CASTI CONNUBII
Pope Pius XII
On Christian Marriage
(selections)

 

 

MS-Word.doc full text (Latin & Engl)

Casti Connubii -Encyclical Of Pope Pius XI On Christian Marriage (Dec. 31, 1930)

[…] 7. By matrimony, therefore, the souls of the contracting parties are joined and knit together more directly and more intimately than are their bodies, and that not by any passing affection of sense of spirit, but by a deliberate and firm act of the will; and from this union of souls by God’s decree, a sacred and inviolable bond arises. Hence the nature of this contract, which is proper and peculiar to it alone, makes it entirely different both from the union of animals entered into by the blind instinct of nature alone in which neither reason nor free will plays a part, and also from the haphazard unions of men, which are far removed from all true and honorable unions of will and enjoy none of the rights of family life.

8. From this it is clear that legitimately constituted authority has the right and therefore the duty to restrict, to prevent, and to punish those base unions which are opposed to reason and to nature; but since it is a matter which flows from human nature itself, no less certain is the teaching of Our predecessor, Leo XIII of happy memory:[7] “In choosing a state of life there is no doubt but that it is in the power and discretion of each one to prefer one or the other: either to embrace the counsel of virginity given by Jesus Christ, or to bind himself in the bonds of matrimony. To take away from man the natural and primeval right of marriage, to circumscribe in any way the principal ends of marriage laid down in the beginning by God Himself in the words ‘Increase and multiply,’[8] is beyond the power of any human law.”

9. Therefore the sacred partnership of true marriage is constituted both by the will of God and the will of man. From God comes the very institution of marriage, the ends for which it was instituted, the laws that govern it, the blessings that flow from it; while man, through generous surrender of his own person made to another for the whole span of life, becomes, with the help and cooperation of God, the author of each particular marriage, with the duties and blessings annexed thereto from divine institution.

10. Now when We come to explain, Venerable Brethren, what are the blessings that God has attached to true matrimony, and how great they are, there occur to Us the words of that illustrious Doctor of the Church whom We commemorated recently in Our Encyclical Ad salutem on the occasion of the fifteenth centenary of his death:[9] “These,” says St. Augustine, “are all the blessings of matrimony on account of which matrimony itself is a blessing;

[1] offspring,

[2] conjugal faith

[3] and the sacrament.”[10]

And how under these three heads is contained a splendid summary of the whole doctrine of Christian marriage, the holy Doctor himself expressly declares when he said:

[1] “By conjugal faith it is provided that there should be no carnal intercourse outside the marriage bond with another man or woman;

[2] with regard to offspring, that children should be begotten of love, tenderly cared for and educated in a religious atmosphere;

[3] finally, in its sacramental aspect that the marriage bond should not be broken and that a husband or wife, if separated, should not be joined to another even for the sake of offspring.

This we regard as the law of marriage by which the fruitfulness of nature is adorned and the evil of incontinence is restrained.”[11]

11. Thus amongst the blessings of marriage, the CHILD HOLDS the FIRST PLACE. And indeed the Creator of the human race Himself, Who in His goodness wishes to use men as His helpers in the propagation of life, taught this when, instituting marriage in Paradise, He said to our first parents, and through them to all future spouses: “Increase and multiply, and fill the earth.”[12] As St. Augustine admirably deduces from the words of the holy Apostle Saint Paul to Timothy[13] when he says: “The Apostle himself is therefore a witness that marriage is for the sake of generation: ‘I wish,’ he says, ‘young girls to marry.’ And, as if someone said to him, ‘Why?,’ he immediately adds: ‘To bear children, to be mothers of families’.”[14]

12. How great a boon of God this is, and how great a blessing of matrimony is clear from a consideration of man’s dignity and of his sublime end. For man surpasses all other visible creatures by the superiority of his rational nature alone. Besides, God wishes men to be born not only that they should live and fill the earth, but much more that they may be worshippers of God, that they may know Him and love Him and finally enjoy Him for ever in heaven; and this end, since man is raised by God in a marvelous way to the supernatural order, surpasses all that eye hath seen, and ear heard, and all that hath entered into the heart of man.[15] From which it is easily seen how great a gift of divine goodness and how remarkable a fruit of marriage are children born by the omnipotent power of God through the cooperation of those bound in wedlock.

13. But Christian parents must also understand that they are destined not only to propagate and preserve the human race on earth, indeed not only to educate any kind of worshippers of the true God, but children who are to become members of the Church of Christ, to raise up fellow-citizens of the Saints, and members of God’s household,[16] that the worshippers of God and Our Savior may daily increase.

14. For although Christian spouses even if sanctified themselves cannot transmit sanctification to their progeny, nay, although the very natural process of generating life has become the way of death by which original sin is passed on to posterity, nevertheless, they share to some extent in the blessings of that primeval marriage of Paradise, since it is theirs to offer their offspring to the Church in order that by this most fruitful Mother of the children of God they may be regenerated through the laver of Baptism unto supernatural justice and finally be made living members of Christ, partakers of immortal life, and heirs of that eternal glory to which we all aspire from our inmost heart.

[…] 19. The second blessing of matrimony which We said was mentioned by St. Augustine, is the blessing of conjugal honor which consists in the mutual fidelity of the spouses in fulfilling the marriage contract, so that what belongs to one of the parties by reason of this contract sanctioned by divine law, may not be denied to him or permitted to any third person; nor may there be conceded to one of the parties anything which, being contrary to the rights and laws of God and entirely opposed to matrimonial faith, can never be conceded.

 […] 23. This conjugal faith, however, which is most aptly called by St. Augustine the “faith of chastity” blooms more freely, more beautifully and more nobly, when it is rooted in that more excellent soil, the love of husband and wife which pervades all the duties of married life and holds pride of place in Christian marriage. For matrimonial faith demands that husband and wife be joined in an especially holy and pure love, not as adulterers love each other, but as Christ loved the Church. This precept the Apostle laid down when he said: “Husbands, love your wives as Christ also loved the Church,”[24] that Church which of a truth He embraced with a boundless love not for the sake of His own advantage, but seeking only the good of His Spouse.[25] The love, then, of which We are speaking is not that based on the passing lust of the moment nor does it consist in pleasing words only, but in the deep attachment of the heart which is expressed in action, since love is proved by deeds.[26] This outward expression of love in the home demands not only mutual help but must go further; must have as its primary purpose that man and wife help each other day by day in forming and perfecting themselves in the interior life, so that through their partnership in life they may advance ever more and more in virtue, and above all that they may grow in true love toward God and their neighbor, on which indeed “dependeth the whole Law and the Prophets.”[27] For all men of every condition, in whatever honorable walk of life they may be, can and ought to imitate that most perfect example of holiness placed before man by God, namely Christ Our Lord, and by God’s grace to arrive at the summit of perfection, as is proved by the example set us of many saints.

[…] 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.

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.”[45]

[…] 59. Holy Church knows well that not infrequently one of the parties is sinned against rather than sinning, when for a grave cause he or she reluctantly allows the perversion of the right order. In such a case, there is no sin, provided that, mindful of the law of charity, he or she does not neglect to seek to dissuade and to deter the partner from sin. 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.

 

68. FINALLY, that pernicious practice must be condemned which closely touches upon the natural right of man to enter matrimony but affects also in a real way the welfare of the offspring. For there are some who over solicitous for the cause of eugenics, not only give salutary counsel for more certainly procuring the strength and health of the future child - which, indeed, is not contrary to right reason - but put eugenics before aims of a higher order, and by public authority wish to prevent from marrying all those whom, even though naturally fit for marriage, they consider, according to the norms and conjectures of their investigations, would, through hereditary transmission, bring forth defective offspring. And more, they wish to legislate to deprive these of that natural faculty by medical action despite their unwillingness; and this they do not propose as an infliction of grave punishment under the authority of the state for a crime committed, not to prevent future crimes by guilty persons, but against every right and good they wish the civil authority to arrogate to itself a power over a faculty which it never had and can never legitimately possess.

69. Those who act in this way are at fault in losing sight of the fact that the family is more sacred than the State and that men are begotten not for the earth and for time, but for Heaven and eternity. Although often these individuals are to be dissuaded from entering into matrimony, certainly it is wrong to brand men with the stigma of crime because they contract marriage, on the ground that, despite the fact that they are in every respect capable of matrimony, they will give birth only to defective children, even though they use all care and diligence.

70. Public magistrates have no direct power over the bodies of their subjects; therefore, where no crime has taken place and there is no cause present for grave punishment, they can never directly harm, or tamper with the integrity of the body, either for the reasons of eugenics or for any other reason. St. Thomas teaches this when inquiring whether human judges for the sake of preventing future evils can inflict punishment, he admits that the power indeed exists as regards certain other forms of evil, but justly and properly denies it as regards the maiming of the body. “No one who is guiltless may be punished by a human tribunal either by flogging to death, or mutilation, or by beating.”[54]

   71. Furthermore, Christian doctrine establishes, and the light of human reason makes it most clear, that private individuals have no other power over the members of their bodies than that which pertains to their natural ends; and they are not free to destroy or mutilate their members, or in any other way render themselves unfit for their natural functions, except when no other provision can be made for the good of the whole body.

72. We may now consider another class of errors concerning conjugal faith. Every sin committed as regards the offspring becomes in some way a sin against conjugal faith, since both these blessings are essentially connected. However, we must mention briefly the sources of error and vice corresponding to those virtues which are demanded by conjugal faith, namely the chaste honor existing between man and wife, the due subjection of wife to husband, and the true love which binds both parties together.

73. It follows therefore that they are destroying mutual fidelity, who think that the ideas and morality of our present time concerning a certain harmful and false friendship with a third party can be countenanced, and who teach that a greater freedom of feeling and action in such external relations should be allowed to man and wife, particularly as many (so they consider) are possessed of an inborn sexual tendency which cannot be satisfied within the narrow limits of monogamous marriage. That rigid attitude which condemns all sensual affections and actions with a third party they imagine to be a narrowing of mind and heart, something obsolete, or an abject form of jealousy, and as a result they look upon whatever penal laws are passed by the State for the preserving of conjugal faith as void or to be abolished. Such unworthy and idle opinions are condemned by that noble instinct which is found in every chaste husband and wife, and even by the light of the testimony of nature alone, - a testimony that is sanctioned and confirmed by the command of God:”Thou shalt not commit adultry,”[55] and the words of Christ: “Whosoever shall look on a woman to lust after her hath already committed adultery with her in his heart.”[56] The force of this divine precept can never be weakened by any merely human custom, bad example or pretext of human progress, for just as it is the one and the same “Jesus Christ, yesterday and today and the same for ever,”[57] so it is the one and the same doctrine of Christ that abides and of which no one jot or tittle shall pass away till all is fulfilled.[58]

74. The same false teachers who try to dim the luster of conjugal faith and purity do not scruple to do away with the honorable and trusting obedience which the woman owes to the man. Many of them even go further and assert that such a subjection of one party to the other is unworthy of human dignity, that the rights of husband and wife are equal; wherefore, they boldly proclaim the emancipation of women has been or ought to be effected. This emancipation in their ideas must be threefold, in the ruling of the domestic society, in the administration of family affairs and in the rearing of the children. It must be social, economic, physiological: - physiological, that is to say, the woman is to be freed at her own good pleasure from the burdensome duties properly belonging to a wife as companion and mother (We have already said that this is not an emancipation but a crime); social, inasmuch as the wife being freed from the cares of children and family, should, to the neglect of these, be able to follow her own bent and devote herself to business and even public affairs; finally economic, whereby the woman even without the knowledge and against the wish of her husband may be at liberty to conduct and administer her own affairs, giving her attention chiefly to these rather than to children, husband and family.

75. This, however, is not the true emancipation of woman, nor that rational and exalted liberty which belongs to the noble office of a Christian woman and wife; it is rather the debasing of the womanly character and the dignity of motherhood, and indeed of the whole family, as a result of which the husband suffers the loss of his wife, the children of their mother, and the home and the whole family of an ever watchful guardian. More than this, this false liberty and unnatural equality with the husband is to the detriment of the woman herself, for if the woman descends from her truly regal throne to which she has been raised within the walls of the home by means of the Gospel, she will soon be reduced to the old state of slavery (if not in appearance, certainly in reality) and become as amongst the pagans the mere instrument of man.

76. This equality of rights which is so much exaggerated and distorted, must indeed be recognized in those rights which belong to the dignity of the human soul and which are proper to the marriage contract and inseparably bound up with wedlock. In such things undoubtedly both parties enjoy the same rights and are bound by the same obligations; in other things there must be a certain inequality and due accommodation, which is demanded by the good of the family and the right ordering and unity and stability of home life.

[…] 79. We have so far, Venerable Brethren, shown the excellency of the first two blessings of Christian wedlock which the modern subverters of society are attacking. And now considering that the third blessing, which is that of the sacrament, far surpasses the other two, we should not be surprised to find that this, because of its outstanding excellence, is much more sharply attacked by the same people. They put forward in the first place that matrimony belongs entirely to the profane and purely civil sphere, that it is not to be committed to the religious society, the Church of Christ, but to civil society alone. They then add that the marriage contract is to be freed from any indissoluble bond, and that separation and divorce are not only to be tolerated but sanctioned by the law; from which it follows finally that, robbed of all its holiness, matrimony should be enumerated amongst the secular and civil institutions. The first point is contained in their contention that the civil act itself should stand for the marriage contract (civil matrimony, as it is called), while the religious act is to be considered a mere addition, or at most a concession to a too superstitious people. Moreover they want it to be no cause for reproach that marriages be contracted by Catholics with non-Catholics without any reference to religion or recourse to the ecclesiastical authorities. The second point which is but a consequence of the first is to be found in their excuse for complete divorce and in their praise and encouragement of those civil laws which favor the loosening of the bond itself. As the salient features of the religious character of all marriage and particularly of the sacramental marriage of Christians have been treated at length and supported by weighty arguments in the encyclical letters of Leo XIII, letters which We have frequently recalled to mind and expressly made our own, We refer you to them, repeating here only a few points.

80. Even by the light of reason alone and particularly if the ancient records of history are investigated, if the unwavering popular conscience is interrogated and the manners and institutions of all races examined, it is sufficiently obvious that there is a certain sacredness and religious character attaching even to the purely natural union of man and woman, “not something added by chance but innate, not imposed by men but involved in the nature of things,” since it has “God for its author and has been even from the beginning a foreshadowing of the Incarnation of the Word of God.”[60] This sacredness of marriage which is intimately connected with religion and all that is holy, arises from the divine origin we have just mentioned, from its purpose which is the begetting and education of children for God, and the binding of man and wife to God through Christian love and mutual support; and finally it arises from the very nature of wedlock, whose institution is to be sought for in the farseeing Providence of God, whereby it is the means of transmitting life, thus making the parents the ministers, as it were, of the Divine Omnipotence. To this must be added that new element of dignity which comes from the sacrament, by which the Christian marriage is so ennobled and raised to such a level, that it appeared to the Apostle as a great sacrament, honorable in every way.[61]


 

[…] 7. By matrimony, therefore, the souls of the contracting parties are joined and knit together more directly and more intimately than are their bodies, and that not by any passing affection of sense of spirit, but by a deliberate and firm act of the will; and from this union of souls by God’s decree, a sacred and inviolable bond arises. Hence the nature of this contract, which is proper and peculiar to it alone, makes it entirely different both from the union of animals entered into by the blind instinct of nature alone in which neither reason nor free will plays a part, and also from the haphazard unions of men, which are far removed from all true and honorable unions of will and enjoy none of the rights of family life.

Coniugio igitur animi iunguntur et coalescunt, hique prius et arctius quam corpora, nec fluxo sensuum vel animorum affectu, sed deliberato et firmo voluntatum decreto: et ex hac animorum coagmentatione, Deo sic statuente, sacrum et inviolabile vinculum exoritur. Quae contractus huius natura propria omnino et singularis, eum toto caelo diversum facit cum a coniunctionibus pecudum solo naturae caeco instinctu factis, in quibus nulla ratio est nec voluntas deliberata, tum ab iis quoque hominum vagis coniugiis, quae ab omni vero honestoque voluntatum vinculo remota sunt et quovis domestici convictus iure destituta.

8. From this it is clear that legitimately constituted authority has the right and therefore the duty to restrict, to prevent, and to punish those base unions which are opposed to reason and to nature; but since it is a matter which flows from human nature itself, no less certain is the teaching of Our predecessor, Leo XIII of happy memory:[7] “In choosing a state of life there is no doubt but that it is in the power and discretion of each one to prefer one or the other: either to embrace the counsel of virginity given by Jesus Christ, or to bind himself in the bonds of matrimony. To take away from man the natural and primeval right of marriage, to circumscribe in any way the principal ends of marriage laid down in the beginning by God Himself in the words ‘Increase and multiply,’[8] is beyond the power of any human law.”

