Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Pope Paul VI and "Humanae Vitae": I told you so
St. Louis Review ^ | 3/3/12 | Jennifer Brinker

Posted on 02/04/2012 7:57:07 PM PST by marshmallow

The image has spread rapidly around social media networks: It's a photo of Pope Paul VI, and in the likeness of those popular inspirational posters, includes the saying, "Humanae Vitae No. 17: I told you so."

It's a humorous but stark nod to a reality that Catholic Americans are facing today: a slow, but sure dissolution of freedom of religion, this time through forcing artificial contraception upon Catholic institutions.

In his 1968 encyclical "Humanae Vitae," Pope Paul VI waxed prophetic of the consequences of artificial contraception -- the same contraception that the current federal administration wants to force Catholic institutions to provide in health care plans. This mandate includes drugs that produce abortions, as well as sterilization procedures.

Here's what Pope Paul VI wrote about artificial birth control more than 40 years ago:

"Careful consideration should be given to the danger of this power passing into the hands of those public authorities who care little for the precepts of the moral law. Who will blame a government which in its attempt to resolve the problems affecting an entire country resorts to the same measures as are regarded as lawful by married people in the solution of a particular family difficulty? Who will prevent public authorities from favoring those contraceptive methods which they consider more effective? Should they regard this as necessary, they may even impose their use on everyone."

Eerie, right?

Most Catholics have a pretty clear understanding that the Church teaches artificial contraception is an intrinsic evil -- yes, a sin. But many -- as evidenced through numerous studies that show a majority of Catholics still use contraception -- either don't fully understand or appreciate the Church's teaching.

Here are a few reasons why the Church teaches against contraceptives:

1. Marriage = Unity + Procreation

In "Humanae Vitae," Pope.......

(Excerpt) Read more at stlouisreview.com ...


TOPICS: Catholic; Moral Issues; Theology
KEYWORDS:

1 posted on 02/04/2012 7:57:11 PM PST by marshmallow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

I read the whole thing, great, thanks.


2 posted on 02/04/2012 8:07:07 PM PST by zorro8987
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow
Consequences of Artificial Methods

17. Responsible men can become more deeply convinced of the truth of the doctrine laid down by the Church on this issue if they reflect on the consequences of methods and plans for artificial birth control. Let them first consider how easily this course of action could open wide the way for marital infidelity and a general lowering of moral standards. Not much experience is needed to be fully aware of human weakness and to understand that human beings—and especially the young, who are so exposed to temptation—need incentives to keep the moral law, and it is an evil thing to make it easy for them to break that law. Another effect that gives cause for alarm is that a man who grows accustomed to the use of contraceptive methods may forget the reverence due to a woman, and, disregarding her physical and emotional equilibrium, reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires, no longer considering her as his partner whom he should surround with care and affection.

Finally, careful consideration should be given to the danger of this power passing into the hands of those public authorities who care little for the precepts of the moral law. Who will blame a government which in its attempt to resolve the problems affecting an entire country resorts to the same measures as are regarded as lawful by married people in the solution of a particular family difficulty? Who will prevent public authorities from favoring those contraceptive methods which they consider more effective? Should they regard this as necessary, they may even impose their use on everyone. It could well happen, therefore, that when people, either individually or in family or social life, experience the inherent difficulties of the divine law and are determined to avoid them, they may give into the hands of public authorities the power to intervene in the most personal and intimate responsibility of husband and wife.

Limits to Man's Power

Consequently, unless we are willing that the responsibility of procreating life should be left to the arbitrary decision of men, we must accept that there are certain limits, beyond which it is wrong to go, to the power of man over his own body and its natural functions—limits, let it be said, which no one, whether as a private individual or as a public authority, can lawfully exceed. These limits are expressly imposed because of the reverence due to the whole human organism and its natural functions, in the light of the principles We stated earlier, and in accordance with a correct understanding of the "principle of totality" enunciated by Our predecessor Pope Pius XII. (21)

3 posted on 02/04/2012 8:14:00 PM PST by A.A. Cunningham (Barry Soetoro is a Kenyan communist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

Though I appreciate the moralistic view, I do have a problem taking sexual and marital advice from a bunch of celibate priests. Was this the Satan’s ploy to take people with stronger than usual moralistic and theistic values and remove them from the gene pool?

Simply saying birth control is evil lacks any existential thinking.

On the other hand, why is it that the more technologically and moralistically advanced a society becomes, the lower the birthrate goes — as the least technologically and moralistically (at least by our measure) breed like mice.

It doesn’t take any leaps of intuition to figure out the ending to that story.


4 posted on 02/04/2012 8:29:07 PM PST by Usagi_yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Usagi_yo

While the US of the late 1800s was technologically inferior to the US of today, I’m not as confident that the were morally less advanced...


5 posted on 02/04/2012 8:54:34 PM PST by reed13k (Knight Rampant Bibliophile, Protector of Knowledge, Purveyor of Inquiry, Defender of Aged Wisdom, an)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: reed13k

What? You mean to say those sexting teens are not morally superior to those catholic farms girls that used to babysit me?


