Is birth control really that "controversial" an issue for Catholics?

[dad_o_six]

In a response to a question I asked on this website, the apologist commented (among other things) that birth control was a “controversial” issue. I found that comment shocking coming from an apologist–something I might have expected from, say, NPR, but not from someone who supposedly really understands Catholic doctrine. Is the church’s teaching on birth control not clear? Am I required to be obedient on this issue? And is my obedience, in spite of any personal struggles or opinions, required on the same level as, say, receiving the Eucharist on the hand if the priest refuses to offer on the tongue?

 

[1ke]

In a response to a question I asked on this website, the apologist commented (among other things) that birth control was a “controversial” issue. I found that comment shocking coming from an apologist–something I might have expected from, say, NPR, but not from someone who supposedly really understands Catholic doctrine.

I think you grabbed on to the word “controversial” in Michelle’s answer and have given it much more meaning and weight than she likely intended-- although you should ask her if it’s really bothering you.

There are many Church teachings that are clear and unambiguous and yet in modern society are “controversial.” Contraception, abortion, euthanasia, stem cell research, and in vitro fertilization come readily to mind. They ar not “controversial” from a Church teaching standpoint, but rather from a societal standpoint. And yes, that filters down to individual Catholics with improperly formed consciences. It is our job to help them properly form their consciences, but not ever situation is the right situation to speak up. Sometimes we can do more harm than good. We must use the virtue of prudence when deciding when to speak and when to remain silent.

I believe it is the wider context to which Michelle was speaking.

Is the church’s teaching on birth control not clear?

No. It isn’t. And yet, there are millions of Catholics who will tell you it is. Why? Because they are being misled by the culture, by society, and by the confused teaching of some even within the Church.

Am I required to be obedient on this issue? And is my obedience, in spite of any personal struggles or opinions, required on the same level as, say, receiving the Eucharist on the hand if the priest refuses to offer on the tongue?

Yes, you are required to be obedient. I’m not sure how you got all of this line of thinking from Michelle Arnold’s reply. You are WAY overthinking her response.

 

[tweetymom]

It is very controversal forme, because it doesn’t state in the Bible that it is a sin. I do not believe that the Church can tell someone how many children to have or not have, or how to or when to have sex with my spouse. Just my opinion. and that is how I have lived my life. God Bless those who do different.

 

[floresco]

In a response to a question I asked on this website, the apologist commented (among other things) that birth control was a “controversial” issue.

I looked up “contorversial” in the dictionary and it had the definition: “likely to give rise to disagreement”. It is very true that people are likely to disagree with Church teaching on this. This is not due to any lack of clarity in the teaching. There is no reason that an apologist (or any good Catholic) should not describe birth control as a controversial issue.

 

[dad_o_six]

Isn’t the figure something like 80 or 90 % of Catholics disagree with the church’s teaching on birth control, to stick to this one example, though it could be extended to more fundamental Catholic teachings as well. It seems to me that this is due to a profound lack of leadership in the clergy and hierarchy. I mean, if I were teaching a college class and 80% of the students didn’t understand key distinctions or core principles, I would consider myself a failure. I don’t believe that trying not to offend people is an adequate excuse for limp catechesis. After all, they can always go to the Protestant church down the street. Of course, the mainline Protestants are dwindling. In fact, it seems to me that the more firm and unambiguous religious groups actually seem to be growing.

 

[floresco]

Isn’t the figure something like 80 or 90 % of Catholics disagree with the church’s teaching on birth control, to stick to this one example, though it could be extended to more fundamental Catholic teachings as well. It seems to me that this is due to a profound lack of leadership in the clergy and hierarchy. I mean, if I were teaching a college class and 80% of the students didn’t understand key distinctions or core principles, I would consider myself a failure. I don’t believe that trying not to offend people is an adequate excuse for limp catechesis.

I agree that poor catechesis is a factor. Another one is that people’s minds are not formed by the Church, but by popular culture. The majority of people are immersed in television and other media for hours every week, against one hour (at best) at church. Of course, their values come from the secular culture.

 

[sanctamaria17]

To me, it really isn’t.

No one is telling anyone how many children one can or cannot have. The Church does not say responsible family planning is sinful or that parents are wrong for using prudence and discernment.

