Why is artificial birth control usage so wrong?

[jilly4ski]

I would tell her that she and her husband need to consult with their doctor, who would explain the potential risks and benefits of the various birth control methods, and suggest what would work best for this particular woman.

After 27 years of marriage, with birth control and without, before vasectomy and after vasectomy, before hysterectomy and after hysterectomy, I can assure you that none of these things demean or pervert the marital act in any way. Couples need to to make these decisions together, through prayer and competent medical advice, with husband and wife respecting the feelings and wishes of the other. If a woman’s health is a reason to avoid pregnancy, they need to consult with her doctor. A competent doctor can suggest the method that would be best, taking into consideration specific health issues and potential risks. Periodic or complete abstinance is usually not conducive to intimacy and bonding in marriage, unless you are both in agreement with that method – again that is the decision of the couple – not the Catholic Church. If God does not impose this requirement of sexual abstinance in marriage, why does the Catholic Church?

I

God doesn’t impose requirements of sexual mores? I don’t mean to be snippy, but do you have a direct line to God to ask him? God made us for a reason and we were given our reason and intellect to figure that out. God made sex for babies and unity of the couple, which is clearly observable. If people take away from one (or both) of these God given purposes we could possibly say they might be going against God’s will.

I understand you are not Catholic and therefore don’t believe that Jesus gave authority to Peter and the apostles to run a church on earth and that the Holy Spirit would always guide it, and you (probably) believe in the primacy of the Bible. But as Catholics we know that the whole Truth is not contained in the bible, that God’s entire nature cannot be completely revealed in it, since as humans on Earth we can never understand God’s entire nature. So what if the bible doesn’t say “thou shall not use ABCs,” the bible also doesn’t say “thou shall not clone people.” But we can still reason that cloning people is against God’s will.

And a church can tell its own members whatever it wants. The orthodox can (and do/did) tell its members that they can’t have any sex during lent. Obviously if a church doesn’t have a good reason or can’t explain the rule it sets down then they will probably loose a lot of member and not survive. The Catholic church can and does explain its rules, like no ABC and no abortion etc. They only arrive at rules like this because they are looking at a deeper meaning. Love -goes to- marital love -goes to- purpose of marriage -goes to- no disturbing the purposes of marriage. They start from a big principle and work down to small rules for the faithful to follow that are in line in the big principle which is revealed to us by God and the Bible.

 

[Priscilla_Ann]

God doesn’t impose requirements of sexual mores? I don’t mean to be snippy, but do you have a direct line to God to ask him? God made us for a reason and we were given our reason and intellect to figure that out. God made sex for babies and unity of the couple, which is clearly observable. If people take away from one (or both) of these God given purposes we could possibly say they might be going against God’s will.

I understand you are not Catholic and therefore don’t believe that Jesus gave authority to Peter and the apostles to run a church on earth and that the Holy Spirit would always guide it, and you (probably) believe in the primacy of the Bible. But as Catholics we know that the whole Truth is not contained in the bible, that God’s entire nature cannot be completely revealed in it, since as humans on Earth we can never understand God’s entire nature. So what if the bible doesn’t say “thou shall not use ABCs,” the bible also doesn’t say “thou shall not clone people.” But we can still reason that cloning people is against God’s will.

And a church can tell its own members whatever it wants. The orthodox can (and do/did) tell its members that they can’t have any sex during lent. Obviously if a church doesn’t have a good reason or can’t explain the rule it sets down then they will probably loose a lot of member and not survive. The Catholic church can and does explain its rules, like no ABC and no abortion etc. They only arrive at rules like this because they are looking at a deeper meaning. Love -goes to- marital love -goes to- purpose of marriage -goes to- no disturbing the purposes of marriage. They start from a big principle and work down to small rules for the faithful to follow that are in line in the big principle which is revealed to us by God and the Bible.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. Apparently the majority of Catholics also disagree with this manmade teaching of the Catholic Church, since the majority of them do practice ABC, not NFP. I don’t have a source to quote, but the figures I’ve read indicate that between 80% and 95% of Catholics do practice ABC. Would you conclude that those Catholics who practice ABC aren’t really Catholic? Would you suggest that they leave the Catholic Church?

By the way, why do you consider the bible to be insufficient?

 

[Abu]

Roy5
to try to tell others that it is immoral to follow their conscience on this question is another matter.
Intolerance gets the church nowhere. There should be room within Christ’s church for legitimate differences of opinion, conscience and practice on some of these difficult issues. Jesus certainly lambasted the ecclesiastical authorities of his time and place for their pious condemnation of others.
There are too many complex and uncertain situations for any of us to be dogmatic and harsh in our judgments. I’ll let God handle that and am confident that the Lord understands and respects decisions made out of concern and love and not out of the same sort of rigid legalism that was so opposed by Christ.

1. It’s not rocket science – it’s simple – as John Paul II warned in *Veritatis Splendor *#64, ….“ ‘freedom of conscience’ is never freedom ‘from’ the truth but always and only freedom ‘in’ the truth because the Magisterium does not bring to the Christian conscience truths which are extraneous to it; rather it brings to light the truths which it ought already to possess, developing them from the primordial act of faith…helping (conscience), especially in more difficult questions, to attain the truth with certainty and to abide in it.”

Cardinal Ratzinger: “For Newman…the centrality of ….conscience is linked to the prior centrality of truth and can only be understood from this vantage point. I would say that a man of conscience is one who never acquires tolerance, well-being, success, public standing, and approval on the part of prevailing opinion at the expense of truth.” (The Priest, Autumn, 1993).

No Catholic with a correctly formed conscience can place it above Christ and His Church. Jesus left no room for prejudices and “opinion” in teaching “He that hears you, Hears Me” (Lk 10:16). And to His chosen St Peter to whom He gave Primacy over His Church: “Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven.” (Mt 16:18).

Jesus certainly lambasted those who prostituted the temple for buying and selling.

1. Some seem to think that the two Commandments of love somehow enable us to reject or wink at the other Commandments. A false idea of “legalism” is easily dispelled as Christ told the woman taken in adultery to “sin no more” as she had breached the sixth commandment – which ensured that she paid more attention to the law. (Jn 8:3-11).

To “What must I do to have eternal life?”, Christ’s answer is “Keep the commandments.” (Mt 19:17).
It is easy to ignore the Master’s examples on how we fail to love God or neighbour in His warnings of sins which defile or befoul (Mk 7:21-23), in addition to ignoring His guarantees against error in transmitting His truths.

1. Apart from commanding the woman found in adultery to “go and sin no more” the Christ commanded us to
   “Stop judging by appearances, but judge justly.” (Jn 7:24).
   “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but underneath are ravenous wolves. By their fruits you will know them” (Mt 7:15, 16).
   “Every tree that does not bear good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire. So by their fruits you will know them.” (Mt 7:19-20).

And St Paul, following the Master:
“Test everything: retain what is good.” (1Thess 5:21).
“The spiritual person, however, can judge everything but is not subject to judgement by anyone.” (1 Cor 2:15).

That is precisely why we judge actions, speech, writing against true teaching to what is good and what is evil.

 

[edwest2]

We will see when the church changes it stance on this AND gay marriage in the years to come. The generation that is growing up now is not going to stand for gay marriage being illegal. I am 23 and I don’t know one person my age that is against gay marriage. I can only imagine that my 20 month old son is going to be even more tolerant of gay marriage. And in 25-30 years (or sooner) the church is going to change its stance on gay marriage and ABC. The only thing that the church will keep its stance on is abortion because it is the only debated topic that can be argued through secular means.

The fact that you know something about the people around you is not a scientific poll that is representative of the people that live in the United States.

The ability to predict the future is not scientific.

This is Catholic Answers, not secular answers, the enitire population of the United States is not secular.

You might want something to be true but that does not automatically mean it will become true because you want it to be true.

God bless,
Ed

 

[edwest2]

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.

Humanae Vitae will not go away. Who decides when anyone has sex? The Church? The State? I hope that each one of us realizes that each one of us has the ability to say no. Our minds are not controlled by our sexuality. To think otherwise is irrational. To tell other people they simply cannot control their own sexual desires is irrational.

In the middle of the 1950s, the average number of kids born in my neighborhood was two. Two.

Predicting the future is not scientific.

God bless,
Ed

 

[jilly4ski]

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. Apparently the majority of Catholics also disagree with this manmade teaching of the Catholic Church, since the majority of them do practice ABC, not NFP. I don’t have a source to quote, but the figures I’ve read indicate that between 80% and 95% of Catholics do practice ABC. Would you conclude that those Catholics who practice ABC aren’t really Catholic? Would you suggest that they leave the Catholic Church?

