English
EspañolThe family arises from the nature of man and woman and from the complementarity of their love, which is a fruitful communion.
Text
“Yet another challenge is posed by the various forms of an ideology of gender that denies the difference and reciprocity in nature of a man and a woman and envisages a society without sexual differences, thereby eliminating the anthropological basis of the family. This ideology leads to educational programmes and legislative enactments that promote a personal identity and emotional intimacy radically separated from the biological difference between male and female”. (The Joy of Love, n.56)
Commentary
For many years, gender ideology has been trying to introduce its influence at various levels of society, especially in the initial educational years. They consider their primary objectives to be “deconstructing” the family and religion. They have a strong presence in the media. We all have to be very attentive and make every effort to neutralize this harmful current that would destroy the family, religion, and society.
Each of us is a person incarnated in a male or female body. We are not a disembodied spirit, nor do we “have” a body in the way we “have things”: an apartment or a dress. We are our personal bodies. The body that each of us is manifests our person, and what we do with our body affects our inner world. We are also not only a body without a spirit. This way of existing, also referred to as substantial unity – a singular personal spirit embodied in its masculine or feminine body – resoundingly manifests itself in the authentic family.
Just as wine is the fruit of the vine and man´s labor, so the family arises from infusing the love of the personal spirit into corporeal sexuality and reproduction. Work would never produce authentic wine without the vine, just pure impostor chemistry. Without human labor, the earth and its vines cannot transform into wine. Similarly, no matter how hard we try, we cannot be a complete and authentic family without respect for the masculine and feminine nature and their loving and fruitful complementarity. And we fail because, from the outset, we take away essential aspects of human nature.
When the committed presence of faithful and definitive love between man and woman is rejected, then sex and reproduction do not manage to form the complete familial bonds of love, neither the conjugal nor the consanguineous, but only partial and fragmented aspects.
In turn, without faithful and definitive personal love between man and woman, reproduction and sex can verge on the simple animality of which human selfishness or limitations are also capable. By denying the loving and fruitful complementarity between man and woman, ideological arbitrariness produces substitutes, simulacra, and failures. When you deny heterosexuality and replace it with an artificial invention in the name of an ideology, the fullness of conjugal and consanguineous bonds that make up a family becomes impossible. You expose yourself to frustrations and tragedies.
A new generation of children loved in their entirety by their fathers, mothers, grandfathers, and grandmothers –in other words, genetics and love working hand in hand– would be impossible if we expect such genealogy of relationships to be born from a union that rejects or lacks the complementarity between male and female.
