Great piece Sarah with some important and thought-provoking points. I have certainly been in the NFP frustration camp and actually frequently talk with friends about the difficulties of this particular teaching. That being said, one of my best friends is Orthodox and I do get to see how this more nuanced approach ends up working out in practice -- which is that contraception becomes accepted/the norm, Sunday attendance at liturgy is essentially optional, confession a rarity (not saying this of her in particular, simply in the exposure I've had to Orthodox culture generally as its often practiced). When the absolutes slides people jump ship! It's understandable! If Sunday Mass wasn't an obligation but simply STRONGLY ENCOURAGED how many times would I have been tired, etc? (so many is the answer).
And I have as a convert experienced marriage etc without NFP and I can say that sex/babies etc is always fraught - you can't really avoid it. It's always some kind of issue, so I also think some cradle Catholics see this vision of timed pregnancies/contraception as some grass is greener alternative and it's truly not. Again, not to gloss over the difficulties of NFP in the least! And I know people who absolutely need hormonal BC for medical reasons and no Catholic doctor should suggest that is not a completely viable option for them. I've also had the experience of having a lovely Napro/No BC doctor who ultimately ended up very much disappointing me in essentially refusing to investigate any fertility/miscarriage issues beyond pen and pencil Creighton method and endless rounds of blood work... I had to go to a fertility clinic (yes one of those) for them to actually figure out what was going on (and no you can't just throw progesterone at every issue and Napro does not solve every fertility issue). So the golden glow around these things in Catholic circles has got be a bit more measured!
I also think Catholics don't talk enough about how the Church's teaching on 'open to life' does leave plenty of room for prudential discernment around bigger age gaps, smaller families, etc. Having children is generous and a good thing - (I like Jen Fulwiler's insistence that the only response to a pregnancy is CONGRATULATIONS!) - BUT it should be said that sometimes it is the absolute healthiest (for physical or mental reasons) to avoid pregnancy for a time or indefinitely and that the stress of continual abstaining can strain a marriage for sure. Though I will say I always think abstaining can be a little... exciting? If something is always on the table it sort of loses its allure, I guess? Anyway - these are some rambly thoughts but hopefully makes some sense. One of the #1 reasons I was drawn to Catholicism was because of the strictness and clarity of its sexual teachings - but that doesn't mean the actual lived experience of them is always easy or even fun. It's good for us all to talk about this a bit more!
Wow, thank you Katie for such a thoughtful response! I share your impression about Orthodoxy and "exceptions" becoming the norm. And in my experience it's often the CATHOLICS, not fellow Orthodox, who persuade Orthodox couples to stop contracepting (and, often, to just become Catholic ... but I digress!)
I mean yea if we haven't learnt about the disconnect between theory and practice in the context of Vatican 2.....it's bad enough that some of the things that we are hardline about get ignored anyway
This has been an eye-opening rabbit hole to fall down this morning. I watched Chris's video and have made it about 1/4 of the way through the first Substack post. As a person who has taught NFP, who has used NFP my entire adult life, through weird cycles, through infertility, I absolutely, positively adore my NaPro provider, who made my family of 4 kids possible after a dismissive though ostensibly pro-life secular doctor, who is now navigating NFP in perimenopause--as that person, I wrestle with my desire to defend NFP. I have been seeing the grays around the issue of birth control for some time, but had not ever seen it all laid out in this way. I think this is all difficult because the reality is that b.c. *is* thrown at everything as if it's a catch-all, and digging down to find and address the actual problem actually *is* more respectful of the dignity of the woman. That being said, making this rigid black and white is also a problem, and one I'm wrestling with personally for reasons that are not mine to share.
The only thing I will push back on in this post is the argument about women having to abstain during the time they're most interested in sex. That's totally true. But I think we tend to forget that if hormonal birth control is suppressing ovulation (as it's supposed to), that desire also goes away. So birth control does not solve that issue.
Not all forms of birth control involve women taking artificial hormones to suppress ovulation. Equating birth control to hormonal birth control skews the discussion.
I so appreciate your thinking and writing on this.
I once was in a marriage prep position with a couple who needed to avoid pregnancy for health reasons and financial reasons and were using birth control of some kind- I think just barrier?. The pastor handled it well- didn't prevent them from getting their marriage blessed, more according to how you describe the solution here. My husband and I were uncomfortable with how he allowed them to move forward but chalked it up to "its on him" if he made the wrong call. The longer I live and encounter the real life stories of families unfolding, the more mercy I feel is merited.
This comes up a lot in Catholic circles, but far less so outside of them.
Hormonal birth control, including hormonal IUDs, are most commonly used because of their high effectiveness. The highest effectiveness with the least side effects is the goal.
