Why is artificial birth control usage so wrong?

[Abu]

Thank you, Corki.

As Vezelay apears to be incapable of correctly reproducing facts, incapable of assenting to definitive teaching and incapable of reasoning from cause to effect, he has been unable to contribute anything worthwhile to this DB.

 

[choose_to_love]

Oh boy.

Vezelay, do you acknowledge that the article about the bishops and receiving communion does not say what you claim it does? Using contraception was not listed not because it is OK to use, but because the bishops decided for whatever reason not to include it.

Second, that “horrible morning temperature taking ordeal”? Have you ever practiced it? I found it neither horrible nor an ordeal, taking all of two minutes and involving only being conscious enough to get the thermometer to my bride’s lips. She herself was barely awake many times. Perhaps you are not a morning person?

As to the ends of spacing pregnancies being the the same in NFP or contraception, surely you recognize that the ends do not justify the means as a principle, yes? Many good ends can be achieved through evil means.

I didn’t see ironband (beautiful post, BTW) say anything nasty, although honestly I’m not sure you are saying ironband did.

But on a more substantive matter, what does it mean to you, Vezelay, to be big-C Catholic if you can, as you say, assert the primacy of your conscience on matters on which the Church has clearly spoken definitively? You do not accept what the Church teaches. As I understand it, communion is, among other things, a sign of unity - - i.e., all communicants believe the same things, perhaps most particularly as to the Real Presence, but it is still a sign of unity, no? Another poster pointed out that you can find research that indicates that less than 50% of Catholics believe in the Real Presence- - does that mean the the “we are church” folks get to define away the Real Presence? If not, why not? “They are church”, right? Can one go so far in making individual judgments contrary to the teaching of the Church that to call oneself in communion with that church is meaningless? What is that point, or do you not think that is possible? Do you think the Church even has any teaching authority?

I am not trying to be a wise guy - - I would really like to hear what someone who asserts primacy of conscience on this matter thinks vis-a-vis being big-C Catholic.

 

[Corki]

I don’t know where you find the non sequitur. It stands to reason that those Catholics who use contraceptives are not going to face unwanted pregnancies and, therefore, are not going to seek abortions. Those Catholics who do not use contraceptives are the ones who find themselves pregnant and who, in far too many cases, seek abortions.

I realize that this thread is becoming the provebial “dead horse” but I feel compelled to respond to this one item.

Vezelay,

If over half the abortions committed in this country are for women who use contraceptives, how does contraceptive use lead to fewer abortions?

I don’t think you find many women seeking abortions after ineffectively using NFP.

That leaves contraceptive users and those who engage in risky unprotected behavior (mostly premarital sex) as those getting abortions.

 

[Roy5]

A few quick thoughts which probably have already been expressed.

1. Both artificial birth control and the church-approved method have a common goal: prevent pregnancy. If one is condemned as somehow thwarting God's will, why not the other?

 2. Science has given us many man-made creations. I believe some Bishop 100+ years ago said that God had intended for us to fly he would have provided us with wings! We even have artificial hearts now. Artificial is not always a negative word.

 3. Married sex is not to be viewed only for the procreation of children. It also is an important expression of love, often the balm that heals after a marital spat, perhaps, certainly a romantic, pleasurable act that helps bond husbands and wives. 

 4. It could be argued that the bedroom is the private preserve of married couples and if they choose to use artificial birth control, why should any church forbid it?

 5. As a practical matter, the church has alienated millions by its condemnation on artificial birth control. Feeling guilty, they say, in effect, 'to heck with the church'. Someday (I predict) that rule will be changed.

 6. Even today priests differ. I know someone who confessed use of birth control to one priest and received a severe scolding. Away for awhile, at another church the priest told him in effect to do what his conscience seemed to command. It was a matter between him and God.

 7. I know one family who had six children. The wife became afraid, even hostile, toward sexual union because she feared another pregnancy. Her doctor had warned her that another pregnancy could likely mean her death and probably that of the child. The couple finally agreed to use artificial birth control. How big a sin was that? When a priest lectured her at the confessional they decided to attend the Episcopal Church.

