Vy 4: The Development of Sexual Ethics in Contemporary Roman Catholicism Sexuality is a very significant aspect of human existence, and all human eultures have tried to discover its meaning and the values and norms that should govern sexuality. Sexual morality and sexual ethics have always been significant issues in the Christian tradition. Within the Roman Catholic Church today sexual questions and ethics have become one ofthe most vital areas of debate and concern ‘The official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church in sexual matters is widely known. But equally well known is that the majority of Catholic believers disagree with the off- cial hierarchical teaching on such issues asthe absolute con: ddemnation of masturbation, contraception, sterilization, and divorce. There is also a strong questioning of the teaching ‘on homosexuality and some disagreement on premarital ex: uality. This general attitude has been documented in many ‘pinion polls. Ar the Synod of Bishops in Rome in 1980 Arch: bishop John R. Quinn cited a Princeton University study showing that 76.5 percent of American Catholic married women of child-bearing age used some form of contracep- ‘ion, and 9¢ percent of them used a means condemned by the pope." Many married couples who use artificial contraception have continued to participate in the total life ofthe church. The same is true for some divorced and remarried Catholics as well as for some gays. From my perspective such reactions ” The Development of Serual Ethics 75 ‘can be very good and indicate the legitimacy of practical dis sent within the church despite some attempts to prevent it However, the present situation of great discrepancy between Catholic teaching and Catholic practice in sexual morality also has significant negative effects, The eredibilty ofthe hier. archical teaching office is called into question. Asa result of ‘many of these sexual teachings a good number of Roman Catholies have become disillusioned and left the church, Andrew Greeley and his associates on the bass of their socio logical findings and analysis have come tothe conclusion that Humanae Viae, the 1968 encyclical condemning atificial con- traception, “seems to have been the reason for massive apos- tasy and for a notable decline in religious devotion and belief."® Greeley has admitted that he first thought that the deterioration of American Catholic belief and practice would hhave occurred even without the encyclical, but his research ‘made him change his rind, (On the more theoretical and ethical levels the vast majority of Catholic theologians writing inthis area have challenged the basis for the official Catholic teaching. The very nature of official Catholic teaching on sexual ethics occasioned this type of challenge. The Roman Catholic Church and it hier- archical teaching authority have maintained that its teaching js based on the natueal law and hence in principe is open to rational acceptance by all human beings. The church does recognize that reason is illumined by faith in these matters, bbut nonetheless the natural-law methodology claims that the teaching is based on human reason reflecting on human na- ture and not directly on faith o revelation. ‘The majority of Catholic ethicists as well as practically all ‘non-Catholic theologians have found the present hierarchical teaching and its theoretical bass to be wanting. The official teaching still rests on the innate purpose and finality of the sexual faculty. The faculty has a twofold purpose— procreation and love union, Every sexual actor actuation must express this twofold finality. This understanding ofthe sexual faculty land the sexual act forms the basis for the condemnations of ‘masturbation, contraception, sterilization, and homosexual acts, Note that such an understanding also grounds the com:76 The Development of Sevual Ethics dempation of artificial insemination even with the husband's Semen (ATH), The next chapter will discuss in greater detail the methodology used in official Catholic sexual teaching, Many people in the past mistakenly though that the core of the Roman Catholic postion was its pronatalist emphasis Such isnot the case. The ultimate basis ofthe Catholic teach ing is the need for and the inviolability ofa sextal act which "must be open to procreation and expressive of love. Contra ception is wrong because the act is not open to procreation; AIH is wrong because the act of insemination is not the natural act which by its very nature is expressive of love, In this light I have pointed out that the primary problem with the official hierarchical teaching is its physicalism oF biolo- gism, The physical act must always be present, and no one can interfere with the physical oF biological aspect for any reason whatsoever. The physical becomes absolitized. Most revisionist Catholic theologians today will argue that for the sod ofthe person or for the good of the marriage itis legiti= ‘ate at times to interfere with the physical structure of the act. Note that itis precisely in questions of sexual morality ‘that Catholic teaching has absolutized the physical and iden: tified the physical with the truly human or moral aspect. For ‘example, there has always existed an important distinction between killing and murder, since murder isthe morally con- ddemned act, whereas killing is the physical act which is not always wrong. However, artificial contraception understood sa physical act is said to be always and everywhere wrong, In the area of sexual cthies church authorities have taken action against some theologians who have dissented on mat- ters of sexual morality. My case is by no means the only ex ample, Stephan Pfirtner in Switzerland, the late Ambrogio \Valsecchi in Italy, and Anthony Kosnik in the United States ‘have all lost their teaching positions because of their writings fon sexuality, Some Catholic theologians