Why do most people ignore the Church's teaching on contraception?

[MomaMary8]

I think you’re right, Lifeisbeautiful. That’s how I’ve read Loumeland’s posts too. Several of his/her post state outright the he/she views some forms of artificial contraception as okay, starting way back with post #1.

Here we are at 916 and counting…
–Ooops. I’d better clarify what I mean by “916 and counting” . That refers to the number of posts so far on this thread. It’s not a brag about anyone’s family size, and I hope the comment won’t be taken as insult anyone with fewer than 916 children.

Back to my popcorn.

 

[ALoveDivine]

The fact of Onan being killed by God for spilling his seed puts paid to such gross error.

This is an example of considering an action and a consequence without any consideration for the context. Onan was called to provide a child for his departed brother through his widow, and deliberately chose not to do so. This was before the Mosaic law and its proscribed penalty for such an action. Onan disobeyed God and dishonored his brother, hence he was killed. To assume he was killed only for the action, without considering that context, is disingenuous.

If withdrawl in and of itself was such a terrible thing, it would be reasonable to assume that st Paul would have condemned it in 1 Corinthians, as he goes into detail about sexual immorality in that epistle. Paul’s silence is telling, given the prevalence of this practice in the ancient world.

Declaring that the only Church which Christ formed for our acceptance, the Catholic Church is in error, rejects Christ Himself through His Divine Love, throwing Him aside selfishly for personal error.

The Church is a lot bigger than the Roman Catholic Church, I would include the EO and the OO, and even the AOE, as all being parts of that One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. Where there is apostolic succession and the apostolic faith, with valid sacraments, there is the Church. Just because we don’t all share full communion at this moment in time does not make this any less true. Even the RCC does not any longer view these bodies as being in schism or heresy.

So if the RCC says contraception is intrinsically evil, but the rest of the apostolic Church does not, then here we find an issue of disagreement. Perhaps in the future, once full unity is achieved, this and other issues can be settled by a genuine ecumenical council.

The Church can NEVER, and has NEVER, been wrong in that teaching which is contained only in doctrine and dogma on faith or morals for the whole Church.

The use of torture was at one time, and for a long time, considered morally right and just if used for certain ends. Now the church explicitly condemns torture. This acceptance of torture as morally just extended up to the Popes, and was the case for centuries. Hence, the Church was wrong on an issue of morals.

Look pregnancy is a serious issue. It can lead to death in many cases. People in poverty having more kids than they can provide for is a very serious problem. Housing restrictions can put large families on the street. The economy is not organized to encourage or support large families. To top all that off typical use NFP has a failure rate of 25%. That is quite frankly too high given the seriousness of this issue. All manner of reason and common sense dictates that it is wise and just to take control of our fertility and plan our families lovingly and rationally, based on what is in our capacity to handle; while at the same time being 100% pro-life and avoiding any ‘micro-abortions’ that certain forms of contraception may cause. And the overwhelming majority of Catholics in the world agree with me on these issue.

You are all of course free to follow the Church teaching to the letter on this and I commend you for your struggle and sacrifice. But judge not lest you be judged.

 

[Thorolfr]

The fact of Onan being killed by God for spilling his seed puts paid to such gross error.

So how many people does God strike dead every day for spilling their seed? If He did, there would probably be millions being struck dead every day. Should all men make a decision about this issue based on one single ambiguous story that is only a few lines long from more than 2000 years ago?

 

[TMC]

Many of us just don’t honestly see anything particularly wrong with contraceptive options that do not result in the termination of an embryo. A medication that delays ovulation, or even withdrawl, harm no one at all. Spouses are not supposed to abstain for long periods of time, but to enjoy their sexuality together lovingly. St Paul does not encourage frequent and prolonged marital abstinence, he actually discourages it.

I think the church is wrong on this. Sorry, that’s how I feel. The Orthodox Church has the more reasonable position. Me and my fiance will likely use contraception, like the majority of other Catholic couples in the world. It is what it is. If it really is some intrinsically terrible thing, that hopefully God will be merciful.

That is certainly the conclusion reached by the vast majority of Christians. The answer to the OP’s question is that people don’t ignore the Church’s teaching, they just don’t agree with it.

 

[Rau]

So how many people does God strike dead every day for spilling their seed? If He did, there would probably be millions being struck dead every day. Should all men make a decision about this issue based on one single ambiguous story that is only a few lines long from more than 2000 years ago?

Which sins DOES God strike people dead for regularly?

 

[Xantippe]

Which sins DOES God strike people dead for regularly?

Gluttony.

