Then I don’t think any Catholic here who supports the Church’s teaching on contraception has ever posited that the act of ingesting a pill or applying a condom is intrinsically evil.
On this we are agreed.
I’m not disagreeing with you at all here, just want to clear up a possible inconsistency I might have seen.
Every single part of Church teaching that mentions contraception does so in the context of marriage and the conjugal act.
The more I read on the subject, the more I would have to say yes.
Yes.
Certainly.
I don’t see Father Curran mentioned here.
It first surfaced in Curran’s writings. It has been repeated many times. Again, NO substantiation at all.
Well, when referring to other people, it is simply not our place to try figure out culpability… if we tried, there is no way for us to know someone’s heart, but even if we could, it is simply not our place. If a person asks us we can suggest they speak with a spiritual advisor/confessor.You are correct, you did put the word “willful” in there… I hadn’t seen that. Either way, I’m sure it didn’t hurt for me to reiterate to the OP exactly what “willful” means by showing examples.
When we are in a state of emotional distress, or when we are afraid, or when we are addicted, or when we feel a certain sense of obligation to do something,… can all be examples of not having full consent of the will.
Technically, you are correct. But sex can be very important in a marriage, and if one partner knows that there would be huge problems in the marriage if one of them stopped having sex for any reason other than legitimate illness or paralysis, they might feel like it’s something they have to do for the good of the family.
It’s always best not to jump to conclusions.
I’m honestly not sure why you’re nit picking at my posts so much. It’s getting kind of old at this point. I have said nothing against Church teaching, and all the examples I have listed as possible circumstances which would lessen culpability have all been talked about a great deal here on CAF. I never said “if the following are true, you are free to assume you are not in mortal sin and may continue on in grave matter,” I merely listed a few possible examples so the OP would understand.
Ah, now I see where PRMerger (and yourself) are coming from.
Gents, I believe you are both mistaken (or better, could be more accurate).
Contraceptive human acts (ie as defined by the Church) are also to be found outside of marriage.
Yes, I agree that Magisterial Church Teaching is assumed to be targeted at married Catholic couples. However the definition/principles of “contraceptive act” can also be applied outside marriage.
Those who fornicate promiscuously usually use ABC for the purpose of avoiding pregnancy. Why would such immoral acts not be both sins of fornication and contraception?
Keep in mind that "conjugal act’ is often simply a euphemism for sexual intercourse (which of course must be conjugal if we assume we have celibate Cardinals talking to good Catholicshmmmnn). But taking things in context is is relatively clear it is not actually limited to the married.
Yes. I have never proposed that this is limited to the married. Extra-marital sex is merely a feigned conjugal act.Ah, now I see where PRMerger (and yourself) are coming from.
Gents, I believe you are both mistaken (or better, could be more accurate).
Contraceptive human acts (ie as defined by the Church) are also to be found outside of marriage.
Yes, I agree that Magisterial Church Teaching is assumed to be targeted at married Catholic couples. However the definition/principles of “contraceptive act” can also be applied outside marriage.
Those who fornicate promiscuously usually use ABC for the purpose of avoiding pregnancy. Why would such immoral acts not be both sins of fornication and contraception?
Keep in mind that "conjugal act’ is often simply a euphemism for sexual intercourse (which of course must be conjugal if we assume we have celibate Cardinals talking to good Catholics
Thats fine, you are the one who made the statement not me. Here is what you said:** “It appears to me as if you are saying that the Pill, as an object, isn’t intrinsically evil.”**
I apologize if it seemed like I was lecturing you on trying to figure out other people’s culpability, I agree with what you are saying on that matter, I didn’t realize it sounded as if I was disagreeing, I was simply adding something, a caveat, to what you were saying… that we cannot assume that we are scott- free if we have one of the examples given. I’m sorry you felt I was nitpicking! Basically I was trying to say, it is good to know that there are factors that could affect our culpability, but for practical application, it is not our place to figure out culpability of others on one hand, so knowing they may be more or less culpable may affect our impression of them, but it wasn’t our business to begin with to try to gage their culpability, and on the other hand if we are using that information when deciding whether to willfully take action, we cannot rely on the fact that we are in one of those situations to expect our culpability to be mitigated. I think you agree with that, based on the fact that you mentioned that you would not tell anyone to assume they are not committing a mortal sin just because they find themselves in such a situation.