Humanae vitae and the bishops: an update.

FATHER ALPHONSE DE VALK, C.S.B.

In honour of its thirtieth anniversary, Bishop Roman Danylak of the Ukrainian-Byzantine Eparchy of Toronto took the initiative in calling for a new Canadian affirmation of the 1968 encyclical Humanae vitae (On human life). The bishop responded to the writings of Msgr. Vincent Foy about the background and the nature of the Canadian comments to the encyclical made in Winnipeg, in September 1968, the so-called Winnipeg Statement (hereafter W.S.).

Msgr. Foy first got involved back in 1966, in the Letters to the Editor column of the Globe and Mail, against the now laicized Father Gregory Baum, a peritus (expert) brought to the Vatican Council (1962-1965) by Toronto's late Archbishop Philip Pocock.

Baum had been questioning the authority of the Church's teaching against birth control from 1964 onwards. The question of "the Pill" was brought up during the Second Vatican Council and referred to a Papal Commission in March 1963 by Pope John XXIII (1958-1963).

On April 8, 1966, the centre spread of the Globe Magazine, an insert in the Globe and Mail daily, printed an article by Father Baum under a huge headline: "Catholics may use contraceptives now." Time magazine (April 22, 1996) picked it up and broadcast Father Baum's thesis throughout the English-speaking world. The thesis was "Lex dubia non obligat"--a doubtful law does not oblige. Why was it doubtful? Because, said Father Baum, it was now under study.

In response, Msgr. Vincent Foy, head of Archdiocesan Catechetics in Toronto, pointed out that the true precept was, that "when in doubt, the law prevails," and that a study group does not make for universal doubt of a 2,000 year-old tradition.

Msgr. Foy opposed the growing group of dissenters wherever he could. After the Winnipeg Statement and a long silence, he produced two lengthy scholarly articles on W.S., the first on its nature and background; the second on the consequences which followed from it. These were printed in Challenge magazine of October 1988 and December 1989. Furthermore, in 1997 he published the booklet, Did Pope Paul VI approve the Winnipeg Statement? A search for the truth, pp 63, which shortly thereafter led Gerald Emmett Cardinal Carter to circulate a twelve page memoir of the events in 1968 (these four items are available from C.I. independently, or for $8.00 together).

Bishop's responses

Of the few bishops who had been informed before publication, Bishops Colin Campbell of Antigonish and Basil Filevich, retired Eparch of Saskatoon, immediately thought it a good idea to revisit Humanae vitae. By the beginning of August eight other bishops had contacted either Bishop Danylak, Msgr. Foy, or Messrs John Stone and Gilles Grondin of the small supporting group "Society for Catholic Life and Culture." None of these bishops favour a wide-open discussion of the W.S; however a majority believes that a new statement on Humanae vitae is a distinct and fruitful possibility. As Archbishop Henri Goudreault of Grouard MacLennan (northern Alberta) put it a week before he died: wide open discussion: "out of the question"; "a new statement: a good possibility." This has given us a sense of hope that a new affirmation may really be forthcoming.

Sample proposals

The requested endorsement of the sample proposal on page 21 of the July/August issue does not seem to be well understood. The idea is to photocopy the statement, gather signatures on the back of the photocopy of those who favour the idea of the bishops making a new, strong, affirmation of Humanae vitae, thereby closing the loophole of section 26 of W.S. Readers should know by now that this section leaves the impression that the use of contraceptives is "up to you" (see Editorial on page 3). Copies can be sent to your local bishop, or to us, or both.

The sample proposal was put together by us, not by the bishops. It is meant to facilitate the bishops' discussion. It is easier to work with something in hand than to start from scratch.

So far we have received five responses by mail (60 signatures); from personal meetings with small groups we have garnered 180 signatures to date (Aug. 14.). As explained earlier, C.I. is not putting on a "drive" or campaign. We simply would like to show that laity and priests are interested and supportive of this idea.

The other suggestion is for readers to write their own local bishop. It is an opportunity to tell him about your own experience, or that of relatives or neighbours, vis-a-vis the Pill, and why you think they should issue a new statement.

Publicity

Bishop Danylak's initiative has had some publicity in the dailies. The Winnipeg Free Press of Saturday, July 25, 1998 headed it "Catholic group prods bishops on birth control"; the Ottawa Sunday Sun, July 26, in a full page article, called it "The Age of Immorality." The Globe and Mail carried it on its Wednesday, July 29, front page entitled "Catholic groups demand birth-control crackdown." This in turn, led to a Canadian Press summary printed, for example, in The Montreal Gazette ("Conservative Catholics push for harder line on contraception"), and to a much fuller article by Bob Harvey in the Ottawa Citizen on Friday, July 31, headed, "Calling for a return to morality. Three Canadian Catholic bishops seek to undo the Winnipeg Statement allowing birth control."

