How would you like your Bible served Mam?

[KizlarAgha]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='Jun 2 2005, 05:07 PM'] And I'm saying that if Ironmonk would make that statement to a mother holding a child she has been desparately praying for for the past five years, then he would be completely heartless. [/quote]
In that sentence hot stuff, I would have used the indicative mood rather than the subjunctive.

[thessalonian]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='Jun 2 2005, 05:07 PM'] Thess I'm not saying invitro is right

I'm saying they were very fortunate that none of the embryos died. 

And I'm saying that if Ironmonk would make that statement to a mother holding a child she has been desparately praying for for the past five years, then he would be completely heartless. [/quote]
Intent over outcome is the primary concern. They violated Church teaching. Now I don't think you need to run in ant tell them they are going to hell but they did committ a grave sin if they were in fact as you say "very, very" Catholic. They knew the Church teaching and went against it. That is as serious as eating a juicy steak on a friday evening in early march I would think. It's wonderful that they have three children, praise God, but they need to reconcile with God and the Church on this one and that is being compassionate in my book. Now of course charity in all things but I think your vent on Ironmonk is unwaranted. Can you image anything more trying then being asked to deny Jesus under the threat of death, or perhaps the threat of your childrens death, and yet the Church made it very difficult for people who did deny him to reenter the Church. Admonish the sinner is a work of mercy last I checked.

Edited June 2, 2005 by thessalonian

[KizlarAgha]

[quote name='thessalonian' date='Jun 2 2005, 06:53 PM'] Intent over outcome is the primary concern. They violated Church teaching. Now I don't think you need to run in ant tell them they are going to hell but they did committ a grave sin if they were in fact as you say "very, very" Catholic. They knew the Church teaching and went against it. That is as serious as eating a juicy steak on a friday evening in early march I would think. It's wonderful that they have three children, praise God, but they need to reconcile with God and the Church on this one and that is being compassionate in my book. Now of course charity in all things but I think your vent on Ironmonk is unwaranted. Can you image anything more trying then being asked to deny Jesus under the threat of death, or perhaps the threat of your childrens death, and yet the Church made it very difficult for people who did deny him to reenter the Church. Admonish the sinner is a work of mercy last I checked. [/quote]
There's a time and a place for everything. While holding an innocent child is probably neither the time nor the place. Having a serious theological discussion with them at some point, if they are open to such a thing, would be helpful. However, slamming down the catechism on their heads isn't helpful.

Besides which, it's really hard for people who can have kids to know what it's like to not be able to do so.

[kateri05]

wait, if you USE all the invitro babies, its still wrong? just checkin


edit: oh wait, i'm dumb. you have to extract the semen through immoral means plus separating pro-creative and unitive functions... lalalala. ok, just kidding, i know the answer! sorry!

Edited June 3, 2005 by kateri05

[ironmonk]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='Jun 2 2005, 07:07 PM'] Thess I'm not saying invitro is right

I'm saying they were very fortunate that none of the embryos died.

And I'm saying that if Ironmonk would make that statement to a mother holding a child she has been desparately praying for for the past five years, then he would be completely heartless. [/quote]
Not quite.

It is heartless to rationalize a sin. Even if it was something that they wanted... we are to rely on God, not men.

For you not saying something is the very type of thing for the reason why this country is so screwed up and so many Catholics are ignorant of their own faith because of rationalization and failure to correct our Catholic family.

We must do the right thing, not the things that make us "happy" if that means going against God.

When the question is asked, a real answer should be given. The answer can be delivered in a soft way, but it must be given.

It is heartless to allow someone to live in a mortal sin. It is heartless to allow someone to go through life thinking something is ok when it is wrong in God's eyes. It is foolish to rebel against God. It is mindless to think that feelings are more important than the salvation of our souls.

There is a Hell.


