Praise be to God! After 25 months of prayer, my dear husband (not yet a believer) has agreed to allow me to have a tubal reversal...in order to be obedient to the teachings of the Catholic Church and have our marriage (of almost 19 years!) be open to life! I would love your prayers for a successful surgery, it is scheduled for October 20, 2003! I am 40, he is 42, we have three awesome boys ages 15, 12, and 9...I am not holding my breath for a baby, that is totally up to God, but am so excited about having this glorious opportunity to repair the damage I did and let His will be done in our marriage. I believe this will be an amazing grace to our family and marriage, and be a big factor leading to my husband's conversion someday. Thank you, Jesus, Mary & Joseph! Cindy Brown

-- Cindy Brown (cindybrown@gorge.net), September 04, 2003

Answers

Wonderful news! We'll be sure to remember you in our family Rosary on the day of the prodedure. You are to be commended for going "above and beyond" and having the reversal done. Don't let the recovery time go to waste. Your discomfort offered willingly has incredible value before the throne of God.

I'd be interested in knowing how you arrived at the decision to have the reversal, and what transpired to bring you to this point. I think it would be of great value to anyone out there who is considering surgical sterilization, or having the procedure reversed.

-- jake (jake1REMOVE@pngusa.net), September 04, 2003.

Mrs Brown

I will rember you guys in my prayers.

Are you the same Mrs. Brown that Jake H. topped a thread complimenting you and offering his prayers well over a year ago?

If so, I hope Jake reads your thread, because I'm sure his prayers are very powerful.

God bless you Cindy Brown

-- David (David@excite.com), September 04, 2003.

Oh my! The wonders Our Lord works. A day later and I would have missed this thread!

Yes indeed, this is the same Mrs. Brown! And I humbly thank you David for your words. Cindy, you will be in my prayers!

The heavens are singing the Glory of the Lord manifest through your patience and perseverance!

The Lord has GREAT plans for you Cindy. You are a witness to us all.

-- Jake Huether (jake_huether@yahoo.com), September 04, 2003.

Cindy, congratulations. im glad you and your husband have discussed this and chosen to reopen your marraige to the fruitfulness of life. I'll certainly say a prayer for you on october 20, if you will say a prayer for me on that day for my 21st birthday.

-- paul (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), September 05, 2003.

Thank you, Cindy, for your beautiful message and your gift of self-sacrifice. You are an inspiration to all of us.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), September 05, 2003.

Hi Cindy,

I too, admire your openness to God and your desire of wanting more children that are destined to love and praise God forever. However, lest someone get the wrong impression, I’d like to clarify a point you brought up for others who may misunderstand what you are saying.

You wrote, “...my dear husband (not yet a believer) has agreed to allow me to have a tubal reversal...in order to be obedient to the teachings of the Catholic Church...” In saying it this way you have, in my opinion, given others who visit this forum the impression that the Church teaches that all couples who have had tubal ligations require reversals in order to “be obedient to” her teachings. This is definitely not the case and I hope you are not going through this very serious operation out of believing the Church requires it of you and your husband to be reinstated into her good graces.

The Church does not teach that reversals of sterilizations are necessary to remain faithful to her teachings. When a couple has undergone such medical procedures as sterilization, (this would also include other procedures such as vasectomies) that are not in keeping with the Church’s teachings on openness to life, all that is required by her is for the offenders to confess their transgressions with a sincere and contrite heart at confession and then get on with their life. The Church does not teach it is incumbent upon the couple to attempt to physically rectify or reverse their sin through any means available to them, not the least of which are medical procedures which risk harm or injury.

-- Ed (catholic4444@yahoo.ca), September 06, 2003.

Ed, You are right. But... The Church DOES teach that marriage from the begining MUST be open to life. That's not necessarily saying that once one is sterilized they must reverse the process. As you said, the Church teaching then is that one must only repent (through the sacrament of reconciliation of course). However, I think that Cindy was refering to the Church's teaching that marriage must be open to life - not the latter. In other words, she would like to go above and beyond in order to "start anew" her marriage, as the Church has taught.

Hope that makes sense.

God bless.

-- Jake Huether (jake_huether@yahoo.com), September 06, 2003.

