The intrinsic evil of contraception

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ron_Conte
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

Ron_Conte

Guest
There are three fonts of morality:
  1. intention
  2. moral object
  3. circumstances
Catechism of the Catholic Church: “The morality of human acts depends on: the object chosen; the end in view or the intention; the circumstances of the action. The object, the intention, and the circumstances make up the ‘sources,’ or constitutive elements, of the morality of human acts.”

Compendium of the Catechism: “The morality of human acts depends on three sources: the object chosen, either a true or apparent good; the intention of the subject who acts, that is, the purpose for which the subject performs the act; and the circumstances of the act, which include its consequences.”

USCCB Catechism: “Every moral act consists of three elements: the objective act (what we do), the subjective goal or intention (why we do the act), and the concrete situation or circumstances in which we perform the act… All three aspects must be good – the objective act, the subjective intention, and the circumstances – in order to have a morally good act.”

Any act with a bad moral object, i.e. any intentionally chosen act that is intrinsically ordered toward an evil end is intrinsically evil. A good intention in the first font of morality does not justify an act with an evil moral object, an intrinsically evil act, because all three fonts must be good for any act to be moral.

Contraception is intrinsically evil and always gravely immoral.

Pontifical Council for the Family: “The Church has always taught the intrinsic evil of contraception, that is, of every marital act intentionally rendered unfruitful. This teaching is to be held as definitive and irreformable. Contraception is gravely opposed to marital chastity; it is contrary to the good of the transmission of life (the procreative aspect of matrimony), and to the reciprocal self-giving of the spouses (the unitive aspect of matrimony); it harms true love and denies the sovereign role of God in the transmission of human life.” (Vademecum, n. 4, instruction for confessors).

The intentional (deliberate) choice of contraception is necessarily the choice of an act inherently ordered toward rendering the marital act unfruitful, i.e. of thwarting the procreative meaning intended by God for sexual acts. Such acts are intrinsically disordered.

The intention for which the act was chosen, such as to treat a medical condition or to prevent disease transmission, does not change the fact that an intrinsically evil act was intentionally chosen by the human person, in contradiction to the moral order established by God.

The use of condoms by a married couple to prevent disease transmission is not justified by that good intention; condoms used in natural intercourse are a type of contraception, and contraception is intrinsically evil.

The use of a contraceptive pill by a woman who is sexually active with the intention of treating a medical condition does not justify the act. The intention is good, but the moral object remains evil. The intentionally chosen act, to engage in sexual relations that is rendered unfruitful by the contraceptive pill, remains an intrinsically evil act. The moral object of an act is not changed by a good intention.

Pope John Paul II: “Consequently, circumstances or intentions can never transform an act intrinsically evil by virtue of its object into an act ‘subjectively’ good or defensible as a choice.” (Veritatis Splendor, n. 81.)

Pope Pius XI: "But no reason, however grave, may be put forward by which anything intrinsically against nature may become conformable to nature and morally good. Since, therefore, the conjugal act is destined primarily by nature for the begetting of children, those who, in exercising it, deliberately frustrate its natural power and purpose, sin against nature and commit a deed which is shameful and intrinsically vicious.
…
“Since, therefore, openly departing from the uninterrupted Christian tradition, some recently have judged it possible solemnly to declare another doctrine regarding this question, the Catholic Church, to whom God has entrusted the defense of the integrity and purity of morals, standing erect in the midst of the moral ruin which surrounds her, in order that she may preserve the chastity of the nuptial union from being defiled by this foul stain, raises her voice in token of her divine ambassadorship and through Our mouth proclaims anew: any use whatsoever of matrimony exercised in such a way that the act is deliberately frustrated in its natural power to generate life is an offense against the law of God and of nature, and those who indulge in such are branded with the guilt of a grave sin.” (Casti Connubii, n. 54-56.)
 
Was there a question or point of discussion here, Ron? Seems all pretty cut and dried to me. 🙂
 
Ron_Conte said:
Contraception is intrinsically evil and always gravely immoral.
Click to expand...
Pope Pius XI declared, in 1930, in his encyclical, Casti Connubii (56), “any use whatsoever of matrimony exercised in such a way that the act is deliberately frustrated in its natural power to generate life is an offence against the law of God and of nature, and those who indulge in such are branded with the guilt of a grave sin.”

