Dangerous pregnancies, ABC, NFP

[Bookcat]

But when the state imposes fines and they can’t afford it, what are they supposed to do?

I’ll quote the YOUCAT when u have a mo!

The point is that the State should not do that. It is immoral.

As for* the couple* facing such and worse -Yes that can figure into *their * judging that they have reasons to use NFP (that someone is going to fine you beyond your ability to pay and thus eat or raise the kids… or is going to show up and do a forced abortion on you …can figure in rather largely in their judgement)

 

[Brendan]

If what you’re writing above is correct, then if a spouse asks his/her partner to put on a specific piece of clothing, or wear a certain kind of perfume, then according to your standard, the unitive property is not present - and that’s not true.

If, like the bag over the face, they do so specifically to cover up or reject an aspect of their spouse, they it would be a violation Unity.

One cannot be unified to what one rejects.

 

[Truth_Faith13]

Ahs…since you don’t believe I’m trying to understand, I see no reason to continue dialogue with you. I can’t tell you I accept that teaching, because I don’t! I can continue here and try and understand, but since you seem to think I have a agenda to prove ABC is right, I’m struggling to see any reason too.

 

[ahs]

Ahs…since you don’t believe I’m trying to understand, I see no reason to continue dialogue with you.

You do realize that this is yet another misrepresentation of me, right? Or do you not realize this? Can you quote my words that lead you to believe this?

I can’t tell you I accept that teaching, because I don’t!

Okay. I’m not aware of any moment where I expected you to accept it.

I can continue here and try and understand, but since you seem to think I have a agenda to prove ABC is right, I’m struggling to see any reason too.

You do realize that this is yet another misrepresentation of me, right? Or do you not realize this? Can you quote my words that lead you to believe this [the bolded]?

Continuing on, I asked some very specific questions in post 56 and 82, (and in a few other posts…but 56 and 82 should cover it for now). If you would kindly answers those, I believe you will begin to understand on your own, without having to continue with me. Would that be better for you, if you didn’t have to put so much focus on what “ahs” is writing, and rather put more focus on your own answers to some very specific questions?

 

[Truth_Faith13]

You do realize that this is yet another misrepresentation of me, right? Or do you not realize this? Can you quote my words that lead you to believe this?

Okay. I’m not aware of any moment where I expected you to accept it.

You do realize that this is yet another misrepresentation of me, right? Or do you not realize this? Can you quote my words that lead you to believe this [the bolded]?

Continuing on, I asked some very specific questions in post 56 and 82, (and in a few other posts…but 56 and 82 should cover it for now). If you would kindly answers those, I believe you will begin to understand on your own, without having to continue with me. Would that be better for you, if you didn’t have to put so much focus on what “ahs” is writing, and rather put more focus on your own answers to some very specific questions?

Are you really trying to understand it? Or are you trying to single out the faulty position that SOME Catholics use as their arguments, so that you can show how NFP and ABC are alike? Every one of your posts so far shows me that it is the later.

Please explain to me how that paragraph doesn’t mean “you are not trying to understand our perspective”

I’ve explained the questions too…

 

[ahs]

Please explain to me how that paragraph doesn’t mean “you are not trying to understand our perspective”

That fact that I asked questions, rather than making assertions, shows that I am, well…asking. Then I made an observation about how I am seeing it, prefaced, of course, with the questions which are supposed to tell you that I am seeking clarification.

I’ve explained the questions too…

I have not seen those explanations about any questions I asked so far. Can you show me where you explained any of the questions I asked? I can readily see where you said that SOME Catholics say ‘such-n-such’, and therefore you are led to believe NFP and ABC are similar/the same. But this doesn’t address any questions I asked at all, and is why I asked those 2 questions, followed by my observation above. ABC is wrong based on an objective criteria, not based on why some Catholics say it is wrong.

And that leads into the other several questions I asked which show a clear difference between ABC and NFP (recall post 56).

So, ABC is wrong because it seeks to remove the procreative nature from an act which is procreative by God’s natural design. Regardless of what others have told you in explaining why its’ wrong, that is why ABC is wrong. Using this fact, please answer post 56.

