R
ReformedCatholic
Guest
There’s no need for insecurity or hostility. Just presenting an alternative view.
- Status
R
ReformedCatholic
Guest
**I posted a link to a website with “dissident” Catholics arguing against the teaching on birth control.
Going on memory here, but some of the arguments they make go back to the natural philosophers, who allegedly observed animal sexuality, noticed that animals did it for procreation, and concluded that humans engaged in deviant behavior when they did it for non-procreative reasons.
Around the type of important men such as Augustine gnosticism was somewhat powerful. Agustine himself was a member of a gnostic sect for many years, and they viewed sex as evil.
Agustine also had a lot of lustful experiences and for him it was his greatest sin. Augustine influenced the Church a lot.
Further in the past it was believed that the sperm provided all the material to form a new human being, Aquinas believed this, it’s not hard to infer from this type of teaching that doing anything that throws sperm away is sinful.
Until Vatican II the unitive components of sex and marriage were not given their due. Vatican II happened very recently!
Personally I believe the Church is operating under outdated understandings of science with respect to its prohibitions of spilling of sperm, and outdated understandings of the role of unitiy/love/emotion/pleasure in the conjugal act.
Tthe birth control “commission” recommended that the teaching on contraception be changed, most Catholics and virtually all non-Catholics reject the teaching of the Church on this matter.
Something is up. **
Great post on another thread. Seems I’m not the only one who learned some Church history.
Going on memory here, but some of the arguments they make go back to the natural philosophers, who allegedly observed animal sexuality, noticed that animals did it for procreation, and concluded that humans engaged in deviant behavior when they did it for non-procreative reasons.
Around the type of important men such as Augustine gnosticism was somewhat powerful. Agustine himself was a member of a gnostic sect for many years, and they viewed sex as evil.
Agustine also had a lot of lustful experiences and for him it was his greatest sin. Augustine influenced the Church a lot.
Further in the past it was believed that the sperm provided all the material to form a new human being, Aquinas believed this, it’s not hard to infer from this type of teaching that doing anything that throws sperm away is sinful.
Until Vatican II the unitive components of sex and marriage were not given their due. Vatican II happened very recently!
Personally I believe the Church is operating under outdated understandings of science with respect to its prohibitions of spilling of sperm, and outdated understandings of the role of unitiy/love/emotion/pleasure in the conjugal act.
Tthe birth control “commission” recommended that the teaching on contraception be changed, most Catholics and virtually all non-Catholics reject the teaching of the Church on this matter.
Something is up. **
Great post on another thread. Seems I’m not the only one who learned some Church history.
J
johntkd
Guest
As I have stated many times I am not against NFP nor am I against someone else using ABC if thats what they choose.
to address the simple term above.
NFP= to know when one would be fertile so that in most cases this could be used to avoid conception.yet still be able to enjoy the natural pleasures associated with the "marital embrace.
ABC=various methods used to avoid conception.yet still be able to enjoy the natural pleasures associated with the “marital embrace”
the intent is the same, the means are what is so different.
I have read nothing in any bible passages about regulating family size, I have read that we were told to go forth and multiply.
I believe we need to regulate our familys size for many reasons.
I am not going to comment here about Mary and Joseph because that brings up valid marriage questions or possibilities of abstinence being the only acceptable way to avoid conception…
L
LittleDeb
Guest
Actually you are mistaken. Many folks beyond child-bearing years still practice periodic abstinence as a form of sacrifice. My own parents, married 40+ years are proud of the way we present NFP specifically because we talk about the sacrifice of periodic abstinence in making good marriages even better.
I wasn’t going to respond to this a few posts back but since you have presented it again I feel I should. You are correct “Birth Control” is acceptable, and rightly names what NFP is. I refrain from using that term whenever possible but not for the reasons you assert.
1, Birth control is a misnomer. NFP and barrier methods are actually conception control. The Pill and abortion are actually birth control since they allow conception but then end the life, thus controling birth. The term, without clarification, is misleading.
- The term was brought into the vernacular by a woman named Margaret Sanger. By forum rules I am not allowed to say my personal opinion of this woman or where she might be residing for all eternity. Her behavior and teachings, however, had a huge negative impact on society as a whole and set women’s rights back a century.
L
LittleDeb
Guest
None here. 300+ posts here and you are the first to ever call me hostile or insecure. (
I know, not to my face right? 
)My friends from another Rite do not refer to the Roman Church. They refer to the Catholic Church. They are members of the Catholic Church not the Roman Rite. Since you are a member of the Catholic Church, it still seems strange to call it something which would not include you in its membership.
I still highly disagree with your assessment of history.
J
johntkd
Guest
Ok I stand corrected on the TERM I have been using , you are very much correct. CONCEPTION CONTROL, even sounds better as well…I will try to log that into my as of late over strained memory bank…Thank you.
and I always admit when I am wrong,
John
L
LittleDeb
Guest
So is there anything that would convince you that contraception, as a means, is intrinsically evil? I understand that you don’t believe NFP is evil. I commend you for that.
J
johntkd
Guest
well being as I was a Non Catholic for almost 40 years and never really attended church that is really an unfair question for me to answer, as I have a very open mind to various ABC methods,
and have been a participant with some of them as well.
I have some disagreements with some things the Church teaches about modern conception controls, However we are allowed to disagree even told so in scripture, so thats not an issue to discuss
because i have my own reasons for these disagreements, I dont want any chance of influencing others on my arguements, to me that would be wrong.
I will say using a condom takes away from the act in many ways.
and other forms of ABC can be hazzardous to some people.even though these methods also have other positives in medical situations.to just use them regularly makes them more unsafe.
I see lots of things done that I feel are inheritantly evil, one of them i have to participate in this weekend. I would say if you are a practicing Catholic you should follow your faith on these types of issues,because the ramifications of not following could definatly lead to evil.as in where would you stop following or not following,
ex: well gee i dont follow this because i do not totally agree with it and this other thing i dont like so i think i will do this,once you start it may never end so to speak…
sorry i cant objectivly answer the question posed.
Code:
God bless
John
L
LittleDeb
Guest
Actually, that was a pretty objective answer, I think. From an outsiders perspective it shows thoughtfulness and respect. The reason you gave as to “where to draw the line of obedience without agreeing” was very good. I have said I have a LOT of respect for those who are obediant even when they disagree. I wasn’t. I just wanted to do what I wanted to do, so I just became inactive over this and other issues.
Ironically it was researching this issue for health reasons that I came back to full communion with the Church. I “got it” when I least wanted to get it! The Holy Spirit works on His timetable not ours.
Please stay around and see if we can help you see things in a new light.
B
bear06
Guest
Yes, I could go with this. It is an alteration of a lifestyle. That said, I can’t tell you how many ways that marriage and family alter my lifestyle on a constantly changing basis. Altering you’re lifestyle isn’t sinful as long as you are not being selfish. Secondly, I’ve “refused” to get close to my spouse and he has never refused to get close to me because we were fearful of the outcome. People don’t seem to understand that it is a prayerful decision that we make with each and every marital embrace. People are still looking at it as a rejection or a refusal on the part of either spouse. Dieting is an alteration of a lifestyle? Is it evil? It’s a denial of one’s natural instinct. Is it wrong to use self control when necessary for the healthier outcome? And when we’re dieting do we set the table with chocolate to tempt ourselves? Should we be dieting for vain reasons?
You seem to be missing the “in the marital embrace”. Each and everytime we participate in the marital embrace, we are giving totally of ourselves whether or not we are fertile.
Man made things are wonderful as long as they aid in God’s design. They are not when they are contra to God’s design.
What exactly is it?
Let me ask you. Are you a professional in reproduction or marriage therapy?! What exactly are you going to clarify since you seem to be a professional.
I don’t know about your diocese but ours doesn’t have newlyweds teaching marriage prep. We’ve been married for 15 years and are about to have our 7th child so I think we might know a little about communication, NFP, raising children, marriage as a sacrament, what we take from our families and bring into our marriage, and all of the other things we cover. Not only that, in our diocese, we go through a very lengthy training course before they let us unprofessionals loose.
Hello!!! Like I’ve said before (although I can’t remember is it’s in this thread or the other 19) Humanae Vitae itself says it’s a way to control births. Why don’t you just quote the Church teaching. When we talk about ABC and NFP we talk about the difference between contraceptive sex and NFP. Are you under the impression that you are contracepting if you are using NFP? Maybe, if you’re going to let them have it you might want to make the clarification that you think it is birth control, not contraception as not to confuse everyone else and get them off course.
