NFP and marriage

[underacloud]

This is why I stated that his conscience was speaking here in a way that hers was not.

I think that I have addressed this above. You see, he is offering an alternative. He is suggesting postponing the wedding. That way his conscience is clear, and she does not have to face the fear of going to school with a child. I fail to see where his position is wrong.

But perhaps his conscience is not well formed on this matter. I think they should discuss with a priest, who can help them both understand the teachings. He may be under a misapprehension as to what sort of serious reason is required. Perhaps he is under the not uncommon belief that the reason has to be life or death, which is not simply a matter of personal opinion but an incorrect understanding. Clearly, none of us in this thread knows the fiance’s reasoning in this matter, so it’s hard to theorise.

I agree that postponing is the best option if they cannot agree on this matter. But I also fear that if they find they need to pospone because they cannot reach agreement in this matter, that this would be sympomatic of a larger problem for them.

As someone who completed her entire Master’s degree after marriage–and pregnant and with a child or two–I would say that her desire to complete her degree is fine. It is simply a matter of comfort when it comes to doing this before or after children.

What I am seeing here is that the fiance does not consider this motive sufficient for NFP. The OP does. Either he is required to do violence to his conscience (and practice NFP according to her desire), or they wait. He would like to be married and be willing to accept children. She would like to be married and not accept children … at least not yet. Postponing their wedding does not require that either of them go against their consciences or deal with the uncomfortable fear of pregnancy in school. Marrying and practicing NFP requires the fiance to go against his conscience. Marrying and not practicing NFP requires the OP to deal with the, for her, uncomfortable fear of pregnancy in school, but she is not required to do something she considers morally improper.

She will accept children. She would just prefer to try to postpone for some time. In reality, many couples who use NFP to avoid immediately after marriage end up blessed with a child soon anyway (we were). So she may well be a young mother completing her master’s degree, and it’s great for her to hear from people like yourself that this is OK.

But…there’s still the issue at hand to work through.

 

[Kelfa28]

She will accept children. She would just prefer to try to postpone for some time. In reality, many couples who use NFP to avoid immediately after marriage end up blessed with a child soon anyway (we were). So she may well be a young mother completing her master’s degree, and it’s great for her to hear from people like yourself that this is OK.

But…there’s still the issue at hand to work through.

I agree.

My husband and I were blessed with DD after “practicing” NFP for 4 months. Honestly, we didn’t really try to abstain at all. I didn’t postpone school either. We are using NFP now since ecological BFing didn’t work out and I’d like the chance to space my children.

Personally, I don’t see why wanting to get used to marriage for some time, such as living together and enjoying marital relations (which is a brand new experience), isn’t a just reason to practice NFP.

But that’s why NFP should be discerned by the married couple.

 

[lifeisbeautiful]

Aside from 1ke, whose advice on this forum I have never actually seen be wrong, I feel as though most (not all! I know a couple of people agreed with 1ke) people are vilifying the OP’s fiance.

Many people will repeat ad nauseam that sufficient reasons for postponing/spacing children are subjective. What might seem a valid reason to one person may not to another. Over and over, posters will be told “Don’t you DARE suggest that this couple’s reason might not be valid. Of COURSE it is because they think it is!!!”

But the flip side of that is that if someone does not think it is valid, then it is NOT sufficient reason.

The OP’s fiance does not consider schooling sufficient reason to postpone children. His conscience says that it is not sufficient. The OP’s conscience is not saying to her that she has a moral duty NOT to have children. She is, by her own admission, simply frightened of doing so. She does not consider it immoral. Her fiance does consider postponing immoral.

Why does her comfort trump his conscience? He is perfectly amenable to a situation that would more completely guarantee the OP’s smooth, uninterrupted graduation–postponing the wedding rather postponing the children. Why is this wrong?

