Premarital Sex with Contraception


Would it be more sinful to have premarital sex with artificial birth control than without, keeping in mind the Church’s teaching on contraception?


Hell is hot. Now please, by all means argue about which mortal sins are worse…


I don’t feel this question makes sense.


Ok, let me try to clarify.

It is a mortal sin to have premarital sex.
It is also a mortal sin to have sexual intercourse while using artificial birth control.

In the case that one were to choose to fornicate, would it be more sinful for that person to use artificial birth control while fornicating?

Or would it be better for him to be “open to life” and avoid artificial birth control?

And obviously it goes without saying that neither would be ideal. But that’s not what I’m trying to ask.



Again what does it matter?
If I rob a bank is it better if I use a gun?
One mortal sin has you hell bound. Here one would have two mortal sins to confess. So how does one mortal sin make the other one better. Sinning twice is not better than once!

An unrepentant person can take it up with a tormenting demon, they will have time to debate it in the afterlife…

Basically it goes like this.
Is robbing 1000 dollars from a bank better than murdering the clerk. Sure one is worse but both are mortal.


Well, is this not part of moral theology? Deciding if certain situations are moral or not?

To add, among the mortal sins, some are evidently worse than others e.g. abortion vs contraception, rape vs fornication etc. and it wouldn’t hurt knowing which does more harm spiritually and practically.

For me at least, it doesn’t seem that obvious in the case of premarital sex that adding contraception on top of all that makes it worse.

Btw, (totally unrelated) Catholic forums should consider taking out these early 21st century smiley faces and consider letting us use emojis. That would be so cool. If anyone has connections, please pass this message along. Thanks!


One sin cannot make another sin better. Evil cannot be used to achieve good. This is basic morality.


That’s kinda like asking “would I be more dead if I jumped off a skyscraper or if I jumped in front of a train?”

The question doesn’t have an answer: there’s no ‘more’ or ‘less’ here – either way, you’re dead.

Same thing here: both ways, you’re in a state of mortal sin. There’s no ‘better’ or ‘worse’ in mortal sin; either way, you’re dead to grace.


um yeah, but they are both evil.

There is no moral situation involving both of those.


How about in the case the Pope Emeritus Benedict stated that in exceptional cases, male prostitutes could use condoms to avoid HIV? Obviously both are wrong, but it’s sort of the same idea here.


He did not say that. Please post the quote. What he did say was that it would show a growth. So like if a rapist used a condom.
Have you ever been taught about confession and examination of conscience?

Btw, just from a debate standpoint, you would do better to cite Francis and contraception…

Also please clarify what you meant by not ideal… We are talking objective evil not “ideally”
One does not “not ideally have premarital sex”
One sins gravely…


"There may be a basis in the case of some individuals, as perhaps when a male prostitute uses a condom, where this can be a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility, on the way toward recovering an awareness that not everything is allowed and that one cannot do whatever one wants."


Do you understand what he is saying? About forming a conscience?
Hell, is the destination for unrepented mortal sin. Do you recognize that?


Please note the bold. He does not say that condom use is moral. He says it may be a step toward moral.


Perhaps better wording could have been used. By ideal I mean good. So, both would not be good.


The mortal sin is engaging in pre-marital sex.

Why would any other question that follows this even matter?

You avoid sin…you don’t engage in pre-marital sex. Full stop.

How does birth control even make it into the picture?


Yes, I agree completely with you. But this is not what I was trying to ask in my question.

I ask my question on the assumption that all parties know that both fornication and contraception are grave evils condemned by the church.



Neither are acceptable. And both are gravely wrong.


It’s just a silly question. One more time and then I give up.

There’s a guy, he likes to kidnap torture and kill people. He then kidnaps and tortures your mother but before he kills her he puts her in a drug induced coma to torture her.

Did he act more morally by administering illicit drugs before he killed her, does this show a more openness to life?


I think that some mortal sins are much worse than others and that there are various “levels” in hell. For example, according to the Baltimore catechism, and pre-Vatican II teaching, unbaptised babies go to a place in hell called limbo, but it is not so bad there. This is mentioned also by Dante who says that . Limbo is level 1. According to Dante’s inferno, there are nine levels in hell. In level 1 of hell, there is no punishment, and the atmosphere is peaceful
I don;t think that stealing 1000 dollars from a bank is anywhere near as grave as torturing innocent people and chopping off their heads. Stealing 1000 dollars from a rich bank may send you to level 2, but the cruel torture and murder of innocent people could send you to level 7 or higher.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit