Husband thinks NFP is sinful

  • Thread starter Thread starter aggiecatholic85
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I sorry…I don’t understand some of these comments.

Yes it’s a mutual decision.

But according to some replies…if a wife is concerned about their finances and the fact that she has three children and is not ready to become pregnant with a fourth right now…but the husband disagrees…she has to suck it up and submit to him?

Her opinion has no weight?

I don’t get it.
 
No, of course not, it just means they would abstain. All I am suggesting is that the use of NFP is something that must be done by mutual agreement and with a serious reason.
So he should refuse to have sex with his wife if she wishes to have sex with him when she’s infertile?
 
No, of course not, it just means they would abstain. All I am suggesting is that the use of NFP is something that must be done by mutual agreement and with a serious reason.
This still isn’t what the Church teaches.

It’s actually a sin to deny a spouse sexual intimacy as well…when their is no valid reason to.

The husband forces the wife to abstain. She doesn’t want to. How about that conversation. Is he automatically right?

The point is…the husband is wrong to say that NFP is a sin…according to the Church and the bible…it’s not.
 
Well OK I guess I understand where KostyaJMJ is coming from. If one spouse wants to use NFP and the other does not, the tie goes to abstinence. Basically, no one wins.

I can see that, especially since prolonged abstinence would likely pull the one spouse who does not want to use NFP over to that side. In that situation, the refusal would not be for “no good reason” it would be because one spouse has serious reservations and the parties have not agreed to use NFP.

That’s totally understandable and, I think, a decent way to move forward. I would imagine then that there would also be continued prayer, conversation and, if necessary, consultation with a member of the clergy.
 
The husband forces the wife to abstain. She doesn’t want to. How about that conversation. Is he automatically right?
Ah but see the conversation is not between abstinence and NFP. It’s between NFP and a “whatever” approach to intimate relations.

When it comes to total abstinence versus NFP… well I don’t know how to break that tie. I’d imagine that’s when you talk to a third party. And in rapid fashion so that the intimate life does not start to break down completely.
 
Ah but see the conversation is not between abstinence and NFP. It’s between NFP and a “whatever” approach to intimate relations.

When it comes to total abstinence versus NFP… well I don’t know how to break that tie. I’d imagine that’s when you talk to a third party. And in rapid fashion so that the intimate life does not start to break down completely.
My problem with this is that the husband is not taking his wife’s health and well-being into consideration. Neither are other posters here.
Clearly they are open to life.
But she has health concerns.

The basic facts are NFP is not a sin…according to the Church. Forcing a spouse to abstain IS a sin.

She seems to be losing out on this despite health and financial reasons.
 
Here’s the situation:
  1. She wants to use NFP and thinks that NFP is morally licit.
  2. He also wants to space further pregnancies (due to practical issues–health, overcrowding, financial hardship), but believes that NFP is morally illicit. He thinks that they are sinning by using NFP, but that they “have to,” due to circumstances.
So I think it’s actually a somewhat different situation than a lot of posters have suggested. He believes that he is sinning. I think he’s wrong, but his belief that you might, under certain circumstances, “have to” sin needs to be addressed.
 
The Lord commanded Adam and Eve to “Be fruitful and multiply”. This is useful to know what was intended for marriage, but, He was speaking to Adam and Eve.

Things spoken to individuals in the Bible are not necessarily universally applicable to everyone in every age at every moment of their lives.
 
The theologian Germain Grizes has a multi volume work called “The Way of the Lord Jesus”

Volume 2, chapter 9 , question F. gives a good explanaition of periodic abstinence and the duties of spouses regarding children.
 
I think he’s wrong, but his belief that you might, under certain circumstances, “have to” sin needs to be addressed.
Absolutely. That’s truly one of the biggest issues here. That kind of mindset pervades our culture unfortunately. Why do you think most people think abortion is immoral but a big chunk of them also don’t want it to be illegal? They think that sometimes, based on the circumstances, you just “have to” do that terrible thing.

Obviously the situations are nowhere near equivalent, but the mindset is somewhat similar. And it needs rectifying.
 
I can’t think of anything much more abusive and unloving than my own husband telling me I had to submit to an unlimited number of pregnancies, no matter how I felt about it. Maybe I have a unique perspective because I have miserable pregnancies that turn my family upside down. If my husband said “NO” to NFP, I would have no choice but to cut him off sexually. Is that better for the marriage than thoughtful spacing or postponing of pregnancies?

OP, your husband believes something that defies Church teaching. NFP is not sinful. Our Church has explicitly told us that it is not. Get into marital counseling with a priest or deacon right away. Your husband needs help letting go of erroneous beliefs and possibly with control issues. I will pray for you!
 