[quote]
...
In vitro fertilization itself has also come under closer scrutiny in recent years because it has produced so many "spare" embryos whose fate is now uncertain. More generally, IVF has given rise to a mentality in which human lives can be subjected to "quality control," selective discarding, intentional overproduction, and "selective reduction" (abortion) when more embryos than expected begin to develop in the womb. In addition, a growing body of evidence has begun to document an increased rate of serious birth defects among children conceived by IVF, and especially those conceived by particular IVF procedures such as intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI).30 For all these reasons, efforts to promote the value of respect for human life in its earliest stages should include efforts to help move our society away from use of IVF as a reproductive procedure.
...
Of special concern are methods which introduce outside third parties into the marriage relationship for purposes of reproduction. It is now possible for a child to have as many as five parents: the "genetic" parents or sperm and egg donors, the gestational mother, and the couple that intends to raise the child. In such arrangements the child is denied his or her right to a unified family, and the moral and legal responsibilities traditionally seen as inherent in being a biological parent are diffused and rendered problematic. These practices have given rise to lawsuits in which several parents sue for custody of a child – or in which no parent is willing to claim parental responsibility. Family relationships tend to be redefined in terms of commercial contract law, risking the reduction of human beings to the status of objects. Surrogate motherhood has rightly been criticized along these lines for its tendency to exploit the biological mother as a "surrogate uterus" and to reduce the child to a commodity for sale.

A more difficult but equally important question is whether even the "simple case" of in vitro fertilization, performed using sperm and egg from husband and wife, undermines values inherent in the institutions of marriage and family. Catholic moral teaching, as well as some analyses not based on specifically religious principles, hold that it does.
...

When we manufacture offspring according to preset specifications, we are violating a fundamental aspect of human procreation. We are treating our children as our "creatures." The other abuses of human cloning — the fixation on producing a child "just like me"; the willingness to subject cloned humans to high risks of death and disability; even scientists' willingness to clone embryos solely to exploit and destroy them — flow from this first fundamental error. Human cloning would create a human being who deserves to be treated as our equal, but would do so in a way that undermines or fails to appreciate this equal dignity.

Though to a lesser extent, and despite any positive motives on the part of couples who resort to it, the procedure of in vitro fertilization poses this same problem. By its nature, it fosters (at least among the scientists and technicians who actually perform it) an attitude toward children at their embryonic stage of development that invites further abuses, such as destructive experimentation and the creation of embryos for research. At the very least, then, government should not promote IVF through public funding but should discourage its use, instead promoting infertility treatments that do not pose such serious moral problems.
[url="http://www.usccb.org/prolife/issues/bioethic/embryo/test61203.htm"]http://www.usccb.org/prolife/issues/bioeth...o/test61203.htm[/url]
[/quote]


[quote]
[url="http://www.dioceseoflincoln.org/purple/birth/#4"]http://www.dioceseoflincoln.org/purple/birth/#4[/url]
[i][b]Is it immoral for infertile couples to get involved in "in vitro" fertilization? Is it immoral to freeze human embryos?[/b][/i]

Yes, it is immoral. [b][u]All [/u]"in vitro" fertilization in general is [u]seriously [/u]sinful for those who are involved in it, including the medical and technical personnel, the couple and all who cooperate in the act.[/b] It is well to know that there are good Catholic doctors, who abide by the teaching of God and His church on these issues and who are often able to assist infertile couples to have children in a morally acceptable way. Also there is one type of "gamate transfer" that some reliable and truly Catholic theologians (but not all) claim could fall into the realm of the morally permissible. Your parish priest should be able to direct you to a proper source for more advice about these issues. Those who are involved in "in virtro" fertilization often form more human babies in test tubes or dishes than they need and they destroy the "leftovers," thus incurring the additional dreadful mortal sin of those abortions and the ecclesiastical excommunications that fall upon those who do such crimes. Freezing human embryos for future use or destruction, of course, is gravely sinful and might also involve excommunications. Because all these issues can have myriads of aspects and circumstances involve in them, I recommend you talk over these questions and problems with your priest.

[/quote]


God Bless,
ironmonk

[thessalonian]

Amen IM. Doesn't sound heartless to me at all. Admonishing the sinner is and act of love.

[thessalonian]

I think it's a good time to quote bishop Sheen on this thread with something I ran in to tonight in "Peace of the Soul". It shows why people are so easily swayed by false thinking.

