OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 19, 2014, 05:52:55 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 »  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Orthodoxy's view on contraception?  (Read 27436 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,153


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #45 on: March 12, 2010, 07:42:40 PM »

Irish Hermit,

ytterbiumanalyst is permitted to use the photo of a politician in his avatar if he chooses, as long as he doesn't submit posts with political content on any of the public boards.  If you have a problem with this, then please send a PM to Fr. Chris or one of the global moderators to protest.  Do not derail threads by complaining about a poster's choice of avatar publicly.  I will not tolerate any more discussion of this issue here.

- PeterTheAleut
Faith Issues Section Moderator
« Last Edit: March 12, 2010, 07:43:07 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #46 on: March 12, 2010, 07:47:20 PM »

I'm not going to continue down this tangent with you, because as you say, we are concerned here with contraception. You know what to do if you wish to continue it. But what I'm really concerned with is not what people do in their bedrooms, as I think prying into that is rather perverted. I'm really just concerned with your claim that "Fathers"--and you have not been more specific than that--have said no one should have sex without the intention and capability of reproducing. I really just want you to substantiate that claim. I've asked you twice now as an ordinary poster, and you have instead brought up irrelevant points instead of answering the question. So now I feel I have no choice but to make a formal moderator's request.

Irish Hermit, I request that you provide sources for the statements you have made that "the Fathers" say no one should have sex without the intention and capability of reproducing. Please find one quotation from an Orthodox Father or Mother that supports your position. You have 48 hours, at the expiration of which further moderatorial action will be considered.

"But I wonder why he [the heretic Jovinianus] set Judah and Tamar before us for an example, unless perchance even harlots give him pleasure; or Onan, who was slain because he grudged his brother seed. Does he imagine that we approve of any sexual intercourse except for the procreation of children?"
Saint Hieronymous, " Against Jovinian" 19

Logged
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #47 on: March 12, 2010, 07:48:22 PM »

I'm not going to continue down this tangent with you, because as you say, we are concerned here with contraception. You know what to do if you wish to continue it. But what I'm really concerned with is not what people do in their bedrooms, as I think prying into that is rather perverted. I'm really just concerned with your claim that "Fathers"--and you have not been more specific than that--have said no one should have sex without the intention and capability of reproducing. I really just want you to substantiate that claim. I've asked you twice now as an ordinary poster, and you have instead brought up irrelevant points instead of answering the question. So now I feel I have no choice but to make a formal moderator's request.

Irish Hermit, I request that you provide sources for the statements you have made that "the Fathers" say no one should have sex without the intention and capability of reproducing. Please find one quotation from an Orthodox Father or Mother that supports your position. You have 48 hours, at the expiration of which further moderatorial action will be considered.

"But I wonder why he [the heretic Jovinianus] set Judah and Tamar before us for an example, unless perchance even harlots give him pleasure; or Onan, who was slain because he grudged his brother seed. Does he imagine that we approve of any sexual intercourse except for the procreation of children?"
Saint Hieronymous, " Against Jovinian" 19
Thank you. Claim substantiated, and moderator's request fulfilled.
Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #48 on: March 12, 2010, 07:53:48 PM »

a simple Google search brought these up:

Letter of Barnabas

Moreover, he [Moses] has rightly detested the weasel [Lev. 11:29]. For he means, "Thou shalt not be like to those whom we hear of as committing wickedness with the mouth with the body through uncleanness [orally consummated sex]; nor shalt thou be joined to those impure women who commit iniquity with the mouth with the body through uncleanness" (Letter of Barnabas 10:8 [A.D. 74]).

Clement of Alexandria

Because of its divine institution for the propagation of man, the seed is not to be vainly ejaculated, nor is it to be damaged, nor is it to be wasted (The Instructor of Children 2:10:91:2 [A.D. 191]).

To have coitus other than to procreate children is to do injury to nature (ibid. 2:10:95:3).

Hippolytus

[Christian women with male concubines], on account of their prominent ancestry and great property, the so-called faithful want no children from slaves or lowborn commoners, they use drugs of sterility [oral contraceptives] or bind themselves tightly in order to expel a fetus which has already been engendered [abortion] (Refutation of All Heresies 9:7 [A.D. 225]).

Lactantius

[Some] complain of the scantiness of their means, and allege that they have not enough for bringing up more children, as though, in truth, their means were in [their] power . . . or God did not daily make the rich poor and the poor rich. Wherefore, if any one on any account of poverty shall be unable to bring up children, it is better to abstain from relations with his wife (Divine Institutes 6:20 [A.D. 307]).

God gave us eyes not to see and desire pleasure, but to see acts to be performed for the needs of life; so too, the genital ['generating'] part of the body, as the name itself teaches, has been received by us for no other purpose than the generation of offspring (ibid. 6:23:18).

Epiphanius

They [certain Egyptian heretics] exercise genital acts, yet prevent the conceiving of children. Not in order to produce offspring, but to satisfy lust, are they eager for corruption (Medicine Chest Against Heresies 26:5:2 [A.D. 375]).

John Chrysostom

[l]n truth, all men know that they who are under the power of this disease [the sin of covetousness] are wearied even of their father's old age [wishing him to die so they can inherit]; and that which is sweet) and universally desirable, the having of children, they esteem grievous and unwelcome. Many at least with this view have even paid money to be childless, and have mutilated nature, not only killing the newborn, but even acting to prevent their beginning to live [sterilization] (Homilies on Matthew 28:5 [A.D. 391]).

Why do you sow where the field is eager to destroy the fruit, where there are medicines of sterility [oral contraceptives], where there is murder before birth?. . . Indeed, it is something worse than murder, and I do not know what to call it; for she does not kill what is formed but prevents its formation. What then? Do you condemn the gift of God and Fight with his [natural] laws? (Homilies on Romans 24 [A.D. 391]).

Jerome

But I wonder why he [the heretic Jovinianus] set Judah and Tamar before us for an example, unless perchance even harlots give him pleasure; or Onan, who was slain because he grudged his brother seed. Does he imagine that we approve of any sexual intercourse except for the procreation of children? (Against Jovinian 1:19 [A.D. 393]).

