Nfp

[manualman]

Jesus never preached against abortion either. You for that?
How about sexual abuse of children? Nope, cant find him teaching on it. Must be OK.

Fact is that Judaism already strongly condemned the practice of contraception in the forms known to them (withdrawal, barrier, abortifacient devices). Jesus was raised in that culture and condemned many encroachments that were teachings of men rather than of God. Strangely, He never repudiated that one. On the contrary, He either did not address it or the Scripture authors didn’t consider it important enough to record it since EVERYBODY (at the time) already knew that basic elementary stuff.

The onus is on you to prove that Jesus rescinded previous Jewish teaching, not on us to prove that He still supports it.

And nobody says you must have a large family. The church DOES leave that in the hands of individuals to determine if there are serious reasons to avoid having more and to use moral means to that end that do not sever our sexuality from our loving relationship.

 

[lotusblossom]

The world is populated, but not OVERpopulated . Also, like manualman said, the Church does not say “Have as many children as possible.” In fact, the Church talks about being able to raise and educate your children, not just have them. Why not NFP then? If you have a serious reason, it’s just as effective, if not more, than any form of birth control.

 

[Pug]

With that said, I’ve heard many people say that they think every couple who is preparing for a Catholic marriage should be required to take the class.

I dislike that idea. I see no reason to make a 50 year old take an NFP class as a requirement to get married in the Catholic Church. I don’t cotton to the idea of forcing 20 year olds either. I would rather the Church spend that time to teach *doctrine *about marriage, etc., and not instruct in an actual method of charting as a requirement to marry.

OTOH, if you ask the parish and they have no idea where to direct you to find out NFP information, that is also unhelpful.

 

[lifeisbeautiful]

I dislike that idea. I see no reason to make a 50 year old take an NFP class as a requirement to get married in the Catholic Church. I don’t cotton to the idea of forcing 20 year olds either. I would rather the Church spend that time to teach *doctrine *about marriage, etc., and not instruct in an actual method of charting as a requirement to marry.

OTOH, if you ask the parish and they have no idea where to direct you to find out NFP information, that is also unhelpful.

I second this opinion. For our pre-cana we were required to meet with an NFP intructor and take a short overview class, but not an in-depth one. I think this is how it should be. With that said, I do think the resources and option to take one should be available.

 

[Priscilla_Ann]

The world is populated, but not OVERpopulated . Also, like manualman said, the Church does not say “Have as many children as possible.” In fact, the Church talks about being able to raise and educate your children, not just have them. Why not NFP then? If you have a serious reason, it’s just as effective, if not more, than any form of birth control.

Why not NFP? In my case, I had serious health issues. I couldn’t afford a “trial run” with NFP to see whether it worked or not. At that time, NFP did not have a great reputation in terms of reliability. My husband and I chose a reliable method that worked for us. That was a decison between God, my husband and me. And that is precisely my point…it is between God and a husband and wife. We are accountable to God…not to anyone else, including the Catholic Church.

 

[Pug]

That was a decison between God, my husband and me. And that is precisely my point…it is between God and a husband and wife. We are accountable to God…not to anyone else, including the Catholic Church.

I do agree to the point that much of what is decided about how things will work out in a married couple’s life is something that is not shared outside the two of them (and God, clearly). Right and wrong still apply, however. It would be wrong to agree to include a dog in the marriage bed. The man and wife must restrict their choices to upright ones. They do not choose what right and wrong are. Right and wrong are givens that they must follow. Beyond that, then they are free to choose.

Clearly, many people here at CAF believe ABC is in the realm of wrong, and so is not one of those options they are free to choose. (I’m one of them). I think this is the point that you disagree with?

 

[rayne89]

Why not NFP? In my case, I had serious health issues. I couldn’t afford a “trial run” with NFP to see whether it worked or not. At that time, NFP did not have a great reputation in terms of reliability. My husband and I chose a reliable method that worked for us. That was a decison between God, my husband and me. And that is precisely my point…it is between God and a husband and wife. We are accountable to God…not to anyone else, including the Catholic Church.

