Contraception OK?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Dismas2004
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Dismas2004

Guest
I’m a little confused. I keep hearing from different people and reading in different magazines that Contraception is wrong. The difference in between them all, the inconsistency, is that some say it is OK to use the “pill” (not the mourning after pill) if it is used for a different medical purpose other than contraception, i.e. to help prevent certain kinds of cancer, to help regulate a women’s cycle, etc… What’s the Church’s position on this and where do I find the naswers in the documents of the Church?
 
It’s called the principle of double-effect.

This is what Pope Paul VI wrote on that issue:

“[T]he 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.”

(Encyclical Humanae Vitae, 15)

A woman who takes the “Pill” to intend the good effect of treating her serious illness and does not intend the contraceptive effect, but merely tolerates it, is doing nothing wrong. However, if she takes the “Pill” to intend the contraceptive effect, then she’s crossed the line.
 
What if she uses the pill because her secular doctor said it would help her have less painful periods, or less flow, etc. and she uses this as a “medical” excuse to use the pill to contracept? This seems to be the norm on this subject. Well, my doctor prescribed it, so it must be medically “necessary”, when, in reality, this is just an overinflated excuse. Not that this is the case all the time, but it is quite common. My own doctor kept pressing me to use the pill, and with my irregularities, I could have accepted that as medical need if I was not educated on the subject. We should make sure that girls and women are fully informed and educated on this. Most people will latch on to any excuse to convince themselves that using artificial birth control is OK.
 
40.png
Vincent:
A woman who takes the “Pill” to intend the good effect of treating her serious illness and does not intend the contraceptive effect, but merely tolerates it, is doing nothing wrong. However, if she takes the “Pill” to intend the contraceptive effect, then she’s crossed the line.
Click to expand...
However, a wife that is taking the pill (for “medical” reasons) should abstain from marital relations completely to avoid an early abortion caused by the pill and also the high risk of birth defects due to a successful pregnancy.

Under the Mercy,

Matthew
 
Hi,

The Pill is an abortfacient. It causes abortions. It is intrinsicly evil.

The pill is the door to the culture of death. The pill is a slap in the face of Jesus. There is no debate on the sinfulness of using contraception. The pill shows total disrespect for women. Women are told by society to shove poison down their throats to better society and cure their head aches. The pill is a lie. The pill is total filth.

Don’t you just love all the good christians who say “I love you Lord. Let me be your hands and feet. I would do anything for you. I trust in you Jesus” Then they go into their bedrooms and slam the door in the face of Jesus.

People who use the pill are on the wide road to destruction. The road to salvation is narrow, and few find it. Unless Jesus lied, and didn’t really write the law on our hearts. Maybe, the nuns in my old church are right. Those nuns said 'You know John, there are Gray Areas." That group of nuns hasen’t had a new vocation in 40 years. I wonder why?

Reject the Devil and his lies! Reject any debate about the pill!

The pill will KILL you! EVERY TIME!

John
 
the pill is deadly to women who use it, and so is the patch that manipulates hormones in the same way. the studies have shown the same thing since the pill was introduced, and are widely reported in the secular media, including last week’s MSNBC link to deaths from the patch. Pill causes stroke, heart disease and increased cancers of reproductive organs. It fuels the astronomical spread of STDs by lulling women into accepting promiscuous sexual habits once the fear of pregnancy is gone. It destroys marriages because it reduces the woman from being the completion of the man, from becoming one body with him, into being a sex object who is of use to him only when providing sexual release. It destroys intimacy by erecting a barrier between husband and wife and between God and the marriage bed. My generations was the first to buy into the lie, and the first to suffer the consequences. Learn from the bitter wisdom of your elders.
 
There is a reason I put medical in quote in my post above. THERE ISNT A MEDICAL REASON FOR TAKING THE PILL, THAT THE PILL ACTUALLY SOLVES A PROBLEM. It just covers it up. I would get ahold of CCL or Creighton and take NFP classes first, then go to a good doc and figure out why your cycles are the way they are.