Other dailies also reported on it, such as the Woodstock Sentinel and the Lethbridge Herald. Catholic weeklies, on the other hand, being on summer schedule were slow to report with the exception of the American weekly The Wanderer which reported it on its front page on July 23.

Needless to say, the news reports contained the usual petty annoyances. The Globe's "crackdown" is pejorative. Of necessity those supporting the proposal for a new statement had to be "conservative." The best one yet came from the Winnipeg Free Press where a monsignor acknowledged that he had never heard of the society, and then added, "I think it is a small right-wing group." In the same vein, I suppose a number of Catholics think of Pope John Paul II as a reactionary conservative.

At any rate, the "Society for Catholic Life and Culture" (SCLC) is neither right-wing nor left-wing. It was set up 10 years ago as one man's effort to organize lectures and talks for Catholics. One year ago Catholic Insight people joined it, provided new directors and associate members, for a total of 15. The group hopes to promote cultural interests of the Catholic community.

Dissenters

The press reports, too--as is their wont--resorted to quoting those who dissent from Catholic teaching, in this case Saundra Glynn and Joanna Manning both from Ontario, who promptly pooh-poohed the idea of a strict interpretation of Humanae vitae. Both women are leaders of the ten-year old "Coalition of Concerned Canadian Catholics" (CCCC) which claims a membership of 1,500 (mostly among teachers in Catholic institutions). Glynn, moreover, also headed "Catholics of Vision"--Canada (CVC) which garnered 6,000 signatures in 1997 in favour of "reforming" the Church. CVC, in turn, includes Corpus (laicized priests), Dignity, (homosexuals who reject the teaching of the Church), the "Catholic Network for Women's Equality," and the Quebec-based feminist groups "Culture et Foi" and "Femmes ministeres."

As readers know already, their "reform" envisages the following: married priests; women priests; the abolition of celibacy; the democratic election of bishops; access of divorced people--who have remarried outside the Church--and of active homosexuals to the sacraments; the right of all Catholics to freely dissent; and a remaking of Catholic teaching "on human sexuality." The last point presupposes the rejection of papal moral teaching found in Humanae vitae (1968) and in Veritatis splendor (1993). In Quebec large numbers of teachers and personnel in Church-related institutions, including some 63 male and female "theologians," strenuously objected to these documents, in 1993, and again in 1995.

Networking

In English-Canada the above-mentioned groups have been generally backed by the bi-weekly Catholic New Times (Toronto circulation 12,000) and The Island Catholic News (monthly on Vancouver Island, circ.3500) which printed their petitions and programs while other Catholic publications refused to publish them.

The networking is quite extensive and in depth. For example, in the Island Catholic News of April 1997, Father Jack Sproule of Saanich Peninsula proudly noted how the CVC program was "in full communion with our Diocesan Synod decisions articulated and promulated six years ago." He is absolutely correct. Many of the same sentiments may be found in the Victoria Synod, and also in the Synods of Ottawa (1992) and Halifax (1993). Today, they crop up again in the just published 73 page, Synodal Assembly Booklet, A Thousand Faces -- One Church, of the 1998 ongoing Montreal Synod (see News in Brief, p. 25).

One excellent reason for a new statement on Humanae vitae is precisely to counteract the continued dissent and the claim that the Winnipeg Statement supports them. For years and years their protests against papal teaching, especially on family and sexual morality, have gone unanswered. So, today, they and their supporters may actually believe that the Church will one day change her mind and change her teaching. It's high time that the Canadian bishops disabuse them of this notion.

Silence by many

Meanwhile, the silence on contraception has spread far and wide beyond the ranks of just dissenters. A perfect example of such silence can be found in the book review on the back cover of our July/August issue. It concerns the new, 1998, Canadian bishops' publication Choose Life: Workshops on the Encyclical Evangelium Vitae. The reviewer points out that, although the 1995 encyclical Gospel of Life is chiefly concerned with abortion, euthanasia, and contraception, the compilers of this book, who work for the Conference of Bishops, downplay abortion and totally omit contraception. He expressed his amazement how this can be, in view of the moral collapse today.

This incident also illustrates the flaw in the argument that the teaching of the Pope on this issue is not true teaching, because it "has not been received by the people." This idea reflects surveys which claim that in North America contraception is practised as much by Catholics as by the rest of society. But if this is so--and I am not certain that it is so to the extent that the surveys say it is--it is because (a) Humanae vitae has never been taught and (b) many Catholics were confused by contradictory statements. Both of these are facts.

Following the controversy in 1968, the Catholic Church in North America fell silent on everything related to family morality. Priests were either afraid or unprepared to address the issue, while people were engulfed and overwhelmed by an exploding permissive society which made the idea of sin look ridiculous. On the institutional and hierarchical level everyone shifted from the unpopular and embarrassing birth-control issue at home to the much more attractive promotion of economic and political "social justice" causes in fields far away. It was an escape and "cop-out" which has now lasted 30 years.

As we put it in the July-August editorial "High Noon," it's high time for the Church in Canada to utter a prophetic cry.