Adam’s Original Solitude and Original Union with Eve

It is not good that man should be alone; I will make him a helper to fit him.      Gen. 2:18

The most startling implication of this Scripture above is that creation, and even God Himself, is not enough for Adam.  Why is this?  We conclude with St. John Paul II in his magisterial Theology of the Body (TOB) that this original solitude was necessary for Adam to be alone so that eventually he would know what it means to be in union, and negatively, the implications of rebellion.  Originally he was a “partner” with the Absolute, but “alone” before Eve. Adam was a body among bodies, but distinguished by his imago dei.  His original solitude provided the context to contemplate death and immortality since he had been given the command about the two trees.

What Adam was before Eve is hard to say, but was not “male” as we know it, and the text does not suggest he was androgynous.  The imagery of the rib may refer back to the Sumerian Ninti, goddess of life, whose cuneiform sign is used for both “rib” and “life.”  If so, she is Adam’s “life.”  His original solitude was the foundation for relationship which here is expressed in his “original” emotional delight when he sees Eve.  Even is created to be a “helper” to Adam; the Hebrew word here does not imply “servant,” for the word is often used of God as our “help.”  Rather, it implies that it is through relationship, not solitude, that the imago dei is realized.

As we have said previously, the body is an aspect of the imago dei.  The conjugal act of union makes them “one flesh” where man and woman rediscover each time, in a special way, the mystery of creation.  Sex expresses an ever new surpassing of the limit of solitude.  “Original nakedness” suggests a direct and spontaneous discovery through the senses of the naked body.  It consists of a reciprocal vision, a gazing at each other from the inside out and the outside in.  Adam and Eve’s naked exterior corresponded to their naked interior, a simple and pure display of the imago dei in all of its fullness. To be truly naked is to be innocent of the fact.  This is the “spousal meaning” of the body.

The meaning of the sex act is in the creative donation, a self-gifting to one another, that opens before both the mystery of creation without shame.  It is therefore “beatific,” the power to express love, the love in which the human person becomes a gift.  Being “beatific, it is not unrelated to the beatific vision of God.  It is deeply spiritual and not merely physical, a union of both.  To be one flesh is to possess knowledge, a knowledge that takes them further into creation’s mysteries.  This knowledge extends to continuing God’s creation in pro-creation.  It is from this foundational text that Jesus Himself (Matt. 19:3-8), and His Church, teaches that marriage can only be between a man and a woman, that it is both unitive and creative, and is complimentary.  Moreover, this text is essential for understanding the union of the Incarnate Christ with His Bride, the Church (Eph. 5:21-33).

One last note on original nakedness.  Ephrem the Syrian writes,

They were not ashamed because the glory with which they were clothed.  It was when this glory was stripped from them after they had transgressed the commandment that they were ashamed because they were naked

The loss of original glory and the clothing motif becomes, as we shall see, essential salvation language throughout Scripture (so Chrysostom in ACCS).

Adam’s original solitude and God’s provision of Eve for him reveal God’s generosity.  God who is all in all and fills everything shares Adam with Eve and Eve with Adam.  God was “not enough” for Adam to be complete; God made it so!  The profound implication of this is Adam would love God through Eve, and Eve would love God through Adam, and by extension, the Church as Bride of Christ loving the Father through the Son, the Church’s Spouse. This reality is the foundation of Marriage as Sacrament, and what JP II Names, the Primordial Sacrament.”

Takeaway: Much of this post is taken straight out of JP II’s Theology of the Body.  Although he modestly refers to it as an “adequate” anthropology (in contrast to modern secular anthropologies that are decidedly inadequate), it is the most complete and profound anthropology the Church has given us.

Question: If you are married, have you every thought of your marriage in light of the Theology of the Body described here?   Do you feel challenged?  Explain.

Resources:

John Paul II, Man and Woman He Created Them: A Theology of the Body (Pauline Books and Media, 2006).

Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture (ACCS).