Natural Family Planning Classes- too expensive!

[Pug]

On the contrary, they’re raising the standards. They want couples who get married in the Church to really understand the purpose of sex and marriage and to be prepared to space children legitimately if the need arises.

The purpose of an NFP class is not to teach the Catholic theology/doctrine of sex and marriage, though. Also, every couple already can space children if a need suddenly arises. They can abstain.

Moreover, I don’t think most people realize how different NFP is from contraception. If a couple doesn’t appreciate this difference then why would they choose a more time-consuming and sacrificial method over one that involves taking a pill?

Again, an NFP class is not designed to carefully explain why it is immoral to use the condom, etc. They are not out to fully explain why one is okay and the other isn’t, so that the couple can fully appreciate the difference. They may point out some obvious advantages to using NFP compared to a condom, but that is not really the same. I would be more supportive of the idea of a class whose purpose was to teach Catholic teaching, like that contraception is wrong, and the meaning of the marital act. NFP is a mechanics class, specific to one method, often. Depending on who is teaching an NFP mechanics class, they may not be remotely interested in letting the couple know that MM is not licit as a replacement for the marital act during the fertile phase. The classes aren’t always taught by Catholics.

I do agree with you, though, I would have utilized it when I got married if my parish had offered an optional (and hopefully free) NFP method class.

Still, I’d prefer it if a well-informed couple were not required to take a pointless (for them) class of any sort. I’d like a parish to treat people as individuals and not shove them through a one size fits all hole. It’s alienating.

 

[ack]

The fact these mandatory courses also have to be paid for by the couple brings the spectre of simony into the equation as well, don’t pay for the course no sacrament.

It seems very much that NFP “ministries” are a huge money maker given that you can buy a book for $10 that tells you all you need to know and yet some places are charging over $100.

1. Contact the Bishop’s office. Use the word simony in your letter. This will usually obtain the effect you want. If they still insist you can appeal to Rome. Takes a few months, but this will put a stop to the practice when they reply to your local ordinary.

Thinking a little more about this, I’ve concluded that this does not go against the prohibition of simony, because the church is making no money here. All the money is going to the independent organizations teaching NFP, and the church has no control over what they charge (although I am surprised that the diocese did not set up their own NFP classes.)

Because therefore they are not technically “charging for a sacrament” (in the words of the OP), this practice would not be prohibited under those canons.

If I were the OP, I would go to the pastor and explain that you already know NFP and want to be exempted for that reason. (The OP gave no indication of having done so.)

 

[ack]

Still, I’d prefer it if a well-informed couple were not required to take a pointless (for them) class of any sort. I’d like a parish to treat people as individuals and not shove them through a one size fits all hole. It’s alienating.

Are you then opposed to any and all mandatory marriage preparation that parishes require? Because it seems like standard practice (at least in the US) to require the couples to go through marriage prep before marrying.

 

[moon1234]

Thinking a little more about this, I’ve concluded that this does not go against the prohibition of simony, because the church is making no money here. All the money is going to the independent organizations teaching NFP, and the church has no control over what they charge (although I am surprised that the diocese did not set up their own NFP classes.)

Because therefore they are not technically “charging for a sacrament” (in the words of the OP), this practice would not be prohibited under those canons.

If I were the OP, I would go to the pastor and explain that you already know NFP and want to be exempted for that reason. (The OP gave no indication of having done so.)

Requiring money for ANY sacrement is simony. Period. If the church says we will not marry unless you attend this class which costs money and you can not afford said class then that is simony. It is not charitable at all.

If these classes are so important why not ask why people don’t donate their time? If this is such an important class why is it not taught by clergy? It would be like saying you could not come to mass unless you pick up the envelopes for collection which by the way cost $25 for 6 months.

Money for sacraments is wrong in all situations. The couple should donate what they are capable of if they have it.

 

[ack]

Requiring money for ANY sacrement is simony. Period. If the church says we will not marry unless you attend this class which costs money and you can not afford said class then that is simony. It is not charitable at all.

The definition of simony from the Beal and Coriden commentary on Canon Law:

[Simony} means an explicit or implicit and externally manifest agreement whereby one party deliberately agrees to confer a sacrament on another in exchange for some temporal good, e.g. money or property. The delict essentially is the deliberate intent to equalize the spiritual and temporal, i.e. to deal commercially in sacred things. However, this is not verified regarding the legally regulated offerings of the faithful for the celebration of the Eucharist or other sacraments.

Per my previous post, I don’t see how the parish’s failure to provide free NFP classes consitutes simony in the canonical sense, because the first party (the parish and pastor) is not receiving any money or property due to this requirement.*

 

[moon1234]

The definition of simony from the Beal and Coriden commentary on Canon Law:

[Simony} means an explicit or implicit and externally manifest agreement whereby one party deliberately agrees to confer a sacrament on another in exchange for some temporal good, e.g. money or property. The delict essentially is the deliberate intent to equalize the spiritual and temporal, i.e. to deal commercially in sacred things. However, this is not verified regarding the legally regulated offerings of the faithful for the celebration of the Eucharist or other sacraments.

