Is sterilization ok if a future pregnancy could end up with the death of a mother?

[gardenswithkids]

…Jesus himself recognized that we all weak. He made us. I think that in our human weakness, He makes us strong. I am concerned that the teachings of the church are the the end all for some people. Though we all strive to follow the teachings of the church, I simply have to believe that our conscious also has to be followed. …

…The faithful are responsible to well inform and form their consciences, and will be accountable before God as much. The Church also warns about a false sense of autonomy of conscience that some Catholics use to rationalize divergence from Church teaching and sin choices…

Priestly instruction can be a very important part of forming our consciences. Many ask priests for help when facing difficult situations. We need our priests to help us be strong, especially when we are weak.

I wrote earlier about penitents who ask a priest when their minds are already made up to get sterilized. Then I got to thinking after he wrote about following his conscience, why would someone speak to a priest* before *they get sterilized if they’re already completely convinced sterilization okay? If they feel the need to speak to a priest first, then at least one member of the couple has some hesitation and wants to verify the Church teachings. The person who speaks first is at least open to hearing what the Church has to say.

Friends of mine face a similar situation to the op. Doctors warned her that her body wouldn’t tolerate another pregnancy, (multiple c-sections with complications.) At the doctor’s suggestion, her husband planned to get a vasectomy. They honestly believed that since her life was at risk, the Church allowed it, but something inside told them to ask a priest first. He told them “no” sterilization was always wrong and recommended NFP. He didn’t get the vasectomy. They took an NFP class. That was a few years ago, and she’s still alive and not pregnant. She told me how very grateful she was the priest let them know what the Church teaches.

I sympathize with my friends, with the original poster and with others. The Anglican clergy members who attended the Lamberth Conference in the 1930’s also sympathized when women faced life threatening pregancy. Prior to that Lamberth Conference, Protestant churches agreed with the Catholic Church on the evils of contraception. Sermons by notable Protestants like Luther and Wesley sound like the most “militant” Catholics on this issue. My FIL remembers his Lutheran pastor preaching against contraception in the 1950’s. Now we have a hard time finding any Protestant Church that doesn’t allow contraception for all situations. Contraception entered into our culture by tugging at our heartstrings. Humanae Vitae reads like a prophesy, warning that contraception within marriage would result in contraception outside of marriage and a generally loosening of societies sexual morals.

Here are two beautiful Church documents that may help some struggling to properly form (or perhaps re-form) their consciences. Humanae Vitae: ewtn.com/library/ENCYC/P6HUMANA.HTM

Next, what I think most charitably acknowledges the struggle many Catholic face with conjugal morality and advices priest how on to advice us. The Vademeccum for Confessors: ewtn.com/library/ENCYC/P6HUMANA.HTM

The Church teachings may be the end of some people–and with that end comes a new beginning in Christ, who makes us strong in our weakness.

 

[setter]

Are sins of the flesh* always*

sexual in nature? Is impurity always sexual impurity?
Impurity refers to sexual sin.

IMPURITY, defn.; A common term for sins of lust, whether internal or external. Internal sins of lust are interior thoughts or desires that are not carried out in practice. They may take on a variety of forms, e.g., taking pleasure in sexual imaginative representations, complacently enjoying previous sinful venereal experiences, desiring unlawful sexual pleasures. Otherwise the sins are external. therealpresence.org/dictionary/adict.htm

I won’t deny that there is great sexual impurity today but isn’t there a greater and more widespread lack of respect for God?

 

[setter]

I don’t think anyone has brought this up so I will. Don’t you think that threatened life to mom and baby may be a mitigating circumstance that would severly lessen a person’s culpability. Its like with the sin of masturbation…It is always objectively wrong, but there are circumstances that lessen a person’s will, like stress. I can’t beleive than there is any stress like the fear of death or dying in a person. Just a thought:shrug:

I have to disagree. Worst case, the couple must indefinitely practice marital continence. My gosh, it is not like they are being tortured, one finger nail at a time being slowly pulled out, or skinned alive, fryed in boiling oil, …get my point. What about the exercise of a bit of heroic virtue? The only stress is privation of a natural good of marriage the sake of a greater good, i.e., self-sacrifice to avoid a potentially lethal medical complication. Self sacrifice and dying to self, this is what marriage and discipleship to Jesus Christ is all about. We don’t always get to pick and choose our crosses. Unfortunately, too many Catholics do not like to be challenged to grow up in Christ, to become a virtuous man or woman of God, but prefer to remain babes in the faith, and to operate from that perspective.

