HV Debate

[BruceK]

Here’s the latest from my exchange with the progagonist on this issue. As you will see his comments are very revealing-His words are in bold:

God’s will is known by the fact that He created humans so that it would not be true God’s will w.r.t. the “inseparable conection” is best.And God’s will confirms the discernment of the 95% of married Catholics who use birth control, who have direct knowledge and experience of conjugal life, and who, following their consciences based on that knowledge and experience, also reject HV24.and HV in general.:

But if your right in what you say w.r.t God’s will then there are some inexcapale implications you must confront: In the early part of the 20th century 95% of Catholics would have been opposed to the practice of ABC.

**Accepting 95% for the sake of argument, it would be correct to say that 95% accepted the Churchs position on the morality of birth control **

Also, up to the early 20th century all christian churches, sects and denominations were opposed to ABC. <<

This may be true. It is also true that until the second half of the 20th century, the Catholic Church had never formally condemned slavery.

1. Does God determine his will by sticking out his thumb and see which way the wind the blows? So God therefore may have said one thing on a issue then after centuries or thousands of years he changes his mind and reverses himself on that issue, thus God is like a Democratic presidential candidate; he’s a flip-flopper?! <<

I believe Catholic theology teaches that God’s will is immutable. Sounds right to me.

2.Or that all Christiandom was so incompetent that they couldn’t acurately figure out God’s will until the later half of the 20th century? But any of these of implications would be as what Cardinal John Henry Newman would say is “An intolerable paradox.” Well what say you? <<

**I say its nonsense, not an intolerable paradox. Christiandom is learning Gods will little by little as time goes by. Underscore that this issue is our understanding of Gods immutable will, not whether or not Gods changes His mind. **

But, lets be specific. To understand Gods will w.r.t. conjugal morality through His creation of humans, humans first had to reach an adequate understanding of the human reproductive system in all of its aspects (physiological, psychological and spiritual) as God created it. Christiandom was not competent to do so until the first half of the 20th century. While their knowledge is not complete, in the first half of the 20th century, they arrived at a sufficiently comprehensive understanding, to also appreciate that God did not will that procreation be the only or even the primary purpose of conjugal intercourse, or that the two ends of conjugal intercourse be inseparably connected. Hence, Pope Pius XII in 1951 reversed the Churchs 2,000 year old teaching against any form of birth control and sanctioned rhythm to exclude (separate) procreation from conjugal intercourse.

I know there’s a least a few flaws in his arguments, specifically what are the flaws and what is rebuttal to his arguments?

 

[BruceK]

Here’s the latest from my exchange with the progagonist on this issue. As you will see his comments are very revealing-His words are in bold:

God’s will is known by the fact that He created humans so that it would not be true God’s will w.r.t. the “inseparable conection” is best.And God’s will confirms the discernment of the 95% of married Catholics who use birth control, who have direct knowledge and experience of conjugal life, and who, following their consciences based on that knowledge and experience, also reject HV24.and HV in general.:

But if your right in what you say w.r.t God’s will then there are some inexcapale implications you must confront: In the early part of the 20th century 95% of Catholics would have been opposed to the practice of ABC.

**Accepting 95% for the sake of argument, it would be correct to say that 95% accepted the Churchs position on the morality of birth control **

Also, up to the early 20th century all christian churches, sects and denominations were opposed to ABC. <<

 

[BruceK]

**Here’s the in my debate with my protagonist on this issue: The **morality of murder is objectively knowable, both from the perspective of the observer and the victims. The knowledge of those things that are objectively knowable, like murder, rape, lying, etc., may not depend on immediate direct experience. In the case of ABC, the question is: On what basis does one judge it to be moral or immoral? My position is that those acts that are in conformance with God’s will are moral and those that conflict with God’s will are immoral. That leaves the discernment of just what is in accord with God’s will w.r.t. conjugal intercourse and what conflicts with it . In conjugal intercourse, couples learn from their direct experience and knowledge of conjugal life the two separate roles God that intended for conjugal intercourse to play in marriage. Married Catholics through their (subjective) direct experience and knowledge of conjugal intercourse properly discerned God’s (objectively knowable) will as to the separate ends of conjugal intercourse.
**I replied: And the morality of ABC is not objectionally knowable? **
He replies,The morality of ABC is subjectively known to most married Catholics through their direct experience of the conjugal life, and objectively knowable to those who are honest enough to recognize God’s will as expressed through His creation of humans. Or to put it another way, honest enough to re-read the language of the body, spoken by the Creator through His creation of humans, in truth
**Obviously something doesn’t seem to jive right with his position so what would be the best rebuttal to this? **