I don't like NFP

[Jennifer_J]

tiny'(name removed by moderator)my:

Thanks for all your posts.

I use Creighten model, and it is very easy. I don’t do any of the temp taking or internal stuff at all. I probably wouldn’t do it if I was supposed to. If I were sick or something, then it would be a blessing, because then at least my husband and I could have sex sometimes without jeopardizing my health. And if I happened to get pregnant then God must have a plan.

I feel pressured from all sides to use NFP. My husband’s family is Catholic, but they all think that the Church is crazy. They’re from Italy and they’ve seen A LOT of Church corruption, so they don’t have very much respect for her teaching authority. Their Catholicism is a series of quaint devotions to Jesus and the saints. They are simple Southerners, but their attitudes rubbed off on their college educated, Americanized kids. So I refuse to use any birth control, but I’m willing to compromise with NFP, and my husband has the attitude that everything should be run as efficiently as possible, including the “spacing” of children. If we have the ability to calculate every birth so things work out best for everybody, then according to his logic we would be fools not to. It’s not an irrational request, so I go along with it. He knows how I feel, but I can’t make him have sex with me. I could, but then I would feel manipulative, and it’s just not the same. And I’m not going to lie and say that I’m not fertile when I suspect that I am.

The Orthodox/Byzantine view of the purpose of marriage is the mutual salvation of souls. We are supposed to ensure that the other one gets to heaven, and a natural extention of that goal applies to the children. When an Eastern priest councils a marrying couple he tells them not to use any artifical birth control, and NFP is okay for “spacing,” but letting God and nature take its course is preferred. I think this is true for Roman Catholicism too. Many of the Eastern saints were married, and most of them lived in celibacy for the latter parts of their lives, for spiritual and temporal reasons. Necessity closes a physical door and God then opens a spiritual window. Mary and Joseph lived celibate, so I guess Jesus’s stepfather had grounds for an annulment in the Catholic Church.

Unfortunately society has a huge impact on the lives of all families, and I just wish we lived in a genuinely pro-life culture that truely celebrated all life from natural conception to natural death.

Well, on the bright side, your extended family and husband could be insisting you use immoral birth control! That’s what my mil does every chance she gets! But, seriously, you and your husband should talk this out and you should be praying for your husband. Maybe spacing is what needs to be done, but maybe you and God can soften his heart to allow less space and more babies! God bless you and you struggle through this. Sorry I don’t have better advice.
Jennifer

 

[ConcernCatholic]

tiny'(name removed by moderator)my:

I have a second post in this thread, outlining why we are using NFP, but nobody has commented on it, so I don’t know if anybody read it or not. The thread kind of deteriorated into talking about mucus again.

We are using it for “spacing” because that’s what my husband wants to do. I’m his wife, right? He makes the decisions. There has been some debate on this thread as to whether or not there must be “grave” reasons. Some people say that “spacing” for any reason is acceptable. That’s also what we were taught in NFP class. My husband would say that it is gravely necessary to “space” the children to make sure that everything works out as smoothly as possible. We are not wealthy. Technically I don’t even think we are middle class!

If anybody has the time to read my second thread and has some advice, I’d appreciate it.

I have seen and read several different definitions of grave reason. Like you, in my NFP class, it was presented as being OK to space children. I think one of the most important reasons to space children is the health of the mother. It takes quite a while for your body to recover from giving birth. I know what you mean about not even being middle class. I think we are just above the poverty level with a family of 4.

 

[Jennifer_J]

Here’s what the CCC says about responsible parenthood:
scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a6.htm#2368

2368 A particular aspect of this responsibility concerns the regulation of procreation. For just reasons, spouses may wish to space the births of their children. It is their duty to make certain that their desire is not motivated by selfishness but is in conformity with the generosity appropriate to responsible parenthood. Moreover, they should conform their behavior to the objective criteria of morality:

When it is a question of harmonizing married love with the responsible transmission of life, the morality of the behavior does not depend on sincere intention and evaluation of motives alone; but it must be determined by objective criteria, criteria drawn from the nature of the person and his acts criteria that respect the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love; this is possible only if the virtue of married chastity is practiced with sincerity of heart.156
2369 "By safeguarding both these essential aspects, the unitive and the procreative, the conjugal act preserves in its fullness the sense of true mutual love and its orientation toward man’s exalted vocation to parenthood."157

2370 Periodic continence, that is, the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality.158 These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom. In contrast, “every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible” is intrinsically evil:159

Thus the innate language that expresses the total reciprocal self-giving of husband and wife is overlaid, through contraception, by an objectively contradictory language, namely, that of not giving oneself totally to the other. This leads not only to a positive refusal to be open to life but also to a falsification of the inner truth of conjugal love, which is called upon to give itself in personal totality. . . . The difference, both anthropological and moral, between contraception and recourse to the rhythm of the cycle . . . involves in the final analysis two irreconcilable concepts of the human person and of human sexuality.160

 

[tiny_smommy]

Jennifer your info seems contradictory, not that I’m blaming you. It seems to me then, based on that post, that the Church is in fact promoting what we all keep referring to as spacing. But if that’s the case, then what really is the difference in mentality (i.e. the contraceptive mentality) if couples using birth control are using it for the same reasons? There only seems to be a technical difference, not motive. I know that my husband’s motive for using NFP is in fact the same if we were using the pill or condoms. And I don’t think it’s just him.

I don’t know. I would still rather be celibate for an entire year, if having a child is so “gravely” inopportune right now, than keep playing this game. And it does seem like a game to me. It’s like we’re not married; we’re just teenagers fornicating for the fun of it, being careful not to get “caught.” Like I said before, if I were really sick it would be a different story. But even then I would trust God.

 

[Ray_Scheel]

Just like ther are good and bad reasons to space children, theire are right and wrong ways to space children. However, a wrong way to space children is never acceptable, even if the intent is otherwise licit.

Your situations sounds like your husband’s reasons are not holding up to scrutiny, but he’s adamant in not wanting more kids. You do have an obligation to respect his decision to avoid more children while working on his thinking, but that sort of errors in thinking on his part isn’t serious enough reason to withold the marriage bond in the meantime. Your use of NFP therefore seems to be licit (the grave reason being the preservation of marital harmony), whether or not your husband’s is, so try to focus on that while keeping on letting him know that you do want more kids.

 

[Jennifer_J]

What I posted was from the Catechism. It’s not contradictory. There are licit means to space babies–NFP. All other means seperate the conjugal act which is supposed to be both procreative and unitive. Contraception means against conception. NFP works with the women’s natural cycles of fertility. As you know, we (women) are not fertile all the time. Now certainly NFP can, has and probably is used with a contracpetive mentality. That’s a shame, but for those who have recourse to use NFP, it’s a blessing. The Church doesn’t teach that we must have all the children we can possibly produce. Certainly in days before NFP married couples would have to abstain until menopause if there were serious concerns. This is not always the healthiest thing for a marriage (though can certainly be a blessing, but both parties would need to agree). You certainly don’t HAVE to use NFP! It’s not a Church teaching that you MUST use NFP!
You really need to have a talk with your dh and express you concerns!

I suggest you read Humane Vitae
ewtn.com/library/ENCYC/P6HUMANA.HTM
Donum Vitae
nccbuscc.org/prolife/tdocs/donumvitae.htm

Janet Smith’s talk Contraception, Why Not?
catholiceducation.org/articles/sexuality/se0002.html

And here are a few books:
Kimberly Hahn’s Life Giving Love
Christopher West’s Good News About Sex and Marriage
I’m sure others can suggest more!

Hope that is somewhat helpful!

