A Catholic Response to "The Scandal of NFP"

[ahs]

Part 4 of 6: Dave responds to CMTV Exec. Producer Terry Carroll. Terry’s words in black, Dave’s in blue to retain original format as it was sent to CMTV and other recipients that Terry Carroll sent it to [Dave is not aware of who these are…just that they were sent the material].

[By the way, for those who prefer to read it all together as 1 contiguous thought, I have posted this to my blog in full. Link is CMTV's Reply to "A Catholic Answer to 'The Scandal of NFP'": Refuted”]HERE. ]

The sin, if there is any, lies in the decision regarding how one will act. NFP allows couples with “serious motives” to refrain from sexual relations during the fertile times, and to engage in sexual relations during the infertile times. There’s a lot more to the evaluation of the morality or immorality of NFP in a given instance than observing that it is a morally neutral “gathering of information.”

For this statement to not fall flat, you need to show where it is immoral for a couple “to refrain from sexual relations during the fertile times, and to engage in sexual relations during the infertile times”. That is your claim, and your burden to prove…and it’s NOT a Catholic position.

If I “gather information” to help me kill someone, that “information gathering” is hardly morally neutral.

Logical fallacy number 5, same brand as number 4.

NFP is, in our judgment, something permitted by the Church in response to exceptional situations…

Your judgment is completely irrelevant. YOU don’t get to decide what Church teaching is or put words into the Magesterium’s mouth, so to speak. NFP for the purpose of avoiding pregnancy is linked to “periodic continence” and the Church has already expressed her view on it. And the Church’s view is much different than yours. Why do I, as a Catholic, need to conform my view to your opinion, and reject the 160 year continuous teaching of the Church on this subject?

…that is, unfortunately, marketed and often practiced as a routine part of Catholic marriage and as a natural rather than artificial method of birth control.

Why do you have a problem with couples routinely practicing NFP? And how do you know NFP is often practiced as a routine part of Marriage? And wouldn’t it be wise to have the knowledge that NFP gives, since a couple never knows when they may need to use it? Do you think it’s wise to wait until a life/death situation before a couple starts to learn how to chart, when the risk of failure [of the method] is high? Why not learn the method and become comfortable with how it works before sexual activity is part of the picture? It’s helpful to have this knowledge beforehand. No one is going to force married couples to avoid pregnancy. However, the Church calls the regulation of births an aspect of responsible fatherhood and motherhood (CCC2399). Are you wiser than the Church that you’re going to tell me it’s not?

I know, NFP is routinely defended as “not birth control” but that’s a bit disingenuous, don’t you think?

No, I don’t think it is when you understand what they mean by “birth control”. In theology, sure it would misrepresent the facts to a degree…but the people the Church is reaching while teaching NFP are not theologians. Their definition of “birth control” is often contraception. So the people speaking in these terms are not being disingenuous, they are meeting people where they are. But then in the theological realm your position is even weaker, because theologically, “birth control” = “birth regulation” and the Church does not teach against this…in fact calls it “an aspect of responsible [parenthood]” (CCC 2399).

[By the way, for those who prefer to read it all together as 1 contiguous thought, I have posted this to my blog in full. Link is CMTV's Reply to "A Catholic Answer to 'The Scandal of NFP'": Refuted”]HERE. ]

 

[ahs]

…If it’s really that bad, then don’t have sex. Yep – that’s tough. Yep – that’s a sacrifice. But marriage IS sacrifice, one for the other, and both for the family.

Why is complete abstinence any more holy than periodic abstinence?

Good question…and I hope Liza is able to answer it with authentic Church Doctrine.

 

[ahs]

Part 5 of 6: Dave responds to CMTV Exec. Producer Terry Carroll. Terry’s words in black, Dave’s in blue to retain original format as it was sent to CMTV and other recipients that Terry Carroll sent it to [Dave is not aware of who these are…just that they were sent the material].

