Posted on 12/12/2013 4:07:04 PM PST by matthewrobertolson
The Church strongly opposes contraception, in keeping with the historical position of Christianity. Openness to procreating life is one of the defining characteristics of marriage, which is primarily what makes homosexual "marriage" impossible. The Church also upholds the life-long commitment that is marriage. Contrast the Church's beautiful teachings on all of this against the positions of Protestantism -- those of Anglicanism, in particular.
Anglicans once agreed with the Church on these subjects, up until the 1930 Lambeth Conference that approved contraception in some cases (which, of course, had a snowball effect). Here's the 15th resolution from the Conference:
"Where there is clearly felt moral obligation to limit or avoid parenthood, the method must be decided on Christian principles. The primary and obvious method is complete abstinence from intercourse (as far as may be necessary) in a life of discipline and self-control lived in the power of the Holy Spirit. Nevertheless in those cases where there is such a clearly felt moral obligation to limit or avoid parenthood, and where there is a morally sound reason for avoiding complete abstinence, the Conference agrees that other methods may be used, provided that this is done in the light of the same Christian principles. The Conference records its strong condemnation of the use of any methods of conception control from motives of selfishness, luxury, or mere convenience."There were still some restrictions, obviously, but since then, all practical barriers to contraception have fallen. That decision of that Conference is interesting, especially considering that it stated that "the primary purpose for which marriage exists is the procreation of children" in its 13th resolution and that "the duty of parenthood [is] the glory of married life" in its 14th resolution.
The Episcopal "Church" of the USA (the official American branch of Anglicanism) also now blesses homosexual relationships. (See their liturgy for it here.) The "Church" of England recently announced that it will follow the same route.
But what must be kept in mind is that, in 1991, the ECUSA officially barred homosexual couples from having sexual relations:
"..the 70th General Convention of the Episcopal Church affirms that the teaching of the Episcopal Church is that physical sexual expression is appropriate only within the lifelong monogamous 'union of husband and wife in heart, body, and mind' 'intended by God for their mutual joy; for the help and comfort given one another in prosperity and adversity and, when it is God's will, for the procreation of children and their nurture in the knowledge and love of the Lord' as set forth in the Book of Common Prayer" [link]And the 1930 Lambeth Conference addressed the subject, as well:
"[The Conference] reaffirms 'as our Lord's principle and standard of marriage a life-long and indissoluble union, for better or worse, of one man with one woman, to the exclusion of all others on either side, and calls on all Christian people to maintain and bear witness to this standard.'" [from Resolution 11]So, if openness to life is not required in marriage (which the acceptance of contraception would seem to indicate), then why are same-sex couples in the ECUSA mandated to practice sexual abstinence? And if it is required, then why are contraception and homosexual relationships now endorsed?
And I must say that I find it laughable (but not at all surprising) that Anglicanism, which was founded by a king that just wanted a few divorces, is so inconsistent on the subject of divorce, too. Its leaders have taught that marriage is to be a "life-long union" (Resolution 114 of the 1958 LC) and "no husband or wife has the right to contemplate even legal separation until every opportunity of reconciliation and forgiveness has been exhausted" (Resolution 116 of the 1958 LC), yet divorce and "remarriage" are now totally accepted.
The Anglican positions on marriage and sexuality are nonsensical. Would not God's true Church be more consistent? If Anglicans really want to "secure a better education for the clergy in moral theology" (Resolution 12 of the 1930 LC), then they should tell them to become Catholic.
----------
“Follow” me on Twitter, “Like” Answering Protestants on Facebook, Add Answering Protestants to your Circles on Google+, and “Subscribe” to my YouTube apologetic videos.
----------
Judas betrays Christ with a kiss.
The audacity of that comment is astounding.
Not really, the Christian thing to do is pray for all lost souls (protestants, pagans etc...) to come to Jesus in His Church, through His sacraments.
You go right ahead and hang on to that cult like thinking. Just remember that when you hear of lots of people missing it wasn’t aliens.
Interesting, isn’t it, that when non-Catholics make some comment questioning a Catholic’s salvation, we’re immediately regaled with *Judge not lest ye be judged* and yet when they do it, it’s with spiritual condescension and pride that’s palpable.
Tell me, do you ever use antibiotics when you get an infection? Do you keep some type of defensive weapon in your home in case someone breaks in and threatens your family? Why not leave THAT all up to God?
I fully understand WHY Catholics make a big deal out of this issue. It's not all that different than the big deal they make over the "Eucharist". It is all an attempt to assert superiority of rules concerning faith and morals and to presume the Roman Catholic Church - because it claims this superior position (according to it) - must be the only, true church of Jesus Christ. All the foibles, atrocities, abuses, crimes, perversion of the Gospel and demands for full and complete obedience in ALL things gets swept under the rug like some side show in a carnival.
It's quite telling the attacks coming from you people when the basic question about hypocrisy in this one area CANNOT be answered honestly. Quite telling indeed!
Well said!
I’ve often mentioned the double mindedness of Catholics. It’s not difficult to ascertain where their allegiance lies.
Thanks for proving my point once again! Nobody is allowed to question the Catholic church, not on ANYTHING. If you ever do, then you must be a bigot, heretic, anti-catholic hater. That's the kind of spiritual blindness which is the saddest sight indeed!
NFP verses other forms of birth control is simply another example of the double mindedness of Catholic teaching. It’s a carnal explanation to somehow get around what the church has added to scripture as a rule. The hypocrisy is obvious to anyone willing to be honest with themselves.
Mind control at it’s finest, reinforced with threats of eternal damnation for disagreeing with the estalished hierarchy.
All cults do the same.
Mormons are also big on labeling anyone who points out the truth of Mormon history to someone as a *liar* or a *bigot*, or a *hater*.
And the former Mormons who know their church history use their own documents to prove their points, and they spiritual blindness is so deep that the Mormons still can’t see the truth.
And in typical fashion, the RC knee jerk reaction to someone pointing out the hypocrisy of their church is to label them as a *heretic* and make innuendos about their moral character.
As if Catholics hold the moral high ground.
One looks at their clergy is enough to dispel THAT rumor, much less the lifestyle of the average Joe Catholic.
We former Catholics know better. They’re not fooling anyone but themselves.
**NFP verses**
Is this a new poem about Natural Family Planning with many verses? LOL!
My failing to catch that spelling error did give you that chance to exhibit your need for superiority so count you blessings.
I thought it was funny. Lighten up.
Good points.
Which proves vasectomies don’t work.
Natural Family Planning is far removed from the old rhythm method. Please read up on it. (For child bearing children in your family!)
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.