In my heart, not truly open to life (NFP question)

[Perian]

[BIBLEDRB][/BIBLEDRB]Thank you so, so much for your prayers. I can’t tell you how much I appreciate it. It’s so touching to know that the anonymity of posting online hasn’t obscured the realness of my struggles to you.

Since this thread has been such a constructive sounding board, I’d like to pose another question. This one is relevant to my current issues, but it’s much more practical. I just don’t think I’m cut out for multiple children. I believe God would give me the strength to power through my days but I seriously doubt that I would be genuinely happy. I am a quiet, peaceful soul who is easily rattled by chaos. I place enormous value on being able to devote the appropriate amount of love and attention to a loved one. My love language is quality time and acts of service. In moms groups, the women talk lightheartedly about how little time they spend with their kids because theyre fulfilling household duties and shuffling the family through the nightly routine. I can’t think of anything worse… What’s the point in having your family if you don’t get to live in them? I don’t want to cobble together precious stolen moments between shouting and ordering and coralling.

I was neglected in my childhood when my brother came alone eight years later. All material needs were met, but I passed through my teenage years unchecked. My abuse in high school was completely missed by my parents. My brother was a difficult boy who requires a different parenting style. I don’t blame my parents for letting things slip through the cracks while they were first time parents all over again, because I certainly wasn’t volunteering information, but the signs were there. The cycle of mistreatment it has perpetuated in my life… I don’t want to do that to my baby. And I fear that I do not have the emotional capacity to be the best mother possible to more than one child.

I guess we’re getting into “trust God” territory again but I need to know… When is it okay to trust my own self-knowledge in all this? I only have one baby and I’m simultaneously bored and overwhelmed at home, and fighting to maintain my inner life emotionally and spiritually… The thought of neglecting my baby girl in all of this because a new baby has needs too is tragic. I don’t want her to be shortchanged like I was. The effects were so great.

 

[underacloud]

Is it okay that my husband and I are intimate when I am unlikely to get pregnant even though I am fearful, distrusting, and dreading another pregnancy? It just doesn’t seem like it aligns with the spirit of NFP. Am I lying to God and my husband by saying yes with my body while my heart is screaming no and praying that this moment doesn’t end in a new life?

Perian,

From reading your posts, I think you have a misconception about what NFP is and why it is acceptable.

The term “open to life” is vague and misleading. It is actually not the term found in official Church teaching in this area, and is only a popular paraphrase. The actual teaching is that “it is necessary that each and every marriage act remain ordered per se to the procreation of human life.”

“remain ordered per se” here means in brief that a man and woman have sexual intercouse with no contraception. In this way the act itself is properly ordered. Note that it is irrelevant here whether conception is likely or even possible, and irrelevant whether it is intended or deliberately being avoided.

Regarding NFP, the Catechism says this:

“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.”

So, in brief, if you have serious reasons to avoid pregnancy, it is perfectly acceptable to use NFP for the specific aim of having sex that is unlikely to result in pregnancy. You are not lying to God and you are not at odds with the “spirit of NFP” - the teaching itself is designed to allow for precisely your use of NFP.

With that concern out of the way, you need to give more thought to you and your husband being on the same page here. If you can’t cope with a nother child now, he needs to respect that. I hope and pray that you can help each other through this difficult period.

 

[z_0101]

We arrive at the crux of the matter.
You have legitimate concerns and your past haunts your present as I suspected and why I made the suggestions I did, you need that three prong attack on this situation. I would now add a mom’s group thru your church if they have one… these groups are a good source of spiritual support, growth, and mutual care.

BTW: IMHO: Nothing wrong with at least wanting to space children apart so that you can deal with them… it was a nightmare trying to potty train the twins Just don’t let your past haunt you… you need to get it out in the open, the evil that was done to you only grows in the darkness and by exposing it to the light, with your husband, with a good counselor and thru prayer - Satin will lose control over your life thru that wound, and it is a wound just as much as having a hand cut off. You wouldn’t walk around and do nothing to such a corporal wound, so, neither you should not neglect the spiritual and physical wounds you have suffered.

 

[SpidersfromMars]

We don’t know that there isn’t something medical going on here.

• Did she have a very difficult pregnancy - we don’t know.
• Was the delivery a horrible experience, perhaps the medical staff had the bedside manner of a twig -* we don’t know.*
• Is she suffering from a form of postpartum depression - once again we don’t know.

So, it would seem reasonable suggestion to discuss the situation with a medical professional if these or other reasons are affecting her position - even if there isn’t any medical issue it’s better to make sure than to leave that thread lose. So many bad things have happened that could have been avoided had a simple conversation between a Mother and her OB/GYN or even a G.P. had occurred; therefore, *** I’ll stand by that suggestion!***

Well that’s true, all those things could be possible. And it looks like you were right in this case; there were some other issues.

