I just don't get this...

[beattyfamily]

Or my questions on scripture justification for anti-b/c as Jewish Law (aren't we a Judeo-Christian culture) only prohibits male b/c. My personal belief is based on gender bias, ie. subservient role of women in religion.

Not every teaching or doctrine in the Catholic Church is taken directly from the Bible but this is what I found:

Genesis 38:9-10: "It is illicit and shameful for a man to lie with even his lawful wife in such a way as to prevent the conception of offspring."

 

[Lisa F]

Or my questions on scripture justification for anti-b/c as Jewish Law (aren't we a Judeo-Christian culture) only prohibits male b/c. My personal belief is based on gender bias, ie. subservient role of women in religion.

Actually I see it as quite the opposite. Just like the tradtional ketubah (jewish wedding contract) is only concerned with protecting the rights of the woman in the marriage in the face of a male dominated socity, the lack of prohibition of birth control methods for women gives them utter control over their own bodies. If they don't wish to become pregnant, they don't have to. If it were the other way around the male would be the one in control of whether or not their wives got pregnant.

 

[BuckNaked]

If you're only supposed to confess if you are truly sorry then why do you confess to this? You obviously aren't truly sorry if you know that you are going to continue to "sin". So isn't that in a sense a false confession?

According to all but one priest that I've confessed to, no, this is not a false confession. That's what I meant earlier about different priests reacting and dealing with it differently. Most priests realize that this is a difficult decision for many Catholics, and they recognize that while some of us are using BC with the full knowledge that it is a sin, they also realize that we are human.

I guess no one wants to answer my question regarding NFP.

There's not much to answer - artificial birth control is a sin, and NFP is not an artificial form of birth control. As taught by the Church, NFP is not simply the "rhythm method" where the woman takes total responsibility for looking at the calendar and counting days. The Church teaches that there is a closeness that can be found for the couple that works together to not only recognize the biological signs of fertility, but also in the mutual sacrifice of both partners that occurs during a fertile period. According to the Church, NFP should be used for spacing of children and should not be undertaken with the intent to forever prevent conception and birth.

Or my questions on scripture justification for anti-b/c as Jewish Law (aren't we a Judeo-Christian culture) only prohibits male b/c.

It's quite simple - Jewish Law is based on one interpretation of Scripture, Catholic canon law is based on a different interpretation. Surely you aren't suggesting that simply because Judaism was a building block of early Christianity that Christians should be bound by Jewish interpretation of the Scriptures?

 

[DisDuck]

First of all 'beattyf' your quote says 'man' not woman which coincides with what 'Lisa F' posted that female b/c should be OK. So if not scripture based then how did the 'early' church formulate the 'no b/c' precept. Someone had to first ennunciate this position then give it some basis in 'writing'. Otherwise, to me, it is a made up position that has no 'religious' backing and should be scrapped as archaic.


Actually, Lisa, you answered my question precisely along the lines of the information I get from a Halachi website. Why this thinking did not carry over to the 'early' christian church I do not know.

 

[RitaZ.]

Ok, I'll do the work for you.[/url]

Thank you so much! Off to read now...

 

[BuckNaked]

Otherwise, to me, it is a made up position that has no 'religious' backing and should be scrapped as archaic.

As I said before, I'm opposed to the Church's position on BC, but I find it incredibly arrogant that a non-Catholic would be giving instructions to the Catholic Church on what positions should or should not be scrapped.

 

[beattyfamily]

First of all 'beattyf' your quote says 'man' not woman which coincides with what 'Lisa F' posted that female b/c should be OK. So if not scripture based then how did the 'early' church formulate the 'no b/c' precept. Someone had to first ennunciate this position then give it some basis in 'writing'. Otherwise, to me, it is a made up position that has no 'religious' backing and should be scrapped as archaic.

Oh well, it won't ever be "scrapped as archaic" even if you think it should be.

That was what I found (for you) with a quick search trying to help you out. Why should I do the work for you and what's the point anyway? I don't believe your questions are sincere.

Like I said before, in the Catholic Church there are many teachings and doctrines that developed over many years that are not taken word for word from the bible.

I'm going to have my lunch now.

 

[DisDuck]

Buck.. Actually, if you have read my other posts on religious subjects that is precisely my point of view. The 'early' church made decisions distancing themselves from the Jews at the time for reasons that I think had as much to do with that ages politics and personal ambitions than for purely religious reasons. If I am to acknowledge that Jesus existed (which some Jews don't) then I have to put him into his historical context even if one grants that he was the 'messiah'. In that context I believe that Jesus was an observant and practicing Jew who wished to purge the Sanhedrin of their 'wicked' ways. Something like what Martin Luther was doing/saying when he posted his 15 thesis's. Jewish Law is based on The Torah as interpreted and expanded over the centuries by Rabbi's and Sages. The Talmud is one result so why would I not expect the Catholic Church to do the same. Look at its writings in the gospels (& other works) for defining their Laws and Traditions. If you are saying this doesn't always happen then 'people' are making 'laws' based on 'personal' preferences and who is to say that those preferences are the correct ones.

 

[Lisa F]

According to all but one priest that I've confessed to, no, this is not a false confession. That's what I meant earlier about different priests reacting and dealing with it differently. Most priests realize that this is a difficult decision for many Catholics, and they recognize that while some of us are using BC with the full knowledge that it is a sin, they also realize that we are human.

So what if you break other rules while being a catholic and then confess them with no intention of stopping. Do these priests say that is OK too because you are, after all, only human? Is there a list somewhere of sins that are OK to repeat vs. sins that you have to be sorry for and stop in order to be absolved of them through confession? If you like meat and eat it during lent and have no intention of giving up your daily roast beef sandwich and confess that are you forgiven? What is their position on gays... if you are gay and catholic and you believe that you are who you are and you have no intention of living a life of celibacy and you confess, will you be absolved of your "sin"? I guess I'm just having a hard time understanding where the line is drawn between "being human" and knowingly committing the same sin over and over again with no intention of ever stopping. That's like a little kid saying they are sorry for doing something bad and then doing the same thing two seconds later. They are not really sorry, if they were, they would stop doing it.

I may disagree with a lot that Pope John Paul II believed but the one thing I have to admire is his consistency. If ever there was a man who practiced what hey preached... a very rare quality nowadays.

 

[cheyita]

Lisa F - I totally understand where you're coming from. And this leads into another aspect of the church that is inconsistent but yet helpful to many - dispensation. You can receive dispensation from a priest in order to "get away" with various different sins. (I'm not mocking, I'm just trying to explain in simple language)

People get dispensation from fasting during Ash Wednesday and Good Friday, they get dispensation from attending Sunday Mass for certain conflicts, and I believe you can get dispensation for using birth control if - for instance - there is a medical reason the woman should not become pregnant.

So sometimes you can get an okay by some of the priests. Certainly inconsistent. But it also makes sense as the world is not black and white and I'm glad when the church recognizes that.

 

[DisDuck]

beattyf.. how can you be sure my questions are not sincere? Is it because I am not Catholic and therefore have no place in asking questions? Ask anyone who has followed my posts/response since 1999 if I ask sincere questions or not? If I am trying to be sarcastic I announce in advance and even apologize if my sarcasm offends. I believe in questioning. It was how I was taught both publically and religiously. I am a history student and wonder why things have happened. Why was one path chosen over another? On this issue I do have questions that some may not like because they do question 'your' theology. I wonder how they were derived at since Jewish Law took a different path yet Jesus was a Jew. I don't believe b/c is a sin but a personal decision that does not need religious approval or disapproval. I also believe that someone who has not the personal experience should be making those kinds of decisions for others. Has that person had to weigh what another mouth to feed would mean to the family dynamics? I have 4 children so in these modern times I am considered a large family. It was a mutual decision on number and cut-off. Our children are quite spaced 10 years from oldest to youngest because that is what we wanted. I don't think these decisions are anyone else's to make or advise on.

 

[phillybeth]

In my case, I'm the one that confesses, because I'm the one with the IUD. While I'm sure that there are many people that don't confess to BC, I do, because I want to take Communion, and I wouldn't feel comfortable doing so if I hadn't confessed to the BC.

I've also found that different priests react/counsel differently on the confession of BC.

But how can you do that? When you are given absolution you are told to go and sin no more. How can you truly confess and recieve absolution and then communion, knowing that the IUD is still there and still actively preventing pregnancy? I was told that that is a mortal sin, confessing to a sin you have no intentions of stopping. This is not a personal attack, I am genuinely curious.

 

[RitaZ.]

I was raised Catholic, but have become completely disillusioned with my religion over the years. I disagree with many of the Catholic Church's teachings. The ironic part is that I live/lead my life in ways that the Catholic Church would very much approve of. I tried using BC pills years ago, but I had trouble with them so I gave up on them. I started "practicing" NFP without even knowing that there was such a thing, but did it based on what I learned/knew about reproduction/ovulation. The funny thing is that I disagree with the Catholic Church's stance on contraception, even though I don't use any. Go figure!

 

[BuckNaked]

To all of the "How can you do that???" and "How can the priest do that???" questions, all I can say is, ask the priest. I've never lied to a priest about my BC, nor have I ever tried to say it was for anything (medical reasons, etc) other than we didn't want to have any more children. When the one priest would not absolve me, I refrained from taking communion until such a time as I was absolved, and it has never been an issue since. Were I to encounter a priest that wouldn't absolve me, of course I wouldn't take communion.

