Dear Miss Chit Roces,
 |
| Pope Paul VI |
You praise him for his “assurance” that RH Bill is about responsible parenthood. You are comforted that you have someone of stature to defend you from the Catholic bishops who call RH Bill a birth-control bill or population control bill. You are glad your belief that contraception is alright as a means for family planning has a “champion” in the ranks of the Catholic clergy.
I am also glad you wrote the article. I had a glimpse of the frame of mind of a person with contraceptive mentality. I saw a mind fascinated by science and technology's achievement to curtail human fertility as a family planning method. I saw a mind fascinated by the convenience it affords for planning one's family.
But you admitted in your article that prolonged use of the Pill poses probable risks. Have you ever wondered that technology ought to be employed to cure, enhance and preserve human life? Had it ever occurred to you that in contraception, technology is rather used to adulterate, frustrate and destroy human life?
Don't you realize that in contraception, science and technology is misused the same way that Alfred Nobel's invention of the dynamite was misused?
Perhaps you will answer back and counter a question:
“But doesn't God allow us to develop and use technology? Why can't we use contraceptives to regulate the conception of children. We can after all, take an aspirin to soothe a headache”.In reply to you, I would quote Anthony Percy, author of The Theology of the Body Made Simple, who said:
“The argument is persuasive but flawed. A headache is a curse, while fertility is a blessing. Contraceptives are not at all like medications. Contraceptives prevent the blessing of a child, while medications heal a sickness”. (Chapter 3, paragraph 33)
 |
| Pope John Paul II |
Contraception is wrong not only to Catholics, but for all humanity. Those who claim "contraception is not bad" may already have an erroneous conscience, that is, a conscience that takes lightly something realistically and gravely wrong and even inversely considers it good.
Contrary to Fr. Bernas' claim, pluralistic society will not be served well if contraception is legislated. A pluralistic society cannot be sustained without an objective criteria of morality.
| "A headache is a curse, while fertility is a blessing. Contraceptives are not at all like medications. Contraceptives prevent the blessing of a child, while medications heal a sickness." - Anthony Percy Theology of the Body Made Simple |
Catholic bishops never wished to curtail couples' desire to enjoy sex, as you complained. They, rather, wish to admonish couples to treat sex as a manifestation of love before viewing it as mere recreation. For sex to be an authentic and genuine manifestation of love, they exhort the faithful and humanity at large, that the procreative function ought not be detached from the act itself.
 |
| Pope Benedict XVI |
Instead of looking up to Fr. Bernas for counsel, I highly recommend you look-up to the thoughts and teachings of Blessed John Paul II, instead. If you prefer a living guide, the present head of the Catholic Church Pope Benedict XVI is an excellent source of light in matters of faith and morals.
There is only one side of the Church, Miss Chit Roces. That is “inside” the Church, united with the Pope and the bishops, in communion with him. The “other side” you are referring is more accurately called “outside” the Church!
FOR FURTHER READING
Why are the TV networks don't broadcasts the negative expose on rh bill such as this Sen. Sotto's expose on the said bill? Are they afraid of malacañang or may PINAPANIGAN? Ka Noli, take courage! The Black Nazarene is with you, don't worry! http://cbcpforlife.com/?p=8481
ReplyDeleteThank you, Mr. Gil, for commenting and patronizing my post.
DeleteI agree with you. It is becoming more obvious that current media outfis are skewed to favor pro-Pnoy stands even if it run against Filipino Christian customs. Our Catholic bishops should get the hint from some Christian sects which has their own TV channels.
Once again, Thank you!
Beautifully said, bro. Jun! :) May God bless you abundantly! And may the Lord enlighten pro-choice people like Ms Chit, who choose to stand "outside" the church and dictate their flawed opinions and judgements on Filipinos who are pro-life, and pro-truth, and pro-church. God have mercy on us all.
ReplyDeleteThank you, bro. Victor, for commenting and patronizing my post. I will echo your prayers, too.
DeleteFacts about RH Bill like this must out in the open to keep the people informed of the real TRUTH.
ReplyDeleteSo well said. thank you.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Fr. Bernas when he said, “public money knows no religion”. But he ought to foresee, too, that the legalization of contraception will grant undue favor from the State to anti-Christian beliefs.
ReplyDeletebro. jun do you not know that contraception has never been illegal in this country and is in fact being distributed in health centers for a very long time now?
