From your experence why does NFP feel better than contraception?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Odell
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Life involves various difficulties.

It is how approach those difficulties that is of great importance.

We are to approach them as Christians…both the little jabs and the major crosses.

Attitude is key here. As of course is prayer and the Sacraments…(closeness to Christ)
 
Bookcat said:
The last line is not on target…for one thing RCIA varies from place to place…and from presenter to presenter…ones mileage will vary…(and the 5% is a rather far off notion).

The rejection of contraception is not an optional thing…it is not a matter open to opinion.

It is not an optional thing…not a thing for private opinion. As Pope John Paul II noted when asked in 1987 : “What is taught by the Church on contraception is not one of the matters that may be freely disputed by theologians. To teach the contrary is equivalent to leading the conscience of spouses into error”…

Lets say for argument sake that such is not infallible …even then it would still something one is to *assent *to as a Catholic.

(and someone who claims that the practical judgment of their conscience (which would be erroneious) tells them that they would sin here and now if they did not use contraception…need to *correct *their erroneious conscience just as one who thinks it would be a sin to pray needs to. It is by the way not their conscience against the Church…but their conscience divided against itself…for they are Catholics and the teaching of the Church is not some foreign thing to their conscience…)

There are various kinds of assent to be given the various kinds of teaching…but assent is to be given as a Catholic. As the Catechism notes as well as has been explained by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith…

The CDF noted that there are certain things that are to be given the assent of Faith…other things that are to be given a “firm and definitive assent” based on faith in the Holy Spirit’s assistance etc and there are teachings that require the religious submission of intellect and will…

Also I should note

The Vademecum issued by in 1997 for confessors noted:

"The Church has always taught the intrinsic evil of contraception, that is, of every marital act intentionally rendered unfruitful. This teaching is to be held as definitive and irreformable. Contraception is gravely opposed to marital chastity, it is contrary to the good of the transmission of life (the procreative aspect of matrimony), and to the reciprocal self-giving of the spouses (the unitive aspect of matrimony); it harms true love and denies the sovereign role of God in the transmission of human life (Vademecum for Confessors 2:4)

Jimmy Akin – Catholic Answers senior apologist give the following commentary in 2004:

jimmyakin.org/2004/11/contraception_i.html

And in a note from the CDF in 2010 one interestingly finds regarding the mortal norm concerning contraception this line: “This norm belongs to the tradition of the Church…”
Click to expand...
I’m not talking about rendering “every” marital act infertile. In fact, I generally agree with this statement from the Vademecum. Read it again and note that very important word “every”.

I say on my research and searching it is not infallible dogma, not universally taught by the Ordinary Magisterium. Look at the Canadian Bishops’ statement! Clearly not universally taught. And quoting more fallible statements from the Pope doesn’t change this. Previous Popes insisted the Earth was flat and the sun went around the Earth. Do you assert those must be agreed with too? They also made statements about the immorality of democratic government, about the acceptability of slavery, and all kinds of other things. Fortunately none of those were spoken ex cathedra either!
 
Blacksword said:
I’m not talking about rendering “every” marital act infertile. In fact, I generally agree with this statement from the Vademecum. Read it again and note that very important word “every”.
Click to expand...
Yes…it is clear (form that document and others) that every marital act must be open to life…period.
 
Blacksword said:
I say on my research and searching it is not infallible dogma, not universally taught by the Ordinary Magisterium. Look at the Canadian Bishops’ statement! Clearly not universally taught. And quoting more fallible statements from the Pope doesn’t change this. Previous Popes insisted the Earth was flat and the sun went around the Earth. Do you assert those must be agreed with too? They also made statements about the immorality of democratic government, about the acceptability of slavery, and all kinds of other things. Fortunately none of those were spoken ex cathedra either!
Click to expand...
You misunderstand here the universal ordinary magisterium. I invite further study.

But again…even it it such were not infallible…there is absolutely not doubt as to the fact that one is to give assent to it. It is not an open thing. (and the Canadian thing your talking about a mistake they made in the past…I suggest this book for you…I understand he addresses such and more: shop.catholic.com/product.php?productid=16717&cat=20&page=1
 
Bookcat said:
Life involves various difficulties.
Click to expand...
:doh2:

Gee, no one here knew that, Bookcat.

