NFP and Traditional Catholicism

[Rence]

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”.

Again, we disagree. But I hope to do so with respect This is why I insist that “grave” depends on the family. And I have said numberous times that one should consult with their priest to determine grave.

As one who lives 15 miles away from town in both directions, and as one who went to school and will be working over an hour away from home commuting 50 miles each way down the interstate, I say that a cell phone is a safety necessity. However, I think there are plans out there that are affordable, have the least minutes, and with no text messaging or extras, since this would not be a social extra, it would be a safety device.

On HDTV, I agree with you

I think the list can go on and on, but generally what is grave will depend on the family. And one or two things are not going to make or break a family’s ability to welcome another child into the family (such as a cell phone) - and mind you, I have to reiterate, choosing to use NFP to prevent another pregnancy does not mean one is not open to life and won’t be welcoming a blessed little bundle of joy despite the parents’ decision But bills are a cumulative effect and need to be considered that way: rent/mortgage, electricity, water, gas, car gas, groceries (food + nonfood items), medications, phone, clothing, shoes, and other essentials. Are any children already in school? Are both parents working or only one? If both are working, is there childcare to pay? Has something gone bad recently that require monthly payments? I think we can all agree that the broken dishwasher can wait, but what about such things as the heat/air system breaking down, the refrigerator stopped working, the septic needs repair, a water pipe broke.

Things happen, and things we can’t always forsee. And it’s easy to say “this isn’t a “grave” reason”, but don’t you have to look at the whole picture?

 

[giuseppeTO]

Again, we disagree. But I hope to do so with respect This is why I insist that “grave” depends on the family. And I have said numberous times that one should consult with their priest to determine grave.

As one who lives 15 miles away from town in both directions, and as one who went to school and will be working over an hour away from home commuting 50 miles each way down the interstate, I say that a cell phone is a safety necessity. However, I think there are plans out there that are affordable, have the least minutes, and with no text messaging or extras, since this would not be a social extra, it would be a safety device.

On HDTV, I agree with you

I think the list can go on and on, but generally what is grave will depend on the family. And one or two things are not going to make or break a family’s ability to welcome another child into the family (such as a cell phone) - and mind you, I have to reiterate, choosing to use NFP to prevent another pregnancy does not mean one is not open to life and won’t be welcoming a blessed little bundle of joy despite the parents’ decision But bills are a cumulative effect and need to be considered that way: rent/mortgage, electricity, water, gas, car gas, groceries (food + nonfood items), medications, phone, clothing, shoes, and other essentials. Are any children already in school? Are both parents working or only one? If both are working, is there childcare to pay? Has something gone bad recently that require monthly payments? I think we can all agree that the broken dishwasher can wait, but what about such things as the heat/air system breaking down, the refrigerator stopped working, the septic needs repair, a water pipe broke.

Things happen, and things we can’t always forsee. And it’s easy to say “this isn’t a “grave” reason”, but don’t you have to look at the whole picture?

Rence, I disagree that we disagree because I agree. Your respectfulness and courtesy in posting are refreshing. I hope you have many children and bring them up the same way, my friend.

 

[Rence]

Rence, I disagree that we disagree because I agree. Your respectfulness and courtesy in posting are refreshing. I hope you have many children and bring them up the same way, my friend.

Awww thanks Giuseppe Thank you for the warm wishes. I hope and pray that I will have many children too And I hope God blesses you the same!

 

[CradleCath]

Yes, but remember that the majority of Catholics admit to being on artifican birth control.

That’s sad. The Church teaches that NFP is “allowed”. It is not recommended but allowed “when grave & serious reasons” to space out your children. It’s best if one realizes that the Catholic Church’s teachings are primarily about what constitutes a Catholic family. When we obsess about the use of ANY means of birth control, without understanding what a Catholic family is supposed to be, we miss the whole thing.

 

[sulkow82]

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’ve wondered about this in this respect. The way that NFP was taught to me, the couple has a monthly meeting where they look at where they are spiritually, mentally, physically, etc. So, what about having the priest teach the couple how to assess their situation. Teach a couple a fish…

 

[CradleCath]

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 don’t think that SOCIETY expects parents to pay for a college education, but my husband & I expected it of ourselves & of our children. When our first child started college in 1978, we were farmers & it was evident that the days of making a living on a family farm were overA combine (harvesting machine) now costs about $300,000 & that is a machine that every farmer needs. So, we felt that a college education would give our children a start that would be a terrific start on any career they chose.

One of our children started in 1978, as I said, the second began college in 1980, the third in 1981 & the last one in 1985. We always had at least 2 kids in college at the same time. For a couple of years, we had 3 in at the same time. We didn’t know how we were going to make it happen…just that we WERE. From the age of 13yrs. on, the children took odd jobs anywhere they could. From chopping weeds out of the neighbors soybean fields, to working for a man who drilled wells. to babysitting 40 hrs. a week (My daughter) Plus, we started putting almost every extra (I smile as I write that word) dollar in a college fund.

The kids also knew that any & all scholarships that they could earn would be very important. Two of the boys won small (about $1500. per semester) athletic scholarships, my daughter won the Freshman Scholarship Award, $1750. total. It had to be renewed every year, so her grades were very important. One son a smaller Freshman Award.
One thing I learned is that these types of scholarships put a lot of pressure on the child, as they are actually being “paid” for their talents. If my sons got cut from the Wrestling team…their “pay” would be gone, same for my daughter & other son…if their grades fell, the scholarship would be lost. It was a good life lesson, if you want something, you have to work for it. They handled the pressure well.

We did it, all four graduated from division 1 good schools, all four of them learned that if they wanted to live in apartments instead of dorms, they would have to pay for that, etc.

What we did was just kind of have a college money pool. We put most of the money in, but they put** almost** as much. I found out later that they often called each other, rather than us, when they needed money for books, etc. If our daughter had extra left over (at the moment), & one of the boys were in need…she would send him money, if she was in need the next semester…he’d send money to her.

During those years, my husband & I both worked 60 hr. weeks. My point is this…if you want it badly enough, you’ll find a way. There are scholarships galore that are never applied for, thus never awarded, so one needs to contact the University one chooses at least a year in advance & pray about it daily.

As I reread this post, it sounds as if Im boasting & I don’t mean to do that. I know one Catholic family with 10 children, who all went to college & their parents had no more money than we did. It’s just that often I find people justify their decision to have only two children, without enough knowledge. God can make the “impossible” happen. My kids in their late 30’s & 40’s are closer than any siblings I’ve ever known & I think that part of the reason is…they were never alone in their struggles, we all did it together, with the help of God.
BTW. they all found the Newman Center the first week, attended Mass through all their years at their different Universities.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

regarding college…That normally occurs 18 years after baby is born…

Does anyone have knowledge about what could happen 18 yrs in the future…

 

[Rence]

One of our children started in 1978, as I said, the second began college in 1980, the third in 1981 & the last one in 1985. We always had at least 2 kids in college at the same time. For a couple of years, we had 3 in at the same time. We didn’t know how we were going to make it happen…just that we WERE. From the age of 13yrs. on, the children took odd jobs anywhere they could. From chopping weeds out of the neighbors soybean fields, to working for a man who drilled wells. to babysitting 40 hrs. a week (My daughter) Plus, we started putting almost every extra (I smile as I write that word) dollar in a college fund.

Yeah, you guys had it together I think it’s probably prudent to have a college pool and to start it early, and I don’t know too many people who don’t have such a pool.

However, the responsibilities you instilled in your children is a rare find. I can’t get my nearest neighbor’s teenage son to do anything, while a few miles away another kid the same age will do anything for money because he is saving up for something. I remember when I was a kid, my brother grabbed any odd job the neighbors needed. It’s difficult to find today And that doesn’t do much to teach the kids. Your children knew what it was to work for a goal, and that should be one of among many things you should be proud of

As I reread this post, it sounds as if Im boasting & I don’t mean to do that. I know one Catholic family with 10 children, who all went to college & their parents had no more money than we did. It’s just that often I find people justify their decision to have only two children, without enough knowledge. God can make the “impossible” happen. My kids in their late 30’s & 40’s are closer than any siblings I’ve ever known & I think that part of the reason is…they were never alone in their struggles, we all did it together, with the help of God.

