Should we respectfully leave the Church

[Jaaanosik]

There are many things that are essentially multipurpose faculties limited only by how they could fail you personally at any given moment.

Some faculties though, sexual expression being one, rely on singular dedication to protect the integrity of the faculty for the sake of its natural primal and divine purpose.

What is the singular dedication?
What is the natural primal purpose?
What is the divine purpose?
Where and how they are defined?

An example that I’ve used that some people find a bit crude, but it demonstrates the importance of primary purpose… is the integrity of your toothbrush.

It is an instrument that could serve a lot of purposes by its makeup. You could scrub down the shower or clean the toilet bowl with it or how great is if for getting into the floor tile grouting. You might say but if we sterilize everything before, after and around the act, the integrity of the toothbrush is unaffected. It’s still fine for cleaning your teeth?

A toothbrush has one single purpose. Almost everybody was taught what it is. If an object is not being used in a way that it fulfills its purpose then it’s a sin. That’s a foundation of the Natural Law reasoning process.

The question is what to do if an object has multiple goals/purposes/aspects?
Do we expect an AND between the multiple goals? In other words, do we expect to fulfill all multiple goals at the same time? Is it logical? Is it Natural?

However, as Catholics we know the importance of respecting what is holy and sacred without compromise so that it continues through the generations to come to serve humanity, physically and spiritually.

Many people will continue to contrast Catholic and Protestant beliefs on contraception not realising that until 1930 Protestant and Catholic were completely aligned on the intrinsic evil of contraception.

What contraception you are talking about? The ovum was discovered in the 19th century and it took some time for ordinary people to understand the whole reproduction process.
So what contraception was the Church against prior to the 20th century?
All the contraception stuff is fairly ‘new’ (no more than 150 years). It appears that’s the reason why the issue is not settled yet… meaning Catholics ignore the Church’s teaching and the Church grants them ignorance (see the Vademecum for Confessors).

The problem was that at the Anglican conference, the concession was made that while contraception is evil, people could use their own consciences to decide if they had grave reasons to use it. That resolution concluded "The Conference records its strong condemnation of the use of any methods of conception control from motives of selfishness, luxury, or mere convenience."

In that short time, most Protestants by dint of unassisted conscience passed from generation to generation, have come to believe that contraception is part and parcel of not just conjugal sex… but of sterile pre marital sex.

Is there really any question about the damage that contraception and sexual gluttony have wrought on the world? Sexual freedom has become so esteemed that the consequences are regarded as necessary collateral damage. Abortion would have to be the most horrible genecide that the contraceptive, anti life mentality has produced. The number of anti-life acts perpetrated in human abbatoires around the world due to this mentality will mark our generation as one of the most evil that ever lived.

That’s why the Church is so steadfast and committed to protecting the integrity of the human sexual faculty.

 

[Rau]

…Not sure we have the right to stop life as a way
of stopping potential pain.

I assume you say that in the context of NFP. All future eventualities are potential, because the future is not known exactly. Invariably, “serious reasons” are a judgement about those potential eventualities.

 

[Jaaanosik]

Those words were directed at another poster, but is it just a co-incidence that you levelled just the same accusations at me? Honestly, I have no idea how my posts could have earned that response!

OK, no problem. But now that you have learned of the teaching of the preponderance of priests of the Church (which the OP already knows about), as written down in the Catechism, would you repeat that advice? If so, could you please explain why?

If a priest tells you to follow your well informed conscience then what do you do?

 

[Rau]

If a priest tells you to follow your well informed conscience then what do you do?

I have no difficulty with a person’s decision to do just that in response to priestly advice.

But when I subsequently learn that the Church teaches directly on the subject at hand, I come into possession of rather more weighty advice that causes me to review any earlier position. My conscience cannot help but be nudged as it becomes better informed.

 

[Jaaanosik]

I have no difficulty with a person’s decision to do just that in response to priestly advice.

But when I subsequently learn that the Church teaches directly on the subject at hand, I come into possession of rather more weighty advice that causes me to review any earlier position. My conscience cannot help but be nudged as it becomes better informed.

