OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 21, 2014, 06:25:56 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 8 9 10 11 12 13 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The Catholic Route to Birth Control  (Read 30180 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #405 on: March 03, 2011, 12:18:09 PM »

The ones who left it as a pastoral issue.

The ones who condemned the drugs of sterility like the low dose birth control pill, the pull out method, or other barrier methods (btw, neither the pill nor the withdrawal method are barrier methods) also condemned the spacing of children.

Name for me one early church father who condoned the use of artificial birth control.

You didn't. And you can't. Because there aren't any.

If there are any, I am happy to concede. But for you to assert that the consensus of the Fathers was that contraception is ever okay is absurd.

But you haven't asserted it, for good reason - because the Fathers universally condemned contraception.

We can ask:  name one Father who approved the use of NFP?  The answer is simple: NOT one!

The Fathers condemned all marital sex which

1. Was not intended to create a child

2.  Was not able to create a child.

They saw much of the sexual relationships which we accept today as an abomination before the Lord, such as sex when a woman is past the age of child bearing or when a couple is infertile.  The Church no longer accepts these teachings of the Church Fathers.

Father, please do explain your words that "The Church no longer accepts these teachings of the Church Fathers."  I do know that many monastic spiritual father on Mt. Athos and in this country do follow the teachings of the Church Fathers on this subject, and they are often sharply criticized for doing so, but what is your basis for this assertion that the Church has regected the Fathers on this point?

I do not know bishops or priests who forbid the faithful to enjoy the marital bed if they cannot conceive (infertile, too old, etc.) or do not intend to conceive.   This is contrary to the teachings of the Fathers who taught that sex is permissible when

1.  there is the intention to conceive
2.  there is the possibility to conceive.

I see that the OCA website speaks of the change in laying aside patristic teaching on two points: conception and usury.
Can you link, Father?


Btw, that "sharp criticism"jah, what specifically is it?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #406 on: March 03, 2011, 02:45:36 PM »

As for the reasons why men with wives are not consecrated as bishops now, we have a thread on that here.  It's not because "all intercourse is unclean,"  nor because "even the blood of martydom does not wash away the defilement of marriage."
I have never heard anyone in my Church teach that intercourse is unclean in the context of marriage. Like anything else that is part of human nature, there is a correct and holy way and there is a sinful way. By the way, it is possible for a Catholic couple to use NFP and still be sinning. Being "open to life" as does not just mean using NFP, but it is also the attitude of the couple and they way they use it. If a couple goes into a marriage using NFP to avoid ever having children, that is still contracepting as it is not being open to life to use it that way. They might as well use condoms if their intent is to never conceive.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #407 on: March 03, 2011, 03:43:14 PM »

As for the reasons why men with wives are not consecrated as bishops now, we have a thread on that here.  It's not because "all intercourse is unclean,"  nor because "even the blood of martydom does not wash away the defilement of marriage."
I have never heard anyone in my Church teach that intercourse is unclean in the context of marriage.
Technically, you still haven't:St.Jerome died in communinon with our Church. But as for yours, I've heard/read it plenty of times, but I haven't the time right now to go down that memory lane.  I will share that one of your preist/friar (judging by what he was wearing) on EWTN talked about churching of women and the necessity for it because she propogated sin (I'll admit, though, that it was one of the mediocre talkers, not the likes of Mother Angelica nr Fr. Groeschel, or even Fr. George (who is wrong, but he can make an intelligent defense of your wrong beliefs)).

Like anything else that is part of human nature, there is a correct and holy way and there is a sinful way.

Oh? What's the corect and holy way of abortion?

By the way, it is possible for a Catholic couple to use NFP and still be sinning. Being "open to life" as does not just mean using NFP, but it is also the attitude of the couple and they way they use it. If a couple goes into a marriage using NFP to avoid ever having children, that is still contracepting as it is not being open to life to use it that way. They might as well use condoms if their intent is to never conceive.
Have you seen the post above?
I've been wondering about those who admit that the rhythm method, which they call "Natural Family Planning," can be sinful when done for selfish reasons, or to avoid having children at all.  When does it become a sin?  Newlyweds use it to get some time "to know each other" (as our priest says, you will learn nothing useful in the first years). Time goes on, they are trying to save for a house, advance their careers to be established enough for a child (if you wait until you can afford kids, you will never have them), etc. and before you know it, the wife has passed her peak fertility and they have trouble, or can't, conceive (happens all the time).  Have they sinned? is it mortal or venial?  What if they just put it off and never get around to it-is it venial or mortal?
« Last Edit: March 03, 2011, 03:44:18 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #408 on: March 03, 2011, 04:12:02 PM »

Why is that?
As for the reasons why men with wives are not consecrated as bishops now, we have a thread on that here.  It's not because "all intercourse is unclean,"  nor because "even the blood of martydom does not wash away the defilement of marriage."
Btw, here is the thread I was thinking of:
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,33961.msg536344.html#msg536344
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #409 on: March 03, 2011, 04:20:21 PM »

Technically, you still haven't:St.Jerome died in communinon with our Church. But as for yours, I've heard/read it plenty of times, but I haven't the time right now to go down that memory lane.  I will share that one of your preist/friar (judging by what he was wearing) on EWTN talked about churching of women and the necessity for it because she propogated sin (I'll admit, though, that it was one of the mediocre talkers, not the likes of Mother Angelica nr Fr. Groeschel, or even Fr. George (who is wrong, but he can make an intelligent defense of your wrong beliefs)).
As long as you realize that my Church does not officially teach that marital intercourse is sinful I am cool with you disagreeing with other stuff. I just do not like my faith to be misrepresented.

Oh? What's the corect and holy way of abortion?
Okay, you got me there. What I meant to say is "like so much in human nature." Obviously there are some things which are intrinsically evil and can never be permitted. In terms of intercourse (the original topic of this discussion), however, there is a right way and a wrong way. The right way is between a husband and wife with both the unitive and procreative aspects of the act still in tact. Don't misunderstand me, I am not saying that every time a couple has sex that they have to conceive, they just have to be open to it.


I've been wondering about those who admit that the rhythm method, which they call "Natural Family Planning," can be sinful when done for selfish reasons, or to avoid having children at all.  When does it become a sin?  Newlyweds use it to get some time "to know each other" (as our priest says, you will learn nothing useful in the first years). Time goes on, they are trying to save for a house, advance their careers to be established enough for a child (if you wait until you can afford kids, you will never have them), etc. and before you know it, the wife has passed her peak fertility and they have trouble, or can't, conceive (happens all the time).  Have they sinned? is it mortal or venial?  What if they just put it off and never get around to it-is it venial or mortal?
This would be a good thing to ask a Priest, but I would say, in this case and in my opinion, they have not sinned if their intent was not to be closed to life and they just happened to not end up having children for whatever reason.
« Last Edit: March 03, 2011, 04:20:44 PM by Wyatt » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #410 on: March 05, 2011, 03:16:03 PM »

I was reminded of this thread by this:
http://www.catholic.com/library/Celibacy_and_the_Priesthood.asp
Quote
Most Catholics marry, and all Catholics are taught to venerate marriage as a holy institution—a sacrament, an action of God upon our souls; one of the holiest things we encounter in this life.

In fact, it is precisely the holiness of marriage that makes celibacy precious; for only what is good and holy in itself can be given up for God as a sacrifice. Just as fasting presupposes the goodness of food, celibacy presupposes the goodness of marriage. To despise celibacy, therefore, is to undermine marriage itself—as the early Fathers pointed out.

Celibacy is also a life-affirming institution. In the Old Testament, where celibacy was almost unknown, the childless were often despised by others and themselves; only through children, it was felt, did one acquire value. By renouncing marriage, the celibate affirms the intrinsic value of each human life in itself, regardless of offspring....
NIHIL OBSTAT: I have concluded that the materials
presented in this work are free of doctrinal or moral errors.
Bernadeane Carr, STL, Censor Librorum, August 10, 2004

IMPRIMATUR: In accord with 1983 CIC 827
permission to publish this work is hereby granted.
+Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego, August 10, 2004
which is true.  However, the celibates (and celibate wannabes, such as St. Augustine) upon whom the supporters of HV relie, have no problem cast away the intrinsic value of each human life and redue the married to only the means of breeding:


The "clear teaching" that Humanae Vitae apparently depends on (I cite the apologia for it, as it doesn't cite patristics on this at all) does not include HV in that consensus, as it is a tradition which abhors sexuality (but not gender: it is rather misogynist) in general and sex in particular, and basically teaches that if weak individuals succumb to their animal urges, then the only excuse is to procreate and serve as breeders for the monastic orders-Jerome's "I praise marriage because it gives me virgins."

