Talk:Casti connubii

from vfd:

• Casti Connubii - wikisource? Secretlondon 14:10, Dec 10, 2003 (UTC)
  • Not an article. Delete. Bmills 14:18, 10 Dec 2003 (UTC)
  • Replace with an article about the encyclical. --MIRV 15:12, 10 Dec 2003 (UTC)
  • Keep. BL 15:52, 10 Dec 2003 (UTC)
  • Agree, not an article. Delete - Marshman 05:39, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)
  • Delete, move to wikisource is optional. Daniel Quinlan 07:32, Dec 11, 2003 (UTC)
  • Keep. The content isn't too good yet, but there's nothing wrong with having an article about it. It should be improved, not deleted. Tualha 06:08, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)
  • Delete, not an article -- wikisource sounds good. -- BCorr ¤ Брайен 18:07, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)
  • Keep. In its current state, it's a reasonable stub. I hope the text is at Wikisource. -Anthropos 18:49, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Changes on 1 December, and some suggestions

I stumbled across this article, and made various changes. I don't think anything was massive, but there were too many to put into the edit summary, so I'm making a few notes here:

• There was funny coding for the quotations. It made them appear in different font from the rest of the text, but the font wasn't sufficiently different to stand out as a quotation – just enough to look irritating (in my view). I changed it to indented quotes with italics. If anyone has a better idea, please go ahead.

• The article stated: "Prior to this encyclical, it was commonly believed among Catholic laypeople and clergy that the only licit reason for sexual intercourse was an attempt to create children." I don't think that's true. Some may have had that idea, but it certainly wasn't the teaching of the Church. Otherwise, it would have been forbidden to have intercourse after menopause, or after a hysterectomy, or during pregnancy. The article gave the impression that Casti Connubii changed a basic teaching in this regard. I've changed it to "Prior to this encyclical, it was believed by some Catholics that the only licit reason for sexual intercourse was an attempt to create children", in order to soften what I considered to be a sweeping statement, but even still, I put the {{fact}} template there. The article needs more work.

Many couples did not have intercourse during pregnancy or while breastfeeding, believing it immoral. I agree with your change, though - the documentation of sexual activity and beliefs for the time period in question is too sparse to draw any sweeping conclusions.

• The article also stated: "However, for the first time in Catholic doctrine, Casti Connubii also acknowledges the unitive aspect of intercourse as licit." I took out "for the first time in Catholic doctrine". I don't think there's any indication that the unitive meaning of sex was not considered licit before that, although there was certainly less emphasis placed on it in Catholic teaching before the twentieth century. It's still objectively wrong, according to Catholic teaching, to try to separate the procreative meaning from the unitive meaning, just as it was wrong a hundred years ago and five hundred years ago and three thousand years ago. But when they're not separated, the unitive meaning is licit, and did not suddenly become licit when that encyclical was written.

I've tried to change the wording to say more what I meant. I'm under the impression there was no official teaching other than procreation being the primary purpose of intercourse; some people took this to mean it was the only purpose. That interpretation was definitively declared erroneous in this encyclical; the topic simply hadn't (to my knowledge) been addressed earlier.

• I made slight changes to the wording of the bit about natural family planning. I think I made the wording flow a little better, but I do realize that I've (simultaneously, and not intentionally) removed the hint that NFP can also be used to achieve pregnancy. I'll have another look at the article in the next few days, when I'm less busy.

• I think it ends very abruptly, with a quotation from the encyclical about the connection between contraception and abortion. It needs to be rounded off a bit better.

I added a section to try to tie the article together; it's rather short right now, though. Hopefully someone with more knowledge than I have will be able to improve on it.Lyrl 16:05, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Suggestions are welcome.

AnnH ^(talk) 21:00, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Early church teachings on sex

This article sheds some light on where the "intercourse only for procreation" idea became associated with Catholicism - many early Church theologens supported it, though it appears this view never completely predominated. I'm linking it here in case future editors want to expand that section of the article (pre-Casti Connubii Catholic view of sex). Lyrl ^Talk _Contribs 20:32, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Very biased and doesn't tells nothing, about eugenics' opppostion in this enciclic

The article is biased.The main subject of this papal enciclic was eugenics.In this enciclic, the pope Pius XI told us, about his complete opposition to eugenics.Eugenic sterilization is described as against Roman Catholic Church teachings. Agre22 (talk) 18:49, 4 July 2008 (UTC)agre22

No colaboration with governs

The article lies, when this enciclic tells about the colaboration between Roman Catholic Church and political leaders.In fact, the opposite is true.Clearly, this enciclic tells that Public magistrates aren't the owners of their subjects.Public magistrates for eugenical or any other razon couldn't sterilize anyone, for any razon.They couldn't also sent to prision anyone, except in grave crimes.Agre22 (talk) 18:55, 4 July 2008 (UTC)agre22