Condom NFP question?

[LongingSoul]

If you want to start with something with more of a secular spin, research Fertility Awareness Method (FAM). The Church’s teachings conflict with a couple of aspects of the method, but it is a good introduction to how to become aware of your fertility so that you are able to avoid or achieve pregnancy.

I have to disagree with that advice. Fertility Awareness Method is not NFP because it doesn’t stress abstinence to avoid pregnancy. It suggests contraception during the fertile times. A major aspect of NFP is proper shift of fundamental mentality around sex and fertility.

I would suggest to the OP that they/or she could learn through Catholic NFP how to recognise fertility signs while still using condoms regardless, but not to begin a practice of dual ‘unprotected’ and ‘protected’ sex according to fertile times. That doesn’t qualify as ‘natural’ and hinders the necessary shift in mentality that makes NFP positive and prolife in the life of a marriage.

 

[Edangela]

I would suggest to the OP that they/or she could learn through Catholic NFP how to recognise fertility signs while still using condoms regardless, but not to begin a practice of dual ‘unprotected’ and ‘protected’ sex according to fertile times. That doesn’t qualify as ‘natural’ and hinders the necessary shift in mentality that makes NFP positive and prolife in the life of a marriage.

Could you clarify?
I am aware that NFP (with a Catholic emphasis) uses abstinence on fertile days while the other fertility awareness uses condoms. Is this the difference you are referring to? I would like to “not sin” when using NFP so obviously I would not be using condoms but rather abstain.

 

[LongingSoul]

Could you clarify?
I am aware that NFP (with a Catholic emphasis) uses abstinence on fertile days while the other fertility awareness uses condoms. Is this the difference you are referring to? I would like to “not sin” when using NFP so obviously I would not be using condoms but rather abstain.

You are right. However, you’d mentioned your husband was not against condoms so if it is the case that he is not fully on board with the idea of NFP as yet, I think it would be a negative route to use a method that says have unprotected sex while you are infertile and contracept while you are fertile. The virtue in NFP is honed by proper practice but the contraceptive mentality is honed improper use also.

 

[Edangela]

Yes, you are right.

My husband is not on board. I need to convince him that NFP is reliable and actually works before he would even consider. I have started charting this cycle to see how my body works. How many cycles does it take most people before they actually understand and know what they are doing?

Until then ( if I have the grace to convince my husband otherwise) he will be using condoms.

 

[mikekle]

This is something that has perplexed me, I know the CC considers ANY form of birth control to be a sin, and at ANY age, even for couples in their 50s…?? Then we have all the other sexual sins mentioned in the bible…but at the same time, when God creates us, he makes the act of sex between a man/women to be VERY pleasurable, not like some other of Gods animals, in which sex is painful and they dont really enjoy it and only do it for pro-creation…so God creates humans, who are basically hard-wired for sin, have a sinful nature from birth, and STILL, God intentionally makes sex between humans to be as enjoyable as it is…??? Im sorry, but what did god expect to happen with all these things put together in the way they are? LOL

Almost seems like entrapment or a ‘cmon, go ahead and sin’ kind of thing…?

furthermore, another thing I still dont understand, why in the world would sex between 2 men be as enjoyable for gay men? If God was SOOO against this type of behavior, it seems to me he would have ‘engineered’ some negative results should this type of sex be attempted.

 

[ahs]

This is something that has perplexed me, I know the CC considers ANY form of birth control to be a sin, and at ANY age, even for couples in their 50s…??

The reason you might be perplexed is because you “know” something that isn’t actually true. “Birth control” is not a sin, per se. Contraception is a sin. There is a difference.

Then we have all the other sexual sins mentioned in the bible…but at the same time, when God creates us, he makes the act of sex between a man/women to be VERY pleasurable, not like some other of Gods animals, in which sex is painful and they dont really enjoy it and only do it for pro-creation…

Other sins mentioned in the Bible in regard to sexuality are those which abuse or mis-use the Marital Act (sex). Sex within a Marriage is not sinful (as long as it is achieving its two-fold purpose of unity+fecundity). The fact that God made is pleasurable for spouses to be together in this way is an added benefit, to be sure.

