I'm very liberal, considering Catholicism.

[jmcrae]

I’ll be completely honest…I don’t like the idea of abortion very much at all and I was even against it as an atheist. I myself got pregnant at 18 and wouldn’t even consider abortion. I do have a problem voting for pro-life candidates however because of their stance on abstinence only education and contraceptives. The contraception issue is one that I do not agree with. EVEN if I’d agree it was sinful to use contraception, I think that the more people that use contraception and the more educated the youth is about sex the less abortions people will have. I rather people sin by using contraceptives than by harming the unborn. That’s my reasoning, I guess I’m too much of a realist.

Ah, yes, the back-handed self-compliment - you’re so much more “in touch” with today’s kids than this 2,000 year old world-wide Church that’s - let’s face it - been around more than one block, and more than once around.

Been there, done that, got the spanking.

Sorry - no, you’re not a “realist.” God defines reality; not us.

God made sex for making babies - a real realist would acknowledge that sex is for making babies, and that contraception is “contra” (con)ception - that is to say, against God’s design for sex.

That’s why sex is reserved for married people who are prepared to become the mother and father of the “one” who comes about, when the two become “one.”

 

[JDaniel]

Living in this great country in our human eyes makes us free (religion, voting, abortion, gay marriage, etc.) however we are not truly free until we live within God’s laws (Ten Commandments, Catechism of the Catholic Church, Sacred Tradition, etc.) which frees us from sin; keeps us from going hell and allows us to obtain sanctifying grace which we need to live in heaven. This is true Freedom. I was once a liberal Catholic and now I am ashamed to even claim that however in my search for the Truth did I come to this realization. Pray to our Lord that he will show you the Truth the Way and the Light. As far as a voting Catholic who votes for a politician who is pro-abortion that person may not have a well formed conscience. However, if a Catholic votes for a pro-abortion candidate that person must seek reconciliation only if that person has true contrition.

Bella5:

You are correct: “true contrition”.

Knowingly voting for a pro-abortionist when there is an antithetical candidate to vote for, will require reconciliation through “true contrition” only.

Merry Christmas and
God Bless,
JD

 

[JDaniel]

I second this. Although I would love for you to embrace the truth of the Catholic faith, I feel that the Episcopal faith would be easier for you to accept because it is far more liberal than the Catholic faith. Make no mistake, being Catholic in the modern world is extremely difficult. We are different than the rest of society and are held to a far greater moral standard. Our beliefs are offensive to many people. However, our doctrines and beliefs will never change. Liberal theologians and clergy have tried to change the faith over the last forty years but they have failed. The Church will never compromise with the modern worldview. If you hold “liberal” views, you will find the Catholic faith difficult to embrace. However, I encourage you to re-examine your beliefs and pray to God for guidance.

Dempsey1919:

This is funny, as I’m sure you meant this sort of tongue-in-cheek"!

If you can’t be a Catholic, go be something, well . . . non-Catholic.

Merry Christmas and
God Bless,
JD

 

[JudieK]

The Catholic Church is for everyone, everywhere. It is wrong to tell people to go somewhere else. The truth is here! It is very common for people not to be in full agreement with everything the Church teaches. That doesn’t mean people should leave. It means they need to PRAY for the Spirit to guide them, read and learn and ask about the issue all they can from Church teachings so that their conscience can be properly formed, and give the Church the benefit of the doubt until they feel enlightened. It sometimes takes years- a lifetime- before people are fully on-board with all that the Church teaches. The bigger sin would come in creating scandal- publicly promoting dissent against the Church.

For example: A husband and wife practices birth control. They know it is against Church teachings, but continue to do so because in their hearts they just don’t feel it is wrong. They carry on as faithful Catholics in every other way. Now- they ARE wrong, and SHOULD follow Church teachings anyway, but they don’t. They are sinning, but it is between them and God at this point. They are not making their sins a public scandal. They never tell the priest until later in life, when they feel true contrition and go to confession. They are forgiven and all is well. (Of course time in Purgatory may be in order!)

NOW: What if the same couple feels very strongly that the Church is wrong on this issue. They continue to use birth control, and openly encourage others to ignore this teaching. They even get involved in a group that is actively working to change the Church’s teachings on this, or that promotes the idea that the Church is wrong on this. The priest would be well within his rights to tell the couple to stop, or risk ex-communication… and then follow up.

We all sin all the time. As we mature, we see the wisdom of the Church’s teachings and embrace them. If we just booted out everyone who wasn’t 100% on board, the pews would be empty. The Church is a hospital for sinners. We just can’t expect the Church to change to accomodate our sin. We must pray to be formed into the image of Christ as brought to us in His Church.

