Categoria: Filosofia

What to think of the new forms of cohabitation

Leonardo BoffDeixe um comentário

Besides the marriage-families constituted in the socio-juridic and sacramental framework, more and more appear families of simple cohabitation and free unions that are mutually agreed outside the traditional framework that exist as long as the consensus lasts giving origin to the common law non conjugal families.

All over the world grow unions of homoaffective persons, (man-man and woman-woman), who struggle for the creation of a juridical framework that guarantees them stability and social recognition.

It is not licit to pass ethical judgement about these forms of cohabitation without having tried before to understand the phenomenon. Concretely, how to think of the family seeing all the varied forms in which a family is presently being structured?

Marco Antonio Fetter, a Brazilian specialist creator of the first University of the Family, in Porto Alegre, Brazil, that offers all the academic degrees, defines family this way: «the family is a unit of persons with common objectives and with links and strong emotional bonds each one of them with a defined role, where naturally appear the roles of father, mother, children and siblings»(Correio Riograndense, 29/10/2003,11).

On the other hand, an important transformation has happened in the family with the apparition of preservatives and contraceptives, now already incorporated into the culture as something normal and that help avoid AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases. Moreover, with preservatives and the pill, sexuality has been separated from procreation and from steady love.

Frequently now, sexuality and marriage as well are seen as opportunities for personal realization, without including procreation. Conjugal sexuality gains intimacy and spontaneity because with contraceptives and family planning is liberated from non desired and unwanted pregnancies. The children are wanted and decided in common agreement.

The emphasis in sexuality as personal realization has made possible the apparition of forms of cohabitation not strictly matrimonial. Expression of this are the consensual and free unions without any other compromise than the mutual realization of the partners or of the homoaffective cohabitation.

Such practices, new as they are, must also include an ethical and spiritual perspective. It is important to care that they are expressions of love and mutual trust. From a Christian point of view of the phenomenon, if there is love, has to do with God, because God is love (1John 4,12.16). Hence, neither prejudices nor discrimination are correct. Better, there must be respect and openness to understand those facts and also place them before God. If the persons in the compromise do it this way and assume that relationship with responsibility, religious and spiritual relevance to that relationship can not be denied. An atmosphere that helps overcome the temptation of promiscuity appears, stability is enforced and social prejudices diminished.

If there is sex with no procreation, procreation without sex can exist. Is the complex problem of in vitro procreation, of artificial insemination and of the «uterus for rent». All this question is extremely polemic in ethical and spiritual terms, and there seems not to be consensus.

The official Catholic position often tends to a naturalist vision that demands, with respect to procreation, the direct sexual relationship of the spouses when, in fact, is reasonable to admit the legitimacy of the union of an ovule of the wife with a sperm of the husband in an artificial form; and later to implant in the uterus the fecund ovule, as long as such procedure is justified by love.

About this complex question we rely on the opinion of a Catholic Dutch specialist:

«The technification of human procreation is not free of problems. Artificial insemination in its different forms, the fecundation in vitro and the transplant of embryos permit us to have a pregnancy out of the security frameworks of the traditional marriage. Thus, is possible that a woman gets pregnant by the artificial insemination of the sperm of an anonymous donor; sperms and ovules can be unified in vitro, and later implanted them in the woman, a child can be had through a «mother of rent». These technical means are not at our disposal in a neutral form, as a capability merely instrumental: an ethical responsibility must be present in their utilization» («Concilium» magazine, 260, 1995, 36). These are means at the service of parental love.

Is not enough artificial procreation. The human being has the right to be humanly born, from a father and a mother that in love desired him. If for any problem a technical intervention is used that never has to lack a true human inspiration and a well based ethical purpose.

The son or daughter born that way must be able to have a name and last name and be socially welcome. The social identity, in these cases, is anthropologically more important than the biological identity. Moreover, is important that the creature is included in a familiar environment so that, in the process of individuation, the complex of Electra in relation to the mother or of Oedipus in relation to the father, can successfully be realized. This way irreparable damages are avoided.

Finally, life must be always understood as the culmination of the cosmogenesis and the best gift of the Creator.

