How is NFP morally different to condoms?

[manualman]

Things are always messiest when a spouse rejects church teaching.

Have you investigated further how it came to be that you became pregnant using NFP? Which method? Was it around the time you just got fertility back? Are your cycles irregular?

If you have a particularly hard to track cycle, it may be beneficial for you to contact a professional in the Creighton Method. I understand they are continually researching/refining the understanding of how fertility can be monitored and hard cases like yours may help out the next gal in your shoes.

 

[Ignatius]

BibleReader:

Not only does the condom user affirmatively seek to get sexual pleasure WITHOUT conception when sex at that time = “conception time” – something the NFP user does NOT do – but Scripture EXPRESSLY condemns ABC use while it seems to EXPRESSLY approve the premise underlying NFP.

These scripture verses would be very useful in furture discussion on this subject. Can you please provide them? Thank you.

 

[mumto5]

manualman:

Things are always messiest when a spouse rejects church teaching.

Have you investigated further how it came to be that you became pregnant using NFP? Which method? Was it around the time you just got fertility back? Are your cycles irregular?

If you have a particularly hard to track cycle, it may be beneficial for you to contact a professional in the Creighton Method. I understand they are continually researching/refining the understanding of how fertility can be monitored and hard cases like yours may help out the next gal in your shoes.

I have no idea. Maybe we got too close and my husband has super hardy swimmers? lol. I’m very glad it happened

The only method taught here is the mucous/temperature method. Big problem is that I can’t afford to wait and see if a different method is going to work better or not. (And wouldn’t that be employing a contraceptive mentality anyway?).

It’s been (and still is) a huge struggle for me. Sometimes I’ve felt like I may as well give up. But then why should I when the use of NFP is only 1% higher among Catholics than the rest of the population? (Still in single digits). At least I have a reason behind my decision which I believe is in the best interests of my children. Doesn’t help that every priest has said ‘no problem’. Went to confession and the priest asked how many children I had, then thought it was no big deal and gave me one Our Father for penance.

I’m not a hypocritical or two-faced person. So yes, this is hard. Especially since I’m actually not sorry and believe I did the right thing by letting my husband go ahead with the vasectomy. I’m not happy about it but not for strictly spiritual reasons. The fact I feel it’s hypocritical, that bothers me, but not the reason behind it. Right now I’m keeping on going in spite of feeling I should just give up. I don’t care of 95% of Catholics have no problem with it, I do.

 

[gardenswithkids]

mumto5:

II’m not a hypocritical or two-faced person. So yes, this is hard. Especially since I’m actually not sorry and believe I did the right thing by letting my husband go ahead with the vasectomy. I’m not happy about it but not for strictly spiritual reasons. The fact I feel it’s hypocritical, that bothers me, but not the reason behind it. Right now I’m keeping on going in spite of feeling I should just give up. I don’t care of 95% of Catholics have no problem with it, I do.

It sounds to me like you chose not to fight with your husband over his vasectomy rather than purposefully choosing to disobey Church teachings. It’s particularly sad that you did not have a priest whom would back you up if you had chosen to oppose your husband’s sterilization.

God gives us free will. You did not prevent your husband from freely choosing to sterilize himself, but it doesn’t sound as if you encouraged it. It seems as though you prefered to follow Church teachings, but not at the risk of your marriage when your life was also at risk. If you have confessed it, even if you didn’t have perfect contrition, you are forgiven. If you still feel like a hypocrit, mention that next time in confession and confess that you don’t regret his vasectomy.

Don’t beat yourself up over this. I know of people who were happy with sterilization for years until one day what they really did finally hit them. I know I had this nagging guilt when I was using contraception, but not enough to regret it at the time. God gently got through to me. I then in turn tried pounding the Church teachings against contraception into my poor husband’s head, which caused some difficulties in my marriage for a time. Thankfully, my husband never made any permanent changes or our family would be much smaller.

Back to the topic of the original thread, when couples are fighting over the issue of NFP vs. condoms (or other contraception), the Catholic who desires to follow the Church teachings must be careful. If the conflict gets too heated, the other spouse may decide to put an end to the fighting by getting sterilized. Talk to God more; argue with spouse less.

 

[mumto5]

gardenswithkids:

It sounds to me like you chose not to fight with your husband over his vasectomy rather than purposefully choosing to disobey Church teachings. It’s particularly sad that you did not have a priest whom would back you up if you had chosen to oppose your husband’s sterilization.

