There always seems to be a great deal of confusion surrounding John Paul II's explanation of "Original Nakedness" (the ability of Adam and Eve to see one another as pure gift before the Fall) and his discussion of shame after the Fall. In our American minds, we tend to hear, "shame" and think of guilt, embarrassment over something bad or a hiding in fear. So, consequently, we hear people infer that a truly redeemed person should be able to embrace nakedness. Recently, I heard someone remark that the problem comes into play when God asks, "Who told you that you were naked?".
Yet the issue when God asked Adam and Eve this question wasn't the fact that they knew they were naked ... it was the fact that distrust, fear and a grasping for self-fulfillment had entered into the logic of the gift. When sin entered the picture, the reverence for the other that had existed from the beginning had to be lived in a new way. And this is shame.
Shame, then, is good. No, it's not the perfect, all-beautiful plan that God had for us from the beginning. But it is a way protecting the spousal meaning of the body, of recognizing our call to greatness. Shame serves two purposes -- to protect oneself from being used by another, and to inspire love.
Perhaps "modesty" is a term that we can relate to a bit more easily than "shame." Either way, we have to see that shame is not some sort of evil. It's actually a good. And it's meant to protect a good.
If you have your doubts, check out Genesis 3:21 -- "And the Lord God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skins, and clothed them."
Yes, God gave Adam and Eve clothes. He provided for them and protected them in a new way in the face of sin. He invited them to cover themselves not out of fear or embarrassment, but out of love.
No comments:
Post a Comment