I was going to
point out an interesting inconsistency (?) in the encyclical Laudato Si.
But this past weekend, I was confronted with major headlines about something
else Pope Francis has said. It started with a Dutch news site, which was shared
in a WhatsApp group:
Pope:
contraception is allowed against Zika
Going to the Internet to
find out the truth of the matter, there were many more such headlines from
international news sources:
BBC: Zika virus: Pope
hints at relaxation of contraception ban…
CNN: Pope suggests
contraception OK to slow Zika
Wall Street Journal: Pope
Francis Says Contraception Can Be Acceptable in…
New York Times: Francis
Says Contraception Can Be Used to Slow Zika
Los Angeles Times: Pope
opens the door to contraception in averting harmful…
Washington Post: Pope
Francis suggests contraception could be permissible…
The Guardian / USAToday /
ABCNews: Pope suggests contraception can be condoned in Zika crisis
Fighting my own little
guerrilla war on misinformation, I posted a link to the actual interview. It
was conceded that the Pope had not quite said it in those words.
There was a brave attempt
by an alumna of the University of Nebraska to explain that ‘avoiding pregnancy’
does not necessarily mean using contraceptives. This is true, but while writing
this blogpost, I heard that Fr. Lombardi has confirmed
that the Pope was indeed speaking about contraceptives. Which makes a statement
like the following difficult to harmonize with Church teaching:
On the other hand,
avoiding pregnancy is not an absolute evil. In certain cases, as in this one,
or in the one I mentioned of Blessed Paul VI, it was clear.
So not only does the Pope
suggest that contraception is permissible to counteract the Zika virus, but he
suggests that it is clearly permitted.
Of course, questions now arise
why this should be the case for Zika but not for AIDS.
I think I will wait for
the dust to settle.
So, what is the
inconsistency in Laudato Si? This concerns the addressees of the
encyclical. In 1963, Pope John XXIII made a significant change in addressing
his encyclical on world peace (Pacem in Terris) not only to his
fellow-bishops and the other faithful, but to all people of good will. This
precedent has been followed in some other encyclicals, such as Caritas in
Veritate (but, oddly enough, not Fides et Ratio).
In Laudato Si, the
circle seems to be drawn even wider. In one of the first paragraphs, Pope
Francis writes,
Pope Saint John XXIII
… addressed his message Pacem
in Terris to the entire “Catholic world” and indeed “to all men and women of
good will”. Now, faced as we are with global environmental deterioration, I
wish to address every person living on this planet.
A good will is not
required; if you are a person, then Pope Francis is speaking to you, whether
you are benevolent or hostile. However, further on in the document, this open
address seems to be narrowed down again, in the first sentence of Chapter 2
about the Gospel of creation:
Why should this
document, addressed to all people of good will, include a chapter dealing with
the convictions of believers?
What happened to the
villains inhabiting this planet? Do they not exist or are they no longer in
view? Perhaps it is supposed that they do not read encyclicals? That would be a
wrong assumption, because I have in fact read Laudato Si.
Questions, questions.
Well, let me end with an assertion, again from Pope Francis, from the airplane
interview that has so quickly become (in)famous. This is a good bit, in
response to a question about the friendship between Pope John Paul II and Dr.
Anna-Teresa Tymieniecka, that threatens to get overlooked:
A man who does not
know how to have a relationship of friendship with a woman – I'm not talking
about misogynists, who are sick – well, he's a man who is missing something. …
No comments:
Post a Comment