|
|
|
Were our Hearts Not Burning? (Lk 24:32) Reply to a question Modesty in mixing men and women when discussing NFP. N., in Christ, You pose a fascinating question. I would approach it like this. The question is, “Should various couples of men and women be together in NFP classes?” Some would say yes, for these reasons, which you point out in your letter below:
My thoughts regarding this matter is the following. 1. Modesty is one of the virtues of temperance. That is, we can live out the virtue of temperance concretely in several ways. Some of these are continence, modesty, humility, meekness, etc., all of which are virtues in and of themselves. 2. Modesty can be lived in various ways. It can mean “not drawing attention to oneself,” in general, but often it refers specifically to the sexual dimension of the person and is related to chastity. It can be exercised in thought (memories, feelings, etc.), in word (conversations, etc.) and deed (impure curiosity, how one dresses, etc.) The Catechism defines it (CCC 2521), “It means refusing to unveil what should remain hidden,” so that we deal with all 3. There are several effects of modesty (2522): - it “protects the mystery of persons and their love” - it establishes conditions for real, pure love - it gives us “an intuition of the spiritual dignity proper to man” (2524) 4. The Church addresses some misconceptions about the “sexual liberty” of our day in these very same paragraphs. CCC 2525 discusses the restraint due to issues of purity in the media and public arena. CCC 2526 discusses the error of “moral permissiveness” which eclipses bases in the moral law. Furthermore, it enjoins educators like you, N., “to give young people instruction respectful of the truth, the qualities of the heart, and the moral and spiritual dignity of man.” Therefore, I think your reflections are very reasonable and well supported by solid principles. Of course, this is a prudential judgment. By prudence one applies the universal principles to the here and the now in all of its circumstances. That’s not always easy, and therefore we have to have the humility to act prudently, and the humility accept whether the decision, after the facts and in hindsight, was right or wrong. Finally, as the least of all arguments, I refer to my personal experience. I have taught every age group, for many years of my life, and I have studied the philosophy of education and pedagogy, both classical and contemporary. One thing I always find is that it’s always better to separate men from women, boys from girls, in any educational situation. It’s better for everyone involved. Co-ed was a monstrous theory that was born from the sexual revolution, mercilessly imposes upon a couple generations, who now stand as “guinea pigs,” victims of inhumane experimentation. Oh, the sins that cry to heaven! Furthermore, I know from my three year stay in Germany that in 1996-7, my last year, a debate was being stirred up by German thinkers who proposed that, from the strict point of view of success in academic education, co-ed was a failure, and we should begin separating the schools again. I like your idea, and I support you. I’m glad it came from a married woman first. Sometimes, since I’m a celibate male, people very childishly disregard things I might say. It’s usually when I say demanding things, and such poor souls use the sophism, “oh, he doesn’t understand.” But I guess they really understand celibate males? Well, in fact I think they do, as celibates also understand the married. The intellect is a tremendous thing, and men are not prisoners of their subjective impressions. But that enters into a discourse upon the knowledge of truth, which is quite off topic. Let me know what results you notice, for if time proves your thought successful, I’m sure I’d like to implement this type of segregation. Now, on to answer those who oppose us, referring to the first three questions at the top of my letter, above. 1. Adults, it is true, shouldn’t be affected badly by sexual realities. That is, in the world Adam and Eve enjoyed before the fall. But adults are as prone to lust, sexual fantasy, adultery of body and of heart, as anyone is. Even a spouse must overcome lust to truly love his spouse. We are all affected badly by these things, for we do not enjoy the spiritual knowledge and perfect self-dominion Adam and Eve enjoyed before the fall, and our passions suffer concupiscence. This same foolish argument is the basis for why some otherwise good Catholics allow themselves to sit through and watch pornographic films, or pornographic scenes in R movies. Some use this argument to allow themselves to use pornography, to “enhance their sexual lives with their spouses,” to “spice up their relationship,” when nothing could be more detrimental. Or immature men have these “stag parties,” full of impurities, and they justify it by thinking they are somehow christening a man into an active sexual life. All of these things are immature surrender to the passions. 2. It is true that couples should enjoy sexual intimacy. This is a noble conquest. But it should be attained after marriage and not before. Furthermore, even if there were a class of NFP already-married couples, the sexual intimacy they should share is not “malehood” to “femalehood,” nor “all ten of us men here in this class with all ten of us women,” but rather one person to another person. Therefore there would be no justification to have ten couples, married or not, growing in sexual intimacy together. 3. If people bully you for your decision based on childish name calling such as “prudish,” “melodramatic,” and so forth, call them on the mat: “let’s put the name calling aside, and let’s see who’s really acting immature. Now tell me, what exactly is the problem with the method…” and proceed like intelligent human beings who wish to calmly present arguments on points of difference. Anyway, that’s my thoughts on the matter. I hope it helps. If in any point you disagree or whatever, fine; I don’t present Church teaching when I say my opinions (I do when I quote the Catechism, by the authority of the words themselves of course), so forgive me if in any of this you find any errors. In Christ, Fr. Paul Ward
Fr. Paul Ward |