Humanae Vitae

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Humanae Vitae (Latin "Of Human Life") is an encyclical written by Pope Paul VI and promulgated on July 25, 1968. Subtitled "On the Regulation of Birth", it re-affirms the traditional teaching of the Roman Catholic Church regarding abortion, contraception, and other issues pertaining to human life.

Mainly because of its prohibition of all forms of artificial contraception, the encyclical has been controversial. The document is sometimes described as prophetic by those who believe that its four predictions about the effects of contraception on society were accurate.

Pope Paul VI, saddened by the reactions to Humanae Vitae, would not issue any additional encyclicals in the remaining ten years of his pontificate.

Contents

[edit] Summary

The encyclical opens with an assertion of the competency of the Magisterium of the Church to decide questions of morality. It then goes on to observe that circumstances often dictate that married couples should limit the number of children, and that the sexual act between husband and wife is still worthy even if it can be foreseen not to result in procreation. Nevertheless, it is held that the sexual act must "retain its intrinsic relationship to the procreation of human life", and the "direct interruption of the generative process already begun" is unlawful.

Abortion, even for therapeutic reasons, is absolutely forbidden, as is sterilization, even if temporary. Similarly, every action specifically intended to prevent procreation is forbidden. This includes both chemical and barrier methods of contraception. All these are held to directly contradict the "moral order which was established by God".

Therapeutic means which induce infertility are allowed (e.g., hysterectomy), if they are not specifically intended to cause infertility (e.g., the uterus is cancerous, so the preservation of life is intended). Natural family planning methods (abstaining from intercourse during certain parts of the woman's cycle) are allowed, since they take advantage of "a faculty provided by nature."

The acceptance of artificial methods of birth control is then claimed to result in several negative consequences, among them a "general lowering of moral standards" resulting from sex without consequences, and the danger that men may reduce women "to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of [their] own desires".

The encyclical acknowledges that "perhaps not everyone will easily accept this particular teaching", but points out that the Roman Catholic Church cannot "declare lawful what is in fact unlawful".

The encyclical closes with an appeal to public authorities to oppose laws which undermine the natural moral law (see natural law), an appeal to scientists to further study effective methods of natural birth control and appeals to doctors, nurses and priests to promote the method.

[edit] History

See also: Christian views on contraception

There had been a long-standing general Christian prohibition on contraception and abortion, with such Church Fathers as Clement of Alexandria and Saint Augustine condemning the practices. It was not until the 1930 Lambeth Conference that the Anglican Communion allowed for contraception in limited circumstances. All other mainline Protestant denominations have since removed prohibitions against artificial contraception.[1]

In a partial reaction, Pope Pius XI wrote the encyclical Casti connubii (On Christian Marriage) in 1930, reaffirming the Catholic Church's belief in various traditional Christian teachings on marriage and sexuality, including the prohibition of artificial birth control even within marriage. While the emphasis in Casti Connubii is against contraception, it was controversially interpreted to allow the use of natural family planning.

[edit] Writing of the Encyclical

[edit] The commission of John XXIII

With the appearance of the first oral contraceptives in 1960, some voices in the Church argued for a reconsideration of the Church positions. In 1963 Pope John XXIII established a commission of six European non-theologians to study questions of birth control and population.[2][3] After John's death in 1963, Pope Paul VI added theologians to the commission and over three years expanded it to 72 members from five continents (including 16 theologians, 13 physicians and 5 women, with an executive committee of 9 bishops and 7 cardinals).[2][3] The commission produced a report in 1966, proposing that artificial birth control was not intrinsically evil and that Catholic couples should be allowed to decide for themselves about the methods to be employed.[2][3][4][5]

One commission member, American Jesuit theologian John Ford (with the assistance of American theologian Germain Grisez) drafted a minority report working paper that was signed by Ford and 3 other theologian priests on the commission, stating that the Church should not and could not change its long-standing teaching.[2][3][4][5] Even though intended for the Pope only, the commission's report and two working papers (the minority report and the majority's rebuttal to it) were leaked to the press in 1967, raising public expectations of liberalization.[4][6] However, Paul VI explicitly rejected his commission's recommendations in the text of Humanae Vitae, noting the 72 member commission had not been unanimous (4 theologian priests had dissented, and 1 cardinal and 2 bishops had voted that contraception was intrinsically evil--significantly Cardinal Ottaviani, the commission's president and Bishop Colombo, the papal theologian).[2][3][5] Humanae Vitae did, however, explicitly allow the modern forms of natural family planning that were then being developed.

