Allergic to semen... Condoms okay?

  • Thread starter Thread starter SanctaMommy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Havard said:
The condom proscription actually does seem different to me.

Sorry to be graphic, but if he uses a condom, he’s got to throw the semen away. That’s seems a lot less unitive than in the instance where the woman takes the pill for medicinal purposes. Does anyone else feel like the act of throwing away semen into a trash bin makes the act a whole lot different?
Click to expand...
Yes, I see what you’re saying. I thought the suggestion earlier of poking a hole in the condom was a good one. Perhaps since very little would get through she would not have a severe reaction? I guess they would not know until they tried. But I am pretty sure that would be licit, since that is what Catholic men can do if they need to give a semen sample to their doctor.
 
because condomistic intercourse directly contradicts and violates marital relations. According to the criteria of the principle of double effect, the action at issue must be morally good or at least neutral. That is clearly not the case here.
Click to expand...
If I were actually having a two sided conversation with this priest, I would ask him to explain to me why the birth control pill fits under the principal of double effect then, but he’s not here so I can’t ask him. I’d also ask him about the whole condom with a hole to get a sperm sample. Does he think organizations that say that the Church approve this are wrong. How does a lack of hole in the condom directly contradict and violate marital relations while the hole doesn’t? And these are not rhetorical questions. Growing in understanding of these things helps to develop one’s conscience and I think can prevent scruplocity.

Either way, there is more morality to navigate in this circumstance and as such I’d advise private spiritual direction, and I would advise that once she has sought spiritual direction that no one is sitting there ready to condemn the adviser if he gives advise you disagree on. His creditibility as an orthodox priest loyal to the magistirum should be judged before you seek his council. You’re not seeking his council if you’re determining his trustworthiness by his answer. I say this because I know for instance that the issue on embryo adoption is still a legitimately discussed topic. It seems to be leaning toward it being wrong, but its not an issue where those arguing for it are denying Divine Revelation, acting as Cafeteria Catholics or what have you.
 
iloveangels said:
It’s LEWD in a public forum. I don’t want to hear about some stranger’s stinking body parts.

This is properly a medical and moral issue and needs to be discussed with doctor and priest, not in public. It’s LEWD in a public context like this.

Some people have no shame.
Click to expand...
Sexual issues are a tricky issue to discuss the morality about and thus to discern properly. When discussing it with a priest, you’re stuck with his lack of experience with sex. I never thought this would ever be a problem till I got married and found the act wasn’t as easy as I expected and didn’t work the way I expected. I realized my misunderstandings about sex while I was a virgin can be embraced by any virgin and taint advise. That’s not to say that the Church has no authority. We’re talking about magisterial authority here, not authority of the priest himself. But the priest may be limited in his ability to apply all the moral issues to sex. So this leads to the temptation to get very detailed about sex with the priest, which can seem imprudent and just strange. I’ve had priests tell me they’re not qualified and to talk to other married couples. The married couples than point me in the direction of the priest.
 
iloveangels said:
Talk to your priest and your doctor. This is not the kind of thing that gets solved on CAF. In fact, it’s LEWD in a public forum. Particularly a Catholic forum. It’s about what’s in your underpants, in case you haven’t noticed. YUCK.

The things people will type into the internet! Makes you wonder. :eek:
Click to expand...
Sorry, sad truth: there are much worse things going on than medical discussions… all over the internet! This person is trying to get moral guidance about a sensitive topic. Perhaps we should be thankful that the poster is trying to do so here instead of other… less savory places.
 
Debora123 said:
No, they are not the only 2 choices that I would accept. However, since the Church apparently doesn’t allow condom use in this case, they are the only 2 choices the Church would allow. Either deal with it/find a cure/treatment, or stop having sex. If you believe the Church has other options out there, you are free to list a few. Otherwise it’s no use telling me there are other options when you can’t even list any yourself.

