Moral dilemma; please help!

  • Thread starter Thread starter javelin
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Dear Alan,

Family commitments kept me away from the discussion yesterday. Please don’t think I’m ignoring you.

Despite well-reasoned arguments on both sides, you and I are never going to agree on the birth control issue, but I do wish to make clear that we are not starting from the same premise. I do not concur with you that Paul is teaching that spouses may not abstain for long periods if someone’s health would be endangered, either by intercourse itself or by pregnancy. It is my opinion that he is telling spouses not to abstain because they think they’ll be holier if they do. He is telling them that having relations in marriage is a good and holy thing, not to be compared unfavorably with celibacy in other vocations. He is upholding the dignity of marriage. You said in the first post in which you mentioned this idea that you’ve never heard this taught or preached. Perhaps that’s because the Church doesn’t interpret it your way, either. I am going to the Ask an Apologist forum to ask if there are any official Church teachings on these verses - look for a thread there.

I won’t beat the birth control issue further into the ground, but I do want to say that I fully concur with the eloquent comments of Bear06.

Javelin, I do know from personal experience that NFP, observed in the strictest possible way, that is, only making use of the infertile time toward the end of the cycle, is extremely effective. This may be an option for you in your most difficult and heart-wrenching situation. My prayers are with you and your wife.

Betsy
 
QUOTE=Princess_Abby]You said in your first post that you feel birth control is unnecessary in your circumstances
Because I know that abstinence is really the only 100% method of avoiding pregnancy. I also know that my wife does not consider abstinence or NFP options (basically because she is afraid we won’t be able to abstain when necessary, and our track-record of three unplanned pregnancies is not very good). So I’m about to the place where I can do something like what Princess_Abby suggested – basically taking the moral high ground.

I’m very concerned about that position, too. Although it can be said in love, there is no denying the implication: “You are going to sin, and that is your choice, but I will have as little to do with it as possible. I’m being good; you’re not.” For someone who is plagued with (in her mind) Church-imposed guilt doesn’t need that reinforced by me, nor does she need the “moral separation” from me taking the “high ground”. I’m afraid at what this further strain on our relationship will do.

Alan, I definitely see your point, especially on the seemingly illogical argument for why ABC is bad, yet NFP is good, if the reason for ABC being bad is it is “not being open to life”, while the sole purpose of NFP is for 99% assurance of not bringing life (doesn’t sound very open to life to me, really). I also see, however, that my two kids would probably not be here if Jean had been on ABC, and for that I can only thank God for His impression on our hearts to remain off of ABC during that time.

In Alan’s defense, though, I am at the point where I believe there are times when ABC may not be morally objectionable. Even the Church teaches that when faced with several options, all of which are wrong to some degree, it is moral to choose the least of all the perceived evils. I think it is sinful to use ABC in the normative case, but I think that in my wife’s situation it is the least immediate concern. I do not feel it is more evil than forcing her to live in an abject fear and depression that could be deadly to her (even if that fear and depression is illogical to me, it is very real to her, and most likely a manifestation of her illness). Since I have offered both strict NFP and abstinence, both of which were refused, that is all I can really do. Because her position is not based on rational arguments, I cannot “talk her out of it” or convince her via rational arguments that she is wrong. Actaully, in some ways she already knows her depression and anxiety are illogical, which makes it more scary to her because she cannot deny that they are real.