You may see a number of women who are widows before they are wives. Others, indeed, will drink sterility [oral contraceptives] and murder a man not yet born, [and some commit abortion] (Letters 22:13 [A.D. 396]).

Augustine

This proves that you [Manicheans] approve of having a wife, not for the procreation of children, but for the gratification of passion. In marriage, as the marriage law declares, the man and woman come together for the procreation of children. Therefore, whoever makes the procreation of children a greater sin than copulation, forbids marriage and makes the woman not a wife but a mistress, who for some gifts presented to her, is joined to the man to gratify his passion (The Morals of the Manichees 18:65 [A.D. 388]).

You [Manicheans] make your auditors adulterers of their wives when they take care lest the women with whom they copulate conceive. They take wives according to the laws of matrimony by tablets announcing that the marriage is contracted to procreate children; and then, fearing because of your [religious] law [against childbearing] . . . they copulate in a shameful union only to satisfy lust for their wives. They are unwilling to have children, on whose account alone marriages are made. How is it, then, that you are not those prohibiting marriage, as the apostle predicted of you so long ago [I Tim. 4:1-4], when you try to take from marriage what marriage is? When this is taken away, husbands are shameful lovers, wives are harlots, bridal chambers are brothels, fathers-in-law are pimps (Against Faustus 15:7 [A.D. 400]).

For thus the eternal law, that is, the will of God creator of all creatures, taking counsel for the conservation of natural order, not to serve lust, but to see to the preservation of the race, permits the delight of mortal flesh to be released from the control of reason in copulation only to propagate progeny (ibid. 22:30).

Caesarius

Who is he who cannot warn that no woman may take a potion [an oral contraceptive or an abortifacient] so that she is unable to conceive or condemns in herself the nature which God willed to be fecund? As often as she could have conceived or given birth, of that many homicides she will be held guilty, and, unless she undergoes suitable penance, she will be damned by eternal death in hell. If a women does not wish to have children, let her enter into a religious agreement with her husband; for chastity is the sole sterility of a Christian woman (Sermons 1:12 [A.D. 522]).
Logged
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #49 on: March 12, 2010, 08:04:44 PM »

^ All the more reason why it was an easy request to fulfill. But fulfilled it is, and I will leave this discussion now. I'd rather not discuss sex.
Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,153


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #50 on: March 12, 2010, 08:10:58 PM »

a simple Google search brought these up:

Letter of Barnabas

Moreover, he [Moses] has rightly detested the weasel [Lev. 11:29]. For he means, "Thou shalt not be like to those whom we hear of as committing wickedness with the mouth with the body through uncleanness [orally consummated sex]; nor shalt thou be joined to those impure women who commit iniquity with the mouth with the body through uncleanness" (Letter of Barnabas 10:8 [A.D. 74]).

Clement of Alexandria

Because of its divine institution for the propagation of man, the seed is not to be vainly ejaculated, nor is it to be damaged, nor is it to be wasted (The Instructor of Children 2:10:91:2 [A.D. 191]).

To have coitus other than to procreate children is to do injury to nature (ibid. 2:10:95:3).

Hippolytus

[Christian women with male concubines], on account of their prominent ancestry and great property, the so-called faithful want no children from slaves or lowborn commoners, they use drugs of sterility [oral contraceptives] or bind themselves tightly in order to expel a fetus which has already been engendered [abortion] (Refutation of All Heresies 9:7 [A.D. 225]).

Lactantius

[Some] complain of the scantiness of their means, and allege that they have not enough for bringing up more children, as though, in truth, their means were in [their] power . . . or God did not daily make the rich poor and the poor rich. Wherefore, if any one on any account of poverty shall be unable to bring up children, it is better to abstain from relations with his wife (Divine Institutes 6:20 [A.D. 307]).

God gave us eyes not to see and desire pleasure, but to see acts to be performed for the needs of life; so too, the genital ['generating'] part of the body, as the name itself teaches, has been received by us for no other purpose than the generation of offspring (ibid. 6:23:18).

Epiphanius

They [certain Egyptian heretics] exercise genital acts, yet prevent the conceiving of children. Not in order to produce offspring, but to satisfy lust, are they eager for corruption (Medicine Chest Against Heresies 26:5:2 [A.D. 375]).

John Chrysostom

[l]n truth, all men know that they who are under the power of this disease [the sin of covetousness] are wearied even of their father's old age [wishing him to die so they can inherit]; and that which is sweet) and universally desirable, the having of children, they esteem grievous and unwelcome. Many at least with this view have even paid money to be childless, and have mutilated nature, not only killing the newborn, but even acting to prevent their beginning to live [sterilization] (Homilies on Matthew 28:5 [A.D. 391]).

Why do you sow where the field is eager to destroy the fruit, where there are medicines of sterility [oral contraceptives], where there is murder before birth?. . . Indeed, it is something worse than murder, and I do not know what to call it; for she does not kill what is formed but prevents its formation. What then? Do you condemn the gift of God and Fight with his [natural] laws? (Homilies on Romans 24 [A.D. 391]).

Jerome

But I wonder why he [the heretic Jovinianus] set Judah and Tamar before us for an example, unless perchance even harlots give him pleasure; or Onan, who was slain because he grudged his brother seed. Does he imagine that we approve of any sexual intercourse except for the procreation of children? (Against Jovinian 1:19 [A.D. 393]).

You may see a number of women who are widows before they are wives. Others, indeed, will drink sterility [oral contraceptives] and murder a man not yet born, [and some commit abortion] (Letters 22:13 [A.D. 396]).

Augustine

This proves that you [Manicheans] approve of having a wife, not for the procreation of children, but for the gratification of passion. In marriage, as the marriage law declares, the man and woman come together for the procreation of children. Therefore, whoever makes the procreation of children a greater sin than copulation, forbids marriage and makes the woman not a wife but a mistress, who for some gifts presented to her, is joined to the man to gratify his passion (The Morals of the Manichees 18:65 [A.D. 388]).