I think part of it was that he wanted to have a vasectomy three kids ago and has raised the issue each and every time. And while he is glad he didn’t, knowing how hard he is working and how tired he can get, I felt it would be unfair to keep having more babies. Particularly since we feel that under the circumstances NFP isn’t sure enough, I didn’t really see any other option. I felt we had to do something - and that was more for the sake of the children and my husband than myself. I feel I’d be ok with medical intervention. So I guess I just admitted defeat and let him do it. No, I didn’t encourage it - but I didn’t oppose it. I resigned myself to it because I felt that it would be unfair to say ‘too bad to everyone else, I’m going to maybe have another baby’.

One thing I would like to correct is that yes, I would have prefered to follow church teachings but it seemed to me that church teachings were no longer realistic. I don’t believe my marriage would have been at risk if I had stood up and opposed it, but my being there for my children was at risk. That was probably the key element.

I definitely do not have perfect contrition. I am sorry that I am not able to follow church teachings, but not sorry for the action taken, if that makes sense. I would like to use NFP and accept more children - I’d love more children - but I’m afraid the ideal and reality have crashed. I don’t see any point in confessing it again when all the priests seem to think there’s no problem and no sin anyway. I do know of one who would - but he’s gone. I guess I could have a chat with the Opus Dei priest. Maybe next time. I think he’s pretty conservative. That’s another thing…I’ve been going to some Opus Dei meetings but am thinking of giving up on that. I just don’t fit the mold and can’t be that kind of Catholic anymore. I guess that makes me a Cafeteria Catholic.

We’re on Offertory this weekend. I don’t feel right about that either. I just want to sit in the back row and not be noticed. While it’s not out of repentance, I feel this is the only kind of Catholic I can be now - a sidelines one, not a ‘real’ one. So I join 95% of the Catholic population using birth control.

 

[PLAL]

Natural Family Planning is the knowledge of a couple’s fertility. It is a knowledge base about a couple’s ability to conceive a child.

The application of this knowledge in a particular marriage is called responsible parenthood. The couple either decides to try to achieve a pregnancy or to avoid by timing their use of the privileges of marriage according to the knowledge of their mutual fertility. (The man, if healthy, is fertile all the time. The woman, if healthy, is fertile about three or four days a month.)

Responsible parenthood differs from contraception in two ways: 1. There is no alteration of the bodies of either the husband or wife and this is a huge difference. 2. When the couple uses the privileges of marriage, they are not holding back at all or refusing to give everything they are, physically and spiritually. If they are infertile at the time, this is the result of the way God created them. They are giving themselves totally to one another AS THEY ARE AT THAT MOMENT. No one could require more. Further, God never asked couples to use the privileges of marriage at any particular time. That decision is completely theirs. So, in the marital act during an infertile period, husband and wife who are applying the knowledge of their fertility (NFP) responsibly (responsible parenthood) are giving everything they are at that moment to one another.

The intention is also different. The NFP couple realizes that in every marital union there is a chance (perhaps remote) of conceiving a child and they accept this possibility. The contracepting couple (even if only with condoms) has a positive intention against confepction. An example might help: I want some money from a bank. It makes a huge difference whether I go to the bank and draw the money out from a checking account or whether I approach a teller with a gun and “withdraw” $100. Either way, I get the $100, but one act is radically differnt from the other.

 

[jegow]

I am going to assume that you only understand the difference between NFP and abortifacient contraception since this is what you said. Before I say anything I would like to show what Pope Paul VI said.

From Humanae Vitae #12: The reason is that the fundamental nature of the marriage act, while uniting husband and wife in the closest intimacy, also renders them capable of generating new life—and this as a result of laws written into the actual nature of man and of woman. And if each of these essential qualities, the** unitive and the procreative, is preserved, the use of marriage fully retains its sense of true mutual love and its ordination to the supreme responsibility of parenthood to which man is called. We believe that our contemporaries are particularly capable of seeing that this teaching is in harmony with human reason.
From Humanae Vitae #14: Similarly excluded is any action ***which ***either before, at the moment of, or after sexual intercourse, is specifically intended to prevent procreation—whether as an end or as a means.

Now in** #16** of Humanae Vitae, Pope Paul VI actually is giving an answer to the question. I would recommend reading it. vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html

greenfrog:

However… looking at the issue from a practical, common-sense angle, how are NFP and condoms different from each other?

To your question:
One of the unfortunate things that has happened today is that the use of NFP is growing by leaps and bounds without the couples asking themselves if there are any well-grounded reasons (talked about in Humanae Vitae) for spacing births. I feel that NFP is being abused because people are using it not to resposibly space births becasue of well-grounded reasons but only for the reason that they can’t morally use condems and NFP is morally acceptable and just as efficient.

