min read
A- A+
Pope Francis
The Pope meets with Lilianne Ploumen
Fr. Bernhard Häring
Unborn baby
Fr. Maurizio Chiod
Aborted baby


Faithful Catholics now greatly fear that the Papal Commission that Pope Francis has set up to re-examine and re-evaluate Humanae Vitae, strongly indicates that the Pope intends to permit contraception in some way or another. This foreboding is greatly increased by him inviting vile advocates of abortion and ruthless population controllers such as; Paul Ehrlich and Jeffery Sachs to various Vatican meetings and onto various Vatican Committees.


If the Pope endorses “contraception”, he will obviously cause further untold damage to Catholicism and its “Culture of Life” and to the predominantly Catholic pro-life movement.

Catholics have always been the backbone of the world-wide pro-life movement, and besides opposing abortion, they have resolutely opposed birth control, recognising that many contraceptives are abortive, and that the “contraceptive mentality” gives rise to abortion and that the world-wide normalisation of abortion has been via the spread of contraception.

In fact, the Catholic “pro-life” movement is nowadays, virtually the only part of the Church that is truly militant, being relentless in opposing the “Culture of Death” and in defending unborn children, their mothers and fathers and Catholic morality, dogma, tradition and culture.

Should the Pope somehow permit “contraception”, then as the Vicar of Christ, he would thereby disregard previous teachings of the Church on this matter; shred his last vestiges of moral authority; and destroy Catholic belief that the Holy Spirit has always protected and guided the Pope and the Church in such grave moral matters.

Furthermore, because each individual human life begins at conception/fertilisation, if it becomes morally acceptable to murder very young human beings when they are between 5 and 11 days old, then what moral arguments could be used to condemn abortions at later and later stages, even right up to the time of birth?

Also, by way of the same reasoning, to move right past birth and justify the killing by infanticide and euthanasia, of inconvenient, unwanted, unplanned, defective, surplus and ‘burdensome’ children and adults?

In other words, to adopt the ideology that the friends of the Pope, such as Ehrlich, Sachs, Bonino and Ploumen endorse, and to adopt the ideology of demonic organisations such as Planned Parenthood, The Marie Stopes Foundation, The World Council of Right to Die Organisations, The Sierra Club, The UN Population Fund and The World Health Organisation.

During December 2017, Bonino was photographed rejoicing at the passage of Italy’s End of Life Law. A law that even goes so far as to prevent physicians from refusing to be involved in killing their patients by Euthanasia. No “right to choose” for doctors who refuse to kill by euthanasia, only rights and protection for doctors who “choose” to murder by abortion and euthanasia!


There are ever more increasingly strong indications that Pope Francis will some way or another permit contraception.

Amongst these is his rehabilitation of dissident moral theologian Bernhard Häring -- who against all indisputable scientific evidence that a new human individual comes into being at conception – proclaimed that “before the twenty-fifth to fortieth day, the embryo cannot be considered a human person.”

If Häring’s absurd ideas are adopted, then it becomes possible that contraception will be allowed. Also, Häring’s ideas could be used to allow abortion up to the 25th day after conception! Apart from Häring’s advocacy of contraception and sterilisation, is his astonishing self-contradiction by endorsing artificial insemination.

Recently two magnificent articles about the moral theology of Bernhard Häring have been published and both are available on the web. These are: ‘Bernard Häring and his Medical Ethics’, by Dr Pravin Thevathasan; and ‘Pope Francis and Bernard Häring: The literally infernal cheek of dissent’, by Dr Jeff Mirus.

Both authors provide insights into Häring’s theology, and some understanding of how far Haring’s ideas have been incorporated into this Pontificate.


Could it be possible that this Pope who relied on some very questionable scientific opinions in writing Laudato Si – while excluding opinions from scientists who held contrary views -- will seek the opinions of those who might uphold Haring’s views?

The Catholic Herald of 12 Feb 2018 reported that Rabbi Fishel Szlajen, appointed by Pope Francis to the newly constituted Pontifical Academy for Life, supports abortion in certain circumstances. Another member, Rabbi Avraham Steinberg said the unborn child has “no human status” before 40 days. After 40 days, it has “a certain status of a human being, not full status”. Another newly appointed member, Professor Nigel Biggar said abortion was permissible before 18 weeks, adding: “It’s not clear that a human foetus is the same kind of thing as an adult.”

The idea of “personhood” and the lack thereof was the one that led Jews Gypsies, Poles, Russians, the mentally and physically handicapped, Catholic priests, as well as everyone else the Nazis wished to include in the category of ‘lacking personhood’- ‘untermenschen’, to be exterminated in The Holocaust.


