The Enduring Importance of Humanae Vitae

Perhaps one of the most well-known Church documents of the modern era is the encyclical letter Humanae Vitae (Of Human Life), issued by Blessed Pope Paul VI on July 25, 1968. In this relatively brief document, Paul VI provided instruction on the responsible transmission of human life, and as part of this teaching he reiterated the Church’s unchanging teaching that all forms of contraceptive behavior are intrinsically immoral (HV, 14). Sadly, few people, including Catholics, understand and appreciate this teaching. As we approach the 50th anniversary of Humanae Vitae, Dr. Perry Cahall, Academic Dean of the School of Theology and Professor of Historical Theology at the Pontifical College Josephinum, offered his insights in response to some questions about the enduring importance of this document.

As a theologian, could you talk about the theology behind Humanae Vitae?

Humanae Vitae  is commonly referred to as the Church document that condemns the use of contraception. However, far from being a negative document, Humanae Vitae  advocates for God’s beautiful design for marital love. In Humanae Vitae, Paul VI uses the term “responsible parenthood” to refer to the morally upright way in which spouses regulate the birth of children, in fulfillment of their God-given mission to transmit new life (HV, 10). One of the most important and overlooked aspects of Humanae Vitae is that Paul VI situates his teaching on responsible parenthood in the context of the true meaning of married love. He describes married love as a “fully human” love, including both the spiritual and bodily dimensions of the human person, and he points out that by God’s design married love is permanent, faithful, and fruitful (HV, 9). In the midst of discussing these qualities that make married love unique among all types of human love, Paul VI states, “Whoever really loves his partner loves not only for what he receives, but loves that partner for the partner’s own sake, content to be able to enrich the other with the gift of himself” (HV, 9). This means that instead of being a self-seeking love, married love is a type of love that seeks a complete mutual gift of self, where each spouse gives himself/herself completely for the good of the other. In Humanae Vitae , Paul VI clarifies that maintaining the inseparability of the unitive and procreative meanings of the conjugal act is not just about maintaining the integrity of a biological function, but is about preserving the fullness of “true mutual love” between a couple (HV, 12). Thus, Humanae Vitae is really an instruction about how spouses are to exist as mutual gifts for each other in their love-making, in accord with the truth of married love. 
How does St. John Paul II’s Theology of the Body build upon Humanae Vitae  and reinforce the sacredness of the marital act? 

St. John Paul II further elaborated on the vision of marriage that was presented by Paul VI, and during his papacy John Paul II left an invaluable legacy to the Church and the world. In particular, in his Theology of the Body John Paul II explained that the procreative and unitive dimensions of the marital act are both aspects of the person as gift. John Paul II talked about “the language of the body” and grounded Paul VI’s teaching in an understanding of the language of self-gift that God designed the body to speak in the conjugal act. True love holds nothing back, for in marriage a husband and wife give themselves totally to each other. Similarly, in sexual intercourse, which is most properly called the marital act, a husband and a wife are to give and receive all that they have to offer, including their fertility. If someone thinks it should be morally permissible to give a partial gift of self in the conjugal act then he or she does not understand the nature of conjugal love, which is a love of complete and total self-gift. 

John Paul II applied “the language of the body” to contraceptive behavior, allowing us to see that an act of contraceptive intercourse says “no” not only to giving life, but “no” to a full act of self-donating love. Instead of allowing the body to speak the language of complete self-gift, the language of contraception says, “I want to receive all of you … but that,” or, “I want to give all of myself to you … but this.” If we explain the content of the “this” and the “that,” they are a husband’s and a wife’s fertility; the fertility that each of them is trying to deny is an aspect of their persons. If spouses are trying to unite in the conjugal act without giving and receiving each other’s fertility (whatever state that fertility may be in) then the spouses are not giving and receiving the fullness of each other. In fact, they are rejecting a dimension of each other’s personal identity, a dimension that most clearly distinguishes them as male and female in their personal and bodily complementarity. By rejecting each other’s fertility, a contraceptive act of intercourse does not result in a true body-soul union of persons. By rejecting or refusing to give each other’s fertility a couple refuses to give a total gift of self.
It should be noted that when John Paul II taught that contraception opposes loving union and a complete gift of self, he was not accusing couples who practice contraception of not loving each other. Instead, he was pointing out that by using contraception, couples are not allowing themselves to experience the fullness of love that God wishes them to communicate in the marital act. Contraception impedes what is supposed to be the most intimate communication of love between a husband and a wife. Additionally, contraception can present the danger of one spouse using the other for sexual pleasure and can lead to the other person “fading away” in the context of this most intimate expression of love.
How prophetic was Paul VI’s document and his insights at a time when the “sexual revolution” was gaining steam?

Blessed Pope Paul VI’s insights in Humanae Vitae  were truly prophetic, not only in the sense of proclaiming God’s truth, but also in the sense of predicting the outcomes of the widespread use of contraception. In 1968, Pope Paul VI predicted what would happen if the practice of contraception was to take hold in society. He predicted that there would be an increase in conjugal infidelity and a general lowering of morality, a loss of respect for women who would be viewed as objects, the imposition of population control policies by government authorities (think China), and the further domination of the human body and its functions, as we would begin to treat our bodies as machines (HV, 17). Sadly, I think most people can think of many examples that show that all of these predictions have come true.

