Having trouble following the church on birth control

[Duane1966]

No. In C, Susie did come into existence, and was killed.

You can argue that Susie should have come into existence in B. Someone else could argue that she should have come into existence on a certain day, but that the NFP couple decided not to have sex that day solely to prevent her from coming into existence. One can draw distinctions, but the distinction between these two cases are much smaller than the distinction between B and C.

Wrong. You are changing the parameters. The marital act has been performed. Susie would have come into existence if not for conraception! But now you are saying the couple practicing NFP were meant to have sex that day, but didn’t. Though the end results are meant to be the same, the major difference between NFP and contraception, is that NFP in no way inhibits the natural result of the marital act. One blocks, the other doesn’t.

I might add, the couple practicing NFP, never has to wonder if a child would have resulted from their marital act.

 

[Pedro_1987]

The Bible says the consequence for not fulfilling the levirate duty of providing off-spring for your brothers widow is public shaming, not death. If anyone is curious where it is, I will cite it. It’s either in Leviticus or Deuteronomy. I’m on my phone.

And as I already said, to my knowledge no punishment is mandated in the Old Testament for contraception, and primitive forms of contraception certainly existed back then. Also as I already said, should we then kill everyone who uses contraception?

Really? So why the need for contraception? If it is part of God’s plan, why not from the beginning? Was original sin part of God’s plan? Is genocide part of God’s plan? Is any sin part of God’s plan?

I don’t know God’s plan. Why don’t you ask Him? And sin most certainly can be a part of God’s plan; Judas’s betrayal was part of the plan, yet few would argue that betraying God like that wasn’t a sin.

Once again, this all implies a very weak God whose plans are easily derailed with a simple condom.

Surely, if contraception is not wrong, then everyone practicing it 100% of the time, for the rest of their lives cannot be wrong either. What would the results be?

By this logic, religious life is wrong. What would happen if everybody decided to become celibate monks, priests, and nuns? Pretty much the same as your scenario.

 

[Hicks]

Pedro, Church teaching on this subject is plain. Accept it, or don’t. Having a fit and attacking the Church at every level isn’t going to change a thing. Choose who you are going to serve.

 

[pensmama87]

By this logic, religious life is wrong. What would happen if everybody decided to become celibate monks, priests, and nuns? Pretty much the same as your scenario.

Here may be a big part of the problem with your thinking. One does not simply "decide " One discerns. In marriage, spouses discern together.

Simcha Fisher has an excellent short, very readable book about NFP called The Sinner’s Guide to Natural Family Planning that could clear up some of your confusion.

 

[Duane1966]

I don’t know God’s plan. Why don’t you ask Him? And sin most certainly can be a part of God’s plan; Judas’s betrayal was part of the plan, yet few would argue that betraying God like that wasn’t a sin.

Once again, this all implies a very weak God whose plans are easily derailed with a simple condom.

You conflate God allowing something to happen, with it being part of God’s plan. Scripture is clear that this is not true. If you doubt, read Jesus on divorce. What God has joine **let no man put asunder. ** How can man put asunder what God has joined? By your logic He is weak.

By this logic, religious life is wrong. What would happen if everybody decided to become celibate monks, priests, and nuns? Pretty much the same as your scenario.

Not at all. Your warped sense of logic has misguided you. Any celibate is not doing anything contrary to life, by choosing not to have sex. Again, the part you seem to not understand, because your arguments never address the point, is that contraception clearly divorces the act from the natural consequences of the act. Celibacy does not engage in the act, so your comparison is a straw man.

 

[TCEL]

And as I already said, to my knowledge no punishment is mandated in the Old Testament for contraception, and primitive forms of contraception certainly existed back then. Also as I already said, should we then kill everyone who uses contraception?

I don’t know God’s plan. Why don’t you ask Him? And sin most certainly can be a part of God’s plan; Judas’s betrayal was part of the plan, yet few would argue that betraying God like that wasn’t a sin.

Once again, this all implies a very weak God whose plans are easily derailed with a simple condom.

By this logic, religious life is wrong. What would happen if everybody decided to become celibate monks, priests, and nuns? Pretty much the same as your scenario.

I’m not advocating the death penalty for contraception just as I don’t advocate it for adultery. Adultery merited stoning in the OT. You know, Chesterton once said that God is too liberal for liberals. He gives us the freedom to say, “No.” This isn’t weakness, this is incredible strength. Of course He still works all things into His divine providence, but like St. Paul says, we shouldn’t do evil simply because God may make it work for the good.

This ties in to the sacraments. St. Paul says marriage is an icon of Christ’s love for the Church. (Not the other way around.) God created Eve from Adam’s side. (The Hebrew word used there actually means “side,” not rib.) When the soldier pierced Jesus’ side, blood and water came forth, symbolizing Baptism and the Eucharist. These are also marital sacraments, from a covenant standpoint. A Jewish bride would do a ritual bath before being wed, we are initiated into the wedding covenant with Christ through Baptism. The Eucharist is obviously physical communion with Jesus, a communion in which he held nothing back, but in the proper time, gave His whole body. “This is my body, given up for you.” (This statement of Jesus hit me like a 2x4 after I was married.)

You are called to die on the cross for your wife. Your union, to mirror Christ’s fruitful union with the Church, must not be manipulated by pulling the rug out from underneath. Ultimately, keeping in mind that sacramental marriage is an icon of Christ and the Church, not the other way around, it boils down to whether you think Jesus would “contracept” his love for the Church. Sounds funny when you put it that way, but I’m not making this stuff up. The Church Fathers saw the connection between Jesus’ sacrifice, and marriage. I recommend reading “Jesus the Bridegroom,” by Dr. Brant Pitre.

Peace out.

PS-As Catholics we don’t believe that everything binding is only in Scripture, but you already indicated you know that. But, if you are curious, I will cite where it says the penalty for not providing sons for your brother is public shaming.

 

[edlinked]

I saw this video and thought it would be good to see it.

Dr. Alice von Hildebrand: Life-long Catholic - The Journey Home Program
youtube.com/watch?v=J4m_g87D8VI