V. Concerning the Circumstance: By what Aids

241. - 1. Artificial fertilization (cf. no. 88) is unlawful, according to the very declaration of the Holy Office ¹, whenever the semen to be infused is to be obtained by a prior pollution.

¹ On 24 March 1897, to the doubt "Whether the artificial fertilization of a woman can be employed," the Sacred Roman and Universal Inquisition replied, "It is not lawful."

2. But if, for begetting offspring, it seems conducive that semen, after it has been received within the vagina in the natural manner (therefore not in a condom), be subsequently withdrawn so that it may be projected higher into the vagina, the matter seems to incur reproach neither from the end, which is excellent, nor from the manner, inasmuch as it contains no venereal abuse. Cf. Génicot, II, 547, VI; Eschbach, Disputationes physiologico-theologicae, etc., p. 70 ff.; Bucceroni, vol. 4, no. 1052, pp. 142-143.

3. Furthermore, if by some method of puncture semen (that is, spermatozoa) is taken from the epididymis of the husband so that it may be infused into the vessel of the wife, this method of artificial fertilization does not seem to be condemnable, since without any venereal abuse, that is, without any sexual commotion, it procures the end of marriage.

But it is not lawful to receive semen in this manner from another man, even with the assent of the husband, and it would be contrary to the laws of marriage: for the wife can conceive from her husband alone, so that the care of each parent may of itself fall to the child.

4. Finally, if a man had need of obscene images to arouse himself, the sight of them before intercourse, with evil desire excluded, will be rendered honorable through that utility and end. Cf. no. 240, 2.