Do you believe that practicing ABC is morally permissible? Answer if your Catholic only please.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Little_One0307
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
From the Holy See…directed to all Priests…to guide them in hearing the confession of their penitents…

My understanding is that it is infallible via the Ordinary Magisterium. And heck it has PS in the doctrinal note from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith of December 21 of last year…

It is interesting that they note regarding moral norm regarding contraception:

“This norm belongs to the tradition of the Church”
 
from a document from the Vatican:

“The Church has always taught the intrinsic evil of contraception, that is, of every marital act intentionally rendered unfruitful. This teaching is to be held as definitive and irreformable. Contraception is gravely opposed to marital chastity, it is contrary to the good of the transmission of life (the procreative aspect of matrimony), and to the reciprocal self-giving of the spouses (the unitive aspect of matrimony); it harms true love and denies the sovereign role of God in the transmission of human life [Vademecum for Confessors 2:4, emphasis added].”

Jimmy Akin of CA gives his commentary here:

jimmyakin.typepad.com/defensor_fidei/2004/11/contraception_i.html
 
PS in the note from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith of December 21 of last year…

It is interesting that they note in terms of the moral norm regarding contraception:

“This norm belongs to the tradition of the Church”
 
Bookcat, you posted ALL Of this on the last page, word for word. Please don’t just repost things if you have nothing to add to them.
 
LaSainte said:
What do you mean “setting aside the question of what they thought”? Their writings are plain as day. They are very clear that sex is for procreation ONLY and is otherwise sinful, period.

You can’t use the Fathers to defend the Church’s position on contraception and then simply throw everything else they taught about marital sex out of the window. Best not to use them as an argument at all, since their teachings about contraception are the very same teachings that refute any sort of sex for non-procreative purposes. These teachings are one in the same.
Click to expand...
I will repeat my post (I do not think you or I are experts on what the Fathers of the Church taught or did not teach…and I am not going to get into some selective lifting of texts to try to see what they would have thought about NFP…what is very clear is that they would certainly accept the teaching of the Church…it is sort of like asking them what they think about cloning…such was not even a possiblity (though perhaps in fiction of sorts)…to all questions …what is clear is that they would do as I noted in my post…and which I will now repeat:

Given the rest that we know of them…if you took them for a ride in the TARDIS to the 21st Century …and asked them “Do you accept NFP as something that can be legit in marriage?” They would then in turn ask? What does the Church teach about it? What does Peter say? And then having been informed…they would respond *“then so say I!” *
 
LaSainte said:
Bookcat, you posted ALL Of this on the last page, word for word. Please don’t just repost things if you have nothing to add to them.
Click to expand...
They are very important texts…so therefore I have done so…

🙂

The stand vividly there on their own.
 
Uggh here I go displaying my ingnorance and laziness in one post.

Bookcat, what’s a TARDIS? I think I asked this question, but am a bit too lazy to go scrolling through a long search page.

God bless you for indulging my laziness. 😃
 
LaSainte said:
Canon 750

§ 1. Those things are to be believed by divine and catholic faith which are contained in the word of God as it has been written or handed down by tradition, that is, in the single deposit of faith entrusted to the Church, and which are at the same time proposed as divinely revealed either by the solemn Magisterium of the Church, or by its ordinary and universal Magisterium, which in fact is manifested by the common adherence of Christ’s faithful under the guidance of the sacred Magisterium. All are therefore bound to avoid any contrary doctrines.

§ 2. Furthermore, each and everything set forth definitively by the Magisterium of the Church regarding teaching on faith and morals must be firmly accepted and held; namely, those things required for the holy keeping and faithful exposition of the deposit of faith; therefore, anyone who rejects propositions which are to be held definitively sets himself against the teaching of the Catholic Church.

"Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same;*

Contraception does NOT fall under that which must be believed with divine and Catholic faith and not believing in the Church’s teaching regarding contraception cannot constitute heresy.
Click to expand...
Contraception definately falls under the criteria bolded above.
Bookcat said:
from a document from the Vatican:

“The Church has always taught the intrinsic evil of contraception, that is, of every marital act intentionally rendered unfruitful. This teaching is to be held as definitive and irreformable. Contraception is gravely opposed to marital chastity, it is contrary to the good of the transmission of life (the procreative aspect of matrimony), and to the reciprocal self-giving of the spouses (the unitive aspect of matrimony); it harms true love and denies the sovereign role of God in the transmission of human life [Vademecum for Confessors 2:4, emphasis added].”

