Eucharist and contraception

[Monica83]

Plan B cannot prevent fertilisation if sex was on ovulation day. If the ovum is ready it will take only minutes before a new human is created and mitosis begins.

 

[Vico]

Vico:

The conscience must be informed however. Note that as taught in the Catechism, autonomy of conscience is a mistaken notion:

I’m going to have to disagree. What the catechism says (you quoted it) is “…assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy…” You have interpreted that as “autonomy of conscience is a mistaken notion.” Sorry. That’s not what the catechism says: it says that there can be a “mistaken notion of autonomy.” And of course there can be a “correct” notion of autonomy. It does NOT say “ALL autonomy of conscience is a mistaken notion” for the simple reason that that would go against Catholic doctrine.

They speak of the error due to a poor understanding or conception of autonomy, not that there is no correct autonomy, the correct autonomy is not a rejection of the Church’s authority and her teaching.

1792 Ignorantia Christi et Eius Evangelii, mala exempla ab aliis praebita, passionum servitus, postulatio male intellectae autonomiae conscientiae, reiectio auctoritatis Ecclesiae eiusque doctrinae, defectus conversionis et caritatis origo esse possunt deflexionum iudicii in modo morali agenda.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

What approach might that be, exactly?

Trying to make it illegal. Failed.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

Do you think every potentially pregnant woman of childbearing age who has a heavy period should treat it like a funeral?

Well, according to the Catholic Church (your interpretation) each of these is a complete human being with all the rights and privileges of any person. So why are they not treated equally?

 

[Erikaspirit16]

It is when a persons’ “conscience” is leading them in opposition to the teachings of the Church.

I think you’ve missed the point here. “Church teaching” has different interpretations. It’s not necessarily that someone has rejected “God’s revelation” or however you want to phrase it. They are simply disagreeing with YOUR interpretation of it. Same with “Church teaching.” It’s not quite as clear cut as you and others think. There are different interpretations. Generally you (the ‘general’ you who are arguing against conscience) are saying “Our interpretation is correct. Yours is wrong. You are a heretic.” Nonsense.

 

[guanophore]

Trying to make it illegal. Failed.

Not entirely. In fact, things are moving back now toward a recognition that human life begins at conception.

But I agree, this alone is insufficient, just like murder of a person once out of the womb is insufficient. If people are going to espouse a value of not taking the life of the innocent, it must come from education and a transformational change on the inside.

This is why having Christ at the center of one’s heart is the goal. We can also work to be light and salt to the culture, and promote legislation and practices that support life, but by itself, it is not sufficient. People will be absorbed into the culture of death in which we live unless they are salvaged by the Light.

Well, according to the Catholic Church (your interpretation)

I think I missed my interpretive part of this? The documents are posted in # 477 without any interpretation from me.

each of these is a complete human being with all the rights and privileges of any person.

I am not sure what you mean by this language. What is "a complete human being’?

Do you think a human being is less complete the day before they are born?

As far as “rights and privileges” there is a wide gap between what the Church teaches and what our culture of death propogates. Our culture/law, does not consider the fetus a person until it is born, so it has no rights or privileges.

What “rights or privileges” do you think should be afforded to the unborn that are not?

You seem to be under some misapprehension that Catholics do not have funeral arrangements for miscarried and stillborn babies.

How to Bury Your Baby After a Miscarriage – Catholic Stand

catholicstand.com

“Church teaching” has different interpretations.

Yes, of course. And a person with a properly formed conscience will not defy the teachings of the Church, which are the teachings of Christ.

 

[guanophore]

It’s not necessarily that someone has rejected “God’s revelation” or however you want to phrase it.

People have been disobedient to the Apostolic faith since it was founded, with a great exacerbation that occurred during the Reformation and since. Of course, everyone rationalizes to themselves that what they are doing is right.

They are simply disagreeing with YOUR interpretation of it.

Since I have not interpreted the commandments (including “do not kill”), that would be a difficult position to defend. Rather, you would have to make a defense of the documents posted in # 477. It is the Church that has been given the gift of infallibility, not the lay persons who are members of her. It is the teaching authority appointed by Christ, the Magesterium, who have been given the responsibility to interpret the doctrines.