I was trying to type something up, but this says it well.
I saw an answer somewhere about perhaps his conscience being incorrectly formed. Marriage is ordered towards procreation. A man that wants to get married, that doesn’t have any grave reasons (where it is obvious they need to avoid), and wants to be open (as in not avoiding) to children seems pretty healthy to me. Perhaps his conscience is well formed and he, in striving for sainthood, wants for them as a couple to be very generous and does not feel this is a reason for which they absolutely have to avoid. We are all called to sanctity. It is definitely not the easiest path. He is not asking her to get married and have children if she is not ready, he is asking her to wait until she is ready to have children before they marry. They are not married yet and I think it is wise for him to bring up the idea of postponing if they cannot be in agreement on this subject. Marriage is for the long haul, and if couple are not on the same page with regards to receiving children, they may be in for a rough time.

 

[lifeisbeautiful]

I was trying to type something up, but this says it well.
I saw an answer somewhere about perhaps his conscience being incorrectly formed. Marriage is ordered towards procreation. A man that wants to get married, that doesn’t have any grave reasons (where it is obvious they need to avoid), and wants to be open (as in not avoiding) to children seems pretty healthy to me. Perhaps his conscience is well formed and he, in striving for sainthood, wants for them as a couple to be very generous and does not feel this is a reason for which they absolutely have to avoid. We are all called to sanctity. It is definitely not the easiest path. He is not asking her to get married and have children if she is not ready, he is asking her to wait until she is ready to have children before they marry. They are not married yet and I think it is wise for him to bring up the idea of postponing if they cannot be in agreement on this subject. Marriage is for the long haul, and if couple are not on the same page with regards to receiving children, they may be in for a rough time.

I wanted to add one more thing… Although I do not understand why this would make you feel objectified, OP…(?) I do see how it would upset you if you feel like your voice is not being heard. It is very important in marriage that both voices be heard, and to have very good communication about what is going on, how we are feeling, etc etc… Before marriage I used to silently grow resentful. I used to call it “building a wall”. With marriage I learned I need to knock down the wall before it gets a chance to grow.
I think it would be good for you guys to talk about this. You should let your fiance know how this is making you feel. From an outside perspective it seems to me like your fiance simply wants you both to be generous, something that is very good, but if you are feeling forced into a corner instead of lead to something good, then you need to talk with him and let him know this. Communication is very important in marriage, and sometimes, even if one spouse is trying to help the other spouse be better, they need to make sure they way they are doing it is a loving and understanding way. Not sure if I used the I used effective wording here… two of my blessings kept interrupting me lol…

 

[Pug]

I never would have gotten through graduate school taking care of my husband, a baby, school, and work. As it was I had to quit before my doctorate. How important is finishing graduate school to you? If it is super important, I’d finish before getting married, unless the factors are right. A baby could work out in graduate school if you don’t have to work to pay your ride and you have support and help and he doesn’t expect you to be superwoman and your marriage isn’t rocky. I might feel like I missed out a bit on the baby, though, since graduate work, at least for me, was very involving.

That the two of you already disagree about the course of the first two years says to me that you need to work that out before marrying. How’s the communication between the two of you? That this surprise has come up makes me think it is worth pondering.

 

[ExGratia]

You could tell him that you’d be okay with not avoiding during fertile times, but also with not tracking fertile times. That way, you are not doing anything specifically to avoid, or anything specifically to help, and if you get pregnant then it was God’s will.

It is so hard to accept God’s will and truly be open to children. However, I would still be hesitant to consider financial situation as “new” as yours. Good luck.

As nice as that suggestion sounds, it will likely result in a pregnancy. A healthy young couple is likely to be, um, exited to be intimate when they get married. Which means nearly daily intimacy. And for two healthy young people, this leads to…a baby!

One of the things that confuses me about choosing not to be aware of your fertile times is that lack of awareness seems unlikely. I have never truly practiced NFP, but merely from counting or very superficial observation of symptoms, I was aware of my fertile times even before marriage. This observation wouldn’t be as effective in avoiding pregnancy as true NFP, but it certainly could be a temptation to abstain (even after telling husband she wouldn’t) because it is so easy to be aware of your body!

 

[underacloud]

I saw an answer somewhere about perhaps his conscience being incorrectly formed.

Well, that would be me.

