Can this be true??

[askeptic]

Semper Fi:

Why are you here posting flamebait? Catholics teachings on contraceptives applies to only Catholics. Anyone who is not a Catholic obviously is not going to abide by Catholic teaching. Why are you holding the Church responsible for people’s sins? We teach that the husband must respect his wife, and if some African isn’t doing that, because he is a sinner, how can the Church as a whole be held responsible for that? It seems to me that you have a vehement hatred for the Catholic Church. Ever wonder why the Catholic Church is the target of so much hate? You keep on posting these fallacies and it is a sure way to get banned… One more thing, you are being very bigoted by saying a homosexual cannot control themselves.

Fallacies? It is a fact that the Church forbids divorced people to remarry.

This means that if a man is cheated on and left by his wife, he must spend the rest of his life alone, because marrying another woman would be adultery. It means that if a woman finds her husband is abusive, she can separate from him, but she cannot find love and marry again.

The Church teaches that people cannot marry if they intend to have no children. This means that men and women who love each other but want to dedicate themselves completely to science, medicine, or say building infrastructure in Africa must choose between love and their dreams.

What is the point of this? How does this help human beings?

It is not the fault of the Church that some African husbands are selfish and don’t respect their wives, but it is the fault of the Church if those wives don’t use contraception to protect themselves because they are afraid of committing a sin.

I am angry at the Catholic Church for all the damage it has done to humanity throughout the years. But I am by no means telling falsehoods, merely expressing a point of view.

 

[magdelaine]

EtienneGilson:

If it is accessable through natural law, one would wonder why the Catholic Church stands alone, not even with the Orthodox on the issue.

And yet the magisterium has changed moral teachings like slavery and torture before. The pope has not invoked the office of infallibility on the subject and has engaged arguments. It really isn’t much of an argument if no criticism can be leveled.

There is only one magisterium and it is not the pope. Do not suppose that infalliblity is such a magical tool.

Ahhh, finally a breath of fresh air… This is the information I was looking for. My husband and I have been turning the arguments against contraception over and over. It begins to sound like “if God intended us to fly, he would have given us wings”, therefore we shouldn’t ride in airplanes. This is not about being open to life. As stated before, using a condom involves the risk of pregnancy. So does using NFP. If a couple is open to children that are concieved, what is wrong with using latex or NFP to reduce the chance that it might happen if it is not a particularly opportune time for pregnancy? It’s about playing the odds, not being at odds with life, per se.

In reviewing my original question, it seems that the best answer for this couple IS abstinence; not because condoms are inherently evil (still having all kinds of trouble with that one) but because there is a risk to the fetus. It would be a small sacrifice to make for the child.

As to the earlier point, I will pray that my beloved Church finds enlightenment on this as it has on other teachings.

 

[magdelaine]

askeptic:

Fallacies? It is a fact that the Church forbids divorced people to remarry.

This means that if a man is cheated on and left by his wife, he must spend the rest of his life alone, because marrying another woman would be adultery. It means that if a woman finds her husband is abusive, she can separate from him, but she cannot find love and marry again.

The Church teaches that people cannot marry if they intend to have no children. This means that men and women who love each other but want to dedicate themselves completely to science, medicine, or say building infrastructure in Africa must choose between love and their dreams.

What is the point of this? How does this help human beings?

It is not the fault of the Church that some African husbands are selfish and don’t respect their wives, but it is the fault of the Church if those wives don’t use contraception to protect themselves because they are afraid of committing a sin.

I am angry at the Catholic Church for all the damage it has done to humanity throughout the years. But I am by no means telling falsehoods, merely expressing a point of view.

While I have thought you made a few good points here and there, you are hijacking this thread with opinions about the Church on things you clearly don’t understand. Have you had a conversation with a priest lately? You would find it VERY enlightening.

As someone who has made a few mistakes in life, including a prior “marriage”, I have managed to come Home to the Catholic Church and I am living in a sacramental marriage. The Church is not perfect, but it IS Jesus’ body and bride here on earth. Search deeper and you will find the Grace within.

Peace be with you.

