"Furthermore, as the Magesterium of the Church has taught repeatedly, direct sterilization of the male or female, whether permanent or temporary, is equally to be condemned."

--Humanae Vitae
Pope Paul VI
July 25, 1968

Humanae Vitae: 30 Years Later

If anyone doubts whether Pope Paul VI was speaking with the aid of the Holy Spirit in 1968 when he said "there must be rejection of all acts that attempt to impede procreation," that person ought to take a look at the world in its present state.

Saturday, July 25, 1998, marked the 30^th anniversary of Humanae Vitae, called by Denver Archbishop Charles Chaput, "certainly the most misunderstood papal intervention of this century." Chaput’s comments are part of a papal encyclical in which he reviewed several points made by Pope Paul VI in the encyclical that reaffirmed the Catholic Church’s rejection of birth control.

The pontiff in 1968 did not merely say, "contraception is bad; don’t do it." He predicted that the widespread acceptance and use of contraception would have dire effects on future society. Now, 30 years later, those predictions have come true.

Four predictions

Chaput’s letter covers the four major predictions made by Paul VI:

He warned that the widespread use of contraception would lead to "conjugal infidelity and the general lowering of morality."

He also warned that man would lose respect for woman and "no longer [care] for her physical and psychological equilibrium," to the point that he would consider her "as a mere instrument of selfish enjoyment."

The Holy Father also warned that widespread use of contraception would place a "dangerous weapon … in the hands of those public authorities who take no heed of moral exigencies."

Pope Paul warned that contraception would mislead human beings into thinking they had unlimited domain over their own bodies, relentlessly turning the human person into the object of his or her own intrusive power.

Four predictions: 30 years later

Chaput goes on to point out briefly how these things have occurred, and truly, naivete rules the person who would deny the fulfillment of these predictions.

Current divorce rates are higher than they have ever been with one of every two marriages ending in divorce.

Sex is no longer a powerful sign of love between a husband and wife. It is the subject of talk shows, soap operas and sit-coms. Furthermore, there is a general feeling in American society that sex is a right to be practiced, rather than a sanctifying union between a woman and man joined in marriage.

As Chaput points out, mandatory contraception policies are often included in any discussion regarding foreign aid. China stands as the most graphic example of this prediction of Pope Paul’s. The country has a mandatory one-child limit, enforced by contraception and abortion.

It is expected that contraception is used during sexual intercourse, and people get frustrated and feel betrayed when contraception does not work. Rather than relying on abstinence and recognizing the natural workings of the body, individuals often rely on contraception. This gives them a false sense of power over their bodies.

Our state of addiction

Chaput begins his pastoral letter with a discussion on addiction, which at first seems out of place. But, when one considers the current AIDS epidemic and the debate regarding sex education, one can understand why a discussion of addiction makes sense in this letter.

People in American society have grown so accustomed to getting their way that they will do what they want without regard to a real danger. There is one sure way of not contracting the AIDS virus through sexual contact – abstinence. But, because it is considered moral teaching, which we are supposed to avoid in public schools, the accepted sex education is to instruct teens about condoms and to encourage their use.

These are sure signs of addiction. We have in some cities clean needle exchanges in order to prevent the spread of disease among drug addicts. We recognize that such individuals are addicted and will take actions to feed their addiction regardless of the danger of disease, yet we do not wish to see the same parallel with regard to sexual addiction.

Birth control, the more common and popular term because it connotes responsibility, is a mainstay in our society. As I write this letter, the U.S. Congress is moving to require that health insurance for federal employees cover the cost of contraception. Contraception is seen as the responsible way to act. People who engage in sexual activity without using some form of birth control are viewed as being irresponsible and even foolish.

Yet, true responsibility would be to avoid sexual intimacy if a child is not desired. This is too difficult, however, and is not considered by most people. How can this not be considered an addiction? It is something considered so difficult to give up that people would rather take pills or take other extreme measures in order to continue their practices rather than stop. What exactly is the difference between a condom and a clean needle?

Sexual abstinence

Although abstinence is the best and only sure-fire way to avoid pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases, children in schools often are subjected to sexual education that mentions abstinence only in passing. It is the only subject where teachers would rather teach a shortcut that doesn’t always work as opposed to the best, but not always easy, way!

