25). We are saved in hope. But who
hopes for what he has already attained (see v. 24)? In this sense Paul
speaks of the ultimate fulfillment of the redemption of the body-the
eschatological victory over death, to which Christ gave testimony above
all by his resurrection. Those who limit themselves to this sense of Paul's
words might resign themselves merely to coping with concupiscence until
Christ returns. We will certainly always feel the pull of concupiscence in
this life, but John Paul insists that the redemption of the body can and
must bear fruit in the here-and-now of historical man's life. Recall from
our reflection on historical man that "the 'redemption of the body' is al-
ready an aspect of human life on earth. This redemption is not just an
eschatological reality but a historical one as well. It shapes the history of
the salvation of concrete living people .. .in keeping with the intent of the
Creator announced to the first parents before the fall."24 Thus, in the Ser-
mon on the Mount, Christ calls historical man to overcome concupiscence
not only by observing external norms of behavior, but "even in the
uniquely interior movements of the human heart" (301). This call "is a
question not of the eschatological hope of the resurrection, but of the hope
of victory over sin." With humble faith and buoyant optimism, John Paul
calls this "the hope of every day." The "hope of every day," the Pope ob-
serves, "manifests its power in human works and even in the very move-
ments of the human heart, clearing a path, in a certain sense, for the great
eschatological hope bound with the redemption of the body" (301).
Whether man chooses marriage or celibacy for the kingdom, he must
daily give a living witness of fidelity to his choice. For both vocations,
such fidelity is only possible when man draws "from the mystery of the
redemption of the body the inspiration and the strength to overcome the
evil that is dormant in him under the form of threefold concupiscence."
This victory comes from "the hope of every day, which in proportion to
the nonnal duties and difficulties of human life helps to overcome 'evil
with good' (Rom 12:21)." Thus, as John Paul affirms, "the 'redemption of
the body' is expressed not only in the resurrection as victory over death. It
is present also in Christ's words addressed to 'historical' man" (301).
24. "The Family as a Community of Persons," Persoll & Community: Selected Es-
says. p. 326.
Celibacyfor the Kingdom 305
C. The Theology of the Body Is Fundamental

John Paul states that there is a "bond that exists between the dignity
of the human being (man or woman) and the nuptial meaning of his body."
The more we live and experience daily a victory over concupiscence, the
more we "discover and strengthen that bond" (301). As this bond estab-
lishes itself firmly in man's conscience, he discovers the true dignity ofev-
ery human being by readily recognizing the nuptial meaning of that
person's body. In fact, we could even say that to the extent that concu-
piscence binds us, we are blind to the dignity of the person precisely be-
cause we are blind to the nuptial meaning of his or her body. Or, perhaps
more aptly, to the extent that we are bound by concupiscence, the dignity
of the person remains only an idea, a concept we may well accept, but
which we do notfeel and experience in the movements of the heart.
The triptych of Christ's words affords us that "hope of every day"
which enables llS progressively to rediscover and, more, to experience in
our hearts the nuptial meaning of the body. Through the mature freedom of
the gift, we can fulfill our body's nuptial meaning either through marriage
or celibacy for the kingdom. "Both [vocations] fumish a full answer to one
of man's fundamental questions, the question about the significance of
'being a body,' that is, about the significance of masculinity and feminin-
ity" (299). "In these different ways," John Paul says, enlisting his anthem
from Vatican II, "Christ fully reveals man to man, making him aware of
'his sublime vocation'" (302). What is man's sublime vocation? It is to be
taken up into the etemal ecstasy of the Trinitarian mystery through a union
with the etemal Word, which St. Paul compares to the union of spouses
(see Eph 5:31-32). And this vocation, the Holy Father reminds us, "is in-
scribed in man according to all his psycho-physical makeup, precisely
through the mystery of the redemption ofthe body" (302).
Apart from the redemption of the body, all interpretations of man-
or, what John Paul calls "anthropological hermeneutics"-inevitably fall
short of the full truth of man's greatness, of his sublime calling. Thus, John
Paul boldly proclaims that the "theology of the body is shown to be some-
thing truly fundamental and constitutive for all anthropological hermeneu-
tics" (299). In other words, unless we understand the truths of the theology
of the body, we do not-and cannot-understand fundamentally and ad-
equately who man is and who he is meant to be. Nor can we understand
how he is meant to live. For the theology of the body is "equally funda-
mental for ethics." And, if we are to penetrate man's subjectivity, it is fun-
damental in constructing a "theology of the human ethos" (299).
With this concise review of his reflections up to this point, John Paul
prepares his audience for the next cycle of reflections on the sacrament-
ality of marriage.
Celibacy for the Kingdom-In Review

I. Christ's words about those who make themselves eunuchs "for the
sake of the kingdom" form the basis of the Pope's reflection on the celi-
bate vocation. This voluntary and supernatural calling serves as a charis-
matic sign of the future resurrection when men and women "neither marry
nor are given in marriage" but participate eternally in the marriage of the
Lamb. Based on the covenant with Abraham, preferring to be a eunuch
was virtually unthinkable for a Jew.
2. The departure from the Old Covenant was effected especially in
the celibate example of Christ. The celibate lives of Joseph and Mary also
speak to this new dimension. In a profound paradox, they simultaneously
embrace the marriage of earth and the marriage of heaven. By doing so,
they effect the most fruitful marriage of the cosmos-the union of the hu-
man and divine natures in the Person of Christ. All those who live an au-
thentic celibate vocation participate in some way in this new super-
abounding spiritual fruitfulness.
3. Behind both marriage and the celibate vocation "are found the
same anthropology and the same ethos." In other words, both vocations
flow from the same vision of the human person and the same call to expe-
rience the redemption of our bodies, which includes the redemption of our
sexual desires. Without understanding the ethos of redemption, life-long
continence is viewed as hopelessly repressive and marriage as a "legiti-
mate outlet" for lust.
4. An authentic understanding of the "superiority" of continence
never means disparaging marriage. It is not based on any prejudice toward
the "one flesh" union which, as the essential element of marriage, is part
of God's good and holy design. The celibate vocation is "superior" only in
its more direct orientation toward man's superior heavenly destiny.
5. Christ does not wish to hide the real sacrifice involved in choosing
life-long continence. Historical man is "made" for marriage. However,
continence in no way rejects man's dual nature as a sexual being. It par-
ticipates in the ultimate purpose and meaning of masculinity and feminin-
ity. The celibate person fulfills the nuptial meaning of his body differently
and even "more" than the married person by being a sincere gift to others.
6. Marriage and celibacy do not divide the Church into two camps of
those who are "perfect" and "imperfect." Perfection is measured by char-
ity, not by whether or not one is celibate. Celibacy and marriage, in fact,
explain, complete, and in some sense interpenetrate each other.
Celibacy/or the Kingdom 307
7. Marriage reveals that continence, too, is an expression of conjugal

love which leads to a spiritual fatherhood and motherhood. Continence, by
anticipating the heavenly union of Christ and the Church, reveals that mar-
riage is a sacramental participation in the same mystery. Each vocation, in
its own way, expresses the reality of "gift" inscribed in the body.
8. Masculinity and femininity reveal that the human person is created
to be a gift "for" another. Christ's words reveal that men and women can
express this in choosing celibacy "for" the kingdom. This is only a renun-
ciation when viewed in temporal categories. The kingdom for which some
choose celibacy expresses the fullness of God's bounty toward man and is
the ultimate fulfillment of all that man desires.
9. The celibate vocation is not only a matter of formation but of
transformation. Only when a person is liberated from lust and is in posses-
sion of his own sexual subjectivity can he be a gift to others-whether in
the celibate vocation or in marriage. Only one who understands and em-
braces the beauty and sacredness of God's plan for sex and marriage can
renounce them in the mature sense that Christ requires.
10. In 1 Corinthians 7, St. Paul presents the truth about celibacy pro-
claimed by Christ, yet at the same time he employs a style "totally his
own." It can seem as though Paul has a rather negative view of marriage,
but in a thoughtful reading of the text we see no introduction to Manichae-
ism. In fact, Paul insists that both marriage and the celibate vocation are a
special "gift" (grace) from God.
11. Many have thought that Paul's statement "it is better to marry
than to bum" justifies indulging concupiscence within marriage. It may
seem difficult to reconcile John Paul II's teaching with St. Paul's. Yet
Paul's words cannot be interpreted apart from Christ's words about lust
nor apart from Paul's teaching as a whole, which includes "the redemption
of the body" and the call of husbands to love their wives "as Christ loved
the Church."
12. The Apostle writes that he who marries "does well," but he who
refrains "does better" since he can devote himself in an undivided way to
"the affairs of the Lord." Marriage itself is a vocation to holiness and
therefore concerns the "affairs of the Lord." But experience attests that the
responsibilities of marriage and family life can distract men and women
from their ultimate vocation and tie them down to "earthly affairs." It is
in this sense that Paul exhorts married people to live as though they were
not married.
13. When Paul speaks of granting "conjugal rights" and spouses "rul-
ing over the body" of the other, these expressions cannot be explained
apart from the context of the love proper to the marriage covenant. Grace
is poured out on the couple in their conjugal life to harmonize their differ-
ent levels of sensitivity. The periodic abstinence which Paul recommends
can aid this.
14. Christ fulfills the ''proto-evangelium'' of Genesis not only in his
teaching, but especially with his death and resurrection. In this way Christ
"re-creates" man and woman and redeems the nuptial meaning of the
body. This redemption is not only a hope for the eschaton, but is also a
"hope of every day." It already begins here-and-now and clears a path for
future glory.
15. A deep bond exists between the dignity of the person and the nup-
tial meaning of his or her body. To the extent that concupiscence binds us,
the dignity of the person is not "felt." Thus, the theology of the body and
the redemption to which it calls us is fundamental for all interpretations of
man and for constructing an adequate and authentic human ethos.
Cycle 5
The Sacramentality of Marriage
The theology of the body has emerged along the lines which Christ
provides in the triptych or three-part "revelation of the body." Having re-
flected on this "total vision of man" and then applied it to the vocation of
celibacy for the kingdom, we are now prepared to penetrate the "great
mystery" of the sacramentality of marriage. For what Christian celibacy
participates in by immediate anticipation, Christian marriage participates
in by sacramental mediation.
We are speaking, of course, about the marriage of the Lamb-the ul-
timate fulfillment of both the celibate vocation and the sacrament of mar-
riage. But in what way does Christian marriage participate in the spousal
relationship of Christ and the Church? The answer lies in this fifth cycle of
John Paul II's theology of the body. These twenty-two general audiences
delivered between July 28, 1982 and February 9, 1983 1 are perhaps more
densely packed with far-reaching theological insight than the other cycles.
So it will take a bit more ink to unpack this cycle than the others.
Cycle 5 provides a fresh analysis of what John Paul calls another
"key" and "classic" text of Scripture: Ephesians 5:21-33. The mystery of
God's spousal love for humanity, John Paul says, was only "half opened"
by the prophets of the Old Testament. In Ephesians 5 :21- 33 "it is fully re-
vealed."2 St. Paul speaks of the "great mystery" of man and woman's com-
munion in "one flesh" as a perennial foreshadowing of Christ's incarnate
communion with the Church. Hence, this text brings our understanding of
the body and nuptial union to a "mystical" level. We can mine the great
1. John Paul postponed his catechesis for a year after closing this cycle. He resumed
in May of 1984 with a reflection on the Song of Songs, the story ofTobiah and Sarah, and
a review of Ephesians 5. Some divisions of the Pope's catechesis include these (five)
addresses in cycle 5. However, as John Paul indicates, these addresses are better situated
as an introduction to his cycle on Humanae Vitae (see 5/23/84, TB 368).
2. 9/22/82, TB 329.
309
riches of this passage only in light of Christ's "revelation of the body."

The Pope wants to understand how the sacramentality of marriage
emerges in this "classic" text. He wants to understand how it is expressed
and confirmed there. He adds that the answers he seeks cannot be attained
quickly, but only through a gradual, "long-term" effort. These answers, he
says, "must pass through the whole sphere oLthe theology of the body."3
Using our former image, when spouses allow their "tires" to be in-
flated with the "great mystery" proclaimed in Ephesians 5, they come to
experience marriage as it was created to be. The deep longings and worthy
desires of the heart for love-for giving and receiving affirmation, tender-
ness, mercy, and compassion, for life-long commitment and fidelity of
heart, mind, and body-are not left fmstrated, but are met in tme measure.
In short, marriage works when both spouses are committed to the "great
mystery" of redemption in Jesus Christ. The road of married life will al-
ways have its bumps, but couples with tires inflated by the "breath of
God" are supremely equipped to handle them.
64. Marriage and the "Great Mystery" of Ephesians

July 28; August 4, 1982 (TB 304 -309)
One would be hard-pressed to find a passage in the Scriptures that

has been more maligned and dismissed by today's "politically correct" so-
ciety than Ephesians 5. In light of such polemics-which have even
seeped into the Church-John Paul is at pains to resurrect the tme mean-
ing of St. Paul's4 words and to show their fundamental importance. Here is
the full passage:
Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ. Wives, be subject
to your husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife
as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. As
the church is subject to Christ, so let wives also be subject in everything
to their husbands. Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church
and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed
her by the washing of water with the word, that he might present the
3.7/28/82, TB 305.
4. The Holy Father acknowledges in an endnote that some exegetes question the
Pauline authorship of Ephesians. John Paul provides a provisional solution to the dispute
"by means of a median supposition which we accept here as a working hypothesis:
namely, that St. Paul entrusted some concepts to his secretary, who then developed and
refined them" (7/2811982, endnote; TB 380). For this reason he altemately references
"the author of the letter to the Ephesians," the "Apostle," and "St. Paul."
The Sacramentality of Marriage 311
church to himself in splendor, without spot or wrinkle or any such thing,

that she might be holy and without blemish. Even so husbands should
love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves him-
self. For no man ever hates his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it,
as Christ does the church, because we are members of his body. "For this
reason a man shall leave his 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; however, let each one of you love
his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.
A. The Crowning of the Themes of Scripture

When this controversial passage from Ephesians is correctly under-
stood in the full biblical context, we realize that it contains "central themes
and essential truths" that cannot be dismissed. John Paul even says in his
poetic fashion that we should consider this passage "as the 'crowning' of
the themes and truths which, through the word of God revealed in Sacred
Scripture, ebb and flow like long waves" (305). He reiterates this and even
goes a step further in his Letter to Families by describing this passage
from Ephesians as "the compendium or summa, in some sense, of the
teaching about God and man which was brought to fulfillment by Christ."5
John Paul wants to penetrate this "summa" to help us "understand possibly
'to the very depths' how much richness of the truth revealed by God is
contained in the scope of [this] wonderful page" (306). To do so we must
presuppose the triptych of Christ's words about the human body in the be-
ginning, in history, and in the resurrection.
As John Paul points out, the words of Ephesians 5 "are centered on
the body." They speak of the body in both the analogous sense of the Body
of Christ, which is the Church, and the concrete sense of the human body
in its sexual complementarity and its "perennial destiny for union in mar-
riage"(305). The convergence of these two meanings of the body gives
us the key to understand the "great mystery" St. Paul speaks of in verses
31- 32 . There the Apostle links the primordial meaning of the "one
flesh" union of spouses with the union of Christ and the Church. What
is the relationship between these two holy communions? John Paul will
provide a "studied" answer.
Precisely at this point- in the relationship of that perennial union in
"one flesh" with the union of Christ and the Church-we find ourselves on
the threshold of the meaning and mystery of the universe. We find our-
selves on the threshold of discovering the glory and greatness that God has
bestowed on us by creating us as male and female and calling us to incamate

communion. This is why, using again his anthem from Gaudium et Spes,
John Paul says that this passage from Ephesians "reveals- in a pat1icular
way- man to man, and makes him aware of his lofty vocation" (306).
B. The Experience of the Incarnate Person

By linking this passage from Ephesians with the key anthropological
statement of Vatican II, we glimpse from yet another angle the exceptional
importance John Paul places on St. Paul's words here. However, a person
can only see this link with Gaudium et Spes 22 "inasmuch as he shares in
the experience of the incarnate person" (306). This phrase "the experience
of the incarnate person" in some way describes the Pope's entire cateche-
sis. This is what the theology of the body-and this passage from
Ephesians-are all about. They seek to ground man in the experience of
his own incarnate personhood. The modem view of man, however, has ef-
fectively severed man from his body. In the often vehement dispute over
Ephesians 5, we glimpse the great clash of two competing humanisms
and, in particular, their respective views of the human body and the mean-
ing of sexuality.
In the modem view, the body has been relegated to the realm of sub-
human nature. It may serve as a biological reference point, but it has noth-
ing to say about the human person and the order of human relationships.
Much less does the body say anything about theology-about the nature of
the divine mystery and God's love for humanity. In this view, the person
stands over and against his body. The body does not call him to anything.
It makes no demands on him. Modern man owns his body like a thing and
he can do whatever he wants with it. The body and sexuality are then used
as tools and as a means to selfish pleasure, even profit. The "word" (or
anti-word) inscribed in the body for modem man is "self-gratification."
St. Paul, on the other hand, is deeply rooted in a sacramental, theo-
logical view of the body. He knows the body "speaks" a mystical lan-
guage. It speaks not only about the truth of the human person as male and
female. It speaks about the "great mystery" hidden in God from all eter-
nity. For St. Paul, the truth about who man is as male and female can only
be understood in light of this "great mystery." Recalling God's incarnate
plan for man and woman in Genesis, he links it with the analogy of the
spousal love of God for his chosen people. In doing so, he calls man and
woman to embrace the sublime vocation inscribed in their bodies from
"the beginning"-to love as God loves. The Word inscribed in the body in
Ephesians 5 is "self-donation."
The modem view of man and of human sexuality cannot tolerate and,
in fact, radically opposes this "great incarnationalmystery." Such a grand
The Sacramentality ofMarriage 313
vision places far too many demands on man and challenges his utilitarian
view of the body at its roots. Thus, those who embrace the vision of the
body and of marriage proclaimed in Ephesians 5 should expect fierce at-
tacks. It is no coincidence, as John Paul indicates, that St. Paul's proclama-
tion of the "great mystery" is followed by "a stupendous encouragement to
the spiritual battle (see 6:10-20)" (308). It is also important to realize that
St. Paul began his letter by presenting the eternal plan of man's salvation in
Christ (see Eph 1). This is the battle we are fighting-the battle of salva-
tion. It is a spiritual battle but it is waged against the truth of the body.
And, as we learn from the Letter to the Ephesians, the sacramentality of
marriage stands at the center of the clash. If we are to win this battle, the first
piece of armor we must don is to "gird our loins with the truth" (Eph 6: 14).
65. The Body Enters the Definition of Sacrament

July 28; August 4,11, 1982 (TB 305-311)
In his audience of August 4, John Paul outlines the overall structure

of the Letter to the Ephesians before analyzing chapter 5. This helps us po-
sition St. Paul's detailed instructions to husbands and wives in the broader
context of the moral obligations of the family, the larger Christian commu-
nity, and society as a whole. It also helps us understand the spiritual cli-
mate which the Apostle believes should animate the lives of Christians.
Sinful humanity is called to new life in Jesus Christ. Only by living this
"new life"-that is, only through the encounter with the risen Christ-are
men and women empowered to live as St. Paul exhorts them to live.
For this reason the Apostle bends his knee "before the Father" and
asks him to grant that the readers of his letter would "be strengthened with
might through his Spirit in the inner man, and that Christ may dwell in
your hearts through faith; that you, being rooted and grounded in love,
may have power to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and
length and height and depth, and to know the love of Christ which surpasses
knowledge, that you may be filled with the fullness of God" (3:14-19). If
the Apostle holds husbands and wives to a high standard, he assures his
readers that the "fullness of God" and the love of Christ within us affords
a "power" that can do far more in us than anything we could ask or imag-
ine (see Eph 3:20).
A. God's Plan of Salvation Is Rooted in the Body

The union of man and woman in one flesh is a "great mystery" that
refers to Christ's union with the Church (see 5:31- 32). Even at first glance
we see that this truth proclaimed by Ephesians 5 confirms John Paul's the-
sis statement (see §22). The Apostle is speaking here of that "great mys-
tery" hidden in God from time immemorial that, according to John Paul,
the body "and it alone" is capable of making visible to us. It is the mystery
of divine love and life-of Trinitarian Communion-in which man and
woman are called to participate through the intimacy of a quasi-nuptial
union with Christ. This is the very essence of what this passage from
Ephesians reveals about the sacramentality of marriage and its consum-
mate expression of conjugal intercourse. The Pope seeks gradually to un-
fold precisely this point.
The Pope reiterates his thesis when he affirms that "in some way,
even if in the most general way, the body enters the definition of sacra-
ment, being' a visible sign of the invisible reality,' that is, of the spiritual,
transcendent, divine reality. In this sign-and through this sign-God
gives himself to man in his transcendent truth and in his love. The sacra-
ment is a sign of grace, and it is an efficacious sign." In other words, the
Pope says, "Not only does the sacrament indicate grace and express it in a
visible way, but it also produces it." The sacrament "effectively contrib-
utes to having grace become part of man, and to realizing and fulfilling in
him the work of salvation, the work begun by God from all eternity and
fully revealed in Jesus Christ" (305 - 306).
This is a grand statement of incarnational theology. It grounds God's
plan of salvation in the body by grounding the action of God's grace in the
body. It beautifully echoes Tertullian's famous saying: "the flesh is the
hinge of salvation."6 Man is an incarnate person. This is the only way he
can encounter God and be himself. This means that, contrary to popular
opinion, in his quest for transcendence man need not shed his skin. In an
act of utter kenosis (self-emptying), Transcendence himself took on man's
skin, thus divinizing the body. In the Bridegroom, Jesus Christ, "the whole
fullness of deity dwells bodily" (Col 2:9). The Incarnation, then, as John
Paul said at the conclusion of his first cycle, "is the definitive source of the
sacramentality of marriage. "7 The Incarnation, in fact, is the definitive and
ultimate "nuptial" union. It is the union of divinity and humanity in the
Person of the Word. It is the indissoluble sign of the Father's covenant
love for humanity, of the super-abounding grace bestowed upon the incar-
nate-that is, the human-person.
6. See CCC. n. 1015.

7.412180, TB 89 (see §24).
This is precisely the affirmation of the body and of nuptial union

found in st. Paul's proclamation of the "great mystery" in Ephesians 5.
John Paul will explore the meaning of sacrament (particularly the sacra-
ment of marriage), as he says, first in the dimension of covenant and grace
(this is the divine reality of sacrament), and then in the dimension of the
sacramental sign (this is the human reality of sacrament).
B. Modern Sensitivities and St. Paul s Interpretive Key

Since he became pope, John Paul has repeatedly proclaimed, "Be not
afraid." We can certainly apply this to St. Paul's words in Ephesians 5. We
need not be afraid of what this passage reveals about man and woman's
relationship. John Paul certainly is not. He presses into it without hesita-
tion. In the process he shows that far from promoting an imbalance or in-
equality between spouses, this passage provides the only means of ensur-
ing the proper ordering of love between them-reverence for the mystery
of Christ revealed through their bodies.
In speaking of the wife's subjection to her husband, the Holy Father
affirms that the "author of the letter to the Ephesians does not fear to ac-
cept those concepts which were characteristic of the mentality and of the
customs of the times .... Nowadays our contemporary sensitivity is cer-
tainly different; quite different, too," the Pope continues, "are the mental-
ity and customs, and also the social position of women in regard to men"
(310-311). But when we dismiss St. Paul's words out-of-hand because of
modem sensitivities, we miss his evangelical genius altogether. Like any
great evangelist, he seeks to inject the cultural customs of his day with the
Christian mystery. Since the first chapter of his letter the Apostle has been
outlining the divine plan of man's salvation-that mystery hidden in the
Father which has been made known through Christ's union with the
Church. He has also been seeking to outline the vocation of those who are
baptized into this mystery. According to John Paul, these are the two prin-
cipal guidelines of the entire letter, and St. Paul's "classic" teaching on
marriage appears at the meeting of these guidelines. The mystery of
Christ's union with the Church and the vocation of Christians to "walk in
love, as Christ loved us" (5: 1- 2) provide the interpretive key to Paul's
teaching. This is crucial to a proper understanding of the passage.
The Apostle insists that those who accept their vocation in Christ
"must no longer live as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their minds; they
are darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God ... due to
their hardness of heart" (4: 17 -18). Then he exhorts his readers: "Put off
your old nature which belongs to your former manner of life and is corrupt
through deceitful lusts, and be renewed in the spirit of your minds, and put
on the new nature, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness
and holiness" (4:22-24). Do we not see here reference to that same "hard-
ness of heart" and that same "lust" Christ referred to in his words about
God's original plan for marriage and in the Sermon on the Mount? Do we
not also see the call to a radical transformation of the conscience and atti-
tudes of men and women according to the image and likeness of God in
which they were made?
In light of the ethos of redemption, St. Paul's exhortation to husbands
and wives takes on a revolutionary meaning. Indeed, it turns the typical
interpretation (i.e., that St. Paul is justifying male domination) on its head.
Knowing that male domination flows from sin (see Gen 3: 16), the Apostle
is actually calling husbands and wives to live according to God's original
plan in which there was a perfect balance, complementarity, and equality
between the sexes.
C. Mutual Subjection
Based on the Holy Father's exegesis, we might conclude that Paul is
saying something like this to his readers: "You are accustomed to subordi-
nation within marriage. This means one thing to the Gentiles who are
darkened in their understanding and corrupted by lust. But here is how this
looks in light of the mystery of Christ. Here is what this means for the vo-
cation of Christians."
The first thing St. Paul calls spouses to do is to be "subject to one
another out of reverence for Christ" (5:21). John Paul emphasizes this pas-
sage in order to highlight the often overlooked fact that subjection within
marriage, according to St. Paul, is mutual. It is not, as often thought, a uni-
lateral subjection of the wife to the husband. At this point the questions
multiply. What does it mean to be "subject" to one another? And why out
of reverence for Christ? Furthermore, does it not seem like Paul then
stresses the wife's subjection to her husband more than the husband to his
wife? As we shall see, these questions can only be properly answered if we
believe in "the gift." They can only be properly answered if we understand
that the truth of masculinity and femininity lies in the sacramental ability
of the body to convey the covenant relationship of God and man. "The
gift" is the love which the Heavenly Bridegroom gives to humanity as
Bride. But men and women must believe in the gift if they are to receive it
and recapitulate it in their love for one another.
Remove this element of "gift" and, in relation to divinity, humanity
can only assert itself in the face of a supposed tyranny. In tum, this same
dynamic will be played out in the relationship of the sexes. "Subjection"
then means a self-abnegating surrender to domination, particularly in the
The Sacramentalif)1 ofMarriage 317
relationship of the wife to the husband. Void of "the gift," the feminist re-
volt against Ephesians 5 is quite understandable. But we are not void of
the gift! The gift has been given in superabundance through the "great mys-
tery" of which Ephesians 5 speaks. But we must "believe in the good news"
(Mk 1: 15). We must reclaim the original meaning of the body-of masculin-
ity and femininity-and the original way of living the body as a gift.
Recall one of John Paul's key statements from his reflections on Gen-
esis: "This is the body: a witness to creation as a fundamental gift, and so
a witness to Love as the source from which this same giving springs. Mas-
culinity-femininity-namely, sex-is the original sign of a creative dona-
tion [by God] and of an awareness on the part of man, of a gift lived so to
speak in an original way."8
The original way of living "the gift" was manifested in the perfect
balance of love between the sexes as exhibited by the peace of original na-
kedness. As we all know from experience, however, original sin shattered
this "original way." Concupiscence does not live the reality of gift. In-
stead, it appropriates and dominates the other. This is felt in a particularly
pointed way by woman in relation to man (see §28). But through the
power of the Holy Spirit, the author of Ephesians calls spouses to put off
their old nature corrupted by lust and put on the new nature made in God's
image (see 4:22 - 24). In other words, through the mystery of redemption,
S1. Paul calls spouses back to that "original way" ofliving the gift.
66. Reverence for Christ Must Inform the Love of Spouses

August 11,18; September 1,1982 (TB 309-314,320)
Only when the Apostle's words are imbued with the mystery and fi-
delity of the "gift" does his teaching about "subjection" within marriage
take on its authentic meaning. From this perspective we come to under-
stand with John Paul that to be "subject" to one's spouse means to be
"completely given" (312). In tum, mutual subjection means "a reciprocal
donation of self" (310). In other words, to be subject to one another means
to live the sincere gift of self "in everything" (v. 24) according to the nup-
tial meaning of the body, of masculinity and femininity.
A. Reverencefor Christ
This is the radical paradigm shift st. Paul calls for by informing the
customs of the day (which concupiscence certainly influenced) with the
8. 1/9/80, TB 62 (see § 17).

mystery of Christ. In this way, John Paul says that Christian marriage, ac-
cording to Ephesians, "excludes that element of the pact which was a bur-
den and, at times, does not cease to be a burden in this institution" (310).
Husbands and wives are called to mutual subjection out of reverence for
Christ. This means that their mutual relations should flow from their com-
mon relationship with Christ. They should flow from a profound and lived
experience of the redemption of the body and, in this way, reclaim some-
thing of that original harmony of the beginning.
This reverence for Christ, John Paul points out, is analogous to "fear
of the Lord" or piety. Such "fear" is not a defensive attitude before God as
if he posed a threat. It is a gift of the Holy Spirit that inspires a profound
respect for the holy, the sacred, and the expression of this gift is love. The
mystery of Christ is, in fact, inscribed in the very bodies of husband and
wife and in their "one flesh" union. This is what makes marriage a sacred
mystery. As John Paul says, when "awe" for this mystery penetrates the
spouses' hearts it engenders in them that holy "reverence for Christ" and
leads them to be "subject to one another." This confers a profound and ma-
ture character on the conjugal union.
With Christ as both the source and the model of their subjection (of
their giving), the Holy Father observes that the psychology and moral na-
ture of the spouses is so transformed as to give rise to "a new and precious
fusion" of their relations and conduct (310). Husband and wife become
"fused" in this sense not only with one another, but also with the Holy
Spirit who inspires them to live the "sincere gift of self." Filled with the
Spirit (see v. 18), husbands are inspired to love their wives "as Christ
loved the church" (v. 25); and wives are inspired to be subject (or given) to
their husbands "as the Church is subject to Christ" (v. 24).
B. The Spousal Analogy

Christian spouses must model their relationship after the relation-
ship of Christ and the Church. According to the great "spousal analogy,"
the wife is an icon of the Church as Bride and the husband is an icon of
Christ as Bridegroom. Hence we read: "Wives, be subject to your hus-
bands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is
the head of the church" (vv. 22 - 23). John Paul stresses, "In saying this,
the author does not intend to say that the husband is 'lord' of the wife [in
any way that would imply] that the interpersonal pact proper to marriage
is a pact of domination of the husband over the wife" (310). Recall that
Christ says any proper "headship" among his followers must not be
modeled after the Gentiles who lord it over their subjects and make their
authority felt. Instead the "lord" must serve others in love and in self-
sacrifice (see Lk 22:25-26).
The Sacramentality a/Ma,.riage 319
St. Paul could not be clearer on this point when he says: "Husbands,
love your wives as Christ loved the church." How did Christ love the
Church? He "gave himself up for her" (v. 25). Christ said that he came not
to be served but to serve, and to lay down his life for his Bride (see Mt
20:28). Thus, John Paul insists that the love to which St. Paul calls hus-
bands clearly "excludes every kind of subjection whereby the wife might
become a servant or a slave of the husband, an object of unilateral domina-
tion. Love makes the husband simultaneously subject to the wife, and
thereby to the Lord himself, just as the wife to the husband" (310).
But one might still ask why St. Paul, having called spouses to a mu-
tual subjection, subsequently specifies the wife's subjection to her hus-
band, whereas he calls the husband to "love his wife." The Holy Father
might respond that in this manner the Apostle maintains the comple-
mentarity of the sexes that is indispensable in living "the gift." Husband
and wife are certainly called to a mutual subjection, but, according to the
nature of sexual difference, each lives this subjection in different, comple-
mentary ways .
• The feminist debate arises precisely here, in the admission that any
fundamental and meaningful d~fJerence between the sexes exists. But,
again, it arises only in a paradigm void of the "the gift" (see §65). In the
face of man's historical domination of woman, many feminists think that
the only way to claim their equality with men is to level sexual difference.
They prefer words like "mutuality" to "complementarity" when discussing
the inter-relationship of the sexes. Of course, there is a proper place for
"mutuality," such as in the expression "mutual self-donation." But the
original call of mutual self-donation is only possible in and through the
beauty, mystery, and complementarity of sexual difference. The point is
that equality between the sexes does not and must not mean "sameness."
As Jolm Paul expresses, the equal dignity of man and woman results from
their "specific diversity and personal originality.... Consequently, even the
rightful opposition of women to what is expressed in the biblical words,
'He shall rule over you' (Gen 3:16) must not under any condition lead to
the 'masculinization' of women." He continues, "In the name ofliberation
from male 'domination,' women must not...deform and lose what consti-
tutes their essential richness."9Tragically, by leveling sexual difference we
also eradicate the nuptial mystery proclaimed by our humanity. In other
words, we blind ourselves to the theology of the human body in its male-
ness and femaleness.
9. Mulieris Digllitate1l1, ll. 10.

B. Giving and Receiving the G(fi

As John Paul stated in his reflections on original man, the reality of
gift "indicates the one who gives, the one who receives the gift, and also
the relationship that is established between them."'o The Pope was refer-
ring specifically to the covenant of creation established between God and
man. But it also applies to the nuptial relationship of man and woman
which images and participates in God's covenant love with humanity. As
John Paul expresses, in imaging the nuptial mystery of Christ's love for
the Church "the husband is above all he who loves, and the wife, on the
other hand is she who is loved" (320). In other words, it corresponds to the
nuptial meaning of the husband's body to "initiate the gift," whereas it cor-
responds to the nuptial meaning of the wife's body to "receive the gift."
This complementary, sacramental reality is written in our very anatomy-
and, thus, because the body is the "sacrament" of the person, it is written
in our very personality as male and female .
• This giving and receiving of the gift is not to be equated with "ac-
tivity" and "passivity." Nor is it correct to limit "giving" to the masculine
and "receiving" to the feminine. Recall John Paul says that "the giving and
the accepting of the gift interpenetrate, so that the giving itself becomes ac-
cepting, and the acceptance is transformed into giving."" We could qualify
the complementarity of the sexes in their giving and receiving, as Dr. Will-
iam E. May expresses it, by stating that the man "gives in a receiving
way," whereas the woman "receives in a giving way."12
Through our analysis it comes to light, as the Holy Father proposes,

that "the wife's 'submission' to her husband, understood in the context of
the entire passage of the letter to the Ephesians, signifies above all 'the ex-
periencing oflove.' All the more so since this 'submission' is related to the
image of the submission of the Church to Christ, which certainly consists
in experiencing his love" (320).
By drawing this analogy between spousal love and Christ's love for
the Church, we realize that, despite modem sensitivities and cultural dif-
ferences, the fundamental moral principle of the Letter to the Ephesians
remains the same for all times and cultures. When properly understood
and lived, the Pope observes that it always produces that profound and
10. 112/80, TB 59 (see § 17).

11. 2/6/80, TB 71.
12. See Marriage: Th e Rock on which the Family Is Built (San Francisco, CA:
Ignatius Press, 1995), p. 50.
The Sacramentality of Marriage 32J
solid structure of the true communion of persons in maniage. It enables

men and women to live the sincere gift of self stamped in the nuptial
meaning of their bodies. In this way, husband and wife, in their own
complementary ways, image God and thus fulfill the very meaning of their
being and existence.
67. Carnal Love and the Language of Agape

August 11, 18,25; September 1, 1982 (TB 311-320)
As we are seeing, the sacramentality of maniage emerges in the Let-

ter to the Ephesians via the spousal analogy of Christ's love for the
Church. The Pope tells us that St. Paul inserts his teaching on maniage
into the very reality of the mystery hidden from eternity in God and re-
vealed to mankind in Jesus Christ. In this way we are "witnesses of a par-
ticular meeting of that mystery with the very essence of the vocation to
marriage" (311). This means that the sacramentality of maniage is not
merely some holy thing tacked onto marriage as a natural institution.
Maniage's participation in the divine mystery is of its velY essence. Of
course, in the strict sense of the tenn, marriage is only a sacrament when
both spouses are already baptized in Christ. Yet even in the marriages of
non-Christians there remains a "figure" in some sense of the primordial
sacrament, 13 a certain-even if not sacramentally efficacious-sign of
Christ's union with the Church.
John Paul observes that maniage clarifies and illuminates the mys-
tery of Christ and the Church, at least to a certain degree. Yet at the same
time, the mystery of Christ and the Church "unveils the essential truth
about marriage" (312). Thus John Paul tells us that the spousal analogy
operates in two directions. In analyzing the text of Ephesians 5, we must
look at both. Here we can recall what we stated in the prologue about read-
ing the human spousal analogy from the perspective of the divine
"katalogy." This means that the movement upwards ("ana") from the hu-
man spousal union to the union of Christ and the Church implies a prior
downward ("kata") movement from Christ's union with the Church to the
union of spouses (see §4).
A. Marriage Emergesfrom the Mystery of Christ

When we reread St. Paul's analogy "inversely"-that is, beginning
with Christ's relationship with the Church and then moving to husband
13. See 10/ 13/82, TB 336.

and wife ("katalogy")-we realize that "marriage, in its deepest essence,

emerges from the mystery of God's etemallove for man and for humanity:
from the salvific mystery which is fulfilled in time through the spousal
love of Christ for the Church" (313). As John Paul asserts, this means
"that marriage corresponds to the vocation of Christians only when it re-
flects the love which Christ the Bridegroom gives to the Church his Bride,
and which the Church ... attempts to return to Christ. This is redeeming
love, love as salvation, the love with which man from etemity has been
loved by God in Christ" (312).
This is quite a lofty calling. Who by his own strength can live this
divine love? Only the grace of salvation makes it possible. And the sacra-
ment of marriage affords precisely this. As John Paul says, marriage "is a
revelation and a realization in time of the mystery of salvation, of the
election of love, hidden from eternity in God" (312).14 So once again we
leam that "at the basis of an understanding of marriage in its very essence
is the spousal relationship of Christ to the Church" (313). From the begin-
ning, marriage found its raison d'etre as a visible sign of the divine etemal
mystery, as an image and foreshadowing of Christ's union with the
Church. In this way, John Paul says that the Letter to the Ephesians leads
us to the very foundations of the sacramentality of marriage.
Accordingly, we must conclude that in the spousal analogy St. Paul
does not find merely a coincidental or extrinsic resemblance that affords a
convenient way of making his point. This is not the wistful thinking of a
dreamy evangelist. Instead, "one must admit," according to the Holy Fa-
ther, "that in the very essence of marriage a particle of the mystery is cap-
tured. Otherwise, the entire analogy would hang suspended in a void." It
"would be without a real basis, as if it had no ground beneath its feet"
(313). The cross of Christ is planted in the ground beneath the feet of this
spousal analogy. Here we witness the totality of Christ's spousal love for
the Church. "That gift of himself to the Father by obedience unto death
(see Phil 2:8) is contemporaneously, according to the Letter to the
Ephesians, a 'giving himself up for the Church.' In this expression, re-
deeming love is transformed," the Pope says, "into spousal love: Christ,
giving himself up for the Church, through the same redeeming act is
united once and for all with her, as bridegroom with the bride, as husband
with his wife" (314).
In this way we can see that "the mystery of the redemption of the
body conceals within itself, in a certain sense, the mystery of 'the marriage
of the Lamb'(see Rev 19:7)." Through the Bridegroom's sincere gift of
14. Emphasis added.

self "the entire salvific gift of the redemption penetrates the Church as the
Body [of Christ], and continually forms the most profound, essential sub-
stance of her life" (314). This is the mystery stamped in our bodies, in the
gift of sexual difference and our call to become "one flesh." Hence, we can
understand why in Familiaris Consortio John Paul describes spouses as "the
permanent reminder to the Church of what happened on the cross." "Their
belonging to each other," he says, "is the real representation, by means of
the sacramental sign, of the velY relationship of Christ with the Church."'5
B. Head and Body Analogy

All of this is confirmed and deepened by the head and body analogy
St. Paul also uses. 16 The Pope suggests that this analogy seems even more
central to the Apostle in his proclamation of the truth about Christ's rela-
tionship with the Church. However, John Paul says we must equally affirm
that St. Paul has not placed the head-body analogy alongside or outside of
the spousal analogy. In fact, the Apostle speaks as if in marriage the hus-
band is also the "head of the wife" and the wife "the body of the husband."
These two images are so interrelated that, according to the Holy Father,
the analogy of head-body actually becomes the analogy of groom-bride.
We see the link between these two analogies in the "one flesh" union the
Apostle speaks of, quoting from Genesis. Speaking of the spousal relation-
ship in tenns of the head-body relationship, it is as if St. Paul is saying that
spouses, in becoming "one body," are united so intimately as to fonn "one
organic union"-one "organism."
And since the body is the expression of human subjectivity, John
Paul goes so far as to say that, by becoming "one body," spouses also be-
come in some manner "one subject." The Apostle indicates this when he
says, "He who loves his wife loves himself" (v. 28). The Holy Father
quickly clarifies, however, that this does not blur the spouses' individual-
ity. An essential and dominant "bi-subjectivity" always remains at the ba-
sis of "uni-subjectivity." Otherwise, spouses would be lost or swallowed
up in the other, rather than finding their true selves through the sincere gift
of self (see §23).17
15. Familiaris Consortio. n. 13.

16. See CCe, nn. 787 -796.
17. These reflections are closely related with the themes of solitude being "prior" to
unity (see §§ 11,49), of double-solitude as the foundation for unity (see §I4), of unity-in-
plurality (see §§23, 53), and of the rediscovery of a perfect subjectivity and inter-subjec-
tivity (see §§49, 53).
We can see this distinction clearly in the relationship of Christ with

the Church. John Paul states that there "is no doubt" that Christ is a sub-
ject different from the Church. Nonetheless, he is united with her in a par-
ticular relationship as in one organic union of head and body, or, as the
Catechism expresses, as "one mystical person."18 Even so, the unity of
Christ and the Church, like the unity of husband and wife, does not re-
move their distinction. 19 Precisely in the tension of unity-in-plurality, the
Trinitarian mystery is manifested in a real way, and man's own mystery is
revealed to himself.
C. Unity through Love

The Holy Father further specifies that the spouses' "uni-subjectivity"
does not have a "real character" but only "intentional." It is a "unity
through love" established not in an ontological sense but in a moral sense.
Still, in this moral sense, conjugal love is so unifying that it allows spouses
"to be mutually interpenetrated, spiritually belonging to one another to
such a degree that the ... 'I' becomes in a certain sense the 'you' and the
'you' the '!''' (320). In other words, spousal love makes the "I" (that is, the
subjectivity) of the other person his own. "The 'I' of the wife," the Pope
suggests, "becomes through love the 'I' of the husband" (319). Hence, at
the close of his passage, St. Paul reiterates that each husband is to "love
his wife as himself' (v. 33).
As John Paul stresses, all of this is rooted in and expressed through
the body. "The body is the expression of that T and the foundation of its
identity. The union of husband and wife in love is expressed also by means
of the body" (319). So, in loving their wives "as Christ loved the Church"
(v. 25), husbands are to "love their wives as their own bodies" (v. 28). For
this is how Christ loves the Church, which is his Body. John Paul says that
the body of the "other" becomes "one's own" in the sense that one cares
for the welfare of the other's body as he cares for his own. "For no man
ever hates his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, as Christ does the
church, for we are members of his body" (vv. 29 - 30). All of these refer-
ences to the body (see vv. 23, 28, 29, 30, 31) find their logic in "the motive
of one flesh" that Paul presents as a "great mystery." This bodily love
which unites the spouses expresses "the most general and at the same time
the most essential content" of the entire passage of Ephesians 5. This in-
carnate love signifies divine love. In this way, John Paul demonstrates that
"carnal love"-far from being base or innately corrupt as often sus-
pected-is meant to express "the language of 'agape'" (320).
18. See eee, nn. 795,1119,1474.

19. See eee, n. 796.
Thc Sacrarncntality a/Marriagc 325
• In Love & Responsibility, Karol Wojtyla otTers a practical applica-

tion for how a husband is to care for his wife's body as he does his own
within the intimacy of marital relations. In the final chapter entitled "Sex-
ology and Ethics," the future pope tells us that if a man is tlUly to love his
wife, "it is necessary to insist that intercourse must not serve merely as a
means of allowing [his] climax." Love, he says, "demands that the reac-
tions of the other person, the sexual 'patiner,' be fully taken into account."
He continues: "Sexologists state that the curve of arousal in woman is dif-
ferent from that in man-it rises more slowly and falls more slowly .... The
man must take this difference between male and female reactions into
account...so that climax may be reached [by] both ... and as far as possible
occur in both simultaneously." The husband must do this, Wojtyla insists,
"not for hedonistic, but for altruistic reasons." In this case, if "we take into
account the shOlier and more violent curve of arousal in the man, [such]
tenderness on his part in the context of marital intercourse acquires the sig-
nificance of an act of virtue." Wojtyla is speaking here not so much of the
"technique" of marital relations, but of an atmosphere of tenderness, com-
munication, and affection that creates the proper "culture" of marital rela-
tions. This culture of love reflects Christ's tender, incarnate love for the
Church. 20
68. Baptism Expresses Christ's Spousal Love for the Church

August 25; Septelnber 1, 1982 (TB 317-321)
The Pope tells us that St. Paul's teaching in Ephesians 5 provides us

with a profound sense of the sacredness of the human body in general, and
especially in marriage. We can already see from our analysis that St. Paul
had a keen grasp of the human body's capacity to signify sacred myster-
ies-to convey theology. The head-body and groom-bride analogies he
employs can carry the tremendous load he places on them because the hu-
man body, in the mystery of sexual difference and the call to union, "was
created to transfer into the visible reality of the world, the invisible mys-
tery hidden in God from time immemorial, and thus to be a sign of it."21
From this perspective, St. Paul does not place an excessive load on the
body at all. God created the body to carry this "load." God created the
body as a theology-as a visible sign of his own divine mystery.
20. Love & Respollsihility, pp. 272, 274, 275 .

21. 2/20/80, TB 76 (see §22).
This sign in no way exhausts the mystery; it is not a complete or ad-

equate image. As stated previously, we must be careful never to reduce the
spiritual and divine mystery to its physical and human sign. This would
involve a dangerous and heretical blurring between Creator and creature.
Nonetheless, with that understood, the body is an efficacious sign and in a
real way communicates the divine mystery it symbolizes.
A. The Nuptial Character of Baptism

In examining the spousal character of Christ's love for the Church in
Ephesians 5, we notice that the scope and goal of Christ's love is the
Church's sanctification: "Christ loved the church and gave himself up for
her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of wa-
ter with the word, that he might present the church to himself in splendor,
without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and with-
out blemish" (vv. 25 - 27).
The Church understands this "washing of water" as a reference to
Baptism. John Paul describes Baptism as "the first and essential fruit of
Christ's giving himself for the Church." In this way Baptism takes on a
nuptial character. It "is an expression of spousal love," the Pope says, "in
the sense that it prepares the Bride (Church) for the Bridegroom [and]
makes the Church the spouse of Christ" (317). Baptism, of course, is ap-
plied to individual persons. But within the spousal analogy, St. Paul speaks
of this "washing" in reference to the Church as a whole. As John Paul
affirms, "The spousal love of Christ is applied to her, the Church, every
time that a single person receives in her the fundamental purification by
means of Baptism. He who receives Baptism becomes at the same time-
by virtue of the redemptive love of Christ-a participant in his spousal
love for the Church" (317).
To accent the spousal character of Baptism, the Pope points to an in-
triguing insight of various biblical scholars. They observe that the washing
with water recalls the ritual of the nuptial bath which at one time com-
monly preceded a wedding. This was an important religious rite, John Paul
notes, even among the Greeks. 22
B. Physical Beauty Is an Image of Holiness

Baptism, however, is only the beginning of our nuptial relationship
with Christ. St. Paul also points to Baptism's eschatological fulfillment
when he speaks of the Church "in splendor without spot or wrinkle or any
such thing" (v. 27). Christ will "present the Church to himself' in radi-
22. See CCC, n. 1617.

The Sacram entality afMarriage 327
ance. The Pope says that this "seems to indicate that moment of the wed-
ding in which the bride is led to the groom, already clothed in the bridal
dress and adorned for the wedding." John Paul continues: "The text quoted
indicates that the Christ-spouse himself takes care to adorn the spouse-
Church; he is concerned that she should be beautiful with the beauty of
grace, beautiful by virtue of the gift of salvation in its fullness, already
granted from the moment of the sacrament of Baptism" (317).
It is significant, according to the Holy Father, that St. Paul presents
the image of the Church in splendor as a bride "all beautiful in her
body"- as a bride without spot, wrinkle, blemish, or "any such thing."
This is certainly a metaphor, but the Pope pauses to demonstrate its elo-
quence in showing how deeply important the body is in the analogy of
spousal love. According to John Paul, '''spot' can be understood as a sign
of ugliness, and 'wrinkle' as a sign of old age or senility" (318). Both
terms, according to the metaphor, indicate not a defect of the body, but a
defect of the spirit, a moral defect. The Pope also adds that, according to
St. Paul, the "old man" signifies the man dominated by sin (see Rom 6:6).
Therefore, Christ's redemptive and spousal love "ensures that the Church
not only becomes sinless, but remains 'eternally young'" (318).
Recall that the body is the outward expression of the person. With
this deeply integrated understanding of body and soul, physical beauty is
understood as a sign of spiritual beauty. Spiritual beauty is goodness and
purity-in a word, it is holiness. And what is holiness? Holiness "is mea-
sured according to the 'great mystery' in which the Bride responds with
the gift of love to the gift of the Bridegroom."23 Having received the
Bridegroom's (Christ's) love, the Bride (each member of the Church as
well as the Church understood as a corporate person) can respond also
with that same love. And this holiness is manifested in the body. Holi-
ness, John Paul affirms, "enables man to express himself deeply with his
own body... precisely by means of the sincere gift of himself." It is "in
his body as male or female, [that] man feels he is a subject of holi-
ness ."24 For St. Paul, then, the physical beauty of the body without spot,
wrinkle, or blemish is an image of the holiness to which we are all called
as the Bride of Christ.
• In our day and age, the desire for youthfulness and beauty has
spawned its own religion. This false "cult of the body"25 is saturated with a
23. Mulieris Dignitatem. n. 27 (see also eee, n. 773).

24.2/20/80, TB 76-77 (see §22).
25. See eee, 11. 2289.
million and one "sacraments" that promise the "grace" of remaining for-
ever young and attractive. Thousands of beauty aids promise skin without
spot or wrinkle or "any such thing." Thousands of creams, soaps, scrubs,
and medications pledge to free us from our blemishes. Thousands of other
products-from power shakes to thigh-busters-guarantee to reshape our
metabolisms and our figures in order to restore our shapeliness and youth-
ful vigor. Untwist this distorted cult of bodily youth and beauty, and what
do we have? Our desire for holiness; our desire for sanctification, for pu-
rity and innocence; our desire for heaven, where we will share in the radi-
ant beauty and eternal youth of Christ's Bride.
By using the image of physical beauty to convey holiness, St. Paul

shows a masterful understanding of the sacramentality of the body. For
him, the human body indicates "attributes and qualities of the moral, spiri-
tual, and supernatural order" (318). By virtue of this "sacramentality," St.
Paul can explain the mystery of sanctification, the mystery of Christ's re-
demptive love, and the mystery of humanity'S union with the divine all
"by means of the resemblance of the body and of the love whereby hus-
band and wife become 'one flesh'" (318 - 319).
Yet again we must clarify that this is not a wishful projection of the
Apostle's ideals on the body and sexual union. The body and sexual union
are meant to convey this. God inscribed this in our humanity by creating
us as male and female and calling us to become "one flesh." It all pro-
claims the mystery of Christ-not adequately and perfectly, but wonder-
fully, beautifully, and efficaciously. In this way we "see how profoundly
the author of the letter to the Ephesians examines the sacramental reality,
proclaiming its grand analogy: both the union of Christ with the Church,
and the conjugal union of man and woman in marriage are in this way illu-
minated by a particular supernatural light" (318).
69. Spousal Love and the Recognition of True Beauty

September 1, 1982 (318-321)
Using St. Paul's image of the Bride's beautiful body as a metaphor

for holiness, and following the logic of the spousal analogy in which hus-
bands and wives are to mirror the love of Christ and the Church, we dis-
cover a remarkable truth that helps us understand the attractiveness of the
human body. Of course our attraction toward the body has been confused
by concupiscence. If we are to understand beauty and attractiveness in its
proper perspective, we must listen to that "echo" of God's original plan
still deep within us; we must recognize the distortions of sin; and we must
trust in the power of redemption to restore holiness in our lived experience

of the body. With that in mind, let us open our hearts to absorb what the
Holy Father has to say.
A. The Husband Must Desire His Wife s Beauty

If Christ, in his self-giving love for his Bride, desires her beauty-
that beauty of interior holiness which is also manifested in the body-then
husbands, in loving their wives "as Christ loved the Church," must also
desire their beauty. "Love obliges the bridegroom-husband," according to
John Paul, "to be solicitous for the welfare of the bride-wife; it commits
him to desire her beauty and at the same time to appreciate this beauty
and to care for it" (319).26 Of what beauty is the Pope speaking? Calling
us again, not to be merely more "spiritual" but more incarnational, John
Paul adds that this "is a case of visible beauty, of physical beauty" (319).
Precisely at this point we must recall the tension and conflict that exist be-
tween the manner of appreciating the beauty of the body for original man,
and the manner of appreciating the beauty of the body for the man of lust.
Right in the crux of that tension the man of lust is called to faith in the
power of redemption.
We could say that for original man, the appreciation of the other's
beauty was disinterested. In appreciating the beauty of Eve's body, Adam
was not seeking his own gratification. He was appreciating her beauty for
"her own sake" as a marvel and image of God's beauty. Nakedness without
shame enables us to discern this. Likewise, the entrance of shame enables us
to recognize a profound change in man and woman's understanding of and
appreciation for the beauty of the other's body. A spark still flickers within
us of that original, holy appreciation of the beauty of the body, but we
must contend now with self-seeking. We have lost the self-mastery that af-
forded "the peace of the interior gaze" (see §§17, 27).
Woman feels the resulting pain of this distortion in a particularly keen
way. It seems the beauty of woman is more often objectified and exploited
in society. And men with their disordered attractions seem more to blame
for society'S false standard of "beauty" than women. In tum, this illusory
standard contributes to a deep-seated sense of inadequacy and even self-
loathing in many women because they fail to meet it. And those women
who come closer to society's impossible standard of beauty must continu-
ously stake the claim of their own dignity in the face of men's lustful at-
tractions in order to avoid constant degradation. In both situations, men fail
to recognize, desire, appreciate, and care for the true beauty of woman.
26. Emphasis added.

• Two personal stories might illustrate how grace can enable men to
appreciate woman's true beauty. The first regards a woman who seemed to
capture society's standard of beauty, and the other regards a woman who
was far from it. Several years ago, during a Mass at the National Shrine of
the Immaculate Conception, I noticed a very beautiful woman sitting a few
pews ahead of me. At one point she casually flipped her red hair over her
shoulder. Whoa! This gesture tapped into some deep well in my soul. It
captured all that was so beautifully "feminine" about her. "Lord, what was
that?" I prayed. Rather than repress the stirrings of my heart, I surrendered
them to Christ so he could purify them and show me their true meaning. As
I prayed, it dawned on me that the beauty of woman- if we have the purity
to see it-lies in her being a living, incarnate symbol of heaven, of the
New Jerusalem, of God's dwelling place. Is not woman's womb the dwell-
ing place of the Lord? And yes, when all is purified, man's desire to enter
woman's gates seems to point in some way to his desire to dwell in the
house of the Lord. This is what purity of heart affords and how grace reori-
ents us when we let it. The deepest truth of my attraction to this woman
confirmed my desire for heaven. Some might suspect that my attraction to
this woman during Mass would be a source of distraction-or worse, an
occasion of sin. Yet as I allowed the distortions to be crucified, this woman
helped me enter into true worship. She helped me understand what the
Mass is all about. I realized that right then and there, in that Basilica dedi-
cated to Mary, I was already in "woman's womb" and I was about to wit-
ness the Word being made flesh. In this realization the words of John Paul
II ring out: Christ instituted the Eucharist to express in some way "the rela-
tionship between man and woman, between what is 'feminine' and what is
'masculine. '''27
The next story is closely related. Several months later I was vacation-
ing at the beach. Seeing many shapely, bikini-clad women, I found myself
engaged in a lively battle to reclaim this heavenly vision of woman's
body.28 Then I noticed a very overweight woman and my initial thought
was, "Oh, what a relief. No struggle there." But then I realized that my re-
action to her was simply another dimension of a distorted view of the per-
27. Mulieris Dignitatem, n. 26.

28. By telling this story I do not mean to give license to those who might be so
bound by lust that going to a beach would be an "occasion of sin." For the man bound by
lust, the admonition "Turn away your eyes from a shapely woman" (Sir 9:5) retains all its
wisdom (see §32).
The Sacramentality a/Marriage 331
son. My heart sank. The dignity of the person is so great that he-or, in
this case, she-is never meant to be used as a means of selfish gratifica-
tion. Again, in the case of this heavy woman, "No problem there." But
wait! Is a person meant to be disregarded and discarded, pushed aside as if
inconsequential? 1 did have a problem there: a big problem. As 1 had been
praying to see the true personal beauty in all of the "shapely" women at the
beach, so too did I begin to pray to see the true personal beauty in all the
"unshapely" women at the beach. Coming to do so is another dimension of
our struggle to see others as Christ sees them. By God's grace I experi-
enced a new level of integration that day, a new level of purity of heart.
"Even now ... [purity of heart] enables us to see according to God ... ; it lets
us perceive the human body--ours and our neighbor's-as a temple of the
Holy Spirit, a manifestation of divine beauty."29
B. True Love Recognizes Woman:S True Beauty

How, then, is that "appreciation of beauty," to which John Paul calls
husbands, to be lived out? Only the man who experiences freedom from
the domination of concupiscence through ongoing conversion to Christ
can look beyond the illusory measures of beauty to woman's true beauty-
a beauty in which every woman shares. It is the beauty of the human story,
the beauty of the mystery of humanity. For, as John Paul says elsewhere,
woman is "the archetype of the whole human race: she represents the hu-
manity which belongs to all human beings, both men and women. "3U
Woman's body, then, in a unique way-and even more particularly ac-
cording to the personal characteristics of each woman-bears testimony
to the original good of creation, the tragedy of the fall, and the hope of
full redemption .
• We see this pre-eminently in the woman-Mary, the Mother of God.

Without a doubt, this woman is the most beautiful creature God has ever
created. Her body radiates the glory of God, the splendor of holiness like
no other body (next to Christ's own body which, of course, originates from
his mother's body). For she lives in her body, like no other human person,
the mystery of the human drama of creation and redemption. As the Cat-
eellism expresses, "Mary goes before us all in the holiness that is the
29. CCC, n. 2519.

30. Mulieris Dignitatenl, n. 4.
Church's mystery as the 'bride without spot or wrinkle. "'31 In this sense we
speak of Mary as "our hope." For she lives already in her body what we
hope for-the fullness of redemption. In this light we can also understand
the interconnectedness of Mary's Immaculate Conception and bodily As-
sumption into heaven. One who has received the fullness of redemption
(Immaculate Conception) does not experience decay but lives the final res-
1IITection "already" (Assumption).32
The husband who believes wholeheartedly in the human story (in

other words, the husband who believes wholeheartedly in the Gospel) em-
braces his wife's humanity as she is. He sees even in her blemishes and
disfigurations an "echo" of the beginning and the hope of eternal glory.
Such a husband, the Pope says, "examines his bride with attention, as
though in a creative loving anxiety to find everything that is good and
beautiful in heL" This is what "he desires for her" (319). He desires that
all that is good and beautiful in her would blossom and radiate through her
body. This is what he sees in her. This is his wife's beauly- tile radialion
of her goodness. In this way he reclaims something of the original good of
God's vision (see Gen 1:31).
The Holy Father even says that the husband's love in some sense
"creates" the goodness that he sees in the one he loves. In this way the
husband imitates the love of the Creator whose love "gives a beginning to
good and delights in good."33 The husband's ability to see that good, the
Pope continues, "is like a test of that same love and its measure" (319). In
other words, the husband who does not recognize this good, this beauty in
his wife, cannot be said to love his wife. In any case, he does not love his
wife "as Christ loved the Church."
• [s beauty definable? [s it not in the eye of the beholder? Certainly

every man and woman-whether they meet the idealized standard of
beauty or not-reflects something of the beauty of God. Granting this, why
do we find some bodies more "attractive" than others? Research indicates
that even infants will stare at an "attractive" face longer than em "unattrac-
tive" one. 14 What mystery of our humanity is revealed by the spectrum of
physical appearances we find in the human family? Obviously standards of
beauty are deeply influenced by cultural conditioning. Even so, I would
31. CCc. 11. 773.

