marraige and trust

As a teenager who was raised Roman Catholic, I found the Humanae Vitae very interesting. Specifically, I liked paragraph nine, Married Love. The Pope puts what the church values in and what is expected of marriage very eloquently. “It is a love which is total—that very special form of personal friendship in which husband and wife generously share everything…” I think that this quote embodies what it means to be in true love. True love starts out as a friendship and slowly turns into something more. When you have found love that is truly meant to be, you should be more than willing to share everything, in fact, it should be natural to do so. Another quote I really liked from this paragraph is “husband and wife become in a way one heart and one soul, and together attain their human fulfillment”. This quote embodies what marriage should be. Married people really should complete each other, and be one person. The wording of this is almost romantic in my opinion. While there are certainly things in the Catholic Church that I don’t necessarily agree with, I believe that this paragraph about what marriage is and should be is near perfect. One thing that could be discussed, which isn’t directly, is the element of trust. The paragraph talks about being faithful and being together until death, but does not touch on how to do that. It does state that “this fidelity of husband and wife sometimes presents difficulties”, and talks about how it is honorable and meritorious to be married, however, nowhere does it say anything about aspects of that. In my opinion, being able to trust one another is right up there with becoming one soul and sharing everything in importance. Without trust, a relationship of any kind is nothing. If I could change one small thing about this section of Humanae Vitae, without changing the principles of the Catholic Church (which once again, I do not necessarily support) or causing great controversy, it would be that trust, as one of the most important parts of marriage, is an important and necessary element of what married love is.

Change is a-coming

“The changes that have taken place are of considerable importance and varied in nature. In the first place there is the rapid increase in population which has made many fear that world population is going to grow faster than available resources, with the consequence that many families and developing countries would be faced with greater hardships. This can easily induce public authorities to be tempted to take even harsher measures to avert this danger. There is also the fact that not only working and housing conditions but the greater demands made both in the economic and educational field pose a living situation in which it is frequently difficult these days to provide properly for a large family.

Also noteworthy is a new understanding of the dignity of woman and her place in society, of the value of conjugal love in marriage and the relationship of conjugal acts to this love.

But the most remarkable development of all is to be seen in man's stupendous progress in the domination and rational organization of the forces of nature to the point that he is endeavoring to extend this control over every aspect of his own life—over his body, over his mind and emotions, over his social life, and even over the laws that regulate the transmission of life.”

Paragraph 2 details the successes accumulated over the years of life. But it’s an interesting “importance” the Pope delineates; an importance that separates the individual from the group, the woman from the man, and the culture from the society. The first paragraph in this section deals with the world and the population’s across it and the resources that play key roles in the existence of those populations. The next two paragraphs talk about the separation of man and woman and their roles in society, life, and culture. The Pope sets on the table that these roles are strict, fixed. But this oxymoron of a rule doesn’t stay fixed in this life time. Populations grow, individuals change, the role of the woman and man shift. But these changes are good. They show a nation that is healthy and heading in the correct direction, contrary to the Pope’s beliefs.

The Pope has a point here though. A point that there have been many changes in our culture, but not all these changes are bad. Yes, there are some, that if we were able to travel back in time we might change, but of course we don’t have that luxury, yet. But these mistakes can be seen as points to improve on. The growing population issue yes is true, but if we all work together we’ll pull through. The role of woman spreading from what was constricting back in the 1920s and further are becoming nonexistent as we see woman climb the ladder for the greater good. And man, always flying to new heights.

I do find at least one fault with the Pope’s message: the argument, although very nicely said, but a bit implicit, of the separation of the roles of woman and man in society. Haven’t we in society come to the point where there is no separation? Where man and woman are equals? The Pope goes on to say, “This love is above all fully human, a compound of sense and spirit... It is also, and above all, an act of the free will, whose trust is such that it is meant not only to survive the joys and sorrows of daily life, but also to grow, so that husband and wife become in a way one heart and one soul, and together attain their human fulfillment.” Man and woman are one, yet the Pope says throughout the entire article that it is not alright for artificial birth control. Birth control brings the man and woman closer, it helps them to reach to newer heights with their relationship, to reach for the top point where a child could come in to their lives, but the Pope doesn’t see it that way. The birth control is woman’s way of being able to control that what God has given her to her pace of life. To the Pope the pill is steering women down the wrong path. I believe, on the contrary to “the wrong path” that Pope preaches of, the pill is a step in the right direction. It helps women to learn the goings-on’s of the body and to be able to be ready for when the time comes that she does want to bear a child into this world. The Pope talks of in the first paragraph that there is fear of a vastly growing population that will out run the resources, well the pill helps to counter that increase by giving women the right to chose when they are ready and when they are not. The body and mind have to be one, and sometimes the body reacts too fast for the mind to compensate. Our culture has brought with it change, a change that brings the individual with the population, the woman with the man, and the culture with the society. Our culture today isn’t fixed, it’s ever changing, and the Pope may not like it, but he should brace himself for it, because change is a-coming.

Pope restricts preventing disease in children?

