Contraception and Catholic couples

[Dadof9]

I Fly–I couldn’t agree with you more. These gays think they have a leg to stand on because what really is the purpose of marriage? Many Protestants could not tell you because they don’t know. Great Points you have made. MAJOR DITTOS!

 

[Cindy]

Ric:

I know the issue well, but contraception is not “evil” if it is not the “Pill”. The “Pill” as you know is an abortion by meds. We do not believe in using the “Pill”.

If contraception is not evil “if it is not the Pill,” why then did the Protestant Reformers condemn it? They certainly didn’t have the Pill in their day. Why did Martin Luther call birth control “sodomy,” and why did John Calvin call it a form of “homicide”? Why did all Christians before 1930 believe that contraception was intrinsically evil and gravely sinful?

BTW, the Pill isn’t the only abortifacient contraceptive, but that’s beside the point. The Church teaches that “every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible” is intrinsically evil (CCC 2370).

God bless!

 

[iguana27]

There are so many blessings to have when you use NFP. When you accept all of your spouse, including his/her fertility, you can feel truly close.

Contraception basically says, “I love you, and I want pleasure from relations with you, but I don’t want to create new life with you.”
True women’s liberation comes from respect for the beautiful creative power contained in her body, and NFP helps the couple to recognize and respect that power.

Thank God for NFP. My husband and I have really enjoyed the openness that it creates in our relationship.

What a pleasure to decide to conceive a child for the joy of it, trusting in God to help you provide!

It is not easy, but it is definitely worth the effort!

 

[Veronica_Anne]

Proud2bRC:

I was shocked when I learned that the pill was abortifacient, and angry that no priest had ever warned us from the pulpit.

Me, too. When I was an early teen, Mom had me put on the Pill in order to regulate my period as a preventive measure because my period lasted a little over two weeks and the amount of my flow was like hers… and hers resulted in extreme anemia and she had to get a full hysterectomy for her own health. She and our doctor didn’t want for me to meet the same fate.

When I got older, it was very convenient to already have a prescription for the Pill as I fornicated away. :tsktsk:

When I came back to the Church, I stopped fornicating, stopped taking the Pill, and went to Confession. :getholy: Still, even then my confessor did not tell me that it’s an abortifacient.

We really need to have these kinds of topics covered in the homily. I mean that, sincerely!

Since then, I got married to a man who’d been “fixed” before we met, so I have no way of personally knowing the difference. Or of even knowing how many babies I’d “naturally” aborted!!

Freaks me out, no end!

 

[OhioBob]

Benedictus:

I absolutely agree with you. Far too often promoters of NFP make it sound like periodic abstinence is the Catholiic contraceptive. It is implied that people need to sterilize their marriage somehow, and that Catholics need to do it via NFP.

NFP, when used as a means of avoiding pregnancy, is a legitimate means of spacing births if, and only if, the couple has a serious reason to do so.

Pressing all engaged couples to take NFP classes sends the wrong message. It should not be taken for granted that all couples will need to use NFP at some point.

Starting off a marriage by intentionally avoiding pregnancy seems completely backwards. Children are the primary purpose of marriage. It doesn’t seem right to start of a marriage by avoiding having children.

Jason

I’m probably going to get flamed for this view, but what the heck…

My wife and I began practicing NFP about 6 years ago, although lately we haven’t been abstaining - too old to need to anymore I guess :dancing:

My point is that “serious” is a rather arbitrary term and I think the individual couple is the determinant of whether their reasons for abstaining are “serious enough”. I totally agree that one of the purposes of marriage is procreative (as well as unitive) and that every act of intimacy must be open to the possibility that God will reward that act with the blessing of a child.

However, I feel that if a couple, by using NFP, elects to abstain from intimacy during certain periods for reasons that are serious to them, that that doesn’t suddenly make NFP “Catholic contraception” if the “seriousness” of their reasons don’t pass muster with someone else. God could choose to reward any act of intimacy with conception, even in the less fertile times. As long as the couple does not place barriers to God in their intimacy, I feel they are being true to their vows and the sacremental teachings of the Church regarding marriage.