Per my previous post, I don’t see how the parish’s failure to provide free NFP classes consitutes simony in the canonical sense, because the first party (the parish and pastor) is not receiving any money or property due to this requirement.*

The act of requiring money to paid to ANYONE before a sacrament is conferred is wrong. This is what the church was doing in the 1400’s. You paid the state a stipends before sacrements were conferred or to get people to heaven, etc. If money must change hands in order to receive a sacrament, irrespective of who gets the money, that is wrong.

 

[PaulinVA]

The act of requiring money to paid to ANYONE before a sacrament is conferred is wrong. This is what the church was doing in the 1400’s. You paid the state a stipends before sacrements were conferred or to get people to heaven, etc. If money must change hands in order to receive a sacrament, irrespective of who gets the money, that is wrong.

So, along your line of thinking a parish can’t say that there is a cost for the religious ed class that is required for children to have their First Holy Communion? That no where can money enter into it? A parish can’t require you to be a registered, donating member before they marry you?

 

[Pug]

Are you then opposed to any and all mandatory marriage preparation that parishes require? Because it seems like standard practice (at least in the US) to require the couples to go through marriage prep before marrying.

No, not at all. Marriage preparation (note that is what you said, not generic preparation classes) is vital. The bishop ought to carefully provide for this in his diocese. Each priest should be sure that each couple receives the preparation and support they need, in a form suited to them. I do think it is a lesser, unhelpful idea that it unequivocally must be tied to a set series of classes with set topics that everyone must take willy-nilly, x months prior to marriage. For a simple example, some people might be better instructed one-on-one than in a class. If necessary, that ought to be provided. Just making them go through a class that won’t work for them is not a replacement for giving them the preparation that they deserve. I understand, though, that logistics often get in the way. I’m part of an RCIA program, so I know this happens. But I also know that we give someone individual instruction if they don’t really fit where the class is right now. If needed, you meet with them at 9 pm on Sat or whatever fits their schedule and give them all the customized help they need. The point is to prepare them, not to have a piece of paper that one can point to in order to absolve oneself and say, I did it, I prepared them, I did my duty. (I’m not saying you said that at all, but it sure would be a shame if parishes just put people through generic classes and figured, okay, they are prepared). My experience in life has been that generic classes often are not the best fit for some people. Some couples might benefit from a retreat, help with their prayer life, or time spent visiting the home of a happy, large family, who knows? For some people, the existence of normal, happy people with a large family of well-adjusted children would be a revelation.

If some person is already familiar with what is in the classes, why not go the extra mile and give them something different, something that delves a little deeper into a topic, instead of rubber-stamping them through the classes?

 

[ac_claire]

To the OP - I just googled NFP in Austin and the CCL website for Austin ccl.austin.tx.us/ says they will wave or reduce the fee for hardship. Talk to someone it really sounds like they are willing to work with you.

Oh wow, thank you for that info!
I didn’t know that. To whoever else who asked if I was sure that the $159 is per couple or per person…everything I read seemed to indicate per person, but I could be wrong. And each of us has to have the certificate. But I’m going to look into the CCL here in Austin. If they do operate on some sort of sliding scale, that would really, really help us. That will be Plan B. In the meantime (for “Plan A” lol) we’ve located an online NFP course that will give us certificates upon completion that is totally free. I don’t know if there’s a catch or not. So…we’re going to try that first and see what happens.

 

[catholic79]

Oh wow, thank you for that info!
I didn’t know that. To whoever else who asked if I was sure that the $159 is per couple or per person…everything I read seemed to indicate per person, but I could be wrong. And each of us has to have the certificate. But I’m going to look into the CCL here in Austin. If they do operate on some sort of sliding scale, that would really, really help us. That will be Plan B. In the meantime (for “Plan A” lol) we’ve located an online NFP course that will give us certificates upon completion that is totally free. I don’t know if there’s a catch or not. So…we’re going to try that first and see what happens.

 

[sheilathebard]

My advice would be to check out the link for NFP International offered earlier: nfpandmore.org. It is run by John and Sheila Kippley, who founded the Couple to Couple League. They offer their manual for free download. I get the impression that they’re not entirely pleased with how expensive the first course they invented has become now that they’re not in charge there anymore.

