Infertile/sterile couples

[iamme]

i wasnt sure where to post this (as with most things i post ) so i figured this was a good spot.
ive heard the argument that sex is for procreation, and that contraception is basically the same as abortion (as is masturbation) and that single people should refrain from both sex and masturbation. my question, is if there is a married couple, who find themselves incapable of having children, would it be wrong for them to continue having sex, knowing that a child will not come from it?

 

[gardenswithkids]

…my question, is if there is a married couple, who find themselves incapable of having children, would it be wrong for them to continue having sex, knowing that a child will not come from it?

No, it’s not wrong.

Just because they appear infertile that doesn’t mean they “know” a child will not result from the marriage act. It may be highly unlikely, but the Bible has several stories of couples like Abraham and Sarah, St. Elizabeth and St. Zechariah. Those couples were thought to be infertile had children in their old age.

 

[manualman]

Nope. It’s a good question that naturally flows from poor or incomplete catholic explanations of the contraception teaching.

A lot of people will try to condense catholic teaching and say that sex is only for procreation. Not correct.

God created sex to be both unitive and procreative. He created woman such that she is only fertile a relatively small portion of the time (and not at all after menopause). When a married couple has intercourse during a naturally infertile time, they commit do wrongdoing. Far from it, they are renewing their sacramental union.

But when that couple deliberately takes action to BLOCK their natural fertility so that they can grasp and possess the pleasure of sex while sterilizing the outcome, they change the very nature of what it is they are doing. Instead of being both unitive AND procreative, it becomes sterile and even the unitive function is injured.

This is why it is perfectly acceptable for sterile or post-menopausal couples to make love. Even those who got tuubes tied or had a vasectomy can morally do it once they’ve repented and confessed. A woman who needs a hysterectomy need not worry about the licitness of further intimacy. It is also why NFP is OK when used for a just reason: there is no BLOCKING of the natural fetility. By fasting during the fertile time, the link between sex, love and life is maintained.

 

[iamme]

Nope. It’s a good question that naturally flows from poor or incomplete catholic explanations of the contraception teaching.

A lot of people will try to condense catholic teaching and say that sex is only for procreation. Not correct.

God created sex to be both unitive and procreative. He created woman such that she is only fertile a relatively small portion of the time (and not at all after menopause). When a married couple has intercourse during a naturally infertile time, they commit do wrongdoing. Far from it, they are renewing their sacramental union.

But when that couple deliberately takes action to BLOCK their natural fertility so that they can grasp and possess the pleasure of sex while sterilizing the outcome, they change the very nature of what it is they are doing. Instead of being both unitive AND procreative, it becomes sterile and even the unitive function is injured.

This is why it is perfectly acceptable for sterile or post-menopausal couples to make love. Even those who got tuubes tied or had a vasectomy can morally do it once they’ve repented and confessed. A woman who needs a hysterectomy need not worry about the licitness of further intimacy. It is also why NFP is OK when used for a just reason: there is no BLOCKING of the natural fetility. By fasting during the fertile time, the link between sex, love and life is maintained.

ok, thats the kind of answer i was looking for, as alot of people argue that sex is solely for procreation, thanks for the illumination.

and gardenswithkids, i understand the response, but comparing the old testaments times with the medical and biological sciences of today is slightly backwards thinking. we can identify things that guarantee to a medical certainty that there are couples who can never have children on their own, and looking at the world i live in, divine intervention doesnt exist anymore. but i do understand what you mean.

 

[kage_ar]

“Alot of people” argue that man has never walked on the moon or that elvis did not die, that does not make it true.

You have demonstrated deep misunderstandings of teachings of Christ through the Holy Catholic Church.

I’d really suggest you sit down and read the Compendium of the Catechism and then follow with the Catechism, coupled with prayer.

Learn what the Church teaches.

 

[manualman]

iamme, I promise: Divine intervention DOES still exist. But God doesn’t want us to be puppets. He wants us to freely choose Him. His intervention is as present as ever.

WARNING! DANGEROUS ADVICE!
Doubt me? Ask Him. He’s cool, really. Ask him sincerely to help you to understand how much he loves you. Then keep the TV turned off for a week, add some quiet time in your life and see what happens.

Here is Pope Paul VI’s Humanae Vitae explanation from the late 1960’s: vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html

John Paul II had a lot to say on the matter too that IMO more fully explores the unitive function of sex. A good intro to that is “Theology of the Body for Beginners” by Christopher West.

 

[newbetx]

ok, thats the kind of answer i was looking for, as alot of people argue that sex is solely for procreation, thanks for the illumination.

and gardenswithkids, i understand the response, but comparing the old testaments times with the medical and biological sciences of today is slightly backwards thinking. we can identify things that guarantee to a medical certainty that there are couples who can never have children on their own, and looking at the world i live in, divine intervention doesnt exist anymore. but i do understand what you mean.

Ah, no. It’s as applicable today as it was thousands of years ago. Our neighbor was told she was infertile. They adopted two kids and raised them. One week she wasn’t feeling to well and went to the doctor. They had a healthy baby girl 9 months later. She was my DD’s playmate until they moved last year. We forget sometimes it’s all on God’s time, not ours.

Many claim the Church’s teaching on sex/reproduction is wrong. I, too, thought that for decades. God blessed me by alowing my eyes to open and see the beauty of the lessons from scripture. To say it just saved my marriage is an understatement. I suggest you pick up a book or audio on Theology of the Body for a better understanding of the value of sex and the relationship it is intended to be. We can easily fool ourselves into thinking we know all about it and the Church “doesn’t understand modern life.” I found out how right on some aspects I was and how wrong I was on others. If you want a love life that is beyond what anyone can try to sell you, I suggest you pick up on TOB and embrace it. I’ve never been sorry.

 

[iamme]

iamme, I promise: Divine intervention DOES still exist. But God doesn’t want us to be puppets. He wants us to freely choose Him. His intervention is as present as ever.

WARNING! DANGEROUS ADVICE!
Doubt me? Ask Him. He’s cool, really. Ask him sincerely to help you to understand how much he loves you. Then keep the TV turned off for a week, add some quiet time in your life and see what happens.

1)i have done that, and i dont have a personal relationship with god (if he exists). i am not atheist, i am agnostic, and after very very hard years of trying, have given up trying to prove he exists for me on any level, the balls in his court now.

1. tv is rubbish. anytime i like a show, it gets cancelled, so i decided to help people who do like tv by not watching it anymore

kage_ar, im not catholic, and dont even know where to begin with these things, i have a faint understanding of what the catechism, and i dont have a convenient access to it (i hate to read book length things on a computer monitor) which is why i come here to try and answer my questions. also, the “lot of people” were posters on this forum, which is why i asked my question here to begin with. theres a vocal minority or a silent majority that makes things extremely confusing for people like me.

 

[iamme]

Ah, no. It’s as applicable today as it was thousands of years ago. Our neighbor was told she was infertile. They adopted two kids and raised them. One week she wasn’t feeling to well and went to the doctor. They had a healthy baby girl 9 months later. She was my DD’s playmate until they moved last year. We forget sometimes it’s all on God’s time, not ours.

im not saying that doctors cant be wrong, but most of the time, theyre not. if they were unreliable, we wouldnt see them, right? this was an instance where something unforeseeable happened, and congrats to them, but theyre in the minority. granted, doctors never say never, but they can say “i wouldnt make a play room anytime soon”

 

[kage_ar]

Try this link.

scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

You can search for the teaching you want to understand and read that.

 

[iamme]

Try this link.

scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

You can search for the teaching you want to understand and read that.

thanks for that man!
i will use that!

 

[newbetx]

im not saying that doctors cant be wrong, but most of the time, theyre not. if they were unreliable, we wouldnt see them, right? this was an instance where something unforeseeable happened, and congrats to them, but theyre in the minority. granted, doctors never say never, but they can say “i wouldnt make a play room anytime soon”

the doctor wasn’t wrong. She WAS infertile. They used nothing for BC for 20+ years. When they found out, they were exstatic… but that’s not the point, really.

I don’t know how I can convince you of God’s existance if you aren’t willing to be convinced. IMO, science has the details but lacks the reasoning. Faith provides the “why” and to try to keep the two separate is folly. Too much has happened in my life that if stuff was just up to chance… I’d be dead or worse (yes there is something worse than dead.) I hope He calls on you soon. You seem very polite and responsible based on your posts here. I hope we can help answer any other questions you have.

Peace!

 

[iamme]

the doctor wasn’t wrong. She WAS infertile. They used nothing for BC for 20+ years. When they found out, they were exstatic… but that’s not the point, really.

I don’t know how I can convince you of God’s existance if you aren’t willing to be convinced. IMO, science has the details but lacks the reasoning. Faith provides the “why” and to try to keep the two separate is folly. Too much has happened in my life that if stuff was just up to chance… I’d be dead or worse (yes there is something worse than dead.) I hope He calls on you soon. You seem very polite and responsible based on your posts here. I hope we can help answer any other questions you have.

Peace!

she obviously wasnt infertile if she conceived. it was no divine intervention. something in her biology (or his) had changed to the point where their bits and pieces were compatible. not using birth control also doesnt guarantee pregnancy.
also, im not sure faith means what you think it means, or reasoning.

but im glad things are working out for you and that youre alive!

 

[newbetx]

she obviously wasnt infertile if she conceived. it was no divine intervention. something in her biology (or his) had changed to the point where their bits and pieces were compatible. not using birth control also doesnt guarantee pregnancy.
also, im not sure faith means what you think it means, or reasoning.

but im glad things are working out for you and that youre alive!

eerr, first reply got trashed somehow.

No. She was infertile. And I did not say it was divine intervention. I would not know. And I agree, something in the process changed to enable the pregnacy.

Here’s where I am on this. God is the creater of all nature. He made the natural processes and the processes do what they do. He has the ability to override or change these processes if He so desires. Miracles do happen. They have happened to me. I won’t try to convince you but I will tell you that is what I believe. I will also tell you I haven’t been a “religious nut” for very long. I really don’l like considering myself one but I could understand how you might think I am one. I know this woman thought all of us here were nuts.

You say you’ve left convincing you He exists up to Him. OK. She did, too.

Peace to you!

 

[iamme]

And I did not say it was divine intervention. I would not know.

Here’s where I am on this. God is the creater of all nature. He made the natural processes and the processes do what they do. He has the ability to override or change these processes if He so desires.
Peace to you!

you say you say it wasnt divine intervention, then what you describe is exactly divine intervention. i also dont understand what bringing in someone who hasnt said or done anything close to do with this topic is achieving…
peace to you as well…

 

[newbetx]

you say you say it wasnt divine intervention, then what you describe is exactly divine intervention. i also dont understand what bringing in someone who hasnt said or done anything close to do with this topic is achieving…
peace to you as well…

You are correct once again. I have wandered off topic with you. My appologies.