Posted on 06/06/2006 5:43:16 AM PDT by areafiftyone
The Vatican today issued a sweeping condemnation of contraception, abortion, in-vitro fertilisation and same-sex marriage, declaring that the traditional family has never been so threatened as in today’s world.
The document was issued by the Pontifical Council for the Family, whose head, Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo, is a strong opponent of the use of condoms under any circumstances.
However, the document did not mention an ongoing debate within the Vatican on whether the Roman Catholic Church could permit condoms to battle Aids when one partner in a marriage had the virus.
It reaffirmed the famous 1968 encyclical “Humanae Vitae” that stated the Vatican’s opposition to contraception.
Since then, it said, couples “have been limiting themselves to one, or maximum two children”.
“Never before in history has human procreation, and therefore the family, which is its natural place, been so threatened as in today’s culture,” said the 57-page document.
By the logic that there should be no impediment to a woman getting pregnant, I suppose that means any man who throws himself at a woman should not be resisted and he should be allowed to penetrate her so she might carry his seed. Rape would be moot. After all, supposedly this is to avoid tampering with nature (and nature does not have marriage, BTW). Likewise anything in between lawful relations and rape - a wife should never resist her husband whenever he wants sex, etc. (Wouldn't that make the "rhythm method" bad, too?)
If you look at Humanae Vitae, it says:
13. Men rightly observe that a conjugal act imposed on one's partner without regard to his or her condition or personal and reasonable wishes in the matter, is no true act of love, and therefore offends the moral order in its particular application to the intimate relationship of husband and wife. If they further reflect, they must also recognize that an act of mutual love which impairs the capacity to transmit life which God the Creator, through specific laws, has built into it, frustrates His design which constitutes the norm of marriage, and contradicts the will of the Author of life. Hence to use this divine gift while depriving it, even if only partially, of its meaning and purpose, is equally repugnant to the nature of man and of woman, and is consequently in opposition to the plan of God and His holy will. But to experience the gift of married love while respecting the laws of conception is to acknowledge that one is not the master of the sources of life but rather the minister of the design established by the Creator. Just as man does not have unlimited dominion over his body in general, so also, and with more particular reason, he has no such dominion over his specifically sexual faculties, for these are concerned by their very nature with the generation of life, of which God is the source. "Human life is sacred—all men must recognize that fact," Our predecessor Pope John XXIII recalled. "From its very inception it reveals the creating hand of God." (13)
It goes on to say:
16. Now as We noted earlier (no. 3), some people today raise the objection against this particular doctrine of the Church concerning the moral laws governing marriage, that human intelligence has both the right and responsibility to control those forces of irrational nature which come within its ambit and to direct them toward ends beneficial to man. Others ask on the same point whether it is not reasonable in so many cases to use artificial birth control if by so doing the harmony and peace of a family are better served and more suitable conditions are provided for the education of children already born. To this question We must give a clear reply. The Church is the first to praise and commend the application of human intelligence to an activity in which a rational creature such as man is so closely associated with his Creator. But she affirms that this must be done within the limits of the order of reality established by God.If therefore there are well-grounded reasons for spacing births, arising from the physical or psychological condition of husband or wife, or from external circumstances, the Church teaches that married people may then take advantage of the natural cycles immanent in the reproductive system and engage in marital intercourse only during those times that are infertile, thus controlling birth in a way which does not in the least offend the moral principles which We have just explained. (20)
Neither the Church nor her doctrine is inconsistent when she considers it lawful for married people to take advantage of the infertile period but condemns as always unlawful the use of means which directly prevent conception, even when the reasons given for the later practice may appear to be upright and serious. In reality, these two cases are completely different. In the former the married couple rightly use a faculty provided them by nature. In the latter they obstruct the natural development of the generative process. It cannot be denied that in each case the married couple, for acceptable reasons, are both perfectly clear in their intention to avoid children and wish to make sure that none will result. But it is equally true that it is exclusively in the former case that husband and wife are ready to abstain from intercourse during the fertile period as often as for reasonable motives the birth of another child is not desirable. And when the infertile period recurs, they use their married intimacy to express their mutual love and safeguard their fidelity toward one another. In doing this they certainly give proof of a true and authentic love.
I think the above extracts dealt with all of your concerns.
Of course He does. He knew you were going to put up your post, and that I would respond.
That, however, only means that He knows. Our free will determines whether we do something, or not.
Is this a real question?
Do parents control their two year old child? Does that one year old child have free will, within limits? Do the parents allow the child a certain amount of free will? Does the child sometimes choose to be obedient and sometimes naughty?
Thanks for the info. It's clarifying. But I still don't understand how 1 determines that "I have a headache" is now legitimate enough to stop the "transmit life which was built into it". I may have a headache (in my case, more like stomach ache, which is much worse for this activity), but not want to deny. I'm not really going to enjoy it, but I can "put up with it". I'll guess you'll say that's not an act of love - but isn't it if I'm willing to "sacrifice"? ?:-\
I think that covers the headache/stomachache issue.
No, I said if the wife is willing to make a sacrifice (and I don't mean she even complained about it to him, so the husband doesn't even know).
The pill is the following:
Efficiency
With perfect use, the birth control pill can be as much as 99% effective.
However, perfect use means remembering to take the Pill everyday at the same time and to be in good health, under the age of 35 and a nonsmoker.
With typical use, the average failure rate is between 3 and 13% per year, depending on the type of pill you are taking.
Certain factors can decrease the efficiency of the contraceptive pill, though. These factors include:
Taking antibiotics
Taking certain medications, include oral vaginal infection medication, certain anti-seizure drugs and certain HIV drugs
Having diarrhea or vomiting
Taking St. John's Wort
Taking Orlistat (not confirmed)
The birth control pill is not recommended for women who smoke, have certain health conditions or are over the age of 35.
(bold mine)
If He knows we are going to do something ahead of time, and God cannot be wrong, then how could we do anything other than what God has planned for us?
It sounds like God has already planned our choice, and we just think we are making a choice.
Yes
Do parents know what their child is going to do 30 yrs before it is born, and are these parents never wrong? Do they create this child, knowing infallibly, that it will grow up to be president, or a mass murderer, including the exact date and times?
It sounds like God has already planned our choice, and we just think we are making a choice.
You don't believe in free will, do you? God does not "plan" our choices. He knows what choices we will make, but He allows us complete and total freedom to make those choices.
Oops, I forgot about section 2354.
If God is infallible, knows the future and is the creator of all, then no I do not believe in it.
Do you believe that God has a plan for each of us?
If He knows what choices we will make and all the consequences of these choices, and creates us, and cannot be wrong, how do we have complete and total freedom? Is it possible to do something other than what God knows we will do?
Analogies are never perfect.
BTW, since God's vision is inconceivable to those of us imprisoned in time and space, there is no way a tiny mind such as yours - or mine - can see with His vision or understand what He understands.
Try this - imagine seeing past, present, and future all at once, all the time. And seeing the eternal Kingdom of God (Para Vyoma in Sanskrit) which is free from past and future. And seeing the inner heart of every living being, hearing all their prayers, knowing their wants, needs, happiness, and distress. Now imagine being spread out so you're in every atom and in between every atom, as well as in the Kingdom of God. Now imagine being in total control, directly or indirectly, of not only this universe but countless millions of them.
And now imagine you've given countless living beings free will, but they're still under your laws.
Okay?
There are two types of questions. One is because the questioner has a sincere interest in the discussion, wants to learn or at least hear the other POV. The second is merely a challenging or disrupting kind of questioning.
The first is worth answering, the second is not.
You and I will always come from different perspectives, then. Human free will is one of the foundations of love. A person who is not free cannot love.
Do you believe that God has a plan for each of us?
He places desires in us that, if we follow the best of them, yields a plan.
If He knows what choices we will make and all the consequences of these choices, and creates us, and cannot be wrong, how do we have complete and total freedom? Is it possible to do something other than what God knows we will do?
We have complete and total freedom because God loves us, and has given us that freedom. God knows what will happen, but He does not make it happen.
God has given us life, freely, and permits us to actually reject Him and His desires for us. We choose that. He may know we will choose that, yet He still gives us life so that we can choose.
Especially when talking about God, they are non-existent.
Yes, we really don't have free-will, we just were designed to think we have, but not capable of proving or dis-proving it.
I realise what that answer means, thanks anyway.
Why not?
Does that mean God modifies His plan, on the go, as we make our choices? Doesn't sound like a plan, more like a real-time documentary.
Knowing what will happen, and creating everything that makes it happen, is not making it happen?
You are not wrong. I shouldn't try to read posts while having three grandchildren in the house! Sorry for the mistake.
Think nothing of it! I thought maybe you were right and I had screwed up my own point. Be well.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.