However, God created sex to be both ordered toward union and procreation. Even when trying to avoid procreation (through means of NFP or otherwise), you must not try and frustrate that aspect (even if you conceived on the Pill, you wouldn’t abort that child, right? Same principle).

Natural Family Planning (or Fertility Awareness Method with the use of abstinence as opposed to barriers) is not only effective (most failures relating to user failure rather than method failure), it also makes use of God’s design by encouraging couples to learn about each other’s bodies.Couples are forced to learn when they can engage in relations and when they can abstain, how strictly they should follow the rules. As a result, they are forced to evaluate their reasons for waiting. Are they worried about financial ruin or not getting a mansion? Since no one outside the marriage can evaluate reasons, it takes careful discernment between God, the husband, and the wife.

It’s actually very fiscally and environmentally responsible…Not to mention very encouraging of gender equity…I don’t get why more aren’t on bored with this…

 

[Corki]

Isn’t the figure something like 80 or 90 % of Catholics disagree with the church’s teaching on birth control, to stick to this one example, though it could be extended to more fundamental Catholic teachings as well. It seems to me that this is due to a profound lack of leadership in the clergy and hierarchy. I mean, if I were teaching a college class and 80% of the students didn’t understand key distinctions or core principles, I would consider myself a failure. I don’t believe that trying not to offend people is an adequate excuse for limp catechesis. After all, they can always go to the Protestant church down the street. Of course, the mainline Protestants are dwindling. In fact, it seems to me that the more firm and unambiguous religious groups actually seem to be growing.

That number isn’t really much higher than the figure for Catholics who don’t go to Mass every Sundy and is probably much lower than for Catholics who don’t regulaly go to Confession.

I don’t think it’s a matter of anyone not understanding the key concepts. It’s just that for many Catholics obedience to Church teaching just doesn’t carry the same weight as it used to.

 

[mjs1987]

Natural Family Planning (or Fertility Awareness Method with the use of abstinence as opposed to barriers) is not only effective (most failures relating to user failure rather than method failure), it also makes use of God’s design by encouraging couples to learn about each other’s bodies.Couples are forced to learn when they can engage in relations and when they can abstain, how strictly they should follow the rules. As a result, they are forced to evaluate their reasons for waiting. Are they worried about financial ruin or not getting a mansion? Since no one outside the marriage can evaluate reasons, it takes careful discernment between God, the husband, and the wife.

It’s actually very fiscally and environmentally responsible…Not to mention very encouraging of gender equity…I don’t get why more aren’t on bored with this…

It is because birth control isnt about population control and family planning. It is about maximizing pleasure while decreasing any chances of negative side effects. NFP means reducing pleasure and not being able to do what feels good whenever you feel like it. NFP is a restriction on the freedom to have pleasure. That is why people do not like NFP over birth control pills and the condom. Most feminists until Margaret Sanger were very pro-life and saw motherhood and femininity as being things that made women superior to men. Feminists today see women and men as being pretty much the same in every way. Instead of women acting with their superior qualities, they become everything that men could ever want to them to be: woman that put out whenever they want them to with little struggle. Why should people use NFP when mainstream feminism these days encourages men not to care about women and to use them for their own pleasure? Birth control was thought to empower women but all it does it allow men to walk all over women. Until people start to feel the negative consequences from birth control, NFP will be unpopular. Until women really want to be equal with men, NFP will be unpopular. Until pleasure is not the highest goal, NFP will be unpopular. Until feminists go back to the feminism of Susan B. Anthony, birth control will be the cultural norm. Why should men give up easy women? Men are only taking advantage of the situation that women put in front of them. While men need to start acting more like men and less like animals, women do not need to use the failures of men to join the pack and fail themselves. The victorious always rise above the average. If women want true equality and want men to treat them more than as objects then they need to demand it in greater numbers.

While you are one of those women that gives feminism a good name, you are in a huge minority. I am also in a huge minority of men that respects the boundaries of women. All I can do is set an example.

 

[sanctamaria17]

I get that…

I was addressing mainly the environmentalist, feminist, crowd that claims to be for community, anti-consumerism, and anti-objectification, etc…Yes, they exist…They tend to be in my crowd.

 

[Paul1961]

I don’t think it’s a matter of anyone not understanding the key concepts. It’s just that for many Catholics obedience to Church teaching just doesn’t carry the same weight as it used to.

