Another Birth Control Question

[Rence]

My wife and I are both in our 50s. We entered into our marriage 25 years ago in good faith with the intent of starting a family, but ended up never having children for reasons I shall not go into at this time. My wife still has her monthly cycle which means she still ovulates which means she could still get pregnant.

There are numerous studies out there that say a first-time pregnancy at this stage of life is asking for trouble. Birth defects, danger to the child and/or mother’s well-being to name just a few. Additionally, there are practical concerns. Even if we were to have a happy, healthy child at this age, we’d be well into our 70s when the child becomes a young adult, goes to college, gets married etc. I feel it would be wrong to put a person at that age in a position to have to care for a senior citizen parent (or arrange for their funeral!)

Nevertheless, we would still like to have a healthy sex life while staying within the good graces of the Church. But as we all know, the Church has a problem with artificial birth control, and frankly, I don’t trust NFP. I know that birth control is permissible when used for treating medical conditions, but I’m not sure if it allowed for preventing a medical condition.

What are our options (besides abstinence)?

I completely understand that you don’t want to read this, but the Church’s only option for you is NFP. And of course, the ramifications on your wife’s health are certainly grave enough to use it. Health of the mother is just one reason to use NFP, and there are many, depending on the family, according to Humanae Vitae. Only you and your wife can determine what those “grave” reasons are.

I’d recommned talking with your priest about it. No one can explain it better than your priest. And no one can advise you better than your priest. If you don’t have one that you work with, contact the diocese for a counselor.

I also understand your distrust of NFP, and I know it’s scary, so I’d recommend learning more about NFP before writing it off altogether. The health risks of ABCs is dangerous, so hormone therapy should probably not even be considered for the sake of your wife’s health as it significantly increases risk for stroke.

I completely understand your distain for the rules on top of rules on top of nested rules. I could lose my eyes in the back of my head about all the rules. But you know you have a choice: you can be a good Catholic and obey the Church or be a non-compliant Catholic and not obey the Church. It’s up to you…But I’d still talk to a priest or a counselor from the diocese. They will help you to sort it out.

 

[RichP]

Perhaps, but I think the real reason the CC is against ABC and abortion is to increase its membership.

For many of us that received a Catholic education 20, 30, or 40 years ago, it was probably very incomplete. I know mine was… Sure, I learned the basics but I never learned anything beyond the basics. When important questions and issues came up, I had no solid information to use to understand the issues and properly form my conscious. I could not understand why the Church was so against ABC and abortion. It has taken me YEARS to recover from the lousy education I received. Even today, I am still learning about things I should have been taught in high school. For example, the Church’s position on ABC and abortion is not new. It has stood firmly against it since the earliest days.

I joined the CAF back in November with the hope I might strengthen my faith and become a better Catholic but so far it seems to be having just the opposite effect.

It might be okay to stick with the “Ask the Apologist” forum if you want to increase your knowledge and faith. Unfortunately, there are postings in the other forums that may contain misleading and maybe even dangerous information to someone trying to improve their faith.

If you are not blindly conformant, and obey everything the Church teaches, then you are banished to Hell for all eternity.

I’m not sure where you learned this, although it may be easy to misread many of the postings here to think this is true. This isn’t true and never was. We all need to obey God. The real question is what does God through the Church teach that is so difficult to obey?

Last week at the grocery store wife and I ran into a friend of ours that we use to sit beside in church. We hadn’t seen her in over a year. My wife casually asked what mass she was going to these days and the friend replied that she was no longer attending mass, and may leave the Church altogether. She said she was fed up with all the “stupid rules” the Church seems to be obsessed with. I can’t say as I disagree with her.

Do you know which “stupid rule” she is breaking? Usually, people don’t think a rule is “stupid” if they are not violating it. Sounds like she is breaking a rule over and over and does not want to change her way. She would prefer the Church change their rule to conform with her behavior.

1. When you go to confession, you must confess to EVERY sin.

EVERY sin committed since your last confession that you remember. If you go to confession on a regular basis, this should not be too much of a problem. Why wouldn’t you want to confess EVERY sin? Are there sins you do not want to confess?

