How many Catholic couples contracept and/or are sterlized?

[LJN21]

Found this form the USCCB on Contraception

usccb.org/laity/marriage/MarriedLove.pdf

I’m still trying to figure out how anyone could think the teaching is not clear at this point.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

I don’t know the exact percentage of Catholics who contracept.

I can guess it’s high. From the time we know what the birds and the bees are we are bombarded with “safe sex, safe sex safe sex.”

Doctors promote it. Catholic Dr’s promote it…my Catholic ex-doctor (who I chose because she was Catholic) told me straight out "the Church is wrong…so when you use a condom with your husband say a prayer first.

ABC options are many, many. We see them in magazines, on tv everywhere.

NFP is complicated, we need to learn the methods, take courses, and sometimes do this when trying to figure out symptoms.

And trying to find an NFP only Dr? Very difficult.

When something goes wrong with contraception, women can call their Dr.'s and get advice.

With NFP, we are basically stuck with the method of whichever instructor is near us.

Don’t get me wrong. I think NFP is important to know, I truly believe and accept the Church’s teaching. But with all the Catholic Doctors, with all the Catholic hospitals, shouldn’t there be more options with managing our fertility naturally? Shouldn’t there be something that p(name removed by moderator)oints more accurately the days we are fertile?

I remember from Bio we are only fertile 1or 2 days a month. How come we don’t have something that says, “here, today is the day, you have optimum chances for conceiving a baby today!”

I think many people don’t trust that NFP actually works…and then use contraceptives…because everybody…doctors, nurses etc say, “here, use this”

There doesn’t seem to be too many NFP marketers in real life.

 

[newbetx]

I have heard that same story so many times - people that couldn’t have babies suddenly getting pregnant when they let go of working at it and are in the adoption process.

Hubs and I will likely begin that process within the next year.

Then let me be the first to congratulate you!

 

[newbetx]

I think many people don’t trust that NFP actually works…and then use contraceptives…because everybody…doctors, nurses etc say, “here, use this”

There doesn’t seem to be too many NFP marketers in real life.

Bet there is more money in selling chemicals than in charts and thermometers, eh? And besides, it is exactly “How come we don’t have something that says, “here, today is the day, you have optimum chances for conceiving a baby today!”” That would be the problem. It is getting easier, but the mindset about sex can become so far removed from the purpose of the act that even the NFP method described above can become “contraceptive” in nature.

It seems to be an uphill battle in our culture to debate the true meaning of sex… It seems that the culture has demonized babies and glorified fun. While the opposite is not what I’m promoting, we seemed to have lost the true meaning of sex. It’s not entertainment, it’s love and the demonstration of the responsibility of the consequence of the act.

Oh, well, we continue to go in circles…:hypno:

 

[SirOscar]

Thank you for the link, boy that is a long read.

1. And now, Venerable Brethren, we shall explain in detail the evils opposed to each of the benefits of matrimony. First consideration is due to the offspring, which many have the boldness to call the disagreeable burden of matrimony and which they say is to be carefully avoided by married people not through virtuous continence (which Christian law permits in matrimony when both parties consent) but by frustrating the marriage act. Some justify this criminal abuse on the ground that they are weary of children and wish to gratify their desires without their consequent burden.** Others say that they cannot on the one hand remain continent nor on the other can they have children because of the difficulties whether on the part of the mother or on the part of family circumstances**

54. But no reason, however grave, may be put forward by which anything intrinsically against nature may become conformable to nature and morally good.

Since, therefore, the conjugal act is destined primarily by nature for the begetting of children, those who in exercising it deliberately frustrate its natural power and purpose sin against nature and commit a deed which is shameful and intrinsically vicious.

What I gather from this is that couples who use ABC for medical reasons is not allowable either, and should abstain or use NFP. Am I interpretating this incorrectly?

I support NFP. I know it works. My agruement is strictly that it is a form a birth control, and that there are catholics out there who believe that NFP it is wrong, my friend is one of them. Few, but they are out there.

God made sex for the purpose of procreating, but he also made it for pleasure between a married man and woman (otherwise we would be like animals and mate only when we were fertile.) YIKES!