Same with “Church teaching.” It’s not quite as clear cut as you and others think.

There are none so deaf as those who do not wish to hear.

Generally you (the ‘general’ you who are arguing against conscience) are saying “Our interpretation is correct. Yours is wrong. You are a heretic.” Nonsense.

I agree, this is nonsense. Laypeople on a forum have not the authority to interpret what is written in # 477. In addition, a heretic must have, at one time, espoused the true teachings of the faith, then deliberately rejected them. No one on an internet forum could possibly determine if you ever really accepted the Church teaching on this matter.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

There are none so deaf as those who do not wish to hear.

Well, we agree on that.

 

[guanophore]

. Generally you (the ‘general’ you who are arguing against conscience)

I have no argument about conscience. I am arguing that a well formed conscience is consistent with Church teaching, and that a person who is not in agreement or understanding with the Church teaching will exercise right conscience to submit to that teaching.

1783 Conscience must be informed and moral judgment enlightened. A well-formed conscience is upright and truthful. It formulates its judgments according to reason, in conformity with the true good willed by the wisdom of the Creator. The education of conscience is indispensable for human beings who are subjected to negative influences and tempted by sin to prefer their own judgment and to reject authoritative teachings.

The Church teaching on conscience goes way beyond any one persons personal opinions.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

The Church teaching on conscience goes way beyond any one persons personal opinions.

If conscience worked the way you claim it does, the Church wouldn’t waste time talking about it. It would just say “Here are the rules. We will interpret them for you. Obey.” But you know what? It doesn’t do that. It spends a lot of time–Vatican II documents, encyclicals, catechism, etc.–talking about conscience. Now why would it do that if you forbidden to use your conscience? A mystery, perhaps?

 

[guanophore]

If conscience worked the way you claim it does, the Church wouldn’t waste time talking about it.

What a strange assertion! You make it sound as if the Church has definitive teachings on every choice a person makes every day! This is not the case.

It would just say “Here are the rules. We will interpret them for you. Obey.”

The Church does have rules, but the primary issue in this discussion is not canon law or church disciplines(rules). These can change over cultures, time, and place. What cannot change is the commandments of God. Regarding those, this is indeed what the Church says/does. This is why Jesus gave teaching authority to the Church. It is to prevent the faithful from passing through the gates of hell.

It spends a lot of time–Vatican II documents, encyclicals, catechism, etc.–talking about conscience. Now why would it do that if you forbidden to use your conscience?

You are creating a strawman Erikaspirit16. No one has claimed that we are forbidden to use your conscience - you just made that up, probably to avoid what the Church does actually teach about conscience. People can be led astray by their own conscience, especially when they follow it in defiance of the Teachings of the Church.

i Tim 1: 5 …whereas the aim of our charge is love that issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and sincere faith. 6 Certain persons by swerving from these have wandered away into vain discussion, 7 desiring to be teachers of the law, without understanding either what they are saying or the things about which they make assertions. … By rejecting conscience, certain persons have made shipwreck of their faith…

A “good conscience” is one that is in harmony with the Teaching of the Apostles (doctrines of the faith). A “good conscience” does not lead one away from the Church Teaching, which will cause a shipwreck of faith.

There is no “mystery” here, Erikaspirit16. You are attempting to appeal to "conscience’ to justify disobedience to the doctrines of the faith.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

It must be wonderful to live in a black & white only world. I am not so blessed. I see shades of gray everywhere.

1783 Conscience must be informed and moral judgment enlightened. A well-formed conscience is upright and truthful. It formulates its judgments according to reason, in conformity with the true good willed by the wisdom of the Creator. The education of conscience is indispensable for human beings who are subjected to negative influences and tempted by sin to prefer their own judgment and to reject authoritative teachings.

This was your quotation from the catechism. I have no quarrel with it whatsoever. Please read it: Does it say “Conscience MUST ALWAYS conform to Church teachings” or something like that? No. It clearly (as least to me) says “It [conscience] formulates its judgments according to reason…” so far, what’s not to like? “…in conformity with the true good willed by wisdom of the Creator.” No argument there. The problem is defining what “true good” is. And yes, of course conscience can be mistaken; no one is perfect or infallible.