 

[precious_roy]

Ok, well I can see where the problem lies. If you aren’t Catholic and do not agree with Catholic teachings, then you need to take a step back and first start arguing why Catholicism is true or not, so start another thread. You cannot go about disproving something properly basic (Catholicism) by demonstrating that its consequences (contraception) do not fit with your sense of the world (example: I don’t see black holes nor do I have any concept of negative energy, but I don’t throw out relativity and quantum mechanics as nonsense). You might be able to justify to yourself why you don’t think it is not true, but it only provides minor undercutting argument to the basic belief. When the concept becomes SO restrictive as to serve absolutely no value at all any more (which I don’t think that you are trying to demonstrate), then I would consider getting rid of it.

So, like I said, start another thread about why you think Catholicism is false. And, like I mentioned before, saying something is not true because you don’t like one of its consequences or think that it is harmful is a non-sequiter.

 

[bear06]

askeptic:

As I have said before, Catholicism doesn’t place a great deal of value on human happiness and quality of life.

Love, companionship, relationships are all very important to human beings. Happiness is important. Enjoying life is important. Perhaps a female scientist with a male companion will be happier, more stable emotionally, and as a consequence a more productive scientist.

This is what I mean. If you don’t start out with a belief in God and and an everlasting life, we’ll never reach much common ground making this conversation pointless.

All of these things are only important to human beings as far as they will lead us to everlasting life. A man can be a hermit and still attain everlasting life with God. Ture happiness is only found in God’s will and that may not be found in our earthly time.

Basically, we have an ultimate goal that you do not share as an agnostic. Our life here is not the goal for most of us. Our life hear is only a path to that goal. Catholicism has the ultimate goal of our happiness with God in heaven. What you seem to be speaking of is relativism because that’s what “quality of life” would fall under.

 

[bear06]

What I don’t support are ideologies that force one kind of lifestyle on every single person

Neither God nor the Catholic Church forces any kind of lifestyle on anyone. Nobody is forced to be Catholic. It’s called free will. These are the Truths of our faith. You can accept or reject them at will.

 

[jdnation]

askeptic:

It is a fact that the Church forbids divorced people to remarry

This is correct, it has been since the Old Testament Law given to Moses. Remarriage risks STDs being spread amongst people, as well hopefully this will deter a divorce from happening even for such a reason as sexual intercourse. It is sad and unfortunate that either party must suffer, but that is what happens. They may make a case where the marriage can be found to be invalid, but otherwise they have no choice but to bear it. If the couple wishes to avoid this they must reconcile amongst themselves and avoid breaking up their marriage. I realize this is extremely hard to accomplish, but it is the only way. The other option is of course waiting until your spouse is dead… but let’s not think of aiding that option. Of course we have even to tackle the issues if the couple have children!

The Church teaches that people cannot marry if they intend to have no children. This means that men and women who love each other but want to dedicate themselves completely to science, medicine, or say building infrastructure in Africa must choose between love and their dreams.

Of course people who are unopen to children should not be allowed to marry! This logically follows since contraception is not allowed! And if they didn’t want kids in the first place chances are they’d make lousy parents. If one wishes to dedicate themselves so much to science etc. why marry or have a love life at all either? That will only get in the way. Right? Why not take the argument that far? How many love stories/movies can we list that involve two people in love, but one wants to chase a dream and they are forced to choose between what is more important due to teh chance of separation etc.? These problems can exist with children or without children. If anything it will be more convenient to follow your large dreams without the ‘hindrance’ of marriage. But perhaps it would be more adventerous to do both and even have kids and God is certainly not opposed to it.

What is the point of this? How does this help human beings?

These are harsh rules, but we are held to a perfect standard despite our shortcomings. If you do not like it, then we cannot convince you any further. You are free to settle for something of a lower standard, and with it the risks of STDs and couples who can divorce at the drop of a hat. Become too lenient, as society has surely become, and things are worse and taken for granted. What’s to stop them from finally taking the gun and firing the final bullet into what we call marriage. Now people no longer think marriage is of any use, preferring to ‘co-habitate’ with each other, have children out of wedlock, and increase their chances of STDs etc. while hoping technology and medicine will catch up to aid them. It is such leniency about marriage that is leading society to have unhappy marriages, breakups, adultery, pre-marital sex, abortion, homosexuality, polygamy and we’re even in danger of soon allowing what they call ‘intergenerational love’ which is really a fancy cotton candy word for pedophilia/pedaresty.

