A New Assault on Humanae Vitae Begins

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JimG

Guest
“Although the cleric presents his form of reasoning as new and pastorally farsighted and a great improvement over the “rigidity” of traditional Catholic morality, it is in fact an age-old method for justifying evildoing for the sake of achieving good — reasoning that’s been rejected by the Church countless times over the centuries, beginning with St. Paul in Romans 3:8.

Pope John Paul II condemned this form of reasoning in Veritatis Splendor, precisely because it leads to the justification of actions traditionally condemned as evil by the divine laws and natural laws and so by the Church”

www.ncregister.com

A New Assault on ‘Humanae Vitae’ Begins

The age-old use of proportionalism came to the fore at a recent Vatican conference on Pope Paul VI’s 50-year-old encyclical and the apostolic exhortation ‘Amoris Laetitia.’
www.ncregister.com www.ncregister.com
 
This has been coming for a few years now and the assault is just ramping up. We’ve already had one prominent member of the clergy state that it is OK to use artificial birth control in certain circumstances; I predict there will more and more making similar statements as the year goes on. It is clear there are a number of prominent members of the hierarchy, including bishops and cardinals that do not believe in the Church’s teaching on contraceptives.
 
There is a palpable sense of hurry and rush in some quarters to accomplish whatever can be accomplished under this pontificate.
 
Serious question here. Does anyone recall priests and bishops making frequent statements against church teachings to the press under previous papacies? Because I don’t.
 
Last edited:
It seems a lot of this, including the stuff with mutliple marriages being bandied about, is not so much a direct denial of the moral principle, but rather of the spread of the following Jansenist error (definitively condemned by Pope Innocent X as heretical–see 1092 here):

“Some precepts of God are, when one considers the powers which man possesses, impossible of fulfillment even to the just who wish to keep the law and strive to do so; grace is lacking whereby these laws could be fulfilled.”

This is nothing new with regards to contraception. Pope Pius XI referenced this same error being behind similar pushes for contraception, when he definitively confirmed this point of morality in Casti Connubii (the definition is in paragraph 56 and the discussion of this error is in paragraphs 61 and 62).
 
Last edited:
I believe Humane Vitae, being an Encyclical, is more authoritative than AL which is a post synod exhortation. There fore shouldn’t AL be read in the light of HV and not the other way around. It seems a bit ludicrous that AL is given such weight that it literally creates a paradigm shift in the Churches 2000 years of Moral theology.
 
Humanae Vitae was never accepted as anything but a norm. Norms aren’t being attacked anywhere. It’s rigidity that’s being addressed.

HV doesn’t have a pretty history. I don’t think bishops at that time thought that HV was well written. So, just like AL, it could be interpreted different ways.

I believe that Pope Francis is only trying to make something publicly acceptable that some are already doing in private with the permission of their pastor, similar to communion for the divorced and remarried in some circumstances.

It’s not new, it’s not a recent attack. It’s been going on since HV was written. And it needs to be cleared up…hence the Commission to study HV and it’s theological influences.

I don’t think Veritatis Splendor is being used correctly when it’s used to stop theologians from theology. I don’t think that it’s mention of creative reasoning applies here, and was not meant to be used as a weapon against further doctrinal development…as if all reasoning stoped with VS.
 
Last edited:
Norms ARE being attacked. And there is ample evidence of a campaign in some quarters of the Church to water down the Church’s teachings on artificial contraception, homosexuality, etc.
 
It has always been with us but the tendency is increasing—to take the position that when Church teachings seem too difficult or hard or uncomfortable, to think that the teaching must be changed. But the teaching cannot change.
 
The problem with this line of reasoning is that use of artificial birth control in order to avoid pregnancy (excluding things such as medical uses) is ALWAYS immoral. It is NEVER right to use it as a means to avoid conception. Some people just don’t seem to be able to accept that for whatever reason. So their answer is to try to change the teaching. But no matter how many priests, bishops, cardinals, or the pope himself says it is OK to use because it is too difficult, or we can’t afford more kids, or whatever reason one can come up with, doesn’t make it right.
 
Last edited:
  1. But no reason, however grave, may be put forward by which anything intrinsically against nature may become conformable to nature and morally good. Since, therefore, the conjugal act is destined primarily by nature for the begetting of children, those who in exercising it deliberately frustrate its natural power and purpose sin against nature and commit a deed which is shameful and intrinsically vicious.
  2. Small wonder, therefore, if Holy Writ bears witness that the Divine Majesty regards with greatest detestation this horrible crime and at times has punished it with death. As St. Augustine notes, “Intercourse even with one’s legitimate wife is unlawful and wicked where the conception of the offspring is prevented. Onan, the son of Juda, did this and the Lord killed him for it.”
  3. Since, therefore, openly departing from the uninterrupted Christian tradition some recently have judged it possible solemnly to declare another doctrine regarding this question, the Catholic Church, to whom God has entrusted the defense of the integrity and purity of morals, standing erect in the midst of the moral ruin which surrounds her, in order that she may preserve the chastity of the nuptial union from being defiled by this foul stain, raises her voice in token of her divine ambassadorship and through Our mouth proclaims anew: any use whatsoever of matrimony exercised in such a way that the act is deliberately frustrated in its natural power to generate life is an offense against the law of God and of nature, and those who indulge in such are branded with the guilt of a grave sin.
  4. We admonish, therefore, priests who hear confessions and others who have the care of souls, in virtue of Our supreme authority and in Our solicitude for the salvation of souls, not to allow the faithful entrusted to them to err regarding this most grave law of God; much more, that they keep themselves immune from such false opinions, in no way conniving in them. If any confessor or pastor of souls, which may God forbid, lead the faithful entrusted to him into these errors or should at least confirm them by approval or by guilty silence, let him be mindful of the fact that he must render a strict account to God, the Supreme Judge, for the betrayal of his sacred trust, and let him take to himself the words of Christ: "They are blind and leaders of the blind: and if the blind lead the blind, both fall into the pit." - CASTI CONNUBII
If you know of priests who are encouraging people to use contraception, you need to report them to the diocese, and even to the Holy See if necessary. This both to prevent them from leading their flocks astray, as well to provide an occasion for them to repent of their evil ways and thus save themselves from the fires of Hell.
 
