Dubia action

[Rau]

I don’t believe I have ever tried to tell anybody what the Pope has stated - other than what he has stated. Yes I have given my take on the principles he may have used to explain his statements which, if true could be applied to other scenarios. I prefer an explanatory approach (which may be wrong) rather than pretend he didn’t say what he did say which if I recall correctly was your approach.

I prefer an approach of looking for meaning that does not directly contradict the Church teaching on contraception. I have seen no credible attempts at all to reconcile what it is reported that the Pope said and meant and the Church’s longstanding teaching on contraception. Have theologians all simply decided the matter is best left to fade away?

Had the Pope taught that it’s ok for married couples to use contraception to avoid a Zika pregnancy then this important development should be widely and urgently disseminated and its application to other medical scenarios addressed. I am not seeing that happen. Perhaps there is an encyclical in preparation? To be followed by Dubia no doubt

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Understanbly so. Bishops in different jurisdictions taking different positions on this matter does not sit well with me either.

I went to around 8 different schools during my childhood. Some went for uniforms. some did not. Those that were into uniforms weren’t uniform with other uniform schools.
I started out in a uniform school. When I went to one without uniforms it somehow seemed illicit. I soon got over it and realised that being uniform wasn’t the be all and end all of discipline. I was 10 at the time. Some people still have that enjoyable learning experience ahead of them even at 50.

PS there have always been licit types of contracepting: Congo Nuns, rape victims. Not exceptions but consonant with the principles. Just like “exceptions” to “Thou shall not kill.”

 

[Rau]

I went to around 8 different schools during my childhood. Some went for uniforms. some did not. Those that were into uniforms weren’t uniform with other uniform schools.
I started out in a uniform school. When I went to one without uniforms it somehow seemed illicit. I soon got over it and realised that being uniform wasn’t the be all and end all of discipline. I was 10 at the time. Some people still have that enjoyable learning experience ahead of them even at 50.

PS there have always been licit types of contracepting: Congo Nuns, rape victims. Not exceptions but consonant with the principles. Just like “exceptions” to “Thou shall not kill.”

There are no exceptions to the negative precepts of the law (properly understood). See Vetitatis Splendor. If those proposing contraception is good for a married couple fearing Zika could explain how it accords with the principles of catholic teaching, your remark would be of some relevance. We do understand why the moral object of acts to terminate the progress of a rapists semen (“indirect contraception” if you will) are good and consistent with moral theology.

I’m sorry you had difficulties at school. School uniforms are simply a convention and really a near arbitrary practice. Not a question of morality!

I note there was no overt intent in AL that Bishops could follow Francis or stick with JP II. There should be clarity, shouldn’t there?

 

[Blue_Horizon]

There are no exceptions to the negative precepts of the law (properly understood). See Vetitatis Splendor. If those proposing contraception is good for a married couple fearing Zika could explain how it accords with the principles of catholic teaching, your remark would be of some relevance. We do understand why the moral object of acts to terminate the progress of a rapists semen (“indirect contraception” if you will) are good and consistent with moral theology.

I’m sorry you had difficulties at school. School uniforms are simply a convention and really an arbitrary practice. Not a question of morality!

I note there was no overt intent in AL that Bishops could follow Francis or stick with JP II. There should be clarity, shouldn’t there?

Thanks for the empathy Rau. Actually going to many different schools when young is pretty much like learning many different languages or growing up in very different countries before the human intellectual firmware ceases being re-writable. It is painful, just as is the stretching and strengthening of young muscles that often makes for athletes with greater prowess than those without such early conditioning. So there are compensating advantages which outweigh the difficulties thanks.

It provides catholic, objective perspective and enables escape from the prision of mental insularity that most persons who grow up “non-mobile” rarely escape. It enables a better ability to understand what is contingent and what is not and what the unchanging principles really are that allows for the disparities of practice that many confuse for contradiction.