Leonardo Boff Eco-Theologian-Philosopher Earthcharter Commission

Free translation from the Spanish sent by
Melina Alfaro, alfaro_melina@yahoo.com.ar.
Done at REFUGIO DEL RIO GRANDE, Texas, EE.UU.

Que pensare delle nuove forme di coabitazione

Leonardo Boff2 Comentários

Accanto alle famiglie-matrimonio, istituite sul calco giuridico-sociale e sacramentale, sempre più frequentemente sorgono famiglie-partnership (coabitazioni e unioni-libere) che si formano consensualmente fuori del binario tradizionale e durano fino a che dura la partnership, dando origine alla famiglia consensuale non coniugale.

Sorgono in tutto il mondo unioni tra omo-affettivi (uomini e donne) che lottano per la costituzione di un quadro giuridico che garantisca loro stabilità e riconoscimento sociale, cosa che si fa anche in Brasile.
Non è lecito emettere un giudizio etico su queste forme di coabitazione senza prima aver conosciuto il fenomeno. Concretamente: come concepire la famiglia davanti alle varie forme con cui sta strutturandosi attualmente?

Uno specialista brasiliano Marco Antonio Fetter, il primo da noi a creare, a Porto Alegre, l’Università della Famiglia, con tutti i gradi accademici, così definisce la famiglia: “Un insieme di persone con obiettivi comuni e con legami e vincoli affettivi forti, e ognuna di loro con un ruolo definito, in cui naturalmente appaiono i ruoli di padre, di madre, di figli e di fratelli” (Correio Riograndense, 29/10/2003, 11; cf. http://www.unifam.com.br e e-mail: mafetter@terra.com.br)

Una trasformazione ancora più grande è avvenuta nella famiglia con l’introduzione di preservativi e di anticoncezionali, oggi inseriti nella cultura come qualcosa di normale, utili per evitare l’AIDS e altre malattie sessualmente trasmissibili. Inoltre con i preservativi e con la pillola la sessualità è rimasta separata dalla procreazione e dall’amore stabile.

Sempre più di frequente la sessualità, e anche il matrimonio, sono visti come opportunità di realizzazione personale, sia che includano o no la procreazione. La sessualità coniugale ottiene più intimità e spontaneità, perché con l’aiuto dei contraccettivi e attraverso la programmazione familiare viene liberata dall’imprevisto di una gravidanza non voluta. Figli e Figlie sono voluti e decisi di comune accordo.
L’enfasi sulla sessualità come realizzazione personale ha facilitato il sorgere di forme di coabitazioni che non sono strettamente matrimoniali.

Espressione di questo fenomeni sono le unioni consensuali e libere senza altro impegno che la mutua realizzazione dei componenti o la coabitazione degli omo-affettivi.

Tali pratiche, per quanto siano recenti, devono includere anche una prospettiva etica e spirituale. E’ importante aver cura che siano espressione di amore e di fiducia reciproca. Se c’è amore, per una lettura cristiana del fenomeno, questo ha a che vedere con Dio, poiché Dio è amore (1 Jo 4,12.16). Dunque non è questo il posto dei preconcetti e delle discriminazioni. Anzi, è necessario rispetto e apertura per capire questi fatti e metterli pure davanti a Dio.

Se le persone così impegnate lo faranno, si assumeranno la relazione con responsabilità, non si potrà negare loro uno spessore religioso e spirituale. Si crea un’atmosfera che aiuta a superare la tentazione della promiscuità e rafforza la stabilità che fa diminuire i preconcetti sociali.

Se c’è sesso senza procreazione, potrà esserci procreazione senza sesso. Si tratta del complesso problema della procreazione in provetta, dell’inseminazione artificiale e del’ “utero in affitto”. Tutta questa questione è estremamente complessa in termini etici e spirituali e su questo pare non esista consenso.
Generalmente la posizione ufficiale cattolica tende a una visione naturistica che esige per la procreazione la relazione sessuale diretta degli sposi, mentre è ragionevole ammettere la legittimità dell’unione di un ovulo della sposa con un spermatozoo dello sposo in forma artificiale e dopo aver impiantato l’ovulo fecondato nell’utero, purché tale procedimento sia imbevuto di amore.

