Is Using Contraception a Mortal Sin?

[Gabriel_Serafin]

I donly agree with the idea that using contraception is evil. Once again, the condom and NFP both have the same goal in mind. So why shouldn’t condoms be used in the very circumstances the Church outlines as valid uses of NFP?

Again, the goal of a condom is to trap the seed and flush it down the toilet or toss it in the garbage in order to avoid conception. NFP does not throw away the seed, but rather abstains from having relations at certain times. God does not command a married couple to have relations every day even though they have the right to do so. What’s more, with NFP, a couple can abstain from having relations if they have a serious reason. NFP simply informs a couple when a woman is fertile.

The end does not justify the means. One man works hard at an honest job to save $10,000, while another man robs $10,000 from a bank. Do you see the difference?

Additionally you say I am “not being open to life.” Yet I am being EXACTLY as open as ANYONE using NFP! You make it sound like people use NFP for a reason other than avoiding having children and that is not true. 100% of people use NFP to avoid having children…maybe temporarily, but ALWAYS to avoid having children. That is the whole purpose behind NFP, its use, and the scientific research behind it.

Actually, people use NFP in order to achieve a pregnancy too. Many couples who have problems conceiving a child have discovered the blessing of NFP’s NaproTechnology which identifies a couples most fertile period in order to achieve conception.

—FYI, the ability to conceive only happens a few days each month, when a woman’s mucous is present enabling the sperm to travel to reach the implanted egg. There are 3-4 days for this to happen each cycle. NFP (Creighton Model) accurately identifies those days once a woman learns how to chart.

It really boils down to Church teaching. Though you are free to reject Church teaching, but when one rejects the Church he rejects Christ. People seem to want to have Christ on their own terms not on Christ’s terms. The World says *use condoms! * All Christian denominations up until 1930 taught that artificial contraception was a great evil. But since 1930 all have been assimilated, except for the teachings of the Church. Again, I urge you to listen to these talks by Janet E Smith.

PART 1
PART 2
img821.imageshack.us/img821/421/listeningtochrist.jpg
“He who listens to you listens to me; he who rejects you rejects me; but he who rejects me rejects him who sent me.” Luke 10:16

 

[StevenFrancis]

I think it is also important to point out that…

My wife would never support using Natural Family Planning, and that I wouldn’t either, mainly because it would be irresponsible at this point in our lives together to have a child, and NFP presents a greater risk than other birth control methods. Also, my wife is in medical school and I am in law school, so our lives are extremely busy and having sex on a schedule would be virtually impossible. It also is not fair to say to my wife, “Sorry, you are going to have to risk having a child right now and potentially put medical school on hold.” And if I did do that, and she did get pregnant, we don’t have the money to pay for childcare or to properly cloth/feed a child. So not only would my wife have to give up on medical school while she is pregnant, she would likely have to wait several years before starting up again.

I know the Catholic response demands we either not have sex or use natural family planning, but the logic behind these two methods seem nearly identical to that of birth control and Humanae Vitae does not, in my opinion, show a valid difference between the two. Additionally, for how long should my wife and I not have sex? For seven years of medical school and residency? It seems to me that my wife’s potential for saving lives a doctor who wants to serve impoverished communities should outweigh having a child at this point in our relationship. Our ability to help the world would be GREATLY diminished by having a child now, and asking a married couple to abstain from sex for seven years doesn’t seem right either.

I guess I just don’t understand the entire teaching, even if it is a mortal sin, and it remains a huge roadblock for me and my faith. I know this second post is not quite on topic with the original, but it is all interconnected.

I know the Catholic Church has the authority to make any determinations it sees fit on issues of faith and morals, but does it really have the authority to say absolutely, without a single doubt, that issues like contraception and natural family planning, which are not essential Christian doctrines, are infallible? I think the Church has overstepped its bounds in making that distinction. It’s one of the few areas I feel that way about, maybe the only one.

In order for a sin to be mortal, it must meet three conditions:

• Mortal sin is a sin of grave matter - (The doctrine of the Church is that married persons are always open in their hearts to the will of God in the transmission of life during the marital embrace. The disruption of the natural transmission of life in the marital embrace by artificial means is grave matter according to the doctrine of the Church.
• Mortal sin is committed with full knowledge of the sinner - (If one is fully catechized regarding the doctine of the Church on contraception, then one would have full knowledge.)
• Mortal sin is committed with deliberate consent of the sinner - (with the knowledge cited above regarding contraception, if one decides that they know better than the magesterium of the Holy Catholic Church, and deliberately close their marital union to life by artificial means in spite of the known doctrine, then one is intentionally not submitting to the doctine of the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, and when they proclaim the creed, they are not honestly beleiving it, and therefore have created their own moral code and seperated themselves from the will of God).
  
  Of course none of us here have the authority to determine if mortal sin has occurred in any one person’s specific instance. We can only suggest that one might wish to consult with the Bishops of the Catholic Church, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Holy Scripture, Holy Tradition, The Fathers, the Doctors, and the Saints.