Thank you all for your prayers,
javelin
 
40.png
baltobetsy:
Dear Alan,
Family commitments kept me away from the discussion yesterday. Please don’t think I’m ignoring you.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your concern. Please don’t feel an obligation to answer me, especially in any given time frame. Sometimes I lose track of which threads I’m involved in; I will always assume you have your reasons, if I assume at all.
Despite well-reasoned arguments on both sides, you and I are never going to agree on the birth control issue, but I do wish to make clear that we are not starting from the same premise. I do not concur with you that Paul is teaching that spouses may not abstain for long periods if someone’s health would be endangered, either by intercourse itself or by pregnancy. It is my opinion that he is telling spouses not to abstain because they think they’ll be holier if they do. He is telling them that having relations in marriage is a good and holy thing, not to be compared unfavorably with celibacy in other vocations. He is upholding the dignity of marriage. You said in the first post in which you mentioned this idea that you’ve never heard this taught or preached. Perhaps that’s because the Church doesn’t interpret it your way, either. I am going to the Ask an Apologist forum to ask if there are any official Church teachings on these verses - look for a thread there.
Click to expand...
I’m curious how you arrived at your opinion of why he is telling them not to abstain, when he specifically stated why, “so that Satan may not tempt you through your lack of self-control.” Is not Paul clearly stating that subjecting yourself to temptation without good reason or for extended periods. Certainly what constitutes an “extended period” differs by individual. Some would find 3 months, as bear06 suggested, no big deal. Others have a problem with 3 days. I agree with you that Paul is not comparing it with celebacy in other vocations, even though he wishes all were “like him” but acknowledges the concept of different strokes for different folks.

I certainly don’t think we should take Paul’s exhortation lightly or explain it away easily, especially considering that the whole purpose of marriage according to 1 Cor 7 has to do with temptation and sexual immorality. I’ve always found it odd how the Church wrote that into the Bible, but maintains in Humanae Vitae and other places that the “purpose” of marriage is to procreate. Maybe the purpose for the institution is related to procreation, but from what Paul is saying, the reason for any particular couple to get married as opposed to choosing celebacy like him, is to avoid temptation. To exercise an extended abstinence when one has an option invites temptation, or Paul’s writings have no value.

Oh, and I will look for a thread in the AAA forum. So far I haven’t visited it much.
I won’t beat the birth control issue further into the ground, but I do want to say that I fully concur with the eloquent comments of Bear06.
Click to expand...
If you want to drop the discussion, I respect that. If we are offending anyone or hijacking the thread, I invite them to speak up or PM me. I am willing to go on, because personally I crave resolution, whether I find out I’m right or wrong. Maybe I think I’m David, a lone voice against the Goliath of many opinions to the contrary. More likely I’m just a dude in a pickup truck in Iraq with a shotgun trying to stop the US army. Either way I cannot just “leave it alone” although I may abstain for a time, because I honestly believe this is an issue of life and death, in both the eternal and the temporal.

Of the comments bear06 made, do you agree that I am looking toward the “here and now” and disregarding the issue of sin? If so, then I need to examine either my heart or my composition style because that is not my conscious intent.

Alan
 
Javelin, there’s something here that doesn’t make sense to me. If your wife is, at worst,
plagued with (in her mind) Church-imposed guilt
Click to expand...
and, at best,
trying to deepen her faith and feel right with God
Click to expand...
then why do you think it would help her peace of mind to do something that the Church clearly teaches to be immoral? In other words, isn’t it possible that using contraception might itself “push her over the edge”? (Sorry if this sounds alarmist; I’m just trying to understand your thinking.)
Because her position is not based on rational arguments, I cannot “talk her out of it” or convince her via rational arguments that she is wrong. Actaully, in some ways she already knows her depression and anxiety are illogical, which makes it more scary to her because she cannot deny that they are real.
Click to expand...
Hmm. I’m not suggesting that she go off her medication (I have enough bipolar friends and family to know that that could be a very bad idea)…but, have you investigated possible spiritual factors that could be influencing her mental state? Past sins - even if they’ve been confessed and forgiven - might have opened the door to harassment by evil spirits. The evil one especially likes to attack people who are trying to deepen or return to their faith. Depression and anxiety can be symptoms of this. He’ll use any tool available, even “hyperreligiosity.” Fr. Amorth’s book, “An Exorcist Tells His Story,” is a good place to learn more about this phenomenon.

