Author Topic: Raoul and NFP: Why? (Read 6451 times)

Matthew · « **on:** October 25, 2009, 07:30:15 PM »

First of all, I would like to point out that the "NFP" thread is exactly what I like to see on CathInfo. We have reasoned discussion, and we're all trying to get to the bottom of important issues.

Of course, we have this Crisis in the Church which means that certain issues will never be resolved definitively -- for example, anything that only existed in the last 10, 20, or 40 years would have existed only after Vatican II. So the Rome of neo-Modernist tendencies will not act as it should -- for example, the Church used to have an Index of forbidden books. Reading books on the Index was sinful. Would a truly Catholic Rome put most movies/TV shows on the Index? You bet. But since they haven't, you have a constant debate about TV.

When I read Raoul's thread on NFP, a few questions popped into my mind:

1. Why Raoul, and why this topic? Why is a single man spending dozens (hundreds?) of hours on an issue that affects only those in the married state.

2. Even though he's not being paid to do this, it's not part of his Duty of State (as it would be for a Priest), and he's not pursuing a degree in that area?

3. Has Raoul considered that many priests, including holy ones, have thought about these same issues and not come to the same radical conclusions as he? Does that not raise red flags for him? Or is he quick to humbly accept the fact that he is a genius groundbreaking pioneer in the Traditional movement? (Ok, that was a bit of a stretch)

4. Does Raoul really think that NFP is the central issue, bar none, facing the Traditional Catholic world? That would mean that if everyone stopped using NFP, the world would improve more than if any other one thing was done. But wouldn't all those kids end up in public school, injected with poisons (vaccinated) and sent to die in Illuminati-contrived wars overseas? How can "more Catholics", in itself, be the solution? By itself, it is nothing. Especially if all those Catholics end up in hell because of more serious issues, including spiritual ones, in the world today.

5. Does he realize the contradiction between his own personal stance ("I'm not ever going to marry or have kids, because the world is going to Hell") and his belief that NFP is the prime issue in the Catholic world?

6. Does Raoul appreciate the correlation between his own personal status (single man, practicing ongoing abstinence) and his seeming obsession with abstinence for married couples? There is a phenomenon which applies many places -- not just here -- whereby a strong man looks down on the weakling, the money-savvy looks down on the bad-with-money person, the computer nerd looks down on the AOL-user, etc. because, to them, certain things are "easy" and so anyone should be able to do them.

Whatever a man is strong in, he is less likely to be compassionate about. If a man is convinced of his own sinfulness, he will have compassion on sinners. But if he never had a hard time with drunkenness, for example, he will be especially hard on drunks -- since alcohol was never a difficulty for him.

More later...

Matthew

Caminus · « **Reply #1 on:** October 25, 2009, 07:46:15 PM »

But Raoul is not moved by examples of authority, unless of course they fit into his preconceived agenda (note his strange referencing to a book written by a liberal). Raoul is simply trying to pick a fight and stir up problems where none exist, namely with regard to the old teaching of the theologians and not with the causes of the abuse of this doctrine among certain Catholics. So extremely unreasonable has he become, so rash and thoughtless, that he has literally deprived himself of the soul saving Sacraments even prior to removing his ignorance on the doctrinal issues. That is, he refuses communion with other Catholics based upon chimera and mere suspicion! Can you imagine the degree of pride and ignorance that goes into making such judgments? This is the classic definition of schism. The very sad thing obviously is that Raoul will end up in hell alongside the very men he despises, hating them with an even more intense hatred, and cursing the God he now claims to worship and honor.

Now if he truly believes that the "novus ordo" Church is absolutely speaking a false sect, then why does he pay so much attention to it? It would be like your or I spending hours studying doctrinal controversies in the Lutheran sect.

Telesphorus · « **Reply #2 on:** October 25, 2009, 09:49:31 PM »

Raoul strikes me as someone who might be a very ingenious troll.

I certainly hope I'm wrong about that. I don't consider it slander or detraction to say that, because here on the internet, anyone can be anyone - and it is only right to be suspicious of posters.

Anyway, Raoul does raise an interesting points - the question of certain aspects of the Pius XII Papacy that are problematic. And NFP promotion is a very serious problem for Catholics. Many people think they are being "good Catholics" by teaching courses on it and that it should be required to be taught to Catholic couples before they marry.

Raoul is giving us some issues that need to be worked out.

In my own view, NFP is something that can become part of a spiritual malaise, but is not necessarily sinful and is not something that can be judged as such. That it can easily become sinful and lead to perdition is something that should be considered as a serious warning against it.

Vladimir · « **Reply #3 on:** October 25, 2009, 10:01:22 PM »

Quote from: Caminus

But Raoul is not moved by examples of authority, unless of course they fit into his preconceived agenda (note his strange referencing to a book written by a liberal). Raoul is simply trying to pick a fight and stir up problems where none exist, namely with regard to the old teaching of the theologians and not with the causes of the abuse of this doctrine among certain Catholics. So extremely unreasonable has he become, so rash and thoughtless, that he has literally deprived himself of the soul saving Sacraments even prior to removing his ignorance on the doctrinal issues. That is, he refuses communion with other Catholics based upon chimera and mere suspicion! Can you imagine the degree of pride and ignorance that goes into making such judgments? This is the classic definition of schism. The very sad thing obviously is that Raoul will end up in hell alongside the very men he despises, hating them with an even more intense hatred, and cursing the God he now claims to worship and honor.

Now if he truly believes that the "novus ordo" Church is absolutely speaking a false sect, then why does he pay so much attention to it? It would be like your or I spending hours studying doctrinal controversies in the Lutheran sect.

:applause:

Vladimir · « **Reply #4 on:** October 25, 2009, 10:05:42 PM »

I used to despise you Caminus, but now I thank God that you post on this forum.