This month marks the 40th anniversary of the publication of Humanae Vitae (On Human Life), the landmark encyclical of Pope Paul VI reaffirming the Church’s position against artificial contraception.
The so-called sexual revolution, now well into its 40s, has given us a lousy hangover from the past four decades of recklessness and immorality. Birth control always has been a thorny issue, and the advent of “the pill” in the early 1960s heightened the intensity of the discussion. Not only did it offer families an easier means to regulate births but it also aided the countercultural revolution by providing a means for sex on demand and seemingly did away without the consequences. Forty years after the publication of Humanae Vitae we see that there are in fact grave moral, spiritual, and physical costs to a life devoted to the cult of the body.
In his letter the Pope Paul VI reiterated traditional Church teaching, “a teaching which is based on the natural law as illuminated and enriched by Divine Revelation:”
Each and every marriage act must remain open to the transmission of life,” the Holy Father wrote. “[It] is the most serious role in which married people collaborate freely and responsibly with God the Creator. It has always been a source of great joy to them, even though it sometimes entails many difficulties and hardships.
What is interesting about Humanae Vitae is that a majority of the theologians consulted on this encyclical before it was published disagreed with the pope. As a whole they could come to no clear consensus on artificial means to prevent pregnancies. They felt that the Church’s position on birth control must be categorized as “evolutionary,” like the Church’s view on intercourse itself.
Early Christian writers believed sex in marriage was justifiable only for procreative purposes. Eventually, of course, the stricture was loosed; hence the assertion by theologians that the stricture against birth control could be similarly loosed. What was the difference?
It is a development for the Church to come to the understanding that the unitive nature of the sexual act along with its procreative nature, as the Catechism says, “achieves the twofold end of marriage: the good of the spouses themselves and the transmission of life.” This development is based on the recognition that God himself established the “connection… between the unitive significance and the procreative significance” and that they “are both inherent to the marriage act.” Once this recognition has been made, the conclusion that “man on his own initiative may not break” this connection follows logically (see CCC 2366). We see in that development of doctrine exactly the kind of organic wholeness of thought that John Henry Cardinal Newman identified as a feature of genuine development of doctrine.
But the claims of the moral theologians of the majority report did not meet that test of organic development; instead their claims really were a capitulation to what was happening in the world at the time: moral and social deterioration. Advances in the science of artificial birth control had man heady with his power to control the beginning of life. As Pope Paul recognized man was “playing God,” with men and women deciding when life should start — soon they would progress logically to deciding when it would end, for both the culture of death and the civilization of life have their own internal and inexorable logic. Part and parcel of the logic of birth control was abortion and though it may be harder to see the connection, euthanasia — all are “intrinsic evils.” All are born of the desire to control life.
In retrospect, what made Paul’s encyclical so brilliant is that, despite opposition, he published Humanae Vitae, not simply because it affirmed the Church’s view on the sanctity of life, but also because it was an exercise of papal authority. To have caved into the liberal mindset sweeping the world — and some blocks of the Magisterium — would have meant that the Successor to Peter was second-guessing the Divine inspiration afforded his office.
Since its publication, reflection by the faithful has even more strongly confirmed that society is rightly ordered only when we understand that God is in control, and when we understand and support the privileged vocation of married life. When a couple receives the sacrament of matrimony they vow to “accept children lovingly from God.” That doesn’t mean when they decide it’s convenient. It means trusting that when and if God deigns to bless them with children they will be ready and able — financially or otherwise. It means the loving maintenance of marital chastity. “Married love, therefore, requires of husband and wife the full awareness of their obligations in the matter of responsible parenthood,” Pope Paul wrote. In matrimony the spouses accept responsibility for the results of each and every marriage act — so that they bring to it a sense of sacred responsibility and self-sacrificial participation in the work of God that no contracepting couple can imagine.
God remains the author of life and through his servant Paul He made clear that life alone is his to give — and to take. But the forces that opposed Humanae Vitae forty years ago have not dried up and blown away, withered though they may be by now. That is why as a seminarian, I write frankly about my love for this teaching — but anonymously. God willing, I shall continue my formation and sometime in the not-too-distant future be free to stand before a congregation of God’s people and teach them the beauty of Humanae Vitae.
