PROCREATION, SPOUSAL RELATIONSHIP, AND SEX AFTER AMORIS LAETITIA

Authors

  • Todd A Salzman Creighton University
  • Michael G Lawler Creighton University

Keywords:

Amoris Laetitia, Marriage, Pius XI, Pope Francis, Procreative Model, Responsible Parenthood, Spousal Relation Model

Abstract

A consideration of the models of marriage in the Catholic Church is mandatory for, before educators can prepare a couple for marriage, they must be clear on what model of marriage they will promote. A model is an imaginary construct postulated by analogy with a familiar reality and used to correlate a set of observations. There are two major models of marriage in the Catholic tradition, a procreation model and a spousal relation model. The procreative model dominated in the tradition from the second to the twentieth century; the spousal relation model came to the fore at the Second Vatican Council in the 1960s. Pope Francis embraces both models in his Amoris Laetitia, though he prioritizes the spousal relation models. This essay considers the two models and the present prioritization of the spousal relation model.

Author Biographies

Todd A Salzman, Creighton University

Todd A. Salzman (toddsalzman@creighton.edu) is the Amelia and Emil Graff Professor of Catholic Theology at Creighton University in Omaha, U.S.A.

Michael G Lawler, Creighton University

Michael G. Lawler (michaellawler@creighton.edu) is the Amelia and Emil Graff Professor Emeritus of Catholic Theology at Creighton University. Together they are the authors of the award-winning and best-selling The Sexual Person (Georgetown University Press, 2008), of Sexual Ethics: A Theological Introduction (Georgetown University Press, 2012), and many articles worldwide in Theological Studies, Louvain Studies, Heythrop Journal, Irish Theological Quarterly, etc.

References

Ian G. Barbour, Myths, Models, and Paradigms: A Comparative Study in Science and Religion, New York: Harper and Row, 1974, 30; Religion in an Age of Science, Harper, 1990.

Arthur Eddington, The Nature of the Physical World, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1928.

Avery Dulles, Models of the Church, Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1974.

Bernard J.F. Lonergan, Method in Theology, New York: Herder, 1972, 281-294; Paul Minear, Images of the Church in the New Testament, Philadelphia: Westminster, 1960).

David Tracy, The Analogical Imagination: Christian Theology and the Culture of Pluralism, New York: Crossroad, 1981.

William Hill, Knowing the Unknown God, New York: Philosophical Library, 1971.

Urban Navarette, “Structura Juridica Matrimonii Secundum Concilium Vaticanum II,” Periodica 56 (1967).

Charles E. Curran and Robert E. Hunt, Dissent in and for the Church: Theologians and Humanae Vitae, New York: Sheed and Ward, 1969.

Germain Grisez, John C. Ford, Joseph Boyle, John Finnis, and William E. May, The Teaching of Humanae Vitae: A Defense, San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1988.

Janet E. Smith, Humanae Vitae: A Generation Later, Washington: Catholic University of America Press, 1991.

Richard McCormick, Notes on Moral Theology 1965-1980, Lanham: University of America Press, 1981.

Todd A. Salzman and Michael G. Lawler, “Amoris Laetitia: Has Anything Changed?” Asian Horizons 11 (2017).

Acta Apostolicae Sedis 22 (1930).

Von Hildebrand, Marriage, London: Longman’s, 1939.

Heribert Doms, The Meaning of Marriage, London: Sheed and Ward, 1939.

Benedict XVI, Deus Caritas Est, AAS 98 (2006).

John Paul II, Insegnamenti V/3, Rome: Typis Polyglottis Vaticanis, 1982.

Michael G. Lawler, Symbol and Sacrament: A Contemporary Sacramental Theology, Omaha: Creighton University Press, 1995.

Michael G. Lawler, Family: American and Christian, Chicago: Loyola University Press, 1998.

Downloads

Published

2018-06-30

How to Cite

A Salzman, T., & G Lawler, M. (2018). PROCREATION, SPOUSAL RELATIONSHIP, AND SEX AFTER AMORIS LAETITIA. Asian Horizons, 12(02), 233–246. Retrieved from https://dvkjournals.in/index.php/ah/article/view/2198