Thoughts on this article?
Lol the line about god saying did you love not god saying did you take your temperature proved that they’re wrong. They aren’t loving. They aren’t open to gods love. That’s what they fail to see
Interesting article. The women have very valid points. Throughout history, women have always been oppressed. In the USA, women couldn’t even vote till the 1920’s.
Our Blessed Mother knows and see what’s going on.
How some catholic women. Not all.
You gotta understand the times.
It’s satanic propaganda.
When you say propaganda, are you thinking the article is inaccurate/not true spreading fallacies to make those who chose contraceptives feel better about themselves since oh so many other people are doing the same?
The factual claims may be true (I wouldn’t know), but it’s clear whose side the article is on.
Some keys to interpret this article:
It’s a gender studies. That’s mean it is an history review of women who are historically oppressed by institution and patriarchal society and religion.
So, in this article, it is the history of the Church teaching on birth control (the oppresive patriarchal religion) versus the catholic laywomen, who dissent and fight the teaching in a growing numbers, until there is “almost no statistical difference on contraceptive use between catholic and others women in America”. The goal is now reached.
And the moral, is that we must thanks the precedings gererations who liberate women of this injust teaching that cause so much harm on women and their relatives.
The photography choose to illustrate the text is significative: an happening against Church teachings and institution.
As a conclusion, it is not a neutral history. It is a militant history: it poses the prerequisites that the lector should and have to be agree with the opinion express here, that is presented as an unquestionable universal true.
Genders studies have anglo-saxon origins. Since a decade or two thoses perspectives are also uses in others cultural areas.
The good part is that it permits to explore history in forgotten perspective. The wrong is it is usually militant History.
The Church does not prohibit contraception so as to oppress women, quite the opposite, it prohibits it because it is sinful and directly against God’s design for marriage, for sex and for women.
Not so much that they fought against the prohibition as that they ignored it and used contraceptives anyway…present company excepted, of course…
Doesn’t a similar dynamic exist in all faiths and denominations? Jews who do not keep Kosher, Hindus who eat beef, SDAs who attend parties on Friday nights, etc?
I’ve heard the older generation of Catholic women say they thought Paul VI missed the boat, that the anti-contraceptive line should have been drawn at the point of conception instead of prior to the sex act. In other words, remain against terminating pregnancy once it starts, but be in favor of using artificial methods of preventing conception in the first place. Given what we know now about the negative health effects of the pill and other contraceptive devices, heck even condoms have their own downsides, it may be that Paul was on to something that we didn’t understand at the time.
What seems to be forgotten about the contraception issue is the fact that from the beginning of the Reformation onward, every Protestant denomination had the same teaching as the Catholic Church. Artificial contraception was universally condemned as being against God’s law. It was something on which Catholics and Protestant teaching agreed. That was the case for 400 years.
That began to change in 1930, with the Anglican Lambeth Conference of that year. One of the resolutions allowed for artificial contraception, for married couples, for grave reasons. That was the crack in the dike. The floodgates opened and other denominations followed. The pope responded with the encyclical Casti Connubi, reaffirming Catholic doctrine. Pope Paul VI again reaffirmed Catholic doctrine with Humanae Vitae.
But the contraceptive floodgates were opened, and the contraceptive culture followed, enabling the sexual revolution that followed, bringing sexual chaos upon society.
Interestingly many conservative Protestant believers are increasingly opposed to contraception and Christians of all demoninations are slowly returning to the view that it is a sin.
It is a little simplification…
Not all the “older generation” favor contraception versus a younger one who tend to agree.
A part of the generation that were is their procreative years in the end of 1960’s opposed the Doctrine…
And a small part of the generation that is actually in their procreative years today followed the Church Doctrine, among the most engaged. So the balance of ideas are in favor of the doctrine in the faithfull opinions. (But not within all the Church that include some people who are just baptisted and married in Church).
In reality, if we look at the statistics clearly, there increasively is more and more contraceptive usage among the society, including the Catholics.
And today, in some european areas (such as in France), there is an increase in practice in naturals methods, and a high criticism and desaffection of hormonal methods, it is out religious reasons, and even without any pro-life morality. The exigence of familiy planning stay the same. For eg, the media have highly spoken of the 37 abortions in a stockholm hospital in a few mounths among women who used the application Natural Cycles…
True, secularism is everywhere and a general tend…
But sexuality, procreation and marriage are sensible topics, who tend to not deserve the same treatments as others obligations, as it is seen as something that can be “hidden”, as a privacy use versus eating in public during the Ramadan for eg…
Like the unchaste man in the Old Testament that believe that nobody can see him, when he is hidden by walls… except that God see all…
I will not said all denominations, because there is a general tend to follow the path open by general society among mainline protestants in US, for eg, “gay marriage”.
But the beliefs of some more conservative Protestant, can be very different, as you point truly.
And 10 years ago, the light was directed to thoses quiverfull Christians, and some leaders publically express their doubts on the social consequences of contraception…
It seems to me, that those people are in crisis identity, as things moove quickly amon evangelicals circles, but certainely always exists.
YUP. Even Martin Luther himself was strictly against contraception.
Protestantism today is not Protestantism from centuries ago.
Catholicism today is still Catholicism from centuries ago.
This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.