You faithful people of God who have wondered where the priests are who will speak these things, please know that the John Paul II priests, the Theology of the Body priests, who are also the Pope Paul VI and Humanae Vitae priests are here and increasing. Pray for me that I shall join their ranks.
July 19th, 2008 at 3:03 am
Not only does “the pill” interfere with marriage and tend to cause impurity/infidelity just by implication of a sense of “safety”, it also kills tiny babies by not allowing them to implant in the mother’s womb.
It pollutes our water supply with great excess of female hormones, so that the balence in numbers between male and female fish and anphibians is disturbed. The excess hormones in the water are turning males into females or producing more females, and may actually threaten the existance of these types of animal life. Where are the “environmentalists” on this danger?
Has anyone checked about this effect on hormone levels for male humans? Are they being “feminized” too? Are we all becoming an endangered species??? The pill kills in all sorts of ways and is a threat to life on earth. Wake up WORLD! God and the Church have tried to warn us. We MUST listen.
July 19th, 2008 at 5:14 am
Sign the Humanae Vitae Pledge…
Click or Paste this: https://www.hli.org/humanae_vitae_pledge.php
July 19th, 2008 at 5:36 am
It is the “Threshold of Hope” for most Catholics; the point at which they are no longer willing to follow Jesus and his Church; the point where they leave their faith behind them and forge on without His Grace. For my marriage, and for many of the JPII generation, it is our legacy and contribution to the Church. If I had time I would write a book on the experiences we have had over the last 17 years. The joys and trials, the hardships and graces, the ridicule and affirmation that goes along with having a large family in today’s society. We are poineers; an oddity to some, a thorn to others. We forge ahead without question, because Our Lord has given us a great Grace in the knowledge of Humanae Vitae. It is more than just a church document, it is our life.
Andy – father of 8 with number 9 almost ready for the Light of day.
July 19th, 2008 at 7:27 am
Anonymous,
We will continue to pray for you and all seminarians, that you learn and accept the beautiful truth, and that you are strong and courageous. Thank you for answering God’s call!!
July 19th, 2008 at 8:33 am
As young newlyweds in the early 80’s my husband and I bit into the “apple” of contraception and birth control gladly and willingly because we were “ignorant” Catholics. By ignorant I mean that we knew what the Church taught regarding birth control but thought it was archaic and sadly out-of-touch with reality; in essence, we decided to play God and “decide for ourselves” what was right and wrong. We went beyond the popular 1.5 kids and had 3 boys, but the last one was an “accident” when our second was only 5 months old. I can still remember how I felt sitting on the side of the tub looking at that little blue strip, wondering how we were going to make it with three children in a young marriage with two working parents. While the thought of abortion never crossed my mind, despair did rush in as I pondered what my boss was going to say when I told him I was pregnant AGAIN!!!!! Oh, how well I remember his reaction and the reaction of others when they shook their collective heads and muttered, “She does know what causes that, right?”
After child number three, my husband elected to get a vasectomy and I went with him to hold his hand and encourage him through the in-office procedure which now, looking back, was made to appear like nothing more than having a tooth removed. There was no surgeon draped in a sterile surgical gown, no sterilized instruments in a surgical setting, no surgical masks, etc. Within thirty minutes we were finished and heading home with a six-pack of beer and a small vial of painkillers clutched happily in my husband’s hand.
As the Church heaped further recriminations on our heads for this latest transgression, we opted to leave the Church rather than feel like hypocrites and horrible Catholics … and began hopping from a variety of “feel-good” Protestant churches that seemed to focus on a loving and forgiving God who wanted us to be prosperous, victorious, and forgiven instantly with no visible sign of repentence or change. And we were happy in this setting.
As the TRUTH of the teachings of the Catholic Church began to clamor in my head as I got older, I began to listen to Catholic radio and watch EWTN in an effort to try and figure out a way to live in both worlds. This, of course, was impossible. As I realized, more and more, that I knew the Truth and was openly rejecting it (especially in regards to the Eucharist), a holy fear of God came over me and I knew I had to truly repent and return to the Church or suffer the consequences. We were active and faithful Methodists at this time because their liturgical calendar and services are very, very similar to the Catholic Church’s and we thought it would be a happy compromise. But, there are no compromises with God … He wants ALL OF US! Protestants refer to this as being “completely sold out”, and I knew that we weren’t. We were still wanting it “our way” instead of God’s way … and we were taking the easy road rather than the hard one. And, as hard as it was to do it, we left the Methodist church, repented of our sins against God and His Holy Church, and returned to the Church of our youth.
Fortunately, I was way into menopause when we returned so my husband did not have to get a vasectomy reversal, but if it had been required, we would have done it out of obedience to the Church and our creating God. I have many moments when I wonder how many children my husband and I might have been blessed with … and that old boss is long gone and rarely remembered except in moments like these, and my response is to always lift him and others like him up in prayer. “Father, forgive us … for we truly do not know what we do! Amen.”
July 19th, 2008 at 9:21 am
Let us all pray that this fine seminarian is ordained and able to touch the lives and hearts of many Catholics through his priesthood.
And let us also pray that those who have created the enviornment which compels him to write *anonymously* come to embrace Humanae Vitae also.
Humanae Vitae is part of the Good News of Jesus Christ. Our church should be proclaiming it with joy instead of forcing seminarians to write about it under the cloak of anonymity.
July 19th, 2008 at 9:51 am
God bless you, Doris!
July 19th, 2008 at 12:26 pm
He’s a seminarian and he can’t openly support the teachings of the Pope? What on earth is going on in our seminaries?
July 19th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
He asked me to keep his identity confidential because he could be identified as an “idealogue” and it could jeapardize his ordination.
I agree it is a sad state of affairs when a man realizes that he has to keep a lid on his committment to Church teaching in order to be ordained, but the positive thing is that the generation of the modernist agenda is finally dying off and being replaced by so many fervent priests.
The important thing is to pray for him.
July 19th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
The most depressing thing about this article is that this young seminarian, a hero in my eyes, must write anonymously. Those that fear an American schism are too late. It’s already happened. Too many leaders in the AM Church are wolves in sheep’s clothing. A smaller, more faithful Church is inevitable. St. Chrysostum was right. AndyP/Doria2 Yonkers, NY HOSEA 4:6
July 19th, 2008 at 5:29 pm
I understand this young seminarian having to write anonymously. We have 10 children, and it is *Catholics* more than any other denomination who give us the meanest comments – they even have the nerve, or lack of manners rather, to say ugly things *in front of* our other children. A priest once told us, “When God said ‘Be Fruitful and Multiply’, He did not mean for you two do it” — whatever. I have heard it is quite difficult for those seminarians who are obedient to Church teachings, and they have to be under the radar in order to become ordained. It is pitiful, but these brave men are such blessings from God for us! Do keep them in constant prayer.
July 19th, 2008 at 5:35 pm
What a sad state of affairs when a Catholic seminarian, in a supposedly Roman Catholic Seminary, must write anonymously when re-affirming what the Roman Catholic Church teaches… even he must be “politically correct” to be able to accomplish God’s work! What is wrong with this picture?
Oh, it’s not his fault, to be sure. But for the last 40 or 50 years, I have not heard a single sermon on issues dealing with sexual sin, including abortion resulting from “recreational sex.” Many Catholics at Sunday Mass go to receive Our Lord dressed in a very inappropriate and undignified manner. But the pastors and priests turn a blind eye. They prefer to have these people attend Mass than not, and put in a few bucks in the collection box than not.
This is to the detriment of the Church. I, for one, would prefer clear, courageous leadership, true to Jesus Christ and His Bride, The Church. Membership would not diminish much; probably would increase.
Perhaps too many in leadership positions are gutless wonders; they prefer political correctness over truth. This is the kind of leadership that played a big role in the sexual abuse crisis on the American Catholic Church.
I will pray for this seminarian and for ALL our seminarians; that God’s love, mercy and courage maintain them strong in their journey to the priesthood and beyond.
God bless you and all seminarians who have heeded God’s call to spend yourself for His People. We need faithful, courageous, honest priests.
Thanks!
