How many Catholic couples contracept and/or are sterlized?

[newbetx]

My friend had the uterine ablation done for medically necessary purposes. She is now infertile, but can still conceive and chooses not to practice NFP, as the church tells her she does not need to. She and her husband have sex whenever they want without regard to the child that could be conceived, but will not be able to grow because it cannot implant.

I’m no doctor. So I don’t know just how necessary the procedure was. Or if Conception is possible. I’ll take your word for it. From your other description, I got the impression that it was not life threatening problem… Again, I’m not that versed in the medical condition here.

Another couple the husband chooses to have a vasectomy because his wife will not able to handle having another child, emotionally or physically. The church offers them permission to do this. They too are now infertile, but they cannot conceive. They have sex whenever they want. They will never conceive as the man has no sperm.

This is a grave offense. Alternatives are available to avoid conceiving children. The Church will not provide permission for this. An improperly informed person attempting to represent the Church may fool them into thinking the Church gave them permision…

Take the ablation procedure and the vasectomy out of the equation and you are left with couples who are both infertile, but one is still able to conceive.

Well one really can’t take the procedures out of the equations, can one? It’s not a natural state. It was chosen by the couple.

How can the church, say to the women you do not need to practice NFP or ABC. Choosing to have sex, when you know you can still conceive, and spontaneous abort every time, has no regard for the child that was conceived. Where is the “respect life” doctrine in this case? There is a baby conceived.

If the first lady needed the operation as a way to save her life, then no sin is committed. Through some miracle, an implantation is possible but unlikely, yes. If the first operation amounted to nothing more than a way to contracept… IF the person confessed, a suggested remedy might be to avoid sex when signs of fertility are present. A similar solution is sometimes suggested for a man who had a vascectomy. The confession takes away the contraceptive surgery sin, but to prevent the acts from being sinful again is always a tough thing to do. This is where one of the previous posters referenced some suggested “ongoing” penance procedures.

 

[LJN21]

Hello all,

First, let me introduce myself. I am Kara, AKA SirOscar. Yes, I am a female. SirOscar is my boxer. He is a dog. I am 43. I married at the age of 30. I have 4 children, all beautiful girls. My first was born when I was 33, then 35, 37 & my last at 39. We are done having children. Am I tempted to use contraception…sometimes, well lots of time. At one point I told my husband to get a vasectomy. (he didn’t) At one point I was willing to get my tubes tied.(I didn’t) We even used condoms a handful of times.

We both stand by the church’s teaching on ABC & abortion, but we both fail, we both sin. We are still tempted at times to use ABC., because, honestly, it would just be easier.

I’m so sorry for your struggle Things are so hard these days, modern influence are every where. Its almost impossible to walk out your door with out being subject to some from of immorality. Keep praying and keep trying, God knows your struggles and knows you trying to do whats right, He also knows we are all just human.

My friend had the uterine ablation done for medically necessary purposes. She is now infertile, but can still conceive and chooses not to practice NFP, as the church tells her she does not need to. She and her husband have sex whenever they want without regard to the child that could be conceived, but will not be able to grow because it cannot implant.

I did a quick Google search yesterday for this procedure. Just on the surface it looks as this could fall under the principle of double effect. Its a treatment for a condition. However I’m not seeing how it necessarily for it to conform, it must be the ONLY option and it needs of equal gravity. What I was reading said that it could still in fact a rare chance it could implant and that if you got pregnant again it would risk the life of the mother and the baby, so that a form of birth control would be necessary for ever following the procedure. NFP would still be your only moral recourse in this situation. Again this is all off a brief Google search and I’m far from any Doctor.

Another couple the husband chooses to have a vasectomy because his wife will not able to handle having another child, emotionally or physically. The church offers them permission to do this. They too are now infertile, but they cannot conceive. They have sex whenever they want. They will never conceive as the man has no sperm.

