It Takes 2 to Make a Thing Go Right (II)

Daniel 13:5-63

So back to the mantra: "the pictures do not show too much. They do not show enough."

It's this last part that trips me up. The soul is not a "part" in the body. Rather, as the body's principle, the soul animates every part of the body. Under "normal" circumstances--where the woman is married to a man--this same body can communicate one of the greatest gifts possible, the gift of herself in lifelong devotion to being a wife and mother. It is possible, though of course only "in a certain sense," to see the soul through the body.

[For the sake of "normalcy," this is not to the exclusion of the possiblity for the same body to communicate a complete gift of self to God and to others without being married]

Part of my hesitancy comes from experience. If we were looking at a piece of art (even a photograph), which tastefully depicted a woman in the nude, would we feel the need to say, "this doesn't show enough?" My guess would be probably not. And why not? Because the art as a medium opens us up to a deeper reality. It puts our eyes at ease and allows us to take in all the wonders of the body. It is obvious that pornography as a medium obscures the deeper realities of the human person; it forces the observer to exaggerate and distort the very being of this historically unique woman.

Now please do not get me wrong. I'm not at all advocating picking up pornography in order to try and redeem the medium by a one-sided optimism: "if I look at this the right way it can make everything ok." The form of the damn thing (yes, I said damn and meant it...it's not from God) is such that it can never be something else than a terrible perversion. I think really for me, it's knowing that there is a real person depicted in the magazine, who on account of her body, automatically gets associated with the "trash" part of "trashy" magazines. This is not to remove whatever responsibility the woman has to respect her body and the souls of those men who look at her. I just think I err on the side of seeing the woman as Susanna--in need of the benefit of the doubt in a culture that has more than likely taken advantage of her.

So to both the woman in the magazine and John Mayer, I think the body can show more than enough and is just as big as you are.

It Takes 2 to Make a Thing Go Right (I)

During my undergrad days it was quite normal to hear a certain phrase in connection with pornography; and ever since, it has almost served as a mantra for certain faithful (or perhaps not so faithful) adherents of Theology of the Body.

The phrase used and now in vogue is, "the pictures do not show too much. They do not show enough." The point being of course is that the woman in the magazine is reduced from a person of inestimable worth to an object of lust. And of course this is right "in a certain sense." Just recently a friend of mine (not Mr. C) and I were talking and he used this phrase and it struck me as a little, well, not entirely correct. And all of you who know me I'm sure can guess what happened next. Immediately a song, which has bothered me for some time, came into my head.
The song is a John Mayer song and the lyrics go **throat clearing** like eh-zo.

Some day I'll fly/some day I'll soar
Some day I'll be/somethin' much more
Cuz I'm bigger than my body gives me credit for.

Ironically, this comes from the same man who wrote "Your Body is a Wonderland." At any rate, what has bothered me about the song lyrics is how John confuses (perhaps with invincible ignorance) our sinfulness with the body. When John Mayer says he's "bigger than his body," what he means is, he's capable of more than his sinful nature gives him credit for. To say otherwise, would be to say that the body is evil and enslaves the soul.

Now it is true, our sinfulness is mediated through our bodies, but it's not the body's fault per se. [Insert attempt to make a quick though readily intelligible argument from Aquinas] The soul is the principle of the body...the body cannot go anywhere without the soul. And the soul needs the body in order to do human things like understand stuff, "there is nothing in the mind that was not first in the sense." The unity between the body and soul is so great that I can call this unity, "Reginald" - one subject.

On the one hand, if John is looking to place the blame for his frustration, he won't find it in the body. He'll be even more frustrated when the soul does not have a body. If on the other hand, he wants to accept his real lot, he'll come to know his soul is indeed trapped, but by sin and his only true freedom will come in realizing his unlimitted capacity for virtue, goodness, and perfection in and through his body - probably greater than he "gives it credit for."

Stay tuned folks...

Up and coming is a post where John Mayer and pornography both meet Aquinas and Mr. C (<--think John Paul II and TOTB).