Maternal Age as a serious reason to avoid pregnancy

[mommamaree]

Part of the reason for the friendly fire is that NFPers usually overstate their case. NFP is all butterflies and candy and it is so awesome, and it is approved by the Church, in fact all people should be educated in it etc…

As pointed out earlier NFP is the exception. Sex is the default.

This thread is still good, however it is taking a turn for the personal and not the theoretical or logical. While I cannot side with Xantippe and do not see her logic in some things, I don’t think her personal struggles need to be brought up. It biases my pondering of her arguments. By the same token, her shot at homeschooling large families is not needed either. Being as I am a homeschooling dad of a large family and am ready to have more kids no matter our station in life. It is personal. parenting is easy for me.

Ooh,
I missed this post earlier! It is a good one. Yes, I agree that NFP is oversold. I refuse to drink the koolaid.
It is good that we have a moral and EFFECTIVE option for avoiding pregnancy; however, it is hard. It sometimes requires significant periods of abstinence. It can be tricky to interpret charts at times.
And I am always adamantly opposed to any perspective that implies that anyone ever has a moral obligation to use it. I am also opposed to perspectives that say a couple should not use it. I think both are ways lay people overstep their bounds. It is also tempting to impose our view upon others simply as a way to justify ourselves. We have to be careful about that, too. But, even despite all those challenges to such a conversation, lay people are pretty much the ONLY people who are discussing this. We are not hearing about this in our parishes or dioceses very much, unless it is word of mouth from another lay person. And the threads on it here at CAF, of course!

 

[The_Bucket]

The Church has used phrases like “responsible” parenthood. It turns out “responsible” can mean whatever you wish it to so I wonder why the word was used at all?

So that you in particular wouldn’t have a leg to stand on when telling people that their reasons are insufficient.

If people want to lie to themselves, that’s their affair. That’s their sins. God is not fooled. But the Church wrote the doctrine as She did specifically so that married couples don’t have to ask the mob, or even their priests, whether they need to not avoid sex during fertile periods. Because asking for permission to not have sex is insane.

 

[mommamaree]

Is it your contention that MOST Catholic women knew about fertility signs thousands of years ago. That someone named Marie in Ireland in 1250 rounding up chickens in the village knew ovulation days?

Did some have this knowledge? Perhaps. I would need to see the academics of that one. But “most” nope. Most “Catholic” women today do not know about mucus signs.

No, that was not my assertion.

And remember that we have had a couple generations of women in the Pill. Hormonally-contracepting women do not have mucus! So how would they know?
This was not an academic issue. This was a women’s wisdom issue. Women DID know that they would bleed once per month for a few days, and in the middle of their cycle, they would be wetter with mucus. Women FEEL and SEE this. They didn’t need doctors to tell them.

I am not saying most women understood but I am certain that a lot of them did.

Edited to add: if humans were smart enough to observe and interpret the signs that a female animal was in heat, it stands to reason that they could ALSO figure out the signs that a woman was more fertile at a certain time of month.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Breast feeding. Formula came along in the beginning part of the 20th century. Before that most mothers nursed their own babies, or if they could not, baby was fed by someone else. Breast feeding in the past was a natural child spacer. In third world countries it is still and the safest for both mothers and children.

My Great Grandmother had 8 kids, between the ages of 21 - 43. She had 4 kids in her 20’s 3 in her thirties and the last at 43.

That is a really good point.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

So that you in particular wouldn’t have a leg to stand on when telling people that their reasons are insufficient.

If people want to lie to themselves, that’s their affair. That’s their sins. God is not fooled. But the Church wrote the doctrine as She did specifically so that married couples don’t have to ask the mob, or even their priests, whether they need to not avoid sex during fertile periods. Because asking for permission to not have sex is insane.

I don’t like being accused of something I am not doing

So that you in particular wouldn’t have a leg to stand on when telling people that their reasons are insufficient.

All this shows is that you have not followed the thread and you are looking for a fight or are quite defensive.

I have no wish to be drawn into this type of emotional debate. I have found that especially on this forum that one is accused and attacked for trying to employ theology and logic.
Sometimes this happens because it is the internet. Sometimes it is because people are defensive about something.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

No, that was not my assertion.

And remember that we have had a couple generations of women in the Pill. Hormonally-contracepting women do not have mucus! So how would they know?
This was not an academic issue. This was a women’s wisdom issue. Women DID know that they would bleed once per month for a few days, and in the middle of their cycle, they would be wetter with mucus. Women FEEL and SEE this. They didn’t need doctors to tell them.

I am not saying most women understood but I am certain that a lot of them did.