I myself am entirely against mandating NFP. Encouraging, sure – there are lots of good reasons why a couple would want to learn it before marriage instead of after. But there are also lots of good reasons why a couple wouldn’t want to: money, stress (hey, engagement is a stressful enough time without having to freak out about what your temperature’s doing – which, of course, because you’re stressed, is not what it’s supposed to do), the desire to have children right away, mutual agreement (which we had) that in the event of a serious reason to avoid, we would try total abstinence first, etc. Many people would argue with these, but I think that it’s the couple’s choice, whatever their reasons. If Catholics could get married without knowing NFP two generations ago, I don’t see why we suddenly would have to learn it now or else we are not allowed to get married.

NFP is also required in the Arlington diocese, so despite a lot of debating with our priest (who, by the way, is a wonderful priest, even though he disagreed with me) about why I should have to take the course, especially since I already knew all the basics, I ended up taking the course available from NFP International. They do not have an official course, but I emailed them, and they decided that if I sent them 3 charts with my interpretation, as I completed them, and wrote them an essay, they would give me a certificate. They have been extremely kind and helpful. I am giving them a freewill donation of $40, to thank them for providing all they do, and in return they offered to send me three free books!

As far as getting around the requirements – I don’t know. We are getting married at an Institute oratory ourselves, but since we live far away from the church where we will be married, we made an agreement with the church to do marriage prep out here, fulfill all their requirements, and then send the completed paperwork to the church that will marry us. I believe we are also expected to meet with the priest out there, so he can make sure our marriage prep didn’t miss anything important!

So, we’re fulfilling every requirement under the sun, and I hope they’re happy! From the NFP course, which would have been quite expensive by most routes, to the weak-theologied engaged conference (which cost us $85), we’ve kind of run the gamut. Luckily our priest has been wonderful enough to make up for all we’ve had to go through.

I must say, in defense of the FSSP and Institute, that each of these orders has priests who are well-trained in the canon law that refers to them, and that consulting with a priest of one of these orders should clear up what exactly you would have to do to satisfy them. Most likely they have an agreement with the diocese saying exactly what requirements couples who marry at their churches have to fulfill – which may or may not be different from what the diocese as a whole requires. The only way to find out is to ask.

 

[a_cermak]

Are you then opposed to any and all mandatory marriage preparation that parishes require? Because it seems like standard practice (at least in the US) to require the couples to go through marriage prep before marrying.

Are marriage prep classes one size fits all though? I know in my neighborhood at least one of the local Catholic churches has an expedited program for those Catholics who are living together and already have children with each other. It makes sense as these families are quite different from a couple just starting out. I would hope the same would be true for an older couple, perhaps a widow and a widower embarking on a second marriage. They would have unique challenges and benefits compared to a couple just starting out.

 

[ack]

No, not at all. Marriage preparation (note that is what you said, not generic preparation classes) is vital. The bishop ought to carefully provide for this in his diocese. Each priest should be sure that each couple receives the preparation and support they need, in a form suited to them. I do think it is a lesser, unhelpful idea that it unequivocally must be tied to a set series of classes with set topics that everyone must take willy-nilly, x months prior to marriage.

This sounds good. From my impression on this forum, it seems like many parishes are taking the “one-size-fits-all” approach though.

So, along your line of thinking a parish can’t say that there is a cost for the religious ed class that is required for children to have their First Holy Communion? That no where can money enter into it? A parish can’t require you to be a registered, donating member before they marry you?

The waters actually get muddy here – due to the complimentary norm that I mentioned previously, parishes have the right to impose preparation requirements for marriage, but as far as I know, nothing similar exists for Confirmation and First Communion. A parish can request that its members sign up for preparation classes, but if a properly disposed and educated individual approaches the priest and asks for communion or confirmation, he or she is entitled to the sacrament under Canon Law, regardless of formal preparation. (At least, this is how my parish’s Canon Law guru explained it to me.) Apparently, this is almost never an issue, because it’s so rare for proper religious education to be given at home anyway.

Can a parish require that you be a registered donating member before marrying you? No, I don’t think so. The concept of parish registration doesn’t even exist in Canon Law – even if you never registered at any parish, you are still a parishioner of the parish where you live, and you are entitled to receive the sacraments at that parish. The parish can deny you a “special” wedding Mass in that situation, and insist that you marry during a regularly scheduled Daily Mass.

 

[maryjk]

The waters actually get muddy here – due to the complimentary norm that I mentioned previously, parishes have the right to impose preparation requirements for marriage, but as far as I know, nothing similar exists for Confirmation and First Communion. A parish can request that its members sign up for preparation classes, but if a properly disposed and educated individual approaches the priest and asks for communion or confirmation, he or she is entitled to the sacrament under Canon Law, regardless of formal preparation. (At least, this is how my parish’s Canon Law guru explained it to me.) Apparently, this is almost never an issue, because it’s so rare for proper religious education to be given at home anyway.

It isn’t as rare as you would think. I home schooled my son until he HAD to attend the parish CCD.

I was told it wasn’t an option to continue to home school him for Confirmation. If I wanted him Confirmed, he had to attend class and he had to attend an overnight retreat.

I fought it as much as I felt I could. Since I also work for the parish, I couldn’t push it too hard.

So it ended up that my son attended classes, where he learned very little. He attended a retreat, where he spend way too much time playing ice breaker games and way too little time praying and learning about our faith.

And he is now counting the days until he can say good bye to the class.

(Our parish uses Faith First, we used Faith and Life. Apples and oranges in matters of the faith.)

 

[Pug]

This sounds good. From my impression on this forum, it seems like many parishes are taking the “one-size-fits-all” approach though.

Yes, it does seem that way, sadly. I really wish they wouldn’t.

 

[ac_claire]

Yes, it does seem that way, sadly. I really wish they wouldn’t.

I agree as well…I think that it’d be best if marriage prep was dealt with on an individual couple basis. One size does not fit all. I should say though that me and my fiance’s situation is relatively unusual and somwhat complicated, but despite this Father has agreed to work with us and is I think doing the best he can with the standard marriage prep requirements at this parish.

 

[PaulinVA]

This sounds good. From my impression on this forum, it seems like many parishes are taking the “one-size-fits-all” approach though.

As a Quality Assurance professional, I can say that a process that allows variation does not yield consistent results.

The one-size-fits-all approach is more likely to be applied consistently. The question is whether you want consistency. Well, I guess you could modify the process to allow for variation (Could you “test out” of taking the NFP course, etc)

I don’t know. Allowing individual parish priests to determine what is needed for marriage prep would definitely yield inconsistent results…

 

[Pug]

As a Quality Assurance professional, I can say that a process that allows variation does not yield consistent results.

Consistent results are not the same as good results. You can get a consistently bad result. Also, you can make a consistent way to deal with a variety of situations, instead of one consistent way to deal with every situation. You could make 8 different “tracks”, and place each couple on the best track for them. That would be better than sending a sterile couple to a series of lectures on how to chart fertility signs.

 

[tinytherese]

I’d like to personally point out that a lot of people think that they understand how to use NFP, but then they discover that in reality they only have a limited knowledge of it. The charting can get complicated at times such as after a baby is born and when a woman is breastfeeding. I’d personally feel relieved if I had the reassurance of a professional to confirm that I really know what I’m doing.

NFP is also not just used to postpone pregnancy, but also to achieve pregnancy. Not to mention NFP can be used to make sure that a woman’s system isn’t having problems. NFP can spot when there’s a problem going on where the woman may need medical assistance. Its been recommended to me that I find an instructor to learn how to chart to p(name removed by moderator)oint if I have any medical problems even though I don’t even have a boyfriend. LOL

We also need to keep in mind that its not as if NFP teachers are as common as youth ministers and the like for a parish. You have to look online for a teacher close to your area or get an online teacher to show you how to do it and to do check ups to make sure everything is going well. Also, consider which method of NFP that you want to use. For some people, they like the STM, others creighton, and some BOM. One style of it doesn’t fit everyone. It depends on what works for you in your style. Personally, I’d like to learn the BOM.

Sure a doesn’t HALF to use NFP, but there is good reason for it to be promoted and taught. Those who use it consistently and accurately are known to have very happy and successful marriages. To those who don’t want to use it claiming that basically “whatever happens happens” are certainly not living out heresy. However, I’d argue that using it would be a very good thing for them. The thought of, “well we can’t possibly afford anymore children so we just won’t have anymore sex” strikes me of missing the point of God’s design of sex. He has given women “seasons” where she isn’t likely to conceive and sex is more than just about procreation where pleasure comes along. No, it is also about the couples bonding and growing in their relationship. To check out more about that, start getting into learning about the Theology of the Body.

 

[RedSoxWife]

I just finished reading this thread and I have to say I am surprised at how many people were skeptical that you can learn how to use NFP without a class. We got an old CCL book from our local Catholic bookstore and did it that way. I avoided postpartum, avoided while breastfeeding, and then when we decided it was another, used it to conceive the little one we’re expecting now. It’s not rocket science, particularly if you use the other signs your body gives you each day, rather than just relying on temps which can be confusing when you’ve just had a little one. Sure some people have a hard time with it, but for others it’s pretty easy (and I have/ had a totally irregular cycle). A lot of people are totally capable of learning on their own.

As I said, I did, and I’ve found myself teaching health care providers about how my body and cycle work lately!

Actually (and I know this is a old thread) I was also surprised at how uncompassionate some people were. $159 is a lot for some people. It would be almost 20% of what our family squeaks by on each month. Not something that some people can frivolously spend if they don’t need a class. Not everyone goes out and squanders money on frivolous expenses and learning something that you already know would be pretty frivolous in my book.