By the way, why do you consider the bible to be insufficient?

Because the bible says so. John’s gospel clearly says that not everything is was written down. Just so that we “may come to believe”. Also the Bible is only a text, it cannot interpret itself, someone must do it, and as evidenced by Protestantism, any John/Jane Doe can interpret the bible the any way they see fit. (people even used the bible to justify slavery). See the story where Philip explains scripture to the eunuch in Acts 8:28(ish). Since the New testament itself is just letters to Churches or to other Christian followers, the Church already existed and didn’t have the new testament then. Indeed the letters were used to correct behavior and teach, but there could have been other things taught that didn’t make into letters. And because Christ gave us the Church and told Peter that the gates of the netherworld would not prevail against it.

But all this is off topic. If the bible is completely sufficient for all teaching, how can you oppose human cloning? (maybe you don’t, this is just something that most people on this forum agree is wrong and against God’s will).

I obviously I can’t say that those Catholics practicing ABC are not Catholics, because their baptism says otherwise. I can however say that they are in grave sin and should not be receiving communion per the Church’s rules. It would be up to them to actually leave the Church, if they cannot in good conscience follow the Church’s rule I personally don’t know why they stay, but I am not them.

I am not sure why people bring up the number of Catholics who use ABC, the numbers do not mean that it is not a sin, merely that lots of people sin in this way. I am pretty sure God doesn’t really care how many people participate in a sin he is still grieved by each sin. (indeed he wanted to wipe out all of Sodom and Gomorrah even the innocent because of their sinful ways and this was whole cities).

 

[edwest2]

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.

“changed its teachings”? Examples please.

Thanks,
Ed

 

[edwest2]

Contraception does not indicate a distrust of God. If that were true, things like seat belts, medicine, health insurance, and retirement accounts would also indicate a distrust of God.

Keep in mind that Theology of the Body and similar teachings come from men – not from God. God’s list of rules is quite short, and I don’t find evidence that he instructed men to “go forth and make more rules”, which is exactly what the Catholic Church has done. Jesus and the apostles did not tell us what to eat or how to have sex with our spouses. Do you think he forgot? Or is it possible that he expects us to think and make wise, responsible decisions?

In the late 1960s, I heard the same thing. “Leave us alone! We’re responsible adults!” I also hear the following: “After we put the kids to bed we can watch porn.” Which is why it’s called “adult entertainment” by the industry. My parents had two kids in the middle of the 1950s. The average number of kids in my neighborhood was Two.

Later, a small group of radicals armed with The Pill began to sow the seeds of discontent by creating a false reality. The propganda failed to impress me after reading it:

In the 1950s, housewives were “barefoot and pregnant.”
In the 1950s, women were “baby factories.”
In the 1950s, women were chained to the kitchen stove and bored out of their minds.

Not true. None of it.

What did Jesus say to His disciples? “He who hears you hears me.” Luke 10:16

catholicbible101.com/papalinfallibility.htm

God bless,
Ed

 

[Abu]

Priscilla Ann
God’s list of rules is quite short, and I don’t find evidence that he instructed men to “go forth and make more rules”, which is exactly what the Catholic Church has done. Jesus and the apostles did not tell us what to eat or how to have sex with our spouses. Periodic or complete abstinance is usually not conducive to intimacy and bonding in marriage, unless you are both in agreement with that method – again that is the decision of the couple – not the Catholic Church. If God does not impose this requirement of sexual abstinance in marriage, why does the Catholic Church?
why do you consider the bible to be insufficient?

Such confusion and misinformation helps no one. Of course Jesus gave His Church His authority to teach everything which he had given to His Apostles with the protection from error of the Holy Spirit (Mt 28:20). “Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven.” (Mt 16:18).

Precisely because Jesus wrote nothing, and gave us His Church to teach us infallibly on faith and morals, His Church gave us the Sacred Scriptures which do not have all of His teaching.

Jesus specifically included sexual sin as defiling and specifically included fornication (Mk 7:21). God has not commanded anywhere that the marital act should not be performed when a woman is infertile, through natural rhythms, age etc. Natural Birth Regulation is extremely effective when properly practised, encourages self-control, and has no harmful effects on health. It is the only moral method which may be used when serious reasons may justify its use.

