Birth Control and Abstinance

[mattheus09]

I have been an an orthodox Catholic Priest that if a women chose to use the pill she would have to abstain from relations because, not only of the possible aborting effect, but also because of the contraceptive effect. He said double effect would only apply if the pill were used to save the life of the woman because the “good effect must be equal to or greater than the bad effect”. I have heard other people say that this is not true. Is what the priest said in accordance with Catholic teaching?

 

[mattheus09]

Anyone???

 

[Marc_Aupiais]

He’s right, you cannot risk abortion in any circumstance like that- drunk driving- or driving at extreme speeds is wrong, how much more russian roulette, based not on the chance of survival of the child, but live, and I kill you, what an assumption, and not a holy one.

c.f. scripturelink.googlepages.com/search
or see it’s articles on contaception and the bible. Marc

 

[mattheus09]

I actually disagree with him. I have heard Catholics go a bit further. Some think that one would have abstain the entire time because the “the good effect of sex” would not be equal to or outweigh “that of the bad effect”, even if the mother would have to talk the pill in order to live. The priest was said it would be permissible under these circumstances: Good Effect Saving Life of Women, bad effect possible death of baby. The Act of Saving the mother is morally good and the act of saving the life of the women is equal to the death of the baby and therefore it is morally permissible. However, they think that the bad effect should be compared to the good effects of the marital act, not the bad effect compared to the reason of the medication. The bad effect compared to the reason for the medication is entirely different situation. Is this correct an in line with Church teaching? Which one is correct?

 

[Aleii]

Below are quotes from the “Ask an apologist” section, which state that if a woman is using the pill for medical reasons, she is not obligated to abstain.

When taken as necessary for therapeutic reasons, use of “the pill” is not immoral. Humanae Vitae states, “the Church does not consider at all illicit the use of those therapeutic means necessary to cure bodily diseases, even if a foreseeable impediment to procreation should result there from—provided such impediment is not directly intended for any motive whatsoever” (HV 15).

Also, in such circumstances, abstinence is not required.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=15756&highlight=birth+control

The Church considers a miscarriage to be a physical evil. Since abortion DELIBERATELY causes a miscarriage, it is therefore also a MORAL evil. The Church sees an UNintended miscarriage as only a physical evil since it is not deliberately caused by the couple.

The use of the pill for medical reasons may cause an UNintended miscarriage. Women often have unintended miscarriages—sometimes without even knowing it. It is only miscarriages that are INTENDED that the Church considers immoral. The Church never allows the pill to be used as an abortifacient. But it does allow the use of the pill for medical reasons with the possiblity of producing an unintended miscarriage—without obliging the couple to abstain from sexual relations during that time.

Fr. Vincent Serpa, O.P.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=4618&highlight=birth+control

 

[Marc_Aupiais]

“necessary to cure bodily diseases”

If it is neccessary, perhaps, but not for pointless things, but I will research…

 

[Marc_Aupiais]

scripturelink.googlepages.com/search?cx=001763116401597409521%3Af7idlv7awxw&cof=FORID%3A11&q=pill+medical+reasons+more%3Aapologetics_and_evangelism#1140

I’ve heard that there is often, if not always a substitute for any immoral means, making this likely not “Necessary”, anything like this- being bought supports those who support abortion, but depending ho Necessary, it may even be a duty to your body, otherwise, contact a second advisor to give another pill, if there isn’t, and it is needed, then it’s up to the conscience and the confessor, and spiritual guide, but I’ll forward you specific question to the ask and apologist forum./B]

God bless, marc.

 

[Marc_Aupiais]

If you must do this, which I see as grey, at least, as your priest said so, and as I do not know enough, at least use NFP while on the pill, it is about 100% effective (see my signature), and may give you more chance of doing right, marc

I still feel uncomfortable, but I am sure an answer will emerge, but if it is moral, take my advice, marc.

 

[mattheus09]

I am a man, so I obviously won’t been worried about this personally. I do have respect for Father Serpa, he is a great priests, but I disagree with him on this issue. Contraceptive intercourse is always intrinsically evil and therefore breaks the 1st provision of Double Effect (the act must be morally neutral or good) and the act of having contraceptive intercourse is neither of those two. Therefore, abstinence would be required.