I was just saying that there are some people who just don’t want a large family. No medical reasons, it just doesn’t appeal to them. I wouldn’t want someone who feels like that to think they must have something wrong with them

 

[Vico]

To get straight to the point, I have an incredible and deeply loved one year old, but I feel my heart is hardening against the idea of more children. I am currently undergoing a long process of healing from great spiritual desolation over the past three years. I hope very much that this will help to reorient my heart and I will trust God’s will for my life again, but in the meantime, my husband and I are using NFP as faithfully as possible to delay conception.

We do not use any other barrier and, should I conceive unexpectedly, we obviously would welcome the next child into our lives. But, in my heart, I am absolutely not open to life. I do not want another child for the foreseeable future… If it were 100% my choice, which it absolutely isn’t, I’d be done for good-- that’s where I am right now.

Is it okay that my husband and I are intimate when I am unlikely to get pregnant even though I am fearful, distrusting, and dreading another pregnancy? It just doesn’t seem like it aligns with the spirit of NFP. Am I lying to God and my husband by saying yes with my body while my heart is screaming no and praying that this moment doesn’t end in a new life?

The consent of the will to do what is moral is what is required.

There are four indications for NFP given by Pope Pius XII, and must be grave to be justifiable: medical, eugenic, economic, and social. Also there must be mutual agreement of the spouses.

 

[underacloud]

and must be grave to be justifiable

“Serious” is the word used by the Church. Grave is an excessively strict translation no longer in use.

Here is the relevant section of Humanae Vitae, taken from the English translation published on the Vatican website:

With regard to physical, economic, psychological and social conditions, responsible parenthood is exercised by those who prudently and generously decide to have more children, and by those who, for serious reasons and with due respect to moral precepts, decide not to have additional children for either a certain or an indefinite period of time.

 

[LongingSoul]

The consent of the will to do what is moral is what is required.

There are four indications for NFP given by Pope Pius XII, and must be grave to be justifiable: medical, eugenic, economic, and social. Also there must be mutual agreement of the spouses.

The absence of a serious reason might indicate a selfishness but does not make avoiding sexual intercourse to avoid pregnancy, ‘contraception’. I do not intend ever to have another child but because I don’t use contraception to achieve that… I am still ‘open to life’.

 

[Xantippe]

“Serious” is the word used by the Church. Grave is an excessively strict translation no longer in use.

Here is the relevant section of Humanae Vitae, taken from the English translation published on the Vatican website:

Yes. “Psychological” is a fit here, and “social” is also a possibility.

Any of the terms from Humanae Vitae (psychological, economic, social and economic conditions) is a huge umbrella for a great many possible situations. The combination of a psychologically fragile wife and a husband who isn’t around much sounds pretty serious to me.

A few thoughts regarding the OP’s update:

1. Your situation growing up with your brother was unusual. Most families get along pretty well with a school age child and a baby. On the other hand, given that many psychological difficulties have a genetic component, I would not be comfortable saying that none of your kids are going to be equally difficult–you probably do have a fair chance of one or more tough kids. On the other hand, my oldest was VERY difficult as a 6 and 7-year-old, but by the time we had a third child when she was 10 (and her younger brother was 7), it was amazingly easy to have a new baby. I have to confess that there were about 2-3 years when (due to miscarriage, recovery, new pregnancy, complications, infancy, and young toddlerhood) I haven’t been quite the hands-on/Tiger mom that I used to be for my oldest two, but the big kids seem to be doing OK, and they have often thanked me for having the baby.
2. I had a somewhat similar to yours (but much less dire situation) growing up. My mom seemed to get along very well with my sister and me when there were just two kids and we lived in a rental house. But then my parents started building a house (and continued for the next 5 or so years), my mom had a baby and we moved into the unfinished house, and our relations definitely deteriorated. My memories of then are mostly of my mom yelling at us to do stuff–the amount of relation-building stuff that she did with us big kids was greatly reduced because she just had way too much on her plate, and not enough money to deal with it. Looking back, I think the combination of unfinished house and new baby was more than my mom could deal with and it nuked our relationship for the next 15-20 years. (I am happy to report that that did not happen with my oldest daughter when our youngest was born–I’m really proud of our relationship. And 12-year-olds can be very difficult!)
3. If your family is well-off, a mother’s helper or college student could be very helpful. Were your parents struggling financially like mine were? If they were and you aren’t, your lives are going to be very different. It’s quite possible to hire somebody to hold the new baby while you take care of the big kids’ emotional boo boos. The new baby will be fine.

