S
SAVINGRACE
Guest
mmm if only he founded a Church that has the authority to define doctrine.
Why do most people ignore the Church's teaching on contraception?
- Status
A
Abu
Guest
PARABLE. A short story based on a familiar life experience used to teach a spiritual lesson. It resembles the fable and the allegory. Jesus used the parable many times in his public ministry. “Why do you teach them in parables?” his disciples asked him. “Because,” he replied, “the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven are revealed to you, but they are not revealed to them” (Matthew 13:10-I1). It was a means of teaching his doctrine especially to those who accepted him as Messiah. (Etym. Greek parabolē, comparison, parable; literally, a throwing beside, juxtaposition.) [My emphasis].
Modern Catholic Dictionary
by Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J.
therealpresence.org/cgi-bin/getdefinition.pl
All that we need has been given by Christ to His Church so that when the need arises, as with the dogmas of the Assumption and Papal Infallibility, Catholics can be certain of the truths.
L
LongingSoul
Guest
I was wondering if seeing the issue of nfp discussed on online Catholic forums might have affected your outlook because I know that myself, prior to this internet forum, I never really thought too much about the negatives of doing nfp. I guess we just had an ‘it is what it is’ attitude towards it. We didn’t seem to mind the predictability aspect at all or taking an even more conservative approach when we got into our 40’s.
I do think though that there is an enormous difference in living a marriage without contraception and living one with it.and that’s where I think the majority of angst originates for people who have experienced a contracepting sex life and then adopt nfp. It’s not just a matter of practical differences. It means changing your whole relationship dynamic to accommodate abstinence as part of the overall sexuality. I really think it would help people a whole lot more to experience the natural and divine purpose of living in accord with the patterns of the human body with discipline as part of adopting nfp.
M
Memaw
Guest
A niece of my friend started taking the “pill” when she married at age 21 and 6 months later died of a heart attack. I was in the hospital with a day that had a blood clot for the pill and she was madder than heck cuz her Dr. said she could never take the pill again. Closer to home my sister had a stroke at age 42 after being on the pill for 14 years. Nothing we said to her could talk her out of taking it before.I bet just about everyone knows of someone who had problems, I know many others also. I agree with you 100% God Bless, Memaw
L
loumeland
Guest
Just out of curiosity (and given my tendency to think outside the box), what if the Pope **infallibly **declares that excathedra statements are only to be promulgated within the context of collegiality?
U
Usige
Guest
I’ve seen this sentiment of “impossibility” raised on several occasions.What makes you think it’s impossible for so many when it is possible for some?
Really for the first 1900 years of Church history contraceptives were relatively difficult to obtain. They have been around in one form or the other for at least 3500-4000 years, but it has only been in the last 60-80 years that they have been fairly common at the local drugstore. Heck until maybe the mid-80s all contraceptives were kept behind the pharmacy counter even if they didn’t require a prescription.
I seriously doubt that humans desires have changed much in the last 10,000 years. So if mankind’s sexual desires have not changed it has either been impossible for us to live God’s plan for 10,000+ years or something has changed since the widespread availability of contraceptives.
We know that God does not change, so it wasn’t Him that all the sudden made it nearly impossible to follow His will. Given that, it is us that have changed. Instead of accepting that children are the natural part of marriage and sexual congress, we have tried to change the rules and completely divorce the two. It’s a little like a child that tries to ignore rules of a game and then petulantly cries foul when things don’t work the way they want.
It seems that it was possible for married people to accept the teaching since the time of Christ and society’s embracing contraceptives did not change the rules, but made it easier to try cheating. The issue I think many will find is that God knows the cheater and will ask for an account at the judgement.
As far as I can tell we have been expected to follow the same rules from time immemorial. The only thing that makes it nearly impossible is that we now have the hubris to tell God that we, and not He, are the authors of our lives. It is us that should dictate morality, rather than Him. Contraception is only one part of the larger issue that people only want to follow Him if the way is easy. This was true in the time of Christ and is true to this day. The way is narrow, not because of God, but because people refuse to put aside their own desires and willingly embrace their cross and sacrifice. To paraphrase Archbishop Fulton Sheen: we are all willing to pickup a cross of our own choosing.
U
Usige
Guest
I’d say that papal infallibility would mean nothing then. It basically says that infallibility is contingent on majority rule. It seems too much like setting up a legislature with two branches where the Pope is the executive and either signs or veto’s excathedra statements, and the college of cardinals and all bishops are the legislative branch who would put forth excathedra statements for approval. Would you also see excathedra statements being subject to a super majority override? If the Pope “vetoed” something from the college could they override him with 2/3 vote. That seems to be what some think should have happened before the promulgation of Humanae Vitae.
Okay, my point is that Christ left the successor of Peter as the arbiter of disputes in the Church. The Pope is supposed to be the hand that guides the Church when she starts going astray. Papal Infallibility is a gift from God to safe guard the Church from stampeding over the cliff. If you yoke that gift to the rest of the college, then you are simply saying that infallibility belongs to a majority vote. You might as well do away with the papacy if you do not think that Christ placed the Church in the hands of Peter and his successors.
