Amoris Laetitia . . . The Problem Begins With Contraception, Not Divorce
By LOUISE KIRK
(Editor’s Note: Louise Kirk, who writes from England, covered last fall’s Ordinary Synod of Bishops for The Wanderer.)
+ + +
The priest had just been showing us a photograph of himself alongside a beaming bride and groom. He was evidently fond of the couple. “Mind you,” he added, stabbing the picture, “he is a bit ‘various’ when it comes to attending Mass. I came across him idling in the street the other day, and told him: ‘I’m fed up with you. It’s time for Church. Get yourself there.’ That,” the priest added mischievously, “is the New Evangelization.”
Pope Francis has also been bold, in a completely different way, in opening up the evangelization of the family. His aim in setting up two synods and now publishing his exhortation Amoris Laetitia was not to restate the Church’s position on marriage and sexuality. We have had clear magisterial teaching on these subjects for the last fifty years and more. The problem is that few Catholics have listened. If anything, the breakdown of their families and their faith has gathered in pace. Pope Francis’ goal is therefore to reach out to the People of God and so close the chasm between doctrine and practice.
Amoris Laetitia is large and encompasses within its nine chapters many levels of thought. The Holy Father asks us to read it slowly, and to dwell on those parts which concern us most. At its best, I found his writing touching on the sublime. It appears to feed from his own life of prayer and devotion to Sacred Scripture. I strongly recommend it, and especially his chapters 4, 5 and 9.
However, the test of Pope Francis’ enterprise will not be whether it nourishes the committed but if it is able to reverse the trend in family breakdown and bring people back to a strong faith.
Here, as it stands, the document disappoints. There is much that is obscure and much that is missing. However, I also think that there are buried within it enough rich elements to build with. Finding these is ultimately more constructive than continuing to criticize a document which is here to stay.
The Holy Father’s approach is by now well known, since it takes from his work as a pastor in his native Argentina and draws extensively on the two synods. Put briefly, he believes that the way to draw sinners back to faith and full communion with the Church is to show mercy and to give each person an encounter with Jesus’ gratuitous love. This means discerning the good in each person, and holding back from speaking of Church disciplines until the person is strong enough to take them.
It also appears to mean taking a broad approach to conscience in which general intent is more important than detailed obedience. “It is true that general rules set forth a good which can never be disregarded or neglected, but in their formulation they cannot provide absolutely for all particular situations” (n. 304).
One can see how such thinking leads to Pope Francis’ answer on the divorced and remarried. This he gives in paragraph 300, which states that “the consequences or effects of a rule need not necessarily always be the same” and he includes in a footnote that this is also the case with regard to sacramental discipline. His words have done nothing to quiet controversy. The Catholic media have been abuzz and Raymond Cardinal Burke has already come forward as a canon lawyer stating that this is not a magisterial pronouncement but the Pope’s personal, if well considered, position.
The furor over the divorced and remarried has obscured something more fundamental. The mismatch between Church teaching and the actions of the faithful begins not with divorce but with contraception. Contraceptive practice is widespread and there are now any number of secular studies which show how its use increases the instances of promiscuity, abortion, IVF, and yes, of divorce itself. It is draining the strength and the faith out of families. Without digging out the root of the problem, marriage and family life will not be healed.
Here Pope Francis’ approach, which follows directly from that of the two synods, is most curious. He quotes Humanae Vitae directly or indirectly six times, and supports it with a beautiful description of the fruitfulness demanded of sexual love (n. 80). However, the section on Humanae Vitae lacks punch because it fails to give practical guidance on how to inculcate it. Urgency is absent because there is also no diagnosis of why, after nearly sixty years, Humanae Vitae continues to be neglected or how it has contributed to family breakdown.
It is perverse, for instance, to discuss the growing menace of cohabitation without considering contraception. This latter word is avoided, appearing only once in the document and then as part of a quote protesting state intervention. The science of natural family planning is never mentioned at all. It is as though Pope Francis, to distance himself from “rigid Catholic rules,” is determined to avoid every term which may have negative connotations.
The Holy Father cannot have it both ways. Either Humanae Vitae is correct and must be at the heart of family renewal, or it can be forgotten. The very fact that a Pope who is determined to win souls through loving rather than pointed words has still stood by Humanae Vitae is one of the greatest gifts of this document. It is a renewed sign to everybody in the Church, including the liberals, that the Holy Spirit has spoken and the teaching is permanent.
This, then, is the task waiting to be seized and it can take energy from the focus that Pope Francis has given to marriage and family. He tells us that “the Christian proclamation on the family is good news.” Let us take confidence and spread it. He tells us that we “need a more responsible effort to present the reasons and motivations for choosing marriage and family.” Let us teach well. He says that not all pastoral solutions rely on the Magisterium and it is for each country or region to seek its own situations. My prediction is that it is the dioceses which promulgate and give practical support to living Humanae Vitae which will see the greatest growth.
I say this with confidence for two reasons. The first is that science has moved on since Humanae Vitae was first promulgated. There is now secular evidence to support every aspect of the Catholic Church’s magisterial teaching on sexuality and marriage. In a sense, it no longer matters what individual churchmen say. The international pro-family movement, represented by bodies such as the World Congress of Families which is composed of professionals in every discipline, continues to prove that respect for the ecology of the human person, body, mind, and spirit, is key to protecting family life. This applies to everybody, not just Catholics, and it is time we woke up and we said so.
My second reason is because I take issue with the idea that Catholics have had too much sexual morality thrust upon them in the last decades. The problem is the reverse: Most Catholics have been taught next to nothing. Parish churches are silent while the contraceptive industry has been given full rein in the media, in school sex education classes, and in the medical industry. There are vested commercial interests in maintaining the status quo which means that natural family planning networks are scanty and often rely on the work of a few gallant volunteers. However, interest is there. I have noticed different attitudes in the twenty-five years, among people of all kinds. With the Holy Spirit behind us, I believe we are ripe for a sea change.
The process of turning society around is obviously not easy and will take time. Here Amoris Laetitia gives encouragement. There is much emphasis on the need for new and better training in the whole subject of family apostolate, beginning with priests and catechists. Marriage preparation and support is also emphasized, from the youngest years till after the wedding.
Pope Francis is particularly strong on the importance on good moral formation in the home: “[I reiterate that] the overall education of children is a ‘most serious duty’ and at the same time a ‘primary right’ of parents. This is not just a task or a burden, but an essential and inalienable right that parents are called to defend and of which no one may claim to deprive them” (n. 84). Curiously, this is left out of the section on sex education (which is generally very weak); however, there is nothing to suggest it does not also apply there, and much from earlier Vatican documents to say that it does.
One of the Holy Father’s pet phrases is that “time is greater than space.” It appears twice in Amoris Laetitia where he goes on to explain that it is more important to start processes than to dominate spaces or try to control all that happens thereafter. Pope Francis has given us the freedom to take up his initiative as appears most appropriate. We may not have his language, any more than we have the character to wind down a car window on a loitering lad. What is important is that we each take new courage that: “The Church is good for the family, and the family good for the Church” (n. 87).