 

[casey_zia]

The immoraliity of ABC is strictly a matter of opinion. There is no commandment that says, “Thou shalt not practice ABC.” Birth control is a matter of conscience and moral responsibility. God does not forbid us to use our brain to make responsible decisions. Having six children when you cannot afford to feed and clothe them is not morally responsible.

The Church does not ask every married couple to have more children than they can handle, financially, emotionally, etc. God does want us to “use our brain” and make informed and holy choices that stem from biblical and Traditional teachings of the Church. The bible does not say “Thou shalt not practice ABC” but it does say “Thou shalt not kill” (abortion, birth control pills), and Onan was killed for “spilling his seed”. All Christian churches until 1930 (and this includes the reformers Luther and Calvin) were 100% against any form of artificial birth control. Ignoring the mountain of evidence, some maintain that the Church considers the use of contraception a matter for each married couple to decide according to their “individual conscience.” Yet, nothing could be further from the truth. The Church has always maintained the historic Christian teaching that deliberate acts of contraception are always gravely sinful, which means that it is mortally sinful if done with full knowledge and deliberate consent (CCC 1857). The teaching of the Church about deliberate acts of contraception cannot be changed–this is infallible teaching. This conscience argument is really about choosing and advocating disobedience.

 

[casey_zia]

Periodic or complete abstinance is usually not conducive to intimacy and bonding in marriage

Interesting that couples who practice NFP throughout their married lives have a VERY LOW divorce rate (1-2%). Must be something about the intimacy and bonding that is the fruit of periodic abstinence and truly loving every aspect of one’s spouse, including his/her fertility. It’s about unselfishness, openness, self-mastery, respect, fidelity, courage.

Perhaps Priscilla Ann and others against the teaching of the Church in this matter need to hear from those Catholics who can give testimony to the light and life that this teaching gives their lives. We’ve all come to this teaching from different angles, and often through many trials and challenges. Takers?

 

[Abu]

Facing Reality
For all those Catholics here who think conscience is tool to be manipulated to suit opinions and prejudices, a non-Catholic sets them straight.
catholiceducation.org/articles/apologetics/ap0006.html
The Church Isn’t a Democracy, George Jonas
I’m not a Catholic, either by cradle or conversion.
The Catholic Church is there to mediate between your conscience and God. It is, I suppose, a kind of compulsory arbitration. When you become a member of the faith you undertake to abide by it.
If you don’t go in for that kind of stuff; if you’d rather have your conscience plugged in directly to God, what you do is become a Protestant.

 

[Holly3278]

Interesting that couples who practice NFP throughout their married lives have a VERY LOW divorce rate (1-2%). Must be something about the intimacy and bonding that is the fruit of periodic abstinence and truly loving every aspect of one’s spouse, including his/her fertility. It’s about unselfishness, openness, self-mastery, respect, fidelity, courage.

Perhaps Priscilla Ann and others against the teaching of the Church in this matter need to hear from those Catholics who can give testimony to the light and life that this teaching gives their lives. We’ve all come to this teaching from different angles, and often through many trials and challenges. Takers?

Exactly! The extremely low divorce rate among those who practice only NFP and only for serious cases is because God is blessing them. The Lord loves those who are faithful to His teachings. Also, the Bible and Tradition does teach against artificial birth control:

Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.” So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. And God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.”
(Genesis 1:26-28 RSV)

As you can see here, the Bible clearly commands us to be fruitful and multiply. It does not teach us to limit our populations.

Then Isaac called Jacob and blessed him, and charged him, “You shall not marry one of the Canaanite women. Arise, go to Paddan-aram to the house of Bethu’el your mother’s father; and take as wife from there one of the daughters of Laban your mother’s brother. God Almighty bless you and make you fruitful and multiply you, that you may become a company of peoples. May he give the blessing of Abraham to you and to your descendants with you, that you may take possession of the land of your sojournings which God gave to Abraham!”
(Genesis 28:1-4 RSV)

Here we see how being fruitful and multiplying is a blessing from God.

