Encyclical Letter Humanae Vitae of the Supreme Pontiff

Introduction copyright ©2012 David Trumbull, Agathon Associates. All Rights Reserved.

Introduction by David Trumbull

Until the twentieth century all major Christian bodies prohibited the use of contraceptives. At the beginning of the twenty-first century the Catholic Church was the sole remaining major Christian body consistently opposed to artificial contraception. Over that century secular society, which formerly had, for the most part, at least officially, agreed with the Church that contraception is an evil not to be permitted, came to not only accept contraception, but to actively embrace it, promote it, and subsidize it. Most Protestant groups, after initial opposition, came 'round to accept contraception. Even the Orthodox churches, which in 1968, applauded Humanae Vitae modified, at least in some cases, their teaching to accomodate contracepting Christian married couples.

While not necessarily the first Christian body to allow contraception, the approval given by the Anglican bishops at the 1930 Lambeth Conference shook up the Chrisian world. Lambeth Resolution 15 stated:

Where there is clearly felt moral obligation to limit or avoid parenthood, the method must be decided on Christian principles. The primary and obvious method is complete abstinence from intercourse (as far as may be necessary) in a life of discipline and self-control lived in the power of the Holy Spirit. Nevertheless in those cases where there is such a clearly felt moral obligation to limit or avoid parenthood, and where there is a morally sound reason for avoiding complete abstinence, the Conference agrees that other methods may be used, provided that this is done in the light of the same Christian principles. The Conference records its strong condemnation of the use of any methods of conception control from motives of selfishness, luxury, or mere convenience.

This "pastoral" language, directed toward "difficult cases," coupled with the caveat that contraception not be used for "motives of selfishness, luxury, or mere convenience" is precisely the language that in the 1960s was used by those who sought to relax the traditional moral teaching of the Catholic Church. The response of many Christian bodies in 1930 to Lambeth was denunciation and reaffirmation of the traditional teaching. The Catholic response to Lambeth was Pius XI's encyclical letter Casti Connubii. The radicalism of the Anglican bishops in 1930 is clear when we consider that a mere decade earlier, at the 1920 Lambeth Conference they maintained the traditional teaching of all Christians.

The Conference, while declining to lay down rules which will meet the needs of every abnormal case, regards with grave concern the spread in modern society of theories and practices hostile to the family. We utter an emphatic warning against the use of unnatural means for the avoidance of conception, together with the grave dangers - physical, moral and religious - thereby incurred, and against the evils with which the extension of such use threatens the race. In opposition to the teaching which, under the name of science and religion, encourages married people in the deliberate cultivation of sexual union as an end in itself, we steadfastly uphold what must always be regarded as the governing considerations of Christian marriage. One is the primary purpose for which marriage exists, namely the continuation of the race through the gift and heritage of children; the other is the paramount importance in married life of deliberate and thoughtful self-control. We desire solemnly to commend what we have said to Christian people and to all who will hear.--Resolution 68
The Conference urges the importance of enlisting the help of all high-principled men and women, whatever be their religious beliefs, in co-operation with or, if necessary, in bringing pressure to bear upon, authorities both national and local, for removing such incentives to vice as indecent literature, suggestive plays and films, the open or secret sale of contraceptives, and the continued existence of brothels. --Resolution 70

What a difference a decade -- but, after all, not just any decade, but the 1920s -- makes. For more on the dizzingly speed and extent of social change in that decade see Only Yesterday: An Informal History of the 1920s by Frederick Lewis Allen (1931). The 1930 Lambeth Conference is also a cautionary tale for those who would make church teaching subject to majority vote at a convention.

With the marketing of the combined (oestrogen and progestogen) oral contraceptive pill ("The Pill") beginning in 1960, demands that the Catholic Church "update" its teaching escalated. In 1963 Pope John XXIII appointed six non-theologians a Papal Commission for the Study of Problems of the Family, Population, and Birth Rate. Pope Paul VI added theologians to the Commission and over three years expanded it to 72 members, with an executive committee of 16 bishops, including seven cardinals. In 1966 the Commission gave its report to the Pope, advising relaxation of the Church's traditional teaching that contraception is always illicit. The report was leaked to the press and is commonly referred to as the Majority Report. American Jesuit theologian John Ford and three other member of the Commission dissented in what has become known as the Minority Report.

The so-called Majority Report argues that:

  1. the "complexity of modern life" warrants re-evaluation of traditional teaching against contraception,
  2. "the church in Vatican Council II has entered into dialogue [with the world]," and
  3. while the teaching of the Church has remained unchanged, the application of the teaching has been "in evolution"

1. The "complexity of modern life," as a concept, is the central argument, and appears in several phrasings such as:

  • "the changes occurring today in almost every field,"
  • "the large amount of knoweldge and facts which throw light to today's world,"
  • "changes in matrimony and the family, especially in the role of woman; lowering of the infant mortality rate; new bodies of knowledge in biology, psychology, sexuality and demography; a changed estimation of the value and meaning of human sexuality and of conjugal relations; most of all a better grasp of the duty of man to humanize and to bring to greater perfection for the life of man what is given in nature."
  • "better, deeper, and more correct understanding of conjugal life,"
  • "new elements which today are discerned in tradition under the influence of new knowledge and facts,"
  • "problem in today's terms is new and has not been proposed before,"
  • "in light of the new data these elements are being explained and made more precise," and
  • "immense difficulties and profound transformations which have arisen from the conditions of contemporary life."

2. The Majority Report depends heavily on the documents of Vatican II, citing them nearly 20 times. Nearly all the citations are from one document, the Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the World of Today, which itself refers to Casti Connubii and the statements of Pius XII and to an address by Paul VI, the author of Humanae Vitae. There is one sentence from the pre-Vatican II document Casti Connubii. The pre-Vatican II document Arcanum is mentioned but with no direct citation and Pius XII is referenced but, also, with no specific citation. There are a half dozen citations from the New Testament and one from the Old, none of which directly addresses the question of contraception.

3. What the Majority Report means by evolution of the teaching is unclear, largely due to the report's sparse citation of historic documents. The report states:

This maturation has been prepared and has already begun. The magisterium itself is in evolution. Leo XIII spoke less explicitly in his encyclical Arcanum than did Pius XI in his wonderful doctrinal synthesis of Casti Connubii of 1930 which gave a fresh start to so many beginnings in a living conjugal spirituality. He proclaimed, using the very words of the Roman Catechism, the importance, in a true sense the primary importance, of true conjugal love for the community of matrimony. The notion of responsible parenthood which is implied in the notion of a prudent and generous regulation of conception, advanced in Vatican Council II, had already been prepared by Pius XII. The acceptance of a lawful application of the calculated sterile periods of the woman-that the application is legitimate presupposes right motives-makes a separation between the sexual act which is explicitly intended and its reproductive effect which is intentionally excluded
A couple (unio conjugum) ought to be considered above all a community of persons which has in itself the beginning of new human life. Therefore those things which strengthen and make more profound the union of persons within this community must never be separated from the procreative finality which specifies the conjugal community. Pius XI, in Casti Connubii already, referring to the tradition expressed in the Roman Catechism, said: "This mutual inward molding of a husband and wife, this determined effort to perfect each other, can in a very real sense be said to be the chief reason and purpose of matrimony, provided matrimony be looked at not in the restricted sense as instituted for the proper conception and education of the child, but more widely as the blending of life as a whole and the mutual interchange and sharing thereof" (AAS, XXII, 1930, p.547).

