Opinions

Op-ed: Pope shows us "more real" world

In print | March 26, 2009

The Phoenix’s March 18 editorial on Benedict XXI’s in-flight response at an impromptu press question (“The Pope courts a contraception controversy”) was fairly focused and touched upon the underlying question that is almost never raised. The use of condoms as that default against AIDS generally avoids the (newly resurrected) “800lb gorilla in the room”: the whole topic of sex itself.

Responding with counter-studies that show improvement in AIDS rates where sex is put into the context of natural law just produces another “survey debate” and surrenders the option of suggesting that pure science might not be the only foundation for right reasoning in this controversial argument.

It is not news to The Phoenix that the Church has not come along for the ride as Western civilization sets sail for a brave new world where sex has little or nothing in particular to do with love, marriage or procreation. In handing on the eloquence of Genesis received from the faith of Israel, the Church bought — hook, line and sinker — the evidence of human biology and psychology that sexual intimacy has two obvious and inseparable consequences.

And, because both are essential to the favorable outcome of species survival (if not actually the attainment of full human potential), pleasure and gratification are involved. Sex makes for unity — the two in one flesh image — and not just in the biological fact of intercourse, but on a level that not even science can fully understand, the bonding of man and woman in every aspect of their lives and for the totality of those lives.

Love is the first consequence. The second is dependent upon it: because of the bond of love, the conceived child has the best potential for survival and full attainment of such complexities of reason and emotion that even 18 years can’t be always enough for mature and independent existence.

Darwin is probably right on: We have evolved as a species to monogamous mating-for-life for the sake of species preservation.

So what does a swath of latex have to do with all of this and how in the world could an intelligent (you’ve got to spot the guy something here) man as Benedict possibly be inclined to see condoms as the snake in the garden rather than the guarantor against infection?

My adolescence, in the eighth century, found us young folk more concerned about how not to get pregnant than even getting some infection or other nothing as deadly, admittedly, as AIDS, but still quite nasty — then and now. Condoms were nowhere near the top of the list of what was deemed “safe” in that regard. Girls still got pregnant. And it wasn’t just because the technology was underdeveloped (that being also a truism).

The primary cause of pregnancy with premarital sex (always the nomenclature) was the cocktail of passion, the temporary insanity of good old-fashioned lust, and the general ten- thumb-itis of the moment. They broke, they slipped and they couldn’t be found in time.

In the era of “Leave it to Beaver,” the great shame of an out-of-wedlock pregnancy and the social and moral judgment of an action (maybe less so if it was a lifestyle) were more prophylactic than anything bought over the counter. I genuinely feel great angst and pity for the present generation because of the absolute innundation of sexuality in the arts and in advertising you endure, and the deliberate promulgation of the notion that if you are not sexually active there is something wrong with you. Today’s stakes are higher still. You can die from this. Still it’s freedom. Right? And an obscenely lucrative industry benefits from it.

The Church, with current chief-of-communications B16 at the mike, keeps wanting to draw humanity back to the fundamental: what our bodies are designed to do by nature; what our minds and hearts, metaphysically grafted to our flesh and blood and bones, work at either in harmony or in conflict.

At the deeper level is a sad sense of despair about what humans are capable of achieving. “They can’t be responsible about sex…bring on the tubal ligations and vasectomies, the pills and IUDs, the foams and sponges… and, with lowest percentile of contraception, the condom. Usually it is the woman’s job to take care of these things. She packs the condoms as well…no wonder; the consequences for her are off-the-scale compared to her partner. Equality in sex is overrated anyway, right?”

The Church, certainly not oblivious to the “real” world, points to a “more real” world where the actions of human bodies are in sync with the mind-heart-soul of human dignity and worth. The Church just keeps referencing sex and marriage and children as inseparable realities. Crazy, huh?

The artificiality and technology of contraception that was so novel with “the Pill” when Paul VI issued his letter on marriage and family, “Humane Vitae” (1968), has now played itself out to where he predicted it would go: the manufacturing of human life rather than its creation in love.

The use of condoms allows that diminished perspective of the value of sex and of life to play itself out in more deadly terms than just AIDS — bad enough. On the surface and masquerading as “responsible” and “safe.” But in consequence being so “safe” allows sex to be just the fun and games the culture — minus any troublesome moral compass — wants it to be.

And, in that, with multiple partners, little need for self-control or reference to natural law, AIDS — and a host of other deadly creatures — will have its way. Is the Pope so very wrong to shine the harsh light of reality where darkness or even deliberate myopia prevails? It’s not just a factor of statistics. Sometimes it’s as simple as what is truly human. Or not.

The Church keeps wanting to see humans as the image of God, and nothing less. Fault Benedict if you will.

Father Ed Windhaus is a Newman chaplain and religious advisor at Swarthmore College. You can reach him at ewindha1@swarthmore.edu.