Ok, but your argument above was that equating birth control to hormonal birth control skews the discussion. It doesn’t REALLY skew the discussion, though, in the sense that it’s most likely the type of birth control most married couples will use.
That’s actually not true. There are couples who are not Catholic (some not religious at all) who choose NFP/FAM methods for family planning. There are secular methods that continue to pop up. There are also a significant number of people who are not Catholic themselves but are married to someone who is Catholic and choose to use NFP.
Well, your last statement is not exactly true. Many, many non-Catholics (and non-Christians) use FABMs now specifically to avoid using artificial hormones and barrier methods. I know many of them myself.
Also, I have experience with a lot of methods of artificial contraception as well as NFP, and while I find NFP very difficult, I strongly disagree that the tradeoffs are more steep. In fact we moved to NFP because of the many negative experiences we had with hormonal contraceptives and various barrier methods.
Actually, that's not true. There is an explosion of secular apps for tracking fertility. A lot of people are interested in avoiding unnecessary use of chemicals that go into the environment.
I listened to an interview the Everts did with Pints with Aquinas awhile back where they talked about how difficult practicing NFP was in their marriage, and the crosses they had to carry with it. They really suffered, and struggled for a long time.
These are the same people who LITERALLY wrote the NFP pamphlet we got in marriage prep that wrote in glowing terms how easy, fulfilling, and great NFP was. In their defense, I think they wrote that when they were first married, and the recent Pints interview was after twenty some odd years of marriage...but still.
It was really, really hard not to feel anger and a certain sense of schadenfreude listening to that interview. I think the most charitable takeaway from the whole thing is that newly married or engaged couples should not be the ones in charge of writing promotional materials or leading classes on this stuff.
A quick sidebar: One thing I wonder about re: the pastoral discernment question is that it requires the pastor to know each of his parishioners very well. It seems in some way to give the pastor more authority over the parishioner...and yet priests are so overworked that they really can't know everyone well enough to do this well. Also, developing that kind of knowledge of a person takes time, even years, and parishioners and priests both don't stay at the same parish necessarily...
I think of the harm done even when a person is just misunderstood in the confessional and given inappropriate advice. I would rather work between my own conscience and the Catechism than get permission for specific things from a pastor who did not know me and might read the situation quite wrongly. Some people really like to have a spiritual director, and others don't...I wouldn't want to feel that I *had* to have one to practice discernment.
I don't think I completely understand how it works in Eastern churches, but these are some reasons I prefer the Catholic approach, from what I know.
This was such a great piece. The older I get the more I truly believe the Catholic Church’s sexual ethics are the only thing that makes sense on all these issues, and the more I realize what a hard sell it is, and how much hard work the church needs to do in helping people in the day to day trenches of living such a high standard out. Particularly when we are surrounded by a culture shouting at us about how wrong the Catholic approach is, Catholics really really need the kind of accompaniment and support the Orthodox model seems to emphasize. Thanks for sharing!
Of course! I think if we stop talking about this teaching in terms of the Gospel and the call to conversion it will never make sense. We've wasted so much precious energy trying to convince people that it's easy, or the most pragmatic thing to do. It's a fool's errand.
Yes! We’ve been putting the cart before the horse so much in our preaching. The Catholic sexual ethic and other moral precepts will never make sense out of an abiding relationship with Christ, and the proclamation of the good news of salvation, and the now salvific nature of suffering as a result of Christs own suffering on the cross
"or at minimum, a full-blown crisis of dissent and dismissal of this important teaching,"
I think we are there already to be honest.
Going to be very personal here. I had fallen away from the faith - sounds very cliche but that's what happened - about 6-7 years ago. After the birth of my first child, my wife was diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis. We were told by her doctors if we wanted more kids to do it right away because the medicine she would need to be on would greatly increase the risk of miscarriage and other pregnancy complications.
So we got pregnant with our second child very quickly after the first. And that pregnancy was absolutely horrible. My wife lost her eye site (could not drive, was almost fired from work) she lost use of one leg almost entirely (was limping around extensively, no balance whatsoever). She was only 26 years old and it seemed she would be in a wheelchair by 30. She had our second child (I remember her crying because she didn't know if she would be able to see his face clearly) and her postpartum period was a shitshow as well with many complications.
She got on the MS meds she needed and immediately started to recover. Her eye site came back, thank God. Her balance and gait returned to normal. We saw hope that our kids would have a mother who could do all the things she wanted to care for her children. But the MS meds lead to high chance of miscarriage and other severe pregnancy issues. Her doctor told her she would need to avoid getting pregnant essentially for the rest of her life (and doc believed pregnancy is what caused such severe relapse in the first place, and said a third pregnancy might not be recoverable from).
