How does an unlearned person know if Catholic Church or Orthodox is true?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rocks_91
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Do you think the contraceptive mentality has anything to do with the abortion holocaust?
I think Atheism has everything to do with the abortion holocaust. The abortion holocaust is now world-wide and is the only holocaust that has already killed more people than the holocaust led by the Atheistic Communists of the 20th Century through out Russia (USSR) and Asia (China, Cambodia, Vietnam, Korea, etc.).
 
Will I get a consistent opinion on contraception from an Orthodox priest or will my mileage vary?
Each Orthodox Christian priest follows his Bishop’s decision on this and every practice Because they have the real and immediate authority over their flock.

Every single Orthodox Christian Bishop guides the practice within his jurisdiction the unanimous teaching of the Fathers that Abortion is fully condemned. Period. End of story.

Some Bishops, recognizing that, unlike in the Father’s day, not all birth control methods in existence today are abortive (like NFP, condems, spermicide, sponge, etc.) and so in the Orthodox Church we have some Bishops who, using their authority, permit the laity to use non-abortive forms as long as their marriage is life-giving, one of the purposes of an Orthodox Marriage, & some Bishops, using their authority, do not allow any form of birth control to be practiced by the laity under their authority. And some Bishops, rather than giving a blanket permission or a blanket condemnation, delegate to the priest spiritual father, who know intimately each individual couple’s struggles & strengthens, to make the decision whether or not any form of non-abortive birth control will permitted for a time.

In the Orthodox Church, the Bishop has actual authority & can utilize it as he determines is best.

Unless an Ecumenical Council is called and a unanimous practice is establish, as was done with the dating of Easter, Bishops will continue to utilize their authority in this and all other practices involving “gray areas” where the Fathers either didn’t specifically address because they didn’t exist, ie. use of non-abortive birth control methods & adding to the Liturgical intercessory prayers for those who “travel by air & space”.
 
Which paragraph of the Catechism of the Catholic Church condemns the use of NFP for specific purposes, ie. selfishness?
2368 A particular aspect of this responsibility concerns the regulation of procreation. For just reasons, spouses may wish to space the births of their children. It is their duty to make certain that their desire is not motivated by selfishness but is in conformity with the generosity appropriate to responsible parenthood. Moreover, they should conform their behavior to the objective criteria of morality:
Code:
*When it is a question of harmonizing married love with the responsible transmission of life, the morality of the behavior does not depend on sincere intention and evaluation of motives alone; but it must be determined by objective criteria, criteria drawn from the nature of the person and his acts, criteria that respect the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love; this is possible only if the virtue of married chastity is practiced with sincerity of heart.156 (Gaudium et Spes, 51)*
scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a6.htm#2368
 
And I would love to see all the patristic support for NFP. All of the condemnation of ABC applies equally to NFP. 😉
this is definitely a dodge. ABC alters God’s creation of fertility. NFP works with God’s created fertility cycle. Periodically abstaining from sex is not a sin.
 
this is definitely a dodge. ABC alters God’s creation of fertility. NFP works with God’s created fertility cycle. Periodically abstaining from sex is not a sin.
So you say. Referring to the fathers is never a dodge my friend.
 
you didn’t refer to the fathers concerning ABC.
To have coitus other than to procreate children is to do injury to nature - Clement of Alexandria

But I wonder why he [the heretic Jovinianus] set Judah and Tamar before us for an example, unless perchance even harlots give him pleasure; or Onan, who was slain because he grudged his brother seed. Does he imagine that we approve of any sexual intercourse except for the procreation of children? - St Augustine

For thus the eternal law, that is, the will of God creator of all creatures, taking counsel for the conservation of natural order, not to serve lust, but to see to the preservation of the race, permits the delight of mortal flesh to be released from the control of reason in copulation only to propagate progeny - Jerome

They exercise genital acts, yet prevent the conceiving of children. Not in order to produce offspring, but to satisfy lust, are they eager for corruption - Epiphanius

