Catholics: Will the Catholic Church ever accept same-sex marriage? Or artificial birth control?
The Catholic Church has changed its teachings on sexual morality a number of times.
In the time of St Augustin, he wrote that to the extent that one enjoys the sexual act to that extent one commits at least venial sin.
Until very recently -- last century -- it was ALWAYS considered sinful to have sex IF you did not intend it to be procreative. Thus it was sinful to have sex with your wife while she was pregnant or when it was known she could not conceive.
Pope Pius XI (encyclical Casti Connubii) added the "unitive principle" (being in love) to that of the necessity to procreate as reasons for the sex act. He also allowed for people to use the "rythym method" of birth contriol.
In 1966, a commission of Bishops and theologians reported to Pope Paul 6th, in a majority decision, that it was OK to use artificial birth control. He disregarded their opinion.
Will the Church EVER allow birth control?
Or same-sex marriage?
SKEPSIS:
I agree. But using this EXACT Natural Law methodology, the pope, in 1866, stated that the Institution of SLAVERY was neither against the Divine Law nor the Natural Law.
EVERYDAY:
It is NOT required that procreation be the intent of the sex act. Otherwise people who can not conceive would not be allowed to have sex, and the use of the rythym method would be allowed.
MRGLVWSD:
I was a seminarian for 8 years and have had 4 years of Catholic Theology. I find you answer impuning my intelligence and knowledge offensive.
MIDGE:
Start reading some history. The Church (Catholic) has changed its moral position on many issues. You can start reading "Changes in Official Catholic Moral Teachings" by Theologian Charles E. Curran. Readings in Morsal Theology #13.
I studied under Father Curran at Catholic University in Washington DC.
Daver:
Yes. I did learn quite a lot.
Your opinion is biased just as mine is. Our biases can not be completely overcome. I just try my best to do just that. I have come to the honest conclusion that the Bible does NOT condemn loving committed same sex relationships. This decision was neither hasty nor without a lot of study and prayer. I have spent much of my life in trying to understand this moral issue.
And I am quite affronted at your suggestion that I "did not learn anything."
All your words in last anaylsis lie with interpretation. Sure I can be wrong. But I have come to this conclusion as honestly as possible.
MrgLvWsd:
The Magisterium of the CC uses the Fathers of the Church to support their position all the time.
Reading Augustine, Jerome, and Gregory of Nyssa would Appall people today. ”Marriage” was considered more a contract than a covenant in the early history of the church and also so profane that commoners were not permitted to be married in any church. It was NOT considered a sacrament until the 12th century.
In 655 the Ninth Council of Toledo, to help enforce clerical celibacy, declared all children of clerics to be SOLD INTO SLAVERY! This later became Canon Law.
For centuries it was asserted that the conjugal act not be free from sin unless it truly sought the transmission of life! Theologians before St. Alphonsus Liguori maintained the necessity for the INTENT TO PROCREATE!
It was Casti Connubial [Pius XI] and later Humanae Vitae [Paul VI] changed the long held tradition allowing that the conjugal act need ONLY to be procreational in FORM.