Delicate question about sexual morality within marriage

[leaner]

If you read the entire article it covers it – and, if you follow that the Pope himself has said natural child spacing is ok, than natural family planning is ok, b/c it puts no artificial barrier between the act of procreation and the result of procreation – only a natural one (that of abstinence during the fertile period) – we are called to be responsible parents, which, as the Pope also stated, can mean a need to avoid pregnancy – it is the reason that can make it a sin, not the act of preventing naturally itself.

 

[jess7396]

Pira, I have been where you are, it took me a long time to “get” the Church teaching on this subject, until you do, you have to just be held to her teachings, she has more wisdom than we do.

That said, I find there are 2 types of people who say what you are saying, one- people who would never use anything to avoid pregnancy (NFP included), and two- people who want to justify their use of artificial birth control. The first group has no problem with sinning as a result of their beliefs on this, the second is fooling themselves and deying the authority of the Church. I do not presume to know which group you are in, but if it is the second group, much prayer and reading is in order.

 

[1ke]

Augustine:

Forgive my ignorance, but aren’t preliminaries OK, including those you mentioned, as long as the climax isn’t reached thusly?

Even Christopher West stated so, supposedly an expert on JPII’s Theology of the Body.

TIA

Yes. Of course. That is why I stated that they are wrong OUTSIDE intercourse. If intercourse is included, they are not.

 

[1ke]

siamesecat:

Sperm can live inside a woman for 14 days, so even if there is no egg, there is still a small chance she could get pregnant when one eventually forms.

Sperm cannot live 14 days. In the most fertile type of mucus, they can live up to 5 days. Without fertile mucus they live only about 12 hours.

 

[1ke]

pira114:

It’s my understanding that foreplay is acceptable as long as the entire act of love making ends the proper way.

My arguement about the timing method still stands. If you are using it as a way to have sex without getting pregnant, then it constitutes birth control. Period. One cannot logically deny that. If sex is intended for procreation only, then the only time you should have sex is when you are attempting to procreate. If birth control is O.K. in one form then why not another?

Of course it is birth control. The Church does not teach birth control is wrong, or it would not recommend spacing and postponing pregnancy through periodic continence.

The Church teaches Contraception is wrong. Not all means to an end are morally equivalent.

 

[mercygate]

1ke:

Of course it is birth control. The Church does not teach birth control is wrong, or it would not recommend spacing and postponing pregnancy through periodic continence.

The Church teaches Contraception is wrong. Not all means to an end are morally equivalent.

Indeed. The distinction is often not understood but it is not subtle. Means/ends issues arise. Keep the focus on “natural human act of intercourse.” It starts to make sense.

 

[siamesecat]

1ke:

Sperm cannot live 14 days. In the most fertile type of mucus, they can live up to 5 days. Without fertile mucus they live only about 12 hours.

I could be wrong but whenever someone writes in my teen mags asking if they can get pregnant during their period, that is the response.

 

[leaner]

siamesecat:

I could be wrong but whenever someone writes in my teen mags asking if they can get pregnant during their period, that is the response.

I’m going to go with the ACOG (American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists) and medline folks on this one vs. the Tiger Beat staff “expert” on fertility…google it and see what you find for yourself.

 

[1ke]

siamesecat:

I could be wrong but whenever someone writes in my teen mags asking if they can get pregnant during their period, that is the response.

The response is 100% incorrect if they are stating that sperm lives 14 days.

It is correct that the menstrual flow is considered fertile, if using NFP instructions to avoid pregnancy. This is because mucus can be present and undetectable. If you had intercourse during the menstrual cycle and became pregnant, this means that early ovulation took place, not that the sperm lived 14 days.

 

[terri910]

pira114:

It’s my understanding that foreplay is acceptable as long as the entire act of love making ends the proper way.

