I have not posted on the Church and sex lately, so let me continue. I consider myself a good catholic; that doesn't mean I have to jump everytime the pope burps.:). And the magisterium? So complicated, so many levels, only a full time 'parser' could follow it all. But back to sex and the church. In a later post I will deal with natural law a term tossed around by anyone who wants support for their argument.
But two little words are my focus now: "direct" and "artificial." The church realizing that on the issue of abortion almost no one supports its extreme views (abortion is always murder) has now refined this, as I note on the blogs, that, yes you can kill a fetus just so it's done indirectly. A very puny difference most think. Whether I dissolve an insentiate number of cells(direct) or blow up a house of a drug dealer with 10 pregnant women inside(indirect) the fetus' still are killed.
And then "artificial." Since almost nobody, not even catholics, are buying the idea that sexual intercourse is for procreation only, the church says deliberately avoiding conception by the use of calendars and temperatures and NFP classes is all right because this is not "artificial". Give me a break! Oh, I know about the "unitive" principal; high flown but not at all truly descriptive with any catholics I know.
The church's position is clear , at least to me. Sexual intercourse is demeaning(after all you cannot concentrate solely on God if you have sex thoughts) but it is alright if it produces another Catholic(Okay, that's mean). But since no one buys this let's say no "artificial" means of not producing another person.
Listen, I can hardly wait to be upbeat, as I am , about the Church. In the meantime I do resent my sex life(past tense) being determined by those who think sex is bad and have sworn it off for a lifetime. Or to put it another way:I don't want my brain surgery done by a Christian Scientist. Jack=JACK