Sex Education: The Catholic Scene (chapters 4 & 5) by Margaret Whitehead

The opening sentence of Chapter Four states that this is to be a candid discussion "concerning the lifestyle or vocation of various persons or groups and about some of the sexual issues that face them directly". But "lifestyle" and "vocation" are not synonyms. Lifestyle refers to a pattern of life chosen by an individual for personal reasons; whereas, vocation means a calling to a life's work, and in a religious sense, a way of life chosen in response to a call by God or to carry out His plan. To use these terms interchangeably is confusing, and tends to secularize the religious connotations of "vocation" and to diminish its meaning.

The first paragraph states that the material in this section is meant for adults. By the last sentence of the same paragraph, however, it is recommended that the content "also should be incorporated into sexuality education as age, maturity, and needs dictate". It seems that content intended for adults may be taught to children if the teacher believes it appropriate.

This is the longest chapter in Human Sexuality and it deals with some of the important moral issues of our day and, in some ways, it does so quite well. Some of the most effective teaching and quotations from Church documents are is given in this chapter. The discussion of "Conjugal Love and Responsible Parenthood" goes into some detail and is generally good. However, it lacks a discussion of the supernatural goals of the married couple, overemphasizes "planned" children, and in some places, contains contradictory and weak statements. For example, a statement (on page 45) that "the Church has recognized that there are certain times in a married couple's life when sexual intimacy may be desirablewhen there are sound reasons to forego pregnancy." But by the end of this paragraph, reasons are being given to "forego the procreative dimension of sexual intercourse"-which is not the same thing, since every act of sexual intercourse must be open to life, the procreative dimension.

Recommendations for a couple experiencing marital difficulties are all secular (p. 43): counseling, talking to other couples and joining marriage-enrichment programs. Recourse to prayer, spiritual direction and the sacraments are not mentioned.57

At the end of the discussion of responsible parenthood, hope is expressed that "the logic of respecting one's natural rhythms expressed here is compelling". Yet the authors apparently assume that the teaching will not actually be so "compelling" after all, and feel constrained to issue this caveat:

Also, on page 48: "It is our earnest belief that God's Spirit is working through the magisterium, the authoritative teachers in the Church, in developing this doctrine". However, the authors evidently assume that couples will not accept the Church's teaching on contraception, and seem almost to absolve in advance those who reject magisterial teaching:

As Saint Paul says, "If a bugle's sound is uncertain, who will get ready for battle?" (I Cor. 14:8).

Single Life, Homosexuality
The next section of this chapter deals with sexuality and the single life. It is a long complaint about the difficulty of being both single and chaste and suggests that single people feel overburdened by the Church. Jesus is proposed as a model for them but only because he was single. He is not presented as the source of grace and strength for those striving to be virtuous.

Then follows a discussion of cohabitation and all the reasons given against it are practical (p. 53). No sin seems to be involved and no concern for the spiritual health or salvation of the singles is expressed. At the end of this section (p. 54), the bishops "gently remind them [single people] that chastity is a virtue that demands fidelity, a sexually appropriate response from each person" and request diocesan leaders and religious educators "to be more attuned to the presence, needs, and talents of all single people in the local parish and church community". The sense of this section is that single people need mainly social, not spiritual, support from the Church. Sanctification and salvation are apparently not very significant -- perhaps they are not considered "relational" enough.

In the next section, on homosexuality, Christians are asked to control their own fears about homosexuality because homosexuals have so much trouble with "self-acceptance". The Church's teaching that homosexual activity as opposed to homosexual orientation "is morally wrong" is given but the parallel teaching that homosexual orientation is "intrinsically disordered" is not.58 In fact, there remains a question about exactly what is meant by "homosexual orientation". Is this "orientation" revealed in sexual fantasies? If so, is sexual fantasizing itself (whether heterosexual or homosexual) sinful? No guidance is given on how to deal with sexual fantasies in the Guidelines.59

The language here, as throughout the document, is weak and its meaning seems deliberately obscure, e.g.: "Therefore homosexual genital activity is considered immoral" (p. 55, emphasis added); "the distinction between being homosexual and doing genital actions, while not always clear and convincing, is a helpful and important one" (p. 56, emphasis added).

"Modeling Homosexuality"
The Guidelines recommend that attitudes toward homosexuality be taught in the classroom mainly through "modeling and teaching respect for every human person regardless of sexual orientation" (pp. 56-58). But there are alarmingly serious problems with using "modeling" as a teaching technique in this area. In the public schools it has meant bringing HIV-positive homosexuals into the classroom to discuss their lifestyles and illness; setting up special classes and counselors for adolescents who think they may be homosexuals and teaching that homosexuality is a normal option for everyone based on the view that all sexual lifestyles are normal and moral.

There is considerable debate in scientific circles about whether homosexuality is inherited or learned. The latest, highly publicized research done with identical twins by Michael Bailey and Richard Pillard indicates a possible genetic predisposition toward homosexuality but also brings out the importance of environmental factors, "in half the cases of male identical twins of whom one was homosexual, the other was not; since identical twins have identical genetic make-up, this homosexuality must be the result of environmental factors".60 It is certainly not the role of the Catholic school to provide environmental factors that might dispose young people toward the homosexual lifestyle and yet, modeling homosexual lifestyles could have this effect.

A distinction must also be made between teaching and counseling. Counseling involves advice and help given to individuals who have problems. Teaching is designed to give students the truth and to motivate them to the good in the hope that they will be able to avoid problems. This cannot happen if teachers are presenting a disordered lifestyle as a positive alternative. Who would bring an active drug pusher or user into the classroom to discuss his lifestyle? In drug prevention programs, it has been found that even bringing former drug users into a classroom has been counterproductive:

Celibacy
The section on "Vowed or Professed Celibacy" -- emphasizes the loneliness and difficulty of celibate life. By implication, it makes marital intimacy the standard of the fulfilled Christian life, instead of union with Christ, and under-emphasizes the spiritual meaning of vowed celibacy. It fails to mention several important aspects of the priesthood; that a priest gives both love and sacramental life to his spiritual children; that he is a sign of the life to come where "they neither marry nor are given in marriage but are like angels in heaven" (Mk 12:25); that he is an alter Christus, who imitates the celibacy of Jesus and symbolizes His saving priesthood.

Consecrated religious women and men also have a special vocation of spiritual motherhood and fatherhood that contributes to building a spiritual family -- a community of love and life. The witness of celibate men and women to the importance of the sense of the spiritual is needed today more than ever. People need to be reminded "do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell" (Mt. 10:28).

This section on vowed celibacy is extremely weak and unconvincing, and does not follow EGHL #56, which emphasizes the primacy of the vocation to consecrated virginity for the sake of God's Kingdom. Instead of giving the force of Jesus' teaching about the importance of celibacy as a sign of the life to come [cf. Mk. 12:35] -- a teaching supported by many centuries of Catholic tradition -- the Guidelines merely state that "John Paul II suggests that virginity or celibacy, accepted for the sake of the kingdom, serves as a complement to the vocation of marriage" (p. 58; emphasis added).

Adolescence
The Guidelines next focus on the challenge of adolescence. Although we are urged "to insist on sexual abstinence and preparation for marital responsibility for adolescents" (p. 61), most of the discussion concerns a very subjective psychological development rather than moral or spiritual development:

There is far more concern, in this section, about "bruis[ing] terribly the person's self-esteem and caus[ing] serious psychological damage", than there is about the spiritual damage, anguish or losses resulting from involvement in non-marital sexual intimacy (pp. 58-62). The spiritual and moral gains of sexual continence, of the virtue of Chastity, are virtually ignored.

At the conclusion of this section, we find the assurance that "God understands better than any human being the difficulties and powerful urges with which [young people] are dealing.... Through prayer, discipline, and the grace of the sacraments, every person can overcome the temptation to sin. It is important to keep mistakes in perspective" (p. 61). This statement is true, of course; however, in this context it is a non sequitur, for no real concept of sin had been introduced in the preceding discussion. The message it conveys seems more to reduce any possible guilt ("psychological damage") that the adolescent may experience than to inspire him to greater virtue.

"Overarching" Issues: AIDS, Abortion, Abuse
The concluding section of the Chapter focuses on "A few Overarching Issues" including Masturbation, Art vs. Pornography, HIV/AIDS Crisis, and Sexual Abuse and Dysfunction. Abortion, which is mentioned a few times in passing in the Human Sexuality Guidelines, is evidently not considered important enough to be treated as an "overarching" sexually-related issue. Neither is divorce and its attendant ills, nor the widespread implementation of Kinseyan-type sex education programs and services in almost all public schools. This last is a significant issue for many parents and teachers. But instead of taking this problem seriously, this document seem tacitly to support these public school programs with few modifications.