 

[Lisa F]

So sometimes you can get an okay by some of the priests. Certainly inconsistent. But it also makes sense as the world is not black and white and I'm glad when the church recognizes that.

I think, though, that this is one of the problems that people had with the Pope. The "church" doesn't recognize it if you see the "Church" as being with a capital C, centered in the vatican with the Pope as the leader. I've been hearing/reading for years now about the disconnect between what people are doing here in the US and Rome (in fact DH saw some commentary on some news channel he was watching that listed that as one of the reasons that it would be highly unlikely that we would ever see a Pope from the US even though next to Italy, the US has the most cardinals in the college).

I guess from my point of view I can certainly admire the Pope for sticking to his values and being so consistent in them, even if I disagree. I also can admire people who do not see the world as black and white and who are thinking, feeling, compassionate and who can make decisions based on that rather than on black and white rules. What I personally can't stand is hypocrisy... people who pick and choose what rules they want to follow and THEN condemn others for not picking and choosing the same rules to follow. It's okay if I use birth control but it's not OK if people are gay. (I'm not saying that anyone is making that argument here, just an example).

 

[LindsayDunn228]

Not every teaching or doctrine in the Catholic Church is taken directly from the Bible but this is what I found:

Genesis 38:9-10: "It is illicit and shameful for a man to lie with even his lawful wife in such a way as to prevent the conception of offspring."

Beatty, I looked this verse up and this is not what I read. This is what I read: ...and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother. 38:10 And the thing which he did displeased the LORD: wherefore he slew him also.

He wasn't with his wife. He was with his brother's wife. That's infidelity. I don't know what Bible you are reading out of.

 

[helenabear]

I disagree with this.

You might want to see that I corrected myself on that one... It was a debate that I heard a few priests having and I totally forgot what the answer was. I double checked myself and found myself to be wrong. This was one where it was how you read the 10 Commandments (which honestly is EXACTLY correct in what I said about communion), and the church read it one way, others have read it another. Not to say the church is wrong, just saying that it was a debate I knew others had and sorry I had the answer inccorect... wish you would edit the post so no one could see anything inccorect at all. Truthfully on that one... I felt bad I said the wrong answer, even though I was 100% on with the idea of Communion. I just took it out all together since it was way off topic otherwise.

People get dispensation from fasting during Ash Wednesday and Good Friday, they get dispensation from attending Sunday Mass for certain conflicts, and I believe you can get dispensation for using birth control if - for instance - there is a medical reason the woman should not become pregnant.

I think you probably feel right on that... having another child probably would've killed my mother. Trust me, they used a sure fire way of birth control after I was born. Can that be a sin? Probably in some eyes... but to knowingly kill my mother and child to go along with it seems so much more wrong. I have read through the whole BC issue, and there has been total acknowledgement that there are very valid reasons why people should not become pregnant in the eyes of the church. Where I have been told/read this, I cannot say for sure, but I know I have heard & read it more than once.

The difference with the Jewish law vs Catholic is that it was a scripture that was interpreted differently. It's not something that will change easily either.

Sadly I think this is an issue that so many struggle with in the Church...

Rita, your post kind of made me smile... I know many who kind of say the same sort of thing as you do.

As for sinning when you know you are and confessing? Not a personal attack, but I don't see the point of it either. It would be one thing to make an attempt to not sin, but to confess and do nothing about it, that doesn't make sense to me much. Probably not a nice answer, but it's my honest thought... no confession unless you mean it and are trying to change.

 

[beattyfamily]

Beatty, I looked this verse up and this is not what I read. This is what I read: ...and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother. 38:10 And the thing which he did displeased the LORD: wherefore he slew him also.

He wasn't with his wife. He was with his brother's wife. That's infidelity. I don't know what Bible you are reading out of.

Sorry, like I said, it was a quick search. I got it from a website.

 

[septbride2002]

This has nothing to do with the subject at hand, but there's plenty of evidence to refute what you brought up about Pope Pius XII BUT I quoted Pope Pius XI, different Pope entirely.

I really don't want to debate this. I only want to answer sincere questions and correct any errors I think I see written.

It was just a question - step off the soapbox now. Be careful - you might twist your ankle looking down on someone like that.

~Amanda

 

[MrsKreamer]

How can someone not get touchy with people attacking their religion? Does it really affect you in any way what Catholics do? It's not like we go around telling everyone that they should be Catholic or they are going to Hell. Believe whatever you want to believe. All religions have made some mistakes, they are ALL MANmade. I like the Catholic faith because it is old and traditional, and to me that is comforting in a day and age with so much hate and anger. I don't badger you with questions filled with snide remarks or tell you your religion is wrong b/c of things done in the past. So I would appreciate, I am sure my fellow Catholics would as well, the same curtiousy.