Contraception and the Trivialization of Sex Part 2 of 4

Out of Order
Pius XII feared the fragmentation, “layer by layer,” of human sexuality. Therefore, he denounced the divorce of the unitive aspect of sexual intercourse, which united husband and wife in a profoundly personal way, from the procreative end that invoked God’s creative hand. He denounced procreation without personal love because it disparaged the physical and interpersonal dimensions of sexual union that God Himself had created. He denounced sexual union that negated the possibility of procreation for a more complex reason. As he stated, he feared the “deplorable consequences” that would happen if the secondary end of marriage—the good of the act of intercourse for the spouses—was no longer “subordinated” to the primary end which is to honor the generative implications of the sexual act.

By subordinating the secondary end of sexual union to the primary end, Pius XII was merely restating a long and firmly-held tradition. The 1917 Code of Canon Law, canon 1013, provided: “The primary purpose of marriage is the procreation and education of children. The secondary purpose is mutual support and a remedy for concupiscence.”

The Holy Father was not suggesting, nor did he hold, that one end is superior or more excellent than the other. He simply affirmed that the integrity of the marital act demands an ordination of one part to the other. To reject this order is to violate the integrity of the act. This notion of order, how one thing naturally leads to another, is what our fragmented world has great difficulty in comprehending. Yet for many, contraception, which separates the two ends of the marital act from each other, seems to unlock a door of freedom. How could “deplorable consequences” spring from an act of freedom?

As order is disrupted, meaning becomes eroded. Marriage and sexual union between husband and wife are matters of such incomparable importance that one must be extremely wary of what dire consequences or altered meanings might follow upon the disruption of their natural purposes.

In farming, the order of planting, cultivating, and harvesting is established by nature and cannot be altered. To say that planting is subordinated to harvesting is to say that the latter fulfills the purpose of the former. But it is also to say that harvesting gives meaning to planting. Can one separate the two ends of marital union without radically altering their meanings?

http://www.cuf.org/LayWitness/online_view.asp?lwID=670

I wonder how long it is going to be before most realize that we must have things in order BEFORE our lives go on correctly!