Posted on 07/01/2012 1:18:00 AM PDT by stpio
R. Albert Mohler, Jr., President of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary isn't sure if Birth Control is a sin.
Watch this Vortex. The problem with Protestantism, you get to decide.
This was news to me, and while a single man i have never had to deal with this as a Christian, some research quickly revealed that i am not alone.
“...not all doctors are aware that the Pill can act as an abortifacient. Dr. Walter Larimore admitted that he prescribed the Pill for nearly twenty years—and used it in his own marriage before anyone informed him that it could have such an effect.”
When another doctor clued him in, he said that he had never heard of such a thing, and that the claims seemed to be “outlandish, excessive, and inaccurate.”[5] He began a search of the medical literature, “to disprove these claims to my partner, myself, and any patients who might ask about it.” However, what he discovered compelled him to stop using the Pill in his medical and personal life. Reviewing the information, he realized how many doctors (and patients) were ignorant of the abortifacient potential of the Pill. It was a humbling realization, considering that ever since the 1970s, the patient package insert for birth control pills explained how the drug reduces the likelihood of implantation.[6]
After informing his colleagues, Dr. Larimore noted, “several said that they thought it would change the way family physicians informed their patients about the Pill and its potential effects.”[7] Because many physicians felt that it was unfair to leave women in the dark, some of them submitted a proposal to the American Medical Association (AMA) calling for a vote on whether doctors should tell patients that birth control pills can act as abortifacients. However, in 2001 the AMA voted overwhelmingly against the proposal.
As for when life begins, no one knows, but ,
One reason why certain doctors may not tell women about the abortifacient nature of the Pill is that some physicians do not believe that pregnancy begins with fertilization. Until the 1960s, when the Pill was invented, it had been taken for granted that the union of the sperm and egg signaled the beginning of pregnancy. In 1963 even the United States government published health information declaring that anything that impairs life between the moment of fertilization and the completion of labor is to be considered an abortion.[8]
Because many women would never have agreed to use a drug or device that could cause an early abortion, those in favor of such contraceptives knew that the issue had to be resolved. In 1964 a Planned Parenthood doctor speaking of another type of abortifacient birth control recommended that scientists not “disturb those people for whom this is a question of major importance.” He added that judges and theologians trust the medical community, and “if a medical consensus develops and is maintained that pregnancy, and therefore life, begins at implantation, eventually our brethren from the other faculties will listen.”[9]
One year later the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) decided to redefine pregnancy. In its words, “conception is the implantation of a fertilized ovum.”[10] Instead of defining conception as fertilization, ACOG decided that life begins nearly a week later, at implantation. At the time they said that this was because pregnancy could not be detected before then. Today science is able to detect pregnancy before implantation, but the ACOG still won’t correct its definition.[11] The original change had nothing to do with a scientific discovery in women’s health, reproduction, or biology. Unfortunately, doctors today are split on the issue.[12] http://chastity.com/chastity-qa/birth-control/abortion/do-birth-control-pills-ca
A dirty, little secret in the pharmaceutical world is that the Pill if taken in a certain way can actually work AFTER conception by preventing the embryo from implanting on the uterine wall. In other words, the pill can cause the baby to die. This is simply abortion by another name.
The “Morning After” Pill is nothing more than the regular birth control pill taken in massive dosage to insure that the embryo will not implant.
When taken as prescribed (every day) the birth control pill prevents conception by: 1. usually preventing ovulation, and 2. thickening cervical mucous to delay/interfere with sperm entry through the cervix.
If the pill fails to prevent ovulation and conception, it prevents the fertilized egg from growing through “changes in the endometrium which reduce the likelihood of implantation” (a form of abortion).
When taken as a “morning after pill” the mechanism of action is to prevent implantation of a conceptus (zygote, the fertilized egg). Prevention of implantation can also be a factor in preventing pregnancy in those women who forget to take the pill every day, and therefore ovulate. Ovulation can occasionally occur even when a woman never misses a pill [between 1 and 3 of very 100 women get pregnant while on the pill, and “research indicates that figure may be considerably higher, up to 4% for ‘good compliers’ and 8% for ‘poor compliers’” (Potter, “How Effective Are Contraceptives?” Obstetrics and Gynecology 1996; 135:13S-23S.)]. http://christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-bcpill.html
It is harder for the women, but i think this needs to be made known. We know that the liberals do not want evangelicals to have kids, unless they can harvest them, which the schools work to do.
I am Catholic and submit myself to Her in all matters which She has declared as binding on the faithful.
I think you will see more non Catholics come to a right understanding of the error of artificial birth control as they see how the deliberate separation of the unitive and procreative aspects of sex have lead to such moral disaster, both personal and cultural.
