NFP marketing, is promoting it right?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ByWhatAuthority
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

ByWhatAuthority

Guest
I’ve never been comfortable with the marketing of Natural Family Planning by the Church. If you read Humanae Vitae it rather clearly states that Catholic couples should only use NFP as a last resort for “Grave or serious reasons”.
But in the back of most of the churches I attend, there is a stack of pamphlets promoting the wonders of NFP as the end all be all to a perfect marriage. I understand the terrible sin of contraception and the wide use of it among Catholics so I think I know why the church promotes nfp this way. Maybe because it is the lesser of two evils?? I don’t know? Is it really in the best interest of the faithful to be taught that nfp is permissible to use in this way? Not as a solution to a grave issue but as Catholic contraception, 99% effective means to prevent pregnancy.
I think marriages could be made stronger by teaching and promoting the Churches true teaching that married couples are to be open to children and accept them as blessings.
 
Last edited:
NFP is not always for “contraceptive” reasons… it can also be used in assistance for concieving life
 
First, “NFP” is not one single thing. It is a generic, umbrella term.

There are many methods of NFP, the Church does not own nor promote one method over another. Each couple needs to evaluate the various methods and choose what works for them at their current phase of life.

At our parish, every week we refer to the Bishops’ web resource ForYourMarriage.org Folks can from there research some well-known methods of NFP


It also refers people back to their Diocese to find out what trainers practice in their area. There are correspondence courses, Skype learning, many resources (our parish also has a resource page on our website with links to various method practitioners).

There are also many secular resources, I often suggest the http://www.sweeteningthepill.com/resources.php website

A dusty stack of pamphlets in the back of the church is not where the modern couple looks for information. Help your parish update their website!
 
And the Church uses the term “just reasons”. Does not have to be grave. Just. And once you have been married and have lived NFP you quickly learn that if your reasons are unjust you will simply throw the method out the window.
 
ByWhatAuthority said:
I think marriages could be made stronger by teaching and promoting the Churches true teaching that married couples are to be open to children and accept them as blessings.
Click to expand...
Be careful that you don’t tie burdens around the necks of people by selectively reeling out Church Teachings.

This is Church teaching:

2368 A particular aspect of this responsibility concerns the regulation of procreation. For just reasons, spouses may wish to space the births of their children. It is their duty to make certain that their desire is not motivated by selfishness but is in conformity with the generosity appropriate to responsible parenthood. Moreover, they should conform their behavior to the objective criteria of morality:

When it is a question of harmonizing married love with the responsible transmission of life, the morality of the behavior does not depend on sincere intention and evaluation of motives alone; but it must be determined by objective criteria, criteria drawn from the nature of the person and his acts, criteria that respect the total meaning of mutual self-giving and human procreation in the context of true love; this is possible only if the virtue of married chastity is practiced with sincerity of heart.

And this

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. 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:

Thus the innate language that expresses the total reciprocal self-giving of husband and wife is overlaid, through contraception, by an objectively contradictory language, namely, that of not giving oneself totally to the other. This leads not only to a positive refusal to be open to life but also to a falsification of the inner truth of conjugal love, which is called upon to give itself in personal totality. . . . The difference, both anthropological and moral, between contraception and recourse to the rhythm of the cycle . . . involves in the final analysis two irreconcilable concepts of the human person and of human sexuality.
 
ByWhatAuthority said:
If you read Humanae Vitae it rather clearly states that Catholic couples should only use NFP as a last resort for “Grave or serious reasons”.
Click to expand...
I don’t believe the phrase “last resort” gets used with regard to NFP in Humanae Vitae. Cite?

Also, it isn’t “the lesser of two evils.”

NFP gets used heavily by Catholics and others to achieve pregnancy.

When it’s used to avoid, it’s just abstinence.
 
So the Catholic Church changed her position a bit?
Did it kinda go like this:

It used to be taught that God decided the number of children a married couple would be blessed with. That couples should always be open to having children and never use any artificial means to prevent pregnancy but in a "serious "or “grave” situation, abstinence to avoid is permissible.

Then it seems to get muddied up a bit.