Whether or not this sort of harassment is a factor, I hope your wife is receiving the sacraments of Reconciliation and the Eucharist on a regular basis. And staying close to the saints, especially the Blessed Mother. Our Lady will help us, when we call out to her in our time of trial. She does understand. 🙂
 
Javelin,

In terms of taking the high ground, it all comes down to intention. As you stated, your wife is basing her desire for ABC on irrational arguments. If she’s being irrational, which seems highly likely due to all of the psychiatric chaos that she is experiencing internally, her culpability for choosing ABC is questionable. I would highly doubt that she is able to discern her choices as being grave matter, as well as her full will and consent being given. This would lend one to conclude that she is not committing a mortal sin. Obviously she has desired in the past to do what is right, evident by practicing NFP.

I would simply implore you to not give up your conscience in this battle. Don’t be united to Jean in sin; be one with her in CHRIST, as your marriage has made the two of you. Be the solid rock in her storm that does not falter. Although SHE may not be committing a mortal sin in taking ABC, it appears that YOU might be. I say this with total charity and compassion for your situation while recognizing that I cannot read your soul and absolutely do not have the ability to recognize whether or not YOUR will is impeded; but if you know something is wrong, please do not condone it! Don’t risk your soul. Love your wife to the best of your capabilities by offering yourself to her without the intent of contraception, periodically requesting that she reconsider her position.

As for what Mrs. Rigby said, spiritual oppression and/or possession is a very real thing and widely unrecognized nor talked about. You may want to ask your priest if he suggests any recourse for the spiritual warfare your wife is undergoing.

Many prayers your way,
Abby
 
As for what Mrs. Rigby said, spiritual oppression and/or possession is a very real thing and widely unrecognized nor talked about.
Click to expand...
It’s interesting that you bring this up, because Jean has thought on more than one occasion that she is under spiritual assault. She said she had very vivid dreams of “present evil” while in the hospital, and at one time was convinced there was something evil inside her to the point that she called a priest in the middle of the night to ask him to come and perform an exorcism. She didn’t get in touch with him, though, so nothing happened. She said some of the dreams made “The X-Files” seem tame, and she was afraid of sleep for a time. She told some of this to the priest she met with afterwards, but did not give details on the content of her dreams.

That said, I don’t think any kind of possession is going on, if only because she has received the sacraments of reconciliation and the eucharist several times, in addition to physically going to chuch, being blessed with holy water, etc. My approach was to remind her that God loves her, and that He has power over demons such that He will protect her if those things were more than just her hyperactive mind’s hyperactive imagination. She knows she was under some powerful medication at the time, too.

I will not discount the spiritual side of this, however. When participating in a “Life in the Spirit” seminar with charismatics in college, I had some strange experiences where I felt spiritually attacked, usually when asleep or nearly asleep. I cannot discount the timing of those experiences as mere coincidence.

Peace,
javelin
 
I just wanted to let you know that you are not alone. When I was young and able to get pregnant, I had a horrible struggle with the Church’s teaching on birth control. Here is what I couldn’t figure out. When I was in Catholic school (pre-Vatican II), the nuns taught me that it was almost always wrong to steal, but if a man stole a loaf of bread to feed his starving family, it might be a venial sin or no sin at all. I was taught that killing is almost always wrong, but exceptions are made for self-defense, capital punishment, and a just war. I could never figure out why there were not exceptions for birth control. Another thing that drove me crazy is the answer that I learned to a particular question in the Baltimore Catechism: “What are we commanded by the fifth commandment?” The answer was that we are commanded to take proper care of our spiritual and bodily well being. It always seemed to me that if a woman got pregnant when she shouldn’t, (as in when she has a serious illness), she would be guilty of breaking the fifth commandment by not taking proper care of her bodily well-being. I have always wondered what the Church would say if anything you do results in an evil.
  1. Abstain forever (couple gets divorced or man has affair)
  2. Get pregnant anyway (mother dies and leaves 5 children)
  3. Practice Artifical Birth Control (both risk going to hell)
I will definitely keep you in my prayers.
 
