T
tskrobacz
Guest
You think the early Jews had a local Walgreens? Widespread use of contraception is a modern creation and phenomena…
- Status
T
tskrobacz
Guest
I’m sure you were saddened to no longer partake in the Eucharist and Reconciliation.
H
Hoosier_Daddy
Guest
Well, not really. Contraception (though certainly not as potent) has been used widespread for, well about as long as humans have been having sex. From poisons, to barriers to mutilation to myths and superstitions. Kind of like today…
T
tskrobacz
Guest
Yes, probably so…just not as “accessible” as it is in our times.
Q
QuestLove
Guest
Not true. Contraception may not have been available in a store but its use is certainly not a modern phenomenon. Even today, in developing countries there are local brews etc. for those who cannot afford to buy modern forms of contraception.
B
Bookcat
Guest
Yes and such can be seen too in the New Testament with Paul condemning “pharmakeia".
Which is not referring to going to a pharmacy…but can yes be said to be a condemnation of such attempts at contraception.
And in later early Church …and down through the centuries.
Such has been condemned since the early days.
T
Tomdstone
Guest
They have valid Sacraments in the Eastern Orthodox Church, which does not take a strict line against ABC.
S
StevenFrancis
Guest
At first I accepted the answers of the Church for these questions upon faith in the authority of the Catholic Church. But then, as I studied the Church’s explanation on each of these matters, they make perfect sense to me now, and in fact I find the Church teachings to be motivated by love, and the pastoral care for our souls.What are the issues that you deal with and pray about on a daily basis? Thank you all , in advance for being honest.
For the Church to take any other stand on these matters, would be saying that morality doesn’t in fact matter, and that contemporary culture, and what the majority of people in the pews think is superior to the deposit of the faith entrusted to the Church founded by Jesus Christ. These types of important issues are not simply a list of shalt-nots, but loving assistance, intended to get help get us all to heaven.
No one who believes in the Church, and truly studies and prays on the teaching on any given matter in the realm of the Church’s authority, will be kept from understanding the reasoning behind a particular element of faith or morals, unless they wish to maintain their own stubbornness and pride over the teaching authority of the Church. Reasonable explanations are there, and have been continually pronounced by the Church.
The 1st one - ABC, is man superimposing himself in the roll of God, in order to make marriage sterile at the whim of the couple. At least that was what it was at first. This led to what is referred to as the “Contraceptive mentality”, which ends up believing that sterility is good. It leads to the non-married using it to fornicate. It leads inevitably to the acceptance on some level, for abortion when the contraception used to “protect” us from the gift of life, (which becomes the curse of life eventually under contraceptive mentality). It leads to a relaxation of morals. It leads to a sense of safety in immorality, and eventually leads us to accept the co-habitation, with sexual activity, by unmarried persons, as morally licit. The Church says that ALL persons are called to celibacy. Even the married man and woman are called to celibacy, or probably more specifically abstinence from the marital embrace if they are not at least spiritually open to the possible outcome of a human life. Humanae Vitae is a beautiful document. It is not a difficult or dense one to read. There are good sound theological, moral, ethical, psychological, and social reasons why artificial contraception, is disordered and immoral.
2nd one - The Church is concerned that the new couple not engage in fornication and/or adultery. This doctrine comes from Christ Himself, and without a filter. The reasons for this doctrine are the easiest on the list to understand. This is the Church in it’s role as a protector or Her people. To help us to avoid a. Committing adultery according the Lord Jesus Christ, and b. Protecting them from harming themselves spiritually by receiving the sacrament of Eucharist unworthily.
3rd one - When sexual relations occur between one or more people who are not joined together under the sacrament of Holy Matrimony, which is a spiritual and theological gift only given to the natural complimentary of one man and one woman who are at least accepting of the possible occurrence of the generation of human life), then one or more instances of sexual immorality are occurring from among fornication, masturbation, adultery, sodomy. There are worse things yet, than one can stack up on the shoulders of these top three, but I don’t wish to get graphic or gratuitous. The gentle way of saying this is that we are ALL called to chastity. This is not just the LGBT community. They are simply one group for whom the refraining from sexual acts outside of the God sanctioned bond of Holy Matrimony between one man and one woman, constitutes a cross to bear. We can all accept our crosses with dignity and love, or resentment and hatred. But the cross is always there. What a person does with it is the measure of his moral constitution. And more importantly his love of Christ, and faith in His Church to know what is morally correct, and the best prescription for finding eternal life with Christ.
There is much in the way of good, intelligent and compassionate explanation of all these things readily available to the faithful, as well as those who are simply curious. In Scripture, in the Catechism, in Encyclicals, letters and bulls from the see of Peter, in books and documents by Church Fathers, Doctors, Saints, Bishops, Theologians, and Philosophers since the beginning of oral and written history.
I’ve probably repeated much of what has already been written in this thread, which I will now go and read. Anything here which has already been said or considered, please ignore as superfluous. I also encourage all to seek the answers to these questions for themselves in the aforementioned scripture, catechism, encyclicals, letter and bulls from the see of Peter, books and documents by the fathers, doctors, saints, bishops, theologians and philosophers rather than my crude and probably jagged sounding short distillations on a forum thread.
God’s love, and peace be with us all,
B
Bookcat
Guest
Christians have not been taught from the early days that the learning the alphabet in English is evil…
But rather contraception.
