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

[flyingfish]

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’.

My point isn’t about whether the teaching is good or bad, but whether or not it’s controversial. It’s definitely controversial, because there are many theologians, Catholics, and so on who don’t agree with this teaching.

The statistics I’ve seen is that >=95% of married Catholics in the US use ABC, I didn’t research those statistics in too much detail, so maybe they’re wrong. But considering things like Church attendance, like family size, like abortion and divorce statistics, I’m inclined to think they’re accurate.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

My point isn’t about whether the teaching is good or bad, but whether or not it’s controversial. It’s definitely controversial, because there are many theologians, Catholics, and so on who don’t agree with this teaching.

The statistics I’ve seen is that >=95% of married Catholics in the US use ABC, I didn’t research those statistics in too much detail, so maybe they’re wrong. But considering things like Church attendance, like family size, like abortion and divorce statistics, I’m inclined to think they’re accurate.

I understand your point. . .but as I said, it doesn’t matter how many will ‘reject’ a truth; it doesn’t render the truth into a ‘non-truth’. \

as the OP himself made note, the fact is, the teaching is the truth. That makes those who argue against it not ‘controversial’ but rather in denial of truth.

And the subject is not controversial in that it isn’t a question of two oppositional (but equally valid) points of view, with one ‘larger’ group opting for a less ‘known’ position. It is a question of a number of people (the actual number or percentage not being germane to the case) who are rejecting a truth and attempting to make it seem that they are perfectly justified in doing so. They aren’t.

 

[flyingfish]

I understand your point. . .but as I said, it doesn’t matter how many will ‘reject’ a truth; it doesn’t render the truth into a ‘non-truth’. \

as the OP himself made note, the fact is, the teaching is the truth. That makes those who argue against it not ‘controversial’ but rather in denial of truth.

And the subject is not controversial in that it isn’t a question of two oppositional (but equally valid) points of view, with one ‘larger’ group opting for a less ‘known’ position. It is a question of a number of people (the actual number or percentage not being germane to the case) who are rejecting a truth and attempting to make it seem that they are perfectly justified in doing so. They aren’t.

Well, the thing with truth is that the theologians who think ABC should be permitted think their view is the truth. Maybe there are some who consciously support falsehood, but generally in disagreements like this people honestly believe they’re in the right.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Well, the thing with truth is that the theologians who think ABC should be permitted think their view is the truth. Maybe there are some who consciously support falsehood, but generally in disagreements like this people honestly believe they’re in the right.

And if this were a question that did not revolve around faith and morals, it would be permissible for people to ‘honestly believe they were in the right.’

Red Sox Fans honestly (but mistakenly) think the NY Yankees are the Evil Empire.

NY Yankees fans honestly (but mistakenly) think that the Red Sox are whiners.

Plenty of people honestly (but mistakenly) think that Elvis and J.F.K. are both alive, that there are hordes of mutant crocodiles living in NYC sewers, that women wearing short skirts ‘ask for’ being raped, etc. etc. Heck, people think that Jerry Springer is performing a public SERVICE in his shows. There is no limit for people being (honestly) mistaken.

But when it comes to setting oneself up against revealed truth (which is authoritative) and which is binding on Catholics (clergy and lay), no, we don’t have people being honestly mistaken. At the very most, we have people who are honestly CONFUSED and thus make mistakes. . .but one cannot be ‘honestly mistaken’ about defying truth. Either the person accepts the truth but defies it (the case for probably the majority of the laity and possibly the clergy as well), or the person becomes confused over what the teaching is, what the role of conscience is, etc., and because of the confusion defies the truth, mistakenly (but THINKING it ‘honest’ though because of the confusion, they ‘honestly’ don’t realize what they’re rejecting).

 

[jwashu]

I would say it’s controversial because for many years the Canadian Bishops just flat didn’t teach it and in turn it took the Vatican around a decade to tell them they had to. Add to that the fact that numerous Priests and even some Bishops continually speak out against the teaching as being incorrect I would classify that as indeed controversial.

Joe

 

[flyingfish]

And if this were a question that did not revolve around faith and morals, it would be permissible for people to ‘honestly believe they were in the right.’

It’s possible to honestly and sincerely believe that the Church is not infallible. If you speak these views as a Catholic theologian you’ll probably get censured by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, but you can still sincerely hold these views.

It’s just a fact that there are aspects of Catholic teaching that not all Catholics agree with. And birth control specifically is a big one because many Catholics personally use it.

 

[BillP]

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

Mission accomplished. The Earth is full and subdued

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."