You [Manicheans] make your auditors adulterers of their wives when they take care lest the women with whom they copulate conceive. They take wives according to the laws of matrimony by tablets announcing that the marriage is contracted to procreate children; and then, fearing because of your [religious] law [against childbearing] . . . they copulate in a shameful union only to satisfy lust for their wives. They are unwilling to have children, on whose account alone marriages are made. How is it, then, that you are not those prohibiting marriage, as the apostle predicted of you so long ago [I Tim. 4:1-4], when you try to take from marriage what marriage is? When this is taken away, husbands are shameful lovers, wives are harlots, bridal chambers are brothels, fathers-in-law are pimps (Against Faustus 15:7 [A.D. 400]).

For thus the eternal law, that is, the will of God creator of all creatures, taking counsel for the conservation of natural order, not to serve lust, but to see to the preservation of the race, permits the delight of mortal flesh to be released from the control of reason in copulation only to propagate progeny (ibid. 22:30).

Caesarius

Who is he who cannot warn that no woman may take a potion [an oral contraceptive or an abortifacient] so that she is unable to conceive or condemns in herself the nature which God willed to be fecund? As often as she could have conceived or given birth, of that many homicides she will be held guilty, and, unless she undergoes suitable penance, she will be damned by eternal death in hell. If a women does not wish to have children, let her enter into a religious agreement with her husband; for chastity is the sole sterility of a Christian woman (Sermons 1:12 [A.D. 522]).
Yes, it's already been established that many of the Fathers taught that marital relations were honorable only so far as the motive was procreation, thus ruling out contraception as evil.  The question put before us, though, is whether all the Fathers (to use your words) or just "the Fathers" (without qualification, thus implying patristic consensus, as Irish Hermit insinuated) taught this.
Logged
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #51 on: March 12, 2010, 08:12:30 PM »

yes i know, you demand 100% percent unanimity on everything, but im not sure what beliefs that could actually leave you with ....
Logged
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #52 on: March 12, 2010, 08:19:20 PM »

a simple Google search brought these up:

Letter of Barnabas

Moreover, he [Moses] has rightly detested the weasel [Lev. 11:29]. For he means, "Thou shalt not be like to those whom we hear of as committing wickedness with the mouth with the body through uncleanness [orally consummated sex]; nor shalt thou be joined to those impure women who commit iniquity with the mouth with the body through uncleanness" (Letter of Barnabas 10:8 [A.D. 74]).

Clement of Alexandria

Because of its divine institution for the propagation of man, the seed is not to be vainly ejaculated, nor is it to be damaged, nor is it to be wasted (The Instructor of Children 2:10:91:2 [A.D. 191]).

To have coitus other than to procreate children is to do injury to nature (ibid. 2:10:95:3).

Hippolytus

[Christian women with male concubines], on account of their prominent ancestry and great property, the so-called faithful want no children from slaves or lowborn commoners, they use drugs of sterility [oral contraceptives] or bind themselves tightly in order to expel a fetus which has already been engendered [abortion] (Refutation of All Heresies 9:7 [A.D. 225]).

Lactantius

[Some] complain of the scantiness of their means, and allege that they have not enough for bringing up more children, as though, in truth, their means were in [their] power . . . or God did not daily make the rich poor and the poor rich. Wherefore, if any one on any account of poverty shall be unable to bring up children, it is better to abstain from relations with his wife (Divine Institutes 6:20 [A.D. 307]).

God gave us eyes not to see and desire pleasure, but to see acts to be performed for the needs of life; so too, the genital ['generating'] part of the body, as the name itself teaches, has been received by us for no other purpose than the generation of offspring (ibid. 6:23:18).

Epiphanius

They [certain Egyptian heretics] exercise genital acts, yet prevent the conceiving of children. Not in order to produce offspring, but to satisfy lust, are they eager for corruption (Medicine Chest Against Heresies 26:5:2 [A.D. 375]).

John Chrysostom

[l]n truth, all men know that they who are under the power of this disease [the sin of covetousness] are wearied even of their father's old age [wishing him to die so they can inherit]; and that which is sweet) and universally desirable, the having of children, they esteem grievous and unwelcome. Many at least with this view have even paid money to be childless, and have mutilated nature, not only killing the newborn, but even acting to prevent their beginning to live [sterilization] (Homilies on Matthew 28:5 [A.D. 391]).

Why do you sow where the field is eager to destroy the fruit, where there are medicines of sterility [oral contraceptives], where there is murder before birth?. . . Indeed, it is something worse than murder, and I do not know what to call it; for she does not kill what is formed but prevents its formation. What then? Do you condemn the gift of God and Fight with his [natural] laws? (Homilies on Romans 24 [A.D. 391]).

Jerome

But I wonder why he [the heretic Jovinianus] set Judah and Tamar before us for an example, unless perchance even harlots give him pleasure; or Onan, who was slain because he grudged his brother seed. Does he imagine that we approve of any sexual intercourse except for the procreation of children? (Against Jovinian 1:19 [A.D. 393]).

You may see a number of women who are widows before they are wives. Others, indeed, will drink sterility [oral contraceptives] and murder a man not yet born, [and some commit abortion] (Letters 22:13 [A.D. 396]).

Augustine

This proves that you [Manicheans] approve of having a wife, not for the procreation of children, but for the gratification of passion. In marriage, as the marriage law declares, the man and woman come together for the procreation of children. Therefore, whoever makes the procreation of children a greater sin than copulation, forbids marriage and makes the woman not a wife but a mistress, who for some gifts presented to her, is joined to the man to gratify his passion (The Morals of the Manichees 18:65 [A.D. 388]).

