or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Talk Amongst Ourselves › Spirituality › Catholic/Non-Catholic Vasectomy question
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Catholic/Non-Catholic Vasectomy question - Page 2

post #21 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMJ View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by JTA Mom View Post

Yes, this. I believe the Catholic church makes exceptions for this. I know that in medical conditions where one needs birth control pills (say, big fibroids, endometriosis) it is allowable to use them, since the primary use is medical, not because a couple didn't want children.

 

For all the other posters mentioning super strict NFP.....when does the health risk outweigh birth control being bad? I'm pretty sure that there is that option out there.

 

Also, complete abstinance, as another poster mentioned, sex is not just for procreation. So abstaining would technically be sinful in that case, since sex is important in a marriage outside of procreation.

 

Ami

 


This is not an accurate summary of Catholic teaching.  While the church does make allowances if the birth control itself would resolve a healthy problem, her husband's vasectomy will not cure the OP.  While the couple certainly has grave reason to avoid having more children and is certainly not acting in selfishness, just because they do not want children, the action of the vasectomy would be to prevent children rather than to treat a health problem I understand that many of you on this forum view this differently, but in the eyes of the Church, this is how it is.  Abstinence is the only Catholic response to the need to prevent pregnancy.  The extent of this abstinence (NFP, strict NFP, post-ovulation only + added days, or even total abstinence) is a decision for the couple as part of their call to responsible parenthood.  Complete abstinence would not be sinful in this case while a Catholic couple resorting to birth control would be considered sinful.  I admit that it is hard to understand, and many disagree with the official Catholic teaching that complete or almost complete abstinence would be allowable under the principle of double effect while birth control would not.  As the last poster pointed out, the fact that the OP's Protestant husband views this differently than the Catholic Church is what complicates this.


But it IS treating a health problem. If mother gets pregnant, she dies. The OP and her husband would love more children. But to do so will likely lead to death.

 

How is this any different from the case of removing the fallopian tube during an ectopic pregnancy? If a woman has 2 ectopics and loses both tubes, she is, in effect, sterilizing herself at the same time she is saving her life. Why would this be any different? If there is no form of sterilization, then both mother and baby die. Or would it be more acceptable for her to get a hysterectomy while pregnant, following the ectopic principle? Not being snarky, truly curious. To me, this is a grave condition, one that would be allow birth control.

 

Ami

post #22 of 38

Good questions, Ami!  However, so as not to detract from the original purpose of this thread, I would love to continue this discussion through PM.  Here, I will just say that the official teaching body of the church views it differently, even though many Catholics and almost all Protestants (such as the OP's husband) would agree with you.

post #23 of 38

i just want to clarify, there is no sin in remaining completely abstinent in marriage.  This is a very hard thing but sex is not necessary for a couple to remain close.  However when one is not relying on sex to carry a relationship it does take a lot of work to keep a strong connection.

 

my concern for the original poster is that her husband is not Catholic.  

 

Also someone mentioned it is fine to take birth control for medical reasons and this is true but the couple would be expected to forgo sex until the treatment was finished.

post #24 of 38

 


I had no idea what happened to you, annettemarie! How horrible, and I'm so sorry for that trial and the anguish you are going through now. greensad.gif

To be quite honest, if my DH was of another faith, I would not hesitate about the vasectomy, only because I would know that it would not be against his conscience and that he would be doing so out of love for me. He would not be bound by Catholic teaching.

Of course, I would also tell him what the Church believes regarding such things, and that I could not approve sterilization for myself, but if he chose that then that would be his decision.

No, you should not feel guilty for being relieved. Like a pp said, you are human.

How many Catholic women have themselves sterilized and later realize the sinfulness of that action, and then confess it? I don't think, however, with that forgiveness that they somehow are not ever relieved, though. It's a human reaction to what could be a scary situation.

I will pray for you.
post #25 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilyka View Post



Also someone mentioned it is fine to take birth control for medical reasons and this is true but the couple would be expected to forgo sex until the treatment was finished.




 

This is not the Church's teaching.