That’s fine as far as it goes, but the use of terms such as “gift” and “reward” implies a certain mindset of desire on the part of the recipient do it not? That is to say if you give someone something they do not want one can hardly characterize it as a “gift” or a “reward”…

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."

You seem to be misinterpreting that passage. Onan’s sin is commonly held to be act of disobeying God, by refusing to impregnate his sister-in-law, not the particular methodology which he chose, in fact, neither the Catechism nor Theology of the Body use that example to explain the teaching.

 

[tweetymom]

Mission accomplished. The Earth is full and subdued

That’s fine as far as it goes, but the use of terms such as “gift” and “reward” implies a certain mindset of desire on the part of the recipient do it not? That is to say if you give someone something they do not want one can hardly characterize it as a “gift” or a “reward”…

You seem to be misinterpreting that passage. Onan’s sin is commonly held to be act of disobeying God, by refusing to impregnate his sister-in-law, not the particular methodology which he chose, in fact, neither the Catechism nor Theology of the Body use that example to explain the teaching.

Very good and true.

 

[Mayita30]

Very good and true.

Contraception is unnatural and makes men view women as sex object. Contraception is also related to Abortion…Chastity should always be practice. You have to be Chaste before and after marraige. During the married state, natural family planning should be practice so you wont be contradicting the scripture. A couple should always be open to life!

 

[Mayita30]

Contraception is unnatural and makes men view women as sex object. Contraception is also related to Abortion…Chastity should always be practice. You have to be Chaste before and after marraige. During the married state, natural family planning should be practice so you wont be contradicting the scripture. A couple should always be open to life!

===========================================================
Does the birth control pill cause abortions? Using research results from medical literature, Randy Alcorn has convincingly shown that the answer is `yes.’ He has, with care and compassion, given us the truth. The question for us as Christians is how we will respond now that we know."

~ Linda Martin, M.D., Pediatrician

source :prolife.com/BIRTHCNT.html

Deuteronomy 30:19: “I call heaven and earth to witness against you this day, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse; therefore choose life, that you and your descendants may live".
Jeremiah 1:5: Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations.”

Psalm 139:13: “For thou didst form my inward parts, **thou didst knit me together in my mother’s womb.” **
Isaiah 44:2:Thus says the LORD who made you, **who formed you from the womb and will help you: **Fear not, O Jacob my servant, Jeshurun whom I have chosen.

Isaiah 44:24:Thus says the LORD, your Redeemer, **who formed you from the womb: **"I am the LORD, who made all things, who stretched out the heavens alone, who spread out the earth – Who was with me?

 

[Mayita30]

===========================================================
Does the birth control pill cause abortions? Using research results from medical literature, Randy Alcorn has convincingly shown that the answer is `yes.’ He has, with care and compassion, given us the truth. The question for us as Christians is how we will respond now that we know."

~ Linda Martin, M.D., Pediatrician

source :prolife.com/BIRTHCNT.html

Deuteronomy 30:19: “I call heaven and earth to witness against you this day, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse; therefore choose life, that you and your descendants may live".
Jeremiah 1:5: Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you; I appointed you a prophet to the nations.”

Psalm 139:13: “For thou didst form my inward parts, **thou didst knit me together in my mother’s womb.” **
Isaiah 44:2:Thus says the LORD who made you, **who formed you from the womb and will help you: **Fear not, O Jacob my servant, Jeshurun whom I have chosen.

Isaiah 44:24:Thus says the LORD, your Redeemer, **who formed you from the womb: **"I am the LORD, who made all things, who stretched out the heavens alone, who spread out the earth – Who was with me?

========================================================
Again, if you’re reading about CHEMICAL ABORTIONS for the first time, this may surprise, or even shock you. Most Americans are not aware that the Pill and other chemical “contraceptives” cause millions of “non-surgical” abortions each year in the early weeks of pregnancy. If you are using the Pill, Depo-Provera or Norplant, you need to know the truth about how these products work.

Most women take these “contraceptives” because they don’t want to have a baby. But how many women know they can have BREAKTHROUGH OVULATIONS and become pregnant while using these “contraceptives?” Very few! And how many of these women know that if they become pregnant after a BREAKTHROUGH OVULATION, these “contraceptives” will almost always kill any son or daughter they’ve conceived?