 

[papa_k]

Ray_Scheel:

Your situations sounds like your husband’s reasons are not holding up to scrutiny, but he’s adamant in not wanting more kids. You do have an obligation to respect his decision to avoid more children while working on his thinking, but that sort of errors in thinking on his part isn’t serious enough reason to withold the marriage bond in the meantime. Your use of NFP therefore seems to be licit (the grave reason being the preservation of marital harmony), whether or not your husband’s is, so try to focus on that while keeping on letting him know that you do want more kids.

I am not sure I agree her primary goal is more kids. I think she doesn’t want to “play this stupid game” anymore, meaning of skating around pregnancy. She indicated being open to God’s will, but not necessarily having a goal of pregnancy. If that were the case, NFP could be used to maximize the chance of pregnancy, which is probably its most licit use.

Secondly, NFP has to be a mutual agreement. Her husband cannot impose it, and she has every right to not comply with it. The purpose of Christian marriage is not to avoid children. St Paul writes that they can abstain on occassion for serious reason, and that it should be brief.

Conversly, it is HIS duty to comply with her if she asks for relations, as that is her right by marriage (for the husband hath not control of his own body, but the wife, etc). Whether he is compelled to other forms of sin by her refusal to comply with NFP is another matter.

Basically, she has every right to not do NFP, and he has every duty to not insist on it, under pain of sin. This is fundemental to NFP. Personally, I find it an interesting reversal of a previous thread I read on Morality about the Marriage Debt, but this one favors the wife’s side, where the other was traeted as sexist and unfair to the wife. Here is a wife in a position to make a request, and a husband who must step up if able, assuming she makes her will clear to him.

 

[YinYangMom]

tiny'(name removed by moderator)my:

I don’t know. I would still rather be celibate for an entire year, if having a child is so “gravely” inopportune right now, than keep playing this game. And it does seem like a game to me. It’s like we’re not married; we’re just teenagers fornicating for the fun of it, being careful not to get “caught.” Like I said before, if I were really sick it would be a different story. But even then I would trust God.

I actually understand this position, you presented it well.
There are two things to consider with celibacy for the sake of child spacing (not for spiritual reasons):

1. While you would probably be fine living celibately since hormonally it just is easier for women than men (especially moms), it is most definitely very difficult for men.

Right now your husband’s desire to use NFP (for valid reasons, whether or not the desire is as ‘holy’ as it should be) is forcing you to do something which is displeasing to you and which is moving you toward refraining from the marital embrace all together. It is damaging your relationship with your husband.

Turn the tables, where your desire not to play that game any more (for valid reasons, ‘holy’ or not) force your husband into a celibate lifestyle until such time as he deems it appropriate to add another child to the fold. This would be displeasing to him, very difficult to accomplish and would put him at risk for sins of adultery - whether through masturbation, pornography or worse. It, too, would be damaging your relationship with your husband.

1. Let’s say the two of you survive celibacy without either one of you succumbing to the temptations of lust/adultery and the time is now ripe for bringing more children into the world…would re-establishing the marital embrace be easy or difficult? While I hear you say you’d prefer celibacy I suspect there would be an undercurrent of resentment brewing just beneath the service for how ever long such an arrangement is in effect, so much so that the desire to reunite may no longer be present when necessary. Before you know it, that ‘next’ child just keeps getting put off and put off until the child never gets to be. This is why the unitive aspect of relations is so important - to keep the embers burning throughout.

Anyway, those are the two thoughts which came to mind.

Yet, if the two of you lovingly and respectfully agree on celibacy until the appropriate time then the Church would respect that as well. The key would be to find other ways to keep the embers burning and the love/intimacy nurtured in the interim. Dancing, hugging, holding hands, kissing are all ways to reaffirm our desires for the other without crossing over into lust or adultery. As PapaK noted, abstinence is encouraged - but only for short terms. If you and your husband decide a year or two is all that is needed before the next child, I’d consider that not to be long term, but it also seems rather relative. 2 years out of 60+ years of marriage seems short term to me, but 2 years without relations seems long term as well.

 

[Celia]

MamaSusie:

Well, let me know what you find out! I would love to NOT set my alarm for 4 am on the weekends!

