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

[PaulinVA]

So if we think as the world thinks, the teaching will not make sense. The eyes and ears of faith are required, as with anything else. If we are not docile to the teaching, how can it enter our hearts and minds?

BINGO! You’ve just admitted that the teaching doesn’t 'make sense to the people we are trying to evangelize, whether they are Catholics or not. That’s the problem.

The Church’s moral credibility is not based on the merit, talents, and relative virtues of Christians, it is based on Christ himself.

Uhm, no. When Bishop this or Cardinal that makes some pronouncement on sexual morality, the priest abuse scandal is brought up and whatever point they are trying to make is lost.

If you are trying to evangelize a position (contraception is wrong), you have to do it from a position of moral authority and your arguments need to be such that someone who doesn’t believe all of the other doctrine finds the argument compelling. If not, you have lost.

 

[clem456]

BINGO! You’ve just admitted that the teaching doesn’t 'make sense to the people we are trying to evangelize, whether they are Catholics or not. That’s the problem.

Uhm, no. When Bishop this or Cardinal that makes some pronouncement on sexual morality, the priest abuse scandal is brought up and whatever point they are trying to make is lost.

If you are trying to evangelize a position (contraception is wrong), you have to do it from a position of moral authority and your arguments need to be such that someone who doesn’t believe all of the other doctrine finds the argument compelling. If not, you have lost.

The teaching is compelling, even from a natural law standpoint.

But Christians first have to know the teaching, and know how to express it, and of course have the courage and virtue to live it.

For starters, we have to stop dismissing eminently reasonable teaching because people find them difficult to live. Most all of the Christian gospel has been dismissed from the very beginning, not because it runs counter to sound reason, but because it runs counter to worldly desire.

TOB can be intimidating.
The Symbolon series is a more condensed series of presentations of the Catholic faith.
I think Edward Sri produces that. Very clear and concise well reasoned. Can appeal to anyone with an open mind.

 

[Thorolfr]

For starters, we have to stop dismissing eminently reasonable teaching because people find them difficult to live. Most all of the Christian gospel has been dismissed from the very beginning, not because it runs counter to sound reason, but because it runs counter to worldly desire.

It’s always much easier to believe something if it doesn’t affect you in an especially negative way.

For example, it’s easy for someone to say that divorce is wrong if they have a happy marriage. But if it turns out that your spouse is abusive, cheats on you, leaves you, and divorces you, but you are then told that you are still married to this person in the eyes of the Church, it might be more difficult to believe that marriage is until death do you part, especially if you can’t get an annulment and you were not personally at fault. Who would want to remain married for the rest of their life to an abusive philanderer?

 

[clem456]

It’s always much easier to believe something if it doesn’t affect you in an especially negative way.

For example, it’s easy for someone to say that divorce is wrong if they have a happy marriage. But if it turns out that your spouse is abusive, cheats on you, leaves you, and divorces you, but you are then told that you are still married to this person in the eyes of the Church, it might be more difficult to believe that marriage is until death do you part, especially if you can’t get an annulment. Who would want to remain married for the rest of their life to an abusive philanderer?

Trust me I know what you are talking about as I have broken every commandment in my life. without exception.
The Church’s teaching can be really difficult to accept.
I wouldn’t pretend to have an answer to your abuse/divorce scenario as I don’t have that issue. But I have relatives , and it is agonizing for them to be cast aside and then try to rebuild their spiritual lives in a Church community. Many times our parishes reflect the rules very efficiently, but not the end of the rules, which is a place in a loving community.
At the end of every moral imperative or exhortation by the Church is God’s love.

In my experience, Church teaching is the salve that brings healing. And I don’t mean just the rules about abortion, or divorce, for instance.
I’m referring to the truth of Christianity that all of this talk about morality is for our good, and is an expression of God’s love for us.

 

[PaulinVA]

It’s always much easier to believe something if it doesn’t affect you in an especially negative way.

For example, it’s easy for someone to say that divorce is wrong if they have a happy marriage. But if it turns out that your spouse is abusive, cheats on you, leaves you, and divorces you, but you are then told that you are still married to this person in the eyes of the Church, it might be more difficult to believe that marriage is until death do you part, especially if you can’t get an annulment and you were not personally at fault. Who would want to remain married for the rest of their life to an abusive philanderer?

