NFP sinful

[Nate13]

One can use NFP and not be in grave sin if they HAVE GOOD REASON not to have a child. When was that rule adopted in the Catechism of the church?

How is that biblical? Certainly that thought was not handed down in Tradition. The Church was forced to give some leeway, because the days of having/wanting families of 15 children were done. The church moved with the world.

We are a church who embraces suffering. It seems to me that even if a child would bring about more suffering (be it financial, health) then it is all for the greater good. Obviously any good reason a couple would have for not having a child is an attempt to avoid suffering.

Where does it say in the Bible that we are to just let babies come as the come? The Church’s teaching is based in natural moral law. If as you said God wanted us to have babies constantly he would have created a woman’s body to always be fertile. 75% of time sex is primarily unitive for a couple because the woman is not fertile.

Also, just because a gift is good does not automatically mean we should desire to get as much of it as we possibly can. We all love chocolate cake, but if you sit down and eat the whole cake that is bad for you. If you have diabetes, eating even one piece could be bad. This line of thinking is what the Church is referring to when it says “for serious reasons”. Babies are gifts from God, but that does not mean we should desire to have as many as will come with no regard for the circumstances surrounding that decision. By limiting a woman’s fertility to 25% of the time, God has clearly designed sex to give man some amount of control in the process and its our job to use our ability to reason to use that control to do God’s will.

 

[sw85]

You see, my grandmother is of the generation where families of 13, 15, even 20 children were common. They were the ones truly open to life at all times, at all costs. There was never a good reason not to be open to life. A child is a blessing. This is why NFP is difficult for me to accept.

Yes, “openness to life,” properly understood, will lead to large families where fertility is not disordered and the circumstances permit.

Again, NFP may be used licitly only where the circumstances do not permit large families – cases of extreme financial hardship or health problems, serious persecution, natural disasters, etc. These are circumstances most people do not face for long periods of time. Therefore, for most people, NFP can’t be licitly used, for long periods of time. (The one exception I can think of is perhaps for 6-12 months after the birth of a child, as multiple successive pregnancies can be very damaging to the mother).

I don’t see why you have a problem with this. The Church has laid out the circumstances under which it can be used. Those circumstances are very narrow. In essence you are in agreement with the Church, except that you say (wrongly) that it can never ever be used and they say it can almost never ever be used. What’s the problem?

 

[joclucsylv]

Yes, “openness to life,” properly understood, will lead to large families where fertility is not disordered and the circumstances permit.

Again, NFP may be used licitly only where the circumstances do not permit large families – cases of extreme financial hardship or health problems, serious persecution, natural disasters, etc. These are circumstances most people do not face for long periods of time. Therefore, for most people, NFP can’t be licitly used, for long periods of time. (The one exception I can think of is perhaps for 6-12 months after the birth of a child, as multiple successive pregnancies can be very damaging to the mother).

I don’t see why you have a problem with this. The Church has laid out the circumstances under which it can be used. Those circumstances are very narrow. In essence you are in agreement with the Church, except that you say (wrongly) that it can never ever be used and they say it can almost never ever be used. What’s the problem?

So you are saying that the church says that NFP can almost never be used. Wow…where are those families of 15 then lol!!!

 

[sw85]

So you are saying that the church says that NFP can almost never be used. Wow…where are those families of 15 then lol!!!

If some of the post-apostolic revelations can be trusted, most Catholics are going to Hell.

 

[seekerz]

Yes, “openness to life,” properly understood, will lead to large families where fertility is not disordered and the circumstances permit.

Again, NFP may be used licitly only where the circumstances do not permit large families – cases of extreme financial hardship or health problems, serious persecution, natural disasters, etc. These are circumstances most people do not face for long periods of time. Therefore, for most people, NFP can’t be licitly used, for long periods of time. (The one exception I can think of is perhaps for 6-12 months after the birth of a child, as multiple successive pregnancies can be very damaging to the mother).

Most families I know cannot support more than 3 or 4 kids, if that many. So, I’m not sure that the circumstances under which NFP can be licitly practiced are as uncommon or short-lived as you imply.

 

[sw85]

Most families I know cannot support more than 3 or 4 kids, if that many. So, I’m not sure that the circumstances under which NFP can be licitly practiced are as uncommon or short-lived as you imply.

Well, far be it from me to judge what, exactly, constitutes “extreme financial hardship.” All I’ll say is that Catholic families were substantially larger a century ago, when the standard of living was markedly lower.

 

[seekerz]

Well, far be it from me to judge what, exactly, constitutes “extreme financial hardship.” All I’ll say is that Catholic families were substantially larger a century ago, when the standard of living was markedly lower.

Families were larger, cost of living was definitely lower and the standard of living was arguably also lower. The only one of those which individuals have full personal control over in today’s world, is family size.

 

[Nate13]

Families were larger, cost of living was definitely lower and the standard of living was arguably also lower. The only one of those which individuals have full personal control over in today’s world, is family size.

Arguably there are many parts of the standard of living that are subjective. Saving up $50,000 per child so they have college paid for is one such subjective matter.

 

[maryjk]

Again, NFP may be used licitly only where the circumstances do not permit large families – cases of extreme financial hardship or health problems, serious persecution, natural disasters, etc. These are circumstances most people do not face for long periods of time. Therefore, for most people, NFP can’t be licitly used, for long periods of time. (The one exception I can think of is perhaps for 6-12 months after the birth of a child, as multiple successive pregnancies can be very damaging to the mother).

Checking the Catechism of the Catholic Church and not finding this anywhere.

In fact, it says, " For just reasons, spouses may wish to space the birth of their children."

Just as there are people that believe that any reason justifies the use of NFP, there are people that believe there are no reasons to justify its use.