Ok.
Click to expand...
Actually what I see merely by the Church is the affirmation that contraceptives (including condoms) are immoral and cannot be rationalized. Even with the HIV issue, I never see them advocate abstainence. The Church doesn’t offer any answers. Its like telling a child “no, no” and slapping their hand away, but not telling them what an alternative is. You think of “Ok maybe this” but then you actually go to that area and again the answer is no. You get into the conjugal rights thing. This leads to the possible third conclusion: the individuals’ health and pain when they engage in sex is irrelevant. It is more important to do sex the correct way than to care for each other’s health. This then goes opposed to the basic command of loving your neighbor. Meanwhile Christ says that the commandments all fall under the category of loving God and loving neighbor. As such, everything in regards to chastity is in an understanding that unchaste acts oppose love. This makes sense when it comes to the procreative value: the value of human life which would lead to the sacredness of the sexual act. Then there is what the act expresses (total self donation). This all makes wonderful and beautiful sense until you get people claiming that treatments for medical conditions that thwart the nature of the act against the couple’s will somehow put the couple in a category of “You are doomed to sin by the letter of the law.”

As such, the reason to disagree is that you have to. There is no conclusion to reach that doesn’t violate one of the Church’s teachings. One of the teachings is being misrepresented. Now we all talk the contraceptive issue to death because we’re obsessed about sex and about birth control and people’s desires to have sex without getting pregnant. Its like this overambitious drive to make sure we’re not ever appearing to approve of their sins. But let’s negate and push against the marriage debt a little bit? We all don’t seem to obsess about that one. its not one of the overdiscussed issues that a simple search on the internet actually comes up with a million and a half hypothetical situations violating the marriage debt. There are a few, but mostly not. After all, most people are pretty happy to have sex.

Are we actually discussing what the Church is teaching, or is this mixing in with cultural trends happening around the Church?

What I can say with certainity is what is clear: contraceptives are immoral. Their uses for other situations are tricky moral ground with many voices condemning it that seem to be in authority. So therefore tread carefully, but that doesn’t mean this isn’t a case being overly scruplous.
 
twoangels said:
Sexual issues are a tricky issue to discuss the morality about and thus to discern properly. When discussing it with a priest, you’re stuck with his lack of experience with sex. I never thought this would ever be a problem till I got married and found the act wasn’t as easy as I expected and didn’t work the way I expected. I realized my misunderstandings about sex while I was a virgin can be embraced by any virgin and taint advise. That’s not to say that the Church has no authority. We’re talking about magisterial authority here, not authority of the priest himself. But the priest may be limited in his ability to apply all the moral issues to sex. So this leads to the temptation to get very detailed about sex with the priest, which can seem imprudent and just strange. I’ve had priests tell me they’re not qualified and to talk to other married couples. The married couples than point me in the direction of the priest.
Click to expand...
I’m still a virgin, so I don’t know how much help I can be. But I was just thinking…Is it possible to talk to an Eastern Catholic priest about this? Even on the phone possibly? Eastern Catholics are married and have relations with their wives and are priests- That sounds like a good place to get advice for marital (sexual) questions as regards Catholic morality. Since they are so few, perhaps even a phone conversation would do. Medical issues can only be sorted out medically, of course, but Catholic morality should always be consulted in these matters.

What do you think?
 
twoangels said:
Sexual issues are a tricky issue to discuss the morality about and thus to discern properly. When discussing it with a priest, you’re stuck with his lack of experience with sex. I never thought this would ever be a problem till I got married and found the act wasn’t as easy as I expected and didn’t work the way I expected. I realized my misunderstandings about sex while I was a virgin can be embraced by any virgin and taint advise. That’s not to say that the Church has no authority. We’re talking about magisterial authority here, not authority of the priest himself. But the priest may be limited in his ability to apply all the moral issues to sex. So this leads to the temptation to get very detailed about sex with the priest, which can seem imprudent and just strange. I’ve had priests tell me they’re not qualified and to talk to other married couples. The married couples than point me in the direction of the priest.
Click to expand...
I’m still a virgin, so I don’t know how much help I can be. But I was just thinking…Is it possible to talk to an Eastern Catholic priest about this? Even on the phone possibly? Eastern Catholic clergy are married and have relations with their wives and are priests (and orthodox, hopefully)- That sounds like a good place to get advice for marital (sexual) questions as regards Catholic morality. Since they are so few, perhaps even a phone conversation would do. Medical issues can only be sorted out medically, of course, but Catholic morality should always be consulted in these matters.