However, Pope Paul VI watered down the gravity of such an act in his encyclical Humanae Vitae #14 which reads:

“Consequently, it is a serious error to think that a whole married life of otherwise normal relations can justify sexual intercourse which is deliberately contraceptive and so intrinsically wrong.”

Please note that Paul VI deliberately refrained from calling such acts mortal or grave sin and instead called them “intrinsically wrong” not “intrinsically evil.”
 
Truthlover said:
Pope Pius XI declared, in 1930, in his encyclical, Casti Connubii (56), “any use whatsoever of matrimony exercised in such a way that the act is deliberately frustrated in its natural power to generate life is an offence against the law of God and of nature, and those who indulge in such are branded with the guilt of a grave sin.”

However, Pope Paul VI watered down the gravity of such an act in his encyclical Humanae Vitae #14 which reads:

“Consequently, it is a serious error to think that a whole married life of otherwise normal relations can justify sexual intercourse which is deliberately contraceptive and so intrinsically wrong.”

Please note that Paul VI deliberately refrained from calling such acts mortal or grave sin and instead called them “intrinsically wrong” not “intrinsically evil.”
Click to expand...
My how we nit pick our Vicars of Christ to get around the truth of teaching.:rolleyes:Carlan
 
Truthlover said:
Pope Pius XI declared, in 1930, in his encyclical, Casti Connubii (56), “any use whatsoever of matrimony exercised in such a way that the act is deliberately frustrated in its natural power to generate life is an offence against the law of God and of nature, and those who indulge in such are branded with the guilt of a grave sin.”

However, Pope Paul VI watered down the gravity of such an act in his encyclical Humanae Vitae #14 which reads:

“Consequently, it is a serious error to think that a whole married life of otherwise normal relations can justify sexual intercourse which is deliberately contraceptive and so intrinsically wrong.”

Please note that Paul VI deliberately refrained from calling such acts mortal or grave sin and instead called them “intrinsically wrong” not “intrinsically evil.”
Click to expand...
Both Popes presented the same teaching, with different wording. The term intrinsically evil is also called intrinsically wrong, inherently immoral, and various other wordings. All these wordings express the same truth: that certain knowingly chosen acts of human persons are immoral, in and of themselves, by the very nature of the act.
 
Ron_Conte said:
The term intrinsically evil is also called intrinsically wrong,
Click to expand...
I, for one, would rather do something “wrong” than something “evil”. To be lazy is “wrong”, to practice pedophilia is “evil”.

The following information, which shines more light on this topic, from the pope’s new book can be found in post #4304 at:

theratzingerforum.yuku.com/to…html?page=216

"It’s worth noting that in a different section of the new book, the pope defended the 1968 encyclical “Humanae Vitae,” which taught that, in the context of married love, contraception techniques, including condoms, are immoral because they close off the possibility of the transmission of life.

“The basic lines of ‘Humanae Vitae’ are still correct. Finding ways to enable people to live the teaching, on the other hand, is a further question,” the pope said. He indicated that pastors should show some tolerance for Catholics who have difficulty with the teaching on contraception.

“We should not take the failure to live up to this high moral standard as an authoritative objection to the truth. We should try to do as much good as we can and to support and put up with each other” and create conditions for better understanding of the teaching, he said.

The Pope does appear to be taking a softer approach than traditional church teaching, as did Pope Paul VI in Humanae Vitae when he deliberately refused to call the use of contraception a grave or mortal sin. Paul VI said contraception was “intrinsically wrong” which was less harsh than previous Popes who had called contraception a “grave sin”. "

It is difficult, at this stage, to draw any other conclusion than that Benedict is indicating a softening in the church teaching regarding contraception, particularly when we read “We should not take the failure to live up to this high moral standard as an authoritative objection to the truth.” This statement shows that the Pope clearly does not see contraception as being a grave or mortal sin.
 
