| User | Post |
|
2:35 pm
October 23, 2009
|
ormom2
Member
| | | |
| posts 14 |
|
|
Michael,
Your response to me, and some of what you said to Zenobius, is helpful and gives me something to think about.
I guess I struggle most with the idea of contraception (immoral) vs regulation (moral). Contraception means:
“the deliberate prevention of conception or impregnation by any of various drugs, techniques, or devices; birth control.”
The deliberate attempt to regulate (prevent, avoid) conception by the use of a technique (NFP) is technically contraception, IMO.
I have heard that NFP should not be used as contraception but I don’t understand the distinction. I hate sounding like I’m playing semantics because I’m very serious. But, I truly don’t understand, yet this is the terminology being used by those who educate in this arena.
When I can’t rationally understand distinctions like this I tend to get cynical and believe the distinctions are disingenuous. That is undoubtedly my own shortcoming. But contraception is also not a matter of faith and dogma and, as I understand it, is therefore open to the individual’s moral discernment. That is why it concerns me so much - I want to be sure I am making a moral decision.
I think you come closest to helping me understand when you speak of the use of artificial means as tempting God to perform miracles. I had not thought of it that way before (contraceptives fail too often for me to think of an unexpected pregnancy as miraculous) and it certainly gives me food for further thought.
Thank you.
|
|
|
4:21 pm
October 23, 2009
|
Michael
Member
| | | |
| posts 216 |
|
|
Ormom2:
I will not pretend to know all that I probably should on the subject. I’m glad some of what I said may have been helpful.
NFP, when used with the intent to contracept, is an improper use of the technique and of the gift of sex. It is an intent to deny one of the “ends” of the gift, which is children. However, my basic understanding is that when serious reasons are present requiring a family to consider “spacing” children (note that that word does not imply “cessation”), NFP provides the necessary recognition that 1) God is in control and knows what He wants of us, 2) that the spouses recognize that any act of intercourse is intended to bring about children as an end, but that there are times when, for serious reasons, that “end” may cause hardship, and 3) Regardless of our will or percieved distress, we accept God’s will in our lives.
(contraceptives fail too often for me to think of an unexpected pregnancy as miraculous)
Contraceptive failures do not indicate a miracle, but use indicates that the intent of the couple is to deny that God knows what is good and thwart an end and a good of the act.
I do trust that you are trying to make a moral decision. My understanding is that contraception is a matter regulated as one of morality. I believe that Humanae Vitae fulfills the requirements as an infallible teaching and that the ban on contraception is covered. The catechism, 2230, refers to contraception, either in means or end, as “intrinsically evil.” I cannot pretend to know the struggle you have, but I can offer you my prayers and willingness to answer question to the limit of my ability.
Please check with someone trusted by your bishop to answer the question definitively. I’m not brushing you off. I’m happy to continue the discussion because it will provoke me to think and to discover answers that I might not seek out on my own. Just know that I can’t possibly be counted an authority and may well err seriously. I hope not to, however.
In the interim, may I suggest the following (they should hyperlink):
Humanae Vitae
The Catechism - Read 2230
Casti Connubii
In Christ,
Michael
|
 |
“The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been difficult and left untried.”
“The poets have been mysteriously silent on the subject of Cheese.”
- GK Chesterton |
|
|
|
4:22 pm
October 23, 2009
|
Michael
Member
| | | |
| posts 216 |
|
|
Post edited 4:42 pm - October 23, 2009 by Michael
Saintstephen:
I answered her question perfectly and she responds with argument.
Let’s rewind to the truth. Your initial and second posts addressed the “science” of a particular method of contraception, and the weak attempt to explain the will of the Church didn’t address her question - you simply turned it around and proposed it as an answer. You also added confusion to the argument by stating that NFP is more effective than contraception - leading on to the possible conclusion that NFP is “Catholic contraception,” which it most definitely not. From her response to the second post you jumped immediately to accusation - very unfair, but one of the ad hominem style attacks characterizing your MO when contradicted or shown to be in error.