July 19th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
Grace:
i don’t know about the fish, but scientists are working on a ’solution’ if human males become sterile – conception by either ‘egg fusion’ or, more likely, with ‘artifical sperm’- bone marrow cells which are altered so they can be used to fertilize an egg. The latter procedure has already ‘progressed’ to the point that it has been used to conceive mice. When this procedure reaches human testing, and then human implementation, women won’t even need a man to provide a frozen sperm sample- lesbian couples will be able to conceive and bear a child with a biological tie to both ‘parents’, and no direct tie to any male at all. All such children will be female, as there will be no possibility of a Y chromosome being transmitted. Barring the Lord’s return in glory, I bet there will be self-reproducing ‘male-free’ enclaves by the end of the century.
July 19th, 2008 at 8:46 pm
It is the deacon in our church who delivers the biggest punch with his homilies … and I am very grateful for his courage. He is also a county judge in our area so this really adds to his credibility with our young people. We have seen many priests come and go in our small parish because they “dared” to speak against immodesty, abortion, homosexuality, adultery, and loose morals. It is almost more than I can bear sometimes when I see a communion steward handling the Body and Blood of Christ in a low-cut blouse or very short skirt … or a reader in similar inappropriate attire. Oh, please, dearest Father, send us bold and courageous priests who will deliver Your message of Truth without courage and confidence.
July 20th, 2008 at 12:04 am
To MichelleGA: Congratulations! You are standing tall for the teachings of Jesus and His Church! When Protestants and non-believers put down your family, you have a chance to catechize. The same goes for those Catholics who make mean remarks, including the priest! They speak the way they do because they either don’t KNOW, or don’t BELIEVE the teaching of the Church. Respond to their ignorance/unbelief as Jesus would: by telling them the TRUTH! And, don’t you dare “hang your head” when you do!
July 20th, 2008 at 9:10 am
I, unfortunately, am here to attest to Pope Paul VI’s prophetic teaching. But also to attest to God’s grace and mercy. I lived most of my adult life contracepting- both before and after marriage. Everything the Pope taught would happen did in my life. It started with the pre-marital sex, then to artificial contraception, to an unexpected pregnancy, to abortion. My husband and I continued to contracept into our marriage-this, among other things led to the failure of our marriage. Through God’s infinite mercy and post abortion healing, I found a way back to Christ and His Church.
My prayers continue for those in need of this same healing. And to this brave seminarian, I will continue to pray for you as well. Once ordained I pray you will have the courage to preach the Church’s perfect teaching on the sanctity of life and marriage.
July 20th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
Dear Anonymous Seminarian,
“Be not afraid.”
I’m the mother of seven miraculous children. They are intelligent, generous, loving, intuitive and fun. God ministers to me through them. They are my greatest blessings. Only 2 of them were conceived with my consent.
My OB/GYN is pro-life, Catholic and she and her husband practice NFP in their marriage. She prescribes birth control, performs tubal ligations and struggles with her faith versus the daily exploitation of women she sees in her office. When things were darkest in my marriage, I felt that my OB/GYN was the only person who was sympathetic to my needs. Despite her asking me many times during my most recent pregnancy, I didn’t get my tubes tied. She treated me with love, but she has a superficial understanding of what happens to women in abusive relationships.
The reason I raise this issue is because the treatment of women and the plight of those of us in abusive relationships are at the fulcrum of the conflict between our culture and the Magisterium. Sex outside of marriage is profane and disgusting. This is a universal truth, independent of any religious teaching. It’s the plight of women and the absence of respect for the dignity of motherhood that fuels the contraception/abortion movement. This is a real issue, but contraception and abortion are band-aids for the weeping wound while the deeper cancer continues to devour the souls of the families being affected.
I’m financially dependent on my husband. That’s why I haven’t left. I also believe with all my heart that each of my children deserves a loving, attentive, interested, physically-present mother during their early years. My husband has used this belief along with my refusal to use contraception to control me. In essence I have been a slave to my husband. He has had therapy and is better, but that doesn’t undo the way I have been victimized, exploited and abused. I deserved better. All women in abusive situations deserve better. Until we have a Church and society where women can go for help and HAVE HELP PROVIDED, contraception and abortion will thrive. Until priests can say more than, “Pray for him,” we won’t have an answer.
Humanae Vitae needs to be preached in every church by every priest. Every priest needs to have a comprehensive understanding of the implications of living the teaching. Women need advocates in their pastors. Goodness knows I’ve been in need of it. I still fear being rejected by my faith if and when I finally get out. How many women choose between being rejected by the church because of divorce and secretly using contracpetion and abortion to let some of the pressure off? We shouldn’t have to face the temptation.
