Why do so many Catholics use contraception? Experts weigh in

[Michie]

Recent data from the federally administered National Survey of Family Growth shows large majorities of Catholics report using at least one form of artificial contraception — with over 90% having used condoms and more than 60% having used the hormonal birth control pill.

Experts say this is “a crisis of catechesis within the Church” and one that requires both a compassionate response and a firm application of Catholic sexual ethics.

The Catholic Church for centuries has taught that all forms of artificial birth control are illicit and forbidden to married couples. This teaching was formalized in 1968 by St. Paul VI, who in his encyclical Humanae Vitae declared that “any action … specifically intended to prevent procreation” was “absolutely excluded” as a lawful means of regulating the number of children in a Catholic marriage.

Though Church teaching on the matter continues to be unambiguous, large numbers of Catholics have reported high usages of artificial contraception over the years. A 2011 Guttmacher study, for instance, found that “among women who are currently at risk of unintended pregnancy,” fully 87% of Catholics “use a method other than natural family planning.”

Continued below.

Why do so many Catholics use birth control? Experts weigh in

Large majorities of Catholics use birth control, which experts say is “a crisis of catechesis within the Church.”

www.catholicnewsagency.com

 

[RileyG]

They care more about pleasure than their souls. Apparently sex rules everything, IMO. It’s sad.

 

[Cosmic Charlie]

"Experts weigh in."

"Crisis in Catechesis", "Gospel of the Sexual Revolution".

Who are these experts ?

I've actually talked to, like, a Catholic Theologian on this topic (in secret, of course, off the record, semi anonymously because they can't talk out loud because they've been effectively silenced on the topic - a fact that speaks volumes about the problems with this teaching)

I've read Humane Vitae, more the once. Discussed it with others.

Maybe the problem isn't the Catechesis, maybe the teaching doesn't make sense.

It's been suggested.

More the once.

By better minds then mine (by me - but by better minds then mine as well)

Humane Vitae is badly reasoned, based almost sole on Natural Law (which is subject to reinterpretation without notice), incomplete in its logic and was written by one man after he rejected the multi-year research of an ecumenical council on the subject. His reason for rejection of the majority of the council was never made clear. And the almost universal rejection by almost everyone who has to actually use this teaching brings the possibility of it being just wrong based on something called the "Magisterium of the laity", a concept I can't even begin to explain but has been suggested to me by said Catholic Theologian.

Anyway.

My first post on our little forum was about Humane Vitae needing clarification. I got jumped immediately.

20 years later, it still needs clarification. Because nobody, who can actually understand it, buys it completely. And that's not a problem in Catechesis, that's a problem with the teaching itself. And most people can't really understand it, because it's badly reasoned and just written funny.

 

[RileyG]

"Experts weigh in."

"Crisis in Catechesis", "Gospel of the Sexual Revolution".

Who are these experts ?

I've actually talked to, like, a Catholic Theologian on this topic (in secret, of course, off the record, semi anonymously because they can't talk out loud because they've been effectively silenced on the topic - a fact that speaks volumes about the problems with this teaching)

I've read Humane Vitae, more the once. Discussed it with others.

Maybe the problem isn't the Catechesis, maybe the teaching doesn't make sense.

It's been suggested.

More the once.

By better minds then mine (by me - but by better minds then mine as well)

Humane Vitae is badly reasoned, based almost sole on Natural Law (which is subject to reinterpretation without notice), incomplete in its logic and was written by one man after he rejected the multi-year research of an ecumenical council on the subject. His reason for rejection of the majority of the council was never made clear. And the almost universal rejection by almost everyone who has to actually use this teaching brings the possibility of it being just wrong based on something called the "Magisterium of the laity", a concept I can't even begin to explain but has been suggested to me by said Catholic Theologian.

Anyway.

My first post on our little forum was about Humane Vitae needing clarification. I got jumped immediately.

20 years later, it still needs clarification. Because nobody, who can actually understand it, buys it completely. And that's not a problem in Catechesis, that's a problem with the teaching itself. And most people can't really understand it, because it's badly reasoned and just written funny.