There is a book out called “Who’s Church is it, anyway?” I haven’t read it, but I think it goes on the premise that the Church belongs to the people, and should change to reflect the values of the people in this day and age. (Someone correct me if I am wrong here.) I believe this is a faulty premise. The Church isn’t ours…it is CHRIST’S. We are just stewards of it… we are not free to change it and plunder it’s treasures.

Anyway… that’s my opinion.

 

[kage_ar]

I think that the more people that use contraception and the more educated the youth is about sex the less abortions people will have. I rather people sin by using contraceptives than by harming the unborn. That’s my reasoning, I guess I’m too much of a realist. That’s all for now, I need to get some sleep.

Take a look at this chart:

msnbcmedia1.msn.com/i/msnbc/Components/Art/HEALTH/071011/AP_ABORTION_RATES.gif

This is the data from a report by the Guttmacher Institute, that is the research arm of Planned Parenthood.

Notice something…

you can see that the illegal rate of abortion in Africa is lower than the legal rate in Europe.

Central America’s rate (legal and illegal) is lower than North America’s legal rate. So countries whose people have [fewer] resources than us are aborting at a lower rate.

The rate of abortion in “developed nations” is almost twice as high (50 abortions per 100 births, compared to 29 abortions per 100 births) as “developing nations.”

Europe has contraception available, Africa doesn’t. Which one has a lower abortion rate? The place where there are fewer legal abortions available.

source stopp.org/wsr071017.htm

 

[Neil_Anthony]

Hi all!

This has become a stumbling block for me. Part of me is really interested in becoming Catholic because a lot of the theology makes sense, but the other part of me is terrified of conservative clergy. I’m having a very hard time differentiating what is peoples opinions and what is the actual teaching of the Church.

I read somewhere that if a Catholic votes for a politician that is not pro-life that they are automatically excommunicated. Is that how it is?

Hi Doubtfire,

This forum has a lot of converts from Evangelical churches and its much more conservative than typical Catholics.

There is a liberal side to Catholicism too, which is found in the Church’s social teaching.

 

[kage_ar]

Hi Doubtfire,

This forum has a lot of converts from Evangelical churches and its much more conservative than typical Catholics.

There is a liberal side to Catholicism too, which is found in the Church’s social teaching.

However, none of the Church’s teaching, social or otherwise, supports abortion or contracaption.

 

[tuviskazinai]

Hi Doubtfire,
I just wanted to say WELCOME! I think your attraction to the Church is beautiful.

I’d like to agree with those who have pointed out the difference between doubt and disobedience. Even though as a Catholic you are asked to believe some difficult doctrinal things AND their translation into certain specific social policies (I get the sense that that’s what is hardest for you at this point), know that there is no hard-and-fast litmus test to determine who is welcome in the Catholic Church. The biggest question is whether you feel drawn to it by the Holy Spirit, through a love of Christ, Mary, and the Saints, and if you believe that the Magisterium radiates the wisdom of the ages (even if some parts of it seem inscrutable for now).

A personal note: until recently, my own big reservation was that I, too, believed that however wrong gay marriage may be from a religious point of view, a secular, democratic society has no right to ban it. Attempts to ban it seemed to me downright wrong. But (again, difference between doubt and disobedience) I said to myself, You know, over the course of my life I’ve changed my mind about a lot of things. I will never be “right” about everything. Indeed, living a truthful life is not about standing forever in the “right” position and never budging; it is directional, it is about moving TOWARDS the truth, and it is relational, it is about walking with Christ.

I myself have recently come to see (mainly from reading Stanley Kurtz, who isn’t even Catholic but whom I’d recommend) how the Church is (I think) on the right side of defending the institution of marriage, after all. I am grateful for this understanding, and even more so because I know that although it took me a while to reach it, my journey was honest.

So as long as you are obedient and humble, your doubts may actually make you a very good Catholic someday, one who doesn’t just turn her brain off because the Church has already told her what to believe, but rather one who is always questioning where she may be called upon to grow and develop next as a human being. As long as you make Christ your loadstone and the Magisterium your compass throughout that process, I think you will do well.

Does that make sense?
God bless you in your discernment!
AMDG

 

[tuviskazinai]

Hi Doubtfire,
I just wanted to say WELCOME! I think your attraction to the Church is beautiful.

