Is this "development" or "change" in doctrine?

[Dominus Fidelis]

"In the first edition, first printing (1963) of The Orthodox Church by Timothy (Kallistos) Ware - a widely-cited and authoritative source on Orthodox teaching -, the author states (page 302):

Artificial methods of birth control are forbidden in the Orthodox Church.

The first edition, revised 1984 version of The Orthodox Church, however (NY: Penguin Books, page 302), states (emphasis added):

The use of contraceptives and other devices for birth control is on the whole strongly discouraged in the Orthodox Church. Some bishops and theologians altogether condemn the employment of such methods. Others, however, have recently begun to adopt a less strict position, and urge that the question is best left to the discretion of each individual couple, in consultation with the spiritual father.

The second edition, revised 1993 version of The Orthodox Church reveals even further alarming departure from Orthodox and previously universal Christian Tradition (page 296; emphasis added):

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."

From: http://ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ274.HTM

Are these statements taken out of context at all? Anybody have source material at your disposal to check?

 

[Iacobus]

"In the first edition, first printing (1963) of The Orthodox Church by Timothy (Kallistos) Ware - a widely-cited and authoritative source on Orthodox teaching -, the author states (page 302):

Artificial methods of birth control are forbidden in the Orthodox Church.

The first edition, revised 1984 version of The Orthodox Church, however (NY: Penguin Books, page 302), states (emphasis added):

The use of contraceptives and other devices for birth control is on the whole strongly discouraged in the Orthodox Church. Some bishops and theologians altogether condemn the employment of such methods. Others, however, have recently begun to adopt a less strict position, and urge that the question is best left to the discretion of each individual couple, in consultation with the spiritual father.

The second edition, revised 1993 version of The Orthodox Church reveals even further alarming departure from Orthodox and previously universal Christian Tradition (page 296; emphasis added):

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."

From: http://ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ274.HTM

Are these statements taken out of context at all? Anybody have source material at your disposal to check?

Hi DOF

These changes made by Bishop Kallistos have been strongly criticized by most of Orthodoxy. I think if you go to the webpages for the various jurisdictions, you will find that this does not represent the general opinion in the Church. The general rule, I think, is this: artificial birth control is strongly discouraged. NFP is generally accepted. As with all things, there is a certain amount of economia, but we start with the idea that ABC is not allowable.

I think the Bishop's statements are reflective of certain writings from some seminary profs. Like Roman Catholicism, we have a few professorial types who cause much gnashing of teeth. But this is not a generally held view in the Church.

James

 

[Dominus Fidelis]

Hi DOF

These changes made by Bishop Kallistos have been strongly criticized by most of Orthodoxy. I think if you go to the webpages for the various jurisdictions, you will find that this does not represent the general opinion in the Church. The general rule, I think, is this: artificial birth control is strongly discouraged. NFP is generally accepted. As with all things, there is a certain amount of economia, but we start with the idea that ABC is not allowable.

I think the Bishop's statements are reflective of certain writings from some seminary profs. Like Roman Catholicism, we have a few professorial types who cause much gnashing of teeth. But this is not a generally held view in the Church.

James

I was under the impression that he was a respected member of your Church. Wasn't there a thread about him being a Saint?



"we start with the idea that ABC is not allowable."

Thats not what other Orthodox have told me. They said it was up to the couple through the counseling of their confessor.

 

[Iacobus]

I was under the impression that he was a respected member of your Church.

He is, very much so, and well beloved. But that does not make him infallible.

James

 

[Dominus Fidelis]

He is, very much so, and well beloved. But that does not make him infallible.

James

So who is in charge to make these decisions clear to the faithful?

 

[Iacobus]

So who is in charge to make these decisions clear to the faithful?

From the top down:

1. Ecumenical councils

2. our Bishop

3. our priest.

I mean, really, DOF, its not that hard. Am I wrong, or are there not people in the RC church that say things that cause the faithful to roll their eyes? Does that mean that the person is immediately clasified as evil or that one's faith is thrown into disarray? Of course not. The Church keeps marching on.

James

 

[Dominus Fidelis]

From the top down:

1. Ecumenical councils

2. our Bishop

3. our priest.

I mean, really, DOF, its not that hard. Am I wrong, or are there not people in the RC church that say things that cause the faithful to roll their eyes? Does that mean that the person is immediately clasified as evil or that one's faith is thrown into disarray? Of course not. The Church keeps marching on.

James

I'm not talking about people being evil, I am talking about clear teaching on whether something is sinful or not.

 

[Iacobus]

I'm not talking about people being evil, I am talking about clear teaching on whether something is sinful or not.

We have that clear teaching from our Bishops and from Holy Tradition. Just because a retired Bishop or St. Vlad's prof pushes the envelope is not a big deal.

We're kind of talking at cross purposes here. No, we don't have a single person who lays down the law. But the mind of the church is perfectly clear. And in my mind, I see the same kind of disarray, if it can be called that, in the RC Church. Is there not disagreement among the bishops on whether or not they'll give John Kerry communion, and by extension, as to the nature and province of the Eucharist itself? Are there not other variances among bishops? Are there not people writing quite seriously about allowing women into the priesthood, or allowing married priests? But because there are voices of dissent or even foolishness does not mean that the edifice crumbles. Believe me, we know the truths of our faith.

James

 

[Dominus Fidelis]

We have that clear teaching from our Bishops and from Holy Tradition. Just because a retired Bishop or St. Vlad's prof pushes the envelope is not a big deal.

We're kind of talking at cross purposes here. No, we don't have a single person who lays down the law. But the mind of the church is perfectly clear. And in my mind, I see the same kind of disarray, if it can be called that, in the RC Church. Is there not disagreement among the bishops on whether or not they'll give John Kerry communion, and by extension, as to the nature and province of the Eucharist itself? Are there not other variances among bishops? Are there not people writing quite seriously about allowing women into the priesthood, or allowing married priests? But because there are voices of dissent or even foolishness does not mean that the edifice crumbles. Believe me, we know the truths of our faith.

James

Then tell me straight up the truths of your faith. Is contraception ever justified?

 

[NewToLife]

Then tell me straight up the truths of your faith. Is contraception ever justified?

Simply put the answer to your question is Yes. But that would not be the position in most cases.

If for instance a man was HIV positive but the wife was not it might be seen as a reasonable precaution for the couple to use a condom. Also it might well be seen as reasonable if there were medical reasons why pregnancy would not be advisable for the woman. Some women because of physical illness might not survive a pregnancy after all. All of this ought to be discussed between the couple and their priest or spiritual father though.

 

[nyj]

Simply put the answer to your question is Yes.

And that is where things break down. Doing evil can never be seen as doing good. If birth control is wrong, it is wrong. God is not a subjective God. From my vantage point, things are quite clear. Orthodoxy has no unified stance on birth control. If it's basically up to the laity, praying over it with their priest, then there is no stance within Orthodoxy that birth control is wrong... well, there is a stance, but it appears to be "If you can rationalize it, we'll allow it."

Also it might well be seen as reasonable if there were medical reasons why pregnancy would not be advisable for the woman. Some women because of physical illness might not survive a pregnancy after all.

Blessed Gianna Beretta Molla, pray for us.

 

[nyj]

I found this... was floored:

Orthodox Church in America website - How to prevent HIV infection
[font=Geneva, Arial, Helvetica, san-serif]

How can I protect myself from getting HIV/AIDS?​

​

​

[/font] [font=Geneva, Arial, Helvetica, san-serif]

The only 100% effective way of making sure you don’t get HIV is by not sharing needles for intravenous (IV) drugs (not doing drugs is just a good idea in general) and by postponing sex until you are married, and then remaining faithful to your spouse. Even with your spouse, before you consumate sexual relations, it is a good idea to be tested for any sexually transmitted diseases. Once again, sexual abstinence is the only way to not contract HIV, however, if you have sex and you do not know the sexual history or medical status of your partner, you must wear a condom to ensure your mutual protection. While condoms are not fullproof, they have been prooven to stop the transmission of HIV. Mostly when condoms fail during sex (ie break) it is because they are put on improperly. ​

