No communion for Obama supporters

[ForeverRoses]

Originally Posted by Jill1228

Point taken. But with IUI (inter uterine insemination), conception is in the womb. However, the male counterpart has to do his donation outside the womb (and yes, I know the church looks down on "handling your business")...so is that a no?

So if a couple has done all the low tech procedures and some of the higher tech (IUI) and have resort to IVF, gestational carriers, or surrogacy are they SOL and should not be able to take communion?

Just wondering

Okay- here is the info on IUI as it was explained to me. I hope this post doesn't stop me from getting a job with the Obama admin.

There is a device that allows for the collection of semen while a "normal" copulation is taking place. Think a condom with holes in it to allow some semen to flow through, while collecting some as well.
This device allows that "no seed is being spilled". It also allows for semen to be tested for things like sperm count. This semen can theorectically also be used for IUI. using this method, IUI would be acceptable. Again, the Pope Paul VI Institute (it is in Omaha) would be the best resource for someone wanting to know the details.

The Roman Catholic Church also does not have a stand (currently) on Embryo adoption, so that is another alternative for a couple that cannot concieve on their own, but wants to follow church teaching.

Should people who go outside the Roman Catholic Church teachings be denyed communion? Personally, who am I to judge someone else? However I don't completely understand why you would WANT to take communion if you disagreed with major church teachings.

[honeychile]

Originally Posted by ForeverRoses

Okay- here is the info on IUI as it was explained to me. I hope this post doesn't stop me from getting a job with the Obama admin.

There is a device that allows for the collection of semen while a "normal" copulation is taking place. Think a condom with holes in it to allow some semen to flow through, while collecting some as well.
This device allows that "no seed is being spilled". It also allows for semen to be tested for things like sperm count. This semen can theorectically also be used for IUI. using this method, IUI would be acceptable. Again, the Pope Paul VI Institute (it is in Omaha) would be the best resource for someone wanting to know the details.

The Roman Catholic Church also does not have a stand (currently) on Embryo adoption, so that is another alternative for a couple that cannot concieve on their own, but wants to follow church teaching.

Should people who go outside the Roman Catholic Church teachings be denyed communion? Personally, who am I to judge someone else? However I don't completely understand why you would WANT to take communion if you disagreed with major church teachings.

Not being Catholic, I don't have a dog in this fight. However, when my ex and I went for premarital counseling (mandatory in our church), we were told that the IUD is prohibited in our church. The concept behind it is that the IUD allows fertilization of an egg, but doesn't allow the fertilized egg to implant into the uterus. The IUD basically does the job of a D&C, so that even if a gamete is able to implant itself, sooner or later, the IUD will scrape it (or worse, part of it) off.

Catholic friends of mine who couldn't conceive were told that they must refuse IVF, or even artificial insemination. While I can somewhat understand religious grounds for IVF, if a couple undergoes artificial insemination then has normal relations, who would know which sperm impregnated the egg? But that may be my limited understanding on the process.

I completely understand your last paragraph.

[OneTimeSBX]

Originally Posted by honeychile

Not being Catholic, I don't have a dog in this fight. However, when my ex and I went for premarital counseling (mandatory in our church), we were told that the IUD is prohibited in our church. The concept behind it is that the IUD allows fertilization of an egg, but doesn't allow the fertilized egg to implant into the uterus. The IUD basically does the job of a D&C, so that even if a gamete is able to implant itself, sooner or later, the IUD will scrape it (or worse, part of it) off.

i was told my by OBGYN that depending on which IUD you chose, it only prevents implantation by irritating the uterus, or causing damage to the egg or sperm. ive never read anywhere (and trust me i did a LOT of research before i got mines!) about it scraping anything off...

[Munchkin03]

Originally Posted by OneTimeSBX

i was told my by OBGYN that depending on which IUD you chose, it only prevents implantation by irritating the uterus, or causing damage to the egg or sperm. ive never read anywhere (and trust me i did a LOT of research before i got mines!) about it scraping anything off...

