rkwright Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 (edited) I read this on Catholic.com It has an IMPRIMATUR on it... The Church also has affirmed that the illicitness of contraception is an infallible doctrine: "The Church has always taught the intrinsic evil of contraception, that is, of every marital act intentionally rendered unfruitful. This teaching is to be held as definitive and irreformable. Contraception is gravely opposed to marital chastity, it is contrary to the good of the transmission of life (the procreative.aspect of matrimony), and to the reciprocal self-giving of the spouses (the unitive.aspect of matrimony); it harms true love and denies the sovereign role of God in the transmission of human life" (Vademecum for Confessors 2:4, Feb. 12, 1997). Is the illicitness of contraception an infallible doctrine? Edit: At the end of the document it also states this... Ignoring the mountain of evidence, some maintain that the Church considers the use of contraception a matter for each married couple to decide according to their "individual conscience." Yet, nothing could be further from the truth. The Church has always maintained the historic Christian teaching that deliberate acts of contraception are always gravely sinful, which means that it is mortally sinful if done with full knowledge and deliberate consent (CCC 1857). This teaching cannot be changed and [i]has been taught by the Church infallibly.[/i] There is no way to deny the fact that the Church has always and everywhere condemned artificial contraception. [i]The matter has already been infallibly decided.[/i] The so-called "individual conscience" argument amounts to "individual disobedience." Edited March 4, 2009 by rkwright Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scardella Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 It's certainly true, but I can't comment on whether it's officially doctrine or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 It has Church teaching since Apostolic times: In the New Testament: The early Christian community upheld the sanctity of marriage, marital love, and human life. In the New Testament, the word pharmakeia appears, which some scholars link to the birth control issue. Pharmakeia denotes the mixing of potions for secretive purposes, and from Soranos and others, evidence exists of artificial birth control potions. Interestingly, pharmakeia is oftentimes translated as "sorcery" in English. In the three passages in which pharmakeia appears, other sexual sins are also condemned: lewd conduct, impurity, licentiousness, orgies, "and the like." (Confer Galatians 5:19-21.) This evidence highlights that the early Church condemned anything which violated the integrity of marital love. In the Didache: 2.1 The second commandment of the teaching means: 2.2 You shall not murder, You shall not commit adultery. You shall not corrupt boys. You shall not fornicate. You shall not steal. You shall not practice magic. You shall not use sorcery. You shall not murder a child by abortion or commit infanticide. Against the word used is pharmakeia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkwright Posted March 4, 2009 Author Share Posted March 4, 2009 Sorry maybe I should clarify my question. I have no doubt that the Church has always taught the illicitness of contraception. My question is, is it an infallible teaching? (Scardella caught on to this) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 It is an infallible doctrine <-- church scholar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StColette Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 [quote name='rkwright' post='1797372' date='Mar 4 2009, 02:54 PM']Sorry maybe I should clarify my question. I have no doubt that the Church has always taught the illicitness of contraception. My question is, is it an infallible teaching? (Scardella caught on to this)[/quote] Yes, infallible. It is taught so by the ordinary universal Magisterium. It also lies within the natural moral law, which is why it is taught as infallible by the ordinary universal Magisterium. For more info read [url="http://www.ewtn.com/library/CHRIST/CONFATAL.TXT"]http://www.ewtn.com/library/CHRIST/CONFATAL.TXT[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 ^ church scholar (that's two now.. but she's cuter so listen to her) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkwright Posted March 4, 2009 Author Share Posted March 4, 2009 ok cool I have Ott's Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, and didn't find this in there... Honestly its hard to keep track of all the infallible doctrines sometimes. When I see someone saying something is infallible I tend to wonder for a second... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Adam Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 Yes, it is an infallible doctrine because it is taught as part of the Deposit of Faith that has been given to us by Jesus Christ. Micah has an excellent lengthy explanation of the hierarchy of truth in the Church. A doctrine declared so by the Church is by its nature without error as the "gates of hell shall not prevail against the Church". Always good to have a Catechism to look stuff like this too - its the best reference tool you can own for learning what the Church teaches. No, not popular enough to be a Church scholar, but I am completing a MA in Theology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkwright Posted March 4, 2009 Author Share Posted March 4, 2009 (edited) [quote name='Brother Adam' post='1797387' date='Mar 4 2009, 03:09 PM']Always good to have a Catechism to look stuff like this too - its the best reference tool you can own for learning what the Church teaches.