Why should Humanae Vitae  be considered a pro-woman document, and how has contraception led to the objectification of women?

Contrary to popular thought, Humanae Vitae  should be considered a pro-woman document. Far from leading to women’s liberation, contraception has actually led to the objectification and exploitation of women. Paul VI predicted that “a man who grows accustomed to the use of contraceptive methods may forget the reverence due to a woman, and, disregarding her physical and emotional equilibrium, reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires, no longer considering her as his partner whom he should surround with care and affection” (HV, 17). Paul VI was pointing to the fact that by opposing the life-giving potential of the marital act, contraception can lead men to look at women merely as available sex objects. Who can doubt that this has happened? At a recent conference on Humanae Vitae held at The Catholic University of America, Archbishop Charles Chaput said that “Humanae Vitae  identified and rejected sexual exploitation of women years before that message entered the cultural mainstream,” and Archbishop Chaput noted that Paul VI would not have been surprised by the #MeToo movement. 

In many ways contraception is the paradigmatic issue in sexual morality. Contraceptive behavior represents an acceptance of the premise that it is morally legitimate to separate the baby-making and the love-making dimensions of the conjugal act. Once this premise is accepted it leads to other distortions of the conjugal act and of the human person, and the sexual confusion that our culture suffers from today. In many cases, those who suffer the most are women.

Why is this teaching on the negative impact of contraception so widely rejected in society and even among Catholics?

One reason why Paul VI’s teaching on the negative impact of contraception is so widely rejected in society, even among Catholics, is that we have all been infected with a false understanding of “freedom” that was promoted by the sexual revolution. Contrary to what many believe, true freedom is not merely self-will; it is not simply the ability to do whatever we want to do, whenever we want to do it. This radical understanding of freedom is at the heart of the sexual revolution, which claims the right to do whatever one wants in the sexual arena. The sexual “freedom” of the sexual revolution proclaimed that we are only free when we can have sex on-demand, any way we want, without any consequences. However, Jesus reminds us that only the truth sets us free (Jn 8:32). In reality, true freedom is only found when we freely choose to live according to the truth that comes from God. We are only truly free if we accept who we are, made male or female in God’s image and likeness, and give ourselves completely to God and to others in true love. What may help people get over the difficulty of accepting that true freedom means giving up the desire to do whatever we want to do, is to point out that the God to whom we belong knows better than we do what will make us happy. Additionally, God desires our happiness more than we could ever desire it for ourselves. So we have nothing to fear, and everything to gain, by abandoning a false view of radical freedom and embracing a freedom that coincides with choosing the truth that comes from God, including the truth about human sexuality that is articulated and defended in Humanae Vitae .

Do you encounter people who have not have read the document but then are shocked by how prescient it is after reading it?

Unfortunately, many people who reject the teaching of Humanae Vitae  have never read the document. If people are confused by the Church’s teaching on contraception, or even if they are opposed to this teaching, I would encourage them to read Humanae Vitae (it can be found online at: http://w2.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae.html). It is a short document, and I have known people, including medical physicians, who are shocked by how prescient the document is. However, I know even more people who when they are presented with the Church’s teaching on responsible parenthood (even though they have not read Humanae Vitae  are blown away by how much sense the teaching makes. I know many couples who have said that they wish they had heard this teaching earlier in their married lives, because they have experienced the negative effects (physical and relational) of contraception. Many of these couples just didn’t know that there was any other way to exist. After embracing God’s plan for married love and the marital act, they experienced the joy and peace of speaking “the language of the body” in truth. 

What should married couples take away from Humanae Vitae and how can their perception be changed on contraception, true marital love, and openness to children?
What married couples should take away from Humanae Vitae  is that married love is a beautiful, yet demanding love. It is a love that requires a mutual and total gift of self, which sometimes entails sacrifice. When this self-giving love is expressed in the conjugal act, married couples give and receive the totality of themselves, holding nothing back, including their procreative potential. This means that far from being a negative teaching, the teaching of Humanae Vitae  offers positive instruction on how to live according to God’s beautiful design for married love, a love which is given the privilege of being life-giving. There are many ways that a husband and a wife can express love for each other, but when they choose to express their love in the conjugal act they are choosing an expression of married love that has a life-giving potential. Couples have the responsibility of reverencing God’s design for this act, and speaking “the language of the body” in truth. They should acknowledge and accept what God has made sex for, and not attempt to make it what they want it to be. This is, by the way, where natural methods of regulating fertility differ strikingly from contraception. Natural methods of regulating fertility allow a couple to work with God as responsible parents to either achieve or avoid conception, while reverencing both human nature and the nature of the marital act. 

So, above all, married couples should get over the misperception that Humanae Vitae  imposes a bunch of arbitrary rules. Instead, they should see this encyclical of Blessed Pope Paul VI as safeguarding God’s beautiful plan for married love, a plan that will lead to true happiness and freedom if we follow it. Walking in the way of truth may not always be easy, but it will always be worth it. To those who might not be convinced of the Church’s teaching on responsible parenthood, I would simply say, “Come and see” (Jn 1:39). Read Humanae Vitae , trust in God’s design for married love, and you might just be surprised.