Natural Family Planning dilemma

[PaulGH]

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.

I think we are in agreement here. As I stated in a previous post, there is a difference between ends and means. A couple who contracepts is objectively committing sin, because they are using immoral means (i.e., contraception). Even if their end (intention) is good, the act is still objectively sinful, because of the immoral means used.

On the other hand, a couple who uses NFP to avoid pregnancy is NOT using immoral means, no matter their reason for using NFP. Using NFP to avoid pregnancy still could be objectively sinful, but only if the couple has an immoral end (e.g., a selfish, trivial reason for avoiding pregnancy). But that immoral end does not make the means (NFP) immoral.

Do we agree?

And by the way, I am not saying that I think most people who use NFP do so in an immoral way, i.e. with an immoral intention. I think that such cases are possible, but most likely rare.

 

[PaulGH]

On the other hand, a couple who uses NFP to avoid pregnancy is NOT using immoral means, no matter their reason for using NFP. Using NFP to avoid pregnancy still could be objectively sinful, but only if the couple has an immoral end (e.g., a selfish, trivial reason for avoiding pregnancy). But that immoral end does not make the means (NFP) immoral.

By the way, selfish, trivial reasons for avoiding pregnancy have been called by some people a “contraceptive attitude.” Whether or not this term is accurate or helpful, it is one that I have heard, and it is what I thought that bitterhope meant about using NFP contraceptively. So that might explain how we are getting crossed up on terminology.

I do agree that strictly speaking, NFP cannot be used contraceptively, because it is not contraception. But again, I suspect that bitterhope was using the word “contraceptively” as a shorthand for a selfish attitude toward the idea of having another child.

 

[Memaw]

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

They are very friendly and kind. I visit with them whenever I am visiting my cousin. They get along very well with their neighbors. The children are friendly, well behaved and helpful. I buy eggs and homemade noodles from them every time, as well as garden veggies in season. God Bless, Memaw

 

[Thinking10]

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.

Type the term “Fertility Awareness Method” in Google. It seems like many medical websites consider the “Fertility Awareness Method” a form of contraception.

 

[LongingSoul]

I think we are in agreement here. As I stated in a previous post, there is a difference between ends and means. A couple who contracepts is objectively committing sin, because they are using immoral means (i.e., contraception). Even if their end (intention) is good, the act is still objectively sinful, because of the immoral means used.

On the other hand, a couple who uses NFP to avoid pregnancy is NOT using immoral means, no matter their reason for using NFP. Using NFP to avoid pregnancy still could be objectively sinful, but only if the couple has an immoral end (e.g., a selfish, trivial reason for avoiding pregnancy). But that immoral end does not make the means (NFP) immoral.

Do we agree?

And by the way, I am not saying that I think most people who use NFP do so in an immoral way, i.e. with an immoral intention. I think that such cases are possible, but most likely rare.

I do agree. It is critical that we use the term ‘contraception’ correctly so as not to confuse those who are new to the concept or trying to discern the immorality of it.

And as far as the number of people using NFP while having a personal moral deficiency, I don’t think it is even relevant to the NFP issue at all. We all have flaws and weaknesses that need to be worked on. We are all naturally at different stages of faith life. Many of us could have coped with more children had we been more affectively mature and more deeply holy. Many others may also retrospectively see that their decision to have unlimited children was based on a false belief about Gods will. There is no way of judging each other based on external appearances ie number of children or financial position etc.

It is as moot a point as judging a person in the communion queue regarding their moral status.

 

[Memaw]

Type the term “Fertility Awareness Method” in Google. It seems like many medical websites consider the “Fertility Awareness Method” a form of contraception.

They are not the authority on it.I would go by the teachings of the Church. God Bless, Memaw

 

[PaulGH]

Type the term “Fertility Awareness Method” in Google. It seems like many medical websites consider the “Fertility Awareness Method” a form of contraception.

Are you familiar with the phenomenon that within Catholic theology, many words have meanings that are much more narrow and precise than the meanings of those words in the culture at large?

