Just Love: A Framework for Christian Sexual Ethics

About a decade ago I significantly cut back my readings of Catholic moralists and ethicists for two reasons. First, the "Curran methodology" seemed to expand the umbrella of moral concerns and constituencies to a point of infinite ubiquity. Second, the present generation of Catholic moralists--seminary professors, for example--appeared to labor in an unproductive and potentially dangerous environ of balancing absolute Magisterial imperatives against the work product of the sciences and the sense and practice of many Catholic Faithful in matters of human sexuality. Sister Margaret Farley's work at hand was brought to my attention by the Vatican's public censure of "Just Love" in 2012. Evidently I was not the only ambulance chaser; as of this writing "Just Love" ranks #16,623 among all Amazon sales and commands $80.00 in hardback. Who knew Rome was as potent as Oprah when it comes to hawking books? So what kind of work touches off a firestorm in both directions? "Just Love" is a seminal work, that is, a well-defined hypothesis or direction of research. In our work at hand the author approaches the ethics of sexuality from a novel [and yet very ancient] approach, the tradition of Christian justice. Justice, over centuries of theological formulation, has evolved into the art of human rights, the specific entitlements if you will, of each and every one of God's children. Not accidentally, this sense of justice has permeated papal teaching since Leo XIII defended private property in 1893 and girds the Church's present day emphasis upon the right to life. Early in the work Farley makes the valid point that every generation and every culture is called upon to explore the meaning of the unique human experience of gender, both in terms of assigned roles and personal experience, and implied in that, the experience and meaning of sexual acts. The author's range of examined disciplines and philosophies is extensive and consumes a considerable portion of the work. My own learning curve was accelerated by the exhaustive bibliography of present day philosophers, anthropologists, ethicists, and historians, too numerous to quickly count, who, like the author, are exploring the profound meanings of human gender experience and the relational implications of that awareness. At times her survey conveys a feminist sympathy, as do at least many of her sources, but in fairness, "the victors write the history" and some critique of custom and teaching seems a reasonable corrective. As Joseph Ratzinger himself wrote in 1969, "...Tradition must not be considered only affirmatively, but also critically." [186] It is Chapter Five where the author begins to delve into present-day experience of human sexuality and its behavioral implications. I should note here that the reader is well advised at this point to carry forward some sense of difference between Christian ethics [behaviors appropriate to all the baptized] and Catholic morality [prescribed behavior--based upon a fluid matrix of Revelation and subsequent ecclesiastical Tradition.] As a vowed Catholic religious who taught four decades at Yale Divinity School, Farley is well positioned to speak from both disciplines, though at times a reader is hard-pressed to know which hat she is wearing--which evidently was one of the Vatican concerns. Farley's guiding principle in matters of sexual behavior is stated clearly enough: "...the aims of sexuality ought to be in accord with, or at the very least, not violate the concrete reality of human persons." [214] Her sympathies lie with the acting intentionality of a just person, and as she unfolds her discussion, it becomes clear that she is not proposing an overthrow of Catholic orthodox teaching, but rather like Archimedes a better place to stand to shape an effective blueprint for sexual ethics. If nothing else, her proposal rescues Catholic sexual teaching from moral physicalism, a stumbling block in church teaching of matters of sexual expression [as in why "rhythm" is morally acceptable and a condom is not, when human intentionality is the same.] A splendid example of Farley's method is found in her treatment of marriage. For a marriage to be truly just, she argues, its framework must be mutuality, equality, and fruitfulness. She makes an interesting case that the pastoral phraseology "total gift of self to the other" can be dangerously misconstrued toward a "power differential" [267], a state of affairs, she observes, that rarely works in favor of the woman. In treating of marriage, Farley notes that the marriage vow is oriented toward the future. The individual, the spouse, the offspring, and society in general are justly served by the permanence of a progressive commitment to the vow. She allows that there are circumstances when the vow can no longer be maintained, most of these in my view described as moral collapse or severe personality disorder. But in a remarkable insight, she argues that a marriage vow can never existentially disappear. A couple that has shared community, sexual intimacy, and created children cannot casually erase history, obligation, affection, or responsibility by civil [or by implication, Church] court. Farley raises this question in the matter of remarriage, particularly in the matter of just care for children in custodial considerations. Farley discusses the current controversial public discussion of same sex marriage at considerable length in the same context of the entitlement to justice. Whatever one's reaction to her analysis, in fairness this is a working hypothesis. The Vatican has concluded that this work is a danger to the faithful. Is this the case? In the first instance, I do not believe this work was intended for "the faithful" but was instead a contribution to working Christian ethicists and theologians. [Ironically, Rome itself promoted the author's book into the limelight.] Secondly, this is a work of methodology, not pastoral policy. Thirdly, the condemnation arises from a peculiar tendency to single out specific items of sexual behavior as litmus tests of full Catholic orthodoxy. And finally, one would hope that the Church never becomes so self-satisfied that a healthy critique is perceived as something other than a gift.

