Sterilization followed by confession?

[smichhertz]

The Church doesn’t require an attempt to “reverse” the procedure. The intent to contracept is the sin, and deliberate damage done to to the genitals is also the sin.

Surgery to correct the damage is not without inherent risk of further, possibly permanent damage. The Church does not mandate one voluntarily risk death or injury to escape sin. Contrition and absolution is enough.

Yes, I understand that. Nothing I stated contradicted that.

There’s a big difference between one who gets sterilized ignorant of Church teaching, and then later repents and one who deliberately and defiantly calculates a way to become sterilized by seeking loopholes in Church teaching. I’m not saying that forgiveness is impossible in the OP situation, only that it is called into question.

 

[LaSainte]

The Church is only infallible concerning matters of revealed Truth (or matters that are necessary for our understanding of a revealed Truth) that concern faith and morals. I have yet to see a convincing argument that the total ban on contraception is in any way a matter of revealed Truth.

 

[smichhertz]

The Church is only infallible concerning matters of revealed Truth (or matters that are necessary for our understanding of a revealed Truth) that concern faith and morals. I have yet to see a convincing argument that the total ban on contraception is in any way a matter of revealed Truth.

The Church is infallible in matters of faith and morals. It became an infallible teaching when Humane Vitae was issued.

vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html

 

[cviolette]

The problem is, then they’re probably not sorry. To be honest, the only way to show that they are truly sorry is to at least attempt to get it reversed.

I’m usually pretty liberal on what will count as sorry for confession, but if it is deliberately planned like that, I have trouble believing such a person’s confession would be valid. In other words, all future confessions of such a person would be invalid as they would be in a defiant state of sin. The only way to get out of it would be to make some external act of true repentance and purpose of amendment (such as attempting to have it reversed).

You can have true repentance and be forgiven without reversal. I was not following the church teaches for most of my life. I had a tubal after my 4th child. I went back to my faith and did a general confession. I discussed the tubal ligation with the priest. I felt like I needed to reverse it. The priest said that I could be forgiven without a reversal. The decision for a reversal needed to be between me, my husband and doctor. My husband said no and I could not go against his wishes. I doubt my doctor would have approved it either because I had 4 c-sections.

 

[Little_One0307]

Yeah, here’s where the problem is. Unfortunately, this person will probably die in a state of mortal sin, not because contraception is a mortal sin, but because they would be denied absolution of any other mortal sins they committed for the rest of their lives. Nice.

Truth can be hard like this. Yet, however remember they are choosing to die in a state of mortal sin.

God bless.

 

[Little_One0307]

But the Church has erred. Didn’t the pope in 1999 ask forgiveness for it’s treatment of Jews, the Inquisition, and human right abuses. If it knows what is right and wrong why did the Church act in such an abusive way??

Not in the sense that we Catholics mean that the Church does not err. When we say this, we mean that the Church is kept from doctrinal error, however her members can err and sin, and this is made manifest many countless times in history. However She, Mother Church is kept doctrinally sound and pure. There is no error in Her Teaching.

God bless.

 

[smichhertz]

You can have true repentance and be forgiven without reversal. I was not following the church teaches for most of my life. I had a tubal after my 4th child. I went back to my faith and did a general confession. I discussed the tubal ligation with the priest. I felt like I needed to reverse it. The priest said that I could be forgiven without a reversal. The decision for a reversal needed to be between me, my husband and doctor. My husband said no and I could not go against his wishes. I doubt my doctor would have approved it either because I had 4 c-sections.

Hi cviolette!

Understand that your situation is different from the OP. runningdude raised this same issue and I addressed it, please see my post below:

Yes, I understand that. Nothing I stated contradicted that.

There’s a big difference between one who gets sterilized ignorant of Church teaching, and then later repents and one who deliberately and defiantly calculates a way to become sterilized by seeking loopholes in Church teaching. I’m not saying that forgiveness is impossible in the OP situation, only that it is called into question.

 

[Corki]

Yeah, here’s where the problem is. Unfortunately, this person will probably die in a state of mortal sin, not because contraception is a mortal sin, but because they would be denied absolution of any other mortal sins they committed for the rest of their lives. Nice.

If the person lived his/her whole life without repenting then, yes, he/she would die out of a state of grace. It is because of all of the sins committed, contraception, pride, impenitance. Contrition isn’t about a feeling. It is an intellectual understanding of the error of one’s own actions and a spiritual sorrow for having offended God.

 

[cviolette]

Hi cviolette!

Understand that your situation is different from the OP. runningdude raised this same issue and I addressed it, please see my post below:

I hadn’t read the whole thread That makes more sense. Mine wasn’t ignorance. I did know it was wrong and didn’t care but I wasn’t following any of my faith and never planned on confessing it.

I do think that I am paying for the sin more than benefiting from it. My marriage was damaged and I am longing for another child.

 

[Little_One0307]

The Church is only infallible concerning matters of revealed Truth (or matters that are necessary for our understanding of a revealed Truth) that concern faith and morals. I have yet to see a convincing argument that the total ban on contraception is in any way a matter of revealed Truth.

From the catechism of the Catholic Church - Emphasis Mine

#2366

Fecundity is a gift, an end of marriage, for conjugal love naturally tends to be fruitful. A child does not come from outside as something added on to the mutual love of the spouses, but springs from the very heart of that mutual giving, as its fruit and fulfillment. **So the Church, which “is on the side of life” 151 teaches that “it is necessary that each and every marriage act must remain ordered per se to the procreation of human life.” 152 **“This particular doctrine, expounded on numerous occasions by the Magisterium, is based on the inseparable connection, established by God, which man on his own initiative may not break, between the unitive significance and the procreative significance which are both inherent to the marriage act.” 153

151 FC 30
152 HV 11
153 HV 12, Pius XI, encyclical, Casti connubii

There’s pleny to see in Humane Vitae.

This is a Church Teaching and one that the Church has taught from its earliest inception. There are two choices, either you stand with the Church and What she Teaches and Holds for us to practice and do, or you do not stand with Her and you do what you want to do.

The reason the Church is forbidding contraception is becuase it is not conducive to The Sacrament of Matrimony and God after all he did say to be fruitful and multiply. [No birth control here.] Contraception is a Moral subject. NFP actually accomplishes all that birth control would accomplish with respect to the spouses and the openess of the couple to children, which are gifts from God.

One can argue all day and night whether it is right or wrong, but I by the grace of God stand with the Church and the Magisterium of the Church, where do you want to stand?

God bless.

 

[KostyaJMJ]

If the person lived his/her whole life without repenting then, yes, he/she would die out of a state of grace. It is because of all of the sins committed, contraception, pride, impenitance. Contrition isn’t about a feeling. It is an intellectual understanding of the error of one’s own actions and a spiritual sorrow for having offended God.

That doesn’t sound all that difficult. If it contrition isn’t a feeling, then it shouldn’t be any problem to be sterilized and then decide to have contrition afterwards.

And it is hardly any problem to admit - not necessarily feel - you were wrong and the Church is right as long as you get to stay sterilized.

 

[KostyaJMJ]

Yeah, here’s where the problem is. Unfortunately, this person will probably die in a state of mortal sin, not because contraception is a mortal sin, but because they would be denied absolution of any other mortal sins they committed for the rest of their lives. Nice.

I think that a person in those circumstances should decide to abstain from sex for the rest of his life or at least until the sterilization is reversed. I believe that is the best solution even if it isn’t absolutely a requirement.

The problem isn’t that you can’t be forgiven; the problem is that you are still benefiting from your sin. You couldn’t go out and set up a system that stole a million dollars every year and then simply go to confession and keep your ill gotten gains and the system in place. If you can you have to return the money and repair things.

 

[LaSainte]

The Church is infallible in matters of faith and morals. It became an infallible teaching when Humane Vitae was issued.

vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html

That is not true. It has to have several criteria to be infallibly taught.

1.) it must be a matter of faith and morals

2.) It must be a Revealed Truth contained in the Word of God, or it must be “intimately and strictly connected” with Revealed Truth

BOTH of these are necessary for the Church to even be ABLE to infallibly teach something.

Lastly, “Nothing is considered to be infallibly defined unless his has been clearly established” (1983 code of canon law).

Since there is no consensus among theologians, bishops and priests that this has been infallibly defined, then obviously it has not been “clearly established”…

 

[cviolette]

I think that a person in those circumstances should decide to abstain from sex for the rest of his life or at least until the sterilization is reversed. I believe that is the best solution even if it isn’t absolutely a requirement.

The problem isn’t that you can’t be forgiven; the problem is that you are still benefiting from your sin. You couldn’t go out and set up a system that stole a million dollars every year and then simply go to confession and keep your ill gotten gains and the system in place. If you can you have to return the money and repair things.

I was concerned when I went to confession that the two choices would be abstinence or reversal.

It would not be healthy for a marriage to stop having sex. And you would not be trusting in God’s forgiveness.

 

[Corki]

That doesn’t sound all that difficult. If it contrition isn’t a feeling, then it shouldn’t be any problem to be sterilized and then decide to have contrition afterwards.

And it is hardly any problem to admit - not necessarily feel - you were wrong and the Church is right as long as you get to stay sterilized.

Of course you can’t just give “lip service” to your admission. You have to believe you were wrong. You can’t really “decide to have contrition”. You either have it or you don’t. Either you admit, to yourself, to God and to the priest in Confession, that you were wrong and that you want to reform your life, or you don’t.

 

[smichhertz]

That is not true. It has to have several criteria to be infallibly taught.

1.) it must be a matter of faith and morals

2.) It must be a Revealed Truth contained in the Word of God, or it must be “intimately and strictly connected” with Revealed Truth

BOTH of these are necessary for the Church to even be ABLE to infallibly teach something.

Lastly, “Nothing is considered to be infallibly defined unless his has been clearly established” (1983 code of canon law).

Since there is no consensus among theologians, bishops and priests that this has been infallibly defined, then obviously it has not been “clearly established”…

LaSainte,

If you don’t mind me asking, why did you start this thread? To discuss a hypothetical situation, or are you yourself considering sterilization?

Often, I find those who disagree with the Church’s teaching on ABC do so because there are deeper reasons driving them. Perhaps if you would be willing to share some of your personal story, we could help you understand the Holy Spirit’s message better. If you are not comfortable sharing publicly, you are also free to PM me.

 

[Corki]

That is not true. It has to have several criteria to be infallibly taught.

1.) it must be a matter of faith and morals

Yes, the teaching on contraception is a matter of morals.

2.) It must be a Revealed Truth contained in the Word of God, or it must be “intimately and strictly connected” with Revealed Truth

The teaching of the Church on contraception is intimatey and strictly connected with revealed truth. Specifically, it is connected with the revealed truth about the Sacrament
of Marriage.

BOTH of these are necessary for the Church to even be ABLE to infallibly teach something.

covered.

Lastly, “Nothing is considered to be infallibly defined unless his has been clearly established” (1983 code of canon law).

Since there is no consensus among theologians, bishops and priests that this has been infallibly defined, then obviously it has not been "clearly established

Clearly established doesn’t mean that you will get 100% agreement by taking a poll of the current bishops. It has nothing to do with consensus. The teaching of the Church on contraceptives has been clearly estabished over the centuries. It is clearly an infallible teaching.

(BTW, the opinions of lay theologians or even priests aren’t relevant in a discussion of infallibility. It is the teaching of the ordinary magisterium - the Pope and the Bishops.)

 

[Little_One0307]

That is not true. It has to have several criteria to be infallibly taught.

1.) it must be a matter of faith and morals

2.) It must be a Revealed Truth contained in the Word of God, or it must be “intimately and strictly connected” with Revealed Truth

BOTH of these are necessary for the Church to even be ABLE to infallibly teach something.

Lastly, “Nothing is considered to be infallibly defined unless his has been clearly established” (1983 code of canon law).

Since there is no consensus among theologians, bishops and priests that this has been infallibly defined, then obviously it has not been “clearly established”…

Actually it has been “clearly established”, see post #30.

Since when is being open to God providing children in a SACRAMENT, namely the Sacrament of Marriage not related or if not a moral issue? And there is much in the “Word of God” to support the forbidding of contraception. And another thing one MUST also take into consideration Sacred Traditions and The Magisterium of the Catholic Church of which Humane Vitae certainly falls under.

God bless.

 

[KostyaJMJ]

Of course you can’t just give “lip service” to your admission. You have to believe you were wrong. You can’t really “decide to have contrition”. You either have it or you don’t. Either you admit, to yourself, to God and to the priest in Confession, that you were wrong and that you want to reform your life, or you don’t.

Not lip service but rather an act of the will. You decide you believe what the Church teaches.

Admitting you want to reform your life is easy when it doesn’t require any hard sacrifice from you. You got sterilized so that you can engage in sex without the consequences. After you confess you still are able to engage in sex without the consequences. Mission accomplished, and you don’t have to worry about going to hell. Hard decision, right? I think that more is required to get to actual attrition. Perhaps abstaining for 2 weeks a month or more. And really abstaining isn’t the problem, for most it is the fear of pregnancy, so maybe having the procedure reversed is the best route.

 

[cviolette]

Not lip service but rather an act of the will. You decide you believe what the Church teaches.

Admitting you want to reform your life is easy when it doesn’t require any hard sacrifice from you. You got sterilized so that you can engage in sex without the consequences. After you confess you still are able to engage in sex without the consequences. Mission accomplished, and you don’t have to worry about going to hell. Hard decision, right? I think that more is required to get to actual attrition. Perhaps abstaining for 2 weeks a month or more. And really abstaining isn’t the problem, for most it is the fear of pregnancy, so maybe having the procedure reversed is the best route.

God knows what is in your heart. He knows if it is lip service or you truly repent.