To take this in chronological order, Leo XIII in 1880, reaffirmed the teaching of the Roman Catechism that "in strict truth, was marriage instituted for the propagation of the human race," while Pius XI in the passage (#24) from the 1930 document Casti Connubii quoted above may be read as expanding the purpose of marriage, however, as the Report acknowledges, that statement is no more than the "tradition expressed in the Roman Catechism" -- hardly "evoluton" of the teaching.

The Report also sees "evolution" in "The acceptance of a lawful application of the calculated sterile periods of the woman," as articulated by Pius XI in Casti Connubii at #59

Nor are those considered as acting against nature who in the married state use their right in the proper manner although on account of natural reasons either of time or of certain defects, new life cannot be brought forth. For in matrimony as well as in the use of the matrimonial rights there are also secondary ends, such as mutual aid, the cultivating of mutual love, and the quieting of concupiscence which husband and wife are not forbidden to consider so long as they are subordinated to the primary end and so long as the intrinsic nature of the act is preserved.
However, this is no "evolution" as the "rhythm method" had been held acceptible by the church since at least the mid-19th century. Furthermore, Pius XI, far from deviating from the tradional teaching that contraception is illicit, rather, reaffirms it in strong tones stating:
Casti Connubii, 54. But no reason, however grave, may be put forward by which anything intrinsically against nature may become conformable to nature and morally good. Since, therefore, the conjugal act is destined primarily by nature for the begetting of children, those who in exercising it deliberately frustrate its natural power and purpose sin against nature and commit a deed which is shameful and intrinsically vicious.
Casti Connubii, 55. Small wonder, therefore, if Holy Writ bears witness that the Divine Majesty regards with greatest detestation this horrible crime and at times has punished it with death. As St. Augustine notes, "Intercourse even with one's legitimate wife is unlawful and wicked where the conception of the offspring is prevented. Onan, the son of Juda, did this and the Lord killed him for it."

Finally, the Report refers to, but gives no specific citation from, Pius XII, who advocated the "rhythm method," hardly an "evolution" considering that he did not go beyond public pronouncements of the Church going back a hundred years.

All in all, the report reminds one of the old line about aruging the defense in a case at law: If you have the law on your side, argue the law; if you have the facts on your side, argue the facts; if neither the law nor the facts are on your side, throw your client on the mercy of the court. The authors of the Majority Report find the traditional teaching to be a hard one to live up to and, therefore, propose a more compassionate alternative --

Therefore the morality of sexual acts between married people takes its meaning first of all and specifically from the ordering of their actions in a fruitful married life, that is one which is practiced with responsible, generous and prudent parenthood. It does not then depend upon the direct fecundity of each and every particular act. Moreover the morality of every martial act depends upon the requirements of mutual love in all its aspects. In a word, the morality of sexual actions is thus to be judged by the true exigencies of the nature of human sexuality, whose meaning is maintained and promoted especially by conjugal chastity as we have said above.

One would think that 60-some persons working on the question for three years could have come up with better arguments for relaxing the teaching.

In the so-called Minority Report, John Ford focuses on the central question, "is contraception always seriously evil?" If so the Church cannot change her teaching.

First the Report examines the recent teaching of the Church and finds three major twentieth century Papal documents, John XXIII's Mater et Magistra, Pius XII's Address to Italian Association of Catholic Midwives, and Pius XI's Casti Connubii. Eight additional documents from Pius XII are also referenced. Secondly the Report cites several examples of twentieth century bishops addressing the issue and notes that "the Holy See between 1816 and 1929, through the Roman curia, answered in this matter 19 times. Finally the Report asserts that through her entire history the Church has consistantly held that contraception is sinful. "Evolution," it is true, may be observed in the doctrine of marriage, but not so with regard to contraception.

Ford exposes five erroneous arguments against the traditional teaching.

    1. Some say that the teaching arises from the command in Genesis "increase and multiply," whereas the traditional teaching is found in the understanding that contraception is analogous to homicide.

    2. Some say the traditional teaching reflects the need for large families in mainly agricultural communities in a time of high infant morality, whereas "both St. Augustine and St. Thomas taught that our earch was already sufficiently populated."

    3. Some have mistaken the development of the doctrine regarding matrimony for evolution in the teaching regarding contraception.

    4. Some say that the traditional teaching was based an incorrect understanding that all conjugal acts were procreative, whereas older thinkers knew that "many conjugal acts are actually sterile" and, furthermore, to the extent that we have better scientific knowledge about fertility that knowledge should, rather, "invite us to have a greater respect for them."

    5. Others say that the traditional teaching reflects an obsolete view of nature as fixed by God, whereas the the generative process is "inviolably" not because it is natural but because human life itself "is not under man's dominion."

In place of the five erroneous theories of the traditional teaching, Ford sets forth five reasons why the Church teaches that contraception is always seriously evil.

    1. Generative acts are destined by their nature to the good of the human species.

    2. As human life itself is removed from the dominion of man, so the generative process is removed from his dominion.

    3. For the above arguments arises "the ancient traditional analogy to homicide" which accounts for "the severity with which the Fathers, the theologians and all faithful Christians have constantly rejected contraception."

    4. Procreation is good of itself, therefore to destroy it is evil; procreation is good for the species, therefore to destroy it is to place self above humanity.

    5. The Church has been set as a guard over moral teaching, especially with regard to "those things which appertain to marriage where the inordinate desire for pleasure can attack frail human nature and easily deceive it and lead it astray."

The Church cannot change the teaching, Ford writes, because the teaching is true and because the Church cannot have been wrong for all these centuries and still be the Church. The question is not whether Casti Connubii can be changed, because that document of 1930 merely restated what the Church had been saying all along. If the Church can persist for centuries in error regarding a moral issue of this importance then the Church has no authority to make any definitive moral judgments.

Ford identifies at the heart of the matter the underlying problem, that is, that some have "New Notions of the Magisterium and Its Authority." Against the traditional Catholic teaching that the authority of the Church to teach "is never limited to matters of 'strictly religious concerns'" but "rather the entire matter of the natural law...[is] in her power," there are now theologians hold that the Church can and has erred, that what may have been true once is no longer true, and who even go so far as "denying to the magisterium of the Church the power [over] the consciences of the faithful." But, Ford says, if the Church can reverse centuries of teaching and approve contraception, then why not suicide, abortion, fornication and even adultery.

Ford next attempts to restate, in a logical manner, precisely the argument, or arguments, of those seeking to relax the teaching. They, according to Ford, follow the teaching of the Church in reverencing the human person, however, only in "its spiritual element, and in a partial fashion." They hold that "man's intervention in nature is not limited a priori by any absolute boundaries." Rather, they hold that "Parts, organs, functions of man are conceived as contra-distinct from [man, and]...subordinated to him...almost as are plants and animals." They view "Human nature...as adaptable and perfectible historically" so that "when man's fecundity and morality have been modified, his sexual activity ought not to be changed, but rather the moral norm laid down for it." From this they argue that Casti Connubii be reformed.

They also, according to Ford, subordinate the teaching authority of the Church to developments in culture; restirct the magisterium to matters that are clearly part of revelation, not natural law; say, effectively, that the Church should not teach as binding something that the majority of Catholics have doubts about; and, demand that "in the study of nature the magisterium will leave methods of action up to the discretion and responsibility of scientists."

The innovators hold that the morality of acts is determined by "The basic intention of the person acting" and "not necessarily in single actions." And their morality is, extremely simple: "not to use others as a means." Beyond that they hold that "means are morally indifferent and are to be specified by the intention of the person acting."

Addressing the question at hand, they argue that: "The existence of sterile days does not afford a sufficient solution for modern society -- because of the conditions of life, biological anomalies, psychological disturbances, the repression of spontaneity, the dangers to fidelity, etc. Recourse must be had to artificial ways of frustrating the natural generative power." They conclude, that the use of contraceptives in marriage is moral because it is done with the honest intention of making for a happy marriage in which children can be reared and educated conveniently. Even if they concede that it is evil, they believe "it is a lesser evil." Finally, he notes, "Others think it simply is good... because of the values and complex intention indicated above."

Against the traditional teaching they lodge these objections:

    "[T]he traditional teaching, from an ignorance of biology, supposed that each individual conjugal act was by its nature ordained to children...[had he understood this] Pius XI would not condemn such resort to artifice... when used for legitimate motives of expressing conjugal love in union."

    They also argue that the "Pontiff was not dealing with individual actions destined to the service of biological life of a future offspring but with the whole complex of conjugal life."

    They argue that "the traditional teaching concerning contraception, since it was never defined (and cannot be defined because it is not in revelation), must be reformed, once the falsity has been demonstrated of its foundation with regard to children, as to the primary end of marriage."

They argue that "the best doctors and married couples in modern life" say the traditional teaching is impossible to follow.

Some argue from the "principle of the lesser evil." Others seeks "to save the greater conjugal-family good, by sacrificing the lesser good of the physiological integrity of the act." Others "apply the principle of totality" arguing that, "through the physical evil of contraception, a psychic good may be obtained."

Ford's answers that the above arguments for change are:

    (1) Faulty because removing natural law from the jurisdiction of the magisterium "does not do justice to protect either the competence which the Church has so many times vindicated for herself for the interpretation of the natural law, nor the Church's effective capacity of discerning the moral order."

    (2) Faulty because these arguments grant human nature to the dominion of man, allowing "insufficient place in human life for the action of the Holy Spirit and for his mission of healing sin." Further he says, "Neither is it evident what are the great demands on virtue which are often affirmed in this new tendency."

    (3) Faulty because the charge that the traditonal teaching is rooted in the conditions of a pre-modern world are "brought out by false reasoning and false interpretations of history."

    (4) Faulty because "The authenticity of the magisterium seems to be substantially violated: (a) by restricting its mission and power beyond the limits vindicated by the Church for herself through the actions of several Pontiffs and through the First and Second Vatican Councils,... (b) by confusing the consensus of the faithful...with the belief of the faithful...(c) by taking away from the magisterium the authority to discern the requirements of the natural law..." [and] (d) [by proposing an argument under which] "it would have to be acknowledged that the Holy Spirit in 1930, in 1951 and 1958, assisted Protestant churches, and that for half a century Pius XI, Pius XII and a great part of the Catholic hierarchy did not protect against a very serious error..."

    (5) Faulty because they "lack the fundamental distinction between the sexual condition of man and the free and voluntary use of the genital faculty" so that these arguments not only can be used to justify "use of this faculty can be turned aside in marriage...[but also] outside of marriage." Furthermore, the reasoning is based on a faulty understanding of the former state of knowledge regarding fertility, supposes a fault contradiction between Catholic teaching and the biology and physiology of the sexual act, and fails to take into account that "conjugal love is above all spiritual and it requires no specific carnal gesture."

Finally Ford points out that the promoters of change, who claim that the Church is operating from presumptions of another era may themselves be "essentially limited by the influence of their time and culture and region and by organized propaganda."

Turning to the consequences were the Church to change her teaching, Ford says that admiting such a change would lead to all many of sexual sins claiming the Church's approval.

Were the Church to reverse centuries of teaching, says Ford, if would undermine the Church's authority to speak on moral and dogmatic matters. Furthmore, it would undermine the teaching that the Holy Ghost assists the Church in leading the faithful to salvation. Indeed, it would amount to admiting that for three decades the Holy Ghost was guiding the Anglican Church while the Catholic Church was in error.

To those who "say that the teaching of the Church was not false for those times. Now, however, it must be changed because of changed historical conditions," Ford replies that "the Anglican Church was teaching precisely [what the innovators demand] and for the very reasons which the Catholic Church solemnly denied, but which [the innovators] would now admit."

Regarding "claims that the Church would be better off to admit her error, just as recently she has done in other circumstances, Ford replies, "this is no question of peripheral matters...or of an excess in the way a thing is done...[rather]...This is a most significant question which profoundly enters into the practical lives of Christians."

Encyclical Letter Humanae Vitae of the Supreme Pontiff

to His Venerable Brothers the Patriarchs, Archbishops, Bishops, and Other Local Ordinaries in Peace and Communion with the Apostolic See, to the Clergy and Faithful of the Whole Catholic World, and to All Men of Good Will, on the Regulation of Birth

Honored Brothers and Dear Sons, Health and Apostolic Benediction.

The transmission of human life is a most serious role in which married people collaborate freely and responsibly with God the Creator. It has always been a source of great joy to them, even though it sometimes entails many difficulties and hardships.

The fulfillment of this duty has always posed problems to the conscience of married people, but the recent course of human society and the concomitant changes have provoked new questions. The Church cannot ignore these questions, for they concern matters intimately connected with the life and happiness of human beings.

I. Problem and Competency of the Magisterium

2. The changes that have taken place are of considerable importance and varied in nature. In the first place there is the rapid increase in population which has made many fear that world population is going to grow faster than available resources, with the consequence that many families and developing countries would be faced with greater hardships. This can easily induce public authorities to be tempted to take even harsher measures to avert this danger. There is also the fact that not only working and housing conditions but the greater demands made both in the economic and educational field pose a living situation in which it is frequently difficult these days to provide properly for a large family.

Also noteworthy is a new understanding of the dignity of woman and her place in society, of the value of conjugal love in marriage and the relationship of conjugal acts to this love.

