Birth control dissenter

[diosa25]

Point taken. However, I would never encourage any negative behaviour in my children. I would constantly bring them back into what is the expectation. Certainly rules and teachings have their proper place in both the church and society, otherwise we would have anarchy on our hands, as I mentioned. However, Jesus commands us (law) to love above all else (spirit of the law). Would it be better for those struggling with this issue to leave the church (or their faith) over this one issue (God forbid!!!) Where we fail, there is love and forgiveness. This does not relax the teaching, only bringing the reality of it, to us, less than perfect, creatures!

**Again, this confirms that you seem to be looking for compassion in dealing with the struggle. No one says you must leave the church and no one is forcing you out. I’m sorry that more people have not been supportive in recognizing your struggles. **

I’ve read a bit. I have never used either ABC or NFP, I just am not very fertile, so it has never been an issue in our marriage. Now that I cannot have any more children at all due to complications with the last one, it will never be an issue in my marriage.

I base my thoughts mostly on my knowledge of developmental biology.

I feel the church is bending by allowing NFP. If you are going to allow that, you might as well allow barrier methods.
**If we keep in mind that our bodies were created by God FIRST, and that we have always had fertile time and infertile times of the month in our cycles, then it would make more sense that other denominations are “bending” by allowing contraception. You have it backwards. NFP was first whether it had a name or not. It always existed. NFP was just given a name and people were taught how to read their fertility. God gave us infertile breaks in our cycle, so we just go along with them. He did not say we cannot have intercourse during them. By using NFP we go along with his creation to plan our family. By using condoms, we selfishly say “I want more”. **

I used NFP with my husband to prevent pregnancy after my first son was born because I was not able to breastfeed while having to go back to work and I was fertile about 3 months after that. We used NFP to abstain for aobut 6 months. I know the struggles with it as we have been there. Our marriage did not break up but it was hard. That being said, I don’t understand how NFP can break up a marriage. I agree with some other posters who have said that there were probably already problems and NFP tested the marriage and then amplified the problems. Given that a woman is only fertile for a very short period that requires abstaining for about a week or 2, I don’t see how that is so hard that it causes divorce. I highly doubt that many married couple have intercourse every night or every other night of the month (although so probably do). So 1-2 weeks should be doable. Hard, but doable. While it is hard, that is why it should be done in prayer as well. Only God can give the graces necessary to work through it. My opinion is based on my own experiences. I do understand that it is harder for others to abstain, but that is where God is just giving you the opportunity to build self control. And if you can do it in this area, then you can do it anywhere.

 

[shannyk]

If we keep in mind that our bodies were created by God FIRST, and that we have always had fertile time and infertile times of the month in our cycles, then it would make more sense that other denominations are “bending” by allowing contraception. You have it backwards. NFP was first whether it had a name or not. It always existed. NFP was just given a name and people were taught how to read their fertility. God gave us infertile breaks in our cycle, so we just go along with them. He did not say we cannot have intercourse during them. By using NFP we go along with his creation to plan our family. By using condoms, we selfishly say “I want more”.

What a great post!!!

 

[Good_Daughter]

I have tried to conform myself to Church teaching on artificial birth control. I have read and studied, tried to understand why, and to see the reasoning behind the teaching.

I have a question for you:

You say you’ve read and studied, so WHY, do you think, does Catholicism teach against contraception?

 

[Serap]

NFP was my final stumbling block to becoming fully integrated in the Catholic teachings. I had an issue with this as well.

I finally gave NFP a chance and once I began to pratice NFP, I realized it was a lot easier than I thought it would be. My husband is not a practicing Catholic, but respects my desire to not use ABC.

I let my husband know in advance when we can make love. I tell him straight up that if we don’t make love that day, he’ll have to wait just over a week for my fertility window to close. I usually get a quick “ok” and he drops whatever he’s doing

So now that we’ve been using NFP, love making is so much more passionate for me. I feel closer to my husband and God. I never ever thought I could associate God with “sex”, but for some reason, using NFP makes me feel closer to God while I’m in the act.

At first my husband didn’t accept NFP very well, so I prayed and my prayers were answered. My husband became more open in a short amount of time.

Before I began NFP, I read over and over that abstaining during my fertile time would be hard b/c a woman is more aroused during her ovulation time. I also had a problem with personal gratification, so I was afraid of failing in both areas. With daily prayer (in particular the Rosary), God has taken those temptations away. I was on the pill for 6 years and I can tell you that making love to my husband is 100 times more satisfying now than it ever was using the pill.

I finally get what the church teaches. NFP IS completely different than ABC. Having said that, I would never judge a person using ABC. That’s up to God and God is very merciful.

 

[Calliso]

I am probably going to botch this explanation but this is the one that made it “click” for me. I think it came from Janet Smith’s talk.

It’s not about what is more effective. It’s not a numbers game, it is about chosing to act.

When you use a contraceptive, especially a barrier method, you chose to act against life in the moment.

When you abstain, you are not acting.

True, something can be sinful by ommission. But married couples are not expected to have sex every night or to have sex on every fertile day. Sometimes you have sex, sometimes you don’t. So chosing not to have sex on any given day is not a sin of ommission.

Even though I still donlt agree with the teaching and it still doesn;t totally logically make sense to me why NFP is allowed but condoms aren;t. This is one of the first posts that I have seen that has gotten me close to trully understanding why you all believe as you do.!

 

[BlestOne]

Has anyone yet pointed out that the Lambeth conference is Anglican not Catholic?
Lambeth Conference 2008

The Lambeth Conference is one of the global Anglican Communion’s Instruments of Communion.
It takes place every ten years at the invitation of the Archbishop of Canterbury.

 

[Steeltemplar]

Even though I still donlt agree with the teaching and it still doesn;t totally logically make sense to me why NFP is allowed but condoms aren;t. This is one of the first posts that I have seen that has gotten me close to trully understanding why you all believe as you do.!

One of the key things is that NFP is not intended as contraception.

I have seen people say things along the lines of “We used NFP but had a baby anyway, so NFP failed”.

No, NFP did not fail. NFP is not contraception.

The purpose is merely to help space out births, not to prevent them. And that is a very different thing from a condom.

 

[basilisk]

In my first post, I said that I thought the Anglicans were ahead of us on this one. So yes, it has been pointed out that it was an Anglican conference.

Perhaps I have not studied or read enough. My main problem, and where I call it dissent instead of just struggle to obey, is that especially the natural law arguments don’t wash for me.

 

[Arnobius]

There is a common misconception that NFP = Catholic Contraception. It is not so.

Contraception is the actively making use of the marital act, but preventing it from having a possibility of life.

NFP refrains from the sexual act during times when conception is possible. Since a couple does not sin by mutual consent to refrain from marital relations for a good reason, the couple is not contracepting.

So this klnd of comparison is a false analogy.

As for the "Church could have made a mistake

Innocent III admitted that ‘it sometimes happens that the Church looses one whom God has bound, and binds by the judgement of the Church one who in God’s sight is free’;

I would like to see the context of what Innocent III said, as a Google search reveals only your link and this thread with any such statement.

It is curious that the quote given in the OP comes from a partial statement from that article. In full, the article says

I am not raising the difficult question of infallibility in their exercise. Even Innocent III at the height of ecclesiastical idealism admitted that ‘it sometimes happens that the Church looses one whom God has bound, and binds by the judgement of the Church one who in God’s sight is free’; but I see manifold reason to believe that in the case of Birth Prevention the 'very strong tradition in the Catholic Church ’ has been in the right, and has divine sanction. It is a practice which it has rightly judged to be unnatural, like other sadly common misuses of the sexual organs.

.

We need to remember that while we need to follow conscience, we need to follow a properly formed conscience within the teaching of the Church, and not make an unformed conscience into a deification of what we want

 

[Good_Daughter]

Perhaps I have not studied or read enough. My main problem, and where I call it dissent instead of just struggle to obey, is that especially the natural law arguments don’t wash for me.

Are you able to articulate why you think the Church teaches as it does on contraception?

It’s important to understand a teaching before dissenting from it. So far, you’ve shared both your struggles with Catholic teaching and your admiration for Anglican teaching on contraception but you have yet to demonstrate a solid understanding of Catholic teaching on the issue. If you can, please do so.

If you’re still questioning the “whys” of Catholic teaching on contraception, it may be helpful to get those questions asked.

 

[Em_in_FL]

Perhaps I have not studied or read enough. My main problem, and where I call it dissent instead of just struggle to obey, is that especially the natural law arguments don’t wash for me.

What is the “natural law argument”?