H
Hoosier_Daddy
Guest
We could solve this with a return to the Latin…
B
Bookcat
Guest
Not with *my *poor Latin.We could solve this with a return to the Latin…
Latin is still the language of the Church…
Here is the Catechism:
vatican.va/archive/catechism_lt/p3s2c2a6_lt.htm#III.%20Coniugum%20amor
M
MarkInOregon
Guest
Was this an answer to my question? My question was about the use of the word dignity: the quality or state of being worthy, honored, esteemed–in regards to euthanasia. Isn’t caring for a loved one until the end showing their dignity–doesn’t it show their worth, and the honor and esteem in which they are held --that we are willing to do that? Doesn’t killing them instead imply that they’re not worthy of that care? That they lack the dignity to be cared for?
The peace of Christ,
Mark
A
Abu
Guest
See the clear answer in post #383. You are wrong.
A
Abu
Guest
And what was “the purpose” of Christ teaching “He that hears you hears Me” (Lk 10:16), and “If he will not listen to the Church let him be as the heathen and the publican.” (Mt 18:17)?
St. Paul teaches also, “through the Church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places (Eph 3:10).” The Church teaches even the angels! This is with the authority of Christ!
The purpose of Jesus being crystal clear is to encourage all of good will to follow Him through His infallible teaching Church.
**All four promises to Peter alone: **
“You are Peter and on this rock I will build My Church.” (Mt 16:18)
“The gates of hell will not prevail against it.”(Mt 16:18)
“I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven." ( Mt 16:19)
“Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven.” (Mt 16:19) [Later to the Twelve].
Sole authority:
“Strengthen your brethren.” (Lk 22:32)
“Feed My sheep.”(Jn 21:17).
The DIDACHE, one of the earliest written disciplinary documents from the infant Church (100-150 A.D.) condemned both abortion and contraception, as in the Decretals of Pope Gregory IX (1148-1241), as did Pope Sixtus and Blessed Pope Innocent XI in the 16th century, and the Council of Trent. During the reign of Pius IX (1846-78), at least 5 decisions were handed down by the Holy See with regard to contraception. One of these specifically mentions that the practice is opposed to natural law, and authorizes confessors to question penitents if they have reason to suppose that contraception is being practiced. Thus the infallible doctrine in Casti Connubii of Pope Pius XI and in *Humanae Vitae *of Pope Paul VI – consistent and from the earliest times.
Real Catholics know that Natural Birth Regulation (NBR) may be used for grave, serious, reasons, thus rejecting the sin of Onan
H
Hans_W
Guest
This was a comment on the “infallible dogma” on contraception which the majority of Catholics simply ignore.
The following is taken from a 2012 report in the Washington Post washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/the-claim-that-98-percent-of-catholic-women-use-contraception-a-media-foul/2012/02/16/gIQAkPeqIR_blog.html
… The data listed in the Guttmacher report, meanwhile, referred to current contraceptive use among “sexually active women who are not pregnant, post-partum or trying to get pregnant.” That is a smaller universe of women, and it shows that 68 percent of Catholic women used what are termed “highly effective methods:” 32 percent sterilization; 31 percent pill; five percent IUD.
Again, only two percent currently used natural family planning. Interestingly, 11 percent used nothing, even though they were not trying to get pregnant. Four percent were placed in an “other” category, which mainly consisted of “withdrawal,” which is also not accepted by the Catholic Church as a birth-control method.
The data also indicated there were relatively few differences among women of different religions in terms of the contraception method that was used. Evangelicals appeared more likely to rely on sterilization, but almost no one used “natural” family planning.
Jones noted that there has long been data showing that Catholic women are avid users of artificial contraception. The first NSFG survey, which in 1973 was administered only to married women, shows that 66.4 percent of all married Catholic women of child-bearing age at the time used contraception. (Table 17). Among those using birth control, only 8.3 percent relied on rhythm; 2.9 percent relied on withdrawal.
The figures look plausible. The “dogma” is completely ignored.
Circumstances have changed. Consider infant mortality. For most of human history 30-40% of new-borns didn’t make it to their 1 birthday. In a first world country today more than 99% will survive their first year.
In the past people needed lots of children. They were an asset, they worked as soon as possible and later supported the older generations. Very different from today.
R
Rau
Guest
I refer you back to Post #392. Is the Church, in its teaching, merely a source of informed opinion? Surely that is the larger question.
A
Abu
Guest
God has created us to increase and multiply — through marriage, the sacrament of the New Law.
God has created the woman with fertile/infertile periods, and has NOT commanded that only the fertile periods be used in marriage.
**Answer by Fr.Stephen F. Torraco (EWTN) on July 24, 2007: **
“There can be no conflict between a well formed and correctly informed conscience and the Church’s Magisterium. A person who does not accept the Church’s teaching on contraception removes him or herself from communion with the Church.”
God has created the woman with fertile/infertile periods, and has NOT commanded that only the fertile periods be used in marriage.
**Answer by Fr.Stephen F. Torraco (EWTN) on July 24, 2007: **
“There can be no conflict between a well formed and correctly informed conscience and the Church’s Magisterium. A person who does not accept the Church’s teaching on contraception removes him or herself from communion with the Church.”
H
Hans_W
Guest
You have told us repeatedly what the Church teaches. We got that.
The question is what do you do if 68% of Catholics ignore or disregard it?
Let me give you another example. The Church doesn’t allow you to receive communion in a state of “mortal sin”. The church I go to has a fairly large congregation, about 4000 people every Sunday spread over four services. Virtually everybody receives communion. In more than 12 years I have never seen anybody going to confession, except during Holy Week. I can give you more examples.
R
Rau
Guest
The first thing to be done is to decide whether the Church teaches infallibly.
- Status