Does what we know about transgender people throw a wrench at Catholic teaching on sex and marriage?

[aux1]

Is this a fancy way of calling what I am saying just a question of semantics?

Yes

As I said before, the statement by a few members, even of the hierarchy, does *not *constitute the Church’s doing something, *especially *in regards to something outside the area in which the Church has authority.

Semantics. You are basically asserting that Humane Vitae etc. is different from the sentence against Gallileo because the former is a doctrinal document why the latter is a discplinary document. I find that distinction to be artificial. What you are trying to do is divorce orthodoxy from orthopraxis. But if you do that, then for example you cannot cite Didache as evidence that the Church has always opposed abortion, because Didache is a disciplinary document, not a doctrinal document.

I even know why this distinction was developed – it was a defense against those who were deploying Gallileo to attack papal infallibility. Nevertheless, I believe that if a widespread praxis in some area exists – especially if this praxis is codified in a disciplinary document – then this praxis is the view of the Church, even if it is not explictly codified as such at the doctrinal level. JP2 used this reasoning in Ordinatio Sacerdotalis: since there was never a praxis of ordaining women, then women cannot be ordained.

There was a period where the Catholic Church held to a praxis of believing into immobility of the Earth, as evidenced by its disciplinary documents (multiple editions of Index librorum prohibitorum), and despite quite obvious scientific evidence. This praxis has later been quietly dropped when scientific evidence become undeniable.

Since the research into the phenomenon of transsexualism is relatively new, we are not yet quite sure what this phenomenon phenomenon actually is. However, at one point we will know, and it’s entirely possible that this finding will lead to revision of current praxis concerning the issue. (This will not be a major problem, unless Vatican decides to shot itself in the foot in the mean time by issuing a document elevating current praxis to doctrinal level. )

To the Church’s credit, it always follows scientific knowledge, even if it takes a while to catch up

Regarding the present praxis of not allowing transsexuals to marry, I do not think that this is set in stone either. The main argument against marrying transsexuals is that they are infertile by definition. However, the Church already allows infertile couples to marry (can. 1084.3). So I do not see a fundamental problem with marrying a trans person, provided that they disclose their trans status prior to marriage, so there is no ground for annulment per can. 1098.

Of course, I’m not holding my breath. I doubt I will see such praxis in my lifetime

Christ is resurrected, rejoince! (You too, trans people!).

 

[aux1]

Male-to-female transexuals do not identify with giving birth, which is something only women can do. …]

Nope, giving birth is only something that fertile women can do.

However, since the Church does not distinguish between fertile and infertile women with respect to marriage (can. 1084.3) then your argument is largely moot.

 

[aux1]

Huh? Okay, so the principle here is “whatever one identifies with, society should treat one as such”. Don’t you see the problem? Again, the anorexic identifies as being overweight. Should society treat her like this? The man in the lunatic asylum thinks he’s Jesus Christ. Should everyone bend their knee at his name?

Good question!

In case of anorexia, there is a good objective reason to reject self-identification as overweight, because accepting it would mean that the individual would startve herself to death.

In case of someone believing himself to be Jesus Christ, then there is a good objective reason to reject such self-identification because there was only one Jesus Christ.

If you want to reject the transsexual’s wish to change sex, you’d have to demonstrate one of two things:

(a) the disorder does not actually exists – or, that it’s a delusion, and that you can treat such delusion;

(b) that the individual will be better off if they don’t change sex.

AFAIK the current state of medical knowledge is that neither (a) nor (b) holds, so it’s best to go forth with the sex change.

Of course, I must say that the doctor should be really sure that sex change is the best course of action. It should not be done just because.

 

[fix]

What you are saying is that one’s social role should be defined his/her genitals.

There are historical examples of women who would cross-dress in order to fulfill social roles reserved only for men:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nawojka
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lillie_Hitchcock_Coit

And your Church even recognizes some of them as saints:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_the_Monk
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hildegund_%28virgin%29
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodora_of_Alexandria

Oh, and we wouldn’t be probably having this conversation if it wasn’t for one trans-woman:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynn_Conway

You seem confused here. One’s sex is objective. Whether one accepts this objective truth or not cannot change reality. One is male or female. Thinking one is something they are not changes nothing.

 

[markeverett49]

Nope, giving birth is only something that fertile women can do.

However, since the Church does not distinguish between fertile and infertile women with respect to marriage (can. 1084.3) then your argument is largely moot.

