Is ABC ever permissable

[Blue_Horizon]

So it is not a mortal sin for her to use ABC and prevent the birth of any future children?

Tom I am suggesting to you do not really understand the words/concepts you/others are using here.
Until you realise this and get clarity on the basic words/concepts then nothing anyone says here will help you gain further clarity. It will in fact get more confusing.

Lets be clear about what “mortal sin” is for a start.
Mortal sin is a free and knowing act that completely kills the presence of God in the soul, destroys sanctifying grace, makes habitual goodness impossible (until repentance) and immediately destines a person for eternity in hell.
So does whacking on a piece of latex or swallowing a hormone pill while being sexually active ALWAYS have this result… this is what you are really asking us.

And I am clearly saying NO. It cannot be rightly said that the Church teaches this - as I think you already know deep down.

I believe both Dorothy or Attila would agree with me on this - despite the fact they have just advised us all the opposite .

Just goes to show, words/concepts, as the Church uses them in her teaching, need to be understood by all of us.
It is very very hard at times even for theologians who argue over even such small matters as whether sexual intercourse should be defined as ejaculating (a) “in” or (b) “into” one’s partner .

So I think it would be helpful (more for your own growth in understanding) if you could re-phrase your question and we can take it from there. You still aren’t going to get the easy answer you seem to want. But at least by this dialogue you will have, hopefully, a better understanding of Church teaching and your own motivations for asking .

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Such situations are ALWAYS unique in their many details…Details that are never supplied in the scenarios for the simple reason that to do so would require writing a book instead of an internet posting.
Things you’ve left out are how this woman feels about having so many children…what is the role of the husband in all of this…etc…

Because these details cannot be known in sufficient detail on a public forum…and also because the function of a public forum is to provide public answers, we must state categorically that ABC is never permissible…

Your question here moves from the realm of the “law” and toward the idea of God’s mercy. It moves from the area of "normative teaching, to the needs of a given unique individual (or couple) in a given unique circumstance.
Here, I would simply make this observation. God granted His clergy the power or bind or loose sin…Confession, that is the sacrament of Reconciliation, is the place we go to discuss and deal with our sins and our struggles…
A person who finds themselves in the circumstance you outline here, needs to have the (name removed by moderator)ut and the guidance of a good regular confessor.

The Church’s teachings are firm and they are good. God’s mercy to those who seek to follow Him with all their heart is endless.

So - could a good confessor ever allow for an exception? Anything is possible…if the unique situation warrants it…
But I stress this above all…IF THE UNIQUE SITUATION WARRANTS IT…
and if it is seen (by Christ’s minister in confession / counseling) to be warranted…then it should not be discussed by the participants with anyone else so as to not cause confusion or sin by others.

I trust I have been sufficiently obtuse…

Peace
James

James I believe this is a very spiritually mature peice of advice. Esp the bit about separating out private and public Forums.

My only reservation is that you give the impression that a Priest somehow has the authority to say that a human act that is determined to be contraceptive is permissable with his permission and ongoing evaluation of the situation. This would be incorrect. Not even God can say that something intrinsically evil is somehow not intrinsically evil. He can of course forgive.

What I understand you to be really suggesting is that in cases of confusion and great anxiety (such as these) a priest may objectively determine that a person may not have full knowledge or freedom of will and that, given these unique set of circumstances, this person cannot be reasonably assumed to be sinning mortally.

There is also a world of difference between:
(a) a priest actively counselling someone not to keep using ABC and
(b) the same priest NOT actively counselling someone else not to keep using ABC .

 

[Blue_Horizon]

First of all I have my doubts that this is a real situation and not a fishing exercise, but I would like to point out that there is one form of birth control that works everytime and is approved by the Church- Abstinence.

The problem is that you present the situation with the assumption that everyone should be able to have sex without consequences. Which is a secular position, yet we are talking about religious people? Guess what? When people have sex they could get pregnant. This is the will of God and anything that trys to interfers with that is contrary to the will of God. If someone truely thinks they can’t handle another child then don’t have sex. Yes, Married couples can abstain from sex.

The situation you present is not a realistic one. If there truly is this haggard, run down, tired woman who can’t handle another child, But insists on adhering to Church teaching I seriously doubt she or her husband have the time, energy or desire to risk it.

Good insight .

Steve if you look around the Forum you will come across a number of very sincere cases that are even worse (because some wives have very irregular periods and even NFP is off the table, also some in poor health have a high chance of death with another pregnancy).

While I accept your insight, it must of course be understood that a form of birth control only really becomes a possibly contraceptive one when related to an actual incidence of sexual intercourse. So abstinence (or not getting married) are not contraceptive methods of birth control .

 

[Tomdstone]

Here I don’t think that we have an ad-hominem attack, saying that the question sounds like that of a child indicates (to me) more of an assessment of the spiritual maturity of the one asking.