 8. Some Catholics resent that a celibate male clergy appears to make such rules. If they were married they would have a better understanding of the complex issues involved. Besides, where does Christ forbid artificial birth control? One rather wild reference usually is quoted from somewhere in Genesis.  

 9. It's one thing to forbid abortion. But to forbid artificial birth control also is likely to lead to abortions. Artificial birth control cuts down on abortions. Otherwise, abortion becomes a far more extreme form of birth control.

 10. While we discourage and even condemn pre-marital sex, certainly among youth, if it happens artificial birth control diminishes the likelihood of single parents, devastated lives, distressed and often angry grandparents, unwanted child, etc.

  Ten sounds like a good number on which to stop.

  God bless all of his children, of everfy creed, color and country.

 

[davidv]

A few quick thoughts which probably have already been expressed.

1. Both artificial birth control and the church-approved method have a common goal: prevent pregnancy. If one is condemned as somehow thwarting God’s will, why not the other?
2. Science has given us many man-made creations. I believe some Bishop 100+ years ago said that God had intended for us to fly he would have provided us with wings! We even have artificial hearts now. Artificial is not always a negative word.
3. Married sex is not to be viewed only for the procreation of children. It also is an important expression of love, often the balm that heals after a marital spat, perhaps, certainly a romantic, pleasurable act that helps bond husbands and wives.
4. It could be argued that the bedroom is the private preserve of married couples and if they choose to use artificial birth control, why should any church forbid it?
5. As a practical matter, the church has alienated millions by its condemnation on artificial birth control. Feeling guilty, they say, in effect, ‘to heck with the church’. Someday (I predict) that rule will be changed.
6. Even today priests differ. I know someone who confessed use of birth control to one priest and received a severe scolding. Away for awhile, at another church the priest told him in effect to do what his conscience seemed to command. It was a matter between him and God.
7. I know one family who had six children. The wife became afraid, even hostile, toward sexual union because she feared another pregnancy. Her doctor had warned her that another pregnancy could likely mean her death and probably that of the child. The couple finally agreed to use artificial birth control. How big a sin was that? When a priest lectured her at the confessional they decided to attend the Episcopal Church.
8. Some Catholics resent that a celibate male clergy appears to make such rules. If they were married they would have a better understanding of the complex issues involved. Besides, where does Christ forbid artificial birth control? One rather wild reference usually is quoted from somewhere in Genesis.
9. It’s one thing to forbid abortion. But to forbid artificial birth control also is likely to lead to abortions. Artificial birth control cuts down on abortions. Otherwise, abortion becomes a far more extreme form of birth control.
10. While we discourage and even condemn pre-marital sex, certainly among youth, if it happens artificial birth control diminishes the likelihood of single parents, devastated lives, distressed and often angry grandparents, unwanted child, etc.

Ten sounds like a good number on which to stop.

God bless all of his children, of everfy creed, color and country.

Your are right, they were already express and soundly debunked as selfish opinions meant to sooth guilty consciences.

 

[tjm190]

If over half the abortions committed in this country are for women who use contraceptives, how does contraceptive use lead to fewer abortions?

Not to get involved in a discussion about the morality of contraception of my Catholic credentials, statistics is always a fun discussion.

I don’t know the percentage of American sexually active couples using contraception- shall we say 80%?

I don’t know the percentage of abortions that are procured by those using contraception, but it seems you do- (I’m going to make relatively baseless assumptions about how you operate stylistically) you said “more than half” which to me means more than 50%. However, you did not say “more than 2/3” or “the vast majority” or something like that- so I’ll work with 60%.

Now, breaking down that supposed 20% which does not use contraception. There are many reasons not to use contraception- the biggest ones, I’d wager, are that you are either past the age where child bearing is even a remote possibility or you are seeking to have a child. Let’s say these account for 1/2 of non-contraception users. This group is important, because they are highly unlikely to seek an abortion- of course a 55 year old will conceive occasionally and a medical emergency will arise, but these do not make up a significant portion of abortions. That leaves us with 10% of people who are neither using contraception nor seeking to have a child. And then let’s throw in NFP- 5% of the population maybe? So now he have 5% of the sexually active couples who are not contracepting, likely to conceive, do not want a child, and are not bound by Catholic morality. As such, this 5% is likely to be responsible for the vast, vast majority of abortions in that 40%
So on one end we have 80% of sexually active couples procuring 60% of abortions- on the other we have 5% procuring 40% of abortions (the 40% not being procured by contraception users).