While it can be more prudent and self-sacrificing to practice NFP or abstinence while using hormonal birth control to treat a disorder, it is not required any more than it would be required for a chemotherapy patient to abstain from sex in order to not accidentally miscarry conceived children.
post #26 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by JTA Mom View Post




But it IS treating a health problem. If mother gets pregnant, she dies. The OP and her husband would love more children. But to do so will likely lead to death.

 

How is this any different from the case of removing the fallopian tube during an ectopic pregnancy? If a woman has 2 ectopics and loses both tubes, she is, in effect, sterilizing herself at the same time she is saving her life. Why would this be any different? If there is no form of sterilization, then both mother and baby die. Or would it be more acceptable for her to get a hysterectomy while pregnant, following the ectopic principle? Not being snarky, truly curious. To me, this is a grave condition, one that would be allow birth control.

 

Ami



 



The Church never permits artificial birth control or sterilization, since the INTENDED and DIRECT result is only to prevent pregnancy.

The Church does, however, permit use of hormonal birth control to treat OTHER problems even though the UNINTENDED and INDIRECT result might result in a miscarriage. In this way, it is no different than using other medications to treat a person's disease which also have the UNINTENDED and INDIRECT result of causing miscarriage.

The "ectopic principle" is allowed because the TUBE is now damaged, so it can be removed though its removal has the unintended and indirect result of causing loss of newly created life.

Please understand that my ALL CAPS aren't yelling at you, just highlighting the important info! smile.gif
post #27 of 38

I just want to clarify that I never said marital abstinence is a sin.

 

However, I do firmly believe that long-term abstinence in an otherwise happy and healthy marriage IS going to be harmful to the relationship.
 

Also, JMJ?
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by JMJ View Post

OP, I've been thinking and praying for you a lot recently.  It sounds like your husband will likely choose to have a vasectomy because that is what he believes is best.  If he chooses to, it may not be your sin at all, but as Catholics, we don't just teach that contraception is wrong because we want people to be obedient.  We believe that it has a negative impact on families that is there even if there is no sin.  I mourn for you to be in a situation that seems to have no good solution.  I wonder if there is anything that can be done to counteract the negative effects of contraception.  You are in my prayers.


I fail to see how any of this is supportive.  Granted, you're very good at stating the Church's official teachings, but otherwise ... not so much.  The facts are: AM clearly loves her non-Catholic husband, she cannot safely continue to bear children, they have to arrive at a mutually acceptable decision in order to come to terms with this very serious issue so that AM can continue to be a loving, nurturing caregiver for her family.
 

Perhaps we could remember that Jesus Christ sometimes "bent the rules" (Jewish LAW!) in the interest of practicality, and for the physical well-being of His followers.

And He took a lot of heat for it, too.

post #28 of 38


Miscarriage?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Anastasiya View Post





 

The Church never permits artificial birth control or sterilization, since the INTENDED and DIRECT result is only to prevent pregnancy. The Church does, however, permit use of hormonal birth control to treat OTHER problems even though the UNINTENDED and INDIRECT result might result in a miscarriage. In this way, it is no different than using other medications to treat a person's disease which also have the UNINTENDED and INDIRECT result of causing miscarriage.The "ectopic principle" is allowed because the TUBE is now damaged, so it can be removed though its removal has the unintended and indirect result of causing loss of newly created life. Please understand that my ALL CAPS aren't yelling at you, just highlighting the important info! smile.gif
post #29 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katala View Post


Miscarriage?





 

You're right. Indirect abortion.
post #30 of 38

I fail to see how any of this is supportive.  Granted, you're very good at stating the Church's official teachings, but otherwise ... not so much.  The facts are: AM clearly loves her non-Catholic husband, she cannot safely continue to bear children, they have to arrive at a mutually acceptable decision in order to come to terms with this very serious issue so that AM can continue to be a loving, nurturing caregiver for her family.
 

Perhaps we could remember that Jesus Christ sometimes "bent the rules" (Jewish LAW!) in the interest of practicality, and for the physical well-being of His followers.

And He took a lot of heat for it, too.