1755 A *morally good *act requires the goodness of the object, of the end, and of the circumstances together. An evil end corrupts the action, even if the object is good in itself (such as praying and fasting “in order to be seen by men”).

The object of the choice can by itself vitiate an act in its entirety. There are some concrete acts - such as fornication - that it is always wrong to choose, because choosing them entails a disorder of the will, that is, a moral evil. (CCC)

1756 It is therefore an error to judge the morality of human acts by considering only the intention that inspires them or the circumstances (environment, social pressure, duress or emergency, etc.) which supply their context. There are acts which, in and of themselves, independently of circumstances and intentions, are always gravely illicit by reason of their object; such as blasphemy and perjury, murder and adultery. One may not do evil so that good may result from it. (CCC)

 

[duskyjewel]

I don’t think anyone has brought this up so I will. Don’t you think that threatened life to mom and baby may be a mitigating circumstance that would severly lessen a person’s culpability. Its like with the sin of masturbation…It is always objectively wrong, but there are circumstances that lessen a person’s will, like stress. I can’t beleive than there is any stress like the fear of death or dying in a person. Just a thought:shrug:

I think this post is excellent. She’s not dissenting, but also bringing up a great point. For lots of other mortal sins, we see discussions of how certain circumstances can lessen culpability. She brings up masturbation, where I have seen both immaturity and habit used as circumstances that can lessen culpability, even to the point of rendering what might otherwise be a mortal sin venial. (I read this in the Catechism as well, for the particular issue of masturbation.) I would think that in a situation where fear of death, of poverty, of ruined health, becomes such a stressor as to prevent a truly free choice, it would lessen culpability and perhaps render this sin less serious than otherwise. Just like with any other mortal sin.

I have been warned on other threads not to be “more Catholic than the Catholic Church.” If even the Church can find enough compassion and sympathy for the strength of human emotion and imperfection to say that it can in fact lessen culpability, then so can the people who post on Catholic message boards.

The post just previous to this one makes the point about lack of compassion and charity perfectly. It is completely dismissive of the realities and hardship of long-term abstinence, perhaps for the total term of a woman’s remaining fertile years. It might not seem like torture to you…but it would be for many of us! People vary in their levels of sex drive and mutual attraction. For those of us in relationships where both are VERY strong, it would be like torture not to be able to express our love in that way, ever, for possibly 20 years or more. The frustration and stress of that can and does ruin marriages. Once again, I ask, how is it good for the children that already exist if their parents’ marriage fails, or becomes unhealthy and no example of Christ’s love? Isn’t it being a servant and dying to self to put your children’s needs above all else? Remember in Dante’s Inferno, the punishment for the fornicators? It was to eternally remain in close physical proximity to one another, just nearly about to touch, but NEVER able to. Perhaps I am just being intentionally stubborn here, but I just can’t see how any married couple deserves that form of hell for perhaps the majority of their marriage. Let’s face it, if death is a real possibility from another pregnancy, then a couple can’t even take the chance of relying on NFP. They must do something that has ZERO failure rate, which would be total abstinence. Sterilization does have a failure rate, but it’s so low as to be close to zero, and it is not subject to user error, as NFP is. And also not subject to a couple getting so desperate to be together that they unwisely take the risk anyway.

 

[setter]

I would think that in a situation where fear of death, of poverty, of ruined health, becomes such a stressor as to prevent a truly free choice, it would lessen culpability and perhaps render this sin less serious than otherwise. Just like with any other mortal sin.

Only God can judge culpability. The sin remains grave, it does not become a “less serious” sin based on culpability.

