Will Catholics who use artificial birth control go to Hell? ---POLL!

[Olympia]

WhiteDove:

I hear that most Catholic couples use artificial birth control and still take communion. If they die unrepentant, will they go to Hell?

Sorry to be nit-picking, but your poll does not reflect these parameters. I would have voted differently.

 

[Olympia]

BLB_Oregon:

In that case, I submit that you are attributing the motive of fear to our leaders when you do not know that to be their motive. Moreover, you are deliberately choosing to use some of the least charitable phrasing available to you. Keeping in mind that the duties inherent in your position in the Church normally do not include the public correction of our leaders, might you restrict your complaints to their actions, and couch your comments with the qualifying “With all due respect”?

Please lighten up yourself. I happen to agree with PittsburghJeff, and I applaud him for telling the truth about some of our bishops. "Cowardly is a VERY charitable interpretation of their deafening silence or interpretations of many, too many topics!

Why is it that when somebody speaks some TRUTH, others immediately get warm and fuzzy and “charitable”? Catholic Answers in general is the the most “gentlemanly” forum of the entire Internet, IMHO.

 

[Teresa9]

I just thought before you condemn all people to hell in your finite wisdom, that you should view Fr Serpa’s answer to a question on birth control in respect of people who use it for medical reasons. I think there are exceptions, I think the church realises these exceptions. I hope My Lord will show more mercy than my piers. I hope the forgiveness I have shown in my life will be shown to me by My Lord Jesus Christ, I hope all people can take a place with the Lord in Heaven. I hope that our good acts and love go some way to negate our sins , I hope our faith in Christ’s death and ressurection goes some way to call mercy upon us. Fact is we all sin, fact is we should encourage each other to do better, fact is we don’t do that when we sit deciding who’ll go to hell and who won’t, this debate is not healthy in this respect, we should be debating how to assist families with natural birth control that is accepted by the Church and is born in and out of love. God Bless you all xxx

 

[Olympia]

laywoman:

I voted ‘No’ because I believe that some women cannot cope with too many children and they know it. I think it should be left up to peoples’ conscience. It is certainly better to use prevention than to have an abortion. In fact I argue that the existence of contraceptives should make abortion all the more intolerable.

Sometimes the situation makes laws inapplicable. Such as where there is a danger of catching Aids from your spouse. This is why some prominent Christian leaders like Anglican Archbishop(?) or Bishop Desmond Tutu criticizes the Catholic Church for causing the death toll from Aids to rise in Africa.

I think people have a conscience and know when they are being selfish and also know when the other choices are worse in effect.

Answers like these are what you get when you give “charitable” responses and fuzzy logic advice to the peoplefor 20 years or so.

**To Laywoman, the poster of the above: I really do not mean to insult you, I am just illustrating a point which is not really related to this thread. **

 

[Olympia]

AHMFan:

… I just don’t know how people get off thinking they are allowed to be the judges…It is so irritating to me…

Tanya

Dear AHMFan (Tanya): “Being judgmental” is a modern-day problem. This concept did not appear until recently. Before EVERYTHING became OK, or, (if it feels good, do it), being what you call judgmental was actually a VIRTUE!!!

Yes, being able to discern right from wrong was an attribute of maturity. We are called to discern many minute differences every day. We are called to judge the potential effects of our choices in life. For instance, in our choice of a mate: don’t marry a drug addict, you will never be able to reform him. Job ethics: better not embezzle money from your employer, it’s just not going to get you anywhere in life, etc. Fashion: Don’t wear prints with plaid.

 

[fix]

you should view Fr Serpa’s answer to a question on birth control in respect of people who use it for medical reasons.

Where is the answer? I doubt he said birth control was licit. Birth control hormone pills may be used for a non contraceptive purpose. There is no way they would be condoned for birth control reasons.

I think there are exceptions, I think the church realises these exceptions.

There are no exceptions. One may never commit an intrinsically evil act for any reason. One may use such pills for another medical purpose, such as cysts, but never as a contraceptive.

I hope that our good acts and love go some way to negate our sins

We have confession to absolve us.

Fact is we all sin

Sinning is not the issue. Hopefully when we sin we accept we sinned and go to confession. That is not the same assinning and saying it is not really a sin. One can be forgiven for the first, but not the second.

we should be debating how to assist families with natural birth control that is accepted by the Church

We all agree to that.

