For Liberareggio.org
The "hot" deeds of our President Council are, as you know, go back to the forefront of media pillory. Regularly used to put up with such talk and fighting political, ideological and erotic, now can not do even that much to be indignant. But the topic I wanted to focus on this intervention does not affect the most sordid details of how and how often B. has used with the various Ruby "heartthrob." What I wish to analyze is the unbearable hypocrisy and bigotry of those many moralizing that if only they had a quarter of money, power and privileges enjoyed by B. who knows what to combine.
be clear: I do not mean in any way justify the actions of a seventy-five (for the position from which he covered is unjustifiable, to say the least), most likely, if done with the minors, but rather would be useful to begin to scratch the unbearable guillotine hanging over sexuality confenzionataci from that mix of bigotry, priestcraft, and pretended respectability that much damage continues to bring to our civilization (and the recent sentencing of sex education from the Pope, completely blind to a very serious problem called AIDS, says a lot about it).
But what is really for us this blessed (or cursed) sexuality? What are the historical roots that have brought us the current state of affairs, that of repression, which inevitably carry with them transgressions, excesses, neuroses and diseases? Why can not we finally break free from the clutches of clerical condemnation of responsible sexuality, in my opinion, just the same problems that would solve rejecting them, cutting away as if nothing had happened? Groped for responding to such questions will suggest some excerpts of an essay entitled "The rejection of pleasure," one of the greatest historians of the Middle Ages, Jacques Le Goff.
To review the common late antiquity marks a fundamental shift in the conception and practice of sexuality in the West. While in ancient greek-latin sexuality and carnal pleasure were considered positive values \u200b\u200band everywhere reigned great sexual freedom, we then take over a general condemnation of sexuality and regulation of the manner of its exercise. Leading factor in this reversal is Christianity.
[...] With the advent of Christianity, one of the first new feature is the link between the flesh and sin. Not that the term "carnal sin" is frequently in the Middle Ages, but it is already visible during the process that will lead the entire Middle Ages, by a shift in meaning, to use the supreme authority of the Bible, to justify the repression of the majority part of sexual practices. The biblical heritage had left the Christian doctrine a heavy baggage of sexual repression. The Old Testament, often lenient in this regard had focused the repression of sexuality in the ritual prohibitions listed in Leviticus (15:18). In the New Testament, the Gospels are very discreet about sexuality. They praised the marriage, provided that it is monogamous and indissoluble. The meat is not treated as sinful sexual activity: it basically means only, as the Gospel of John, the human nature. For Paul, the call to virginity and continence is based on respect for the human body. In the Middle Ages, however, the demonization of the flesh and body, similar to places of depravity, the center of the production of sin, will remove all dignity to the body.
[...] Between the time of the Gospels and the triumph of Christianity (fourth century), two series of events to ensure the success of the new sexual ethics: on the theoretical level, the dissemination of new concepts of flesh, fornication, lust, and the sexualization of original sin on a practical level, the appearance of a virginal status among Christians and the realization of the ideal of chastity in monasticism. Regarding the concept of meat is the main opposition nell'inasprimento of flesh / spirit, which leads to the concept of the flesh is weak, corruptible, and significance of flesh to that of sex.
But more important is the long evolution will lead to better assimilate the original sin in carnal sin. In Genesis, the original sin is a sin of the spirit, which is to conceive the desire of knowledge and disobey God Clement of Alexandria is the first to approach the original sin in the sexual act, but it was Augustine to definitively tie sin original sexuality, through lust. From the sons of Adam and Eve, original sin is transmitted to humans through sexual intercourse. This concept will become a general during the twelfth century: the vulgarization made by the majority of the preachers, confessors and moral treatises of the authors, this shift will be up to the assimilation of sin originale al peccato carnale. L'umanità è stata generata nella colpa, insita in ogni accoppiamento a causa della concupiscenza che inevitabilmente vi si manifesta.
[…] La nuova etica sessuale è, in definitiva, solo la forma più diffusa e spettacolare di un tema storico che il cristianesimo ha ripreso per farlo pesare sull’Occidente: il rifiuto del piacere. […] Il Medioevo (dobbiamo forse vedervi un segno di ‘imbarbarimento’?) ha sempre più nella mira i peccati della carne, li stringe in una rete sempre più fitta di definizioni, divieti e sanzioni. Per correggerli, alcuni esponenti della Chiesa redigono i penitenziali, elenchi di peccati e penitenze in cui aleggia lo spirito barbarian codes. The sins of the flesh will take the place of much larger, reflecting the ideals of the militants and the ghosts of the monastery. Contempt of the world, humiliation of the flesh: the monastic model has weighed very strongly on the customs and mentality of the West.
[...] Even in the realm of sexuality is an obvious manifestation - at least in the eyes of the Church - a social and cultural separation between clergy and laity (including nobility) on one hand, and between the two orders of clerics and knights and that of workers - especially farmers - on the other. The contempt for the peasants [who the legitimate domain "cloaked" by the promise of spiritual salvation] is therefore also food in sex. There are two beliefs that will spread throughout the Middle Ages. First, the illness and obsessive guilt, sickness and worry (as it will plague the mid-fourteenth century), leprosy, has its origin in the sexual offender. And then there's this fixation of excessive sexual shamelessness in the world of illitterati, the poor, the peasants. It is no coincidence that the servitude expresses the consequences of original sin in medieval Christian society. More than any other meat slaves, servants also deserve to be slaves of the lords. What better barrier could be established between clergy and laity of that of sexuality? To the lay marriage and lust, the clergy, virginity, celibacy and continence. A wall separates the purity from impurity. In a similar strain, the party dominated society is presented as part of the weak, apathetic, without reason, but also without a will. In that world of warriors, peasants are almost animals, toys at the mercy of evil desires.
0 comments:
Post a Comment