     It is very apparent that pre-implantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) is not allowed in the realm of the Catholic Church. This procedure is available for an expensive price at many fertility clinics throughout the United States. The link below provides access to the website of every PGD fertility clinic in the USA. http://www.ihr.com/infertility/provider/preimplantation-genetic-diagnosis-pgd.html

     It is a procedure that takes place after a man and a woman decide to undergo the process of in vitro fertilization (IVF). In summary, IVF can increase pregnancy chances by extracting eggs from a woman and fertilizing her eggs with the father’s sperm in a Petri dish outside the womb. After these two cells multiply to around 50, they are called a blastomere and are mature enough to be implanted in the uterus. With PGD, right before implantation, the blastomere’s DNA is screened by scientists. At this point in time, PGD is most readily used to prevent serious genetic diseases that could significantly alter/inhibit the child’s life. The most common diseases that are prevented with this procedure are Down syndrome, Cystic Fibrosis, and the rare blood disorder Diamond-Blackfan anemia. If this procedure became more readily available to the public, these diseases have the possibility of being eliminated all together.

     The pope clearly states in his publication Humanae Vitae under section 15 of Lawful Therapeutic Means that “the Church does not consider at all illicit the use of those therapeutic means necessary to cure bodily diseases, even if a foreseeable impediment to procreation should result there from—provided such impediment is not directly intended for any motive whatsoever.” 

     This statement is fairly straightforward. It says that if a woman is sick, she may be given the available treatment, even if it has consequences of infertility. According to this statement, the process of PGD seems to be acceptable by the Catholic Church. It is a means to cure/prevent diseases. However, what is not often publicized about pre-implantation genetic diagnosis is what happens to the blastomeres that carry disease genes. These balls of cells are discarded, not implanted into the womb, and one could say they are ‘aborted’. The Catholic Church is an advocate of the statement that life begins at conception, and highly condemns abortion. So, which statement should a Catholic follow?

     The Catholic Church formed their statement of beliefs thousands of years ago. This was before the enlightenment, when people obeyed the law of religion and did not know any other way. They did not use science or rational thought. The alteration of culture and society in those days and in the modern world is astonishing. In our world today, it is sometimes difficult to draw the line and make ethical and moral decisions with the advanced technology that is available. Many people in our society, or at least in the Midwestern culture that I have been shaped by, have common values and morals. Many of these values are constructed by the church. In my personal Christian but not Catholic opinion, I think PGD to eliminate high chances of disease is completely ethical and acceptable. In my mind it is only rational to do everything possible to ensure the health of a child. It is my idea of 'responsible parenthood', a term the pope uses often. 

     It is interesting that the Pope mandates that in order to demonstrate responsible parenthood, “a man’s reason and will must exert control over them” (Section 10, Responsible parenthood). The Catholic Church tells men to think rationally and control sexual urges, however they do not allow them to think rationally about discarding 50 cells to ensure a quality life for their children. 

Dear, Pope

hello his highness, i write to you with a couple concerns of a recent release of your views of god's love and his how and what you can and cannot do under his name. I would like to begin by addressing certain issues like"free love" and "married love". To start, you words on free love meaning extra marital, pre marital, and homosexual love which is against the structure of love that god has put up for us i think is highly restrictive. I think that these doctrines of coarse should be held only to those who are believers and true Christians which as we know not everybody is. You state that "every marital act must of necessity must retain its intrinsic relationship to the pro-creation of human life" is of particular puzzlement to me. One can look at the means or reasons why people have sex and come up with many different answers, or one could look at it as a means to nothing. not every marital or pre marital act has to look for a means to an end, in fact i believe that sex can be a meaningless thing that to some people could be as apathetic as a hand shake (which to me is not the case but for some people it is). I think that to put a means to an end to everything under the word of god would be quite crazy. Sex could in fact just fulfill basic human needs for people like human to human contact, procreation, or just romantic love. i believe It is to the individual to decide to what means they wish to act in what manner they wish.

This ties into my next topic of homosexual love and marriage as well. If we do look at marriage or love as a means to an end we can take your definition of a marriage stating "The fundamental nature of the marriage act, while uniting husband and wife in the closest intimacy, also renders them capable of generating new life". The issue i have with this is that it leaves out even heterosexual couple who may be sterile but live a complete Christian life which would deem their marriage not of the gods love structure. after all it is not their fault they cannot have kids because they can;t complete the procreative part of their marital obligations. however, these individuals are certainly capable in raising am adoptive child. The same goes for same sex couples. Partners may have the deepest love for each other and want to bind that love with a marital contract, but are unable to fulfill the pro creative part. If parents are fully supportive and loving toward their kids does it matter what sex they are?

