NFP is a Heresy?

[jpusateri]

mlchance:

Precisely. One may properly use NFP to avoid conception for financial reasons. Of course, those financial reasons must be genuinely serious. If the choice is between having, say, a vacation home and avoid conception, or not having a vacation home and having a child, the latter would be the proper course of action (to use a very obvious example).

Of course, no use of NFP can be justified without proper examination of conscience and, quite possibly, spiritual direction as well.

– Mark L. Chance.

I am in agreement with this, so my apology for misunderstanding still stands.

 

[Kendy]

Semper Fi:

Yes it is a form of birth control, but it still gives the chance at conception if done properly. ARTIFICIAL birth control is where the problem comes in. My girlfriend before I started following the Faith was on birth control and I find that when she was on birth control it let me treat her more like a sex object than I should have (we are now both abstinent). Artificial birth control is not a good thing for women, it makes men treat women like sex objects (is that the real freedom women want?).

I am not arguing for contraception, but I have heard this statement about NFP often and I don’t get it. How does contraception make women into sex objects? How does NFP avoid that?

Kendy

 

[javelin]

migurl:

I think a lot of people have trouble accepting NFP because of its effects. The point though is that we are using our natural cycles, the ones God set up to determine when we can or cannot get pregnant. Now, there are plenty of catholics out there who use NFP like they would ABC, but the purpose of NFP is to use God’s rules in a way that is natural and w/o perversion. NFP is ONLY acceptable if the couple has a serious reason, like bankrupcy, serious illness (mental or physical). THey are supposed to talk to a priest about the decision and recieve guidance so that they can come to the right decision. SImply saying a prayer together doesnt’ cut it, you’ve got to go to a good priest and tell him your reasons and they he is supposed to be honest and tell you whether that is good enough or not. If it is a good enough reason, you can’t keep yourself in that situation just so you can use NFP and you can’t use NFP for longer than the situation exists.

I don’t think what I bolded above is true at all. Praying together is exactly what couples should be doing when contemplating their futures and families. I believe the Church was specifically vague about defining what constituted “serious reasons”, for in its wisdom it knows that decisions like bearing another child lie not with the local priest, but with the couple that God gave the gift of procreation to.

In an ideal situation the local priest should be able to provide sound counsel, but this decision is ultimately left to the discernment of the parents, and rightfully so.

The Church does not expect us to go running to the local priest regarding every decision we make. We also need to realize our local priests are not infallible, and many are tremendously overworked.

If the Church allows leeway in a decision, we must pray hard and follow the dictates of our conscience.

Peace,
javelin

 

[Kendy]

kleary:

As far as NFP goes I was suggested and mandated by my pastor to go to NFP classes as part of Pre-Cana.

I do not see any moral objections to NFP. I mean simply abstaining for nine days or so from the marital act is supposed to be wrong?

Ken

Nine Days? I thought it was five?

Kendy

 

[Kendy]

StCsDavid:

I gotta tell you…I don’t get it. ABC is for the prevention of pregnacy…NFP is open to God’s creation. Couples have to communicate and be in concert with the whole process. How is this a bad thing? It seems that a couple that would be looking forward to the woman’s period so they can have sex without worry of children are not in the proper frame of mind about what the sexual relationship is all about in the first place. On the other hand, for a couple to honestly evaluate their present situation and abstain from marital relations at a time when she is most likely to conceive…I’m sorry…I just don’t see the evil here.?

But if they did not think it wise to have children right now, would they not be looking forward to times when they can have sex. Are they supposed to say, “Oh, it’s unfortunate that we have to have sex during this time of infertility.”

 

[javelin]

Kendy:

I am not arguing for contraception, but I have heard this statement about NFP often and I don’t get it. How does contraception make women into sex objects? How does NFP avoid that?

Kendy

If you really want to read the best treatment on this, try JPII’s Theology of the Body or Christopher West’s book, Theology of the Body for Beginners.

In a nutshell, by denying the procreative aspect of the sexual union, the sole end of the act is pleasure seeking. The individual members no longer need to respect the awesome potential for new life from each union. When couple practices NFP, they are respectful of the gift of fertility they are given, and are continuallly reminded that through their love, God brings life. It takes love and respect for a husband to say to his wife “I desire you now, but since we have prayerfully concluded we cannot have another child now, I can wait, for the sake of our family.” This instead of the expectation that the desire be met any time it is felt.

