A
agapewolf
Guest
I still didn’t read the word “command” anywhere in your quotes. The opposite of obey is not command.
- Status
F
flyingfish
Guest
“Rules” and “commands” are the same things to me.
The point I was making that in the past a man’s authority was viewed as “king of his home”, women’s rights were not an issue at the time, and it seemed right and natural to people that women should be obedient to their husbands in all things (unless of course he makes an immoral request).The popes and Catholic theologians of the time were raised in that culture and knew no different, so when they wrote on the family they wrote about the family life they knew.
A
agapewolf
Guest
I get your point, but my point is that the church isn’t saying officially what you seem to think it is. Commands and rules are not the same thing.“Rules” and “commands” are the same things to me.
The popes and Catholic theologians of the time were raised in that culture and knew no different, so when they wrote on the family they wrote about the family life they knew.
P
Persuader
Guest
Right. So, some of you have objected to my analogy with medicating hyperactive children. It is clear that for some children hyperactivity (not ADD in general) can be a real problem, but for others medication is more of a way to make it easier for other people to be around them. It isn’t really about curing any type of illness, but it does help the children function in society. My aunt is a psychologist, and have been working with this. However, I could come up with other examples if this does not agree with you. Most of the enterprise of plastic surgery is aimed at suppressing or changing healthy functions to achieve some goal. A lot of cosmetics does the same thing (like body-hear removal products). I could go on and on.
It seems to me like the real reason you have a problem with contraceptives, is not because it is suppressing or changing healthy bodily functions per se. It’s because of the specific bodily functions contraceptives suppresses or changes, and what kind of consequence that entails. So the problem you have is really about the fact that it prevents pregnancy, and that would be fine if NFP didn’t do something similar.
So then we are back to my analogy with the sunlight. Why is protecting oneself from UV-rays by suppressing bodily functions (sun-block suppresses normal skin reaction) so much worse than staying out of the sun to avoid UV-rays? As of now, I do not understand why the difference matters. And if it doesn’t matter, you shouldn’t favor one strategy over the other (all other things being equal (that means the relationship is identical except for choice of contraceptive.).).
Now, you have also questioned my view of sex. Ok, this is a complex issue. Is it true that I see sex as commitment? No, not necessarily. Sex, in general, doesn’t imply commitment in a relationship. As I have said, I have had friends with benefits, and I think this is fine as long as you are not in a committed relationship. I am not saying an arrangement like that isn’t without its problems, but given the right type of people it can be a good arrangement.
As far as my relationship with my gf goes - we are in a committed relationship. It is important to notice that sex is different in a committed relationship. I can enjoy sex with women without loving them, but being in love makes it better, and changes the meaning of sex by reinforcing and increasing our commitment, love and attachment. This was actually a problem in a previous relationship. Because I was in love, I was fooled into thinking the sex was generally good, so when I fell out of love, I realized she wasn’t very good in bed. However, I do not think this will happen in my current relationship. I have more experience now, and I think I am able to notice the difference.
Some of you have also speculated that my initial attraction to her was because of her faith. If so, it must have been subconscious. Honestly, the initial attraction was based on the fact that she is hot. Her faith wasn’t the first topic of conversation either, so I think the groundwork was laid quite separate from our views on religion. Mostly biology, I would guess. That doesn’t mean her charming personality and good nature was completely disconnected from her faith, though, and in this sense I would concede that her faith might have had a part in sustaining the attraction and making me interested in a relationship with her. Although I imagine I would be quite willing to be with her if she was less charming and less good-natured.
What was said about NFP and divorce-rate is very interesting. I would like to see a source on the numbers. Generally, though, correlation does not mean causation. There could be other reasons for why NFP-couples stick together. For instance, one would think they were a lot more conservative than the average, and that they would be more motivated to stay together because of religious views.
However, I do know about some research about birth control and relationship-problems. When my gf was researching what to use, she came over an article about how couples who met when the woman was using birth control, could get problems if the woman got off the birth control. The reason was that birth control changes some things about what the woman is attracted to. This could explain some of the reason for why NFP-couples have lower divorce-rates. Luckily, that is not the case between me and my gf. She didn’t start using birth control until after we’d been having sex several times (about 5 months in to the relationship. We used condoms in the beginning.).
