A wholly reasonable approach to birth control

[Genesis315]

We they did. Not every family was populated with 13 kids. How do you explain having only 3?

A child isn’t created everytime a couple has intercourse. Some are more fertile than others. Plus, not all couples are having sex all the time. Some do more than others. Periods of abstinance in marriage is fine with mutual consent (St. Paul even recommends it). It would be rash judgment to assume all were sinning. But, the fact is, people do sin as well. That doesn’t make it not a sin even if many do so (many are called, but few are chosen, and few find the narrow gate, as Jesus says).

Look at the fruits of the proliferation of contraception–is the sexual revolution it led to a good thing? Are families more or less broken? Is divorce more or less common? Are other much more obviously disordered sexual and anti-life practices more or less common or commonly accepted?

The fruits speak for themselves that this is contrary to our nature.

 

[JohnStrachan]

The fruits speak for themselves that this is contrary to our nature.

The use of contraception alone does not lead to broken families, divorce, disordered anti-life practices. I could just as well argue that NPF leads to frustration and undermines spontaneity.

 

[Toledo]

A wholly reasonable approach to birth control Moral Theology

The Church’s teaching on contraception is not a rule. It’s a teaching on the moral law. It’s doctrine.

Yes, you are correct. I knew that but was a little too loose with my language…I need to be more precise sometimes!

 

[Genesis315]

The use of contraception alone does not lead to broken families, divorce, disordered anti-life practices. I could just as well argue that NPF leads to frustration and undermines spontaneity.

We don’t see the negative results necessarily of each individual sin. Sometimes we “get away with it.” But human beings are social creatures. The proliferation of a particular sins can have deleterious effects on the society as a whole.

Virtue can certainly be divisive as well, as Jesus says, but that is when it is opposed by sin. The flesh is weak and must be subdued to the spirit, otherwise conflict can happen both within and with others (we’re all sinners, so we can all appreciate this I think).

 

[1ke]

So why would the Orthodox church veer from the moral law?

See above, cutting itself off from the infallible teaching authority leads to error. The Orthodox have been cut off from Rome, which has led to error in their practices.

In the “economy” areas I’ve seen in the Orthodox churches it goes like this (a simplification):

Thing X is a sin. Thing X is hard. So apply “economy” to that, so you can do X because we know it hard. Contraception and divorce/remarriage are two that come to mind.

 

[MarkRome]

Sounds very much like the protestant Episcopal Church at their Lambeth Conference of 1930. Contraception is intrinsically evil. All churches, protestant, Catholic, Orthodox, believed it was a sin up until 1930 when the Episcopal Church opened the door. Unfortunately, the Ukranian Orthodox Church of Canada has bought into this cultural mindset.

Because there isn’t consistency of beliefs among different Orthodox Churches, I bet not all Orthodox believe contraception is OK.

 

[Todd_Easton]

The Catholic Answers tract, “What the Early Church Believed: Contraception and Sterilization,” contains quotations from early Church Fathers supporting the Catholic perspective.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

On the web page for the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Canada under beliefs and practices concerning birth control it states:

"The view of most Orthodox bodies is that controlling conception through “natural family planning”, or contraception, is acceptable for married couples, as long as it is done in a spirit of responsible Christian stewardship of life.

This means, first, that birth control will not be used merely because having and rearing children is seen as a financial or social inconvenience. Secondly, it means that any form of contraception used will not be physically harmful to either spouse, and will not involve the abortion of a fertilized egg. Finally, the decision to utilize birth control, as well as the decision to have a child, must be a mutual one between both wife and husband."

This seems like a reasonable approach to birth control. So why do the Orthodox and RC churches have such a differing perspective?

Because, on this issue, the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of Canada is simply wrong.

Contraception is intrinsically evil, meaning that any deliberate, willful, intended use of it is sinful. The traditional teaching of the Catholic Church is that any deliberate, completed sin of the flesh — and it is a sin of the flesh (basically mutual pleasuring) — is a mortal sin, given the other two conditions that every Catholic should know.

 

[Gorgias]

This seems like a reasonable approach to birth control. So why do the Orthodox and RC churches have such a differing perspective?

I’m not seeing how this differs from the Catholic position!

 

[JohnStrachan]

that every Catholic should know.

This is laughable. If it isn’t taught, it can’t be known… If there is no NFP coaches or training in the churches, couples have not opportunity to learn. If it’s brushed off during marriage prep or even scoffed at, how can you expect it to gain any traction?

 

[Mrchatsworth]

Because much like any person who wants satisfaction of lust without consequences they choose to divorce sex from God.

 

[JohnStrachan]

satisfaction of lust without consequences

Are you suggesting that if a couple uses contraception then they are simply giving in to lust?

 

[Mrchatsworth]

Sure. 10 characters

 

[goout]

"The view of most Orthodox bodies is that controlling conception through “natural family planning”, or contraception,

These are not the same thing.

 

[goout]

Toledo:

It is simple…the Catholic Church’s rules

The Church’s teaching on contraception is not a rule. It’s a teaching on the moral law. It’s doctrine.

Yes.
It’s also not an arbitrary negative prohibition manufactured out of thin air by the Church.

1. The Church’s moral theology observes the good that God reveals. If you don’t grasp this as the foundation for morality, none of the rest makes sense.

Question for readers to ponder:
What is the good that the Church’s moral theology, and sexual moral theology more specifically, observes and affirms?

 

[JohnStrachan]

Sure. 10 characters

If it’s so fundamental then why is teaching NFP not a bigger priority for the church? I mean, why wouldn’t there be a nation-wide network of coaches and teams in every church. Instead, crickets.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

HomeschoolDad:

that every Catholic should know.

This is laughable. If it isn’t taught, it can’t be known… If there is no NFP coaches or training in the churches, couples have not opportunity to learn. If it’s brushed off during marriage prep or even scoffed at, how can you expect it to gain any traction?

I’m not sure my meaning came across. Mortal sin consists of three elements:

• The matter itself is mortally sinful (or as many like to say these days, gravely sinful — in this case, same thing)
• The sinner is sufficiently aware that it is mortally sinful
• The sinner fully wants to commit the sin

These are the conditions that every Catholic should know. I was not referring to knowing NFP. I was referring to knowing what a mortal sin is. Many these days have no clue.

 

[Rau]

The view of most Orthodox bodies is that controlling conception through “natural family planning”, or contraception, is acceptable

Seems they start off by defining (using) words to have different meanings!

 

[Rau]

What does orthodox mean? It means “correct belief”

If my name is Jo Perfect, does that make me perfect?

 

[on_the_hill]

JohnStrachan:

This seems like a reasonable approach to birth control. So why do the Orthodox and RC churches have such a differing perspective?

I’m not seeing how this differs from the Catholic position!

I agree. Unless I read it wrong, it talks about natural family planning, not contraception in general.