Just a thought

Peace
James

If a question is asked and the response is that the person who has asked the question does not have spiritual maturity, why would this not be an ad hominem response? You are attacking the integrity and the spiritual maturity of the person asking the question. You are not answering the question itself.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

You didn’t comment on the answer I gave to your question which is abstinence.

Again I object to your assumption that sex is for pleasure not procreation. Which is a secular view that you are applying to religious people who, obviously, do not share your opinion on the matter or they wouldn’t be in SSPX.

Steve I think there is a problem for many virile young men when “a remedy for concupiscence” is withdrawn from them. Lets not pretend that denial of this remedy is a small matter because it can cause accidental unfaithfulness which doesn’t help the family either. We live in a broken world … that must be taken into account also.

If denial of this legitimate end of marriage is not easily handled then NFP is something that loyal Catholics would want to consider. It requires prudent planning and chastity (regulation of desire to the infertile periods) which are both virtues that all Christians are called to follow to the degree that circumstances dictate.

Howver there are, rarely, exceptional cases in which even NFP is not possible which suggests complete abstinence only remains. As others have well pointed out, this is not necessarily so, but it requires ongoing spiritual direction/discernment with a Priest. The living Church is compassionate - and wise in the face of human weakness and what men may do outside the family if uncontrollable needs are denied.

The point is that solidarity/communication with the living Church and the willingness to practice some level of chastity is essential in Christian life. Sexual matters are not regarded as trivial by the Church.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

That’s above my pay grade. As Catholics, we can’t worry too much about what the Orthodox teach. In our daily decisions on morally, we must learn and follow what the Catholic Church teaches.

Corki have you seen what the Pope said recently about Catholic 2nd marriages and how the Orthdox Church handles this widespread issue?

So we may have to worry about such things sooner than we think .

 

[Tomdstone]

The answer is the same no matter what the “hypothesis”. Contraception is always a moral evil and is never moral. Never. Ever. Never. Why is that not clear?
.

It is not clear because the Roman Catholic Church has been in dialog with the Eastern Orthodox Church which a Pope has called a sister Church of the Roman Catholic Church. And we have a case where a sister Church of the Roman Catholic Church (according to my understanding) would most likely apply economia or leniency in such a case and allow a mother of 15 children to use ABC. Also, again according to my understanding, the Eastern Orthodox Church does not see any difference in ABC or NFP when it is used to prevent children. How then can there be any union between the RCC and the EOC, when one Church insists on the immorality of ABC even in such an extreme case, while the other Church says that it is appropriate for their Church to apply mercy and allow the use of ABC since the lady has her hands full with 15 children.

 

[Tomdstone]

Repeat:

She **cannot **contracept.

I don’t think that this is true. According to RCC teaching perhaps, she may not contracept. But she does have the ability to contracept, so that she can contracept, but she may not contracept according to the teaching you are referring to.

 

[Steveabrous]

If a question is asked and the response is that the person who has asked the question does not have spiritual maturity, why would this not be an ad hominem response? You are attacking the integrity and the spiritual maturity of the person asking the question. You are not answering the question itself.

In other words this person made a point that you can’t counter so you fake outrage at the comment to cover for the fact that you can’t counter. Your following the play book flawlessly. Good job.

 

[Tomdstone]

What I object to is the obvious answer to this “Moral problem” which is the Catholic church is wrong on thier stance on birth control. Why? Because some sspx woman with 15 kids might have a husband who wont stop having sex with her and doesn’t lift a finger to help her. In otherwords a situation that is extremely rare if exists at all and because of this fictitious situation the Real Catholic church should change its position on birth-control in the real world? When the reality is the secular world wants to have sex without consequences and do not like it when the mean old Catholic church tells them its wrong.

This is the same tactic used by the secularist concerning abortion using the what if a woman is raped, molested, or thier life is in danger. Again, extremely rare cases if they happen at all in the modern world. Yet because of this hypothetical the Christian world stood silent in ,large part, and watched as billions were aborted, and not for those reasons. Why? because we were afraid to offend anyone. And as a result of not wanting to offend anyone we lost our culture and the culture war.
We loose these arguments because we allow the secular world to frame the debate with these ridiculous hypotheticals and are afraid to call their bluff. Not me. Not anymore.

Actually, it is not the case that her husband does not lift a finger to help her. He was feeding one of the babies with a bottle, so he was lifting a finger.

 

[Tomdstone]

James I believe this is a very spiritually mature peice of advice. Esp the bit about separating out private and public Forums.

My only reservation is that you give the impression that a Priest somehow has the authority to say that a human act that is determined to be contraceptive is permissable with his permission and ongoing evaluation of the situation. This would be incorrect. Not even God can say that something intrinsically evil is somehow not intrinsically evil. He can of course forgive.