32. See CCC, 11. 2853.
33. (/2/80, TB 59.
34. See Cathy Newman, "The E11igma of Beauty," National Geographic (January
2(00), pp. 95-121.
imagine every culture could relate, each in its own way, to a general scale
of "normally attractive," "unattractive," and "very attractive." Extending
the Pauline metaphor of physical beauty as an image of holiness, I would
hazard the idea that within this scale or spectrum we see something of
original man, historical man, and eschatological man. Furthennore, recog-
nizing that Christ fully reveals man to himself, I would suggest that in this
spectrum we can see something of a parallel in Christ's own life. Christ
was figured to our "nonnally attractive" humanity in the Incarnation, dis-
figured by our sin in his passion, and transfigured by God's glory in his
resurrection. It seems in some way we all bear this spectrum in our bodies,
some visibly emphasizing one element of the spectrum more than other el-
ements. Yet recall the continuity in the human drama. In Christ, the "fig-
ure" of original man, the "disfigure" of historical man, and the
"transfigure" of eschatological man is all one man, one mystery which is
the final Adam-and this one mystery is radiantly beautiful! We fail to see
authentic human beauty when we fail to recognize how the body of his tori-
cal man, with all its blemishes and disfigurations, contains the echo of the
beginning and the hope of eternal glory. Without this "total vision of
man"-with the final Adam's death and resurrection at the center of it all-
real human beings are not beautiful. We much prefer fantastic images and
air-bmshed ideals. Without Christ at the center of the human drama, not
only do we prefer fantasy, we actually become repulsed by the real. Many
a man who has indulged his fantasy in the illusionary world of pornogra-
phy has found it terribly difficult to love the real flesh and blood he mar-
ried. Those who cannot love a person with blemishes grasp at glory. They
fail to reckon with the "mystery of iniquity" and grope in some sense for
eschatological man without the cross of history. Perfect human beauty will
come, but not as the world desires. The radiance of the "spotless Bride" is
given as a gift, but we must be willing to be configllred to the whole Adam
(Christ) in his figure, disfigure, and then his transfigure.
C. Spousal Love and the Eucharist

Covered with the blemishes, spots, and wrinkles of sin-Christ loved
his Bride all the more. He saw her goodness, her beauty still, and longed
to tell her of it by the testimony of his death on the cross. "God shows his
love for us in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us" (Rom 5:8).
Thus, the husband who commits himself to "nourishing" and "cherishing"
the beauty of his wife's body must give himself to her in the most disinter-
ested way "as Christ does the Church" (v. 29). This is the measure of love,
as St. Paul tells us and as the Pope reiterates.
According to many Scripture scholars, this "nourishment" the

Apostle refers to is "a reference to the Eucharist with which Christ in his
spousal love nourishes the Church" (321). In this way we glimpse how
this nourishment (the Eucharist) indicates, even though in a minor key,
"the specific character of conjugal love, especially," the Pope observes,
"of that love whereby the spouses become 'one flesh'" (321).35
We will later return to the Eucharistic character of marital love and
conjugal union. It will profoundly influence the rest of John Paul's reflec-
tions on the body, specifically his reflections on Humanae Vitae. For now,
the Pope merely states that the expressions of nourishment and caring for
the body help us to understand in a general way the dignity of the body
and the moral imperative to care for its good. They also give us a profound
sense of the sacredness of man and woman's relationship and their call to
become "one flesh."
70. Mystery, Sacrament, and the Climax of the Spousal Analogy

September 8, 1982 (TB 321-324)
In his audience of September 8, 1982, the Holy Father launches into

a specific analysis of the riches of sacramental theology. In one of the most
interesting endnotes of the entire catechesis, John Paul helps us understand
the multi-layered texture of the word "sacrament" by tracing its history
and usage. 36 This term "has traveled a long way in the course of the centu-
ries" (380). The journey begins with the Greek word "mysterion" ("mys-
tery"), which in the Book of Judith referred to the king's secret military
plans (see Jdt 2:2). In the book of Wisdom (2:22) and in the prophecy of
Daniel (2:27), however, "mystery" came to signify God's creative plans
for man and the purpose which he assigns to the world. st. Paul's usage
marks a turning point. For him "mystery" is not merely God's eternal plan,
but the accomplishment on earth of that plan in Jesus Christ (see Eph 3:4;
Col 2:2, 4:3).
It was not until the third centmy that the most ancient Latin versions
of the Scriptures translated mysterion with the word "sacramentum." In-
terestingly, this term originally referred to the military oath taken by the
Roman legionaries. Tertullian pointed out that since these soldiers were
initiated into a new form of life, made a commitment without reserve, and
pledged faithful service even unto death, the term "sacrament" was fitting
35. See CCc, n. 1621.

36. See CCc, n. 774.
for those sacred rites of Christian initiation: Baptism, Confirmation, and

Eucharist. St. Augustine emphasized that sacraments are sacred signs
which contain and confer in some way what they symbolize. St. Thomas
then further specified that not all sacred signs are sacraments, but only
those signs which actually sanctify our humanity. From this point forward,
the word "sacrament" was restricted to mean one of the seven sources of
grace instituted by Christ. 37
A. Recovering the Broader Meaning of "Sacrament"

Only in the last century have theologians sought to recover that
broader and more ancient understanding of sacrament as the revelation and
accomplishment of the mystery hidden in God from time immemorial.
John Paul asks, "Is not 'sacrament' synonymous with 'mystery'" (323)?
Given the particular nuance of these synonyms, we can understand the re-
ality of "mystery-sacrament" in the tension of that "hidden-revealed" mar-
vel that is God and his plan for humanity. Within this tension, "mystery"
signifies primarily what is hidden, whereas "sacrament" signifies primarily
what is revealed. 38 The good news of the Gospel is found precisely here.
What has been hidden from time immemorial in God has been definitively
revealed to us in Jesus Christ (see Rom 16:25-26).
Yet, even so, in the age of the sacraments (that is, on this side of the
resurrection) this "hidden-revealed" tension will always remain. For the
divine mystery so far exceeds the human capacity of comprehension that,
as the Pope reminds us, "even after its proclamation (or its revelation) it
does not cease to be called 'mystery'" (323). "For now we see in a mirror
dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall understand
fully, even as I have been fully understood" (1 Cor 13:12).
John Paul speaks of the sacrament-or "sacramentality"-of the
body in this broader sense. He points out that the Fathers of the Second
Vatican Council also revived this meaning of the word when they de-
scribed the Church in Lumen Gentium as "the universal sacrament of sal-
vation." Earlier in the same document they proclaimed that the "Church is
in Christ in the nature of a sacrament-a sign and instrument, that is, of
communion with God and of unity among all men."39 The Pope observes
that the phrase "in the nature of a sacrament" was used to recover that
37. See eee, n. 1117.

38. See eee. nn. 774, 1075. See also Gerard Beigel, Faith and Social Justice in the
Teaching of Pope John Paull! (New York, NY: Peter Lang, 1997), p. 35.
39. Lumen Gentium, nn. 1,48; See eee. nn. 747, 774-776, 780, 1045, 1108,1140.
broader sense of the term without confusing this with the seven sacra-
ments. Speaking in this way, the Council Fathers indicate that the Church,
in her existence as Bride and Body of Christ, proclaims and accomplishes
the mystery of salvation. This is the mystery hidden in God from eternity:
that all members of the human race would live in fruitful communion with
the Trinity and with one another through communion with Christ. This is
the "great mystery" of nuptial communion of which St. Paul speaks in
Ephesians. This "great mystery," John Paul tells us, "as God's salvific plan
in regard to humanity, is in a celtain sense the central theme of the whole
of revelation, its central reality. It is this that God, as Creator and Father,
wishes above all to transmit to mankind in his Word" (322).
B. Keystone of the Spousal Analogy

As St. Paul indicates, marriage has participated in this "great mys-
tery" as a sign and proclamation from the beginning. Hence, while the
sacramentality of the Church is related to each of the seven sacraments, "it
must be said that the sacramentality of the Church remains in a particular
relationship with marriage: the most ancient sacrament" (324). This "par-
ticular relationship" comes to full light in verses 31- 32 of St. Paul's mar-
velous passage. Directly following his words about the Eucharistic gift
through which Christ "nourishes" the Church with his own body, St. Paul
references the original biblical call to spousal self-donation. "for this rea-
son a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife and
the two shall become one flesh" (v. 31). Then, in a stroke of inspired theo-
logical genius, st. Paul immediately links this to the Eucharistic mystery
of which he just spoke. The two becoming one flesh "is a great mystery,
and I mean in reference to Christ and the church" (v. 32). John Paul says
that here St. Paul writes not only of the great mystery hidden in God, but
also, and above all, of the mystery which Christ accomplishes through his
act of redemptive-spousal love. In this act of love, Christ gives his body
up for the Church and is thereby united with her "in a spousal manner, as
the husband and wife are reciprocally united in marriage instituted by the
Creator" (323). Thus, the Pope observes that the Apostle's reference to
Genesis 2:24 is necessary not so much to recall the "one flesh" unity of
spouses, but to present the mystery of Christ's union with the Church.
This linking of the union of marriage with the union of Christ and the
Church is, according to John Paul, "the most important point of the whole
text, in a certain sense, the keystone" (321). Only by comprehending this
linking can we understand how Ephesians 5 "reveals man to himself and
makes his supreme calling clear" (see §64). In this linking, St. Paul "unites
marriage, as the most ancient revelation (,manifestation') of the [divine]
plan in the created world, with the definitive revelation and 'manifesta-
tion'" of that plan in Jesus Christ (321-322). In this way "St. Paul sets in
relief the continuity between the most ancient covenant...and the definitive
covenant." God established the original covenant "by constituting mar-
riage in the very work of creation," according to Genesis 2:24. And he es-
tablished the definitive covenant in Christ, who, "having loved the Church
and given himself up for her, is united to her in a spousal way, correspond-
ing to the image of spouses. This continuity," the Pope continues, "consti-
tutes the essential basis of the great analogy contained in the letter to the
Ephesians" (322). We might even say that through this linking of the in-
carnate union of spouses with the incarnate union of Christ and the
Church, the spousal analogy reaches its climax.
71. The Foundation of the Whole Sacramental Order

September 8,29, 1982 (TB 321-324,332-333)
"Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his
wife, and they become one flesh" (Gen 2:24). These are the words John Paul
spoke of early in his catechesis, saying they will have in God's revelation
"an ample and distant perspective."40 This ample and distant perspective
comes into sharp focus in Ephesians 5:31-32. In view of the entire Bible,
John Paul says that the words of Genesis 2:24 can be considered "the funda-
mental text on marriage" (321). These are also "the words that constitute the
sacrament of marriage."41 Becoming "one flesh," then, does not merely ex-
press the joining of two bodies. According to the Holy Father, this is "a 'sac-
ramental' expression which corresponds to the communion ofpersons."42
A. The Sacrament Proclaims and Accomplishes the Mystery

Summarizing our previous reflections, "sacrament" (in the broader
and more ancient sense of the term) refers to the revelation of the divine
mystery. The Pope adds that it also presupposes man's acceptance of the
mystery by means of faith. At the same time, however, John Paul says that
"sacrament" is something more than this. Sacramental reality is such that
the mystery proclaimed is also effectively accomplished in those who be-
40. 11114179, TB 47 (see §14).

41. 2/20/80, TB 76 (see §22).
42. 6/25/80, TB 123 (see §29).
lieve. Man really participates in the mystery of divine life signified by the
sacrament. "The sacrament consists in the 'manifesting' of that mystery in
a sign which serves not only to proclaim the mystery, but also to accom-
plish it in man. The sacrament is a visible and efficacious sign of grace.
Through it, there is accomplished in man that mystery hidden from eter-
nity in God, of which the letter to the Ephesians speaks" (323).
John Paul asks if St. Paul might be speaking of marriage as a sacra-
ment in the sense that we understand sacraments today (i.e., the seven sac-
raments). He concurs, however, with the widespread opinion of Biblical
scholars and theologians that Paul is not. Nonetheless, John Paul says, "it
seems that in this text he is speaking of the bases of the sacramentality of
the whole of Christian life and in particular the bases of the sacramentality
of marriage." Even if he speaks of marriage as a sacrament in an indirect
way, still he does so "in the most fundamental way possible" (323). The
keystone of the sacramentality of marriage in Ephesians 5 is, once again,
found in verses 31- 32 where St. Paul links the "one flesh" union of the
first Adam and Eve with the union of the New Adam and Eve (Christ and
the Church). Here we witness the salvific initiative of God toward man in
the different phases of its revelation. St. Paul is speaking of the revelation
of the "great mystery" in its most ancient phase and in the phase of "the
fullness of time" (Gal 4:4).
Through "the image of the conjugal union of husband and wife, the
author of [Ephesians] speaks ... of the way in which that mystery is ex-
pressed in the visible order, of the way in which it has become visible, and
therefore has entered into the sphere of sign" (332). By "sign" John Paul
simply means the visibility of the Invisible. According to St. Paul, two in-
timately related "signs" make the divine Reality visible. The union of hus-
band and wife is the most ancient sign of the mystery. And the union of
Christ and the Church is the definitive sign ofthis mystery revealed in "the
fullness of time." John Paul credits st. Paul with "a special merit" for
bringing "these two signs together, and [making] of them one great sign-
that is, a great sacrament" (333).
Here we find the surest foundation for speaking of the Eucharistic-
or "liturgical," as John Paul will later say (see §90)-nature of marital
love and of the "nuptial" nature of the Eucharist. The love of husband and
wife (consummated when the two become "one flesh") and the love of
Christ and the Church (consummated sacramentally in Eucharistic com-
munion) are so intimately related as to form, according to St. Paul and as
John Paul II expresses, "one great sign." This sign not only reveals to man
the mystery hidden for ages in God that all would be one in Christ (see
Eph 3:9,1:10). It also accomplishes it in man.
B. Conjugal Union in Light of the Incarnation

Since this is the most important point and "keystone" of the entire
text, we should try to penetrate even further the inter-relationship of these
two "signs" which form "one great sign." The Pope has already described
the conjugal union of spouses as the original and "most ancient" revelation
of the mystery. Given this, his following statement might seem odd. The
Holy Father asserts that the divine mystery "has become visible first of all
in the very historical event of Christ" (332).43 This is puzzling within the
confines of historical chronology. However, by recalling the first sentence
of John Paul II's first encyclical, we solve the puzzle: "The Redeemer of
man, Jesus Christ, is the center of the universe and of history. "44
History is measured by Christ. In a sense, history does not begin "in
the beginning" and move forward in time. The human drama, we could say,
"begins" with the Incarnation at its center and moves outward in both di-
rections. The point here is that, as Pope Leo XIII said in his encyclical on
maniage, the "one flesh" union of man and woman "has been even from
the beginning a foreshadowing of the Incarnation of the Word of God."45
Conjugal union, therefore, can only be fully understood in light of Christ's
union with the Church. For it is the "relationship of Christ to the Church,"
John Paul emphasizes, which "constitutes the fulfillment and the concreti-
zation of the visibility of the mystery itself" (332). Looking backward in
time from the vantage point of Christ's incarnate union with the Church,
John Paul says our attention turns "to what was already presented previ-
ously-in the context ofthe very mystery of creation-as the 'visibility of
the Invisible,' to the very 'origin' ofthe theological history of man" (332).
Here John Paul wants us to recall his thesis : "The body, in fact, and it
alone is capable of making visible what is invisible: the spiritual and di-
vine. It was created to transfer into the visible reality of the world the mys-
tery hidden since time immemorial in God, and thus to be a sign of it. "46
This sacramental understanding of the body is constituted by means of
man's visible masculinity and femininity. Therefore, the body also com-
municates the mystery "by means of the conjugal union of man and
woman when they unite in such a way as to form 'one flesh. '" In this way,
through the unity of masculinity and femininity, John Paul tells us that the
body "assumes the value of a sign-in a way, a sacramental sign."47
43 . Emphasis added.
44. Redemptor Hominis, n. I.
45. Arcanum.
46. 2/20/80, TB 76 (see §22).
47. 10/22/80, TB 163 (see §35).
C. Foundation and Summit of the Sacramental Order

Now a key text of the Holy Father's comes to light-a text which in
some way captures the full weight of glory that the Pope believes God
has ascribed to marriage and to the consummate union of spouses. "It
can be said," John Paul asserts, "that the visible sign of marriage 'in the
beginning,' inasmuch as it is linked to the visible sign of Christ and of
the Church ... transfers the eternal plan of love into the 'historical' dimension
and makes it the foundation of the whole sacramental order" (332-333).
This is another one of those stunning statements that the Pope plants in
his catechesis without commentary. It may well become one of those
texts that theologians chew on for centuries, only gradually unpacking
its implications.
In this context, John Paul stresses that Christ's union with the Church
is "the summit of the salvific economy of God" (333). With this image in
mind, we might say that at the trail-head marking the path to this summit,
we have marriage and its consummate expression of conjugal intercourse.
Inasmuch as this "trail-head" points to the summit, the visible sign of mar-
riage is the foundation upon which God reveals and actuates his hidden
designs-revealing his plan for man and for the universe that all things in
heaven and on earth might be "one" in fruitful union with Jesus Christ (see
Eph 1: 10). This is the deepest essence and meaning of human embodi-
ment, of erotic desire, and of nuptial love. They are meant to point us to
Christ and to God's hidden designs for the universe. Thus, inasmuch as the
spousal union points us (analogically) to Christ's union with the Church,
the visible sign of marriage constitutes "the foundation of the entire sacra-
mental order"-that order by which God incarnates his own mystery,
making it visible in the order of "signs."
Perhaps now we can sense with what awe and reverence St. Paul re-
ferred to the "one flesh" union as "a profound mystery." Perhaps now we
can better understand what St. Paul means when he calls spouses to submit
to one another out of reverence for Christ. Words fail when we come in
contact with such a mystery. The only proper response is silence offered as
praise and tears offered in reparation for the desecration of this sacramen-
tal mystery so prevalent in our world and often in our own hearts.
72. Christ Reveals the Mystery of Divine Love

September 15, 22, 1982 (TB 324 - 330)
In his audience of September 15, 1982, the Holy Father reflects once
again on the first chapter of the letter to the Ephesians. There St. Paul out-
lines the revelation of "the mystery... set forth in Christ" (l :9). The Pope tells
us that in the rest of the letter St. Paul exhorts those who have received this
revelation and accepted it in faith to model their lives according to the truth
they have received. This truth is not a concept, but a person. This Truth is
Jesus Christ.
A. The Centrality of Christ

The greater part of Paul's letter provides moral instruction (or
parenesis). But John Paul stresses that the Apostle's moral instructions are
intimately intertwined with the "great mystery" revealed in Christ. They
are given to those in whom the grace of redemption is efficaciously at
work by virtue of the sacraments, especially Baptism. The point is that the
moral life can never be divorced from life in Christ. Christian morality is
not a sterile ethical code but a living ethos vivified by the resurrected life
of Jesus Christ.
This indispensable truth has a particular bearing on the moral life of
husbands and wives since their union is a sign and actuation of the mys-
tery of salvation. In that climactic moment of Ephesians 5:31-32, we
learn that "the mystery hidden for ages in God" (3:9) was foreshadowed
"from the beginning" in the union of Adam and Eve. But it is the New
Adam who definitively reveals the mystery by leaving his Father in heav-
en, and leaving the home of his mother on earth, to "cleave to his wife"
(the Church) and become "one flesh" with her. Christ is the meaning of
embodiment. Christ is the meaning of morality. Christ is the meaning of
marriage. Throughout this audience (and throughout the entire catechesis
on the body), the Holy Father underscores the centrality of Christ.
Christ stands at the heart of the "great mystery" proclaimed by St. Paul.
"In him-precisely in him-humanity has been eternally blessed 'with ev-
ery spiritual blessing.' In him-in Christ-humanity has been chosen 'be-
fore the creation of the world. ", When "this eternal mystery is accomplished
in time, this is brought about also in him and through him: in Christ and
through Christ. Through Christ there is revealed the mystery of divine
love. Through him and in him it is accomplished" (325). We have been
chosen in Christ to "be holy and blameless before him"; to be part of
God's family; to be adopted as "his sons through Jesus Christ." This is
possible despite humanity'S fall because we now "have redemption
through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the
riches of his grace which he lavished upon us." This is "the mystery of
[God's] will"; this is his "plan for the fullness oftime": to "unite all things
in [Christ]" (Eph 1:3 - 5, 7 -1 0).
B. The Mode of Gift and the Veils o.fFaith

This eternal mystery is accomplished in time in the mode of "gift"-
the gift God gives to man in Jesus Christ. St. Paul likens this divine gift to
the gift of spouses who through mutual self-donation become "one
flesh."48 In Ephesians 5 the "supernatural conferring of the fruits of re-
demption acquires ... the character of a spousal donation of Christ himself
to the Church similar to the spousal relationship between husband and
wife. Therefore, not only the fruits of redemption are a gift. Christ himself
is a gift. He gives himself to the Church, as to his spouse" (325).
John Paul says that when we accept the gift offered to us through
faith in Christ, we really become participants in the eternal mystery, even
though it works in us under the veils of faith. The "veils of faith" can also
be described as the veils of sacramental signs. For, as John Paul said in his
previous audience, participation in the eternal plan of God "becomes a re-
ality in a mysterious way, under the veil of a sign; nonetheless, that sign is
always a 'making visible' of the supernatural mystery which it works in
man under its veil."49
Various saints have observed that God veils his mystery in sacra-
mental signs out of mercy, for if we saw his glory as he is we would die.
No one can see God's glory and live (see Ex 33:20). But herein lies our
privileged calling. God's gift to us is his own self-disclosure: his own
self-communication. We shall see his face and live! Indeed, we are called
with "unveiled face," St. Paul tells us, to behold the glory of the Lord.
This vision transforms us into God's likeness "from one degree of glory
to another" (2 Cor 3: 18).
Through this ongoing transformation we reclaim and experience the
sacramentality of our bodies. Even if it does so in a veiled way, the human
body is meant to proclaim God's eternal mystery. The more we are trans-
formed "from glory to glory" according to the likeness of God, the more
we can see the divine mystery stamped in our bodies-in everybody. Fur-
thermore, we come to understand, just as spouses come to experience, that
the communion of male and female in "one flesh" participates in God's
glory as well.
48. See CCC, n. 772.

49.9/8/82, TB 323.
73. The Spousal Analogy Helps Penetrate the

Essence of the Mystery
September 22,29, 1982 (TB 327-333)
In order to help us better understand the letter to the Ephesians and

the great spousal analogy, the Holy Father reminds us that the idea of the
spousal love of God for humanity does not appear in the abstract. Instead,
it is in continuity with the spousal analogy employed throughout the Old
Testament. Here the Pope reminds us of the many passages from Isaiah,
Hosea, and Ezekiel and of the vivid celebration of spousal love presented
in the Song of Songs.
St. Paul preserves the spousal analogy of the Old Testament while
transforming it and deepening it according to the "great mystery" now re-
vealed through Christ's union with the Church. This "Christo logical" and
"ecclesiological" dimension, John Paul says, was found only as an "em-
bryo" in the Old Testament. It was only foretold. But what was "scarcely
outlined," only "half-open," is now "fully revealed" in the letter to the
Ephesians. Fully revealed, but of course, the Pope reminds us, "without
ceasing to be a mystery" (329- 330).
A. Your Maker Is Your Husband

To show the continuity and development of the spousal analogy from
the Old to the New Testament, John Paul II devotes an entire audience (9/
22/82) to analyzing the following text from Isaiah in light of that classic
passage from Ephesians 5.
[Yjou will forget the shame of your youth, and the reproach of your wid-
owhood you will remember no more. For your Maker is your husband,
the Lord of hosts is his name; and the Holy One of Israel is your Re-
deemer, the God of the whole earth he is called. For the Lord has called
you like a wife forsaken and grieved in spirit, like a wife of youth when
she is cast off, says your God. For a brief moment I forsook you, but
with great compassion I will gather you, ... with everlasting love I will
have compassion on you, says the Lord, your Redeemer. ... For the moun-
tains may depart and the hills be removed, but my steadfast love shall
not depart from you, and my covenant of peace shall not be removed,
says the Lord, who has compassion on you (Is 54:4- 8, 10).
The Pope states that this text "has theological content of extraordi-
nary richness." "These words brim over with an authentic ardor of love,"
he says. And this "is perhaps the strongest 'declaration of love' on God's
part, linked up with the solemn oath offaithfulness forever." Furthermore,
these words indicate "the very character of the gift, which is the love of
God for the spouse-Israel." It is "a gift which derives entirely from God's
initiative .. .indicating the dimension of grace, which from the beginning is
contained in that love" (328) .
• Recall that God's initiative as Bridegroom and humanity'S response

as Bride are essential in understanding how the bodies of male and female
reveal the nuptial mystery. The nuptial meaning of the man's body calls
him to image God's initiation of the gift, whereas the nuptial meaning of
the woman's body calls her to image humanity'S receptivity and response
to the gift (see §66). This is why the Pope describes woman as the "arche-
type of the whole human race."so Of course this does not mean that it is
"wrong" for wives to initiate the gift of self. It is also crucial that husbands
learn how to receive and respond. Even so, since the body is the revelation
of the person, initiation and receptivity speak not only of male and female
anatomy, but of male and female personality. Ii is not mere social conven-
tion, for example, that men most often propose marriage to women. It
speaks of the masculine call to image God in the initiation of the gift.
Whatever resistance we might have to this truth ultimately stems, it seems,
from a failure to believe in and live the reality of gift. As soon as the ele-
ment of the "sincere gift" is removed, the initiation of God, and, in turn,
the initiation of the male, is seen (understandably so) as a threat. In tum,
woman retreats (understandably so) from her natural receptivity.
John Paul comments that the "shame of your youth" and the "re-
proach of your widowhood" mentioned by Isaiah indicates the mentality
of the time when it was disreputable for a marriageable woman to remain
unmarried. While the Holy Father does not mention this, we might also
recognize an echo of that shame of Eden which man and woman experi-
enced having broken their covenant with God. Only through the love of
our Redeemer and the restoration of the covenant can a man and woman
regain something of that original vision of the body that enables them to
"forget" their shame. Indeed, authentic love "swallows shame," as Wojtyla
expresses it. 51
B. New "Mmnents" of"Revelation

Comparing the text ofTsaiah with that of Ephesians, we certainly rec-
ognize a continuity, but we also recognize "new revealed moments"-the
trinitarian, Christological, and eschatological moments. Isaiah obviously
50. Mulieris Digl1itatelll, n. 4

51. See Love & Responsihility. p. 181 .
could not consciously speak to these new "moments." God as a Trinity of

Persons; Christ as the Incarnate Son, Bridegroom, and Redeemer; and the
ultimate consummation of the nuptial mystery in which Christ's Bride will
be "holy and blameless before him" (Eph 1:4) are realities only revealed in
their fullness in the historical event of Christ. From this perspective, St.
Paul can distinguish the work of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit
throughout his letter in a way that Isaiah could not.
In fact, John Paul points out that in Ephesians St. Paul presents the
mystery hidden for ages in God first in the dimension of paternal love
rather than conjugal love. The Father "destined us in love to be his sons
through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will" (Eph 1:5). Of
course the prophets also spoke ofthe paternity of God (see Hos 11: 1- 2; Is
64:8; Mall :6). But what Isaiah did not and could not know in speaking of
God as Redeemer was that the "figure of the Redeemer is ... proper to him
who is the first 'beloved Son' of the Father (Eph 1:6)" (329). According to
John Paul, God as "spouse" in some way parallels God as "redeemer."
Christ the Redeemer is the heavenly Bridegroom. Without knowing the
full implications, Isaiah himself spoke to this reality. In fact, Isaiah uses
the analogy of spousal love only when the Creator and the "Holy One of
Israel" is manifested as redeemer.
Thus the Holy Father observes that St. Paul no longer repeats:
"your Maker is your Husband." Instead St. Paul reveals Christ the Son as
Redeemer and Bridegroom. Christ's salvific love "consists in giving
himself up for the Church." In this way St. Paul reveals redemptive love
"as spousal love whereby [Christ] espouses the Church and makes it his
own Body" (329). Thus John Paul says that Christ's giving himself up
for the Church is equivalent to carrying out the work of redemption. In
this way the "Creator Lord of hosts" spoken of by Isaiah becomes the
"Holy One of Israel" as her Redeemer. But John Paul adds that in this
case, we are speaking of "the new Israel," the Church. Here we see the
continuity and the deepening of the spousal analogy from the old covenant
to the new covenant.
C. The Radical Character of Grace

Through the different phases of the spousal analogy-from the em-
bryo ofthe old covenant, to the full revelation of the new-we come to see
both the full extent and limitations of this analogy. John Paul believes that
"the analogy of spousal or conjugal love helps to penetrate the very es-
sence of the mystery"-but, of course, only "up to a certain point" and
only "in an analogical way." The Pope continues: "It is obvious that the
analogy of earthly... spousallove cannot provide an adequate and complete
understanding of that absolute transcendent Reality which is the divine

mystery.... The mystery remains transcendent in regard to this analogy as in
regard to any other analogy, whereby we seek to express it in human lan-
guage" (330).52 That being said, the Pope believes that the "analogy of
spousal love contains in itself a characteristic of the mystery which is not
directly emphasized by... any other analogy used in the Bible" (331). He
also mentions that this even includes the analogy of paternal love.
What specific characteristic does John Paul mean? "The analogy of
spousal love," he says, "permits us to understand in a certain way the
mystery... as a love proper to a total and in-evocable gift of self on the part
of God to man in Christ." John Paul points out that this is a question of
"man" both in the personal and in the communal sense. Isaiah expresses
the community dimension as "Israel" and St. Paul expresses it as "Church."
In both cases these tenus indicate a "reduction of the community to the
person"-Israel and the Church are considered as "bride-person" in rela-
tion to the "bridegroom-person" (Yahweh and Christ). Thus every "con-
crete 'I' should find itself in that biblical 'we'" (331). That biblical "we" is
the one bride who has received God's ilTevocable gift of self.
John Paul says that this gift of God to man is certainly "radical" and
therefore "total." He adds, however, that we cannot speak of this "total"
giving of God to man in its transcendental fullness. As a creature, man
cannot receive divinity as such. Such a "total" and uncreated gift "is
shared only by God himself in the 'triune communion of the Persons'"
(331). Nevertheless, through God's gift of self-which by virtue of the In-
carnation is a bodily gift, and, analogously, a nuptial gift-we do participate
in the divine nature (see 2 Pet 1:4). As the Eucharistic prayer indicates, we
"come to share in the divinity of Christ who humbled himself to share in
our humanity." According to this measure, God's self-gift is "total" in that
he gives all that he can give of himself to us considering our limited facul-
ties as creatures.
In this way the spousal analogy, like no other analogy in the Bible,
indicates the radical character of grace. John Paul says that it helps us un-
derstand the mystery of grace both as an eternal reality in God and as an
historical fruit of mankind's redemption in Christ. This is how man-iage as
a human reality "incarnates" spousal love in the image and likeness of the
divine Mystery.
52. See ccc, ll. 42.

74. Original Unity: A Fruit of Eternal Election in Christ

October 6, 1982 (TB 333 - 336)
In his audience of October 6, 1982, John Paul begins to re-examine

marriage's "beginning" in light of what we have learned in Ephesians about
the "great mystery." The Pope says that the letter to the Ephesians authorizes
us to do this because the Apostle himself refers to the "beginning." He refers
specifically to the words of Genesis 2:24, which instituted marriage as a sac-
ramental reality right from the beginning. The Holy Father wants to return to
these words regarding the "one flesh" union in order to better understand
how they illuminate marriage as the primordial sacrament.
A. Imbued with Christ before Original Sin

"The letter to the Ephesians opens up before us the supernatural
world of the eternal mystery, of the eternal plans of God the Father con-
cerning man. These plans," the Pope reminds us, "precede the 'creation of
the world,' and therefore also the creation of man. At the same time those
divine plans begin to be put into effect already in the entire reality of cre-
ation" (334). This sheds new light on the nature and origin of the grace of
original innocence. "The letter to the Ephesians leads us to approach this
situation-that is, the state of man before original sin-from the point of
view of the mystery hidden in God from eternity" (333 - 334). According
to this mystery, God chose us in Christ not only after we sinned and in or-
der to redeem us from sin. God chose us in Christ "before the foundation
of the world" (Eph 1:4). This means that "before sin, man bore in his soul
the fruit of eternal election in Christ" (334).
It seems that John Paul cannot stress this point enough. Comparing
the testimony of the "beginning" with the testimony of Ephesians, he says
that "one must deduce that the reality of man's creation was already im-
bued with the perennial election of man in Christ.. .. Man, male and female,
shared from the 'beginning' in this supernatural gift." And again he says
that this supernatural endowment in Christ "took place before original sin"
(334- 335)Y Rereading the account of creation in light of the New Testa-
ment, we realize that man's destiny in Christ is already implied in his cre-
ation in the image of God. For it is Christ who "is the image of the invisible
God." Thus, it is in Christ that we image God right from the beginning (see
Col 1:15 -16).54
53. Emphasis added.

54. See CCC, nn. 280, 1701.
With these statements, the Holy Father appears to be adding his input
to a centuries-old theological debate: Would Christ have come had man
not sinned? In any case, this pope's opinion on the matter seems clear. For
him, Jesus Christ-the incarnate Christ-"is the center of the universe
and of history."55 For him, it seems even to entertain the idea of a universe
without an incarnate Christ is to miss a central point of the "great mys-
tery" of God's love for humanity. 56
Christ is "the first-born of all creation" (Col 1: 15). Everything-es-
pecially man in his original unity as male and female-was created for
him, through him, and in expectation of him. When we reread man's be-
ginning in view of the "great mystery" of Ephesians, we can see that
Christ's incarnate communion with the Church is already anticipated and
in some sense "contained" in the original incarnate communion of man
and woman. And this original unity in "one flesh" was constituted by God
before sin. Man and woman's original unity, therefore, was a beatifying
participation in grace (see §20). This grace made original man "holy and
blameless" before God. Here John Paul reminds us that their primordial
(or original) holiness and purity were also expressed in their being naked
without shame. The Holy Father then asserts that this original bounty was
granted to man in view of Christ, who from eternity was "beloved" as Son,
"even though-according to the dimensions of time and history-it had
preceded the Incarnation" (334).
B. The Continuity of God s Plan

If this is the case, the Incarnation is not an afterthought-a second
plan intended to rectify the first, supposedly thwarted when man sinned.
Of course sin put man on a major detour, one might say, in realizing God's
plan. But sin is not an insurmountable roadblock. Sin is not more powerful
than God's eternal plan to unite us with Christ. God's plan for man and for
the universe continues in spite of sin.
The grace of original innocence, John Paul tells us, "was accom-
plished precisely in reference to [Christ] while anticipating chronologi-
cally his coming in the body" (335). And, recalling our reflections on Gen-
esis, that grace was given "in an irrevocable way, despite the subsequent
sin and death."57 It is true that man lost this grace as a result of sin. The
entrance of shame attests to this. But he did not lose it forever. Christ's

56. See CCC, nn. 280, 381, 653.
57. 1/30/80, TB 67 (see §20).
resurrection bears witness that the grace ofthe mystelY of creation becomes,
for anyone open to receiving it, the grace of the mystery of redemption. 58
"The redemption was to become the source of man's supernatural endow-
ment after sin and, in a certain sense, in spite of sin" (335). In this way
God's eternal plan for man-remaining the same yesterday, today, and for-
ever- is definitively accomplished in his beloved Son.
John Paul wants to stress the continuity between God's plan in the
mystery of creation and his plan in the mystery of redemption. But at the
same time we can deduce a "new" dimension to God's self-gift-the rev-
elation of his mercy. 59 After sin, in order to fulfill "the mystery hidden for
ages in God" (Eph 3:9), Christ would first have to reconcile man to the
Father. This means that his Incarnation and his bodily gift of self would
now entail his suffering and death. "In him we have redemption through
his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses" (Eph I :7). This forgiveness is
essential to Christ's mission. Still, it is not the only purpose of his mission.
Forgiveness of our sins is only part of "the riches of his grace which he
lavished on us" (Eph 1:7-8). One might call it the necessary prerequisite
for the fulfillment of God's eternal plan for us "to be his sons through
Jesus Christ" (1 :5). From the perspective of the spousal analogy, if
spouses have been at enmity with each other, they must first reconcile
before they re-unite in "one flesh." Christ's self-gift on the cross is the rec-
onciliation of estranged spouses that opens the way for their eternal con-
summate communion.
75. Marriage Is the Central Point of the Sacrament of Creation

October 6, 1982 (TB 333 - 336)
We spoke above of the eternal plan of God the Father to unite us in

an incarnate communion with Christ. These plans precede the creation of
the world and therefore also our creation as male and female. Furthermore,
man's sin did not and could not thwart God's plan. The Father continues to
carry out the mystery of his will to unite all things in Christ despite sin.
John Paul asks: "In what way is the reality of the sacrament, ofthe primor-
dial sacrament, verified in this context?" (335) We will now seek to an-
swer this question.
58. See 10/29/80, TB 167.

59. See Dives in Misericordia, n. 7.
A. The Body Pervaded by Grace

The Holy Father says that the following phrases sum up his entire
analysis of the creation accounts in Genesis. He quotes himself: '''Man ap-
pears in the visible world as the highest expression of the divine gift, be-
cause he bears within himself the interior dimension of the gift. And with it
he brings into the world his particular likeness to God .... Resulting from this
likeness there is also the primordial awareness of the conjugal significance
ofthe body, pervaded by the mystery of original innocence'" (333).60
God is "gift" just as "God is love" (1 Jn 4:8). Man is the highest ex-
pression of the divine gift in the visible world because he is created as a
person who is called from within to love. This is "the interior dimension of
the gift." But in the perfect integration of body and soul, this "interior di-
mension" is also manifested outwardly in the body-in the nuptial mean-
ing (here translated "conjugal significance") of the body. To say that their
awareness of the nuptial meaning of the body was "pervaded by the mys-
tery of original innocence" is to say their experience of the body was "per-
vaded by grace." This is that grace of election in Christ which was already
granted in the mystery of creation. The effect of that grace is, as John Paul
says (quoting again from his earlier catechesis on Genesis), "'that man
feels himself, in his body as male and female, the subject of holiness.' 'He
feels' himself and he is such from the 'beginning'" (335).
And what is holiness? "The holiness of God is the inaccessible center
of his eternal mystery."61 Human holiness is our participation in this mys-
tery enabled by God's utterly gratuitous gift of himself to us. Therefore,
human holiness is measured according to the response of the Bride (man)
to the gift (grace) of the Bridegroom (Christ). In tum, holiness "enables
man to express himself deeply with his own body... precisely by means of
the 'sincere gift' ofhimself."62 In this way we see how the invisible divine
reality of gift-grace-holiness (in a word, love) was originally made visible
through the human body and in the incarnate self-gift of man and woman
to each other. Therefore the Holy Father adds that the holiness that the
Creator conferred originally on man pertains to what he calls the "sacra-
ment of creation."
60. This quote from the audience of February 20, 1980 (see TB 76) is translated
differently here.
61. CCC, n. 2809.
62 . 2120/80, TB 76 - 77.
B. The Sacrament of Creation

When John Paul speaks of the "sacrament of creation" he indicates
that all of the created universe in some way makes the invisible mystery of
its Creator visible. As the psalmist proclaims: "The heavens are telling the
glory of God" (Ps 19: 1). The sacrament of creation reaches its highest ex-
pression in the crown of creation: man, male and female. Man, in turn,
reaches his fulfillment through the sincere gift of self which was realized
in an original way through that rich personal union of man and woman in
"one flesh." It is the incarnate communion of man and woman that in
some way sums up or consummates the "sacrament of creation" (see §22).
The Holy Father expresses this when he says: "The words of Genesis
2:24, 'a man ... cleaves to his wife and they become one flesh,' ... constitute
marriage as ... a sacrament inasmuch as it is an integral part, and," the Pope
believes, "the central point of the 'sacrament of creation.' In this sense it is
the primordial sacrament" (335). Quoting himself again, the Pope reminds
us that the primordial sacrament is to be "'understood as a sign which ef-
fectively transmits in the visible world the invisible mystery hidden from
eternity in God. And this is the mystery of truth and love, the mystery of
the divine life in which man really shares'" (333). Thus, John Paul tells us
that "the institution of marriage, according to the words of Genesis 2:24,
expresses not only the beginning of the fundamental human community."
At the same time it expresses "the salvific initiative of the Creator, corre-
sponding to the eternal election of man [in Christ], of which the letter to
the Ephesians speaks" (335).
Here we reach the summit of the "great mystery" of our creation as
male and female and our call to become "one flesh." Here we touch the
deepest essence of the body and of nuptial union as theology. It is this:
When we allow the grace of redemption to "untwist" what is disordered in
our sexuality, we realize that our entire incarnate personalities as male and
female-lived in the current of our erotic desire for union-proclaim, ex-
press, and summon us to receive as utter "gift" our eternal election in
Jesus Christ. This election invites us to dwell in the glory of the divine
self-giving for all eternity. This divine life of triune self-giving is "the
mystery hidden from eternity in God." And this is what the body-through
its visible masculinity and femininity-proclaims and in what it summons
us to participate. The Holy Father recalls his thesis: '''The body in fact,
and only it, is capable of making visible what is invisible: the spiritual and
divine. It was created to transfer into the visible reality of the world the
mystery hidden from eternity in God, and thus to be its sign'" (335).63
63. In the audience of February 20, 1980, the English translation stated that the body
becomes "a" sign of the divine mystely. Here the translation states that the body becomes
"its" sign. The Italian (He cosi esserne segno 'J says "a" sign.
The primordial sacrament as instituted in Genesis 2:24 contains a su-

pernatural efficacy because already in creation man was "chosen in
Christ."ii4 In this way the Pope says we must recognize that the original
"sacrament of creation" draws its efficacy from Christ. John Paul indicates
that St. Paul speaks of this grace in Ephesians 1:6-the "grace which [the
Father] freely bestowed on us in the Beloved." MalTiage-this primordial
sacrament of sexual love-is intended, therefore, not only to advance the
work of creation through procreation. God also intends that it serve "to ex-
tend to further generations of men the same sacrament of creation, that is,
the supernatural fruits of man's eternal election on the part of the Father in
the eternal Son" (336) .
• Based on this, is it any wonder why Satan attacks right here? Recall
that sin "and death entered man's history, in a way, through the very heart
of that unity which, from 'the beginning,' was formed by man and woman,
created and called to become 'one flesh. "'65 Satan's goal is to keep man
from his eternal election in Christ. He does so by plagiarizing the primor-
dial sacrament. Satan wants to twist man and woman's union into an "anti-
sacrament"-an effective denial of the gift of God's life and love. He
plagiarizes the Word inscribed in the body ("self-donation") and makes it
his own anti-word ("self-gratification"). At this point we are getting closer
to understanding why Karol Wojtyla, just a few months before his election
as Pope John Paul II, described the teaching of Humanae Vitae as a
"struggle for the value and meaning of humanity itself."66
76. Marriage: Platform for the Actuation of God's Designs

October 6, 13, 1982 (TB 334-337)
We have been chosen in Christ "before the foundation of the world to

be holy and blameless before him" (Eph 1:4). This is the mystery of God's
will St. Paul announced in the first chapter of Ephesians: to unite us (and
all things) with Christ according to the riches of his grace (see vv. 4, 8-9).
According to John Paul, this is all actuated by the "great mystery" pro-
claimed in Ephesians 5.
64. See CCC. n. 257.

65. 3/5/80, TB 77 (see §24).
66. Cited in Crossing the Threshold a/Love. p. 113.
We have learned that maniage-instituted by the union of male and fe-

male in "one fiesh"-was already "in the beginning" an image of and a par-
ticipation in this eternal election in Christ. This lofty theological concept
may seem hopelessly removed from the "real life" experience of ordinalY
men and women. From the experience of men and women dominated by
concupiscence, yes. But for husbands and wives who are being freed from
the domination of concupiscence through ongoing conversion to Christ, this
"lofty theology" gradually becomes what they live and experience.
In what way? How actually is maniage and its consummate expres-
sion supposed to image and participate in our eternal election in Christ? To
answer this question we must attune ourselves to that "echo" of our origins
deep within us. We must recall the original experiences we reconstructed
in our analysis of Genesis-solitude, unity, and nakedness-and believe in
the power of the grace "which God lavishes on us in his Beloved" to re-
store what was lost.
A. Being Chosen and Being Able to Choose

The Holy Father recalls that in all of creation, the election to the dig-
nity of adopted sonship was proper only to the "first Adam"-to the man
created in the image and likeness of God as male and female. This
"Adam" realized he was alone in the visible world as a person. The deep-
est meaning of this solitude is that Adam was constituted "in a unique, ex-
clusive, and unrepeatable relationship with God himself." He alone among
all the body-creatures was a "partner of the Absolute."67
The experience of original solitude, then, was an experience of "be-
ing chosen" and of "being able to choose." God chose Adam in love. He
chose him in Christ. For, as John Paul's favorite passage from Vatican II
tells us, "Adam, the first man, was a figure of him who was to come,
namely Christ the Lord."68 Furthermore, in "being chosen," Adam was
also given the ability to choose to love God in return and to choose to love
another human person in order to recapitulate the love God had given to
him. In this way original solitude leads to the experience of original unity
(see § 12). For it is not good for the man to be alone.
But the experience of original nakedness in particular enables us to
see how man and woman's original unity was an image of and participa-
tion in man's eternal election in Christ. Nakedness without shame revealed
that they were "free with the very freedom of the gift." Adam had no com-
pulsion to satisfy an "urge" at the sight of woman's nakedness. Her body
67.10/24/79, TB 38 (see §12).

68. Gaudi1tm et Spes, n. 22.
inspired nothing in Adam but the desire to make a "sincere gift" of himself
to her: to choose her in freedom as his bride, as God had chosen him in
Christ "before the foundation of the world." Furthermore, knowing that
she was a person made for "her own sake," he knew he could not "take"
her or "grasp" her. He had to trust that she-in her freedom-would desire
to open herself to the gift he initiated and respond freely with the gift of
herself to him, which she did (see § 18). Free from any compulsion and
selfish sting, their marital union was a mutual choice- a choice made for
the good of the other and because of the good of the other. It was a partici-
pation in that original good of God's vision which, as John Paul says, af-
firms his choosing of us.
In this way their conjugal union was a "beatifying experience," imag-
ing and participating in their having been "elected" or chosen by eternal
Love (see § 19). John Paul describes this participation as the "supernatural
efficacy" of the primordial sacrament. In other words, the experience of
original unity truly communicated God's life and love to man and woman.
B. Sin and the Loss of Supernatural Efficacy

This reality, however, as experience attests, became dimmed by the
heritage of original sin. As John Paul expresses, "the heritage of grace was
driven out of the human heart at the time of the breaking of the first Cov-
enant with the Creator." In this way "marriage, as a primordial sacrament,
was deprived of that supernatural efficacy which at the moment of its insti-
tution belonged to the sacrament of creation in its totality. Nonetheless,"
the Pope continues, "even in this state, that is, in the state of man's heredi-
tary sinfulness, marriage never ceased being the figure of that sacrament
we read about in the letter to the Ephesians." Despite sin, John Paul sug-
gests that "marriage has remained the platform for the actuation of God's
eternal designs" (336).
Even if crippled in its ability to do so, man and woman's longing for
marital union has spoken in some way of the "great mystery" to all the
generations of history. The universal cultural heritage of romantic poetry,
literature, music, and art often points to a basic intuition that the love of
the sexes is meant to be a merging ofthe human and the divine. 69
While marriage entails many trials under the inheritance of sin, a
"spark" of that beatifying beginning remains. In fact, this spark prepares
men and women for the gift of redemption. The heart longs for "something
more" than life can offer under sin's influence. To tap into that desire for
"something more" is to tap into that "echo" deep within our hearts of
69 . See Gaudium et Spes, n. 49.

The Sacram en tality of Marriage 355
God's original plan for us. Despite formidable foes that seek to snuff it
out, that yearning cannot and will not be repressed. 70 It is a yearning to live
in the grace of our eternal election in Christ. It is a yearning to live in the
eternal embrace of the Marriage of the Lamb. Nothing else can satisfy.
Nothing else can fulfill. And all else is destined to pass away.
• It is precisely this yeaming that Satan targets and toys with in order
to manipulate us in his direction. The myriad pleasures of this world which
he parades before us as "the prince of the power of the air" (Eph 2:2) pur-
port to satisfy our longings but leave us empty. Still, we must always keep
in mind that all Satan can do to attract us is plagiarize the joys God created
for us in this world to foreshadow the joys of heaven. All the authentic
pleasures of this world are in some way sacramental, whereas all the coun-
terfeit pleasures of this world are in some way sacrilegious. This is where
the battle is fought: between sacraments and their counterfeits, between
icons and idols, between signs and anti-signs. One foreshadows an etemity
of fulfillment and communion, the other an eternity of emptiness and alien-
ation.
77. Sacrament of Creation Fulfilled in Sacrament of Redemption

October 13,1982 (TB 336-339)
The "echo" of God's original plan that resounds in the human heart
despite sin is irrepressible. We might call this an echo of the sacrament of
creation. And this echo prepares men and women to receive the sacrament
of redemption. John Paul speaks to this when he suggests that "the sacra-
ment of creation had drawn near to men and had prepared them for the
sacrament of redemption, introducing them into the work of salvation"
(336). What does the Pope mean by the "sacrament of redemption"? To
answer this, let us first recall what he means by the sacrament of creation.
A. Sacraments oj'Creation and Redemption

The sacrament of creation is that which in the totality of creation
makes visible the mystery hidden in God from all eternity. This is the mys-
tery of divine life and love-of communion- in which original man really
participated through the grace of the sacrament of creation.71 Man'iage as
70. See Lorenzo Albacete, God at the Ritz: AUl'Clctiol7 10 In/inity (New York: Cross-
roads, 2002).
71. See CCc. n. 375.
instituted by the words of Genesis 2:24 is the central and consummate

point of the sacrament of creation. In this sense it is the primordial sacra-
ment which was at work in man and woman with supernatural efficacy.
Marriage, however, lost its efficacy as the central point of the sacrament of
creation with the dawn of sin. When man broke his covenant with the Cre-
ator, the "life" with which he had been in-spired, ex-spired in his heart.
Shame in their nakedness attests to this loss of grace and holiness. Even
so, as John Paul suggests, "marriage has remained the platform for the ac-
tuation of God's eternal designs" (336). "In fact, the original 'unity in the
body' of man and woman does not cease to mold the history of man on
earth, even though it has lost the clarity of... the sign of salvation, which it
possessed 'at the beginning. '''72
When St. Paul links this "unity in the body" of the first Adam and
Eve with the incarnate communion of the New Adam and Eve (Christ and
the Church), he speaks of it as a "great mystery." Acwrding to the Holy
Father, this linking of Genesis 2:24 with Christ and the Church "seems to
indicate not only the identity of the mystery hidden in God from all eter-
nity, but also that continuity of its actuation" (336 - 337). This continuity
"exists between the primordial sacrament connected with the supernatural
gracing of man in creation itself, and the new gracing which occurred
when 'Christ loved the Church and gave himself up for her to make her
holy.. .' (Eph 5:25 - 26)." It is this "new gracing," the Pope emphasizes,
"that can be defined in its entirety as the sacrament 0/ redemption" (337).
According to St. Paul, Christ gives himself/or the Church and to the
Church in the image of the nuptial union of husband and wife in marriage.
In this way John Paul says that in some sense the sacrament of redemption
takes on once again "the figure and form of the primordial sacrament."
The marriage of the first man and woman was a sign of the supernatural
gracing of man in the sacrament of creation. To this "there corresponds the
marriage, or rather the analogy of the marriage, of Christ with the Church
as the fundamental 'great' sign of the supernatural gracing of man in the
sacrament of redemption" (337). This "new gracing" definitively renews
the covenant of the grace of election, which was broken in the beginning
by sin. The Pope also says that this "new gracing" of the sacrament of re-
demption is "a new actuation" of that mystery hidden in God from all eter-
nity. It is new in relation to the sacrament of creation because this new
grace is in a certain sense a "new creation." As St. Paul proclaims: "There-
fore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has passed away,
behold, the new has come" (2 Cor 5: 17).
72. 11124/82, TB 345.

The Sacrarnentality ofMarriage 357
While John Paul stresses the continuity between the original gracing
and the new gracing, he also notes an important difference. The original
gracing given in the sacrament of creation constituted man in the state of
original innocence. The new gracing given in the sacrament of redemption
is given first for the remission of sins. But, as discussed previously (see
§74), forgiveness of sins is only part of "the riches of his grace which he
lavished on us" (Eph 1:7 - 8). In this context the Holy Father quotes from
Romans 5:20: "Where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."
B. Signs of Creation and Redemption

But in what manner is the grace of the sacraments of creation and re-
demption actuated? John Paul stresses that "in speaking about the eternal
mystery being actuated we are speaking also about the fact that it becomes
visible with the visibility of the sign" (338). There is a sign that actuates
the sacrament of creation by making the mystery of creation visible. And
there is a sign that actuates the sacrament of redemption by making the
mystery of redemption visible. What are these signs? John Paul himself
tells us that "the mystery hidden in God from all eternity.. .in the sacrament
of creation, became a visible reality through the union of the first man and
woman in the perspective of marriage." This same mystery "becomes in
the sacrament of redemption a visible reality [through] the indissoluble
union of Christ with the Church, which the author of the letter to the
Ephesians presents as the nuptial union of spouses" (338).
As John Paul said: "It is a special merit of [the Apostle] that he
brought these two signs together, and made of them one great sign-that
is, a great sacrament."73 When we speak of these signs-of the union of
spouses and of the analogous union of Christ and the Church-according
to John Paul, "we are speaking also about the sacramentality of the whole
heritage of the sacrament of redemption, in reference to the entire work of
creation and redemption" (338 - 339). This is the power of sacramental
signs. They actualize that which they symbolize. In the beginning marital
unity was created to symbolize the eternal mystery of life-giving Com-
munion in the Trinity. "As the 'first Adam'-man, male and female-cre-
ated in the state of original innocence and called in this state to conjugal
union (in this sense we are speaking of the sacrament of creation) was a
sign of the eternal mystery, so the 'second Adam,' Christ, united with the
Church through the sacrament of redemption by an indissoluble bond,
analogous to the indissoluble bond of spouses, is a definitive sign of the
same eternal mystery" (338).
73. 9/29/82, TB 333.

From this perspective John Paul tells us that the Church itself is the
"great sacrament," the new sign of the covenant and of grace. Just as mar-
riage emerged from the sacrament of creation as a primordial sign of the
covenant and of grace, now the new sign of the covenant and of grace
"draws its roots from the depths of the sacrament of redemption." Thus,
the "primordial sacrament is realized in a new way in the sacrament of
Christ and the Church. "74
John Paul is talking about the profound interrelationship of the mar-
riage of the first Adam and Eve and the marriage of the New Adam and
Eve (Christ and the Church). We could even say these two marriages are
married to each other. In this way they form "one great sign" which re-
veals the "great mystery." Of course sacramental signs do not fully explain
the mystery. As an object of faith the mystery remains veiled even in the
expression of its sign. Yet grace is communicated with power under the
veil of the sign.
C. Christ s Spousal Love Is Unitive and Life-Giving

In this densely packed audience of October 13, 1982, John Paul
stresses that the nuptial gift of Christ to the Church, as the analogy indi-
cates, has both a unitive and a "life-giving dimension." We see the unitive
dimension in the reciprocity of the gift between Christ and the Church.
Christ initiates the sacrament of redemption by giving up his body for the
Church with the desire of "uniting himself with her in an indissoluble
love, just as spouses, husband and wife, unite themselves in marriage"
(338). But the gift given must also be received. Through her response to
the gift, the Church "in her tum completes this sacrament as the wife, in
virtue of spousal love, completes her husband." This "completion" of the
husband by his wife was already pointed out, the Pope says, when the first
man found in woman "a helper fit for him."
Recall that the wife's mystery "is manifested and revealed com-
pletely by means of motherhood" (see §23). Hence, along with the "uni-
tive dimension" of Christ's spousal love for the Church we also recognize
the "life-giving dimension." In this context John Paul says "we can add
also that the Church united to Christ, as the wife to her husband, draws
from the sacrament of redemption all her fruitfulness and spiritual mother-
hood" (338). St. Peter testifies to this in some way when he writes that we
have been "reborn not from a corruptible, but from an incorruptible seed,
through the living and enduring word of God" (l Pet 1:23).
74. 10/27/82, TB 342.

At this point we are close to understanding the importance of the en-

cyclical Humanae Vitae. The "one flesh" union of spouses is meant to be a
sign of the "great mystery" of Christ's union with the Church. And, as
John Paul has already said, we can speak of moral good and evil in the
sexual relationship "according to whether... or not it has the character of
the truthful sign. "75 Anyone can recognize that an attack on the unitive di-
mension of sexuality-for instance, physical abuse inflicted on one's
spouse-would contradict utterly the sign of Christ's love for the Church.
Why then is it so difficult to recognize that an attack on the life-giving di-
mension also utterly contradicts this sign of Christ's love for the Church?
This is the context in which the Holy Father will reflect on the issue of
contraception in his next cycle.
78. Marriage: Prototype of All the Sacraments

October 20,27,1982 (TB 339-342)
John Paul II's analysis of Ephesians demonstrates the profound inter-

relationship of creation and redemption in the human drama. In this same
context it also demonstrates the profound inter-relationship of nature and
grace. Some conceive of man as capable of a purely "natural fulfillment"
apart from grace. Grace is then "added on" to man's nature, it seems, as if
it were a two-story structure. But based on John Paul II's analysis of Gen-
esis and Ephesians, we know that God gave grace to man in his creation as
man. To be full of grace, then, is man's natural state-if by "natural" we
mean God's one and original plan for man.
Just like a bride is created in her very being to receive her husband,
so too is man created in his very being to receive grace; to receive divine
life as the Bride of Christ (see §55). This insight is found already in the
work of St. Thomas Aquinas, who taught that man is naturally capable of
grace because he is made in God's image. 76 In this sense we cannot speak
of a purely "natural" state of man detached or divorced from grace. The
only natural state is that willed by God in the beginning. When man fell
75.8/27/80, TB 141-142.
76. See Summa Theologiae, I-IIae, q. 113, a. 10. Fathers Hogan and LeVoir also
point this out in their discussion of nature and grace in their book Covenant ofLove: Pope
John Paul II on Sexuality, Marriage, and Family in the Modern World (San Francisco,
CA: Ignatius Press, 1992), p. 35. For a discussion ofWojtyla's intervention at the Council
on the issue of nature and grace, see Rocco Buttiglione, Karol Wojtyla: The Thought of
the Man Who Became Pope John Paul II, pp. 195-199.
from grace, he did not become a "natural" man. He stooped lower than his
nature. This is why Christ, in revealing the mystery of the Father and his
love-that is, in revealing the mystery of grace-fully reveals man to him-
self. This grace, of course, is not man's due, any more than being created
in the first place is his due (see § 12). We need not dissociate nature and
grace, as some might imagine, in order to maintain this important truth.
Man's creation-and his creation with a graced nature-is not owed him.
It is a sheer gift. 77
A . Grace a/the Primordial Sacrament Restored

We see this "marriage" of nature and grace in Ephesians 5 :31- 32
where St. Paul weds the consummate sign of the sacrament of creation with
the consummate sign of the sacrament of redemption. Quoting from Genesis
he 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." Then he adds: "This
is a great mystery, and I mean in reference to Christ and the church."
According to the Holy Father, a careful analysis of this key text shows
that the Apostle's linking of the original union of spouses with the union of
Christ and the Church "is not merely a comparison in a metaphorical sense."
This passage speaks "of a real renewal (or of a 're-creation,' that is, of a new
creation) of that which constituted the salvific content (in a certain sense, the
'salvific substance') of the primordial sacrament" (341). In other words, the
grace of the primordial sacrament which was lost through sin is now re-
stored, re-created, or resurrected in the sacrament of redemption.
Marriage regains its efficacy-its power to actualize that which it
symbolizes. This time, however, it draws this efficacy not from the sacra-
ment of creation, but from the sacrament of redemption. With this efficacy,
John Paul points out that marriage is not merely a model and figure of
Christ's union with the Church. It "constitutes also an essential part of the
new heritage" (339). "Christ in his conversation with the Pharisees (Mt
19) not only confirms the existence of marriage instituted from the 'begin-
77. This brief sketch barely begins to introduce a very complex debate that lies at the
heart of the theological problem of our time. At the core of the contemporary controversy
regarding the relationship between nature and grace is the teaching of the French Jesuit
theologian Henri de Lubac. For a summary of the debate as it centers on his thought see
David Schindler's introduction to de Lubac's book, The Mystery of the Supernatural
(New York: Crossroad Herder, 1998), pp. xi- xxxi. For a more comprehensive discussion,
see Hans Urs von Balthasar's The Theology of Karl Barth (San Francisco, CA: Ignatius
Press/ColTIlTIunio Books, 1992), especially part III, pp. 251- 358.
ning' by the Creator, but he declares it also an integral part of the new
sacramental economy" (340). The new sacramental economy is the new
order of "salvific signs" which derives its origin and efficacy from the sac-
rament of redemption.
B. Marriage Provides the Basic Structure of Salvation

In referring to these new "salvific signs" John Paul moves from the
broader sense of "sacrament" to the more specific sense in which sacra-
ment refers to those signs instituted by Christ and administered by the
Church (see §70). The Pope emphasizes that this new sacramental
economy differs from the original economy in that it is directed not to the
man of original innocence, but to the man burdened with the heritage of
original sin. This new economy has seven sacraments instituted to give
grace to the man of concupiscence. In the original economy, John Paul
says that marriage was "the unique sacrament" instituted for man in the
state of innocence. Based on the integral relationship of creation and re-
demption, we can conclude that the primordial sacrament already fore-
shadowed the grace that was to become the gift of redemption. This grace
is now given to the man of concupiscence through the spousal union of
Christ and the Church poured forth in each of the seven sacraments. It is
given for the remission of sins but also in superabundance for the sake of
eternal communion with Christ.
Recall that God's original plan for man is in a sense continuous. Sin
did not thwart it. Accordingly, marriage-which was the central point of
the sacrament of creation in its totality-also provides the figure according
to which we construct "the basic main structure of the new economy of
salvation and of the sacramental order which draws its origin from the
spousal gracing which the Church received from Christ" (339). In other
words, Christ assumes into the whole economy of redemption the same
nuptial imprint which permeated creation. As the Catechism teaches, "The
entire Christian life bears the mark of the spousal love of Christ and the
Church."78 Therefore John Paul observes that marriage, as a primordial
sacrament, is "assumed and inserted as it were from its very bases" into
the integral structure of the new sacramental economy. Thus, marriage
arises from redemption, as the Holy Father emphasizes, "in the form of a
prototype. " "Reflecting deeply on this dimension, one would have to con-
clude that all the sacraments of the new covenant find in a certain sense
their prototype in marriage as the primordial sacrament" (339).
78. CCC, n. 1617.