continue to defend the hierarchical teaching ofthe Catholic Church in sexual mat~ ters, but the vast majority of theologians express significant disagreement from this teaching. ‘This overview and analysis ofthe sexual teaching and SeX- ‘ual ethics in the contemporary Roman Catholic Church in ‘The Development of Sexual Ethics 77 dicates thatthe primary question or problem in developing & sonal ethie today isnot the ethical question tel tthe tcclsiological question of dissent and authoritative church teaching The oficial hirarchial teaching ofc ofthe church Sppearsdetrmined to maintain its preset teaching and even toediscipline some ofthe theologians who propose athe pos tions. Anyone interested in changing the oa Mera ewual teaching and sexialethies must frst deal with the ccclesiological question. Can and should the official hie trchical teaching allow theological and practical dissent n these areat? Can and should the hirarcial ofc change it teaching in there areas? have ktdded some of my colleagues in ecclesiology by sy ing thatthe real eelsiolgialinses today, expecially thve involving the teaching authority the churey are beng faced bby moral theologians particultlyin the are of sexeal moral ity and sexual eis, Why is this the case? Many reason help 10 explain this reality. Obviously sexuality ia very sign cat matter which personaly affects everyone, When you put sexuality and authory together, you are Bound to have a volatile situation, The ofc hirarchial caching in sexual tatters has long history, and this caching has been ine Cated at al level education, Ths bth history and the very hature ofthe sexual question show how much the teaching alice of the church hasbeen involved in thi mater much ‘more so than in mot other areas = loweve, a contemporary reson alo exists why the area otsentl ic wo ruben toy and nied with eclesilogieal concerns, All mst amit that the Seon ‘Vascan Counel ought abot great changes te beolgy and ie of the Roman Catholic Church There can apd el bedebates about the extent and depth ofthese changes, To day most cormmentacors and thedlogians recognize the com: promise nature of most ofthe conllar dacuments. Newer {pects and approaches ae defintely proposed, bu oie some athe older sspets and approaches ae tastlned. How ver all must dt hat he coniar process definitly Brought about real change inthe ie ofthe church, Many af the documents prepared by the peconeiar commissions18 The Development of Secual Ethics ‘were rejected in toto by the council. These preliminary docu: ents expressed the neo-Scholastic manualistic theology of | the times, Such an approach no longer reigned supreme after the council. Inthe areas of ecumenism, the church, religious liberty, faith, and revelation very significant developments ‘occurred in and through the conciliar process However, sexual morality and sexual ethies went through no such development at Vatican Il. The most important issue ‘of the time was that of artificial contraception, But Pope Paul, VI took this issue out of the council's hands and reserved it to himself.) Finally in 1968 Paul VI issued his encyclical Humanae Vitae condemning artificial contraception for mar- ried couples as intrinsically evil It should be noted that Pope Paul VI never issued another encydical in the remaining years, of his pontificate. Sexual morality and sexual ethics, under- stood as the more systematic, coherent, consistent, theoretical explanation of sextial morality, went through no change or development at Vatican II. Consequently this area of moral ity is sill based on the neo-Scholastic understanding of the manuals of moral theology which were in existence before the Second Vatican Council ‘This reality was brought home to me again as a result of| some of my reading in March 1987. Herbert Vorgrimler’s Understanding Rohner gives some biographical information on Rahner based especially on his correspondence. Frequently in the preparatory and early phases of the Second Vatican Council Rahner spoke ofthe original drafts and the continual strugeles against the manualistic theology of the time in these commission meetings. He mentions in this connection on ‘many occasions the theology of Sebastian Tromp and also the work of Franz Hurth.« T was somewhat interested because both of these Jesuit theologians had been my professors at the Gregorian University in the 1950s. In fact T would occa’ sionally have long Latin conversations with Hirth, who was always cordial and seemed to enjoy such meetings, In my later years I changed my thinking quite abit, but I remember with fondness my occasional conversations with Hiirth At the same time in early March the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued its “Instruction on Respect for The Development of Srual Ethics 79 Human Life in Its Origin and onthe Dignity of Procreatin * “The isaue that drew the mox disagreement within the Reson Catholic community was the rejection of este teriisaton tang the husband’ seed on the grounds that artical nsene nation even with the husband seed was always morally srrong. The footnote tothe condemnation af homologs trill insemination (AIH) referred to Pope Pius XITs-Dis: Course to Those Taking Partin the Fourth International Com tress of Catholie Doctor, September 29,1949" Tn ths a res the pope condemned ALF a violating the divine pan tecause the natural conjugal act lf was not preset ‘There are two intersting comments that mus be made about the 1949 papal addres, Fist, before the address umber of Cathole morals held tht in practice atl insemination between husband and wife could be permited provided the husband's sperm was obtained in some legitimate Wray. This condition refered to the fact that those authors thought masturbation was intrinsically eil and could never be the means of obtaining the semen. Even as conservative 2 Catholic moral theologian as Thomas J ODonnell admits that ATE was an open question in theory andin pacts be- fore 1949.