Nowadays we often hear of males wanting to be females or vice-versa. Their “rights” are often upheld by recipients of public money, unlike the rights of those who are opposed; who object to their taxes being used for the construction of “trans” toilets and so forth. As so often, liberalism is liberal only towards its proponents.
That sex-change, far from being moral, is not even valid, is averred by some on the basis that, for example, an inserted “uterus” will not actually bear a child, nor will a constructed “penis” actually transmit semen. This argument, though telling, may not hold the fort long-term. For it is at least conceivable that, with the constant advances in technology, it will one day be possible (God forbid!) to engraft in men, a fully functional uterus, and to give women a fully functioning penis.
From a Catholic standpoint however, even in such a “brave new world”, the man would remain a man – albeit horribly mutilated – just as the woman would remain a woman. For, as Clement V infallibly defined at the Council of Vienne (D481 = DS902) the soul is the form of the body. Therefore, an essential change in the body – such as the change from male to female or vice versa – would require God to create a second, essentially different soul – something contrary to all Catholic tradition.
We know from our Faith that, as a matter of fact, God will never change a man into a woman or vice-versa. But could He do so? Is this theoretically possible? It would seem the answer must be no. God, of course, can do anything not involving a logical contradiction, such as making a weight He cannot lift. But for a man to become a woman or vice-versa, the same person must exist throughout the change. On what basis, however, could it be maintained that the person remains identical, if both the soul and the body have undergone an essential change? Rather it would have to be said that God has destroyed the man and created a woman in his place, or vice versa.