60/80=6/8=3/4.
40/5=8.

3/4x=8, 3x=32, 32/3= 10.6666… So, assuming my numbers were perfectly accurate (they aren’t) that 5% of the population is over 10 times as likely to get an abortion as those using contraception.
That does not mean contraception prevents abortions of course- however, it does imply that if those using contraception were to be deprived of it and adopt the practices of that 5%, we would see a massive increase in the number of abortions. (Of course, some of them would just have less sex)

 

[tjm190]

Your are right, they were already express and soundly debunked as selfish opinions meant to sooth guilty consciences.

You assume, falsely, that there is guilt to begin with.

 

[Abu]

Roy5
Both artificial birth control and the church-approved method have a common goal: prevent pregnancy. If one is condemned as somehow thwarting God’s will, why not the other?..It could be argued that the bedroom is the private preserve of married couples and if they choose to use artificial birth control, why should any church forbid it?..where does Christ forbid artificial birth control?

Perceptive readers will notice the frightfully naïve, misinformed mere prejudices so often expressed

Consider the vital fact that NBR uses God-given infertile periods without any interference with His natural moral law; that used for serious reasons, this would foster family life. Where has God forbidden us to use the infertile period?
But He killed Onan for using contraception. (Gen 38:9-10).

The bedroom is private so anything goes – where do you live, on the moon? Why do you think God has given Commandments against fornication and adultery – are these performed in public?

Where does Christ forbid slavery?

Why shouldn’t Christ’s Church teach His truth? “Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in Heaven.” Why do you think He founded His Church – to teach “anything goes”?

 

[jilly4ski]

A few quick thoughts which probably have already been expressed.

1. Both artificial birth control and the church-approved method have a common goal: prevent pregnancy. If one is condemned as somehow thwarting God's will, why not the other?

Did you even read the thread? It has been expressed that regulating births is not the problem nor does the church forbid this, but rather we may not regulate births using immoral means. Artificial birth control is not immoral because it is “artificial” or man made, or because it helps couples regulate births, but rather because it goes against God’s purpose and plan for marriage and marital love.

 2. Science has given us many man-made creations. I believe some Bishop 100+ years ago said that God had intended for us to fly he would have provided us with wings! We even have artificial hearts now. Artificial is not always a negative word.

See above, this is not why artificial birth control is immoral.

 3. Married sex is not to be viewed only for the procreation of children. It also is an important expression of love, often the balm that heals after a marital spat, perhaps, certainly a romantic, pleasurable act that helps bond husbands and wives.

The Church teaches that these purposes (procreation and unitive) of marriage cannot be separated. To separate them goes against God’s purpose.

 4. It could be argued that the bedroom is the private preserve of married couples and if they choose to use artificial birth control, why should any church forbid it?

Wow, do people actually make this argument? So God has no place in the relationship with ones spouse? We should be striving to do God’s will in all aspects of our lives not just in the areas that we choose.

 5. As a practical matter, the church has alienated millions by its condemnation on artificial birth control. Feeling guilty, they say, in effect, 'to heck with the church'. Someday (I predict) that rule will be changed.

So because a lot of people don’t like it that makes it right or the truth? This is also a bad argument. The majority of people thought that slavery in the US was ok, did this make is right? Of course not, there is objective truth revealed by God. But if there is no one to say what this is, we have what we had during slavery with people interpreting the Bible to say that slavery was ok, which is why we need the Church.

 6. Even today priests differ. I know someone who confessed use of birth control to one priest and received a severe scolding. Away for awhile, at another church the priest told him in effect to do what his conscience seemed to command. It was a matter between him and God.

So what? Individual priests are not the Magisterium. Not to mention that priests are humans with all the failings and sins that come with that. I heard an unfortunate phrase once, that priests who abrogate the rules for their parishioners are probably abrogating the rules for themselves.