So when you can credibly explain why contracepting Congo nuns and rape victims are not immoral I believe you will have the answer to the Zika “contradictions” that you seek.
You are almost there: … at least you now seem to accept that the Nuns were contracepting by the usual meaning of that word. And hopefully you are able to accept that forced sex is still sex and that force does not change the teleological meaning of the purpose and biological effect of the pharmaceuticals applied to the victim afterwards.

And BTW, it wasn’t me that said Zika contraception could be acceptable - a Catholic Pope did . So there must be a justifying moral theology behind it whether you like it or not. Better to search for that theology rather than put one’s head in the sand and pretend it wasn’t stated, he isn’t a true Pope or that AL is heretical as the more foolish contributors on CAF are want to rant.
I don’t say my explanations are right - though I have yet to see an argument that wholesale demolishes them. I am also discovering a variety of theologians out there who are beginning to explicitate along the same lines as I have here on CAF for the last year or two. That doesn’t make me right, but it suggests I am not being unreasonable.

 

[Rau]

Thanks for the empathy Rau. Actually going to many different schools when young is pretty much like learning many different languages or growing up in very different countries before the human intellectual firmware ceases being re-writable. It is painful, just as is the stretching and strengthening of young muscles that often makes for athletes with greater prowess than those without such early conditioning. So there are compensating advantages which outweigh the difficulties thanks.

It provides catholic, objective perspective and enables escape from the prision of mental insularity that most persons who grow up “non-mobile” rarely escape. It enables a better ability to understand what is contingent and what is not and what the unchanging principles really are that allows for the disparities of practice that many confuse for contradiction.

Wow. You’ve convinced me to shift my kids more often!

So when you can credibly explain why contracepting Congo nuns and rape victims are not immoral…

I was unaware you believed their acts to be immoral
But the task viz a viz Zika is for you to explain why the contraception is “indirect” (thus removing the evil moral object).

 

[graciew]

Unless you choose to express yourself plainly, there would be little point.

Unless you deal with the fantasy that I am " choosing" not to express something plainly instead of reading what I said,what can I do?.
Second language,ESL: improving and expanding:

Zika hasnt been forgotten. It is alive and kicking.
Where mosquitoes abund 24/ 7 it leaves us speaking from the inside of a car with air conditioning if we pretend to understand what people go through…
Unless you ve gone through the almost " Mission Impossible" not to get stung by a mosquito where they abund,and live like that without a possibility of escaping for years,then all there is to say is go through it.
At least,I can get into the car and go back to town.Our house has mosquito nets and we can afford Deep Woods. Even then,I am prey for mosquitoes in the only uncovered toe…or a sq millimeter anywhere available.
For many many people,this is a permamanent issue whether we read about it,forget it or not.
Plus aedes aegipti. And subsequent blood tests. Maybe dengue,maybe zika,maybe chikungunya.
Nothing more,nothing else than this…
And still off topic.

 

[Rau]

Unless you deal with the fantasy that I am " choosing" not to express something plainly instead of reading what I said,what can I do?.
Second language,ESL: improving and expanding:

Zika hasnt been forgotten. It is alive and kicking.
Where mosquitoes abund 24/ 7 it leaves us speaking from the inside of a car with air conditioning if we pretend to understand what people go through…
Unless you ve gone through the almost " Mission Impossible" not to get stung by a mosquito where they abund,and live like that without a possibility of escaping for years,then all there is to say is go through it…

Do just as you have done in this post - use sufficient words to make your point!

I was not suggesting the medical matter of Zika was forgotten, but rather the statements made by the pope which at face value, and according to various interpretations of others, assert that contraception to avoid a Zika pregnancy would be morally OK. We don’t hear much of that anymore.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

I was unaware you believed their acts to be immoral

When you can take the the question seriously and actually answer it we can one day resume where we left off .

 

[Rau]

When you can take the the question seriously and actually answer it we can one day resume where we left off .

