Use of Contraception

  • Thread starter Thread starter SPKey
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

SPKey

Guest
What is the position of the Catholic Church on the use of contraception between a couple planning marriage, where one is bringing in an STD?

I would think that for the protection of the uninfected partner, it would be acceptable.

Simon
 
Contraception is never allowed under any circumstance because the sexual act must always be open to the possibility of life. The sexual act must also occur within marriage. Just because two people love each other, does not mean that they can morally have sex with each other. For a couple planning marriage, one of the worst decisions they could possibly make is to have pre-marital sex (couple’s who cohabit prior to marriage actually have a 75% divorce rate).

With regards to STD prevention, condoms do not guarantee this. They are known to break and the pores in the latex can be large enough for viruses such as HIV to pass through. Furthermore, given the frequency of sexual relations between a husband and a wife, the statistical likelihood of transmitting an STD if one of the partners were infected would become significant over the course of a few years even if a condom were used.
 
Still not allowed.
I’ve wondered the same thing before, but now I better understand the teaching. First of all, condoms actually make STDs more rampant, the idea that handing out condoms will stop the HIV/AIDS epidemic is absolute bs(You can even look at the statistics, countries where condoms are employed STDs have gotten worse, in countries where abstinence is favoured STD rates have shrank.)
First of all condoms don’t protect against all STDs, some viruses are small enough to penetrate the pores in latex condoms. Also condoms break. So if a spouse wanted to protect their loved one from catching their disease, they shouldn’t be having sex at all(and if they have the STD before marriage I don’t think the marriage would be valid because they can’t consummate their marriage)
It also still violates the unitive and procreative aspect of Church teaching. So not only would you be committing a grave sin, but gravely endangering your spouse with a false sense of security.
 
To the OP: I really think this question would be better answered by an apologist.

TeenageConvert: Your facts are incomplete.
TeenageConvert said:
Still not allowed.
I’ve wondered the same thing before, but now I better understand the teaching. First of all, condoms actually make STDs more rampant, the idea that handing out condoms will stop the HIV/AIDS epidemic is absolute bs(You can even look at the statistics, countries where condoms are employed STDs have gotten worse, in countries where abstinence is favoured STD rates have shrank.) Well, the problem was, condoms were available, but not being employed.
First of all condoms don’t protect against all STDs, some viruses are small enough to penetrate the pores in latex condoms. Only one particular type of condom- lambskin. Also condoms break. Absolutely true!So if a spouse wanted to protect their loved one from catching their disease, they shouldn’t be having sex at all(and if they have the STD before marriage I don’t think the marriage would be valid because they can’t consummate their marriage)
It also still violates the unitive and procreative aspect of Church teaching. So not only would you be committing a grave sin, but gravely endangering your spouse with a false sense of security.
Click to expand...
 
Contraception is intrinsically evil. They may not be used for any reason, even the one you propose.

A person with an STD that can endanger a future spouse or children may be called to remain single.

The couple should go talk to their pastor.
 
1ke said:
Contraception is intrinsically evil. They may not be used for any reason, even the one you propose.

A person with an STD that can endanger a future spouse or children may be called to remain single.

The couple should go talk to their pastor.
Click to expand...
A hard thing, but honest and sincere. Do talk to the pastor on this matter. And remember that in Christ we are called to give a lot…it was never meant to be easy…and He was the first one to know it.
 
Due to medical reasons, my intended is unable to bear children. God has already made His will for her known where that subject is concerned. The use of a condom would be for her protection.

To suggest that someone remain single seems extreme to me. That two people shouldn’t be able to fall in love and devote their lives to God and each other because of this circumstance is ridiculous. Both parties entering willfully into the marriage, fully aware of the condition is enough.

It is difficult for me to believe that God would condemn either of us under these circumstances.
 
SPkey i’m sorry for your condition but it is still not allowed. If a person truly loves another and I mean real sacrificial love that is necessary for marriage he or she would not ever under any circumstances put their beloved at risk for any harm. As another poster mentioned condoms break and malfunction all the time so using it would not be a guarantee.

Marriage is not a right and there are plenty of people that are called to be celibate due to many reasons
 
SPKey said:
Due to medical reasons, my intended is unable to bear children. God has already made His will for her known where that subject is concerned. The use of a condom would be for her protection.