That’s good. That’s your conscience.
There are people that need more than that. They need to understand why they are supposed to ‘nudge’.
For example how was the Natural Law reasoning process applied in HV. Where does the AND between the two marital act aspects come from?

 

[marywarfield]

If a priest tells you to follow your well informed conscience then what do you do?

For me, on a different matter, I had to ask myself
ultimately where was the defect in my formed
conscience causing me to repudiate Church teaching.
But a person can only do that if they sense that
their own intellectual understanding is no
match for two thousand years of sophisticated theology
and billions of Catholics who came before. The
likelihood that some momentous understanding
and awareness had suddenly commenced in me was
very unlikely. And realizing that I had to lose
the arrogance of my specialness and admit the
fault was all mine.

 

[gardenswithkids]

Thank you for all your replies and opinions. Trust me, I am not taking anyone’s word as medical advice! I know everyone is just offering their perspective.

I can’t possibly reply to each post or comment on some of the tangents that my original post has taken. I’m sorry!

**This morning I spent some time with three Protestant girlfriends doing a Bible study. These ladies are on fire for the Lord and have such passion for Christ’s role in their families’ lives. It is a passion and commitment I have rarely seen among my Catholic acquaintances (although I am sure some of you here are that way!) These are all very happily married women with fantastic husbands and kids, and all of them have used contraception and one’s husband had a vasectomy after their third child. They seem totally happy and guilt-free about it?

It’s hard for me to reconcile it being “so bad” for marriages and “evil” when I see very happy couples with strong marriages, who love the Lord, enjoying the benefits and safety of contraception to plan their families.** They all know what my faith teaches and think it’s bizarre and controlling. We had a nice long chat about it and while I explained my perspective, their perspectives really made so much sense to me.

I am still not sure what I am going to do. I do love my Church and my faith. I want to obey, but I just can’t bring myself to do something that I think is going to put my life at increased risk, or harm my marriage. I have been open to life. I brought forth life from my body. I continue to try to raise holy, good children with my wonderful, supportive husband. I will continue to pray about this.

God bless you, Avocadomom, for praying and pondering over this issue! Please be assured that you and your situation are in my prayers.

What you wrote about your Protestant friends hits me because I just learned this weekend that yet another one of my Protestant friends has separated from her husband. This is the third Protestant couple I know who has recently decided to break up a 20 plus year marriage. The news made me very sad. They were once committed to Christ and each other, but now their marriages are broken.

Most protestant churches don’t really teach against contraception or divorce and re-marriage anymore. They used to. All Christians used to understand that marriage should last a lifetime and it’s purpose included the procreation of children. There is a cultural connection between contraception and divorce. I don’t mean that everyone who uses contraception will have a bad marriage and later divorce, nor that everyone using NFP will have a perfect marriage. But there is some correlation between contraception and divorce in the broader culture.

I really hope that you and your Protestant friends all have marriages that stay strong! But as I just read what you wrote about your Protestant friends and their happy marriages, I thought about this news I heard recently about some of my Protestant friends whom I once also sat in Bible study with and whose marriage seemed happy in the past, but who are no longer together with their spouses.

 

[shelby_sun]

Those words were directed at another poster, but is it just a co-incidence that you levelled just the same accusations at me? Honestly, I have no idea how my posts could have earned that response!

I never said you did not read all my post, but you did inter that I either did not speak to a priest, that he did say what I said he said, or that I misunderstood what he told me, non of which are true.

OK, no problem. But now that you have learned of the teaching of the preponderance of priests of the Church (which the OP already knows about), as written down in the Catechism, would you repeat that advice? If so, could you please explain why?

I already new that and all the other teaching of the Church on this issue which is why I spoke to my priest in the first place. Yes I would repeat that advice. I cannot just switch my beliefs ans the way I see things because I read a new rule of the Church, again that would be like being brain washed.

