Control of the body "in holiness and honour"
1. In our preceding reflections—both in the analysis of Christ's
words, in which he refers to the "beginning", and during the
Sermon on the Mount, that is, when he refers to the human
"heart"—we have tried systematically to show how the dimension
of man's personal subjectivity is an indispensable element
present in theological hermeneutics, which we must discover and
presuppose at the basis of the problem of the human body.
Therefore, not only the objective reality of the body, but far
more, as it seems, subjective consciousness and also the
subjective experience of the body, enter at every step into the
structure of the biblical texts, and therefore require to be
taken into consideration and find their reflection in theology.
Consequently theological hermeneutics must always take these two
aspects into account. We cannot consider the body an objective
reality outside the personal subjectivity of man, of human
beings, male and female. Nearly all the problems of the ethos of
the body are bound up at the same time with its ontological
identification as the body of the person. They are also bound up
with the content and quality of the subjective experience, that
is, of the "life" both of one's own body and in its
interpersonal relations, especially in the perennial man-woman
relationship. Without any doubt, the words of the First Letter
to the Thessalonians, in which the author exhorts us to "control
our own body in holiness and honor" (that is, the whole problem
of "purity of heart") indicate these two dimensions.
Dimensions concerning attitudes of persons
2. They are dimensions which directly concern concrete, living
men, their attitudes and behavior. Works of culture, especially
of art, enable those dimensions of "being a body" and
"experiencing the body" to extend, in a way, outside these
living men. Man meets the "reality of the body" and "experiences
the body" even when it becomes a subject of creative activity, a
work of art, a content of culture. Although generally speaking,
it must be recognized that this contact takes place on the plane
of aesthetic experience, in which it is a question of viewing
the work of art (in Greek aisthá nomai: I look, I observe)—and
therefore that, in the given case, it is a question of the
objectivized body, outside its ontological identity, in a
different way and according to the criteria characteristic of
artistic activity—yet the man who is admitted to viewing in this
way is a priori too deeply bound up with the meaning of the
prototype, or model, which in this case is himself:—the living
man and the living human body—to be able to detach and separate
completely that act, substantially an aesthetic one, of the work
in itself and of its contemplation from those dynamisms or
reactions of behavior and from the evaluations which direct that
first experience and that first way of living. By its very
nature, this looking is aesthetic. It cannot be completely
isolated, in man's subjective conscience, from that looking of
which Christ speaks in the Sermon on the Mount: warning against
lust.
Creating climate favourable to purity
3. Therefore, in this way the whole sphere of aesthetic
experiences is, at the same time, in the area of the ethos of
the body. Rightly we must think here too of the necessity of
creating a climate favorable to purity. This climate can be
threatened not only in the way in which the relations and
society of living men take place, but also in the area of the
objectivizations characteristic of works of culture; in the area
of social communications, when it is a question of the spoken or
written word; in the area of the image, that is, of
representation and vision, both in the traditional meaning of
this term and in the modern one. In this way we reach the
various fields and products of artistic, plastic and dramatic
culture, as also that based on modern audio-visual techniques.
In this field, a vast and very differentiated one, we must ask
ourselves a question in the light of the ethos of the body,
outlined in the analyses made so far on the human body as an
object of culture.
Living human body creates object of art
4. First of all it must be noted that the human body is a
perennial object of culture, in the widest meaning of the term.
This is for the simple reason that man himself is a subject of
culture, and in his cultural and creative activity he involves
his humanity, including his body. In these reflections, however,
we must restrict the concept of object of culture, limiting
ourselves to the concept understood as the subject of works of
culture and in particular of works of art. It is a question, in
a word, of the thematic nature, that is, of the "objectivation"
[sic] of the body in these works. However, some distinctions
must be made here at once, even if by way of example. One thing
is the living human body, of man and of woman, which creates in
itself the object of art and the work of art (for example, in
the theater, in the ballet and, to a certain point, also in the
course of a concert). Another thing is the body as the model of
the work of art, as in the plastic arts, sculpture or painting.
Is it possible to also put films or the photographic art in a
wide sense on the same level? It seems so, although from the
point of view of the body as object-theme, a quite essential
difference takes place in this case. In painting or sculpture
the human body always remains a model, undergoing specific
elaboration on the part of the artist. In the film, and even
more in the photographic art, it is not the model that is
transfigured, but the living man is reproduced. In this case
man, the human body, is not a model for the work of art, but the
object of a reproduction obtained by means of suitable
techniques.
Important distinction
5. It should be pointed out right away that the above-mentioned
distinction is important from the point of view of the ethos of
the body in works of culture. It should be added at once that
when artistic reproduction becomes the content of representation
and transmission (on television or in films), it loses, in a
way, its fundamental contact with the human body, of which it is
a reproduction. It often becomes an anonymous object, just like
an anonymous photographic document published in illustrated
magazines, or an image diffused on the screens of the whole
world. This anonymity is the effect of the "propagation" of the
image-reproduction of the human body, objectivized first with
the help of the techniques of reproduction, which—as has been
recalled above—seems to be essentially differentiated from the
transfiguration of the model typical of the work of art,
especially in the plastic arts. This anonymity (which, moreover,
is a way of veiling or hiding the identity of the person
reproduced) also constitutes a specific problem from the point
of view of the ethos of the human body in works of culture,
especially in the modern works of mass culture, as it is called.
Let us confine ourselves today to these preliminary
considerations, which have a fundamental meaning for the ethos
of the human body in works of artistic culture. Subsequently
these considerations will make us aware of how closely bound
they are to the words which Christ spoke in the Sermon on the
Mount, comparing "looking lustfully" with "adultery committed in
the heart." The extension of these words to the area of artistic
culture is especially important, insofar as it is a question of
"creating an atmosphere favorable to chastity," which Paul VI
spoke of in Humanae Vitae. Let us try to understand this subject
in a deep and fundamental way.
Taken from: L'Osservatore Romano Weekly Edition in English 21
April 1981, page 11
Return to the Theology of the Body Main
Page...