To suggest that someone remain single seems extreme to me. That two people shouldn’t be able to fall in love and devote their lives to God and each other because of this circumstance is ridiculous. Both parties entering willfully into the marriage, fully aware of the condition is enough.

It is difficult for me to believe that God would condemn either of us under these circumstances.
Click to expand...
Well, an answer is given to your question, which was: “what does the Catholic Church teach”.
The question now is, do you value what the Church teaches?
It my be difficult for you to believe and practice, but it is what it is.

My prayers for you, this is a difficult cross to bear. I have been lax in these areas for most of my life, but I don’t begrudge the Church it’s right and proper wisdom, no matter how hard it is to believe or practice. I do my best. The more I accept the Church’s wisdom and authority, the more support I receive from God to practice the faith.
 
SPKey said:
Due to medical reasons, my intended is unable to bear children. God has already made His will for her known where that subject is concerned. The use of a condom would be for her protection.

To suggest that someone remain single seems extreme to me. That two people shouldn’t be able to fall in love and devote their lives to God and each other because of this circumstance is ridiculous. Both parties entering willfully into the marriage, fully aware of the condition is enough.

It is difficult for me to believe that God would condemn either of us under these circumstances.
Click to expand...
No, if through no fault of her own, your intended being unable to bear children is not the issue.

Whatever the STD is, just look up any condom. None can offer 100% protection. For example, a friend of mine took up with a young lady who gave him genital herpes, and they later parted ways. Later, his wife to be understood and they managed.

Definitely take this up with a priest.

Best,
Ed
 
I don’t see how God is condemning anyone.

If a person with an STD marries, intending to have sex using a condom, isn’t he/ she really saying, “I love you enough to protect you some, but I don’t love you enough to protect you 100%.”?

Condoms are not full proof. If my husband put sex and his pleasure before my health, I would not be happy. Is that true, self sacrificing love?
 
KCT said:
Condoms are not full proof. If my husband put sex and his pleasure before my health, I would not be happy. Is that true, self sacrificing love?
Click to expand...
And if your husband put sex and his pleasure before God’s law, risking his soul and yours, is that true self sacrificing love?

It’s more self sacrificing to realize that if one has an STD one must deal with it morally for the sake of God’s kingdom. It’s a bit too easy to brush it saying “we will use contraception for the sake of love”. Sounds like the husband who says “I will hit you because I love you and want the best for you”.
 
Sounds like the husband who says “I will hit you because I love you and want the best for you”.

That is ridiculous. I’m talking love and you’re talking domestic violence.

It seems convenient to some participating here that they should hang on to the term “contraception” but ignore the term “protection”.
 
Marriage is not a right and there are plenty of people that are called to be celibate due to many reasons

When I used the term “Marital Right”, I didn’t mean that it was my right to be married.
 
Please seek counsel from your pastor.

Yes, it is difficult when our past actions have consequences that impact our future. Whether or not you contracted as STD through your own fault (such as through promiscuity) or through no fault of your own (such as prior marriage or sexual assault), the consequences do remain and will have to be dealt with. Sometimes, there is no easy answer. Sometimes the cross we are asked to bear is quite heavy. But all things are possible through Christ.

Talk to both your pastor AND your doctor.
 
This is just a suggestion:

If you were to pierce a hole in the condom prior to use, you would then be protecting your partner and not impeding God’s will at the same time.

Just an idea.
 
I think this must be a hypothetical question. I’m a medical professional so let’s go over the reality of protecting your wife from your STD

HIV :w meds you can achieve zero viral load and therefore eliminate virus in your bodily fluids. This requires diligent medical treatment but quite common now a days

Hep C :not really an std but a disease transmitted by blood blood exchange. Blood can be exchanged during marital act but it is more likely to be exchanged in sodomous acts or in acts where one partner has open sores on their genitalia. Most married people who discover one has hep c do not have to change sexual practices it’s more important they don’t share razors

Hpv or warts : condoms do not protect

Herpes : condoms do very little to protect as sores are often on surrounding skin and these sores is where the virus s shed from

Syphilis TREATABLE

Chlamydia, gonorrhea: TREATABLE

I might be missing something but I really cannot imagine any std a man can enter into marriage with except maybe HIV that would warrant long term condom use.

And you mentioned your fiancé is infertile. If her uterus is surgically absent and you are HIV + than I can’t imagine this would be considered “contraception”
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top