¢ Thus iis hard to speak abou a traditional each ing ofthe Roman Cathoie Church inthis regard “A second note about this document i mos facinating. A commentary on the September 29 papal addres writen by Franz Hirth appeared in the September 15, 1949, issue of Padi Te wae well own that Hirth wrote mox of Pius Xi addresses on moral eues, One Roman wag commented that in this ease they had to bold back the publication of the commentary unt the address itself was given! Tethe light ofthe Rahner history andthe new document af the Gongregation forthe Doctine af the Fit I became Cxintentially very aware that Catholic moral teaching in 1987 seas all based on the neo-Scholastism ofthe pre-Vatican Tans of moral theology. If this sae reality were true in other areas such as revelation, the church, ecumenism, fd religious berg, the Roman Cathie Church woud lok Site diferent tod What would have happened if Vaican II had dicused80 The Development of Serual Ethics and decided the issue of artificial contraception? Pethaps the teaching would have been changed especially in the light of the other changes which occurred at that time. Undoubtedly. ‘the major issue would have been how can the church now ac- ‘cept something which it had earlier condemned. How could there be such a change oF development in the offical teaching of the church? The best illustration of change at Vatican II was the teaching on religious freedom. Here John Courtney Murray and others proposed a theory of development based. fon changing historical circumstances. In the nineteenth cen= tury the church rightly condemned the understanding of re~ ligious freedom based on Continental liberalism, but in the twentieth century religious liberty, understood asa civil right, of immunity ina limited constitutional government structure, could be accepted.* This theory of development downplayed the discontinuity factor and employed the changing historical circumstances to justly the change. It is easy in retrospect 10 criticize this theory for failing to recognize that somewhere along the line the teaching ofthe church was wrong or should hhave been changed sooner. In the area of contraception it probably would have been necessary to face head-on the ise of the existence of erzor in the official eaching of the hier- archical magisterium. It is impossible for anyone to know what would have hap- pened if Vatican II had debated the questions of artificial con- traception and of sexual morality. Two things are certain to- day. First, in the area of sexual morality and ethics there has ‘been no development within the church's teaching as there hhas been in many other areas debated at Vatican II, How ‘often in other areas of teaching in theology would a 1949 papal address on a specific issue be totally normative? Second, the primary issue today in the hierarchical Catholic sexual teach ing remains the issue of change in the teaching and the eccle- sial question of the nature ofthe hierarchical teaching office. Many reasons help to explain the reluctance on the part ‘of people in authority to change the official church teaching in this matter or to allow the possibility of dissent. The patti~ archal nature ofthe church and of its teaching on human sex- uality cannot be denied. The Catholic Church has excluded The Development of Sexual Ethics 81 women from any kind of significant decision-making role in the life of the church. Iam sure that the desire for control of others and a celibate fear of sexuality have also contributed to the present hierarchical teaching and to the reluctance to change it. However, those of us working for such changes ‘must address the most significant isues raised by the defenders of the present teaching even though we recognize there are other factors that also support this teaching, “The strongest reason for maintaining the present teaching in the eyes of its defenders is one’s understanding of the teaching function of the church, The hierarchical teaching function of the church is believed to be under the power and guidance of the Holy Spirit. Could the Holy Spirit ever per: ‘mit the hierarchical teaching office to he wrong in a matter fof such great import in the lives of so many Christian peo ple? The church and the officially commissioned leaders of the church have their role as mediating the salvific word and work of Jesus through the presence of the Spirit. Could the hierarchical teaching role actually hinder and hurt the peo ple it was supposed to help? Such questions cannot be easily dismissed. One must at Teast fel the force of such questions for those who are posing, them. The only adequate response to these questions is the recognition thatthe hierarchical teaching office ise has failed to recognize and teach the proper nature and binding force of such teaching as well as the assent due to such teaching, By its very nature this teaching on these specific and com plex questions of the norms governing sexuality involves what has recently been called the authoritative noninfallble hier~ archical teaching office. Such teaching according to a 1967 document of the West German bishops has a certain degree ‘of binding force, and yet, since it is not a de fide definition, it invalves a certain element of the provisional even to the point of being capable of including error? ‘The ultimate epistemological reason why this teaching can- not claim an absolute certitude comes from the very nature ‘of moral truth, Thomas Aquinas pointed out the difference between speculative and practical or moral truth, In the area ‘of morality with its complexities and many circumstances the82 The Drcelopmont of Secu Eth secondary principles of the natural law genevally oblige bu in some cases they do not hold, Thomas uses as an exannple the natural-law principle that deposits should be returned. An bbligation exists