 From the same site of Fr. Hardon:
Quote
It is in this context that the following stricture of contraception was made.  Marriage in itself merits esteem and the highest approval, for the Lord wished men to “be fruitful and multiply.” He did not tell them, however, to act like libertines, nor did He intend them to surrender themselves to pleasure as though born only to indulge in sexual relations. Let the Educator (Christ) put us to shame with the word Exechiel: “Put away your fornications.” Why, even unreasoning beasts know enough not to mate at certain times. To indulge in intercourse without intending children is to outrage nature, whom should take as our instructor (Paedagogues, 2, 10; 95, 3, GCS, 12, 214).

Here St. Clement is not mentioning the rhythm for contraception, but the rhythm method for conception. In other words, married couples shouldn't mate out of season. In the language question of Katharevousa versus Dhemotiki, the point was made that even the most die hard supporter of Katharevousa had to resort sometimes to Dhemotiki: no one made love in Katharevousa. So it was claimed. I get the feeling that St. Clement would, if he would, make love in Katharevousa, if not in Attic.


Quote
Clement of Alexandria

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

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. 3o7]).

Lactantius

"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).

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]).

Augustine

"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).
http://www.ewtn.com/library/ANSWERS/FKBCONTR.HTM[/size]
[/size]
« Last Edit: March 05, 2011, 03:17:38 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #411 on: March 05, 2011, 03:49:38 PM »

Hmm ... so if the EO Church no longer follows the consensus of the Church Fathers on this issue, does that mean it allows for "development of doctrine"? Wink

As I have pointed out, there is not in fact a consensus of the Fathers on this point since what we have from them is so sparse.  And to prove this one only has to examine the Roman Catholic sites on contraception and the quotes they offer.

In some matters also, both our Churches have abandoned the teaching of the Fathers - slavery and usury come to mind.

What is really sparse are fathers who affirm the unitive aspect of marriage.  There is a great deal in fact on the procreative aspect of marriage and the evils of any anti-procreative activity.

Mary
Isn't it the teaching of HV that the "unitive" and "procreative" cannot be seperated?

Yet again, HV vs. its Fathers.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #412 on: March 05, 2011, 04:15:56 PM »

Hmm ... so if the EO Church no longer follows the consensus of the Church Fathers on this issue, does that mean it allows for "development of doctrine"? Wink

As I have pointed out, there is not in fact a consensus of the Fathers on this point since what we have from them is so sparse.  And to prove this one only has to examine the Roman Catholic sites on contraception and the quotes they offer.

In some matters also, both our Churches have abandoned the teaching of the Fathers - slavery and usury come to mind.

What is really sparse are fathers who affirm the unitive aspect of marriage.  There is a great deal in fact on the procreative aspect of marriage and the evils of any anti-procreative activity.

Mary
Isn't it the teaching of HV that the "unitive" and "procreative" cannot be seperated?

Yet again, HV vs. its Fathers.
Why does Izzy so desperately want us to join him in committing the sin of Onanism?
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #413 on: March 05, 2011, 05:06:38 PM »

Hmm ... so if the EO Church no longer follows the consensus of the Church Fathers on this issue, does that mean it allows for "development of doctrine"? Wink

As I have pointed out, there is not in fact a consensus of the Fathers on this point since what we have from them is so sparse.  And to prove this one only has to examine the Roman Catholic sites on contraception and the quotes they offer.

In some matters also, both our Churches have abandoned the teaching of the Fathers - slavery and usury come to mind.

What is really sparse are fathers who affirm the unitive aspect of marriage.  There is a great deal in fact on the procreative aspect of marriage and the evils of any anti-procreative activity.

Mary


Isn't it the teaching of HV that the "unitive" and "procreative" cannot be seperated?

Yet again, HV vs. its Fathers.
Why does Izzy so desperately want us to join him in committing the sin of Onanism?

Who knows what underlies this relentless campaign of negativity.   He's got plenty of company so best not even to partake of the sour notes...It has prompted me to go back and do some private rereading of the original and exegesis of the original that has been very productive as a spiritual exercise.

« Last Edit: March 05, 2011, 05:07:30 PM by elijahmaria » Logged

Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #414 on: March 05, 2011, 05:25:49 PM »

Hmm ... so if the EO Church no longer follows the consensus of the Church Fathers on this issue, does that mean it allows for "development of doctrine"? Wink

As I have pointed out, there is not in fact a consensus of the Fathers on this point since what we have from them is so sparse.  And to prove this one only has to examine the Roman Catholic sites on contraception and the quotes they offer.

In some matters also, both our Churches have abandoned the teaching of the Fathers - slavery and usury come to mind.

What is really sparse are fathers who affirm the unitive aspect of marriage.  There is a great deal in fact on the procreative aspect of marriage and the evils of any anti-procreative activity.

Mary


Isn't it the teaching of HV that the "unitive" and "procreative" cannot be seperated?

Yet again, HV vs. its Fathers.
Why does Izzy so desperately want us to join him in committing the sin of Onanism?

Who knows what underlies this relentless campaign of negativity.   He's got plenty of company so best not even to partake of the sour notes...It has prompted me to go back and do some private rereading of the original and exegesis of the original that has been very productive as a spiritual exercise.


Can you point me to some good reading on the topic?
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #415 on: March 05, 2011, 06:05:49 PM »

Hmm ... so if the EO Church no longer follows the consensus of the Church Fathers on this issue, does that mean it allows for "development of doctrine"? Wink

As I have pointed out, there is not in fact a consensus of the Fathers on this point since what we have from them is so sparse.  And to prove this one only has to examine the Roman Catholic sites on contraception and the quotes they offer.

In some matters also, both our Churches have abandoned the teaching of the Fathers - slavery and usury come to mind.

What is really sparse are fathers who affirm the unitive aspect of marriage.  There is a great deal in fact on the procreative aspect of marriage and the evils of any anti-procreative activity.

Mary
Isn't it the teaching of HV that the "unitive" and "procreative" cannot be seperated?

Yet again, HV vs. its Fathers.
Why does Izzy so desperately want us to join him in committing the sin of Onanism?

Onanism is not a good thing but then again, is it a good thing that Catholics resort to complicated scientific methods and charts and thermometers and mucus examinations just so the Catholic male is able to deposit his semen in an infertile womb?
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,417


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #416 on: March 05, 2011, 06:45:47 PM »

Hmm ... so if the EO Church no longer follows the consensus of the Church Fathers on this issue, does that mean it allows for "development of doctrine"? Wink

As I have pointed out, there is not in fact a consensus of the Fathers on this point since what we have from them is so sparse.  And to prove this one only has to examine the Roman Catholic sites on contraception and the quotes they offer.

In some matters also, both our Churches have abandoned the teaching of the Fathers - slavery and usury come to mind.

What is really sparse are fathers who affirm the unitive aspect of marriage.  There is a great deal in fact on the procreative aspect of marriage and the evils of any anti-procreative activity.

Mary
Isn't it the teaching of HV that the "unitive" and "procreative" cannot be seperated?

Yet again, HV vs. its Fathers.
Why does Izzy so desperately want us to join him in committing the sin of Onanism?

Onanism is not a good thing but then again, is it a good thing that Catholics resort to complicated scientific methods and charts and thermometers and mucus examinations just so the Catholic male is able to deposit his semen in an infertile womb?

So now you are against ABC? That's fantastic. You have made progress in your spiritual life.
Logged

You are right. I apologize for having sacked Constantinople. I really need to stop doing that.
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #417 on: March 05, 2011, 06:52:34 PM »

Hmm ... so if the EO Church no longer follows the consensus of the Church Fathers on this issue, does that mean it allows for "development of doctrine"? Wink

As I have pointed out, there is not in fact a consensus of the Fathers on this point since what we have from them is so sparse.  And to prove this one only has to examine the Roman Catholic sites on contraception and the quotes they offer.

In some matters also, both our Churches have abandoned the teaching of the Fathers - slavery and usury come to mind.

What is really sparse are fathers who affirm the unitive aspect of marriage.  There is a great deal in fact on the procreative aspect of marriage and the evils of any anti-procreative activity.

Mary
Isn't it the teaching of HV that the "unitive" and "procreative" cannot be seperated?

Yet again, HV vs. its Fathers.
Why does Izzy so desperately want us to join him in committing the sin of Onanism?

Onanism is not a good thing but then again, is it a good thing that Catholics resort to complicated scientific methods and charts and thermometers and mucus examinations just so the Catholic male is able to deposit his semen in an infertile womb?

