In:
Journal of Religious Ethics, Wiley, Vol. 43, No. 4 ( 2015-12), p. 629-673
Abstract:
Traditional Christian descriptions of homosexuality as a “sin against nature” rely on a claim about the transparency of the sexed body to universal reason: homosexual acts are sins against nature because natural law renders them obviously unnatural. This moral description “unnatural” subverts itself for two reasons. First, neo‐traditionalist descriptions conflate “natural” and “normal.” Dialogue with D idier E ribon's work on the “insult” shows how such moral descriptions self‐subvert and render chastity impossible. Second, neo‐traditionalists use the description to require celibacy, which the tradition teaches is likely impossible without a special gift. This use of natural law thus fails to be self‐consistent or true to reality and so undermines its ability to serve as a critical principle in the search for truth. A critical use of natural law allows for an alternative, non‐insulting description of homosexual characters. This essay outlines the character description through immanent critique of two spheres of Catholic teachings about sex: Augustinian sexual ethics and nuptial theology.
Type of Medium:
Online Resource
ISSN:
0384-9694
,
1467-9795
DOI:
10.1111/jore.2015.43.issue-4
Language:
English
Publisher:
Wiley
Publication Date:
2015
detail.hit.zdb_id:
2005952-8
SSG:
0
SSG:
1
SSG:
5,1
