B
bzkoss236
Guest
No, it just means that you would sin if you avoided without serious reason. You are never required to have a child, and you are not required to have sex when you are fertile.
- Status
E
Em_in_FL
Guest
If there is a serious/grave/just reason to avoid having children, why wouldn’t you want the MOST effective method?
See? It’s not about having more potential to have children - or even being “open to life”! Some people have life and death situations when it comes to having children - REALLY GRAVE REASONS for avoiding conception.
The morality comes into play when you alter the act - because that ACT is SACRED. It is sacred because God designed it as the act through which a new, eternal soul is created.
B
BioNerd
Guest
Ok I’m sorry, I’m not trying to argue, but this just doesn’t make sense. If we have no serious reason to avoid, then by avoiding we’re sinning. So if we wanted to stay in a state of grace then wouldn’t we be required to have another? If we’re “never required to have a child” then why is it a sin to avoid them if we just don’t want one?
E
Em_in_FL
Guest
If you’re not in the mood to have sex, you’re not in the mood to have sex… easy.
But say hubby rolls over and says, “Hey sweetie…”
Wifey could, but decides to roll the other way because it’s too much effort.
Eh… not cool.
Dissing your husband like that can cause strife, right? Is that a sin? Maybe, depends on the situation…
Did she have a good reason? If so, that’s pretty easy to defend and a loving husband wouldn’t think twice listening to a good reason.
With NFP this discussion is usually had ahead of time and feelings aren’t caught up in the moment.
B
bzkoss236
Guest
There is a difference between avoiding and not being in the mood or just happening to not have sex. Actively avoiding without serious reason is sinful. If you’re not in the mood, or you just happen to not have sex, it is not sinful. It is the intent that makes it sinful.
Q
QuasiCatholic
Guest
What if you’re in the mood but the thought of getting pregnant puts you out of the mood?
Or for that matter, what if coitus interruptus occurs because you get a really bad leg cramp and have to stop?
B
bzkoss236
Guest
If you have to stop, you have to stop. Nothing immoral about having to stopping if something happens, like if you injure yourself or your kids happen to burst in
That’s different than being in the mood and purposefully avoiding (or denying your spouse) without good reason.What if you’re in the mood but the thought of getting pregnant puts you out of the mood?
I
IBombAtomically
Guest
bzkoss did a good job of answering this for me, but I’d say we are not “required” to have children, but we do need to be open to life, to be open to God’s Will above our own. We see children as a blessing from God, and sometimes His will for us might include more or fewer children than what we, in our limited understanding, think is the best for us. Does that make sense at all? God doesn’t require us to intentionally conceive as many children as possible when, say, another pregnancy would be life-threatening to the mother, or another grave circumstance.
Thank you for the question! How does my answer seem similar or different from how your own faith background views the issue?
B
BioNerd
Guest
So if both spouses are in the mood but they don’t do anything because they just don’t want a baby, they’re sinning because they didn’t have sex?
R
RoseMary131
Guest
Have sex during what appears to be infertile time - so as to be united to your spouse while still being open to the NORMAL possibility of conceiving - is not removing the wife’s fertility from the union. The fertility does not exist by God’s design.
Normal possibility of conceiving could happen - meaning
- if the wife ovulates sooner or later than expected,
- ovulates twice by some chance,
- the sperm lives longer than expected,
- hormonal change due to illness or loss of sleep or increase stress,
- misreading fertility signs.
It is said the the marital embrace is actually a renewal of the Marriage Vows. It is a very physical “Two shall become One.”
Having sex during an infertile time - says you did nothing to not conceive on the infertile day. You engaged in a natural action of sexual love. You are Open to conceive if it were to occur. It is God’s design of the female body that keeps the union from conceiving.
Basically - if you are having sexual relations - you are saying - God we invite you to procreate a child with us. If naturally, we do not conceive - that is okay with us. If naturally, we do conceive - that is okay with us.
If you are having sexual relations and blocking the reproductive system so it can not work - you have said - “We choose to remove the normal possibility of children from our acts of sex.”
God put sexual love together in a two part way: Union of the Spouses and Procreation of Children.
When we take them apart - we have broken apart what his plan was for Sexual Love.
In wearing a condom and saying, “We are open to New Life if we conceive during this sexual union.” We are saying “If something slips, breaks, is defected - we will happily accept the child. God if you want to join the egg and sperm Miraculously - we will happily accept the child.” You really mean - “We don’t want our fertility today - we know we are a fertile couple today. We reject Your Gift of our fertility. We only want your gift of union with our Spouse - but not your gift of today’s fertility. Lord - We take away your gift of fertility today by blocking our sperm and egg during our sexual union.”
God doesn’t go around changing nature because its His will. The nature of a condom is to block egg and sperm. God can, if He wants, change how the condom work - but it is unlikely. The condom may fail - but that’s an “undesired” trait of the condom.
If I remove all the lights in my windowless room so I can’t see, then say “God if you want me to see, give me Light.” God allows the natural order to flow. Its still going to be dark in my room - no light. God could, if he wants, miraculously give me light - but not very likely.
Spermicide works to take away our fertility. Spermicide kills the life of the sperm and the life giving property of the man’s healthy fertility. (God’s design is killed or destroyed by the spermicide.)
It doesn’t matter that the couple still has direct contact with each others’ flesh - the purpose of the spermicide is to say, “God, We do not want the gift of the husband’s fertility today. We only want your design of joining us closer to each other, but not the design of fertility that you put with it.”