Su questa questione complessa, ci serviamo delle opinioni di uno specialista olandese cattolico:
“L’apporto tecnico della procreazione umana non è libero da problemi. L’inseminazione artificiale nelle sue differenti forme, la fecondazione in provetta o l’impianto di embrioni ci permettono di realizzare una gravidanza fuori dai quadri sicuri del matrimonio tradizionale. Così è possibile che una donna sia gravida per l’inseminazione artificiale con sperma di un donatore anonimo; si può riunire in provetta spermatozoi e ovuli impiantarli in seguito in una donna; si può avere un figlio attraverso una madre in ‘affitto’. Questi mezzi tecnici non stanno a nostra disposizione in forma neutra in quanto capacità puramente strumentali, in essi deve essere sempre presente la responsabilità etica. (Concilium n.260, 1995,36). Sono mezzi a servizio dell’amore genitoriale.

Non basta la procreazione artificiale. L’essere umano ha diritto di nascere umanamente, da un padre e una madre che nel loro amore lo hanno voluto. Se per qualsiasi problema si ricorre a un intervento tecnico, mai si può perdere la valenza umana e il retto proposito etico.

Il figlio/a che nascerà deve poter avere un nome e un cognome e essere socialmente accolto. L’identità sociale in questi casi, è antropologicamente più importante che la loro identità biologica. Inoltre, è importante che il bambino sia inserito in un ambiente familiare affinché nel suo processo di individuazione, possa realizzare, nel linguaggio di Freud, il complesso di Elettra in relazione alla mamma o di Edipo in relazione al padre, in modo ben riuscito. Così si evitano danni psicologici irreparabili.

Infine si deve sempre concepire la vita come il culmine della cosmogenesi, il dono più grande del Creatore.

*Leonardo Boff ha scritto con Rose-Marie Muraro, Femminino/masculino, Record, Rio de Janeiro 2002.

Traduzione di Romano Baraglia e Lidia Arato.

Qué pensar de las nuevas formas de cohabitación

Leonardo Boff2 Comentários

Al lado de las familias matrimoniales que se constituyen en el marco jurídico-social y sacramental, cada vez más surgen las familias-pareja (cohabitación y uniones libres) que se forman consensuadamente fuera del marco tradicional y perduran mientras exista la pareja, dando origen a la sociedad familiar consensual no conyugal.

En todo el mundo aumentan las uniones entre homoafectivos (hombres y mujeres) que luchan por la constitución de un marco jurídico que les garantice estabilidad y reconocimiento social, lo cual también se está haciendo en Brasil.

No es lícito emitir un juicio ético sobre estas formas de cohabitación sin antes entender el fenómeno. En concreto: ¿cómo conceptuar la familia según las diversas formas en las que se está estructurando en los días actuales?

Un especialista brasileño, Marco Antonio Fetter, el primero entre nosotros en crear la Universidad de la Familia, en Porto Alegre, con todos los grados académicos, la define así: la familia es un conjunto de personas con objetivos comunes y con lazos y vínculos afectivos fuertes, cada una de ellas con un papel definido, donde naturalmente aparecen los papeles de padre, madre, hijos y hermanos (Correio Riograndense, 29/10/2003,11; ver también:www.unifam.com.br e o e-mail:mafetter@terra.com.br

La transformación más grande, sin embargo, ocurrió en la familia con la introducción de los preservativos y anticonceptivos, hoy incorporados a la cultura como algo normal, que ayudan a evitar el SIDA y otras enfermedades de transmisión sexual. Además, con los preservativos y la píldora, la sexualidad se ha separado de la procreación y del amor estable.

La sexualidad así como el matrimonio se ven cada vez más como una oportunidad de realización personal, incluyendo o no la procreación. La sexualidad conyugal gana más intimidad y espontaneidad, pues, por los medios anticonceptivos y la planificación familiar, queda liberada del imprevisto de un embarazo no deseado. Los hijos/hijas son queridos y decididos de común acuerdo.