I can see valid reasons why a newlywed couple might choose to lessen the probability that they will conceive early in their marriage. It might not be your choice, or mine, but if - after reflecting on their situation - that is their choice for their reasons, I would rather have them have learned NFP in PreCana.

Again, as long as each act of intimacy is open to children, I cannot criticize a Catholic who practices NFP. Even if their reasons for abstaining might not seem “serious enough” to me.

Blessings.

 

[Ric]

Cindy:

If contraception is not evil “if it is not the Pill,” why then did the Protestant Reformers condemn it? They certainly didn’t have the Pill in their day. Why did Martin Luther call birth control “sodomy,” and why did John Calvin call it a form of “homicide”? Why did all Christians before 1930 believe that contraception was intrinsically evil and gravely sinful?

BTW, the Pill isn’t the only abortifacient contraceptive, but that’s beside the point. The Church teaches that “every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible” is intrinsically evil (CCC 2370).

God bless!

Ummm…

Did you read what I did say?

I stated that the “pill” was wrong!

 

[Cindy]

Ric:

Ummm…

Did you read what I did say?

I stated that the “pill” was wrong!

Ric,

I* know* you believe the Pill is “wrong.”

In a previous post, you wrote…

I know the issue well, but contraception is not “evil” if it is not the “Pill”. The “Pill” as you know is an abortion by meds. We do not believe in using the “Pill”.

You said, “contraception is not evil if it is not the Pill.” You seem to think that the only “wrong” form of contraception is the Pill. My point was that the Protestant Reformers condemned contraception before the Pill was ever invented! History shows that all Christians condemned contraception – any form of contraception – up until 1930. For 1900 years, *all *Christians believed that contraception was intrinsically evil and gravely sinful. The Catholic Church alone has remained faithful to this teaching. Protestantism and Orthodoxy have succumbed to the secular culture on this and other moral issues.

My offer still stands: If you would like a copy of The Bible and Birth Control by Charles Provan, just email me privately.

God bless!

Cindy

“I am supposing, then, although you are not lying [with your wife] for the sake of procreating offspring, you are not for the sake of lust obstructing their procreation by an evil prayer or an evil deed. Those who do this, although they are called husband and wife, are not; nor do they retain any reality of marriage, but with a respectable name cover a shame. Sometimes this lustful cruelty, or cruel lust, comes to this, that they even procure poisons of sterility. … Assuredly if both husband and wife are like this, they are not married, and if they were like this from the beginning, they come together not joined in matrimony but in seduction” – St. Augustine of Hippo, A.D. 419, Marriage and Concupiscence 1:15:17.

 

[petra]

MichelleTherese:

Yesterday I found a free tape at the Cathedral here in town. It was titled, “Contraception: Why not?” I took it home and immediately plopped onto my bed and listened to it. (A written version can be found at:
catholiceducation.org/articles/sexuality/se0002.html)
You can order tapes of this talk as well.

What a great article!! Thank you for sharing that.

 

[TreeHugger]

Hey Karisue,

You guessed it and I am providing a response to your opinion about grad school. I’m actually going to be getting married next summer, and have had a number of discussions about whether to wait to have children until after i finish grad school. I think there are a number of questions to consider in a situation like this…like, do i plan on staying home with my children? if so, why do i want to go? if i’m in grad school to prepare myself for the workforce, will i need to use NFP while i’m trying to get/when i get a job to establish myself? i think there’s a real danger to using it for these reasons, although you’ve already pointed this out…just thought i’d share with everyone these questions which others have brought to my attention…

 

[pittsburghjeff]

NWUArmyROTC:

When that time (getting married) rolls around, definitely plan on following NFP. It makes sense and I have heard positive things about it, course, I don’t have to cross this bridge quite yet.

Just make sure you discuss it with whoever you are dating as soon as you think there is a possibillity for something serious

Contraception is one of those issues in marriage that you just can’t “compromise” on

I have seen guys sell out on this issue because they were afraid to bring it up early on and then they fell in love and it was too late

 

[mrconrail]

Ric,

I don’t want to come across as attacking you I just want to understand where you are coming from (this is the reason of my first question). I also want to list a few questions for everyone else to think about. The idea of these questions is just to get people to think.

