Birth control

[DavidPalm]

I suspect that you are a sedevacantist, else that much support from the Popes would convince you. Tell us plainly, please, if you are or are not a sedevacantist. If you are not, please tell us why you reject the repeated teachings of the Roman Pontiffs on this point.

Come on, tell us plainly whether you are a sedevacantist or not. I would be willing to discuss this matter with someone who holds John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, and Benedict XVI to be authentic Popes, but it’s a complete waste of time otherwise. So speak up.

 

[Walter_X_Mitty]

Isn’t the point that you have to be open to new life?

 

[Methodi]

How many Catholics truly live by the church’s teachings on not using birth control? I feel like the last guy in America who does. At least that’s what everyone tells me.

I do not think many do, & the Church knows it, but its a touchy thing to go after catholics for, so the church treads gently on the issue. Just my opinion, dont think it`s far off tho

 

[weepixie71]

nfp and fpm are the same thing

naturale family planning

family planning method

 

[Extempore]

Come on, tell us plainly whether you are a sedevacantist or not. I would be willing to discuss this matter with someone who holds John XXIII, Paul VI, John Paul I, John Paul II, and Benedict XVI to be authentic Popes, but it’s a complete waste of time otherwise. So speak up.

There’s a world of difference, I think, between pointing out the difference between infallable teaching and private opinion and being a sedevacantist. Trying to equate the two is just kind of silly.

The real issue seems to be a question of whether the teachings of the Popes after Pius X were statements of the Ordinary Magisterium or whether they were simply private opinions of those Popes.

 

[eelpis]

Truth is not determined by numbers, otherwise the Chinese would always be right.

The Church’s teaching on contraceptives is from apostolic times and cannot be changed ever.

 

[DavidPalm]

There’s a world of difference, I think, between pointing out the difference between infallable teaching and private opinion and being a sedevacantist. Trying to equate the two is just kind of silly.

The real issue seems to be a question of whether the teachings of the Popes after Pius X were statements of the Ordinary Magisterium or whether they were simply private opinions of those Popes.

Fine. Then let him pony up with a statement that he accepts all of those I listed above as valid Popes and we can continue. Otherwise, it’s pointless to discuss since any source we bring to the table can be dismissed out of hand as not being by a “real Pope”.

 

[sonofourlady]

Show me an infallible teaching contrary to Pius XI’s teaching that any sexual intercourse is immoral where there is an intention of not having children.

Just because a Pope gives his private opinion on something (and while doing it scandalizes the faithful) does not mean that it is infallible or even beneficial for Catholics.

First off its not a private opinion, but the teaching of the Church. Secondly you don’t understand the basic nature of NFP. NFP is about abstaining from having sex during fertile periods. When they do have sexual intercourse there is always the intention of being OPEN to children.

 

[PJM]

How many Catholics truly live by the church’s teachings on not using birth control? I feel like the last guy in America who does. At least that’s what everyone tells me.

My dear freind in Christ,

Your half way to heaven!

When it’s not easy, it’s a darn sure sign that is’s the right thing to do:clapping::extrahappy:

God is happy with your humility and obedience, keep it up.

Love and payers,

 

[savienu]

My husband and I use natural family planning and reject artificial contraceptives.

 

[Cracker_Mom]

I agree with everyone here, Birth Control/Natural Family Planning are very evil under any circumstances

Well, one sure wouldn’t agree with with the Catechism if they believe NFP is evil under any circumstance. Nor the pope. (Nor with me for that matter…)

 

[savienu]

I’m not sure why this was addressed to me, but at any rate, I agree with everything you said. NFP is very versatile and is not just used to space births, but to conceive as well.

 

[savienu]

Oh, okay. I thought that might be it, but I wasn’t sure. It’s so hard to tell online, y’know? Plus, I’ve got pregnancy brain.

 

[Michael96]

Just a side note: All BC, excluding condoms, are abortificants.

Other methods that are not abortificiant are:

Vasectomy
Tubal ligation
The cap

Personally I don’t have a problem with non-abortificiant methods; I think it can be quite a sensible decision, esepcially later in married life.

 

[savienu]

Other methods that are not abortificiant are:

Vasectomy
Tubal ligation
The cap

Personally I don’t have a problem with non-abortificiant methods; I think it can be quite a sensible decision, esepcially later in married life.

It’s a good thing we have the Magisterium to listen to about what is or isn’t appropriate for married couples to do regarding spacing births. Why is natural family planning not a sensible option for you, exactly?

 

[savienu]

Oh I agree. I’ve still got a long way to go, no doubt, but having children has helped with a LOT of my selfishness. Not that childless people are selfish, mind you, just talking about my own life in particular, y’know?

 

[Isaac_Jogues]

First off its not a private opinion, but the teaching of the Church.

It’s not a teaching of the Church that is infallible(ordinary or extraordinary magisterium), but merely private opinion based on a lack of trust in God’s will.

Secondly you don’t understand the basic nature of NFP.

When used properly, there is no chance whatsoever of getting pregnant. The seed cannot fertilize the egg if it isn’t there. 99% accuracy is pretty good. The other percent is based on correct usage.
I think it is you who does not understand being open to life.

NFP is about abstaining from having sex during fertile periods.

So abstaining only while the wife is fertile is being open to life. Wow!

When they do have sexual intercourse there is always the intention of being OPEN to children.

The openess to life is determined by whether the couple uses NFP correctly or not. That doesn’t sound very open.
If a couple only uses the marital act while the female can’t get pregnant, they are not being open to life.

 

[Michael96]

Why is natural family planning not a sensible option for you, exactly?

To be honest that goes into more personal detail than I am willing to give on a public forum. But I believe sometimes a more reliable method than NFP is required.

 

[Jennifer_J]

It’s not a teaching of the Church that is infallible(ordinary or extraordinary magisterium), but merely private opinion based on a lack of trust in God’s will.

When used properly, there is no chance whatsoever of getting pregnant. The seed cannot fertilize the egg if it isn’t there. 99% accuracy is pretty good. The other percent is based on correct usage.
I think it is you who does not understand being open to life.

So abstaining only while the wife is fertile is being open to life. Wow!

The openess to life is determined by whether the couple uses NFP correctly or not. That doesn’t sound very open.
If a couple only uses the marital act while the female can’t get pregnant, they are not being open to life.

Is it sinful to abstain totally? No. Is it a sin to abstain at all? No. Does the Church state you may only have sex when the woman is fertile? No.

The reason NFP is a licit form of spacing births is because the ACT REMAINS UNALTERED. There is nothing about the ACT that is changed. It is done and completed as God has created it. This cannot be said of contraception. Each act is altered when contraception is used. Your reasonings for thinking NFP is wrong are flawed. NFP allows each act to be open to procreation–whether the woman is fertile or not. This teaching is why infertile couples can be married licitly in the Church. Fertility is not an impediment, while impotence (or the inability to have sex) is.

 

[SourGrape]

We are looking here at a long and totally unbroken tradition by which the See of Peter has approved the use by spouses of periodic continence in order to avoid conception, when their personal circumstances truly constitute a just cause for that avoidance. That sort of Catholic tradition ought to be enough to satisfy any Catholic traditionalist. (Is Natural Family Planning a ‘Heresy’?)
[/INDENT]

David, thanks for the link to that article!