I have been warned on other threads not to be “more Catholic than the Catholic Church.” If even the Church can find enough compassion and sympathy for the strength of human emotion and imperfection to say that it can in fact lessen culpability, then so can the people who post on Catholic message boards.

Please cite direct quotes of these posters – I am still trying to find and identify these posters in need of fraternal correction.

 

[LJN21]

I think this post is excellent. She’s not dissenting, but also bringing up a great point. For lots of other mortal sins, we see discussions of how certain circumstances can lessen culpability. She brings up masturbation, where I have seen both immaturity and habit used as circumstances that can lessen culpability, even to the point of rendering what might otherwise be a mortal sin venial. (I read this in the Catechism as well, for the particular issue of masturbation.) I would think that in a situation where fear of death, of poverty, of ruined health, becomes such a stressor as to prevent a truly free choice, it would lessen culpability and perhaps render this sin less serious than otherwise. Just like with any other mortal sin.

I have been warned on other threads not to be “more Catholic than the Catholic Church.” If even the Church can find enough compassion and sympathy for the strength of human emotion and imperfection to say that it can in fact lessen culpability, then so can the people who post on Catholic message boards.

Yeah the culpability for Masturbation can be lesson normally its because of situation where you don’t really consider what you are doing. Stress, habit make it a reaction almost taking away the time to make a full decision, some what taking away the “full consent” requirement of a mortal sin. That does not mean you have not commented a mortal sin, it just means your responsibility may be some what lessened. Just like if you truely don’t know what you are doing is a mortal sin, while you have still committed the sin your are not responsible for your actions because you didn’t know.

It would be basically impossible to go through with a sterilization surgery with out having time to consider its effects. You have weeks to contemplate and decide. This isn’t some reaction to a moment of overwhelming desire.

 

[LJN21]

The post just previous to this one makes the point about lack of compassion and charity perfectly. It is completely dismissive of the realities and hardship of long-term abstinence, perhaps for the total term of a woman’s remaining fertile years. It might not seem like torture to you…but it would be for many of us! People vary in their levels of sex drive and mutual attraction. For those of us in relationships where both are VERY strong, it would be like torture not to be able to express our love in that way, ever, for possibly 20 years or more. The frustration and stress of that can and does ruin marriages. Once again, I ask, how is it good for the children that already exist if their parents’ marriage fails, or becomes unhealthy and no example of Christ’s love? Isn’t it being a servant and dying to self to put your children’s needs above all else? Remember in Dante’s Inferno, the punishment for the fornicators? It was to eternally remain in close physical proximity to one another, just nearly about to touch, but NEVER able to. Perhaps I am just being intentionally stubborn here, but I just can’t see how any married couple deserves that form of hell for perhaps the majority of their marriage. Let’s face it, if death is a real possibility from another pregnancy, then a couple can’t even take the chance of relying on NFP. They must do something that has ZERO failure rate, which would be total abstinence. Sterilization does have a failure rate, but it’s so low as to be close to zero, and it is not subject to user error, as NFP is. And also not subject to a couple getting so desperate to be together that they unwisely take the risk anyway.

I’m sure someone here can correct me if I’m wrong but I believe you can practice some forms of NFP to the point where they have a zero failure rate. Most couples using Sympto-Thermal already have a method failure rate of less than 1%. You will have long periods of abstinence but with an ultra conservative method your risk would be none.

 

[duskyjewel]

It would be basically impossible to go through with a sterilization surgery with out having time to consider its effects. You have weeks to contemplate and decide. This isn’t some reaction to a moment of overwhelming desire.

