Birth Control (Jesus, priests, moral, celibacy, contraceptives)

[Scott1]

Metanoia,

Before I met my boyfriend he had a girlfriend who was trying to be a good catholic. She decided to go off the pill and convinced him to use the rythm method. Now he has a gorgeous 4 year old son to show for it and a not so nice bank account from child support.

I would just like to be a pain in the fanny and point out that this could have been prevented if your boyfriend had practiced abstinence.

No marriage, no sex, and maybe his bank account would be "nicer"........... at least it sounds like you like his son...... may God bless you all.

Peace,
Scott

[Bright-ness' Shadow]

Scott,

"Not in this case" You expect me to proved examples by way of expalantion of what I say? The beam in your eye does not become you.

I did provide two expilicit examples in the sentance preceeding what you quoted and stated that the was a larger category. Perhaps my assumption that you would know the history of the RCC was faulty.

To help you remember:

• Royal marriages were blessed by the RCC for very young teens
• There was a period when the RCC did not marry couples but only blessed the marriage
• If you count the period of time when Peter was Bishop of Rome, the RCC had married bishops
• The RCC was ruled by lacivious popes, notably popes John XII, Benedict IX, Boniface VIII,Urban VI, Alexander VI, Leo X, and Clement VII
• Abortion was not considered "murder" for about 8 or so centuries
• Et cetera

So , in light of the history and the whim of dogma, the RCC can be rightly termed hypocritical.

-pah-

[Scott1]

pah,

"Not in this case" You expect me to proved examples by way of expalantion of what I say? The beam in your eye does not become you.

How did you know I was beaming...... ???

So , in light of the history and the whim of dogma, the RCC can be rightly termed hypocritical.

Not in my opinion (suprised?). The "whim" of dogma as you describe it would only be hypocritical if the RCC claimed that ALL revelation and revealed truth was already evident...... they do not:



Growth in understanding the faith

94 Thanks to the assistance of the Holy Spirit, the understanding of both the realities and the words of the heritage of faith is able to grow in the life of the Church:

- "through the contemplation and study of believers who ponder these things in their hearts";57 it is in particular "theological research [which] deepens knowledge of revealed truth".58

- "from the intimate sense of spiritual realities which [believers] experience",59 the sacred Scriptures "grow with the one who reads them."60

- "from the preaching of those who have received, along with their right of succession in the episcopate, the sure charism of truth".61

95 "It is clear therefore that, in the supremely wise arrangement of God, sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and the Magisterium of the Church are so connected and associated that one of them cannot stand without the others. Working together, each in its own way, under the action of the one Holy Spirit, they all contribute effectively to the salvation of souls."62


FYI, here is a more complete teaching about chastity:
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a6.htm#2331

Peace,
Scott

[Bright-ness' Shadow]

[quote=SOGFPP]pah,



Not in my opinion (suprised?). The "whim" of dogma as you describe it would only be hypocritical if the RCC claimed that ALL revelation and revealed truth was already evident...... they do not:

Why have you not addressed the hypocritical history?

No where else in Christianity is "tradition" and "[i]ex cathedra[\i]" in play. That is considered heretical by many. But if tradition is a valid source of revelation, then history is authoritative. Thw "whim" of dogma still stands in my eyes.

-pah-

[Scott1]

pah,

You seem to be missing the point. All truth is not evident as the Gospel continues to reveal itself in terms of our human understanding. The teaching office of the Church does not claim to be God.

One more time: it would only be hypocritical if the Church taught that it was all-knowing. IT DOES NOT.

These changes in doctrine are part of Church history.... for an athiest, you seem to have more of a problem with the fact that the Church is not God than I do!!!!

I just don't think you understand the difference between tradition, Tradition, and the deposit of faith...... I can help you with that, but without an open mind, it would be a waste of time. Let me know.

No where else in Christianity is "tradition" and "[i]ex cathedra[\i]" in play.

Wrong....... virtually EVERY Christian faith uses tradition in one form or another.... you can't have the Bible without it.......

Peace,
Scott

[Ceridwen018]

Scott,

What you said makes more sense to me and seems less hypocritical. To say that Rhythm is alright but condoms aren't seems a little silly to me, because they both do the same thing--and condoms aren't 100% affective, so if god really really wants you to get pregnant, the possibility is still there, haha.

'Don't want kids, don't have sex' is certainly an effective method (probably the only one that hits 100%), but personally I don't think it's reasonable. Couples don't get married solely to have children--that's certainly one reason, but I think the main reason is because they want to spend the rest of their lives with each other and support each other. Therefore, it seems to me that there would be times when a couple might want to hold off on children until they're more financially stable, or otherwise, or when they feel their family is large enough and don't want more children. To ask a married couple to stop having sex is quite outlandish, in my opinon. You are married aren't you? Do you agree with me on that one?

Another question though. I come from an extremely diehard Irish Catholic family. I also come from a family of very fertile women, meaning that I've got a regular army of cousins! Anyhow, one of my 2nd cousins had about 10 kids, and the doctor told her that she probably wouldn't be able to handle another one. After having practiced rhythm her entire life, she went on birth control pills. What does the Catholic Church say about something like this? If she had gotten pregnant again, she ran the risk of severe complications and death...in this case, does the church accept birth control pills?

[Scott1]

Ceridwen018,

Great post and great questions! I will try to cover everything and jump on later tonight if I can't finish....

Therefore, it seems to me that there would be times when a couple might want to hold off on children until they're more financially stable, or otherwise, or when they feel their family is large enough and don't want more children.

True, but life, and more importantly, the "conception" of a SOUL is a much larger thing than any human concern.
The birth of a child is a miracle, and in my opinion, the only chance humanity has to partake in something divine. We "help" God bring another soul into the world..... that has more implications than ANYTHING else we do on this planet.
The misconception in that the Catholic view of sex is somehow stunted.... on the contrary, our view is that sex, marriage, and the sanctity of life is GREATER than any secular view might hold. To say that a fleeting human financial state is comperable to the act of bringing a life into the world is not compatable with revealed truth.

To ask a married couple to stop having sex is quite outlandish, in my opinon. You are married aren't you? Do you agree with me on that one?

Quite outlandish...... I am married, and I would probable go insane! Some people though, would think it outlandish and a horrible restriction on their freedom if they could not masturbate 27 times a day.... have sex with multiple partners..... get divorced on a whim...... beat their spouse...... etc etc.....

. After having practiced rhythm her entire life, she went on birth control pills. What does the Catholic Church say about something like this? If she had gotten pregnant again, she ran the risk of severe complications and death...in this case, does the church accept birth control pills?

I'll get back to you on this...

Scott

[Ardhanariswar]

why must a relgion command over the sex lives of its married couples? i find that a little control freakish. who cares?! if God wills them to have children, i think the couple will know, i mean, its thier relationship with God, no celibate pope can command over that and think thier law comes from God.