Bingo:thumbsup:

And I am one of them. Especially those issues that the church has decided the policy but there is very little, if any, scriptural basis for. The claim of infallibility falls embarrassing hollow when you see the many flaws in the church. Yesterday, during our homily, the deacon compared Vatican II to the two stories of the Pentecost. Telling us how each session began with a prayer to the holy spirit to guide them. If the holy spirit was guiding the Bishops in 1961, I would hope that it could have found a moment to have them address the issues of child abuse and molestation that were currently happening around the world.

 

[tweetymom]

Bingo:thumbsup:

And I am one of them. Especially those issues that the church has decided the policy but there is very little, if any, scriptural basis for. The claim of infallibility falls embarrassing hollow when you see the many flaws in the church. Yesterday, during our homily, the deacon compared Vatican II to the two stories of the Pentecost. Telling us how each session began with a prayer to the holy spirit to guide them. If the holy spirit was guiding the Bishops in 1961, I would hope that it could have found a moment to have them address the issues of child abuse and molestation that were currently happening around the world.

And I am one of them too. Heartly agreed.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Bingo:thumbsup:

And I am one of them. Especially those issues that the church has decided the policy but there is very little, if any, scriptural basis for. The claim of infallibility falls embarrassing hollow when you see the many flaws in the church. Yesterday, during our homily, the deacon compared Vatican II to the two stories of the Pentecost. Telling us how each session began with a prayer to the holy spirit to guide them. If the holy spirit was guiding the Bishops in 1961, I would hope that it could have found a moment to have them address the issues of child abuse and molestation that were currently happening around the world.

Sigh. Infallibility is not the same as impeccability. Infallibility as understood by the Church is the preservation of the Church from TEACHING error in matters of faith and morals.

Impeccability (which NO ONE CLAIMS is possessed by the Church or its clergy) is the inability to sin.

And for what it’s worth, my friend, how do you know the Holy Spirit did NOT address the bishops --and the bishops refused to listen??

Also ‘birth control’ tends to be used in a confusing manner. The Church does not frown on the idea of birth ‘control’ through natural methods of periodic continence and NFP. . .and never did. After all, a woman is not ‘fertile’ every day of the month, is she?

However, "artificial birth control’ involving pills, chemicals, barrier methods and such that ‘artificially’ separate the procreative act from its natural completion etc. are NOT permitted, are not licit. There is a big difference from two responsible adults who, while utilizing NATURAL methods that are morally licit, responsibly ‘space’ their children in order to provide the best possible circumstances for wife, husband, AND children . . . and from two adults, not necessarily even married, who are simply trying to extract the ‘pleasure’ from the sex act without the ‘consequences’ of possible pregnancy. That is NOT morally licit and has contributed to women being treated as objects, to the abuse of children, and to the bestialization of men. IOW, the so-called sexual revolution has not given women and men freedom, it has enslaved them, it has degraded them, it has led to worse treatment of women and children, and it has been a factor in leading to men becoming irresponsible, selfish rapists and murderers.

 

[Corki]

Bingo:thumbsup:

And I am one of them.

And I am one of them too. Heartly agreed.

It’s sad but not unexpected that people proudly declare themselves to be outside the Church while at the same time declaring themselves to be Catholic. Is a “thumbs up” or a “heartily” a good thing when applied to dissent? Dissent should be troubling or sad not something to pat oneself on the back for. It should be painful to find yourself at odds with Church teaching.

 

[Mayita30]

It is very controversal forme, because it doesn’t state in the Bible that it is a sin. I do not believe that the Church can tell someone how many children to have or not have, or how to or when to have sex with my spouse. Just my opinion. and that is how I have lived my life. God Bless those who do different.

Genesis 1:28: “God blessed male and female, saying: 'Be fertile and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it…”

Psalms 127:3-5: Children too are a gift from the Lord, the fruit of the womb, a reward. Like arrows in the hand of a warrior are the children born in one’s youth. Blessed are they whose quivers are full."

Genesis 38:8-10: Then Judah said to Onan, “Unite with your brother’s widow, in fulfillment of your duty as brother-in-law, and thus preserve your brother’s line.” Onan however, knew that the descendants would not be counted as his; so whenever he had relations with his brother’s widow, he wasted his seed on the ground, to avoid contributing offspring for his brother. What he did greatly offended the Lord, and the Lord took his life too."

