Contraception???

[Philothei]

Whew, this gets heated and we all basically agree.

After having three children myself, I can see how someone may just not have more after that through simple exhaustion driven celibacy.

Basil

lol... or self imposed celibacy... St. John of Krostadst did it... now did he "ask" his spiritual father? I am sure he went to his bishop with that....

 

[heart of peace]

As we know, many types of birth control literally induce abortion, which is why it's a total mystery how some Christians who are staunchly against abortion don't think twice about using the pill? It must be a case of burying one's head in the sand to avoid having to face reality, because they really want to avoid the inconvenience of pregnancy.

Basil

It seems you are referring to the morning after pill which is not the same as the birth control pill. The former prevents a fertilized egg from implanting (i.e. early stage abortion) and the latter prevents ovulation.

But ever since the debate on abortion started being taken seriously and birth control methods that expel an unimplanted baby came along (as well as in vitro fertilization), they decided to start defining pregnancy at implantation rather than fertilization. This allows the goose-stepping fiends at Planned Genocide, and the gynecologists in their pockets, to claim that birth control methods that interfere with implantation don't cause abortion, because according to their determination, the pregnancy hasn't begun yet. Consequently, women everywhere are being fooled into using contraceptive methods that kill their babies instead of merely preventing them from coming into being.

It is sad that Planned Parenthood seemingly does have a hidden agenda they are trying to meet because what PP originally stood for was a decent one (for women who have no health insurance). There was a time that I needed to visit a midwife at a PP office when I did not have health insurance from my employer.

I wanted to point out that preventing a baby from coming in to being [from use of barrier methods] is a far cry from killing a baby that has come in to being [abortion] and I don't understand how anyone can accuse someone of killing simply from using contraception.

 

[Thekla]

Whew, this gets heated and we all basically agree.

After having three children myself, I can see how someone may just not have more after that through simple exhaustion driven celibacy.

Basil

 

[vanshan]

It seems you are referring to the morning after pill which is not the same as the birth control pill. The former prevents a fertilized egg from implanting (i.e. early stage abortion) and the latter prevents ovulation.

No, I'm referring to regular hormone-based birth control pills, patches, implants, or IUDs, which prevent pregnancy in a few different ways. They do affect ovulation, but if an egg happens to be released and gets fertilized, they all also work by preventing implantation of that embryo. That is why all of these are considered abortifacient methods, and are therefore absolutely unacceptable in all cases.

I wanted to point out that preventing a baby from coming in to being [from use of barrier methods] is a far cry from killing a baby that has come in to being [abortion] and I don't understand how anyone can accuse someone of killing simply from using contraception.

Barrier methods are normally unacceptable, but as we've said above, out of pastoral concern, in extreme cases, they may be permitted, but this should be rare. The only reason these might be permitted or natural family planning, is that they don't kill anyone, so they are definitely not the same, but sin is sin. If someone is just trying to avoid children because they'd be too burdened with eight children, this is not a legitimate reason to use these types of birth control. Not wanting to have children is something one should consider before getting married, because if he or she doesn't want to have kids, there is always celibacy or monasticism.

This sounds kinda extreme, even to me, but I think that's because we exist within a depraved culture that believes the pleasure of sex is an entitlement that all mankind has a right to experience without any guilt, consequences, or obligations.

Basil

 

[choirfiend]

It seems you are referring to the morning after pill which is not the same as the birth control pill. The former prevents a fertilized egg from implanting (i.e. early stage abortion) and the latter prevents ovulation.



It is sad that Planned Parenthood seemingly does have a hidden agenda they are trying to meet because what PP originally stood for was a decent one (for women who have no health insurance). There was a time that I needed to visit a midwife at a PP office when I did not have health insurance from my employer.

I wanted to point out that preventing a baby from coming in to being [from use of barrier methods] is a far cry from killing a baby that has come in to being [abortion] and I don't understand how anyone can accuse someone of killing simply from using contraception.