If you can explain how these quotes apply to ABC but not NFP then my hat’s off to you. 😉
 
🍿
To have coitus other than to procreate children is to do injury to nature - Clement of Alexandria

But I wonder why he [the heretic Jovinianus] set Judah and Tamar before us for an example, unless perchance even harlots give him pleasure; or Onan, who was slain because he grudged his brother seed. Does he imagine that we approve of any sexual intercourse except for the procreation of children? - St Augustine

For thus the eternal law, that is, the will of God creator of all creatures, taking counsel for the conservation of natural order, not to serve lust, but to see to the preservation of the race, permits the delight of mortal flesh to be released from the control of reason in copulation only to propagate progeny - Jerome

They exercise genital acts, yet prevent the conceiving of children. Not in order to produce offspring, but to satisfy lust, are they eager for corruption - Epiphanius

If you can explain how these quotes apply to ABC but not NFP then my hat’s off to you. 😉
 
Sure it is. It certainly has the exact same purpose, to enable a couple to have intercourse without getting pregnant. I have to say this whole question is kind of silly. To say that using a condom to prevent pregnancy is sinful, but using this…

Is natural is pretty absurd.
First condoms:

Let’s take a look at JEWISH theology on sex…

The Jews believe that sex is OK as long as the seed is not being wasted (some even say fornication is OK as long as the seed is not wasted). So that rules out condoms, diaphragms, sponges and onanism without even using Catholic theology! 😃

Now to NFP:
NFP is planned ABSTINENCE. Birth Control is “I don’t need to abstain because I can bypass God’s system.”

At the same time, NFP is NOT supposed to be used indefinitely. It’s supposed to be used only in situations where the couple is willing to have children, but is hoping to put it off or refrain because a (another) child would place financial or emotional stress on the family. There has to be a good reason to refrain.

If a couple doesn’t want kids and is totally capable of having them, without issue and morally doesn’t have a good reason not too… then refusing to have children while sexually active may be sinful.

But a couple who already has 5 kids and on food stamps, struggling to pay bills most likely would not be sinning by abstaining from sex as a way to prevent pregnancy.

In summary:
  • Can some people (with a sinful intent) abuse NFP? Yes. But can it be used morally? Yes.
  • In general, people who use NFP make a sacrifice (abstinence) to avoid untimely pregnancies.
  • Where as people who use ABC do make NO sacrifices and just keep on having sex.
There in lies the problem.

God Bless.
 
To have coitus other than to procreate children is to do injury to nature - Clement of Alexandria

But I wonder why he [the heretic Jovinianus] set Judah and Tamar before us for an example, unless perchance even harlots give him pleasure; or Onan, who was slain because he grudged his brother seed. Does he imagine that we approve of any sexual intercourse except for the procreation of children? - St Augustine

For thus the eternal law, that is, the will of God creator of all creatures, taking counsel for the conservation of natural order, not to serve lust, but to see to the preservation of the race, permits the delight of mortal flesh to be released from the control of reason in copulation only to propagate progeny - Jerome

They exercise genital acts, yet prevent the conceiving of children. Not in order to produce offspring, but to satisfy lust, are they eager for corruption - Epiphanius

If you can explain how these quotes apply to ABC but not NFP then my hat’s off to you. 😉
Read Theology of the Body. The ancients didn’t understand the menstrual cycle the same as we do today. They had some correct notions, but they also had some ideas which were not scientifically accurate.

Furthermore, each of those quotes are addressing ACTS OF LUST. If you are lusting after your wife and using NFP then that is wrong.

But the marriage act, when being done as an ACT OF LOVE, then that’s different. Otherwise, once a wife reaches menopause sex would not be allowed. Well… that’s not what the Church teaches. Couples can make love when either spouse is sterile, as long as they can still have sex with one another (aka, man is not castrated or have severe impedance).

Consummation of the marriage is very important and it’s why it’s called MAKING LOVE.

