Dangerous pregnancies, ABC, NFP

[Truth_Faith13]

Say if a great chef gave you a precious recipe and instructions for making a cake because he wanted to gift you with a beautiful feast.

You then get the ingredients out but leave out the eggs or the flour or the milk when baking. You’ve gone through the process but in the end you don’t have a real cake. You’ve subverted the cake making process for convenience or taste or some other reason… and ended up with anything but a cake. Would the chef be happy with you calling that finished product His cake?

If you believed in the chefs wonderful gift and didn’t want to compromise it in any way, so decided to leave all the ingredients in the cupboard for a day when you could give your whole heart to the baking… that’s not foiling the cake making process. That’s putting it off until the time is best for an uncompromising outcome and the gift of cake that the chef wanted you to have.

That analogy only works for sex resulting in pregnancy or abstinence which suggests having sex when you know you are not fertile is wrong…you can’t bake and not result in a cake? That’s another issue…if God only intended sex to be for pregnancy why make it so you are only fertile one day a month?

 

[ahs]

That analogy only works for sex resulting in pregnancy or abstinence which suggests having sex when you know you are not fertile is wrong…you can’t bake and not result in a cake? That’s another issue…if God only intended sex to be for pregnancy why make it so you are only fertile one day a month?

What makes you think it’s ONLY for pregnancy? Sex is BOTH unitive AND procreative.

 

[LongingSoul]

That analogy only works for sex resulting in pregnancy or abstinence which suggests having sex when you know you are not fertile is wrong…you can’t bake and not result in a cake? That’s another issue…if God only intended sex to be for pregnancy why make it so you are only fertile one day a month?

The ‘cake’ is not strictly a baby. The cake is the wonderful gift of conjugal communion in the marriage.

 

[LongingSoul]

Wow…that is a GREAT analogy!!! I’m at a loss for words trying to compliment you on that…just absolutely great!

I’ve been a chef in a previous occupation and see so many answers in the whole cooking processes. Thanks.

 

[Truth_Faith13]

God bless you.

I understand your frustration! At one time I was so frustrated with the church, struggling to understand the teachings on artificial birth control, ordination of women priests, sheeeeesh I could write forever about the teachings I had problems with it was a long list.

Please ask yourself this question: Do you want to embrace the Catholic Church’s teachings? If so, then ask the Holy Spirit for help in opening up your heart. We here on this website can answer your questions with tons of facts, figures, clever comebacks and interesting viewpoints, however they are all meaningless if your heart is not ready and your mind is not yet open to the Catholic Church’s teachings on this matter. The Holy Spirit will help you, surrender to Him.

Remember, that even Jesus Christ in the flesh had many people walk away from Him. Can you imagine how charismatic and persuasive he was!!! Therefore I don’t necessarily think that a persuasive argument will do the “trick” here…I think you need to be honest with yourself and ask yourself if you want to embrace what the Catholic Church teaches. It will be difficult because it means surrender, it means letting go, it means handing over your will, but in the end if you embrace the Bride of Christ you will find freedom and peace. Hope this helps a little, God bless you in your faith journey.

See women’s priests teaching makes sense to me, I’m fine with that. I can’t figure out the logic of NFP.

Another way to think of it…a man has a heart attack, man made drugs are administered to help save his life…but what if this was Gods natural way of ending his life, bringing him home. The logic of NFP would suggest we shouldn’t use medications or medical intervention but leave it all upto the will of a God…nature.

 

[Xantippe]

Truth_Faith13:

“You can’t schedule sex.”

Yes you can.

Sorry! More seriously, what is wrong with scheduling? Don’t we often mentally pencil it in for such occasions as anniversaries, date night, Valentine’s, leaving for a trip, coming back from a trip, etc.? Counselors often encourage couples to schedule sex, because it often happens that couples fail to make time for each other. Too much TV, too much internet, too much laundry, and pretty soon it’s too late to do anything but brush your teeth and fall asleep as soon as the head hits the pillow.

There’s also the problem that occurs when theoretically, one could have sex any time, but in practice, one doesn’t. Remember the Protestant couple from Monty Python’s Meaning of Life? They could have sex any time and use some sort of weird exotic condom–but they don’t. The nice thing about NFP for longer-married couples is that it gives one a bit of a schedule and produces a sense of urgency to make proper use of the available time.

 

[7armyrugrats]

Pregnancy isn’t a disease. In a perfect world, no one would even think about NFP, we would just put it perfectly in God’s hands as we should. but we do not live in a perfect world. Not all of us can or are willing to allow God to have complete control of everything. God knew this as He was creating us, and He gave us signs to help us along the way. We can choose to read these signs, follow these signs, or ignore these signs. It is up to us to do what we see fit for us and our families. We can apply this to many aspects of life, not just in our bedrooms. When we purposely turn our backs on God and say to Him, “I don’t like your path. The signs are not as clearly marked as I would like them to be. There are too many obstacles in the way. I’m just going to make my own path to follow.” that is when we start falling short of the mark. We will never be as good at forging our own path as God is at laying one out for us. That is why many forms of birth control work in a couple of different ways (suppressing ovulation and abortifacient), and many people have abortions if they fail. With NFP, if a couple strictly follows the signs laid out by God, the failure rate is quite low, and if a couple is abstinent, the failure rate is 0%. You can not get pregnant if you are not having sex.