We don’t know either way. All we know (based on the OP’s viewpoint) is the he doesn’t think her desire to complete her masters before children is not a serious enough reason in his opinion. Due to this, I have a couple of thoughts:

a) They need to have a serious descussion about what they each think are sufficiently serious reasons to use NFP. Is his opinion that NFP is not acceptable unless it’s a matter of life and death? Will he expect them to be trying for more children as soon as her cycle begins after each pregnancy? At what point is her “comfort” an acceptable reason (remembering that the Church recognises psychological reasons)? If I were the OP, I’d want to know exactly what his thoughts and plans are before committing to their life together.

b) His opinion in this matter seems to be saying to the OP “I don’t think your reason is serious”. If I were the OP, this would be a massive red flag!

Unless I’m mistaken, you even seem to allude to this yourself?

I do see how it would upset you if you feel like your voice is not being heard. It is very important in marriage that both voices be heard, and to have very good communication about what is going on, how we are feeling, etc etc…

This isn’t just about NFP. This is about communication and mutual respect. If they can’t work through this issue together, and need to postpone the marriage because they can’t agree, then maybe they are not suited to each other period.

As I said earlier, if the reason for avoiding children is sufficiently serious to postpone the wedding, then why wouldn’t it be sufficiently serious to get married and use NFP? So the real reason to postpone is not the issue of children, but that they may not be ready or even suited to each other for marriage.

 

[severus68]

Well, that would be me.

We don’t know either way. All we know (based on the OP’s viewpoint) is the he doesn’t think her desire to complete her masters before children is not a serious enough reason in his opinion. Due to this, I have a couple of thoughts:

a) They need to have a serious descussion about what they each think are sufficiently serious reasons to use NFP. Is his opinion that NFP is not acceptable unless it’s a matter of life and death? Will he expect them to be trying for more children as soon as her cycle begins after each pregnancy? At what point is her “comfort” an acceptable reason (remembering that the Church recognises psychological reasons)? If I were the OP, I’d want to know exactly what his thoughts and plans are before committing to their life together.

b) His opinion in this matter seems to be saying to the OP “I don’t think your reason is serious”. If I were the OP, this would be a massive red flag!

Unless I’m mistaken, you even seem to allude to this yourself?

This isn’t just about NFP. This is about communication and mutual respect. If they can’t work through this issue together, and need to postpone the marriage because they can’t agree, then maybe they are not suited to each other period.

As I said earlier, if the reason for avoiding children is sufficiently serious to postpone the wedding, then why wouldn’t it be sufficiently serious to get married and use NFP? So the real reason to postpone is not the issue of children, but that they may not be ready or even suited to each other for marriage.

Well said. I would just add that the OP should not just give in as she suggested she would do. There may be resentment and even anger later on. Best to sort this out now.

 

[Walking_Home]

Originally Posted by underacloud
Well, that would be me.

---

I agree.

 

[lifeisbeautiful]

Well, that would be me.

We don’t know either way. All we know (based on the OP’s viewpoint) is the he doesn’t think her desire to complete her masters before children is not a serious enough reason in his opinion. Due to this, I have a couple of thoughts:

a) They need to have a serious descussion about what they each think are sufficiently serious reasons to use NFP. Is his opinion that NFP is not acceptable unless it’s a matter of life and death? Will he expect them to be trying for more children as soon as her cycle begins after each pregnancy? At what point is her “comfort” an acceptable reason (remembering that the Church recognises psychological reasons)? If I were the OP, I’d want to know exactly what his thoughts and plans are before committing to their life together.

Yes, there are different types of reasons that can be serious/just/grave, but they still need to be serious/just/grave in order to use them. I do agree with you, that they need to talk about this beforehand. A couple should always prayerfully discern if they have good enough reasons to tell God they don’t want to have children at the moment, and it is important to make sure beforehand that they are on the same page when it comes to wanting to be as generous as possible.

b) His opinion in this matter seems to be saying to the OP “I don’t think your reason is serious”. If I were the OP, this would be a massive red flag!

Unless I’m mistaken, you even seem to allude to this yourself?

I do think it is ok for her fiance to let her know he does not feel the reason is good enough. Not only ok, I think he should if this is how he feels. That being said, it sounded like she is feeling somewhat forced, and I think she needs to speak out about this as well. This does not mean that she should ask her fiance to go against his conscience, but they do need to communicate about this because unless the get on the same page, resentment can build up. Marriage can be tough. Having kids can be tough. If they are not on the same page to begin with, it can make things a lot more complicated.

This isn’t just about NFP. This is about communication and mutual respect. If they can’t work through this issue together, and need to postpone the marriage because they can’t agree, then maybe they are not suited to each other period.

As I said earlier, if the reason for avoiding children is sufficiently serious to postpone the wedding, then why wouldn’t it be sufficiently serious to get married and use NFP? So the real reason to postpone is not the issue of children, but that they may not be ready or even suited to each other for marriage.

Apples and Oranges. In one situation they are not married and in the other they are. Postponing a wedding is a whole different thing than marrying someone and purposefully avoiding children.

 

[underacloud]

Apples and Oranges. In one situation they are not married and in the other they are. Postponing a wedding is a whole different thing than marrying someone and purposefully avoiding children.

Since marriage doesn’t change the reason for postponing, I don’t see this as apples and oranges at all. The issue at hand is whether the reason to avoid children is serious; the means of avoiding is NFP in mariage or postponement. If it’s not serious enough to use NFP, why would the fiance consider it serious enough to postpone? He must wish to postpone precisely because they cannot agree and that he thinks it is not a serious reason. As I’ve hypothesised, he perhaps thinks a level of seriousness is required that is not indicated in Church teaching.

 

[lifeisbeautiful]

Since marriage doesn’t change the reason for postponing, I don’t see this as apples and oranges at all. The issue at hand is whether the reason to avoid children is serious; the means of avoiding is NFP in mariage or postponement. If it’s not serious enough to use NFP, why would the fiance consider it serious enough to postpone? He must wish to postpone precisely because they cannot agree and that he thinks it is not a serious reason. As I’ve hypothesised, he perhaps thinks a level of seriousness is required that is not indicated in Church teaching.

The Church doesn’t require a couple to have serious reasons to avoid children pre-marriage . There is a difference between being married, having sex, but avoiding children, and not being married.

 

[mrs_ahs]

Many people will repeat ad nauseam that sufficient reasons for postponing/spacing children are subjective. What might seem a valid reason to one person may not to another. Over and over, posters will be told “Don’t you DARE suggest that this couple’s reason might not be valid. Of COURSE it is because they think it is!!!”

But the flip side of that is that if someone does not think it is valid, then it is NOT sufficient reason.

Huh? So if one spouse thinks there is a valid reason to avoid and the other doesn’t, it defaults to the person who thinks there is no valid reason? Is that really what you are saying? Please clarify. Hypothetical example: by what you stated above, if I believed that my postpartum depression was a valid reason, when, say, I had a 1 year old and a 6 month old, and my husband believed that it was not valid, he wins? Also, how would this work out in reality? If I say no to fertile marital relations, then what? I am sinning? Or does the husband always win because he is the man? Please clarify.

The OP’s fiance does not consider schooling sufficient reason to postpone children. His conscience says that it is not sufficient. The OP’s conscience is not saying to her that she has a moral duty NOT to have children. She is, by her own admission, simply frightened of doing so. She does not consider it immoral. Her fiance does consider postponing immoral.

Abstaining from sex is not immoral. Give me a break.

Why does her comfort trump his conscience? He is perfectly amenable to a situation that would more completely guarantee the OP’s smooth, uninterrupted graduation–postponing the wedding rather postponing the children. Why is this wrong?

Because a) it’s not her “comfort” we’re talking about. And b) the issue of her fiance not taking her reasons seriously is the real problem here, not the reasons themselves. Five years down the road when they have three little kids and she is working and taking care of them and her job and the house, and the baby has colic and there are financial problems and mom is facing health issues that make her feel horrible, fiance’s conscience may still tell him not to avoid. It’s not wrong to postpone the wedding - but If they have never resolved this issue, it’s going to become a huge problem later down the line, and then they can’t sweep it under the rug by postponing a wedding until they are ready to conceive. They’ll already be married. They need to have this discussion NOW. Expectations about respect need to be made clear NOW.

If I were a friend of the OP’s fiance, I would certainly be warning him that his intended does not respect his conscience.

Seriously??? Where are you getting this from??

OP, you love your fiance, yes? Why oh why would you want him to do something that he considers wrong because you are fearful? He is all right with postponing the wedding for your schooling’s sake. YOU are the one who is being demanding here. You want the marriage now, AND you want him to go against his conscience to give you this marriage now? Is that loving?

I fail to see where she is being demanding. I think you’re way over the top here. Not having sex is not wrong.

 

[Sillara]

I fail to see where she is being demanding. I think you’re way over the top here. Not having sex is not wrong.

You are correct that not having sex by mutual agreement is not wrong. For one spouse to unilaterally refuse is wrong.

 

[Pug]

One thing that occurs to me is that a person could be worried about their potential spouse’s willingness to ever have children. A couple could get married with the intention to postpone children a few years, but after a few years that morphs into one member of the couple keeps postponing kids and the other member is very, very sad because they married with the idea of having kids.

I’m not saying there is an indication of that here, but perhaps this happened within the man’s experience of his relatives, so it is a potential something that could drive his concerns here. I’m just wondering if that is a fear of his that needs to be addressed.

Of course her fears and concerns need to be addressed and not brushed under the rug, too!

 

[fpt]

you are correct that not having sex by mutual agreement is not wrong.

per se, it is not totally true, it is function of the situation, and reasons.

for one spouse to unilaterally refuse is wrong.

per se, it is not totally true, it is in function of the situation and reasons.

 

[fpt]

one thing that occurs to me is that a person could be worried about their potential spouse’s willingness to ever have children. A couple could get married with the intention to postpone children a few years, but after a few years that morphs into one member of the couple keeps postponing kids and the other member is very, very sad because they married with the idea of having kids.

I’m not saying there is an indication of that here, but perhaps this happened within the man’s experience of his relatives, so it is a potential something that could drive his concerns here. I’m just wondering if that is a fear of his that needs to be addressed.

Of course her fears and concerns need to be addressed and not brushed under the rug, too!

the declaration of nullity of marriage is possible **(see the case law of the roman rota). **sometimes, it is a possiblity of nullity of marriage, under special conditions.

 

[Pug]

the declaration of nullity of marriage is possible **(see the case law of the roman rota). **sometimes, it is a possiblity of nullity of marriage, under special conditions.

Yes, some marriages can be annulled. But I would not enter one if I was worried that mine might soon get annulled. Here is one lesser consideration: you might not succeed in getting it annulled, even though you think it is worthy of it.

 

[mrs_ahs]

You are correct that not having sex by mutual agreement is not wrong. For one spouse to unilaterally refuse is wrong.

To demand sex is just as wrong. If you are going to argue that a spouse must consent to sex any old time the other spouse wants it, I won’t debate with you further because you will never convince me of that. If one spouse wants to do something and the other doesn’t, the default is that you don’t do it. BOTH spouses need to agree to invite pregnancy before it is invited. And that goes for any married couple.

 

[underacloud]

The Church doesn’t require a couple to have serious reasons to avoid children pre-marriage . There is a difference between being married, having sex, but avoiding children, and not being married.

Of course…but that’s not at all what we’re talking about…well, not what I’m talking about. The suggestion was, or seemed to be, that the fiance was respectful of the OP’s desire to avoid children for now by offering the alternative of postponing the wedding. This option, however, is no more respectful of her reasons as “serious”, since if the reason was serious, they could get married and use NFP. I certainly see how this suggestion is equally upsetting to the OP, especially at this stage of their engagement.

So, the OP is still having the proverbial rug pulled from under her by a fiance who does not consider her reasons to avoid children for now to be serious. Postponing the wedding doesn’t resolve the concern that they are no clearer on what would be considered a sufficiently serious reason. If they get married and another possible reason comes up, then what? Unless they can resolve the problem before the wedding, either now or after a postponement, then they still have a big issue unresolved.