Harvard Researcher agrees with Pope on condoms in Africa

Cambridge, Mass., Mar 21, 2009 / 10:11 am (CNA).- Pope Benedict’s recent brief remark against condoms has caused an uproar in the press, but several prominent scientists dedicated to preventing AIDS are defending the Pope, saying he was correct in his analysis. In an interview with CNA, Dr. Edward Green explained that although condoms should work, in theory, they may be “exacerbating the problem” in Africa.

Benedict XVI’s Tuesday comments on condoms were made as part of his explanation of the Church’s two prong approach to fighting AIDS. At one point in his response the Pontiff stressed that AIDS cannot be overcome by advertising slogans and distributing condoms and argued that they “worsen the problem.” The media responded with an avalanche of over 4,000 articles on the subject, calling Benedict a “threat to public health,” and saying that the Catholic Church should “enter the 21st century.”

Senior Harvard Research Scientist for AIDS Prevention, Dr. Edward Green, who is the author of five books, including “Rethinking AIDS Prevention: Learning from Successes in Developing Countries” discussed his support for Pope Benedict XVI’s comments with CNA.

According to Dr. Green, science is finding that the media is actually on the wrong side of the issue. In fact, Green says that not only do condoms not work, but that they may be “exacerbating the problem” in Africa.

“Theoretically, condoms ought to work,” he explained to CNA, “and theoretically, some condom use ought to be better than no condom use, but that’s theoretically.”

Condom proponents often cite the lack of condom education as the main culprit for higher AIDS rates in Africa but Green disagrees.

After spending 25 years promoting condoms for family planning purposes in Africa, he insists that he’s quite familiar with condom promotion. Yet, he claims that “anyone who worked in family planning knew that if you needed to prevent a pregnancy, say the woman will die, you don’t recommend a condom.”

Green recalls that when the AIDS epidemic hit Africa, the “Industry” began using AIDS as a “dual purpose” marketing strategy to get more funding for condom distribution. This, he claims, effectively took “something that was a 2nd or 3rd grade device for avoiding unwanted pregnancies” and turned it into the “best weapon we [had] against AIDS.”

The accepted wisdom in the scientific community, explained Green, is that condoms lower the HIV infection rate, but after numerous studies, researchers have found the opposite to be true. “We just cannot find an association between more condom use and lower HIV reduction rates” in Africa.

Dr. Green found that part of the elusive reason is a phenomenon known as risk compensation or behavioral disinhibition.

“[Risk compensation] is the idea that if somebody is using a certain technology to reduce risk, a phenomenon actually occurs where people are willing to take on greater risk.” The idea can be related to someone that puts on sun block and is willing to stay out in the sun longer because they have added protection. In this case, however, the greater risk is sexual. Because people are willing take on more risk, they may “disproportionally erase” the benefits of condom use, Green said.

Another factor that contributes to ineffective condom use in Africa, is the phenomenon where condoms may be effective on an “individual level,” but not on a “population level.” Green’s research found that “condoms have been effective” in HIV concentrated areas where high risk activities are already being conducted, such as brothels in countries like Thailand.

Claiming to be a liberal himself, Green asserts that promoting Western “liberal ideology” where, “most Africans are conservative when it comes to sexual behavior,” is quite offensive to them. Citing his new book, “Indigenous Theories and Contagious Disease,” Green described Africans as “very religious by global standards” who are offended by “trucks going around where people are dancing to ‘Rock ‘n’ Roll’, tossing out condoms to teenagers and the children of the village.”

Green also noted that there is an ideology called “harm reduction” that is being pushed by many organizations trying to prevent AIDS. The ideology believes that “you can’t change the underlying behavior, that you can’t get people to be faithful, especially Africans,” the HIV specialist explained.

Read the rest of the story here.

Church leader sparks Georgian baby boom

Church leader sparks Georgian baby boom

By Tom Esslemont
BBC News, Tbilisi
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7964302.stm

Two years after having one of the lowest birth rates in the world, Georgia is enjoying something of a baby boom, following an intervention from the country's most senior cleric.

