Posted on 12/12/2013 4:07:04 PM PST by matthewrobertolson
The Church strongly opposes contraception, in keeping with the historical position of Christianity. Openness to procreating life is one of the defining characteristics of marriage, which is primarily what makes homosexual "marriage" impossible. The Church also upholds the life-long commitment that is marriage. Contrast the Church's beautiful teachings on all of this against the positions of Protestantism -- those of Anglicanism, in particular.
Anglicans once agreed with the Church on these subjects, up until the 1930 Lambeth Conference that approved contraception in some cases (which, of course, had a snowball effect). Here's the 15th resolution from the Conference:
"Where there is clearly felt moral obligation to limit or avoid parenthood, the method must be decided on Christian principles. The primary and obvious method is complete abstinence from intercourse (as far as may be necessary) in a life of discipline and self-control lived in the power of the Holy Spirit. Nevertheless in those cases where there is such a clearly felt moral obligation to limit or avoid parenthood, and where there is a morally sound reason for avoiding complete abstinence, the Conference agrees that other methods may be used, provided that this is done in the light of the same Christian principles. The Conference records its strong condemnation of the use of any methods of conception control from motives of selfishness, luxury, or mere convenience."There were still some restrictions, obviously, but since then, all practical barriers to contraception have fallen. That decision of that Conference is interesting, especially considering that it stated that "the primary purpose for which marriage exists is the procreation of children" in its 13th resolution and that "the duty of parenthood [is] the glory of married life" in its 14th resolution.
The Episcopal "Church" of the USA (the official American branch of Anglicanism) also now blesses homosexual relationships. (See their liturgy for it here.) The "Church" of England recently announced that it will follow the same route.
But what must be kept in mind is that, in 1991, the ECUSA officially barred homosexual couples from having sexual relations:
"..the 70th General Convention of the Episcopal Church affirms that the teaching of the Episcopal Church is that physical sexual expression is appropriate only within the lifelong monogamous 'union of husband and wife in heart, body, and mind' 'intended by God for their mutual joy; for the help and comfort given one another in prosperity and adversity and, when it is God's will, for the procreation of children and their nurture in the knowledge and love of the Lord' as set forth in the Book of Common Prayer" [link]And the 1930 Lambeth Conference addressed the subject, as well:
"[The Conference] reaffirms 'as our Lord's principle and standard of marriage a life-long and indissoluble union, for better or worse, of one man with one woman, to the exclusion of all others on either side, and calls on all Christian people to maintain and bear witness to this standard.'" [from Resolution 11]So, if openness to life is not required in marriage (which the acceptance of contraception would seem to indicate), then why are same-sex couples in the ECUSA mandated to practice sexual abstinence? And if it is required, then why are contraception and homosexual relationships now endorsed?
And I must say that I find it laughable (but not at all surprising) that Anglicanism, which was founded by a king that just wanted a few divorces, is so inconsistent on the subject of divorce, too. Its leaders have taught that marriage is to be a "life-long union" (Resolution 114 of the 1958 LC) and "no husband or wife has the right to contemplate even legal separation until every opportunity of reconciliation and forgiveness has been exhausted" (Resolution 116 of the 1958 LC), yet divorce and "remarriage" are now totally accepted.
The Anglican positions on marriage and sexuality are nonsensical. Would not God's true Church be more consistent? If Anglicans really want to "secure a better education for the clergy in moral theology" (Resolution 12 of the 1930 LC), then they should tell them to become Catholic.
----------
“Follow” me on Twitter, “Like” Answering Protestants on Facebook, Add Answering Protestants to your Circles on Google+, and “Subscribe” to my YouTube apologetic videos.
----------
Judas betrays Christ with a kiss.
Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem;
Creatorem caeli et terrae.
Et in Jesum Christum,
Filium eius unicum, Dominum nostrum;
qui conceptus est
de Spiritu Sancto,
natus ex Maria virgine;
passus sub Pontio Pilato,
crucifixus, mortuus, et sepultus;
descendit ad inferos;
tertia die resurrexit a mortuis;
ascendit ad caelos;
sedet ad dexteram Dei Patris omnipotentis;
inde venturus est
iudicare vivos et mortuos.
Credo in Spiritum Sanctum;
sanctam ecclesiam catholicam;
sanctorum communionem;
remissionem peccatorum;
carnis resurrectionem;
vitam aeternam. Amen.
In English:
I believe in God, the Father almighty,
creator of heaven and earth.
I believe in Jesus Christ,
his only Son, our Lord.
He was conceived
by the power of the Holy Spirit,
and born of the Virgin Mary,
He suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, died, and was buried;
He descended into hell.
On the third day he rose again;
he ascended into heaven,
he is seated at the right hand of the Father,
he will come again
to judge the living and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Spirit,
the holy Catholic church,
the communion of saints,
the forgiveness of sins,
the resurrection of the body,
and the life everlasting. Amen
My comments started on this thread by trying to expose what I see is a double standard Catholicism has in the area of procreation in marriage. I adamantly reject any methods that destroy human life and is why BC pills and IUDS, not to mention abortion, are things Christian couples should never consider. However, the so-called "barrier" methods don't seem to me to be a violation of God's purposes.
I had a professor in college who was a pacifist so much so that he stated he would not use any kind of weapon even if it was to protect the lives of his wife and children. He believed that this was the "ultimate" example of trusting God in all things. Can you see a problem with this kind of thinking and the extent to which some people will take the concept of trusting in God? Just as I have a way to protect my family in the case of a break in, use medications to help stay healthy and have undergone surgeries to correct physical problems I had, so too do I believe God has given us common sense and medical discoveries to help us and to live healthier lives to better serve him.
