What is the Catholic husband to do?

[pprimeau1976]

Here is a “hypothetical” situation I have come across:

The husband is a Catholic who agrees with everything the Church teaches. The wife is a “cafeteria Catholic” who has opinions about birth control that are contrary to what the Church teaches.

The wife insists that when they are intimite during her fertile cycles, he uses contraception. What are the moral implications, if the wife initiates intimacy and the husband compromises his beliefs in order to keep “peace in the home.” My simple logic is that if Adam was banished from the Garden for not saying no to Eve, then the act of not saying no to his wife is therefore a mortal sin.

My recommendations would also be for the husband to wait for his wife’s infertile periods to be intimate and to pray.

What say you?

 

[1ke]

This Vatican document discusses the situation when one spouse contracepts.

The man in your situation knows contraception to be wrong. He cannot contracept. To do so is to sin mortally.

 

[pprimeau1976]

Thanks for the document, it was very informative.

1. Special difficulties are presented by cases of cooperation in the sin of a spouse who voluntarily renders the unitive act infecund. In the first place, it is necessary to distinguish cooperation in the proper sense, from violence or unjust imposition on the part of one of the spouses, which the other spouse in fact cannot resist.46, 561).] This cooperation can be licit when the three following conditions are jointly met:
   1. 
      *]when the action of the cooperating spouse is not already illicit in itself;47
      *]when proportionally grave reasons exist for cooperating in the sin of the other spouse;
      *]when one is seeking to help the other spouse to desist from such conduct (patiently, with prayer, charity and dialogue; although not necessarily in that moment, nor on every single occasion).

1. 
   So according to this, the man is violating condition even though his wife is encouraging him to use “protection.” What would be an example of condition two be? And thankfully, condition three is applicable in this scenario. I know the man has tried to talk with his wife and reason with her, and even pray with her…she feels awkward about praying with him.
   
   Suppose the man sticks to his moral convictions and the wife is then forced to use artificial birth control, should he refrain from initiating any conjugal activity? Wouldn’t he in a sense be cheapening himself?

 

[setter]

Suppose the man sticks to his moral convictions and the wife is then forced to use artificial birth control, should he refrain from initiating any conjugal activity? Wouldn’t he in a sense be cheapening himself?

It would be morally permissible for the husband to engage in marital relations because he is not the one introducing contraceptive intercourse. It is also within the husband’s moral prerogative to refrain from sexual intercourse with his contracepting wife. It is a cheapening and violation of the marital act by introducing the lie of contraception into the love language of body.

 

[1ke]

Proportionately grave reasons would be, for example, a threat to the marriage itself-- ie, have sex with the contracepting spouse or she is going to seek divorce, have an affair, etc.

Maintaining the unitive element is a proportionately grave reason when to withhold the affection would result in a complete breakdown of the marriage.

IMHO.

 

[larry85704]

I think the issue here is that can your spouse demand that you do something that is, in your opinion, sinful.

As a general rule, I’d say no to any activity I thought was sinful. Additionally, this is grounds for divorce. So now you are confronted with a dilema, what mortal sin do you wish to commit? Think about it, if you spouse will come between you and God in one way, where does it end?

Actually, getting a divorce and an annulment is not sinful.

But, life is never easy. If you are happily married and your spouse is good in most respects getting a divorce would be really stupid. Do you think you will find a better spouse? Are you prepared to remain single and celibate for the rest of your life?

Maybe you should be thankful that your spouse is not cheating, or drinking or spending all your money. Maybe loving her means accepting her and being happy about her in all ways. Isn’t that what God does for us?

 

[Della]

If I were this man I’d want to find out what his wife is so afraid of that she is willing to coerce him into doing something he regards as sinful. For it is most probably fear that is driving this woman’s behavior not just an obstinate refusal to live according to the teachings of the Church. I also think they ought to talk to their priest about the situation, as well as a good Catholic marriage counselor.

 

[1ke]

Additionally, this is grounds for divorce.

Can you please provide the authoritative church document that specifies this is grounds for divorce? You won’t find one because it is not grounds for divorce.

So now you are confronted with a dilema, what mortal sin do you wish to commit? Think about it, if you spouse will come between you and God in one way, where does it end?

Clearly you did not read the link I posted.

Actually, getting a divorce and an annulment is not sinful.

On the contrary, divorce is a grave offense against the sixth commandment. I suggest you re-read paragaraphs 2382 - 2386 of the Catechism.

Maybe loving her means accepting her and being happy about her in all ways. Isn’t that what God does for us?

No actually.

One would not be called to accept her objectively wrong and grave acts. One would be called to fraternal correction in that case.

 

[setter]

Proportionately grave reasons would be, for example, a threat to the marriage itself-- ie, have sex with the contracepting spouse or she is going to seek divorce, have an affair, etc.

Maintaining the unitive element is a proportionately grave reason when to withhold the affection would result in a complete breakdown of the marriage.

IMHO.

But the non-contracepting spouse is not compelled to partake in contraceptive intercouse for the sake of marital stability.

 

[gardenswithkids]

If I were this man I’d want to find out what his wife is so afraid of that she is willing to coerce him into doing something he regards as sinful. For it is most probably fear that is driving this woman’s behavior not just an obstinate refusal to live according to the teachings of the Church…

It seems to me that this woman is afraid of pregnancy. She may be frightened by possible health problems or by the resulting children. Either way, contraception does not always prevent preganancy, and the male condom has a high rate of unwanted pregnancy. Yet some place trust in latex anyway.

If the wife insists on contraception, the husband may wish to abstain from relations. If prolonged abstainance put the marriage at risk, then the Vademeccum quote sighted earlier may apply. (But if she choose a contraception that worked through abortificatients, that complicates the matters–that’s listed elsewhere in the document.)