Ok, here we go! From the Kippley manual, on page 76 under “when and how frequently?” in regards to mucus checks:

During phase 1: If you are not making the external observations, then make the internal observation twice a day-1.) about midday and 2) before bedtime. If you are, one internal observation BEFORE bed is sufficient.

Phase 2: If you are having abundant external mucus, you don’t need to to make the internal observation till the end of your mucus patch. Then start making it at the END of the day to help determine peak day.

Phase 3: No need to keep making the internal mucus observation. If you are using a mucus only system, keep making the internal observation at the end of the day or before relations. (in case of a double mucus patch.)

Also from Kippley’s “Art…” on page 80 under “when should I observe the cervix?”…

Make your cervix exam once or twice a day when you make your internal mucus observation. (so, midday or before bedtime or both) Start to make your cervix observations on cycle day 6, or if you have a period less than 5 days, start the first day after your period stops.

(here’s a part I think you’ll like, MamaSusie! ) Don’t make your cervix exam early in the morning or right after you’ve taken a good nap! The cervix tends to be consistently higher in the morning. This is probably because the muscles that support the uterus contract a bit during the night when you sleep and then stretch a bit after you have been around for a while. We’re assuming the same sort of thing might happen after a long nap. Don’t make the cervix observation more than twice a day; you don’t want to disturb your external mucus observations.

So basically, the only thing you have to do first thing in the morning when you wake up is take your temperature. Hope this helps!!

 

[otm]

2shelbys:

Well, if you went too far, a least you went too far in the right direction.

I don’t think I would agree with that; it generally implies something along the lines of scupulosity, and the Church rejects that. Going too far is often a sign of, at the minimum, a misguided approach to the issue, and often an unhealthy approach.

 

[otm]

papa_k:

I often feel EXACTLY like Tiny’(name removed by moderator)my. My wife and I practice this to some degree, and I credit NFP with our ever-growing family. Ironic? Maybe. You see, I like NFP best when we are pushing it, or outright failing at it. The time you want it most is the time that is “off limits”. Is that marriage? I never felt it was unitive, and I always felt marriage is ordered to conjugality, not this drastic measure, which was intended for the exception, but has turned into what it is supposed to be against. A loophole form of birth control with a general birth control mentality, and the result of it is a “traditional” catholic family of 2.3 kids, and a speed boat and most catholics I know are openely anti-having-more-kids, and they amazingly get a second HUGE dog (call it their “baby”) before they’d even fathom being pregnant with a human soul. Our moral compass is spinning wildly, and I partly blame NFP for making us feel like we are “in the good” when we are being selfish. I also hate the idea that my parish family may be chock full of repressed, “interested” husbands with pent up energy, thinking who knows what about my dw in their hearts, all thanks to the wall between them and their own dw, and their so-called agreement to not have sex for (dare I venture there, probably no good reason). Sorry, but this has been building up a long time, and I had to vent or I will go crazy. God just didn’t mean for us to be going to the outer limits to skate around the procreative first nature of marriage. When you feel in the mood, it is for a reason. I cannot imagine any saints being into this.

Looking at the other side of the coin, according to the Church, God also does not require a couple to have a child “every rainy Tuesday” either.

I fail to understand how you were being selfish by having intercourse at a time you could not conceive, unless you had also come to the decidion that you were able - financially, emotionally, economically, etc. to have more childeren and had decided not to.

The church requires couples to approach the decision of haveing more, or not having more children as one of the more serious decisions the couple makes, but the Church does not dictate the parameters of that decision; it simply defines their general location. There are undoubtedly couples who make that decision in a way that might charitably be said to be pushing extremely hard on the edges - in other words, someone who is eminently capable of having four or five children, for example, without crimpoing their style, and stops at two.

There are, however, couples who for legitimate reasons put off having another one - for now, or indefinitely, and feel they are being selfish, or somehow sinfull, or if not that, skating very close.