You [Manicheans] make your auditors adulterers of their wives when they take care lest the women with whom they copulate conceive. They take wives according to the laws of matrimony by tablets announcing that the marriage is contracted to procreate children; and then, fearing because of your [religious] law [against childbearing] . . . they copulate in a shameful union only to satisfy lust for their wives. They are unwilling to have children, on whose account alone marriages are made. How is it, then, that you are not those prohibiting marriage, as the apostle predicted of you so long ago [I Tim. 4:1-4], when you try to take from marriage what marriage is? When this is taken away, husbands are shameful lovers, wives are harlots, bridal chambers are brothels, fathers-in-law are pimps (Against Faustus 15:7 [A.D. 400]).

For thus the eternal law, that is, the will of God creator of all creatures, taking counsel for the conservation of natural order, not to serve lust, but to see to the preservation of the race, permits the delight of mortal flesh to be released from the control of reason in copulation only to propagate progeny (ibid. 22:30).

Caesarius

Who is he who cannot warn that no woman may take a potion [an oral contraceptive or an abortifacient] so that she is unable to conceive or condemns in herself the nature which God willed to be fecund? As often as she could have conceived or given birth, of that many homicides she will be held guilty, and, unless she undergoes suitable penance, she will be damned by eternal death in hell. If a women does not wish to have children, let her enter into a religious agreement with her husband; for chastity is the sole sterility of a Christian woman (Sermons 1:12 [A.D. 522]).
Yes, it's already been established that many of the Fathers taught that marital relations were honorable only so far as the motive was procreation, thus ruling out contraception as evil.  The question put before us, though, is whether all the Fathers (to use your words) or just "the Fathers" (without qualification, thus implying patristic consensus, as Irish Hermit insinuated) taught this.

Irish Hermit insinuated nothing!   But I think that the use of the emotive word "insinuated" wants to insinuate something about me?

Irish Hermit has already stated here and many times elsewhere that the paucity of patristic writings on this matter makes it difficult to say we have a consensus.  The sample range of the Holy Fathers is not wide enough.   And indeed the Church has rejected the teaching that we do have from the Fathers.  The Church has chosen to go with Saint John Chrysostom and his teaching of the value of unitive sex as well as the value of procreative sex.
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,153


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #53 on: March 12, 2010, 08:24:52 PM »

yes i know, you demand 100% percent unanimity on everything, but im not sure what beliefs that could actually leave you with ....
Yes, that's the joy of my faith.  There are very few beliefs about which I'm so dogmatic that I need to win a fight to preach them. Wink
Logged
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #54 on: March 12, 2010, 08:32:09 PM »

well to each his own i suppose. the joy of my faith is that its not up to me, bc id screw it up.
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,153


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #55 on: March 12, 2010, 09:16:09 PM »

well to each his own i suppose. the joy of my faith is that its not up to me, bc id screw it up.
Indeed!  That's why I try not to define a whole bunch of dogmatic positions that just don't need defined. Wink
Logged
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #56 on: March 13, 2010, 02:11:54 PM »

ah, but YOU have decided that they dont need defined, whereas our Fathers and Saints have said quite a bit about them! If they spill so much ink on any given topic, we should accept that it matters, rather than re-examining everything through our secularist 21st century lenses that we all have on at times.
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,153


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #57 on: March 13, 2010, 03:11:59 PM »

ah, but YOU have decided that they dont need defined, whereas our Fathers and Saints have said quite a bit about them!
No doubt they have, but they're not the ones synthesizing their disparate statements into a unified dogmatic corpus on this thread.  You are.

If they spill so much ink on any given topic, we should accept that it matters, rather than re-examining everything through our secularist 21st century lenses that we all have on at times.
Yes, we should accept that it matters, but not in the way you think it matters.  What are you trying to prove here, anyway?  That the Church has proclaimed contraception evil and that no priest or bishop has any authority to grant economy to individual couples on this matter?  We all--well, most of us--agree that the Church sees contraception as less than ideal.  The question is about how this perspective is to be applied to specific couples facing specific circumstances.  Can you answer that?
Logged
jckstraw72
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 1,174



« Reply #58 on: March 13, 2010, 09:02:35 PM »

ah, but YOU have decided that they dont need defined, whereas our Fathers and Saints have said quite a bit about them!
No doubt they have, but they're not the ones synthesizing their disparate statements into a unified dogmatic corpus on this thread.  You are.

no, on this thread i merely did a Google search and copy and pasted the quotes that someone else asked for.

If they spill so much ink on any given topic, we should accept that it matters, rather than re-examining everything through our secularist 21st century lenses that we all have on at times.
Yes, we should accept that it matters, but not in the way you think it matters.  What are you trying to prove here, anyway?  That the Church has proclaimed contraception evil and that no priest or bishop has any authority to grant economy to individual couples on this matter?  We all--well, most of us--agree that the Church sees contraception as less than ideal.  The question is about how this perspective is to be applied to specific couples facing specific circumstances.  Can you answer that?
[/quote]

my point is simple: look to Tradition on any matter having to do with faith, not to ourselves and our culture.
Logged
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #59 on: March 13, 2010, 09:13:27 PM »

i dont know if there is any "official" stance, but your priest seems to be pretty in line with all the earliest Fathers and theologians

Out of line really....

Although we do not have an extensive amount of material from the Fathers on this topic we do have enough to know that they had two requisites..

The conjugal act must take place with the

1. intention to conceive

2. possibility to conceive.

So, no woman in menopause should engage in sexual acts with her husband? No pregnant woman, even at very early stages of pregnancy? No lactating woman? No woman who underwent hysterectomy? No woman (or man) who is as androgine?


As I have piointed out we have little material from the Fathers on this matter but what we do have shows that they were sharply against sexual intercourse in all the situations you have described.   They saw them as simply an exercise in lust.

The one exception to the Fathers' opinion is Saint John Chrysostom who speaks of what we would now call unitive sex as being of at least equal value with procreative sex.

Citations are already in the Forum's archives many times over.

Thank you, Father. To me, it's just sad. I cannot understand, how one can not value, appreciate unitive sex in marriage and consider it in ANY case an "exercise in lust." That's dehumanizing... For yet another time, I cannot but think that Fathers were, in some respects, strange people, to put it mildly.