This idea is closely related with what the Holy Father said earlier
when he described the visible sign of marriage as "the foundation of the
whole sacramental order" (see §71). Marriage is in some sense the founda-
tion, the model, and the prototype of all of the sacraments because all of
the sacraments draw their essential significance and their sacramental
power from the spousal love of Christ the Redeemer. John Paul points out
that Ephesians 5 shows the spousal character of Baptism (v. 26) and the
Eucharist (v. 29) in a particularly graphic, if somewhat allusive, manner.
Moreover, we can recognize that each of the seven sacraments is imbued
with a nuptial meaning. Each of the sacraments, in its own way, unites us
in the flesh with Christ our Bridegroom. When we as Bride are open to the
gift, the sacraments infuse (pushing the analogy, we might say "impreg-
nate") us with divine life .
• A person can go through the motions of receiving the sacraments

while denying the life-giving grace they afford; an example of this would
be a person who receives the Eucharist in a state of defiance toward God.
This would be a serious sacrilege. A question then arises. If the consum-
mate expression of the sacrament of marriage is meant to symbolize the
gift of Christ and the receptivity of the Bride to divine life, what does con-
traception do to this picture?
The "great mystery" of Christ's union with the Church was foreshad-
owed from the beginning in our creation as male and female and in our
call to become one flesh. As if this has not been emphasized enough, we
shall say it again: Sexuality-when given its full biblical, theological-sac-
ramental, and anthropological meaning-is all about Christ. And Christ "is
the center of the universe and of history. "79
79. An Adequate Anthropology and an Adequate Ethos

October 20,27; November 24, 1982 (TB 340-347)
In keeping with his circular style of writing, in his audiences of Octo-

ber 27 and November 24, 1982,80 John Paul revisits those key words of
Christ about God's original plan for marriage and his words about lust as
"adultery committed in the heart." We can now understand the power and

80. No audiences were delivered as part of the catechesis between these two dates.
importance of these key texts with even more precision in light of the
"great mystery" of Ephesians 5. John Paul reminds us that these words
have a profound theological, anthropological, and ethical significance.
"Christ speaks from the depths of that divine mystery. And at the same
time he enters into the very depths of the human mystery" (347). In this
way the God-Man witnesses to a theological-anthropology. Christ "fully
reveals man to himself' by unveiling the God-like dignity bestowed on
men and women in the mystery of creation and redemption. It is a dignity
that calls men and women to greatness. In other words, it makes demands
on them-ethical demands.
A. The Anthropology of Redemption

When Christ refers to God's original plan for man and woman's join-
ing in "one flesh," as well as when he condemns the lust in man's heart,
his words penetrate "into that which man and woman are (or rather into
who man and woman are) in their original dignity of image and likeness of
God." John Paul immediately stresses that historical man inherits this
same dignity in spite of sin. In fact, the dignity of original man is "continu-
ally 'assigned' to man as a duty through the reality of redemption" (346).
Christ's key words flow "from the divine depth of the 'redemption of
the body' (Rom 8:23)" (343). Christ thereby opens marriage (and male-fe-
male relations in general) "to the salvific action of God, to the forces
which ... help to overcome the consequences of sin and to constitute the
unity of man and woman according to the eternal plan of the Creator"
(345). John Paul says that redemption, in fact, signifies a "new creation."
It assumes all that is created to express it anew according to "the fullness
of justice, of equity, and of sanctity designated by God"-especially in
man who is created as male and female in the divine image. Thus, the
"salvific action which derives from the mystery of redemption assumes in
itself the original sanctifying action of God in the very mystery of cre-
ation" (345). Christ's words bear within them the leaven of this hope. The
Pope reminds us that this is not only a hope reserved for our state in the
final resurrection. This is also a hope that can be progressively realized "in
the dimension of daily life" (343)-"the hope of every day" (see §63).
John Paul insists that it is truly possible for historical man to "find
again the dignity and holiness of the conjugal union 'in the body,' on the
basis of the mystery of redemption" (346). What hope! Man and woman
need not be continually wounded by the blades of concupiscence which
stab at the heart of their dignity and their communion. Married life need
not be only an ongoing coping with or mere channeling of wounded and
wounding desires. The Pope says that marriage invites us to participate
consciously in the redemption of the body. Spouses who are committed to

doing so (Christian spouses are supposed to commit to this) can progres-
sively rediscover, reclaim, and live according to their original dignity.
They can-by daily taking up the redeeming cross of Christ-experience
a real measure of the harmony, peace, and happiness of original unity. As
the Catechism teaches, "By coming to restore the original order of creation
disturbed by sin, [Christ] himself gives the strength and grace to ... 'receive'
the original meaning of marriage and live it."81
B. The Ethos of Redemption

Christ's words about marriage not only show us who we are in the
mystery of creation and redemption. They have at the same time an "ex-
pressive ethical eloquence." In other words, Christ's words provide the
foundation both for an "adequate anthropology" and for an "adequate
ethos." John Paul has already described this as "the ethos of redemption."
Christ not only confirms marriage as a primordial sacrament. In referring
to "the beginning," he also draws moral conclusions: "Whoever divorces his
wife and marries another commits adultery against her" (Mk 10: 11). The Pope
points out that St. Paul also places his teaching on marriage in the context of
moral exhortations, which outline the ethos that should characterize the life
of Christians. John Paul then defines what a Christian is: "Christians [are
those] people aware of the election which is realized in Christ and in the
Church" (340). Precisely these people have been empowered by grace to
understand and to live the "ethos of redemption." Those who have not
been so empowered will inevitably see the demands of Christian morality
as an imposition. They will see an external ethic that burdens rather than
an internal ethos that liberates (see §2S) .
• It seems that few people who fill the pews of our churches are
"aware of the election which is realized in Christ and in the Church" (340).
More specifically, my experience in sharing the theology of the body with
Christians around the world indicates that most people who fill the pews do
not realize that this election-the mystery of the Gospel itself-is stamped
mysteriously in their own bodies as male and female. Hence, as John Paul
II repeatedly insists, a cmcial need exists for a "new evangelization"-new
because it is largely directed to the baptized. 82
81. CCC, n. 1615.

82. The epilogue will address how John Paul II's theology of the body provides a
foundation, both in substance and methodology, for the new evangelization.
While the Christian ethos can be explained philosophically (and John

Paul adds through a personalist philosophy)-nonetheless, Christian ethos
is essentially theological since it is an ethos of redemption. More specifi-
cally, according to John Paul, it is an ethos of the redemption of the body.
Ultimately, the Christian ethos is only fully tenable to those who are living
their election in Christ-to those who are living the grace of a redeemed
life in the body. Redemption is "the basis for understanding the particular
dignity of the human body, rooted in the personal dignity of the man and
the woman" (345). This dignity forms the basis of all morality.
All of the Church's teachings on sexual morality, then, are a call for
men and women to embrace and uphold their own greatness. As the Holy
Father says, in defining the ethos of sexual morality in the Sermon on the
Mount, Christ "assigns as a duty to every man the dignity of every
woman; and simultaneously (even though this can be deduced from the
text only in an indirect way), he also assigns to every woman the dignity
of every man. Finally," the Pope concludes, "he assigns to everyone-both
to man and woman-their own dignity" (346). John Paul defines this dig-
nity as the "sacrum "-the "sacredness"-of the person. And he specifi-
cally adds that this sacredness of men and women is "in consideration of
their femininity or masculinity, in consideration of the 'body'" (346). The
body reveals man's greatness-man's dignity.
C. The Struggle with Concupiscence

Living according to our own dignity is a continuous and often ardu-
ous struggle. In this context Christ speaks of the heart-"that 'intimate
place' in which there struggle in man good and evil, sin and justice,
concupiscence and holiness" (347). However, if Christ wants all men and
women to realize that they are subject to concupiscence, he also wants
them to realize that he makes the grace of redemption available to them
with real power to transform their hearts.
Redemption "is given to man as a grace of the new covenant with
God in Christ-and at the same time it is assigned to him as an ethos"
(345). This is a demanding ethos, to be sure. Christ assigns it to man's
heart and, as John Paul adds, "to his conscience, to his looks, and to his
behavior" (347). If the man of concupiscence feels powerless in himself to
meet these demands, he need only remember his election in Christ.
Here John Paul reminds us that the new ethos is "the form of the mo-
rality corresponding to God's action in the mystery of redemption" (345).
What was God's action in the mystery of redemption? It was grace poured
out in superabundance to conquer sin (see Rom 5:20). It was the death of
our sinful nature "so that as Christ was raised from the dead to the glory of
the Father, we too might walk in newness of life" (Rom 6:4). If we once
yielded our bodies to impurity, now the Spirit enlivens our mortal bodies
and empowers them for righteousness (see Rom 6:19; 8:11). When the
power of the Holy Spirit vivifies us in this way, we come to know the sa-
credness of the body and of conjugal relations. Living from this aware-
ness-even if we still recognize the tug of concupiscence-we simply do
not desire to profane the sacred. We would prefer to be crucified.
As St. Peter learned, if we keep our eyes on Christ we can walk on
water. Even if our faith wanes and we begin to sink, Christ always reaches
out to save us if we but turn to him again (see Mt 14:25-31). But we must
first believe in the power of Christ and step out of the boat. As we ob-
served previously, the drama of redemption-in this case the drama of
conquering concupiscence in our hearts, our looks, and our behavior-lies
not in the "safety" of the boat, but amidst the wind and the waves. That is
where Christ is, and he beckons us, "Come!"
80. Marriage Reveals the Salvific Will of God

November 24; December 1,1982 (TB 344-349)
The Church firmly believes that Christ instituted each of the seven
sacraments. Traditionally theologians have pointed to Christ's presence at
the wedding feast of Cana as the biblical evidence of Christ's institution of
marriage as a sacrament. 83 John Paul II also points to Christ's discussion
with the Pharisees as such evidence. Based on these words, the Pope con-
cludes that marriage is not only a sacrament from the very "beginning,"
but it is also a sacrament arising from the mystery of the "redemption of
the body." Elsewhere in the same audience John Paul says that "Christ's
words to the Pharisees refer to marriage as a sacrament, that is, to the pri-
mordial revelation of God's salvific will" for man (344).
A. Gaudium et Spes 24 Linked with Genesis 2:24

This definition of the sacrament of marriage deserves comment.
What is God's salvific will for man? Christ summarizes it when he says:
"This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you"
(In 15: 12). This is the meaning of our creation as male and female and our
call to become "one flesh." It is a call to love as God loves "from the be-
ginning." John Paul then links this call revealed already in Genesis 2:24
with the teaching of Gaudium et Spes n. 24:
83. See ccc, n. 1613 .

... the Lord Jesus, when praying to the Father "that they may all be
one ... even as we are one" (In 17:21- 22), opened up new horizons
closed to human reason by implying that there is a certain parallel be-
tween the union existing among the divine persons and the union of the
sons of God in truth and love. It follows, then, that if man is the only
creature on earth that God has wanted for its own sake, man can fully
discover his true self only in a sincere giving of himself.
In virtue of God's salvific will, John Paul says that "man and woman,
joining together in such a way as to become 'one flesh,' were at the same
time destined to be united 'in truth and love' as children of God" according
to the above teaching of Gaudium et Spes. John Paul continues by saying
that Christ directs his words about marriage as the primordial sacrament "to
this unity and toward this communion of persons, in the likeness of the
union of the divine persons" (344- 345), as the above teaching of the
Council also indicates. In his Letter to Families, John Paul states that ev-
ery man and woman "fully realizes himself or herself through the sincere
gift of self. For spouses the moment of conjugal union constitutes a very
particular expression of this. It is then that a man and a woman, in the 'truth'
of their masculinity and femininity, become a mutual gift to each other. "84
John Paul illuminated for us early on that this teaching ofthe Council
on communion among persons through the sincere gift of self is rooted in
the body-in the nuptial meaning of the body (see §18). The human model
for all the "sons of God" who are united "in truth and love" is the union of
husband and wife in "one body." For we are all "one body" in Christ (see
I Cor 12: 12 - 13). This reflects what was already said about the conjugal
union shedding light on all genuine expressions of love (see §4).
B. Dominion Over Concupiscence

When husband and wife are united "in truth and love," marriage be-
comes "an efficacious expression of the saving power of God." This "sav-
ing power" enables man and woman to overcome concupiscence and gain
dominion over the tendency toward an egoistic gratification. "The unity
and indissolubility of marriage are the fruit of this dominion, as is also a
deepened sense of the dignity of woman in the heart of a man (and also the
dignity of man in the heart of woman)." This deepened appreciation for
the dignity of the opposite sex becomes evident "both in conjugal life to-
gether, and in every other circle of mutual relations" (348).
John Paul already said that "the freedom of the gift" afforded by lib-
eration from lust "is the condition of all life together in truth."85 Ifwe want

85.10/8/80, TB 158-159 (see §35).
to build a culture that respects life and acknowledges human dignity, we

must begin by overcoming concupiscence in our own hearts. There is no
other starting point. There is no other solution. It all begins right here. But
how can we do it? Concupiscence is ever-ready to rear its ugly head and
blind us to our great dignity. True enough. But when we open our flesh to
the life of the Holy Spirit, we find a power at work in us infinitely greater
than the force of concupiscence. Listen to these words of hope: "As much
as 'concupiscence' darkens the horizon of the inward vision and deprives
the heart of the clarity of desires and aspirations, so much does 'life ac-
cording to the Spirit' ... permit man and woman to find again the true liberty
of the gift, united to the awareness of the spousal meaning of the body in
its masculinity and femininity" (349). John Paul specifies that this "life ac-
cording to the Spirit"-while available to everyone-is also the specific
grace poured out in the sacrament of marriage.
As a sacrament of the Church, the Pope says that marriage is also "a
word of the Spirit" which exhorts man and woman to model their whole
life together by drawing power from the mystery of the redemption of the
body. In this way, man and woman "are called to chastity as to a state of
life 'according to the Spirit'" (348). Marriage, then, is a sacrament of re-
demption given to the man of concupiscence as a grace and at the same
time as an ethos. In this case John Paul says that the redemption of the
body signifies the "hope of daily life, the hope of temporal life" which
overcomes the domination of concupiscence.
C. Better to Marry than to Be Aflame with Passion

In this context, the Holy Father wishes to stress again that the chaste
love of husband and wife excludes the idea that marriage provides a "le-
gitimate outlet" for indulging concupiscence (see §34). To this end he
turns again to St. Paul's words in 1 Corinthians 7 in order to clarify the
common but-in John Paul's mind-erroneous interpretation of the
Apostle's teaching.
There St. Paul recommends marriage "because of the temptation to
immorality" (v. 2). He would prefer that his readers remain single as he is.
"But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better
to marry than to be aflame with passion" (v. 9). On first reading, this pas-
sage clearly seems to justify the indulgence of concupiscence in marriage.
We previously asked if an incongruity exists between the teaching of St.
Paul and the teaching of John Paul II on this point. It was my opinion
that John Paul's explanation of the apparent incongruity was not altogether
satisfying (see §61). This time, however, the Pope's explanation is a bit
more convmcmg.
The Holy Father again stresses the Apostle's teaching that Christian
marriage, like Christian celibacy, is a special gift of grace (see v. 7). For
John Paul, grace always signifies the new ethos. Hence, he concludes that
St. Paul "expresses in his striking and at the same time paradoxical words,
simply the thought that marriage is assigned to the spouses as an ethos"
(348). To demonstrate this, the Pope points out that in Paul's words, "it is
better to marry than to be aflame with passion," the verb ardere ("to be
aflame") signifies a disorder of the passions deriving from concupiscence.
But "to marry" signifies the ethical order which Paul consciously intro-
duced in this context. So, according to this reasoning, St. Paul is saying
that the ethos of marriage (which transforms the desires of the heart into
sincere self-giving) is better than being ruled by concupiscence.
John Paul reminds us that marriage is meant to be "the meeting place
of eros with ethos and oftheir mutual compenetration in the 'heart' of man
and of woman, as also in all their mutual relationships" (348). Purity of
desire is the fruit born when eros and ethos meet in the human heart (see
§38). Such purity excludes the indulgence of concupiscence altogether.
Such purity has no desire whatsoever to appropriate the other for one's
own selfish gratification-only to love the other as God loves, in the sin-
cere gift of self.
81. Conjugal Union According to the Holy Spirit

December 1, 1982 (TB 349-351)
In the beginning, the body and erotic desire was the trustworthy
foundation of man and woman's communion. Due to the distortions of
concupiscence, however, men and women often question the trustworthi-
ness of the body and of erotic desire (see §28). Concupiscence, one might
say, has put a multi-pronged thorn into the relationship of the sexes. This
jagged barb has pricked and pierced many men and women so often that
they have become numb to their aspirations for authentic love and com-
munion in marriage. In such case, "double solitude"-rather than leading
toward a "unity of the two" in which the sexes really participate in each
other's humanity-stagnates, leading them to withdraw into what could be
called a protective "double alienation" (see §§12, 14).
Nonetheless, men and women who mutually overcome the con-
cupiscence of the flesh through "life according to the Spirit" can rediscover
marriage as "the sacramental alliance of masculinity and femininity."
Through this ongoing transformation, the same "flesh" that is held suspect
due to concupiscence "becomes the specific 'substratum' of an enduring and
indissoluble communion of the persons ... in a manner worthy of the

persons" (348 - 349). This means that Christ gives us hope of healing. To
continue with the above image, can we not recognize in Christ's own
thorn-pierced flesh his willingness to take upon himself those very wounds
that keep the sexes from true unity and communion? The Bridegroom's
gift of self on the cross proclaims at the same time both the depth of our
woundedness and the possibility of re-establishing a true life-giving mari-
tal communion.
A. Sexual Gratification "in the Spirit"

We should highlight again that living "according to the Spirit" does
not mean eschewing the body (see §§2, 41, 46). It means the integration of
body and spirit. It means opening our flesh to the Holy Spirit's in-
spiration. For spouses, this also means opening the "one flesh" they be-
come in marital intercourse to the indwelling of the Spirit. John Paul does
not hesitate to say that "life 'according to the Spirit' is also expressed in
the mutual 'union' whereby the spouses [become] 'one flesh.'" He does
not even shy away from describing "the consciousness of the gratification"
that spouses experience as an expression of life according to the Spirit.
And this "life according to the Spirit," the Pope says, is "the grace of the
sacrament of marriage" (349). Husband and wife are meant to experience
this grace when, through the sincere gift of self, they become "one flesh."
Sexual union, then, is meant to be not only the union of husband and
wife, but also of God and man. In this way, sexual pleasure itself (under-
stood integrally) is meant to be a participation in God's own mystery-in
the joy of loving as God loves (see §§20, 54, 67). Recall that Christ gave
us the commandment to love as he loves so that his joy might be in us and
that our joy might be complete (see Jn 15: 11). Of course this pleasure and
gratification greatly differs from the "egoistic gratification" toward which
concupiscence tends. John Paul tells us that authentic sexual gratification
always corresponds to the dignity of the spouses themselves. The husband
and wife who are fully aware of their dignity as expressed in the nuptial
meaning of their bodies strive to uphold it in all of their expressions of in-
timacy and affection.
Furthermore, when conjugal gratification is "in the Holy Spirit," it is
never closed in on itself. Spouses, in opening their flesh to the Holy Spirit,
are also conscious that this Spirit is "the Lord and Giver of Life." If their
sexual union is to be "according to the Spirit," spouses must trustingly
"submit their masculinity and femininity to the blessing of procreation"
(349). As John Paul explicitly affirms, the spouses' dignity cannot be di-
vorced from their potential to become parents. The pulse and intensity of
authentic gratification in conjugal union is naturally integrated with "the

profound awareness of the sanctity of the life ... to which the two [might]
give origin, participating-as progenitors-in the forces of the mystery of
creation" (349). Would not any intentional divorce from these "forces of
the mystery of creation," in fact, be a specific closing off of one's flesh to
the Lord and Giver of Life- a closing off to "life according to the Spirit"?
B. Procreation: An Integral Part of Creation and Redemption

Since the mark of nuptial love permeates both the mystery of cre-
ation and the mystery of redemption (see §78), so too does its fruitfulness.
As the Scriptures demonstrate, procreation is an integral part of both the
mystery of creation (see Gen 1:28) and the mystery of redemption (see Lk
1:35; 1 Tim 2: 15). Recall John Paul's statement that every conception of a
child reproduces the mystery of creation (see § 15). Now lie also states that
every child conceived is a testimony to the hope of redemption. He relates
this once again to St. Paul's words about the hope of the redemption ofthe
body (see Rom 8).
In light of this hope, John Paul says that each "new human life,
[each] new man conceived and born of the conjugal union of his father
and mother, opens to 'the first fruits ofthe Spirit' (Rom 8:23) 'to enter into
the liberty of the glory of the children of God' (v. 21)" (349). In other
words, every time a child is conceived, the very mystery of that child's
conception proclaims the work of the Spirit. It proclaims the mystery of
Trinitarian love and the mystery of our being chosen in Christ to be chil-
dren of God in communion with him for all eternity.
Because of sin, however, this hope that the child represents is not re-
alized without suffering. Since the dawn of man's shame, an element of
the cross has also been written into the mystery of nuptial union and pro-
creation. Authentic love between the sexes is determined right here: Will
men and women embrace the cross or run from it? Love leads to redemp-
tive suffering. Lust leads to resisting suffering. Sexual sin, in fact, always
involves a specific attempt to divorce love from the cross of Christ. In all
truth, there is no love apart from this cross.
C. Lust, Love, and Suffering

When spouses "take up their cross and follow" Christ, the suffering
of nuptial love and procreation is redemptive. Indeed, it plunges men and
women-husbands, wives, and their offspring-headfirst into the mystery
of Christ's death and resurrection. Spouses who believe in the "good
news" of redemption are not crippled by fear of the sufferings they must
endure. They are not afraid to surrender their "one body" to the Lord and
Giver of Life. In fact, when they do, they effect in some way what their
sacrament symbolizes. They recapitulate the entire mystery of creation and
redemption (see §77).86 For the marital embrace "bears in itself the sign of
the divine mystery of creation and redemption."87
When husband and wife are aware of the "great mystery" which their
union symbolizes and in which it participates, marriage "constitutes the
basis of hope for the person, that is, for man and woman, for parents and
children, for the human generations" (350). John Paul speaks of this hope
when, quoting again from Romans 8, he declares: "And if 'the whole cre-
ation has been groaning in travail together until now' (v. 22), a particular
hope accompanies the pains of the mother in labor." This is "the hope of
the 'revelation of the sons of God' (v. 22)" (350). Every newborn babe
who comes into the world bears within himself a spark of this hope. Rec-
ognizing this spark, however, can be difficult in a world engulfed by dark-
ness. John Paul affirms with St. Paul that the hope of redemption is "in the
world." It penetrates all creation. However, this hope is not "of the world."
It is of the Father. Herein lies the struggle. In order to live in the hope of
redemption, we must trust in the Father's love. But man has called the
Father's love into question since "the beginning."
Recall that original sin is the mystery of man turning his back on the
Father. "Original sin attempts, then, to abolish fatherhood, destroying its
rays which permeate the created world, placing in doubt the truth about
God who is Love."88 Through original sin, man casts God out of his heart,
detaching himself from what is "of the Father" so that all that remains in
him is what is "of the world." In this way, we witness the birth of human
lust (see §26). As the Apostle John tells us, lust "is not of the Father but is
of the world" (1 Jn 2: 16). However, the Pope tells us that marriage, includ-
ing the sexual love proper to spouses, is not "of the world" but "of the Fa-
ther." Deep in the human heart a battle rages for dominance between the
two-between that which is of the Father and that which is of the world. A
battle rages between love and lust, between hope and despondency, be-
tween life and all that opposes it.
Genesis tells us with certainty that fertility is a blessing from the Fa-
ther (see Gen 1:28). However, because of the suffering it entails, men and
86. If we do not hesitate to describe spouses as co-creators with God, could we not
also describe them in this sense as "co-redeemers" with God? (I owe this provocative
idea to my friend and colleague Steve Habisohn, founder and president of the GIFT
Foundation.)
87.11114/84, TB 416.
88. Crossing the Threshold of Hope. p. 228.
women often question the value of bringing another life into the world.
Without a living faith in Christ's resurrection, the suffering connected with
procreation can even lead people to the point of counting the original
blessing of fertility itself as a curse (see §24). Such people will often seek
to avoid procreation not by avoiding sexual intercourse, but by defrauding
this sacred act of its procreative potential. Closing their union in this way
to the Lord and Giver of Life, they close themselves to that which is "of
the Father," and there remains what is "of the world." There remains
sexual desire un-inspired by God. This cannot not be lust (see §26).
D. Procreation and the Eschatological Hope

In this way we see that the blessing of fertility forces us to choose
between that which is "of the Father" and that which is "of the world."
This choice has eternal consequences. The Holy Father quotes again from
the Apostle John: "On the one hand, indeed, 'the world passes away and
the lust thereof,' while on the other, 'he who does the will of God abides
forever' (1 Jn 2: 17)" (350). John Paul then states that the grace of "mar-
riage as a sacrament immutably ensures that man, male and female, by
dominating concupiscence, does the will of the Father. And he 'who does
the will of God remains forever' (1 Jn 2: 17). In this sense marriage as a
sacrament also bears within itself the germ of man's eschatological future"
(350 - 351). In other words, the chaste love of spouses, as proof of the in-
dwelling of the Holy Spirit, becomes a foreshadowing and even a "guaran-
tee" in some sense of eternal life (see Eph 1: 13 -14). As the Catechism
says, "Chastity is a promise of immortality. "89
In this context John Paul briefly revisits Christ's words about the fu-
ture resurrection. Recall that Christ's exclusion of marriage in the resur-
rection does not mean that the deep truth of marriage will be done away
with. It means it will be fulfilled in the Marriage of the Lamb (see §49).
Earthly m31Tiage serves as the indispensable precursor to heavenly mar-
riage. Of course, in order for marriage to prepare people for heaven, the
earthly model must accurately image the divine prototype. John Paul de-
scribes marriage as "the sacrament of the human beginning." As man's ori-
gin, conjugal union enables man to have a future not merely in the historical
dimensions, but also in the eschatological. Thus John Paul observes that ev-
ery man brings into the world his vocation to share in the future resurrection
because his origin lies in the marriage (more specifically, the sexual union)
of his parents. In this way marriage fulfills an "irreplaceable service" with
regard to man's ultimate destiny.
89. eee, n. 2347 .

Hope of eternal life- this is the living hope in which spouses partici-
pate when they become "one flesh" and open their bodies to life according
to the Spirit. They choose what is of the Father. In the face of all that as-
sails their hope, they choose life-not only in its earthly temporal dimen-
sion, but also in its heavenly, eternal dimension.
82. The Fusion of Spousal and Redemptive Love

December 15,1982 (TB 351- 354)
In his audience of December 15, 1982, John Paul summarizes and

concludes his analysis of that classic text from Ephesians 5. In doing so,
he takes us for yet another lap in his ever deepening spiral of reflections.
The Pope tells us that the "great mystery" St. Paul speaks of is above all
the mystery of Christ's union with the Church. But, according to the conti-
nuity of God's saving plan, the Apostle links this "great mystery" to the
primordial sacrament in which the two become "one flesh." Here John
Paul says we find ourselves in "the domain of the great analogy" which
presupposes and rediscovers the sacramentality of marriage. Marriage is
presupposed as "the sacrament of the human beginning" linked with the
whole mystery of creation. But it is "rediscovered as the fruit of the spou-
sal love of Christ and of the Church linked with the mystery of the re-
demption" (351).
A. The Unity of Spousal Love and Redemption

Presupposing the original meaning of marriage, St. Paul calls spouses
to "learn anew" this sacrament in light of the spousal unity of Christ and
the Church. This means modeling their lives and their unity not only on
the original unity of man and woman, but also and more so on the unity of
Christ and the Church. As John Paul states: "That original and stable im-
age of marriage as a sacrament is renewed when Christian spouses--con-
scious of the authentic profundity of the 'redemption of the body'-are
united 'out of reverence for Christ' (Eph 5:21)" (352). This is not just an
abstract theological concept. It is meant to be lived and experienced by
couples. Uniting "out of reverence for Christ" means uniting with a deep
respect and awe for the "great mystery" stamped in and revealed through
the nuptial meaning of the male and female body.
But notice the Pope says this is possible only when spouses are "con-
scious of the authentic profundity of the redemption of the body." In other
words, they must be conscious of the gift of the Holy Spirit poured out in
Christ's death and resurrection. They must allow the life and love of Christ
to vivify their entire body-soul personalities. To the extent that men and
women are not vivified in this way, the distortions of concupiscence will
continue to obscure the "great mystery" inscribed in their bodies. But to
the degree that spouses allow their lusts to be "crucified with Christ" (see
Gal 5:24), the grace poured out in and through the sacraments (including,
if not especially, the sacrament of marriage) can free spouses (and men
and women in general) from the blinding effects of concupiscence. The
more we cooperate with this grace, the more the scales fall off our eyes.
As this happens, we come more to see, experience and "feel" the true dig-
nity and nuptial meaning of the body as a revelation of the mystery of
Christ. Precisely in this way we gain that "reverence for Christ" of which
St. Paul speaks. In fact, John Paul boldly observes that this "reverence for
Christ" is nothing but a spiritually mature form of sexual attraction. 90
This is what authentic marital love affords. Spousal love is itself re-
demptive. The Pauline image of marriage "brings together the redemptive
dimension and the spousal dimension of love. In a certain sense it fuses
these two dimensions into one. Christ has become the spouse of the
Church, he has married the Church as a bride, because 'he has given him-
self up for her' (Eph 5:25)" (352). In the sacrament of marriage, both the
spousal and redemptive dimensions of love "permeate the life of the
spouses." In this way, the nuptial meaning of the body-and an authentic
reverence for it-is confirmed and in some sense, John Paul says, "newly
created." At the same time husband and wife-via their spousal-redemp-
tive love-"participate in God's own creative love. And they participate in
it both by the fact that, created in the image of God, they are called by
reason of this image to a particular union (communio personarum), and
because this same union has from the beginning been blessed with the
blessing of fruitfulness" (352).
B. Understanding Human Existence

John Paul says that the linking of the spousal significance ofthe body
with its "redemptive significance" is obviously important with regard to
marriage and the Christian vocation of spouses. But then he adds that it
also "is equally essential and valid for the understanding of man in gen-
eral: for the fundamental problem of understanding him and for the self-
comprehension of his being in the world" (352 - 353). This is another one
of those striking statements that almost stops the reader in his tracks. Ac-
cording to John Paul II, the meaning of human existence is contained right
90. See 7/4/84, TB 379.

here: in Ephesians 5 where St. Paul links the spousal significance of the
body from Genesis 2:24 (the two become "one flesh") with the redemptive
significance of the body revealed by Christ's union with the Church. John
Paul believes that the "great mystery" of Christ's union with the Church
"obliges us" to link the spousal significance of the body with its redemp-
tive significance. In this link, John Paul reiterates that all men and women
"find the answer to the question concerning the meaning of 'being a
body'''-which is the meaning of being a human being (353).
Our creation as male and female-our sexuality-is inextricably in-
tertwined with the question we all have about the meaning of life. Sexual-
ity, as John Paul says, is "profoundly inscribed in the essential structure of
the human person" (353). And it is a call "from the beginning" for men
and women to participate in the divine nature by loving as God loves-in
a fruitful communion of persons (communio personarum). This is the
deepest meaning of human existence: We are created by eternal Love and
Communion, to participate in eternal Love and Communion. This is the
spousal significance of the body. Yet, because of sin, we cannot fulfill the
meaning of our existence unless we are redeemed. Christ's incarnate union
with the Church affords this redemption and this is the redemptive signifi-
cance of the body. Thus in the spousal-redemptive significance of the body
lies the very meaning of human existence.
Love, in a word, is man's origin, vocation, and destiny. While Love
in its divine mystery is purely spiritual, in its revelation and human real-
ization it is always incarnational. This mystery of love and communion
was revealed in the original spousal significance of the body. But the
body's original meaning is only "completed," John Paul tells us, in the re-
demptive significance of Christ's incarnate union with the Church. Christ
initiates his spousal-redemptive love as a gift. We are created to receive it,
but never forced to do so. If we engage our freedom and open ourselves to
the gift, like a bride we conceive that gift within us. Life then becomes
thanksgiving (eucharistia) for the gift received, and we experience an in-
cessant desire to extend the divine-human communio personarum to the
ends of the earth.
C. Spousal Love Embraces the Universe

The "great mystery" of spousal and redemptive love is clearly reca-
pitulated (although differently) in the vocations to marriage and celibacy.
However, John Paul stresses that the spousal and redemptive meanings of
the body pertain to everyone in every human situation. They are not only
lived in marriage and celibacy for the kingdom, he says. They are lived in
many "diverse ways of life and in diverse situations: ... for example, in the
many forms of human suffering, indeed, in the very birth and death of
man" (354). Spousal love marks all of human life, and maniage provides
the paradigm for all of human life. No one is excluded from this "great
mystery." It embraces "every man, and, in a certain sense, the whole of
creation" (353). John Paul goes so far as to say that through "the new cov-
enant of Christ with the Church, marriage is again inscribed in that 'sacra-
ment of man' which embraces the universe" (354).
Everyone without exception is called to the "great sacrament" of
Christ's union with the Church. Maniage is organically inscribed in this
new sacrament of redemption just as it was inscribed in the sacrament of
creation. This means that the sacrament of marriage remains "a living and
vivifying part" of the process of salvation "to the measure of the definitive
fulfillment of the kingdom of the Father" (354).
In all of this John Paul wants to underscore yet again the profound
unity-the maniage of sorts-between creation and redemption. When we
take this unity and continuity seriously, the implications multiply: We rec-
ognize a profound and original unity between nature and grace (see §78),
between God and man (see §12), between man and woman (see §14), and
between man and all creation (see §52). We also recognize that all of these
unities-all of these marriages-find their foundation and draw their
efficacy from the ultimate unity, the ultimate maniage: that of the divine
and human natures in the incarnate person of Christ. He is "the center of
the universe and of history."91 Christ "fully reveals man to himself and
makes his supreme calling clear."92 Only when we take the profound link
between creation and redemption seriously does the meaning of our llU-
manity and our lofty vocation as men and women come into focus.
As John Paul states: "Man, who 'from the beginning' is male and fe-
male, should seek the meaning of his existence and the meaning of his hu-
manity by reaching out to the mystery of creation through the reality of
redemption. There one finds also the essential answer to the question on
the significance of the human body, and the significance of the masculinity
and femininity of the human person" (354). It is Christ. We were created
from the beginning as male and female and called to communion to pre-
pare us for communion with Christ.

92. Gaudiurn et Spes, n. 22.
83. The Language of the Body and the Sacramental Sign

January 5, 12, 19, 1983 (TB 354-363)
Early in this cycle of reflections John Paul said he would explore the
meaning of sacrament, particularly the sacrament of marriage, first in the
dimension of covenant and grace (this is the divine dimension), and then
in the dimension of the sacramental sign (this is the human dimension)
(see §65). Having explored the former, the Holy Father now devotes the
five remaining audiences in this cycle to the latter. Of course, John Paul
has already said much about the nature of marriage as a sacramental sign.
Still, he wants to penetrate more deeply into the very "structure" of the
sign and define it more specifically. By doing so it seems he brings a wel-
come resolution to a centuries-old theological discussion. What visible re-
ality of marriage (human dimension) symbolizes and effects the invisible
mystery (divine dimension) of grace?
A. Debate About the Sign

Theological debates about what constituted marriage as a sacramen-
tal sign came to the fore around the tenth and eleventh centuries when
marriage was placed more fully under the jurisdiction of the Church. Most
theologians and canonists followed the lead of Hugh of St. Victor who
posited the sign of malTiage in the words of consent (the wedding vows)
and their mutual exchange in the rite of marriage. Other currents of
thought posited the sign in the bodily act of consummation. The latter
view was resisted for various reasons. For example, how would such a
view account for the virginal malTiage of Joseph and Mary? Furthermore,
emphasis on consummation was resisted, no doubt, at least in some cases,
because of the "interpretation of suspicion" and its inability to imagine the
sexual act as a participation in grace .
• This debate was closely related with the question about what estab-
lished the indissoluble bond of marriage. Roman law recognized the mutual
consent as the "contractual moment" of marriage. However, the various
cultures of northern Europe being evangelized in the tenth and eleventh
centuries recognized marriage either at the moment of betrothal (when the
father handed the bride over to the husband) or at the moment of consum-
mation. In light of these debates, Pope Alexander III decreed that marriage
is ratified at the moment of consent. However, marriage is not constituted in
its full reality until the moment of consummation. In some cases, therefore,
prior to sexual union a marriage can be dissolved by papal dispensation. 93
93 . See canons 1061, 1142. For an ovelview of the history outlined here see Peter J.
Elliot, What God Has Joined (Homebush, Australia: St. PaullAlba House, 1990), pp. 73 -117.
John Paul's faith in the real power of the redemption of the body re-
moves the taint of suspicion from the sexual act. For him, there is no ques-
tion that the sexual union of spouses is meant to be a participation in
grace. He has already affirmed that God intends the "one flesh" union and
its accompanying pleasure as a vehicle of the Holy Spirit in manied life-
of the specific grace of the sacrament ofmaniage (see §81).
Does this mean he simply sides with those more daring theologians
who posited the sign of maniage in the act of consummation? For John
Paul conjugal intercourse certainly plays a fundamental role in under-
standing the sacramental sign of maniage. He has already said as much in
various ways throughout his catechesis (see §§22, 29, 31, 35, 77). But
John Paul does not resolve the debate by picking sides. He creatively dem-
onstrates that, in effect, both "sides" are conect. The key to this innovation
lies in understanding the rich and mysterious "language of the body."
B. Words of the Spirit Expressed in the Flesh

All that John Paul has said about the body and its nuptial meaning is
expressed through the body's "language." According to John Paul, the
body "speaks." It speaks the deepest truth of man's personal existence as
male and female and of his call to love as God loves in a life-giving com-
munion of persons. And man "cannot, in a certain sense, express this sin-
gular language of his personal existence and of his vocation without the
body" (359). From the beginning, man was constituted in such a way as to
express spiritual realities in and through his flesh. This means that "the
most profound words of the spirit-words of love, of giving, of fidelity-
demand an adequate 'language ofthe body.' And without that, they cannot
be fully expressed" (359). To divorce the language of the spirit from the
language of the body, as John Paul says elsewhere, breaks "the personal
unity of soul and body [and] strikes at God's creation itself at the level of
the deepest interaction of nature and person. "94
What bearing does this have on determining the structure of the sac-
ramental sign of maniage? John Paul says that the exchange of wedding
vows gives an intentional expression on the level of intellect and will, of
consciousness and of the heart to the spiritual reality of love, of giving,
and of fidelity. However-if, according to the Pope's thesis, the body and
it alone is capable of making spiritual realities visible-the spoken lan-
guage of the vows is not "complete" without an adequate and conespond-
ing language of the body. The spiritual expression of intellect and will
must have a conesponding bodily expression. What is that conesponding
bodily expression? Conjugal intercourse.
94. Familiaris Consortio, n. 32.

The marital embrace, one might say, is where the words of the wed-
ding vows become flesh. The "language" inscribed in sexual intercourse
and expressed by those who perfOlTIl the sexual act is and should always
be the language of wedding vows. John Paul states: "Indeed the very
words 'I take you as my wife-my husband' ... can be fulfilled only by
means of conjugal intercourse." With conjugal intercourse "we pass to the
reality which corresponds to these words. 95 Both the one and the other ele-
ment," he says, "are important in regard to the structure of the sacramental
sign." And this sign, the Pope reminds us, "expresses and at the same time
effects the saving reality of grace and of the covenant" (355) .
• St. Bonaventure offered a profound reflection on the interrelation-

ship of the exchange of vows and consummation in marriage. He taught
that in the moment of consent when spouses commit their will to marriage,
they are with Christ in his agony in the garden. There Christ committed his
will to "giving himself up" for his Bride. In the moment of consummation,
spouses are with Christ on the cross, living out in their bodies what they
committed to at the altar, just as Christ is living out what he committed to
in the garden.96
John Paul concludes that the "sacramental sign is constituted in the

order of intention insofar as it is simultaneously constituted in the real or-
der" (355). He continues by saying that the words spoken by the bride and
groom "would not, per se, constitute the sacramental sign of marriage" un-
less these words corresponded to the awareness of the body, linked to their
masculinity and femininity. Here we must recall the whole series of our
previous analyses of Genesis. Most specifically, the Holy Father recalls
that the Creator himself instituted conjugal intercourse from the very be-
ginning according to those familiar words of Genesis 2:24. Hence, the
Pope affirms that the structure of the sacramental sign remains essentially
the same as "in the beginning." It is expressed in '''the language of the
body' inasmuch as the man and the woman, who through marriage should
become one flesh, express in this sign the reciprocal gift of masculinity
and femininity as the basis of the conjugal union of the persons" (356).
Through their mutual exchange of vows, in fact, "the man and the woman
express their willingness to become 'one flesh' according to the eternal
truth established in the mystery of creation" (355) . Recall John Paul's
95 . See ccc, n. 1627.

96. See St. Bonaventure, "On the Integrity of Matrimony," Reviloquium, Part VI,
chapter 13.
The Sacrarnentality ofMarriage 381
statement that marriage only corresponds to the vocation of Christians if

they chose it just as the Creator instituted it "from the beginning" (see §59).
This means the exchange of vows is a sacramental sign by reason of
its content-by its expressed willingness to actuate the vows in "one
flesh." However, John Paul tells us that in and of itself the exchange of
consent is "merely the sign of the coming into being of marriage. And the
coming into being of marriage is distinguished from its consummation to
the extent that without this consummation the marriage is not yet consti-
tuted in its full reality" (355). While marriage is contracted at the moment
of consent, it is not fully constituted as a marriage until the moment of
consummation.
C. The Interplay of Form and Matter

According to the scholastic tradition, sacraments are constituted by
the creative interplay of the words spoken (the "form") and the physical
reality (the "matter").97 The vows make up the "form" of the sacrament of
marriage and the bodies of husband and wife make up the "matter." Ac-
cordingly, as John Paul says: "Both of them, as man and woman, being the
ministers of the sacrament in the moment of contracting marriage constitute
at the same time the full and real visible sign of the sacrament itself' (356).
The words spoken correspond to the "human subjectivity of the en-
gaged couple" in their masculinity and femininity and in their call to be-
come "one flesh." In the marital embrace the "form" and the "matter" (their
vows and their bodies) in some sense become one and the same sacramen-
tal mystery-one and the same sacramental sign. "In this way," John Paul
says, "the enduring and ever new 'language of the body' is not only the
'substratum' but, in a certain sense, the constitutive element of the com-
munion of the persons" (356). Of course, the communion of persons in
marriage does not refer only to the specific moment of joining in "one
flesh." Conjugal intercourse is meant to be a sign that encompasses and
sums up (con-summates) the whole reality of married life. "The man and
woman, as spouses, bear this sign throughout the whole of their lives and
remain as that sign until death." At the beginning of their lives together, the
"liturgy of the sacrament of marriage gives a form to that sign: directly, dur-
ing the sacramental rite ... ; indirectly, throughout the whole oflife" (357).
So, does the liturgical exchange of vows make up the sign? Do the
man and woman themselves make up the sign? Does conjugal intercourse
make up the sign? Does the whole of married life make up the sign? Yes,
yes, yes, and yes. The entire reality of the gift of man and woman to each
97. See 10/20/82, TB 341.

other "until death" is the unrepeatable sign of marriage. And, as John Paul
says, this is a "sign of multiple content" (363). It is first established by the
liturgical rite in the exchange of consent, and it is then embodied and
brought to fulfillment in marital intercourse. In tum we come to realize
that this "is not a mere immediate and passing sign, but a sign looking to
the future which produces a lasting effect, namely the marriage bond, one
and indissoluble" (363). In its multiple content, the sacramental sign of
marriage "is a visible and efficacious sign of the covenant with God in
Christ, that is, of grace which in this sign should become a part of them as
'their own special gift' (according to the expression of the 1 Corinthians
7:7)" (356).
84. The Prophetism of the Body

January 12,19,26,1983 (TB 357-365)
The sacramental sign of marriage is expressed through the language

of the irrevocable self-giving of man and woman to each other. It is a gift
given "in good times and bad, in sickness and in health, ... all the days of
my life." This language of the spirit-ofthe heart, will, and intellect-has
a corresponding "language of the body." This body-language is expressed
throughout married life, but especially in the act of marital intercourse. As
the Holy Father says in his Letter to Families: "All married life is a gift;
but this becomes most evident when the spouses, in giving themselves to
each other in love, bring about that encounter which makes them 'one
flesh. "'98 This confirms the Pope's statement that "the 'language of the
body' also enters essentially into the structure of marriage as a sacramental
sign" (357). Just as the body is the visible sign of a person's soul, the "one
body" that spouses become serves in some way as the visible sign of their
marriage's "soul." In tum, if the whole of married life is a sign, we might
say that conjugal intercourse is the sign of that sign.
A. The Body Proclaims God s Covenant Love

Although John Paul gives a fresh voice to this idea of the body pos-
sessing a language, he points out that it has a long biblical tradition. This
tradition begins in Genesis (especially 2:23-25), passes through the
prophets, and finds its definitive culmination in Paul's Letter to the
Ephesians (see Eph 5:21-33). John Paul believes that the prophetic books
of the Old Testament have a particular importance for understanding mar-
riage in the dimension of sign. In the text of the prophets the body speaks

the language of God's covenant love for his people. Based on this tradi-
tion, John Paul says we can even "speak of a specific 'prophetism of the
body' both because of the fact that we find this analogy especially in the
prophets, and also in regard to its very content. Here, the 'prophetism of
the body' signifies precisely the 'language of the body'" (357).
The analogy the prophets use seems to have two levels. "On the first
and fundamental level, the prophets present the Covenant between God
and Israel as a marriage (which also pennits us to understand marriage it-
self as a covenant between husband and wife)" (357 -358). If other books
of the Old Testament tend to present Yahweh as the Lord of absolute do-
minion, the prophets present "the stupendous dimension of this 'domin-
ion,' which is the spousal dimension. In this way, the absolute of dominion
is the absolute of love" (358). Thus, in the prophets, a breach of the Cov-
enant involves not only a breaking of the law of the supreme Legislator,
but infidelity and betrayal of God's love. This "is a blow which even
pierces his heart as Father, as Spouse and as Lord" (358).
This more fundamental level of the analogy reveals a second level
which is precisely the language of the body. If God's covenant love is pre-
sented as a spousal love, the language of the body is meant to express
faithfully that same covenant love of God. It is in this way that the lan-
guage of the body is understood as prophetic. As John Paul points out: "A
prophet is one who expresses in human words the truth coming from God,
one who speaks this truth in the place of God, in his name and in a certain
sense with his authority" (361). This is precisely what God created the hu-
man body to do. From the beginning God created the body to proclaim his
own truth, his own mystery of life and love-of communion.
B. Man: The Author of His Own Language

However, John Paul points out several times that the body itself is
not the author of this prophetic language. The language of the body, to be
sure, has an objective dimension-a meaning given by God which is pre-
inscribed in the body, so to speak. However, man must take up this lan-
guage as its subject. In this way, John Paul says, he becomes the "author"
of the language of his own body. If he is to speak the truth with his body,
every man must ensure that the subjective language he authors corre-
sponds with its objective meaning.
Here we glimpse the very foundations of morality for man. Through-
out his catechesis, John Paul-in accord with modem sensitivities-fully
recognizes man as a personal subject. In this context he affirms it again:
"Man ...is a conscious and capable subject of self-detennination. Only on
this basis can he be the author of the 'language of the body'" (367). How-
ever, man's liberation as a subject comes not by a self-assertive divorce
from objective reality. It comes by wedding himself to it- not because it is

imposed upon him, but because he trusts in it and desires it freely. He sub-
jects himself to it as a subject (see §§8, 9, 21, 25, 38, 46). If man's "au-
thorship" of the language of his own body speaks of his freedom to choose
between good and evil, it does not thereby give him authorship over what
is good and evil. This is a tree from which man cannot eat, lest he die (see
Gen 2: 17). The moment man divorces himself from the objective good and
seeks to author his own reality is precisely the moment of abuse of his
own subjectivity. It is the moment of broken trust in his Creator and of in-
fidelity to the covenant (see §26).
Recall that the prophets use the language of the body both in praising
God's fidelity to his covenant and in condemning Israel's infidelity as
"adultery." In this way the prophets outline ethical categories, setting
moral good and evil in mutual opposition. This has immediate implica-
tions for the union of man and woman. In their relationship "it is the body
itself which 'speaks'; it speaks by means of its masculinity and femininity,
it speaks in the mysterious language of the personal gift, it speaks ... both in
the language of fidelity, that is, of love, and also in the language of conju-
gal infidelity, that is, of 'adultery'" (359).
What does all this mean? If man, as a self-determining subject, is the
author of his own body's language, he can choose to speak the truth. But
he can also choose to speak lies. In other words, if the body is prophetic,
the Pope points out that we must carefully distinguish between true and
false prophets. John Paul remarks that the categories of truth and falsity
are essential to every language. Everyone can recognize that it is possible
to speak a lie with the body. The Scriptures give a plain example in Judas'
kiss. Here an expression of love became instead an act of betrayal.
C. Speaking the Language of the Body in Truth

John Paul says that when spouses exchange the words of consent
they explicitly confirm the essential "truth" of the language of the body
and implicitly exclude any "falsity." In other words, they commit to being
true prophets according to the original biblical meaning of joining in "one
flesh." The body speaks the truth "through conjugal love, fidelity, and in-
tegrity." It speaks lies "by all that is the negation of conjugal love, fidelity,
and integrity" (360-361). John Paul says that in this way the essential
truth of the sign will remain organically linked to the morality of the
spouses' marital conduct. Recall that we can speak of moral good and evil
in the marital/sexual relationship "according to whether... or not it has the
character of the truthful sign."99
99 . 8/27/80, TB 141-142.
In this context, John Paul specifically reminds us that the language of

consent in marriage-to which the language of the body in sexual inter-
course corresponds-must include an affirmative answer to the following
question. As an essential part ofthe liturgical rite, the priest or deacon asks
the couple: "Are you willing to accept responsibly and with love the chil-
dren that God may give you ... ?" If the language of the consent says "yes"
but the language of the body says "no" to this question, would we not en-
counter a specific negation of conjugal love, fidelity, and integrity?
As the author of his own body's language, man must learn to reread
the nuptial meaning of the body as integrally inscribed in each person's
masculinity or femininity. "A correct rereading 'in truth' is an indispens-
able condition to proclaim this truth, that is, to institute the visible sign of
marriage as a sacrament" (361). Indeed, John Paul says that "the essential
element for marriage as a sacrament is the 'language of the body' in its
aspect of truth. It is precisely by means of that, that the sacramental sign
is, in fact, constituted" (360).
Through the whole "ensemble of the 'language of the body' ... the
spouses decide to speak to each other as ministers of the Sacrament of
Marriage" (363). They not only proclaim the truth coming from God. John
Paul even says that in some sense they proclaim this truth in God's name.
In constituting the marital sign in the moment of consent and fulfilling it in
the moment of consummation, the spouses "perform an act of prophetic
character. They confirm in this way their participation in the prophetic
mission of the Church received from Christ" (361).
By speaking the language of the body in truth, spouses "also arrive
in a certain sense at the very sources from which that sign on each occa-
sion draws its prophetic eloquence and its sacramental power. One must
not forget," the Pope insists, "that the' language of the body,' before being
spoken by the lips of the spouses, the ministers of marriage as a sacrament
of the Church, was spoken by the word of the living God, beginning from
the book of Genesis, through the prophets of the Old Covenant, until the
author of the letter to the Ephesians" (362). Hence, John Paul reaffirms
that this enduring language of the body carries within itself all the rich-
ness and depth of the divine-human mystery: first of creation and then
of redemption.
85. Constituting the Sign in Love and Integrity

January 19,26; February 9, 1983 (TB 363-368)
The entire question of the sacramental sign of marriage has "a highly
anthropological character," the Holy Father tells us. "We construct it on
the basis of theological anthropology and in particular on ... the 'theology

of the body'" (365). In tum, the understanding of the sacramental sign as
John Paul presents it confinns his theological anthropology, his specific in-
terpretation of man.
The body is understood as a "theology" specifically because God cre-
ated it from the beginning to be a sign of his own divine mystery. He cre-
ated it as such in its sexuality-its masculinity and femininity-and the
call to form "one body." We know, however, that with original sin the
body almost lost its capacity to reveal the divine mystery. The man of
concupiscence is almost blind to the value of the body as a sacramental
sign. How then is he to "reread" the language of the body in truth? Pre-
cisely at this point we stand at the thresholds of two competing and irrec-
oncilable anthropologies. We either open to the possibility of rebirth in the
Holy Spirit, or we condemn man with an irreversible suspicion.
A. Man Is Not Determined by Lust

Rereading the language of the body in truth is given as a task to the
man of concupiscence. But is such a man up to the task? Is the man of lust
not bound to falsify the language of the body? At this point John Paul re-
calls his reflections on "the masters of suspicion," who believe man is de-
tennined by lust and has no alternative but to lust (see §36). John Paul in-
sists again that the redemption of the body is not only a divine mystery,
but also-in Christ and through Christ-a human reality in every man.
Christ does not merely accuse the heart of lust in the Sermon on the
Mount. Above all, Christ calls the man of concupiscence to overcome the
lust in his heart through the ethos of redemption (see §29). Christ calls
man with tenderness and compassion, with mercy and forgiveness.
We see this foreshadowed already in the prophets. John Paul points
out that Hosea in particular "sets out in relief all the splendor of the Cov-
enant-of that marriage in which Yahweh manifests himself as a sensitive,
affectionate Spouse disposed to forgiveness, and at the same time, exigent
and severe."IOO Christ's words about lust are indeed severe. However, are
"we to fear the severity of these words, or rather have confidence in their
salvific content, in their power?"IOI They have power to save us because
the man who speaks them is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of
the world. This means that the man of concupiscence need not be deter-
mined by lust. If such were the case, man would "be condemned to essen-
tial falsifications." He would be "condemned to suspect himself and others
100. 1112/83, TB 359.

