B
buffalo
Guest
Sources please.
- Status
L
Linnyo
Guest
I personally don’t think that contraception weakens family bonds and it does not prevent us from loving each other so I don’t think that these are relevant arguments.
B
buffalo
Guest
Opinions need to be based on more than feelings.
Contraception is called the Berlin Wall of Marriage. It has to do with self donation and giving of yourself completely. Contraception has at least one person holding back from the fullness of the marital embrace.
There are plenty of tracts and books that prove the anti-family effects on any kind of contraception.
L
Linnyo
Guest
I can’t recall the source as it was from a long time ago when I was studying sciences at uni. ( 11years ago)
L
Linnyo
Guest
There are occasions when it would be ill-advised to have intercourse without contraception especially since the Bible says that one should not deprive their spouses of marital relationships. Some people could be sinning regardless of what they do if this is the case. An example is if a woman is on medication and that medicine says pregnancy must be avoided. Should she deny her husband or take risks with her own health. Bear in mind that not all women have a regular cycle so there may not be a safe natural method.
L
Linnyo
Guest
Well the Berlin wall was knocked down so that artgument fails to convince me.
From 1930 onwards there has been an increase in divorce but it would be inaccurate to suggest that this is due to contraception. It is more to do with peoples’ attitude to the institution of marraige.
F
fix
Guest
Because Christ is the author of natural law.
1955 The “divine and natural” law6 shows man the way to follow so as to practice the good and attain his end. The natural law states the first and essential precepts which govern the moral life. It hinges upon the desire for God and submission to him, who is the source and judge of all that is good, as well as upon the sense that the other is one’s equal. Its principal precepts are expressed in the Decalogue. This law is called “natural,” not in reference to the nature of irrational beings, but because reason which decrees it properly belongs to human nature:
1956 The natural law, present in the heart of each man and established by reason, is universal in its precepts and its authority extends to all men. It expresses the dignity of the person and determines the basis for his fundamental rights and duties:
1959 The natural law, the Creator’s very good work, provides the solid foundation on which man can build the structure of moral rules to guide his choices. It also provides the indispensable moral foundation for building the human community. Finally, it provides the necessary basis for the civil law with which it is connected, whether by a reflection that draws conclusions from its principles, or by additions of a positive and juridical nature.
The Church decided what books composed the bible and how it is to be interpreted.
Contraception was wrong from the start of the human race and will always be wrong.
L
Linnyo
Guest
These are based on more than personal feelings. The break down of the family happens more now because it is socially acceptable but in the past it was not socially acceptable. That doesn’t mean there was more love in marraiges in the past. It indicates that people may have been more likely to stay in loveless marraiges because of the social implications of separation. The reason for the apparent increase in broken families could be a number of things other than contraception. Certainly, you would be right in saying that less children make separation less complicated.
B
buffalo
Guest
Natural Family Planning is both natural and effective for women no matter their cycles.
F
fix
Guest
Not only that, but a couple may have to abstain in certain cases.
B
buffalo
Guest
Stemming from contraceptive practices. The statistics are pretty clear.
B
buffalo
Guest
There has been a recent tendency to be more selfish. Contraception is also selfish. The more someone uses the “I” word in the marriage the higher the chance of failure. Marriage historically has been very consistent with Church teachings in the unitive and procreative sense. Families stayed together for the sake of the kids, as it should be. Abdicating this responsibility because “I” am not happy etc… is contraceptive mentality. Think deeply on this.
L
Linnyo
Guest
Read carefully. The word ‘I’ was not included in my post.
L
Linnyo
Guest
Out of curiousity, are you male? female? priests? married with kids? married without kids?
B
buffalo
Guest
Male, married with kids.
M
mikew262
Guest
I agree. Divorce years ago was considered a scandal, not so these days.
L
Linnyo
Guest
Thankyou! I’ve been getting a hard time
.
M
mikew262
Guest
That can happen here. I’ve been pounded many times. It’s hard telling some folks they’re wrong; they just don’t take it well.Thankyou! I’ve been getting a hard time
PS: I’m kidding folks!
B
buffalo
Guest
I know it’s very hard. Like banging your head against the wall. :banghead: :banghead:That can happen here. I’ve been pounded many times. It’s hard telling some folks they’re wrong; they just don’t take it well.
Perhaps we can ask Jesus to be a moderator and He will tell us we all are wrong.
R
Robert_in_SD
Guest
Russ 2073:
To use an analogy from the legal field, there are secondary sources that lawyers use as an aid to discerning the law applicable to certain situations. These secondary sources -sometimes called “Restatements” - are written to be accurate summaries of the law, with citations to the primary or binding authorities upon which it is based (i.e. cases and statutes). But these secondary sources or "Restatements themselves are not “the law” nor can they be cited to a court as binding authority. Their usefulness comes from their format - as a useful and searchable aid to quickly determine what the general rule of law is in any particular legal field.
IMHO, I think these restatements of the law are analogous to the CCC. The CCC is an easily used - but general - restatement" of the teachings of the church, with citations to the church’s “primary authority” (i.e. Scripture and declarative papal and conciliar statements). So, in other words, while the CCC is not binding it is a good summary of the doctrines of the Church, and useful to use as a study aid. However, it should not be relied upon as if it were the binding authority - only the gospels and the original doctrinal teachings of the church hold that kind of authority.
Just my :twocents:
To answer the original poster, I think that the CCC was not intended to replace the gospels or the teaching authority of the church, but was intended to be a compilation or restatement of the teachings of the Church in a usable and searchable format.
To use an analogy from the legal field, there are secondary sources that lawyers use as an aid to discerning the law applicable to certain situations. These secondary sources -sometimes called “Restatements” - are written to be accurate summaries of the law, with citations to the primary or binding authorities upon which it is based (i.e. cases and statutes). But these secondary sources or "Restatements themselves are not “the law” nor can they be cited to a court as binding authority. Their usefulness comes from their format - as a useful and searchable aid to quickly determine what the general rule of law is in any particular legal field.
IMHO, I think these restatements of the law are analogous to the CCC. The CCC is an easily used - but general - restatement" of the teachings of the church, with citations to the church’s “primary authority” (i.e. Scripture and declarative papal and conciliar statements). So, in other words, while the CCC is not binding it is a good summary of the doctrines of the Church, and useful to use as a study aid. However, it should not be relied upon as if it were the binding authority - only the gospels and the original doctrinal teachings of the church hold that kind of authority.
Just my :twocents:
- Status