to return to the owner what has been given fone to care for and keep safe. Such a principle usually obliges but not always. I someone has lft you a sword for safekerp: ing and now wants it back but is drunk and threatening to Kill people, you have an obligation not to return the sword In their two pastoral letters on peace and the economy the United States bishops have recognized the same reality. On the level of complex and specific judgments one cannot claim ‘certitude that excludes the possibility of error. Thus, for ‘example, the bishops maintain that the first use of counter: force nuclear weapons is always wrong, but they recognize that others within the church community might come to a different conclusion." Within the traditional understanding of the teaching func tion af the hierarchical magisterium ic is possible for authori- tative noninfallible hierarchical teaching on specific moral issues to be wrong, Church authority has added to the exist- ing problem by its failure to recognize explicitly the some ‘what provisional nature ofits teaching in these areas. In this, light one can understand the charge of creeping infallibilism that has been made, Noninfallble teaching is thought to be as certain and absolute as infallible teaching. Ifthe very nature nd limitation of such authoritative noninfalible teaching were better understood, the fat of erroneous church teaching would not be as great a problem as one might think. In addition, such a recognition could serve as a very good way of indi- cating the role of all the baptized contributing in different ‘ways tothe teaching of the church and also be a salutary re ‘minder that the hierarchical teaching authority has not car~ ried out its own learning and teaching function in the most suitable way. For any of us to admit we have made mistakes is very dif ficult. tis obviously very difficult for the hierarchical teaching office with its understanding of having the assistance of the Holy Spirit to recognize that its teachings might be wrong. However, history docs record the existence of such errors it The Development of Serual Ethics 83 the past, and Catholic self-understanding acknowledges the theoretical possibility of such errors. A recognition of mis takes by church authority would not be unprecedented. The Decree on Ecumenism (n. 7) of Vatican Council I! humbly recognizes there has been sin on all sides in the work for Church unity and begs pardon of God and our separated brothers and sisters just as we forgive those who have tres passed against us. In the present situation the first step that ‘an and should be made isthe offical recognition ofthe some= ‘what provisional character ofthe authoritative noninfllible hierarchical teaching in these areas. From this there follows the possibility and perhaps at times even the legitimacy of dissent both in theory and in practice. ‘What about the credibility of the hierarchical teaching office if it explicitly recognizes the legitimacy of dissent or feven changes its teaching? How can anyone ever again put trust and confidence in such a teaching office? It must be pointed out that there already exists a very great problem of credibility for the hierarchical teaching office in sexual m: ters, When the vast majority of the members ofthe church disagree with the official hierarchical teaching on issues such ‘as contraception, there truly exists a problem of confidence jn that authority. The case can be made that the hierarchical teaching office would gain credibility ifit recognizes the possi- bility of dissent and even changes its teaching in this area, In my view dissent from the authoritative noninfllible hier= arehieal teaching ofthe Roman Catholic Church tries to sup: port and not destroy the credibility of this teaching office. ‘The hierarchical teaching office in general would be more credible fit is clear to all thatthe critical interpretative func- tion of Catholic theologians at times might call for dissent from the teaching ofthe hierarchical magisterium. Here the theological community ean play the critical role of the loyal ‘opposition and thus enhance inthe long run the hierarchical teaching role in the church "To carry out its teaching role properly the hierarchical ‘magiaterium must be in dialogue withthe whole church, The primary teacher in the church remains the Holy Spirit, and 1no one has a monopoly on the Holy Spirit. Wide consultaBE The Development of Sevnal Ethie 1 the lunetion of the tion and dialogue are a necessary pa hierarchical teaching office, Unfortunately such dialogue and consultation have not accurred in the area of sexual moral: ity, and the credibility of the hierarchical teaching office has suffered Compare, far example, the proces involved in writing the pastoral letters of the United States bishops and the process involved in writing the recent Roman documents such as the instruction of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on bioethics The American bishops engaged in a broad con sultation process and shared their dralts withthe whole wend in a very public dialogue. Also the bishops recognized dif ferent levels of teaching and the diflerent responses duc 0 the various levels. The pastoral letters distinguish the levels of principle and universal teaching on the one hand froma that of specific judgments and conclusions. Legitimate diversity can exist within the church in the realm of specific judgments dnd even complex specific norms. I agree very much with this basic approach, which recognizes thatthe possibility of cer titude decreases as the matter under consideration becomes more specific and complex. However, even here there is a tendency in the pastoral letters to claim too much agreement and certitude on the level of principle. The pastoral leter on peace maintains that the independent principe of dscrimina: tion ot noncombatant immunity is something that must be