This is what I found on Wikipedia, so YMMV:

"The presence of a device in the uterus prompts the release of leukocytes and prostaglandins by the endometrium. These substances are hostile to both sperm and eggs; the presence of copper increases this spermicidal effect.[40][41] The current medical consensus is that spermicidal and ovicidal mechanisms are the only way in which IUDs work.[35]"

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by Munchkin03

This is what I found on Wikipedia, so YMMV:

"The presence of a device in the uterus prompts the release of leukocytes and prostaglandins by the endometrium. These substances are hostile to both sperm and eggs; the presence of copper increases this spermicidal effect.[40][41] The current medical consensus is that spermicidal and ovicidal mechanisms are the only way in which IUDs work.[35]"

When I read this on Wikipedia it was followed by a sentence that said "Still, a few physicians have suggested they may have a secondary effect of interfering with the development of pre-implanted embryos;[42]"

[Munchkin03]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

When I read this on Wikipedia it was followed by a sentence that said "Still, a few physicians have suggested they may have a secondary effect of interfering with the development of pre-implanted embryos;[42]"

Ooops, I thought I had included that line as well. But, that still doesn't = scraping. Because, if the IUD was really scraping up womens' endometriae, there'd be many more infections and deaths, right?

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by Munchkin03

Ooops, I thought I had included that line as well. But, that still doesn't = scraping. Because, if the IUD was really scraping up womens' endometriae, there'd be many more infections and deaths, right?

I think I missed the whole scraping conversation. I happened to look this up earlier in the thread to see if they were still listed as working partially by preventing implantation.

I think there were a lot of infections and deaths or maybe just infections and lasting infertility with previous versions, but I think IUDs seem to be coming back in an improved form. On the previous version: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalkon_Shield

[ForeverRoses]

Originally Posted by honeychile

Not being Catholic, I don't have a dog in this fight. However, when my ex and I went for premarital counseling (mandatory in our church), we were told that the IUD is prohibited in our church. The concept behind it is that the IUD allows fertilization of an egg, but doesn't allow the fertilized egg to implant into the uterus. The IUD basically does the job of a D&C, so that even if a gamete is able to implant itself, sooner or later, the IUD will scrape it (or worse, part of it) off.

Catholic friends of mine who couldn't conceive were told that they must refuse IVF, or even artificial insemination. While I can somewhat understand religious grounds for IVF, if a couple undergoes artificial insemination then has normal relations, who would know which sperm impregnated the egg? But that may be my limited understanding on the process.

I completely understand your last paragraph.

True- that is one reason why IUDs are a no-no. Some NFP practioners will also tell you that Birth Control Pills can cause a failure to implant- so you do have fertilization but not implantation. And if you believe that life begins at conception- is that at fertilization, implantation or both?

And the prohibition behind artificial insemination goes back to the "spilled seed" argument. In order to get the sperm, the sperm donor would usually need to masterbate. That is a no-no per Roman Catholic Church teaching. So AI is (artificial insemination as apposed to alumni initiation) wrong because of the means used to gather the sperm. The only acceptable way to have AI is if the sperm is gathered as I outlined above, and I believe it can only come from the husband.

IVF is always a no-no since fertilization occurs outside the womb. it also brings up the issue of what to do with the fertilized but unused eggs. (which could be one reason there has never been a statement on embryo adoption).

[nittanyalum]

Originally Posted by ForeverRoses

The only acceptable way to have AI is if the sperm is gathered as I outlined above, and I believe it can only come from the husband.

So condom use = ok to get pregnant. But condom use =/= ok to not get pregnant.

I am Catholic. My entire family is Catholic. But it's 2008. Having stringent rules against sex education, birth control AND abortion are conflicting, confusing and out of touch with people's reality. It's 2008.

But I agree with whoever said you just need to go find another church. We "parish-shopped". Seriously. There's a church not a 1/4-mile from us that is what I think of as "old-line" Catholic church. Did not enjoy it there. At all. We found another parish that is much ... trying to think of the word ... "friendlier"? I remember when I walked in and saw a plaque that said "all are welcome here" and there was a huge mural of a smiling Jesus I thought, "hm, now this isn't what I'm used to!" It's a great parish, it's a comfortable parish, our pastor (who happens to be African American) is one of the most laid-back, personable priests I have EVER known and he's never once given us an ultimatum about being Catholic OR voting the way he (or the Church) might think is "right". He's just glad to see us every week.

