ACI Prensa Staff, Jul 25, 2024 / 18:30 pm (CNA).
On July 25, 1968, St. Paul VI published Humanae Vitae, an encyclical on the regulation of birth and the dangers involved in the use of artificial contraceptive methods and their imposition as state policy. At the time the encyclical was rejected by many even within the Catholic Church.
The document, published at the beginning of the sexual revolution, continues to draw mixed reactions, which is why it’s necessary to take a closer look at five key points that allow us to better understand the encyclical, the context in which it was written, its prophetic message, and its validity even today.
1. It is ordinary, definitive, and irreformable magisterial teaching.
Various priests, theologians, and laypeople frequently claim the encyclical only belongs to the ordinary magisterium of a pope and that as such, its content could change with another pope who comes later. However, Humane Vitae has been reaffirmed by the pontiffs who succeeded Paul VI.
St. John Paul II went so far as to affirm that “what is taught by the Church on contraception does not belong to a matter freely disputable between theologians. Teaching the opposite is equivalent to misleading the moral conscience of the spouses.”
Furthermore, the Polish pope maintained that the Catholic doctrine on contraception belongs to the moral doctrine of the Church and that this has been proposed “with uninterrupted continuity” because it is “a truth that cannot be disputed.”
Therefore, the doctrine of an encyclical belongs to the ordinary magisterium, however, if it is exercised continuously and definitively, it is irreformable, even if it is not infallible.
2. Humanae Vitae is a prophetic encyclical.
Various notable Catholics have characterized the encyclical as “prophetic and still pertinent.”
In 1968, the discussion about the negative impact of artificial contraceptives was just in its infancy; however, the document not only meant a concrete response to the debate surrounding sexual ethics, “but it meant at the time, and still means, a refusal of the Church, clear and explicit, to bow to the proposals and demands of the sexual revolution,” as explained by the Spanish Bishops’ Conference.
In 2018, the late archbishop of Warsaw, Henryk Hoser, noted that the voice of St. Paul VI in Humanae Vitae has been shown to be prophetic about contraceptives, as he “predicted that their application would open the easy way to marital infidelity and the general decrease in births.”
Furthermore, the archbishop stressed that the encyclical is always relevant because conjugal love, “physical or spiritual, must combine these two dimensions” and that it must always be a love “free of selfishness.”
Similarly, Spanish priest Javier “Patxi” Bronchalo stated in 2022 that the document warned at the time about the increase in marital infidelity, moral degradation, the general loss of dignity of women, and ideological colonization through government policies.
3. The encyclical underwent significant changes before being published.
According to research by an Italian scholar at the Vatican Apostolic Archive, Humanae Vitae should have been originally published on May 23, 1968, but then St. Paul VI decided to publish it on July 25.
This measure was taken by the pope, despite the fact that the document was already printed in Latin under the title De Nascendae Prolis (Of Children to Be Born), because he considered that it was very dense in doctrine and that it was not pastorally adequate.
After some changes to the original document, Paul VI “took the entire pastoral section and added a series of very sensitive points that still reveal his imprint today.”
4. St. Paul VI consulted the bishops before publishing the encyclical.
Some accuse St. Paul VI of having published the encyclical Humanae Vitae without consulting the bishops. However, the Italian scholar’s research reveals the opposite. During the 1967 Synod of Bishops, the pope asked all prelates to share with him their position on the issue.
Of the almost 200 bishops participating in the synod, only 26 responded in the period from Oct. 9, 1967, to May 31, 1968. Of this group, 19 expressed themselves in favor of contraceptives and only seven against them.
Of these seven, the best known and most important were the venerable Archbishop Fulton Sheen and the then-archbishop of Krakow, Poland, Karol Wojtyla, who would become St. John Paul II, who always wanted to be remembered as “the pope of the family,” as Pope Francis stated during the canonization of the Polish pope in 2014.
The then-secretary of state, Cardinal Agostino Casaroli, said that “on the morning of July 25, 1968, Paul VI celebrated the Mass of the Holy Spirit, asked for light from on high and signed: He signed his most difficult signature, one of his most glorious signatures. He signed his own passion.”
5. Humanae Vitae promotes rational thinking about sexuality.
According to the Jesuit Bertrand de Margerie, being rational about sex does not evoke an indiscriminate and complete autonomy of the intimate life of the couple nor the use of artificial means to control births but rather the exercise of the virtue of chastity.
“The acquired virtue of chastity penetrates with reasonableness the exercise of sexual life when the latter is legitimate,” the Jesuit priest wrote, citing St. Thomas Aquinas in the Summa Theologica.
“By encouraging periodic continence and the regulation of births without artificial control, Paul VI rightly exalts a humble and complete rationalization of the sexual sphere subjected to the knowledge of human reason and to the control of freedom helped by grace,” the priest pointed out.
“He does not appeal to instincts,” the Jesuit explained, “which are common to men and to other animals and which are deprived of reason, but he appeals to man’s freedom, through which man resembles pure spirits such as angels are.”
This story was first published by ACI Prensa, CNA’s Spanish-language news partner. It has been translated and adapted by CNA.