It is not a decision with no emotional components. it is, however, a decision that can be achieved with the application of some logic and common sense; and once made, can be revisited if necessary and appropriate; but if the emotions are nagging, then perhaps some outside counseling is appropriate. It is easy to sin; it is also easy to slip into a form of scrupulosity.

I agree that when you are in the mood, it is for a reason, but God also gave us a brain. The body is designed to make babies; and the brain is designed to add the component of rational decisions concerning how many and when; God didn’t intend us to simply respond blindly to our hormones.

In other words, that old word “sacrifice” comes into play. Sacrifice is too often seen as a negative, as a “giving something up”. Better that it is seen as an offering of self, of self giving. Putting the unitive aspect of intercourse into only a hormonal response belittles the unitive aspect of intercourse, at the minimum.

 

[papa_k]

I hate to say, but I am tired of Chris West, and what he is doing to my faith culture. He is teaching an entire people to have less children. Whatever else you can say about TOTB and all that, this much is at least clear to me. We are poorer as a people, for all this. People basically keep saying, better this than condoms. That’s pretty sad.

I fail to understand how you were being selfish by having intercourse at a time you could not conceive, unless you had also come to the decidion that you were able - financially, emotionally, economically, etc. to have more childeren and had decided not to.

Because many people frivolously make this decision. NFP started as an exception scenario, and is now the norm, unless the couple outright uses ABC. I know maybe 3 large young families in my parish of 4000 souls. Something is amiss.

The church requires couples to approach the decision of haveing more, or not having more children as one of the more serious decisions the couple makes, but the Church does not dictate the parameters of that decision; it simply defines their general location. There are undoubtedly couples who make that decision in a way that might charitably be said to be pushing extremely hard on the edges - in other words, someone who is eminently capable of having four or five children, for example, without crimpoing their style, and stops at two.

The Church acts magisterially when it defines objective sin. NFP is a loophole, as I say, b/c when someone subjectively thinks that is what they need to do, then the Church objectively says it is ok to use it. The subjective is where everyone thinks they are that guy. Honest introspection is necessary, but harder to enforce. I am not saying I know anybody’s specific needs, but I do know the large family is disappearing, so this is being exploited.

I agree that when you are in the mood, it is for a reason, but God also gave us a brain. The body is designed to make babies; and the brain is designed to add the component of rational decisions concerning how many and when; God didn’t intend us to simply respond blindly to our hormones.

The brain is where we also think up all our excuses, and I can name lots of intelligent people from history who were immoral. I think virtue decides the right path.

In other words, that old word “sacrifice” comes into play. Sacrifice is too often seen as a negative, as a “giving something up”. Better that it is seen as an offering of self, of self giving. Putting the unitive aspect of intercourse into only a hormonal response belittles the unitive aspect of intercourse, at the minimum.

This bothers me. It is one thing to excuse oneself or feel justified taking continuous measures to reap the pleasure of marriage when one thinks he can get away with it. It is another, and worse thing, to now conclude he is actually more virtuous as a result. Further, reducing intercourse to a mucus chart and a safe timeframe is also damaging to unity and belittles the act.

Sacrifice is known very well to the large families. Pope Pius XII wrote a beautiful letter to large families, in which he said the following.

*Wherever you find large families in great numbers, they point to: the physical and moral health of a Christian people; a living faith in God and trust in His Providence; the fruitful and joyful holiness of Catholic marriage…

Far from being a “social malady,” large families are a quarante of the moral and physical health of a nation. Virtues flourish spontaneously in homes where a baby’s cries always echo from the crib, and vice is put to flight, as it if has been chased away by the childhood that is renewed there like the fresh and invigorating breath of spring.

So let the weak and selfish take their example from you; let the nation continue to be loving and grateful toward you for all the sacrifices you have taken upon yourselves to raise and educate the citizens (Address to Large Families, 20 January 1959). *

Question: Does the current culture of NFP impress you as one that will produce saints, priests, sacrificing people? How many priests will come from a family of two? Or how many soldiers?

