In a series of lectures, the late John Paul II laid out a “Theology of the Body,” a potentially revolutionary way of looking at and speaking about human sexuality. Christopher West, research fellow and faculty member of the Theology of the Body Institute in Pennsylvania and founder of the Cor Project, is a prolific teacher and writer on the topic. He is author of the new book At the Heart of the Gospel: Reclaiming the Body for the New Evangelization, his first written for a major publisher, the Image imprint at Random House. West talks to National Review Online’s Kathryn Jean Lopez about the book, the Gospels, and theology of the body’s potential.
KATHRYN JEAN LOPEZ: Isn’t the “Heart of the Gospel” Christ’s death and resurrection? What does that have to do with the body?
CHRISTOPHER WEST: You can’t die or rise from the dead without a body. Christianity begins with this “outlandish” idea that God has a human body. The Incarnation is at the heart of everything. Christianity is an “enfleshed” religion. We must diligently resist the strong tendency we have to “unflesh” it.
LOPEZ: What’s so greatly mysterious about human sexuality? Kids sure seem to figure it out without much instruction.
WEST: When we reduce sex to something merely biological, all we have is the plumbing. Christ invites us to another way of “seeing.” True sexual love is a doorway into another realm, another world — kind of like the wardrobe into Narnia. But we never see this “great mystery” when we stop at the surface.
Advertisement
Do you remember that Peter Gabriel song: “In your eyes — the light the heat / In your eyes — I am complete / In your eyes — I see the doorway to a thousand churches . . . ”? Now let’s reduce that song to something merely biological: “In your eyes — the cornea / In your eyes — the retina / In your eyes — I see the lines of a thousand blood-shot blood vessels.”
I once had a student shout: “Stop! You’re ruining the song!” Precisely. That’s what happens when we reduce sex to something merely biological: We ruin the song. God is singing a love song to us in and through our sexuality. “Morality” is all about learning how to live and move to the rhythm of that divine love song.
LOPEZ: What is the “universal longing”? How can you be sure you’re not being too general? Too certain?
WEST: Bruce Springsteen put it best: “Everybody’s got a hungry heart.” Haven’t we all felt it — that hunger, that yearning for something? The Greeks called it eros. We all wrestle with selfish lusts, but we also experience a noble eros, a longing for the true, the good, and the beautiful, a longing for love and happiness. And we sense that somehow, one way or another, that longing is connected with our sexuality.
LOPEZ: What does it mean to integrate eros, sexual love, and agape, divine love for mankind? Is that even possible given our culture today?
WEST: Even misdirected eros shows us what kind of beings we are: creatures created for love, for union, for intimacy. Yes, there are a lot of counterfeit loves on the market today, love substitutes. I call it the “fast-food gospel”: the promise of immediate gratification for our hunger. It’s everywhere, and we easily fall for it because most of us are raised with what I call the “starvation-diet gospel.”
Sex in the divine plan, as I’ve learned it through John Paul II’s “Theology of the Body”, is meant to be a sign here on earth of the eternal bliss that awaits us in heaven. But who grows up hearing that? This is why the “fast food” starts to look quite attractive. It may not be “good for you,” but it’s better than nothing.
Agape is the Greek word for divine love, for self-giving love. Integrating eros and agape means learning how to direct our sexual desires away from selfishness and in the direction of self-giving love. The more we learn how to do this, the more we experience “the banquet” for which our hunger is designed.
Is this even possible? It’s what the “new wine” of Christ’s first miracle is all about. We’ve all “run out of wine,” like the Biblical story of the wedding in Cana. But Jesus’s first miracle is to restore “divine wine” to the man and woman’s relationship, to restore agape to eros. If we want to learn to love divinely, we need to drink deeply of this “new wine.” As the saints say, we need to get “drunk” on God’s love.
LOPEZ: How can the “Song of Songs” help us?
WEST: Ah! The Song of Songs — that beautiful erotic love poem of the Old Testament! It takes us to “the essence of Biblical faith,” according to Benedict XVI. How? The essence of Biblical faith is the recognition that God wants to “marry” us. It sounds odd or even scandalous to some, but it’s the central message of the Bible. The Bible begins with the marriage of man and woman and ends with the marriage of Christ and the Church, and right in the middle we have the Song of Songs.
As Pope Benedict affirms, God loves us with eros! An eros that is perfectly agape. This is the “story” that our bodies tell as male and female — or at least, it’s the story they’re meant to tell. Tragically, when we’ve “run out of wine” (agape), our bodies tell a very different story — a story of selfishness, heartache, and disillusionment.
As the great mystic St. Teresa of Avila put it, the Song of Songs is an invitation from God to his Bride (all of us) to “drink as much as she desires and get drunk on all these wines in the cellar of God! . . . Let her die at last in this paradise of delights.” “Oh blessed death that makes one live in such a way!” exclaims Teresa. I’d guess most people didn’t hear this growing up in Catholic schools. I didn’t.
"But when we buy into the idea that pleasure itself is the main goal of sex, society becomes utilitarian. You’re valued if you’re useful."
Historically it happened the other way around. Utilitarian ideals came before the sexual revolution. The contemporary attitude towards sex is an effect, not a cause.
"Anyone who is concerned about where the sexual revolution has gotten us and is looking for a response that takes us beyond the polarizing extremes of sexual indulgence, on the one hand, and sexual repression on the other, I think will find this book compelling."
Psychological studies show that when people are ordered to do something via authority that they then obey, they automatically begin to rationalize the rules. If you are wondering why Catholic priests specifically trend towards homosexuality, it's because they've rationalized that sex with women is somehow bad, all the while unable to control their libido. This is what happens when you stray from the Bible. If Catholics are hoping to lead a new sexual revolution, perhaps they should clean up their own house first.
1 Cor. 7:9, "But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion."
1 Timothy 4, "The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron. They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth. For everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, because it is consecrated by the word of God and prayer."
As long as Catholics continue to order their priests to be celibate, they will have issues with their priesthood and with sex. You're going to need more than pretty words about how sex is a metaphor for God's relationship with mankind to lead a new sexual revolution. I have read Song of Songs, and I'm pretty sure Solomon was not writing about any relationship with God. However if I were committed to celibacy for spiritual reasons, I might have to make up something to that effect to justify the fact that I still have to read it, being part of the Bible. But I sometimes enjoy watching people twist themselves into theological pretzels, so I might actually read the Pope's book. Catholics: Remove the plank in your eye, then we can talk.
Sorry, Protestant, you are a sorry Protestant. You ought remove that chip from your shoulder. The Catholic church continues to grow, continues to affirm the gospel and the number of Catholics who embrace a life of consecrated celibacy continues to grow. Embrace, not merely reluctantly accept. Meanwhile, non-Catholic Western Christian denominations continue to focus on their crotchular regions, accepting divorce, homosexual couples (who can't couple) and ministers and engaging in self-congratulating rationalization, excerpting scripture quotes to back up their error. Enjoy the view from your own pews... there are plenty of open spots for you to get the best angle.
Derek, you're overlooking that the call to a life of consecrated chastity is not limited to mandatory celibacy for priests of the Latin rite. There are many, many women who have freely consecrated themselves to Christ by the voluntary taking of vows in religious orders, not to mention monks and male religious who do the same. The core of this consecrated life is rooted in the closer following of Christ in living a poor and chaste life in total obedience to the Father. Nobody is forcing these people to take these vows. Their lives of self-sacrifice are an admirable witness to Christ.
Also, Pope John Paul's TOB talks are essentially a book-length catechesis on Scripture: first, the book of Genesis; followed by a long analysis of Christ's words to the Pharisees about marriage and divorce, and then Paul's words, especially Ephesians 5 on marriage.
So, I hope you will forego your self-righteous attitude in sermonizing Catholics to "remove the plank from their eye," as if you are so perfect you have nothing to remove yourself!