Most people don’t know the real facts about how “contraceptives” work. And because of this lack of knowledge, most women are not aware that they may be having BREAKTHROUGH OVULATIONS, and conceiving children that are killed very early in the pregnancy. Women using these “contraceptives” almost never perceive that they have become pregnant, or that chemicals have killed their tiny baby.

source :prolife.com/BIRTHCNT.html

 

[BillP]

But how many women know they can have BREAKTHROUGH OVULATIONS and become pregnant while using these “contraceptives?”

This is quite simply nonsense. The medical definition (American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists) of “pregnant” is when “the fertilized ovum implants into the uterine wall”. Which is why the AMA says that chemical contraceptives have no effect on pregnancies and are not abortifacient.

Further I would point out that ~40% of all fertilized ova fail to implant for whatever cause, which further supports measuring pregnancy from time of implantation rather than fertilization. Or are you seriously asserting that 40% of all “pregnancies” end in miscarriage?

Oh, by the way excessive CAPITALIZATION, bold fonts and COLORS aren’t actually arguments or evidence!

 

[Mayita30]

This is quite simply nonsense. The medical definition (American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists) of “pregnant” is when “the fertilized ovum implants into the uterine wall”. Which is why the AMA says that chemical contraceptives have no effect on pregnancies and are not abortifacient.

Further I would point out that ~40% of all fertilized ova fail to implant for whatever cause, which further supports measuring pregnancy from time of implantation rather than fertilization. Or are you seriously asserting that 40% of all “pregnancies” end in miscarriage?

Oh, by the way excessive CAPITALIZATION, bold fonts and COLORS aren’t actually arguments or evidence!

I hope you are not being rude here.I’m not here to offned anyone. I use capitalization to emphasize something. Some of the messages I posted wwere from a Catholic site and it already came with capitalization…

 

[Mayita30]

The birth control Pill makes the inner lining of the uterus very hostile
to implantation. It is not known how often the Pill acts in this way, but
it cannot be denied that the Pill may be acting as an early abortion agent
in any given cycle in any given woman.​

A responsible woman should not use contraception and use NFP instead by determining her fertile days! Women are only fertile 5-7 days in a month and a Catholic married woman should learn how to read her own fertility cycle. A man should understand the fertility Cycles of a woman too and should respect her when to have relations and when not to have it. Respect works both ways…

 

[m_crane]

The teachings of the Church on contraception vs NFP seem to be very difficult to accept for many Catholics I have known.

Could it be because living this teaching requires a degree of obedience and self-control that these couples have failed to practice from the beginning of their relationship or even before their relationship began?

Failing in small ways to practice a virtue, clouds our judgement in the practice of that virtue, in the case, Chastity. We can then go on the bigger failings like the contraceptive mentality thinking we are justified in our actions.

I believe that the practice of contraception and the mentality that it is good for the couple, comes from the clouding of a person’s conscience by the poor choices they made when they were presented their first opportunities to practice Chastity.

I’m not casting stones at anyone but I think this could be the answer in many cases,to why Catholics would have a problem with this teaching. Of course, a good Confession could have prevented this clouding of our consciences so add that in too.

We need to educate our young children about the importance of Chastity, dressing modestly, controlling viewing of unchaste media and teaching them how beautiful and private their bodies (and everyone elses) are.

 

[jenlovesyu]

The teachings of the Church on contraception vs NFP seem to be very difficult to accept for many Catholics I have known.

Could it be because living this teaching requires a degree of obedience and self-control that these couples have failed to practice from the beginning of their relationship or even before their relationship began?

Failing in small ways to practice a virtue, clouds our judgement in the practice of that virtue, in the case, Chastity. We can then go on the bigger failings like the contraceptive mentality thinking we are justified in our actions.

I believe that the practice of contraception and the mentality that it is good for the couple, comes from the clouding of a person’s conscience by the poor choices they made when they were presented their first opportunities to practice Chastity.

I’m not casting stones at anyone but I think this could be the answer in many cases,to why Catholics would have a problem with this teaching. Of course, a good Confession could have prevented this clouding of our consciences so add that in too.

We need to educate our young children about the importance of Chastity, dressing modestly, controlling viewing of unchaste media and teaching them how beautiful and private their bodies (and everyone elses) are.

I like this post, very well written.
I personally can not understand, and I mean this sincerely not sarcastically, why so many Catholics have a hard time understanding the Church’s teaching on artificial contraceptives. It seems so genuine, so reasonable and clear cut to me.
I guess I can understand, at the least, how difficult it is to live this teaching when society around us doesn’t seem to have any issue with contraceptives at all. Sin is constantly being flashed in our faces as if it were virtuous.
But Jesus did caution us in telling us that following Him wasn’t going to be easy. And we can’t honestly say we are following Jesus if we are disobeying His Bride (the Church), correct?

