I certainly haven't read every Encyclical ever written, but those that I do read I don't read as a thing isolated and different from what has been taught before. It was my impression that Encyclical addressed a specific question having to do with the epoch. I don't have it before me right now, but doesn't it have a preface that sets the encyclical in context?
That context renders Sinkspur's criticism, imo, invalid. The Pope was soliciting opinions from everyone - is that unCatholic? - prior to his rendering a decision about a raging controversy. It makes sense to me the Pope wanted to survey just how many (Bishops included)disagreed with the Ordinary Magisterium about that specific Teaching.
I don't think it rational to expect each Encyclical to be structured the same, nor make exhaustive references to Scripture, prior teaching etc. I assume the Pope assumed we KNEW all that and he was addressing a specfic controversy sitetest
Actually, you'll note that I'm loathe to directly criticize Humanae Vitae, itself. I've pointed out that I needed more to be brought to docile acceptance of the teaching.
But I agree with you that it isn't a just criticism that an encyclical doesn't recapitulate the entire historical treatment of an issue within itself. Otherwise, every encyclical on a subject would have to be longer than the teaching document before it, until no one would be able to read any of them. ;-)
I'll confess, I finally accepted this teaching some years ago, and haven't re-read Humanae Vitae since, so my memory's a little vague. But I just don't remember being pointed to Sacred Tradition, to the historical context of this teaching by Humanae Vitae. It may be in there, but I'm kind of slow and thick-headed, and I wish there had been language strewn throughout like this, "This encyclical isn't exhaustive of this subject - YOU WILL NOT GET IT IF YOU DON'T READ CAREFULLY X Y AND Z."
I really believe that Pope Paul VI meant for large numbers of laypeople to read the document. I remember copies of the encyclical being available in the vestibules of the churches when I was younger. It would have been good to have provided a little more explicit instruction to non-theologians like me pointing me in the right direction. It would have been good if Pope Paul VI had suggested that pastors who made copies of the encyclical available to their parishioners accompany these copies with copies of the Didache, of Casti Connubii, etc. This is especially true considering that Pope Paul VI could have easily foreseen that many theologians and pastors might oppose his encyclical (heck, most of his commission opposed it), and that the laypeople might need more of his direct instruction than usual.
I read the articles beginning this thread. It's actually the second time I read them. I forgot where I first read them. If what you're saying is that the content of their criticisms is over the top, and ultimately, that they fail, I agree. I think that the more extreme arguments fail utterly. One reason is that I think that ultimately, Humanae Vitae is going to succeed. I said as much in my first post.
But I don't think that all criticism of the encyclical is unwarranted. And I don't think that the act of offering such criticism is unCatholic, or "protestant". Even if the criticism is ultimately judged wrong, it isn't wrong to offer it in good faith.
sitetest