But the most remarkable development of all is to be seen in man's stupendous progress in the domination and rational organization of the forces of nature to the point that he is endeavoring to extend this control over every aspect of his own life—over his body, over his mind and emotions, over his social life, and even over the laws that regulate the transmission of life.

New Questions

3. This new state of things gives rise to new questions. Granted the conditions of life today and taking into account the relevance of married love to the harmony and mutual fidelity of husband and wife, would it not be right to review the moral norms in force till now, especially when it is felt that these can be observed only with the gravest difficulty, sometimes only by heroic effort?

Moreover, if one were to apply here the so called principle of totality, could it not be accepted that the intention to have a less prolific but more rationally planned family might transform an action which renders natural processes infertile into a licit and provident control of birth? Could it not be admitted, in other words, that procreative finality applies to the totality of married life rather than to each single act? A further question is whether, because people are more conscious today of their responsibilities, the time has not come when the transmission of life should be regulated by their intelligence and will rather than through the specific rhythms of their own bodies.

Interpreting the Moral Law

4. This kind of question requires from the teaching authority of the Church a new and deeper reflection on the principles of the moral teaching on marriage—a teaching which is based on the natural law as illuminated and enriched by divine Revelation.

No member of the faithful could possibly deny that the Church is competent in her magisterium to interpret the natural moral law. It is in fact indisputable, as Our predecessors have many times declared, \1\ that Jesus Christ, when He communicated His divine power to Peter and the other Apostles and sent them to teach all nations His commandments, \2\ constituted them as the authentic guardians and interpreters of the whole moral law, not only, that is, of the law of the Gospel but also of the natural law. For the natural law, too, declares the will of God, and its faithful observance is necessary for men's eternal salvation. \3\

In carrying out this mandate, the Church has always issued appropriate documents on the nature of marriage, the correct use of conjugal rights, and the duties of spouses. These documents have been more copious in recent times. \4\

Special Studies

5. The consciousness of the same responsibility induced Us to confirm and expand the commission set up by Our predecessor Pope John XXIII, of happy memory, in March, 1963. This commission included married couples as well as many experts in the various fields pertinent to these questions. Its task was to examine views and opinions concerning married life, and especially on the correct regulation of births; and it was also to provide the teaching authority of the Church with such evidence as would enable it to give an apt reply in this matter, which not only the faithful but also the rest of the world were waiting for. \5\

When the evidence of the experts had been received, as well as the opinions and advice of a considerable number of Our brethren in the episcopate—some of whom sent their views spontaneously, while others were requested by Us to do so—We were in a position to weigh with more precision all the aspects of this complex subject. Hence We are deeply grateful to all those concerned.

The Magisterium's Reply

6. However, the conclusions arrived at by the commission could not be considered by Us as definitive and absolutely certain, dispensing Us from the duty of examining personally this serious question. This was all the more necessary because, within the commission itself, there was not complete agreement concerning the moral norms to be proposed, and especially because certain approaches and criteria for a solution to this question had emerged which were at variance with the moral doctrine on marriage constantly taught by the magisterium of the Church.

Consequently, now that We have sifted carefully the evidence sent to Us and intently studied the whole matter, as well as prayed constantly to God, We, by virtue of the mandate entrusted to Us by Christ, intend to give Our reply to this series of grave questions.

II. Doctrinal Principles

7. The question of human procreation, like every other question which touches human life, involves more than the limited aspects specific to such disciplines as biology, psychology, demography or sociology. It is the whole man and the whole mission to which he is called that must be considered: both its natural, earthly aspects and its supernatural, eternal aspects. And since in the attempt to justify artificial methods of birth control many appeal to the demands of married love or of responsible parenthood, these two important realities of married life must be accurately defined and analyzed. This is what We mean to do, with special reference to what the Second Vatican Council taught with the highest authority in its Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the World of Today.

God's Loving Design

8. Married love particularly reveals its true nature and nobility when we realize that it takes its origin from God, who "is love," \6\ the Father "from whom every family in heaven and on earth is named." \7\

Marriage, then, is far from being the effect of chance or the result of the blind evolution of natural forces. It is in reality the wise and provident institution of God the Creator, whose purpose was to effect in man His loving design. As a consequence, husband and wife, through that mutual gift of themselves, which is specific and exclusive to them alone, develop that union of two persons in which they perfect one another, cooperating with God in the generation and rearing of new lives.

The marriage of those who have been baptized is, in addition, invested with the dignity of a sacramental sign of grace, for it represents the union of Christ and His Church.

Married Love

9. In the light of these facts the characteristic features and exigencies of married love are clearly indicated, and it is of the highest importance to evaluate them exactly.

This love is above all fully human, a compound of sense and spirit. It is not, then, merely a question of natural instinct or emotional drive. It is also, and above all, an act of the free will, whose trust is such that it is meant not only to survive the joys and sorrows of daily life, but also to grow, so that husband and wife become in a way one heart and one soul, and together attain their human fulfillment.

It is a love which is total—that very special form of personal friendship in which husband and wife generously share everything, allowing no unreasonable exceptions and not thinking solely of their own convenience. Whoever really loves his partner loves not only for what he receives, but loves that partner for the partner's own sake, content to be able to enrich the other with the gift of himself.

Married love is also faithful and exclusive of all other, and this until death. This is how husband and wife understood it on the day on which, fully aware of what they were doing, they freely vowed themselves to one another in marriage. Though this fidelity of husband and wife sometimes presents difficulties, no one has the right to assert that it is impossible; it is, on the contrary, always honorable and meritorious. The example of countless married couples proves not only that fidelity is in accord with the nature of marriage, but also that it is the source of profound and enduring happiness.

Finally, this love is fecund. It is not confined wholly to the loving interchange of husband and wife; it also contrives to go beyond this to bring new life into being. "Marriage and conjugal love are by their nature ordained toward the procreation and education of children. Children are really the supreme gift of marriage and contribute in the highest degree to their parents' welfare." \8\

Responsible Parenthood

10. Married love, therefore, requires of husband and wife the full awareness of their obligations in the matter of responsible parenthood, which today, rightly enough, is much insisted upon, but which at the same time should be rightly understood. Thus, we do well to consider responsible parenthood in the light of its varied legitimate and interrelated aspects.

With regard to the biological processes, responsible parenthood means an awareness of, and respect for, their proper functions. In the procreative faculty the human mind discerns biological laws that apply to the human person. \9\

With regard to man's innate drives and emotions, responsible parenthood means that man's reason and will must exert control over them.

With regard to physical, economic, psychological and social conditions, responsible parenthood is exercised by those who prudently and generously decide to have more children, and by those who, for serious reasons and with due respect to moral precepts, decide not to have additional children for either a certain or an indefinite period of time.

Responsible parenthood, as we use the term here, has one further essential aspect of paramount importance. It concerns the objective moral order which was established by God, and of which a right conscience is the true interpreter. In a word, the exercise of responsible parenthood requires that husband and wife, keeping a right order of priorities, recognize their own duties toward God, themselves, their families and human society.

