Birth control.

[cmarie423]

Okay so I don't want to cause unneeded drama but I have a hard time believing all types of birth control is wrong. I understand the pill and hormonal birth control because they can cause miscarriages and that I do agree with, but seriously condoms aren't okay? I mean how is that any different from nfp if you practice that correctly? Your intent is NOT to have children. Sex within marriage cannot just be for procreation. If that's the case all Catholics should be celibate until they want a child. Seems a bit much. Anyways I'm just looking for some honest answers. Every Catholic marriage seriously cannot result in 12 kids just because you aren't allowed to use some sort of birth control. I understand being open to life but everyone is not equipped to deal with a large family.

 

[Anhelyna]

Hmm are condoms perfect ?

Has man made anything that is perfect [ i.e. 100% fool proof and fault free ] ?

Of course not.

Our priest has 7 kids - 6 boys , one girl and a baby in utero

 

[The Fire Rises]

Wait....is that seriously a Catholic doctrine?

I always knew about the anti-abortionism, which I for one agree with...but this is completely new territory. I'm surprised I haven't heard of this before.

 

[Gwendolyn]

It is about leaving sex completely unaltered. Using artificial birth control alters the nature of the act, putting unnatural barriers in the way.

It is true that the intent is the same with NFP - not to conceive a child. The issue is more one of using nature's own methods (abstinence, natural infertile days) vs using artificial methods that get in the way of nature.

 

[The Fire Rises]

So if someone is discovered to have purchased condoms, are they labeled as a "heretic" and asked to leave the Church? (I'm not trying to be sarcastsic, I'm genuinely just asking)

Also, where do Catholics trace the root of this doctrine/decree? Did one of the early popes implement it, or is it relatively new? Or do they point to the Bible for support?

 

[sylverpiano]

Complete celibacy works very well for me.

 

[ebia]

Wait....is that seriously a Catholic doctrine?

I always knew about the anti-abortionism, which I for one agree with...but this is completely new territory. I'm surprised I haven't heard of this before.

Really? It's one of the RCCs most controversial teachings (not for its impact on individual westerners but for its impact in the 3rd world, especially Africa)

 

[Cosmic Charlie]

It is about leaving sex completely unaltered. Using artificial birth control alters the nature of the act, putting unnatural barriers in the way.

It is true that the intent is the same with NFP - not to conceive a child. The issue is more one of using nature's own methods (abstinence, natural infertile days) vs using artificial methods that get in the way of nature.

No. This is not correct, you have an incorrect understanding of Humane Vitae.

It is NOT about using a "natural" method, it's strictly about not creating a barrier to conception.

Natural vs. Unnatural is not at issue. The issue is a barrier. And the barrier isn't sexual, it physical and spiritual. It's about withholding yourself during intercourse.

Humane Vitae says you must share yourself completely with your spouse, and that includes your reproductive self. To withhold any part of your being is what is at issue here.



Which brings us to the real issue with Humane Vitae:

Why is the ongoing, month by month, careful planning to scupulously avoid intercourse when you are likely to become pregnant not considered intentionally withholding your reproductive self ?

(I've still got it)

 

[The Fire Rises]

I'd still like some answers to my previous questions...

 

[ebia]

.

 

[Gwendolyn]

Oh, sorry about that, Charlie. Thanks for the correction.

Short answer: if a person uses contraception they are not able to receive the sacraments of the Church. They are in grave sin and must confess the sin and strive to cease using contraception. Only once they stop using it can they receive the sacraments again.

Long answer: to be in mortal sin you have to have full knowledge that something is wrong, you have to have the full freedom to make the choice to choose that wrong thing, and the sin itself (contraception) has to be considered grave matter. Some people don't have full freedom and that affects their culpability.

 

[Cosmic Charlie]

So if someone is discovered to have purchased condoms, are they labeled as a "heretic" and asked to leave the Church? (I'm not trying to be sarcastsic, I'm genuinely just asking)

Also, where do Catholics trace the root of this doctrine/decree? Did one of the early popes implement it, or is it relatively new? Or do they point to the Bible for support?

I'd still like some answers to my previous questions...

OK, dude, you asked for it.

Step back and try to keep up (This subject was debated (bare-fisted, as David used to say) for 3 solid years on this forum between Catholics who were SERIOUSLY informed on the subject)

Buy a condoms doesn't get you anything (after all us might be using them in a water balloon fight)

Using one, that's different, using one disfigures the martial act and is a mortal sin (look up mortal sin, don't make me explain it)

Heresy has nothing to do with it.

Until....


.....You run into a guy like me who has a challenge on the encyclical on the subject of birth control called : Humane Vitae. (Look up encyclical - don't make me explain that either)

So USING a condom isn't hearsay, but suggesting that there is no difference between using NFP (that's Natural Family Planning - look that up too) and using a condom - that could be considered hearsay.