At the end of 2007, in a move to reverse the Caucasian country's dwindling birth figures, the head of the Georgian Orthodox Church, Patriarch Ilia II, came up with an incentive. He promised to personally baptise any baby born to parents of more than two children.

There was only one catch: the baby had to be born after the initiative was launched.

The results are, in the words of the Georgian Orthodox Church, "a miracle".

Easy decision

The country's birth rate increased by nearly 20% during 2008 - a rate four times faster than the previous year.

Many parents say they took the decision to have another child on the basis of the Patriarch's incentive.

Giorgi and Pati Bluashvili have just had their fourth child. He is a boy called Giviko. He has big blue eyes and a loud laugh. As I try to interview his mother he takes delight at interrupting by babbling away.

Pati says the decision to have another child was an easy one.

"There's no doubt in my mind that we had Giviko because of the Patriarch's incentive," she says.

"When he announced that he would baptise any child born to parents with at least two children already we could not resist the opportunity to have another baby. To have a child baptised by the Patriarch is so very special."

Many other parents agree. It is perhaps not surprising in a country where more than 80% of people follow the Orthodox faith.

On a Thursday afternoon, dozens of parents are queuing up outside a registry office in central Tbilisi to put their child's name down for the Patriarchal mass baptism. The ceremonies take place four times a year.

Scribbling down the name of her three-month-old boy, Nino - a young mother - says it is an honour to be contributing to the task of boosting birth rates.

"The Patriarch did a really good thing launching this initiative," she says.

"I am sure that most parents decided to have more babies because of him. If his Holiness baptises your child it means he becomes his or her godfather and that is such an honour."

No surprise

The next baptism is scheduled for early April, when thousands of mums, dads and their children will cram into Tbilisi's biggest church, the Sameba Cathedral. The babies will be briefly dipped into a gigantic inflatable font after receiving a blessing from his Holiness, Ilia II.

The Patriarch plays a very influential role in Georgian society. Many see him as the most authoritative figure in their life.

But to Church insiders, the increased birth rates come as no surprise.

"Faith is getting stronger," says Irakli Kadagishvili, a spokesman for the Patriarch Foundation, a movement set up to promote the interests of the Church.

"The Patriarch is seen not only as a religious figure, but also as a national authority. When he saw the need to increase the birth rate he only had to provide an incentive. It was the only stimulus most parents needed if they were already thinking about having more children."

The Church is taking the credit for the sudden trend in having babies. But there are other factors to consider, including economic ones.


Who is now creating families? People who five years ago were out of work
Giorgi Vashadze
head of Georgian civil registry

The head of Georgia's civil registry, Giorgi Vashadze, has been monitoring the recent figures.

He tells me that the jump from 48,000 in 2007 to 57,000 in 2008 can, in part, be explained by the Patriarch's incentive, but also by the rise in average household incomes.

"Who is now creating families? People who five years ago were out of work," he says.

"Previously, they had no income. They could not get married. Today they are working. They have salaries. They are maybe not as high as in [other] European countries but they are quite normal for Georgia. So I think this is a major factor."

In a country which early last year boasted of having economic growth rates of 7.9% there is little doubt that economic factors may have played a role in bringing on the baby boom.

But the role of the Church cannot be underestimated in Georgia.

Twenty years ago, just before Georgia gained independence from the Soviet Union, the Orthodox religion was all but suppressed in the country.

Now it is more than clear that the faith has never been stronger.

Year of Astronomy: Big Bang or Black Hole?

What Christians Can Glean From the UN Celebration

By Elizabeth Lev

ROME, JAN. 29, 2009 (Zenit.org).-On Jan. 15, Paris, the City of Light, saw stars as the Year of Astronomy dawned.

To commemorate the 400th anniversary of Galileo’s first recorded observations with the telescope, the U.N. Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization has launched a year dedicated to this fascinating science with a series of initiatives and lectures titled, “The Universe: Yours to Discover.”

By emphasizing the contributions of the science of astronomy to culture and society, UNESCO hopes to draw the globalized world a little closer together. Many different civilizations, professing various faiths, living in diverse locations and using varying instruments, can claim extraordinary achievements in this field. Drawing on man’s instinctive interest in the cosmos as a source of clues to the answers to his greatest questions, the organizers present astronomy as an instrument of world peace.

Benedict XVI, a longtime member of the Pontifical Academy of Science (which traces its origins to an earlier academy to which Galileo belonged) lauded the Year of Astronomy during the Angelus of Dec. 21, 2008, a month before it began. Speaking on the day of the winter solstice, he welcomed the year of celebration of this important science and reminded the crowds of the Church’s longstanding interest in the field of astronomy.

"There have been practitioners of this science among my predecessors of venerable memory," Benedict said, “such as Sylvester II, who taught it, Gregory XIII, to whom we owe our calendar, and St. Pius X, who knew how to build solar clocks."

Indeed, throughout the centuries, the Catholic Church has been at the forefront of astronomy. As University of California History professor J.L. Heilbrun wrote in his “The Sun in the Church: Cathedrals as Solar Observatories”: “The Roman Catholic Church gave more financial and social support to the study of astronomy for over six centuries, from the recovery of ancient learning during the late Middle Ages into the Enlightenment, than any other, and, probably all other, institutions.”

Even before the birth of the Church, it was three wise men studying the skies who found and recognized the Savior of the world by following a star. The alignment of the planets that heralded the arrival of Christ corresponded to an era of universal peace wrought by Emperor Augustus. This moment represented history’s most beautiful example of faith, science and secular forces all working in cosmic harmony.

Pope Benedict’s enthusiasm for man’s quest of knowledge and his warm reception of this Year of Astronomy provides a great example for Christians. As we celebrate our increasing understanding of the heavens and enjoy the marvels that centuries of diligent study have revealed, we can also reflect on the responsibility that comes with the privilege of knowledge.

Changing tides

For many, science has become antagonistic to faith. An increasing number of people believe Galileo to be the father, Darwin (whose Origin of the Species is celebrating its 150th anniversary this year) the son, and Albert Einstein the holy spirit of a new materialistic religion. This will be a banner year for proponents of the triune god of science.

In the eyes of its worshippers, this deification of science has freed it of moral responsibility or accountability, which necessarily results in tensions with the Church. The devotees of the god of science often view Christians as superstitious simpletons at best, and, at worst, virulent heretics to be stamped out.

Even President Obama, in his inaugural speech, seemed to take up this flag. He spoke of the many errors and wrongs of the previous years and in his platform of change he vowed that “We will restore science to its rightful place.” What is this rightful place? We found out soon enough.

The next day the new U.S. president lifted the Bush administration’s ban on embryonic stem cell testing. The inevitable conclusion is that for Obama, the “rightful place” of science is above ethics, morals and life itself. While once the domain of the laboratory, today some would raise it to the altar. With this carte blanche to scientific research at the expense of human life, the prospects for the future of ethics in science look grim indeed.

Oddly enough, a 13th-century “Golden Legend” contains a similar story. Emperor Constantine, afflicted with leprosy, had tried every known remedy without success. He was assured that the only sure cure would be to bathe in the blood of newborn infants, as their pure blood would restore his withered flesh.

As 3,000 infants were gathered for his cure, the emperor shrank before the prospect of such violence. He declared that “the honor of the Roman people is born of the font of piety. Piety gave us the law by which anyone who kills a child in war shall incur the sentence of death. What cruelty it would be, therefore if we did to our own children what we are forbidden to do to our enemies!”

That night, Sts. Peter and Paul told Constantine in a dream to go to Rome and find Pope Sylvester to be cured. Pope Sylvester told him that the best way to relieve his sufferings was baptism. In accepting the sacrament of baptism, Constantine was cured.

While this is pious legend, it is interesting to note that the worst cruelty imaginable in Constantine’s world was to sacrifice infants to save the life of a man, as well as the horror expressed at the lengths one would go for a “miracle cure.” What some call progress, others might call regress.