…so God creates humans, who are basically hard-wired for sin, have a sinful nature from birth,

No, God created humans to know, love, and serve Him. Sin was not supposed to be part of the equation. Adam and Eve’s disobedience to God is what led to sin and our inherited sinful natures. God did not Will that.

and STILL, God intentionally makes sex between humans to be as enjoyable as it is…??? Im sorry, but what did god expect to happen with all these things put together in the way they are? LOL

God gifted Married spouses with pleasurable sex, and I think that is great. The fact that some people choose to abuse this gift through sin is our own fault, not God’s. We have the freedom to choose to abuse His gifts or not. What God expects is for us to not abuse His gift, and to know, love, and serve Him. I’m not sure how that’s a “LOL” matter??

Almost seems like entrapment or a ‘cmon, go ahead and sin’ kind of thing…?

That would be the devil talking at you, not God.

furthermore, another thing I still dont understand, why in the world would sex between 2 men be as enjoyable for gay men? If God was SOOO against this type of behavior, it seems to me he would have ‘engineered’ some negative results should this type of sex be attempted.

There is a negative result. It’s called “absence from Him when we choose to turn our back on God”. Again, God gave us the gift of sexuality and the added benefit of it being a pleasurable experience. It is not His Will for us to abuse that gift, but we do have free will to do so, because He does not force anyone to know, love, and serve Him.

 

[LongingSoul]

This is something that has perplexed me, I know the CC considers ANY form of birth control to be a sin, and at ANY age, even for couples in their 50s…?? Then we have all the other sexual sins mentioned in the bible…but at the same time, when God creates us, he makes the act of sex between a man/women to be VERY pleasurable, not like some other of Gods animals, in which sex is painful and they dont really enjoy it and only do it for pro-creation…so God creates humans, who are basically hard-wired for sin, have a sinful nature from birth, and STILL, God intentionally makes sex between humans to be as enjoyable as it is…??? Im sorry, but what did god expect to happen with all these things put together in the way they are? LOL

Almost seems like entrapment or a ‘cmon, go ahead and sin’ kind of thing…?

furthermore, another thing I still dont understand, why in the world would sex between 2 men be as enjoyable for gay men? If God was SOOO against this type of behavior, it seems to me he would have ‘engineered’ some negative results should this type of sex be attempted.

mikekle, you are falling prey to a thing we commonly fall prey to and that is misunderstanding the nature of the world and our souls capacity to transcend it.

When you look at nature you see the pull of the flesh (concupiscence in humans) everywhere. For example it was Mothers Day in Aus. today and I received lots of chocolates as part of my presents from my kids… but the whole day my little dog has been following me around begging for a chocolate… stealing wrappers to suck on and basically being very annoying. Chocolate can kill dogs but they LUV it. Another example is when we leave our hot chocolate cup dregs in the sink before going to bed… next morning there’s a million dead flies floating in those dregs. There are things that are just so divine… but they are deadly.

The flesh is weak. The devil asked God if he could have power in the world and that’s what he has. Unlike dumb animals, we humans have a capacity to resist the devils temptations and choose to conform to Gods will. Where would the test of our love be if everything bad was horrible and everything good was delicious?

 

[Rmac81]

This is something that has perplexed me, I know the CC considers ANY form of birth control to be a sin, and at ANY age, even for couples in their 50s…?? Then we have all the other sexual sins mentioned in the bible…but at the same time, when God creates us, he makes the act of sex between a man/women to be VERY pleasurable, not like some other of Gods animals, in which sex is painful and they dont really enjoy it and only do it for pro-creation…so God creates humans, who are basically hard-wired for sin, have a sinful nature from birth, and STILL, God intentionally makes sex between humans to be as enjoyable as it is…??? Im sorry, but what did god expect to happen with all these things put together in the way they are? LOL

Almost seems like entrapment or a ‘cmon, go ahead and sin’ kind of thing…?

furthermore, another thing I still dont understand, why in the world would sex between 2 men be as enjoyable for gay men? If God was SOOO against this type of behavior, it seems to me he would have ‘engineered’ some negative results should this type of sex be attempted.