Wait a minute! One of the concerns raised early in this discussion was of BCP wreaking havoc with this woman’s attempt to reach some stability with her bipolar disorder – the hormones in the pills causing additional difficulties. I have a dear friend and neighbor experiencing all sorts of problems after having her prescription changed abruptly. The Pill isn’t as easy for some as the rest of us would like to think!

This isn’t as simple as Jean going on The Pill for a while. The Pill could upset her psychological balance – and her medications for bipolar disorder could also interfere with the Pill’s contraceptive effectiveness.

There’s NOT going to be an easy solution for this dear couple, and no mistake. And telling them, “use your own best judgment, even if it defies Church dogma” isn’t going to help a bit!
 
I have been reading all the posts with interest. I had a cancer removed and had to have further therapy. During the time I was waiting to have the therapy, we were told to use birth control so that I would not get pregnant. After the therapy, we were told not to risk getting pregnant, so we had another time set for us.

My husband and I abstained. Six months…and that was not an easy thing to do. It was hardest on my husband…because he was not the one living in fear that I would become pregnant, have the radio active iodine injure the baby and be faced with a severely retarded child, or that I would not have my cancer irradicated thoroughly because I became pregnant.

I admire my husband for not once suggesting that we use birth control or for putting any undue pressure on me.

Having said that - Jean, poor dear, is going through a rough enough time. I see that the medical doctor has suggested the pill to be used for birth control. Have you seen the** side effects of the pill? Possible cancer, heart attack, blood clots, stroke and even death! What doctor in his right mind would suggest any woman let alone someone who is already dealing with mood swings, take the pill?**

Why isn’t the doctor advising javelin to use a condom?

The whole point of my post is that it is NOT impossible to abstain. The picture six months down the road may be totally different than it is today, especially as Jean is helped with her medications.

Javelin - you are also to be admired. You are not taking this lightly or dismissing it. Continue loving your wife the best way you know how…flowers are always more than welcome to a woman. Help her out even more than you are now, with the children.

God Bless you both - you are in my prayers.
 
Javelin,

If your wife has received the euchaist, while in a state of grace, and has not had an adverse reaction, she is probably not possessed. That does not, however, rule out spiritual oppression. Has your wife made a good confession lately? Has she brought these fears and intentions to the Lord in the sacrament?

Not every priest is able to perform an exorcism. Each diocese has one priest, usually only known to the bishop, who is “the exorcist” for that particular region and set of parishes. You can call the diocese or ask your priest to make an inquiry for possession, if you are really worried about it or concerned it is a possibility. It is my understanding, too, that after an exorcism, the house of the inhabitant is also sometimes exorcised–to cast out any demons that choose to hang around and continue wreaking havoc upon your wife.

If your wife is openly talking and worrying about spiritual warfare, I would take her seriously. It doesn’t hurt to be prayed over, nor for a priest to “cast out” any oppressors near her (or within) her that may be harming her or your family.

That said, fear is also a favorite tool of the devil. Talk to your priest and see what he says–be sure to tell him of the dreams.

Is there a Catholic bookstore near you? Or even at your parish, a baptismal font? Get some holy water! Bless your wife each morning after she wakes, and each evening before she rests.

Does your wife wear a Miraculous Marian medal? Or a brown scapular? Does she ask her guardian angel to protect her? If she doesn’t, YOU can still do it for her. Remember, we are connected to the saints in heaven and the body of Christ, angels included. Utilize heaven and our many intercessors (saints) in re-claiming your wife’s peace.

Abby
 
Javelin,

Scratch what I said about not being able to receive the eucharist if you are possessed. You CAN receive the eucharist and still be possessed–it is yet another tool of the devil in confusing a person or the exorcist himself to think that the soul is no longer (or was never) posssessed.

