Natural Family Planning dilemma

  • Thread starter Thread starter Aaahm28
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
NFP clearly impairs the natural function of sex and most definitely the natural function of reproducing. Abstaining from sex when you most want it and having sex when you dont is a disruption in the nature of sex. It’s similar to gluttony: Eating even when you’re full and your body is telling you no more, or like Anorexia when your body is telling you to eat but you choose to starve yourself instead. Clearly disordered. The fertility cycle is impaired.

Actually a condom least impairs the sex act, because you’re still having sex even during fertile periods. And since the reality of condoms breaking exists, according to one of our past Popes, condom use actually results in more pregnancy.

Either it is all disordered or it is not. Cant pick and choose.
So unless a married couple is constantly engaged in intercourse during the fertile period, they’re sinning?

:dts:

What’s weird is that we have people who are proponents of contraception in agreement with fundamentalists who despise the notion of any deliberate child spacing whatsoever. :hmmm:
 
Why are we not living like the Amish if, on principle, we are not to use man made methods of doing things in place of “natural” methods?
Because I never said, and the Catholic Church does not teach, that “on principle, we are not to use man made methods of doing things in place of ‘natural’ methods.” This discussion is about the marital act, which (obviously, I think) is something special and sacred, while something like talking on the phone (to use an earlier example) is not.

And I would not illustrate the difference between NFP and contraception as natural vs. artificial. Because what if an herb were found that had contraceptive properties? That herb would in some sense be natural, but it would not be morally right to use it as a contraceptive.

Instead, I would look at it this way: When a married couple engages in intimacy, are they doing anything to impede the God-given purpose of that act? With contraception, the answer is yes. With NFP, the answer is no.
 
Because I never said, and the Catholic Church does not teach, that “on principle, we are not to use man made methods of doing things in place of ‘natural’ methods.” This discussion is about the marital act, which (obviously, I think) is something special and sacred, while something like talking on the phone (to use an earlier example) is not.

And I would not illustrate the difference between NFP and contraception as natural vs. artificial. Because what if an herb were found that had contraceptive properties? That herb would in some sense be natural, but it would not be morally right to use it as a contraceptive.

Instead, I would look at it this way: When a married couple engages in intimacy, are they doing anything to impede the God-given purpose of that act? With contraception, the answer is yes. With NFP, the answer is no.
They are deliberately avoiding sex when the woman is fertile.
 
No, humans were made to be most likely to have sex when the woman is fertile, not when she is infertile.
Yes, desire is typically higher at that time for the woman. But nothing impedes sex the rest of the time.

We are remarkably different than other species in that regard, who ONLY have sex to reproduce. We also have the ability to say “no” and control our impulses, which other animals do not.

ETA: It seems as if you and Thorns wish to argue that a couple must be constantly copulating during the fertile period if there is to be any assertion by anyone that contraception must be wrong. Which is absurd on its face, so clearly contraception is OK?

What a strange line of argument. Seriously, this is not hard.
 
They are deliberately avoiding sex when the woman is fertile.
Right. And doing so does nothing to impede the purpose of the marital act, because if they are not engaging in the marital act, then they cannot be impeding its purpose. 🙂

The only way I can see that abstaining from the marital act would be the same as impeding the purpose of the marital act would be if married couples have an obligation never to abstain for any significant length of time. Do you contend that they have such an obligation?
 
To be fair, I do believe that NFP can be used contraceptively. I do believe it can be used in a way that goes against Church teaching. It can also be wrong to deny your spouse for unjust reasons, so total abstinence can be wrong. I also believe it to be just as wrong to purposely achieve pregnancy when you cannot physically, mentally, spiritually, financially, etc. possibly care for that child or the ones you currently have. If it happens, so be it. But to purposely have children and no way to care for them is not right. It is perfectly alright to not try to achieve and not try to avoid and instead just allow God to give as He sees fit. All of that is truthful. I do think there are people who avoid for unjust reasons. I know my husband and I did try that for several years. We had no serious reasons to not have any more kids, we just simply did not want them. We had our two and we were done. I am now very grateful that I am as fertile as my mom and grandmothers and that NFP won’t work for me. I can’t imagine not having my other kids now. Funny how God works in our lives.

It is not wrong, however, to avoid pregnancy for serious reasons. It is very holy as a matter of fact. It is placing your personal desires aside while accepting God’s will for you and your family. For most couples, NFP works wonderfully. For some like us, we need to abstain. It’s especially hard considering that I want nothing more than to try again as soon as possible to have another baby. For the first time in my life I have caught the baby bug, ironically just at a time I am unable to have more. Physically I know I need a break. Financially we are facing a grim situation and providing for the ones we already have may very well become almost impossible in the very near future. My only option is to abstain. Currently I would be anyway since my husband is half way around the world, but when he gets home I know will be more difficult. It is far from impossible and it is not life threatening to live sex free. It is in my situation the loving thing to do, and also the holy thing to do. I do pray, though, that God will work in my life in a way that I am able to someday have more children.

I agree with mommamaree that people need to stop pushing condoms and other birth control. It isn’t as if we aren’t reminded if these options at every doctor’s appt, family gathering, even trip to the grocery store. Every time I go out with my 8 I am reminded that I have “too many” and that “there is a way to fix that problem.” We don’t need to hear it here as well. I do feel like NFP is pushed too strongly on CAF without any regard for those of us that aren’t able to use it and without any admittance that it can be wrongly used, but at least until this thread I had not seen ABC advocated for here.
 
To be fair, I do believe that NFP can be used contraceptively. I do believe it can be used in a way that goes against Church teaching.
I absolutely agree. But in that case, it is wrong because the intention is morally wrong, not because the method used to achieve that intention is morally wrong.

For an act to be morally right, both the ends (intention) and means (method of achieving that intention) must be morally right, or at least neutral. Using contraception cannot be morally right, because the means are intrinsically wrong.
 
Why are we not living like the Amish if, on principle, we are not to use man made methods of doing things in place of “natural” methods?

It is because man made “artificial” means of doing things are not forbidden on principle. This rule is applied to sex, but is not applied anywhere else.
I am not sure you really know much about how the Amish live. The Amish use many man made things and man made methods in their life. They allow for modern medicines and procedures, many make use of cell phones even. I’m a “taxi driver” for my Amish neighbors. There are so many misconceptions about their way of life and their religious beliefs
 
I absolutely agree. But in that case, it is wrong because the intention is morally wrong, not because the method used to achieve that intention is morally wrong.

For an act to be morally right, both the ends (intention) and means (method of achieving that intention) must be morally right, or at least neutral. Using contraception cannot be morally right, because the means are intrinsically wrong.
Yes, NFP can be used sinfully, but it isn’t always sinful. It also is harder to use NFP sinfully since in His beautiful plan, God has found ways to make it harder to use unless truly needed. ABC is always sinful regardless of why it is chosen.
 
No, humans were made to be most likely to have sex when the woman is fertile, not when she is infertile.
But doesn’t that demonstrate the true anti humaness of contraception. To deliberately stop fertility or prevent all possibility of conception as a result of sex is to deny a fundamental human reason for existing.
 
Originally Posted by bitterhope
To be fair, I do believe that NFP can be used contraceptively. I do believe it can be used in a way that goes against Church teaching.
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong and again wrong. Natural Family Planning can be used selfishly… but ***not ***contraceptively. This false belief is causing so much trouble in understanding the Church position on contraception.
 
The action they took was the choice not to have sex during fertile periods. Just because NFP isnt that reliable doesnt mean the intention behind it isnt contraceptive. And yes, the decision to take inaction is itself an action, much like how Sins of Ommision are still sins.
So how many times must a couple have relations during the fertile time, to not be in sin?
 
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong and again wrong. Natural Family Planning can be used selfishly… but ***not ***contraceptively. This false belief is causing so much trouble in understanding the Church position on contraception.
That’s fine, and you may be technically correct. Please substitute “with a morally wrong intention” or “in a morally wrong manner” in place of “contraceptively”, and I will be happy to agree with that statement instead.
 
Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong and again wrong. Natural Family Planning can be used selfishly… but ***not ***contraceptively. This false belief is causing so much trouble in understanding the Church position on contraception.
Well then fill contraceptive with whatever word you think is better. But I know that I have used NFP as my chosen form of birth control as a form of contraceptive. It was wrong of me, I have confessed, and I am not accusing anyone here of using NFP sinfully other than myself. I had no reason to use it besides societal pressure and my own selfishness. Thankfully it failed me miserably. Now, years later, I am facing an indefinite period if abstinence because I know that I can’t use NFP even though I know have a just reason. I have wondered if it’s not my penance for the years I spent misusing NFP.

It does no one any good to try to pretend that there is no way to sin in the bedroom other than by using ABC. And thank you for ignoring all of my points besides that one. It seems to happen a lot on NFP threads
 
That’s fine, and you may be technically correct. Please substitute “with a morally wrong intention” or “in a morally wrong manner” in place of “contraceptively”, and I will be happy to agree with that statement instead.
But absolutely anything can be undertaken by a person experiencing moral deficiency (which is all of us). ie. getting married, going to Mass, praying. That has zero bearing on the nature of the thing itself… marriage, Mass, prayer. When it leads to people saying ‘well marriage can be done wrongly, so why should I get married’ or ‘if Mass can be attended with a wrong intention, why should I even go to Mass?’… it distorts the nature of marriage, of Mass and of NFP. It is a point that doesn’t belong in a conversation on contraception.
 
No, humans were made to be most likely to have sex when the woman is fertile, not when she is infertile.
Please explain to me exactly what you think the Church’s teaching on this is. Your responses here make it pretty clear you have an inaccurate understanding of Church teaching. Perhaps if we clear up that misunderstanding you will be able to realize that the Church’s teaching is actually extremely logical. You may still disagree with it, because you disagree with one of the premises, but given the premises the Church holds as true Her teaching on contraception is eminently logical and really the only possible conclusion. So first things first, what exactly do you think the Church’s reasoning is for saying contraception is immoral?
 
Well then fill contraceptive with whatever word you think is better. But I know that I have used NFP as my chosen form of birth control as a form of contraceptive. It was wrong of me, I have confessed, and I am not accusing anyone here of using NFP sinfully other than myself. I had no reason to use it besides societal pressure and my own selfishness. Thankfully it failed me miserably. Now, years later, I am facing an indefinite period if abstinence because I know that I can’t use NFP even though I know have a just reason. I have wondered if it’s not my penance for the years I spent misusing NFP.

It does no one any good to try to pretend that there is no way to sin in the bedroom other than by using ABC. And thank you for ignoring all of my points besides that one. It seems to happen a lot on NFP threads
 
Well then fill contraceptive with whatever word you think is better. **But I know that I have used NFP as my chosen form of birth control as a form of contraceptive. **It was wrong of me, I have confessed, and I am not accusing anyone here of using NFP sinfully other than myself. I had no reason to use it besides societal pressure and my own selfishness. Thankfully it failed me miserably. Now, years later, I am facing an indefinite period if abstinence because I know that I can’t use NFP even though I know have a just reason. I have wondered if it’s not my penance for the years I spent misusing NFP.

It does no one any good to try to pretend that there is no way to sin in the bedroom other than by using ABC. And thank you for ignoring all of my points besides that one. It seems to happen a lot on NFP threads
This is a critical point to tease out for clarity in the name of correctly understanding Church position on contraception. When you say someone uses NFP contraceptively… do you mean they use their fertility awareness to be able to have sex in the infertile time and to use another means of barrier to have sex in the fertile times. (Condoms or mutual masterbation)?

If you mean that the person following NFP only has sex in the infertile time and abstains during the infertile times… this is not under any circumstances considered ‘contracepting’. To try and make it that is to distort the whole meaning of the Churchs attitude towards contraception.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top