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
Yes a prophetic document and sadly he didn’t have the backbone to the likes of bugini and other masons who stripped the Mass of so many powerful prayers and beauty!
The unspoken assumption underlying your post is the belief that the Traditional Latin Mass is superior in efficacy to the Novus Ordo Mass. Mark Mallet brings up some points that counter your assumption. He Writes:
[begin quote] Many repeat the mantra that, if we just return to the Tridentine Mass, it would resolve our problems. However, they either forget or are unaware that it was precisely at the height of the Latin Mass’s glory—when churches were full and pomp and piety were on full display—that Pope St. Pius X stated:
Who can fail to see that society is at the present time, more than in any past age, suffering from a terrible and deep-rooted malady which, developing every day and eating into its inmost being, is dragging it to destruction? You understand, Venerable Brethren, what this disease is—apostasy from God… When all this is considered there is good reason to fear lest this great perversity may be as it were a foretaste, and perhaps the beginning of those evils which are reserved for the last days; and that there may be already in the world the “Son of Perdition” of whom the Apostle speaks. [Pope St. Pius X, Encyclical “On the Restoration of All Things in Christ (E Supremi), (Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1903), nos. 3, 5.]
In fact, six years prior, Pope Leo XIII warned:
…he who resists the truth through malice and turns away from it, sins most grievously against the Holy Ghost. In our days this sin has become so frequent that those dark times seem to have come which were foretold by St. Paul, in which men, blinded by the just judgment of God, should take falsehood for truth, and should believe in “the prince of this world,” who is a liar and the father thereof, as a teacher of truth: “God shall send them the operation of error, to believe lying (2 Thess. ii., 10). In the last times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to spirits of error and the doctrines of devils” (1 Tim. iv., 1). [Pope Leo XIII, Encyclical “On the Holy Spirit (Divinum Illud Munus),” given in his general audience on May 9, 1897 (Vatican City: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1897), n. 10.]
Clearly, the popes saw something brewing beneath the facade of popular piety. Indeed, when the sexual revolution arrived in full bloom, it quickly swept away many Catholics, laity and clergy alike, who gave “heed to spirits of error and the doctrines of devils.” Ad orientem, communion rails, veils, and Latin were not enough to stop the apostasy from spreading within the Church’s ranks. It’s precisely why Pope St. John XXIII convoked the Second Vatican Council in order that the Holy Spirit would guide the Church anew and prepare her to be ushered into an Era of Peace after the coming days of tribulation.[end quote]
I think it is more than coincidental that the Traditional Latin Mass (in any meaningful sense) did not impede the unfolding of Satan’s 100-120-year plan to destroy the Church. Satan’s first step toward accomplishing that goal began with Margaret Sanger’s birth control efforts circa the 1890s. Birth control facilitated consequent-free sexual perversion.
In deference to one of my children, I watched a video that claimed the smoke of Satan entered the Church through the Second Vatican Council and the Novus Ordo Mass. This was entirely deceptive. They supported their contention by piecing together two completely separate and out-of-context quotes to make it seem like their contention was true. In more than one of my articles, I have shown that it was actually the Church’s overwhelming rejection (by both the Episcopate and the laity) of Humanae Vitae that led to the smoke entering the Church. Pope Paul VI’s 1972 letter (largely uncirculated until 2018) makes that abundantly clear.
What percentage of Catholics in active communion with the Church reject Humanae vitae? What percentage of Catholics in active communion with the Church support an individual’s “right” to choose to have an abortion? What percentage of Catholics in communion with the Church are divorced and remarried outside the Church i.e. without an annulment of their first marriage? What percentage of Catholics in communion with the Church are not living in the same household as their minor-aged children?
What is asked for is great maturity and holiness which, unfortunately, is only gained later in life after much chastening and tribulation. We grow to soon old, and to late smart. We as a Church have not done our job teaching the faith both in the home and the Church.
Big families are very hard to sustain in our fast paced, ever changing competitive society where higher levels of education are imperative. Most households cannot survive unless both parents are fully employed. A stay at home mom is a luxury.
We have not provided an environment where these ideal households can exist. Perhaps we should consider banning together in more communal living. Big families supporting each other, sharing the same values and resources. Living as neighbors who are always there for each other.
I think that the Church expects too much and provides too little. I welcome constructive dialogue on this issue.
Satan will always provide us with plenty of “worldly” reasons why we should disobey God’s laws. We live in a society that has become independent individuals who have lost the ability to trust in God. As he tells us in Scripture, the birds don’t sow and yet God provides for their needs. How much more will God provide for his children’s needs, but not necessarily all our “wants.”
My son and daughter-in-law, after having had five children, called me and asked what they should do about having more kids. They were concerned about finances. I reminded them of the biblical passage cited above. They now have eleven children and God has always provided for their needs. Furthermore, every one of their children have been home-schooled.