You misunderstand what I wrote. My point was not about Church teaching but about men who think they are women because they identify as female. My point was that they don’t identify with giving birth, which is something only women can do. Only women can give birth. Further, MOST adult women give birth. Now I did not say this but for your benefit I suppose I need to: if you think it reasonable that men who think they are women all identify only with infertile women, not the overwhelming majority who are fertile, then I would suggest this is not an identification with women at all but rather with being sexually submissive.

For married couples, infertility is a defect,not an “alternative.”

 

[CopticChristian]

Good question!

In case of anorexia, there is a good objective reason to reject self-identification as overweight, because accepting it would mean that the individual would startve herself to death.

In case of someone believing himself to be Jesus Christ, then there is a good objective reason to reject such self-identification because there was only one Jesus Christ.

If you want to reject the transsexual’s wish to change sex, you’d have to demonstrate one of two things:

(a) the disorder does not actually exists – or, that it’s a delusion, and that you can treat such delusion;

(b) that the individual will be better off if they don’t change sex.

AFAIK the current state of medical knowledge is that neither (a) nor (b) holds, so it’s best to go forth with the sex change.

Of course, I must say that the doctor should be really sure that sex change is the best course of action. It should not be done just because.

Aux,

You have answered your own question. Sex change is a delusion. After hormones, after castration, after therapy…a man XY remains a man XY so it is a delusion at inception that is perpetuated by an attempt by others to aid in perpetuating that delusion. There will always be a delusion as nothing can change the sex of a man to other than what that man was created to be.

Delusion before encounter with the medical profession, reinforced and delusion at the end.

 

[CopticChristian]

So at work we had a seminar on transgender people and etiquette when meeting a transgender person.

1. Assigned gender upon birth
2. Sexual orientation
3. Gender identity
4. Gender expression

And that is what explains the existence of gays (#1 not correlated with #2), transgender (#1 not correlated with #3 and #4), and intersex people (#1 is blurred and not correlated with #3 and #4). #2 can be blurred (bisexuality, transgender attraction), and #3 and #4 can be blurred (genderqueer, crossdressing, switching gender identity in one’s mind, etc.) And transgender people can also be gay or straight (all four variables not correlated).

Lobo,

What I learned was honestly fascinating. We have long thought of gender as binary (male vs female), but it is scientifically very clear that gender is an analysis of four variables:

What you learned was propaganda and not even close to being scientific.

What is also scientifically very clear is that these four variables can all be blurred, and have NO correlation with one another.

Propaganda can be very convincing to the uneducated mind. My mind rejects this propaganda.

My question then is,** if it’s scientifically very evident that our concept of gender, which we long thought of as binary, instead is expressed by a wide range of values for the four variables above, and humans do exhibit this wide range of values, then doesn’t that throw a wrench into Catholic teaching on sex, gender, and marriage?**

Now that you know that this is propaganda and not science you should reframe your question.

My question is, based on propaganda, without any scientific support then why do people believe this and cause people to believe that there is a malady with proper correct Catholic Teaching concerning sex, gender and marriage? Is there an agenda?

Your conclusion should also be reframed…

Doesn’t this also add ammunition to the idea that Catholic teaching is losing relevance in modern society, because the Catholic Church, with its insistence on upholding tradition, becomes hostage to its doctrines and cannot change according to what we now know scientifically?

Knowing that this is propaganda, knowing that this propaganda aims at Catholic teaching, it is clear that the secular world, without any scientific support, is attempting to suggest to the secular world that the Catholic Church is not relevant. Knowing that the Church Tradition, teachings and Doctrines will not change and that science has not brought up any information that is contrary, is it possible that this propaganda is an attempt to infiltrate weak minds and attack the Church?

This would be a better OP…

 

[markeverett49]

You know, even those who want to recognize transexualism as part of human sexuality are not suggesting that there is a sex other than male and female. Those men who think they are women AGREE that people are one or the other; they do not regard themselves as both male and female but rather as being of female gender in a male body.

 

[Stephanie_Pauls]

You know, even those who want to recognize transexualism as part of human sexuality are not suggesting that there is a sex other than male and female. Those men who think they are women AGREE that people are one or the other; they do not regard themselves as both male and female but rather as being of female gender in a male body.

 

[Allegra]

Yes and yes, as evidenced by responses you have received so far.

