| Back to thread |
|
To add another voice on this topic, I was reminded of last year’s post by Bridget Karl “I kissed courting goodbye.” This appeared in Hillsdale Collegian, Volume 128, Number 8, November 4, 2004. The link is: Now to my own question. My question for exploration is: What are the personalist arguments for preserving sexual purity outside of marriage for unbelievers? The answer for Christians is easy: no sexual relations outside of marriage is permitted. But what persuasive answers can we offer to unbelievers? In Love and Responsibility KJW / JP II carefully develops the personalist norm until he reaches the final Chapter IV on Justice towards the Creator. He writes: “In asserting that the person must not be an object to be used, but only an object of love (hence the commandment to love), the personalist norm lays down the rights of the person. Thus love presupposes justice.” There he makes the distinction between “horizontal justice” with persons and “vertical justice” with God at 245. When I read this on 28 May 2009, I wrote: “I have asked how we justify sexual relations only within marriage on philosophical grounds without relying on the easier justification as a command of God. This is necessary to argue for sexual purity to those who are agnostics or atheists presently. Karol Wojtyla as a priest and deep believer could never argue without this fundamental belief in justice to the Creator as truth. He tried with the personalistic norm. Is the personalistic norm persuasive to agnostics or atheists?” Many young people in their 20s and 30s have their faith challenged and some no longer believe in the Christian faith in which they were raised. So what are the “horizontal justice” arguments based on the personalist norm? Can we set them out in a persuasive manner? Further on in JPII’s section “Mystical and Physical Virginity” he includes primarily justice to the Creator arguments, but within those arguments are set forth “the order of nature or the personal order, which demands that they base their relationship on true love” at 249. What does true love demand between the persons regarding purity? The Problem of Reciprocity at pages 84-88 comes into the question for me. Following the first sentence in the Mystical and Physical Virginity section at 249, how does monogamous and indissoluble marriage solve the problem of sexual relations in a way that is just, not only to the Creator, but to the man and woman as persons, even if unbelievers? He writes at 250 that love aims at unification of persons. The unification of persons requires a reciprocated love. See the footnote 74 of JPII. The persons must love and will to unification. The persons, one or both, are free to love or not at any time. In the Jeweller’s Shop, Anna and Stefan once loved each other, but now Stefan may no longer love Anna. JPII offers no easy answers here as what Anna and Stefan are to do. I intend to try and distill the arguments, but would like others to help marshall those arguments. Could we set out 10 or more arguments by the Church, JPII and / or DvH that would persuade a non-believer to remain pure until marriage and then maintain a monogamous and indissoluble marriage with mutual self-giving love until death? 16:08 to Time of Posting |
|
|
Dr. Michael Healy based his 3 June 2009 Talk partly on Purity: The Mystery of Christian Sexuality by Dietrich von Hildebrand. This book is available through the Bookstore at Franciscan University of Steubenville. This is a photocopy of the original, currently out-of-print, but FUS Bookstore has permission to copy it. The cost is $12.50 + $6.00 shipping and handling. You may call toll free at 1-888-333-0381 to Order. You will NOT find it on the bookstore website, but they have it, as I ordered mine today.
|
|
Page 1 of 1 pages
| Back to thread |
John Brooks Randle
Location: Honey Brook, PA
Bio: 3 children: David 25, Emily 28 and Robert 32; Final Promise in Secular Order of Discalced Carmelites on 16 Sep 2001; interest in philosopher, St. Edith Stein; entered Catholic Church on 2 Apr 1994 from Episcopal Church; JD College of William & Mary in Williamsburg, Virginia 1980, practiced law 22 years (inactive now); MA Philosophy from Graduate Faculty of Political and Social Science, New School for Social Research in NYC 1976; Navy 1967-1971; BA Philosophy from Lynchburg College in Virginia 1967; born a twin in Atlanta, Ga. on 24 Nov 1945, old feast of St. John of the Cross. Carmelite name: John Thomas of the Cross �.
Avatar
Photo