A star is born

In his Dec. 21 Angelus address, the Holy Father seemed to suggest that this is a good year for Christians to seek a deeper understanding of the limits of science, and the relationship between religion and science. Astronomy could be the perfect starting point, for Jesus’ arrival was announced by stars and the faithful have long kept an eye on the skies for a heads-up about his return.

When Galileo brought his telescopes to Rome, popes, prelates and princes lined up to see moons and stars and objects never before visible to human eyes.

The empowering of human vision stimulated artists, writers and theologians. As the eyes of the body were enhanced, so could man look to enhance his eyes of faith. That which had been invisible was now visible, reinforcing the idea that the invisible world of angels and the Real Presence was there, simply out of reach to mortal eyes. Discovery didn’t bring fear of contradiction; it brought a promise of knowing more.

This is expressed beautifully in the art of the 17th century, from Caravaggio’s beams of supernatural light piercing through a hyper-realistic setting, to Bernini’s Cathedra Sancti Petri where the stern rules of architecture and physics give way and the walls dissolve, allowing the faithful to witness the Holy Spirit replete with golden light and mighty winds.

And who hasn’t admired the most classic of Baroque-style dome decoration, where one looks up into the seemingly endless reaches of the heavens?

The art of Galileo’s age expresses a joy in the gift of sight which, complemented by Benedict XVI's rational observations, forges a lens through which Christians can look at the Year of Science. It should be lived to the fullest, reveling in man’s discoveries but with the constant awareness of what we have been privileged to see through God’s self-revelation. Having seen, we now can testify and express our pride in the Church’s long and balanced promotion of both faith and reason.

The Pope's last comment in the Angelus address illuminated how, "If the heavens, according to the beautiful words of the psalmist, 'narrate the glory of God' (Psalm 19 [18], 2), even the laws of nature, which in the course of centuries many men and women of science have helped us to understand better, are a great stimulus to contemplating the works of the Lord with gratitude."

In this spirit, the constellation of events surrounding the Year of Astronomy offers a glimmer of hope for peace and unity between faith and science.

* * *

Elizabeth Lev teaches Christian art and architecture at Duquesne University's Italian campus and at the University of St. Thomas Catholic Studies program in Rome. She can be reached at lizlev@zenit.org.

All are children of God

The following is a Zenit.org analysis of the abortion of down syndrome children; there is increased interest in the topic since the news of Sarah Palin's vice presidential candidacy, and her taking to full term her down syndrome child, Trig.

Unlikely to Survive
Few Down Syndrome Babies Making It to Birth

By Father John Flynn, LC

ROME, SEPT. 21, 2008, (Zenit.org).- One of the consequences of the nomination of Governor Sarah Palin as the Republican party's vice-presidential candidate is renewed attention to Down syndrome.

On April 18, Palin gave birth to Trig Paxon Van Palin, having been told by doctors the previous December that he suffered from Down syndrome, reported the Associated Press on May 3.

An article in the Washington Post on Sept. 10 by opinion columnist Michael Gerson noted that when tests reveal Down syndrome in an unborn child, around 90% are aborted.

The numbers of Down syndrome children being aborted could well rise if last year's recommendation by the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists is heeded, he added. The college urged universal, early testing for Down syndrome for all expectant mothers, not just those who are older and therefore have a higher chance of a child affected by the condition.

Gerson argued, however, that children born with Down syndrome "are generally not experienced by their parents as a curse but as a complex blessing." Many doctors and counselors, nevertheless, urge mothers to have an abortion instead of going ahead with a Down syndrome pregnancy, he noted.

This practice of ending "imperfect" lives, Gerson continued, cannot be separated from how we regard and treat all people who have disabilities. "And this feeds a social Darwinism in which the stronger are regarded as better, the dependent are viewed as less valuable, and the weak must occasionally be culled," he concluded.

Revealing truths

In spite of the difficulties in raising a child with Down syndrome, a number of newspapers have published stories highlighting the positive experiences of parents with such children.

Raising a child with Down syndrome can reveal many profound truths about parents and their children, reported the Washington Post on Sept 14.