B
Burt_Macklin
Guest
Look at it another way. Everybody lies from time to time. In fact I’m sure that it is impossible to go your entire life without telling a lie. That doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t strive to be truthful though.
B
Burt_Macklin
Guest
It isn’t as if mankind has been following God’s plan for our sexuality for the past 10,000 plus years. It’s always been “impossible” to follow.
M
marymary1975
Guest
I don’t.think.is.so much that is impossible, I think is.lack of.support for.people that do not fit the mold, lack.of.support for.people struggling with it, lack of.pro activism in our side and surrounding circumstances that makes things more.difficult for people.
I personally don’t like the argument of how it used to be done.in the past because truth is, in the past people would have 10.to 12.children so out of those 5 will survive. Child mortality was extremely high, the women.Will stay home.taking care of the children with the help of other children, usually you had the farm.lifestyle in which the whole family will work on the farm and they would eat home.grown food, add to that that you could live on one income. So most people will.quickly disregard that argument based on that society has given a huge change.
However what we can absolutely do.as a whole is provide better support for people who are struggling with the circumstances.
U
Usige
Guest
I’d agree with you to a point. While it might have always been difficult, I think more people simply followed his plan for lack of options. I doubt that people in the 4th century were petitioning Constantine for free access to siliphium (an early contraceptive plant) as their right. I would say it is only in the modern era that the majority of people see sex and children as only tangentially related.
B
Burt_Macklin
Guest
Well no but they were not abstaining from sex within marriage either. It was accepted that you took the children that God sent you or died in the process.
P
PaulinVA
Guest
That is not a good analogy. If you hang out here for any amount of time, which I know you do, you will meet a lot of people who followed an NFP method to the letter and had many more children then they expected. To me, that’s the start. Add in the couples who couldn’t even attempt it, and you certainly approach impossible.
P
PaulinVA
Guest
Interesting question. No, I don’t think so. I would chalk it up to age and experience. AS I’ve said, we used NFP to achieve pregnancy and to avoid pregnancy, so we are a “success” story. But, cycles were predictable and we were willing to have very few days a month where relations were possible.
I think the use of NFPis certainly more “natural” in terms of the act and of the relationship, but it’s also incredibly unnatural as well, putting relations on a schedule.
U
Usige
Guest
I am not saying that how it was done in the past is better or worse. I am simply saying that God exists in past, present and future and He did not lay out moral laws that only worked in the pre-modern era. What I reject is this though that somehow “advances” in science and society change God plan. No one is forced to live in high cost areas or spend 100s of thousands on college educations. Those are choices we make. What I am talking about is in the past people accepted that certain things in life we just natural. The vast majority of rural farmers weren’t thinking, “how can I have sex 20 times a month and never have a kid.” They likely accepted that sex leads to kids at some time. it is only in the modern era that we expend significant resources to say I want all the “good” and won’t accept any trade offs.
I completely understand, but I’ll tell you in 7 years of teaching NFP, the vast majority of medical professionals (including catholic ones) want nothing to do with NFP. They are trained in school that the best solution is medication. Even at that, when my wife and I would refer people to doctors, nutritionist, etc that knew about fertility and NFP, people would ignore us and go to “their doctor” because the professionals we referred them to were too far away, or not on their insurance, or had a funny name, or 100 other reasons. Inevitably their doctor’s solution was birth control pills or tubal ligation.
I know you mentioned in the past that many NFP instructors have no medical training. That is true in many cases, but don’t be fooled that having an MD after your name makes you more knowledgeable about fertility. My wife has had to explain to more than one doctor about the function of G, L, P and S mucus, Z granules, and other basic parts of the role of mucus in the fertility cycle. My wife made it through the first semester of her nursing degree, yet has a better grasp of the function of human fertility than most MDs. Despite not being a doctor she has helped some women achieve pregnancy by suggestions on changes of diet that doctors never even though of. That being said she knows enough to refer people when things go beyond where she can help. She can identify common sets of problems, but once you go beyond that she will refer to a doctor (who most women ignore).
Here is the real problem when someone falls outside of the norm. Almost all medicine starts from observing symptoms and deducing what is going on based on those symptoms. That is the same thing that happens in NFP; based on the general population, these signs mean X. When those symptoms fall outside a range of norms the only way to truly know what is going on is direct testing. This means tests like hormonal assays. Unfortunately most insurance companies will not pay for these tests. In many cases people opt for taking a free BC pill since it is cheaper than finding out why the deviate from the norm.
As far as ministries of support, I have zero problem with that. But it has to be understood that the Church cannot do everything. People also have to be willing to do something. While not a huge fan of how Doctor Hilgers used some of the work of the Drs Billings without permission, Creighton University does offer services for those outside the norm that are willing to seek them out. How far is the Church required to go to make those services available on every corner though?