1. If you deliberately omit mentioning a sin, your confession is invalid and none of your sins are absolved.

What is the point of going to confession if you are going to deliberately omit a sin?

1. If it was a sin that you committed as a child, every confession you made since then is invalid and the sins are piling up.

Sounds like there may be mitigating circumstances that would reduce one’s culpability. (Mental health issues are definitely mitigating circumstances…) If this is a huge concern of yours, all it takes is one confession explaining all this to a priest.

1. If you receive Communion while in a state of sin, you have just committed another sin.

Yes,* if* you are in a state of MORTAL sin.

1. Following this “logic”, if you get married while in a state of sin, your marriage is invalid resulting in your children being born “out of wedlock.” Ooops! Another sin.

Well, your logic is incorrect and misleading you. A marriage is not invalid if one is married in the state of sin. It is not even grounds for an annulment!

The Church expects everyone to be perfect - absolutely perfect - in order to obtain salvation.

Actually, Jesus wants us to be perfect. (Matt 5:48) But don’t you think God understands that we are not perfect? Why do you think he gave us the Church? Because he knows we are not perfect and can easily be led astray from him.

The Church should focus more on the big picture and an overall assessment of a person’s life; not just go through a checklist of things you did or didn’t do in the course of your life. There is too much emphasis one what you’ve done wrong and very little credit is given for what you’ve done good.

Isn’t the “big picture” the salvation of people’s souls? The Church is NOT running a popularity contest. Neither did Jesus. Being a Christian is might be difficult not because the large number of “rules” but because the teachings of Jesus are so radical and extreme. Many of potential disciples of Jesus stopped following him when they disagreed with what Jesus was teaching and asking them to do. They wanted Jesus on their terms, not on his.

I am tired of being expected to be just some mindless robotic drone that conforms to every teaching without question. Catholicism is supposed to be a church; not a cult.

If you look at Catholicism as only a church with a list of rules that we need to follow in order to get our ticket to heaven punched, then you are going to be discouraged and seek salvation somehow, somewhere else. I know I would! But Catholicism and being a Catholic is not belonging to a church, it is one’s personal encounter with God through Jesus who gives us the freedom from the slavery of sin and a new way of living life.

 

[kctigerhawk]

My cup runneth over with humility.

I am not going to pretend to understand what is like to suffer from depression (although I might and not know it). However, as a recovered alcoholic I do understand the importance of humility and the danger of self deception.

I would submit for your consideration that perhaps you have a misunderstanding of what humility is.

Catholic Encyclopedia
The virtue of humility may be defined: “A quality by which a person considering his own defects has a lowly opinion of himself and willingly submits himself to God and to others for God’s sake.” St. Bernard defines it: “A virtue by which a man knowing himself as he truly is, abases himself.” These definitions coincide with that given by St. Thomas: “The virtue of humility”, he says, “Consists in keeping oneself within one’s own bounds, not reaching out to things above one, but submitting to one’s superior” (Summa Contra Gent., bk. IV, ch. lv, tr. Rickaby). newadvent.org/cathen/07543b.htm

‘Having a problem with authority’, hostility toward the Church (if you are Catholic), hostility toward God are all symptoms of a lack of humility.

Catechism of the Catholic Church
2559 "Prayer is the raising of one’s mind and heart to God or the requesting of good things from God."2 But when we pray, do we speak from the height of our pride and will, or “out of the depths” of a humble and contrite heart?3 He who humbles himself will be exalted;4 humility is the foundation of prayer, Only when we humbly acknowledge that "we do not know how to pray as we ought,"5 are we ready to receive freely the gift of prayer. "Man is a beggar before God."6 scborromeo.org/ccc/p4s1.htm#2559

Humility is a prerequisite for prayer. Trouble praying/reluctance to pray/hostility to prayer are additional symptoms of a lack of humility.

Finally I would submit this prayer for your consideration

Litany of Humility
O Jesus! meek and humble of heart, Hear me.
From the desire of being esteemed,
Deliver me, Jesus.
From the desire of being loved…
From the desire of being extolled …
From the desire of being honored …
From the desire of being praised …
From the desire of being preferred to others…
From the desire of being consulted …
From the desire of being approved …
From the fear of being humiliated …
From the fear of being despised…
From the fear of suffering rebukes …
From the fear of being calumniated …
From the fear of being forgotten …
From the fear of being ridiculed …
From the fear of being wronged …
From the fear of being suspected …

That others may be loved more than I,
Jesus, grant me the grace to desire it.

That others may be esteemed more than I …
That, in the opinion of the world,
others may increase and I may decrease …
That others may be chosen and I set aside …
That others may be praised and I unnoticed …
That others may be preferred to me in everything…
That others may become holier than I, provided that I may become as holy as I should…

ewtn.com/devotionals/prayers/humility.htm

That prayer always reminds me how far I have to go. I pray that some day all of our cups do runneth over with humility.

May the peace of Christ be with you.

 

[catharina]

I am not going to pretend to understand what is like to suffer from depression (although I might and not know it). However, as a recovered alcoholic I do understand the importance of humility and the danger of self deception.

I would submit for your consideration that perhaps you have a misunderstanding of what humility is.
Not necessarily.

‘Having a problem with authority’, hostility toward the Church (if you are Catholic), hostility toward God are all symptoms of a lack of humility.

**
In many many cases, the essential factor of depression is “anger turned inward.”
It is not at all uncommon to have problems with any authority, even with God,
when the underlying illness is depression.

Of course, we MUST pray for humility - that’s for all of us.**

 

[kctigerhawk]

Not necessarily.

In many many cases, the essential factor of depression is “anger turned inward.”
It is not at all uncommon to have problems with any authority, even with God,
when the underlying illness is depression.

Of course, we MUST pray for humility - that’s for all of us.

I will admit that I don’t know about depression so I am not pretending to know what a person that suffers from it needs to do.

However, what is presented in my previous post is the definition of humility.

Having a condition that makes humility difficult to achieve does not change the definition.

I do have some personal experience with this. Humility is a tough pill to swallow for an alcoholic or my kind of alcoholic anyway.

Sometimes I have humility and sometimes I don’t. Telling myself that I am humble when I am not will pretty much guarantee that I never will be.

I have to be honest with myself and recognize when I fit the definition of humility and when I don’t.

Jesus, Mary and Joseph pray for us.

 

[catharina]

I will admit that I don’t know about depression so I am not pretending to know what a person that suffers from it needs to do.

However, what is presented in my previous post is the definition of humility.

Having a condition that makes humility difficult to achieve does not change the definition.

I do have some personal experience with this. Humility is a tough pill to swallow for an alcoholic or my kind of alcoholic anyway.

Sometimes I have humility and sometimes I don’t. Telling myself that I am humble when I am not will pretty much guarantee that I never will be.

I have to be honest with myself and recognize when I fit the definition of humility and when I don’t.

Jesus, Mary and Joseph pray for us.

Your quoted definition of humity is wonderful.
The prayer for humility is also wonderful.

The major problem with depression is that it ‘paralyzes’ one
so that any effort toward health, toward holiness, seems to be impossible.
Rarely are there any feelings that one can use to “feel” progress or affirm oneself.

 

[LilyM]

Lost_Sheep:

Perhaps, but I think the real reason the CC is against ABC and abortion is to increase its membership.

Surely you jest. Paul VI knew full well, being pressured on all sides to permit ABC, that his decision to teach against it would be extremely unpopular.

He doubtless knew also that it would be unpopular enough to COST membership, as it has in spades.

So it seems to me that, far from wanting to increase Church membership (those advocating the easy and popular route of permitting ABC were surely the ones who wanted increased membership), he took a brave if unpopular stance that he knew would cost.

 

[Lost_Sheep]

Why wouldn’t you want to confess EVERY sin? Are there sins you do not want to confess?

What is the point of going to confession if you are going to deliberately omit a sin?

Put it this way: There are some things the Church considers sinful but I don’t. Yeah, I’m overstepping my bounds here, but that is the way I feel. Why should I be expected to atone for something that I don’t believe is wrong?

Actually, Jesus wants us to be perfect. (Matt 5:48) But don’t you think God understands that we are not perfect?

