The Evils of Contraception

[chevyontheriver]

Thanks, this is interesting information. I don't know of any of these methods mentioned in the Bible though. Manuscripts from the age of the Roman empire only refer to abortive means of birth control as far as I know, but abortion was mostly performed after an infant was carried to full term and born, after which they were carried out into the countryside and left alone out on a hill somewhere in order to die from exposure. Tradition tells us that the early Christians would go looking for them and bring them home and raise them as their own.

I think these methods are mentioned as 'pharmakia' in the New Testament, where they are condemned. You are right that Greco-Roman culture was big on abandoning infants to die, taking them to the dump. Roman fathers had the right to decide whether to keep or abandon a newborn at birth. And the Christians would go to the dump and bring home the babies.

 

[truefiction1]

I think these methods are mentioned as 'pharmakia' in the New Testament, where they are condemned. You are right that Greco-Roman culture was big on abandoning infants to die, taking them to the dump. Roman fathers had the right to decide whether to keep or abandon a newborn at birth. And the Christians would go to the dump and bring home the babies.

"Pharmakia" in the New testament appears like 5 times and it is a reference to magic potions used in witchcraft. It would be assuming a great deal to say that the Apostle penning the letters was referring to chemical concoctions being used to destroy fertilized embryos, which the Church condemns anyway. The most commonly used translations of the New testament translate the Greek word "pharmakia" into the English word "witchcraft".

 

[Vicomte13]

Well, I am not one of those types of Christians who think we can break Christ's commandments and still be saved. I know most non-Catholics you encounter may think that way, but I am not one of them. I believe that looking at a woman in lust can cause one to be in danger of hell fire (Matthew 5:28-30). It is why we as believers need to live holy as a part of saving grace. Grace is not a license for us to sin.

That's fine, as an aspiration. But nobody can live that way on a continuous basis. Nobody does. If they say they do, they are lying. The world has too many demons in it for men to really stay all that clean.

We do have to try, we have to aspire to it. But reality is: we fail. And we're going to keep failing. We're not out here all alone, we are always under attack by immensely powerful beings - the devil and his angels. They are smarter than us and stronger than us, and sometimes they win. Against all of us.

There are people who proclaim that God defeats all, but if their own personal lives were fully laid bare, with no ability to lie, all of the dirt and sin and failure would be clear.

So yes, we aspire to be perfect. But no, nobody achieves it. And whoever pretends to in front of men is a liar, a serial liar, and destined for the Lake of Fire for THAT reason.

If Christ's standard was purity, then everybody who dies after early childhood is doomed.

We're not. Christ's standard is purity, but Christ knows all along that we are under tremendous pressure and attack and that we will fail. We will certainly fail. He knows that. Which is why he gave the way to get clean of sin, the standard of forgiveness: seventy-times-seven, and the method to be forgiven: forgive others.

Forgiveness was a major part of Christ's message. And that forgiveness was emphatically not: "You're baptized, you're clean, you'll never sin again." If that WERE really the standard, as some arrogant and stupid Christians assert, then all adults go to Hell in the end and nobody is saved. Objectively speaking, in the real world, people do sin again. People who deny that are liars.

We do sin again, and God knows that we do, and will. Which is why Jesus said seventy-times seven times we must forgive, and that God will forgive to the extent that we forgive.

So, does this mean that you can follow Christ and sin? Well, there are two ways to put that:
No, because when you're sinning you are not following Christ - but you can start following Christ again when God forgives you.
Or
Yes, because you're going to sin again - it's inevitable. You have to fight sin, but if you fail, there is forgiveness.

What you can't do is glorify sin, to pretend that sin isn't sin. God will forgive sin if you're really sorry, and if you forgive others their sins. But if you insist that sin isn't even sin - as those do who, for example, assert that it's not sinful to accidentally kill children as collateral damage in warfare - then you're really in trouble.

In a world without demons or the Devil, it would not be hard to avoid sin. We don't live in such a world. God knows that, which is why the most important part of his message to us isn't the aspirational "Be perfect" that we all fall well short of, but love God and forgive others.

 

[Vicomte13]

"Pharmakia" in the New testament appears like 5 times and it is a reference to magic potions used in witchcraft.

