R
Ruthie
Guest
…know I was hallucinating.
- Status
A
amarischuk
Guest
Monsignor Lambruschini, who presented the encyclical Humani Vitae noted at the presentations press conference “attentive reading of the encyclical Humanae Vitae does not suggest the theological note of infallibility"
ewtn.com/library/Theology/PRSSCNHV.HTM
ewtn.com/library/Theology/PRSSCNHV.HTM
T
TOME
Guest
For me, I would accept the teaching, trust the Holy Spirit, and not practice it, remember the question asked if the Church permitted Contraception, it didn’t make it mandatory.
B
BillyHW
Guest
If the Church ever reversed its teachings on contraception it would absolutely shatter my faith.
I’d probably become a sedevacantist.
Either that, or I’d go insane and I’d take up arms and start killing people. Starting with an assassination of the Pope.
I’d probably become a sedevacantist.
Either that, or I’d go insane and I’d take up arms and start killing people. Starting with an assassination of the Pope.
S
stanley123
Guest
I don;t know why Pope Paul VI set up a committee to look into the contraceptiion issue, if it was already an infallible doctrine, why would he be doing that?
B
But_for_Grace
Guest
I really like this question, it helps me see where SSPX comes from. What do you do when the truth you know is changed? Well, if it is the truth then you keep it and discent from the false teaching.
M
mairegrrrl
Guest
The document, Humanae vitae, is not infallbile because it belongs to the “ordinary/authentic” teaching authority of the Magisterium.
“What might be called the conventional wisdom of theologians over the last two decades is that the decision against contraception handed down in Paul VI’s 1968 Encyclical Humanae Vitae belongs to the “authentic” ordinary Magisterium of the Catholic Church. That is, it is presented as “non-infallible” teaching, in which the Magisterium does not give us any absolute guarantee that the teaching is immutably true and therefore forever irreformable.” (source: rtforum.org/lt/lt12.html)
See also: “at a higher level of magisterial authority, Cardinal Charles Journet had already written in L’Osservatore Romano that even though Humanae Vitae did not solemnly define the immorality of contraception “as contained in the revealed deposit,” it nevertheless gives a decision about contraception which can be known with certainty to be true” (source: rtforum.org/lt/lt12.html) (emphasis mine)
For clearer understanding of the teaching authority of the Magisterium, please see Francis Sullivan, S.J.'s Magisterium: Teaching Authority in the Catholic Church, Dublin, Gill & Macmillan, 1983, and his *Creative fidelity : weighing and interpreting documents of the magisterium *, New York : Paulist Press, c1996. See also Richard Gaillardetz’s *Teaching With Authority : A Theology Of The Magisterium In The Church *, Collegeville, Minn. : Liturgical Press, c1997.
“What might be called the conventional wisdom of theologians over the last two decades is that the decision against contraception handed down in Paul VI’s 1968 Encyclical Humanae Vitae belongs to the “authentic” ordinary Magisterium of the Catholic Church. That is, it is presented as “non-infallible” teaching, in which the Magisterium does not give us any absolute guarantee that the teaching is immutably true and therefore forever irreformable.” (source: rtforum.org/lt/lt12.html)
See also: “at a higher level of magisterial authority, Cardinal Charles Journet had already written in L’Osservatore Romano that even though Humanae Vitae did not solemnly define the immorality of contraception “as contained in the revealed deposit,” it nevertheless gives a decision about contraception which can be known with certainty to be true” (source: rtforum.org/lt/lt12.html) (emphasis mine)
For clearer understanding of the teaching authority of the Magisterium, please see Francis Sullivan, S.J.'s Magisterium: Teaching Authority in the Catholic Church, Dublin, Gill & Macmillan, 1983, and his *Creative fidelity : weighing and interpreting documents of the magisterium *, New York : Paulist Press, c1996. See also Richard Gaillardetz’s *Teaching With Authority : A Theology Of The Magisterium In The Church *, Collegeville, Minn. : Liturgical Press, c1997.
F
fix
Guest
In Defense of Humanae Vitae
by Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J.
therealpresence.org/archives/Faith_and_Morals/Faith_and_Morals_003.htm
T
Tracy1974
Guest
James_2:24:
Tracy
He’s right, y’all. There is no way I’d go on the pill. Too many side effects. NFP is not hard if you don’t have a big “appetite,” if you know what I mean. My husband and I are just tired - all the time. And we only have one child. We want more, but we want to wait until she’s out of diapers - at least. And folks - we use nothing. No condoms, nothing. Even if we happen to “slip up,” (and I don’t think I’d have to tell you what that means) we’re in the confessional immediately. Anyway, regarding the poll, I selected “stay Catholic and accept the teaching.” I think that the only reason I’m not on the pill is because of the horrible side effects, but the only reason my husband and I don’t use condoms is because we’re Catholic. Yes, I’d have a hard time with that. But then again, it is rather beautiful working with God and his way of doing things rather than super-imposing your own will and desires upon His. It’s something to think about.From my studies NFP is more effective than contraception…
Besides this many forms of contraception cause cancer.
Finally, many forms induce abortion…
Why would you want this? NFP is natural, safe, and faithful…
I am getting married soon and have been taking NFP courses…
It is what we’ll be using for only serious reasons of course. I’m looking forward to a large family
Tracy
F
felra
Guest
Your point being? Implications for the faithful? (otherwise you fall into the category of “hit and run” poster).
T
trumpet152
Guest
If this happened, the Catholic Chruch would not be true, therefore I couldn’t believe it. Protestants are a splinter off Catholicism, therefore they would also not be an option. I would move to Eastern Orthodox.
S
SHEMP
Guest
I chose other:
Some “church” might allow contraception but the Catholic Church will not.
I would remain a Catholic and get out of the false church that allowed contraception.
Some “church” might allow contraception but the Catholic Church will not.
I would remain a Catholic and get out of the false church that allowed contraception.
I
Island_Oak
Guest
There’s that healthy, measured, pro-life response we were all waiting for…
Me…I’d jump for joy (if you want me to be honest) not that I believe it will ever happen.
M
Mystophilus
Guest
James_2:24:
However, I am a heretic.
As stated elsewhere, I would be glad to see the Church follow the likes of UNAIDS and the CDC in promoting the use of condoms in order to reduce the spread of HIV, especially in developing countries. While I understand the position on contraception, I would suggest that this action would be a matter of mercy over dogma.
However, I am a heretic.
F
felra
Guest
I appreciate the integrity of your position and opinion with your self-identified label.
Why the false dichotomy between mercy and dogma? Dogma is mercy personified in Christ, who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.
her·e·tic, n., defn: A person who holds controversial opinions, especially one who publicly dissents from the officially accepted dogma of the Roman Catholic Church.
dog·ma**,*n, defn:***A doctrine or a corpus of doctrines relating to matters such as morality and faith, set forth in an authoritative manner by a church.
M
mairegrrrl
Guest
Implications for the faithful, I daresay would be an examination of conscience. Many of the “hit and run responses” elicted by this poll demonstrate that many folks believe that Humane vitae is infallible and therefore unchangeable. Instead of critically reasoning the natural law theory that shaped the document and then critically reasoning one’s conscience, the implication is that “the faithful” are not being faithful but rather, blindly gulping down Magisterial teaching. I would question the integrity of such a decision since this is not demonstrative of revelation that comes to the faithful. PIC, people believe they are “acting immorally” if the document is seen as infallible or pass judgement individually upon other people who understand that Humane vitae is fallible. The implications are endless and provocative because they quite frankly challenge how we as catholic christians come to understand the notion of revelation and its “mode of transportation.”
F
fix
Guest
HV is infallible. What part of the document is anyone free to reject? Even if it were not infallible it would still be binding.
THE AUTHORITY OF THE ENCYCLICAL HUMANAE VITAE **M. R. Gagnebet O.P.
ewtn.com/library/Theology/AUTHUMVT.HTM
**
F
felra
Guest
Thank you for clarifying and qualifying your opinion.
Some feedback: You appear to be confusing obedience and holy assent with “blindly gulping down Magisterial teaching”. Both these virtues require cooperation with grace (you know, that pride thing often gets in the way). You also seem to equate these two virtues with intellectual prowess, exhaustiveness, conclusiveness, which may compliment but is not a prerequisite for being a faithful and obedient Catholic.
I have provided a few cited sources below for reconsideration of your misconstrued and dissident position:
Is the ordinary Magisterium always infallible?
**1783 **Conscience must be informed and moral judgment enlightened. A well-formed conscience is upright and truthful. It formulates its judgments according to reason, in conformity with the true good willed by the wisdom of the Creator. The education of conscience is indispensable for human beings who are subjected to negative influences and tempted by sin to prefer their own judgment and to reject authoritative teachings. (CCC)
1784 The education of the conscience is a lifelong task. From the earliest years, it awakens the child to the knowledge and practice of the interior law recognized by conscience. Prudent education teaches virtue; it prevents or cures fear, selfishness and pride, resentment arising from guilt, and feelings of complacency, born of human weakness and faults. The education of the conscience guarantees freedom and engenders peace of heart. (CCC)
THE AUTHORITY OF THE ENCYCLICAL HUMANAE VITAE M. R. Gagnebet O.P.
****http://www.ewtn.com/library/Theology/AUTHUMVT.HTM
(Excerpt):
In the first place, let us point out that, according to the teaching of the last council, the doctrinal authority of the Pope and the Bishops is not limited to infallible teaching. The duty of obedience is not restricted to definitions of faith: “That religious assent of mind and will is due in a very singular way to the authentic Magisterium of the Sovereign Pontiff, even when he does not speak ex cathedra: this implies the respectful acknowledgement of his supreme teaching authority and the earnest adherence to his statements, in conformity with his manifest thought and desires, as well as with the deductions possible, especially because of the nature of the document or the frequent repetition of the same doctrine or the mode of expression”.
Let us apply these criteria to the recent encyclical. Obviously the Pope intended to resolve a controversy which questions the time-honoured teaching of theologians approved by the Magisterium. On the same topic, Pius XII specifically stated, in the Encyclical “Humani Generis” (D. Sch. 3885), “this question is no longer open to the free discussion of theologians”. …Finally, the document in which the Pope expounds his teaching is an Encyclical is an authentic interpretation of the natural law which declares the use of marriage which is conformable to the law and that which is not.
M
Mystophilus
Guest
The dichotomy is created by the difference between Christ and the church, and I wish that it were false.
F
fix
Guest
The Church is the mystical body of Christ. There is no dichotomy because Christ is Truth.
- Status