We are all called to be Chaste, even married people. Unchaste sex in a marriage is still sinful.
 
To have coitus other than to procreate children is to do injury to nature - Clement of Alexandria

But I wonder why he [the heretic Jovinianus] set Judah and Tamar before us for an example, unless perchance even harlots give him pleasure; or Onan, who was slain because he grudged his brother seed. Does he imagine that we approve of any sexual intercourse except for the procreation of children? - St Augustine

For thus the eternal law, that is, the will of God creator of all creatures, taking counsel for the conservation of natural order, not to serve lust, but to see to the preservation of the race, permits the delight of mortal flesh to be released from the control of reason in copulation only to propagate progeny - Jerome

They exercise genital acts, yet prevent the conceiving of children. Not in order to produce offspring, but to satisfy lust, are they eager for corruption - Epiphanius

If you can explain how these quotes apply to ABC but not NFP then my hat’s off to you. 😉
Which is why there is not a problem between the statements of the ECF and NFP - the couple who engage in sexual relations -while using NFP are open to procreation - by uniting in this way they accept responsibility for any life that results.

They may use natural physical aspects to chose when to abstain from sexual relations - that is - they refrain from the act that potentially result in new life … Thus for the NFP couple - each and every encounter is open to life …

Unlike artificial forms which by their nature are un-open to life …they place an artificial barrier in a specific to attempt engage in relations while at the same time prevent life from occurring.

One [Contraceptive] is centered in the self - in opposition to God’s plan - One is sexual gratification without consequences, without responsibility …

The other [NFP] is rooted in responsible action, deferring sexual gratification - the exercise restraint …

For natural family planning to be sinful by your ECF quotes - a married couple should not have relations while a woman is pregnant or nursing because she is less fertile, or any time she was unlikely to conceive, and especially after menopause … but that understanding would have eliminated the birth of Isaac and John the Baptist as their mothers were long past childbearing when they conceived …

Its just such a stretch to attempt t equate NFP with any form of ABC whether is abortive or not …
 
Which is why there is not a problem between the statements of the ECF and NFP - the couple who engage in sexual relations -while using NFP are open to procreation - by uniting in this way they accept responsibility for any life that results.

They may use natural physical aspects to chose when to abstain from sexual relations - that is - they refrain from the act that potentially result in new life … Thus for the NFP couple - each and every encounter is open to life …

Unlike artificial forms which by their nature are un-open to life …they place an artificial barrier in a specific to attempt engage in relations while at the same time prevent life from occurring.

One [Contraceptive] is centered in the self - in opposition to God’s plan - One is sexual gratification without consequences, without responsibility …

The other [NFP] is rooted in responsible action, deferring sexual gratification - the exercise restraint …

For natural family planning to be sinful by your ECF quotes - a married couple should not have relations while a woman is pregnant or nursing because she is less fertile, or any time she was unlikely to conceive, and especially after menopause … but that understanding would have eliminated the birth of Isaac and John the Baptist as their mothers were long past childbearing when they conceived …

Its just such a stretch to attempt t equate NFP with any form of ABC whether is abortive or not …
Generally speaking the fathers taught that the only reason for sex is to procreate. Anything else is sinful. So therefore, anything intentionally done to facilitate intercourse without procreation would be sinful. I understand what the Catholic teaching is. I’m simply saying it’s not supportable from the patristic record.
 
The other [NFP] is rooted in responsible action, deferring sexual gratification - the exercise restraint …
Perhaps, as a Catholic, you are unaware that an Orthodox Christian following the prescribed fasts of the Church calendar, already abstains from sexual relations for a little over half the year
 
Generally speaking the fathers taught that the only reason for sex is to procreate. Anything else is sinful. So therefore, anything intentionally done to facilitate intercourse without procreation would be sinful. I understand what the Catholic teaching is. I’m simply saying it’s not supportable from the patristic record.
And the point is every Catholic that engages in sexusl activity accepts procreation as a probable outcome. Yes I am aware of proscibed fast in the Orthodox tradition…abstaining from relations always results in birth control…engaging in relations may or may not…whether you are consciously aware of that fact or not, whether your God given intellect allows you to be informed of same or not.

