Husband and I not having sex because we don't want children.

[Jaaanosik]

. You really should write a blog!!

It appears you ran out of any counter arguments. The only thing left are smileys.

 

[Jaaanosik]

It seems that the procreation is not defined biologically by the Church, which would be incomplete. There is in addition to the human mode of the act of reproduction, the intention to accept a new life that results, promote it, and to raise that new life in holiness. Intention, action, and omission are all significant to the preservation of charity. Disrespect for the Creator in his plan for the preservation of the species is a sin of pride.

In Love and Responsibility, Wojtyla gives that procreation is based in the existential – the existence of the human person and love for the person.

“If the sexual urge has an existential character, if it is bound up with the very existence of the human person–that first and most basic good–then it must be subject to the principles which are binding in respect of the person. Hence, although the sexual urge is there for man to use, it must never be used in the absence of, or worse still, in a way which contradicts, love for the person”.

Wojtyla, Love and Responsibility, p. 53.

“inasmuch as it is realized under the constant influence of God the Creator. A man and a woman, through their conjugal life and a full sexual relationship, link themselves with that order, agree to take a special part in the work of creation”

Wojtyla, Love and Responsibility, p. 56.

The “order of nature” and the “biological order” must not be confused or regarded as identical; the “biological order” does indeed mean the same as the order of nature but only insofar as this is accessible to the methods of empirical an descriptive natural science, and not as a specific order of existence with an obvious relationship to … God the Creator. This habit of confusing the order of existence with the biological order, or rather of allowing the second to obscure the first, is part of that generalized empiricism which seems to weigh so heavily on the mind of modern man …

Wojtyla, Love and Responsibility, pp. 56-7.

“The sexual urge owes its objective importance to its connection with the divine work of creation…and this importance vanishes almost completely if our way of thinking is inspired only the biological order of nature”

Wojtyla, Love and Responsibility, p. 57.

See christendom-awake.org/pages/may/summaryofl&r.htm

This: “It seems that the procreation is not defined biologically by the Church,….”
is more accurate like this: “It seems that the procreation is not defined ONLY biologically by the Church,…”
because it can not be denied that the major part of the definition is physical/biological order.

A couple with four children using condoms can be more virtuous, have less sex than a couple using NFP with one child.
Which couple is showing bigger respect for the Creator in his plan for the preservation of the species?
The answer is simple. We do not know. It’s between God and the couple.

The point is that even couples using condoms can fulfill the Natural Moral Law and procreate and raise their children.
The physical/biological order is loosing its importance as shown in my examples. What is important is to have children, not how the sex is done.

enotes.com/topics/love-responsibility
“Behavior toward humans is good when they are treated as persons rather than as objects. Using people as the means to an end denies them their intelligence and creativity; it usurps their freedom.”

It appears the Church is treating married couples as robots. It’s programming the physical/biological order into them.
Plain and simple, it does not work. That’s the reason it’s not accepted as they wish the teaching should be.
It appears the Church’s teaching does not carry the weight of the truth to win over hearts of Catholics.
There is no other teaching so controversial between the Catholics. These are the facts.

Vico, you are good “soldier”, I respect that. Showing the Church’s teaching, but do you think for yourself? Would you have your own opinion?
Can you tell me your reasoning why the physical/biological order is important?

 

[Rau]

One question to you and any scholar in the world.
At what point a custom or a tradition becomes a law?

Don’t know! But Onan’s dad, Judah, not God, told his son what he was required to do. And we know what happened when he ‘contracepted’!

 

[Jaaanosik]

Don’t know! But Onan’s dad, Judah, not God, told his son what he was required to do. And we know what happened when he ‘contracepted’!

Well, the Onan story has two parts. Onan not procreating, not giving a child to his brother and Onan spilling the semen.
The first part is related to a custom that later made it to the law.
The second part is forgotten. It did not make it to the law.
If Onan was killed for the spilling don’t you think it’s so serious that Moses would make sure nobody else does it and he makes it a law not to spill so nobody else would come close to be killed for it?

If as you say the law was already in place then Onan was supposed to know what to do. Why the command from Judah?
It’s reasonable to think that there were men before and after Onan that spilled the semen. Where they killed? Did they make it to Bible?
It’s reasonable to say Onan knew the severity of the command and the circumstances because it’s hard to imagine that God would kill him if Onan was ignorant of what was going on.

