NFP? A question about marriage and contraception

  • Thread starter Thread starter knewknowledge85
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
K

knewknowledge85

Guest
Ave!
Perhaps some of you could help me out here. I recently got in a debate with one of my non practicing catholic friends who thinks the Church’s teaching on contraception is hogwash and he brought up a really good question which I can honestly not get around. The question is, “if sex between a married couple is ment for the unity between man and woman AND procreation, then NFP whether or not it is used in a grave circumstance is still ment to impede the conception of life”. Now im really stumped about this and Im now highly confused about NFP, can someone please tell me why NFP is ok or is not against the procreative union! Thank you very much brothers and sisters.
Sincerely, Pari’
 
First of all, please read Christopher West’s “Good News About Sex and Marriage”…it really helped me to understand exactly what you are questioning.

Now, I will do my best. Very simply, contraception is doing something that frustrates conception.

By abstaining during fertile times with NFP all we are doing is not having sex. We are not doing anything (like using a barrier or chemical etc) to frustrate conception. We are not doing anything…

Now, where it gets confusing is that someone using NFP can stil have a “contraceptive mentality”.

But NFP is not, and cannot be, immoral. If it were, then we would be required to have sex every second of every minute because we might conceive.

I doubt I’ve done a very good job…please check out the book for a much better answer!

Malia
 
I read somewhere that NFP is a little like party etiquette. If you’re not having a party, you don’t send your friend an un-invitation, you just don’t send them any invitation.

To abstain from the marital act during the fertile time is a little like not sending God an invitation to a party you’re not having. On the other hand, ABC is like throwing a big party and sending God an un-invitation, an ‘in your face’ notice that you’re having a gala event, designed and created by him and not inviting him, on purpose.

I know that sounds a little silly, and there are many other reasons, not the least of which is the abortive ‘quality’ of the pill, but maybe this’ll help.
 
but still isnt the underlying reasoning of having sex during the unfertile period not to have kids? I guess that sounds really base and an obvious fact but what I mean is that, if you cant have children for grave reasons, why still have sex???
 
I would posit that this would be where the other, unitive, purpose for sex comes into play…

BTW, I loved the ‘party’ analogy. Although we’ve used NFP for quite some time, I can’t say I completely understood the difference between NFP and ABC.

Christopher West made it abundantly clear.

Jaye
 
40.png
knewknowledge85:
but still isnt the underlying reasoning of having sex during the unfertile period not to have kids?
If sex were only for procreation, we could ONLY have relations during the fertile time and we’d have to stop altogether at menopause. Does your friend plan to do that? The unitive aspect of marriage can be enjoyed at any time 🙂 —KCT
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Feanaro's Wife:
But NFP is not, and cannot be, immoral. If it were, then we would be required to have sex every second of every minute because we might conceive.

I doubt I’ve done a very good job…please check out the book for a much better answer!

Malia
Click to expand...
You have done an excellent job, Malia! NFP is a method that can be used well or used shabbily, but it is never an occasion of sin.
 
40.png
knewknowledge85:
but still isnt the underlying reasoning of having sex during the unfertile period not to have kids? I guess that sounds really base and an obvious fact but what I mean is that, if you cant have children for grave reasons, why still have sex???
Click to expand...
First of all one needs to understand that marriage is a vocation.
One is called to it, just as others are called to the seminary.
The vocation is to participate in the Trinity by being open to bringing life into the world and raising those souls to know God, to love Him and to serve Him.

Here’s more of what Christopher West had to say on NFP (from Marriage and the Eucharist):

Now some people come up to me and ask, “If we’re going to give up contraception in our marriage does that mean we have to have 1500 kids?”

What could you do if you had a serious reason to avoid a pregnancy in the marriage that would not be a violation of your wedding vows? Abstain.

There are times when abstaining from renewing your wedding vows would be an act of love -

One of you might be sick…it’s a valid reason to abstain, it would be the loving thing to abstain, and unloving NOT to abstain.

You may have recently had a child…a valid reason.

You might be at your in-laws and there are thin walls…

Maybe you have a good reason to avoid a pregnancy…to abstain…that’s the very principle of NFP. Get the resources, learn, contact your parish…live the truth of this stuff.