 

[Teresa9]

Thanks fix, I think you misread the question posed and my reply to it. I am not condoning contraception for the sake of it, I am responding to the question which is…will people who use contraception go to hell…in answer, I don’t know and neither do you, it is a sin yes, but this question didn’t consider those who use it for medical reasons and not as a contraceptive, although the contraceptive elements still remains when used, I take it you have read what Fr Serpa said and therefore those who use it for medical reasons are not condemned for by the Church for doing so, even if it prevents life. That is how I read it, how did you read it?

 

[conniejean]

I replied I don’t know. But, my husband and I weren’t going to take any chances. He recently had a reversal vasectomy. Even though he repented during reconciliation, we still felt we needed to “get right with God”, since we are both young enough to have more children. We’re planning another baby too! It’s exciting!:dancing:

 

[Anna_Elizabeth]

pittsburghjeff:

Most priests and Bishops don’t talk about contraception because they are cowards. I don’t think there is a hidden agenda.

Yes, Jeff, I’m afraid (!) you’re right. Others may not like to accept this or prefer that you couch your conclusion in more politically correct language, but I’m with you. After all, we are REQUIRED to judge the actions of others, even though their motivation and salvation or damnation is not ours to determine.

Thankfully, we have had a truly surprising number of loyal and COURAGEOUS priests (young of course), where I live. So, there are indeed some who are preaching true Catholic moral theology. OTOH an older priest has actually admitted to me that “preaching on contraception is hard!” (He never does. But he is very big on social justice).

Last thought: No one has mentioned that all this freedom to figure things out for ourselves is leading us straight into a duplicate of European society…self-extermination. Great! Enjoy while you can. If you don’t reproduce, others will, and the society they will impose upon you may sound the death knell for all your choices and those of the children you have been willing to have…

Anyway, pray at all times,

Anna

 

[Anonymous]

God is merciful.

 

[irish_mcmom]

After all, we are REQUIRED to judge the actions of others, even though their motivation and salvation or damnation is not ours to determine.

It is not our requirement to judge anyone – only GOD will judge us. We are required to live our lives as CHRISTLIKE as we can. Jesus himself said the greatest of all the commandments was LOVE.

 

[rwoehmke]

buffalo:

I get so irritated when people accuse others of being judges or judgemental when they attempt to explain or correct someone. That is not being judgemental. Only God can and will judge their salvation. If you steal something and I point out you are a thief, it is a fact not a judgement. Whether you are worthy of heaven I cannot say as only God knows whether you have confessed and are contrite.

Right on! One has an obligation to admonish the sinner. To judge acts as objectively sinful and to advise another of this is judging the action and not the persons culpability. “Judge not lest you be judged” refers to judging the state of someone elses soul.

 

[ND_Mike]

According to our faith, those that die in a state of mortal sin have lost God’s grace and shall remain that way. Therefore they would be in Hell. The use of artificial birth control is a mortal sin if the requirements are met. Furthermore, I can honestly say a person who dies in a state of mortal sin will go to Hell. However, I can’t tell if a person is in that state. One could confess and ask for forgiveness before death. Therefore I cannot judge whether one is in a state of mortal sin. However, if they are and die in that state they will go to Hell.

I consider it like this. We are like a lump of clay. We are molded throughout our lives just like that clay. When clay is burned in a fire it hardens and stays in that final shape. Just as the clay we harden in the shape we die in, good or bad.

I don’t mean to sound like a mean person but we can’t be affraid to speak the truth.

 

[irish_mcmom]

Mike, while what you say is true, I also believe that choices that we make while ignorant (in the uninformed category) are not as dangerous to our mortal soul/state of grace as the choices we deliberatly make against the truth.

God expects so much more of us the more we know and believe – for those of us who continue to make choices that we know the Church does not support and keep us from a state of Grace, yes, then our souls are in mortal danger. Does that make sense???

 

[ND_Mike]

irish_mcmom:

Mike, while what you say is true, I also believe that choices that we make while ignorant (in the uninformed category) are not as dangerous to our mortal soul/state of grace as the choices we deliberatly make against the truth.

That is true. I was trying to make that point, but I didn’t explain it clearly. I cannot say for sure that someone is in a state of mortal sin. Therefore I cannot judge the status of one’s soul. I don’t even know if I myself will make it to Heaven. I hope so, but I am not certain

 

[hosea]

SavedByHim:

Before I start, I just want to say that I don’t want to hear any “tsk tsk tsks” for what I’m about to say. I’m working through the issues with God and my husband, I would prefer not to receive judgement from anyone here.

That said…

I had been on the pill for most of my adult life. My husband and I decided we were “ready” (financially and otherwise) to have a baby and so I went off the pill. That next month, we were blessed with a pregnancy and nine months later, a healthy baby girl.

Since then, I’ve not went back on the pill mostly because of nursing, but also because of this forum and learning that artificial contraception is a sin. BUT, my husband will not have unprotected sex with me. He insists on a condom because he is not “ready” for another baby yet. Frankly, I’m not sure I am either, (my daughter’s only 9 months old) but I would be excited and very happy if I were to find out I was pregnant. (Being “ready” and excited for a baby are two different things…)

Anyways, what is a wife to do in this position? Refuse her husband and refrain from sex? (And keep in mind that my husband is not Catholic…) Do I make him “suffer” for beliefs that are part of my religion and not his?

Also, do you people really believe that if you are not “ready” for another child that God will not give you what you can’t handle? I’m not trying to be snotty, I’m really amazed at the leap of faith that it takes to do that. If I had 5 kids, and REALLY could NOT afford anymore or we would be on welfare, I would really just have to say “OK God, you know our situation, so please no more babies.”?

I strive for that kind of faith, but unfortunately, I guess I’m just not there yet.

Well, that’s enough rambling I guess. It’s just that the whole contraception thing really stirs me up. Bottom line — yes, my husband and I contracept, but I still believe that my way to heaven is not blocked off…

Not “hate posts” please.

My wife and I use the Catholic rhythm method. We make it a romantic game. I’m past 50, she’s past 40 so logic tells us that a baby would challenge our late years but we would welcome one with joy. And so, during those incredible 5 days per month when my beloved is fertile, we hold eachother and anticipate the days to come when we can be ‘together’ and avoid the challenges of being in our late 60’s with a teenager :bigyikes: . And when she says ‘come to me, my beloved’ it is like the wedding night all over again. Whooooohooooo!

What day is this???..gotta go home!

 

[patg]

Here is a different point of view on this subject from Father Andrew Greeley - someone with a lot more insight than most of us. I am sorry for the length but I think it is well worth reading (from Confessions of a Parish Priest):

*So, while one hears of the politics of the Curia after the birth-control commission made its report and went home, the argument against the change was neither one of moral theology nor one of sexual ethics. Rather, the argument was one of authority and power. The time was not ripe for a change in the doctrine, the Pope was told. The Catholic laity would not be able to understand the reason for the change. Should there have been a change in birth control teaching, grave scandal would have been caused among the faithful and they would have doubted all forms of Catholic authority. Therefore, the birth-control teaching must be preserved, not because of its internal rationality but as a matter of protecting the authority of the Vatican. To the extent that this argument was efficacious (and my Roman sources report it was the only argument that was decisive for the issuance of the encyclical), it turned out to be false. The laity, instead of respecting authority, came to have contempt for it. *

• Not only did it destroy the sexual credibility of Church authority, it also was a terrible injustice to the married lay people.*

The problem with Humanae Vitae, as I see it, is that the experience of the married faithful did not make its unique and indispensable contribution to the formation of the encyclical.

*Moreover, for all the talk in Papal documents about the human sciences, the contribution of the human sciences in matters of marital sex has been totally ignored. We know now from such disciplines as paleoanthropology and comparative primatology that what is unique and special about human sexuality is not its procreative but its pair-bonding aspects… We are pervasively instead of episodically interested in sex, ready for it at almost any time and attracted to members of the opposite sex precisely because these characteristics were selected in the evolutionary process to bind together the male and the female in a quasi pair bonding of the sort necessary to sustain their relationship so that the infant of the species, weak and defenseless for many years, might have two parents to protect him or her during the infancy and childhood years. *

Thus, for those interested in natural law, frequent and passionate sex between the male and the female of the human species is “natural” because it reinforces the quasi pair bonding, and to abstain from sex is to some extent “unnatural” because it weakens the quasi pair bonding.

It would appear, therefore, that the Catholic attempt to minimize marital sexuality in the name of the natural law in fact betrays that law. The refusal of Church leaders and Church theologians to take seriously what the human sciences say about the nature of human nature is a violation of the tradition which in the great natural-law thinkers like Thomas Aquinas was always empirical, seeking to learn by investigation instead of deriving propositions on a priori grounds about the nature of human nature.