I dont know. I don’t know what women knew or didn’t know thousands of years ago. I am not as certain as you of these things. But I will tell you in my NFP experience fertility is something that my wife and I learned. And it usually affected the sex. Sex in the fertile times is ALWAYS better for us. So I do see some idea of what you are saying.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Ooh,
I missed this post earlier! It is a good one. Yes, I agree that NFP is oversold. I refuse to drink the koolaid.
It is good that we have a moral and EFFECTIVE option for avoiding pregnancy; however, it is hard. It sometimes requires significant periods of abstinence. It can be tricky to interpret charts at times.
And I am always adamantly opposed to any perspective that implies that anyone ever has a moral obligation to use it. I am also opposed to perspectives that say a couple should not use it. I think both are ways lay people overstep their bounds. It is also tempting to impose our view upon others simply as a way to justify ourselves. We have to be careful about that, too. But, even despite all those challenges to such a conversation, lay people are pretty much the ONLY people who are discussing this. We are not hearing about this in our parishes or dioceses very much, unless it is word of mouth from another lay person. And the threads on it here at CAF, of course!

 

[The_Bucket]

I don’t like being accused of something I am not doing

All this shows is that you have not followed the thread and you are looking for a fight or are quite defensive.

I have no wish to be drawn into this type of emotional debate. I have found that especially on this forum that one is accused and attacked for trying to employ theology and logic.
Sometimes this happens because it is the internet. Sometimes it is because people are defensive about something.

I’m a strong believer in that these kinds of threads can seriously burden people’s consciences and quite unnecessarily so. I cannot conceive of a situation of where one would confess using NFP. I can conceive of a situation where one would confess not being physically generous with a spouse due to selfish reasons, but not using NFP via joint, prayerful agreement.

You stated earlier that you confessed using NFP. As a sin. That, to me, makes very little sense. And you’ve repeatedly stated that you do not understand how X can be serious for one couple and Y (something way more grave) is the “serious reason” for another. I get it.

But the Church’s teaching is absolutely crystal clear and this is not some piece of doctrine that is up to the masses to answer. It’s up to the consciences of individual married couples! It just is! Long-winded discussions like this, in my opinion, serve little positive purpose but instead compel individuals prone to scrupulosity to over-scrutinize their consciences, finding fault where there is not, and then lead to either unnecessary worry over sin or imprudent decision making.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

I’m a strong believer in that these kinds of threads can seriously burden people’s consciences and quite unnecessarily so. I cannot conceive of a situation of where one would confess using NFP. I can conceive of a situation where one would confess not being physically generous with a spouse due to selfish reasons, but not using NFP via joint, prayerful agreement.

You stated earlier that you confessed using NFP. As a sin. That, to me, makes very little sense. And you’ve repeatedly stated that you do not understand how X can be serious for one couple and Y (something way more grave) is the “serious reason” for another. I get it.

But the Church’s teaching is absolutely crystal clear and this is not some piece of doctrine that is up to the masses to answer. It’s up to the consciences of individual married couples! It just is! Long-winded discussions like this, in my opinion, serve little positive purpose but instead compel individuals prone to scrupulosity to over-scrutinize their consciences, finding fault where there is not, and then lead to either unnecessary worry over sin or imprudent decision making.

ok thanks for your (name removed by moderator)ut.

 

[Rico_S]

Sometimes it is because people are defensive about something.

(that’s twice now for those who are counting)

Perhaps you are mistaking disagreement for defensiveness? You know, it is totally possible that people disagree with you logically, and theologically.

 

[The_Bucket]

Perhaps you are taking disagreement with defensiveness? You know, it is totally possible that people disagree with you logically, and theologically.

I think he’s mistaking defensiveness for aggressiveness. I am aggressive over this issue because this forum in general has a lot of people who have scrupulosity issues. Trying my best to be my brothers/sisters’ keeper on an issue where the doctrine could literally not be any more clear that no one has the responsibility to ask anyone, including a priest, about this issue.

Remember again folks, we’re talking about “is this a serious reason to not have sex sometimes?” I don’t even.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

(that’s twice now for those who are counting)

Perhaps you are taking disagreement with defensiveness? You know, it is totally possible that people disagree with you logically, and theologically.

It is possible. Either on this thread or another I think that happened. I think if you look back in this thread especially where bookcat was posting everyone was quite open minded and not defensive so I doubt what you are saying, But it is possible. All I know is that rarely are these threads dealt with in a logical way. Usually it is emotion. I am guilty of that at times as well. But so are you. Right?

 

[mommamaree]

I dont know. I don’t know what women knew or didn’t know thousands of years ago. I am not as certain as you of these things. But I will tell you in my NFP experience fertility is something that my wife and I learned. And it usually affected the sex. Sex in the fertile times is ALWAYS better for us. So I do see some idea of what you are saying.