[edit] The role of Karol Wojtyła

According to George Weigel's biography of John Paul II, Paul VI named Archbishop Karol Wojtyła to the commission. However, the Communist authorities in Poland would not permit him to travel to Rome to physically take part. Wojtyła had earlier defended the church's position from a philosophical standpoint in his 1960 book Love and Responsibility. Wojtyła's position was strongly considered, and was reflected in the final draft of the encyclical, although much of his language and arguments were not incorporated. Weigel attributes much of the poor reception of the encyclical to the omission of many of Wojtyła's arguments.[7]

[edit] Highlights

[edit] Faithfulness to God's Design

13. Men rightly observe that a conjugal act imposed on one's partner without regard to his or her condition or personal and reasonable wishes in the matter, is no true act of love, and therefore offends the moral order in its particular application to the intimate relationship of husband and wife. If they further reflect, they must also recognize that an act of mutual love which impairs the capacity to transmit life which God the Creator, through specific laws, has built into it, frustrates His design which constitutes the norm of marriage, and contradicts the will of the Author of life. Hence to use this divine gift while depriving it, even if only partially, of its meaning and purpose, is equally repugnant to the nature of man and of woman, and is consequently in opposition to the plan of God and His holy will. But to experience the gift of married love while respecting the laws of conception is to acknowledge that one is not the master of the sources of life but rather the minister of the design established by the Creator. Just as man does not have unlimited dominion over his body in general, so also, and with more particular reason, he has no such dominion over his specifically sexual faculties, for these are concerned by their very nature with the generation of life, of which God is the source. "Human life is sacred—all men must recognize that fact," Our predecessor Pope John XXIII recalled. "From its very inception it reveals the creating hand of God." [8]

[edit] The Concern of the Church

18. It is to be anticipated that perhaps not everyone will easily accept this particular teaching. There is too much clamorous outcry against the voice of the Church, and this is intensified by modern means of communication. But it comes as no surprise to the Church that she, no less than her divine Founder, is destined to be a "sign of contradiction." [9] She does not, because of this, evade the duty imposed on her of proclaiming humbly but firmly the entire moral law, both natural and evangelical. Since the Church did not make either of these laws, she cannot be their arbiter—only their guardian and interpreter. It could never be right for her to declare lawful what is in fact unlawful, since that, by its very nature, is always opposed to the true good of man. In preserving intact the whole moral law of marriage, the Church is convinced that she is contributing to the creation of a truly human civilization. She urges man not to betray his personal responsibilities by putting all his faith in technical expedients. In this way she defends the dignity of husband and wife. This course of action shows that the Church, loyal to the example and teaching of the divine Savior, is sincere and unselfish in her regard for men whom she strives to help even now during this earthly pilgrimage "to share God's life as sons of the living God, the Father of all men."

[edit] Developing countries

23. We are fully aware of the difficulties confronting the public authorities in this matter, especially in the developing countries. In fact, We had in mind the justifiable anxieties which weigh upon them when We published Our encyclical letter Populorum Progressio. But now We join Our voice to that of Our predecessor John XXIII of venerable memory, and We make Our own his words: "No statement of the problem and no solution to it is acceptable which does violence to man's essential dignity; those who propose such solutions base them on an utterly materialistic conception of man himself and his life. The only possible solution to this question is one which envisages the social and economic progress both of individuals and of the whole of human society, and which respects and promotes true human values." [10] No one can, without being grossly unfair, make divine Providence responsible for what clearly seems to be the result of misguided governmental policies, of an insufficient sense of social justice, of a selfish accumulation of material goods, and finally of a culpable failure to undertake those initiatives and responsibilities which would raise the standard of living of peoples and their children. [11] If only all governments which were able would do what some are already doing so nobly, and bestir themselves to renew their efforts and their undertakings! There must be no relaxation in the programs of mutual aid between all the branches of the great human family. Here We believe an almost limitless field lies open for the activities of the great international institutions.

[edit] Reception

Some Cardinals, bishops, priests in Western Europe and the USA voiced opposition to Humanae Vitae. Some lay Catholics disagree with the prohibition on artificial birth control and continue to use these methods.

[edit] Galileo affair comparison

Cardinal Leo Joseph Suenens, a moderator of the ecumenical council, questioned, “whether moral theology took sufficient account of scientific progress, which can help determine, what is according to nature. I beg you my brothers led us avoid another Galileo affair, One is enough for the Church."[12] In an interview in Informations Catholiques Internationales on May 15, 1969, he critiqued the Pope’s decision again as frustrating the collegiality defined by the Council [13], calling it a non-collegial or even an anti-collegial act.[14]. He was supported by Vatican II theologians such as Karl Rahner, Hans Küng, and several bishops, including Christopher Butler, who called it one of the most important contributions to contemporary discussion in the Church.[15]

[edit] Open dissent

The publication of the encyclical marks the first time in the twentieth century that open dissent about teachings of the church was voiced widely and publicly[citation needed]. The teaching has been criticized by development organizations and others who claim that it limits the methods available to fight world-wide population growth and struggle against AIDS.

