Observing the Natural Law
- The sexual activity, in which husband and wife are intimately and chastely united with one another, through which human life is transmitted, is, as the recent Council recalled, "noble and worthy.’’ (11) It does not, moreover, cease to be legitimate even when, for reasons independent of their will, it is foreseen to be infertile. For its natural adaptation to the expression and strengthening of the union of husband and wife is not thereby suppressed. The fact is, as experience shows, that new life is not the result of each and every act of sexual intercourse. God has wisely ordered laws of nature and the incidence of fertility in such a way that successive births are already naturally spaced through the inherent operation of these laws. The Church, nevertheless, in urging men to the observance of the precepts of the natural law, which it interprets by its constant doctrine, teaches that each and every marital act must of necessity retain its intrinsic relationship to the procreation of human life. (12)
NOW lets compare this to Casti Connubii. The MOST DIRECT reference would be none other than paragraph 59 (quoted multiple times already):
- Holy Church knows well that not infrequently one of the parties is sinned against rather than sinning, when for a grave cause he or she reluctantly allows the perversion of the right order. In such a case, there is no sin, provided that, mindful of the law of charity, he or she does not neglect to seek to dissuade and to deter the partner from sin. Nor are those considered as acting against nature who in the married state use their right in the proper manner although on account of natural reasons either of time or of certain defects, new life cannot be brought forth. For in matrimony as well as in the use of the matrimonial rights there are also secondary ends, such as mutual aid, the cultivating of mutual love, and the quieting of concupiscence which husband and wife are not forbidden to consider so long as they are subordinated to the primary end and so long as the intrinsic nature of the act is preserved.
The same concept is shown in each quote. More from HV where Casti Connubii is quoted:
Unlawful Birth Control Methods
- Therefore We base Our words on the first principles of a human and Christian doctrine of marriage when We are obliged once more to declare that the direct interruption of the generative process already begun and, above all, all direct abortion, even for therapeutic reasons, are to be absolutely excluded as lawful means of regulating the number of children. (14) Equally to be condemned, as the magisterium of the Church has affirmed on many occasions, is direct sterilization, whether of the man or of the woman, whether permanent or temporary. (15)
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. (16)
Perfectly in line with Casti Connubii.
I think you forgot to take your modernist medications or simply are hypoglycemic.
(i) Define : Natural Family Planning, infertile periods and infertility,
(ii) What is the purpose of Natural Family Planning?
(iii) Maybe you could be so kind, since your colleagues failed to do, as to show us where Castii Connubii discusses Natural Family Planning? The name NFP in itself is a misnomer. How is family planning Natural unless it is to procreate only?
(iiii) Challenge: Can one use NFP all their life and not have children?
(I know you will avoid this one?
)
(v) BTW, you must have missed the memo, your bus, or the post. Read it again, where does HV quote Casti Connubii? It does not. Hello, anybody there?
(vi) One would think a document as important to the modernist sect argument of NFP should at least get a little mention, right?.
*
I do not disagree with Castii Connubii and nowhere in it does it discuss NFP. *
Read the other posts by myself and your brethren Sure, your a tad late or a slow reader, this has already been, covered, and Sure has yet to show me where NFP is discussed in Castii Connubii and why the fallible theologians took 40 years, that is correct, 4 decades to reinterpret a infallible document that was guided by the Holy Ghost in order to come up with something that was always practiced from the beginning and was so trivial.
Your modernist propaganda shall not prevail in these parts.
You jig is up Dude.
(vi) Concerning HV; is this the same author Paul VI who highlighted the non-infallible, non-definitive character of Vatican II , has yet to be nominated for sainthood, exiled Bugnini the Architect of the NO- mass, and Smoke of Satan Paul VI? just a little aside Question Dude
)
