Jesus and Same-Sex Couples — Part 3

Seeker030 posted on his blog and clarified what sort of relationship he had in mind when he wrote the tweet that got me started on this series. I hadn't quite understood what he was getting at, and I have left a comment there, responding to his specific concerns. Please check it out.

As long as we're thinking about Jesus and same-sex couples, there are a couple of further general points I had in mind which I think are worth presenting for consideration.

Jesus must not be thought of apart from the rest of the Bible.  The fact that Jesus did not speak directly to a specific topic does not necessarily mean that Christians are free to do whatever they feel like. We cannot ignore what Paul, and John, Peter, and James tell us about how Christians ought to live. We cannot ignore the prophets and wisdom literature of the Old Testament when they tell us how God wants his people to live. After all, Jesus himself, on the road to Emmaus, interpreted the parts of scripture which referred to him for the disciples. Luke 24:27 Christians believe that Jesus is the Word of God (John 1:1) and that the Bible is the Word of God in human language. There can be no real contradiction between them. What this means is that if we find the Bible telling us to do this or not to do that, then that is how God is calling to live, even if Jesus did not speak about it.


Jesus does not always approve what we want. People sometimes say, Jesus would not want me to have the unhappiness which this rule would bring. But Jesus does not promise pleasure or happiness in this life. In the Beatitudes (Matthew 5:3-12), he calls blessed, people who are poor in spirit, who mourn, who are persecuted. Ultimately, their reward will be great, but for now, we are told that we have a cross to carry daily. (Luke 9:23) The line, "How can something that feels so right be wrong?" is sometimes used to assuage guilty consciences in situations of adultery and fornication. We shouldn't let our feelings overcome what we know about right and wrong or invoke an image of a loving God which has been transformed into an image of an indulgent God.

Whatever moral standards exist are for our good, since God did not send Jesus for the purpose of condemning us, but to save us. John 3:17


"Jesus appreciates same-sex couples who are committed to one another in love."

To sum up my feelings on this, I'd say that Jesus certainly appreciates all, including same-sex couples, who are attempting to live a life of  love, even if their understanding of what is right or wrong is mistaken on some points. And it certainly doesn't matter whether I think they are mistaken.

My belief is that when it comes to sex, for one thing we are supposed to avoid lust. That is one of the big points in the Theology of the Body, which I have been posting about. But lust is not the same thing as attraction, much less is it the same as affection. So an affection which does not seek to reduce the other to an instrument for one's own sexual gratification is legitimate. And when it comes to action, it seems to me that what is forbidden is only those actions which involve contact with the genitals or which more or less inevitably lead to sexual arousal. I believe that there can be innocent touch including such things as embracing, stroking, cuddling, even light kissing — depending on the "tolerance" of the individuals. Different people probably have different levels of activity in which they can engage without sexual arousal. Within those limits, I see no problem in physical expressions of affection and love. (I know that other Side B people take a more rigorous position either because they believe the pleasure that comes from these forms of touch is so sexual as to be restricted to husband and wife, or because it is too difficult for most me to stop before the touch progresses to more explicitly sexual activity.)

So I agree with Seeker030 in the sense in which he meant his tweet. I wouldn't mind some of that sort of expression of love in my own life.

Theology of the Body — 2011/11/02

"The naked human body, in its full masculinity and femininity, has the meaning of a gift from person to person. This is the basis of all ethical guidelines regarding nakedness. The dignity of the person must always be upheld.

"In the husband/wife relationship, the nude body achieves the nuptial meaning through the sincere gift of self. But in art, the nude body takes on a different meaning. First, it becomes a model for the artist; then, once the art is complete, the body becomes a subject for the viewer.

"To an extent, objectifying the body is necessary in art. This raises a number fo problems, which multiply as the motives of artists and viewers are brought into question. These problems do not mean that the nude human body is an inappropriate subject for art — only that this is a complicated moral issue, not simply a matter of artistic taste.

"When sin entered the world, there arose, along with shame, a need for bodily privacy — especially between the sexes. Among sinful human beings, sexual privacy shields the gift from the gaze of lust. We don't just wear clothing to protect ourselves from the weather, but to guard our dignity. …

When the boundary of shame is crossed, nakedness becomes an insult. In the Nazi concentration camps, forced nakedness was used to depersonalize victims and strip them of their dignity. An analogous assault on the person occurs in pornography.

"In art, as in life, the right to privacy must be respected in order to preserve the gift-giving meaning of the body."


Comment: Here the focus is on artistic depictions of the human body. I'm wondering, though, about the implications of what he says about the basic meaning of the body and the naked body, for non-sexual nudity among persons who are not husband and wife. For example, what if children had been born before the Fall. Nudity would not have signified a gift of self between parents and children nor among siblings like that which exists between husband and wife. It seems to me that the phrase, "especially among the sexes," suggests that in situations where lust is neither intended nor experienced, nudity can be permissible.

Theology of the Body — 2011/09/30

"We began our reflections on the theology of the body with Christ's words to the Pharisees: 'Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning' (Mt. 19:8). Going back to the time of original innocence, we saw how the full truth about man is revealed in [the story of] Eden. By creating man in the image of God, precisely as male and female, God inscribed his love in the human body. Our complementary bodies, masculine and feminine, carry the sign of the gift.

"In our present reflections, taking up Jesus' teachings on lust and Paul's doctrine of purity, we considered the situation of man after the Fall. … We saw why Christ defined lust as 'adultery in the heart,' and what relevance this has for our lives today.

"What do Christ's words demand of us? That we overcome lust and seek purity … in living by the Spirit.

"… Jesus directs our attention back to the state of original innocence.… He doesn't tell us to return to the state of innocence — that is impossible. Instead, he urges us to acquire purity of heart.…[b]y opening our hearts to the Spirit, who actualizes within each Christian the redemption of the body won by Christ.

"Purity is not just abstaining from lust, but appreciating the dignity of the body. When the heart is dominated by lust, our outlook is so distorted that even our glance is sinful. With purity of heart, we come to see other persons in light of the original … meaning of the body…. This is a truth that sets us free.

"When purity is gained, we are free to experience the body — both our own and those of others — in all its fullness and joy. Through the gift of the Spirit, and by controlling our bodies in holiness and honor, we receive the gift of ourselves. Only then can we become a true gift for another person."

Italics in original; underlining added.

Theology of the Body — 2011/08/24

"For St. Paul, purity is expressed in self-control. …[H]e writes,'It is God's will that you should be sanctified .… For God did not call us to be impure, but to live a holy life' (1 Th[essalonians] 4:3-7.

"Paul speaks of purity as a capacity that can be acquired through practice. But it requires sgtrenous exercise and discipline. To find purity, we must bring our desires under Christ's control, directing them, with his help, towards the true, beautiful, and good.

"Of course, purity means abstaining from lust. But purity is not simply negative — it is about more than abstinence. In Paul's words, it is a matter of directing the body towards holiness and honor.

"The negative and positive poles of purity — abstinence and self-control —depend on each other. In order to control the body in holiness, a person must honor the bodily and sexual aspects of human existence. To acquire purity, a person must honor both himself and every other human being, male and female.

"Why should we honor the body? Because God created it and declared it 'very good.' Does this apply to every part of the body? Paul writes:

God has arranged the parts of the body, every one of them, just as he wanted them to be.… Those parts of the body that seem weaker are indispensable, and the parts that we think are less honorable we treat with special honor. … [T]here should be no division in the body, but … its parts should have equal concern for one another. (1 Cor. 12:18-25)

"Though Paul is actually writing about the Church — as the Body of Christ — his words deepen our understanding of the theology of the body.

"Self control is not needed because the body is evil — the truth is just the opposite. The body should be controlled with honor because it is worthy of honor. This is perhaps the most important theme in Paul's doctrine of purity."  (Underlining added.)

Theology of the Body — 2011/08/21

"All of Christian morality [as well as the moral system of the Old Testament] finds its fulfillment in a single word — love.