10 l. 10/8/80, TB 159 (see §34).
in regard to the truth of the language of the body. Because of the concu-
piscence of the flesh he could only be 'accused,' but he could not be really
'called'" (367).
However, John Paul assures us that "the 'hermeneutics of the sacra-
ment'''-that is, the interpretation of man in light of the grace poured out
through the sacrament-"permits us to draw the conclusion that man is al-
ways essentially 'called' and not merely 'accused'" (368). The Pope in-
sists, therefore, that concupiscence does not destroy the capacity to reread
the language of the body in truth. In fact, the light of the Gospel and of the
New Covenant revealed in Christ's body enables us to reread the true lan-
guage of the body "in an ever more mature and fuller way" (366). Thus,
John Paul affirms that despite the heritage of original sin, men and women
are able-from the evangelical and Christian perspective of the problem-
to constitute the sacramental sign in fidelity and integrity. And they are
able to do so "as an enduring sign: 'To be faithful to you always injoy and
in sorrow, in sickness and in health, and to love and honor you all the days
of my life'" (367).
B. Speaking the Truth Day by Day

Spouses establish this enduring sign at the moment of their consent
in the exchange of vows. However, that initial sign will be continually
completed by the "prophetism of the body." The spouses' bodies will con-
tinue to speak "for" and "on behalf of" each of them-in the name of and
with the authority of each of the spouses. In this way, in and through the
language of their bodies, husband and wife will carry out "the conjugal
dialogue" proper to their vocation. They will continually and mutually
speak of their commitment to their marital covenant (or their lack thereof).
John Paul says that spouses are called to form their life and their liv-
ing together as a communion of persons on the basis of that language of
the body. And, as he exclaims, "it is necessary that it be reread in tlUth!"
(364) In this sphere John Paul says that the spouses are both the cause and
the authors of conjugal actions which have "clear-cut meanings." These
"conjugal actions" refer, of course, to the acts of conjugal intercourse. But
they also refer to the whole "ensemble of the 'language of the body' in
which the spouses decide to speak to each other as ministers of the Sacra-
ment of Marriage" (363). The Pope observes that all the meanings of the
language of the body are initiated and synthesized in the content of conju-
gal consent. Day by day, the spouses draw from that synthesis the same
sign, identifying themselves with it throughout their lives. In all that they
do-and especially in the consummate expression of their union-the
spouses remain faithful to their original consent, or they fail to do so. They
deepen their love and fidelity, or they cheapen it.
In this way we see that there "is an organic bond between rereading in
truth ...the 'language of the body' and the consequent use of that language in
conjugal life" (364). Spouses "are called explicitly to bear witness-by us-
ing correctly the 'language of the body'-to spousal and procreative love, a
witness worthy of 'true prophets.' In this consists the true significance and
the grandeur of conjugal consent in the sacrament of the Church" (365).
"If concupiscence ... causes many 'errors' in rereading the 'language of the
body' ... nevertheless in the sphere of the ethos of redemption there always
remains the possibility of passing from 'error' to the 'truth' ... the possibil-
ity of.. .conversion from sin to chastity as an expression of a life according
to the Spirit" (366- 367).
With these words of hope from the Holy Father, we conclude our re-
flections on the fifth cycle of the theology of the body. Now we are well
prepared to understand the crucial importance of Humanae Vitae.
The Sacramentality of Marriage-In Review

1. In Cycle 5 of his catechesis on the body, John Paul seeks to resur-
rect the true meaning of Ephesians 5 and to demonstrate its fundamental
importance not only for understanding the sacramentality of marriage, but
for understanding the entire Christian mystery and the very meaning of
human existence.
2. The Apostle's outline of the nuptial mystery in Ephesians 5 reveals
man to himself in a particular way and makes him aware of his lofty voca-
tion. But man can only see the imp0l1ance of Ephesians 5 for his own ex-
istence to the extent that he participates in the experience of the incarnate
person. Modem rationalism, with its radical split between body and soul,
is perpetually at odds with the "great mystery" of Ephesians 5.
3. In a general way the body enters the very definition of "sacrament"
as a visible sign of the invisible. The body, then, through its sacramentality,
is an efficacious sign of grace; it is "the hinge of salvation." Thus, man
need not shed his skin in his quest for transcendence. He need not eschew
his body and sexuality. This is the affirmation of Ephesians 5- bodiliness
and nuptial union are a "great mystery" that refer to Christ and the Church.
4. In calling wives to "be subject" to their husbands, St. Paul appeals to
the custom of the day in order to inject this mentality with the mystery of
Christ's love for the Church and the vocation of Christians to "walk in love,
as Christ loved us." In this light, the Apostle calls spouses to "be subject to
one another out of reverence for Christ." Subjection within marriage, then,
is not one-sided, but mutual. And it must be modeled on the love of Christ.
5. When viewed through the paradigm of the "gift," we come to un-
derstand that to be "subject" to one's spouse means to live the sincere gift
of self. In tum, mutual subjection means reciprocal self-donation. Accord-
ing to the spousal analogy, the husband must image Christ in his self-giv-
ing and the wife is called to image the Church in her receptivity to the gift,
and in her giving of herself back to her husband.
6. Since the husband is to love his wife "as Christ loved the Church,"
this clearly excludes male domination. This results from original sin.
When properly understood, the wife's "submission" to her husband signi-
fies above all the experiencing of love. This seems even more obvious be-
cause the wife's "submission" is related to the submission of the Church to
Christ, which certainly consists in experiencing his love.
7. The spousal analogy operates in two directions. To a certain degree
marriage illuminates the mystery of Christ and the Church. At the same
time Christ's relationship with the Church unveils the essential truth about
marriage. The very essence of marriage captures a particle of the Christian
mystery. If it were otherwise, the analogy would hang suspended in a void.
8. The spousal analogy is intimately related with the head-body anal-
ogy. In becoming "one body," the spouses almost form "one organism,"
like a head and a body. In this way they almost become "one subject"
while maintaining an essential "bi-subjectivity." This is a unity-in-plural-
ity through the mystery of love in which the "I" of the other in some sense
becomes one's own. In this way "carnal love" images the Trinity and ex-
presses the language of agape.
9. Ephesians 5 shows that the purpose of Christ's self-gift is our sancti-
fication. Christ cleanses us "by the washing of water with the word." This is
a reference to the "nuptial bath" of Baptism, which applies and extends the
spousal and redemptive love of Christ to all who are bathed so that we might
become a glorious bride, "without spot or wrinkle or any such thing."
10. By using physical beauty as a metaphor for holiness, St. Paul
demonstrates a masterful understanding of the sacramentality of the body.
For him, the human body indicates attributes of the moral, spiritual, and
supernatural order. St. Paul explains the mystery of sanctification, the
mystery of Christ's redemptive love, and the mystery of humanity'S union
with the divine by means of the resemblance of the body and of the spou-
sal union in "one flesh."
11. Love obliges the husband to desire his wife's beauty, to appreci-
ate it and to care for it. A husband who loves his wife "as Christ loved the
Church" wants all that is good in her to blossom and radiate through her
body. He sees even in her blemishes and disfigurations an "echo" of the
beginning and the hope of eternal glory. Christ saw his Bride covered with
the blemishes and disfigurations of sin and loved her all the more.
12. The "nourishment" Christ offers his Bride is his own body in the
Eucharist. Thus, in Ephesians 5 we glimpse the manner in which the Eu-
charist indicates the specific character of nuptial love, especially of that
gift of self in "one flesh."
13. Since the time of Aquinas, the term "sacrament" has referred al-
most exclusively to the seven signs of grace instituted by Christ. Only in
the last century have theologians sought to recover the broader and more
ancient understanding of "sacrament" as the revelation and accomplishment
of the mystery hidden in God from eternity. If "sacrament" is synonymous
with "mystery," mystery connotes that which is hidden, and sacrament that
which is revealed.
14. The "great mystery" revealed by the sacrament is God's plan of
salvation for humanity. In some sense this is the central theme of divine
revelation. St. Paul indicates that the "one flesh" union of spouses has par-
ticipated in this "great mystery" from the beginning. His linking of Gen-
esis 2:24 with Christ's union with the Church is the keystone of Ephesians
5. It establishes the continuity between the most ancient covenant and the
definitive covenant.
15. The sacrament manifests the divine mystery in a sign which serves
not only to proclaim the mystery, but accomplish it in man. The image of
conjugal union in Genesis 2:24 speaks of the most ancient way in which the
divine mystery was made visible while the union of Christ and the Church
speaks of the definitive sign of this mystery given in the fullness of time. To
his special merit, St. Paul makes of these two signs one great sign.
16. Conjugal union foreshadowed the Incarnation right from the be-
ginning. Thus, the visible sign of marriage-inasmuch as it is analogically
linked to the visible sign of Christ and the Church, the summit of God's
revelation-transfers God's eternal plan of love into history and becomes
the "foundation of the whole sacramental order."
17. Christ is at the heart of the "great mystery" proclaimed in
Ephesians. In him we have been blessed "with every spiritual blessing" and
chosen "before the creation of the world." The eternal mystery is accom-
plished in Christ and through Christ. Christ reveals the mystery of divine
love. Christ is the meaning of embodiment and marriage. Christ is the mean-
ing of the moral instruction given by Paul. Christ is the center of everything.
18. The "great mystery" is accomplished in the mode of gift, of the
spousal donation of Christ himself to his Bride. We participate in the eter-
nal mystery of love and communion when we open ourselves to the gift
and accept it through faith. The divine mystery is at work in us under the
veil of faith and the veil of a sign that makes the Invisible visible.
19. The spousal love of God for humanity was only "half open" in
the Old Testament. In Ephesians 5 it is fully revealed. Paul presents new
revealed moments unknown prior to Christ. We now learn with clarity
what Isaiah already intuited: that there is a certain parallel between God as
"spouse" and God as redeemer. Christ's spousal gift of self to his Bride is
equivalent to carrying out the work of redemption.
20. The spousal analogy is certainly not adequate or complete, yet it
contains a characteristic of the mystery not emphasized by any other anal-
ogy in the Bible-the aspect of God's "total" gift of selfto man. In Christ,
God gives all that he can give of himself to man considering man's limited
faculties as a creature. In this way, the spousal analogy provides a vivid
image of the radical character of grace.
21. Man was chosen in Christ "before the foundations of the world."
Thus, the grace of original innocence was accomplished in reference to
Christ, while anticipating chronologically his coming in the body. Christ's
coming, therefore, is not merely the result of sin. God's eternal plan for
man in Christ remains the same yesterday, today, and forever. The redemp-
tion became the source of grace for man after sin and, in a certain sense, in
spite of sin.
22. Genesis 2:24 constitutes marriage as the primordial sacrament in-
asmuch as it is the central point of the "sacrament of creation." All cre-
ation makes God's mystery visible in some way. Yet the "sacrament of cre-
ation" reaches its highest expression in man, male and female, who fully
realizes himself through the sincere gift of self. The interior dimension of
the gift in man is revealed through the grace-filled awareness of the nuptial
meaning of the body.
23. The primordial sacrament contains a supernatural efficacy be-
cause already in creation man was "chosen in Christ." Hence the original
"sacrament of creation" draws its efficacy from Christ. Marriage is in-
tended, therefore, not only to advance the work of creation through procre-
ation. God also intends that it serve to extend his eternal plan of love and
election in Christ to further generations.
24. The heritage of sin dimmed the beatifying experience of original

unity. As the primordial sacrament, marriage was deprived of its supernatu-
ral efficacy. Yet even in the state of man's hereditary sinfulness, marriage al-
ways remained the figure of that sacrament-the platform for actuating
God's eternal designs. The original unity in the body still molds human his-
tory, even though it lost the clarity of the sign of salvation.
25. The "sacrament of redemption" refers to the totality of the new
gracing of man in Christ. St. Paul links it with Genesis 2:24, showing that
it takes on the same form in some sense as the primordial sacrament. The
sacraments of creation and redemption are actuated in the visibility of
their signs-through the union of the first Adam and Eve in creation, and
through the union of the New Adam and Eve (Christ and the Church) in
redemption. These signs, which st. Paul made one "great sign," refer to
the entire work of creation and redemption.
26. Christ's spousal relationship with the Church, as the analogy
would indicate, has both a unitive and a life-giving dimension. The unitive
dimension is completed when the Church receives and responds to the gift
of her Bridegroom, just as Eve completed her husband as a "helper fit for
him." In tum, the Church manifests the life-giving dimension in her fruit-
fulness and spiritual motherhood.
27. The Apostle's linking of the original union of spouses with the
union of Christ and the Church is not merely a metaphor, but speaks of a
real renewal of that which constituted the salvific content of the primordial
sacrament. In other words, the grace of the primordial sacrament, which
was lost through sin, is now resurrected in the sacrament of redemption.
28. In some way Christ assumes into the whole economy ofredemp-
tion the same nuptial imprint which permeated creation. As a primordial
sacrament, marriage is assumed and inserted from its very bases into the
integral structure of the new sacramental economy. Thus, marriage arises
from redemption in the form of a prototype. In some way all of the sacra-
ments find their prototype in marriage as the primordial sacrament.
29. Marriage constitutes an exhortation to participate consciously in
the redemption of the body. Spouses who are committed to doing so can
progressively rediscover, reclaim, and live according to their original dig-
nity. They can-by daily taking up the redeeming cross of Christ-experi-
ence a real measure of the harmony, peace, and happiness of original unity.
30. Christian ethos can be explained philosophically but, ultimately,
it is only fully tenable to those who are living the grace of a redeemed life
in Christ. Christ assigns the ethos of redemption to man's heart, his con-
science, his looks, and behavior. The sacred and personal dignity of the
body forms the basis of all morality, sexual or otherwise. When we are
vivified by the Holy Spirit, we are consciously aware of this sacred dignity
and do not desire to profane it.
31. There is a deep link between the call to become "one flesh" in
Genesis 2:24 and the teaching of Gaudium et Spes 24 that man can only
find himself "through the sincere gift of self." The egotistic gratification of
concupiscence is incompatible with such self-giving. Yet as much as
concupiscence distorts the heart and its desires, so much does "life accord-
ing to the Holy Spirit" permit men and women to find again the true free-
dom of the gift in their bodily union.
32. St. Paul's words-"it is better to marry than to be aflame with
passion"-do not justify indulging concupiscence. "To be aflame" signi-
fies a disorder of the passions, whereas "to marry" signifies the ethical or-
der and the ethos of redemption. Marriage is meant to be the meeting place
of eros with ethos-a meeting which bears fruit in purity of heart.
33. The mutual union in "one flesh" and its accompanying gratifica-
tion is meant to be an expression of "life according to the Spirit"-of the
specific grace of the sacrament of marriage. Authentic gratification, how-
ever, is not egoistic, nor is it ever closed in on itself. If conjugal union is to
be "according to the Spirit," spouses must open their union to that Spirit
who is the Lord and Giver of Life.
34. Every child conceived of conjugal union not only reproduces the
mystery of creation, but also proclaims the hope of redemption. Openness
to life in conjugal intercourse, therefore, has not only a temporal dimen-
sion, but also an eternal dimension. The blessing of fertility forces men
and women to choose between what is "of the Father" and what is "of the
world." "The world passes away and the lust thereof; but he who does the
will of God abides forever" (1 In I: 17).
35. In light of Ephesians 5, spouses are called to model their lives not
only on the original unity of man and woman, but even more so on the unity
of Christ and the Church. In this way the original meaning of marriage is
presupposed and rediscovered, but only if spouses consciously experi-
ence the redemption of the body. Authentic spousal love is itself redemp-
tive. St. Paul, in some sense, fuses these two dimensions oflove into one.
36. The linking of the spousal significance of the body with its redemp-
tive significance is obviously important with regard to marriage, but it is
equally essential if man is to comprehend the very meaning of his existence in
the world. Man is called in his body to love as God loves. This is the spousal
significance of the body. Yet, because of sin, he cannot fulfill the meaning of
his existence unless he is redeemed. Christ's union with the Church affords
this redemption, and this is the redemptive significance of the body.
37. By reaching out to the mystery of creation through the reality of

redemption, we discover the meaning of human existence, the meaning of
sexuality, and the meaning of maniage. Spousal love marks all of human
life. In Christ's union with the Church, maniage is again inscribed in that
"sacrament of man" which embraces the universe.
38. The wedding vows give an intentional expression to the spiritual
reality of marital love and fidelity. Yet, these profound words of the spirit
demand a conesponding "language of the body." The words of the wed-
ding vows, in fact, can be fulfilled only by means of conjugal intercourse.
Only in the act of consummation is maniage constituted in its full reality.
Both the vows and the marital embrace, then, are important in regard to
the structure of the sacramental sign of maniage.
39. The sacramental sign of maniage is a sign of multiple content. It
is first established by the liturgical rite in the exchange of consent and is
then consummated in marital intercourse. In tum, the sacramental sign en-
dures in the man and woman themselves and their indissoluble bond
throughout their lives.
40. Since the language of the body proclaims the mystery of God's
life and love, we can speak of a specific "prophetism of the body." Man, as
a subject, becomes the author of this language. He can choose to speak the
truth with his body, but he can also choose to speak lies. If the body is "pro-
phetic," we must carefully distinguish between true and false prophets.
41. Spouses must learn to reread and "speak" the language of their
bodies truthfully. Indeed the essential element of the sacramental sign of
maniage is the language of the body spoken in truth. During the liturgical
rite of maniage, the priest or deacon asks the couple if they promise to re-
ceive children lovingly from God. If the language of consent says "yes"
but the language of the body says "no," this falsifies the sacramental sign.
42. All the meanings of the language of the body are initiated and syn-
thesized in the content of conjugal consent. Day by day, spouses draw from
that synthesis the same sign, identifying themselves with it throughout their
lives. In all that they do- and especially in the consummate expression of
their union-the spouses remain faithful to their original consent, or they
fail to do so. They deepen their love and fidelity or they cheapen it.
43. Rereading the language of the body in truth is given as a task to
the man of concupiscence. Even if concupiscence causes many "enors" in
rereading the language of the body and gives rise to sin, man is not deter-
mined by concupiscence. Through the ethos of redemption the possibility
always remains of passing from "enor" to the "truth"- the possibility of
conversion from sin to chastity through life according to the Holy Spirit.
Cycle 6
Love and Fruitfulness
The Holy Father postponed his catechesis on the body during the
Holy Year of Redemption in 1983. He resumed the next year with his sixth
and final cycle, consisting of twenty-one addresses delivered between May
23 and November 28, 1984. After some reflections on the Song of Songs,
the book of Tobit, and some new themes gleaned from Ephesians 5, John
Paul II applies his "adequate anthropology" to the teaching of Pope Paul
VI's landmark encyclical Humanae Vitae. As he states: "The reflections
we have thus far made on human love in the divine plan would be in some
way incomplete if we did not try to see their concrete application in the
sphere of marital and family morality." Taking this further step "will bring
us to the completion of our now long journey." I
It has been a long journey indeed. Every step has led us to this point.
In fact, John Paul sees his entire catechesis on the body as "an ample com-
mentary on the doctrine contained in the encyclical Humanae Vitae."2
Questions come from this encyclical which, according to John Paul, "per-
meate the sum total of our reflections." Therefore, it "follows that this last
palt is not artificially added to the sum total but is organically and homoge-
neously united with it."3 In his introduction to this cycle, the Holy Father
states: "It seems to me, indeed, that what I intend to explain in the coming
weeks constitutes as it were the crowning of what I have illustrated."4
The fierce denunciation of the encyclical's teaching had inspired
John Paul II to develop his theology of the body in the first place. He made
this the first major catechetical project of his pontificate because it is abso-
lutely impossible to build a civilization of love and a culture of life if we
1. 7/11/84, TB 386.
2. 11128/84, TB 420.
3. Ibid, TB 422.
4. 5/23/84, TB 368.
395
do not understand and embrace the teaching of Humanae Vitae. And it is

impossible to understand the full importance of Humanae Vitae without a
"total vision of man." As Paul VI himself recognized: "The problem of
birth, like every other problem regarding human life is, to be considered
beyond partial perspectives." It must be seen "in light of an integral vision
of man and of his vocation, not only his natural and earthly, but also his
supernatural and eternal vocation."5 This was John Paul's cue. This "inte-
gral vision of man" is precisely what the theology of the body provides for
us. This biblical-theological-sacramental-personalistic vision of man and
of conjugal union not only provides a new and winning context for under-
standing the Church's constant teaching on the immorality of contracepted
intercourse. It also places it on the surest foundation possible: that of di-
vine revelation itself.6
Some divisions of the catechesis place the Pope's reflections on the
Song of Songs and the malTiage of Tobiah and Sarah at the conclusion of
the Sacramentality of MalTiage. However, not only does John Paul indi-
cate that these five audiences are a preface to his analysis of Humanae Vi-
tae,7 the importance of these audiences is also "felt" more when seen in
this light. His stated goal is to help us understand in a more adequate and
exhaustive way the sacramental sign of marriage. "The spouses in the
Song of Songs, with ardent words, declare to each other their human love.
The newlyweds in the book of Tobit ask God that they be able to respond
to love. Both the one and the other find their place in what constitutes the
sacramental sign of malTiage. Both the one and the other share in forming
that sign."8As we shall see, these biblical couples help us understand how
vital the teaching of Humanae Vitae is if spouses are to "form the sign" of
marriage according to its divine prototype.
86. The Biblical Ode to Erotic Love

May 23,1984 (TB 368- 370)
"All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for re-
proof, for correction, and for training in righteousness" (2 Tim 3: 16). Un-
fortunately, some churchmen throughout history have seemed to think
these words of St. Paul do not apply to the erotic love poetry of the Song
5. Humanae Vita e, n. 7.
6. See 7/18/84, TB 389; 11/28/84, TB 421.
7. See 5/23/84, TB 368.
8.6/27/84, TB 377.
Love and Fruitfulness 397
of Songs. As John Paul admits, the reading of this apparently "profane"

book of the Bible has often been discouraged. Yet he also points out that
the greatest mystics have drawn from this source, and its verses have been
inserted into the Church's liturgy.
For those who have comprehended the theology ofthe body thus far,
a biblical ode to erotic love is not the least bit troubling. It only affirms
John Paul's thesis that God created the human body and the mystery of
erotic love as a primordial sign of his own divine mystery. A conundrum
only arises, it seems, when we accept the "interpretation of suspicion" (see
§36). The Song's unabashed celebration of erotic love does not permit
such suspicion. It teaches us to love human love with the original good of
God's vision.
A. Interpreting the Song of Songs

But how are we to understand the Song of Songs? In three extensive
endnotes, John Paul discusses many studies and hypotheses regarding this
book. Quoting from various scholars, John Paul seems critical of those
who rush to disembody the Song of Songs, seeing it only as an allegory of
God's "spiritual" love. It certainly serves to illuminate the prophets' de-
scription of God's spousal love for Israel. In tum, the Song of Songs also
sheds light on Christ's union with the Church as St. Paul describes in
Ephesians 5. Nonetheless, John Paul expresses the view of Alonso-
Schockel that to "forget the lovers" or to "petrify them in fictions" is not
the right way to interpret the Song of Songs (384).
It is "the conviction of a growing number of exegetes," the Pope in-
sists, that the Song of Songs (quoting biblical scholar J. Winandy) is '''to
be taken simply for what it manifestly is: a song of human love'" (383).
The Pope quotes Alonso-Schockel again: "'Anyone who does not believe
in the human love of the spouses, who must seek forgiveness for the body,
does not have the right to be elevated .... With the affirmation of human
love instead, it is possible to discover in it the revelation of God'" (384).
This confirms an essential element of incamationallsacramental real-
ity. Grace-the mystery of God's life and love-is communicated through
the "stuff" of our humanity, not despite it. Presenting the position of the
scholar A. M. Dubarle, John Paul says that "a faithful and happy human
love reveals to man the attributes of divine love" (385). This means, as D.
Lys notes, "that the content of the Song of Songs is at the same time sen-
sual and sacred" (385). If we ignore the sacred, the poetry of the Song is
seen as a purely lay erotic composition. But when we ignore the sensual,
we fall into "aUegorism." Thus, integrating the sensual and the sacred is
essential-not only to a proper interpretation of the Song of Songs, but
also to a proper interpretation of what is authentically human.
B. Mutual Fascination with the Body

Integrating the sensual and the sacred is precisely the goal of a theology
(sacred) of the body (sensual). Hence, the Song of Songs evokes all the
themes already discussed in the Pope's catechesis. John Paul says that the
entire Song testifies to that "beginning" Christ referred to in his decisive con-
versation with the Pharisees. It demonstrates all the richness of the language
of the body whose first expression is already found in Genesis 2:23-25.
Recall John Paul's description of Adam's fascination with woman as
the biblical prototype of the Song of Songs (see § 13). Now he says that
what "was expressed in the second chapter of Genesis (vv. 23-25), in just
a few simple and essential words, is developed here in full dialogue." It is
expressed "in a duet, in which the groom's words are interwoven with the
bride's and they complement each other." A wonder, admiration, and fasci-
nation similar to Adam's "runs in a peaceful and homogeneous wave from
the beginning to the end of the poem" (369). And just like in the begin-
ning, the "point of departure as well as the point of arrival for this fascina-
tion-mutual wonder and admiration-are in fact the bride's femininity
and the groom's masculinity in the direct experience of their visibility."
The body reveals the person and the body summons them to love. Thus,
their words of love are "concentrated on the 'body'" (369).
Fascination with the human body in its masculinity and femininity-
often considered innately prurient-is entirely biblical. Concupiscence has
certainly distorted our vision and our sentiments. Yet, when we tap into
that deep well of human desire and fascination that remains beyond the
distortions of concupiscence, we discover that our attraction to the body is
God-given. And it is very good (see Gen 1:31). Of course attraction to the
body in an integral sense must always be and always is attraction to a per-
son. It is a vision of another person not only with the eyes but with the
heart. A look determines the heart within the one who looks, and it deter-
mines whether or not he sees the heart of the person at whom he looks.
When one's heart is pure, so is his look. When he looks, he sees not just a
body, but somebody. Seeing the person, he cannot use the person as an ob-
ject of egoistic gratification. As we continue reflecting on the Pope's
analysis, this is precisely what we willieam about the "look" of the lovers
in the Song of Songs.
87. Integrating Eros and Agape

May 23; June 6,27,1984 (TB 368-370,373-376)
John Paul continually emphasizes that in the inspired duet of the

Song of Songs, the body itself constitutes the source of the lovers' mutual
fascination. It "is on the body that there lingers directly and immediately
that attraction toward the other person, toward the other 'I' -male or fe-
male-which in the interior impulse of the heart generates love" (369). Or,
we could say that it is meant to generate love. Tragically, for the man of
concupiscence, the visibility of the body often generates lust. Of course,
through the gift of redemption, historical man can overcome the domina-
tion of concupiscence, but not without a lively spiritual battle.
John Paul observes that it is as if the spouses of the Song live and
express themselves in an ideal world in which the struggle in the heart be-
tween good and evil did not exist. "The words of the spouses, their move-
ments, their gestures correspond to the interior movement of their hearts"
(368). The movement oftheir hearts is purity, freedom, and love. "Is it not
precisely the power and the interior truth of love that subdues the struggle
that goes on in man and around him?" (376) The more that love purifies
the heart, the less concupiscence can deceive us.
A. Experience of the Beautiful

In turn, this "love unleashes a special experience of the beautiful,
which focuses on what is visible, but at the same time involves the entire
person" (369). An integrated understanding of beauty always involves the
whole person. The lover exults: "Behold, you are beautiful, my love, be-
hold, you are beautiful! Your eyes are doves behind your veil. Your hair is
like a flock of goats moving down the slopes of Gilead" (Song 4: 1). The
Pope acknowledges that such metaphors of beauty may surprise us today
since we are not familiar with the life of shepherds and goat herders.
Nonetheless, they show us how the language of the body seeks support
and corroboration "in the whole visible world."
As John Paul tells us, the groom rereads this "language" at one and
the same time with his heart and with his eyes. In other words, the groom
is entirely integrated internally and externally. If a "look" determines the
very intentionality of existence (see §33), the lover has determined to live
in the truth of the gift. He respects woman as a gift. His look concentrates
"on the whole female 'I' of the bride." He sees her as a person-a sub-
ject-created for her own sake. And her personhood "speaks to him
through every feminine trait, giving rise to that state of mind that can be
defined as fascination, enchantment" (370).
In this way the language of the body finds a "rich echo" in the
groom's words. He speaks in poetic transport and metaphors, which attest
to the experience of beauty, what the Pope calls "a love of satisfaction"
(370). Yet in the end the lover's metaphors fall short. Leaving them be-
hind, the groom says, "You are all beautiful, my beloved, and there is no
blemish in you" (Song 4:7). Even though their duet precedes the time of
Christ, here we see that the husband loves his wife "as Christ loved the
Church" (Eph 5:25). Recall John Paul's statement that Christ-like love
obliges the husband to desire his wife's beauty, to cherish it and care for it,
desiring all that is good for her (see §69). For Christ gave himself up for
his bride that she might be "holy and without blemish." Likewise, John
Paul tells us that the husband's aspiration in the Song of Songs is "born of
love" on the basis of the language of the body. It "is a search for integral
beauty, for purity that is free of all stain: it is a search for perfection that
contains ... the synthesis of human beauty, beauty of soul and body" (373-374).
B. Eros Purified by Love

This is true erotic love! According to John Paul, eros is to be under-
stood as the heart's aspiration toward what is true, good, and beautiful (see
§38). But for eros to be experienced in this way, it must be integrated with
love. "This love has been called 'agape' and agape brings the eros to
completion by purifying it" (375). We might even say that we witness this
purification of eros in the strophes of the Song of Songs. Here '''the lan-
guage of the body' becomes a part of the single process of the mutual at-
traction of the man and woman, which is expressed in the frequent refrains
that speak of the search that is full of nostalgia, of affectionate solicitude
(see Song 2:7), and of the spouses' mutual rediscovery (see Song 5:2).
This brings them joy and calm, and seems to lead them to a continual
search" (373). John Paul observes that in their search for each other and
even in their meeting and embracing they ceaselessly "tend toward some-
thing." Their duet clearly shows their readiness to respond to the call of
eros. But it also intimates that they desire to surpass the natural limits of
eros-to infuse it with something more. That "something more" is agape.
"In the Song of Songs the human eros reveals the countenance of
love ever in search and, as it were, never satisfied. The echo of this rest-
lessness runs through the strophes of the poem: 'I opened to my lover, but
he had departed, gone. I sought him but I did not find him; I called to him
but he did not answer me' (Song 5:6)" (374). John Paul asks whether or
not such restlessness is part of the nature of eros. Then he adds that if it is,
it would indicate the need for self-control. It seems that here John Paul re-
fers to an experience of eros that has yet to be integrated with agape. Rest-
lessness in this sense seems related to John Paul's idea of the "insatiability
of the union" (see §28). Yet if such is the case, eros need not be aban-
doned, repressed, or held in suspicion. It need only be opened to the infu-
sion of agape.
Above we quoted John Paul saying that the lovers of the Song in
some sense seem "outside" the battle between good and evil. This is true
Love and Fruiifulness 401
in most of the Song. Nonetheless their restless need to integrate eros with
agape seems to point to just such a battle. The Song describes love in
terms of a jealousy as "cruel as the grave" (Song 8:6). St. Paul, however,
will say that love "is not jealous" (1 Cor 13 :4). How do we account for the
discrepancy? John Paul does not venture an analysis other than to suggest
that when human eros "closes its horizon," it remains opened to another
"horizon of love" that in Paul's words speaks another language. It is the
language of agape.
If love is stem as death (see Song 8:6), according to John Paul this
means that love "goes to the furthest limits of the 'language of the body' in
order to exceed them" (374). The language of erotic love is only a sign-a
sacrament-of Trinitarian love, of agape. Ultimately even spouses must
"break away," the Pope says, from those earthly means of expressing eros-
agape in order to enter into "the very nucleus of the gift from person to
person" (374). The ultimate reality of gift can be none other than the eter-
nal mystery of the Trinity itself. That Communion alone can satisfy the
love that is ever seeking and (in this life) never satisfied.
John Paul's exegesis of the Song of Songs touches each of the
themes of his catechesis up to this point. We see signs of original man, his-
torical man, and eschatological man. We see the truth about married love
and even the meaning of "breaking away" from such love as expressed in
the celibate vocation.
88. Mutual Entrustment and the Truth of the Person

May 30; June 6, 1984 (TB 370-374)
John Paul tells us that it is vitally important for the theology of the
body and for the theology of the sacramental sign of marriage "to know
who the female 'you' is for the male 'J' and vice versa" (370). This is also
vitally important for life in general. Recall the Pope's statement that the
dignity and balance of human life depend at every moment of history and
at every point on the globe on who woman will be for man and who man
will be for woman (see §35). The poetic duet of the lovers in the Song of
Songs expresses with particular eloquence who man and woman "are" for
each other. John Paul focuses on two themes or plots from the Song which
exemplify this.
A. My Sister, My Bride
The first could be called the "fraternal" theme. Several times
throughout the Song, the lover refers to his bride first as his sister. "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!" (4:9-10) According to John Paul, these expressions say much more
than if he had called her by name. They illustrate how love reveals the
other person. "The fact that in this approach that female 'I' is revealed for
her groom as 'sister' -and that precisely as both sister and bride-has a
special eloquence" (371). It reveals that he sees her not as a thing to be
appropriated, but as a person to be loved. To be a person "means both 'being
subject' and 'being in relationship ", (371). The term "sister" denotes this.
The word "sister" speaks of their common humanity. We can recall
the meaning of "double solitude" (see §14). Both man and woman share
the same solitude, the same humanity. It is as if they "were descended
from the same family circle, as though from infancy they were united by
memories of a common home ... From this there follows a specific sense of
common belonging." Furthermore, through the name "sister," the groom's
words tend to reproduce as the Pope poignantly expresses, "the history of
the femininity of the person loved. They see her still in the time of girl-
hood and they embrace her entire 'I,' soul and body, with a disinterested
tenderness" (371).
The word "sister" also speaks of their being in relationship. It speaks
of the two different ways in which masculinity and femininity "incarnate"
the same humanity (see § 13). At this point, however, the term "sister"
gives way to the term "bride"-but without losing what is essential in the
groom's recognition of his bride as "sister." The transition from "sister" to
"bride" maintains-and it must maintain-the same recognition of her
personhood. This is the special eloquence of calling her "sister" before
calling her "bride." It reveals that the lover's modus operandi in desiring
her as bride is love, not lust.
John Paul observes that recognizing one's beloved first as a "sister"
challenges the man to assess the sincerity of his love. The groom of the
Song readily takes up this challenge. In turn, the Holy Father says that the
sincerity of their love allows them to live their mutual closeness in secu-
rity and to manifest it without fearing the unfair judgment of others. They
are not ashamed of their love because they are confident in its purity. From
this experience of selfless love a deep interior tranquility arises, reminis-
cent of the "peace of the interior gaze" in the experience of original naked-
ness (see § 17). "So I was in his eyes as one who finds peace" (Song 8: 10).
While this is a peace found deep in the human heart, nonetheless John
Paul says it is also a "peace of the body." Above all, John Paul describes it
as the peace of the encounter of man and woman as the image of God by
means of a reciprocal and disinterested gift of self. This is the richness and
the challenge of the words "my sister, my bride."
Love and Fruit/iLlness 4()3
• I have observed differing reactions between men and women when I

have presented the "sister-bride" concept at seminars. For whatever reason,
most women, it seems, tend to respond readily, as if such an idea confirms
their deepest hopes for a romantic relationship. Men, on the other hand, of-
ten seem takcn aback. To consider a potential "sex-partner" as a "sister"
cuts right at the hemi of what most men seem to desire in a relationship. A
man revolts at the idea of indulging lust with his "sister." This is precisely
the point! Women certainly have their own distortions to contend with, but
coming to recognize woman first as "sister" compels men in a particular
way to face the distortions of lust and to seek grace in "untwisting" those
distortions. I also offer the following observation. The whole concept of
"dating" in popular culture today-with its expectations of immediate ro-
mantic involvement if not immediate sexual intimacy-serves to skip the
"fraternal plot" of man and woman's relationship altogether. Men and
women who have never come to love one another fratemally are without a
proper foundation for spousal love. They are in grave danger of mistaking
concupiscence for spollsal love. Building a marriage on such a foundation
is equivalent to building a house on sand.
B. A Gardell Enclosed
John Paul uncovers the second plot of the Song of Songs in the fol-
lowing passage of the poem: "A garden locked is my sister, my bride, a
garden enclosed, a fountain sealed" (4: 12). These expressions also have a
profound contribution to make in determining who man and woman "are"
for each other. The Holy Father intuits that these words reveal the man's
respect for the woman as "master of her own mystery" (372). She is her
own person with her own will to choose, and as such she is inviolable.
Recogni zing this, the lover knows he cannot "take" her or "grasp" her. rf
they are to live in a common union (communio personarum). it must be
based on the freedom of the gift (see § 18). As John Paul expresses it: "The
'language of the body' reread in truth keeps pace with the discovery of the
interior inviolability of the person" (372).
When we fail to reread the language of the body truthfully-that is,
when we lust- we inevitably violate the mystery of the person. We take
what is not given. We become master over another person. And persons-
precisely because they are persons- are meant to be their own masters.
Their dignity demands it. John Paul stresses that the person "surpasses all
measures of appropriation and domination, of possession and gratifica-
tion" (374). If the man were to barge into this "locked garden" (in deed or
thought) , or if he were to manipulate her into surrendering the key, he
would not be loving her, he would be raping her.
Declaring her an "enclosed garden" and a "sealed fountain" attests to

the sincerity of his own gift of self. He is knocking at the door, not breaking
in. He presents himself to her as a gift, placing himself in her hands and
entrusting himself to her freedom. He puts "his hand to the latch" (Song
5:4) only with her "yes"- a yes given in total freedom, without any hint of
coercion. Indeed the bride knows that the groom's "longing" is for her-for
her whole feminine person, not merely her body-so she goes to meet him,
as the Pope describes, with the "quickness" of the gift of herself. She an-
swers him with the entrustment of herself. As master of her own mystery
(that is, with the full freedom of her own choice) she says: "I belong to my
lover." The freedom of the gift is the bride's response to the deep aware-
ness of the sincere gift expressed by the groom's words. In this way their
love is built up. And as the Pope affirms, "It is authentic love" (372).
C. My Lover Belongs to Me and 1 to Him

Authentic love, as proclaimed by the Song of Songs, means "the initia-
tion into the mystery of the person, without, however, implying its viola-
tion" (373). We have described this initiation into the mystery ofthe person
as "participation" in the other's humanity (see §§22, 52). The lovers of the
Song approach this participation through the duet of an ever growing near-
ness between them. In this way they discover each other as a gift and, as
John Paul says, they even "taste" each other as a gift. The "love that unites
them is at one and the same time ofa spiritual and a sensual nature" (373).
In other words, their spiritual love is integrated with and even rooted in
their bodies-in their sexuality and sensuality. The pining of their hearts
for authentic love is expressed in the pining of their bodily senses without
the disturbance and "disconnect" of concupiscence .
• The erotic poetry of the Song of Songs is full of sensual references

to foods and fragrances, to smelling, tasting, eating, and drinking each
other's goodness (see, for example, 1:12-14; 2:3--6; 4:10-5:1). This indi-
cates a profound interconnection between nuptial love, smelling, tasting,
eating, and drinking. Are not these senses (and, in fact, all of the senses)
fully engaged in erotic love? What does the passionate kiss of lovers say if
not in some sense "I want to taste you; 1 want to take you into myself and
consume you; 'eat' you; 'drink' you"? Furthermore, does not the very fra-
grance of the body stir men and women to love? Perhaps we look on the
senses with suspicion because they often rouse concupiscence. But to the
degree that men and women live from that vivification of the Holy Spirit,
all things sensual stir them to love. Yes, our senses-all of our senses-
were created by God to inspire love! This is the nature of incamationaV
Love and Fruit/it/ness 4(}5
sacramental reality. We see these interconnections between nuptial love,

smelling, tasting, eating, and drinking very clearly-even if only analo-
gously-in the Eucharistic liturgy. Here, more than in any earthly encoun-
ter, Christ invites us to "taste and see" his own goodness (see Ps 34:8).
Fragrances of incense, oils, and candles all add to the sensual experience of
the union of Bridegroom and Bride. And how is the marriage of Christ and
the Church sacramentally consummated? The deepest desire of the Heav-
enly Bridegroom is that we, his Bride, might eat his flesh and drink his
blood.
Concupiscence alone violates the person, never love. If a person's

"love" violates the one loved, then it is not love and should not be called
love. It is love's counterfeit-lust. If lust seeks to grasp and possess the
other, true love "expresses the authentic depth of the mutual belonging of
the spouses" (372). John Paul observes that the spouses in the Song are
aware of "belonging" to each other, of being "destined" for each other:
"My lover belongs to me and I to him" (Song 2:16). But recall the "per-
sonal analogy of belonging" of which the Holy Father previously spoke
(see §30). In the language of authentic love, when spouses speak of "be-
longing" to each other it "indicates the reciprocity of the donation, it ex-
presses the equal balance of the gift...in which the mutual communio per-
sonarum is established."9 As John Paul states: "When the bride says, 'My
lover belongs to me,' she means at the same time, 'It is he to whom I en-
trust myself,' and therefore she says, 'and I to him' (Song 2:16). The
words 'to me' and 'to him' affirm here the whole depth of that entrustment,
which corresponds to the interior truth of the person" (372) .
• In man and woman's being "destined" for each other we can even
see a sign of our being destined in Christ (see Eph 1:4). Similarly, if a
Christian speaks of "belonging" to Christ, this is not an "ownership" on
Christ's part. God may indeed have a "right of ownership" over his crea-
hIres. But here is the mystery of the "divine respect" he shows toward hu-
manity-he does not assert such a right of ownership. He, too, respects
us-his Bride-as "masters of our own mystery." Wojtyla makes this point
unambiguously in the following provocative statement: "Nobody can use a
person as a means toward an end, no human being, nor yet God the Cre-
ator. On the part of God, indeed, it is totally out of the question, since, by
giving man an intelligent and free nahlre, he has thereby ordained that each
man alone will decide for himself the ends of his activity, and not be a
9.7/30/80, TB 129.
blind tool of someone else's ends. Therefore, if God intends to direct man
toward certain goals, he allows him to begin with to know those goals, so
that he may make them his own and strive toward them independently. In
this amongst other things resides the most profound logic of revelation:
God allows man to learn his supernatural ends, but the decision to strive
toward an end, the choice of course, is left to man's free will. God does not
redeem man against his will."'O
89. Sacrificial Love Conquers Death

June 27, 1984 (TB 375-377)
To deepen further the meaning of the sacramental sign of marriage,

in his audience of June 27, 1984, the Holy Father begins to analyze the
marriage ofTobiah and Sarah in the book of Tobit. Setting the stage for his
reflections, the Holy Father recalls to his audience that Sarah had already
been married seven times, but because of a demon each man died before
having intercourse with her (see Tob 6:13-14). John Paul II-man of keen
observation that he is-says that in taking Sarah as his wife, young Tobiah
had reason to be afraid. In fact, upon giving his daughter to Tobiah in mar-
riage, Sarah's father proceeded to dig Tobiah's grave (see Tob 8:9). But an
angel said to Tobiah: "Do not be afraid, for she was destined for you from
eternity. You will save her, and she will go with you, and ... you will have
children by her." Then we read: "When Tobiah heard these things, he fell
in love with her and yearned deeply for her" (Tob 7: 17).
A. Love Is Victorious in the Test ofLife and Death

Here we see all the components of good and evil gearing up for a
great spiritual battle: angels and demons; life and death; God's eternal
salvific will and man's rebellious designs; love and all that is opposed to
love. In what context does this great clash take shape? In the joining of a
man and woman in "one flesh." Precisely in this union, John Paul tells us,
"the choices and the actions [of men and women] take on all the weight of
human existence" (376).
These are weighty words, but they should not surprise us. We have
seen that the weight of human existence rests on man and woman's union
from the outset of our reflections. The first pages of Genesis reveal that
sexuality and procreation are intimately linked with the great contest of
10. Love & Responsibility. p. 27 .

good and evil, life and death (see §24). As John Paul starkly expresses:
Spouses, "in fact, becoming one as husband and wife, find themselves in
the situation in which the powers of good and evil fight and compete
against each other" (376).
Husbands and wives live this great spiritual contest in their bodies.
We see this vividly in the case of Tobiah and Sarah. John Paul observes
that from the very first moment their love had to face the test of life and
death. He continues: "The words about love 'stem as death,' spoken by the
spouses in the Song of Songs ... assume here the nature of a real test" (376).
Tobiah knows that if he is to conquer death through love, he must tum to
the Lord in prayer:
When the door was shut and the two were alone, Tobiah got up from the
bed and said, "Sister, get up, and let us pray that the Lord may have
mercy upon us." And Tobiah began to pray, "Blessed art thou, 0 God of
our fathers, and blessed be thy holy and glorious name for ever... Thou
madest Adam and gavest him Eve his wife as a helper and support. Thou
didst say, 'It is not good that the man should be alone; let us make a
helper for him like himself. ' ... And now, 0 Lord, I am not taking this sis-
ter of mine because of lust, but with sincerity. Grant that I may find
mercy and grow old together with her." And she said with him, "Amen"
(Tab 8:4-8).
Tobiah's prayer "situates the 'language of the body' on the level of
the essential terms of the theology of the body" (377). Notice that, just as
Christ will eventually direct the Pharisees to do, Tobiah and Sarah set their
hearts on God's original plan for marriage. Notice Tobiah calls her "sister"
like the lover in the Song of Songs. Notice that he contrasts lust with the
"sincere gift of self." Notice that he intends to spend his whole life with
her ("What therefore God has joined together let no man put asunder" [Mt
19:6]). And notice that Tobiah knows they cannot live this sublime calling
without the help of God's mercy.
The prospect of proclaiming and choosing the truth of God's original
plan for marital union "opens up before them with the trial of life and
death, already during their wedding night" (377). Yet Tobiah and Sarah are
confident in love's victory. They "unhesitatingly face this test. But in this
test of life and death, life wins because, during the test on the wedding
night, love, supported by prayer, is revealed as more stem than death."
Yes, love "is victorious because it prays" (376).
If Tobiah had "reason to be afraid" in taking Sarah as his wife, as St.
John tells us: "There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear" (1
Jn 4: 18). In a clarion call for all men and women to embrace that perfect
love-almost repeating his signature phrase "be not afraid"-John Paul
declares: "The truth and the power of love are shown in the ability to place
oneself between the forces of good and evil which are fighting in man and
around him, because love is confident in the victory of good and is ready
to do everything so that good may conquer" (376).
B. Tobiah Lives!
No sacrifice is too great for true lovers-no suffering too much to
bear-when it is needed to ensure the victory of good over evil. This is
precisely the testimony of the cross, of Christ's spousal love for the
Church. This is precisely the perfect love in which every husband and wife
is called to participate. And this is precisely what the teaching of Humanae
Vitae calls spouses to embrace.
As the Holy Father reminds us, marriage "is, in fact, the image ... of
that covenant which takes its origin from eternal Love." It is "the original
sacrament of the Covenant of God with man, with the human race."
Hence, "the 'language of the body' becomes the language of the ministers
of the sacrament, aware that in the conjugal pact there is expressed and re-
alized the mystery that has its origin in God himself" (377). This mystery
is that God is Love and that God is Life! Because of their prayer and their
love, Tobiah and Sarah can "see with the glance offaith the sanctity of this
vocation." Through "the unity of the two, built upon the mutual truth of
the 'language of the body'-they must respond to the call of God himself
which is contained in the mystery of the Beginning. And this is why they
ask: 'Call down your mercy on me and on her'" (377). In receiving this
mercy, they consummate their marriage and Tobiah lives!
Ifthe demon in Sarah's previous marriages wrote death into the plan
of man and woman's relationship, the angel's message to Tobiah restored
life to that plan. Inspired by God's designs for marriage, Tobiah's sacrifi-
cial (Christ-like) love conquered death. In the face of authentic nuptial
love, death has no chance. Life refuses to surrender (see §24). Because of
the eros-agape love that united them in "one flesh," Tobiah and Sarah wit-
ness to God as the God of Life. Their union joyously proclaims: "Where,
o death, is your victory? Where, 0 death, is your sting?" (see 1 Cor 15:55)
90. Conjugal Life Becomes Liturgical

June 27; July 4, 1984 (TB 377-380)
In both the Song of Songs and the story of Tobiah and Sarah we see
the spouses rereading the language of the body in truth. Both couples
witness to the deepest meaning of the sacramental sign of marriage.
They understand the truth of this sign not only in an objective sense.
They also desire it subjectively. They long for it in their hearts. When this
profound integration between objective reality and subjective experience

occurs, John Paul says that spouses experience the language of the body
for what it is. They experience it as the language of the liturgy.
A. The Liturgical Language of the Body

In his audience of July 4, 1984, John Paul develops the idea that by
living according to the ethos of redemption, conjugal life itself becomes
liturgical. In some sense this audience brings us to the climax of John
Paul's dramatic proposal about the "greatness"-the God-likeness-of
nuptial love. Here we cross the threshold and enter into the most profound
integration of the sensual and the sacred. But what, exactly, does it mean
to describe conjugal life as liturgical?
Turning to the Catechism, we learn that in Christian tradition, liturgy
"means the participation ofthe People of God in 'the work ofGod."'" The
work of God refers above all to the "great mystery" of our redemption in
Jesus Christ accomplished through his death and resurrection. To say that
conjugal life is liturgical is to say that it participates in this "great mys-
tery." As such, the union of man and woman in conjugal love is meant to
sanctify the world as a living sign of redemption-a constant reminder of
what happened in the death and resurrection of Christ. "It is this mystery
of Christ that the Church proclaims and celebrates in her liturgy so that the
faithful may live from it and bear witness to it in the world."'2 Spouses do
precisely this when they live in fidelity to the language God inscribed in
their bodies as male and female.
The Catechism also says that liturgy is the Church's "celebration of
divine worship." In fact, it is "a participation in Christ's own prayer ad-
dressed to the Father in the Holy Spirit."'3 So, too, is conjugal life. When
lived according to the "great mystery" of God's designs, even the marital
embrace itself becomes a profound prayer. It becomes Eucharistic (see
§71) as an act of thanksgiving offered to God for the joyous gift of sharing
in his life and love. Pushing the analogy, we might even view the marital
bed as an altar upon which spouses offer their bodies in living sacrifice, holy
and acceptable to God. This is their spiritual act of worship (see Rom 12: 1).
Liturgy also refers "to the proclamation of the Gospel and to active
charity" carried out by the Church "in the image of her Lord."'4 So does
conjugal life. Conjugal life is a profound and continuous proclamation of
11. CCC, n. 1069.

12. CCC, n. 1068.
13. CCC, n. 1070, 1073 .
14. CCC, n. 1070.
the "Gospel of the body" lived in the image of Christ's love for the
Church. Quoting from the Second Vatican Council, the Catechism con-
cludes: "The liturgy then is rightly seen as an exercise ofthe priestly office
of Jesus Christ. It involves the presentation of man's sanctification under
the guise of signs perceptible by the senses and its accomplishment in
ways appropriate to each of these signs."15 In conjugal life, the sanctifica-
tion of spouses is presented and appropriately accomplished through the
sign of their faithful union, lived out day-to-day and consummated in be-
coming one flesh. In this way spouses are initiated into the mystery of
Christ through an ongoing marital-liturgical catechesis which proceeds
"from the visible to the invisible, from the sign to the thing signified, from
the' sacraments' to the 'mysteries. '" 16
The idea that conjugal life is in some way liturgical is not surprising
when we consider that the whole liturgical life of the Church revolves
around the sacraments. 17 Marriage is not only one of the sacraments, but is
in some sense the prototype or model of all the sacraments (see §78).
Hence, not only is conjugal life liturgical. When we read the spousal anal-
ogy in the other direction, we realize that the Church's liturgical life is in
some sense conjugal. "The entire Christian life bears the mark of the spou-
sal love of Christ and the Church."18 According to this analogy, the
Church's liturgical life is where she enters into the "great mystery" ofnup-
tial union with Christ. It is where the Bride receives the spousal love of
her Bridegroom in an eternally fruitful embrace (fiat) and offers endless
praise and thanksgiving for so great a gift (magnificat).
B. The Mystical Language of the Body

The Holy Father looks once again to that marvelous passage of
Ephesians 5 for corroboration of the body's liturgical language. "This
text," he says, "brings us to such a dimension of the 'language of the body'
that could be called 'mystical.' It speaks of marriage, in fact, as a 'great
mystery'" (378). It is true that St. Paul says this "great mystery" refers to
Christ's union with the Church. Nevertheless, st. Paul extends that mysti-
cal analogy to the sacramental sign of marriage. He extends it "to the 'lan-
guage of the body' reread in the truth of the spousal love and the conjugal
15. Ibid.
16. CCC, n. 1075.
17. See CCC, n. 1113.
18. CCC, n. 1617.
union of the two." It is the liturgy which "elevates the conjugal pact of
man and woman, based on the 'language of the body' reread in truth, to
the dimensions of 'mystery,' and at the same time enables that pact to be
fulfilled in these dimensions through the 'language of the body.' It is pre-
cisely the sign of the sacrament of marriage that speaks of this." (378).
If we ponder this "great mystery," John Paul observes that the text of
Ephesians 5 radically frees our thinking both from elements of Manichae-
ism and from a non-personalistic view of the body. At the same time it
"brings the 'language of the body,' contained in the sacramental sign of
matrimony, nearer to the dimension of real sanctity" (378). The great sign
of married love expresses not only "an interpersonal event laden with in-
tense personal content." It also expresses "a sacred and sacramental real-
ity, rooted in the dimensions of the Covenant and grace-in the dimension
of creation and redemption. In this way," John Paul continues, "the liturgi-
cal language assigns to both [spouses] love, fidelity, and conjugal honesty
through the 'language of the body.' It assigns them the unity and indissolu-
bility of marriage in the 'language of the body.' It assigns them as a duty
all the sacrum (holy) of the person and of the communion of persons, and
likewise their femininity and masculinity-precisely in this language"
(379). The language of the body-expressed in the whole of married life and
consummated in becoming "one flesh"-is sacred. It is holy. It is mystical
and liturgical!
When we let these truths sink in, we cannot persist in our suspicion
toward the body. We cannot persist in the heretical belief that the body and
sexuality are somehow inherently tainted (Manichaeism). We cannot per-
sist in the dualistic error that views the body as an inherent obstacle to the
spiritual life. Instead we realize that our male and female bodies are the
vehicle of the Holy Spirit, in all of life, but especially in married life. Our
bodies are created to be infused with holiness, with grace. Even if we have
lost this grace due to sin, we can receive it once again through the sacra-
ments. As John Paul evangelically proclaims: "The sacraments inject
sanctity into the plan of man's humanity: they penetrate the soul and body,
the femininity and masculinity of the personal subject, with the power of
sanctity" (378).
This is not an abstract theological concept. John Paul insists that we
can experience this in the depths of our subjectivity. He adds that all of
this is expressed in the body and brought about through the language of
the liturgy. When spouses understand marriage as an integral part of the
liturgical life of the Church, they are empowered to live their sacrament as
the vocation to holiness that it is. They experience and express the true
language of their bodies not only in the moments of joining in "one flesh,"
but in "an uninterrupted continuity of liturgical language"-in the whole

series of acts and duties that make up their daily lives as spouses.
When spouses strive with God's grace to speak the liturgical language
of the body honestly in the consummate sign of their union, the whole en-
semble of their conjugal dialogue becomes an extension of that fidelity.
Living the true language of the body becomes a way oflife, a liturgical way
of life, a life of prayer. Every sacrifice, every diaper change, every meal
cooked, every commute to work, every duty and responsibility carried out
day-to-day is understood and lived as a continuation of the faithful gift,
that unconditional "yes" spoken by the body in the marital union of
bodies. It all becomes an offering to God as an ongoing participation in
the Church's liturgy. It all serves to sanctify the family and the world. 19
C. Spiritually Mature Sexual Attraction

A profound sense of the holiness of the body and of conjugal
union-of the person and the communion of persons-must form the es-
sential "ethos" and "spirituality" of married life. S1. Paul calls spouses pre-
cisely to this when he exhorts them to be "subject to one another out of
reverence for Christ" (Eph 5 :21).
In fact, John Paul says that this Pauline image of reverence for Christ
"is none other than a spiritually mature form of that mutual attraction:
man's attraction to femininity and woman's attraction to masculinity"
(379). The Pope remarks that this is the same sexual attraction which the
book of Genesis revealed for the first time (see 2:23-25) and which
"seems to flow like a wide stream" through the verses of the Song of
Songs. It also finds a concentrated expression in the story of Tobiah and
Sarah. This spiritually mature sexual attraction "is none other than the
blossoming of the gift of fear"-that reverence and awe for the sacred
which John Paul reminds us is one of the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit
(see §66). Chaste thought and action stem precisely from this spiritually
mature attraction. As the Pope concludes, chastity is not only a human vir-
tue, but a divine gift (grace)-a gift of the Spirit dwelling in our flesh.20
Through the virtue and gift of a mature chastity, men and women find
that lust no longer deceives them. The desires of their hearts conform to
the truth, dignity, and sacredness of the body and the call to communion.
As the Holy Father says: "Both the man and the woman, getting away
from concupiscence, find the proper dimension of the freedom of the gift,
19. See CCC, nn. 1368,2031.

20. See CCC, nn. 1810, 1811,2345 .
united to femininity and masculinity in the true spousal significance of the

body." In this way they experience the mysterious language of the body
"in a depth, simplicity and beauty hitherto altogether unknown" (380).
Such a statement is not a projection of a celibate pontiff, but an observation
continually confirmed by a pastor who has worked intimately and exten-
sively with married couples.
John Paul concludes that this seems to be the integral significance of
the sacramental sign of marriage. "In that sign-through the 'language of
the body'-man and woman encounter the great 'mystery' in order to
transfer the light of that mystery ... to the 'language of the body.'" The Pope
affirms that through the ethos of redemption married couples are able to
transfer "the light of truth and beauty, expressed in liturgical language," to
their "practice of love, of fidelity, of conjugal honesty" (380). Through the
gift of redemption, man and woman are called, just as they were "in the be-
ginning," to be the visible sign of God's creative love. Ephesians 5 fully dis-
closes the "great mystery" of this sign, but it "sinks its roots .. .in the mystery
of the creation of man: male and female in the image of God" (379).
If redeemed man, joining as male and female so intimately as to be
"one flesh," is called to image God as the visible sign of his creative love,
what happens to this "sign" if the spouses rob it of its procreative poten-
tial? If the lovers of the Song of Songs proclaim the joy of living the true
sign of marital love while Tobiah and Sarah face a test of life and death to
reclaim the truth of that sign, what light does this shed on the teaching of
Humanae Vitae?
91. Humanae Vitae and the Truth of the Sacramental Sign

July 11, 1984 (TB 386-388)
As Cardinal Wojtyla wrote in his book Sources oj Renewal, "The key

problem of life as actually lived by Christians is that of the link between
faith and morals." We discover "Christian morality understood in all its
fullness"-that is, "not only in the field of behavior and its governing
norms, but still more in the field of.. .ethos "-only by participating "in the
priestly and kingly mission of the Redeemer." Christian morality, there-
fore, "combines the element of sacrifice, proper to a priesthood, with the
kingly element of victory, of man's dominion over himself and the world
of nature. These two elements," Wojtyla concludes, "constitute the very
root of [Christian] morality."21
21. Sources of Renewal, p. 99.

These two elements-sacrifice and victory-also constitute the root

of the teaching of Humanae Vitae. Only those willing to embrace the sac-
rifice required by authentic conjugal love will ever taste the victory over
concupiscence that comes through the redemption of the body. Only
through such sacrifice and victory can man and woman's union shine as a
transparent sign of God's love in the world. Our long study of John Paul's
catechesis on the body shows what is at stake in the Church's teaching on
the regulation of births-the very essence of the human vocation to mirror
God's love in the world as male and female.
A. The Summit of the Issue

In an essay published soon after the release of Humanae Vitae,
Wojtyla observed that the teaching of the encyclical hinges on a basic
theological proposition concerning conjugal love. Conjugal love takes its
origin from God-from the God who has revealed himself to us at one and
the same time as "Love" and as "Father."22 According to Wojtyla, this is
"the very summit of the issue. The theological view of conjugal love must
lead us to this summit." Thus, Wojtyla observes that Paul VI's encyclical
"responds basically to a single question: what must conjugal love be like
in order to discover God's eternal plan of love in it? Under what condi-
tions does conjugal love reflect its prime exemplar, God as Love and God
as Father? This is the level upon which we must consider the entire encyc-
lical and the teaching on conjugal love contained therein."23
In this light, before we venture into John Paul II's specific analysis of
this most contested encyclical, we will do well to remember the Pope's
"key" for interpreting reality: "Original sin attempts ... to abolish father-
hood. "24 Does not contraception, in a given act of intercourse, attempt to
do the same? "Called to give life, spouses share in the creative power and
fatherhood of God." Indeed, the "divine fatherhood is the source of human
fatherhood. "25
The question then arises: Can an act of sexual intercourse that the
couple renders sterile possibly image and communicate to the world the
eternal mystery of God who has revealed himself to us at one and the same
time as "Love" and as "Father"? What might this say about the one who is
ultimately behind the scheme to sterilize conjugal love? Who is behind the
original temptation to "abolish fatherhood"?

23. "The Teaching of the Encyclical Humanae Vitae on Love," Person & Commu-
nity: Selected Essays, pp. 303, 304.
24. Crossing the Threshold of Hope, p. 228.
25. CCc. nn. 2214, 2367.
B. Two Inseparable Meanings of the Conjugal Act

John Paul begins his analysis of Humanae Vitae in his audience of
July 11, 1984. The Pope's appeal to human subjectivity throughout his
catechesis makes it clear that he believes it virtually impossible to explain
the Church's teaching on sexual morality without incorporating the way
modem men and women think. Humanae Vitae, in fact, is one of the first
documents of the Church's Magisterium to draw from modem phil-
osophy's "subjective tum" in its approach to married life and conjugal mo-
rality. John Paul relates that the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council had
already discussed the necessity for a deepened analysis of human subjec-
tivity in this regard. 26 In tum, the Council clearly integrated personalist
language into its teaching on marriage.27 Even prior to that, there were a
few seeds of personalism in Pope Pius Xl's Casti Connubii of 1930.28 Still,
Humanae Vitae is the first Magisterial document which attempts to frame
a major moral pronouncement in largely personalist terms .
• Here it is easy to recognize the influence of a certain Polish prelate

in the paragraphs of Paul VI's encyclical. In fact, historians and other
commentators on Church affairs often credit Karol Wojtyla as the main ar-
chitect behind Humanae Vitae. Papal biographer George Weigel, how-
ever-while recognizing Wojtyla's influence-argues that the encyclical
did not adopt in full the rich personalist context that Wojtyla proposed to
his predecessor. Weigel even suggests that the encyclical might have been
better received and the aftennath not so ugly had Paul VI more fully
heeded Wojtyla's advice. 29
Humanae Vitae reaffinns the constant teaching of the universal Church

that in each and every marriage act "there must be no impainnent of its natu-
ral capacity to procreate human life."30 There is nothing new here. The nov-
elty of Paul VI's encyclical, however, is that it bases this teaching "on the
inseparable connection, established by God which man on his own initiative
may not break, between the unitive significance and the procreative signifi-
cance which are both inherent to the marriage act."]l Without analyzing the
whole encyclical, John Paul focuses primarily on this passage.
26. See 10/31/84, TB 411.

