The New Natural Lawyers, Contraception, Capital Punishment, and the Infallibility of the Ordinary Magisterium

Christian D. Washburn

In the years following Humanae Vitae, the encyclical enjoyed little support from Catholic theologians; but a few moral theologians, led by Germain Grisez, heroically came to its defense.1 These theolo- gians attempted to use their New Natural Law theory (NNLT) in the service of the magisterium, but their arguments proved inad- equate to stem the tide of dissent. In 1978, John C. Ford and Ger- main Grisez took a new approach, publishing an article arguing that the Church’s teaching on the immorality of artificial contraception was taught infallibly by the ordinary universal magisterium. Their article was so successful that Russell Shaw’s 1978 summary of their argument is still on the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops website.2 The NNLT, however, has led a number of its proponents to hold views on other theological issues that are clearly contrary to the teaching of Sacred Scripture and the doctrine of the Catholic Church, most notably on the issue of capital punishment.