NFP and Traditional Catholicism

  • Thread starter Thread starter whm
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The fact is, we’re all only human and it’s not that difficult to justify just about anything to ourselves if the stakes are high enough. That’s one reason, for instance, that we have priests to hear our confessions instead of just “going straight to God” with our sins. We need that objectivity to keep us honest.
That is a very good analogy. Its not something you want to a mistake about. You want to keep your will aligned with God. You may not make the perfect decision, but by taking proper steps and consulting a faithful, informed priest, your intentions will be good and your conscience clean.
 
On another note…I have read the Bible backwards and forwards and I can’t find anywhere where Jesus addressed the Popes. Do you realize that the Pope/s/ are human beings and mortal? I respect them as head of the Church (somebody has to be in charge), but like any other human being…there are failings.
Mathew 16:18

“And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”
 
Certainly Marriage is not instituted solely for procreation as all of the Sacraments were instituted by God to give grace.

Nevertheless, a statement that “Marriage to be sure is not instituted solely for procreation**” can forget the fact that the procreation and education of children is still the primary end of Marriage and all other benefits and purposes are, ultimately, secondary. T**he danger in emphasising the secondary benefits to the detriment of the primary purpose is that people will begin to subjugate the primary purpose to these secondary purposes.

Again, it is hard to deny that this is a real danger in NFP because NFP - when used to avoid pregnancy - does, in fact, intentionally subject the primary purpose to the secondary purpose which is not the natural order. The idea is that hopefully there is a very good reason for doing so and that the reason is temporary.This is also why I keep harping on the fact that the way NFP is being portrayed and marketed to Catholics today is a serious problem.
As a Mother of 4 grown children, I must say that you have explained Catholic parenthood in an EXCELLENT way.
 
I still don’t get this one, If your spouse could die why would you risk a 1/50 chance of getting pregnant (each year assume you use NFP very well)? Here pure abstinence seems to be the best choice, unless one can not avoid mortal sin. Note I did not say that the Church requires total abstinence, it does not especially if their is danger of mortal sin (eg mortal sin is worse than death while in a state of grace)
Pure abstinence may be the best choice for some, but not all. It’s a risk one would be willing to take, and they can do that if they wish. It doesn’t have anything to do with being able to avoid mortal sin. Being at high risk due to pregnancy isn’t likely to make one keel over moments after implantation. More than likely they’ll have plenty of time for numerous confessions.
 
I still don’t get this one, If your spouse could die why would you risk a 1/50 chance of getting pregnant (each year assume you use NFP very well)? Here pure abstinence seems to be the best choice, unless one can not avoid mortal sin. Note I did not say that the Church requires total abstinence, it does not especially if their is danger of mortal sin (eg mortal sin is worse than death while in a state of grace)
A very good question. Truly total abstinence is not required if the risk is accepted by both, but neither is total abstinence unwarranted. For an interesting statement, see Pope Pius XII:
Serious motives, such as those which not rarely arise from medical, eugenic, economic and social so-called “indications,” may exempt husband and wife from the obligatory, positive debt for a long period or even for the entire period of matrimonial life.
Address to Midwives, Given by His Holiness Pope Pius XII, 29 October 1951

An Address of Pope Pius XII to the Seventh International Hematological Congress in Rome. (Friday September 12, 1958)
We stated in the discourse delivered in 1951 that married couples who make use of their conjugal rights have a positive obligation; in virtue of the natural law governing their state, not to exclude procreation. The Creator, in effect, wished human beings to propagate themselves precisely by the natural exercise of the sexual function. But to this positive law We applied the principle which holds for all the others: that these positive laws are not obligatory to the extent that their fulfillment involves great disadvantages which are neither inseparable from the law itself nor inherent in its accomplishment, but which come from another source and which the law-maker did not intend to impose on men when he promulgated the law.
lifeissues.net/writers/doc/doc_32moralityeugenics.html

Also commented on later in 1991. When there are serious indications, the obligation “of providing for the preservation of mankind” (621) ceases, because a woman is not obliged. by the matrimonial contract, to expose herself to dangers or injury which are not ordinarily part of maternity (Courier de Rome, June 1991, p.2).

Given here: catholicapologetics.info/morality/family/natural.htm
 
I still didn’t get answer on the second question regarding couples past child bearing age or that are infertile. Not directed at you claire, but I recall someone on the boards stating that couples should continue as if they were fertile…and not turn it into a free for all.
That’s not true. They are free to embrace in their marriage because they are not doing anything to affect their fertility, which still makes them open to life. Catholics believe that anything is possible with God. Therefore, if God wants a woman past childbearing age, or one who is infertile, to conceive, she will.
I am still of the belief, that what is in your bedroom…stays in your bedroom. If the folks on here are stating that using NFP as a natural type of birth control is a sin…I would ask them how much would they like to contribute to households where kids are popping out every 9 months and no additonal income is coming into the house.
That would definitely make things much easier for those who have to use NFP for spacing out pregnancies or delaying pregnancies. There are many who want children but know they can’t afford to raise one at the time.
 