Exinde iam constat legitimam quidem auctoritatem iure pollere atque adeo cogi officio coercendi, impediendi, puniendi turpia coniugia, quae rationi ac naturae adversantur; sed cum de re agatur ipsam hominis naturam consesequente, non minus certo constat id quod fel. rec. Leo XIII decessor Noster palam monuit (8):  «In deligendo genere vitae non est dubium, quin in potestate sit arbitrioque singulorum alterutrum malle: aut Iesu Christi sectari de virginitate consilium, aut maritali se vinclo obligare. Ius coniugii naturale et primigenum homini adimere, causamve nuptiarum praecipuam, Dei auctoritate initio constitutam, quoquo modo circumscribere lex hominum nulla potest : Crescite et multiplicamini» (9).

9. Therefore the sacred partnership of true marriage is constituted both by the will of God and the will of man. From God comes the very institution of marriage, the ends for which it was instituted, the laws that govern it, the blessings that flow from it; while man, through generous surrender of his own person made to another for the whole span of life, becomes, with the help and cooperation of God, the author of each particular marriage, with the duties and blessings annexed thereto from divine institution.

Itaque germani connubii sacrum consortium divina simul et humana voluntate constituitur: ex Deo sunt ipsa matrimonii institutio, fines, leges, bona; Deo autem dante atque adiuvante, ex hominibus est, per generosam quidem propriae personae pro toto vitae tempore factam alteri traditionem, particulare quodlibet matrimonium cum officiis ac bonis a Deo statutis coniunctum.

Marriage in the Teaching of the Catholic Church

 

 

 

10. Now when We come to explain, Venerable Brethren, what are the blessings that God has attached to true matrimony, and how great they are, there occur to Us the words of that illustrious Doctor of the Church whom We commemorated recently in Our Encyclical Ad salutem on the occasion of the fifteenth centenary of his death:[9] “These,” says St. Augustine, “are all the blessings of matrimony on account of which matrimony itself is a blessing;

Quae vero quantaque sint haec veri matrimonii bona divinitus data dum exponere aggredimur, Venerabiles Fratres; illius Nobis praeclarissimi Ecclesiae Doctoris verba occurrunt, quem non ita pridem, Nostris Encyclicis Litteris Ad salutem pleno ab eius obitu saeculo XV datis (10), celebravimus: «Haec omnia, — inquit S. Augustinus, — bona sunt, propter quae nuptiae bonae sunt:

[1] offspring,

PROLES,

[2] conjugal faith

FIDES,

[3] and the sacrament.”[10]

SACRAMENTUM» (11).

And how under these three heads is contained a splendid summary of the whole doctrine of Christian marriage, the holy Doctor himself expressly declares when he said:

Quae tria capita qua ratione luculentissimam totius de christiano connubio doctrinae summam continere iure dicantur, ipse Sanctus Doctor diserte declarat, cum ait:

[1] “By conjugal faith it is provided that there should be no carnal intercourse outside the marriage bond with another man or woman;

«In fide attenditur ne praeter vinculum coniugale cum altero vel altera concumbatur; i

[2] with regard to offspring, that children should be begotten of love, tenderly cared for and educated in a religious atmosphere;

n prole, ut amanter suscipiatur, benigne nutriatur, religiose educetur;

[3] finally, in its sacramental aspect that the marriage bond should not be broken and that a husband or wife, if separated, should not be joined to another even for the sake of offspring.

in sacramento autem, ut coniugium non separetur, et dimissus aut dimissa, nec causa prolis, alteri coniungatur.

This we regard as the law of marriage by which the fruitfulness of nature is adorned and the evil of incontinence is restrained.”[11]

Haec est tamquam regula nuptiarum, qua vel naturae decoratur fecunditas vel incontinentiae regitur privatas» (12).

11. Thus amongst the blessings of marriage, the CHILD HOLDS the FIRST PLACE. And indeed the Creator of the human race Himself, Who in His goodness wishes to use men as His helpers in the propagation of life, taught this when, instituting marriage in Paradise, He said to our first parents, and through them to all future spouses: “Increase and multiply, and fill the earth.”[12

Itaque primum inter matrimonii bona locum tenet PROLES. Et sane ipse humani generis Creator, qui pro sua benignitate hominibus in vita propaganda administris uti voluit, id docuit cum in paradiso, matrimonium instituens, protoparentibus et per eos omnibus futuris coniugibus dixit: «Crescite et multiplicamini et replete terram» (13).

] As St. Augustine admirably deduces from the words of the holy Apostle Saint Paul to Timothy[13] when he says: “The Apostle himself is therefore a witness that marriage is for the sake of generation: ‘I wish,’ he says, ‘young girls to marry.’ And, as if someone said to him, ‘Why?,’ he immediately adds: ‘To bear children, to be mothers of families’.”[14]

Quod ipsum Sanctus Augustinus ex Sancti Pauli Apostoli verbis ad Timotheum (l4) perbelle eruit, dicens: «Generationis itaque causa fieri nuptias, Apostolus ita testis est: «Volo, inquit, iuniores nubere. Et quasi ei diceretur: «Utquid?, continuo subiecit: Filios procreare, matres familias esse» (15).

12. How great a boon of God this is, and how great a blessing of matrimony is clear from a consideration of man’s dignity and of his sublime end. For man surpasses all other visible creatures by the superiority of his rational nature alone. Besides, God wishes men to be born not only that they should live and fill the earth, but much more that they may be worshippers of God, that they may know Him and love Him and finally enjoy Him for ever in heaven; and this end, since man is raised by God in a marvelous way to the supernatural order, surpasses all that eye hath seen, and ear heard, and all that hath entered into the heart of man.[15] From which it is easily seen how great a gift of divine goodness and how remarkable a fruit of marriage are children born by the omnipotent power of God through the cooperation of those bound in wedlock.