1. Couples using NFP to avoid pregnancy utilize ABSTINENCE as the means by which they avoid pregnancy. ] How is it possible to remove the procreative nature from an act that is not taking place?

1. Couples using NFP to avoid pregnancy often DO engage in sex, on purpose, during the infertile window. Yet they STILL complete these act in the natural manner. ]How is it possible to remove the procreative nature of an act that is infertile by God’s design (the “infertile period”) when that act is being completed in the natural manner?

1. Some people say that because both contraception AND abstinence seek to avoid conception, that they are both morally equal. ]Is it okay for a Catholic to NOT have sex [at any given time], and is it okay for a Catholic couple to have sex purposefully during the infertile period? Are couples required to WANT to conceive during each Marital embrace, or are they rather required to complete the act naturally when they engage in it?

 

[UnCatholicBride]

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.

Please do not ever compare a mental illness to sin again. Your example is incredibly ignorant and hurtful to those who either have suffered with an eating disorder, or live with someone who is a disordered eater.

This week is National Eating Disorder Awareness Week.

 

[Truth_Faith13]

That fact that I asked questions, rather than making assertions, shows that I am, well…asking. Then I made an observation about how I am seeing it, prefaced, of course, with the questions which are supposed to tell you that I am seeking clarification.

Why do you need clarification to a statement I made about trying to understand your guys perspective? You clearly don’t believe this otherwise you would not have questioned it if you want to believe “trying to clarify” is what you were doing then fine, but that’s not what I see.

If you need clarification with a clear statement I made…the ball is in your court not mine!

Again I shall say, the questions are about NFP…I don’t have an issue with NFP. Answering those questions do not help me understand why ABC is wrong so please stop repeating yourself.

 

[Bookcat]

Here -these are the experts that Catholic Answers sends people to…

ncbcenter.org/page.aspx?pid=1124

ncbcenter.org/page.aspx?pid=315

After reading the articles …

There is also a number at the bottom there --give them a call and ask to talk with an ethicist. They can help one understand these various things. Tis their profession.

 

[ahs]

Why do you need clarification to a statement I made about trying to understand your guys perspective? You clearly don’t believe this otherwise you would not have questioned it if you want to believe “trying to clarify” is what you were doing then fine, but that’s not what I see.

Fair enough. Let’s move past that misunderstanding then, shall we?

Again I shall say, the questions are about NFP…I don’t have an issue with NFP. Answering those questions do not help me understand why ABC is wrong so please stop repeating yourself.

The questions are geared specifically to noting the difference between ABC and NFP, in the context of your OP. If you don’t want to answer them, that’s fine. But the fact is that these questions are arranged specifically for the purpose of showing the difference here, in the very context of YOUR opening post and the topic that YOU posted about. Why ABC is wrong is a great topic, but that’s not what you initially wondered about, according to your OP. The only reason I have posted why ABC is wrong is then compare it to NFP in order to show the difference between them, in the context of your OP.

But hey, you don’t have to sit here and read my words about it. Obviously you and I are not engaging in effective dialog. I just as readily defer to the experts, as provided by another member:

from Bookcat: Here -these are the experts that Catholic Answers sends people to…

ncbcenter.org/page.aspx?pid=1124

ncbcenter.org/page.aspx?pid=315

After reading the articles …

There is also a number at the bottom there --give them a call and ask to talk with an ethicist. They can help one understand these various things. Tis their profession.

 

[Truth_Faith13]

Fair enough. Let’s move past that misunderstanding then, shall we?

The questions are geared specifically to noting the difference between ABC and NFP, in the context of your OP. If you don’t want to answer them, that’s fine. But the fact is that these questions are arranged specifically for the purpose of showing the difference here, in the very context of YOUR opening post and the topic that YOU posted about. Why ABC is wrong is a great topic, but that’s not what you initially wondered about, according to your OP. The only reason I have posted why ABC is wrong is then compare it to NFP in order to show the difference between them, in the context of your OP.

