Orthodox and birth control

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pax_et_Caritas
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Chaldean_Rite said:
Your confusing what condoms and birth control pills do versus periodic abstinence.
Click to expand...
As I said previously we never condone birth control pills. It’s dishonest for you to make that comparison because by interjecting birth control pills with the rest of the discussion you’re creating a false impression based on people’s legitimate emotional reaction to abortifacients. I would appreciate it if you wouldn’t do that. 🙂

What do I think about Genesis 38? I’m still alive aren’t I. 😉

Yours in Christ
Joe
 
Jennifer_J said:
It doesn’t make NFP any easier when we’ve needed to use it, but I’m glad the option is available because total abstinence until menopause would be extraheroic, at least in my eyes 😊 . I know it’s totally possible and all that, but I’m still glad;)
Click to expand...
Oh it wouldn’t be as bad as that you know. 😉

If NFP weren’t an option (for whatever reason), couples would just need to limit sex to a few times per year. :o

😃
 
mark_a said:
Is sterilization an option w/ Orthodox?

Just curious.
Click to expand...
I don’t know that there has been a consensus on the matter. You certainly couldn’t do it just because you didn’t want to have children. There would have to be some chronic medical condition that would make conception and childbirth extremely dangerous for the mother and or child. I can’t imagine a situation in which it would ever be acceptable for a man to have a vasectomy.

Please remember, this is just my personal opinion, not an official teaching of the Church.

Yours in Christ
Joe
 
mardukm said:
Your answer is self-refuting. Using the word “retroactively” itself indicates a solid distinction between the two practices.
Click to expand...
Wrong Mark.

It does not matter how you try to twist or spin doctor. The legalistic practice of decree of nullity is shameful. People are married for 25 years with children and suddenly they are granted an annulment of said marriage because the “Church” deems that the sacrament never really occurred. Does this mean that the children of said marriage never really occurred? Oh wait–Rome says that the children are legitimate. But wait, the marriage never happened! But hey, there are children that were born into the world as a result of the love between this man and wife–and now we hear that they were never “really” married! But the “Church” says the children are legitimate. Round and round we go. :whacky:
 
mardukm said:
Since senseless rhetoric is the order of the day, I guess it would be just as valid to say, “the Eastern Orthodox principle of economy is really just your excuse to commit sin without any culpability.”
Click to expand...
Yes. That would be senseless rhetoric.
 
josephdaniel29 said:
Which would be the greater sin, to allow the innocent child to die a slow painful death or to steal from the store?

Yours in Christ
Joe
Click to expand...
But those aren’t the only 2 options…you could EARN the money and NOT steal–as long as there is a choice (and regarding birth control, there are several choices other than contraception), then you CAN’T sin by stealing, knowing you could earn the money, borrow the money or whatever. They are both sins as they are part of the 10 commandements.
 
Mickey said:
Wrong Mark.

It does not matter how you try to twist or spin doctor. The legalistic practice of decree of nullity is shameful. People are married for 25 years with children and suddenly they are granted an annulment of said marriage because the “Church” deems that the sacrament never really occurred. **Does this mean that the children of said marriage never really occurred? Oh wait–Rome says that the children are legitimate. But wait, the marriage never happened! **But hey, there are children that were born into the world as a result of the love between this man and wife–and now we hear that they were never “really” married! But the “Church” says the children are legitimate. Round and round we go. :whacky:
Click to expand...
Yes, as we all know, some EO jurisdictions conflate the laws of the State on divorce and remarriage with the laws of the Church on the matter. That is why you are confused.😃
Yes. That would be senseless rhetoric.
Click to expand...
That was my point. Thanks for the support.👍

Blessings,
Marduk
 
mardukm said:
Yes, as we all know, some EO jurisdictions conflate the laws of the State on divorce and remarriage with the laws of the Church on the matter. That is why you are confused.
Click to expand...
You bold and underline a comment about legitimate children in a nullified Roman Catholic marriages–and then you throw a barb at “some EO jurisdictions”.

Methinks it is you who are confused. 😉
mardukm said:
. Thanks for the support.
Click to expand...
You’re welcome. 👍
 
Mickey said:
You bold and underline a comment about legitimate children in a nullified Roman Catholic marriages–and then you throw a barb at “some EO jurisdictions”.
Click to expand...
That’s no barb. It’s the truth. It hurts, don’t it?
Methinks it is you who are confused. 😉
Click to expand...
I don’t think it was me (or Catholic apologists in general) that had to keep backtracking with “oh wait” or “but wait.” :rotfl:

The fact is, brother, to Catholics and Christians in general, the question of “legitimacy” does or should not come up. We look at children with the eyes of Jesus, as the Apostle exhorts us to put on the mind of Christ. EVERY child is a precious unique life whose worth cannot be judged on the parents’ actions. You’re obviously confused or not properly catchized about that fact (which is where the EO conflation of State and Church laws come into the picture) or you would not have brought up the legitimacy canard.😛

And so what if a couple has been married for 25 years? If a marriage of consanguinity has occurred and lasts 25 or 100 years, would you say they have been validly married in the eyes of the Church? In any case, how many times has such a situation taken place? Are you saying it was the norm, and not that the authorities in that one instance(?) were perhaps wrongly influenced by concerns other than spiritual/canonical well-being. Geeze Louise, if we took occasion to condemn because of a rare or singular instance - well, I would say your Church would not have a leg to stand on either.:whistle:

