The stance of the Catholic Church on medical treatment of transsexuality

  • Thread starter Thread starter Saya
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
tuffsmurf said:
In trans communities they usually refer to biological sex as the sex “assigned at birth”.
Click to expand...
The “assigned at birth terminology” tends to downplay its basis in fact. It refers to an act with the implication it could be in error, rather than to fact. I don’t know whether that’s an unintended implication or not.
 
Last edited:
neophyte said:
I imagine that such grave self-mutilation would be treated in moral theology in the same way that any other grave self-mutilation would be treated.
Click to expand...
0Scarlett_nidiyilii said:
However, the Church forbids the destruction of healthy body parts.
Click to expand...
In the case of bottom surgery that will sterilize the
person, I believe that we can use the rule of double
effect in a similar way. The surgery itself is neutral.
The good effect, from the perspective of the person
undergoing it, is that his or her body will come to
present to the world the person in the gender he or
she experiences inside. The relief of suffering this
represents is profound. The inability to bear or father
a child is a regrettable and foreseen consequence, but
it is not a means to the good end. Indeed, some
transpersons desperately wish their reproductive
function did not have to be sacrificed, and in fact
some go through a transition in such a way as to
preserve it. Sterilization, then, is a side effect of
correcting what amounts to a birth defect. It is an
unintended but foreseen consequence.

From an article by a Catholic Healthcare Association of the United States. Looks like the Church is not even sure what to think about the “bottom parts” surgery.
 
Last edited:
Could you please tell me if any of those contain the official stance of the Church on the morality of various aspects of treatment? The overview suggests no such thing is contained there.
 
Last edited:
Saya said:
From an article by a Catholic Healthcare Association of the United States. Looks like the Church is not even sure what to think about the “bottom parts” surgery.
Click to expand...
https://www.chausa.org/publications...6/transgender-persons-and-catholic-healthcare

Note that this particular organisation does not speak for the Catholic Church. The article itself acknowledges that the Church has not said much at all directly on the topic of transgenderism.

The article is highly speculative, making statements such as: “Transpersons are persons who, it can be argued, are either missing normal breasts (MtF), or have them accidentally (FtM), due to a different kind of pathology.” And this one: “Sterilization, then, is a side effect of correcting what amounts to a birth defect. It is an unintended but foreseen consequence.”
 
Last edited:
I know. Like I said in my opening post, they’re all very vague and avoid taking a firm stance. So at the end of the day looks like the Church simply doesn’t know whether transitioning (or some of its aspects) is acceptable or whether it’s a sin?
 
As others have said, I don’t believe there is an “official” black and white statement on all the various aspects of treatment.
I think all we’re going to get is statements from various individuals or associations. I don’t think that the curia is going to put out a detailed statement on the different procedures, if that’s what you’re looking for.
Why do you need to see some kind of official statement? Are you seeking guidance for personal reasons, or for argument?
Just because you request a statement doesn’t mean there is going to be one.
 
Last edited:
I think the Church is trying to balance being compassionate and being clear. The Church doesn’t have to delineate every sin to indicatethat a particular line of action is sinful.
 
Last edited:
Saya said:
Like I said in my opening post, they’re all very vague and avoid taking a firm stance.
Click to expand...
The nature of what has befallen a person who experiences extreme gender dysphoria is not known. I suspect that is an impediment to analysing the morality of what are seemingly radical treatments.
 
Saya said:
From an article by a Catholic Healthcare Association of the United States.
Click to expand...
A single quack (that article had only one author) who thinks that normal genitalia are a birth defect is not the Church, nor does she speak for it in any way.

And to mutilate normal, healthy genitalia in order to pander to the disordered perceptions of the patient is not a good, it is an objective evil.
 
Last edited:
27lw said:
The Church doesn’t have to delineate every sin to indicatethat a particular line of action is sinful.
Click to expand...
I think that it should at least know whether a particular line of action is sinful. And if this line of action is an important, highly controversial moral issue debated in the society it should let people know its stance on it. Just like it does in case of abortion, homosexual acts etc.
 
Saya said:
40.png
27lw:
The Church doesn’t have to delineate every sin to indicatethat a particular line of action is sinful.
Click to expand...
I think that it should at least know whether a particular line of action is sinful. And if this line of action is an important, highly controversial moral issue debated in the society it should let people know its stance on it. Just like it does in case of abortion, homosexual acts etc.
Click to expand...
There is a Vatican document! “Male and female he created them”.
What more do you want? It’s linked above but you dismissed it.
 
Last edited:
27lw said:
“Male and female he created them”.
Click to expand...
I’ve read it. It doesn’t answer any of my question. It doesn’t discuss any aspects of the treatment at all. It just states that you can’t pick your sex and talks about transsexuality as a part of the so-called “identity politics”, not about the medical condition of gender identity disorder/gender dysphoria.
 
Saya said:
I think that it should at least know whether a particular line of action is sinful.
Click to expand...
It’s not so simple. Mutilation is sinful. The challenge is to develop insight as to what is mutilation. That requires a certain depth of understanding of what is really happening in the transgender case, versus other scenarios. When transgenderism isn’t scientifically understood, that may be difficult.
 
tuffsmurf said:
Could we stop arguing semantics here? In trans communities they usually refer to biological sex as the sex “assigned at birth”. We all know what we mean, can we discuss the topic of the thread?
Click to expand...
What they mean is that sex isn’t clearly defined and so it is something that is assigned by a human person, such as a doctor.

That isn’t what science tells us and a person’s sex (any mammal’s sex) is very clear almost 100% of the time, but they don’t want to accept that because their biological sex causes them severe psychological distress, pain, and anxiety, so they fight against it anyway that they can.and are trying to reshape the world in their image.
 
Last edited:
I don’t know anything about that organization.

Try contacting the National Catholic Bioethics Center.
 
Again,there are a few problems going on.

First, transgenderism is a very new condition, historically.

Second, it emerged at a time of increasing secularization and scientific ability to do human experimentation.

Thirdly, there is no standard definition of the word “transgender”

Fourthly, because of social factors that go as far back as the sexual revolution and the presence of powerful lobby and pressure groups (make no mistake—in spite of all the boo-hooing transactivists do about their “oppression”, they have a great deal of power and influence), scientists hands are tied when they try to study it.

The Church doesn’t generally rule on particular medical or psychiatric conditions, but on the morality of various treatments.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top