Within two days of the encyclical's release, a group of dissident theologians, led by Rev. Charles Curran, then of The Catholic University of America, issued a statement claiming that Catholics' individual consciences should prevail in such a personal and private issue.

[edit] Canadian, Dutch and German bishops

Two months later, the controversial "Winnipeg Statement" issued by the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops stated that those who cannot accept the teaching should not be considered shut off from the Catholic Church, and that individuals can in good conscience use contraception as long as they have first made an honest attempt to accept the difficult directives of the encyclical. Dutch and German bishops also stressed the role of the individual conscience in their catechisms.

[edit] Dutch Catechism

The Dutch Catechism of 1966, based on the Magisterium of the Dutch bishops' interpretation of the just completed Vatican Council, and the first post-Council comprehensive Catholic catechism, noted the lack of mention of artificial contraception in the Council. "As everyone can ascertain nowadays, there are several methods of regulating births. The Second Vatican Council did not speak of any of these concrete methods… This is a different standpoint than that taken under Pius XI some thirty years which was also maintained by his successor... we can sense here a clear development in the Church, a development, which is also going on outside the Church." [16]

[edit] Poland

Main article: Humanae Vitae and Poland

[edit] Soviet Union and ecumenical reactions

In the Soviet Union, Literaturnaja Gazeta, a publication of Soviet intellectuals, included an editorial and statement by Russian physicians against the encyclical.[17] Ecumenical reactions were mixed. Lutherans and the World Council of Churches were disappointed. Eugene Carson Blake criticised the concepts of nature and natural law, which, in his view, still dominated Catholic theology, as outdated. This concern dominated several articles in catholic and non-catholic journals at the time. [18] [19] [20] The ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras I, stated his full agreement with Pope Paul VI: “He could not have spoken in any other way” [21]

[edit] Latin America

In Latin America, much support developed for the Pope and his encyclical. As World Bank President Robert McNamara declared at the 1968 Annual Meeting of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank Group that countries permitting birth control practices will get preferential access to resources, doctors in La Paz, Bolivia, called it insulting that money should be exchanged for the conscience of a Catholic nation. In Colombia, Cardinal archbishop Anibal Muñoz Duque declared, if American conditionality undermines Papal teachings, we prefer not to receive one cent.[22] The Senate of Bolivia passed a resolution, stating that Humanae Vitae can be discussed in its implications on individual consciences, but, it is of greatest significance, because the papal document defends the rights of developing nations to determine their own population policies.[23] The Jesuit Journal Sic dedicated one edition to the encyclical with supportive contributions.[24]

[edit] Response of Pope Paul VI

Pope Paul VI was troubled by the Encyclical's reception in the West. In March 1969, he had a meeting with one of the main critics of Humanae Vitae, Cardinal Leo Joseph Suenens. Paul heard him out and said merely, "Yes, pray for me; because of my weaknesses, the Church is badly governed,"[25]

[edit] Legacy

More recently, there has been a degree of resurgence of support for the teaching in the Church. Several Catholic lay writers, including Janet E. Smith, Kimberly Hahn, Christopher West and Mary Shivanandan have all written extensively in support of the teaching, and on the reasons behind it. Also, developments in fertility awareness since the 1960s[26] have given rise to natural family planning organizations such as the Couple to Couple League and the Creighton Model FertilityCare System, which actively provide formal instruction on the use and reliability of natural methods of birth control.

[edit] John Paul II

After he became pope in 1978, John Paul II gave a series of lectures, entitled the Theology of the Body, that further developed themes in Humanae Vitae and Love and Responsibility.

Pope John Paul II readdressed some of the same issues in his 1993 encyclical Veritatis splendor. He reaffirmed much of Humanae Vitae, and specifically described the practice of artificial contraception as an act not permitted by Catholic teaching in any circumstances. The same encyclical also clarifies the use of conscience in arriving at moral decisions, including in the use of contraception.

