I just can't reconcile some things

[CatholicChef]

Awfulthings9? :clapping:

 

[Breeze]

As the librarian for our small church library, I just purchased a book called “A Case for Chastity: the way to real love and true freedom for Catholic teens.” I just finished reading it to make certain it would be appropriate.

I’m nearly 60 yrs. old and I wish I had been offered such a complete understanding of the true beauty of the sacrament of marriage in my early years. I think it is priceless for not only teens, but both singles and married couples. It covers all the issues you mention, but with a depth of beauty for the fullness of the gift of sexuality that God has given us.

I’d really suggest you read this book…I pray you will read this book…and see if it doesn’t give you a much broader perspective and deeper understanding of the issues you’ve raised.

 

[javelin]

I am almost shocked at the number of people who have said, essentially, “better you go”. How is that the best way to teach and guide?

I really think it is MUCH better to stay the course. I may be wrong, but I don’t think the Church’s position on Birth Control is considered a doctrine that requires us to believe it. Rather, it is a moral teaching that we are bound, individually, to obey.

So, even if she doesn’t think it’s really sinful, as long as she lives in obedience to the Church on it, she’s fine. It is also OK for her to express her troubles with the teaching, as long as it is not intended to lead others to deny it and thus fall into sin. She should definitely continue to pray about the issue and learn all she can, however, as it seems she is already doing.

To be hypocritical is to say one thing, then do the opposite. She would not be a hypocrite if she joined the Church now, professing her belief that it is the Church instituted by Christ, while still unsure about the birth control issue. This would be totally different, though, if we were talking about a dogma or doctrine such as the Trinity or the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Those must be believed, in faith.

Ryniev, I pray you find the guidance you need, and that you continue to avail yourself to the Grace offered through the Catholic Church.

One last thing – there are a number of great, supportive people (and more women, I think) in the Family Life forum. Perhaps you could post your dilemma there.

Peace,
javelin

 

[Semper_Fi_1]

Check out the Couple to Couple League.

 

[ABalch]

Try this very simple prayer on these matters of doctrine that are troubling you

“Lord I belive, Help my unbelief” . During my stint going through RCIA I needed to deal with my differing views on some matters as well. It took me some time to really internalize a couple of the doctrines of the Church. Once I did, though, I had no problem going through with Easter Vigil, when I was baptized and confirmed into the Church.

It isn’t a bad thing, if you feel you still have things to work through, to talk with the pastor at your parish, and tell him, even right before Easter Vigil, that you would like some more time in RCIA to straighten out some things. I know that if I had gone through Easter the first year I was going to my parish, I would not have yet been at the point I was when I went through the second Easter I was at my parish, and that it helped me to have the extra time to get myself striaightened out, so to speak. I trust God knew what I would need, when I came to my parish that first year, tried to get into RCIA that year, but I was too late to get into it that year, and so had to wait a little longer. The longer wait than I expected, and longer than I wanted at first, turned out to be just long enough to allow me the extra time I needed to be able to enthusiastically go through the Rites of Initiation on Easter in 2003.

Like so many others on this board, I urge you to talk with your pastor, and seek the information that will help you to come to understand the Church’s teachings on contraception and birth control, which in the case of the “pill” is an abortificant act often enough. For, often enough, a woman does actually get pregnant, and then the pill causes the newly formed life to abort.

Pax vobiscum,
ABalch

 

[mercygate]

Breton:

Ryniev,

I believe Mercygate is referring to Janet E. Smith.

Thanks for the correction. Of course, you are correct!

 

[otm]

Part of the problem with the whole issue is that all too many people feel that the choices are two: use the Pill or some other form of contraception, or be inundated with unwanted children.

You need, while researching what the Church says, to also examine thoroughly ( as in, not what you hear from someone who has never even tried it) the practice of Natural Family Planning. If illiterate Hindus in India can practice it effectively (and they have; they were taught by Mother Theresa), then literate, intelligent people in the US can too.

Before you make up your mind, research it thoroughly. It is as effective or more so that any mechanical or medical means of determining when you will have children, and has numerous side benefits in terms of the relationship between husband and wife.

The situation is not “either/or”, but most people cast it in that light.

 

[Didi]

You have received a lot of great resources from others, websites, etc. I hope you take the time to look carefully at this issue. As with all the teachings of the Church, once the reasoning behind it is understood, both with the mind and with the heart, it gives you a real peace of mind that you are following what God wants. Sometimes the understanding takes awhile, so be patient with yourself and don’t give up your search!

For me, the issue comes down to something very basic. As Christians, we are called to give everything to God – love Him with our whole heart, mind, soul and very being. We dedicate ourselves to Him.

If, through contraception, someone decides to “hold back” this part of their lives from God, then they are not really giving God all of themselves. It’s like saying **“God, I give you my heart, all I do and say, but you can’t have my reproductive organs. Sorry, those are mine.” ** Or also saying "God I trust You with all my life, except Your plan for how many children I should have. Leave that to me."

Sounds kind of silly, doesn’t it?

Natural Family Planning and the Creighton Method allow a couple to decide together when they will have marital relations that may or may not produce a child. It puts the responsibility on both of them, and unites them regarding their family.

It is different from other forms of birth control, which can be dangerous to the user, can actually cause an abortion to occur, and completely take God out of the picture. With artificial birth control, the couple or individual closes to door to life. With natural ways to plan a family (NFP or Creighton), the door is still open for God to be in control.

 

[cheddarsox]

Didi:

If, through contraception, someone decides to “hold back” this part of their lives from God, then they are not really giving God all of themselves. It’s like saying **“God, I give you my heart, all I do and say, but you can’t have my reproductive organs. Sorry, those are mine.” ** Or also saying "God I trust You with all my life, except Your plan for how many children I should have. Leave that to me."

Sounds kind of silly, doesn’t it?

.

Not arguing over birth control. We used NFP for years. But this “argument” seems silly to me. There are plenty of areas in our lives where it is perfectly acceptable to take responsibility and means of directing our own lives and no one in the church cries foul. We save our money in banks, make use of modern medical techniques, put security systems in our homes, write wills and buy insurance policies etc. etc. If trust in God is the issue, why are all those other things acceptable?

cheddar

 

[puzzleannie]

Ryniev:

I’veI’m in RCIA and I love learning about the faith and I like the people I’m learning with. However, after praying and searching for several weeks I’ve come to the conclusion that I just don’t believe what the Church teaches regarding birth control.

). I don’t want to debate my postions rather I’m wondering since I’ve already gone through the Rite of Acceptance do I have some sort of obligation to continue? Should I make an appointment with the Priest and tell him why I’m dropping out? Talk to my sponsor? I hate thinking I’m letting people down or disappointing them but that would be a stupid reason to join!

I guess maybe I should have resolved these issues before starting RCIA but I was honestly hoping that I would be able to come to some sort of agreement if I studied and prayed hard enough but I just can’t. I’m very saddened and feel as if I’m in kind of a limbo.

the rite of acceptance is not some kind of binding agreement, yes you can drop out know, but if you do you will be losing the very means of resolving your dilemma, which is to ask more questions, get more information, pray more, learn the mind of the Church. You must discover within yourself if you can mold yourself to accept that if what the Church teaches is true in other areas, the fundamentals of doctrine, that you can accept She teaches the truth in other subsidiary areas, even though you may not understand all those areas and the basis of those doctrines.

this discovery process does not necessarily occur at the same speed for every one, and your catechumenate may be longer for that reason. It is not necessary that you learn in great detail and take a college course on every doctrine. What is necessary is that you can make a profession of faith, contained in the Nicene Creed, sincerely, and that you accept the Church teaches the truth even in areas you do not fully understand or accept yet.

If you are not at this point, certainly your first action is to speak with the priest, and with the RCIA team. If they give you counsel you know to be sinful (disregard the teaching, engage in practices the Church teaches are sinful etc.) you know they are not reliable guides. Please don’t just drop out without telling anyone why. Hopefully members of the RCIA team will be honest with their own struggles in accepting this and other difficult challenging teachings, and you will all reflect more deeply on Christ’s command that we take up our cross if we are to follow him.

You are not dropping out completely, you are acknowledging a plain truth about RCIA: it takes as long as it takes, and there are always going to be roadblocks and stumbling blocks. As with any relationship, the answer is not to walk away, but work to resolve the difficulty.

The resource I have found most helpful in coming to acceptance on the entire teaching about sexuality and marriage, not just the prohibitions, is Theology of the body for beginners, by Christopher West, available from most realiable Catholic book catalogs. I used this first myself, then with my daughters – they all got a copy as gifts – with Jrs. & Seniors in our CCD program, and with those in Adult Confirmation and RCIA classes in teaching this area.

At least it will give you, in a readable, understandable form, the way this teaching plays out in “real life” and answer your very legitimate questions.

 

[msgstephen]

To Mercy:

Let’s take condom use. Let’s say a man and woman have a son who trips the lights fantastic at the gay bars. I can image the parents wanting his son to use condoms rather than bareback … wouldn’t you?

Although the son is sinning and the parents would wish that he wasn’t, even so, the parents love the son and would prefer that if the son does sin at least the son could sin “safer” so to speak. And condom use in that case would dramatically reduce the risk of HIV infection and subsequent AIDS.

But the Church couldn’t condone condom use in such circumstances. Why? It’s thinking and pronouncement on morals is ABSOLUTIST. The Church is FROZEN and cannot make a distinction because it is “all sin” to the Church and the Church can’t approve any of it. But then again, it is not the Church’s son, is it?