Once again…completely dismissive! No, it’s not a reaction to a moment. It’s a reaction to contemplating years, perhaps decades, of not being able to express mutual, unitive marital love. It’s a reaction to years, perhaps decades, of overwhelming fear of pregnancy if one decides to take the risk of practicing NFP. (There is at least one poster on these boards currently pregnant from what she thought was an infertile day. It happens!) It may the reaction of a man, like one of the people on this thread, who is so concerned for his wife that he decides to take the responsibility for what he knows is a sin onto himself to protect her! Or it might be the reaction of a wife who does not want her husband to do that, and so takes that on herself. They may be misguided, but they ARE being servants to one another when they think that way. Each wants to protect the other so much that they are willing to risk the penalty of mortal sin for the other! Or, perhaps the mother is willing to take that risk in order to protect her children’s well-being and need to be raised in a healthy marriage. As I said before, any Catholic who chooses to be sterilized knows that they are doing something the Church says is wrong. I just think many of you have not considered the reasons they may be willing to do that! Or the fact that all of the reasons I have stated might cause enough stress or emotional upheaval to lessen culpability.

 

[rayne89]

As I said before, any Catholic who chooses to be sterilized knows that they are doing something the Church says is wrong. I just think many of you have not considered the reasons they may be willing to do that! Or the fact that all of the reasons I have stated might cause enough stress or emotional upheaval to lessen culpability.

Actually not necessarily. Several people I know were told by their priests that being sterilized because of health risk was fine believe it or not. And most Catholics from my former parish have no clue that using birthcontrol is a sin. I used to belong to a group of families from my old parish that got together monthly. At one gathering a group of the women sat around talking about their husbands’ vasectomies -one had just recently had it done so they were sharing stories. I tried my best to gently evangelize when the moment presented itself but we finally left the group.
I was told in confession at a very conservative Catholic conference associated with EWTN to “get my tubes tied -just get it over with and then confess it”. I know the church teaching so I would never do to such a thing but it very hard for people who are already struggling with fears about becoming pregnant to get very little support about their decision not to get sterilized -especially from people who should know better.
It’s absolutely not ok to get sterilized in order to avoid pregnancy for any reason. But so many on this board refuse to believe so many Catholics do not know this -and even worse are told quite the opposite from their own priests.

 

[LJN21]

Once again…completely dismissive! No, it’s not a reaction to a moment. It’s a reaction to contemplating years, perhaps decades, of not being able to express mutual, unitive marital love. It’s a reaction to years, perhaps decades, of overwhelming fear of pregnancy if one decides to take the risk of practicing NFP. (There is at least one poster on these boards currently pregnant from what she thought was an infertile day. It happens!) It may the reaction of a man, like one of the people on this thread, who is so concerned for his wife that he decides to take the responsibility for what he knows is a sin onto himself to protect her! Or it might be the reaction of a wife who does not want her husband to do that, and so takes that on herself. They may be misguided, but they ARE being servants to one another when they think that way. Each wants to protect the other so much that they are willing to risk the penalty of mortal sin for the other! Or, perhaps the mother is willing to take that risk in order to protect her children’s well-being and need to be raised in a healthy marriage. As I said before, any Catholic who chooses to be sterilized knows that they are doing something the Church says is wrong. I just think many of you have not considered the reasons they may be willing to do that! Or the fact that all of the reasons I have stated might cause enough stress or emotional upheaval to lessen culpability.

First off the NFP failures. Creighton method (this is the method people in this thread with failures were using) it only uses mucus signs (again someone correct me if I’m wrong on this) and is one of the methods more prone to failure. There are many methods of NFP that have varying degrees of effectiveness. Sympto-Thermal is the one we were taught and there are periods were you know you are completely infertile.

Secondly, no one is attempting to pass judgement on anyone that for what ever reasons were sterilized. The Church is in a sad state of confusion right now on many of these issues and priests and even bishops make huge mistakes in council every day. The poor people that rely on this council are the victims in a lot of ways. I think they have every one’s sympathy.

This thread is about someone that is asked if it is okay if the priest said so. The answer to that is No its not. The Church teaches that there is no justification for sterilization. None. To say “well you know, if your really hurting” would be false witness. There is no mitigating circumstance to give bad council when you know the truth.

