TOB 1-10: The Beginning

I have been reading the Theology of the Body now for 4 days (not counting the introductions), and I figure I should be at the point where I can put a reflection forward on what has happened thus far.

At this point, John Paul II is still talking about the creation of man as laid out in Genesis, and the appeal of Christ to those words.

Man was created as male and female, and it is significant that there are two separate accounts which each tell us different things about this important aspect of mankind. Christ refers to both of these when he appeals to "the beginning".

When we examine the second creation story in detail, and in relation to the first, we note a certain richness that is expressed there. In this story, God created man (Adam) first, but man was alone. Though similar to the beasts, because he possessed a body, Man was different from them in significant ways. He could make choices, he was in the image of God.

Adam was the first man, or properly the first Human. In him was embodied all that is humanity. But, it is not good for man to be alone, so God created the animals, which didn't change the solitude that Man existed in, to this point. And so, God put Adam into a deep slumber (removing the will of Adam from the equation) and fashioned woman from the rib of Adam.

It was not until this point that Adam had any sense of "maleness" because an understanding of sex (gender) cannot exist without the complimentary relation between male and female. And so, up until the creation of Eve, Adam and Eve were literally and actually one flesh. And so, when it is said that through conjugal union, the two will become one flesh, this is what it meant by that. Adam, being the archetypal human, is complete in all ways. This completeness is what is reached when "the two become one flesh" through the conjugal union.

When they unite with each other (in the conjugal act) so closely so as to become "one flesh," man and woman rediscover every time and in a special way the mystery of creation, thus returning to the union in humanity ("flesh from my flesh and bone from my bones") that allows them to recognize each other reciprocally and to call each other by name, as they did the first time. ... The fact that they become "one flesh" is a powerful bond established by the Creator through which they discover their own humanity, both in its original unity and in the duality of a mysterious reciprocal attraction. (TOB 10:2)

Man is not truly complete as only male or only female, but regains a fullness in humanity through the community of persons, the relations between male and female.

I look forward to continuing these discourses.

Benedict XVI is no John Paul II

A journalist has stated that he is upset with BXVI, because he's not living up to JPII's legacy. (Article)

An Italian priest-journalist has criticized Pope Benedict XVI for imitating the style of his predecessor, but failing to achieve the same results, during his visit to Brazil last week.

"Wojtylism is useless without Wojtyla," wrote Father Filippo Di Giacomo in a column for the daily La Stampa. The former missionary said that attendance at the opening session of the CELAM meeting in Aparecida-- about 200,000, rather than the 1 million organizers had anticipated-- showed a failure to match the popularity of Pope John Paul II. (A congregation estimated at about 1 million had gathered in Sao Paulo earlier when the Pope presided at the canonization of Frei Galvao.)

Di Giacomo argued that Pope Benedict had engaged in disputes with the bishops of Latin America during his trip-- another reason, he said, that the papal journey had been a disappointment.

Just after the anniversary of his second year, he doesn't live up to a 26 year reigning Pope. Big surprise. Plus, he's not JPII, he's his own Pope (or something like that). I think he's doing a good job, being Pope isn't just about drawing the crowds.

-JG

The Sainthood of JPII

On this the second anniversary of the death of our Beloved Holy Father, Pope John Paul II, I have decided to write a short reflection on him, and discuss some of what has been happening in his cause for canonization.

John Paul II was the only Pope I ever knew. As I made my way back to the faith, he really became a great symbol of the Church in my life. He really was the shepherd of the flock of Christ. He was an extremely charismatic figure, even in his late years. His teachings and writings were exactly what the Church needed, tempering the "spirit of Vatican II" and bringing forth and reflecting on the Truth that the Council taught.

I prayed for him to the end, and was saddened to see him go. Yet, I knew he was heading to be closer to God, it was clear in his final years that he was destined to spend eternity with Christ.

Now, two years have passed, and he is that much closer to being declared a Saint. I word it this way because I truly believe that he is right now a Saint, in Heaven with our Lord, continuing to watch over the flock entrusted to him.

Recently, the initial study of his life and death has been concluded by the Diocese of Rome, and is therefore being forwarded to the Congregation for the Causes of Saints. They will review the material, and draft a document outlining the ways John Paul II lived a life of heroic virtue. They will also be reviewing a possible miracle, relating to a Nun who was cured of Parkinson's disease, of which the former Pope ailed. If this and another miracle are approved, the Canonization can be made.

This leaves only one question remaining. What will we call him? He was called John Paul II for quite a long time. Will he be Pope St. John Paul, Pope St. John Paul II, just St. John Paul or St. John Paul II? Maybe we will even begin using St. John Paul the Great. This is one question only time will answer for us.

-JG