Protestants: defend your use of artificial contraception

[mark_a]

I would not exclude Catholics? Would you?

I would exclude the willfully ignorant.

 

[mark_a]

Forsooth, anyone, educate me on how using a condom is intrinsically evil and a sin against God.

It can’t be done to your satisfaction. I think the best answer is that the Catholic Church sides with the historical Jewish and Christian POV.

The thing that I don’t get though, is how for Protestantism, contraception isn’t even a question. Openness to life is in fact, a Catholic teaching to be held up for ridicule, just as contraception’'s offspring, abortion, was and still is viewed as a “Roman Catholic” problem.

How can Protestants turn their backs on 400 years of reformed moral theology?

 

[larkin31]

I would exclude the willfully ignorant.

I don’t see how you could be certain of determining this in a lot of cases. I really wouldn’t trust your opinion on anyone’s conscience but your own. So I don’t really care whom you would exclude, and don’t really see why you care whom I would exclude.

 

[larkin31]

It can’t be done to your satisfaction. I think the best answer is that the Catholic Church sides with the historical Jewish and Christian POV.

The thing that I don’t get though, is how for Protestantism, contraception isn’t even a question.

For which Protestants is it “not even a question”?

Openness to life is in fact, a Catholic teaching to be held up for ridicule, just as contraception’'s offspring, abortion, was and still is viewed as a “Roman Catholic” problem.

Openness to life has not been “ridiculed” by any Protestant here (many many Protestants practice unprotected sex), and abortion is clearly everyone’s problem who confronts the possibility. You seem to be arguing against strawmen here.

 

[mark_a]

So I don’t really care whom you would exclude, and don’t really see why you care whom I would exclude.

Your right. I was just giving my pov.

 

[mark_a]

For which Protestants is it “not even a question”?

Besides WELS (and I’m no longer sure about them either) and a few Anglicans, I don’t know of any Protestant denoms’ teachings who teach the sinfulness of contraception.

Openness to life has not been “ridiculed” by any Protestant here

Maybe not on this thread, but you know better.

(many many Protestants practice unprotected sex),

True, the number is about the same as for Catholics. Although I did not make it clear in my previous posts, I have been speaking of Protestant* teaching.*

and abortion is clearly everyone’s problem who confronts the possibility.

I also think it would be a problem for anyone considering one, no matter how much she or her church denied the sinfulness of abortion. Here again though, I didn’t clearly state in my previous posts that I was speaking of Protestant teaching, which is what I meant.

 

[larkin31]

Besides WELS (and I’m no longer sure about them either) and a few Anglicans, I don’t know of any Protestant denoms’ teachings who teach the sinfulness of contraception.

So? This is not the only way to discuss the ethics and problems of the decision.

Maybe not on this thread, but you know better.

I don’t care about what your Uncle Bertrand may have said at dinner last week. The Protestants here aren;t doing it, so to generalize this way is unhelpful. And inaccurate.

I also think it would be a problem for anyone considering one, no matter how much she or her church denied the sinfulness of abortion. Here again though, I didn’t clearly state in my previous posts that I was speaking of Protestant teaching, which is what I meant.

Again, there are serious adult ways to discuss the problems and gravity of a decision like abortion without having to bring “sin” into the conversation. You are basing your position, it seems, entirely on whether a behavior is called “a sin” or not.

 

[inocente]

Genesis 2: 24-25 And the two become one flesh= child.

Thanks for replying.

Surely the verses are about marriage, not offspring? Compare Matthew 19:4-6.

*no condom = a possibility of another Mother Teresa,etc.

Contraception= my will, the reality is we are supposed to procreate not obliterate!*

But I can’t see the difference between NFP and a condom, when both are closed to the possibility but neither is permanently closed.

 

[inocente]

The thing that I don’t get though, is how for Protestantism, contraception isn’t even a question. Openness to life is in fact, a Catholic teaching to be held up for ridicule, just as contraception’'s offspring, abortion, was and still is viewed as a “Roman Catholic” problem.

Mark, you may be misunderstanding my motives. I’ve given the case for the defense as per the OP, and am now cross-examining myself.

Rom 2:15 - “They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them”. Currently none of my thoughts accuse me but when I see other Christians sincerely saying condoms are a sin I’d like to understand why I’m blind to what you see . Pro-life isn’t just a Catholic teaching, no one could be anti-life and follow Christ.

How can Protestants turn their backs on 400 years of reformed moral theology?

We don’t, but to us theologians only help us find our way, they are not authorities.

I take your point about not necessarily being able to go further in this setting. Benedict has helped me a lot, and I’m hoping one day he will write about this subject in depth as he has a way of getting to the core truth.

 

[onenow1]

Thanks for replying.

Surely the verses are about marriage, not offspring? Compare Matthew 19:4-6.

But I can’t see the difference between NFP and a condom, when both are closed to the possibility but neither is permanently closed.

The intention is one of the problems, NFP is entirely open in intention, and requires a different mindset. Condoms would be used with the intention of self gratification, the hope of no child. As a consequence, in some cases not all; if a condom failed, the avenue of abortion is available and may be the crux of this matter, also the answer you seek ?

Peace

 

[mark_a]

Mark, you may be misunderstanding my motives. I’ve given the case for the defense as per the OP, and am now cross-examining myself.

Rom 2:15 - “They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them”. Currently none of my thoughts accuse me but when I see other Christians sincerely saying condoms are a sin I’d like to understand why I’m blind to what you see . Pro-life isn’t just a Catholic teaching, no one could be anti-life and follow Christ.

We don’t, but to us theologians only help us find our way, they are not authorities.