Wow Cindy, yes this will be an amazing opening for new graces to be poured out on your family. This act of the will, this obedience is rare, and so pleasing in the sight of God.Matter of fact, I would go so far as to say your act of selfless love for God will save many souls. I celebrate with you. Jake and I will remember you on the 20'th.

-- Theresa Huether (Rodntee4Jesus@aol.com), September 06, 2003.

Bless you Cindy! May the will of God be done in your life! To further clarify the Church's teachings....although it is not absolutely necessary to have a surgical sterilization reversed, the couple must ponder whether a)it might be financially possible to do so,and b)medically, the results would most possibly be favorable. To say that one can go and get sterilized and then just confess this is kind of hypocritical (for the couple doing it, I mean). If they are truly sorry, part of making a good confession is the firm amendment to not sin...in the case of surgical sterilization, this is kind of hard, unless they decide to abstain from marital relations for extended periods. So the couple must at least look into the possiblities open to them regarding reversing the operation. If it is financially or medically not possible, then they are not obligated to pursue the reversal.

-- Christina (introibo@nospam.com), September 06, 2003.

Hi, Christina

Nice to see you posting. I hope everyone is doing well in your big Catholic family.

I disagreee with what you said to Cindy, when you said,".....to say that one can go and get[sterilzed and just confess this kind of Hypocritical..."

Nothing is guarenteed in this life. People die every day just walking in hot weather. We [all just Confess] our hypocritical sins and if we are given absolution from the priest then we know we are forgiven.

I think whatever Cindy and her husband decided about this(is there call) but I don't agree with your way of looking at this.

She is a very young woman at 40, but she is not 30. And a 30 year old is not 20. Where could one draw the line with this as far as age? Sure its medically possible for Cindy, but is it worth the risk? It is not medically guarenteed that this will work. But it is guarenteed that if she confessed and repented than she is forgiven.

How can we draw the line with finances? What are the risks of her dying and her children not having a Mom? All are medically possible.

I respect your opinion, but just don't think its a "hypocritical sin" the way you do. Wht if she was 48 and it great health? Where is the line drawn?

God bless you

-- - (David@excite.com), September 06, 2003.

Jake, I understand that Cindy has decided to perform this selfless act for God of her own volition. However, it was the wording in her post which I thought might be misleading to others and so, felt a qualification was in order.

Theresa, I would agree with most of what you said. However in saying, “this OBEDIENCE is rare” when referring to what Cindy plans to do, is I feel, again, giving the misleading impression that the Church requires this of her and her spouse and of anyone else who has been voluntarily sterilized. Of course this couldn’t be further from the truth. In order for one to “obey” one must "carry out", "fulfil the command, order, or instruction of", or "comply with", a previous directive or edict. In this case there is clearly no such directive or edict given by the Church.

Christiana, you wrote, “To further clarify the Church's teachings....although it is not absolutely necessary to have a surgical sterilization reversed, the couple MUST PONDER whether a)it might be financially possible to do so, and b)medically, the results would most possibly be favorable.” You used the term “must ponder” as in to be “obliged” or “compelled” to see if such a change is “financially possible” or if the results would be “medically ... favorable”. Where did you ever get this idea? Can you please quote any Catholic source (Scripture, Catechism, other Church documents, etc.) for your rather strong and obligatory outline of what a Catholics “must” do after having gone through voluntary sterilization and who wish to be reinstated into the good graces of the Church?

Christina, you went on to say, “So the couple MUST at least look into the possibilities open to them regarding reversing the operation. If it is financially or medically not possible, then they are not obligated to pursue the reversal.” This is completely untrue and based on nothing the Church has said about the subject. The couple is under no such obligation whatsoever to look into “reversing the operation” based on “financial or medical” grounds and to insinuate as much is to mislead all who have read your post.

I did not intend to make light of the situation or the seriousness of the matter, in my earlier post by saying “ALL that is required.... is confession...” after all, I did use the words “sincere and contrite” when describing the penitents motives for going to confession. Please understand that in attempting to clarify the Church’s stance in this situation, I am not minimalizing, demeaning or criticizing Cindy’s desire to please God in this way. I am merely pointing out that her actions are completely voluntary and not actions that are required by the Church for those in similar circumstances.

-- Ed (catholic4444@yahoo.ca), September 07, 2003.