 

[Marc_Aupiais]

With what I added- i.e. other methods, I would say yes, perhaps we have misheard him

in any case, ask for clarification, I think that without danger, or no chance of childbearing, the morning after pill is always intrinsically evil, with need for absinence, but serpa can be misunderstood, no matter how cool we all know he is.

 

[mattheus09]

I just have a hard time understanding when two great priests say two totally opposite things (one need not abstain when using the pill for medical reasons, and the other one needs to because contraceptive intercourse is always evil and does not fulfill double effect). Are both positions permitted?

 

[Marc_Aupiais]

Not if we had all knowledge, I’m sure Father Serpa, a very Orthodox man, would object to “health reasons” like an 18 year old I know of who uses the pill for skin “improvement”, or any minor case- but he is not speaking of minor cases, but serious cases, where it is vital to health.

The priest you spoke to is right, but Serpa notes that miscarriages often happen, and his point that the abortion is not intended shows against one of the three requirements of mortal sin to a degree, so, it is complex, but I think he means serious issues, and further, this realm, while not necessarially defined as yet- still has a right and a wrong known in God- never disobey conscience (romans 14), when in such grey areas, because this is a dangerous place. I think again, that father serpa was speaking in a context, or misunderstood by us. I’ve often had people think me to say the weirdest things, or think I am not 100% catholic, and having always, even before my reversion, respectful of ideas like marriage, to clarify, I have always been chaste, but some have misunderstood my words, St.Paul and Jesus are still misunderstood by protestants, and some catholics seem to think oral sex acceptable (what the church says is about the acceptance of foreplay, not masturbation, and that spilling of the seed outside the place is utterly immoral, and mortal sin), others misunderstand much, so it could be that we have misunderstood his words, the other option, which is rare, is that either we or Serpa have wrong facts, yet I’d go with your confessor.

Otherwise, ask Serpa, but I think he was referring to a very specific circumstance. Marc

To answer, when things aren’t defined, go with conscience, and seek as much truth as viable, but there perhaps (haven’t looked enough to know) are some exceptions, if I am right, e.g. killing one so two may survive (c.f. Jonah chapter 1).

 

[mattheus09]

Thanks for all of your great insights and information. The priest that I am talking about was serious about there being no circumstances that would permit a person to have intercourse while on the pill for medical reasons. He said that a person could be on the pill for medical reasons, if the reasons outweighed the contraceptive effect and that all other options were looked into. He was admimant about abstaining not only because of the abortive aspect, but also because having intercourse while the body is prevented from procreating from the pill is intrinsically evil and double effect does not apply.

 

[mattheus09]

Thanks for all of your great insights and information. The priest that I am talking about was serious about there being no circumstances that would permit a person to have intercourse while on the pill for medical reasons. He said that a person could be on the pill for medical reasons, if the reasons outweighed the contraceptive effect and that all other options were looked into. He was admimant about abstaining not only because of the abortive aspect, but also because having intercourse while the body is prevented from procreating from the pill is intrinsically evil and double effect does not apply. Is this an acceptable Catholic position?

 

[Marc_Aupiais]

Yes, it is. (c.f. Romans 14), the dangerous road is better avoided- the position is correct, they should abstain from sexual intercouse, however, those whose conscience, and knowledge prevent them from having such distinction, could be in venial sin, or we could be wrong, but the stance of the priest is within the correct genre, just as any more conservative view is, but that does not yet or in any way obligate you to follow it, if there is sufficient doubts, but yes, the better of two goods is always better, if they can abstain, they must abstain, rather than choose something doubtful. Marc

 

[mattheus09]

Thank you so much for your help!

 

[Marc_Aupiais]

That said, things that cause infertility, such as hot baths for health reasons, are not always evil, if I am correct, but the manner in which procreation is utterly and artificially prevented in the pill may render a different rendering on it (and hot baths don’t always prevent what is questioned). So, yes, the first part is utterly acceptable, whether true or not, they should abstain, on the second part, whether it is always immoral with the pill, based on the very act of preventing child-birth, well, as I don’t know persay, I would accept my confessor’s advice, by being safe, but I have asked the apologists here for clarity, and think that unless a life is in danger, it is frivilous, and the fact they can abstain, means they have another option, so, I would say the advice of abstinance, is the Correct advise, as to his argument for it, there are canon lawyers to tell us that, and not simply very informed people about canon law. I will further inquire for you, marc.

 

[mattheus09]

Well, according to this priest, if you have intercourse when on the pill it is “contraceptive intercourse” and therefore is immoral. He said that this is also why double effect does not apply to married persons with std’s because condomistic intercourse is always evil. In both cases you are preventing procreation, which is (according to Father Peter Damian Fehlner, S.T.D.) “intrinsically evil”. So, it seems that, according to various theologians, there is a blanket condemnation of intercourse while on the pill (even for medical reasons) because contraceptive intercourse is evil. But I gather that this is in accordance with Catholic doctrine.

 

[Marc_Aupiais]

I would say yes if Father Serpa hadn’t said otherwise, remember, condoms actually prevent contact, violating a basic concept, the spilling of seed outside the womb (c.f. Onan; Sodom, Gommorah, Livitical law), so definitely, this is utterlly immoral,

Abortion, requires the life of the abortant,
so again, utterly immoral, in fact, there may be a blanket excommunication with the exception of when mother and child will die.

So, unless the very admittedly clever, and Orthodox Father Serpa has additional information, that we don’t have, then I do see this view in line with Catholic doctrine- that it is better and safer to either use another form of of healthcare, or abstain, as to the view that not abstaining is wrong, well it likely is, as there does seem to be that blanket excommunication, and for anything but life and death, i’d apply the principal used with drunkeness, and love of speed, that this is mortal sin, in order to get this additional information, we must ask Father Serpa, as he likely will tell us of the small exception he seems to be woprking on, but the view of the priest, cannot be condemned, just as communion on the tongue is better and the desire of the vatican, but communion on the hand is permitted when with reverence,. the breaking of analogy is that the pill is immoral, so this must either be a specific exception by Serpa, or else something we need to research. I will look into it, I have also asked the help of my fellow very Orthodox friend and researcher.

 

[Marc_Aupiais]

Dear MKMMOM,

This is a very important matter that is widely misunderstood:

The Church considers a miscarriage to be a physical evil. Since abortion DELIBERATELY causes a miscarriage, it is therefore also a MORAL evil. The Church sees an UNintended miscarriage as only a physical evil since it is not deliberately caused by the couple.

The use of the pill for medical reasons may cause an UNintended miscarriage. Women often have unintended miscarriages—sometimes without even knowing it. It is only miscarriages that are INTENDED that the Church considers immoral. The Church never allows the pill to be used as an abortifacient. But it does allow the use of the pill for medical reasons with the possiblity of producing an unintended miscarriage—without obliging the couple to abstain from sexual relations during that time.

Fr. Vincent Serpa, O.P.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=4618

the oridinal, quoted by

When taken as necessary for therapeutic reasons, use of “the pill” is not immoral. Humanae Vitae states, “the Church does not consider at all illicit the use of those therapeutic means necessary to cure bodily diseases, even if a foreseeable impediment to procreation should result there from—provided such impediment is not directly intended for any motive whatsoever” (HV 15).

Also, in such circumstances, abstinence is not required. For more on this see the post Pill allowed as an abortifacient?

For alternatives to the pill check out Pope Paul VI Institute.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=4618

I just don’t know, the point is that miscarriage is a physical evil, not a moral evil, intended miscarriage is a moral evil and wrong, I guess it’s like collateral damage- what I would suggest is the use of NFP at the same time, to ensure no abortion (with prayer), or miscarriage (even so, with prayer for otherwise) is the result.

Whether the pill, and not just contraception is allowed, is a different story, but I am sure Father Serpa will either get back to me, or otherwise- we all are human, including your priest, and mine, but I do think that it is better to do as I advise with NFP, or as others have, than to risk even a physical evil. God’s blessing in Our saints, especially saints Gregory and Philomena, Marc