I wonder, did they (the Fathers) even understand that there is a GIVING aspect in marital conjugation, not merely receiving? And that the giving is, in the case of couples that live together long enough and truly love each other, indeed the most precious, unique, un-replaceable giving of the gift of oneself?

Probably not...

Funny (or strange) that my remark caused no discussion whatsoever. People kept hitting each other regarding the points they had made, but my point was never addressed.
« Last Edit: March 13, 2010, 09:18:15 PM by Heorhij » Logged

Love never fails.
Punch
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Body of Christ
Posts: 5,801



« Reply #60 on: March 13, 2010, 11:04:44 PM »

i dont know if there is any "official" stance, but your priest seems to be pretty in line with all the earliest Fathers and theologians

Out of line really....

Although we do not have an extensive amount of material from the Fathers on this topic we do have enough to know that they had two requisites..

The conjugal act must take place with the

1. intention to conceive

2. possibility to conceive.

So, no woman in menopause should engage in sexual acts with her husband? No pregnant woman, even at very early stages of pregnancy? No lactating woman? No woman who underwent hysterectomy? No woman (or man) who is as androgine?


As I have piointed out we have little material from the Fathers on this matter but what we do have shows that they were sharply against sexual intercourse in all the situations you have described.   They saw them as simply an exercise in lust.

The one exception to the Fathers' opinion is Saint John Chrysostom who speaks of what we would now call unitive sex as being of at least equal value with procreative sex.

Citations are already in the Forum's archives many times over.

Thank you, Father. To me, it's just sad. I cannot understand, how one can not value, appreciate unitive sex in marriage and consider it in ANY case an "exercise in lust." That's dehumanizing... For yet another time, I cannot but think that Fathers were, in some respects, strange people, to put it mildly.

I wonder, did they (the Fathers) even understand that there is a GIVING aspect in marital conjugation, not merely receiving? And that the giving is, in the case of couples that live together long enough and truly love each other, indeed the most precious, unique, un-replaceable giving of the gift of oneself?

Probably not...

Funny (or strange) that my remark caused no discussion whatsoever. People kept hitting each other regarding the points they had made, but my point was never addressed.

Sorry.  I think the problem was that you were right on the money, which is less entertaining than watching a bunch of pseudo-intellectuals blinding themselves with their own aura.
Logged

I would be happy to agree with you, but then both of us would be wrong.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,153


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #61 on: March 13, 2010, 11:26:05 PM »

my point is simple: look to Tradition on any matter having to do with faith, not to ourselves and our culture.
I think this thread has been about looking to Tradition for answers to the question of the OP, though.
« Last Edit: March 13, 2010, 11:27:06 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,494


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #62 on: May 12, 2010, 05:47:54 AM »

CONTEXT NOTE:  The following continuation of this thread split off from here:  Marital sex is a sin in Orthodoxy?  -PtA



The problem with any form of aritificial "birth control" is that it is essentially an anti-life act. Sex between man and wife is not only for procreation (it is also for intimate marital pleasure and for fighting worldly temptations, as Asteriktos said), but it must not be artficially separated from procreation. Since there are natural means of "family planning," artificial barriers to the conception of life are antithetical to God's plan for sex and marrige.


Selam
« Last Edit: May 21, 2010, 01:43:42 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged

"There are two great tragedies: one is to live a life ruled by the passions, and the other is to live a passionless life."
Selam, +GMK+
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #63 on: May 12, 2010, 08:14:54 AM »

Unfortunately, what Gebre expressed above seems to be a rather prevalent view among the Orthodox clergy and laity. At least on the Internet forums.  Grin

Personally, as I wrote many times, I believe it's a bunch of BS.  Cry (But that's just me.)

Most importantly, however, - there is no "one-size-fits-it-all" dogma about non-abortive contraception in Orthodoxy. It is PRINCIPALLY a PASTORAL issue, NOT a dogmatic one. There are no papal encyclicas that are "binding" to us, Orthodox, in regards of when do we have children after we marry, how many children we have, how do we "space" our children etc. etc. etc. Instead, for us there are our priests, whom we are supposed to ask for their blessing for what we have in mind regarding our plans to have or not to have children.
Logged

Love never fails.
chrevbel
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 708



« Reply #64 on: May 12, 2010, 04:15:55 PM »

Unfortunately, what Gebre expressed above seems to be a rather prevalent view among the Orthodox clergy and laity. At least on the Internet forums.  Grin
Personally, as I wrote many times, I believe it's a bunch of BS.  Cry (But that's just me.)
No, it's not just you.  I also believe it is a bunch of bunk.
Logged
Rosehip
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Posts: 2,760



« Reply #65 on: May 12, 2010, 04:29:26 PM »

I'm not married, but am firmly in Heorhij's camp on this one!
Logged

+ Our dear sister Martha (Rosehip) passed away on Dec 20, 2010.  May her memory be eternal! +
HandmaidenofGod
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA (Ecumenical Patriarch)
Posts: 3,397


O Holy St. Demetrius pray to God for us!


« Reply #66 on: May 12, 2010, 04:41:45 PM »

Unfortunately, what Gebre expressed above seems to be a rather prevalent view among the Orthodox clergy and laity. At least on the Internet forums.  Grin

Personally, as I wrote many times, I believe it's a bunch of BS.  Cry (But that's just me.)

Most importantly, however, - there is no "one-size-fits-it-all" dogma about non-abortive contraception in Orthodoxy. It is PRINCIPALLY a PASTORAL issue, NOT a dogmatic one. There are no papal encyclicas that are "binding" to us, Orthodox, in regards of when do we have children after we marry, how many children we have, how do we "space" our children etc. etc. etc. Instead, for us there are our priests, whom we are supposed to ask for their blessing for what we have in mind regarding our plans to have or not to have children.

