J
Jesus4Me
Guest
I wonder what happened to greenfrog… 
- Status
O
OhioBob
Guest
NFP isn’t a “thing”, it is knowledge. By understanding the natural cycles of our bodies we are better able to appreciate them as gifts of God. For couples who have learned NFP, each marital act is a conscious decision of the will, not a surrender to hormones knowing that a condom has your back.
In NFP, each act of marital love is a decision between husband and wife with full knowledge of the possibilities that the particular act might coincide with a natural period during which conception is more likely. Based upon that knowledge the couple can decide whether to abstain (sacrifice) or not. But every act is entirely open to the possibility of life. Some times might suggest a higher possibility than others, but every act is open to life.
With NFP (and don’t say that "God could make the condom break .
There is no “prevention” or “obstruction” involved. Each act can result in conception if that is the creative will of God. Sure it might be more or less likely depending upon the natural cycle, but there are no selfish obstacles imposed by man.
I agree with the sentiment that if you truly cannot see a moral differentiation between a barrier isolating one partner from another and usurping the creative power of God) and a decision to abstain from marital relations in a particular situation, then you just aren’t open to seeing.
In NFP, each act of marital love is a decision between husband and wife with full knowledge of the possibilities that the particular act might coincide with a natural period during which conception is more likely. Based upon that knowledge the couple can decide whether to abstain (sacrifice) or not. But every act is entirely open to the possibility of life. Some times might suggest a higher possibility than others, but every act is open to life.
With NFP (and don’t say that "God could make the condom break .
There is no “prevention” or “obstruction” involved. Each act can result in conception if that is the creative will of God. Sure it might be more or less likely depending upon the natural cycle, but there are no selfish obstacles imposed by man.
I agree with the sentiment that if you truly cannot see a moral differentiation between a barrier isolating one partner from another and usurping the creative power of God) and a decision to abstain from marital relations in a particular situation, then you just aren’t open to seeing.
M
mike182d
Guest
lol. Exceptional job, my friend. You express the very point I was trying to make with your first statement. The nature of an immaterial, infinite God existing as one in three persons is beyond finite human comprehension. However, it is still a Truth we must believe, regardless of our inability to fully comprehend it.
I must say, though, you do present a rock-solid argument
O
OhioBob
Guest
NFP isn’t a “thing”, it is knowledge. By understanding the natural cycles of our bodies we are better able to appreciate them as gifts of God. For couples who have learned NFP, each marital act is a conscious decision of the will, not a surrender to hormones knowing that a condom has your back.
In NFP, each act of marital love is a decision between husband and wife with full knowledge of the possibilities that the particular act might coincide with a natural period during which conception is more likely. Based upon that knowledge the couple can decide whether to abstain (sacrifice) or not. But every act is entirely open to the possibility of life. Some times might suggest a higher possibility than others, but every act is open to life.
With NFP (and don’t say that "God could make the condom break .
There is no “prevention” or “obstruction” involved. Each act can result in conception if that is the creative will of God. Sure it might be more or less likely depending upon the natural cycle, but there are no selfish obstacles imposed by man. And arguments that “God could make the condom break if he wanted to so ABC is also open to life” are silly.
I agree with the sentiment that if you truly cannot see a moral differentiation between a barrier isolating one partner from another and usurping the creative power of God) and a decision to abstain from marital relations in a particular situation, then you just aren’t open to seeing.
In NFP, each act of marital love is a decision between husband and wife with full knowledge of the possibilities that the particular act might coincide with a natural period during which conception is more likely. Based upon that knowledge the couple can decide whether to abstain (sacrifice) or not. But every act is entirely open to the possibility of life. Some times might suggest a higher possibility than others, but every act is open to life.
With NFP (and don’t say that "God could make the condom break .
There is no “prevention” or “obstruction” involved. Each act can result in conception if that is the creative will of God. Sure it might be more or less likely depending upon the natural cycle, but there are no selfish obstacles imposed by man. And arguments that “God could make the condom break if he wanted to so ABC is also open to life” are silly.
I agree with the sentiment that if you truly cannot see a moral differentiation between a barrier isolating one partner from another and usurping the creative power of God) and a decision to abstain from marital relations in a particular situation, then you just aren’t open to seeing.
O
OhioBob
Guest
He must be out buying condoms…I wonder what happened to greenfrog…
G
GodBlessJoanie
Guest
NPF is birthcontrol with self control… period.