[edit] References

  1. ^ Campbell, Flann (Nov., 1960). "Birth Control and the Christian Churches". Population Studies Vol. 14 (No. 2). 
  2. ^ a b c d e Shannon, William Henry (1970). "VII. The Papal Commission on Birth Control", The lively debate: response to Humanae vitae. New York: Sheed & Ward, pp. 76-104. ISBN 0-8362-0374-7. 
  3. ^ a b c d e McClory, Robert (1995). Turning point: the inside story of the Papal Birth Control Commission, and how Humanae vitae changed the life of Patty Crowley and the future of the church. New York: Crossroad. ISBN 0-8245-1458-0. 
  4. ^ a b c "Reveal papal birth control texts" (1967-04-19). National Catholic Reporter 3 (25): pp. 1, 3, 8-12. 
  5. ^ a b c (1968) "I. Documents from the Papal Commission", in Hoyt, Robert G. (ed.): The birth control debate. Kansas City: National Catholic Reporter, pp. 15-111. 
  6. ^ Kneeland, Douglas E. (1967-04-17). "Majority report seeks papal shift on contraception". New York Times: p. 1. 
  7. ^ Weigel, George (1999, 2001). Witness to Hope. HarperCollins. ISBN 0-06-018793-X.  "The encyclical was not drafted precisely as Wojtyla proposed".
  8. ^ See John XXIII, encyc. letter Mater et Magistra: AAS 53 (1961), 447 [TPS VII, 331].
  9. ^ Lk 2. 34)
  10. ^ John XXIII, Encyc. letter Mater et Magistra: AAS 53 (1961), 447 [TPS VII, 331]
  11. ^ See Paul VI, encyc. letter Populorum progressio, nos. 48-55: AAS 59 (1967), 281-284 [TPS XII, 160-162]
  12. ^ Peter Hebblethwaite, Paul VI, Paulist Press New York, 1993, p.394
  13. ^ Hebblethwaite, Paul VI, Paulist Press New York, 1993, p 533
  14. ^ Hebblethwaite, Paul VI, Paulist Press New York, 1993, p 528
  15. ^ Peter Hebblethwaite, Paul VI, Paulist Press New York, 1993, p 533
  16. ^ A New Catechism, 402
  17. ^ HK 1968 548
  18. ^ La Croix 7.31 1968, 8,13, 1968,
  19. ^ Sontagsblatt, 11,11,1968,
  20. ^ Reforme, 8,10,1968
  21. ^ Herder Korrespondenz, Orbis Catholicus, Freiburg, 1968 HK 1968 404
  22. ^ Herder Korrespondenz, Orbis Catholicus, Freiburg, 1968, HK 1968 549
  23. ^ Herder Korrespondenz, Orbis Catholicus, Freiburg, 1968 HK 1968 549
  24. ^ Sic, 31, 308, October 1968 pp 359-379
  25. ^ Peter Hebblethwaite, Paul VI, Paulist Press New York, 1993, p.532
  26. ^ For example, one Natural Birth Control website (Justisse) quotes the British Medical Journal (British Medical Journal, 307, 2003) as saying "According to the World Health Organization, 93% of women everywhere can identify the symptoms which distinguish adequately between the fertile and the infertile phases of the [menstrual] cycle… [Using fertility awareness for reproductive planning] is inexpensive, highly effective, without side effects and may be particularly acceptable to and efficacious among [certain] people." World Health Organization Endorses Fertility Awareness. Justisse. Retrieved on 2007-03-27.


[edit] External links

[edit] Further reading

  • Wojtyła, Karol, Love and Responsibility, Ignatius Press, ISBN 0-89870-445-6, 1993.
  • Smith, Janet, Why Humanae Vitae Was Right: A Reader, Ignatius Press, ISBN 0-89870-433-2, 1993.
  • Shivanandan, Mary, Crossing the Threshold of Love: A New Vision of Marriage, Catholic University of America Press, ISBN 0-8132-0941-2, 1999.
  • Hahn, Kimberly, Life-Giving Love, Charis Books, ISBN 0-8132-0941-2, 2002.
  • Kippley, John F, Sex and the Marriage Covenant: A Basis for Morality, Ignatius Press, ISBN 0-89870-973-3, 2005.
  • McClory, Robert, Turning point: the inside story of the Papal Birth Control Commission, and how Humanae Vitae changed the life of Patty Crowley and the future of the church, Crossroads Publishing, ISBN 0-8245-1458-0, 1995.
  • Rubio, Julie Hanlon. "Beyond the LIberal/Conservative Divide on Contraception." Horizons: The Journal of the College Theology Society Villanova University, Volume 32, Number 2. Fall 2005.
  • Dominion, Jack and Montefiore, Hugh, "God, Sex and Love", SCM Press, 1989