Why did you and your wife reject the information from Pre-Cana about NFP? Did you try NFP?

For those who say that artificial contraception is ok, why? What insight has God given you that he did not give the Church, which Jesus founded?

For those of you who use NFP why? I know that the Church says that NFP is ok but why are you using it? are you using it to avoid children for selfish reasons? (e.g. I can feel good about following the Church’s teaching and still have my SUV)

The following is just my own personal though on the whole issue: All human life is sacred, for not only is it life created by God (which plants and animals are as well) but, it is life which has a soul. It is this soul which makes it sacred. Thus if human life is sacred then so is the way in which it is created.

There are only two ways in which life is created (that I know of) and they are natural (the physical activity between a man and a woman) and artificial (e.g., in vitro fertilization, cloning.) Of these two methods only one is open to the will of God and that is the natural method. The other method forces the will of man on God, by saying that “although God may not want this couple to have a child at this time, this couple’s will is more important.”

Since no one knows which sperm will fertilize an egg no sperm must exit a male (this excludes natural acts that are out of ones own control) unless it is entering a female with the possibility to create new life.

This is why homosexual activity, self-pleasure, contraception, and viscetamies and the like are wrong.

John

 

[OhioBob]

mrconrail:

For those of you who use NFP why? I know that the Church says that NFP is ok but why are you using it? are you using it to avoid children for selfish reasons? (e.g. I can feel good about following the Church’s teaching and still have my SUV)

There’s that “selfish” word again. Right up there with “grave reason” and “serious reason”. I don’t presume to judge the decisions that Catholic couples use in practicing NFP. I still can’t seem to equate abstinence with a contraceptive mentality.

My understanding of Church teaching is that each act of intimacy must be open to the possibility that God will present that act with new life. That is true in every intimate act practiced by an NFP couple. God could certainly choose to create life on “more fertile days” or on “less fertile days”. If a couple chooses to abstain on more fertile days and be intimate on less fertile days, I don’t see how that is considered contracepting. There are no barriers presented to God in the acts of intimacy.

I see it more like saying to God “OK, Big Guy, in our reasoned opinion, this wouldn’t be the greatest time in the world for us to have a child. We would rather wait a bit, so we choose to abstain during the more fertile times and build our marriage through intimacy during the less fertile times. But what the heck, we aren’t placing barriers to Your will, so if You have other ideas for us, Thy will be done.”

We seem to be too quick to judge the hearts of others in their NFP motivations. We should just rejoice that their intimacy is open to life and not place value judgements on their reasons or their timing.

We seem pretty eager to point out the sins of others. I recall that Christ had something to say about that… :tsktsk:

 

[familyof8]

OhioBob,

That line struck a chord with me as well. I agree with you that the post seemed to be an accusation that NFP is the result of selfishness. It amazes me that this conversation causes so much contraversy. This same conversation is taking place in the NFP culture in the Church (or something like that.) with the same lack of understanding.

Perhaps the original poster of the comment had an experience similar to ours. Our NFP instructors told us that NFP was 98-99% effective contraception that was endorsed by the Church. They used it because they didn’t want to be the “little old family that lived in the shoe” and that we could control exactly how many children we wanted to have, the same as when using the pill, etc.

We left there totally repulsed. Never was their any mention about how God created our bodies so wonderfully, that in cooperation with Him and the natural cycles He created, we could prayerfully approach our intimacy, in union with Him, to space our children if we needed. God was never mentioned, nature was never mentioned, the sacramental unity of marital love…nothing.

We left there empty. Praise the Lord that he gave us a priest that preached JPII’s Theology of the Body repeatedly. He gave us information to read that takes your breath away in its beauty. It makes you understand that physical unity is also a spiritual communion, a union with the Holy Spirit that graces your lives. Understanding NFP from this point of view makes your point that abstinence is NOT contracepting, but is a physical sacrifice that may be offered in union with the cross. You are right.

