Because procreation is not the only purpose of sex. Since it is one of the purposes of sex it is wrong to mess with your biology to remove your fertility from sex, but since it is not the only purpose it is fine to have sex even when you know that your body is currently, naturally, infertile. I know this can be a hard distinction to see, but does that help at all?
I know sex is not for procreation alone - I mentioned that on my question - but I thought that the Catholic position was that if the act were not open to procreation, it was wrong. That’s how NFP avoids being another method of contraception. In theory God could heal whatever was causing a person’s infertility and, in the case of the elderly we have the example of Abraham and Sarah. I suppose that God could cause a pregnant woman to conceive again but I wouldn’t think that’s good for the mother. Any way you cut it, sex during pregnancy doesn’t seem to qualify as being open to conception. What am I missing here?
It’s a fair question.
I don’t disagree with what you said but I must be missing something. How can sex during pregnancy be both procreative and unifying?
But since there is no realistic chance of conceiving, how can sex during pregnancy (or after menopause) be honestly called procreative. I mentioned Abraham and Sarah but that’s not exactly a common occurrence.
Because you are doing it the way people do it when they want to procreate. That’s what procreative means - not the (possible) end result.
It isn’t only about being able to conceive. Being procreative is being open (pro) to God’s will (creation).
You are right in saying that the Catholic position is that it must be open to life, but your unerstanding of what the Church means by ‘open to life’ is incorrect. The Church isn’t saying that what is necessary for being open to life is that conception is possible, if that was all then they really would be hypocritical to say that artificial conraceptionis sinful while NFP (or sex while pregnant, post menopausal, after one spouse has been sterilized etc) is fine. A lot of people think the Church is being hypocritical precisely because they do not understand (or refuse to accept) what it actually is that the Church means by this word. So if you are going to understand what the Church actually teaches, the first step to that is making sure that you ignore the false understanding of the term ‘open to life’ which you have come to. This is not what the phrase ‘open to life’ means. Essentially, what is meant by open to life is that the couple must not do anything to mess with their natural fertility, ie use artificial means to render themselves, or a particular sexual act, infertile. The fact that they are currently infertile is not a problem, what is considered sinful is messing with their fertility in an attempt to artificially remove it from their particular act of sex. In which case its pretty clear that there is no contradiction in the Church saying that having sex while pregnant is not sinful. The apparant contradiction comes in through misinformation about what the Church means by ‘open to life’.
I would also add that even after menopause, couples can still have sex because God can decide to make a miracle happen. Being open to life doesn’t mean you can’t have sex post menopause. As long as you don’t continue to hinder the aspect that may be procreative which is fertility. The unitive aspect is still there.You are right in saying that the Catholic position is that it must be open to life, but your unerstanding of what the Church means by ‘open to life’ is incorrect. The Church isn’t saying that what is necessary for being open to life is that conception is possible, if that was all then they really would be hypocritical to say that artificial conraceptionis sinful while NFP (or sex while pregnant, post menopausal, after one spouse has been sterilized etc) is fine. A lot of people think the Church is being hypocritical precisely because they do not understand (or refuse to accept) what it actually is that the Church means by this word. So if you are going to understand what the Church actually teaches, the first step to that is making sure that you ignore the false understanding of the term ‘open to life’ which you have come to. This is not what the phrase ‘open to life’ means. Essentially, what is meant by open to life is that the couple must not do anything to mess with their natural fertility, ie use artificial means to render themselves, or a particular sexual act, infertile. The fact that they are currently infertile is not a problem, what is considered sinful is messing with their fertility in an attempt to artificially remove it from their particular act of sex. In which case its pretty clear that there is no contradiction in the Church saying that having sex while pregnant is not sinful. The apparant contradiction comes in through misinformation about what the Church means by ‘open to life’.
It’s easy to be open to conception when it’s impossible to conceive.It isn’t only about being able to conceive. Being procreative is being open (pro) to God’s will (creation).
If a woman is on the pill, the couple is going through the motions also. To say you’re open to conception when you know it’s impossible is meaningless.
I think you’re getting closer to the answer but I’m not sure we’re there yet. With NFP it is possible to become pregnant. In the case of sex during pregnancy, it is not. Why doesn’t the Church say abstain from sex during pregnancy.
only if by ‘open to conception’ you insist on using a different meaning than that used by the Church, which is why I pointed out earlier that if you want to get anywhere in trying to understand the Church’s teaching on this point you have to be willing to accept that your current understanding of the phrase ‘open to life’ is not what the Church means by it. It is ridiculous to criticize the Church based on something that She does not actually believe or teach. Your current understanding of the Church which you are using to criticize the Church just plain isn’t what the Church actually teaches. If your not willing to accept this then this conversation will not go anywhere.