Ruthie:
Vincent, you sound like me about a year ago!
I hope you followed Scott’s advice to read
catholic.com/thisrock/1991/9107chap.asp.
It’s short and sweet.
That’s a good, tough question. I can’t give a short answer; please bear with me.
NFP is natural, just like it says. It uses what God has already given us: the natural cycles of the woman’s body.
As an earlier writer said, a couple may not use NFP to avoid children. It should be used to space children, when that is desireable for a good reason. Finances are only one; there are also women who need to space their children to recover their health between pregnancies. There are also brave women who use NFP to avoid pregnancy because a pregnancy could kill them. The “sane” person might go ahead and contracept - the Catholic person trusts God.
Of course, those arguments can also be used in favor of contracepting. So why is contracepting wrong?
Because we are messing with God’s plan. Abstaining during fertile days does not prevent anything; if there is no egg, there is no pregnancy. And the reason there is no egg is because God made us that way, not because we decided for ourselves what we would allow God’s will to be.
Catholic marriages must be open to new life. Contraception is an act of self will, which closes the marital embrace to new life, and is thus an offence against marriage.
At Gethsemane, Jesus said, “My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as thou wilt.” (Matt 26:39)
Using contraception is saying only, “Let this cup pass from me.” We’re interfering in God’s will.
Thank you. That is an understandable position to hold. I disagree with it, but understand how one could come to hold it and not be unreasonable. I do not think however that it is possible to conclude from Scripture that sex is only meant for pro-creation (see my above posts). Indeed Paul writes to husbands and wives not to deny each other except for times of fasting and prayer inorder to deter them from sexual immorality. Abstaining inorder to comply with the requirements of NFP seems to be an unecessary burden, especially for a young couple; non-abortofacient birth control solves this issue. I agree that children are a gift to be embraced and that a married couple should be willing to be parents. However part of being good parents could include limiting their family to what they can provide for, protecting the mother if another pregnancy would harm or kill her (which would also make her incapable of fulfilling her obligation to care for already existing children) etc. I also disagree with NFP being acceptable as opposed to other birth control because it is natural. God gaves us brains to subdue nature and master it (within certain constraints of course i.e. no human cloning) Modern medicine enables us to lead healthier, longer and happier lives by altering the natural course our bodies would otherwise take, so I don’t think unnatural equals intrinsically evil.
I read the article and again think its stretching scripture to accomodate a belief. There are other instances were God has seen fit to end life inorder to provide an example to his people, where death was not necessarily warranted according to Levitical law. Lot’s wife was transformed into a pillar of salt for looking back at the city (normally not an executable offense). Abraham was commanded to sacrifice his Son (God ultimately did not require him to, but Abraham’ willingness showed that he did not think it beyond God’s right to demand life at anytime for any reason) and Ananias and Sapphira were struck down for saying they gave more than they actually had to the church. In other cases throughout the Old and New Testament God has chosen to show mercy to those who have committed sins waranting death according to Levitical law (David would be one example off hand seeing as how he committed murder, adultrey and envy all in one go). The point is that the penalties in the Levital laws were for men to enforce the law amongst each other, God is neither bound nor limited by the punishments prescribed in them.
