Then and now

This entry is written as a postscript to "The contraception debate".

When the papal encyclical "Humanae Vitae" was released in the late sixties, a storm of criticisms descended on Pope Paul VI. Many accused him of being a prophet of doom and gloom, and ridiculed his message on the dangers of contraception.

As we near the end of 2006, let's reconsider his warnings in the light of almost forty years of human experience, and see if history has vindicated Paul VI.

The Holy Father warned in his encyclical released in 1968, "Let them consider, first of all, how wide and easy a road would thus be opened up towards conjugal infidelity and the general lowering of morality. Not much experience is needed to be fully aware of human weakness and to understand that human beings - and especially the young, who are so exposed to temptation - need incentives to keep the moral law, and it is an evil thing to make it easy for them to break that law."

Fast forward to our time, no one denies that for more than 35 years, the world has taken a manic dive into a quagmire of indecency and sexual immorality. Adultery, divorces, abortions, teenage and unwanted pregnancies, venereal diseases and broken families litter our moral landscape like so many corpses dying from a dreaded disease.

The Vicar of Christ also cautioned, "Another effect that gives cause for alarm is 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."

How alarmingly true of modern relationships, where a woman's body is often treated more as a haven for gratification than a temple of the Holy Spirit. Pornography, sexually explicit corporate advertising and gross indecencies in entertainment arts all reduce the value of a woman's dignity to her sexual attractiveness.

The situation in Japan where individuals and corporations prey on the sexual willingness of schoolgirls who ply sex for material gains or money is but a sad reminder of the great loss of innocence in the world today. And for years, the pornographic industries reap in billions of dollars from eager new "artistes"; women who are constantly transformed into objects of lust by the temptation of money and comfort, while unscrupulous structures in third world countries continue to exploit helpless women sold into slavery to feed a raging appetite of lustful men who come by busloads in organised sex tours.

"Finally, careful consideration should be given to the danger of this power passing into the hands of those public authorities who care little for the precepts of the moral law. Who will blame a government which in its attempt to resolve the problems affecting an entire country resorts to the same measures as are regarded as lawful by married people in the solution of a particular family difficulty? Who will prevent public authorities from favoring those contraceptive methods which they consider more effective? Should they regard this as necessary, they may even impose their use on everyone. It could well happen, therefore, that when people, either individually or in family or social life, experience the inherent difficulties of the divine law and are determined to avoid them, they may give into the hands of public authorities the power to intervene in the most personal and intimate responsibility of husband and wife. "

Contraception is a dangerous weapon to place in the hands of governments whose agendas are anything but moral. In taking away the children of those who struggle, the rich and powerful often succeed in taking away the hopes and futures of the poor.

All one has to do is look at China with its one child policies where sterilization, contraception and even abortion is encouraged with intimidating social and economic pressures. The 20th century in particular was a sad witness to the population control policies of government agencies who enforced sterilisation and contraception for families struggling with poverty in various parts of Africa, Asia and South America, thereby threatening to wipe-out entire ethnic legacies and villages by robbing them of their young instead of providing infrastructures to help them care for children.

Many educational and health authorities in western countries who advocate contraception as a more realistic alternative to moral formation and chastity, believe that "if we cannot stop teenagers and people with greater HIV risks from having casual sex, the least we can do is to keep them safe by handing out condoms", only to discover that now more than ever, the figures for teenage pregnancies and HIV positive encounters have gone off the scale.

The ironic tragedy in most population control policies is that where they have succeeded, they have succeeded only too well, forcing governments to seek remedies for a rapidly shrinking population with no hopeful signs of growth. Japan, Europe and even Singapore are clear examples of this.

"Consequently, unless we are willing that the responsibility of procreating life should be left to the arbitrary decision of men, we must accept that there are certain limits, beyond which it is wrong to go, to the power of man over his own body and its natural functions—limits, let it be said, which no one, whether as a private individual or as a public authority, can lawfully exceed. These limits are expressly imposed because of the reverence due to the whole human organism and its natural functions..." - Pope Paul VI in Humanae Vitae

It is amazing with what divine accuracy the Pope's predictions have come true in our own age. Cloning, in-vitro fertilisation, test-tube babies, genetic engineering, surrogate motherhood, all of which are a testament to the power that man has usurped to himself in playing God. Only unlike God, he has no complete power over his creations.

For all intents and purposes, it is obvious that the "miracle" of Contraception, although attractively beneficial in theory, is in fact deadly disastrous in practice.

Forty years ago, one man stood against the tide of popular opinion and proclaimed that truth.

Forty years later, are we still deaf to this truth?