Sex within marriage mirrors God’s love for the Church. Marriage is a sacrament, and the unitive act is holy. Dr. Popcak’s book Holy Sex! does an excellent job of teaching what sex is really meant to be, instead of what our culture has stripped it down to. I’m still fighting against what I was taught sex was, and working towards seeing sex as holy.

 

[mikekle]

The flesh is weak. The devil asked God if he could have power in the world and that’s what he has. Unlike dumb animals, we humans have a capacity to resist the devils temptations and choose to conform to Gods will. Where would the test of our love be if everything bad was horrible and everything good was delicious?

Well, Satan FELL from grace, was kicked out of heaven for this, so why in the world would God grant him ANYTHING? LOL

I see what you are saying and the more I think about it, the more I think Satan did not go against God, but was only doing what he was intended to do…in the end, Satan is the alternative, so there can be a choice, if he did not fall, and there was no temptation for us, we would likely all be good people living in a paradise, but that is not what God wanted, so he HAD to create an alternative.

I think the story of Satans fall, taking 1/3 of the angels with him, is just that…a story to make people understand it better, but in reality, Id say nothing of the sort took place, and Satan is doing exactly as God instructed him to do. There is just no way God would grant Satan all kinds of powers and abilities if he had truly went against God as depicted in the bible, I mean, he created hell as their place of punishment, but it seems they can come and go as they like, have the capability to influence many many people, what angel, especially a fallen one, has those kinds of powers?!! LOL, doesnt seem like much of punishment to me!

 

[agapewolf]

I got pregnant tracking cervical mucous. It was a dry day. Totally dry. Still got pregnant.

If that was the only factor in determining a non-fertile time, then you did it wrong.

 

[ktmeyer]

If that was the only factor in determining a non-fertile time, then you did it wrong.

I was also using predicted ovulation date, and ended up being a bit off. But it was my understanding that the poster above was saying one didn’t need to track other things, just cervical mucous. I was disagreeing, saying that cervical mucous alone is NOT enough of an indicator, as my son is evidence of. Better tracking of predicted ovulation date would have helped. This pregnancy, for the record, was the result of marital relations on a dry day (dry at cervix) 4 days before ovulation.

 

[agapewolf]

I was also using predicted ovulation date, and ended up being a bit off. But it was my understanding that the poster above was saying one didn’t need to track other things, just cervical mucous. I was disagreeing, saying that cervical mucous alone is NOT enough of an indicator, as my son is evidence of. Better tracking of predicted ovulation date would have helped. This pregnancy, for the record, was the result of marital relations on a dry day (dry at cervix) 4 days before ovulation.

I disagree that cervical mucous alone is not enough. There are 2 very reliable methods that use it alone. CM is the MAIN indicator in all 4 reliable methods. In addition, these methods are not internal checking at cervix, so you did not use a cm only method correctly. Methods cannot be mixed.

My point with you is that simply saying “dry day” does not automatically make one in a non-fertile time. There are other factors taken into account to determine that, and I’m not talking about symptoms.

 

[LongingSoul]

I disagree that cervical mucous alone is not enough. There are 2 very reliable methods that use it alone. CM is the MAIN indicator in all 4 reliable methods. In addition, these methods are not internal checking at cervix, so you did not use a cm only method correctly. Methods cannot be mixed.

My point with you is that simply saying “dry day” does not automatically make one in a non-fertile time. There are other factors taken into account to determine that, and I’m not talking about symptoms.

I remember this phenomenon quite well back in ‘my day’. I would regularly have a completely dry day in between mucous days. I would not take a chance on them though if we were avoiding pregnancy.

 

[agapewolf]

I remember this phenomenon quite well back in ‘my day’. I would regularly have a completely dry day in between mucous days. I would not take a chance on them though if we were avoiding pregnancy.

a dry day in between mucous days is not considered a non-fertile time in Creighton.

rephrased: Using a dry day that was in between mucous days would be considered using the method to achieve pregnancy in Creighton.

(just to be clear, agreeing with longing soul)

 

[ktmeyer]

a dry day in between mucous days is not considered a non-fertile time in Creighton.

rephrased: Using a dry day that was in between mucous days would be considered using the method to achieve pregnancy in Creighton.

