“Sex education” is often discussed today, but mainly in order to include under this expression programs of information on human sexuality that are generally presented to children and adolescents in the context of schools. These programs would have as their objective furnishing enough biological information for children to avoid the heavy consequences of contracting sexually transmitted diseases, HIV/AIDS and unwanted pregnancies. This kind of sexual education is necessarily incomplete because it leaves to one side the relational, affective and spiritual aspects of human love. It further runs the risk, depending on the program and the philosophy of the teacher, of being excessively explicit and constituting merely an introduction to the practice of contraception and “safe sex”. Finally, the programs of sex education proposed in the schools do not always take into account the immaturity of the students receiving it and can cause harm and upset them. There is also another aspect of sex education that is not often looked at and which is of capital importance, as Dr. Polaino-Lorente explains: sex education in the family. The Pontifical Council for the Family dedicated the document The Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality: Guidelines for Education within the Family (8 December 1995) to this most important topic. The parents are the first persons responsible for the sexual education of their children. They can help them to better acquire the virtue of self-discipline and the importance of the other, which are essential for the human exercise of sexuality. They are the ones who can best introduce the child to the “beautiful love” that comes first from the heart and the mind before being expressed in the body. (‰ Sexual and Reproductive Rights; Family Nature and the Person; Sexual Identity and Difference; Homosexuality and Homophobia; The Person and Integral Procreation; Personalization; Safe Sex)

It is an undeniable fact that there is a relationship between life and sexuality, to the point that the origin of any living human being is always with reference to, in one way or another, the sexual conduct of the ancestors who preceded them. Therefore it would not be thorough to try and speak here about sex education without an explicit reference to the being whose sexuality is discussed.

As Ruiz-Retegui [1] explains, “Sexuality affects all the wide variety of the parts and dimensions that constitute the human person. The human person is man or woman, and has this condition written into its entire being”. Besides the fact that it marks a way of being, sexuality is that human dimension which “makes the person capable of a specific interpersonal gift of self.”

Human sexuality also indicates the psycho-biological capacity that is manifested through sexual conduct, a gesture that means that two persons, man and woman, give themselves to each other and bind themselves to each other in a reciprocal manner. In the same way, sexual conduct, given its elasticity – as well as its possibility to deviate into strange, conflictive or damaging behaviors, shows that the person possesses sufficient freedom to carry out his personal behavior in this area.

Thus, it does not follow that one can enclose a person within any determinism: neither biological (which reduces human behavior to pure biology or to instinct, as far as sexuality goes), nor historicist (which neglects the biological aspects and considers that human sexual behavior is at the mercy of what every person wants to choose) [2].

But the human person, at any stage of his life, is never totally completed, nor totally in progress: he is a free being –although his freedom is not absolute and it is conditioned by corporality and many other circumstances. Thus, he is unfinished and he only builds himself in accordance with the manner in which he conducts his life. Yet the greatness of freedom is counterbalanced with the possibility of making bad use of that freedom, with the misery of choosing wrongly, with the possibility of losing one’s way in life, and eventually losing oneself. And precisely for all these reasons, education in sexuality is something that is very necessary. It is demanded of the parents by the children, and the parents must meet this demand in a satisfactory manner.

At the core of this learning and molding process of human sexual behavior lies the mystery of freedom. Through freedom, man opens himself to all things, and is able to submit himself to the truth about what ought to be his sexual conduct, in accord with his natural being. Yet on the other hand, man can err, become vulnerable, and not make a correct decision while searching for the truth about his personal conduct.

Freedom makes possible the opening of man towards truth, but that same truth also makes it possible for man to hermetically close himself inwardly, and with his own errors. The misuse of freedom–and the error which is its cause and/or consequence–in an absolute way can be understood as a sign of freedom, but not as freedom itself. That is the reason that the person who errs the most is not the person with the most freedom. On the contrary, the person who errs the most is least free and has fewer chances to achieve happiness. Precisely because of that freedom which man possesses, and which he can use in a disordered or mistaken manner, he can then err in most of his decisions, including in his sexual behavior.

Sexuality is one of those faculties badly used in a widespread manner today. This generalized error makes manifest the lack of formation of contemporary man and his entrenchment in ignorance, which most of the time is vincible, as long as it is reached in time. Ignorance buries man in obscurity and makes him more and more dependent, each time, on his own errors. It is thus necessary to offer important points of reference that will enable him to re-orient his human conduct where sexuality is concerned, in such a manner that these behavioral errors can be avoided [3].

