Winters' charge that the Cardinal uses "constant teaching of the church" seems logically spurious. 

He makes an analogy between Burke on  HUMANAE VITAE and Burke on the Curch's teaching on marriage. In the latter case,  Burke cites the the "constant teaching of the church". Indeed, he probably has a strong case here. (Winters suggests that Burke does not start his discourse with the Lord, but he easily could. cf. Mt 19). He does not cite the constant teaching of the church re HV. But why? 

"constant teaching of the church", should really be taken to mean, "where the church has been constant it must remain so". Sure , it has not been constant on HV, because condoms were not around in the 15th century. Similarly, neither has it been constant on nuclear proliferation . Or, one could say the church has trivially been on constant on all of these things: "At all times t, where y was an issue, the church uniformly said x about y". Under either interpretation, Winters' analogy fails.