Pastoral Privilege, and Contraception

  • Thread starter Thread starter littlestsparrow
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

littlestsparrow

Guest
I had someone (a very devout Catholic) from my church tell me that he/she spoke to a priest, and he used his pastoral privilege, as provided through Canon Law, to allow a couple to practice, “Temporary,” contraception, due to extreme circumstances in the family (not health related).

I’ve since told a few other people about this, and almost everyone has said that a pastor may not make that determination for any reason.

I’ve been all over the Internet on this, and I can’t find anything that actually addresses the above issue.

Info. and comments would be most welcome…regarding exigent circumstances, as well as critical health issues.

Thanks,
Sparrow
 
littlestsparrow said:
I had someone (a very devout Catholic) from my church tell me that he/she spoke to a priest, and he used his pastoral privilege, as provided through Canon Law, to allow a couple to practice, “Temporary,” contraception, due to extreme circumstances in the family (not health related).

I’ve since told a few other people about this, and almost everyone has said that a pastor may not make that determination for any reason.

I’ve been all over the Internet on this, and I can’t find anything that actually addresses the above issue.

Info. and comments would be most welcome…regarding exigent circumstances, as well as critical health issues.

Thanks,
Sparrow
Click to expand...
Your friend’s priest was VERY VERY VERY incorrect.
What the heck is ‘pastoral privilege’ anyway?
Tell your friend to review the cathechism. The priest was wrong, and it would be nice if your friend went to the priest before he leads anyone else astray!!
(Though, this is not the first time I’ve heard of a priest ‘letting a sin slide’. It’s ridiculous!)
 
There is no such ‘pastoral privilege’.
The Magisterium teaches that contraception is intrinsically evil, and always gravely immoral, regardless of intention or circumstances.
See Veritatis Splendor and Humane Vitae (among many other sources).
 
I’ve since told a few other people about this, and almost everyone has said that a pastor may not make that determination for any reason.

Boy was that priest wrong. Regardless of how he personally may feel he is really doing a disservice to the people he advised. He is to propose Church teaching and it’s up to the individual to decide to follow. The Church teaches that people follow her of their own free will. The pastor has taken this away.
 
Seems to me that the place to address this would be in the confessional.

Could it be that she meant that the priest had determined that due to the circumstances, the three factors that need to be present for mortal sin (grave matter, full knowledge, and consent), were not present all together so that no mortal sin was involved so long as those circumstances existed? It would seem that this would be within a priest’s authority to discern.

In any case it does sound like it a very, very private matter that should be dealt with behind the seal of confession.

And definitely not taken as a ticket for others to seek out some kind of break on contraception.
 
There is no such “pastoral privilege.”

The priest is honestly mistaken, or worse, he deliberately misled this woman.
 
OraLabora said:
Seems to me that the place to address this would be in the confessional.

Could it be that she meant that the priest had determined that due to the circumstances, the three factors that need to be present for mortal sin (grave matter, full knowledge, and consent), were not present all together so that no mortal sin was involved so long as those circumstances existed? It would seem that this would be within a priest’s authority to discern.
Click to expand...
I think it would be definately within a priest’s authority to discern it for a past act but the OP was relating a priest giving “permission” for a future practice.

Since using contraception is objectively grave matter, the priest can’t contravene that.
Full knowledge would exist once the matter was brought to confession.
That only leaves full consent. You can’t plan to commit a sin in the future without full consent.
 
Corki said:
I think it would be definately within a priest’s authority to discern it for a past act but the OP was relating a priest giving “permission” for a future practice.

Since using contraception is objectively grave matter, the priest can’t contravene that.
Full knowledge would exist once the matter was brought to confession.
That only leaves full consent. You can’t plan to commit a sin in the future without full consent.
Click to expand...
I think the temporary nature of the situation may have compelled the priest to:
  1. give absolution;
  2. reassure the penitent that as long as those circumstances prevail, the conditions for mortal sin won’t exist, so you don’t need to confess every single week about this.
I haven’t a clue what those circumstances are. It could very well be that the priest was off in left field. Who knows, we’re hearing the story third hand.

Take a drug addict or alcoholic. They can’t possibly mortally sin on their “habit” because they can’t be in full consent due to the addiction. Therefore the priest can probably say with some assurance, that as an addict, even in the future, they aren’t mortally sinning if they take drugs. Especially since there’s no real “cure” for addiction, just avoidance.

