Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: CharlesWayneCT
Taken literally, this would suggest that it is also immoral to practice natural birth control by only having sex when you know you can't get pregnant, or even abstaining from sex in marriage to avoid getting pregnant.

There are those who actually share that viewpoint. They are called the Full Quiver movement. God Bless 'em, but a theological understanding of Humanae Vitae shows that this idea misses the point of the doctrine.

As I doubt many of us believe that, we are back to asking what steps to prevent procreation are acceptable, and which are sinful. As a non-Catholic, I don't feel compelled by edicts, but I can still look at the issue from a religious and theological perspective.

Again, the mere issue of birth control is not the point, it is the effect.

I appreciate the conservative viewpoints of our Catholic brethren, so I don't get upset when I am occasionally confronted with their belief that I'm a practicing sinner and worthy of condemnation. Everybody has their religion, and they aren't generally kind to each other.

And I appreciate the mature attitude that you have. Whether or not one is in communion with Rome, we are all part of the Body of Christ. St. Paul disparaged divisions in that Body (reference multiple points throughout his writings, particularly in his first letter to the Church in Corinth). We ALL (of whatever confession -- and I include myself in this reproof) should keep that context uppermost in our minds.

I use contraception, and I most certainly do not deny the trinity.

Ah, context. There was one thing that I didn't put down here as well as I should have (considering to whom I was posting, I didn't feel it necessary...forgot that others read my posts, as well). Sorry about that. Again, I find myself without adequate time to really explain this properly, but in short:

The Church teaches that marriage is an icon of the Trinity. In the Trinity, the Father and the Son are inseparable and of the same substance. Their very nature as Love send forth the Spirit throughout creation. Nothing separates them: they are one. They are all-giving without reservation.

In marriage, the two become one flesh. Contraception prevents this from happening. There is a block that prevents the natural, God ordained outcome from happening. There is a limit placed on the giving of yourself to your spouse (That's why abstinence for a period is not seen in the same light as artificial birth control). God the Father did not place any limits or restrictions on His giving. God the Son likewise gave His all. There are no limits as to the extent of God the Spirit.

If there are limits placed on the degree of giving in the marriage relationship, it is seen as a denial, in practice, of the two becoming one flesh (one flesh, except...). Thus it is seen as a denial of that marriage truly being an icon of the Trinity (and perhaps that is how I should have said it).

I realize that you see it differently...

16 posted on 05/19/2008 3:44:45 AM PDT by markomalley (Extra ecclesiam nulla salus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]


To: markomalley

Now that you mention the “full quiver” movement, I believe I watched a 1-2 hour presentation from a member of that group. That may have shaped my opinion on the matter.


18 posted on 05/19/2008 8:34:00 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT (Green, but not gullible)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson