Posted on 07/27/2017 2:10:29 PM PDT by ebb tide
Four theologians specialising in marriage and family life are studying Vatican archival material with a view of telling the whole story of how and why Blessed Paul VI wrote his encyclical Humanae Vitae on married love.
Mgr Gilfredo Marengo, leader of the group and a professor of theological anthropology at Rome’s Pontifical John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family, spoke to Vatican Radio about the study on July 25, the 49th anniversary of the encyclical’s publication.
Some bloggers, writing in the spring about the study group, described it as an initiative of Pope Francis to change the encyclical’s teaching against the use of artificial contraception.
Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, chancellor of the John Paul II Institute, categorically denied the bloggers’ reports.
In reply to an email, Mgr Marengo told Catholic News Service that the study “is a work of historical-critical investigation without any aim other than reconstructing as well as possible the whole process of composing the encyclical”.
“Anyone who imagined any other aim should have simply done their work and verified their sources,” he said.
In view of the 50th anniversary, Mgr Marengo told Vatican Radio, he and three other Italian professors are conducting their research with the goal of showing the encyclical’s place among “all of the very important and fruitful things the Church has said on marriage and family in the past 50 years”.
Also, he said, from a historical point of view, it is important that theologians formally examine and document the process that led to the encyclical’s publication. What Mgr Marengo called “the distinct phases” of the encyclical’s development included the work of a small committee appointed by St John XXIII in 1963 and expanded greatly by Pope Paul. The commission’s work ended in 1966 with the leaking of a report by the majority of commission members asserting artificial contraception was not intrinsically evil and minority reports insisting it was.
In the end, Mgr Marengo said, the commission “was not able to give him [Pope Paul] what he needed to write the encyclical. Therefore, Paul VI almost had to start over alone,” but with the added complication of public opinion, including among theologians, “polarised between those favourable and those contrary” to the use of the contraceptive pill.
The encyclical itself was criticised by many – and not just by those who advocated for acceptance of artificial contraception, the priest said. “It is important to remember that in those years many still looked at the regulation of births” using natural fertility rhythms “as a ‘benevolent concession’ to couples rather than as a positive value to pursue.”
Procreation, he said, was seen by many as the primary purpose of marriage, so Pope Paul’s insistence in Humanae Vitae that sex within marriage is both procreative and unitive was something new, as was his declaration “without uncertainty that the exercise of responsible parenthood is an objective value for Christian families” when done using natural methods.
Mgr Marengo told CNS that, given “the importance the document has had in the life of the Church of our times and the debates that it unleashed,” he felt it was important to ask the Vatican to set aside rules that prevent scholars from accessing Vatican archival material for 70 years.
“The competent Vatican authorities accepted my request, permitting access particularly to the collections of the Vatican Secret Archives and the archive of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith,” he said.
In the end, Mgr Marengo said, the commission “was not able to give him [Pope Paul] what he needed to write the encyclical. Therefore, Paul VI almost had to start over alone,” but with the added complication of public opinion, including among theologians, “polarised between those favourable and those contrary” to the use of the contraceptive pill.
>>snip<<
Mgr Marengo told CNS that, given “the importance the document has had in the life of the Church of our times and the debates that it unleashed,” he felt it was important to ask the Vatican to set aside rules that prevent scholars from accessing Vatican archival material for 70 years.
Marengo and Francis sound like they're up to no good.
They will be probably be under guard and material monitoring the whole time to make sure they don’t access any other archives not related to this.
They be hiding some very powerful stuff in there...
Humanae Vitae is an example where religious belief coincides with Darwinian law. If nothing else Humanae Vitae stood against the anti fertility advocates who were promoting birth control and abortion. The anti fertility advocates were arguing for personal choice and population control.They promised great improvements in personal happiness and the quality of life. The Church rightly recognized that without a high birth rate the population would stagnate, contract and the culture would erode. Darwinian biologists also predict a weakening and decline in any species which has had procreation for whatever reason impaired. Both the Church and the Darwinian biologists were proven correct. Of course the anti fertility advocates, despite cultural decay, widespread drug use, hedonism and social decline are still adamant and are doubling down on their policies. New arguments such as “climate change”, environmental destruction and the embrace of hopelessness are now being used to dissuade procreation.