All we like sheep have gone astray, we remove children from the sexual act, then we removed the sexual act from marriage, and soon we may do away with the concept of marriage altogether. After all many already see it as limiting, there is after all so much ‘happiness’ in having multiple partners, some even would suggest that it is unnatural for anyone to have one partner. One thing leads to another. God and the wisest know this, this is human nature, and we must therefore not be allowed to be as lenient as we like, cleary we have abused our free will.

contd>

 

[jdnation]

It is the fault of the Church if those wives don’t use contraception to protect themselves because they are afraid of committing a sin.

Well as harsh as the African situation is, let’s first remember how they got that way to the point where the situation is such a mess that women who want to avoid sin must tolerate harsh realities. We are all sufferring because of the effects fo the fall and our first ancestor Adam. We are all born into a world where we are vulnerable, get hurt, feel pain, have to fight the temptations of our flesh and die. Entropy continues and the world and humanity are in a state of constant degenerating ‘death.’ But no matter how bad it gets we are called to live up to the standard of perfection even if it kills us. The African women will have to refuse sex, and if they are beaten or forced, even with a condom, then it is not their fault. This is no laughing matter, neither am I trying to make light of this situation and dismiss it. This is terrible! But we cannot go against what God commands of us and must endure until we die or He personally comes down and fixes everything. This is the noble thing to do. Perhaps you are horrified, but since you are an agnostic the reality of God and absolutes do not occur to you so you will not take it seriously and continue to follow your own falliable opinions within your limited experience. We cannot force women, or you, or anyone else to follow these rules, you either accept and obey them or you don’t. You find no reason to if you do not believe in God. Thus humanity as a whole will see the fruit it bears and frankly, it is already rotten.

I am angry at the Catholic Church for all the damage it has done to humanity throughout the years. But I am by no means telling falsehoods, merely expressing a point of view.

And I am angry at mankind, and especially myself for all we’ve contributed to getting to where we are today. However the law remains and ought to be followed for our own good. You may be pessimestic about how we cope with such rules since they are especially so hard to follow, but I am optimistic that if we did indeed attempt to follow them we can better our situation significantly overtime. Even if technology provides perfect ways to prevent STDs and cure Aids, this will only lead to more widespread immorality and we will be less in touch and intimate with each other as we give ourselves up to more selfishness even at an unconscious level. The Catholic Church has done nothing. There aren’t even statistically that many Catholics in all of Africa (13.2%) ! So it’s not like the large majority would listen to us anyway… . plus it’s not like the UN and other organizations will stop sending condoms and contraceptives to Africa because the Church said so… heck, as mentioned before, many so called Catholics themselves don’t abide to the Church teachings, even in South Africa! So with all these condoms etc. flowing into Africa, why is the situation as bad as it is!!! In fact, it seems that despite a few successes, maybe even slowing the spread, the situation has not gotten any better. The Church had nothing to do with it then… and isn’t as powerful a voice as you think now!!! Your anger is misplaced. Please rethink your position and examine it more carefully.

 

[askeptic]

bear06:

Neither God nor the Catholic Church forces any kind of lifestyle on anyone. Nobody is forced to be Catholic. It’s called free will. These are the Truths of our faith. You can accept or reject them at will.

Can a person have free will when he is being threatened with eternal torment?

People can’t even give consent in marriage if there is some kind of a coersion, I would say eternal punishment is the ultimate coersion.

 

[askeptic]

jdnation:

This is correct, it has been since the Old Testament Law given to Moses. Remarriage risks STDs being spread amongst people, as well hopefully this will deter a divorce from happening even for such a reason as sexual intercourse. It is sad and unfortunate that either party must suffer, but that is what happens. They may make a case where the marriage can be found to be invalid, but otherwise they have no choice but to bear it. If the couple wishes to avoid this they must reconcile amongst themselves and avoid breaking up their marriage. I realize this is extremely hard to accomplish, but it is the only way. The other option is of course waiting until your spouse is dead… but let’s not think of aiding that option. Of course we have even to tackle the issues if the couple have children!

This isn’t much of an argument. What if neither of the people has an STD? Should this teaching change when we are able to cure every STD known to man?

