{"id":26068,"date":"2010-12-22T09:23:19","date_gmt":"2010-12-22T13:23:19","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/2010\/12\/dont-trivialize-sexuality-vati\/"},"modified":"2010-12-22T09:23:19","modified_gmt":"2010-12-22T13:23:19","slug":"dont-trivialize-sexuality-vati","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/2010\/12\/dont-trivialize-sexuality-vati\/","title":{"rendered":"Don’t trivialize sexuality Vatican urges"},"content":{"rendered":"


\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n<\/m:narylim><\/m:intlim>
\n<\/m:wrapindent><\/p>\n

Note of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the
\nFaith<\/span><\/p>\n

On the trivilization of sexuality regarding<\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

certain interpretations of Light of the World<\/i><\/span><\/b><\/p>\n

Following the
\npublication of the interview-book Light of the World<\/i> by Benedict XVI, a
\nnumber of erroneous interpretations have emerged which have caused confusion
\nconcerning the position of the Catholic Church regarding certain questions of
\nsexual morality. The thought of the Pope has been repeatedly manipulated for
\nends and interests which are entirely foreign to the meaning of his words – a
\nmeaning which is evident to anyone who reads the entire chapters in which human
\nsexuality is treated. The intention of the Holy Father is clear: to rediscover
\nthe beauty of the divine gift of human sexuality and, in this way, to avoid the
\ncheapening of sexuality which is common today.<\/span><\/p>\n

Some interpretations have
\npresented the words of the Pope as a contradiction of the traditional moral
\nteaching of the Church. This hypothesis has been welcomed by some as a positive
\nchange and lamented by others as a cause of concern – as if his statements
\nrepresented a break with the doctrine concerning contraception and with the
\nChurch’s stance in the fight against AIDS. In reality, the words of the Pope –
\nwhich specifically concern a gravely disordered type of human behaviour, namely
\nprostitution (cf. Light of the World<\/i>, pp. 117-119) – do not signify a
\nchange in Catholic moral teaching or in the pastoral practice of the Church.<\/span><\/p>\n


\n<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/m:defjc><\/m:rmargin><\/m:lmargin><\/m:dispdef><\/m:smallfrac><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

As
\nis clear from an attentive reading of the pages in question, the Holy Father
\nwas talking neither about conjugal morality nor about the moral norm concerning
\ncontraception. This norm belongs to the tradition of the Church and was
\nsummarized succinctly by Pope Paul VI in paragraph 14 of his Encyclical Letter Humanae
\nvitae<\/i>, when he wrote that “also to be excluded is any action which either
\nbefore, at the moment of, or after sexual intercourse, is specifically intended
\nto prevent procreation–whether as an end or as a means.” The idea that anyone
\ncould deduce from the words of Benedict XVI that it is somehow legitimate, in
\ncertain situations, to use condoms to avoid an unwanted pregnancy is completely
\narbitrary and is in no way justified either by his words or in his thought. On
\nthis issue the Pope proposes instead – and also calls the pastors of the Church
\nto propose more often and more effectively (cf. Light of the World<\/i>, p.
\n147) – humanly and ethically acceptable ways of behaving which respect the
\ninseparable connection between the unitive and procreative meaning of every
\nconjugal act, through the possible use of natural family planning in view of
\nresponsible procreation.<\/span><\/p>\n

On the pages in question, the Holy Father refers to
\nthe completely different case of prostitution, a type of behaviour which
\nChristian morality has always considered gravely immoral (cf. Vatican II,
\nPastoral Constitution Gaudium et spes<\/i>, n. 27; Catechism of the Catholic
\nChurch<\/i>, n. 2355). The response of the entire Christian tradition – and indeed
\nnot only of the Christian tradition – to the practice of prostitution can be
\nsummed up in the words of St. Paul: “Flee from fornication” (1 Cor 6:18). The practice
\nof prostitution should be shunned, and it is the duty of the agencies of the
\nChurch, of civil society and of the State to do all they can to liberate those
\ninvolved from this practice.<\/span><\/p>\n

In this regard, it must be noted that the
\nsituation created by the spread of AIDS in many areas of the world has made the
\nproblem of prostitution even more serious. Those who know themselves to be
\ninfected with HIV and who therefore run the risk of infecting others, apart
\nfrom committing a sin against the sixth commandment are also committing a sin
\nagainst the fifth commandment – because they are consciously putting the lives
\nof others at risk through behaviour which has repercussions on public health.
\nIn this situation, the Holy Father clearly affirms that the provision of
\ncondoms does not constitute “the real or moral solution” to the problem of AIDS
\nand also that “the sheer fixation on the condom implies a banalization of
\nsexuality” in that it refuses to address the mistaken human behaviour which is
\nthe root cause of the spread of the virus. In this context, however, it cannot
\nbe denied that anyone who uses a condom in order to diminish the risk posed to
\nanother person is intending to reduce the evil connected with his or her
\nimmoral activity. In this sense the Holy Father points out that the use of a
\ncondom “with the intention of reducing the risk of infection, can be a first
\nstep in a movement towards a different way, a more human way, of living
\nsexuality.” This affirmation is clearly compatible with the Holy Father’s
\nprevious statement that this is “not really the way to deal with the evil of
\nHIV infection.”<\/span><\/p>\n

Some commentators have interpreted the words of Benedict XVI
\naccording to the so-called theory of the “lesser evil”. This theory is,
\nhowever, susceptible to proportionalistic misinterpretation (cf. John Paul II,
\nEncyclical Letter Veritatis splendor<\/i>, n. 75-77). An action which is
\nobjectively evil, even if a lesser evil, can never be licitly willed. The Holy
\nFather did not say – as some people have claimed – that prostitution with the
\nuse of a condom can be chosen as a lesser evil. The Church teaches that
\nprostitution is immoral and should be shunned. However, those involved in
\nprostitution who are HIV positive and who seek to diminish the risk of
\ncontagion by the use of a condom may be taking the first step in respecting the
\nlife of another – even if the evil of prostitution remains in all its gravity.
\nThis understanding is in full conformity with the moral theological tradition
\nof the Church.<\/span><\/p>\n

In conclusion, in the battle against AIDS, the Catholic faithful
\nand the agencies of the Catholic Church should be close to those affected,
\nshould care for the sick and should encourage all people to live abstinence
\nbefore and fidelity within marriage. In this regard it is also important to
\ncondemn any behaviour which cheapens sexuality because, as the Pope says, such
\nbehaviour is the reason why so many people no longer see in sexuality an
\nexpression of their love: “This is why the fight against the banalization of
\nsexuality is also part of the struggle to ensure that sexuality is treated as a
\npositive value and to enable it to have a positive effect on the whole of man’s
\nbeing” (Light of the World<\/i>, p. 119).<\/span>
\n<\/m:brkbinsub><\/m:mathpr><\/w:worddocument><\/xml><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Note of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith On the trivilization of sexuality regarding certain interpretations of Light of the World Following the publication of the interview-book Light of the World by Benedict XVI, a number of erroneous interpretations have emerged which have caused confusion concerning the position of the Catholic Church regarding … Continue reading Don’t trivialize sexuality Vatican urges<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[7,6],"tags":[2335,2577,1703,1704],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/26068"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=26068"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/26068\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=26068"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=26068"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/communio.stblogs.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=26068"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}