Humanae vitae: "Have artificial contraceptives really been worth it?"

By Charles D. Dern
Pewsitter.com

July 18, 2008 - This month marks the fortieth anniversary of the encyclical Humanae vitae. Promulgated by Pope Paul VI, the encyclical is infamous for reaffirming the Catholic teaching that use of artificial methods to prevent conception always is immoral in each and every conjugal act. The encyclical came as a shock to many who had assumed that the Church was going to change its centuries-old prohibition, especially in light of the fact that a majority of the Church’s special commission on the subject had argued for such change.

In the sexual revolution culture, the teaching of the encyclical certainly appeared anachronistic if not outright ridiculous. More than a few Catholic theologians agreed. Did not the discovery of the anovulant pill herald in a new era for women’s sexual freedom? Now they too could enjoy their sexuality like men virtually without fear of pregnancy. And certainly the reduction of unintended pregnancies would reduce the need for abortions. .

The Theological Argument

So how can it be in light of all the aforementioned apparent goods that the Catholic Church obstinently holds to this seemingly archaic teaching? The bulk of the encyclical consists in reminding all of us of the need for totality and fidelity in married love, something with which all persons of good will can agree. The disputed issue is found in section twelve which states that “there is an unbreakable connection between the unitive meaning and the procreative meaning [of the conjugal act], and both are inherent in the conjugal act. This connection was established by God and Man is not permitted to break it through his own volition” (Janet Smith’s translation). .

Unfortunately, the encyclical itself is oblique in clarifying why there is an “unbreakable connection” and what the connection is. However, Paul VI’s successor, Pope John Paul II (the former Karol Wojtyla), spent his life clarifying these very things. In 1960, Wojtyla wrote a book titled “Love and Responsibility” (which rumor has Paul VI reading at the same time he wrote Humanae vitae), in which he defends the Church’s teaching from a “negative” approach. In that book, Woytyla argues that true love at its core is not mere emotion, but a decision to will the true good of the other. Thus the opposite of love is not hate, but the intentional mere use of another for one’s own purposes. .

There are two basic ways in which one person can use another person: to employ them as a mere means to one’s own end or, to enjoy them as an object of mere pleasure. The recent pact by New Jersey high school girls (who presumably had access to government funded contraceptives) to become pregnant is a prime example of the former. These girls used the sexuality of various men for their own goals, without real respect for the men as persons. .

The second type of use, mere enjoyment of another, likely is the most common. The most egregious example would be that of a “one night stand.” It is important to note that even if such an encounter is by consenting adults, each still uses the other. Even within a marriage that generally is open to children, a conjugal act that brackets off a person’s potential fertility does not accept the totality of that person. Wojtyla, as John Paul II would write some years later in his Letter to Families, “The person can never be considered a means to an end; above all never a means of “pleasure.” The person is and must be nothing other than the end of every act. Only then does the action correspond to the true dignity of the person.” To treat a person with anything less than the fullness of love is to not completely respect the inherent dignity of that person. .

Later as pope, John Paul II gave a series of talks that since have become known collectively as the “Theology of the Body.” In those talks, the pontiff explains the teaching of Humanae vitae in a positive sense. There we find that reason and the rhyme for the “unbreakable connection” is the nature of married love itself. The first letter of John in the New Testament tells us that “God is Love.” Now one of fundamental Christian doctrines about God is that He is Triune, or One God, Three Persons. Our everyday experience of persons tells us that persons are separate entities. But in God, the gift of one person to the others must be so total and infinite, that they form One Being. Thus the first fundamental attribute of true love is that it is unifying. .

The very beginnings of scripture reveal to us that God also is Creator (regardless of how creation actually takes place). This tells us that procreating, or a fruitfulness that spills forth, is also of the very essence of true love. Thus, as Humanae vitae simply affirmed, true love, as viewed through the very nature of God, is open to both union and fecundity. The “unbreakable connection” between unity and fecundity is love itself. Both are essential to true love. Excluding either constitutes some degree of use of another person, or John Paul II says “a false love.” .

This understanding of true love underscores the logic of many of the Church’s other teachings. For example, where artificial contraception leads to: “unity without fecundity”, artificial reproductive technologies that substitute for the conjugal act are “fecundity without unity” (above and beyond reducing the creation of a human person to a mere commodity). It also is the reason homosexual marriage cannot be. Two persons of the same sex cannot in anyway be open to the fecundity of each other. .

But what to make of persons who are sterile naturally, through no doing of their own? First, a close look at the words of the encyclical reveals that is speaks of the “procreative meaning,” not just “procreation.” Those who are naturally sterile, even because of menopause or because of the menstrual cycle, can remain open to the procreative meaning of the conjugal act. This also is the key to why Natural Family Planning (NFP) is acceptable while artificial methods are not. Artificial methods are not immoral simply because they are artificial. They are immoral because they necessarily close the couple off to the procreative meaning. NFP allows the possibility for the couple to remain open to the procreative meaning (although whether they do so or not is another issue). .