27. See Gaudium et Spes, nll. 47-52.
28. See Casti Connubii, n. 24, for example.
29. See Witness to Hope, pp. 209-210.
30. Humanae Vitae, n. 11. This passage is typically and less accurately translated:
" ... each and every marriage act must remain open to the transmission of life."
31. Ibid, n. 12.
This new basis of defense for the Church's teaching marks a clear
tum to the subject. To focus on the "significance" (or meaning) of the act
rather than its "end" is to evaluate the sexual act from the interior perspec-
tive of the persons performing it. As Wojtyla wrote in a pre-papal essay,
"One can detect in this part of the encyclical a very significant passage
from what some might call a 'theology of nature' to a 'theology of per-
son. '''32 The purpose is not to separate "nature" from "person," but to link
them in a deep and organic way. In an integral "theology of person," an
appeal to the "meaning" of the conjugal act does not imply that persons
are free to assign their own meaning to the act. Paul VI avoids the pit of
"subjectivism" by linking this subjective tum with objective reality. These
two meanings of sexual intercourse, he says, are rooted in "the fundamen-
tal structure" of the act and "the actual nature of man and of woman."33
Through this "fundamental structure" and because of the "actual nature"
of the persons engaging in the act, anyone can observe that sexual inter-
course both "unites husband and wife in the closest intimacy" and at the
same time "makes them capable of generating new life" (387). Logic rec-
ognizes both meanings as essential to the integrity of the act as nature
(God) designed it. Thus, it logically follows-unless we have a split view of
nature and person, body and soul (as most of the "modem world" does, and
herein lies the precise problem)-that both meanings of the act are essential
to the integrity of the subjects themselves who are performing the act.
Here John Paul insists that morality is not based merely on evaluat-
ing an "act" in the abstract. It is based on the truth of the acting person( s)
and their dignity.34 Only persons, in fact, are capable of morality. In evalu-
ating sexual morality "we are dealing with nothing other than reading the
'language of the body' in truth" (388). He also stresses, therefore, that the
inseparability of the unitive and procreative meanings of intercourse "is
closely connected with our previous reflections on marriage in its dimen-
sion as a (sacramental) sign" (386). The sacramental sign is based on the
faithful and ongoing incarnation of the vows freely professed at the al-
tar-vows of fidelity, permanence, and openness to children (see §§83,
84). "In fact, the man and the woman, living in the marriage 'until death,'
repropose uninterruptedly," the Pope suggests, "that sign that they made-
through the liturgy of the sacrament-on their wedding day" (387).
32. "The Teaching of the Encyclical Humanae Vitae on Love," Person & Commu-
nity: Selected Essays, p. 308.
33. See ibid.
34. It is significant to note that the very first line in the section of the Catechism that
deals with morality is "Christian, recognize your dignity... " (CCC. n. 1691).
C. Signs and Counter-Signs

If all of married life constitutes the sacramental sign, there is also a
consummate moment in which spouses renew and express this sign in a
very particular way-the moment of the marital embrace. Here couples
are called to speak and renew the vows they made at the altar with their
bodies. As John Paul stresses: "Precisely at such a moment so rich in sig-
nificance, it is also especially important that the 'language of the body' be
reread in truth. This reading," he continues, "becomes the indispensable
condition for acting in truth, that is, for behaving in accordance with the
value of the moral norm" (387). Notice the words "value" and "moral
norm." John Paul observes that in Paul VI's encyclical, the Church not
only wants to recall an objective moral norm, but also demonstrate its sub-
jective value and foundation. In his theology of the body, John Paul frames
the objective truth and the subjective value of the norm in terms of the sac-
ramental sign, that is, in terms of the objective language of the body and
its SUbjective "rereading in truth."
Recall that statement we have repeated several times: We can speak
of moral good and evil in the sexual relationship according to "whether or
not it has the character of the truthful sign."35 John Paul reasonably main-
tains that "the 'language of the body' should express, at a determinate
level, the truth of the sacrament. Participating in the eternal plan of love
('Sacrament hidden in God'), the 'language of the body' becomes, in fact,
a kind of 'prophetism of the body. "'36 In other words, the language of the
body-throughout all of married life, but especially in the conjugal act-is
meant not only to proclaim the mystery of God's life and love, but to en-
able spouses to participate in it. From this perspective, as professor Mary
Rousseau has expressed, morally upright sexual behavior is simply an-
other way of saying "sacramentally efficacious" sexual behavior. 37
For sacramental signs to be efficacious they must accurately symbol-
ize the spiritual reality they are intended to communicate. The "one flesh"
union of husband and wife-inasmuch as it is a sign of Christ's union with
the Church (see Eph 5:31-32)-is meant to symbolize "the entire work of
creation and redemption. "38 It is meant to be a sign of the Trinitarian mys-
35.8/27/80, TB 141-142.
36. 8/22/84, TB 397.
37. See Mary Rousseau, "Eucharist & Gender" Catholic Dossier (September/Oc-
tober, 1996): pp. 19-23. This article is an insightful and provocative treatment of sacra-
mental efficacy as applied to sexual morality and especially the reservation of priestly
ordination to men.
38. 10/ 13/ 82, TB 338-339.
tery hidden in God from all eternity. This is the mystery of eternal Iife-
giving Love and Communion in which man is called to participate through
the "great mystery" of Christ's union with the Church-a union that gives
life and gives it to the full (see Jn 10:10).
But what does a contracepted act of intercourse- that is, an act of inter-
COlLrse that the spouses themselves defraud of its procreative potential-do
to this sacramental picture? We can certainly argue against contraception
purely from natural law (i.e., human reason). But John Paul's catechesis on
the body demonstrates the ultimate theological reason for the immorality
of contraception: it is fundamentally sacrilegious. It profanes the "great
mystery"- the "great sacrament" by falsifying the sign. 39 As the Pope says,
by virtue of their sacrament, spouses have a divine mission "fundamental
for all humanity" to "witness to Love and to Life." But if marital love is
falsified "communion is broken, the mission destroyed."40
• In his insightful book Sex & Sacredness (A Catholic Homage fo Ve-

nus) Christopher DelTick frames his entire discussion of sexuallllorality in
terms of the profane and the sacred. In doing so, he takes the insights of
John Paul's theology of the body to their logical conclusions. To "profane,"
he observes, "refers to whatever we find in front of the temple (pro/anum),
and therefore outside it, to whatever lacks the religious kind of importance.
The 'sacred' will then be whatever does have the religious kind of impor-
tance." As the Church sees it, sex is supremely sacred. "If the word 'sacra-
ment' means anything at all in this connection," Denick writes, "it means
that the symbolic is here the actual- that God is actively present in the
marital bedroom and deeply involved in what happens there .... He's right
in there where the action is; and we, on our side, are correspondingly in-
volved with him." In response to the notion that the Church harps dispro-
portionately on sexual sin, Derrick responds that we may well be tempted
to commit any number of sins. "But unless we go in for Satanism and the
Black Mass, there is only one kind of sin which allures us powerfully and
constantly and which (if committed) will involve the profanation of a sac-
rament." This applies particularly, DelTick believes, to contraception. "In
order to avoid the Cross, we shall be separating love from creativity."
Contracepted intercourse "will still have a theological meaning. But this
will now be Manichaean instead of Christian: we sh(lll be en(lcting [not
faith in Christ, but] the faith of those who denied the possibility of (lilY di-
39. See CCC. 11. 2120.

40. Homily 011 the Feast of the Holy Family, December 30, 1988.
Love and Frui~/itlness 419
rect relationship between God's love and the existence of this troubled
world. The Venus whom we then serve will be daemonic in the rather spe-
cialized sense of being heretical or worse."41
Sexual union is not only a biological process; it is also a theological

process. When we override the divine Word written in our bodies with
contraception, we speak against (we contra-diet) the "great mystery" of
God's life and love that our bodies were created and redeemed to pro-
claim. Insert contraception into this sacramental symbol of married love,
and (knowingly or unknowingly) a couple engages in a counter-sign of the
"great mystery" of creation and redemption. Their union becomes an objec-
tive denial of God's creative and redemptive love. In this way, the objective
language of the body turns the spouses (knowingly or unknowingly) into
"false prophets." In contracepted intercourse, the language of the body is
akin to blasphemy. It speaks not the symbolic Word, but the diabolic anti-
Word (see §5).
Such are the logical, moral, practical, and pastoral conclusions of an
authentic theology of the body. If we are to embrace our own greatness-
our own God-like dignity-as revealed in the Scriptures, we must also em-
brace the demands incumbent upon our dignity. For those who come to
understand the "great mystery" of joining in one flesh, contraception is
simply unthinkable. As John Paul will say in the course of his reflections:
such couples have a "salvific fear" of ever "violating or degrading what
bears in itself the sign of the divine mystery of creation and redemption. "42
92. The Harmony of Authentic Love with Respect For Life

July 11. 18,25; August 8,22, 1984 (TB 386-392,396-399)
John Paul acknowledges that the moral norm taught by Humanae Vitae
is not found literally in Sacred Scripture. Nonetheless, we find the basis for
this teaching in the Scriptures, "especially," the Pope says, "in biblical an-
thropology." Hence, while some would claim the Bible has little or noth-
ing to say on the matter of contraception, the Holy Father believes that it is
"totally reasonable" to look precisely in a biblical "theology of the body"
for the foundation of the truth taught by Humanae Vitae. Precisely within
this full biblical context we realize that the norm upheld by the encyclical
41. Sex & Sacredlless, pp. 23, 97,99, 100.

42. 11114/84, TB 416.
belongs not only to the natural moral law, but also, John Paul stresses, "to
the moral order revealed by God" (389). It is an integral part ofthe "ethos
of redemption." The "the norm of the natural law, based on this 'ethos,'
finds not only a new expression, but also a fuller anthropological and ethi-
cal foundation in the word of the Gospel and in the purifying and corrobo-
rating action ofthe Holy Spirit" (390).
In other words, the immorality of contraception is not the teaching
of men, but the teaching of God, a teaching based on God's revelation.
Therefore, as the Magisterium has stated, "This teaching is to be held as
definitive and irreformable."43 It cannot be changed, nor is it open for
theological debate. Furthermore, insofar as it is a norm of natural law, it
concerns all men and women everywhere-not only members of the
Church. Yet the Church, in particular, is called to witness to this norm
before men. In this context, John Paul appeals to "every believer and es-
pecially every theologian" to "reread and ever morc decply understand
the moral doctrine of the encyclical in this complete context" (390).
Then he adds that his own catechesis on the body is precisely an attempt
at this rereading.
A. Theology of the Body Not Merely a Theory

Having built his theology of the body on the solid foundation of
Christ's own words, the Pope concludes: "The theology ofthe body is not
merely a theory, but rather a specific, evangelical, Christian pedagogy of
the body" (396). It is an education-and the most suitable method of edu-
cation- in the meaning of being human. 44
John Paul says that the importance of the theology of the body derives
from its source-the Bible, especially the Gospels and the words of Christ
himself. The Gospel, "as the message of salvation, reveals man's true good,
for the purpose of modeling ... man's earthly life in the perspective of the
hope of the future world." This is what the encyclical Humanae Vitae pro-
claims. It points to "the true good of man as a person, male and female"
(396). By doing so it shows how the problem of birth regulation can be ad-
dressed in a way that corresponds to man's true dignity and lofty vocation.
It is an entirely biblical idea that God has inscribed his own "lan-
guage," his own Word, in the body in order to reveal his mystery to the
world. Every human being proclaims this mystery through his (or her)
own body. If we are to be ourselves, we must learn to read this divine
43 . Vademecumfor Confessors Concerning Some Aspects of the Morality ofConju-

gal Life, n. 4.
44. See 4/8/80, TB 215.
body-language "in truth." John Paul says: "It is a question here ofthe truth
first in the ontological dimension (,fundamental structure') and then-as a
result-in the subjective and psychological dimension (,significance')"
(388). Here the Pope stresses the primacy of objective reality but also indi-
cates its link with subjective experience. Through this linking, Humanae
Vitae attempts to demonstrate how its moral norm is not imposed from
"outside," but wells up from "within" man. In other words, it is in accord
with the deepest truth about man and, hence, his deepest desires .
• Many would argue that Humanae Vitae did not persuasively demon-
strate this. It is no injustice to Paul VI to recognize that his personalistic
argument, although groundbreaking, needed refinement. But John Paul II's
theology of the body compensates in abundance for whatever might have
been lacking in Paul VI's argument. It imbues precisely that rich and de-
veloped personalism that makes the teaching of Humanae Vitae ring true.
Recall that moral norms are not hurled into emptiness (see §37).
When we learn to read the objective truth of the body, it then enters the
person's consciousness (his subjective dimension) and finds a home
there. We are created for truth, and the honest person knows it when he
finds it. Demonstrating his trust in people's good will, Paul VI writes:
"We believe that our contemporaries are particularly capable of seeing
that this teaching [on the immorality of contraception] is in harmony
with human reason."45 John Paul adds that we should also be capable of
seeing its profound conformity with all that Tradition has gIven us,
which stems from biblical sources.
B. Development of the Council s Teaching

Many claim that the teaching of Humanae Vitae was a step backward
from the forward-looking teaching of Vatican II. On the contrary, the
Council issued strong statements affirming the constant teaching of the
Church on the immorality of contraception. In this context the Council
also referenced some of the most authoritative statements of the modern
Magisterium in this regard, Pius Xl's Casti Connubii being first on the
list. 46 As John Paul states: Humanae Vitae "is not only found to be along
the lines of the Council's teaching, but it also constitutes the development
and completion of the questions contained there, particularly regarding the
question of the 'harmony of human love with respect for life'" (390).
45. Humanae Vitae, n. 12.

46. See Gaudium et Spes, n. 51, endnote 14.
• Endnote 14 of Gaudium et Spes n. 51 reveals part of the reason why

so many people were expecting the Church's teaching to change. The
Council Fathers stated that they reserved judgment on celiain "questions
which need further and more careful investigation." These "have been
handed over... to a commission for the study of population, family, and
births, in order thal, after it fulfills its function, the Supreme Pontiff may
pass judgment." The point in question was the birth control pill. Faulty
natural law arguments that posited the immorality of contraception prima-
rily in the physical obstruction of semen (i.e., barrier methods and with-
drawal) found no grounds against the pill. This new historical situation
raised new considerations. It also pointed to the need for a renewal in
moral theology~away from a physicalist interpretation of natural law to a
personalist one. Just such a renewal was already underway in Poland with
the guidance of Karol Wojtyla. The personalist understanding of the moral
law which he helped develop at the University of Lublin left no doubt
about the immorality of the pill. But the Council's tacit admission of uncer-
tainty on this point gave people the idea that the Church was considering a
change in her teaching. Indeed, as the familiar story goes, the papal com-
mission rendered a split decision to Paul VI: the majority advocating not
only acceptance of the pill, but a complete change in teaching on contra-
ception. In turn, this "majority report" was leaked to the press, fueling
false hopes that an unprecedented Catholic about-face was imminent. So a
maelstrom of opposition was poised and ready when Paul VI, inspired, we
must believe, by the Holy Spirit, saw the wisdom of the "minority report"
and issued Humal7(1e Vitae.
Perhaps the most common argument for contraception is that it en-

ables couples to foster their love for one another when conception is un-
desirable. With this argument in mind, John Paul recalls the Council's
statement that "a true contradiction cannot exist between the divine laws
pertaining to the transmission of life and those pertaining to the fostering
of authentic conjugal love."47 In fact , since the unitive and procreative
meanings of the sexual act are truly inseparable, if the couple violates
one, they also damage the other.
The raison d 'are of joining in "one flesh" is for the spouses to form
a true communio personarum in the image of divine Love and Commun-
ion. However, as John Paul says, when a couple engages in contracepted
intercourse, they may engage in a union of bodies, but they fail to achieve
a true communion of persons. In fact, contraception introduces a divorce
47. Ibid.
at the very heart of the spouses' body-soul integrity. By doing so, it

"strikes at God's creation itself at the level of the deepest interaction of
nature and person."48 If contracepted intercourse claims to express love for
the other person, it can only be a dis-embodied person. It is not a love of
the person for his or her "own sake" (see § 19). It is not a love for the per-
son as God created him or her to be in the full truth of masculinity and
femininity. Instead, by contracepting, spouses implicitly (or even explic-
itly) reject the way God made them as persons. More specifically, they re-
ject the God-ordained unity of body and soul. In this way, by attacking the
procreative meaning of the sexual act, contracepted intercourse "ceases
also to be an act of love" (398).
C. The Essential Evil of Contraception

Truth and love go hand-in-hand. "As ministers of a sacrament which
is constituted by consent and perfected by conjugal union, man and
woman are called to express that mysterious 'language' of their bodies in
all the truth which is proper to it." At this point the Holy Father presents
his most vivid image of sexual love: "By means of gestures and reactions,
by means of the whole dynamism, reciprocally conditioned, of tension and
enjoyment-whose direct source is the body in its masculinity and its
femininity, the body in its action and interaction-by means of all this,
man, the person, 'speaks'" (397-398).
What does the body-person say? Based on the Pope's teaching on the
prophetism of the body we can conclude that if the husband loves his wife
"as Christ loved the Church," he says: "This is my body which is given for
you" (Lk 22: 19). And if the wife responds in love to her husband as the
Church responds to Christ, she says (as the model of the Church says):
"Let it be done to me according to your word" (Lk 1:38). By speaking this
prophetic language honestly, spouses faithfully and continually minister
their sacrament to each other in the true image of the union of Christ and
the Church. By joining in "one flesh" in this way "man and woman recip-
rocally express themselves in the fullest and most profound way possible
to them." They "express themselves in the measure of the whole truth of
the human person" (398). Then the whole "dynamism of tension and en-
joyment" which they experience is a participation in the joy Christ prom-
ised when we love as he loves (see In 15: 11). Indeed, the whole dynamism
of tension and enjoyment is a vehicle of the Holy Spirit, a participation in
divine life, the very grace of the sacrament of marriage.
48. Familiaris Consortia, n. 32.

But insert contraception into this picture and it changes everything.

Void of the sincere gift of self, the whole dynamism of tension and enjoy-
ment becomes an end in itself rather than a fruit of love. In the final analy-
sis, contracepted intercourse amounts to little more than an act of mutual
(or at least one-sided) use and self-seeking. In this regard, contracepted in-
tercourse is closer to an act of (mutual) masturbation than to an act of
spousal love and self-donation.
Rendering the sexual union sterile effectively scrambles the sacra-
mental language of the body. Continuing with the above image, by refus-
ing to give his own potency, the husband declares: "This is my body not
given for you." And by denying the fruitfulness of her own womb, the
wife declares: "Let it not be done to me according to your word." Right at
the great mystery's "moment of truth," the truth is exchanged for a lie. Far
from imaging the union of Christ and the Church, in some sense contra-
cepted intercourse bccomes a "countcr-sign" of thc grcat mystcry-wc
might even sayan "anti-sacrament."
Is this not the deceiver's goal from the beginning? The father of lies
wants us to speak his own language! He wants the Word of the Gospel in-
scribed in our bodies (self-donation) to become his anti-word (self-gratifi-
cation). He wants us to lie with our bodies. According to the Holy Father:
"Such a violation of the interior order of the conjugal union, which is
rooted in the very order of the person, constitutes the essential evil of the
contraceptive act" (398). He adds that the reflections on the "sign" of mar-
riage as a sacrament are of "special validity for this interpretation" (399) .
• In an address entitled "The Church: a Bride Adorned for Her Hus-

band," John Paul contrasted the biblical, feminine figure of Christ's Bride
with "the hostile and furious presence of another female figure, 'Babylon,'
the 'great harlot' (see Rev 17:1,5)." John Paul points out a major differ-
ence between the two: the Bride of Christ (the Church) "is endowed with
an inner fruitfulness by which she constantly brings forth children of
God .... These are the children who form that 'assembly of the first-born
who are enrolled in heaven. '" Thus, in union with the Holy Spirit (the Lord
and Giver of Life), the Bride cries, "Come, Lord Jesus!" (Rev 22:20) In
contrast, John Paul says we recognize the "great whore" of Babylon as the
one who embodies "death and inner barrenness." With an understanding of
the symbolic language of the body gained from John Paul's catechesis on
the body, we might ask which figure from Revelation does contracepted in-
tercourse symbolize-the life-giving Bride of Christ, or the adulterous one
who chooses barrenness? The desire to avoid a pregnancy (when there is
sufficient reason to do so) is not what vitiates contracepted intercourse.

What vitiates the act is the specific choice to render sterile a potentially
fertile union. This changes entirely (contra-dicts) the symbolic meaning of
the act. When spouses have sufficient reason to avoid a pregnancy, it is en-
tirely possible to do so without ever rendering a potentially fertile act ster-
ile, without ever adulterating the sacramental meaning of the act.
93. Humanae Vitae: A Call to Liberation and Responsible

Parenthood
July 25; August 1,22,1984 (TB 392- 394,397)
MalTiage is the primordial sacrament of God's eternal mystery in the

world. God gives it to us as a gift- as a means of entering a covenant rela-
tionship not only with an earthly spouse, but also with him. But God does
not force us to participate in the malTiage covenant according to his de-
signs. He sets forth his designs in creation and confirms them in Christ and
in the teachings of his Church. Then he places us in the freedom of our
own counsel.
A. Interpreting the Eternal Plan ofLove

As John Paul says, God calls every husband and wife "to be a wit-
ness and interpreter of the eternal plan of love" (397). These expressions
indicate a profound and even stunning act of entrustment on God's part.
God places the primordial revelation of his own mystery in human hands
and then he "lets go." In turn, every couple interprets this mystery-
faithfully or unfaithfully-"by becoming the minister of the sacrament
which 'from the beginning' was constituted by the sign of the 'union of
flesh'" (397).
Why such self-abandoned trust on God's part? He knows we will be
unfaithful to his plan. Yes, but he also knows that a spark of our "beatify-
ing beginning" remains despite the distortions of concupiscence, and he is
always looking for ways to fan that spark into flame. The trusting gift of
self is the only way to "revive" our authentic humanity. He is willing to
take that risk of entrusting himself to us even if we take advantage of that
trust: even if we shun him-even if we crucify him-in his very act of en-
trustment. Some might ask: "Why does God even give us the possibility of
spoiling his plan?" Here again we contemplate the mystery of human free-
dom. Ifwe did not have the ability to forsake God's plan-to twist, distort,
and malign it-we would not have the ability to enter into it. For love to
be love, it must be free. In other words, as discussed previously, without

the possibility of sin there is no possibility oflove (see §§ 12,25,42).
Every time a husband and wife form that "sign" of the union of flesh,
God is wooing them to open up to him and his eternal designs. But if a
husband and wife are detached from that "spark" of God's original plan,
they will have difficulty recognizing that their sexual union is a "sign" of
anything beyond their own desire for a gratifying experience of shared
pleasure. They will want to call this "love," but in reality, what is often
called love, "if subjected to searching critical examination turns out to be,
contrary to all appearances, only a form of 'utilization' of the person"49
stemming from concupiscence. When man and woman are cut off from
their own dignity and lofty calling, concupiscent "love" seems quite nor-
mal to them. Sadly, it may be all they lmow and all they have ever known.
Such a couple may desire a few children along the way. But prior to that,
or once they have the desired number, they will almost inevitably view
contraception or even surgical sterilization as the most expedient way to
continue "loving" one another without fear of an "unwanted pregnancy. "50
If they are Catholic, they will probably brush offthe Church's teaching as
"out of touch," impractical, and not "pastoral."
B. True Pastoral Concern

John Paul II responds to such accusations by defining the true nature
of pastoral concern. "Pastoral concern," he insists, "means the search for
the true good of man, a promotion of the values engraved in his person by
God." In this context, there is indeed a "rule of understanding." But this
does not consist in watering down the true dignity of man. Instead, the rule
of understanding "is directed to the ever clearer discovery of God's plan
for human love, in the certitude that the only true good of the human per-
son consists in fulfilling this divine plan" (392).
John Paul remarks that whoever believes that Humanae Vitae does
not sufficiently take into account the difficulties present in concrete life

50. Dr. William E. May is keen to point out that the slogan of contraception and
abortion proponents is "No unwanted child ought ever to be bom." However, the truth
proclaimed by the Church in the name of Christ is that "No person ought to be unwanted"
(see The John Paul II Institute 1993-1995 Academic Catalogue, p. 41). This sums up well
the disparity between secular and Christian humanisms.
does not understand the pastoral concern at the origin of the document.
Throughout his encyclical, Paul VI is solicitous of the real problems and
questions of modem man in all their import and states explicitly that he
has no desire to pass over these concerns in silence. He acknowledges that
some might find the encyclical's teaching "gravely difficult" if not "im-
possible to observe." He states plainly, in fact, that men and women can-
not live this teaching "unless God came to their help with that grace by
which the good will of men is sustained and strengthened. "51 If God makes
serious demands on us, at the same time he pours out all the grace needed
for men and women not only to meet those demands, but fulfill them su-
per-abundantly.
Paul VI's choice was either to trust in God's grace, or to compromise
the truth. What is the truly loving, the truly "pastoral" thing to do? As Paul
VI stated in his encyclical: "To diminish in no way the saving teaching of
Christ constitutes an eminent form of charity for souls."52 Humanae Vitae,
in fact, is nothing other than a call for men and women to embrace their
own "greatness"-to embrace the full truth of what it means to be created
in the image and likeness of God and redeemed in Jesus Christ. Is this not
pastoral? Is this impractical? Is this only an ideal that needs to be adjusted
in light of man's concrete possibilities? We have already recorded John
Paul's response to this question:
But what are "the concrete possibilities of man"? And of which man are
we speaking? Of man dominated by lust or of man redeemed by Christ?
This is what is at stake: the reality of Christ's redemption. Christ has re-
deemed us! This means he has given us the possibility of realizing the
entire truth of our being; he has set our freedom free from the domina-
tion of concupiscence. And if redeemed man still sins, this is not due to
an imperfection of Christ's redemptive act, but to man's will not to avail
himself of the grace which flows from that act. God's command is of
course proportioned to man's capabilities; but to the capabilities of the
man to whom the Holy Spirit has been given; of the man who, though he
has fallen into sin, can always obtain pardon and enjoy the presence of
the Holy Spirit. 5]
51. See Humanae Vitae, nn. 3,20,25.

53. Veritatis Splendor, n. 103 (emphasis in original).
Humanae Vitae, then, is a call to faith in the real power of redemp-

tion. It is a call to a radical paradigm shift in which we listen attentively to
that "echo" of God's original plan deep within us and refuse to normalize
concupiscence. Yes, Humanae Vitae, so often viewed as oppressive, calls
us to liberation! It calls us to live in the true freedom of love. It calls us to
respond to the unreserved gift God gives to us with the unreserved gift of
ourselves to him.
C. Responsible Parenthood
Does this mean that couples are to leave the number of children they
have entirely to "chance"? No. Both the teaching of Vatican II and
Humanae Vitae, in calling couples to a responsible love, call them also to a
responsible parenthood.
As John Paul II expresses, "responsible parenthood requires that
husband and wife, 'keeping a right order of priorities, recognize their
own duties toward God, themselves, their families and society' (HV, 10).
One cannot therefore speak of 'acting arbitrarily.' On the contrary the mar-
ried couple 'must act in conformity with God's creative intention' (HV,
10)" (394). This, of course, implies a mature ability on the part of husband
and wife to discern God's intention for the size of their family. The coun-
sel of a priest or spiritual director can certainly assist them in this regard.
However, the Church wisely teaches that it "is the married couple them-
selves who must in the last analysis arrive at these judgments before
God."54 No one else can make this judgment for them. And John Paul
states that this point is "of particular importance to determine ... the moral
character of 'responsible parenthood'" (393).
The Council limits the guidance it gives to couples to the following:
Husband and wife should consider "their own good and the good of the
children already born or yet to come." They should "read the signs of the
times and of their own situation on the material and spiritual level." Fi-
nally, they should consider "the good of the family, of society, and of the
Church."55 One couple might prudently make these considerations and
choose to have a large family. Another couple might prudently make these
considerations and choose to limit their family size. So long as both
couples are acting in a way that respects the meaning of sexual union-in
a way that never falsifies the language of the body- the Church teaches
that they are both exercising responsible parenthood. 56
54. Gaudium et Spes, n. 50; emphasis added.

55. Ibid.
94. The Natural Regulation of Births

August 1,8,22, 1984 (TB 393-399)
It is a myth that the Catholic Church teaches that couples must have
as many children as is physically possible. The Church readily recognizes,
particularly in our day and age, that in the course of married life couples
might have just reason to avoid a pregnancy. As John Paul points out,
Humanae Vitae admits that even those who use contraception can be moti-
vated by "acceptable reasons" for avoiding pregnancy. However, the Holy
Father also emphasizes that the end never justifies the means. Contracep-
tion remains a grievous violation of the sacramental sign of married love
regardless of the motives for using it. In this context John Paul refers to
the following teaching of the Council:
When it is a question of harmonizing married love with the responsible
transmission of life, it is not enough to take only the good intention and
the evaluation of motives into account; objective criteria must be used,
criteria drawn from the nature of the human person and human action,
criteria which respect the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human
procreation in the context of true love; all this is possible only if the vir-
tue of married chastity is seriously practiced. 57
"The relative principle of conjugal morality is, therefore, fidelity to
the divine plan manifested in the 'intimate structure of the conjugal act'
and in the 'inseparable connection of the two significances of the conju-
gal act'" (394).
B. Non-Procreative versus Anti-Procreative

Suppose a couple has just reasons for avoiding a pregnancy. What
could they possibly do that would in no way violate the objective meaning
of conjugal intercourse?
Every time a couple engages in the marital embrace they must speak
the language of their bodies in truth. In other words, they must renew hon-
estly (with their bodies) the commitments they freely made at the altar-
commitments of fidelity, permanence, and openness to children. But are
couples always obligated to engage in intercourse? Indeed, on various oc-
casions in life a couple may have good reason to refrain from intercourse.
In such cases, abstinence itself becomes an expression oflove. The need to
avoid a pregnancy is just such an occasion. In itself, refraining from mari-
tal union to avoid a pregnancy in no way violates the truth of intercourse
as a "sign." In order actively and directly to violate the sign of intercourse,
you must first engage in it. Only then can you defraud it of its meaning.
57. Gaudium et Spes, n. 51 .

Furthermore, what if a couple who were abstaining from intercourse

to avoid a pregnancy were to discover-based on the very way God de-
signed human fertility-that an act of intercourse on a given day would be
naturally infertile. Would they be doing anything that objectively violated
the sign of conjugal union by engaging in intercourse then? Would they be
contracepting? In other words, would they be doing anything to impede
the procreative potential of that act of intercourse?
Herein lies the specific moral difference between contraception and
the natural means of regulating fertility. It is true, as Humanae Vitae rec-
ognizes, that "in each case married couples, for acceptable reasons, are
both perfectly clear in their intention to avoid children." Paul VI even
states that "they mean to make sure none will be born. "58 However, in the
one case, infertile intercourse is an act of God. In the other case, the
couple take the powers of life into their own hands with the intent of
thwarting God's creative designs.
Anyone who thinks the moral difference here is a matter of splitting
hairs must answer the following question. What is the moral difference be-
tween a miscarriage and an abortion? The result is the same-a dead baby.
But one is an "act of God," and in the other, man takes the powers of life
into his own hands. As John Paul says elsewhere: "Contraception is to be
judged so profoundly unlawful as never to be, for any reason, justified. To
think or to say the contrary is equal to maintaining that in human life, situ-
ations may arise in which it is lawful not to recognize God as God."59
Married couples who recognize God as God realize, as Paul VI points
out, that they are not the masters of the sources of life, but rather the min-
isters of the design established by the Creator. GO As Creator, God calls mar-
ried couples to be procreative (see Gen 1:28). Spouses may at times have a
just reason to be non-procreative. But it would violate the very essence of
married love to be anti-procreative. Abstaining from intercourse and engag-
ing in naturally infertile intercourse are both non-procreative behaviors. In
this way, as Humanae Vitae states, couples can "control birth without of-
fending moral principles."61 However, to render an act of intercourse infer-
tile is to engage in anti-procreative behavior. One harmonizes with the
nature of man and of marital love, while the other grievously contradicts
both.

59. L 'Osservatore Romano, October 10, 1983, p. 7.
61. Ibid, n. 16.
Love alld Fruitjitlness 431
• We speak of "natural" family planning (NFP) specifically because

of this-it hannonizes with the nature of man and of marital intercourse.
NFP is morally acceptable not because it is not "artificial," but because it is
not contraceptive. Couples who use NFP morally never impede the procre-
ative potential of any of their acts of intercourse. In this way, the value of
the "sign" of intercourse remains objectively intact. Likewise, artificial
birth control is not immoral because it is atiificial, but because it is contra-
ceptive-because it objectively violates the sign. In my opinion, the term
"artificial" should be dropped from the discussion altogether as it only con-
fuses the issue. Most confusing of all is the phrase "artificial contracep-
tion," as it implies that NFP is somehow "natural contraception." NFP is
not contraception at all! This, in fact, is the key distinction.
B. Two Irreconcilable Views of the Person

Some object that the Church's teaching reduces morality to the laws
of biology. Faulty and impersonal interpretations of natural law may merit
such an accusation. However, when the accusation of "biologism" is lev-
eled outright against the Church's teaching on the proper regulation of
births, it conceals within itself a pernicious vision of the human being
which effectively divorces body and soul.
As John Paul wrote in Familiaris Consortia: "The difference, both
anthropological and moral, between contraception and recourse to the
rhythm of the cycle .. .is much wider and deeper than is usually thought,
one which involves in the final analysis two irreconcilable concepts of the
human person and of human sexuality."62 In the one view, the body-in-
cluding its fertility-is seen as integral to the person and, hence, as inte-
gral to self-giving love. In the other view, the body is seen as part of the
realm of sub-human "nature" over which the person has dominion. From
the latter perspective, man sees no moral problem in applying the same
techniques of dominion to his body and feliility which he exerts over the
forces of nature. In fact, doing so is necessary, they say, in order to "hu-
manize" the processes of reproduction. 63 But such language betrays a radi-
cal divorce between the physical and the personal in man.
62. Familiaris COllsortio, n. 32.

63. The "majority report" of what camc to bc dubbed the "papal birth control com-
mission" used precisely such language. In seeking to justify contraception it spoke of
"the duly to humanize ... what is given in nature." For "it is natural to man to use his skill
in order to pnt under human control what is given by physical nature." The processes of
fertility do not need to be "humanized." They are already fully human!
We have previously quoted the Holy Father saying that the "whole
development of modern science .. .is based on the separation, in man, of
that which is corporeal in him, from that which is spiritual."64 In his Letter
to Families John Paul writes: "The separation of spirit and body in man
has led to a growing tendency to consider the human body not in accor-
dance with .. .its specific likeness to God, but rather on the basis of its simi-
larity to all the other bodies present in the world of nature, bodies which
man uses as raw material in his efforts to produce goods for consumption."
(We engineer tomatoes and cattle to suit our preferences. Why not engineer
our own bodies?) John Paul concludes: "When the human body... comes to
be used as raw material in the same way that the bodies of animals are
used ... we will inevitably arrive at a dreadful ethical defeat."65
Humanae Vitae stands as a constant reminder that "biological laws ...
involve human personality."66 When we tinker with the human body, we
tinker not just with laws of biology, but with human persons in their body-
soul integrity. Marital love and responsible parenthood require that
spouses come to embrace the harmony of biology and personality. Domin-
ion over the "forces of nature," when applied to the important question of
regulating births, must never mean obliterating some integral aspect of hu-
man nature and personality. The only proper "dominion" to speak of in
this case is that of self-mastery of one's drives and desires. Unfortunately,
as John Paul observes, modern man shows a tendency to transfer the meth-
ods proper to the dominion of drives and desires to the domination of his
physical constitution. Man looks to dominate his biology through medi-
cine and technology in an attempt to dodge the ascetic effort required by
spiritual and moral responsibility.
In fact, according to John Paul, the essence ofthe Church's teaching
on contraception lies right here-in maintaining an adequate relationship
between dominion of the forces of nature and mastery of self. Without
self-mastery, man puts his intelligence at the service of manipulation
rather than love. In turn, when intelligence is no longer informed by love,
it exults in what it can do rather than in what it should do. Man comes to
relate to himself and to all of creation not with loving care and respect, but
with a selfish will to dominate and control. Man's proper dominion over
creation, therefore, always begins with a proper understanding and experi-
ence of self-mastery in the male-female relationship. Man's freedom-or
64.4/8/81, TB 215.
lack thereof-to choose the good in his sexual life will always reveal the
manner in which he exercises dominion over creation. Our study of Gen-
esis already revealed the profound interrelationship between the male-fe-
male communion and human dominion over the earth (see § 11).
C. Self-Mastery and the Freedom of the Gift

Paul VI acknowledges that man "has made stupendous progress in the
domination and rational organization of the forces of nature to the point
that he is endeavoring to extend this control over every aspect of his own
life-over his body, over his mind and emotions, over his social life, and
even over the laws that regulate the transmission of life."67 Yet John Paul
asserts that dominating the natural processes of fertility through contracep-
tion "menaces the human person for whom the method of 'self-mastery' is
and remains specific." Self-mastery corresponds to the fundamental consti-
tution of the person as a subject. In this sense exercising self-mastery is a
"natural" method of birth regulation because it is "natural" to man to be in
control of his own drives and desires. Resorting to contraception, on the
contrary, "destroys the constitutive dimension of the person; it deprives
man of the subjectivity proper to him and makes him an object ofmanipu-
lation" (397).
In other words, the only type of "birth control" in keeping with hu-
man dignity is self-control. Why do we spay or neuter our pets? Precisely
because they cannot say no to the urge to mate. We can. If we say other-
wise we deny our original solitude before God. We deny that which distin-
guishes us from the animals. We deny our dignity as subjects. We deny the
essence of our humanity. As the Pope observes: "Man is precisely a person
because he is master of himself and has self-control. Indeed, insofar as he
is master of himself he can 'give himself' to the other. And it is this di-
mension-the dimension of the liberty of the gift-which becomes essen-
tial and decisive for that ' language of the body,' in which man and woman
reciprocally express themselves in the conjugal union" (398).68
Without self-mastery, no true gift of self takes place, but only some-
thing akin to the mating of animals. In other words, if one cannot say "no"
to sexual intercourse, his "yes" is emptied of its meaning. He is no differ-
ent from the animals and he cannot express love. All he can do is indulge
concupiscence (see §27). The man who fails to master himself-to master
his own drives and desires-will inevitably seek to master others in order
to satisfy those drives and desires. Manipulation replaces love.
67 . Humana e Vitae, n. 2.
68. See CCC, n. 2339.
From this perspective, a little-recognized fact comes to light. In the

final analysis, contraception was not invented to prevent pregnancy. We al-
ready had a perfectly safe, infallibly reliable way of doing that: abstinence.
Certainly other motives came into play, but ultimately, if necessity is the
mother of invention, the "necessity" that mothered contraception was the
desire to indulge sexual instinct without restraint-without abstinence.
This can only stem from concupiscence.
In these ways we see how John Paul's defense of Humanae Vitae
plunges its roots deep into the soil of the garden of Eden-into the truth of
man's original solitude, unity, and nakedness which empowered him to
image God as a subject in the freedom of self-giving love. This is the "full
truth" about man, the truth he must reclaim if he is ever to be himself. And
contraception attacks this truth at its roots .
• Magisterial statements on what constitutes responsible parenthood

provide the appropriate balance sometimes lacking in various circles of
those who accept the Church's teaching against contraception. In general,
there seem to be two poles in a "mentality conflict" among such people.
One pole seems to minimize the necessity of having just reasons to avoid
pregnancy, while the other seems to think that couples are obligated to pro-
create unless avoiding pregnancy is a matter of life and death. The prim31Y
danger of the former mentality is that of selfishness in avoiding children. 69
Couples with the latter mentality, however, may end up practicing another
less obvious form of selfishness. Large families are often the result of pru-
dent consideration and selfless giving. Other times, however, large families
may be a result of the couple's lack of freedom to abstain from intercourse.
Self-mastery is an absolute prerequisite of authentic conjugal love. This is
why the practice of periodic continence is such an aid to marital love. The
freedom to say "no" demonstrates the authenticity of the couple's "yes."
Thus, even if a couple has prudently concluded that they have no serious
reason to avoid pregnancy, occasional periods of abstincncc should bc
practiced (obviously these need not be during the fertile period) in order to
foster authentic freedom in self-giving. The point is that parenthood can
only be considered "responsible" when either the choice to avoid inter-
course during the fertile time, or the choice to engage in it, is free of any
selfish sting.
69. See CCC, n. 2368.

95. The Integral Vision of Natural Fertility Regulation

August 22, 28; September 5; October 3,31,1984 (397-405, 411-412)
If we are to understand how natural fertility regulation differs sub-

stantially from contraception, we must have an "integral vision of man"
and of his vocation. We must understand who man is as a person made in
God's image as male and female. We must understand who man is as a
subject created "for his own sake," who can only find himselfthrough "the
sincere gift of himself."
Safeguarding these anthropological truths is the raison d'etre of the
encyclical Humanae Vitae. For contraception directly attacks the truth that
man is created in God's image and likeness. It directly attacks man's sub-
jectivity and his call to sincere self-giving. Yes, the very identity of man is
at stake in the debate about contraception. Contraception is a betrayal of
our humanity.
A. Naturalness at the Level of the Person

The Holy Father insists that the "whole question of the encyclical
Humanae Vitae ... goes back to the very SUbjectivity of man" (411). Anyone
would certainly misinterpret the encyclical who would see in "responsible
parenthood" merely a reduction to a "biological rhythm of fertility." John
Paul insists that the "author of the encyclical energetically disapproves of
and contradicts any form of reductive interpretation ... and insistently repro-
poses the integral intention" (404 - 405).
When we view the issue of birth regulation with this "integral inten-
tion"-that is, with an understanding of man's incarnate SUbjectivity-we
realize that this "question belongs not so much to biology as to psychol-
ogy: from biology and psychology it then passes into the sphere of the
spirituality of marriage and the family" (411----412) . It passes into the
sphere of religion and theology-a theology that seeks God's revelation in
the body. John Paul observes that without this perspective, the method of
natural birth regulation is frequently separated from its proper ethical di-
mensions and is, therefore, put into effect in a merely functional, even
utilitarian, way. In this situation "one no longer sees the difference be-
tween it and the other 'methods' ... and one comes to the point of speaking
of it as ifit were only a different form of contraception" (403).
Such is the case when the "naturalness" of natural birth regulation is
viewed only at the level of biology. But the integral vision recognizes, as
John Paul insists, that "this is 'naturalness' at the level of the person.
Therefore there can be no thought of a mechanical application of biologi-
cal laws. The knowledge itself of the 'rhythms of fertility' - even though
indispensable-still does not create the interior freedom of the gift which
is [needed] to make possible the giving of self to the other."70 The call to
regain this interior freedom is at the heart of Humanae Vitae s integral vi-
sion of natural birth regulation.
B. Personalist interpretation of Natural Law

Being free with the interior freedom of the gift is man's natural state.
It was man's state "in the beginning." The call to regain this freedom-
inherent in the encyclical Humanae Vitae-is also inherent in John Paul's
personalist understanding of the natural law. 71
The natural law is often confused with the "laws of nature." The laws
of nature pertain to those laws which govern irrational beings, whereas
natural law pertains to man's rational participation in the divine law. 72
Thus, in speaking of the teaching of Humanae Vitae as a norm of the natu-
ral law, "we mean that' order of nature' in the field of procreation insofar
as it is understood by right reason" (401). Linking the objective truth of
natural law with the modern "turn to the subject," John Paul stresses that
the natural law refers to "man not only in the 'natural' aspect of his exist-
ence, but also in the integral truth of his personal subjectivity" (397). The
order of the natural law "is the expression of the Creator's plan for man."
Hence, the Holy Father states that the virtue expressed in natural fertility
regulation is determined not so much by fidelity to an impersonal "natural
law" but by fidelity "to the Creator-Person, the source and Lord of the or-
der which is manifested in such a law" (401).
Although John Paul himself does not explicitly point this out, we see
here a link between the natural law and the sacramentality of the body.
The body reveals the mystery and plan of God for man. This plan, in-
scribed in our bodies, is only impersonal if our bodies are impersonal. But
the body is the "sacrament" of the person. Furthermore, in Christ, the hu-
man body is the sacrament of the divine Person of the Word. Thus, from
the perspective of the theology of the body, the natural law is anything but
impersonal. It is the law of the gift. It is the law of the freedom of the gift
of persons. In other words, it is the law of life-giving love written in our
persons by a personal God who destines us for the communion of per-
sons-human and divine. John Paul repeats that from this perspective, the
reduction to a mere biological regularity, separated from the Creator's
plan, deforms the authentic thought of the encyclical Humanae Vitae.
70. 11/7/84, TB 414.

71. See CCC, nn. 1954- 1960.
72. See CCc, n. 1955.
So, in the case of conforming to the natural law in regulating fertility,

the Pope emphasizes that it is not a question of "reducing ethics to biology,"
as some have mistakenly held. It "is a question of the real good of human
persons and of what corresponds to the true dignity of the person" (402).
C. Having a Procreative Attitude

The integral intention of natural fertility regulation also presupposes of
spouses "a definite family and procreative attitude: that is to say, it requires
'that they acquire and possess solid convictions about the true values of life
and of the family' (HV, 21)" (399-400). In a contraceptive culture, children
are often looked upon as a burden to be resisted rather than a blessing to
be embraced. In such a milieu, couples often enter marriage with an atti-
tude toward children that assumes they will not have them unless or until
they "want" them. Without thinking much of it, couples who take this ap-
proach will simply look for the most expedient way to carry out their plan
of avoiding "unwanted" children.
Suppose such a couple chose to use the natural method of avoiding
pregnancy. This would not correspond to Humanae Vitae s integral vision
of responsible parenthood. Although they would not objectively violate
the value of the sign of conjugal intercourse, they would violate that sign
subjectively. They would violate that sign "in their hearts." The Holy Fa-
ther clarifies: "As regards the immediate motivation, the encyclical
Humanae Vitae requires that 'there exist reasonable grounds for spacing
births, arising from the physical or psychological condition of husband or
wife, or from external circumstances ... ' (HV, 16)" (400). John Paul II con-
cludes: "The use of the 'infertile periods' for conjugal union can be an
abuse if the couple, for unworthy reasons, seeks in this way to avoid hav-
ing children, thus lowering the number of births in their family below the
morally correct level" (402).
"Humanae Vitae presents 'responsible parenthood' as a high ethical
value. In no way is it exclusively directed to limiting, much less excluding
children; it means also the willingness to accept a larger family" (402).
The integral vision of natural fertility regulation, then, does not involve
merely a "mode of behavior" in a certain field. It involves an attitude
based on the integral moral maturity of the spouses. John Paul says that
this morally mature attitude can be described in biblical terms as "living
by the Spirit." He then adds that confusion arises about the difference be-
tween contraception and periodic abstinence precisely when this moral
maturity is lacking. Herein lies the importance of the theology of the body
understood as a pedagogy of the body. Instruction in the truth of the body
and its language of divine-human love fosters just such moral maturity in
men and women.
43R THEOLOGY OF THE BODY EXPLAINED
• The following analogy may demonstrate not only the important

moral distinction between contraception and natural feliility regulation, but
also the necessary moral attitude that must accompany the integral inten-
tion of natural family planning. Our natural attitude toward others should
be one that desires their life and good health. Circumstances, however,
could lead us to have a righteous desire for God to call someone on to the
next life. Suppose an elderly relative was suffering greatly with age and
disease. You could have a noble desire for his passing. It is one thing in
such a situation to suffer with your loved one while waiting patiently for
his natural death. In such a situation there would be nothing blameworthy
even to be grateful for his death when it occurred. This would be akin to
having a righteous desire to avoid a pregnancy, waiting until the naturally
infertile time to consummate your marriage, and even rejoicing that God
has granted a time of infertility. But, retuming to the elderly relative, it
would be quite another thing to take the powers oflife into your own hands
and kill him because you cannot bear his sufferings. This would be akin to
rendering yourself sterile because you cannot bear the suffering of absti-
nence. Taking this analogy a step fmiher, it is also possible that your desire
for your relative's death might be unrighteous. You may have some SOli of
hatred toward him that would lead you to wish him dead. You may not kill
him yourself, indeed he may die of a natural cause, but nonetheless your
rejoicing in his death would be blameworthy. This is akin to a couple who
uses natural family planning with an unrighteous desire to avoid a preg-
nancy. Their rejoicing in the infertile time would also be blameworthy be-
cause it is motivated by a selfish, anti-child mentality.
"The concept of a morally correct regulation of fertility is nothing

other than the rereading of the 'language of the body' in truth." And, as
John Paul continues: "It is necessary to bear in mind that the 'body speaks'
not merely with the whole extemal expression of masculinity and feminin-
ity, but also with the intemal structures of the organism." Perhaps the most
decisive "internal structure" of the human body-person is his and her fer-
tility and the preparedness of the woman's womb to bear new life. "All
this should find its appropriate place in that language in which husband
and wife dialogue with each other, as persons called to the communion of
'the union of the body'" (402).
In this way the Pope observes that the theology of the body, under-
stood as the pedagogy of the body, leads to the "theology of the family." In
other words, when we understand the meaning of the body as a theology,
we understand that its potential procreativity-its potential to establish or
increase the family-is an integral part of the body's capacity to image
and participate in the creative love of God. Hence, the theology of the
family flows directly from the theology of the body.
96. Outline of an Authentic Marital Spirituality

October 3, 1984 (TB 404-406)
By demonstrating the evil of contraception and by outlining a respon-

sible means of regulating fertility, Humanae Vitae outlines the Christian
spirituality of marriage and family life. Conjugal spirituality consists first in
understanding God's plan for the body, marriage, and sexual union. Secondly,
it consists in opening one's flesh-and the "one flesh" spouses become-to
the in-spiration of the Spirit who empowers spouses to live according to their
great dignity and lofty vocation. John Paul reminds us that authentic marital
spirituality can only be lived if spouses bear in mind the whole doctrine on
chastity understood as the life ofthe Spirit (see Gal 5:25).73
John Paul has been developing precisely these themes in his cateche-
sis on the body. Therefore, as he concludes, education in the theology of
the body ("theology-pedagogy") "already constitutes per se the essential
nucleus of conjugal spirituality" (404).
A. Christian Realism
According to John Paul, the feasibility of the norm confirmed by
Humanae Vitae "constitutes one of the most essential questions (and cur-
rently also one of the most urgent ones) in the sphere of the spirituality of
marriage."74 Many people, in light of their own weaknesses, look at this
teaching as hopelessly unrealistic. Paul VI, as a faithful witness to Christ,
wants to reassure his readers that God's power is made perfect in weakness
(see 2 Cor 12:9). He proclaims that through the Sacrament of Matrimony
spouses "are strengthened and ... consecrated to the faithful fulfillment of
their duties; to realizing to the full their vocation." In this way spouses bear
witness "to Christ before the world. "75
This "strength" and "consecration," as John Paul emphasizes, is none
other than "the love planted in the heart ('poured out into our hearts') by
the Holy Spirit" (405). And the "sketch of conjugal spirituality" found in
Humanae Vitae intends to place in relief precisely those "powers" which
make the authentic Christian witness of married life a living possibility.
73. See 8/28/84, TB 400 (§§41, 81).

74.10/31184, TB 411.
Humanae Vitae is certainly aware of man's weaknesses, but it does not

base its conclusions on them. To do so would empty the cross of its power.
To do so would drain Christianity of its life-blood. Humanae Vitae bases its
conclusions on the reality of the power of God that has been poured into our
hearts through Christ's death and resurrection. This is authentic Christian re-
alism. As John Paul observes, Humanae Vitae s view of married life is
marked at every step by such realism. Humanae Vitae preaches Christ cruci-
fied-a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles. But to those
whom God has called, Humanae Vitae proclaims the wisdom and power of
God (see I Cor 1:23- 24). It calls Christ's followers to take up their crosses
and travel on the narrow path of salvation (see Mt 7: 14).
Can men and women live the teaching of Humanae Vitae relying on
their own resources? A realistic assessment of human weaknesses says
"no." But to whom is this teaching given? To men and women who remain
slaves to their weaknesses, or to men and women who have been set free
by Jesus Christ to love as he loves? As Christ says in the verses following
his discourse on the "one flesh" union: "With men this is impossible, but
with God all things are possible" (Mt 19:26). As both Paul VI and John
Paul II remind us, the Church does not only lay down the demands of
God's law and then leave men and women to their own resources in at-
tempting to carry it out. The Church '''is also the herald of salvation and
through the sacraments she flings wide open the channels of grace through
which man is made a new creature. '" In his new creation man can respond
'''in charity and true freedom to the design of his Creator and Savior, expe-
riencing too the sweetness of the yoke of Christ' ... (HV, 25)" (404).
Here our previous reflections on the ethos of redemption are most
pertinent. Ultimately the teaching of Humanae Vitae is a question of faith.
Do we believe in the gift of God? Do we believe that Christ died and rose
again to free us from our sins and empower us to live according to God's
original plan? Do we believe that the Holy Spirit-the very power and
love of God-has been poured into our heat1s? These could not be more
crucial questions with which to confront men and women, husbands and
wives, of today. To fault the Church for her teaching in Humanae Vitae is
to fault the Church for calling men and women to holiness- to faith in the
Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Let us recall John Paul II's definition of faith: ''faith, in its deepest
essence, is the openness of the human heart to the gift: to God s self-com-
munication in the Holy Spirit. " 76 Without such faith, it is impossible to live
an authentic marital spirituality. And without an authentic marital spirituality
76. Dominum et Vivijicantem, n. 51 .

it's impossible to live the teaching of Humanae Vitae. But with such faith,
men and women can move mountains (see Mt 17:20); men and women can
walk on water (see Mt 14:29); men and women can live God's plan for
marital love as it was established "in the beginning" (see Mt 19:8).
B. Infallible Means ofMarital Spirituality

The encyclical also marks the road spouses must travel in living this
spirituality. Paul VI admits that spouses must pass through the "narrow
gate" and travel along the "hard way." But this, for all Christians, is the
way that leads to etemallife. 77 John Paul adds that even if the gate is nar-
row, awareness of the future life opens up "a broad horizon of power" to
guide spouses along their way. Humanae Vitae "points out how the mar-
ried couple must implore the essential 'power' and every other 'divine
help' through prayer; how they must draw grace and love from the ever
living fountain of the Eucharist." Furthermore, spouses "must overcome
'with humble perseverance' their deficiencies and sins in the Sacrament of
Penance" (405-406). Prayer and the sacraments-especially the Eucharist
and Penance: These are the "infallible and indispensable" means, John
Paul stresses, "for forming the Christian spirituality of married life and
family life. With these, that essential and spiritual creative 'power' of love
reaches human hearts and, at the same time, human bodies in their subjec-
tive masculinity and femininity" (406). As quoted previously: "The sacra-
ments inject sanctity into the plan of man's humanity: they penetrate the
soul and body, the femininity and masculinity of the personal subject, with
the power of sanctity."78
The sacramental life is the place where we work out the restoration
of God's original plan for our humanity. In the final analysis, men and
women have two choices-holiness or the betrayal of their humanity.
Spouses, too, must choose between holiness in their conjugal union or the
betrayal of their marriage. God's love poured into the spouses' whole
spiritual-sexual being-"allows the building of the whole life of the mar-
ried couple according to that 'truth of the sign. '" In this way "marriage is
built up in its sacramental dignity, as the central point of the encyclical re-
veals (see HV, 12)" (406). As John Paul writes in his Letter to Families,
"When a man and a woman in marriage mutually give and receive each
other in the unity of 'one flesh,' the logic of the sincere gift of self be-
comes a part of their life. Without this, marriage would be empty."79 In

78.7/4/84, TB 378.
other words, when the consummate expression of the sign of married love
is lived faithfully, it bears fruit in the whole life of the married couple.
Conversely, when the whole of married life is lived faithfully, it bears fruit
in the faithful expression of its consummate sign. The opposite is also true.
If sexual union is lived as a counter-sign of authentic love, it undermines
the whole reality of married life. And if the whole of married life is
marked by a lack of commitment to the demands of love, sexual union will
be marked by the same. In fact, it will be inherently dishonest.
Once again we see a parallel with the Eucharist. Ifwe receive Christ's
body worthily, our communion bears fruit in our whole life. Conversely, if
we live a faithful Christian life it affords a worthy reception of Christ's
Body in the Eucharist. However, if we receive Christ's Body unworthily, it af-
fects our whole Christian life. In fact, we profane our union with Christ and
eat and drink judgment upon ourselves (see 1 Cor 13 :27-29). And if our life
is marked by a lack of commitment to Christ, receiving his Body in the Eu-
charist can be nothing but a lie.
97. The Role of Conjugal Love in the Life of Spouses

October 10, 1984 (TB 406-408)
In his audience of October 10, 1984, John Paul again, even if very
quietly, seems to offer a solution to an ongoing theological debate. This
time it regards the role of conjugal love in the life of spouses. Some back-
ground infonnation on the issue is needed if we are to realize the impor-
tance of the Holy Father's contribution.
According to John Paul, conjugal love~inspired by the Holy Spirit
(by the Person-Love8°)~is the key element of the spirituality of spouses
and parents. This may seem like an obvious observation. However, it actu-
ally represents a new emphasis in both Catholic theology and Magisterial
teaching influenced by the personalistic tum of the twentieth century. Tra-
ditional theological and Magisterial treatments of marriage are marked by
what, today, seems like a glaring underemphasis or even devaluing of the
role of conjugal love in the life of spouses. The interpretation of suspicion
may have played its role, but this deficiency can also be explained, at least
in part, by the traditional way of "doing theology." Love as lived and ex-
perienced in marriage is primarily an interior reality. Traditional, objective
analyses of marriage could not penetrate the subjective dimensions of
love. Instead, traditional formulations~in keeping with their objective
80. See Dominwn et Vivificantem, n. 10.

Love and Fruitfttlness 443
methodologies-focused on the specific and ordered ends of marriage:

procreation being the primary end; mutual help and the remedy for con-
cupiscence being secondary ends.
A. The Poles of the Debate

The modem shift in consciousness is much more attune to the need
of incorporating the interior dimensions of love into a theology of mar-
riage. Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II is not only one of the main proponents of
this need, but he is also one of the main architects behind the construction
of a modem theology of marriage that successfully develops this need. As
we have already quoted him saying, without this interior perspective we
ponder only "abstract considerations rather than man as a living subject."s,
Hence, both subjective consciousness and experience must "be taken into
consideration and find their reflection in theology."s2 This is especially true
in a theology of marriage and sexuality.
Even prior to the work of Karol Wojtyla, the twentieth century wit-
nessed some bold theological developments in this regard. s3 But the sorely
needed process of wedding traditional formulas of marriage with modem
sensitivities has had its share of growing pains. Some, in their desire to
read an affirmation of spousal love into the traditional schema of ends,
have equated "mutual help" with conjugal love. Such a reading is not only
erroneous, but results in an unnecessary "power struggle" of sorts between
procreation as the "primary end" and conjugal love as the assumed "sec-
ondary end." Displeased with such a conclusion, some theologians have
scrapped the traditional hierarchy of ends altogether in favor of placing all
primacy on love. Such a move, however, can lead-and has led in many
cases-to an interpretation of conjugal love divorced from the objective
goods and purposes of marriage. Marriage then becomes relativized ac-
cording to personal preferences.
In anticipation of (or in reaction to) this error, currents of thought on
the other end of the spectrum have been reluctant to accept any incorpora-
tion of conjugal love into the Church's traditional schema on marriage.
Such thinking is suspicious of emphasizing subjectivity because of the
dangers of relativizing the objective meaning of marriage. Ultimately, er-
81. 9/26/79; second endnote, TB 94.

82.4115/81, TB 218.
83. For example, Dietrich von Hildebrand's book, Marriage (originally published in
German in 1929 as Die Ehe), broke new ground with its bold emphasis on conjugal love
as the primary meaning of marriage, distinguished from procreation as its primary pur-
pose. This short, innovative volume is now published in English under the title Marriage:
The MystelY of Faithfi,/ Love (Manchester, NH: Sophia Institute Press, 1991).
rors on both poles of the debate stem from a failure to link the objective
and subjective dimensions of marriage. In comes the philosophical project
of Karol Wojtyla/John Paul II. Once this problem is viewed through his
new synthesis of metaphysics and phenomenology (objectivity and subjec-
tivity), a simple and much needed solution emerges.
B. Authentic Love Rejoices with the Truth

Notice how the Pope, in the following definition of love, links sub-
jectivity with objective truth. He states that "love, from the subjective
viewpoint, is a power ... given to man in order to participate in that love
with which God himself loves in the mystery of creation and redemption"
(406). In other words, love has an anchor. It has an objective reference point.
That reference point is Ultimate Truth itself: for God is love (1 In 4:8).
The Pope continues by quoting St. Paul: Authentic love "is that love
which 'rejoices with the truth' (1 Cor 13:6)." It is that love "in which there
is expressed the spiritual joy... of every authentic value: a joy like that of
the Creator himself, who in the beginning saw that everything 'was very
good' (Gen 1:31)" (406). Prior to sin, subjectivity was completely objec-
tive. The relativizing of love only occurs with man's distancing from God.
But a love cut off from God is not really love at all, only the counterfeit of
concupiscence. Such a counterfeit is not "of the Father" but "of the
world." Authentic love, however, is always "of the Father" (see 1 In 2:16).
Thus, it is "actively oriented toward the fullness of good and for this very
reason toward every true good" (406).
Is this authentic love possible? Or is man simply "stuck" in the real-
ity of a counterfeit love because of sin? If he is stuck in an impure love,
marriage can only be understood within two main schemas: the subjectiv-
ism of a "love" cut off from the objective good, or the objectivism of a
sterile and loveless conformity to abstract principles. But John Paul re-
peatedly insists that man is not stuck in his impurities. The new ethos that
flows from the redemption of the body is a reality in the name of which
man must feel called, and called with power! This means "the subjective
profile oflove" can gradually become "objective to the depths."84
In other words, emphasizing authentic conjugal love does not mean
abandoning the ends of marriage. It means fulfilling them! Nor does
maintaining these ends mean de-emphasizing conjugal love. It means-
and must mean-calling couples to the fullness of conjugal love. For
only love can confer "adequate content and value to conjugal acts ac-
cording to the truth" (407).
84.2/20/80, TB 75 (see §21).

