Sex during pregnancy

[Catholic80]

If your "unable to conceive’ can you always muster up being open to new life?

Of course! I have a friend whose parents were sterile. Then, in their mid 40’s, her mother started getting sick (vomiting, fatigue, strange symptoms) She thought she had cancer, and found out there indeed was a growth… That growth turned out to be my friend.

The couple was sterile (the wife) and deemed sterile by the doctors, but they were open to pregnancy, and it happened, years into their marriage. We even have Biblical evidence of this… Sarah and Abraham, Elizabeth and Zacharias.

By the way you are interpreting “open to new life,” a couple would be unable to have intercourse any other time than when the woman was fertile (which is about a week out of each month) A couple should have sex any time they are in the mood and consenting unless they have grave reason not to.

Pope Paul VI: “The sexual activity, in which husband and wife are intimately and chastely united with one another, through which human life is transmitted, is, as the recent Council recalled, ‘noble and worthy.’ It does not, moreover, cease to be legitimate even when, for reasons independent of their will, it is foreseen to be infertile. For its natural adaptation to the expression and strengthening of the union of husband and wife is not thereby suppressed. The fact is, as experience shows, that new life is not the result of each and every act of sexual intercourse. God has wisely ordered laws of nature and the incidence of fertility in such a way that successive births are already naturally spaced through the inherent operation of these laws.” (Humanae Vitae, n. 11.)

 

[johnnyjones]

After nearly 20 years in healthcare, most in Maternal/Newborn care, I will say that your comment of “If your tubes are tied and burned, you’re not getting pregnant, period” is inaccurate. I’ve cared for women who thought their tubal ligation was permanent, but there they were, in the maternity unit, having an unplanned child and as I recall, each of those women were quite happy about it. The only way to be 100% sure that pregnancy is impossible is to: (1) abstain from any sexual contact, or (2), have a complete hysterectomy, including a bilateral oopherectomy (removal of both ovaries), or a plain bilateral oopherectomy. Otherwise, there is always a chance of pregnancy. In fact, when I worked in OB at one hospital (not a Catholic one), the form that the patient had to sign when requesting a tubal ligation specifically stated that it was not 100% and there was a small chance that conception/pregnancy could occur. Since it’s not 100%, Catholic women who have had a tubal ligation and have been through the Sacrament of Reconciliation are still biologically open to life when they honor their marital vows of intimacy. Same with a Catholic man who had a vasectomy, but then realized his sin and received the Sacrament of Reconciliation, since vasectomies are not 100% either.

I disagree. Tied and burned if done correctly can not re-fix itself. I have worked in a health care environment myself and have seen the opposite of what you are saying.

 

[johnnyjones]

Of course! I have a friend whose parents were sterile. Then, in their mid 40’s, her mother started getting sick (vomiting, fatigue, strange symptoms) She thought she had cancer, and found out there indeed was a growth… That growth turned out to be my friend.

The couple was sterile (the wife) and deemed sterile by the doctors, but they were open to pregnancy, and it happened, years into their marriage. We even have Biblical evidence of this… Sarah and Abraham, Elizabeth and Zacharias.

By the way you are interpreting “open to new life,” a couple would be unable to have intercourse any other time than when the woman was fertile (which is about a week out of each month) A couple should have sex any time they are in the mood and consenting unless they have grave reason not to.

Do you know there are people that are sterile who can’t mentally accept (even after forgiveness) a procreative order? You can always find examples of inspirational accounts, but many who either willfully became sterile or through natural events struggle with the issue. This was my aim, along with the “unfairness factor.”

 

[catholicmamajoy]

I disagree. Tied and burned if done correctly can not re-fix itself. I have worked in a health care environment myself and have seen the opposite of what you are saying.

That’s fine to disagree, based on your experiences. I am going with my years in OB and what I have encountered in the births I have been a part of where moms, with various forms of tubal ligations (sutured, clamped, or cauterized), have subsequently given birth without an intentional reanastomosis. Sad to say, I assisted in the OR with postpartum tubal ligations (using all the forms I mentioned above), before I had a reversion to the Faith, so I have a pretty in-depth background in those procedures (much more I would say, than the average hospital employee). Needless to say, I no longer work in that regard.

 

[Corki]

Do you know there are people that are sterile who can’t mentally accept (even after forgiveness) a procreative order? You can always find examples of inspirational accounts, but many who either willfully became sterile or through natural events struggle with the issue. This was my aim, along with the “unfairness factor.”