 

[Mayita30]

It is very controversal forme, because it doesn’t state in the Bible that it is a sin. I do not believe that the Church can tell someone how many children to have or not have, or how to or when to have sex with my spouse. Just my opinion. and that is how I have lived my life. God Bless those who do different.

The Church is not saying that you should be irresponsible and have lots of kids, more kids than you are capable of caring.The Church teaches us to be responsible, to be open to life. It approves of NFP (rythm, sympto-thermal,creighton ) methods. These methods of natural family planning are approved and does not cause Indirect Abortion.
Using Contraceptives is like what is said in Genesis 38:8-10:
You are wasting your seed on the ground!

 

[Paul1961]

If “wasting you seed on the ground” was the point in the story of Onan, then it would have been mentioned in the sexual sins in Leviticus. It was not.

With all the details of Jewish laws given in Leviticus, this omission was clearly not accidental.

Corki,
The thumbs up was for you clear identification of the problem.

 

[flyingfish]

In a response to a question I asked on this website, the apologist commented (among other things) that birth control was a “controversial” issue. I found that comment shocking coming from an apologist–something I might have expected from, say, NPR, but not from someone who supposedly really understands Catholic doctrine. Is the church’s teaching on birth control not clear? Am I required to be obedient on this issue? And is my obedience, in spite of any personal struggles or opinions, required on the same level as, say, receiving the Eucharist on the hand if the priest refuses to offer on the tongue?

The issue of artificial contraception was brought up during Vatican II. Pope Paul VI formed a an advisory commission, which recommended that ABC should be permitted. The Pope disagreed and wrote Humanae Vitae, where ABC was condemned.

It is still a controversial issue because most Catholics use ABC, and many theologians, priests, etc. think it’s okay. The official stance of the Church is that ABC is a sin, but only a minority of Catholics are obedient to this particular teaching.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

The issue of artificial contraception was brought up during Vatican II. Pope Paul VI formed a an advisory commission, which recommended that ABC should be permitted. The Pope disagreed and wrote Humanae Vitae, where ABC was condemned.

It is still a controversial issue because most Catholics use ABC, and many theologians, priests, etc. think it’s okay. The official stance of the Church is that ABC is a sin, but only a minority of Catholics are obedient to this particular teaching.

And that is an excellent example that demonstrates that truth is truth, not a ‘majority decision.’

Advisory Commissions are meant to advise, but they can get things ‘wrong’. Ultimately the Pope made a pastoral decision, and thank God he did. As the years go by it becomes more and more apparent just how right he was.

Truth is truth and remains truth, no matter how many would reject it.
Just as a false teaching remains false, no matter how many would embrace it.

Because teaching doesn’t depend on how many ‘accept it’ or ‘reject it’. Truth stands as truth, no matter what.

And the figure of those who supposedly ‘reject’ the teaching is, like all statistics, ‘manipulative’. Suppose you have a young Catholic who roughly between the ages of 21 and 26 becomes deluded by society (or even, heaven help us, by clergy who should know better)and practices ABC. And then suppose that by the grace of God the person becomes aware (through other priests who correct the mistaken one), or through forums which link to the actual teachings, etc. . . .and STOPS engaging in ABC.

Now for 5 years the person ‘went against Church teaching’, but often with either no knowledge that it was against, or with the mistaken idea that ‘conscience’ could supersede the teaching, or even flat out, ‘yeah, that’s what the Church says but I’m doing it MY way’. . .but then, hosannah, the lost sheep returned. And for the remainder of that person’s life, they abide by the teachings.

There are probably a lot of people out there who have been confused or deluded, willingly or not. And there are probably a lot of people out there who have come to their senses already, or will relatively soon. …

Of course, it doesn’t exactly HELP to have people continually try to keep preaching the same old dissent and acting as though "the people have spoken, it’s the CHURCH who needs to change’ and in essence trying to be millions of little popes of the church-of-one. Those who knowingly make life ‘more difficult’ in such a way will have to answer to God, and so we pray for them as well as for those who have been given false teachings and told to ignore the truth.

 

[Paul1961]

And that is an excellent example that demonstrates that truth is truth, not a ‘majority decision.’

.

All it really just means is that the boss makes the ultimate decision.