www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Humana Vitea and the Eastern Church

Hello all,

I am hoping that someone can help me with a couple of questions. I am a Byzantine Catholic, and as such was attempting to defend the Catholic teaching in regard to banning contraception. One of the folks that disagree with me is also Byzantine, or as he puts it an "Orthodox in commuion with Rome." He said that the eastern church allows couples to contracept because of the principle of oikonomia, and quotes Fr. Meyndorff to support this view. I had asked my priest about this topic, and I know that he supports Humana Vitea.
Also the question of 'original sin,' came up. I was under the impression that the 'guilt,' was not ever dogmatized, but I found through research today that the council of Trent did seemingly dogmatize it. As this notion does not fit well with the eastern anthropology, what should our attitude be toward it?
If thest topics have already been covered please direct me to the proper source for clarification. Thank you.

Bob

Bob,

I don't have time for a lengthier response, but I will only say that Humanae Vitae reflected what was at one point the universal Christian view - that is until the Anglican Lambeth Conference in the early 20's opened Pandora's box. After Pope Paul VI's prophetic encyclical, Patriarch Athenagoras came out with a letter supporting this view. Since then, unfortunately, many Orthodox have regarded this as a matter for personal discernment with one's pastor and spiritual father. On the surface this seems quite pastoral, but economia cannot dispense from the moral law...ecomomia refers only to its prudential application. (In practice, many Latin priests who dissent on this matter feel empowered to do the same for their flocks.)

On matters regarding abortifacient contraception (such as IUD's, the Morning After pill, and the little known secondary effect of "the Pill" which makes the lining of the uterine wall hostile to implantation of the child who was conceived thus making it a form of abortifacient), the Orthodox stand together with the Catholics.

And where would Europe and the Middle East be had the Christians there been as committed to fruitfulness as the Muslims? Where will the US be in a few decades? We are seeing the bitter fruits of a contraceptive mentality played out on a global scale. When the righteous refuse the blessing of new life, the end result is catastrophic.

God bless,

Gordo

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/p..._p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html

Thanks for the reply. I just wanted to verify that the "offical," stance of the Eastern Church was the same as the "offical," view of the RC. I have always thought it was, but since this individual was professing that it was the eastern view that he was giving, I wanted to verify that he was, indeed, speaking for himself rather than for the EC.

Bob,

It is interesting how some claim "the Eastern view is this..." when in fact it may only reflect the speculation of particular theologians or the opinions of individual bishops. As Eastern Catholics we are not bound to believe what has been taught by Orthodox theologians or even synods if it directly contradicts a matter of Catholic belief and teaching (thankfully such things are rare). With that said, we should listen attentively to the teachings of Orthodox synods and hierarchs and follow their guidance where we can, particularly in matters liturgical (and I do not just mean "the rubrics", although that in itself would be nice!). Ultimately we need to listen to our hierarchs who are part of the great college of bishops with and under the bishop of Rome, who is graced infallibly to be its head and spokesperson as the Successor of St. Peter.

But being Catholic and Eastern is both a blessing and a cross at times. We need to pray for unity and discern the mystery of the will of God in the midst of it all.

God bless,

Gordo

Unfortuantely, I made no head-way in this discussion. I did find the quote from the ecemenical patriarch, but he said that he is not the eastern Pope (i.e one could disagree with him). It was a straw-man arguement, however, since he quoted Fr. Meyndorff for support for his view and said that was the eastern view of the matter. He also made mention of the crowning ceremony of the eatern marriage service, and said that the couple is vested to make their own moral decisions.

Dear Bob,

I hesitated to get into this conversation because it often turns judgemental and ugly.

In the Eastern Orthodox faith, one must have the intent of having children in a marriage or they are sinning. One is NEVER allowed to have a vasectomy or fallopian tube tie. Abortion is never allowed, and is considered a grave sin with a hefty canonical penance. Other types of sexual activity (even within marriage) which are considered unnatural are also considered grave sins by the more traditional priests. More liberal priests don't ask.

Also, though many of my more liberal Orthodox friends will disagree with me here, we are to abstain from sexual relations on holy days, on fast days, the day before and the day of Holy Communion. If you know anything about Eastern fasts, you will realize why there is a joke that this is 'Orthodox birth control'.

However, every Orthodox Christian should have a spiritual father/confessor who will get to know them spiritually, emotionally, and intimately--as to what their personal situations are in life. If it is okay with one's spiritual father, an Orthodox Christian is allowed by the grace of 'dispensation/economy' given to him by his/her spiritual father to plan the number of children they will have, and to practice some sort of birth control. One will take note that our married priests rarely have more than four children.

I ask restraint from my Catholic brethren in any contrary responses to this post, and I will also ask that, in Christian love and charity, that they respect the discipline and approach of the Eastern Orthodox Church here.

Thank you.

In Christ,
Alice

Alice,

I appreciate your comments. This is an issue that is very important to me, but I don't want anything I say below to be construed as an attack on you or others.