To offer the person these points of reference is nothing else but to provide him with those objectives that are so necessary for his personal identity. Through them, he can be helped in guiding and orienting his future sexual conduct, in such a manner that it is reaffirmed and reaches its completion during his lifetime.

There are four cardinal points or dimensions in the education of human sexual conduct: generative, affective, cognitive, and religious.

The generative dimension studies the way that sexuality is implicated in reproduction and the generation of new human beings. In this dimension, procreation and genitalia are studied. Actually, it is very common that the procreative dimension of sexual behavior is suppressed or frustrated.

The affective dimension shows that man and woman are, before all else, persons and for that reason, sexual behavior cannot be used only for pleasure. Sexuality and affectivity are necessary for each other [4].

The cognitive dimension highlights that the carnal union between man and woman demands an awareness and knowledge of each other, a commitment to give oneself, the link of mutual donation. The more you love someone, the more you want to know them.

The religious dimension, finally, shows that the generative human capacity would not be possible where it not for the intervention of the Being who makes it possible, and to whom it must be ordained [5].

Before going on, it is necessary to answer a pertinent question: Can sexuality be taught as a psycho-biological function of the human person? In light of what has been learned in the past years, that question can be answered with a resounding yes. In effect, if sexuality is a human function that is complex and mysterious – which is developed over a space of time – and it is a matter about which a child has little information, it is logical that a child’s education must include this subject matter. This is even more so when, in some way, individual and social happiness of the future youth can be threatened if formation in this area is absent.

Now, sex education cannot be reduced to mere information about sexuality. That is because sexuality, as a dignified and important function of the human person, is not limited to merely genital physiology. Because it is freely exercised and requires the involvement of another person, there needs to be an inherent set of attitudes and values that logically go beyond the restricted sphere of simple information. Hence, sex education cannot be considered as an apprenticeship in techniques, useful only for the achievement of personal sexual satisfaction [6].

There are other values involved in this matter which are non-negotiable and which mold in part, not only human sexual behavior, but also the whole human personality. Hence, formation in this area justifiably demands the title of a real and true education.

For many years, sex education has been the “pending assignment” of society, and more concretely, of parents. Still today, parents are hesitant to deal with their children’s education in this matter because they do not consider themselves sufficiently prepared to do so. Under these circumstances, what happens most often is that they delegate to others (teachers, doctors, priests, or anyone else) their children’s sex education. This is the situation, despite the fact that it is natural and advisable for parents to teach their children about sex.

There has been an absence of parents in this field because of ignorance, laxity, or lack of competence. During the 1970s professors and educational institutions took charge of instructing children in this matter. It is hard–given the differences in programs and idiosyncrasies of the different institutions –to evaluate the sex education that has gone on since then. In some cases, sex education has lacked scientific rigor and sufficient information, having in practice restricted itself to one hour of classroom teaching, tied to classes in science or biology.

In other cases, sex education programs have proved counter-productive, having become a collection or inventory of sexual deviations that, with the aid of slides, was explained to adolescents by a psychologist. Paradoxically, at the end of the sex education program, the student barely knew anything about sexuality, and instead had received more information about “sexual deviations” than the average medical student.

There have been different types of experiences–especially with those involving community or institutional programs–which not only resulted in not helping to resolve the problem of sex education, but acted in favor of sexual deformation. Some of these programs were a matter of public scandal themselves because of pornographic content and because the information in them was destructive of modesty. As a consequence, this effort was lacking in pedagogy because it incited students to abuse sexuality, to use contraceptives and even to have abortions.

In most educational institutions there was no sex education program, despite the fact that many had both boys and girls in their classrooms as co-educational institutions. In several institutions, we have seen recently the explosion of small in-class sexual rebellions. Lamentably, the responsibility for these classroom incidents should be distributed between the parents, teachers and students, since sexual rebellion in class is usually related to the permissiveness of the parents at home and of the teachers at school [7].

All of this means that parents have the inalienable duty to educate their children in sexuality. The references supporting this affirmation could be multiplied indefinitely. For the sake of brevity, the following few will suffice:

“It is imperative to give suitable and timely instruction to young people, above all in the heart of their own families, about the dignity of married love, its role and its exercise” [8].