NFP isn’t really doing nothing but gathering information! It is information gathered to control something, either conception or its avoidance. True, there is no “contraceptive act” in NFP since abstinence is judged as “doing nothing.” But if it’s really “doing nothing,” then why is it so hard to do? When I fast from food, am I really “doing nothing?”

Logical fallacy #6. Can you please explain how abstaining from sex is a sin? (Authentic Church Document please.) Human beings like to eat, which is why fasting (the lack of eating) is hard. Human beings also like to have sex, which is why fasting from sex (abstinence) is hard. However, food is required to stay alive. Sex is not. There is no established minimum interval at which married couples must engage in the marital act.

One last point I would like you to consider. We all know and accept that periodic continence is permitted by the Church in response to serious circumstances.

Yes. Where we disagree, and the point of my initial response to “The Scandal of NFP” is where someone tries to decide for another couple what their serious reasons are. JPII called this a “grave offence”.

But since we know that NO method of avoiding pregnancy is perfect and 100% effective, why is the diminished risk through NFP worth it at all? It seems to me that if one’s reasons for avoiding pregnancy are truly serious – economic hardship, psychological issues, risk of death etc. – why is ANY degree of risk worth it?

Irrelevant, and a red herring. Logical fallacy #7. And what are you proposing as an alternative in these dire straits? Total abstinence? The Church has taught that the marital debt to not to be withheld except by spousal consent. It’s the couple’s choice…no one else’s.

Is it not a bit like playing Russian Roulette with one’s serious reasons?

No, it’s not a bit like that because, when a couple knows there is a high likelihood of conception, they are exercising self-control and abstaining. At the same time, they realize that their Marriage is properly ordered toward procreation, so when they DO have sex, they will properly order it so and accept a child if God grants it to them. Why do you have a problem with this?

Why risk severe economic hardship, psychological damage, or life itself, for sex?

Logical fallacy #8. But, you have just refuted yourself. The Vortex episode in question makes it seem like NFP is so accurate that it’s just like “contraception lite” according to Voris…that pregnancy can’t occur. One of you has just refuted the other. If you concede the flip side, which is the point you JUST made…that pregnancy CAN occur in the infertile times, you have just proven that couples practicing NFP ARE open to life and your entire premise in that Vortex episode just fell flat on its face. You have just refuted your own position on NFP, no matter which direction you want to run with your own statement.

[By the way, for those who prefer to read it all together as 1 contiguous thought, I have posted this to my blog in full. Link is CMTV's Reply to "A Catholic Answer to 'The Scandal of NFP'": Refuted”]HERE. ]

 

[ahs]

This cannot be emphasized enough.

Terry, representing any number of anti-NFP activists like him: Why risk severe economic hardship, psychological damage, or life itself, for sex?

The response: … you have just refuted yourself. The [whatever source for their argument that NFP is not open to life] makes it seem like NFP is so accurate that it’s just like “contraception lite” [or this “contraception mentality” they brand NFP users with]…that pregnancy can’t occur. One of you has just refuted the other. If you concede the flip side, which is the point you JUST made…that pregnancy CAN occur in the infertile times, you have just proven that couples practicing NFP ARE open to life and your entire premise in [whatever source] just fell flat on its face. You have just refuted your own position on NFP, no matter which direction you want to run with your own statement.

Folks who want to argue against NFP, from only my experisnce, ALWAYS have ended up here. First, NFP is too closed to life, in their opinion. But when it gets to making the fallacious reasoning errors, all of the sudden NFP carries too much risk of conception…it’s TOO open to life.

It cannot be stressed enough…NFP is infomration which can be used to either 1) decide to ABSTAIN from an act, or 2) ENGAGE in an act. That is all NFP is. It isn’t NFP these folks have a problem with. It’s the fact that people practicing “periodic continenece” aren’t instead practicing “complete abstinence”. And why they have a beef with that is beyond me…because it certainly is NOT a Catholic point of view.

 

[ahs]

Part 6 of 6: Dave responds to CMTV Exec. Producer Terry Carroll. Terry’s words in black, Dave’s in blue to retain original format as it was sent to CMTV and other recipients that Terry Carroll sent it to [Dave is not aware of who these are…just that they were sent the material].

We all know that total abstinence is 100% effective in preventing births.

Agreed, and if a couple chooses that, good for them. But the Church teaches that a couple must agree to this because the marital debt cannot be withheld, except with “consent for a time” for the purpose of prayer (1Cor 7:5). This point was driven home by St. Gregory the Great (Regula Pastoralis, Part III, Caput xxvii) in the 6th century. How’s that for hermeneutic continuity?

Is the routine practice of NFP within Catholic marriages, as if it were an integral part of daily married life and not merely a response to unexpected challenges, truly virtuous?

According to the Catholic Church, yes it is. I have provided ample quotes and citations from the Church saying so. On the other hand, CMTV, who seems to think it NOT virtuous, has provided NO Catholic Church teachings to defend their position.

Are we really better off having the choices that NFP makes possible to us? Are we really able to be as confident as our Catholic ancestors could be that they were trusting in Divine Providence?

What choice does NFP offer us other than whether or not to have sex on a particular day? Have Christians only just now been able to decide when and when not to have sex? Logical fallacy #9 gets you no where.

I’ll leave you with a very interesting essay forwarded to us by someone who wishes to remain anonymous after listening to the Mic’d Up episode on NFP:

How about instead of insulting my intelligence by sending me an anonymous article comparing NFP to infanticide, you support your position with actual Church teaching and some objective facts? The “article” goes on and on about the evils of choice, and then concludes by telling us, “one chooses either God and renunciation of self-will or else the world and its choices.” It speaks of “choice” as being a bad thing, whereas the Church teaches that choice is our “inalienable right” (Pope JP II) and as an exercise of “disicpline ,which is proper to the purity of the married couples” (Pope Paul VI). What about the choice to get Married? Is the freedom to choose a vocation bad? If you don’t see the irony and utter lack of similarity to Catholic doctrine in this article, I don’t know what else to say. It’s no wonder the author chose to remain anonymous after writing this embarrassment to Christianity. Terry, you owe me an apology on behalf of CMTV for sending me that degrading anti-Catholic propaganda to read.

Also, to show fairness, and because I DO support the work that CMTV does, I will hold off on posting this response for a couple days (say, until Wednesday morning) to give you a chance to address the 9 instances of fallacious reasoning. I am giving you the benefit of the doubt that it was not intentional. You can admit that each instance I pointed out does not support CMTV’s position on NFP as conveyed in “The Scandal of NFP” and is not relevant to the argument…because they don’t and they aren’t. Otherwise, this response will appear just as it is here.
May God bless you and CMTV in your mission to bring light into darkness.

-my name]

[By the way, for those who prefer to read it all together as 1 contiguous thought, I have posted this to my blog in full. Link is CMTV's Reply to "A Catholic Answer to 'The Scandal of NFP'": Refuted”]HERE. ]

That’s all of it folks. As I mentioned above a vouple times, there are other emails I received from Terry but I did not bother addressing them here because it’s just more of the same, and I don’t feel like advertising Terry’s non-Catholic perceprtion of what the Church SHOULD teach while failing to address what She DOES teach, and the fact that this Vortex episode misrepresented and contradicted that.

 

[fpt]

In my humble opinion, the N.F.P is taught during the preparation of marriage in order to permit:

to the woman of understanding her own cycle, one part of her own feminity, and of having the conscience of her own capacity of procreation and thus in the facts to be capable, in concreto, of practicing her part of the responsible procreation, the responsible maternity;

to the man of understanding the cycle of woman, one part of the feminity, and of having the conscience of the capacity of procreation of woman and thus in the facts to be capable,** in concreto,** of practicing his part of the responsible procreation, the responsible paternity;

to the man of acting like a responsible husband with his wife, and like a responsible father his children and his family;

to get the mutual and reciprocal knowledge of the mysteries of life via the female cycle;

to get the mutual and reciprocal information about the marital act and the procreative corollaries;

not to be naive in order to be able to cope with the difficulties of conjugal life;

to avoid the other wrong methods of birth control that go to against the natural moral law;

to avoid the conjugal fideism, the conjugal quietism, the conjugal quiverfullism, the conjugal theoretical providentialism, the absolute conjugal procreationism;

to speak about conjugal sexual sacrifices;

to explain that the marital act is not only for babies;

**to say that the fact of having a large family is not a dogma or is not a moral obligation (an end of marriage that has to be attempted), per se;

to say that the fact of wanting a baby can be irrresponsable in special cases, and that is not morally responsible;**

ETC…

 

[clem456]

Question about terminology…

Can NFP be considered “contraception”? Can NFP be properly called “birth control”?

I was under the impression that NFP is condoned by the Church simply because it is natural,
it’s not artificially interrupting the marital act, or corrupting it, as I think another poster put it. Abstinence is natural whether you consider it an act, or the lack of an act. It is still natural. The sex act is also natural.

That seems like a simple proposition and I don’t understand where all the hand wringing comes in.
I would think that only God can know if a couple is avoiding children out of ill will.

 

[ahs]

Question about terminology…

Can NFP be considered “contraception”? Can NFP be properly called “birth control”?

I was under the impression that NFP is condoned by the Church simply because it is natural,
it’s not artificially interrupting the marital act, or corrupting it, as I think another poster put it. Abstinence is natural whether you consider it an act, or the lack of an act. It is still natural. The sex act is also natural.

That seems like a simple proposition and I don’t understand where all the hand wringing comes in.
I would think that only God can know if a couple is avoiding children out of ill will.

It depends on whether you are asking a typical “joe” (like most of us here) or a theologian. “Contraception” could be “natural”…like withdrawal, for example. So, it isn’t just the “natural” aspect that makes NFP okay. It’s the fact that it does not remove the procreative nature of an act.

NFP could be called “birth control”, theologically. “Birth control” in that sense would be the same as “birth regulation”, which is not a bad thing in and of itself. It’s just part of the decision making that a coupe does when deciding if they need to space births or not.

But in the everyday world, “birth control” is understood as contraception…therefore, no, NFP could not be called “birth control” in that sense. It often is, presumably so that the people being presented with it can have some basic primer of understanding of what NFP is supposed to help them with (using charting and periodic continece to avoid pregnacy rather than contraception).

 

[John_Q_Sinner]

I see nothing wrong with NFP itself. However I think prudence should be taken and I believe a priest/spiritual director should be sought out for spiritual guidance when a couple is thinking about using NFP. I say this because even though NFP is completely legitimate, it could be something which may reinforce a couple’s incorrect type of thinking. While consulting a priest/spiritual director is not mandatory, I think it should be highly recommended.

Take for instance fasting. This is legitimate, however, people are recommended to seek spiritual direction when doing so. One would not recommend fasting to a person with an anti-eating disorder, no more than you would recommend NFP to a couple that is entertaining the idea of being anti-children.

IMHO I think one of the major down falls I see when it comes to the topic of NFP is that we only really hear about NFP in regards to the spacing out of children, and that we hardly -if ever- hear the other benefits of NFP, like how it can help married couples achieve pregnancy. I mean in a culture that is so anit-children it would be wonderful to see threads where people are talking about using NFP to achieve pregnancy, and how it has helped them reach this goal.

God Bless.

 

[Rau]

The position of the anti-NFPers seems to be:

1). The only reason to deny yourselves sex, when you’d like yo have it, is if you’ve got very serious reasons, and really, if the reasons are this serious, you better not have sex at anytime;

2). If you don’t have such serious reasons as above, then if you feel the desire, you must go ahead and have sex. In this way you are supremely open to life, and place yourself in God’s providence.

Issue 1 is about the meaning of serious. Issue 2 is about denying couples the right, indeed obligation, to use their God-given faculties to plan aspects of their lives.

 

[Pug]

Your wife has a life threatening illness that would kill her if she were to get pregnant? Then why in God’s name would you EVER put her life at risk by having sex with her?