Of course people who are unopen to children should not be allowed to marry! This logically follows since contraception is not allowed! And if they didn’t want kids in the first place chances are they’d make lousy parents. If one wishes to dedicate themselves so much to science etc. why marry or have a love life at all either? That will only get in the way. Right? Why not take the argument that far? How many love stories/movies can we list that involve two people in love, but one wants to chase a dream and they are forced to choose between what is more important due to teh chance of separation etc.? These problems can exist with children or without children. If anything it will be more convenient to follow your large dreams without the ‘hindrance’ of marriage. But perhaps it would be more adventerous to do both and even have kids and God is certainly not opposed to it.

Couples can use NFP throughout their marriage and have no children that way. Why marry and have a love life, because it is a basic human need, because it is essential for most people’s psyhological well being, because it makes you a better person by teaching you to love another? Why not share your life with a member of the opposite sex even if you don’t intend to have any children? Where is the evil in it?

These are harsh rules, but we are held to a perfect standard despite our shortcomings. If you do not like it, then we cannot convince you any further. You are free to settle for something of a lower standard, and with it the risks of STDs and couples who can divorce at the drop of a hat. Become too lenient, as society has surely become, and things are worse and taken for granted. What’s to stop them from finally taking the gun and firing the final bullet into what we call marriage. Now people no longer think marriage is of any use, preferring to ‘co-habitate’ with each other, have children out of wedlock, and increase their chances of STDs etc. while hoping technology and medicine will catch up to aid them. It is such leniency about marriage that is leading society to have unhappy marriages, breakups, adultery, pre-marital sex, abortion, homosexuality, polygamy and we’re even in danger of soon allowing what they call ‘intergenerational love’ which is really a fancy cotton candy word for pedophilia/pedaresty.

All we like sheep have gone astray, we remove children from the sexual act, then we removed the sexual act from marriage, and soon we may do away with the concept of marriage altogether. After all many already see it as limiting, there is after all so much ‘happiness’ in having multiple partners, some even would suggest that it is unnatural for anyone to have one partner. One thing leads to another. God and the wisest know this, this is human nature, and we must therefore not be allowed to be as lenient as we like, cleary we have abused our free will.

contd>

I don’t think people should divorce at the drop of a hat. I think people should do all they can to save their marriages. But similarly I don’t think it makes sense to prohibit abandoned spouses from remarrying.

Cohabitation, if done throughout the people’s lives, is practically identical to marriage. The fact that priest didn’t say any “magic words” doesn’t make their relationship any different in practice.

I don’t agree with either abortion, and I think people should strive to have only one sexual partner throughout their lives.

As for polygamy, if you read the Old Testament there is a lot of it there and no condemnations made by God.

I agree with you that people can go to extremes, but just as polygamy is an extreme, so is the notion that a woman who leaves an abusive husband can never find love and marry again.

 

[Mike_O]

askeptic:

Can a person have free will when he is being threatened with eternal torment?

People can’t even give consent in marriage if there is some kind of a coersion, I would say eternal punishment is the ultimate coersion.

Wrong.

No is “threatening” you with anything.

Your statement is analogous to saying that you cannot jump off a skyscraper because you are being “threatened” with death.

Everything is about free will. You can accept God and live a life accordingly.

You can reject God and likewise live accordingly. You are “threatened” with nothing. If you choose the latter, you choose separation from God for eternity.

Burning in flames, torture, eternal torment…none of this is anything compared to eternal separation from God.

 

[jdnation]

askeptic:

Can a person have free will when he is being threatened with eternal torment?

People can’t even give consent in marriage if there is some kind of a coersion, I would say eternal punishment is the ultimate coersion.

Actually that eternal torment is really a conscious rejection of God and his Law as a whole whether you believe in Him or not. Otherwise all sins can be forgiven. And those who die ‘unclean’ but not deserving of hell can be ‘clensed’ for a period of time and eventually make it to heaven. You are not forced to be married. And if anyone’s getting into the marriage expecting to be out of it soon, ought not to marry at all, fear of damnation or not… I’d argue that even this fear would keep the couple together where they can try to love each other and prevent possible spread of infection and this ends with happiness when they finally manage to reconcile themselves. If not, they must bear the pain. Those getting married should know what they are getting into. It is a contract, a covenant before God and there are consequences for breaking it. Listen to the priests words. Works the same way in business etc. but I’d deem this as more important.

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

magdelaine:

The Church is not perfect, but it IS Jesus’ body and bride here on earth.

