Exactly how is NFP (Natural Family Planning) NOT just another form of birth control?

[Geremia]

No, because its not an action, it is no action. There is nothing that says spouse must have sex. They are free to choose when they want to enjoy sex or conversely when they would rather abstain form it.

I’m pretty sure keeping track of your fertile and infertile times, as NFP requires, is an action.

 

[Newbie2]

Marriage exists for having children, for populating the world with more Catholics. NFP, which is not total abstinence, is contrary to this.

Marriage does not exist solely for having children. Please provide a reference if you think this is Catholic doctrine.

 

[LJN21]

An example:

You are having a party. You send out the invitations and one of the guests you know is probably not going to be able to make it, but you send Him and invitation anyway. That what where talking, by having relations only during non fertile times you are in essence sending an invitation to God when you know he’s probably not going give you a baby. Contraception however is UN-inviting God.

 

[LJN21]

I’m pretty sure keeping track of your fertile and infertile times, as NFP requires, is an action.

Yes, but keeping track of you fertile and infertile times does not do anything by it self. You have to act on it or not (in the case of delaying pregnancy), you can also you NFP have children and lots of people do.

Edited for clarity.

 

[Geremia]

Marriage does not exist solely for having children. Please provide a reference if you think this is Catholic doctrine.

Having children is not its only purpose but it is its grandest purpose. To go against its purpose is immoral.

 

[LJN21]

Having children is its grandest purpose. To go against its purpose is immoral.

Source?

 

[Geremia]

Source?

“The words increase and multiply, which were uttered by the Lord, do not impose on every individual an obligation to marry, but only declare the purpose of the institution of marriage.”
—from the Trent Catechism

 

[newbetx]

I thought the Church was to enunciate what God wanted, not God seeing that the church had decided this as what he wanted. The distinction is subtle but real. I cannot meld God and the Church as one. God is infallible, The church makes mistakes, though I trust that God leads her back to correctness in time.

I understand about church (little c) and Church (big C). To some they are the same. I understand they are not. If Big C is God and little c is fallable people that attempt to serve it, I know where you are. It will take a while to untangle Big C from little c.

 

[newbetx]

Natural Family Planning (NFP) is a form of contraception and birth control. Catholics should not use even NFP because it closes us off to the idea that the whole point of marriage and the marriage act is to have children. It develops a bad mindset for married Catholics.

This concept is uncharitable at the least and the h word at the worst.

NFP CAN be used to avoid. Not always as some posters will attest. Saying YOU don’t choose to use it is fine. Telling others they should not use it because it goes against God goes against the CCC which would be against God.

We appreciate the fact that any liberty can be misused. Many threads here make that point. But to banish it completely is wrong.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

As I continue to say, the hoops being jumped through to justify this is telling.

It’s very simple, no jumping through hoops are required:

Each individual marital act has to be open to life. Since God designed our bodies, it isn’t our fault if we are sometimes infertile. If we don’t want to have a baby, then a couple may choose to not have sex when their God-created reproductive system is fertile.

The end may be the same, to avoid having a baby, but the means is different. God gave us the choice to abstain if we aren’t ready to have a baby. Waiting until God’s system is infertile is very different from intentionally breaking the reproductive system that God designed for us.

 

[newbetx]

Boy that is a mis-statement if ever there was one. Contraception allows the poor to avoid pregnancies THEY DO NOT WANT because they cannot afford to raise additional children. There is utterly nothing sinister about such a practice. You act like someone wants to kill poor people. Unless you suscribe to the idea tha all children are good even if they starve to death, then helping the poor reduce their risk of pregnancy is universally considered a good thing. No one is required to use contraception for goodness sake.

Like it’s the poor that benefit from contraception… another lie you’ve bought into. If the poor “starve to death” then WE aren’t doing our jobs. Remember, we are here to help those who need it. Not ourselves.

So in your world, would you propose a income limit on who could have birth control? Only those making less than $xK/yr are allowed?

What is advocated is self-control and Trust in God. Something ABC says is unneeded.

This of course is a strawman argument. Of course there is no prenancy by anyone practicing abstinence. That is not the point at all. Abstinence fails because kids don’t practice it, they become pregnant and either abort, raise it or give the child up for adoption. Kids presented with full sex-educaiton programs simply get pregnant less often that abstinence only kids (what they are taught) thus there are less pregnancies to abort, raise or give up for adoption. Since both options one and two are not suggested as good, then the folks who promote full sex education actually prevent more abortions than do those that promote abstinence.

I know that PPH is hated here. Oddly it receives funding from hundreds of other groups, so apparently very few share the strange hatred engendered here.

You seem to be a strong supporter of Sex as right rather than privalege. Sorry, I’m loosing hope quickly here. Kids have no right to be having sex. It’s really that simple.

And if the non-christian empire supported something, it must have been good? Really do you think God “goes with the majority”? God doesn’t do “democracy.”