held by all people within the church. However, the West Ger- ‘man bishops in their pastoral letter on war do not accept tis independent principle as an absolute norm. Chapter eight will discuss in greater detail the West German and United States pastoral letters on peace. However, the process involved in the writing of the United States pastoral letters has enhanced their credibility. Documents emanating from Rome would have a greater credibility if such a process and approach were employed in 'A final objection asks where all his is going to end. Per~ haps dissent on one or another issue might be acceptable but not across such a broad spectrura. Is everything up for grabs? ‘Are there no limits? It is incumbent on those of us within the Roman Catholic The Development of Sexual Ethics 85 Church who call for a broader area of dissent ro address this {question and to talk about limits. One must recognize that dissent or, more positively, pluralis exists within a broader area of unity, assent, and agreement, In the Christian faith community not everything is up for grabs. The church is called to creative fidelity with regard to the word and work of Jesus. It is important to recognize the distinction between ‘what is core and central tothe faith and what is more remote and peripheral. Today the emphasis on praxis in contem- porary theology reminds us that morality and what we do are integral parts of our faith community and our faith commit- ment. However, specific issues and concrete norm in com= plex cases require room for more diversity and disagreement, ‘The church must always teach and live the values oflove and fidelity in marriage, but it does not follow that divorce and remarriage are wrong in all circumstances. Doubtless there will be greater areas of dissent and pluralism than there were in the past. Also there will be more grey areas than ever before. The methodological understanding of contemporary theology points in this direction. However, these realities of sreater pluralism and greater dissent on specific issues stil exist side by side with the unity of the church and with a credible hierarchical teaching office in the church. In fact, ‘one could make the case that atthe present time such dissent and unity are already existing in practice in the Roman Cath- lie Church ‘There is much disagreement within the Roman Catholic Church today about sexual morality. Church authorities are taking disciplinary action against some theologians writing in these areas and thus preventing the development of a con- temporary sexual ethic within Roman Catholicism, There are significant practical and theoretical factors calling for a different understanding of sexual morality and of sexual ethics. However, the biggest obstacle to such developments comes from the practical ecclesiological issue of the hierarchical {caching office. We who are calling lor a changed theory and practice of sexuality in the Roman Catholic Church will be successful only if we can convince the church of the need to change some ofits current ecclesiological understandings of|86 The Development of Sexual Ethics the hierarchical teaching office and to admit the possibii ‘of dissent and error in such teachings. NOTES 1._ Archbishop John R. Quinn, “New Context for Contracep- tion Teaching,” Origins 10 (1980) 263.267, 2, Andrew M. Greeley, William C. McCready, and Kathleen McCort, Catholic Schools n a Declining Church (Kansas City, MO: Sheed and Ward, 1976), p_ 153. 5 Robert Blair Kaiser, The Polits of Second Religion (Kansas City, MO: Sheed and Ward, 1988), p. 68. 4 Herbert Vorgrimler, Undstaaing Kart Roe An Irdue tion to His Life and Thought (New Yorks Crossroad, 1985), pp. 35, 52, 94, 96, 136, 156, 157, 162, 166, 1684 5. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, “Instruction on Respect for Human Life in Its Origin and on the Dignity of Pro creation,” Orgies 16 (1987): 697M, Tl, B, 5 ‘6. Thomas J. O'Donnel, Medicine and Christian Morality (New York: Alls House, 1976), p. 266 7. Franciscus Hirth, “Annotationes,” Poiedie de ve Moral Cononce, Liturica 38 (1949): 282-295, 18 John Courtney Murray, The Pron of Religious radom (West- minster, MD: Newman Press, 1965), pp. 47-84 ‘9 This document is cited at great length by Karl Rahner, The logical Iceigtions, vol. XIV: Basco, Questions nthe Church, the ‘Chins in the World (New York: Seabury Press, 1976), p. 86 10. Thomas Aquinas, Summe Teologiae, Pars [a Hae (Rome: Mariewi, 1952), 94, ad 11. For a more in-depth discussion of dissent representing the ‘most significant positions see Charles E. Curran and Richard A. McCormick, eds. Readings in Moral Theology No: The Magisterium ‘and Morality (New York: Paulist Press, 1982) 5: Official Catholic Social and Sexual Teachings: A Methodological Comparison The official hierarchical teaching of the Roman Catholic Church in moral matters has importance not only for the church members themselves but also for others in society at large. The attention given to this moral teaching in the pop- ‘lar pres illustrates the news worthiness attached tot. Thanks to the popular media people in the United States were widely alerted to the stance taken by the United States Roman Cath- lic bishops on war and the economy as well as the postion of the Vatican on testtube babies. ‘A general impression is in evidence both within and out- side the Catholic Church that Catholic moral teaching in social and sexual areas appears to be somewhat different. From the Perspective of the general public contemporary Catholic social teaching with its criticism of the United States economic sys- tem and of our nuclear war and deterrence policy falls into what is ofien called the “liberal camp.” However, Catholic teaching in sexual matters i definitly in the more “conserva tive camp.” ‘The impression of differences between official Catholic s0- cial and sexual teaching also exists within the Catholic Church itself. Many conservative and neoconservative Roman Cath lies have objected strenuously to the recent socal teachings of the United States bishops but seem to have no problems with the official church teaching on sexual ethies. On the other hand, liberal Catholics have applauded the recent social teachings while often dissenting from the sexual teachings. 878B Official Catholic Social and Sexual Teachings The purpose of this chapter is not to discuss the relation. ship between social and sexual ethies; nor will I take sides in the dispute between “liberal” and “conservative” Catholi ‘even though my own position is well known. My purpose to examine the ethical methodology employed in each of these ‘two aspects of official Catholic moral teachings and to point ‘out the clear differences between the methodologies. Catholic Social Teaching ‘Today a body of official Catholic social teaching exists go- ing back to Pope Leo XIIT's encyalical Rerum Novaram in 1891," Subsequent encyclicals and official documents were often issued on anniversaries of Rerum Navarum, such as Pope Pius XI's Quadragesimo Annu? in 1981, Pope John XXIIT's Mate ‘Magisra in 1961, Pope Paul VIs Octegesima Adeenins in 1971, and Pope John Paul II's Laboren Exrcens in 1981. In addi tion there-are other papal documents as well as documents from the Second Vatican Couneil and the synods of bishops ‘which constitute this body of official Catholic social teaching. (One significant question about these documents and other hierarchical social teaching concerns the authoritative nature of such teaching and the response which is due to such teach- ing on the part of Roman Catholic believers. To discuss the nature, extent, and limits of authoritative teaching inthe Cath- lic Church lies beyond the scope of the present considera- tions. However, one point should be made. There are many other hierarchical church teachings from Pope Leo XII and later which are no longer remembered today. Leo's teaching ‘on the political order is seldom read or even mentioned on the contemporary scene. Leos political writings generally insist fon at best paternalistic or at worst an authoritarian view of society.* The unofficial canon of Catholic socal teaching today has been brought about by the reception ofthe church itself —the voices of subsequent popes but also the response fof the total church. The whole church has played a role fn shat is viewed today as constituting the body of official Cat lic social teaching. Official Catholic Socal and Sexual Teachings 89 Within the documents themselves the popes ad the eis opal bodies explicitly stes the continu with nat est tere. Popes ate very fond of quoting the pedeceaors of happy memory. However, in elity much change and devel opment have occurred within this body of social teaching. This scion wl study thee important methodologies whi have experienced a very sigfant change inthe les than 10-year histrieal span covered by this body a oficial Cady lie socal teaching These methodological changes in sal teaching wl be contrasted in the fllowing secon wih the cial teaching on sexual ties which has not experienced such changes. The thee metedcogcal areas tobe considered sre the shift to historia consciounnesy, the sho personal ism, and te acceptance ofa reaonality- responsibly ec dl Each thevemetodlogial developments mil ow Shift Hisrical Consciousness” Historical consciousness often contrasted with asic Classicism understands reality in terms ofthe cera, he i= ‘mutable, and the unchanging; whereas historical consciousness gives more importance tothe particular, the contingent, the historical, and the individual. Historical consciousness ould also be contrasted with the other extreme of sheer existen- tialism, Sheer existentialism ces the present moment in sola. tion from the before and the after of time, wih no binding relationships persons and values in the present. Historical consciousness recognizes the need for both continuity and discontinuity. This discussion about workview tends to be primarily philosophical endeavor, bu there are relationships to the theological. ‘The Catholic theological tration has ‘recognized historicity in its rejection ofthe axiom “the srip- ture alone.” The seripture must always be understood, 2p Propriated, communicated, and lived in the light ofthe his torial and cultural realities ofthe present time. The church {ust cannot repeat the word ofthe sriptures. Catholicism has undergone much more development than most people think, While creative fidelity is necessary for any tradition90 Official Catholic Social and Sexual Teachings sch creative fidelity is consistent with the philosophic! word view of historical consciousness. " serene “These two diferent worldviews spawn two diferent meth: odological approaches. ‘The casi worldview i nated with the deductive methodology that deduces is conclusions from its premises, which are eternal verites, The sllogtn well illustrates the deductive proach: Not tha in eka approach one's conclusions areas certain as the premises if the logic is correct. Historical consciousness recognnes the need fora more inductive approach However, the need to maintain both continuity ax well as discontinuity argues agains a one-sided inductive approach, An inductive sppreach byits very nature can never achieve the rame degre of cert tude for its conclasions as does the deductive methodology ofthe clasicit workview ‘There can be no dou that a significant development toward historical conciousness has occurred in the body of offical social teaching. Pope Plus Xs 1931 encyclical Quai {tina Anna is ft called a English “On Reconstructing the Social Order." In this encyclical the pope proposes his plan for this reorganiation, which is often called moderate cor poratisn or tlidatis In keeping wit the traditional em- Phasi inthe Catholic tration this papa plan sees the dif ferent institutions