You mean that the people within Her are not perfect.

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

askeptic:

Fallacies? It is a fact that the Church forbids divorced people to remarry.

No, this is not a fact at all. It is a fact that people who have been sacramentally (i.e. validly) married cannot remarry. My grandmother was married before she came into the Church and got a divorce from her first husband. She was able to get permission from the Holy See to remarry to my grandfather because of her situation.

askeptic:

This means that if a man is cheated on and left by his wife, he must spend the rest of his life alone, because marrying another woman would be adultery. It means that if a woman finds her husband is abusive, she can separate from him, but she cannot find love and marry again.

Again, incorrect.

askeptic:

The Church teaches that people cannot marry if they intend to have no children. This means that men and women who love each other but want to dedicate themselves completely to science, medicine, or say building infrastructure in Africa must choose between love and their dreams.

Again, incorrect.

askeptic:

What is the point of this? How does this help human beings?

I don’t need to respond to this since your earlier comments are totally false.

askeptic:

It is not the fault of the Church that some African husbands are selfish and don’t respect their wives, but it is the fault of the Church if those wives don’t use contraception to protect themselves because they are afraid of committing a sin.

A woman should not be in that marriage if her husband is disrespecting her and raping her like that. You are actually encouraging her husband to continue to rape her by allowing him to use condoms. You must think it’s not rape if the husband uses condoms or something. A priest would encourage her to get a divorce or separate from her husband for a period of time to see if they could work things out. Then she could get an annulment under certain circumstances if the marriage was not working.

askeptic:

I am angry at the Catholic Church for all the damage it has done to humanity throughout the years. But I am by no means telling falsehoods, merely expressing a point of view.

See above, yes, you are posting fallacies and libeling the Church.

 

[magdelaine]

Semper Fi:

You mean that the people within Her are not perfect.

Yep, that’s what I meant.

 

[jdnation]

askeptic:

This isn’t much of an argument. What if neither of the people has an STD? Should this teaching change when we are able to cure every STD known to man?

The more people you have sex with, the risk of infection goes up. Cutting it off at the root will effectively prevent this calamity. Plus as others have said before sex has a unitive and procreative act. Your marriage is a contract under God and you cannot break it unless He directs you otherwise. You must give yourself to your spouse. Selfishness will break up the marriage and no divorce is allowed. You must like up to that perfect standard, the model that God has set up. The Church has no authority to change it. A monogamous relationship and fidelity will always be stressed for the good of both parties and their happiness.

Couples can use NFP throughout their marriage and have no children that way. Why marry and have a love life, because it is a basic human need, because it is essential for most people’s psyhological well being, because it makes you a better person by teaching you to love another? Why not share your life with a member of the opposite sex even if you don’t intend to have any children? Where is the evil in it?

Couples who use NFP are not doing anything unnatural, in most circumstances, conception will not occur anyway. There is no unnatural hindrance taking place. The stage of actual conception is not something anyone has any control over, however, making sure you-know-what goes in the right place is entirely within your means, and that’s all you have to do. In any case, couples are encouraged to have children. I disagree that marriage and a love life is a basic human need. Love certainly is, but not ‘love of a spouse.’ Plenty of people manage fine without ever marrying. YOu can learn to love others without marriage or sex. You can marry and have sex all you want, but you must have sex in the natural manner. The Church insists that we have children, it is God’s command. So try and plan within your means. It is hard for people to accept and believe, but they are encouraged to trust in God to provide them with all they need. And children may well be part of that plan, so we ought never to close the door to them no matter how bad the circumstance or the hoplessness of the situation.

But similarly I don’t think it makes sense to prohibit abandoned spouses from remarrying… so is the notion that a woman who leaves an abusive husband can never find love and marry again

It is harsh, though there can always be grounds for annulment and then remarriage can occur. There is some info here: landru.i-link-2.net/shnyves/grounds_annul.htm

In any case, to avoid such a thing it must be stressed that the couple knows that they are getting into a permanent contract. They should know each other well, know why they are getting married, and preferably be fully compliant with Catholic teachings in order to avoid such situations. Of course people aren’t perfect and time can do many things. In any case, it is simply the way it is. If both husband and wife obeyed the law, they’d be fine. if one breaks it, then they are at fault and are responsible for ruining the life of the other as well. Those who are the victim are unfortunately left unable to marry again, and are encouraged to carry that burden and turn to God instead. There is no getting around that this is unfortunate, but Christians are to always focus on God and in Him find strength and all he happiness they’d ever want. Some might even say they will carry their misfortune as penance for their sins. In order to sow their obedience to God and be an example to others. I myself would hate to be in such a situation, but we must be prepared, and obedience to the law comes first. We must set our sights on higher things to begin with. It is for such eventualities that Paul opinions that it might be better not to marry, but those that can’t live like that ought to marry and look after their marriage lest they fall into sin.

 

[bear06]

askeptic:

Can a person have free will when he is being threatened with eternal torment?

People can’t even give consent in marriage if there is some kind of a coersion, I would say eternal punishment is the ultimate coersion.

So, you don’t see the pointlessness yet? Eternal damnation is a reality. Heaven is a reality. People can choose one or the other. The only thing I’m “threatened with” is my own demise. It’s not the Catholic Church’s choice. It’s my choice and it’s reality. The Catholic Church proposed no Truth not from God. You don’t believe this plain and simple. Great. Why keep arguing about it then? This is just your circular debate starting back at “Does God exist?”

 

[askeptic]

Mike O:

Wrong.

No is “threatening” you with anything.

Your statement is analogous to saying that you cannot jump off a skyscraper because you are being “threatened” with death.

Everything is about free will. You can accept God and live a life accordingly.

You can reject God and likewise live accordingly. You are “threatened” with nothing. If you choose the latter, you choose separation from God for eternity.

Burning in flames, torture, eternal torment…none of this is anything compared to eternal separation from God.

I don’t know. We are separated from God know and life is pretty good for many of us.

Furthermore, if God is good then he would not let people be eternally separated from him for trivialities such as remarrying after having been abandoned or using condoms.

And even if he did, he would let them continue living on earth with other people rather than enduring unimaginable torment in hell.

 

[askeptic]

Semper Fi:

No, this is not a fact at all. It is a fact that people who have been sacramentally (i.e. validly) married cannot remarry. My grandmother was married before she came into the Church and got a divorce from her first husband. She was able to get permission from the Holy See to remarry to my grandfather because of her situation.

I presume you are referring to annulments. As far as I know a person can remarry only if he was never married in the first place (never married in the eyes of the Church that is.).

In light of this, if two people were validly married, which I imagine most Catholics who marry in Church are, and one of them is later cheated on or abandoned, or abused, etc. The innocent party cannot find love and marry again.

Those who are lucky enough to get an annulment are not in this predicament, but not everyone is that lucky.

A woman should not be in that marriage if her husband is disrespecting her and raping her like that. You are actually encouraging her husband to continue to rape her by allowing him to use condoms. You must think it’s not rape if the husband uses condoms or something. A priest would encourage her to get a divorce or separate from her husband for a period of time to see if they could work things out. Then she could get an annulment under certain circumstances if the marriage was not working.

I don’t think you can get an annulment because your marriage is not working, you can only get it if there was never a marriage in the first place. (i.e. if consent was not valid, if they did not intend to be open to life or something like that)

The fact is that people who were sacramentally married (which is what I had in mind when I said married given that this is a Catholic board) can never remarry. True, they can separate in the case of abuse, but the abused spouse cannot fall in love and start a family with someone who is not abusive. The spouse who is cheated on and abandoned cannot marry again.

All of this still holds.

 

[askeptic]

bear06:

So, you don’t see the pointlessness yet? Eternal damnation is a reality. Heaven is a reality. People can choose one or the other. The only thing I’m “threatened with” is my own demise. It’s not the Catholic Church’s choice. It’s my choice and it’s reality. The Catholic Church proposed no Truth not from God. You don’t believe this plain and simple. Great. Why keep arguing about it then? This is just your circular debate starting back at “Does God exist?”

Instead of making hell God could just let people who reject him continue living on earth.

Instead of making hell the all-knowing God can choose to create only those people who he knows in advance will FREELY choose to go to heaven.

Furthermore, God can make it so the only way to “reject him for all eternity” is by comitting a truly evil did, such as the murder and rape of a child, not the use of condoms, missing mass on Sunday, or remarrying after having been abandoned by your spouse.