Nathan Calvino

As the last of the credits roll past, the lights flicker on, dimly revealing the two hundred other people in the auditorium as they slowly get up and stretch. Some start chatting immediately, intruding upon the precious stillness; others file silently through four exits appropriately marked by glowing red light. What is going through your mind? Is it the magic, the valiant heroes, or the grandeur of medieval pageantry? What do you feel? Is it tense excitement, oscillating nostalgia, or something else which you can’t quite put your finger on? Fantasy leaves people with a sense of longing for something greater. Young people are affected, true, but so also are many adults who enjoy being able to escape from the pressures of the “real world” for a few hours.

“Lord of the Rings”, “Narnia”, “Wheel of Time”… the list goes on. Fantasy, whether written or on the screen has an uncanny ability to reach down into the very depths of the human psyche; it draws us irresistibly in. We love the grand scale upon which events take place and the hero who rises from insignificance to majestic splendor.

Have you ever realized that we actually do live in a fantasy world? When we open our eyes in faith to what Divine Revelation has revealed, life begins to take on grandiose dimensions.

Supernatural powers are at work in our world. However, in place of the vague magic of literature, we find the omnipotence of God. Magical creatures surround us, but in place of a few grotesque animals, the real world claims myriads of angels and hosts of demons.

Every fantasy has a good outline. Have you ever read the one about the king who was born in a cowshed, who won the affection of his whole people and who after losing their fickle affection in the course of a night, died in their stead in order to pay a debt which was owed to an enemy? The story goes on to say that the king came back to life, conquered seemingly insurmountable odds, and then promised his faithful subjects eternal life in a cosmic kingdom which lasts forever.

Perhaps we too often read the gospel as a nursery rhyme or as a history textbook instead of taking it for what it really is.

The best part about Gospel Fantasy is that it is real. When we enter into it, it is not just to escape from the “real world” for a few hours. It is the real world. This story is one that continues; it is one in which we can partake in the adventure. The next time you read the Gospel don’t be one of those who intrude upon the precious silence, nor be one of those who silently file out the appropriately marked exits. Don’t leave; rather make it your life.

I was recently forwarded a link to an article on the most recent batman movie, “The Dark Knight Rises.” Jerry Bowyer compares it in his blog (see link below) to “A Tale of Two Cities” and titles the movie “an Instant Conservative Classic.” I’m sorry Jerry, but I must respectfully disagree. Batman lost any respect of mine with his most recent performance. Please see my reasons below your link.

http://godfatherpolitics.com/6352/the-dark-knight-rises-is-an-instant-conservative-classic/2/#ixzz22E5C7PIs

What the world is not confronted with, it can’t be taught, and what it is not taught, it will not know. Even the apostle Thomas, he who spent three years at the side of Christ, is recorded as saying that unless he saw the nail marks in Christ’s hands and put his finger where the nails were, and put his hand into Christ’s side, he would not believe that the Lord had risen. If even Thomas the Apostle needed to be confronted with the person of the living Christ in the flesh and blood, how much more must those who have not traveled at Jesus side as Thomas did.

In a world that has buried God beneath its own gods and excluded him from the public sphere, it is up to the public to tell the world that the buried God has rolled back that spherical stone guarding entrance to his tomb. No more can we wait for medieval Irish monks to set forth from the Isle of the Saints, or for St Norbert to apparate in the midst of Times Square converting the masses. We ourselves must be the missionaries of today. I propose a challenge.

Fallen Adam could not reach out and touch God; it was the new Adam, Christ, who finally reached out and touched man, who truly became man and lived among us. He is not content to sit alone in our Church buildings waiting for the masses to come to him, but wishes to venture out into our streets and malls, our offices and sport arenas.

Perhaps on no other day is this fact so explicitly evident as on the Solemnity of Corpus Christi. I have processed around a church in Chicago on that day, I have processed around St Patrick’s Cathedral in downtown New York, and I have processed across town here in homely little Downers Grove, each time following the Blessed Sacrament. People always stare; they can’t help it.

I was touched in a special way this year by the parishioners who had altars set up at their houses along the route where we stopped for Benediction. Jesus is so eager to come into my home and heart, to enter into the very depths of my life, to inebriate every facet of my existence.  He wants to do this for every man and woman on the planet. Yet—he needs me to carry him.

This is the challenge I offer: how are you going to confront the world with the person of Christ this week? Did last Sunday’s solemnity of the Body and Blood of Christ pass you up, or are you passing Christ up? Remember, the world cannot know He whom no one will carry to it.

I was recently in a discussion with a group of friends, and one friend brought up the question of what distinguishes betrothed love from ordinary love. Many of us know the answer without really being able to put it into words. Others might be in for a surprise. Here’s what a little research into JPII’s writings turned up.

“When love between a man and a woman takes its natural course, they give themselves each to the other, become each other’s property. Before their love can take on its definitive form, become ‘betrothed love’, the man and the woman each face the choice of the person on whom to bestow the gift of self. To choose a person is also to opt for ‘betrothed’ love, for the reciprocal gift of self.”

“Property,” “Gift of Self” Now these are interesting ideas. One who loves another with a betrothed love is that person’s property. This also helps to explain why polygamy or multiple relationships is impossible when one’s love is full and complete. How can one be the property of two different people? They can’t. JPII goes on:

“For the choice of a person is a process in which sexual values cannot function as the sole motive, or even—if we analyse this act of will thoroughly—as the primary motive…each chooses the sexual values because they belong to a person, and not the person because of his or her sexual values.”

Hmm…Betrothed love is not necessarily contingent on sexuality at all.  What about the warm emotional fuzzies that are often identified with betrothed love though? Don’t they demand a sexually oriented relationship? Maybe, but if we’re asking this question, we’re already on the wrong track.

“Although the sexual values in the object of choice may disappear, and however they may change, the fundamental value—that of the person—will remain.”

“The love for a person which results from a valid act of choice is concentrated on the value of the person as such and makes us feel emotional love for the person as he or she really is, not for the person of our imagination, but for the real person. We love the person complete with all his or her virtues and faults, and up to a point independently of those virtues and in spite of those faults. The strength of such a love emerges most clearly when the beloved person stumbles, when his or her weaknesses or even sins come into the open. One who truly loves does not then withdraw his love, but loves all the more, loves in full consciousness of the other’s shortcomings and faults, and without in the least approving of them.”

When we come down to the nuts and bolts, Betrothed love is a free choice, a decision of the will to belong exclusively to another person—regardless of feelings. It is a participation in the agape love of God. Now that’s pretty cool. Don’t get me wrong; nothing is bad about emotions and feelings, but let’s face the fact: they don’t define the essence of what betrothed love is.

(Excerpts are taken from John Paul II’s “Love and Responsibility.”)

Desire is typically understood with a rather selfish connotation. When I say, for instance, that I am hungry and want a cheeseburger, I mean that I want something to satisfy a craving of my own. Nothing’s wrong with this. What about, however, when a man or a woman feels a desire for someone of the opposite sex? Doesn’t this reek of utilitarianism and objectifying people? Actually, it doesn’t. Here’s what John Paul II said in support of the role desire plays in love:

“Desire too belongs to the very essence of the love which springs up between man and woman.”

The difference is that when I desire a person, I hopefully desire the good of that person. If I really want someone the way I want a cheeseburger, something is wrong with me, but when I say “All I need is you,” I really mean “All I need is your happiness. Your good is my good; your needs are my needs.”

My Prayer with God

Lord, thank you for making my need you own need. You became man to suffer the punishment for my sin. Teach me to love others with the same desire in my heart that you have when you see me.

Consider sharing this link if you think the world needs to hear more about John Paul II’s Theology of the Body.

This series is based on a systematical reflection of John Paul II’s great masterpiece on Theology of the Body, “Love & Responsibility.” Join us, one sub-heading at a time!