Statement on Abortion by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith

Foundation: Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.
source : Holy See.
language original: Latin.
Copyright the Latin original: No.
English translation: Holy See.
Copyright of the Spanish translation: No.
Date: 18 November 1974.
Checked on 7 April 2003.

Statement on Abortion by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith

I Introduction

1. The issue of induced abortion and its eventual legal liberalisation has become the subject of passionate discussions almost everywhere topic . These debates would be less serious if they did not concern human life, a primordial value that must be protected and promote. Everyone understands this, even if some seek reasons to serve this goal, even against all evidence, even by means of abortion itself. In fact, it is astonishing to see how the indiscriminate protest against the death penalty, against all forms of war, and the demand to liberalise abortion, either entirely or by means of ever more numerous "indications", are growing at the same time. The Church is too aware that it is part of her vocation to defend man against all that could undo or demean him to remain silent on this matter topic: since the Son of God became man, there is no man who is not his brother in humanity and who is not called to be a Christian, to receive salvation from him.

2. In many countries, public authorities who resist liberalisation of abortion laws are under strong pressure to induce them to do so. This, it is said, would not violate anyone's conscience, while it would prevent everyone from imposing their own on others. Ethical pluralism is claimed as the normal consequence of ideological pluralism. But the one is very different from the other, since action touches the interests of others more quickly than mere opinion; apart from the fact that freedom of opinion can never be invoked to infringe on the rights of others, especially the right to life.

3. Numerous Christian lay people, especially doctors, but also parents' associations, politicians and personalities in positions of responsibility, have reacted vigorously against this campaign of opinion. But above all, many episcopal conferences and bishops on their own account have seen fit to recall, without ambiguity, the traditional teaching of the Church.1 These documents, whose convergence is impressive, admirably highlight the human and Christian attitude to respect for life. These documents, whose convergence is impressive, admirably highlight the human and Christian attitude of respect for life. It has happened, however, that several of them have met here and there with reservation or even with opposition.

4. The Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, charged with promote and the defence of faith and morals in the universal Church2 , intends to recall these teachings, in their essential lines, to all the faithful. In this way, by highlighting the unity of the Church, it will confirm with the authority proper to the Holy See what the bishops have happily undertaken. She is counting on all the faithful, even those who have been bewildered by the controversies and new opinions, to understand that it is not a question of opposing one opinion to another, but of conveying a constant teaching of the supreme Magisterium, which expounds the rule of morality in the light of faith3. It is therefore clear that this declaration cannot but seriously bind Christian consciences4. May God also enlighten all men who with a sincere heart try to "realise the truth" (Jn. 3, 21).

II In the light of faith

5. "God did not make death; nor does he rejoice in the loss of the living" (Wis 1:13). Certainly, God has created beings who live only temporarily, and physical death cannot be absent from the world of corporeal beings. But what was intended above all is life, and everything in the visible universe was made with man, the image of God and the crown of the world, in mind (Gen 1:26-28). On the human level, "by the devil's envy death entered the world" (Wis 2:24); introduced by sin, death is linked to it, being both sign and fruit of it. But it cannot triumph. Confirming faith in the resurrection, the Lord will proclaim in the Gospel that "God is not the God of the dead, but of the living" (Mt 22:32), and that death, like sin, will be definitively conquered by the resurrection in Christ (1 Cor 15:20-27). It is thus understood that human life, even on this earth, is precious. Infused by the Creator5 , it is he himself who will take it up again (Gen 2:7; Wis 15:11). It remains under his protection: man's blood cries out to him (Gen 4:10) and he will call it to account, "for man is made in the image of God" (Gen 9:5-6). God's commandment is formal: "Thou shalt not kill" (Ex 20, 13). Life is not only a gift but also a responsibility: received as a "talent" (Mt 25, 14-30), it must be made to bear fruit. To this end, man is offered many options in this world which he must not avoid; but more deeply, the Christian knows that eternal life for him depends on what he will have made of his life on earth with God's grace.

6. The tradition of the Church has always held that human life must be protected and favoured from its beginning as well as in the various stages of its development development. Opposing the customs of the Greco-Roman world, the Church of the first centuries insisted on the distance that separates these customs from Christian customs. In the Didache it is clearly stated: "You shall not kill by abortion the fruit of the womb and you shall not cause the child already born to perish "6. Athenagoras notes that Christians consider women who take medicine for abortion to be murderers; he condemns those who kill children, including those still living in their mother's womb, "where they are already the object of application by divine Providence "7. Tertullian may not always have used the same language, but he does not fail to affirm with the same clarity the essential principle: "it is an anticipated homicide to prevent birth; it matters little whether life already born is suppressed or whether it is made to disappear at birth. He who is on the way to becoming a man is already a man "8.

