[Mrs. Don-o]

"how is the case of "Belgian nuns in the Congo" being in danger of rape different from any other girl or woman anywhere else in the world who lives in danger of being raped to a greater or lesser degree every day of her life?"

It's not different.

"Are you saying that "danger of rape" is always a legitimate exception from the prohibition against contraception?"

If there's an effective protection for the woman which does not need cooperation from the rapist (!) (i.e. the condom is not an option) and does not involve abortifacients (most hormonal "contraceptives" can sometimes function as abortifacients) --- then yes, any woman at real risk of rape could use a protective device. For instance a diaphragm and spermicide.

The immediate priority, of course, would be to get women out of a rape danger zone. The salient feature in the Congo case, was that that the nuns were operating medical mission stations and did not want to leave their patients.

[ebb tide]

You are setting a very bad example for young Catholic women, in my opinion. I would advise these women to ignore you. It is not sound Catholic advice.

[Dajjal]

The immediate priority, of course, would be to get women out of a rape danger zone.

That can mean "anywhere where there are men."

For instance a diaphragm and spermicide.

Can you cite me a Church document giving this permission to use diaphragms and spermicides?