From this it follows that they are not free to act as they choose in the service of transmitting life, as if it were wholly up to them to decide what is the right course to follow. On the contrary, they are bound to ensure that what they do corresponds to the will of God the Creator. The very nature of marriage and its use makes His will clear, while the constant teaching of the Church spells it out. \10\

Observing the Natural Law

11. The sexual activity, in which husband and wife are intimately and chastely united with one another, through which human life is transmitted, is, as the recent Council recalled, "noble and worthy.'' \11\ It does not, moreover, cease to be legitimate even when, for reasons independent of their will, it is foreseen to be infertile. For its natural adaptation to the expression and strengthening of the union of husband and wife is not thereby suppressed. The fact is, as experience shows, that new life is not the result of each and every act of sexual intercourse. God has wisely ordered laws of nature and the incidence of fertility in such a way that successive births are already naturally spaced through the inherent operation of these laws. The Church, nevertheless, in urging men to the observance of the precepts of the natural law, which it interprets by its constant doctrine, teaches that each and every marital act must of necessity retain its intrinsic relationship to the procreation of human life. \12\

Union and Procreation

12. This particular doctrine, often expounded by the magisterium of the Church, is based on the inseparable connection, established by God, which man on his own initiative may not break, between the unitive significance and the procreative significance which are both inherent to the marriage act.

The reason is that the fundamental nature of the marriage act, while uniting husband and wife in the closest intimacy, also renders them capable of generating new life—and this as a result of laws written into the actual nature of man and of woman. And if each of these essential qualities, the unitive and the procreative, is preserved, the use of marriage fully retains its sense of true mutual love and its ordination to the supreme responsibility of parenthood to which man is called. We believe that our contemporaries are particularly capable of seeing that this teaching is in harmony with human reason.

Faithfulness to God's Design

13. Men rightly observe that a conjugal act imposed on one's partner without regard to his or her condition or personal and reasonable wishes in the matter, is no true act of love, and therefore offends the moral order in its particular application to the intimate relationship of husband and wife. If they further reflect, they must also recognize that an act of mutual love which impairs the capacity to transmit life which God the Creator, through specific laws, has built into it, frustrates His design which constitutes the norm of marriage, and contradicts the will of the Author of life. Hence to use this divine gift while depriving it, even if only partially, of its meaning and purpose, is equally repugnant to the nature of man and of woman, and is consequently in opposition to the plan of God and His holy will. But to experience the gift of married love while respecting the laws of conception is to acknowledge that one is not the master of the sources of life but rather the minister of the design established by the Creator. Just as man does not have unlimited dominion over his body in general, so also, and with more particular reason, he has no such dominion over his specifically sexual faculties, for these are concerned by their very nature with the generation of life, of which God is the source. "Human life is sacred—all men must recognize that fact," Our predecessor Pope John XXIII recalled. "From its very inception it reveals the creating hand of God." \13\

Unlawful Birth Control Methods

14. Therefore We base Our words on the first principles of a human and Christian doctrine of marriage when We are obliged once more to declare that the direct interruption of the generative process already begun and, above all, all direct abortion, even for therapeutic reasons, are to be absolutely excluded as lawful means of regulating the number of children. \14\ Equally to be condemned, as the magisterium of the Church has affirmed on many occasions, is direct sterilization, whether of the man or of the woman, whether permanent or temporary. \15\

Similarly excluded is any action which either before, at the moment of, or after sexual intercourse, is specifically intended to prevent procreation—whether as an end or as a means. \16\

Neither is it valid to argue, as a justification for sexual intercourse which is deliberately contraceptive, that a lesser evil is to be preferred to a greater one, or that such intercourse would merge with procreative acts of past and future to form a single entity, and so be qualified by exactly the same moral goodness as these. Though it is true that sometimes it is lawful to tolerate a lesser moral evil in order to avoid a greater evil or in order to promote a greater good," it is never lawful, even for the gravest reasons, to do evil that good may come of it \18\—in other words, to intend directly something which of its very nature contradicts the moral order, and which must therefore be judged unworthy of man, even though the intention is to protect or promote the welfare of an individual, of a family or of society in general. Consequently, it is a serious error to think that a whole married life of otherwise normal relations can justify sexual intercourse which is deliberately contraceptive and so intrinsically wrong.

Lawful Therapeutic Means

15. On the other hand, the Church does not consider at all illicit the use of those therapeutic means necessary to cure bodily diseases, even if a foreseeable impediment to procreation should result there from—provided such impediment is not directly intended for any motive whatsoever. \19\

Recourse to Infertile Periods

16. Now as We noted earlier (no. 3), some people today raise the objection against this particular doctrine of the Church concerning the moral laws governing marriage, that human intelligence has both the right and responsibility to control those forces of irrational nature which come within its ambit and to direct them toward ends beneficial to man. Others ask on the same point whether it is not reasonable in so many cases to use artificial birth control if by so doing the harmony and peace of a family are better served and more suitable conditions are provided for the education of children already born. To this question We must give a clear reply. The Church is the first to praise and commend the application of human intelligence to an activity in which a rational creature such as man is so closely associated with his Creator. But she affirms that this must be done within the limits of the order of reality established by God.

If therefore there are well-grounded reasons for spacing births, arising from the physical or psychological condition of husband or wife, or from external circumstances, the Church teaches that married people may then take advantage of the natural cycles immanent in the reproductive system and engage in marital intercourse only during those times that are infertile, thus controlling birth in a way which does not in the least offend the moral principles which We have just explained. \20\

Neither the Church nor her doctrine is inconsistent when she considers it lawful for married people to take advantage of the infertile period but condemns as always unlawful the use of means which directly prevent conception, even when the reasons given for the later practice may appear to be upright and serious. In reality, these two cases are completely different. In the former the married couple rightly use a faculty provided them by nature. In the later they obstruct the natural development of the generative process. It cannot be denied that in each case the married couple, for acceptable reasons, are both perfectly clear in their intention to avoid children and wish to make sure that none will result. But it is equally true that it is exclusively in the former case that husband and wife are ready to abstain from intercourse during the fertile period as often as for reasonable motives the birth of another child is not desirable. And when the infertile period recurs, they use their married intimacy to express their mutual love and safeguard their fidelity toward one another. In doing this they certainly give proof of a true and authentic love.

Consequences of Artificial Methods

17. Responsible men can become more deeply convinced of the truth of the doctrine laid down by the Church on this issue if they reflect on the consequences of methods and plans for artificial birth control. Let them first consider how easily this course of action could open wide the way for marital infidelity and a general lowering of moral standards. Not much experience is needed to be fully aware of human weakness and to understand that human beings—and especially the young, who are so exposed to temptation—need incentives to keep the moral law, and it is an evil thing to make it easy for them to break that law. Another effect that gives cause for alarm is that a man who grows accustomed to the use of contraceptive methods may forget the reverence due to a woman, and, disregarding her physical and emotional equilibrium, reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires, no longer considering her as his partner whom he should surround with care and affection.

