NFP vs condoms for creating love within marriage

[Mrc]

Ok, so I want to respond to everything.

My wife and I are so close it’s amazing. This view is something we’ve both come to. We’ve been working hard for 10 years to find where the physical attraction has gone, and we’ve both separately realised it’s 100% because of NFP.

All protestants are going to hell because they use contraception, said no Catholic ever.

Abstaining because you know it’s a fertile time takes no self control whatsoever. We have a major responsibility to each other and our children to not have any more children. We’ve prayed plenty.

Having sex whenever, during phase 2 as well because you trust that God won’t give you a child if it’s not His will is the same as Jesus’ temptation to jump - don’t test God.

Having sex with a condom is still being open to life because sex makes babies. It’s the intention (like all other moral teachings) that’s important. At least, that would be more consistent with other theology.

We don’t choose to not enjoy that part of our love, we’re forced to not enjoy it.

These things are my experiences. They’ve made me realise these things, and they’ve made me think about it logically. I’ve preached NFP, but I avoided trying to hold the stance on condoms because I could never back it up.

I’m not writing it of anger, malice, or any bad intent. I’m not trying to justify myself to disobey the Church. I’m not asking how to deal with NFP. I’m stating facts, and I’m giving insight to where I’m coming from, because I’m legit Catholic.

I’m putting it out there: back up the theology with scripture. All other theology can be quite easily backed up. Condoms; I can’t. I haven’t been able to get anyone to. Within marriage, your intent is love. Within marriage, you’re open to life. Within marriage, you want to experience the pinnacle of pleasure as a celebration of the sacrament. NFP is contraception with a different label. It’s a means to prevent pregnancy out of responsibility.

 

[Lara]

The problem isn’t NFP. What you are really rebelling against is the whole way in which our bodies work and are designed.

I don’t really understand why you can’t have more children. I don’t understand all the sickness that befalls you. I think the secret lies in trying to make more money so you can solve some problems, get more help with your children and housework, have more children, feel more faith in the future.

 

[Mrc]

I’m not rebelling, I want to find out. My philosophy is follow the rules, but find out why. After 20 years, I still can’t find out why on this issue.

You can’t say “To enjoy being Catholic, you have to be rich”. That’s incredibly naive. In addition, my wife had a 10cm diastasis extending up to her ribs. She had to be hospitalized several times due to hyperemesis, and it didn’t cease until after birth. Her recovery is still not complete, and she has endometriosis and a painful permanent hernia. She often has severe nausea and vomiting for days 1-4 due to these physiological issues. I don’t have space to go into the economic stress we are under.

And how is using a condom going against how our bodies work? This is precisely my point that condoms fall into the same category as NFP as “contraception which is good” vs other contraceptive methods which would fall into the “contraception which is bad” group. In fact, I would go as far as to say that NFP goes against how our bodies work - because abstaining in marriage is more unnatural, and to do so for the sole purpose to prevent pregnancy when this is unnecessary doesn’t make sense. We use medical care, and it’s moral to do so. Science is a very important aspect of the Catholic faith, and our theology even says that (basically) “Let scientists find out the science - that’s their job. Let doctors do the healing - that’s their job. We’ll do the theology, because that’s our job”, and that is in recognition of the fact that God gives different talents to different people.

NFP prevents pregnancy by preventing fertilization. Condoms do the same. There is no life until fertilization, and sperm cells are produced and recycled by the million daily. Egg cells are expelled from the body monthly as well.

From the man’s side; if he ejaculates during phase 2 (because this does happen as a natural process occasionally), should he then put that sperm into his wife? No, it doesn’t make sense, and it’s not “spilling seed”. It’s a similar thing as the egg which is shed during phase 1. In addition, sex in marriage is part of the sacrament, and by definition of being married, a couple is open to life. Condom doesn’t change those facts. The one scriptural reference which directly talks about this is Onan. But using a condom is not the same thing - Onan was disobeying God’s will. And he was doing so mindfully. If he had abstained, he still would have been disobeying God’s will. God gave him several chances too - it wasn’t that one ejaculation that carried the specific sperm that was to become the life God was going to imbue the embryo with - no, the life would imbue whichever embryo was naturally created. Jonah also disobeyed God’s will, but on second chance, he changed, and God’s will was done.

In fact, I’ve been trying to find references to refute the claim from other Christians about predestination (and God’s divine election). Onan is a direct reference that we have a choice, and that God doesn’t choose for us (even though he may know the choice).

 

[F_Marturana]

Is there a way to learn a different method of NFP?

Generally women are fertile the day of ovulation, for about 24 hours. Sperm can survive circa 5-6 days prior to ovulation.

Another method might allow for more days of intimacy.

 

[F_Marturana]

NFP prevents pregnancy by preventing fertilization. Condoms do the same.

NFP prevents pregnancy by avoiding sex.

Condoms are used to have sex regardless of fertility to avoid pregnancy.

 

[Mrc]

First, F_Marturana, yes, both prevent pregnancy - that’s the definition of contraception.