Blessings,
Marduk
 
mardukm said:
It hurts, don’t it?
Click to expand...
Nah. Barbs do not hurt me.
mardukm said:
The fact is, brother, to Catholics and Christians in general, the question of “legitimacy” does or should not come up.
Click to expand...
Nah. Here’s the facts, brother. The Catholic Church has set into place a legal system whereas they can grant an Ecclesiatical divorce by calling it a decree of nullity, for a price. In doing so they declare that the sacrament of marriage never really happened–many times for obscure reasons—but the children from this “marriage that never happened” are legitimate. Now of course I am not saying that the children should be declared illegitimate, but the Church is in a quandary by retroactively eliminating the sacrament of marriage when children are in the picture. I know that this is a difficult situation for most Catholics–but the truth hurt don’t it, brother. 😉
mardukm said:
Geeze Louise, if we took occasion to condemn because of a rare or singular instance
Click to expand...
LOL!!! Rare and singular instance!!! You are a funny man!!!
:rotfl:
 
Mickey said:
Wrong Mark.

It does not matter how you try to twist or spin doctor. The legalistic practice of decree of nullity is shameful. People are married for 25 years with children and suddenly they are granted an annulment of said marriage because the “Church” deems that the sacrament never really occurred. Does this mean that the children of said marriage never really occurred? Oh wait–Rome says that the children are legitimate. But wait, the marriage never happened! But hey, there are children that were born into the world as a result of the love between this man and wife–and now we hear that they were never “really” married! But the “Church” says the children are legitimate. Round and round we go. :whacky:
Click to expand...
Maybe because you forget that marriage, firstly, is a natural institution and the Sacrament is the supernatural one? :confused:

The “Church”, btw, is the one started by Christ, not the one you are a part of, about 1000 years old. 👍
 
Chaldean_Rite said:
Maybe because you forget that marriage, firstly, is a natural institution and the Sacrament is the supernatural one?
Click to expand...
So then Rome can pretend that the supernatural part did not happen? Okay. :eek:
Chaldean_Rite said:
The “Church”, btw, is the one started by Christ, not the one you are a part of, about 1000 years old.
Click to expand...
I am in the Church that Jesus Christ instituted.:love:

I will reiterate that your ad hominem attacks to not enhance your credibility. :nope:
 
Mickey said:
So then Rome can pretend that the supernatural part did not happen? Okay. :eek:
I am in the Church that Jesus Christ instituted.:love:

I will reiterate that your ad hominem attacks to not enhance your credibility. :nope:
Click to expand...
No, Mickey, its that it DID NOT happen.

Oh, and I think made a mistake by using “ad hominem” since I’m just stating history, nothing personal to you.
 
goarch.org/print/en/ourfaith/article7101.asp
  1. The possible exception to the above affirmation of continuity of teaching is the view of the Orthodox Church on the issue of contraception. **Because of the lack of a full understanding of the implications of the biology of reproduction, earlier writers tended to identify abortion with contraception. **However, of late a new view has taken hold among Orthodox writers and thinkers on this topic, which permits the use of certain contraceptive practices within marriage for the purpose of spacing children, enhancing the expression of marital love, and protecting health.
  • my bolding & italics.
One of the types of contraceptive practices allowed by the Orthodox Church is NFP another is sterilization…if the mother’s health is indangered. This decision to use contraceptive practices are not done lightly, but with prayer and direction from the couples’ spiritual father.
Click to expand...
Example: I know of a GO couple who have 8 children, 4 of them are 3 and under. NFP did not work for this couple (yes, the charted everything and made use of the NFP counselor…there is a small % of women for whom NFP does not work for - this mother is one of them as they got pregnant 4 times after following NFP to prevent additional children which they cannot afford due to one of their children having severe medical problems causing the couple to spend around $100k + a year after their insurance for her was exhausted) and during their last pregnancy the mother nearly died. The couple was told by their doctor that a next pregnancy would kill her and he recommended sterilization of the husband. The couple went to their spiritual father who gave them permission to accept the doctor’s advise in this grave matter.
Click to expand...
I wonder what a Roman Catholic Family under the same extreme situation would be allowed to do or would the Church simply tell them that they are never to have sexual relations again and tell them that they will go to hell and be excommunicated if they took their doctor’s advise? This stance would seem heartless.
Click to expand...
The Orthodox position is on birth control what God is: **Merciful and Loving. **
Click to expand...
The Orthodox Church, like God, evaluates each unique situation before making judgement in matters of birth control.
Click to expand...
 
Mickey said:
What do you mean? Does Rome have a time machine to back up and erase the sacrament?
Click to expand...
You are presupposes an actual Sacrament happened. The Sacrament of Matrimony is the only Sacrament that the couple imparts on themselves so both need to be aware of what they are doing.

Catechism of the Catholic Church
**1623 **According to Latin tradition, the spouses as ministers of Christ’s grace mutually confer upon each other the sacrament of Matrimony by expressing their consent before the Church. In the tradition of the Eastern Churches, the priests (bishops or presbyters) are witnesses to the mutual consent given by the spouses, but for the validity of the sacrament their blessing is also necessary.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top