Good reply - I agree 100%!
“Anyone who imagined any other aim should have simply done their work and verified their sources,” he said.
Right. It's true. I mean absolutely, true.
However, as we were researching this material, perfectly innocently you understand, we were surprised and maybe even a little astounded to come across this document.....
It really changes the whole story of Humanae Vitae and calls into question.....this important new information....potentially game changing..... blah, blah, blah. You know how it goes.
The first question which anyone with any critical faculties will ask themselves, is why, of all previous papal encyclicals, they are snooping around this one....and during this dreadful pontificate.
We know why they are snooping.
But it does not matter what they find or why Paul VI wrote it.
The theology of it conforms to everything taught by Church magisterially prior.
Snooping in vain
Bergoglio has already undermined Humanae Vitae because Amoris undermines ALL MORAL LAW.
The surest way to know that something is absolutely true: Has it been denied by a cardinal, archbishop, bishop, monsignor, secretary, or janitor in the Vatican? Or by “the Vatican”?
The Alleged Vatican Commission on Humanae Vitae – Nothing to See Here?
#9 ebb tide ~ powerful comment. Well done!
Thanks. I was just quoting Steve Skojec’s comments.
“But it does not matter what they find or why Paul VI wrote it. The theology of it conforms to everything taught by Church magisterially prior.”
It actually doesn’t when it discusses the ends of marriage. What came before Vatican II is different than what Paul VI taught in HV and Vatican II. Which really shouldn’t be a surprise.
http://www.ewtn.com/v/experts/showmessage.asp?number=342823&Pg=&Pgnu=1&recnu=
The idea articulated in HV that couples may never sever the unitive and procreative aspects of the marriage act is a development of doctrine, not a reversal nor a new doctrine. It has roots all the way back to Genesis.
The reality is that Paul VI already moved away from Traditional Catholic teaching in HV. It really isn't all that surprising to see that the Vatican is now looking to take us further down the slippery slope.
Unitive does not contradict procreative, nor jump ahead in position. They both are essential aspects of a marriage act.
As you know, there is a strong argument made that HV is an infallible teaching. We deny that teaching at our peril IMO.
Dear John, Many thanks. I wrote my doctoral dissertation on this subject and so feel confident on the subject. I defended all these papal teachings affirming the primary end of marriage as the procreation and education of children instead of the secondary end, the mutual fulfillment of the spouses. And I historically cited the writings of the Rev. Doms and Krempel who inverted these two ends. This I did in 1961 and 1962. Now, John, of course I still h0ld on to this teaching as being solid and traditi0nal. But no document in the writings of Vatican 11 expresses the superiority of the classic primary end over the secondary end. The statement used is "the essential ends of marriage". So that is the position of the Council. Notice all those papal teachings you cited are prior to that of the Vatican 11. In the Web of Faith we try to reflect what the Church itself holds, as expressly as possible. So what say you? Fr. Bob Levis
It is not coincidental that Fr Levis was ordained prior to Vatican II.
Please. Both ends being essential does not require any primary and secondary designations. It may be that some official document will so articlate procreation as primary again.
But HV does not deal with primary and secondary at all as I recall. It only deals with the inseperability of the 2 ends. To read HV as changing what is primary is over reading that marvelous document. And denying Paul VI’s magnificent courage in putting theologians in their rightful place in formulating doctrine.
Traditional minded Catholics recognize (and care about) rather than poo-poo the obvious shift.
Thank you for link to blog.
I see the connection between contraception and rest.
But the Church is not static. Magisterial teachings develop.
It is our duty to bow our heads to a authentic teachings.
I recognize your good will, but do not agree with your assessment of HV.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.