Posted on 07/26/2008 3:11:56 PM PDT by wagglebee
The use of the phrase “anti-imperialist youth” tells me that a commie scumbag had his hand in this at some point. Therefore, I am skeptical that such a document exists, or, if it does, that its significance is as alleged.
I have to admit, for all my railing against certain unbiblical beliefs and practices of the Church of Rome, their understanding of reproduction “modern family planning” is not one of them.
Ms. Valenzona and the Roman Catholic position on this is absolutely correct—and in accord with God’s holy Word.
Thanks for what you wrote. I think that it’s important to remember that, despite our differences, Catholics and Evangelicals are in full agreement on so many important moral issues.
Hyperbole does not a logical argument make.
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...Maybe the pope actually knew something, way back in 1968.Consequences of Artificial Methods
17. Responsible men can become more deeply convinced of the truth of the doctrine laid down by the Church on this issue if they reflect on the consequences of methods and plans for artificial birth control. Let them first consider how easily this course of action could open wide the way for marital infidelity and a general lowering of moral standards. Not much experience is needed to be fully aware of human weakness and to understand that human beings—and especially the young, who are so exposed to temptation—need incentives to keep the moral law, and it is an evil thing to make it easy for them to break that law. Another effect that gives cause for alarm is that a man who grows accustomed to the use of contraceptive methods may forget the reverence due to a woman, and, disregarding her physical and emotional equilibrium, reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires, no longer considering her as his partner whom he should surround with care and affection.
Finally, careful consideration should be given to the danger of this power passing into the hands of those public authorities who care little for the precepts of the moral law. Who will blame a government which in its attempt to resolve the problems affecting an entire country resorts to the same measures as are regarded as lawful by married people in the solution of a particular family difficulty? Who will prevent public authorities from favoring those contraceptive methods which they consider more effective? Should they regard this as necessary, they may even impose their use on everyone.
Hey newbie, the statement IS NOT hyperbole. Perhaps you wandered into the wrong website, Free Republic is a PRO-LIFE, conservative forum.
Do you really consider the use of “condoms, IUDs, and other modern family planning methods” as the equivalent of participating in genocide?
Many of the enviro weenies will admit to that.
To have the future be Western, you have to show up. Western civilization has decided not to show up.
Then why does the Catholic Church use natural methods to control birth control?
In Humanae Vitae, Pope Paul VI outlined the criteria for “grave motives” to avoid a pregnancy. The couple must be limited by financial, psychological, physical, or social factors.
http://www.ccli.org/news/magazine/afeature-04.php
The Best Plan
Living out the values we had chosen
http://www.ccli.org/news/magazine/afeature-04.php
Like most engaged couples, we set goals for our life together. As we progressed toward our wedding date, we constructed an idea of what our life would be in “The Five-Year Plan.” We wanted as large a family as we could afford; we anticipated three or four children, but hoped for more. Our “Plan” was formed by values created by society — self-fulfillment and material comfort. The life we hoped to live was one that appeared to be easy for us and would have impressed our family, friends, and neighbors. The thought of pleasing God by exercising stewardship over our material gains — no matter how few or many — by living a life of sacrifice, and by building a relationship with God as a means of fulfillment had not occurred to us. The question of children — when and how many — was adapted to our wills in consideration of our comfort.
After our engagement, Sonia went on the Pill. We knew that the Catholic Church prohibits the use of birth control, however, we thought that meant we weren’t to avoid pregnancy at any time for any reason by any means. Our perception of the teaching led us to envision an endless stream of children spaced nine months apart. It never occurred to us that there was a licit, effective method to avoid pregnancy, one based on God’s design of the female body.
By the time we made an Engaged Encounter, Sonia was experiencing side effects associated with the Pill. Jack did not like seeing her suffer for the sake of “worry-free, whenever-you-want-it” sex.
The Engaged Encounter included a talk on Natural Family Planning (NFP). What impressed us most about NFP was learning that it is an effective method of birth regulation without any side effects. We were also pleased to learn it is inexpensive to use! The shared responsibility was an enticing aspect. Most of all, it was a relief for us to learn that the Catholic Church approved of a sound method of spacing children. This was the first time either of us had heard the Church’s true teaching on birth control.
The following week, we enrolled in a course taught by CCL, and Sonia threw away her Pills.
The class taught us many things. We learned how to use the Sympto-Thermal Method effectively. We learned much about the biology of a woman’s body. We learned that contraception, like all sin, can damage and potentially ruin a marriage. We heard the call to married couples to be open to God’s will in planning their families.
Between the knowledge we had gained in the classes and the clarity of Sonia’s charts, it became apparent to her that her next fertile time would correspond with our wedding. A call to our Teaching Couple confirmed the probability.
This came as a bit of a surprise to us. While we had considered the possibility of Sonia being fertile during our honeymoon, we did not think it was probable that we would face being fertile at that time.
We had made the decision to use NFP by logic; however, our moral and religious convictions had grown strong. We began to realize that following God’s plan for marriage means more than not sinning to avoid pregnancy; it means being generous. In order to use NFP in the proper moral context, God needed to be part of “the Plan.” We had been looking upon Him as a silent partner. We had to recognize that part of letting God into our marriage meant having Him be a vocal, active partner.
We had committed ourselves, in word, to making God a part of our marriage. We would be married in the Church making our union a Sacrament and a covenant between God and ourselves. Next, we had to commit ourselves, by our actions, to the covenant among the three of us.
We had to make a decision that would uphold the values that we had decided would guide our marriage. We had three choices: use contraception on our honeymoon, abstain on our honeymoon, or have relations during the fertile time and leave it in the Lord’s hands.
We had firmly decided that contraception would have no place in our marriage. We did not want to separate the unitive and procreative aspects of the sexual act; we wanted our marital relations as God had intended them to be. Therefore, contraception would have negated any presence of the Lord in our marriage and, this, would have denied the values we had wanted to guide our marriage.
Abstaining on our honeymoon would have adhered to our moral convictions. Also, it would have given us complete assurance that conception would not occur. But conscious abstinence during the fertile time, without “grave motives” (HV n. 10), would mean refusing the Lord’s offer of a child. In the wedding ceremony, we would be asked if we would accept children willingly and lovingly. “When we want to,” would not be an acceptable answer.
We had to rethink our circumstances using Christian prudence and generosity. Was preventing a pregnancy completely necessary? Were our reasons for avoiding pregnancy valid? In Humanae Vitae, Pope Paul VI outlined the criteria for “grave motives” to avoid a pregnancy. The couple must be limited by financial, psychological, physical, or social factors. We began to see that the criteria by which we judged our readiness to start a family were selfish and that choosing a morally licit method of avoiding pregnancy was not enough for us to follow Christ.
Thus, after much prayer and discussion, we chose to consummate our marriage covenant on our honeymoon — without desecrating the meaning of the marital act — and to allow God to exercise His Will as He saw fit. Ironically, we found ourselves worried that we would not conceive! We realized that by letting the Lord have dominion over our family, we were letting Him decide. We also realized He could say no.
With the Sympto-Thermal Method, a couple needs only to see the woman’s temperature elevated for 21 days to know, with 99% certainty, that they have achieved pregnancy. For us, excitement won out and Sonia had a pregnancy test at the college health services department on the first day of classes for the spring semester.
We had agreed to wait until the evening to discuss the results. As Jack rode the Metro that evening, he looked around in amazement at the families that crowded the train. The train at that time of day was usually full of business people. Many of the families carried signs which read “Choose Life” and other pro-life slogans as they returned home from the March for Life. Sonia did not need to tell him what the results were!
Jonathan Owen was born about nine months later!
Now, almost 10 years later, Jonathan is still our one and only. It has been during this time that we have been blessed to learn firsthand of the flip side of Humanae Vitae — that love and life cannot be separated even to conceive a child. Man cannot push God’s hand and demand a child.
We live in a society where couples and individuals have tried to separate love and life. Couples and individuals are able to have sex without bearing children, to have children when they want to bear them, abort them when they don’t want them, and have a doctor make them when they can’t make them. By following the call of Humanae Vitae, CCL teaches couples to cooperate with God and accept His will. This education has been the tool that opened our marriage to the graces that God wishes to bestow upon every married couple.
As faithful Catholics, we live in a community of believers that generously endeavors to counteract the Culture of Death. In this facet of society, it is important to avoid the perception that a large family equals holiness, lest we fall into spiritual pride or discontent with the blessings God has given us.
When a couple understands Humanae Vitae, they can hear the call to exercise both prudence and generosity in the practice of responsible parenthood. They also have the knowledge that reminds them to exercise charity when noting the size of other families. Only God knows a couple’s heart.
Some time ago, Sonia was given insight to God’s ways by the mother of seven boys. The mother had said that the challenges of raising a large family had been the source of so many graces for her and her husband. Sonia quipped that we must have a long way to go because we do not have enough children. “That’s not true!” replied the mother. “God has given you the family that will bring you closer to Him!”
Every family has a story. The ones we find most beautiful are the ones where the final word of the husband and wife is “Thy Will Be Done.” In those families we hear God’s gentle laughter in the voice of one child, many children, or the countless spiritual children touched by a barren couple.
— Jack and Sonia Ferraro are CCL members in Manassas, Virginia. They also served as a CCL Teaching Couple from 1994 to 2002.
On the topic at hand, I have major trouble with the basic premise that contraception is tantamount to genocide. If the article had said abortion is tantamount to genocide that is one thing, but contraception is a whole other kettle of fish.
Calling contraception genocide is, to be honest, absolutely insane. Also someone mentioned that this is a pro-life website ....that it is, and thanfully. Being against abortion is being pro-life (which I am), but trying to wiggle being anti-contraception as being pro-life is one of the craziest things I have heard in quite some time. 100% loony.
I guess everytime a woman has a period, and every time a teen boy has a wetdream, then they are responsible for killing people. After all, that is an egg, and those are millions of sperm, that never had the chance to form a human life. Or what about the number of times people trying to have a child do not get one (even if you are 100% fertile, it is not as if every moment you have sex there is conception) ....or for that matter, if your wife gets pregnant and you continue having sex with her, doesn't that mean that the sperm that are exuded during intercourse after the conception 'wasted.'
Goodness! Anyways, I firmly believe that life begins at conception, but trying to sell the hock that contraception is GENOCIDE is just plain-party ludicrous. I've seen some arguments on this series that make some sense (e.g. how morality has been degraded over the decades), but contraception as genocide ...sell me another.
My point is not that every sperm and unfertilized egg is a potential person, but when a society decides to stop reproducing, it is committing suicide.
Here in the Western World, we have stopped having babies. For those of us in North America, that means you need a lot of illegals from Latin America to get the work done. Which as bad as it is, they are at least of similar cultures.
But Europe will not be Europe in a generation. They are importing mainly Muslims. The immigrants are having babies, the natives are not. Soon the native population will be old and the young blood will be the immigrants. In effect, the ethnic groups will go away. There won't be many English in England or French in France. They will go the way of the Celts or Basques. Some small communities will survive, but much of the race will be gone.
We have as a people chosen to abandon the future. We have stopped having babies, and opened the doors to others to come and take our place. So in that respect, we have committed a slow genocide against ourselves.
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.