Archive for the ‘Marriage Covenant’ Category

Natural Family Planning…What God Has Put together

Sunday, June 30th, 2019

From a letter to a doctor who inquired about our approach to teaching NFP.

When the subject of morality and biological/medical education comes up, I think of a day in the medical school education of my second daughter and her future husband.  The University of Cincinnati medical school brought in an “expert” to explain to the future docs about the patients they might be seeing.  People doing sodomy and whatever with, of course, some consequences.  The whole purpose of the day was to instruct the future docs not to be judgmental.

I would like the medical schools to bring in informed Catholics who could help future docs why believing Catholics believe that unnatural forms of birth control are immoral and thus not be judgmental and thinking that such Catholics and some others are crazy or luddites.  We try to do that in Chapter 1 of our manual.  Explaining Catholic belief in terms not only of the proscription of contraception but also in terms of covenant theology of the marriage act might help some of them.  After all, if that theology helped Kimberly and Scott Hahn accept Catholic teaching on  birth control when Scott considered himself the most anti-Catholic person at their seminary, perhaps it can help others as well.

Anyone who reads our manual will realize that it does not take many words to explain this sort of thing—the idea that the human sexual act ought to be 1) exclusively a marriage act and 2) a true marriage act, a renewal of the marriage covenant.  That simple idea gives meaning to the sexual act.  It helps people to understand the intrinsic dishonesty of 1) sex outside of marriage and 2) marital contraception.

I think that almost every theist can understand that the acceptance of contraception means the acceptance of the idea that modern men and women can take apart what God has put together in the human sexual act.  A couple of questions suffice:  “Who put together in one act what we call ‘making love’ and ‘making babies’?”  A thinking theist has to say, “God.”  “What is contraception except the effort to take apart what God has put together?”  Well, what else?  Thus, the acceptance of marital contraception logically entails the application of that “taking apart” to the entirety of imaginable sexual actions including adultery, fornication, incest, and—of course—the acceptance of sodomy, provided only that the parties are of legal age and have given mutual consent.

If you are dealing with a person who claims to be an atheist, it may be helpful to note that no one can prove that God does not exist.  The logicians have long told us that no one can prove a negative.  If you think it might  be helpful in dealing with an unbeliever, you can give her or him a brochure I developed (at the request of a prisoner) titled “Why Believe?”  Yon can download it (free) at http://nfpandmore.org/brochure.shtml .

I better stop now.  You have hit my hot button.
John Kippley

Natural Family Planning and Response to a Dissenter

Sunday, May 19th, 2019

I was theologically active at the time of Humanae Vitae.  I examined the arguments offered by the dissenting theologians.  I found them so inadequate that I wrote a book defending the received teaching and criticizing the dissenters’ arguments.  For its second edition I retitled it as “Birth Control and the Marriage Covenant.”  It was that edition that found its way into the hands of Kimberly and Scott Hahn when they were students in a Protestant seminary.  It helped persuade them of the truth of the received teaching affirmed by Humanae Vitae, and such acceptance was a step towards their entry into full communion with the Catholic Church.  An expanded version is now published as “Sex and the Marriage Covenant” by Ignatius.  In March 1971, the generally liberal journal Theological Studies published my article “Continued Dissent: Is It Responsible Loyalty?” in which I showed that the decision-making principles of arch-dissenter Fr. Charles Curran could not say NO even to spouse-swapping.  To the best of my knowledge, no one ever accused me of making a “straw-man” argument.

I suggest that you read those things before you waste lots of time and effort trying to support the dissenting position, a position that is unsupportable except in the context of situation ethics which is incompatible with Christian discipleship.

The only thing really surprising in Humanae Vitae is an amazing omission in Section 17 which deals with the consequences of the societal acceptance of unnatural forms of birth control.  In 1930 when the Anglican bishops were debating birth control, their conservatives pointed out that the acceptance of marital contraception would logically entail the acceptance of sodomy.  Not only were they correct, but today the Anglicans accept as bishops those who are openly involved in the practice of sodomy and calling it marriage.  I regret that Pope Paul VI did not include this important bit of history.

At our website you can find lots more to support Humanae Vitae and to uphold the dignity of women as mothers.  Nowhere else will you find so much support for the kind of breastfeeding that actually DOES naturally postpone the return of fertility.  We have to call it “Ecological Breastfeeding” to distinguish if from the styles of breastfeeding that have little or no effect on the return of fertility.

Future historians will record Humanae Vitae as a bright spot in Catholic history.