Finally, careful consideration should be given to the danger of this power passing into the hands of those public authorities who care little for the precepts of the moral law. Who will blame a government which in its attempt to resolve the problems affecting an entire country resorts to the same measures as are regarded as lawful by married people in the solution of a particular family difficulty? Who will prevent public authorities from favoring those contraceptive methods which they consider more effective? Should they regard this as necessary, they may even impose their use on everyone. It could well happen, therefore, that when people, either individually or in family or social life, experience the inherent difficulties of the divine law and are determined to avoid them, they may give into the hands of public authorities the power to intervene in the most personal and intimate responsibility of husband and wife.

Limits to Man's Power

Consequently, unless we are willing that the responsibility of procreating life should be left to the arbitrary decision of men, we must accept that there are certain limits, beyond which it is wrong to go, to the power of man over his own body and its natural functions—limits, let it be said, which no one, whether as a private individual or as a public authority, can lawfully exceed. These limits are expressly imposed because of the reverence due to the whole human organism and its natural functions, in the light of the principles We stated earlier, and in accordance with a correct understanding of the "principle of totality" enunciated by Our predecessor Pope Pius XII. \21\

Concern of the Church

18. It is to be anticipated that perhaps not everyone will easily accept this particular teaching. There is too much clamorous outcry against the voice of the Church, and this is intensified by modern means of communication. But it comes as no surprise to the Church that she, no less than her divine Founder, is destined to be a "sign of contradiction." \22\ She does not, because of this, evade the duty imposed on her of proclaiming humbly but firmly the entire moral law, both natural and evangelical.

Since the Church did not make either of these laws, she cannot be their arbiter—only their guardian and interpreter. It could never be right for her to declare lawful what is in fact unlawful, since that, by its very nature, is always opposed to the true good of man.

In preserving intact the whole moral law of marriage, the Church is convinced that she is contributing to the creation of a truly human civilization. She urges man not to betray his personal responsibilities by putting all his faith in technical expedients. In this way she defends the dignity of husband and wife. This course of action shows that the Church, loyal to the example and teaching of the divine Savior, is sincere and unselfish in her regard for men whom she strives to help even now during this earthly pilgrimage "to share God's life as sons of the living God, the Father of all men." \23\

Pastoral Directives

19. Our words would not be an adequate expression of the thought and solicitude of the Church, Mother and Teacher of all peoples, if, after having recalled men to the observance and respect of the divine law regarding matrimony, they did not also support mankind in the honest regulation of birth amid the difficult conditions which today afflict families and peoples. The Church, in fact, cannot act differently toward men than did the Redeemer. She knows their weaknesses, she has compassion on the multitude, she welcomes sinners. But at the same time she cannot do otherwise than teach the law. For it is in fact the law of human life restored to its native truth and guided by the Spirit of God. \24\ Observing the Divine Law.

20. The teaching of the Church regarding the proper regulation of birth is a promulgation of the law of God Himself. And yet there is no doubt that to many it will appear not merely difficult but even impossible to observe. Now it is true that like all good things which are outstanding for their nobility and for the benefits which they confer on men, so this law demands from individual men and women, from families and from human society, a resolute purpose and great endurance. Indeed it cannot be observed unless God comes to their help with the grace by which the goodwill of men is sustained and strengthened. But to those who consider this matter diligently it will indeed be evident that this endurance enhances man's dignity and confers benefits on human society.

Value of Self-Discipline

21. The right and lawful ordering of birth demands, first of all, that spouses fully recognize and value the true blessings of family life and that they acquire complete mastery over themselves and their emotions. For if with the aid of reason and of free will they are to control their natural drives, there can be no doubt at all of the need for self-denial. Only then will the expression of love, essential to married life, conform to right order. This is especially clear in the practice of periodic continence. Self-discipline of this kind is a shining witness to the chastity of husband and wife and, far from being a hindrance to their love of one another, transforms it by giving it a more truly human character. And if this self-discipline does demand that they persevere in their purpose and efforts, it has at the same time the salutary effect of enabling husband and wife to develop to their personalities and to be enriched with spiritual blessings. For it brings to family life abundant fruits of tranquility and peace. It helps in solving difficulties of other kinds. It fosters in husband and wife thoughtfulness and loving consideration for one another. It helps them to repel inordinate self-love, which is the opposite of charity. It arouses in them a consciousness of their responsibilities. And finally, it confers upon parents a deeper and more effective influence in the education of their children. As their children grow up, they develop a right sense of values and achieve a serene and harmonious use of their mental and physical powers.

Promotion of Chastity

22. We take this opportunity to address those who are engaged in education and all those whose right and duty it is to provide for the common good of human society. We would call their attention to the need to create an atmosphere favorable to the growth of chastity so that true liberty may prevail over license and the norms of the moral law may be fully safeguarded.

Everything therefore in the modern means of social communication which arouses men's baser passions and encourages low moral standards, as well as every obscenity in the written word and every form of indecency on the stage and screen, should be condemned publicly and unanimously by all those who have at heart the advance of civilization and the safeguarding of the outstanding values of the human spirit. It is quite absurd to defend this kind of depravity in the name of art or culture \25\ or by pleading the liberty which may be allowed in this field by the public authorities.

Appeal to Public Authorities

23. And now We wish to speak to rulers of nations. To you most of all is committed the responsibility of safeguarding the common good. You can contribute so much to the preservation of morals. We beg of you, never allow the morals of your peoples to be undermined. The family is the primary unit in the state; do not tolerate any legislation which would introduce into the family those practices which are opposed to the natural law of God. For there are other ways by which a government can and should solve the population problem—that is to say by enacting laws which will assist families and by educating the people wisely so that the moral law and the freedom of the citizens are both safeguarded.

Seeking True Solutions

We are fully aware of the difficulties confronting the public authorities in this matter, especially in the developing countries. In fact, We had in mind the justifiable anxieties which weigh upon them when We published Our encyclical letter Populorum Progressio. But now We join Our voice to that of Our predecessor John XXIII of venerable memory, and We make Our own his words: "No statement of the problem and no solution to it is acceptable which does violence to man's essential dignity; those who propose such solutions base them on an utterly materialistic conception of man himself and his life. The only possible solution to this question is one which envisages the social and economic progress both of individuals and of the whole of human society, and which respects and promotes true human values." \26\ No one can, without being grossly unfair, make divine Providence responsible for what clearly seems to be the result of misguided governmental policies, of an insufficient sense of social justice, of a selfish accumulation of material goods, and finally of a culpable failure to undertake those initiatives and responsibilities which would raise the standard of living of peoples and their children. \27\ If only all governments which were able would do what some are already doing so nobly, and bestir themselves to renew their efforts and their undertakings! There must be no relaxation in the programs of mutual aid between all the branches of the great human family. Here We believe an almost limitless field lies open for the activities of the great international institutions.