The sexual relationship between husbands and wives is a GIFT from God, meant to draw us closer to each other as well as to bring children into the family. I don't think planning for children in smart ways - being responsible for making sure they are well cared for and provided for - dishonors God in any way. It still accepts that it is God who "opens and closes the womb" and that his will WILL be done in all things. We definitely have a problem in the world where sexual activity is taken out of the context of marriage and Satan has perverted God's plan for a healthy society. Millions of children are born who have NO ONE who cares for them. They are abused and cast aside like trash as are the millions who have been aborted before they took their first breath. We have a disrespect for life which has deteriorated ALL of society in many ways. This terrible dysfunction will never be healed until ALL life is respected as God's creation.
I see responsible family planning as a part Christian couples can play in responding to God's gift of procreation as well as the intimate union he brings about through intimate marital relations. Couples past child bearing years STILL enjoy this gift and bring glory to God by being faithful to him and each other. God bless you, xzins, for your loving heart and gentle wisdom.
I think Catholicism makes a mockery out of Christianity. Unbelievers don’t have to look through scriptures much at all to understand that what Catholics do and say is counter to each other. Then when they read scripture they know that what Catholics teach isn’t in there. Many unbelievers and especially atheists are very familiar with paganism and where many of the beliefs and rituals of Catholicism come from.
Was that Ghehenna, Sheol, or Hades?
My soul magnifies the Lord,
And my spirit rejoices in God my Savior.
For He has regarded the low estate of His handmaiden,
For behold, henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.
For He who is mighty has done great things for me, and holy is His name. And His mercy is on those who fear Him from generation to generation.
He has shown strength with His arm:
He has scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts.
He has put down the mighty from their thrones,
and exalted those of low degree.
He has filled the hungry with good things;
and the rich He has sent empty away.
He has helped His servant Israel, in remembrance of His mercy;
As He spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to His posterity forever.
Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Spirit.
As it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen
Magníficat ánima mea Dóminum,
et exsultávit spíritus meus
in Deo salvatóre meo,
quia respéxit humilitátem
ancíllæ suæ.
Ecce enim ex hoc beátam
me dicent omnes generatiónes,
quia fecit mihi magna,
qui potens est,
et sanctum nomen eius,
et misericórdia eius in progénies
et progénies timéntibus eum.
Fecit poténtiam in bráchio suo,
dispérsit supérbos mente cordis sui;
depósuit poténtes de sede
et exaltávit húmiles.
Esuriéntes implévit bonis
et dívites dimísit inánes.
Suscépit Ísrael púerum suum,
recordátus misericórdiæ,
sicut locútus est ad patres nostros,
Ábraham et sémini eius in sæcula.
Glória Patri et Fílio
et Spirítui Sancto.
Sicut erat in princípio,
et nunc et semper,
et in sæcula sæculórum.
Amen.
She became the Mother of God, in which work so many and such great good things are bestowed on her as pass man’s understanding. For on this there follows all honor, all blessedness, and her unique place in the whole of mankind, among which she has no equal, namely, that she had a child by the Father in heaven, and such a Child . . . Hence men have crowded all her glory into a single word, calling her the Mother of God . . . None can say of her nor announce to her greater things, even though he had as many tongues as the earth possesses flowers and blades of grass: the sky, stars; and the sea, grains of sand. It needs to be pondered in the heart what it means to be the Mother of God.
(Commentary on the Magnificat, 1521; in Luther’s Works, Pelikan et al, vol. 21, 326)
I think some of the problem comes in with people thinking that sex is all about procreation.
After Adam and Eve fell, God greatly increased Eve’s ability to conceive. Until then, when they had sex, it was for nothing more than intimacy and enjoyment.
If sex was simply for procreation, God could have solved a lot of problems by simply having women go into heat, like animals.
That mentality, that sex is all about procreation, degrades the sexual relationship between a husband and wife to being merely utilitarian.
Are you clairvoyant, read minds, or know what metmom knows somehow?
>>You have abdicated the argument with your inability to find scripture defending condom use.<
Wait,,,,,,,What?????? You demand proof from scripture for the use of a condom but don’t need it for the assumption of Mary?????????? And then deny that Catholics are hypocrites?? Oy vey!!!!
So those who can’t have children, who are beyond their reproductive years etc shouldn’t argue they can still have sex?
Couldn’t answer the question ey? So you say you believe it but don’t know what exactly it is that you believe?? Wow! Just Wow!
Explain again to me how wide that “almost all of Christianity” is.
rotflmao!
You are a hoot dearie.
You say you believe something and can’t tell me what that something is and you think I’m a hoot? Alrightythen! I’ll bet you think I should also believe what you believe right? But you don’t know what it is that you believe but I should believe that also. Did I get that right?
In the Religion forum, on a thread titled Anglicans and Sexual Contradictions, metmom wrote:
I think some of the problem comes in with people thinking that sex is all about procreation.Of course you should know that is absolutely NOT the view of the One Holy and Apostolic Universal Church that Our Lord founded. Right?
Just how absurd can this get?!? lol! It’s a huge testament to the absurdity of the RCC in general. “Experts” coming together to discuss their views on...condoms.. Oh yes, I’ve read many times on God’s timeline for mankind His desire that we discuss the pro’s and con’s of family planning. Rightly divided, of course...
You’ve beat that pony to a pulp, narses. Give it a rest.
That is a friendly and heartfelt post, boatbums, and I appreciate the effort to uphold Christian Unity. In the spirit of that, I would like you to prayerfully consider any scripture in which either the act of physical barrier or some relevant concept touching on physical barrier is upheld, such as human control of fertility.
There is no need to respond to this post. You are one who wishes to be guided by biblical principles. While I’m not your pastor, any pastor could hope for nothing more than that.
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.