Eucharist and contraception

[Erikaspirit16]

I think this “condition” is really only a symptom. The underlying “condition” is a lifestyle devoid of walking with God. Even a poor person can practice continence and chastity. Poverty does not force someone to have sex during their fertile times.

In an ideal world…we would all be perfect. I hate to break it to you, it’s neither an ideal world nor are any of us perfect. So we have to make the best of it.

 

[EvangelistVictor]

Thanks to those who replied to me. I’ll pray more about this and ask the Holy Spirit for a deeper understanding on the matter of using a condom to prevent bringing another child into this world when one cannot afford it or be too old to raise one.

After being in Evangelical and Pentecostal churches for the past 20 years, and getting my BA in Pastoral Leadership Studies and a MA in Theology, this is a huge moral change in my understanding to holiness. I hope you understand where I’m comming from in my quest to embrace the Catholicism of my youth.

 

[thistle]

Lets break this down in simplest terms.

If I use a condom with my wife, its a mortal sin leading to hell?

Condom usage = murder???

If you die in a state of mortal sin (it does not matter which mortal sin) then you go immediately to Hell.

 

[EvangelistVictor]

After thinking about this more, sadly the people who are hurt the most by the CC stance against contraceptives are Christ blessed poor.

I can say alot more about the poor, but it would offend all the right wing conservatives here who want to strip every benefit away from them to help their families.

Hopefully Pope Francis who says is a defender of the poor will recognize this and use his authoratative Papal powers to give some leniency on this matter.

 

[guanophore]

Lets break this down in simplest terms.

If I use a condom with my wife, its a mortal sin leading to hell?

Condom usage = murder???

It is a frustration of God’s intention for human intimate relations. The marital embrace is a reflection of Christ’s love for the Church. Jesus did not hold back any part of Himself to sanctify the Church to Himself.

Holding back a part of ourselves while in the marital embrace is lying with the body. The words may say “I give all of myself for you, and to you” but they action is saying the “but I am holding back the life producing element”.

We murder our own relationship with God when we allow our own wants to replace His plan for us. This is not about sex, it is about walking outside of God’s plan.

I remember back in the 70’s when “Catholic” women were complaining that they did not want the Pope in their bedroom. The Pope doesn’t want to be in the bedroom of a married couple. He wants God to be there!

 

[guanophore]

Respectfully, I think that the Church has stated that upon fertilization a new human person exists and this can only come about by the infusion of an immortal soul.

It is a human life, certainly, but we have no way of knowing when God joins an immortal soul to that life. As has been mentioned, a large percentage of fertilized eggs are miscarried. It may be that God does not infuse a soul into these zygotes.

We must afford the zygote all the respect of a human person because we cannot do otherwise.

 

[guanophore]

If thinks can’t change, then why did the Second Lateran Council held in 1139 rule to forbidding priests to marry. Then in 1563, the Council of Trent reaffirmed the tradition of celibacy. Was the Holy Spirit wrong for 1000 years??

No, married priests are a discipline, not a doctrine. Doctrines come from God. Disciplines/rules come from the Magesterium, and can be changed (although it is not likely this one will).

Same logic applies to contraceptives.

No. Apples and turnips.

In an ideal world…we would all be perfect. I hate to break it to you, it’s neither an ideal world nor are any of us perfect. So we have to make the best of it.

Catholics “make the best of it” by following the teaching of the Church.

We are to be light and salt to the world, so “making the best of it” means bringing Christ to the world, not compounding one sin with another.

 

[guanophore]

Thanks to those who replied to me. I’ll pray more about this and ask the Holy Spirit for a deeper understanding on the matter of using a condom to prevent bringing another child into this world when one cannot afford it or be too old to raise one.

It would also be useful to study Theology of the Body, and Natural Family Planning.

I hope you understand where I’m comming from in my quest to embrace the Catholicism of my youth.

Some things take more time than others. I had a similar experience with the Marian dogmas when I returned.

Hopefully Pope Francis who says is a defender of the poor will recognize this and use his authoratative Papal powers to give some leniency on this matter.

Nothing the Pope can say or do can change what God has revealed to us as True.

 

[Reuben_J]

Exactly. The Catholic teaching is that we are poor, imperfect and living in a fallen world (not ideal world). The reason why we need to walk with God, where in Him, nothing is impossible. It is free too.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

Exactly. The Catholic teaching is that we are poor, imperfect and living in a fallen world (not ideal world). The reason why we need to walk with God, where in Him, nothing is impossible. It is free too.

We agree…but if we assume (as the other poster seems to) that everyone will / should do the right thing, then why bother with a police force? Why have a welfare system? And so on. It’s all very well and good to say “Well, naughty naughty, you shouldn’t do x,” but in fact people do–and will do–x all the time. So we have to provide for that in public policy.

 

[Reuben_J]

You are right there, insofar we need law and order.