"Paul reveals the connection between freedom and love. 'You, my brothers, were called to be free,' he writes. Therefore 'serve one another in love' (Gal. 5:13). …

"There is a danger [of] misunderstanding what 'freedom from the law' means. Paul warns against using our freedom to indulge in sin — that is the opposite of true freedom. A person dominated by lust cannot be free. … He cannot be a true gift to another — he can only reduce the body to a sex object.

"Among the 'acts of the flesh,' Paul lists 'sexual immorality, impurity, and debauchery.' He contrasts these with self-control, one of the fruits of the Spirit. Self-control is inseparable from purity of heart.

"… Paul places purity of heart within the context of a Spirit-driven life – a heart given over to Christ that expresses itself outwardly through self-control and acts of love."

Theology of the Body — 2011/07/21

"Throughout his letters, Paul examines [the] conflict between good and evil in the human heart. … For [the Manichaeans], it was a struggle between matter and spirit — the spiritual part of man is good, but the body is evil. For Paul, however, it is not that simple.

"When Paul uses the terms 'flesh' and 'Spirit," he does not mean body and soul. Instead, his use of 'flesh' is synonymous with John's description of lust in its three forms. Flesh … is the part of [man's] heart dominated by sin. A person who lives 'by the flesh' is driven by desire for that which is 'of the world.' The man described by Jesus, who looks upon a woman lustfully, is a clear example.

"The Spirit of God — who lives in the heart of every Christian — desires something entirely different. God wants us to … develop a disposition to purity. This strength is not our own — it is the power of Christ operating with us through the Holy Spirit.
…
"… Life in the flesh began when sin entered the world. Before that time, Adam and Eve lived entirely by the Spirit. With sin came death and decay. But Paul [anticipates] the final victory over sin and death. The first sign of this is Christ's resurrection.  'If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit, who lives in you' (Rom. 8:11).

"Our only hope for victory is justification in Christ. This justification is not just a promise of something that will happen in the future. It is a real power operation within the heart and expressed through our actions. …
…
"The acts of the flesh [listed in Galatians 5:19-22] spring from a heart given over to lust. The fruits of the Spirit flow from a heart given over to Christ — that is the way of redemption.

"The fruits of the Spirit aren't acquired without effort. Behind each of these virtues — love, joy, peace, and so on — there are moral choices, acts of the will. But it is only through the power of the Holy Spirit that a person can overcome the flesh and choose goodness. Spirit-driven acts are not human 'works' — they are gifts of God."

In this section, the Pope quotes the passage in Galatians which I cited. Earlier, he also quotes Romans 5:5 and 8:5-11. If you read those passages, it may make this section of the book even clearer. I did not include the passages in order to keep the post from getting too long.

Theology of the Body — 2011/06/26

"By reconnecting body and heart … Christ introduces a new ethos, a new way of living as an embodied person. … [H]e shows that holiness is about far more than following the rules. This is the ethos of redemption. … It is new and revolutionary for every sinful human being.

"Because of sin, the Apostle Paul writes, all of creation … longs for liberation, while human beings in particular 'wait eagerly for . . . the redemption of our bodies' (Rom 8:23).

"Christ did not come to redeem the 'spiritual' aspect of man and leave the body behind. All of Christ's work — the entire Gospel — is directed towards the redemption of the body.

" … His appeal to the beginning [at Matthew 19:8, when he tells the Pharisees that divorce wasn't allowed in the beginning] only makes sense in light of redemption. Without redemption, man would be in permanent bondage to lust and decay. It would be useless to appeal to the state of original innocence as a standard for our lives today.

"Christ does not change the Law. He confirms the commandment, 'Do not commit adultery.' At the same time, he leads us to the fullness of God's original intent for this command. … To the extent that our thoughts and actions are directed towards the redemption of the body, the man of lust gives way to the 'new man.' The way to nurture the new man within is by guarding our hearts and controlling our impulses.

"Sexual self-control is not simply about abstinence. It is not an emptiness, but a fullness. When we allow Christ to transform our desires, the true meaning of the body and the person is respected. Self-control protects the value — the attractiveness — of the other person, while lust only cheapens it.