Lucky
July 20th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
I am glad we have at least one seminarian in this country who is faithful to the Church, though sometimes I really fear that it truly is just one. Like others who have commented, I have never heard at my parish any homilies centered on the morality of Humanae Vitae. I’ve come across two recorded homilies, but it is simply not the same thing. I used to think that priests and deacons had an obligation through justice to provide the full teaching of the Church in their homilies, come what may. Not that every homily had to focus on contraception. But perhaps, if it is not too much, well, perhaps maybe just one. I no longer care about the issue of justice.
Instead, I care only about mercy. The silence on the issue of contraception is merciless. The assumption that married couples alone have any reason to speak on the issue is mean-spirited. We are broken people. We are not ordained. We lack graces that only the ordained may receive. Moreover, we lack a certain objectivity that only celibates and virgins can provide. How on earth can any of us discern whether (for example) God is calling us to have a fifth or eighth or tenth child if no one will provide us with any formation on how to conduct such a discernment? On the other hand, what if we are called not just to periodic abstinence but to a very long period of abstinence for one reason or another? How will we know that the reason is good enough? And if so, who better than a “celibate old man” to provide practical guidance on how to submit one’s will to that of God under such circumstances? Why then is the silence so utter, so complete? I can only conclude that at best it is an expression of indifference and that at worst, an expression of hatred directed toward those of us who try (and rather routinely fail) to follow the Church in her teaching as it pertains to contraception and sterilization. Since we fail – and do so often – we are at best lost sheep mucking about in search of the shepherd. We need help. And none comes. Ever. It is cruel.
July 20th, 2008 at 5:55 pm
Dear Lucky: I’m so very sorry to hear of your struggles. As I read your post, one paragraph from HV immediately came to mind:
“Men rightly observe that a conjugal act imposed on one’s partner without regard to his or her condition or personal and reasonable wishes in the matter, is no true act of love, and therefore offends the moral order in its particular application to the intimate relationship of husband and wife.” Humane Vitae #13
The Church has also come to a better understanding of the dynamics of domestic violence, and wrote a profoundly beautiful letter that (granted) is only the beginning of the kind of help you rightly say is so desperately needed … but it is the beginning. Here is the link for this document: http://www.usccb.org/laity/help.shtml
Of particular help is the idea that women are not obliged to live under the same roof as her abuser. She is entitled — no, obligated — to find safety for herself and her children. Children are especially vulnerable to this kind of living situation — even if they are not themselves being abused, having to watch their mother endure this kind of treatment has long-term effects on their view of the world.
If you are not getting the help you need from your priest, I urge you to seek out a qualified Catholic counselor who can help you. “Pastoral Solutions” can counsel you by phone, if needed. God bless you, and may the Blessed Mother stay close to your side.
July 20th, 2008 at 6:25 pm
Thank you, Heidi, for responding to Lucky. You did so with compassion and sensitivity, and I hope she finds the healing in your response. I hope you’ll be able to reply to HomeschoolNfpDad with the same level of encouragement.
My response to Lucky involves her fear of rejection: “I still fear being rejected by my faith if and when I finally get out. How many women choose between being rejected by the church because of divorce and secretly using contracpetion and abortion to let some of the pressure off?” It is my understanding that DIVORCE does not result in “rejection” (excommunication?), but that REMARRIAGE (without an annulment, which is more than possible under the circumstances) is the objectionable action.
Finally, yes, you DO have to pray for him, BUT you don’t have to stay with him! Legally, he will be required to finacially care for you and your children until they are grown. Some government assistance should also be available. Between the two, it’ll be tough, but it’s better for your children to have a disadvantaged life than to grow up thinking this kind of treatment is NORMAL!
July 20th, 2008 at 7:19 pm
Praise God for our seminarians!!! A seminarian in my home parish is now leading a weekly study group on “Spe Salvi”. It seems to me that our seminarians today are on their way to become some VERY good priest. Let us continue to pray for them and support them in every way we can as we praise God for them!
May the Lord bless you and keep you; May the Lord let His face shine upon you; May the Lord look upon you kindly and bring you peace!
