Does sex have an objective standard definition?
Just raising that question causes many people these days to look at you like you have three eyeballs. But how often do people bother to ask themselves such a rudimentary question?
A great saint dared to ask such questions. He also wrote beautifully about the meaning of the conjugal act in many different works of his.
As popular and as well-respected as Pope Saint John Paul II was, I still think the late Holy Father was underappreciated in his day.
He wrote masterful works on the meaning of the human body, as well as the meaning of the conjugal act. Unfortunately, too few people heeded his remarks, as the Sexual Revolution continued toward its destructive course.
The Sexual Revolution sought to redefine sex to be merely a recreational activity between two (or more) consenting individuals. Is this a sufficient meaning to the conjugal act?
POPE SAINT JOHN PAUL II IDENTIFIES AN OBJECTIVE STANDARD FOR SEX
In his papal encyclical, the Polish Pontiff states definitively sex does have an objective standard.
“…[T]he Second Vatican Council clearly affirmed that “when there is a question of harmonizing conjugal love with the responsible transmission of life, the moral aspect of any procedure does not depend solely on sincere intentions or on an evaluation of motives.
“It must be determined by objective standards. These, based on the nature of the human person and his or her acts, preserve the full sense of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love” (#32, emphasis added).
Notice here the distinctions the pope makes. People may have good intentions. However, that does not make every choice of theirs a good moral decision. Here the pope is speaking in the realm of sexual ethics, but this applies to all areas of life.
Individuals may disagree with the objective standard, but that does not render the standard false.
First, Pope Saint John Paul II is not defining something new here. He is simply identifying what is true and knowable as it exists in reality already.
Instead, it means they are not in conformity with the truth. They need to amend their lives to conform to reality. Unless they relent, they will keep running into the Law of Natural Consequences for their actions which do not conform with human nature.
Examples abound, undoubtedly. However, I am thinking here of homosexuals who experience rampant disease as a natural consequence for their unnatural lifestyle. I am also thinking of those using contraception to avoid the procreative power of the conjugal act. Their resulting illnesses and possible sterility as a result of taking the Birth Control Pill or other measures come with the territory.
THE VAST MAJORITY OF PEOPLE IGNORE THE OBJECTIVE TRUTH AND SUBJUGATE THE MEANING OF SEX TO FIT THEIR HARD LIFESTYLES
Let’s face it, though. Not too many people these days want to conform their lives to the truth.
The popular mode of living one’s life these days is to define for one’s self one’s reality.
Pope John Paul the Great is well-aware of this flawed way of thinking. That is why he stresses that the objective meaning of the conjugal act is knowable by all. It is knowable by means of the Natural Law.
The pope from Poland places the meaning of the conjugal act within our human nature. Thus, every person by means of their human reason can reach this same conclusion as to the true meaning of the conjugal act. Thus, they can know homosexual acts and contraceptive sex do not conform to their human nature.
ANTICIPATING OBJECTIONS
I imagine some reading this will be shaking their heads. “Who is this guy to decide for me what the purpose of my sexual activity is?
“He may have worn a pointy hat in the past, but that doesn’t make him my lord or master. I can decide for myself with whom and how I engage in my sex, thank you very much.”
If this is your reaction, then consider two things.
First, Pope Saint John Paul II is not defining something new here. He is simply identifying what is true and knowable as it exists in reality already.
The pope did not define the meaning of sex. Rather, he is pointing it out to help others to identify it.
Since it is something we can all reason to, this is anything but his invention.
Second, consider what happens to those who do not live in conformity with the truth of the conjugal act. What happens to those who choose a different path with their sexual activity?
Sure, in the short term they may think they are happier. Sexual activity is pleasureful and so getting a lot of it, especially in a short amount of time, feels good physically.
However, homosexual sex leaves its participants usually diseased. Contraceptive sex also leads to sexually transmitted diseases, on top of broken hearts.
Does fornication fulfill? Does promiscuity lead to lifelong joy? Or does such a lifestyle lead to ruin—not only physically, but emotionally and spiritually?
If you deny a hard lifestyle results from wandering from the objective meaning of the conjugal act, then you are not being honest with yourself.
Or maybe you are willing to agree that contraceptive sex, homosexuality, and so forth do lead to hard lifestyles. Perhaps then you can admit that maybe, just maybe, Pope Saint John Paul II had a point.
Will you heed his words this time around?
YOUR TURN
What do you make of Pope Saint John Paul II’s identification of the objective standard definition of sex?
Do you think he is spot on, or do you think sex still has subjective meaning?
Please share your thoughts below.