Amen!
Logged

"For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, says the LORD, thoughts of peace and not of evil, to give you a future and a hope." Jer 29:11
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,494


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #67 on: May 12, 2010, 05:03:06 PM »

For those of you that have remarked that my comments are "bunk," please tell me what I have said that is contradictory to biblical and apostolic teaching. Here are my comments again, and I will break them down so as to afford others the opportunity to demonstrate exactly how I am in opposition to the Teachings of my Church. I am certainly prepared to repent if I have stated anything heretical.

1. The problem with any form of aritificial "birth control" is that it is essentially an anti-life act. ("Contraception" by definition means "against or contrary to procreation." Thus artificial birth control is inherently an anti life action.)

2. Sex between man and wife is not only for procreation (it is also for intimate marital pleasure and for fighting worldly temptations, as Asteriktos said)... (Why is this bunk? Do you think that sex is only for procreation and not for pleasure and intimacy between man and wife? That would seem to be the Catholic view, not the Orthodox one.)

3. ...but it must not be artficially separated from procreation. (Do you think that God's purpose for sex within marriage is strictly pleasure? Then why marry? If the only purpose for sex is pleasure, then fornicate freely. But this doesn't seem to be the Orthodox view either. I would consider it the hedonist view.)

4. Since there are natural means of "family planning," artificial barriers to the conception of life are antithetical to God's plan for sex and marriage. (Please notice that I have never indicated that married people must have children, or that they must have many children. There are natural ways of preventing the conception of a child without using articficial "contraception." These natural means do require a modicum of self discipline and restraint, which again are things that seem quite compatible with Orthodoxy.)


Selam
« Last Edit: May 12, 2010, 05:04:13 PM by Gebre Menfes Kidus » Logged

"There are two great tragedies: one is to live a life ruled by the passions, and the other is to live a passionless life."
Selam, +GMK+
chrevbel
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 708



« Reply #68 on: May 12, 2010, 05:08:17 PM »

For those of you that have remarked... 
You seem to be enamored with the term artificial.  How, precisely, are you defining that term, if you want to be precise and analytical with this whole discussion?
Logged
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,494


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #69 on: May 12, 2010, 05:19:23 PM »

For those of you that have remarked... 
You seem to be enamored with the term artificial.  How, precisely, are you defining that term, if you want to be precise and analytical with this whole discussion?

Artificial as in unnatural, i.e. condoms, pills, devices, contraptions, chemicals, etc. Anything that is done prior to or after sexual intimacies for the specific purpose of precluding conception.


Selam
Logged

"There are two great tragedies: one is to live a life ruled by the passions, and the other is to live a passionless life."
Selam, +GMK+
Alveus Lacuna
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,965



« Reply #70 on: May 12, 2010, 05:22:55 PM »

The problem with any form of artificial "birth control" is that it is essentially an anti-life act.("Contraception" by definition means "against or contrary to procreation." Thus artificial birth control is inherently an anti life action.)

Why is natural birth control OK?
Logged
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #71 on: May 12, 2010, 05:28:57 PM »

For those of you that have remarked that my comments are "bunk," please tell me what I have said that is contradictory to biblical and apostolic teaching. Here are my comments again, and I will break them down so as to afford others the opportunity to demonstrate exactly how I am in opposition to the Teachings of my Church. I am certainly prepared to repent if I have stated anything heretical.

1. The problem with any form of aritificial "birth control" is that it is essentially an anti-life act. ("Contraception" by definition means "against or contrary to procreation." Thus artificial birth control is inherently an anti life action.)

2. Sex between man and wife is not only for procreation (it is also for intimate marital pleasure and for fighting worldly temptations, as Asteriktos said)... (Why is this bunk? Do you think that sex is only for procreation and not for pleasure and intimacy between man and wife? That would seem to be the Catholic view, not the Orthodox one.)

3. ...but it must not be artficially separated from procreation. (Do you think that God's purpose for sex within marriage is strictly pleasure? Then why marry? If the only purpose for sex is pleasure, then fornicate freely. But this doesn't seem to be the Orthodox view either. I would consider it the hedonist view.)

4. Since there are natural means of "family planning," artificial barriers to the conception of life are antithetical to God's plan for sex and marriage. (Please notice that I have never indicated that married people must have children, or that they must have many children. There are natural ways of preventing the conception of a child without using articficial "contraception." These natural means do require a modicum of self discipline and restraint, which again are things that seem quite compatible with Orthodoxy.)


Selam

Gebre, I am sorry if I hit a nerve. No, you did not contradict Biblical or apostolic teaching. But the thing is, neither the writers of the Bible nor the holy Apostles knew about modern contraceptive techniques. They also knew nothing about antibiotics, cars, planes, tanks, computers etc. So they could not possibly write or teach something about Provera or vasectomy one way or another. There are no Biblical or apostolic teachings about antibiotics, cars, computers, Provera, or vasectomy.Smiley

What I called "bunch of BS" is the view that any contraception except the so-called natural (?) family planning is "anti-life." The reason for this scepticism of mine about this view is simply that married couples sometimes have sex with conscious wish to NOT have children right now, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that by any human or Biblical or Apostolic or whatever standard. The sexual act in this case is for the sole purpose of giving yourself as a gift to your spouse. This act sustains marriage not any worse than the act WITH a desire to conceive. If I use condom, I don't kill any life. If my wife takes Provera, she does not kill any life either. It's exactly the same as having sex on days when there is no ovulation. Except, of course, there is more probability that your wish to NOT conceive a child will be fulfilled if you use a condom instead of playing a "Russian roulette" of this so-called "natural" family planning.

But again, it's just me. I do not represent Orthodoxy when I say this, just my own thoughts.
Logged

Love never fails.
chrevbel
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 708



« Reply #72 on: May 12, 2010, 05:29:33 PM »

How, precisely, are you defining that term...
Artificial as in unnatural, i.e. condoms, pills, devices, contraptions, chemicals, etc.
And here is the first inconsistency.  Not all chemicals are unnatural.  Not all condoms are unnatural (ever heard of fish skin?)  You'll have to do better than that.  An inconsistent argument is always the easiest to defend.

Quote
Anything that is done prior to or after sexual intimacies for the specific purpose of precluding conception.

Anything is a pretty broad category.  Does this include mental activity?  Such as realizing that waiting a few days would likely avoid conception?  Because that's what I thought you meant earlier by natural means
Logged
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,494


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #73 on: May 12, 2010, 05:40:23 PM »

The problem with any form of artificial "birth control" is that it is essentially an anti-life act.("Contraception" by definition means "against or contrary to procreation." Thus artificial birth control is inherently an anti life action.)

Why is natural birth control OK?


I'm not really sure what my Church's teaching on that is. Without getting too graphic, let's just say that there are two primary forms of "natural" birth control. One form is condemned in the Old Testament (see Genesis 38:9-10), and may in fact be considered unnatural. I'm not sure. But the other form - sometimes called the "rhythm method" - is quite natural and quite effective.

Natural birth control does not seek to interfere with the divine inherent purpose for the natural will and order. It respects God and honors creation. Artificial birth control is a kind of sexaul bulimia nervosa. We want the physical pleasure without the natural and spritual benfits that were intended to accompany that pleasure.


Selam
Logged

"There are two great tragedies: one is to live a life ruled by the passions, and the other is to live a passionless life."
Selam, +GMK+
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #74 on: May 12, 2010, 05:43:26 PM »

Quote
Anything that is done prior to or after sexual intimacies for the specific purpose of precluding conception.

Anything is a pretty broad category.  Does this include mental activity?  Such as realizing that waiting a few days would likely avoid conception?  Because that's what I thought you meant earlier by natural means

Exactly! I have always wondered, why in the world avoiding sex on those days when conception is most likely is "natural," while making any day a day when conception is highly unlikely "unnatural." Because the latter is achieved by a pharmaceutical intervention? Well, then drinking coffee in the morning is "unnatural," either, and contradicts the Apostolic teachings. (BTW, I am joking of course, but Mormons very seriously believe that it is indeed so. Smiley)
Logged

Love never fails.
Alveus Lacuna
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,965



« Reply #75 on: May 12, 2010, 05:44:00 PM »

Natural birth control does not seek to interfere with the divine inherent purpose for the natural will and order. It respects God and honors creation. Artificial birth control is a kind of sexual bulimia nervosa. We want the physical pleasure without the natural and spiritual benefits that were intended to accompany that pleasure.

How is any kind of "control" not an "interference"?
Logged
chrevbel
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 708



« Reply #76 on: May 12, 2010, 05:45:05 PM »

Artificial birth control is a kind of sexaul bulimia nervosa. We want the physical pleasure without the natural and spritual benfits that were intended to accompany that pleasure.
How certain are you that this is the only motivation for using what you call artificial birth control?
Logged
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,494


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #77 on: May 12, 2010, 05:49:28 PM »

How, precisely, are you defining that term...
Artificial as in unnatural, i.e. condoms, pills, devices, contraptions, chemicals, etc.
And here is the first inconsistency.  Not all chemicals are unnatural.  Not all condoms are unnatural (ever heard of fish skin?)  You'll have to do better than that.  An inconsistent argument is always the easiest to defend.

Quote
Anything that is done prior to or after sexual intimacies for the specific purpose of precluding conception.

Anything is a pretty broad category.  Does this include mental activity?  Such as realizing that waiting a few days would likely avoid conception?  Because that's what I thought you meant earlier by natural means

The highlighted words indicate an act or actions, not mere thoughts.

I knew you were trying to trap me, but your trap was unsuccessful. I specifically clarified what I mean by "artificial," and my comments belied no inconsistencies. You can parse my words and play games of semantics, but I was very clear. However, if you want an official answer, then consult the Teachings of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church on the matter.  


Selam
Logged

"There are two great tragedies: one is to live a life ruled by the passions, and the other is to live a passionless life."
Selam, +GMK+
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,494


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #78 on: May 12, 2010, 05:52:13 PM »

Natural birth control does not seek to interfere with the divine inherent purpose for the natural will and order. It respects God and honors creation. Artificial birth control is a kind of sexual bulimia nervosa. We want the physical pleasure without the natural and spiritual benefits that were intended to accompany that pleasure.

How is any kind of "control" not an "interference"?

Because self control is not an interference but rather the path to theosis.


Selam
Logged

"There are two great tragedies: one is to live a life ruled by the passions, and the other is to live a passionless life."
Selam, +GMK+
Alveus Lacuna
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,965



« Reply #79 on: May 12, 2010, 05:54:24 PM »

How certain are you that this is the only motivation for using what you call artificial birth control?

Indeed. Let's posit that, for example, a woman undergoes multiple cesarean sections because there are multiple complications with the vaginal deliveries of several infants. After having two or three of these, her doctor informs her that to have additional children would endanger her life and safety, because her uterine wall will likely rupture from the multiple incisions. In other words, it would be suicide to have anymore kids.

Are her and the husband then forever forbidden to engage in sexual activity, knowing that they would have to use some form on contraception (be it a vasectomy or at least condoms) to ensure the safety of the wife's life? In this scenario, it has nothing to do with avoiding children, but rather has to do with protecting life while seeking to retain the intimate bonds of affection in marital relations.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2010, 05:58:16 PM by Alveus Lacuna » Logged
Alveus Lacuna
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,965



« Reply #80 on: May 12, 2010, 05:55:27 PM »

Because self control is not an interference but rather the path to theosis.

When you control yourself you are interfering with your sinful inclinations. Are you not getting my point?
Logged
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,494


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #81 on: May 12, 2010, 05:55:45 PM »

Artificial birth control is a kind of sexaul bulimia nervosa. We want the physical pleasure without the natural and spritual benfits that were intended to accompany that pleasure.
How certain are you that this is the only motivation for using what you call artificial birth control?


It is not the only motivation, but I am very certain that in this society it is the primary motivation. I am also certain that most Christians have been negatively effected by the standards of society, especially in the area of sexuality. And this forum provides ample evidence.