July 20th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
Your understanding is, of course, correct. Indeed, in my limited experience within the Church, I have encountered at least as much faithfulness among divorced Catholics who have embraced the Lord even within their difficult circumstances, as among married Catholics. This would be a good place for any priest or deacon to begin in bringing the teaching of Humanae Vitae to the pulpit. Contraception and spousal abuse spring from the same root. Both require spouses to see each other as things, worthy only insomuch as one is useful to the other. One might concede that contraception is the result of a mutual mindset of use, wherein both spouses treat each other as things. But contraception can also be wielded as a weapon when one spouse wishes to follow the teaching of the Church and the other does not. Or indeed as a shield, to limit the direct consequences of a spouse keen on manipulation and control. Letting go of controlling the other always requires that one control himself first. Thus do contraception and spousal abuse go hand in glove, for the worse of all humanity.
Not surprisingly Humanae Vitase covers this as well:
That Pope Paul should speak so knowingly when all seemingly rational forces of the world see things in a different light (should in no way surprise us, but it often does, and nowhere moreso than in the teaching of Humanae Vitae. To claim that Humanae Vitae merely addresses the issue of artificial birth control or even the more broadly stated issue of human sexuality is to demonstrate one’s ignorance of the encyclical. Humanae Vitae covers the entire reason of our existence in the world:
We are called to union with God, the only “true happiness” which can last more than a fleeting moment. We deserve to hear this message spoken often, for as St. Paul says, faith comes from hearing, and as Pope Paul says, “Now it is an outstanding manifestation of charity toward souls to omit nothing from the saving doctrine of Christ; but this must always be joined with tolerance and charity, as Christ Himself showed in His conversations and dealings with men” (HV 29).
Pope Paul also says, “Husbands and wives, therefore, when deeply distressed by reason of the difficulties of their life, must find stamped in the heart and voice of their priest the likeness of the voice and the love of our Redeemer” (HV 29). So, returning to our priests and deacons, won’t you please heed the fullness of your calling? We need you, not because we are so great and profound in our knowledge. This knowledge, in all the history of humanity, has never surpassed that which St. Thomas Aquinas called “straw” — and none of us is worthy so much as to wash the Angelic Doctor’s feet. Rather, we need faithful priests and deacons to be beacons for us, to help us in our walk towards holiness. And we need you precisely because we recognize that we are broken, and the closer we come to holiness, the more apparent is the dim light of our own brokenness.
Won’t you help us?
July 20th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
I am amazed no other priest has responded. I spoke rather strongly on HV this weekend. One of my parishes’ (I pastor 3 different parishes) has a Communion Minister (called EMHC’s in our Archdiocese) take the Eucharist to the local Care Center while I am off at another parish for Sunday Mass.
This month, the EMHC is the proud mother of 7, with the youngest scheduled to be baptized next weekend (yippee!). She was asked if the three girls she had with her in the care center were all she had. When she said she actually had three boys and four girls, the **Catholic** resident she was speaking to said something like “you need to be fixed!”
When this young mother told me this later in the afternoon, she thanked me for my homily on HV and the timeliness of it, given such a rude response.
I was terribly saddened that this elder would be so wrongheaded, but was very encouraged by the young mother standing proud with her children.
From the Gospel this weekend:
The Son of Man will send his angels,
and they will collect out of his kingdom
all who cause others to sin and all evildoers.
I told my parishioners that I feared for my brother priests and even the bishops who have dissented from HV. I also told them that, as much as I love them, I am not willing to eternally suffer for their earthly comfort. So they were told – straight out: contraception is a grave sin – stop it.
My reason for writing this, as I am in my 25th year as a priest, is to say to my annonymous (baby) brother: keep on! There are many of us priests who will welcome you with open arms, and willing support. Yes, there are some brothers who are timid or even anti-… Church teaching, but there are many of us who desire the truth to be told. Don’t back away, my young brother. I was nearly stopped at my seminary 25 years ago as well. It is worth it to fight through, even if you have to fight through in silence.
Mary K.: If this seminarian wants to contact me, I would be willing to help with any moral support I can. I assume you can make that happen if he asks!?