 

[puzzleannie]

msgstephen:

To . The Church is FROZEN and cannot make a distinction because it is “all sin” to the Church and the Church can’t approve any of it. But then again, it is not the Church’s son, is it?

Yes, it is the Church’s son, and the Church is frozen because what will be the ultimate good for the son never changes, it is hard-wired into his very human identity with which he was created. To deny that human nature, to deny that identity, and to somehow debase her son by declaring his as something less than fully human would be the real degradation.

 

[msgstephen]

And your point being?

The Church doesn’t care if he gets AIDS from his sinful romp. The Church would fluff it off as God’s punishment for his sins.

His parents, however, are left with the tradgedy. They would have prefered he used condoms and hoped that someday he would come to his senses and straightened up.

It’s all fine and DANDY to be ABSOLUTIST, but real life has a different schedule.

So I can really understand parents who would prefer that, should their children sin, at least sin ‘safer’ because they are much more likely to avoid disease, pregnancy etc. etc.

The Church can’t accept that because it is absolute in Faith and Morals and is worried only about “eternal souls” and not real lives.

Sure, if a son of mine got AIDS the Church would care. It would rush a priest over to give the Extreme Unction. Wow, we’re happy now! Thank you Church!

If , instead, I had a son who used condoms and was much more likely to avoid AIDS, at least I could hope that some day he might come to his senses.

 

[StCsDavid]

Talk to a priest, and I suggest you visit www.omsoul.com. It has some excellent resources on the truth about artificial birth control that doesn’t get reported by popular media. I might also suggest you read Christopher West’s book on Theology of the Body. Finally, there’s nothing that binds you to join the faith. I pray that you continue with RCIA and continue to research and pray about this issue. If you get to the Easter Vigil and you just can’t go through with it, then you could say no.

Is it just the Church’s stand on ABC, or are there other issues associated with that (i.e. pre-marital sex?)

 

[Philthy]

msgstephen:

To Mercy:

Let’s take condom use. Let’s say a man and woman have a son who trips the lights fantastic at the gay bars. I can image the parents wanting his son to use condoms rather than bareback … wouldn’t you?

But the Church couldn’t condone condom use in such circumstances.

• **I disagree that the Church has spoken on condom use between homosexuals as sinful. **
• Therefore you lack a basis for your claim that the Church is frozen.
• Prove me wrong or discontinue your irrelevent topic.

Phil

 

[maryalene]

msgstephen:

The Church doesn’t care if he gets AIDS from his sinful romp. The Church would fluff it off as God’s punishment for his sins.
.

This is going OT, but I don’t think the Church has ever taught that God punishes us for our sins. However, our actions do have natural consequences.

 

[msgstephen]

You’re right Philthy, I should just say my piece and not put words into the Church’s proverbial mouth.

As it stands then, it is better that those engaged in homosexual activity to use “safer” methods including condoms.

 

[puzzleannie]

msgstephen:

So If , instead, I had a son who used condoms and was much more likely to avoid AIDS, at least I could hope that some day he might come to his senses.

even if your logic were correct, the sad fact is that condoms don’t do much to stop the spread of HIV, HPV, and other STDs. According to the dear family member (and his friends) close to me who lives as the son does in your parable, a big part of the thrill and attraction of this way of life and its approach to sexual pleasure is sponaneity, anonymous encounters, frequent encounters, and risk taking. none of them use condoms or want to use them, so for them at least it is a non-issue. for what it’s worth, none of them are interested in anything legally designated as a marriage, either, as they have no inclination to make a permanent commitment to one person.

 

[Superstar905]

msgstephen:

You’re right Philthy, I should just say my piece and not put words into the Church’s proverbial mouth.

As it stands then, it is better that those engaged in homosexual activity to use “safer” methods including condoms.

Thats ridiculous. Listen, the Church tells us that Abstinence is the way to go, and that is the best advice anyone could give. Maybe Aids is God’s punishment for our abuse of sex, ever consider that? If people followed the church’s teachings on sex, these STD’s would disappear from the earth, its as simple as that.

The Church, will never offer a “safer” way to sin, and to think so, is beyond…nevermind. Sorry, I don’t mean to be harsh, but this teaching to any Christian should be obvious.

So, bottom line, it is not better to encourage those engaged in sexual activity to use safer methods, it is better to preach absitnence.

 

[Mickey]

cheddarsox:

We save our money in banks, make use of modern medical techniques, put security systems in our homes, write wills and buy insurance policies etc. etc. If trust in God is the issue, why are all those other things acceptable?

Children are directly from God. Do you equate them with money, technology, insurance policies, etc?
Render to Caesar what is Caesar’s.