I agree with the church defending their beliefs before the state and standing their ground in this fight. it is both their right and their religious mandate, but since this bill will in no way force anyone to use contraceptives and go against their beliefs then the church has no right to force the governments hand in legislation. since this is a secular country and the government needs to create laws for every filipino and not just filipino catholics.
if contraceptives are against the teachings of the church then it is the burden of the church to steer their flock against these methods.
they should do so using their own institutions likes catholic schools and parishes and not through government machinery. why you may ask? because the philippines is not only for catholics, i am a muslim and in my religion it is not against our beliefs to use these methods. why can't i experience the benefits of this bill just because it against yours? is that not unfair to be deprived of government aid just because we are the minority religion?
i respect that these contraceptives are wrong in your faith, but the bill will not require anyone to use this or that method. it will only make them available for free because some of us cannot afford to buy them in convenience stores.
as a muslim not eating pork is one of our most sacred laws. it might be trivial for you but for us this is something that we can never do if we want to attain salvation. im using this as an example because although pork is readily available in markets, muslims don't buy them because we are taught by our religion not to. in the same way that condoms are in the market and if it is against catholic beliefs your religion should teach catholics not to buy them. you don't see us clamoring for pork to be removed to spare us from temptation. it is our responsibility as muslims to do so on our own.
you might say that the government is not spending tax money for pork to be distributed to muslims for free but in fact it is. DOH and DEPED has a joint project that feeds students in public schools if they attend classes. most of the meals that are served here in zamboanga have pork in them but muslims have the option to not eat them. my point here is our tax money, the same that you are paying are being used to buy pork to feed to school children. but that is ok with us, you don't see us rallying in the streets to stop the government. its because it is not forced to us. we have the right to chose not to.
if this bill forces you to do something that your faith is against then i will be the first one to stand in arms and protest against it. but as it stands it will only give everyone options including NFP which is acceptable by your religion. so please as a filipino do not deprive other filipinos of these benefits just because it is against yours.
thank you
"bro. jun do you not know that contraception has never been illegal in this country and is in fact being distributed in health centers for a very long time now?"
DeleteYes, it is not illegal. But being not illegal does not mean it is NOT IMMORAL. Please recognize the hierarchy and ascendancy of divine eternal law over changeable human laws. Contraception was new technological invention in the '60s. People were fascinated by it; fascinated by the apparent "convenience" it affords. That is the main purpose of Humanae Vitae, to clarify to people that contraception is, in fact, immoral.
"since this bill will in no way force anyone to use contraceptives and go against their beliefs then the church has no right to force the governments hand in legislation. since this is a secular country and the government needs to create laws for every filipino and not just filipino catholics."
Actually, you have it the other way around. The church is not forcing the government's hand. It is the government meddling with an issue - contraception is a spiritual and moral issue - which it has no competence and deciding for itself contrary to the institution (the church) which has the proper competence on it.
You say the bill will not force anyone to use contraceptives. Why is there penal provisions for those who would oppose use and application of contraception?
A secular society still needs an objective criteria of morality for that society to flourish. A society built on relativistic principles will not grant equal rights to all. The rule of law in a relativistic society will be dictated by fallible persons and groups who happen to possess at a given time the compelling power of the state: it will be "might is right".
"if contraceptives are against the teachings of the church then it is the burden of the church to steer their flock against these methods."
Precisely, it is this reason that the shepherds and pastors are opposing this bill. They foresee clearly that it will necessarily undermine their work to steer their flock against these methods. Besides, the faithfuls of the church are at the same time the citizens of the state. The church and state are serving one and the same subjects. If the church is successful is leading its "flock" to moral and virtuous ways, it will reflect in their being good and upright citizens - traits desired by the state for its subjects.
"i am a muslim and in my religion it is not against our beliefs to use these methods."
This is analogically the same with case of the Mormons in the US who advocated polygamy in the past. It was demonstrated and proven that this Mormon "belief" negatively affects other groups. the federal state had to intervened and requested the Mormons to stop practicing it, specially when it involves persons outside of the Mormon group.
When the US founding fathers formulated the "separation of church and state" principle it was intended to recognize the contribution of the various religious sects towards forming a more upright and responsible electorate and citizenry but short of favoring one among many and establishing a state religion.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution, Article 3, states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;..”.
This is the provision recognizing freedom of religion in the US Constitution. Several US Supreme Court decisions upheld the interpretation of this to be the principle of Separation of Church and State.
Thank you for patronizing my post and for going out of your way to write a very lengthy comment. I read it thoroughly. I hope you will do likewise in my reply to you, Mr. Gerry Tiblani.
Respectfully yours,
thank you for taking your time to reply to my lengthy comment.
Deleteplease understand that i am coming from a perspective of a muslim filipino living in this country, i do not understand your catholic references at all times but i will try to absorb as much as i can. please remember that we are discussing a filipino law, do you agree with me that this law should know no religion? that this law should be applicable to every filipino whether they believe in god or don't?
