The Catholic Message Board
http://forums.avemariaradio.net/

Responsible parenthood
http://forums.avemariaradio.net/viewtopic.php?f=69&t=161916
Page 1 of 1

Author:  Peregrinator [ Sat Dec 19, 2015 9:44 am ]
Post subject:  Responsible parenthood

So this phrase has been in the news quite a bit lately. A couple of related questions:

(1) Did the term "responsible parenthood" originate with Humanae Vitae?

(2) Can the translation of "paternitatis consciae" as "responsible parenthood" be justified? If so, is it the best translation? Are there other contexts in which conscius is translated as "responsible"? Would not the concept of "responsible" (assuming that's what the author meant) be better rendered in Latin as responsalis, responsabilis?

Author:  Obi-Wan Kenobi [ Sat Dec 19, 2015 9:58 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Responsible parenthood

http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/tex ... 3Dconscius

Author:  Obi-Wan Kenobi [ Sat Dec 19, 2015 10:12 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Responsible parenthood

Mmmmmmm ... couscous.

Author:  Peregrinator [ Sat Dec 19, 2015 10:19 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Responsible parenthood

Obi-Wan Kenobi wrote:
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0059%3Aentry%3Dconscius

Is that a definitive answer? I don't see "responsible" among the varied meanings of conscius. In your opinion, is "responsible" a good way of rendering conscius into English?

I believe this is an important question, because if the phrase "responsible parenthood" originated with Humanae Vitae, and it is indeed a mistranslation, then an entire corpus of teaching has been developed around a mistranslated phrase. "Conscious parenthood" or "knowing parenthood" are slightly different than "responsible parenthood," a phrase which lends itself to the notion that parents should (or even must) seek to limit the conception of children in accordance with their means. I think this is contrary to the authentic teaching that they can (but not must or even should) choose to postpone conception if they have just reasons for doing so.

N.B.: The French version also has "responsible" (responsable). So do the Spanish and the Italian! I also note that the headings are omitted in the Latin -- one wonders if they were added by the translators (all of them?) or if they were removed when the Latin was finalized.

Author:  Peregrinator [ Sat Dec 19, 2015 10:27 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Responsible parenthood

I did a search on Google and while the phrase "responsible parenthood" did not originate with Humanae Vitae, it appears that HV introduced it into the Catholic lexicon - or at least made the phrase acceptable among Catholics in general. Prior to 1960 it was used by those in favor of population control and those Christians who rejected abortion but not contraception (and so used as a euphemism for "birth control"). It does seem like there were a few Catholic writers who were using the phrase from 1963 onward.

Author:  Obi-Wan Kenobi [ Sat Dec 19, 2015 10:33 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Responsible parenthood

Lewis and Short is the standard Latin dictionary for classical Latin; I don't know if it deals with ecclesial usage much.

Author:  Mrs. Timmy [ Sat Dec 19, 2015 10:37 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Responsible parenthood

Obi-Wan Kenobi wrote:
Mmmmmmm ... couscous.


I have a fantastic recipe for orange chicken that's served on couscous...interested?

Author:  Peregrinator [ Sat Dec 19, 2015 10:38 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Responsible parenthood

I mean, this might be one of those "active participation" things.

Author:  Bombadil [ Sat Dec 19, 2015 11:22 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Responsible parenthood

The "doctrine" of responsible parenthood is wrong.

I hate to go all sola scriptura here, but I can't find any support for it in the Bible, rather the opposite. I find nowhere in the Bible where limiting the number of one's children is recommended or seen as beneficial. Rather, children are referred to as a blessing and barrenness as a curse. Then there is the quiver full verse in Psalms.

Author:  Peregrinator [ Sat Dec 19, 2015 11:50 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Responsible parenthood

Bombadil wrote:
The "doctrine" of responsible parenthood is wrong.

If you mean interpreted as "parents should not have more children if they don't have the means to support them," then yes, it is wrong.

Author:  Bombadil [ Sat Dec 19, 2015 1:00 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Responsible parenthood

Yes, but also that it is somehow better not to have children, not just that it would be wrong to.

Author:  Pro Ecclesia Dei [ Sun Dec 20, 2015 11:12 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Responsible parenthood

The meaning is unchanged. It still means (with genitive) conscious of or knowing of. Here, "a conscious/knowing parenthood"

Author:  Peregrinator [ Sun Dec 20, 2015 3:36 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Responsible parenthood

Pro Ecclesia Dei wrote:
The meaning is unchanged. It still means (with genitive) conscious of or knowing of. Here, "a conscious/knowing parenthood"

That is what I thought, at least for the Latin (which I'm going to guess is from the editio typica -- and further guess that the vernacular translations were made before the editio typica was done, and never corrected). But "responsible parenthood" carries other connotations -- just as with comparing Catholics with large families to "rabbits," it's a phrase used by the Church's enemies.

Author:  Peregrinator [ Sun Dec 20, 2015 3:41 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Responsible parenthood

"Knowing parenthood" might be, "I know that I am poor and can't really afford another child, but I trust in Divine Providence."

"Responsible parenthood" might be, "I am poor and can't really afford another child, so I will do the responsible thing and not have any more children." And I think that interpretation is what is being promoted by some in the Church today.

Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 5 hours
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/