Just personally? I find that if something waddles like a duck, and quacks like a duck, there is a very good likelihood that it is a duck. Just saying.

I will pray for you. Please pray for me.

Yours in Christ,

Steven

 

[vsedriver]

If what you say is true, once again, NFP would be invalid because it clearly aims to avoid having children.

NFP has no aim. It is teaching a couple about the natural fertility cycle of a woman.

Choosing to have sex when you are fertile is not a sin.
Choosing to have sex when you are infertile is not a sin.
Choosing to make yourself infertile in order to have sex is a sin.

 

[Havard]

That’s because according to the Church, being “open to life” doesn’t really mean being open to life. It simply means not using contraception and not using NFP to avoid for reasons that aren’t just.

Jinc, I wish you the best of luck in your journey to understanding this teaching.

You’re confusing “being open to life” with frustrating the nature of the act. They are two very different matters. Imho, it’d be best if we didn’t even discuss them in the same thread, because I keep seeing people confuse them.

Being open to life is not a black and white issue about making babies whenever possible. It’s about a couple acknowledging that the marital union is directed toward procreation, and with that in mind, prayerfully seeking how to responsibly use their procreative gift. The “open to” part means that they know God has commanded them to be fruitful, and their discernment must both keep this in mind, and involve prayer and humility.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

NFP has no aim. It is teaching a couple about the natural fertility cycle of a woman.

Choosing to have sex when you are fertile is not a sin.
Choosing to have sex when you are infertile is not a sin.
Choosing to make yourself infertile in order to have sex is a sin.

Nice and simple and to the point.

 

[vsedriver]

…I figured it was only a matter of time before someone came out and told the OP to stop having sex with his wife.

Lol it seems to be the favorite around here for some reason.

Well I didn’t tell the OP to stop having sex with his wife. I simply said that if the risk of pregnancy is so great then their only choice is to abstain. The OP has stressed how seriously damaged their lives would be if his wife became pregnant yet you think they should continue to play Russian roulette and gamble on ABC.

Besides, I have two twin nieces because my sister who never wanted kids trusted ABC.

 

[vsedriver]

It is very incorrect of you to say this, and quite frankly, not your place. :nope:

no, it is not incorrect of me to say this. Too often it isn’t said enough to young people wanting to marry. Too many marry when they aren’t ready for the full responsibility of marriage which includes children.

Finish school.
Get a job that pays enough to support a family.
Get married.
Have kids.

In that order.

 

[GraceDK]

NFP has no aim. It is teaching a couple about the natural fertility cycle of a woman.

Choosing to have sex when you are fertile is not a sin.
Choosing to have sex when you are infertile is not a sin.
Choosing to make yourself infertile in order to have sex is a sin.

Indeed. I can’t understand what’s so difficult to understand.
When procreation and pleasure is severed from each other, its no longer a human marital act following the design of God.
As a convert to Catholicism I understood that in my soul after brief pondering.

Sexuality used to be called the generative power. Today sex is thought of, not like this, but as a pleasurable intimacy with a rather inconvenient side effect.

Thank you to the poster who said NFP is often used to monitor so that couples can conceive. For some people struggling with infertility using the method of NFP can also help figure out what the problem is. eg. with hormonal imbalances.

I too must say… if contraception is okay, and thus it is okay to sever the life-giving potential from the pleasurable aspect, then why cant I go and have sex.
I am unmarried and have to wait not just a few years, but maybe forever, before I can have sex. Is that not unfair to ask me to wait?

Lastly… one of my friends told me the other day that she had conceived her last child while having a spiral in her… a method used as an “absolutely contraceptive” in my country … anyway… nothing is certain.
.
Classic: Sex = Baby = Congratualitions, it works!

 

[Havard]

no, it is not incorrect of me to say this. Too often it isn’t said enough to young people wanting to marry. Too many marry when they aren’t ready for the full responsibility of marriage which includes children.

Finish school.
Get a job that pays enough to support a family.
Get married.
Have kids.

In that order.

Curious, did you see that in the Tim Russert speech I mentioned in another thread, or have you heard it elsewhere?

 

[vsedriver]

Curious, did you see that in the Tim Russert speech I mentioned in another thread, or have you heard it elsewhere?

no, hadn’t seen that. It’s something my mom drilled into our heads. By the way, all six of her children did it that way.

 

[Havard]

no, hadn’t seen that. It’s something my mom drilled into our heads. By the way, all six of her children did it that way.

No doubt, it’s a responsible course of action. However, once a couple is validly married, then God’s plan is surely that they stay married. So I very much disagree with intimating that any couple that is already married, shouldn’t be married.

 

[Bookcat]

Thread derailed

 

[Debora123]

Well I didn’t tell the OP to stop having sex with his wife. I simply said that if the risk of pregnancy is so great then their only choice is to abstain. The OP has stressed how seriously damaged their lives would be if his wife became pregnant yet you think they should continue to play Russian roulette and gamble on ABC.

