www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Orthodoxy and Contraception

Hitherto, I had understood that one ALWAYS has a choice of good, no matter what. We are never forced to choose between two evils.

Logos Teen

In the debate on whether contraception is licit or not, have we forgotten the basis for married conjugal love.
Let a husband love his wife as Christ loves the Church. How does Christ love the Church.
He gives his very life for it. In effect it is a sacraficial, a self giving love. Spouses faithfully and continually misinter their sacrament to one another in the true image of the union of Christ and the Church. They join "in one flesh" that is intimately, man and woman reciprocally express themselves in the fullest and most profound way possible to them.

Stephanos I

Dear Logos Teen,

Please, let us not jump to conclusions, yet. We are still waiting for Andrew's take on my question. Perhaps we are misinterpreting his statements or just don't understand his logic in this. I'm still open to seeing this seeming dychotomy resolved.

Your brother in Christ's Light,

Ghazar


Dear Brother Stephanos:

You have said it very well!

Okay, fine by me.

Logos Teen

Dear Chtec,

What a wonderfully, pastoral bishop that was!

"Afternoon delight!"

Before or after None?

One newly-married priest refused to have sex with his wife before etc. and she got him to call me.

I told him to meditate on some scripture during the you-know-what.

Let's say that that seemed to be a satisfying answer all around!

Reader Andrew,

You are welcome!

Alex

Dear Friends,

Orthodoxy has never had a "hard and fast" attitude toward ALL forms of artificial birth control.

And so what if the RC Church does?

The vast majority of RC's ignore their Church's teaching on birth control.

Alex

Alex,

What doe the fact that many or most Catholics ignore the Church�s teaching on the use of artificial birth control have to do with the validity of this teaching? What is true is not dependent upon what is convenient or desirable.

Admin

Dear Administrator,

In fact, a number of national RC bishops' conferences "mitigated" the papal teaching Humanae Vitae when it came out.

During that time when I was in university, I had occasion to speak to a number of confessors and Catholic theologians about it.

The confessors said they wouldn't refuse absolution to a penitent who said he was doing the best he could, but could not NOT practice artificial birth control.

Theologians have tended to come out against it.

The fact that there is opposition to that teaching and the "natural law" that underlines it - does not this mean that it is something capable of question?

Was Humanae Vitae an infallible statement?

And the more than 90% of Catholics in this country at least who don't follow that teaching - they are excommunicated?

Also, laity, theologians and others with a dissenting voice - they have no say in such matters - is that what you are saying?

In some ways, you can be more papal than popes, er, Sir!

"Convenient?" You are obviously not married, er, Sir.

That is usually something one hears from monks, priests, and young religious people who don't get out much.

It doesn't become a secular Cantor who knows his way in the world (and on the internet) as yourself! (You are the one who told me not to back down on what I believe in. You should be happy now . . .

The only thing, however, that is "artificial" about my personal relationship with my wife is the quality of the incense and candles, at times . . .

Alex

Alex,

Thanks for your post. With all due respect, you seem to very protestant on this issue (as, indeed, are some of the bishops conferences).

Humanae Vitae was not issued as an infallible teaching but it was most certainly issued as an authoritative teaching. It should not be dismissed so cavalierly. Theologians and others with a dissenting voice certainly do have (and should have) the right to speak. But if the Church has issued an authoritative teaching on the matter they should first seek ways to be faithful to it.

Are those Catholics who don�t follow this teaching excommunicated? In a sense, yes. We each excommunicate ourselves with our sins and we are always in need of conversion and repentance to re-unite us to Christ.

It is not a matter of me being very papal. It is a matter of each of us always striving to submit ourselves to Christ. This is all I have been saying.

Admin

Alex,
It may not have been "infallible" in the defined sense but it was sure prophetic! And neither was it an attempt to limit birth which is legitimate, just the means to accomplish that end that were in question.

Stephanos I
PS Why dont you try reading it again with a sense of humbleness before God, He just might reveal something to you.

Dear Administrator,

Please do not feel I'm attacking you!

If you wish to call those who disagree with you "Protestant" (and I'm not the one on the website calling for people to accept Jesus as "Lord and Saviour"), rather than offer reasoned arguments, I have no quarrel with that!