18. And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.
19. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
Matthew 16:18-19

Christ gave the Church the authority to bind and loose. He said to Peter our first pope “I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven”.

28. Keep watch over yourselves and over the whole flock of which the holy Spirit has appointed you overseers, in which you tend the church of God that he acquired with his own blood.
Acts 20:28

One may never do evil so that good may result from it
1789 Catechism of the Catholic Church

The regulation of births represents one of the aspects of responsible fatherhood and motherhood. Legitimate intentions on the part of the spouses do not justify recourse to morally unacceptable means (for example, direct sterilization or contraception).
2399 CCC

*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: *
2370 CCC

 

[Priscilla_Ann]

18. And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it.
19. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."
Matthew 16:18-19

Christ gave the Church the authority to bind and loose. He said to Peter our first pope “I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven”.

28. Keep watch over yourselves and over the whole flock of which the holy Spirit has appointed you overseers, in which you tend the church of God that he acquired with his own blood.
Acts 20:28

One may never do evil so that good may result from it
1789 Catechism of the Catholic Church

The regulation of births represents one of the aspects of responsible fatherhood and motherhood. Legitimate intentions on the part of the spouses do not justify recourse to morally unacceptable means (for example, direct sterilization or contraception).
2399 CCC

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:
2370 CCC

I am a Christian, but no longer Catholic. References from the Catechism are based on the teachings and traditions of man, not God. Your interpretation of Matthew 16:18 is a matter of Catholic teaching, not Christian teaching.

 

[manualman]

I am a Christian, but no longer Catholic. References from the Catechism are based on the teachings and traditions of man, not God. Your interpretation of Matthew 16:18 is a matter of Catholic teaching, not Christian teaching.

Laste three words should be “… not Protestant teaching.”

Unless of course you’ve found a passage I missed where Jesus revoked Judaic prohibitions on contraception…

 

[bobtails]

I wish that an NFP course had been mandatory. I had never heard of it prior to precana and was unsure of it. I grew up in a pro-abc family who still are baffled in our choice of NFP.

There is a family that our family has gotten close to from church. the wife doesn’t seem to know much about NFP eventhough she is a recent convert! I am shocked. I wish that we were at least exposed to it more. It seems to be only by mouth. It just doesn’t seem enough. Did that make any sense? I think I was rambling…

 

[LittleDeb]

In our local chapter of CCL teachers and promoters of Sympto-thermal NFP, some folks wanted the whole class to be a requirement. I suggested the one-class overview that has been referenced here. Since only STM is available in our state, I thought an overview class would be good in case someone wanted to seek out Creighton or Billings method some other way.

Our Engaged Encounter had almost nothing on NFP. They held up a book and said, “This is good and it is what The Church teaches.” That was it. Needless to say a few years after that my husband and I volunteered to give talks on NFP. We are now a regular part of the weekends. My husband hates public speaking but he does it anyway. He’s a convert and really loves Church teaching about letting God be in control of your sexuality, and that children are a blessing.

As a former protestant (and invalidly married) he was so frustrated with their teaching on marital love. He jokes that he has waaaay more sex now using periodic abstinence than he ever did using contraception. I really wish we could put that in our talk to the engaged couples!!

 

[maryj]

I am a Christian, but no longer Catholic. References from the Catechism are based on the teachings and traditions of man, not God. Your interpretation of Matthew 16:18 is a matter of Catholic teaching, not Christian teaching.

This always perplexes me a little. IF you are no longer catholic(by catholic I mean someone in the catholic faith who agrees with the churches teachings, and abides by them, which apparently you did not, which means you were not catholic at all) what are you doing on a catholic answers web site. Serious question, I really gotta know.

 

[renee1258]

There definitely has to be an introduction of the basics of NFP at pre-cana, what it is and what it isn’t. That would take a good 30 minutes, but I don’t know about require a woman to learn how to chart as a requirement. I have a difficult time with this at pre-cana because many couples are still at pre-cana because “they have to” mentality. I find it is so much easier to talk about NFP when someone else brings up family planning/birth control, rather then started off cold with an audience.