Yes they do.A human being is born with difficult to define physical features. As a result they are hard to define as a particular gender. Perhaps this is a genetic anomaly, perhaps a result of epigenetic response to environmental factors, perhaps this being is simply the way God made. They are told repeatedly that they need to be “corrected”, that the are the result of Original Sin, because to consider them to be unusual but still made in God’s image would make us all uncomfortable. Does that multi or neithee-sex induvidual have a physical reality to deal with,
No it does not.or does our desire change that?
I agree with that as well. Sexuality is an integral part of a whole person. Based on that fact, the physical is an inseparable part of a person. A person is a unity of body and soul. So while it’s true that sexuality is more than the physical realities, it cannot be separated from them. A person’s physical integrity cannot be subject to mere feelings, desires, ideas, etc. That is Gnosticism…the idea that the physical world is inferior and/or irrelevant.There are a lot of really thoughtful responses, so I am not going to respond to each individually. But here are a few bits I feel are worth digging into:
- the idea that sexuality runs deeper than physical appearance is one I quite agree with.
There are instances of individuals with intersexed brains. For example, a woman could have a masculinized brain but still have a female body. If he were to marry a man, despite the parts fitting together, it would be essentially a same-sex attraction, but if he was straight he would want to be with a woman. Which desire is disordered? How does the concept of complimentarianism address this? How do we as humans decide how God knows such an individual?
- On physical pleasure as an indicator of complimentarianism: I hate to be the one to say this, but orgasm feels good, even when achieved in same-sex unions, so I don’t think it is really evidence either way. That heterosexual unions are the only ones with a chance of producing offspring is not open for debate. That, in and of itself, does not fully explain the concept of complimentarianism.
- I am not trying to say that Adam was literally a neuter. I am trying to imply that one could interpret Genesis in such a way that does not deny or deride the existence of any part of the human family. If all that is female and male could be contained in one individual, if God is reflected in our diversity and if “There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus.” –(Galatians 3:28)… Then I don’t see the basis for complimentarianism as it is currently employed.
- I plan to read Theology of the Body, which is hopefully full of citations to whatever it is based on.
So does complimentarianism fail to address individuals who do not physically fit into a binary gender model? I am not trying to argue that the physical nature of such people is either inferior or irrelevant - quite the opposite. I suspect their existence has potentially significant spiritual implications. If complimentarianism is based on observations of the natural world, does it need to be inclusive of all the gender diversity that exists in nature? If not, why not?A person is a unity of body and soul. So while it’s true that sexuality is more than the physical realities, it cannot be separated from them. A person’s physical integrity cannot be subject to mere feelings, desires, ideas, etc. That is Gnosticism…the idea that the physical world is inferior and/or irrelevant.
I’m not sure that there is diversity in gender, beyond male and female, which are diverse. I suppose a scientist (I am not one) would have to look at the unusual cases which you are talking about.So does complimentarianism fail to address individuals who do not physically fit into a binary gender model? I am not trying to argue that the physical nature of such people is either inferior or irrelevant - quite the opposite. I suspect their existence has potentially significant spiritual implications. If complimentarianism is based on observations of the natural world, does it need to be inclusive of all the gender diversity that exists in nature? If not, why not?
What spiritual implications do you see in Down’s syndrome or in Autism? Do you perceive a need to attach a divine intent to these conditions?So does complimentarianism fail to address individuals who do not physically fit into a binary gender model? I am not trying to argue that the physical nature of such people is either inferior or irrelevant - quite the opposite. I suspect their existence has potentially significant spiritual implications. If complimentarianism is based on observations of the natural world, does it need to be inclusive of all the gender diversity that exists in nature? If not, why not?
Sorry, C&D. I misunderstood the meaning of “heteronormative”. Thanks for the correction.Perhaps I wrote that rather inelegantly. Actually “heteronormative” does NOT refer to same-sex marriage:
As to how would it make the world a better place? I’m not trying to answer that, or ask it. I am trying to determine if the Biblical teachings on gender align with science, and how Catholic teachings address the issue of gender when it falls outside of the assumptive male/female binary, and the implications.
That is so beautifully stated! Yes, I do believe there IS such a thing as Truth with a big T. The part I struggle with is, as you state, whether or not the truth is understood - either by myself, the Church, or lay Catholics. To my knowledge, there is no official teaching on intersex individuals specifically (please correct me if I’m wrong, perhaps I missed something). A lot seems to hinge on the assumption that there are exactly two, wholly distinct, genders. That assumption may not be accurate in light of scientific knowledge, much as the geocentric model. I am wondering how then to understand complimentarianism in light of our current understanding of gender.If you acknowledge that truth exists, then we can discuss and even argue about whether or not I, or the Catholic Church, correctly understands the truth of this matter. But if you deny that there is such a thing as truth, that is,** the truth**, not just my truth and your truth, then the matter becomes merely an exercise of raw political power in terms of who has more votes to impose an agenda, and that is what makes it ultimately tyrannical.