“When this love is exercised inside marriage, the gift of self expresses, through the human body, the complementarity and totality of the gift; conjugal love becomes then a force that enriches and makes persons grow and, at the same time, contributes to the growth of the civilization of love; when, on the contrary, the meaning and significance of the gift in sexuality is lacking, then a civilization of ‘things’ and not of ‘persons’ is introduced; it becomes a civilization in which persons are used as if they were things. In this context of the civilization of pleasure, the woman can become an object for the man, and the children an obstacle for the parents.”

“Utilitarianism is a civilization of production and of use, a civilization of ‘things’ and not of ‘persons’, a civilization in which persons are used in the same way as things are used […] To be convinced that this is the case, one need only look at certain sexual education programmes introduced into the schools, often notwithstanding the disagreement and even the protests of many parents” [9].

“Sex education, which is a basic right and duty of parents, must always be carried out under their attentive guidance, whether at home or in educational centers chosen and controlled by them. In this regard, the Church reaffirms the law of subsidiarity, which the school is bound to observe when it cooperates in sex education, by entering into the same spirit that animates the parents” [10].

“The right and duty of parents to give education is essential, since it is connected with the transmission of human life; it is original and primary with regard to the educational role of others, on account of the uniqueness of the loving relationship between parents and children; and it is irreplaceable and inalienable, and therefore incapable of being entirely delegated to others or usurped by others” [11].

“Beginning with the changes which their sons and daughters experience in their bodies, parents are thus bound to give more detailed explanations about sexuality (in an on-going relationship of trust and friendship) each time girls confide in their mothers and boys in their fathers. This relationship of trust and friendship should have already started in the first years of life” [12].

“In answering children’s questions, parents should offer well-reasoned arguments about the great value of chastity and show the intellectual and human weakness of theories that inspire permissive and hedonistic behavior. They will answer clearly, without giving excessive importance to pathological sexual problems. Nor will they give the false impression that sex is something shameful or dirty, because it is a great gift of God who placed the ability to generate life in the human body, thereby sharing his creative power with us” [13].

“Young people should be aptly and seasonably instructed in the dignity, duty and work of married love. Trained thus in the cultivation of chastity, they will be able at a suitable age to enter a marriage of their own after an honorable courtship” [14].

“Through this remote formation for chastity in the family, adolescents and young people learn to live sexuality in its personal dimension, rejecting any kind of separation of sexuality from love–understood as self-giving–and any separation of the love between husband and wife from the family” [15]. “The family is, in fact, the best environment to accomplish the obligation of securing a gradual education in sexual life” [16].

Here is a summary of the four principles that parents should keep in mind before beginning to give the necessary information to their children with respect to human sexuality: 1) “Every child is a unique and irreplaceable person and ought to receive an individualized formation”; 2) “The moral dimension must always be part of the explanations”; 3) “Chastity education and opportune information about human sexuality must be offered in the widest context of education human love”; 4) Parents must provide information on sexuality with extreme delicacy, but nonetheless in a clear way and at an opportune time” [17].

True sexual education must logically address many different subjects. Some of them must touch on morphological, anatomical and psycho-biological aspects of sexuality: from individual differences to affection, from psycho-biological differentiation to interpersonal communication, from the roles assumed within the couple to the ethics of sexual behavior.

The disciplines brought together here are many (psychology, anthropology, physiology, psychiatry, religion, etc.), which makes it especially difficult to form educators who are competent in this interdisciplinary area. In any case, the contents that are imparted must be useful so that the child develops in the future a well-adjusted healthy sexual behavior that is acceptable from an ethical perspective.

The contents must be imparted progressively following the specific characteristics and needs of each child as they develop over time. It is important not to forget that sexual education should not be oriented only to satisfy an instinct, but rather is oriented towards the happiness of the person [18].

Among the principle objectives that must be found in any sex education program, one must cite the following important ones: 1) Provide ample information on this subject matter from an interdisciplinary perspective (biology, psychology, anthropology, religion, etc.). 2) Show the finality, meaning and significance of human sexuality within the perspective of a realistic anthropology (the generative, affective, cognitive, and religious dimensions). 3) Inform about the psycho-biological differences between men and women. 4) Explain to children sexual relations in a proportionate and adequate manner as a natural part of marriage, in accordance with the age and circumstances of the children. 5) Contribute to reducing or eliminating fears and anxieties that normally arise because of fear regarding sexual problems or failures. 6) Encourage the necessary discernment regarding stereotypes, compromises, prejudices, and sexual errors that are present in contemporary society. 7) Offer the necessary information to prevent sexually transmitted diseases and AIDS. 8) Present a coherent code of ethics, including the principles on which it is based, in order that the student can satisfy, develop and realize those moral values that lead to a unitive and procreative sexuality within the context of conjugality [19].