www.ncregister.com

A New Assault on ‘Humanae Vitae’ Begins

The age-old use of proportionalism came to the fore at a recent Vatican conference on Pope Paul VI’s 50-year-old encyclical and the apostolic exhortation ‘Amoris Laetitia.’
www.ncregister.com www.ncregister.com
Pope John Paul II condemned this form of reasoning in Veritatis Splendor, precisely because it leads to the justification of actions traditionally condemned as evil by the divine laws and natural laws and so by the Church:

“Such theories are not faithful to the Church’s teaching, when they believe they can justify, as morally good, deliberate choices of kinds of behavior contrary to the commandments of the divine and natural law. These theories cannot claim to be grounded in the Catholic moral tradition” (76).
Click to expand...
 
Catechism of the Council of Trent:
It was also for this reason that God instituted marriage from the beginning; and therefore married persons who, to prevent conception or procure abortion, have recourse to medicine, are guilty of a most heinous crime.
Click to expand...
Pius XI Casti Connubii
Since, therefore, openly departing from the uninterrupted Christian tradition some recently have judged it possible solemnly to declare another doctrine regarding this question, the Catholic Church, to whom God has entrusted the defense of the integrity and purity of morals, standing erect in the midst of the moral ruin which surrounds her, in order that she may preserve the chastity of the nuptial union from being defiled by this foul stain, raises her voice in token of her divine ambassadorship and through Our mouth proclaims anew: any use whatsoever of matrimony exercised in such a way that the act is deliberately frustrated in its natural power to generate life is an offense against the law of God and of nature, and those who indulge in such are branded with the guilt of a grave sin.
Click to expand...
Bl. Paul VI, Humanae Vitae:
  1. Therefore We base Our words on the first principles of a human and Christian doctrine of marriage when We are obliged once more to declare that the direct interruption of the generative process already begun and, above all, all direct abortion, even for therapeutic reasons, are to be absolutely excluded as lawful means of regulating the number of children. (14) Equally to be condemned, as the magisterium of the Church has affirmed on many occasions, is direct sterilization, whether of the man or of the woman, whether permanent or temporary. (15)
Similarly excluded is any action which either before, at the moment of, or after sexual intercourse, is specifically intended to prevent procreation—whether as an end or as a means. (16)

Neither is it valid to argue, as a justification for sexual intercourse which is deliberately contraceptive, that a lesser evil is to be preferred to a greater one, or that such intercourse would merge with procreative acts of past and future to form a single entity, and so be qualified by exactly the same moral goodness as these. Though it is true that sometimes it is lawful to tolerate a lesser moral evil in order to avoid a greater evil or in order to promote a greater good," it is never lawful, even for the gravest reasons, to do evil that good may come of it (18)—in other words, to intend directly something which of its very nature contradicts the moral order, and which must therefore be judged unworthy of man, even though the intention is to protect or promote the welfare of an individual, of a family or of society in general. Consequently, it is a serious error to think that a whole married life of otherwise normal relations can justify sexual intercourse which is deliberately contraceptive and so intrinsically wrong.
Click to expand...
See also CCC 2370 and 2399.

These don’t seem like “guidelines” to me.
 
Last edited:
1Lord1Faith said:
Humanae Vitae was never accepted as anything but a norm. Norms are not being “attacked” anywhere. It’s rigidity that’s being addressed. And it needs to be addressed, as evidenced by attitudes here on CAF.

HV doesn’t have a pretty history. I don’t think bishops at that time thought that HV was well written. So, like AL, it could be interpreted different ways. Most priests I’ve known have said that birth control is okay under certain circumstances, but they’ve only said that privately. They need to be able to say it publicly, but the way HV is written, they won’t.

I believe that Pope Francis is only trying to making something publicly acceptable that some are already doing in private with the permission of their pastor, similar to communion for the divorced and remarried in some circumstances. It’s not new, it’s not a “recent attack”. It’s been going on since HV was written. And it needs to be cleared up…hence the Commission to study HV and it’s theological influences.

The erroneous quoting of Veritatis Splendor also needs to stop. A cursory reading of the document shows that it’s mention of creative reasoning doesn’t apply here, and was not meant to be used as a weapon against further doctrinal development…as if all reasoning stoped with VS.
Click to expand...
So what you are saying is many Priests believe it is ok to recieve communion while committing adultery. It is also ok to use contraception! (In special cases of course, whatever that means)

You agree with this?
 
Let me guess…
Nobody contributing here has actually read the address itself yet?

When are we loyal Catholics going to wake up and realise that we are being manipulated by the “push their buttons” media.

To knee jerk react on 2nd hand news is no way to wisely or virtuously respond to the manipulations of the world.
 
The church is under attack from within, sir! The German bishops have just said that Protestants can receive communion. This is a crisis!
 
By all means start another thread and reference their actual addresses so people have something objective to discuss instead of unhelpful me-oh-my handwringing and empty emoting.
 
Paul VI was already in a minority position when he wrote Humanae Vitae. The pro contraception lobby wouldn’t just have disappeared. In fact, with the creeping tide of modernism in the church, I’d wager the problem is larger than you think.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top