Quantum vero hoc Dei beneficium sit et matrimonii bonum ex hominis dignitate et altissimo fine apparet. Homo enim vel solius rationalis naturae praestantia omnes alias creaturas visibiles superat. Accedit, quod Deus homines generari vult, non ut solum sint et impleant terram, sed multo magis, ut Dei cultores sint, ipsum cognoscant et ament eoque tandem perenniter fruantur in caelis; qui finis ex mirabili hominis per Deum in supernaturalem ordinem elevatione, omne superat quod oculus vidit, et auris audivit et in cor hominis ascendit (16).  Ex quo facile apparet proles, omnipotenti Dei virtute, coniugibus cooperantibus, orta, quantum divinae bonitatis sit donum, quam egregius matrimonii fructus.

13. But Christian parents must also understand that they are destined not only to propagate and preserve the human race on earth, indeed not only to educate any kind of worshippers of the true God, but children who are to become members of the Church of Christ, to raise up fellow-citizens of the Saints, and members of God’s household,[16] that the worshippers of God and Our Savior may daily increase.

Christiani vero parentes intelligant praeterea se non iam solum ad genus humanum in terra propagandum et conservandum, immo vero, non ad quoslibet veri Dei cultores educandos destinari, sed ad pariendam Ecclesiae Christi subolem, ad cives Sanctorum et domesticos Dei (17) procreandos, ut populus Dei et Salvatoris nostri cultui addictus in dies augeatur.

14. For although Christian spouses even if sanctified themselves cannot transmit sanctification to their progeny, nay, although the very natural process of generating life has become the way of death by which original sin is passed on to posterity, nevertheless, they share to some extent in the blessings of that primeval marriage of Paradise, since it is theirs to offer their offspring to the Church in order that by this most fruitful Mother of the children of God they may be regenerated through the laver of Baptism unto supernatural justice and finally be made living members of Christ, partakers of immortal life, and heirs of that eternal glory to which we all aspire from our inmost heart.

Etsi enim christiani coniuges, quamvis ipsi sanctificati, sanctificationem in prolem transfundere non valent, immo naturalis generatio vitae facta est mortis via, qua originale peccatum transeat in prolem; aliquid tamen quodammodo participant de primaevo illo paradisi coniugio, cum eorum sit propriam subolem Ecclesiae offerre, ut ab illa matre filiorum Dei fecundissima per lavacrum baptismatis ad supernaturalem iustitiam regeneretur, et vivum Christi membrum, immortalis vitae particeps, atque aeternae gloriae, quam omnes toto pectore concupiscimus, heres tandem fiat

   
24. This mutual molding (conformatio) of husband and wife, this determined effort to perfect each other, can in a very real sense, as the Roman Catechism teaches, 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. Haec mutua coniugum interior conformatio, hoc assiduum sese invicem perficiendi studium, verissima quadam ratione, ut docet Catechismus Romanus (29), etiam primaria matrimonii causa et ratio dici potest, si tamen matrimonium non pressius ut institutum ad prolem rite procreandam educandamque, sed latius ut totius vitae communio, consuetudo, societas accipiatur.
25. By this same love it is necessary that all the other rights and duties of the marriage state be regulated as the words of the Apostle: “Let the husband render the debt to the wife, and the wife also in like manner to the husband,”(1Cor 7.3) express not only a law of justice but of charity. Cum hac eadem caritate reliqua coniugii tam iura quam officia componantur necesse est; ita ut non solum iustitiae lex, sed etiam caritatis norma sit illud Apostoli : «Uxori vir debitum reddat; similiter autem et uxor viro»
   

Contraception and the "Primary End of Marriage"

 

   

52. Indeed there are some who desire and insist that these practices be legitimatized by the law or, at least, excused by their general acceptance among the people. They do not seem even to suspect that these proposals partake of nothing of the modern “culture” in which they glory so much, but are simply hateful abominations which beyond all question reduce our truly cultured nations to the barbarous standards of savage peoples.

Immo non desunt qui velint et instent ut etiam legibus huiusmodi portenta probentur aut saltem publicis populorum usibus institutisque excusentur; et ne suspicari quidem videntur talia nihil sane habere recentioris culturae de qua tantopere gloriantur, sed nefandas esse corruptelas, quae ad barbaros quarumdam ferarum gentium usus etiam cultas nationes procul dubio redigerent.

53. And now, Venerable Brethren, we shall explain in detail the evils opposed to each of the benefits of matrimony. First consideration is due to the offspring, which many have the boldness to call the disagreeable burden of matrimony and which they say is to be carefully avoided by married people not through virtuous continence (which Christian law permits in matrimony when both parties consent) but by frustrating the marriage act. Some justify this criminal abuse on the ground that they are weary of children and wish to gratify their desires without their consequent burden. Others say that they cannot on the one hand remain continent nor on the other can they have children because of the difficulties whether on the part of the mother or on the part of family circumstances.

Sed, ut ad singula iam, Venerabiles Fratres, tractanda accedamus, quae singulis matrimonii bonis opponuntur, primum de prole sit sermo, quam multi molestum connubii onus vocare audent, quamque a coniugibus, non per honestam continentiam (etiam in matrimonio, utroque consentiente coniuge, permissam) sed vitiando naturae actum, studiose arcendam praecipiunt. Quam quidem facinorosam licentiam alii sibi vindicant, quod prolis pertaesi solam sine onere voluptatem explere cupiunt, alli quod dicunt se neque continentiam servare, neque ob suas vel matris vel rei familiaris difficultates prolem admittere posse.

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.