The CCC does not require that your life must be on the line before having recourse to periodic continence. You are not objecting to NFP itself by the quote above. You are objecting to something else entirely.

 

[saintjohnxxiii]

I think I would avoid Voris for the following reasons:

1. He takes a cheap shot at Karl Keating and Jim Akin by judging how much money they should make.
2. He says that there is no difference between Republicans and Democrats with regard to life issues by bringing up Chris Christie and Paul Ryan’s positions that are against Catholic teachings as if all 2 of them represent the Republican party.
3. I haven’t heard but one of his Vortex episodes is on defending Father Corapi who I believe has left the Church although I could be mistaken.
4. I worry about this NFP business and wonder if associates with Christopher Ferrara who says that NFP is not good at all.

 

[ahs]

I think I would avoid Voris for the following reasons:

1. He takes a cheap shot at Karl Keating and Jim Akin by judging how much money they should make.
2. He says that there is no difference between Republicans and Democrats with regard to life issues by bringing up Chris Christie and Paul Ryan’s positions that are against Catholic teachings as if all 2 of them represent the Republican party.
3. I haven’t heard but one of his Vortex episodes is on defending Father Corapi who I believe has left the Church although I could be mistaken.
4. I worry about this NFP business and wonder if associates with Christopher Ferrara who says that NFP is not good at all.

For item 3, what I recall was that he took the position of focusing on the good that Corapi had done, not judging him, and praying for the best. I take no issue with that. On the 4th item, I have no idea. But, I do know for a fact, that one of the sources (possibly 2) that his Exec Prod. was trying to shove at me to “study” was written by a fella who had but 1 acclimation given to his book…by an SSPX Priest. The one I know for sure is the author Michael Malone…“The Case Concerning Catholic Contraception”. Now, I’m not saying that an SSPX Priest cannot tell good theology form bad, etc…but I wonder why a devout Catholic like Terry Carroll, who by his office at CMTV represents CMTV…thereby lumping Voris in with him, would be reading a book acclaimed by someone who believes out Pope is not really the Pope. That’s got me thinking.

BUT, I don’t want this to turn into a “let’s bash Michael Voris” party. My goal is to have someone from CMTV give a reasoned and logically consistent response to my OP and address the logical fallacies given by the Executive Producer. If CMTV is supposed to be the place where “lies and falsehoods are trapped and exposed”, then I NEED to see an answer for the fallacious and deceptive reasoning tactics used by CMTV in order to take them seriously anymore…as does everyone else reading this thread.

 

[ahs]

For item 3, what I recall was that he took the position of focusing on the good that Corapi had done, not judging him, and praying for the best. I take no issue with that. On the 4th item, I have no idea. But, I do know for a fact, that one of the sources (possibly 2) that his Exec Prod. was trying to shove at me to “study” was written by a fella who had but 1 acclimation given to his book…by an SSPX Priest. The one I know for sure is the author Michael Malone…“The Case Concerning Catholic Contraception”. Now, I’m not saying that an SSPX Priest cannot tell good theology form bad, etc…but I wonder why a devout Catholic like Terry Carroll, who by his office at CMTV represents CMTV…thereby lumping Voris in with him, would be reading a book acclaimed by someone who believes out Pope is not really the Pope. That’s got me thinking.

BUT, I don’t want this to turn into a “let’s bash Michael Voris” party. My goal is to have someone from CMTV give a reasoned and logically consistent response to my OP and address the logical fallacies given by the Executive Producer. If CMTV is supposed to be the place where “lies and falsehoods are trapped and exposed”, then I NEED to see an answer for the fallacious and deceptive reasoning tactics used by CMTV in order to take them seriously anymore…as does everyone else reading this thread.

I beg your pardon…same author (who did indeed write that above mentioned book that Carroll recommended to me), but the book that had the SSPX acclimation was a different title: “The Only Begotten”. The Priest who praised it is Fr. Timothy Hopkins, Shrine of St. Philomena, Miami, Florida.
sacramentals.org/MikeMalone.htm
shrineofsaintphilomena.com/ABOUT_US/ABOUT_US.HTM

From the second link: “Father Hopkins is proud and privileged to have been a friend and collaborator of the Society of Saint Pius X for more than 22 years and insists upon his demise that Saint Philomena Shrine in Miami be given to the charge of the Society.”