B
bear06
Guest
Give me a break. This is probably just one of the many reasons that the Pope rejected the commissions findings. I can probably name 50 people off the top of my head who we around before Humanae Vitae who rejected contraception and who were quite please with Humanae Vitae. I’m related to most of them and I’m sure my family, although I like to think it is, isn’t unusual. If you gave me an hour, I’m sure I could come up with many more.
F
fix
Guest
Does truth change with time?
It is evil because it places us above Christ.
F
fix
Guest
ReformedCatholic said:
This is really funny. The Church lays out Her teaching for all to read and this post basically rejects Her theology and substitutes their own logic and attributes it to the Church. And why would any thinking person accept such “proof” that so contradicts reality?
The more I read about this topic the more I understand how correct the Church is about this and all other moral issues.
R
ReformedCatholic
Guest
Because your “reality” may be indoctrinated delusion.
If it works for you, great. There are many paths up the mountain. Best of luck to ya.
J
johntkd
Guest
the way I am looking at this thread is not a rejection of what the church teaches,Its more of a getting a better understanding of the hows and whys of the churches teachings.
My posts were more directed at something different,as I am not against either I feel its up to the individual on what they decide to do in the bedroom, on that note I am nothing but a mere human I am not the church,just a tiny part of it.
My posts were merely directed at “dressing up appearences”
But it came to me today also ( havnt slept much the last 37 hours) so sorry if i stray a bit,
anyhow it came to me that this runs on the same principles of eyewitnesses to a crime, all seen the same crime but most times you cannot get the same story out of 2 people whom seen whole thing, they get a “different interpretation” same thing with this topic, people get different interpretations of “given words”
I am very guilty of jumping on the terms used,and was even corrected on one i use myself and is wrong ( birth control) which should have been properly worded as conception control.
Terms get generalized, and it would be even more prevelant on a forum of this magnitude as assumed meanings will be different by a given area in the world,country and even within a state.
so like I said I am just as guilty of the nit picking of interpretations.
But i really dont see this particular thread as a rejection of teachings,
B
bear06
Guest
This is why the Church gets to do the interpreting. The Church has obviously done different interpreting than some.
So much time spent on the term birth control. Even Humanae Vitae says it’s “contolling births” or something similar.
F
fix
Guest
I do not have any type of existential neurosis. I know there is an objective reality and an objective truth.
Playing fast and loose with facts will not convince anyone of your position.
F
fix
Guest
My post was directly mostly at Reformed Catholic. I have not followed your posts, but deciding what to do in the bedroom, or anywhere else, should be done with the understanding that conscience is a pupil and not a teacher.
R
RyanL
Guest
And your “reality” may be self-imposed deception. Go look at what I have to say about your Gospel on the other thread. It is divorced from the Bible (seeing that you reject no less than 2/3 of it outright because it doesn’t ‘seem’ correct to you) and it is divorced from the teachings of Christ (many of which you conveniently ignore). You make it up as you go along. For example:
Really?
John 14:6
Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and thelife. No one comes to the Father except through Me."
Could you please explain to us the definition of “the” please? Does it imply “many”?
Or how about this? Wanna’ guess who said 'em?
- “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth." (wow - that’s quite a lot of authority)
- "As the Father has sent Me, I also send you.” (read: with the authority with which I was sent)
- “Assuredly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." (seems like He meant it)
- " He who hears you hears Me, he who rejects you rejects Me, and he who rejects Me rejects Him who sent Me." (nah - I’m sure He didn’t mean it - “many paths up the mountain”, right? Free to dissent? Of course - that’s why you’re “Reformed”!)
RyanL
P
Palamite
Guest
Littledeb,
To be fair though, this does not require that one take the Humanae Vitae position. Though Orthodoxy doesn’t see a substantial difference between NFP and ABC, fasting (which in our understanding always includes abstaining from sexual relations) is a big deal. If one is following the ecclessiastical calendar, Orthodox fast from animal foods (meat, seafood, dairy, etc.), alcohol, and sexual relations with one’s spouse for at least a third of the year, possibly more if one receives Holy Communion on a very regular basis (since fasting is a preparation for this as well - at least from the previous evening, at most for three days before…discipline can vary.)
- Status