Birth Control Methods

ArmyMatt

Regular Member
Supporter
Jan 26, 2007
41,469
20,025
41
Earth
✟1,455,676.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I think pretty much all of us would agree that an extreme medical situation could call for legitimate use of a preparation to prevent destruction or death of the person taking the preparation.

correct, and we too often use that 1% to green light the other 99%
 
Upvote 0

prodromos

Senior Veteran
Supporter
Nov 28, 2003
21,424
11,978
58
Sydney, Straya
✟1,167,262.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Oh, and can somebody get these stupid pilgrim hats off our heads? The pilgrims and Puritans were extreme forms of Protestants that we actually have a serious theological problem with, and it actually bugs me to see them dancing on our images of icons
Given the international aspect of Christian forums, I find this forcing of North American culture rather tiresome. I have a sneaking suspicion that the whole reason for the recent upgrade was because someone in the management of the forums wanted to implement this 'feature' specifically for the USA tradition. I expect we will all get football helmets when the superbowl is on.
 
Upvote 0

ArmyMatt

Regular Member
Supporter
Jan 26, 2007
41,469
20,025
41
Earth
✟1,455,676.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
How to get rid of the holiday stuff:

1. Click on your name (top right of screen)
2. Click on this icon
1669399228747.png

3. Click on 'Preferences'
4. Scroll down to 'Disable Holiday Styling' and click to remove tickmark
5, Scroll down to 'Save' and click

FYI
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Michie
Upvote 0

E.C.

Well-Known Member
Jan 12, 2007
13,746
1,267
✟134,199.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
I figured this video was a good recent example of conservative push back against the claim that the Orthodox Church no longer teaches against contraception. It reminds me of this quote from Palamas, because no one speaks this way anymore:

“For the physical impulse to reproduce is involuntary and does not obey the law of our mind, although some do bring it forcibly into subjection, while others chastely give rein to it solely for the purpose of betting children.” (Homily 52 Par 7)

I figured this is a worthy discussion.
I'm sorry, but if this is from Orthodox Ethos I can not take a grain of it seriously whatsoever. A priest who openly encouraged other priest to be disobedient to their bishops is not only that I would recommend to listen to on any other topic.

Orthodoxy is against abortion. Other birth control methods, like the Pill, are de facto purely pastoral matters between a married couple and their confessor. It is not our business.
 
Upvote 0

abacabb3

Newbie
Jul 14, 2013
3,208
555
✟73,913.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I'm sorry, but if this is from Orthodox Ethos I can not take a grain of it seriously whatsoever. A priest who openly encouraged other priest to be disobedient to their bishops is not only that I would recommend to listen to on any other topic.

Orthodoxy is against abortion. Other birth control methods, like the Pill, are de facto purely pastoral matters between a married couple and their confessor. It is not our business.
I think your last paragraph is your real issue, not the controversies surround Father Peter Heers. BC is not "purely pastoral" any more than the Wed-Fri fasts and other disciplines. Saint Gregory Palamas unambiguously teaches what the sole purpose behind the procreative act and even says that this is a condescension for those who do not pursue complete chastity. That is the Orthodox doctrine. How spiritual fathers and their children in good faith work out their salvation in fear and trembling to attain to this ideal is something that requires the spiritual father like a doctor to navigate the thorny issues of life and our weaknesses. But this cannot be construed as there being no ideal and no absolute demand upon all of us to do everything we can to attain to that ideal.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: rusmeister
Upvote 0

All4Christ

✙ The Handmaid of God Laura ✙
CF Senior Ambassador
Supporter
Mar 11, 2003
11,682
8,018
PA
Visit site
✟1,013,227.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I think your last paragraph is your real issue, not the controversies surround Father Peter Heers. BC is not "purely pastoral" any more than the Wed-Fri fasts and other disciplines. Saint Gregory Palamas unambiguously teaches what the sole purpose behind the procreative act and even says that this is a condescension for those who do not pursue complete chastity. That is the Orthodox doctrine. How spiritual fathers and their children in good faith work out their salvation in fear and trembling to attain to this ideal is something that requires the spiritual father like a doctor to navigate the thorny issues of life and our weaknesses. But this cannot be construed as there being no ideal and no absolute demand upon all of us to do everything we can to attain to that ideal.
Quotes like the one from St. Gregory Palamas (only purpose of sexual intercourse being for procreation) are always tough to hear when someone is diagnosed with infertility. Thankfully Orthodoxy as a whole has a more comprehensive viewpoint when looking at all Church Fathers.