I did checked the post again, it was about having spiritual value (walking with God) to be able to follow Church’s teaching on contraception, which transcends poverty and difficulties. And they can be done.

Guess it is here that the faithfuls are the signs of contradiction to the world.

 

[Vico]

AdamP88:

But no where in the Catechism does it say: “Conscience is supreme and if you feel you are ok in your conscience, then you can do what you like, even if it’s explicitly against the teaching of the Church.”

Actually it does. My original quotation from the Catechism:

1782 "Man has the right to act in conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions. “He must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience. Nor must he be prevented from acting according to his conscience, especially in religious matters.”

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

1792 Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one’s passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church’s authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct.

 

[guanophore]

We agree…but if we assume (as the other poster seems to) that everyone will / should do the right thing, then why bother with a police force?

No such assumption can be made like this. In fact, we would have to assume the opposite. If the polls are any reflection, even 80% of Catholics have rejected this teaching of Christ, so we need to begin by evangelizing our own pews. Those faithful Catholics will then be able to reach those in the world living in darkness, and be light and salt to the worls.

It’s all very well and good to say “Well, naughty naughty, you shouldn’t do x,” but in fact people do–and will do–x all the time. So we have to provide for that in public policy.

Perhaps, and it may be the lesser of two evils for the Church not functioning properly (because her members are living in sin), but it is not Christ’s plan for His Church, or for the world.

having spiritual value (walking with God) to be able to follow Church’s teaching on contraception, which transcends poverty and difficulties. And they can be done.

Guess it is here that the faithfuls are the signs of contradiction to the world.

Yes, if we are swept away by worldly values, our salt has lost it’s flavor.

Actually it does. My original quotation from the Catechism:

1782 "Man has the right to act in conscience and in freedom so as personally to make moral decisions. “He must not be forced to act contrary to his conscience. Nor must he be prevented from acting according to his conscience, especially in religious matters.”

No one is compelled to follow Christ and His Teaching, and neither should they be “forced” to do so. There are consequences for rejecting Him, and persons who do so separate themselves from Him.

John 14:15 15 “If you love me, you will keep my commandments."

Participation in killing of the innocent is not keeping His commandments. It reflects a lack of love for Christ.

Matthew 7:21 [ Concerning Self-Deception ] “Not every one who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.

A person who claims Jesus as Lord, but does not do the will of God, cannot expect they will enter the Kingdom of heaven.

 

[fredystairs]

t is a human life, certainly, but we have no way of knowing when God joins an immortal soul to that life.

If there is no soul, then there cannot be a human life. We are a body and soul composite. Without a soul, all one has is a bunch of cells. This from the CCC:

362 The human person, created in the image of God, is a being at once corporeal and spiritual. the biblical account expresses this reality in symbolic language when it affirms that "then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being."229 Man, whole and entire, is therefore willed by God.
363 In Sacred Scripture the term “soul” often refers to human life or the entire human person.230 But “soul” also refers to the innermost aspect of man, that which is of greatest value in him,231 that by which he is most especially in God’s image: “soul” signifies the spiritual principle in man.
364 The human body shares in the dignity of “the image of God”: it is a human body precisely because it is animated by a spiritual soul, and it is the whole human person that is intended to become, in the body of Christ, a temple of the Spirit:232
Man, though made of body and soul, is a unity. Through his very bodily condition he sums up in himself the elements of the material world. Through him they are thus brought to their highest perfection and can raise their voice in praise freely given to the Creator. For this reason man may not despise his bodily life. Rather he is obliged to regard his body as good and to hold it in honour since God has created it and will raise it up on the last day 233
365 The unity of soul and body is so profound that one has to consider the soul to be the “form” of the body:234 i.e., it is because of its spiritual soul that the body made of matter becomes a living, human body; spirit and matter, in man, are not two natures united, but rather their union forms a single nature.
366 The Church teaches that every spiritual soul is created immediately by God - it is not “produced” by the parents - and also that it is immortal: it does not perish when it separates from the body at death, and it will be reunited with the body at the final Resurrection.235 (emphasis added)

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P1B.HTM

As has been mentioned, a large percentage of fertilized eggs are miscarried. It may be that God does not infuse a soul into these zygotes.

I would respectfully disagree with this. Since the Church teaches in Donum Vitae that a new human person begins at fertilization and since it teaches in the CCC that a human person can only exist if there is a body and soul, then any zygote, whether it implants or not, has a soul.

We must afford the zygote all the respect of a human person because we cannot do otherwise.

Agreed. This is per Donum Vitae.

Blessings

 

[Erikaspirit16]

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.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

No one is compelled to follow Christ and His Teaching, and neither should they be “forced” to do so. There are consequences for rejecting Him, and persons who do so separate themselves from Him.

It looks like we might part company on this one. Following your conscience is NOT rejecting Christ. It’s simply me interpreting him differently than you. Based only on the evidence of this forum, you can see Catholics disagreeing on virtually everything–I don’t think that means one side rejects Christ. Both are trying to find Christ, but in their own ways.