Looking back, I think that money stress was probably also a big factor in my mom’s struggle with parenting us when my youngest brother was born. My parents were always arguing about money at the time. When I was a kid, I thought it was just my mom being bad with money (and there was some of that), but now that I’m a grownup, I realize that my parents’ main problem with money was not having enough of it.

1. Again, preschool and parents’ day out can be great.
2. And in your situation, a year or two or three or four of spacing could be very helpful. Every year of spacing will help a lot.

Best wishes!

 

[Xantippe]

1. You can “test drive” a second child (or third or whatever) by babysitting. If it isn’t workable, you can tell your husband. I’d retry the experiment every six months or so to see if it’s gotten easier to deal with as your kid gets older. At some point, you may actually find it a relief to have another child for your child to play with.
2. If your husband wants a second baby NOW and you don’t, make sure he has opportunities for extended solo time with your 1-year-old. 2 or 3 or 4 hour outings are good–zoo, playground, children’s museum, or maybe just home with daddy while mommy gets a haircut and does a little Christmas shopping. If your husband can’t cope with 2-4 hours with one child, it’s totally fair to ask him, “If you can’t manage one child for 3 hours, how am I supposed to manage that child for 9 or 10 hours?” or “If you can’t manage one child for three hours, what makes you think that I can manage two kids for 9 or 10 hours by myself Monday through Friday?” (Adjust script according to your household schedule.)

In my experience, a certain number of men suffer from the “mommy sparkles” theory of parenthood. These guys believe that women are somehow endowed with special super power “mommy sparkles” that enable us to engage in non-stop childcare or housework without needing any breaks or downtime. It’s really important to help that kind of guy understand that there are no “mommy sparkles”–moms get tired of being with the kids for long periods of time, just like dads get tired of being with the kids for long periods of time.

 

[moondawg]

This is your opinion but NOT what the Catholic church teaches at all. With all Christian charity please do not post things that are contrary to church teaching as church teaching, as it may confuse others.

Is this a forum for discussion and learning, or indoctrination?

 

[Xantippe]

Is this a forum for discussion and learning, or indoctrination?

Since it is a Catholic forum, casual or uninformed readers may assume that anything that sounds hard-nosed is actual Catholic teaching.

It is worthwhile to flag rigoristic posts and explain that no, such and such is not actually Catholic teaching, so that no casual reader or learning Catholic will feel be deceived about what the Church does and does not ask of us.

 

[Scientia_Dei]

well, we must understand first that Life is a very GOOD thing. An amazing miracle. But before life we must understand how it comes into existence. So we have to understand sex. If you truly love your spouse, the same way Christ loved His Church, then you are willing to go through hell and back. Let’s be real, no woman on earth wants to use contraceptives. (Chicken nuggets from McDonalds are healthier…just saying) they may want to have intercourse with out having children, but no woman wants to be at war with her own physiology. (Humana Vitae actually goes deeper then what I can do on any post, check that writing out) John Paul 2 raises questions on this matter "What if a Women’s body is perfectly made? What if she doesn’t need all those chemicals and barriers? What if a women just needs to be understood? So that instead of conforming her body with chemicals to conform to the man’s desire, what if we (males)conform our desires to the perfect way her body is? She only needs to be understood (ponder on this). " This is complete Sexual Liberation. Our bodies are perfectly made, and our bodies reveal our call to Love. And with a woman’s body it reveal something of the feminine soul. That she is called to this active receptivity in her love. To be actively receptive, to nurture that love and to welcome that. Our modern world has flipped this upside down. Women are actively aggressive instead of receptive. All walled up and closed because they’ve been hurt so much. They don’t welcome life (life in the womb), they are scared to death by it. But if we went back to the way our bodies are created, it would and will remember us who we are called to be, both male and female. And when we remember this and act accordingly, we can actually love as God calls us to love. And through that Love, behold a living monument appears, a child. Pray to Virgin Mary for not just guidance but hope. God Bless you, i’ll dedicate a prayer for you.

 

[thewanderer]

The consent of the will to do what is moral is what is required.

There are four indications for NFP given by Pope Pius XII, and must be grave to be justifiable: medical, eugenic, economic, and social. Also there must be mutual agreement of the spouses.

As has been noted, the correct English translation is “serious” not “grave”. Also, I must take issue with the idea that both spouses must always want to postpone. Yes, it is wrong to withhold sex in marriage without a serious reason (such as you are sick etc). However, if you have a serious enough reason to use NFP then you have a serious enough reason to be excused from the marital debt, and so, would not sin by refusing to have sex when fertile. For example, a mother has developed a condition such that another pregnancy would put her life in serious danger yet her husband is against the idea of any kind of abstinance. She insists on using NFP, and he insists on trying to manipulate her into giving in and having sex while she is fertile despite the very serious reasons they have to avoid pregnancy. The wife is not the one sinning here despite the fact that she is using NFP without the agreement of her spouse. Just saying.

