I was taught that anything that prevents the creation of life is a no no. As well the passage in the bible that comes to mind is that it is a mortal sin to look at another person and lust after them. I assume thats where the “no masterbation allowed” teaching has come from. My Christian Ethics teacher certainly didn’t promote masterbation nor did the sex ed teacher in my catholic school. I think it’s easy to deduce the “every sperm is sacred” arguement from this.
I think it’s less “every sperm is sacred” and more that the sex act takes place only between a married and man and woman. Even there, it’s not just for procreation but for the fun of it too. After all, there are only a few fertile days each month; the idea is not to have sex only then, but not to impede potential conception then.
That makes sense, changes my theory on things.
The last I heard of this on the news;one of the Pope’s spokesman said it was just allowed in a marriage if one partener had Aids,and that was because it’s purpose was to prevent illiness not pregnancy.
Not many Catholics I know pay attention to the church’s ruling on birth control.
Monavis
Well, according to the article, “sexual abstinence” is the current preferred method for the church, to avoid AIDS spreading and contagion.
I would say they’re right. The best way to avoid getting AIDS would be by not having sex. But since odds are people won’t stop having sex altogether, it’s nice to see that at least they’re studying accepting the use of condoms.
But I don’t know, seeing all this, has gotten me confused. I think I remember, back when I was in school, when we were seeing Sex Ed, that my teacher said that the church only condoned the use of any birth control method that would result in the death of the unborn baby, such as the intrauterine devices or the “next day pill.” she said it was because the conception took place and then the birth control device was the one who prevented the development of the embryo, effectively “killing” an unborn child… guess my teacher was either wrong, or blatantly lied to us…
Here are two passages from the Catechism:
<< 2399 The regulation of births represents one of the aspects of responsible fatherhood and motherhood. Legitimate intentions on the part of the spouses do not justify recourse to morally unacceptable means (for example, direct sterilization or contraception).
2370 Periodic continence, that is, the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality. These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom. In contrast, “every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible” is intrinsically evil:
Thus the innate language that expresses the total reciprocal self-giving of husband and wife is overlaid, through contraception, by an objectively contradictory language, namely, that of not giving oneself totally to the other. This leads not only to a positive refusal to be open to life but also to a falsification of the inner truth of conjugal love, which is called upon to give itself in personal totality. . . . The difference, both anthropological and moral, between contraception and recourse to the rhythm of the cycle . . . involves in the final analysis two irreconcilable concepts of the human person and of human sexuality. >>
So:
–Sex takes place only in the context of marriage between a man and a woman (so the abstinence you mention would take place within the marriage)
–Natural family planning is acceptable since it does not involve barrier methods or abortifacients.
–Use of abortion, barrier methods, sterilization, IUD, morning-after Pill, and the Pill itself since it is an artifical means and prevents implantation of a fertilized egg, not OK
[Did you mean to say “condone” in the last paragraph?]
Nope, it was sort of a typo. I meant to say that The Church were against the use of any birth control device that would prevent the development of the embryo. For some reason I typed “condone” instead.
Chalk it up to my subconscious?
Condom, condone… 
Thanks, gigi, I was just going to say what you said, but less eloquently, because I wouldn’t have answered directly from the Catechism.
Couples who do use NFP are supposed to prayerfully consider each month whether or not they have sound moral reason for avoiding conception.