Life Site News Jan 8, 2018 reported that; “New Academy for Life Italian moral theologian Fr. Maurizio Chiodi said at a December 14 (2017) public lecture entitled “Re-reading Humanae Vitae (1968) in the light of Amoris Laetitia (2016) at the Pontifical Gregorian University in Rome that there are “circumstances — I refer to Amoris Laetitia, Chapter 8 — that precisely for the sake of responsibility, require contraception.”

In such circumstances, he said, “an artificial method for the regulation of births could be recognized as an act of responsibility that is carried out, not in order to radically reject the gift of a child, but because in those situations responsibility calls the couple and the family to other forms of welcome and hospitality.”

Despite Catholic morality holding that “the ends do not justify the means” and “circumstances don’t change the morality of a human act”, Fr. Chiodi believes that an individual or a couple jointly, can commit the mortal sin of contraception as an act of “responsibility” and may even be compelled to do so, depending on the circumstances. Here he takes his cues from the reasoning of Pope Francis in AL.

Can it be remotely possible that Fr. Chiodi is so ignorant about the many varieties and the various mechanisms of actions of contraceptives, that he dares to speak of contraception without differentiating between real contraceptives, such as condoms, diaphragms and spermicides and coitus interruptus on the one hand, and on the other the various varieties with their dreadful abortive effects such as IUDs, hormonal pills and injections?

His behavior in so speaking -- and that before an audience in the renowned Gregorian University -- can only be described as culpably homicidal ignorance. But his and similar opinions, tragically false and whacky as they are, may well result in the Pope approving of generic ‘contraception’ with unknown numbers of abortions being caused as a result.

There is so much more that is profoundly objectionable in Fr. Chiodi’s attempted demolition of morality, but once again, a moral theologian and his case a key member of the Commission to Re-evaluate Humanae Vitae, while talking about ‘contraception”, avoids the brutal reality that most commonly used methods of contraception are abortive.

Therefore, Chiodi, in promoting generic “contraception”, which alone, of itself is intrinsically evil, is also promoting the possible indiscriminate murder of human embryos. Then to augment this utter catastrophe he incredibly holds that the use of contraceptives is “responsible and even compulsory at times”.

A reflection on Amoris Laetitia was posted on the website of the Pontifical Academy for Life in which Fr. Professor Gerhard Höver, a member of the academy, proposes that the term “intrinsically evil” is outdated.

Professor Josef Seifert in One Peter Five of 9 January 2018, provides a superb dissection, analysis and rebuttal of Fr. Chiodi’s morally destructive and recklessly dangerous ideas.


Another indication that this Pope intends to normalise contraception, is the fact that he has set up a Commission to re-evaluate and re-examine HV. Despite assurances that “the four theologians specialising in marriage and family life are studying Vatican archival material with a view of telling the whole story of how and why Blessed Paul VI wrote his encyclical Humanae Vitae on married love”, many Catholics fear that great evil is afoot.

Mgr. Marengo a member of the Commission, told Vatican Radio, that “he and three other Italian professors are conducting their research with the goal of showing the encyclical’s place among “all of the very important and fruitful things the Church has said on marriage and family in the past 50 years”.

Also, he went on to say, “from a historical point of view, it is important that theologians formally examine and document the process that led to the encyclical’s publication”. Out of these statements very worrying questions arise.

1. Why are theologians involved and not church historians, if the aim is only to do as they claim. 2. Does re-interpreting HV in the light of AL mean devaluing and contradicting HV as Fr. Chiodi is already busy doing?

Another indication that the Pope intends to widely and generally permit Contraception is the fact that he has already approved of the use of contraceptives to prevent pregnancy in areas where the Zika Virus is prevalent. With this precedent in mind, it not difficult to see that the same moral rationale used to justify the use of contraceptives in preventing Zika’s transmission, can now be applied to preventing other ills, including genetically transmitted diseases and defects; sexually transmitted diseases such as AIDS and Syphilis and to prevent many other diseases and social conditions.


“If it should be declared that contraception is not evil in itself, then we should have to concede frankly that the Holy Spirit had been on the side of the Protestant churches in 1930 [when Casti Connubii was promulgated] and in 1951.

It should likewise have to be admitted that for a half a century the Spirit failed to protect Pius XI, Pius XII, and a large part of the Catholic hierarchy from a very serious error. This would mean that the leaders of the Church, acting with extreme imprudence, had condemned thousands of innocent human acts, forbidding, under pain of eternal damnation, a practice which would now be sanctioned. The fact can neither be denied nor ignored that these same acts would now be declared licit on the grounds of principles cited by the Protestants, which Popes and Bishops have either condemned, or at least not approved.”