That isn’t quite the same thing as “giving permission”. It is saying that it is still a sin, you should do your best to avoid it, and you can still confess it if it helps you with your recovery.

Of course I’m wary because we’re hearing a “friend of a friend” sort of story, and they tend to get distorted with each telling.

I’d bet good money though that the priest effectively said that the person was not in a state of mortal sin because those temporary conditions preclude full consent.

Not quite the same as “giving permission”.
 
Your friend should write a letter to the Bishop, giving the facts and leave it to him to correct this error and prevent it from happening again.
 
OraLabora said:
  1. reassure the penitent that as long as those circumstances prevail, the conditions for mortal sin won’t exist, so you don’t need to confess every single week about this.
Click to expand...
Contraception is an intrinsically evil and gravely immoral act. The Magisterium teaches that neither good intention, nor dire circumstances can cause an intrinsically evil act to become moral.

“Consequently, circumstances or intentions can never transform an act, intrinsically evil by virtue of its object, into an act ‘subjectively’ good or defensible as a choice.”
(Pope John Paul II, Veritatis Splendor, n. 81.)

“No circumstance, no purpose, no law whatsoever can ever make licit an act which is intrinsically illicit, since it is contrary to the Law of God which is written in every human heart, knowable by reason itself, and proclaimed by the Church.”
(Pope John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae, n. 62.)

“It is therefore an error to judge the morality of human acts by considering only the intention that inspires them or the circumstances (environment, social pressure, duress or emergency, etc.) which supply their context. There are acts which, in and of themselves, independently of circumstances and intentions, are always gravely illicit by reason of their object; such as blasphemy and perjury, murder and adultery. One may not do evil so that good may result from it.”
(The Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 1756.)

“The Church has always taught the intrinsic evil of contraception, that is, of every marital act intentionally rendered unfruitful. This teaching is to be held as definitive and irreformable.”
(Pontifical Council for the Family, Vademecum ‘Go with me’] for Confessors concerning some Aspects of the Morality of Conjugal Life, n. 2-4.)

Therefore, a confessor may not morally instruct or permit a penitent to commit the intrinsically evil act of contraception, regardless of intention or circumstances.
 
Thanks, all. That’s the response I needed. I did call my friend (and as one of you mentioned, you are getting this info. third hand, so I apologize for that); he/she maintained that Canon Law allows for pastoral discretion, due to exigent circumstances, with the permission of the Bishop. This person said this information had been obtained from the diocesan canon lawyer. I asked for a reference/citation. I’m waiting for that reference at this time.

sparrow
 
What if your friend was mistaken or is misleading you?
Certainly if something of this serious a nature was discussed with
their priest shouldn’t it have been confidential?
Things of a personal nature etc I would have thought were between the
priest and the person.
You may not have ALL the facts either.

I do hope all is well for all involved.I do think this is third hand
limited information and a judgement of whether the priest did wrong
or not is not for us to make.If the friend has genuine ‘concern’ over
advice given from the priest best to contact the bishop as another
poster mentioned.
God bless
 
Ron_Conte said:
Contraception is an intrinsically evil and gravely immoral act. The Magisterium teaches that neither good intention, nor dire circumstances can cause an intrinsically evil act to become moral.
Click to expand...
I did not use the word “moral”. I used the word mortal in connection with the level of culpability of the person committing the sin.

There’s a huge difference.
 
littlestsparrow said:
I had someone (a very devout Catholic) from my church tell me that he/she spoke to a priest, and he used his pastoral privilege, as provided through Canon Law, to allow a couple to practice, murder, due to extreme circumstances in the family (not health related).

I’ve since told a few other people about this, and almost everyone has said that a pastor may not make that determination for any reason.

I’ve been all over the Internet on this, and I can’t find anything that actually addresses the above issue.

Info. and comments would be most welcome…regarding exigent circumstances, as well as critical health issues.

Thanks,
Sparrow
Click to expand...
If one grave sin is allowed under a “pastoral privilege”, than any of them is.
 
Dear brother Jermosh,
Jermosh said:
Eastern rite?
Click to expand...
That is quite discerning of you. Does anyone know if the priest spoken of is from one of the Eastern Catholic Churches? I myself have doubts that an Eastern Catholic priest would be advising a couple that contraception was OK.