A conception is not a “difficulty.” It’s a child, a new life, a major addition to the conscientious family.
 
Elizabeth502 said:
:doh2:

Gee, no one here knew that, Bookcat.

A conception is not a “difficulty.” It’s a child, a new life, a major addition to the conscientious family.
Click to expand...
Yes of course …such is not a difficulty …it is a gift.

(though difficulties are associated with it and many other events in life…which we are to meet with virtue…and become more fully human and better persons via such)
 
@Blacksword
Infallibility pertains to teachings on matters of faith and morals from the Pope where he speaks from the seat of Peter, or teachings that the bishops and Pope all are in accord with. You seem to imply from this that both must be in place for infallibility to exist. This is not the case and a doctrine given by the Pope on a matter of faith when spoken from the seat of Peter is infallible in and of itself whether the bishops can all agree on it or not. I won’t go into your list of supposed examples of where the Pope/bishops had it wrong, but if you do a search I’m sure you can find explanations over the teaching of infallibility and the history of the Church’s teachings dissected.
 
Blacksword said:
Previous Popes insisted the Earth was flat and the sun went around the Earth.
Click to expand...
From Forum Rules:
Guidelines
For both Catholic and non-Catholic posters:
Bringing up historical controversies peculiar to a particular religion should be done cautiously*
It is acceptable to discuss the effect the incident had on current policy or practice.
It is fallacious reasoning to use embarrassing incidents to claim that they “prove” a particular religion [or unrelated teaching] is false.
Click to expand...
[Underline and bracketed addition, mine]

(Just saying…)
 
Bookcat said:
Yes of course …such is not a difficulty …it is a gift.
Click to expand...
Catholics who use NFP with the same intent & vigor that others use artificial methods of controlling births, are not necessarily viewing the addition of a child as a gift. They’re viewing it as a source of panic. As long as they do so, they will find NFP more than mildly inconvenient and “just one of life’s difficulties.” They will find, I maintain, that it may or will interfere with the joy of their love-making. NFP is only a solution for those who can relax about pregnancy, i.m.o.
 
Bookcat said:
Yes…NFP to avoid is not a normal thing…it is something only for serious reasons.

Normally it should be relations at various times.

But as we all know* from other areas in life*…we do not always have circumstances that are in favor of the normal… such is part of the struggle in life… flu and headaches…not getting the raise one wants…those annoying knats around ones head on ones vacation etc…

Let us learn of course to offer these little jabs up for the good of others …such too is part of our life. (see Pope Benedict XVI Encylical on Hope)
Click to expand...
I’m going to reiterate: if any forms of BC are wrong, NFP is wrong too. It’s used as a form of BC, and we all know it. Couples employing it are very much hoping to avoid pregnancy, that’s WHY they are going to such extreme lengths to try to assess when it’s “safe” to have sex. They have a contraceptive mentality, it’s a distinction without a difference.
 
Bookcat said:
Yes…it is clear (form that document and others) that every marital act must be open to life…period.
Click to expand...
Lol! Except the statement from the Vadecum didn’t say that. It said what is wrong is contraception to intentionally render EVERY act infertile. Read it again, that statement isn’t helping your cause.🤷
 
Elizabeth502 said:
Catholics who use NFP with the same intent & vigor that others use artificial methods of controlling births, are not necessarily viewing the addition of a child as a gift. They’re viewing it as a source of panic. As long as they do so, they will find NFP more than mildly inconvenient and “just one of life’s difficulties.” They will find, I maintain, that it may or will interfere with the joy of their love-making. NFP is only a solution for those who can relax about pregnancy, i.m.o.
Click to expand...
Well I would not put the last part in that way…I am sure you are not saying that they should use CC 🙂 (which some could read into it…not again that you intended such!)

And it is important to note that NFP is still very different than CC even if it is being used in a way contrary to the way it is to be used…hopefully in time …certain virtues will be acquired and a new realization of the realities involved with dawn …and things will be different…etc

Nor do I think that just cause a couple can not “relax” about pregnancy…that such a couple is acting necessarily in a way …interiorly or exteriorly that is disordered per se. Often there can be a very legit stressful reaction …

But yes…we all need to see a child as a gift…and seek to live constantly (externally and internally) in ways that are ever growing in virtue and seeking the good and ordered towards it.
 
Nate13 said:
@Blacksword
Infallibility pertains to teachings on matters of faith and morals from the Pope where he speaks from the seat of Peter, or teachings that the bishops and Pope all are in accord with. You seem to imply from this that both must be in place for infallibility to exist. This is not the case and a doctrine given by the Pope on a matter of faith when spoken from the seat of Peter is infallible in and of itself whether the bishops can all agree on it or not. I won’t go into your list of supposed examples of where the Pope/bishops had it wrong, but if you do a search I’m sure you can find explanations over the teaching of infallibility and the history of the Church’s teachings dissected.
Click to expand...
Understand that. The Pope never spoke from the chair on contraception. There’s the problem.
 
Elizabeth502 said:
Catholics who use NFP with the same intent & vigor that others use artificial methods of controlling births, are not necessarily viewing the addition of a child as a gift. They’re viewing it as a source of panic. As long as they do so, they will find NFP more than mildly inconvenient and “just one of life’s difficulties.” They will find, I maintain, that it may or will interfere with the joy of their love-making. NFP is only a solution for those who can relax about pregnancy, i.m.o.
Click to expand...
That’s kinda the beauty of NFP, at least in my, and my wife’s, experience. As our just reason became less “just”, abstaining during the fertile period became increasingly difficult. Once we had no truly just reason, it was impossible, unless we happened to be away from each other (travel, etc…).
 
Blacksword said:
Lol! Except the statement from the Vadecum didn’t say that. It said what is wrong is contraception to intentionally render EVERY act infertile. Read it again, that statement isn’t helping your cause.🤷
Click to expand...
You misunderstanding the statement …

“The Church has always taught the intrinsic evil of contraception, that is, of every marital act intentionally rendered unfruitful.”

Means that every act must be open to life. It should be read as “every” meaning “each”.

The document is not going to start supporting the view that was expressly condemned by the Church!

Yes it could be said better…but every document must be understood in light of the others…and this point is is very clear.
 
Bookcat said:
You misunderstanding the statement …

“The Church has always taught the intrinsic evil of contraception, that is, of every marital act intentionally rendered unfruitful.”

Means that every act must be open to life. It should be read as “every” meaning “each”.

The document is not going to start supporting the view that was expressly condemned by the Church!

Yes it could be said better…but every document must be understood in light of the others…and this point is is very clear.
Click to expand...
Sigh, then it’s TERRIBLY worded. I’m reading “every” as meaning “each”. On that reading, this particular statement thus objectively implies that there is no evil where every act is not rendered infertile. So as long as some acts are fertile, one is not running afoul of this statement. That’s the clearest reading of it. And yes, I know that doesn’t agree with every dictate in Humanae Vitae on the Rule, as I call it.
 
Blacksword said:
Sigh, then it’s TERRIBLY worded. I’m reading “every” as meaning “each”. On that reading, this particular statement thus objectively implies that there is no evil where every act is not rendered infertile. So as long as some acts are fertile, one is not running afoul of this statement. That’s the clearest reading of it. And yes, I know that doesn’t agree with every dictate in Humanae Vitae on the Rule, as I call it.
Click to expand...
Yes translations can sometimes limp. But that is certainly the meaning.

Catechism:

2366 Fecundity is a gift, an end of marriage, for conjugal love naturally tends to be fruitful. A child does not come from outside as something added on to the mutual love of the spouses, but springs from the very heart of that mutual giving, as its fruit and fulfillment. So the Church, which "is on the side of life"150 teaches that "each and every marriage act must remain open ‘per se’ to the transmission of life."151 "This particular doctrine, expounded on numerous occasions by the Magisterium, is based on the inseparable connection, established by God, which man on his own initiative may not break, between the unitive significance and the procreative significance which are both inherent to the marriage act."152
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top