 

[Nate13]

Checking the Catechism of the Catholic Church and not finding this anywhere.

In fact, it says, " For just reasons, spouses may wish to space the birth of their children."

Just as there are people that believe that any reason justifies the use of NFP, there are people that believe there are no reasons to justify its use.

Theologians disagree on what can be considered serious reasons, however all theologians in concert with Rome agree there are cases where it can be used. All also agree it is up to the discretion of the couple to make the call. It is also the duty of the couple to inform themselves and prayerfully discern God’s will for their family.

 

[seekerz]

Arguably there are many parts of the standard of living that are subjective. Saving up $50,000 per child so they have college paid for is one such subjective matter.

I agree. I’m just referring to the everyday cost of raising kids.

 

[maryjk]

Theologians disagree on what can be considered serious reasons, however all theologians in concert with Rome agree there are cases where it can be used. All also agree it is up to the discretion of the couple to make the call. It is also the duty of the couple to inform themselves and prayerfully discern God’s will for their family.

Very true.

But that doesn’t stop everyday people from deciding that there must be an extreme case before NFP is legitimate. Nor does it stop people from passing judgement on those that do use it.

 

[sw85]

Checking the Catechism of the Catholic Church and not finding this anywhere.

In fact, it says, " For just reasons, spouses may wish to space the birth of their children."

Just as there are people that believe that any reason justifies the use of NFP, there are people that believe there are no reasons to justify its use.

As I said earlier in the thread, previous popes (I believe most recently Pius XII, could be wrong there) have said that the circumstances under which NFP may be used are quite limited, and I don’t believe any more recent papal teaching has abrogated that. So I’m assuming they’re still in effect.

 

[seekerz]

As I said earlier in the thread, previous popes (I believe most recently Pius XII, could be wrong there) have said that the circumstances under which NFP may be used are quite limited, and I don’t believe any more recent papal teaching has abrogated that. So I’m assuming they’re still in effect.

Considering that the Catholic Church is universal, and that there are millions of people living on less than $1 a day without life’s basic amenities, those ‘limited’ circumstances seem to affect a whole lot of people.

That’s my one pet peeve with NFP: not enough training in the method is widely available; leaving many Catholics to choose between responsible procreation and ABCs.

 

[Nate13]

As I said earlier in the thread, previous popes (I believe most recently Pius XII, could be wrong there) have said that the circumstances under which NFP may be used are quite limited, and I don’t believe any more recent papal teaching has abrogated that. So I’m assuming they’re still in effect.

From the Theology of the Body A Simplified Version:

The Pope teaches there are two groups of parents who “exercise responsible parenthood”. The first group “prudently and generously decide to have a large family.” The second group “for serious reasons and with due respect for the moral law”, “choose to have no more children for the time being or even for an indeterminate period.” Responsible parenthood requires both a disposition to limit births and to increase the fmaily size in accord with prudence. Parents must examine “the objective moral order instituted by God”, which is truly interpreted by a right conscience (HV 10)

Pope Paul VI said that the reasons for practicing periodic continence require “reasonable grounds for spacing births”. These are based upon “the physical or psychological conditions of husband or wife, or from external circumstances”

 

[Nate13]

That’s my one pet peeve with NFP: not enough training in the method is widely available; leaving many Catholics to choose between responsible procreation and ABCs.

Agreed. I think some non-profits need to spout up that provide free lessons in NFP for couples who are in need. You would think that would also be something you could get the government behind… NFP is not only a lesson in birth control its also a lesson in responsibility which our country is in dire need of.

 

[nodito]

As I said earlier in the thread, previous popes (I believe most recently Pius XII, could be wrong there) have said that the circumstances under which NFP may be used are quite limited, and I don’t believe any more recent papal teaching has abrogated that. So I’m assuming they’re still in effect.

On November 26, 1951, Pope Pius XII addressed the Association of Large Families:

The Church, on the other hand, can understand, with sympathy and comprehension, the real difficulties of matrimonial life in these our days. For this reason, in Our last address on conjugal morality, We affirmed the legitimacy and at the same time the limits—truly very wide—of that controlling of births which, unlike the so-called “birth control,” is compatible with God’s law. It can be hoped . . . that for such a lawful method a sufficiently certain [scientific] basis can be found, and recent research seems to confirm this hope.

The limits are “truly very wide,” which means that they are not the strict, tight limits that many believe. The Church never says that NFP can only be used by those in “extreme hardship” or when threatened by life or death situations. She trusts couples to use prudential judgement and avoid children for serious reasons only, but what those serious reasons are, she doesn’t specify.

 

[joclucsylv]

Most families I know cannot support more than 3 or 4 kids, if that many. So, I’m not sure that the circumstances under which NFP can be licitly practiced are as uncommon or short-lived as you imply.

Back in my grandmother’s day they couldn’t support the children they had…but they still had them…up to 20 kids…and God provided.

 

[seekerz]

Agreed. I think some non-profits need to spout up that provide free lessons in NFP for couples who are in need. You would think that would also be something you could get the government behind…

Only if the Church were seriously pushing it. I get the impression that the average Catholic is a little embarrassed to talk about NFP in the normal course of life.

The prevalent opinion is that people have no ability to control their sexual behavior, as exemplified in that idiotic ad featuring a women carrying in groceries: …“suddenly you find yourself pregnant” the narrator commiserates…I get so irritated; if you’re old enough to drive a car, you’re old enough to figure out how pregnancy ‘happens’, for goodness sake.

 

[joclucsylv]

Very true.

But that doesn’t stop everyday people from deciding that there must be an extreme case before NFP is legitimate. Nor does it stop people from passing judgement on those that do use it.

So in that case…people shouldn’t judge people who use ABC. ABC and NFP used incorrectly are both mortal sin.