But I do believe college is very very important to some people. In fact, it may be very important to many. Perhaps that is why people are having only one or two children. These days it is very difficult to get a family-sustaining job without some kind of trade school or college. So I agree that many people would consider it imperitive to ensure their children have a college education or go to trade school…
Rence, in my opinion, this is one of the biggest problems with today’s modern world and that is “entitlement”. To set the expectation in a child that he is owed a college education by either his parents or the government is a huge mistake. My parents did not provide a college education for me or any of my siblings yet we all went out and made it happen for ourselves by working and paying for our colleges. I have a graduate degree that I paid for myself.

Likewise, I instilled in all my children the fact that I was not going to pay for their college education, but that this education was nonetheless very important. They all figured out how to apply for their own loans, got grants, scholarships, and/or joined the military and all put themselves through college. Mind you, some do have student loans they are paying off, but they all understood they were using (or wasting) their own money in college.

This idea that parents owe each child a college education is not only ludicrous, but detrimental to the formation of children with regards to responsibility and leadership.

— I’ll get off my soapbox now.
 
I am still of the belief, that what is in your bedroom…stays in your bedroom. If the folks on here are stating that using NFP as a natural type of birth control is a sin…I would ask them how much would they like to contribute to households where kids are popping out every 9 months and no additonal income is coming into the house.
What is in your bedroom is no business of the folks on this board. We are merely discussing the teachings of Holy Mother Church.
 
Pure abstinence may be the best choice for some, but not all. It’s a risk one would be willing to take, and they can do that if they wish. It doesn’t have anything to do with being able to avoid mortal sin. Being at high risk due to pregnancy isn’t likely to make one keel over moments after implantation. More than likely they’ll have plenty of time for numerous confessions.
I don’t think you understand what I was trying to say. The example was that the couple (that should abstain for grave reason) has sex even tough it is dangerous to avoid mortal sin (eg adultery, masturbation, porn etc.)

In any event sin is much more dangerous than that. The problem is you can allow yourself to be fooled that you don’t need to go to confession… Anyway the mortal sin exception for not abstaining right there in the Pope Pius XXII material as well as the extracts from the Summa posted earlier.
 
Rence, in my opinion, this is one of the biggest problems with today’s modern world and that is “entitlement”. To set the expectation in a child that he is owed a college education by either his parents or the government is a huge mistake. My parents did not provide a college education for me or any of my siblings yet we all went out and made it happen for ourselves by working and paying for our colleges. I have a graduate degree that I paid for myself.
I understand you. But it has a lot to do with culture, and as you know, a Catholic can come from anywhere. It is very American to make it happen for yourself. I know, that’s how I got it done too 🙂 But for example, my ex-step father, who put all seven of his kids through school, who was Chinese, was taught by his parents, and his parents before him, etc. that it was the parents’ responsiblity to provide education for their kids. Some are adamant that it is their responsiblity to provide for their childrens’ education, some don’t. Remember that financial responsiblities don’t just end with sending children to college, as I said in a previous post. Education includes catholic grammar and high school, which a lot of Catholic parents want for their children. That costs money. Not everyone can send 5+ children to school…
 
Rence, in my opinion, this is one of the biggest problems with today’s modern world and that is “entitlement”. To set the expectation in a child that he is owed a college education by either his parents or the government is a huge mistake. My parents did not provide a college education for me or any of my siblings yet we all went out and made it happen for ourselves by working and paying for our colleges. I have a graduate degree that I paid for myself.

Likewise, I instilled in all my children the fact that I was not going to pay for their college education, but that this education was nonetheless very important. They all figured out how to apply for their own loans, got grants, scholarships, and/or joined the military and all put themselves through college. Mind you, some do have student loans they are paying off, but they all understood they were using (or wasting) their own money in college.

This idea that parents owe each child a college education is not only ludicrous, but detrimental to the formation of children with regards to responsibility and leadership.

— I’ll get off my soapbox now.
I agree 100%.

Personally, in both my immediate and extended family there was *never *any question of our parents paying for our college education. We were expected to take summer jobs, apply for scholarships and grants, take workstudy jobs on campus and, if necessary, take out loans to pay for our college. My parents helped in any way they could with extra money here and there. But there was NEVER of question of a responsibility to foot the entire bill.

FWIW, I had never even heard of this notion that some parents think they are “expected” to pay for college until a few years ago. 🤷
 
I still didn’t get answer on the second question regarding couples past child bearing age or that are infertile. Not directed at you claire, but I recall someone on the boards stating that couples should continue as if they were fertile…and not turn it into a free for all.
That sounds to me like some random CAFer’s personal opinion. 😉 Couples who are infertile or past child-bearing age are definitely allowed to marry in the Church. And couples are not told to abstain under other circumstances where conception would be impossible, such as when the wife is already pregnant or is taking birth control pills for a medical reason, etc. So the Church does provide for those situations. As I understand it, the couples’ intention to be open to life is what counts.

