Abortion and Contraception: Old Lies

Catholic Exchange ^ | July 10, 2007 | Pete Vere

[wideawake]

So a RCC married couple could live their entire married lives using the natural method of birth control with great success and NEVER have a child.

No.

Couples who are capable of having children have a moral obligation to have children.

NFP is intended to provide a respite if necessary in a larger context of having children.

For example, my friend who was advised by her doctor after a couple of miscarriages to take an 18-24 month break between pregnancies in order to reduce the chance of further miscarriages.

That is an appropriate context.

[adiaireton8]

True. But as I understand it, those with known [antecedent and perpetual] impotence or sterility cannot enter into marriage. That is an impediment to a valid marriage.

-A8

[Running On Empty]

Correct. There are frequently cases where, for a serious medical reason, a woman who already has children to care for, may need to avoid another pregnancy for a limited period of time.

That is one value of knowing NFP. On the the other hand, NFP can be helpful when couples want to achieve a pregnancy.

[sitetest]

Dear adiareton8,

Impotence is an impediment to valid marriage, as it makes impossible consummation of the marriage.

However, I don’t believe that infertility is an impediment.

sitetest

[sitetest]

Dear adiaireton8,

Here's a cite from Canon Law:

Can. 1084 §1. Antecedent and perpetual impotence to have intercourse, whether on the part of the man or the woman, whether absolute or relative, nullifies marriage by its very nature.

§2. If the impediment of impotence is doubtful, whether by a doubt about the law or a doubt about a fact, a marriage must not be impeded nor, while the doubt remains, declared null.

§3. Sterility neither prohibits nor nullifies marriage, without prejudice to the prescript of can. 1098.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P3Y.HTM

sitetest

[adiaireton8]

Thanks. Let's clarify. Is it not true that actions such as castration, removal of the ovaries, and hysterectomy, render a person sterile, and also are impediments to marriage, even if the male retains the ability to have an erection. Is that not correct?

Natural sterility is not treated the same as the three actions above. Right?

-A8

[sitetest]

Dear adiareton8,

Someone who is sterilized with just cause, it is my understanding, is free to marry if he or she isn’t impotent. A woman who has a hysterectomy because she has uterine cancer, or her ovaries removed because of cancer, is, to my understanding, still free to marry.

I have actually known Catholic women who have validly married who have had these surgeries for legitimate medical reasons.

Similarly, if a man were to receive medical treatment that incidentally rendered him infertile, but not impotent, it is my understanding that he could still marry.

I don’t know what would happen to someone made sterile for the purposes of avoiding procreation, i.e., a man who voluntarily received a vasectomy strictly to avoid procreation.

The canons don’t seem to suggest any differentiation between natural sterility and sterility imposed by human action.

sitetest

[adiaireton8]

Interesting. Thanks again. I thought cases of castration/hysterectomy were treated like impotence. I guess I was wrong. The Church has a very high view of divine omnipotence. :-) Apparently, as long as the capacity for the conjugal act is there, a couple can be genuinely open to procreation. That says something about what the Church thinks about divine involvement in procreation.

-A8

[Tax-chick]

Interesting. I think I’ll request the books he mentions in his article. We might even have them in our library, since the author is a local university professor!

[huldah1776]

Thank you for this information, since no numbers are given anywhere about the history of abortion. I need to know if abortion was practiced in pre-war Germany and Europe, and now I know what to look for in my research. I could never understand the holocaust, but if abortion was being overlooked and practiced, then a Bible study I have done will be confirmed in my mind, and a great fear of the LORD fills my heart.

[huldah1776]

“Holy Scripture may never use the words abortion and contraception; however, the Bible is not silent on the issue.” God definitely lets us know that He hates child sacrifice.

[redgolum]

Dr. Brian Koop, a former FReeper, used to be the main advocate for the Christian view of contraception. He made me think of it for the first time (before I was married, it wasn’t an issue).

What is interesting is that many pastors are starting quietly change their view on chemical contraception, so the tide is starting to turn.

[redgolum]

Abortion was practiced in a limited way in pre WWII Europe. It was mainly used as a method of eugenics, much like it got it’s start here.

[redgolum]

Abortion was practiced in a limited way in pre WWII Europe. It was mainly used as a method of eugenics, much like it got it’s start here.

[redgolum]

Dang double post!

[Tax-chick]

Dang double post!

Happens to us all.