So, how is she doing now? Well, she went to see a psychiatrist. He didn’t put her on anti-depressants, or advice her to take the Implanon out (not yet anyway). Instead, she was referred to a psychologist who has some experience with grief and loss of faith. From this, I think it could go a number of ways.
). Things are definitely improving, and with the holidays right around the corner, it will give us more time to focus on her healing. Her family is still an issue, though, and the possible visit will surely present problems. My gf has said she will handle them, and I hope she is right. But if I can improve my understanding of the catholic faith, I will be better equipped to assist her, so I am trying (maybe not succeeding very well ).
It seems to me like the real reason you have a problem with contraceptives, is not because it is suppressing or changing healthy bodily functions per se. It’s because of the specific bodily functions contraceptives suppresses or changes, and what kind of consequence that entails. So the problem you have is really about the fact that it prevents pregnancy, and that would be fine if NFP didn’t do something similar.
So then we are back to my analogy with the sunlight. Why is protecting oneself from UV-rays by suppressing bodily functions (sun-block suppresses normal skin reaction) so much worse than staying out of the sun to avoid UV-rays? As of now, I do not understand why the difference matters. And if it doesn’t matter, you shouldn’t favor one strategy over the other (all other things being equal (that means the relationship is identical except for choice of contraceptive.).).
Now, you have also questioned my view of sex. Ok, this is a complex issue. Is it true that I see sex as commitment? No, not necessarily. Sex, in general, doesn’t imply commitment in a relationship. As I have said, I have had friends with benefits, and I think this is fine as long as you are not in a committed relationship. I am not saying an arrangement like that isn’t without its problems, but given the right type of people it can be a good arrangement.
As far as my relationship with my gf goes - we are in a committed relationship. It is important to notice that sex is different in a committed relationship. I can enjoy sex with women without loving them, but being in love makes it better, and changes the meaning of sex by reinforcing and increasing our commitment, love and attachment. This was actually a problem in a previous relationship. Because I was in love, I was fooled into thinking the sex was generally good, so when I fell out of love, I realized she wasn’t very good in bed. However, I do not think this will happen in my current relationship. I have more experience now, and I think I am able to notice the difference.
Some of you have also speculated that my initial attraction to her was because of her faith. If so, it must have been subconscious. Honestly, the initial attraction was based on the fact that she is hot. Her faith wasn’t the first topic of conversation either, so I think the groundwork was laid quite separate from our views on religion. Mostly biology, I would guess. That doesn’t mean her charming personality and good nature was completely disconnected from her faith, though, and in this sense I would concede that her faith might have had a part in sustaining the attraction and making me interested in a relationship with her. Although I imagine I would be quite willing to be with her if she was less charming and less good-natured.
What was said about NFP and divorce-rate is very interesting. I would like to see a source on the numbers. Generally, though, correlation does not mean causation. There could be other reasons for why NFP-couples stick together. For instance, one would think they were a lot more conservative than the average, and that they would be more motivated to stay together because of religious views.
However, I do know about some research about birth control and relationship-problems. When my gf was researching what to use, she came over an article about how couples who met when the woman was using birth control, could get problems if the woman got off the birth control. The reason was that birth control changes some things about what the woman is attracted to. This could explain some of the reason for why NFP-couples have lower divorce-rates. Luckily, that is not the case between me and my gf. She didn’t start using birth control until after we’d been having sex several times (about 5 months in to the relationship. We used condoms in the beginning.).
So, how is she doing now? Well, she went to see a psychiatrist. He didn’t put her on anti-depressants, or advice her to take the Implanon out (not yet anyway). Instead, she was referred to a psychologist who has some experience with grief and loss of faith. From this, I think it could go a number of ways.
- she accepts her loss, and moves on without spirituality.
- she regains her spirituality as something separate from the concept of God.
- she regains her spirituality with a concept of God. This doesn’t necessarily mean she returns to Catholicism. It could mean deism, Protestantism, Buddhism, etc.
). Things are definitely improving, and with the holidays right around the corner, it will give us more time to focus on her healing. Her family is still an issue, though, and the possible visit will surely present problems. My gf has said she will handle them, and I hope she is right. But if I can improve my understanding of the catholic faith, I will be better equipped to assist her, so I am trying (maybe not succeeding very well ).