I am not going to waste my time yours as you don’t seem to trust me. This is certainly an issue that makes me too think I should leave the Church, luckily for me I belong too a very large Catholic community that sees things as I do and who focus on their own sins rather than the sins of other. If I ever become perfect, I hope I never sound like some people on this site.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Hello

I did some research on that gene, as genealogy interests me. The reason I stated what I did was because I came across some stats suggesting that 75% of people born with this gene will suffer with some form of developmental delay, amongst other forms of health issues.

May I ask if you and your wife have good health? I know you have stated your wife was very ill during pregnancies, but is she generally healthy? The reason I ask is that I am not. Thus I know what a cross it is to watch life pass you by as you cannot participate in it: to miss events, to spend months housebound, to miss out on a career and financial security because your brain is sharp but your body does not co-operate, to have to leave mass three times during the Christmas ceremony because you are so sick, to basically have your whole life be dictated by what your body can do. I also know what it is like to have pain so great that you wish for God to take you. People who have spent most of their life healthy simply cannot understand what it is like to be as sick as this. It’s a bit like the way I can sympathise with an alcoholic; however I can’t say I truly understand what it is like to be one.

So for me, wanting to avoid wouldn’t be about wanting a so-called ‘perfect’ child, it would be about not wanting to knowingly bring a child into the world who would suffer endlessly. It wouldn’t be about me seeing the kids as ‘defective’. There are many Down’s Syndrome children in my country for instance. However I do not see them as defective. I’m certainly not saying your children shouldn’t be here. What I was wondering was how you could be at peace with knowing they could suffer through a lot of health problems. That is all.

I just wouldn’t want to get pregnant knowing that my child could have serious health problems. If I got accidentally pregnant then I would see it as a blessing and God’s wish, but my point is that I would try to avoid.

You may consider that position anti-life, but to me it is prudent. I have been sick off and on for 18 years (since I was a young teenager) and I would not want to risk a child having to live through that. Of course, there is never a way to guarantee perfect health, but I personally would not be comfortable being sexually active without the use of NFP in such a case.

This is just my opinion. I was curious as to your reasons, and you provided them. Fair enough…

I’m sorry but that is not what your first post indicated. You asked how I could reconcile having a child with a possible genetic deletion. I have the deletion. Not my wife. But now you ask about her health?

She is very healthy.

If you wish to discuss further you can PM me.

I have no understanding of your reasons to avoid and frankly I don’t care to. That is between you and your husband and God. I am not making any judgments on you about it one way or another. I will say that you were unbelievably rude with your comment and I expected an apology. You say genetic things interest you, that is fine. But your interpretation of even this rare deletion which has no bearing on you personally is flawed. Scientifically, I would be happy to run down the information with you but I ask that you respect my family and our Catholic position. Your first post was out of line. But this can be salvaged and informative if you wish.

Either way, this thread is not about this subject, and it is personal,

so. Back to the original topic…

 

[Rau]

**I already new that and all the other teaching of the Church on this issue **which is why I spoke to my priest in the first place. Yes I would repeat that advice. I cannot just switch my beliefs ans the way I see things because I read a new rule of the Church, again that would be like being brain washed.

I am not going to waste my time [or] yours as you don’t seem to trust me. This is certainly an issue that makes me too think I should leave the Church, luckily for me **I belong too a very large Catholic community that sees things as I do **and who focus on their own sins rather than the sins of other. If I ever become perfect, I hope I never sound like some people on this site.

I did not know that you already knew the Catholic Church’s teaching about contraception. So is this a far summary of the experience you have shared on this thread:

• you knew Catholic teaching rejects contraception;
• you believe contraception could be OK;
• you discussed the matter with your priest;
• he said “follow your conscience”
• you decided to stick the view that contraception is OK.

You know of God by virtue, largely, of the Catholic Church. But on this topic, you know God’s will from a different source - your own “beliefs”.

To change one’s beliefs as one learns more is not to submit to brain-washing. You are free to follow the Church, the source of almost everything that you know about God, or other sources.