Yes, but going further, "witchcraft" produced by pharmakeia was primarily the altered mental states that these potions brought on.

In modern terms - to be a drug dealer in substances that get people high so they "escape" the world into fantasyland is a mortal sin.

That doesn't simply mean heroin and cocaine either. It can encompass Xanax and other legal pharmaceuticals.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

That's fine, as an aspiration. But nobody can live that way on a continuous basis. Nobody does. If they say they do, they are lying. The world has too many demons in it for men to really stay all that clean.

We do have to try, we have to aspire to it. But reality is: we fail. And we're going to keep failing. We're not out here all alone, we are always under attack by immensely powerful beings - the devil and his angels. They are smarter than us and stronger than us, and sometimes they win. Against all of us.

There are people who proclaim that God defeats all, but if their own personal lives were fully laid bare, with no ability to lie, all of the dirt and sin and failure would be clear.

So yes, we aspire to be perfect. But no, nobody achieves it. And whoever pretends to in front of men is a liar, a serial liar, and destined for the Lake of Fire for THAT reason.

If Christ's standard was purity, then everybody who dies after early childhood is doomed.

We're not. Christ's standard is purity, but Christ knows all along that we are under tremendous pressure and attack and that we will fail. We will certainly fail. He knows that. Which is why he gave the way to get clean of sin, the standard of forgiveness: seventy-times-seven, and the method to be forgiven: forgive others.

Forgiveness was a major part of Christ's message. And that forgiveness was emphatically not: "You're baptized, you're clean, you'll never sin again." If that WERE really the standard, as some arrogant and stupid Christians assert, then all adults go to Hell in the end and nobody is saved. Objectively speaking, in the real world, people do sin again. People who deny that are liars.

We do sin again, and God knows that we do, and will. Which is why Jesus said seventy-times seven times we must forgive, and that God will forgive to the extent that we forgive.

So, does this mean that you can follow Christ and sin? Well, there are two ways to put that:
No, because when you're sinning you are not following Christ - but you can start following Christ again when God forgives you.
Or
Yes, because you're going to sin again - it's inevitable. You have to fight sin, but if you fail, there is forgiveness.

What you can't do is glorify sin, to pretend that sin isn't sin. God will forgive sin if you're really sorry, and if you forgive others their sins. But if you insist that sin isn't even sin - as those do who, for example, assert that it's not sinful to accidentally kill children as collateral damage in warfare - then you're really in trouble.

In a world without demons or the Devil, it would not be hard to avoid sin. We don't live in such a world. God knows that, which is why the most important part of his message to us isn't the aspirational "Be perfect" that we all fall well short of, but love God and forgive others.

As for walking holy and upright in the Lord, I will redirect you to this thread I created here.

As for the devil and his temptations:

The Bible says,

"Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you." (James 4:7).

As for being tempted:

“There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.” (1 Corinthians 10:13).
‭‭

 

[Vicomte13]

As for walking holy and upright in the Lord, I will redirect you to this thread I created here.

As for the devil and his temptations:

The Bible says,

"Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you." (James 4:7).

As for being tempted:

“There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.” (1 Corinthians 10:13).
‭‭

Let's cut to the chase, then. Christians sin. What do they have to do to be forgiven"?

Jesus said explicitly what we have to do: forgive other men their sins, and God will forgive you.

That's the law of God: to be forgiven, you must forgive. If you do not forgive, neither are you forgiven.

Do you agree?
Yes or no?

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Let's cut to the chase, then. Christians sin. What do they have to do to be forgiven"?

Jesus said explicitly what we have to do: forgive other men their sins, and God will forgive you.

That's the law of God: to be forgiven, you must forgive. If you do not forgive, neither are you forgiven.

Do you agree?
Yes or no?

Of course believers can be forgiven if they repent. Of course believers can struggle with sin. But they do not stay down in the mud eating the slop with the pigs their whole lives. You are simply not addressing the verses I posted to you. Please do so. Then we can talk about God's grace and forgiveness.

 

[chevyontheriver]

"Pharmakia" in the New testament appears like 5 times and it is a reference to magic potions used in witchcraft. It would be assuming a great deal to say that the Apostle penning the letters was referring to chemical concoctions being used to destroy fertilized embryos, which the Church condemns anyway. The most commonly used translations of the New testament translate the Greek word "pharmakia" into the English word "witchcraft".

It's worth a longer look. I hope you don't give up on the idea without it.

First, it's more 'potions' than 'witchcraft'. In fact sometimes right next to 'pharmakia' is 'sorcery'. One could read it as only 'potions' used by 'sorcerers', as in anything but contraception. Yet there has long been a component to 'witchcraft' over centuries which IS about contraception and abortion. So it is rational to conclude that the New Testament might really be condemning exactly that. Not proof, I'll grant you, but it's a clue. I accept it as likely.

Second, it's not just chemical concoctions to destroy fertilized embryos. It's concoctions and methods to prevent pregnancy too. The whole gamut of 'reproductive medical care'. Abortion causing and conception preventing 'medical care. Of the sort which Hippocrates was so against. In any event, Christians clearly came out over time against contraception, abortion, and infanticide, which were all popular in Greco-Roman culture. And Christians changed the culture, slowly over the centuries. Now the culture is headed back in many ways to something like a Greco-Roman one in regard to sexuality. And we're about to get rolled by it.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Yes, but going further, "witchcraft" produced by pharmakeia was primarily the altered mental states that these potions brought on.

In modern terms - to be a drug dealer in substances that get people high so they "escape" the world into fantasyland is a mortal sin.

That doesn't simply mean heroin and cocaine either. It can encompass Xanax and other legal pharmaceuticals.

I think the local potion maker was doing a twisted 'community service' supplying many 'needs. I have not heard of one of those needs being the providing of psychoactive drugs, but I suppose it could be. There are historians who do think they provided contraceptives and abortifacents. They probably also had love potions and junk like that.

The thing to be careful about is that 'pharmakia' should NOT be understood to condemn modern medicines that actually cure and are actually used on purpose. And I note that recently some medical researchers looked at medieval medications and actually found many of them to be effective. Who woulda thunk it.

 

[chevyontheriver]

Let's cut to the chase, then. Christians sin. What do they have to do to be forgiven"?

Don't forget John 20: 19-23.

 

[Vicomte13]

You are simply not addressing the verses I posted to you. Please do so. Then we can talk about God's grace and forgiveness.

I am addressing them in the way I know how - but cutting to the chase of what it means for people in the real world, who have to deal with their own weakness and the weaknesses of others on a constant basis.

There is strong exhortatory language, particularly from certain Apostles, about what being a Christian means. That's all good - it's good to be encouraged, to strive to be better than we are. But that very easily and readily slips over the edge of unreality among Christians, including Christians all over this site, into the absolutely absurd and counterfactual fantasy that BECAUSE people are Christians they do not sin. Or even that the fact somebody is a Christian MEANS that he is incapable of sin, and that therefore if somebody sins he isn't REALLY a Christian. This is of a piece with quoting St. Paul's "all have sinned" to mean that every human being who has ever lived, except for Jesus, has sinned.

That's what he literally said, but if he is taken literally then it is preposterous and he was a fool. Little babies - little children - have not sinned. They're people, and they haven't sinned. They're innocent, and if they die - whether they're growing up under parents who are Christians, Muslims, atheists, Nazis, Satan worshippers - doesn't matter - they have never sinned, and therefore they all pass final judgment - there's nothing to judge and - spotless - they are great indeed in the City of God at the end, and enjoy Gan Eden - Paradise - until the end.

The Apostles seem to say many things. Those things are hortatory. That's fine. But if taken absolutely literally, they blot out Christ, and they blot out reality, and they destroy the Christian religion by turning it into an obvious babbling stream of untruths.

Christians DO sin. That's a fact. Any Christian who tells you he doesn't is a liar - and has sinned right there. They may not sin AS MUCH as they did before, but they sin nevertheless. Being Christian does NOT immunize anybody from committing sin. In fact, it may draw in the demons for a closer and harder attack. We cannot lose sight of the good, the right and the just, and that has been revealed to us by God, by Jesus, by the Holy Spirit, by the Apostles, by the saints, by angels - all through the ages. We know what it is. And we know that we fall short of it.

So, to read the Scriptures in a way to suggest that reality isn't so - that Chistians don't sin - is to uproot reality and destroy Christianity. Because every honest Christian is aware of, and sensitive to, his own sins, the issue is not that he doesn't. He does. The issue is not that he can't sin. He can, and he does.

The issue is: I messed up, forgive me. THAT is the central issue of Christianity. Not the exhortation not to sin, but the forgiveness of God, and one another, the mercy God shows and that we are to show BECAUSE we are weak creatures that sin, err, make mistakes.

Everybody has a Dutch aunt who is hellbent - I use the word advisedly - on focusing on the blame, and focusing on perfection. Such people are repellent. They think it is because their purity drives off sin. Truth is, their hypocrisy drives off Christians, and drives off people from becoming Christians.

So here I have directly addressed what you quoted. First, almost all of it is from Apostles. Apostles are important teachers, but they are not God, their words are not as authoritative as the words of Jesus. Second, the Apostolic commentary is hortatory - it urges us to be better than we are. And by striving, we CAN BE better than we are. In abstract theory we could be perfect. But in reality, we're not. So therefore, third, the "how to be forgiven" part - how to obtain God's mercy - is much more important than the exhortations not to sin - because we're GOING TO SIN, and we need help once we do to get out of the mess.

The trouble with the hortatory "don't sin", and the extent to which Christians exaggerate the degree to which we avoid sin is that it causes us to become judgmental and insensitive to others whom we need to forgive, not judge.

The forgiveness part of Christianity is the active ingredient. That sin and evil infect everything, including Christians, is obvious. The question is: what do we do about it? We can dream of perfection, but we're not going to achieve it, so as a practical reality we have to learn damage control. And damage control is what Jesus said: to be forgiven the virtually inevitable sins, one has to forgive others.

I keep coming back to that, and not the hortatory stuff, because the hortatory stuff is just that - hortatory, urging, optimistic. It's useful only in a general sense. What we actually NEED, since we sin, is forgiveness, so I concentrate on that.

 

[Vicomte13]

Don't forget John 20: 19-23.

There's an interesting side discussion that could be had on that.

Does being forgiven by an Apostle, or by a priest, MEAN that one can skip the requirement of Jesus that one forgive others their sins? Can one be forgiven one's sins by a priest, NOT forgiver others their sins, and have those sins nevertheless forgiven by God? John 20: 19-23 could be read that way.

But the answer is no.

What the apostolic priest can do is sit in the chair of the ruler in the parable of the unforgiving servant. He can, on behalf of God, forgive the great debt, and it's really forgiven. HOWEVER Jesus spoke truly when he said that unless you forgive, your sins will not be forgiven by God.

So, the man knowing he needs forgiveness stands in the shoes of the servants in the parable, just as the priest stands in the role of the ruler. The priest, like the king, forgives - and the man is forgiven. BUT when he then steps away and is unforgiving to his fellow man, then he has sinned again - this time by NOT forgiving the sins of the other. And then, just as happened in the parable, the very king who had granted the forgiveness calls the unforgiving servant BACK and UN-forgives him: You worthless servant! I forgave you all of that, but you did not forgive - so you bear the penalty.

Jesus commandment: that to be forgiven you must yourself forgive other men, is an absolute. The absolution of the priest does forgive the sin - the priest stands in personam God or the ruler in the parable - BUT God in the parable said that the unforgiving servant's forgiven sins are un-forgiven - the forgiveness extended is revoked BECAUSE OF the sin of unforgiveness, and that is exactly what happens.

The sinner who confesses and is absolved, but who is unforgiving and arrogant, is un-absolved of his absolution due to his fresh sin of unforgiveness. God measures by the yardstick by which the man measures. Confession and absolution do not do an end run around the iron laws of forgiveness that Jesus laid down. Through the priest, the man can know forgiveness, but if he believes that he is absolved, thereby, by the requirement of forgiving others, he is very much mistaken. He isn't, and it's rather important that he realize it. Absolution of sin is on God's terms, and God made those terms crystal clear with Jesus. He didn't change that or create another way to do an end run around it. We should not kid ourselves that he did. We either forgive people their sins, or we fail final judgment and are thrown into Hell. There are no exceptions, and there is no special grace. The forgiveness is ALREADY the special grace. To refuse to forgive is to reject the special grace of forgiveness, and to remain unforgiven, and to be damned by Jesus to be thrown into the fire.

So just forgive. It's not that hard, really. It's easier to forgive than to not sin.

 

[chevyontheriver]

There's an interesting side discussion that could be had on that.

Does being forgiven by an Apostle, or by a priest, MEAN that one can skip the requirement of Jesus that one forgive others their sins? Can one be forgiven one's sins by a priest, NOT forgiver others their sins, and have those sins nevertheless forgiven by God? John 20: 19-23 could be read that way.

But the answer is no.

Of course. Those who do not forgive cannot be forgiven. The Catholic 'AND' applies. This AND that. Not this OR that.

 

[disciple1]

On another thread someone commented that Christians should be able to figure out the “evils of contraception.” I’m not going to post the quote because I’m not trying to call anyone out. And I decided to start a new thread so as to not derail the other. That being said...

Excluding contraception that terminates life (Plan B, for example), please discuss how contraception that prevents fertilization (condoms, for example) are evil.

Matthew chapter 11 verse 30
For my yoke is easy and my burden is light."

Raising children isn't easy or a light burden.

 

[Phil 1:21]

There's an interesting side discussion that could be had on that.

Does being forgiven by an Apostle, or by a priest, MEAN that one can skip the requirement of Jesus that one forgive others their sins? Can one be forgiven one's sins by a priest, NOT forgiver others their sins, and have those sins nevertheless forgiven by God? John 20: 19-23 could be read that way.

But the answer is no.

What the apostolic priest can do is sit in the chair of the ruler in the parable of the unforgiving servant. He can, on behalf of God, forgive the great debt, and it's really forgiven. HOWEVER Jesus spoke truly when he said that unless you forgive, your sins will not be forgiven by God.

So, the man knowing he needs forgiveness stands in the shoes of the servants in the parable, just as the priest stands in the role of the ruler. The priest, like the king, forgives - and the man is forgiven. BUT when he then steps away and is unforgiving to his fellow man, then he has sinned again - this time by NOT forgiving the sins of the other. And then, just as happened in the parable, the very king who had granted the forgiveness calls the unforgiving servant BACK and UN-forgives him: You worthless servant! I forgave you all of that, but you did not forgive - so you bear the penalty.

Jesus commandment: that to be forgiven you must yourself forgive other men, is an absolute. The absolution of the priest does forgive the sin - the priest stands in personam God or the ruler in the parable - BUT God in the parable said that the unforgiving servant's forgiven sins are un-forgiven - the forgiveness extended is revoked BECAUSE OF the sin of unforgiveness, and that is exactly what happens.

The sinner who confesses and is absolved, but who is unforgiving and arrogant, is un-absolved of his absolution due to his fresh sin of unforgiveness. God measures by the yardstick by which the man measures. Confession and absolution do not do an end run around the iron laws of forgiveness that Jesus laid down. Through the priest, the man can know forgiveness, but if he believes that he is absolved, thereby, by the requirement of forgiving others, he is very much mistaken. He isn't, and it's rather important that he realize it. Absolution of sin is on God's terms, and God made those terms crystal clear with Jesus. He didn't change that or create another way to do an end run around it. We should not kid ourselves that he did. We either forgive people their sins, or we fail final judgment and are thrown into Hell. There are no exceptions, and there is no special grace. The forgiveness is ALREADY the special grace. To refuse to forgive is to reject the special grace of forgiveness, and to remain unforgiven, and to be damned by Jesus to be thrown into the fire.

So just forgive. It's not that hard, really. It's easier to forgive than to not sin.