What really strikes me is the degree of presumption concerning the husbands view on NFP. I would not be so bold as to say he views it as morally illicit based on the OP. Could be a lot of things going on here…

Maybe they have a different understanding on their financial situation and of the health concerns involved…

Based on just the OP it is just as reasonable to conclude that the husband does not view their reasons as serious enough to justify the use of NFP and finds the use of NFP in their current situation sinful. I am not sure how one can conclude he is selfish, wrong-headed, or inconsiderate unless we invent our own facts…

With that said, the one thing I think most here would agree on is there may be a communication issue here that needs to be addressed quickly – and both parties need to be open discussion, counseling, and prayer. Understanding his view is just as important as him understanding her view…
 
Hi, thank you for all the responses. Without going into too much detail, I am in and out of the hospital a lot. Even with our insurance, we have about 3k or more in bills a year that is difficult to pay on our reduced salary. Hence the bankruptcy despite being faithful Dave Ramsey followers. I love my husband but he doesn’t stop to.consider how we pay these bills. He says let them go into collections: using NFP is more harmful for us and therefore is more important than money. Meanwhile, I am the one that may have to take a second job and budget for our family. Hubs isn’t exactly stellar at budgeting. In addition to everything, my pregnancies involve extreme morning sickness and hospitalization for dehydration, pre term labor and bedrest. I think with this pregnancy, and seeing how it is started worse than the others, he said it “clicked” for him that I physically and mentally struggle with everything and need a break. This doesn’t solve the perspective that NFP is a sin for him but it gives me some measure of balance. This has really taken its toll…I have been a staunch cradle Catholic all my life and firmly believe contraception is 100% wrong. This whole situation has me wanting to turn to ABC if it means getting my husband away. So not healthy. I am looking into Retrouville right now for us as well as some advice from a priest.
 
I am looking into Retrouville right now for us as well as some advice from a priest.
Glad that you are considering to see a priest. He will give you peace of mind.

I pray for you for your health to get better.

Love and blessings!
 
I’ll admit I am short on time, so I only read a portion of the article, but this is clearly someone’s opinion (someone who apparently is not a fan of Janet Smith, or at least not a fan of a conference she gave).
I hope you’ll read it when you get the chance; I think you might find it interesting. I wouldn’t call it an opinion piece so much as a persuasive essay. Kathleen van Schaijik is a theologian at Franciscan University. She’s critical of the one response that Janet Smith gave in a Q&A session in that conference, but I think their convictions are otherwise very much in line. And I also have a great deal of respect for Janet Smith. Her article on NFP and the natural law is one of my favorites. In any event, this particular article does a good job articulating why theoretical providentialism is contrary to Church teaching and I thought it was quite compelling. I also thought it might resonate with a Catholic convert, if he’s not used to reading encyclicals.
 
No, you’re giving a response based on your own opinion that men should basically dominate the household and have the “final say” no matter what. Except that’s not what the Church teaches. The Church teaches that the marriage is a partnership between man and woman based on love and mutual self-sacrifice and the leader of the family is GOD.
Great response.
 
The use of NFP is never a requirement. It is always something that must be done by mutual consent and with a serious reason. It isn’t something that can be forced upon either spouse.
The great thing about NFP is that’s it’s impossibler to “force” it on her husband. She can chart all she wants and take her temp and record her symptoms without involving him in the least. The only part that would involve him is abstaing from sex (which he woul dbe obliged to do if she were not in agreement to having sex at a particular time) or having sex during an infertile time (which he should be happy to do if he believes that conjugal sex is not a sin). NFP is information, not an act. Sex is an act.
 
I have been married 4 years, 3 children (expecting #3). I have rather serious health complications that have required the use of NFP to space our kids. Recent developments there as well as financial difficulties (bankruptcy, job loss/significant reduced income/tiny living space) have made longer abstinence required between children. Recently, my husband revealed to me that he thinks NFP is very sinful and that it’s his opinion that we’re just sinning because we “have to.” He is a convert and a very literal Bible person…he thinks “be fruitful and multiply” is the only aspect of our marriage that should be emphasized. Which leads to me feeling used, refusing intimacy, stress on our marriage, etc. I’ve given him “Holy Sex” and “The Good News about Sex and Marriage” to read. I’ve pointed to church teaching on NFP. I’ve argued that St. Paul talks about “abstinence when agreed upon for prayer.” I’ve cried and stated that I want a break and will continue to refuse him if he continues to treat me like an object through whom to gain his (desired) large family. I don’t know what else to do. He is swamped with work so efforts to speak to our priest are in vain. I have never in my LIFE heard of a HUSBAND thinking that NFP is sinful. I’ve only ever read on here of spouses refusing NFP for arbitrary reasons like it “doesn’t work” or it’s “too hard.” I don’t know how to combat the “NFP is a sin.”
According to the teaching of Roman Catholic Church who respects the natural moral law of marriage and who respects the holy anthropology of the holy scriptures about the marriage, the responsible procreation, the responsible maternity, the responsible paternity and the marital act during infertile times, and thus the natural family planning who is an expression of this responsible procreation, is not per se, by nature, a sinful act. By essence, that is not sinful, and it cannot be an immoral thing.

The interpretation of you husband is wrong, that is a false view about the catholic paradigm of marriage with this particular corollary. Your husband is wrong. He needs to study the catholic doctrine in the details and with all subtilties, that is one of his own moral obligations

And you, his wife, you have also the moral permission to refuse unilaterally the marital act under special conditions. Indeed, there are two moral regimes for the NFP: the bilateral agreement , the normal regime under condtions and the unilateral regime under other special conditions. Two different systems.

He (your husband) seems to be in favor of theoretical providentialism in thinking like that. The dangers of his speech and of his thought are: the pharisaism, the externalism, the moralism, the rigorism, the absolute procreationsim, the judgmentalism (presumptionism of selfishness, the trial of wrong intentions of couple), the possible refusal of concept of the conjugal rape, the integrism, the primary anti-rationalism.

The catholic teaching is not like that, it is more moderated, more balanced, more in favor of the liberty of decision of each couple, and of each member of couple.

For information about the theoretical providentialism
Abusing NFP
by Kathleen van Schaijik

theuniversityconcourse.com/article/1915.html
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top