Ron_Conte said:
The use of a contraceptive pill by a woman who is sexually active with the intention of treating a medical condition does not justify the act. The intention is good, but the moral object remains evil. The intentionally chosen act, to engage in sexual relations that is rendered unfruitful by the contraceptive pill, remains an intrinsically evil act. The moral object of an act is not changed by a good intention.
Click to expand...
Good point… A couple years ago, my wife was diagnosed with polycistic ovarian syndrome where the doctor prescribed her with “birth control” pills to regulate her monthly cycles to reduce the risk of ovarian cancer.

We threw the pills away and just gave birth to our third child two days ago.

Glory be to God!
 
Truthlover said:
It is difficult, at this stage, to draw any other conclusion than that Benedict is indicating a softening in the church teaching regarding contraception, particularly when we read **“We should not take the failure to live up to this high moral standard as an authoritative objection to the truth.” **This statement shows that the Pope clearly does not see contraception as being a grave or mortal sin.
Click to expand...
I’m having trouble making the same connection that you are… :confused:

The Pope is clearly assuring us in the above quote that there is NO new objection to the truth, even though there is a widespread failure to “live up” to this truth.
 
The Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, told reporters Tuesday that he asked the pope if he intended his comments to apply only to men. Benedict replied that it really didn’t matter — the important thing was that the person took into consideration the life of another, Lombardi said.

“I personally asked the pope if there was a serious, important problem in the choice of the masculine over the feminine,” Lombardi said. “He told me no. The problem is this: … It’s the first step of taking responsibility, of taking into consideration the risk of the life of another with whom you have a relationship.”

courier-journal.com/article/20101123/FEATURES03/311230100/1010/FEATURES/Pope++Condoms+to+prevent+AIDS+also+permitted+for+women
 
Truthlover
“We should not take the failure to live up to this high moral standard as an authoritative objection to the truth.” This statement shows that the Pope clearly does not see contraception as being a grave or mortal sin.
Click to expand...
Typically false, again.
The self-styled “Truthlover” continues to savage truth and to promote dissent against Christ and His Church in the arrogant attempt to pontificate that contraception is not wrong, nor evil, nor a grave sin, but as self-styled “at worst…a venial sin” – expresses ably the selfism and wishful thinking that permeate every aspect of this poster’s falsehoods.

He has used this DB to promote his dissenting fantasies against the definitive infallible doctrine in *Casti Connubii *(Pius XI, 1930) and *Humanae Vitae *(Paul VI, 1968).

In 1930, in his encyclical, *Casti Connubii *(56), Pope Pius XI declared, “any use whatsoever of matrimony exercised in such a way that the act is deliberately frustrated in its natural power to generate life is an offence against the law of God and of nature, and those who indulge in such are branded with the guilt of a grave sin.”

In 1968, in *Humanae Vitae *(14), Pope Paul VI declared: “it is never lawful, even for the gravest reasons, to do evil that good may come of it” and uses this to affirm that: “it is a serious error to think that a whole married life of otherwise normal relations can justify sexual intercourse which is deliberately contraceptive and so intrinsically wrong.”

May 10, 2008, VATICAN CITY
In a speech marking the 40th anniversary of Humanae Vitae, Pope Benedict XVI reaffirmed: “What was true yesterday remains true even today….The truth expressed in Humanae vitae doesn’t change; on the contrary, in the light of new scientific discoveries it is ever more up to date…. Forty years after its publication, that teaching not only shows itself to be unchanged in its truth, but it reveals the farsightedness with which the problem was tackled.”
legacy.signonsandiego.com/new…thcontrol.html

catholicculture.org/comme…otc.cfm?id=735
“Note this well. The Church’s teaching on contraception is that contraception is intrinsically evil when used to frustrate the procreative purpose of the marital act.” (Dr Jeff Mirus, Nov 22, 2110).

This is an outstanding article on the comments in Pope Benedict’s Book, showing the permanence of the definitive, infallible teaching against contraception in marriage.