7. Throughout the whole of history, the Fathers of the Church, her pastors, her doctors, have taught the same doctrine, without the different opinions as to the moment of the infusion of the spiritual soul having given rise to any doubt as to the illegitimacy of abortion. It is true that, when in the age average the opinion was general that the spiritual soul was not present until after the first weeks, a distinction was made as to the species of the sin and the gravity of the penal sanctions; worthy authors admitted, for this first period, broader casuistic solutions, which they rejected for the following periods. But it was never denied at the time that induced abortion, even in the first days, was objectively a serious offence. This condemnation was in fact unanimous. Among many documents, suffice it to recall a few.

The first Council of Mainz (Germany), in 847, reaffirms the penalties decreed by previous councils against abortion and determines that the most rigorous penance be imposed "on women who cause the elimination of the fruit conceived in their womb "9. The Decree of Gratian refers to these words of Pope Stephen V: "He is a murderer who causes to perish, by means of abortion, that which was conceived "10. St. Thomas, Common Doctor of the Church, teaches that abortion is a grave sin, contrary to the natural law11. At the time of the Renaissance, Pope Sixtus V condemns abortion with the greatest severity12. A century later, Innocent XI reproved the propositions of certain lax canonists who sought to excuse abortion provoked before the moment at which some placed the spiritual animation of the new being13 . In our own day, recent Roman pontiffs have proclaimed the same doctrine with the utmost clarity: Pius XII has given an explicit response to the most serious objections14; Pius XI has clearly excluded all direct abortion, that is, that which is carried out as an end or as a means15; John XXIII has recalled the teaching of the Fathers on the sacred character of life, "which from its very beginning demands the creative action of God "16. More recently, the Second Vatican Council, presided over by Paul VI, very severely condemned abortion: "Life from conception must be safeguarded with the greatest care; abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes "17. Paul VI himself, speaking of this topic on various occasions, has not hesitated to repeat that this teaching of the Church "has not changed since it is immutable "18.

III Also in the light of reason

8. Respect for human life is not something imposed on Christians alone; reason alone is sufficient to demand it, based on an analysis of what a person is and should be. Constituted by a rational nature, man is a subject staff, capable of reflecting for himself, of deciding about his actions and therefore about his own destiny. He is free; he is therefore master of himself, or rather, since he realises himself in time, he has the capacity to be so, that is his task. Immediately created by God, his soul is spiritual and therefore immortal. It is open to God and only in him will it find its full realisation. But he lives in the community of his fellow human beings, he is enriched in interpersonal communion with them, within the indispensable social environment. In the face of society and other men, each human person possesses himself, his life, his various goods, by way of right; this is demanded of everyone, in relation to him, by strict justice.

9. The temporal life lived in this world, however, is not identified with the person; the person has a deeper level of life which cannot end. Bodily life is a fundamental good, a condition for all others here below; but there are higher values for which it may be lawful and even necessary to expose oneself to the danger of losing them. In a society of persons, the common good is for each person an end which he must serve and to which he will subordinate his own interests. But it is not his ultimate end; in this sense it is society which is at the service of the person, because the person will only reach his destiny in God. He can only be definitively subordinated to God. Man can never be treated as a mere means to a higher end.

10. On the reciprocal rights and duties of the individual and of society, it is the task of morality to enlighten consciences; it is the task of law to specify and organise services. However, there is precisely a set of rights which society cannot grant because they are prior to it, but which it has the mission statement to preserve and enforce: these are the majority of what are nowadays called "human rights", the formulation of which our age glories in.

11. The first right of a human person is his life. He has other goods and some of them are more precious; but that is the fundamental one, the condition for all the others. For this reason it must be protected more than any other. It does not belong to society or to public authority, in whatever form, to recognise this right for one and not to recognise it for others: all discrimination is iniquitous, whether based on race, sex, colour or religion. It is not recognition by others that constitutes this right; it is something prior to it; it demands to be recognised and it is absolutely unjust to refuse it.

