JOY OF LOVE. Lust and marriage. THOUGHT OF THE APOSTLE PAUL

 

.

In St. Paul it is clear that for him the man-woman relationship corresponds to the upper-lower ratio [The Cor 11, 7-9; 14,34; The Tm 2, 11-14]. But these are his ideas. The doctrine instead of her husband, "head of the wife" [Ef 5, 22-33] it's another thing. Indeed, while on the subject general "Man-woman" feel Paul with his rabbinical misogynism, in the doctrine of the relationship husband wife certainly it shines the beauty of God's Word, that does not go, and that was confirmed and deepened by the Council, that has come to affirm that "their union constitutes the first form of communion of persons"

.

.

.

.

PDF print format article

.

.

Writes John Cavalcoli: "Unfortunately it was realized for centuries that here Paul does not truly reflect the vision of Genesis and even the evangelical" [ed. WHO]. there, John was needed Cavalcoli to say that St. Paul, the Apostle of the Gentiles, the greatest missionary and evangelist in the history of the Church "does not truly reflect the vision of Genesis and even the evangelical". Then who, of grace, It reflects authentically? Expenses, after 2000 year old, It realized that Paul was not inspired by the Holy Spirit but by lust when he wrote his epistles? But John Cavalcoli, obviously! Most learned of San Girolamo, deepest of Sant 'Agostino, wittiest most of St. Thomas, slimmest of St. Bonaventure. More inspired by the Spirit. there, I have a proposal. I propose to amend a section of the missal according to the Roman rite of Holy Mass. When you will read in 1 Corinthians 7,9, instead of "Word of God", It will say, "Here Paul is not authentically reflects the vision of Genesis and even the Evangelical" or "Word of lust '". To which the faithful respond with joy, "Thanks be to Cavalcoli!».

Matteo

.

.

.

We start from the method of biblical exegesis, since it allowed to have Having noted that in São Paulo there are some questionable ideas on sexual lust, related to his anti-feminism, I was attacked by several parties with modernism accusations and rahnerismo [cf. WHO]. I respond well to my opponents, because it gives me the opportunity to explain further.

.

I would point to my opponents I wrote a critical book on Rahner, the result of thirty years of studies. I invite you to read it [1]. And instead of wasting time with me, their audition to criticism of Rahner like the one I did!

.

I begin, therefore, with a discourse on method. Exegesis of sacred Scripture must distinguish what is truly the Word of God from their own ideas dell'agiografo or culture of his time. The inerrancy of Scripture evidently refers to those steps, in which the sacred writer, inspired by God, enunciates truths revealed by God, that is, truth of faith.

.

Senonché, But, it is inevitable that the sacred writer, be limited and fallible human, like all, let even leaked his opinions or his time, that they are not the Word of God, but they can be either very backward ideas or even wrong, obviously without any intention to deceive, but simply through ignorance or to the limits of his knowledge.

.

In tal modo, the advancement of knowledge of Bible teachings implies that, while what belongs to Revelation remains unchanged, being the Word of God, the dell'agiografo ideas can also be accepted for a long time; but it is possible that at some point the Church realizes, in the light of the Word of God itself, they are overcome or correct.

.

It was about, after all, human opinions, that the Church does not agree in the sense of dogmatizzarle - thing I could never do -, but in the sense that, for a certain time, Also many centuries, not disapprove and circulates. but when, with the progress of exegesis and the very life of the Church, it is clear that these ideas are outdated or incorrect, The Church intervenes by marrying new and better interpretation, that best reflects the truth of God's Word.

.

The antiquity, also millenary, a biblical doctrine, It not always argues in favor of its immutability; must be checked in individual cases if it is a matter of faith o di an opinion dell'agiografo. If the Church realizes, and when he realizes that it was a simple idea dell'agiografo or his cultural environment, He does not hesitate to abandon it or even to exclude it explicitly, even if it does so with every respect, not to disrespect all'agiografo.

.

The defects of the modernists and their so-called modernist exegesis, to about, no data from this principle of distinction between what has been revealed and ideas dell'agiografo, but by two things:

.

First thing. The modernists are the historicist or evolutionist, ie do not allow universal and immutable truth, even those of faith. For them, everything changes, God also. So, do not change only the dell'agiografo ideas, but also the revealed data, in the sense that today we no longer believe the same truths of faith, to which he believed St. Paul, because even the truths of faith changes over time and varies according to different cultures, so for them there can be no single faith, but a plurality of "rings". According to them, there are no eternal truths and supratemporal, ma Truth is the daughter of time. What was true yesterday, Today is false and vice versa. Therefore, the Church is wrong in repeating the same doctrines or dogmas themselves, because by doing so it lags behind the historic progress.