I did indicate in my 1:13 p.m. post that I agree with you when you finally suggest that she should consult a person with significantly more knowledge in the matter than you or I. But your attack on someone sincerely seeking answers prior to your actually answering the question(s) posed or referring her to an authority is a strange method of instruction and does you no credit. Perhaps you should review the conversation and you can see your error. No one is interfering with you “Sacred Duty;” you’re simply not always good at it.
In Christ,
Michael
|
|
“The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been difficult and left untried.”
“The poets have been mysteriously silent on the subject of Cheese.”
- GK Chesterton |
|
|
|
10:09 pm
October 23, 2009
|
Michael
Member
| | | |
| posts 216 |
|
|
Ormom2:
Sorry, long day I guess. The reference in the catechism is 2370 here.
That which I provided above makes no sense what-so-ever.
In Christ,
Michael
|
|
“The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been difficult and left untried.”
“The poets have been mysteriously silent on the subject of Cheese.”
- GK Chesterton |
|
|
|
11:22 pm
October 23, 2009
|
ormom2
Member
| | | |
| posts 14 |
|
|
Thanks for the references. I’ll give them a read.
I did some reading about infallability of encyclical teachings - but theologians don’t all agree. All state that they must be taken very seriously and some more than others, however the fact that some lose relevance over time has to also be considered. I believe that leaves some room for serious personal moral discernment on this issue.
|
|
|
6:13 am
October 24, 2009
|
saintstephen
Member
| | | |
| posts 357 |
|
|
Post edited 6:28 am - October 24, 2009 by saintstephen
Post edited 6:40 am - October 24, 2009 by saintstephen
Post edited 6:50 am - October 24, 2009 by saintstephen
Post edited 7:04 am - October 24, 2009 by saintstephen
Post edited 7:12 am - October 24, 2009 by saintstephen
Post edited 7:40 am - October 24, 2009 by saintstephen
ormom2 said:
Thanks for the references. I’ll give them a read.
I did some reading about infallability of encyclical teachings - but theologians don’t all agree. All state that they must be taken very seriously and some more than others, however the fact that some lose relevance over time has to also be considered. I believe that leaves some room for serious personal moral discernment on this issue.
Dormom2, Theologians do not minister the Sacraments. Contraceptives are immoral because they kill or spill reproductive fluids which is a mortal sin. NFP is not a sin because all sexual intercourse is done naturally and it is not a sin to refrain from sexual intercourse with the intent to avoid conception.
As I already advised you before you can receive Holy Communion without condemnation is to seek a Confessional and explain your problem to a Priest. You state you have a moral question yet you think a theologian ministers the Sacraments?
You must seek the council of a Priest on this matter otherwise any Holy Communion you eat is Sacrilegious.
If you really are a Catholic then you have been going to Mass and you have a Parish Priest and you know where the Confessional is and you know where his office is. Your problem is not debatable, it is a moral dilemma which can only be absolved by your Parish Priest.
Theologians do not have and right to ordination to minister the Sacraments and as long as you delay in seeking the Confessional, the more you place yourself in grave danger of mortal sin by killing and spilling either sperm or uterine egg cells.
No Priest in the entire world will condemn the use of NFP and it has already been recognized as free from sin and the use of it requires no Sacramental Confession at all.
This is a moral issue not a scientific issue so make an appointment immediately with your Parish Priest so that your sin can be absolved and you can start renewed in the Truth.
I am in direct contact daily with a female relative of mine who recently Married in the Catholic Church and is trying to get pregnant. She had taken the contraceptive pills for years and her uterus is so messed up from cell damage that her possibility for conception is so questionable that her doctors already said that if she conceives it will take a miracle.
If you think I overstate the dangers of chemical alteration of the normal body fluids and functions of the body you are leaving yourself in a terrible place of physical damage which will inflict you for years to come. Read the label on the pills and look up the serious side effects of chemical alteration of your body cells.