Because nobody else was killed, that we know, for spilling and Moses did not make a law against it then it’s illogical to say that Onan was killed for it and to ignore the rest of the story that was described in the Bible. If the rest of the story was not important the Bible would not bother to say what was going on. It would say straight Onan was killed for spilling.

 

[Vico]

This: “It seems that the procreation is not defined biologically by the Church,….”
is more accurate like this: “It seems that the procreation is not defined ONLY biologically by the Church,…”
because it can not be denied that the major part of the definition is physical/biological order.

A couple with four children using condoms can be more virtuous, have less sex than a couple using NFP with one child.
Which couple is showing bigger respect for the Creator in his plan for the preservation of the species?
The answer is simple. We do not know. It’s between God and the couple.

The point is that even couples using condoms can fulfill the Natural Moral Law and procreate and raise their children.
The physical/biological order is loosing its importance as shown in my examples. What is important is to have children, not how the sex is done.

enotes.com/topics/love-responsibility
"Behavior toward humans is good when they are treated as persons rather than as objects. Using people as the means to an end denies them their intelligence and creativity; it usurps their freedom."

It appears the Church is treating married couples as robots. It’s programming the physical/biological order into them.
Plain and simple, it does not work. That’s the reason it’s not accepted as they wish the teaching should be.
It appears the Church’s teaching does not carry the weight of the truth to win over hearts of Catholics.
There is no other teaching so controversial between the Catholics. These are the facts.

Vico, you are good “soldier”, I respect that. Showing the Church’s teaching, but do you think for yourself? Would you have your own opinion?
Can you tell me your reasoning why the physical/biological order is important?

Do I have any original thoughts? There is no way to know that because I have studied so many topics and authors over so many years. I do contemplate.

Just as the soul is the form of the body, the concept and intention of total donation in matrimony is the form of the physical acts. To be specific, unity is lacking where a condom is used because this follows from the idea of not giving a total donation. So I do not agree with you that “even couples using condoms can fulfill the Natural Moral Law and procreate and raise their children”.

Therefore also I do not agree with the idea that “the major part of the definition [of procreation] is physical/biological order.” for the conceptual is the major part as it is the formal aspect. Also because the procreative and unitive are always considered together.

It is a comment on the lack of reflection that teaching of the Church is rejected. The passion is strong and this works against charity.

 

[Rau]

Well, the Onan story has two parts. Onan not procreating, not giving a child to his brother and Onan spilling the semen.
The first part is related to a custom that later made it to the law.
The second part is forgotten. It did not make it to the law.
If Onan was killed for the spilling don’t you think it’s so serious that Moses would make sure nobody else does it and he makes it a law not to spill so nobody else would come close to be killed for it?

If as you say the law was already in place then Onan was supposed to know what to do. Why the command from Judah?
It’s reasonable to think that there were men before and after Onan that spilled the semen. Where they killed? Did they make it to Bible?
It’s reasonable to say Onan knew the severity of the command and the circumstances because it’s hard to imagine that God would kill him if Onan was ignorant of what was going on.

Because nobody else was killed, that we know, for spilling and Moses did not make a law against it then it’s illogical to say that Onan was killed for it and to ignore the rest of the story that was described in the Bible. If the rest of the story was not important the Bible would not bother to say what was going on. It would say straight Onan was killed for spilling.

The Bible story states that Onan was killed for what he “did”. Something that was unacceptable in the sight of God. You can deny all you wish. You can demand absolute completeness in documentation of events throughout the hundreds of years of the Bible. You can enquire why the 10 commandments are not more detailed. You can deny the Church has any teaching authority. On this basis, all elements of the faith may be discarded.

 

[Jaaanosik]

Do I have any original thoughts? There is no way to know that because I have studied so many topics and authors over so many years. I do contemplate.

Just as the soul is the form of the body, the concept and intention of total donation in matrimony is the form of the physical acts. To be specific, unity is lacking where a condom is used because this follows from the idea of not giving a total donation. So I do not agree with you that “even couples using condoms can fulfill the Natural Moral Law and procreate and raise their children”.

Therefore also I do not agree with the idea that “the major part of the definition [of procreation] is physical/biological order.” for the conceptual is the major part as it is the formal aspect. Also because the procreative and unitive are always considered together.

It is a comment on the lack of reflection that teaching of the Church is rejected. The passion is strong and this works against charity.

Well, the idea of not giving a total donation is interesting one.
Sperms do not ‘come to date’ when condom is being used but with NFP the ovum does not ‘come to date’.
NFP couples work very hard at it through charting so the ovum does not come to date.
The only way a conception can be avoided is that a couple makes sure the sperms and the ovum do not meet.
It means the concept and intention of total donation is NOT there for NFP couple as well.

Dismissing what role the physical/biological order plays in the definition of the procreative aspect is like sticking the head in the sand.
It appears illogical to me but whatever suits anybody.

 

[Jaaanosik]

The Bible story states that Onan was killed for what he “did”. Something that was unacceptable in the sight of God. You can deny all you wish. You can demand absolute completeness in documentation of events throughout the hundreds of years of the Bible. You can enquire why the 10 commandments are not more detailed. You can deny the Church has any teaching authority. On this basis, all elements of the faith may be discarded.

Again, was Onan killed for WHAT he did? What he did is he pretended that he was giving a child to his brother, deceiving and fooling his father and everybody around. He disrespected his father and God’s will. He did not procreate, he did not give a child to his brother at the end.
… or he was killed for HOW he did it?

A conclusion that what he did was spilling the semen can be made only when the rest of the story is ignored.
Based on what merit we can do that?

 

[mavdragon]

We don’t even think about sex, obviously now. There is no room for lust in our lives right now. I am devoting more time to pray about this.

Dluna,

I had read all your posts in this thread and it is wonderful to see the progress in your marriage as both of you open up your hearts to God’s will.

This last comment is a little concerning still, but I do not wish to say much about it since I can see that there is communication between you and God and it is probably going to work itself out as you stay close to him. It seems as though to you sex is something dirty or disgraceful and something to be avoided at all costs if you are to have a loving relationship with God. Forgive me if I’m off base here, but could there be something to this? I am very familiar with lust and how it can destroy a marriage, you can check into my posting on this forum about that. What i’m finding is that when we remove lust from the marriage bed then sex can be quite life giving and can really deepen the love between spouses. there are some wonderful chastity talks on youtube under the steubenville youth conferences. Justin Evert and his wife have a wonderful talk on romance in marriage that is very centered on the catechism and the teachings of the Catholic church.

I wonder. Do you pray with your husband? Do you pray for your husband? Are there any men’s groups in catholic churches nearby where he can regularly connect with other Catholic men?

Joseph and Mary both lived lives of Chastity while married so I can see how it could be possible to live a marriage free from sex, but these two agreed on this before getting married from what I’ve been taught. They didn’t have an aversion to children or think that sex was dirty. They had given their sexuality to God.

 

[Rau]

Again, was Onan killed for what he did?

Yes. For we learn later that not marrying in the said circumstances is only punished with humiliation, whereas God gave a much greater punishment to Onan.

 

[Jaaanosik]

Yes. For we learn later that not marrying in the said circumstances is only punished with humiliation, whereas God gave a much greater punishment to Onan.

Do we agree that Onan avoided to give his brother an offspring?
That’s what he did. We know that because the author of the story used many more words to described the circumstances and what was going on.

The conclusion that how he did is more important can be made only when the rest of the story is ignored.
On what merit? What would justify ignoring the rest?

What would happened if Onan gave his brother a child but occasionally he would spill the semen? Would he be killed?

 

[Rau]

Do we agree that Onan avoided to give his brother an offspring?
That’s what he did. We know that because the author of the story used many more words to described the circumstances and what was going on.

The conclusion that how he did is more important can be made only when the rest of the story is ignored.
On what merit? What would justify ignoring the rest?

What would happened if Onan gave his brother a child but occasionally he would spill the semen? Would he be killed?

I appreciate your keenness to dispute the wrongs of contraception. But we are solidly into repetition. There is no point persisting. You may care to reread the link I provided some time back.

 

[Vico]

Well, the idea of not giving a total donation is interesting one.
Sperms do not ‘come to date’ when condom is being used but with NFP the ovum does not ‘come to date’.
NFP couples work very hard at it through charting so the ovum does not come to date.
The only way a conception can be avoided is that a couple makes sure the sperms and the ovum do not meet.
It means the concept and intention of total donation is NOT there for NFP couple as well.

Dismissing what role the physical/biological order plays in the definition of the procreative aspect is like sticking the head in the sand.
It appears illogical to me but whatever suits anybody.

It is total donation of what on has available, for example, some are infertile. The Vatican ruled that the fluid must be transferred for consummation, but does not need to contain sperm.