Ask A Catholic II

[timtofly]

The soul is not a biological phenomenon: Timtofly's hypothesis is not the doctrine of the Catholic Church.

I did not mean to imply the soul was connected to the DNA. I was trying to be concise. Our human makup allows for our bodies to receive a soul. Now unless you can answer where the soul comes from, the Bible says that God breathed into Adam the breath of life and Adam became a living soul. IMO the soul is God's breath. Now since God does not need to breath, what part of God makes us a living soul that comes in the first breath we breath? It is also the part of us that lives eternally. I also believe that the soul can also be damned. Now can God damn a part of Himself? I do not claim to know everything, but either the Bible contradicts itself, or there are things about God that we do not know, but will be revealed to us later. God does say that he can remove a name from the book of life. Is the book of live the registry of each soul? When a name is removed, is the soul no longer God? I say that the soul is the connection we have with God and nourishing the soul through reading the Bible is how we maintain a godly life. The experiences we have growing up can also effect how the soul is "developed" in each of us.

 

[Arakhor]

Coitus interruptus is not a valid birth control technique. If you going to try something, at least use a modern method.

 

[Jehoshua]

So, where does this leave "pulling out?"
Or using the calendar to lower the chances of pregnancy?
Seems like two ways to avoid the procreation.

Doesn't it seem like a technique simply used to manipulate people into creating more people, who will be subject to the Church, thereby increasing its power?

What is the scriptural basis for no birth control?

Natural family planning is not prohibited so long as it is not undertaken out of a contraceptive mentality and is conducted due to a genuine inability to support a certain number of children. However even then it remains open to the possibility of life. ("Pulling out" would thereby be improper, at least as it is the same thing as the sin of Onan in genesis 38 8:10)

As to the last, in addition to the previously mentioned passage it is fairly well known that it is written to "Be fruitful and multiple gen 1:28. Likewise it is written that Christ broke not one letter of the law. This commandment was for all men (in contrast to the commandments of the covenant which applied only to jews [the levitical laws and such]) and thus is thus as valid and in force as a divine commandment today, as it did yesterday and the aeons before.

 

[El_Machinae]

Jesus was fruitful and multiplied?

 

[Jehoshua]

I did not mean to imply the soul was connected to the DNA. I was trying to be concise. Our human makup allows for our bodies to receive a soul. Now unless you can answer where the soul comes from, the Bible says that God breathed into Adam the breath of life and Adam became a living soul. IMO the soul is God's breath. Now since God does not need to breath, what part of God makes us a living soul that comes in the first breath we breath? It is also the part of us that lives eternally. I also believe that the soul can also be damned. Now can God damn a part of Himself? I do not claim to know everything, but either the Bible contradicts itself, or there are things about God that we do not know, but will be revealed to us later. God does say that he can remove a name from the book of life. Is the book of live the registry of each soul? When a name is removed, is the soul no longer God? I say that the soul is the connection we have with God and nourishing the soul through reading the Bible is how we maintain a godly life. The experiences we have growing up can also effect how the soul is "developed" in each of us.

The soul is created ex nihilo and is vivified by God, the Lord and giver of life through his eternal life, symbolised through the term "breath". Breath is seen as synonymous with life as breathing is the manner of the animate compared to that which is dead or inanimate which does not breath. Either way to claim the soul is God and that the soul is God's breath is effectively saying there are two separate gods, one energistic in nature immanent within the human self and one transcendant and eternal beyond that immanent interior reality.

 

[Jehoshua]

Jesus was fruitful and multiplied?

Jesus was not married. the sexual act is only appropriate within marriage for reasons i've already specified.

-

Furthermore in the case of the celibate they consecrate themselves, "marry" themselves to the Church/Christ. Thus sexual relations by them are innapropriate as it violates this "marriage" between the consecrated celibate person (cleric or religious) and the Church/God. (we say priest and monks are "married" to the church as instruments of christ whereas the terminology regarding women religious is married to Christ in devotion and consecration to Him)

Incidentally the Church is often called the bride of Christ. In a sense the faithful are his children begotten through the Church and the truth it protects and propagates.

 

[civ_king]

So, where does this leave "pulling out?"
Or using the calendar to lower the chances of pregnancy?
Seems like two ways to avoid the procreation.

Doesn't it seem like a technique simply used to manipulate people into creating more people, who will be subject to the Church, thereby increasing its power?

What is the scriptural basis for no birth control?

coitus interruptus is not valid and is ineffective too...

There is no sin from abstaining from sex and even if you are planning with the calendar there is still a chance of new life.

 

[El_Machinae]

edit to xpost: Er, coitus interruptus certainly maintains the chance of life. I guess what's emphasised is the intent, the intent to have healthy relations with your wife, but with the intent of preventing pregnancy.



Original reply:

So, "Be fruitful and multiply" wasn't actually a commandment, and so Jesus didn't break the commandment?

That paragraph really confused me! You cannot say that it was a 'commandment for all men' and then say that 'Jesus kept all the commandments', I think.

Paul's vibe (not commandment) seems to be more in line with what you're saying. "It's best to be a celibate worshiper, but get married if you can't resist the natural urge to lust". But if it's better to remain celibate, then there's no way that the commandment to multiply is so binding.

What do married Catholic couples do, if they don't want kids?

 

[kochman]

As to the last, in addition to the previously mentioned passage it is fairly well known that it is written to "Be fruitful and multiple gen 1:28. Likewise it is written that Christ broke not one letter of the law. This commandment was for all men (in contrast to the commandments of the covenant which applied only to jews [the levitical laws and such]) and thus is thus as valid and in force as a divine commandment today, as it did yesterday and the aeons before.

I don't see how saying "be fruitful and multiply means that every time you have sex it should be a potential birth (which it is anyway, as only abstinence is 100%).
Why do you think that?

 

[kochman]

coitus interruptus is not valid and is ineffective too...

There is no sin from abstaining from sex and even if you are planning with the calendar there is still a chance of new life.

What do you mean by "not valid"?
Tons of catholics use that method... are they sinning?

 

[timtofly]

Can someone tell me why the soul cannot be God, but every time one takes communion, it is turned into the body of Christ thus through eating flesh and blood the soul is transferred into "God"? Now every version that I read leans toward the "interpretation" that I was repremanded for except the version that jehoshua used. I was not being disrepectful, but going with the majority of texts. Am I to believe that it is better to be an eater of flesh, or trust God's word in that a Soul is the part of us that connects us to God, from the beginning of our life, instead of part by part after we are old enough to comprehend? Would you say that the Holy Spirit is not needed, because that is the work of the "communion"? Can you also provide scripture that says the soul is ex nihilo? BTW, I do not believe that God becomes seperated when the soul enters the body. I also believe that God is the force that holds every molecule together. God cannot be quantified. He is all and in all and without Him there would be nothing. We are not God, but we do "contain" Him, otherwise we would never be allowed in His presence and would be unable to live godly, moral lives.

 

[civ_king]

Can someone tell me why the soul cannot be God, but every time one takes communion, it is turned into the body of Christ thus through eating flesh and blood the soul is transferred into "God"? Now every version that I read leans toward the "interpretation" that I was repremanded for except the version that jehoshua used. I was not being disrepectful, but going with the majority of texts. Am I to believe that it is better to be an eater of flesh, or trust God's word in that a Soul is the part of us that connects us to God, from the beginning of our life, instead of part by part after we are old enough to comprehend? Would you say that the Holy Spirit is not needed, because that is the work of the "communion"? Can you also provide scripture that says the soul is ex nihilo? BTW, I do not believe that God becomes seperated when the soul enters the body. I also believe that God is the force that holds every molecule together. God cannot be quantified. He is all and in all and without Him there would be nothing. We are not God, but we do "contain" Him, otherwise we would never be allowed in His presence and would be unable to live godly, moral lives.

It doesn't turn into the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ when consumed, it is when consecrate

Koch, it would have been better said as "not licit" according to natural law

 

[kochman]

So, pulling out, even in marriage, is sinning?

I guess fellatio is a big No-No then?

 

[civ_king]

So, pulling out, even in marriage, is sinning?

I guess fellatio is a big No-No then?

Correct

I would presume so, never really looked into it as it is basically irrelevant to a chaste unmarried person

 

[kochman]

Correct

I would presume so, never really looked into it as it is basically irrelevant to a chaste unmarried person

Fellatio can occur between married people as well...

 

[MagisterCultuum]

From what I've read Catholics consider fellatio within marriage acceptable only when it is used as a form of foreplay preceding vaginal intercourse, performed long enough to help overcome erectile dysfunction but not to cause premature ejaculation.


Whereas the catholic teaching on sex being only for procreation has only a very flimsy scriptural basis, banning Coitus Interruptus within marriage has much stronger support. The Sin of Onan was pulling out early when having sex with his wife, in this case because she was a wife taken in levirate marriage and the first son she bore him would be counted as his older brother's son and would be able to claim a large portion of the inheritance he wanted to keep all for himself. Taking such measures to prevent pregnancy when your wife wants a baby and your reason for not wanting one is greed is certainly wrong. Taking the reference to spilling seed and using it to outlaw masturbation is quite a stretch.

 

[Lovebird]

As the apple tree among the trees of the wood, so is my beloved among the sons. I sat down under his shadow with great delight, and his fruit was sweet to my taste.

Song of Solomon 2:3

Awake, O north wind; and come, thou south; blow upon my garden, that the spices thereof may flow out. Let my beloved come into his garden, and eat his pleasant fruits.

Song of Solomon 4:16

How do you reconcile this endorsement of sodomy with your view that sex should only be for procreation?

 

[_random_]

Fellatio can occur between married people as well...

[citation needed]

 

[Takhisis]

As the apple tree among the trees of the wood, so is my beloved among the sons. I sat down under his shadow with great delight, and his fruit was sweet to my taste.

Song of Solomon 2:3

Awake, O north wind; and come, thou south; blow upon my garden, that the spices thereof may flow out. Let my beloved come into his garden, and eat his pleasant fruits.

Song of Solomon 4:16

How do you reconcile this endorsement of sodomy with your view that sex should only be for procreation?

How is what you posted an endorsement of sodomy?

 

[Lovebird]

Supposedly God-breathed Scripture is describing sodomy between lovers in flowering, positive terms. Seems pretty straightforward.