At nulla profecto ratio, ne gravissima quidem, efficere potest, ut quod intrinsece est contra naturam, id cum natura congruens et honestum fiat. Cum autem actus coniugii suapte natura proli generandae sit destinatus, qui, in eo exercendo, naturali hac eum vi atque virtute de industria destituunt, contra naturam agunt et turpe quid atque intrinsece inhonestum operantur.

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.”[45]

Quare mirum non est, ipsas quoque Sacras Litteras testari Divinam Maiestatem summo prosequi odio hoc nefandum facinus illudque interdum morte puniisse, ut memorat Sanctus Augustinus: «Illicite namque et turpiter etiam cum legitima uxore concumbitur, ubi prolis conceptio devitatur. Quod faciebat Onan, filius Iudae, et occidit illum propter hoc Deus» (47).

56. Since, therefore, openly departing from the uninterrupted Christian tradition some recently have judged it possible solemnly to declare another doctrine regarding this question, the Catholic Church, to whom God has entrusted the defense of the integrity and purity of morals, standing erect in the midst of the moral ruin which surrounds her, in order that she may preserve the chastity of the nuptial union from being defiled by this foul stain, raises her voice in token of her divine ambassadorship and through Our mouth proclaims anew: any use whatsoever of matrimony exercised in such a way that the act is deliberately frustrated in its natural power to generate life is an offense against the law of God and of nature, and those who indulge in such are branded with the guilt of a grave sin.

Cum igitur quidam, a christiana doctrina iam inde ab initio tradita neque umquam intermissa manifesto recedentes, aliam nuper de hoc agendi modo doctrinam sollemniter praedicandam censuerint, Ecclesia Catholica, cui ipse Deus morum integritatem honestatemque docendam et defendendam commisit, in media hac morum ruina posita, ut nuptialis foederis castimoniam a turpi hac labe immunem servet, in signum legationis suae divinae, altam per os Nostrum extollit vocem atque denuo promulgat: quemlibet matrimonii usum, in quo exercendo, actus, de industria hominum, naturali sua vitae procreandae vi destituatur, Dei et naturae legem infringere, et eos qui tale quid commiserint gravis noxae labe commaculari.

57. We admonish, therefore, priests who hear confessions and others who have the care of souls, in virtue of Our supreme authority and in Our solicitude for the salvation of souls, not to allow the faithful entrusted to them to err regarding this most grave law of God; much more, that they keep themselves immune from such false opinions, in no way conniving in them. If any confessor or pastor of souls, which may God forbid, lead the faithful entrusted to him into these errors or should at least confirm them by approval or by guilty silence, let him be mindful of the fact that he must render a strict account to God, the Supreme Judge, for the betrayal of his sacred trust, and let him take to himself the words of Christ: “They are blind and leaders of the blind: and if the blind lead the blind, both fall into the pit.[46]

Sacerdotes igitur, qui confessionibus audiendis dant operam, aliosque qui curam animarum habent, pro suprema Nostra auctoritate et omnium animarum salutis cura, admonemus, ne circa gravissimam hanc Dei legem fideles sibi commissos errare sinant, et multo magis, ut ipsi se ab huiusmodi falsis opinionibus immunes custodiant, neve in iis ullo modo conniveant. Si quis vero Confessarius aut animarum Pastor, quod Deus avertat, fideles sibi creditos aut in hos errores ipsemet induxerit, aut saltem sive approbando sive dolose tacendo in iis confirmarit, sciat se Supremo Iudici Deo de muneris proditione severam redditurum esse rationem, sibique dicta existimet Christi verba: «Caeci sunt, et duces caecorum: caecus autem, si caeco ducatum praestet, ambo in foveam cadunt» (48).

58. As regards the evil use of matrimony, to pass over the arguments which are shameful, not infrequently others that are false and exaggerated are put forward. Holy Mother Church very well understands and clearly appreciates all that is said regarding the health of the mother and the danger to her life. And who would not grieve to think of these things? Who is not filled with the greatest admiration when he sees a mother risking her life with heroic fortitude, that she may preserve the life of the offspring which she has conceived? God alone, all bountiful and all merciful as He is, can reward her for the fulfillment of the office allotted to her by nature, and will assuredly repay her in a measure full to overflowing.[47]

Causae vero, ob quas matrimonii malus usus defenditur, non raro, — ut de iis quae turpes sunt taceamus, — fictae aut exaggeratae proferuntur. Nihilominus pia Mater Ecclesiae optime intelligit atque persentit quae de matris sanitate, vita periclitantis, dicuntur. Ecquis nisi miserenti animo haec perpendere possit? Quis non summa afficiatur admiratione, si quando matrem cernat vix non certae se se morti, heroica fortitudine, offerentem, ut proli semel conceptae vitam conservet? Quod ipsa fuerit perpessa ut naturae officium plene impleret, id unus Deus ditissimus et miserentissimus retribuere poterit, dabitque profecto mensuram non tantum confertam sed superefluentem (49).

   
   
   

Eugenic Liberalization of abortion laws

 

63. But another very grave crime is to be noted, Venerable Brethren, which regards the taking of the life of the offspring hidden in the mother’s womb. Some wish it to be allowed and left to the will of the father or the mother; others say it is unlawful unless there are weighty reasons which they call by the name of medical, social, or eugenic “indication.” Because this matter falls under the penal laws of the state by which the destruction of the offspring begotten but unborn is forbidden, these people demand that the “indication,” which in one form or another they defend, be recognized as such by the public law and in no way penalized. There are those, moreover, who ask that the public authorities provide aid for these death-dealing operations, a thing, which, sad to say, everyone knows is of very frequent occurrence in some places.