(just to be clear, agreeing with longing soul)

The time I’m referring to was not in between mucous days. I hadn’t had a mucous day. However, I was breastfeeding, which I’m sure influenced this.

 

[agapewolf]

The time I’m referring to was not in between mucous days. I hadn’t had a mucous day. However, I was breastfeeding, which I’m sure influenced this.

Your particular anecdote of :

-tracking cm only
-ovulation prediction
-breastfeeding

in NO WAY can give any kind of experience to Cm only methods not working.

By the way, ovulation can’t be predicted. That can change due to many factors.

 

[Allegra]

Just an FYI…

I’ve read the secular book and used the fertility test strips and monitor.

Now that I’m using the Creighton model, I can see there was absolutely no reason to spend so much money each month for the test strips. In addition, it was a pain to get up every morning and use them. The test strips and temperature taking I did for so long only let you know if you’ve already ovulated. Whereas now with Creighton, and I’m sure others are similar, I know when my body is preparing to be fertile. I just don’t see how anyone gets pregnant using Creighton. Now the temperature taking would let you know the exact day you ovulate I suppose, but unless you’re trying to figure that out specifically (like we were bc we’ve been unable to conceive) then I don’t know why you’d put in that extra effort.

don’t waste the money on test strips.

I use Creighton as well and it worked great for us. The only problem is now that I’m breast-feeding, it seems like I have mucus constantly, and there are a lot less usable days. I’m starting to consider trying the monitor and seeing if it works better.

 

[Allegra]

Yes, you are right.

My husband is not on board. I need to convince him that NFP is reliable and actually works before he would even consider. I have started charting this cycle to see how my body works. How many cycles does it take most people before they actually understand and know what they are doing?

Until then ( if I have the grace to convince my husband otherwise) he will be using condoms.

My instructor told us to abstain during the whole first cycle, so that I could get the hang of identifying CM without having the confusion of seminal fluid to deal with. I think it was probably the third cycle where I felt really comfortable.

 

[ktmeyer]

Your particular anecdote of :

-tracking cm only
-ovulation prediction
-breastfeeding

in NO WAY can give any kind of experience to Cm only methods not working.

By the way, ovulation can’t be predicted. That can change due to many factors.

I’m not saying they can never work. But…I was tracking CM, and hadn’t had ANY that cycle. So I don’t know how you can say I should have been using something else to better figure things out. My only other clue was my typical day of ovulation, which as you mentioned, changes often. As for breastfeeding, if the Church wants us to have children, it stands to reason women will spend a LOT of time breastfeeding. So anything that doesn’t work while nursing is not a valid option for many women. My daughter was almost 2 years old, waiting until NOT nursing to do NFP isn’t really an option.

So saying that I can’t give any kind of experience to CM only methods not working doesn’t make sense. I’m happy for you to clear up what on earth else one would have been tracking in the Creighton model if there was no mucus.

 

[mommamaree]

I’m not saying they can never work. But…I was tracking CM, and hadn’t had ANY that cycle. So I don’t know how you can say I should have been using something else to better figure things out. My only other clue was my typical day of ovulation, which as you mentioned, changes often. As for breastfeeding, if the Church wants us to have children, it stands to reason women will spend a LOT of time breastfeeding. So anything that doesn’t work while nursing is not a valid option for many women. My daughter was almost 2 years old, waiting until NOT nursing to do NFP isn’t really an option.

So saying that I can’t give any kind of experience to CM only methods not working doesn’t make sense. I’m happy for you to clear up what on earth else one would have been tracking in the Creighton model if there was no mucus.

I am curious because I haven’t learned about the Creighton method, but does it involve charting and keeping track of which cycle day one is on? The sympto-thermal method keeps track of that and has rules for that. For example, for those who don’t have a long charting history, Phase II is said to start on day 6 (sixth day after starting period). So even if there is no mucus yet, we still presume fertility. There are a couple more rules we can use with a longer charting history that can add a couple more days after the period. But it is still only about a week of Phase I. Does Creighton involve any kind of such charting with cycle day?

Edited to add:
Phase I - first day of period until beginning of Phase II = infertile
Phase II - presumed fertility until several days after ovulation has occurred
Phase III - post-ovulation infertile time