Catholic MNetters: do you use artificial contraception?

[Elasticwoman]

There is an item on Woman's Hour at the moment where 2 women are debating whether artificial contraception should be used by practising Catholics, in the light of the papal encyclical Humanae Vitae of 1968.

For me, this is one, but not the only reason I left the Catholic church. I believe that artificial contraception is right, and that to discourage people from using it is wrong. Natural contraception, imo, is a choice only suitable for a minority of couples, and even then should be their choice, not a moral imperative.

How does any one reconcile the use of artificial contraception with belonging to the Catholic church?

I don't honestly think I can convert at my age EW but in a way I wish I had been brought up with it so I can turn a blind eye to the stuff with which I don't connect. Coming to it as a grown woman I can't be hypocritical enough to convert.

It means I'll always feel a bit rejected and alienated when it comes to taking communion though.

spidermama - converts can still reject the dogma they disagree with, or at least debate it! Why should those baptized (at an early age, I mean) have all the rights!

Actually, I think that converts tend to have a better understanding of tenets than those brought up in it.

If converting would mean being a hypocrite, then of course no reason to convert. It just sounds as though you believe that every sperm is sacred. Perhaps you just have trouble with the Pope declaring himself Infallible in 1871?

There was an implicit challenge there, can anyone 'defend the indefensible'... well here goes an attempt to say why artificial contraception might be wrong. I'm no theologian so feel free to shoot me down.

Marriage represents the love between Christ and His Church, ie God's love for you and me. We were created male and female in His image, instructed to become one flesh and encouraged to be fruitful and multiply. That's why the core of marriage is sexual union, and possible conception is a participation in the miracle of creation.

So the love expressed in a marriage must be full, free, fruitful and faithful. And deliberately putting hormonal or latex barriers between the couple disrupts this more than having sex only at infertile times.

Now, very few people have perfectly full, free, fruitful and faithful marriages, let alone those of us who are living with a partner outside of marriage. So it's no wonder that most Catholics are having trouble living up to the ideal of a perfect sex life. We fail (some people call it sin) in all the other areas of our life as well. Surely that's why we need God's help!

elasticwoman, the Catholic Church faced up to the Fascist threat to the Jews long before any of the Allies did. www.catholicculture.org/library/view.cfm?recnum=1438

Yes, the Catholic Church do claim to have stood up to the fascist threat, but do independent historians agree?

I follow your argument until: "deliberately putting hormonal or latex barriers between the couple disrupts this more than only having sex at infertile times" Why? What makes the chemical or physical barrier worse than avoiding the fertile time?

Personally I think it's much more immoral to be careless about conceiving more children than you can look after.

My idea of sin is something you do or don't do which causes you to feel shame or guilt afterwards, because it causes harm. A great deal of harm is done by denying people the option to use modern forms of contraception, especially in the 3rd world.

Dh and I have been married 15 years and had to do one of those pre-marriage courses.
The course was led by 3 couples, the priest came in only on the last day.
Those couples explained all the different contraceptive methods available, the pill, condoms, diaphragm etc. We were given a diaphragm ( unused, I hasten to add!) to pass around. I felt there was a huge disconnect between Humanae Vitae and the stance taken by the marriage course.
I don't often go to Mass but one of the few times I went last year the priest, a young guy, did seem relatively "with it". He talked amongst other things about "The end of a marriage" which would have been unheard of at Mass when I was growing up. There is a vast difference between a Priest and a Pope.

I have never used artificial contraception with the exception of one relationship at university. I have however only ever had sex in a relationship since that time when I have been happy to have children. I think I must be rather infertile as I only have one child. I have in the past used s persona machine and I am careful what time of the month I have sex. I do fail the catholic teaching however as I am divorced and am now having sex with a man outside of marriage (well not right now obviously).

What I am trying to get at, Twinset, is why people think it important to avoid artificial contraception. And you have raised the question in mind - why do they think avoiding contraception is more important than confining sexual activity to marriage?

Because, EW, artificial contraception is reliable. Natural contraception is not and I have ds1 and ds2 to prove it! The Catholic Church has a very large membership and they want it to stay that way!

I also think that sex should ideally be confined to marriage If dp and I could get married we would do. I tried hard not to have a sexual relationship but I am only human. I did wait until I knew he was a life partner. I very strongly believe only God can take or give life and it is not my place to interfere. However when teaching in a catholic school I have always taught about contraception.

Couldn't you marry dp in a civil ceremony, Twinset? Or would that defeat the object for you?

There would be little point in terms of trying to keep to my faith as the church does not recognise civil ceremonies.

Hi Elasticwoman

A lot of 'independent' historians are pretty anti-catholic. Vatican historians are obviously not independent either. Just trying to show that there seems to be evidence against collusion, even though many lay Catholics failed the Jews.

Speaking personally, for most of my life I thought natural methods were more or less equivalent to artificial ones. Till I tried them. I do find infertile times less disruptive than latex and / or hormones. And I've tried almost all 'modern' methods except IUD.

I agree with you needing to make sure we can look after any children we bring into the world. But the 'method' failure rate of (for example) the ovulation method is as low as most medical methods. The 'user' failure rate of most contraceptives is dire.

To me, the Church not stating its position would be 'denying people the choice to use modern methods' because it would imply that those methods are the only choice. Poverty, poor education and unfair gender relations are the main barriers to choice in family planning.

I am a lapsed Catholic but ironically being averse to contraception is one thing I have retained! (bit surprising I know). I just found that learning about natural family planning (or the fertility awareness method, as it's known for non-Catholics) was incredibly eye-opening: fascinating and oddly empowering, and felt much nicer, more dignified and natural to me than other methods, so I've largely stuck with that. (We use condoms or w/drawal in fertile times - but then tbh I guess my whole attitude is fairly 'Catholic' in some sense, in that I wouldn't really feel comfortable being in a sexual relationship if a baby would be a real disaster.) I really don't think it's a moral issue though.

If you're using condoms at fertile times you're not really using natural contraception, are you? It's like saying you're vegetarian except for when you have a bacon sandwich.

I use artificial contraception and always have done. Never discuss it with priests, etc, as I

surprised at the catholics here bothering to engage with the truculent anti-catholic tone of this "debate".

so am i bossy kate. seems like elasticwoman just wants to know so she can call them a hypocrite.

lucky catholicism is more about forgiveness than contraception choice

I am a Catholic and use artificial contraception and don't feel in any way guilty about it. It's a teaching based on an absolute notion of possible conception that just cannot be reconciled with the modern world.

I don't feel hypocritical and I don't see why I should "leave" a church because of one small aspect of its teaching. I believe that the Church, when it's good, can be very very good (solidarity in developing world, opposition to death penalty, rejection of materialism etc) and when it's bad, it's horrid (covering up child abuse etc) But just because there are bits of it I don't like/ accept, doesn't mean I reject it all. It's made up of humans who are frail and have faults and this awareness, in itself, is a good thing: it means we should always strive to lead morally better lives eg work in areas where we can improve the lives of others rather than greedily make money for ourselves.

And of course elderly celibate men who have the time to debate ad infintum these things will come up with absolute rules but these will change over time: the Church thinks in centuries, not years.