Sed aliud, etiam, Venerabiles Fratres, gravissimum commemorandum est facinus, quo vita prolis, in sinu materno reconditae, attentatur. Id autem permissum volunt alti et matris patrisve beneplacito relictum; alli tamen illicitum dicunt, nisi pergraves accedant causae, quas medieae, socialis, eugenicae indicationis nomine appellant. Hi omnes quod ad poenales reipublicae leges attinet, quibus genitae necdum natae prolis peremptio prohibetur, exigunt, ut quam singuli, alti aliam, defendunt indicationem, eandem etiam leges publicae agnoscant et ab omni poena liberam declarent. Immo nec desunt qui postulent, ut ad has letiferas sectiones magistratus publici praebeant auxiliatrices manus; id quod, proh dolor, alicubi quam frequentissinle fieri omnibus notum est.

64. As to the “medical and therapeutic indication” to which, using their own words, we have made reference, Venerable Brethren, however much we may pity the mother whose health and even life is gravely imperiled in the performance of the duty allotted to her by nature, nevertheless what could ever be a sufficient reason for excusing in any way the direct murder of the innocent? This is precisely what we are dealing with here. Whether inflicted upon the mother or upon the child, it is against the precept of God and the law of nature: “Thou shalt not kill:”[Exod., XX, 13; cfr. Decr. S. Offic. 4 May 1897, 24 July 1895; 31 May 1884.] The life of each is equally sacred, and no one has the power, not even the public authority, to destroy it. It is of no use to appeal to the right of taking away life for here it is a question of the innocent, whereas that right has regard only to the guilty; nor is there here question of defense by bloodshed against an unjust aggressor (for who would call an innocent child an unjust aggressor?); again there is not question here of what is called the “law of extreme necessity” which could even extend to the direct killing of the innocent. Upright and skillful doctors strive most praiseworthily to guard and preserve the lives of both mother and child; on the contrary, those show themselves most unworthy of the noble medical profession who encompass the death of one or the other, through a pretense at practicing medicine or through motives of misguided pity.

Quod vero attinet ad  «indicationem medicam et therapeuticam» — ut eorum verbis utamur — iam diximus, Venerabiles Fratres, quantopere Nos misereat matris, cui ex naturae officio gravia imminent sanitatis, immo ipsius vitae pericula: at quae possit umquam causa valere ad ullo modo excusandam directam innocentis necem? De hac enim hoc loco agitur. Sive ea matri infertur sive proli, contra Dei praeceptum est vocemque naturae : «Non occides!» (52). Res enim aeque sacra utriusque vita, cuius opprimendae nulla esse unquam poterit ne publicae quidem auctoritati facultas. Ineptissime autem haec con tra innocentes repetitur e iure gladii, quod in solos reos valet; neque ullum viget hic cruentae defensionis ius contra iniustum aggressorem (nam quis innocentem parvulum iniustum aggressorem vocet?); neque ullum adest «extremae necessitatis ius» quod vocant, quodque usque ad innocentis directam occisionem pervenire possit. In utraque igitur et matris et prolis vita tuenda ac servanda probi expertique medici cum laude enituntur; contra, nobili medicorum nomine et laude indignissimos se li probarent, quotquot alterutri, per speciem medicandi, vel falsa misericordia moti, ad mortem insidiarentur.

65. All of which agrees with the stern words of the Bishop of Hippo in denouncing those wicked parents who seek to remain childless, and failing in this, are not ashamed to put their offspring to death:

Quae quidem plane severis consonant verbis quibus Episcopus Hipponensis in coniuges depravatos invehitur, qui proli quidem praecavere student, at, si nullo exitu, nefarie eam interimere non verentur:

 “Sometimes this lustful cruelty or cruel lust goes so far as to seek to procure a baneful sterility, and if this fails the fetus conceived in the womb is in one way or another smothered or evacuated, in the desire to destroy the offspring before it has life, or if it already lives in the womb, to kill it before it is born. If both man and woman are party to such practices they are not spouses at all; and if from the first they have carried on thus they have come together not for honest wedlock, but for impure gratification; if both are not party to these deeds, I make bold to say that either the one makes herself a mistress of the husband, or the other simply the paramour of his wife.”

«Aliquando eo usque,  inquit, pervenit haec libidinosa crudelitas vel libido crudelis, ut etiam sterilitatis venena procuret, et si nihil valuerit, conceptos fetus aliquo modo intra viscera exstinguat ac fundat, volendo suam prolem prius interire quam vivere, aut si in utero iam vivebat, occidi antequam nasci. Prorsus, si ambo tales sunt, coniuges non sunt: et si ab initio tales fuerunt, non sibi per connubium sed per stuprum potius convenerunt; si autem non ambo sunt tales, audeo dicere: aut illa est quodammodo meretrix mariti, aut ille adulter uxoris» (53).

[St. August., De nupt. et concupisc., cap. XV.]

 

66. What is asserted in favor of the social and eugenic “indication” may and must be accepted, provided lawful and upright methods are employed within the proper limits; but to wish to put forward reasons based upon them for the killing of the innocent is unthinkable and contrary to the divine precept promulgated in the words of the Apostle: Evil is not to be done that good may come of it. [Rom., III, 8.]

Quae autem afferuntur pro sociali et eugenica indicatione, licitis honestisque modis et intra debitos limites, earum quidem rerum ratio haberi potest et debet; at necessitatibus, quibus eae innituntur, per occisionem innocentium providere velle absonum est praeceptoque divino contrarium, apostolicis etim verbis promulgato: Non esse facienda mala ut eveniant bona (54).

67. Those who hold the reins of government should not forget that it is the duty of public authority by appropriate laws and sanctions to defend the lives of the innocent, and this all the more so since those whose lives are endangered and assailed cannot defend themselves. Among whom we must mention in the first place infants hidden in the mother’s womb. And if the public magistrates not only do not defend them, but by their laws and ordinances betray them to death at the hands of doctors or of others, let them remember that God is the Judge and Avenger of innocent blood which cried from earth to Heaven. [Gen., 4, 10.]