However, I believe many people are not educated and fail to understand the beauty of the Church’s teaching on NFP. That is why there is so much perversion…why bother with NFP and use contraception, using NFP can be the equivalent to contraception, to not using NFP is to not be intellectually engaged in sexual unity. These are all attitudes that are contrary to Church teaching. However, IMHO, the Church has not done its job in educating people on the theology of the body.

If we had not been blessed by learning about the theology of the body, I would probably be struggling with the same sort of opinion as the original poster. When all you have seen of NFP is contraception, it is confusing to understand and detangle it from your heart knowing that contraception is wrong. So, perhaps education would be a better response. I think a discussion on the Theology of the Body would be helpful to those who don’t know anything about it.

 

[OhioBob]

familyof8:

However, I believe many people are not educated and fail to understand the beauty of the Church’s teaching on NFP. That is why there is so much perversion…why bother with NFP and use contraception, using NFP can be the equivalent to contraception, to not using NFP is to not be intellectually engaged in sexual unity. These are all attitudes that are contrary to Church teaching. However, IMHO, the Church has not done its job in educating people on the theology of the body…

When all you have seen of NFP is contraception, it is confusing to understand and detangle it from your heart knowing that contraception is wrong…

I agree completely with what you’ve said. I think the Church has dropped the ball on education regarding the theology of the body. Heck, there are still tons of folks out there who think that Catholics think sex is bad! If they only knew the Church’s true teaching, maybe contraception and abortion wouldn’t be as prevalent as they are today.

I think you also may be right that our NFP eduators might be creating much of the stir by the way the program is taught. Our teacher never used the “NFP is Catholic contraception” argument, but any that do have definately missed the boat.

That being said, however, I still cannot fault a couple who use NFP to time their families (or attempt to, since even with NFP, all intimacy is open to life) no matter what you call it - timing their family, spacing their children, delaying starting a family, etc. etc.

It’s certainly better than the alternative.

Blessings.

 

[johnnyjoe]

familyof8:

OhioBob,

That line struck a chord with me as well. I agree with you that the post seemed to be an accusation that NFP is the result of selfishness. It amazes me that this conversation causes so much contraversy. This same conversation is taking place in the NFP culture in the Church (or something like that.) with the same lack of understanding.

Perhaps the original poster of the comment had an experience similar to ours. Our NFP instructors told us that NFP was 98-99% effective contraception that was endorsed by the Church. They used it because they didn’t want to be the “little old family that lived in the shoe” and that we could control exactly how many children we wanted to have, the same as when using the pill, etc.

We left there totally repulsed. Never was their any mention about how God created our bodies so wonderfully, that in cooperation with Him and the natural cycles He created, we could prayerfully approach our intimacy, in union with Him, to space our children if we needed. God was never mentioned, nature was never mentioned, the sacramental unity of marital love…nothing.

We left there empty. Praise the Lord that he gave us a priest that preached JPII’s Theology of the Body repeatedly. He gave us information to read that takes your breath away in its beauty. It makes you understand that physical unity is also a spiritual communion, a union with the Holy Spirit that graces your lives. Understanding NFP from this point of view makes your point that abstinence is NOT contracepting, but is a physical sacrifice that may be offered in union with the cross. You are right.

However, I believe many people are not educated and fail to understand the beauty of the Church’s teaching on NFP. That is why there is so much perversion…why bother with NFP and use contraception, using NFP can be the equivalent to contraception, to not using NFP is to not be intellectually engaged in sexual unity. These are all attitudes that are contrary to Church teaching. However, IMHO, the Church has not done its job in educating people on the theology of the body.

If we had not been blessed by learning about the theology of the body, I would probably be struggling with the same sort of opinion as the original poster. When all you have seen of NFP is contraception, it is confusing to understand and detangle it from your heart knowing that contraception is wrong. So, perhaps education would be a better response. I think a discussion on the Theology of the Body would be helpful to those who don’t know anything about it.

A couple of quick points.

