[Note: I will again not cite sources, for I didn’t explicitly consult when writing this. However, some of the topics for which I did cite (or previously adduced sources) are discussed here. You may consult those materials. To explain the metaphysics of the family, I was inspired by a chapter in Right & Reason by Fr. Austin Fagothey, titled “The Family”. I was also inspired by an article by John Finnis used in the reader Why Humanae Vitae Was Right, edited by Janet Smith. Unfortunately, the article’s title escapes me.]
To understand how a being is good one must understand what it means for it to be. Better stated, one must understand the kind of being that a given being is. Take, for example, a watch. A watch is a time-telling being; in the nature of being a watch is the disposition to yield time-telling behavior. If the watch tells time well, it is a good watch because it is fulfilling the identity of a watch. If it is broken, it is a bad watch because it is not fulfilling the identity of a watch – to tell time.
Likewise, if a man wants to be good he must fulfill the identity of his being, which is humanity. He must behave consistently with the characteristics that make a human, human. For an example that we shall return to, one aspect of his being is to understand truth. By evaluating the nature of his mind and reasoning powers, one is lead to conclude that he has such a characteristic in his being. Since to be good is to fulfill one’s being, and part of his being is to be a reasoner, and to reason is to discern truth, part of his good is achieved by discerning truth.
Now, part of man’s identity is sexuality. It’s clear from the evaluation of sexuality that it is characterized by the disposition to reproduce. Connected with this are 2 aspects: parental relationships and relationships with one’s sexual compliment – for a male, a female, and vice versa. The former consists in authority over a child so the parents may cultivate in that child the characteristics that make one human. That is essentially what is meant by reproduction: making a new person. This consists in ‘growing’ all those traits by which a human is what it is – bodily and ‘soulfully’, if you will. The latter might be called ‘spousal love’. To fulfill the reproductive nature of sexuality each sex needs to be receptive to the participation of the other sex. In virtue of the human form, all humans receive the characteristics of their being (and ergo that by which they are good) by the reproductive unity of the sexes. For a particular person, whilst embracing his or her sexuality, to be good, (s)he must realize that this reproductive end of sexuality can only be met by accepting one’s sexual compliment, as regards his or her whole person, as a necessary participant in that venture. For it is, in part, by the identity and characteristics of the other that the child receives its being and goodness. These characteristics aren’t simply genes (the bodily) but also the personality, the moral character and so forth (hence the term ‘soulful’).
Whole books could be and are dedicated to explaining what I just wrote in about in a simple paragraph, but let it suffice. (I will perhaps write a short discourse on the metaphysics of the family, but that’s forthcoming.) For the questions that concern us are these: What does it mean to be ‘perverse’? How can sexuality be perverted?
The root of the word ‘perverse’ provides a clue. It stems from the Latin ‘perversus’, which means ‘turned around’. Now, among other things, moral goodness consists in the will selecting and intending good behavior. A behavior is thus morally perverse when an agent deliberately wills a behavior to obtain an end that is not consistent with the goods of the human identity that the behavior is to fulfill. The will ‘turns around’ from good ends and uses behaviors that are disposed to those ends to achieve contrary ends. Getting back to our first example, one aspect of man’s being, and ergo an aspect by which he is good, is to discern and pursue truth. Now, the mind is the ‘tool’ of reason by which he reaches that end. Now, sometimes (perhaps always for some people) associated with the attainment of truth is a ‘eureka moment’. By that I mean the moment of elation one gets when one learns some fact. Suppose a man were to use his reason, not with the intention of learning truth, but with the intention of gaining the ‘eureka moment’. It is not the truth as such that he wants, but the sentiment associated with it. Now, the good of being a reasoner is to discern truth, not gain the ‘eureka moment’. If he does so, he is rejecting the good of understanding truth – the good proper to the fulfillment of his mind and being a reasoner – and choosing as his end something that does not fulfill the good of being a reasoner. While the truth may in a circumstance be that which gives the ‘eureka moment’, his interest is the elation and not the truth as such. To be good is to want to gain the truth, not to simply attain it by accident of pursuit of elation. It is in this that the action is perverse: willing a behavior in order to achieve an end that is inconsistent with the good that derives from the nature of that behavior.
So, a man is sexually perverse when he wills sexual behavior for an end that is inconsistent with the goods of sexual behavior: parental relationship and spousal love. While there are many, let’s look at three sexual perversions that sadly are applauded today:
1) Masturbation
In this behavior, both the end of parenthood and the relationship with one’s sexual compliment are ignored so as to achieve sense experience. Moreover, as regards the relation with one’s sexual compliment, a person is imagined, rather than veridically interacting with, in the context of an erotic moment so as to derive the sensations one would achieve if the act were performed veridically. This behavior shows a lack of integrity, for by performing this act one’s interest is only the sense experience of sexuality rather than the goods proper to it.
2) Contraceptive Behavior
With this act, the relationship with one’s sexual compliment is had, but the relationship is not in such a way that is consistent with the nature of sexuality. The end to which the sexual act is directed is the sensation that one achieves through sexual contact with another’s body. Now, it is partially through the being and character of the sexual compliment (partially the self) that one achieves the end of reproduction, which is the cultivation of a new person. Thus, one of the goods of sexuality is receptivity to the identity of one’s sexual compliment. This receptivity entails acceptance of the participation of the other’s person in providing for the identity and flourishing of a new being. So, the perversion of contraceptive behavior is an embrace of a sexual behavior that rejects the spousal unions towards which sexuality leads its participants by its very nature.
3) Homosexuality
The same points as discussed above apply also to homosexuality with respect to the embrace of sexual behavior for the purposes of achieving sensuality rather than the goods of sexuality. However, the added error is the refusal to interact with the complimentary sex whereby the goods of sexuality are fulfilled. The nature of sexual behavior disposes humans to a relationship with their sexual compliments and receptivity to their identities and characters. Bear in mind that I’m using ‘reproduction’ in the sense I spoke of in paragraph three – the cultivation of new humans as regards their total being. Humans receive and actualize their beings through the qualities that each sex individually passes on, as well as by bearing witness to the unique relationship that characterizes the cooperative unity of the sexes, actualized in parenthood, towards which all people through sexuality are disposed. It is thus a good of sexuality to be in partnership with one’s sexual compliment. Homosexuality betrays this good by A) being a rejection of sexual interaction with a given individual’s sexual compliment and B) being an entailment of sexual interaction with a member of the same sex for purposes of achieving sensuality, as opposed to the purposes of parenthood.
magnificatanimameadominum1987 