Newspaper Page Text
“Marital love, then, in its deepest meaning
relates not only to the birth and rearing of chil
dren within the family society, but to the
growth and well-being of human society on its
every level and in its every aspect. It relates at
the same time to the eternal life of those who
choose marriage as their way to salvation.”
impair fife. In its emphasis on
the virtues of fidelity and
hope, so essential to the
prophetic witness of the
family, Christian sexual
morality derives therefore not
from the inviolability of
generative biology, but
ultimately from the sanctity
of life itself and the nobility
of human sexuality.
The Christian ascetic of
chastity, within and outside
marriage, honors the sanctity
of life and protects the
dignity of human sexuality.
Were there no Revelation
nor religion, civilization itself
would require rational
discipline of the sexual
instinct. Revealation,
however, inspires chastity of
the sexual instinct.
Revelation, however, inspires
chastity with more sublime
purposes and creative power.
In chaste love, the Christian,
whether his vocation be to
marriage or to celibacy,
expresses love for God
Himself. In the case of
spouses, marital chastity
demands not the
contradiction of sexuality but
its ordered expression in
openness to life and fidelity
to love, which means also
openness and faithfulness to
God.
These considerations enter
into the definition of
responsible parenthood. The
decision to give life to
another person is the
responsibility, under God, of
the spouses who, in effect,
ask the Creator to commit to
their care the formation of a
child (cf. Gaudium et Spes,
50). The fact that the
decision touches upon human
life and the human person is
an indication of the reverence
in which it must be made; the
fact that the decision involves
openness to God’s creative
power and providential love
demands that it be unselfish,
free from all calculation
inconsistent with generosity.
Responsible parenthood,
as the Church understands it,
places on the properly
formed conscience of spouses
all the judgments, options
and choices which add up to
the awesome decision to give,
postpone or decline life. The
final decision may sometimes
involve medical, economic,
sociological or psychological
considerations, but in no case
can it deliberately choose
objective moral disorder. If it
is to be responsible, it cannot
be the result of mere caprice
nor of superficial judgments
concerning relative values as
between persons and things,
between life and its
conveniences.
Marital love, then, in its
deepest meaning relates not
only to the birth and rearing
of children within ghe family
society, but to the growth
and well-being of human
society on its every level and
in its every aspect. It relates
at the same time to the
eternal life of those who
choose marriage as their way
to salvation. It is within this
perspective of a total vision
of man and not merely of
isolated family considera
tions, narrowly conceived,
that Pope Paul, drawing
extensively on the content of
Vatican Council II, has
written his encyclical
Humanae Vitae.
The Encyclical And
Its Contents
The Pastoral Constitution
on the Church in the Modem
World provides the
theological framework within
which Pope Paul works out
the teaching set forth in
Humanae Vitae:
“Therefore when there is
question of harmonizing
conjugal love with the
responsible transmission of
life, the moral aspect of any
procedure does not depend
solely on sincere intentions or
on an evaluation of motives.
It must be determined by
objective standards. These,
based on the nature of the
human person and his acts,
preserve the full sense of
mutual self-giving and human
procreation in the context of
true love. Such a goal cannot
be achieved unless the virtue
of conjugal chastity is
sincerely practiced. Relying
on these principles, sons of
the Church may not
undertake methods of
regulating procreation which
are found blameworthy by
the teaching authority of the
Church in its unfolding of the
divine law.
“Everyone should be
persuaded that human life
and the task of transmitting it
are not realities bound up
with this world alone. Hence
they cannot be measured or
perceived only in terms of it,
but always have a bearing on
the eternal destiny of men”
(Gaudium et Spes, 51). Pope
Paul speaks of conjugal love
as “fully human”, “a very
special form of personal
friendship,” “faithful and
exclusive until death,” “a
source of profound and
lasting happiness.” Such love,
however, “is not exhausted
by the communion between
husband and wife, but is
destined to continue, raising
up new lives.” There is an
“objective moral order
established by God” which
requires that “each and every
marriage act must remain
open to the transmission of
life.”
Both conciliar and papal
teaching, therefore,
emphasize that the
interrelation between the
unitive meaning and the
procreative meaning of
marriage is impaired, even
contradicted, when acts
expressive of marital union
are performed without love
on the one hand and without
openness to life on the other.
Consistent with this, the
encyclical sees the use of the
periodic rhythms of nature,
even though such use avoids
rather than prevents
conception, as morally
imperfect if its motivation is
primarily refusal of life rather
than the human desire to
share love within the
spirituality of responsible
parenthood.
The encyclical Humanae
Vitae is not a negative
proclamation, seeking only to
prohibit artificial methods of
contraception. In full
awareness of population
problems ana family
anxieties, it is a defense of
life and of love, a defense
which challenges the
prevailing spirit of the times.
Long range judgments may
well find the moral insights of
the encyclical prophetic and
its world-view providential.
There is already evidence that
some peoples in economically
under-developed areas may
sense this more than those
conditioned by the affluence
of a privileged way of life.
