Can a married Catholic in good conscience use contraception?

[LJN21]

wasurso-

The church condemns any form of ABC and has for 2000 years. Yes, there are priests and bishops out there that will give you all sorts of opinions on this and tell you how the church needs to change and how this isn’t infallible teaching. They are wrong. The truth doesn’t change. Please educate your self on the true teaching of the Church by reading the Catechism and Humanae Vitae. It is quite clear that it is forbidden to use ABC to keep form conceiving.

There does seem to be a loop whole that if you need the pill for other medical conditions it may be allowed. This is ONLY if you main purpose is to prevent another condition and not to use it as a contraceptive. There is a problem with this tho as the pill only masks the symptoms and doesn’t actually take care of the problem. There are many NFP doctors that specialize in helping people find treatments for these issues that don’t involve the ABC.

nfpoutreach.org/physicians/Martin_article1.htm Is an article about on of those doctors and her studies about the pill. She confirms what over people have been anything about the pill having the potential to be an abortifacient. She says this risk is even higher in low dose birth control because the chance of ovulation is much higher.

 

[jmcrae]

You said it yourself in your quote, the different ways to interpret the bible. Literally is just one of them. Please don’t tell me you take the Bible, word-for-word as literal! The bible is meant to be interpreted. Any priest will tell you that much.

We don’t replace the literal interpretation with the various forms of spiritual interpretation. Rather, these are added to the literal interpretation. It’s not “pick and choose.”

For example, taking your example of the multiplication of the loaves and fishes. We take that story literally. (It really happened - it is not a nice little fable about sharing - the Jews knew how to share; it was a commonplace occurence for them. They would not have considered sharing food with each other to be “a miracle” and they would not have recorded it as such.)

Add to the fact that it really happened spiritual things that we can learn from that historical event. 1. Allegorical: We can trust Jesus to provide for our needs. 2. Moral: Our offerings to Jesus for the poor will be multiplied abundantly, so we should never fear that the little we have to offer will be not enough - we give to Him trusting that He will multiply it to good use. 3. Anagogical: I look at my life and see that whenever I was most desperate, it was then that Jesus was most with me - He provided the means for me to get through that situation.

 

[wasurso]

Why don’t you research the issue before deciding? Medical science is not a recent invention, and neither is chemical birth control. Chemical birth control is as old as the profession of prostitution and the sins of fornication and adultery, since without chemical birth control, all of these things are impossible to get away with.

I have researched the issue (which I believe is a non-issue) extensively for almost 10 years.

The only thing new is that, for the very first time in human history, these things - first, chemical birth control, and then the sins that birth control enables - have become legal and even quite acceptable in certain strata of society.

That’s very insulting - do you know this for a fact, or are you just assuming that our ancestors were as dumb as rocks?

I know for a fact that in biblical times that they didn’t have MRIs and CT scans. I know that they didn’t know how Chlamydia, HPV and PID can deplete a woman’s fertility. Had they seen a copy of my hysterosalpingogram, they would know that conceiving for me is life-threatenting. Had the biblical writers of that time knew what “could” happen as the result of conception, they might have felt differently.

And I think it’s very insulting that you ASSUMED that I think our ancestors were as dumb as rocks. That’s like saying Sauk was stupid because he lived prior to the 21st century.

 

[wasurso]

1. Allegorical: We can trust Jesus to provide for our needs.

Literal: I can sit and do nothing and Jesus will provide for me.

Interpretative: Jesus will provide for me as long as I’m strong and I aim to provide for myself.

 

[wasurso]

Dear Wasurso,

To answer your question, yes I am married, with my 3rd child on the way. Yes, I too have suffered a loss in marriage (I assume you are referring to the very tragic case of miscarriage). I am very sorry to hear about your tubal pregnancy, and thank God it was detected before it was too late. You will be in my prayers.

I’m sorry you had a miscarriage, I have lost three pregnancies. One of which threatened my life. Until your life has been threatened in that way (and God forbid!) then you can’t understand what I am saying. I won’t allow my children to be without their mother because I chose not to use contraception.

However, what you are arguing is called moral relativism. God is eternal. His laws are eternal. You and I are not the only people who have faced hard hard times trying to follow the teachings of His Church. Ask St. Gianna how easy it was for her to make her decisions. However, like St. Gianna, I will not change Church teachings to suit my needs because I think too much time has passed since they were laid down. I will not twist the truth to be more in line with my life. I will change my life to be in line with the Truth.

Church teachings and church doctrine are two different things. The Church can teach about our glorious past and the richness of our religion. The Church can teach about our Savior and why we should look to everlasting life. But the Church also sets down doctrine. Doctrine that mortal man has created for the good of the Church. Doctrine, over the years has been changed.