In order to reach these goals, it is necessary to insist on several fundamental ideas. The first one is that love is more important than sex. No person in love would renounce their love for a “dose” of sex. Sex is an important part, but it is not the most important component of love. Love, on the other hand, is everything. To love is to discover that personal happiness depends on the fact that the beloved is happy; it is to subordinate one’s personal happiness for the happiness of the other person; or better yet, it is to discover that the existence of one and another person coexist, needing and tending towards happiness together. As Lewis (1960) wrote about this matter, “eros creates a mysterious desire for one particular woman… the lover, loves the beloved for themselves, and not for the pleasure she can give to him [...]” [20].

Sexuality finds its meaning precisely in the form of an interpersonal relationship, whereby the love of the lover is realized in giving of themselves to the beloved satisfying the need to give oneself to make the other person happy, which is truly the only way to bring happiness to the person in love. It is in this context where the sexual gift of self–a mutual self-giving–acquires its full meaning: to see themselves as a reciprocal gift, undeserved, and often not sought. When this happens, the beloved is the source that gives meaning to all that is done, felt and thought. Thus it is understood that to be in love “makes us prefer to share unhappy situations with the beloved, rather than to be happy in any other way” [21]. And that is because the “human sexual dimension”–as Ruiz-Retegui (1987) states–establishes a form of self-giving that is open to giving one’s life as an expansion of its own dynamics” [22].

It is as if the sexual union were not by itself sufficient and would need to go beyond itself, generating another person–a different “novum”: the child –who, independently from those who love each other, would transcend them. Transcendence (in space, time, and personal being) of this new human being has a foundation, which is the union of the sexual act of those who love each other. The child is the living and independent witness of that union. He is an exceptional witness, inextinguishable and irrevocable of that act of human love. Moreover, the union which brings forth the child is self-constitutive of the child’s own being [23].

It is therefore logical to understand that among the ways to empty human sexuality of any meaning, two are particularly frequent today: to deprive it of fertility (sexuality without procreation) and to disassociate it from affectivity (sexuality without a personal commitment, a depersonalized sexuality without self-giving). “Physical self-giving that is not at the same time personal would be a lie in itself, because it would consider the body as something simply external, as a disposable object and not as one’s own personal reality” [24]. In such a case, self-giving would not exist, because neither would give to the other, both would be partially and reciprocally using each other (referring here only to their bodies), while the subjectivity of this act vanishes from their encounter, which is generative and transcendent.

An encounter of this nature, designed only for the satisfaction of fleeting physical pleasure, would be an impersonal ghost-like encounter that empties of meaning the unitive act. And between ghosts, there is only place for a fictitious union. Of what use is it to a man or a woman to share each other’s bodies if the other is completely detached and uncommitted, given that their most intimate thoughts, desires, feelings, and dreams are silenced and ignored? Why resign oneself only to bodily satisfaction, which only lasts a few moments, renouncing having another give themselves freely and totally to become the lord of the will and beloved ruler of the other’s heart? How and why can one try to be satisfied with so little [25]?

The answer can be found in the words of John Paul II: “Sexuality, by means of which man and woman give themselves to one another through the acts which are proper and exclusive to spouses, is by no means something purely biological, but concerns the innermost being of the human person as such. It is realized in a truly human way only if it is an integral part of the love by which a man and a woman commit themselves totally to one another until death. The total physical self-giving would be a lie if it were not the sign and fruit of a total personal self-giving” [26].

Sexuality has much to do with “psychological maturity”, understood as the capacity to subordinate all our impulses, desires and emotions to ordered reason or to the light of our understanding and the decision of our will. A person is psychologically mature, with respect to sexual behavior, if he is capable of committing himself, in a stable and continued manner, to a union with another person (unity), only with that person (exclusivity) and forever (fidelity) [27].