.

According to the modernists, for example Schillebeeckx, the identity of faith's content over time is not assured by dogmatic concepts, that I am not fixed, but they are changing and must change, depending on the circumstances and the historical and cultural situations. Indeed, per Schillebeeckx, the concept does not capture the real in himself, but only there tends not reach. The real is caught instead by a "pre-conceptual experience athematic", specific, global and existential, But that in itself is inexpressible. We have to express it; ma, by the very nature of our knowing, when we do, we are obliged to use simple, uncertain and precarious' interpretative models ", that they are just images or metaphors or comparisons, essentially subjective, at least in relation to a given time or a given culture.

.

Those who claim to possess, in matters of faith, universal truths, absolute and eternal, It is a rigid and intolerant person, can not appreciate pluralism, It has no historical sense, is a backward, You do not understand their time, is a presumptuous, and a fundamentalist. dthis relativist epistemology and evolutionary follows, in knowledge of faith, that the cognitive relationship with Christ is not insured, as in the dogmas, from abstract ideas, but from that experience athematic, implying the prassi, experience that would have the same faith, for which we draw from the mystery of Christ. Senonché, But, per Schillebeeckx, in the moment in which we interpret, express and communicate the concepts, these concepts are not and should not always be the same, but they are and they have to change and be different, that is suited to the mystery that we intend to capture and express, depending on the times, circumstances and people, to which we turn. If one clings to an outdated concept or the past, She lives outside of their own time and use a language incomprehensible to his contemporaries.

.

For instance, to express the mystery of Christ today, Schillebeeckx proposed to stop saying that "Jesus is God", because this expression, According to him, It would be a surplus of ancient pagan mythology of '' divine man ' (theiòs anèr), it would be better instead to designate Christ as the "eschatological prophet". And similarly, instead of talking, how does the Council of Chalcedon, of "one person in two natures", it would be better to speak of "a nature in two persons'. And so on.

.

Second thing. In interpreting Scripture, the modernists, like the Protestants, They do not account for those passages that the Church He has already interpreted or even serve as a justification, evidence or scriptural basis of a dogmatic teaching, and then they do not respect the interpretation by the Church, but interpret them in their own way, easily falling into heresy.

.

Here's an example. The church, relying on those passages of Scripture, which she speaks of the human soul, teaches 1. the distinction between soul and body [Fourth Lateran Council of 1215; 2]; that the soul is the substantial form of the body [Concilio di del Viennes 1312; 3]; that the soul is immortal [Fifth Lateran Council of 1513]. Well, Rahner, denying explicitly these dogmas of the Church, argues that when the Bible speaks of the soul, always it means the whole man.

.

In the matter, the case of São Paulo is particularly delicate course, since it is not a simple hagiographer as other, but of an eminent Apostle. But the Church, who looks only to the truth, He has problems to overcome and also correct human ideas, historically conditioned, a St. Paul. This fact is demonstrated very clearly right about our issue of sexual lust, closely connected with that of the dignity of women and marriage, so much so that it is good to treat them together.

.

The Pauline doctrine of marriage as a "remedy for concupiscence", It has actually been taught by moralists until Vatican II, who, vice versa, treating of marriage, absolutely not talk about this thing. And since then, the great papal documents, as the Human life of Blessed Paul VI, the Family member company of St. John Paul II, until The joy of love of the Reigning Pontiff, I am on this line. Which shows clearly that the idea of ​​St. Paul's exceeded, and if it is exceeded, Paul evidently there in fact does not speak on behalf of God, but in its own name, or perhaps mistakes in good faith his idea for divine revelation.

.

It is not about here obviously to doubt or deny the existence of sexual lust, or the option to cancel it in the present life. Instead, it is a legacy of original sin present in all, and which it consists of an irrational drive for sexual pleasure and the act that matches. The pursuit of pleasure is a natural impulse in humans and animals. The problem, for man, It is that this research needs to be rationally justified; and if it is not, is sinful. Well, concupiscence causes the opposite sex attracts us to her with such force, that in certain cases it is very difficult to curb.

.

St. Paul says: who can't help himself, get married. If it does it, It is better than virgin remains. Today, as I said in my article [cf. WHO], since after the Council, the Church speaks differently: everyone, with a good discipline, the exercise and the help of grace, we must be able to dominate us, to order our, to control us and restrain, then it is not nothing but the cardinal virtue of temperance, mandatory for all, whether we are called to marriage, whether we are called to religious life. even Paul, in other places, He admits this without problems. And this is certainly the Word of God.

.

