Husband getting vasectomy

  • Thread starter Thread starter Puppy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
HomeschoolDad said:
hope this won’t be interpreted as an attack on the OP — I don’t mean it that way — but the question of birth control, and how conception issues will be handled throughout the marriage, are things that need to be gotten out of the way before the wedding. If the non-observant partner won’t agree never to resort to contraception or sterilization, then why would a faithful Catholic go through with it and marry that person in the first place?.
Click to expand...
i thInk the op had already answer this. It seems ot is the hisband who had underevaluated this question or change his mind…
Puppy said:
He knew my stance before I married him, I made it very clear.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I would suggest seeing a counselor. Sounds like there could be more problems here that just having physical marital relations.
 
LittleFlower378 said:
It would not be the same if he were to use condoms
Click to expand...
Actually, if I am understanding correctly, if a husband insists on using condoms, as long as the wife does not consent to this in her will, or say to herself “ok, this is fine, I accept this”, she can be without moral fault. He is the one performing the contraceptive act, not she.

It would be absolutely imperative for the wife to describe her husband’s intransigence to her confessor and follow his advice. This is a matter requiring the assistance of a priest, not a decision the innocent spouse should make on her own.
 
hopeful3542 said:
The part about the condoms is incorrect. The OP could have relations with her husband if he used condoms as he would be the one using contraception, not her. What she may not do is use contraception herself.
Click to expand...
Vademucum for Confessors

13. Special difficulties are presented by cases of cooperation in the sin of a spouse who voluntarily renders the unitive act infecund. In the first place, it is necessary to distinguish cooperation in the proper sense, from violence or unjust imposition on the part of one of the spouses, which the other spouse in fact cannot resist.46, 561).] This cooperation can be licit when the three following conditions are jointly met:

1. when the action of the cooperating spouse is not already illicit in itself;47
2. when proportionally grave reasons exist for cooperating in the sin of the other spouse;
3. when one is seeking to help the other spouse to desist from such conduct (patiently, with prayer, charity and dialogue; although not necessarily in that moment, nor on every single occasion).

14. Furthermore, it is necessary to carefully evaluate the question of cooperation in evil when recourse is made to means which can have an abortifacient effect.48

The act of the condom would intrinsically evil and be contraceptive from the beginning of the act and during the entire time of the act and against 1 in the Vademecum. It would be a sin of formal cooperation for the wife in this instance. Vasectomy and withdrawl would be a sin for the husband in this situation but not for the wife IF she is in accord with the Vedemecum (above) and she have 1)grave reasons in cooperating with spouse as she does since it would be a sexless marriage 2) she help spouse tell him of his conduct

Denzinger 2795:

** “Can the wife, aware of such “condomistic” union, yield herself passively?**
No, she would indeed be engaging in an act that is intrinsically illicit.”
 
Last edited:
The problems in your marriage seem to run deeper than a disagreement about birth control. It’s more about control for either side. You need to fix that.
 
It varies. A woman’s fertility will be at it’s lowest during peri-menopause but she can still be fertile. Also some women may become very fertile during during this time as her body seems to have “last call” for a baby before menopause. And at what age this happens also varies.
 
Last edited:
No, you didnt finish, its already illicit for both since the entire act is contraceptive as stated in Denzinger and the wife would be participating in that act…formal cooperation.
 
Willing_Spirit said:
Using NFP to avoid having children for no other reason than just not wanting them is also sinful.
Click to expand...
I agree with you, but some faithful Catholics of good will maintain that NFP may be used absolutely at the discretion of the couple, reasons notwithstanding, or for no reason at all other than just, as you say, not wanting to have children.