First of all, my statements above were in no way aimed at Cindy. In my opinion, for her to attempt a reveral of tubal ligation at age 40 is not necessary, given my comments....however, if she feels that she would likely conceive after age 40, then that is all the more reason for her to go ahead with the attempt. I don't believe the current catechism discusses reversals of sterilizations. But let's take a step back from this and look at it logically. Say a woman is 25, healthy, has normal monthly cycles, etc. She had been sterilized at age 22. She gets married, husband has very good paying job (i.e. money is not object). She realizes the sin and error of having been sterilized. Does just going to confession "cover her"? Yes? I don't think so. I had been at a talk given by some very excellent priests who were knowledgable in moral issues (one of whom was Father Richard Rego). As I recall, they said that a good faith effort should be made to look into the possibility of reversing the operation. This doesn't mean to kill yourself financially or medically. Doesn't this only make sense? Years ago, sterilization was considered a mortal sin. I would believe it still is. So unless the couple decides to abstain from marital relations for a certain period each month (or whatever they and a good spiritual advisor decide upon), I find it ludicrous to say that they can confess the sin, be sorry, and go on their merry way. The primary purpose of marriage, traditionally, was the begetting and raising of children. And I can't put my finger on a reference at this point, but I believe that traditionally, it would be the duty of the couple to look into the possibility of reversing the operation. (by the way, I did not use capital letters as emphasis in my original post - they DO add something which I didn't originally imply).

-- Christina (intoibo2000@nospam.com), September 07, 2003.

Hi, Christina

First off I do agree with you on the caps. KNOCK IT OFF, Ed. :-)

What you say always make sense. I think that sterilation has been and probably always be a mortal sin. And it most definetley (I would think) cross a couples mind, but I think this would have nothing to do with receivng absolution.

I do think one could confess this sin and be forgiven without exploring this option, though. It doesn't seem ludicrous to me to think otherwise. When one has truley repented, and goes to Confession than this is all that is required, as long as one does his or her penannce. The Blood of Christ will take care of the rest.

-- - (David@excite.com), September 08, 2003.

Christina, I am sorry about the CAPS! The caps were used in my post to highlight the words I took exception to in referring to what the Church teaches on this subject. When you used the word “must” I read your post to mean that is was necessary to explore reversals of sterilizations in the financial and medical areas in order to be forgiven by the Church, which of course is not the case. And by the way Christina, may I ask what a good paying job has to do with having children, or for that matter what age the couple is? If I am poor, aged and have a child have I committed a sin against God?

It’s one thing to say that you heard a group of priests say that explorations of reversals of sterilizations are necessary to comply with Church teaching, but until you come up with where it can be found in official Church teachings, I remain unconvinced. (By the way, the reason you can't put your finger on it, is because it doesn't exist.) Also can you tell me, did this group of priests mention if the Church would accept all responsibility and liability, if for example, a young mother of three children dies on the operating table while having here sterilization reversed because these priests had told her it was Church regulation and that she had to do it in order to be forgiven by God? The next time you hear a priest make such a statement you might want to ask him how many times he has given tubal ligation reversals as penance in confession since he maintains this is required by the Church. I don’t believe any priest would say this who is knowledgeable with the Church’s teachings in this area. However, I do believe many are misunderstood for what they actually say.

If anyone finds it ludicrous (- laughable or hilarious because of obvious absurdity or incongruity) to say one can sin, confess it, be sorry and then be on their merry way then I would suggest they don’t understand the true purpose or function of Confession and I would recommend they read the Catechism, particularly those paragraphs covering the Sacrament of Confession, more notably, paragraph 1480 "Like all the sacraments, Penance is a liturgical action. The elements of the celebration are ordinarily these: a greeting and blessing from the priest, reading the word of God to illuminate the conscience and elicit contrition, and an exhortation to repentance; the confession, which acknowledges sins and makes them known to the priest; the imposition and acceptance of a penance; the priest's absolution; a prayer of thanksgiving and praise and dismissal with the blessing of the priest. " That's it! Nothing more! That is all that is required to be forgiven by God.

Scripture also tells us we have a forgiving God who holds no grudges and whose forgiveness is free, without strings attached, and plentiful. At the pool what penance did Jesus give the sick man he healed when He said, “go and sin no more” (John 5:14), or to the harlot they were about to stone, what additional penance did He give when He said, “neither do I condemn you, go and sin no more” (John 8:11), or to the man they lowered through the roof to be closer to Him, what extra form of penance did Jesus assign in order for the man to be forgiven, when scripture tells us “when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, “Child your sins are forgiven” (Mark 2:5). Jesus looks at what is in your heart, not was is in your pocket book. Jesus forgave all of these individuals for the sins they committed and He told them to get on with their lives. He only required of them to begin living in a way that gives glory to God, nothing more.