Iis denique, qui apud nationes principatum tenent feruntve leges, oblivioni dare non licet auctoritatis publicae esse, congruis legibus poenisque, innocentium vitam defendere, idque eo magis, quo minus ii, quorum vita periclitatur et impugnatur, se ipsi defendere valent, inter quos primum sane locum tenent infantes in visceribus maternis abditi. Quod si publici magistratus parvulos illos non solum non tueantur, sed, legibus suisque ordinationibus, permittant atque adeo tradant medicorum aliorumve manibus occidendos, meminerint Deum iudicem esse et vindicem sanguinis innocentis, qui de terra clamat ad caelum (55).

 

 

Eugenic Control of Reproduction

 

68. FINALLY, that pernicious practice must be condemned which closely touches upon the natural right of man to enter matrimony but affects also in a real way the welfare of the offspring. For there are some who over solicitous for the cause of eugenics, not only give salutary counsel for more certainly procuring the strength and health of the future child - which, indeed, is not contrary to right reason - but put eugenics before aims of a higher order, and by public authority wish to prevent from marrying all those whom, even though naturally fit for marriage, they consider, according to the norms and conjectures of their investigations, would, through hereditary transmission, bring forth defective offspring. And more, they wish to legislate to deprive these of that natural faculty by medical action despite their unwillingness; and this they do not propose as an infliction of grave punishment under the authority of the state for a crime committed, not to prevent future crimes by guilty persons, but against every right and good they wish the civil authority to arrogate to itself a power over a faculty which it never had and can never legitimately possess.

Reprobetur denique oportet perniciosus ille usus, qui proxime quidem naturale hominis ius ad matrimonium ineundum spectat, sed ad prolis quoque bonum vera quadam ratione pertinet. Sunt enim qui, de finibus eugenicis nimium solliciti, non solum salubria quaedam dent consilia ad futurae prolis valetudinem ac robur tutius procurandum — quod rectae rationi utique contrarium non est — sed cuilibet alii etiam altioris ordinis fini eugenicum anteponant, et coniugio auctoritate publica prohiberi velint eos omnes ex quibus, secundum disciplinae suae normas et coniecturas, propter hereditariam transmissionem, mancam vitiosamque prolem generatum iri censent, etiamsi iidem sint ad matrimonium ineundum per se apti. Quin immo naturali illa facultate, ex lege, eos, vel invitos, medicorum opera privari volunt; neque id ad cruentam sceleris commissi poenam publica auctoritate repetendam, vel ad futura eorum crimina praecavenda, licebit, scilicet contra omne ius et fas ea magistratibus civilibus arrogata facultate, quam numquam habuerunt nec legitime habere possunt.

69. Those who act in this way are at fault in losing sight of the fact that the family is more sacred than the State and that men are begotten not for the earth and for time, but for Heaven and eternity. Although often these individuals are to be dissuaded from entering into matrimony, certainly it is wrong to brand men with the stigma of crime because they contract marriage, on the ground that, despite the fact that they are in every respect capable of matrimony, they will give birth only to defective children, even though they use all care and diligence.

Quicumque ita agunt, perperam dant oblivioni sanctiorem esse familiam Statu, hominesque in primis non terrae et tempori, sed caelo et aeternitati generari. Et fas profecto non est homines, matrimonii ceteroqui capaces, quos, adhibita etiam omni cura et diligentia, nonni si mancam genituros esse prolem conicitur, ob eam causam gravi culpa onerare si coniugium contrahant, quamquam saepe matrimonium iis dissuadendum est.

70. Public magistrates have no direct power over the bodies of their subjects; therefore, where no crime has taken place and there is no cause present for grave punishment, they can never directly harm, or tamper with the integrity of the body, either for the reasons of eugenics or for any other reason. St. Thomas teaches this when inquiring whether human judges for the sake of preventing future evils can inflict punishment, he admits that the power indeed exists as regards certain other forms of evil, but justly and properly denies it as regards the maiming of the body. “No one who is guiltless may be punished by a human tribunal either by flogging to death, or mutilation, or by beating.”[Summ. theol., 2a 2ae, q. 108 a 4 ad 2um.]

Publici vero magistratus in subditorum membra directam potestatem habent nullam; ipsam igitur corporis integritatem, ubi nulla intercesserit culpa nullaque adsit eruentae poenae causa, directo laedere et attingere nec eugenicis nec ullis aliis de causis possunt unquam. Idem docet Sanctus Thomas Aquinas, cum, inquirens num humani iudices ad futura mala praecavenda hominem possint malo quodam plectere, id quidem concedit quod ad quaedam alia mala, sed iure meritoque negat quod ad corporis laesionem «Numquam secundum humanum iudicium aliquis debet puniri, sine culpa, poena flagelli, ut occidatur, vel mutiletur vel verberetur» (56).

71. Furthermore, Christian doctrine establishes, and the light of human reason makes it most clear, that private individuals have no other power over the members of their bodies than that which pertains to their natural ends; and they are not free to destroy or mutilate their members, or in any other way render themselves unfit for their natural functions, except when no other provision can be made for the good of the whole body.

Ceterum, quod ipsi privati homines in sui corporis membra dominatum alium non habeant quam qui ad eorum naturales fines pertineat, nec possint ea destruere aut mutilare aut alia via ad naturales funetiones se ineptos reddere, nisi quando bono totius corporis aliter provideri nequeat, id christiana doctrina statuit atque ex ipso humanae rationis lumine omnino constat.

   
   

 


xcxxcxxc  F ” “ This Webpage was created for a workshop held at Saint Andrew's Abbey, Valyermo, California in 2003...x....   “”.