John
Paul II - Theology of the Body |
Faithfulness to the Divine
Plan in the Transmission of Life
General Audience, August 8, 1984
1. We said previously that the
principle of conjugal morality, taught by the Church (Second Vatican
Council, Paul VI), is the criterion of faithfulness to the divine
plan.
In conformity with this principle, the Encyclical Humanae Vitae
clearly distinguishes between a morally illicit method of birth
regulation or, more precisely, of the regulation of fertility, and
one that is morally correct.
In the first place "the direct interruption of the generative
process already begun [abortion]...is morally wrong" (HV 14),
likewise "direct sterilization" and "any action, which either
before, at the moment of, or after sexual intercourse, is
specifically intended to prevent procreation" (HV 14)—therefore, all
contraceptive means. It is however morally lawful to have "recourse
to the infertile periods" (HV 16): "If therefore there are
reasonable grounds for spacing births, arising from the physical or
psychological conditions of husband or wife, or from external
circumstances, the Church teaches that then married people may take
advantage of the natural cycles immanent in the reproductive system
and use their marriage at precisely those times that are infertile,
and in this way control birth without offending moral principles..."
(HV 16).
Natural regulation versus contraception
2. The Encyclical emphasizes especially that "between the two
cases there is an essential difference" (HV 16), and therefore a
difference of an ethical nature: "In the first case married couples
rightly use a facility provided them by nature; in the other case,
they obstruct the natural development of the generative process" (HV
16).
Two actions that are ethically different, indeed, even opposed,
derive from this: the natural regulation of fertility is morally
correct; contraception is not morally correct. This essential
difference between the two actions (modes of acting) concerns their
intrinsic ethical character, even though my predecessor Paul VI
states that "in each case married couples, for acceptable reasons,
are both perfectly clear in their intention to avoid children." He
even writes: "...that they mean to make sure that none will be born"
(HV 16). In these words the document admits that even those who use
contraceptive practices can be motivated by "acceptable reasons."
However, this does not change the moral character which is based on
the very structure of the conjugal act as such.
Moral and pastoral dimensions
3. It might be observed at this point that married couples who
have recourse to the natural regulation of fertility, might do so
without the valid reasons spoken of above. However, this is a
separate ethical problem, when one treats of the moral sense of
responsible parenthood.
Supposing that the reasons for deciding not to procreate are morally
correct, there remains the moral problem of the manner of acting in
this case. This is expressed in an act which—according to the
doctrine of the Church contained in the Encyclical—possesses its own
intrinsic moral qualification, either positive or negative. The
first one, positive, corresponds to the "natural" regulation of
fertility; the second, negative, corresponds to "artificial
contraception."
4. The whole of the previous discussion is summed up in the
exposition of the doctrine contained in Humanae Vitae, by pointing
out its normative and at the same time its pastoral character. In
the normative dimension it is a question of making more precise and
clear the moral principles of action; in the pastoral dimension it
is a question especially of pointing out the possibility of acting
in accordance with these principles ("the possibility of the
observance of the divine law", HV 20).
We should dwell on the interpretation of the content of the
Encyclical. To this end one must view that content, that
normative-pastoral ensemble, in the light of the theology of the
body as it emerges from the analysis of the biblical texts.
5. The theology of the body is not merely a theory, but rather a
specific, evangelical, Christian pedagogy of the body. This derives
from the character of the Bible, and especially of the Gospel. As
the message of salvation, it reveals man's true good, for the
purpose of modeling—according to the measure of this good—man's
earthly life in the perspective of the hope of the future world.
The Encyclical Humanae Vitae, following this line, responds to the
question about the true good of man as a person, as male and female;
about that which corresponds to the dignity of man and woman when
one treats of the important problem of the transmission of life by
married couples.
To this problem we shall devote further reflection.
Taken from: L'Osservatore Romano Weekly Edition in English 13 August
1984, page 1
Return to the Theology of the Body Main
Page...
This page is the work of the Servants of the Pierced Hearts of Jesus and
Mary
|