El énfasis en la sexualidad como realización personal propició la aparición de formas de cohabitación que no son estrictamente matrimoniales. Expresión de ello son las uniones consensuadas y libres sin otro compromiso que la mutua realización de la pareja o la cohabitación de homoafectivos.

Tales prácticas, por nuevas que sean, deben incluir también una perspectiva ética y espiritual. Es importante velar para que sean expresión de amor y de mutua confianza. Si hay amor, en una lectura cristiana del fenómeno, tiene que ver con Dios, pues Dios es amor (1Jn 4,12.16). Entonces no caben prejuicios y discriminaciones. Antes bien, hay que tener respeto y apertura para entender tales hechos y colocarlos también ante Dios. Si las personas comprometidas así lo hacen y asumen la relación con responsabilidad, no se le puede negar relevancia religiosa y espiritual. Se crea una atmósfera que ayuda a superar la tentación de la promiscuidad, se refuerza la estabilidad y hace disminuir los prejuicios sociales.

Si hay sexo sin procreación, puede haber procreación sin sexo. Se trata del complejo problema de la procreación in vitro, de la inseminación artificial y del “útero de alquiler”. Toda esta cuestión es extremadamente polémica en términos éticos y espirituales y sobre esto parece que no hay consenso.

En general, la posición oficial católica tiende a una visión naturista, exigiendo para la procreación la relación sexual directa de los esposos. Cuando es razonable se admite la legitimidad de la unión de un óvulo de la esposa con un espermatozoide del esposo de forma artificial y luego la implantación del óvulo fecundado en el útero, siempre que tal procedimiento esté imbuido de amor.

Sobre esta cuestión compleja, nos valemos de la opinión de un especialista holandés católico:
«La tecnificación de la procreación humana no está exenta de problemas. La inseminación artificial en sus diferentes formas, la fecundación in vitro y el trasplante de embriones nos permiten realizar un embarazo fuera de los marcos seguros del matrimonio tradicional. Así es posible que una mujer esté embarazada por inseminación artificial con esperma de un donante anónimo; se pueden reunir in vitro espermatozoides y óvulos e implantarlos después en la mujer; se puede tener un hijo por medio de una madre de “alquiler”. Estos medios técnicos no están, de forma neutra, a nuestra disposición como capacidad puramente instrumental, en ellos debe estar presente una responsabilidad ética» (Concilium n.260,1995,36). Son medios al servicio del amor parental.

No basta la procreación artificial. El ser humano tiene derecho a nacer humanamente de un padre y de una madre que en su amor lo desearon. Si por cualquier problema se recurre a una intervención técnica, nunca se puede perder el ambiente humano y el correcto propósito ético.

El hijo/hija que procede de ahí debe poder tener nombre y apellido y ser recibido socialmente. La identidad social, en estos casos, es más importante, antropológicamente, que la identidad biológica. Además, es importante que el niño sea insertado en un ambiente familiar para que, en su proceso de individuación, pueda realizar el complejo de Electra en relación a la madre o el de Edipo con respecto al padre, de forma exitosa. Así se evitan daños psicológicos irreparables

Por último, siempre se debe entender la vida como la culminación de la cosmogénesis y el mayor don del Creador.

*Leonardo Boff escribió con Rose-Marie Muraro, Femenino/Masculino, 2002.

Traducción de Mª José Gavito Milano

The Earth’s future will not come from heaven

Leonardo Boff2 Comentários

Most readers will find it difficult to accept what I am going to express here. Even though it is based on the best scientific minds that have been studying the universe, the situation of planet Earth and her eventual collapse, or qualitative leap to another level of reality, for almost a century, it has not penetrated into either the collective consciousness or the major academic centers. The old atomic, mechanistic and deterministic paradigm that arose in the XVI century with Newton, Francis Bacon and Kepler, continues in force, as if Einstein, Hubble, Planck, Heisenberg, Reeves, Hawking, Prigogine, Wilson, Swimme, Lovelock, Capra or so many others who have elaborated a new vision of the Universe and of the Earth had never existed.

