birth control

[ohyah007]

is the practice of not using birth control biblically supported, or is it just something that the catholic church feels is immoral because its stopping possible human life. I don’t believe that when onan pulled out and was killed for it to be a bible chapter against birth control because i think that he was killed for not obeying to make his sister-in-law pregnant.

 

[Seatuck]

is the practice of not using birth control biblically supported, or is it just something that the catholic church feels is immoral because its stopping possible human life. I don’t believe that when onan pulled out and was killed for it to be a bible chapter against birth control because i think that he was killed for not obeying to make his sister-in-law pregnant.

If you study that subject more closely I think you will change what you think.

catholic.com/thisrock/1991/9107chap.asp

Of course the church also teaches it is wrong through moral tradition and that it is damaging to marriage.
vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html

You should take a good long look at what the church teaches about marriage and marital relations since you are planning to be married.

scborromeo.org/ccc/p2s2c3a7.htm

I’d also recommend The Good News About Sex and Marriage by Christopher West. As well as Holy Sex… by Greg Popcak. Love and Responsibility by Karol Wotyla.

For deeper study - Theology of the Body by John Paul 2 or any of the studies of that work. Christopher West has several of those.

Here are some articles by Christopher West to give you an overview-

catholiceducation.org/articles/sexuality/se0109.html

 

[Lancer]

If it isn’t…remember
(1) Divine revelation is from the One source (The Word Made Flesh–Jesus Christ) with two “streams”…first and foremost is Sacred Scripture and then Sacred Tradition (things the apostles verbally passed on about Jesus’ teachings and sayings).

(2) When Jesus established his Church on Peter (the Rock)…he also said that whatever you bind on earth…is also bound in heaven…whatever you loosen on earth…is also loosened in heaven (Matt 16:16-19). Jesus also tells the apostles that the Holy Spirit, the Advocate, will come and teach and lead them in all truth (Jn 14: 6, 15-18, 25-27)…and Paul tells Timothy (1Tim 3:15) that the pillar and bulwark of Truth is the Church (not Holy Scripture).

In other words…when the Pope/the Magisterium speaks or teaches on faith and morals—its an infallible teaching and we must give our ascent of faith to their teaching…we may struggle to follow it…but I can’t dismiss it and say it does not apply to me…I have to keep praying and wrestling with the teaching… being docile to the Holy Spirit’s graces and gifts (wisdom, counsel, knowledge, understanding, fortitude, piety and fear of the Lord) to help me give full ascent and obedience.

Why would you believe the doctrine of transubstantiation and the Real Presence (this is my body…take and eat…this is my blood…take and drink)…or the One God-person of Jesus with two natures – human and divine – with God the Son, the Second person of the Holy Trinity, as the Person who is always saying and doing whatever Jesus is saying or doing…that Mary was conceived without original sin…or that Mary is and always will be the Virgin Mary in time and in eternity…or that Mary is truely the Mother of God…and then say…that that same Church and Holy Father and Magisterium who teaches all these very mysterious doctrines/dogmas…is in error on its teachings about contraception/birth control in marriage…its the same Holy Spirit who is guiding the Church and its Pope & bishops in all matters of faith and morals…through time…until the end of the age. The Pope is the Vicar of Christ on earth…if you believe that, why doubt his teaching on contraception?

Hope some of this helps…and believe me, I struggle with much more that the Church’s teaching on contraception…but I know the minute I start picking and choosing…I set myself up as my own little “magisterium”…with my own “chair” or said another (Peter Kreeft) way…“ah, excuse me Jesus and Pope Benedict, but you are sitting in my chair!”

Dietrich Bonhoeffer said that the first response to the grace of justification…is obedience…not love or hope or any feelings/emotions…simple obedience in faith to Jesus Christ.

Pax Christi

 

[ohyah007]

so the only times that i can have sex is when i’m going to have children?

 

[1ke]

is the practice of not using birth control biblically supported, or is it just something that the catholic church feels is immoral because its stopping possible human life.

Of course it is based on the teachings of Christ, as is all Catholic doctrine.

And, the Church does not teach that spacing/planning/avoiding pregnancy for a just reason (a.k.a. “birth control”) is immoral. The Church teaches that *contraception *is an immoral means of birth control.

I don’t believe that when onan pulled out and was killed for it to be a bible chapter against birth control because i think that he was killed for not obeying to make his sister-in-law pregnant.

Well, you are wrong.

What you “think” here is based on your desire to do something the Church states is wrong. The Church has both the authority and the credentials to rightly interpret Scripture. The interpretation you give is novel and is unsupported by any early Church writings or teachings. All of the early Church teachings support the Church’s teaching regarding Onan. The Church is infallible. You are not.

 

[1ke]

so the only times that i can have sex is when i’m going to have children?

No.

Each time you have intercourse with your spouse, that marital act must be unaltered and completed vaginally. That means it is both unitive and procreative, objectively, whether or not it results in conception. God did not design the human body to conceive every time the marital act is engaged in.

 

[LeroyCRHP]

Natural rhythm is accepted. That is taught at our church.

so the only times that i can have sex is when i’m going to have children?

 

[Garbage_Man]

Natural rhythm is accepted. That is taught at our church.

Natural rhythm is far too dependent on factors the average person cannot reliably measure by themselves to be a reliable birth control method. Any woman who uses it with the intent of avoiding pregnancy is asking to get pregnant.

 

[1ke]

Natural rhythm is far too dependent on factors the average person cannot reliably measure by themselves to be a reliable birth control method. Any woman who uses it with the intent of avoiding pregnancy is asking to get pregnant.

That depends on what he means by “natural rhythm.”

If he means the calendar rhythm method, which is based on averages, then yes that method is highly unreliable. However, it is NOT taught by Church ministries and hasn’t been for over 40 years.

If he means the modern, scientific methods of natural family planning that all rely on the natural rhythm of the cycle and the fertility signs of the woman, then those are indeed highly reliable and easy to learn.

And, as for natural methods being “dependent on factors the average person cannot reliably measure by themselves”… that is just plain untrue.

 

[Garbage_Man]

If he means the calendar rhythm method, which is based on averages, then yes that method is highly unreliable. However, it is NOT taught by Church ministries and hasn’t been for over 40 years.

This is what I meant, it is the only form of “rhythm method” I am familiar with. How does this more reliable method work?

For that matter, if it is a reliable method of contraception… why exactly are other methods (condoms, oral contraceptives, etc.) prohibited? Because it seems to me that if your intent, and result, are the same, what does it matter which method you use? Shouldn’t trying to have sex without allowing procreation either be acceptable or not? Why split hairs?

 

[RobertLGarrett]

This is what I meant, it is the only form of “rhythm method” I am familiar with. How does this more reliable method work?

For that matter, if it is a reliable method of contraception… why exactly are other methods (condoms, oral contraceptives, etc.) prohibited? Because it seems to me that if your intent, and result, are the same, what does it matter which method you use? Shouldn’t trying to have sex without allowing procreation either be acceptable or not? Why split hairs?

Ah…the key is the “have sex” portion of your question. In Natural Family Planning, the only way you “avoid procreation,” is by not having sex…at times when a woman is fertile. Not having sex (i.e. abstaining) is not the same as “having sex without allowing procreation.”

EDIT ADD:

* The fecundity of marriage

2366 Fecundity is a gift, an end of marriage, for conjugal love naturally tends to be fruitful. A child does not come from outside as something added on to the mutual love of the spouses, but springs from the very heart of that mutual giving, as its fruit and fulfillment. So the Church, which is "on the side of life,"151 teaches that "it is necessary that each and every marriage act remain ordered per se to the procreation of human life."152 "This particular doctrine, expounded on numerous occasions by the Magisterium, is based on the inseparable connection, established by God, which man on his own initiative may not break, between the unitive significance and the procreative significance which are both inherent to the marriage act."153

2367 Called to give life, spouses share in the creative power and fatherhood of God.154 "Married couples should regard it as their proper mission to transmit human life and to educate their children; they should realize that they are thereby cooperating with the love of God the Creator and are, in a certain sense, its interpreters. They will fulfill this duty with a sense of human and Christian responsibility."155

2368 A particular aspect of this responsibility concerns the regulation of procreation. For just reasons, spouses may wish to space the births of their children. It is their duty to make certain that their desire is not motivated by selfishness but is in conformity with the generosity appropriate to responsible parenthood. Moreover, they should conform their behavior to the objective criteria of morality:

