which, imo, is a cop out.
I’m sorry i just don’t see how that is what procreative means. It seems like it would have been a lot more clear to just say “have natural sex” instead of confusing it with saying it must “ordered to procreation”.
You have explained it well. It is to no fault of your own that I have the beliefs that I do. Maybe it is the engineer in me. I don’t know. I just feel that NFP isn’t ordered to procreation.
The vocabulary can seem odd, I agree. I know the Church has attempted to be clear, but at first glance, it can appear obtuse. It is okay for you to have that reaction. Let us avoid those terms entirely for the moment then. Each and every sexual encounter must be between husband and wife, in the natural way, meaning vaginal intercourse and the husband climaxes inside his wife. The encounter must be loving and consensual. They must not use drugs or devices that sterilize either spouse, and they may not put a rubber barrier between their genitals. They, as a couple, get to decide if and when they choose to engage in intercourse. Do you agree with all these principles?
No, honestly no books. I read Humanae Vitae, and The Way of Our Lord Jesus (twolj, for short), and that helped a great deal. Have you had an opportunity to peruse, or even locate, either of these two resources online?
Yes, during non-fertile times a couple engages in an act in the natural manner. To my knowledge, couples are free to purposefully have sex during an infertile period. Do you agree? Or is there some reason couples should not engage in intercourse during an infertile window?
That’s exactly what I’ve been saying, so it seems we are 100% agreement on this. So then, when the couple is abstaining in that fertile window, how is it possible to remove the procreative nature from an act that is not taking place?
I think you meant “infertile times”. But no, you are not removing the procreative nature from an act, because either 1) an act is being avoided or 2) when it is engaged in, it is completed in the natural manner. Also, it’s not impossible to procreate with NFP. First of all, it’s because NFP is nothting more than information that a couple uses to decide to either 1) avoid sex or 2) engage in sex. Secondly, it IS still possible (it happens), just unlikely.
But you didn’t answer either question. You danced around them. If you don’t want to answer them directly, that’s fine…but it’s disengenuous to resort to logical fallacy and then pretend you have answered them. Christians should be above this behavior.
So, couples are required to engage in intercourse every time they are fertile?? Is there some Church teaching that says this? Any chart on the required number of times a couple must have sex during their Marriage in order to prove they are being “procreative”?
Yep!
Thanks. I haven’t read them yet but will.
And in my mind so is only having sex when you can’t get pregnant.
I do agree.
The issue with this is that you are only thinking about half of what NFP is. By only looking at only the abstaining part, it isn’t NFP…it is abstinence. You have to look at what all of NFP is not just the abstaining part.
…That is impossible to procreate in
It’s also possible to procreate while on ABC
oh please. I did answer them. You keep hiding behind the abstaining part of NFP and not the sex part. BTW, I’m not sure if you know what logical fallacy means
I have never said this.
Then I believe that you don’t like the vocabulary, but you obviously agree with the underlying principles. That is not an insurmountable problem. Engineers and scientists are frequently vocabulary-oriented folks. We learn and memorize so much vocabulary, with precise, agreed-upon meanings, that discussing matters within the liberal arts (philosophy, theology, religion, history, etc) can be maddening at times. The fluidity and nuance that are absent from the sciences are ever-present in these fields of study. I think that is why the Church has been careful to offer definitions alongside the use of vocabulary and to clarify things that become confusing. I think it is also why She persists in using Latin to communicate. If you don’t like the ambiguous vocabulary, I don’t see why you must use them. Talk about this in plain speech, and leave it to the theologians to develop and communicate the nuanced vocabulary.
And I find your “logical fallacies” and “a Christian should be above this” and “That would be the Christian thing to do” to be condescending as well.
