I came upon this from a Catholic Blog that I have been reading for years and it took me a bit by surprise because I always took the blogger to be an orthodox Catholic, completely in line with the magisterium.
What is a married Catholic or Orthodox woman of child-bearing years supposed to do when her oncologist tells her that her cancer treatment requires that she practice contraception?
Suggesting that she and her husband refrain from sex during the period does violence to the marital bond which is already strained by a diagnosis of cancer. The emotional support that the woman seeks in the arms of her husband is an important factor in her recovery. That emotional support naturally leads to sexual relations between a husband and his wife, particularly because death looms over both of them.
NFP is not an option because the same drugs that necessitate contraception also disrupt the menstrual cycle.
Are there any priests here who could address this topic?
A couple of things bothered me about this. First of all, the catechism is very clear about the use of artificial contraception. If you do an engine search at one of the catechism sites and type in “intrinsically evil” artificial birth control is the only item that comes up. Couple that with the amazing Theology of the Body from John Paul II’s beloved pontificate and I think the teaching of the Church is pretty clear.
Why then is this blogger asking for the opinion of a priest on this matter? I’m sure there would be plenty of dissident priests who would be happy to give the standard, “follow your conscience” cop out line. Is that what is asked for here? A cop out? absolution? one priest willing to stand up and take on the “error” of centuries of Catholic thought?
And what is the point of that exactly other than I guess to make this particular blogger feel justified in dissenting against the church’s teaching on the matter.
I suggested the Paul VI institute as a resource for a woman looking for cutting edge information on natural family planning.
As the conversation progressed the blogger and an anonymous commenter (my favorite, the “anonymous” commenter)while having absolutely no faith whatsoever in NFP being effective during chemotherapy, (without any stats, studies or articles to back that up) had complete and total confidence that nonabortive methods of birth control would be 100% sure proof in preventing pregnancy. The statistics don’t support that but I don’t think that’s the real issue. The real issue is that the church is only leaving one option and they just find that unthinkable.
The blogger ended with this:
Some cancers are triggered by hormones. Treatment would interrupt the hormones. How that would affect the menstrual cycle is unknown to me, but I would expect there would be serious disruption that would impact the use of NFP.
This is no time to become pregnant. Period. If I were in the childbearing years, I would use a non-abortifacient artificial method of birth control throughout treatment with chemo,
Interesting in that non-abortifacient artificial methods aren’t 100% sure proof. Period. So why place complete confidence in them over a natural church approved method.
and deal with the religious consequences after I had gotten through it.
In my experience, when someone is going through a crisis, they need to deal with the “religious consequences” DURING the event. At least in my experience I have needed to turn to God then, not after I had it all sorted and figured out.
If God can’t understand that, He is no loving God and unworthy of the sacrifices this religion demands.
Something my 7 year old would say. Not a very mature understanding of suffering, the faith, or God.
If John Paul I could acknowledge the merits of ABC and plan to change the Church’s position on this, I’d be foolish to do anything else.
This argument always makes me laugh. I don’t know what John Paul I had in mind. I only know he died suddenly less than a month after he became pope, and that his successor, John Paul II gave us the Theology of the Body. I think it’s interesting how it played out and wonder why the blogger doesn’t find it equally foolish to ignore that.
We are not talking about being selfish or materialistic here. Neither are we talking about rejecting children.
Right. We’re talking about how a Catholic woman in her childbearing years should handle a serious health issue where it is inadvisable to become pregnant. The exact requirements from the blogger were: “a married Catholic or Orthodox woman of child-bearing years.”
I submit that it depends on the “Catholic” woman. An orthodox, devout, practicing Catholic woman will have deep revulsion at the idea of using artificial birth control. She and her husband will want to honor their deeply held religious beliefs and consider this part of the cross laid before them. A Catholic woman who does not hold to such deeply held religious beliefs will line up her arguments, her rationalizations, and “let her conscience be her guide” a la the secular idea of conscience formation. And these days it will be much easier to find a priest or theologian that supports the latter than the former.
Technorati Favorites!” src=”http://static.technorati.com/pix/fave/tech-fav-1.gif”>
Please browse my eBay items!
Visit my new Amazon Store!