See, before I ever heard of NFP, I had already noticed the presence of signs around the time I would ovulate, and I often had a moment of pain when I actually did ovulate. My research and conversations with other women confirmed that this is common.

 

[Rau]

As pointed out earlier NFP is the exception. Sex is the default.

…It is personal. parenting is easy for me.

That parenting is easy for some and hard for others seems to get routinely overlooked. “Serious reasons” is not an absolute standard, it is hugely personal.

And for a couple with 30 years of fertility, who fall pregnant readily, and for whom parenting is not “easy”, NFP may quite properly become their default.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

I think he’s mistaking defensiveness for aggressiveness. I am aggressive over this issue because this forum in general has a lot of people who have scrupulosity issues. Trying my best to be my brothers/sisters’ keeper on an issue where the doctrine could literally not be any more clear that no one has the responsibility to ask anyone, including a priest, about this issue.

Remember again folks, we’re talking about “is this a serious reason to not have sex sometimes?” I don’t even.

Most people with scruples on this thread don’t tend to have them with this issue. Usually it is something like "I killed a bug on the way to Mass, should I confess it.

Does that make you this aggressive on animal stewardship threads?

 

[Rico_S]

It is possible. Either on this thread or another I think that happened. I think if you look back in this thread especially where bookcat was posting everyone was quite open minded and not defensive so I doubt what you are saying, But it is possible. All I know is that rarely are these threads dealt with in a logical way. Usually it is emotion. I am guilty of that at times as well. But so are you. Right?

Sure.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Some of the newbies to the thread need to go back and read the whole thing. I know I know it is long and as Bucket said these threads drag on and get ridiculous but if you are going to add to the post count perhaps reading the whole thing could be beneficial.

There was a lot of information in this thread. I found much of it helpful and though I did not agree with all of it there was a nice string of posts that were about as informational as I could imagine.

Xantippe
Bookcat
7army
Mommamarie.
Mom of 7

You all have helped shape my thinking in this and I have learned a lot. Thank you.

 

[The_Bucket]

Most people with scruples on this thread don’t tend to have them with this issue. Usually it is something like "I killed a bug on the way to Mass, should I confess it.

Does that make you this aggressive on animal stewardship threads?

I confess that this issue in particular (along with a few others) bothers the heck out of me because the doctrine is explicitly spelled out in the Catechism… and yet we have 25 pages on it? Why? To what positive end?

But in terms of aggressiveness… I don’t post in many threads. When I do, I tend to not mince words and be an extremely open book about my own myriad of faults, failures and sins in an effort to help others. What I write in my signature is not hot air. Not either sentiment actually!

 

[The_Bucket]

If you liked me in this thread, you’ll love me in threads about: Addiction, pornography, emotional and psychological abuse and the “men’s rights” movement.

Bonus: If you read threads about the first three, you’ll get to find out what a completely horrible person I was for a number of years. Fun!

 

[Xantippe]

mommamaree said:

“It is very upsetting. I actually struggle with these self-deprecating thoughts every. single. day.”

I think you may be scrupulous. It’s something to bring up with your confessor and/or a therapist.

It sounds like your mind is probably running some unnecessary “programs” (some malware, if you will), and you’ll find you function better once you start running a “virus check”.

HoosierDaddy said:

“NFP is all butterflies and candy and it is so awesome, and it is approved by the Church, in fact all people should be educated in it etc…”

I think that is a real issue elsewhere, but it is practically non-existent on CAF (at least on the forums I frequent).

TheBucket said:

“Ok, but also a part of the way things “used to be” was more children dying young, more miscarriages due to poor health of the mother, women dying in childbirth, desperate poverty for 99% of the world’s population… see where I’m going here?”

Yes. As I’ve mentioned, I’m a faithful reader of a rural Indian doctor’s blog (jeevankuruvilla.blogspot.com), and it’s been an eye-opener as to what it means to be an expectant mother in a very poor country.

Here’s a sample post (not for the squeamish):

jeevankuruvilla.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=2014-04-21T09:00:00%2B05:30&max-results=3

They see a lot of that sort of case.

The Bucket said:

“Given what we know about the nature of man, I think it’s a fair assumption that most people did not practice abstinence or anything like the rhythm method. They practiced withdrawal, engaged mutual masturbation, oral sex to completion, used less-reliable barriers and plain old had herb-induced abortions when all else failed.”

Not unlikely. There would also be acidic douches. Even very recently, women of the Soviet Union were sticking lemons you-know-where as birth control and I recall seeing a recipe for something similar involving vinegar in my Peace Corps copy of “Where There is No Doctor”.

A perusal of old manuals for confessors would be helpful. I think that the strength of our tradition on “unnatural acts” suggests that they have always been popular.