If you were really interested in the truth you would know that there is no link between celibacy and sexual problems. For one, this would mean that anyone who is celibate has problems and is prone to homosexuality or to sexually abuse others, which is ludicrous. This would include Jesus himself, who was celibate for the sake of his mission, and in his own words, there are those who choose to be so for the sake of his kingdom. Furthermore, the rate of pedophilia & ephebophilia is about the same across all professions/classifications, including among married protestant ministers and rabbis.
Also, please refer to exactly what church teachings and references/documents you are citing when you say that the Church has taught people that sex is bad. Of course, you will not be able to find any. It was the Church which has consistently condemned such ideas throughout the centuries.
You also selectively quote from scripture, ignoring Paul's counsel a few verses later in I Cor. 7 about advising people- arguably ministers- that they may choose to be celibate because it keeps them focused on their task; and you ignore Christ's statement already noted that there are those who are celibate for the sake of the kingdom.
"If you were really interested in the truth you would know that there is no link between celibacy and sexual problems. For one, this would mean that anyone who is celibate has problems and is prone to homosexuality or to sexually abuse others, which is ludicrous."
I didn't say that anyone who is celibate has sexual problems. I am myself a virgin. I said forcing people to be celibate when that is not their gift causes problems. The case the Catholic must make is that there is a link between celibacy and effectiveness as a priest. That, sir, is ludicrous. That in order to be an effective priest one must be celibate? This is exactly the sort of hogwash legalism that Paul was preaching against because it had destroyed Judaism.
I also did not say that Catholic priests were more prone to be sexual abusers than anyone else. I said that when they do turn into pedophiles, they are homosexual by a large margin, far larger than other types of pedophiles. This supports my argument, which I made in full knowledge of the facts. But don't take my word for it:
"You also selectively quote from scripture, ignoring Paul's counsel a few verses later in I Cor. 7 about advising people- arguably ministers- that they may choose to be celibate because it keeps them focused on their task; and you ignore Christ's statement already noted that there are those who are celibate for the sake of the kingdom."
There is nothing wrong with being celibate for the sake of the kingdom. There is also nothing wrong with having sex and a family for the same. But Catholic priests don't choose to be celibate. You must be celibate or you cannot be a Catholic priest. That is not a choice. That is coercion.
"But there is a movement of sorts underway, and it’s spreading, both in Catholic circles and across denominational lines. It wouldn’t surprise me at all, in fact, if evangelical Christians took it up and became a real catalyst in helping get the message out."
I think this is a great interview and I agree with it much of it. However -- and this is not at all intended to be churlish -- I have to point out that many evangelical, particularly Reformed, theologians and scholars have been making these arguments about the theology of the body for a long time and it is the Catholic Church which is now catching up.
The author is right, I'm sure, that the large bureaucracy of the Roman church moves very slowly, as all large bureaucracies do. It may be that the more flexible and less bureaucratized structure of Protestant churches and universities allows for faster innovation (both good and bad, admittedly).
However, it is certainly the case that the evangelical commitment to exhaustive exegetical study of the Bible as the sole source of special revelation is what has led evangelicals to a proper theology of the body well ahead of the Catholic Church. As the author shows from his generous quotation of Scripture, rather than Roman Church tradition, to support his argument, it is God’s Word as revealed in Scripture alone which undergirds the proper theology of the body. The elevation of human philosophy to a level co-equal with the light of God’s Word has been responsible for every confusion about God’s plan for sexuality, whether it’s Benthamite utilitarianism in the modern case or the Gnostic obsession with the dichotomy between body and spirit responsible for the contra-Biblical elevation of celibacy above marital sexuality in Catholic theology.
The Bible read honestly and treated appropriately leads inexorably to all good theology, including the theology of the body. What is encouraging to see here is that the Catholic Church has arrived at an important doctrine through a reliance on Scripture alone, which hopefully bodes well for the continued renewal of Catholic theology based on solid Biblical exegesis.
“All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.”