Unfortunately it sounds like they got bad advice form someone acting in a position of authority in the Church. You can never purposely militate a health organ.

vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xi_enc_31121930_casti-connubii_en.html

1. Furthermore, Christian doctrine establishes, and the light of human reason makes it most clear, that private individuals have no other power over the members of their bodies than that which pertains to their natural ends; and they are not free to destroy or mutilate their members, or in any other way render themselves unfit for their natural functions, except when no other provision can be made for the good of the whole body.

You may remove malfunctioning or deceased organs which in doing so will result in infertile but you can never take a health functioning organ and cut it up.

It used to be common practice for couples that have had this procedure done for the Church to asked them to use NFP and abstain during the infertile time as recompense. Thats not longer the case however.

Take the ablation procedure and the vasectomy out of the equation and you are left with couples who are both infertile, but one is still able to conceive.

How can the church, say to the women you do not need to practice NFP or ABC. Choosing to have sex, when you know you can still conceive, and spontaneous abort every time, has no regard for the child that was conceived. Where is the “respect life” doctrine in this case? There is a baby conceived.

Just a moral issue my friend is facing, and this was my point to my previous post.

Any thoughts welcome.

Sadly there are very few doctors (even “Catholic” Doctors) that are willing to uphold the church teaching, there are even people in some Church with positions of authority that are in open descent of the Church teachings - not just on ABC. It so upsetting to me how hard it can be today to actually do (or even know) what the Church teaches from bad Masses (buffet style communion) , bad Schools (sex ed anyone?), to bad RE (more sex ed). My MIL got forbidden to teach RE in a parish here 15 or so years ago when she told a group of Conformation students ABC and condoms were a sin

Anyway fortunately it seems things are starting to come around again. Before had an OB/GYN whose nurse that looked at me like I had two heads when I said I’d be using NFP for Birth Control (she then processed to make sure I knew nursing wouldn’t suppress ovulation…), now I’ve found a wonderful OB who I just love, she has a very large family of her own and response when we talked about NFP was, “Okay, well you need to make sure both you and your husband are on the same page about this, or its not going to work and cause other issues, but if it doesn’t work out kids are a blessing!”

I really hope and pray you find peace in the Church’s teachings Kara, I know its hard and very confusing specially when people that are supposed to know this stuff tell people things that have been clearly stated over and over and over wrong and something that can never be done.

 

[duskyjewel]

SirOscar… first, sorry for thinking you were a man, but I think that was an understandable assumption.

Second, and I know I am going to get blasted for this… I think with the ablation vs. vasectomy scenario you presented that the vasectomy is the morally superior of the two. Why? Because there are no lives being conceived and then having nowhere to grow. This could be happening over and over in the ablation case, but most likely never will in the vasectomy case (it does have a small failure rate). If I had to choose between those two with no other options, I would take the vasectomy, because no one is DYING in that case, whereas it is possible that many have died in the ablation case.

Call that what you will… but it’s what I really think.

 

[newbetx]

Second, and I know I am going to get blasted for this… I think with the ablation vs. vasectomy scenario you presented that the vasectomy is the morally superior of the two. Why? Because there are no lives being conceived and then having nowhere to grow. This could be happening over and over in the ablation case, but most likely never will in the vasectomy case (it does have a small failure rate). If I had to choose between those two with no other options, I would take the vasectomy, because no one is DYING in that case, whereas it is possible that many have died in the ablation case.

Call that what you will… but it’s what I really think.

Well we know you know both are sins so hopefully someone won’t think you are recommending one or the other.

While (in the vas case) no lives are “lost”, none are created either. The loss comes in a different form. More spiritual death than physical death. In the other case, while the life was not brought foward, it not the same as an abortion. Many conceptions under normal circumstances end this way… So God has some plan for those.

Really, all of these are relative levels of the same issue. Death in lieu of life. I’ve come to understand why the Church says to avoid such situations… There always is a down side someone didn’t consider.

 

[LJN21]

SirOscar… first, sorry for thinking you were a man, but I think that was an understandable assumption.

Second, and I know I am going to get blasted for this… I think with the ablation vs. vasectomy scenario you presented that the vasectomy is the morally superior of the two. Why? Because there are no lives being conceived and then having nowhere to grow. This could be happening over and over in the ablation case, but most likely never will in the vasectomy case (it does have a small failure rate). If I had to choose between those two with no other options, I would take the vasectomy, because no one is DYING in that case, whereas it is possible that many have died in the ablation case.