6 posted on 02/04/2012 9:20:46 PM PST by MNDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Usagi_yo

I was acquainted with a Roman Catholic monsignor who had been in the Dutch resistance in WWII. He told me once, “With birth control there is neither birth nor control.”


7 posted on 02/04/2012 9:26:58 PM PST by TEXOKIE (... and HAPPY NEW YEAR to all FREEPERS EVERYWHERE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Usagi_yo

Birth control pills are putting toxins into a woman’s body. Toxins harm the body by causing all sorts of diseases, etc. They just had a “recall” on some birth control pills—why?—they don’t prevent pregnancy.

Great! Now, think of those babies that are conceived while the mother is putting this toxin into her body. Do you not think it harms the health of the baby if they decide to keep it? Me-—I would NOT want my baby in my uterus soaked with those toxins when it is at its most vulnerable stage of development. Birth control pills are nothing but evil! A toxin put into the human body to prevent normal functions always does some harm.

Moralistically advanced? You are wrong. I think we are as debased as the Weimar Republic was in 1919-—and as Rome at the fall. Debased, satanic cultures don’t reproduce-—they implode and die. They have child “sacrifice” and end up killing off the future. Immigration is what sustains them until they are overcome and morph into something else.


8 posted on 02/04/2012 10:04:22 PM PST by savagesusie (Right Reason According to Nature = Just LawD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: TEXOKIE

That is the best saying I have heard in a long time!


9 posted on 02/04/2012 10:06:53 PM PST by savagesusie (Right Reason According to Nature = Just LawD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: savagesusie

The toxins as you so suggest are a different matter altogether vis-a-vis birth control and the Catholic Church, which can however be extended to say Jehovah’s witnesses or Christian Scientists with regards to medicinal drugs and procedures as a whole.

The moral line between between birth control and abortion is quite clear at least to me, but then it is line anchored at both ends by people stuck on absolutes.

Again though back to the thought that taking sexual and marital advice from a celibate is counter intuitive.
though they may be right on certain things, it’s only serendipty rather than something you can attribute to wisdom and experience.

Back to the aside ... by relative time frames, we are like the Romans and the low birth rate western worlds will be swallowed by the high birth rate third world.


10 posted on 02/05/2012 1:46:53 AM PST by Usagi_yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Usagi_yo
” I do have a problem taking sexual and marital advice from a bunch of celibate priests.”

You impose inconsequential conditions on them that obviate, for you, their conclusions. That's handy. If a cop tells you not to rob a bank...

11 posted on 02/05/2012 5:23:58 AM PST by TalBlack ( Evil doesn't have a day job.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Usagi_yo
Again though back to the thought that taking sexual and marital advice from a celibate is counter intuitive.

That's an ad hominem argument; almost a textbook case of one.

It might make a tiny, slim bit of sense if the "celibate" in question were making up something out of whole cloth. In this case, though, he's just reiterating for you what had been the constant teaching of the whole Christian community up until 1930. It doesn't take any special understanding of marriage to do that.

There are also plenty of married people who will tell you that artificial contraception is a bad thing. Does their opinion not count?

12 posted on 02/05/2012 6:08:30 AM PST by Campion ("It is in the religion of ignorance that tyranny begins." -- Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Campion

As opposed to what? The Halo argument?

It’s more like asking a lifetime vegatarian for a good roast recipe.

An ad hominem deals with a characteristic of the person. So if I said they’re fat so I don’t take sexual or marital advice from them, than that is a definitive ad hominem, also somewhat grayer is if I say that they believe in God, therefore I don’t trust their advice on sex and marriage, that is another ad Hominem.

But they are celibate. Meaning they vowed specificaly to not have sex or marriage. So, it addresses the point.

Therefore, no ad hominem.


13 posted on 02/05/2012 6:32:07 AM PST by Usagi_yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Running On Empty

Markng


14 posted on 02/05/2012 6:36:41 AM PST by Running On Empty (The three sorriest words: "It's too late")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Campion
Well speaking of Latin phrases "There are also plenty of married people who will tell you that artificial contraception is a bad thing. Does their opinion not count?" Is a non sequitur. But to answer ... yes, it counts for them. Not me, and not the Church. Look, I'm on the side where the government shouldn't be telling catholic run hospitals to provide birth control or abortions -- and vice versa. The Church advocates belief -- not dictate them and the Catholic church has a very spotty record between advocate and dictate.
15 posted on 02/05/2012 6:46:01 AM PST by Usagi_yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: TalBlack

It’s not inconsequential and creating a false analogy with a policeman and robbing banks is just tortured logic for contrarian sakes.

The fact is, it’s against the law to rob a bank. It’s not against the law to use birth control so that you can have sex (lets just keep it between husbands and wives) for pleasures sake without having a resulting child.

That is a theological doctrine — nonetheless the government shouldn’t be dictating to the church that it has to dispense birth control from it’s facilities.