So I made the decision to get a vasectomy. In my mind at the time, I knew if she got pregnant and then had a miscarriage she would have blamed herself for the loss of the child. I knew if she got pregnant again and had a relapse like before, she may never walk or see again. It wasn't the right decision to get a vasotomy. I *know* that now, but I did it because at the time it felt like the only option.
About 3 years ago my life I had an - again very cliche - come back to the church revelation. My life was not what I wanted. My relationships with my wife and children and family were not what I wanted. I knew it was the absence of Church and God that were leading to these issues, the loss of that rock to stand on and take the beatings of life.
So I went to confession and confessed it all. I was so scared that this could not be absolved. I went to a random church I had no connection with so the priest would not know who I was.
That 10 minutes in the confessional was so powerful it near brings me to tears thinking about it. The priest did not excuse my action of course, but he was compassionate. I walked out of the confessional more relieved than I had been in years. My wife - healthier than ever now - and two children are fully in the church. Thank God.
Very long story to say...I do think the Church's teaching on contraception is correct. But I think acknowledging that in certain circumstances - that by definition cannot be defined - some pastoral prudence is called for. I'd be encouraged to see the Church take a more pastoral approach, without changing doctrine. This does not excuse my action - it was a genuine confession I gave, I do regret what I did and wouldn't do it again - but is just one more story to add.
Praise be to God for your story. Thank you for your vulnerability in sharing here! As a newly married wife and mother, reading this renews my hope in the wisdom of Christ’s guidance given through the Church.
Such a great piece! I’ve been married 26 years and had a baby last year a couple months before our 25th anniversary. Openness to life has been a bumpy road and a cross at times.
I fail to see how using artificial contraception would fix what is one of the most grievous problems with NFP, though, which is the wife having to abstain from sex precisely when she is interested (perhaps the only time she’s interested). Artificial contraception, at least of the hormonal variety (because that’s what most people choose to avail themselves of), removes her cycle entirely from the table. Hormonal contraception puts a woman into an unending luteal phase. If a woman struggles with desire during her luteal phase, artificial contraception is just that all the time. (I know from personal experience—we didn’t observe the Church’s teaching on contraception in the first few years of our marriage.)
I guess I’m just thinking, what I really liked about your piece is how you emphasized that sex is serious and has eternal implications. As frustrating and difficult as it can be, I feel like real maturity comes when we stop thinking about maximizing pleasure and instead about maximizing love.
Another commenter pointed this out as well about hormonal BC. Vasectomies, condoms, and PO method would obviously be the most "beneficial" choice for women in this regard ... and I think we are seeing an uptick in vasectomies these days precisely because women are talking about their own sexual desire more. So, that's good, I guess?
For what it's worth, in my own Protestant land, I would like us to be a little more specific in terminology.
"Contraception" could mean anything from PO or using a condom around times of fertility (a glorified PO method) to..... all manner of invasive, medicalized versions that are doing degrading and harmful things to our proper functions. These medicalized ones *especially* create new and particular moral conundrums about honoring our bodies, their health and function, living within the limits of those, and what the ends of medicine even are.
Of course, in Catholicism these are all one and the same in terms of moral no's—but with fellow Protestants these are not always the same thing, if that makes sense.
Just an observation / my two cents, not trying to make a case for anything right here. haha
I guess. I know SOME married couples do use condoms but my anecdotal observation is most people view marriage as the opportunity to say goodbye to barrier methods forever. PO is statistically ineffective but I suppose might be the “best” option here. 😬
The primary benefit of Catholic teaching isn’t that NFP is a thing, but that the Catholic Church still welcomes large families from couples who feel called to have large families. The attitude of “if you want another kid, have one” is not present everywhere and something that I think that Catholics take for granted.
There is no health benefit to NFP that doesn’t apply to ordinary cycle tracking and the relationship effect is mixed at best. Not using hormonal contraception is not the same thing as not using contraception at all or following Catholic teaching on the matter.
Thank you so much for writing this. The naive optimism with which NFP is presented has caused a lot of cognitive dissonance and anxiety for my wife. This needs to be a much greater pastoral priority.
Thank you for sharing this Sarah! I grew up in a pretty secular pro-feminist home and went on the bc pill as kind of a rite of passage at 17 - almost all my friends took it because it was seen as normal, almost part of becoming an adult.
I ended up Catholic (RCIA at 19, but not fully practicing the teachings until 23) in large part due to my hatred of hormonal bc and the effects it can have on the body, including the suppression of normal hormonal cycling. I really appreciate this perspective as a reminder of what happens when one becomes an extremist on this issue. I also have always known and respect that bc is sometimes the only realistic help for certain medical conditions.
The ovarian wedge resection story is deeply upsetting. I will pray for that woman first, that a miracle may happen or that she may be able to pursue adoption if she wishes. Also, this is my inner lawyer talking, but if I were in her shoes I would be considering a lawsuit.
IME American doctors are way too quick to recommend surgery in general, but surgery on the ovaries is WELL known to be very risky (this is covered in the non-religious Taking Charge of Your Fertility book). I've read it should really only be done in cases of severe endometriosis when there are few other options for pain management, and even then it can affect fertility. It's so terrible that this happened.
FWIW I agree with you that the Catholic position is right here. I revere Orthodoxy so much that I literally devoted a Substack to an Orthodox Christian lol but I think the Catholics have the truth here. The problem is that too many Catholics do NOT understand this teaching, which we need to fix.
I wonder, and have observed in my own circles, a hesitation to take this more individualized approach due to what Katie was sharing. There’s a fear that folks would flock to the more permissive pastors and ignore the more conservative hard liners. And, honestly, I’m not sure what would happen, but I do think that it has the potential to have a net positive effect on the Church by creating stronger relationships between priests and laity as well as building authentic community as we actually have the conversations that it seems everyone wants to have but few have found the context in which to actually have them.
I also wonder what this looks like in our current parish models. Where I live, multiple churches in our diocese have closed or merged due to a shortage of priests and while there has been an increase in ordinations in the last few years, we’ve yet to see what that looks like. In these large parishes, it’s easier to get lost in the masses and go through the motions, especially when you consider the pace at which most people’s lives are moving. This level of discernment requires developing deep relationship and that takes a significant amount of time for both the priest and the individuals seeking guidance, which can be a significant barrier.
As I was reading, I was thinking about our current pastor who likes to tell the whole congregation that missing mass is a “mortal sin” every time he’s announcing mass times for a holy day of obligation. It’s these oversimplifications and straight up falsehoods that are a serious piece of the problem. Ultimately, the Catholics I see wrestling with teaching and asking questions aren’t looking for a loophole or permission to do whatever they want, they’re looking for exactly what you’re talking about: guidance, nuance, tangible support, and ultimately the development of their own consciences within the Church community.
Personally, I mostly discuss this issue with my husband, my close friends and my spiritual director and have found great comfort, encouragement and camaraderie there. My spiritual director is an 80 year old nun who finds the lack of real dialogue on this issue as infuriating as I do and that alone has been a comfort. It’s easy to underestimate the power of shared frustration and disappointment, but when there are no easy answers, having someone to share in the burden of the cross is a real gift.
Wow thank you for all this. I really appreciate the thought-out response. The practicals of how economia would practically look in Church life seem really difficult to me for exactly the reasons you've stated: pastors are already swamped and we already have a culture of self-selection in our parishes based on the vibe. Priests, and especially bishops, in my opinion, need to be released from their administrative responsibilities as much as possible. They often end up as acting bureaucrats rather than fathers. More to say but my computer is about to die! Lol
It is wild to me the interconnectedness of these issues. Now I’m also thinking about who takes over the admin and the self selecting nature of church employees in many parishes, the lack of paid parental leave (don’t get me started on this), abismal salaries and other policies that don’t support having young people with families employed within their churches and Catholic schools and then, and then and then… you know how it goes.
Sarah, thank you so much for writing this. I woke up to one of those Chris Damien posts in my inbox on Tuesday. Man, did it get under my skin! I love your emphasis on Christ’s redemption here. I feel like so many of the people commenting on his post were missing that. Your last paragraph in particular sums up what I’ve internalized about the Church’s teaching on contraception so potently. Truly this was a balm on my sore heart. God bless!
A great post, Sarah! As a Catholic who received an annulment, I also was fascinated the differences there between the Orthodox and Catholics when it came to remarriage. Why?! Just seemed unnecessary to me…
Great piece Sarah with some important and thought-provoking points. I have certainly been in the NFP frustration camp and actually frequently talk with friends about the difficulties of this particular teaching. That being said, one of my best friends is Orthodox and I do get to see how this more nuanced approach ends up working out in practice -- which is that contraception becomes accepted/the norm, Sunday attendance at liturgy is essentially optional, confession a rarity (not saying this of her in particular, simply in the exposure I've had to Orthodox culture generally as its often practiced). When the absolutes slides people jump ship! It's understandable! If Sunday Mass wasn't an obligation but simply STRONGLY ENCOURAGED how many times would I have been tired, etc? (so many is the answer).