 

[Ruthie]

I strongly agree with Good Daughter.

I’m another for whom the question of birth control is abstract; I’m past menopause. Perhaps that makes it easier for me.

But what helped me a great deal in coming to terms with the Church’s teaching about it was by searching for the love behind it. And I found it…

Lovemaking should be exactly that: making love. When we marry, we give ourselves totally to each other and to God. The marital union is, among other things, a renewal of our vows. It is also a total giving of one’s self to the other.

If I ask my DH to wear a condom, I’m effectively saying to him, “I love all of you - except your fertility.” And having sex while fearing getting pregnant is also not the complete union our loving God wants us to have.

Hope that helps…

Two more notes. In general, the marriages that are in trouble over NFP usually have one partner who is dedicated to using it, but the other isn’t. One is willing to abstain during fertile times, the other is selfish about sex. Those where both couples are dedicated rarely break up.

Second: they call it “family planning” because it can be used for all aspects of it. Knowing when the fertile periods are is just as good for making a baby as for avoiding one. Neither a condom nor any other artificial method allows that.

Look for the love, Basilisk; it’s there. I promise.

God bless you,

Ruthie

 

[shannyk]

What is the “natural law argument”?

I was wondering this myself. Maybe there is something you can banter around with on this thread to help better understand it? I haven’t met a better bunch of people to explain the ins and out’s of NFP than here.

 

[basilisk]

Just to let you know, I am not ignoring the questions y’all have posed to me. I am just short on time with family stuff. And the next post will probably be a long and involved one, so I have to wait until I have a chunk of time.

I am coming back, I promise…

 

[LeroyCRHP]

Life will be so great when the Pope opens up and allows us to practice cafeteria style. We can just practice what we want.:hypno:

 

[mpi]

From: [I cannot tell you how many threads I have read on these boards full of pain, sorrow, despair, anger, and sadness, because trying to practice NFP has destroyed marriages. Use whatever semantic tool you wish to deflect that, but it is NFP itself which is the ruin of what might otherwise have been loving, happy, lifelong marriages. …)](I cannot tell you how many threads I have read on these boards full of pain, sorrow, despair, anger, and sadness, because trying to practice NFP has destroyed marriages. Use whatever semantic tool you wish to deflect that, but it is NFP itself which is the ruin of what might otherwise have been loving, happy, lifelong marriages.)

I agree NFP destroys marriages - so does ABC. That is why couples should just have sex whenever they want and accept any babies they are blessed with. Catholics who engage in family planning (NFP or ABC) are usually sinning - at least in the context of the Western world as there is so little abject poverty. Only serious health issues seems legitimate for using NFP.

 

[Steeltemplar]

I agree NFP destroys marriages - so does ABC. That is why couples should just have sex whenever they want and accept any babies they are blessed with. Catholics who engage in family planning (NFP or ABC) are usually sinning - at least in the context of the Western world as there is so little abject poverty. Only serious health issues seems legitimate for using NFP.

I suspect that anyone whose marriage is adversely effected by NFP is:

1. Practicing NFP with the wrong intent. As I stated earlier, it is not a contraceptive and if you have a contraceptive mentality about it then that is a problem.

and/or

1. Having other serious problems in the marriage.

You are correct that NFP is meant to be used for health reasons (or poverty reasons). So again we see how the contraceptive mentality is against the spirit of NFP.

 

[mommymichelle]

For everyone who is having a hard time, I’m sorry. I feel your pain. :grouphug:

 

[Calliso]

I agree NFP destroys marriages - so does ABC. That is why couples should just have sex whenever they want and accept any babies they are blessed with. Catholics who engage in family planning (NFP or ABC) are usually sinning - at least in the context of the Western world as there is so little abject poverty. Only serious health issues seems legitimate for using NFP.

And what about mental reasons? Not everyone can just handle kid after kid after kid. I am sure there has been more then a few marriages strained because of too many kids.

 

[PaulinVA]

Weren’t the Anglicans the first Christian denomination to cave on this? Now they are in total disarray. Why follow them?

What’s the big deal about ABC versus NFP? NFP requires us to tell ourselves no to sex (if you are abstaining). This is the absolute issue. Can people go for two weeks without sex? Isn’t that the issue?

Another problem is when the woman is practicing NFP and the husband is not - that creates denial and I don’t have the answer to that.