I have no idea what God thinks and neither do you. I don’t presume to know what God thinks. All I know is that He has laid down certain laws. Not only do we have to obey them, we are flying blind and hoping we are doing everything right.

They wanted Jesus on their terms, not on his.

I suppose I’m guilty of that too. Cha-CHING! Another sin. They do pile up quickly, don’t they?

 

[Lost_Sheep]

Surely you jest.

No, I’m serious as a heart attack.

Paul VI knew full well, being pressured on all sides to permit ABC, that his decision to teach against it would be extremely unpopular.

He doubtless knew also that it would be unpopular enough to COST membership, as it has in spades.

So it seems to me that, far from wanting to increase Church membership (those advocating the easy and popular route of permitting ABC were surely the ones who wanted increased membership), he took a brave if unpopular stance that he knew would cost.

Yes, Pope Paul VI stuck to his guns, and rightly so. But I’m saying the principle behind not permitting ABC is to increase membership; not necessarily that it would be the end result.

Besides, I can understand being against abortion because you are taking a human life but preventing a life vs. taking a life are two different things in my book. Also, I think an argument can be made that a healthy marital relationship can be maintained or made better when the husband wife can engage in lovemaking without the, uh, consequences (for lack of a better word).

Let me clarify another point so you understand where I’m coming from on this. I do not condone extra-marital sex. I don’t not think it is a good idea for teenagers who are not mature or responsible to engage in sex. I think adultery is wrong. But a married couple such as a couple of empty-nesters who have already made their contribution to the world in the form of the next generation should be free to engage in carefree sex.

 

[cfrancis]

No, I’m serious as a heart attack.

Yes, Pope Paul VI stuck to his guns, and rightly so. But I’m saying the principle behind not permitting ABC is to increase membership; not necessarily that it would be the end result.

IF your vision extends only to this world, here and now, your statement has merit.
But if your vision includes what was created in the beginning and what awaits us at the resurrection of the body, your statement woefully misses the mark.

Also, I think an argument can be made that a healthy marital relationship can be maintained or made better when the husband wife can engage in lovemaking without the, uh, consequences (for lack of a better word).

IF you’re buying what the world is selling, then perhaps you are right…but then again, the world has been going about marriage its way since the mid-60’s, complete with contraception and an “anything goes” mentallity in the bedroom, and the divorce and abortion rates speak for themselves. Remember, the selling point for contraception: less abortions, better marital relationships because there will be no “consequences”. The divorce and abortion rates speak for themselves.
But if you invest in God’s plan as He created us AND as Christ has redeemed us AND as in what awaits us in the beatific vision, you’ll come to a different conclusion.

Let me clarify another point so you understand where I’m coming from on this. I do not condone extra-marital sex. (1) I don’t not think it is a good idea for teenagers who are not mature or responsible to engage in sex. I think adultery is wrong. But a married couple such as a couple of empty-nesters who have already made their contribution to the world in the form of the next generation should be free to engage in**(2) carefree sex**.

The first highlighted segment implies that if teenagers do consider themselves (or are considered) mature and responsible, they can engage in sex. Is this what you are saying?
As for the second highlighted statement, I’m not 100% certain, but I’m close, that God never intended the marital embrace to be free of care. As the marital embrace is a pale representation of the love that exists in the Trinity, I’m can’t see using “care-free” as an adjective for it!

 

[Incomplete]

I have no idea what God thinks and neither do you. I don’t presume to know what God thinks. All I know is that He has laid down certain laws. Not only do we have to obey them, we are flying blind and hoping we are doing everything right.

You say you have no idea what God thinks, but you presume to know that He has laid down certain laws that we have to obey…or what? Hell if we do not obey every law? Do you presume to know that this is what God thinks?

 

[Lost_Sheep]

You say you have no idea what God thinks, but you presume to know that He has laid down certain laws that we have to obey…or what? Hell if we do not obey every law? Do you presume to know that this is what God thinks?

We have have God’s law laid out in the commandments, and their subsequent infallible interpretations by the Holy Father. That much we do know. And we strive to obey those laws though, more often than not, falling short of the mark.