Besides, I have two twin nieces because my sister who never wanted kids trusted ABC.

Just because someone may have grave reasons to avoid pregnancy, doesn’t mean they are to automatically stop having a marital/sexual relationship.

And besides, from what the OP has stated concerning his reasons for postponing pregnancy, I’d say he has painted them as being reasonable, just reasons (which btw, is all he needs)… not life/death ones.

Suggesting that people stop having sex with their spouses seems to be a favorite around here and I’m not going to lie, I find that to be very strange.

I personally don’t think it was fit for you to suggest him not make love to his wife, but to each their own I guess. It was bound to happen as it always does in these threads.

 

[Debora123]

no, it is not incorrect of me to say this. Too often it isn’t said enough to young people wanting to marry. Too many marry when they aren’t ready for the full responsibility of marriage which includes children.

Finish school.
Get a job that pays enough to support a family.
Get married.
Have kids.

In that order.

Oh please. I know a lot of good Catholic couples who got married in school or before they had a good paying career.

The above may be your own personal standard, but the Church doesn’t teach it, and to tell a stranger online that he shouldn’t have gotten married is extremely out of line.

 

[mgoforth]

no, it is not incorrect of me to say this. Too often it isn’t said enough to young people wanting to marry. Too many marry when they aren’t ready for the full responsibility of marriage which includes children.

Finish school.
Get a job that pays enough to support a family.
Get married.
Have kids.

In that order.

I agree, it was not incorrect of you to say this, perhaps it will benefit someone in a similar situation who hasn’t married yet. The OP is already married, so all he can do at this point is live within the bounds of morality for a married person as defined by the Church.

Debora, in all charity, you are confused about these teachings and you risk leading the OP astray.

NFP is allowed by the Church, if the reasons for using it to space out children are just. My wife and I have 3 young children now, and are currently using NFP to delay additional children for now. But we’ve both agreed that NFP can’t be the final answer…once we’re no longer overwhelmed with babies we’ll need to make ourselves open to another child by not using NFP.

 

[Havard]

I agree, it was not incorrect of you to say this, perhaps it will benefit someone in a similar situation who hasn’t married yet. The OP is already married, so all he can do at this point is live within the bounds of morality for a married person as defined by the Church.

Debora, in all charity, you are confused about these teachings and you risk leading the OP astray.

NFP is allowed by the Church, if the reasons for using it to space out children are just. My wife and I have 3 young children now, and are currently using NFP to delay additional children for now. But we’ve both agreed that NFP can’t be the final answer…once we’re no longer overwhelmed with babies we’ll need to make ourselves open to another child by not using NFP.

One clarification, the OP knows what the Church teaches in terms of when NFP is acceptable, etc., he doesn’t understand the rationale.

 

[Debora123]

I agree, it was not incorrect of you to say this, perhaps it will benefit someone in a similar situation who hasn’t married yet. The OP is already married, so all he can do at this point is live within the bounds of morality for a married person as defined by the Church.

Debora, in all charity, you are confused about these teachings and you risk leading the OP astray.

NFP is allowed by the Church, if the reasons for using it to space out children are just. My wife and I have 3 young children now, and are currently using NFP to delay additional children for now. But we’ve both agreed that NFP can’t be the final answer…once we’re no longer overwhelmed with babies we’ll need to make ourselves open to another child by not using NFP.

There is no Church teaching that says “if you have just/serious reasons to postpone pregnancy during the newly wed stage of your marriage you should not be getting married.”

One may hold the OPINION that it is BEST to go into a marriage with NO reason to postpone pregnancy. But to hold us all to that as if it’s official Church teaching is incorrect, and to tell someone you hardly know that he shouldn’t have gotten married is just uncalled for and not to mention extremely counterproductive.

 

[Bookcat]

There is no Church teaching that says “if you have …serious reasons to postpone pregnancy during the newly wed stage of your marriage you should not be getting married.”
.

Right.

 

[mgoforth]

One clarification, the OP knows what the Church teaches in terms of when NFP is acceptable, etc., he doesn’t understand the rationale.

This will sound uncharitable, but I don’t mean it to be. Whether or not he understands the rationale doesn’t really matter. We’re called to try to understand as much about God, the Church, etc that we can…but whether we reach a clear understanding or not, the “rules” are still the “rules”. Using NFP with the intent to delay or avoid conception is allowed in certain circumstances even if the person using it doesn’t understand why it’s allowed.

I think it’s great that so many have tried to educate the OP on why contraception is wrong, why NFP could be permissible, etc…but at the end of the day it doesn’t matter whether he fully understands or even whether he agrees with the Church’s teaching. He is still bound by them.

 

[Debora123]

Debora, in all charity, you are confused about these teachings and you risk leading the OP astray.

I am not confused by any Church teaching.

I know very well what the official Church teaching is regarding this subject. But like the OP, I don’t understand them and figured I’d ask a few questions regarding one quote that I found to be very contradictory.