There are numerous threads about sterile/infertile couples and marriage right here at CAF. If you just do a keyword search you’ll probably find dozens.
On another note…I have read the Bible backwards and forwards and I can’t find anywhere where Jesus addressed the Popes. Do you realize that the Pope/s/ are human beings and mortal? I respect them as head of the Church (somebody has to be in charge), but like any other human being…there are failings.
Try Matthew 16:18, as a previous poster already pointed out. Papal infallibility only has to do with teachings on faith and morals. Of course the pope, as a man, is just a regular, imperfect human being. St. Peter was a perfect example of this.
 
Rence, in my opinion, this is one of the biggest problems with today’s modern world and that is “entitlement”. To set the expectation in a child that he is owed a college education by either his parents or the government is a huge mistake. My parents did not provide a college education for me or any of my siblings yet we all went out and made it happen for ourselves by working and paying for our colleges. I have a graduate degree that I paid for myself.

Likewise, I instilled in all my children the fact that I was not going to pay for their college education, but that this education was nonetheless very important. They all figured out how to apply for their own loans, got grants, scholarships, and/or joined the military and all put themselves through college. Mind you, some do have student loans they are paying off, but they all understood they were using (or wasting) their own money in college.

This idea that parents owe each child a college education is not only ludicrous, but detrimental to the formation of children with regards to responsibility and leadership.

— I’ll get off my soapbox now.
THANK YOU.

My momma didn’t pay for my school. The pride she has for me graduating from college isn’t surpassed by me paying off my student loans on my own, but it ranks up there. I then went back to school again, this time taking advantage of Government re-training programs for laid off workers. After much paperwork and patience I went back to school and paid probably around 500 bucks total.

The sense of entitlement people have these days drive me crazy. CRAZY. It’s like people who demand you give tips to people even when the service is poor.

My wife and I are having a baby in seven months. When our kid grows up, we’ll give it everything it needs. But if the no-name shampoo ain’t good enough or if they want fancier clothes it’s called a “paper route” or getting a job at McDonalds.

Education is no different. We’ll help out as much as we can…but not at the expense of the other kids or potential kids we may have.
 
I agree 100%.

Personally, in both my immediate and extended family there was *never *any question of our parents paying for our college education. We were expected to take summer jobs, apply for scholarships and grants, take workstudy jobs on campus and, if necessary, take out loans to pay for our college. My parents helped in any way they could with extra money here and there. But there was NEVER of question of a responsibility to foot the entire bill.

FWIW, I had never even heard of this notion that some parents think they are “expected” to pay for college until a few years ago. 🤷
I understand what you’re saying, again, because I put myself through college myself. My point was not whether or not parents should pay for, or help, their children get through college.

My point was, priorities and “grave” reasons will be different from family to family depending on their background, how they were raised and by their culture — and their financial status in proportion to their bills or debt. It’s really not up to an outside party (except the counsel of a priest) to decide on what is “grave” or not grave for a family.

My parents did not contribute to my college education. But they STILL struggled to provide for my brother and I and there were only two of us. They didn’t have all these “extras” that kids today have, because they didn’t exist at the time. The most “fancy” thing my brother had as a pre-teen was an Atari (gifted by someone outside the family) and two games (pacman and donkey kong)…now that’s showing my age. We didn’t own our own property until my brother and I were teenagers. Our parents rented a modest apartment in a modest part of town. I don’t recall having lots of different clothes, shoes, ect. But my parents did put my brother and I through catholic grammar schools and catholic high schools. They would not have been able to provide for more and so they didn’t. The economy is much worse today than it was then. With or without a college fund, if people can’t do it, they can’t do it. Families will remain small until people can provide for more children - not just financially, but emotionally as well.
 
My point was, priorities and “grave” reasons will be different from family to family depending on their background,
That is why it is important to seek guidance from a priest to assess the gravity of your situation. I’m sure there are parents who feel that if they can’t afford a cell phone and a personal HDTV for each child that this qualifies as “grave”.
 
I don’t think you understand what I was trying to say. The example was that the couple (that should abstain for grave reason) has sex even tough it is dangerous to avoid mortal sin (eg adultery, masturbation, porn etc.)

In any event sin is much more dangerous than that. The problem is you can allow yourself to be fooled that you don’t need to go to confession… Anyway the mortal sin exception for not abstaining right there in the Pope Pius XXII material as well as the extracts from the Summa posted earlier.
So wouldn’t NFP fit the bill…abstinence to avoid pregnancy…and use of non fertile times to “pay the marriage debt?”

What I don’t understand regarding the marriage debt…(love that euphemism, btw)… If one spouse demands the debt, and demands immediate payment, isn’t there the possibility of treating the other spouse in a lustful fashion…?

NFP requires temperance and self control…aren’t those good qualities to foster?
 
That is why it is important to seek guidance from a priest to assess the gravity of your situation. I’m sure there are parents who feel that if they can’t afford a cell phone and a personal HDTV for each child that this qualifies as “grave”.
Ciao, Giuseppe! (my dear father’s name)

I’m not sure that a couple that materialistic in regarding objects, could at the same time practice the temperance neccessary in using NFP.

Maybe such couples exist…and if it doesn’t bother them to abstain for a cell phone or HDTV…maybe there are other problems in the family, that have nothing to do with NFP.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top