Practical Arguments

The heart of Humanae vitae is not so much about not allowing artificial contraception but about a proper attitude towards sex and about what it means to really love and respect another person. Not using an artificial method simply is a logical consequence of this proper understanding. But even beyond the theological arguments, the societal impact of the attitude encouraged by artificial contraceptives use has been muddled at best and disastrous at worst. .

At minimum, many contraceptives have side effects in and of themselves. Hormonal contraceptives can cause cardiovascular problems including heart attacks, strokes and blood clots. The Depo-Provera shot almost always affects mood and libido. On the bizarre side, researchers at the University of St. Andrews in Scotland found that chemical contraceptives change the type of male face to which the women that use them are attracted. .

But far worse is that contraceptives do nothing to stop the spread of venereal diseases or of HIV/AIDS while at the same time encouraging the casual sexual activity that accelerates the spread of these ills. Now one in four teenage girls has a sexually transmitted disease (STD). STDs can cause cancer and infertility and the treatment of HIV/AIDS, other STDs or the resulting cancer or infertility involves multiple costs. Foremost is the human cost in dreams unfulfilled or lives cut short. But there also is the monetary cost of treating these diseases that often is put upon society (through government or insurance monies) that could have been spent on something else. Clearly one’s attitude toward sex is not simply a “private” choice but has significant social ramifications. .

Further argument that the use of contraceptives is not merely a private choice comes the fact that the human body does not process the active ingredients fully. Thus, like any other pharmaceutical, some of the active ingredient enters the drinking water supply. As early as March 2002, the United Kingdom’s Environment Agency called the pill a “pollutant” that was feminizing the fish stock. Some have pointed to the presence of estrogen in our drinking water as a potential cause of human male infertility. Again a so-called “personal” choice has clear social ramifications. .

Overall, the “contraceptive mentality” has had social ramifications as well. Pope Paul VI predicted that contraceptives make it easy for many “to justify behavior leading to marital infidelity or to a gradual weakening of morals” and that “husbands who become accustomed to contraceptive practices will loose respect for their wives ... use their wives as instruments for serving their own desires [and] will no longer view their wives as companions who should be treated with attentiveness and love.” Certainly these attitudes have come true and are unquestionably behind the vast increase in divorces, which tend to leave women and children in poverty. .

The increase in children committing sex crimes also is symptomatic of the flawed attitude that society as a whole has towards sex, that is, sex as primarily for pleasure. The immorality of such acts goes far beyond the inadequate rationalistic criterion that the sex either was not consensual or that the person involved was not of consenting age. Such crimes are an affront to the inherent dignity of the victims, treating them as mere objects of sexual pleasure. (Note that the “enlightened” at least still agree that we ought to “impose morality” as punishments for various sexual crimes). .

Finally, one of the most pernicious problems that the availability of artificial contraception has not solved is the “need” for abortions. Contraceptives are available in nearly every drug store and from a host of “family planning” organizations and yet we remain awash in millions of “unintended pregnancies.” And it is not non-use of contraceptives that is the problem. Marie Stopes International, an Australian equivalent to Planned Parenthood, has reported that up to seventy percent of women with “unintended pregnancies” (and seeking abortions) were using either the pill or a condom at the time. .

This problem hits right at the heart of Humanae vitae. The cause of “unintended pregnancies” is the undertaking of sexual intercourse with absolutely no openness to the possibility that one could become pregnant (which remains possible even with the most effective contraceptive). Obviously the abortion rate has risen side by side with the rate of casual sexual activity. .

Practically put, the problem is the complete disassociation of sex from human procreation which is something that Mahatma Gandhi concluded by his own observations, completely independent of Catholic teaching: “This sexual urge has been isolated from the desire for progeny and it is said by the protagonists of the use of contraceptives that conception is an accident to be prevented except when the parties desire to have children. I venture to suggest that this is a most dangerous doctrine to preach.” .

Theologically put, humanity is attempting to separate out from conjugal love something that is intrinsic to the nature of true love. To have sexual relations with another with no openness whatsoever to the potential motherhood or fatherhood of the other is to bracket off part of the complete gift that is the other person. Only when one accepts the total personhood of the other in the sexual act, including his or her potential fertility, is the person treated with the true equal dignity that he or she deserves. .

Humanae vitae was prophetic in warning about the potentially disastrous effects that widespread contraceptive use and the mentality that accompanies it would have. Contraceptives and the contraceptive mentality have in reality resulted not in freedom or equality, but has increased the spread of diseases, broken many relationships, and encouraged the demeaning of women (and even men) as objects for sexual fulfillment. It is not mere religious fanaticism to pause and really ask oneself, “Have artificial contraceptives really been worth it?” .

Charles D. Dern, Ph.D., is an Adjunct Instructor of Moral Theology and Medical Ethics for St. Charles Seminary and Immaculata University, both located in suburban Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.