Masturbation is reported to be immoral in the "Catholic tradition", but the main approach recommended is to find the underlying causes and "not reduce the self-esteem" of the one who engages in this practice. While these recommendations may be unexceptionable in themselves, they do not help the young person achieve holiness as well as wholeness (as in Chapter Two, "Sexuality and the Christian Life, A Christian Calling to Wholeness and Holiness"). Young people have to be taught that masturbation is seriously immoral and spiritually harmful so that they will be motivated to end this behavior with the help of prayer and the sacraments and the works of justice and charity recommended at the end of this section. The Guidelines offer no help in teaching this.

The section on "Art vs. Pornography" makes unremarkable and bland statements about the subject; but it does not begin to probe the seriousness of the problem, as recently expressed by Cardinal Roger Mahony, Archbishop of Los Angeles, who called for a new family film code

The section on HIV/AIDS is poorly focused and unhelpful. The emphasis is entirely on compassion and care for those who have the disease. AIDS is a terrible disease, of course, and people who have contracted it certainly need care, both spiritual and physical. But it, like most sexually transmitted diseases, is largely preventable. It is caused in the overwhelming majority of cases by promiscuous, mainly homosexual sex. The second largest category of AIDS sufferers consists of drug abusers. The Catholic teachings on pre-marital chastity and marital fidelity do indeed provide "the best means of avoiding AIDS" (p. 65) and of avoiding the spiritual and physical disasters which result from these promiscuous lifestyles. The emphasis in this section needs to be on the need for prevention of the behavioral aberrations involved in the spread of this disease -- especially in education for the young.

The section on sexual abuse and dysfunction, presents an overview of some of these problems and contexts in which they might occur. While the text states that there is "no justification, moral or otherwise", for sex abuse of any kind (p. 66), the authors make a point of expressing concern for the abuser:

It is an entirely unwarranted assumption that all abusers are "victims." If applied a priori to all abusers, this would involve a practical denial of free will.

[Editor's Note -- The moral relativism implicit in this section is striking. By designating abusers equally as victims with those whom they abuse, and suggesting that, as victims, abusers are entitled to "respect" and compassionate care identical with that accorded their victims, the authors of the Guidelines dangerously relativize the objective sin of the abuser against the person of the abused. While it is true that the "needs" of the abuser "must be met", those needs are hardly to be determined by the abuser, as this statement implies; but rather by confronting the truth of his destructive action, by conversion, repentance and reparation. In fact, by committing the sin of sexually abusing another person, the abuser willfully compromises his own "dignity", at the very least, as well as degrading the person of his victim in the most profound way. Notwithstanding the innate dignity and worth of all persons, and the obligation of Christians to "love the sinner", it is also an obligation to "hate the sin" -- and love of the sinner implicitly contains a desire to see the restoration of the human dignity of the sinner, which can only be accomplished through his own acknowledgement of the sin (conviction), conversion, and repentance. It seems obvious that the seriously damaged "dignity" of the sinner must be restored in this way before it can be fully "respected".]

Chapter 5 -- Education in Human Sexuality
Family, School, Church, and Society in Partnership

This chapter recites Church teaching concerning the primary role of the parents in the education of their children, and includes many quotes from magisterial documents. However, as we have seen elsewhere, although the parental role is acknowledged in principle it is undermined in practice by the emphasis on the role of professional educators and the community.

After quoting Vatican II on the "long-standing Catholic belief that since parents have conferred life on their children they 'have the original, primary and inalienable right to educate them'", the text then subsumes the parents' rights under the rights of the child: "the underlying basis for the parental obligation to educate their children is the absolute right of every child to 'life, to bodily integrity, and to the means which are suitable for the development of life'" (p. 70; emphasis added).

Catholic teaching is distorted here. The child is entrusted to the parents who have "conferred life" on him -- not to the community. The community's role is secondary and meant to be supportive of the parents. The above quotation from John Paul II (Familiaris Consortio, #40) is incomplete as given, omitting important comments of the pope that strengthen parental authority and delineate the relationship between parents and educators. The next sentence says,

A new spin is also given to the teaching of Vatican II, repeated in Educational Guidance in Human Love (EGHL) #15, that "the preferential place for education of young people in chastity" is the home. In this Human Sexuality document, "young people" has been changed to "especially the very young", (p. 3 & p 79) or "young children" (p. 71).

The parents' role is devalued in a variety of other ways in this chapter. On page 72, the "dark side" of family life is stressed, along with the observation that "real families make mistakes". Significantly, no mention is made of possible mistakes by "real" educators. On pages 73 and 74, parents are described as feeling "incapable of serving as sexuality educators for their own children, particularly in content areas that require a more sophisticated understanding of biology and the human sciences". On page 74, they are also described as having "insecurities and personal problems" that prevent them from teaching their own children. On page 80, parents are again admonished not to object to sex education programs or to "overstate their personal objections". Experts, apparently, always know better what is needed for children than parents.

