1 posted on
10/20/2010 2:24:55 PM PDT by
NYer
To: netmilsmom; thefrankbaum; markomalley; Tax-chick; GregB; saradippity; Berlin_Freeper; Litany; ...
A tough topic in any parish.
2 posted on
10/20/2010 2:28:41 PM PDT by
NYer
("Be kind to every person you meet. For every person is fighting a great battle." St. Ephraim)
To: NYer
There is no greater sign of reform and renewal in the Church at present than the recapturing and reasserting of the Church’s teaching on contraception.
To: NYer
Artificial contraception is wrong because it violates the gift of self that ought to be at the center of every act of physical love. When you take the pill or use a foam, diaphragm, condom, or whatever, you are, in effect, saying to your spouse, "In this, the most intimate act of our marriage, I am going to give myself to you, but only up to a point." Or, conversely, you are saying, "I want you in this act to make a total gift to me of yourself, except that part of you which so deeply defines you as a sexual being, your fertility." The body has its own deep language, and when we add chemicals or latex to the act of love, when we deliberately destroy its potential for making new life, we falsify the nuptial meaning of its actions. We hold back the full gift of self which during the wife's fertile period must include an openness to new life.I'm sorry, but this sounds like crazy talk to me.
Isn't it more likely that a church would discourage contraception for business reasons - to grow the flock?
To: NYer
I wish someone would have talked me out of getting married like that.
6 posted on
10/20/2010 2:37:49 PM PDT by
kbennkc
(For those who have fought for it freedom has a flavor the protected will never know .F Trp 8th Cav)
To: NYer
Women, in particular, may decide on purely feminist grounds that artificially thwarting their fertility is demeaning.Indeed, the concept that there is something deeply, fundamentally wrong with women - because their bodies can produce those terrifying babies - is profoundly demeaning. "Just be a toilet." I don't know why woman would accept it.
7 posted on
10/20/2010 2:39:27 PM PDT by
Tax-chick
(I love the smell of napalm in November. Cue the Wagner music ...)
To: NYer
“If the arrival of children needs to be spaced (a job once done quite effectively by full-time breast-feeding), “
My son is living proof that it isn't always that effective :).
My husband and I have decided to let God determine our family size. As my last pregnancy had serious complications, we don't say this lightly. God was merciful and all went as well as it possibly could have. I must confess to some fear, but God is sovereign over all...even my womb.
14 posted on
10/20/2010 2:56:59 PM PDT by
Spudx7
To: NYer
The general ignorance surrounding NFP is a real tragedy, because couples who use it almost universally report what a boon it is to their marriage. NFP is not "Catholic birth control." Nor is it the calendar rhythm method, which has a 15 percent failure rate and went out the window decades ago. It is a method whereby both partners exercise restraint during the wife's fertile period, which is determined by a few simple symptoms. Used correctly, it is more effective than the pill. And it ought to be noted that the more effective an artificial contraceptive is, the more potentially harmful side-effects there are for the wife. Seems like birth control is birth control.
15 posted on
10/20/2010 2:57:46 PM PDT by
Netizen
To: NYer
Can we point out before this thread gets too far along that nowhere does the church teach that infertile couples must abstain from marital relations? It always comes up, and completely misses the point that fertility is an aspect of marriage that must remain in God’s domain and not man’s. There is a big difference between a man or woman withholding that aspect of sex for their own ends, as opposed to God withholding it for His.
26 posted on
10/20/2010 3:14:28 PM PDT by
Eepsy
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson