April 04, 2011

God's Reflection In Humanity

In studying the Theology of the Body this year, I was asked to enlarge upon the "spousal meaning of the body." So, here I am...doing Theology.

Turning to Webster:
nuptial; matrimonial.

So, I can say I am also enlarging upon the "matrimonial meaning of the body," etc.

The Body was made in God's image (Gen. 1: 26) and likeness, etc. However specific language is used by God when he says "Let us make men in our image..." This is immediate reference to God's status as three Persons in one God.

The Hypostatic Union is the name of the unique relationship shared between God the Father, God the Son, and the Holy Spirit: the Father's love is manifest in His Son, and the result of Their love is the Holy Spirit. I'd like to note, "love" is a very worldly and imperfect word that cannot come close to resembling the actual relationship shared between the three persons in the Trinity.

Bearing in mind we are made in God's image, examine the human marital figure. A man's love directed at a woman manifests a child at the peak of mutual love. If you were expecting me to say the same thing about mankind as I did about God, your preconceptions are far too hopeful.

Not only is mankind fallen, but its expression of love is naturally less perfect because of its physical medium. Love's perfection manifests in a mystery, and we are incapable of reproducing this feat. Regardless, the similarities are still significant. Each figure, the Trinity and the human, involves three participants; two which "perform" the "act" of love (for lack of a better way to put it) and the resulting being (sadly, men are incapable of producing a divine result...).

When Christopher West exclaims so forcefully that the intent of our marriage is "engraved on our bodies," he refers to our physical *coughcough* gonads. However, I feel his attempt to impose an epiphany is lacking in that it does not imply divine rule. Our duty as humans to strive for perfection leads us to reflect the Trinity's model of perfect love; accepting the obvious ought to be accepted as being obviously insufficient.

In retrospect, a lot of what I wanted to say was based entirely in the worldly application of the spousal meaning rather than the spousal meaning itself, which I may have explained better then than I had planned. Either I'm getting better at blogging, getting better at getting sidetracked, or am blissfully unaware of the nonsensical nature of the above text.


Labels: , , ,


Post a Comment

<< Home