Defending NFP

  • Thread starter Thread starter tlcpaul
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

tlcpaul

Guest
I read in the most recent edition of “This Rock” that the purpose of marital relations is both unitive and procreative. A friend of mine suggests that since relations are not procreative while a woman is either pregnant or post menopausel, than it need not be procreative while a woman can become pregnant. I need some teaching to defend this angle. Thanks.
 
Is your friend thus making the case that contraception should be permitted because the “unitive” aspect of love-making is still present? A very weak argument.

If this is, in fact, the argument, there are several points I would make.

First, when a woman is not fertile, she is not fertile because of the laws of nature (of God!), not of man. Rendering oneself infertile is not the same as being aware of one’s fertility and making use of non-fertile times. As Christopher West says, the difference is the same difference as between a miscarriage and an abortion. One is an act of God, the other an act of man.

Secondly, the argument that contraceptive love-making is still “unitive” is absolutely false. Spouses are saying, with their bodies, “I love you, but not enough to give you my fertility.” “I love you, but not enough to be open to life.” HOW can love-making under these conditions be unitive if the very nature of the love-making is self-pleasure?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top