I’m not a theologian. I’ve never read it.

What does “magisterium of the laity” even mean?

 

[Michie]

I’m not a theologian. I’ve never read it.

What does “magisterium of the laity” even mean?

Magisterium = Vatican/ being in union with the Church. Laity = you and I. The pew sitters.

 

[Cosmic Charlie]

I’m not a theologian. I’ve never read it.

What does “magisterium of the laity” even mean?

Oh, really, Riles you gotta read HV.

It's not that long (30 paragraphs), and it's written pretty straight forward, so it's not hard to understand. It's just impossible to follow and raises more questions in this reader's mind than it answers. (And, again, I'm not alone in THAT regard) For one thing, I can't figure out why intermittently abstaining from intercourse is actually a permissible form of birth control, I don't think it should be given the issues of unity/reproduction laid out in the document. But, that's another post (or 20).

If you're up to it:

Humanae Vitae (July 25, 1968) | Paul VI

Humanae Vitae - Encyclical Letter of His Holiness Paul VI on the regulation of birth, 25 July 1968

www.vatican.va

As far as "Magisterium of the Laity" is concerned: It's a concept that states (broadly and sort of) that we, as the faithful, have the Word of God written on our souls, and we know, collectively, what is right and with is wrong. And we will not follow, collectively, something that is morally incorrect or unsound. When it was explained to me, I thought of it as a safety value that prevented the faithful from being cowed into following a false teaching or personality. (But, again, I'm not in any position to argue this one way or the other, I got lost in the weeds of moral philology by this point in the conversation and I got the impression that this person was not comfortable talking about it in the particular context of Humane Vitae)

 

[fide]

My conclusion is that it's not a crisis of catechesis, but a crisis of faith - that is to say, more specifically, supernatural faith. Many Christians, in my opinion, operate on merely natural "faith." Faith itself - the theological virtue of faith, infused in Baptism - is a supernatural reality. Totally different is "natural faith", which is not salvific faith at all but is (perhaps a mixture of) training from childhood, effects of formation under parenting, rational conclusions, human reasonings, affective comfort, intuitive sense, cultural factors, etc.
All those causes or explanations of faith are human - "of man". Salvific supernatural faith is not of man, but is of God - a gift of God through grace. As Paul wrote:
Eph 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God—
Eph 2:9 not because of works, lest any man should boast.

Bp Strickland wrote a blog "Supernatural Truth" on the decline of the supernatural in the Church. One paragraph from the essay is this:

It is of the utmost importance that humanity embraces Jesus Christ and His Church. However, the tremendous challenge of this is seen clearly in these times as His chosen vessel, the Church, which is plagued with human weakness and sinfulness, struggles against the One who has brought her into being – God’s Divine Son. The Church is holy, yet composed of sinful human beings, and although guided by supernatural truth, she often gets bogged down in and even corrupted by things of this natural world. The image of the statue in the Book of Daniel comes to mind; the statue with feet partly of clay and partly of iron is an apt image of the Church. She has the iron of supernatural truth, but she also has the fragile pottery of the world, which often falls to dust. In our time, it appears that the overwhelming presence of fragile clay in the Church threatens to obliterate the supernatural truth that is her heart and soul. Christ has promised us that the Church will not be obliterated by the powers of Hell, but we must make it our daily choice to live the supernatural truth that is Jesus Christ.

He includes this very powerful and disturbing fact in the Church today:

Too many prelates not only exhibit a lack of supernatural faith on their part, but they are also “hell-bent” on eliminating every vestige of supernatural faith from the Church. This has been building momentum over many decades, but we must open our eyes to the crescendo of apostasy that we are now witnessing. Whether in liturgy, doctrine, or simple everyday piety of Catholics, too many prelates and powerful forces in the Vatican are doing their best to dismantle every vestige of supernatural faith, as well as any understanding of the supernatural truth that Jesus Christ has revealed to us.