Basically at that point he recommends people take a course on NFP through the diocese…but what he was saying leading up to that point is that we married couples have to be responsible in our parenting. As a couple we must discern what God is calling us to do - have 1 child? have 0 natural children but adopt? have 5 children? have more? But we pray for guidance and we examine our own gifts/limitations and the needs of our other children before adding another to the mix…some of us are blessed with extended family members who can help raise the children (and provide good hand-me-downs), some of us have good sources of income to accommodate a bigger family, some of us don’t, and some of us have mental or physical limitations which may mean it’s better for us not to put too much on our plate if it’s going to make us snap (that would not be good for the other members of the family). And sometimes we need to not have children while one of us is working out a spiritual issue or an addiction (anger management, alcoholism, drugs, porn).

But at all times we trust in the Lord by inviting Him into our marital embrace so that His will be done. That’s what the party reference is about…at least we send Him an invitation. He is with us every time we engage in the marital embrace even when we are trying to do His will by spacing our children. When to use NFP is a very personal and spiritual decision a couple makes, but they do so with God, not on their own.

ABC is not a decision which includes or respects God.
 
but this is what I get hung up on. If you know you cant have anymore kids, why have sex. if you where to have sex during an infertal period isnt that taking away the possibility of life because you know that she is infertal? I suppose what I mean to say is that wouldnt that also be sinful. I would like to say that I thank you for your help on this I have no other resources right now.
 
40.png
knewknowledge85:
but this is what I get hung up on. If you know you cant have anymore kids, why have sex. if you where to have sex during an infertal period isnt that taking away the possibility of life because you know that she is infertal? I suppose what I mean to say is that wouldnt that also be sinful. I would like to say that I thank you for your help on this I have no other resources right now.
Click to expand...
Because you never know you can’t have any more kids.
Only God knows that.

Why we have sex even when we have every reason to believe it’s impossible for us to conceive is because we are renewing our wedding vows. We are saying over and over and over again, that I take you to be my wife/husband, I give myself to you completely today just as I did XX years ago. It’s called the ‘unitive’ aspect of the marital embrace. It’s celebrating God bringing the two of you together, for being by your side in everything, for blessing you, your marriage, your children.

As for unitive being sinful, that would only be if one party is imposing sex on the other out of lust, not out of love. We don’t get married so that we always have a release for our libido.

Something else Christopher West points out in that CD (or was it from his Theology of the Body CDs?) is: If you can’t say NO out of love, then what does your YES mean???

Think about it. If I’m feeling ‘in the mood’ but my spouse is overly stressed from work, or tired, or his/her allergies are acting up…how loving would it really be of me if after I made the advance gesture they said, No…and yet I kept making advances until the person ‘gave in’? That’s saying my need to satisfy my sexual urge is more important than my obligation to care for my spouse, and that’s how that spouse starts to feel used even within marriage and the unitive aspect of the marital embrace begins to unravel.

No. It’s always important to have open communication with one’s spouse. Marriage is a journey together, a spiritual one, and we’re called to help each other be the best that we can be. Sometimes that means denying ourselves one thing for the greater good of the relationship - it could mean turning down a promotion, it could mean postponing having that third child we always envisioned, it could mean taking in the in-law because they are ill and can’t afford a nursing home even though there’s little money in the bank or little room in the house and it would mean your husband or wife would be exhausted at the end of a day because the nursing for that elder is hard work or that the elder is awake during the night but sleeps during the day. That in-law could be living in your home for 2 - 5 - 8 years, who knows? Should the spouse have to worry that the other will have an affair because he/she knows there hasn’t been time/energy/opportunity to work on the marital embrace part of the union?

This is how the practice of NFP early on in a marriage helps the couple grow in love together so that when extenuating circumstances arise - and they will - the marriage remains secure out of love and discipline.
 
Ahhhh
Thanks a lot YYmom and the rest, thanks for beating it into my head. I really appreciate it. Take it easy, God Bless.
-Colin "Parri’ "
 
40.png
knewknowledge85:
but this is what I get hung up on. If you know you cant have anymore kids, why have sex. if you where to have sex during an infertal period isnt that taking away the possibility of life because you know that she is infertal? I suppose what I mean to say is that wouldnt that also be sinful. I would like to say that I thank you for your help on this I have no other resources right now.
Click to expand...
I will assume that by “know you can’t have kids any more” you don’t mean that it is impossible, but that for whatever reaseon - medical, economical, or whatever sound reason (not excuse) you have decided you cannot have more children.