Also, the husband’s role in marrige is to help his wife get to heaven–so pray and fast for her! Try to identify *why *the wife is afraid of pregancy and look for ways to resolve that. Does she have health concerns that might be addressed by a good Catholic OB/gyn? Is she overwhelmed by their present child/children? Are they struggling financially? Whatever it is, the husband should try to help ease his wife’s fear. He won’t help her address her real fears simply by wearing a thin piece of latex. Pray, pray, pray as if her salvation depended on your prayers–because it might!

 

[1ke]

But the non-contracepting spouse is not compelled to partake in contraceptive intercouse for the sake of marital stability.

No, they are not *compelled *to… they are *permitted *to.

 

[pprimeau1976]

OK, great discussion here. The Lord’s yoke is easy, but the instruction manual for the yoke is almost impossible to read. Thank God for the Church!

So, if the man is fearful of what would happen if he refused his wife - i.e. it may split up his family, has tried to discuss the issue with her and convince her why it is wrong, and still used artificial contraception when she initiated relations. Is the man’s decision a mortal sin or a venial sin, given the circumstances?

 

[setter]

OK, great discussion here. The Lord’s yoke is easy, but the instruction manual for the yoke is almost impossible to read. Thank God for the Church!

So, if the man is fearful of what would happen if he refused his wife - i.e. it may split up his family, has tried to discuss the issue with her and convince her why it is wrong, and still used artificial contraception when she initiated relations. Is the man’s decision a mortal sin or a venial sin, given the circumstances?

Try this AAA post link: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=124621&highlight=contraception+spouse

 

[gardenswithkids]

OK, great discussion here. The Lord’s yoke is easy, but the instruction manual for the yoke is almost impossible to read. Thank God for the Church!

So, if the man is fearful of what would happen if he refused his wife - i.e. it may split up his family, has tried to discuss the issue with her and convince her why it is wrong, and still used artificial contraception when she initiated relations. Is the man’s decision a mortal sin or a venial sin, given the circumstances?

Yes, thank God for the Church. Objectively speaking, contraception is a mortal sin. Such circumstances as you describe complicate the matter, and I’d advice him to find a good, solid Catholic priest–one who would support the Church teachings and help advice him in this situation. (Such a priest may be difficult to find, but worth seeking even if it takes a few tries.)

Also, a person in such a situation must know himself! Someone might convince himself that he only uses contraception “because of his spouse”, when a tiny part of him also wants to contracept. They might both play that game–“I’m not contracepting–he’s the one with the condom/I’m only doing it because she insists.” Honestly though, if the wife is so set upon contraception, why would she insist that it be a condom? Condoms are hardly the most effective form of contraception!

Even if the only reason why they contracept is because of his wife, then even if he’s not in mortal sin, she likely is. Marriage makes them “two become one” (even if latex gets in the way) and they are linked to each other in their marriage. If his spouse is in a state of mortal sin, that greatly concerns him, and he should do whatever he can (pray/fast/novena/have Masses said etc.) to save her from sin. Follow Christ’s example of His love for His bride, the Church.

 

[setter]

OK, great discussion here. The Lord’s yoke is easy, but the instruction manual for the yoke is almost impossible to read. Thank God for the Church!

So, if the man is fearful of what would happen if he refused his wife - i.e. it may split up his family, has tried to discuss the issue with her and convince her why it is wrong, and still used artificial contraception when she initiated relations. Is the man’s decision a mortal sin or a venial sin, given the circumstances?

Try this AAA post link: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=124621&highlight=contraception+spouse

 

[otjm]

It would be morally permissible for the husband to engage in marital relations because he is not the one introducing contraceptive intercourse. It is also within the husband’s moral prerogative to refrain from sexual intercourse with his contracepting wife. It is a cheapening and violation of the marital act by introducing the lie of contraception into the love language of body.

And carrying that to an extreme is a short invitation to a divorce, with no guarantee that the marriage could be declared null by a tribunal.

 

[1ke]

Is the man’s decision a mortal sin or a venial sin, given the circumstances?

The man is not sinning in the case described.

 

[setter]

And carrying that to an extreme is a short invitation to a divorce, with no guarantee that the marriage could be declared null by a tribunal.

What if the loss of personal integrity of the non-contracepting spouse is at stake? What if the non-contracepting feels a gross violation and repulsion to be a party to contraceptive intercourse, while making every attempt to incorporate marital intimacy during infertile times using NFP?

 

[otjm]

What if the loss of personal integrity of the non-contracepting spouse is at stake? What if the non-contracepting feels a gross violation and repulsion to be a party to contraceptive intercourse, while making every attempt to incorporate marital intimacy during infertile times using NFP?

Given that the OP did not posit a case such as you are describing, it is outside the post and subject to speculation.

Given the OP’s post, if there is a perceived loss of personal integrity, then one might spend more time dwelling on the issue of personal integrity, as they would be basing their personal integrity on something not required by the Church.

As in, being more Catholic than the Pope. Generally, not reccomended.

 

[gardenswithkids]

The man is not sinning in the case described.

Maybe I misunderstood, but I thought the op described that the man is the one wearing the contraception. (the op wrote things like: "his wife is encouraging him to use “protection” “he uses contraception”.) If the man is wearing a condom (or other male contraception/sterilization), I think the man participates in the sin.

If they are using a female method of contraception, then the man needs to take some care that the method is not an abortificatient method, (ie artificial hormones or IUD that may destroy very young humans.) That sin there is slightly different from contraception. From the Vademeccum:

1. Furthermore, it is necessary to carefully evaluate the question of cooperation in evil when recourse is made to means which can have an abortifacient effect.48