Excellent book and very timely. As a Roman Catholic I am sorry that the Vatican silenced her on this matter. This is such a middle of the road approach to a new Sexual Ethic, I can't see the merits of the Vatican continuously burying its collective head in the sand. I understand the 'ideal' that it may be trying to espouse but ideals are just that - what has to be done is to provide moral guidance to the Church that enables them to live in the world while seeking the sacred. This policy of not even talking with Sr. Margaret Farley is absurd, is that because she is a woman religious or a woman? What if this had been written by a Man? Let's not forget that after Jesus was crucified the male disciples were in hiding, they didn't have the courage to go outside. The women disciples not only went outside but they went to the tomb, to the place of death. This was not only courageous but was an act of faith - which seemed to be absent in the men in hiding. Sr. Margaret has courage to speak out, she has faith to talk truth with compassion and yet all the men are in hiding, afraid to do anything - meanwhile the marginalized in the world suffer at the hands of the world.

Margaret Farley has crafted an intricate and profound point-of-view in the ever important and growing discussion of Christianity and sexuality. I enjoyed that Farley looked at multiple cultures for their views of gender and sexuality and even provided historical information for Christianity along with adapting the ideas of Michel Foucault for her work. With all these resources Farley constructs her compelling argument and ideas. I will say that I did not agree with all of Farley's conclusions myself (such as her statement on a certain sexual act, I won't say what that is or what her view is as I want other readers to find out for themselves) but I could still see where she was coming from and why she said such things. I would recommend this book for any Christian who wishes to delve into the issues behind the ongoing discussion of Christianity and sexuality or who may work in some sort of pastoral setting with a attention to sexual issues.

This book is much more that the work of a beleaguered scholar; it is a very well-written piece of scholarship and a much better read than most scholarly works, especially theological works. (I am a [non-Roman Catholic] recently retired philosopher and holder of a chair in ethics.) Just Love's voluminous references are so placed that they do not obstruct the main text. Chapter 2 has many succinct (and well documented) summaries of the history of sexuality. It is also the best book I have read since Laurel Thatcher Ulrich's 1990 work, A Midwife's Tale: The Life of Martha Ballard, Based on Her Diary, 1785-1812. I am eagerly reading the book aloud to my spouse and would love to have had the chance to teach with it. Just Love is very worthy of a close read whatever your politics.