When it is a question of harmonizing married love with the responsible transmission of life, the morality of the behavior does not depend on sincere intention and evaluation of motives alone; but it must be determined by objective criteria, criteria drawn from the nature of the person and his acts criteria that respect the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love; this is possible only if the virtue of married chastity is practiced with sincerity of heart.156
2369 "By safeguarding both these essential aspects, the unitive and the procreative, the conjugal act preserves in its fullness the sense of true mutual love and its orientation toward man’s exalted vocation to parenthood."157

2370 Periodic continence, that is, the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality.158 These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom**. In contrast, “every 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**:159

Thus the innate language that expresses the total reciprocal self-giving of husband and wife is overlaid, through contraception, by an objectively contradictory language, namely, that of not giving oneself totally to the other. This leads not only to a positive refusal to be open to life but also to a falsification of the inner truth of conjugal love, which is called upon to give itself in personal totality. . . . The difference, both anthropological and moral, between contraception and recourse to the rhythm of the cycle . . . involves in the final analysis two irreconcilable concepts of the human person and of human sexuality.160

 

[Garbage_Man]

every 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:

Okay, I get this. But it seems that deliberately abstaining from sex to avoid having children is the same thing. Example: Let’s say I married a woman, and we together intended never to have children. If we only used this rhythm method to prevent conception, would that be acceptable? I would guess not, because the purpose of a catholic marriage is to procreate, right? But then, where is the limit at which it becomes acceptable? If we only have one child, is that enough? Must we have two, or three, or four? At what point can my wife and I decide we will never have any more children, and use this method to carry out our intent?

 

[RobertLGarrett]

Okay, I get this. But it seems that deliberately abstaining from sex to avoid having children is the same thing. Example: Let’s say I married a woman, and we together intended never to have children. If we only used this rhythm method to prevent conception, would that be acceptable? I would guess not, because the purpose of a catholic marriage is to procreate, right? But then, where is the limit at which it becomes acceptable? If we only have one child, is that enough? Must we have two, or three, or four? At what point can my wife and I decide we will never have any more children?

You are correct. To go into a marriage with the idea of never having children would not be licit - see CCC 2367 in previous post.

As far as the number of children, there isn’t a set number. The decision must not be based on “selfishness.” It should conform with the “generosity appropriate to responsible parenthood.” (CCC 2368) Also, there are situations where the health of the mother are a concern. For example, after our fourth child, my wife was very concerned because she had gestational diabetes and was bedridden for much of her pregnancy. We have opted to use NFP. If she becomes pregnant, we will still, of course, have the baby.

 

[1ke]

This is what I meant, it is the only form of “rhythm method” I am familiar with. How does this more reliable method work?

www.ccli.org
www.creightonmodel.com
www.boma-usa.org
www.marquette.edu/nursing/NFP/Model.shtml

For that matter, if it is a reliable method of contraception… why exactly are other methods (condoms, oral contraceptives, etc.) prohibited?

Natural familiy planning is not contraception.

Because it seems to me that if your intent, and result, are the same, what does it matter which method you use?

Of course it does.

If my intent is to support my family, I can choose from the following means:

(a) get a job
(b) rob a bank
(c) euthanize Grandma for the substantial inheritance

The end is moral: supporting my family
Only one of the three means are moral: working

Spacing/avoiding pregnancy for a time is a moral end. There are various means to achieve that.

(a) abstaining
(b) contracepting

Only (a) is moral.

Every time you engage in an act of intercourse it must be completely unaltered.

Contraception alters the act to render it infertile.

Natural family planning is information that one can use to decide to have intercourse or abstain from it. One never alters the act when one engages in it.

Shouldn’t trying to have sex without allowing procreation either be acceptable or not?

Certainly. Contraception does this and is always wrong.

Natural family planning does not do this. There is NEVER any attempt to have sex and not allow it reach its natural end.

Why split hairs?

The Church does NOT split hairs.

 

[1ke]

Okay, I get this. But it seems that deliberately abstaining from sex to avoid having children is the same thing.

If you are reading this right now, you are deliberately abstaining from sex.

God does not issue any positive command to have sex with a particular frequency or at a particular time.