Then Judah said to Onan, “Go in to your brother’s wife, and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.” But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother’s wife he spilled the semen on the ground, lest he should give offspring to his brother. And what he did was displeasing in the sight of the LORD, and he slew him also.
(Genesis 38:8-10 RSV)

Here we see how Onan practiced the sin of contracepting by withdrawing and spilling his semen on the ground. We can see that this was so serious a sin in the eyes of God that God killed him.

"Say to Aaron, None of your descendants throughout their generations who has a blemish may approach to offer the bread of his God. For no one who has a blemish shall draw near, a man blind or lame, or one who has a mutilated face or a limb too long, or a man who has an injured foot or an injured hand, or a hunchback, or a dwarf, or a man with a defect in his sight or an itching disease or scabs or crushed testicles; no man of the descendants of Aaron the priest who has a blemish shall come near to offer the LORD’s offerings by fire; since he has a blemish, he shall not come near to offer the bread of his God.
(Leviticus 21:17-21 RSV)

Here we see that a man with crushed testicles (someone who is infertile) cannot be a priest in the Old Testament. In the Old Testament times, priests were married. Therefore, anyone who deliberately does something to their sexual organs in order to prevent conception is guilty of violating this commandment.

"When men fight with one another, and the wife of the one draws near to rescue her husband from the hand of him who is beating him, and puts out her hand and seizes him by the private parts, then you shall cut off her hand; your eye shall have no pity.
(Deuteronomy 25:11-12 RSV)

Here we see that any man who has some sort of injury or operation done to their sexual organs which would prevent reproduction is to be severely dealt with. In fact, it is so severe that if a woman is guilty of having her husband sterilized, she will have her hand cut off.

Part 2 on next post.

 

[Holly3278]

Lo, sons are a heritage from the LORD, the fruit of the womb a reward. Like arrows in the hand of a warrior are the sons of one’s youth. Happy is the man who has his quiver full of them! He shall not be put to shame when he speaks with his enemies in the gate.
(Psalms 127:3-5 RSV)

Here we see that children are a blessing.

Therefore deliver up their children to famine; give them over to the power of the sword, let their wives become childless and widowed. May their men meet death by pestilence, their youths be slain by the sword in battle.
(Jeremiah 18:21 RSV)

Here we see how infertility can sometimes be a punishment for sin.

You ask, “Why does he not?” Because the LORD was witness to the covenant between you and the wife of your youth, to whom you have been faithless, though she is your companion and your wife by covenant. Has not the one God made and sustained for us the spirit of life? And what does he desire? Godly offspring. So take heed to yourselves, and let none be faithless to the wife of his youth.
(Malachi 2:14-15 RSV)

Here we see that God loves righteous offspring. Therefore, we should not practice birth control and should have our children baptized soon after they are born.

Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you, which you have from God? You are not your own; you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.
(1 Corinthians 6:19-20 RSV)

Here we see how our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit. What worse way to treat these temples of the Holy Spirit than to put false hormones in them or use some sort of barrier to prevent them from doing what they are naturally designed to do?

Now concerning the matters about which you wrote. It is well for a man not to touch a woman. But because of the temptation to immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. For the wife does not rule over her own body, but the husband does; likewise the husband does not rule over his own body, but the wife does. Do not refuse one another except perhaps by agreement for a season, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, lest Satan tempt you through lack of self-control.
(1 Corinthians 7:1-5 RSV)

Here we see periodic abstinence recommended by Saint Paul.

Yet woman will be saved through bearing children, if she continues in faith and love and holiness, with modesty.
(1 Timothy 2:15 RSV)

Here we see how bearing children is considered a good work.

Now the works of the flesh are plain: fornication, impurity, licentiousness, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, anger, selfishness, dissension, party spirit, envy, drunkenness, carousing, and the like. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
(Galatians 5:19-21 RSV)

Here, the Greek word for sorcery is “pharmakeia” which is where we get the English word “pharmacy” or “pharmaceutical” from. According to Strong’s Hebrew and Greek Dictionaries, this can include medication. We know from Church teaching that using artificial birth control except for strictly therapeutic reasons is wrong.

And now for Sacred Tradition:

“Moreover, he [Moses] has rightly detested the weasel [Lev. 11:29]. For he means, ‘Thou shall not be like to those whom we hear of as committing wickedness with the mouth with the body through uncleanness [orally consummated sex]; nor shall thou be joined to those impure women who commit iniquity with the mouth with the body through uncleanness’” *Letter of Barnabas 10:8 (A.D. 74). *

Here we see that non-procreative sex is condemned.“Because of its divine institution for the propagation of man, the seed is not to be vainly ejaculated, nor is it to be damaged, nor is it to be wasted” *Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor of Children 2:10:91:2 (A.D. 191).