But my point continues to be that conscience, as the catechism says, formulates its judgments according to reason, seeking the “true good” willed by the Creator.

Your version of conscience and the Church is something like (please note the wording–no analogy is perfect) the Communist Party. If you were a member of the Communist Party, you were expected to follow the “party line” without deviating. If you deviated, you were kicked out, and maybe executed. If you were voting in a Communist parliament, you could vote as you liked…as long as you voted the way the Party wanted.

In your world, you can only follow your conscience if it is 100% in lockstep with YOUR interpretation of Church teachings. If you deviate, you are kicked out–a heretic. If you follow your conscience and “vote” against official Church teaching, you are also kicked out, and go to Hell.

In fact, the Church is very much like a political party in a democracy. Everyone is searching for “true good.” Everyone has a slightly different way of achieving it. Members of the same party have different opinions, and some of the opinions differ over important topics. But no one is kicked out, called a heretic, and executed. They are encouraged to debate their ideas, convince the other side of the worth of their arguments, and vote their conscience.

 

[guanophore]

It must be wonderful to live in a black & white only world. I am not so blessed. I see shades of gray everywhere.

The world is not black and white by any means, but there are commandments of God that are.

Trying to find a “gray” spot in the commandments of God where one can use one’s conscience as a loophole to be disobedient is not recommended.

What did you think was meant by “the education of conscience is indispensable”?

Here are some courses supported by my diocese:

https://vlcff.udayton.edu/courses/courses.php?group_by_track=1

If you look at the Basic Morality and Practical Morality classes, you can see that they contain the Commandments, Beatitudes, and precepts of the Church. It is clear that,what the Church considers an appropriate “education of conscience” is consistent with Scripture, the catechism, and the catechesis of the Popes.

1777 Moral conscience,48 present at the heart of the person, enjoins him at the appropriate moment to do good and to avoid evil. It also judges particular choices, approving those that are good and denouncing those that are evil.49 It bears witness to the authority of truth in reference to the supreme Good to which the human person is drawn, and it welcomes the commandments. When he listens to his conscience, the prudent man can hear God speaking.

“It is by the judgment of his conscience that man perceives and recognizes the prescriptions of the divine law…”

Where do you imagine these prescriptions are found, if not in the Church founded by Him?

“Yet it can happen that moral conscience remains in ignorance and makes erroneous judgments about acts to be performed or already committed.”

“One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience.”

“How then do we form a right conscience? Catholics seek to inform their consciences according to reason and revelation as guided by Church teachings.”

The real question here, Erikaspirit, is why it would be so important to you to place your own conscience over and above what God has already revealed to the Church. Clearly you believe that your own opinion of right and wrong is of more value than the once for all divine deposit of faith.

No. It clearly (as least to me) says “It [conscience] formulates its judgments according to reason…” so far, what’s not to like? “…in conformity with the true good willed by wisdom of the Creator.” No argument there. The problem is defining what “true good” is.

Yes. But for those who recognize that there is no separation between Christ and His Church, and that the Church has the fullness of God’s revelation for the benefit of the faithful.

 

[guanophore]

of course conscience can be mistaken; no one is perfect or infallible.

The Church is.

reason, seeking the “true good” willed by the Creator.

Yes, and that true good is well defined by the Church. There are some “gray” areas of morality, but contraception is not one of them. It has been defined as a grave moral evil.

Your version of conscience and the Church is something like (please note the wording–no analogy is perfect) the Communist Party.

No one will “kick you out” of the Kingdom of heaven. Knowing, willful, and deliberate defiance of the Church’s teachings will separate you by itself.

If you want to be your own standard of Truth, why would you want to be part of a Church that defines this for you anyway? Why be called a Christian if one does not want to be a disciple of Christ?

If you were voting in a Communist parliament, you could vote as you liked…as long as you voted the way the Party wanted.

The difference between Communism and Catholicism is that Catholicism is a Theocracy. Jesus is Head of the Church, so it is His standard to which one is to conform, not one invented by mortals.

St. Paul writes this to one of the first Bishops in the church:

Titus 2:15 Declare these things; exhort and reprove with all authority. Let no one disregard you.

This passage demonstrates that the successors of the apostles were given “all authority” and that no one who wants to be part of the Church is to disregard this authority appointed by Christ.

In fact, the Church is very much like a political party in a democracy.

This is a modern American fallacy. Americans have been contaminated by the secular thinking that no one should “tread” upon their individuality, and that government should be run according to popular opinion. The Church is not a democracy. It never has been, and never will be.

 

[guanophore]

But no one is kicked out, called a heretic, and executed.

Most of us work hard here not to use the term heretic, even when it applies. Instead, we will tell posters that they have embraced heretical ideas. Since Latae Sententiae Excommunication applies in many cases, there is not cause for the Church to make formal pronouncements of them all.

Do you remember what happened to those who did not follow a well formed conscience and made a shipwreck of their faith?

“By rejecting conscience, certain persons have made shipwreck of their faith, 20 among them Hymenae′us and Alexander, whom I have delivered to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme.” I Tim. 1

This is an early reference to excommunication. Those that are in obstinate defiance of Church teaching will no longer be protected by the Church from the ravages of Satan.

They are encouraged to debate their ideas, convince the other side of the worth of their arguments, and vote their conscience.

Voting one’s conscience has to do with civil elections, not moral imperatives. Even so, there are non-negotiables in civil voting.

The laypeople don’t “vote” on the doctrines of the faith. They receive them from the successors of the Apostles to whom they were committed.

All the voters guides will emphasize conception to death as a non-negotiable. You are free to reject this teaching of the Church. You may not want to promote yourself as a Catholic, though, as it seems disingenuous.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

Trying to find a “gray” spot in the commandments of God where one can use one’s conscience as a loophole to be disobedient is not recommended.

Thou shalt not steal. An infinite number of possibilities. It’s NOT cut and dried.

 

[guanophore]

Thou shalt not steal. An infinite number of possibilities. It’s NOT cut and dried.

Infinite? Really? Well human life is pretty much cut and dried. Either the zygote is allowed to live, or it is killed. Not a lot of other “possibilities” there!

 

[Erikaspirit16]

“One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience.”

And it seems that you are intent on telling me what my errors of conscience are. I’m beginning to get insulted.
You deal with YOUR conscience, and I will happily deal with mine.

The real question here, Erikaspirit, is why it would be so important to you to place your own conscience over and above what God has already revealed to the Church. Clearly you believe that your own opinion of right and wrong is of more value than the once for all divine deposit of faith.

But what you are doing is 1) claiming that there is no uncertainty or ambiguity in “what God has revealed to the Church” and 2) that my interpretation is somehow inferior to yours. That’s just insulting.

I’m done–go insult someone else.

 

[guanophore]

And it seems that you are intent on telling me what my errors of conscience are. I’m beginning to get insulted.
You deal with YOUR conscience, and I will happily deal with mine.

Indeed, no one can discern, from an internet forum, the state of another’s conscience. I would say that such a job would properly belong to your confessor and/or spiritual director.

We each have the responsibility to deal with our own conscience, as none of us are in a position to deal with another’s. Even a spiritual director can only give you support and the teaching of the Church as you navigate the dictates of your conscience. Such a person might also share with you the possible consequences of making a shipwreck of faith.

and wrong is of more value than the once for all divine deposit of faith.

I did not claim this. I said there is no uncertainty or ambiguity on the pro-life teaching of the Church.

1. that my interpretation is somehow inferior to yours. That’s just insulting.

Well, since I have not offered any interpretations, that is not a problem. If you are insulted by what the Church teaches, then that might be something for your conscience to work out?

Your posts on this thread seem to support that a person can defy the teaching of the Church with regard to pro-life issues. You seem quite obstinate in this view, so I have posted these things for others who might be reading the thread, so that they will not be misled.

Some people refer to those who pick and choose which Church teachings to follow “cafeteria Catholics”. Personally, I think these persons have become Protestants without realizing it. When they do realize it, they often walk away from the CC and find a community that better matches with their own ideas about morality.

2 Timothy 4:3 " For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own likings…"