Scripture tells us plainly that if we do not forgive others God will not forgive us. (Matthew 6:15)

 

[Basil the Great]

Avoiding contraception might have been a good idea 100 years ago. However, even with the heavy use of contraception in the West for the past 50+ years, the planet's population is still rising. Sadly, our planet has finite resources and a finite amount of livable land. I believe that we are now at 7.5 billion. If the West had not begun regular use of contraception in the 1960's, logically we would now be at a minimum of 8.5 billion and probably at 9 billion. Uncontrolled population growth, especially with people living longer now due to modern medicine, will only lead to famine, disease, wars, etc. I would also point out that the majority report given to Pope Paul called for an end to the Church's ban on artificial contraception. However, there was a minority report that endorsed no change in the Church's teaching and Pope Paul went with the minority report. Still, Humane Vitae was not, I repeat not issued as an infallible decree. Hence, the Church can still change it's teaching regarding this issue and if the world's population reaches a tipping point, one would think that such would be a sufficient reason for a change in the teaching.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

I am addressing them in the way I know how - but cutting to the chase of what it means for people in the real world, who have to deal with their own weakness and the weaknesses of others on a constant basis.

There is strong exhortatory language, particularly from certain Apostles, about what being a Christian means. That's all good - it's good to be encouraged, to strive to be better than we are. But that very easily and readily slips over the edge of unreality among Christians, including Christians all over this site, into the absolutely absurd and counterfactual fantasy that BECAUSE people are Christians they do not sin. Or even that the fact somebody is a Christian MEANS that he is incapable of sin, and that therefore if somebody sins he isn't REALLY a Christian. This is of a piece with quoting St. Paul's "all have sinned" to mean that every human being who has ever lived, except for Jesus, has sinned.

That's what he literally said, but if he is taken literally then it is preposterous and he was a fool. Little babies - little children - have not sinned. They're people, and they haven't sinned. They're innocent, and if they die - whether they're growing up under parents who are Christians, Muslims, atheists, Nazis, Satan worshippers - doesn't matter - they have never sinned, and therefore they all pass final judgment - there's nothing to judge and - spotless - they are great indeed in the City of God at the end, and enjoy Gan Eden - Paradise - until the end.

The Apostles seem to say many things. Those things are hortatory. That's fine. But if taken absolutely literally, they blot out Christ, and they blot out reality, and they destroy the Christian religion by turning it into an obvious babbling stream of untruths.

Christians DO sin. That's a fact. Any Christian who tells you he doesn't is a liar - and has sinned right there. They may not sin AS MUCH as they did before, but they sin nevertheless. Being Christian does NOT immunize anybody from committing sin. In fact, it may draw in the demons for a closer and harder attack. We cannot lose sight of the good, the right and the just, and that has been revealed to us by God, by Jesus, by the Holy Spirit, by the Apostles, by the saints, by angels - all through the ages. We know what it is. And we know that we fall short of it.

So, to read the Scriptures in a way to suggest that reality isn't so - that Chistians don't sin - is to uproot reality and destroy Christianity. Because every honest Christian is aware of, and sensitive to, his own sins, the issue is not that he doesn't. He does. The issue is not that he can't sin. He can, and he does.

The issue is: I messed up, forgive me. THAT is the central issue of Christianity. Not the exhortation not to sin, but the forgiveness of God, and one another, the mercy God shows and that we are to show BECAUSE we are weak creatures that sin, err, make mistakes.

Everybody has a Dutch aunt who is hellbent - I use the word advisedly - on focusing on the blame, and focusing on perfection. Such people are repellent. They think it is because their purity drives off sin. Truth is, their hypocrisy drives off Christians, and drives off people from becoming Christians.

So here I have directly addressed what you quoted. First, almost all of it is from Apostles. Apostles are important teachers, but they are not God, their words are not as authoritative as the words of Jesus. Second, the Apostolic commentary is hortatory - it urges us to be better than we are. And by striving, we CAN BE better than we are. In abstract theory we could be perfect. But in reality, we're not. So therefore, third, the "how to be forgiven" part - how to obtain God's mercy - is much more important than the exhortations not to sin - because we're GOING TO SIN, and we need help once we do to get out of the mess.

The trouble with the hortatory "don't sin", and the extent to which Christians exaggerate the degree to which we avoid sin is that it causes us to become judgmental and insensitive to others whom we need to forgive, not judge.