Selam
Logged

"There are two great tragedies: one is to live a life ruled by the passions, and the other is to live a passionless life."
Selam, +GMK+
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,494


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #82 on: May 12, 2010, 05:57:59 PM »

How certain are you that this is the only motivation for using what you call artificial birth control?

Indeed. Let's posit that, for example, a woman undergoes multiple cesarean sections because there are multiple complications with the vaginal deliveries of several infants. After having two or three of these, her doctor informs her that to have additional children would endanger her life and safety, because her uterine wall will likely rupture from the multiple incisions. In other words, it would be suicide to have anymore kids.

Are her and the husband then forever forbidden to engage in sexual activity, knowing that the would have to use some form on contraception (be it a vasectomy or at least condoms) to ensure the safety of the wife's life? In this scenario, it has nothing to do with avoiding children, but rather has to do with protecting life.

And I never asserted that this is the only motivation for artificial birth control.

A few more posts and they'll be saying I advocate female cirucmcision!


Selam
Logged

"There are two great tragedies: one is to live a life ruled by the passions, and the other is to live a passionless life."
Selam, +GMK+
chrevbel
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 708



« Reply #83 on: May 12, 2010, 06:01:40 PM »

The highlighted words indicate an act or actions, not mere thoughts.
And I thought it was clear that I was implying the act of waiting, but perhaps it was not.

Quote
I knew you were trying to trap me, but your trap was unsuccessful. I specifically clarified what I mean by "artificial," and my comments belied no inconsistencies. You can parse my words and play games of semantics, but I was very clear. However, if you want an official answer, then consult the Teachings of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church on the matter.
No, I wasn't trying to trap at all, merely to understand.  But if your final answer is to squawk about semantics and point me to the official answer, then that's fine; we're probably done.

Do please realize, however, that your original response wasn't citing the Ethiopian Orthodox Church teachings.  It was simply signed GMK.  If you don't wish your thoughts to be analyzed, then I'd recommend you not present them as your own.

Regards.
Logged
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,494


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #84 on: May 12, 2010, 06:03:20 PM »

Because self control is not an interference but rather the path to theosis.

When you control yourself you are interfering with your sinful inclinations. Are you not getting my point?

I get your point. And my point is that natural birth control is not interfering with God's plan for sexuality. The rhythm method involves self-coltrol, which is a good thing. Also, when married couples use natural means of not conceiving out of altruistic motivations, then this is also a good thing.  


Selam
Logged

"There are two great tragedies: one is to live a life ruled by the passions, and the other is to live a passionless life."
Selam, +GMK+
Alveus Lacuna
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,965



« Reply #85 on: May 12, 2010, 06:03:43 PM »

And I never asserted that this is the only motivation for artificial birth control.

A few more posts and they'll be saying I advocate female circumcision!

Not at all. You seemed to be saying that all forms of artificial birth control are wrong in all situations. I was providing a situation where I would think that they would be perfectly acceptable. But there are many other individual situations which would require such considerations. This is why this is considered to be a pastoral issue. You seem to making a blanket condemnation which doesn't seem fair to me, that's all.

Peace be with you.
Logged
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,494


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #86 on: May 12, 2010, 06:05:35 PM »

The highlighted words indicate an act or actions, not mere thoughts.
And I thought it was clear that I was implying the act of waiting, but perhaps it was not.

Quote
I knew you were trying to trap me, but your trap was unsuccessful. I specifically clarified what I mean by "artificial," and my comments belied no inconsistencies. You can parse my words and play games of semantics, but I was very clear. However, if you want an official answer, then consult the Teachings of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church on the matter.
No, I wasn't trying to trap at all, merely to understand.  But if your final answer is to squawk about semantics and point me to the official answer, then that's fine; we're probably done.

Do please realize, however, that your original response wasn't citing the Ethiopian Orthodox Church teachings.  It was simply signed GMK.  If you don't wish your thoughts to be analyzed, then I'd recommend you not present them as your own.

Regards.

I am willing to discuss it, as I have been. Still waiting for someone to show me how my original comments are heretical or out of line with Orthodox teaching.


Selam
Logged

"There are two great tragedies: one is to live a life ruled by the passions, and the other is to live a passionless life."
Selam, +GMK+
Alveus Lacuna
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,965



« Reply #87 on: May 12, 2010, 06:10:15 PM »

Because self control is not an interference but rather the path to theosis.
When you control yourself you are interfering with your sinful inclinations. Are you not getting my point?
I get your point. And my point is that natural birth control is not interfering with God's plan for sexuality. The rhythm method involves self-control, which is a good thing.

My point is that control = interference in this situation. Perhaps I'm making a false equivalent. At any rate, your resolute line of control being acceptable at the "mental" level but not the physical/material one just seems inconsistent to me. It would seem like to be highly principled and consistent in this matter one would have to always be rolling the dice every time they had relations, not keeping track to be certain "when it's safe."
Logged
Alveus Lacuna
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,965



« Reply #88 on: May 12, 2010, 06:13:19 PM »

Still waiting for someone to show me how my original comments are heretical or out of line with Orthodox teaching.

Your line of thinking can work within Orthodoxy, but it seems to be a matter of opinion rather than fact. You are stating that artificial contraceptives are categorically wrong and unnatural, but I just don't see how that is true in every situation. It seems true in some or even most situations to me, but certainly not all.
Logged
chrevbel
Site Supporter
High Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 708



« Reply #89 on: May 12, 2010, 06:15:17 PM »

Still waiting for someone to show me how my original comments are heretical or out of line with Orthodox teaching.
I'm certain that I never said, nor do I think anyone has said, that your comments or thoughts are heretical. You stated them, however, in a way that clearly implied you considered them to be absolutely true.

But absoluteness has an extremely elusive quality to it, as my questions about your definition of artificial quickly demonstrated.  The OP asked a question about our faith.  Your answer was clearly intended to communicate that there is only one correct answer.  With that conclusion, I vehemently disagree.
Logged
Tags: contraception birth control 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 »  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.176 seconds with 71 queries.