1. NFP can NEVER be “equivalent” to contraception…it may give a couple some information, and they can decide not to engage in the marital act when they could, but that decision does not place a barrier-chemical, physical, or surgical-between them when they engage in the marital act. You may call a couple who does this “selfish”, but you cannot call them “contracepting”, for to do so swings the argument around what the definition of contraception is. Contraception is not defined by its success rate, it is defined by the barrier it places between the couple.
2. There are all manner of folks teaching NFP, praise God, and as in all things, the Church has it’s share of people who speak wrongly in her name. Indeed JPII’s Theology of the Body is a great opportunity to break us out of our cultural blinders if we are open to it; but the practice of NFP must be emphasised because it does one thing that “contraception” cannot do. It allows the Holy Spirit it enter a couples bedroom and work on their hearts. I believe the Church must offer NFP as an alternative, as an antidote if you will, so that couples have the chance to break out of the cultural mindset. Our contraceptive cultural mindset is very powerful, and I think it naive to think we can simple teach couples to not use “anything” and accept children as God wills. That leaves the contraceptive mindset unchalleged, if you will.

 

[YinYangMom]

OhioBob:

My understanding of Church teaching is that each act of intimacy must be open to the possibility that God will present that act with new life. That is true in every intimate act practiced by an NFP couple. God could certainly choose to create life on “more fertile days” or on “less fertile days”. If a couple chooses to abstain on more fertile days and be intimate on less fertile days, I don’t see how that is considered contracepting. There are no barriers presented to God in the acts of intimacy.

This is the part which stirred trouble in my marriage early on though…because it was difficult to find ‘my’ pattern more often than not I was ‘refusing’ intimacy out of fear of and ‘untimed’ pregnancy. Well, we were basically using NFP to ‘space’ our children since we wanted at least four and were certainly open to ‘something’ happening ‘outside’ the ‘peak time’ as a sign from God that it was meant to be. But unfortunately, not being able to determine that time caused a rift that took many, many years to heal and to be honest, it still isn’t quite there. So here I was saying ‘No’ and hubby, over time, took it personally as rejection. According to the church teachings, it seems I was wrong to say “no” when I did which stirred up trouble, yet I was ‘right’ to say no since we were using the NFP for spacing.

Bottom line…it messed us up…so I’m still so darn confused about how using NFP to not conceive is still in line with our directives to be intimate and open to life.

 

[familyof8]

johnnyjoe:

A couple of quick points.

1. NFP can NEVER be “equivalent” to contraception… You may call a couple who does this “selfish”, but you cannot call them “contracepting”, for to do so swings the argument around what the definition of contraception is.

2)…I think it naive to think we can simple teach couples to not use “anything” and accept children as God wills. That leaves the contraceptive mindset unchalleged, if you will.

Are you replying to my post? I do not believe I said any of those things. Perhaps more careful reading would allow you to understand instead of planning a reply.

I do not believe NFP is contraception. My point was that we went into our NFP class knowing that contraception was wrong and that was the word our instructors repeatedly used. Without knowing or understanding what the church teaches, this leaves you totally confused and creates the objections that others have made repeatedly…the NFP contraception mindset. When you understand why NFP is recommended for the spacing of children and how abstinence is working with natural law and not in violation to it, then NFP makes sense. Otherwise, it doesn’t.

As far as the “selfish” part. If I have written anything about that, I don’t remember. If I did, the only thing I can imagine is that it was in reply to when someone stated that not using NFP (and allowing them to come as they come) was less “holy” than using NFP. I would have simply been trying to point out that people can pervert the teaching of the church. I do not think using NFP is selfish. However, using NFP with a mindset that you do not want children is not in spirit with church teaching.

I have never advocated that the church teaches that we should “accept children as God wills” and not use NFP. We personally do not use NFP since we have not discerned a serious reason to space our children more than they already are. However, that is our personal decision, not one I have stated was a teaching of the church.

 

[OhioBob]

YinYangMom:

So here I was saying ‘No’ and hubby, over time, took it personally as rejection. According to the church teachings, it seems I was wrong to say “no” when I did which stirred up trouble, yet I was ‘right’ to say no since we were using the NFP for spacing.

Bottom line…it messed us up…so I’m still so darn confused about how using NFP to not conceive is still in line with our directives to be intimate and open to life.

I’m sorry that you had the experience you did with NFP. As a hubby myself, it sounds like he wasn’t quite at the same place you were with regard to the “pros” of NFP (the communication/intimacy part) and was focusing on the “cons” (the abstaining part). I admit that I didn’t come to a full appreciation of NFP as quickly as my wife did (It must be a guy thing).

Seriously though, I can see that if both parties are not equally committed to NFP as a relationship builder, not just a kid-spacer, your experience might not be unique.

I don’t think NFP is a panacea. I suppose that, depending upon how it was taught and how it is embraced, it can work in both positive and negative ways. More reason to pray for NFP educators and that our Bishops/Priests step up with their teaching on JPII’s theology of the body.

Blessings.

 

[mrconrail]

Some times after posting a question or statement it is clear that it should have been stated differently to get across the point trying to be made. Let me try to clear up what my original thought was on the issue of NFP.

When I ask why are you using NFP? Is it out of selfishness? My thought behind that was, when my wife and I were preparing for marriage we had decided to use NFP, Shortly into our marriage we begin to ask each other "why are we following NFP? Why not just enjoy each other fully when ever we wanted to and let God surprise us in his time with children. It seemed clear to me that the reason we were using NFP was out of selfishness, (better car, nicer vacation, lets build up our savings, ect.) these are the same reasons other people (not all) might be following NFP. So my intent was to have people take a step back and honestly ask themselves why are they using NFP.

I strongly support NFP but just worry that some people may follow it out of routine or fear of what others will say if they have more children. I do believe that there may be good reason to follow NFP. Even if you explained to me your reason for following NFP I could not (nor should anyone else) make a judgment as to if you should or should not continue to follow it since I still will not understand your situation the way that you understand it.

This is why we are called to make and examination of our own conscious (and not someone else’s) each day, but use the churches teaching as a guide. (I hope I don’t open another can of worms with this statement)

John

 

[johnnyjoe]

familyof8

Are you replying to my post? I do not believe I said any of those things. Perhaps more careful reading would allow you to understand instead of planning a reply.

I do not believe NFP is contraception. My point was that we went into our NFP class knowing that contraception was wrong and that was the word our instructors repeatedly used. Without knowing or understanding what the church teaches, this leaves you totally confused and creates the objections that others have made repeatedly…the NFP contraception mindset. When you understand why NFP is recommended for the spacing of children and how abstinence is working with natural law and not in violation to it, then NFP makes sense. Otherwise, it doesn’t.

As far as the “selfish” part. If I have written anything about that, I don’t remember. If I did, the only thing I can imagine is that it was in reply to when someone stated that not using NFP (and allowing them to come as they come) was less “holy” than using NFP. I would have simply been trying to point out that people can pervert the teaching of the church. I do not think using NFP is selfish. However, using NFP with a mindset that you do not want children is not in spirit with church teaching.

I have never advocated that the church teaches that we should “accept children as God wills” and not use NFP. We personally do not use NFP since we have not discerned a serious reason to space our children more than they already are. However, that is our personal decision, not one I have stated was a teaching of the church.

Indeed, I must have misunderstood your point. It is beyond my understanding why a couple teaching NFP would make the analogy that NFP was contraception, or even equate it as equal. If this couple taught for CCL, please do us a favor and write the central office, or send me an email. This is too important of an issue to have Teaching Couples mislead the couples the Holy Spirit sends our way.

I think it interesting how the “NFP” name illicits such broad and interesting responses. This is a fairly safe place to chat about NFP, and yet it still brings out the sharpness in people. As a teacher, I see the process as only and simply information gathering. What that information means to a couple has many factors that come into play, but the fact remains that as long as family size and the decision to have children is held hostage to the dominant “contraceptive” cultural mindset, few, if any couples have a chance to have the Holy Spirit enrich and guide thier marriage.

I see all the other issues that arise with the use of NFP as subsequent to adopting the practice. Where the apologetic rubber meets the road, if you will. Yet if we cannot get couples to even consider NFP as viable, they are not even on the right track to hear the will of God for their families.