Personally, I don't believe in birth control. And that's not the issue here.

The Catholic Church teaches that people should have only that number of children that they can adequately feed AND educate.

Some follow the acceptable "natural methods" of birth control.

There are those who cannot for various reasons and I'm not talking about experimenting teens and people who are well off for whom children will upset their travel plans.

These people really struggle in their lives and their confessors - and their local bishops - extend pastoral sensitivity toward them.

I'm not saying that Humanae Vitae's principles are wrong.

But to see the teaching of the Catholic Church on birth control as ONLY Humanae Vitae is to see only one part of the picture.

Bishops also interpret this teaching for their flocks, as the Austrian and German Conferences of Bishops did for theirs.

This pastoral outreach to married laity also continues to the confessional.

But this also seems to leave out a great number of Catholics who simply ignore this teaching.

You raised the issue of excommunication and one of our Toronto theologians at ST Michael's University once said that "Yes, they are excommunicated, but they ignore the Church's teaching on birth control in good conscience and/or in terms of invincible ignorance and so are members in good standing in the Church."

That is theological double-talk at best.

In any organization where the majority of "lower members" does not follow the commands/wishes of the administration, change will soon come about.

This is not infallible teaching, there are serious problems with it in the lives of Catholics, not ALL of whom are insincere, pleasure-seeking, good-for-nothing, irreligious etc.

That isn't being Protestant, but pastorally-sensitive.

And since when does an Eastern Catholic hold to the infallibility of "natural law" that undergirds Humanae Vitae?

No, I think you are showing some latent RCism here.

And it wasn't I that began with the name-calling here!

Hmmm . . . well, if I had to be a Protestant, a High Church Anglican parish might be all right . . .

Alex

Dear Stepanos I,

I don't reject Humanae Vitae's principles.

And I don't believe in birth control as far as I'm concerned - and ideally as far as anyone is concerned.

With respect to humility, what is pastoral sensitivity if not helping people who struggle with moral and social questions in their lives?

Is it humility to tell people that the circumstances of their family life has no impact on their moral status before God if they don't follow Humanae Vitae?

Do you think I'm the only one who thinks this way?

Perhaps you should get out more and not see things within the limitations (and idealizations) of monastic views.

Alex

Alex, I must spar with you once more.

Contraception has been judged by the entire Scriptural and Patristic tradition to be intrinsically evil, and always morally wrong. Go read the words of Our Father Among the Saints John Chrysostom concerning contraception, when he states that those who practice it are worse than murderers, since they deprive their children of life before it has even begun. Such evil cannot be justified under any "circumstances."

The fact that some RC bishops have embraced heresy is well-known and well-documented. One cannot justify one's own dissent from Humanae Vitae by pointing to bishops or bishops' conferences. Ask St. Athanasius about that one when you see him.

The argument that certain people are incapable of abstaining from contraception is about as valid as similar arguments that attempt to justify other evils. We are told that some people "cannot do without" abortion, sodomy, self-abuse, etc. etc. This argument is well-worn but useless. I need not remind a devout and erudite Christian like yourself that the grace of God is more powerful than any vice, if we trust Him.

"Pastoral sensitivity" that gives approbation to the vice of contaception is as misguided as similar sensitivity to the other above-named vices. TRUE pastoral concern dictates compassion, and a willingness to help penitents overcome their sins. To confirm penitents in sin is the greatest act of uncharity a confessor can commit.

Respectfully,

LatinTrad

Dear LatinTrad,

Well, now, you and the Administrator really ARE closer than the two of you think!

Wouldn't you at least give me brownie points for bringing people together this way?

And, apart from Chrysostom, whose quote you have taken out of context (yet again), did you know that the type of contraception that the Fathers condemned were, in their day, abortifacients, something that, without a doubt, would be avoided by many CAtholics practicing artifical birth control today?

So you say that all Catholics who practice ABC are in heresy and so excommunicated?

So the Catholic Church isn't as big as it thinks it is after all.

But, again, you are acting as if I'm the first one to voice these views.

Where have you, Stephanos and the Administrator been living in the last little while?

On this planet?

(O.K., I'm ready for those patristic citations . . .)

Alex

I'll be back with the citations in a second . . . just keep in mind that Scripture condemns withdrawal as well, which is not an abortifacient.