-- Ed (catholic4444@yahoo.ca), September 08, 2003.

Hi Ed!Do you mind me asking how do you know so much on medical/ethical/moral type issues?! ARe you a doctor or trained theologian? Your answers are always so detailed and accurate. Do you have to spend much time researching questions to get answers like that or is it all just stored up in the melon?

Blessings

-- Kiwi (csisherwood@hotmail.com), September 08, 2003.

Oh Good Luck and Blessings on the operation Cindy!

-- Kiwi (csisherwood@hotmail.com), September 08, 2003.

No Kiwi, I can assure it isn’t “all stored up in the melon”! Hahahahahaha. I’ve always been curious about my faith. I’ve always tested my faith against my beliefs, particularly in those areas I didn’t personally agree with, or fully understand. Inevitably each time I did this I came away with a more profound, better understanding and appreciation of God’s gift of faith to man, and of just how beautiful our faith, the Catholic faith, really is.

The good Sisters of St. Joseph taught me the foundations of my faith. But better still, they taught me not to accept everything I heard. They taught me to question elements of the faith I could not understand or thought were unfair. They knew that in doing this, I would discover the answers that would solidify and strengthen my faith in the long run. I do have a certificate of Pastoral Theology (no big deal - it’s equivalent to 1st year Bachelor’s degree in Theology) from a very liberal university in Ottawa, where, while not learning very much about the tenets of the Catholic faith. I did learn to question what others might say about particular issues concerning our faith. I’ve heard everything from Catholic priests and theologians, from, “there is no Hell, it doesn’t exist!” to “in order to prove the Real Presence of Jesus in the Eucharist you must be able to prove it scientifically”. So nothing surprises me anymore.

On average, I would estimate a reply takes about an hour to research and prepare. I always try to provide proof when outlining my position on a certain topic. As time is of the essence, I pick and chose which topics I want to participate in. Usually a thread will peek my interest if there is what I believe to be an untruth or misconception being propagated. I must admit I don’t read all of the threads that are posted. I get most upset when someone attempts to expound on what the Church purportedly says about a particular topic or criticises the Church for what seems to be her apparent error, without providing substantive proof, especially when repeated requests for that proof are ignored and only personal opinions are offered over and over again.

While I appreciate your kind comments Kiwi, I can assure you my replies are not always “accurate” as Messrs. Gecik, Butler, et al can attest to. I have been called to task in the past for statements I have made in haste that have not been sufficiently substantiated in either Scripture, Church doctrine or both and, I might add, I have learned from these experiences.

I acknowledge that my postings at times, should be tempered with more charity and humility. Sometimes they tend to come off as standoffish or arrogant and I suspect that has more to do with my writing style and my passion for the faith than anything else.

In all of this I must say, I feel I have not sufficiently offered Cindy my heartfelt love and appreciation for what she is doing. The gift of new life destined to praise God for eternity is the greatest gift one can give a loving God. Cindy again, I admire your openness to God and the role He plays in your life. Rest assured you will be in my prayers.

-- Ed (catholic4444@yahoo.ca), September 08, 2003.

Kiwi, you have not "misfired" in identifying Ed as a superb contributor.

Ed, I see the "4444" in your e-mail address. Is that part of why David calls you "Four-Jacks Ed"? Are you a poker player?

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), September 08, 2003.

Ed, all because the Vatican has not come out with a formal pronouncement on this subject, does not mean that the Church does not encourage couple to pursue the reversal of sterilization where possible. There is this thing know as tradition - teachings passed down from the Church Fathers and Doctors of the Church. Many many moral theologians are in favor of the practice that I discuss above. Included are Janet Smith and Germain Grisez. There is an excellent book on the subject listed on the website www.omsoul.com/sreversalbook.html. If that doesn't work, try www.omsoul.com and there is a link to the book.

-- Christina (introibo2000@nospam.com), September 08, 2003.