I fail to see bending the rules in loving and supportive.

 

Based on other convos with the PP, she holds to what Our Lord and His Church teaches.  Telling her to do something contrary to what she has, in the past, stated support for, is not supportive.

 

Christ gave us His Church and His Spirit to guide us on this Earth.  If His Church states that all forms of birth control and sterilization are sinful, except in extreme emergencies regarding medical treatment, then we are to hold to that and practice it, no matter how difficult it can be.  The road to Heaven is a narrow one.  Changing the Truth to attempt to widen to road does no good for anyone.

 

I guess I have other comments, but they would have to be presented in Religious Studies since Spirituality is not for debate.

post #31 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by PatienceAndLove View Post

I guess I have other comments, but they would have to be presented in Religious Studies since Spirituality is not for debate.


Be sure to link the thread. orngbiggrin.gif

post #32 of 38

OP, I would yield to your husband on this one without guilt.  All the best to you!

post #33 of 38

Peace to you, Trigger.  I will be supportive as best I know how based on my world view, and I trust that you will do the same.

post #34 of 38

AM - I was just reminded that a friend of mine asked me, about a year ago, about Church teaching and her tubal ligation. (She's battled cancer twice, and has a host of other health issues that make bearing another child a very serious risk to her life; plus two small children, one of whom has become extremely difficult due to some psychological issues.  All of this has put an enormous strain on her marriage, and on her own emotional & physical well-being.)  Part of my repsonse was

 

In any case, you obviously did what was best for you, for your physical and emotional health, and for your family.  And that is strictly between you and God, in my opinion.  I truly do not believe that God wants us to bear children at the expense of our physical/emotional health, and especially at the expense of our families' well-being.  "Being open to children" and "Having the physical and emotional capacity to bear children" are two very different things, in my opinion, which the Church needs to acknowledge.
 
post #35 of 38

Annette, I can't say what your priest might say, and I haven't read all the responses, but I just wanted to chime in that my very best friend's mother went through a similar situation after her 7th child. She was 40 or 41, and my friend was her 7th child..she nearly died. The doctor told her she should not have another child under any circumstances but she and her husband were very faithful Catholics. She went to the priest in tears and he told her that it was his belief and that of the church that she was released from any guilt or sin because her life was in danger. She actually had her tubes tied after that. My friend (her daughter) and I were recently discussing this because I told my friend I wanted as many children as the Lord would give me, and she told me that story.

 

That was 35 yrs ago..surely things haven't changed. I cannot imagine that putting your life in danger would be acceptable to the church!

 

I'm so sorry you are struggling with this, and I will be lifting you up in prayer.

 

 

 

post #36 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by annettemarie View Post

. This was just so outside my plan. My plan was to just accept babies if/when they came.

 

I think that sometimes our greatest growth comes from things outside our plan. I'm not catholic, but from a different tradition altogether. I'm wondering if there is a prayer or ritual that would help you come to accept that what is best for your children and marriage requires a sacrifice of your plan.

 

I deeply believe that our children come from god and that we have a sacred duty to them. I believe that nurturing our marriage is one of the best things we can do for our children.

 

All that requires you staying alive.

 

You've been though so much, and you are so very, very loved. May be this is God's way of letting you enough that you've done enough in this area. That you've completed what he wanted of you in this way. You've graduated from this lesson. You did accept babies when they came. You've been blessed with 6 living children, and the heartache of 3 that didn't make it. It sounds like that was God's Plan, and that you were willing. Now it sounds like God's Plan for you to let go and trust that he loves you, even though your body is completely done having babies. May be the peace for you can come from accepting that Your Plan and God's Plan weren't exactly the same.

 

Peace
 

post #37 of 38
Quote:
Originally Posted by Linda on the move View Post


May be the peace for you can come from accepting that Your Plan and God's Plan weren't exactly the same.

 

Peace
 


brilliant words.  something I need to be reminded of at regular intervals. 

post #38 of 38

prayers for you.

.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Spirituality
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Talk Amongst Ourselves › Spirituality › Catholic/Non-Catholic Vasectomy question