Talk:Pontifical Commission on Birth Control

Untitled
"Humanae Vitae": The True Story of its Gestation.

"An authoritative member of the commission that prepared the controversial encyclical reveals new details about the event - and debunks a myth."

By Sandro Magister, in www.chiesa.espressonline.it, July 9, 2003: http://chiesa.espresso.repubblica.it/articolo/6960?eng=y — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.247.160.133 (talk) 08:04, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Title of article
There is rather a lot wrong with this article as it stands. Let me review just the title.


 * "The Pontifical Commission on Birth Control" – despite the term appearing from time to time (in Sandro Magister's 2003 article, no less) the commission is more correctly identified as a "Papal" one. "Pontifical" connotes permanent institutional structures, both within the Curia (the various Pontifical Councils,  Commissions and  Academies) and without (e.g.,  Pontifical Universities, and religious institutes of Pontifical right).  As it happens, the word "Pontifical" appears only in the title of the article (and as repeated in the first sentence of the lede).  By contrast, the more correct term "papal commission" appears in the title of 3 of the seven cited sources (nos 1, 2, 5) and appears in the first paragraph of two others (nos 3, 6).  I don't have access to sources 4 or 7.

As a control, an archaeological commission established by Pope Pius IX in 1852 was specifically elevated to the status of a Pontifical Commission by Pius XI in 1925 - see the historical note at the relevant page of the Vatican website. Ridiculus mus (talk) 14:52, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Status and Remit of the commission
Other problems in the opening sentence:-


 * "was a committee within the Roman Curia" – untrue. It was never a structure within the Roman Curia, but was a temporary ad hoc body of diverse composition.

"'Its task was to examine views and opinions concerning married life, and especially on the correct regulation of births; and it was also to provide the teaching authority of the Church with such evidence as would enable it to give an apt reply in this matter, which not only the faithful but also the rest of the world were waiting for'" Ridiculus mus (talk) 14:58, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
 * "tasked with analyzing the modern impact of birth control on the Roman Catholic Church" – inadequate and misleading. Its remit (as amplified by Paul VI) was to study problems of population, the family, and the birth-rate specifically NOT limited to the impact of these topics on the Catholic Church (and certainly not limited to the Roman Catholic Church).  Compare what Pope Paul VI himself wrote about the remit of the commission in Humanae Vitae itself, at n. 5:-

Problems with the rest of the lede
5. . . When the evidence of the experts had been received, as well as the opinions and advice of a considerable number of Our brethren in the episcopate—some of whom sent their views spontaneously, while others were requested by Us to do so—We were in a position to weigh with more precision all the aspects of this complex subject. Hence We are deeply grateful to all those concerned.
 * "The disagreements within the commission ultimately led to the publication of the encylical Humanae Vitae" – untrue. At best, the disagreements might be said to have "led to a delay in the publication of the encyclical".  The commission's conclusions were delivered to the Pope by 29 October, 1966, and the encyclical was published on 25 July, 1968.  Certainly, Pope Paul VI intended from the start (that is, from June 1964 when, it seems, he reorganised the commission) to make a definitive pronouncement on the questions of married love and the regulation of births – topics which he had removed from the competency of the Second Vatican Council precisely because thought on them had not sufficiently matured by then.  The commission was one means for him to obtain both practical evidence and advice; direct consultation with bishops around the world was another.  Again, it is in Humanae Vitae that we find the true situation explained, together with the Pope's reasons for not accepting the majority advice offered to him by the commission (nn. 5 and 6) :-

6. However, the conclusions arrived at by the commission could not be considered by Us as definitive and absolutely certain, dispensing Us from the duty of examining personally this serious question. This was all the more necessary because, within the commission itself, there was not complete agreement concerning the moral norms to be proposed, and especially because certain approaches and criteria for a solution to this question had emerged which were at variance with the moral doctrine on marriage constantly taught by the magisterium of the Church. Ridiculus mus (talk) 15:07, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Proposed new title and lede
The Papal Study Commission on the Problems of Population, Family and the Birth-Rate

This commission, vulgarly known as the Papal Commission on Birth-Control, was established in March 1963 in order to offer evidence and advice to the Supreme Pontiff of the Catholic Church regarding new developments in society and medical technology and their interaction with the sexual expression of marital love. Since the moral, social and theological questions raised by these issues were contentious, Pope John XXIII had withdrawn them from the competence of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council which he had summoned and which had convened in October 1962.

The commission was greatly expanded by Pope Paul VI, but lack of agreement within the commission on the continuing validity of the Church's long-established teaching upon the regulation of births contributed to a delay in the pope's formal pronouncement, in his 1968 encyclical Humanae vitae, that this teaching was to be firmly upheld.

Proposal ends. Ridiculus mus (talk) 17:41, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Citation Issue
Hello everyone, I'm struggling to make an important change to the citations of the article. The last citation for "How the Pope Became Infallible" is mistaken. The page number is not 170, but rather it is 270. I'm sitting in the library at Queen's University and found the book, it would seem this was a mistake. However, when I click 'edit this page' all the references disappear. If someone could change the reference that would be great! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1sttomars (talk • contribs) 22:35, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

POV problem
One gets the impression from the article that the Commission was closely divided and Paul VI stepped in to resolve the conflict. In fact its endorsement of lifting the ban on contraception was overwhelming (62 - 10) but Paul, feeling that Casti Connubii could not be overruled, vetoed the Commission's findings with Humanae Vitae. 24.44.243.38 (talk) 18:39, 17 April 2015 (UTC) captcrisis

Where are the names of the other members of the Commission? I would suggest that only naming the ecclesiastical members of the commission, and NOT the laypeople, exacerbates this POV problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alaraxis (talk • contribs) 13:10, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Question: date commission dissolved?
Greetings, If another editor knows of the date this commission ended? Also a better date in 1963 the commission was created? Regards, JoeHebda (talk) 19:51, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

2019 BBC podcast contradicts what a lot of other reliable sources say. Perhaps it is given undue weight.
I know that the BBC is generally considered a reliable source, but this episode of this podcast in particular that is cited in a lot of its foundational information is blatantly contradicted by other reliable sources.

It says in its own description while laying the foundation for the understanding of Papal Infallibility, "The idea that the Pope could not err had been a double-edged sword from the Middle Ages, though; while it apparently conveyed great power, it also meant a Pope was constrained by whatever a predecessor had said. If a later Pope were to contradict an earlier Pope, then one of them must be wrong, and how could that be…if both were infallible?" This source essentially suggests that it is the Catholic position that a Pope can never be contradicted.

However this understanding of papal infallibility of a Pope always being right is contradicted by other sources. For example, this source, quoting Pope Benedict XVI, says "'The Pope is not an oracle; he is infallible in very rare situations, as we know. Therefore, I share with you these questions, these problems. I also suffer,' he said in his address, transcribed and published by the Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano." According to this other source, Pope John Paul II said that he has never spoken infallibly. This other source quotes Pope John Paul II as saying "Many Popes, however, have not exercised [Papal Infallibility]."

I suggest that the BBC citation be removed from this article so as to not give this position undue weight. The sentence it is used to support might be true (I don't know), but whatever the case, this source is clearly going against the grain of a lot of other sources on the basic understanding of what papal infallibility is. If someone wants to put another source in, go for it, but I really think this one needs to be removed as undue. JMM12345 (talk) 03:04, 15 October 2021 (UTC)JMM12345