Why have sex? Because it is unitive; it works to bind the two parties together.

I don’t have my research at hand, but there has been research that shows that intercourse releases a chemical into the bloodstream that has two significant psychological impacts.

The first is that it binds the two together as a couple psychologically, they “unite”.

The second effect is that it tends to cause a type of, for lack of a better term, amnesia; it causes one to forget the odds and ends that tend to separate us; the little, and not so little things that gripe us about the other. The effect of forgetting the things you don’t like about the other multiplies the effect of binding the two of you together.

So if for no other reaon, having sex after one has come to the decision not to have any more children, has the effect of strengthening the marriage.

And that, essentially, is what the Church means by the unitive aspect of sex in a marriage.

Having sex during an unfertile period doesn’t take anything away. There is nothing to take away.

Actually, just the opposite; it brings something to the couple, and that is the binding effect.

Sex is a gift from God. How can a couple making love when she can’t conceive be a sin? It is giving and receiving the gift that God gave us.

At the bottom of this, I suspect, is your beleief or feeling that sex is only for procreation, or that it has to be primarily for procreation, and if you happen to enjoy it while procreating, then that enjoyment is somehow made less sinful, but if it is not for procreating, then it has to be sinful. At least, that is how I am reading your questions.

The Church doesn’t teach that. Perhaps someone told you that is what the Church teaches, or perhaps you understood them to say that, but it ain’t so.
 
"At the bottom of this, I suspect, is your beleief or feeling that sex is only for procreation, or that it has to be primarily for procreation, and if you happen to enjoy it while procreating, then that enjoyment is somehow made less sinful, but if it is not for procreating, then it has to be sinful. At least, that is how I am reading your questions.

The Church doesn’t teach that. Perhaps someone told you that is what the Church teaches, or perhaps you understood them to say that, but it ain’t so." ------I concede, with my ignorance blazing, please enlighten me lol :confused: 🙂
 
40.png
otm:
At the bottom of this, I suspect, is your beleief or feeling that sex is only for procreation, or that it has to be primarily for procreation, and if you happen to enjoy it while procreating, then that enjoyment is somehow made less sinful, but if it is not for procreating, then it has to be sinful. At least, that is how I am reading your questions.

The Church doesn’t teach that. Perhaps someone told you that is what the Church teaches, or perhaps you understood them to say that, but it ain’t so.
Click to expand...
I thought that the Church teaches that the primary end of marriage is the procreation and education of children and that sex in marriage is primarily for the begetting of children.
 
Firstly, I’m a Protestant who agrees with the Catholic view on sex and contraception. My wife and I began looking at NFP after I listened to a CD by Dr. Janet Smith. I also read Christopher West’s book, “Good News About Sex & Marriage”. I recommend reading this book and looking up an online articles on contraception by Dr. Smith.

God ordained marriage and sex between a man and a woman. It is a twofold gift. It is not only procreative, it is also an intimate act of self giving and pleasure to be shared between them. If God had intended sex solely for procreation, don’t you think our sexual desire would only kick in for a fews days each month?

God simply said that for a few days in a month, He exercises the right to create life if He so wills it. It is our choice as to when we wish to have sex. Not having sex on those fertile days is a responsible way of spacing children and/or deciding not to have children. And the fact remains that sometimes, God still surprises us with and unexpected gift. The difference is that we’ve been open to it.

By practicing NFP, a married couple stating that they are being responsible in a healthy manner while still remaining open to God’s will. It is within the confines of the natural law that God created. Contraception breaks natural law while NFP embraces it…therein lies the difference.

CSJ
 
40.png
knewknowledge85:
but still isnt the underlying reasoning of having sex during the unfertile period not to have kids? I guess that sounds really base and an obvious fact but what I mean is that, if you cant have children for grave reasons, why still have sex???
Click to expand...
I think the confusion comes from two places.

First, your friend does not understand that the Church does not teach it is wrong to space, plan, or postpone children. It has never taught this. So, the church does not teach that birth control is wrong. It teaches that there are right and wrong ways to achieve the morally good end of spacing, planning, and postponing children when there are sufficient reasons to do so.