Man (in a general sense) abuses this pleasure and distortes God’s purpose of sex. Some want it, when they want it, with no consequences, even to the point of rape.

People don’t want to be told when they can have sex. People don’t want to abstain. Our society has deemed children a burden, not a gift. People are choosing not to marry. We are becoming a self sufficient society, where all emphasis is focused on the individual himself. (I’ll stop now)

Yes, ABC is wrong by the church’s standard

Yes, thank you.

One more point, we make judgements others. We are making judgements about other couples choice of birth control. It is our human nature. We judge lots of things about eachother, however, we do not condemn.

This is an awesome thread on the church’s teachings.

God Bless you all. I learned some things, Thank you!

 

[LJN21]

What I gather from this is that couples who use ABC for medical reasons is not allowable either, and should abstain or use NFP. Am I interpretating this incorrectly?

You can never use artificial birth control

You can however use hormone therapy to treat a condition that has an unwanted side effect of effecting your fertility, as long as there are no other options and there is grave reason.

This is called the Principle of Double Effect. You could read more about that in a different exampl here:

catholic.com/thisrock/2006/0609uan.asp

I support NFP. I know it works. My agruement is strictly that it is a form a birth control, and that there are catholics out there who believe that NFP it is wrong, my friend is one of them. Few, but they are out there.

Yeah, I’ve run in to a few of them my self. Nothing we can really do but be a good example and know the answers if they should ask us questions and pray.

God made sex for the purpose of procreating, but he also made it for pleasure between a married man and woman (otherwise we would be like animals and mate only when we were fertile.) YIKES!

Man (in a general sense) abuses this pleasure and distortes God’s purpose of sex. Some want it, when they want it, with no consequences, even to the point of rape.

People don’t want to be told when they can have sex. People don’t want to abstain. Our society has deemed children a burden, not a gift. People are choosing not to marry. We are becoming a self sufficient society, where all emphasis is focused on the individual himself. (I’ll stop now)

I just try and take some kind of comfort in the fact they are not having kids and those of us faithful to Gods plan are. Won’t take long before we out number them

Yes, ABC is wrong by the church’s standard

Don’t forget that the Churches standard is not some arbitrary standard made up by man but it is God’s standard.

One more point, we make judgements others. We are making judgements about other couples choice of birth control. It is our human nature. We judge lots of things about eachother, however, we do not condemn.

This is an awesome thread on the church’s teachings.

God Bless you all. I learned some things, Thank you!

There is a difference between judging the state of a persons soul and holding up Gods truths. We well be held responsible before God if we do not uphold His teachings and therefor His Churches teachings. No one is judging the state of someone soul for using ABC or anything else seen as sin, only God can know the battles of their heart.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

Bet there is more money in selling chemicals than in charts and thermometers, eh? And besides, it is exactly “How come we don’t have something that says, “here, today is the day, you have optimum chances for conceiving a baby today!”” That would be the problem. It is getting easier, but the mindset about sex can become so far removed from the purpose of the act that even the NFP method described above can become “contraceptive” in nature.
:

Hi, I meant actually p(name removed by moderator)ointing the day to actually get a baby.

I also meant, that Catholics (dr’s, nurses, hospitals, layity, priests…)haven’t done a really good job marketing NFP. The Catholic Dr. I mentioned prior was affiliated with a Catholic Hospital. If anyone could have been in a position to talk about, promote and answer questions about NFP, it should have been her. But I get “use a condom, say a prayer.”

 

[SirOscar]

Hello LJN21,

Yes, we do not put judgement/condemnation on their soul, but we are making the judgement that their choice of ABC as wrong. That is all that I meant.

I make many statements for the sake of defending the church’s stand on birth control so that I can be better prepared. I learned how to respond why NFP is not contraception.

I have a friend who has very heavy, painful periods. She is Catholic. She went to the priest and received permission. She had the uterine ablation procedure done, as she could not deal with the periods. They truly, did her in for a number of days. Pregnancy would not be a problem though.

Is this a case for the Principal of Double Effect?

Many women go on hormonal therapy or have procedures done to relieve heavy periods, not because pregnancy would be difficult.

How do you defend that?

Also just a note, the uterine ablation procedure makes the women infertile, but still able to conceive.

 

[LJN21]

Hello LJN21,

Yes, we do not put judgement/condemnation on their soul, but we are making the judgement that their choice of ABC as wrong. That is all that I meant.

Thats just it ABC is always wrong, it is intrinsic evil. If someone does not know it is wrong (or other mitigating circumstances) they do not incur the guilt for the sin but it is still wrong.

I make many statements for the sake of defending the church’s stand on birth control so that I can be better prepared. I learned how to respond why NFP is not contraception.

I have a friend who has very heavy, painful periods. She is Catholic. She went to the priest and received permission. She had the uterine ablation procedure done, as she could not deal with the periods. They truly, did her in for a number of days. Pregnancy would not be a problem though.

Is this a case for the Principal of Double Effect?

Many women go on hormonal therapy or have procedures done to relieve heavy periods, not because pregnancy would be difficult.

How do you defend that?

Also just a note, the uterine ablation procedure makes the women infertile, but still able to conceive.

As to the rest I do not of enough medical knowledge to answer the questions. My only recommendation would be for your friend to attempt to find a NFP only OB/GYN and/or contact the Pope Paul VI Institute popepaulvi.com/ .

 

[duskyjewel]

Many women go on hormonal therapy or have procedures done to relieve heavy periods, not because pregnancy would be difficult.

How do you defend that?

With the example of my friend, whose potassium and iron got so low from the blood loss that she landed in the ER twice. She is seriously considering having the ablation done.

This dismissive tone when talking of heavy periods as a medical problem really bugs me. This is true, honest, health-compromising, and at times even life-threatening, suffering that these women go through. My friend was told in the ER that her iron and potassium were SO LOW that it would have affected her heart rhythms inside of another hour or two.

Would you have women like this give up their health and ability to function, to care for the children they already have, to take care of their homes, to be good wives and/or employees, because of some hangup you have about the side effects of hormonal treatments or ablation, which the Church itself says are morally fine in these cases?

And forgive me for this… I am not usually a raging sexist, SirOscar, but… as a man, I think you should refrain from commenting on what you think it is like to have a woman’s body and go through any period, much less a really difficult one. Even with the experience of living with your mother, wife, or however many sisters you might have… you know nothing on this topic.

 

[SirOscar]

And forgive me for this… I am not usually a raging sexist, SirOscar, but… as a man, I think you should refrain from commenting on what you think it is like to have a woman’s body and go through any period, much less a really difficult one. Even with the experience of living with your mother, wife, or however many sisters you might have… you know nothing on this topic.

You know nothing about me.

I was by no means trying to be dismissive. By all means women who experience heavy periods for medical reasons need to have hormone therapy or procedures done. My friend is one of them, and I love her dearly, and want the best for her.

My friend will be infertile by this procedure. She is young, what if she wants to have children later and regrets her decision. It can’t be reversed. With this procedure she can still conceive it is just that the fertilized egg would never implant and a spontaneous abortion would occur. She would need hormonal therapy or practice NFP the rest of her years that she ovulates. This is something many doctors to not tell the patient, that all women need to be aware of.

So with that, I am truly, truly sorry that I offended you. That was not my intent at all.

 

[kind_bean]

You can never use artificial birth control

Is it OK to take birth control pills for medical reasons?:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=15756

 

[LJN21]

Is it OK to take birth control pills for medical reasons?:
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=15756

Read the rest of my post.

 

[Good_Daughter]

"
]“Hic et nunc” means “here and now.” In other words, it is a purpose of amendment that somewhere in your heart you deeply believe cannot be sustained but that you trust in the power of Christ to MAKE IT HAPPEN. Those of us who struggle with repetitive sin (like posting on these threads half the live-long day ) are sometimes forced into this form of penitence. The great sin with repetitive sin is abandoning hope that grace will ever be sufficient to overcome our sin. Giving up is far worse than failing because it bespeaks a lack of faith.