And I have as a convert experienced marriage etc without NFP and I can say that sex/babies etc is always fraught - you can't really avoid it. It's always some kind of issue, so I also think some cradle Catholics see this vision of timed pregnancies/contraception as some grass is greener alternative and it's truly not. Again, not to gloss over the difficulties of NFP in the least! And I know people who absolutely need hormonal BC for medical reasons and no Catholic doctor should suggest that is not a completely viable option for them. I've also had the experience of having a lovely Napro/No BC doctor who ultimately ended up very much disappointing me in essentially refusing to investigate any fertility/miscarriage issues beyond pen and pencil Creighton method and endless rounds of blood work... I had to go to a fertility clinic (yes one of those) for them to actually figure out what was going on (and no you can't just throw progesterone at every issue and Napro does not solve every fertility issue). So the golden glow around these things in Catholic circles has got be a bit more measured!
I also think Catholics don't talk enough about how the Church's teaching on 'open to life' does leave plenty of room for prudential discernment around bigger age gaps, smaller families, etc. Having children is generous and a good thing - (I like Jen Fulwiler's insistence that the only response to a pregnancy is CONGRATULATIONS!) - BUT it should be said that sometimes it is the absolute healthiest (for physical or mental reasons) to avoid pregnancy for a time or indefinitely and that the stress of continual abstaining can strain a marriage for sure. Though I will say I always think abstaining can be a little... exciting? If something is always on the table it sort of loses its allure, I guess? Anyway - these are some rambly thoughts but hopefully makes some sense. One of the #1 reasons I was drawn to Catholicism was because of the strictness and clarity of its sexual teachings - but that doesn't mean the actual lived experience of them is always easy or even fun. It's good for us all to talk about this a bit more!
Wow, thank you Katie for such a thoughtful response! I share your impression about Orthodoxy and "exceptions" becoming the norm. And in my experience it's often the CATHOLICS, not fellow Orthodox, who persuade Orthodox couples to stop contracepting (and, often, to just become Catholic ... but I digress!)
I mean yea if we haven't learnt about the disconnect between theory and practice in the context of Vatican 2.....it's bad enough that some of the things that we are hardline about get ignored anyway
This has been an eye-opening rabbit hole to fall down this morning. I watched Chris's video and have made it about 1/4 of the way through the first Substack post. As a person who has taught NFP, who has used NFP my entire adult life, through weird cycles, through infertility, I absolutely, positively adore my NaPro provider, who made my family of 4 kids possible after a dismissive though ostensibly pro-life secular doctor, who is now navigating NFP in perimenopause--as that person, I wrestle with my desire to defend NFP. I have been seeing the grays around the issue of birth control for some time, but had not ever seen it all laid out in this way. I think this is all difficult because the reality is that b.c. *is* thrown at everything as if it's a catch-all, and digging down to find and address the actual problem actually *is* more respectful of the dignity of the woman. That being said, making this rigid black and white is also a problem, and one I'm wrestling with personally for reasons that are not mine to share.
The only thing I will push back on in this post is the argument about women having to abstain during the time they're most interested in sex. That's totally true. But I think we tend to forget that if hormonal birth control is suppressing ovulation (as it's supposed to), that desire also goes away. So birth control does not solve that issue.
That's a great point! I've never been on hormonal bc but I have heard anecdotally that this is true, and it certainly makes sense that it would be.
Not all forms of birth control involve women taking artificial hormones to suppress ovulation. Equating birth control to hormonal birth control skews the discussion.
They are still the most commonly used. Reversible, not messy, no interruptions to spontaneity.
I so appreciate your thinking and writing on this.
I once was in a marriage prep position with a couple who needed to avoid pregnancy for health reasons and financial reasons and were using birth control of some kind- I think just barrier?. The pastor handled it well- didn't prevent them from getting their marriage blessed, more according to how you describe the solution here. My husband and I were uncomfortable with how he allowed them to move forward but chalked it up to "its on him" if he made the wrong call. The longer I live and encounter the real life stories of families unfolding, the more mercy I feel is merited.
This comes up a lot in Catholic circles, but far less so outside of them.
Hormonal birth control, including hormonal IUDs, are most commonly used because of their high effectiveness. The highest effectiveness with the least side effects is the goal.
Ok, but your argument above was that equating birth control to hormonal birth control skews the discussion. It doesn’t REALLY skew the discussion, though, in the sense that it’s most likely the type of birth control most married couples will use.
No, other couples have multiple options if they want to avoid hormones. It's not as all-or-nothing as many Catholic sources imply.
Nobody chooses NFP who isn't Catholic because the tradeoffs of NFP are pretty steep compared to everything else.