But hey, you don’t have to sit here and read my words about it. Obviously you and I are not engaging in effective dialog. I just as readily defer to the experts, as provided by another member:

Lets do it this way…what questions do you think I have? What issues do you think I have? What purpose do you think I have?

Also if you go through my posts on this forum and read all the ones related to NFP, ABC etc, you may better understand the point of this thread.

Also again, please stop repeating posts, it’s boring. I have read the post from bookcat, it’s greatly received and I shall look into it when I have chance.

 

[Rence]

Catechism 1643 “Conjugal love involves a totality, in which all the elements of the person enter - appeal of the body and instinct, power of feeling and affectivity, aspiration of the spirit and of will. It aims at a deeply personal unity, a unity that, beyond union in one flesh, leads to forming one heart and soul; it demands indissolubility and faithfulness in definitive mutual giving; and it is open to fertility. In a word it is a question of the normal characteristics of all natural conjugal love, but with a new significance which not only purifies and strengthens them, but raises them to the extent of making them the expression of specifically Christian values.”

I’m sorry, I don’t see anything about the unitive property as described in HV in the quote you provided.

 

[sailor28]

Please do not ever compare a mental illness to sin again. Your example is incredibly ignorant and hurtful to those who either have suffered with an eating disorder, or live with someone who is a disordered eater.

This week is National Eating Disorder Awareness Week.

Yes! Amen! I am so tired of this food analogy with NFP and ABC. It is nonsense. It is always the same rhetoric said and assumptions being made. This is what turns people away. If you want to bring people to God stop using the rhetoric and assumptions and analogies that just don’t work.

Catholics are free to get a gastric bypass surgery. This is completely “unnatural” Of course, serious consideration needs to be given to this and proper psychological assessment and perhaps consulting with a priest. But the church has no law against it. For some, obesity has strong genetic ties. Some individuals can not lose weight via natural means for many reasons. For some, the surgery saves their lives. Life is complicated and is not all black and white.

 

[Vico]

Lets do it this way…what questions do you think I have? What issues do you think I have? What purpose do you think I have?

Also if you go through my posts on this forum and read all the ones related to NFP, ABC etc, you may better understand the point of this thread.

Also again, please stop repeating posts, it’s boring. I have read the post from bookcat, it’s greatly received and I shall look into it when I have chance.

So far, you asked about 22 questions:

#1

• If it really is about trusting God, then maybe NFP is wrong too?
• What about those people who it’s dangerous to get pregnant…they will never have children so NFP in that case is never going to be procreative?
• Whys this right and ABC wrong?
• Yes I know you should be “open” and trust in God but if it is really about Gods will, why do people who are in danger avoid pregnancy with NFP, surely God would not allow it to happen unless it’s his will?

#4

• But if God allows us to be responsible, why can’t we be responsible and use ABC…abc doesn’t say that sex doesn’t achieve it’s purpose of procreation, it just prevents it. The same way abstaining prevents it?

#5

• Condoms don’t cause that?
• How can you say NFP is open to pregnancy if you are deliberately avoiding the ovulation date?

#16

• Question: if a husband & wife both want to have sex but don’t want to get pregnant so abstein…is that wrong?

#21

• 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?

#49

• I can’t see the logic there at all?
• How is being ok with ABC (I’m talking more about condoms here) deduce that abortion is ok?

#54

• So can you explain my heart attack analogy?
• If you’ve seen it?

#57

• That is the problem I am having, the logic used to discredit ABC, I can use the same logic to discredit NFP…which for someone outside the church who has not accepted its authority yet, suggests it’s not entirely fallible. Does that make more sense?.
• PS I’m sorry I’m not understanding things the first or second time…but does that really matter?

#68

• You mentioned the procreative did you not?
• Are you saying you don’t think ABC is not unitive?

#73

• Question… Reading the YOUCAT it mentions that not having children because the state dictates the amount you can have is selfish and therefore not a reason to not have children?
• In china they have a one child policy and huge fines if they have more! What if people can’t afford them?

