Twenty five years ago, in an encyclical entitled Humanae Vitae, Pope Paul VI denounced absolutely all forms of "artificial" birth control. The edict was issued in the wake of the liberal spirit that infused the Roman Catholic Church after the Second Vatican Council, and was directly contrary to what most had predicted would be a softening of restrictions. Many prominent Catholics were caught by surprise--so much so that the main result of the decree in theological circles was to begin a debate on the nature of papal authority versus individual conscience.

Pope John Paul II is currently attempting to throw a similar ideological hand grenade. Veritatis Splendor (The Splendor of Truth), the encyclical which will be formally issued tomorrow, is a reaction to what the Pope writes is "an overall and systematic calling into question of traditional moral doctrine." According to The New York Times, which obtained an official English translation of the edict, the document details "fundamental moral principles" which "transcend all eras and cultures."

While the encyclical reiterates the pope's conservative stance on issues of sexuality, it will prove far more controversial for the position it stakes out on the role of the Catholic clergy in stifling dissent. According to the Times report, "The Pope tells the bishops that they have a 'grave obligation to be personally vigilant' and must take 'appropriate measures to insure that the faithful are guarded from every doctrine and theory contrary' to official church teaching."

In other words, the pope is charging his bishops (to whom the edict is addressed) to tear down the uneasy balance between religious allegiance and personal belief that many Catholics hold on issues such as birth control. Pope John Paul II's views are not a surprise--he has always been far more conservative on this issue than the majority of American Catholics. But by directing the Catholic clergy--many of whom strongly disagree with him--to censure all who fail to strictly abide by church teaching, he is throwing a divisive stake right down the center of American Catholicism.

Non-Catholics, who have a tendency to view the Catholic church as some sort of authoritarian Stalinesque entity, may be surprised that an edict ordering clergy to stifle dissent will cause such commotion. There is a tendency to judge Catholicism from what the pope says, rather than from what the majority of American Catholics do. Yet consider, for example, the following responses to Humanae Vitae.

Belgian bishops issued a letter saying that "Someone, however, who is competent in the matter... may, after a serious examination before God, come to other conclusions on certain points. In such a case he has the right to follow his conviction..."

Scandinavian bishops wrote that "No one should, therefore, on account of such diverging opinions alone, be regarded as an inferior Catholic."

Over 600 Catholic theologians and academics signed a statement saying that "spouses may responsibly decide according to their conscience that artificial contraception in some circumstances is permissible."

This is not to suggest that Catholics are as flexible as Unitarians. The response of the American bishops read, in part, that dissent was permissible "only if the reasons are serious and well-founded, if the manner of the dissent does not question or impugn the teaching authority of the Church and is such as not to give scandal." But the very possibility of dissent is herein assumed, as indeed it was in Vatican II, which affirmed the "primacy of conscience."

But for most of the last 25 years, such dissent has expressed itself mostly in the reluctance of many Catholic clergy to discuss birth control with their parishioners. As Father Richard A. McCormick, a prominent liberal theologian, put it: "The uneasy silence [has] continued, abetted by the fact that many bishops and priests just [do] not have their hearts in it."

In an article in America, a journal of Catholic thought, McCormick quotes a Michigan bishop on the current state of birth control teaching by the clergy. "Many would compare us to a dysfunctional family that is unable to talk openly about a problem that everyone knows is there," said Bishop Kenneth Untener at a 1990 bishop's meeting.

In some respect, then, the pope is merely trying to break past this "agree to disagree" attitude that has silenced most recent debate on Humanae Vitae. Yet he is doing so in a manner that is designed to make many American Catholics feel that a gauntlet has been thrown down between them and their church.

A Newsweek poll taken at the time of the pontiff's visit to Denver showed that 62 percent of the American Catholics polled thought that the church was too conservative on birth control and that 63 percent had either used artificial birth control themselves or knew other Catholics who had. More remarkably, while the highest number of those polled said the church was "about right" on issues of abortion and human sexuality, the percentage who felt it was too conservative on both issues was only marginally lower than those who agreed with the church.

And, despite the urgings of many conservative Catholic leaders to do otherwise, 44 percent of American Catholics voted for Bill Clinton, who supports both the right to choose abortion and homosexual rights.

These statistics are sometimes lost amidst pictures like those this summer that showed half a million adoring Catholics cheering the pope on at World Youth Day in Denver. But for many American Catholics, disagreeing with some article of church doctrine is less important than the community and family identity that the church represents to them.

One need look no further than yesterday's Boston Globe, however, to see that the pope's message of universal morality will be embraced by many who fear an encroaching secularism. In a speech delivered to a Catholic group earlier this month and reprinted in the Focus section of the Globe, Massachusetts State Senator William M. Bulger attacked the "fiery evangelists of the Age of Aquarius who would have us 'do our thing'--whatever it might be." Bulger further warns that Catholicism is under attack and that "the teachings of our church are ridiculed in every form of communication."

And for many theologians, Veritatis Splendor will be hailed as a brilliant summation of Catholic principles. "He wrestled with every hot potato of the last 20 years in fundamental moral theology," says Monsignor William B. Smith in the New York Times article, calling the work "a moral masterpiece."

Reception of this latest papal encyclical will be divided. Nothing new in that piece of news--except that the very nature of the edict would preclude such division. If the pope was hoping to stifle the issues of authority raised twenty five years ago by Humanae Vitae, he may have only sparked a new surge of active dissension.