John Kippley
Sex and the Marriage Covenant

Natural Family Planning: Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI essay

Sunday, April 14th, 2019

Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI:  The Church and the Scandal of Sexual Abuse

At long last Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI has commented on the priestly sex abuse scandal.  Publishing this on April 10, just six days before his 91st birthday, he has a long view of what has happened in the last 60 years.  Although I have witnessed much of this period, some of the content was surprising.   This document does not have paragraph numbers, so I have added my own (1-80).

1.  The effect of the sexual revolution on the Church (7-15). I had not realized how bad sexuality instruction was in Germany in the Sixties and perhaps even earlier.  That contributed greatly to what Benedict calls the Revolution of 1968, the year of Humanae Vitae—a battle to have an “all-out sexual freedom, one which no longer conceded any norms”(12).  We can see this reflected in the Majority Report of the papal birth control commission.  They proposed a big-picture morality in which contraceptive acts had no intrinsic morality but were to take their morality from those other non-contraceptive acts including those that caused pregnancy.  St. Pope Paul VI saw that their proposal could not say NO to any imaginable sex act between two consenting partners of legal age.  He called contraceptive acts “intrinsically dishonest” (HV n. 14).

2.  Problems in moral theology (16-31). I was interested in his comments about the post-Vatican II efforts to abandon a natural-law theology and to focus on a biblical theology. I’m glad that I wasn’t aware of this battle; it might have cowed me into never articulating the covenant theology of the marriage act—“Sexual intercourse is intended by God to be, at least implicitly, a renewal of the marriage covenant.”  “Covenant” is a basic biblical theme, and this brief theological statement applies to all the sexual acts condemned as sinful in the Bible.

3.  Seminaries and canon law (32-49). I had no idea how bad the situation was in some seminaries. “In various seminaries homosexual cliques were established, which acted more or less openly and significantly changed the climate in the seminaries…”(33).  In the seminary I attended, the rule book instructed us not to engage in “particular friendships” if I recall the word correctly.  At the time I assumed that meant no special cliques that break up overall community.  The idea that men could be sexually attracted to other men simply did not occur to me.  After three years in the military and graduate school, I had my first real job in New York.  I replied to an “apartment to share” ad.  After a few other questions, the two guys asked me if I was gay.  I told them that I supposed I liked a good party as well as the next guy.  I did not receive an invitation to move in with them.

4.  Meaning (50-61). I very much appreciated Benedict’s emphasis on the need for meaning.  The covenant theology of the marriage act is an effort to describe the meaning that God has built into the human sexual act.  With the biblical condemnation of all non-marital sexual acts, God makes it clear that the human sexual act is meant to be exclusively a marriage act.  And God’s Church has clarified that within marriage, the sexual act ought to be a true marriage act, for better and for worse including the imagined worse of possible pregnancy.

5.  The Holy Eucharist (62-66). It may seem strange that in a document dealing with sexual abuse Benedict has five paragraphs on the Holy Eucharist.  Perhaps this struck me because my first article was titled “Holy Communion: Eucharistic and Marital.”  Here I proposed a five-fold analogy between the worthy reception of the Holy Eucharist and the worthy marriage act.  It was published 17 months before Humanae Vitae.  (See http://nfpandmore.org/Holy%20Communion%20-%20Eucharistic%20and%20Marital.pdf ).  This is also Chapter 4 in Sex and the Marriage Covenant: A Basis for Morality.

The Church (67-80).  In one sense, I can understand why the priestly sexual abuse of children and young men has led some people to lose their faith in the Church.  I have a 100% different take on the matter.  To me the Scandal shows what happens when priests do not accept the teaching of the Church about sexual morality.  The fundamental idea that is behind the acceptance of marital contraception is that modern men and women can take apart what God has put together in the marriage act—making love and making  babies.  Once you accept the idea that you can take apart what God has put together in the order of love, marriage, and sexuality, there is no logical stopping point short of the practical—messing with minors is against the law.

We have  been convinced from the time we started our NFP apostolate in 1971 that it is important to explain the Church’s teaching without being bashful about our Catholicity.  In recent years we have become even more clear.  That’s why we let our clients/students read and hear the threefold promise of Jesus at the Last Supper to send the Holy Spirit to lead the Apostles and their successors into the fullness of the truth.  The question is really this:  Do we believe the promises of Jesus?  Every person taking an NFP course under any sort of Catholic auspices ought to know these promises.

I recommend reading the commentary by Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI.  If you have read other papal documents, you may be pleased with this: it is actually easy to read.

The good news.  Putting these things on the table for all to see is a positive step towards remedying the situation and authentic renewal within the Church, ourselves, and our culture.

John F. Kippley
Sex and the Marriage Covenant: A Basis for Morality (Ignatius)