My investigation into why the Pill + marital relations is never licit

[Karen10]

Hello all budding apologists and moral theologians,

I wrote and edited and polished what I believe is a cogent argument, based on current Church teachings as I understand them, to dismiss the idea that use of the Pill in conjunction with marital relations is never licit. I disagree with those who gather that current Church teachings imply that such use is licit, or that people have the freedom to interpret it as such.

The whole purpose of my posting here is to make this document public and open for possible criticism, so please read it, and don’t reply to the thread without reading it, please! Thanks.

It’s probably not as polished as it should be, but I think it’s ready to be presented for critical reading. I’m open to any criticisms or anything that would help to improve upon it.

One thing I am not doing, is adding to Church teaching. I’m simply showing that through existing teachings, one should conclude that the marital act is never licit where abortifacients are being used.

If I’m not on to something, please correct me gently!

Here is the URL:

Are Marital Relations in Conjunction With The Pill Ever Licit, Per Church Teaching?

 

[thistle]

What is the source of the two teachings A and B?
I can’t find them in the CCC. I would like to see original source wording.

 

[Karen10]

Hi, they’re not in the CCC as far as I know, but rather…

Teaching A is found in Vademecum for Confessors. You can find it here. I think the section pertaining to Teaching A starts at 13:

1. Special difficulties are presented by cases of cooperation in the sin of a spouse who voluntarily renders the unitive act infecund. In the first place, it is necessary to distinguish cooperation in the proper sense, from violence or unjust imposition on the part of one of the spouses, which the other spouse in fact cannot resist.46, 561).] This cooperation can be licit when the three following conditions are jointly met:

1. 
   *] when the action of the cooperating spouse is not already illicit in itself;
   *] when proportionally grave reasons exist for cooperating in the sin of the other spouse;
   *] when one is seeking to help the other spouse to desist from such conduct (patiently, with prayer, charity and dialogue; although not necessarily in that moment, nor on every single occasion).

1. 
   Check out #14 as well:
   

   1. Furthermore, it is necessary to carefully evaluate the question of cooperation in evil when recourse is made to means which can have an abortifacient effect.48

   Teaching B is in Humanae Vitae section 15. Here’s a link to Humanae Vitae; scroll down to 15: Lawful Therapeutic Means.
   

   Lawful Therapeutic Means
   

   1. On the other hand, the Church does not consider at all illicit the use of those therapeutic means necessary to cure bodily diseases, even if a foreseeable impediment to procreation should result there from—provided such impediment is not directly intended for any motive whatsoever. (19)

   Thanks for helping to convince myself to add these into my document as the sources. I’ll add them shortly.
   
   Thanks!

 

[Karen10]

Karen10:

Hello all budding apologists and moral theologians,

I wrote and edited and polished what I believe is a cogent argument, based on current Church teachings as I understand them, to dismiss the idea that use of the Pill in conjunction with marital relations is never licit.

I meant, “… to dismiss the idea that the use of the Pill in conjunction with marital relations is EVER licit.”

Sorry for the typo.

 

[Scott_Waddell]

Karen10:

I meant, “… to dismiss the idea that the use of the Pill in conjunction with marital relations is EVER licit.”

Sorry for the typo.

Ok. I was wondering for a second. That one extra letter makes a giant difference doesn’t it?

Scott

 

[Karen10]

Yea, by the time I got to posting the first post here, my writing deteriorated (I’m wearing out). I’m hoping nobody will dismiss reading the document because of my first post!