Call that what you will… but it’s what I really think.

First off it was two different people. Two different situations.

Secondly, I’d thank you to stop misrepresenting Catholic Churches teaching. That is the exact reason it is so difficult for people who are trying to be faithful to the Churches teaching, because so many people who don’t have the authority to, are continually trying to misrepresent, reinterpret, and redefine the Church teaching. I understand you have come to you own decisions about how things are supposed to be, thats between you and God. Please, stop trying muddy up the Churches teaching by your own ideas of morality that are not espoused by the Church. She is asking for the Churches teaching and how it applies to the situation, not someones personal opinion on what the Churches teaching should be.

 

[AngelRose81]

I think a lot more than we think. I remember going through RCIA a few years ago and hearing one of the team members joke about contraception and that’s why there’s always a long line at confession on Sunday. It made me really upset.

 

[newbetx]

First off it was two different people. Two different situations.

Secondly, I’d thank you to stop misrepresenting Catholic Churches teaching. That is the exact reason it is so difficult for people who are trying to be faithful to the Churches teaching, because so many people who don’t have the authority to, are continually trying to misrepresent, reinterpret, and redefine the Church teaching. I understand you have come to you own decisions about how things are supposed to be, thats between you and God. Please, stop trying muddy up the Churches teaching by your own ideas of morality that are not espoused by the Church. She is asking for the Churches teaching and how it applies to the situation, not someones personal opinion on what the Churches teaching should be.

Please be more kind. Duskyjewel misrepresented nothing. She stated an opinion and made clear that it was that. She endorsed neither. She bounded the situation and just stated her opin that one seemed to be clearly (to her) more detrimental to life than the other.

We are still allowed to THINK here… Most know how we are supposed to act. I recall saying once that given a choice I would prefer to have women priests over married priests. I got the same type of response. Attacking me for stating an opinion… I never said the the Church was wrong. I never said She was being sexist. There was no heresy. I stated a simple opinion.

No. I don’t need a lecture on WHY priests will only be men. I understand that.

 

[newbetx]

I remember going through RCIA a few years ago and hearing one of the team members joke about contraception and that’s why there’s always a long line at confession on Sunday. It made me really upset.

If I might suggest, it should make you happy. We all sin. If at least they are going to confession about it, then eventually they may stop using it… And at least they know it’s wrong. It’s the ones that use it and don’t care that it’s wrong you have to be sad for.

But I understand, sort of… When I went through RCIA, I heard similar things from the Catholics. I thought they were funny. I’ve come to understand that most of the jokes I’ve heard that were funny, have a real moral lesson in them that can be turned around if we just dare. But most people don’t want fables… “it was just a joke.” KWIM?

 

[duskyjewel]

While (in the vas case) no lives are “lost”, none are created either. The loss comes in a different form. More spiritual death than physical death. In the other case, while the life was not brought foward, it not the same as an abortion. Many conceptions under normal circumstances end this way… So God has some plan for those.

Really, all of these are relative levels of the same issue. Death in lieu of life. I’ve come to understand why the Church says to avoid such situations… There always is a down side someone didn’t consider.

While I totally understand your point here, I have to say I think we have much more moral obligation to lives that are conceived and already created and living than to potential lives that might be. I get the thing about spiritual death… I’ve felt some of that, so I can relate to the point.

First off it was two different people. Two different situations.

Secondly, I’d thank you to stop misrepresenting Catholic Churches teaching. That is the exact reason it is so difficult for people who are trying to be faithful to the Churches teaching, because so many people who don’t have the authority to, are continually trying to misrepresent, reinterpret, and redefine the Church teaching. I understand you have come to you own decisions about how things are supposed to be, thats between you and God. Please, stop trying muddy up the Churches teaching by your own ideas of morality that are not espoused by the Church. She is asking for the Churches teaching and how it applies to the situation, not someones personal opinion on what the Churches teaching should be.

#1 I am aware she was talking about two different people. That was why I distinguished througout my post between the “ablation case” and the “vasectomy case.”

#2 Uh… WOW. Back off. I never represented anything I said as being Church teaching. What I was doing was a moral thought exercise between two less than desirable options. Real people do this everyday. As none of us are perfect, many times we are reduced to choosing the least evil of the less-than-moral options in front of us. I never said I advocated either vasectomy or ablation, though as has been established, ablation at least can have valid medical uses.

Please be more kind. Duskyjewel misrepresented nothing. She stated an opinion and made clear that it was that. She endorsed neither. She bounded the situation and just stated her opin that one seemed to be clearly (to her) more detrimental to life than the other.

We are still allowed to THINK here… Most know how we are supposed to act.

Thank you, newbetx.

 

[LJN21]

Please be more kind. Duskyjewel misrepresented nothing. She stated an opinion and made clear that it was that. She endorsed neither. She bounded the situation and just stated her opin that one seemed to be clearly (to her) more detrimental to life than the other.

We are still allowed to THINK here… Most know how we are supposed to act. I recall saying once that given a choice I would prefer to have women priests over married priests. I got the same type of response. Attacking me for stating an opinion… I never said the the Church was wrong. I never said She was being sexist. There was no heresy. I stated a simple opinion.

No. I don’t need a lecture on WHY priests will only be men. I understand that.

Had opinion been asked for I would not have said anything however she was asking how the teaching of the Church rationalized the two. It didn’t matter what MY opinion is, my opinion wasn’t asked for, and my opinion is fallible.

There is so much confusion, considering the number of times this question comes up over and over I really don’t believe most people know on this issue. I firmly believe one of the major reasons is because every time it comes up theres always someone dissenting. There is always the voice of “oh follow your heart”, or “don’t worry about it, it just too hard”. This voice of dissent is everywhere and all of it chips away at the resolve up people desperately trying to follow the Faith. Yes NFP is hard, its very hard. Actually putting in to practice NFP is one of the hardest things we’ve done in our marriage.

 

[duskyjewel]

The quotes SirOscar gave as coming from “the Church” sound like things said by ill-informed, cowardly, or dissenting priests.

There’s another big reason for the ignorance and dismissal of this teaching… being told that’s OK by priests. How can someone be culpable for a mortal sin for contracepting when their priest told them it was OK? Answer is, they can’t, unless they went “priest shopping” in full knowledge of the teaching.

This turn in the conversation just reinforces the need for those who are way ahead of the rest of us, and can accept and live this teaching, to reach back a hand in compassion to the rest of us. Not to slap back our tentative and usually erroneous thought process.

 

[newbetx]

Had opinion been asked for I would not have said anything however she was asking how the teaching of the Church rationalized the two. It didn’t matter what MY opinion is, my opinion wasn’t asked for, and my opinion is fallible.

There is so much confusion, considering the number of times this question comes up over and over I really don’t believe most people know on this issue. I firmly believe one of the major reasons is because every time it comes up theres always someone dissenting. There is always the voice of “oh follow your heart”, or “don’t worry about it, it just too hard”. This voice of dissent is everywhere and all of it chips away at the resolve up people desperately trying to follow the Faith. Yes NFP is hard, its very hard. Actually putting in to practice NFP is one of the hardest things we’ve done in our marriage.

I understand and share your concern. As you may likely know but maybe not. But in this case I think DJ was just more concerned about dying zygots than the fact they both were sins. And I think she just felt the need to share that.

I think sometimes I read too much into posts. And sometimes, some posters just seem like they are looking for a fight. This is a public forum and we have all kinds here. If it were more moderated like “ask an apologist” then there would be less confusing information… although I’ve seen some eyebrow raising things there sometimes, too.

I agree that her post might have been better placed elsewhere, if at all, but this thread is already so off track, I don’t know that it matters.

 

[newbetx]

The quotes SirOscar gave as coming from “the Church” sound like things said by ill-informed, cowardly, or dissenting priests.