My arguement about the timing method still stands. If you are using it as a way to have sex without getting pregnant, then it constitutes birth control. Period. One cannot logically deny that. ** If sex is intended for procreation only**, then the only time you should have sex is when you are attempting to procreate. If birth control is O.K. in one form then why not another?

If you have been reading this entire thread you would note that the Church does NOT say that sex is intended for procreation ONLY. It is** unitive** and procreative.

 

[Heart_Of_Mary]

pira114:

The question remains unanswered.

If one form of birth control is allowed, why is any other not? What’s the difference? I would be more than happy to reverse my position on this issue if someone could explain it in a logical way.

By the way, I’ve read Scripture over and over. NFP is not mentioned. So it’s not really between me and God. It’s between me and the Church, isn’t it?

You are sooooo right.:yup:

HOM

 

[Heart_Of_Mary]

1ke:

Of course it is birth control. The Church does not teach birth control is wrong, or it would not recommend spacing and postponing pregnancy through periodic continence.

The Church teaches Contraception is wrong. Not all means to an end are morally equivalent.

Well, then according to dictionary definition, NFP is wrong IF there is a blanket teaching that ALL contraception is wrong…(and no - I did not miss the second definition)

con·tra·cep·tion kòntrə sépsh’n ] (plural con·tra·cep·tions)

noun Definitions: 1. **prevention of fertilization: **the prevention of pregnancy using artificial methods such as condoms and birth-control pills or natural methods such as avoiding sex during the woman’s known fertile periods

1. **means of preventing pregnancy: **a method or device used to prevent pregnancy

[Late 19th century. < contra- + conception]

 

[marymol]

it seems to be more of a spirit of the law of love -
as mysterious and glorious as between Christ and His Church…

All artificial methods leave a taste of leaving the users as 'feeling used ’ - a husband who had vasectomy , a wife who has to swallow detrimental hormones or put on detrimental chemical patches …or all other acts that take away from the maital act being sacred …and build up the dignity of each other as children of God …
And as long as that sacredness is there , even when the couple is menopausal , there is always that little possibility , even that little excitement ,… that they are open to life - if God wills … not just a sex object
As to relations during fertile phase - it is an act of charity on the part of God and The Church that says - well, since there is nothing there that intenttionally withholds the God given potential, it is acceptable and as before the couple evn there is still open to life , has to be , since there is always the possibility, even if slim…

And somehow if and when any such surprise babies come , they seem like a special blessing …check it out also try to hear the couples who would witness as to how their marriages improved - more dignity, less selflove - root of all evil.
You might even find a lot more satisfaction and real love and tenderness from the heart - that would compensate for all the empty acts …

 

[pira114]

Just so I have this straight. Some of you are saying that the Church does NOT teach that birth control is wrong, as long as it isn’t “artificial.” And, you are saying that the Church does not teach that sex is for procreation only?

If sex is not for procreation only, then why care about artificial birth control? Are you trying to tell me that if I were to use birth control, I wouldn’t feel the same unity, closeness, and love with my wife during sex? That’s crazy.

By the way, which Cannon Law are you quoting when you say what the Church teaches? If your not, then can you be sure you’ve got it right? Different Churches around the country have left people with different ideas about what the Church teaches. When there is a question, you have to refer to Cannon Law. As soon as I can find a complete list of Cannon Law, I’m going to look it up.

 

[mlchance]

Well, then according to dictionary definition, NFP is wrong IF there is a blanket teaching that ALL contraception is wrong…(and no - I did not miss the second definition)

The dictionary does not determine Catholic doctrine.

All methods of artificial birth control are wrong. Note the period.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[mercygate]

pira114:

Just so I have this straight. Some of you are saying that the Church does NOT teach that birth control is wrong, as long as it isn’t “artificial.” And, you are saying that the Church does not teach that sex is for procreation only?

A good place for you to start is the encyclical, Humanae vitae. The full text is available on line at vatican.va.

No: it’s not just “artificial” birth control that is unacceptable. Coitus interruptus is not artificial, and it is not acceptable. The key is that between a husband and wife, sexual relations must occur as a “natural human act of intercourse.”

If sex is not for procreation only, then why care about artificial birth control? Are you trying to tell me that if I were to use birth control, I wouldn’t feel the same unity, closeness, and love with my wife during sex? That’s crazy.

It’s not all about what you feel. It is about what actually is. Drugs and barriers interfere with a natural human act of intercourse which, de facto, interferes with the unity of the procreative and unitive aspects of sexual intercourse.

By the way, which Cannon Law are you quoting when you say what the Church teaches? If your not, then can you be sure you’ve got it right? Different Churches around the country have left people with different ideas about what the Church teaches. When there is a question, you have to refer to Cannon Law. As soon as I can find a complete list of Cannon Law, I’m going to look it up.

Where did you get the idea that this must be covered in canon law? You will not find the word “contraception.” This is covered in other documents, such as Humanae vitae. Early on in this thread, mention was made of Christopher West’s Good News about Sex and Marriage. West has a web site with lots of easy-to-understand resources on this subject. christopherwest.com/

FYI, the Code of Canon Law is available here: intratext.com/X/ENG0017.htm

 

[Heart_Of_Mary]

mlchance:

The dictionary does not determine Catholic doctrine.

All methods of artificial birth control are wrong. Note the period.

– Mark L. Chance.

You are right about the dictionary not determining Catholic doctrine. HOWEVER there needs to be a place to go to understand the meaning of a word and I would venture to guess that even the Pope has used a dictionary once or twice . Note the wink.

HOM

 

[pira114]

“It’s not all about what you feel. It is about what actually is. Drugs and barriers interfere with a natural human act of intercourse which, de facto, interferes with the unity of the procreative and unitive aspects of sexual intercourse.”

So planning your sex around your menstral cycle is not interferring with the “natural human act of intercourse?” And are we supposed to be seperating the “procreative” and “unitive” aspects of sex? The word unitive is what I was talking about when I spoke of feelings. So if it’s not about procreating, and not about feelings, then what is it? If it’s both, then any form of birth control would be wrong. If it’s either one, then why would any form of birth control be wrong?

Another point is the fact that our rules and laws are seperated into so many different books and articles. When did we stop relying on the Bible (the word of God) for our guidance?

 

[aterrell]

pira114:

When did we stop relying on the Bible (the word of God) for our guidance?

The Bible is not the ONLY word of God! God gave us his Church to guide us as well.

 

[OhioBob]

A few random thoughts on previous posts…

Whether an act of intimacy is “open to life” (from the couples perspective) means only that the couple themselves is not placing an obstacle to the will of God. It doesn’t matter whether conception is physically possible (fertility, prior pregnancy, etc.), only that the couple isn’t taking it upon themselves to prevent conception (a.k.a. “contra”-ception) were it to occur (regardless of how likely or unlikely conception might be at that particular moment).

Regardless of what a dictionary might say, choosing NOT to do something is not the same thing as doing something while using outside means to assure the same outcome as not doing it (not very clear, sorry). Abstinence (as in NFP) is NOT choosing to engage in intimacy. The decision to abstain from intimacy is not the same as actively acting to oppose conception during intimacy.

In NFP, every act of intimacy is open to the possibility of conception. That possibility may be high or low at that particular moment, but the possibility remains unobstructed by any act of the couple. To me that is the essence of honoring both the unitive and procreative roles of each act marital intimacy. NFP allows both to be honored. Contraception does not.

It took me a while to understand the philosopy behind NFP and the difference between NFP and contraception. I wanted things the way I wanted them to be, and that can be a difficult cloud to cut through. Once I reached that “a-ha!” moment, it all seemed pretty clear and my previous reluctance to see the nuances seemed just like my own selfishness.

Sometimes we all need to be like the blind man and pray “Lord, that I might see…”

My :twocents: