The priests who dissented and some theologians. That was the problem in 1968. That led to seminaries telling prospective priests in the 1970s that ‘birth control’ was a personal conscience issue. That’s how it became watered down.Its amazing that I am currently reading Fr. Paul Marx’s auto biography ‘faithful for life’ and he actually mentions priests who were againt the Humane Vitae and dissented. He was the founder of HLC - Human life International.
I believe we all know inherently what the church is teaching, we try to argue to suit our wants and desires. Lets not do that. Do not touch a foetus in you, because he/she is a human being, another life, and must be sheltered and protected. The message is simple. If you are dying and you seek a cure which kills the foetus that is ok, but if you kill the foetus so you will prolong your life that is a big NO NO.
I guess where I am a bit confused is if the doctor told you there is 99% chance that by giving you this medicine to cure your disease, the side effect would kill your three month old foetus ( cause a miscarriage) should you go ahead with the treatment? when at the back of your mind you know that each sip of the medicine is killing the foetus. Can you rid yourself of the guilt if you do suffer miscarriage?
Pax et Bonum
Odopa
There was a LOT of dissent. Because of the euphoria of Vatican II, many seminary professors expected, nearly demanded, that the teaching on birth control would change. They also told their students to expect that soon after ordination, the Church would change the discipline of celibacy, allowing them to marry. That didn’t happen either. I am personally aware of several newly ordained priests of the period who wrote the Vatican naively asking for dispensation to marry while remaining in the priesthood. But there were thousands. Some of their long-winded letters were an embarrassment of sophomoric writing. Needless to say, that didn’t happen, and thousands of priests left the priesthood, as a result of false expectations pumped up by dissenting theologians…The priests who dissented and some theologians. That was the problem in 1968. That led to seminaries telling prospective priests in the 1970s that ‘birth control’ was a personal conscience issue. That’s how it became watered down.
God bless,
Ed
I agree with you there. Vatican II, as one can see by reading its documents, was orthodox in doctrine. But many of the periti and hangers on were having a field day pushing change.Hi JimG,
It wasn’t the euphoria of Vatican II. It was the hype being put out by the dissenters who saw this as their big chance to push through their idea of reforms. Somehow Vatican II has become a scapegoat. It was disobedient theologians who ran a full page ad against Humanae Vitae in the New York Times, not the Church. That led to the rest of the dominos falling and it was supported by the planned secular attack on American morals of the time.
God bless,
Ed