 

[Xantippe]

(Apologies, as that was not in perfectly good taste–but I just could not help myself.)

 

[Rau]

That is certainly the conclusion reached by the vast majority of Christians. The answer to the OP’s question is that people don’t ignore the Church’s teaching, they just don’t agree with it.

A large number of people choose to contracept. That’s what we can say with confidence.

 

[Rau]

Gluttony.

. Not sure if that can be laid on God!

 

[Xantippe]

A large number of people choose to contracept. That’s what we can say with confidence.

Yes.

 

[LongingSoul]

So how many people does God strike dead every day for spilling their seed? If He did, there would probably be millions being struck dead every day. Should all men make a decision about this issue based on one single ambiguous story that is only a few lines long from more than 2000 years ago?

That’s the Old Testament conveying the fact of consequences for sin. So with the limits of knowledge and science man interprets the realities of sin as best he can. God struck people down and sent plagues as punishments for sin. With progress in knowledge and science we are capable of seeing the consequences of sin in a more humanistic way. For instance, there is study and debate around the issue of how the high level of artificial contraceptive hormones deposited back into the environment through human waste, affect the water and land we depend on for food production. The Old Testament may have recorded an event as God poisoning the land as a punishment for sin. We are aware of a more scientific relationship between sin and its consequences.

 

[Abu]

Thorolfr #925
So how many people does God strike dead every day for spilling their seed? If He did, there would probably be millions being struck dead every day. Should all men make a decision about this issue based on one single ambiguous story that is only a few lines long from more than 2000 years ago?
ALoveDivine #924
To assume he was killed only for the action, without considering that context, is disingenuous.

Such repetitive railing, repeating Thorolfr’s #874 rejection against Christ’s Church and the Protestant Reformers until the latter’s capitulation to expediency when contraception was accepted, shows the lack of faith in Christ.

There is nothing “ambiguous” or “disingenuous” about Onan’s action as realised by the Magisterium and the doyens of Catholicism. What is appalling is the posters’ monumental capacity to feel that they know more than Christ and His Church.

“In the fourth century **St. Augustine wrote, “Relations with one’s wife when conception is deliberately prevented are as unlawful and impure as the conduct of Onan who was slain.” **St. Thomas Aquinas, in the thirteenth century, taught clearly the constant doctrine of the Christian religion that birth-control is a grave sin. He writes, “Next to murder, by which an actually existent human being is destroyed, we rank this sin by which the generation of a human being is prevented.” Contra Gent., Bk. III., c. 122. It is not a new law by any means.”
radioreplies.info/radio-r…ol-1.php?t=111

rtforum.org/lt/lt67.html
“That Onan’s unnatural act as such is condemned as sinful in Gen. 38: 9-10 was an interpretation held by the Fathers and Doctors of the Catholic Church, by the Protestant Reformers, and by nearly all celibate and married theologians of all Christian denominations until the early years of this century, when some exegetes began to approach the text with preconceptions deriving from the sexual decadence of modern Western culture and its exaggerated concern for ‘over-population.’ ” [Pope Pius XI, *Encyclical on Christian Marriage, *Casti Connubii *(31 December 1930)].

The revered Fr John A Hardon, S.J. in Modern Catholic Dictionary:
CONTRACEPTION. Deliberate interference with marital intercourse in order to prevent conception. It is the performance of the marriage act with the positive frustration of conception.** Also called conjugal onanism, from the sin of Onan, referred to in the Bible (Genesis 38:8-10);
**therealpresence.org/cgi-bin/getdefinition.pl
[My emphases].

 

[Abu]

ALoveDivine #924
So if the RCC says contraception is intrinsically evil, but the rest of the apostolic Church does not, then here we find an issue of disagreement. Perhaps in the future, once full unity is achieved, this and other issues can be settled by a genuine ecumenical council.

There is no other “apostolic Church”. How extraordinary for a Catholic to be so misinformed and unwilling to listen to the Magisterium! It’s not what anyone “says”, the scope of which is gargantuous, it is what the Catholic Church teaches that needs to be known, understood and retained by real Catholics.

