Page 2, 25th November 1955

25th November 1955
Page 2
Page 2, 25th November 1955 — THE SACREDNESS OF SEX

Report an error

Noticed an error on this page?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it.



Related articles

New Triumphalism 'makes The Old Seem Benign'

Page 5 from 5th April 1974

Christian Marriage

Page 2 from 2nd December 1955

Catholic Teaching

Page 2 from 11th November 1955

C ' A Vi . 2 ....., E Ce. Via E.v.-5 C Ts T

Page 3 from 15th April 1966

Biology And Sex Education

Page 2 from 1st May 1959


Right Thinking About Married Love

SIR,—Having read Fr. Holloway's final letter several times, 1, a parish priest of many years standing, cannot discover any definite meaning amongst all the abundance of words, but only an attitude, which still seems to me the over-puritanical attitude

which has been consciously left behind by the Church at large. For instance, there seems a sug gestion that before the Fall there Is there any grain of truth in the

said suggestion? Only that a married couple may give up their use Of Marriage, tas1 as people may give up sugar in their tea; and this might be pleasing to God. but not to do it is not an " imperfection."

As for that alarming word " con

cupiscence." so valuable to sensational pulpit-orators, what after all does it really mean when the old confusions are cleared up? It simply means that owing to the Fall the controlling guidance of reason over instinct (all instinct. not only the sexual) is more difficult, and often imperilled. Fr. Holloway writes as if desire

becomes " concupiscence " by being more " intense." Not at all; it becomes concupiscence by being inordinate. • Inordinate " does not mean extra-strong, it means wrongly-directed, out of order as regards ultimate object or purpose, an "urge" that seeks to elbow reason aside. If the outlook suggested by Fr. Holloway's letters were the true one. it seems to follow that strongly-sexed people would be hopelessly handicapped in the " illumination " and " unitive" ways, and the saints would mostly be drawn from the undersexed. This is so unlike anything one gathers from history, hagiography. and common observation, that I should call such a conclusion (which of course Fr. Holloway has not actually drawn) the most arrant nonsense.


blog comments powered by Disqus