I take your point about not necessarily being able to go further in this setting. Benedict has helped me a lot, and I’m hoping one day he will write about this subject in depth as he has a way of getting to the core truth.

No need for me to go further here. I’ve enjoyed the conversation. Best wishes to you.

 

[mark_a]

So? This is not the only way to discuss the ethics and problems of the decision.

I don’t care about what your Uncle Bertrand may have said at dinner last week. The Protestants here aren;t doing it, so to generalize this way is unhelpful. And inaccurate.

Alrighty then!!

Again, there are serious adult ways to discuss the problems and gravity of a decision like abortion without having to bring “sin” into the conversation. You are basing your position, it seems, entirely on whether a behavior is called “a sin” or not.

There are folks who can argue the pro-life point of view from an atheist or agnostic pov. I’m not one of them.

Best wishes to you and happy holidays!

 

[Sufjon]

The Catholic Church teaches that artificial contraception (pill, condom, IUD, etc) is a mortal sin.

How are you able to accept condom use, etc? Do you not see it as the seed that led to a bad tree (sexual revolution, huge pornography industry, etc)???

I can not comprehend how Protestants have such varied views on artificial contraception. This might be because I have for most of my Christian life been a Catholic.

Just a hypothetical question: What if every parish across the nation held a special nationwide service to which only adult Catholics who had never used a condom could attend. How crowded would the churches be that day? Full? Three quarters full? Half full? Quarter full? A pew or two? Serious question. Really.

Your friend
Sufjon

 

[Jenny4Him]

A “humanization of sexuality” indeed! I commend the Pope for these comments and am encouraged by these statements.

Unfortunately; you still have to get people to use them 100% of the time and that will never happen; so the Pope would have been better sticking to his original thoughts and consistency with RC teaching on the issue. Now he has set himself up for criticism on both sides. But that is his problem; meanwhile tens of thousands continue to die from aids because of immorality and the consequences of immorality.

 

[Jenny4Him]

Genesis 2: 24-25 And the two become one flesh= child.

no condom = a possibility of another Mother Teresa,etc.

Contraception= my will, the reality is we are supposed to procreate not obliterate!

Peace

Happy is the man who’s quiver is full; however quiver in that day were of various sizes from 2 to 20-30. Quivers come in the same sizes today as well; nothing new here. It is a matter of one’s belief and conscience as long as the method does not violate God’s command(s); ie murder using RU486 as an example. So if the RCC teaches that using birth control is a sin, then to the Catholic it is deemed a sin and no one should argue otherwise or ridicule them and likewise for a non-Catholic that chooses to prevent pregnancy and to plan for a family using non-murderous methods and they do so in good conscience, then no one is to argue concerning that either.

 

[larkin31]

Unfortunately; you still have to get people to use them 100% of the time and that will never happen; so the Pope would have been better sticking to his original thoughts and consistency with RC teaching on the issue. Now he has set himself up for criticism on both sides. But that is his problem; meanwhile tens of thousands continue to die from aids because of immorality and the consequences of immorality.

some people are very very good about safe sex

And, of course, sexual immorality was destroying the lives of millions of persons long before HIV. No sexual policy or code has ever protected humanity from its mistakes. But ethics and morals around the matter certainly help.

 

[Reuben_J]

Just a hypothetical question: What if every parish across the nation held a special nationwide service to which only adult Catholics who had never used a condom could attend. How crowded would the churches be that day? Full? Three quarters full? Half full? Quarter full? A pew or two? Serious question. Really.

Your friend
Sufjon

What’s the point?

It only goes to show how prevalent its usage is.

 

[Jenny4Him]

some people are very very good about safe sex

And, of course, sexual immorality was destroying the lives of millions of persons long before HIV. No sexual policy or code has ever protected humanity from its mistakes. But ethics and morals around the matter certainly help.

That is why when we are obedient to the moral Lawgiver; we avoid the consequences of sin. Father knows best!

 

[RCconvert7]

I know I am way out of the mainstream but I don’t understand why married couples think it’s an impossible burden to be celibate within a marriage if they should not have more children for health or economic reasons. Nobody is supposed to have sex outside of wedlock and people spend years, sometimes their entire lives in situations that necessitate celibacy. People can have close intimate relationships without regular sexual intercourse.

Of course NFP is allowed so married couples don’t have to practice perfect abstinence if they wish to avoid conception. I just don’t get the idea that just because someone is married they should be able to have sex whenever they feel like it.

Someone may have already answered this, but let me add my 2 cents. I don’t think there is ANY situation where being celibate would be an easy task, especially for a man. HOWEVER, I would challenge ANY Priest or chaste single Catholic man to try being celibate when he is in constant contact with a woman he loves deeply, has been intimate with many times in the past. Married people are not called to celibacy in normal circumstances. To imply that there is something wrong with them if they desire each other is ignorant and obviously comes from an unmarried person.

The Church’s teaching on NFP (or celibacy in marriage, for that matter) is pretty clear. If one uses NFP to prevent pregnancy indefinitly, even if the couple has had X number for children in the past, one is committing the same mortal sin if one were to just use the pill or an IUD or a condom or whatever. Same could be argued for celibacy in marriage. The church teaches that having children is a primary purpose of marriage. Avoidance of that primary purpose is the primary sin, not the way in which one contracepts. NFP as a method of “child spacing” is not sinful, NFP as a method of avoiding pregnancy entirely is equally sinful to using the pill.

 

[larkin31]

That is why when we are obedient to the moral Lawgiver; we avoid the consequences of sin. Father knows best!

Sometimes, for sure.

But ultimately, we all die, and in no way, righteous or not, can we avoid that consequence of sin.