What do you mean by “accept a procreative order”?

 

[johnnyjones]

What do you mean by “accept a procreative order”?

Basically an individual or a couple that can’t come to terms with having sex under a Catholic mindset because they are either sterile due to their own actions or nature.

 

[Corki]

Basically an individual or a couple that can’t come to terms with having sex under a Catholic mindset because they are either sterile due to their own actions or nature.

A couple that finds themselves unable to have sex has other issues regardless of how they became sterile. Those issues could be physical or psychological but are not really related to the topic of this thread.

 

[johnnyjones]

A couple that finds themselves unable to have sex has other issues regardless of how they became sterile. Those issues could be physical or psychological but are not really related to the topic of this thread.

Wrong. You don’t seem to understand the point.

 

[Corki]

Wrong. You don’t seem to understand the point.

That’s why I asked.

 

[johnnyjones]

That’s why I asked.

Your last post was a statement, not a question.

 

[Corki]

What do you mean by “accept a procreative order”?

Basically an individual or a couple that can’t come to terms with having sex under a Catholic mindset because they are either sterile due to their own actions or nature.

A couple that finds themselves unable to have sex has other issues regardless of how they became sterile. Those issues could be physical or psychological but are not really related to the topic of this thread.

Wrong. You don’t seem to understand the point.

What am I not understanding?

1. To have marital relations in a manner ordered to procreation is to have normal genital sex to completion without adding anything to the act to disrupt it (ie contraception).
2. If the couple doesn’t do this, they aren’t really having marital relations.
3. If they can’t do this, there are unresolved issues. Either a physical problem that needs to be addressed or a psychological resistance.

Are you saying that there are no issues or that they should just refrain from trying?

 

[johnnyjones]

What am I not understanding?

1. To have marital relations in a manner ordered to procreation is to have normal genital sex to completion without adding anything to the act to disrupt it (ie contraception).
2. If the couple doesn’t do this, they aren’t really having marital relations.
3. If they can’t do this, there are unresolved issues. Either a physical problem that needs to be addressed or a psychological resistance.

Are you saying that there are no issues or that they should just refrain from trying?

Please do not adopt a domineering approach by asserting that this is not a topic for this thread. It is closely related. A good portion of CAF threads are way off topic and go on without correction. You say “without adding anything to the act to disrupt it” which I understand, but it is already disrupted either purposely or “naturally” in many cases.

Some are troubled or find little sense in having sex in an ordered way while trying to dissuade themselves of their impediment towards new life. It’s not that they “can’t do this” but that it is a feeling of opposition to church teaching. In all honesty I would find it more logical and consistent if the churches decree was that non fertile couples cease from sexual relations as hard as that would be to “enforce”. Under the current outlook, one sterile couple can have sex like rabbits and a fertile couple is forced into a more measured approach. So in the first case the sin because forgiven has created a free pass toward a pleasure focused only act.

 

[Corki]

You say “without adding anything to the act to disrupt it” which I understand, but it is already disrupted either purposely or “naturally” in many cases.

If someone is contracepting, that is true. If someone is infertile, for whatever reason, they are not adding anything to disrupt the marital act. Something was done, or happened, in the past, but nothing is happening now, in the present.

Some are troubled or find little sense in having sex in an ordered way while trying to dissuade themselves of their impediment towards new life. It’s not that they “can’t do this” but that it is a feeling of opposition to church teaching.

I don’t know those “some people” but if they are reaching that conclusion, there is a possibility that they either have a faulty understanding of Church teaching or they are not at peace about what ever happened in the past. Either way, some good spiritual direction can help to reconcile their feelings and enable them to resume normal marital relations.

In all honesty I would find it more logical and consistent if the churches decree was that non fertile couples cease from sexual relations as hard as that would be to “enforce”.

That would be very inconsistent with Church teaching - not only about marriage but about the Sacrament of Reconciliation… Your proposal would be assigning a life long penance to someone absolved for the sin of sterilization and also imposing a punishment for someone who had committed no sin.

Under the current outlook, one sterile couple can have sex like rabbits and a fertile couple is forced into a more measured approach. So in the first case the sin because forgiven has created a free pass toward a pleasure focused only act

Either couple could be focused solely on pleasure and that would be wrong. Neither couple is given permission to approach the marital act as only for pleasure.

 

[johnnyjones]

If someone is contracepting, that is true. If someone is infertile, for whatever reason, they are not adding anything to disrupt the marital act. Something was done, or happened, in the past, but nothing is happening now, in the present.

I don’t know those “some people” but if they are reaching that conclusion, there is a possibility that they either have a faulty understanding of Church teaching or they are not at peace about what ever happened in the past. Either way, some good spiritual direction can help to reconcile their feelings and enable them to resume normal marital relations.

That would be very inconsistent with Church teaching - not only about marriage but about the Sacrament of Reconciliation… Your proposal would be assigning a life long penance to someone absolved for the sin of sterilization and also imposing a punishment for someone who had committed no sin.

Either couple could be focused solely on pleasure and that would be wrong. Neither couple is given permission to approach the marital act as only for pleasure.

I realize that you don’t know those “some people”, that is why I am informing you of this issue. The size of your network and how deep your able to communicate has a bearing on this knowledge. This is becoming a circular debate and it doesn’t seem you are getting a good grasp upon what I am trying to point out. I thank you for your well thought out responses.

 

[Catholic80]

Do you know there are people that are sterile who can’t mentally accept (even after forgiveness) a procreative order? You can always find examples of inspirational accounts, but many who either willfully became sterile or through natural events struggle with the issue. This was my aim, along with the “unfairness factor.”

I’m not sure what you are trying to say here. Could you please clarify?

 

[johnnyjones]

I’m not sure what you are trying to say here. Could you please clarify?

See post 66

 

[Catholic80]

See post 66

If I am understanding you correctly, your point is that people who are sterile need to come to terms with that fact and stop trying to conceive or have sex??? Please correct me if I am wrong in my understanding of what you are trying to say, but that is what is coming across on my end.

In reply to that, there is a difference between being sterile and being impotent. A person who is impotent may not enter into marriage. They cannot be open to life because their procreative nature is compromised. Being infertile is NOT the same as being impotent. The couple’s procreative nature is still intact and ordered towards procreation.

An infertile couple is not preventing conception from occurring, and there are many cases where an infertile couple has conceived… so many, that they are even Biblical accounts, and I personally know at least 5 couples where at least one was deemed “infertile” and then conceived.
An impotent person has no ability to engage in the marital act whatsoever. They cannot be open to new life due to the unfortunate circumstance. Any sexual contact with another person would be outside the procreative order.

Contraception is very different than a couple being naturally sterile because by contracepting, the couple are deliberately trying to interfere with the procreative unionm wherease the sterile couple is still acting according to the natural reproductive process.

 

[thewanderer]

Basically an individual or a couple that can’t come to terms with having sex under a Catholic mindset because they are either sterile due to their own actions or nature.

This is your post 66

I take it, from this, that what you are trying to do is simply point out that there are some couples who find it difficult to view their sexuality as the Church views it because of their inability to conceive.

Am I correct in assuming that you are not trying to claim that there is something morally wrong with having sex when sterile, but simply trying to point out that this state sometimes brings with it a particular difficulty?

 

[johnnyjones]

This is your post 66

I take it, from this, that what you are trying to do is simply point out that there are some couples who find it difficult to view their sexuality as the Church views it because of their inability to conceive.

Am I correct in assuming that you are not trying to claim that there is something morally wrong with having sex when sterile, but simply trying to point out that this state sometimes brings with it a particular difficulty?

You are correct.

 

[underacloud]

Am I correct in assuming that you are not trying to claim that there is something morally wrong with having sex when sterile, but simply trying to point out that this state sometimes brings with it a particular difficulty?

That’s what I thought johnnyjones was trying to point out.

But then this…

Some are troubled or find little sense in having sex in an ordered way while trying to dissuade themselves of their impediment towards new life. It’s not that they “can’t do this” but that it is a feeling of opposition to church teaching. In all honesty I would find it more logical and consistent if the churches decree was that non fertile couples cease from sexual relations as hard as that would be to “enforce”. Under the current outlook, one sterile couple can have sex like rabbits and a fertile couple is forced into a more measured approach. So in the first case the sin because forgiven has created a free pass toward a pleasure focused only act.

So the suggestion is to stop all infertile couples from having sex; that it’s more logical and consistent…but there is no Catholic teaching on sexual ethics that is at all consistent with this approach.

We don’t have to intend to conceive each time we have sex. We don’t even need to be able to conceive each time we have sex. But we are not allowed to deliberately frustrate the act of the potential for conception (whether it’s a real possibility or not). God designed man and woman this way and infertile couples do nothing wrong in cooperating with nature in this regard. For some couples, this is a cross they bear, if infertility is undersirable for them. We all have our crosses.