[epchick]

Originally Posted by honeychile

The IUD basically does the job of a D&C, so that even if a gamete is able to implant itself, sooner or later, the IUD will scrape it (or worse, part of it) off.

Although this might be true a lot of the time, you'd be surprised how many children are born even though the mother has/had an IUD.

I know at least 5 people who were "IUD babies" and they are all perfectly healthy.

This post is exactly why I previously posted that this is an issue for Catholics. Your definition of grace is not the issue here, and your post indicates that you do not understand Catholic teachings on grace or of ordination and priesthood.

So then what is the Catholic definition of Grace?

I was a Catholic for 12 years, and when we left the church I really wanted to go back, UNTIL I found old Catechism booklets I had and read that (as a Catholic) i'm suppose to believe that Jesus Christ came down, not to die on the cross & save us from eternal damnation, but to build & found the Catholic Church. There is your "Catholic teachings" for ya.

[Munchkin03]

Originally Posted by epchick

Although this might be true a lot of the time, you'd be surprised how many children are born even though the mother has/had an IUD.

I know at least 5 people who were "IUD babies" and they are all perfectly healthy.

But the whole "scraping" thing is a myth, it seems. Just like how a lot of people think the Pill works by making your body think it's pregnant.

All BC has a possibility of failure, even with perfect use.

[SWTXBelle]

Originally Posted by epchick

I was a Catholic for 12 years, and when we left the church I really wanted to go back, UNTIL I found old Catechism booklets I had and read that (as a Catholic) i'm suppose to believe that Jesus Christ came down, not to die on the cross & save us from eternal damnation, but to build & found the Catholic Church. There is your "Catholic teachings" for ya.

The two aren't mutually exclusive. If, as Roman Catholics do, you believe that the Church is the way to salvation, then in fact Jesus came down to found the Roman Catholic Church TO save you from eternal damnation. Again, I'm not RC, but that's my understanding.

[epchick]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

The two aren't mutually exclusive. If, as Roman Catholics do, you believe that the Church is the way to salvation, then in fact Jesus came down to found the Roman Catholic Church TO save you from eternal damnation. Again, I'm not RC, but that's my understanding.

I don't ever remember learning it so i'm not exactly sure if that is what they are implying, but here is what it says (verbatim):

"Why did Jesus come down to earth?

God sent Jesus to earth so that he could found the Catholic Church"


I've also always wondered if other Catholics (in an area that is not predominantly Hispanic) have such an "admiration" to the Virgin Mary that the Hispanic (mainly Mexican) Catholics do.

[ISUKappa]

Originally Posted by epchick

I don't ever remember learning it so i'm not exactly sure if that is what they are implying, but here is what it says (verbatim):

"Why did Jesus come down to earth?

God sent Jesus to earth so that he could found the Catholic Church"

According to dicionary.com, one of the definitions of catholic is

# Catholic

1. Of or involving the Roman Catholic Church.
2. Of or relating to the universal Christian church.
3. Of or relating to the ancient undivided Christian church.
4. Of or relating to those churches that have claimed to be representatives of the ancient undivided church.

so the catechism may be referring to the ancient undivided church as opposed to the Roman Catholic church. I know in our hymnals (LCMS Lutheran) there's a footnote in the Apostle's Creed where it states the word Christian in one spot used to be catholic. I believe other denominations still use the term catholic when they recite the creed.

Or maybe Roman Catholics are really that self-centered.

[epchick]

Originally Posted by ISUKappa

According to dicionary.com, one of the definitions of catholic is
so the catechism may be referring to the ancient undivided church as opposed to the Roman Catholic church. I know in our hymnals (LCMS Lutheran) there's a footnote in the Apostle's Creed where it states the word Christian in one spot used to be catholic. I believe other denominations still use the term catholic when they recite the creed.

Or maybe Roman Catholics are really that self-centered.

Even if they are referring to the "undivided church," I'm pretty sure that Jesus didn't come to earth to form a church. I think Jesus was more concerned about people's salvation than "hey let me create a church and then name the followers after myself"

I agree with your last point thought! lol