After introducing some general purposes of Catholic sex education (pp. 74, 75), the text then delineates the "ultimate objective" of sex education. The "ultimate objective of education in human sexuality" is stated to be "the personal realization of total sexual identity and the affective maturation of the learner" (p. 75, emphasis added). This is said to include not only information, but also:

This explanation involves an inflation of the actual meaning of the terms sexual identity and affective maturation. A similar problem occurred earlier in the text with the definitions of sex and sexuality and procreation. Here sexual identity means gender and affective maturation means emotional growth. It is very ambiguous and confusing to claim that these terms could possibly include the total Catholic vision of human sexuality. To pretend this is so diminishes the understanding and the vision of what sexuality means in Catholic belief and practice. It is an attempt to put a supernatural world inside the limited natural world of emotions and sex; it does not even clearly include the ideas of marriage and children. This "ultimate objective of education in human sexuality" simply does not convey the proper role of human sexuality in the divine scheme, which includes sanctification and clear vocational purposes for this life and even a plan for the next life that does not involve sexual activity (cf., Luke 20:34-36).

The last section of Chapter Five, dealing with teacher education, stresses secular training and subjective qualifications: "Personal integrity or authenticity is the ultimate characteristic of the good teacher" (p. 82). There are only a few fleeting references to teachers as "persons of faith", with "fidelity to the Church's teachings" who make choices "in the light of church teaching", in the two and a half pages of recommendations.

In this section, a qualified reference to "respect[ing] the privacy of the learner" occurs. This privacy has nothing to do with the teacher respecting the "natural sense of decency" of the child (EGHL #72) by avoiding the "intimate aspects [of sex education], whether biological or affective" (EGHL #58). It simply refers to respecting the "learner's personal sharing" with the teacher. One more reference to privacy occurs in the Appendix to the Guidelines:

The Guidelines assume that early adolescence begins at nine years of age. At this stage, as well as most other stages of life, the maturity levels of the children in a classroom will differ (not "may differ") -- and it really is not possible for a teacher to adjust a general instruction program to each child in the classroom. In fact, this directive seems to undermine the whole rationale for sex education in a classroom at these early ages.

These two references to privacy in the Guidelines contrast strongly with EGHL, which insists repeatedly upon the need for private, individual instruction for all students, for example, #48, 58, 71, 72, 90, 109. In the Human Sexuality Guidelines the emphasis is always on giving information and being candid, with little regard for the privacy, modesty and sensitivity of the students. In contrast to the Holy See's documents, little concern about possible trauma or loss of innocence is apparent in the Guidelines.

57. This is also an omission in the "Third Consultation Draft" of the family pastoral, "Follow the Way of Love." [Ed.]
58. Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics, Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 1975, #8: "This judgment of Scripture does not of course permit us to conclude that all those who suffer from this anomaly are personally responsible for it, but it does attest to the fact that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered and can in no case be approved of."
59. Cline, Victor B., Ph.D., Professor of Psychology, University of Utah, and an expert in treating sexual addictions had the following to say in a letter to Mrs. Yvonne Mortensen, Vancouver, Washington:

60. National Review, Feb. 3, 1992, "What is Normal?," by Steven Goldberg, pp. 36-39.
61. Drug Prevention Curricula, A Guide to Selection and Implementation, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education, 1988.
62. Arlington Catholic Herald, "Los Angeles Cardinal Calls for New Movie Code", February 13, 1992, p. 36.

PERMISSION GUIDELINES

All material on this web site is copyrighted and may not be copied or reproduced without prior written permission from Women for Faith & Family,except as specified below.

Personal use
Permission is granted to download and/or print out articles for personal use only.

Quotations
Brief quotations (ca 500 words) may be made from the material on this site, in accordance with the “fair use” provisions of copyright law, without prior permission. For these quotations proper attribution must be made of author and WFF + URL (i.e., “Women for Faith & Family – www.wf-f.org.)

Attribution
Generally, all signed articles or graphics must also have the permission of the author. If a text does not have an author byline, Women for Faith & Family should be listed as the author. For example: Women for Faith & Family (St Louis: Women for Faith & Family, 2005 + URL)

Link to Women for Faith & Family web site.
Other web sites are welcome to establish links to www.wf-f.org or to individual pages within our site.

Back to top -- Home
Women for Faith & Family
PO Box 300411
St. Louis, MO 63130

314-863-8385 Phone -- 314-863-5858 Fax -- Email