Under the Mercy,

Matthew
 
There are Medical reason to use the pill, to avoid certain kinds of cancers. True, it increases the risk for others, but that is a risk to be weighed by doctors and the patient. But my question is still unanswered: Where in church documents will I find the answers? Encyclicals are not binding ont he laity, so although HV gives insight, they are not authorative.
 
40.png
Dismas2004:
There are Medical reason to use the pill, to avoid certain kinds of cancers. True, it increases the risk for others, but that is a risk to be weighed by doctors and the patient. But my question is still unanswered: Where in church documents will I find the answers? Encyclicals are not binding ont he laity, so although HV gives insight, they are not authorative.
Click to expand...
The pill may have a few legitimate medical uses. However, due to the requirement for abstinence to prevent an early abortion it is hard to imagine it as a viable option for a married woman.

Humane Vitae does teach infallibly and it is binding in what it teaches. See section 14.

Section 15 speaks to use for theraputic means. However, in section 14 abortive function is never allowed.

Also, you may want to read this:
VADEMECUM FOR CONFESSORS CONCERNING SOME ASPECTS OF THE MORALITY OF CONJUGAL LIFE

vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/family/documents/rc_pc_family_doc_12021997_vademecum_en.html

Section 3 subsection 14 of above speaks to your question.

In summary, use the pill ( I would still consider it unwise after reading the many pages of harmful effects and how it destroys the body and its fertility) but if you are married live abstinently.

Under the Mercy,

Matthew
 
40.png
Dismas2004:
There are Medical reason to use the pill, to avoid certain kinds of cancers. True, it increases the risk for others, but that is a risk to be weighed by doctors and the patient. But my question is still unanswered: Where in church documents will I find the answers? Encyclicals are not binding ont he laity, so although HV gives insight, they are not authorative.
Click to expand...
There are other threads on this but Humanae Vitae merely expressed the timeless teaching of the Church on this subject. This teaching is based in both natural and moral law, neither of which is mutable by the Church. It is therefore binding. There is absolutely no warrant whatever for saying that this encylical does not bind the laity. Anyone who tells you otherwise is merely begging the question and endangering your soul and his own.

That said, the blessings in living in consonance with life are often not apparent until one has done so . . . Try it. You’ll be blessed.
 
Agree with Mercygate. It IS binding.

This brings up another point, just a general observation and not intended as a comment on anyone in this post or on this forum: If you are genuinely seeking to gain knowledge about a teaching of the Church, then you are on the right path. If you are looking for a way around a known teaching of the Church - a loohole, if you will - then your intentions may not be sincere. A better course is to accept the teaching and abandon the attempt to reconcile Church teaching with the desired lifestyle.
 
The Barrister:
Agree with Mercygate. It IS binding.

This brings up another point, just a general observation and not intended as a comment on anyone in this post or on this forum: If you are genuinely seeking to gain knowledge about a teaching of the Church, then you are on the right path. If you are looking for a way around a known teaching of the Church - a loohole, if you will - then your intentions may not be sincere. A better course is to accept the teaching and abandon the attempt to reconcile Church teaching with the desired lifestyle.
Click to expand...
Ahhh The Barrister…yet again, you make a good point. 🙂
 
40.png
CatholicMatthew:
There is a reason I put medical in quote in my post above. THERE ISNT A MEDICAL REASON FOR TAKING THE PILL, THAT THE PILL ACTUALLY SOLVES A PROBLEM. It just covers it up. I would get ahold of CCL or Creighton and take NFP classes first, then go to a good doc and figure out why your cycles are the way they are.
Click to expand...
Matthew,

Do you know this from experience? Are you a medical doctor? Have you successfully used NFP to control your menstraul cycles or prevent endometrial cancer?
 
The Pill is marketed, to the extent that if this was any other product they would be violating cosumer protection laws for deceptive advertising. My husband recieved junk mail from an IUD company, it has a boost of hormones implanted in it, so they can claim that sperm and egg “might never meet” (their words not mine) or it “might prevent pregnancy by the thinning of the uterus lining.” They don’t want to tell you exactly how an IUD works in its marketing material. Also the misquote by combing the stats for charting with calendar method, dramatically raising the failure rate of charting. Hence, misleading women the NFP is merely chance.
 