 

[marybee]

Yeah the culpability for Masturbation can be lesson normally its because of situation where you don’t really consider what you are doing. Stress, habit make it a reaction almost taking away the time to make a full decision, some what taking away the “full consent” requirement of a mortal sin. That does not mean you have not commented a mortal sin, it just means your responsibility may be some what lessened. Just like if you truely don’t know what you are doing is a mortal sin, while you have still committed the sin your are not responsible for your actions because you didn’t know.

It would be basically impossible to go through with a sterilization surgery with out having time to consider its effects. You have weeks to contemplate and decide. This isn’t some reaction to a moment of overwhelming desire.

Yeah, masturbation just happens! No one thinks about it. Funny, I am sure they think about it enough to give themselves some privacy! If they can’t think hardly, why arent there more people just doing it in the public and in open places. The mere fact that they do it privately tells me they are thinking about it plenty.

So the severe stress only applies to masturbation?

I don’t know many people who are afraid of losing their lives or their kids for not masturbating.

 

[LJN21]

Yeah, masturbation just happens! No one thinks about it. Funny, I am sure they think about it enough to give themselves some privacy! If they can’t think hardly, why arent there more people just doing it in the public and in open places. The mere fact that they do it privately tells me they are thinking about it plenty.

At least in my experance I already had the privacy before it was a tempation Some tempations do “just happen.”

So the severe stress only applies to masturbation?

Not at all, masturbation was the example used in the other posts so that’s the one I used in mine.

I don’t know many people who are afraid of losing their lives or their kids for not masturbating.

I know people that have lost there lives and there kids for masturbating. Go read the threads on masturbation in this very forum you will see many examples of people who’s lives were almost destroyed because of it.

 

[marybee]

At least in my experance I already had the privacy before it was a tempation Some tempations do “just happen.”

Not at all, masturbation was the example used in the other posts so that’s the one I used in mine.

I know people that have lost there lives and there kids for masturbating. Go read the threads on masturbation in this very forum you will see many examples of people who’s lives were almost destroyed because of it.

This is my point…God takes EVERYTHING into consideration when judging us. Including masturbation, including lust, including adultery, including sterilization, condom use, and lying…

You nor I can say difinitively if someone in this situation is going to Hell.

God will look at the person’s heart, something we can not do. Especially on the internet! lol

 

[marybee]

At least in my experance I already had the privacy before it was a tempation Some tempations do “just happen.”

Not at all, masturbation was the example used in the other posts so that’s the one I used in mine.

I know people that have lost there lives and there kids for masturbating. Go read the threads on masturbation in this very forum you will see many examples of people who’s lives were almost destroyed because of it.

I said for NOT masturbating, not masturbating. The point was, this lady fears losing her life or baby if she is not sterilized!

I am sure there are plenty of people who use the “extreme stress” or “habit” or “immaturity” as an excuse rather than a circumstance! So I would not be too quick to judge someone either way!

 

[aurora77]

It would be basically impossible to go through with a sterilization surgery with out having time to consider its effects. You have weeks to contemplate and decide.

Not always. In most cases yes, but in mine–surgery for a cyst, found cancer, a couple of hours later, I’m sterile. Not to try to avoid pregnancy, in that case, yes, you have time to think this through. All my thinking about sterlization and its effects has taken place post-surgery.

It’s absolutely not ok to get sterilized in order to avoid pregnancy for any reason. But so many on this board refuse to believe so many Catholics do not know this -and even worse are told quite the opposite from their own priests.

This is the real tragedy here. So many of us were never taught that ABC or sterilization to avoid pregnancy were wrong. To hear this from a priest, the person that we should be able to trust the most of issues of sin, just makes things that much more awful. Instead of jumping down each other’s throats, we need to teach this truth with love. Don’t hide the truth, but unfortunately, we can’t assume that everyone does know the truth about ABC and sterilization.

The Church teaches that there is no justification for sterilization. None.

Not to pick nits, but this is a sensitive subject for me. There is justification for sterilization–as a treatment for a disease, not as a way to avoid pregnancy. Too many people have misconceptions about what the Church teaches on this issue, and I don’t want to see this added to the pile.