So now you are against ABC? That's fantastic. You have made progress in your spiritual life.

If Catholics wish to use Natural Family Planning so that Catholic males may enjoy semi-onanastic pleasures when there is no fear of conceiving, who am I to forbid them.
Logged
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #418 on: March 05, 2011, 07:15:11 PM »

Hmm ... so if the EO Church no longer follows the consensus of the Church Fathers on this issue, does that mean it allows for "development of doctrine"? Wink

As I have pointed out, there is not in fact a consensus of the Fathers on this point since what we have from them is so sparse.  And to prove this one only has to examine the Roman Catholic sites on contraception and the quotes they offer.

In some matters also, both our Churches have abandoned the teaching of the Fathers - slavery and usury come to mind.

What is really sparse are fathers who affirm the unitive aspect of marriage.  There is a great deal in fact on the procreative aspect of marriage and the evils of any anti-procreative activity.

Mary


Isn't it the teaching of HV that the "unitive" and "procreative" cannot be seperated?

Yet again, HV vs. its Fathers.
Why does Izzy so desperately want us to join him in committing the sin of Onanism?

Who knows what underlies this relentless campaign of negativity.   He's got plenty of company so best not even to partake of the sour notes...It has prompted me to go back and do some private rereading of the original and exegesis of the original that has been very productive as a spiritual exercise.


Can you point me to some good reading on the topic?

There are some things on-line and a few books.  John Paul's book on love is one that I read periodically.  I can't remember the exact title at the moment.  I don't pay any attention to Mr. West, but I do read the Theology of the Body homilies that are on-line.  I'll get you a few things and line them up in your mail box...and of course HV is on-line in a number of places.
Logged

ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #419 on: March 05, 2011, 08:31:40 PM »

Hmm ... so if the EO Church no longer follows the consensus of the Church Fathers on this issue, does that mean it allows for "development of doctrine"? Wink

As I have pointed out, there is not in fact a consensus of the Fathers on this point since what we have from them is so sparse.  And to prove this one only has to examine the Roman Catholic sites on contraception and the quotes they offer.

In some matters also, both our Churches have abandoned the teaching of the Fathers - slavery and usury come to mind.

What is really sparse are fathers who affirm the unitive aspect of marriage.  There is a great deal in fact on the procreative aspect of marriage and the evils of any anti-procreative activity.

Mary
Isn't it the teaching of HV that the "unitive" and "procreative" cannot be seperated?

Yet again, HV vs. its Fathers.
Why does Izzy so desperately want us to join him in committing the sin of Onanism?
If you are reading some such invitation into the post, we know what you're focused on, as no one brought up onanism, either solo or with a friend.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #420 on: March 05, 2011, 08:35:55 PM »

Hmm ... so if the EO Church no longer follows the consensus of the Church Fathers on this issue, does that mean it allows for "development of doctrine"? Wink

As I have pointed out, there is not in fact a consensus of the Fathers on this point since what we have from them is so sparse.  And to prove this one only has to examine the Roman Catholic sites on contraception and the quotes they offer.

In some matters also, both our Churches have abandoned the teaching of the Fathers - slavery and usury come to mind.

What is really sparse are fathers who affirm the unitive aspect of marriage.  There is a great deal in fact on the procreative aspect of marriage and the evils of any anti-procreative activity.

Mary
Isn't it the teaching of HV that the "unitive" and "procreative" cannot be seperated?

Yet again, HV vs. its Fathers.
Why does Izzy so desperately want us to join him in committing the sin of Onanism?

Onanism is not a good thing but then again, is it a good thing that Catholics resort to complicated scientific methods and charts and thermometers and mucus examinations just so the Catholic male is able to deposit his semen in an infertile womb?

So now you are against ABC? That's fantastic. You have made progress in your spiritual life.

If Catholics wish to use Natural Family Planning so that Catholic males may enjoy semi-onanastic pleasures when there is no fear of conceiving, who am I to forbid them.
Nothing semi about it, Father: they, according to the Fathers on which they depend, act with the same intention as Onan.  In fact, even worse: Onan's method required no great forethought and is quite undependible, and thus far more "open to life" than the mucus and temperature etc. which require all that effort to act on the intention of wasting seed, with far more reliability of shutting off conception.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2011, 08:36:43 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #421 on: March 05, 2011, 08:50:03 PM »

http://www.ewtn.com/library/Theology/FELICHV2.HTM

Quote
Therefore when there is question of harmonizing conjugal love with the responsible transmission of life, the moral aspect of any procedure does not depend solely on sincere intentions or on an evaluation of motives. It must be determined by objective standards. These, based on the nature of the human person and his acts, preserve tile full sense of mutual self-giving arid human procreation in the context of true love. Such a goal cannot be achieved unless the virtue of conjugal chastity is sincerely practiced. Relying on these principles, sons of the Church may not undertake methods of regulating procreation which are found blameworthy by the teaching authority of the Church in its unfolding of the divine law.

The principles affirmed

"Everyone should realize that human life and the task of transmitting it are not realities bound up with this world alone. Hence they cannot be measured or perceived only in terms of it, but always have a hearing on the eternal destiny of men".

When mention is made of the teaching authority of the Church, the note introduced, as we have said, by the Conciliar Commission, is cited. The text thus drawn up (with only one modification, at the beginning of n. 51, in which we read: Versari posse—may find themselves—instead of versari—find themselves), was approved and promulgated in the public Session on 7th December 1965. (26)

The line of development of the pastoral Constitution Gaudium et spes, as regards matrimonial fertility, shows clearly that the following principles have been constantly affirmed:

1) Marriage and conjugal love are directed, by their very nature. to the begetting and education of children, who are the greatest gift of God and the crowning-point of conjugal union;

2) it is for the conscience of husband and wife to give the ultimate and final judgment on the number of children;

3) the conscience of husband and wife must be formed according to the objective standards of morality;

4) in the moral evaluation of the procreative act, the very nature of the act and its intrinsic ends must be kept in mind;

5) the objective standards of morality are constituted by the law of God, of which the Magisterium of the Church is the faithful interpreter, headed by the Sovereign Pontiff by the will of Christ;

6) what the Magisterium of the Church lays down in this matter is indicated in the principal documents of Pius XI (Enc. Casti Connubii 1930), of Pius XII (Address to Midwives, 1951) and of Paul VI (Address to Cardinals, 1964).

It is precisely these principles that are stressed in the Encyclical Humanae vitae. Therefore not only does the Encyclical not disappoint the hopes of Gaudium et spes but it is in perfect agreement with the doctrine set forth in that Constitution. this doctrine is clarified and developed authentically by the Sovereign Pontiff, according to the votes and wishes expressed by the Fathers in Council.
Logged

ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #422 on: March 05, 2011, 09:04:32 PM »

http://www.ewtn.com/library/Theology/FELICHV2.HTM

Quote
Therefore when there is question of harmonizing conjugal love with the responsible transmission of life, the moral aspect of any procedure does not depend solely on sincere intentions or on an evaluation of motives. It must be determined by objective standards. These, based on the nature of the human person and his acts, preserve tile full sense of mutual self-giving arid human procreation in the context of true love. Such a goal cannot be achieved unless the virtue of conjugal chastity is sincerely practiced. Relying on these principles, sons of the Church may not undertake methods of regulating procreation which are found blameworthy by the teaching authority of the Church in its unfolding of the divine law.

The principles affirmed

"Everyone should realize that human life and the task of transmitting it are not realities bound up with this world alone. Hence they cannot be measured or perceived only in terms of it, but always have a hearing on the eternal destiny of men".

When mention is made of the teaching authority of the Church, the note introduced, as we have said, by the Conciliar Commission, is cited. The text thus drawn up (with only one modification, at the beginning of n. 51, in which we read: Versari posse—may find themselves—instead of versari—find themselves), was approved and promulgated in the public Session on 7th December 1965. (26)

The line of development of the pastoral Constitution Gaudium et spes, as regards matrimonial fertility, shows clearly that the following principles have been constantly affirmed:

1) Marriage and conjugal love are directed, by their very nature. to the begetting and education of children, who are the greatest gift of God and the crowning-point of conjugal union;

2) it is for the conscience of husband and wife to give the ultimate and final judgment on the number of children;

3) the conscience of husband and wife must be formed according to the objective standards of morality;

4) in the moral evaluation of the procreative act, the very nature of the act and its intrinsic ends must be kept in mind;

5) the objective standards of morality are constituted by the law of God, of which the Magisterium of the Church is the faithful interpreter, headed by the Sovereign Pontiff by the will of Christ;

6) what the Magisterium of the Church lays down in this matter is indicated in the principal documents of Pius XI (Enc. Casti Connubii 1930), of Pius XII (Address to Midwives, 1951) and of Paul VI (Address to Cardinals, 1964).