The choice of one's vocation, in spirituality today, Whether it's marriage or consecrated life or priesthood, It should not be understood as answering the question of whether I can or can not help myself from sex. Ma, under the assumption that I have reached that degree of temperance, which makes me master my instincts, This choice must be made to much higher grounds: namely the response to the gift of God, which actually Paul himself acknowledges: "Each one has his own gift from God" [The Cor 7,7].

.

This means that the conjugal act It must be seen not as a result of the opening of the floodgates double, for which the torrent of passion bursts tumultuous, but legalized, in married life. It should not be seen as a fulfillment, an outlet, and at the same time a legitimate and tolerated embankment, of concupiscence, otherwise uncontrollable dilagherebbe, so its suppression would be unbearable or impossible, as Luther believed.

.

The sexual act instead it must be an expression of self-giving, will to make each other happy and welcomed the gift that the other makes of himself. Act, that, as I said in my previous article, It expresses love and increases the love. The fulfillment of the same marriage debt, it is the duty of justice and other services, more common in the elderly, in which weakened the thrust of 'eros, It must continue to be more than ever the expression. One could rightly say, thinking the sacrament of marriage, that the conjugal act is a sign of holiness and incentive.

.

The change in the concept of marriage initiated by the Council it consists of a visual more optimistic and more noble, more faithful to Genesis and the Gospel: while before the Council marriage was markedly place in the horizon fallen nature with original sin and of the inferiority of women with men, the new vision arises decisively in the horizon resurrection and equality of the specific nature of the two and mutual complementarity.

.

A woman's dignity Today is better to light, his moral qualities are better highlighted, His most exalted spiritual attitudes, while conversely diminish the reasons or prejudices, that in the past, as in the Old Testament itself, they showed in women almost a having less, a minor, with limited liability. It was seen as a fragile creature, impulsive, emotional, easy to illusions, suggestible, unreliable, to drive, educate, check, fix and hold off; or a danger: a seductress, Quasi una maliarda, of which one should beware. In essence, the woman was seen in the light of Eve sinner and not the Madonna.

.

In Sao Paulo it is clear that for him the man-woman relationship corresponds to the upper-lower ratio [The Cor 11, 7-9; 14,34; The Tm 2, 11-14]. But these are his ideas. The doctrine instead of her husband, "head of the wife" [Ef 5, 22-33] it's another thing. Indeed, while on the subject general "Man-woman" feel Paul with his rabbinical misogynism, in the doctrine of the relationship husband wife certainly it shines the beauty of God's Word, that does not go, and that was confirmed and deepened by the Council, that has come to affirm that "their union constitutes the first form of communion of persons" [GS, 12].

.

These limits that we find in the Pauline concept the woman did not prevent the Apostle to enunciate some fundamental principles of the Christian view of women, principles, they certainly are the subject of Revelation: the principle of reciprocity: "In the Lord, neither the woman without the man; neither is the man without the woman ' [The Cor 11,11]; and the prospect of 'unione eschatological, in which it is implied the resurrection of the sexes, which has widely spoken Saint John Paul II in the catechesis on the theology of the body: "There is neither man nor woman, for you are all one in Christ Jesus " [Gal 3,28]. This is the clear recovery Gen 1-2, where he taught the equality of dignity and specific nature.

.

With the Council, Anyway, It occurred an improvement in the vision of the woman, for which she, without this we fall into easy optimism, It is seen more in the light of the Madonna that does not Eve. The Council has confirmed the substance of the sublime Pauline doctrine on marriage as a mystical image (“great mystery”!) and none other than the sacramental sign of Christ's union with the Church. In this doctrine - and here we are truly in God's Word -, where it does not transpire nothing of the contempt of Paul for the woman and for his doctrine on sexual lust, There does not seem to find even the author himself. The rest, a discordant note of Paul himself seems to be in the c.7 First Corinthians, where it is hard to come to an agreement the aforementioned sublime mystical comparison with the known perhaps too human, according to which "the married woman is anxious about the things of the world, how to please the husband ' [v.34]. But if her husband is the image of Christ, who is then this? Here we go again with the remedy for concupiscence?

.

There is a clear link between the woman seen in this light and sex control problem. Progress in understanding the dignity of women through the centuries went hand in hand with a higher perspective of marriage and sexuality. It is also evident that, the nearer man abandons his superiority complex and sees in the woman not so much the temptress or having less, but rather a traveling companion to the sky, the conjugal union will become less and less the safety valve and the legitimate outburst and tolerated instinct and increasingly selfless gift of love: love, joy,!

.

Varazze, 10 May 2016

.

.

___________________

Notes

[1] Karl Rahner. The Second betrayed, Editions Faith&Culture, Verona 2009.

.

.

.

.

.

.