Whatever benefits this lapsed Catholic reader derived from "Just Love" came from a few pages in Chapter 6. The section heading "Norms for Just Sex" listed 5 precepts that this reviewer can live with. Sexual relationships should: >Entail no unjust harm>Be of free consent>Include mutuality, equality and commitment. A 6th heading on "fruitfulness" was totally over this reader's head. That brief section was the meat of "Just Love". In fact, the rest of JL reminded this reviewer of the learned theology and philosophy texts he was assigned in required college classes. He did not get them then and fails to understand JL now. The text is too deep with far too many footnotes. Chapter 3 alone contains 128! Perhaps a reprint could place the footnotes in the back next to the index instead if in the main body of text. That stated, it is difficult to be critical of JL. Imagine the research that Sister Farley, with her impressive resume, had to produce just to publish JL. She is to be commended highly. It is hard to subtract too many stars. If she is to be taken to task for any shortcomings herein, a greater mind than this reviewer's will have to do it. JL came to this reader's attention via the "Rewrite" program on MSNBC. The reporter claimed that Vatican criticism had blazoned JL and made it a bestseller! There is another way to look at criticism from On High: When this reviewer was in high school, a Jesuit told us that the Catholic Church picks its fights: It didn't (back then at least) want to be criticized for causing a book or movie to flop, causing folks economic hardship. So the Church waited (again-back then) until a production had made a mark-and then pounced with less economic gnashing of teeth. At least that makes a nice story. The bottom line: This is challenging reading on a vital subject. Who is disinterested in sex? There is nothing to lose by trying JL. If stymied by the academics and footnotes, at least read Chapter 6.

Condemned by the Vatican, this was a "must-read" for me. Margaret Farley is a highly respected moral theologian who begins this intellectual study with a carefully written analysis of love and sex in various world religions as well as in Christianity. She does not repeat standard Catholic clichés, which would be way too easy, nor does she state that hers is a universally Catholic standard. Instead, she clearly uses her own intelligence to present fresh, original ideas for our complicated world. Tradition, culture, and various religious norms are not neglected but are brought into a comprehensive, well-reasoned discussion of human sexuality and human love in a sensitive manner that leads to a foundation for Christian sexual ethics. Farley's conclusions are "just" and relevant and very appealing to many, not simply Catholics. The Vatican evidently finds such quality scholarship quite terrifying.

This book is a wonderful reminder of core Christian principles. As a psychologist and advocate for victims of violence, it was a joy to discover a work that more closely represents the best of Christianity in my experience. Psychologists are often skeptical of religion and any violence advocate can tell plenty of horror stories about religious leaders giving dangerous advice to victims. However, many Christian churches and other religious organizations are great forces for good in the world and this book by Margaret Farley reminds us of all the dedication to well-being and sophisticated understanding of intimacy that are part of so many Christian approaches to helping people during times of crisis. Has been helpful to me in my work.

It is not my practice to pay $27.00 for an e book, $3.00 is usually my upper limit. Hopefully the bulk of this substantial charge will go to the author in support of her right to free speech and academic freedom. The comments of those who reviewed this book and rated one star convinced me to purchase the book. To be sure it is challenging and not an easy read. Apparently it is not consistent with the Magisterium. The rigor and thoroughness of this text should be the bases for evaluating the currency of the Magisterium.

I found this an interesting read, particularly when I got to the seven norms of sexual justice. These pretty well accord with my own thoughts about what I'd want with a partner. Fruitfulness is an interesting one, since I have thought that a good partnership is one in which the partners know how to help one another along, and do so, which may also be to the benefit of the world at large. I am glad Foley managed so well to avoid the big words, and was relatively gentle when it came to Foucault and the like. Practical and ontologically challenged people like me should probably go straight to the list of norms, and only afterwards go back to find the grounding for these, if they feel the need to. I think one of the problems of modern sociology is its self-criticism, which can leave a sense of any positive ground having been whipped from under one's feet and nothing left in its place. Despite Papal consternation, this book does seem to accord with social trends in at least the more advanced industrial societies, and should be interesting well beyond Roman Catholicism, Christianity and religion per se. I am left wondering how this proposal fits with Maslowian psychology. A cheeky thought to finish: modern biology tells us that flowers are the sexual parts of plants; well, they do not seem to be ashamed of waving it about!

With theologians like this there's hope left for the survival of North American and European Catholic Eucharistic Assemblies....provided their voices aren't stifled by the Vatican machine! This is a must-read for anyone influenced by academic theological writing....Of course, the Academy itself is flawed and idealist categories do infect the book. Nevertheless I recommend it to you...hugely!....JUST LOVE

A very interesting perspective. Well worth reading.

Very interesting book.