To my brother(s) in the seminary: don’t think it is hopeless trying to make it through. It is not only the faithful laity who are waiting for your ordination, your future brothers await you as well. I pray you well and safe into the priesthood of Jesus Christ.
Fr. Frank
July 20th, 2008 at 11:25 pm
Fr. Frank, you are a prize! May your parishoners rise up and call you blessed! As for your EMHC, please look at my previous post here addressed to Michelle. (And, btw, congratulations on 25 years in the priesthood!)
HomeschoolNFPDad, thanks for your confirmation re Lucky. Back in my mother’s day, one WAS excommunicated for divorce, but I thought that had changed. A lonely life is preferable to ANY form of abuse, and I speak from the wrong end of that stick. As to your request (?)for guidance in discernment, it IS possible. I would recommend that you (and/or your wife) spend some time with the Blessed Sacrament, if possible (or, even before the Tabernacle) and really lay this out with God. He’s not trying to “keep you in the dark” but, as finite beings, sometimes we just can’t understand the only answer He has. From both faith and experience, I can assure you that He can and will make His will known if you keep opening yourself to Him. I’ll be praying for you.
July 24th, 2008 at 12:43 pm
From HV, paras 28 and 29, addressed to priests:
…it is your principal duty…to spell out clearly and completely the Church’s teaching on marriage. In the performance of your ministry you must be the first to give an example of that sincere obedience, inward as well as outward, which is due to the magisterium of the Church…And this, rather than the arguments they put forward, is why you are bound to such obedience…and should speak as with one voice. Therefore We make Our own the anxious words of the great Apostle Paul and with all Our heart We renew Our appeal to you: “I appeal to you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no dissensions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment.”
…speak with full confidence, beloved sons, convinced that while the Holy Spirit of God is present to the magisterium proclaiming sound doctrine, He also illumines from within the hearts of the faithful and invites their assent. Teach married couples the necessary way of prayer and prepare them to approach more often with great faith the Sacraments of the Eucharist and of Penance. Let them never lose heart…
And from para 30, addressed to Bishops:
…We invite all of you, We implore you, to give a lead to your priests who assist you in the sacred ministry, and to the faithful of your dioceses, and to devote yourselves with all zeal and without delay to safeguarding the holiness of marriage, in order to guide married life to its full human and Christian perfection. Consider this mission as one of your most urgent responsibilities at the present time. As you well know, it calls for concerted pastoral action in every field…
We’ve kind of dropped the ball, to say the least.
July 25th, 2008 at 8:22 pm
This is going to sound a bit overextended (and ling-winded), but it is an important point. One was never excommunicated for divorce, not even back in your mother’s day. One might excommunicate oneself, even today, for remarrying after divorce, but even this would depend upon the particulars. There are folk who remarry after divorce, live celibately – even under the same roof – and pursue a potentially legitimate annulment. Objectively understood, such a scenario would not constitute sin, much less excommunication. But such cases are admittedly rare.
There are also those with paper annulments who have never presented a case before a defender of the bond, probably because their diocese just didn’t do that sort of thing. And they live within the bonds of a sacramental union whose external form is valid. What God may have to say to such folk is beyond me: he will no doubt be merciful – more merciful by far than the diocesan authorities who never defended the prior bond. But there’s something not quite right here. And in our modern Church the (very few) remarried Catholics who live celibately while pursuing a case before the defender of the (prior) bond are usually treated far worse than those who never had to defend a prior bond but otherwise put up a good front. Thank God none of us has to judge hearts, but looking at these cases, one is forced to conclude that our modern Church is judging hearts – and without a whole lot of mercy thrown in.
This is rather the opposite of the way things were probably done in your mother’s day. The assumption back then was that annulment would be rare, and divorce was usually viewed as an affirmative separation of oneself from the Body of Christ. Today, the Pope (this was John Paul II) has wondered aloud why annulment is so common and chastity so rare. We now look at those divorced, fear to offer any judgment, and proclaim sin or lack thereof based exclusively on the procurement of a particular piece of paper – and usually without any concern for the heart-felt and body-expressed disposition of the divorced Catholics themselves. The result often is: annulment, you’re in, notwithstanding any real sin you might be living; and no annulment, you’re out, notwithstanding any real celibate chastity you may be enduring while pursuing a real annulment case. Some of the former judgments will no doubt be correct in God’s eyes, just as will some of the latter. But all will not always be correct – and we possess the means (namely sacramental confession, where the priest can actually determine the state of individual souls and can advise confidentially and properly) to do better.
But returning to the original point: One was never excommunicated for divorce, not even back in your mother’s day. One might excommunicate oneself, even today, for remarrying after divorce, but even this would depend upon the particulars. The Church today often slides too far to the side of laxity in actual practice. The Church in your mother’s day would often slide too far to the side of scrupulosity. But this is merely in practice. The Church, in its actual teachings on marriage, annulment, civil divorce, and remarriage (and contraception for that matter) has never erred – not today, not in your mother’s day, never. Indeed, if one pursues the root of the Church’s “life in the world,” as it were, all the way back to the time of Christ, we see two separate threads: the thread of actual doing, which is marred significantly by human error; and the thread of teaching, which is never so marred. Popes and bishops have wrongfully persecuted people in their actions (just consider, for example, the bitter example of Bishop Cauchon of Beauvais, who ignored the solemn prior judgment of his superiors in Poitier and pursued St. Joan of Arc until she burned). But no Pope – and no bishop, when teaching in communion with the full body of bishops – has ever misrepresented the Truth as it is.
The early Church figured it out pretty quick: sins (i.e. wrong actions) could be forgiven. Sinful people could go to heaven. But those who taught others that sin was good were committing an atrocity. This is because teaching others that evil is good has the potential to fool them into rejecting God forever. But those who merely do evil can be resisted – and often are resisted – by genuine saints. Thus, the Church has never emphasized orthopraxis (right action) as an absolute requirement. She has always exhorted the faithful to right action, but she has also recognized that the failing faithful can be forgiven. However, the Church has always insisted on orthodoxy (right thinking) in the articulation of her teaching. This is one reason why the infallibility of declarations on faith and morals extends only to the Pope and to the full body of all the world’s bishops (i.e. the Magisterium) – and even then, as Pope Benedict is quick to remind us in his introduction to Jesus of Nazareth – even then, certain formal requirements must be met. The Pope or Magisterium must be declaring on issues of faith and morals; the declaration must be made in the proper form; and the declarations must conform to the existing, publicly declared body of teaching on faith and morals as it already exists. In other words, not even the Pope or the Magisterium could ever invalidate the Sacred Tradition. Genuine doctrinal development always fits these multiple criteria. But schism and denial of eternal Truths never does.
Thus, officers of the Church in your mother’s day may well have declared that divorced Catholics in your mother’s day were excommunicated. (And back then, it is probably true that the penalty of excommunication prompted many Catholics to return to the fold, which is the end sought by every excommunication.) But if those excommunications failed to meet the strict requirements of Church teaching, then they were invalid. Only God can make these determinations. The purveyors of modern laxity are not God; they cannot make this judgment. (And incidentally, modern radical traditionalists – some of whom have used the arguments I make here to falsely claim that the papacy has been vacant since the time of Pius XII – cannot make this judgment.) Over-scrupulous clerics from yesteryear (of whom Bishop Cauchon of Beauvais is merely exemplary) also could not make this decision. That they often did is merely proof that we humans are a fallen species.
It should be noted that many today – and yesterday – have made hard judgments based exclusively on what they could know externally and from legitimate inquiry into the state of a particular soul – and have been wrong. This is not what I am referring to in this rather long-winded post. Humans, even priests and bishops, make mistakes, even in the good faith application of unchangeable doctrine. That is why God (and only God) is the final arbiter. In these questions where fault lies only in how we apply doctrine, forgiveness can and should come easily. And officers of the Church must exercise their office, knowing they will make mistakes. Doctrine, therefore, must always be unapologetically and truthfully declared. But the Truth must always be declared in Charity or else it is neither Charity nor Truth.
But though willful misapplication and genuine mistakes have always been present, the Church has never made even a single mistake in her teachings proper. In other words, nothing eternal has ever changed – not at least when we understand it within this larger context.
July 26th, 2008 at 5:38 am
HomeschoolNFPDad, thank you for your very cogent post and for caring enough about your fellow Catholics to take the time to write it. Thank you so much for being here with us on CE.