Sexual behavior must be understood as a capacity for commitment, which cannot be taken out of the personal life project that has been chosen. Sexual behavior is not a mere result, the consequence of one person being attracted by this or that quality that the other “has”, rather it is for an irreducible unity that the other “is” and union with them to constitute “one flesh”. This “you” cannot be changed and is untouchable and the relationship is indissoluble and stronger than death [28].

Human sexuality participates in the properties of the transcendent power of love, from which it cannot be differentiated. Love itself is transcendent since, in order to love, one must go out of oneself and meet the other. Thanks to this going beyond oneself, this deep contemplation of the other at the same time that one is denying and forgetting oneself, the human person is affirmed. In the same way, human sexual behavior inevitably must pass through a self-denial in order to achieve personal re-affirmation.

Infidelity consists, precisely, in wanting to withdraw what was given, so that it will no longer belong to the other person. Infidelity is nothing else but opting exclusively for oneself, renouncing what cannot be renounced: the other person with whom the commitment was made.

Religious formation of sexuality today is the best way to rectify, rescue and dignify human sexual conduct and in this way reach personal maturity. Sexual behavior is desired by God according to a certain order, one which is identified with and most fully dignifies and satisfies the natural being of the person. The sexual union of persons, when in conformity with this order, constitutes an extraordinary occasion to find God.

Psychological immaturity is very common in contemporary society. It can be affirmed that young people mature later in life today than they used to in former times. Adults also imitate young people in much of their behavior and attitudes, as today’s society idolizes youth. We have heard so many times the slogan “it is great to be young” that adults have finally begun to believe it. Some adults today even confuse a youthful spirit with a lack of commitment, spontaneity with authenticity, trivialization of responsibility with conviviality, time with the present moment, duty with pleasure” [29].

Those who behave in this manner seem to have forgotten that when the self of the other person that is given to us is disassociated from the components that make up that person, we are inevitably substituting the love of the object for the love of a person. That is, we are “objectifying” the person who gives themselves to us making of them a “person-object”. The impoverishing reductionism of the other person ends up also ruining the person who accepts that kind of a relationship. Having accepted only a part of that person, instead of that person’s entire self, the full giving/receiving of the other person is rejected, and that person is also impoverished by accepting only a fragment or part of the other person.

In this polarity of transcendence-egotism, the immature person appears as a being who sells himself at a low price, who has substituted who he is for someone he is not. By having only in mind oneself, he is self-absorbed and forgetful of the other person. By closing himself from transcendence, he will despair in his own enclosed narcissism, in the hermetical selfishness dealing only with his sexual pleasure, in infidelity to their promise, which while seeking self-affirmation progressively isolates and impoverishes them.

Sex education is a necessary process in the formation of children, which cannot be limited only to giving them some information, despite the fact that this constitutes the what, which is the content of this education. Even if this information is necessary, nonetheless, in itself it does not replace the much more deep and complex task to educate in sexuality. Since this information cannot be avoided, we must therefore address it.

The information that is transmitted to children must be complete and well-balanced. It will be complete if it satisfies the different dimensions that are part of human sexual conduct. Children must be informed of the biological aspects without which they cannot understand human sexual conduct and the reproductive function to which it is directed, as well as the psychobiological differences that characterize man and woman.

In addition, it is necessary to attend to the psychological aspect of, for example, the pleasure that comes from such acts and the subordination of that pleasure to other more relevant psychological finalities such as the love between persons, personal and reciprocal knowledge, communication, a stable and lasting commitment, sharing a common goal, and the possibility of fatherhood and motherhood, etc. Among these contents which must be taught, it is very necessary to attend to the meaning and finality of sexual behavior, that is, to the anthropological, social, cultural, and religious dimensions which come together and must be distinguished.

Regarding the how to educate in sexuality, it is necessary to keep in mind that, as far as possible, this education must be individualized, even personalized, which does not prevent questions being raised by the children at any moment, even within a public or private context.

The information that is imparted must be truthful, unambiguous, clear, and precise without falling into crudeness or artificiality. One can be very clear without being crude. In a word, the information must be imparted and grounded in naturalness.

Regarding the when to teach sex education, it is necessary to inform opportunely, keeping in mind the context in which sex education is imparted, as well as the age of the learner adapting to the age and development of the child.