When you damage your body intentionally it is a sin so the sooner you seek out a Priest the better to absolve this terrible scourge on women which not only destroys life within the mother but also your husband who must morally live with the fact of sin and any children who can be terribly deformed by chemical poisoning in birth if they live that long.
When you go to Mass and receive the Body and Blood of Christ, his body unites to your body in transubstantiation of bread and wine to body and blood. So you are willing to give the pill to Christ himself as he unites in flesh with you? Giving the pill to Christ only adds to His suffering in the flesh. When you receive Holy Communion your body is a living sacrifice to Christ and so you are to Confess your sins so that you offer to Christ a spotless, unblemished body, mind, heart and soul as a living sacrifice of the Mass.
For the sake of your Sanctity, please do not feed your contraceptive pills to the Body of Christ as this pains him terribly because it is Sacrilege meaning your first sin of feeding your pills to chemically alter your body chemistry is compounded by feeding your pills to Christ also and so the act of Holy Communion with Christ is made in mortal sin. To avoid Sacrilege of Holy Communion you must go to Confession before Mass to Confess this sin and make amendment of life to avoid the sin in the future. Your body must be cleansed in order to receive Christ in His Body and Blood.
By delaying your immediate Confession with a Priest you only prove that you are in fact a Scientologist which is in fact an atheist and not a Catholic at all. Anyone who advises you that you can take this pill and still receive Holy Communion without Sacrilege is condemning your soul. No theologian can dismiss you from your Sacred Duty to the Sacraments. Only a Priest in the Confessional or in consult in his office can lead you to Holiness in the Body and Blood of Christ.
You also have a serious misunderstanding of medical interventions according to the Teaching Authority of the Church which you need to discuss with your Parish Priest as well. Medical interventions must be considered in Light of Church Doctrine and teaching. There are a multitude of medical interventions which have already been condemned by the Church and contraceptive is one medical intervention that has been condemned. Simply because the medical community devises a chemical or procedural intervention that they think saves lives does not immediately qualify as authorized by the Church. Scientology is atheistic and medical practice is nearly overwhelmingly dominated and controlled by atheists so the safest form of medical intervention is done by a Catholic Doctor if you can find one near you, the Archdiocese has a list of Catholic Doctors who are educated in Church Doctrine and so only are allowed to prescribe medical interventions that comply with Church teaching and Doctrine.
Do not be deceived by so called Doctors who in fact intend maliciously to poison your body with chemicals. They intend not to heal you rather to do your body harm which may not be recoverable and contraceptive pills do in fact cause irreparable harm to the uterus making conception nearly impossible were it not for the effect of Divine Intervention into what man considers “Science”.
All Science must be evaluated in the Light of Christ and that is what the Church has already done for you, all you need to do is comply with Church teaching in order to remain in a state of grace and health in mind and body.
|
|
|
10:54 am
October 24, 2009
|
Michael
Member
| | | |
| posts 216 |
|
|
Ormom2
I did some reading about infallibility of encyclical teachings - but theologians don’t all agree. All state that they must be taken very seriously and some more than others, however the fact that some lose relevance over time has to also be considered.
I’m sorry that I was unclear in my statement about Humanae Vitae. The document itself is not infallible - only authoritative. Teachings on faith and morals are the only things which can have the mark of infallibility. Articles 11 and 12 (sometimes Nos. 11 and 12) - and in particular the first paragraph of No. 12 - have the marks of infallibility because they reiterate what has been taught since antiquity by the ordinary magisterium. Those items in HV that fall outside of the Church’s or popes’ competence to pronounce upon are authoritative for the Catholic (must be gravely considered), but with respect to matters addressing faith and morals, these statements have much greater weight - to the point that when something is reiterated to have been universally taught, it has the characteristic of an infallible statement.
The only items that can lose relevance over time are those not concerned with faith and morals. While exigencies will require refinement on the issues, they will never contradict that which has been universally taught.
At least that’s my understanding.
In Christ,
Michael
|
|
“The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been difficult and left untried.”
“The poets have been mysteriously silent on the subject of Cheese.”
- GK Chesterton |
|
|
|
10:56 am
October 24, 2009
|
Michael
Member
| | | |
| posts 216 |
|
|
Saintstephen:
As I already advised you before you can receive Holy Communion without condemnation is to seek a Confessional and explain your problem to a Priest. You state you have a moral question yet you think a theologian ministers the Sacraments?
In the first place you are not competent to judge ormom2 to be in mortal sin or not - which your assessment that she brings condemnation upon herself most certainly does. You may judge her in error, but you would have to know her immediately enough to be able to prove that all three aspects of grave sin have been met in order to say that her actions deny grace. Her statements leave room enough for doubt that this is the case, particularly as it relates to “knowledge of sin.” She appears to be making the right steps to overcome doubts or ignorance on the topic, so she can’t be said to be in “vincible ignorance,” either.
Next, she never even implied that a theologian is a minister of the Sacrament. This is an unfounded inference on your part - and never implied on hers.
Yes, consultation with someone better at this than we is highly recommended.
No Priest in the entire world will condemn the use of NFP and it has already been recognized as free from sin and the use of it requires no Sacramental Confession at all.
This statement is also in error. Had you read the statements above as well as Humanae Vitae you would understand why. The statement is too broad for the scope of the discussion at hand, and ormom2’s question, in particular.
An please, quit accusing people who disagree with you or have questions about some of the things you say as being atheist, Protestant, Arian, Scientologist, or anything else. No one needs to agree with everything you say in order to be a faithful Catholic. Faithful Catholics can misunderstand the faith until proper catechesis is achieved - as you should well know by now. Even some saints had problems with doctrinal matters - St. Cyprian of Carthage, comes foremost to mind.
In Christ,
Michael
|
|
“The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been difficult and left untried.”
“The poets have been mysteriously silent on the subject of Cheese.”
- GK Chesterton |
|
|
|
11:10 am
October 24, 2009
|
saintstephen
Member
| | | |
| posts 357 |
|
|
Post edited 11:20 am - October 24, 2009 by saintstephen
Post edited 11:31 am - October 24, 2009 by saintstephen
Post edited 11:36 am - October 24, 2009 by saintstephen
Post edited 11:57 am - October 24, 2009 by saintstephen
Post edited 3:18 pm - October 24, 2009 by saintstephen
Michael said:
This statement is also in error.
In Christ,
Michael
Michael, You’re attitude is in error. Read the address of Pope John Paul II to the NFP Teachers here: http://www.vatican.va/holy_fat…..mber/docum
ents/hf_jp-ii_spe_19961207_nfp_en.html
ADDRESS OF HIS HOLINESS JOHN PAUL II
TO TEACHERS OF NATURAL FAMILY PLANNING
Consistory Hall
Saturday, 7 December 1996
Distinguished Ladies and Gentlemen,
Dear Brothers and Sisters.
1. Once again this year the Catholic University’s Study and Research Centre for Natural Fertility Regulation is offering a course to train teachers in the natural methods. This meeting is particularly significant, because it is being held during the 20th year of this centre’s activity, an event recently celebrated with a congress of international importance significantly entitled: “At the Sources of Life”.
On this occasion I am pleased to renew my sentiments of appreciation and esteem for the work you have done, which is better and better understood by the ecclesial community and by medical and scientific circles.
Also, your contention that I have no right to address personal sin is also in error as I am a Priest in common according to Catechism which qualifies me to direct this woman who has identified herself as Catholic and obviously at conflict with Church teaching to be morally at fault by refusing to accept what she already knows that the use of contraceptives have been condemned by the Church.
I behave morally correctly and in accord with Church Teaching.
What you do not know about me and so I will educate you that with the full authority and guidance of the Roman Catholic Church in the Diocese of Saint Paul/Minneapolis my wife and I were leaders of the Stephen’s Ministry at the parish of Saint Nicholas, Carver, Minnesota and fully authorized by the Bishop Flynn to learn and teach the NFP method which is sanctioned by the Roman Catholic Church as the “only” approved method of birth control that is considered “sinless” when used as directed. I trained at the NFP facility in New Prague which operates also with full teaching authority with the approval of the then Bishop Harry Flynn.
To further educate you concerning my position as stated is that I am trained and commissioned by the Archdiocese of Mpls/Saint Paul also under the auspice of Bishop Harry Flynn as 1. Presiding in the Absence of a Priest 2. Eucharist Minister 2. Catechist 4.Lector 5. Befriend-or 6. Adoration of Christ Co-ordinator for the parish of Saint John the Baptist and 7 A member in good standing of the Franciscans Order of Penitents taking the name of Brother Simon Peter, all of which elevate the requirement to address a professed Catholic who presents evidence to me that they are confused about their state of grace and requires me to direct that person to the Sacraments and council with a Priest.
As a professed Catholic this woman is required to resolve her concern not on a faith discussion forum but in direct consult with a Catholic Priest as her issue is entirely concerning a question of a state of sin, not a state of scientific delusion.
In any case, your judgment does not super-cede mine as I am required to live the faith according to my own conscience as you are yours. As the Saint/Doctor/Pope Gregory the Great once said, “If your own conscience does not convict you, whose will”? In this particular case with the sin of contraception and this woman’s use of it when she has full awareness of NFP as the only approved method for birth control, my conscience does not convict me, nor does yours.
May I ask what is your education, training and titles with respect to Diocese approval?
|
|
|
1:46 pm
October 24, 2009
|
ormom2
Member
| | | |
| posts 14 |
|
|
I never thought or intended that my conversation should cause anyone such distress. I appreciate the help and concern but I will not be posting here any more.
I ask you to pray for me and I will pray for you.
|
|
|
3:16 pm
October 24, 2009
|
saintstephen
Member
| | | |
| posts 357 |
|
|
Post edited 6:08 pm - October 24, 2009 by saintstephen
Post edited 6:11 pm - October 24, 2009 by saintstephen
Post edited 6:13 pm - October 24, 2009 by saintstephen
ormom2 said:
I never thought or intended that my conversation should cause anyone such distress. I appreciate the help and concern but I will not be posting here any more.
I ask you to pray for me and I will pray for you.
Dear Ormom2, Even though you choose not to make any further comments, rest assured that I began to pray for you the moment I made my first reply. Indeed it was by prayer that I answered you and while in prayer enlightened what to say.
May your Guardian Angel watch over you in every thought, word and deed as you continue to prayerfully discern the beauty and wonder of the Blessed event of Conception through Our Lord Jesus Christ who lives and reigns with the Father and the Holy Spirit now and forever. Amen
P.S. It is my turn to pray for 4 hours tonight in the Adoration Chapel at Saint John the Baptist so I hereby pledge those hours as dedicated especially for you and my prayer will be this: that waves of Holy Water wash over you to sanctify your conception according to and with all faith in Divine Providence for the life in the Spirit of all your children. Amen
P.P.S. Remember one need not be ashamed to walk from the darkness into the Light of Christ, one only need be ashamed to walk from the Light of Christ into the darkness. Please do come back to visit us again on perhaps another topic. There are many threads to discuss other than this. I would be most interested in reading your opinions on a number of topics as you sound like a very interesting person. Thank you very much for what you have contributed so far to a very educational topic although the title has been meandered away from.
|
|
|
6:03 pm
October 24, 2009
|
saintstephen
Member
| | | |
| posts 357 |
|
|
Post edited 6:14 pm - October 24, 2009 by saintstephen
Post edited 6:31 pm - October 24, 2009 by saintstephen
Post edited 7:09 pm - October 24, 2009 by saintstephen
Post edited 7:17 pm - October 24, 2009 by saintstephen
Post edited 7:23 pm - October 24, 2009 by saintstephen
Post edited 7:31 pm - October 24, 2009 by saintstephen
Post edited 7:33 pm - October 24, 2009 by saintstephen
Post edited 7:46 pm - October 24, 2009 by saintstephen
Post edited 9:05 am - October 25, 2009 by saintstephen
Post edited 9:15 am - October 25, 2009 by saintstephen
Post edited 9:28 am - October 25, 2009 by saintstephen
Michael said:
An please, quit accusing people who disagree with you or have questions about some of the things you say as being atheist, Protestant, Arian, Scientologist, or anything else.
Michael, For a minute there I was astounded you wrote that then I got it! You mean stop trying to identify those false beliefs that are contradictory to Catholic Faith? I am compelled by the Spirit to identify them Michael, it is my life’s mission, sort of like remaining faithful to the Catholic Faith. I would not want to fall into error.
You got me all wrong Michael, I thoroughly enjoy it when someone disagrees with “me”,as so does Noel and Pristinus. You have not given me your credentials as of yet to qualify you as coach and referee of all debate defining what is permitted and for what reason and in which cases. Even with outstanding credentials it is supremely presumptive that anyone in particular does not appreciate or even admire being identified by the correct title or label. I know many atheist who would not want to be identified as protestant.
If you noticed at all ormom2 had not definitively stated her religion prior to the attempted analysis I made and it is supremely pertinent to further dialog to attempt identification to make the proper clarifications or if needed dismiss certain subject matter as irrelevant to understanding and education. Further no one even in the case of an identified religious belief presume that education or even belief in any particular precept is guaranteed.
As a Special Educator licensed in the State of Minnesota and a Catechist, I have fielded literally hundreds of thousands of questions and according to my approved training, any question must be premised with accurate identification of the person in question to arrive at a correct answer, otherwise we achieve wasted breath or paper and type.
It is only when a professed Catholic writes something that disagrees with Catholic Doctrine that I get all worked up. Like Cinderella, if the shoe fits, you wear it. Think of me only as the shoe Cobbler. I try to fit everyone with the right pair of shoes.
|
|
|
8:09 pm
October 24, 2009
|
Michael
Member
| | | |
| posts 216 |
|
|
Ormom2:
Please don’t think that your question has caused distress. If my posts have offended you,plese accept my apology. Your questions have been profound and spirited - and clearly a challenge to many on these boards.
Your presence here has sparked some good conversation. Take a week to get to know the boards - then decide. You’ve still not met a lot of very good people. I do hope that you reconsider.
Please be assured of my prayers.
In Christ,
Michael
|
|
“The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been difficult and left untried.”
“The poets have been mysteriously silent on the subject of Cheese.”
- GK Chesterton |
|
|
|
10:27 pm
October 24, 2009
|
saintstephen
Member
| | | |
| posts 357 |
|
|
Post edited 9:44 am - October 25, 2009 by saintstephen
Post edited 9:49 am - October 25, 2009 by saintstephen
ormom2 said:
I never thought or intended that my conversation should cause anyone such distress. I appreciate the help and concern but I will not be posting here any more.
I ask you to pray for me and I will pray for you.
Dear Ormom2, I went to Adoration of Christ tonight for an hour to pray for any further inspiration of the Holy Spirit and found this also for you to consider from the Catechism of the Catholic Church #2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. “A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae by the very commission of the offense” and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law.
#2274 ” It is immoral to produce human embryos intended for exploitation as disposable biological material” Certain attempts to influence chromosomic or genetic inheritance are not therapeutic but are aimed a producing human beings selected according to sex or other predetermined qualities.
In your case, you do not have an embryo that is fertilized as you are chemically altering the embryonic development so as to destroy any opportunity for fertilization which is becoming very close to the definition of abortive manipulation of the embryo so the Church considers this an abomination and mortal sin.
In the final analysis, contraceptives in any method of deliver achieve “abortive” effect of the male or female “natural” body function of pro-creation. The “pill” aborts the process of ovarian development. NFP aborts nothing at all, rather it merely identifies the particular cycle of menstruation in the woman using the method and the timing of the act of sexual intercourse is entirely up to the discretion of the family who uses it which does not equate to sin as abstinence from anything is not a sin. In fact the Pope encourages abstinence in all cases of pre-marital involvements and further encourages abstinence as a sinless rationale for anyone who discerns family planning issues and health issues providing a marriage is unitive in resolve.