Blessings,
Joanie
Blessings,
Joanie
M
mike182d
Guest
I find it amusing that in every one of your examples, a person is trying to prevent death or sickness.
Are you trying to say that having a child is equivalant to death and sickness, something we *should *protect ourselves from?
That’s the contraceptive mentality at work.
M
mercygate
Guest
Sorry, Marina, that’s Christopher WEST, of course.
M
mike182d
Guest
And a great job you did!
Infact, I never thought about the difference between “procreative” and “reproductive” before - I used the two interchangeably. Thank you for your insight.
The best reference I have to offer is *Theology of the Body Explained *by Christopher West. The original work by Pope John Paul II is brilliant, but can be very hard to follow. It was a compilation of his weekday audiences and it is not written in a “linear” fashion. Pope John Paul II was more of a mystic and this is most evident in his reflections and meditations on the theology of the body. Christopher West, however, is a brilliant theologian as well, and was able to expound upon and elaborate on the whole of John Paul II’s work and package it into a more logical form.
I *highly *recommend it.
M
mike182d
Guest
My bride and I are actually using NFP to *achieve *pregnancy right now - something that contraception could never do.
M
mercygate
Guest
As I have read the posts on this excellent thread, I am struck by how this question relates to the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Greenfrog seems tentative about that, implying that the “physical details” are somehow less holy than the spirit and heart:
Bingo!
I had never before connected the Eucharist to procreation in quite the same integral way before. I recognized that the inseparability of the unitive and procreative aspects of intercourse are, in a sense, a “real presence” of God in marriage – making us co-creators; I had not before associated this acceptance of the divine purpose directly to the Eucharist.
Thank you ALL! :tiphat:
Greenfrog is closer to the truth than he realizes. You can’t separate the spirit and the heart from the “physical details” – especially in the marriage act!
Bingo!
I had never before connected the Eucharist to procreation in quite the same integral way before. I recognized that the inseparability of the unitive and procreative aspects of intercourse are, in a sense, a “real presence” of God in marriage – making us co-creators; I had not before associated this acceptance of the divine purpose directly to the Eucharist.
Thank you ALL! :tiphat:
M
mike182d
Guest
Christopher West has an audio CD titled: “Marriage and the Eucharist” that I highly recommend.
The connection between the two is uncanny. Its beautiful enough to make a person all teary-eyed.
M
mercygate
Guest
Yup. That’s what’s happening now. And all that John 6 stuff is interdigitating here in --your word – an uncanny way. Hair standing on end.Christopher West has an audio CD titled: “Marriage and the Eucharist” that I highly recommend.
The connection between the two is uncanny. Its beautiful enough to make a person all teary-eyed.
H
HpyCatholic
Guest
I belive I am one of the posters you were talking about because I mentioned the sacrificing part of abstienence while using NFP to delay pregnancy.
First I never ment to imply that abstinence for its own sake is a good thing. I don’t believe this is true at all. You could be using NFP for the wrong reasons in which case the abstinence practiced during the fertile periods would be immoral.
Now that that is out of the way just having sex whenever you want to is not a bad thing at all and most certainly not selfish as long as you are open to the procreative aspect of it AND you are in union with your spouse (not forcing it on them). I’m not sure where you got the idea that this was a bad thing.
I personally never used the sacrifice of abstinence as the key to proving it is morally good. Obviously you could be postponing pregnancey for grave reasons and this sacrifice would not be morally good at all.
What I meant to convey is that while abstaining you are making a sacrifice which you can then offer up for any number of reasons. Its like an added bonus.
Also, sex isn’t weak at all it is a very good strong act when performed for the right reasons, it is precisely because of this that the sacrifice is so great when the reasons for delaying a pregnancy are morally justified.
S
Shiann
Guest
Beautiful!Ok I’ve read every reply and and now I am ready to jump in.
Mike182d and greenfrog are making some great headway. but there is one thing that you both agreed on that I don’t agree. Years ago I used to have greenfrog’s seemingly valid position. Why I changed and am actually now an NFP promoter is due to the one area that I disagree.
When I say it I know Mike182 will say “oh yeah that is important.” and will help me find the documentation on it.(please?) Otherwise I agree with everything else he said and all I can say is wow, you rock Mike! I also suffer long bouts of infertility so I can answer that concern also.
