The Pontifical Academy For Life released a "STATEMENT ON THE SO-CALLED
“MORNING-AFTER PILL” in October 2000 wherein it states:
vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_academies/acdlife/documents/rc_pa_acdlife_doc_20001031_pillola-giorno-dopo_en.html
*4. Consequently, from the ethical standpoint the same absolute unlawfulness of abortifacient procedures also applies to distributing, prescribing and taking the morning-after pill. All who, whether sharing the intention or not, directly co-operate with this procedure are also morally responsible for it.
*
When one reads this instruction, does it also apply to rape cases assuming the rape victim has not ovulated? Apparently not, if we listen to what the USCCB states in its “Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services” wherein it states in directive # 36.
usccb.org/bishops/directives.shtml
“…A female who has been raped should be able to defend herself against a potential conception from the sexual assault. If, after appropriate testing, there is no evidence that conception has occurred already, she may be treated with medications that would prevent ovulation, sperm capacitation, or fertilization. It is not permissible, however, to initiate or to recommend treatments that have as their purpose or direct effect the removal, destruction, or interference with the implantation of a fertilized ovum.”
Basically, the USCCB says the rape victim has the right to defend herself from conception coming from a non-marital aggression (sexual assault is a non-marital act) , assuming there is no danger of medication being abortifacient. Similarly the Connecticut bishops appear to see the issue along the same lines, when it said in its “Statement by Connecticut Bishops Regarding Plan B” that
catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=7836
*"…Nonetheless, to administer Plan B pills in Catholic hospitals to victims of rape a pregnancy test to determine that the woman has not conceived is sufficient. An ovulation test will not be required. The administration of Plan B pills in this instance cannot be judged to be the commission of an abortion because of such doubt about how Plan B pills and similar drugs work and because of the current impossibility of knowing from the ovulation test whether a new life is present. To administer Plan B pills without an ovulation test is not an intrinsically evil act.
Since the teaching authority of the Church has not definitively resolved this matter and since there is serious doubt about how Plan B pills work, the Catholic Bishops of Connecticut have stated that Catholic hospitals in the State may follow protocols that do not require an ovulation test in the treatment of victims of rape. A pregnancy test approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration suffices. If it becomes clear that Plan B pills would lead to an early chemical abortion in some instances, this matter would have to be reopened."*
The question is: are the statements of the USCCB and Connecticut Bishops representative of Magesterial teaching? Indeed it has spurred debates in the area.
lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/sep/07092807.html
Note that the Connecticut Bishops said that
“…since the teaching authority of the Church has not definitively resolved this matter…”, so it would appear that there is some ambiguity in the area. Is there?
Personally I would stick to a conservative position here (absolute prohibition of contraceptives), until such time that a more definitive papal pronouncement comes along. I am not aware of any definitive Magesterial statement that qualifies exceptions to the “intrinsic evil” of using or prescribing contraceptives.
There is some talk that the CDF is coming up with such an explicit statement to address the matter.
catholicnewsagency.com/news/vatican_office_clarifies_teaching_on_condoms_and_aids_will_not_change/