After all my years of studies - especially my studies of the history and theologies of the various Christian Churches and denominations, I have become convinced that the greatest modern "proof" of the divine founding and protection of the Catholic Church is Humanae Vitae. I realize how crazy this sounds, but I believe it to be true. There is no human reason why Paul VI (a known "liberal") could have resisted the incredible human and demonic pressure that was on him in the 1960's to loosen the restrictions against artificial birth control (ABC) - even his own advisors were against him! I believe it was only by divine providence that he was able to prophetically proclaim God's Truth in this matter.

This is why it is such a deep, deep disappointment to me that some Orthodox Churches (not just individual priests as in the Catholic Church) have begun to disregard our 2,000 year shared Tradition on this matter and allow ABC in some cases. There is a well-known Protestant couple recently that was against ABC and even wrote a book about it. They were "classical" Christians in that they greatly respected our Christian tradition (which is one reason they rejected ABC). However, after having a few children quickly in their marriage, they changed their mind and decided ABC was okay after all. This is understandable - we are all weak and I do not judge them personally. But what disturbed me greatly was that they had converted to Eastern Orthodoxy and were able to justify their decision as being consistent with the teachings of their new Church. They did not feel challenged to reconsider their position in light of the Orthodox Faith; instead they pointed to Meyendorff (someone I greatly admire) as case #1 why ABC was acceptable.

Please note that I speak this out of love, not hatred. I have a deep love and respect for all the Eastern Christian Churches, which is why their acceptance of this sinful behaviour is so disappointing to me.

Alice,

Thank you for an excellent exposition on the Orthodox position. It was certainly more balanced than what I attempted in my haste.

I would only reiterate that the shift in pastoral practice to the toleration of contraception is a recent development within Orthodoxy. Not all Orthodox Christians are in agreement on this issue - some do uphold the ancient practice as taught by the Orthodox and Catholic churches. As to the discernment process re: the limitation of family size, I agree with the idea of jointly discerning with a spiritual father. But I obviously would not agree that barrier and chemical methods of controling fertility would ever be an acceptable or moral option for a couple. To be sure, there exist many natural methods that respect the unitive and generative (read "covenantal") meaning of the act of marriage, not to mention the woman's physical well being. (Does anyone actually READ the possible side effects of the pill?!?)

Certainly no disrespect, and only disagreement as to means, not ends.

In Christ,

Gordo

I honestly don't know the answer to the original contraceptive question w/r/t Orthodoxy. Alice did a great job addressing the broad issue.

Personally, I tend to think that interfering with nature and with natural human functions (as nature and natural human functions are God's creation) too much is generally wrong and to be avoided.

Three of my cousins just had babies shy of 40 after (a little baby boom), for whatever natural reason, not having had any before. As they said, sometimes God throws you a little surprise. Why not be open to it?

Since my husband, who occasionally trolls these boards, might notice my comment about not interfering in natural human functions to much, I will make clear that it is NOT acceptable to belch at the table, especially in front of my mom!

I will just respond with one more post and then that is it:

There are many situations in today's modern world, which don't necessarily involve selfishness, and which make it very difficult for some couples to have a large family.

These situations can encompass anything from mental or other type of illness in a family member or child which may necessitate much personal attention and medical care and money, to insecure finances or job situations which can bring periods of feast and famine and no health insurance, to illness of a parent, to the necessity of a mother to work full time with no extended family in the area or even any family which is alive, etc. These are the very real situations which God's people suffer and for some, they are crosses that remain with them for life.

A spiritual father will be able to discern between selfishness and necessity. In my humble opinion, I think that this very sensitive issue, and the pastoral care and guidance which is given in Eastern Orthodoxy is realistic... (even in the most strict Orthodox circles it is sometimes allowed- although life time penances are sometimes required in return for the oikonomia/dispensation)

I do understand the beauty of humana vitae and the incredible theology behind it--one that finally dispelled the myth that Catholicism follows the extreme Augustinian view of sexuality being sinful in every context.

In an ideal world, we would all live in the beautiful village of the old world, one which I experienced as an observer firsthand not too many decades ago, and it would take that loving Christian village to raise all its children in the otherwise safe environment. There would be no rapists, child kidnappers, or pedophiles on the loose, and children could still play outside while waiting for dinner without worry. They could also walk to school and all would be in such close proximity that more than one car, even with teens, would not be necessary. Men would be able to completely support their wives. Houses would be handed down from generation to generation or be given as dowries from the generous parents (or brothers) of the wife, without real estate taxes to worry about affording. No one would ever be homeless. Aging parents would live with their married children and wouldn't be sent to nursing and old age homes. (Something which makes most Americans cringe, and which most of my American friends belittle--in this country there seems to be an unwritten rule that aging people are supposed to be independent and living on their own, and if they are not, or can not, then off to a senior or nursing home they are sent!)though our homes are *sinfully* the sizes of mini palaces in comparison to the homes in Europe.