40.png
LabChick:
Matthew,

Do you know this from experience? Are you a medical doctor? Have you successfully used NFP to control your menstraul cycles or prevent endometrial cancer?
Click to expand...
I’ve sucessfully used NFP for almost four years now, some avoiding some trying, and within those four years two children.

Why exactly would a woman want to “control” her cycles? There is a difference in thinking, my sexuality is a normal occurance as a part of my biology. Nothing is wrong with with ovulating and menstraution, it is healthy and normal. As women we should take pride in this, rather hating ourselves to think it is sin that needs medical attention.

When you take the Pill, you are shutting done a normal functioning part of your body and replacing it to mechanically fool itself that it is acting normal, by non-menstrating bleeding every 28 days. Women on the Pill don’t menstrate, they have hormonally induced bleeding.

There is a lot of money to be made by the Pill, and if women were truley informed how her sexuality worked they would be appauled how we are being scammed. I see myself of a feminist using NFP, I am female and why should I have to supress or destort what defines me as a woman that when there alternatives that do not effect my sexuality.

If choose at this point in my life not to concieve, I abstain during my fertile time without the need any obstruct my sexuality with chemicals or foriegn plastic objects in my body. I’m sure you have read all the lovely side effects on the tiny pamplet with size 4 font on the Pill. There are so many possible effects, that is is just easier to check my cervical mucus every day in the shower and wait a week .
 
40.png
legeorge:
What if she uses the pill because her secular doctor said it would help her have less painful periods, or less flow, etc. and she uses this as a “medical” excuse to use the pill to contracept? This seems to be the norm on this subject. Well, my doctor prescribed it, so it must be medically “necessary”, when, in reality, this is just an overinflated excuse. Not that this is the case all the time, but it is quite common. My own doctor kept pressing me to use the pill, and with my irregularities, I could have accepted that as medical need if I was not educated on the subject. We should make sure that girls and women are fully informed and educated on this. Most people will latch on to any excuse to convince themselves that using artificial birth control is OK.
Click to expand...
To second what the Barrister said above, the operative term in the above quote is “excuse”. We are called to model our lives on Christ, not find ways to avoid that modeling.
 
Things are going in circles here. There are essentially two issues now 1)Is using a medicine that prevents contraception morally acceptable if the medicine is being taken for another purpose, that is to prevent certain kinds of cancer? 2) What is the authority of encyclicals?

I want to address the encyclical question first. I agrre with most of what everyone is “trying” to say, but not with what is being said. I think that has been a failure here in understanding. Encyclicals are not binding on the faithful. Plain and simple. See your Bishop, look up the facts in the catechism, Catholic Encyclopedia, etc… Now, wait a minute before you get all huffy puffy and start formulating your “repsonses”! Equally true is that often, within encyclical the Pope, our Spiritual leader, will teach, restate, and emphasize binding teachings on all the faithful. the distinction, and this is important, is that the encyclical is not binding because it was written by a Pope, but it can contain, and often does, binding teachings.

In regards to the Pill question, there is some misunderstandings of what th epill is and does. Some do induce abortions and morally unacceptable under any circumstance. Some however do not and have other medical purposes and have FDA approval for such purposes and are even marketed for such purposes. Under these circumstances, would it be OK for a woman to use a medicine if the side effect is the prevention of conception?

Let us keep in mind Charity as we continue this discussion. Let us listen with our Hearts as st. Benedict so often said. In other words, listen to what is being said without trying to figure out how to answer it or refute it while reading it.
 
So then, Dismas, you understand that the teaching affirmed by HV is binding. Right?
 
One more thing, in Charity. Let us not think the individual, or situation in question is trying to work around the Law of Christ, but rather trying to fulfill it as well as preserving her body the best she can. This is the charity we are called too, so let us not make the person questioning such things out to be someone who is trying to deceive or make an excuse. To do so would be to lack in the Charity of Christ. We are called to love and have hope in our brothers and sisters. The operative word here is LOVE!!!

He/She who is with out sin may cast the first hint of insincerity upon the individual in question.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top