I believe it was Chesterton who said something like this: Sitting in a pew makes man a Catholic to the same extent sitting in a car makes him a car.
DON’T read Chesterton if you would hate being Catholic - his works convert countless many.
Neither does the Church. Sex between a husband and wife is a gift from God that is both procreative and unitive.
Peace be with you.
That’s Bible, though some “fathers” had a rather disparaging view.
Thanks! You’re helping ansell see, much better than I
can, you’re witty too. There are “unfaithful” Catholics, we’re all sinners.
'Amazing Grace for Those Who Suffer'
Natural and Unnatural (father of 5 shocks mother of 1)
NFP — It Ain’t Your Momma’s Rhythm
Responsible Parenthood in a Birth Control Culture, Part Two [Open]
Responsible Parenthood in a Birth Control Culture, Part One [Open]
Contraception v. Natural Family Planning — Part 5 of 6 [Open]
Journey to the Truth (Natural Family Planning) [Open]
Enslaving Women One Pill at a Time (Birth Control Pills and Natural Family Planning)
New Study Shows Natural Family Planning Technique More “Effective” Than Contraception
Fargo) Diocese set to require pre-marriage course in natural family planning
Making Babies: A Very Different Look at Natural Family Planning
Clerical Contraception (Important Read! By Fr. Thomas J. Euteneuer)
(Fargo) Diocese set to require pre-marriage course in natural family planning
Natural Family Planning Awareness Week, July 25, 2004
IS NATURAL FAMILY PLANNING A 'HERESY'? (Trads, please take note)
Thanks Doc: More (and Younger) Doctors Support Natural Family Planning
Couple say Natural Family Planning strengthens marriage
Reflections: Natural family planning vs sexism
British Medical Journal: Natural Family Planning= Effective Birth Control Supported by Catholic Chrch
Natural Family Planning
It’s really true, we have to share it more. I was the same, I had no idea, a time before my conversion, for five or six years I was on the Pill.
There was a website I happened on, women told about the side effects of the “morning after pill”, it was awful and they sounded so young most of them.
Wow! Thank you for all the links, I like the many Natural
Family Planning sites you shared.
“NFP, as the Alvas proclaim, uses no drugs, devices or any other artificial means. Instead, it requires a couple to pay close attention to the woman’s body and abide by the signs nature gives. Shown to be more effective than condoms and some other birth control, it calls for abstinence from intercourse at fertile times.
On top of that, couples say, NFP enhances marriage.”
You are most welcome. I don’t think enough couples realize the POSITIVE effects of Natural Family Planning.
Why do some people post threads that are INTENTIALLY provocative, that they MUST know will cause dissension and that needlessly give the REAL enemies of the Christian faith more ammunition with which to criticize us? Is it as a springboard into further issues with which to degrade those who differ with them on theological grounds? I suspect that is the true motive and we should all be aware of it when it happens. Causing discord among brethren is a grave sin - something God says He HATES - and one that gets too little attention here sometimes.
"No maybe
No might be
SHALL BE
So says Paul. God says something very different. Matt 7:21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’
That's ridiculous! Provide the evidence!
I think that those religions that delve so far into the personal lives of its adherents that they presume to tell a married couple what they can and cannot do in the marriage bed that is undefiled and blessed by God, is going too far. Should couples have all the information available to them about the truth of what happens with these products that help in family planning? Yes, they should and nothing should be hidden or disguised about their choices. Will non-married people take advantage of methods that aid a married couple to plan their families? Of course! Everything God has created, Satan will try to pervert but it doesn't mean no one should be allowed to invent or utilize things that help them to live.
I think the Catholic Church is being hypocritical when they insist that ALL types of birth control are "mortal sins" but then turn around and promote what they call "natural family planning". NFP is a method similar to the "rhythm method" my parents used - but which often failed - and it predicts when a woman is fertile so that intercourse can be avoided during those times. They are telling couples intercourse is for bringing children into the world, yet advise couples they can have sex "safely" without pregnancy as long as they do it the "Church's" approved way. What I think is hypocritical, is they allow a couple to have sex with the intention of NOT having children using this NFP method but call barrier methods sinful, when the result and intention is the same! I agree that abortion is morally wrong and any method that causes the death of the embryo or fertilized egg is equally wrong, but methods that prevent fertilization from happening in the first place are NOT the same and the church should butt out in telling a married couple how they should manage their families. God gave us brains for a reason.
Not mythical or mysterious at all. I am at least baseline familiar with the unregenerate Patristics -- Ignatius (baptismal regeneration); Cyprian (purgatory, extra nulla salus ecclesiam); Irenaeus (salvation as a reward for works, rather than works as a result of salvation; vs. Eph 2:8+); Origen (more purgatory, a second chance after death for unsaved and devils; vs Rev. 20:10, 15); Augustine (prayers for the dead, university within the visible church), etc., etc. All these are a result of incorporating pantheistic Platonism to fortify doctrines unsound and unproven not only to the NT writers, but also to regenerated literal-grammatical interpreters of this age.
The ante-Nicene "Fathers" stood nearer to the LORD's incomparable never-enlarged, never-augmented, nor amended finalized foundation of The Apostles and prophets (Eph. 2:19-22, 1 Cor. 3:19-11) than we do, but their writings lacked the Go-breathed beauty, clarity, precision, and infallibilty of That Which Is Perfectly Completed, the inscripturated essence Of The Jehovah, The Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, I would never use their arguments to mask, amend, replace, modify, or buttress any argument that will not pass the naked double-edged Sword of The Spirit, The Hrema of The God, which goes out of His mouth.
Yes, Ignatius did refer to catholicity, but it was not until Constantine married the already prevailing but unscriptural Nicolaitanism--of Ignatius and Cyprian--to the Roman State that we got what is titled the Roman Catholic (made proper) State Church. This raised the hypothetical slippery improvidential invisible catholicity in an impure church, to a very formal embodied visible unity, and that is how Roman Catholicism was birthed to control a newly inaugurated sacral society under the aegis of the civil government.
The Roman Church in America can never rest until She has taken over the operation of the civil government, IMHO, for She is not designed to operate any other way. (BTW, this the point of why Mohler remarked, "...Again, for an evangelical Protestant to respond to the papacy, we have to say that one of the problems is this critical claim to both temporal and spiritual power. And that is a very dangerous mixture. Who knows in what role he is speaking?")
With this the true NT ecclesiology can never find common ground with Roman Catholicism nor Protestantism. This knitting of churchianity with civil government in Statist Catholicism or Protestant Reconstructionism is the very antithesis of the New Testament Church and its Baptistic distinctive; that is, separation of church and state (Jn. 18:36 -- "... My Kingdom is not of this kosmos ..."; Mt. 22:21).
Again, I am not indicating this in a pejorative sense or to open old wounds (as is the wont of many debaters); only to show that my stated conclusion is that you and I will not arrive at an agreeable settlement -- only a restive troubled truce.
That's ridiculous! Provide the evidence!
It's very simple.
Contraception interferes with The God's plan for the use of that which He has designed.
As does Sodomy, Onanism, and other unmentionable perversions.
Contraception and abortifacient schemes also remove some practical barriers to adultery and the like.
All useful to those serving the god of this world.
Appears to me ridiculous that folks of a normal intelligence cannot seem to grasp that ---
“Barrier” methods, though, such as spermicides, condoms, sponge, or the diaphragm, do NOT, or are not supposed to, allow the event of fertilization to even happen which does not carry the moral equivalence to the other kinds of BC...
NFP is a method SIMILAR to the “rhythm method” my parents used - but which often failed - and it predicts when a woman is fertile so that intercourse can be avoided during those times. They are telling couples intercourse is for bringing children into the world, yet advise couples they can have sex “safely” without pregnancy as long as they do it the “Church’s” approved way.”
~ ~ ~
Were you baptized Catholic? Good thing the old rhythm method failed your parents, you wouldn’t be here brother.
God decides life not us boatbums, the reason Birth Control is a sin. Doesn’t matter the method. See why Reverend Mohler wrote what he did? He is convicted, troubled, he knows most all of Protestantism approves of Birth Control.
They have since 1930 but Protestants are waking up, they are seeing and Cafeteria Catholics too, the terrible fruit of Birth Control.
“NFP does NOT refer to the so-called “calendar rhythm method,” which was based on calendar calculations of a “normal” cycle. NFP, instead, based on direct observations of various signs that occur in a woman’s body (changes in the cervix, cervical mucus, and temperature) which tell her when ovulation occurs. These observations are relatively easy to make, take only a few minutes, and work even for irregular cycles. NFP is internationally known and practical and is extremely effective. The medical principles on which NFP rests are being used by more and more doctors for a wide range of purposes.”
The Church teaches that it's God's grace from beginning to end which justifies, sanctifies, and saves us. As Paul explains in Philippians 2:13, "God is the one, who, for his good purpose, works in you both to desire and to work."
Remember also that it's not those who just say "Lord, Lord" who will be saved, but, as Paul says you must work to be righteous (that's different from works to get saved - you can't do that)
the Council of Trent is pretty clear when it states unambiguously that "If anyone says that man can be justified before God by his own works, whether done by his own natural powers or by the teaching of the Law, without divine grace through Jesus Christ, let him be anathema" (Session 6; can. 1). "let him be anathema" means "condemn his teachings"
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.