NFP after sterilization?

[vaearia]

Hello! I’m new to this here! I am a born and raised Catholic and have been practicing NFP since January 2011 (with the exception of the several months I was pregnant)… We haven’t been having the best of luck though. For 8 months prior to my last pregnancy we did Creighton and got pregnant with it without meaning to. For the last year I’ve been doing STM but with great difficulty. My cycles are irregular and sometimes anovulatory (sp?) - We have serious reasons to avoid because of health concerns. I should also mention we have been blessed with 3 WONDERFUL children already, twins who are 3 1/2 and the baby is just about to turn 1. I have been working closely with my OB doctor and with my NFP instructors to try to get to the root of my cycle issues and resolve them. I’m also trying dietary changes and supplements to get things straightened out. My next doctor appointment is August 26th & I’m hoping he will do an ultrasound to check for cysts, etc… They have not and supposedly will not check my hormones until I have a miscarriage, which I refuse to get pregnant just to see if that will happen, so that’s out! Unless I can convince them to check my levels anyway, which he might do, but again, I don’t even go back in until the end of August. So after that little bit of history, here is my question… My husband and I are 100% sure we are done having kids. With the health reasons, it is just to great a risk for us to take. I am completely fine with the amount of time NFP requires us to abstain, in fact, I could care less if I ever have sex again at this point. I am THAT serious on not getting pregnant again. My husband, who is NOT Catholic (but very supportive and understanding of my faith and NFP, in fact he does attend mass with the children & I every week, but at this point has no intention of actually becoming Catholic), isn’t quite on board with the whole “no sex until after menopause” idea (we are in our mid-twenties), but he also doesn’t want to have anymore kids. He is considering a vasectomy… He has researched the cons and is okay with it, he knows where I stand on it; he is only “lightly” considering it at this point. I am really struggling with this. My human instinct loves the ideas because I feel like it would be my “security blanket” to make sure we don’t get pregnant again, but I also know what the catechism says regarding the matter of sterilization. I already decided a long while ago that if he went ahead with it I would still continue to practice NFP and we would abstain during fertile times, out of respect for my body and the Church’s teachings. We have been working closely with the Deacon of my parish, and have also spoken with my priest. They have both said the same thing, give NFP a chance and they we can explore other options. They have also said that sterilization is acceptable for health reasons. After a discussion with some fellow Catholics, it seems that they aren’t giving the proper advice…

Also, my husband and I learned in our pre-cana classes (and we looked it up in our book just to make sure!) that taking artificial birth control in order to “protect future fertility” or “for medical reasons” and “not with the intent of contraception” is acceptable in the Church. Now I cannot take birth control, that is definitely a no-go! I have had bad side effects from it and I refuse to do that to my body again! Plus I am very much pro-life and I know (now) how birth control acts in an abortificant way, and I just refuse to do it.

So I am really confused! Birth control can be used for medical reasons but sterilization for serious reasons is not allowed? Would sterilization be acceptable if I continued to practice NFP? (Keep in mind it is not me but my husband who would be doing it and he isn’t Catholic, but I do feel responsible because, after all, if it wasn’t for me he wouldn’t be doing it…) I’ve tried to find some information online about this but I can’t find anything…

Thanks for all your help!

 

[1ke]

They have also said that sterilization is acceptable for health reasons. After a discussion with some fellow Catholics, it seems that they aren’t giving the proper advice.

If they meant that it was “acceptable” to purposely get sterlized (vasectomy/tubal) to avoid having additional children then, no that was not proper advice in line with Church taching as that is intrinsically evil and grave matter.

If they meant that it was acceptable if you became sterile as a result of a treatment for a health reason (such as hysterectomy due to female issues such as bleeding, cancer, endo, etc) or your husband became sterile due to treatment (prostate cancer, testicular cancer, etc) then, yes, that was correct advice.

Also, my husband and I learned in our pre-cana classes (and we looked it up in our book just to make sure!) that taking artificial birth control in order to “protect future fertility” or “for medical reasons” and “not with the intent of contraception” is acceptable in the Church. Now I cannot take birth control, that is definitely a no-go! I have had bad side effects from it and I refuse to do that to my body again! Plus I am very much pro-life and I know (now) how birth control acts in an abortificant way, and I just refuse to do it.

I am sorry, but just because something is in a precana book does not make it true. This is truly a misconstruing of actual church teaching. It is acceptable to use hormones, just as it is acceptable to use chemo, radiation, antibiotics, etc, in the treatment of an actual disease.

