Vatican urged to reopen debate on birth control

[msproule]

frommi:

Well, if there was such a thing as ‘papal infalliabilty’ then perhaps we could have a debate…or you are referring to the infallible teaching authority of the roman magesterium? Two very different things, one exists and one does not.

You are wasting time and energy arguing semantics since technically it is simply called “infallibility”. The other names further describe the manners in which the charism is invoked. However, most dissenters take offense specifically to the infallible teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff, which is why I brought that up in particular.

I’m just surprised that you could color with one brush every Catholic couple who has grappled with this birth control issue as though you can know what is going on inside their hearts and minds. It seems like a dangerous thing to do.

You’re right; I cannot do that. I will soften my assertion to say that many, not all, couples who contracept are some combination of prideful, selfish, and ignorant. However, I would still love to hear how one could be none of these things and still defy this particular Church teaching.

 

[frommi]

msproule:

You are wasting time and energy arguing semantics since technically it is simply called “infallibility”. The other names further describe the manners in which the charism is invoked. However, most dissenters take offense specifically to the infallible teaching authority of the Roman Pontiff, which is why I brought that up in particular.
.

I’m not wasting time arguing semantics…they are truly different things…one implies a man with special powers…the other implies a gift of God that is exercised through the petrine office.

And frankly, I’m gonna go out on a limb and say that I know people who have used birth control, and I wouldn’t put them in any of the categories you described. For most it’s not a decision arrived at lightly.

 

[rlg94086]

I had this discussion yesterday with a non-Catholic friend. He said, “why is the Catholic Church so hung up on birth control.” I had to explain that the Church isn’t “hung up” on birth control - she has remained steady in her teaching. Individuals are “hung up” on birth control and most don’t take the time to understand Church teaching. It is not an obvious sin like rape (as another poster mentioned), but this does not mean it isn’t a sin.

The other thing I like to point out is that all the major protestant faiths taught that birth control was a sin until around 1930. Apparently, they then discovered that something had changed in the Bible or their theology.

As a convert and former “cafeteria” Catholic, I am speaking from personal experience. I’m glad our doctrines don’t change so easily.

Riley259:

I disagree. I think the logic in Humane Vitae is very compelling if you actually examine what it is saying. Once you understand the arguments, it all makes so much sense - it is truth. Too many so called “cafeteria” Catholics have no idea why the Church says that birth contro is wrong - if they would only sincerely examine the document itself but sadly for many it’s not even on their radar screen.

 

[bones_IV]

frommi:

I’m not wasting time arguing semantics…they are truly different things…one implies a man with special powers…the other implies a gift of God that is exercised through the petrine office.

And frankly, I’m gonna go out on a limb and say that I know people who have used birth control, and I wouldn’t put them in any of the categories you described. For most it’s not a decision arrived at lightly.

Your using semantics as an excuse not to be Catholic. Do you not realize that Papal Infallibility is a Charism? It’s a gift. “Not a decision arrived at lightly?” That’s your best arguement? Surely, you can do better than that. Stop beating and skipping around the bush like you do in so many of your posts. And just simply admit that you are wrong. Your ignorance is showing. Just using the semantics technique as an attmept to change the subject.

Seems to me your confusing impeccability with infallibility which are two different things.

 

[msproule]

frommi:

I’m not wasting time arguing semantics…they are truly different things…one implies a man with special powers…the other implies a gift of God that is exercised through the petrine office.

You and I have argued semantics before…I am not going to waste my time just because *you *think it makes him out to be some kind of super hero, (Infallibleman?).

And frankly, I’m gonna go out on a limb and say that I know people who have used birth control, and I wouldn’t put them in any of the categories you described.

You must keep better company than me…I also know plenty of couples who do this, and they all fit into one of the three categories that I suggested.

Examples:

• “I do not care what the Vatican says, they cannot tell me what to do with my body.” (pride)
• “NFP? That’s too much work, but I don’t want to have kids now.” (selfishness)
• "I don’t know what the church teaches, but my priest tells me it’s OK." (ignorance)

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

frommi:

I’m not wasting time arguing semantics…they are truly different things…one implies a man with special powers…the other implies a gift of God that is exercised through the petrine office.

And frankly, I’m gonna go out on a limb and say that I know people who have used birth control, and I wouldn’t put them in any of the categories you described. For most it’s not a decision arrived at lightly.

Ah, but the Petrine office can only be exercised by a man (who can wield its special powers - wowza!). It doesn’t act as an abstract concept on its own.

