God's commands based in natural law (like the Ten Commandments) are eternal and eternally binding. Pastoral commands were provisional, as pastoral commands are provisional today.
But we know they do not all apply, because of Jesus Christ.
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven." " (Matthew 5:17-20)
Do you honestly believe people who do not want children should have them?
If they do not want children, they should not get married. The primary purpose of marriage is the begetting and raising of children. For Christians, the primary purpose of marriage is the begetting of children, their raising, and their preparation for heaven.
People who get married should accept the fruit of intercourse. No Christian denomination accepted artificial means of birth control until 1930, when the Lambeth Conference accepted it for hardship cases.
Additionally, consider that most couples that have "accidents" are most often pleasantly surprised. Certainly, there are some parents who may never want their children, but the suffering that these children endure can be used by God for His purposes.
Because that would be a horrible thing--to have children only because other people think you should.
See above. People who get married should accept the resulting children. Artificial contraception is the reproductive equivalent of binging and purging.
When you really think about it, it would actually be immoral: wrong to do to the child, wrong to do to oneself, wrong to do to anyone else it might affect, and thus wrong to do in God's sight.
Why immoral? Again, let's assume that the parents do not want their children even after birth. The children will certainly suffer as a result. But God can use this suffering for His ends, to bring a greater good.
Using an evil means (artificial contraception) to justify a questionable good (children not being born to parents who don't want them) is immoral.
There are many purposes for marriage. Procreation is indeed one of them. But I don't believe it's a mandate.
There are three natural purposes of marriage that we can discern using reason alone: procreation, the mutual care of the spouses, and the channeling of the sex drive.
If procreation is removed from the definition of marriage, the remaining purposes are mutual care and the channeling of the sex drive, ends that can be realized by other means. This definition strips marriage of its unique and essential feature. Consider that this definition can be applied equally to homosexuals.
I understand conservative Catholics may feel differently, and that's fine.
My argument is a natural law argument, so it applies not only to Catholics, but to all Christians, and even all people.
The sacramental nature of marriage is unique to Christianity.
God's commands based in natural law (like the Ten Commandments) are eternal and eternally binding. Pastoral commands were provisional, as pastoral commands are provisional today.
I agree the Moral Law (part of which is "Do not murder", for instance) is eternal. I'm not sure what you mean by pastoral commands. Are those things taught by church leaders that are not taken from the Bible?
"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished...."
Excellent Scripture selection, but I'm not sure what your point is. Yes, Jesus has fulfilled the Law, in every meaning of the word, because He was and is the only perfect person to have walked this earth.
Again, because of Christ, we do not live under the Old Testament law anymore:
In the same way, after the supper [Jesus] took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you."- Luke 22:20
I just read through the rest of your post and think we will just have to disagree that only people who want children should get married.
And I don't want to offend you, because I like you and think you've very well-intentioned, but such a view is a Catholic viewpoint. I'm fairly sure most Protestants do not share that belief. And we read our Bibles too.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't Catholics allowed to use the rhythm method of birth control? Why is that? It's still birth control, and it still means they would be trying to not have a baby.
And I remember what Dr. Keyes said in his argument against homosexual marriage. Here's a snippet:
"KEYES: No, you don't understand the difference between incident and essence. Homosexuals are essentially incapable of procreation. They cannot mate. They are not made to do so. Therefore the idea of marriage for two such individuals is an absurdity."
I thought it was interesting that throughout the interview he made sure to emphasize the *capability* of procreation rather than the actual execution of it.
To my knowledge, Keyes has never made any public statements directly addressing the issue of birth control, which I find interesting since he has taken such bold, righteous stands against abortion and homosexual marriage. He's obviously not spoken about birth control on purpose, and the only reason that seems to make any sense is that his beliefs on the subject are somehow different from yours.