 

[Xantippe]

As has been noted, the correct English translation is “serious” not “grave”. Also, I must take issue with the idea that both spouses must always want to postpone. Yes, it is wrong to withhold sex in marriage without a serious reason (such as you are sick etc). However, if you have a serious enough reason to use NFP then you have a serious enough reason to be excused from the marital debt, and so, would not sin by refusing to have sex when fertile. For example, a mother has developed a condition such that another pregnancy would put her life in serious danger yet her husband is against the idea of any kind of abstinance. She insists on using NFP, and he insists on trying to manipulate her into giving in and having sex while she is fertile despite the very serious reasons they have to avoid pregnancy. The wife is not the one sinning here despite the fact that she is using NFP without the agreement of her spouse. Just saying.

Yes.

 

[Vico]

As has been noted, the correct English translation is “serious” not “grave”. Also, I must take issue with the idea that both spouses must always want to postpone. Yes, it is wrong to withhold sex in marriage without a serious reason (such as you are sick etc). However, if you have a serious enough reason to use NFP then you have a serious enough reason to be excused from the marital debt, and so, would not sin by refusing to have sex when fertile. For example, a mother has developed a condition such that another pregnancy would put her life in serious danger yet her husband is against the idea of any kind of abstinance. She insists on using NFP, and he insists on trying to manipulate her into giving in and having sex while she is fertile despite the very serious reasons they have to avoid pregnancy. The wife is not the one sinning here despite the fact that she is using NFP without the agreement of her spouse. Just saying.

Of course gravi meaning heavy can be grave or serious. The point being to avoid grave sin. Surely, if someone is at risk medically, it excuses from the conjugal gift entirely, so there need not be agreement. There may not always be agreement on other indications, as witnessed in some threads here, about conflict over having children that occurs in matrimony.

 

[thewanderer]

Of course gravi meaning heavy can be grave or serious. The point being to avoid grave sin. Surely, if someone is at risk medically, it excuses from the conjugal gift entirely, so there need not be agreement. There may not always be agreement on other indications, as witnessed in some threads here, about conflict over having children that occurs in matrimony.

And the official English translation on the Vatican website uses serious not grave.

As for the rest, of course you’re going to find disagreement among people as to what is serious enough, just like you find disagreement among people as to what is serious enough to use NFP in the first place. The point is that your claim that there must be agreement of both spouses to use NFP for NFP to be moral is false. There are clearly circumstances where that is not necessary.

 

[QuasiCatholic]

Let’s be real, no woman on earth wants to use contraceptives … they may want to have intercourse with out having children, but no woman wants to be at war with her own physiology.:

I took the Pill for years before I was actually having sex. Women’s physiology is kind of obnoxious. I know lots of women who are more than happy to take a pill that reduces cramps, shortens and lightens your period, clears up your complexion and helps prevent the emotional chaos of PMS.

I only gave it up to make my husband happy. And if the church ever changes its stance on it I would likely be back on it within a month or two.

 

[Vico]

And the official English translation on the Vatican website uses serious not grave.

As for the rest, of course you’re going to find disagreement among people as to what is serious enough, just like you find disagreement among people as to what is serious enough to use NFP in the first place. The point is that your claim that there must be agreement of both spouses to use NFP for NFP to be moral is false. There are clearly circumstances where that is not necessary.

No, I am not claiming that, as you can read in my posts regarding medical indication.

 

[thewanderer]

No, I am not claiming that, as you can read in my posts regarding medical indication.

Yes, you are no longer claiming that to be the case, however, I was referring to your previous claim that it was so.

 

[Vico]

Yes, you are no longer claiming that to be the case, however, I was referring to your previous claim that it was so.

It is generally true as given in Casti Canubi (Pius XI) yet there is an exception when the obligation ceases due to highly risksy pregnancy (medical risk).53. And now, Venerable Brethren, we shall explain in detail the evils opposed to each of the benefits of matrimony. First consideration is due to the offspring, which many have the boldness to call the disagreeable burden of matrimony and which they say is to be carefully avoided by married people not through virtuous continence (which Christian law permits in matrimony when both parties consent) but by frustrating the marriage act. Some justify this criminal abuse on the ground that they are weary of children and wish to gratify their desires without their consequent burden. Others say that they cannot on the one hand remain continent nor on the other can they have children because of the difficulties whether on the part of the mother or on the part of family circumstances.