<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Sex and the Human Person: Part II - Sex in Creation?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cosmos-liturgy-sex.com/2006/03/29/sex-and-the-human-person-part-ii-sex-in-creation/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cosmos-liturgy-sex.com/2006/03/29/sex-and-the-human-person-part-ii-sex-in-creation/</link>
	<description>Now This Is The Real World! Where Theology and Real Life Meet.</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2008 01:49:19 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: COSMOS-LITURGY-SEX &#187; Sex and the Human Person: Part III - Sex Differences</title>
		<link>http://cosmos-liturgy-sex.com/2006/03/29/sex-and-the-human-person-part-ii-sex-in-creation/#comment-1053</link>
		<dc:creator>COSMOS-LITURGY-SEX &#187; Sex and the Human Person: Part III - Sex Differences</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Mar 2006 12:42:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cosmos-liturgy-sex.com/2006/03/29/sex-and-the-human-person-part-ii-sex-in-creation/#comment-1053</guid>
		<description>[...] Theological anthropology tells us that our sexual identity is given to us as a gift and is immutable, as either male or female. We are created this way, it comes through no choice of our own. The sciences offer confirmation, to the extent they are competent, that this Christian anthropology is sound.Â  While the sex characteristics serve a telos, a purpose, they do it in such a way that the masculine primary and secondary characteristics are eccentric, he initiates and goes outward.Â  Feminine primary and secondary are integrating and interior.Â  In the context of the previous post, you can already see how this will come together.Â  The next time we will look at the way in which men and women are not just different, but different in a unifying manner. We will discuss complementarity.     TrackBack URI   Permalink [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Theological anthropology tells us that our sexual identity is given to us as a gift and is immutable, as either male or female. We are created this way, it comes through no choice of our own. The sciences offer confirmation, to the extent they are competent, that this Christian anthropology is sound.Â  While the sex characteristics serve a telos, a purpose, they do it in such a way that the masculine primary and secondary characteristics are eccentric, he initiates and goes outward.Â  Feminine primary and secondary are integrating and interior.Â  In the context of the previous post, you can already see how this will come together.Â  The next time we will look at the way in which men and women are not just different, but different in a unifying manner. We will discuss complementarity.     TrackBack URI   Permalink [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David</title>
		<link>http://cosmos-liturgy-sex.com/2006/03/29/sex-and-the-human-person-part-ii-sex-in-creation/#comment-1051</link>
		<dc:creator>David</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Mar 2006 20:13:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cosmos-liturgy-sex.com/2006/03/29/sex-and-the-human-person-part-ii-sex-in-creation/#comment-1051</guid>
		<description>Donna - I always hate to speak for someone else, but it seems that he would call it anomalous.  He does say "most cultures" and "fairly consistent human instinct."  I have not read whether he has a specific theory as to why for example, the Norse mythology may have varied from this norm.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Donna - I always hate to speak for someone else, but it seems that he would call it anomalous.  He does say &#8220;most cultures&#8221; and &#8220;fairly consistent human instinct.&#8221;  I have not read whether he has a specific theory as to why for example, the Norse mythology may have varied from this norm.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Donna Marie Lewis</title>
		<link>http://cosmos-liturgy-sex.com/2006/03/29/sex-and-the-human-person-part-ii-sex-in-creation/#comment-1050</link>
		<dc:creator>Donna Marie Lewis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Mar 2006 19:49:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cosmos-liturgy-sex.com/2006/03/29/sex-and-the-human-person-part-ii-sex-in-creation/#comment-1050</guid>
		<description>But then what does this say about mythologies where many or most of the 'typical' polarities are not present ? I'm thinking of the Norse mythos in particular, (and the Tolkien-verse which is partially dervied from it.) There, sun is feminine, moon is masculine, sea is primarily masculine while land is primarily feminine, heaven is primarily feminine and earth primarily masculine.  I know that Kreeft is familar with this, since he has actually written a book on Tolkien, but I've never seen him comment on this prominent anomaly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>But then what does this say about mythologies where many or most of the &#8216;typical&#8217; polarities are not present ? I&#8217;m thinking of the Norse mythos in particular, (and the Tolkien-verse which is partially dervied from it.) There, sun is feminine, moon is masculine, sea is primarily masculine while land is primarily feminine, heaven is primarily feminine and earth primarily masculine.  I know that Kreeft is familar with this, since he has actually written a book on Tolkien, but I&#8217;ve never seen him comment on this prominent anomaly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