16 posted on 02/05/2012 6:57:31 AM PST by Usagi_yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Usagi_yo

You, no doubt, must then dismiss all of the teachings of Christ and St. Paul.


17 posted on 02/05/2012 6:57:56 AM PST by A.A. Cunningham (Barry Soetoro is a Kenyan communist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Usagi_yo

A priest is as capable as anyone else of understanding the human condition. Placing false requirements upon a reasoner that have nothing to do with Reason is, as I said, Handy.


18 posted on 02/05/2012 7:24:54 AM PST by TalBlack ( Evil doesn't have a day job.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Usagi_yo
Well speaking of Latin phrases "There are also plenty of married people who will tell you that artificial contraception is a bad thing. Does their opinion not count?" Is a non sequitur.

Hardly. If your argument is that "don't contracept" is false because the messenger telling you that is celibate and therefore not to be trusted to teach you anything about marriage, my response is to present you with married people who say the same thing.

But to answer ... yes, it counts for them. Not me

And your response is to engage in solipsism. I guess you don't really want to address the content of what either of those groups of people actually say, you just want to dismiss them.

19 posted on 02/05/2012 12:50:29 PM PST by Campion ("It is in the religion of ignorance that tyranny begins." -- Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: TalBlack

Sorry, I don’t follow your line of reasoning. A celibate priest has forsworn sex. What is he going to tell me that isn’t biased towards his beliefs?

Just like contraceptives and the Catholic Church. They don’t think we should use them — That’s what they are going to teach and that’s what they are going to espouse — if you excuse the pun.


20 posted on 02/05/2012 1:00:15 PM PST by Usagi_yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Usagi_yo

The advise is the same that was given by the Apostles. It was not until the 19th century that morality was so totally identified with sexuality, caused the neuroses that Freud so accurately identified and so successfully treated. Never mind that his theory based on his experience of those times is false when universally applied. Paul’s truth is more firmly based. Man is a reed, as Pascal says, but a thinking reed. Only he should be able to admit his mistakes. In this case, the celibate priest had the truth at his disposal and his critics, clerical and otherwise, hade only a half-truth at theirs.


21 posted on 02/05/2012 7:49:27 PM PST by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Usagi_yo

Maybe it doesn’t count for you because you don’t believe there is such a thing as truth in religion and morality. Catholics believe that the Church speaks the truth. You seem to be with Pilate, “Truth,” what is truth.”? Then he gave the order to kill truth.


22 posted on 02/05/2012 11:50:20 PM PST by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS

Incoherent.


23 posted on 02/06/2012 6:42:56 AM PST by Usagi_yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Usagi_yo

What is truth? then? Is there truth in religion?


24 posted on 02/06/2012 8:50:08 AM PST by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS

Truth is either absolute or moralistic (relative).

I’m deist. I believe in the “watchmaker”.


25 posted on 02/06/2012 11:22:35 AM PST by Usagi_yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Usagi_yo

You mean either objective or subjective? Deism is pretty broad a term. Newton, the idol of of the Enlightenment, was an Arian, which is why he never took Holy Orders.


26 posted on 02/06/2012 8:45:47 PM PST by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS

However so we may try to be objective, it’s a futile effort that only results in relative truths.

Look at both sides of the Filioque schism as an example.


27 posted on 02/06/2012 11:26:36 PM PST by Usagi_yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Usagi_yo
Two plus two equals four. A rock inevitably falls to the ground unless intercepted. Men and women often produce children. A man must eat to live. Man is born to die. All objective truths--and subjective. Asa for the filioque controversy, that is a matter both political and theological in origin. Political because Rome spoke Latin and Constantinople spoke Greek, and because Rome was of Apostolic origin and Constantinople, not. Theological because the Greek Fathers saw things differently than the Latin ones. Things would be very different if Augustine had been as well-versed in Greek as Jerome, for that left the Greeks mystified by the Pelagian controversy, Matters are hard to decide when they concern a deep mystery. Just to go back to the physical world, we do not know “what” an electron is. That is a mystery even to the scientists, one as impossible to reduce to formula as the mysteries of the Trinity. Or the mystery of Jesus. At the heart of the mystery are those reports of his Resurrection. Objectively or subjectively, such an event is impossible. But we must be open to mystery. As Hamlet said, "there are more things under heaven and earth than are deameth of by your philosophy, Horatio. “

And beyond our experiences. I am not talking about ghosts and gobblins, and spirits manifest to the senses. But really, about man and his place in the universe.

28 posted on 02/07/2012 12:07:45 AM PST by RobbyS (Christus rex.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Usagi_yo

“What is he going to tell me that isn’t biased towards his beliefs?”

Putting aside the absurdity of the above question with respect to a Man of God, are you thinking of becoming a priest? And weren’t we talking about his fitness to prescribe and proscribe to his flock? Now he is “biased”? Like I said...’handy’.


29 posted on 02/10/2012 4:46:00 AM PST by TalBlack ( Evil doesn't have a day job.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson