Having trouble following the church on birth control

[pensmama87]

I have to restate that I’m really not trying to be flippant about it at all. Sometimes following this teaching involves wailing and gnashing of teeth, . The blunt point about eating helped drive the point home for myself, because I had the same questions. Abortion is wrong? Easy to get. Contraception? What’s wrong with that?

Just to clarify, because I’m not sure, but I was trying to build on your point, not disagree with you.

The analogy to food helped me a great deal, too, especially since I am in recovery from disordered eating. Food is as natural as you get, but the idea that I am entitled to food whenever and however and in the quantities and varieties that I want in the moment, and to simultaneously reject or not care how that could affect my body? It’s a nonsensical way to think, yet it’s how many think about sex today.

NFP is just a recognition of how that works. Maybe I can’t eat dessert every day without getting fat, but thanks to my knowledge about nutrition I can indulge twice a week. Am I cheating my digestive system? Nope, just working with how God designed it.

Nobody using NFP is getting away with anything. Because they’re abstaining.

 

[CatholicRaven]

A sexless marriage is a terrible marriage to live in.

It’s hard, isn’t it? Giving, loving, sacrificing. Much easier to find excuses to do what we want (or think we want) than to love and obey as Christ does, as Christ calls us to do.

Dying to self.
Taking up our cross.
Sacrificing for others.
Taking responsibility for our actions.
Loving your spouse as Christ loved the Church.

It’s easier to say, “Why can’t I just have the pleasure without any consequence (except that in reality, your wife and marriage pay the consequence)? Why should I have to trust God and not trust in man’s medicine to thwart His plans instead? Why can’t I just reject my wife’s fertility and disrespect the sanctity of her womb, and just use her for my own pleasure, instead of waiting until it’s a good time for both of us?”

Yeah, excuses are easy. Following Christ is not.

Just be careful that pleasure doesn’t become your idol (as it has in our society).

 

[Rau]

I’ve always heard it as “walk the walk”. Google shows about twice as many hits (11 million) for “walk the walk” as “walk the talk” (5.7) It could be that there are regional differences in the idiom.

Walk the talk - put into oractice what you preach. One hears this expression butchered routinely.

 

[CatholicRaven]

Food is as natural as you get, but the idea that I am entitled to food whenever and however and in the quantities and varieties that I want in the moment, and to simultaneously reject or not care how that could affect my body? It’s a nonsensical way to think, yet it’s how many think about sex today.

NFP is just a recognition of how that works. Maybe I can’t eat dessert every day without getting fat, but thanks to my knowledge about nutrition I can indulge twice a week. Am I cheating my digestive system? Nope, just working with how God designed it.

Exactly. You and TCEL have this spot-on.

 

[TCEL]

Just to clarify, because I’m not sure, but I was trying to build on your point, not disagree with you.

The analogy to food helped me a great deal, too, especially since I am in recovery from disordered eating. Food is as natural as you get, but the idea that I am entitled to food whenever and however and in the quantities and varieties that I want in the moment, and to simultaneously reject or not care how that could affect my body? It’s a nonsensical way to think, yet it’s how many think about sex today.

NFP is just a recognition of how that works. Maybe I can’t eat dessert every day without getting fat, but thanks to my knowledge about nutrition I can indulge twice a week. Am I cheating my digestive system? Nope, just working with how God designed it.

Nobody using NFP is getting away with anything. Because they’re abstaining.

I know. I just wanted to state that I realize the comparison between fasting, and binging and purging, can be offensive. My intent is not to provoke anger, but thought, since it helped me. Sometimes I’m dense or distracted, and need it to be put bluntly.

 

[utah_rose]

There’s no logical reason to abstain from sex for a week every month?

Not just that, but NFP just seems like a legalistic loop hole that doesn’t really jive with anything else in its teachings.

You haven’t mentioned how your wife feels about this! You sound like you haven’t been married too long. I can tell you that as you and your wife age, their may be times you will have forced abstinence, and a little of it now won’t hurt you. And contraceptives are not 100% effective. In the 60s when many priests were uninformed about the pill, I did take it for awhile and got pregnant. We didn’t have the finances either but it worked out. I was born during the catastrophic World War 11, and I bet my parents feared we’d lose the war! Our daughter was born in 1968, a year of upheaval and assassinations. We feared a civil war, with cities burning, yet I don’t regret a minute of it. Now because of my husband’s health problem we do have forced abstinence. Sometimes I feel that this is Gods payback for the years we practiced this. Have faith n God, and he will see you through.

 

[Pedro_1987]

My husband is a saintly man and respects me as much as ever, and I respect him more for it. There are sometimes health reasons for abstinence. The options are abstinence, NFP, or come what may.

So, it sounds like you do think NFP is different from other methods because it requires abstinence sometimes?

I said it several times in this thread, and so far everybody is ignoring what I said; NFP feels like nothing more than a loophole. It doesn’t feel like a natural church teaching. Having sex when you know the wife isn’t ovulating is the exact same as birth control.

It’s hard, isn’t it? Giving, loving, sacrificing. Much easier to find excuses to do what we want (or think we want) than to love and obey as Christ does, as Christ calls us to do.

Giving to who?! I want it, and she wants it. Neither of us want nor can afford a kid. And in fact nowhere in the Bible is this mentioned, not once. I know Catholics aren’t sola scriptura, but if it’s so important, I’d think Jesus would’ve mentioned it at least once. Or at least somewhere in the Jewish laws. They managed to squeeze in a verse about polyester in the Old Testament, but just couldn’t get around to putting anything in about even primitive birth control? And don’t say Onan, his sin was breaking a covenant.

 

[Rau]

I said it several times in this thread, and so far everybody is ignoring what I said; NFP feels like nothing more than a loophole. It doesn’t feel like a natural church teaching. Having sex when you know the wife isn’t ovulating is the exact same as birth control.

Seeking to exercise control over when one becomes pregnant is not itself wrong. To abstain is one (licit) means to do this. Contraception is a manipulation of the conjugal act to destroy its character. This latter thing is what the church teaches as wrong.

And don’t say Onan, his sin was breaking a covenant.

That sin (failing to agree to give the woman child) is elsewhere in the bible given a punishment of public humiliation. God’s action against Onan was death!! And the bible states that Hod’s action was in response to “what he did”.

 

[Pedro_1987]

God gives death to a lot of people that the law didn’t necessarily mandate. Lot’s wife was turned to salt (presumably this means death) for looking at an explosion. God summoned bears to eat some kids for harassing a prophet.

Also, using your logic, we should kill anybody who uses birth control.

 

[Rau]

God gives death to a lot of people that the law didn’t necessarily mandate. Lot’s wife was turned to salt (presumably this means death) for looking at an explosion. God summoned bears to eat some kids for harassing a prophet.

Also, using your logic, we should kill anybody who uses birth control.

Good grief. I think you are saying you do not care to accord with this teaching. Your enquiry no longer seems genuine.

 

[Slime13]

I said it several times in this thread, and so far everybody is ignoring what I said; NFP feels like nothing more than a loophole. It doesn’t feel like a natural church teaching. Having sex when you know the wife isn’t ovulating is the exact same as birth control.

NFP IS a loophole. For 1900+ years any sort of prevention was not allowed (except perhaps in very serious cases where a married couple completely abstained). The church (recently in relative terms) modified its view to allow for NFP, it will eventually modify the contraception stance again and agree that hormones in the pill are natural. My guess is…5 years or less.

Of course, NFP is practically a sacrament in these parts, so don’t look for sympathy to your point of view.

 

[pensmama87]

NFP IS a loophole. For 1900+ years any sort of prevention was not allowed (except perhaps in very serious cases where a married couple completely abstained). The church (recently in relative terms) modified its view to allow for NFP, it will eventually modify the contraception stance again and agree that hormones in the pill are natural. My guess is…5 years or less.

Of course, NFP is practically a sacrament in these parts, so don’t look for sympathy to your point of view.

So how often were couples required to have sex so they couldn’t be considered trying to avoid?

NFP is abstinence. It’s just based on knowledge about women’s cycles that was not known in nearly as much detail until recently. So instead of lengthy periods of abstinence (years, say) they can be shorter (not always, varies based on circumstances).

I don’t know how anyone can say NFP is a loophole. Don’t want babies, don’t have sex. Contraception is “have sex anyway but alter myself, my partner, or the act.”

 

[Rau]

NFP IS a loophole. For 1900+ years any sort of prevention was not allowed (except perhaps in very serious cases where a married couple completely abstained). The church (recently in relative terms) modified its view to allow for NFP, it will eventually modify the contraception stance again and agree that hormones in the pill are natural. My guess is…5 years or less.

Of course, NFP is practically a sacrament in these parts, so don’t look for sympathy to your point of view.

Right - for 1900 years, very regular sex was compulsory.

For most of that 1900 years, recognising the start of the fertile period, some days prior to ovulation, was not possible.

 

[pensmama87]

Right - for 1900 years, very regular sex was compulsory.

For most of that 1900 years, recognising the start of the fertile period, some days prior to ovulation, was not possible.

I’m going to call the MLB and tell them that they better tell players they aren’t allowed to consult nutritionists, trainers, or physical therapists, because using that knowledge about their bodies is pretty much the same thing as using steroids, and so a violation of their doping policy.

 

[Rau]

I’m going to call the MLB and tell them that they better tell players they aren’t allowed to consult nutritionists, trainers, or physical therapists, because using that knowledge about their bodies is pretty much the same thing as using steroids, and so a violation of their doping policy.

 

[TCEL]

The Bible says the consequence for not fulfilling the levirate duty of providing off-spring for your brothers widow is public shaming, not death. If anyone is curious where it is, I will cite it. It’s either in Leviticus or Deuteronomy. I’m on my phone.

 

[TCEL]

I said it several times in this thread, and so far everybody is ignoring what I said; NFP feels like nothing more than a loophole. It doesn’t feel like a natural church teaching. Having sex when you know the wife isn’t ovulating is the exact same as birth control.

Giving to who?! I want it, and she wants it. Neither of us want nor can afford a kid. And in fact nowhere in the Bible is this mentioned, not once. I know Catholics aren’t sola scriptura, but if it’s so important, I’d think Jesus would’ve mentioned it at least once. Or at least somewhere in the Jewish laws. They managed to squeeze in a verse about polyester in the Old Testament, but just couldn’t get around to putting anything in about even primitive birth control? And don’t say Onan, his sin was breaking a covenant.

There are a lot of things Jesus didn’t mention, but were passed on to the Apostles. Even John mentions that Jesus said and did many things that all the books in the world couldn’t contain. I mentioned in another post the consequence for not fulfilling the levirate duty. It was public shaming, not death.

We have answered how it is different. You have revealed that you think it is different too, because it requires abstinence.

 

[TCEL]

Again, as a Catholic, even if you think all the methods are the same, wouldn’t you be glad the Church has allowed the possibility of NFP? Even if you don’t get it?

 

[Duane1966]

There are levels of preparedness though. To say everybody should have kids right away is ludicrous and can in fact ruin people’s futures.

You do realize that the argument about ruining a persons future, is the argument that is often used to support abortion? If a person should have resulted from a marital act, but contraception prevented fertilization, have you not just ruined their future? You wish to divorce the marital act from its natural consequences.

This is incredibly reckless and this kind of logic would never apply to anything else. For example, you might as well ask if a driver trusts God enough to save him in an accident; therefore seatbelts are proof one doesn’t trust in God. By this logic you should also never receive medical attention of any kind, but instead to trust in God to save you.

Terrible analogies on your part. Neither a seat belt, or medical attention are designed to prevent life, but to save it. Nor is a car accident a natural result of driving cars, but usually of human error. Life, however, is a natural result of the marital act.

This is not he Christian God I was taught about. The god you described is incredibly weak. Nothing any human does can interfere with the Christian God’s plan. To say otherwise is to elevate man above God.

Really? So why the need for contraception? If it is part of God’s plan, why not from the beginning? Was original sin part of God’s plan? Is genocide part of God’s plan? Is any sin part of God’s plan?

Surely, if contraception is not wrong, then everyone practicing it 100% of the time, for the rest of their lives cannot be wrong either. What would the results be?

 

[bluerose]

A sexless marriage is a terrible marriage to live in.

I’ll pass that bit of info on to my brother-in-law. He and his wife had to forego sex when she was diagnosed with a terminal illness. I’ll be sure to let him know you said that having to go without sex for over a year while his wife was dying meant his marriage was terrible.