Hmmm, I think that was a poor explanation, but I hope it might help.

Personally, I think one of the biggest testimonies to this truth is the statistics regarding what the widespread use of birth control has done to marriages. Divorce and cheating are way up during the time ABCs became the norm. To many men, all women are now “fair game” since the natural consequences have been removed. Rather than freeing women, “the pill” has made them more abused than ever before, IMHO.

Sorry, but I just found this article by someone far more eloquent than I: catholic.com/thisrock/2003/0311fea3.asp

Please read it – I hope it helps.

Peace,
javelin

 

[javelin]

Kendy:

But if they did not think it wise to have children right now, would they not be looking forward to times when they can have sex. Are they supposed to say, “Oh, it’s unfortunate that we have to have sex during this time of infertility.”

Certainly they would be looking forward to being together, but the important thing is that they are not deliberately acting to prohibit life from coming from that sexual union. Sex between married couples, done in love for each other, is always a good thing for them and the marriage. It is the action people take to stop or limit their fertility during the union that is sinful.

Peace,
javelin

 

[javelin]

Kendy:

Nine Days? I thought it was five?

Kendy

Physically, the fertile period is about 5 days, as the female egg only has about 24 hours to be fertilized, and the male sperm can continue for about 4 days. However, in practice, what is considered the “fertile period” is closer to 9 days because you cannot predict 4 days in advance exactly when the woman will ovulate. Thus, depending on how conservatively the couple is practicing, they will abstain several extra days.

Peace,
javelin

 

[Kendy]

javelin:

If you really want to read the best treatment on this, try JPII’s Theology of the Body or Christopher West’s book, Theology of the Body for Beginners.

In a nutshell, by denying the procreative aspect of the sexual union, the sole end of the act is pleasure seeking. The individual members no longer need to respect the awesome potential for new life from each union. When couple practices NFP, they are respectful of the gift of fertility they are given, and are continuallly reminded that through their love, God brings life. It takes love and respect for a husband to say to his wife “I desire you now, but since we have prayerfully concluded we cannot have another child now, I can wait, for the sake of our family.” This instead of the expectation that the desire be met any time it is felt.

Hmmm, I think that was a poor explanation, but I hope it might help.

Personally, I think one of the biggest testimonies to this truth is the statistics regarding what the widespread use of birth control has done to marriages. Divorce and cheating are way up during the time ABCs became the norm. To many men, all women are now “fair game” since the natural consequences have been removed. Rather than freeing women, “the pill” has made them more abused than ever before, IMHO.

Sorry, but I just found this article by someone far more eloquent than I: catholic.com/thisrock/2003/0311fea3.asp

Please read it – I hope it helps.

Peace,
javelin

I feel like there is an presumption here that abstaining is only a sacrifice for men, which certainly news to me. Anyway, I will check out the article.

Kendy

 

[Kendy]

javelin:

Physically, the fertile period is about 5 days, as the female egg only has about 24 hours to be fertilized, and the male sperm can continue for about 4 days. However, in practice, what is considered the “fertile period” is closer to 9 days because you cannot predict 4 days in advance exactly when the woman will ovulate. Thus, depending on how conservatively the couple is practicing, they will abstain several extra days.

Peace,
javelin

Oh Dear!

 

[javelin]

I feel like there is an presumption here that abstaining is only a sacrifice for men, which certainly news to me. Anyway, I will check out the article.

Kendy

No – no presumption! It is definitely a sacrifice for both. :yup:

It was, admittedly, affected by the stereotype in our society of the husband who wants it every day and the wife who is more patient.

Peace,
javelin

 

[StCsDavid]

Kendy:

But if they did not think it wise to have children right now, would they not be looking forward to times when they can have sex. Are they supposed to say, “Oh, it’s unfortunate that we have to have sex during this time of infertility.”

Well that’s just silly, dear. It’s not that they can’t look forward to marital relations during infertile periods, but neither should they mourn their decision not to have relations during fertile periods. Why is that so hard to grasp?

 

[JKirkLVNV]

thistle:

You are wrong. The Church does not teach and allow anything which is immoral and it teaches that NPF is allowed so you are in fact rejecting the Church’s teaching by saying you consider it immoral.