Underlined emphasis mine. That is on their webpage! That is in their Youth and Young Adult Ministries section! Oy!
[/font]

 

[nyj]

Also, found this:

OCA Q&A - Birth Control

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The control of the conception of a child by any means is also condemned by the Church if it means the lack of fulfillment in the family, the hatred of children, the fear of responsibility, the desire for sexual pleasure as purely fleshly, lustful satisfaction, etc. [/font]

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Again, however, married people practicing birth control are not necessarily deprived of Holy Communion, if in conscience before God and with the blessing of their spiritual father, they are convinced that their motives are not entirely unworthy. Here again, however, such a couple cannot pretend to justify themselves in the light of the absolute perfection of the Kingdom of God.​

[/font]

[font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Bold emphasis mine. In my book, that is called "rationalizing". This appears to be the Orthodox stance.
[/font]

 

[JeffreyLloyd]

MOD HAT:

This thread has been moved to TAW

MOD HAT OFF

 

[Iacobus]

MOD HAT:

This thread has been moved to TAW

MOD HAT OFF

Oh goody.

To quickly recap for those fortunate enough to have missed the action thus far, DOF posts excerpt from latest edition of Bishop Kallisto's book, which seems to suggest that use of birth control is pretty everyday among the Orthodox. I post, perhaps unwisely, and suggest that the new edition overstates the position, and that generally speaking the Orthodox start with the idea that birth control should be avoided, but subject to the exercise of economia. Somebody posts excerpt from OCA webpage saying pretty much the same thing. Spirited exchange ensues expressing horror that Church would exercise economia in this matter, and diverting into argument over wisdom of suggestion that people who are going to engage in risky sex should use condoms, and whether that is an immoral statement for a church to make when preceded by statement that person shouldn't be engaging in risky sex to start with.

I think that brings us up to date. We now return you to our daily RC expression of dismay and distate vis a vis EO Church.

 

[Oblio]

Also, found this:

Underlined emphasis mine. That is on their webpage! That is in their Youth and Young Adult Ministries section! Oy!


...

In my book, that is called "rationalizing". This appears to be the Orthodox stance.

Hardly:

This is the Orthodox stance that was conveniently ommited:

What does the Church say about HIV/AIDS?

The Church teaches that only sex inside of marriage is healthy and appropriate (Rom. 1:24-27, 1Cor 6:9-11, 1Tim 1:8-11).
The Church teaches that it is sinful to use illicit drugs ( 1Peter 4:1-6).
The Church, however, follows Jesus’ example and teaches that we must love and be compassionate toward all people who are sick and in need (Matt 25:31-46), including people with HIV/AIDS.

 

[ufonium2]

And that is where things break down. Doing evil can never be seen as doing good. If birth control is wrong, it is wrong. God is not a subjective God.

But doesn't Catholicism believe the death penalty is allowable in some societies but not others? How is that not subjective?

 

[Matrona]

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Iacobus again.

Dang.

DOF: You started this thread questioning Orthodox doctrine in OBOB? Isn't that a little counterproductive?

I'm not talking about people being evil, I am talking about clear teaching on whether something is sinful or not.

Holy Tradition balanced by oikonomia (economy). What's good for the goose could be harmful to the gander. This allows the Orthodox Faith to deal responsibly with the "hard cases". For instance, we allow second marriages not out of disrespect for the sacramental Mystery or for the first marriage itself, but out of concern for the souls of those involved, lest they turn to having relations totally outside of marriage.

 

[Cradle]

I know several Orthodox families with 7, 8, 9... children. I also know young Orthodox people who painfully broke nice relationships over disagreements on what they do on this issue after they get married. Will people please bear it in mind and show the due respect before reaching e-conclusions.

I'm really curious to see what people will think of tomorow to prove we are undeveloped, immoral, divided, unclear, quarelsome, proud, stupid, rational... is there anything else I don't recall?

 

[Oblio]

irreverent ?