JamesV.Cameron, it hasn’t got to do with me, and my frustrations - it’s got to do with the teaching. I’m saying it doesn’t make sense. Catholic theology says contraception is wrong. But NFP is contraception, so we call it something else so that it’s right. Condoms don’t prevent love - they promote it (because I’m talking from a moral married point of view). NFP “encourages different types of love as substitute”, but this hasn’t rung true for my 10 year marriage. We have that love regardless. We’re up against a brick wall in trying to get our physical love to the same level.

To get to the point of it - the umbrella rule is love. From that perspective, it would make more logical sense to say “these forms of contraception are acceptable, and these aren’t”. I would list NFP and condoms in the former.

So, my wife and I have (I think) once or twice ever used a condom for sex in phase 2. The first time was experimental, and it may have been around a time when we were trying to conceive. The second has a whole story behind it. So YES we do NFP, and because we are Catholic, we do as Catholics should.

I want to know why. We have certain doctrines which have solid routes, but not scriptural reference, and those are solid and make sense. The teaching behind NFP is scriptural as well. But the teaching against condoms isn’t scriptural (at least I haven’t found a reference), but it’s a deduction. From my knowledge of the theology (which I admit isn’t full), condoms are ring-fenced as contraception, and NFP not, and this causes one to be wrong and the other right.

As we know, the church does adapt its teaching according to science, and in a particularly controlled way. I believe it is up to the laity to ask the questions, because this is a fairly serious issue, and extremely misunderstood in the non-Catholic world. It is also important because many Catholics don’t follow this teaching. Many Catholics leave the church because of this teaching. And I agree with them (because of said reasons). Obviously I would like to know the scripture behind it, but no one has given that. It’s “offer up your suffering”, or “the Church teaches it”, or “condoms are a ticket to hell”, etc. I haven’t been able to convince any non-Catholic, or a Catholic who disagrees by giving good scriptural or logical (theological) reason.

Ok, so I make a good argument. My reasoning is consistent with scripture, and importantly with the rule that we love one another. My reasoning is consistent with other sacraments. What’s the reason I’m wrong?

 

[1ke]

All protestants are going to hell because they use contraception, said no Catholic ever.

All people who know something is wrong and do it anyway commit a grave sin, and if unrepentant will be judged accordingly.

All people who are truly ignorant of the moral law or the gravity of their actions will be judged accordingly.

Catholic or not.

It’s the intention (like all other moral teachings) that’s important.

Actually, that is NOT the moral teaching on any moral area. At all.

I suggest part 3, section 1, chapter 1 in the Catechism in its entirety. But here are some relevant passages on the morality of our actions:

1750 The morality of human acts depends on:

• the object chosen;
• the end in view or the intention;
• the circumstances of the action.
  The object, the intention, and the circumstances make up the “sources,” or constitutive elements, of the morality of human acts.

1755 A morally good act requires the goodness of the object, of the end, and of the circumstances together.

1756 It is therefore an error to judge the morality of human acts by considering only the intention that inspires them

 

[1ke]

I’m putting it out there: back up the theology with scripture.

Divine Revelation consists of both Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition. Do not fall into the heresy of sola scriptura in your quest to defend the indefensible.

As you well know, the Church teaching on the ordered and disordered use of our sexual faculties. I will repeat here what Pope Paul VI said in Humanae Vitae: Similarly excluded is any action which either before, at the moment of, or after sexual intercourse, is specifically intended to prevent procreation—whether as an end or as a means. Neither is it valid to argue, as a justification for sexual intercourse which is deliberately contraceptive, that a lesser evil is to be preferred to a greater one

 

[Mrc]

• the object chosen;

• the end in view or the intention;

• the circumstances of the action.

• The object, the intention, and the circumstances make up the “sources,” or constitutive elements, of the morality of human acts.

Ok, so that’s more detail. The intention, the circumstance, the marriage, and the outcome are all love.

But yes, you are right that I shouldn’t say it’s based solely on the intention. You should be able to see that I’m not by everything I’ve written.

“Similarly excluded is any action which either before, at the moment of, or after sexual intercourse, is specifically intended to prevent procreation” - such as abstaining (before).
Yes, I get the Divine Revelation part of Catholic Tradition, but the Divine Revelation is also dependent on scripture. It’s not sola scriptura, but there is a strong and fundamental tie between Tradition and Scripture. I respect the teaching in Humanae Vitae, and I respect and honor the teaching of the Church, but that same teaching says that we should ask the questions (not in so many words, however).

“Unfortunately our opinions don’t really matter.”
Yes, they do. If you believe this, you’re not Catholic. You can’t separate the Church and God.

“It’s not a debate and the church isn’t a democracy.”
Yes, it is a debate, and the question needs to be asked. We are the Church.

“You’re free to make your decision but you’re not free of the consequences.”
My decision (and I urge anyone reading here to do the same) is to follow the Church’s teaching. Questions are good - questions build understanding and faith.

 

[TMC]

Lots of Catholics struggle and/or disagree with the Church’s teaching on contraception. As you have seen, you will not find a lot of understanding about that here. Have you tried bringing this up with your priest, or some other spiritual advisor in real life? You are not likely to find helpful advice in an online forum, IMO.

 

[TheLittleLady]

It sounds as if the method you have selected is not working well in your marriage. Have you visited with your instructor? Have you explored other methods and wearable tech?