 

[canadianguy1143]

You seem to be misinterpreting that passage. Onan’s sin is commonly held to be act of disobeying God, by refusing to impregnate his sister-in-law, not the particular methodology which he chose, in fact, neither the Catechism nor Theology of the Body use that example to explain the teaching.

Onan did disobey God. Nobody is disputing that. God told him to conceive a child which would involve sex. Onan did have sex with his sister-in-law but removed the sperm prior to intercourse so that no pregnancy could occur. The fact that God punished him for his form of contraception is clear for those who accept Catholic teaching.

Even if my interpretation isn’t correct, the last time I checked, you listed your religious beliefs as Catholic. Catholics can’t practice artificial birth control in good conscience.

 

[jmcrae]

This is quite simply nonsense. The medical definition (American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists) of “pregnant” is when “the fertilized ovum implants into the uterine wall”. Which is why the AMA says that chemical contraceptives have no effect on pregnancies and are not abortifacient.

Right - redefine the word, and the problem just “goes away.”

Unfortunately, those are actual human children being flushed down the toilet.

Further I would point out that ~40% of all fertilized ova fail to implant for whatever cause, which further supports measuring pregnancy from time of implantation rather than fertilization. Or are you seriously asserting that 40% of all “pregnancies” end in miscarriage?

Perhaps they do, and what of it, if so? (How does anyone know this? If no one is detecting these undetectable early pregnancies, where is the data coming from?) Perhaps God has ordained that 40% of the population of Heaven gets there with no struggles in life, and no testing to go through. That doesn’t give anybody a green light to snuff out those whom God intended to live and to be born.

In any case, it boggles my mind that people claiming to believe in God can’t understand that God is never going to create anyone “by accident.” If you end up pregnant, it’s because God purposely created that child in your womb, to fulfill some aspect of His will here on earth.

How can we pray “Thy will be done” if we keep closing the door against His workmen, and shutting them out of the world?

 

[ALLGIRLS]

Right - redefine the word, and the problem just “goes away.”

Unfortunately, those are actual human children being flushed down the toilet.

Thank you! It’s a biological fact that at the moment of conception, that is, the moment sperm and egg meet, an entirely new entity comes into being, with dna completely distinct from the both the mother and father. It’s also a fact that’s it is a human entity. Why is it ok to dispose of these humans in the manner that chemical contraceptives can?

In Christ,

Ellen

 

[dad_o_six]

First of all, I really appreciate the numerous comments of support.

It has since occurred to me that my thinking on this problem was backwards. My real question should have been, “Is NOT using birth control really that controversial?”

When my family strolls into a modern Catholic church, especially one that we do not normally attend, heads turn. I’ve heard the whispers. As my wife is just starting to show our next blessing, number seven, I am anticipating similar reactions to the treatment we’ve received in the past.

We are not poor. We’re not rich either. I’m educated in a not very lucrative field. My wife is a stay-at-home-mom. Our oldest enters college next year; fortunately, he’s mostly covered by scholarships and subsidized loans. Mostly. I worry. I worry a lot. My wife, she’s more faith-filled than I am. As you can no-longer load a bunch of kids in a station wagon and our minivan is overcrowded, we could really use a 12-passenger van. We’ll have to wait until next year as the budget doesn’t allow it just yet. Raising a large family in 2010 has distinct challenges. Still, we’ll manage. We still have multiple cell-phones, high-speed internet, digital cable. We can cut back on these if necessary. We’ve had a few vacations, but nothing extravagant and years apart.

In short, we live NOTHING like my siblings and really a very different lifestyle from most of the people in the pews (and everyone in Canada, lol But, we have something that I think many of those people are really missing. Children really are a blessing.

This is something that I think most people just don’t get: By far the most difficult thing for me about raising a large family is the flack I get from various people. I get joking and occasionally quite rude comments at work. I get viscious comments from my non-Catholic mother and my wife’s non-Catholic relatives. But when I get sneers and jeers at the modern Catholic church, I find it frankly unacceptable.

I haven’t always thought, felt, or acted the way I do today. But, at least when I called myself a Catholic, I was open to the possibility that maybe the Church’s teaching was correct. I had enough grace to suspect that I just didn’t understand the Church’s teaching–yet. Frankly, I just don’t get why some people don’t just become Lutherans or Episcopaleans if that’s what they already believe. Instead, they hang around trying to make the Catholic church into something She never was and never will be, except perhaps in near ruins.