*How much more plain and simple can you get?"[Some] complain of the scantiness of their means, and allege that they have not enough for bringing up more children, as though, in truth, their means were in [their] power . . . or God did not daily make the rich poor and the poor rich. Wherefore, if any one on any account of poverty shall be unable to bring up children, it is better to abstain from relations with his wife." *Lactantius, Divine Institutes 6:20 (A.D. 307).

*Here, we clearly see Natural Family Planning being recommended for those who cannot afford to have children.And here are some more Scriptural references and references from Sacred Tradition about contraception:

scripturecatholic.com/contraception.html

God Bless,
Holly* *

 

[markxcool]

Re: Why is artificial birth control usage so wrong?

Originally Posted by Priscilla Ann View Post
Periodic or complete abstinance is usually not conducive to intimacy and bonding in marriage

Interesting that couples who practice NFP throughout their married lives have a VERY LOW divorce rate (1-2%). Must be something about the intimacy and bonding that is the fruit of periodic abstinence and truly loving every aspect of one’s spouse, including his/her fertility. It’s about unselfishness, openness, self-mastery, respect, fidelity, courage.

Perhaps Priscilla Ann and others against the teaching of the Church in this matter need to hear from those Catholics who can give testimony to the light and life that this teaching gives their lives. We’ve all come to this teaching from different angles, and often through many trials and challenges. Takers?

I want to quickly debunk the misconception that NFP couples are, as a result of NFP, happier, have a lower divorce rate, etc.

It is interesting to me that some here are willfully blind when it comes to the short sightedness of their pro NFP arguments and are so eager to pounce and parade the weaknesses of pro ABC arguments. We can’t have it booth ways. We can only have the Truth; hence why I’m taking the initiative to point out a very basic and evident consideration that debunks this blissful perspective of NFP couples.

Has casey zia ever considered that the 5% of Catholics who practice NFP are more spiritual, conservative and committed to a faith-based lifestyle even before their choice of birth control method (NFP/ABC) comes into the picture? The low divorce rate and extolled virtues of such couples ARE NOT FRUIT OF NFP, but rather of the spiritual commitment, personal dedication and predisposition to sacrifice out of love of God.

Let’s give credit where credit is due. And credit is not due to NFP, which is dishonestly cranked up to be beneficial to areas in a relationship where it actually is a huge cross to carry and damaging.

These 5% of NFP couples should be admired for their low divorce rate especially because they have learned to live with the negative impact and unreasonable demands of NFP on their lives.

 

[Roy5]

Freedom of Conscience

Someone in an earlier posting quoted JPII as declaring that “freedom of conscience is never freedom from the truth…”

Wow! That is scary! It seems to imply that there is no valid freedom of conscience apart from church teaching. It's that sort of statement that has caused Protestants (and others) to suspect the Papacy of dubious motives, that it really would like to enforce Catholic teachings and practices upon the wider population whenever it has that power.

 To me, freedom of conscience is true freedom when it comes to belief. A Buddhist should be free to believe as he believes, and the same for Catholics, Hindus, Muslims, Mormons, ad infinitum. Now, when that conscience leads to breaking the law or violence - as on 9/11, for example - that's quite another matter.

 I wrote my undergraduate thesis on St. Thomas Aquinas and became quite well-acquainted with his huge body of work. He was brilliant and certainly ambitious amd disciplined. There is much wisdom in his *Summa Theologica*. However, my deep admiration for him came to an abrupt halt when I came upon his insistence that the church not execute heretics but must turn them over to the state who should execute them instead. Now, what kind of freedom of conscience is that?

 Fortunately, the overwhelming majority of the Catholic rank and file embrace the true freedom of conscience. "Think and let think." The old horror of 'heresy' has all but disappeared except among embittered dogmatists. Millions of well-educated Catholics (and Protestants, too) are thinking for themselves, and that is good for Christianity, for our nation and for the world at large.