Contraception is a wrong way of postponing prenancy and abstaining from sex is the right way.

Second, your friend doesn’t seem to understand that the reason contraception is wrong is because contraception engages in the marital act while SIMULTANEOUSLY altering that act to be sterile-- before, during, or after.

NFP does no such thing, simply because there is no act to alter. Abstaining from sex respects that each time a couple comes together they do nothing before, during, or after to alter the act.

Couples are not required to have sex with any specific frequency-- I could abstain because I’m tired, out of town, etc. So, abstaining is not wrong. Engaging in sex and perverting the act by sterilizing it is wrong.
 
Excuse me if this has already been mentioned, I only skimmed the thread. This is another Christopher West analogy.

Three people are walking past a church. One goes in to say a prayer, one keeps walking, and one walks in and spits. Which one disrespected the church?

The person who goes inside to pray is like the couple who is open to and desiring new life. The person praying for something may not get it in the way they ask, just as the couple trying to have a child may not conceive at that time. The person who keeps walking is like the couple who abstains- perhaps this person is a faithful Catholic, but has a good reason that he or she can’t stop. The person may go in at another time, just as the couple may decide to have intercourse another time. The person who spits in the church is the couple who uses artificial birth control- they intentionally go inside the church/have intercourse with intentions that are against church teaching.

In light of the Church’s view of the human body, especially a woman’s, as a holy temple, this analogy is even more fitting.

Another poster also pointed out in another thread that being procreative is not the same as being reproductive. Every act of sex that is not contracepted in some way is procreative- in favor of creation- in that it is not opposed to creating life. It is only reproductive when a new life is formed.
This is especially true in the instance of infertile couples who desperately try to have children but are unable to conceive. Surely no one would say they’re not being procreative, but you’d be laughed at to claim they were being reproductive.
 
40.png
stanley123:
I thought that the Church teaches that the primary end of marriage is the procreation and education of children and that sex in marriage is primarily for the begetting of children.
Click to expand...
That’s what I thought too. Apparently there is a discrepency here.
Someone please clear this.
 
Feanaro's Wife:
But NFP is not, and cannot be, immoral. If it were, then we would be required to have sex every second of every minute because we might conceive.

I doubt I’ve done a very good job…please check out the book for a much better answer!

Malia
Click to expand...
40.png
Fortiterinre:
You have done an excellent job, Malia! NFP is a method that can be used well or used shabbily, but it is never an occasion of sin.
Click to expand...
Does this mean that postponing children by abstaining (even for selfish / unjust / frivolous reasons) is never sinful? Or … Does this mean that NFP as a method if used properly (with serious reasons) is never sinful?
 
40.png
KingdomHallsEnd:
That’s what I thought too. Apparently there is a discrepency here.
Someone please clear this.
Click to expand...
I wrote this in another thread of similar topic:

“Love and Responsibility” by JPII would seem to be a trusted source in this thread. This comes from chapter one “The Person and the Sexual Urge” (starting on page 66 in my wife’s copy)
The Church…teaches, and has always taught, that the primary end of marriage is procreatio (procreation), but that it has secondary end, defined in Latin terminology as mutuum adiutorium (mutual assistance). Apart from these as tertiary aim is mentioned- remedium concupiscentiae (remedy for concupiscence). Marriage, objectively considered, must provide first of all the means of continuing existence, secondly a conjugal like for man and woman, and thirdly a legitimate orientation for desire. The ends of marriage, in the order mentioned, are incompatible with any subjectivist interpretation of the secual urge, and therefore demand from man, as a person, objectivity in his thinking of sexual matters, and above all in his behavior. This objectivinty is the foundation of conjugal morality.
…By reason of the fact that they are persons a man and a woman must consciously seek to realize the aims of marriage according to the order of priority given above, because this order is objective, accessible to reason, and therefore binding on human persons.
Click to expand...
It is interesting… PJII also mentions how mutuum adiutorium is often mis-interpreted as meaning “Mutual Love”
Click to expand...
The book has a lot more to say… my feeble mind has a difficult time understanding much of it. For those who can… I recommend you pick up a copy. (My wife does say that its is a bit easier to understand than “Theology of the Body”)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top