But for my Latin brethren here who may not know, there is a concept called oikonomia (or economy) in the Eastern and Oriental Churches. It is a pastoral prerogative wherein the temporal punishment due to sin is lessened or removed. Now, it is possible that a priest could do this for pastoral reasons, while exhorting and reminding the couple that contracepting is a sin. This faculty is normally granted only by a bishop to a priest. And the circumstances must be serious enough to warrant such a pastoral leniency.

Maybe that is what occured, not that the priest told the couple that is was OK to contracept. However, from the OP, it does not seem as though the circumstances warrant the use of oikonomia.

Blessings,
Marduk
 
Hi again,

I guess I need to clarify to some degree. I, personally, am not questioning the Church’s teaching on contraception. St. Elizabeth Ann Seton said, “Be children of the Church,” and so I am, and wish to continue as one of the Church’s obedient children.

My concern is, that this friend of mine, is very devout, conservative and learned person, who is employed at this time, by the diocese. I find myself…in a state of irritation, over his/her insistence that this, “Privilege,” is allowed.

Thanks again, to all who have responded.
sparrow:
 
1ke said:
There is no such “pastoral privilege.”

The priest is honestly mistaken, or worse, he deliberately misled this woman.
Click to expand...
Or perhaps the woman totally misunderstood what he said. One hears “with a different ear” when strong need is felt.🤷
 
littlestsparrow said:
regarding exigent circumstances, as well as critical health issues.Thanks, Sparrow
Click to expand...
The Church does not allow birth control/contraception for the purpose of preventing a pregnancy. However, if you have to take contraception to treat a medical condition (such as endometriosis, or ovarian cyts), that is allowed. Again, that is to treat a medical condition, not to prevent pregnancy.

You really don’t want to be on contraception for a long period of time if you can avoid it. It causes other problems. It’s use has been linked to deep vein thrombosis and stroke. I would certainly hope your friend isn’t smoking along with contracepting.

Although your friend did not tell you what her circumstances are, from what she told you, I doubt it was for medical reasons. I’m not surprised though, because when my mom was younger she was told it was a “matter of conscience” for a married couple. It would be nice, but that’s not what the Church teaches 😉
 
Ron_Conte said:
Contraception is an intrinsically evil and gravely immoral act. The Magisterium teaches that neither good intention, nor dire circumstances can cause an intrinsically evil act to become moral.

“It is therefore an error to judge the morality of human acts by considering only the intention that inspires them or the circumstances (environment, social pressure, duress or emergency, etc.) which supply their context. There are acts which, in and of themselves, independently of circumstances and intentions, are always gravely illicit by reason of their object; such as blasphemy and perjury, murder and adultery. One may not do evil so that good may result from it.”
(The Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 1756.)

“The Church has always taught the intrinsic evil of contraception, that is, of every marital act intentionally rendered unfruitful. This teaching is to be held as definitive and irreformable.”
(Pontifical Council for the Family, Vademecum ‘Go with me’] for Confessors concerning some Aspects of the Morality of Conjugal Life, n. 2-4.)

Therefore, a confessor may not morally instruct or permit a penitent to commit the intrinsically evil act of contraception, regardless of intention or circumstances.
Click to expand...
I don’t want to get nit picky, nor am I trying to start a debate regarding contraception as there has already been one on here with regards to what I am about to say and Fr. Serpa has even given his say with regards to what I will say -

Perhaps your friends friend - the femal has a partifcular medical condition (not unlike one that afflicts myself)- and has been on a form of the pill prior to marriage. If so and if due to medical reasoning which is serious enough there are (while rare) medical circumstances where the pill can be used - for instance if your friends friend has a situation with regards to bleeding which on the pill will help then because it is firstly being taken not to prevent pregnancy can be allowed - this is allowed due to the practice of double effect. Even with regards to what some believe to be true with certain types of the pill being possible abortifacients (which I have yet to see a medical study which has shown this 100 %positively correct) - it is still allowed. Again, not trying to get a debate going on this because I know even with Fr. Serpa ringing in, there are still some out there that don’t believe it to be true, but I thought I could give a possibility where a Priest could possibly o.k. the use of using a form of contraception.

God Bless
Rye

p.s. apologies- for some reason, I didn’t see the post above me until I had posted this- same point - my bad!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top