That’s actually not true. There are couples who are not Catholic (some not religious at all) who choose NFP/FAM methods for family planning. There are secular methods that continue to pop up. There are also a significant number of people who are not Catholic themselves but are married to someone who is Catholic and choose to use NFP.
Well, your last statement is not exactly true. Many, many non-Catholics (and non-Christians) use FABMs now specifically to avoid using artificial hormones and barrier methods. I know many of them myself.
Also, I have experience with a lot of methods of artificial contraception as well as NFP, and while I find NFP very difficult, I strongly disagree that the tradeoffs are more steep. In fact we moved to NFP because of the many negative experiences we had with hormonal contraceptives and various barrier methods.
Actually, that's not true. There is an explosion of secular apps for tracking fertility. A lot of people are interested in avoiding unnecessary use of chemicals that go into the environment.
“Multiple options”
The only non-hormonal option I would consider reliable is the copper IUD. Or surgical sterilization.
I could have written almost this exact comment. ♥️
I listened to an interview the Everts did with Pints with Aquinas awhile back where they talked about how difficult practicing NFP was in their marriage, and the crosses they had to carry with it. They really suffered, and struggled for a long time.
These are the same people who LITERALLY wrote the NFP pamphlet we got in marriage prep that wrote in glowing terms how easy, fulfilling, and great NFP was. In their defense, I think they wrote that when they were first married, and the recent Pints interview was after twenty some odd years of marriage...but still.
It was really, really hard not to feel anger and a certain sense of schadenfreude listening to that interview. I think the most charitable takeaway from the whole thing is that newly married or engaged couples should not be the ones in charge of writing promotional materials or leading classes on this stuff.
Oh man. I had the same reaction.
A quick sidebar: One thing I wonder about re: the pastoral discernment question is that it requires the pastor to know each of his parishioners very well. It seems in some way to give the pastor more authority over the parishioner...and yet priests are so overworked that they really can't know everyone well enough to do this well. Also, developing that kind of knowledge of a person takes time, even years, and parishioners and priests both don't stay at the same parish necessarily...
I think of the harm done even when a person is just misunderstood in the confessional and given inappropriate advice. I would rather work between my own conscience and the Catechism than get permission for specific things from a pastor who did not know me and might read the situation quite wrongly. Some people really like to have a spiritual director, and others don't...I wouldn't want to feel that I *had* to have one to practice discernment.
I don't think I completely understand how it works in Eastern churches, but these are some reasons I prefer the Catholic approach, from what I know.
A great sidebar. I totally agree … in practice it seems both unrealistic and also somehow more rigid.
This was such a great piece. The older I get the more I truly believe the Catholic Church’s sexual ethics are the only thing that makes sense on all these issues, and the more I realize what a hard sell it is, and how much hard work the church needs to do in helping people in the day to day trenches of living such a high standard out. Particularly when we are surrounded by a culture shouting at us about how wrong the Catholic approach is, Catholics really really need the kind of accompaniment and support the Orthodox model seems to emphasize. Thanks for sharing!
Of course! I think if we stop talking about this teaching in terms of the Gospel and the call to conversion it will never make sense. We've wasted so much precious energy trying to convince people that it's easy, or the most pragmatic thing to do. It's a fool's errand.
Yes! We’ve been putting the cart before the horse so much in our preaching. The Catholic sexual ethic and other moral precepts will never make sense out of an abiding relationship with Christ, and the proclamation of the good news of salvation, and the now salvific nature of suffering as a result of Christs own suffering on the cross
"or at minimum, a full-blown crisis of dissent and dismissal of this important teaching,"
I think we are there already to be honest.
Going to be very personal here. I had fallen away from the faith - sounds very cliche but that's what happened - about 6-7 years ago. After the birth of my first child, my wife was diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis. We were told by her doctors if we wanted more kids to do it right away because the medicine she would need to be on would greatly increase the risk of miscarriage and other pregnancy complications.
So we got pregnant with our second child very quickly after the first. And that pregnancy was absolutely horrible. My wife lost her eye site (could not drive, was almost fired from work) she lost use of one leg almost entirely (was limping around extensively, no balance whatsoever). She was only 26 years old and it seemed she would be in a wheelchair by 30. She had our second child (I remember her crying because she didn't know if she would be able to see his face clearly) and her postpartum period was a shitshow as well with many complications.
She got on the MS meds she needed and immediately started to recover. Her eye site came back, thank God. Her balance and gait returned to normal. We saw hope that our kids would have a mother who could do all the things she wanted to care for her children. But the MS meds lead to high chance of miscarriage and other severe pregnancy issues. Her doctor told her she would need to avoid getting pregnant essentially for the rest of her life (and doc believed pregnancy is what caused such severe relapse in the first place, and said a third pregnancy might not be recoverable from).
