Not all religions have imposed moral precepts upon their adherents, but all those known as “world religions” have made such a firm connection between their practice and the practice of the moral virtues. Living a morally upright life is, in the teaching of any of these religions, essential for salvation, however the particular religion conceives of it. A tight connection be (...)
Article
Indefensible
Moral teaching after ‘Humanae Vitae’
The remainder of this article is only available to paid subscribers. If you’re not currently a Commonweal subscriber in print or online, an online-only subscription costs just $34 a year. Click here for immediate access.
In spite of his credentials as a professor of logic and philosophy, Dr. Dummett, in his reading of Humanae Vitae, appears to have missed the precept at the core of the encyclical; namely, that every "marriage act" should remain open to the possibility of the transmission of life; in other words, open to what only the Author of Life can give. The use of oral contraceptives is diametrically opposed to that possibility inasmuch as it attempts to guarantee that pregnancy will not ensue. The users of "natural" methods of regulating births, on the other hand, recognize that we do not have complete control of our bodies anymore than we have complete control of any aspect of our lives; they acknowledge that God has a role to play, a role which we are wrong to deny by our actions.
It is not Pope Paul's encyclical itself which has "engendered moral chaos" and confusion, but rather the widespread and persistent misunderstanding of its teaching. Articles such as this one serve only to perpetuate that misunderstanding.