It’s a scientific fact that transsexuals have brain structure matching their psychological gender. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_transsexualism#Brain_structure So it’s not a mere psychological disorder which can be cured through psychotherapy (as many here would like to believe), these people are literally hardwired to think like the other sex.

Also, I find the following sentiment among Catholics to be very disturbing:

This view basically asserts that a person is completely defined by their DNA. Of course, this conveniently ignores: epigenetics, influence of hormones on embryonic and fetal development (ever heard of CAIS - XY females?) and influence of environmental factors (pseudo-estrogens in drinking water, anyone?).

As evidenced by the post quoted above, some Catholics today hold dearly to a mindset where a person is defined by DNA. I’d find that rather amusing, if such mindset wasn’t downright scary. First off, if you believe that all your traits are in DNA, then the logical conclusion is that you could eliminate unwanted traits from the population by removing them from the gene pool. Oh, we’ve just invented eugenics. You have Catholics that decry eugenics, but somehow hold dearly to (scientifically inaccurate) idea it is based on. Second, Catholics believe that a human is made of body and soul. Yet, if everything is in DNA, then there is really no place for immaterial soul, is it? That “DNA is everything” view is pure materialism.

That’s a fundamentally anti-Catholic, anti-Christian idea. It has been picked up because it makes a nice anti-abortion argument, without realizing the amount of damage it carries.

A transsexual is a female soul in a male body (or vice versa), but you will never hear a Catholic saying that, since they’ve abandoned the concept of the soul in favor of genetic determinism.

Are souls male and female? In the Bible is says that there will be no woman or man in heaven. It’s our bodies that are male and female, and our biology influences our cognition. This is why there are marked differences in male and female thought. We are designed to think differently because we are designed to function different roles in society. I don’t see how this influences our soul though. Our soul is immortal, designed to last far beyond our physical, earthly needs.

 

[Stephanie_Pauls]

You seem confused here. One’s sex is objective. Whether one accepts this objective truth or not cannot change reality. One is male or female. Thinking one is something they are not changes nothing.

It isn’t merely thinking.

 

[markeverett49]

. Our soul is immortal, designed to last far beyond our physical, earthly needs.

The soul is immortal but the resurrection of the body is also dogma. Plato thought the soul was as a prisoner in the cell of the body; the Church doesn’t see the soul that way. The body and soul comprise a unity. (This is why the Church denies that souls pre-exist conception and it also denies that a particular soul might be joined to a succession of bodies.)

 

[CopticChristian]

It isn’t merely thinking.

SP,

Please tell me what it is inside our heads…

We have the ability to

Think, Feel, Imagine…in our heads

We have the ability to

Speak and Act in our body

Now if you say that it is not just thinking that leaves imagining and feeling…if you say that it is not thinking that it is feeling then we know that feelings are not fixed or we would be out of control with our emotions and unable to change how we feel about this or that and this is not true…

So besides thinking what is it in your mind?

Tell me why you see that it is not thinking as the problem?

Tell me what it means to you that thinking is not the problem.

Tell me besides thinking as it regards you what this says about you.

 

[Stephanie_Pauls]

SP,

Please tell me what it is inside our heads…

We have the ability to

Think, Feel, Imagine…in our heads

We have the ability to

Speak and Act in our body

Now if you say that it is not just thinking that leaves imagining and feeling…if you say that it is not thinking that it is feeling then we know that feelings are not fixed or we would be out of control with our emotions and unable to change how we feel about this or that and this is not true…

So besides thinking what is it in your mind?

Tell me why you see that it is not thinking as the problem?

Tell me what it means to you that thinking is not the problem.

Tell me besides thinking as it regards you what this says about you.

Lets say for the sake of arguement I grant you are correct about transgenderism. It cant be cured. No more than schzizophrenia, bi polar, aspergers, autism, Rhetts, anything else of the brain. Sexchange is the best solution we have. You want to deprive those who are tg that closest thing to a cure. The problem is you are not pragmatic.You want a male body to stay in the male role come hell or high water, at all costs. I want whats works. SRS has proven to me it works.

 

[Stephanie_Pauls]

Are souls male and female? In the Bible is says that there will be no woman or man in heaven. It’s our bodies that are male and female, and our biology influences our cognition. This is why there are marked differences in male and female thought. We are designed to think differently because we are designed to function different roles in society. I don’t see how this influences our soul though. Our soul is immortal, designed to last far beyond our physical, earthly needs.

Male and female souls in the sense of personality.