Stephen Michael, I’m happy to see that you have disabused the contracepting Catholic frequenting these pages with your family anecdote. The truth is, that with each additional child, the cost each child “imposes” on the family resources decreases. Let’s face it, as children age they will learn the art and skills of helping care for the younger ones – skilks essential for their own future parenthood. The more children in the family, the less emphasis is placed on them learning materialistic values and the less chance of their turning out to be narcissists. The more children in the family, the more time the family gets to spend together as ten children couldn’t possibly be shuffled off to soccer, baseball, basketball, hockey and football practices and games – all of which erodes family life. When I was a freshman in high school in preparation for the Franciscan brotherhood, I lived in a large family-style house with 46 other guys of high school age. We slept in bunkbeds in dormitories of different sizes. We had four showers to use among us. We were totally responsible for the upkeep of the house. We played sports among ourselves. We had two large rooms for study halls where 5 nights a week we spent at our desk from 6 pm to 8:30 studying or reading silently. We attended daily Mass, morning prayer and afternoon Rosary. On Saturdays, there were assigned chores. Sundays were a day of celebration, quiet rest and recreation. There was Grand Silence from the time of Night Prayer and bed at 9:30 until after Mass the next morning (imagine 46 teenagers keeping silent for that long today). There were no fights that I can recall although everyone from time to time disagreed. I could go on and on but I think my point is well taken: surely 10 or more children in a well-ordered family is no heavy burden.
What a beautiful experience as a freshman in high school. Does this program still exist? Hope so. We need more alternatives like this to offer to our young people. Catholic high school guidance counselors should offer more alternatives than just college placement. While on this subject, whatever happened to home economics for the girls and shop classes for the boys? If we expect our young married to have large families why don’t we teach the girls to cook and keep house as we once did? And the boys need to know how to use tools if they are going to be heads of a large families and unable to hire carpenters, plumbers, landscapers etc. This is an example of what I mean that the Church has let us down. Her institutional values
Copy those of the world- the necessity of a college degree, high paying job, stereotyped lifestyle etc. etc. We look so much like the world that we are undistinguishable from the world. Few conservative Catholics will have anything to do with the Catholic Worker Movement, but these people are living the Gospel. They are not materialistic and they share and care. They may not talk the talk but they surely walk the walk of the Gospel. More people in the Church could learn from them for they have much to teach. May God bless us all as we strive to live for Him and each other.
James – Having been married for over 50 years and using NFP, let me say I like and agree with your comments. The last two sentences though, I think, could be taken wrong. The Church’s teaching on sexuality isn’t easy, but it must uphold the goal – to protect us. The Church provides the sacrament of confession when we (I have) failed. Yes, the Church could provide more, but I can tell you first hand, when we taught NFP in our parish, protestants and people who wanted to keep objects and chemicals out of their bodies outnumbered Catholics who attended. Yes, constructive dialog, is needed, and people who use NFT should not judge couples who contracept. I understand that contraception can sometimes be the lesser of two evils, but JPII reminded us that it is never … just ok. Through the prayers of the Mother of God, may our Savior save us!
Rick from Oregon
Your premises are false. It is a blessing to learn to not desire luxuries for one’s family. And a two parent working family is a luxury. When you say “the Church” I assume you mean what the Church teaches, of which it has no options. It does not make things up. It can only give the world the witness of what God demands from His Church.
I was a pro-life atheist undergrad when Humanae Vitae was published. I thought it was a great thing and knew it was a victory for the unborn even though the issue was much smaller in that year. But the childish response of widespread rejection by Catholics left an impression that delayed my conversion years later. I remember walking past the office of the Newman Club and students were in tears singing protest folk songs. Moral problems are never the fault of administrative errors by those in power or miscalculations. They are always the fault of how people act in their willful human evilness.
My wife (of over 50 years) and I have practiced Natural Family Planning starting a year after we were married. That was the year she became Catholic. We became credentialed NFP teachers with the Billing’s and Sympto-Thermal methods.
I know of what I speak – first hand. It’s not just an opinion.
#1: NFP, while not easy, is effective and well worth the effort.
#2: Andrés, thank you for your well written and informative article!
May your articles continue to help us live in His word, and continue to give Glory to Jesus Christ – Forever!
Rick from Oregon
And then there’s the early and opening wedge at the Anglican Lambeth Conference of 1930 where the vote was 193 for contraception and 67 against. Very synodal, that. Of which, later in 1948, the defeated minority still TOLD IT LIKE IT IS:
“It is, to say the least, suspicious that the age in which contraception has won its way is not one which has been conspicuously successful in managing its sexual life. Is it possible that, by claiming the right to manipulate his physical processes in this manner, man may, without knowing it, be stepping over the boundary between the world of Christian marriage and what one might call the world of Aphrodite, the world of sterile eroticism?” (Cited in Wright, “Reflections on the Third Anniversary of a Controverted Encyclical,” St. Louis: Central Bureau Press, 1971).
Connect the dots: contraceptive culture, the abortion backstop, the “sterile eroticism” of gay marriage, LGBTQ tribal religion, and transgender/gender theory with 57 variants (not unlike COVID “variants”!) and even a political party with a straight face (the only thing straight!) that can no longer tell us what a “woman” is.