At this point it is more important to inform more than less; to arrive earlier is better than to arrive after. Many times, one will have to take advantage of the circumstances which ordinarily happen in the life of the child. This is the case, for example, when the child begins to discover sex as something which is part of themselves, either because of the changes and development of their reproductive organs, or because of the manifestations that accompany the emergence of the first sexual impulses. All this presupposes bewilderment, the discovery of pleasure, and the related internal turmoil that accompanies it.

In other circumstances one must take advantage of the natural curiosity of children, by comparing themselves to their siblings in aspects which differentiate them. And in other occasions, it would be opportune to intensify this educational process, taking advantage of the moments when boys and girls begin to be attracted to their classmates and friends of the opposite sex.

In any case, one should never wait for these circumstances to arise; instead, parents must act ahead of time and speak of the matter opportunely and independently of those circumstances. But of course, if these circumstances do arise, then they must take advantage of them.

At no time should parents leave unanswered a question posed by the child. Neither should parents begin to educate in sexuality in an incomplete or only partial way. That is, it is not proper to speak only of sexual physiology or anatomy, excluding the most substantive aspect of this behavior: the interpersonal encounter and loving self-giving.

It is necessary to educate on other relevant aspects as well, such as modesty, since it is indispensable in comprehending human sexuality. Education in modesty is what allows children to recognize the value of their intimacy and self-respect they should have for themselves and their body. Without it, it is very difficult in practice to respect others. As Choza writes, “modesty in covering one’s body means that one is in possession of our body, that one is not willing to share it with the whole world, and consequently, one is capable of giving it to a person or not to give it to anyone. This is the meaning behind the concern that the husband or boyfriend has that their wife or girlfriend dresses in a chaste manner” [30].

Education in modesty thus contributes to the child learning to defend himself from strangers, both as to his bodily integrity and his personal interior self, and thus can reveal himself only under those circumstances and before such persons before whom he must, since it contributes to the perfection of their being and their personal self-realization.

Any manifestation of sexual behavior constitutes a sign that the person is manifesting his most intimate self, as regards the body, that is the me-body, which almost always means that the person is willing to give his interior self to the other person.

If a person only gives his me-body, while refusing to give his interior self, in a sense he is not giving himself to the other person, but only a part of himself, his body, configured as to the other person as a man–object or a woman–object.

The very nature of this teaching also demands a needed characteristic of family sex education, education in chastity. It is natural for children to experiment with the attraction to those of the opposite sex, as well as with their sexual tendencies. But it is no less true that it is also natural to demand that the person have dominion over himself and his instinctive tendencies. He must be someone who possesses a necessary rational self-control, in such a manner so that he is not at the mercy of them. It is only then that a person can control his sexual conduct and voluntarily direct it to where it is personally desired, free of any type of slavery. Education in chastity will be very difficult if there is no appeal to the religious dimension of human sexual conduct.

From a natural perspective, what is proper to the well-balanced person is to act out his will freely and not to be ruled by what his appetites, stimulated under certain circumstances, impose. In fact, sexual behavior, when ordered, reaches its fullest expression in a loving gift of self. But this is not always clear. In any circumstance, human sensibility can demand sexual satisfaction with the urgency proper to the needs of the appetites. This is a case of a selfish appetite, which, aroused by the senses, hardly looks for anything but immediate pleasure. But this way of proceeding does not satisfy the fullest sense of the loving commitment and the happiness that accompanies it [31].

In other circumstances, sexual attraction which is channeled through sentimentality also seeks its own satisfaction. This is a case of a selfish sentimentality, which seeks the psychological satisfaction of the self, whereby the person seeks an affective satisfaction more than a sexual satisfaction. Again, it is rooted in the self. In neither of these two previous circumstances are the conditions met for a loving gift of self. In the first, because the person sets up a mere subjective animal sensibility; in the second, because the person falls into an emotional subjectivity of their own self.

Sexual behavior finds its goal in the loving gift of self, when, oriented by reason, the desire of the will is directed to the other person, seeking that person’s integral good. Human sexual conduct achieves its goal when it seeks the happiness of the other person–as well as one’s own happiness–which takes place in the encounter and gift/acceptance of the other person in their totality, which is, in a relationship founded on commitment, which by its nature must be forever. And so, it is not parts of the other person that are accepted, such as that person’s body, affection, social position, etc. What is sought is a commitment to and with the entire person.