Moreover, our bodies are created so that they are naturally fertile some of the time and naturally infertile some of the time. God designed the body this way.

Example: Let’s say I married a woman, and we together intended never to have children.

That intent renders your marriage null. One cannot enter a valid marriage with this intent.

If we only used this rhythm method to prevent conception, would that be acceptable?

You would not be guilty of contraception.

It would absolutely be valid to use natural family planning to avoid children for a time-- or indefinitely-- IF one has a just reason.

I would guess not, because the purpose of a catholic marriage is to procreate, right? But then, where is the limit at which it becomes acceptable? If we only have one child, is that enough? Must we have two, or three, or four? At what point can my wife and I decide we will never have any more children, and use this method to carry out our intent?

The Church states that one may space/avoid pregnancy for a just reason. It is up to each couple to discern just reasons that are in conformity with the moral law.

 

[Garbage_Man]

Natural familiy planning is not contraception.

Isn’t it “planning” if you are trying to control when and how many children you have?

Spacing/avoiding pregnancy for a time is a moral end. There are various means to achieve that.

(a) abstaining
(b) contracepting

Only (a) is moral.

Every time you engage in an act of intercourse it must be completely unaltered.

Does that make it moral for a married couple to, if they so choose, abstain from sex permanently, if they don’t want children?

 

[RobertLGarrett]

Isn’t it “planning” if you are trying to control when and how many children you have?

Um…yeah…thus the word “planning” in Natural Family Planning. If you are using “Artificial” Birth Control, however, it isn’t “natural.” I’m surprised that isn’t obvious…

 

[Janet_S]

so the only times that i can have sex is when i’m going to have children?

This is one of the best explanations of the Church’s teachings on artificial birth control:

“Contraception, Why Not?” by Janet Smith

janetsmith.excerptsofinri.com/

 

[bookgirl32]

Okay, I get this. But it seems that deliberately abstaining from sex to avoid having children is the same thing. Example: Let’s say I married a woman, and we together intended never to have children. If we only used this rhythm method to prevent conception, would that be acceptable? I would guess not, because the purpose of a catholic marriage is to procreate, right? But then, where is the limit at which it becomes acceptable? If we only have one child, is that enough? Must we have two, or three, or four? At what point can my wife and I decide we will never have any more children, and use this method to carry out our intent?

The purpose of a Catholic marriage is to fulfill a vocation given by God, procreation is part of it, if God wills it.

NFP can be abused morally. However, the abuse of NFP does not make NFP contraception. Contraception can ONLY exist in the context of sexual intercourse. If NFP is used correctly (even immorally) and the only intercourse engaged in is finished vaginally without artificial barrier or hormonal / chemical interference, it is not contraception. If a couple “says” they’re using NFP while using above listed ABC, it is not really NFP (as the Church defines NFP).

 

[Holly3278]

Some verses relevant to the issue of birth control are:

Genesis 1:28 RSV And God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.”

Genesis 9:1 RSV And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth.

Genesis 9:7 RSV And you, be fruitful and multiply, bring forth abundantly on the earth and multiply in it."

Genesis 35:11 RSV And God said to him, "I am God Almighty: be fruitful and multiply; a nation and a company of nations shall come from you, and kings shall spring from you.

In the above verses we see the command to be fruitful and multiply. How can one do this if they are using artificial birth control?

Genesis 28:3 RSV God Almighty bless you and make you fruitful and multiply you, that you may become a company of peoples.

Here we see fertility as a blessing.

Genesis 38:8 RSV Then Judah said to Onan, “Go in to your brother’s wife, and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.”
Genesis 38:9 RSV But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother’s wife he spilled the semen on the ground, lest he should give offspring to his brother.
Genesis 38:10 RSV And what he did was displeasing in the sight of the LORD, and he slew him also.

Here we see that Onan died because the Lord punished him for using coitus interruptus. One cannot use coitus interruptus even today without being in a state of grave sin.

1 Chronicles 25:5 RSV All these were the sons of Heman the king’s seer, according to the promise of God to exalt him; for God had given Heman fourteen sons and three daughters.

Here we see a person who was blessed for having many children.

These are just a couple of verses related to birth control. You can visit the following website for more verses:

scripturecatholic.com/contraception.html

Also, visit the following website for more information about birth control:

omsoul.com/