A debate with fellow Catholic who dissent with some Church teachings (i.e. contraception)

[camerong]

Contraception is a sin inside and outside of marriage.

Humanae Vitae stated that the teaching on contraception is “Based on the principals of human and Christian marriage” but does not restrict it to marriage.

See vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html, paragraph 14.

-Tim-

I believe that is incorrect. My assertion was made by the apologist on on Catholic Answers the day after the Pope’s comments about condoms, and is also made on Jimmy Aiken’s blog at ncregister.com/blog/understanding-the-popes-dilemma-on-condoms. As Mr. Aiken writes,

Thus far the Church has not explored the question of condom use—or other, typically contraceptive acts—in cases outside of marriage.

the Catechism of the Catholic Church states (quoting Paul VI’s 1968 encyclical Humanae Vitae):

“[E]very action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible” is intrinsically evil [CCC 2370].

As Mr. Aiken points out, “conjugal act” clearly refers to marriage, not fornication or adultery.

Mr. Aiken and others could of course be wrong, but you will need a more specific quote than just a link to Humanae Vitae. But as I’ve said before, your position would really make little sense, and would be like the Church delving into whether anal or vaginal sex between unmarried people is better.

 

[camerong]

The problem is that “Rome” (in this case, the Church) never generally says what you’d like it to say…

…and when it does – i.e., ABC within marriage – it has a hard time saying WHY, beyond, “because we’re the Church and we say so.”

. . .

1. You write, “The rule [no ABC within marriage] is not made by “Unmarried men supported by the Sunday collection.” The rule is made by God and is taught to the faithful through God’s visible kingdom on earth which was established by Jesus Christ so that mankind might know his will. That visible kingdom is the Holy Catholic Church.”

–which boils down to “Because the Church says so.”
. . .

1. As to my question, “Have I “left the faith” because, for example, I criticise Rome?”, you responded, “What you call “Criticizing Rome” is public disobence and advocating others to disobey a magesterial teaching of the Church established by Jesus Christ. The conduct of a priest has nothing to do with it.”

–What if “Rome” (or its agents, i.e., bishops) ignores the problem of pedophile priests (which it may have)? Now the conduct of a priest is quite relevant, no?

VonDerTann,
Forgive me for jumping in at the middle of a debate. I would be interested to read your response to my earlier comment. But in response to your above comments:

I share identical views as you do with respect to the non-infallible positions or acts of the Church. The Church is dumb, lazy, inefficient, and even painfully incompetent (or unwilling to act) in some areas. How anyone could question that, I have no idea. But given that the Church is made up of people, it would be unbelievable to have it any other way. Christ made no promises that His Church would be super efficient at administrating or that its leaders would always be honest. He did not promise His Church’s leaders would be honest and forthcoming about terrible scandals such as child molestation. So I feel free to criticize and disagree in these areas.

He did, however, promise that His Church would never promulgate false teachings on morals or spirituality. Among those teachings is that on contraception within marriage (but notably, no teaching about contraception not within marriage, as discussed in my previous post to Tim). Is my believing in this teaching deficient somehow because it is merely what “the Church says so”? I don’t think so. My faith (and reason) tells me that if the Church makes a teaching on faith or morals, it MUST be infallible (because I believe Christ’s words about his Church). From there it is a simple logical procession. “Tom is always correct when he predicts the score of Yankees game. Tom predicted the score of the Yankees game. Ergo, this score must be correct.” Now, the attack on this logic is that Tom is wrong in claiming to be able to predict scores, and likewise that the Church is wrong in claiming to be free from error on faith and morals. But that is really a much, much deeper question than contraception, and goes back to the existence of the Church at all. I ask you, if the Church can be wrong on the most basic thing it claims to be right about, what is the purpose of the Church? Frankly, to me, it is wholly logically untenable to believe the Church could be wrong about contraception but still worth listening to about anything.

 

[Ron_Conte]

1. The Church does in fact teach that some mortal sins are more gravely disordered than other mortal sins. For example, the CCC teaches that rape is a grave sin, but that rape of a child is “graver still” (CCC 2356).

The use of contraception is a grave sin, the use of abortifacient contraception is graver still. Whatever makes an act more disordered morally, makes the act more sinful. So the use of contraception in marriage is a grave sin, but the use of contraception in conjunction with extramarital sexual acts is graver still.