Does your tradition (and did the ECF) demand that couples where the woman has aged beyond childbearing refrain from sexual relations forever 100%? Does your tradition require that couple refrain from relations 100% once a couple knows the woman is pregnant? Did the ECFs? Do you chart fertility and only engage in relations when the couple us fertile lest you engage in sexual relations for less then procreation?

So, if i am understanding you - Orthodox couples only engage in sexual relations when they hope to get pregnant. If that is not the goal, they abstain and when that potential is impossible they refrain forever after? This is what the Orthodox believe the ECF held…

And Catholics who abstain from sexual relations when they feel unable or unwilling to have a child and engage in sexual relations with the full intent to accept and care for whatever child may result are somehow not in keeping with the ECF?
 
Speaking as an “unlearned person” my take is that the church most fully in line with the will and character of Christ must be one that is truly ‘catholic’ in the sense that it is not narrowly parochial and married to one particular culture and rather closed and unwelcoming to those not of that particular culture. One should expect it to adhere to St. Paul’s example and admonitions to recognize what is good, true and of value in every culture it experiences and baptize those good and holy elements into the culture of the Christian communities there.

Perhaps it’s my rather limited exposure and travel, but the orthodox churches do seem excessively tied to a rather narrow human cultural realm.

Besides that, they lack the Rock. Each EO bishop seems to teach something slightly different and who’s to say which of them is in error and which is right? For all the poor disciplinary action of Rome in recent decades at least there is the POTENTIAL for it built into the system. That, to me, seems to be in line with how Jesus explicitly told his apostles how to preach the Kingdom.
 
And the point is every Catholic that engages in sexusl activity accepts procreation as a probable outcome. Yes I am aware of proscibed fast in the Orthodox tradition…abstaining from relations always results in birth control…engaging in relations may or may not…whether you are consciously aware of that fact or not, whether your God given intellect allows you to be informed of same or not.

Does your tradition (and did the ECF) demand that couples where the woman has aged beyond childbearing refrain from sexual relations forever 100%? Does your tradition require that couple refrain from relations 100% once a couple knows the woman is pregnant? Did the ECFs? Do you chart fertility and only engage in relations when the couple us fertile lest you engage in sexual relations for less then procreation?

So, if i am understanding you - Orthodox couples only engage in sexual relations when weekthey hope to get pregnant. If that is not the goal, they abstain and when that potential is impossible they refrain forever after? This is what the Orthodox believe the ECF held…

And Catholics who abstain from sexual relations when they feel unable or unwilling to have a child and engage in sexual relations with the full intent to accept and care for whatever child may result are somehow not in keeping with the ECF?
I believe that the difference is that in NFP, the couple purposefully engages in the pleasure of the marital acts during a time when they are nearly 100% certain their action will Not produce an heir…this is what is seen as the same as any other form of birth control - open to the pleasure while not open to a child.

I think perhaps, you’re focused on the less than 1% chance the NFP practicing couple could conceive (at which point they’ll accept the child), while Seraphim73 is focused on the over 99% chance it won’t.

I’m not sure why NFP is considered “open to life” when it’s used to keep the pleasure act, but only during time the couple is as certain that no life will be created. (although, I do believe it is successful in using to achieve pregnancy and that would certainly be open to life)
 
If you can explain how these quotes apply to ABC but not NFP then my hat’s off to you. 😉

Quite simple, actually. The EF were holy and their ideas and writings have value because they proved with their lives their fidelity to Christ. But catholics have never considered the EF to be tantamount to Scripture, nor are they infallible. They especially are not remotely infallible in matters of science.