Without that radical commitment, sexual behavior would appear not to have a finality because by means of it, the other person would be used without accepting their totality, that is, the other person is manipulated and submitted to the selfish interest of obtaining mere satisfaction or some pleasure. But, by manipulating the other, the sexual manipulator remains a captive in this sexual manipulative game, and thus an unsatisfactory, incomplete and therefore frustrating sexual conduct is made manifest.

And that is how, as García-Hoz writes, “the young man must clearly understand that everything sexual is above his own essence, ordained to the ultimate goal of marriage and family; that all sexual impulses must be subordinated to love. The youth must understand the greatness of the gift placed in the sexual power, both in himself and in the other person, and which can only be developed correctly and fully through chastity. It is only then that the intimate self will have true satisfaction and peace. Only thus will man be whole, only then will his life be satisfied in truth, already as a single person, as a spouse or a mother or father. Only thus also will he achieve maturity ” [32].

[1] A. RUIZ RETEGUI, “La sexualidad humana”, in M. LÓPEZ MORATALLA ET AL., Deontología biológica, University of Navarre 1987.

[2] A.POLAINO-LORENTE, “Dimensao da sexualidade humana”. in Cenaculo, 61 (1976), 21-24; ID., “Psicofisiología y sentido de la sexualidad humana. Estudio psicológico”; in J. CHOZA, Analítica de la sexualidad. Ed. Eunsa. Pamplona. 1978, 41-96.

[3] A. POLAINO-LORENTE, Sexo y cultura. Análisis del comportamiento sexual, (Biblioteca Instituto de Ciencias para la Familia de la Universidad de Navarra), Rialp, Madrid 1993.

[4] A. POLAINO-LORENTE, “¿Cómo saber si se está enamorado o no?”, in Letras de Deusto 27(1997) 75, 13-42.

[5] A. POLAINO-LORENTE, “Los cuatro puntos cardinales de la sexualidad humana,” in Cuestiones fundamentales sobre matrimonio y familia. Eunsa. Pamplona. 1980, 465-470.

[6] A. POLAINO-LORENTE, Sexo y cultura; ID., Amore conjugale maturitá personale, San Paolo, Milan 1994; ID., “Para entender la actual liberalización sexual.” in Documentos pro-vida, Barcelona 1995.

[7] A. POLAINO-LORENTE – P. MARTÍNEZ, Embarazo y maternidad en la adolescencia. Rialp, Madrid 1995.

[8] Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1632.

[9] JOHN PAUL II, Gratissimam sane, 13.

[10] JOHN PAUL II, Familiaris consortio, 37.

[11] JOHN PAUL II, Familiaris consortio, 36.

[12] PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR THE FAMILY, The Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality, 89.

[13] ibid

[14] Gaudium et spes, 49.

[15] PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR THE FAMILY, The Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality, 32.

[16] SACRED CONGREGATION FOR CATHOLIC EDUCATION, Educational Guidance in Human Love, 48.

[17] PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR THE FAMILY, The Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality, 65; 68; 70; 75.

[18] M. GOTZÓN SANTAMARÍA GARAI, Saber amar con el cuerpo Libros MC, Madrid 1996, A. POLAINO-LORENTE, Amore conjugale maturitá personale; ID., “Para entender la actual liberalización sexual.”

[19] A. POLAINO-LORENTE, Sexo y cultura.

[20] C. S. LEWIS, The Four Loves (Harcourt Brace, New York 1960).

[21] C. S. LEWIS, The Four Loves.

[22] RUIZ RETEGUI, “La sexualidad humana”.

[23] A. POLAINO-LORENTE, Sexo y cultura.

[24] RUIZ RETEGUI, “La sexualidad humana”.

[25] A. POLAINO-LORENTE, Sexo y cultura.

[26] JOHN PAUL II, Familiaris Consortio, 11.

[27] A. POLAINO-LORENTE, ¿Cómo saber si se está o no enamorado?”.

[28] J. B. TORRELLÓ, Psicología abierta, Rialp, Madrid ²1999.

[29] A. POLAINO-LORENTE, Madurez personal y amor conyugal. Factores p sicológicos y psicopatológicos, Rialp, Madrid 41996.

[30] J. CHOZA, La supresión del pudor, Eunsa. Pamplona 1980.

[31] POLAINO-LORENTE – P. MARTÍNEZ, Embarazo y maternidad en la adolescencia.

[32] V. GARCÍA HOZ, La educación de la sexualidad, Rialp. Madrid 1981.