To Scientists

24. Our next appeal is to men of science. These can "considerably advance the welfare of marriage and the family and also peace of conscience, if by pooling their efforts they strive to elucidate more thoroughly the conditions favorable to a proper regulation of births." \28\ It is supremely desirable, and this was also the mind of Pius XII, that medical science should by the study of natural rhythms succeed in determining a sufficiently secure basis for the chaste limitation of offspring. \29\ In this way scientists, especially those who are Catholics, will by their research establish the truth of the Church's claim that "there can be no contradiction between two divine laws—that which governs the transmitting of life and that which governs the fostering of married love." \30\

To Christian Couples

25. And now We turn in a special way to Our own sons and daughters, to those most of all whom God calls to serve Him in the state of marriage. While the Church does indeed hand on to her children the inviolable conditions laid down by God's law, she is also the herald of salvation and through the sacraments she flings wide open the channels of grace through which man is made a new creature responding in charity and true freedom to the design of his Creator and Savior, experiencing too the sweetness of the yoke of Christ. \31\

In humble obedience then to her voice, let Christian husbands and wives be mindful of their vocation to the Christian life, a vocation which, deriving from their Baptism, has been confirmed anew and made more explicit by the Sacrament of Matrimony. For by this sacrament they are strengthened and, one might almost say, consecrated to the faithful fulfillment of their duties. Thus will they realize to the full their calling and bear witness as becomes them, to Christ before the world. \32\ For the Lord has entrusted to them the task of making visible to men and women the holiness and joy of the law which united inseparably their love for one another and the cooperation they give to God's love, God who is the Author of human life.

We have no wish at all to pass over in silence the difficulties, at times very great, which beset the lives of Christian married couples. For them, as indeed for every one of us, "the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life." \33\ Nevertheless it is precisely the hope of that life which, like a brightly burning torch, lights up their journey, as, strong in spirit, they strive to live "sober, upright and godly lives in this world," \34\ knowing for sure that "the form of this world is passing away." \35\

Recourse to God

For this reason husbands and wives should take up the burden appointed to them, willingly, in the strength of faith and of that hope which "does not disappoint us, because God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us." \36\ Then let them implore the help of God with unremitting prayer and, most of all, let them draw grace and charity from that unfailing fount which is the Eucharist. If, however, sin still exercises its hold over them, they are not to lose heart. Rather must they, humble and persevering, have recourse to the mercy of God, abundantly bestowed in the Sacrament of Penance. In this way, for sure, they will be able to reach that perfection of married life which the Apostle sets out in these words: "Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the Church. . . Even so husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. For no man ever hates his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, as Christ does the Church. . . This is a great mystery, and I mean in reference to Christ and the Church; however, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband." \37\

Family Apostolate

26. Among the fruits that ripen if the law of God be resolutely obeyed, the most precious is certainly this, that married couples themselves will often desire to communicate their own experience to others. Thus it comes about that in the fullness of the lay vocation will be included a novel and outstanding form of the apostolate by which, like ministering to like, married couples themselves by the leadership they offer will become apostles to other married couples. And surely among all the forms of the Christian apostolate it is hard to think of one more opportune for the present time. \38\

To Doctors and Nurses

27. Likewise we hold in the highest esteem those doctors and members of the nursing profession who, in the exercise of their calling, endeavor to fulfill the demands of their Christian vocation before any merely human interest. Let them therefore continue constant in their resolution always to support those lines of action which accord with faith and with right reason. And let them strive to win agreement and support for these policies among their professional colleagues. Moreover, they should regard it as an essential part of their skill to make themselves fully proficient in this difficult field of medical knowledge. For then, when married couples ask for their advice, they may be in a position to give them right counsel and to point them in the proper direction. Married couples have a right to expect this much from them.

To Priests

28. And now, beloved sons, you who are priests, you who in virtue of your sacred office act as counselors and spiritual leaders both of individual men and women and of families—We turn to you filled with great confidence. For it is your principal duty—We are speaking especially to you who teach moral theology—to spell out clearly and completely the Church's teaching on marriage. In the performance of your ministry you must be the first to give an example of that sincere obedience, inward as well as outward, which is due to the magisterium of the Church. For, as you know, the pastors of the Church enjoy a special light of the Holy Spirit in teaching the truth. \39\ And this, rather than the arguments they put forward, is why you are bound to such obedience. Nor will it escape you that if men's peace of soul and the unity of the Christian people are to be preserved, then it is of the utmost importance that in moral as well as in dogmatic theology all should obey the magisterium of the Church and should speak as with one voice. Therefore We make Our own the anxious words of the great Apostle Paul and with all Our heart We renew Our appeal to you: "I appeal to you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no dissensions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment." \40\

Christian Compassion

29. Now it is an outstanding manifestation of charity toward souls to omit nothing from the saving doctrine of Christ; but this must always be joined with tolerance and charity, as Christ Himself showed in His conversations and dealings with men. For when He came, not to judge, but to save the world, \41\ was He not bitterly severe toward sin, but patient and abounding in mercy toward sinners?

Husbands and wives, therefore, when deeply distressed by reason of the difficulties of their life, must find stamped in the heart and voice of their priest the likeness of the voice and the love of our Redeemer.

So speak with full confidence, beloved sons, convinced that while the Holy Spirit of God is present to the magisterium proclaiming sound doctrine, He also illumines from within the hearts of the faithful and invites their assent. Teach married couples the necessary way of prayer and prepare them to approach more often with great faith the Sacraments of the Eucharist and of Penance. Let them never lose heart because of their weakness.

To Bishops

30. And now as We come to the end of this encyclical letter, We turn Our mind to you, reverently and lovingly, beloved and venerable brothers in the episcopate, with whom We share more closely the care of the spiritual good of the People of God. For We invite all of you, We implore you, to give a lead to your priests who assist you in the sacred ministry, and to the faithful of your dioceses, and to devote yourselves with all zeal and without delay to safeguarding the holiness of marriage, in order to guide married life to its full human and Christian perfection. Consider this mission as one of your most urgent responsibilities at the present time. As you well know, it calls for concerted pastoral action in every field of human diligence, economic, cultural and social. If simultaneous progress is made in these various fields, then the intimate life of parents and children in the family will be rendered not only more tolerable, but easier and more joyful. And life together in human society will be enriched with fraternal charity and made more stable with true peace when God's design which He conceived for the world is faithfully followed.

A Great Work

31. Venerable brothers, beloved sons, all men of good will, great indeed is the work of education, of progress and of charity to which We now summon all of you. And this We do relying on the unshakable teaching of the Church, which teaching Peter's successor together with his brothers in the Catholic episcopate faithfully guards and interprets. And We are convinced that this truly great work will bring blessings both on the world and on the Church. For man cannot attain that true happiness for which he yearns with all the strength of his spirit, unless he keeps the laws which the Most High God has engraved in his very nature. These laws must be wisely and lovingly observed. On this great work, on all of you and especially on married couples, We implore from the God of all holiness and pity an abundance of heavenly grace as a pledge of which We gladly bestow Our apostolic blessing.

Given at St. Peter's, Rome, on the 25th day of July, the feast of St. James the Apostle, in the year 1968, the sixth of Our pontificate.