B. Conjugal Love Fulfills the Ends of Marriage

So, in assessing the proper role of conjugal love in the life of spouses,
we come to realize that it is not an end of marriage at all. Instead, conjugal
love is the inner form-the "soul"-of marriage. It coordinates the actions
of the spouses in the sphere of the purposes of marriage. In other words, the
ends of marriage are also the ends of conjugal love. The Council Fathers
make this clear when they state: "Marriage and conjugal love are by their
nature ordered toward the begetting and educating of children. "85
While John Paul acknowledges that neither Gaudium et Spes nor
Humanae Vitae use the language of the hierarchy of ends, he nonetheless
maintains that they "deal with what the traditional expressions refer to."
By linking the objective ends of marriage with the subjectivity of the
spouses, these documents clarify "the same moral order," but they do so
"in reference to love" (407). In this way they avoid the danger of an
objectivized morality and a subjectivized love. Hence, the traditional teach-
ing on the ends of marriage is not done away with, as some might think.
As John Paul affirms: "In this renewed formulation the traditional teaching
on the purposes of marriage (and their hierarchy) is reaffirmed and at the
same time deepened from the viewpoint of the interior life of the spouses,
that is, of conjugal and family spirituality" (407).
We see here a parallel with Christ's own words: "I have come not to
abolish [the law and the prophets] but to fulfill them" (Mt 5: 17). How is
the law fulfilled? Precisely through love understood as life in the Holy
Spirit (see §25). As St. Paul says, "Love is the fulfillment of the law" be-
cause "it does no wrong" (Rom 13: 10). This is exactly what an authentic
marital spirituality is-the fulfillment of the objective demands (or ends)
of marriage through the subjective vivification of love understood as life
in the Spirit. This is the role of conjugal love in the life of spouses.
98. Continence Is a Virtue Essential to Conjugal Love

October 10,24,31, 1984 (TB 406-412)
We have established that love is not rightly considered an end of

marriage. Instead, as John Paul expresses it, love "is 'poured out into [the]
hearts' (Rom 5:5) of the spouses as the fundamental spiritual power of
85. Gaudium et Spes, n. 50; emphasis added. See Ramon Garcia de Haro's Marriage
and the Family in the Documents of the Magisterium (San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press,
1993), pp. 200, 234, 244, etc., for a discussion ofthe role of conjugal love and the error of
considering it an end of marriage. See also Rocco Buttiglione's Karol Wojtyla: The
Thought o.fthe Man Who Became Pope John Paul II, pp. 98-99.
their conjugal pact" (407). In turn, conjugal love orients spouses toward
the fulfillment of the ends of marriage by protecting both the value of the
true communion of the spouses and the value of truly responsible parent-
hood. Therefore, as the Holy Father concludes: "The power of love-au-
thentic in the theological and ethical sense-is expressed in this, that love
correctly unites 'the two meanings of the conjugal act'" (407).
This crucial statement takes us to the heart of the debate over
Humanae Vitae. The real debate over this encyclical is a debate about the
meaning of human love. It is a debate about the very meaning of human
life-as the title of the encyclical itself indicates.
A. Love versus Concupiscence

As John Paul notes, the idea that the teaching of Humanae Vitae de-
prives spouses of the opportunity to express their love is the most frequent
objection to the encyclical. But what kind of "love" are we speaking of
here? Authentic love, the Pope maintains, excludes "not only in theory but
above all in practice the 'contradiction' that might be evidenced in this
field" (407). In other words, those who are vivified by the life and love of
the Holy Spirit realize internally that there is no contradiction "between
the divine laws pertaining to the transmission of life and those pertaining
to the fostering of authentic conjugal love."86 In fact, they realize that the
teaching of Humanae Vitae provides them with the proper measure to en-
sure that what they express when they become "one flesh" is truly love
and not merely a cheapened counterfeit.
If we are going to speak of a "contradiction" in this matter, the con-
tradiction is contraception. It blatantly speaks against (contra-dicts) the
very meaning of the marital embrace as a participation in the life-giving
mystery of God's love. With regard to the Church's teaching, as John Paul
says, there is no "contradiction" involved, only a "difficulty." This diffi-
culty "arises from the fact that the power of love is implanted in man lured
by concupiscence: in human subjects love does battle with threefold
concupiscence (see I Jn 2: 16), in particular with the concupiscence of the
flesh which distorts the truth of the 'language of the body.' And therefore
love too is not able to be realized ... except through overcoming concu-
piscence" (407).
In effect John Paul is saying that those who seek to justify contracep-
tion in order to express their "love" for one another have actually (and per-
haps unwittingly) confused love with concupiscence. Love does not seek
86. Gaudium et Spes, n. 51 .

Love and Fruitfitlness 447
to justify what is wrong but "rejoices with the truth" (1 Cor l3:6)-what-
ever the cost. Concupiscence, on the other hand, is not concerned with
maintaining the truth of sexual union as a sign of God's life-giving love. It
is concerned with seeking its own satisfaction and is "afraid" of the cost of
authentic love. As we observed previously, contraception was not invented
to prevent pregnancy. Ultimately, it was invented to skirt the sacrifice re-
quired by self-control (see §94). Contraception can certainly seem like an
attractive alternative to the difficulties inherent in attaining self-mastery.
However, to the degree that one is not master of himself, it is impossible to
be a true gift to another. To this degree it is impossible to express love in
sexual union.
Precisely at this moment-in the moment of recognizing the "diffi-
culty" involved in true love-man and woman must make a decision.
They must activate their self-determination and decide what power will
hold sway in their relationship: love or concupiscence; truth or counter-
feits? Much is at stake in such a decision. As the story of Tobiah and Sarah
illustrates so well, it is a test of life and death (see §89). Precisely in this
decision, as stated previously, the choices and the actions of man and
woman "take on all the weight of human existence." Precisely in this deci-
sion "husband and wife find themselves in the situation in which the pow-
ers of good and evil fight and compete against each other." But those who
love are not afraid. For the "truth and the power of love are shown in the
ability to place oneself between the forces of good and evil which are
fighting in man and around him, because love is confident in the victory of
good and is ready to do everything so that good may conquer."R7
Authentic conjugal love prefers to suffer-even die-for the truth
("Husbands, love your wives as Christ loved the Church). "If the powers
of concupiscence try to detach the 'language of the body' from the
truth, ... the power of love instead strengthens [the language of the body]
ever anew in that truth, so that the mystery of the redemption of the body
can bear fruit in it" (406). And the fruit that the redemption of the body
bears is precisely an ongoing liberation from concupiscence through an
ongoing strengthening of the virtue of continence. According to John Paul,
the virtue of continence is so critical here that without a proper under-
standing of it we can never arrive "either at the heart of the moral truth, or
at the heart of the anthropological truth of the problem" presented by
Humanae Vitae. 88
87.6/27/84, TB 376.
88. 9/5/84, TB 403.
B. Continence Is a Permanent Moral Attitude

John Paul says that if the key element of the spirituality of spouses is
love, this love is by its nature linked with the chastity that is manifested as
self-mastery. Such self-mastery is also known as continence. As stated
above, only one who is master of himself can make a gift of himself. In
other words, only one who is continent can love.
In speaking of the natural regulation of births we speak of practicing
"periodic continence." However, John Paul indicates that such continence
should not be viewed merely as a temporary "technique." Properly under-
stood, "continence itself is a definite and permanent moral attitude; it is a
virtue, and therefore, the whole line of conduct guided by it acquires a vir-
tuous character" (400). In other words, not only does exercising one's
freedom to abstain from intercourse when there is sufficient reason to
avoid a pregnancy constitute an act of virtue. Exercising continence in this
way also fosters the freedom necessary to ensure that when spouses do be-
come "one flesh" they act out of authentic love and do not merely indulge
concupiscence. In this way we begin to see, as John Paul points out, that
the role of continence lies not only in protecting the procreative meaning
of intercourse, but also the unitive meaning. How so?
Continence, John Paul reminds us, is part of the more general virtue
of temperance. Unfortunately, it seems both words tend to have a nega-
tive connotation, as if they were only a "saying no" to something. Conti-
nence certainly involves "saying no" to lust. As John Paul says, "The
conviction that the virtue of continence 'is set against' the concupiscence
of the flesh is correct, but it is not altogether complete" (409). The Pope
observes that continence does not act in isolation, but always in connec-
tion with the other virtues such as prudence, justice, fortitude, and above
all with charity. John Paul insists, then, that continence "is not only-
and not even principally-the ability to 'abstain.' [This] role would be
defined as 'negative.' But there is also another role (which we can call
'positive') of self mastery: it is the ability to direct the respective reactions
[of emotion and desire], both as to their content and their character" (412).
The virtuous person does not tyrannize his passions. The virtuous person
orders his passions so that he "tends toward the good with all his sensory
and spiritual powers."89
The mature virtue of continence, therefore, in connection with the
other virtues, enables men and women gradually to experience sexual de-
sire as God intended it to be-as the desire to make a free and sincere gift
of self according to the true meaning of love and the nuptial meaning of
89. CCc, n. 1803.

Love and Fru itfulness 449
the body. This is why the virtue of continence is so crucial in the relation-
ship of the sexes. Without it, men and women are pulled to and fro by the
tides of concupiscence. And for lack of knowledge of anything else, more
often than not they will make the tragic mistake of calling that love. As
stated previously, if a marriage were to be built upon such a foundation, it
would be akin to building a house on sand (see §30).
99. Continence Authenticates and Intensifies Marital Affection

October 24, 1984 (TB 408-410)
As discussed in the second cycle of reflections, concupiscence tends

to flare up in man like an unquenchable fire. It "invades his senses, excites
his body, involves his feelings, and in a certain sense takes possession of
his 'heart. '" Concupiscence also causes the "external man" to reduce the
"internal man" to silence. In other words, because passion aims at satisfac-
tion, "it blunts reflective activity and pays no attention to the voice of con-
science. "90
Those who continually indulge concupiscence remain blind to the
Gospel of the body. If men and women wish ultimately to experience the
transformation of the very "content and character" of sexual desire accord-
ing to the truth of love-if they want to see and experience the body as an
efficacious sign of the very mystery of God-they must progressively ac-
quire mastery over concupiscent impulses and desires.
A. Acquiring Self-Mastery
John Paul observes that "conjugal chastity (and chastity in general) is
manifested at first as the capacity to resist the concupiscence of the flesh."
Then, the more such mastery is acquired, chastity "gradually reveals itself
as a singular capacity to perceive, love, and practice those meanings of the
'language of the body' which remain altogether unknown to concupis-
cence itself' (409).
"Self-mastery is a long and exacting work. One can never consider it
acquired once and for all. It presupposes renewed effort at all stages of
life. "91 If men and women are to acquire self-mastery, they "must be com-
mitted to a progressive education in self-control of the will, of the feelings,
of the emotions." And this "must develop beginning with the most simple
acts in which it is relatively easy to put the interior decision into practice"
90.9110/80, TB 145, 146 (see §32).

91 . CCC, n. 2342.
(408). Notice the Pope's wise pastoral counsel. In effect, he is saying, if

you want to experience the mature virtue of continence, you must be pa-
tient with yourself and start small. It is similar to lifting weights. A begin-
ner should not expect to bench-press 300 pounds. However, if he begins
with a realistic appraisal of his own abilities and commits himself to a pro-
gressive program of training, he will increase his strength day by day. And
what was once impossible will eventually become reality.
Of course, in this whole process of strengthening virtue, unlike a
weightlifter, progress does not depend merely on our natural capacities.
Recall that continence is not only a human virtue, but even more so a di-
vine gift-a gift of the Spirit dwelling in our flesh (see §90). At every step
of the way the supernatural gift of grace aids us, if we avail ourselves of it.
As the following plea of St. Augustine illustrates, continence is not only
something to work for, but something to pray for: "I thought continence
arose from one's own powers, which I did not recognize in myself. I was
foolish enough not to know... that no one can be continent unless you grant
it. For you would surely have granted it if my inner groaning had reached
your ears and I with firm faith had cast my cares on yoU."92
The Holy Father says that willingness to commit to ongoing growth
in virtue also presupposes the clear perception of the values expressed in
God's law. These are the values of the personal and sacramental meaning
of the body and sex. The person who wishes to practice true virtue must
set his will like flint on these values. He must put his hand to the plow
and never look back (see Lk 9:62). He must prefer to die a martyr's
death than to lust. Indeed, if some are willing to kill to indulge their lusts
(this is what abortion, for example, amounts to), Christians, on the other
hand, must be willing to die rather than give in to lust. If one does not
prefer death to lust, he is not yet fully ready to overcome lust. As John
Paul states, it is precisely such "firm convictions which, if accompanied
by the respective disposition of the will, give rise to the virtue of conti-
nence (self-mastery)" (408).
Thus, the continent person exercises "control" precisely in order to
uphold the incomparable value of sexuality-to protect it from the degra-
dation of lust. This is an essential point. We cannot speak of continence as a
virtue if one's "control" in sexual matters is based on a fear or devaluation
of sexuality. That would imply acceptance of the Manichaean anti-value (see
§§3S, 44). Prudery and repressiveness may masquerade as viliue, but in re-
ality they point to its lack. 93 In fact, at their root we often find the "inter-
92. Cited in CCC, n. 2520.

pretation of suspicion," which is the antithesis of the meaning of life (see

§36). Such an interpretation leads either to the repression of all things
sexual, or to the regular indulgence of concupiscence. People in either
case remain under the dominion of concupiscence which makes man "in a
certain sense blind and insensitive to the most profound values that spring
from love" (408).
We expressed this previously when we stated that a person who gives
place to lust, to suspicion, and/or to the Manichaean anti-value has no
knowledge of the innermost layers of his own heart where that "echo" of
the beatifying beginning resounds . True chastity, however, flows from the
"ethos of redemption," and this ethos is based on a close alliance with
those deepest layers of the heart (see §40). It is those layers of the heart
that can recognize the value of the nuptial meaning of the body. Those lay-
ers can see in the body the value of a "transparent sign." This sign, in tum,
reveals the gift of communion, that is, the mysterious reality of God's im-
age and likeness. 94 Only when self-control is motivated by these values
can we speak of continence as a virtue and as a participation in "life ac-
cording to the Spirit."
B. The Fruits oj Continence

We can recognize authentic continence versus a repressive conti-
nence based on the fruits each bears in man and woman's relationship. For
example, does the exercise of self-control open a couple to those more
profound and more mature values inherent in the nuptial meaning of the
body? Does their exercise of self-control lead them to experience the au-
thentic freedom of the gift? Or, does their exercise of "control" lead to an
impoverishment of affection and an increase in tension and conflict?
If self-control leads to the latter, the solution is not to abandon self-
control. This would only justify the unrestrained indulgence of concu-
piscence, leading to far worse conflict. The solution is to open to the
conversion of heart that leads to authentic virtue. The asceticism necessary
to practice continence as a virtue does not impoverish the relationship of
the sexes. Quite the contrary! As the Holy Father expresses, it progressively
enriches "the marital dialogue of the couple, purifying it, deepening it, and
simplifying it." Thus, expressions of affection are not dampened. The vir-
tue of continence actually "makes them spiritually more intense" (409).
Authentic continence does not repress sexual attraction. As the virtue
matures, it enables men and women to live from that place of redeemed
94. See 12/3/80, TB 176.

sexual attraction (see §38). These pure, deep, simple, and spiritually in-
tense experiences of which John Paul speaks flow directly from that ma-
ture sexual attraction that St. Paul writes about when he calls spouses to
defer to one another "out of reverence for Christ" (Eph 5:21) (see §90).
According to John Paul, this "deferring to one another" means the com-
mon concern for the truth of the language of the body. And deferring "out
of reverence for Christ" indicates the Holy Spirit's gift of "fear of the
Lord," which accompanies the virtue of continence. We have already de-
scribed this reverent "fear" or "awe" as the gift of piety (see §44). Authen-
tic conjugal love matures in a couple in measure with this piety, this "rev-
erence for Christ." John Paul relates that such reverence seems to open
that "interior space" in both man and woman that makes them ever more
sensitive to the most profound and mature values of the nuptial meaning of
the body and the true freedom of the gift.
When a husband and wife see each other's bodies as a sign of God's
own mystery, when they know that their incarnate union is a sign of the
"great mystery" of Christ's union with the Church-in other words, when
the theology of the body is not just a concept but an experience-sexual
attraction takes on its purest, simplest, deepest, and most intense character.
It is precisely through "this interior maturing," John Paul says, that "the
conjugal act itself acquires the importance and dignity proper to it in its
potentially procreative meaning" (410).
Furthermore, not only does the marital embrace take on its full and
glorious meaning. Conjugal chastity also reveals to the awareness and ex-
perience of the couple all the other possible "manifestations of affection"
that can express the couple's deep life of communion. Although marital in-
tercourse remains the consummate expression of spousal love, other ex-
pressions of affection are also revealed in their purest, simplest, deepest,
and most intense character "in proportion to the subjective richness of
femininity and masculinity" (410). Countless wives, for example, upon
experiencing the maturation of continence in their marriage, can attest to
the joy of being kissed, embraced, or tenderly touched by their husbands
without the suspicion that he is out to "get" something. A virtuous husband
is never out to "get" something. His manifestations of affection are truly
that. He has no ulterior motive.
Harmony, peace, sincere affection, and spiritually intense commun-
ion-these are the fruits of the virtue of continence. 95 In this way we see
95 . See Humanae Vita e, n. 21 . There Paul VI outlines the "beneficent influence" of

continence on marriage and family life. Those who practice continence as a virtue know
precisely whereof he speaks.
Love and Fruitfidness 453
"the essential character of conjugal chastity in its organic link with the
'power' to love, which is poured out into the hearts of the malTied couple
along with the 'consecration' of the Sacrament of MalTiage" (409). When
spouses live from that "power to love" granted by God-when they live
the "consecration" of their sacrament-malTiage works! Using our former
image, to the degree that we allow our tires to be inflated, we experience
the car the way it is meant to be experienced. And it works!
100. The Church Is Convinced of the Truth of Humanae Vitae

October 31; November 7,1984 (TB 411-415)
If John Paul extols the harmony of malTied life that flows from con-
jugal chastity (understood also as the virtue of continence), some couples
might look at their own experience and retort that continence is more often
a cause of conflict-first within oneself and, in tum, within their common
life as a married couple. But is such an experience of continence an expe-
rience of the virtue in its integral sense? Has such a couple crossed the
threshold from continence as a "constraint" to continence as the interior
freedom of the gift?
John Paul observes: "It is often thought that continence causes inner
tensions from which man must free himself." But he immediately empha-
sizes: "In the light of the analyses we have done, continence, understood
integrally, is rather the only way to free man from such tensions" (411).
A. Continence Affords Authentic Freedom

"Tensions" here would commonly be understood as pent-up sexual
energy that seeks release. In this context John Paul speaks of sexual "ex-
citement" as distinguished from "emotion." Excitement, he says, is
aroused more directly by the body and seeks corporeal pleasure in the
sexual act. Emotion, on the other hand, is aroused more by the whole real-
ity of the person in his masculinity or femininity. It is not immediately
aimed at the sexual act but more toward other "manifestations of affection."
• It is easy to recognize that, according to these definitions, most men

tend more toward "excitement" while most women tend more toward
"emotion." Both excitement and emotion have their concupiscent expres-
sions, which treat the opposite sex as a means toward selfish gratification.
But both excitement and emotion also have their original and redemptive
expressions, which open men and women to the possibility of an authentic
communion of persons. In Love & Responsibility, Wojtyla describes such
excitement and emotion as the "raw material" of love. But it is a mistake to

consider the raw material as the "finished form." In our fallen state, mere
excitement and emotion often stems from a utilitarian outlook contrary to
the very nature of love as self-donation. 96
If continence is understood only as a means of "containing" sexual

excitement (and emotion) then, yes, such continence will lead to inner ten-
sions from which man will seek to "free" himself. Freedom, in this sense,
of course, would come-it is supposed-by releasing one's tensions without
restraint. In this paradigm continence is viewed as the enemy of freedom.
But does indulging one's desires without restraint lead to freedom or to
slavery? If one cannot say no, is he free or is he in chains? And is such
uncontrollable desire love or is it lust? The mere arousal of excitement and
emotion is no guarantee of love. In fact, "if they are not held together by
the correct gravitational pull," excitement and emotion "may add up not to
love, but to its direct opposite."97
Recall the Pope's statement that the "antithesis and, in a way, the ne-
gation of...freedom takes place when it becomes for man 'a pretext to live
according to the flesh.",n In essence, those who want to be "free" from
continence want to be free from freedom so they can embrace their bond-
age to concupiscence unhindered (see §43). Continence as an authentic
virtue calls us to a radical paradigm shift. It calls us to the freedom for
which Christ has set us free (see Gal 5). This is the freedom of the ethos of
redemption. It is the freedom[rom the domination of concupiscence which
frees usfor the sincere gift of self. As John Paul repeatedly insists, the vir-
tue of continence is "not only the capacity to 'contain' bodily and sensual
reactions, but even more the capacity to control and guide man's whole
sensual and emotive sphere." Therefore, continence is able "to direct the
line of excitement toward its correct development and also the line of
emotion itself, orienting it toward the deepening and interior intensifica-
tion of its 'pure,' and in a certain sense, 'disinterested' character" (413).
Disinterested desire is interested in love, not its own satisfaction. Only
to the degree that we experience this mature level of continence are we truly
free from those inner "tensions." And only to the degree that we are free
from those inner tensions can we become a real gift to another person. Pre-
cisely through such freedom we discover and experience that "mature spon-
taneity" and "noble gratification" spoken of previously (see §39).

98.1114/81, TB 198.
B. Balance between Excitement and Emotion

The Holy Father clarifies that in distinguishing between excitement
and emotion, he does not mean to imply that they are opposed to one an-
other. The distinction only demonstrates the subjective richness of human
persons in their sexual body-soul constitution. Furthermore, the virtue of
continence affords a balance between excitement and emotion, enabling
them to be lived as different elements in the same experience. Excitement
informed by virtue is aroused not merely by the body, but by the body of
one's spouse as the expression of his/her person. In tum, the virtuous con-
jugal act is not merely sensual but involves "a particular intensification of
emotion." Virtuous intercourse, as an authentic communion of persons, is
both physically and emotionally intense. And John Paul adds that "it
should not be otherwise" (4l3).
We can observe that an incontinent act of intercourse can also be a
physically and emotionally intense experience. But such an experience is
not anchored in the incarnate truth of persons and their call to communion.
Such an act may hint at love, but it is not integrated with the truth of love
and communion revealed by the spousal (or nuptial) meaning of the body.
An incontinent act of intercourse, therefore, cannot not be an indulgence
of concupiscence. As John Paul reminds us: "The very spousal meaning of
the body has been distorted, almost at its very roots, by concupiscence."
The mature virtue of continence, on the other hand, "gradually reveals the
'pure' aspect of the spousal meaning of the body. In this way, continence
develops the personal communion of the man and the woman, a commun-
ion that cannot be formed and developed in the full truth of its possibilities
only on the level of concupiscence." And the Pope adds: "This is precisely
what the encyclical Humanae Vitae affirms" (414-415).
Thus, the Vicar of Christ firmly maintains that the Church is "totally
convinced" of the con'ectness of the teaching of Humanae Vitae. It "teaches
responsible fatherhood and motherhood 'as proof of a mature conjugal
love'-and therefore it contains not only the answer to the concrete question
that is asked in the sphere of the ethics of married life but, as already has
been stated, it also indicates a plan of conjugal spirituality" (414).
101. Chastity Lies at the Center of Marital Spirituality

November 14, 1984 (TB 415- 417)
In his audience of November 14, 1984, the Holy Father takes us for a
final lap in his deepening circle of reflections by reviewing the key con-
cepts of an authentic marital spirituality. By doing so it seems as if he is
preparing us for what might be considered the summit of his commentary

on Humanae Vitae, which he delivers in the following audience of Nov em-
ber 21, 1984.
John Paul recalls that the fundamental element of the spirituality of
married life as taught by Humanae Vitae is the love poured out into the
hearts of the couple as a gift of the Holy Spirit (see Rom 5:5). Through
their own sacrament, the couple receive this divine gift along with a spe-
cial "consecration." An integral element of this love is "conjugal chastity,
which, manifesting itself as continence, brings about the interior order of
conjugal life" (415). What is the interior order of conjugal life? It is pre-
cisely that purity of heart to which Christ calls couples in the Sermon on
the Mount. As a fruit of "life in the Spirit," this purity enables the interior
reality of the heart to conform to the objective truth of the nuptial meaning
of the body. In tum, this "interior order" enables man and woman to estab-
lish an authentic communion of persons in all of married life through the
mutual gift of self.
A. Chastity Solves the Internal Problem of Every Marriage

In his book Love & Responsibility, Karol Wojtyla asserted that the re-
alization of a true communion of persons in each particular sexual act pre-
sents "the internal problem of every marriage."99 Thus, he affirms that
chastity lies at "the center of the spirituality of marriage." For it is pre-
cisely the virtue of chastity that orders sexual excitement and emotion to-
ward the truth of an authentic communion of persons.
"Chastity means to live in the order of the heart. This order permits
the development of the 'manifestations of affection' in their proper propor-
tion and meaning. In this way conjugal chastity is also confirmed as 'life
by the Spirit' (see Gal 5:25)." In other words, Christian chastity, as we
have affirmed previously, should be understood "not only as a moral virtue
(formed by love), but likewise as a virtue connected with the gifts of the
Holy Spirit-above all, the gift of respect for what comes from God"
(415). John Paul defines this "respect" as the gift of piety and reminds us
that the author of Ephesians has this gift in mind when he exhorts married
couples to "defer to one another out of reverence for Christ" (Eph 5:21).
Through this deference and reverence for the mystery of Christ, the one
flesh union "finds its humanly mature form thanks to the life 'in the
Spirit'" (417). In fact, as the Holy Father emphasizes, "Those 'two' who-
according to the oldest expression in the Bible-'become one body' (Gen

2:24) cannot bring about this union on the proper level of persons
(communio personarum) except through the powers coming .. from the
Holy Spirit who purifies, enlivens, strengthens, and perfects the powers of
the human spirit" (415-416).
This is a bold claim. According to John Paul, sexual union is only
what it is meant to be as an authentic communion of persons when it is
performed in union with God as an expression of his own Trinitarian
life-the life of the Holy Spirit. There is no two-tiered distinction between
nature and grace here. It is of sexual union's very "nature" to be full of
grace-to be in some sense a sacramental expression of the mystery and
inner life of the Trinity.
B. The Original Spirituality ofMarriage

"It follows from this that the essential lines of the spirituality of mar-
riage are inscribed 'from the beginning' in the biblical truth on marriage.
This spirituality is also open 'from the beginning' to the gifts of the Holy
Spirit" (416). Recall that we described the original gracing of creation as a
special state of "spiritualization" in man (see §20). This enabled the first
man and woman's created communion to participate in some way in God's
Uncreated Communion. Loving one another as God loves-that is, loving
according to the "breath" of the Spirit which in-spired their flesh (see Gen
2:7)-they experienced a beatifying immunity from shame (see Gen 2:25).
Through this experience of original nakedness, we discerned that
man and woman understood and lived the body as an efficacious sign of
the very mystery of creation (see § 17). In turn, the entrance of shame
marked the loss of this original gracing and, thus, the loss of this under-
standing of the body as a sign (see §26). However, the good news of the
Gospel is that through the death and resurrection of Christ, the "new
gracing" of redemption restores God's original plan for the body and for
the "one flesh" communion of marriage. Through this new gracing the
body (and the personal union of bodies) recovers its efficacy as a sign
(see §77-78).
Thus, when a husband and wife open themselves to the gift of pi-
ety-the gift of respect and awe for what is sacred-the Holy Spirit instills
in them "a sensitivity to everything that is a created reflection of God's
wisdom and love." In turn, they regain "a particular sensitivity to every-
thing in their vocation and life that bears the sign of the mystery of cre-
ation and redemption." This sensitivity "seems to introduce the man and
woman to a specially profound respect for the two inseparable meanings
of the conjugal act." Such respect "can develop fully only on the basis of a
profound reference to the personal dignity of what in the human person is
intrinsic to masculinity and femininity, and inseparably in reference to the

personal dignity of the new life which can result from the conjugal union
of the man and the woman" (416).
C. Salvific Fear of Violating the Sign

Through the in-spiration of the Holy Spirit, this "specially profound re-
spect" for the inseparability of the unitive and procreative meanings of inter-
course wells up from within the couple. It is not imposed on them from
"outside." They come to see the body and sexual union with something of
the original good of God's vision and, as John Paul says, they are "filled
with veneration for the essential values of the conjugal union" (416).
When a couple interiorizes the glorious plan of God for sexual union,
it is no exaggeration to say they would prefer to die martyrs' deaths than to
engage in contracepted intercourse. Yes, it is that serious. As John Paul
says, such couples have a "salvific fear" of ever "violating or degrading
what bears in itself the sign of the divine mystery of creation and redemp-
tion" (416).100 But, of course, they do not live in fear. Instead, loving as
Christ loves, they taste the eternal joy that Christ himself promised (see Jn
15: 11). To the degree that they embrace the sacrifices involved in remain-
ing faithful to the language of the body, they re-create something of that
beatifying experience of the beginning. Indeed, through the sincere gift of
their body-persons to each other they fulfill the very meaning of their be-
ing and existence (see § 18).
At this point the sacramentality of marriage and the Gospel of the
body are not only religious concepts, but also lived experiences. At this
point spouses experience the marital embrace at a level that is mystical
and even liturgical. At this point the apparent contradiction in this area
"disappears" and the difficulty arising from concupiscence is gradually
overcome. Is it possible to get to this point? Yes-not without a willing-
ness to die with Christ and not based on one's own resources, but thanks to
the power of the Holy Spirit's gift.
102. The Exceptional Significance of the Conjugal Act

November 21, 1984 (TB 417-419)
The audience of November 21, 1984 brings us to the pinnacle of

John Paul's analysis of the marital spirituality implicit in the teaching of
100. See CCC, n. 1432.

Humanae Vitae. In these final reflections, one cannot help but be struck by
the clarity of insight with which this celibate pontiff penetrates the inner
life of spouses. He is able to enter their longings and aspirations and, in
turn, point husbands and wives to the path that leads to their authentic ful-
fillment. In the process he demonstrates that-despite any surface inter-
pretation to the contrary-contracepted intercourse is antithetical to the
true love and affirmation for which men and women long.
A. The Deep Need for Affirmation

As John Paul stated in his catechesis on Genesis, the nuptial meaning
of the body reveals both the call to become a gift, and the capacity and
deep availability for the "affirmation of the person." This affirmation
means "living the fact that the other-the woman for the man and the man
for the woman-is ... someone willed by the Creator for his (or her) own
sake." This someone is "unique and unrepeatable: someone chosen by
eternal Love."lol
When we first read these words we asked: Is there any man or
woman alive who does not ache in the depths of his or her being for such
affirmation? Is this not what men and women are looking for in their mu-
tual relationship-in all of their "manifestations of affection"? Are they
not looking to be affirmed for who they are as God created them to be in
their own uniqueness and unrepeatability? At the deepest level of the hu-
man heart, no one wants to be treated as an object for someone else's grati-
fication. Men and women want to be loved sincerely, disinterestedly, for
their own sake.
As John Paul says, such love "can happen only through a profound
appreciation of the personal dignity of both the feminine 'I' and the mas-
culine 'I' in their shared life. This spiritual appreciation is the fundamental
fruit of the gift of the Spirit which urges the person to respect the work of
God. From this appreciation," the Pope continues, "all the 'affectionate
manifestations' which make up the fabric of remaining faithful to the
union of marriage derive their true spousal meaning" (418). This true
spousal meaning is the giving and receiving of the gift, which affords the
love and affirmation for which men and women are longing in marriage.
And it is precisely an uncompromising respect for the work of God (piety)
that ensures this love and affirmation. As John Paul says, such respect
"creates and enlarges, so to speak, the interior space for the mutual free-
dom of the gift in which there is fully manifested the spousal meaning of
masculinity and femininity" (418).
10l. 1116/80, TB 65 (see §19).

The interior constriction of concupiscence presents the main obstacle

to this freedom. Concupiscence does not bless the other "I" as a person
created for his or her own sake. Instead, as the Pope observes, con-
cupiscence is directed toward the other person as an object of pleasure. If
the aim is merely to satisfy desire, one can do this in any number of ways.
The person who is the object of concupiscence gradually realizes the senti-
ment of the other: "You don't need me. You don't desire me as the person I
am. You desire only a means of gratification." Hence, far from feeling
loved and affirmed as a unique and unrepeatable person, those objecti-
fied by concupiscence feel used and debased as an insignificant and re-
peatable commodity.
As John Paul indicates, herein lies the "enormous significance" of the
attitude of respect for the work of God, which the Spirit stirs up in the
couple. As men and women come to reclaim something of that original
good of God's vision, they stand in "awe" of the mystcry of God rcvcaled
in the other. In other words, when men and women come to see the body
as a theology, they gain "the capacity for deep satisfaction, admiration,
[and] disinterested attention to the 'visible' and at the same time the 'invis-
ible' beauty of masculinity and femininity." They "gain a deep apprecia-
tion for the disinterested gift of the 'other '" (418).
It is precisely this "awe" and respect that frees men and women from
the interior constriction of concupiscence. It frees them from all that re-
duces the other "I" to a mere object of pleasure and strengthens in them
the freedom of the gift. When men and women live from this place of re-
spect and interior freedom, all their manifestations of affection "protect in
each of them that' deep-rooted peace' which is in a certain sense the inte-
rior resonance of chastity" (419).
B. The Interior Harmony of Marriage

Chastity is not a "negative" virtue; it "is above all positive and cre-
ative.",o2 As John Paul eloquently expresses, chastity resonates in the hearts
of men and women as a deep peace reminiscent of that original "peace of
the interior gaze" (see § 17). One is at total peace when he knows he is loved.
He can be himself without fear of rejection. He can be naked without shame.
Such peace creates the fullness of the intimacy of persons.
This is what authentic chastity affords. It affords "the interior har-
mony of marriage" because "the couple live together in the interior truth
of the 'language of the body'" (419). Far from eschewing the body, conju-
gal chastity "involves a profound and universal attention to the person in
102. Love & Responsibility, p. 171 .

one's masculinity and femininity." Such attention brings with it the deep
affirmation of the person, "thus creating the interior climate suitable for
personal communion" (419). When spouses open themselves to "life in the
Spirit," chastity becomes profoundly liberating. Spouses taste the freedom
for which Christ set them free (see §§42, 43). And all of their manifesta-
tions of affection take on their true meaning in building their communion.
Even so, while all expressions of marital affection are certainly sig-
nificant, according to John Paul, spouses who live "in the Spirit" come to
realize "in the sum total of married life" the particular importance of "that
act in which, at least potentially, the spousal meaning of the body is linked
with the procreative meaning." The Holy Father expounds: "In the spiri-
tual life of married couples there are at work the gifts of the Holy Spirit,
especially the gift of piety.... This gift, together with love and chastity
.. .leads to understanding among the possible 'manifestations of affection,'
the singular, or rather exceptional, significance of [the conjugal] act: its
dignity and the consequent serious responsibility connected with it" (417).
In fact, John Paul concludes that recognizing and protecting the dig-
nity of the sexual act is the specific goal of marital spirituality. As he
states: "The virtue of conjugal chastity, and still more the gift of respect
for what comes from God, mold the couple's spirituality to the purpose of
protecting the particular dignity of this act, of this 'manifestation of affec-
tion' in which the truth of the 'language of the body' can be expressed only
by safeguarding the procreative potential" (417).
C. Antithesis ofAuthentic Marital Spirituality

Now we approach John Paul's ultimate conclusion about the impor-
tance of the encyclical Humanae Vitae for an authentic marital spirituality.
Keep in mind that without an authentic marital spirituality, we do not
know who man is as male and female and who he is meant to be. Without
an adequate understanding of marriage, we cannot have an adequate an-
thropology. For "man and woman were created for marriage." 103
As we stated above, "life in the Spirit" leads to understanding "the
singular, or rather exceptional, significance" of the conjugal act. "There-
fore," the Pope concludes, "the antithesis of conjugal spirituality is consti-
tuted, in a certain sense, by the subjective lack ofthis understanding which
is linked to the contraceptive practice and mentality" (417). One-hundred-
twenty-eight Wednesday audience addresses have led us to this conclu-
sion: Contracepted intercourse demonstrates in some way the "antithesis
of marital spirituality."
103.2113/80, TB 74 (see §21).

From the beginning God created man as male and female and called
them to "be fruitful and multiply" in order to reveal (make visible) his own
invisible mystery of life-giving love and Communion. But this primordial
sacrament not only imaged the mystery-it was also supernaturally
efficacious. In other words, through their own life-affirming communion,
man and woman actually participated in the eternal Communion of God
right "from the beginning." This is the Word that the language of the body
speaks. The anti-Word, however-that enemy of God and the enemy of
man-wants to keep man from participating in God's life-giving Com-
munion. Thus, Satan attacks "through the very heart of that unity which,
from 'the beginning,' was formed by man and woman, created and called
to become 'one flesh.'"104 As John Paul says in his encyclical on the Holy
Spirit, Satan "seeks to 'falsifY ... creative love. "105 "This is truly the key for
interpreting reality.... Original sin attempts, then, to abolish father-
hood. "106 Is this not the precise effect of contracepted intercourse?
Nuptial union is meant to bear witness to "creative love." As John
Paul II says in Mulieris Dignitatem, every time a new life is conceived
man and woman share in the "eternal mystery of generation, which is in
God himself, the one and Triune God." In fact, he says, "All 'generating'
in the created world is to be likened to this absolute and uncreated model"
which "belongs to the inner life ofGod."107
An authentic marital spirituality calls spouses to open their bodies to
the in-spiration of the Holy Spirit so that they might image and participate
in the inner life of God. Insert contraception into this picture and we wit-
ness a specific and determined "closing off' of the spouse's flesh to the
presence of the Holy Spirit-a closing off to "the Lord and Giver of Life."
This is precisely why contraceptive practice and mentality manifests the
antithesis of an authentic marital spirituality.
• A woman at one of my presentations once asked a question that ex-

emplified this "closing off." Recognizing the role of the Holy Spirit in the
marital embrace and the conception of a child, she asked: "What if I want
to have sex with my husband, but we don't want the Holy Spirit there?"
This is exactly what the language of contracepted intercourse says. Conju-
gal life, and the marital embrace in particular, is meant to be liturgical. As
the Catechism says, "In every liturgical action the Holy Spirit is sent in or-
der to bring us into communion with Christ and so to form his Body. The
104.3/5/80, TB 77 (see §24).

105. Daminum et Vivijicantem, n. 37.
106. Crossing the Threshold a/Hope, p. 228.
107. Mulieris Digl1itatem, nn. 18 and 8.
Love and Fruitfitlness 463
Holy Spirit is ... the Spirit of communion .... Communion with the Holy
Trinity and fraternal communion [in this case, spousal communion] are in-
separably the fmit of the Spirit in the liturgy."IORBy using contraception,
spouses are performing an "anti-epiclesis" of sorts. The epic1esis refers to
the invocation of the Holy Spirit which is at the heart of each sacramental
and liturgical celebration, especially the Eucharist l09 "Let your Spirit come
upon these gifts to make them holy, so that they may become for us the
body and blood of our Lord, Jesus Christ." It would be an utter sacrilege
for a priest to go through the motions of celebrating the Eucharist- "the
sacrament of the Bridegroom and of the Bride. .. as John Paul describes
itllO-and say, "Let your Spirit 1I0t come upon these gifts .. .. " In some
sense, this is what spouses are doing when they render their union sterile.
They are profaning and thus negating communion with each other and with
the Trinity. They are draining their union of the '''power that comes f011h'
from the Body of Christ, which is ever-living and life-giving. "III But
would spouses continue to make such a choice if they knew that this is
what their actions implied? It seems apparent that in most cases spouses
simply "know not what they do."
Someone might argue that couples who practice natural family plan-
ning are also closing themselves to the Holy Spirit. This lIlay be the case,
but not necessarily. Let us return to the priest and his celebration of the Eu-
charist. A priest may have legitimate reason to abstain from saying Mass
on a given day. He does nothing wrong in this case. This is worlds apart
from going through the motions of a Mass but profaning it through an
"anti-epiclesis." However, a priest may also have an illegitimate reason for
abstaining from Mass-perhaps out of contempt for the demands of being
a priest, perhaps out of anger at God or his congregation. Such motives
would indicate some sort of closure to the Holy Spirit. Similarly, if spouses
have a contempt toward children, abstaining to avoid them could indicate a
closure of some SOli to the Spirit. Here is a test for determining whether or
not a couple is open to the Holy Spirit in their acts of intercourse. Can they
honestly pray every time they join in one flesh: "Come, Holy Spirit, if it is
YOllr will, let there be life"? Spouses who use natural family planning re-
sponsibly would have no problem praying this prayer every time they
unite. They may, in fact, have a legitimate hope that it /lot be God's wiIl to
bring forth a child. They may also be virtually assured that it is a biological
IDS. CCc, Il . t IDS.

109. See CCc. Iln. 1105, II Do, 1624.
11 0. Mlllieris Dignilalem. 11. 26.
Ill. CCc. Il . t 116.
impossibility. But they are content to leave that entirely in the Holy Spirit's
hands.
D. Ethical, Personal, and Religious Content of Sexual Union

"In addition to everything else," John Paul says that the contraceptive
practice and mentality "does enormous harm from the point of view of
man's interior culture" (417). Whether they know this or not, by using
contraception men and women are cutting themselves off from the very
source of married love. Since conjugal intercourse is meant to be a sign of
and inspiration to their whole married life, spouses who sterilize their
union inevitably weaken and cheapen their entire relationship. Every time
they engage in contracepted intercourse, rather than consummating and
strengthening their marriage bond, they are being unfaithful to the prom-
ises they made at the altar. How hcalthy would a marriagc bc if husband
and wife were continually unfaithful to their wedding vows?
On the other hand, as the Pope observes, "Respect for the work of
God contributes to seeing that the conjugal act does not become dimin-
ished and deprived of the interior meaning of married life as a whole-that
it does not become a 'habit'-and that there is expressed in it a sufficient
fullness of ethical and personal content." Furthermore, the gift of the Spirit
fills the sexual life of spouses with a proper "religious content." Sexual
union itself becomes an act of "veneration for the majesty of the Crea-
tor...and for the spousal love of the Redeemer" (418).
This veneration instills in the couple an unwavering conviction that
God is "the only and the ultimate depositary of the source of life" (418).
Spouses realize that to take this power into their own hands would be to
make themselves "like God" (see Gen 3:5). It would be to commit the
original sin all over again-grasping at the divine likeness rather than re-
ceiving it (see §26).
103. Humanae Vitae and the Authentic Progress of Civilization

November 28, 1984 (TB 419-422)
John Paul delivered the 129'11 and final address of his theology of the
body on November 28, 1984. He concludes his catechesis with a brief
sketch of the extensive project he just completed, outlining his goals and
purposes and the structure and method of his analysis.
He says the entire catechesis can be summed up under the title: "Hu-
man love in the divine plan," or more precisely, "The redemption of the
body and the sacramentality of marriage" (419). He describes the phrase
Love and Fruitjitlness 465
"the theology of the body" as a "working term" which places the theme of
the redemption of the body and the sacramentality of marriage on a wider
base. However, he says that "we must immediately note that the term 'the-
ology of the body' goes far beyond the content of the reflections that were
made." Multiple problems (the Pope lists suffering and death as primary
examples) not addressed specifically by this catechesis belong to a theol-
ogy of the body. 112 And John Paul adds: "We must state this clearly" (420).
A. John Paul s Priority

The Pope's priority, of course, was to propose the biblical vision of
embodiment in terms of erotic desire and man's call to communion. As he
says, the words of Genesis 2:24 (the two become one flesh) "were origi-
nally and thematically at the base of our argument." These words confirm,
among other ways, "the moment when the light of Revelation touches the
reality of the human body" (420).
John Paul observes once again that he made his reflections in order to
face the questions raised by the encyclical Humanae Vitae. The largely
negative reaction that the encyclical aroused confirms both the importance
and the difficulty of these questions. As the Pope's entire catechesis dem-
onstrates, these questions do not concern only biology or medicine. To
frame the discussion merely in such terms is to stop at the surface of the
issue. These questions are "organically related to both the sacramentality
of marriage and the whole biblical question of the theology of the body,
centered on the key words of Christ" (420). Hence, the Pope's final cycle
of reflections on Humanae Vitae "is not artificially added to the sum total"
of his catechesis "but is organically and homogeneously united with it." In
fact, the part "located at the end is at the same time found at the begin-
ning" (422). John Paul adds that this last statement is important from the
point of view of "structure and method," thus indicating how his deepen-
ing spiral of reflections returns to its origin by reaching its destiny.
John Paul is convinced that adequate answers to the questions raised
by Humanae Vitae must be sought in "that sphere of anthropology and the-
ology that we have called 'theology of the body'" (421). In other words,
the Pope maintains that adequate answers to man's perennial questions
and also to the difficult questions of our modern world concerning mar-
112. John Paul states that his Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortia outlines
the direction for the progressive completion and development of the theology ofthe body.
We could also add that the entire library of John Paul II's teaching constitutes, in some
sense, a building on the foundation of his "adequate anthropology" found in his first ma-
jor catechetical project.
riage and procreation must focus on the "biblical and personalistic as-
pects" of these issues.
B. Biblical and Personalist Aspects

John Paul focuses on the biblical aspects in order to place the doc-
trine of today's Church on the foundation of Revelation. In light of some
trends that tend to develop theology apart from the Scriptures, the Holy
Father stresses that progress in theology takes place through a continual
restudying of the deposit of Revelation. 113
Countering the fears of others who are leery of his engagement with
and incorporation of modem thought, John Paul states that the Church is
"always open to questions posed by man and also makes use of the instru-
ments most in keeping with modem science and today's culture" (421). In
other words, if the Church is going to evangelize the modem world, she
must enter into the mind of the modem world and appeal to that mind in
presenting the unchanging truths of the Gospel (see §§8, 9). She must
readily accept and thoughtfully respond to the questions men and women
pose regarding Church teaching. (We might observe that 129 Wednesday
audience addresses spanning five years is a thoughtful response indeed.)
Justifying his tum to the subject, the Holy Father states: "It seems
that in this area the intense development of philosophical anthropology
(especially the anthropology that rests on ethics) most closely faces the
questions raised by the encyclical Humanae Vitae" (421). John Paul even
says that examining the Church's teaching with a personalistic approach is
essential for man's authentic development since modem civilization ex-
hibits an "occult tendency" to measure progress on the basis of "things"
rather than on the basis of the person. "The analysis of the personalistic
aspects of the Church's doctrine ... emphasizes a determined appeal to mea-
sure man's progress on the basis of the 'person,' that is, of what is good for
man as man-what corresponds to his essential dignity." Thus, the encyc-
lical Humanae Vitae "presents as a fundamental problem the viewpoint of
man's authentic development...measured to the greatest extent on the basis
of ethics and not only on 'technology'" (421--422).
C. Technology, Ethics, and Progress

Modem technology has provided incalculable benefits for humanity.
But technology is only a good insofar as it is at the service of the true good
113. John Paul II has certainly made this point most emphatically by his own ex-
ample. Virtually all his encyclicals, apostolic letters, and other magisterial statements be-
gin with a reflection on the Word of God.
of man. In other words, technology is answerable to ethics. Regarding the

issue at hand, the Catholic response to contraceptive technology is that it is
not in keeping with the true good of man. This is precisely what the Pope's
theology of the body has sought to demonstrate "from the beginning."
As John Paul II states: "Paul VI, in Humanae Vitae, expressed what
elsewhere had been affirmed by many authoritative moralists and scien-
tists, even non-Catholics-namely, that precisely in this field, so pro-
foundly and essentially human and personal, it is necessary above all to
refer to man as a person, the subject who decides for himself, and not to
'means' which make him the 'object' (of manipulations) and 'depersonal-
ize' him." John Paul concludes that the teaching of Humanae Vitae is a
question nothing short of the "authentically 'humanistic' meaning of the
development and progress of human civilization.""4
Precisely on this point we see the dramatic clash of two irreconcil-
able visions of the human person, of human sexuality, and of human
progress. Some emphatically claim that contraception provides a key (if
not the key) to solving many of the problems which hinder the progress of
human civilization. In tum, such people accuse the Church of fostering
such travesties as poverty, starvation, the abuse of women, and the spread
of AIDS because of her insistence on the immorality of contraception.
What, however, is the root cause of poverty, starvation, the abuse of
women, and sexually transmitted diseases? Do they not stem precisely
from rejection of the "great mystery" of God's plan for human life in-
scribed in our bodies? Is not the proclamation of this plan and the univer-
sal invitation to participate in it precisely the road to authentic human
flourishing? Of course this does not mean merely delivering a message.
We must be willing to join in solidarity with those who suffer from pov-
erty or those who are dying of AIDS. We must love them where they are
and as they are precisely because of their great dignity as men and women
made in the divine image. These are the issues at stake-the truth of love,
the dignity of man, the very meaning of being created male and female in
the divine image.
If what the Church proposes about the great dignity and meaning of
our humanity is correct, contraception can never be the solution to our
problems but only the beginning of a terrible setback for humanity.
Whether the problem at hand is a pregnant woman living in a Brazilian
favela struggling to feed the children she already has, or the pandemic of
AIDS in Africa-the Church believes that a return to the "great mystery"
114.10/31/84, TB 411.
of God's plan for man and woman is the only real and lasting solution to
the problems we face.
D. Humanization and Evangelization

As we previously quoted John Paul saying, the relationship of the
sexes "constitutes the pure and simple fabric of existence." Thus, the dig-
nity and balance of human life "depend at every moment of history and at
every point of geographical longitude and latitude on 'who' she will be for
him and he for her."I 15 Enslavement to concupiscence is the basic and fun-
damental force disrupting the relationship of the sexes and, in tum, the
dignity and balance of human life. Give people contraceptives and we
keep them in their chains. Give them the "great mystelY" of God's plan for
life and love as proclaimed in John Paul's theology of the body and we
bring good news to the poor, we set captives free, we give sight to the
blind (see Lk 4: 18). We set men and women on the path to fulfilling the
very meaning of their being and existence.
An authentically "humanistic" meaning of the development and
progress of human civilization consists precisely in this. When we take
John Paul II's anthem to heart-that Jesus Christ fully reveals man to him-
self- we realize why, for this Polish pontiff, humanization and evangelization
are simply two sides of the same coin. 116 This is what the new evangelization
is and must be-the universal proclamation of and invitation to participate
in the "great mystery" of God's plan for human life. This great mystery is
inscribed in our bodies "from the beginning." It is inscribed in masculinity
and femininity and the call of the "two" to become "one flesh." And it is
definitively revealed in the Word made flesh, in Christ's incarnate com-
munion with his Bride, the Church.
This is what we learn in John Paul II's theology of the body-the
good news of the Gospel is written in human flesh, in everyone's flesh, in
everybody. Our concluding reflections will seek to demonstrate how this
theology of the body plays an indispensable role in the new evangeliza-
tion. In some sense, the new evangelization is and must be a proclamation
of the Gospel of the body.
115. 10/8/80, TB 159 (see §35).

116. See Phillip Egan, "Priesthood in the Teaching of John Paul II," in The Wisdom
ofJohn Paul II (London: CTS Publications, 2001), p. 37.
Love and Fruiifulness 469
Love and Fruitfulness-In Review

1. John Paul's final cycle, premising some reflections on the Song of
Songs and the book of Tobit, applies his "adequate anthropology" to the
fiercely resisted teaching of Pope Paul VI's encyclical Humanae Vitae.
Questions come from this encyclical which permeate the Pope's entire
catechesis. Thus, this final cycle is homogeneously united with the preced-
ing cycles.
2. John Paul examines the Song of Songs with the aim of better un-
derstanding the sacramental sign of marriage. He seems critical of those
exegetes who are quick to disembody the Song, seeing nothing more than
a "spiritual" allegory. Precisely in this profound affirmation of erotic
love-not despite it-we are able to discern God's revelation. It is in the
lovers' mutual fascination with the body that we see the divine mystery
made visible.
3. The groom's fascination with the visible femininity of his beloved
reveals an aspiration born of love on the basis of the language of the body.
It is a search for integral beauty, the beauty of body and soul free of all
stain. It is a love and appreciation not just for a body but for somebody, for
her entire feminine person.
4. The restlessness of their desire for a love that is "ever in search"
but "never satisfied" speaks of their desire for integration of eros with
"something more"-with agape. If love is "stem as death," this means that
love goes to the furthest limits of the language of the body in order to ex-
ceed them. Ultimately even spouses must "break away" from the ealihly
reality of love which-when it is true- leads them into the heart of agape,
the love of eternity.
5. In calling his beloved first his "sister" before his "bride," the
groom speaks of their common humanity, reproducing in some way the
whole history of the femininity of the person he loves. "Sister" demon-
strates the disinterested tenderness of his desire toward her, demonstrating
the sincerity of his self-gift. Unless lovers first recognize each other as
brother and sister, they are unable to love one another properly as husband
and wife.
6. The expression "you are a garden enclosed" reveals the lover's
recognition of his beloved as a person created for "her own sake." Because
she is "master of her own mystery," the lover knows that he cannot grasp
or possess her. He must trust in the freedom of the gift. Spousal love-
which is simultaneously spiritual and sensual-enables an initiation into

the mystery of the person without ever violating the mystery of the person.
7. In the union of the sexes, people's choices and actions take on "all
the weight of human existence." We see very pointedly in the marriage of
Tobiah and Sarah that in becoming one flesh, spouses find themselves at
the center of the great contest between good and evil, life and death, love
and all that is opposed to love. Yet the power of love is shown in the readi-
ness of spouses to place themselves in the center of the battle. Love is ever
confident in the victory of good and is ready to do everything so that good
may conquer.
8. Tobiah's prayer shows that he desires not lust, but to be a sincere
gift to Sarah according to God's original plan. Hence, in calling upon
God's grace and mercy, Tobiah and Sarah face the test of life and death-
and their love, supported by their prayer, is revealed as "more stem than
death." In this way their "one flesh" union bears witness to God as the
God of life.
9. Ephesians 5 brings us to the "mystical" and "liturgical" dimension
of the language of the body. Conjugal life becomes liturgical (an act of
prayer and worship) when, through the ethos of redemption, it enables
men and women to reclaim God's original plan for their humanity. Above
all, liturgical life involves the celebration of the sacraments. The sacra-
ments penetrate both soul and body, the entire male and female personal-
ity, with the power of sanctity.
10. The ethos and spirituality of married life is formed by that "rever-
ence for Christ" to which St. Paul exhorts spouses. This reverence is noth-
ing but a mature form of sexual attraction. It is a gift of the Holy Spirit
(piety) which frees men and women to experience the language of the
body in a depth, simplicity, and beauty altogether unknown to spouses
dominated by concupiscence. It enables spouses to be a true sign of God's
eternal, creative love.
11. Humanae Vitae bases its teaching on "the inseparable connec-
tion" between "the unitive and procreative meanings" of sexual inter-
course. This formulation appeals to modem philosophy's "subjective
tum." Couples, however, are not free to assign their own meaning to the
conjugal act. Its twofold meaning is already objectively pre-inscribed in
"the fundamental structure" of the act and "the actual nature of man and
of woman."
12. The immorality of contraception is revealed (theologically) in the
integral truth of marriage as a sacramental sign. It is especially important
in the consummate sign of married love that the language of the body be
reread in truth. Contraception negates this truth and falsifies the divine
Word inscribed in the body. It turns the spouses into "false prophets."
Rather than proclaiming the "great mystery" of God's life-giving love,
they blaspheme with their bodies.
l3. The moral norm of Humanae Vitae belongs not only to natural
law, but also to the moral order revealed by God. It is based on a biblical
theology of the body, which "is not merely a theory, but rather a specific,
evangelical, Christian pedagogy of the body." The teaching of Humanae
Vitae presents an integral aspect of the message of salvation for the pur-
pose of modeling earthly life on the hope of life eternal.
14. Since the two meanings of intercourse are inseparable, by attack-
ing the procreative meaning, contracepted intercourse also ceases to be a
communion of persons and an act of love. Through the whole dynamism
of tension and enjoyment, the bodies of husband and wife are meant to
speak the mystery of God in all its truth. But contraception, by violating
the interior order of conjugal union, turns the language of the body into a
lie. This constitutes the essential evil of the act.
15. Pastoral concern means the search for man's true good and the
proclamation of God's plan for human love. In turn, God calls every
couple to be a witness and interpreter of his plan. In the exercise of parent-
hood, couples "interpret" this plan responsibly when they prudently and
generously decide to have a large family, or when-for serious reasons
and with total respect for the language of the body-they choose to space
births or limit family size.
16. A couple who resorts to contraception may have an acceptable
reason to avoid a pregnancy, but the end never justifies the means. Ab-
staining from that which causes pregnancy is the only means of avoiding
pregnancy that does not objectively violate the language of the body.
Through abstinence, couples show themselves capable of authentic free-
dom in self-giving.
17. Responsible parenthood requires that spouses embrace the har-
mony of biology and personality. When we suppress fertility, we tamper
with the body-soul integrity of the human person. Thus, the essence of the
Church's teaching on contraception lies in maintaining an adequate rela-
tionship between dominion of the forces of nature and mastery of self.
Self-mastery corresponds to man's dignity as a subject with self-determi-
nation. Suppressing fertility deprives man of his subjectivity, making him
an object of manipulation.
18. In the integral vision of natural family planning presented by

Humanae Vitae, there can be no thought of a mechanical application of
biological laws. Responsible parenthood requires a mature freedom in
self-giving, and a positive family and procreative attitude. It requires that
the language of the body-including its internal structures-be reread in
truth. Thus, in no way is responsible parenthood exclusively directed to
limiting, much less excluding children.
19. Natural law refers to the Creator's plan for man insofar as it is
understood by right reason. Fidelity to the natural law is not a reduction
of ethics to "impersonal" laws of biology, but is rightly understood as
fidelity to the Creator-Person who inscribed his will for us in our own
body-persons. It is therefore a question of what corresponds to the true
dignity of persons.
20. Humanae Vitae outlines an authentic marital spirituality, and the
theology of the body constitutes the essential nucleus of such spirituality.
Spouses must pass through the "narrow gate" and travel the "hard way,"
yet they are strengthened and "consecrated" by the power of the Holy
Spirit to bear authentic witness to Christ in their married life. Prayer and
the sacraments-especially the Eucharist and Penance-are the "infallible
and indispensable" means for forming an authentic conjugal spirituality.
21. The Church's renewed formulation, with its emphasis on the
subjective dimension of love, reaffirms the traditional teaching on the
objective purposes of marriage (and their hierarchy) and at the same
time deepens this teaching from the viewpoint of the interior life of the
spouses. Thus, conjugal love is not an "end" of marriage but the inner
form of married life. Conjugal love directs spouses to the fulfillment of
the ends of marriage.
22. Authentic love correctly unites the two meanings of the conju-
gal act. There is no contradiction involved here, only a "difficulty" since
love must do battle in the heart with concupiscence. If the powers of
concupiscence try to detach the language of the body from the truth, the
power of love strengthens the language of the body ever anew in that
truth. In this way spouses bear witness to the mystery of the redemption
of the body.
23. Continence (self-mastery) certainly involves "saying no" to lust.
But continence is not only-and not even principally-the ability to say
no. This is the negative role of continence, but it also has a positive role.
Mature self-mastery enables one to direct the very "content and character"
of physical and emotional reactions toward sincere self-giving. If chastity
Love and Fruitfidness 473
is first manifested as the capacity to resist concupiscence, it gradually re-

veals itself as the capacity to perceive, love, and live the true, sacramental
meaning of the body and of sex.
24. To acquire self-mastery a person must be committed to a progres-
sive education in self-control of the will, feelings, and emotions-begin-
ning with the most simple acts in which it is fairly easy to practice control.
The continent person exercises "control" precisely in order to uphold the
incomparable value of sexuality-to protect it from the degradation of
lust. We cannot speak of continence as a virtue if one's "control" in sexual
matters is based on a fear or devaluation of sexuality. That would imply
acceptance of the Manichaean anti-value.
25. The asceticism necessary to marital chastity does not impoverish
the relationship of the sexes. It progressively enriches their dialogue puri-
fying it, deepening it, and simplifying it. Expressions of affection are not
dampened but become spiritually more intense. If marital intercourse re-
mains the consummate expression of spousal communion, through conju-
gal chastity other expressions of affection are also revealed in their purest,
simplest, deepest, and most intense character. Harmony reigns in married
life as the fruit of a mature continence.
26. It is often thought that continence causes inner tensions from
which man must free himself. Yet, when understood integrally, continence
is the only way to free man from such tensions. Continence is not only the
capacity to "contain" sensual reactions, but even more the capacity to con-
trol and guide the whole sphere of man's sensuality and emotions. Mature
continence directs excitement and emotion toward the sincere gift of self.
27. Man and woman's personal communion cannot be formed in the
full truth of its possibilities only on the level of concupiscence. In fact, the
nuptial meaning of the body has been distorted by concupiscence almost at
its very roots. The teaching of Humanae Vitae affirms the possibility of
overcoming these distortions with God's grace and living conjugal love in
its pure, integral truth. This is also love's most physically and emotionally
intense form.
28. Chastity lies at the center of marital spirituality as a manifestation
of "life in the Holy Spirit." In fact, spouses cannot experience conjugal in-
tercourse on the proper level of persons (communio personarum) "except
through the powers coming from the Holy Spirit who purifies, enlivens,
strengthens, and perfects the powers of the human spirit." Through the
Holy Spirit, man and woman are filled with veneration for the values of
the conjugal union.
29. The gift of piety-of respect and awe for what is sacred-instills
in the couple a profound respect for the twofold meaning of the conjugal
act. When men and women interiorize God's glorious plan for sexual
union, they have a "salvific fear" of ever violating or degrading "what
bears in itself the sign of the divine mystery of creation and redemption."
Thus, when spouses live by the Holy Spirit, contracepted intercourse be-
comes unthinkable.
30. Men and women who are the object of concupiscence gradually
realize that they are not loved for their "own sake," but only insofar as
they satisfy the other's selfish needs. Herein lies the enormous significance
of respect for the work of God which the Spirit stirs up in those who are
open to it. When men and women live from this place of respect, all their
manifestations of affection protect and affirm in each of them a "deep-
rooted peace." This peace is the "interior resonance" of chastity.
31. The gift of piety, together with love and chastity, leads the couple
to understand "the singular, or rather exceptional, significance" of the con-
jugal act. Recognizing and protecting the dignity of this act is the specific
goal of conjugal spirituality. Thus "the antithesis of conjugal spirituality"
is constituted, in some sense, by a couple's lack of understanding of the
exceptional significance of intercourse demonstrated by contraceptive
practice and mentality.
32. Respect for what is sacred contributes to seeing that the conjugal
act does not become an empty "habit"-and that there is expressed in it a
sufficient fullness of ethical, personal, and religious content. Through the
gift of the Spirit, the sexual union of spouses becomes an act of veneration
for the majesty of the Creator and for the spousal love of the Redeemer.
33. Birth regulation is not only a biological problem, but is organi-
cally related to the whole question of the theology of the body. Thus,
answers to man's pressing questions must focus on the biblical and per-
sonalistic aspects of the issue. The biblical emphasis demonstrates that the
Church's teaching against contraception is rooted in divine revelation. The
personalistic emphasis demonstrates that authentic human progress must
be measured not merely on the basis of technology, but on the basis of the
essential dignity of the human person.
34. Enslavement to concupiscence is the basic and fundamental force
disrupting the dignity and balance of human life. Contraception only fos-
ters this concupiscence. But the "great mystery" of God's plan for the
sexes proclaimed by the theology of the body sets men and women on the
path to fulfilling the very meaning of their being and existence. Humanae
Vitae, therefore, is a question nothing short of the authentically "humanis-
tic" meaning of the development and progress of civilization.
Epilogue
The Gospel of the Body and the New Evangelization
Having undertaken the mammoth task of studying John Paul II's the-
ology of the body from start to finish, let us now conclude by looking
briefly at its importance for the Church at this historical moment. Describ-
ing this moment in his Apostolic Letter at the close of the Great Jubilee,
John Paul wrote: "A new millennium is opening before the Church like a
vast ocean upon which we shall venture, relying on the help of Christ."i
Though rough waters abound, John Paul beckons us to set sail without
fear, and to "put out into the deep" for a catch: "Due in altum" (Lk 5:4).2
Two millennia ago, led by Peter's faith in Christ-"at your word I will let
down the nets" (Lk 5:5)-the first disciples cast their nets and caught a
multitude of fish.
Peter's 263 rd successor has reflected with great faith on Christ's
words in his theology of the body. He has sought-and found-in the
Master's words the deepest answers to the most pressing questions of
modem men and women concerning the meaning of our creation as male
and female and the call ofthe two to communion in "one flesh." These are
always questions about the meaning of life itself, the meaning of love, the
meaning of existence. These are questions that take us to "the deepest sub-
stratum of ethics and culture." Our answers to these questions determine
culture-whether men and women flourish in a culture of life or languish
in a culture of death. If there is to be a great catch of fish in a "new evan-
gelization," we sons and daughters of the Church must first recover the
sense of having an urgently important message for the salvation of the
world. The Gospel of the body proclaimed by John Paul II is that message.
How urgently it is needed! We must follow Peter's example of faith and
"put out into the deep" for a catch-"Duc in altum!"
1. Novo Millennia Ineunte, n. 58.