The encyclical is a positive
statement concerning the
nature of conjugal love and
responsible parenthood, a
statement which derives from
a global vision of man, an
integral view of marriage, and
the first principles, at least, of
a sound sexuality. It is an
obligatory statement,
consistent witn moral
convictions rooted in the
traditions of Eastern and
Western Christian faith; it is
an authoritative statement
solemnly interpreting
imperatives which are divine
rather than ecclesiastical in
origin. It presents without
ambiguity, doubt or
hesitation the authentic
teaching of the Church
concerning the objective evil
of that contraception which
closes the marital act to the
transmission of life,
deliberately maxing it
unfruitful. United in collegial
solidarity with the Successor
of Peter, we proclaim this
doctrine.
The encyclical reminds us
that the use of the natural
rhythms never involves a
direct positive action against
the possibility of life;
artificial contraception
always involves a direct
positive action against the
possibility of life.
Correspondence with the
natural rhythms remains
essentially attuned to the
unitive and procreative intent
of the conjugal act even when
the spouses are aware of the
silence of nature to life.
There are certain values
which may not oblige us
always to act on their behalf,
but we are prohibited from
ever acting directly against
them by positive acts. Truth
is such a value; life is surely
another. It is one thing to say
that an action against these
values is inculpable,
diminished in guilt, or
subjectively defensible; it is
quite another to defend it as
objectively virtuous.
The Church’s teaching on
the moral means to
responsible parenthood
presupposes certain positive
values. One of these is that
Christian marriage involves an
ever-maturing mutuality
between husband and wife, a
constantly increasing
awareness of the manner in
which the total nuptial
relationship parallels and
symbolizes the love-sharing
and life-giving union between
Christ and His Church. The
unitive and creative values
symbolized by sexual
expression permeate marriage
in its every aspect. This
consideration becomes more
important as the years of
married life go by, especially
when changes in society give
couples longer years of leisure
together after their children
begin to live on their own.
This explains the importance
that couples be united from
the beginning of their love by
common interests and shared
activities which will intensify
their nuptial relationship and
insure its unity against
disruption because of
disappointment in one or
another of their hopes.
No one pretends that
responsible parenthood or
even fidelity to the unitive
love of marriage, as these are
understood by the Church, is
easy of attainment without
prayerful discipline. Recourse
to natural rhythms, for
example, presents problems
which the Holy Father has
asked medical science to help
solve. Chastity, as other
virtues, is not mastered all at
once or without sacrifice. It
may involve failures and
success, declines and growth,
regressions in the midst of
progress. A hierarchy of
values that reflects a
conformity to the example of
Christ is neither easily
achieved nor insured against
loss. Moreover, Christians,
however many their failures,
will neither expect nor wish
the Church to obscure the
moral ideal in the light of
which they press forward to
perfection.
In the pursuit of the ideal
of chastity, again as of every
other virtue to which he is
bound, the Christian must
never lose heart; least of all,
can he pretend that
compromise is conquest. At
all times, his mind and heart
will echo St. Paul: “Not that
I have become perfect yet; I
have not yet won, but I am
still running, trying to
capture the prize for which
Christ Jesus captured me”
(Phil. 3,12). In no case, does
he suppose that the Church,
in proposing such goals,
teaches erroneously and
needlessly burdens its
members.
They are quite right who
insist that the Church must
labor to heal the human
condition Qy more than word
and precept alone if it wishes
its preaching to be taken
seriously. All the moral
teaching of the Church
proposes objective standards
difficult to attain: of
honesty, respect for other
peoples’ property and lives,
social justice, integrity in
public office, devotion to
learning, to service, to God.
These standards demand of
those to whom they are
preached renunciations,
frequently against the grain,
but creative in their final
effect. They also demand of
those who preach these ideals
that they, too, play their full
part in the struggle against
the social evils which obstruct
their attainment.
We shall consider later in
this letter some of our
pastoral responsibilities
toward the promotion of
distributive justice, the rights
and stability of the family,
and the consequent social
climate favorable to marriage
morality. In the meantime,
the Church, when she fulfils
her prophetic role of
preaching moral ideals and
social reform, must do so
with all the patience that the
work of teaching requires (cf.
2 Tim. 4,2).
The existence of the
Sacrament of Penance in the
Church is an indication‘that
Christian ideals are not easy
to achieve nor, once achieved,
ours forever. The Church
cannot, however, compromise
the ideal. She is bound to
teach it as it is.
The Encyclical And
Conscience
Developing last year the
teaching of the Council on
the nature of the Church, we
spoke of the reciprocal claims
of conscience and authority
in the Christian community
as Christ called it into being.
We noted that conscience
“though it is inviolable is not
a law unto itself”; that “the
distinction between natural
religion and revealed lies in
this: that one has a subjective
authority, and the other an
objective”, though both
invoke conscience. We
recalled that “God does not
leave man to himself but has
entered history through a
Word which is ‘the true light
that enlightens all men’; that
Word speaks to us and still
enlightens us in the Church of
Jesus Christ which carries the
double burden of human
conscience and divine
authority.”
These wider questions of
conscience, its nature,
witness, aberrations and
claims, above all its