path: root/drafts/on_humanae_vitae.rst

On Humanae Vitae
################

:date: ""
:status: draft
:category: faith
:tags: cultural wars, Catholics, infallibility, disqus

View in discussion
Discussion on First Things 35 comments
Humanae Vitae | Peter M. J. Stravinskas
mcepl
mcepl pt8685 6 days ago

Which of course is completely irrelevant. When I am talking about NFP I don't mean the fact that ovulating woman are less likely (on unable?) to conceive. I am talking about NFP as a method to find out when that moment is. And in that aspect I found NFP as completely unreliable.
Edit
View in discussion
mcepl
mcepl pt8685 16 days ago

Yeah, that’s a good one! I will surely remember it.

Fortunately for us, my wife’s cycle used to be very regular. We could (and we did for couple of years) do just counting days as our contraceptive technique, because we knew always pretty surely where we are in the cycle. We have tried to do NFP as well, but even though we knew what actually is going on in her body we were never able to do any head and toes from temperatures or any physical signs on her body (I don’t want to get into too much gory details here). I was strictly against the Pill then, not because of the false dichotomy between NFP and contraception, but because I was worried to mix with my wife’s body while we still hoped to have more children, so I am very glad the days counting worked for us. What would we do with my wife’s cycle being less reliable, I don’t know, and I am very glad I didn’t have to deal with it. But certainly the last thing in the world would be to trust NFP.
2
Edit
View in discussion
mcepl
mcepl 18 days ago

Could you please explain me how from your nonsensical babble on the verse about circumcision it follows that my wife should endanger her health (she has MS, so further pregnancy could very well lead to another attack), why my friend should endanger her marriage (their fourth child is severely disabled so taking care of her stretches the family to its limits)? Or is all your talk about sanctity of sex just nonsense and you really believe that all should lead the only really truly holy celibate life as you? I really believe that exactly such irresponsible nonsense leads to complete loss of credibility of the Catholics in any discussion on the contraception. Yes, I am angry, because of this nonsense we have lost all Catholics from the debate about the real issues of life into this cesspit of ignorance. Not mentioning that I actually love my wife and care about her more than about your infallibility.
3
Edit
View in discussion
Discussion on Echo24.cz 43 comments
Zajatci virtuality. Hloupý lidovec, Hitler a morální policisté
mcepl
mcepl Stanislav Cerman 9 days ago

Zkuste si přečíst ještě jednou co jsem napsal. Nevím, jak jinak odpovědět na něco co jsem opravdu nenapsal. Hint: zkuste třeba začít u toho zaměstnavatele.
Edit
View in discussion
mcepl
mcepl Stanislav Cerman 9 days ago

Předpokládám, že to je házení perel sviním, ale mezi panem Kalendou a Vašim nadáváním na komunisty vidím několik drobných rozdílů: pan Kalenda není jenom tak někdo, ale politik reprezentující stranu, která se tváří jako slušná; a jako taková ho má naprosto všechny práva na světě vyhodit ho ze svých řad, protože ji dělá ostudu. KDÚ jsem volil a pokud by s ním okamžitě nevyrazili futro, tak bych o jejich slušnosti velice vážně zapochyboval.

Pokud Vám to nepřipadne správné, tak zkuste veřejně říkat nebo udělat něco co může silně poškodit Vašeho zaměstnavatele. Pak nám sdělte co bude následovat.

Nevím, jestli to myslel vážně (a popravdě řečeno mě to ani moc nezajímá), ale jako politik se dal do kšeftu s image a pokud to nevěděl,
tak v politice nemá co dělat.

Další rozdíl je v tom, že pravděpodobně se mu nestane nic dalšího než že odejde z politiky (alespoň doufám, že to udělá, a neskončí u někoho jiného), najde si nějaké poctivé zaměstnání, a bude alespoň svobodný říkat kde chce co chce.
Edit
View in discussion
Discussion on First Things 655 comments
Gay Marriage and Religious Freedom | R. R. Reno
mcepl
mcepl 15 days ago

BTW, I have to also mention this ... I have incredibly strong feeling that before we can talk about that speck of the tax non-exemption, there is a log all believers should take care of. What about that?

Before we can cry how we have God-given right of being tax exempt (we don't), we should probably acknowledge a terrible abuse which does happen with this right. I have no clue what to do about it, but it seems a bit hypocritical not to mention it.
Edit
View in discussion
mcepl
mcepl a month ago

I am afraid the author puts the question in a wrong order. It should not be "Why to support religious non-profit organizations?" (we should support them of course), but "Why not to suppport non-religious NGOs?". And I don't think he gives a good answer on the latter.
5
Edit
View in discussion
Discussion on First Things 129 comments
The Deeper Issue at the Synod | George Weigel
mcepl
mcepl Ford 18 days ago

So, condoms are permitted? Awesome!
Edit
View in discussion
mcepl
mcepl Michael C 20 days ago

I won't give you chapter and verse, but get yourself into Desert Fathers or some more ascetic literature and you'll get that. However, exact quarrel about this was not the point of what I wanted to say.
Edit
View in discussion
mcepl
mcepl Michael C 20 days ago

I will happily let you, Catholics, to fight this among yourselves. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=humane+vi... and you will find hundreds of opinions (including some of them from seemingly quite authoritative authors). Having no interest in getting into that debate myself too much, let me stand aside.

Besides, somebody here corrected me that my problem is not that much papal infallibility as much as infallibility of magisterium.
1
Edit
View in discussion
mcepl
mcepl LeoXIII 21 days ago

Let me just state that I have read your post, it doesn't make any sense to me, and unfortunately I don’t have time to reply to it now.

Be well!
Edit
View in discussion
mcepl
mcepl Dennis Neylon 22 days ago

Medicine is denying the will of God, until the middle ages many in Christendom agreed with this. How dare you stop somebody from dying when the God decided that one should die?

What I am trying to say is that with this silly absolutes, you won't get far in the discussion. And, BTW, the argument about stopping a wife from conceiving as against the will of God doesn’t seem to me that much different.
2
Edit
View in discussion
mcepl
mcepl Iowa_Lawyer 22 days ago

Thank you for very thoughtful and concise reply. Could you elaborate, please? Perhaps I am not as ignorant as you try to make me?
Edit
View in discussion
mcepl
mcepl 22 days ago

I completely agree that behind Humane Vitae lurks a way deeper issue and that is the infallibility of pope/magisterium. I am not a Catholic myself (and even less I am a theologian), but I believe that the papal infallibility is one of the biggest problems for the credibility of the Church in the Western world. Anyway, as I said I am not a Catholic so the issue of papal infallibility (and confused misunderstanding of the distinction between the Universal and Roman-Catholic Church, which I am afraid is one of the sources of the papal infallibility) are not much interest of me.

What is the interest and what I see as the very evil fruit of Humane Vitae is that by pushing the official Catholic doctrine to the indefensible corner and discarding any credibility of Catholics to talk on the reproductive issue for any non-Catholic, there is now missing voice in the discussion. I do believe that abortion is a murder, and I do believe (and I did promise in my marriage vows), that accepting children God gives us is an inseparable part of the marriage. However, neither of these positions is absolute (e.g., even the civil law knows that there are situations when killing of other person is legitimate; isn't the situation when the life and health of the mother is in danger one of these?) and I believe there is need for continuous discussion on the topic. I would love to have voice of conservative Catholics participate in such discussion. Unfortunately, they are mostly silenced because of the lost credibility and inability to formulate any other opinion than blindly recite Humane Vitae’s dogmatic statements.