I am glad that there are some passages that balance it out, such as this quote from St John Chrysostom.

Listen to what Paul says: “Because of the temptation to immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband.”. These are the two purposes for which marriage was instituted: to make us chaste. Of these two, the reason of chastity takes precedence. When desire began, then marriage also began. It set the limits to desire by teaching us to keep to one wife. Marriage does not always lead to child-bearing, although there is the word of God which says, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth.” We have as witnesses all those who are married but childless. So the purpose of chastity takes precedence, especially now when the whole world is filled with our kind.

From St John Chrysostom, On Marriage and Family Life, trans., Catharine P. Roth and David Anderson (New York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1986)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: E.C.
Upvote 0

ArmyMatt

Regular Member
Supporter
Jan 26, 2007
41,469
20,025
41
Earth
✟1,455,676.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
with those, there is also the oneness that husband and wife experience in marriage, where they mutually submit to each other.

I don’t remember which Father said that, but I know it’s there as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: All4Christ
Upvote 0

rusmeister

A Russified American Orthodox Chestertonian
Dec 9, 2005
10,394
5,011
Eastern Europe
Visit site
✟432,491.00
Country
Montenegro
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Quotes like the one from St. Gregory Palamas (only purpose of sexual intercourse being for procreation) are always tough to hear when someone is diagnosed with infertility. Thankfully Orthodoxy as a whole has a more comprehensive viewpoint when looking at all Church Fathers.

I am glad that there are some passages that balance it out, such as this quote from St John Chrysostom.



From St John Chrysostom, On Marriage and Family Life, trans., Catharine P. Roth and David Anderson (New York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1986)
I do agree, A4C. That’s why I keep speaking of the consensus of the fathers. If we go with what just one or two saints or fathers said, leaving out everybody else, we take a real risk of going off the rails. There are so many things we find consensus on, and a right attitude toward sexuality is one of them. OTOH, if what one says is consistent with and not contradicting everything the others are saying, we do need to give it more weight even if we don’t like what is being said because it cuts across something that we want.
Finally, abacabb3 is right in that there IS an ideal that we too quickly throw out the window as “unattainable”. It’s Aesop’s fox saying “sour grapes” that has us saying that either we don’t need, or even that there isn’t an ideal to strive for.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

rusmeister

A Russified American Orthodox Chestertonian
Dec 9, 2005
10,394
5,011
Eastern Europe
Visit site
✟432,491.00
Country
Montenegro
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I'm sorry, but if this is from Orthodox Ethos I can not take a grain of it seriously whatsoever. A priest who openly encouraged other priest to be disobedient to their bishops is not only that I would recommend to listen to on any other topic.

Orthodoxy is against abortion. Other birth control methods, like the Pill, are de facto purely pastoral matters between a married couple and their confessor. It is not our business.
I have to generally disagree, EC.
While obedience to bishops IS the general rule, there IS Orthodox precedent for disobedience to bishops - when bishops teach against the consensus of our Tradition. I have seen hierarchs and bishops in both the Greek and Russian Churches say and do despicable things that tempt me to toss faith altogether. But I have not, generally seen, open calls to disobey bishops. The priests in my former town have been punished, by the hierarchy, simply for saying that the violence of brother against brother is a bad thing. But none called for any disobedience to the hierarchs.

Having finally watched the video (I am in survival mode as a refugee, and working the equivalent of two full-time jobs just to make ends meet), I have to say that Heers is pretty solid. I thought maybe you meant that he was calling for disobedience to bishops, and found nothing of the sort in the video.

Heers lays out the unpopular ideal, and then repeatedly stresses that it cannot be imposed by others, but must be desired by the person who wants to grow closer to God, and that most can only domthis gradually, through struggle, and even, without condescension, sacrificing that asceticism in love for the sake of the weaker person they are yoked to. For we must admit that giving in to our carnal desires, as such, is weakness, and not spiritual strength. But he makes it clear that we do what we can, and doesn’t impose an external demand for absolute monastic chastity.