Sexual education that focuses on abstinence is criticized, because it is believed to be moral education and religious-based. As a democratic country with a separation of church and state, many consider abstinence to be crossing the line.

But, again, does it not make sense to explain to children that the only sure way to avoid the unexpected and undesired results of sexual intercourse is to avoid sexual intercourse? In this way, it is not simply a matter of morals, but of common sense. If you don’t want to fall out of a tree, don’t climb one!

Today’s contraception

In the last 30 years, birth control has been transformed. There is no doubt that today, people have many types of birth control to choose from, and they’re all more effective than they used to be.

The birth control pill is about 98 percent effective. Other innovations like Norplant and RU-486 are tapped as being virtually ineffective.

And, attitudes toward contraception have changed. In the 1930s, prior to Humanae Vitae, nearly 65 percent of Americans lived according to the Church’s teaching against contraception. Today, that number is down to four percent.

As freedom-focused as the 1960s were, it is not until the 1990s that advertisements for condoms and other forms of birth control are commonplace. That’s because today, it is seen as responsible to use a condom, and it is viewed as an infringement on freedom to imply that single people should not have sexual relations.

BUT… (You knew that was coming)

What has really changed about contraception? Nothing.

Attitudes may have changed, people may have changed, and details of contraceptive methods may have changed, but the basic nature and intention of contraception – what makes it wrong – have not.

Contraception is wrong because it defies the unitive and procreative elements of sexual intercourse. More effective and less intrusive birth control methods STILL do that.

At one point, there was discussion among Catholic theologians that the birth control pill might not be morally wrong. This occurred in the 1950s and 1960s. The thought was that it might not be wrong because "unlike other kinds of birth control, it did not seem to break the integrity of the sexual act" (Smith 2).

In spite of the wishes of these dissenting theologians, the teaching of the Church was not changed and was reinforced in Humanae Vitae. Why? Because although the face of contraception had changed, its nature and intention had not.

The contraceptive pill, as well as all other forms of contraception, eliminate the procreative and unitive elements from sexual intercourse. The natural end of sex, though not always achieved, is procreation. By engaging in contracepted sex, a couple is simultaneously engaging in an act of love and undermining it at the same time. This goes against the natural law and will always be wrong no matter how effective or non-intrusive the contraceptive may be.

Natural Family Planning

Although the Church states that a couple engaging in sexual intercourse should always remain open to the possibility of conceiving a child, the Church recognizes the needs, be they financial or otherwise, for some families to limit the number of children. For this purpose, the Church recognizes Natural Family Planning as the moral alternative to contraception.

Although NFP has its naysayers, the plan is as effective as the best contraceptives – about 99 percent. NFP calls for a couple to monitor natural fertility signs in the mother and to abstain from sex during fertile periods if the couple chooses not to conceive a child at that time.

The difficult part of NFP is abstaining, and that is why many couples do not choose it. Yet, NFP is the only method of spacing children that appreciates and utilizes the natural fertility cycles in women. Best of all, it is drug-free, paraphanalia-free, and the most cost-effective method available.

Finally, NFP allows a deep bond between a husband and wife, caused, most likely, by the times of abstinence:

A proof that NFP is good for a marriage is that whereas in the U.S. over fifty percent of marriages end in divorce (and it is safe to assume that most of these couples are contracepting [remember only four percent of Catholics live according to Church teaching on this issue], very, very few couples who use NFP ever divorce; they seem to bond in a deeper way than those who are contracepting. (Smith 18)

Communication is a must with NFP. Perhaps it is this communication that leads to the deep bond among NFP families.

Chris Mosmeyer
August 6, 1998

Sources and Further Reading Suggestions:

Chaput, Charles "Of Human Life: A pastoral letter to the people of God of northern Colorado on the truth and meaning of married love." Issued by the Denver Archbishop July 22, 1998

Pope Paul VI. Humanae Vitae. "On the Regulation of Birth." July 25, 1968.

Smith, Janet. Humanae Vitae: A Challenge to Love. New Hope, Kentucky: New Hope Publications, n.d.

Catechism of the Catholic Church.