secret teachings of the catholic church...

[ecuworrier]

well perhaps i is exagerating... but a recent conversation with a recent crossover (anglican to catholic) alerted me to soemthing!

it was one of those moaning about the church (protestantism) conversations ... spontaneously glided into....  catholic teachings apparently accorded with my views... i was not convinced...

catholicism has not been that evangelical here in inggland cos they've suffered endless persecution right up to 1834... and one cannot be catholic and be pm or marry the heir to the throne.... well i was thinking this is a bit of a minority interest and it  did not stop folks being followers of Jesus which really the discussion was meant to be about... the siege mentality though was endemic in innglish catholicism....

what was the issue that caught my attention well it was:

the contraceptive method taught in the catholic church.... i was assured that it was as effective as other methods to 99%  but i was i terested to be told that a couple practising that reduced divorce to  5% AND improved marrital relationships....

well i was interested.... so why is this kept so secret if it is .... they certainly thought that the catholic church should make more of a fuss over this.....   

as for the rest.....  seems the various saints ARE the experts on theology....   a theology that all too sadly is kept secret in books?

anyways as a starter for 1 what do folks think of the fertility cycle method of contraception ..... ?

GOD BLESS!

Peace and Love,

[Boudi]

I don't think it's a 'secret', nor is it properly effective, and if people want to be more certain they tend to use a 'better method such as a condom, which also prevents STDs (which can't pass through the little holes, as some would have you believe)

[AndyHB]

... a condom, which also prevents STDs (which can't pass through the little holes, as some would have you believe)

But can pass through the surprising number of larger holes that are 'fabric' failure.  Heard a doctor on this a few months ago and he reckoned that somewhere in the region of 10-15% of condoms fail on this score.  He referenced a stress test that is done by a group like 'Which?', but which wasn't 'Which?'

[Boudi]

Is that really due to 'fabric failure' or user failure? People who put them on inside out, or don't use lube, or keep them in a wallet and sat on for 6 months, or in a glove compartment, or use oil based lubricants?  It's like driving a car while drunk and saying the car let you down when it crashed.

[tranchiebabe]

anyways as a starter for 1 what do folks think of the fertility cycle method of contraception ..... ?

It doesn't work accurately that is for sure. When we were first marrried in 1969 we tried it out as an experiment (not for religious reasons) using a special fertility indicator we bought. Ten months later our first daughter put in an appearance, and she was two weeks overdue!

[AndyHB]

Is that really due to 'fabric failure' or user failure?

The ones tested were fresh from the factory, Boudi.  I suspect that if you take the factors you have mentioned into account as well, its probably nearer a 25% 'failure' rate.

As for the question about the fertility cycle means of contraception, I believe that the more you take a variety of 'cycle' elements into account, the more effective it is - but its getting accurate 'readings' for these varied elements that is the problem.  Never tried it, mind; just what I remember from reading in various publications from John Hopkins School of Medicine and their pregnancy research department that the Nursing Campus in Pokhara subscribed to (and I had to sort out as part of my work assisting the librarian there).

[ecuworrier]

the person i spoke to sure ... was talking up it's efficacy... but also had a pretty strong emphasis on that ... i guess both partners would be in negotiation about when to avoid(or be hopeful) ... there was a greater stress on the social bond... that was according to the teaching they had received a better repellent of divorce proceedings.... well one could i guess also argue that perhaps the co-operative stance suits some couples better than others and that greater co-operativity between partners leads to a more rosy outlook on their own marriage..

GOD BLESS!

Peace and Love,

[AndrewF]

The 'Billings' method (as it is called) is very effective - for SOME people - and totally useless for others!
As for it reducing divorce - I can see no connection at all...

[ecuworrier]

The 'Billings' method (as it is called) is very effective - for SOME people - and totally useless for others!
As for it reducing divorce - I can see no connection at all...

am only reiterating what a married new to catholicism convert told me

GOD BLESS!

Peace and Love,

[AndrewF]

Not meaning to get at you - just giving my experience!

[ecuworrier]

Bless you, i didn't think that you were...

i do like facts so.... can you be more explanatory as to the folks wot are not suitable ...

GOD BLESS!

Peace and Love,

[AndrewF]

I don't know what the difference is, I just know that for example it did not work for us at all... - and I know of other couples for whom this is the case; but as you say, it does seem to work for some people ....?

[JJ]

Neither did it work for us, not that we were following Catholic teachings - partner lapsed and me Anglican.  It was more because of a desire to use non invasive methods, chemical and physical.
Anyway, what I don't understand is the manipulation of the method - if making love is for the procreation of children - how come it's OK to weasel past that period of time and then have a free for all when there is no supposed chance of conception?

Or is that a totally naive question?

[ecuworrier]

Neither did it work for us, not that we were following Catholic teachings - partner lapsed and me Anglican.  It was more because of a desire to use non invasive methods, chemical and physical.
Anyway, what I don't understand is the manipulation of the method - if making love is for the procreation of children - how come it's OK to weasel past that period of time and then have a free for all when there is no supposed chance of conception?

Or is that a totally naive question?

it's a very good question... sex is one of the relationship glues that effectively justifies the practise of marriage (though an imperfect theory of it's own)... is it wrong to talk about it in that way? is that anti-doctrine?

do you think they have the wrong emphasis then?

GOD BLESS!

Peace and Love,

[AndrewF]

I'm sorry to say that I think it is another example of the (some would say hypocritical) way the Catholic chuch thinks... Another example is that, if you are to pay the Curia nicely, there are more reasons for which a marriage can be annulled in the catholic thinking than there are excuses for a divorce, but you are not allowed to divorce... and incidentally any children you had before a marriage was anulled were born within wedlock despite the annulment meaning that the marriage never existed in the first place!
As you say, sex is one of the things whioch helps to bind a marriage togerther, - it is not (at least IMO!) purely for the purpose of procreation, but is an expression of the mutual bond. The trouble is that the RC have got thoroughly hung up on sex to an even greater extent than the C of E - which is saying quite something!