Milwaukee Archbishop: You Can’t Call Yourself Catholic and Support Contraception

  • Thread starter Thread starter lemonbeam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
MyRdmrLvs said:
I see your point but in reality by the time they get to the condom its probably more like twenty sins so adding one more to prevent the pregnancy and probable abortion and disease seems a small addition. I say this in understanding your church has a prohibition on birth control that I am not compelled to agree with. I do however appreciate your bishop standing strong on what he believes is sinful. God gave us the example of what happens when morality and perfect laws are mandated.(see the old testament) then He gave us the ability to receive Grace and the gift of the Holy Spirit, it is only through that, that the unredeemed will ever have the desire to obey Gods laws. So the unredeemed will do what the unredeemed will do. lets focus on keeping them safe and getting them the message of the gospel of our Lord.
Click to expand...
Up until the early 1930s not a single Christian Denomination allowed contraception. What changed? Did the immoral suddenly become moral or did many denominationas abandon themselves to the cultural mores of the times?
 
estesbob said:
Up until the early 1930s not a single Christian Denomination allowed contraception. What changed? Did the immoral suddenly become moral or did many denominationas abandon themselves to the cultural mores of the times?
Click to expand...
it could be that in the 1930s we had prayer in schools, kids rarely were sexually active, and stds didnt kill you., combine these things with an inconsistent prohibition on contraception with no scriptural support, in a world where the population has exploded so the instruction to be fruitful has been done… People may be realizing that when the prohibitions on contraception first were pronounced they helped to ensure the very survival of a community and that is no longer the case. infant mortality was much higher than in is today.
 
MyRdmrLvs said:
it could be that in the 1930s we had prayer in schools, kids rarely were sexually active, and stds didnt kill you., combine these things with an inconsistent prohibition on contraception with no scriptural support, in a world where the population has exploded so the instruction to be fruitful has been done… People may be realizing that when the prohibitions on contraception first were pronounced they helped to ensure the very survival of a community and that is no longer the case. infant mortality was much higher than in is today.
Click to expand...
If STD did not kill you in the 1930’s that would be news to Al Capone and countless others. The birthrate in the USA is barely keeping up I understand from Mark Steyn but most of the rest of the west is so low as to guarantee their demise. Using a contraceptive is one sin…killing the unborn is quite another.🤷
 
Kuddos to the Archbishop!!

It is about time that we as Catholics stand up and be counted. Time to say that something is wrong and not be called “judgmental” for standing up for what we, as Catholics, believe in and hold true.
 
joeflow said:
There are a lot of people out there who can’t call themselves Catholic then…
Click to expand...
JL: What makes the difference how many there are. They are proclaiming another Gospel, a false Gospel, that will not save. They can call themselves protestant of some sort, maybe The Worldwide Cafeteria Church. Why not if they think the Church is wrong, why not just make up their own religion, which they are doing anyway. If the Church doesn’t know and teach the truth then anyone’s truth would be as good as another’s. I’m glad to see Milwaukee’s Archbishop along with an increasing number willing to stand up regardless the cost for the Gospel that brings salvation. There is no love of neighbor in false teaching.
 
estesbob said:
Up until the early 1930s not a single Christian Denomination allowed contraception. What changed? Did the immoral suddenly become moral or did many denominationas abandon themselves to the cultural mores of the times?
Click to expand...
JL: The Church of England at the Lambeth Conference in 1930, changed it’s teachings to allow contraception. Gradually others followed. mum.org/contrace.htm
 
I think that in the interest of full disclosure persons who reply to this thread should indicate whether or not they are in a position whereby they could become new parents. My wife and I continually “fell off the wagon” during her child bearing years and still have more than the usual 2 kids you usually see with parents at church. I am more understanding now of Church teaching regarding contraception than I was when my wife was of child bearing age.
 
It is nice to hear of a bishop who is not afraid to speak the Truth. 👍

And yes, rep, my wife and I are of childbearing age. We have 5 kids right now, and would be pleased if God saw fit to gift us with more. Because that is what children are, a gift from God that He specifically created for the couple
 
rep140 said:
I think that in the interest of full disclosure persons who reply to this thread should indicate whether or not they are in a position whereby they could become new parents. My wife and I continually “fell off the wagon” during her child bearing years and still have more than the usual 2 kids you usually see with parents at church. I am more understanding now of Church teaching regarding contraception than I was when my wife was of child bearing age.
Click to expand...
Rep, Yep, I’m in my 30’s and expecting baby #5;). (my husband is MM who also replied on here)…and yes, all of ours were ‘planned’ w/ NFP. 👍 I’d rather be open to life and know that I am doing God’s will than to be pro-contraception and have to explain myself to Him someday. 🤷 Is NFP always a cakewalk? Nope, but that’s life and we just deal w/ it. Once we got the ‘hang of it’, it’s not been a ‘burden’ on our marriage at all, actually brings us closer as a couple. 👍
 