Jimmy Akin of CA gives his commentary here:

jimmyakin.typepad.com/defensor_fidei/2004/11/contraception_i.html
Click to expand...
I will also add Lumen Gentium (Dogmactic Constituation on the Church)
In matters of faith and morals, the bishops speak in the name of Christ and the faithful are to accept their teaching and adhere to it with a religious assent. This religious submission of mind and will must be shown in a special way to the authentic magisterium of the Roman Pontiff, even when he is not speaking ex cathedra; that is, it must be shown in such a way that his supreme magisterium is acknowledged with reverence, the judgments made by him are sincerely adhered to, according to his manifest mind and will. His mind and will in the matter may be known either from the character of the documents, from his frequent repetition of the same doctrine, or from his manner of speaking.
Click to expand...
From an interview on the 35th Anniversary of Humanae Vitae
With “Humanae Vitae,” Paul VI reaffirmed the constant and very firm teaching of the Church excluding contraception. I believe and have argued that teaching had already been proposed infallibly by the ordinary magisterium – that is, by the morally unanimous agreement of the bishops of the whole world in communion with the popes. Together, they had taught for many centuries that using contraceptives always is grave matter.

Their manner of teaching implied that what they taught was a truth to be held definitively. Thus, the teaching on contraception met the conditions for infallible teaching, without a solemn definition, articulated by Vatican II in “Lumen Gentium,” 25.
Click to expand...
 
Corki said:
Contraception definately falls under the criteria bolded above.

I will also add Lumen Gentium (Dogmactic Constituation on the Church)

From an interview on the 35th Anniversary of Humanae Vitae
Click to expand...
Yes, it is possible that it falls under the bolded portion above…although there is some debate on the matter that it only requires submission of the will and intellect, which is what I personally believe. Either way, this does NOT require divine and Catholic faith and as such, not believing in the Church’s position on contraception CANNOT constitute heresy.
 
Bookcat said:
They are very important texts…so therefore I have done so…

🙂

The stand vividly there on their own.
Click to expand...
If they stand on their own, then it really shouldn’t be necessary to spam them repeatedly on the same thread.
 
Don’t forget though, that most, well at least more than half of the Catholics on here respect and honor most of the church teachings. If you take this poll on the streets, I’m sure you would have a higher percentage of Catholics saying ABC use is morally okay.

On another note… Why is the 95 such a famous number in terms of “morality” percentages? I’ve heard several times before that 95% of men masturbate. 🤷
 
LaSainte said:
If they stand on their own, then it really shouldn’t be necessary to spam them repeatedly on the same thread.
Click to expand...
Just like in a verbal conversation it is possible to restate the very same line “but again the Church teaches…such and such” …especially if new person join the conversation…so noting certain important things …can be good as a thread continues…

If other keep repeating what they say…(what does different words matter?) …I will post these wonderful texts for new readers who do not scroll through the whole thread.

(though I will try to add a line or two to ease your eyes…)
 
stringbeanduck said:
Don’t forget though, that most, well at least more than half of the Catholics on here respect and honor most of the church teachings. If you take this poll on the streets, I’m sure you would have a higher percentage of Catholics saying ABC use is morally okay.

On another note… Why is the 95 such a famous number in terms of “morality” percentages? I’ve heard 95% of men masturbate several times before. 🤷
Click to expand...
Hmmm I don’t know where the 95% comes from, but after reading your reply, I have recollected several times this percentage as been used. I am not sure why though.

God bless.
 
Bookcat said:
I will repeat my post (I do not think you or I are experts on what the Fathers of the Church taught or did not teach…and I am not going to get into some selective lifting of texts to try to see what they would have thought about NFP…what is very clear is that they would certainly accept the teaching of the Church…it is sort of like asking them what they think about cloning…such was not even a possiblity (though perhaps in fiction of sorts)…to all questions …what is clear is that they would do as I noted in my post…and which I will now repeat:

Given the rest that we know of them…if you took them for a ride in the TARDIS to the 21st Century …and asked them “Do you accept NFP as something that can be legit in marriage?” They would then in turn ask? What does the Church teach about it? What does Peter say? And then having been informed…they would respond *“then so say I!” *
Click to expand...
Well unfortunately, all we know is what they DID say about marital sex, which is that it is for procreation ONLY and that any sex ouside of these parameters is at least a venial sin (Augustine was VERY specific about this, as was Gregory). Speculating about time machines and the like is fruitless and completely unnecessary, since their writings speak for themselves.
 
Bookcat said:
If other keep repeating what they say…(what does different words matter?) …I will post these wonderful texts for new readers who do not scroll through the whole thread.
Click to expand...
Isn’t spamming against forum rules? This is definitely spamming.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top