Rules for Avoiding Scrupulosity Over Sexual Ethics in Marriage

One common problem many married faithful Catholic couples face is the scourge of scrupulosity when it comes to marital sexuality. Far too often, married couples come across scattered blogs or YouTube videos made by armchair theologians giving harsh moral opinions and falsely passing them off as if they represent the mind of the Church or the consensus of Her theologians. This not only has the unfortunate consequence of driving some Catholics to an unhealthy spiritual space, but can also cause a gradual breakdown in conjugal intimacy by throwing it into an environment of fear or undue guilt. This is one reason why we put together our new Compendium of Moral Theologians on Marital Chastity Questions, but in addition to that, we want to put out some clear guidelines informed by sound principles of moral theology to fight against this scourge of scrupulosity so that all of you can form your consciences in a spiritually healthy way. 

Here are some of our guidelines to avoid scrupulosity in your moral discernment about marital intimacy: 

1. The idea that when in doubt one is morally obligated to always choose the most restrictive opinion among moralists just to “play it safe” has been condemned formally by the Church under Pope Alexander VIII [1]. Do not follow this advice. If a moral opinion that favors liberty not condemned by the Church, is embraced by a decent number of esteemed moralists, and has good arguments in its favor, you are safe to follow it! 

2. If an opinion is held by at least 5 esteemed moral theologians and you see no holes in the arguments supporting it, then that opinion is safe to follow. This satisfies not only the demands of probabilism but also the demands of equiprobabilism which is the system adopted by Alphonsus in forming one’s conscience which states that one can choose in favor of liberty when one is reasonably certain that the opinion that favors liberty has stronger arguments and is backed up by several noted moralists [2].  

3. When we consider the Church’s judgment on the safety of St. Alphonsus’ moral opinions, we must remember that the Church is not implying that all of Alphonsus’ moral opinions are correct but that you will not fall into mortal sin if you follow them. Therefore, if you adopt a moral opinion that is more permissive than Alphonsus, this does not necessarily  mean you are in unsafe territory. 

4. If you bring the matter you’re confused about to the confessional and your confessor counsels you to follow the permissive opinion, you can feel safe in following his counsel. The only exception to this would be if he recommended an opinion that was clearly condemned by the Church’s magisterium. 

5. Celebrity priests on the internet do not count as esteemed moralists. When St. Alphonsus refers to authorities, he is not simply referring to priests but to licensed moral theologians whose works are known for their erudition in adjudicating moral questions and whose works are used in the formation of priests for confession. The reason we put together our Compendium was so that the authoritative voices of esteemed moralists could serve their proper role in forming consciences on questions of marital chastity and sexual ethics. We hope you avail yourself of their wisdom! 

Footnotes

1.  Pope Alexander VIII, Errors of the Jansenists, Denzinger The Sources of Catholic Dogma 1957

   Dz. 1291-1321

2.  Harty, J. (1911). Probabilism. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company.