 

[jilly4ski]

Freedom of Conscience

 To me, freedom of conscience is true freedom when it comes to belief. A Buddhist should be free to believe as he believes, and the same for Catholics, Hindus, Muslims, Mormons, ad infinitum. Now, when that conscience leads to breaking the law or violence - as on 9/11, for example - that's quite another matter.

Indeed, according to the Church, a Buddhist is free to believe in Buddhism, a Muslim in Islam, Mormons in Mormonism, and Catholics in Catholicism, and people whose beliefs don’t fit into any defined categories are free to believe whatever they believe too. So why do these “rank and file” Catholics, as you call them, still insist that they believe in Catholicism when clearly their beliefs no longer are in line with what their self identified religion actually teaches? That is not freedom of conscience.

 

[Abu]

Roy5
Fortunately, the overwhelming majority of the Catholic rank and file embrace the true freedom of conscience. “Think and let think.”

You have elegantly described the licence of conscience – those who believe in nothing will fall for anything, as you have. That’s why you deny Christ and His Church and do not think with Him.

No theologian, not even St Thomas, can give us infallible doctrine – only Christ and His Church. The world is “suffering from tolerance: tolerance of right and wrong, truth and error, virtue and evil, Christ and chaos.” (Bishop Fulton J Sheen on Broadmindedness).

Facing Reality
For all those Catholics who think conscience is a tool to be manipulated to suit opinions and prejudices, a non-Catholic sets them straight.
catholiceducation.org/articles/apologetics/ap0006.html
The Church Isn’t a Democracy, George Jonas
I’m not a Catholic, either by cradle or conversion.
The Catholic Church is there to mediate between your conscience and God. It is, I suppose, a kind of compulsory arbitration. When you become a member of the faith you undertake to abide by it.
If you don’t go in for that kind of stuff; if you’d rather have your conscience plugged in directly to God, what you do is become a Protestant.

 

[Corki]

JPII’s quote notwithstanding, the Church doesn’t really teach a doctrine of freedom of conscience. The applicable Church teaching is *primacy of conscience *and it presupposes a properly formed conscience using the Church and her teaching over the centuries as a guide for that formation.

Catholics who choose to use ABC are not legitimately exercising primacy of conscience. They may claim a freedom of conscience but by doing so they are declaring a freedom from the Church.

 

[casey_zia]

I want to quickly debunk the misconception that NFP couples are, as a result of NFP, happier, have a lower divorce rate, etc.

It is interesting to me that some here are willfully blind when it comes to the short sightedness of their pro NFP arguments and are so eager to pounce and parade the weaknesses of pro ABC arguments. We can’t have it booth ways. We can only have the Truth; hence why I’m taking the initiative to point out a very basic and evident consideration that debunks this blissful perspective of NFP couples.

Has casey zia ever considered that the 5% of Catholics who practice NFP are more spiritual, conservative and committed to a faith-based lifestyle even before their choice of birth control method (NFP/ABC) comes into the picture? The low divorce rate and extolled virtues of such couples ARE NOT FRUIT OF NFP, but rather of the spiritual commitment, personal dedication and predisposition to sacrifice out of love of God.

Let’s give credit where credit is due. And credit is not due to NFP, which is dishonestly cranked up to be beneficial to areas in a relationship where it actually is a huge cross to carry and damaging.

These 5% of NFP couples should be admired for their low divorce rate especially because they have learned to live with the negative impact and unreasonable demands of NFP on their lives.

#1: Couples who practice NFP do have a very low divorce rate. Nothing to “debunk” there. If the practice of NFP is so damaging and destructive, the divorce rate would be higher, no?

#2: The fruit of NFP (even without a spiritual life): mutual respect, self-control, generosity, patience, fidelity. There is a very strong correlation between NFP and strong marriages.

#3: “Huge cross”, “negative impact”, “unreasonable demands”… markxcool, from my personal life, there was more “cross”, negative impact, and unreasonable demands when I was living outside of the NFP mindset and outside of the moral teaching of the Church. What I know now is true love, deep respect, profound joy in truly sharing my life (all of me, fertility included) with my husband. It has a good impact on our marriage and on how our children treat each other and look at the world. The demands are not unreasonable, as there are consequences to our conjugal relationship, which makes everything “reasonable”. The periods of abstinence are periodic, and the whole lifestyle is virtue-building. I know many many couples who live their married lives with NFP and are thankful.