If you had an actual disease that hormones would treat, then yes you could take them even if the secondary and unintended result was temporary or permanent sterility.

Birth control can be used for medical reasons

Well no. Hormones can be used in the treatment of an actual medical condition. That those hormones are also found in contraceptive pills is irrelevant. One is not taking contraception, one is receiving a hormone therapy. These hormones might make you temporarily or permanently sterile but that is not the purpose of taking them. Just as radiation or removing your uterus can render you sterile, you don’t have these procedures for that purpose but to treat a disease. The sterlity is the unavoidable side effect.

but sterilization for serious reasons is not allowed?

Correct. It is always immoral to purposely avoid children through contraception or sterlization.

Would sterilization be acceptable if I continued to practice NFP?

No

 

[vaearia]

So, we have no option other than living in abstinence? Even if our marriage ends as a result of that?

 

[1ke]

So, we have no option other than living in abstinence?

Periodic abstinence through NFP or complete continence.

Even if our marriage ends as a result of that?

I would hope that neither party would abandon the other.

 

[vaearia]

So what do i do if my husband has a vesectomy?

 

[vaearia]

This is disappointing and faith challenging. I pray now for regularity in my cycles, reproductive health and the strength for my husband and I to embark on a possibly sexless marriage. It’s discouraging to see so many contradictions and find so many misinformed clergy.

 

[1ke]

So what do i do if my husband has a vesectomy?

Seek pastoral counsel from your confessor.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

So what do i do if my husband has a vesectomy?

Hello Vaearia. In the end the decision about the vasectomy is your husbands and you are not responsible, if by the lights God has given him as a non Catholic, he decides to go ahead with this. Your only responsibility before God is to ensure he understands that you would prefer him not to - but of course you will still love him whatever course of action he decides on. And I am sure he will love you either way as well - though if he is getting a vesectomy because of your medical condition it does sound like a contradiction doesn’t it! Just remember, he is not a Catholic and is doing his best given the situation and the natural lights God has given him to date.

And the consequences if he does get a vasectomy? You still keep loving him just as much as before (and maybe more if you believe he is following his conscience).

A sexless marriage for a man (and some women) in their 20s would require heroic virtue of a Catholic - impossible for a non Catholic. It would seem to deny the injunction that St Paul recognised was necessary for many men that it is better to marry than to burn (with a need for passion/intimacy). Is it really that bleak for your husband given your health?

If he does get a vasectomy then I do not understand the need to keep practsing NFP? Is it to lower the risk of pregancy still further (I thought vasectomys were pretty good already)?
Or is it to declare your ongoing intention before God that you are not “participating in evil” as the saying goes?

If it is the latter reason then I belive this is misguided and totally unnecessary. Your intent and responsibility before God re that is achieved by making clear to your husband you are against the vasectomy - though you accept it is his final decision if that is what he wishes to do in good conscience.

Your situation (irregular cycles which makes NFP next to impossible) is a difficult one. God is compassionate, we do what we can to the extent of our limited freedom’s and daily ask his mercy in trust and joy and peace for the rest of the “mess” that is life.

I hope this helps.

 

[vaearia]

Seek pastoral counsel from your confessor.

Yeah, because their advice in the past has been spot on… “Give NFP a chance and then explore other options, sterilization is acceptable for medical proposes”…

 

[vaearia]

If it is the latter reason then I belive this is misguided and totally unnecessary. Your intent and responsibility before God re that is achieved by making clear to your husband you are against the vasectomy - though you accept it is his final decision if that is what he wishes to do in good conscience.

Your situation (irregular cycles which makes NFP next to impossible) is a difficult one. God is compassionate, we do what we can to the extent of our limited freedom’s and daily ask his mercy in trust and joy and peace for the rest of the “mess” that is life.

I hope this helps.

Yes, it is out of respect for the church and my body that I would continue NFP after he gets a vesectomy, if he so chooses to do. I like knowing what is going on with my body and I know the benefits NFP has for understanding reproductive health. But also because I know vesectomies aren’t 100% reliable either and it is so dire at this time that we avoid, we would still have to abstain during fertile times (which is alot it seems!) the vesectomy would only be a security blanket (for lack of a better description) in case we misinterprete the chart or something. We are not rule benders/breakers when it comes to NFP, we are very careful! We have to be!

My husband was very much considering becoming Catholic until we went through pre Cana and started doing NFP and found out how unsympathetic the Church is in our situation (and many others I suspect). Now he doesn’t have any intention of converting, which is deeply saddening to me. I hope he changes his mind someday. Even though our deacon has said that sterilization may be okay in our situation, I know this is not what the true teaching of the Church is. It’s discouraging. I’ve talked with several family members of mine who are devout Catholics and even they are surprised at the information I am finding.

 

[Michael_Allen]

Hi vaearia

I would say pray and trust your conscience on this one. Personally I think vasectomy can often be a sensible choice to conclude things at an appropriate time in a marriage. Only the couple will know their own circumstances - health, finances, state of relationship, etc.

I don’t think clergy are misinformed - it’s just that on this topic a large portion of the voice of the faithful holds a view different to official doctrine, and many of us do not see things as black and white as official doctrine states. Many (most?) clergy accept this and treat contraception in marriage, within certain bounds, as a matter of conscience for the individual or couple.

Praying that you and your husband find a way that is right for you both. Using NFP with vasectomy as a safety net isn’t something I have heard of before, but I can see that it is a thoughtful and respectful approach.

God bless +

Michael

P.S. Accepting other people do not see things as I do.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Yeah, because their advice in the past has been spot on… “Give NFP a chance and then explore other options, sterilization is acceptable for medical proposes”…

You are right Vaearia, obviously the medical condition would have to be in your husband for this to justify vasectomy - and to be honest I know of no medical conditions that require vasectomy even if your husband was sick.

If your PP advised that your husband could legitimately have a vasectomy because of your medical condition then I belive he is 100% mistaken. However, if you had have followed his advice not knowing any better then that mistake would not have been imputable to you. Surely God understands it is hard to get decent advice on these topics and we easily get confused by different opinions even from different priests.

 

[vaearia]

You are right Vaearia, obviously the medical condition would have to be in your husband for this to justify vasectomy - and to be honest I know of no medical conditions that require vasectomy even if your husband was sick.

If your PP advised that your husband could legitimately have a vasectomy because of your medical condition then I belive he is 100% mistaken. However, if you had have followed his advice not knowing any better then that mistake would not have been imputable to you. Surely God understands it is hard to get decent advice on these topics and we easily get confused by different opinions even from different priests.

My priest and deacon both weren’t talking specifically on vesectomies but about sterilization altogether. The reason my husband opted for vesectomy rather than me getting sterilized is because he knows it goes against my faith, he knows it is a longer and more complicated procedure for me than it would be for him and financially it is less expensive for him than me. There are some more reasons but those are the few larger reasons.

 

[vaearia]

Hi vaearia

I would say pray and trust your conscience on this one. Personally I think vasectomy can often be a sensible choice to conclude things at an appropriate time in a marriage. Only the couple will know their own circumstances - health, finances, state of relationship, etc.

I don’t think clergy are misinformed - it’s just that on this topic a large portion of the voice of the faithful holds a view different to official doctrine, and many of us do not see things as black and white as official doctrine states. Many (most?) clergy accept this and treat contraception in marriage, within certain bounds, as a matter of conscience for the individual or couple.

Praying that you and your husband find a way that is right for you both. Using NFP with vasectomy as a safety net isn’t something I have heard of before, but I can see that it is a thoughtful and respectful approach.

God bless +

Michael

P.S. Accepting other people do not see things as I do.

Thank you. the vast majority of people, including Catholics have said exactly what you said. Ultimately I know that it is wrong no matter what. But we have to find what is right for us. I will feel completely responsible if my husband has it done and I hope that our merciful God will forgive me if we find ourselves in that situation.

This has definitely been a test for us. A test of faith and of self control. I feel like our marriage is slowly sinking so I hope we are able to sort things out soon. And I hope that all of his doesn’t turn my husband completely away from accepting the catholic faith as his own.

Thank you for how you explained why clergy have given me some seemingly improper advice. I plan to speak with them again to clear things up. I felt discouraged after finding out what the doctrine said and recalling what they had said. It made me wonder what other things they had misconstrued. I have a lot of questions for my deacon after this holiday weekend I hope I can speak with him. Some other concerning things within our pre Cana that don’t quite add up.

Thank you again.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Yes, it is out of respect for the church and my body that I would continue NFP after he gets a vesectomy, if he so chooses to do. I like knowing what is going on with my body and I know the benefits NFP has for understanding reproductive health. But also because I know vesectomies aren’t 100% reliable either and it is so dire at this time that we avoid, we would still have to abstain during fertile times (which is alot it seems!) the vesectomy would only be a security blanket (for lack of a better description) in case we misinterprete the chart or something. We are not rule benders/breakers when it comes to NFP, we are very careful! We have to be!