B
bzkoss236
Guest
It is considered ‘avoiding’ if they are choosing not to have sex at that moment with the explicit purpose of not wanting to possibly conceive.
Think of it this way:
If they would normally have sex, but are choosing not to solely because they do not want to possibly conceive, then it would be sinful.
E
Em_in_FL
Guest
Catechism says:
2368 A particular aspect of this responsibility concerns the regulation of procreation. For just reasons, spouses may wish to space the births of their children. It is their duty to make certain that their desire is not motivated by selfishness but is in conformity with the generosity appropriate to responsible parenthood.
T
thewanderer
Guest
What do you mean by they “just didn’t want a baby”? I think lots of people say something like that when there are real reasons behind it. But if you mean honestly and truly that there is no reason to not have kids, that their society needs more people for future generations, that they are perfectly capable in every respect, and decide to avoid having children anyway “just because” then, well, yeah, that would be selfish and so sinful. Humanity needs future generations to continue. If you are a married couple who truly has no reason to avoid leaves it up to others who have better reasons to avoid and for whom it would be more difficult to have and raise children then yes, that is sselfish, and so, obviously, sinful.
R
RoseMary131
Guest
Stopping sex in the “middle of sex” is not always coitus interruptus.
Coitus interruptus is to purposefully “stop” the sexual union for the purpose of avoiding the sperm from uniting with the egg.
Something that “interrupts” the couple during sex is an outside interference that took the couple away from their sexual union. The couple was not saying “No to the gift of fertility”. (The couple was probably saying, “Oh No, no interference.”)
B
BioNerd
Guest
Code:
Well I was baptized and raised Catholic, but it was more of a "mom dragged me to mass for 18 years of my life" kind of thing. Then I started school at UT Austin a year ago and I haven't been to church since. I felt a little guilty which is why I recently started learning more about the church, but I won't lie, some of the teachings (mainly contraception) just seem ridiculous to me. And then I read this and I find out its not just that. Apparently you really do need to have as many children as possible. People can euphemized it anyway they want, but that's basically it. If you have the means (physical, mental, finacial, emotional) to squeez in another child, whether it comes or not, you need to throw caution to the wind, or you're sinning. And I just don't agree with that.
I wholeheartedly agree that kids are gifts and that's why I want to be able to provide all the love and opportunities I can possibly give them. After reading some threads on this, people here make it sound that just because someone wants to have a comfortable life with a small number of children, they're the most selfish human beings in the world. Selfish to who? A baby that doesn't even exist? A society that clearly is NOT going to go extinct just because a couple chooses to maybe stop having kids after number 3? What if they help out with charities and orphanages instead? None of that counts because they simply don't want another kid? I'm really sorry if I offended anyone, thats definitely not my intention. I'm just trying to learn more about my faith but right now it doesn't look very appealing to me...
Q
QuasiCatholic
Guest
Amen.
T
thewanderer
Guest
Again, “wanting a comfortable life” is different than “just because”. Depending on who you ask different standards of comfort will be acceptable reasons for avoiding children. Thing is all of those different opinions are just that, opinions. Church teaching leaves it up to the couple to discern for themselves whether their reasons are justified or selfish. If a couple has honestly sought after the truth in their situation and come to the conclusion that they are justified in avoiding kids then they are. We are to form our consciences according to Church teaching and then to trust them. Where there is no official teaching we are to use our judgement to determine what is the right course of action, of course keeping our decisions in line with official Church teaching. Don’t let others opinions turn you away from the Church. Instead pay attention to the difference between actual Church teaching and other people’s opinions about that teaching.
E
Em_in_FL
Guest
No, please don’t misunderstand - this doesn’t mean we have to keep on having children!!!
Re-read what the catechism says:
This is a very personal decision… some people have the capacity to handle more, others don’t - personalities and temperaments and situations are all unique between spouses, so it’s not up to anyone to tell YOU what should be right for YOU.
Re-read what the catechism says:
It should be a prayerful decision - asking God, “Am I making this decision selfishly?” Maybe not! Maybe 3 children is what you and your spouse have prayerfully decided to be “responsible parenthood”…
This is a very personal decision… some people have the capacity to handle more, others don’t - personalities and temperaments and situations are all unique between spouses, so it’s not up to anyone to tell YOU what should be right for YOU.
T
thewanderer
Guest
No, please don’t misunderstand - this doesn’t mean we have to keep on having children!!!
Re-read what the catechism says:
It should be a prayerful decision - asking God, “Am I making this decision selfishly?” Maybe not! Maybe 3 children is what you and your spouse have prayerfully decided to be “responsible parenthood”…
This is a very personal decision… some people have the capacity to handle more, others don’t - personalities and temperaments and situations are all unique between spouses, so it’s not up to anyone to tell YOU what should be right for YOU.
Exactly
P
Prodigal_Son
Guest
Understood. But I think it bears repeating that no Catholic has to have sex when they don’t want to. As for a person’s motivations, those are not things someone on the outside is capable of judging. As you have said, there are good motivations people can have to avoid having children. There are also selfish reasons to avoid the one-flesh union of lovemaking. Avoiding this union for selfish reasons is wrong – not “we’re going to send you to hell” wrong, but certainly less than ideal.
Contraceptives can be used with good intentions – no one is disputing that. But the nature of the contraceptive is to cheapen the sexual relationship. It has done this, by spawning a culture in which sexual pleasure is considered a valid reason for action – and this has been quite destructive, especially in the lives of young people and poor people.
- Status