 

[CopticChristian]

Lets say for the sake of arguement I grant you are correct about transgenderism. It cant be cured. No more than schzizophrenia, bi polar, aspergers, autism, Rhetts, anything else of the brain. Sexchange is the best solution we have. You want to deprive those who are tg that closest thing to a cure. The problem is you are not pragmatic.You want a male body to stay in the male role come hell or high water, at all costs. I want whats works. SRS has proven to me it works.

SP,

I never said it could not be cured. You want to believe that SRS works. All I need is one case to prove that GD is not fixed. Here it is…

spiritrelease.com/cases/Fiore_gender.htm

He said, "I’m here against my three therapists’ advice. They’re upset because it was my wife’s decision. In fact, one got quite angry with me because he felt Mary is manipulating me. We had a horrible therapy session, Mary, the therapist and I, last week. We were very close to getting into a violent argument, she is totally rejecting of the program I’m in and that I’m going through with a sex-change operation.

and then…

Just as I finished writing up Roger’s account, I got an inspiration to call him to see how he has been. It’s been a year since we’ve talked on the phone or had any communication. Roger was more than delighted to hear from me. Thirty minutes before his phone rang, he had just finished a letter to me which was on a table next to the door to be mailed the next day. He said, “It can’t be a coincidence!” He reported that he is “doing fine.” The gender dysphoria is a thing of the past.

If one person can find relief from their GD and depression then it is possible that others too can find relief, even if it means that there may be other than conventional means to do it…

Now, I am not saying I agree with possession, but if someone believes that they are possessed then you work with them in that belief to get them well…

So, what you think and believe needs to be thought of in light of there are others that may be helped by other than conventional means…no drugs, no surgery, and resolution…

If the propaganda is that the only therapy is acceptance, hormones, surgery then that is what you will believe…

If you discover that this is an industry that feeds Therapists to make money for people that have a problem, Endocrinologists that now have a populaiton to make money on that they would not have seen before and Surgeons that now have a line of work to get paid for that they would not have seen absent…

Propaganda to say otherwise…then the line will continue to grow for the door to the propaganda fed with money, mutiliation, increased risks from Hormones…to satisfy a belief, desire, wish…and not offering any alternative but

Acceptance=$$$$$$

Next, you might want to review NARTH on the man that would be Queen…

narth.com/docs/queen.html

Though the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) notes that a high percentage–perhaps as much as 75%–of GID children go on to identify as bisexual or gay, a causative relationship cannot be offered. We have no way of knowing, for example, why the other 25% self-identified as heterosexual; nor do we know the number of matched comparisons of heterosexuals who were classified as GID children, but later managed to make the transition to heterosexuality. Bailey himself admits that he does not know how children develop their sexual feelings! (p. 34)

 

[Stephanie_Pauls]

SP,

Acceptance=$$$$$$

Also Non acceptrance-= $$$$$$$. Why You ask, because Ill be in a psychiatric hospital till I likely die if we did things your way.

 

[CopticChristian]

Also Non acceptrance-= $$$$$$$. Why You ask, because Ill be in a psychiatric hospital till I likely die if we did things your way.

SP,

You cannot predict what would happen other than to say that you wish, choose, prefer, desire not to do so. You project your future based on your clinging to a belief. We are not born with beliefs. Beliefs are thoughts that we apply meaning to and then accept. If you choose to change a belief or not change a belief then there is no telling what will happen however it starts with the same desire, preference, wish to change a belief and until then you remain as you are.

If $$$ is the issue then we have to do a cost benefit analysis…

$$$ for mutilation, risk of Hormones, and the unknown…

$$$ for resolution, maintenance of created reality, no risk of Hormones, and the unknown…

How much money is it worth to anyone to maintain the gift God gave them?

 

[Stephanie_Pauls]

SP,

You cannot predict what would happen other than to say that you wish, choose, prefer, desire not to do so. You project your future based on your clinging to a belief.

No it’s based on Knowing myself and being very highly prredictable. I’m about as predictable as they get. It’s a family trait, you can fit all the spontaniousness Im caple of in a thimble.

 

[Jeremiah_29_11]

This guy thought he was a tiger. Should we have put him in a tiger enclosure in a zoo?

Even after all his surgeries to change his appearance to that of a cat, was he in actuality, a cat?

Or just a very sick human being?

He died of suicide, tragically enough. He needed help, and I think the surgeons who carried out the surgery were extremely cruel and could be sued for malpractice. I think the same about doctors who do sex-mutilation operations.