The support of Humane Vitae (referred to as HV from this point forward) from a theological stand point is based primarily on Natural Law ( Note the capitalization and don't even consider responding until you understand what Natural Law is in Catholic theology.)

Having an encyclical based almost solely on Natural Law is unusual and in the specific case of HV it come with it's own special set of issues which I can't hope to explain to you unless you have read it.

Which you won't and you won't understand it completely without some understanding of Natural Law.

Happy now ?

 

[Brooklyn Knight]

Really? It's one of the RCCs most controversial teachings (not for its impact on individual westerners but for its impact in the 3rd world, especially Africa)

You're never going to get the Vatican to throw a little leeway for those who want to enjoy premarital sex or infidelity, and I doubt you Anglicans are loosey-goosey on that front either.

 

[The Fire Rises]

Are there any Catholic teachers/preachers that you know of who give very comprehensive and logical defenses of this subject, preferably with Biblical context?

(either books, videos or articles, I really don't care which)

I've learned by now that forums are arguably one of the worst places to go for clarity and agreement.

 

[cmarie423]

Still to me it seems insane that condoms cannot be used within the confines of marriage. They aren't perfect, a child can still come from them. I've heard a lot of arguments about people preventing God's will for them having a child but really if God wants a child to be born wouldn't that happen weather or not people use a condom? I can't remember which scripture it is but there's one that speaks about it's better to be married then to sin outside of marriage...I believe it's speaking about sex. I just don't see how God would create something for two married people to enjoy and you can only do it to create a child. Forgive me for being blunt and I'm trying to say this in the most polite way possible but if it wasn't supposed to be enjoyed and purely meant for procreation why would it be pleasurable? Animals get no pleasure and they create. The desire to have children would be the same I'm sure if sex wasn't enjoyable. It's all just confusing.

 

[Brooklyn Knight]

Still to me it seems insane that condoms cannot be used within the confines of marriage. They aren't perfect, a child can still come from them. I've heard a lot of arguments about people preventing God's will for them having a child but really if God wants a child to be born wouldn't that happen weather or not people use a condom? I can't remember which scripture it is but there's one that speaks about it's better to be married then to sin outside of marriage...I believe it's speaking about sex. I just don't see how God would create something for two married people to enjoy and you can only do it to create a child. Forgive me for being blunt and I'm trying to say this in the most polite way possible but if it wasn't supposed to be enjoyed and purely meant for procreation why would it be pleasurable? Animals get no pleasure and they create. The desire to have children would be the same I'm sure if sex wasn't enjoyable. It's all just confusing.

Sex is indeed pleasurable but sex shouldn't be the only thing to define a marriage. Having intercourse without any objections to procreating doesn't always lead to pregnancies: low sperm count, infertility, impotency, problems with the uterus or ovaries that narrows the window to procreate, menopause, etc.

 

[Cosmic Charlie]

Are there any Catholic teachers/preachers that you know of who give very comprehensive and logical defenses of this subject, preferably with Biblical context?

(either books, videos or articles, I really don't care which)

I've learned by now that forums are arguably one of the worst places to go for clarity and agreement.

I'm going to try this again:

The theology of the Humane Vitae is not based directly on Biblical principles

It's based, almost solely, on Natural Law.

You are not asking the right question.

The right question is: What is the theological basis for the Churches prohibition of artificial birth control methods ?

That has an answer. The answer is Humane Vitae, an encyclical written on the subject by Pope Paul VI.

It can be found here

It is the best explanation on the subject and it's own theological defense.

Read it.

or not.

I don't really care, but it you do read it be advised: you won't completely understand it.

That's ok, but at least then we have a context on which to educate you on the subject.

 

[ebia]

You're never going to get the Vatican to throw a little leeway for those who want to enjoy premarital sex or infidelity, and I doubt you Anglicans are loosey-goosey on that front either.

What?

 

[Brooklyn Knight]

What?

You brought up Africa, and everyone likes to point out that us Catholics don't allow contraceptive use and that it's supposedly the single-reason as to why HIV/AIDS is increasing.

So, people in Africa are devout because they don't use contraceptives...yet, somehow, things like infidelity get lost in translation for them?

You're not going to get the Church to make exceptions for premarital sex, and especially not for infidelity. If someone is that driven to commit sin, then mind as well do something where the consequence isn't that negative for your livelihood and/or soul.

As if not putting on that condom was going to lessen that sin.

 

[ebia]

You brought up Africa,

As the reason the CC's position of contraception is well known.

Although there are innocent victims in the African situation - such as the faithful wives and children contracting HIV through the husband's infidelity.