Here is a link you might read:

therealpresence.org/archives/Demonology/Demonology_006.htm
 
Javelin, et. al.,

Dearest Alan, I understand that some, if not most, people find NFP very hard. My husband and I absolutely hate it. However, due to some health issues, we were forced to use it for 6 months. When it came down to it, while we considered it sheer torture, we lovingly did it to protect me and the child that would result from not using it. I would do it again in a heartbeat to protect my husband and he to protect me. If I were in Jean’s situation, my husband would insist on using NFP. Our love for each other is not based on the marital act. It’s a result of it. There are numerous other results that we had to rely on during our forced NFP time.

When I start seeing labels like “autocratic church” or feelings of “oppression” that Javelin has stated then there’s some understanding missing. A bunch of single, chaste men, particularily the Pope do know a plethera about sex and marriage. The Pope has shown this in his numerous writings. Once again, God guides the Church. He promised us this. Satan is the one who promotes doubt in this.

Once again, the Church in union with Rome is guided by the Holy Spirit on matters of Faith and Morals. SHE IS HERE TO PROTECT US!!! She is not here to oppress us.

ABC is against wrong is that it goes against Natural Law designed by God. It does not go against Natural Law to abstain. Heck, just look at the wild. Animals even abstain for reasons of health! Their choice is responsive and ours is a conscious choice.

The Pill is evil. You could possibly have a child of yours killed by it. ALL pills are to SUPPOSED to prevent ovulation. If that does occur and a baby is conceived, it has a nifty back up plan which is a spontaneous abortion. How in the world would this ever help your wife or you mental stability?

I am not suggesting you “taking the moral high ground” with your wife. I am talking about loving her unconditionally and with the utmost care for her spiritual life which is far more important than this earthly one.

How can we live the way God would have us with all of these pressures such as Jean’s and Javelin’s? Countless saints have gone through mental illness and spiritual attacks. They are not pretty. They did, however, live their lives has God would want despite the temptations to save themselves. How though?

The contemplative life and I don’t get along. I’m pretty much a bone head when it comes to the spiritual. I can tell you, however, that in my darkest times when I thought I was probably going to die and leave 3 small children and a husband, I found myself face down on the ground in front of Our Lady and Our Lord. I would say go to the Ask the Apologist forum for much better and knowledgable explanations than you’ll probably get here from any of us but I would assume that developing an incredibly strong spiritual life was probably the saving grace of many tortured souls. Daily rosary, Mass, Holy Hours, lots of Holy Water and even offering up times of abstinence is probably the best key to your wife’s health and your relationship with your wife.

You might also want to pray to the Martins, St. Therese’s parents, who, out of love of God and with permission of the Church, lived as brother and sister during the early part of their marriage until God called them to live otherwise. I’m sure there are probably more saints and future saints who have done the same. This, I’m sure, flies right in the face of the verse that everyone thinks is the “loophole” to abstaining being a good thing but God did bless them with a saint!

Please consider suggesting a period of abstinence to give the medication time to work. You might also call the Pope Paul the VI Institute at Creighton for advice. I’m sure they’ve come across the mental illness problem before. I know somebody has already suggested this and gave you a link.

Many prayers!
 
40.png
bear06:
Once again, the Church in union with Rome is guided by the Holy Spirit on matters of Faith and Morals. SHE IS HERE TO PROTECT US!!! She is not here to oppress us.
ABC is against wrong is that it goes against Natural Law designed by God. It does not go against Natural Law to abstain. Heck, just look at the wild. Animals even abstain for reasons of health! Their choice is responsive and ours is a conscious choice.

How can we live the way God would have us with all of these pressures such as Jean’s and Javelin’s? Countless saints have gone through mental illness and spiritual attacks. They are not pretty. They did, however, live their lives has God would want despite the temptations to save themselves. How though?
Click to expand...
Dear bear06,

Thank you for the very kind response. I still don’t understand something, though. We are willing to make an exception to Paul’s teaching because of illness. I have no problem with that. What I don’t understand is why we are unwilling to make an exception to the avoidance of ABC (and I’m not talking about abortifacients). That’s why I’m trying to figure out whether the teaching against ABC is infallibly declared, because wouldn’t it have to be in order for us to give it more weight than Scripture?

