Okay, so you said “sexuality” and I admit that that is not exactly the same thing as sex, as in the actual mechanics of sexual intercourse, but I was responding to your point overall. The fact that I used a shorter and somewhat offhand form of words doesn’t change the point that I was making. I could go back and change it to “sexuality” and everything I said would still stand. I find it genuinely strange that when asked what to include in a six-week introduction to Catholicism for Protestants you would think that the first thing that comes to mind is John Paul II’s theology of the body and Catholic ideas about human sexuality in general. At most, I would subsume the theology of the body into my final point about focusing on the Church’s social teaching and the teachings about the culture of life and the dignity of the human person and the Church’s role in the history of the twentieth century. In the whole of the 2,000-year worldwide history of the Catholic Church, the theology of the body is not the most important thing to tell Protestants about. There is just so much that is more fundamental. Like, for example, I didn’t think to mention our idea that what the Church teaches is revealed by God and the sources of that. Protestants would be fascinated to know how Catholics read the Bible for example. So much more fundamental than talking to them about sexuality.
Oh, and as somebody else pointed out, purgatory. I mean, the Catholic Church’s teachings on purgatory was possibly the single biggest contributing factor in the Reformation in the first place. Purgatory and indulgences. That would be totally fundamental in dialogue with Protestants. It would just be infinitely more important to cover than anything to do with sex or sexuality or the theology of the body.