We love with our bodies. 'We are called to love as God loves, in and through our bodies' (West, 2009 p. 26). As we endeavour to love, God, who is goodness, love, and life, is made incarnate and visible in the world (United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 1991). Most of our encounters with other people are usually in a face to face bodily way. Compare, for example, the experience of walking into a room in which someone is sitting and the experience of walking into an empty room. Now think about walking into a room where there is a computer online with someone at the other end in a chat room. The first impression in the first instance will be far more intense because the physical presence of a body makes us immediately aware that there is a person in the room and draws our attention to him or her. In a world in which so much of our communication is done through technology, often as voiceless words on a screen. It is easy to forget how significant the body is in our communication, until we are indeed confronted by the presence of another, and he or she is confronted with our presence. To be present in the world is to be present in a bodily way. It is in and through our bodies that we relate to the world, sense the world and respond to the world. It is in and through our bodies that we, as images of God, of love, of relationality, of rationality and of justice, make God present in the world. This is all the more potent when it involves touch. Think about the difference between being hit and striking another, and being kissed and caressing another. Physical contact communicates immense meaning. As the saying goes: 'Actions speak louder than words'. So how we act, how we pay attention to our bodies and the bodies of others and how we respond to our bodies and the bodies of others, is vital in influencing how we make present our deepest convictions about the meaning and value of life, love and justice. In no way, then, can we consider the erotic dimension of love simply as a permissible evil or a burden to be tolerated for the good of the family. Rather, it must be seen as gift from God that enriches the relationship of the spouses. As a passion sublimated by a love respectful of the dignity of the other, it becomes a 'pure, unadulterated affirmation' revealing the marvels of which the human heart is capable. In this way, even momentarily, we can feel that 'life has turned out good and happy' (Pope Francis, 2016 Amoris Laetitia).

Communication in our society is frequently understood merely in terms of transferring information. The word communication can also refer to the functioning of the media. Pope Saint John Paul II, however, sees a deeper meaning for communication revealed in the Genesis narrative and especially in the statement that the man and the woman are naked and yet are not ashamed. In this connection, the words they were not ashamed can mean in sensu obliquo only an original depth in affirming what is inherent in the person, what is visibly female and male, through which the personal intimacy of mutual communication in all its radical simplicity and purity is constituted. To this fullness of exterior perception, expressed by means of physical nakedness, there corresponds the interior fullness of man's vision in God, that is, according to the measure of the image of God (cf. Gen. 1.:17). According to this measure, man is really naked ( They were naked : Gen. 2:25), even before realizing it (cf. Gen. 3:7-10). (Saint John Paul II, General Audience, 19 December 1979) The Catholic vision of communication in the context of relationships and sexuality education is one that 'sees as God sees'. The man and the woman in the Genesis narrative look at each other even though they are naked. Indeed, because they are naked they see the essential truth of the other as one like oneself and yet different and unique. When the man sees the woman and the woman sees the man their mutual 'seeing' can be described as respectful 'seeing' in the sense defined above. the man sees and knows that the woman is like him but different from him precisely because of her body. The woman sees and knows the man because of his body. But what they know is more than just the external truth about a physical difference. What they know is that together they form a union and commune with each another to become more than they could be on their own. In a symbolic sense in seeing each other naked each sees the other as God sees each of them. Each of them is an image of God, at the core of their being at both the external physical level and the interior spiritual level. God sees every human being naked in this sense. We can hide nothing from God. So to 'see as God sees', to love and to communicate in intimate relationships is to see the other as God sees him or her. this involves allowing oneself to be seen by the other through God's eyes. A man and a woman together are called to form a community, an intimate partnership of trust, based on honest communication one with the other.

Communication between a man and a woman goes beyond the sexual dimension. We communicate with every part of our bodies. We choose how to use our bodies to communicate. We communicate how we think and feel about the world in a bodily way. We can love with our bodies and hurt with our bodies. Through our bodies we can both be hurt and protect ourselves from harm. In other words there is a sense in which we can choose to use our bodies to give flesh to God's love. Sexual relations between a man and a woman in the context of marriage give flesh to God's love in a particular way. In the words of Pope Francis, 'Sexuality is not a means of gratification or entertainment; it is an interpersonal language wherein the other is taken seriously, in his or her sacred and inviolable dignity' (2016 Amoris Laetitia 151). Even though sexual relations between a couple have an inward focus there also needs to be an outward focus that extends their communication to the world beyond the family. This outward focus, this seeing as God sees is necessary to avoid an 'inward-looking, consumption oriented, privatized practice of marriage' (Coultier and Mattison 2010, p. 223).