My husband was very much considering becoming Catholic until we went through pre Cana and started doing NFP and found out how unsympathetic the Church is in our situation (and many others I suspect). Now he doesn’t have any intention of converting, which is deeply saddening to me. I hope he changes his mind someday. Even though our deacon has said that sterilization may be okay in our situation, I know this is not what the true teaching of the Church is. It’s discouraging. I’ve talked with several family members of mine who are devout Catholics and even they are surprised at the information I am finding.

Vaearia, Michael has just beaten me to the post re your own conscience. I believe a point can come when a mature, sincere Catholic realises that Church Teaching, Canon Law etc etc just doesn’t seem to have taken my very unusual,particular situation into account when applying the abstract principles.

You sound to me like a very sincere, committed and mature Catholic. Your situation/body does not fit the norm. We can all see that Church Teaching doesn’t yet seem to have caught up with situations such as yours and really has nothing to say either way. You have sought advice from your local “experts” (I wouldn’t consider a PP or a Deacon “experts” when it comes to this sort of thing * nevertheless you have done your duty before God in seeking advice to the best of your ability and circumstance).

Therefore, only because of the above, I agree with Michael that you make a decision in your own conscience before God and be at peace with what your conscience tells you.

The only thing I am slightly concerned about is how you take into account your non-Catholic partner. Your marriage may be a non-sacramental marriage (as was Mary’s and Joseph for that matter) but it is still as sacred as any marriage. But you must understand that you cannot morally treat this situation in exactly the same way as you would if your husband was a Catholic. If he was Catholic more strict criteria would apply. But he is not, and he is sincerely not a Catholic which must be respected or at least presumed.

I believe this means you have more “leg room” in applying “Catholic” ethical principles and in thinking about what God expects of you both together. It is a wonderfully unique situation and your decisions will be a work of art/inspiration rather than “paint by numbers” from the Catholic paint book as it were. Be gentle on your expectations of your non-Catholic husband. There is a way of sacrificing our “catholicism” (which is hard for cradle catholics) which is in fact a journey to a deeper “Catholicism.” Just as Jesus “sacrificed” his divinity when he became man. The Greek Church calls that sort of sacrifice “kenosis.”

I think you are spiritual enough to understand what I mean without taking it the wrong way.
Good luck.*

 

[lifeisbeautiful]

Vaearia, the teachings of the Church are very much in tune with reality and with our times… and they are there for a reason. They are there to guide us towards what is good/away from what is bad… Teachings like these are not random things we can dismiss… I could not disagree more with the posters suggesting that it is ok to ignore Church teachings as long as our (I’m guessing ill-formed?) consciences say it’s ok?

2370 Periodic continence, that is, the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality.157 These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom. In contrast, “every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible” is intrinsically evil:158

Thus the innate language that expresses the total reciprocal self-giving of husband and wife is overlaid, through contraception, by an objectively contradictory language, namely, that of not giving oneself totally to the other. This leads not only to a positive refusal to be open to life but also to a falsification of the inner truth of conjugal love, which is called upon to give itself in personal totality… the difference, both anthropological and moral, between contraception and recourse to the rhythm of the cycle . . . involves in the final analysis two irreconcilable concepts of the human person and of human sexuality.159

Regarding your culpability, I think some may be referring to this document (meant for confessors):

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:

when the action of the cooperating spouse is not already illicit in itself;47
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).
14. 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

1. Christian couples are witnesses of God’s love in the world. They must therefore be convinced, with the assistance of faith and even in spite of their experience of human weakness, that it is possible to observe the will of the Lord in conjugal life with divine grace. Frequent and persevering recourse to prayer, to the Eucharist and to the sacrament of Reconciliation, are indispensable for gaining mastery of self.49

1. Priests, in their catechesis and in their preparation of couples for marriage, are asked to maintain uniform criteria with regard to the evil of the contraceptive act, both in their teaching and in the area of the sacrament of Reconciliation, in complete fidelity to the Magisterium of the Church.