Alan
 
Alan, it appears that some of us do not interpret the passage from Paul the same way you do. I, and possibly others, do not see it as a precedent-setting exception to abstain in case of illness, as you do. If we start with different premises (which we do), we cannot attribute illogic to each other if we come to different conclusions. What you are doing is starting in a different place from the rest of us, then assuming in your evaluation of our arguments that we started in the same place, and that, therefore, our arguments are illogical.

Your arguments are perfectly logical according to your original premise. Some of us disagree with your original premise, and, as a result, come to perfectly logical conclusions which differ from yours.

The task, then, is to see which of the original premises is true. I hope we get some insight into this on the AAA forum in the next day or so.

Betsy
 
40.png
bear06:
Once again, the Church in union with Rome is guided by the Holy Spirit on matters of Faith and Morals. SHE IS HERE TO PROTECT US!!! She is not here to oppress us.
Click to expand...
I agree, but also know that** viewpoint means everything** here. If someone really views the Church that way, no well-formed theological argument is going to flip some magic switch to change an opinion born of emotional experiences. It will take a lot of time and patience to work on building trust again between the person and the Church before that view changes. The dilemma is what to do through that time. While I understand the argument that nothing should ever be compromised, I also wonder if simply letting her make the choice now and seeing where it leads might be the only way. When it doesn’t give her what she is really seeking, maybe only then will she see the wisdom of the Church. I’m beginning to think she needs to “get burned” a little before she will see the danger of “playing with fire”. I will be very watchful, of course, to see that the fire is controlled (and pray that God is with me). But that may be the only way. Her heart is pretty hard on this issue right now.

Still searching,
javelin
 
40.png
javelin:
However, it is preventing conception that is neccessary for her psychological and emotional well-being right now (according to the doctor). I have to admit that her becoming pregnant right now is scary even for me because it will be devastating to her.

Peace,
javelin
Click to expand...
Javelin

If you are going to take this step of contracepting, you had better start to think down the road as to what your wife is going to do should her contraception fail.

As soon as children become an unwanted consequence of the sexual act, abortion comes into the picture. It may sound far fetched, but it is not.

I can see your wife making the same arguments for abortion (having a baby would be damaging to her well being and there could be a problem with the baby) that she is making in support of using contraception. And don’t be too sure that you could stop her from aborting. You have already said that she hasn’t been thinking rationally - just wait until she gets pregnant. Under the law, you don’t even have a right to be notified that your wife is pregnant. She could abort without even telling you.

I say this not to exaggerate the moral dilemma that you are currently facing, but to underscore what the Church correctly teaches: the contraceptive mentality leads to abortion.
 
40.png
AlanFromWichita:
Dear bear06,

Thank you for the very kind response. I still don’t understand something, though. We are willing to make an exception to Paul’s teaching because of illness. I have no problem with that. What I don’t understand is why we are unwilling to make an exception to the avoidance of ABC (and I’m not talking about abortifacients). That’s why I’m trying to figure out whether the teaching against ABC is infallibly declared, because wouldn’t it have to be in order for us to give it more weight than Scripture?

Alan
Click to expand...
Alan,

I just wanted to chime in and say that when Paul was telling spouses not to deprive eachother, he was talking about the sexual act as God intended it.

He didn’t intend that spouses would offer chemically-altered versions of themselves to eachother to shut out the fertility that God gave them. After all, when you have contraceptive sexual relations you are “depriving” your spouse of your whole self. You are offering them a chemically altered version, or you are putting a barrier between you and your spouse.
 
I forgot to add, so I will now…my five year old granddaughter was conceived WHILE her mother was taking the Pill! She is a beautiful little girl and she is much loved…

The pill is not one hundred percent effective. There are many reasons for it failure. One of them is the taking of antibiotics while taking the pill…it makes it less effective. The new lower hormonal pills carry a higher pregnancy rate. Read the small print.