2. Ibid, n. 1.
475
As we reflected at the start of this book, the twentieth century, which

began with the hope of unlimited progress, ended as the bloodiest century
known to history. Modern man had placed his hopes for a messiah in his
own genius-in science, technology, medicine. Whenever man loses sight
of the "great mystery" and sets his sights on this world, he always meets
disappointment, even despair: "The world is not capable of making man
happy. It is not capable of saving him from evil, in all of its types and
forms-illness, epidemics, cataclysms, catastrophes, and the like. This
world, with its riches and its wants, needs to be saved, to be redeemed."3
We now stand in great need of a "passover" from death to life.
Even after 2,000 years of Christianity, Christians themselves are still
coming to terms with the fact that salvation comes only by way of the
Cross. We are much like the disciples on the road to Emmaus-baffled
by the tragic events of our own day, wondering what it all means and
why it has all gone so sour. Yet, through his theology of the body, the
Vicar of Christ has walked with us, opening up the Scriptures for us.
Those who have heard his words can certainly say, "Were not our hearts
burning within us as he unfolded the 'great mystery' of God's designs?"
(see Lk 24:32) And just as the disciples on the road came to recognize
Christ "in the breaking of the bread"-in his body given for them in the
Eucharist-so, too, have we come, through our study of John Paul's
catechesis, to see Christ revealed in his body: in our bodies because we,
though many, are "one body" with him.
Inasmuch as John Paul's theology of the body takes us to the deepest
roots of the modern crisis and outlines so clearly the path to the "redemp-
tion of the body"; inasmuch as John Paul's theology of the body appeals to
the modern turn to the subject, incarnating the Gospel in the everyday ex-
periences of men and women-it seems indispensable in the Church's ef-
forts to reconnect the modern world with the "great mystery" of God's
spousal love for humanity, Christ's spousal love for the Church. It seems
an indispensable foundation for the "new evangelization" and for the
building of a culture of life.
104. The Antidote to the Culture of Death

We are living in an age that Christians of the future will likely de-
scribe as the near-triumph of "the anti-life heresy." They will recount that
this heresy threatened to destroy civilization at its roots with its resulting
3. Crossing the Threshold o/Hope, p. 56.

Epilogue 477
culture of death. However, as has always been the case in the histOlY of
theological development, the Christians of the future will recognize that
this attack against God's original plan for human life-commonly referred
to in the future as His "marital plan"-will have been vanquished by a
precise theological elaboration of the place of the nuptial meaning of the
body and the marital covenant at the very heart and center of the economy
of salvation. 4
This is the gift of John Paul II's theology of the body to the Church
and the world. It is the antidote to the culture of death and the theological
foundation of the culture of life. Indeed, if the future of humanity passes
by way of marriage and the family,S we could say that the future of mar-
riage and the family passes by way of John Paul II's theology ofthe body.
Put simply, there will be no renewal of the Church and of the world with-
out a renewal of marriage and the family. And there will be no renewal of
marriage and the family without a retum to the full truth of God's plan for
the body and sexuality. Yet that will not happen without a fresh theological
proposal that compellingly demonstrates to the modem world how the
Christian sexual ethic-far from the cramped, prudish list of prohibitions
it is assumed to be-is a liberating, redeeming ethos that, even if it in-
volves the element of the cross, corresponds perfectly with the most noble
aspirations ofthe human heart. This is precisely what John Paul II's theol-
ogy of the body is. But, as we have seen in our extensive study, it is also
so much more.
A. Ramificationsfor All of Theology

As George Weigel writes, "John Paul's Theology of the Body has
ramifications for all of theology. It challenges us to think of sexuality as a
way to grasp the essence of the human-and through that, to discern
something about the divine." Weigel continues, "Angelo Scola, rector of
the Pontifical Lateran University in Rome, goes so far as to suggest that
virtually every thesis in theology-God, Christ, the Trinity, grace, the
Church, the sacraments-could be seen in a new light if theologians ex-
plored in depth the rich personalism implied in John Paul II's theology of
the body."6
This is a striking proposal. Indeed, it is no exaggeration to say that
the Pope's theology of the body will leave the Church reeling in self-dis-
covery for centuries to come. Much like the thinking of Augustine or
4. These ideas expressed with gratitude to Sean Inherst.

5. See Familiaris Consortio, n. 86.
Aquinas, John Paul II's insights-in the whole corpus of his thought but
particularly in his catechesis on the body-inaugurate a new era in the his-
tory of Christian thinking and set a new standard for theological inquiry.
Yet theologians have hardly begun to unpack the great riches of the Pope's
teaching. Recall Weigel's statement that "John Paul's portrait of sexual
love as an icon of the interior life of God has barely begun to shape the
Church's theology, preaching, and religious education. When it does it will
compel a dramatic development of thinking about virtually every major
theme in the Creed."7
Understanding the human body as a theology must not be relegated
to the level of an obscure interest of a few specialized theologians. It must
be the interest of every man and woman who desires to understand the
meaning of human existence. Indeed ultimate reality itself is revealed
through the human body-through the Word made flesh. If we stay the
course, curiosity about the meaning of the body and of sexuality-so often
considered innately prurient-actually leads us into the heart of the mys-
tery hidden in God from time immemorial. Indeed, that biblical "one
flesh" union "bears in itself the sign of the divine mystery of creation and
redemption."g Hence, as we have learned, understanding Christ's revela-
tion regarding the human body and its redemption "concerns the entire
Bible."9 It plunges us head first into "the perspective of the whole Gospel,
of the whole teaching, in fact, ofthe whole mission ofChrist."lo
B. Mainstream Mysticism
Some might ask: "If this theology of the body is so important, where
has it been for two thousand years?" This is a legitimate question. How-
ever, while recognizing that John Paul is presenting a clear development
of thinking, we must also recognize that the fundamental message of the
theology of the body is nothing new. It is the same Gospel which has been
proclaimed since the descent of the Holy Spirit upon Mary and the Apos-
tles in the upper room. John Paul II is penetrating that Gospel- which is
the same yesterday, today, and forever-with new clarity, new insight, new
depth. And he is rooting the revelation of that Gospel- as it always has been,
even if it has not always been so well understood-in the biblical truth of the
human body, of the incarnate person made, as male and female, in the image
and likeness of God.
7. Ibid., p. 853.
8.11114/84, TB 416.
9. 1/13/82, TB 249.
10.12/3/80, TB 175.
Epilogue 479
Mystics throughout history have plumbed the depths of the "great

mystery" of the divine-human "nuptial union." But their ecstatic visions
and the insights they afforded were not exactly mainstream. With the the-
ology of the body, we might say that Pope John Paul II is bringing "nuptial
mysticism" to the whole Church. It seems he is proposing it in some sense
as the "normal" Christian view of the world.
Why has it taken two thousand years for such a liberating mysticism
to be presented by a pope as food for the whole Church? We must recog-
nize that the Church matures through time in some ways similar to a hu-
man person. The analogy is certainly imperfect, but we would not expect a
child to understand himself the same wayan adult does. We might even
say that with John Paul II's theology of the body, the Church, as a corpo-
rate person, has reached puberty-a new "awakening" of sorts regarding
the meaning of the body and the communion of the sexes. We might also
observe that puberty is not full maturity, but only the beginning of the pro-
cess that brings one into adulthood. Thus, if this comparison is at all accu-
rate, the Church still has a good deal of maturing ahead of her, and a good
deal of "growing pains."
Finally, if the Pope's insights are the fruit of two thousand years of
"communal reflection" on the Word of God, II they have also been forged
by the unprecedented triumphs and tragedies of this particular historical
"moment." In the Easter Vigil liturgy we exult in the "happy fault of Adam
which won for us so great a Redeemer." We might also exult in the "happy
fault" of the sexual revolution in the twentieth century which won for us
so great a theology of the body.
105. Incarnating the Gospel Message

In his encyclical Redemptoris Missio, John Paul wrote: "I sense that
the moment has come to commit all of the Church's energies to a new
evangelization and to the mission ad gentes. No believer in Christ, no in-
stitution of the Church can avoid this supreme duty: to proclaim Christ to
all peoples."12 He also wrote: "If we look at today's world, we are struck
by many negative factors that can lead to pessimism. But this feeling is
unjustified: we have faith in God our Father and Lord and in his mercy.
... God is preparing a great springtime for Christianity, and we can already
see its first signs."13
11. See Fides et Ratio, n. 101 .

12. Redemptoris Missio, n. 3.
13. Ibid., n. 86.
John Paul first used the expression "the new evangelization" in a

pastoral visit to Latin America in 1983. Ever since he has "unstintingly
recalled the pressing need for a new evangelization. "14 This urgency
stems not only from the fact that the number of those not yet reached by
the Gospel is still immense,15 but also because "entire groups of the bap-
tized have lost a living sense ofthe faith, or even no longer consider them-
selves members of the Church, and live a life far removed from Christ and
his Gospel."16
Therefore, one thing "new" about this evangelization is the fact that it
entails not only the mission ad gentes, or "to the nations" who have not
heard the Gospel, but also a mission towards men and women who are al-
ready baptized. The widespread phenomenon of the "baptized non-believer"
has come to light as the social structures favoring Christianity have fallen
in the West. Previous generations of men and women may have conformed
in varying degrees to the Christian ethic, but as the social pressures to do
so waned, the essential Christian ethos was found lacking. Men and
women in large numbers were "culturally Christian," but had not experi-
enced a conversion of heart to Jesus Christ and his teachings. The recovery
of an authentic Christian "ethos," in fact, was one of the main goals of
Vatican II. As the Council understood well, this can only happen through
an authentic, compelling, evangelical proclamation of salvation through
Jesus Christ.
A. Bringing Heavenly Mysteries Down to Earth

As John Paul clarified in his Apostolic Letter at the close of the Great
Jubilee, the new evangelization is not "a matter of inventing a 'new pro-
gram.' The program already exists: it is the plan found in the Gospel and
in the living Tradition, it is the same as ever."17 What is essential in order
to meet the unprecedented needs of our day is a proclamation of the Gos-
pel that is "new in ardor, methods, and expression." 18
According to John Paul, "the new evangelization [involves] a vital
effort to come to a deeper understanding of the mysteries of faith and to
find meaningful language with which to convince our contemporaries that
14. Fides et Ratio, n. 103.

15. See Redemptoris Missio, n. 86.
16. Ibid., n. 33; see also Pope Paul VI, Evangelii Nuntiandi, n. 52; Pope John Paul
II, Catechesi Tradendae, nn. 19,42.
17. Novo Millennio Ineunte, n. 29.
18. Address to the Assembly ofCELAM, March 9, 1983.
Epilogue 481
they are called to newness oflife through God's love." It is the task of shar-
ing with modem men and women "the 'unsearchable riches of Christ' and of
making known 'the plan of the mystery hidden for ages in God who created
all things' (Eph 3:8-9)."19 This is precisely what John Paul II's theology of
the body provides: a deeper understanding of the mysteries of faith and a
meaningful way to share them with men and women of today.
Once the Pope's scholarship is actually comprehended (or pre-
sented in a way that people can understand), the theology of the body
has a remarkable ability to bring the heavenly mysteries down to earth.
These are not theological abstractions. They "ring true" in the human
heart because the Pope's teaching is the fruit of a constant confrontation
of doctrine with experience. As the Holy Father observes, "God comes
to us in the things we know best and can verify most easily, the things of
our everyday life, apart from which we cannot understand ourselves. "20
What do we know better, what can we verify more easily, what is more
"everyday" than the experience of embodiment? This is where God
meets us-in the flesh. And this is where the Church must meet the
world in the new evangelization.
The Catechism teaches that the Church "in her whole being and in
all her members .. .is sent to announce, bear witness, make present, and
spread the mystery of the communion of the Holy Trinity."21 This sums
up well the essential goal of evangelization. And this eternal mystery of
communio becomes a practical, incarnate reality through the lens of the
theology of the body. It becomes close to us, we realize that it is part of
us. The divine mystery of love and communion is stamped not only in
our deepest spiritual reality, but also in our physical reality-in our
whole personal experience of being "a body," and of being, as a body,
male or female. This-our creation as male and female-is "the funda-
mental fact" of human existence,zz
B. The Human Question and the Divine Answer

John Paul defines the basic task of evangelization as "the Church's
effort to proclaim to [all men and women] that God loves them, that he has
given himself for them in Christ Jesus, and that he invites them to an un-
19. Springtime of Evangelization: The Complete Texts of the Holy Father's /998 Ad
Limina Addresses to the Bishops of the United States (San Diego, CA: Basilica Press,
1999), pp. 53, 55.
20. Fides et Ratio. n. 12.
2!. CCC, n. 738.
22. See 2/13/80, TB 74.
ending life of happiness."23 This basic message is in itself "good news."

But it needs to be incarnated if men and women are to find their link with
it. Of course, this message was and is incarnated in Jesus Christ. However,
someone might still respond, "What does some man who lived two thou-
sand years ago have to do with me?"
As a professor of mine once said, we can proclaim that "Jesus is the
answer" until we are blue in the face. But unless people are first in touch
with the question, we remain on the level of theological abstraction.
Herein lies the gift of grounding the Gospel in the body. It is the antidote
to theological abstraction. It roots us in what is truly human and by so do-
ing prepares us to receive what is truly divine. In other words, it puts us
squarely in touch with the human question, thus opening our hearts to the
divine answer.
Nothing puts us in touch with the enigma of human existence like the
reality of our own embodiment. In some sense, embodiment is the human
question. What does it mean to be a man? What does it mean to be a
woman? There is no more important question for men and women to ask.
And, as we observed early on, these are inherently sexual questions (see
§6). Of course, the very ability to question and to wonder points to our
deeper, metaphysical (beyond the physical, beyond the body) dimension.
But the human anomaly is that the metaphysical dimension of man is
manifested in his physical dimension. The body reveals the person. The
body reveals man's solitude, and it is this solitude that is the human question.
As we have learned throughout our study, man's solitude is his own
experience of being a person. This is the basic universal human experi-
ence. But what does it mean? This is the basic universal human question!
Where do we find the answer? The same place we found the question-in
our experience of embodiment. If solitude is the question, communion is
the answer.
However, if the question (solitude) arises from within oneself as a
person, the answer (communion) is discovered only by looking outside
oneself towards the "other" person and in relation to that "other" person.
By contemplating the "other" in the mystery of sexual difference, we real-
ize that the body has a nuptial meaning. We realize that "man can only
find himself through the sincere gift of himself."24 This is the very mean-
23. Springtime oj Evangelization: The Complete Texts oJfhe Holy Father s 1998 Ad
Limina Addresses to the Bishops oJthe United States, p. 55.
Epilogue 483
ing of "being a man" and "being a woman"-we are called to be a gift for
one another, a gift that leads to a true communion of persons.
This is not abstract. Even if sin has distanced us from the beauty and
purity of the original experience, everyone knows the "ache" of solitude
and the longing for communion. Everyone knows the "magnetic pull" of
erotic desire. This basic human longing for communion, in fact, is the
most concrete link in every human heart with "that man who lived two
thousand years ago." How so? Experience also attests that even in the
most harmonious human communion, that "ache" of solitude is not en-
tirely satisfied. The heart and body yearn for "something more." Indeed,
the male-female communion (as the paradigm of all human communions)
is only a preliminary answer to the enigma of our existence. It is only a
glimmer, only a foreshadowing, only a sacrament of something far greater.
And only the divine prototype, to which the biblical "one flesh" points,
can ultimately satisfy the human longing for love and communion.
"For this reason ... the two become one flesh." For what reason? To re-
veal, proclaim, and anticipate the union of Christ and the Church (see Eph
5:31-32). The eternal, ecstatic, "nuptial" communion with Christ and the
entire communion of saints-so far superior to anything proper to earthly
life that we cannot begin to fathom it-this alone can satisfy the human
"ache" of solitude. This is the North Pole to which that magnetic pull of
erotic desire is oriented. And this is why "Jesus is the answer." If the spirit
of the Gospel is not incarnated as such, it will forever remain detached
from what is essentially human. It will forever remain outside the scope of
essentially human experiences (see §§l1, 25). Yet, Christ took on flesh to
wed himself indissolubly to that which is essentially human. Hence, if the
Gospel is not incarnated with what is essentially human, it is essentially
not the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Notice how, in the following passage from Evangelium Vitae, John
Paul II not only summarizes the call of the new evangelization, but roots it
in the call to communion through the sincere gift of self which, as he also
affirms, is rooted in the truth of the body and sexuality.
We need to bring the Gospel of life to the heart of every man and woman
and to make it penetrate every part of society. This involves above all
proclaiming the core of this Gospel. It is the proclamation of a living
God who is close to us, who calls us to profound communion with him-
self and awakens in us the certain hope of eternal life. It is the affirma-
tion of the inseparable connection between the person, his life and his
bodiliness. It is the presentation of human life as a life of relationship, a
gift of God, the fruit and sign of his love. It is the proclamation that Jesus
has a unique relationship with every person, which enables us to see in
every human face the face of Christ. It is the call for a "sincere gift of
self" as the fullest way to realize our personal freedom ....
[As a consequence] the meaning of life is found in giving and receiving

love, and in this light human sexuality and procreation reach their true
and full significance. 25
In light of all we have learned in the theology of the body, this pas-
sage takes on its full, incarnate meaning. The "God who is close to us" is
so, in the most concrete sense, in and through the Incarnation, in and
through human flesh. The call to an eternal life of "communion with him-
self" is stamped in our creation as male and female right from the begin-
ning-in our interior spiritual reality and our exterior physical reality.
Thus, there is an "inseparable connection between the person, his life and
his bodiliness." The nuptial meaning of the body reveals human life "as a
life of relationship." In the original human communion, we see the "gift of
God" revealed through the primordial sacrament which is "the fruit and
sign of his love." In the life of the first Adam, we already see a foreshad-
owing of the New Adam's "unique relationship with every person." And
because the human body speaks of the great mystery of Christ, we "see in
every human face the face of Christ." In light of all this, "personal free-
dom" can only be realized in the freedom of the gift- the sincere gift of
self in imitation of Christ. This is the meaning of the Gospel-"giving and
receiving love"-and it is all stamped in the meaning of the body, of hu-
man sexuality and the call to be fruitful and multiply.
106. The Church's Response to Modern Rationalism

John Paul asserts: "To make the Church the home and school oj com-
munion: that is the great challenge facing us in the millennium which is
now beginning, if we wish to be faithful to God's plan and respond to the
world's deepest yearnings."26 The new evangelization, therefore, is not
first an appeal to abstract, objective principles. It is an appeal to the deep-
est yearnings of the human heart for communion and a living witness to
the truth that only Christ can fulfill this yearning. Furthermore, in the new
evangelization, Christians must help men and women realize that their
longing for Christ is written in the "great mystery" of the human body and
its nuptial meaning.
But Christians can only pass this good news on to others if they are
first infused with it and vivified by it themselves. As Pope Paul VI said in
his great encyclical on evangelization, "The Church is an evangelizer, but
25. Evangelium Vitae, nn. 80- 8J.

26. Novo Millennia Ineunte, n. 43.
Epilogue 485
she begins by being evangelized herself. "27 There is no doubt that, in de-
livering his theology of the body, John Paul II's intended audience was,
first and foremost, the Church herself. Very few Christians seem to under-
stand that the "great mystery" hidden for ages in God is stamped in their
own bodies and in their yearning for communion. Large numbers of
Catholics have been caught up in the false humanism of the day and are
hostile towards much of the Church's teaching. Hence, unless the tide is
turned within the Church-unless the Church is first evangelized-she
cannot evangelize others.
A. The Spousal Analogy and the "Analogy of Faith"

John Paul II's theology of the body provides great hope for the ur-
gently needed renewal within the Church. When we view the Gospel mes-
sage through the interpretive key of man and woman's call to incarnate
communion, not only does the Gospel message take on flesh, but even the
most controversial teachings of the Church (virtually all of which are re-
lated to the meaning of gender and sexuality) begin to make sense. Spou-
sal theology demonstrates how all of the various puzzle pieces of the
Christian mystery fit beautifully together. The truth of Catholicism "clicks"
when viewed through the theology of the body. In other words, through
the spousal analogy we become attentive to the "analogy of faith"-that is,
to the coherence of the truths of faith among themselves and within the
whole plan of Revelation centered on Christ. 2R
This is why the theology of the body will lead to a dramatic develop-
ment of thinking about the Creed. This is why the Catechism speaks of the
important connection between sexual rectitude, believing in the articles of
the Creed, and understanding the mysteries we profess in the Creed. In
other words, the Catechism points to the intimate connection between purity
of heart, love of the truth, and orthodoxy of faith. 29 Conversely, Christianity
unravels at the seams-its inner logic collapses and virtually everything it
teaches becomes contested-as soon as we divorce ourselves from the
"great mystery" of nuptial communion revealed through the body.
Modem rationalism, with its absolutizing of the conscious mind,
effects just such a divorce. The body becomes divorced from the spirit
and cannot be viewed as a theology. As John Paul wrote in his 1994 Letter
to Families:
27. Evangelii Nuntiandi, ll. 15.

28. See CCC, llll. 90, 114, 158.
29. See CCc. ll. 2518.
Saint Paul's magnificent synthesis concerning the "great mystery" ap-

pears as the compendium or summa, in some sense, of the teaching about
God and man which was brought to fulfillment by Christ. Unfortunately,
Western thought, with the development of modern rationalism, has been
gradually moving away from this teaching. The philosopher who formu-
lated the principle "Cogito, ergo sum "-"1 think, therefore I am"-also
gave the modem concept of man its distinctive dualistic character. It is
typical of rationalism to make a radical contrast in man between spirit
and body, between body and spirit. The body can never be reduced to
mere matter: it is a spiritualized body, just as man's spirit is so closely
united to the body that he can be described as an embodied spirit. The
richest source for knowledge of the body is the Word made flesh. Christ
reveals man to himself. In a certain sense, this statement of the Second
Vatican Council is the reply, so long awaited, which the Church has
given to modem rationalism. 30
We proposed Gaudium et Spes 22 as the Church's response to mod-
em rationalism in the prologue, and said we would return to it after our
study of the Pope's catechesis on the body. In what way is Gaudium et
Spes 22-"Christ fully reveals man to himself"-a response to modem ra-
tionalism? And how does the Pope's theology of the body, as an extended
commentary on Gaudium et Spes 22, shed light on this?
B. Man as "Absolute" or "Partner of the Absolute"

If modem rationalism makes of man an absolute, then man deter-
mines his own self by himself. He is answerable to nothing greater than
himself and his own subjectivistic "reality." He is not ordered to anything
or anyone else. He is not called to communion. He is a self-defined island.
Fulfillment is attained by self-assertion and selfish gain. Other human be-
ings become a utilitarian means to that gain or, if they are found to be an
obstacle, they are crushed, discarded, even exterminated.
In such a world-view freedom means doing whatever one wants
without any outside constraint. The Supreme Court of the United States,
reaffirming the right of men and women to extenninate their own unborn
children, concisely expressed this individualistic, rationalistic ideology
when it asserted: "At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own
concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of
human life."3l It almost sounds like a religious statement. But it is the reli-
gion of the deceiver. The Supreme Court might simply have repeated his
perennial lie: At the heart of liberty is the right to "make oneself like God"
(see Gn 3:5).

31. Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 1992.
Epilogue 487
Insert Gaudium et Spes 22 into the equation and it unmasks the sham
of modern rationalism: "The religion of the God who became man," said
Paul VI in his closing speech at the Council, encounters "the religion (for
such it is) of man who makes himself God."32 Man does not define him-
self. Christ fully reveals man to himself. Man is not the absolute. The mys-
tery of the Father and his love is the absolute. And how is this revealed?
Through the gift and mystery of Christ's body-through the Word made
flesh! Our humanity is not divine, but in Christ's humanity, we see our hu-
manity wed indissolubly to divinity. In Christ we see that profound link
between theology and anthropology that we spoke of in the prologue and
unfolded throughout our study (see §3).
Asserting his own dignity as a free creature does not place man in a
contest of wills with the Absolute. Such would be the case only if God
were a tyrant, jealous of his own rule and leery of the freedom he be-
stowed upon his creature. This is the original anti-Word promulgated by
the deceiver. The foundation of the universe is that God is love. Man is not
the absolute, but he is called to open his heart to the greatest gift that the
Absolute could possibly bestow upon a creature: Man is invited to be
"partner of the Absolute." This, in fact, sums up the key distinction be-
tween secular and Christian humanisms. Either human freedom deter-
mines man as the absolute, or freedom is given to man so as to enter into
"partnership" with the Absolute. If the former, man is not ordered in any
fundamental way toward anything but himself, and freedom is fulfilled in
his own egoistic, "masturbatory" gratification. If the latter, man is ordered
towards communion with the Absolute, and freedom is fulfilled in the sin-
cere gift of self to the "Other."
Furthermore, as we learn from John Paul's theology of the body, man
determines himself in one direction or the other based on his understand-
ing of his own body and sexuality. The body is either narcissistic or nup-
tial. It either throws man back on himself, or points him to relationship. As
Stanislaw Grygiel, a professor at the John Paul II Institute in Rome, once
stated, "If we don't live the sexual differences correctly that distinguish
man and woman and call them to unite, we will not be capable of under-
standing the difference that distinguishes man and God and constitutes a
primordial call to union. Thus, we may fall into the despair of a life sepa-
rated from others and from the Other, that is, God. "33
32. Cited in Closing Speeches: Vatican Council II (Boston: Pauline Books & Me-
dia), p. 10.
33. Quoted in "The Church Must Guide the Sexual Revolution" (Zenit International
News Agency, August 31, 1999).
• We can also recognize how man and woman's approach to regulat-

ing births pivots them either in the direction of a secular or Christian hu-
manism. When a couple chooses to contracept, they take the powers of life
into their own hands. They determine for themselves that this act of inter-
course will be sterile. By doing so, they make themselves the "Absolute."
However, when a couple chooses to cooperate with the way God designed
human fertility, exercising the freedom to abstain from intercourse when
serious reasons call for the avoidance of pregnancy, they show respect for
God as the Absolute. They enter into "partnership" with the Absolute. Fur-
thermore, if they choose to engage in intercourse during the infertile pe-
riod, they receive infertility as a gift rather than grasp at it.
When we understand the body's nuptial meaning, we understand how

Gaudium et Spes 22 leads us to Gaudium et Spes 24: If man is the only
creature that God willed for "its own sake," man can only find himself
through "the sincere gift of himself." This is how Christ fully reveals man
to himself-by showing him that God is gift and empowering him to live a
life of sincere self-giving. In other words, Christ reveals man to himself by
making the sincere gift of his body on the cross ("this is my body, given
for you") and filling our bodies with new life in the Holy Spirit. In tum,
this "life in the Holy Spirit" restores in us the freedom of the gift.
Living in this freedom, we realize that other human beings are not
means to my own selfish end. They are created for their own sake and the
only proper response to them is love. In this view, at the heart of liberty is
the freedom to choose the good, not to create it. True freedom is liberation
not from the external "constraint" that calls me to good, but from the in-
ternal constraint that hinders my choice of the good. The truth sets us free.
And the Truth is that the Son of God took on flesh and died and rose again
to free us from all that hinders our capacity to love as he loves .
C. Turn to Christ
This is the message of salvation proclaimed with authority by
Christ's body, the Church. Indeed, the Church herself, as the Bride of
Christ, is the sign of this salvation. Furthermore, this message of God's
love and salvation is written in human flesh right from the beginning-in
the "great mystery" of our creation as male and female and our call to be-
come "one flesh." As John Paul observes, "The Church cannot therefore
be understood as the mystical body of Christ, as the sign of man's cov-
enant with God in Christ, or as the universal sacrament of salvation, w1less
we keep in mind the 'great mystery' involved in the creation of man as
Epilogue 489
male and female and the vocation of both to conjugal love, to fatherhood
and to motherhood."34
With modern rationalism, however, man loses sight of the "great
mystery" of his being-he loses sight of the ultimate Mystery that is Be-
ing. As John Paul writes:
Modern rationalism does not tolerate mystery. It does not accept the
mystery of man as male and female, nor is it willing to admit that the full
truth about man has been revealed in Jesus Christ. In particular, it does
not accept the "great mystery" proclaimed in the Letter to the Ephesians
but radically opposes it. It may well acknowledge, in the context of a
vague deism, the possibility or even the need for a supreme or divine
Being. But it firmly rejects the idea of a God who became man in order
to save man. For rationalism, it is unthinkable that God should be the Re-
deemer, much less that he should be "the bridegroom, " the primordial
and unique source of the human love between spouses. Rationalism pro-
vides a radically different way of looking at creation and the meaning of
human existence. But once man begins to lose sight of a God who loves
him, a God who calls man through Christ to live in him and with him,
and once the family no longer has the possibility of sharing in the "great
mystery," what is left except the mere temporal dimension of life?
Earthly life becomes nothing more than the scenario of a battle for exist-
ence, a desperate search for gain, and financial gain before all else. 35
Rationalism does not tolerate mystery because "mystery," by defini-
tion, lies beyond rational categories. Those who subscribe to rationalism
remain locked within the boundaries of their own finite ability to compre-
hend. Mystery, paradox, beauty-the transcendent meaning of birth, life,
suffering, and death become lost. They make no "sense." The God-given
dignity of every human being becomes lost. Love becomes lost. Even if
man has made great progress in understanding his own biology and psy-
chology, "with regard to his deepest, metaphysical dimension contempo-
rary man remains a being unknown to himself."36
The Church responds to just such a man with the bold declaration:
Christ reveals man to himself and makes his supreme calling clear. Man
cannot live without love-and Christ is that love. Man cannot find himself
except by making a sincere gift of himself-and Christ alone can inspire
that gift. In other words, to you who think you are the measure of reality,
turn to Christ who is the center of the universe and of history. To you who,

36. Ibid.
with Descartes, would say, "I think, therefore I am," turn to him who says,
"I am because I am" (see Jn 8:58). To you who have lost the meaning of
birth, life, suffering, and death, turn to him who was born, lived, suffered,
died-and rose again! To you who think life is a battle to gain more and
more, sell all you have and give the money to the poor (see Mt 19:21). To
you who think freedom comes from rejecting any claim to truth, turn to
him who is the Truth and he will set you free. To you who do not know
love, turn to him who is love and receive the gift he gives-his own divine
life. Abandon yourself entirely to him and you will find yourself.
This is the drama of human existence. This is the Gospel. And, we
shall say it again, God stamped it right from the beginning in human
flesh-in the "great mystery" of masculinity and femininity and the call to
communion. But, as John Paul observes, the "deep-seated roots of the
'great mystery' ... have been lost in the modern way of looking at things.
The 'great mystery' is threatened in us and all around US."3? From various
points of view, we live in "a society which is sick [because it] has broken
away from the full truth about man, from the truth about what man and
woman really are as persons. Thus it cannot adequately comprehend the
real meaning of the gift of persons in marriage, responsible love at the ser-
vice of fatherhood and motherhood, and the true grandeur of procre-
ation."38 As a result we "are facing an immense threat to life: not only to the
life of individuals but also to that of civilization itself."39 This is why John
Paul II's theology of the body will prove so pivotal in the new evangeliza-
tion, because it reunites modern man with the "great mystery" of what and
who man and woman really are as persons made in the divine image.
Knowing the true grandeur of God's plan for sexuality is, of course,
one thing. Living it is another. In all truth, it is impossible to live the sub-
lime vision of the body and sexuality that John Paul upholds ... unless there
is some way of subjecting our bodies and the deep impulses of our hearts
to a profound and lasting transformation, to an efficacious redemption. I
would propose that John Paul's proclamation of the real power of Christ's
death and resurrection to effect just such a redemption is the greatest con-
tribution of his theology of the body. "Ne evacuetur Crux! "-Do not
empty the cross of its power! This, according to the Holy Father "is the cry
of the new evangelization."40 This also, I would add, is the cry of John
Paul II's theology of the body.
37. Ibid.
38. Ibid., n. 20.
39. Ibid., D. 2l.
40. Orientale Lumen, ll. 3.
Epilogue 491
D. In Conclusion ...
John Paul II does not mince words when he asserts that "the chal-
lenge facing us is an arduous one: only the concerted efforts of all those
who believe in the value of life can prevent a setback of unforeseeable
consequences for civilization."4! In the concluding paragraphs of Crossing
the Threshold of Hope, the Holy Father affirmed that "Andre Malraux was
certainly right when he said that the twenty-first century would be the cen-
tury of religion or it would not be at all. "42
At the beginning of the third Christian millennium, it is time for the
Church and the world to "cross the threshold of hope" into a new spring-
time. It is time to make our "passover" from a culture of death to a culture
of life. "We are certainly not seduced," the Pope writes, "by the naive ex-
pectation that, faced with the great challenges of our time, we shall find
some magic formula. No, we shall not be saved by a formula, but by a Per-
son, and the assurance which he gives us: I am with you! "43
Christ the Bridegroom is with us! In the midst of the dramatic clash
between good and evil which we are witnessing in our day, Christ makes a
continual gift of himself to us-a gift of his body in the power of the Holy
Spirit. With confidence in this gift, John Paul II seems to believe that with
the celebration of the Great Jubilee "a new time of advent" is upon us, "at
the end of which, like two thousand years ago, 'every man will see the sal-
vation of God. '" In journeying to that end, a collision between the forces
of good and evil "may in many cases be of a tragic nature and may per-
haps lead to fresh defeats for humanity. But," John Paul continues, "the
Church firmly believes that on God's part there is always a salvific self-
giving."44 Man and woman's call to life-giving communion is placed at the
center of this great struggle between good and evil, between life and death,
between love and all that is opposed to love. 45 John Paul asks, "Who will
win?" He immediately responds: "The one who welcomes the gift."46
Mary, Mother ofGod. ..
Mary, bride without spot or wrinkle or any such thing. ..
Mary, one who welcomes the gift...
Pray for us that we might welcome the gift, now and at the hour of
our death. Amen.
41. Evangelium Vitae, ll. 91.

42. Crossing the Threshold o/Hope, p. 229.
43. Novo Millennio Ineunte, ll. 29.
44. Dominum et Vivijicantem, ll. 56.
45. See Letter to Families, ll. 23.
46. Dominum et Viv!ficantem, ll. 55.
Epilogue-In Review
1. If the future of humanity passes by way of marriage and the fam-
ily, the future of marriage and the family passes by way of John Paul II's
theology of the body. There will be no renewal of the Church and of the
world without a renewal of marriage and the family. And there will be no
renewal of marriage and the family without a fresh theological proposal
that compellingly demonstrates to the modern world how the Christian
sexual ethic is a liberating, redeeming ethos that corresponds perfectly
with the most noble aspirations of the human heart.
2. Understanding the human body as a theology must not be rel-
egated to the level of an obscure interest of a few specialized theologians.
It has ramifications for all of theology and all of anthropology. Under-
standing the theology of the body must be the interest of everyone who
desires to understand the meaning of human existence.
3. As the centuries pass, the Church is always advancing towards the
fullness of divine truth. John Paul's theology of the body represents a crucial
step in this advancement. While it is the fruit of 2,000 years of reflection on
the Word of God, it has also been forged under the particular pressures and
trials of this historical moment. In the Easter Vigil liturgy we exult in the
"happy fault of Adam which won for us so great a Redeemer." We might
also exult in the "happy fault" of the sexual revolution which won for us so
great a theology of the body.
4. The urgency of the "new evangelization" stems not only from the
fact that the number of those not yet reached by the Gospel is still im-
mense, but also because entire groups of the baptized are without a living
relationship with Christ and his Church. The new evangelization is not a
matter of inventing a new program. The program is the same as ever. What
is needed is a proclamation of the Gospel that is "new in ardor, methods,
and expression."
5. In the new evangelization we must come to a deeper understand-
ing of the mysteries of faith and find meaningful language with which to
convey these mysteries to others. We must share with modern men and
women the "unsearchable riches of Christ" and make known "the plan of
the mystery hidden for ages in God." This is precisely what John Paul II's
theology of the body provides: a deeper understanding of the mysteries of
faith and a meaningful way to share them with men and women today.
Epilogue 493
6. "God comes to us in the things we know best and can verify most
easily, the things of our everyday life, apart from which we cannot under-
stand ourselves." What do we know better, what can we verify more eas-
ily, what is more "every day" than the experience of embodiment? This
experience puts us directly in touch with the question of solitude. And if
solitude is the human question, communion is the divine answer.
7. If the spirit of the Gospel is not incarnated with the basic human
experiences-with the "ache" of solitude and the longing for commun-
ion- it will remain detached from what is essentially human. "To make
the Church the home and school of communion: that is the great challenge
facing us in the millennium which is now beginning, if we wish to be
faithful to God's plan and respond to the world's deepest yeamings."
8. When we view the Gospel message through the interpretive key of
man and woman's call to incamate communion, not only does the Gospel
take on flesh, but even the most controversial teachings of the Church be-
gin to make sense. Through the spousal analogy we become attentive to
the coherence of the truths of faith among themselves and within the
whole plan of Revelation. Conversely, Christianity's "inner logic" col-
lapses and virtually everything it teaches becomes contested as soon as we
divorce ourselves from the nuptial mystery.
9. "Christ fully reveals man to himself." This serves in a certain
sense as the Church's reply to modem rationalism. Here the religion of the
God who became man meets the religion of man who makes himself God.
There need not be a contest of wills between man and God. For God is not
jealous of his own rule and leery of the freedom he has given his creature.
Christ fully reveals that God is love. He fully reveals that man is destined
to be a "partner of the Absolute." Christ thus fully reveals man to himself
and makes his supreme calling clear.
10. With Gaudium et Spes 22 as a reply to rationalism, the Church
says: To you who, with Descartes, would say "I think, therefore I am,"
turn to him who says, "I am because I am." To you who think life is a
battle to gain more and more, sell all you have and give the money to the
poor. To you who think freedom comes from rejecting any claim to truth,
turn to him who is the Truth and he will set you free. Abandon yourself
entirely to Christ and you will find yourself.
11. We are facing an immense threat to civilization because we can-
not see the "great mystery" revealed through the body and the true gran-
deur of sexuality and procreation. How can we reclaim the true dignity of
man and woman's relationship and build a true culture of life? Only if
there is the possibility of experiencing an efficacious redemption of our
bodies and a transformation of the deep impulses of our hearts.
12. Faced with the great challenges of our time, it is naive to think
we shall find some magic formula to save us. We shall not be saved by a
formula, but by Christ and his cross. Do not empty the cross of its power!
This "is the cry of the new evangelization." And this is the cry of John
Paul II's theology of the body.
13. In the midst of the dramatic clash between good and evil which
we are witnessing in our day, Christ makes a continual gift of himself to
us. Man and woman's call to life-giving communion is placed at the center
of this great struggle between good and evil, between life and death, be-
tween love and all that is opposed to love. Who will win? The one who
welcomes the gift.
Bibliography
Works by Karol Wojtyla

The Acting Person. Translated by Andrzej Potocki. Edited by A. Tymie-
niecka. Analecta Husserliana 10, Dordrecht, Holland: Reidel, 1979.
The Collected Plays & Writings on Theater. Translated by Boleslaw
Taborski. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1987.
Faith According to St. John of the Cross. San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 1981.
Fruitful & Responsible Love. New York, NY: Seabury Press, 1978.
Love & Responsibility. Translated by H. T. Willetts. San Francisco, CA: Ignatius
Press, 1993.
Max Scheler y la etica cristiana. Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos, 1982.
Person & Community: Selected Essays. Vol. 4, Catholic Thought From
Lublin. Translated by Theresa Sandok. Edited by A. N. Woznicki. New York, NY:
Peter Lang, 1993.
Sign of Contradiction. New York, NY: Seabury Press, 1979.
Sources of Renewal. San Francisco, CA: Harper & Row, 1979.
The Word Made Flesh: The Meaning of the Christmas Season. New York,
NY: HarperCollins, 1994.
Works by Pope John Paul II

"Address to the Pontifical Biblical Commission," April 11, 1997
Blessed Are the Pure of Heart. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1983.
Catechesi Tradendae. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1979.
Centesimus Annus. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1991.
Christifideles Laid. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1988.
Crossing the Threshold of Hope. New York, NY: Knopf, 1994.
Dives in Misericordia. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1980.
495
Dominum et Vivificantem. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1986.

Ecclesia in America. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1999.
Evangelium Vitae. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1995.
Familiaris Consortio. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1981.
Fides et Ratio. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1998.
"Homily on the Mount of Beatitudes, Galilee," March 24, 2000.
"Homily at the Mass Celebrating the Restored Sistine Chapel," April 8, 1994.
Laborem Exercens. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1981.
Letter to Families. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1994.
Letter to Women. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1995.
Mulieris Dignitatem. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1988.
Novo Millennio Ineunte. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 200l.
Orientale Lumen. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1995.
Original Unity of Man and Woman. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1981.
Redemptoris Custos. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1989.
Redemptor Hominis. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1979.
Redemptoris Mater. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1987.
Redemptoris Missio. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1990.
Reflections on Humanae Vitae. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1984.
Sollicitudo Rei Socialis. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1987.
Springtime of Evangelization: The Complete Texts of the Holy Father's 1998
Ad Limina Addresses to the Bishops of the United States. San Diego, San Fran-
cisco, CA: Basilica, Ignatius, 1999.
Tertio Millennio Adveniente. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1994.
The Theology of the Body: Human Love in the Divine Plan. Boston, MA:
Pauline Books & Media, 1997.
The Theology of Marriage and Celibacy. Boston, MA: Pauline Books &
Media, 1986.
"Truth Cannot Contradict Truth," Address to the Pontifical Academy of Sci-
ences, October 22, 1996.
Ut Unum Sint. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1995.
Veritatis Splendor. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1993.
Bibliography 497
Other Magisterial Documents
Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition . Washington, D.C.:

Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1997.
Code of Canon Law. Washington, D.C.: Canon Law Society of America,
1983.
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Declaration on Certain Ques-
tions Concerning Sexual Ethics. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1975.
--Domun Vitae. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1987.
Leo XIII. Arcanum, in The Papal Encyclicals 1878-1903. Edited by Claudia
Carlen. Wilmington, NC: McGrath, 1986: 29---40.
Paul VI. Evangelii Nuntiandi. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1975.
--Humanae Vitae. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1968.
Pius XI. Casti Connubii. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1930.
Pontifical Biblical Commission. The Interpretation of the Bible in the
Church. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1993.
--The Jewish People and Their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible.
Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 2002.
Pontifical Council for the Family. Preparation for the Sacrament of Mar-
riage. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1996.
--The Truth & Meaning of Human Sexuality. Boston, MA: Pauline
Books & Media, 1996.
--Vademecum for Confessors Concerning Some Aspects of the Morality
of Conjugal Life. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1997.
Sacred Congregation for Catholic Education. Educational Guidance in Hu-
man Love. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1983.
Second Vatican Council. Closing Speeches. Boston, MA: Pauline Books &
Media, 1965.
--Dignitatis Humanae. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1965.
--Gaudium et Spes. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1965.
--Lumen Gentium. Boston, MA: Pauline Books & Media, 1964.
Vatican Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews. Notes on the
Correct Way to Present the Jews and Judaism in Preaching and Catechesis in the
Roman Catholic Church, June 24, 1985.
Other Sources
Albacete, Lorenzo. God at the Ritz: Attraction to Infinity. A Priest-Scientist

Talks about Science, Sex, Politics, & Religion. New York, NY: Crossroads, 2002.
Allen, Sr. Prudence. "Integral Sex Complementarity and the Theology of
Communion," Communio (winter 1990): pp. 523-544.
--The Concept of Woman: The Aristotelian Revolution 750 B.c.-1250 A.D.
Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1997.
--The Concept of Woman: The Humanist Reformation 1250-1500.
Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002.
Aquinas, Thomas. Summa Theologica, in Basic Writings of St. Thomas
Aquinas. Edited by Anton C. Pegis. New York, NY: Random House, 1945.
Augustine. Sermon LXIX, c. 2, 3, Palrologia Latina, 38, 44l.
Baptut, Jean-Pierre. "The Chastity of Jesus and the Refusal to Grasp,"
Communio 24 (spring 1997): pp. 5-13.
Beigel, Gerard. Faith and Social Justice in the Teaching of Pope John Paul
II. New York, NY: Peter Lang, 1997.
Buttiglione, Rocco . Karol Wojtyla: The Thought of the Man Who Became
Pope John Paul II. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdman's Publishing, 1997.
Catholic Truth Society. The Wisdom of John Paul II. London: CTS Publica-
tions,2001.
De Haro, Ramon Garcia. Marriage and the Family in the Documents of
the Magisterium. Translated by William E. May. San Francisco, CA: Ignatius
Press, 1993.
De la Potterie, Ignace. Mary in the Mystery of the Covenant. New York, NY:
Alba House, 1992.
De Lubac, Henri . The Drama of Atheistic Humanism. San Francisco:
Ignatius Press, 1995.
--The Mystery of the Supernatural. New York: Crossroad Herder, 1998.
Derrick, Christopher. Sex & Sacredness. San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 1982.
Dooley, David, ed. The Collected Works of G. K. Chesterton Vol. I. San
Francisco, CA: Ignatius, 1986.
Elliot, Peter J. What God Has Joined. Homebush, Australia: St. Paul/Alba
HOLlse, 1990.
Fagan, Patrick. "A Culture of Inverted Sexuality," Catholic World Report,
(November 1998): p. 57.
Bibliography 499
Freud, Sigmund. Introductory Lectures in Psychoanalysis. New York: W.W.

Norton and Co., 1966.
Gneuhs, Geoffrey, ed. The Legacy of Pope John Paul II: His Contribution to
Catholic Thought. New York, NY: Herder & Herder, 2000.
Giussani, Luigi. The Religious Sense. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University
Press, 1997.
Hogan and LeVoir. Covenant of Love: Pope John Paul /1 on Sexuality, Mar-
riage, and Family in the Modern World. San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 1992.
Kreeft, Peter. Everything You Ever Wanted to Know about Heaven. San
Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1990.
Kupczak, Jaroslaw. Destined for Liberty. Washington, D.C.: Catholic Uni-
versity of America Press, 2000.
Lawler, Boyle, and May. Catholic Sexual Ethics, second edition. Hunting-
ton, IN: Our Sunday Visitor, 1998.
Lawler, Philip. "The Price of Viltue," Catholic World Report, (July 1997): p. 58.
Mann, Judy. "A Lesson on Lust for the Vatican," Washington Post, (October
10, 1980): pp. B-1 and B-2.
May, William Eoo Marriage: The Rock on which the Family Is Built. San
Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press, 1995.
Newman, Cathy. "The Enigma of Beauty," National Geographic (January
2000): pp. 95-l21.
Poupard, Cardinal Paul. "Galileo: Report on Papal Commission Findings,"
Origins (November 12, 1992).
Mary Rousseau. "Eucharist & Gender," Catholic Dossier (September/Octo-
ber, 1996): pp. 19-23.
Schmitz, Kenneth. At the Center of the Human Drama: The Philosophical
Anthropology of Karola WojtylalPope John Paul II. Washington, D.C.: Catholic
University of America Press, 1993.
Shivanandan, Mary. Crossing the Threshold of Love: A New Vision of Mar-
riage in the Light of John Paul II's Anthropology. Washington, D.C.: Catholic
University of America Press, 1999.
Steinberg, Leo. The Sexuality of Christ in Renaissance Art and in Modern
Oblivion. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1996.
Von Balthasar, Hans Urs. The Theology of Karl Barth. San Francisco, CA:
Ignatius Press/Communio Books, 1992.
Von Hildebrand, Dietrich. Marriage: The Mystery of Faithful Love.
Manchester, NH; Sophia Institute Press, 1991.
Waddell, Helen. The Desert Fathers. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan

Press, 1957.
Weigel, George. Witness to Hope: The Biography of Pope John Paul II.
New York, NY: Harper Collins, 1999.
West, Christopher. Crash Course in the Theology of the Body: A Study
Guide. Dundee, IL: The GIFT Foundation, 2002.
--Good News About Sex & Marriage: Answers to Your Honest Questions
About Catholic Teaching. Ann Arbor, MI: Servant Publications, 2000.
INDEX
Index 503
A loneliness of, 71
abortion "alone," understanding gift of God in,
versus miscarriage, 430 96-97
Supreme Court ruling on, 486 analogy of assisted suicide and contra-
Absolute, man as, 486-488 ception, 438
abstinence, 434. See also periodic absti- analogy of belonging, 162-163
nence analogy of faith and spousal analogy,
accomplishment of mystery, sacrament 485-486
as, 337-338 anchor of society, family as, 26-27
acquiring self-mastery, 449-451 angelism versus animalism, 21-23, 137,
The Acting Person (Wojtyla), 37-38 202
activity versus passivity, 37-38 animalism versus angelism, 21-23, 137,