Now it’s no longer for “grave” reasons but “just” reasons. There is a big difference there! The terminology has changed big time! Phrases like "responsible parenthood " get tossed around and this from the latest catechism:
TheLittleLady said:
These methods respect the bodies of the spouses, encourage tenderness between them, and favor the education of an authentic freedom.
Click to expand...
“Authentic freedom”! Really? So the knowledge and ability to regulate the amount of children you will have is now considered "freedom "? And we no longer use abstinence for serious reasons only? Because in today’s world it would be irresponsible to allow God to decide your family size and being able to regulate the number of children you have is "freedom ".

Things really have changed, haven’t they? And the number of children Catholics have, pretty much matching society in general, is evidence that this mentality is flawed. I guess just about every catholic couple has “just” reasons to not have more then the average number of children. Bye bye large families!
 
Last edited:
Sometimes you need to meet people where they are.
Also, the couple may be unevenly yoked–where one person is very open to life and the other has cold feet.
I would advise fighting one battle at a time. In this culture where ABC is assumed, if you can persuade people to NFP, that’s a pretty good thing.
 
We used NFP. We have seven children. We both read Humanea Vitea and acted accordingly. My last child was born 12 years before I hit menopause. NFP works and is Church teaching. That is good enough for me.
 
The church never said “let God decide how many children you have.” Humane Vitae never changed either, just the translation into English. The earlier English translations used the word “grave” the more recent ones use the word “just”, which is a more accurate translation.

Also, trying to be responsible about your family size doesn’t mean you don’t trust in God, it means that you and your spouse have decided that adding another addition to your family isn’t the best idea right now, but if you were to have another child, God would make it work. My husband and I are in a point in our lives where, with everything else going on, throwing another child into the mix would be less than ideal, so we’re using NFP to avoid, but if I screw up and end up pregnant we know it would all work out. Anybody who’s practices NFP for any length of time will tell you that you know pretty quickly if you have a good enough reason by whether or not you stick with it.

Finally I just wanted to say, because I see so many anti-NFP people lament the lack of large catholic families, to maybe not worry about others family size so much. It took my husband and I nine years and multiple miscarriages before we finally had our first child. We had our second 13 months later. It was after our second child that we actually started practicing NFP, we had never used it before that. But I know from the looks of it that judgy person in the next church pew over would think that we were your typical “modern” couple who waited a long time to have kids, then had our 2 and were done. So don’t just assume because somebody doesn’t have 10 kids that they’re bad Catholics, because there’s any number of totally valid reasons that they don’t.
 
ByWhatAuthority said:
If you read Humanae Vitae it rather clearly states that Catholic couples should only use NFP as a last resort for “Grave or serious reasons”.
Click to expand...
If you read Humanae Vitae it says neither “last resort” nor “grave” reasons.

From the Catechsim:

2368 A particular aspect of this responsibility concerns the regulation of procreation. For just reasons, spouses may wish to space the births of their children. It is their duty to make certain that their desire is not motivated by selfishness but is in conformity with the generosity appropriate to responsible parenthood. Moreover, they should conform their behavior to the objective criteria of morality
 
ByWhatAuthority said:
“Authentic freedom”! Really? So the knowledge and ability to regulate the amount of children you will have is now considered "freedom "? And we no longer use abstinence for serious reasons only? Because in today’s world it would be irresponsible to allow God to decide your family size and being able to regulate the number of children you have is "freedom ".
Click to expand...
Most fertile married couples can’t afford 5, 10 or 15 children in this day and age. Should that preclude them from getting married and having children at all?
 
Last edited:
ByWhatAuthority said:
So the Catholic Church changed her position a bit?

Did it kinda go like this:

It used to be taught that God decided the number of children a married couple would be blessed with. That couples should always be open to having children and never use any artificial means to prevent pregnancy but in a "serious "or “grave” situation, abstinence to avoid is permissible.

Then it seems to get muddied up a bit.

Now it’s no longer for “grave” reasons but “just” reasons.
Click to expand...
I’d suggest a good study of Humanae Vitae. By that I mean you read the document, and at each footnote you read the referenced material. All of the material is available, but, perhaps it will provide a clear picture of the official teachings of the Church.