Is it the view of your large Catholic Community (and its priestly leaders) that contraception is OK in some circumstances? [Is that what you mean by saying they “see things as you do”?]

 

[PaulGH]

What contraception you are talking about? The ovum was discovered in the 19th century and it took some time for ordinary people to understand the whole reproduction process.
So what contraception was the Church against prior to the 20th century?
All the contraception stuff is fairly ‘new’ (no more than 150 years). It appears that’s the reason why the issue is not settled yet… meaning Catholics ignore the Church’s teaching and the Church grants them ignorance (see the Vademecum for Confessors).

Contraception in one form or another has been around for thousands of years. The early church fathers opposed contraception, as mentioned in this article from Catholic Answers. Even two of the most prominent Protestant reformers, Martin Luther and John Calvin, opposed contraception.

 

[Rau]

There are people that need more than that. They need to understand why they are supposed to ‘nudge’.
For example how was the Natural Law reasoning process applied in HV. Where does the AND between the two marital act aspects come from?

Your question spoke of the well-informed conscience. I answered that (new) information (from a credible source- the Church) might influence one’s conscience. I guess you’re really asking now - should we believe the Church if what’s put before us is not fully understood by us, or not proven. This could be applied to many parts of the Faith. The Immaculate Conception, Resurrection, the Real Presence, the Forgiveness of Sins, the evils of Abortion and so on. Why do Catholics believe these things?

 

[millstreet]

Hi there,

This is a rare-ish posting for me but I can’t sit by quietly after 13 pages of discussion on this topic. The posts here reflect everything that is right about the Catholic Church (people with the same fundamental beliefs having a dialogue about how they apply to life), and everything that is wrong (people who think they know better than their priests, who evidently in many cases are simply a vehicle for trans-substantiation or something).

I’m always amused by people who say you shouldn’t “shop around” for a priest, and then tell you exactly what type of priest to shop for (I believe I saw older, wiser, and holier or some such characteristics). You simply can’t DO that. What if you live in an area that isn’t served by multiple priests, as a basic example? Is it not “shopping around” to avoid your area’s one solitary priest, and drive six hours to the nearest ultra-conservative diocese? And I’m sure that some of you will say that’s exactly what you should do, but…

Priests aren’t ordained for the fun of it, and they don’t just ordain any old joe who spells Jesus correctly and makes a tidy sign of the cross. And as clear as you want to believe Church teaching is, if there weren’t any grey areas, every single priest would give you the same advice and you wouldn’t have to bother anyway, because you could just look it up. I think, personally, you should listen to a priest you feel comfortable talking to, because he is most likely to take the time to understand everything you’re telling him.

To those of you who say “you must talk to a priest, you can’t get good advice from the internet [but, make sure you pick a priest who will tell you exactly ‘x’, ‘y’, and ‘z’ because that’s what the Church teaches, in black and white]” you contradict yourselves. Why should she bother talking to a priest then, if the answer to her problem is a given? Is it not actually true that you are equally culpable of what you supposedly reject, which is being told only what you think you should hear?

I’d rather you talk to a priest to find out WHY the Church teaches something, rather than be told “do this” because it does. If you understand why, you are better equipped to follow your conscience, after prayer, as the OP was advised to do (I think, it’s like 10 pages ago). This very subject was touched on a little while ago in our (conservative) parish. The priest explained that contraception is in part “holding something back” from your partner. Makes sense. But here, what is she “holding back”? Her impending death? Doesn’t sound bad.

Just ask that you open your minds a little bit. It’s not like nothing has ever changed in 2,000 years of Church teaching, and honestly, if you truly believe everything is an absolute then that is why we’re experiencing the death of critical thinking in this country. God did not go to the trouble of giving us free will only to tell us exactly what to do, all of the time. I pray for the OP and anyone else going through a similar situation to hers

Aye, but I’m probably destined for Hell, right? Perhaps I should seek a priest.

 

[Groo]

Since my post was referenced I guess I will respond.