Here is Vatican II, Lumen Gentium (Dogmatic Constitution on the Church) #8:
‘This is the one Church of Christ which in the Creed is professed as one, holy, catholic and apostolic, (12) which our Saviour, after His Resurrection, commissioned Peter to shepherd,(74) and him and the other apostles to extend and direct with authority,(75) which He erected for all ages as “the pillar and mainstay of the truth”.(76) This Church constituted and organized in the world as a society, subsists in the Catholic Church, which is governed by the successor of Peter and by the Bishops in communion with him,(13) although many elements of sanctification and of truth are found outside of its visible structure. These elements, as gifts belonging to the Church of Christ, are forces impelling toward catholic unity.’
vatican.va/archive/hist_c…entium_en.html

The Pope never apologises for the Church which is ‘held, as a matter of faith, to be unfailingly holy’ ” [Vatican II, *Lumen Gentium, art 39].Therefore Popes have apologised for the sins of Catholics, never for ‘the Church’

Real Catholics assent to all the doctrines of Christ’s Church, and take the trouble to learn Her teaching.

The use of torture was at one time, and for a long time, considered morally right and just if used for certain ends. Now the church explicitly condemns torture. This acceptance of torture as morally just extended up to the Popes, and was the case for centuries. Hence, the Church was wrong on an issue of morals.

Totally false, again. See Vatican II, Lumen Gentium, art 39, above.

“Under Roman Law the slave was a chattel with no more rights than an animal. His master might seduce, mutilate, torture or kill him without any interference by the law.” [Sir Arnold Lunn, *Is The Catholic Church Anti-Social?, Burns & Oates 1946, p 186, 188].

The Church revolutionised the status of the slave long before there could be any thought of abolishing slavery. The inalienable rights of the slave to marriage and then family were safeguarded from the first by the precepts of the Church, and were later secured by legal enactment in the Theodosian code, which was later revised and classified by Justinian (A.D. 527-565). The law followed where the Church had led. The granting of religious equality to slaves was a silent but tremendous revolution – emancipated slaves were often raised to the priesthood and even to the very Chair of St Peter, Pius I and Callistus I in the second and third centuries. (Ibid. p 187).
[See *The Victory of Reason, Rodney Stark, Random House, 2005, p 30].

In *First Things *(November 1997), Harvard Law Professor Mary Ann Glendon wrote that “the Pope himself has acknowledged the mistakes and sins of Christians in connection with, among other things, the Crusades, the Inquisition, persecution of the Jews, religious wars, Galileo, and the treatment of women. Thus, though the Pope himself is careful to speak of sin or error on the part of the Church’s members or representatives, rather than the Church in its fullness, that important theological distinction is almost always lost in the transmission.” [My emphasis].

Some have a lot to learn about the Church – She is never “wrong on an issue of morals”, nor on faith, in Her doctrine or dogma.

 

[ALoveDivine]

Honestly no matter what anyone says, the overwhelming majority of Christians world-wide are going to use contraception, for the simple reason that having kids you can’t handle having is a very serious problem. The overwhelming consensus of the faithful is that non-abortive contraception is often-times necessary in the real world conditions in which we as lay-people find ourselves.

The opinion of a minority of celibate men is not going to change the fundamental conviction of the overwhelming majority of married Christians on this issue. Which is likely why priests hardly ever talk about this topic, it’s as futile as ordering a dog to speak English.

 

[Rau]

…The overwhelming consensus of the faithful is that non-abortive contraception is often-times necessary in the real world conditions in which we as lay-people find ourselves.

“Faithful”? To what?

The opinion of a minority of celibate men is not going to change the fundamental conviction of the overwhelming majority of married Christians on this issue. Which is likely why priests hardly ever talk about this topic, it’s as futile as ordering a dog to speak English.

Why trust those men on any matter of faith and morals at all? Why trust the Scriptures at all?

 

[whm]

Many of us just don’t honestly see anything particularly wrong with contraceptive options that do not result in the termination of an embryo. A medication that delays ovulation, or even withdrawl, harm no one at all. Spouses are not supposed to abstain for long periods of time, but to enjoy their sexuality together lovingly. St Paul does not encourage frequent and prolonged marital abstinence, he actually discourages it.

I think the church is wrong on this. Sorry, that’s how I feel. The Orthodox Church has the more reasonable position. Me and my fiance will likely use contraception, like the majority of other Catholic couples in the world. It is what it is. If it really is some intrinsically terrible thing, that hopefully God will be merciful.

St. Paul first says it is better to be celibate like he is. He then acknowledges that not all can do that and for them it is better to get married. With respect to the partial quote from St. Paul above, he continues “as to not fall into sexual sin” He never said to enjoy sexuality together loving. You put that in there and is highly misleading.

As for the last part, God is merciful if we accept it. I am very thankful for that because I am very much in need of His mercy. I can tell you this, it is very dangerous game to say, I am going to do this sinful thing for a while and come back and correct it later. That seems to be what you meant with your last sentence.

 

[rotlex]

“Faithful”? To what?

Why trust those men on any matter of faith and morals at all? Why trust the Scriptures at all?

Honestly? This isn’t meant as a dig at the post or the Church; but trusting certain aspects of morality to men that have hidden and committed far worse things than contracepting with their spouse is a lot for some people to deal with.

Also, I’m sorry, but the Church, and most religions in general, have been anti sex since the dawn of time unless it is solely for procreative purposes. The opinions of, as another poster stated, these celibate men on such matters is not something most people are going to trust.

Lastly, and I posted this much much earlier, I’ve been told by my own priest and other religious numerous times over the years that non abortive contraceptive types within the confines of marriage are fine. Especially if you have been open to having children in the past. No, I am not saying this is Church teaching, but when you have clergy out there believing and saying these things, how do you expect the common lay person to think differently?

 

[MomaMary8]

Honestly no matter what anyone says, the overwhelming majority of Christians world-wide are going to use contraception, for the simple reason that having kids you can’t handle having is a very serious problem. The overwhelming consensus of the faithful is that non-abortive contraception is often-times necessary in the real world conditions in which we as lay-people find ourselves.

The opinion of a minority of celibate men is not going to change the fundamental conviction of the overwhelming majority of married Christians on this issue. Which is likely why priests hardly ever talk about this topic, it’s as futile as ordering a dog to speak English.

Our Catholic Faith is not a matter of consensus nor opinion. What has lead you to believe this?

I’ve questioned your readiness for marriage already, and I am doing so again. If you do not think you can control your sexual urges while married, you are not ready. Your fiancé deserves more from you. In this thread you have already tried to blame her for the use of artificial contraception in your future marriage and tried to put the decision/blame on her. This is not the actions of a man ready to give himself to a woman in a sacramental marriage.

How much marriage prep have you done? What Catholic books have you read to prepare yourself? May I recommend some reading?

Men, Women, and the Mystery of Love by Edward Sri

Three To Get Married by Fulton Sheen

Love and Responsibility by Karol Wojtyla

Edward Sri’s book breaks down Karol Wojtyla’s book in a much easier manner. I recommend it if you do not have the time to devote to Wojtyla’s book, but both are excellent. I suggest you bring these reading choices to your fiancé and begin reading them together. Perhaps you could create a marriage prep-book club with other young couples who are struggling to live and understand the teaching of the church in a society that preaches and teaches the opposite.

 

[MomaMary8]

Honestly? This isn’t meant as a dig at the post or the Church; but trusting certain aspects of morality to men that have hidden and committed far worse things than contracepting with their spouse is a lot for some people to deal with.

Also, I’m sorry, but the Church, and most religions in general, have been anti sex since the dawn of time unless it is solely for procreative purposes. The opinions of, as another poster stated, these celibate men on such matters is not something most people are going to trust.

Lastly, and I posted this much much earlier, I’ve been told by my own priest and other religious numerous times over the years that non abortive contraceptive types within the confines of marriage are fine. Especially if you have been open to having children in the past. No, I am not saying this is Church teaching, but when you have clergy out there believing and saying these things, how do you expect the common lay person to think differently?

This is the year of Mercy. Instruct the Ignorant! . Have you given your priest(s) who are so poorly formed reading to help teach them? We are all humans and subject to the fallen world. Seminaries have not always been the bastion of High Moral Catholic teaching. The seminaries are cleaning up their act, but sadly, many priests fell victim to poor theology along with the faithful. Those who are blessed with better formation have a duty to pass it on to others. Sometimes priests need loving guidance as well. Don’t beat them over the head but a dinner conversation with enlightening topics or the sharing of a good book are easy ways to open doors of faith to anyone.

 

[whm]

Also, I’m sorry, but the Church, and most religions in general, have been anti sex since the dawn of time unless it is solely for procreative purposes. The opinions of, as another poster stated, these celibate men on such matters is not something most people are going to trust.

One big problem is that people seem to lose sight of what sex is. Sex from a biological standpoint is the body’s attempt to unit a sperm with an egg. Every time, whether married or not, two males, two females, masturbation etc., body is trying to unit a sperm with an egg. Even if there is no egg or sperm, the body’s actions are still to try and accomplish this. It can also be other things like bonding between spouses, however that clearly is not every time (e.g. no spouse to bond with during masturbation). Also, the bonding of spouses is also ordered towards the creation and support of the potential off-spring of the attempt of the bodies to create new life. This is not religious, it is just a fact. But if you keep this in mind as a foundation, the Church teachings are much easier to understand and make perfect sense. The problem is society in general ignores this biological fact.

Note no where did I say you have to try to create a child to have sex with your spouse.