 

[LongingSoul]

By the way, selfish, trivial reasons for avoiding pregnancy have been called by some people a “contraceptive attitude.” Whether or not this term is accurate or helpful, it is one that I have heard, and it is what I thought that bitterhope meant about using NFP contraceptively. So that might explain how we are getting crossed up on terminology.

I do agree that strictly speaking, NFP cannot be used contraceptively, because it is not contraception. But again, I suspect that bitterhope was using the word “contraceptively” as a shorthand for a selfish attitude toward the idea of having another child.

Still it distorts the meaning of contra-ception to use it blanketly. An attitude might be more accurately described as ‘non-creative’… as in the opposite of pro-creative. It denotes an overall perspective rather than having anything to do with the sex act.

 

[PaulGH]

I do agree. It is critical that we use the term ‘contraception’ correctly so as not to confuse those who are new to the concept or trying to discern the immorality of it.

And as far as the number of people using NFP while having a personal moral deficiency, I don’t think it is even relevant to the NFP issue at all. We all have flaws and weaknesses that need to be worked on. We are all naturally at different stages of faith life. Many of us could have coped with more children had we been more affectively mature and more deeply holy. Many others may also retrospectively see that their decision to have unlimited children was based on a false belief about Gods will. There is no way of judging each other based on external appearances ie number of children or financial position etc.

It is as moot a point as judging a person in the communion queue regarding their moral status.

If I came across as judging anyone, I want to clarify that that most certainly wasn’t my intent. I was trying to speak at the level of what is possible and what is not possible, not to condemn anyone in particular, nor to condemn any group of people in general.

 

[bitterhope]

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.

No. We never used any form of ABC. But NFP was very much our form of Birth control and when my OB asked which form of contraception I was going to use, NFP was accepted by him as a valid option. He even told me his preferred method of NFP and the chart of contraceptives he had in his office included NFP on it. So, if it isn’t acceptable to call it contraception I apologize. I just assumed since society refers to it as a contraceptive option then the term was valid. Whatever you want to call it, it was used very much sinfully in my marriage for selfish reasons. And the Church does say that is wrong. When I confessed doing so to my priest he also said that it is sinful if used for the reasons we had, and that he thinks many couples should be confessing misuse of NFP as well. There are just reasons for NFP but the fact remains there are some of is that use it simply so we have a form of birth control that we assume God and His Church say is moral. It’s not condemning NFP for serious reasons or even me saying what reasons are moral. I’m not saying anyone is wrong, just that I was and I and my priest believe others may very well be as well.

Using condoms, etc. would be sinful because it’s ABC

Mutual masturbation would be sinful because it’s masturbation

Those are different than what posting about in terms of my own sinfulness

 

[LongingSoul]

Type the term “Fertility Awareness Method” in Google. It seems like many medical websites consider the “Fertility Awareness Method” a form of contraception.

Planned parenthood and other agencies that suggest fertility awareness, only advocate abstaining from unprotected sex during fertile time… not abstinence from sexual expression altogether. They are strictly concerned with health issues and preserving the fertility from chemical damage without limiting sexual expression.

NFP was born to keep fertility and sexual expression ‘special’. I use that in the traditional Latin sense… the word specialis meaning for the good of the species. We don’t really think in terms of how what we do affects the species and through faith in God, … the communion of Saints. Fertility and sexual expression are traditionally ‘special’. Man who is prone to thinking himself the center of the universe and a god unto himself… mistakes these gifts we are given as solely within his control for the purpose of self satisfaction regardless of any greater purpose or meaning. The true meaning of ‘procreation’ has been lost to the world, but that is what NFP is an expression of. Procreativity.

 

[thewanderer]

Type the term “Fertility Awareness Method” in Google. It seems like many medical websites consider the “Fertility Awareness Method” a form of contraception.

Thinking10, are you interested in becoming informed on what the Church actually teaches, or are you just reactively throwing things out there to try and demean the church’s position? As I’ve said the Church’s teaching is actually extremely logical. If you actually understand what the teaching is you can disagree with it because of disagreeing with one of the premises, but you can’t attack it for being contradictory in allowing NFP but not ABC. If you aren’t interested in learning about what the Church actually teaches please stop posting inflammatory statements whose only purpose is to demean the Church. If you actually are interested in learning about what the Church actually teaches please let me know what you currently think it teaches so that we can clear up your obvious misconceptions about the actual teaching.

 

[adrift]

It’s exactly the irregularity of ovulation that causes natural family planning methods to fail.

.

It is exactly the irregularity of ovulation that made NFP attractive to us. This statement makes me believe you have no idea how NFP works. It doesn’t require regularity.

 

[Jobis]

Can’t we look at the word ‘contraceptive’ and what it actually means; that is, ‘against-conception’ essentially.

How is having natural, unobstructed intercourse in any way ‘against conception’? ‘unprotected’ sex is how babies are made, and how they have always been made throughout history (with one major exception). The very fact that a couple is not using a condom shows that they are not outwardly against conception; they might inwardly will that their intercourse is fruitless, and that would be a sin of lust, but not the type of mutual masturbation that contraceptives allow. A condom outwardly treats woman as nothing but a pleasure-giver and receptacle; NFP allows a couple to cherish the act of intercourse and not downplay or ignore its importance and role in marriage.

 

[Burdock]

Mommamaree. Those of us who struggle with this are real people too, I actually heard a priest say that the church should have more compassion in such matters.Nobody has aknowledged what I said about the fact that my husband does not share my faith,so I can’t turn round after27 yrs of marriage and say noe im catholic we cant have sex anymore unless we are open to life.

 

[maryjk]

Mommamaree. Those of us who struggle with this are real people too, I actually heard a priest say that the church should have more compassion in such matters.Nobody has aknowledged what I said about the fact that my husband does not share my faith,so I can’t turn round after27 yrs of marriage and say, "No I’m Catholic we can’t have sex anymore unless we are open to life."

Well, actually you can.

I did. It wasn’t after 27 years of marriage, it was after 12.

And my husband isn’t Catholic. And I wasn’t a practicing Catholic.

Then I was. So, I sat down with my husband and told him how important it was to me. I explained that, for me, it meant everything.

And since I mean everything to him, he agreed to do what was important to me. He read books about NFP. He created charts in Excel for me. And he will glace at my chart to see if we are green lighted for tonight. As he said, he didn’t like me taking the pill and putting all of those chemicals in my body anyway.

That was 11 years ago.

 

[Burdock]

Maybe you did, but that c wouldnt work for us, I have a mirena coil for medical reasons, but if I didnt then my husband c would have to use something, he c is not a catholic, so hevwould not be sinning.

 

[maryjk]

Maybe you did, but that wouldn’t work for us, I have a mirena coil for medical reasons, but if I didn’t then my husband would have to use something, he is not a Catholic, so he would not be sinning.

Well, he would be sinning. He just wouldn’t see it as a sin.

But if you are using Mirena for medical reasons, why would he have to use something, if you weren’t?

Whatever your medical problem, it is treated by Mirena? I only ask because Mirena is the target of many lawsuits. I wonder if there is another treatment available.

 

[Burdock]

Yes, the mirena was recommended by a gynaecologist, bleeding extremely heavily, also anaemic, I was 45 c then it will be removed when im 55, ive had no problems with it. Im b in the uk, not aware of any lawsuits against it. If I didnt have that, he would have to use something, being open b to life is not an option .

 

[thewanderer]

Mommamaree. Those of us who struggle with this are real people too, I actually heard a priest say that the church should have more compassion in such matters.Nobody has aknowledged what I said about the fact that my husband does not share my faith,so I can’t turn round after27 yrs of marriage and say noe im catholic we cant have sex anymore unless we are open to life.

If your husband insists on using contraception despite you explaining why it is so important to you that you use NFP instead of contraception, then so long as you do not aid him or approve him in any way of his use of contraception you will not be morally culpable for his sinful act.