Vanshan is right.

This common misunderstanding and lack of knowledge re: the Pill is exactly what Matrona was talking about.
The Pill is abortaficiant.

And to clarify for our RCC inquirer, since Monica has said it, but he still may not realize it:
The Orthodox stance on "contraception" is that ANY method of attempting to purposefully prevent pregnancy is contraception. That includes NFP, barrier, chemical, or any other method outside of simple abstention.

 

[Dorothea]

On contraception, its use by married couples for the spacing or limiting of children can be seen as appropriate, but use outside of marriage or for avoiding all procreation in marriage is universally rejected.

http://www.orthodoxchurchofstandrew.org/faith.html

 

[Dorothea]

By way of example, consider the statements made by distinguished theologians of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople — the oldest and most respected of the Orthodox churches. In his monumental book, The Orthodox Church, Bishop Kallistos Ware, probably one of the Church's most famous contemporary authors, wrote:

"Concerning contraceptives and other forms of birth control, differing opinions exist within the Orthodox Church. In the past birth control was in general strongly condemned, but today a less strict view is coming to prevail, not only in the west but in traditional Orthodox countries. Many Orthodox theologians and spiritual fathers consider that the responsible use of contraception within marriage is not in itself sinful. In their view, the question of how many children a couple should have, and at what intervals, is best decided by the partners themselves, according to the guidance of their own consciences." 1


Father Alexander Men, one of Russia's best known and widely read theologians, addressed the morality of contraception in this way:

"This is not my own opinion. I have consulted with our bishops and they are of the opinion that a person has a right to practice birth control. Otherwise, they may bring more children into the world than they can support, in which case they will become animals rather than human beings." 4​

A modified version of this view was also endorsed in August, 2000 at the Jubilee Bishop's Council of the Russian Orthodox Church, to whit:

"Among the problems which need a religious and moral assessment is that of contraception. Some contraceptives have an abortive effect, interrupting artificially the life of the embryo on the very first stages of his life. Therefore, the same judgments are applicable to the use of them as to abortion. But other means, which do not involve interrupting an already conceived life, cannot be equated with abortion in the least." 5​

Thus, while it is clear that the Russian Orthodox Church allows contraception, it bans the use of those which are abortifacient, and which may have a primary or secondary effect of destroying life.

http://www.hli.org/seminariansforlifeinternational/sem_for_life_eastern_orthodoxy.html
​

 

[vanshan]

On contraception, its use by married couples for the spacing or limiting of children can be seen as appropriate, but use outside of marriage or for avoiding all procreation in marriage is universally rejected.

http://www.orthodoxchurchofstandrew.org/faith.html

I don't think there's a consensus on this point. I think normally spacing children would be acheived through abstention. My wife also tells me that breast feeding limits ovulation naturally, so that may reduce the odds of another pregancy so soon after childbirth.

Basil

 

[Dorothea]

I don't think there's a consensus on this point. I think normally spacing children would be acheived through abstention. My wife also tells me that breast feeding limits ovulation naturally, so that may reduce the odds of another pregancy so soon after childbirth.

Basil

On the contrary, breastfeeding does nothing to prevent pregnancy as my SIL and a couple other friends have found that out by becoming pregnant when their newborns are barely 3 months old.

 

[vanshan]

On the contrary, breastfeeding does nothing to prevent pregnancy as my SIL and a couple other friends have found that out by becoming pregnant when their newborns are barely 3 months old.

Maybe they're not doing it right.

She says that if they are doing it full time without supplementing with formula it should suppress ovulation, but as we know things happen. This is not to say it's as effective a a barrier method, but if you're not going to abstain, then you kinda open yourself to the possibility of pregnancy.

Basil

 

[Reader Antonius]

Vanshan is right.

This common misunderstanding and lack of knowledge re: the Pill is exactly what Matrona was talking about.
The Pill is abortaficiant.

And to clarify for our RCC inquirer, since Monica has said it, but he still may not realize it:
The Orthodox stance on "contraception" is that ANY method of attempting to purposefully prevent pregnancy is contraception. That includes NFP, barrier, chemical, or any other method outside of simple abstention.

Ah I see.

Thanks.

 

[Monica child of God 1]

If I'm "inferring more ... than what was actually there", where exactly were you planning to go with this question/possible explanation? What's the purpose of putting this out there?

Well, first, I posed the question to bring up the possibility that our situation in the Orthodox Church may be more complex because we have married priests. If we had celebate clergy it would be another story. Generally I think there needs to be more openness about the issue. Because the American norm is having 2.5 children, it would be normal for someone living in modern society to assume that a priest with a small family is preventing conception. If nothing else, priests should be aware that an assumption can/will be made and take pains to stress the Orthodox position on the issue.

The world has changed. Contraception is advertised on TV now along with Viagra and Cialis. Contraception is an unquestioned fact of modern life for many people. Because we have married priests who are presumably sexually active, they have the potential to sound a legitimate voice about contraception, childbearing and other modern dilemmas about sexuality. It should not be the responsibility of the laity to ask. It should be articulated clearly like all of the other things in the Christian life that we state firmly.

Additionally, if priests are being granted economia to use NFP or ABC, it must be considered how that may affect the icon of Christ and the Church in parish. Modeling family life is one reason that having married priests in the parish is so important. In the case having children, how are priests and their wives modeling the Orthodox attitude toward this issue? Of course there are privacy concerns, but somehow a balance should be sought. If the parish looks at the priest’s family and sees two working parents and 2-3 children, that communicates something. If they see one parent with a secular job and another who stays at home* with the smallest of their brood of 8, that communicates something else.

Behold, children are a gift of the LORD,
The fruit of the womb is a reward.
Like arrows in the hand of a warrior,
So are the children of one's youth.
How blessed is the man whose quiver is full of them --Psalm 127


I don't have the answer to this question but in my mind, it is a legitamate concern.

M.

*This is not to say that I advocate that moms stay at home. I was just drawing out an example.

 

[Matrona]

I don't think there's a consensus on this point. I think normally spacing children would be acheived through abstention.

"Spacing children" in the fascist-Maggie-Sanger sort of way is out of the question for sure. But if an Orthodox mom has five children under five and a history of getting pregnant while breastfeeding, I would definitely not fault her for seeking her SF's permission to use barrier birth control for awhile to space any subsequent children... and help her retain her sanity.

 

[Monica child of God 1]

Breastfeeding does prevent ovulation in most women for a while. But you have to nurse pretty exclusively to get the full effect. If you have an infant who is ready for cereal early or goes to a caregiver for long periods of time or isn't a good nurser, you might find your periods coming back earlier or you might just get pregnant. I have known two women who don't use contraception and get pregnant after weaning like clock work. One weans at 18 months and the other at two years.

M.

 

[Philothei]

Additionally, if priests are being granted economia to use NFP or ABC, it must be considered how that may affect the icon of Christ and the Church in parish. Modeling family life is one reason that having married priests in the parish is so important. In the case having children, how are priests and their wives modeling the Orthodox attitude toward this issue? Of course there are privacy concerns, but somehow a balance should be sought. If the parish looks at the priest’s family and sees two working parents and 2-3 children, that communicates something. If they see one parent with a secular job and another who stays at home* with the smallest of their brood of 8, that communicates something else.



So, asking for a medical certificate or pschychological testing will be enough? This seems totally unappropriate.. in Orthodoxy we do not operate a "calvinistic police" for our clergy or our laity....

I am sorry to disagree but the size of a priest's family is not anyone's concern but his own. The problem of contraception has nothing to do with "how many kids the priest" has... rather how many kids I am going to have issue... If that was true that laity emmulates what the priest does ... .explain why there are so many divorces then? individuals who ask for divorce bacause they are just "bored" of their spouse like they change their shirts... I do not believe for a second that would make any difference other than not "hiring" such priests since they have big families.... and believe me I have see such situation happening from our beloved laity that they care more about how much salary to give to the priest rather than how many kids he has...

Do not mean to sound sour but I think that the priests are trying to do their best with their resources ... Their salaries are small as it is and you want to see the Papadia not working... that means a family at poverty level... And I am talking about reality check here and also not GOA priests who get more... but ROCCOR priests who have to take upon part time jobs to support their families....

 

[heart of peace]

Lord have mercy on my

I will refrain from further commentary for now.

 

[Monica child of God 1]

So, asking for a medical certificate or pschychological testing will be enough? This seems totally unappropriate.. in Orthodoxy we do not operate a "calvinistic police" for our clergy or our laity....

I am not suggesting that anyone police anyone. I am putting forth questions to consider.

I am sorry to disagree but the size of a priest's family is not anyone's concern but his own.

Philiothei you are taking this in a very individualistic sense of application. I am asking broad questions of implication. I am not telling anyone how many children they must have. These are philisophical reflections.

The problem of contraception has nothing to do with "how many kids the priest" has... rather how many kids I am going to have issue... If that was true that laity emmulates what the priest does ... .explain why there are so many divorces then?

I never said that the laity emulates the priest in everything. I said one of the reasons that we have married clergy is because they model marriage for us. I model good eating habits for my child. If my child eats junk food, does that take away my responsiblity to model good eating habits? No it does not.

Further, we are told to imitate our leaders

"Remember your leaders, who spoke the word of God to you. Consider the outcome of their way of life and imitate their faith."--Hebrews 13:7



If trusting God in matters of childbearing isn't an area of faith, I don't know what is.

Do not mean to sound sour but I think that the priests are trying to do their best with their resources ... Their salaries are small as it is and you want to see the Papadia not working...

I was drawing an example. I don't know which one the Papadia is (the husband or the wife) but I know that priests have to work and many times their wives must work too. But all people of childbearing age who are married struggle with this tension. We need to look at what it means for the church community as a whole when the priest is granted economia to use birth control. What message does that send? Are we straying so far from the ideal that something has been lost? These are questions that I don't have answers for and I am not arguing a particular side. I just want to know if we are asking these questions in the Church.

that means a family at poverty level... And I am talking about reality check here and also not GOA priests who get more... but ROCCOR priests who have to take upon part time jobs to support their families....

My priest works full time. All of the priests at my former parish (6 of them) worked full or part time. The wives of the married priests worked too.

M.

 

[Monica child of God 1]

"Spacing children" in the fascist-Maggie-Sanger sort of way is out of the question for sure. But if an Orthodox mom has five children under five and a history of getting pregnant while breastfeeding, I would definitely not fault her for seeking her SF's permission to use barrier birth control for awhile to space any subsequent children... and help her retain her sanity.

It is actually pretty important for the health of the mother for children to be spaced. Her stores of vitamins and nutrients are depleted because babies draw from them in the womb. They even take calcium from your bones and teeth. Inorder to have future healthy pregnancies and healthy babies it is good to have around two years between pregnancies.

M.

 

[Lotar]

It is actually pretty important for the health of the mother for children to be spaced. Her stores of vitamins and nutrients are depleted because babies draw from them in the womb. They even take calcium from your bones and teeth. Inorder to have future healthy pregnancies and healthy babies it is good to have around two years between pregnancies.

M.

I know women who get pregnant consistently a year or less after giving birth, and they are some of the healthiest women I know.

One funny thing I notice is that it is very rare to find an over weight woman with more than four children.

 

[Monica child of God 1]

The effects of giving birth many times with little space in between shows up after menopause for some women. Calcium depletion in part due to childbearing especially shows up later in life.

But when women nurse on demand for the first year of life, spacing can occur naturally because ovulation is suppressed. It is like God designed it that way

M.