I am considering just how to go about making an inquiry to the Holy See (probably Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith) as to whether this is licit, and whether, at some point within the marriage, the couple at the very least must disregard the natural cycles (more below) for a period of time long enough to be open to the conception of a child without intending otherwise. My sensus catholicus or “Catholic spidey sense” tells me that this is too nuanced of a question, and that there are just too many variables, for the Holy See to be able to say “yes, this reason is valid, but that reason is not valid”. Nonetheless, past Popes (Pius XI, Pius XII) have said that for “grave” or “serious” reasons, NFP may be used, and then the question that begs to be asked is “but what about reasons that are not grave, or are not serious, what then?”. And would it be a sin to use NFP selfishly, where the sin would be in the selfishness, not in the use of NFP per se? Or would we say “if you’re using NFP, that’s selflessness enough, your bona fides is assumed”?

Some could object, “well, then, this means that the Church is forcing married people to have relations”. Not true. Any married couple can always mutually resolve not to have relations, either for a period of time, or permanently as in “Josephite marriages”. But if they do choose to have a normal, healthy conjugal life, the question then is “do they disregard the naturally occurring indicators of female fertility, or do they regard them and act accordingly, either to engage in them if they want to try to conceive a child, or not to engage in them if they wish to avoid conceiving?”. If they regard these indicators and are seeking not to fall pregnant, presto, they’re using NFP! Simple as that.
 
The Church does not provide a checklist. It is up to each couple to determine what is a just reason.
 
What I was taught in NFP class, and my impression from reading Humanae Vitae, was that NFP is just meant to enable responsible parenthood. As I understand, that means if I literally can not afford to feed another child, and/or am struggling to feed the ones I already have, then I can intend not to have a child, but I still have to be open to having a child if it is God’s will and trust He will provide.

Intending not to have children out of concern for their well being is in line with God’s will. Intending not to have children because you are placing your own will above God’s, whether it be saving money for a new car or just don’t want the stress and time commitment that comes with raising a child, is sinful.

I’m just saying the bigger issue here could be priorities in general/health of the relationship and not just the method used to avoid having children, so there might be different conversations worth having that get to the root of the issue.
 
Asinner said:
I’ll tell you how I’m seeing things right now, with the caveat that this is a pessimistic view, and I sincerely hope I’m wrong:
  1. Your children are all adults now, so they’re out of the house now or at least should be able to make their own way without their parents.
  2. He’s getting a vasectomy, meaning he will eliminate the possibility of future kids.
When I put those two things together, I see a very strong possibility that he is going to divorce you.
Click to expand...
I find it curious that you can go so far as to pose an answer to the obvious question of ‘why does he pursue vasectomy’, yet when I ask the OP why she thinks he might be pursuing one, the post is flagged??
 
Willing_Spirit said:
Intending not to have children because you are placing your own will above God’s, whether it be saving money for a new car or just don’t want the stress and time commitment that comes with raising a child, is sinful.
Click to expand...
Intending to have a new car may be entirely reasonable and there are no grounds to conclude that that intention, or a decision to avoid pregnancy at this time, are in opposition to God’s will.
 
I’m sorry you got flagged, and maybe I’m in danger of the same. I hope it’s obvious that we’re all trying to help the OP. As someone whose parents divorced when I was 13, it brings me absolutely no joy to post my comment.
 
Willing_Spirit said:
As I understand, that means if I literally can not afford to feed another child, and/or am struggling to feed the ones I already have, then I can intend not to have a child,
Click to expand...
Yes. You can also space/postpone children for many other reasons. If it is your position that you must be at the point where you can “literally not afford to feed…” as the only reason one might space/avoid, you are mistaken.
Willing_Spirit said:
but I still have to be open to having a child if it is God’s will and trust He will provide.
Click to expand...
Not exactly. Each act of intercourse has to be per se ordered to procreation and unity of spouses. You can “not” have intercourse. Or you “can” have intercourse. What you cannot do is contracept.
 
Rau said:
40.png
Willing_Spirit:
Using NFP to avoid having children for no other reason than just not wanting them is also sinful.
Click to expand...
What sin is that?
Click to expand...
See Pius XII, Address to Midwives: Contraception...Why is it considered sinful? - #35 by Vico
 
Obviously if you are going to abstain, you don’t have to be open to children… otherwise, I still believe what I said is exactly right.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top