Actually, I find the teaching on divorce concise, easy to understand and clearly defined by God.

God said we were created to join together, man leaving his family, etc. Then Jesus said that once joined, it’s for life. That is easy to understand. It stands alone. They are the “red letter words” of Jesus. So, choose wisely.

 

[jschwartz]

Procreation isn’t the only purpose of sexual relations between a married couple. The bible speaks positively of sex in several places, most notably the Song of Solomon.,

 

[Rau]

That’s a short sighted view. All people should follow the Church’s teaching. They should find it attractive and want to convert. If they are Catholic they should want to follow it.

Unfortunately, the teachings frequently require that you accept certain underpinnings that don’t make sense. People can’t buy the Church’s teaching on contraception unless they buy a whole lot of other Church concepts about sex. When you add to that the fact that the Church’s actions in the past four decades have removed it world-wide from having any credibility to talk about sexual morality, you find yourself where we are now.

In the old days, perhaps a rabbi would have said, “have you not heard what God did to Onan…”. And on SSM, “have you not heard that from the beginning…”. He’s saying “open your eyes”. I think there is s willfulness in man to
Close his eyes, to look elsewhere.

Did Christ make “sense” when he told the rich man to sell everything?

 

[Rau]

Actually, I find the teaching on divorce concise, easy to understand and clearly defined by God.

God said we were created to join together, man leaving his family, etc. Then Jesus said that once joined, it’s for life. That is easy to understand. It stands alone. They are the “red letter words” of Jesus. So, choose wisely.

You contradict your earlier thesis that everyone should want to follow the Church because teaching would all be “reasonable” and readily grasped. Not everyone believes there is a God, let alone that Christ is God. Red letter words, attributed by the Church to that person, are accepted by faith, not necessarily by “reason”.

 

[Rau]

Procreation isn’t the only purpose of sexual relations between a married couple. The bible speaks positively of sex in several places, most notably the Song of Solomon.,

Correct, but all its fruits are bound together by design.

 

[clem456]

Procreation isn’t the only purpose of sexual relations between a married couple. The bible speaks positively of sex in several places, most notably the Song of Solomon.,

That’s true.

 

[PaulinVA]

You contradict your earlier thesis that everyone should want to follow the Church because teaching would all be “reasonable” and readily grasped. Not everyone believes there is a God, let alone that Christ is God. Red letter words, attributed by the Church to that person, are accepted by faith, not necessarily by “reason”.

Well, I’m saying that the Church teaching is easily understood in the case of divorce. It’s a simple, “God said so”.

For contraception, that is not true. God did not opine on contraception. Onan’s story is not straightforward. And, frankly, if you use Onan as a tale against contraception, you can’t use the same story to say that mastrubation is wrong.

 

[Rau]

Well, I’m saying that the Church teaching is easily understood in the case of divorce. It’s a simple, “God said so”.

Don’t talk with many atheist’s do you?

For contraception, that is not true. God did not opine on contraception. Onan’s story is not straightforward. And, frankly, if you use Onan as a tale against contraception, you can’t use the same story to say that mastrubation is wrong.

God gave teaching authority to the Church. “God (Christ) said so.” It is simple to see what follows and requires the same faith required to accept that God said marriage is for life.

Masturbation and contraception are sins having the same moral species. So your last sentence is not right.

 

[LongingSoul]

Well, I’m saying that the Church teaching is easily understood in the case of divorce. It’s a simple, “God said so”.

For contraception, that is not true. God did not opine on contraception. Onan’s story is not straightforward. And, frankly, if you use Onan as a tale against contraception, you can’t use the same story to say that mastrubation is wrong.

There are lots of laws not directly commanded by God but are determined by reason and the natural law. The Church has a long tradition of respecting reason and mature conscience as ordained teachers of Gods will. Through anthropological means we know that human fertility has always been a constant aspect of man that is related to his relationship with the First Creator. Fertility has been given so much importance to the meaning of life that there were even deities and totems related to it. It was esteemed and life was built around the cycles and seasons that influenced it.

