Official: Vatican Justifies Contraception



If "practical circuмstances" make “the choice to generate irresponsible”, one may resort to contraceptive techniques, Prelate [color=var(--link-fg, #1a73e8)]Gilfredo Marengo[/iurl]writes in Theological Ethics of Life, a book collecting talks giving at a conference organised by the Pontifical Academy "for Life" and published July 1 by the Libreria Editrice Vaticana, the Vatican's official publishing house.

Lima's Pachamama-Archbishop [color=var(--link-fg, #1a73e8)]Carlos Castillo[/color] writes in his contribution that “it is not healthy for mankind to always have 'swords of Damocles,' threatening damnation, whenever norms are neglected” referring to artificial methods of contraception, not to the Roman Rite which Francis tries to damn.

Contraception propagandist [color=var(--link-fg, #1a73e8)]Father Maurizio Chiodi[/color] proposes an “openness” to “medically assisted procreation” [artificial insemination] for married couples while [still] excluding surrogacy.

The Academy’s head, Archbishop Vincenzo Paglia, told VaticanNews.va (June 30) that the book is opening a "dialogue" between different "opinions." Why is the Vatican not "open" for a "dialogue" regarding the failures of Vatican II, the superiority of the Roman Rite and the need of conversion?

Paglia added that Francis was informed of every step and encouraged the project.

#newsBlykjvnrjk




[/font][/size][/color]

I haven't gone to the original link but he refers to "contraceptive techniques" ... which I could see being a reference to NFP rather than to actual artificial contraceptives.  In that case, at least he's being honest that NFP is in fact a Catholic contraceptive ... as I have referred to it before.

The only circuмstances I can think of, where one might even remotely be able to justify it, is if a woman is married to a brute of a man, who insists upon an unjust fulfillment of the "marriage debt" --- let's say they already have six children, he spends up his paycheck on gambling and booze, and comes home drunk and libidinous (assuming both things can coexist) and insisting on sex --- and she is not able to resist without grave harm (or worse) coming to her and her family.  In essence, she is being raped, and both the husband and his seed are unjust aggressors.  I welcome responses, and in any event, I submit myself to the traditional teachings of the Church on this matter, assuming such a casuistry has ever been done.

Failing this, then both the wife and the husband have free will, and nobody ever has to have sex, otherwise, it's a species of rape, as I noted above.  They don't have to, they just want to, but they don't want the consequences.  IOW, they want to use each other to masturbate.  (What else would you call it?)

And contraceptives fail.  What then?

Nobody ever got pregnant by practicing abstinence.

This thread regards mostly Fr. Couture, but also others.  You can find a dozen other threads on CI:

https://www.cathinfo.com/sspx-resistance-news/sspx-expanding-nfp/15/

I just re-watched his comments, must have slipped my mind.  They are caving to the Modern world on this as they have in so many other areas.  Maybe when he was speaking about younger generations of priests being not as strong as the older ones, he really meant that they weren't as strong in the faith.

I love how he blamed inconsiderate husbands/fathers and cited one example, of the man who worked 2 jobs, from 6AM to 12AM as being "selfish".  I'm sure he enjoyed working those long hours.  Wife just abandoned the family because of "nervous breakdown".  I've seen more and more women in GENERAL becoming increasingly filled with anxiety and it has nothing to do with the number of children, but rather with what society has become.  Plenty of single women without children are nervous and depressed basket cases.  In any event, what number would have prevented this woman from having the break-down, instead of 13, maybe 12?, how about 10?, or would it be 3, where 10 of those children should have been eliminated?  He also pretends that loss of faith is somehow exclusive to large families.  I've seen more of that, quite frankly, in the smaller families, with 1 or 2 children, than in the larger ones.  So his example is completely anecdotal and unscientific.

That's aside from the "contraceptive mentality" he's pushing ... which, despite what he insinuated, was rejected by Archbishop Lefebvre.  Formal intent is the same whether you use artificial or natural contraception.  I love how it's contraception only when "artificial" but gets euphemized into "family planning" (an active of virtue and prudence) when it's "natural".  In both cases, the intent is the same, to be able to have marital relations while positively excluding the primary end of those relations.

No surprise. Bergoglio's Vatican is Lutheran at best.

.
I have to wonder if this priest has ever even been to a trad chapel. It only takes a couple of weeks in any trad chapel in existence to figure out that the more children a mother has, the more happy, content, emotionally balanced, and generally competent she is. On the contrary, the women who are neurotic, have emotional disorders, or are morally lax are the ones who have 2-3 children.

Anyone can see this in any trad family, about 99% of the time. The same is true about the children. The more children a family has, the better people those children are, and the reverse is true. This again can easily be observed just about everywhere.

And I don't think this is a coincidence. Of course someone who is living their vocation in the right spirit is going to be more well-adjusted than someone who sees their vocation in life as an unpleasant burden they're trying to avoid as much as possible.

Right.  He used the one story (totally anecdotal) about the mother of 13 who had a breakdown as if it proved something.  Most of the women I've heard of having breakdowns were not even married.

Probably an insult to Lutheranism.

That too.

So would this be tantamount to the Vatican dropping its prohibition on contraception since it comes from them?

Rephrased.