I don’t think you’re boasting at all. I’m sure the experiences you’re listing are giving other people ideas

 

[Rence]

regarding college…That normally occurs 18 years after baby is born…

Does anyone have knowledge about what could happen 18 yrs in the future…

Of course we don’t Mary Gail, that’s why it’s smart to save and save and save along the way.

 

[CradleCath]

]Yeah, you guys had it together I think it’s probably prudent to have a college pool and to start it early, and I don’t know too many people who don’t have such a pool.

However, the responsibilities you instilled in your children is a rare find. I can’t get my nearest neighbor’s teenage son to do anything, while a few miles away another kid the same age will do anything for money because he is saving up for something. I remember when I was a kid, my brother grabbed any odd job the neighbors needed. It’s difficult to find today And that doesn’t do much to teach the kids. Your children knew what it was to work for a goal, and that should be one of among many things you should be proud of
I don’t think you’re boasting at all. I’m sure the experiences you’re listing are giving other people ideas

Thank you. That’s what I’m hoping for. I’ve been reading several posts on another thread, which state that different couples are “called to” have small families because of the economy & the cost of a college education. I think a Catholic family can find a way to educate many children if they pray & work.

I thank God every day that my parents instilled a good work ethic in each of their 5 children. Especially when I see that it has been passed down to their many grandchildren & great grandchildren

 

[CradleCath]

regarding college…That normally occurs 18 years after baby is born…

Does anyone have knowledge about what could happen 18 yrs in the future…

You are absolutely correct. One can’t plan out their lives & I see so many trying to do just that. Saying, "I can only have 2 children, because I want a decent house in a safe neighborhood, a good education & a **few **luxuries for them. How does one know, when they are 22yrs. old, that they won’t be able to provide that for 5 children?

As for my husband & myself, we could have somehow become wealthy during the years between the birth of our oldest & the college years. BUT, just in case, we worked hard…taught our children a good work ethic & saved as much as we could for their education.

I remember that some months, in the beginning, we were only able to put $15. in the college savings fund, but as the children got older & found ways to earn a little bit themselves that fund began to grow. Our oldest son worked during the summers of his high school years, as a busboy in a restaurant, he hated that job but he stuck at it until he found a better one. By the time he was a junior in high school, he’d “graduated” to working for a big cattle operation, mucking out stalls, baling hay, etc. This he LOVED. During the summers of his college years, he was “top hand” at that ranch & brought home at least, $200. per wk. He is now a
Veternarian. His son, 13, works in his office on the weekends & during the summer, cleaning cages, exercising some of the animals, doing the “grunt work”.

All I’m saying is…don’t be quick to settle for less than you want. If you want a big family, there are ways to provide enough for your children to have happy lives & a good education.

 

[IntegraCatholic]

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…?

It’s possible but is not a just cause to refuse the debt unless this has been demonstrated to be the case. For example, St. Alphonsus says that if a husband were to request the debt more than 3 times in the same night, the wife would no longer be obliged to render it. Until that has been demonstrated clearly, the spouse has an obligation to give what the other deserves. It is the same with any matter of justice. St. Thomas explains that if my friend loans me a weapon and then demands I return it while he is in a fit of rage, I certainly don’t have an obligation to return it. Baring such a serious condition, I must return what rightly belongs to him. The same is true for the marriage debt, for the one’s body no longer belongs to himself but to his spouse.

NFP requires temperance and self control…aren’t those good qualities to foster?

They are but only in the proper context. If someone loans me $100 and asks it to be returned within the time promised (and I have the money to give him), I have an obligation in justice to repay the debt. I can’t just say, “Well, I’m going to hold this back from you so that you learn not to be attached to your wealth.” What’s more, I’m not so sure NFP really produces temperance and self-control. Complete abstinence does foster that for sure. NFP may or may not.