that are part of scity ax working together for the common good ofall. Catholic socal teaching has i SSxed on the metaphor of society as an organism with ll the pars exiting forthe good ofthe totaly. According to sch Sn ouook labor and capital should not be adversaries fighting one another, bat rather they should work together forthe come tmon good. Moderate corporatim ses labor, capital, and on- Sumer all working together and forming one group 1 com trol what happens ina particular industry. This group would Set prices, wages, and the amount of goods to be produced ‘Then other such groups on a higher level would coordinate and ect the india nde and proteins Pope Pius XI proposed his plan for reconstruction a some thing applicable tothe whole world Of epurse, the word of Pius Xl and his contemporaries was primarily the Euro-cetric world, The deductive nature ofthe plan is quite evident in Oficial Catholic Social and Sexual Teachings 91 the encyclical, From a philosophical view of society as an ‘organism the pope sketched out his approach as a middle course between the extremes of individualistic capitalism and collective socialisi, In reality this plan had little chance of sueceeding precisely because it did not correspond to any ‘existing historical realty, and the popes never entered into the debate of making the plan work in practice. Pope Pius XII, the successor of Pope Pius XT, spoke less and less about this plan as his pontificate continued, and Pope Jobn XXIIL basically ignored the proposal? Such a deductive methodology isin keeping with the neo- Scholastic thesis-approach to theology. However, some devel- ‘opments gradually occurred. Pope John XIII's 1965 encye- lical Pacem in Tes stil follows a generally deduetive approach, but in this and in his earlier encyclical Mater et Magista Pope John XXIII did not give attention tothe plan for reconstruc- tion proposed by Pope Pius XI. However, atthe end of each of the four chapters or parts of Pacem in Terris there isa short section on the signs of the times—the special characteristics of the present day." Two years later Gaudium et Spes, the Pastoral Constitution of the Church in the Modern World ‘of the Second Vatican Council, gives a much greater emphasis to historical consciousness. Each of the five chapters in the second part of the document deals with a specific area of con- cern and each begins with the signs of the times Pope Paul VI's Apostolic Letter Octagerima Advenios of 1971 shows a very heightened awareness of historical consciousness In the face of such widely varying situations ii dificult for us ‘utter a unified message and to put forward a soution which has universal validity. Such is not our ambition, nor is it our ‘mission. Its up tothe Christian communities to analyze with ‘objectivity the situation which i proper to their own country, 'o shed on ie the light ofthe Gospel unalterable words and to «draw principles of reflection, norms of judgment, and directives for action from the social teaching of the church... [tis up to these Christian communities, wit the help ofthe Holy Spirit, in communion wih the bishops who hold responsibilty and in dialogue with other Christian brethren and all people of good92 Offivial Catholic Sovial and Sexual Touring vill, eo dic the options and convents which ane called for in wader to bring abut the social, political. and eermonnie 1 he argent needed Only forty vears eater Pope Pius NU ad put forward a plan for social reconstruction which in his mind bad universal vale ity. The difference between the approaches of thse two popes The more inductive methodology of Octagrime Advenens gives great importance to contemporary developments. large portion of the letter is devoted to two aspirations that have come to the fore in the contemporary consciousness: While sientiic and technological progress continues to overturn human surroundings, paterns of knovsledge, work, consump: tion, and relationships, cwo aspirations persistently make then selves felt in these new contexts, and they grow stronger to the ‘extent that one becomes better informed and better educated: the aspiration to equality and the aspiration to participation, two forms of human dignity and freedom." Ii must be pointed out thatthe present pope, John Paul Il, thas pulled back somewhat from Pope Paul VI's insistence on historical consciousness. Laborem Exercs, the 1981 encyclical, isa philosophical reflection on work and its meaning that is intended to address all people. In his other writings John Paul II definitely moves away fom the historical conscious~ ness of Paul VI. His Christology, for example, isa Christology from above which begins with the eternally begotten Word ‘of God and not with the historical Jesus. ‘Two reasons help to explain Joh Paul I's reluctance to ‘embrace historical consciousness as much as his predecessor did, By temperament and training the present pope is a pil fopher who studied, taught, and wrote in the more classical philosophical mode. Such thinking and writing are clearly con- genial to him. In addition, historical consciousness can be seen as somewhat of a threat to the unity and central authority in the church, All today recognize the tensions existing be ‘ween the church universal as represented by the bishop of Rome and the national and local churches. Local diversity Official Catholic Socal and Sexual Teachings 9% ane pluralism are seen as threats to the unity and authors sfehe chureh, There can be no doubt that these existing ton Sons have made Pope John Paul Il very way of hitereal However the present pope doesnot use a more caicit approach to avoid making tome very concrete and eric Satements about existing social realty. Laberon Fares do tot shrink fom etizing many aspects ofthe plight ofthe worker today ‘Recent Catholic social theology and ethics have embraced she concept of hitorical consciosee, Consider