You mentioned doing something at your parish and no one being interested. That is the same response I have had. We offered free introductions to NFP (“NFP Church Teachings and the science behind it”) for 2 or 3 years during NFP awareness week. We had 3 people the first year and only the people offering babysitting the last time we offered it. So rather than talking about it at the parish level it might need to be done at the deanery or diocesan level. A parish might not have the resources, but there might be enough in a cluster to support more efforts. Before I started diagonal formation we were working on trying to establish collectives at the deanery level (6 - 10 parishes) through the diocesan office of marriage and family life. If you have concrete suggestions on what you think is lacking then I’d be happy to hear them. Remember that just saying offer assistance for clear blue easy only applies to those that use Marquette, so it should go beyond simply focusing on our favorite method. Also remember that we cannot force doctors to participate so mere nurses and layman might be the only choice so do not so limit your suggestions to only help 1 percent of people that most need it.
M
MarkInOregon
Guest
I not sure that I would classify not being able to engage in the marital embrace because of a serious need not to have children–“suffering”. Yes–we have sexual urges but because we are human we have the ability to control those urges–the ability to control our response to those urges. I think this idea of reaching a “limit” is a fairly modern western idea. For most of history people just didn’t think like this–intercourse and babies went together–it was a part of the natural process and you accepted what happened without all the anguish that seems to come along today–it was just a part of life. If there was anguish it was often over infertility rather than fertility.
This idea that contraception makes things so much better is just false. Take a look around at all the couples using contraception who are still unhappy. Contraception sets up the false expectation that we can have sex whenever we want – yet life doesn’t always put the spouses on the same page regarding this–and when there is no other reason than --your spouse is not in the mood tonight–well that just leads to more hurt feelings because one spouses needs are not being met and well the other spouse must not love me anymore because they don’t want to be intimate. If contraception is so good for marriages–why is there so much dissatisfaction, adultery and divorce?
In the earliest days of our marriage we used contraception–this was before we began Bible study, stared to learn our faith and then began to try and actually live our faith–and it was not better when we used contraception. We were not happier when we used contraception. We were not intimate in that way more often when we used contraception. And finally–we would not have three of the children we have now–children who’s conception–I am ashamed to admit–we did not welcome with joyful hearts, but children I cannot imagine life without and from whom God has taught us so much.
What sets us up to fail is accepting the secular Wests idea’s regarding sex, the secular Wests idea that life is all about us and our fulfillment–it is the secular Wests inward focus, the focus on ourselves rather than on others–that is what sets us up for failure. I find that when I am unhappy, when I am unsatisfied, when I find myself tending toward depression–it’s because I have become too focused on what I want and what I don’t have. Christ came to set us free from that–to show us a better way to live–a way that leads to joy. It doesn’t just sound great–it is how the earliest Christians lived–amidst great persecution.
The peace of Christ,
Mark
M
Memaw
Guest
Your right, it all depends on wither we want to go to Heaven or Hell on our judgment day. God Bless, Memaw
M
marymary1975
Guest
Oh I agree with your point but what I mean is that it is not.a good point to bring up to Catholics that disagree with the teaching of the Catholic.church because what you will.get back is that women were dying in the past, that the church is.mysongist, that women are disposable in.the church and all that rhetoric. Remember that precisely that idea was Manrget Sanger`s war horse, that women were dying because the church controlled people to think that sex inevitably lead to.children and you couldn’t do.anything about it, and she used the poverty and bad conditions.argument and she was extremely successful with that backlash. So at least in my experience trying to defend the position of the church, it is a very bad idea to bring up the how was in the past argument.
M
marymary1975
Guest
I have also noticed that in the U.S. most doctors are in complete opposition to NFP but there has to be some that have a different view, that is why what we did in my previous pro life group was to hunt down older doctors who were trained with an old fashion mentality to get them connected with people and invite them to the trainings to talk. Now as you say it becomes.more difficult now a days because there are less everyday and I imagine that when you refer people will complain that they are too far away etc. I think that is one.problem that we face because the more time passes the more opposition you find interesting he medical field. On that particular point that is where I think that the church at a higher level needs to try to start funding research or to become.more proactive into interacting with the medical field. Unfortunately I don’t know at local.levels how we can contribute to.that besides telling our priests that we need a little.more action otherwise it will become.worst.
The insurance point you brought up is true. In fact that is the reason.why I had the idea of Marquette. Most people, including in the area of.medicine, that seem reluctant to NFP that I know have a tendency to think Marquette is the most effective. I have had people tell me they would love to use.Marquette but it is too expensive and they don’t have the money while birth control.pills are covered by insurance or.given for free at planned parenthood so obviously they go to planned parenthood because is the one giving them access to services for free. It wasn’t that much because I thought is the only method but it was because is the one that people seem.more.ok.to work with but the complain is the price.
M
Memaw
Guest
My brother and sister-in-law were using NFP and later she got pregnant and he was sooo mad and blamed the Church and went on and on about it. Well later my sister-in-law told me that he insisted on sex when it was not a safe time and then blamed her, then the Church for it. He badmouthed NFP from then on. Can’t always take someones word for the failure! After that baby was born, he insisted she have her tubes tied! God Bless, Memaw
- Status