You may not “deserve” praise, but I find your position worthy of praise. It bespeaks a great desire for truth and a love of God on HIS terms. Many of us “want God” – few of us want Him on His own terms.

I can’t tell you how much I needed to hear this. Your explanation and encouragement brought me to tears.

Thank you, mercygate.

 

[pira114]

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.

---

[Origin: 1885–90; contra-1 + (con)ception]
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.

Emphasis on the word “techinques.”

This is what I was talking about when I said using NFP to avoid pregnancy is contraception.

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.

 

[mercygate]

I can’t tell you how much I needed to hear this. Your explanation and encouragement brought me to tears.

Thank you, mercygate.

:console:

 

[LJN21]

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.

---

[Origin: 1885–90; contra-1 + (con)ception]
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.

Emphasis on the word “techinques.”

This is what I was talking about when I said using NFP to avoid pregnancy is contraception.

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.

–noun the deliberate prevention of conception or impregnation by any of various drugs, techniques, or devices; birth control.

Firsts there is NOTHING WRONG with having sex when your infertile, if this were the case you could only have sex for the ~4 days out of the month you were fertile and no longer be able to after menopause. It doesn’t matter if your charting or not, couples are free to, and it is completely moral to have sex during the infertile time.

During the fertile time there is simply no action taken, no technique, no nothing. There is no direct prevention of conception or impregnation, because there is nothing happening that would CAUSE conception or impregnation. Withdrawal would be a technique that prevents conception.

Again I strongly think that if NFP had like a 50% failure rate we would not be having this discussion.

 

[newbetx]

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.

---

[Origin: 1885–90; contra-1 + (con)ception]
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.

Emphasis on the word “techinques.”

This is what I was talking about when I said using NFP to avoid pregnancy is contraception.

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.

I understood. Not everyone will agree that this is the working definition here… There are two subtleties at work here.

1. NOT having sex happens all the time. Abstenence is usually NOT considered contraception… although by the definition you provided here, it could be. But only IF you consider a lack of a certain action, an action. KWIM? We define contraception as a method to still HAVE sex but using methods that would render the act itself infertile independent of the potential fertility of the woman.

2)First, you are allowed to NOT have sex for any period you wish as a couple. This “open to life” statement means you will accept a life if it comes, not that you must only TRY every time to create one. There is NO GUARANTEE that a couple won’t get pregnant during times indicating they probably are infertile. It’s just not likely… There is NO requirement by the Church to have as many children as physically possible, either.

now one can say “percentages, percentages … blah blah blah, same as ABC”… Not the point. One needs to step back and look at the bigger picture. If one want’s to compare bullet to bullet on a list comparing the two methods, one is missing the point. And it’s hard to explain it all in a few posts discussing details. This is why I recommend reading about TOB. It answers these questions. But in order to understand the difference you have to understand the bigger picture.

free, total, faithful, fruitful… These four components of the act of love must be present. CW does a great job explaining all this. BTW, fruitful doesn’t only mean “capable of making a baby” as some people want to understand it. This is where some people interpret sex as not permissible after menopause or during pregnancy. Married couples are expected to TRY to have children. Pre-planning not to have any voids the marriage.

Sex is a wonderful gift from God and it’s more than just for making babies. But as with all things good, we humans have to be careful to keep it good and not let the evil of the world corrupt it.

 

[SirOscar]

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.

Now, here is 2 different scenarios:

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.

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.

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.

 

[ComputerGeek25]

Now, here is 2 different scenarios:

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.

This falls under the principle of double effect, because a neccessary medical procedure renders the patient infertile. Infertiliy was an unitended concequence.

Also, even though the can concieve but not implant, the act itself is still open to life, even though it is an impossibility.

The frequency of the act does not matter as long as it is both unitive and open to life (more specifically, it is not intentionally thwarted).

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 not the teaching of the church. A vastectomy is always a grave matter, therefore a potential mortal sin, if full knowledge and full consent are present.

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.

Again, the church does not teach this specifically. The framework that the church has given us is that the act is unitive and we are not to intentionally thwart the natural process of the creation of life.

If what you say is true, the church would not allow infertile people to get married, even if it was an act of nature (for example, menopause).