Archive for September, 2018

Dissent from Humanae Vitae and the Sexual Scandals

Sunday, September 9th, 2018

I have been involved in the effort to uphold and explain Humanae Vitae for the last 50 years, and I am writing this to place the scandals of priestly sexual sins in context. Nothing of what follows should be seen as an effort to whitewash or downplay the evils that have been done. However, convicting ex-Cardinal Theodore McCarrick and other clerics and putting them into solitary confinement for the rest of their lives will not solve the problem.

The problem is that for 50 years all too many in the leadership of the Church in North America and elsewhere have been silent about Humanae Vitae, the teaching document of Pope Paul VI that reaffirmed the Traditional Christian teaching that using unnatural forms of birth control is the grave matter of mortal sin. They have also ignored the widespread dissent against this teaching, a dissent movement led by clergy.

What they were dissenting against was the key teaching of Humanae Vitae. “The Church…teaches that each and every marriage act must remain open to the transmission of life… That teaching…is founded upon the inseparable connection, willed by God and unable to be broken by man on his own initiative, between the two meanings of the conjugal act; the unitive meaning and procreative meaning” (n 11 and 12).

Let’s put that into ordinary language.

Who put together in one act what we commonly “making love” and “making babies”?
Those who believe in the Creator God have to say, “God Himself put together in one act what we commonly call ‘making love’ and ‘making babies’.”

What are contraceptive behaviors except the effort to take apart what God Himself has put together? That, of course, is precisely what contraception is all about.

Now, note four things very well. 1) The last 50 years of dissent have been based on the unprovable assertion that modern man can take apart what God Himself has put together in the marriage act; in the wider culture, this has been expanded to the acceptance of any imaginable sexual act between two persons who give mutual consent and are of legal age.

2) That assertion cannot be limited logically to unnatural forms of birth control. If married heterosexuals can tell themselves that they can ignore some 3,000 years of biblical teaching against contraception, it doesn’t take much imagination to realize that those with same-sex attraction can tell themselves the same thing with regard to the biblical teaching against sodomy.

3) This was pointed out when there was discussion in the papal birth control commission about these matters in 1966, but the pro-contraception group said that they did not accept sodomy. I take them at their word, but that was only their personal preference, not the logic of their argument.

4) What was their argument for accepting marital contraception? They said that contraceptive acts should be judged by the fruitfulness of the marriage as a whole. That was called the principle of totality; it was a big-picture morality that initially looks attractive—until you think about it. That would also be attractive to a person tempted to engage in adultery who could try to rationalize that the immorality of those acts is covered by the big picture of his or her fidelity the rest of the time. And certainly a cleric could try to rationalize sexual sins as covered by his fidelity to his vocation the rest of the time.

Pope Paul VI contradicted that big-picture morality by teaching, as we have seen, that each and every marriage act must be left open to the transmission of life. He responded further to the big-picture morality as follows: “Consequently, it is an error to think that a marriage act which is deliberately made sterile and so is intrinsically dishonest could be made honest and right by the ensemble [totality] of a fertile married life” (n.14).

Note that phrase, “intrinsically dishonest.” Blessed Pope Paul VI could have said “intrinsically evil” but he chose to use “dishonest.” That implies that there is an “honest” marriage act, one that is true to its God-given meaning. And there is. From sacred scripture and Tradition we can summarize it in 17 words.

“Sexual intercourse is intended by God to be, at least implicitly, a renewal of the marriage covenant.”

That is, the human sexual act can be morally good only within marriage. Within marriage, it ought to be a renewal of the fidelity and love and affection and commitment of their marriage covenant. It ought to say, “We take each other once again for better and for worse including the imagined ‘worse’ of an unintended pregnancy.” The contraceptive marriage act says, on the other hand, “We take each other for better but NOT for the imagined ‘worse’ of possible pregnancy.” Such acts contradict the marriage covenant. They are intrinsically dishonest.

Do our individual or married actions affect anyone except ourselves? Do they affect the Church as a whole? Yes. St. Paul puts it this way as he describes the various members of the body of Christ: “If one member suffers, all suffer together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together” (1 Cor 12:26). This is called the doctrine of the Mystical Body of Christ. If you and I are living in the state of grace and do good things by way of prayer and helping the less fortunate, we are helping to build up the body of the Church beyond those immediately affected by our good works. It’s a spiritual thing that helps everybody a little bit. On the other hand by our sins, we hurt everybody a little bit.

Surveys show that a huge majority of Catholics in their fertile years are using unnatural forms of birth control. I think this has a negative effect on the Mystical Body of Christ and makes fidelity even more difficult for many priests. I think it has helped some of them to fall. So if you or I point a finger at a fallen priest, it is good to remember that three fingers are pointing at ourselves.

The time has come for all Catholics to accept and to live out the teaching of Humanae Vitae. This applies to all Christians. After all, Humanae Vitae simply reaffirmed what all the Protestant churches taught before August of 1930. Need help? Come to Natural Family Planning International at www.nfpandmore.org. You and your friends and relatives can take the NFPI Home Study Course at your own home and pace.
John F. Kippley

Natural Family Planning, Population and Breastfeeding

Sunday, September 2nd, 2018

Below is John’s response to an invitation to a Catholic gathering of experts regarding the poor and the anti-population agenda.

Thanks for the notification.  I am sure that the speaker-participants will do an excellent job of describing the unhappy efforts of the anti-population bad guys.

But it is unfortunate that there is no one on that panel who will speak on behalf of the positive alternative of Ecological Breastfeeding.  Maybe some will mention other forms of natural birth spacing, but I would be totally surprised if there was any mention of Ecological Breastfeeding.  There is ample research to demonstrate that the pattern of frequent breastfeeding that we term Ecological Breastfeeding postpones the return of fertility.  In some pre-bottlefeeding cultures, breastfeeding produces birth intervals of three to four years with no forms of contraception.  Our research in American culture shows an average return of menstruation between 14 and 15 months.

My wife has written extensively on this,  but she (and research of others as well) is ignored by the current NFP Establishment as well as the anti-abortion establishment.

It has become typical for television coverage of hurricanes in the Caribbean islands to show a young mother complaining that no one is giving her any food for her very young baby when she has God’s own food in her breasts.  It makes me sick to see this.  Why hasn’t the Church done more to educate these folks about breastfeeding for its tremendous health benefits and also for its natural spacing benefit?

Maybe your speakers do not know of anyone who has used Ecological Spacing and experienced 14 or 15 months of breastfeeding infertility.  But please do not make the common mistake of thinking that one’s experience represents the totality of reality.

We have lots of information on this at our website: www.nfpandmore.org.  Enjoy!

Thanks again for the notification.  If you would like to pursue the positive alternatives, we would be delighted to help you.

In His service,
John Kippley