"As eros is redeemed, our deepest longings are confirmed and strengthened. The heart finds its true voice. …

"The path of self-mastery is not easy,especially for a person who has grown accustomed to giving in to his impulses, rather than controlling them. If he perseveres, though, such a person will feel a growing sense of his own dignity. He will begin to experience the body as a gift, and sexuality as a sign of communion — a reflection of God's love. Freedom, the fruit of self-control, is the foundation of love between persons. This is why love can only flourish where there is purity of heart."

This was a bit longer than most of my posts on this topic because I found very little in this chapter that did not seem necessary to include.

Theology of the Body — 2011/06/15

"It is often thought that ethos — or morality — suffocates the spontaneous expression of eros. …

"Ethics is usually understood in the negative sense — as rules and condemnations. The Sermon on the Mount is often read in this way, too. Christ's teaching on lust is reduced to a prohibition, a limitation on our hearts. But when we look deeper, we see that Christ aims to liberate the heart from the constraints of lust.

"Everyone who accepts Christ's teaching is called to fullness. …

"Jesus' words … require us to examine not only our … behavior, but also our innermost thoughts …[and] that we be aware of our deepest impulses. A man must guard his heart from impurity like a wathcman protecting a hidden spring.

"… [W]e need to acquire a true and full understanding of the human body in its masculinity and femininity. This truth … must be lived in our hearts. It cannot be learned simply by reading a book — it demands a deep study of oneself. We must learn to distinguish true attraction — appreciating the bountiful riches of masculinity and femininity — from the simple reductions of lust. …[T]hrough Christ it is possible.

"There is nothing truly … free about lust. It doesn't aspire to goodness, truth, or beauty. Christ, however, far from stifling the noble desires of the heart, opens the way to their fulfillment."

Theology of the Body — 2011/06/10

"The Greek word for romantic love is eros. …[I]t has trickled down into everyday language — for example, when we call something 'erotic.' This word does not appear in the [Greek texts of the] Bible. …

"The Bible speaks of ethos — the condition of the heart with regard to what is true and good — but not eros. In everyday speech, we often hear eros equated with lust. If what is erotic is always lustful, then Jesus would condemn eros along with lust. But is that the case?

"According to Plato, eros is a force within us drawing us toward the good, the beautiful, and the true. … Though the word isn't used, eros is present in Genesis — in the call to become one flesh. … When romantic love is channeled to this end [the communion of persons], it is deeply connected to ethos — what is good and right in God's eyes.

"In this light, eros is not the same as lust. Lust strains not for the beautiful and the good, but for the possession of a person for his or her sexual value. Especially in the Platonic sense, eros strives towards selfless love.

"Jesus doesn't condemn the heart or romantic love. … His call to overcome lust is a call to embrace the good, the beautiful, and the true — eros rightly understood. …

"Only when our hearts are free can we know the true joy of eros. Passion (eros) and purity (ethos) are not opposed to one another. Instead they are called to meet and bear fruit in the human heart. Christ's words are not exclusively a prohibition. They are a call to experience the fullness of erotic love."

Just a reminder: when I post things, whether it's on Theology of the Body or any other topic, of course I hope you'll find it interesting and worth reading. But I also welcome questions and discussion.

Theology of the Body — 2011/06/03

"If the body is not evil, what about the heart?

" … [C]ertain modern thinkers have accused the heart of being dominated by lust in its three forms. Nietzsche interprets human action in terms of the 'will to power' — which is akin to what the Apostle John calls 'the pride of life.' Marx argues that history is shaped by the desire to acquire and protect wealth — in John's words, 'the lust of the eyes.' And according to Freud, everything is ultimately driven by the sex urge — which is to say, 'the lust of the flesh.'
" … Looking at the Bible as a whole … we see a different picture of man: he is afflicted by lust, but not defined by it.

"How is the 'man of lust' described by Jesus and the Apostle John different from the man described by Nietzsche, Marx, and Freud? First, Christ does not declare the heart a hopeless case, entirely captive to the whims of lust. Instead, he calls it to purity. If the heart was lustful at the core, it would be incapable of purity. Second, Christ offers the power of redemption. Purification isn't something we do on our own — it is accomplished through Christ. God created us by grace, and he can redeem us by grace.