2 Timothy 3:16-17.
I wholeheartedly agree with your observation about evangelicals and the theology of the body. I have been involved with this movement for well over ten years, trying to teach Christians that "marriage is honorable in every way, and the marriage bed is undefiled."
bb, I'm not sure you understand JPII and West's teaching. Every Protestant pastor I have had was gung ho for remarriage after divorce, accepted "biblical" divorces, practiced and endorsed (and in one case encouraged and praised) birth control. Thus, this Protestant theology teaches a marriage "covenant" that is not fruitful, not faithful, not full. The Westminster Confession says marriage is for "mutual comfort" rather than to reveal a Triune, relational, covenant, commuing God. What is it you think the Romans are catching up to? Sterile serial marriage? God help us. Jesus said: let not man put asunder. How has Protestant theology miss that for 500 years?
Just a comment on "Sola Scriptura" from a cradle Lutheran..
The New Testament was not dropped from Heaven into the hands of man. If we believe that the New Testament is inspired by the Holy Spirit, then we have to believe that the church councils which separated the inspired writings from the less-inspired writngs were also inspired by the Holy Spirit. That is the only way we get the Bible!
Did inspiration by the Holy Spirit end with the canonization of the New Testament? As John writes, there was much teaching that was not written in the writings of the New Testament! The disciples had disciples!
I believe that "tradition" has to be tested against canonized scripture (as Paul praises the Bereans for), and there were times when the Catholic Church failed in this area.. Thus the Reformation. But we should not throw out the baby with the bath water! Inspiration is ongoing (or my Charismatic church would be teaching heresy), but ALL inspiration must be tested against scripture, since the enemy can disguise himself as an angel of light.
As Christians, we have the privilege.. even the requirement.. that we test the spirits! And what I (not a theologian, just a Christian trying to follow Christ) see is the ancient Church, one which as spent the last 2000 years trying to figure out what it is to be Christian, casting off the encrustation of years and clinging to Christ!
Ah, Derek. You should read one of West's books. He answers all your assertions, as does the Bible. Catholics don't "order" their priests to be celibate. There are married Catholic priests. They teach and train priests to choose to make the Church their family: just as Paul and Jesus did. I don't agree with the practice, but I now understand it, in the light that West presents it in his writings.
In Matthew 19:10-12 (ESV), we read this:
The disciples said to him, “If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry.” But he said to them, “Not everyone can receive this saying, but only those to whom it is given. For there are eunuchs who have been so from birth, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by men, and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Let the one who is able to receive this receive it.”
Thus, some are called to a celibate life and it is not better for all to marry. In I Cor. 7, Paul is not teaching people to be guided by selfish desire. He was teaching believers to honor the calling to marry, rather than practice repression or immorality. West and the Roman Church teach no differently. They just prefer, as is their right, to only ordain those called to celibacy. Have they done it perfectly? No. Have all married rabbis and protestant pastors refrained from immorailty? No. Does marriage cure lust? No more than a feast cures gluttony! West is teaching to come and enjoy the feast free of the gluttony. We gluttons say: Huh?
As a cradle Lutheran who now attends a Charismatic Non-Denominational church, I find this a wonderful essay. The Catholic church has been blessed by two Popes who are wonderful teachers and students of the Word.
As Protestants we emphasize relationship over ritual and religion.. What do we find at the core of this teaching? RELATIONSHIP, of the most imtimate kind! I suspect if more parish priests taught the way these Popes taught/teach, there would be fewer ex-Catholics in our church.
It is clear to us who were there that the only new thing created by the sexual revolution was an epidemic of divorce, broken homes and single motherhood. "They no longer speak to our living situation and are often no longer comprehensible to us" - Ratzinger shows us his great wisdom and strength once again and I am proud once again to be a Catholic.
Normally I like Lopez. This interview is a softie. There are substantial critics of West's teaching, even as he gets endorsed by a lot of good names as well. His analogies and associations seem highly distorted to me. The Song of Solomon in the center of the Bible means sex is the dominant metaphor for Christians... The Heart of the Gospel is embodiment? Creative yes, wrong, also yes. Check out alternative views: doing a google search of West at Headline Bistro.