It is precisely these principles that are stressed in the Encyclical Humanae vitae. Therefore not only does the Encyclical not disappoint the hopes of Gaudium et spes but it is in perfect agreement with the doctrine set forth in that Constitution. this doctrine is clarified and developed authentically by the Sovereign Pontiff, according to the votes and wishes expressed by the Fathers in Council.
Anything in particular we should be looking at?
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #423 on: March 05, 2011, 11:45:57 PM »

Nothing semi about it, Father: they, according to the Fathers on which they depend, act with the same intention as Onan.  In fact, even worse: Onan's method required no great forethought and is quite undependible, and thus far more "open to life" than the mucus and temperature etc. which require all that effort to act on the intention of wasting seed, with far more reliability of shutting off conception.
Unless I am misunderstanding the morality taught by Humanae Vitae, this statement seems to show a lack of understanding regarding the meaning of the term "open to life."
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #424 on: March 05, 2011, 11:54:20 PM »

Nothing semi about it, Father: they, according to the Fathers on which they depend, act with the same intention as Onan.  In fact, even worse: Onan's method required no great forethought and is quite undependible, and thus far more "open to life" than the mucus and temperature etc. which require all that effort to act on the intention of wasting seed, with far more reliability of shutting off conception.
Unless I am misunderstanding the morality taught by Humanae Vitae, this statement seems to show a lack of understanding regarding the meaning of the term "open to life."
No, it's the lack of meaning of the term "open to life" taught by HV.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #425 on: March 06, 2011, 11:56:51 AM »

Nothing semi about it, Father: they, according to the Fathers on which they depend, act with the same intention as Onan.  In fact, even worse: Onan's method required no great forethought and is quite undependible, and thus far more "open to life" than the mucus and temperature etc. which require all that effort to act on the intention of wasting seed, with far more reliability of shutting off conception.
Unless I am misunderstanding the morality taught by Humanae Vitae, this statement seems to show a lack of understanding regarding the meaning of the term "open to life."

Rejection...not misunderstanding.  You cannot argue with rejection.  Any divorced woman knows that  laugh laugh laugh
Logged

ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #426 on: March 06, 2011, 12:04:53 PM »

Nothing semi about it, Father: they, according to the Fathers on which they depend, act with the same intention as Onan.  In fact, even worse: Onan's method required no great forethought and is quite undependible, and thus far more "open to life" than the mucus and temperature etc. which require all that effort to act on the intention of wasting seed, with far more reliability of shutting off conception.
Unless I am misunderstanding the morality taught by Humanae Vitae, this statement seems to show a lack of understanding regarding the meaning of the term "open to life."

Rejection...not misunderstanding.  You cannot argue with rejection.  Any divorced woman knows that  laugh laugh laugh
Cry Cry Cry
 Angry Angry Angry

Not in modern "no fault" divorce court you can't. And no, divorce doesn't end arguing, something that was brought out in "The Case for Marriage."

Btw, I don't know if Mardukm has come on this thread to tell us all how the Latin and Coptic views are the same.  I just came across this, Bishop Serapion who is the Coptic bishop of where Mardukm hails from IIRC, in communion with the Pope of Alexandria:

Quote
Family Planning means that the family plans to have children according to its economic and social conditions, as well as according to its ability to care for the children spiritually, economically, and socially. The family’s role is not limited only to having children, but more essentially to raising the children well.

The family’s awareness of her responsibility towards raising her children is essential. For the Church, the core of family planning is centralized in the family’s awareness of her responsibility towards raising the children, and that this role is carried out as well as can be. For economic, social, or spiritual reasons the family may find that she can’t carry out her responsibility. Thus, contraception is considered. This is an important factor to consider when accepting the principle of family planning: the inability of the family to provide comprehensive care for the children.

The Church acknowledges the need for family planning in order to face the worldwide problem of population growth, which threatens the economy of many nations. H.H. Pope Shenouda III said, “The rise in population growth poses a danger to the countries, and birth control has become an economic and social necessity, which will greatly affect the future of our country. Therefore, we have to restrain the problem of the explosive population growth, which drains all our projects and national economy.”

The presence of a common necessity allows us to accept the principle of family planning. However, the circumstances of each family are different. Therefore, the decision of family planning is a personal one, left up to every family to decide in accordance with her situation, so long as she is aware of her responsibilities towards raising her children, as well as towards the society in which we live.

We will discuss some points, which will raise the family’s awareness in regards to family planning:

1. One of the goals of marriage is procreation. However, it is not the only reason for marriage. A Christian marriage will continue even if it is not blessed by children. Therefore, in Christianity infertility is not a reason for divorce.

2. Children are a blessing from God. God blessed Noah and his sons and said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth.” (Gen. 9:1) God also blessed Abraham and told him, “And I will make you a great nation; I will bless you and make your name great.” (Gen. 12:2) He promised him that his descendants will be like the dust of the earth (Gen. 13:16), and as the stars of the heaven in number (Gen. 15:5). God also told Abraham, “No longer shall your name be Abram, but your name shall be Abraham; for I have made you a father of many nations.” (Gen. 17:5) Also, in Psalms it is written, “Behold, children are a heritage from the Lord.” (Ps. 127:3)

But not all offspring is a blessing from God. God, Who promised Abraham to bless him by having many descendants, also placed a condition for that. He said to Abraham, “As for you, you shall keep My covenant, you and your descendants after you throughout their generations.” (Gen. 17:9) God gave him circumcision as a sign of His covenant. Also God’s covenant was not with all of Abraham’s descendants. He said, “But My covenant I will establish with Isaac.” (Gen. 17:21) and from Isaac’s offspring He chose Jacob.

The true blessing the family receives from the Lord is the good, God-fearing children. The family of Eli the priest was not blessed, because of his evil sons. (1Sam. 2:27-35) Thus it is neither the gender nor the number of children that is important. The family should not be happy with how many children she has, but with the good children she offers to the Lord, the Church, and society.

3. Family Planning does not contradict nature. God placed a natural means of birth control in humanity since a woman is unable to conceive after a certain age. Also, during her childbearing years, she is fertile during certain times of her monthly cycle. During the rest of the time, she is not fertile. All natural family planning is based on determining this period and abstaining from all marital physical relations during this period.

4. Family Planning does not oppose God’s will. As previously mentioned, God placed the principle of family planning naturally. When man realized this scientific fact, he was able to utilize it as a means for natural contraception. Also, better understanding of the reproductive system and how it functions made it possible to find different means of contraception. God allows man to use these discoveries for the goodness and happiness of humanity. This principle also applies to man’s understanding of medicine, in which there is prevention of diseases, using herbal or chemical pharmaceuticals, performing surgical operations, etc. All the above help to prevent illnesses or heal diseases, especially the ones that are deadly. Again, all of these medical developments do not oppose God’s will.

5. Christianity teaches monogamy, and divorce is not allowed due to infertility. In a Christian marriage, the couple abstains from intimate physical relations during periods of fasting and before Holy Communion in order to dedicate oneself to worship. Although the goal of these matters is not family planning, yet they help.

6. Some use the story of Onan, son of Judah, (Gen. 38:6-10) as the basis for rejecting the principle of family planning. However, it is clear in this story that Onan refused because the offspring would carry his brother’s name, “But Onan knew that the heir would not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in to his brother’s wife, that he emitted on the ground, lest he should give an heir to his brother.” (Gen. 38:9) God caused Onan to die, because he refused to give an heir to his brother as the Mosaic Law dictated at that time. Onan would certainly not have done the same thing if the offspring was going to carry his name, not his brother’s name.

7. As long as there is a necessity, the Church agrees on the principle of family planning. However, the method used for contraception must have two elements:

a. It should not endanger the mother’s health. This does not apply to the side effects that occur due to the intake of any medication. Also, it has to be determined which method best suits the mother’s health and well being. This is left up to her gynecologist, and may vary from one woman to another. b. That the method will not cause the abortion of the fetus. The life of the fetus begins from the moment the sperm fertilizes the ovum, and abortion is rejected as a means of contraception.
http://www.lacopts.org/articles/family-planning
« Last Edit: March 06, 2011, 12:11:45 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #427 on: March 06, 2011, 12:08:53 PM »

Nothing semi about it, Father: they, according to the Fathers on which they depend, act with the same intention as Onan.  In fact, even worse: Onan's method required no great forethought and is quite undependible, and thus far more "open to life" than the mucus and temperature etc. which require all that effort to act on the intention of wasting seed, with far more reliability of shutting off conception.
Unless I am misunderstanding the morality taught by Humanae Vitae, this statement seems to show a lack of understanding regarding the meaning of the term "open to life."


Rejection...not misunderstanding.  You cannot argue with rejection.  Any divorced woman knows that  laugh laugh laugh
Not in modern "no fault" divorce court you can't.


Never had to encounter any of that, thankfully.
« Last Edit: March 06, 2011, 12:10:25 PM by elijahmaria » Logged

elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #428 on: March 06, 2011, 12:13:37 PM »

I fail to see how the Coptic approach is any different.  Natural Family Planning is clearly the first choice but other methods are open to pastoral discussion.  There is the rule, and there are the exceptions to the rule.
« Last Edit: March 06, 2011, 12:14:21 PM by elijahmaria » Logged

elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #429 on: March 06, 2011, 01:14:21 PM »

Nothing semi about it, Father: they, according to the Fathers on which they depend, act with the same intention as Onan.  In fact, even worse: Onan's method required no great forethought and is quite undependible, and thus far more "open to life" than the mucus and temperature etc. which require all that effort to act on the intention of wasting seed, with far more reliability of shutting off conception.
Unless I am misunderstanding the morality taught by Humanae Vitae, this statement seems to show a lack of understanding regarding the meaning of the term "open to life."

Rejection...not misunderstanding.  You cannot argue with rejection.  Any divorced woman knows that  laugh laugh laugh
Cry Cry Cry
 Angry Angry Angry

If I caused you personal hurt from my comment, I apologize.  It did not occur to me that it might sting you when I wrote it.   

In fact I ask your forgiveness in particular on this forum for all hurtfulness or harshness that you might have received from my correspondences.  I forgive you as well, and hope to be able to continue in that spirit of forgiveness for the ensuing year.  Forgive me should I fail, and remind me that I have promised to do more than try.

Mary
Logged

Wyatt
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Posts: 2,395


« Reply #430 on: March 06, 2011, 02:13:50 PM »

No, it's the lack of meaning of the term "open to life" taught by HV.
Really? Even before reading Humanae Vitae in its entirety (which I did awhile back) I understood what "open to life" meant just by watching EWTN and reading apologists' writings online.
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #431 on: March 06, 2011, 03:39:01 PM »

Nothing semi about it, Father: they, according to the Fathers on which they depend, act with the same intention as Onan.  In fact, even worse: Onan's method required no great forethought and is quite undependible, and thus far more "open to life" than the mucus and temperature etc. which require all that effort to act on the intention of wasting seed, with far more reliability of shutting off conception.
Unless I am misunderstanding the morality taught by Humanae Vitae, this statement seems to show a lack of understanding regarding the meaning of the term "open to life."

Rejection...not misunderstanding.  You cannot argue with rejection.  Any divorced woman knows that  laugh laugh laugh
Cry Cry Cry
 Angry Angry Angry

If I caused you personal hurt from my comment, I apologize.  It did not occur to me that it might sting you when I wrote it.

Not so much for my personal situation, but that my personal situation has put in in the midst of the front lines, that I notice such things.  I am far from alone.  Just the other week someone I know whose wife rejected and left him decades ago was at the funeral of a mutual friend.  She apologized about how she had acted and what she had done, and then went on to suggest that someday they might try again-this despite the fact that both of them are remarried many years ago, and have children from the second marriage (their own marriage the two sons are long grown up). Divorce solved nothing there.

So if I gave you the impression that I was taking it as a personal attack, I apologize as I didn't.  It is just seeing up front that divorce creates problems, not solve them, I'm more accute on it, but I was before I was first person involved: I disliked intensely, for instance, the plot device in sit coms and movies to use divorce to solve love dilemas in the story (e.g. Niles Crane divorcing his two wives clearing the way to marry Daphne), long before I ever had to step in a divorce court.

Quote
In fact I ask your forgiveness in particular on this forum for all hurtfulness or harshness that you might have received from my correspondences.  I forgive you as well, and hope to be able to continue in that spirit of forgiveness for the ensuing year.  Forgive me should I fail, and remind me that I have promised to do more than try.
God forgives and pray for me.

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #432 on: March 06, 2011, 04:08:04 PM »

Nothing semi about it, Father: they, according to the Fathers on which they depend, act with the same intention as Onan.  In fact, even worse: Onan's method required no great forethought and is quite undependible, and thus far more "open to life" than the mucus and temperature etc. which require all that effort to act on the intention of wasting seed, with far more reliability of shutting off conception.
Unless I am misunderstanding the morality taught by Humanae Vitae, this statement seems to show a lack of understanding regarding the meaning of the term "open to life."

Rejection...not misunderstanding.  You cannot argue with rejection.  Any divorced woman knows that  laugh laugh laugh
Cry Cry Cry
 Angry Angry Angry

If I caused you personal hurt from my comment, I apologize.  It did not occur to me that it might sting you when I wrote it.

Not so much for my personal situation, but that my personal situation has put in in the midst of the front lines, that I notice such things.  I am far from alone.  Just the other week someone I know whose wife rejected and left him decades ago was at the funeral of a mutual friend.  She apologized about how she had acted and what she had done, and then went on to suggest that someday they might try again-this despite the fact that both of them are remarried many years ago, and have children from the second marriage (their own marriage the two sons are long grown up). Divorce solved nothing there.

So if I gave you the impression that I was taking it as a personal attack, I apologize as I didn't.  It is just seeing up front that divorce creates problems, not solve them, I'm more accute on it, but I was before I was first person involved: I disliked intensely, for instance, the plot device in sit coms and movies to use divorce to solve love dilemas in the story (e.g. Niles Crane divorcing his two wives clearing the way to marry Daphne), long before I ever had to step in a divorce court.

Quote
In fact I ask your forgiveness in particular on this forum for all hurtfulness or harshness that you might have received from my correspondences.  I forgive you as well, and hope to be able to continue in that spirit of forgiveness for the ensuing year.  Forgive me should I fail, and remind me that I have promised to do more than try.
God forgives and pray for me.



I will be more careful.  You always have a place in my prayers.

God forgives...

Logged

ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #433 on: March 08, 2011, 03:07:39 PM »

I just stumbled over this:

THE EX CATHEDRA STATUS OF THE ENCYCLICAL HUMANAE VITAE
by Brian W. Harrison, September-November 1992
http://www.rtforum.org/lt/lt43.html

Quote
We have now carefully examined, word for word, the four characteristics of an ex cathedra definition specified in the dogmatic definition of 1870, in the light of Bishop Gasser's authoritative explanation of the text and the subsequent teaching of Vatican Council II. We have also examined Humanae Vitae, presenting evidence that the definition in article 14 of the encyclical clearly manifests all four characteristics. We conclude, therefore, that this definition is indeed an ex cathedra proclamation - infallible and irreformable in itself.

In connection with this, the words of the minority report co-author Cardinal Wojtyla, later Pope John Paul II of Rome.
Quote
If it should be declared that contraception is not evil in itself, then we should have to concede frankly that the Holy Spirit had been on the side of the Protestant churches in 1930 and in 1951.

“It should likewise have to be admitted that for a hall a century the Spirit failed to protect Pius XI, Pius XII, and a large part of the Catholic hierarchy from a very serious error. This would mean that the leaders of the Church, acting with extreme imprudence, had condemned thousands of innocent human acts, forbidding, under pain of eternal damnation, a practice which would now be sanctioned. The fact can neither be denied nor ignored that these same acts would now he declared licit on the grounds of principles cited by the Protestants, which popes and bishops have either condemned or at least not approved
« Last Edit: March 08, 2011, 03:38:03 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #434 on: June 08, 2011, 03:51:55 PM »

Christ is ascended!

I've come across a couple things apropos to this subject, as it shows the basis of the Vatican's "natural law" of HV, which arises from the Stoic confusion between essence and sperm:

The Roman Stoics: self, responsibility, and affection By Gretchen J. Reydams-Schils
http://books.google.com/books?id=nu17k8IkvYIC&pg=PA124&dq=sperm+pneuma+stoic+fragment&hl=en&ei=Bc7vTZbAO4WUtwfr-pDGCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CEMQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=sperm%20pneuma%20stoic%20fragment&f=false
Poetics of the Gnostic universe: narrative and cosmology in the Apocryphon ... By Zlatko Pleše
http://books.google.com/books?id=VmYz1sFIbSMC&pg=PA145&dq=Stoic+fragments+semen&hl=en&ei=W8jvTd38FougtweZr6yjCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=10&ved=0CFgQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=Stoic%20fragments%20semen&f=false
Gnosis: an esoteric tradition of mystical visions and unions By Daniel Merkur
http://books.google.com/books?id=feCZlyf8mecC&pg=PA101&dq=Stoic+spermatikos+logos&hl=en&ei=BsvvTdC7LYe6vwO2x-CPCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&sqi=2&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=Stoic%20spermatikos%20logos&f=false
Stoic theology: proofs for the existence of the cosmic god and of the traditional gods By P. A. Meijer
http://books.google.com/books?id=9lFlb4dn51sC&pg=PA5&dq=Stoic+spermatikos+logos&hl=en&ei=lcvvTYikLdC4tgeHzpC8CQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&sqi=2&ved=0CDkQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=Stoic%20spermatikos%20logos&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=9lFlb4dn51sC&pg=PA7&dq=Stoic+fragment+spermatikos+logos+sperm&hl=en&ei=as3vTZLfIM2htweog_igCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false
The Stoic Tradition from Antiquity to the Early Middle Ages: Stoicism in Christian Latin Thought through the Sixth Century By Marcía L. Colish
http://books.google.com/books?id=YYlcgOTk1OgC&pg=PA82&dq=Stoic+spermatikos+logos&hl=en&ei=lcvvTYikLdC4tgeHzpC8CQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=9&sqi=2&ved=0CFQQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=Stoic%20spermatikos%20logos&f=false
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #435 on: June 08, 2011, 09:12:23 PM »

I just stumbled over this:

THE EX CATHEDRA STATUS OF THE ENCYCLICAL HUMANAE VITAE
by Brian W. Harrison, September-November 1992
http://www.rtforum.org/lt/lt43.html

Quote
We have now carefully examined, word for word, the four characteristics of an ex cathedra definition specified in the dogmatic definition of 1870, in the light of Bishop Gasser's authoritative explanation of the text and the subsequent teaching of Vatican Council II. We have also examined Humanae Vitae, presenting evidence that the definition in article 14 of the encyclical clearly manifests all four characteristics. We conclude, therefore, that this definition is indeed an ex cathedra proclamation - infallible and irreformable in itself.

In connection with this, the words of the minority report co-author Cardinal Wojtyla, later Pope John Paul II of Rome.
Quote
If it should be declared that contraception is not evil in itself, then we should have to concede frankly that the Holy Spirit had been on the side of the Protestant churches in 1930 and in 1951.

“It should likewise have to be admitted that for a hall a century the Spirit failed to protect Pius XI, Pius XII, and a large part of the Catholic hierarchy from a very serious error. This would mean that the leaders of the Church, acting with extreme imprudence, had condemned thousands of innocent human acts, forbidding, under pain of eternal damnation, a practice which would now be sanctioned. The fact can neither be denied nor ignored that these same acts would now he declared licit on the grounds of principles cited by the Protestants, which popes and bishops have either condemned or at least not approved
Father Harrison and others do think that this was an infallible declaration. However, there are theologians who disagree, for example, Father Francis A. Sullivan, who has raised some questions on whether or not this decision was infallible. See: Fr. Francis Sullivan, S.J., : Magisterium: Teaching Authority in the Catholic Church, Dublin, Gill & Macmillan, 1983, pp. 143ff.
 
« Last Edit: June 08, 2011, 09:12:57 PM by stanley123 » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #436 on: June 09, 2011, 12:00:03 AM »

Christ is ascended!
I just stumbled over this:

THE EX CATHEDRA STATUS OF THE ENCYCLICAL HUMANAE VITAE
by Brian W. Harrison, September-November 1992
http://www.rtforum.org/lt/lt43.html

Quote
We have now carefully examined, word for word, the four characteristics of an ex cathedra definition specified in the dogmatic definition of 1870, in the light of Bishop Gasser's authoritative explanation of the text and the subsequent teaching of Vatican Council II. We have also examined Humanae Vitae, presenting evidence that the definition in article 14 of the encyclical clearly manifests all four characteristics. We conclude, therefore, that this definition is indeed an ex cathedra proclamation - infallible and irreformable in itself.

In connection with this, the words of the minority report co-author Cardinal Wojtyla, later Pope John Paul II of Rome.
Quote
If it should be declared that contraception is not evil in itself, then we should have to concede frankly that the Holy Spirit had been on the side of the Protestant churches in 1930 and in 1951.

“It should likewise have to be admitted that for a hall a century the Spirit failed to protect Pius XI, Pius XII, and a large part of the Catholic hierarchy from a very serious error. This would mean that the leaders of the Church, acting with extreme imprudence, had condemned thousands of innocent human acts, forbidding, under pain of eternal damnation, a practice which would now be sanctioned. The fact can neither be denied nor ignored that these same acts would now he declared licit on the grounds of principles cited by the Protestants, which popes and bishops have either condemned or at least not approved
Father Harrison and others do think that this was an infallible declaration. However, there are theologians who disagree, for example, Father Francis A. Sullivan, who has raised some questions on whether or not this decision was infallible. See: Fr. Francis Sullivan, S.J., : Magisterium: Teaching Authority in the Catholic Church, Dublin, Gill & Macmillan, 1983, pp. 143ff.
 
I find HV's status somewhat disingenuopis.  It would be very easy for the Vatican to clarify whether it  is or isn't, but it prefers to act as if it is,  but refusing to say so.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #437 on: June 09, 2011, 01:59:12 AM »


I find HV's status somewhat disingenuopis.  It would be very easy for the Vatican to clarify whether it  is or isn't, but it prefers to act as if it is,  but refusing to say so.

I made an attempt to answer that in message 50
at
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,36812.msg581604.html#msg581604
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #438 on: July 09, 2011, 12:04:07 PM »

Just came across a short summary note in "the Catholic Encyclopedia,"
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14153a.htm
on the real source of HV's dogma, Stoicism:
Quote
The Stoics taught that all existence is material, and described the soul as a breath pervading the body. They also called it Divine, a particle of God (apospasma tou theu) — it was composed of the most refined and ethereal matter. Eight distinct parts of the soul were recognized by them:

the ruling reason (to hegemonikon)
the five senses;
the procreative powers.
Absolute immortality they denied; relative immortality, terminating with the universal conflagration and destruction of all things, some of them (e.g. Cleanthes and Chrysippus) admitted in the case of the wise man; others, such as Panaetius and Posidonius, denied even this, arguing that, as the soul began with the body, so it must end with it.  Graeco-Roman philosophy made no further progress in the doctrine of the soul in the age immediately preceding the Christian era. None of the existing theories had found general acceptance, and in the literature of the period an eclectic spirit nearly akin to Scepticism predominated. Of the strife and fusion of systems at this time the works of Cicero are the best example. On the question of the soul he is by turns Platonic and Pythagorean, while he confesses that the Stoic and Epicurean systems have each an attraction for him. Such was the state of the question in the West at the dawn of Christianity.
The reference to Cicero is interesting, as the CCC cites him as its authority on the existence of natural law, the basis of HV.

Quote
In Jewish circles a like uncertainty prevailed. The Sadducees were Materialists, denying immortality and all spiritual existence. The Pharisees maintained these doctrines, adding belief in pre-existence and transmigration. The psychology of the Rabbins is founded on the Sacred Books, particularly the account of the creation of man in Genesis. Three terms are used for the soul: nephesh, nuah, and neshamah; the first was taken to refer to the animal and vegetative nature, the second to the ethical principle, the third to the purely spiritual intelligence. At all events, it is evident that the Old Testament throughout either asserts or implies the distinct reality of the soul. An important contribution to later Jewish thought was the infusion of Platonism into it by Philo of Alexandria. He taught the immediately Divine origin of the soul, its pre-existence and transmigration; he contrasts the pneuma, or spiritual essence, with the soul proper, the source of vital phenomena, whose seat is the blood; finally he revived the old Platonic Dualism, attributing the origin of sin and evil to the union of spirit with matter.

It was Christianity that, after many centuries of struggle, applied the final criticisms to the various psychologies of antiquity, and brought their scattered elements of truth to full focus. The tendency of Christ's teaching was to centre all interest in the spiritual side of man's nature; the salvation or loss of the soul is the great issue of existence. The Gospel language is popular, not technical. Psyche and pneuma are used indifferently either for the principle of natural life or for spirit in the strict sense. Body and soul are recognized as a dualism and their values contrasted: "Fear ye not them that kill the body . . . but rather fear him that can destroy both soul and body in hell."

In St. Paul we find a more technical phraseology employed with great consistency. Psyche is now appropriated to the purely natural life; pneuma to the life of supernatural religion, the principle of which is the Holy Spirit, dwelling and operating in the heart. The opposition of flesh and spirit is accentuated afresh (Romans 1:18, etc.). This Pauline system, presented to a world already prepossessed in favour of a quasi-Platonic Dualism, occasioned one of the earliest widespread forms of error among Christian writers — the doctrine of the Trichotomy. According to this, man, perfect man (teleios) consists of three parts: body, soul, spirit (soma, psyche, pneuma). Body and soul come by natural generation; spirit is given to the regenerate Christian alone. Thus, the "newness of life", of which St. Paul speaks, was conceived by some as a superadded entity, a kind of oversoul sublimating the "natural man" into a higher species.
It is odd that "the magisterium
Quote
Nihil Obstat. July 1, 1912. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York
condemns Trichotomy as "error," in favor of creationism
Quote
Tertullian's treatise "De Anima" has been called the first Christian classic on psychology proper. The author aims to show the failure of all philosophies to elucidate the nature of the soul, and argues eloquently that Christ alone can teach mankind the truth on such subjects. His own doctrine, however, is simply the refined Materialism of the Stoics, supported by arguments from medicine and physiology and by ingenious interpretations of Scripture, in which the unavoidable materialism of language is made to establish a metaphysical Materialism. Tertullian is the founder of the theory of Traducianism, which derives the rational soul ex traduce, i.e. by procreation from the soul of the parent. For Tertullian this was a necessary consequence of Materialism. Later writers found in the doctrine a convenient explanation of the transmission of original sin. St. Jerome says that in his day it was the common theory in the West. Theologians have long abandoned it, however, in favour of Creationism, as it seems to compromise the spirituality of the soul...St. Thomas's doctrine is briefly as follows...the rational soul is produced by special creation at the moment when the organism is sufficiently developed to receive it. In the first stage of embryonic development, the vital principle has merely vegetative powers; then a sensitive soul comes into being, educed from the evolving potencies of the organism — later yet, this is replaced by the perfect rational soul, which is essentially immaterial and so postulates a special creative act. Many modern theologians have abandoned this last point of St. Thomas's teaching, and maintain that a fully rational soul is infused into the embryo at the first moment of its existence.
for if semen has no connection to the soul or spirit, it's odd that the Vatican, arguing for it being merely only genetic material puts such spiritual importance on its demise (which can't be helped, even in normal conception): it upholds the conclusions of the Stoics while refusing to admit their basis for those conclusions.

The Stoics ranking of procreation as a constituent part of the individual soul and the connection with the Stoic god (although they were queasy about baldly equating sperm with the universal logos) merged with the common idea of semen being the essence of a man (and why women were just incubaters), the idea being that blood from every part of the body congealed in semen.  Of course, a sperm cannot be the essence of a human person: a human person has 46 chromosomes, and a sperm only has 23.  That is what St. Clement of Alexandria adopted (without grounding it in Christianity), along with the Stoics abhorrence of shaving (another aspect of their materialism).
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #439 on: July 09, 2011, 12:29:06 PM »

... as its authority on the existence of natural law, the basis of HV.

The theological foundation of Humanae Vitae is Caritas!

Caritas is the foundation of the Catholic understanding of marriage and family which is expressed most descriptively and simply as SELFLESS-LOVE...or the love of  Christ for all creation, and especially for his adopted brothers and sisters through Baptism in Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit allowing us to be adopted sons and daughters of the Father,  in, from and through Christ.

Tear out any of the human supports of Caritas and all of creation groans under the weight of that evil.

Logged

ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #440 on: July 09, 2011, 01:08:32 PM »

... as its authority on the existence of natural law, the basis of HV.

The theological foundation of Humanae Vitae is Caritas!

Caritas is the foundation of the Catholic understanding of marriage and family which is expressed most descriptively and simply as SELFLESS-LOVE...or the love of  Christ for all creation, and especially for his adopted brothers and sisters through Baptism in Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit allowing us to be adopted sons and daughters of the Father,  in, from and through Christ.

Tear out any of the human supports of Caritas and all of creation groans under the weight of that evil.


Care to quote HV? As I can (and have) quoted its dependence and origin in "natural law."
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #441 on: July 09, 2011, 01:24:04 PM »

... as its authority on the existence of natural law, the basis of HV.

The theological foundation of Humanae Vitae is Caritas!

Caritas is the foundation of the Catholic understanding of marriage and family which is expressed most descriptively and simply as SELFLESS-LOVE...or the love of  Christ for all creation, and especially for his adopted brothers and sisters through Baptism in Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit allowing us to be adopted sons and daughters of the Father,  in, from and through Christ.

Tear out any of the human supports of Caritas and all of creation groans under the weight of that evil.


Care to quote HV? As I can (and have) quoted its dependence and origin in "natural law."

Oh <snap>...I forgot...you only do literal!!
Logged

elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #442 on: July 09, 2011, 01:27:58 PM »

... as its authority on the existence of natural law, the basis of HV.

The theological foundation of Humanae Vitae is Caritas!

Caritas is the foundation of the Catholic understanding of marriage and family which is expressed most descriptively and simply as SELFLESS-LOVE...or the love of  Christ for all creation, and especially for his adopted brothers and sisters through Baptism in Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit allowing us to be adopted sons and daughters of the Father,  in, from and through Christ.

Tear out any of the human supports of Caritas and all of creation groans under the weight of that evil.



The Foundation of Humanae Vitae:

http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Paul06/p6humana.htm

Quote
This love is first of all fully human, that is to say, of the senses and of the spirit at the same time. It is not, then, a simple transport of instinct and sentiment, but also, and principally, an act of the free will, intended to endure and to grow by means of the joys and sorrows of daily life, in such a way that husband and wife become one only heart and one only soul, and together attain their human perfection.

Then, this love is total, that is to say, it is a very special form of personal friendship, in which husband and wife generously share everything, without undue reservations or selfish calculations. Whoever truly loves his marriage partner loves not only for what he receives, but for the partner's self, rejoicing that he can enrich his partner with the gift of himself.

Again, this love is faithful and exclusive until death. Thus in fact do bride and groom conceive it to be on the day when they freely and in full awareness assume the duty of the marriage bond. A fidelity, this, which can sometimes be difficult, but is always possible, always noble and meritorious, as no one can deny. The example of so many married persons down through the centuries shows, not only that fidelity is according to the nature of marriage, but also that it is a source of profound and lasting happiness.

And finally this love is fecund for it is not exhausted by the communion between husband and wife, but is destined to continue, raising up new lives. "Marriage and conjugal love are by their nature ordained toward the begetting and educating of children. Children are really the supreme gift of marriage and contribute very substantially to the welfare of their parents."8
Logged

ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #443 on: July 09, 2011, 07:01:54 PM »

... as its authority on the existence of natural law, the basis of HV.

The theological foundation of Humanae Vitae is Caritas!

Caritas is the foundation of the Catholic understanding of marriage and family which is expressed most descriptively and simply as SELFLESS-LOVE...or the love of  Christ for all creation, and especially for his adopted brothers and sisters through Baptism in Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit allowing us to be adopted sons and daughters of the Father,  in, from and through Christ.

Tear out any of the human supports of Caritas and all of creation groans under the weight of that evil.


Care to quote HV? As I can (and have) quoted its dependence and origin in "natural law."

Oh <snap>...I forgot...you only do literal!!
I prefer something more authoritative than personal musings.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #444 on: July 09, 2011, 07:07:04 PM »

... as its authority on the existence of natural law, the basis of HV.

The theological foundation of Humanae Vitae is Caritas!

Caritas is the foundation of the Catholic understanding of marriage and family which is expressed most descriptively and simply as SELFLESS-LOVE...or the love of  Christ for all creation, and especially for his adopted brothers and sisters through Baptism in Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit allowing us to be adopted sons and daughters of the Father,  in, from and through Christ.

Tear out any of the human supports of Caritas and all of creation groans under the weight of that evil.



The Foundation of Humanae Vitae:

http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Paul06/p6humana.htm

Quote
This love is first of all fully human, that is to say, of the senses and of the spirit at the same time. It is not, then, a simple transport of instinct and sentiment, but also, and principally, an act of the free will, intended to endure and to grow by means of the joys and sorrows of daily life, in such a way that husband and wife become one only heart and one only soul, and together attain their human perfection.

Then, this love is total, that is to say, it is a very special form of personal friendship, in which husband and wife generously share everything, without undue reservations or selfish calculations. Whoever truly loves his marriage partner loves not only for what he receives, but for the partner's self, rejoicing that he can enrich his partner with the gift of himself.

Again, this love is faithful and exclusive until death. Thus in fact do bride and groom conceive it to be on the day when they freely and in full awareness assume the duty of the marriage bond. A fidelity, this, which can sometimes be difficult, but is always possible, always noble and meritorious, as no one can deny. The example of so many married persons down through the centuries shows, not only that fidelity is according to the nature of marriage, but also that it is a source of profound and lasting happiness.

And finally this love is fecund for it is not exhausted by the communion between husband and wife, but is destined to continue, raising up new lives. "Marriage and conjugal love are by their nature ordained toward the begetting and educating of children. Children are really the supreme gift of marriage and contribute very substantially to the welfare of their parents."8
had your supreme pontiff left it at that, you might have a point. He, however, went on:
Quote
These acts, by which husband and wife are united in chaste intimacy, and by means of which human life is transmitted, are, as the Council recalled, "noble and worthy," and they do not cease to be lawful if, for causes independent of the will of husband and wife, they are foreseen to be infecund, since they always remain ordained towards expressing and consolidating their union. In fact, as experience bears witness, not every conjugal act is followed by a new life. God has wisely disposed natural laws and rhythms of fecundity which, of themselves, cause a separation in the succession of births. Nonetheless the Church, calling men back to the observance of the norms of the natural law, as interpreted by their constant doctrine, teaches that each and every marriage act (quilibet matrimonii usus) must remain open to the transmission of life.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
elijahmaria
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 6,473



WWW
« Reply #445 on: July 09, 2011, 09:20:04 PM »

... as its authority on the existence of natural law, the basis of HV.

The theological foundation of Humanae Vitae is Caritas!

Caritas is the foundation of the Catholic understanding of marriage and family which is expressed most descriptively and simply as SELFLESS-LOVE...or the love of  Christ for all creation, and especially for his adopted brothers and sisters through Baptism in Christ by the power of the Holy Spirit allowing us to be adopted sons and daughters of the Father,  in, from and through Christ.

Tear out any of the human supports of Caritas and all of creation groans under the weight of that evil.



The Foundation of Humanae Vitae:

http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Paul06/p6humana.htm

Quote
This love is first of all fully human, that is to say, of the senses and of the spirit at the same time. It is not, then, a simple transport of instinct and sentiment, but also, and principally, an act of the free will, intended to endure and to grow by means of the joys and sorrows of daily life, in such a way that husband and wife become one only heart and one only soul, and together attain their human perfection.

Then, this love is total, that is to say, it is a very special form of personal friendship, in which husband and wife generously share everything, without undue reservations or selfish calculations. Whoever truly loves his marriage partner loves not only for what he receives, but for the partner's self, rejoicing that he can enrich his partner with the gift of himself.

Again, this love is faithful and exclusive until death. Thus in fact do bride and groom conceive it to be on the day when they freely and in full awareness assume the duty of the marriage bond. A fidelity, this, which can sometimes be difficult, but is always possible, always noble and meritorious, as no one can deny. The example of so many married persons down through the centuries shows, not only that fidelity is according to the nature of marriage, but also that it is a source of profound and lasting happiness.

And finally this love is fecund for it is not exhausted by the communion between husband and wife, but is destined to continue, raising up new lives. "Marriage and conjugal love are by their nature ordained toward the begetting and educating of children. Children are really the supreme gift of marriage and contribute very substantially to the welfare of their parents."8
had your supreme pontiff left it at that, you might have a point. He, however, went on:
Quote
These acts, by which husband and wife are united in chaste intimacy, and by means of which human life is transmitted, are, as the Council recalled, "noble and worthy," and they do not cease to be lawful if, for causes independent of the will of husband and wife, they are foreseen to be infecund, since they always remain ordained towards expressing and consolidating their union. In fact, as experience bears witness, not every conjugal act is followed by a new life. God has wisely disposed natural laws and rhythms of fecundity which, of themselves, cause a separation in the succession of births. Nonetheless the Church, calling men back to the observance of the norms of the natural law, as interpreted by their constant doctrine, teaches that each and every marriage act (quilibet matrimonii usus) must remain open to the transmission of life.

The "natural law" in the understanding of the Church is nothing more than God's Providence in Creation...all driven by Caritas.

I don't see the conflict here...but then again I am not the antagonist.

So carry on and wave your hands some more... laugh
Logged

Robb
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: RC
Jurisdiction: Italian Catholic
Posts: 1,537



« Reply #446 on: July 09, 2011, 11:25:02 PM »

It was always my understanding from study that the RCC (Like everyone who existed before the Mid 19Th century) Held that the infusion of the soul into the fetus happened in the fourth month of pregnancy when the child began to move around in the mothers womb.  This action was known as "Quickening" and was considered the officially start of a women's pregnancy.  This was before the discovery of sperm as well as an understanding of the workings of conception and pregnancy due to the invention of the microscope. 

So did the RCC and every other religion condone abortion before the fourth month of pregnancy before the mid 19Th century?  I know that certain Catholic theologians (Including former NY gov. Mario Cumeo) Point out the facts I mentioned above as reason for acceptance of abortion in the first three months of pregnancy by Catholics (Who wish the teaching changed).  I don't hold to that, but was this what the RCC taught centuries ago?
Logged

Men may dislike truth, men may find truth offensive and inconvenient, men may persecute the truth, subvert it, try by law to suppress it. But to maintain that men have the final power over truth is blasphemy, and the last delusion. Truth lives forever, men do not.
-- Gustave Flaubert
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #447 on: July 09, 2011, 11:50:41 PM »

It was always my understanding from study that the RCC (Like everyone who existed before the Mid 19Th century) Held that the infusion of the soul into the fetus happened in the fourth month of pregnancy when the child began to move around in the mothers womb.  This action was known as "Quickening" and was considered the officially start of a women's pregnancy.  This was before the discovery of sperm as well as an understanding of the workings of conception and pregnancy due to the invention of the microscope. 

So did the RCC and every other religion condone abortion before the fourth month of pregnancy before the mid 19Th century?  I know that certain Catholic theologians (Including former NY gov. Mario Cumeo) Point out the facts I mentioned above as reason for acceptance of abortion in the first three months of pregnancy by Catholics (Who wish the teaching changed).  I don't hold to that, but was this what the RCC taught centuries ago?
Yes, there were such teachings among anyone under the shadow of Scholasticism and leaning on "natural law."  We Orthodox, however, escaped most of that and have always held that the human person begins at conception, based on the Church honoring the conceptions of Christ, His mother and St. John the Baptist.

Such is the problem with basing morality on the present state of science, as Thomism (and following the "angelic doctor" the Vatican) does, is that knowledge changes.  Go with revelation, the sure thing.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Moderated
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 38,142



« Reply #448 on: July 10, 2011, 12:07:47 AM »

The "natural law" in the understanding of the Church is nothing more than God's Providence in Creation...all driven by Caritas.
yes, sort of like how Descartes using "cogito ergo sum" to pay lip service to God, and then go dream up whatever he wants.

The Vatican's understanding is all driven by scholasticism, nothing more than pagan philosophy with a Christian veneer.

I don't see the conflict here
I'm sure you don't.

...but then again I am not the antagonist.
and you've be hitting the Kool-Aid.

So carry on and wave your hands some more... laugh
bye-bye   laugh
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Irish Hermit
Kibernetski Kaludjer
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 10,991


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us


« Reply #449 on: July 10, 2011, 03:04:42 AM »

So did the RCC and every other religion condone abortion before the fourth month of pregnancy before the mid 19Th century?  I know that certain Catholic theologians (Including former NY gov. Mario Cumeo) Point out the facts I mentioned above as reason for acceptance of abortion in the first three months of pregnancy by Catholics (Who wish the teaching changed).  I don't hold to that, but was this what the RCC taught centuries ago?

Dear Robb,

Please see message 12 at
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,28966.msg457934.html#msg457934

"The Roman Catholic Church and Abortion: An Historical Perspective"
 
"The tolerant approach to abortion which had prevailed in the Roman Catholic Church for centuries ended at the end of the nineteenth century. In 1869, Pope Pius IX officially eliminated the Catholic distinction between an animated and a nonanimated fetus and required excommunication for abortions at any stage of pregnancy."



Logged
Tags: contraception 
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 »   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 0.241 seconds with 72 queries.