So while questions around that struggle are indeed pastoral, some things are not, and speaking as a general rule (excluding the use of a preparation like the pill for actual medical relief of actual suffering), the pill is not something that a pastor should grant pastorally, because it works so strongly against our Tradition, in which the effort to “control birth” - which nearly always means preventing it - is seen as playing God, deciding who will be born, and when. The consensus of the fathers is pretty clear that all blessed sexual union should be open to procreation, and “birth control” is aimed at closing out that procreation. Too many Orthodox pastors now lack the basic discernment to see that, and as Fr Matt pointed out, the result is massive, widespread abuse of economia, leading people to believe that what ought to be an extreme exception is the norm of Church teaching when in fact it is not. And so we fall further and further away from the Christian ideal.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: prodromos
Upvote 0

All4Christ

✙ The Handmaid of God Laura ✙
CF Senior Ambassador
Supporter
Mar 11, 2003
11,682
8,018
PA
Visit site
✟1,013,227.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I do agree, A4C. That’s why I keep speaking of the consensus of the fathers. If we go with what just one or two saints or fathers said, leaving out everybody else, we take a real risk of going off the rails. There are so many things we find consensus on, and a right attitude toward sexuality is one of them. OTOH, if what one says is consistent with and not contradicting everything the others are saying, we do need to give it more weight even if we don’t like what is being said because it cuts across something that we want.
Finally, abacabb3 is right in that there IS an ideal that we too quickly throw out the window as “unattainable”. It’s Aesop’s fox saying “sour grapes” that has us saying that either we don’t need, or even that there isn’t an ideal to strive for.
I agree with the approach to the Church Fathers, though I still disagree with the statement about the only purpose of sex being for procreation. I firmly believe the consensus of Orthodoxy, including Church Fathers and Bible is against that conclusion. I also am not throwing out the ideal because it is “unattainable”. :) (Lol the smile I put here would be more of a sad smile for a lack of a better emoticon rather than a happy smile.)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: rusmeister
Upvote 0

ArmyMatt

Regular Member
Supporter
Jan 26, 2007
41,469
20,025
41
Earth
✟1,455,676.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
While obedience to bishops IS the general rule, there IS Orthodox precedent for disobedience to bishops - when bishops teach against the consensus of our Tradition.

just to clarify, we do this by seeking the correct believing bishops and come under them, we don’t just break off and do our own thing.

not saying Fr Peter or you or anyone are saying not to do that, just trying to be clear.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rusmeister
Upvote 0

rusmeister

A Russified American Orthodox Chestertonian
Dec 9, 2005
10,394
5,011
Eastern Europe
Visit site
✟432,491.00
Country
Montenegro
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I agree with the approach to the Church Fathers, though I still disagree with the statement about the only purpose of sex being for procreation. I firmly believe the consensus of Orthodoxy, including Church Fathers and Bible is against that conclusion. I also am not throwing out the ideal because it is “unattainable”. :)
I hope you didn’t get that I was suggesting that you were (throwing out the ideal). I am speaking very much in general.
 
  • Like
Reactions: All4Christ
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Justin-H.S.

Member
May 8, 2020
1,400
1,238
The Shire
✟115,626.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I used to believe that sex can only be used for procreation and it's not supposed to be enjoyed, to my wife's chagrin. Then, she told me that sex can be used to bring us closer (her love language is physical touch at #1), and that even Chrysostom stated that sex can be used as a means to grow closer together. So, who knows? All I know is that our marriage has been better, and that she feels more loved as a result.
 
  • Like
Reactions: All4Christ
Upvote 0

ArmyMatt

Regular Member
Supporter
Jan 26, 2007
41,469
20,025
41
Earth
✟1,455,676.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I used to believe that sex can only be used for procreation and it's not supposed to be enjoyed, to my wife's chagrin. Then, she told me that sex can be used to bring us closer (her love language is physical touch at #1), and that even Chrysostom stated that sex can be used as a means to grow closer together. So, who knows? All I know is that our marriage has been better, and that she feels more loved as a result.
my Godfather would say (in addition to chastity) that oneness and procreation are the purposes of sex, and therefore require lifetime commitment. so yes, being one with your spouse is one of its purposes and you should draw together over a lifetime.
 