 

[wasurso]

Just a quick search on Google revealed the following:

Efforts to prevent pregnancy have been attempted since ancient times and in many cultures. Contraception methods ranged from the use of tampons treated with herbal spermicide by the Egyptians in 1550 B.C. to the use of animal membrane condoms in the eighteenth century. The introduction of the oral contraceptive pill in 1960 launched a new era, making contraception easier and more effective than earlier methods. However, sterilization remains the method used most frequently. from science.jrank.org/pages/1769/Contraception.html

and

In the ancient medical manuscript the Ebers Papyrus (1550 BCE), women were advised to grind dates, acacia tree bark, and honey together into a paste and apply it with seed wool to the vulva. Modern science has shown that, since acacia ferments into lactic acid, a well-known spermicide, this method may have been effective. Other compounds that were smeared around the vagina included olive oil, pomegranate pulp, ginger, and tobacco juice. from medhunters.com/articles/historyOfFemaleContraception.html

and that’s just a 5 minute google search.

You also forgot to look up how they used silk handkerchiefs as condoms.

I was referring to contraceptives that actually worked and were not harmful to a woman’s or man’s body. I apologize for not being specific enough.

 

[lisammack99]

Thank you Jennifer.

 

[jmcrae]

You also forgot to look up how they used silk handkerchiefs as condoms.

I was referring to contraceptives that actually worked and were not harmful to a woman’s or man’s body. I apologize for not being specific enough.

Such things have not yet been invented.

Modern contraceptives still fail at least part of the time - and have you looked at the list of potential side effects on the side of the box or on the paper insert in the box? I was listening to a TV commentator list off the side effects of oral contraceptives in an ad for them recently - the list of side effects was longer than the ad itself.

 

[jmcrae]

Doctrine, over the years has been changed.

No, it hasn’t. Disciplines have changed. The ways that we explain our teachings (doctrines) have changed - we understand things differently today than we did at other times in our history.

But the doctrines (teachings) themselves have never changed, and never will change.

 

[CCM08]

I’m sorry you had a miscarriage, I have lost three pregnancies. One of which threatened my life. Until your life has been threatened in that way (and God forbid!) then you can’t understand what I am saying. I won’t allow my children to be without their mother because I chose not to use contraception.

This is a very curious statement to me. According to you conception is life threatening, so I’ll accept your word on that. If we apply logic we must realize that birth control can, and does on a regular basis, fail. In fact with prolonged use of birth control you will experience failures. As such we must logically conclude that if your concern is your children having no mother the only logical choice would be to avoid sexual relations altogether. I certainly know that if such was the case for my wife I could never ask her to play Russian roulette with her life for some sexual gratification. Logically it seems your value system includes sexual gratification above your concern for your children growing up without a mother, both of which take priority above your religious beliefs. A very interesting priority structure, so I’m curious, how does one come to a point where sex is worth gambling one’s life over?

 

[fix]

something cannot be a sin if morally, a person believes it is not.

How so?

This is what Jesus teaches us through His Church:

… “there are certain specific kinds of behaviour that are always wrong to choose, because choosing them involves a disorder of the will, that is, a moral evil”.127…

Let us say that someone robs in order to feed the poor: in this case, even though the intention is good, the uprightness of the will is lacking. Consequently, no evil done with a good intention can be excused. ‘There are those who say: And why not do evil that good may come? Their condemnation is just’ (Rom 3:8)".128…

Reason attests that there are objects of the human act which are by their nature “incapable of being ordered” to God, because they radically contradict the good of the person made in his image. These are the acts which, in the Church’s moral tradition, have been termed “intrinsically evil” (intrinsece malum): they are such *always and per se, *in other words, on account of their very object, and quite apart from the ulterior intentions of the one acting and the circumstances. Consequently, without in the least denying the influence on morality exercised by circumstances and especially by intentions, the Church teaches that “there exist acts which per se and in themselves, independently of circumstances, are always seriously wrong by reason of their object”.131…

Veritatis splendor

 

[Br.Rich_SFO]

I ask this since statistically contraception is the common practice amongst the majority of couples who consider themselves as Catholic.

No, no Catholic can use artifical contraception without it being a serious sin, possibly a mortal sin.

 

[guanophore]

But literal teaching from 50AD is different than teaching today, in 2007. In 50AD, what sort of birth control methods did they have? None. They didn’t even know the full scale of what a woman’s reproductive system does. They used the “moon” and “bleed” method.

I can’t, in good faith, listen to a doctor from 50AD when there is medical technology that fits well with my faith today.

That is like asking for an amputation with only ether.

You are mixing apples and oranges. The Didache is not a medical text, nor was it written by or for medical purposes. It is the Teaching of Jesus and the Apostles.

Also, you should not underestimate ancient methods of contraception. Traditional healers have always known methods of herbal intervention that will cause a miscarriage.

The third mistake you are making is that medical technology (that regarding contraception) “fits well” with your faith today. Contraception is a grave moral sin.

The fourth mistake you are making is separating “my faith today” from the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles. There is no difference in the deposit of faith from the time the Didache was written until today.

 

[larry85704]

Obviously there are people defending the written position of the Church, people openly following the teachings of the Church and people who do not follow the teachings of the Church. What I sense in this thread is that the opinions of people are not going to change. So why bother having this thread?

Somebody said Jesus wanted servants, no, Jesus wants brothers and sisters. Somebody said using birth control will cause you to go to hell, I really do not think so. It is about time to love and respect your brothers and sisters in Christ. Nobody made anybody daddy. Who goes to heaven or hell is up to Jesus, last time I talked to Him that is what He said.

At the risk of sounding un-Catholic, I suggest we all strive for a deeper personal relationship with God. Striving for that relationship will not cause us to disagree with the Church or with one another. Isn’t it the job of the Church to assist its members in having a better relationship with God?

The number of reasons not to have more children increases everyday as medicine understands more about the body and why a woman should not have more kids. Let me share with you one story.

A couple knew the baby they were about to have would be born terribly handicapped and he was. Many times during his life he might have died except for the intervention of medicine. As far as I know he is now 20. He graduated from high school and is unable to move or breathe by himself and lives at home with his parents.

Would it have been morally acceptable to ask God to take this child home when he was a baby? Or at any other time when he was near death? When we say we are pro life, are we really? I think when people want a family member to stay in this life when it is obvious God wants them home is not pro life. How about eternal life, shouldn’t we be pro eternal life?

Now this mother stopped having kids. He was the third and I guess they decided that was enough.

Anyway, Stephen spends many hours in his bed watching TV alone. He is not a very nice person and tends to drive people away. He is Catholic but his church offers nothing to help him or his family. When I see Catholic Church’s working very hard to find people with Stephen’s medical conditions and helping him then, and only then, will I see that the Catholic Church is pro life. Until then, the Catholic Church is pretty buildings with a bunch of non-pro life people yelling to be pro life.

I tried to be good to Stephen, but as I went to God in prayer I knew I’d only make a mess of it. I was overwhelmed with the commitment Stephen’s parents had made to be pro-life. If the Catholic Church wants to say squat about anything it needs to put it’s money and it’s talents where it’s big mouth is.

So to all of you, understand you are following the best way you know to love and serve God. Be sure that there are Saints that put all of us in our place. Have the humility to truly praise your brother and sister for the love and commitment they have made to God. It might be far greater than your own. Do not criticize your brother or sister, lest God criticize you.

 

[setter]

Obviously there are people defending the written position of the Church, people openly following the teachings of the Church and people who do not follow the teachings of the Church. What I sense in this thread is that the opinions of people are not going to change. So why bother having this thread?

Is this your own projection speaking?

Somebody said Jesus wanted servants, no, Jesus wants brothers and sisters. Somebody said using birth control will cause you to go to hell, I really do not think so.

Your implication being, that if we join the family (“brothers and sisters”) of God, then we can disregard the teaching authority of the Church bestowed by Jesus Christ himself? With family members like this, who needs enemies?

It is about time to love and respect your brothers and sisters in Christ. Nobody made anybody daddy.

How is helping someone to know and accept the truth “disrespectful”? A problem with proper authority? Or just understanding proper Church authority?

Who goes to heaven or hell is up to Jesus, last time I talked to Him that is what He said.

Jesus Christ gave the Church the authority to bind on earth what is bound in heaven. The faithful laity simply educating and explaining what the Church authoritatively teaches is not judging anyone …folks can stand in judgment themselves.

“If any one hears my sayings and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world. He who rejects me and does not receive my sayings has a judge; the word that I have spoken will be his judge on the last day.” John 12: 47-48

At the risk of sounding un-Catholic, I suggest we all strive for a deeper personal relationship with God.

This is exactly what the Church and the sacraments are all about – personal encounter with the person of Jesus Christ and growth in holiness.

Striving for that relationship will not cause us to disagree with the Church or with one another.

Really??? …what authentic and substantial personal relationship does not encounter disagreements? …an absence of any conflict or disagreement would leave one to wonder how real such a relationship is.

Isn’t it the job of the Church to assist its members in having a better relationship with God?

Based on encouraging members to accept the truth, loving in truth, in the fullness of the gospel. You cannot have the resurrection without the way of the cross.

The number of reasons not to have more children increases everyday as medicine understands more about the body and why a woman should not have more kids.

This statement can read right from the manual of Planned Parenthood or the devil’s manual for duping God’s children.

Let me share with you one story. …

Anyway, Stephen spends many hours in his bed watching TV alone. He is not a very nice person and tends to drive people away. He is Catholic but his church offers nothing to help him or his family. When I see Catholic Church’s working very hard to find people with Stephen’s medical conditions and helping him then, and only then, will I see that the Catholic Church is pro life. Until then, the Catholic Church is pretty buildings with a bunch of non-pro life people yelling to be pro life.

I tried to be good to Stephen, but as I went to God in prayer I knew I’d only make a mess of it.

It sounds like you pretty much lived up to your own self-fulfilling expectation for Catholics.

I was overwhelmed with the commitment Stephen’s parents had made to be pro-life.

YOU were “overwhelmed” with the heroic sacrifice and commitment of these parents to being pro-life in words and deeds? Such a statement belies a self-referencing and limited perspective, wholy lacking in the infinite wisdom, truth and love of God.

If the Catholic Church wants to say squat about anything it needs to put it’s money and it’s talents where it’s big mouth is.

Uhmmm … Just don’t sign you up? …you are coming across as one of those side line Catholics who only complain that the game is not going to your expectation. Ask yourself this as a self-identified Catholic: Am I part of the problem or part of the solution?

So to all of you, understand you are following the best way you know to love and serve God. Be sure that there are Saints that put all of us in our place. Have the humility to truly praise your brother and sister for the love and commitment they have made to God. It might be far greater than your own. Do not criticize your brother or sister, lest God criticize you.

What about the truth?

 

[mlchance]

Wow. Nine pages of replies for a simple question.

No, a married Catholic cannot in good conscience use contraception.

Everything else is either just clarification (if in agreement) or self-serving rationalization (if not).

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[mercygate]

You also forgot to look up how they used silk handkerchiefs as condoms.

I was referring to contraceptives that actually worked and were not harmful to a woman’s or man’s body. I apologize for not being specific enough.

Holy cow! Nine pages of dialogue here, and nobody has mentioned modern, effective methods of Natural Family Planning?

You have done “10 years of research” and never came across this?

You love the Catholic Church but did not realize that IVF is morally problematic?

You think that doctrine has changed? That the Church should limit herself and leave reproductive moral theology to the medics?

Darlin’ I beg you to expand your knowledge. I’ll bet you have never laid eyes on Humanae vitae.

 

[fix]

Obviously there are people defending the written position of the Church, people openly following the teachings of the Church and people who do not follow the teachings of the Church. What I sense in this thread is that the opinions of people are not going to change. So why bother having this thread?

Yet, it is not a matter of opinion. Jesus said to His apostles he who hears you hears Me. The magisterium transmits the truth. The Church is speaking as Christ. To claim it is simply an opinion or some dusty book that is to be seen as pie in the sky idealism to is minimize what Christ asks of us.

It is urgent to rediscover and to set forth once more the authentic reality of the Christian faith, which is not simply a set of propositions to be accepted with intellectual assent. Rather, faith is a lived knowledge of Christ, a living remembrance of his commandments, and a *truth to be lived out. *A word, in any event, is not truly received until it passes into action, until it is put into practice. Faith is a decision involving one’s whole existence. It is an encounter, a dialogue, a communion of love and of life between the believer and Jesus Christ, the Way, and the Truth, and the Life (cf. Jn 14:6). It entails an act of trusting abandonment to Christ, which enables us to live as he lived (cf. Gal 2:20), in profound love of God and of our brothers and sisters.

Faith also possesses a moral content. It gives rise to and calls for a consistent life commitment; it entails and brings to perfection the acceptance and observance of God’s commandments. As Saint John writes, “God is light and in him is no darkness at all. If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not live according to the truth… And by this we may be sure that we know him, if we keep his commandments. He who says ’ I know him’ but disobeys his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him; but whoever keeps his word, in him truly love for God is perfected. By this we may be sure that we are in him: he who says he abides in him ought to walk in the same way in which he walked” (1* Jn* 1:5-6; 2:3-6).

Veritatis splendor

 

[900MHZ]

They should practice abstinence during their fertile times.

And good luck to all those Catholic newlyweds. They’ll need it. Gosh forbid their honeymoon night in Fiji or Hawaii falls on a fertile time.

 

[guanophore]

And good luck to all those Catholic newlyweds. They’ll need it. Gosh forbid their honeymoon night in Fiji or Hawaii falls on a fertile time.

On the contrary, God would be greatly pleased with their sacrifice of prayer.