So the question is, are our earnest attempts to obey God’s law good enough, or is this a pass-fail examination? Will we be saved with good-faith attempts to be good boys and good girls though we may stumble along the way? Is God going to cut us some slack because we tried? Or is merely trying not good enough because we didn’t succeed?

This is the sort of thing I’m talking about when I say “we don’t know what God is thinking.”

 

[crazzeto]

Natural Family Planning is the best option, I would highly recommend you study up on this system of regulating births.

My wife and I are both in our 50s. We entered into our marriage 25 years ago in good faith with the intent of starting a family, but ended up never having children for reasons I shall not go into at this time. My wife still has her monthly cycle which means she still ovulates which means she could still get pregnant.

There are numerous studies out there that say a first-time pregnancy at this stage of life is asking for trouble. Birth defects, danger to the child and/or mother’s well-being to name just a few. Additionally, there are practical concerns. Even if we were to have a happy, healthy child at this age, we’d be well into our 70s when the child becomes a young adult, goes to college, gets married etc. I feel it would be wrong to put a person at that age in a position to have to care for a senior citizen parent (or arrange for their funeral!)

Nevertheless, we would still like to have a healthy sex life while staying within the good graces of the Church. But as we all know, the Church has a problem with artificial birth control, and frankly, I don’t trust NFP. I know that birth control is permissible when used for treating medical conditions, but I’m not sure if it allowed for preventing a medical condition.

What are our options (besides abstinence)?

 

[Incomplete]

We have have God’s law laid out in the commandments, and their subsequent infallible interpretations by the Holy Father. That much we do know. And we strive to obey those laws though, more often than not, falling short of the mark.

So the question is, are our earnest attempts to obey God’s law good enough, or is this a pass-fail examination? Will we be saved with good-faith attempts to be good boys and good girls though we may stumble along the way? Is God going to cut us some slack because we tried? Or is merely trying not good enough because we didn’t succeed?

This is the sort of thing I’m talking about when I say “we don’t know what God is thinking.”

If God wasn’t going to cut us some slack, what was the point of the cross?

God doesn’t just declare arbitrary laws. Sins are things that ultimately hurt us, as individuals or as a society. For example, you mention birth control. You don’t see how it hurts.

Yet as a woman, I can tell you what a difference it makes in society. Women are generally geared towards relationships, and I’m sure you know there is a great deal of pressure in our society for a woman to have a romantic relationship of some sort. I married a bit later in life and can’t tell you the comments I used to get, things like “always a bridesmaid, never a bride.”

Birth control pills became prevalent in my lifetime. There was a huge difference over a short number of years in my life when this happened. It didn’t take long before women were expected to “give in” if they ever expected to keep dating a guy they liked. In a few years time it went from waiting until marriage, to waiting for awhile, to “what? They’ve dated a few months and she’s still not giving him any? No wonder he left!”

When my daughter was in elementary school (public school) and they were taught about sex, she’d mention waiting until marriage. The kids, all but one of whom came from broken homes, told her that wasn’t right. They told her that you have sex after a date. It’s what you do after a date.

These were fourth graders.

God intends so much more from this gift to us. It’s now become about what we want, not what God would have us have, which is infinitely better.

Having said that, it’s pretty clear in the Bible and in Church teachings that we are not called to be perfect. We are called to love God and love each other, which means we are called to selflessness. We are also called to repent of our sins. Our sins draw us away from God, not because God wants it that way, but because that’s the nature of sin. The more we sin and justify it, the more we become angry with God for His seemingly arbitrary “rules” that we don’t want to obey.

To find it difficult to live that selfless love is natural. We all find it difficult. Our call is to grow in love as best we can and to repent of our failures.

You say we can know God’s mind because of the 10 Commandments and the infallible interpretation by the Holy Father. As well we can know we are called to repentance through what God has spoken in the Bible combined with the infallible interpretation of the Holy Father. In that we can know how easily sin is forgiven.

 

[RichP]

Put it this way: There are some things the Church considers sinful but I don’t. Yeah, I’m overstepping my bounds here, but that is the way I feel. Why should I be expected to atone for something that I don’t believe is wrong?

I understand completely! Why should anyone seek forgiveness when there was no wrong?

There are a number of things I do not think are sinful but are… If I had an opportunity to write the Ten Commandments, I probably would have dropped several of them, changed a couple, and maybe added one or two. But God did not ask for my advice and wisdom!

I think you are saying several things here:

• Your feelings about what is a sin and what isn’t are 100% correct all the time and can never be wrong or misleading. In other words, your feelings are infallible.
• If God is perfect and, by extension, his laws are perfect, then the Church has screwed up badly (accidentally or on purpose) on Scripture and Tradition teaching that some sinful actions really aren’t.
• If the Church didn’t screw up, then maybe God’s laws aren’t so perfect after all…

Logically, only your feelings are correct or the Church (and God) are correct. Both cannot be correct at the same time.

I have no idea what God thinks and neither do you. I don’t presume to know what God thinks. All I know is that He has laid down certain laws. Not only do we have to obey them, we are flying blind and hoping we are doing everything right.

Of course, I do not know exactly what God thinks but I have a good idea, as much as my finite mind will allow…

So why did God give us certain laws? So that we can get to know God, love God, and serve him so that we can be with him for all eternity. Since we have free will, we do not have to obey his laws. We don’t have to be in a relationship with God if we choose not to. But if we choose to be in a relationship with God, if we want to grow our relationship, if we want to have our relationship last forever, obeying his laws are not punitive but formative.

To some extent, we are “flying blind” which is why we have faith and hope in the unknown and the unseen. It certainly is challenging and we cannot “fly blind” alone. We need the grace that God gives us. We receive grace through the sacraments and there are a LOT of graces that we receive in the sacrament of marriage.

Besides, I can understand being against abortion because you are taking a human life but preventing a life vs. taking a life are two different things in my book.

Taking a human life and artificially preventing life are both part of the Culture of Death. One of the problems with ABC is that abortion is often the “next step” when ABC fails.

Also, I think an argument can be made that a healthy marital relationship can be maintained or made better when the husband wife can engage in lovemaking without the, uh, consequences (for lack of a better word).

I think an argument can be made that the main role of a husband and a wife is to help their spouse (and their children if they are parents) get to heaven. Certainly, we better not be an obstacle to them. A husband and wife have a special, unique, and holy bond with each other. The ultimate physical expression of this bond is through lovemaking. If this relationship, this bonding is special, unique, and holy, how can ANY of the consequences be anything but special, unique, and holy?

There is a reason why marriage is a sacrament!

But a married couple such as a couple of empty-nesters who have already made their contribution to the world in the form of the next generation should be free to engage in carefree sex.

Does “carefree sex” really mean “carefree sex”? What happens if a spouse is ill or away on a business trip and unavailable for “carefree sex”? Is the other spouse still entitled to “carefree sex”? Or are they called to chastity to refrain from sex for awhile? The reality is that no spouse is always 100% available for “carefree sex” all the time. That is not the purpose of marriage! We still need to practice chastity even within our marriage!

There has been a lot of discussion here about NFP as a possible solution to your question. I’m sure you have heard a lot about it but have you ever tried it? I won’t jump into the details of NFP but if you have not tried it, you should attend a training course and try it. NFP does a lot of good things. For my wife and I, it improved and increased our intimacy tremendously as we learned so much about each other and each other’s bodies. And if you really love someone, don’t you want to know more about them so you can love them even more?

ABC not only prevents life, it ultimately prevents true marital knowledge and intimacy, and prevents the growth of love.

Peace,

 

[Lost_Sheep]

I understand completely! Why should anyone seek forgiveness when there was no wrong?

There are a number of things I do not think are sinful but are… If I had an opportunity to write the Ten Commandments, I probably would have dropped several of them, changed a couple, and maybe added one or two. But God did not ask for my advice and wisdom!

I think you are saying several things here:

• Your feelings about what is a sin and what isn’t are 100% correct all the time and can never be wrong or misleading. In other words, your feelings are infallible.
• If God is perfect and, by extension, his laws are perfect, then the Church has screwed up badly (accidentally or on purpose) on Scripture and Tradition teaching that some sinful actions really aren’t.
• If the Church didn’t screw up, then maybe God’s laws aren’t so perfect after all…

Logically, only your feelings are correct or the Church (and God) are correct. Both cannot be correct at the same time.

Sure they can.

But Jesus beheld [them], and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible. - Matt. 19:26

For with God nothing shall be impossible. Luke 1:37

And there are dozens of similar references, but you get the idea.

Of course, I do not know exactly what God thinks but I have a good idea, as much as my finite mind will allow…

So why did God give us certain laws? So that we can get to know God, love God, and serve him so that we can be with him for all eternity. Since we have free will, we do not have to obey his laws. We don’t have to be in a relationship with God if we choose not to. But if we choose to be in a relationship with God, if we want to grow our relationship, if we want to have our relationship last forever, obeying his laws are not punitive but formative.

So then how much sin can I get away with and still go to Heaven? [Insert Tongue-in-Cheek emoticon here]

To some extent, we are “flying blind” which is why we have faith and hope in the unknown and the unseen. It certainly is challenging and we cannot “fly blind” alone. We need the grace that God gives us. We receive grace through the sacraments and there are a LOT of graces that we receive in the sacrament of marriage.

Ideally, I’d God to be in my life when I need Him and to stay out of my life when I don’t.

Taking a human life and artificially preventing life are both part of the Culture of Death. One of the problems with ABC is that abortion is often the “next step” when ABC fails.
I think an argument can be made that the main role of a husband and a wife is to help their spouse (and their children if they are parents) get to heaven. Certainly, we better not be an obstacle to them. A husband and wife have a special, unique, and holy bond with each other. The ultimate physical expression of this bond is through lovemaking. If this relationship, this bonding is special, unique, and holy, how can ANY of the consequences be anything but special, unique, and holy?

And you’re telling me that an unexpected newborn baby when a couple is inching towards their twilight years is really a good idea?

There is a reason why marriage is a sacrament!

It’s also been referred to as an “institution”.

Does “carefree sex” really mean “carefree sex”? What happens if a spouse is ill or away on a business trip and unavailable for “carefree sex”? Is the other spouse still entitled to “carefree sex”? Or are they called to chastity to refrain from sex for awhile? The reality is that no spouse is always 100% available for “carefree sex” all the time. That is not the purpose of marriage! We still need to practice chastity even within our marriage!

That’s not what I’m talking about. I mean carefree sex BETWEEN THEMSELVES! In a earlier post, I said that Adultery is wrong.

There has been a lot of discussion here about NFP as a possible solution to your question. I’m sure you have heard a lot about it but have you ever tried it? I won’t jump into the details of NFP but if you have not tried it, you should attend a training course and try it. NFP does a lot of good things. For my wife and I, it improved and increased our intimacy tremendously as we learned so much about each other and each other’s bodies. And if you really love someone, don’t you want to know more about them so you can love them even more?

As I understand it, NFP relies heavily on timing; timing your sexual relations to that period in the woman’s monthly cycle when conception is least likely to occur. But isn’t that really the same as ABC? Deliberately trying to thwart conception? I really don’t see the difference between NFP and ABC. Neither is 100% effective and the expected results (or lack of results) are the same.

Maybe my wife and I have never tried NFP, but I sometimes wonder if NFP proponents have every actually tried sex. You can’t schedule sex like you schedule a doctor’s appointment. For one thing, NFP assumes that both parties will be in the mood for sex during that short window of opportunity and that won’t always be the case. The “moment” will not always be right. The notion of spontaneity is thrown right out the window. What is supposed to be the ultimate expression between an husband and a wife is reduced to being just another household chore that needs to be fit into their harried and hectic lives.

Let’s see now. Wash the dishes, do the laundry, take the dog out, have sex, empty the trash, get the oil changed in the car, schedule my next therapist appointment…

 

[kctigerhawk]

As I understand it, NFP relies heavily on timing; timing your sexual relations to that period in the woman’s monthly cycle when conception is least likely to occur.

For one thing, NFP assumes that both parties will be in the mood for sex during that short window of opportunity and that won’t always be the case.

It appears that your information regarding NFP is a couple of decades old.