I would hope those who use birth control do not do so lightly, because they’ve decided to either become heretics (which probably balances out whatever mitigation might occur to the mortal sin of contraception) or commit mortal sin. But then again, if they put a lot of thought into that choice they’re probably that much more culpable for whichever of those unacceptable options they chose. I understand feeling sorry for individuals who felt compelled to make a horrible choice. But that doesn’t mean you have to defend the choice. I feel sorry for schismatic traditionalists, but their behavior is inexcusable.

 

[bones_IV]

Frommi, paragraph 25 of Lumen Gentium makes it clear that the doctrine of Papal Infallibly exists.

Link

 

[InnocentIII]

frommi:

But there’s the problem, your making the assumption that the discussion/debate has at its core an intention to change teaching. You don’t know that.

Good old frommi. You can always be relied on to take any position that contradicts the magisterium. I do know that because dialogue is code for lets keep discussing it till you see I’m right. Try dialoguing abortion here in Australia. I did and was told it was being divisive. Dialoguing is just a way of avoiding the admission of defeat.

When you make presumptions like this, thats what makes it difficult to dialogue.

Of course it does. It means not buying into the whole dialoguing thing. What is the point of dialoguing the sun rising. It won’t stop the sun from rising and won’t add to the sum total of our knowledge of the sun rising.

And besides, discussions and dialogues can sometimes lead us to new understandings that we didn’t intend to discover.

New understandings apparently meaning changes. You have just confirmed the charge made against dialoguing in the first place.

 

[InnocentIII]

frommi:

Growing in our understanding of the truth is a laudable goal…but we have to be sure we know going in that none of us exactly has the truth sewn up and in our back pocket.

Actually the Church does. We have it on excellent authority

We have a hard time nowadays separating the truth from what our intrepretation of the truth is.

Alleluia. You finally got it frommi.
.

 

[InnocentIII]

If anyone wants a secular argument against birth control just look at the demographicas of Europe where the current birthrate is between 1.25 and 1.65. Put simply Europeans are committing racial suicide. ABC is about the selfishness of the here and now. It will be interesting to see the babyboomers living in poverty because they didn’t create enough replacements to support them. It’s happening already to cassh strapped pension plans in Europe. The future the babyboomers so long lauded is just a wasteland.

 

[Riley259]

InnocentIII:

If anyone wants a secular argument against birth control just look at the demographicas of Europe where the current birthrate is between 1.25 and 1.65. Put simply Europeans are committing racial suicide. ABC is about the selfishness of the here and now. It will be interesting to see the babyboomers living in poverty because they didn’t create enough replacements to support them. It’s happening already to cassh strapped pension plans in Europe. The future the babyboomers so long lauded is just a wasteland.

Excellent point - In case you haven’t read George Weigel’s decline of Europe, I’d recommend it. It’s his latest book.

 

[manualman]

A few notes:

1. I actually LIKE that it is extremely easy to pick out meida articles like this to ignore / not take seriously. Any journalist in 2006 that TWICE states that the only child spacing option open to catholics is RYTHYM is either too lazy to be taken seriously or an obvious activist trying to undermine the church. NFP is demonstrably not rythym and doesn’t take rigorous investigative journalism to learn about.
2. Humanae Vitae certainly draws the correct conclusion about contraception since it enjoys the infallible protection of the ORDINARY magesterium. However, this does NOT mean that the rationale contained within is necessarily complete or the most compelling. I would welcome further prominant public diologue on contraception in the church at large because it would help get out the word that contraception doesn’t just violate the procreative aspect of sexuality, it terribly wounds the unitive aspect too. John Paul II figured a lot of this out and explains it in his Theology of the Body.

 

[frommi]

Riley259:

Excellent point - In case you haven’t read George Weigel’s decline of Europe, I’d recommend it. It’s his latest book.

Oh my…George Weigel is like the Richard McBrien of the right as far as slanted theology goes.

 

[InnocentIII]

frommi:

Oh my…George Weigel is like the Richard McBrien of the right as far as slanted theology goes.

Except the George Weigel does not dissent from Catholic teaching. There is a big difference. But then some people never see the difference as they are too busy justifying themselves.

Rather than make assertions and false comparisons give me some examples of his “slanted theology” and how that dissents from Church teaching.

And please do not quote from the Saginaw Church history page as that particular document is so riddled with error it would be laughable if it wasn’t being believed an uncritically quoted by so many people.

 

[bones_IV]

InnocentIII:

Actually the Church does. We have it on excellent authority

Alleluia. You finally got it frommi.
.

Holy Mary mother of God, pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death. Amen.