Many times we read blogs and articles and watch YouTube videos of our favorite celebrity priest, superstar layperson, who takes their personal opinions and uses some selected quotes out of context and we do that for so often that soon we think those opinions are the official doctrines.

Take the time, do the study.

http://w2.vatican.va/content/paul-v...ments/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae.html

You express surprise at passages of the Catechism that are pretty broadly known (especially by what I call we “Catholic nerds”, people who spend time online talking about and reading about our Faith). Familiarize yourself with the Catechism and it serves us well as we form our consciences and defend the Faith.

Linking some other references that we should have available at our fingertips, you can buy these as ebooks or as real books. I like the convenience of electronic for quick study:

While the Vatican offers the Catechism, the online version that has the best search feature is:

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

Vatican has these and so many more:

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/_INDEX.HTM

http://www.vatican.va/archive/compendium_ccc/documents/archive_2005_compendium-ccc_en.html

Because understanding the Church’s teachings in the world, this one is important to read as well:

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/p...peace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html
 
TheAmazingGrace said:
Most fertile married couples can’t afford 5, 10 or 15 children in this day and age. Should that preclude them from getting married and having children at all?
Click to expand...
ByWhatAuthority,

Be careful that you’re not combining these two ideas:

–Modern society is terrible and polluting (more so than ever in Christian history) and we should protect our children as much as possible from it!

and

–Why don’t people have large families like in the good old days?

The more terrible and polluting modern society is, the harder parents have to work in order to produce a wholesome, healthy environment for them to grow up in. For example, I think that our kids are doing great, but even with a solid income, we are pretty much impoverished by having three children in private school. (If you were here, I could demonstrate this by showing you my clothes, my shoes and my car (our only car).) Even “just” three requires enormous ongoing financial sacrifice. But it is paying off immeasurably–our three kids are flourishing, love their school communities (I always hated mine), and our two special needs children are making amazing progress on their issues.

People are going to say, why don’t you just homeschool? Homeschooling is free! and I’m going to say the following:

–This is our eleventh year in this school community. It’s working for us. I’m not going to throw that away for something that might not work at all for our family.
–My mom got breast cancer at exactly my age. Under the circumstances, I feel that bringing the kids home while I’m expecting to get cancer any year now would be unwise. (When my mom had cancer, she virtually disappeared for a year and we kids were left largely to our own devices–good thing the youngest was 6 at the time.)
–As even enthusiastic homeschoolers can tell you, mom being pregnant, having an infant, a toddler or a preschooler can make it hard to homeschool effectively.
–Also, as even enthusiastic homeschoolers will tell you, it isn’t the right approach for every child. You’ll often hear from CAFers who have some kids doing homeschool, some public, and some private.
–Some homeschooling families give in to the temptation of having homeschool primarily be about getting older school age kids to help out at home with housekeeping and the small children. It’s a great blessing to children to have 6 hours a day blocked out for school instead of helping mom.
–Conscientious homeschooling parents have to work very hard at producing a solid social environment for their kids so that their children will develop socially and have wholesome friendships and peers that encourage them to do the right thing.
–Parents also have to make an effort to keep kids from finding the wrong people online or in real life.
–Doing those two last two things is going to be hard when mom is constantly distracted by pregnancy and small children. I have to tell you that my personal experience of pregnancy is that I get mentally fuzzy and much less intellectually effective.
–And no, the nuclear family alone cannot provide enough of a social outlet for normal development.
 
ByWhatAuthority said:
But in the back of most of the churches I attend, there is a stack of pamphlets promoting the wonders of NFP as the end all be all to a perfect marriage.
Click to expand...
That’s overselling it, but yes, self-denial for the sake of the other and the welfare of the family is pretty important for marriage.

People who think every twitch and tingle of their genitals is the voice of God are deeply mistaken.
 
Mi_Rose said:
NFP works and is Church teaching. That is good enough for me.
Click to expand...
NFP is church teaching? Are you sure about that? I thought the Church always taught that married couples must be open to having babies. NFP/abstinence was mentioned as a solution to “grave or serious reasons” to prevent a possible pregnancy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top