Bishops are to take particular care to be vigilant in this regard; for not infrequently the faithful are scandalized by this lack of unity, both in the area of catechesis as well as in the sacrament of Reconciliation.50

 

[SerraSemper]

Vaearia, Michael has just beaten me to the post re your own conscience. I believe a point can come when a mature, sincere Catholic realises that Church Teaching, Canon Law etc etc just doesn’t seem to have taken my very unusual,particular situation into account when applying the abstract principles.

Canon law and Theology do take into consideration cases where it is dangerous for a woman to conceive a child. We do not know why it is that some people have greater crosses than others. We don’t know why thousands of people starve to death. We don’t have a lot of answers to many questions. But what we do know is that to do evil actions that are evil in themselves is wrong. Sterilization only for the purpose of avoiding children, in a healthy person is sinful. It is definitely hard to abstain, but God ca.lls us to follow His laws regarding our sexuality.

The only thing I am slightly concerned about is how you take into account your non-Catholic partner. Your marriage may be a non-sacramental marriage (as was Mary’s and Joseph for that matter) but it is still as sacred as any marriage. But you must understand that you cannot morally treat this situation in exactly the same way as you would if your husband was a Catholic. If he was Catholic more strict criteria would apply. But he is not, and he is sincerely not a Catholic which must be respected or at least presumed.

This is incorrect unless the OP’s husband is non-baptized, the marriage is sacramental. The sacrament occurs whenever two baptized persons marry. And yes, morally, we do treat the situation as if the husband was Catholic. He may not be as culpable if he is ignorant of moral laws, but the proposed vasectomy itself is gravely sinful when it is only done to prevent fertility.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Canon law and Theology do take into consideration cases where it is dangerous for a woman to conceive a child. We do not know why it is that some people have greater crosses than others. We don’t know why thousands of people starve to death. We don’t have a lot of answers to many questions. But what we do know is that to do evil actions that are evil in themselves is wrong. Sterilization only for the purpose of avoiding children, in a healthy person is sinful. It is definitely hard to abstain, but God ca.lls us to follow His laws regarding our sexuality.

Originally Posted by Blue Horizon
The only thing I am slightly concerned about is how you take into account your non-Catholic partner. Your marriage may be a non-sacramental marriage (as was Mary’s and Joseph for that matter) but it is still as sacred as any marriage. But you must understand that you cannot morally treat this situation in exactly the same way as you would if your husband was a Catholic. If he was Catholic more strict criteria would apply. But he is not, and he is sincerely not a Catholic which must be respected or at least presumed.

This is incorrect unless the OP’s husband is non-baptized, the marriage is sacramental. The sacrament occurs whenever two baptized persons marry.

So…this is correct if the OP’s husband is not baptised .

And yes, morally, we do treat the situation as if the husband was Catholic.

No I do not believe we pastorally treat this couple as if they were both Catholic. The dynamics of the relationship are very different and expectations of what the other partner can be reasonably expected to tolerate need to be modified accordingly to stabilise the marriage. This may require a degree of “participation in evil” that most Catholic wives married to Catholic husbands would not have to countenance. Article 13 in the above document from lifeisbeautiful is the sort of thing I was referring to. Under certain conditions a Catholic wife may in good conscience participate in the “sin” of a spouse who voluntarily contracepts the marital act (eg by sterilisation) on an ongoing basis without her approval.

I understand it may be a sadness for Vaearia if it came to this but it is certainly not sinful for her to continue enjoying union with her husband. Far from it. In fact for the sake of her marriage (stable environment for the children and unitive purpose of becoming one flesh) it may be what God is calling her to do should he have a vasectomy.

Nor should we consider the non-Catholic husband a recalcitrant “sinner” if he engages (him alone) in objectively sinful marital acts having had a vasectomy. We cannot expect a non Catholic husband to readily understand (let alone obey a Church he doesn’t belong to) Teaching re contraception. Apparantly 80% of professing US Catholics don’t understand it or even obey it so how can anyone expect a non-Catholic to readily go down that path.

Therefore if the husband is sincere and in every other way a loving and caring husband/father I believe it would be very reasonable for us all to assume guilt for this objectively sinful situation would not be imputable to him personally. And it certainly wouldn’t be imputable to Vaearia as article 13 above seems to allow “leg room” for.

As hinted at above my small concern was Vaearia’s motivation for continuing observance of NFP infertile periods for sex (even after possible vasectomy). If it truly is just a “security blanket” to be doubly sure of not getting pregnant then fair enough. But anything else, I believe, would be a misguided assuaging of guilt before God (which would not be true) or possibly a small, subconscious “punishment” of her husband. (Vaearia I am not at all suggesting this is the case, just checking that you have covered all the bases for why you would want to do that.)