Still praying for you and all of those who face this problem of wanting to do what seems easy and is culturally acceptable.
 
40.png
pittsburghjeff:
Alan,

I just wanted to chime in and say that when Paul was telling spouses not to deprive eachother, he was talking about the sexual act as God intended it.

He didn’t intend that spouses would offer chemically-altered versions of themselves to eachother to shut out the fertility that God gave them. After all, when you have contraceptive sexual relations you are “depriving” your spouse of your whole self. You are offering them a chemically altered version, or you are putting a barrier between you and your spouse.
Click to expand...
Dear pittsburghjeff,

That’s a good point, and I see how you might be “depriving” the other of a certain part of yourself. Your argument also helps explain what is wrong with chemicals or condom. (Besides, I always used to say that sex with a condom is like taking a shower with a raincoat on.).:whistle:

Ah, but I don’t quite have to change my position…yet. As far as the particular passage at hand, Paul gives his reasoning for not depriving each other, “so that Satan may not tempt you through your lack of self-control.” Therefore, depriving each other “partially,” if done in a way that does not diminish its purpose of taming lust, cannot be considered as “depriving” for the purpose of this teaching. (raincoats notwithstanding) Also, we still have that nagging problem that abstinence for any particular time for the purposes of NFP does not meet the intent of “except perhaps by mutual consent for a time, to be free for prayer.”:nope:

That kind of gets us back to where we were. If we are to recommend abstinence, we have to disregard Paul’s teachings. If we are to recommend ABC, we have to disregard Church’s teachings. If we obey the Church and the Bible at the same time, we have to ignore javelin’s doctor’s warnings and his wife’s intuition and risk creating orphans.:banghead:

Shucks. I really thought we were making progress there for a minute. Back to the drawing board…:coffee:

Alan
 
40.png
AlanFromWichita:
Dear pittsburghjeff,

That’s a good point, and I see how you might be “depriving” the other of a certain part of yourself. Your argument also helps explain what is wrong with chemicals or condom. (Besides, I always used to say that sex with a condom is like taking a shower with a raincoat on.).:whistle:

Ah, but I don’t quite have to change my position…yet. As far as the particular passage at hand, Paul gives his reasoning for not depriving each other, “so that Satan may not tempt you through your lack of self-control.” Therefore, depriving each other “partially,” if done in a way that does not diminish its purpose of taming lust, cannot be considered as “depriving” for the purpose of this teaching. (raincoats notwithstanding) Also, we still have that nagging problem that abstinence for any particular time for the purposes of NFP does not meet the intent of “except perhaps by mutual consent for a time, to be free for prayer.”:nope:

That kind of gets us back to where we were. If we are to recommend abstinence, we have to disregard Paul’s teachings. If we are to recommend ABC, we have to disregard Church’s teachings. If we obey the Church and the Bible at the same time, we have to ignore javelin’s doctor’s warnings and his wife’s intuition and risk creating orphans.:banghead:

Shucks. I really thought we were making progress there for a minute. Back to the drawing board…:coffee:

Alan
Click to expand...
Alan,

Let me take one more stab at this. Paul was telling spouses, in general, not to deprive eachother of sexual relations. He meant sexual relations as God intended them.

Of course when he said “deprive” Paul was not specifically referring to contraception. Paul could not have envisioned the contraceptive culture and technology as we know it. But that does not change what Paul meant when he was telling them to have sexual relations.

Even if Paul was not specifically thinking about contraception when he wrote the words in question, having contraceptive sex with one’s spouse does not fulfill his commandment to have sexual relations with one’s spouse.

Contraceptive sex is just one more way that “Satan temps us through our lack of self-control”. To say that we are contracepting to avoid some other sexual sin really does not make sense. It is the same type of argument as someone who would encourage masturbation to avoid fornication. All sexual sins are interrelated. They all stem from the same mentality - the mentality that reduces sex to a mere pursuit of mutual pleasure and shuts God’s life-giving love out of the act.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top