" … We are not helpless pawns of our sex instinct, or our desire for power or wealth. When we let Christ's words sink in, we begin to hear an echo of God's original plan in our hearts. Looking back to 'the beginning,'* we learn that we are called to something better. We are called to love. We are called to live the truth of our bodies, in their masculinity and femininity. This is our heritage from the beginning, the heritage of the heart, which goes far deeper than lust in its three forms. Through Christ's redeeming grace, the heart's fundamental longing for love is affirmed and empowered."


*The Pope began his series of talks on Theology of the Body with an extensive analysis of the meaning of the verses in Genesis which tell of the creation and fall of man. When I began this series of posts, I though it would be more interesting if I skipped over that part and started with the part about Jesus' "Sermon on the Mount." There are occasional references to "the beginning," but I'll have to come back to the full treatment as the conclusion of this series, which is still a long way off.

Theology of the Body — 2011/05/29

"The body shares in our dignity as persons, just as much as the spirit.

"The body manifests the spirit. It expresses the person, The sexual embrace, too, was designed to express the invisible love and communion shared between spouses. In a way, then, the body and the sexual embrace are both sacramental. Both are physical signs of spiritual realities.

" … By ignoring the sign and reducing the body to an object, lust rejects the body's true value.

"Though man is sinful, this doesn't mean that the body is evil. Sin clouds our ability to see the original meaning of the body, but it can't erase the meaning itself."

…

"The right Christian attitude aims at purifying the heart so we can see the true value of the body and sex, according to God's original plan. Christians believe in the redemption and resurrection of the body. …

"Christ calls our hearts to overcome evil. This means rooting out our sinful desires from within … . If a man looks lustfully at a woman, he must not blame her for his sin. The woman's body is not evil … Instead her body is of a great value that, because of lust, is not fully appreciated.

"Adultery in the heart devalues God's creation. Christ speaks to the heart, calling for a rediscovery of human dignity … . The call to conquer lust springs from this dignity."



Of course, what John Paul II says of the dignity of the female body applies also to the dignity of the male body, which is also a physical sign of a spiritual reality, the value of which is rejected by lust. So we must also not look at men with lust. It seems to me that lust and sexual attraction are not identical. In the Pope's view, it seems that attraction, which is to be expected, can coexist with respect for the human dignity of a person, body and spirit, while lust ignores that dignity.

Theology of the Body — 2011/01/21

"Adultery is sinful because marriage is sacred. … The nuptial union is one of free, mutual giving. Adultery — whether of the body or the heart — attacks the core of this union."
…
"… The Sixth* Commandment cannot be fulfilled by 'following the rules,' but only by purifying our hearts.
"How can we become pure of heart? By restoring Christ's lordship over our hearts and bodies and battling lust. In figurative language, Jesus describes the extent of the struggle:

"If your right eye causes your to sin, [gouge] it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. … (MT 5:29…)

…

"Christ seeks to liberate us from lust, redeeming the heart …. Will we fear the severity of Christ's words, or have confidence in their power to save us from lust?"

*Do not commit adultery. It is sixth in the enumeration traditionally used by Catholics. I believe it is traditionally listed as seventh in most Protestant enumerations.

Theology of the Body — 2011/01/06

"Christ is showing us how the … Commandment, 'Do not commit adultery,' must be understood and put into practice ….
"The key phrase … is 'adultery in the heart.' This is a paradox. How can you commit adultery without committing adultery? …
"'Adultery in the heart' is usually understood as desire for another man's wife. … According to this interpretation, a man is free to look lustfully at his own wife. …
"…
"But in light of Christ's entire revelation, this interpretation must be broadened. Jesus affirms the Ten Commandments, but he doesn't stop there — he sheds new light on them.
"…
"In the situation posed by Jesus, a man looks upon a woman lustfully. It is significant that Christ describes her simply as 'a woman' — not as 'another man's wife.' Adultery in the heart is not limited to the boundaries that define adultery committed in the body. Instead, it is defined by the presence of lust. In Christ's example, the man's relationship to the woman doesn't change the fact that he commits adultery in his heart by looking lustfully. Even if she is his wife, if he reduces her to an object he is still guilty of adultery in his heart.
"This interpretation takes into account the true nature of lust. It reduces the call to form a communion of persons — the perennial attraction of masculinity and femininity — to mere satisfaction of the sex instinct. It reduces a person, called into existence for her own sake, to an object for my pleasure."