More for you to think about and you are quite correct this is all very disturbing when considered in the newborn life of a child of God.
|
|
|
2:18 pm
November 6, 2009
|
Michael
Member
| | | |
| posts 216 |
|
|
Saintstephen:
For a minute there I was astounded you wrote that then I got it! You mean stop trying to identify those false beliefs that are contradictory to Catholic Faith? I am compelled by the Spirit to identify them Michael, it is my life’s mission, sort of like remaining faithful to the Catholic Faith.
Of course I don’t mean that you should not try to identify error, otherwise I could not correct your serious misunderstandings, like when you say further above:
In this particular case with the sin of contraception and this woman’s use of it when she has full awareness of NFP as the only approved method for birth control…
NFP is NOT to be used as “birth control” per se, but a method of regulating the number of children when “serious” circumstances warrant. What I mean is that you cannot assume that she is in sin without objective evidence, like when I point out that you have lied…that is objective since I know that you are at least catechized enough to recognize that calumny is a sin, recognized by the Church, and that you engaged in it willfully. Ormom2 and Zenobius may have the seriousness of any sin mitigated by either knowledge or willfullness - you simply didn’t point it out and did a terrible job of trying to explain why something is wrong.
You have not given me your credentials as of yet to qualify you as coach and referee of all debate defining what is permitted and for what reason and in which cases.
I’m neither coaching nor refereeing as I am not a moderator of this site. I simply point out that you were extraordinarily presumptive in dealing with Ormom2’s questions - trying to identify her as a Scientologist without the faintest shred of evidence was not only bad form - it was rude. Identifying NFP as an approved method of contraception is also wrong on its face and only added to the confusion.
If you noticed at all ormom2 had not definitively stated her religion prior to the attempted analysis I made…
Your “analysis” was poor because she indicated that she is trying to understand what the “Church” (her capitalization) is trying to teach on a Catholic site. She is not saying that the Church is wrong-headed, she clearly indicated a desire to understand the difference between NFP and birth control. You 1)assumed that she was using “chemicals” (probably meaning pharmaceutical) and 2) were unhelpful in trying to show why birth control is wrong as taught by the Church. She didn’t care about your poor attempt at a medical explanation…she cared about why birth control was a question of faith or morals…and why NFP is approved but not another form. The answer isn’t that NFP has the papal seal of approval as birth control, but that all methods which disregard one of the ends of the marital embrace are not to be used. If you really had a clear understanding of the Church’s position, you would not be comparing NFP to the pill, but would have tried to show her that any form of contraception (trying to thwart a “good” of marriage), including NFP, is disordered.
It is only when a professed Catholic writes something that disagrees with Catholic Doctrine that I get all worked up.
As do I, when you presume to teach your unfortunate misunderstanding of the faith both to people who know better and those seriously seeking an answer. It’s one thing to argue about whether Mary actually died or not before her assumption, it is another, entirely, to constantly present to you the statements from which Church teaching come, only to have you ignore them or completely misread or misrepresent what is clearly written.
In Christ,
Michael
|
|
“The Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting; it has been difficult and left untried.”
“The poets have been mysteriously silent on the subject of Cheese.”
- GK Chesterton |
|
|
|
1:01 pm
November 7, 2009
|
saintstephen
Member
| | | |
| posts 357 |
|
|
Michael said: What I mean is that you cannot assume that she is in sin without objective evidence,
Michael, Obviously you are totally confused about the state of sin. Any person who commits an act that is grievously against the commands of God or against Church Teaching is in sin. Whether or not the person is aware that they are committing a sin can only be discerned by their own understanding of how they are accomplice to sin.
No human can dissolve or absolve another in sin except a Priest and then only when full acknowledgment of complicity with the act. In any event a sin is still a sin no matter how one looks at it.
Culpability is what you are struggling with as you usually do and have done in every post you have made so far.
|
|
Login
Search 
Forums
Topic RSS 
Group RSS 
All RSS 
