* Josiah S. Mann Lectures on Pastoralia

Transcription

1 * * Josiah S. Mann Lectures on Pastoralia

2 % % exchange student

3 Web SM 4 UP Publications

4

5 University of Exeter Dr. John Tripp A Pause [Added Power and Understanding in Sex Education] Steve Doughty, Outercourse : Oral Sex Lessons for Teens, Daily Mail,

6 eclipse 7 always ask for a second opinion 7 May 11, 2004, Oral-sex-lessons-teens.html, accessed December 7, David L. Evans and John H. Tripp, Sex Education: The Case for Primary Prevention and Peer Education, Current Paediatrics 16 (April 2006): 95 99

7 141

8 Heidegger What is Being? Being and Time Martin Being has meaning the being to whom 8 What is sexuality? the being to 8 But now it has been shown that the ontological analytic of Dasein in general is what makes up fundamental ontology, so that Dasein functions as that entity which in principle is to be interrogated beforehand as to its Being (Martin Heidegger, Being and Time [Oxford: Blackwell, 1962], 4:35, his italics).

9 143 whom sexuality has meaning to be a meaningful person becoming human 9 humanising sexuality creates communicates embodies seeks actualises shares 9 [Human] anguish is occasioned more by the experience or fear of meaningless being, of meaningless events, than by the mystery of being, by the absence of being, or by the fear of non-being.... The secret of being human is care for meaning. Man is not his own meaning, and if the essence of being human is concern for transcendent meaning, then man s secret lies in openness to transcendence. Existence is interspersed with suggestions of transcendence, and openness to transcendence is a constitutive element of being human (Abraham Heschel, Who Is Man? [Stanford, CA: Stanford Univ. Press, 1965], 52, 66).

10

11 145 theological anthropology 4 8

12

13 147 i. 27 ii. iii.

14 iv. 10 An act of sexual intercourse is at the same time an act of love and a procreative act. This does not mean that sexual intercourse always in fact nourishes love between the parties or always engenders a child. It simply means that it tends, of its own nature, toward the strengthening of love (the unitive or the communitive good), and toward the engendering of children (the procreative good).... An ethic (whether proposed by nominal Christians or not) that in principle sunders these two goods regarding procreation as an aspect of biological nature to be subjected merely to the requirements of technical control while saying that the unitive purpose is the free, human, personal end of the matter pays disrespect to the nature of human parenthood (Paul Ramsey, Fabricated Man: The Ethics of Genetic Control [New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1970], 32, 33). When erotic relationships between the sexes are conceived merely as relationships with no further implications, no end within the purposes of nature then they lack the significance which they need if they are to be undertaken responsibly. They become simply a profound form of play, undertaken for the joy of the thing alone, and depending upon the mutual satisfaction which each partner affords the other for their continuing justification (Oliver O Donovan, Begotten or Made? [Oxford: Clarendon, 1984], 16 17).

15 149 co-humanity co-sexuality sexuality is cosexuality humanity is co-humanity 11 meaning is co-meaning i. 11 In its basic form humanity is fellow-humanity (Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics [Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1960], III/2: 285).

16 a divine movement to and from a divine Other; a divine conversation and summons and a divine correspondence to it 12 analogy of free differentiation and relation 13 the Humanity which is not fellow-humanity is inhumanity When man was to be the subject, it had to be said that the creative basis of his existence was and is a history which took place in the divine sphere and essence; a divine movement to and from a divine Other; a divine conversation and summons and a divine correspondence to it. A genuine counterpart in God himself leading to unanimous decision is the secret prototype which is the basis of an obvious copy, a secret image and an obvious reflection in the co-existence of God and man, and also of the existence of man himself (Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics [Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1958], III/1: 183). 13 God wills and creates man when he wills and creates the being between which and himself there exists this tertium comparationis, this analogy; the analogy of free differentiation and relation. In this way he wills and creates man as a partner who is capable of entering into covenant-relationship with himself for all the disparity in and therefore the differentiation between man as a creature and his creator (Barth, Church Dogmatics III/1: 185). 14 Humanity, the characteristic and essential mode of man s being, is in its

17 151 humanity in covenanted communion Martin Buber 15 ii. 16 co-humanity sexuality is co-sexuality root fellow-humanity. Humanity which is not fellow-humanity is inhumanity. For it cannot reflect but only contradict the determination of man to be God s covenant-partner, nor can the God who is no Deus solitarius but Deus triunus, God in relationship, be mirrored in a homo solitarius (Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics [Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1961], III/4: 117). 15 Martin Buber, I and Thou (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1970) 16 He created them male and female. This is the interpretation immediately given to the sentence God created man. As in this sense man is the first and only one to be created in genuine confrontation with God and as a genuine counterpart to his fellows, it is he first and alone who is created in the image and after the likeness of God (Barth, Church Dogmatics III/1: 184).

18 sexuality in covenanted communion 17 iii. comeaning meaning is comeaning 17 There can be no question that man is to woman and woman is to man supremely the other, the fellowman... so that whatever may take place between man and man and woman and woman is only as it were a preliminary and accompaniment for this true encounter between man and fellow-man, for this true being in fellow-humanity (Barth, Church Dogmatics III/2: 288).

19 153 coming and presence most intense form come and be present presence in its fullest and meaning embodies meaning communicates

20 not my will sex not to be replaced nor generalised not my 18 It is a mistake, I think, to attempt to interpret the relationship between man and woman in terms derived from other forms of dialogue. If the sexual relationship is truly central and paradigmatic in human experience, it cannot be taken as simply one example among others of the meeting of I and Thou. It is, rather, the other way round: the I-Thou relationship in other instances can be fully understood only in the light of the relationship between man and woman (Valerie Saiving Goldstein, Where Is the Woman?, Theology Today 19, no. 1 [April 1962]: ).

21

22 It is striking, but incontestable, that in his description of the grace of God in this final and supreme act of creation, the biblical witness makes no reference at all to the peculiar intellectual and moral talents and possibilities of man, to his reason and its determination and exercise. It is not in something which distinguishes him from the beasts, but in that which formally he has in common with them, viz. that God has created him male and female, that he is this being in differentiation and relationship, and therefore in natural fellowship with God (Barth, Church Dogmatics III/1: 185).

23 157 James Nelson Carl Jung Carl Jung once remarked that when people brought sexual questions to him they invariably turned out to be religious questions, and when they brought religious questions to him they always turned out to be sexual ones (James Nelson, Embodiment: An Approach to Sexuality and Christian Theology [Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1978], 14).

24 [H]umanizing relationship cannot occur on the human dimension alone. Sexuality, we must also say, is intrinsic to our relationship with God (Nelson, Embodiment, 18).

25 159

26