What do you think?
 
twoangels said:
Sexual issues are a tricky issue to discuss the morality about and thus to discern properly. When discussing it with a priest, you’re stuck with his lack of experience with sex. I never thought this would ever be a problem till I got married and found the act wasn’t as easy as I expected and didn’t work the way I expected. I realized my misunderstandings about sex while I was a virgin can be embraced by any virgin and taint advise. That’s not to say that the Church has no authority. We’re talking about magisterial authority here, not authority of the priest himself. But the priest may be limited in his ability to apply all the moral issues to sex. So this leads to the temptation to get very detailed about sex with the priest, which can seem imprudent and just strange. I’ve had priests tell me they’re not qualified and to talk to other married couples. The married couples than point me in the direction of the priest.
Click to expand...
I’m still a virgin, so I don’t know how much help I can be. But I was just thinking…Is it possible to talk to an Eastern Catholic priest about this? Even on the phone possibly? Eastern Catholic clergy are married and have relations with their wives and are priests (and are orthodox in their catholicism, hopefully)- That sounds like a good place to get advice for marital (sexual) questions as regards Catholic morality. Since they are so few, perhaps even a phone conversation would do. Medical issues can only be sorted out medically, of course, but Catholic morality should always be consulted in these matters.

What do you think?
 
twoangels said:
Sexual issues are a tricky issue to discuss the morality about and thus to discern properly. When discussing it with a priest, you’re stuck with his lack of experience with sex. I never thought this would ever be a problem till I got married and found the act wasn’t as easy as I expected and didn’t work the way I expected. I realized my misunderstandings about sex while I was a virgin can be embraced by any virgin and taint advise. That’s not to say that the Church has no authority. We’re talking about magisterial authority here, not authority of the priest himself. But the priest may be limited in his ability to apply all the moral issues to sex. So this leads to the temptation to get very detailed about sex with the priest, which can seem imprudent and just strange. I’ve had priests tell me they’re not qualified and to talk to other married couples. The married couples than point me in the direction of the priest.
Click to expand...
I’m still a virgin, so I don’t know how much help I can be. But I was just thinking…Is it possible to talk to an Eastern Catholic priest about this? Even on the phone possibly? Eastern Catholic clergy are married and have relations with their wives and are priests (and are orthodox in their Catholicism, hopefully)- That sounds like a good place to get advice for marital (sexual) questions as regards Catholic morality. Since they are so few, perhaps even a phone conversation would do. Medical issues can only be sorted out medically, of course, but Catholic morality should always be consulted in these matters.

What do you think?
 
twoangels said:
Sexual issues are a tricky issue to discuss the morality about and thus to discern properly. When discussing it with a priest, you’re stuck with his lack of experience with sex. I never thought this would ever be a problem till I got married and found the act wasn’t as easy as I expected and didn’t work the way I expected. I realized my misunderstandings about sex while I was a virgin can be embraced by any virgin and taint advise. That’s not to say that the Church has no authority. We’re talking about magisterial authority here, not authority of the priest himself. But the priest may be limited in his ability to apply all the moral issues to sex. So this leads to the temptation to get very detailed about sex with the priest, which can seem imprudent and just strange. I’ve had priests tell me they’re not qualified and to talk to other married couples. The married couples than point me in the direction of the priest.
Click to expand...
I’m still a virgin, so I don’t know how much help I can be. But I was just thinking…Is it possible to talk to an Eastern Catholic priest about this? Even on the phone possibly? Eastern Catholic clergy are married and have relations with their wives and are priests (and are orthodox in their Catholicism, hopefully)- That sounds like a good place to get advice for marital (sexual) questions as regards Catholic morality. Since they are so few, perhaps even a phone conversation would do. Medical issues can only be sorted out medically, of course, but Catholic morality should always be consulted in these matters.

What do you think?

Also to add: What about Opus Dei supernumeraries? They are VERY orthodox and faithful to both Catholicism and marriage according to God’s plan- Please find an opus dei centre and talk to a supernumerary wife/couple (Opus Dei priests will also handle you sensitively and will not take marital questions as too “lewd” to discuss). The couple will advise you on what language to use with the priest at confession/other discussions so that you express yourself and communicate your issue and maintain decency at the same time.

Find peace, OP.
 
Debora123 said:
You know, I was thinking too about the fact that the Church considers it licit for a woman who has been raped to take the morning after pill (as long as conception hasn’t occurred yet) in order to prevent a pregnancy.

Likewise, taking this morning after pill doesn’t “cure” anything… it merely prevents something. In this case it prevents a child from conceiving.

I wonder then, how this can be licit… but wearing a condom to prevent allergic reaction from semen is not?
Click to expand...
It is confusing!
 
Debora123 said:
You know, I was thinking too about the fact that the Church considers it licit for a woman who has been raped to take the morning after pill (as long as conception hasn’t occurred yet) in order to prevent a pregnancy.

Likewise, taking this morning after pill doesn’t “cure” anything… it merely prevents something. In this case it prevents a child from conceiving.

I wonder then, how this can be licit… but wearing a condom to prevent allergic reaction from semen is not?
Click to expand...
You know for what it’s worth thank the Lord almighty that the Church considers the morning after pill licit for that purpose, I would have a really tough time the other way around.
 
Debora123 said:
No, they are not the only 2 choices that I would accept. However, since the Church apparently doesn’t allow condom use in this case, they are the only 2 choices the Church would allow. Either deal with it/find a cure/treatment, or stop having sex. If **you believe the Church has other options out there, you are free to list a few. **Otherwise it’s no use telling me there are other options when you can’t even list any yourself.
Click to expand...
I just gave you two more, so that’s four licit options. :banghead:
 
Debora123 said:
You know, I was thinking too about the fact that the Church considers it licit for a woman who has been raped to take the morning after pill (as long as conception hasn’t occurred yet) in order to prevent a pregnancy.

Likewise, taking this morning after pill doesn’t “cure” anything… it merely prevents something. In this case it prevents a child from conceiving.

I wonder then, how this can be licit… but wearing a condom to prevent allergic reaction from semen is not?
Click to expand...
Again, you misreprent the teaching. The committee of Bishops (the Vatican has yet to make a definitive statement on this) have said that the use of the morning after pill *might *be licit if given before ovulation (not conception). The reasoning is that the rape, and its results, being an unwanted agression, can be defended against.

The teaching of the Church regarding conception is always presented in the context of marriage. In the case of rape there is no marital act. In the OP’s case, it is all about the desire for the marital act.
 
Debora123 said:
You know, I was thinking too about the fact that the Church considers it licit for a woman who has been raped to take the morning after pill (as long as conception hasn’t occurred yet) in order to prevent a pregnancy.

Likewise, taking this morning after pill doesn’t “cure” anything… it merely prevents something. In this case it prevents a child from conceiving.

I wonder then, how this can be licit… but wearing a condom to prevent allergic reaction from semen is not?
Click to expand...
  1. From what I have read, it is the opinion of some moral theologians, not a teaching of The Church…and it would be if ovulation hasn’t happened. If the woman has ovulated, even if conception hasn’t happened, the pill could cause an abortion if conception happens after taking the pill since the pill does not prevent the union of the egg and sperm, it just prevents either ovulation or implantation.
  2. There is a HUGE difference between an act that is an act of violence and a marital act. No moral theologian that understands the teachings of the Church would suggest that it is ok to use of the morning after pill to avoid ovulation (when it is known with certainty that ovulation hasn’t happened) as part of a healthy marital act. Rape is not a healthy marital act, the act was thwarted long before the victim is tested to see if she has ovulated. A condom in the marital act, and trying to avoid ovulation after rape is comparing apples and oranges.
 
Havard said:
The condom proscription actually does seem different to me.

Sorry to be graphic, but if he uses a condom, he’s got to throw the semen away. That’s seems a lot less unitive than in the instance where the woman takes the pill for medicinal purposes. Does anyone else feel like the act of throwing away semen into a trash bin makes the act a whole lot different?
Click to expand...
Sorry to get even more graphic and personal. :o

But The semen that goes into the women’s body doesn’t stay there. It leaks out over the course of the next 6 hours or so… in which time we usually wipe and throw away the toilet paper. :o
 
Corki said:
Again, you misreprent the teaching. The committee of Bishops (the Vatican has yet to make a definitive statement on this) have said that the use of the morning after pill *might *be licit if given before ovulation (not conception).
Click to expand...
You just love nitpicking at my comments don’t you?

My comment stated exactly what the Church teaches regarding the issue of the morning after pill, and exactly what you stated again above. If you want to get picky about semantics, go ahead. I’m not gonna waste my time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top