When a court grants a decree of divorce, nullity of marriage or judicial separation it has the power to order ancillary relief.
She mentioned that she is on artificial birth control. Nor was he willing to have another child. This woman worked with her husband and decided that for them, artificial birth control was the best option. I intend this post to be the beginning of a conversation here on the blog for those women and men who struggle with this particular teaching.
I like NFP and I like having children. But I know that my experience is not the norm and I want to be sensitive to the real struggles of Catholics who want to be faithful but do practice some form of artificial contraception or sterilization. My goal here is not to challenge the moral teaching itself, but instead to provide resources for those people who find it difficult or even impossible to obey and to encourage the formation of appropriate pastoral responses for such people.
Authority First, of all, we should not that there are different levels teaching within the Church.
The highest level are those divinely revealed truths that are taught by both the universal and ordinary magisterium as infallible. These teachings require the obedience of faith.
Next we have definitive but non-revealed truths which are infallibly proposed though not revealed in themselves. These teachings require firm assent. Opposing such teachings is called error.
Then there are authoritative but not irreformable teachings that are not infallible but do require respect and obedience. The point of these teachings is to make explicit the content of divine revelation or to aid a better understanding of Revelation. There are other levels of authority too, in decreasing authority, that include disciplinary rules, theological opinions, and certain devotions like wearing a Miraculous Medal or praying the rosary.
Different people could argue about which teaching goes in each category. I would tend to place more abstract moral principles in the second level, like respect for human dignity, care for the poor, care for creation.
The teaching on abortion, for example, depends on how we define abortion and when we say life begins. These contingencies can lead to change or development over time in how we articulate the moral teaching specifically. It is well known, for example, that the teaching on abortion has developed so as to include the protection of the life of the fetus at the earliest levels.
This was not always the case. The point in bringing up this kind of complex point is to illustrate that while the teaching on birth control is incredibly important and authoritative, in fact, it demands our obedience, it is not of the highest level of authority.
Nor is it a teaching immune to development. How we articulate the teaching depends on how we define artificial with regards to contraception, as well as what we define as specifically contrary to the unitive and procreative dimension of sex. Furthermore, it is not sacrilege or heresy or even error to disagree with this third level of authoritative teachings.
It has a specific name. Dissent was a major concern after the promulgation of Humanae Vitae. Our own bishops laid out the norms for licit dissent, stipulating that one may dissent from a particular teaching only if reasons are serious and well founded, and if the the teaching authority of the Church is not undermined nor a cause for scandal.
Ad impossibilia nemo tenetur The next thing that we should note about the teaching on artificial contraception is that nobody is required to do the impossible. This is a well-established Catholic legal principle.
If, for example, you get deathly ill on Sunday, you are, of course, not required to fulfill your obligation to attend Mass. I think this principle gets neglected in the discussion of birth control. There are certain easy cases: In these cases, it is simply impossible to have non-contraceptive sex though there is the possibility of total abstinence.
But there are other cases that might make it impossible to practice non-contraceptive sex.Home > Judgments > archive. Radmacher (formerly Granatino) v Granatino  UKSC Appeal before the Supreme Court concerning the question of whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that pre-nuptial contracts ought to be given decisive weight, where entered into freely by both parties, in an assessment under section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act ; and also whether the.
Home > Judgments > archive. Radmacher (formerly Granatino) v Granatino  UKSC Appeal before the Supreme Court concerning the question of whether the Court of Appeal erred in finding that pre-nuptial contracts ought to be given decisive weight, where entered into freely by both parties, in an assessment under section 25 of the Matrimonial Causes Act ; and also whether the.
George Edward Moore (—) G.
E. Moore was a highly influential British philosopher of the early twentieth century. His career was spent mainly at Cambridge University, where he taught alongside Bertrand Russell and, later, Ludwig Wittgenstein.
* For the sake of simplicity and brevity, in this article we do not address some of the other views of how porneia should be translated in this text, such as an unlawful or illicit marriage or as premarital sex before or during betrothal. These views have been championed by many intelligent Catholic and Protestant commentators, and they are dealt with at length in my thesis.
Jun 09, · We are now approximately one-sixth of the way through the 21st century, and thousands of movies have already been released. Which means that it’s high time for the sorting – and the fighting. Port Manteaux churns out silly new words when you feed it an idea or two. Enter a word (or two) above and you'll get back a bunch of portmanteaux created by jamming together words that are conceptually related to your inputs..
For example, enter "giraffe" and you'll get .