What I understand you to be really suggesting is that in cases of confusion and great anxiety (such as these) a priest may objectively determine that a person may not have full knowledge or freedom of will and that, given these unique set of circumstances, this person cannot be reasonably assumed to be sinning mortally.

There is also a world of difference between:
(a) a priest actively counselling someone not to keep using ABC and
(b) the same priest NOT actively counselling someone else not to keep using ABC .

This would not be the case with the EO Church where the priest is allowed to advise the woman and apply mercy to his response.

 

[Tomdstone]

In other words this person made a point that you can’t counter so you fake outrage at the comment to cover for the fact that you can’t counter. Your following the play book flawlessly. Good job.

What is the point which you say I cannot counter? Please detail the point you are referring to.

 

[Tomdstone]

Corki have you seen what the Pope said recently about Catholic 2nd marriages and how the Orthdox Church handles this widespread issue?

So we may have to worry about such things sooner than we think .

I did see that and had the same question as you did. the statement of the Pope appears to be somewhat sympathetic to the position of the Eastern Orthodox Church on divorce. Contraception was not mentioned, but as you know, under certain conditions, a priest of the EOC may allow a couple to use ABC.

 

[Steveabrous]

It is not clear because the Roman Catholic Church has been in dialog with the Eastern Orthodox Church which a Pope has called a sister Church of the Roman Catholic Church. And we have a case where a sister Church of the Roman Catholic Church (according to my understanding) would most likely apply economia or leniency in such a case and allow a mother of 15 children to use ABC. Also, again according to my understanding, the Eastern Orthodox Church does not see any difference in ABC or NFP when it is used to prevent children. How then can there be any union between the RCC and the EOC, when one Church insists on the immorality of ABC even in such an extreme case, while the other Church says that it is appropriate for their Church to apply mercy and allow the use of ABC since the lady has her hands full with 15 children.

It is the successor of Peter that christ gives infallibility to. Not the Patriarchs in the Orthodox church. So it is irrelevant what they, or any other church, says on the matter. It is the vicar oif christ that can not error on the matter.

 

[maryjk]

Actually, it is not the case that her husband does not lift a finger to help her. He was feeding one of the babies with a bottle, so he was lifting a finger.

So now you are adding more conditions?

The husband helps but refuses to abstain when his wife is fertile. Or was it that NFP doesn’t work for her?

Sorry it is hard to keep up with all of the conditions.

 

[Tomdstone]

So now you are adding more conditions?

The husband helps but refuses to abstain when his wife is fertile. Or was it that NFP doesn’t work for her?

Sorry it is hard to keep up with all of the conditions.

This was not my condition. This condition was brought up by someone else. Please read post #56.

 

[Steveabrous]

Someone presents a moral problem, and the solution is found by attacking the person as an arrogant liberal. Would this be an ad hominem type of response?

Would this whole thing not be a troll? Since you’ve admitted it is all hypothetical, yet it was not presented that way at first.

 

[Steveabrous]

What is the point which you say I cannot counter? Please detail the point you are referring to.

It was pointed out to you that everytime your point is answered you add more conditions to the hypothetical which is coming across as childish. Rather then defending your tactics and showing that they are real world examples you complain about being attacked. Which is a leftist tactic.

I’m just saying.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

I did see that and had the same question as you did. the statement of the Pope appears to be somewhat sympathetic to the position of the Eastern Orthodox Church on divorce. Contraception was not mentioned, but as you know, under certain conditions, a priest of the EOC may allow a couple to use ABC.

Tom if that ever happened it would only be in very rare cases - prob not the ones you are thinking of which are compassionately treated under private spiritual direction as is already adequately happening - and along the lines previously mentioned.

Also, it would be madness for any Pope to publicly say anything to change the present situation even for the sake of the very few and rare legitimate cases. To do so would be to ignite a power-keg of confusion and many married couples who had no case at all would think they can legitimately turn to ABC rather than practice NFP or abstinence - which is the only real moral answer if they wish to limit children.

(A possible rare case may be those where husbands have HIV and do not wish to communicate this life-threatening disease to one’s married partner.)

 

[Tomdstone]

It is the successor of Peter that christ gives infallibility to. Not the Patriarchs in the Orthodox church. So it is irrelevant what they, or any other church, says on the matter. It is the vicar oif christ that can not error on the matter.

A couple of comments here.

1. the Eastern Orthodox Church does not accept the infallibility of the Roman Catholic Pope. And yet, the RCC is attempting to unite with them.
2. There are Catholic theologians who say that the restriction on ABC was not an infallible decision. Where did any Pope say that Humanae Vitae was an infallible decision. In fact, I thought that I read somewhere that Pope Paul VI said something to the effect that the teaching on ABC was not an infallible one - correct me if I am wrong on this, I may not have stated this precisely and I know that we have scholars in semantics here who might be able to give the answer in a more exact semantic detail.