The forgiveness part of Christianity is the active ingredient. That sin and evil infect everything, including Christians, is obvious. The question is: what do we do about it? We can dream of perfection, but we're not going to achieve it, so as a practical reality we have to learn damage control. And damage control is what Jesus said: to be forgiven the virtually inevitable sins, one has to forgive others.

I keep coming back to that, and not the hortatory stuff, because the hortatory stuff is just that - hortatory, urging, optimistic. It's useful only in a general sense. What we actually NEED, since we sin, is forgiveness, so I concentrate on that.

It still does not address the truth of the verses I brought forth. For we walk by faith and not by sight.

 

[Vicomte13]

It still does not address the truth of the verses I brought forth. For we walk by faith and not by sight.

What truth did you bring forth in those verses that I am missing?

 

[Vicomte13]

Avoiding contraception might have been a good idea 100 years ago. However, even with the heavy use of contraception in the West for the past 50+ years, the planet's population is still rising. Sadly, our planet has finite resources and a finite amount of livable land. I believe that we are now at 7.5 billion. If the West had not begun regular use of contraception in the 1960's, logically we would now be at a minimum of 8.5 billion and probably at 9 billion. Uncontrolled population growth, especially with people living longer now due to modern medicine, will only lead to famine, disease, wars, etc. I would also point out that the majority report given to Pope Paul called for an end to the Church's ban on artificial contraception. However, there was a minority report that endorsed no change in the Church's teaching and Pope Paul went with the minority report. Still, Humane Vitae was not, I repeat not issued as an infallible decree. Hence, the Church can still change it's teaching regarding this issue and if the world's population reaches a tipping point, one would think that such would be a sufficient reason for a change in the teaching.

Perhaps. But all that it means is that the West, and Christianity, contracept itself out of existence and Muslims, Chinese Communists and Hindus take over the world.

 

[Vicomte13]

Matthew chapter 11 verse 30
For my yoke is easy and my burden is light."

Raising children isn't easy or a light burden.

That's right. Which is why the whole panoply of social services - and the tax burden to pay for them - must be included in the pro-life argument for ending abortion. The FULL truth needs to be faced unflinchingly. Otherwise we're just Dutch aunts scolding uselessly from the sidelines. People mostly abort babies for reasons that come down to economics.

Yes, that means that their moral compasses are defective, but a lot more people will make the right decision if there is a financial support network for raising the children, or a financial incentive for handing them over for adoption rather than killing them.

The pro-life side wants to focus just on the abortion, because that's easiest, and it makes for a nice clean, rousing moral condemnation. But we lose all of the political battles on the subject everywhere in the world on the matter, because nobody who isn't our religion CARES about what our God thinks - they don't think he exists, and the don't accept morality derived from what they perceive as our boogey man.

If we want to save babies, we are going to have to raise taxes and vastly increase social welfare for unwed mothers. Otherwise it's just words, and words are wind.

When Christianity departs from pragmatic reality, it becomes worse than useless. It becomes like a vapor-locked pump, capable of expending vast energy, but incapable of moving any water. When Jesus wanted attention for himself and the apostles, he and they healed the blind and paralytic and fed thousands and thousands of people at a time. They performed major public miracles of healing and feeding and directly addressed the physical needs of the people they were trying to convert. They taught what they needed to teach, but the prepared the people to hear by performing medical miracles and feeding them - attending to what people perceive as their real needs.

Once somebody performs a miracle for you, or feeds you, you are much more willing to listen to what they have to say about their God.

If we want to save babies from abortion, we are going to have to construct a social welfare structure that provides for them all, and does so well, and we are going to have to put in place a heavier wealth redistribution taxation scheme than we already have. That's the way it is, and no amount of Dutch aunt bleeding out the eyes is going to change any of it. We have lost the political argument. To reopen the battle politically, we have to be ready to expand social welfare or taxation. Abortion is the cheap alternative to welfare. And it keeps down the long term crime rate.

To get people to be willing to stop abortion, the economic issue has to be addressed - not with speeches about Christian moralty - nobody except pro-life Christians care, and we are not the political majority - with money. Want to stop abortion? Pay for the social welfare that makes keeping the baby more attractive an option than killing it.