Here goes:
Greenfrog and Mike182 said they agree that the primary functions of the marital embrace are procreation and unity. This is almost accurate. Here is why NFP is different than condoms:
All created things have a natural order: i.e. Conception must occur before birth and birth must occur before death. The hair on the face must grow before it can be shaved off. This list can be added to forever. Everything created has an order.
The marital embrace has an order too. Procreation is the primary purpose and unity is the secondary purpose. This is wherein lies the difference. ( I know this is documented so this is where I need the help please, Mike.)
To introduce a condom makes the secondary purpose (unity) above the primary purpose and that causes it to be dis-ordered. This is what caused me to change my opinion. Since God is the author of order to change the order is to try to change God.
Some may doubt that there is a natural order. I can guarantee that procreative sex has been going on since before we humans discovered that sex was unitive.
This brings me to the “infertility-menopause” stuff so loosely flying around. NFP is also for those of us who have spaced fertility. We abstain when God asks us to, (7 months post-partum was NOT a problem,) but every time we have sex we are procreative even when we know we are infertile! Procreative and reproductive are not the same thing.
Since my husband and I engage in the natural order of things we are blessed. We have lots of procreation in our marriage and an exactly equal amount of unity. Our reproduction has been only one so far. We’ll keep trying though!
Finally, (I know I’m long winded) The pleasure aspect of sex is not a purpose or a function of sex. It is an incentive to do what is good for us. Eating and sleeping are pleasurable for the same reasons.
Greenfrog, does this help?
M
mike182d
Guest
I know we are on the same team here, but on this point I must beg to differ.
In marriage, it is still possible to lust after your own wife, to see her as a means of attaining one’s own personal, sexual gratification. *All *men and women are called to live chaste lives, married people included.
Having sex whenever you want is not always conducive towards this end and it may be good to abstain periodically.
But that’s just my two cents
S
Shiann
Guest
Exactly. It really isn’t the abstinence part that is pleasing to God- it is the sacrifice part.
It isn’t the fact that we don’t eat fish on Friday that is pleasing to God, it is the deliberate sacrifice we make.
It isn’t the fact that we fast that is pleasing to God, it is the mental and physical sacrifice that we make.
I have to take a moment and agree with mercygate. This really is the most beneficial thread I have read on this subject. There have been a lot of great questions, and amazingly concise and beautifully worded answers.
It is truly wonderfull how all these aspects of life really do matter, and how they really do integrate completely into our Faith.
And what a wonderfull Faith it is.
God Bless you all.
F
felra
Guest
Here is an excert from an article that makes the same direct correlation between the sacrament/sign of the Eucharist and marriage:
http://www.catholicmom.com/nfp0404.htm
“Christian marriage is a sacrament and the sexual act is the physical sign of that sacrament in the same way that the body and blood of Christ under the appearance of bread and wine are the physical signs of the Eucharist. Consider for a moment how shocking it would be to see someone receive the Eucharist and then ‘undo’ the consequences of the act by spitting out the host. Contraception should shock us no less.” (Sara Fox Peterson*–** certified teacher of the Billings Ovulation Method of Natural Family Planning)*
H
HpyCatholic
Guest
I see what your saying Mike, I tried to qualify it later on in the quote to say as long as your spouse is in agreement and your open to the procreative aspect, but I can see when it may be important to abstain say if kids are up and about or some other reason other than these.
I was basically trying to point out that having sex for the right reasons is never selfish, but maybe it can be? I’ll have to think about this more
G
greenfrog
Guest
Oh dear, we seem to be going round in circles now. I’m very glad to have received such enthusiastic responses to my thread though, thanks to all. Unfortunately I’ll be away from computers all weekend so this will be my last post for a while, although I’m sure the discussion will go on and I shall read with interest next week.
I have learned a lot about NFP users’ reasons.
I think that anyone who believes that NFP users have higher motives (as some have claimed) are deceiving themselves, for the reasons I have already explained.
I have more respect for the view that sex without the physical passing of the “seed” is immoral… because it is at least a real difference between the methods, but I would ask those people to consider the teachings of Jesus, what he said about ritual and so called “uncleanliness” and sacrifices, and think whether he would really consider this physical distinction to make a moral difference. I do not believe that he would.
And so here is my problem.
After listening to all the arguments, praying about them, trying to understand them, they make no sense to me.
My wife and I have good reasons for wanting to delay the birth of our next child.
And yet the Catholic church to which I belong, tells me condom use is wrong.