This pretty much fits me to a T
I admit that the gathering of information aspect of NFP is very awkward, too. I mean, taking one’s temperature when one is not sick, and analyzing bodily secretions? Eew. However, it is rather scientific, so that aspect is interesting. Every month a new mystery to investigate, signs just waiting to be observed, recorded and charted. Kinda cool. So my perspective is, moral issues of proper use of NFP aside, that it is the application of the scientific method to an aspect of living and decision-making. Even if the vocabulary seems lacking, the actual use of a method, both for achieving and avoiding, is much more precise.
funny story…back when my wife and I were tyring to concieve our first kid, we started tracking her temp and everything you mentioned. Much like NFP. I was pretty into it…I created my own temp charts on excel and spent way too much time analyzing it. I suppose it is propably more fun when you are trying to conceive vs not wanting to conceive but still very interesting. The problem we ran into is that , if I recall correctly, my wife’s cycles were pretty irregular and ranged from 28 days to 36 days. And sometimes she would miss cycles all together. So I think NFP will be quite a challenge for us.
Except that only having sex when one isn’t likely to become pregnant doesn’t involve “removing the procreative nature from an act which is taking place” because the couple is completing the act in the natural manner, such that they otherwise would become pregnant were this act to take palce in the fertile time. They have not contracepted, rather they are utilizing their free right to have sex in the infertile period.
Do you also agree that the Church teaches that contrception is wrong because of the purposeful attempt to remove the procreative nature from an act that is taking place?
No, I have continuously noted specifically both aspects of using NFP to avoid conception. As I have stated above, it involves 1) abstaining from sex in the fertile period, and 2) enjoying the Marital embrace in the infertile period.
This is what I mean by logical fallacy. You are misrepresenting my position. Please stop doing that.
Which is what I have been doing, as well as explaining that NFP is not an act, rather “information that a couples then uses to decide whether or not to engage in an act”.
That’s another example of what I mean by logicla fallacy. You are “begging the question” by claiming it impossible to procreate as such, and then ignoring the fact that the “act” in question is engaged in, and completed, in the natural manner. In this way, you are re-defining the argument. This is a “strawman fallacy”. I was trying to avoid specifically calling out the fallacious reasoning on your part, but since you thought I was simply being condescending, there are some examples for you to show my sincerety. That is also why I noted that a Christian is above such behavior…out of sincerety…and because it is a plain fact.
Yes, it is. But the possibility of procreation is not what makes an act “ordered toward procreation”. Being ordered toward procreation involves a couple completing an act in the natural manner. It is the purposeful attempt to remove the procreative nature from an act that is taking place which is sinful. That is what separates NFP from contraception.
This is yet another example of logical fallacy…misrepresenting my position along with poisoning the well. Yes, I know what it means.
And please stop doing it.I know. That’s why I asked it in question format to make sure I understand what you are saying. I just asked it again above, like this: “Do you also agree that couples are not required to have sex in the fertile period if they choose not to?”.
Then this question "So then, when the couple is abstaining in that fertile window, how is it possible to remove the procreative nature from an act that is not taking place? " is unable to be answered. I have been arguing that NFP is removing the procreative nature because you only have sex when infertile. So your question makes no sense because sex is taking place in NFP and you seem to only be addressing the abstaining part of NFP
This happens to me, too. One month, I might have a textbook 28-day cycle, while the next month, it is 45 days!
It is not always alternating short, long, short, long, but over time it shows a pretty regular pattern. And I have had some annovulatory cycles, too. I joke with my husband that I must have a sluggish ovary. 
But the beauty of NFP is that it is distinctly different from the calendar method, which relied on regular, 28-29 day cycles. NFP tells you what is happening in real time, so you can tell if it is the sluggish ovary month or the ambitious ovary month, by comparing charts and observing your current signs. That is the interesting part. The hard part is actually abstaining, especially when that darn ovary won’t just pop the egg out already! Exactly. It is impossible to remove the procreative nature from an act which is not taking place. So, the abstinence side of NFP-to-avoid is not like contraception.
Having sex when infertile, even exclusively, does not remove the procreative nature from an act. The procreative nature is present if the act is engaged in, and completed, in the natural manner.
No offense taken. God bless you and have a wonderful remainder of the day.