CCC 2370 Periodic continence, that is, the methods of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods, is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality.157 These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom. In contrast, “every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment, or in the development of its natural consequences, proposes, whether as an end or as a means, to render procreation impossible” is intrinsically evil.

This is also consistent with HV 16 which another poster has quoted to you.

The issue is clear. You do not have to use NFP but you are allowed to use it. It is not immoral but you somehow seem to be using this issue to attack the Church.

You’re correct, but it’s slightly more serious than you let on, Thistle. The statement by a person that any teaching of the Church, either in what she forbids or what she allows, is immoral is, in and of itself, a heresy. The OP doesn’t have to use it, but to remain a faithful Catholic, she must refrain from calling it immoral.

 

[Agricola]

StCsDavid:

Well that’s just silly, dear. It’s not that they can’t look forward to marital relations during infertile periods, but neither should they mourn their decision not to have relations during fertile periods. Why is that so hard to grasp?

I think it’s probably hard to grasp because the end of the practice of NFP is to avoid pregnancy. If you’re trying not to have children, then it is possible that you would, even during the infertile period, be wary of the fact that it is possible that you may conceive.

You’re right though. I doubt that a married couple would not look forward to the marital embrace at any time of the month, even if they are using NFP to avoid pregnancy. Assuming the proper disposition of being “generously open to new life” probably lessens the worry over conceiving during infertile times.

---

As for Kendy’s question about ABC making women an object of sexual desire, here’s my answer. ABC attempts to negate fertility. A person’s fertility is an inseparable part of the unitive element of marital relations. Children are the natural result of the gift of self in the act. In the act the spouses give their entire selves to each other, including their fertility. NFP, if used in accordance with Church teachings, is not an attempt to negate the fertility of either spouse because openness to life is a prerequisite.

Since the woman is the one who conceives the child in pregnancy, her fertility is more apparent. ABC, in actuality, makes both the man and the woman more like objects of sexual desire than loving givers/recipients of the gift of self. However, since the woman’s fertility is more apparent, so is her objectification.

God bless,

Agricola

 

[CARose]

Agricola:

Since the woman is the one who conceives the child in pregnancy, her fertility is more apparent. ABC, in actuality, makes both the man and the woman more like objects of sexual desire than loving givers/recipients of the gift of self. However, since the woman’s fertility is more apparent, so is her objectification.

I think this aspect of NFP vs ABC is crucial to why use of ABC objectifies women. With ABC, the man can have his need met without ever having given of himself in the procreative way, making the union less than complete. This becomes more apparent to the wife who desires more children and is denied them by her husband.

When NFP is misused, it too has the same result, and can leave the wife feeling cheated of the fullness of what the marital embrace is intended to provide, the fullness of life from her husband.

If either partner is feeling cheated in the relationship, it seems to me that it’s time to explore the motives behind the use of NFP seriously, as a couple, or your marriage is being put at risk.

CARose

 

[Kendy]

CARose:

I think this aspect of NFP vs ABC is crucial to why use of ABC objectifies women. With ABC, the man can have his need met without ever having given of himself in the procreative way, making the union less than complete. This becomes more apparent to the wife who desires more children and is denied them by her husband.

When NFP is misused, it too has the same result, and can leave the wife feeling cheated of the fullness of what the marital embrace is intended to provide, the fullness of life from her husband.

If either partner is feeling cheated in the relationship, it seems to me that it’s time to explore the motives behind the use of NFP seriously, as a couple, or your marriage is being put at risk.

CARose

OH CaRose,

I am afraid I just complete don’t buy that. Mostly because I don’t exactly relate to the husband wants to have sex and the wife wants to have babies. While I can only speak for myself, it’s not something I can relate to. As I am thinking about whether or not I should revert to catholicism, I must admit, I am really really not looking forward to giving up nine consecutive days of each month to not have sex with my husband. The only thing that scares me more is the prospect of having eight kids. And I don’t think that makes me unloving. Sex is unitive and pleasurable (I think it’s pretty silly to try to divorce sex from pleasure); it’s a wonderful way for spouses to connect to each other, which helps sustain the relationship, even if they don’t want to children come out of it.

Kendy

 

[javelin]

Kendy,

Did my post #37 make sense to you? Did you read the article I linked to in post #46?

I just don’t want to repeat something if you’ve already digested it =).

Peace,
javelin

BTW, none of this is predicated on “women want babies, men want sex”. It is perfectly natural and normal for men and women to both desire and enjoy sex. What the Catholic Church tries to do is point people to the fullness of that joy, which is found when couples have sex in accordance with God’s design for it in their relationship. No more, and no less.

 

[javelin]

Kendy:

As I am thinking about whether or not I should revert to catholicism, I must admit, I am really really not looking forward to giving up nine consecutive days of each month to not have sex with my husband.

Why is that scary to you? Would it somehow harm your faith?

Many people have found that periodic abstinence makes their sexual relationship stronger, rather than weaker. Do you know what it is like to greet your spouse for the first time after he was away for a week on a business trip or something? Imagine that every month…

Kendy:

The only thing that scares me more is the prospect of having eight kids.

That would be scary, all at once! That is why the Church wisely leaves family planning issues to the couple, who should consider it prayerfully and honestly, examining their motives for waiting (where does the fear really scome from?), and ultimately entrusting their family to God (not blindly, but prayerfully). Remember that we can do all things in Christ who strengthens us.

Kendy:

And I don’t think that makes me unloving. Sex is unitive and pleasurable (I think it’s pretty silly to try to divorce sex from pleasure); it’s a wonderful way for spouses to connect to each other, which helps sustain the relationship, even if they don’t want to children come out of it.

Kendy

You are absolutely correct, which is why God made women fertile only about 17% of the time, during only a portion of her natural life. Children can come, but it is not required for sex to be good.

As a matter of fact, sex between spouses, when done in love, is always a good thing. Always. It is some of the choices that people make around and about their sexual relationship that can be seriously sinful. It is those things the Church has always warned people to avoid.

BTW, did you know that every Christian denomination held contraception as morally evil until 1930? Did you know that the first major church to change positions, the Presbyterian Church, has now wavered on abortion, too (from what I’ve heard)? Moral truths do not change, because God does not change.

Peace,
javelin

 

[Agricola]

Kendy:

I am afraid I just complete don’t buy that. Mostly because I don’t exactly relate to the husband wants to have sex and the wife wants to have babies. While I can only speak for myself, it’s not something I can relate to. As I am thinking about whether or not I should revert to catholicism, I must admit, I am really really not looking forward to giving up nine consecutive days of each month to not have sex with my husband. The only thing that scares me more is the prospect of having eight kids. And I don’t think that makes me unloving. Sex is unitive and pleasurable (I think it’s pretty silly to try to divorce sex from pleasure); it’s a wonderful way for spouses to connect to each other, which helps sustain the relationship, even if they don’t want to children come out of it.

We have a couple problems mentioned in what you’ve written here Kendy.

1. There is no doubt in anyone’s mind that women want to have sexual relations with their husbands, and that men are also objectified by the use of ABC. What was being said was that, because of the greater demand fertility makes of women, the objectification of women is greater. This is because fertility and union are linked. They share a common natural end… children.
2. Why do children scare you? Children are the natural end of conjugal love. They are living, breathing reminders of the love of spouses for each other. You may be a very loving person, but if you are not open to having children with your husband, then you are holding something back from him… your fertility. By holding back your fertility from him you are taking away from the unitive element of sex, the very element that you seek to extend into the fertile period (while remaining child-free) through the use of ABC.

It is not easy to be Catholic. One has to truly desire to give oneself to God, and to follow the precepts of His Church. Our sexuality is a very serious subject. It reaches into every aspect of our lives. We must make sure that when we participate in the fullest realization of our sexuality in marital relations, that we understand that it cannot be divided and manipulated without injuring the relationship that it is meant to stengthen.

It’s all about the gift of self Kendy. Where selfish interest, whether mutual or not, come into play, there is a lessening of the value of all elements of sex.

God bless,

Agricola

 

[Kendy]

Oh, don’t mind me. I am just depressed by how little sex and how many babies I am about to have. :crying:

Kendy

javelin:

Kendy,

Did my post #37 make sense to you? Did you read the article I linked to in post #46?

I just don’t want to repeat something if you’ve already digested it =).

Peace,
javelin

BTW, none of this is predicated on “women want babies, men want sex”. It is perfectly natural and normal for men and women to both desire and enjoy sex. What the Catholic Church tries to do is point people to the fullness of that joy, which is found when couples have sex in accordance with God’s design for it in their relationship. No more, and no less.