I would be grateful for HV to be one voice in the discussion, but it seems obvious that some of its statements turned out to be too extreme and they should be moderated or elaborated. Unfortunately they cannot be because popes consider themselves to be better than other humans and so they cannot say “I am sorry, this was a bit off” about some deeds of their predecessors. Enough, I am starting to be too aggressive.
2

-----------------

View in discussion
Discussion on First Things 7 comments
Luther Reading Challenge | Sarah Hinlicky Wilson
mcepl
mcepl a month ago

Just when talking about Luther I have to mention http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/039... … one of the five books which changed most my life.
Edit
View in discussion


-------------------------

Discussion on Catholic Authenticity 26 comments
My Libido: A Mosquito
mcepl
mcepl James 2 months ago

Well, for one “asexual” is for the other one gifted with the gift of celibacy (1 Corinthians 7:7-9). And of course, it is just right and proper if every Christians follows his/her calling. However, I have problems (yes, I am a Protestant) when the calling is exchanged with the office. E.g., it is my opinion that John Wesley (the great English leader of the Methodist revival in the 18th century) had a gift of celibacy, because he came rationally to the conclusion that a pastor should give an example to his parishioners and be married (although he lived for many many years without a significant problems and his ministry schedule could be an example for 1Co 7:32b how he was incapable of maitaining a good married relationship). Although I don't think he ever did anything immoral, I am also afraid that his marriage was more or less disaster. And of course, I am afraid, that the similar mistake (just in the other direction) is a case for many Catholic priests.
Edit
View in discussion
mcepl
mcepl captcrisis 2 months ago

Well, Augustine had (especially around sexuality) his own issues, what I meant was that Bible is here remarkably egalitarian ... “husband does not have authority over his own body”.
Edit
View in discussion
mcepl
mcepl 2 months ago

> I was complaining to God about what a lustful, brutish, inconsiderate lout he was

Yes, I have to admit that being a guy with similar low libido (actually, as a former lawyer there are moments when I can very much prefer exactly Lex Visigothorum to my wife ;)) I can understand the author's cited feelings. Except, the Bible has something else to say about this:

> For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. Do not deprive one another ... [exceptions follow]

So much for the Paul's supposed preference for celibacy!

Which are exactly the moments, when I would rather throw the Holy Bible out of the window. Choosing the obedience to it may be quite difficult at times.
1
Edit

----------------

View in discussion
Discussion on First Things 74 comments
Liberal Limits—and Our Opportunity | Brandon McGinley
mcepl
mcepl naturgesetz 2 months ago

Exactly, I am not an American myself (only have a law degree from US university), so I may not have facts correct, but from the legal point of view the abandonment of the US Constitution (which requires a Constitutional Amendment for the large scale changes of constitution) started somewhere with FDR ("general welfare" was understood as a right to ignore all limits on the executive power; show me in the Constitution's enumerated powers place for FCC, SEC, etc.?) or with Brown v. Board of Education (however I like its holding, of course, it was going around the legislative process as well). Roe v. Wade and similar disasters just walked on the path already prepared.

Isn't strange that the last amendment with the serious implications of the life of ordinary people was 19th (that's 1920)?
2
Edit

----------------

Discussion on First Things 60 comments
The Church and the “New Normal” | George Weigel
mcepl
mcepl 2 months ago

Does

> But too much of the Church’s clerical and lay leadership lost its nerve after Humanae Vitae.

mean that you are sorry for too much energy spent on defending this encyclical? That would be an interesting thought, which I would tend to agree with.
2
Edit

----------------

Discussion on First Things 10 comments
Liberalism and the Church | David T. Koyzis
mcepl
mcepl 3 months ago

I don’t think you are quoting Locke in the right context. In his essay on understanding he explicitly tried to look at the religion from the political/legal point of view, and he expressly didn't want to distinguish between Christianity and Islam or other religions, and he didn't want to make a theological statement. From such point of view I believe it is perfectly legitimate to consider all religions only as a civic associations, ignoring their revealed part.

Just to the contrary there is a strange link between political liberalism of the nineteenth century and rather personal faith. Lord Acton seems to me for example way more involved in his faith than for example Burke (as much as I admire his political thoughts), who quite passionately disliked all kinds of Christian enthusiasm, because religion was for him mainly bearer of tradition (see his comments on Methodism).