R
- Status
A
alice24
Guest
And your point is…?
The Eastern orthodox leaders may support different views, surprise surprise.
I never met one who thinks contraception is a good way, but we don’t have the system of venial or grave sins. Calling something “not good” in opposition to" forbidden" is sometimes our way to describe sins other than murder and adultery etc.
It’s about a couple and their priest . God bless you.
The Eastern orthodox leaders may support different views, surprise surprise.
I never met one who thinks contraception is a good way, but we don’t have the system of venial or grave sins. Calling something “not good” in opposition to" forbidden" is sometimes our way to describe sins other than murder and adultery etc.
It’s about a couple and their priest . God bless you.
T
TK421
Guest
Never was, never will be.
Last edited:
A
alice24
Guest
In your eyes.
Feel free to misunderstand me. I’m tired of people viewing orthodox Christians as somewhat fallen from the truth just because we don’t have a defined agenda for everything. Have a nice day.
Feel free to misunderstand me. I’m tired of people viewing orthodox Christians as somewhat fallen from the truth just because we don’t have a defined agenda for everything. Have a nice day.
T
TechieGuy
Guest
So you are saying they treat their members as responsible adults who can make this decision for themselves?
Huh, sounds interesting
Huh, sounds interesting
C
commenter
Guest
Reminds me of a conversation in a garden
A
Augustinian
Guest
This would seem to be another major roadblock to the Catholic Church and Eastern Orthodox getting together
V
Vonsalza
Guest
As many have pointed out, they’ll never “get together” in the western sense because they never were together in that way. It would be odd and anachronistic to think that the Orthodox would “return” (read: submit) to Rome in a way they simply never have.
The best you can hope for is communion.
As far as Orthodox views, they have allowed economy to affect a lot of their stances. It’s why divorced people are allowed to remarry on occasion. It’s why a married couple with kids under substantial strains might be quietly permitted birth control. It’s why they’ll ordain married priests.
Grace abounds more there than it does in the west.
Last edited:
L
laylow
Guest
Sounds like progression to me. All Churches, including the Catholic one have “progressed.” Any denial of that simple fact is biased, head-in-the-sand dishonesty.
A
Axsenex
Guest
And? :man_shrugging:t2:
R
Roguish
Guest
It looks like you’re saying that the Orthodox started ordaining married priests out of a sense of “economy” at some point, thus abandoning celibacy as a requirement. I don’t think that’s what happened. I think it went the other way aorund: it used to be okay for both RC & EO priests to be married. The RC church changed her mind about that, the EO simply didn’t.
Last edited:
R
Roguish
Guest
To clarify: I don’t view the Orthodox as more fallen than the RC. In fact, perhaps less so, especially if you look at the past 50 years. I just thought this was an interesting example of how the Orthodox too (i.e. just like the RC) are gradually adopting more “modern” views. This is especially interesting for those Roman Catholics who look to Orthodoxy with a bit of envy, and with the romantic idea that such things aren’t happening in the East. (I do think being “accomodating” with respect to contraception is a bad idea, but the RCC hasn’t been short of bad ideas herself.)
Last edited:
V
Vonsalza
Guest
Sure.
Doctrinal debates aside; from a purely anthropological perspective, a religion that can’t change will absolutely die.
Doctrinal debates aside; from a purely anthropological perspective, a religion that can’t change will absolutely die.
V
Vonsalza
Guest
Case in point; “go and multiply” without any real limiting principle completely works in 1 AD when global population is roughly 300 million people, worldwide.
It doesn’t work as well in 2018 AD when global population is 8 billion and human activity is measurably changing the planet and forcing other species out at speed that approximates the other great extinctions.
Carholicism’s refusal to grant even basic economy to contraception (like allowing married folks with families) is probably the greatest single factor shutting Church doors or turning them into cold, historic landmarks in the 1st world.
R
Roguish
Guest
Perhaps. But how should a religion change? I think a religion should address new problems and questions that arise due to changed circumstances, as the RCC has tried to do (with varying success) in the late 19th century and throughout the 20th. In this sense it is healthy for a religion to “change”. It’s really just addressing new circumstances from the same (unchanged) principles. But that’s not the same as a religion “changing its mind” about something, which is what both the RCC and EO seem to have done.
Oh that’s certainly not the reason, because countless Catholics use contraceptives in spite of the Church’s injunction, don’t confess it and still go to Communion. Whether that’s good or bad is a different discussion, but it makes it quite clear that it’s not the Church’s stance on contraceptives that’s “driving people away”.
Last edited:
V
Vonsalza
Guest
Exactly how Christianity has changed in the last 2000 years. Even for Catholicism - who’d want the impossible task of arguing that the 2000s church is the exact same as the 1300s church - when it was arguably at the height of its power?Vonsalza:
Perhaps. But how should a religion change?
As the present faithful, we don’t want to believe that. But in reality, that’s exactly what happened. Only a few generations ago, every non-Catholic Christian was going to hell, per little Catholic schoolboys. Everyone knew it!
Now? “It’s up to God. Even an atheist has hope.”
To be sure, the failure of a religion isn’t a singular event. It’s a process, like anything else social.
A point where the religion is perceived to break from reality will drive more and more people from it. Of those that remain, most will do so in spite of thinking their religion is wrong about the particular belief. As time passes, fewer and fewer will embody “True Belief”.
There aren’t many “Real Catholics” left in the west, as Kreeft puts it.
Last edited:
C
Carmel
Guest
Many contraceptives are also abortafacient ( they cause the uterus to reject ( hence abort ) the fertilised egg. Hence there is an early stage abortion .
R
Roguish
Guest
True. And that reminds me, the Church Fathers’ teachings on contraception were pretty strong (and clear):
http://www.staycatholic.com/ecf_contraception.htm
@Vonsalza made the point earlier in the thread that such teachings don’t work anymore because we’re 8 billion now, but I don’t believe fundamental objections can be overruled by pragmatic considerations or circumstances.
Last edited:
B
Benadam
Guest
But the human urge to reproduce doesn’t cause overpopulation when in harmony with nature. Contraception enables.
S
Start
Guest
Conforming to the world does raise a red flag.
- Status