Yes, a vasectomy is wrong no matter what but in the end it is not something you can control and God knows that. The real issue is, if it does happen, is how God would want you to lovingly respond. I am gently suggesting you cannot expect your husband to see things as Catholics see them - he may be invincably ignorant and therefore evil is not imputable to him personally. Invincably ignorant Catholics, on the other hand, are still required to obey their Church even when they do not understand. But your husband is sincerely not a member of this Church so has no duty to obey and no sin for doing so.
Thats how I see it anyway and I am a cradle card carrying Catholic (married to a Buddhist).

 

[SerraSemper]

So…this is correct if the OP’s husband is not baptised .

No I do not believe we pastorally treat this couple as if they were both Catholic. The dynamics of the relationship are very different and expectations of what the other partner can be reasonably expected to tolerate need to be modified accordingly to stabilise the marriage. This may require a degree of “participation in evil” that most Catholic wives married to Catholic husbands would not have to countenance. Article 13 in the above document from lifeisbeautiful is the sort of thing I was referring to. Under certain conditions a Catholic wife may in good conscience participate in the “sin” of a spouse who voluntarily contracepts the marital act (eg by sterilisation) on an ongoing basis without her approval.

As hinted at above my small concern was Vaearia’s motivation for continuing observance of NFP infertile periods for sex (even after possible vasectomy). If it truly is just a “security blanket” to be doubly sure of not getting pregnant then fair enough. But anything else, I believe, would be a misguided assuaging of guilt before God (which would not be true) or possibly a small, subconscious “punishment” of her husband. (Vaearia I am not at all suggesting this is the case, just checking that you have covered all the bases for why you would want to do that.)

Okay, a couple clarifications here… First, in this situation, we cannot determine if the OP’s husband will have imputed guilt- that’s up to God. We know that a vasectomy is objectively gravely sinful unless done for medical reasons. We also know that the OP has probably objected to it on the basis of her religious beliefs which breaks down part of the invincible knowledge he might have had otherwise.

Second, once a sterilization has occurred, it does not constitute a sinful act to have intercourse again unless by so-doing, one is approving the sterilization. For example, the OP, if she were to be happy that a vasectomy were to have happened, and consent to it, then that is wrong. But if she were to regret the vasectomy and have intercourse, there would be no fault on her part. It sounds like she has a serious reason to abstain during fertile times. We don’t say it is sinful to have intercourse with a sterile person, we do say it is sinful to intend or approve of deliberate sterilization in healthy individuals for the sole purpose of not being open to children.

 

[Blue_Horizon]

Okay, a couple clarifications here… First, in this situation, we cannot determine if the OP’s husband will have imputed guilt- that’s up to God.

Yes this is my point. And being good Christians we presume the best don’t we - unless circumstances put worse interpretations beyond reasonable doubt.

We also know that the OP has probably objected to it on the basis of her religious beliefs which breaks down part of the invincible knowledge he might have had otherwise.

I don’t think so SS. As Aquinas puts it, “what is received is received according to the limitationsof the receiver.” Invincible ignorance is about far more than “never having had the chance to hear” or “now that you know there are no more excuses.” Just being told doesn’t mean a person truly “knows.” Ignorance also involves internal limitations due to background and differing culture, weakness of reason etc which may limit one’s ability to grasp the truth of new info that one receives. That is why I mentioned it is not readily apparant even to many cradle Catholics why contraceptive acts are inherently disordered. The “evil” of sincerely “invincably ignorant” Catholics who still contracept is not because of they cannot intellectually agree but because they disobey a clear practical “ban” directive given by the Pope in Humanae Vitae.

So if significant numbers of cradle Catholics are invincably ignorant of why contraceptive acts are evil then how can we realistically expect many non-Catholics to intellectually grasp this teaching simply by hearing it? Vaearia’s husband sounds like a sincere truth seeker so we must presume the best interpretation (non culpabale ignorance) if he is presently unable to accept this difficult teaching. Only time will tell if this ignorance is vincible or not.

Once a sterilization has occurred, it does not constitute a sinful act to have intercourse again unless by so-doing, one is approving the sterilization.

Yes I agree and you have put it better than I. My concern was that Vaearia may not see it this way. Also, I was talking about her husband rather than her. Would you think it objectively sinful for him each time he engages subsequent to a vasectomy (which some say is a reversible operation)?