forexampl the whole Held of liberation thology as well a the impor. tance given to praxis and socal analysis in eent wg, Shift w the Person with an Emphasis on Frcdom, Equality, and Participation Within the time frame ofa one-hundred-year pan there hasbeen avery ngificant stn Catholic social caching away from an emphasis on human natre witha concom tant sre on order, the sccepance of some ineqaliy d away from obedience tothe many contaling authorities (0 2 retognition of the vital importance ofthe human person With the conconaitant need for human feeder, equally and Patiipation. Th the ninetenth century the Cathlic Church opposed freedom and the thought of the Enlightenment. Freedom i religion, philosophy, sence, and pole threatened the old order in all its aspects, Individual feedom forgot about human beings relationships to God, o Ge aw, fo human society in genera, and footer barman tings. Continental Tier witht emphasion the induc edo was seen asthe primary enemy a the church Bven in the ine scent entry fia Catholic eathing didnt condemn ll slavery as alays wrong. Pope Leo XII was very much a par ofthis tain, He et order and oa cohesvene rate tha eco jes law and he naral lam gover human xisence Ls wiew of society wae authoritarian rt est paternalistic, He94 Official Cathalic Social and Seeual Teachings often referred to the people as the ignorant multitude that hhad tobe led by their rulers, (Such an approach is somewhat ‘understandable in the light ofthe low state of European liter~ acy atthe time.) In social ethies freedom was seen as a threat to the social organism. Individualisic capitalism was con- cdemned as a form of economic liberalisin whieh elaimed that fone could pay whatever wage one could get away with. Leo ‘was also no friend of democracy because no majority could do away with God's law, and freedom of religion could never be promoted but at best only tolerated as the lesser evil in Development occurred in the methodology of official Cath- olic social teaching precisely because of changing historical circumstances, The Catholic Church's enemy, or in more recent terminology, the dialogue partner, changed. In the nineteenth cencury the church opposed the individualistic i eralism of the day. As the twentieth century advanced, the central problem became the rise and existence of totalitarian governments. In this context the Catholic Church began to defend the freedom and dignity of the human person against the encroachments of totalitarianism. Pope Pius XI in the 1930s wrote encyclical letters against fascism, nazism, and ‘communism. In theory the Roman Catholic Church opposed all forms of totalitarianism, but there can be no doubt that the church was more willing in practice to tolerate totalitar- ianism from the right, After the Second World War Catholic teaching consistendly and constantly attacked communism, (Note that in the 1960s a change occurred with Pope John XXIIL, and there ensued a much more nuanced dialogical approach to Marxism.” Inthe light ofthis polemic Catholic teaching stressed the freedom and dignity of the individual. ope John XXIII's Pacem in Tari in 1963 signals the Cath- lic acceptance ofthe role of freedom. In Mater et Magisra in 1961 John XXITT, in keeping with the Catholic tradition, in sisted in a major part of this document that the ideal social order rests on the three values of truth, justice and love.!® Two years later in Pacem in Tes the pope adds a fourth element — truth, justice, charity, and freedom." Pacem in Teris develops for the first time a full-blown treatment of human rights in Oficial Catoic Social and Sexual Tahings 95 the Catholic tradition > Before that time Catholic thought had been fearful of rights language precisely because of the danger of excessive individualism. Catholic socal teaching had se ‘sted on duties and obedience tothe divine and natural law land not on rights. In its quite late embracing of the humor rights tradition Pacem in Tes sill recognizes the danger of individualism by including economic rights and by insisting fon the correlation between rights and duties, “There was one major obstacle or inconsistency in Catholic social teaching in the early 1960s. While the tradition was now insisting on the importance of freedom and the dignity ofthe individual, oficial hierarchieal teaching still could not secept religious freedom. One of the great accomplishments ofthe Second Vatican Council in 1965 was the acceptance of reli gious freedom as demanded by the very dignity ofthe human person. Religious freedom is understood as freedom Irom ex ternal coercion that forces one to act against one’s conscience for prevents one's acting in accord with one's conscience in religious matters.* In accepting this teaching Vatican Il had toadmit that a significant development and even change had ‘occurred in Catholic thinking because inthe nineteenth and ‘wentieth century before 1965 official Catholic teaching could ‘ot accept religious freedom. Inthe light of present circu stances one appreciates all the more both the theoretical and the practical import of this change in Catholic teaching. In 1971 Pope Paul VI in Octogesima Adveiens devoted a long section of the document to two new aspirations which have become more persistent and stronger in the contemporary context—the aspiration to equality and the aspiration to par- ticipation —two forms of human dignity and freedom * Pope John Paul II has strengthened and even developed the shift to personalise, Laboren Exacas in 1981 emphasizes that the subjective aspect of work is more important than the objective precisely because of the dignity of the human per son. The personal aspect of labor i the basis for the priority of labor over capital ‘Thus in the twentieth century a very significant shift has Sccurred in the methodology of Catholic social teaching ‘through its emphasis on the importance of the dignity and