 

[LJN21]

“The words increase and multiply, which were uttered by the Lord, do not impose on every individual an obligation to marry, but only declare the purpose of the institution of marriage.”
—from the Trent Catechism

Not seeing anything in your quote that says that children are the only or the greatest purpose of marriage, just that it is a purpose of marriage.

I refer back to my quotes form the Catholicism of the Catholic Church.

Now you need to remember, NFP to avoid pregnancy is not to be used selfishly this means you have to have just cause. You can’t get married and decide you don’t want kids because you would rather have a boat, that is sinful. Just reasons to avoid pregnancy would be stuff along the lines of proper spacing of children, serious health reasons, or lack of monetary or emotional ability to take care of the children you already have. There are more reasons but that gives you an idea.

 

[LJN21]

You seem to be a strong supporter of Sex as right rather than privalege. Sorry, I’m loosing hope quickly here. Kids have no right to be having sex. It’s really that simple.

Small point here. As a kid, fear of the repercussions of sex was in no small way part of the reason I was able to save myself for my husband on our wedding night. Had Mom come in with a condom and said, I’d rather you didn’t but just in cause take this, there is no way I would have made it to meeting my husband!

 

[Neil_Anthony]

Small point here. As a kid, fear of the repercussions of sex was in no small way part of the reason I was able to save myself for my husband on our wedding night. Had Mom come in with a condom and said, I’d rather you didn’t but just in cause take this, there is no way I would have made it to meeting my husband!

I would like to add my story too:

When I was 17 I was dealing with tremendous confusion because it seemed all the other kids at my Catholic school thought sex before marriage was Okay. I felt like I must be really strange to be the only one (that I knew of) who thought this was a serious sin. Add natural desires to the mix and it was a difficult choice.

Then came the biology class about sex, where the teacher told everyone she is on the pill and rolled her eyes at Catholic teaching about birth control and sexual morality. I think that was probably the last straw for me before I completely gave up trying to follow my beliefs. Not just the beliefs about sex, but all of them.

(Eventually years later I repented, but that’s another story).

 

[Charlie_Zeaiter]

… Then came the biology class about sex, where the teacher told everyone she is on the pill and rolled her eyes at Catholic teaching about birth control and sexual morality…

I wish I was in that classroom; I would have told her that the Goom Jesus gave his body completely for His Bride/The Church. Similarly, we should give our bodies completely to our spouses.

 

[LilyM]

An example:

You are having a party. You send out the invitations and one of the guests you know is probably not going to be able to make it, but you send Him and invitation anyway. That what where talking, by having relations only during non fertile times you are in essence sending an invitation to God when you know he’s probably not going give you a baby. Contraception however is UN-inviting God.

It’s worse than that, it’s shutting the door in his face and having him frogmarched off the premises by security when He DOES show up

 

[LittleDeb]

“The words increase and multiply, which were uttered by the Lord, do not impose on every individual an obligation to marry, but only declare the purpose of the institution of marriage.”
—from the Trent Catechism

I know you mean well here. I realize you are trying to help people overcome a mentality of “children are a burden and should be prevented.” I get that and it is a noble intent. But your means of condemning periodic abstinence isn’t helping that.

I agree with you that the primary purpose of marriage is procreation. It is procreation not reproduction. Some of the most procreative people I know are the permanently infertile. They are not only trying to make their own babies, they are going in the streets looking for “unwanted” children. But they cannot reproduce. That doesn’t make their marriage less holy.

Please understand that spacing children is moral. Without it I wouldn’t be called to have a family at all. I don’t think you mean to say, “Either have all the children your body can produce or none at all.” But that is what you are saying. If my options are one pregnancy after another without a break or don’t get married at all, I couldn’t have gotten married at all. Some people are called to consecrated celibacy. I wasn’t. I was called to marriage and motherhood.

What you might not realize is that attitudes against all spacing of pregnancies and against* all *small families give the contraception advocates the ammunition they need. The Church, in her infinite wisdom, knows that not everyone is called to a large family. We are ALL called to be generous, though. NFP allows generosity.

If you are calling me to total abstinence in my marriage, I can understand that. Is that what you are trying to say? I am very open to that idea. If pregnancy became such a dire risk to my health, I would gladly embrace total abstinence. But it doesn’t make sense at this point for me to be totally abstinent. My body might be able to carry another baby…(please, oh please, oh please Lord ) Charting my fertility saved my health. I was supposed to get a hysterectomy 15 years ago. I have cycles all over the place…28-35-40 days. Charting has helped me so much!! I can finally predict to the day when my menses and ovulation are! YAY!!:extrahappy:

Without the space between pregnancies I could have none. My two beautiful children wouldn’t exist. My life would be so much more empty if those two precious children weren’t here. Please rethink your stance and come into unity with the Church on this subject. Seek out others like me and encourage them to learn their fertility. Encourage them to trust in God. He designed us fertile and infertile. He did that for a reason. NFP helps us to more fully understand that reason. NFP is a gift. God wrote it on our very bodies.

 

[tr1954]

NFP use CAN be sinful if the reason you use it is for selfish reasons… But that is a slightly different situation… let’s hold off for a min on that.

NFP involves both the man and woman. ABC usually only involves one or the other. Why does that matter? Well, it has to do with choices. With NFP, BOTH decide to sacrafice something. It may be to practice abstenance for a while, or accept the result of the act might create another child for the family. Both are sacrafices.

With ABC, there is no sacrafice. No one does without anything. When a child gets what they want, whenever they want, what is the value of the thing over the long haul? What is the attitude of the child? Respectful? Able to recognize value of things? No. Spoiled “I want it now and if you don’t give it to me, I’m going to throw a fit until I get what I want.” Now many will say that this has never happened to them, and it may be true, but still many more suffer because of just this attitude.

What you have to understand is that NFP promotes the VALUE of sex, it’s meaning, and it’s true purpose. ABC promotes sex as entertainment, a thing to have, a mechanism that can be supplied by alternate methods to that which was intended (porn, masterbation, adultery…)

So the difference isn’t mearly the fact of how a couple chooses to bring children into the world or not. It’s a whole other way of viewing sex and the love of your spouse. And in my experience, a far better way. BTDT.

NFP used the right way CLOSES a sexual act to the creation of life. At least that is what promotes…Natural Family Planning…If a couple wants to open themselves up to procreation, they have to abandon the usage of NFP for that period. That is not evil by any means…a couple wants to space out children, then NFP is excellent for that purpose.

However, the problem I see is the selfish ABUSE of NFP arbitrarily by many couples…today almost everybody using NFP is using it as a method of birth control. (there are exceptions of course, but that just strengthens the rule) Many couples by having one or more children do not want more children for any reason. There are many reasons not wanting more children, but once closing the act to the creation of life, the morality of it is no different than those who use NFP for entertainment purposes only.

And here comes my dilemma…who can say that the action of a couple is morally justified, yet the very same action of others might not be morally justifiable?? I asked a rhetorical question…is it OK for a newly married couple to use NFP selfishly for entertainment purposes only?..I would venture to say that probably 99% of this forum would say is not morally justifiable. Yet if a couple who had 2, or more children are morally justified (I would think by a great majority on this forum) if they decide not to have more children, by closing their sexual act to the creation of life…but there is no difference from a moral standpoint.

In all of this discussion, I have no beef against NFP…that was never the issue. The abuse of it is! It really don’t matter how the abuse takes place, as long as it is condoned, it will aways be the source of many debates…

 

[tr1954]

Isn’t it a bit disengenuous to hail NFP as having such a high success rate of preventing pregnancy and then turn around and say it is sinful if the only purpose of the usage is to prevent pregnacy?.

The issue is the selfish usage of NFP, for entertainment purposes only. There are many ways NFP is a benefit, like spacing out children…

As I continue to say, the hoops being jumped through to justify this is telling. And correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t this whole concept developed because people were so up in arms at having NO alternative but abstinence within marriage to avoid additional children? .

I would think you should take this up with God…He is the one who made infertile periods for women. All men did was observing God’s creation…besides, couples carry their crosses equally, when using NFP

Seems to be what I recall as when this whole new thing of NFP came along. Course it had to wait for the science to make it even remotely viable as an option. I don’t argue with your numbers, I never have been interested in NFP as a method of contraception to investigate its efficacy. I doubt it works well for a large percentage of women, expecially those with abnormal and irratic cycles.

The only problem I see is the abuse of it! Today, more & more couples see NFP as an entertainment…and that is selfish…

 

[Joya]

An example:

You are having a party. You send out the invitations and one of the guests you know is probably not going to be able to make it, but you send Him and invitation anyway. That what where talking, by having relations only during non fertile times you are in essence sending an invitation to God when you know he’s probably not going give you a baby. Contraception however is UN-inviting God.

This analogy is faulty (and happens to be extremely common by nfp supporters on this board). By observing your fertility signs and postponing sex until the infertile period, this in essence is also uninviting God since the couple knows it is **biologically impossible to conceive. **

The scientific knowledge has become so sophisticated since our mothers’ and grandmothers’ times that a woman can be absolutely certain the marital act will not result in pregnancy and she can be safe. I would argue that you are only inviting God if you have no clue as to where you are in your cycle.

Go to the Family Life section. There are threads frequently about what couples should do about birth control if another pregnancy will do serious medical harm to the woman and their doc is recommending sterilization. What do people suggest? Use nfp to avoid pregnancy; it is so reliable and more so than artificial contraception!

Know the phrase "have your cake and eat it, too? This describes many nfp users who use biological markers to determine periods of natural infertility to prevent pregnancy, yet still say they are “open to life” or “inviting God.” You can’t have it both ways.

Please don’t get me wrong. I have used nfp exclusively and enthusiastically, but I never claimed that I was open to the possibility of conception when I knew it wasn’t going to happen or still sending God an invitation, etc.

Nfp is simply a contraceptive birth control method that respects the natural cyclical progression of a woman’s reproductive system more so than other methods. Of course, you can integrate spirituality into the method, but let’s call a spade a spade and stop denying that it is something that it is not.