 7. I know one family who had six children. The wife became afraid, even hostile, toward sexual union because she feared another pregnancy. Her doctor had warned her that another pregnancy could likely mean her death and probably that of the child. The couple finally agreed to use artificial birth control. How big a sin was that? When a priest lectured her at the confessional they decided to attend the Episcopal Church.

Did they even try NFP? Not to mention, what happens if ABC fails? Many of the most common ABCs are abortifacients, so how many of their children are they killing? Have you seen the show “I didn’t know I was pregnant,” it is full of people who were on ABCs and got pregnant.

 8. Some Catholics resent that a celibate male clergy appears to make such rules. If they were married they would have a better understanding of the complex issues involved. Besides, where does Christ forbid artificial birth control? One rather wild reference usually is quoted from somewhere in Genesis.

Many people equate ABCs, especially condoms with the sin of Onan. I am not sure if this is correct, but the bible cannot be our only source of truth, because otherwise we couldn’t be against cloning or other ethical problems in today’s world.

 9. It's one thing to forbid abortion. But to forbid artificial birth control also is likely to lead to abortions. Artificial birth control cuts down on abortions. Otherwise, abortion becomes a far more extreme form of birth control.

Are you sure about this? I mean really, many ABCs are abortifacients and are already killing babies, and what happens when ABC fails? If we follow the church and use NFP to plan children and it fails we can know it is God’s will or (our failure)

 10. While we discourage and even condemn pre-marital sex, certainly among youth, if it happens artificial birth control diminishes the likelihood of single parents, devastated lives, distressed and often angry grandparents, unwanted child, etc.

Yeah cause its worked so well already. We don’t want you to have sex, but if you do here’s a condom. Or better yet, place the burden on the girls and make them take dangerous hormones: you shouldn’t have sex but here is the Pill just in case.
Ten sounds like a good number on which to stop.

  God bless all of his children, of everfy creed, color and country.

Indeed ten is enough. You should really learn what the Church actually teaches and why before you disparage it.

God Bless

 

[Corki]

Not to get involved in a discussion about the morality of contraception of my Catholic credentials, statistics is always a fun discussion.

I don’t know the percentage of American sexually active couples using contraception- shall we say 80%?

I don’t know the percentage of abortions that are procured by those using contraception, but it seems you do- (I’m going to make relatively baseless assumptions about how you operate stylistically) you said “more than half” which to me means more than 50%. However, you did not say “more than 2/3” or “the vast majority” or something like that- so I’ll work with 60%.

The number is over 50%, rather reliably. I didn’t include a link because virtually every study that popped up on a Google seach showed a number greater than 50%.

The problem with the rest of your analysis is that the wide use of contraception actually leads people into behavior that results in pregnancy. Single women are more likely to be sexually active if they think they are “being safe”.

Let me through another statistic at you. Over 50% (some reports say over 60%) of women who have abortions report being forced or pressured into the “choice”. (this time, I’ll give you a link theunchoice.com/pdf/FactSheets/ForcedAbortions.pdf ) The feeling is that they were “owed” sex without consequense because they used “protection”.

The idea that women living otherwise moral lives with their husbands are getting abortions that would have been prevented had they used birth control is just nonsence.

 

[Vezelay]

The number is over 50%, rather reliably. I didn’t include a link because virtually every study that popped up on a Google seach showed a number greater than 50%.

The problem with the rest of your analysis is that the wide use of contraception actually leads people into behavior that results in pregnancy. Single women are more likely to be sexually active if they think they are “being safe”.

Let me through another statistic at you. Over 50% (some reports say over 60%) of women who have abortions report being forced or pressured into the “choice”. (this time, I’ll give you a link theunchoice.com/pdf/FactSheets/ForcedAbortions.pdf ) The feeling is that they were “owed” sex without consequense because they used “protection”.

The idea that women living otherwise moral lives with their husbands are getting abortions that would have been prevented had they used birth control is just nonsence.

The US Catholic Bishops issued their report of their study in November 2006. You can find it if you google “Percentage of Catholics using contraception.” Ninety-six percent of Catholics use the same contraceptives as the rest of the population. The bishops study four years earlier found it to be 97% but since the assessments are usually 3 to 4% valid either way, it could be 100% or 93%. For a long time now the size of Catholic families has been no different from the size of the families of the rest of the population. 11% of Catholics have 3 or more children while 9% of the rest of the population have families with 3 or more. It’s that close. Someone said that the bishops refused to list contraceptive use as a reason for refraining from receiving the Eucharist (Baltimore Nov 2006) “for whatever reason.” I think the reason is clear. Catholics use contraception and they are receiving communion. That’s the fact of the matter. The bishops would have felt awkward to say the least to state that 96% of Catholics may not present for the sacraments. They realize that the people of God have followed the finding of the bishops in 1966 “that there is no doctrinal or theological reason not to lift the ban on contraception.” You may sputter all you want but this is the way things are and today’s bishops recognize the reality of the thinking of their flock. Our leaders are wise enough to follow their followers. They don’t have any other recourse. Forbidding 96% of the faithful from taking communion would end the church. We, the people of God, are the Body of Christ. He is the head, we are the limbs. Peace

 

[Abu]

Vezelay
Forbidding 96% of the faithful from taking communion would end the church. We, the people of God, are the Body of Christ. He is the head, we are the limbs. Peace

Marooned in this morass of deceit – anything goes is the motto. Peace? No. A declaration of war on Christ.

As the Bishops taught (courtesy Corki, post #60):
catholicnews.com/data/sto…ns/0606495.htm
the document says that a Catholic who “knowingly and obstinately” rejects “the defined doctrines of the church” or repudiates “definitive teaching on moral issues” would not be in communion with the church and therefore should not receive Communion.

Obviously, removing himself from communion with Christ and His Magisterium in His Church, Vezelay plays Magisterium.
BTW, as a small percentage of Catholics participate in the Holy Mass, of those more and more are likely to be faithful as the destructive influences of the dissenting theologians to which Vezelay has succumbed fade, and the great pontificates of John Paul the Great and Benedict XVI influence the flock.

 

[Corki]

The US Catholic Bishops issued their report of their study in November 2006. You can find it if you google “Percentage of Catholics using contraception.” Ninety-six percent of Catholics use the same contraceptives as the rest of the population. The bishops study four years earlier found it to be 97% but since the assessments are usually 3 to 4% valid either way, it could be 100% or 93%. For a long time now the size of Catholic families has been no different from the size of the families of the rest of the population. 11% of Catholics have 3 or more children while 9% of the rest of the population have families with 3 or more. It’s that close. Someone said that the bishops refused to list contraceptive use as a reason for refraining from receiving the Eucharist (Baltimore Nov 2006) “for whatever reason.” I think the reason is clear. Catholics use contraception and they are receiving communion. That’s the fact of the matter. The bishops would have felt awkward to say the least to state that 96% of Catholics may not present for the sacraments. They realize that the people of God have followed the finding of the bishops in 1966 “that there is no doctrinal or theological reason not to lift the ban on contraception.” You may sputter all you want but this is the way things are and today’s bishops recognize the reality of the thinking of their flock. Our leaders are wise enough to follow their followers. They don’t have any other recourse. Forbidding 96% of the faithful from taking communion would end the church. We, the people of God, are the Body of Christ. He is the head, we are the limbs. Peace

The percentage of Catholics who disobey a teaching doesn’t change the teaching. In the 2006 United States Catechism for Adults, the very same USCCB stated:

Because of the controversy in the Church surrounding the morality of artificial contraception, he (Pope Paul VI) issued his encyclical On the Regulation of Birth (Humanae Vitae,; HV) in July of 1968. He reaffirmed the teachings of the Church that **artificial contraception is gravely immoral **because it contravenes God’s will for the conjugal act, which unites the spouses in their love and must also be open to the creation of new life. … He recognized the difficulties that married couples might have in following this teaching but he encouraged them to hae constant recourse to God’s grace through the Sacrament of Penance and Reconcilitation and the Sacrament of the Eucharist.

and

In the course of their marriage, couples may, for serious reasons decide to avoid a new birth for the time being or even for an indefinate period, but they must not use immoral means to prevent conception.

The first quote reaffirms artificial contraception as gravely immoral while the second says couples must not use immoral means.

The fact that contraception is not mentioned in that one USCCB document means nothing except that the Bishops know how difficult the issue is for priests and couples. It is clearly included in many other documents as grave matter, which if committed with free will and knowledge = mortal sin. which is a bar to Communion.

 

[StrawberryJam]

Hey everyone. Why is the usage of artificial birth control considered to be so wrong? A friend of mine claims that by using artificial birth control, you are distrusting God. But the fact is, God can overcome any method of birth control if He wants to. And isn’t using natural family planning in a sense being distrustful of God as well?

The only valid reason I can see to not use artificial birth control is because hormonal forms of it can be abortifacient. That and I can also see how perhaps it may cause disunity in the marriage somehow. But what about the above objection?

Killing off species from the stuff going into a water source after urination?

 

[Vezelay]

The percentage of Catholics who disobey a teaching doesn’t change the teaching. In the 2006 United States Catechism for Adults, the very same USCCB stated:

The bishops made a very clear point, by voting overwhelmingly, 2 to 1, to refuse to add using contraception to the list of reasons for refraining from receiving the Eucharist. They did what they did, they said what they said. They were merely reflecting the will of the gigantic majority of Catholics who all use contraception. We are the church, or at least the huge majority of the members of the church and nothing can change the fact that contraception is here to stay and has been for many many years. The size of Catholic families did not just suddenly grow small. Catholics have been using contraception for a long time and they/we have been receiving communion regularly. Nothing you say can change the facts of life. This is the way it is. This is the church. This particular teaching of the church, and there is nothing infallible about it, has been rejected by the people of God. You may not like it but that’s the way it is. All the teachings. all the dicta of church fathers cannot change the behavior of 96% of Catholics. We have no plans to change the way we live, have lived for many years. The church will eventually catch up with us, note the bishops refusal to consider contraception a reason for not receiving communion. Eventually the conclusion of the bishops who studied the issue for two years that there is no doctrinal or theological reason not to lift the ban on contraception will be embraced by the church fathers. They have no alternative. None of the so called teachings that you cite give any doctrinal or theological basis for not controlling parenthood however individuals wish to. Why? because as the bishops in 1966 stated, there is none. Keep ranting but your ranting will not change the Catholic people. And nothing church fathers say can change the Catholic people. We know what we are doing and why. It’s as simple as that. To keep on saying that something is wrong because is wrong doesn’t get you anywhere. Enjoy using the natural method but please don’t try to force it on us. We like what we are using and we receive communion regularly.

and

The first quote reaffirms artificial contraception as gravely immoral while the second says couples must not use immoral means.

The fact that contraception is not mentioned in that one USCCB document means nothing except that the Bishops know how difficult the issue is for priests and couples. It is clearly included in many other documents as grave matter, which if committed with free will and knowledge = mortal sin. which is a bar to Communion.

 

[ironband]

Vezelay,

I suppose you think if you keep saying it, then that will somehow make it true. But the Bishops did not do what you seem to think they did or say what you seem to think they said.

A majority of the faithful, especially the younger Post-vatican II faithful, don’t believe that pre-marital sex is always morally wrong. Nor do they believe that homosexual acts are always morally wrong. A majority of them believe that as long as you believe in God, it doesn’t matter which religion you belong to. (catholicstudiesresearch.net/2007/hoge.htm)

But Truth is not subjective. It doesn’t matter how many of us turn away from it. Truth is still Truth. We are all sinners. We all turn away from Truth in one way or another. The Church helps us find our way when we are lost, and reminds us what Truth is.

Pray for me, a sinner.

 

[Vezelay]

Vezelay,

I suppose you think if you keep saying it, then that will somehow make it true. But the Bishops did not do what you seem to think they did or say what you seem to think they said.

A majority of the faithful, especially the younger Post-vatican II faithful, don’t believe that pre-marital sex is always morally wrong. Nor do they believe that homosexual acts are always morally wrong. A majority of them believe that as long as you believe in God, it doesn’t matter which religion you belong to. (catholicstudiesresearch.net/2007/hoge.htm)

But Truth is not subjective. It doesn’t matter how many of us turn away from it. Truth is still Truth. We are all sinners. We all turn away from Truth in one way or another. The Church helps us find our way when we are lost, and reminds us what Truth is.

Pray for me, a sinner.

Yes, the truth is the truth and the truth is that the church cannot/will not have us “find our way” since we are not lost. We receive the sacraments with completely clear conscience. The church has been in error many times and has eventually apologized and changed its teachings and that will surely happen again. We, the people of God, are hopeful and we pray that the church leaders come to their senses. We are confident that they will as they have in the past. We are optimistic on this issue.

 

[casey_zia]

Yes, the truth is the truth and the truth is that the church cannot/will not have us “find our way” since we are not lost. We receive the sacraments with completely clear conscience. The church has been in error many times and has eventually apologized and changed its teachings and that will surely happen again. We, the people of God, are hopeful and we pray that the church leaders come to their senses. We are confident that they will as they have in the past. We are optimistic on this issue.

Vezelay:
There are some very logical and well-researched comments and arguments in this forum that haven’t had any impact on your relentless denunciation of Catholic doctrine. Abu, Ironband, Corki and others have posted some concise sagacious responses to your specious points, congratulations to them for their time and ongoing charity.

We ARE lost, that’s why Christ came into the world, and established the Church. We cannot receive the sacraments with “completely clear conscience” if we are not in line with the teachings of the Church. Certain disciplines of the Church have changed over years/centuries, but doctrines to not change, and the Magisterium has the authority to teach on matters of faith or morals. ("…they concur in a single viewpoint as the one which must be held conclusively. This authority is even more clearly verified when, gathered together in an ecumenical council, they are teachers and judges of faith and morals for the universal Church. Their definitions must then be adhered to with the submission of faith" (Lumen Gentium 25).)

You are hopeful/optimistic that the Church will change its ways and come into the light of the modern world. It would be something if “the people of God” established doctrine and defined moral principles! There are many people over the last 2000 years who have run that circuit, we call them “protestants”. I’ll personally stick with the Church and the Magisterium, the teachings that are based in Scripture and Tradition, and the community of believers who look to Christ and the Church for answers for the difficult moral issues of today. --CZ

 

[Roy5]

I rather agree with Vezelay. I am generally against pre-marital sexual relations, especially among teens. Look at the mushrooming of single mothers, which can have disastrous effects upon the children and the society. I also don’t want homosexual sex made so attractive that teens and others get enticed into it, which happens. Their lives can be messed up if they play around with that lifestyle. Etc. As for a born-homosexual, that becomes his or her decision. Most of them still can suffer enough from their orientation without being further alienated or castigated or badgered by the rest of us. At the same time, I resent the -in-your-face gays and lesbians who seem to want to flaunt their sexuality in a way that is inappropriate (whether gay or straight).

On the other hand, when it comes to artificial birth control, the church is simply wrong, as it was with Copernicus and Galileo, its opposition to democracy and the separation of church and state (Pius IX), and in other ways and other times.

Certainly, if married couples want to set a reasonable limit to the number of children they feel they should have they ought not have to play 'Russian roulette' in their private, marital relations. If they use artificial birth control it's their business. The 'approved method' is aimed at the same goal and it is 'artificial' in its own way, too. I predict this church condemnation will gradually wither away. The hierarchy can be slow to open its eyes but not usually stupid.

 

[choose_to_love]

OK, Roy, just for one thing: Is Christ the Lord of your Life, or no (rhetorically, of course, not you personally)? If He is the Lord of your Life, He is the lord of your sexuality and fertility as well. God created our sexuality, created us male and female in His trinitarian image, so that we would know, in our very bodies, something about that Trinitarian love that we are all called to: total, free, faithful and fruitful love, as demonstrated most beautifully by the His Incarnation, passion, and sacrifice on the Cross.

To suggest a sphere of life where the couple has priority over God, or to suggest that an area of life is separated from the Creator, i.e., “private” as you put it, I think reflects a poor understanding of God and our relationship to Him.

You also are, I will assume, badly misinformed or uneducated about the effectiveness of natural family planning: humrep.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/short/22/5/1310

From the abstract: “the pregnancy rate was 0.6 per 100 women and per 13 cycles”

More later as time allows