The fact that the Church sees contraception as a grave intrinsic evil, is a reflection of that essential relationship between God, nature and man. Fertility will always be a symbol of the benevolence of God the Creator so the Church would be literally meaningless if she endorsed separating intercourse from the natural cycles and seasons of human fertility.

 

[PaulinVA]

Don’t talk with many atheist’s do you?

I said understood, not believed. It’s easy to understand, “God said so”. We are not taking any jumps in logic. We are not unpacking statements made in hundreds of papal audiences. We are simply stating what we are saying are God’s actual words.

It’s much harder to concisely state the Church’s position on contraception so that it can be understood.

 

[1990Domer]

Buffet Catholic?

I am so sorry, but I have been trying to make it through this thread and I nearly fell off the couch laughing. Trust me, this is not meant as an insult to anyone. The mental imagine of our local grocery’s store buffet dinner immediate hit me.

 

[Rau]

I said understood, not believed. It’s easy to understand, “God said so”. We are not taking any jumps in logic. We are not unpacking statements made in hundreds of papal audiences. We are simply stating what we are saying are God’s actual words.

It’s much harder to concisely state the Church’s position on contraception so that it can be understood.

I understand your point. Though how much difference - in understandability, as opposed to believability - is there between:

• Divorce is wrong because God said so; and
• Contraception is wrong because God’s infallible Church said so?

 

[LongingSoul]

I said understood, not believed. It’s easy to understand, “God said so”. We are not taking any jumps in logic. We are not unpacking statements made in hundreds of papal audiences. We are simply stating what we are saying are God’s actual words.

It’s much harder to concisely state the Church’s position on contraception so that it can be understood.

Understanding is one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit sealed in us by confirmation. As a gift, it implies some effort on the part of a hearer of teaching to develop a skill through prayer and reception of the sacraments.

 

[PaulinVA]

I understand your point. Though how much difference - in understandability, as opposed to believability - is there between:

• Divorce is wrong because God said so; and
• Contraception is wrong because God’s infallible Church said so?

God is believable to an awful lot of people. They understand it’s what He said.

People understand what the Church is saying and that the Church is saying it. God’s infallible Church has lost a lot if not all of it’s moral authority in the past 50 years to make pronouncements about anything.

longing soul said:

Understanding is one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit sealed in us by confirmation. As a gift, it implies some effort on the part of a hearer of teaching to develop a skill through prayer and reception of the sacraments.

That requires effort on the part of people who don’t want to expend the effort. Catholics who use contraception aren’t necessarily looking to be swayed away from it.

 

[Thorolfr]

Well, I’m saying that the Church teaching is easily understood in the case of divorce. It’s a simple, “God said so”.

God supposedly said other things that are little bit hard to swallow. For example, according to 1 Samuel 15:2-3:

Thus says the Lord of hosts, ‘I will punish the Amalekites for what they did in opposing the Israelites when they came up out of Egypt. Now go and attack Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have; do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’”

Now what sins did the children and infants commit to merit being put to death and why would God command that the oxen, sheep, camels and donkeys be killed? This and other examples are why I don’t believe that all Scripture is inerrant. In my opinion, many things in Scripture should be taken with a grain of salt and I’m always skeptical of rules that have no exceptions ever regardless of the circumstances.

 

[LongingSoul]

Now what sins did the children and infants commit to merit being put to death and why would God command that the oxen, sheep, camels and donkeys be killed? This and other examples are why I don’t believe that all Scripture is inerrant. In my opinion, many things in Scripture should be taken with a grain of salt and I’m always skeptical of rules that have no exceptions ever regardless of the circumstances.

Because of the ever evolving awareness and understanding of mankind, Gods word through scripture has to be read in the context of the culture it was written in. So in the 6th century BC, people identified as ‘tribes’ or communities in their relationship with God. We have a highly developed notion of individual accountability and responsibility but in those times the sins of the fathers was routinely visited on the sons. Even in early Christianity there were still notions of a collective salvation/damnation.

They replied, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved–you and your household.” - Acts 16:31