Am I reading too much into that?? I mean, I see red flags waving all over the place with this one. But maybe I’m being too cautious?

 

[oneofmany]

Does anyone know if Michael Voris is married and has children? I haven’t seem much written about him as far as family is concerned.

I think married people are hesitant about going to unmarried people who learn about their sex lives. The priest can tell you the sacred part of marriage but not the everyday life of being married. I can’t understand the everyday life of being a priest. How can one advise the other on what to do when they have a problem? Plus, I don’t think you will find a priest who is comfortable telling a married couple how to arrange their sex life and how many children they should have.

So many Catholics use the pill now I would think if you can get them to use NFP that would be a good change and complicating NFP to the point of frustration would just force them to go back on the pill, IMO.

 

[underacloud]

Does anyone know if Michael Voris is married and has children? I haven’t seem much written about him as far as family is concerned.

I think married people are hesitant about going to unmarried people who learn about their sex lives. The priest can tell you the sacred part of marriage but not the everyday life of being married. I can’t understand the everyday life of being a priest. How can one advise the other on what to do when they have a problem? Plus, I don’t think you will find a priest who is comfortable telling a married couple how to arrange their sex life and how many children they should have.

According to wikipedia, he is unmarried and a consecrated celibate.

Yes, I for one am very hesitant to take advice from the unmarried regarding how to conduct my sex life, beyond abstract moral principles rightly given by the Church. We don’t need people like this extending those principles to the extreme when they have limited practical understanding of the implications. And certainly no practical understanding of how a couple assesses “serious reasons” to avoid pregnancy; and this is IMO the crux of the problem here.

 

[Do_Good_Then_Go]

Does anyone know if Michael Voris is married and has children? I haven’t seem much written about him as far as family is concerned.

I think married people are hesitant about going to unmarried people who learn about their sex lives. The priest can tell you the sacred part of marriage but not the everyday life of being married. I can’t understand the everyday life of being a priest. How can one advise the other on what to do when they have a problem? Plus, I don’t think you will find a priest who is comfortable telling a married couple how to arrange their sex life and how many children they should have.

So many Catholics use the pill now I would think if you can get them to use NFP that would be a good change and complicating NFP to the point of frustration would just force them to go back on the pill, IMO.

According to Wikipedia, Voris has never married and is a consecrated celibate.

I don’t think it’s going too far to say that he may lack an understanding of the realities of married life and all the various factors that impact on a couple’s decisions about their use of NFP.

ETA: I wasn’t quick enough, what underacloud said.

 

[PaulinVA]

According to Wikipedia, Voris has never married and is a consecrated celibate.

I don’t think it’s going too far to say that he may lack an understanding of the realities of married life and all the various factors that impact on a couple’s decisions about their use of NFP.

ETA: I wasn’t quick enough, what underacloud said.

I will make a plug here for Priests and their understanding of the realities of married life. After a few weeks of hearing confessions, I’m sure that they have a pretty good understanding of what goes on between couples; maybe it’s a better understanding than those of us who are married.

Others who are not married? Let their comments speak for themselves.

 

[Do_Good_Then_Go]

I will make a plug here for Priests and their understanding of the realities of married life. After a few weeks of hearing confessions, I’m sure that they have a pretty good understanding of what goes on between couples; maybe it’s a better understanding than those of us who are married.

Others who are not married? Let their comments speak for themselves.

Yes, I think you’re quite right about that.

 

[clem456]

I quit reading right there.

-Tim-

I’ve begun to choose my reading, watching, and listening through this filter:

Does the speaker and the content reflect the gifts of the Holy Spirit, or inspire them in me?

charity, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, generosity, gentleness, faithfulness, modesty, self-control, chastity

Especially the first 10.

Notice that “speaking truth” is not in there.