The fact that many Catholics today are choosing physical pleasures that their own "reasonings" allow, over the way of life the Church has received supernaturally from God - a more difficult path - is not surprising.

 

[Diamond7]

They care more about pleasure than their souls.

They are gambling with their health. The older they get the higher their chance is of getting sick. Even people that make a reasonable attempt to take care of their health still may get sick with something that is 100% preventable.

Side effects include: Dizziness, Bloating, Weight gain, Dry eyes, and Lowered libido.
In rare cases, birth control pills can also cause serious complications, such as heart attack, stroke, blood clots, and liver tumors. These complications can sometimes be fatal

 

[RileyG]

They are gambling with their health. The older they get the higher their chance is of getting sick. Even people that make a reasonable attempt to take care of their health still may get sick with something that is 100% preventable.

Side effects include: Dizziness, Bloating, Weight gain, Dry eyes, and Lowered libido.
In rare cases, birth control pills can also cause serious complications, such as heart attack, stroke, blood clots, and liver tumors. These complications can sometimes be fatal

That’s true.

Also many medications have serious side effects.

 

[Diamond7]

Also many medications have serious side effects.

You have to weigh the risk and the benefit. My dad was a doctor and they knew that 3% of the people at the time would die from the anesthesia. It turns out that is what he died from. You live by the sword, you die by the sword.

I have to go in every 3 months for blood tests to monitor the medicine I am taking.

 

[RileyG]

You have to weigh the risk and the benefit. My dad was a doctor and they knew that 3% of the people at the time would die from the anesthesia. It turns out that is what he died from. You live by the sword, you die by the sword.

I have to go in every 3 months for blood tests to monitor the medicine I am taking.

I’m sorry for your loss.

You’re absolutely right though. There are some antidepressants and mood stabilizers that can cause serious problems with cholesterol and/or cause kidney stones.

Your health is too important.

 

[Chrystal-J]

Most birth control is so hard on the female body. It's either chemicals, metal in someone's body or surgical procedures.

 

[RileyG]

Most birth control is so hard on the female body. It's either chemicals, metal in someone's body or surgical procedures.

That’s a horrifying thought!

Apparently, self-control and abstinence is “old fashioned.” If it feels good, do it.

 

[Cosmic Charlie]

That’s a horrifying thought!

Apparently, self-control and abstinence is “old fashioned.” If it feels good, do it.

Not for nothing but,

We got an entire generation and about a half that "isn't doing it".

Look at the stats: Gen Z is a bunch of virgins with no interest in actually "doing it".


AND.....

EVERYONE IS FREAKED OUT BECAUSE WE'VE GOT NO KIDS.

C'mon

Make up your minds already.

 

[RileyG]

Not for nothing but,

We got an entire generation and about a half that "isn't doing it".

Look at the stats: Gen Z is a bunch of virgins with no interest in actually "doing it".


AND.....

EVERYONE IS FREAKED OUT BECAUSE WE'VE GOT NO KIDS.

C'mon

Make up your minds already.

Really? I actually don’t ask people about what happens in the bedroom because….that’s literally none of my business.

Maybe some Gen Zers would be excellent candidates for monastic orders? LOL

The western world is in a decline on birth rates,. People have been having fewer children and are living longer, no surprise here.

 

[Michie]

Sheesh what a use of the broad brush! Lol!

 

[Diamond7]

Most birth control is so hard on the female body.

They way birth control pills work is to make the women sick so that she can not get pregnant. . These pills work by preventing ovulation and maintaining low levels of estrogen and progesterone, which helps prevent pregnancy2

I get regular blood tests to make sure all of my levels are in the normal range. It is not unusual for me to go to a specialist because it is to complicated for my regular doctor to figure out.

 

[Lady Bug]

Well, some women use it non-BC reasons, like managing their PMDD moods. I don't, but I heard it works for some women in those situations.

 

[RileyG]

Well, some women use it non-BC reasons, like managing their PMDD moods. I don't, but I heard it works for some women in those situations.

I also heard some women use it because they were getting their period every two weeks, and they aren’t sexually active.