 

[giuseppeTO]

St. Alphonsus says that if a husband were to request the debt more than 3 times in the same night, the wife would no longer be obliged to render it.

Ok, I’m going to go out on a limb here and opine that such a husband is more in need of a rosary than anything else.

True charity must also play a part here on both sides of the fence, lest the demand become as sinful as any other “excess”, which may otherwise be lawful. As I tell my children, and I continually pray to the Holy Ghost that I follow my own advise, charity can ONLY be given … it cannot be ‘expected’.

 

[Vico]

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?

Abstinence: yes.
Temperance: yes.

Debt: Abstinence can lead to a weakening of affection or a risk of impurity, yet here are some situations where refusal (abstinance) is ordered, even if not mutually agreed upon:

1. if the spouse has been unfaithful to the extent of adultery (until forgiveness of the injured party).
2. if there is a danger of the infection of disease.
3. if the request is unreasonable.
4. if it be under conditions that are genuinely harmful and distressing.
5. if it is going to be abused by the sin of onanism.
6. if a pregnancy would be fatal or highly dangerous.
7. Address to Midwives, Given by His Holiness Pope Pius XII, 29 October 1951

“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.”

 

[Rence]

It’s possible but is not a just cause to refuse the debt unless this has been demonstrated to be the case. For example, St. Alphonsus says that if a husband were to request the debt more than 3 times in the same night, the wife would no longer be obliged to render it. Until that has been demonstrated clearly, the spouse has an obligation to give what the other deserves. It is the same with any matter of justice. St. Thomas explains that if my friend loans me a weapon and then demands I return it while he is in a fit of rage, I certainly don’t have an obligation to return it. Baring such a serious condition, I must return what rightly belongs to him. The same is true for the marriage debt, for the one’s body no longer belongs to himself but to his spouse.

Part of “responsible parenthood” and deciding that now is not the right time to be pregnant is just cause to refuse the “debt”, for all the reasons described as “responsible parenthood” and “grave” reasons. Yes, one’s body belongs to his and her spouse, but again, we are not slaves and we are not sex objects and to say that the “debt” must be paid unless there is “sufficient” cause takes away the “consensual” component of what separates a sinful sex act from a non sinful sex act.

One of the things my priest was adamant about is that sex has to be consensual and without coersion. Demanding the marital debt to a temporarily unwilling party is sinful. It is sinful to make sex into a weapon and either demand or withold it for evil reasons. However, you don’t have to consent to sex each and every time your spouse wants it.

If a spouse has the common sense to determine that they have just reason for delaying or spacing out a pregnancy, it is selfish of the other spouse to demand the “marital debt”.

 

[ac_claire]

If a spouse has the common sense to determine that they have just reason for delaying or spacing out a pregnancy, it is selfish of the other spouse to demand the “marital debt”.

Well, I’d suggest that it’s not necessarily “common sense” that always decides these things, especially if the other spouse disagrees. The couple should be on the same page about using NFP to avoid for a just reason. Otherwise, as I understand the teaching, the one spouse’s insistence on abstaining is sinful.

 

[Rence]

Well, I’d suggest that it’s not necessarily “common sense” that always decides these things, especially if the other spouse disagrees. The couple should be on the same page about using NFP to avoid for a just reason. Otherwise, as I understand the teaching, the one spouse’s insistence on abstaining is sinful.

There are two sides to every story. I’d ask why they are not on the same page. Selfish reasons can go both ways. There are situations in which one spouse wants another child and the other spouse does not due to non-“grave” reasons, and in this case I would agree that it would be wrong to deny the spouse the wanted child. However, we’ve also seen examples of a spouse who wants another pregnancy, and the opposing spouse has “grave” reasons. In this case it is not wrong to deny the spouse the wanted child.

In any event, when one spouse is not willing to have another child for grave reasons, it’s not fair just to look at the spouse who is opposed. The fair thing to do is look at the whole picture, not one or the other.

That’s a big reason why a priest should be consulted. It is a misconception and an untruth to believe and teach others that the Church wants couples to have as many kids as they can year after year until they can’t, and that they must pay the “marital debt” whenever their spouse wants it or they may be sinning. What the Church does teach s that The Church wants couples to have as many children as they can, but not to the extent of destroying those in the family. The Church does not teach to inundate your spouse with too many children to care for. And they gave us enough tools (CCC, encyclicals and priest counsel, in addition to the books available) to help descern whether they have grave reasons or not. Having children has to be a shared reponsibility and having more children is a shared agreement between spouses, not something to be demanded from one of another spouse. This means that if having another child would cause hardship on one of the spouses, the spouse indeed has the right to withold the marital debt until it is not a hardship.

One also has to consider why on earth one spouse would insist on the marital debt being paid when they know the other spouse isn’t ready at the time, and for whatever reason makes it grave enough for them to discern to withold.

 

[IntegraCatholic]

Part of “responsible parenthood” and deciding that now is not the right time to be pregnant is just cause to refuse the “debt”, for all the reasons described as “responsible parenthood” and “grave” reasons.

“Not the right time” includes very grave reasons, not the whim or “common sense” or “judgment” of any individual. Please re-read the entire thread for more information from actual reputable Catholic moral theologians.

Yes, one’s body belongs to his and her spouse, but again, we are not slaves and we are not sex objects and to say that the “debt” must be paid unless there is “sufficient” cause takes away the “consensual” component of what separates a sinful sex act from a non sinful sex act.

Again, please re-read the thread. Consider reading more about what the nature of the marital bond entails, and how Catholic moral theologians address the issue. Opinions of CA forum members don’t qualify as a standard for proper conduct.

One of the things my priest was adamant about is that sex has to be consensual and without coersion.

No one has said otherwise. That doesn’t change the fact that the spouse who is asked to fulfill the debt is obligated under pain of mortal sin to do so outside of very rare and grave circumstances.

Demanding the marital debt to a temporarily unwilling party is sinful.

No, it simply is not.

However, you don’t have to consent to sex each and every time your spouse wants it.

Yes, you do, baring the grave reasons already addressed.

If a spouse has the common sense to determine that they have just reason for delaying or spacing out a pregnancy, it is selfish of the other spouse to demand the “marital debt”.

You’ve got it backwards. The person who refuses is the selfish one. He already made the decision in exchanging vows to give the other a right over his body. If he didn’t want that, he should not have chosen the married state.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

“Not the right time” includes very grave reasons, not the whim or “common sense” or “judgment” of any individual. Please re-read the entire thread for more information from actual reputable Catholic moral theologians.

Again, please re-read the thread. Consider reading more about what the nature of the marital bond entails, and how Catholic moral theologians address the issue. Opinions of CA forum members don’t qualify as a standard for proper conduct.

No one has said otherwise. That doesn’t change the fact that the spouse who is asked to fulfill the debt is obligated under pain of mortal sin to do so outside of very rare and grave circumstances.

No, it simply is not.

Yes, you do, baring the grave reasons already addressed.

You’ve got it backwards. The person who refuses is the selfish one. He already made the decision in exchanging vows to give the other a right over his body. If he didn’t want that, he should not have chosen the married state.

I guess I don’t understand…husband requests payment of debt, wife might be tired from taking care of kids, wife might have a headache, wife might just not be in the mood, and will have a difficult time getting in the mood. Husband requests* immediate *payment…and he is not guilty of lust…but wife is guilty of mortal sin. Mortal sin?

By the way, the wife could request the debt paid as well, husband could not be in the mood.

I paid attention in pre-cana…I don’t remember ever hearing that.

Do people even approach each other that way…“I demand my debt to be paid?”

Sounds like a contract…marriage is a covenant not a contract

 

[Vico]

Take care to not sin in making an uncharitable demand, for there is no excuse for it, the husband being responsible, as head of the family, for the care of his wife’s feelings and to give affection.

Also, venial sin rather than mortal sin may be the result of refusal when, for example, the demand frequency is often, or it is only a delay, or the demander will forgo.