NFP relies on scientific observation of a woman’s natural fertility markers to pin point the few days each month a woman is fertile. A woman is infertile for the majority of her cycle. There is no timing involved, and there is plenty of time to for ‘the mood’ to strike.

Additionally, the data gathered by these observations can be used by doctors trained to use it to safely treat a whole range of women’s health issues. This is particularly important for older woman heading into their infertile years. The methods (hormone replacement therapy) used by ‘traditional’ medicine is being increasingly tied to breast cancer.

Not only is NFP the only moral option for avoiding pregnancy, its practice can be used to improve the health and happiness of your wife. Along with all of the benefits to marital happiness experienced by those who use it, as mentioned numerous times in this thread.

Here is a link to information on NFP and how it can be used to treat women’s health issues.

naprotechnology.com/index.html

The following link includes information on the effectiveness of NFP. You may be surprised to learn that it is higher than ABC methods.

popepaulvi.com/PDF/AgentsofChange.pdf

NFP can be used with the wrong intention and be as sinful as ABC. For a more indepth discussion of this topic:

shop.catholic.com/product.php?productid=16717&cat=0&page=1

May the Joy of Christ be in you and may your joy be complete

 

[LilyM]

Ideally, I’d God to be in my life when I need Him and to stay out of my life when I don’t.

Doesn’t work that way. You always need God - can’t move a muscle nor take a step nor breathe a single breath nor think a single thought without His permitting it, even if He doesn’t always approve of it.

And you’re telling me that an unexpected newborn baby when a couple is inching towards their twilight years is really a good idea?

Abraham and Sarah and Zachary and Elizabeth seemed to think it was better than just a good idea. So did God, of course.

As I understand it, NFP relies heavily on timing; timing your sexual relations to that period in the woman’s monthly cycle when conception is least likely to occur. But isn’t that really the same as ABC? Deliberately trying to thwart conception? I really don’t see the difference between NFP and ABC. Neither is 100% effective and the expected results (or lack of results) are the same.

NFP is as much like ABC as selling drugs to obtain money is like honestly earning the same money by working for it. In both cases the means matter every bit as much as the end that they’re aiming at.

Of course the person selling drugs for money may need said money for perfectly legitimate and innocent reasons, like paying bills and putting the kids through college. But that need doesn’t justify using such morally dubious means.

Maybe my wife and I have never tried NFP, but I sometimes wonder if NFP proponents have every actually tried sex.

My sister has a lot to say on the subject - used NFP very successfully (not out of religious conviction, mind you, but out of awareness, she being a doctor, of the often harmful effects of artificial methods) for a decade, had two children when they were ready for kids, haven’t had any in nearly a decade since (presumably because they’ve come to the decision that two is as many as they can handle at the moment).

You can’t schedule sex like you schedule a doctor’s appointment. For one thing, NFP assumes that both parties will be in the mood for sex during that short window of opportunity and that won’t always be the case. The “moment” will not always be right. The notion of spontaneity is thrown right out the window. What is supposed to be the ultimate expression between an husband and a wife is reduced to being just another household chore that needs to be fit into their harried and hectic lives.

Exactly the same thing can happen to couples when they both work long hours, when they have children who take up lots of time, when one or both travel a lot, or for other reasons.

It’s entirely a matter of attitude. If you view sex as a right and resent being able to indulge in it whenever you want, then it will feel like any of the other chores you’ve mentioned, and whatever it be (work or travel or children) that stops you from getting your ‘right’ will become a focus of resentment.

Try instead viewing sex as a privilege, like getting a chance to meet the President or your other favourite person in the world. Or a comparatively rare treat, like the chance to indulge in champagne and caviar or take a trip to Venice. If you look at it this way, then you’ll enjoy it all the more for the fact that it’s not an absolutely-everyday-taken-for-granted kinda thing.

 

[white_sheep]

I don’t see any convincing reason to believe that grave reasons exist for them to either use NFP to permanently prevent conception or to abstain from sex altogether. It seems like this teaching is being misrepresented.

 

[Lost_Sheep]

I don’t see any convincing reason to believe that grave reasons exist for them to either use NFP to permanently prevent conception or to abstain from sex altogether. It seems like this teaching is being misrepresented.

Please clarify.