Question:

Dear Father,

We are a Catholic couple with three beautiful children, and we wish to have more. However, when we mention this to other couples who are our friends—also Catholic—they tell us that this is not responsible parenthood. Could you clarify this concept for me? Does it mean we must limit ourselves to the number of children we currently have?

Answer:

Love is ordered towards giving life, towards being fruitful. However, the fruitfulness through which spouses become both fathers and mothers must also be a ‘human’ dimension, meaning guided by reason and by the virtue that perfects it on the level of action: prudence. Hence, the Magisterium speaks of responsible parenthood.

Unfortunately, this term, rich with meaning, has been manipulated to become synonymous with the opposite concept: for many, it indeed equates to closing oneself off to fatherhood and motherhood, even definitively.

What does this concept actually mean in sound theology and in the authentic Magisterium of the Church?

In short, it means that the transmission of life, like all weighty human matters, must be guided by right judgment, by a considered decision to call a child or new children into existence, or also, when the case arises, to not call them for the time being. Carlo Caffarra defined it very precisely, saying: responsible procreation is the act of the will by which two spouses decide to establish the conditions for the conception of a new human person, in a context where it is prudently presumed that the person of the (potential) conceived will be respected in their fundamental rights.

From this concept, several corollaries follow.

The first: responsible procreation is not a negative concept, but a positive one. It defines from an ethical point of view how the human will should move towards this goodness present in the sexual act. Only as a consequence does it say how it should not move: that is, when not to procreate.

The second: the will towards a good does not need any extrinsic justification beyond the pure and simple fact that what is willed is a good. The opposite must be justified: not willing a good. Reasons must be had for not procreating, not for procreating. Spouses should consider themselves called to procreate, unless the contrary is demonstrated.

This is precisely the constant doctrine of the Magisterium. Gaudium et spes stated that spouses “will fulfil their task with human and Christian responsibility”. And it then explains that this means: “with docile reverence toward God, will make decisions by common counsel and effort. Let them thoughtfully take into account both their own welfare and that of their children, those already born and those which the future may bring. For this accounting they need to reckon with both the material and the spiritual conditions of the times as well as of their state in life. Finally, they should consult the interests of the family group, of temporal society, and of the Church herself.”

When it is said that spouses must practice responsible parenthood according to right judgment, it means they must do so with a conscience that is formed and docile to the truth (natural, revealed by God, and expressed in the Magisterium of the Church)

We can now understand that responsible parenthood does not mean – as it is sometimes misunderstood – deciding (choosing with complete freedom) whether or not to have more children, or to do so by the means deemed best or most convenient by the spouses themselves. This is why the text of Gaudium et spes continues: “in their manner of acting, spouses should be aware that they cannot proceed arbitrarily, but must always be governed according to a conscience dutifully conformed to the divine law itself, and should be submissive toward the Church’s teaching office, which authentically interprets that law in the light of the Gospel.”

For this reason, Pope John Paul II categorically affirms: “It is necessary to exclude here that procreation which resorts to contraception in order to regulate births can be qualified as ‘responsible’ from an ethical point of view. The true concept of ‘responsible parenthood,’ on the contrary, is connected with honest regulation of fertility from an ethical point of view”

In Humanae vitae, responsible parenthood implies various things:

• First and foremost, the knowledge and respect of the biological processes of procreation; that is, discovering with one’s intelligence the biological laws that are part of the person and are ordered towards giving life. Spouses must strive to know their intimate nature.
• Secondly, it entails the dominion of intelligence and will over the passions and tendencies of instinct concerning sexual life. That is, it implies acquiring moral virtues (chastity, self-control, etc.).
• Thirdly, using the encyclical’s own words, “responsible parenthood is exercised by those who prudently and generously decide to have more children, and by those who, for serious reasons and with due respect to moral precepts, decide not to have additional children for either a certain or an indefinite period of time.” Only in the last place, then, is the decision regarding the number of children or the regulation of births indicated as an exercise of responsible parenthood, and it does so in terms that must be carefully considered:

• It can be, first and foremost, a considered and generous decision to have a large family; nothing is more absurd than identifying ‘responsible parenthood’ with the simple decision to ‘limit’ the family. John Paul II said: “In the concept of ‘responsible parenthood’ there is contained the disposition not only to avoid ‘a new birth,’ but also to make the family grow according to the criteria of prudence” Regarding the number of children, John Paul II said: “It is necessary to establish this just level taking into account not only the good of one’s own family and the state of health and possibilities of the spouses themselves, but also the good of the society to which they belong, of the Church, and even of all humanity. The Encyclical Humanae vitae presents ‘responsible parenthood’ as an expression of a high ethical value… it also supposes the willingness to welcome a more numerous offspring”
• It can also be a decision to avoid a new birth (for a time or for an indefinite period); a decision that must be taken: a) for serious reasons; b) and with respect for the moral law; this last point is fundamental, which is why Pope John Paul II says: “In this light, from which it is necessary to examine and decide the question of ‘responsible parenthood,’ there always remains as central ‘the objective moral order, established by God, of which a faithful interpreter is the right conscience'” And elsewhere: “… Responsible parenthood, that is… morally right regulation of fertility, concerns what is the true good of human persons and what corresponds to the true dignity of the person”

In conclusion: a decision against the moral law of God is objectively never an act of responsible parenthood.

Fr. Miguel A. Fuentes, IVE

Original Post: Here

Bibliography for further study:

Paul VI, Encyclical Humanae vitae.

John Paul II, Exhortation Familiaris consortio.

John Paul II, Responsible parenthood in the light of Gaudium et spes and Humanae vitae (Catechesis of 1/08/84).

John Paul II, The Church’s teachings on the responsible transmission of human life, Address to participants in the International Congress.

John Paul II, Man and Woman. A Theology of the Body.

Catechism of the Catholic Church, nn. 2331-2400.

Caffarra, Carlo, Etica generale della sessualità.