12. Discrimination based on the various periods of life is no more justified than any other discrimination. The right to life remains unimpaired in an old man, however reduced in capacity; an incurably ill person has not lost it. It is no less legitimate in a newborn child than in a mature man. In fact, respect for human life is required from the very beginning of the process of generation. From the moment of fertilisation of the ovum, a life is inaugurated which is neither that of the father nor that of the mother, but that of a new human being developing on its own. It will never become human if it is not already human.

13. Modern science Genetics provides precious confirmation of this long-standing evidence, which is totally independent of the disputes about the moment of animation19. It has shown that from the very first instant the programme of what this living being will be is fixed: an individual human being, with his or her characteristic features already well determined. With fertilisation, the adventure of a human life has begun, each of whose great capacities requires time, a long time, to develop and to be ready to act. The least that can be said is that today's science, in its most evolved state, does not give any substantial support to the advocates of abortion. Moreover, it is not for the biological sciences to give a decisive judgement on properly philosophical and moral questions, such as the moment at which the human person is constituted and the legitimacy of abortion. However, from the moral point of view, this is true: even if there were doubt as to whether the fruit of conception is already a human person, it is objectively a grave sin to dare to take the risk of homicide. "He who is on the way to becoming a man is already a man "20.

IV Response to some objections

14. Divine law and natural law therefore exclude any right to kill an innocent man directly.

However, if the reasons given to justify an abortion were clearly unfounded and lacking in weight, the problem would not be so dramatic: its seriousness lies in the fact that, in some cases, perhaps quite numerous, refusing an abortion causes damage to important assets which it is normal to hold dear and which may even appear to be a priority. We are not unaware of these great difficulties: it can be a serious health issue, often a matter of life or death for the mother; the burden of an additional child, especially if there is good reason to fear that it will be abnormal or retarded; the importance given in various social circles to considerations such as honour and dishonour, a loss of status, and so on. We must absolutely proclaim that none of these reasons can ever objectively give the right to dispose of the life of others, even in its beginning; and, as far as the unhappy future of the child is concerned, no one, not even the father or the mother, can put himself in its place, even if it is still in an embryonic state, to prefer death to life on its behalf. Nor will it itself, in its mature age, ever have the right to choose suicide; while it is not old enough to decide for itself, neither can its parents in any way choose death for it. Life is too fundamental a good to be weighed against other, even more serious, disadvantages21 .

15. The movement for the emancipation of women, in so far as it tends essentially to free them from all that constitutes unjust discrimination, is perfectly well founded22. Much remains to be done, within the various forms of culture, on this point; but nature cannot be changed, nor can women, as well as men, be deprived of what nature requires of them. On the other hand, every publicly recognised liberty always has as its limit the certain rights of others.

16. The same must be said of the claim to sexual freedom. If by this expression is meant the gradual dominion of reason and true love over the impulses of instinct, at no less a price than pleasure, but keeping it in its rightful place - and this would be the only true freedom in this field - there would be no objection to it; but such freedom would always be careful not to infringe on justice. If, on the other hand, it is understood that man and woman are "free" to seek sexual pleasure to the point of satiety, without taking into account any law or the essential orientation of sexual life towards its fruits of fecundity23 , this idea has nothing Christian about it; and it is even unworthy of man. In any case, it gives no right to dispose of the life of one's neighbour, even if it is in an embryonic state, nor to suppress it on the pretext that it is burdensome.

17. The progress of science opens up and will increasingly open up to technology the possibility of refined interventions, the consequences of which can be very serious, both for good and for ill. These are in themselves admirable achievements of the human spirit. But technology cannot escape the judgment of morality, because it is made for man and must respect his purposes. Just as there is no right to use nuclear energy for any purpose whatsoever, there is no right to manipulate human life in any way whatsoever: the progress of science must be at its service, in order to ensure the best possible use of its normal capacities, to prevent or cure illnesses, to contribute to the betterment of mankind development . It is true that the evolution of techniques makes early abortion easier and easier, but moral judgement does not change.

18. We know how serious the problem of birth control can be for some families and for some countries: this is why the last Council, and later the encyclical Humanae vitae of 25 July 1968, spoke of "paternity manager"24. What we wish to strongly reaffirm, as the conciliar constitution Gaudium et spes, the encyclical Populorum progressio and other pontifical documents have recalled, is that abortion can never, under any pretext, be used, either by a family or by the political authority, as a legitimate means of regulating births25. The violation of moral values is always, for the common good, a greater evil than any economic or demographic harm.

V Morality and law

19. Almost everywhere moral discussion is accompanied by serious legal debates. There is no country whose legislation does not prohibit and punish homicide. Many, moreover, have specified this prohibition and its penalties in the special case of induced abortion. Nowadays, a vast movement of opinion is calling for a liberalisation of the latter prohibition. There is already a fairly widespread tendency to want to restrict all repressive legislation as much as possible, especially when it seems to enter the sphere of private life. The argument of pluralism is also repeated: if many citizens, in particular those faithful to the Catholic Church, condemn abortion, many others judge it to be lawful, at least at degree scroll as the lesser evil; why impose on them to follow an opinion that is not theirs, especially in countries where they are in the majority? On the other hand, where they still exist, laws condemning abortion are difficult to enforce: the crime has become too frequent to always be punished and the public authorities often find it more prudent to turn a blind eye. But upholding a law that is no longer applied is never done without detriment to the prestige of all the others. It should be added that clandestine abortion exposes women who resign themselves to having recourse to it to the greatest dangers to their fertility and also, often, to their lives. Therefore, even if the legislator continues to consider abortion as an evil, can he not propose to limit its ravages?

20. These reasons, and others that are heard from various quarters, are not decisive. It is true that civil law cannot wish to cover the whole field of morality or to punish all offences. No one requires it to do so. It must often tolerate what is a lesser evil in final in order to avoid a greater evil. However, one must be aware of what a change in legislation can mean. Many will take as authorisation what may be nothing more than a Withdrawal punishment. Moreover, in the present case, this Withdrawal even seems to include, at least, that the legislator no longer considers abortion as a crime against human life, since in its legislation homicide is still always severely punished. It is true that the law is not there to settle opinions or to impose one in preference to another. But the life of a child takes precedence over all opinions: freedom of thought cannot be invoked to take it away.

21. The function of the law is not to record what is done, but to help to do it better. In any case, it is mission statement of the state to preserve the rights of everyone, to protect the weakest. For this, it will be necessary to straighten out many wrongs. The law is not obliged to sanction everything, but it cannot go against another law which is deeper and more august than all human law, the natural law inscribed in man by the Creator as a rule which reason deciphers and strives to formulate, which it is necessary to try to understand better, but which it is always wrong to contradict. Human law can renounce punishment, but it cannot declare honest what is contrary to natural law, for such a civil service examination is sufficient for a law to be no longer law.

22. In any case, it must be clearly understood that a Christian can never agree to a law which is immoral in itself; such is the case with a law which admits in principle the lawfulness of abortion. A Christian can neither take part in a campaign of opinion in favour of such a law, nor give it his vote, nor collaborate in its application. It is, for example, unacceptable that doctors or nurses should be obliged to give immediate cooperation to abortions and have to choose between Christian law and their professional status .

23. On the contrary, it is the duty of the law to ensure a reform of society, of living conditions in all environments, beginning with the least favoured, so that every human creature that comes into this world may always and everywhere be welcomed with dignity. financial aid for families and single mothers, financial aid for children, a status for natural children and a reasonable organisation of adoption: a whole positive policy that must be implemented promote so that there will always be a concretely possible and honourable alternative to abortion.

VI Conclusion

24. Following one's conscience in obedience to God's law is not always an easy path; it can impose sacrifices and burdens whose weight cannot be underestimated; sometimes heroism is required to remain faithful to its demands. At the same time, we must also stress that the path to the true development of the human person passes through this constant fidelity to a conscience maintained in uprightness and truth, and we must exhort all those who have the means to lighten the burdens that still weigh down so many men and women, so many families and children, who find themselves in situations that are humanly hopeless.

25. A Christian's outlook cannot be limited to the horizon of life in this world; he knows that in the present life another life is being prepared whose importance is such that judgements must be made on the basis of it.26 From this point of view, there is no absolute wretchedness here below, not even the tremendous penalty of bringing up a deficient child. From this point of view, there is no absolute unhappiness here below, not even the tremendous pain of bringing up a deficient child. This is the radical change announced by the Lord: "Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted" (Mt 5:5). It would be to turn our backs on the Gospel to measure happiness by the absence of sorrow and misery in this world.

