2 of 12

The news articles about this study focus on Roman Catholic doctrine, but Catholic teaching  on this matter is based on natural law and the connection between sex and procreation: "Each and every marital act must of necessity retain its intrinsic relationship to the procreation of human life." The church does not obligate couples to do everything in their power to create babies. It excludes acts "specifically intended to prevent procreation—whether as an end or as a means." If the Catholic church doesn't object to curative medical procedures that have the secondary effect of preventing pregnancy, then it's hardly going to object to an increased risk of non-implantation created by a sexual act at what would still be considered an infertile period. 1968's Humane Vitae explains that it's what's natural that's important:

Neither the Church nor her doctrine is inconsistent when she considers it lawful for married people to take advantage of the infertile period but condemns as always unlawful the use of means which directly prevent conception, even when the reasons given for the latter practice may appear to be upright and serious. In reality, these two cases are completely different. In the former the married couple rightly use a faculty provided them by nature. In the latter they obstruct the natural development of the generative process.

In other words, Catholics aren't going to have a problem with this. And Protestants generally don't object to artificial birth control. Those who do object either agree with Humane Vitae or they're concerned about artificial contraceptives that unnaturally prevent implantation but not barrier methods. Bovens compares the "rhythm method" (which, as Weblog has said before, is not the same as natural family planning) to barrier methods like condoms. That's nonsensical. But so is comparing a natural sexual act that may incidentally result in nonimplantation to chemicals or wires specifically designed to make the uterus hostile to embryonic life.

Bovens isn't arguing with anyone. He's just presenting a straw man designed to make pro-lifers look inconsistent.

4. Another priest guilty of satanic murders?
Just days after an Ohio jury convicted a Toledo priest of a 1980 murder with strong satanic overtones comes this story from Australia: "The Catholic Church has accepted as substantially true allegations that a Melbourne priest took part in satanic rituals in which a number of people were murdered." The priest in that case, however, is now dead, so there will be no trial to prove the allegations.

5. The Christian Science Monitor: Are short-term missions just vacations?
"By the millions, Americans are jumping at the chance to become missionaries—with one key stipulation of the 21st century: They expect to get their comfortable lives back a few days later." So begins a Christian Science Monitor piece briefly examining whether short-term missions are worth it, either for the missionaries or those they serve. Last summer, Christianity Today Online asked similar questions in a conversation between Kurt Ver Beek and Robert Priest.

Quote of the day:
"God's got another plan right now."

—Former Enron chief Ken Lay, to his family after being convicted of fraud and conspiracy charges. He later told supporters, "We'll all come through this stronger and more reliant on God. … God will answer prayers."

Religious employment exemption | Education | Natural family planning study | Life ethics | Politics | Religious displays | Gambling | Church, state, and religious freedom | Military | Sudan | Zimbabwe | Anglican bishop "abandoned" | Church life | Church building disputes | Pope in Poland | Catholicism | Abuse | Crime | La. church shooting | Haddad case | Homosexuality | Healing | Missions & ministry | People | Da Vinci Code | Other articles of interest

next page... |  2 of 12

share this page

May (Web-only) 2006, Vol. 50