*Serious natural-law investigation has long since been abandoned because the Church leadership is inclined whenever there’s debate about the nature of human nature to foreclose such investigation with statements from what is alleged to be the “deposit of faith”. *However, the Vatican has painted itself into such a corner on birth control that a consideration of the natural law of human sexuality is at the present time out of the question.

What a refreshing (and also depressing) point of view…
Pat

 

[misericordie]

WhiteDove:

I hear that most Catholic couples use artificial birth control and still take communion. If they die unrepentant, will they go to Hell?

With all due respect you establish these polls asking what everyone else thinks, but rarely express your own argument within the poll forum??
Anyway, since the Church teaches that ALL use of artificial contraception is A MORTAL(GRAVE) sin, if a person dies UNREPENTANT in ANY MORTAL sin, according to the NEW CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH they are judged and decend into what the church tradition calls, “hell.” Yes, hell is REAL, a defined DOGMA, and it’s reality cannot be denied, otherwise the catholic is no longer a Catholic but HERETIC. Again the same NEW CAtechism states those who until the last moment remain and die in a state of mortal sin will losse their soul. Artificial birth control=mortal sin.

 

[Anna_Elizabeth]

irish_mcmom:

It is not our requirement to judge anyone – only GOD will judge us. We are required to live our lives as CHRISTLIKE as we can. Jesus himself said the greatest of all the commandments was LOVE.

Dear irish_mcmom, You are responding not to what I said, but to what you wish I said. Now, once again:

We are REQUIRED to judge ACTIONS. The actions are those of people. Therefore, the judgements are of peoples’ actions!

CONSIDER: We have Ten Commandments, (not as the saying has it, “10 Suggestions”). We also have the Beatitudes and Our Lord’s own warning as to what will happen to those who do not behave as He wishes us to vis-a-vis these things.

THAT’s where salvation or damnation come in, and it’s up to God. There is a BIG DIFFERENCE. :tsktsk:

Also: You would do well to reread what Our Lord said was the greatest commandment.

“Not he who says to me, Lord, Lord…”

Anna

 

[Anna_Elizabeth]

patg:

Here is a different point of view on this subject from Father Andrew Greeley - someone with a lot more insight than most of us

Pat, I can not believe that I am responding to comments by so-called Father Greeley, after all these years of what generously can be called his foolishness. Still, perhaps some of you may be so young as to give his statements some credence.

Father Greeley spent the first years of his professional life desperately trying to make himself accepted by the secular sociologists among whom he taught. He failed; they never accepted him. In so doing, however, he became very way-out liberal and avant garde, and pulled the figurative rug out from under millions of staunch Catholics who looked to him for guidance. In that capacity he contributed much to the chaos of the last 40 years.

To his credit, he realized how things were stacked against him. He found a whole new life as a writer of fiction. I can’t comment on his ability, becauseI’ve never read his work.

"Insight?’ I don’t think so.

the argument against the change was neither one of moral theology nor one of sexual ethics. Rather, the argument was one of authority and power. … the birth-control teaching must be preserved, not because of its internal rationality but as a matter of protecting the authority of the Vatican.

Really? Well, that does come as a surprise. It would also be a surprise to popes of recent centuries and the members of ALL Christian denominatons up to 1930, when the Anglican (no surprise here), broke with what had been doctrine for 1900 years and made a “small” allowance for women in serious difficulty.The popes warned that artificial contraception would lead to (are you ready?), more adultery, fornicaton of all types - read: homosexuality and beastiality - divorce, ABORTION and euthanasia. Sound familiar?

To the extent that this argument was efficacious (and my Roman sources report it was the only argument that was decisive for the issuance of the encyclical), it turned out to be false.

Note: “my Roman sources.” Father Greeley has contacts inside the Vatican. That’s where he gets his insight! Wow!

Father also refers to St. Thomas Aquinas, but that’s duplicitous. Both St. Thomas Aquinas and St. Augustine considered artificial contraception totally immoral.

What a refreshing (and also depressing) point of view
Pat

Refreshing? I don’t think so…It’s same old, same old, Andrew Greeley, stirring up dissent as long as it gets him attention. I’ll grant you, it is depressing.

Read someone else,

Anna