In this video, the first of a three-part series, I explain the biblical and philosophical basis for the Catholic Church’s teaching on contraception—by far the most controversial, least understood teaching on the planet. When St. Pope Paul VI issued the Encyclical Humanae Vitae.
POINTS COVERED
-
The historical context for the release and rejection of Humanae Vitae
-
Important dates: 1930 (Anglican bishops accept birth control for the first time); 1960 (first Pill approved by the FDA); 1065 (Griswold v. Connecticut Supreme Court decision which legalized the sale and advertising of birth control); 1973 Roe v Wade (abortion first legalized)
-
Bible passages supporting Humane Vitae’s norms: Genesis 1: 27; Genesis 9:1; Genesis 35:11; Psalm 127, Genesis 38:1=10
-
Contraception is the theory, abortion is the practice
-
Natural Family Planning (NFP) is not the moral equivalent of contraception
-
Note the origins of the word: contra (against) ception (the beginning)
- The Catholic sexual ethic leads to human flourishing
RESOURCES MENTIONED
July 25, 1968, Encyclical “Humanae Vitae” by St. Pope Paul VI
The Patrick Coffin Show podcast features weekly interviews with A-list influencers and outliers in the effort to recover the Judeo-Christian roots of the culture. Patrick is the Canadian-born former host of Catholic Answers Live, and he has raving fans around the world. He injects these fascinating interviews with his own distinctive blend of depth and levity. If you’re tired of politically correct mediaspeak, you want to see God back in the public square, and you’re not allergic to having a laugh, this is the place to be.
6 thoughts on “How Can Birth Control Be Wrong? Part I”
Pingback: Not Naming Children After Saints May Open Door to Demons, When God Allows Suffering, and More! – christian-99.com
Pingback: How Can Birth Control Be Wrong? Part II - Catholic Stand
How about I give you my social ?
Written by a fake name coward and dolled up with innerlekshul-sounding phrases, this might be the stupidest reply I have ever read.
I love it when the Old Testament is invoked because for the most part it’s like shooting fish in a barrel.
First we have an allegory where “ God says multiply” (like we wouldn’t anyway) – then drowns all of
humanity. Using Onan as an example of insuring progeny in a world of high infant mortality is an
affront to all that has been accomplished in the name of woman’s rights. Imagine, being required to
have sex with a) some woman you did not choose to be your wife b) someone you most likely are
not attracted to and probably don’t love c) and riddled with magical thinking that any child born
would be his dead brother’s kids !! If ever there was a definition of “an elaborate masturbation tool”
this has to take the prize. Like Thamar had a choice too, couldn’t even remarry someone other than
family. Then we have God, again killing this one and that one – doesn’t sound like Jesus to me, rescuing
an adulterous woman. And as far as birth goes, unless a soul IS given, the human race would become
extinct; the soul IS life. Lastly, this institution called marriage, this “very act God designed”, consumes 20%
of the 10 commands. Its very nature not only attracts unwholesome desires but it is not a freely given gift
with those kind of strings attached – hence, a world of non commitment where adultery, per se, the breaking
of a vow is not the issue In a world of almost 8 billion many don’t feel up to raising 6 kids , don’t have the
faith to expect the best. Face it, when Adam and Eve (there I go, giving credence to an allegory) was shamed
into hiding, naked no less, we all know what it was that they did.
Pingback: MONDAY EDITION – Big Pulpit