Couples can and sometimes do abuse NFP. It is possible to selfishly avoid having children because you are busy forging your own path in some other area of life. NFP can and should be prayed about each and every month it is being utilized. It is harder to abuse, though, because God gave us an overwhelming urge to help us obey Hus command to be fruitful and multiply. In the book of Genesis, God tells Eve that her pain during childbirth would be multiplied, but her desire will be for her husband. This has been in God’s plan for us from the very beginning. Our struggles are as old as Man, but as a generation we seem to fight against it the hardest.

 

[katy]

I don’t have time to read through the entire thread. Do remember that pregnancy can and does occur even when using ABC. Then the “Well, in your case, I think abortion might be justified.” comments begin.

 

[gardenswithkids]

While the Church teaches us to trust God, that is not what makes NFP acceptable to the Church. The Church views children and pregnancy as blessings that are intricately linked to sex and marriage. We cannot intentionally separate those things. NFP is only allowed in some situations and couples should pray about using it. The required abstinance and other difficulties inherant with avoiding pregnancy through NFP help safeguard it from abuse. In cases where an additional pregnancy poses a danger, couples may wish to abstain altogether. NFP is an alternative to total abstainance.

 

[godisgood77]

But NFP is used by people who don’t want children, the intent is to not get pregnant, therefore NFP is not open to pregnancy from an intent perspective. The lie is thinking NFP is open to procreation, when it’s used for the exact opposite! The real way to be completely open to procreation is completely naturally, no NFP, no abc etc…

I’m afraid this can not be refuted… The intention is the same… Doesn’t change what the Church teaches though. We are all obliged to be obedient

 

[gardenswithkids]

I’m afraid this can not be refuted… The intention is the same… Doesn’t change what the Church teaches though. We are all obliged to be obedient

In one case a couple has the intention of following Church teachings and in the other case they have the intention of ignoring the Church teachings. Obedience and disobedience are entirely different things therefore NFP and contaception are entirely different.

 

[jlc2k2]

In my experience, the difference between NFP and ABC is that each month DH and I have to ask ourselves if not having a baby 10 months from now is worth not having sex tonight. That is not a question you have to ask if you are using ABC.

For the record, my first 2 pregnancies resulted from “oh what the heck” nights when we decided it was worth the risk. My third pregnancy was a bit of “oh what the heck” with a good chunk of miscalculation and overconfidence on my part. If I had been using ABC, I probably wouldn’t have chosen any of those times to get pregnant. The good thing for me about NFP is that it’s not necessarily an on/off switch. You can use it by degrees. If my health were in jeopardy, we would follow every rule every time. But it’s not, so we don’t.

 

[godisgood77]

In one case a couple has the intention of following Church teachings and in the other case they have the intention of ignoring the Church teachings. Obedience and disobedience are entirely different things therefore NFP and contaception are entirely different.

Your point about obedience is my point exactly. However it doesn’t automatically follow
that differing birth control methods (NFP, ABC or other natural methods) are completely different. When the intention is the same… Avoiding a pregnancy for a serious reason.

 

[gardenswithkids]

Your point about obedience is my point exactly. However it doesn’t automatically follow that that differing birth control methods (NFP, ABC or other natural methods) are completely different. When the intention is the same… Avoiding a pregnancy for a serious reason.

The intention is not the same - in one case they intend to avoid pregnancy while follow Church teachings, but in the other they intend to ignore Church teachings.

 

[godisgood77]

The intention is not the same - in one case they intend to avoid pregnancy while follow Church teachings, but in the other they intend to ignore Church teachings.

Fair enough… The intention to avoid pregnancy in both cases is clear. You certainly wouldn’t dispute that. From there, if they choose ABC or another natural method over NFP, they are either ignorant to Church teaching, don’t understand Church teaching or reject Church teaching. I don’t know the splits on what percentages fall in to each respective category, but I would bet that the ‘outright reject’ group isn’t the largest.

 

[Robyn_p]

That analogy only works for sex resulting in pregnancy or abstinence which suggests having sex when you know you are not fertile is wrong…you can’t bake and not result in a cake? That’s another issue…if God only intended sex to be for pregnancy why make it so you are only pregnant one day of the month?

That’s a good point, and in fact that’s exactly why the Church permits couples to have sex during infertile periods. The Church doesn’t say God designed sex only for procreation, but for uniting the spouses together in love and for making children. What the Church does say is we can’t purposefully thwart or mess with his design, or alter it in a way that would contradict it. NFP cooperates with and tries to use God’s design (which includes infertile days) to either achieve or avoid pregnancy, ABC doesn’t. Instead it just says “to heck with it.” See the difference?

One analogy that helped me was to take two people for example. Both want to lose weight. One decides to eat however much they want, and then throw it up later. The other decides to diet and exercise. He uses what he learned in health class to eat only foods with low carb count. At the end of the month they both end up losing fifteen pounds. Their intent was the same, the result is the same, but does that mean both ways were equally valid or equivalent? No.

The bolemic way abuses the gift of food God gave us, and completely ignores His purpose for it. The dieting way doesn’t do that, it exercises discipline and our knowledge of nutrition to get the same outcome as the bolemic person, but it does it in line with God’s design. (Which includes healthy foods that help us shed excess weight.)

That doesn’t mean it’s wrong to diet, and it doesn’t mean throwing up food on purpose is fine. Nor does it mean the two are basically the same. One works with our body, the other doesn’t. That’s really what the difference between NFP and ABC comes down to.

The NFP user, like the dieter, isn’t ignoring or contradicting God’s design for sex. He’s following it and using the natural mechanism God set up to get the result that’s best for his current state.

It’s not a perfect analogy, I know. There are flaws like there are in any analogy. But for me, this one helped me see why two actions with the same goal and same result aren’t necessarily equivalent.

 

[Robyn_p]

See women’s priests teaching makes sense to me, I’m fine with that. I can’t figure out the logic of NFP.

Another way to think of it…a man has a heart attack, man made drugs are administered to help save his life…but what if this was Gods natural way of ending his life, bringing him home. The logic of NFP would suggest we shouldn’t use medications or medical intervention but leave it all upto the will of a God…nature.

Not quite. You’re confusing God’s providence (how he works in the world) with his design. Since God’s providence is something only He knows, all we can do is work within his design and cooperate with the laws He set up.

God didn’t design the heart to stop beating, he designed it to beat and it’s purpose is to keep us alive. What causes it to fail is a defect in the hearts functioning. We can and in fact have an obligation to use our God-given reason to correct defects in the body and restore things to their natural function.

But that’s not what contraception does, it makes a perfectly healthy and functional organ dysfunctional. Quite a big difference.

 

[ahs]

But NFP is used by people who don’t want children, the intent is to not get pregnant, therefore NFP is not open to pregnancy from an intent perspective. The lie is thinking NFP is open to procreation, when it’s used for the exact opposite! The real way to be completely open to procreation is completely naturally, no NFP, no abc etc…

I’m afraid this can not be refuted… The intention is the same… Doesn’t change what the Church teaches though. We are all obliged to be obedient

It’s already been refuted in posts 12 and 14. It’s a statement based on fallacy. To begin with, the intent being the same is not relevant. Couples are not required to want to get pregnant during each act of intercourse. We are, however, obliged to complete the act in the natural manner when we engage in it. That’s the difference between contracepting couples, and those using NFP. The other fallacy is trting to make “NFP” into a “thing” or an “act”. NFP is neither…NFP is information a couple then uses to 1) engage in a natural act or 2) abstain from an act. Contraception, on the other hand, is an attempt to remove the procreative nature from an act that is taking place. Comparing NFP to contraception is fallacious reasoning. The proper comparison for this topic is “contraception vs. abstinence”.

Fair enough… The intention to avoid pregnancy in both cases is clear. You certainly wouldn’t dispute that.

Yes, and there is nothing wrong with wanting to avoid pregnancy. The sin is in engaging in an act while simultaneously seeking to remove the procreative power/nature of that act which is taking place. This does not happen during abstinence.

From there, if they choose ABC or another natural method over NFP, they are either ignorant to Church teaching, don’t understand Church teaching or reject Church teaching. I don’t know the splits on what percentages fall in to each respective category, but I would bet that the ‘outright reject’ group isn’t the largest.

That’s not correct. The groups to compare are those who resort to contraception, vs. those who resort to abstaining from sex, in order to avoid pregnancy. NFP is the information couples use to tell them the timing of when to abstain (when trying to avoid), but abstinence is the action they are taking. The comparison is “contraception of an act” vs. “abstaining from an act”. Anything else is intellectually dishonest.

 

[Country_Gal]

Natural family planning is healthier, more holistic, and more respectful of relationships and a woman’s body. Otherwise, morally, I don’t personally see a difference.

 

[godisgood77]

Not quite. You’re confusing God’s providence (how he works in the world) with his design. Since God’s providence is something only He knows, all we can do is work within his design and cooperate with the laws He set up.

God didn’t design the heart to stop beating, he designed it to beat and it’s purpose is to keep us alive. What causes it to fail is a defect in the hearts functioning. We can and in fact have an obligation to use our God-given reason to correct defects in the body and restore things to their natural function.

But that’s not what contraception does, it makes a perfectly healthy and functional organ dysfunctional. Quite a big difference. Rather than being like medicine used to restore a heart, it’s more similar to poison used to prevent the heart from beating.

Isn’t contraception cooperating with God’s design in that the couple is using their God given gift of intellect to determine when to have children and how to prayerfully space the children. Really just playing devil’s advocate… Because, in fact, my wife and I try to be obedient, but the logic behind why NFP is allowed and other natural forms are disallowed makes no sense.