It is simply a fact that you are not competent to interpret the Vademecum.
As I say priests trained in the Vademecum simply do not understand it how you want them to do nor do they do what you want them to. You are not in the real world on this matter. If you cannot accept my testimony at least explore the new paths to truth for yourself I have hopefully indicated … if you can even accept that.
It is simply a fact that you are not competent to interpret the Vademecum.
When I see the Church approve of these so called “allowances”, then I will accept that practice. As it is, I have been told by my diocese, that there are no exceptions for priests to condone or allow couples to do so, in the sense that they can rightly receive both absolution, or Holy Communion.
I believe you are dealing with people who think they can manipulate a law with which they are seriously mistaken.
This is related to a moral law, not a Canon law.
Please, it takes two to knowingly engage in a loving, intimate contracepted act of sexual union.
Knowing is not willing… and there is damage to Matrimonial love in contracepted sex.
The one who does not will, or participate in contracepting, is not guilty of contracepting.
Cooperation in Sin - Contraception
I don’t know how having sex with a spouse that you know is contracepting is not participating in the sin.
I agree that it’s a very difficult dilemma.
I don’t claim to be representing a decision of the Church on this matter. I was rather forced into this question rather unfairly.
However, under circumstances where the husband has done everything in his power to both avoid contraception and guide his wife from doing, and yet she persists, then how can he be guilty of it?
Why can’t he refuse relations?
Didn’t say he cant… but does he have to?
I understand from your previous post that this is personal for you and I have heard otherwise, but I personally don’t see how he is not morally obligated to refuse. One way of participating in sin is cooperation, and I don’t see how having sex with a spouse that you know is using contraception is not cooperating in the sin. Refusing relations may even encourage them to stop contracepting.
If someone can explain how having sex with a spouse that you know is contracepting is not cooperating in the sin I will concede the point.
But this is your opinion too. And I can see your position, and respect it.
But it really has little to do with the issue I was addressing. And this scenerio was an attempt at trapping me.
Either way, the Church does NOT allow couples to contracept, and receive absolution and Communion during these times. That much is stated in the document which BlackFriar referred to. I was then told I just don’t understand it. That is ridiculous dialogue and fellowship. The document is quite clear. To conclude the opposite of what it states is wrong.
I would like to hear one priest, or one Bishop publicly profess that couples are allowed to contracept (for the purpose of contracepting) and be able to receive Sacraments (under ANY circumstances!). I believe many do (maybe not many Bishops), in secret, but not openly.
You weren’t trapped. The issue is with the imprecision of the language you used to describe the events.
The Church does not advise or “authorise” anyone to sin [any sin, of any kind]. Absolution requires genuine repentance and a resolve to try not to sin again.
Do you believe those who contracept can receive Communion?
The Church cannot “allow” this to happen.
I don’t mean by force, but by approval and consent.
Those who have committed mortal sin are to refrain from Communion. It is not possible to answer the question you put because there is insufficient information to reasonably judge whether mortal sin was committed by the person in question.
According to your ideal, everyone should be allowed to receive Communion, since no one can know with absolute k owledge who is has mortal sin.
Those who know what is right to do, but do not do it are not to receive Communion.
The couples in question are those who are suppose to be admonished by the Church (an act of mercy).
The confessor is bound to admonish penitents regarding objectively grave transgressions of God’s law and to ensure that they truly desire absolution and God’s pardon with the resolution to re-examine and correct their behaviour. Frequent relapse into sins of contraception does not in itself constitute a motive for denying absolution; absolution cannot be imparted, however, in the absence of sufficient repentance or of the resolution not to fall again into sin.
Those who are not offered absolution, after being admonished are not to receive Communion.
Actually, what is continually happening is that “Catholics” commit sin and then seek to diminish their culpability by feigning ignorance or some accommodation of “not really act fault.”
It is understandable that the Church Teaches against fornication, adultery, contraception, divorce, remarriage, abortion… yet, we are constantly hearing about is “xyz” a sin; it’s like those toddlers that ask the same question from all the adults and older children around them… even when they continue to get the same answer.
In the case of a spouse that contracepts in defiance of the Church and the husband, she is not only sinning by contraception but she is also lying to the husband and rejecting the Church’s Teaching that Catholics must be open to life.
Yet, as politicians, they mesh everything into liberty and conscience… and the old… ‘not really a sin.’
Bollocks. I expressed no such idea - I just expressed the law of the Church (Can 916) which applies to persons “conscious of grave sin”.
The remainder of your post appears to be directed at what others have said rather than at me. But I will comment that the context of what you have written (quoted?) is a penitent confessing sin.
They may well, and somewhere in their conscience, if they care to look, they will confront this. It does not change the validity of what I have said here.
You realize this whole conversation developed from BlackFriar’s claim that under VADEMECUM FOR CONFESSORS (http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/family/documents/rc_pc_family_doc_12021997_vademecum_en.html) couples are “allowed” to use contraception???
Do you care to address this claim?
I have a feeling you would not conclude what he (or the priests and academics he also claims support by) has.
It began in post #'s 50 and 55
I have not reviewed BF’s argument but I would draw your attention to Clause 13 of the document. Here we have a case where using casual language one might say “the couple used contraception”, yet we can’t say “the couple sinned”. The unwilling spouse might thus be advised by a confessor that to “go along” with the contraception of the other spouse, subject to conditions given [eg. Cl 13 (3)], is not sinful on their part (and thus they may have nothing to be forgiven for).
Still don’t know how we could possibly conclude, from any of the document, that there are exceptions where the Church allows couples to use contraception.
Not only is it not there, but it states the complete opposite! Couples are not to receive absolution unless the repent or resolve not to fall back into sin.
The very separate issue of one spouse not wanting to contracept, while the other is using contraceptives, still does not “allow” anyone to use contraception.
And the fact that confessors who are engaging with penitents, who have not dealt with their issues for many years and are in a generally bad state, have to work carefully and patiently about leading them to understanding Church Teaching, certainly does not mean “allow” to use contraception and receive Holy Communion.
Confessor are bound to admonish grave sin, and not administer absolution without repentance!
It’s clear as day! And thank God we don’t need a theological degree to see clearly!