For spiritual direction, I don’t think it is a good idea to select just any priest. Some priests are better than others at that particular ministry; or they may be a better fit for some people than others. If I am going to trust my spiritual direction to someone, I am going to prayerfully discern who the right person is.

Fr. Larry Richards suggests being discerning about spiritual directors as well. You can find his talks on his website. In his talks, he specifically states that one should not choose a priest simply because he is a priest.

This is not ‘shopping around’ for someone who you like personally or who is apt to agree with you. It is a discernment process of finding the right person to provide spiritual guidance. I don’t see anything wrong with that. Moreover, I am not sure how you arrived at the conclusion that all priests would say basically the same thing. That has not been my experience.

My (name removed by moderator)ut to the OP was to find a wise priest to advise her. It is unfortunate that priests are in short supply and high demand. It can be difficult finding someone for spiritual guidamce. But she is making some very important decisions and needs the best counsel she can get, imo.

 

[MacQ]

Hello

I did some research on that gene, as genealogy interests me. The reason I stated what I did was because I came across some stats suggesting that 75% of people born with this gene will suffer with some form of developmental delay, amongst other forms of health issues.

…

So for me, wanting to avoid wouldn’t be about wanting a so-called ‘perfect’ child, it would be about not wanting to knowingly bring a child into the world who would suffer endlessly. It wouldn’t be about me seeing the kids as ‘defective’. There are many Down’s Syndrome children in my country for instance. However I do not see them as defective. I’m certainly not saying your children shouldn’t be here. What I was wondering was how you could be at peace with knowing they could suffer through a lot of health problems. That is all.

I just wouldn’t want to get pregnant knowing that my child could have serious health problems. If I got accidentally pregnant then I would see it as a blessing and God’s wish, but my point is that I would try to avoid.

You may consider that position anti-life, but to me it is prudent. I have been sick off and on for 18 years (since I was a young teenager) and I would not want to risk a child having to live through that. Of course, there is never a way to guarantee perfect health, but I personally would not be comfortable being sexually active without the use of NFP in such a case.

This is just my opinion. I was curious as to your reasons, and you provided them. Fair enough…

A couple of points:
First of all, what you’re “interested” in is genetics, not geneology (geneology is looking into who your ancestors were).
Genetics is a very complex issue, and when you obtain your PhD in it, you will discover that even though certain conditions are known to be related to specific gene mutations, there is still no way to determine whether or how the actual symptoms will manifest themselves even in someone who has those particular known genetic mutations.
Which is the important point: there is no way to predict what suffering ANY child brought into the world will endure. Genetically perfect people get cancer, have accidents that paralyze them, suffer mental illness…you get the idea.
Seems to me trying to predict and control outcomes is at the heart of self will and attempting to wrest control away from God.

 

[Galbin]

I’m sorry but that is not what your first post indicated. You asked how I could reconcile having a child with a possible genetic deletion. I have the deletion. Not my wife. But now you ask about her health?

She is very healthy.

If you wish to discuss further you can PM me.

I have no understanding of your reasons to avoid and frankly I don’t care to. That is between you and your husband and God. I am not making any judgments on you about it one way or another. I will say that you were unbelievably rude with your comment and I expected an apology. You say genetic things interest you, that is fine. But your interpretation of even this rare deletion which has no bearing on you personally is flawed. Scientifically, I would be happy to run down the information with you but I ask that you respect my family and our Catholic position. Your first post was out of line. But this can be salvaged and informative if you wish.

Since others won’t let this lie, I am going to post to this.

I know you mentioned that you and your wife did not feel NFP was the right choice for you at this time. I don’t see how it is rude that I was surprised. The reason I asked about you and your wife’s health was because you obviously don’t understand what it’s like to have chronic health issues. Hence I was not surprised that you said your wife is very healthy. If you or your wife had suffered through decades of ill health, you might be considering avoiding right now because you wouldn’t want your kids to go through what you had. The same way parents who spend their whole lives scrimping for every cent will often encourage their kids to study hard and go to college.

We just have different opinions on the subject, clearly.

I am only replying to clarify my position. I don’t think you understood that the reason I was talking about my health was to explain that ppl who have not been chronically ill cannot understand what it is like. Anyway, it sounds like the information I read on the deletion was a worst case scenario situation (even though it was a reputable site, sometimes medical sites can focus on this worst case scenario). So I will indeed refrain from commenting on your situation anymore.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Since others won’t let this lie, I am going to post to this.

I know you mentioned that you and your wife did not feel NFP was the right choice for you at this time. I don’t see how it is rude that I was surprised. The reason I asked about you and your wife’s health was because you obviously don’t understand what it’s like to have chronic health issues. Hence I was not surprised that you said your wife is very healthy. If you or your wife had suffered through decades of ill health, you might be considering avoiding right now because you wouldn’t want your kids to go through what you had. The same way parents who spend their whole lives scrimping for every cent will often encourage their kids to study hard and go to college.

We just have different opinions on the subject, clearly.

I am only replying to clarify my position. I don’t think you understood that the reason I was talking about my health was to explain that ppl who have not been chronically ill cannot understand what it is like. Anyway, it sounds like the information I read on the deletion was a worst case scenario situation (even though it was a reputable site, sometimes medical sites can focus on this worst case scenario). So I will indeed refrain from commenting on your situation anymore.

I don’t care what your reasons are. It is none of my business. The fact that you seem to want to make it my business seems to be rather odd and telling.

Again, if you wish to discuss this you can PM me otherwise you will be in violation of forum rules.

All that is needed is just an apology and then move on. If you wish to continue to try to justify your position I have no interest in continuing the conversation. The first post was clearly a shot at my family. I answered you EXTREMELY politely and informatively.

We just have different opinions on the subject, clearly.

Yes, mine happen to be Catholic.

The thing that concerns me is your lack of knowledge and your interpretation of the information in front of you.

Your understanding of simple genetics is lacking. And I don’t fault you for that. But it does mean that before you post about someone’s children, that you try to educate yourself.

Now, moving on…

 

[Galbin]

A couple of points:
First of all, what you’re “interested” in is genetics, not geneology (geneology is looking into who your ancestors were).
Genetics is a very complex issue, and when you obtain your PhD in it, you will discover that even though certain conditions are known to be related to specific gene mutations, there is still no way to determine whether or how the actual symptoms will manifest themselves even in someone who has those particular known genetic mutations.
Which is the important point: there is no way to predict what suffering ANY child brought into the world will endure. Genetically perfect people get cancer, have accidents that paralyze them, suffer mental illness…you get the idea.
Seems to me trying to predict and control outcomes is at the heart of self will and attempting to wrest control away from God.

Meow… Sorry that I was tired and accidently wrote the wrong word. I’ll let my clients know that I am no longer fit to work with scientific material anymore. I’ll include you in my PhD credits, though.

Anyway, I am aware that genetic issues can manifest differently. For example, the MTFHR gene can cause a wide variety of complications, from the mild to the severe. At its most severe it can cause neural tube defects, miscarriages and heart disease. Yet it may only manifest as a slightly lowered immune system in some people. So yes, I know genetic issues can vary wildy.

Wrestling control of outcomes in this case would involve aborting children or using the BCP. And I clearly never said such things. I am simply saying that some couples wish to use NFP to avoid for these sorts of reasons. Again, you strike me as someone who probably has never had any real experience with ill health (as in chronic conditions that wipe out years of your life). You are implying that wanting to avoid your child having chronic health issues would somehow make you a bad person or someone who is playing God? IMO, God would make his decisions known if a couple conceived despite using NFP.

 

[Truth_Faith13]

While the discussion in genetics is fascinating, I am not entirely sure how it helps the OP?

The condition she described sounds like pre-eclampsia which while can be predisposed if maternal ancestors have had the condition, isn’t genetic as far as I am aware.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

While the discussion in genetics is fascinating, I am not entirely sure how it helps the OP?

Yes. It can have a thread of it’s own it it wishes.