"We often justify ourselves by saying that we are following our consciences when we are only following our desires. We fit a creed to the way we live, rather than the way we live to a creed; we suit religion to our actions, rather than actions to religion. We try to keep religion on a speculative basis in order to avoid moral reproaches on conduct. We sit at the piano of life and insist that every knote we strick is right-becausewe struck it. "

Canonize the man. Do it quickly.

Blessings

[KizlarAgha]

I still think that there is a proper place, time, and venue for such things. While you're holding the baby probably isn't it. Common sense people.

[Paphnutius]

[quote name='KizlarAgha' date='Jun 2 2005, 06:55 PM'] However, slamming down the catechism on their heads isn't helpful.
[/quote]
Sorry for going on a tangent...I seem to be best at derailing topics, but I could not help but notice one of Kiz's favoritre terms. Tell me Kiz, have you ever hit, been hit, or seen someone with with the CCC? Just curious because this has come up a few times in your posts

[thessalonian]

[quote name='KizlarAgha' date='Jun 2 2005, 11:48 PM'] I still think that there is a proper place, time, and venue for such things. While you're holding the baby probably isn't it. Common sense people. [/quote]
I think in the context that he put it where he (hot stuff) was holding the child and they asked the question it is a very good time to address the issue in a gentle way. Why avoid it. All that needs to be said is "no this beautiful baby is not wrong. God can make good out of our wrong actions. I don't think the method was advisable". Or something to that effect. Their conscience will bring them to the sacrament of confession if they are in fact "very very Catholic" after that.

[MichaelFilo]

I think this thread taught me something. Thanks Ironmonk and Thessolonian.

God bless,
Mikey

[thessalonian]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='Jun 2 2005, 05:07 PM']
And I'm saying that if Ironmonk would make that statement to a mother holding a child she has been desparately praying for for the past five years, then he would be completely heartless. [/quote]
[quote name='hot stuff' date='Jun 2 2005, Earlier'] When I AM HOLDING  their children and they ask me earnestly "Why was this so wrong?" [/quote]

I say you owe IM an apology for calling him heartless. Admonishing the sinner in a gentle way is not heartless. . Though I am not all that sure that it would be heartless if the mother was holding the baby. It may be that she is looking for approval. The old, how can something that feels so right be wrong. Bishop Sheen above answered it well.

Blessings

Edited June 3, 2005 by thessalonian

[KizlarAgha]

[quote name='Paphnutius' date='Jun 2 2005, 11:52 PM'] Sorry for going on a tangent...I seem to be best at derailing topics, but I could not help but notice one of Kiz's favoritre terms. Tell me Kiz, have you ever hit, been hit, or seen someone with with the CCC? Just curious because this has come up a few times in your posts  [/quote]
Twice I believe. And I have a black belt in hon-jutsu (the art of the book)

Edited June 3, 2005 by KizlarAgha

[KizlarAgha]

[quote name='thessalonian' date='Jun 3 2005, 12:11 AM'] I think in the context that he put it where he (hot stuff) was holding the child and they asked the question it is a very good time to address the issue in a gentle way. Why avoid it. All that needs to be said is "no this beautiful baby is not wrong. God can make good out of our wrong actions. I don't think the method was advisable". Or something to that effect. Their conscience will bring them to the sacrament of confession if they are in fact "very very Catholic" after that. [/quote]
Ok Thess,

Get off your high horse. I don't need to see "very catholic" in quotation marks from you. So the people sinned. Everyone sins. It doesn't take away from their being Catholic any more than your sins eject you from the Church.

[thessalonian]

[quote name='KizlarAgha' date='Jun 3 2005, 12:56 AM'] Ok Thess,

Get off your high horse.  I don't need to see "very catholic" in quotation marks from you.  So the people sinned.  Everyone sins.  It doesn't take away from their being Catholic any more than your sins eject you from the Church. [/quote]

Sin does eject us from participation in eternal life. That is why this conversation is far more important than you think.

Thanks for participating in my thread.

God bless

Edited June 3, 2005 by thessalonian