Another Contraception Thread - serious health concern

[Ron_Conte]

The Church teaches (irreformably) that using a contraceptive in marriage to avoid conceiving a child is immoral.

That is a severe distortion of Church teaching on contraception. The teaching of the Magisterium condemning contraception as intrinsically evil is not limited to its use in marriage, nor is it limited to its use for the purpose (intention) of avoiding conception. Intrinsically evil acts are always immoral, regardless of intention or circumstances.

The absence of a contraceptive intention (to avoid conceiving a child) and the circumstance that the couple is not married do not justify the use of contraception. Intrinsically evil acts are not justified by any purpose, intention, circumstance, or context.

 

[Rau]

That is a severe distortion of Church teaching on contraception. The teaching of the Magisterium condemning contraception as intrinsically evil is not limited to its use in marriage, nor is it limited to its use for the purpose (intention) of avoiding conception. Intrinsically evil acts are always immoral, regardless of intention or circumstances.

The absence of a contraceptive intention (to avoid conceiving a child) and the circumstance that the couple is not married do not justify the use of contraception. Intrinsically evil acts are not justified by any purpose, intention, circumstance, or context.

I make no comment on what the church teaches in contexts other than marriage. I just point out what it does teach in that context. Look at the CCC for example. The teaching is placed squarely in that context. I am not arguing it belongs there exclusively.

Use of drugs with a contraceptive effect need not be the moral wrong of contraception. The contraceptive effect is neither means nor end in various medical scenarios. It is side-effect. You again limit assessment of the object by purely physical/observable factors.

 

[davidv]

I make no comment on what the church teaches in contexts other than marriage. I just point out what it does teach in that context. Look at the CCC for example. The teaching is placed squarely in that context. I am not arguing it belongs there exclusively.

Use of drugs with a contraceptive effect need not be the moral wrong of contraception. The contraceptive effect is neither means nor end in various medical scenarios. It is side-effect. You again limit assessment of the object by purely physical/observable factors.

The point that is apparently being made is that restricting the context to the explicitly documented one is not acceptable when the moral object is an intrinsic evil. In doing so, there seems be an acknowledgement of a possible exception, when none exists.

 

[Rau]

The point that is apparently being made is that restricting the context to the explicitly documented one is not acceptable when the moral object is an intrinsic evil. In doing so, there seems be an acknowledgement of a possible exception, when none exists.

I’m not restricting it - I’ve posted elsewhere on contraception outside marriage, and acts which look like contraception outside marriage (eg. Post rape treatment) but are not.

It is the case that reading only the CCC, HV and CC, one could well conclude that those documents discuss the context of marriage only.