26. But this does not mean that one can remain indifferent to these sorrows and miseries. Every person of heart, and certainly every Christian, must be ready to do what he can to remedy them. This is the law of charity, whose first goal must always be to establish justice. Abortion can never be approve but, above all, its causes must be combated. This entails political action, and this will constitute in particular the field of the law. But at the same time it is necessary to act on customs, to work in favour of everything that can help families, mothers and children. Admirable progress has already been made by medicine in the service of life; it is to be hoped that even greater progress will be made, in accordance with the vocation of the physician, which is not to suppress life, but to preserve it and to promote it as far as possible. It is also to be hoped that all class forms of attendance will be developed within appropriate institutions or, failing that, within those inspired by Christian generosity and charity.

27. We can only work effectively in the field of manners if we also fight in the field of ideas. A way of seeing, and possibly even of thinking, which regards fertility as a misfortune, cannot be allowed to spread without contradicting it. It is true that not all forms of civilisation are equally favourable to large families; they encounter much more serious obstacles in an industrial and urban civilisation. In recent times, the Church has also insisted on the idea of parenthood manager, an exercise of true human and Christian prudence. This prudence would not be authentic if it did not include generosity; it must be aware of the greatness of a task which is cooperation with the Creator for the transmission of life which gives new members to the human community and new children to the Church. The Church of Christ is fundamentally concerned to protect and promote life. Certainly she thinks first of all of the life that Christ came to bring: "I have come that men may have life and have it more abundantly" (Jn 10:10). But life comes from God at all levels, and bodily life is for man the indispensable beginning. In this earthly life, sin has introduced, multiplied, made sorrow and death heavier, but Jesus Christ, taking upon himself this burden, has transformed them: for those who believe in him, suffering and even death become instruments of resurrection. This is why St Paul can say: "I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not in proportion to the glory that is to be revealed in us" (Rom 8:18) and, if we make the comparison, we can add with him: "our tribulations, though light and passing, bring us an eternal stream of glory, of a measure that surpasses all measure" (2 Cor 4:17).

The Supreme Pontiff Paul VI, in the audience granted to the undersigned Secretary of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith on 25 June 1974, ratified, confirmed and ordered the publication of the present declaration on induced abortion.

Given at Rome, at the Offices of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, on the 18th day of November, the dedication of the Basilicas of Saints Peter and Paul, in the year of our Lord 1974.

Cardinal Franjo SEPER, Prefect.

Jerôme HAMER, Titular Archbishop of Lorium, Secretary.

Notes

(1) A certain issue of episcopal documents can be found in G. Caprile, Non uccidere. "Il Magistero della Chiesa" sull-aborto. Part II, pp. 47-300, Rome, 1973.

(2) Regimini Ecclesiare universae, III, 29. Cf. ibid. 31 (AAS 59, 1967, p. 897). It is competent in all questions which refer to faith or which are connected with faith.

(3) Lumen gentium, 12 (AAS 57, 1965, pp. 16-17). The present declaration does not deal with all the questions that may arise with regard to the topic of abortion: it is up to theologians to examine and discuss them. The statement only recalls some fundamental principles which should be for theologians themselves a light and a rule, and for all Christians, the confirmation of propositions of Catholic doctrine.

(4) Lumen gentium, 25 (AAS 57, 1965, pp. 29-31).

(5) The sacred authors make no philosophical considerations about animation, but speak of the period of life preceding birth as the object of God's attention: he creates and forms the human being, moulding him with his hands (cf. Ps 118:73). It seems that this topic is expressed for the first time in Jer 1:5. It is found in many other texts, cf. Is 49:13; 46:3; Job 10:8-12; Ps 22:10; 71:6; 139:13. In the Gospel we read in Luke 1:44: "For no sooner had the voice of your greeting sounded in my ears than the babe in my womb leaped for joy".

(6) Didache Apostolorum, ed. Funk, Patres Apostolici, V. 2. The Letter of Barnabas, 19, 5, uses the same expressions (Funk, 1. c. 91-93).

(7) Athenagoras, In Defence of the Christians, 35 (PG 6, 970: Sources Chrétiennes, 33, pp. 166-167). Note the Letter of Diognetus V, 6 (Funk, o.c. I, 399: S. C. 33), in which it is said of the Christians: "They procreate children, but do not abandon foetuses".

(8) Tertullian, Apologeticum, IX, 8 (PL I, 371-372; Corp. Chris. I, p. 103, 1, 31-36).

(9) Canon 21 (Mansi 14, p. 909). Cf. the Council of Elvira, canon 63 (Mansi 2, p. 16) and the Council of Ancyra, canon 21 (ibid., 519). See also the decree of Gregory III concerning the penance to be imposed on those who become guilty of this crime (Mansi 12, 292, c. 17).

(10) Gratian, Concordantia discordantim canonum, c. 20, C. 2, q. 2. During the Age average the authority of St. Augustine is frequently invoked, who writes on this subject in De nuptius et concupiscentia, c. 15: "Sometimes this libidinous cruelty or this cruel libido goes so far as to procure poisons to cause sterility. If the result is not obtained, the mother extinguishes life and expels the foetus that was in her womb, in such a way that the child perishes before it has lived or, if it was already alive in the womb, dies before it is born" (PL 44, 423-424: CSEL 33, 619. Cf. the Decree of Gratian, q. 2, C. 32, c. 7).

(11) Commentary on the Sentences, book IV, dist. 31, exhibition of the text.

(12) Constitution Effrenata in 1588 (Bullarium Romanum, V, 1. pp. 25-27; Fontes Iuris Canonici, I, n. 165, pp. 308- 311).

(13) Denz. Sch. 1184. Cf. also the Constitution Apostolicae Sedis of Pius IX (certificate Pius IX, V, 55-72; AAS 5, 1869, pp. 305-331; Fontes Iuris canonicis, III, n. 552, pp. 24-31).

(14) Encyclical Casti connubii, AAS 22, 1930, 562-565; Denz. Sch. 3719-21.

(15) The declarations of Pius XII are express, precise and numerous; they would require a separate study on their own. Let us cite only, because it formulates the principle in all its universality, speech to the Italian Medical Union of St. Luke, 12/9/44: "As long as a man is not guilty, his life is untouchable, and therefore any act directly tending to destroy it is unlawful, whether such destruction is sought as an end, or whether it is sought as a means to an end, whether it is a matter of embryonic life, or of life on the way to its full term development or has already reached its end" (Discorsi e radiomessaggi, VI, 183 ff.).

(16) Encyclical Mater et Magistra, (AAS 53, 1961, 447).

(17) Gaudium et spes, II. c. 1, n. 51. cf. n. 27, (AAS 58, 1966, 1072; cf. 1047).

(18) Allocution: Salutiamo con paterna effusione, 9 December 1972, 737. Among the testimonies of this immutable doctrine, let us recall the declaration of the saint official document condemning direct abortion (AAS 17, 1884, 556; 22, 1888-1890, 748; DS 3258).

(19) This statement expressly leaves aside the question of the moment of the infusion of the spirit soul. There is no unanimous tradition on this point, and authors are still divided. For some, this would happen at the first instant; for others, it could be prior to the nesting. It is not for science to elucidate them, for the existence of an immortal soul does not fall within its field. This is a philosophical discussion from which our moral reason is independent for two reasons: 1. Even supposing a late animation, there is already a human life, which prepares and claims the soul in which the nature received from the parents is completed; 2. On the other hand, it is enough that this presence of the soul is probable (and it will never be proved otherwise) so that to take away its life is to accept the risk of killing a man, not only in expectation, but already provided with his soul.

(20) Tertullian, quoted at grade 8.

(21) Cardinal Villot, Secretary of State, wrote on 10/10/73 to Cardinal Döpfner at purpose on the protection of human life: "The Church, however, cannot recognise as licit, in order to overcome such difficult situations, either contraceptive means or, still less, abortion".

(22) Encyclical Pacem in terris, AS 55, 1963, 267. Cons. Gaudium et spes, 29. Paul VI, Allocution Salutiamo, AAS 64, 1972, 779.

(23) Gaudium et spes, II, c. i. 48: "By their natural nature, the institution of marriage and conjugal love are ordered by their very nature to procreation and to the Education of offspring, with whom they are bound as with their own crown". Likewise, n. 50: "Marriage and conjugal love are ordered by their very nature to procreation and to the Education of offspring".

(24) Gaudium et spes, 50 and 51. Paul VI, encyclical Humanae vitae, 10 (AAS 60), 1968, p. 487). Paternity manager supposes the exclusive use of licit means of birth regulation. cf. Humanae vitae, 14 (ibid., p. 490).

(25) Gaudium et spes, 87. Paul VI, encyclical Populorum progressio, 31; address to the United Nations, AAS 1965, 883. John XXIII, Mater et magistra, AAS 53, 1961, pp. 445-448).