So to answer your question. If NFP is used by those who have no well grounded reasons for using it - it’s an abuse - then there is no difference in the intention of the couple. The intention of using a natrual way to aviod pregnancy rather than an un-natural way of avoiding. However, as said in Humanae Vitae, there are people who do have well grounded reasons for using it which is then fine.

The only other thing is for the couple who is using NFP and really shouldn’t be for not having a reason to. As oppsed to condems, in NFP the couple preserves the unitive and procreative element of the act whereas condems take away the procreative element.

What has happened today is that many of the certified presenters of NFP in dioceses present NFP as something all couples can do even if there is no well-grounded reason. And this is the real problem becasue this is not what Humanae Vitae had in mind - people need a good serioous reason for using NFP and today many do not.

Hope this helps

 

[jegow]

mumto5:

I definitely do not have perfect contrition. I am sorry that I am not able to follow church teachings, but not sorry for the action taken, if that makes sense. I would like to use NFP and accept more children - I’d love more children - but I’m afraid the ideal and reality have crashed. I don’t see any point in confessing it again when all the priests seem to think there’s no problem and no sin anyway. I do know of one who would - but he’s gone. I guess I could have a chat with the Opus Dei priest. Maybe next time. I think he’s pretty conservative. That’s another thing…I’ve been going to some Opus Dei meetings but am thinking of giving up on that. I just don’t fit the mold and can’t be that kind of Catholic anymore. I guess that makes me a Cafeteria Catholic.

You know, along the line, everyone runs into a Church teaching that is hard to follow - speaking from experience. NFP when used really well has the same efficiency of condom use. I just attended a presentation on NFP and they were even saying that NFP works better than a condom due to the efficiency of monitoring the infertile periods in women. With that I don’t see how one can say that they use condoms because they work better. Second of all, when condoms come into the picture, they deprave true love and mutual self giving, leaving the couples with an incomplete form of love and a deformed conjugal act. Can you talk to your husband about this? If so, I would really recommend it. Condoms really ruin the self love and total self giving that marriage calls people to.

Lastly, it makes me sad that there are so many priests in peoples’ posts who appear to always be saying that what appears as a sin is really not. They are wrong. Do you have a Catechism? There is so much good stuff in there, read it! Don’t give up, you say you are unable to follow Church teaching - God gives us that strength to follow Him - remember Christ said, “without me you can do nothing.” John 15:5

 

[Greg_McPherran]

greenfrog:

Hi, I would love to hear an explanation of why NFP is morally better than condoms.

NFP says: “YOU are in control.”
Condoms say: “I am in control.”
NFP says: “THY will be done.”
Condoms say: “MY will be done.”

Our Father who art in Heaven, hallowed be THY name, THY kingdom come, THY will be done, on earth as it is in Heaven. Give us this day our daily bread and forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us. Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.

God created us in wisdom for our own joy and benefit. By not following His way, we deny ourselves this joy and offend Him by not seeking His wisdom.

God’s wisdom includes the role and place of sex as well as the consequences of sex. The human body is God’s creation and He gives us the instructions for the best use of His design.

 

[CanonAlberic]

While condoms/artificial birth control are not foolproof, they have a much higher success rate at preventing unwanted pregnancies than NFP. Also, NFP implies that you eventually want a family… I don’t, so the artificial thing works best in my case. Oh, I almost forgot, one is supposed to be a sin, and the other isn’t. There’s my take…

Peace.

 

[Greg_McPherran]

CanonAlberic:

so the artificial thing works best in my case.

The Church teaches that it does not work well at all for your eternal salvation.

 

[PLAL]

Here’s a great website about NFP…

The Couple to Couple League

ccli.org/nfp/index.php

Christopher West’s Free Downloadable Files

christopherwest.com/hearnow.asp

Christopher West - An Introduction to the Theology of the Body

See Christopher West speak in person on Saturday, November 5th from 8AM to 4:30PM at…

Sacred Heart Parish
114 South Elizabeth Street
Lombard, IL 60148

See newevangelization.net/ for Registration information.

Janet Smith - Contraception Why Not?