202
Adam
versus Christ, 204-205, 267-268 animals, naming of, 68-69, 76
dream of, 75 animals versus man
foreshadowing of Christ in, 69 celibacy, 294
love for Eve, 76 evolution, 132-133
naming of animals, 68-69, 76 freedom of choice, 71
original solitude of, 67-70 loss of unity, 145
rib of, 75-76 original unity, 73
sleep of, 74-75 self-mastery, 433
tilling the earth, 68 shame, 104
understanding of death, 71-72 unrepeatability of the person, 118
"adequate anthropology," 5, 51. See also anonymity, danger in art, 232-233
total vision of man, 5, 34, 51, 132, 225 anthropological hermeneutics, 305
adultery anthropological realism, 208
compromise about, 164-165 anthropology
immorality of, 133-134 and ethics, 63, 110
Israel compared to, 165-166 link with theology, 8-11
and lust, 149 of redemption, 363-364
and marriage, 165-166 sexual ethics and, 166-167
adultery in the heart, 133-134, 136 as theology of the body, 5
and lustful looks, 172-174 anti-procreative versus non-procreative,
within man·iage, 176-181 429-431
affairs of the Lord, devotion to, 299-300 anti-Word, Satan as, 20-23, 30, 42, 419,
affirmation 424,462,487
of the goodness of life, 123 antithesis of authentic marital spirituality,
of marriage, celibacy as, 291-292 contraception as, 461-464
need for, 459-460 "appropriation" versus "gift," 160-163
of the person, 103
Aquinas, St. Thomas, 32, 37, 40-41, 43,
agape, integration with eros, 398-401 137,216,247,335,359,390,478
Albacete, Lorenzo, xiii, 85 art
alienation from God, 148 naked body in, 230-236
death as, 71 versus pornography, 234-236
assignment of evil, 184, 185-186 versus possession, 162-163

assisted suicide analogy and contracep- betrayal of humanity, contraception as,
tion, 438 435
"atheistic humanism," 24, 29 betrayal versus holiness, 441--442
attractions of Satan, 355 biblical anthropology, key to, 88-93
Augustine, St, 40-41, 71, 93, 335, 45~ biblical aspects of marriage and procre-
477 ation, 466
authentic freedom, 215-216 birth control. See contraception; natural
in self-mastery, 453-455 regulation of births
authentic love birth control pills, 422
harmony with respect for life, 419--425 birth regulation. See contraception; natu-
rejoicing with the truth, 444 ral regulation of births
authentic marital spirituality, 439-442 "Blessed Virgin," Mary as, 86
contraception as antithesis of, 461-464 blindness of impurity, 224-225
authentic modesty, 219-221
blood, sacrifice of, 17-18
authentic purity, 219-221 bodily experience, original unity as, 84-
authentication of marital affection, self- 85
mastery as, 449-453 body. See also language of the body; liv-
ing the body; nuptial meaning of the
B
body; prophetism of the body; redemp-
Babylon versus the Church, 424--425 tion of the body; resurrection of the
balance body
excitement and emotion, 455 Christianity's view on, 10-11
of gift of God, 160-163 decency of, 186
within marriage, 315-316 epiphany of, 7-8
in morality, 182-183 experience of, 94
need for, 23-24 fascination with, 398
glory of God in, 223-224
Baptism, 3--4
God's plan of salvation in, 313-315
nuptial character of, 326
goodness of, 94-95
"be fruitful and multiply," 63 harmony in, 218-219
beautiful, eros as, 194-198 holiness of, 216-217
honor for, 216-217
beauty. See also physical beauty
as image of God, 142
concept of, 159
pedagogy of, 226-227
desire for, 327-328
as perennial object of culture, 231-232
experience of, 399--400
as image of holiness, 326-328 pervaded by grace, 350
love as recognition of, 331-333 portrayals of, 217-218, 230-236
as proclamation of God's covenant love,
of Mary, 331-332
382-383
and spousal love, 328-334
redemptive significance of, 375-376
standards of, 332-333
revelation of mystery of God, 79-81
of woman, appreciation for, 330-331
as revelation of personhood, 72-73
beginning of shame, 143-144 as sacramental sign, 339
belonging sacramentality of, 9-10, 184-185,328
between lovers, 404--406 sacredness of, 365
Index 505
as sacrifice to God, 31 as communion between God and man,

self-mastery of, 158-160 83
separation of soul from, 247, 431-433 and communion of persons, 287
as sign of mystery of God, 116, 325- as completion of marriage, 288-292
326 and concupiscence, 284-285
as sign of spiritual mystery, 6 and conjugal love, 289-291
as spiritual body, 268-270 as devotion to affairs of the Lord, 299-
spirituality of, 228 300
spiritualization of, 250-252 ethos of, 283-285
spousal significance of, 375-376 eunuchs, 278-281
suspicion toward, 10-11 as exception to the rule, 279
as theology, 351-352, 386 as exceptional calling, 285-288
transcendence of, 147 as expression of nuptial love, 16
unity wilh spirit, 72-73 as fulfillment of sexuality, 286-288
viewed as "dirty," 185-186 as gift of God, 300-301
as witness to love, 254-255 interior integration of, 299-300
body and soul, harmony of, 22, 246-249, for the kingdom, 277-308
249-253 as liberation from concupiscence, 294-
295
body of Christ. See Christ's body
nuptial meaning of the body revealed
bondage in, 289-291
to decay, 267 and nuptial union, 292-294
liberation from, xvi and original solitude, 287
of lust, 214-215, 222-223 Paul's teaching on, 295-298, 298-302
bride as sister, 401-403 and redemption, 281-285
as renunciation, 292-293, 294-295
Bride of Christ versus Babylon, 424-425
as sacrifice, 286-288, 292-294
burning bush imagery, 201 as sign, 280-281
and spiritual fruitfulness, 281-285
c as superior to marriage, 285-286
call of Christ within human hearts, 194 as supernatural, 280-281
call to glory as gift of God, 113-114 as transformation, 294
as voluntary, 280-281
call to holiness
celibacy as, 300-301 centrality of Christ, 341
marriage as, 300-301 chapel analogy (epiphany), 8
call to liberation, Humanae Vitae as, 425- charity, perfection measured by, 288-289
428 chastity
capacity to love, effect of concupiscence and interior harmony of marriage, 460-
on, 157-158 461
and internal problem of every marriage,
catechesis
456-457
definition of theology of the body, 4-8
and marital spirituality, 455-458
structure of theology of the body, 51-
53 children, parents' relationship with, 213-
celibacy. See aLso virginity 214
as affirmation of marriage, 291-292 choice
as "better" than marriage, 298-302 freedom of, 71, 111,212-214,405-406,
as call to holiness, 300-301 425-426
and original nakedness, 353-354 view on the body, 10-11

and original solitude, 353-354 "Christo-centrism," 27
as part offreedom of the gift, 100-10 I
Christ's body. See also Incarnate Christ
and sexual attraction, 87-88
mercy revealed in, 93
chosen by eternal love, 101-104 mystery of God revealed in, 9-10, 18
Christ. See also Incarnate Christ; Word of redemption through, 104
God union with, 2-3
versus Adam, 204-205, 267-268 Church
call within human hearts, 194 versus Babylon, 424--425
centrality of, 341 Christ's love for, 358-359
communion with, 7 evangelization of, 484--491
as continuity, 52 versus modern world, 47
conversion to, 158 reconciliation with freedom, 42
discussion with Pharisees, 61-64 sexual ethic of, 48--49
eternal election in, 347-349 teaching on sexual morality, 229-230
ethic and ethos, 134-135 union with Christ, 311-312, 318-319,
foreshadowing in Adam, 69 321-323, 336-337
freedom in, 137,159-160, 168-169,
circumcision, 17-18
222-223
fulfillment of proto-evangelium, 303 civilization, conjugal union as core of,
happiness in, 105-106 26-27
love for the Church, 358-359 clothing
message of salvation, 488--490 in heaven, 249
mystery of divine love revealed in, 340- and modesty, 219-220
342 common experience of lust, 172
and Old Testament ethos, 163-167
power of resurrection, 192 communication
as communion of persons, 92
reconciliation offered by, 59-60
and marriage, 92
as Redeemer, 344-345
redemption through, 105-106, 131-132, and original nakedness, 91-93
signs as, 38-39
144
resurrection of, 265-270, 490 communion between God and man, 16,
revelation of gift of God, 488 257-258
reverence for, 317-3 18 call to, 70-71
union with the Church, 311-312, 318- celibacy as, 83
319,321-323,336-337 nuptial mystery as, 18-19
unity with, 251-252 original solitude as preparation for, 70-
whole mission of, 202-203, 478 73
Trinity as model of, 254
Christian humanism
as virginal communion, 261-262
and contraception, 488
freedom in, 486--488 communion of persons, 102. See also gift
of self
Christian morality, 341, 364-365
and analogy of belonging, 162-163
elements of sacrifice and victory in,
and celibacy, 287
413--414
communication as, 92
Christian real ism, 439--441 conjugal union as, 456--457
Christianity, 29 contraception, effect on, 422--423
versus modern world, 32--46 fundamental nature of, 263-264
Index 507
and gift of self, 81-83, 366-367 conjugal chastity. See self-mastery

image of Trinity in, 120 conjugal love
and incarnate love, 97-98 and contraception, 414
in Joseph and Mary's marriage, 282- continence as essential to, 445--449
283 ordered toward ends of marriage, 445
longing for, 482--484 role in life of spouses, 442--445
lust, effect on, 151-155
conjugal spirituality. See marital spiritual-
marriage as, 83
in original conjugal act, 83-88 ity
original unity as, 77-78 conjugal union. See also language of the
perfection of, 260 body; original conjugal act; sexual
and procreation, 88 union
and resurrection of the body, 247-248 and celibacy, 289-291
sexual communion, 79-81 celibacy as affirmation of, 291-292
sexuality separated from, 152-153 closing off Holy Spirit from, 462--464
Trinity as model of, 78-81 as communion of persons, 456--457
union of communion, 260-261 as consummation of marriage, 379-381
virginal communion, 280-281 and contraception, 417--419
communion with Christ, 7 as core of family and civilization, 26-
27
Communism, 148,214
culture of love in, 325
complementarity and Incarnate Christ, 339
dimension of love, 13 interior order of, 456
of malTiage and celibacy, 288-292 as liturgical, 409--410
of sexual difference, 319 periodic abstinence from, 301-302
completion and procreation, 370-371
of husband by wife, 358-359 salvific fear of violating, 458
of nuptial meaning of the body, 102- significance of, 458--464
103 in the Spirit, 369-374
compromise unitive and procreative meanings of,
with concupiscence, 164 415--416
in law (in Israel), 164-165 conquering. See victory
concept of beauty, effect of lust on, 159 conscious experience. See experience
conception. See procreation consciousness versus knowledge, 42--44
concupiscence, 86. See also lust consent in marriage, 379-381
and celibacy, 284-285 consequences of sin, 59-60, 267
compromise with, 164
consummation
effect on capacity to love, 157-158
of marriage, 379-381
interior constriction of, 460
as sign of marriage, 378-382
liberation from, 294-295
through the Eucharist, 18-19
versus love, 446--447
and marriage, 284-285 continence. See celibacy; self-mastery
marriage as outlet for, 178-179,297- as essential to conjugal love, 445-449
298,368-369 and natural regulation of births, 429-
overcoming, 367-368 431
and redemption of the body, 304 as permanent moral attitude, 448-449
struggle with, 365-366 continuity
and Wisdom literature, 167-172 Christ as, 52
of God's plan, 348-349 accounts of, 62-64

between original man and historical dominion over, 69-70, 431-433
man, 64-66 effect of original sin on, 146-147
principle of, 242 gift of God in, 95-96
of spousal analogy, 343-346 as myth, 67
contraception. See also Humanae Vitae nuptial mystery of, 95-96
and analogy of assisted suicide, 438 original solitude, 67-70
as antithesis of authentic marital spiri- reasons for, 82, 95-96, 101
tuality, 461-464 through Word of God, 19
as betrayal of humanity, 435 unity with redemption, 377
and conjugal love, 414 of woman, 74-76
and conjugal union, 417-419 criticism of Karol Wojtyla, 41
as contradiction, 446-447 cult of the body, 327-328
effect on communion of persons, 422-
culture and ethics, 24-27
423
evil of, 423-425 culture of death, 1, 182
immorality of, 47-48, 418, 419-425 theology of the body as antidote to, 476-
language of, 424 479
versus natural regulation of births, 429- culture of life, theology of the body as
431 foundation of, 476-479
and progress of civilization, 466-468 culture of love in conjugal union, 325
reason for invention of, 434
and secular versus Christian humanism, culture of lust, 182
488
D
contractual moment of marriage, 378
danger of anonymity in art, 232-233
contradiction
contraception as, 446-447 death. See also culture of death
signs of, 38-39 Adam's understanding of, 71-72
as alienation from God, 71
control, gaining over men, 155
versus immortality, 72
conversion to Christ, 158 versus life, 406-408, 447, 491
coping mechanisms for sin, 170-171 life overcoming, 122-123
cosmic dimension of redemption of the of the Spirit, 211-212
body, 210-214 victory over, 266-267, 304
cosmic shame, 147 decay versus hope, 267
counter-signs of mystery of God, 417- decency of the body, 186

419 democracy, 214
covenant of God denial
revealed in naked Christ, 18 of Fatherhood of God, 141-142
revealed in nuptial mystery, 16 of gift of God, 139-142
covenant of life, 244-245 of God, 24
covenants dependence on God, 72

call to communion with God, 70-71 Derrick, Christopher, Sex & Sacredness
signs of, 17-18 (A Catholic Homage to Venus), 418-
created relations, 259 419
creation. See also mystery of creation; Descartes, Rene, 32-34

sacrament of creation; sign of creation devotion to affairs of the Lord, 299-300
Index 509
diabolic versus symbolic, 21 emotion versus excitement, 453-454, 455

dignity. See human dignity ends of marriage, fulfillment of, 445
"dirty," view of body and sex as, 185- epiclesis, 463
186 epiphany of the body, 7-8
discernment of the heart, 199-200 eros
distortion and ethos, 195-196,369
of primordial sacrament, 121-122 fullness of, 199-200
of sexual desire, 149-151, 155 integration with agape, 398-401
distraction from temptation, 198 versus lust, 131-132
Plato's definition of, 195-196
divine answer and human question, 481- purification by love, 400-401
484 as true, good, and beautiful, 194-198
divine-Christian "katalogy," 13 erotic love
divine-human communion, 257-258, 260 and senses, 404-405
divine love, experience of, 43 in Song of Songs, 396-398
divine mystery. See mystery of God erotic phenomena, definition of, 195
divine Subject, God as, III error of Manichaeism. See Manichaeism.
divinizing spiritualization of the body, eschatological experience, 253-254
250-252 eschatological hope and procreation,
divorce, Christ's response to Pharisees, 373-374
61-64 eschatological man, continuity with origi-
divorce culture, love in, 163 nal man, 108
dominion over creation, 69-70 eternal communion, 255-256, 258, 260-
versus self-mastery, 431-433 261
double alienation, 369 eternal election in Christ and original
unity, 347-349
double meaning of shame, 149-151
eternal life, hope of, 373-374
double solitude, 77, 369, 402
eternal love, chosen by, 101-104
double unity, 77
of man, 74-76 eternal plan of love, interpretation of,
425-426
doubt, 191
eternal sexuality versus lust, 175-176
dream of Adam, 75
ethic and ethos, 134-135
dress. See clothing
ethical content of sexual union, 464
duty and values, 36
ethical dimension of sexual communion,
E 80
ethical realism, 208
earthly marriage as foreshadowing of
heavenly marriage, 373-374 ethical system of Max Scheler, 35-36
ecstasy, 74-75 ethics
and anthropology, 63
election in Christ and marriage, 352-355
and culture, 24-27
elimination of shame, 104 and personalism, 49-51
Elohist creation account, 62-64 and progress of civilization, 466-468
objectivity in, 70 rooted in anthropology, 110
sexual ethics, 166-167 of the body, 94

and technology, 466-468 of divine love, 43
ethics of pure duty (Immanuel Kant), 35- of grace, 255
36 of human dignity, 196-197
of the incarnate person, 312-313
ethos of lust, 156-157, 172
of celibacy, 283-285 of nuptial meaning of the body, 99
and eros, 195-196, 369 of original nakedness, 90-91, 93-97,
and ethic, 134-135 353-354
fulfillment of the law, 135-137 of original solitude, 353-354
of human practice, 181-186 of original unity, 353-354
of marriage, 283-285, 369 primary experience of man, 68
Old Testament ethos, 163-167 and reality, 44
and praxis, 182-183 and revelation, 66-67
of redemption, 149, 157, 187, 195,201- salvation from lust, 168-169
205,209,284,364-365,388,440 of shame, 148, 218
ethos of the gift and subjectivity, 109-112 experiential reality, faith as, 35
Eucharist, 18,330,441-442 exploitation, 148
consummation through, 18-19
exterior nakedness, 94
as nourishment, 334 purity of love for, 102-103
and spousal love, 333-334
external modesty and lust, 172
eunuchs, 278-281
evangelization, 475-494 F
of the Church, 484-491 faith, 192-194
and humanization, 468 analogy of faith, 485-486
mission of, 479-484 definition of, 208, 440
and theology of the body, 229-230, 476, as experiential reality, 35
481 and intellect, 35
Eve, love of Adam for, 76 justification by, 207-209, 212
evil role in reconciliation, 28
assignment of, 184, 185-186 veils of faith, 342
of contraception, 423-425 family
definition of, 63 as anchor of society, 26-27
versus good, 384,406-408,447,491 conjugal union as core of, 26-27
root of, 25-26 fascination with the body, 398
evolution, 132-133 fatherhood, 119-121
exception to the rule, celibacy as, 279 of Joseph, 283
exceptional calling, celibacy as, 285-288 Fatherhood of God, denial of, 141-142,
excitement versus emotion, 453-454, 455 372,414
existence fear
and nuptial meaning of the body, 103- and nakedness, 3-4, 145-147
104 and relative shame, 147-148
pure and simple fabric of, 181-182 and shame, 145-147
experience "fear of the Lord," 318
Adam's understanding of death, 71-72 femininity
of beauty, 399-400 eulogy of, 121
Index 511
and masculinity, 75-76, 153-154 freedom from sin and purity of heart,
meaning of, 25-26 168-169
feminist movement, 154 freedom of the gift, 100-101, 102, 106-
fertility. See contraception; natural regu- 107,190,215,484
lation of births; procreation perfection of, 262
and self-mastery, 433-434
fidelity to the gift, 106-107 source of, 262
first Adam versus last Adam, 204-205, Freud, 189-190
267-268
fruit of the Spirit, 209-210
first feast of humanity, nuptial meaning
fruitfulness, dimension of love, 13
of the body as, 113-114
fruits of self-mastery, 451-453
flat-tire analogy, relationship between the
sexes, 60 fulfillment
of ends of marriage, 445
flesh of law, 135-137
and death of the Spirit, 211-212 of man, 292-294
sacrifice of, 17-18 of marriage, 245-246
versus Spirit, 206-207 of nuptial meaning of the body, 252-
works of, 209-210 253,259-262
foreshadowing of proto-evangelium by Christ, 303
of Christ in Adam, 69 of sacrament of creation, 355-359
of heavenly marriage by earthly mar- seeking in marriage, 125
riage, 373-374 of sexuality, celibacy as, 286-288
mystery of Christ, 2-4 fullness of eros, 199-200
forgiveness of God, 349 future of the human ethos, 109-110
form, interplay with matter, 381-382
G
fraternal love as basis for spousal love,
401-403 Galileo affair, 32-34
free will of man. See freedom, of choice Gaudium et Spes, gift of self and com-
munion of persons, 366-367
freedom. See also liberation
authentic freedom, 215-216, 453-455 gender difference. See also sexual differ-
versus bondage to lust, 214-215, 222- entiation
223 and shame, 143-144
of choice, 71, 111, 405-406, 425-426 gift, 46. See also freedom of the gift
in Christ, 137, 159-160, 168-169,222- versus "appropriation," 160-163
223 of salvation, 65
Church's reconciliation with, 42 gift of God, 30, 82
definition of, 72 call to glory as, 113-114
from the law, 210 celibacy and marriage as, 300-301
of man, 19 in creation, 95-96
and purity, 212-214 denial of, 139-142
in secular versus Christian humanism, eschatological experience of, 254
486-488 grace as, 105-106
and sexual counter-revolution, 50 grasping versus receiving, 174
true freedom, 488 living of, 254-255, 316-317
and truth, 34, 40-44 maintaining balance of, 160-163
to man, 346 goodness of the body, 94-95

in original nakedness, 96-97 "Gospel of the body," 2-4, 410, 449, 458,
in original solitude, 96-97 468,475
in original unity, 96-97
grace, 192-194
questioning of, 139-142
body pervaded by, 350
for reconciliation, 28-29
experience of, 255
in resurrection of the body, 252-253
as gift of God, 105-106
revelation of, 488
of God, 65
in sexuality, 95-96
of mystery of creation, 349
and veils of faith, 342
of mystery of redemption, 349
gift of self, 81-83, 102, 403-404. See and nature, 359-362
also communion of persons; ethos of of original happiness, 104-108
the gift of original innocence, 105-106, 348
chosen by eternal love, 101-104 and purity of heart, 112
and communion of persons, 366-367 radical character of, 345-346
fidelity to, 106-107 restoration of, 193,360-361
giving and receiving, 320-321 in sacraments of creation and redemp-
importance in marriage, 92 tion, 355-357
interpenetration of giving and receiv- of salvation, 322
ing, 107-108 for victory over sin, 365-366
and nuptial meaning of the body, 98 grasping versus receiving, 140, 174
as subjection, 317
growing in holiness, 196-197
giving and receiving
gift of self, 320-321 H
interpenetration of, 107-108
happiness. See also original happiness
glory of God in Christ, 105-106
in the body, 223-224 and nuptial meaning of the body, 103-
versus veils of faith, 342 104
God harmony
as divine Subject, III between authentic love and respect for
knowledge of, 258-259 life, 419-425
God of life, 244-245 in the body, 218-219
God's bounty, maximum fullness of, of body and soul, 22, 246-249, 249-
292-295 253
interior harmony of marriage, 460-461
God's covenant love, proclamation of,
of sexuality and spirituality, 22
382-383
of SUbjective experience with objective
God's glory. See glory of God reality, 45
God's love. See love of God head-body analogy of marriage, 323-324
God's plan healing
continuity of, 348-349 rift from original sin, 27-31
of salvation, 313-315 of sexuality, 149-150
good heart, 138-139. See also adultery in the
definition of, 63 heart
eros as, 194-198 call of Christ within, 194
versus evil, 384, 406-408, 447, 491 discernment of, 199-200
goodness of life, affirming, 123 of layman in John Paul II, 288
Index 513
living the body from, 155-160 importance in marriage, 178

heaven, clothing in, 249 and nakedness, 92
of woman, 188
heavenly marriage, earthly marriage as
foreshadowing of, 373-374 human ethos, future of, 109-110
heavenly mysteries, theology of the body human experience. See experience
as explanation of, 480-481 human life, questions of, 124-125
"helper," understanding gift of God in, human love, debate over meaning of,
96-97 445-449
heritage of the human heart, 194 human question and divine answer, 481-
historical man 484
nuptial meaning of the body for, 112 Humanae Vitae, 52-53, 124-125
versus original man, 191 and authentic marital spirituality, 439-
historical sinfulness, 64 442
as call to liberation and responsible par-
history versus prehistory, 66-67
enthood, 425-428
holiness, 185. See also purity of heart commentary on, 395-396
beauty as image of, 326-328 debate over meaning of human love,
versus betrayal, 441-442 445-449
of the body, 216-217 elements of sacrifice and victory in,
celibacy as call to, 300-301 413-419
definition of, 300, 350 and integral vision of man, 435-439
growing in, 196-197 moral norm taught by, 419-425
as inner transformation, 199-201 pastoral concern of, 426-428
marriage as call to, 300-301 personalism in, 421
and original nakedness, 117 questions raised by, 464-468
Holy Spirit Humanae Vitae crisis, 46-53
closing off from, 462-464
humanization and evangelization, 468
conjugal union in, 369-374
death of the Spirit, 211-212 husbands
divinizing spiritualization of the body, appreciation for wife's beauty, 329-331
251 completion by wives, 358-359
versus flesh, 206-207
fruit of, 209-210 I
restoration of grace through, 193 icon, marriage as, 264-265
sensitivity from, 457-458
idol, marriage as, 264-265
work in Pope John Paul II, 39
image of God
homosexuality, 149
body as, 142
honor for the body, 216-217 communion of persons as, 78-81
hope man created in, 62-64
versus decay, 267 original nakedness as witness of, 142
of eternal life, 373-374 and procreation, 119-121
of redemption, 371-373 image of holiness, physical beauty as,
hope of every day, 304, 363-364 326-328
human body. See body image of Trinity in communion of per-
human dignity, 365 sons, 120
experience of, 196-197 immanent shame, 147-149
immodesty, 219-220 interior nakedness, 94

immorality. See also morality purity of love for, 102-103
of adultery, 133-134 interior order of conjugal life, 456
of contraception, 47-48, 418, 419-425 internal problem of every marriage and
immortality versus death, 72 chastity, 456-457
impurity interpenetration of giving and receiving,
and death of the Spirit, 211-212 107-108
versus purity, 224-225 interplay of form and matter, 381-382
Incarnate Christ, 2-3. See also Christ's interpretation
body of eternal plan of love, 425-426
and conjugal union, 339 of Song of Songs, 397
healing rift from original sin, 27-31
intimacy and experience of original na-
mystery of God revealed in, 9-10
kedness, 94-95
and original unity, 347-348
revelation of love in, 31 intimacy with God and unrepeatability of
as ultimate reality, 51 the person, 252-253
incarnate communion, 257-258 Israel as adulterous wife, 165-166
incarnate love and communion of per-
J
sons, 97-98
incarnate person, experience of, 312-313 Jesus. See Christ
incarnationallove, 376 John Paul II (Pope). See also Wojtyla,

Karol
incontinent act of intercourse, 455 background of, 24
indissolubility of marriage, 61-62 heart of layman in, 288
individualism, 101, 148 Holy Spirit's work in, 39
linking work with Karol Wojtyla, 39
initiation of the gift, 161-162
priority in theology of the body cate-
inner transformation, 199-201 chesis, 465-466
innocence. See original innocence Joseph
integral vision of man, 396 fatherhood of, 283
and Humanae Vitae, 435-439 role in mystery of the Incarnation, 282-
integral vision of natural regulation of 283
births, 435-439 virginal marriage to Mary, 282-283
intellect and faith, 35 joys of purity, 225-226
intensification of marital affection, self- justification by faith, 207-209, 212

mastery as, 449-453 K
intercourse. See conjugal union
Kant, Immanuel, ethics of pure duty, 35-
interior constriction of concupiscence, 36
460
katalogy, 13,321
interior dimension of the gift, 350
kingdom, celibacy for. See celibacy
interior experience of God, 42-43
knowledge
interior harmony of marriage and chas- versus consciousness, 42-44
tity, 460-461 of God, 258-259
interior integration of celibacy, 299-300 meaning of, 117-119
Index 515
scientific versus biblical, 124 living the body, 155-160

and sexual union, 117-119 loneliness of alienation from God, 71
and unity, 119
longing for communion of persons, 482-
knowledge-generation cycle, 122-123 484
L look, purity of, 398
looking lustfully, 172-174
language of contraception, 424
Lord's Prayer, 141-142
language of the body, 382
liturgical language, 408-413 loss
and lust, 386-387 of purity, 112, 149-151
man as author of, 383-384 of supernatural efficacy, 354-355
mystical language, 410-412 of unity, 145
and sacramental sign, 378-382 of virginity, 16,86
speaking in truth, 384-385, 387-388 love. See also agape; authentic love; con-
last Adam versus first Adam, 204-205, jugal love; eros; eternal love; spousal
267-268 love
of Adam for Eve, 76
law
body as witness to, 254-255
compromise in, 164-165
Christ's love for the Church, 358-359
freedom from, 210
directed toward a person, 294
fulfillment of, 135-137
in divorce culture, 163
versus justification by faith, 207-209
and experience of beauty, 399-400
layman's heart in John Paul II, 288 incarnationallove, 376
legalism, 134, 137 versus lust, 143-144, 158,371-373,
"Lesson on Lust for the Vatican, A" 405,446-447
(Mann),180-181 man and woman as subjects of, 113-
117
liberation. See also freedom
man's need for, 31
from bondage, xvi
and nuptial meaning of the body, 97-98
from concupiscence, 294-295
nuptial mystery as dimension of, 13-15
Humanae Vitae as call to, 425-428
paternal love, 345
from lust, 181-186
proclamation of God's covenant love,
life. See also culture of life 382-383
affirming goodness of, 123 purification of eros, 400-401
versus death, 406-408, 447, 491 as reason for creation, 95-96
God of, 244-245 as recognition of beauty, 331-333
offered to God, 30 revelation in Incarnate Christ, 3 I
overcoming death, 122-123 sexual union for, 98
life-giving meaning of Christ's love for and shame, 90, 104
the Church, 358-359 test of, 119
life of spouses, role of conjugal love in, Trinity as prototype of, 13-14
442-445 and true beauty, 328-334
unity in, 324-325
light, revelation in, 249 and unrepeatability of the persoll, 118
liturgical language of the body, 408-413 victory over death, 406-408
lived morality, 137, 181-186 Love & Responsibility (Wojtyla), 36-37
living of gift of God, 254-255, 316-317 love of God, 28-29, 30, 82, 105-106
restoration through, 343-344 victory over, 184-185, 186-188

lovers, belonging between, 404-406 lustful looks, 172-174
loving versus using, 50
M
Lublin School of Philosophy, 36
male domination, 153-154
lust. See also concupiscence; shame
and adultery, 149 man
adultery in the heart, 133-134, 136 as Absolute, 486-488
bondage to, 214-215 as author of language of the body, 383-
burning bush imagery, 201 384
common experience of, 172 blaming woman for lust, 188
communion of persons, effect on, 151- created in image of God, 62-64
155 dominion over creation, 69-70, 431-
concept of beauty, effect on, 159 433
as distortion of sexual desire, 151 double unity of, 74-76
as effect of shame, 143-144 freedom of, 19
versus eros, 131-132 fulfillment of, 292-294
versus eternal sexuality, 175-176 gaining control over, 155
experience of, 156-157 gift of God to, 346
and experience of shame, 148 initiation of the gift, 161-162
and external modesty, 172 integral vision of, 396
importance of overcoming, 92 need for affirmation, 459-460
and language of the body, 386-387 original solitude. See original solitude
original unity. See original unity
liberation from, 181-186, 222-223
as partner of the Absolute, 486-488
and living the body, 156-157
possibilities of, 192-194, 427
and loss of virginity, 86
relationship with God, 72
versus love, 143-144, 158,371-373,
responsibility toward woman, 161-162
405
self-consciousness of, 69
within marriage, 176-181, 180-181
self-determination of, 71
and masters of suspicion, 188-190
solitude of, 482-484
versus nuptial meaning of the body,
spiritualization of, 104
174-175
as subject of truth and love, 113-117
and original sin, 138-144
SUbjection to lust, 154-155
original solitude/unity/nakedness, ef-
sublime vocation of, 305
fect on, 148
as unity of spirit and body, 72-73
overcoming, 196-197,386-387,450-
451 man versus animals
phenomenon of, 171 celibacy, 294
psychological understanding of, 179- evolution, 132-133
181 freedom of choice, 71
loss of unity, 145
redemption from, 190
original unity, 73
redemption versus repression, 197-198
self-mastery, 433
as reduction, 174-175
shame, 104
salvation from, 168-169
unrepeatability of the person, 118
and shame, 149
subjection to, 154-155 Manichaeism, error of, 183-184, 187,
threefold lust, 138 235 , 238,285,296,307,411
tragedy of, 153 Mann, Judy, "A Lesson on Lust for the
"turn away your eyes," 170-171 Vatican," 180-181
Index 517
man's need for love, 31 interior harmony of, 460-461

man's view of God, paradigm shift in, 30 lust in, 180-181
mutual subjection in, 316-317, 319
marital affection, authentication and in-
as mystery, 410-412
tensification of, 449-453
and mystery of Christ, 321-323
marital spirituality and mystery of Ephesians, 310-313
and chastity, 455-458 mystery of God in, 311-312
contraception as antithesis of, 461-464 nakedness in, 151
marriage. See also conjugal union; nup- nuptial meaning of the body revealed
tial mystery in, 289-291
and adultery, 165-166 original spirituality of, 457-458
adultery in the heart within, 176-181 as outlet for concupiscence, 178-179,
balance within, 315-316 297-298,368-369
as basic structure for salvation, 361- Paul's teaching on, 296--297
362 perfection of communion in, 256
biblical and personalist aspects of, 466 periodic abstinence in, 301-302
as call to holiness, 300-301 and personalism, 160
celibacy as affirmation of, 291-292 and perspective of life, 244-245
celibacy as superior to, 285-286, 298- as primordial sacrament, 321
302 as prototype for sacraments, 361-362
celibacy's completion of, 288-292 reconciliation offered by Christ, 59-60
as central point of sacrament of creation, and resurrection of the body, 245-249
349-352 as revelation of mystery of God, 340
Christ's response to Pharisees, 61-64 revelation of salvific will of God, 366-
and communication, 92 369
as communion of persons, 83 reverence for Christ within, 317-318,
and concupiscence, 284-285 374-375
consent in, 379-381 role of conjugal love in, 442-445
consummation and words of consent as as sacrament of redemption, 368
signs of, 378-382 as sacramental sign, 378-382, 416-419
consummation of, 379-381 sacramentality of, 309-394
contractual moment of, 378 seeking fulfillment in, 125
and election in Christ, 352-355 sexual union in, 166, 166-167
as embracing the universe, 376-377 shamelessness in, lSI
essence of, 117-121 as sign of mystery of God, 338
as essential part of sacramental econ- significance in Old Testament, 279
omy,360-361 speaking in truth, 387-388
ethos of, 283-285, 369 union of Christ and the Church, 311-
expectations of, 264 312,336-337
fulfillment of, 245-246, 445 unity and indissolubility of, 61-62
as fundamental to mystery of creation, unity in love, 324-325
263-265 and unrepeatability of the person, 118
as gift of God, 300-301 marriage, sacrament of, II, 114, 309-
head-body analogy of, 323-324 394,410
human dignity within, 178 body as sign of mystery of God, ll6
as icon or idol, 264-265 celibacy as affirmation of, 291-292
importance of gift of self, 92 communion with Christ, 7
importance of prayer, 441-442 covenant of life, 244-245
importance of sacraments, 441-442 incarnate communion, 257
meaning of sacraments, 245-246 and clothing, 219-220

sexual communion in, 80-81 monogamy and polygamy in Old Testa-
marital spirituality, 439-442 ment, 164
Marx, 189-190 moral law, personalist understanding of,
Mary 422
beauty of, 331-332 moral life, purpose of, xvi
as "Blessed Virgin," 86 moral norm taught by Humanae Vitae,
as model of the Church, 252 419-425
virginal marriage to Joseph, 282-283
moral purity versus physical purity, 203-
masculinity 205
and femininity, 75-76, 153-154
moral relativism, 33, 44-45
meaning of, 25-26
moralism, 134, 137
master-slave paradigm, 30
morality. See also Christian morality; im-
masters of suspicion, 188-190
morality; sexual morality
matter, interplay with form, 381-382 balance in, 182-183
mature spontaneity and noble gratifica- basis of, 110
tion, 200-201 ethic and ethos, 134-135
maximum fullness of God's bounty, 292- fulfillment of the law, 135-137
295 mortal sin, 211
meaning of human existence. See mean- motherhood, 119-121
ing of life eulogy of, 121
meaning of life, 15, 190-192 mutual self-giving, dimension of love, 13
and resurrection of the body, 256-257 mutual subjection in marriage, 316-317,
and sexuality, 99 319
and spousal-redemptive significance of
mysteries of faith and theology of the
the body, 375-376
body,480-481
mercy of God, 349
mystery
mercy, revealed in Christ's body, 93 marriage as, 410-412
message of salvation, 488-490 sacrament as, 335-336
metaphysics, 32, 33, 36, 90, 109, 444, sacrament as accomplishment of, 337-
482 338
Michelangelo, Sistine Chapel painting, mystery of Christ
230-231,234-235 foreshadowing, 2-4
and marriage, 321-323
miscarriage versus abortion, 430
mystery of creation, 88
misogyny, 153-154 grace of, 349
model of the Church, Mary as, 252 marriage and procreation as fundamen-
modern rationalism, 33, 46 tal to, 263-265
Church's response to, 484-491 procreation as part of, 371
modern world mystery of divine love, revelation in
versus Christianity, 32-46 Christ, 340-342
versus Church, 47 mystery of Ephesians and marriage, 310-
modesty, ISO 313
authentic modesty, 219-221 mystery of God, 4
Index 519
body as sign of, 116,325-326 integral vision of, 435-439

in marriage, 311-312 nature and grace, 359-362
marriage as revelation of, 340
Nazis. effect on John Paul II, 24
marriage as sign of, 338
in nuptial mystery, 12-19 new Adam. See last Adam
and primordial sacrament, 114-117 New Covenant related to Old Covenant,
revealed in Christ's body, 9-10, 18 137
revealed in nuptial mystery, 14
new evangelization. See evangelization
revealed in the body, 79-81
signs and counter-signs of, 417-419 New Testament, continuity of spousal
in union of Christ and the Church, 311- analogy in, 343-346
312 NFP (natural family planning), 431, 435-
mystery of man, 4 439
mystery of redemption Nietzsche, 189-190
grace of, 349 noble gratification and mature spontane-
procreation as part of, 371 ity,200-201
mystery of the Father, revelation of, 2-3 non-procreative versus anti-procreative,
mystery of the Incarnation, Joseph's role 429-431
in, 282-283 nourishment, Eucharist as, 334
mystery of the person, 403-404 nude. See nakedness
mystery of Trinitarian Life and Love, 7 nuptial character of Baptism, 326
mystical language of the body, 410-412 nuptial imagery
mysticism, nuptial mysticism, 478-479 and male domination, 154
and original sin, 141
myth. creation accounts as, 67
nuptial love, celibacy as expression of, 16
N nuptial meaning of the body, 26, 97-101,
naked Christ, covenant revealed in, 18 102,305,482-484
in art, 231-232
nakedness. See also original nakedness
completion of, 102-103
after resurrection of the body, 248
effect of shame on, 150
effect of original sin on, 90
and existence, 103-104
and fear, 3-4, 145-147
as first feast of humanity. 113-114
and human dignity, 92
fulfillment of, 252-253, 259-262
in marriage, 151
portrayals of, 230-236 and future of the human ethos, 109-110
and shame, 143-144 giving and receiving the gift of self,
320-321
and sin, 3-4
and happiness, 103-104
naming of animals, 68-69, 76 for historical man, 112
natural family planning (NFP), 431, 435- versus lust, 174-175
439 pervaded by grace, 350
natural law revealed in marriage and celibacy, 289-
personalist interpretation of, 436-437 291
and sacramentality of the body, 436- and single people, 290-291
437 nuptial mystery, 12-19,44-45
natural regulation of births, 429-439 as communion between God and man,
versus contraception, 429-431 18-19
covenant of God revealed in, 16 as purity of heart, 106-107

of creation, 95-96 unity in, 84-85
as dimension of love, 13-15 original man
mystery of God revealed in, 14 continuity with eschatological man, 108
in Scriptures, 15-16 versus historical man, 191
nuptial mysticism, 478--479 original nakedness, 19, 67, 88-93, 102,
nuptial union 218
and celibacy, 292-294 and choice, 353-354
as theology, 351-352 and communication, 91-93
experience of, 93-97, 353-354
o freedom of the gift, 100-101
objective morality and objective reality, gift of God in, 96-97
33-34 and holiness, 117
as interior and exterior nakedness, 94
objective reality and intimacy, 94-95
harmony with subjective experience, 45
lack of shame in, 89-90
and objective morality, 33-34 lust, effect on, 148
objectivity, marriage with subjectivity, man looking at, 173
44--46 purity in, 93
objectivity versus subjectivity, 38, 40--41, and purity of heart, 112, 205-206
49-51 versus relative shame, 147-148
balance between, 135 understanding experience of, 90-91
in creation accounts, 63, 70 witness of image of God, 142
ethic and ethos, 134-135 original sin, 19-24, 101
fulfillment of the law, 135-137 denial of Fatherhood of God, 141-142,
original nakedness, 90-91 372,414
revelation and experience, 66-67 fear in nakedness, 145-147
sexuality separated from communion flesh versus Spirit, 206-207
of persons, 152-153 healing rift from, 27-31
Old Covenant versus New Covenant, 137 and loss of supernatural efficacy, 354-
355
Old Testament
and lust, 138-144
continuity of spousal analogy in, 343-
nakedness, effect on, 90
346
and nuptial imagery, 141
significance of marriage in, 279
original virginal value of man, effect
Old Testament ethos, 163-167 on, 86
ongoing conversion to Christ, 158 plagiarizing of sacraments, 20-21
original conjugal act, communion of per- original solitude, 67-70, 102
sons in, 83-88 of Adam, 67-70
affirmed by original unity, 77-78
original happiness, grace of, 104-108
and celibacy, 287
original human experience, 66-67 and choice, 353-354
original innocence, 218 experience of, 353-354
continuity with historical man, 64-66 gift of God in, 96-97
definition of, 104 versus immanent shame, 147
echoes of, 64-70 link with original unity, 87
grace of, 105-106, 348 lust, effect on, 148
of knowledge, 92-93 of man, 67-70
Index 521
as part of original unity, 76 pedagogy of the body, 226-227, 420-

as preparation for communion with God, 421,437-438
70-73 Penance, 441
as revealed in the body, 72-73
perennial object of culture, body as, 231-
original spirituality of marriage, 457-458 232
original unity, 67, 73, 77-81, 102 perfect freedom of the gift, 262
as bodily and spiritual experience, 84-
perfection
85
of communion of persons, 260
as communion of persons, 77-78
measured by charity, 288-289
and eternal election in Christ, 347-349
of subjectivity, 255-256
experience of, 353-354
of union, 262
gift of God in, 96-97
and Incarnate Christ, 347-348 periodic abstinence, 434. See also natural
lust, effect on, 148 regulation of births
original solitude affirmed by, 77-78 in marriage, 301-302
original solitude as part of, 76, 87 permanent moral attitude, continence as,
versus relative shame, 147-148 448-449
sexual union in, 83-88 personal content of sexual union, 464
original virginal value of man, 85-88, personalism
300 and ethics, 49-51
"otherness". See complementarity in Humanae Vitae, 421
and marriage, 160
"Our Father" prayer, 141-142
personalist aspects of marriage and pro-
overcoming
creation, 466
death with life, 122-123
lust, 92, 196-197, 367-368, 386-387, personalist ethic, 48-49
450-451 personalist interpretation of natural law,
ownership, right of, 165 436-437
personalist understanding of the moral
p
law, 422
paradigm shift in man's view of God, 30 personalistic norm, 49-51
parents. See also responsible parenthood perspective of life and marriage, 244-245
relationship with children, 213-214 perversion, 148
participation, definition of, 115-116 Pharisees, discussion with, 61-64
partner of the Absolute, man as, 486-488 phenomenology, 35, 40-44, 66, 135, 205,
partnership with God, 72 444
passivity versus activity, 37-38 phenomenon of lust, 171
passover, 1-2,476 philosophical anthropology, 81
pastoral concern of Humanae Vitae, 426- philosophical project of Karol Wojtyla,
428 32-46
paternal love, 345 philosophy
metaphysics, 32, 33, 36, 90, 109, 444,
Paul 482
teaching on celibacy, 295-298, 298-302 objectivity versus subjectivity, 41
teaching on marriage, 296-297 phenomenology, 35,40-44,66, 135,
peace of the interior gaze, 402 205,444
rift with religion, 32-34 as fundamental to mystery of creation,

photography, danger of anonymity in, 263-265
232-233 and image of God, 119-121
and knowledge-generation cycle, 122-
physical beauty as image of holiness,
123
326-328
link with sex, 47
physical fruitfulness and spiritual fruitful- as part of mystery of creation and re-
ness, 292 demption,371
physical purity versus moral purity, 203- physical and spiritual fruitfulness, 292
205 sexual union for, 98
and suffering, 371-373
piety, 220-221, 318,456
procreative attitude in responsible parent-
plagiarizing of sacraments, 20-21
hood, 437--439
Plato, definition of eros, 195-196
procreative meaning of conjugal union,
polygamy and monogamy in Old Testa- 415--416
ment,164
progress of civilization
pornography, 185-186 and contraception, 466--468
versus art, 234-236 and ethics, 466--468
portrayals of the body, 217-218, 230-236 prophetism of the body, 382-385, 423
possession versus belonging, 162-163 proto-evangelium, fulfillment by Christ,
possibilities of man, 192-194, 427 303
power of Christ's resurrection, 192, 490 prototype for sacraments, marriage as,
power of God, 313 361-362
in the Scriptures, 243-244 prototype oflove, Trinity as, 13-14
praxis and ethos, 182-183 psychological understanding of lust, 179-
prayer, importance in marriage, 441--442 181
pregnancy, avoiding. See contraception; pure and simple fabric of existence, 181-
natural regulation of births 182
purification of eros by love, 400--401
prehistory versus history, 66-67
purity, 3--4. See also purity of heatt
primary experience of man, 68
authentic purity, 219-221
primordial sacrament, 20, 22, 113-117 and freedom, 212-214
distortion of, 121-122 glorifying God in the body, 223-224
marriage as, 321 versus impurity, 224-225
and mystery of God, 114-117 joys of, 225-226
renewal of, 360-361 of look, 398
Satan's attacks on, 352 loss of, 149-151
principle of continuity, 242 in original nakedness, 93
procreation. See also fatherhood; mother- and self-control, 216-217
hood symbols of, 249
avoiding selfishness in, 434 victory over lust, 186-188
biblical and personalist aspects of, 466 and wisdom, 224-225
and communion of persons, 88 purity of heart, 45, 135, 196, 203-205.
and conjugal union, 370-371 See also holiness; purity
and eschatological hope, 373-374 coping mechanisms for sin, 170-171
Index 523
and freedom from sin, 168-169 from lust, 190

and grace, 112 versus repression, 197-198
original innocence as, 106-107 and resurrection, 267
and original nakedness, 112, 205-206 through Christ, 104, 105-106, 131-132,
and spiritual life, 205-210 144
and subjectivity, 112 unity with creation, 377
purity of love unity with spousal love, 374-375
for exterior nakedness, 102-103 redemption of the body, 302-305
for interior nakedness, 102-103 authentic modesty and authentic purity,
219-221
Q celibacy as sign, 280-281
questioning of gift of God, 139-142 and concupiscence, 304
cosmic dimension of, 210-214
questions raised by Humanae Vitae, 464-
grace of God, 65
468
lust versus eros, 131-132
R marriage and personalism, 160
marriage as outlet for concupiscence,
radical character of grace and spousal 178-179
analogy, 345-346 seeking fulfillment in marriage, 125
radical exploitation, 148 victory over lust, 187-188
as whole mission of Christ, 202-203
radical individualism, 148
redemptive significance of the body,
radical perversion, 148
375-376
rationalism. See modern rationalism
reduction, lust as, 174-175
reality and experience, 44
reflection on self-experience, 34
receiving and giving
regulation of births. See also contracep-
gift of self, 320-321
tion; natural fertility regulation
interpenetration of, 107-108
relationality, 81-88
receiving versus grasping, 140, 174
relative shame, 147-149
receptivity of the gift, 141
relativism. See moral relativism
recognition of beauty, love as, 331-333
religion, rift with science, 32-34
reconciliation, 27-29
of Church with freedom, 42 religious content of sexual union, 464
gift of God for, 28-29 renewal
offered by Christ, 59-60 of primordial sacrament, 360-361
role of faith in, 28 sources of, 38
of truth, 33 renunciation, celibacy as, 292-293, 294-
Redeemer, Christ as, 344-345 295
redemption, 45. See also mystery of re- repression versus redemption, 197-198
demption; sign of redemption
respect for life, harmony with authentic
anthropological and ethical realism of, love, 419-425
208
anthropology of, 363-364 responsibility of man toward woman,
and celibacy, 281-285 161-162
ethos of, 201-205, 364-365 responsible parenthood, 428, 434
hope of, 371-373 Humanae Vitae as call to, 425-428
procreative attitude in, 437-439 root of evil, 25-26

restlessness as part of eros, 400-40 I
s
restoration
of grace, 193,360-361 sacrament of creation, 351-352
of harmony in the body, 218-219 fulfillment in sacrament of redemption,
through love of God, 343-344 355-359
grace in, 355-357
resurrection
marriage as central point of, 349-352
of Christ, 192, 265-270
power of, 490 sacrament of marriage, 11, 114, 309-394,
and redemption, 267 410
body as sign of mystery of God, 116
resurrection of the body, 241-242, 265- celibacy as affirmation of, 291-292
270 communion with Christ, 7
and communion of persons, 247-248 covenant of life, 244-245
gift of God in, 252-253 incarnate communion, 257
and marriage, 245-249 meaning of sacraments, 245-246
and meaning of life, 256-257 sexual communion in, 80-81
nakedness after, 248
sacrament of redemption
Sadducees' question about, 242-245
fulfillment of sacrament of creation in,
and sexual differentiation, 247-248
355-359
and theological anthropology, 247
grace in, 355-357
as union of soul and body, 246-249,
marriage as, 368
249-253
sacramental dimension of sexual com-
revelation munion,80
covenant of God in nuptial mystery, 16
and experience, 66-67 sacramental economy, marriage as essen-
of gift of God, 488 tial part of, 360-361
in light, 249 sacramental order, foundation of, 337-
of love in Incarnate Christ, 31 340
of mercy in Christ's body, 93 sacramental sign
of mystery of divine love, 340-342 body as, 184-185,339
of mystery of God in Christ's body, 9- celibacy as, 280-281
10, 18 and language of the body, 378-382
of mystery of God in marriage, 340 marriage as, 378-382, 416-419
of mystery of God in nuptial mystery, sexual communion as, 80
14 sacramentality
of mystery of God in the body, 79-81 of the body, 9-10,116,328,436-437
of mystery of the Father, 2-3 of creation, 116-117
of nuptial meaning of the body, 99, 289- of marriage, 309-394
291 sacraments. See also primordial sacra-
of personhood in the body, 72-73 ment
of salvific will of God, 366- 369 as accomplishment of mystery, 337-338
reverence for Christ within marriage, definition of, 334
317-318,374-375 importance in marriage, 441-442
rib of Adam, 75-76 marriage as prototype for, 361-362
meaning of, 245-246
right of ownership, 165 as mystery, 335-336
rights and duties of spouses, 301-302 plagiarizing of, 20-21
Index 525
sexual communion as, 80-81 Second Vatican Council, 37

sacred and sensual in Song of Songs, secular humanism, 101
397-398 and contraception, 488
sacredness freedom in, 486-488
of the body, 365 self-communication of God, 254
of sex, 418-419 self-consciousness of man, 69
sacrifice self-control, 100-10 1, 160, 201, 400,
celibacy as, 286-288, 292-294 433,451
elements in Humanae Vitae, 413-419 and purity, 216-217
of flesh and blood, 17-18 self-determination of man, 69, 71, 75,
sacrifice to God, body as, 31 133,159,277,383,447
sacrificial love, victory over death, 406- self-donation, 30, 35,43,49,312,319,
408 352,424
Sadducees, question about resurrection of self-experience, reflection on, 34
the body, 242-245 self-giving. See gift of self
salvation self-gratification, 30, 144, 163, 312, 352,
gift of, 65 424
God's plan in the body, 313-315
self-mastery, 190
grace of, 322
acquiring, 449-451
from lust, 168-169
authentic freedom in, 453-455
marriage as basic stmcture for, 361-362
as authentication and intensification of
message of, 488-490
marital affection, 449-453
salvific fear of violating the sign, 458 of the body, 158-160
salvific will of God, revelation of, 366- versus dominion over creation, 431-433
369 and freedom of the gift, 433-434
fmits of, 451-453
same-sex attractions, 149
as permanent moral attitude, 448-449
Satan
selfishness, avoiding in procreation, 434
as anti-Word, 20-23, 30, 42, 419, 424,
462,487 senses and erotic love, 404-405
attacks on primordial sacrament, 352 sensitivity from Holy Spirit, 457-458
attractions of, 355 sensual and sacred in Song of Songs,
distortion of primordial sacrament, 121- 397-398
122
sensuality
plagiarizing of sacraments, 20-21
and sexuality, 404
stages of attack, 23-24 versus spirituality, 269
symbolic versus diabolic, 21
separation of soul and body, 247, 431-
Scheler, Max, ethical system of, 35-36 433
science of the body versus theology of sex
the body, 124 definition of, 77
science, rift with religion, 32-34 link with procreation, 47
Scriptures second discovery of, 152-153
nuptial mystery in, 15-16 Sex & Sacredness (A Catholic Homage to
power of God in, 243-244 Venus) (Derrick), 418-419
second discovery of sex, 152-153 sex education, 228
sexual attraction and sacramentality of creation, 116-117

and choice, 87-88 sexual utilitarianism, 50
spiritual maturity in, 375, 412--413
sexuality
sexual behavior, effect on society, 182 celibacy as fulfillment of, 286-288
sexual communion, 79-81 eternal sexuality, 175-176
as sacrament, 80-81 excitement versus emotion, 453-454,
sexual complementarity, 107 455
gift of God in, 95-96
sexual counter-revolution and freedom,
harmony with spirituality, 22
50
healing of, 149-150
sexual desire. See also eros living the body, 155-160
burning bush imagery, 201 and Manichaeism, 183-184
distortion of, 149-151, 155 and meaning of life, 99
self-mastery of, 158-160 meaning of masculinity and femininity,
and shame, 106-107 25-26
spontaneity of, 200-201 reconciliation offered by Christ, 59-60
sexual differentiation. See also gender sacredness of, 418--419
difference and sensuality, 404
complementarity of, 319 separated from communion of persons,
importance of, 162 152-153
relationality revealed by, 82-83 and shame, 148
and resurrection of the body, 247-248 as temporal fulfillment of communion,
sexual ethics, 49-51, 80 83
anthropology and, 166-167 viewed as "dirty," 185-186
of Church, 48--49 shame. See also lust
sexual intercourse. See conjugal union beginning of, 143-144
sexual morality, 26-27, 365 dimensions of, 144-151
Church's teaching on, 229-230 double meaning of, 149-151
confusion about, 27 effect on nuptial meaning of the body,
and shame, 90 150
and social justice, 146 elimination of, 104
experience of, 218
sexual revolution, 1,46--47,50,265
and fear, 145-147
sexual union. See also communion of and gender difference, 143-144
persons; conjugal union immanent and relative shame, 147-149
as affirmation of the person, 103 lack of in original nakedness, 89-90
ethical content of, 464 as loss of purity of heart, 112
as experience of being chosen by eter- and love, 90, 104
na110ve, 101-104 and lust, 149
as expression of original virginal value and naked body in art, 233
of man, 87 and nakedness, 143-144
as icon or idol, 264-265 phenomenon of, 91-93
and knowledge, 117-119 and sexual morality, 90
for love and procreation, 98 and sexuality, 106-107, 148
in marriage, 166-167
in original unity, 83-88 shamelessness, 89, 148
personal content of, 464 in marriage, 151
religious content of, 464 Sign of Contradiction (Wojtyla), 38-39
Index 527
sign of creation, 357-358 family as anchor of, 26-27

sign of marriage solitude. See also original solitude
consummation as, 378-382 of man, 482-484
words of consent as, 378-382 Song of Songs
sign of mystery of God erotic love in, 396-398
body as, 116,325-326 interpretation of, 397
marriage as, 338 sensual and sacred in, 397-398
sign of redemption, 357-358 soul and body, harmony of, 22, 246-249,
sign of spiritual mystery, body as, 6 249-253
sign of the covenant, sexual union in mar- soul, separation from the body, 247, 431-
riage, 166-167 433
signs Sources of Renewal (Wojtyla), 38
as communication, 38-39 Spirit. See Holy Spirit
of contradiction, 38-39 spirit, unity with body, 72-73
of covenants, 17-18
spiritual battle, 313
of mystery of God, 417-419
spiritual body, 268-270
"signs of the times," 1
spiritual experience, original unity as,
sin. See also original sin
84-85
consequences of, 59-60, 267
coping mechanisms for, 170-171 spiritual fruitfulness
definition of, 144, 173 and celibacy, 281-285
distortion of primordial sacrament, 121- and physical fruitfulness, 292
122 spiritual life and purity of heart, 205-210
effect on woman, 153-154 spiritual mystery, body as sign of, 6
forgiveness of, 349
grace for victory over, 365-366 spirituality. See also marital spirituality
and loss of supernatural efficacy, 354- of the body, 228
355 harmony with sexuality, 22
loss of unity, 145 in marriage, 439-442
and loss of virginity, 16 original spirituality of marriage, 457-
and nakedness, 3-4 458
and original innocence, 64-70 versus sensuality, 269
victory over, 191 spiritualization
sinfulness. See also historical sinfulness, of the body, 250-252
64-66 of man, 104
single people and nuptial meaning of the spiritually mature sexual attraction, 375,
body, 290-291 412-413
sister, bride as, 401-403 spontaneity of sexual desire, 200-201
Sistine Chapel painting (Michelangelo), spousal analogy, 12-13, 16,318-319. See
230-231,234-235 also nuptial mystery
and analogy of faith, 485-486
sleep of Adam, 74-75
of Christ and the Church, 321-323
social justice and sexual morality, 146 continuity between Old and New Testa-
society ments, 343-346
effect of sexual behavior on, 182 keystone of, 336-337
false standard of beauty in, 329 and radical character of grace, 345-346
unity with Christ, 251-252 T

spousal love tardemah,74-75
and Eucharist, 333-334
task of the body and sexuality, 227
fraternal love as basis for, 401--403
and true beauty, 328-334 technology and ethics, 466--468
unity with redemption, 374-375 temperance, 448
spousal significance of the body, 375- temporal fulfillment of communion,
376 sexuality as, 83
spousal theology. See nuptial mystery temptation
spouses, rights and duties of, 301-302 distraction from, 198
standards of beauty, 332-333 as questioning gift of God, 139-142
struggle with concupiscence, 365-366 Tertullian, 20, 314, 334
SUbjection. See also mutual subjection theological anthropology, 46, 51, 81, 225
definition of, 317 and resurrection of the body, 247
to lust, 154-155 theology
subjective experience, harmony with ob- body as, 351-352, 386
jective reality, 45 link with anthropology, 8-11
nuptial union as, 351-352
subjectivity
and ethos of the gift, 109-112 ramifications of theology of the body
marriage with objectivity, 44--46 for, 477--478
perfection of, 255-256 theology of the body, 116
and purity of heart, 11 2 as antidote to culture of death, 476--479
subjectivity versus objectivity, 38, 40--41, defined, 4-8
49-51 and evangelization, 229-230
balance between, 135 fundamental nature of, 305
in creation accounts, 63, 70 as pedagogy, 226-227,420--421,437-
ethic and ethos, 134-135 438
fulfillment of the law, 135-137 ramifications for theology, 477--478
original nakedness, 90-91 versus science of the body, 124
revelation and experience, 66-67 structure of, 51-53
sexuality separated from communion as understanding of mysteries of faith,
of persons, 152-153 480--481
sublime vocation of man, 305 theology of the family, 438--439
suffering and procreation, 371-373 Thomism,41
supernatural, celibacy as, 280-281 threefold lust, 138
supernatural efficacy, loss of, 354-355 tilling the earth, 68
Supreme Court of the United States, 486 total vision of man. See also adequate an-
suspicion thropology, 44,51, 124, 125,241,309,
masters of suspicion, 188-190 396
toward body, 10-11 tragedy of lust, 153
symbolic versus diabolic, 21 transcendence of the body, 147
symbolism in wedding feast of Cana, transformation
204-205 from within, 199-201
symbols of purity, 249 ibacy as, 294
Index 529
tree of the knowledge of good and evil, unity. See also original unity
64 with Christ, 251-252
Trinitarian Life, 108, 115 between creation and redemption, 377
double unity of man, 74-76
Trinitarian mystery of love and gift, 255
of eternal communion, 255-256
trinitarian order, 260-261 and knowledge, 119
trinitarian relations, 259 loss of, 145
Trinity in love, 324-325
in communion of persons, 120 man as unity of spirit and body, 72-73
inspiration for communion between God of marriage, 61-62
and man, 254 in original innocence, 84-85
as model of communion of persons, of soul and body, 246-249, 249-253
78-81 of spousal love and redemption, 374-
as prototype of love, 13-14, 119 375
true beauty and spousal love, 328-334 unity-in-duality, 87, 324
true, eros as, 194-198 unity of persons and virginity, 16
true freedom, definition of, 488 unrepeatability of the person, 118
and intimacy with God, 252-253
trust of God, 425--426
using versus loving, 50
truth
and freedom, 34, 40--44 utter depravity, 157-158
and language of the body, 384-385,
387-388
v
man and woman as subjects of, 113- values and duty, 36
117 Vatican, nude artwork in, 235
reconciliation of, 33
rejoicing with, 444 veils of faith versus glory of God, 342
truth about man, development of, 263- Veritatis Splendor, xvi, 229
265 victory
"turn away your eyes," 170-171 elements in Humanae Vitae, 413--419
of life over death, 406--408
twentieth century, turbulence of, 1,476 over death, 266-267, 304
over lust, 184-185, 186-188
u
over sin, 191,365-366
ultimate reality, Incarnate Christ as, 51 violating the sign, salvific fear of, 458
uncreated relations, 259 virginal communion, 261-262, 280-281
union virginal experience of nuptial union, 253
with Christ's body, 2-3
of communion, 260-261 virginal marriage of Joseph and Mary,
perfection of, 262 282-283
union of Christ and the Church, 336-337 virginity. See also celibacy; original vir-
mystery of God in, 311-312 ginal value of man
spousal analogy of, 318-319, 321-323 loss of, 16, 86
of Mary, 86
unitive meaning
and unity of persons, 16
of Christ's love for the Church, 358-
359 vocation, celibacy as, 277-278
of conjugal union, 415--416 voluntary, celibacy as, 280-281
vows. See words of consent philosophical project of, 32-46

shaping of thought of, 35-39
w Sign of Contradiction, 38-39
wedding feast of Cana, symbolism in, Sources of Renewal, 38
204-205 woman
wedding vows. See words of consent appreciation for beauty of, 330-331
creation of, 74-76
Weigel, George (Witness to Hope: The
dignity of, 188
Biography of Pope John Paul II), xv,
dignity within malTiage, 178
15, 37, 50, 102, 111,214,288,415,
effect of sin on, 153-154
477 eulogy of, 121
whole mission of Christ, 478 gaining control over man, 155
redemption of the body as, 202-203 man blaming for lust, 188
wisdom and purity, 224-225 need for affirmation, 459-460
original unity. See original unity
Wisdom literature and concupiscence,
receptivity of the gift, 141
167-172
responsibility of man toward, 161-162
Witness to Hope: The Biography of Pope as subject of truth and love, 113-117
John Paull!. See Weigel, George subjection to lust, 154-155
witness to love, body as, 254-255 women's liberation movement, 154
wives Word of God. See also Incarnate Christ
completion of husbands, 358-359 creation through, 19
husband's appreciation for beauty of, words of consent as sign of marriage,
329-331 378-382
Wojtyla, Karol. See also John Paul II works of the flesh, 209-210
(Pope)
The Acting Person, 37-38 Y
background of, 35-39
Yahwist creation account, 62-64
criticism of, 41
subjectivity in, 70
linking work with Pope John Paul II's
work,39 "your maker is your husband," 343-344
Love & Responsibility, 36-37 youthfulness, desire for, 327-328

(Christopher West) Theology of The Body Explained PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

(Christopher West) Theology of The Body Explained PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

(Christopher West) Theology of The Body Explained PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What is the book about?

What is the book about?

What are some of the main topics discussed in the book?

What are some of the main topics discussed in the book?

THEOLOGY OF THE BODY

Imprimatur: +Most Reverend Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap .

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Cover design by Helen Rita Lane, FSP

Copyright © 2003, Christopher West

Foreword .................. ... ...................... ............................................................... ......... xv

Cycle 1: Original Man

10. Christ Directs Us Back to "the Beginning" .............................................................. 61

Original Man-In Review ....... .. ... .......... ................................................................ 125

Cycle 2: Historical Man

Cycle 3: Eschatological Man

Cycle 4: Celibacy for the Kingdom

56. Some Make Themselves Eunuchs .. ............................... .. ........ .............................. 278

Cycle 5: The Sacramentality of Marriage

Cycle 6: Love and Fruitfulness

104. The Antidote to the Culture of Death .................................................................. 476

Bibliography ................................. ............................... ...................... ..................... 495

Index ................................................... ....................................................................... 501

Mary Jane Rice, for first introducing me to the Pope's catechesis

all the staff at Pauline Books and Media, especially Sister

Monsignor Lorenzo Albacete, for all the wisdom he has passed on

Dr. David Schindler, for helping me better articulate the nature of

George Weigel for writing the foreword;

Archbishop Chaput, for his support and encouragement of my "mis-

Jeanne Monahan and Jay Wonacott, for critiquing early drafts;

Father Richard Hogan, for critiquing the Prologue;

Eric Scheidler, for his extensive help reviewing and restructuring

Nathan West and Jessica Wunsch, for their research;

Future generations will remember Pope John Paul II for many

In early fall of 1993, a committed Catholic woman who taught at my

I. Witness to Hope (New York, NY: Harper Collins, 1999), p. 343 .

erating message of the Pope's catechesis beyond the realms of academia.

Theological reflection on the human body and sexuality has a check-

1. Redemptoris Missio, n. 86.

1. The Gospel of the Body?

A. Encounter with the Living, Incarnate Christ

2. See Catechism of the Catholic Church eCCC), n. 515.

B. Perfect Love Casts Out Fear

5. Letter to Families, n. 19.

2. Defining "Theology of the Body"

10. CCC, n. 2519.

A. The Pope s Thesis

For starters, many people feel unfamiliar and even uncomfortable

14. CCC, n. 1146.

B. Epiphany of the Body

17. 2/20/80, TB 76.

But we need an epiphany to realize that that "something" is the "great

3. The Link Between Theology and Anthropology

A. The Sacramentality of the Body

20. Dives in Misericordia. n. 1.

B. The Scandal of the Body

26. See CCC, n. 515.

32. See CCC. nn. 648,659, 966.

4. The Nuptial Mystery

tween human-spousal communion and divine-Christian communion.