  • Like
Reactions: All4Christ
Upvote 0
Oct 15, 2008
19,375
7,272
Central California
✟274,069.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
people don’t like the traditional Christian answers because they can be hard to hear and to live by. To see that “the Church no longer teaches“ anything, is an absurdity. Either its teachings or constant or they’re not, and if they’re not, then it’s not the Church.

I think pretty much all of us would agree that an extreme medical situation could call for legitimate use of a preparation to prevent destruction or death of the person taking the preparation. Of course, that is not what 99% of all efforts to get these things promoted are about. The Lambeth conference in 1930, approving the general use of contraceptives by Christians in the Anglican church, and subsequently in Protestantism in general, put an end to any hopes of Orthodox and Anglican unification. I think it is helpful to know what forces are especially interested in promoting birth control among the general population, especially the poor and to see that as a general movement, birth control really means birth prevention, and it is entirely antithetical to what we believe. As Chesterton said, it is used to filch the pleasure from a natural process while simultaneously thwarting that process, And that’s what most people want it for. They want to act and live as if the babymaking act was primarily for pleasure and bonding, and not really for the making of babies. But people don’t want to hear that, so they are going to do what they are going to do, and “Orthodox Christians” are going to seek Economia, and priests are going to give it even if it is countermanded by our tradition, generally speaking. Generally speaking, such priests do not know what they do.

Oh, and can somebody get these stupid pilgrim hats off our heads? The pilgrims and Puritans were extreme forms of Protestants that we actually have a serious theological problem with, and it actually bugs me to see them dancing on our images of icons.
 
Upvote 0
Oct 15, 2008
19,375
7,272
Central California
✟274,069.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
people don’t like the traditional Christian answers because they can be hard to hear and to live by. To see that “the Church no longer teaches“ anything, is an absurdity. Either its teachings or constant or they’re not, and if they’re not, then it’s not the Church.

I think pretty much all of us would agree that an extreme medical situation could call for legitimate use of a preparation to prevent destruction or death of the person taking the preparation. Of course, that is not what 99% of all efforts to get these things promoted are about. The Lambeth conference in 1930, approving the general use of contraceptives by Christians in the Anglican church, and subsequently in Protestantism in general, put an end to any hopes of Orthodox and Anglican unification. I think it is helpful to know what forces are especially interested in promoting birth control among the general population, especially the poor and to see that as a general movement, birth control really means birth prevention, and it is entirely antithetical to what we believe. As Chesterton said, it is used to filch the pleasure from a natural process while simultaneously thwarting that process, And that’s what most people want it for. They want to act and live as if the babymaking act was primarily for pleasure and bonding, and not really for the making of babies. But people don’t want to hear that, so they are going to do what they are going to do, and “Orthodox Christians” are going to seek Economia, and priests are going to give it even if it is countermanded by our tradition, generally speaking. Generally speaking, such priests do not know what they do.

Oh, and can somebody get these stupid pilgrim hats off our heads? The pilgrims and Puritans were extreme forms of Protestants that we actually have a serious theological problem with, and it actually bugs me to see them dancing on our images of icons.
Yeah, nothing blasphemous or insulting about sticking a cartoon hat on top of sacred icons, right? Totally kosher! Yeeesh.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

abacabb3

Newbie
Jul 14, 2013
3,208
555
✟73,913.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Quotes like the one from St. Gregory Palamas (only purpose of sexual intercourse being for procreation) are always tough to hear when someone is diagnosed with infertility. Thankfully Orthodoxy as a whole has a more comprehensive viewpoint when looking at all Church Fathers.

I am glad that there are some passages that balance it out, such as this quote from St John Chrysostom.



From St John Chrysostom, On Marriage and Family Life, trans., Catharine P. Roth and David Anderson (New York: St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1986)
It's funny when we find fathers saying things we do not like, we often try to find another father to invalidate what he says instead of harmonzing their statements. As for Saint John Chrysostom, he agrees 100% with St Gregory Palamas:

Nor again did He abolish all desire, but only that which is unlawful, for he saith, “Nevertheless, because of desires, let every man have his own wife.” But to lay up treasure He allowed not, either with cause or without. For those passions were implanted in our nature for a necessary end; desire, for the procreation of children, and anger, for the succor of the injured, but desire of money not so. (Homily 23 on 2 Corinthians)

Palamas, having seen the uncreated light, was literally divinized by God. He didn't screw theological things up.
 
Upvote 0