I’d like to agree with those who have pointed out the difference between doubt and disobedience. Even though as a Catholic you are asked to believe some difficult doctrinal things AND their translation into certain specific social policies (I get the sense that that’s what is hardest for you at this point), know that there is no hard-and-fast litmus test to determine who is welcome in the Catholic Church. The biggest question is whether you feel drawn to it by the Holy Spirit, through a love of Christ, Mary, and the Saints, and if you believe that the Magisterium radiates the wisdom of the ages (even if some parts of it seem inscrutable for now).

A personal note: until recently, my own big reservation was that I, too, believed that however wrong gay marriage may be from a religious point of view, a secular, democratic society has no right to ban it. Attempts to ban it seemed to me downright wrong. But (again, difference between doubt and disobedience) I said to myself, You know, over the course of my life I’ve changed my mind about a lot of things. I will never be “right” about everything. Indeed, living a truthful life is not about standing forever in the “right” position and never budging; it is directional, it is about moving TOWARDS the truth, and it is relational, it is about walking with Christ.

I myself have recently come to see (mainly from reading Stanley Kurtz, who isn’t even Catholic but whom I’d recommend) how the Church is (I think) on the right side of defending the institution of marriage, after all. I am grateful for this understanding, and even more so because I know that although it took me a while to reach it, my journey was honest.

So as long as you are obedient and humble, your doubts may actually make you a very good Catholic someday, one who doesn’t just turn her brain off because the Church has already told her what to believe, but rather one who is always questioning where she may be called upon to grow and develop next as a human being. As long as you make Christ your loadstone and the Magisterium your compass throughout that process, I think you will do well.

Does that make sense?
God bless you in your discernment!
AMDG

 

[D0UBTFIRE]

Take a look at this chart:

msnbcmedia1.msn.com/i/msnbc/Components/Art/HEALTH/071011/AP_ABORTION_RATES.gif

This is the data from a report by the Guttmacher Institute, that is the research arm of Planned Parenthood.

Notice something…

you can see that the illegal rate of abortion in Africa is lower than the legal rate in Europe.

Central America’s rate (legal and illegal) is lower than North America’s legal rate. So countries whose people have [fewer] resources than us are aborting at a lower rate.

The rate of abortion in “developed nations” is almost twice as high (50 abortions per 100 births, compared to 29 abortions per 100 births) as “developing nations.”

Europe has contraception available, Africa doesn’t. Which one has a lower abortion rate? The place where there are fewer legal abortions available.

source stopp.org/wsr071017.htm

I don’t really want to discuss the “issues” in this thread because it was more a general point that I was asking about. But since you brought it up, I have to say that that is perhaps a good source of evidence to defend the Catholic position. At the same time, I don’t think you can really compare different cultures like that. Simply put, I know that in MY culture people are generally much more open to the idea of having many children, whilst in American culture it’s not quite as common. Thus, the legality or illegality of abortion and the availability of contraception in my culture would have a different effect I believe than in American culture. Just because people here, or people in England have more access to contraception AND have more abortions than people in Africa or Latin America doesn’t mean that IF those latter cultures had more access to contraception that they would necessarily have less children or that they would necessarily have less abortions. I don’t mean that it might not be true, just that it’s not conclusive evidence. I would argue that the groups that are being compared, Europe to Africa and North America to Central America have another factor that must be taken into consideration. That factor is education. The continents you mentioned with the higher rate of abortion also have a higher rate of educated people than the ones they were being compared to. If more educated people want less children then maybe it’s in those places where easy access to contraception is all the more important in order to prevent so many abortions from taking place. After all, a pregnancy that is prevented is one less possible baby killing we have to worry about. We’re not going to get people to just stop having sex so I say throw condoms at them. Like I said before, even if I agreed that contraception was sinful, I am COMPLETELY convinced that in comparison to abortion, contraception is the lesser of the two evils. Contraception only harms the individual couple who’s making the choice to use it. In the end there it IS between them and God. Abortion however, like you all like to say, is the MURDER of an innocent. I know murder is a sin, but not all sins are murder.

 

[D0UBTFIRE]

Hi Doubtfire,
I just wanted to say WELCOME! I think your attraction to the Church is beautiful.

I’d like to agree with those who have pointed out the difference between doubt and disobedience. Even though as a Catholic you are asked to believe some difficult doctrinal things AND their translation into certain specific social policies (I get the sense that that’s what is hardest for you at this point), know that there is no hard-and-fast litmus test to determine who is welcome in the Catholic Church. The biggest question is whether you feel drawn to it by the Holy Spirit, through a love of Christ, Mary, and the Saints, and if you believe that the Magisterium radiates the wisdom of the ages (even if some parts of it seem inscrutable for now).