For starters, I would quote Christian de Duve, 1974 Biology Nobel Laureate, who wrote one of the best books about the history of life: Vital Dust: life as a Cosmic imperative, (Polvo vital: la vida como imperativo cósmico, editorial Norma, 1999): «Biological evolution moves with an accelerated rhythm towards grave instability. Our time reminds us of the important ruptures in evolution, marked by massive extinctions» (p. 355). This time it will not come from a massive meteor that eliminated almost all life, as in past eras, but from the human being itself, that not only can be suicidal and homicidal, but also ecocidal, biocidal and even geocidal. The human being can put an end to most life on our planet, leaving only the underground microorganisms; bacteria, fungi and viruses, that number in the quadrillions of quadrillions.

Given this threat, the result of the death machine created by the irrationality of modernity, the term «anthropocentric» was introduced to refer to the present as a new geological era, in which the great threat of devastation comes from humanity itself (anthropos ). The human being has intervened and continues to intervene in the rhythms of nature and the Earth in a profound manner, that affects the very ecological basis that support us.

According to biologists Wilson and Ehrlich, between 70 to 100 thousand species of living beings will disappear annually, due to the hostile relationship the human being maintains with nature. The consequence is clear: the extreme events we are witnessing irrefutably show that the Earth has lost her equilibrium. Only the ignorant, such as Donald Trump, deny the empirical evidence.

To the contrary, the well known cosmologist, Brian Swimme, who coordinates a dozen scientists in California who study the history of the Universe, struggles to offer a saving path out. We should note in passing that cosmologist Swimme and cultural anthropologist Thomas Berry, published a history of the universe, based on the best scientific data, from the big bang to the present, (The Universe Story, San Francisco, Harper 1992), which is known as the most brilliant work realized to date. (The translation to Portuguese has been done, but the Brazilian editors were too foolish, and until today it has not been published. The Spanish translation has been devalued because the book devotes too much space to the concrete situation of the United States). The authors created the concept, «the Ecozoic era», or «the ecocene», a fourth biologic era that would follow the Paleozoic, the Mesozoic and our Neozoic.

The Ecozoic starts with a vision of the universe as cosmogenic. Permanence is not its hallmark, but evolution, expansion and auto-creation of ever more complex «emergences», thus allowing for the birth of new galaxies, new stars and forms of life on Earth, including our conscious and spiritual life.

The authors are not afraid of the word «spiritual» because they understand that the spirit is part of the Universe itself, always present, which in an advanced phase of evolution has become self aware, seeing ourselves as part of the Whole.

This Ecozoic era represents a restoration of the planet through a relationship of caring, respect and reverence, towards the magnificent gift of the living Earth. The economy should not seek accumulation, but what is enough for everyone, so that the Earth may replace her nutrients. The future of the Earth does not come from heaven, but from the decisions we take to remain in consonance with the rhythms of nature and the Universe. I quote Swimme:

The future will be decided either by those who are committed to the Technozoic –a future of increasing exploitation of the Earth as a resource, all for the benefit of humans– or by those committed to the Ecozoic, a new mode of relating with the Earth, where the well being of the Earth and the entire community of terrestrial life is the principal interest (p. 502)

If the Ecozoic does not triumph, we will probably experience a catastrophe, this time produced by the Earth herself, to liberate herself from one of her creatures, that violently occupied everything, threatening all other species, species that, because they have the same origins and the same genetic building blocks, are her brothers and sisters, which is not acknowledged, resulting in their abuse, and even murder.

We must deserve our survival on this planet. But that depends on having an amicable relationship with nature and life; and on a profound transformation of our forms of living. Swimme adds: «We will be unable to live without the special intuition (insight) that women have had in all phases of human existence» (p. 501).

This is the crossroads of our time: either to change or to disappear. But, who believes it? We will continue to raise high our voices.

Leonardo Boff  Eco-theologian-Philosopher and Member of the Earthcharter Commission
Free translation from the Spanish sent by
Melina Alfaro, alfaro_melina@yahoo.com.ar.
Done at REFUGIO DEL RIO GRANDE, Texas, EE.UU.