---

catholiceducation.org/articles/sexuality/se0002.html

Janet Smith on EWTN’s “Life on the Rock”: Listen Here

---

Aired 3-3-05, Click on “Life on the Rock #401”.

ewtn.com/rock/files/past1.asp?pgnu=3

ewtn.com/rock/files/images/LR_03032005.jpgLife on the Rock #401.
**Fr. Francis Mary w/ Dr. Janet Smith. **
Originally aired: 3/3/2005
Theme: “The Moral Life Matters: The Contraception Trap”.

 

[ChristianWAB]

As it’d been explained to my wife and I, you really ARE, in a sense, leaving the possibility for procreation open by using NFP, since it’s not a 100% guarantee. Condoms allow you to engage in sexual activity anytime you want. NFP makes you abstain for certain periods of time.

 

[mercygate]

ChristianWAB:

As it’d been explained to my wife and I, you really ARE, in a sense, leaving the possibility for procreation open by using NFP, since it’s not a 100% guarantee. Condoms allow you to engage in sexual activity anytime you want. NFP makes you abstain for certain periods of time.

Since condoms and other forms of ABC are also not 100% reliable, I think we need to step back and look at it from the design perspective. NFP works with the natural, God-given rhythms of our bodies; it does not contravene the “system” but follows it by the exercise of our rational and moral faculties. The end might be the same but the approach is quite significantly different. With NFP the means engages the higher faculties of our humanity; ABC operates by catering to the animal urges of our nature.

 

[Kay_Cee]

Who designed human biology? God did.

Does God make mistakes? No.

God designed male biology to be fertile at all times. He designed female biology to be fertile only at certain times and infertile at other times. That is God’s plan.

The reason for using ABC, including condoms, is to render fertile acts infertile. NFP does nothing of the sort. In NFP, a fertile act remains fertile. An infertile act remains infertile.

Using condoms is essentially saying: “God, I do not accept Your design. You made a mistake. This act You designed to be fertile should be infertile. But don’t worry. I’ll fix Your mistake for You.”

Using NFP is essentially saying: “God, I accept your design. If this act is fertile under Your design, I accept that. If this act is infertile under Your design, I accept that.”

There’s a huge difference between accepting the way God designed us and trying to alter that design.

 

[Jocelyn]

I still don’t get it.

Aren’t you making a fertile act infertile by taking temperatures, charting, and checking mucous. The couple doesn’t want a child, so they do everything in their power to avoid intercourse when fertile.

You are saying, “God, I don’t accept your design. So I will take my temperature, chart and check my mucous to make sure I am infertile.”

I struggle with this big time!!!

 

[josephdavid]

ChristianWAB:

As it’d been explained to my wife and I, you really ARE, in a sense, leaving the possibility for procreation open by using NFP, since it’s not a 100% guarantee. Condoms allow you to engage in sexual activity anytime you want. NFP makes you abstain for certain periods of time.

Gen 1:28, 9:1,7; 35:11
Gen. 28:3 -

Gen. 38:8-10 - Onan is killed by God for practicing contraception (in this case, withdrawal) and spilling his semen on the ground.

Gen. 38:11-26 - Judah, like Onan, also rejected God’s command to keep up the family lineage, but he was not killed.

Deut. 25:7-10 - the penalty for refusing to keep up a family lineage is not death, like Onan received. Onan was killed for wasting seed.

Gen. 38:9 - also, the author’s usage of the graphic word “seed,” which is very uncharacteristic for Hebrew writing, further highlights the reason for Onan’s death.

Exodus 23:25-26; Deut. 7:13-14 - God promises blessings which include no miscarriages or barrenness. Children are blessings from God, and married couples must always be open to God’s plan for new life with every act of marital intimacy.

Lev.18:22-23;20:13 - wasting seed with non-generative sexual acts warrants death. Many Protestant churches, which have all strayed from the Catholic Church, reject this fundamental truth (few Protestants and Catholics realize that contraception was condemned by all of Christianity - and other religions - until the Anglican church permitted it in certain cases at the Lambeth conference in 1930. This opened the floodgates of error).

Lev. 21:17,20 - crushed testicles are called a defect and a blemish before God. God reveals that deliberate sterilization and any other methods which prevent conception are intrinsically evil.

Deut. 23:1 - whoever has crushed testicles or is castrated cannot enter the assembly. Contraception is objectively sinful and contrary, not only to God’s Revelation, but the moral and natural law.

Deut. 25:11-12 - there is punishment for potential damage to the testicles, for such damage puts new life at risk. It, of course, follows that vasectomies, which are done with willful consent, are gravely contrary to the natural law.

1 Chron. 25:5 - God exalts His people by blessing them with many children. When married couples contracept, they are declaring “not your will God, but my will be done.”

Psalm 127:3-5 - children are a gift of favor from God and blessed is a full quiver. Married couples must always be open to God’s precious gift of life. Contraception, which shows a disregard for human life, has lead to the great evils of abortion, euthanasia, and infanticide.

Hosea 9:11; Jer. 18:21 - God punishes Israel by preventing pregnancy. Contraception is a curse, and married couples who use contraception are putting themselves under the same curse.

Mal. 2:14 - marriage is not a contract (which is a mere exchange of property or services). It is a covenant, which means a supernatural exchange of persons. Just as God is three in one, so are a husband and wife, who become one flesh and bring forth new life, three in one. Marital love is a reflection of the Blessed Trinity.

Mal. 2:15 - What does God desire? Godly offspring. What is contraception? A deliberate act against God’s will. With contraception, a couple declares, “God may want an eternal being created with our union, but we say no.” Contraception is a grave act of selfishness.

Matt. 19:5-6 - Jesus said a husband and wife shall become one. They are no longer two, but one, just as God is three persons, yet one. The expression of authentic marital love reintegrates our bodies and souls to God, and restores us to our original virginal state (perfect integration of body and soul) before God.

Matt. 19:6; Eph. 5:31 - contraception prevents God’s ability to “join” together. Just as Christ’s love for the Church is selfless and sacrificial, and a husband and wife reflect this union, so a husband and wife’s love for each other must also be selfless and sacrificial. This means being open to new life.

Acts 5:1-11 - Ananias and Sapphira were slain because they withheld part of a gift. Fertility is a gift from God and cannot be withheld.

Rom.1:26-27 - sexual acts without the possibility of procreation is sinful. Self-giving love is life-giving love, or the love is a lie. The unitive and procreative elements of marital love can never be divided, or the marital love is also divided, and God is left out of the marriage.

1 Cor. 6:19-20 - the body is the temple of the Holy Spirit; thus, we must glorify God in our bodies by being open to His will.

1 Cor. 7:5 - this verse supports the practice of natural family planning (“NFP”). Married couples should not refuse each other except perhaps by agreement for a season, naturally.

 

[Kay_Cee]

Jocelyn:

I still don’t get it.

Aren’t you making a fertile act infertile by taking temperatures, charting, and checking mucous. The couple doesn’t want a child, so they do everything in their power to avoid intercourse when fertile.

You are saying, “God, I don’t accept your design. So I will take my temperature, chart and check my mucous to make sure I am infertile.”

No. You are working *within *God’s design. Contraception renders an individual act that **God made fertile **infertile. NFP doesn’t do that. NFP uses the infertile times **God created. **Taking a temperature, charting, and checking muscous does nothing to alter the biology we already have. It does not make a particular fertile act infertile. The act is already infertile under God’s design. It is God who has made that act infertile, not man.

 

[stanley123]

Jocelyn:

I still don’t get it.

Aren’t you making a fertile act infertile by taking temperatures, charting, and checking mucous. The couple doesn’t want a child, so they do everything in their power to avoid intercourse when fertile.

You are saying, “God, I don’t accept your design. So I will take my temperature, chart and check my mucous to make sure I am infertile.”

What you say makes sense to me. Also when NFP is used to defeat the natural primary purpose of marriage, does it not use artificial manipulation of man made instruments such as thermometers, charts, calendars, cycles, and chemical tests, and classroom instructions all with the artificial intention of defeating the natural primary purpose of marriage, which is the procreation of children? In such as case, you are scheming and devising ways of enjoying marital relations while at the same time making every effort to defeat the natural primary purpose of marriage, by the use and manipulation of artificial man made devices such as thermometers, charts, complicated note taking, chemical tests, studies of cycles, etc.

 

[Kay_Cee]

stanley123:

What you say makes sense to me. Also when NFP is used to defeat the natural primary purpose of marriage, does it not use artificial manipulation of man made instruments such as thermometers, charts, calendars, cycles, and chemical tests, and classroom instructions all with the artificial intention of defeating the natural primary purpose of marriage, which is the procreation of children? In such as case, you are scheming and devising ways of enjoying marital relations while at the same time making every effort to defeat the natural primary purpose of marriage, by the use and manipulation of artificial man made devices such as thermometers, charts, complicated note taking, chemical tests, studies of cycles, etc.

This is why you’re supposed to have a grave reason to use NFP. It’s not supposed to be used under normal circumstances.

Besides, someone using NFP is not “making every effort to defeat the natural primary purpose of marriage.” Making every effort would include contraception.