In countries like Greece every effort is made to have a parent live with them, or next to them, even from the early days of a marriage. Those parents help raise the children, and there is always the support of relatives who also live close to you. So, if a mother was not high energy, had low stamina because of a medical condition, or had a low peak of tolerance for stress, there was help. There would be no worry of drugs and alchohol and adolescent problems. Adolescents would still respect their families. Good health care would be free.

Unfortunately, most places in this United States are far from that ideal and therefore, Eastern Orthodox priests and even monastics are aware of the special and difficult circumstances of life in many (though not all) parts of the U.S. and of major urban areas. These are not always such ideal places to raise a family, no less, a large family. That is why I humbly believe that they are being discerning in privately allowing couples some family planning.

On the other hand, I deeply bow to those who are in situations where they accept and feel that they can have as many children as God wills for them. Theirs is a special charism and example, and I thank God for them and for the Christian famiies which they are giving to the world in these difficult times. My prayers are with them and with their children, that every blessing of God will be bestowed upon them for their faithfulness in this difficult reality which we live.

Just some thoughts,
In Christ,
Alice

Alice,

As always, I appreciate your balanced treatment of Catholic positions.

I would only say that no one is asserting that Humanae Vitae is always rejected for purely selfish reasons, although I would argue anecdotally that that is in fact the case the majority of the times. Having lived through an experience where the health of any child we would conceive was at great risk, I can attest to the cross this teaching represents, as well as to the spiritual power God grants to live it out in those "difficult cases".

I would contend, and it is more than just my own belief - the Catholic Church and the traditional teachings of Orthodoxy uphold this view - that it is more than just merely a question of missing the ideal or settling for a lesser option. The use of these means is actually a violation of the covenant of marriage, distorting the life-giving powers of marital union which makes it thus immoral in its use and, strictly speaking, an abuse of the sacramental act of marriage. We go to great lengths to uphold the holiness of priestly activities on the altar of our churches. Why should we expect any less from the holiness of the bed chamber where the lay priestly offerings of the bodies of couples are consumated in marriage and so often celebrated? As you mention, the ideal of "clean hands and a pure heart" precludes some of the lurid practices that society promotes as normative for sexual activity but that should in fact be foreign to the Christian marital bed. A deliberate barrier method, chemical inhibitor or surgical procedure (unless done for other legitimate reasons) should be included in those practices which violate the holiness of marriage and the marital act.

My two cents.

Yours in Christ,

Gordon

Alice,

I appreciate your comments about the fact that not all that do not want a large family are doing so for selfish reasons. If I implied that in my post, know that I do not believe that - I know that there are situations of neccessity that preclude a large family, especially in areas outside the U.S.

However, I think you are bringing up a false dichotomy. In our modern world, having a large family is much more difficult, but it is also possible today to avoid a large family through moral means. NFP, which, aluding to what Gordon mentioned, keeps the marriage bed pure and holy, is very effective in avoiding pregnancy if that is what is desired. And moreover, it is much more practical for poorer families - ones in which a large family is more difficult. Which is easier (and more economical) for a poor, Eastern European family - to be constantly in need of birth control pills or condoms, or to simply have a thermometer around? (And there are even ways of using NFP without a thermometer).

No one is saying that all families are required to be large families - that is a decision that can only be made by the individual family in consultation with their spiritual and medical advisors. But in this day and age, it is quite possible to make these decisions without recourse to artificial, and immoral, birth control practices.

Dear Francis,

I don't know how well NFP would coincide with the fact that outside of fasting periods, Orthodox are only allowed to have relations on Monday, Tuesday, and Thursday...LOL! *wink*

The two together might preclude a married couple EVER having marital relations!

Seriously, though, the Orthodox abstinence rules do much the same in theory as NFP, and that is to teach *chastity* within one's marriage....

I thank you for your input. It would be nice if more Orthodox pastors would promote NFP.

In the meantime, let's remember that every teacher is accountable to God, and if Orthodox priests are wrong or right, it is not for us to judge. There are many other sins of the human condition-- sins of immoral, unethical, and even heretical nature, which are practiced by priests and laity of all churches which need to be dealt with. Sometimes there seems to be so much focus on one particular practice/weakness to the exclusion of all others, that many faithful then consider everything else a turn off and then turn away from organized religion. That is why each soul needs to be carefully dealt with wisdom and guidance in its earthly struggles, the level it is at in its understanding of church discipline and belief, and in its general spiritual growth. That is in essence, the concept of 'dispensation' as I know it.

In the end, we will never be perfect and the only thing we can hope for at our death is God's bountiful mercy.

In Christ,
Alice

Alice said "There are many other sins of the human condition-- sins of immoral, unethical, and even heretical nature, which are practiced by priests and laity of all churches which need to be dealt with. Sometimes there seems to be so much focus on one particular practice/weakness to the exclusion of all others, that many faithful then consider everything else a turn off and then turn away from organized religion."

I do not dispute that there are many sins that need to be dealt with. I do, however, see a connection between certain sins, and I think they acceptance of contraception has opened the door to many other sins being accepted by our culture. Also the dissent from Humana Vitae has helped to foster the cafeteria Catholic mentality, and its resulting liberalizations.