That post-rape treatments (excluding abortions) are moral is widely accepted for reasons outlined by theologians and repeated by me on other threads. It is not a new or novel scenario. The US Catholic bishops themselves have given their assent to such treatments in Catholic hospitals. I suspect you also know that such treatments are moral and could explain why or quote a theologian or Church leader explaining the matter. But no one at all has offered any explanation of how or why contraception of consensual marital relations to avoid a Zika pregnancy (or any other medically compromised pregnancy) can be moral given longstanding Catholic teaching. That is the only unanswered question here.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

That post-rape treatments (excluding abortions) are moral is widely accepted for reasons outlined by theologians and repeated by me on other threads. It is not a new or novel scenario. The US Catholic bishops themselves have given their assent to such treatments in Catholic hospitals. I suspect you also know that such treatments are moral and could explain why or quote a theologian or Church leader explaining the matter. But no one at all has offered any explanation of how or why contraception of consensual marital relations to avoid a Zika pregnancy (or any other medically compromised pregnancy) can be moral given longstanding Catholic teaching. That is the only unanswered question here.

We seem to have a poor connection…
The question was: “can you credibly explain why contracepting Congo nuns and rape victims are not immoral”.

I clearly hold they are moral .
You seem to deny this with your unhelpful negative precept thing (which also seems to rule out lethal self-defence in the face of “thou sha;ll not kill”).

 

[Rau]

We seem to have a poor connection…
The question was: “can you credibly explain why contracepting Congo nuns and rape victims are not immoral”.

I clearly hold they are moral .

Then we agree, and our position is widely shared in theological circles. Good to know.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Then we agree, and our position is widely shared in theological circles. Good to know.

Are you being wilfully obtuse?
If you agree contracepting Congo Nuns and rape victims are acting morally so much for your negative precept argument/mantra .

 

[Rau]

Are you being wilfully obtuse?
If you agree contracepting Congo Nuns and rape victims are acting morally so much for your negative precept argument/mantra .

Perhaps you need to re-read my statement Blue. Here it is again;

“There are no exceptions to the negative precepts of the law (properly understood).”

See that bit in brackets on the end? That’s the part you left off in order represent as mine a statement you made up. You then proceed to rebut that made up statement. Same old Blue.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Perhaps you need to re-read my statement Blue. Here it is again;

“There are no exceptions to the negative precepts of the law (properly understood).”

See that bit in brackets on the end? That’s the part you left off in order represent as mine a statement you made up. You then proceed to rebut that made up statement. Same old Blue.

I was clearly hoping you might explain how the exceptions of Congo nuns and rape victims are not exceptions due to that parenthetical clause and why you are unwilling to consider zika yet another “exception” … rather than pretend the Pope didn’t say what he did say that is all.

All very obvious really … yet you continue to twist, turn and evade and to be “confused” and unable to understand.
Hmmmn, where have we heard that before .
Nevermind, twas a sidetrack anyways.

 

[Rau]

I was clearly hoping you might explain how the exceptions of Congo nuns and rape victims are not exceptions due to that parenthetical clause and why you are unwilling to consider zika yet another “exception” … rather than pretend the Pope didn’t say what he did say that is all.

If Zika is truly an exception - if contraception is good when the motivation is to avoid the risk of a deformed child - if that’s what the Pope was pronouncing - then so must a great many other kinds of medical concerns give rise to the same exception. And if this is so, then we can only hope the Magisterium will make this widely known as soon as possible. For now, faithful Catholics are guided by the Catechism, Humanae Vitae and longstanding teaching, and should seek to understand the Pope in continuity with Catholic teaching.

I think you are aware Blue that rape is not the conjugal act referred to in Church teaching, let alone a knowingly chosen act (on the part of the victim). It is an assault that may be repelled by any and all means throughout its course. And that includes destroying the rapist’s sperm, regardless of whether it was deposited in the conventional way or by a turkey Baster (to quote you from that other thread). Teaching proscribes acts whose moral object is the separation of the unitive and procreative aspects of a conjugal act. There is no application of that teaching to rape.