Hi John, good “talking” with you again. Thanks for the compliment. Yes, “Four Jacks Ed” is a left-over from my (at times mis-spent youth where, in the span of one month during one long hot summer I did draw 4 natural Jacks in a poker hand - twice. Boy, in hindsight, how I wish I had bet the farm! Hehehehehe. My buddies started calling me Four Jacks Ed because of it. Later in life, when I enrolled in Paltalk (chat program) and I needed a “nick” I chose this nick. David picked up on it when he happened to be on Paltalk and our paths crossed (at least I think that’s how he came upon it - isn’t that right David?).

The “4444" while it holds similarities to my nick name pertains to something completely different. When I was 17 years old, my best friend was killed in an alcohol-related car crash. His favourite number was “four” and so I adopted the number “four” as my favourite number as a way of reminding me constantly of the loss of my friend and what might have been. Over the years, I got to thinking, “what could be nicer than four “fours” to remember my buddy by. Every time I see “Catholic4444", it reminds me to say a little prayer for the repose of his soul. You might say “4444" to me is similar to what “jmj” is to you.

Now that I’ve helped in completely derailing this thread, I should beg Cindy’s forgiveness and with”draw” (sorry - couldn’t resist) from any further conversation that doesn’t pertain to this topic’s original thread.

-- Ed (catholic4444@yahoo.ca), September 08, 2003.

Hi Christina! Sorry, I just noticed your post. We must have posted simultaneously. I appreciate your comments about what other “Catholic” theologians suggest couples should do who have undertaken sterilization procedures but I respectfully decline your invitation on the grounds that they do not speak of behalf of the Church. As for tradition, there is no evidence whatsoever that this particular practice has ever been handed down in the form of teachings by the “Church Fathers or Doctors of the Church”. As for me, when seeking out Truth in Church doctrine, I will stick with the Catechism of the Catholic Church and related Church documents.

-- Ed (catholic4444@yahoo.ca), September 08, 2003.

Hi, Ed

No, I was never on "pal talk". But, I rember a few years ago you made a suggestion to forum about the forum getting together on "pal talk". You mentioned that you pray the Rosary at a certain time and invited us to join in. This is the thread you gave your handle."four jack Ed". I just rembered the thread. Maybe one night I'll stop by and chat with you live. :-)

Time sure flys, Ed. Its hard to believe its almost time to top your "pumkin" thread for halloween that you posted two years ago.

May God have mercy on your buddies soul.

-- David (David@excite.com), September 08, 2003.

David, I will echo John's comments from the past - you have an incredible memory! Please say a prayer for my buddy. He was a great guy!

-- Ed (catholic4444@yahoo.ca), September 08, 2003.

I will Ed, this morning during my Holy Hour. I will pray for Larry too, and Cindy Brown.

-- - (David@excite.com), September 08, 2003.

Thanks to all for prayers and encouragement...I am overwhelmed! And yes, I have been to the sacrament of Penance two years ago, am truly sorry, and know I am fully forgiven by Our Lord, which is all that is "required". The conditions for authentic forgiveness are true sorrow for sin, confession, a purpose of amendment, and the fulfillment of the penance. I have not read anywhere that the Church requires a reversal, although many authors and theologicans lean to the idea that it is a wonderful, grace-filled way to be reconciled with God and offer reparation for your sin in the greatest way possible.

However, I feel called by the Lord to go "above and beyond" repentance to full reparation for my terrible mistake. Like I told my husband, without going through with the reversal, it's as if you broke a window, said you're sorry (and meant it) but didn't do anything to fix the damage. The Lord has blessed us with both the doctor and the money in amazing ways, so His provision is wonderful so you can be in His will!

Our Baker Diocese Bishop Robert Vasa wrote an appendix to One More Soul's book, Sterilization Reversal: A Generous Act of Love. He writes that given the present cost, risk and minimal effectiveness of reversal surgeries, such an attempt would not seem to be necessary as a condition for absolution. He cites authors such as Germain Grisez and John Kippley (both Catholic laymen, husbands & fathers) who ponder the idea that simply confessing the sin without true repentance leads to people still "benefitting" from sterilized intercourse...how does the "firm purpose of amendment" tie in here? Some have suggested that sterilized couples practice Natural Family Planning and abstain during the fertile periods, as a way to amend for their sterilization.

God alone knows the heart of each person...and He knows how the properly repetant sterilized couple is seeking to do His will. He will know if the couple still retains even a bit of a contraceptive mentality in their sexual lives.