#80

• But when the state imposes fines and they can’t afford it, what are they supposed to do?

#90

• Why do you need clarification to a statement I made about trying to understand your guys perspective?

It is helpful to know the meaning of procreative significance and unitive significance. Unitive significance from “become one flesh” and procreative significance from “capable of generating new life” and capable in the sense of being apt for creation of children (with no fertility assumed). We see in canon law, the basis of these:Can. 1061 §1 A valid marriage between baptised persons is said to be merely ratified, if it is not consummated; ratified and consummated, if the spouses have in a human manner engaged together in a conjugal act in itself apt for the generation of offspring. To this act marriage is by its nature ordered and by it the spouses become one flesh.

Canon 1084 §3 Sterility neither prohibits no nullifies marriage, … Deposition of semen in the vagina is a necessary condition for the conjugal act to retain its unitive significance. Each and every conjugal act must embody the intention of complete “self-donation,” otherwise one is withholding from one’s partner something natural to the act, which deprives the conjugal act of the unitive significance, making it morally illicit.

In a valid marriage, is not necessary that children will ever result or be desired:

• When conjugal relations occur one must be open to any children that result, and in there must be the positive intention to grant conjugal rights to the spouse, which if not intended makes the marriage invalid.
• It is not wrong to abstain from conjugal relations when mutually agreed on because there is no denial to grant the conjugal rights when asked for (when charitable and just), but it is wrong to commit the marital act itself when corrupted.

 

[LongingSoul]

Originally Posted by UnCatholicBride
Please do not ever compare a mental illness to sin again. Your example is incredibly ignorant and hurtful to those who either have suffered with an eating disorder, or live with someone who is a disordered eater.

Unfortunately binging and purging food is a sin. Of course culpability is reduced by the hold of addiction or mental illness, but the behaviour remains intrinsically contra to the health of the body and the purpose. History documents ancient practices in elite society in Greece and Rome where binging and purging were part of the culture of all day banquets. It is quite a good analogy for conjugal abuses.

When someone gets surgery to lose weight that is a pro-health measure if the body is deemed to be at risk of serious illness because of obesity. The Church specifically recognises the need to use medical help in being pro-health.

 

[Truth_Faith13]

Unfortunately binging and purging food is a sin. Of course culpability is reduced by the hold of addiction or mental illness, but the behaviour remains intrinsically contra to the health of the body and the purpose. History documents ancient practices in elite society in Greece and Rome where binging and purging were part of the culture of all day banquets. It is quite a good analogy for conjugal abuses.

When someone gets surgery to lose weight that is a pro-health measure if the body is deemed to be at risk of serious illness because of obesity. The Church specifically recognises the need to use medical help in being pro-health.

I think it’s fair to say that a few people are going to find it extremely insulting and hurtful to equate mental illness with sin. (Me included). It’s probably better if we all agree to disagree on that point and move on. Besides binge eating/mental illness etc is off topic.

 

[Robyn_p]

Please do not ever compare a mental illness to sin again. Your example is incredibly ignorant and hurtful to those who either have suffered with an eating disorder, or live with someone who is a disordered eater.

This week is National Eating Disorder Awareness Week.

I’m sorry. My intent wasn’t to compare of imply that at all. I don’t believe persons with eating disorders are sinful, nor would I ever want to imply that. :nope:

Thank you, and I’m being sincere, for pointing out how that could be misunderstood in my analogy. I will be more careful in the future.

God bless and thank you again!

 

[Rau]

…I don’t have an issue with NFP. Answering those questions do not help me understand why ABC is wrong so please stop repeating yourself.

The questions posed or viewpoints asserted in your OP are listed below, and I offer my responses following each.