[/quote] Ah yes... duh... should have looked there first... Still I've seen people wiggle around the CCC so much it appears to have no real binding effect - thats a different topic... Edit: BTW where is Micah's post on the teachings?? Edited March 4, 2009 by rkwright Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatherineM Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 Most of the modern moral teachings of the church such as contraception, IVF, etc., fall under Authoritative Doctrine. This is the third level under Dogma and Definitive Doctrine. When something has stayed in Authoritative Doctrine long enough that the church magisterium can come to an agreement that it has stood the test of time, that the church isn't going to change it's mind about it, then it moves up the ladder so to speak. The problem is that the Vatican never actually comes out and says X doctrine belongs A, B, or C level, or today we are officially moving X from C to B. The exception is when the Pope sits ex cathera, and that is rare. I don't think it is on purpose to confuse everyone. I think they just feel that when they say something, it's gold, and can't figure out why all these theologians want to sit around and dissect it, and categorize it. When Humanae Vitae came out, it was based on our theology of what a marriage should be. Now that we have reaped the bitter harvest, we can all see concretely how the contraception mentality has damaged our society from the proliferation of sexually transmitted diseases, pornography, victimization of women, aging societies unable to care for themselves, and even potentially fertility problems caused by these artificial hormones getting into the biosphere. I haven't seen anything out of Rome yet on infallibility of the teaching on contraception. I would not be surprised though if something did. One of the ways besides ex cathera for infallibility to be expressed is through the acceptance of all the bishops that something is infallible. I can't think of too many bishops who would disagree, but that doesn't mean that they have all gotten together in ruled definitively. An Imprimatur just means they were able to get one to say that he believes it to be so, and thinks all the bishops agree with him. Just because they would doesn't mean they have. In my opinion, I think they should, but I just haven't seen anything yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brother Adam Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 [quote name='rkwright' post='1797397' date='Mar 4 2009, 04:18 PM']Ah yes... duh... should have looked there first... Still I've seen people wiggle around the CCC so much it appears to have no real binding effect - thats a different topic... Edit: BTW where is Micah's post on the teachings??[/quote] It still has binding force, even if people ignore it. Just because someone says they are a "prochoice Catholic" does not make it true. It makes them a "currently in mortal sin and willfully separated from the Catholic". I don't think Jesus is amused or tricked when we try to wiggle away from truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StColette Posted March 4, 2009 Share Posted March 4, 2009 [quote name='rkwright' post='1797397' date='Mar 4 2009, 03:18 PM']Edit: BTW where is Micah's post on the teachings??[/quote] [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?s=&showtopic=91142&view=findpost&p=1796171"]http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?s...t&p=1796171[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dairygirl4u2c Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 (edited) [quote name='CatherineM' post='1797398' date='Mar 4 2009, 04:22 PM']Most of the modern moral teachings of the church such as contraception, IVF, etc., fall under Authoritative Doctrine. This is the third level under Dogma and Definitive Doctrine. When something has stayed in Authoritative Doctrine long enough that the church magisterium can come to an agreement that it has stood the test of time, that the church isn't going to change it's mind about it, then it moves up the ladder so to speak. The problem is that the Vatican never actually comes out and says X doctrine belongs A, B, or C level, or today we are officially moving X from C to B. The exception is when the Pope sits ex cathera, and that is rare. I don't think it is on purpose to confuse everyone. I think they just feel that when they say something, it's gold, and can't figure out why all these theologians want to sit around and dissect it, and categorize it. When Humanae Vitae came out, it was based on our theology of what a marriage should be. Now that we have reaped the bitter harvest, we can all see concretely how the contraception mentality has damaged our society from the proliferation of sexually transmitted diseases, pornography, victimization of women, aging societies unable to care for themselves, and even potentially fertility problems caused by these artificial hormones getting into the biosphere. I haven't seen anything out of Rome yet on infallibility of the teaching on contraception. I would not be surprised though if something did. One of the ways besides ex cathera for infallibility to be expressed is through the acceptance of all the bishops that something is infallible. I can't think of too many bishops who would disagree, but that doesn't mean that they have all gotten together in ruled definitively. An Imprimatur just means they were able to get one to say that he believes it to be so, and thinks all the bishops agree with him. Just because they would doesn't mean they have. In my opinion, I think they should, but I just haven't seen anything yet.[/quote] as always, catherine is the voice of authority, reason, common sense. none of that "sure it's infallibe. what? how do i know? um, i just 'know'' i still this whole scheme though is the magic hat that they can use to say 'we never taught that...' Edited March 5, 2009 by dairygirl4u2c Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatherineM Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 [quote name='dairygirl4u2c' post='1797627' date='Mar 4 2009, 07:45 PM']as always, catherine is the voice of authority, reason, common sense. none of that "sure it's infallibe. what? how do i know? um, i just 'know'' i still this whole scheme though is the magic hat that they can use to say 'we never taught that...'[/quote] There's Infallible and there's infallible. I believe that the prohibition against contraception is infallible, there just hasn't been an official document out of Rome that says specifically it is Infallible. Not everything in the Catechism is infallible. One of the reasons that we have so many cafeteria Catholics is that there was a time in the church where we weren't afraid to make proclamations in concrete. Later when there was scholarly debate about things like the synoptic problem or evolution, we looked like we had to back pedal. Now we say "You should do this," but not "You should do this, or else." It used to be that as long as the church told you something, that was all you needed to know. You did it, or didn't do it. Now we don't want to mind until we get slapped down. Look at it this way, it gives theologians and canon lawyers things to debate about. God knows, they don't have enough stuff to talk about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now