Those old enough to remember are familiar with the hippie slogan of the 1960’s: “Let it all hang out”. As the late Fr. Richard John Neuhaus liked to remark, the sociologist Peter Berger’s response at the time was: “Tuck it all back in”. There is still much “tucking in” that needs to be done today by those of us concerned with fostering the dignity of marriage and family life in our early 21st century secular culture.
At times, the temptation is to become pessimistic – it’s one of mine at least on bad days. But our Christian faith and hope is quite reassuring on this score. Jesus calls each of us to be faithful disciples who place our hope in God as we work to build up His kingdom; he does not call us to be U.N. social planners with a multi-year master program for world transformation. Thus, what’s important is not so much what we accomplish, but how we accomplish it, and simply our effort in trying (cf. Pope Benedict XVI, Deus Caritas Est, no. 35). In other words, God’s “outcomes assessment measures” evaluate the quality of our hearts, even though we also desire good consequences to come from our actions.
Indeed, Christian morality is profoundly a “matter of the heart” (cf. Mt 15:10-20; Mk 7:14-23). However, as persons concerned about the moral shape of our culture today, we know that this Christian emphasis on the heart is often misunderstood or outright rejected. It is misunderstood if interpreted to mean that one should ignore the objective nature of an action, i.e. if it is taken to mean: “anything goes as long as I mean well.”
When this Christian emphasis is rejected, it is often because it stands in the way of our society’s concern for measurable results – for so-called pragmatic “solutions.” For example, the “current morality” (or should I say “going with the current morality”?) holds that, if by using a condom one can prevent an “unwanted pregnancy” or HIV/AIDS, then by goodness, one has a grave responsibility to use one (thereby acting responsibly). To disagree is to invite the charge of “avoiding the real world” or being “up tight” about sex. After all, it is argued, why should “unintended pregnancies” occur or persons have to die over mere faithfulness to moral principle?
Christian leaders, however, have a tremendous responsibility to respectfully disagree with these views and advocate a position that rejects condoms (and any form of contraception) in favor of the positive virtues of chastity, abstinence, and natural family planning. Why? Of course, not because we believe death and unintended pregnancies are good, or because we desire slavish conformity to abstract principles even if the heavens should fall, but because we believe it more accurately reflects the Gospel vision of morality as embodied in the Lord’s Sermon on the Mount (see Matthew 5-7). It is a vision that not only desires life and the fulfillment of human persons in everything that is truly good, but leads to this fulfillment.
We affirm, moreover, that this vision is capable of being lived by our contemporaries, including the young. Because there is a correspondence or “fit” between who we are as persons and how we are to act, we know that our message – often masked or distorted by the secular media – is both realistic and capable of providing answers to life’s deepest questions. This includes questions about human sexuality.
So, to the question, “Why oppose condoms?” we could answer as follows:
“Even if condoms were 100% effective in preventing either pregnancy or the spread of disease – which they are not – advocating them does not respect the dignity of the human person. It is, in fact, to deny that dignity because it amounts to saying that we are more like irrational animals than free, intelligent human beings called to revere the goods of mutual self-giving and procreation in the context of true love, i.e. marriage (Vatican Council II, Gaudium et Spes, n. 51). Using a condom blocks the openness we should have to these personal and bodily goods, preventing them from being realized.”
“Also, the condom message fosters the false idea, especially among teenagers, that just because one has (apparent) control over one aspect of one’s life (sexuality), then one has control over…well, one’s life. But what condom, one author asks, will shield the young person from his or her struggles with feelings of anger, despair, inferiority, or lust? What condom will give the young person meaning in life? What condom will give this young person love? And how will the condom empower the young man or woman to take responsible control of their future? Handing out condoms, then, is like trying to cure the measles by painting over the spots, as they say – one only treats the outward symptoms and not the underlying causes – e.g. a broken home or loneliness – of the problematic sexual behavior.”
Young people expect adults to articulate a higher standard of morality, and to live by it. They also expect to be challenged. Thus, when those same adults tell them that they are incapable of self-control – sexual or otherwise, it surely betrays their idealism and their dignity.
“Like” Truth and Charity Forum on Facebook!
As Christians, we are aware that chastity is not an easy virtue, especially in an over-sexualized society that stresses technological means over personal moral virtue in dealing with various social problems. But it is attainable through, among other things, hard work, help from churches, parents, educators, the culture, and foremost, God’s grace.
We Christians emphasize the importance of a virtuous sexual life not because sex is something bad, but rather because sex is something good – so good that, like any good, it needs protection (no pun intended!) for its abuse harms human beings and inevitably leads to bad consequences – for both the individual and for society.
The condom alternative leads only to more unplanned pregnancies and more unhappy people. God calls us to something more, something better. He calls us to lives of moral excellence and perfection (cf. Matthew 5:48).
Mark S. Latkovic, S.T.D. is a Professor of Moral Theology at Sacred Heart Major Seminary (Detroit, MI), where he has taught for over 23 years. He is co-editor of St. Thomas Aquinas and the Natural Law Tradition: Contemporary Perspectives (The Catholic University of America Press, 2004), as well as author of What’s a Person to Do? Everyday Decisions that Matter (Our Sunday Visitor, 2013) and numerous articles in scholarly and popular journals.