What should I do? If my church were telling me to wear green socks every day, I wouldn’t understand, but I would do it. I see no harm in it. However, if it told me to refrain from conversation with my wife at certain times of the month I would be unhappy, and when it tells me to refrain from sex with her at certain times of the month I think it is wrong.
I don’t just think that would be silly, I think it would be wrong to withold myself from her. St Paul tells us not to, unless there is mutual agreement, and there is not.
Should I leave the church? Should I stop going to Mass? Should I stop taking the Eucharist? But then where would I go? I love Jesus, my heart burns within me when I hear his words. He is Truth. He is Life. I need him, and I need a church where I can worship him. Leave for another church? But then I hear un-Christian teachings elsewhere too. One unique (in my experience) fact about the Catholic church is that it does not condemn non-christians to hell, and that is a big reason that has kept me with it.
But I do not want to be a hypocrite. I don’t want to be a “Cafeteria Catholic”.
I feel very sad about this issue. I would love to KNOW that the Church is right, and then I would submit my entire life to it, however crazy it seemed to me. But I have very serious concerns that it is WRONG on this, and perhaps other issues. It has changed its mind before. It has condemned usuary as a sin, and now the Vatican is a huge lender.
The concept of infallibility is an extremely recent one.
In Revelation, Jesus warns the very early church that they are making mistakes. If they were capable of mistakes that early on, how can we assume that the church and all its teachings are perfect now, 2000 years on?
I fear that if I submit to a teaching my conscience cries out against, when I meet God he will say to me “I gave you a mind, I gave you my Son’s words, I gave you the power to discern, why did you squander them?”
I do not suppose that I will get much further with this problem by debate alone, but I pray that God will grant us all a deeper understanding of his Love and Truth through what is discussed. With his help anything is possible.
Thanks again to all,
Peter (greenfrog)
I have learned a lot about NFP users’ reasons.
I think that anyone who believes that NFP users have higher motives (as some have claimed) are deceiving themselves, for the reasons I have already explained.
I have more respect for the view that sex without the physical passing of the “seed” is immoral… because it is at least a real difference between the methods, but I would ask those people to consider the teachings of Jesus, what he said about ritual and so called “uncleanliness” and sacrifices, and think whether he would really consider this physical distinction to make a moral difference. I do not believe that he would.
And so here is my problem.
After listening to all the arguments, praying about them, trying to understand them, they make no sense to me.
My wife and I have good reasons for wanting to delay the birth of our next child.
And yet the Catholic church to which I belong, tells me condom use is wrong.
What should I do? If my church were telling me to wear green socks every day, I wouldn’t understand, but I would do it. I see no harm in it. However, if it told me to refrain from conversation with my wife at certain times of the month I would be unhappy, and when it tells me to refrain from sex with her at certain times of the month I think it is wrong.
I don’t just think that would be silly, I think it would be wrong to withold myself from her. St Paul tells us not to, unless there is mutual agreement, and there is not.
Should I leave the church? Should I stop going to Mass? Should I stop taking the Eucharist? But then where would I go? I love Jesus, my heart burns within me when I hear his words. He is Truth. He is Life. I need him, and I need a church where I can worship him. Leave for another church? But then I hear un-Christian teachings elsewhere too. One unique (in my experience) fact about the Catholic church is that it does not condemn non-christians to hell, and that is a big reason that has kept me with it.
But I do not want to be a hypocrite. I don’t want to be a “Cafeteria Catholic”.
I feel very sad about this issue. I would love to KNOW that the Church is right, and then I would submit my entire life to it, however crazy it seemed to me. But I have very serious concerns that it is WRONG on this, and perhaps other issues. It has changed its mind before. It has condemned usuary as a sin, and now the Vatican is a huge lender.
The concept of infallibility is an extremely recent one.
In Revelation, Jesus warns the very early church that they are making mistakes. If they were capable of mistakes that early on, how can we assume that the church and all its teachings are perfect now, 2000 years on?
I fear that if I submit to a teaching my conscience cries out against, when I meet God he will say to me “I gave you a mind, I gave you my Son’s words, I gave you the power to discern, why did you squander them?”
I do not suppose that I will get much further with this problem by debate alone, but I pray that God will grant us all a deeper understanding of his Love and Truth through what is discussed. With his help anything is possible.
Thanks again to all,
Peter (greenfrog)
- Status