The Man of Lust
The man of lust is a term that John Paul the Great uses in his Theology of the Body catecheses to refer to the fallen human person who is subject to concupiscence. He speaks of this in terms of the three-fold lust St. John the Evangelist speaks about (1 Jn 2:15-16). These are the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life. I will let those who are not familiar with JP the Great’s treatment of this read the link, but the short of it is that in our fallen state we tend toward reduction of the other and selfish benefit. Life and the human person are unintelligible without acknowledging original sin and concupiscence. Life East of Eden can be confusing without reference to God and to our fallen state. I thought I would make a list of some of those common confusions which arise because original sin and concupiscence are not recognized:Authenticity is not acting as you feel. Being “authentic” is a post-modern virtue which essentially means one must be true to his feelings. Your feelings are your guide. I suppose that domestic violence should not be illegal then? Rather, being authentic is being and acting as we were created, to give ourselves totally to God and so to one another. Love is not the same thing as feelings. Feelings change as relationships mature. When the feelings associated with the novelty of a new relationship are mistaken for love, it is no wonder that we have such a high divorce rate. Love is an act of the will. You must choose to love or not to love someone. Lust is not the same thing as love. Lust in fact is the opposite. Lust wants to possess someone as an object for selfish motives; love gives oneself and receives the other as a gift; that is not as a possession.
Experience is not truth. This is especially a problem with some feminist theologians who make their personal experience the criteria for discerning what is authentic Divine Revelation and what they can reject as the product of oppressive patriarchal institutions. Experience must be evaluated and view through the lens of truth as presented by Divine Revelation, not vice versa.
Sexual attraction can be distorted and acting on it can be personally damaging. This includes homosexuality, bestiality, polygamy, etc. For those who do not recognize we are in a fallen state, they must assume that their feelings of attraction are normal but the results are physical, psychiatric, and spiritual mayhem.
Because the goal is purity, there is no such thing as a mature audience. We fool ourselves if we think that we can subject ourselves to sinful temptations in the media and be unaffected by it. Sure adults are more capable of dealing with “mature†material than are children but that does not mean that we can do so without negative spiritual consequences.
Anyone want to add their favorites?
.jpg)





































































































Because original sin and concupiscence are not recognized:
It is possible to separate the sin from the sinner; loving and respectng the person but not the sin. A person is not the sin, just like a person with cancer is not the cancer.
Comment by Anonymous — September 11, 2005 @ 10:39 am
[...] is the problem of the man of concupiscence (see related post). By the way, the new English translation of JPTG’s Theology of the Body replaces [...]
Pingback by Cosmos-Liturgy-Sex » The Man of Concupiscence — November 20, 2007 @ 8:31 pm