This is the talk which gained a lot of attention. Reported apart from the context of all that he had said about lust in previous talks, or even as fully developed in this talk, the headlines to the effect that the Pope says there can be lust and adultery in the heart within marriage were greeted with incomprehension and some ridicule. IMO, JPII makes perfect sense here. And of course, it can apply equally to gay men and their attitudes toward men. Even if sex is legitimate within a stable and loving gay relationship (which I would not agree with), regarding one's partner as an object for one's own gratification puts one into a condition of adultery in the heart, IMO.

Theology of the Body — 2010/12/06

"The eternal attraction of men to women arises from the call to communion. Lust denies this attraction, limiting it to a purely sexual level.
"…. Instead of the body and its sexuality as a gift, the man becomes dominated by his bodily urges. The words of Sirach are apt: 'The soul heated like a burning fire will not be quenched until it is consumed.'
"This is not to question sexual desire itself, which is directed towards union and procreation. Christ's teaching is far from Manichaeism — the belief that the spirit is good and the body evil. True Christian belief has always affirmed the goodness of God's creation, including the body, sexuality, and procreation.
"Disorder occurs when sexual desire seeks its own satisfaction rather than the communion of persons."

Theology of the Body — 2010/11/20

"In the mystery of God's creation, sexual attraction is a call to communion. Lust is a lie. It keeps us from hearing the call to self-giving inscribed in the body itself. Men have always been attracted to the feminine form, and women to the masculine. This, in itself, is nor lust. … It is one thing for a man to be aware of the value of sexuality among the other riches of a woman. It is another to reduce all the riches of her femininity to a single value — sex.
"Lust obscures the significance of the body and the worth of the person. … Lust in the heart aims not to establish a communion of persons, but only to satisfy the sexual urges of the body.
"According to Jesus, this reduction of the person can be expressed in a single look. In the man's heart, the woman ceases to be valued as a whole person, as Eve was valued by Adam, and instead becomes an object of lust."

I think this bit clarifies things greatly, so I'd like to repeat what seem to me to be the most significant sentences. Men have always been attracted to the feminine form, and women to the masculine. This, in itself, is not lust. … Lust in the heart aims not to establish a communion of persons, but only to satisfy the sexual urges of the body.


Obviously, for us homosexuals, lust toward women isn't a big problem, but I think this is useful to think about with respect to our attractions toward men, whether we believe, as I do, that all sexual activity with the same sex is wrong, or we believe that homosexual activity is not necessarily always wrong.

Theology of the Body — 2010/11/03

Continuing my sporadic series of excerpts from Pope John Paul II's Theology of the Body in Simple Language by Sam Torode, ©Philokalia Books


"In the Wisdom literature [of the Old Testament], lust is often compared to fire. …
"… [I]tcreates an insatiable desire to satisfy the body and its senses. … In its restless pursuit of satisfaction, lust drowns out the voice of conscience and dulls sound thinking. …
"This was the image of lust familiar to Jesus and his audience. While the men described in Proverbs and Sirach have already committed adultery, Christ takes a step back. Before adultery is committed in the body, he says, it is commited in the heart, through the eyes.
"The way we look reveals what is in out hearts. As we saw in our earlier reflections, sexuality flows from the gift-giving, nuptial meaning of the body. In marriage, husband and wife are called to become one flesh, forming a selfless communion of persons. But lust looks at the body in a way that denies its nuptial and procreative (life giving) meaning.
"… How is lust a form of adultery? Both violate the true meaning of the body. Both cheapen sexuality and reduce the body to an object.
…
"Sexual desire can be a destructive force. In order for it to be the positive, creative power it was meant to be, it must be transformed by Christ."

Theology of the Body — 2010/10/26

Five weeks ago, I gave some excerpts which presented the teaching of the prophets that Israel's lapses into idolatry were comparable to adultery. Implicit in that view is that adultery is not merely a violation of property rights but a denial of the love between spouses. Now we look briefly at further developments in the Wisdom literature of the Old Testament.

"The Old Testament legal tradition was concerned with adultery of the body. But Christ shifts the focal point of sin from the body to the heart."

When Jesus told his hearers that anyone who looked with lust upon a woman had already committed adultery with her in his heart, that might well have called to mind some of the "wisdom literature" of the Jewish scriptures (Old Testament). "Proverbs, for example, repeatedly warns against the snares of lust."

"In the Book of Proverbs, a father warns his son, 'Do not lust in your heart after her beauty, or let her captivate you with her eyes' (Prov. 6:25). And Sirach instructs, 'Turn your eyes away from a shapely woman, and do not look intently at beauty belonging to another.' (Sir. 9:8-9).
"The Wisdom books …. appeal to the interior man — the conscience —  and in that sense they prefigure Christ's radical shift in the basis of morality. The Wisdom books, together with the Prophets, helped prepare the hearts of the people for the transforming power of Christ."


It would not make sense to me if straight people were not to look with lust, but it was perfectly okay for gay guys simply because the object was a man. So I think the teaching about lust applies to us too.

Theology of the Body — 2010/6/03

     "[T]he Sermon on the Mount is addressed to sinners. It is to lustful human beings that Jesus says, 'I tell you that anyone who looks on a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.'
     "… Christ knows our hearts. …
     "… Laws and rules may constrain our outward behavior, but they can't heal our distorted desires. The Gospel is aimed at the heart."

Theology of the Body — 2010/5/13

It's time to get back to the paraphrase of Pope John Paul II's words on the Theology of the Body.

     "In the nuptial meaning of the body, there's a beautiful understanding of mutual belonging. My beloved. This phrase resounds throughout the Song of Songs. 'I am my beloved's and his desire is for me' (Song of Songs 7:10). Here, possession is not domination; ownership is not reduction to an object. Instead, 'my beloved' speaks of mutual giving and receiving. …
     "Lust distorts this mutual belonging of persons. In the language of love, 'my' refers to the guarded gift; in the language of lust, 'my' refers to an object of possession. These conflicting languages highlight the ongoing battle between love, which comes from the Father, and lust, which is 'of the world.'"

Theology of the Body — 2010/4/26

     "[Both Genesis and the Sermon on the Mount seem] to single out the man as the one who lusts. But both men and women are subject to lust. … [One] can participate by presenting [oneself] as an object and attempting to arouse lust."


     "…[H]uman sexuality was not created only for procreation. The body, masculine and feminine, has a nuptial meaning: it is capable of expressing the selfless love by which a person becomes a gift. By becoming a gift, the human person fulfills the deepest meaning of his existence.
     "The three forms of lust — of the flesh, of the eyes, and the pride of life — all limit and distort the original, nuptial meaning of the body. This distortion takes place in the heart. Outwardly, the body … is still created for communion. But … in the experience of the heart, sexuality no longer seems to aim at communion. The body … has instead become only an object of lust.
     "In the state of original innocence, the body was a perfect expression of the spirit. Now, …
     "[t]he heart has become a battlefield between love and lust. As lust gains ground, it destroys our ability to experience the nuptial meaning of the body. …
     "The human person is the only physical creature created for communion with God. For this reason, the person should never be reduced to an object. At the same time, a person can only discover his true self by making a sincere gift of himself to another. Lust attacks this free, sincere giving. It reduces the person to an 'object for the other,' instead of being 'united with the other' in love.
     "The attacks of lust aren't always obvious. Sometimes, under the cover of strong emotions, lust disguises itself as 'love' — still, it remains selfish at the core. Does this mean we should always distrust the heart? No! But we must keep watch over it."