Ultimately, conscience is supreme. If we simply obey, we are automatons with no free will.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

If the polls are any reflection, even 80% of Catholics have rejected this teaching of Christ, so we need to begin by evangelizing our own pews. Those faithful Catholics will then be able to reach those in the world living in darkness, and be light and salt to the worls.

I agree with you. But I will point out that on the question of abortion, frankly the pro-life proponents have been doing a lousy job.

See a Gallup poll on abortion, http://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx covering 1975-2017.
Legal under any circumstance: 1975–21% 2017–29%
Legal only under certain circumstance: 1975–54% 2107–50%
Illegal in all circumstance: 1975–22% 2017–18%
no opinion: 3% in both 1975 and 2017

So, as you can see, in 42 years the “illegal in all circumstance” has actually fallen 4%, from 22% to 18%.
Meanwhile "legal under any circumstances has gained 8%, from 21% to 29%.

It seems to me that if you haven’t moved the needle (except backwards) in 42 years, you need to re-think your approach.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

Since the Church teaches in Donum Vitae that a new human person begins at fertilization and since it teaches in the CCC that a human person can only exist if there is a body and soul, then any zygote, whether it implants or not, has a soul.

I think we disagree on the interpretation of “immediately” – “immediately” after what?

But leaving that aside, it seems to me that if this ( = a soul is created the moment a sperm touches an egg) was REALLY a firm teaching of the Church, then (as I’ve said earlier) where are all those funeral Masses? If indeed a zygote is just as much a human being, then the spontaneously aborted zygote should have just as much attention and honour as Granny Foofoo who died at 96. The zygote and Granny Foofoo aren’t treated the same at their deaths, are they? Why not?

So while this may (or may not be) a teaching in theory, it’s certainly not a teaching in terms of practical implications. It’s sort of like saying “all men are created equal” and then you take a look around and say “What happened to all that equality???”

 

[guanophore]

If there is no soul, then there cannot be a human life. We are a body and soul composite. Without a soul, all one has is a bunch of cells.

That depends upon one’s point of view, I suppose. Science says that once the ovum is fertilized by the sperm, human life begins. Science does not attempt to address metaphysical issues such as soul.

Was the body of Adam a human life before God breathed into it the Breath of Life?

If science is able to clone a human body(if this has not already been done!) will this “human” have a soul, or sill it just be a “collection of cells”. If only a collection of cells, then would it be immoral to harvest these bodies for organs?

At what point does that “collection of cells” become an ensouled body? Does God create souls for all the natural miscarriages that occur daily? Does He create souls for those bodies that are so deformed that they do not survive pregnancy (the cause of most natural miscarriages)?

a human person can only exist if there is a body and soul, then any zygote, whether it implants or not, has a soul.

This s a good motive for adopting snowflake babies!

It looks like we might part company on this one. Following your conscience is NOT rejecting Christ.

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

It’s simply me interpreting him differently than you.

That is just the point. A properly formed conscience will have no discrepancy between itself, and what has already been revealed by God. It is not about what I think, or what you think, it is about what God has revealed as true.

Based only on the evidence of this forum, you can see Catholics disagreeing on virtually everything–I don’t think that means one side rejects Christ. Both are trying to find Christ, but in their own ways.

Yes, the polls tell us that 80% of Catholics disobey the teaching of the Church. The vast majority of these have never taken the time and effort to understand what the Church teaches and why. The remainder know perfectly well but have decided, in their hubris, that their own perceptions are of more value than what God has already revealed.

 

[guanophore]

Ultimately, conscience is supreme. If we simply obey, we are automatons with no free will.

This is just a lie that emanates from modern individualism. There is absolutely no reason why a persons’ conscience cannot be in harmony with what God has revealed. This harmony does not make people “automatons”, but brings free will to it’s ultimate liberation. A human being that can accept what God has revealed, and chooses to freely cooperate with that revelation, embodies the freedom for which He created humankind.

This kind of thinking ("if we simply obey) has been replaced with a modern hubris that has been growing since the Renaissance. Being enlightened and able to think well is not opposed to divine revelation.

But I was not advocating “simple” or “blind” obedience. I think that it is important for Catholics to understand what God has revealed, and why, so that one chooses to obey with the greatest degree of freedom.

It seems to me that if you haven’t moved the needle (except backwards) in 42 years, you need to re-think your approach.

What approach might that be, exactly?

I think we disagree on the interpretation of “immediately” – “immediately” after what?

I agree. I think it means that each soul is created specifically by God for that human body, but this does not necessarily happen at conception.

( = a soul is created the moment a sperm touches an egg)

Many sperm contact the egg. Once the egg is penetrated, the other sperm are sealed out.

In many cases, most of them very early, the miscarriage cannot even be recognized as such, and is only experienced as a very heavy menstrual cycle. Do you think every potentially pregnant woman of childbearing age who has a heavy period should treat it like a funeral?