ALL EFs had NO knowledge of sperm and egg. They considered semen to be analogous to “seed” and the woman’s uterous analogous to “soil.” Their incorrect scientific view prevented them from making any distinctions between sexual intimacy that intended to not to bring forth children via timing (NFP) and sexual intimacy that included intentional sterilization of that intimacy (ABC).

Such a distinction could not even be conceived of in the scientific view they operated under, so it is unreasonable to expect the language they used to include such distinctions. As a general rule, people prefer to speak as simply and plainly as possible. EFs are no exception. They had no reason to suspect the need to be more detailed and specific. This is why the Church needs a magisterium: to interpret new information and reliably interpret the meaning of previous teaching in light of that new information.​
 
I’m not sure why NFP is considered “open to life” when it’s used to keep the pleasure act, but only during time the couple is as certain that no life will be created. (although, I do believe it is successful in using to achieve pregnancy and that would certainly be open to life)
Again, it’s rather simple. NFP maintains the body/soul link in which sex and babies are an intertwined subject. ABC utterly changes the human condition and physically makes the statement that sex and babies are only incidentally related (and only if you want them to be), not fundamentally connected. Think about it. ABC has radically changed the nature of human civilization. Not ONE nation on earth where ABC is respectable, widely available and cheap has an above replacement fertility rate. Not one. Almost every NFP couple I have ever met has at least 2 kids (replacement rate). Most have more. There’s where the rubber meets the road. One path literally leads to slow motion human extinction. The other leads to flourishing.
 
I believe that the difference is that in NFP, the couple purposefully engages in the pleasure of the marital acts during a time when they are nearly 100% certain their action will Not produce an heir…this is what is seen as the same as any other form of birth control - open to the pleasure while not open to a child.

I think perhaps, you’re focused on the less than 1% chance the NFP practicing couple could conceive (at which point they’ll accept the child), while Seraphim73 is focused on the over 99% chance it won’t.

I’m not sure why NFP is considered “open to life” when it’s used to keep the pleasure act, but only during time the couple is as certain that no life will be created. (although, I do believe it is successful in using to achieve pregnancy and that would certainly be open to life)
I guess open to life depends on how pleasurable and procreative is understood in relation to life. I suppose both are viewed as good, but what of pleasure in a non procreative state. Seems to be where the point is?
 
I believe that the difference is that in NFP, the couple purposefully engages in the pleasure of the marital acts during a time when they are nearly 100% certain their action will Not produce an heir…this is what is seen as the same as any other form of birth control - open to the pleasure while not open to a child.

I think perhaps, you’re focused on the less than 1% chance the NFP practicing couple could conceive (at which point they’ll accept the child), while Seraphim73 is focused on the over 99% chance it won’t.

I’m not sure why NFP is considered “open to life” when it’s used to keep the pleasure act, but only during time the couple is as certain that no life will be created. (although, I do believe it is successful in using to achieve pregnancy and that would certainly be open to life)
And yet to fail to answer the question …is Orthodox teaching that every time a couple comes together procreation must be the sole purpose and thus if one or both persons is infertil they must abstain? Men can be infertile and women too, naturally …thus if a medical doctor informs them of that …would that couple be prohibited from relations? We are created beings that have built in mechanisms that naturally interrupt fertility …for example nursing a child or poor nutrition … Other medical conditions …and would the ECF and Orthodox argue against the unitive aspect of marital relations.

In the writings of the ECF are many inferences both explicit and implicit to the authority of Peter and his successors which you deny . and yet you take writings that do not specifically address marital relations during naturalnatural periods of infertility while being open to life if not eagerly desiring it as being sinful and on equal standing as artificial means (some of which cause the death of the child). Which is absurd .

As I noted, Abraham and Sarah had a child in their old age, far past child bearing age. If they had placed an artificial barrier between their plan and God’s or if they had abstained because they were past the age of fertility they would not have been open to life…

And if the ECF really meant that people should not use the natural cycles (which were known even ’ back in the day’) they should/could have written explicitly to that usage. Just as they did about abortion and sodomy …I don’t see NFP discussed in the Didache
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top