So I made the decision to get a vasectomy. In my mind at the time, I knew if she got pregnant and then had a miscarriage she would have blamed herself for the loss of the child. I knew if she got pregnant again and had a relapse like before, she may never walk or see again. It wasn't the right decision to get a vasotomy. I *know* that now, but I did it because at the time it felt like the only option.
About 3 years ago my life I had an - again very cliche - come back to the church revelation. My life was not what I wanted. My relationships with my wife and children and family were not what I wanted. I knew it was the absence of Church and God that were leading to these issues, the loss of that rock to stand on and take the beatings of life.
So I went to confession and confessed it all. I was so scared that this could not be absolved. I went to a random church I had no connection with so the priest would not know who I was.
That 10 minutes in the confessional was so powerful it near brings me to tears thinking about it. The priest did not excuse my action of course, but he was compassionate. I walked out of the confessional more relieved than I had been in years. My wife - healthier than ever now - and two children are fully in the church. Thank God.
Very long story to say...I do think the Church's teaching on contraception is correct. But I think acknowledging that in certain circumstances - that by definition cannot be defined - some pastoral prudence is called for. I'd be encouraged to see the Church take a more pastoral approach, without changing doctrine. This does not excuse my action - it was a genuine confession I gave, I do regret what I did and wouldn't do it again - but is just one more story to add.
Praise be to God for your story. Thank you for your vulnerability in sharing here! As a newly married wife and mother, reading this renews my hope in the wisdom of Christ’s guidance given through the Church.
Thank you for the kind words, good luck to you!
Such a great piece! I’ve been married 26 years and had a baby last year a couple months before our 25th anniversary. Openness to life has been a bumpy road and a cross at times.
I fail to see how using artificial contraception would fix what is one of the most grievous problems with NFP, though, which is the wife having to abstain from sex precisely when she is interested (perhaps the only time she’s interested). Artificial contraception, at least of the hormonal variety (because that’s what most people choose to avail themselves of), removes her cycle entirely from the table. Hormonal contraception puts a woman into an unending luteal phase. If a woman struggles with desire during her luteal phase, artificial contraception is just that all the time. (I know from personal experience—we didn’t observe the Church’s teaching on contraception in the first few years of our marriage.)
I guess I’m just thinking, what I really liked about your piece is how you emphasized that sex is serious and has eternal implications. As frustrating and difficult as it can be, I feel like real maturity comes when we stop thinking about maximizing pleasure and instead about maximizing love.
Another commenter pointed this out as well about hormonal BC. Vasectomies, condoms, and PO method would obviously be the most "beneficial" choice for women in this regard ... and I think we are seeing an uptick in vasectomies these days precisely because women are talking about their own sexual desire more. So, that's good, I guess?
For what it's worth, in my own Protestant land, I would like us to be a little more specific in terminology.
"Contraception" could mean anything from PO or using a condom around times of fertility (a glorified PO method) to..... all manner of invasive, medicalized versions that are doing degrading and harmful things to our proper functions. These medicalized ones *especially* create new and particular moral conundrums about honoring our bodies, their health and function, living within the limits of those, and what the ends of medicine even are.
Of course, in Catholicism these are all one and the same in terms of moral no's—but with fellow Protestants these are not always the same thing, if that makes sense.
Just an observation / my two cents, not trying to make a case for anything right here. haha
I guess. I know SOME married couples do use condoms but my anecdotal observation is most people view marriage as the opportunity to say goodbye to barrier methods forever. PO is statistically ineffective but I suppose might be the “best” option here. 😬
Although it’s the only method of contraception specifically mentioned (and forbidden) in the Bible, ha!
The primary benefit of Catholic teaching isn’t that NFP is a thing, but that the Catholic Church still welcomes large families from couples who feel called to have large families. The attitude of “if you want another kid, have one” is not present everywhere and something that I think that Catholics take for granted.
There is no health benefit to NFP that doesn’t apply to ordinary cycle tracking and the relationship effect is mixed at best. Not using hormonal contraception is not the same thing as not using contraception at all or following Catholic teaching on the matter.
Good point!
Thank you so much for writing this. The naive optimism with which NFP is presented has caused a lot of cognitive dissonance and anxiety for my wife. This needs to be a much greater pastoral priority.
You are far from alone in that. I’m with you!
Thank you for sharing this Sarah! I grew up in a pretty secular pro-feminist home and went on the bc pill as kind of a rite of passage at 17 - almost all my friends took it because it was seen as normal, almost part of becoming an adult.
I ended up Catholic (RCIA at 19, but not fully practicing the teachings until 23) in large part due to my hatred of hormonal bc and the effects it can have on the body, including the suppression of normal hormonal cycling. I really appreciate this perspective as a reminder of what happens when one becomes an extremist on this issue. I also have always known and respect that bc is sometimes the only realistic help for certain medical conditions.
The ovarian wedge resection story is deeply upsetting. I will pray for that woman first, that a miracle may happen or that she may be able to pursue adoption if she wishes. Also, this is my inner lawyer talking, but if I were in her shoes I would be considering a lawsuit.
IME American doctors are way too quick to recommend surgery in general, but surgery on the ovaries is WELL known to be very risky (this is covered in the non-religious Taking Charge of Your Fertility book). I've read it should really only be done in cases of severe endometriosis when there are few other options for pain management, and even then it can affect fertility. It's so terrible that this happened.
FWIW I agree with you that the Catholic position is right here. I revere Orthodoxy so much that I literally devoted a Substack to an Orthodox Christian lol but I think the Catholics have the truth here. The problem is that too many Catholics do NOT understand this teaching, which we need to fix.
I wonder, and have observed in my own circles, a hesitation to take this more individualized approach due to what Katie was sharing. There’s a fear that folks would flock to the more permissive pastors and ignore the more conservative hard liners. And, honestly, I’m not sure what would happen, but I do think that it has the potential to have a net positive effect on the Church by creating stronger relationships between priests and laity as well as building authentic community as we actually have the conversations that it seems everyone wants to have but few have found the context in which to actually have them.
I also wonder what this looks like in our current parish models. Where I live, multiple churches in our diocese have closed or merged due to a shortage of priests and while there has been an increase in ordinations in the last few years, we’ve yet to see what that looks like. In these large parishes, it’s easier to get lost in the masses and go through the motions, especially when you consider the pace at which most people’s lives are moving. This level of discernment requires developing deep relationship and that takes a significant amount of time for both the priest and the individuals seeking guidance, which can be a significant barrier.
As I was reading, I was thinking about our current pastor who likes to tell the whole congregation that missing mass is a “mortal sin” every time he’s announcing mass times for a holy day of obligation. It’s these oversimplifications and straight up falsehoods that are a serious piece of the problem. Ultimately, the Catholics I see wrestling with teaching and asking questions aren’t looking for a loophole or permission to do whatever they want, they’re looking for exactly what you’re talking about: guidance, nuance, tangible support, and ultimately the development of their own consciences within the Church community.
Personally, I mostly discuss this issue with my husband, my close friends and my spiritual director and have found great comfort, encouragement and camaraderie there. My spiritual director is an 80 year old nun who finds the lack of real dialogue on this issue as infuriating as I do and that alone has been a comfort. It’s easy to underestimate the power of shared frustration and disappointment, but when there are no easy answers, having someone to share in the burden of the cross is a real gift.
Wow thank you for all this. I really appreciate the thought-out response. The practicals of how economia would practically look in Church life seem really difficult to me for exactly the reasons you've stated: pastors are already swamped and we already have a culture of self-selection in our parishes based on the vibe. Priests, and especially bishops, in my opinion, need to be released from their administrative responsibilities as much as possible. They often end up as acting bureaucrats rather than fathers. More to say but my computer is about to die! Lol
It is wild to me the interconnectedness of these issues. Now I’m also thinking about who takes over the admin and the self selecting nature of church employees in many parishes, the lack of paid parental leave (don’t get me started on this), abismal salaries and other policies that don’t support having young people with families employed within their churches and Catholic schools and then, and then and then… you know how it goes.
This was a great article. Incredibly insightful. I need to find a way to use it in Marriage Prep.
Thanks Douglas! Appreciate you reading.
Sarah, thank you so much for writing this. I woke up to one of those Chris Damien posts in my inbox on Tuesday. Man, did it get under my skin! I love your emphasis on Christ’s redemption here. I feel like so many of the people commenting on his post were missing that. Your last paragraph in particular sums up what I’ve internalized about the Church’s teaching on contraception so potently. Truly this was a balm on my sore heart. God bless!
Yeah, those posts are always a doozy. Can't forget that for every woman who has had a bad experience, lots have had good ones, too. Thank you!
A great post, Sarah! As a Catholic who received an annulment, I also was fascinated the differences there between the Orthodox and Catholics when it came to remarriage. Why?! Just seemed unnecessary to me…
Thank you for writing this Sarah! A lot to ponder.
This piece is really excellent. Thank you for making it available to all to read.
Of course! Thank you for reading!