Bishop Vasa lists 3 ways in which repentance could be manifested; these give evidence of an abiding sorrow for the sin of direct sterilization and a definitive rejection of the previously chosen contraceptive mentality:

-- Cindy Brown (cindybrown@gorge.net), September 08, 2003.

(oops, I hit the Submit button too early!)

Thanks to all for prayers and encouragement...I am overwhelmed! And yes, I have been to the sacrament of Penance two years ago, am truly sorry, and know I am fully forgiven by Our Lord, which is all that is "required". The conditions for authentic forgiveness are true sorrow for sin, confession, a purpose of amendment, and the fulfillment of the penance. I have not read anywhere that the Church requires a reversal, although many authors and theologicans lean to the idea that it is a wonderful, grace-filled way to be reconciled with God and offer reparation for your sin in the greatest way possible.

However, I feel called by the Lord to go "above and beyond" repentance to full reparation for my terrible mistake. Like I told my husband, without going through with the reversal, it's as if you broke a window, said you're sorry (and meant it) but didn't do anything to fix the damage. The Lord has blessed us with both the doctor and the money in amazing ways, so His provision is wonderful so you can be in His will!

Our Baker Diocese Bishop Robert Vasa wrote an appendix to One More Soul's book, Sterilization Reversal: A Generous Act of Love. He writes that given the present cost, risk and minimal effectiveness of reversal surgeries, such an attempt would not seem to be necessary as a condition for absolution. He cites authors such as Germain Grisez and John Kippley (both Catholic laymen, husbands & fathers) who ponder the idea that simply confessing the sin without true repentance leads to people still "benefitting" from sterilized intercourse...how does the "firm purpose of amendment" tie in here? Some have suggested that sterilized couples practice Natural Family Planning and abstain during the fertile periods, as a way to amend for their sterilization.

God alone knows the heart of each person...and He knows how the properly repetant sterilized couple is seeking to do His will. He will know if the couple still retains even a bit of a contraceptive mentality in their sexual lives.

Bishop Vasa lists 3 ways in which repentance could be manifested; these give evidence of an abiding sorrow for the sin of direct sterilization and a definitive rejection of the previously chosen contraceptive mentality:

1. Complete abstinence until the wife is past menopause 2. Surgical reversal of the sterilization 3. Periodic abstinence from the marital priviledge

It will be interesting to see how this whole issue plays out in future years, as technology and surgical procedures improve, and the costs/risks of reversal surgery go down. It is hard to keep a straight face when talking to a person who claims "It's too expensive for reversal surgery" as they drive off in an expensive, monthly-financed SUV to their large, mortgage-financed home, with stacks of bills for VISA, cable TV, and vacation trips. It's not a matter of too expensive, it's a matter of priorities, managing your money to honor God, and being generous with the gifts He places in your life. When we started this journey 2 years ago, we didn't have the money available...but I put my trust in God, and He has slowly provided the means to pay off debt, build up savings, then wonderfully provided the rest through a small inheritance. My surgery costs $5500 up front (a $1000 savings from the regular price of $6500) plus we'll have air fare and 2 motel nights. God has provided ALL of this....the small inheritance pays for the surgery, a dividend from an old life insurance policy pays the rest. SO...not only did He provide the grace of recognizing the sin and full forgiveness through the sacrament of Penance, He has also graciously, slowly changed my husband's heart AND provided all of the means for the operation itself! Life is amazing when we submit and walk in His ways.

It brought tears to my eyes when someone wrote that this could help save souls; I never even thought about how reparation by a few can help so many others. What an amazing thing it is to be a part of the Body of Christ! God bless you all! Cindy Brown

-- Cindy Brown (cindybrown@gorge.net), September 08, 2003.

Another phenomenal post, Cindy. You are great!
JFG

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), September 08, 2003.

Thanks Cindy, you said it all in your post (that which I was trying to get across in my 3 posts!) And obviously, Ed, they weren't doing tubals and vasectomies in the time of the early Church Fathers! I was just saying there is more to Church teaching than the Catechism and encyclicals!

-- Christina (introibo2000@nospam.com), September 08, 2003.

Thanks Ed, without gushing too much; between your modesty and Cindys faith.... wow! I wish...

-- Kiwi (csisherwood@hotmail.com), September 11, 2003.