The article described the situation of Adrianne Pedlikin, a mother of three, including a 10-year-old son with Down syndrome. The article acknowledged the difficulties and trials of looking after a boy with Down syndrome, but it described how at the same time, both Adrianne and her husband Philip declared their love for their son and said his birth has changed their worldviews in a positive way.

The article also referred to the experiences of other families, who frequently run into opposition from educational institutions in seeking to have their children with Down syndrome allowed into schools. They also often find that other parents tend to shut them out and that their children don't receive invitations to play with other kids.

Another personal testimony on the positive experience of being a parent of a Down syndrome child was published June 2 in the U.K. newspaper, the Guardian. Annie Rey described how when she was growing up she was terrified by people with disabilities. Then in her early 40s she became pregnant and discovered her child had Down syndrome.

"During the pregnancy I lurched from optimism to despair: optimism that the child, who at 20 weeks we discovered to be a boy, wouldn't have Down's, and despair that he would," she wrote.

Her son Paddy is now 2 years old, and she has now accepted the idea of having a child with Down. She said she realizes that "he is not a diagnosis" but a child with many qualities.

"I truly believe that if my precious boy did not exist, our world, and probably the world at large, would be a poorer place," she concluded.

Joyous

From Canada, the Shaw family recounted their experience of a Down syndrome child in an article published March 2 in the Ottawa Citizen. Michael and Lesley Shaw would have aborted if they had known their daughter, Sydney, had Down syndrome, they told the newspaper.

Now that Sydney is 9 years old, her father declared that they have changed their minds and now consider their daughter as "a wonderful, joyous child."

"She has enriched my life to a degree I didn't think was possible," said Michael Shaw. "She changed my whole focus on life, on what has value and what doesn't have value, and what we consider valuable."

Michael Shaw is also on the board of the Canadian Down Syndrome Society, an advocacy group concerned about the coming of broader prenatal testing in Canada and what it will mean for Down syndrome children.

In February 2007, the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada issued new guidelines recommending that every woman, regardless of age, be offered noninvasive prenatal genetic screening.

According to the Ottawa Citizen about 80%-90% of Canadian women who are given a Down syndrome diagnosis choose to have an abortion.

Read the rest here.

Zenit interview on chastity and abstinence

Beyond Condoms in the AIDS Debate
Interview With Caritas Expert on HIV

By Karna Swanson

MEXICO CITY, JULY 31, 2008 (Zenit.org).- Teaching abstinence outside marriage and fidelity within has been proved to be much more effective in decreasing the spread of HIV than simply distributing condoms, according to the special advisor on HIV for Caritas Internationalis.

Monsignor Robert Vitillo, who will participate in the XVII International AIDS Conference, to be held Aug. 3-8 in Mexico City, adds that unfortunately, abstinence and infidelity are not given the attention they deserve among experts and researchers.

Some 25,000 experts, physicians, activists and decision-makers from around the world are expected to attend the conference organized by the International AIDS Society, which has at its theme "Universal Action Now."

Caritas Internationalis sponsored a pre-conference seminar Wednesday for Caritas participants from Latin America, and on Aug. 5, together with the Jesuits of Mexico and the Catholic HIV and AIDS Network, it will host delegates from Catholic organizations in an evening of prayer and discussion.

In this interview with ZENIT, Monsignor Vitillo shares what he sees as the Church's role in fighting the spread of the AIDS virus, and the role of faith-based organizations at the conference.

Q: You say a major challenge the Church faces with regards to AIDS is ignorance of what the Church is doing to fight it. What is the Church doing? What is unique about the Church's approach?

Monsignor Vitillo: As I have been privileged to witness the response of the Catholic Church to the HIV pandemic on literally every continent, I have noted that the Church's response is very consistent with its overall mission:

-- To teach people both about the facts related to this pandemic, and about the permanent values that should be the foundation of our response. This includes both how to prevent the further spread of HIV -- by observing sexual abstinence outside marriage and life-long, mutual fidelity within marriage -- and how we should respond to those already living with or affected by the virus -- with acceptance, love, and solidarity, and without discrimination, rejection, or stigmatization.

-- To serve people. Here the Caritas organizations at the regional, national, diocesan and parish levels have played -- and continue to do so -- an important role in organizing and replicating health care, social services, emotional support, income-generation activities, orphan care, advocacy and self-help programs for and with persons living with or affected by HIV.

In addition to Caritas, there are many other Catholic organizations working to help those affected by HIV.

-- To provide pastoral care to persons living with or affected by HIV.

Many people who know firsthand the impact of the virus are searching to deepen their relationship with God, especially as they face the challenge which HIV has posed to them and/or to their loved ones.

They also desperately want to understand that this virus has not been sent as a "punishment from God" -- a number of bishops' conferences, as well as Pope John Paul II, addressed this issue very clearly by explaining that, according to Catholic doctrine, God does not "punish" people by sending them illnesses.

Humanae Vitae - 40 years later... a comparison of 2 editorials

"I'm sorry, Mr. Kennedy, but your behavior is totally unacceptable."

What an interesting comparison...
thanks to Fr. Z. for his commentary.

Op-Ed Contributor
The Pope vs. the Pill

By JOHN L. ALLEN Jr.
Published: July 27, 2008

FORTY years ago last week, Pope Paul VI provoked the greatest uproar against a papal edict in the long history of the Roman Catholic Church when he reiterated the church’s ban on artificial birth control by issuing the encyclical “Humanae Vitae.” At the time, commentators predicted that not only would the teaching collapse under its own weight, but it might well bring the “monarchical papacy” down with it.

Those forecasts badly underestimated the capacity of the Catholic Church to resist change and to stand its ground.

Down the centuries, Catholics have frequently groused [excellent word, and it sets a tone…. keep reading] about papal rulings. Usually they channeled that dissent into blithe disobedience, [still setting the tone…] though occasionally a Roman mob would run the Successor of Peter out of town on a rail just to make a point. In 1848, Pope Pius IX was driven into exile by Romans incensed at his refusal to embrace Italy’s unification.

Never before July 25, 1968, however, had opposition been so immediate, so public and so widespread. World-famous theologians called press conferences to rebut the pope’s reasoning. Conferences of Catholic bishops issued statements that all but licensed churchgoers to ignore the encyclical. Pastors openly criticized “Humanae Vitae” from the pulpit. [painting a picture as a backdrop to what is coming up…]

In a nutshell, “Humanae Vitae” held that the twin functions of marriage — to foster love between the partners and to be open to children — are so closely related as to be inseparable. In practice, that meant a resounding no to the pill. [Excellent. Allen actually gives a fair view of the reasoning in Humanae vitae. NB: This wasn’t published in the journal he usually writes for, the NCRep – which had its own dissenting editorial. For the NCRep Humanae vitae was about holding on to power and, digest this, against "real" love.]

The encyclical quickly became seen, both in the secular world and in liberal Catholic circles, as the papacy’s Waterloo. It was so out of sync with the hopes and desires of the Catholic rank and file [too be fair, we have to include the many of the hierarchy] that it simply could not stand.

And in some ways, it didn’t. Today polls show that Catholics, at least in the West, dissent [I am glad he calls it what it is.] from the teaching on birth control, often by majorities exceeding 80 percent.

But at the official level, Catholicism’s commitment to “Humanae Vitae” is more solid than ever. [This use of "official" is not charged with the negativity that it has in the NCRep editorial.]

During his almost 27-year papacy, John Paul II provided a deeper theoretical basis for traditional Catholic sexual morality through his “theology of the body.” In brief, the late pope’s argument was that human sexuality is an image of the creative love among the three persons of the Trinity, as well as God’s love for humanity. Birth control “changes the language” of sexuality, because it prevents life-giving love.

That’s a claim many Catholics might dispute, but the reading groups and seminars devoted to contemplating John Paul’s “theology of the body” mean that Catholics disposed to defend the church’s teaching now have a more formidable set of resources than they did when Paul VI wrote “Humanae Vitae.” [Good point!]

In addition, three decades of bishops’ appointments by John Paul II and Benedict XVI, [A very important factor. I have written about this more than once: this is one of the most important things to consider during the long pontificate of John Paul II.] both unambiguously committed to “Humanae Vitae,” mean that senior leaders in Catholicism these days are far less inclined than they were in 1968 to distance themselves from the ban on birth control, or to soft-pedal it. A striking number of Catholic bishops have recently brought out documents of their own defending “Humanae Vitae.” [I know he is relating facts, here, but I wonder if Allen isn’t quietly arguing that dissent from Humanae vitae is out of step with the present direction of the Church? Namely, if it isn’t a washed up cliche of the "sixties"?]

Advocates of the encyclical draw assurance from the declining fertility rates across the developed world, especially in Europe. No country in Europe has a fertility rate above 2.1, the number of children each woman needs to have by the end of her child-bearing years to keep a population stable. [Perhaps I am unclear about terminology, but do we mean "fertility" rate or "birth" rate? There might also be fertility problems on the rise because of the damage (usually unknown) done by some sexually transmitted diseases, but surely contraception and aboritifcients and abortions are keeping the number of live births very low.]

Even with increasing immigration, Europe is projected to suffer a population loss in the 21st century that will rival the impact of the Black Death, leading some to talk about the continent’s “demographic suicide.” [Well said! An artifically created "Black death" as the consequences of, really it must be said, "dissent" from Humanae vitae’s conclusions in many ways.]

Not coincidentally, Europe is also the most secular region of the world, where the use of artificial contraception is utterly unproblematic. Among those committed to Catholic teaching, the obvious question becomes: What more clear proof of the folly of separating sex and child-bearing could one want? [Hits the nail squarely on the head.]

So the future of “Humanae Vitae” as the teaching of the Catholic Church seems secure, [Because the Church is committed consistently to teach the truth.] even if it will also continue to be the most widely flouted injunction of the church at the level of practice.

The encyclical’s surprising resilience is a reminder that forecasting the Catholic future in moments of crisis is always a dangerous enterprise — a point with relevance to a more recent Catholic predicament. Many critics believe that the church has not yet responded adequately to the recent sex-abuse scandals, leading to predictions that the church will “have to” become more accountable, more participatory and more democratic.

While those steps may appear inevitable today, it seemed unthinkable to many observers 40 years ago that “Humanae Vitae” would still be in vigor well into the 21st century.

Catholicism can and does change, but trying to guess how and when is almost always a fool’s errand. [And some things really can’t be changed.]

John L. Allen Jr. is the senior correspondent for The National Catholic Reporter and the author of “The Rise of Benedict XVI.”

=================================================

Humanae Vitae at 40 years

By NCR Staff
Publication date:
July 25, 2008
Section:
C. Editorials

As we roll through 2008, the press is filled with 40-year anniversary stories. 1968 was a tumultuous year; some say it was a year that helped define America for years to come. [It still divides much of Catholic America, for sure.]

The baby boomers recall vividly the Vietnam War Tet offensive in January; the April assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.; the Paris Peace talks and riots in May; the June assassination of Sen. Robert Kennedy; and the August protest riots in Chicago at the Democratic convention among nation-shaping events that year.

Catholics might recall another 1968 defining moment, the July 29 encyclical called Humanae Vitae, literally “Of Human Life.” The encyclical was a sensitively written expression about the sanctity of marital love and the need to nurture life in marriage. But whatever else it stated, it has been remembered for only one thing: the upholding of the Catholic church’s ban on birth control.

The encyclical upheld Pope Pius XII’s support of the rhythm method (now called natural family planning) [I think there are significant differences between the old "rhythm method" and modern NFP. However, I think this was put in for a reason. The "rhythm method" was widely derided. So, I am guessing that the intention is to paint NFP with the same brush, so to discredit it. This helps to set up the point down the line.] and in doing so, revealed its particular understanding of natural law. [Did the "rhythm method" have a "particular understanding of natural law"?] Its reasoning, theologians say, rested on the physiological structure of the act of intercourse while largely discounting the larger context of human love and family life.

Less than a decade after the encyclical’s promulgation, polls showed it was overwhelmingly rejected by Catholics. Eight out of 10 adult U.S. Catholics simply disregarded it. While bishops were largely upholding the document, many priests in pastoral settings, including confessionals, were saying it was a matter for individual conscience.

By any measure, a gulf between official church teachings and Catholic practice [Again, watch the word choice. I think "official" is code for "something we don’t really have to pay attention to" because, after all, people who are moved by "the spirit/Spirit" are above that sort of backward view of the Church. All those rules stiffle real Church.] had begun to grow and was to continue to grow and to permeate a host of other Catholic teachings on sexuality and morality from homosexuality to the use of condoms in the fight against the HIV virus. The right of women to have special say in reproduction, then an almost exclusively male terrain, was soon added to the list. [Note the shift to a feminist perspective that pits women again men.]

In the four decades since the encyclical was promulgated, the church hierarchy, fully recognizing Catholic lay resistance to the strongly stated ban on the use of birth control, dug in. Pope John Paul II affirmed Humanae Vitae as a pillar of Catholic morality—as well as a pillar of papal authority. [the NCR just made this into a power issue.]

Meanwhile, Catholic lay confidence in the institution was eroding by the year. [What "institution", the Church? That is the "institutional" dimension of the Church? Otherwise, perhaps the "institution" they are talking about is "papal authority"? The antecedent isn’t entirely clear. However, the intent is clear. NCR is pitting an "official" or "institution" or "rule-bound" hierarchical Church against the lay people who are making up their own minds about things and the priests who advise them.]

Torn between following the advice of a partially lay pontifical commission, created to assess the birth control issue, a commission that eventually supported changes in church teaching, and his desire to remain consistent with earlier papal declarations, Pope Paul VI chose the later course. [Hang on. What about Paul VI’s desire to do the right thing? It wasn’t a simple choice between the past and the future. It was about the truth.] The need to assert church authority persuaded him. [Again, the NCR makes this into a power issue. The purpose is to help the reader over to the position that because the decision had such a (low) motivation, those who are enlivened the "the spirit/Spirit" can discount the teaching of Humanae vitae and other rule-bound official Church teachings about morals because they are, after all, only rooted in the desire to maintain power.]

After all, he reasoned, how could the Holy Spirit have allowed the church to be wrong for so many years on an issue of such importance? [THAT is how they describe Paul VI’s reasoning? How stupid do they think we are?] His decision, in the end, was more indicative of church hierarchical dysfunction—the institution’s inability to look at matters, particularly sexuality, in light of new understandings and insights—than it was seemingly of any movement of the Holy Spirit. [And there it is folks! The "spirit/Spirit" is guiding the enlightened!]

Research conducted by sociologist Fr. Andrew M. Greeley found that the encyclical so shook Catholics that by itself, it would have reduced religious practice by almost one-half. That decline never fully occurred, and the reason it did not, Greeley found, was the favorable impact the Second Vatican Council was having on the lives of most Catholics. [Right. But we are not talking about the actual documents of the Council, but rather the "spirit", again, but this time the "spirit of Vatican II", the breaking of "institutions", the deconstruction of whatever was rule-bound or official.]

Repeated U.S. surveys find that Catholics regard church teachings on sexual morality increasingly out of sync with their lived experience and their understanding of love and intimacy. [You are to conclude from this that whatever conflicts with the majority opinion (the rule-bound institutional Church still trying to keep its grip on power by controling how people have sex) is therefore against love and intimacy.] They knew and still know [Notice the authority they give to this "knowledge". It supercedes "official" Church teaching and any insight or motivation the "hierarchy" might have.] that sex between husband and wife is capable of creating far more than new humans. [Dog bites man.] They also know their gay sons and daughters are not disordered. [Another shot at the Church’s "official teaching" about the nature of homosexual orientation.] The surveys have confirmed Rome’s worst fears, [Remember, for the NCR the " Rome" (a bad thing) is only about men struggling to maintain power.] causing at times even more thunderous condemnations [HUH?] that have failed to win many converts. So the cycle of dysfunction and disbelief continues.

National Catholic Reporter July 25, 2008