There’s another big reason for the ignorance and dismissal of this teaching… being told that’s OK by priests. How can someone be culpable for a mortal sin for contracepting when their priest told them it was OK? Answer is, they can’t, unless they went “priest shopping” in full knowledge of the teaching.

This turn in the conversation just reinforces the need for those who are way ahead of the rest of us, and can accept and live this teaching, to reach back a hand in compassion to the rest of us. Not to slap back our tentative and usually erroneous thought process.

Like I always say… Come join me at my table in the Cafeteria… together we’ll find a way to enjoy the whole banquet!

 

[duskyjewel]

Like I always say… Come join me at my table in the Cafeteria… together we’ll find a way to enjoy the whole banquet!

Love that!

 

[LJN21]

The quotes SirOscar gave as coming from “the Church” sound like things said by ill-informed, cowardly, or dissenting priests.

There’s another big reason for the ignorance and dismissal of this teaching… being told that’s OK by priests. How can someone be culpable for a mortal sin for contracepting when their priest told them it was OK? Answer is, they can’t, unless they went “priest shopping” in full knowledge of the teaching.

This turn in the conversation just reinforces the need for those who are way ahead of the rest of us, and can accept and live this teaching, to reach back a hand in compassion to the rest of us. Not to slap back our tentative and usually erroneous thought process.

You are completely correct.

I’m sorry. I over reacted…

The number of posts I’ve read lately from “Catholics” proudly touting how they don’t/won’t follow what the Churches truths has gotten to me lately.

 

[kind_bean]

Read the rest of my post.

LJN21, I wasn’t saying you were wrong, I was just putting the link there for those who were interested, I just used your quote to show how it related to the thread…

As for those talking about uterine ablation, there recently was a question on this too:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=243530

“There is nothing contrary to Catholic moral teaching in having a uterine ablation.” ~ Fr. Vincent Serpa, O.P.

 

[pira114]

I was never saying that abstinance is contracepting.

I’m only saying that DELIBERATELY ONLY having sex when you are not fertile, for the EXPRESS PURPOSE OF NOT HAVING CHILDREN, is contracepting. NOT OPEN TO LIFE.

In my opinion, you cannot deny this.

However, I truely do respect the opinions of others. I will now humbling bow out of the conversation and pray that we all learn the truth according to God’s will. Whatever the truth may be.

P.S. Capital letters to emphasize what I’m trying to get across. Not meant to be construed as yelling.

 

[newbetx]

There’s another big reason for the ignorance and dismissal of this teaching… being told that’s OK by priests. How can someone be culpable for a mortal sin for contracepting when their priest told them it was OK? Answer is, they can’t, unless they went “priest shopping” in full knowledge of the teaching.

I guess I just don’t know what to say about this… I would agree that it would be hard to say that it was a mortal sin for sure. But if everyone else says A and the priest said “not A”… doesn’t that make one wonder if the priest was right? Maybe it’s just my suspicious nature… I try, usually to get two forms of information just to be sure… sometimes there aren’t two… But near as I can tell, some people get the answer they want and stop even thinking about it.

 

[Good_Daughter]

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This
con·tra·cep·tion Audio Help /ˌkɒntrəˈsɛpʃən/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[kon-truh-sep-shuhn] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun the deliberate prevention of conception or impregnation by any of various drugs, techniques, or devices; birth control.

Exactly. NFP is a technique, and some kinds of NFP require a device, but no amount of charting or temperature taking will prevent conception. When you feel like you’re burning up, do you take your temperature to cure a possible fever? No, you take your temperature to determine whether you have a fever. Similarly, NFP is just information. It’s the informed decision to engage in or avoid sex that prevents conception. That decision is not a drug, technique or device.

In other words, if you are using NFP, and only having sex when you are not fertile, then you are not being open to life. Isn’t this a requirement? Not a statement, but actual question.

Catholic married couples aren’t always required to be “open to life”. Anyone who tells you that they are is mistaken. Catholic married couples are always required to keep the sex act itself open to its natural end, ordered toward life and uncontracepted. It is possible to do this even in times of infertility (pregnancy, breastfeeding, menopause, pre and post-ovulation) when the natural end of the sex act would most certainly not be new life.