Mamacita,

You’ve got a great attitude that should serve you well regardless of what life brings. I’ve not looked at hubby’s post, but he is likely as positive as you. A point I was trying to make is not to dump on Catholics who can not meet the challenge of NFP.
 
mamacita said:
Rep, Yep, I’m in my 30’s and expecting baby #5;). (my husband is MM who also replied on here)…and yes, all of ours were ‘planned’ w/ NFP. 👍 I’d rather be open to life and know that I am doing God’s will than to be pro-contraception and have to explain myself to Him someday. 🤷 Is NFP always a cakewalk? Nope, but that’s life and we just deal w/ it. Once we got the ‘hang of it’, it’s not been a ‘burden’ on our marriage at all, actually brings us closer as a couple. 👍
Click to expand...
rep140 said:
Mamacita,

You’ve got a great attitude that should serve you well regardless of what life brings. I’ve not looked at hubby’s post, but he is likely as positive as you. A point I was trying to make is not to dump on Catholics who can not meet the challenge of NFP.
Click to expand...
Rep,

My post was just a simple agreement with and gratitude for the Archbishop standing up and saying what needs to be said about contraception. I have to echo the sentiments of my wife above (hi honey :love: ) that NFP is not easy, it can be very frustrating, but the way in which we sacrifice for each other and grow closwer because of it is a true blessing. It gives me the perspective of sex not being just a physical act, it is so much more than that. It is about communication and all about the respect that I have for her as my wife. She is not an object for my pleasure, she is a part of me in this world, given to me by God and to be honored as such.
 
rep140 said:
I think that in the interest of full disclosure persons who reply to this thread should indicate whether or not they are in a position whereby they could become new parents. My wife and I continually “fell off the wagon” during her child bearing years and still have more than the usual 2 kids you usually see with parents at church. I am more understanding now of Church teaching regarding contraception than I was when my wife was of child bearing age.
Click to expand...
Are you implying that the only people who believe in hurch teaching are those with nothing to lose buy it? How cynical of you.

I’ve been married 10 years now, have 3 kids (2 “planned” and one “what the heck”) and we’ve never used contraception. I have dozens of friends in the same boat (most of whom have more kids than we do, but also didn’t have the pregnancy issues my wife did). Again, I don’t think the bishop is stating that catholics who have a moral lapse and make a sinful choice to use conctraception once in a while should pack bags and go elsewhere. I think he is speaking to those who attempt to rationalize it and legitimize it. Those are two whole different things.

I’ve never used contraception. But I certainly need routine confession for a lot of OTHER sins I struggle with! Contraception isn’t the uber-sin. But stubborn refusal to CONFESS your sins (or even admit that they are sins) IS.
 
Are you implying that the only people who believe in hurch teaching are those with nothing to lose buy it?

No, sorry if it came across this way. The point I was trying to make was that someone who does not have to live up to the challenges presented by NFP (like me) should be cautious in coming on too strong regarding this topic.
 
rep140 said:
I think that in the interest of full disclosure persons who reply to this thread should indicate whether or not they are in a position whereby they could become new parents. My wife and I continually “fell off the wagon” during her child bearing years and still have more than the usual 2 kids you usually see with parents at church. I am more understanding now of Church teaching regarding contraception than I was when my wife was of child bearing age.
Click to expand...
JL: It’s one thing to fall off the wagon on any moral issue, we all fall short in some issues, but hopefully repent at some point. Yet it’s another to TEACH off the wagon is the right moral place to be.
 
MyRdmrLvs said:
yes and with the discovery of penicillin rarely deadly.
Click to expand...
You are ignoring his point (I can’t tell if accidentally or on purpose).

The POINT here is that there is a naive notion that fatal STDs are something new on the scene that requires a game-changing approach. History proves that to be nonsense since syphallis was routinely fatal and widespread until very recently (post-WWII).
 
Jarek is right…If you have ever seen Ibeson’s A Dolls House it is hinted that the friend of the married coupe so gravely ill was suffering from it because he father had contracted it and given it either to him and or his mother or both

There was a movie called Dr Earlch’s magic bullet that dealt with finding a treatment for it also

I think it has probably been around as long as their were people to spread it…but I am not Dr so don’t take it to the bank

It seems all countries blamed the others, when they were no better, and most likely no worse ,themselves

I just wanted to add I think before penicillin they used arsenic to treat it…Isek Dineson the author of Out of Africa was treated with a derivative of arsenic called salvarson(sp)

Her Dr told her some people get just a touch of the disease while others get a very bad case of it…Her husband was mildly ill very briefly it seemed…She was gravely ill

She was living in S Africa ,but had to return to Denmark for treatment…this was around the WW1 time frame
 
manualman said:
You are ignoring his point (I can’t tell if accidentally or on purpose).

The POINT here is that there is a naive notion that fatal STDs are something new on the scene that requires a game-changing approach. History proves that to be nonsense since syphallis was routinely fatal and widespread until very recently (post-WWII).
Click to expand...
Yes we are looking for causes betwene 1930 and today. Antibiotics were widly used by the mid 40s, that is a small gap for the purpose of this discusion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top