The falsehood is precisely what HV 7 identifies:
“It is the whole man and the whole mission to which he is called that must be considered: both its natural, earthly aspects and its supernatural, eternal aspects. And since in the attempt to justify artificial methods of birth control many appeal to the demands of married love or of responsible parenthood, these two important realities of married life must be accurately defined and analyzed.”

Now HV 10: “From this it follows that they are not free to act as they choose in the service of transmitting life, as if it were wholly up to them to decide what is the right course to follow. On the contrary, they are bound to ensure that what they do corresponds to the will of God the Creator. The very nature of marriage and its use makes His will clear, while the constant teaching of the Church spells it out. (10)”

Note 10 above refers us to Vatican II’s Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World (Gaudium et Spes) #50-51. And what do we find?
“In questions of birth regulation, the sons of the Church, faithful to these principles, are forbidden to use methods disapproved of by the teaching authority of the Church in its interpretation of the divine law. 14”
And to what does note 14 refer? To Pope Pius XI’s Encyclical Casti Connubii, 1930, which as we have seen teaches infallibly (#56) as above.
 
TEPO said:
Good point… A couple years ago, my wife was diagnosed with polycistic ovarian syndrome where the doctor prescribed her with “birth control” pills to regulate her monthly cycles to reduce the risk of ovarian cancer.

We threw the pills away and just gave birth to our third child two days ago.

Glory be to God!
Click to expand...
Praise God.

Eleven years ago my wife was diagnosed as initial symptomatic cancer of the cervix when she was found to be pregnant. The gyanecologist who was also a personal friend insisted that she should abort as she could not wait after the delivery to treat her condition. We threw away the medical advice, kept the pregnancy and the boy is a healthy eleven year old now. My wife needed to have a hysterectomy a year after the delivery; she was in CIN2. We are depending on God for any eventuality but have no regret that we had kept the baby.
 
Truthlover said:
The Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, told reporters Tuesday that he asked the pope if he intended his comments to apply only to men. Benedict replied that it really didn’t matter — the important thing was that the person took into consideration the life of another, Lombardi said.

“I personally asked the pope if there was a serious, important problem in the choice of the masculine over the feminine,” Lombardi said. “He told me no. The problem is this: … It’s the first step of taking responsibility, of taking into consideration the risk of the life of another with whom you have a relationship.”

courier-journal.com/article/20101123/FEATURES03/311230100/1010/FEATURES/Pope++Condoms+to+prevent+AIDS+also+permitted+for+women
Click to expand...
It is clear that in the case of a married couple, where one of the couple is HIV positive, that the Pope believes that a main point of the conjugal act is that “of taking into consideration the risk of the life of another with whom you have a relationship.” In the case of the conjugal act this necessarily involves the use of contraception.
 
Self-styled “Truthlover” twists “relationship” to mean marriage – typically false.

All condomistic intercourse is evil in marriage because it deliberately tries to thwart the procreative end of marriage by placing a barrier to it.

Never rely on the secular media, nor on self-styled “Truthlover” for anything Catholic. The Holy Father was being interviewed and a book written – there is no change in doctrine on morals. Everything that is immoral stays immoral – God is immutable (changeless), and Christ’s Church teaches His truth infallibly.

There is nothing to contracept in sodomy – it doesn’t matter what you use – the grave sin exists. A condom doesn’t add to it but cannot be relied upon for protection against AIDS. Sodomy is never justified, nor adultery nor fornication. The habit of using a condom might come to be taken as normal, so that an ensuing real marriage would be tainted by grave evil through condomistic intercourse, hence “(w)hen, with respect to the distribution of condoms to reduce the risk of AIDS, the Pope says the Church ‘of course does not regard it as a real or moral solution, but, in this or that case, there can be nonetheless, in the intention of reducing the risk of infection, a first step in a movement toward a different way, a more human way, of living sexuality’, he is doing exactly the sort of extrinsic moral analysis required for this case.” (Dr Jeff Mirus).

With regard to intrinsically evil acts, and in reference to contraceptive practices whereby the conjugal act is intentionally rendered infertile, Pope John Paul II teaches: ‘Though it is true that sometimes it is lawful to tolerate a lesser moral evil in order to avoid a greater evil or in order to promote a greater good, it is never lawful, even for the gravest reasons, to do evil that good may come of it (cf.Rom.3:8) - in other words, to intend directly something which of its very nature contradicts the moral order, and which must therefore be judged unworthy of man, even though the intention is to protect or promote the welfare of an individual, of a family or of society in general.’ (Veritatis Splendor, n.80).

On March 1, 1997 the Vatican’s Pontifical Council for the Family issued a Vade Mecum for Confessors Concerning Some Aspects of the Morality of Conjugal Life. Included in this document is the following statement: “The Church has always taught the intrinsic evil of contraception, that is, of every marital act intentionally rendered unfruitful. This teaching is to be held as definitive and irreformable.”

Evil may not be done to achieve a good. Self-styled “Truthlover” has his own agenda of corruption of Catholic definitive infallible doctrine.

“The point to remember is that contraception is intrinsically evil within marriage. Outside of marriage, sexual intercourse itself is intrinsically evil; outside of marriage, there is no marital act that must be kept open to life and love; outside of marriage, the morality of contraception must be determined on other grounds, namely extrinsic grounds.” (Dr Jeff Mirus).
catholicculture.org/commentary/otc.cfm?id=735

Evil may not be done to achieve a good.
 
Abu, this article in the Tablet shows that the Pope disagrees with your analysyis:

Pope’s condom comments extend to female prostitutes
24 November 2010
Pope Benedict XVI clarified that comments he made about there being a moral case for prostitutes using condoms to prevent the spread of HIV applied not only to male prostitutes but to female ones as well. His comments appeared in the book-length interview Light of the World, authored by German journalist Peter Seewald, which was launched at the Vatican yesterday. The book quoted the Pope as saying: “In the case of some individuals, as perhaps when a male prostitute uses a condom, this can be a first step in the direction of a moralisation … in the intention of reducing the risk of infection”. Holy See spokesman Federico Lombardi said at the launch: “I asked the Pope personally if there was a serious distinction in the choice of male instead of female and he said ‘no’.” Fr Lombardi added: “The point is [the use of a condom] should be a first step towards responsibility in being aware of the risk [to] the life of the other person one has relations with. If it is a man, a woman or a transsexual who does it, we are always at the same point, which is the first step in responsibly avoiding passing on a grave risk to the other.” Seewald suggested that the Pope’s words could be interpreted as permitting condom use for couples when one is HIV-positive. “The Pope indicates that, beyond the single case, there are further cases where one can imagine that condom use is a step towards a responsible approach to sexuality in this area to avoid further infection,” he said.

thetablet.co.uk/latest-news.php
 
Contraception remains gravely sinful and intrinsically wrong in marriage. No change.
catholicculture.org/commentary/otc.cfm?id=735
**On the Culture
The Pope, the Condom, and the Elephant
By Dr. Jeff Mirus | November 22, 2010 **
Regarding the Pope’s interview, “none of this has any bearing on the Church’s traditional teaching against contraception in marriage. Indeed, no matter what position the Pope or any other moralist may take on the use of condoms in particular situations which are already fundamentally disordered—situations in which sexual activity is already intrinsically immoral—that position cannot affect the Church’s teaching on the use of condoms in sexual acts which are otherwise properly ordered and moral—that is, within marriage. In each and every properly ordered and therefore moral sexual act (that is, in each and every marital act), deliberate contraception remains intrinsically immoral.”

Idle desires, wishful feeling, cannot change that.
 
How can we truly say that contraception is a mortal sin for those using it when most catholics in the west have been told for decades by priests, sisters, and even bishops that contraception is a “personal decision?”
 
Objectively it is a grave sin and intrinsically wrong (Casti Connubii, and Humanae Vitae).

Some priests and some bishops have been lax. Many others have been faithful. What we all should be doing is to help form all in the way the truth and the life.
 
Intrinsically evil acts are always immoral.

Intrinsically evil acts:

non-marital sexual acts
non-unitive sexual acts
non-procreative sexual acts (i.e. contracepted)
abortion
euthanasia
theft
lying

et cetera
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top