1. …I still don’t see the difference between NFP and ABC, both are preventing pregnancies (or hoping to).
   Let us assume a couple can know about their state of fertility, and in fact does know. NFP says to the couple: “If you do not wish to get pregnant at this time, don’t have sex while fertile!”. ABC says: “Take this pill / use this device (whatever) and have sex as and when you please”. The objective “difference” is clear I think. Note that the difference is not in terms of “intent” - both aim to not get pregnant at the present time, but rather in the means adopted. See point 6 below for more.
2. Some people on other threads have made it sound like ABC turns it into “just” sex, but when an NFP instructor is almost talking about “putting it in the diary” (for non fertile times) that’s even worse! You can’t schedule sex. That definitely takes the loving relationship that is supposed to happen out of “making love” and turns it into sex.
   I think you express an opinion here about personal feelings, so one can’t say you are right or wrong. My wife and I, not ready for pregnancy at this time, do schedule intimate time (mentally, diary not required), and find nothing at all odd about that. (By the way, we scheduled when we were trying to get pregnant in the past too!) I certainly don’t agree that this “diminishes the loving relationship…”. It does place some strictures on sexual ‘spontaneity’ - but c’est la vie. (In my experience, the best time for spontaneous sex is while pregnant!)
3. What about those people who it’s dangerous to get pregnant…they will never have children so NFP in that case is never going to be procreative? Whys this right and ABC wrong?
   I suspect the meaning of the word “procreative” has been addressed earlier in the thread. Sorry to repeat, but for clarity, procreative has nothing to do with one’s fertility at the time of sex. It is about the marital act being of a form consistent with procreation. It has nothing to do with the timing of the act. A post-menopausal woman can have procreative sex too. ABC (including: Pill, Condom, ejaculation outside the woman, etc.) renders each sex act “non-procreative”.
4. Yes I know you should be “open” and trust in God but if it is really about Gods will, why do people who are in danger avoid pregnancy with NFP, surely God would not allow it to happen unless it’s his will? I feel as though on one hand your saying trust God, but on the other your not trusting him completely.
   This question is not really about NFP/ABC, but rather it’s about the meaning of God’s Will. If I am studying for exams, the outcome (pass or fail) can’t be said to be God’s will. Were it so, not much point studying, sacrificing other activities, etc. I will surely fail if I do not make use of my God-given faculties to make wise choices in terms of personal priorities, study time and so on. Trusting in God involves cooperation with him too - praying and using our God-given faculties to make good and right judgements. I can trust in God without expecting he will see to it that I get a good test score!
5. But I can’t see anyone recommending to a woman in danger to “trust God” and forgo NFP, ABC etc. (and nor should they!) but needless to say, by using NFP your saying sorry God I don’t trust you, I’m going to abstain from sex to make sure I don’t get pregnant.
   By using NFP in these circumstances, we cooperate with God. We are doing out best to look after “our self”, as is our obligation. By taking no precautions, we may be abrogating personal responsibility. When we cross the road, do we keep our eyes open, or do we “trust in God”? I am posing a non-sense question here of course.

 

[CatholicSooner]

I’m sorry guys but I really don’t see a difference bt using nfp to avoid pregnancy and abc. Both are used to avoid pregnancy.

But your response will be “but you must be open to life. Nfp is still open to life”.

Sorry but that is bs. If god has a plan to get you pregnant when you are not ovulating, then he can most certainly get you pregnant will on the pill or usin a condom.

Let’s face it, nfp came about as a means to make good Catholics feel better about birth control while accomplishing the same thing.

 

[Rau]

I’m sorry guys but I really don’t see a difference bt using nfp to avoid pregnancy and abc. Both are used to avoid pregnancy.

But your response will be “but you must be open to life. Nfp is still open to life”.

Sorry but that is bs. If god has a plan to get you pregnant when you are not ovulating, then he can most certainly get you pregnant will on the pill or usin a condom.

Let’s face it, nfp came about as a means to make good Catholics feel better about birth control while accomplishing the same thing.

If two actions have in mind the same end result, can we say they are the same? Equally acceptable? Your argument is that we can!

Many posts have pointed out clear differences between NFP and ABC. The Will of God (which is that we make good choices, not about if/when you get pregnant) has also been discussed.

To have a discussion, which is the purpose of this site, you need to address the opinions expressed, not simply state opinions.