\1\ See Pius IX, encyc. letter Oui pluribus: Pii IX P.M. Acta, 1, pp. 9-10;
St. Pius X encyc. letter Singulari quadam: AAS 4 (1912), 658;
Pius XI, encyc.letter Casti Connubii: AAS 22 (1930), 579-581;
Pius XII, address Magnificate Dominum to the episcopate of the Catholic World: AAS 46 (1954), 671-672;
John XXIII, encyc. letter Mater et Magistra: AAS 53 (1961), 457.

\2\ See Matthew 28:18-19.

\3\ See Matthew 7:21

\4\ See Council of Trent Roman Catechism, Part II, ch. 8;
Leo XIII, encyc.letter Arcanum: Acta Leonis XIII, 2 (1880), 26-29;
Pius XI, encyc.letter Divini illius Magistri: AAS 22 (1930), 58-61;
Pius XI, encyc. letter Casti Connubii: AAS 22 (1930), 545-546;
Pius XII, Address to Italian Medico-Biological Union of St. Luke: Discorsi e radiomessaggi di Pio XII, VI, 191-192;
Pius XII, Address to Italian Association of Catholic Midwives: AAS 43 (1951), 835-854;
Pius XII, Address to the association known as the Family Campaign, and other family associations: AAS 43 (1951), 857-859;
Pius XII, Address to 7th congress of International Society of Hematology: AAS 50 (1958), 734-735 [TPS VI, 394-395];
John XXIII, encyc.letter Mater et Magistra: AAS 53 (1961), 446-447 [TPS VII, 330-331];
Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the World of Today, nos. 47-52: AAS 58 (1966), 1067-1074 [TPS XI, 289-295]; Code of Canon Law, canons 1067, 1068 §1, canon 1076, §§1-2.

\5\ See Paul VI, Address to Sacred College of Cardinals: AAS 56 (1964), 588 [TPS IX, 355-356];
Paul VI, Address to Commission for the Study of Problems of Population, Family and Birth: AAS 57 (1965), 388 [TPS X, 225];
Paul VI, Address to National Congress of the Italian Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology: AAS 58 (1966), 1168 [TPS XI, 401-403].

\6\ See 1 John 4:8.

\7\ See Ephesians 3:15.

\8\ See Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the World of Today, no. 50: AAS 58 (1966), 1070-1072 [TPS XI, 292-293].

\9\ See St. Thomas, Summa Theologiae, I-II, q. 94, art. 2.

\10\ See Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the World of Today, nos . 50- 5 1: AAS 58 ( 1 966) 1070-1073 [TPS XI, 292-293].

\11\ See ibid., no. 49: AAS 58 (1966), 1070 [TPS XI, 291-292].

\12\ See Pius XI. encyc. letter Casti connubi: AAS 22 (1930), 560;
Pius XII, Address to Midwives: AAS 43 (1951), 843.

\13\ See John XXIII, encyc.letter Mater et Magistra: AAS 53 (1961), 447 [TPS VII, 331].

\14\ See Council of Trent Roman Catechism, Part II, ch. 8;
Pius XI, encyc. letter Casti Connubii: AAS 22 (1930), 562-564;
Pius XII, Address to Medico-Biological Union of St. Luke: Discorsi e radiomessaggi, VI, 191-192; Address to Midwives: AAS 43 (1951), 842-843;
Pius XII, Address to Family Campaign and other family associations: AAS 43 (1951), 857-859;
John XXIII, encyc. letter Pacem in terris: AAS 55 (1963), 259-260 [TPS IX, 15-16];
Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the World of Today, no. 51: AAS 58 (1966), 1072 [TPS XI, 293].

\15\ See Pius XI, encyc. letter Casti Connubii: AAS 22 (1930), 565;
Decree of the Holy Office, Feb. 22, 1940: AAS 32 (1940), 73;
Pius XII, Address to Midwives: AAS 43 (1951), 843-844; to the Society of Hematology: AAS 50 (1958), 734-735 [TPS VI, 394-395].

\16\ See Council of Trent Roman Catechism, Part II, ch. 8;
Pius XI, encyc. letter Casti Connubii: AAS 22 (1930), 559-561;
Pius XII, Address to Midwives: AAS 43 (1951), 843; to the Society of Hematology: AAS 50 (1958), 734-735 [TPS VI, 394-395];
John XXIII, encyc.letter Mater et Magistra: AAS 53 (1961), 447 [TPS VII, 331].

\17\ See Pius XII, Address to National Congress of Italian Society of the Union of Catholic Jurists: AAS 45 (1953), 798-799 [TPS I, 67-69].

\18\ See Romans 4:8.

\19\ See Pius XII, Address to 26th Congress of Italian Association of Urology: AAS 45 (1953), 674-675; to Society of Hematology: AAS 50 (1958), 734-735 [TPS VI, 394-395].

\20\ See Pius XII, Address to Midwives: AAS 43 (1951), 846.

\21\ See Pius XII, Address to Association of Urology: AAS 45 (1953), 674-675;
Pius XII, Address to leaders and members of Italian Association of Cornea Donors and Italian Association for the Blind: AAS 48 (1956), 461-462 [TPS III, 200-201].

\22\ See Luke 2:34.

\23\ See Paul Vl, encyc. letter Populorum progressio: AAS 59 (1967), 268 [TPS XII, 151].

\24\ See Romans 8.

\25\ See Second Vatican Council, Decree on the Media of Social Communication, nos. 6-7: AAS 56 (1964), 147 [TPS IX, 340-341].

\26\ See John XXIII, encyc. letter Mater et Magistra: AAS 53 (1961), 447 [TPS VII, 331].

\27\ See Paul Vl, encyc. letter Populorum progressio, nos. 48-55: AAS 59 (1967), 281-284 [TPS XII, 160-162].

\28\ See Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the World of Today, no. 52: AAS 58 (1966), 1074 [TPS XI, 294].

\29\ See Address to Family Campaign and other family associations: AAS 43 (1951), 859.

\30\ See Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the World of Today, no. 51: AAS 58 (1966), 1072 [TPS XI, 293].

\31\ See Matthew 11:30.

\32\ See Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the World of Today, no. 48: AAS 58 (1966), 1067-1069 [TPS XI,290-291];
Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, no. 35: AAS 57 (1965), 40-41 [TPS X, 382-383].

\33\ See Matthew 7:14; Hebrews 12:11.

\34\ See Titus 2:12.

\35\ See 1 Corinthians 7:31.

\36\ See Romans 5:5.

\37\ See Ephesians 5:25,28-29,32-33.

\38\ See Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, nos. 35, 41: AAS 57 (1965), 40-45 [TPS X, 382-383, 386-387;
Second Vatican Council, Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the World of Today, nos. 48-49: AAS 58 (1966),1067-1070 [TPS XI, 290-292];
Second Vatican Council, Decree on the Apostolate of the Laity, no. 11: AAS 58 (1966), 847-849 [TPS XI, 128-129].

\39\ See Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, no. 25: AAS 57 (1965), 29-31 [TPS X, 375-376].

\40\ See 1 Corinthians 1:10.

\41\ See See John 3:17.