 

[LJN21]

This is my point…God takes EVERYTHING into consideration when judging us. Including masturbation, including lust, including adultery, including sterilization, condom use, and lying…

You nor I can say difinitively if someone in this situation is going to Hell.

God will look at the person’s heart, something we can not do. Especially on the internet! lol

I don’t see anyone doing that in this thread. I don’t see your point. There are people that did it with misinformation thats not there fault, but people that know there is NEVER any justification for it can’t just set by and watch someone else get lead astray.

marybee:
I said for NOT masturbating, not masturbating. The point was, this lady fears losing her life or baby if she is not sterilized!

I am sure there are plenty of people who use the “extreme stress” or “habit” or “immaturity” as an excuse rather than a circumstance! So I would not be too quick to judge someone either way!

Again I don’t see your point.

We are not judging anyone. If you are asked what the churches teaching is you can not misrepresent it just because of the circumstance. Ends NEVER justify the means. In that case you would be complicit in the sin. Possibly having more fault that the person that gets sterilized.

 

[LJN21]

Not always. In most cases yes, but in mine–surgery for a cyst, found cancer, a couple of hours later, I’m sterile. Not to try to avoid pregnancy, in that case, yes, you have time to think this through. All my thinking about sterlization and its effects has taken place post-surgery.

Treating a diseased organ is perfectly moral! The inted is to deal with the cancer the one of the untented effects is sterilization. There is nothing wrong with this!

This is the real tragedy here. So many of us were never taught that ABC or sterilization to avoid pregnancy were wrong. To hear this from a priest, the person that we should be able to trust the most of issues of sin, just makes things that much more awful. Instead of jumping down each other’s throats, we need to teach this truth with love. Don’t hide the truth, but unfortunately, we can’t assume that everyone does know the truth about ABC and sterilization.

Agreed!

Not to pick nits, but this is a sensitive subject for me. There is justification for sterilization–as a treatment for a disease, not as a way to avoid pregnancy. Too many people have misconceptions about what the Church teaches on this issue, and I don’t want to see this added to the pile.

Your right. Your not seeking the sterilization in this case, you are treating a diseased organ!

It is always immoral to mutilate a health organ for sterilization.

 

[IlovemyChurch]

To be honest with you all, I don’t know what there is to argue or discuss.

The Church has spoken on the issue of sterilization.

It is wrong for a man to have a vasectomy to prevent his wife from getting pregnant.

THE END.

There is nothing else to say about it. There is no ‘dispensation’ from this moral precept. It applies in all and every situation, to everyone no matter what.

It is always wrong to purposefully sterilise an act of sexual intercourse.

and yes, if that means life-long abstainence, well so be it

(…although personally, I don’t think life long abstainence would be necessary; at the very least a couple could have sex for a handful of days of a woman’s cycle.
A women menstruates about 2 weeks after ovulating…if you play it super safe, and abstain for all of phase 1, all of phase 2 and then an additional week, that would still give you a good couple of days to have sex before menstruation again)

but yes, even if it meant life-long abstainence…then that it better than losing your soul.

We believe that Christ founded the Catholic Church, and that the Holy Spirit guides the Catholic Church, and that the Church’s teaching on faith and morals come from God.

Intentionally disobeying the teachings of the Church means intentionally disobeying God.

 

[seekerz]

Impurity refers to sexual sin.

 

[marybee]

I know some will think by saying this it sounds like i am condoning it, im not.

Stealing is a sin, period. But certainly there are situations, or mitigating circumstances that lessen a person’s culpability. EG, if a person’s family is starving to death, and THEY ARE AFRAID OF DYING, OR THEIR CHILDREN DYING, they might steal food or money to buy food to save the lives of their children. Would that be a mortal sin? I doubt it, especially when someone is doing it to save their lives.

It reminds me of a psychology experiment. They told children this story…A man could not afford drugs to save his wife’s life, but the druggist refused to give it to him unless he had the full amount of money. The man, to save his wife’s life, stole the drugs. ALL young children said, “he should not steal, he did wrong, he was a thief”. They were not able to take into consideration that his wife was dying.