1 -Actually, you have it the other way around. The church is not forcing the government's hand. It is the government meddling with an issue - contraception is a spiritual and moral issue - which it has no competence and deciding for itself contrary to the institution (the church) which has the proper competence on it.
when you say that the government is the one meddling, i assume that you are saying this because they are promoting artificial family planning methods. but what about the natural family planning method that the church allows? if the government promotes this it is ok? that is not meddling? we can't be selective on this topic.
contraception is not just a moral and spiritual issue, it is also a social and economic issue. for some people contraception is not wrong because their faith allows it. are you saying our faith is wrong for allowing it?
you say that the church has competence in deciding unlike the government, but are you not disregarding other religious institutions like mine for example? are you saying that my institution has no competence to decide on contraception? if you say it has competence just like your church, since it has decided that contraception is ok for our faith then are we still immoral for using them?
2.You say the bill will not force anyone to use contraceptives. Why is there penal provisions for those who would oppose use and application of contraception?
can you show me where in the RH bill this is stated? http://rhbill.org/about/rh-bill-text/ i have included the lin to the text for your reference. there is no provision there that penalizes couple for opposing or refraining from using these contraception.
3.This is analogically the same with case of the Mormons in the US who advocated polygamy in the past. It was demonstrated and proven that this Mormon "belief" negatively affects other groups. the federal state had to intervened and requested the Mormons to stop practicing it, specially when it involves persons outside of the Mormon group.
Deletepolygamy is classified by the state of america as illegal that is why they have every right to act on it even if it is based on religious beliefs. for contraception it is a different story, since it is perfectly legal is is already being distributed by the state.
i'm not sure if i must take offense in your comparison of my beliefs with mormons are you not aware that polygamy is allowed in our religion and is being practiced today in this country without persecution?. did you just implied that my belief in contraception is something that is immoral and in which the church should intervene? but since this is an intelligent discourse i will let it pass.
4. When the US founding fathers formulated the "separation of church and state" principle it was intended to recognize the contribution of the various religious sects towards forming a more upright and responsible electorate and citizenry but short of favoring one among many and establishing a state religion.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution, Article 3, states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;..”.
this is exactly what will happen if the government does not pass the bill just because the catholic church is against it.
this bill does not inhibit any religion for exercising their beliefs. they can do so in their own institutions like catholic schools and parishes. they should teach their flock to not use contraceptives there and not using government machinery to further their beliefs.
other religious groups are for the RH bill
muslims for one
born again christians
baptists
iglesia ni christo
and the list goes on.
should these be disregarded and only the roman catholic church should be listened to by the government?
thanks again for reading this my fellow filipino.
Thank you for your long comment. Please read my reply below:
Delete1. You said, "remember that we are discussing a filipino law, do you agree with me that this law should know no religion?"
Yes, I agree that this law should know no religion. And also it should likewise not know irreligion. Sad to say, whether you and I agree or not, contraception is being used by some elements in society against the Catholic Church. For example, the Polish communist party tried to spread contraception in Poland to undermine the Polish Catholic Church; but they were unsuccessful. If the Philippine State authorities are sincere in their religious neutrality they should stop pushing for contraceptive-inspired-rh-bill that will go against the sensibilities 80% of the population. After all, they don't need a law to have a gov't-funded artificial family planning program. They are already doing it now. Moreover, individuals are free to procure for themselves contraceptives in drugstores and convenient stores. Let the use of contraception be a private personal affair; though I don't personally wish people to engage it that.
2. You said, "i assume that you are saying this because they are promoting artificial family planning methods. but what about the natural family planning method that the church allows? if the government promotes this it is ok?"
The Catholic Church has never aspired enacting Natural Family Planning (NFP) into a Republic Act. And let me enlighten you that NFP is never a contraceptive method. NFP is more of a “fertility-awareness-method” so that couples who wish to take advantage of the fertility and infertility cycle of the wife from conceiving or not. In case of grave reasons, they could take advantage of the infertile moments of the wife avoid conception.
3. You said, "contraception is not just a moral and spiritual issue, it is also a social and economic issue."
Yes, the use of contraception has repercussion in the social and economic spheres. In fact, what is immoral is not also wise socially and economically. For instance, it is not good to accumulate wealth and feed one's children out of stealing from other people's property. The Church and the State are serving one and the same subjects. The Catholic bishops believe contraception will engender irresponsible attitudes among the youth. By exhorting the youth to live chastity and virtue by avoiding contraception, the youth could be virtuous and responsible citizens. Moral and spiritually strong faithful also mean socially responsible and productive citizens.
4. You said, "for some people contraception is not wrong because their faith allows it. are you saying our faith is wrong for allowing it?"
DeleteI don't think all muslims share this belief.
5. You said, "you say that the church has competence in deciding unlike the government, but are you not disregarding other religious institutions like mine for example? are you saying that my institution has no competence to decide on contraception? if you say it has competence just like your church, since it has decided that contraception is ok for our faith then are we still immoral for using them?"
What I am trying to say is that contraception is a MORAL and SPIRITUAL issue. The State's role is the TEMPORAL and MATERIAL spheres of person-citizens. The State's day-to-day tasks should be on the temporal and material needs of its citizens. It should heed the moral and spiritual insights of the various religious groups of its citizens to better serve society. The "church" I was referring could also be your religious institutions. If the Catholic Church and your religious groups has conflicting stands in contraception, the State should be neutral. Legislating that contraception is not-wrong is tantamount to saying the State is favoring other groups to the detriment of others like the Catholic Church who believes contraception is wrong.
6. You said, "can you show me where in the RH bill this is stated? http://rhbill.org/about/rh-bill-text/ i have included the lin to the text for your reference. there is no provision there that penalizes couple for opposing or refraining from using these contraception."
Please read Section 28 Prohibited Acts and 29 Penalties of your linked webpage. The provisions are veiled to hide use and practice of contraception that must be compelled upon employers and medical professionals. The “medically-safe reproductive health care services” is a euphemism for contraception.
Lastly, it would be good for the RELIGIOUS FREEDOM OF ALL GROUPS YOU MENTIONED if rh bill is dismissed and trashed; if there is no law legalizing CONTRACEPTION. Sorry for being blunt and frank. Thank you for your time and best regards.
Dear Mr. Gerrytiblani,
ReplyDeleteThe teaching of the Catholic Church prohibiting contraception is based on Natural Law and therefore on human nature. It is true everywhere and at all times. It doesn't matter if you're Catholic, Protestant, Jew or Muslim, Japanese, Chinese, American or Filipino. If you're human, you're bound by it.
The purpose of the sexual act is procreation and the rearing and education of children. If you put a barrier or prevent it, you subvert its purpose and therefore not natural. Let me illustrate this principle, you use your eyes to see, your ears to hear, your nose to smell. Why? Because that is their nature. You can't see with your ears, or smell with your eyes, can you? But you might say there is an anatomical and physiological impossibility. OK, then let's use the legs and feet. We use it for mobility and for keeping men upright. Now if we use our arms and hands instead that would be unnatural wouldn't it? What would be your reaction when you see someone walking upside down?
The same goes with the sexual act. It has its natural purpose and to put a stop to that is against nature and therefore intrinsically evil.
Your example doesn't belong to this category. Eating pork is not intrinsically evil. What is the purpose of eating? Sustenance to keep us healthy and functional. But we have other choices other than pork to do that. God has provided us with a whole array of food choices. Now to prevent eating altogether, then that's unnatural and intrinsically evil. The same goes for contraception. It prevents the natural purpose of the sexual act. So people who engage in it just for the sake of pleasure end up abusing it.
i am offended by your statement that the YOUR religion's interpretation of natural law bounds all religions. my beliefs come from our own interpretation of natural law in which our hierarchy has deemed that the use of contraception is ok. please do not impose your beliefs to me and tell me that i am bound by your understandings.
DeleteThe same goes with the sexual act. It has its natural purpose and to put a stop to that is against nature and therefore intrinsically evil. - are you saying that if sex is done with the knowledge that pregnancy is not possible then the natural purpose of it is hindered? since during that time sex is only for pleasure since you have the knowledge that pregnancy will not occur and the only reason you are having sex is because she will not get pregnant. if so then technically the natural family planning method is the same thing. using science to determine when the woman is infertile and using that time to have sex for pleasure alone is unnatural and against the goals of the procreative act. if this is the case then why is the church promoting this method. don't tell me that since there is no artificial device it is still natural, because the fact is, science and knowledge of the human body is being taken advantage of to serve a purpose that was not the primary intention. do you think that god made ovulation cycles so that man and wife can have sex for pleasure? no of course not! and using this knowledge that we recently acquired is against the original purpose of sex. if this is your belief that to put a stop to the natural objective of sex is intrinsically evil then the church should stop promoting NFP as well.
my point in the pork analogy is that even though eating pork is wrong in our beliefs we do not call for the government to ban them in markets just because we don't want to be tempted to buy and eat them. we our taught in our religion not to.
the same should be the case with contraceptives. they will not be forced on anyone, they will just be available for those who cannot afford it. so even if it is against your beliefs do not rob us the chance to receive this benefit from the government just because you believe it is evil. well for us it isnt and just because your beliefs defer from others does not give you the right to disregard it is the creation of law for all filipinos not just filipino catholics. i respect you beliefs and i ask you to respect mine. if our religion states that use of contraceptives is not evil and is ok, do not tell us otherwise.
here is a good read from one of your priests:
http://fatherbernasblogs.blogspot.com/
My friend, this is the very reason I have chosen to stay outside of the catholic church despite being baptised as a catholic.
ReplyDeleteYou want to impose your catholic morality on the Philppines when not all of us are catholic. I stand with mr. gerrytiblani in saying that i am offended by your views. The catholic church is far from infallible and to impose your morality on the rest of us, may go against what WE believe in. Are you the only one living in this country? Isn't the backbone of your faith, and all religions in general love? If that is the case then why do you alienate so many people "outside" your righteous church?
Your arrogance, and the general arrogance of the catholic church is what pushes people like to look else ware. Get of your high horse and smell the roses. we are made up of different beliefs, and no singular belief is absolutely right.
Mr. Tiblani, I apologise for the arrogance and ignorance of some of the catholics.
Sorry, no offense meant but you both missed my point. I said the teaching of the Catholic Church is based on Natural Law. It is not based on Catholic morality per se because there is an objective moral law called Natural Law. Kung tao ka, sakop ka ng Batas ng Kalikasan. Here's something for your enlightenment:http://www.tfp.org/tfp-home/catholic-perspective/eternal-and-natural-law-the-foundation-of-morals-and-law.html
ReplyDeleteNow let's tackle your question on natural family planning and contraception. What's the difference you asked? Here's the answer:
“Couples who use natural family planning (NFP) when they have a just reason to avoid pregnancy never render their sexual acts sterile; they never contracept. They track their fertility, abstain when they are fertile and, if they so desire, embrace when they are naturally infertile. Readers unfamiliar with modern NFP methods should note that they are 98-99% effective at avoiding pregnancy when used properly. Furthermore, any woman, regardless of the regularity of her cycles, can use NFP successfully. This is not your grandmother’s “rhythm method.”
In natural family planning, the couple takes advantage of the natural fertility/infertility cycle of the woman without artificially intervening through barrier (IUD, condoms), surgical (tubal ligation, vasectomy, abortion) and chemical (contraceptives) methods. Therefore, NFP is perfectly in conformity with natural law.
The above cited article continues,
“To some people this seems like splitting hairs. “What’s the big difference,” they ask, “between rendering the union sterile yourself and just waiting until it’s naturally infertile? The end result is the same: both couples avoid children.” To which I respond, what’s the big difference between killing Grandma and just waiting until she dies naturally? End result’s the same thing: dead Grandma. Yes, but one is a serious sin called murder, and the other is an act of God.
If a person can tell the difference between euthanasia and natural death, he can tell the difference between contraception and NFP. It’s the same difference. I’m not equating contraception and murder. That’s not the analogy. Rather, Grandma’s natural death and a woman’s natural period of infertility are both acts of God. But in killing Grandma or in rendering sex sterile, we take the powers of life into our own hands — just like the deceiver originally tempted us to do — and make ourselves like God."
Excerpted from: http://catholicexchange.com/contraception-v-natural-family-planning-part-5-of-6/
Does nfp take away the procreative aspect of sex?
Deleteand if this is the case then sex is just done for pleasure and can be abused as well?
Dear Mr. Tiblani,
DeleteNFP never detaches the procreative aspect of sex. NFP couples are not using any chemicals nor devices during the marital act. They observe with patience and virtue the fertility-infertility cycles of the woman-wife to conceive or avoid conceiving.
Through NFP, couples learn to treat sexual pleasure in a secondary way. If you will try it you will also experience it, Mr. Tiblani.
Oh by the way, Fr. Bernas? Sorry, he's not infallible. Just because you think he's a Catholic priest, I will believe what he thinks and say. I base by beliefs on sound Catholic doctrine contained in the Magisterium not the opinion of a Jesuit priest. One must know the difference. To explain where I'm coming from I quote from an article, "The Catholic Faith is unique among all religions in that it contains within it a divinely guaranteed principle of authority, namely the Magisterium of the successors of Peter, and their universal jurisdiction over the entire Church. Against this authority, which comes from God Himself, it is impossible to appeal. And it is precisely her possession of this authority which makes Catholicism unique among all religions, the only faith which is guaranteed by God Himself to be true." Taken from
ReplyDeletehttp://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/articles.cfm?id=541&repos=6&subrepos=1&searchid=897731