Sorry Pope Paul VI, we can't all be the Duggars

Pope Paul VI had his opinions about sex; his so called natural laws. He believed it was only accepted under God and natural when it was between a husband and his wife. He also believed it was only "legitimate" when it is done the "natural" way without any means of contraception (Paragraph 11). A woman should never limit her fertility, she must always remain fertile because that is considered the word of God. So in todays world, Pope Paul VI would consider the Duggar family the so called "perfect" family and he would consider the rest of the world to be going against the word of God. The majority of the world uses some sort of contraception. It has become this social construction and has evolved into being a current "natural law". It is no longer considered taboo. Today, society tells you to limit and not risk fertility. They ultimately want you to be infertile. According to the Pope, the only lawful birth control is no birth control(paragraph 14). He is probably rolling over in his grave over the Plan B controversy. The Pope's claims are no longer/will never be relevant and have become extremely outdated. Very few still support his claims because the idea of sex has become a norm in society. In the Pope's days, sex was a private and unspoken act. Whereas, today it has become more public and accepted. The idea of sex and contraception is advertised and seen everywhere. In todays world, contraception is the natural way to go about things. It has become the safest, healthiest, and recommend practice. If people went by Pope Paul VI's claims the world's population would be reaching its capacity. Pope Paul VI had the right intentions with his claims. They were his beliefs of how society should live under the word of God. But today they are just not plausible. Contraceptives will remain controversial for religious and political reasons. But for now contraception has become not only a cultural norm but it has become human nature.

Till Death Do Us Part

The part of Humanae Vitae that I find very interesting is about Married Love in paragraph nine. I believe that the Pope’s opinion about married love is a very good viewpoint on social identity. When he says that we are meant meant “not only to survive the joys and sorrows of daily life, but also to grow, so that husband and wife become in a way one heart and one soul, and together attain their human fulfillment” I think this is the reason people should get married. They should want to be able to experience not just the good but all the bad that also happens in life by each others side. It also gives very good psychological reasoning since it makes us actually think if we want to spend the rest of our lives with just one person. It truly is a decision that you need to think about for quite awhile and should never be a split decision, since when that happens it typically never ends too well. When the Pope also says “It is a love which is total—that very special form of personal friendship in which husband and wife generously share everything, allowing no unreasonable exceptions and not thinking solely of their own convenience.” I think this also shows a great example of psychological identity since thinking of not just yourself anymore but for a whole other persons well being as well takes a very emotional toll on some people. However if you truly do love someone, this should come as easy as pie since you will be thinking as one person and want the very best for both of you. Another good consequence of being in love when you’re married is knowing that the other person will be faithful and you will have nothing to ever worry about. Having someone be unfaithful to you is probably one of the lowest things someone could ever do to another person, but when it is solid true love it isn’t even a possibility.

Unlawful Birth Control Methods

Population Density Map

I chose to reflect on the excerpt of Humanae Vitae titled Unlawful Birth Control Methods(14). The section discussed the church's view of contraceptives, and the unlawfulness of the interruption of the generative process by any means. It goes on to discuss how the different methods are all condemned in the eyes of the church, the reasoning behind this, and why no one method is to be considered less evil than another in the sense that they are all morally wrong. "We are obliged once more to declare that the direct interruption of the generative process already begun and, above all, all direct abortion, even for therapeutic reasons, are to be absolutely excluded as lawful means of regulating the number of children." (14). This statement sums up the Catholic church's stance on birth control. But what I found particularly interesting was the later section discussing human intent with contraceptives. I chose to link this with the illustration of the "1 child policy" in China.

The one-child policy refers to the one-child limitation applying to about 35 percent of the population of the People's Republic of China. It was created by the Chinese government to alleviate social, economic, and environmental problems in China. I find this policy to be extremely complex and conflicting on a number of levels. But when comparing just the policy itself to the Pope's view on birth Control, the two do coincide. "Though it is true that sometimes it is lawful to tolerate a lesser moral evil in order to avoid a greater evil or in order to promote a greater good," it is never lawful, even for the gravest reasons, to do evil that good may come of it (18)—in other words, to intend directly something which of its very nature contradicts the moral order, and which must therefore be judged unworthy of man, even though the intention is to protect or promote the welfare of an individual, of a family or of society in general." This section explains exactly why this policy is unlawful in the eyes of the Catholic church. By this it means that although the intent of this policy is to better the general living standards of the people in China, man does not have the power to control creation in this deliberative way for it is "intrinsically wrong". Not to mention the branching off of issues the policy has caused such as extreme increase in gender selected abortions, increase in multiple birth fertility treatments (first born child/children), and overall increase in infanticide. There is also the much broader conflict between the two ideas of how society views the policy and how people have "changed" to accept this as something "normal", when the Pope states that humans are, by natural law the same, and remain the same therefore their morals should not be altered by the developmental constructions of society.

All of these contradictions make it extremely difficult, in my opinion, to really form a clear "stance" on the subject. Brought up strictly Catholic, I tend to have the stereotypical conservative personality of a Catholic Christian. So in a way I find what the Pope has to say on birth control extremely smart in relation to the way he chooses to look at humanity. In each aspect whether it be political, social, or psychological he states that an evil is an evil no matter what the intent, therefore birth control is morally wrong, making his viewpoint easy to grasp and almost comforting in its solidarity. Like the path to righteousness is a set of guidelines . But nothing is ever this simple in reality, which makes this idea hard to truly accept. Like we have discussed in class, once new technologies and social constructions are introduced, whole societies are changed. The lines between right and wrong become less and less defined as humanity fluctuates. This complexity causes incompatibility between mind, body, actions and how we choose to live out our lives.