1. Janet Smith: “[Fr.] Rhonheimer asserts that the Church’s teaching on contraception has been rendered only in the context of conjugal acts. That claim is highly debatable. Correspondence that I have with other magisterial theologians indicates that not many of them agree with Rhonheimer. They think that to call contraception “intrinsically evil” means that all contracepted acts, those within and outside of marriage, are immoral. Moreover, many theologians and philosophers think that it is a matter of natural law that contraception is immoral outside of marriage as well as within since it violates the purpose of the sexual act. Until very recently seminarians were taught that contracepting fornicators were guilty of two sins.” (OSV)
2. The Magisterium condemns the distribution and promotion of contraception by governments and institutions, regardless of whether it is used in marriage or outside of marriage, as a grave offense. See Familiaris Consortio, n. 30; Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, n. 234; Evangelium Vitae, n. 17.
3. The Magisterium teaches that contraception is immoral because it separates the two meanings, unitive and procreative, found in human sexuality and in the being of man and woman. This basis for the immorality of contraception does not rely on the marital state, but on the nature of man and woman, on the nature of the human person. Familiaris Consortio, n. 32; Humanae Vitae, n. 12.
4. The Church opposes teaching young unmarried persons how to use contraception in sexual education programs. This opposition is not based solely on the possibility that those young persons might eventually marry and use contraception in marriage. Neither is it based solely on the Church’s opposition to the sin of pre-marital sex. The Church opposes teaching the young how to use contraception because contraception is intrinsically evil and therefore always immoral.
5. The Magisterium teaches that direct sterilization is intrinsically evil and always gravely immoral because it deprives sexual acts of the procreative meaning. Direct sterilization is condemned by the Magisterium, regardless of whether the individual is married or single. And direct sterilization is not necessarily permanent, since the procedure often can be reversed. Contraception is intrinsically evil and always gravely immoral for the same reason as direct sterilization, the deprivation of the procreative meaning from the moral object. We can therefore consider contraception to be a type of direct temporary sterilization.
6. Catholic hospitals are not permitted to dispense contraception, neither to married couples nor to unmarried persons. If the Magisterium taught that contraception were only immoral within marriage, there would be no reason to restrict Catholic physicians in Catholic hospitals from dispensing contraception to unmarried patients in accord with the consciences of the physician and the patients, especially for non-Catholic patients. But such is not the case:

Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith: “Any cooperation whatsoever, institutionally-approved or tolerated, in actions which are in themselves (that is, by their nature and condition) ordered toward a contraceptive end, as well as any that impede the natural result of the sexual act [actuum sexualium] allowing it to be subjected to deliberate sterilization, is absolutely forbidden.” (Quaecumque Sterilizatio, n. 3)

1. Bishop Olmsted of Phoenix recently revoked the Catholic status of St. Joseph’s hospital. He stated three reasons for this action, contraception, sterilization, abortion. The hospital was rebuked by the Bishop for: “Contraceptive counseling, medications, supplies and associated medical and laboratory examinations, including, but not limited to, oral and injectable contraceptives, intrauterine devices, diaphragms, condoms, foams and suppositories”

Every type of contraception was condemned, regardless of whether it was distributed to Catholics or non-Catholics, to married persons or single persons.

1. in Casti Connubii, Pope Pius XI condemns contraception, using the words of St. Augustine:

"Small wonder, therefore, if Holy Writ bears witness that the Divine Majesty regards with greatest detestation this horrible crime and at times has punished it with death. As St. Augustine notes, ‘Intercourse even with one’s legitimate wife is unlawful and wicked where the conception of the offspring is prevented. Onan, the son of Judah, did this and the Lord killed him for it.’ " (St. Augustine, De Adulterinis Coniugiis, Book II, n. 12; Genesis 38:8-10)

The wording used by Saint Augustine and quoted by the Pontiff is this: “even with one’s legitimate wife”. By this wording, Augustine is condemning contraception both outside of marriage and within marriage. He is saying that contraception is still immoral, even within marriage, which implies that it is also immoral outside of marriage. And Pope Pius XI quotes him on this point without any disagreement, correction, or qualification. Then Pope Pius states that this teaching against contraception is an “uninterrupted Christian tradition,” implying that the teaching is also infallible.