All very obvious really … yet you continue to twist, turn and evade and to be “confused” and unable to understand.
Hmmmn, where have we heard that before .
Nevermind, twas a sidetrack anyways.

Who wouldn’t be confused reading this babble Blue

And this is all off-topic. If you wish to make the case for contraception in the face of serious medical risks, a new thread would be appropriate.

 

[JimG]

Ok what’s this dubia and “Amoris Laetita” about? They are wanting the Pope to clarify something about re marriage and the host?

This article from The Catholic Thing summarizes the situation:

Amoris Laetitia: Year One

 

[graciew]

Do just as you have done in this post - use sufficient words to make your point!

I was not suggesting the medical matter of Zika was forgotten, but rather the statements made by the pope which at face value, and according to various interpretations of others, assert that contraception to avoid a Zika pregnancy would be morally OK. We don’t hear much of that anymore.

I’ ll try to explain things better ,Rau. Thank you for the advise.
I ve got to be sincere. We all learn differently. Whatever I learnt blended in me,and quite naturally,thanks to the constant and what I understood as coherent and quite naturally flowing together sources,environment and circles within which I grew up. So sometimes it is hard to tell how or where or when I learnt. Or point to a source.As it has blended.
So,as I understand it, and this is mine, in the case of Zika, when abortion is plain murder, one can put more weight on the side of the balance where we hastily move to find a solution or help this irruption of Zika by funding or concrete help,than sitting down( please take this phrase well…) and giving instructions that many people will not humanly and reasonably be able to do. I understand our Church as living and breathing and compassionate and us,her children,as loving and respecting her.
This understanding,that while one of my brothers may need a special attention I do not need,makes me not claim for the same,for the sake of claiming. Like when one in the family is ill.
So yes,I can understand,there may be cases where the burden more than a challenge is unrealistic.
But again,these are just my thoughts and reasoning.
So,this is Zika and I do not want to derail the thread so,thank you again for accepting and suggesting more words,when I know it is also a burden for you to decipher Spanglish sometimes.
Zika would still be off topic…sorry.
May God bless you all.

 

[billcu1]

There are no exceptions to the negative precepts of the law (properly understood). See Vetitatis Splendor. If those proposing contraception is good for a married couple fearing Zika could explain how it accords with the principles of catholic teaching, your remark would be of some relevance. We do understand why the moral object of acts to terminate the progress of a rapists semen (“indirect contraception” if you will) are good and consistent with moral theology.

I’m sorry you had difficulties at school. School uniforms are simply a convention and really a near arbitrary practice. Not a question of morality!

I note there was no overt intent in AL that Bishops could follow Francis or stick with JP II. There should be clarity, shouldn’t there?

IDK if you’re trying to say it’s ok to stop conception in a case of rape or what. Maybe I am misunderstanding but it’s not the child’s fault he/she was conceived. I think that’s what tha Church says.

 

[Rau]

IDK if you’re trying to say it’s ok to stop conception in a case of rape or what. Maybe I am misunderstanding but it’s not the child’s fault he/she was conceived. I think that’s what tha Church says.

Its ok to take steps to prevent conception in the case of rape. For example the US bishops allow this in catholic hospitals. Such is an act with a good moral object. It is not ok to do anything that could see a conceived child harmed.

 

[Rau]

…This understanding,that while one of my brothers may need a special attention I do not need,makes me not claim for the same,for the sake of claiming. Like when one in the family is ill.
So yes,I can understand,there may be cases where the burden more than a challenge is unrealistic.

I think you are hinting at the “lesser of 2 evils” argument. “Better to contracept than the alternative.” A pastoral and compassionate reaction (and certainly the Pope is these things). Abstinence remains the “good” choice. But as you say, we should leave it for another thread.