 

[Jennifer_J]

papa_k:

I hate to say, but I am tired of Chris West, and what he is doing to my faith culture. He is teaching an entire people to have less children. Whatever else you can say about TOTB and all that, this much is at least clear to me. We are poorer as a people, for all this. People basically keep saying, better this than condoms. That’s pretty sad.

Because many people frivolously make this decision. NFP started as an exception scenario, and is now the norm, unless the couple outright uses ABC. I know maybe 3 large young families in my parish of 4000 souls. Something is amiss.

The Church acts magisterially when it defines objective sin. NFP is a loophole, as I say, b/c when someone subjectively thinks that is what they need to do, then the Church objectively says it is ok to use it. The subjective is where everyone thinks they are that guy. Honest introspection is necessary, but harder to enforce. I am not saying I know anybody’s specific needs, but I do know the large family is disappearing, so this is being exploited.

The brain is where we also think up all our excuses, and I can name lots of intelligent people from history who were immoral. I think virtue decides the right path.

This bothers me. It is one thing to excuse oneself or feel justified taking continuous measures to reap the pleasure of marriage when one thinks he can get away with it. It is another, and worse thing, to now conclude he is actually more virtuous as a result. Further, reducing intercourse to a mucus chart and a safe timeframe is also damaging to unity and belittles the act.

Sacrifice is known very well to the large families. Pope Pius XII wrote a beautiful letter to large families, in which he said the following.

*Wherever you find large families in great numbers, they point to: the physical and moral health of a Christian people; a living faith in God and trust in His Providence; the fruitful and joyful holiness of Catholic marriage…

Far from being a “social malady,” large families are a quarante of the moral and physical health of a nation. Virtues flourish spontaneously in homes where a baby’s cries always echo from the crib, and vice is put to flight, as it if has been chased away by the childhood that is renewed there like the fresh and invigorating breath of spring.

So let the weak and selfish take their example from you; let the nation continue to be loving and grateful toward you for all the sacrifices you have taken upon yourselves to raise and educate the citizens (Address to Large Families, 20 January 1959). *

Question: Does the current culture of NFP impress you as one that will produce saints, priests, sacrificing people? How many priests will come from a family of two? Or how many soldiers?

I don’t think the large family is disappearing thanks to NFP, I think it’s due to contraception. NFP is a way to fix that mentality, albeit not a perfect solution. When we converted we stopped contraception because my dh and I realized what an evil it was. Letting go and letting God is hard to do when society tells you 2 children is enough and your dh is in grad school and you teach in a low paying Catholic school. We turned to nfp, at first to limit births, then to space and now, after 5 children, we’re not sure if we’re called to a bigger family or not. We play it day to day and month to month. During all this time we were and are open to more children, but we have to take into account that we live far from any family help, our house is only so big, our car is only so big and we do have to feed and clothe and educate everyone as well. While society shouldn’t tell us how many children to have, the fact is larger families are harder to support today for many reasons: lack of extended family help, lack of health insurance, education costs, transportation (big vans/suvs are expensive to run and repair), and the way society in general is set up today–we are not agriculturally based. I can’t raise my own food, I have to rely on farmers and such. Are these excuses, maybe, but I think we need to look at these reasons and see that they may be serious enough for some to need to limit family size. I truly and honestly think NFP has little to do with it. Most NFP users I know have many more than 2 children–they are faithful and MORE likely to produce priests and religious. I’m not too sure about soldiers. The prevelant contraceptive mentality is to blame, whether the use ABC or NFP. We must remain open to life.

 

[YinYangMom]

papa_k:

I hate to say, but I am tired of Chris West, and what he is doing to my faith culture. He is teaching an entire people to have less children. ?

Everything I’ve heard or read from him so far is so opposite what you state here. He not only encourages bigger families but he also encourages adoption to boot. The emphasis he places is on responsible planning, not just ‘whatever happens despite our circumstances’, but always with a focus toward more children.

 

[lifeisbeautiful]

Both God and the parents should cooperate in Creation. This does not mean that the parents should always try to control everything except for what they cannot control. I think that is a misconception of what NFP and Responsible Parenthood really is.

 

[otm]

papa_k:

I hate to say, but I am tired of Chris West, and what he is doing to my faith culture. He is teaching an entire people to have less children. Whatever else you can say about TOTB and all that, this much is at least clear to me. We are poorer as a people, for all this. People basically keep saying, better this than condoms. That’s pretty sad.

If you are tired of Chris West, you are tired of John Paul 2; chris didn’t make this up.

{QUOTE=papa_k]Because many people frivolously make this decision. NFP started as an exception scenario, and is now the norm, unless the couple outright uses ABC. I know maybe 3 large young families in my parish of 4000 souls. Something is amiss.1) you are assuming the rest of the folks are using NFP; the sad statistics are that the vast majority most likely are not, but rather ABC.
2) People make frivolous decisions a great deal of the time, including, occasionally, the decision to have children. That is neither here nor there as to NFP. And I don’t believe NFP started as an exception scenario as the Church has not stated that one must have a large family so much as one must be open to the will of God (which we will both grant many are not very open, or only open selectively). However, “Vatican Roulette” was around long before NFP.

papa_k:

The brain is where we also think up all our excuses, and I can name lots of intelligent people from history who were immoral. I think virtue decides the right path.

I would submit that virtue lies in the brain as opposed to the emotions. In plain English, I am saying that just because one is horny doesn’t mean that one has to have intercourse; and putting off intercourse to a time where the hormones are not raging so much my put intercourse into something more thought out (as in, intentional giving of self) as opposed to simply responding to hormones “because that’s the way God made us, so that’s the best time”. You seem to be presuming that since God made all animals with a cycle, that ends the story: God gave us a cycle and that means that God wants us to have intercourse during that time, and doing so at another time (particularly if one didn’t during that time) somehow makes out of cycle intercourse less “holy” or closer to “sinful”. It seems to come across almost as a spin on Jansenism.

papa_k:

Further, reducing intercourse to a mucus chart and a safe timeframe is also damaging to unity and belittles the act.

Given the repeated evidence that NFP has drawn couples much closer to each other, particularly in reference to those using ABC, and the respect that NFP engenders in the couple for one another, and in particular the male for the female (when he is cooperating in NFP, he is clearly willing to not persue “sex at any time”), I think the evidence is to the contrary, and strongly so.

papa_k:

Question: Does the current culture of NFP impress you as one that will produce saints, priests, sacrificing people? How many priests will come from a family of two? Or how many soldiers?

It does, and exceedingly so. Being surrounded by a society that practices ABC with abandon, it is amazing to see the differences between spouses, and how they treat one another, and how they respond to Church when comparing those on NFP and those on ABC.

The essence of what Christ taught is the giving up of self (aka sacrifice); what NFP requires to be practiced is a giving up of self.

The issue of large families is much more one of materialism coupled with poor science (world starvation), consumerism, and a rabid individualism than it is with NFP or no NFP.

 

[otm]

Since part of the discusssion seems to be centered around big families (and for the sake of arguement, lets assume more than 5, although society would say 3 is getting there), it might be helpful to think back about 50 years, to the middle of the last century.

At that time, a laborer could be the sole support of the family; wages compared to the cost of living were higher than they are today. My dad started barbering at a time that a barber would chage about $.25 (that’s right, twenty five cents) for a haircut. although he went to work from 8 am to 5 pm, he did not have a customer in the chair at all times; he might cut hair 50% of the day. Yet he was able to purchase his first house as sole supporter of the family; later he moved and bought a new house, and sold the first one on contract. For 12 years he supported a family that ended up with 4 kids, and my mother stayed home (he had a stroke when I was 12). the month before the stroke, they made the last payment on the second house.

The simple truth of the matter is that a dollar went farther then than it does now. There aren’t too many people now making the equivalent wage who can do the same. That, if nothing else, is going to cut down the size of a family.