I’m not sure I would equate gender diversity with any of those unique conditions, although I am tempted to compare it with the concept of neurodiversity (the idea “that diverse neurological conditions appear as a result of normal variations in the human genome” - Wikipedia). I do feel a need to see divine intent in pretty much everything, actually. I posit that the assumption that intersex individuals are merely an aberration is hard to prove, both scientifically and scripturally, so I am curious what would happen to complementarianism, and all that stems from it, if it were assumed that gender diversity were part of the design rather than a flaw.What spiritual implications do you see in Down’s syndrome or in Autism? Do you perceive a need to attach a divine intent to these conditions?
What spiritual implications do you perceive might be attached to a person experiencing gender dysphoria?
That is a BIG topic! But well worth study. You might start with a simple Google search on the word “intersex” and go from there. Happy reading!I’d be sincerely interested in some education on the proposal of diverse genders.
Starting with what we do know:
Men carry sperm and cannot conceive and carry a child within their bodies.
Women do not carry sperm, they carry an egg, and can conceive and carry a child within their bodies.
From there we have what exactly? Are there people who can do both? Or neither? Or who have a womb for instance, as well as male external organs, or vice versa?
And how does the unique dna of a person express this?
“Intersex” is the new term for “hermaphroditism”, a group of conditions where there is a discrepancy between the external genitals and the internal genitals. The Church wold consider “intersex” to be a physical deformity and the teaching would be in line with those concerning physically challenged.individuals.That is so beautifully stated! Yes, I do believe there IS such a thing as Truth with a big T. The part I struggle with is, as you state, whether or not the truth is understood - either by myself, the Church, or lay Catholics. To my knowledge, there is no official teaching on intersex individuals specifically (please correct me if I’m wrong, perhaps I missed something). A lot seems to hinge on the assumption that there are exactly two, wholly distinct, genders. That assumption may not be accurate in light of scientific knowledge, much as the geocentric model. I am wondering how then to understand complimentarianism in light of our current understanding of gender.
What is it that you would like a teaching on Intersex to address?That is so beautifully stated! Yes, I do believe there IS such a thing as Truth with a big T. The part I struggle with is, as you state, whether or not the truth is understood - either by myself, the Church, or lay Catholics. To my knowledge, there is no official teaching on intersex individuals specifically (please correct me if I’m wrong, perhaps I missed something). A lot seems to hinge on the assumption that there are exactly two, wholly distinct, genders. That assumption may not be accurate in light of scientific knowledge, much as the geocentric model. I am wondering how then to understand complimentarianism in light of our current understanding of gender.
Could you please tell me where the Church identified intersex or hermaphroditism as a physical deformity?“Intersex” is the new term for “hermaphroditism”, a group of conditions where there is a discrepancy between the external genitals and the internal genitals. The Church wold consider “intersex” to be a physical deformity and the teaching would be in line with those concerning physically challenged.individuals.
Unfortunately the reality is very very complicated.The idea of sexual complementarity is not based on a philosophical or theological concept. It is based on the fact that human beings are either man or woman. They have reproductive systems that are sexually complementary. We start with biology.
There may be rare deviations in which sexual identity is indeterminate, but those are just that–deviations, medical problems, like other types of medical or birth defects. No need to make it so complicated.
There are men. There are women. Because they are sexually complementary, there is marriage and family.
If we do indeed start with biology, then to deny or minimize the existence of people who do not fit into the binary gender model doesn’t make sense, and to automatically assume they are “deviations” or “medical problems” is itself problematic. If complementarianism simply does not address this, I feel like this represents a significant interpretive issue. Repeatedly stating that these humans are simply unwell or damaged does not adequatly explain the situation, in my opinion.The idea of sexual complementarity is not based on a philosophical or theological concept. It is based on the fact that human beings are either man or woman. They have reproductive systems that are sexually complementary. We start with biology.
There may be rare deviations in which sexual identity is indeterminate, but those are just that–deviations, medical problems, like other types of medical or birth defects. No need to make it so complicated.
I am posting here because I am too excited about learning more to wait for RCIA! I will of course take anything I learn on an Internet forum with a grain of salt, but I can’t imagine anything could be said to dissuade me from trying to follow Christ and join His Church. Thank you for your kind words. I hope my RCIA classes also reflect the complexity of such personal and significant matters.Unfortunately the reality is very very complicated.
To the OP, I hope your decision to join the RCIA does not hinge on opinions expressed here, they are not binding nor are they cut and dry. Lots of Catholics have a very different perspective on this, it does not make them less catholic.
God bless, I do hope you experience the love of our Father. That will give you all your answers.
JimG in #34 has expressed the reality of Catholic teaching accurately and succinctly. Personal “opinions” against the Church’s teaching need to be corrected for reality in truth.Crow_and_dove #37
Repeatedly stating that these humans are simply unwell or damaged does not adequatly explain the situation, in my opinion.
RCIA cannot cover everything adequately as an “initiation” – I hope that you will purchase and appreciate the *Catechism of the Catholic Church *(CCC) which St John Paul II has declared in his Apostolic Constitution Fidei Depositum:#38
I hope my RCIA classes also reflect the complexity of such personal and significant matters.
I would like it to explain how complementarianism makes sense with more than two genders, because I don’t understand how it does but I trust the Church to teach the truth.What is it that you would like a teaching on Intersex to address?