A personal note: until recently, my own big reservation was that I, too, believed that however wrong gay marriage may be from a religious point of view, a secular, democratic society has no right to ban it. Attempts to ban it seemed to me downright wrong. But (again, difference between doubt and disobedience) I said to myself, You know, over the course of my life I’ve changed my mind about a lot of things. I will never be “right” about everything. Indeed, living a truthful life is not about standing forever in the “right” position and never budging; it is directional, it is about moving TOWARDS the truth, and it is relational, it is about walking with Christ.

I myself have recently come to see (mainly from reading Stanley Kurtz, who isn’t even Catholic but whom I’d recommend) how the Church is (I think) on the right side of defending the institution of marriage, after all. I am grateful for this understanding, and even more so because I know that although it took me a while to reach it, my journey was honest.

So as long as you are obedient and humble, your doubts may actually make you a very good Catholic someday, one who doesn’t just turn her brain off because the Church has already told her what to believe, but rather one who is always questioning where she may be called upon to grow and develop next as a human being. As long as you make Christ your loadstone and the Magisterium your compass throughout that process, I think you will do well.

Does that make sense?
God bless you in your discernment!
AMDG

This response was very helpful, thank you!

 

[Ruthie]

Hello, Doubtfire, and welcome!

I’m a political conservative who hopes very much that you will join the Church. It’s not about politics, but about Jesus, and salvation. I was already a conservative before I converted.

I have read a lot about why the Church teaches what she does, in the matters of faith and morals, when I disagreed. I wound up agreeing with her, every time. Eventually came to the conclusion that I could just accept whatever I didn’t agree with *before *I checked out her reasons. That doesn’t mean I’ve given up thinking. I still love researching the Church.

Here’s something I read about contraception that helped me change my mind.

Oh, and the Ask an Apologist forum is a great resource. You can search it for any subject and usually find an answer. (Use advanced search.)

Come home to Rome!

God bless you,

Ruthie

 

[Cajetan]

This has become a stumbling block for me. Part of me is really interested in becoming Catholic because a lot of the theology makes sense, but the other part of me is terrified of conservative clergy.

Think of it this way: Do you want an authentic, full-blooded treatment of the Catholic faith, or do you want a watered-down treatment of the faith?

Believe me, if the latter is what you’re looking for it ain’t hard to find these days. However, if you desire to experience the real deal – Catholicism as it has been handed down throughout the centuries – I would encourage you to check out a parish that has a reputation for “conservative clergy.”

They’re just priests who are doing their job, taking the faith seriously. The Catholic faith is what it is. So-called ‘liberal’ clergy generally aren’t representing it accurately, and, frankly, would be more at home in a non-Catholic mainline church.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

For one, that I don’t believe our country should become a theocracy. In other words, I strongly believe in a secular government. That means to me that although I can come to accept the Catholic teaching that marriage is between one man and one woman - and that I myself would never marry someone of the same gender - I do not believe that any religion has any right to impose that view on the secular people of our country.

Hi Doubtfire,

You’re right that participation in civil society doesn’t mean that we’re supposed to force other people to follow Catholic morality in their lives.

On the other hand, many questions that come up in politics can only be answered in reference to some philosophy or way of thinking. Religion has a lot of aspects to it, and sometimes religious teachings overlap with philosophies that are relevant to civil society.

So when we’re faced with a political question like the one you bring up, you’re right that we should not just ask ourselves “is this action moral or immoral” and then decide based on that. We shouldn’t oppose gay marriage just because homosexual acts are a sin.

Instead, our decision should be based on asking ourselves “is this good or bad for society”. The answer to this question will come down to the philosophy we adhere to. Do we place individual liberty above or below the good of the whole society? Do we believe that recognizing gay relationships will lead society to a better place or a worse place?

If you sincerely believe that recognizing gay ‘marriage’ would harm society, then it would be right for you to oppose changes to the definition of marriage. Not to force others to obey your religion, but to give your honest opinion about what is best for everyone. And once your beliefs are completely educated by Catholic teaching, you will likely believe that recognizing gay marriage isn’t a good idea for anyone. (It might take a long long time of studying before you get to the point where you really believe that. Just accepting that gay sex is a sin isn’t the same thing at all).

I hope that answers the question!

 

[JDaniel]

I don’t really want to discuss the “issues” in this thread because it was more a general point that I was asking about. But since you brought it up, I have to say that that is perhaps a good source of evidence to defend the Catholic position. At the same time, I don’t think you can really compare different cultures like that. Simply put, I know that in MY culture people are generally much more open to the idea of having many children, whilst in American culture it’s not quite as common. Thus, the legality or illegality of abortion and the availability of contraception in my culture would have a different effect I believe than in American culture. Just because people here, or people in England have more access to contraception AND have more abortions than people in Africa or Latin America doesn’t mean that IF those latter cultures had more access to contraception that they would necessarily have less children or that they would necessarily have less abortions. I don’t mean that it might not be true, just that it’s not conclusive evidence. I would argue that the groups that are being compared, Europe to Africa and North America to Central America have another factor that must be taken into consideration. That factor is education. The continents you mentioned with the higher rate of abortion also have a higher rate of educated people than the ones they were being compared to. If more educated people want less children then maybe it’s in those places where easy access to contraception is all the more important in order to prevent so many abortions from taking place. After all, a pregnancy that is prevented is one less possible baby killing we have to worry about. We’re not going to get people to just stop having sex so I say throw condoms at them. Like I said before, even if I agreed that contraception was sinful, I am COMPLETELY convinced that in comparison to abortion, contraception is the lesser of the two evils. Contraception only harms the individual couple who’s making the choice to use it. In the end there it IS between them and God. Abortion however, like you all like to say, is the MURDER of an innocent. I know murder is a sin, but not all sins are murder.

Doubtfire:

I know it’s tempting to think of “abortion” as on a level above “contraception”. The problem here, is that the Church does not. For Catholicism, they are, at the very least, on the same level.

The Church views contraception as defeating human participation in God’s creation. We have a tendency to “humanize” the debate. So, we are naturally tempted to choose the “life” (of the unborn).

Remember, for God, it doesn’t matter that much that the new child stay here on earth, or be lifted into union with Him. (Well, actually it does: union with God is the higher value.) As I said in another thread, “Sex is that which projects the race into the future by babies and family.” So, neither abortion nor contraception is acceptable.

It could be said, that “contraception” may even be the higher of the two concepts, on the hierarchy of God’s desires for humans. In other words, that God created a universe where “life” exists is, perhaps, the bigger accomplishment, and, thus, perhaps the more compelling requirement for the participation of humans.

As tough as it is, we are not to make our own choices that conflict with the promulgations of the Church. Does this make a little sense?

Merry Christmas and
God bless,
JD

 

[D0UBTFIRE]

Doubtfire:

I know it’s tempting to think of “abortion” as on a level above “contraception”. The problem here, is that the Church does not. For Catholicism, they are, at the very least, on the same level.

The Church views contraception as defeating human participation in God’s creation. We have a tendency to “humanize” the debate. So, we are naturally tempted to choose the “life” (of the unborn).

Remember, for God, it doesn’t matter that much that the new child stay here on earth, or be lifted into union with Him. (Well, actually it does: union with God is the higher value.) As I said in another thread, “Sex is that which projects the race into the future by babies and family.” So, neither abortion nor contraception is acceptable.

It could be said, that “contraception” may even be the higher of the two concepts, on the hierarchy of God’s desires for humans. In other words, that God created a universe where “life” exists is, perhaps, the bigger accomplishment, and, thus, perhaps the more compelling requirement for the participation of humans.

As tough as it is, we are not to make our own choices that conflict with the promulgations of the Church. Does this make a little sense?

Merry Christmas and
God bless,
JD

This is an interesting perspective. Does anyone have another take on it? Are contraception and abortion really on the same level in Catholicism? Can someone show me why…I don’t fully understand the teachings of venial vs mortal sin, and all the categories given to sin, so if someone could explain what contraception and abortion fall under I’d really like to know.

 

[CatsAndDogs]

I don’t feel that pointing anyone toward anything less that what Christ intended (His One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church - the Catholic Church) is extremely irresponsible.

If someone has issues with the Catholic Church they need to change their understanding and acceptance to conform to the Truth - not just find a shoe that fits.

~Liza

Hear hear!

:shamrock2:

 

[kage_ar]

This is an interesting perspective. Does anyone have another take on it? Are contraception and abortion really on the same level in Catholicism? Can someone show me why…I don’t fully understand the teachings of venial vs mortal sin, and all the categories given to sin, so if someone could explain what contraception and abortion fall under I’d really like to know.

Three things are required for a sin to be mortal.

It must be grave, evil or serious matter…

It must be done with full knowledge.

It must be done with consent.

You can see from the Catechism that both contraception and abortion, when done with full knowledge and consent, can be mortal sin.

You can search and read the CCC on line here scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

From the Catechism (bold mine):

Abortion

**2271 **Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law:

You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish. God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.

---

Contraception

2370 Periodic continence, that is, the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality.158 These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom. In contrast, “every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible” is intrinsically evil:159
Thus the innate language that expresses the total reciprocal self-giving of husband and wife is overlaid, through contraception, by an objectively contradictory language, namely, that of not giving oneself totally to the other. This leads not only to a positive refusal to be open to life but also to a falsification of the inner truth of conjugal love, which is called upon to give itself in personal totality. . . . The difference, both anthropological and moral, between contraception and recourse to the rhythm of the cycle . . . involves in the final analysis two irreconcilable concepts of the human person and of human sexuality.160

 

[tuviskazinai]

I think that JD’s post touches very importantly on the danger of hierarchizing sins. When talking about contraception to non-Catholics – and especially in relation to policy in Africa – I’ve found this to be a temptation that comes up often. People will make the interesting point, “Well, if an AIDS-stricken African man is going to sleep around anyway, shouldn’t he at least use a condom when he comes home to his wife?” The problem when we begin hierarchizing sins is that it begins to seem like an either/or scenario, when in reality what the Church teaches is far more truthful: don’t sleep around, AND don’t use a condom.

Often I will then hear in response, “Well, but the temptation to sleep around is a lot stronger than the temptation to use a condom. He might sleep around despite the Church’s teachings because his lust clouds his judgment, but then suddenly decide that he is too Catholic to use a condom when he gets in the bedroom with his wife. So if the Church is only relevant in the marriage bed, shouldn’t it teach the socially responsible thing to do – condom use?”

Of course, this strategy (willfully or not!) marginalizes the Church in considering it a lost cause that it won’t be heeded outside the marriage bed, and it marginalizes the man in giving up on the strength of his will. But even if there are cases like the example describes, the Church’s job is not to be practical, but to teach the truth. If this man wants to ruin his life by selectively choosing from among the Church’s teachings, that’s his business. But the Church would have no authority whatsoever if it started saying, “Well, this sin (contraception) is less serious than this other sin (abortion, promiscuity, etc),” since it would begin to relativize what is absolute. Additionally, in such a situation as this, the Church – in assuming that we are reasonable creatures capable of doing good – holds forth a lot more hope for mankind and human souls than do those who are willing to write promiscuity off in an effort to reduce certain AIDS statistics.

THAT SAID…while your post, JD, also makes a very good point about our openness to life mirroring God’s openness to creation, I am personally not convinced that’s a strong theological foundation on which to make the case that contraception is even more fundamental a sin than abortion. I think that goes a bit far, and also, it threatens to make us pretty bad Catholic apologists, too: if thinking contraception is as bad as abortion leads us into thinking the reasons against contraception are as obvious to non-believers (and believers) as the reasons against abortion, or into forgetting that the physical and psychological damage done by abortion is obviously a lot greater than that done by contraception (speaking about the temporal plane here), then I don’t think we will be very effective at speaking to people’s confusion (about contraception), being open to their pain (in regards to abortion), and avoiding doctrinal pedantry / closed-mindedness in general…

Thoughts? Wonderful discussion so far, I enjoy it!
+AMDG+

 

[tuviskazinai]

In fact, now that I’m thinking about it (not to blabber on – sorry!), I think we do also need to distinguish between, on the one hand, Church teachings being equally true, or social policies that reinforce Church teachings being equally important, and, on the other hand, individual sins being more or less grave for a given individual sinner. Extreme example: if I steal a lollipop from a supermarket, it’s not as bad as murder! Probably abortion is at least in some measure worse than contraception. All the same, this is not to say it’s a good idea to hierarchize sins, especially already grave ones, because not only the intrinsic gravity of the act but the individual’s understanding of the sin come to play in evaluating it.

Often people will say that mass-murderers, sociopaths, etc. represent the deepest evil. But honestly, I think that for someone to want to murder children, he must have some sort of mental illness. Not that this excuses the act, of course, but then when we try to act superior for not killing children simply because we don’t have this deep psychological defect anyway – and when we meanwhile go about committing “lesser” sins all the time, and knowingly, like being arrogant or cruel or what have you – it goes to show that hierarchizing sins can make us too forgiving of ourselves and not understanding enough of others.

Others know more about this than I do, though, and besides, I have probably brought this thread off-topic! So…apologies.