L
Liberanosamalo
Guest
Well, when you fall out of love with this GF, you may come to decide she wasn’t very good either. There you go again, it’s all about what you THINK. You think a lot, but you don’t know much.
It’s all about her serving you, responding to you. Giving to you.
As for your analogy about sunscreen, do you hear yourself? ABC and the pill are SO invasive and altering of the woman’s body that her very psyche is changed radically to get her to desire a different kind of man than she’d choose if she wasn’t chemically altered. And yet you don’t think hormones powerful enough to do this have any effect on her???
Well, back to your sunscreen analogy… avoiding the sun is one way to avoid cancer, sunspots and other undesirable things.
Your analogy would work if sunscreen operated by changing the very nature of skin, causing it to fall off, become non-functional in and of itself, to become less able to fight bacteria and to regulate body temperature and caused the user to be more self-centered and vain and…
well, your analogy falls apart because for the love of mud, you’re equating something that interferes with the holy and sacred transmission of life itself with… sunscreen.
Cancer is an evil to be avoided.
Babies are not evil and are not to be avoided as if they’re cancer. ABC treats it like a disease to be immunized against. And it makes us think we’re in control of the universe.
When you’re an atheist and really do think you’re in control of the universe, well, maybe it’s nothing to you.
But for those of us who recognize just how little control we really have, it’s an arrogant usurpation of God’s very authority. Instead of being co-creators with Him, we are telling him. “Get out of the way. We can do this ourselves.”
By the way, your love 'em and leave 'em attitude is touching.
Love is something you fall into and out of. The sooner you fall out of it again, the better off this girl will be.
By the way, you are not in a committed relationship. A committed relationship requires rings and a wedding license and a church and a vow.
You are in a relationship that will last as long as your others did… untill you “fall out of love” or someone hotter comes along. Like the last time when you ditched your friend with benefits for this “hot” girl.
Yeah, you’re a skirt chaser.
A better simile to ABC/NFP would be your work as a student.
Say the guy next to you in class and you were assigned a paper. The desire for an A is what both of you want. Now, you could follow the rules, respect your role as a student, do the research, exert some discipline and do the paper the right way. You turn it in for a grade. The “paper” in this metaphor is the “sex act.” Follow?
But say the guy next to you doesn’t want to do that. He just wants his A. So he steals your paper and puts his name on it and turns it in. Hey, it’s okay by you, isn’t it? I mean, if both of you just wanted an A, does it matter if he altered the nature of your paper and turned it in and got the same score as if he’d done his own paper?
I’m sure you’d allow that, being that moral standards are whatever people think they should be. Wouldn’t bother you if someone cheated like that, would it?
After all, all it matters is that guy got his A. Oh, but he’s altered the very nature and integrity of the paper. It isn’t really his. It’s a farce. A lie. It looks like a paper. It may read like a paper. The professor may even really enjoy reading it. But at heart, it’s a sham. It wasn’t his paper to hand in. He took upon himself authority that didn’t belong to himself and put his name on YOUR paper.
We do that when we take on ourselves the authority of God in interfereing with life and death matters. Which is eons removed from sunburn in importance.
Now, if he’d chosen NOT to do a paper, or to hand it in later, he wouldn’t have gotten an A. But he wouldn’t have turned in a farce of a paper. At most he’d get an F or a reduced grade. Not an honor code violation. (They do still have those in Europe, right?)
ANY of this getting through your sex-saturated brain?
By the way… if her father is any kind of devoted husband and man, eventually she’s going to want someone like him to love her the way her mother is loved. Apparently it’s good in your world when your GF is happy enough to wait on you and be hot. And apparently you weren’t really attracted to her for her real self. But for her hotness.
You took her virginity and it wasn’t even about “love” but lust. How sad.
M
monicatholic
Guest
being married changes it even more.
being married ***and ***open to life changes it to the meaning God intended.
but you don’t believe in God, so your meaning of sex will continue to change according to your whims.
this is ridiculous but indicitive of your core problem-- unbridled relativism. when you were in love (in bed) with the woman, it ***seemed ***good. when you fell out of love(or was that falling out of bed?) your views changed. it was ***then ***that you realized the sex wasn’t that good.
but, persuader, can you ‘notice the difference’ in your ever-fluctuating perspectives?
you have nothing to hang your hat on, P.
of course you’re glad your girlfriend is healing enough to bring you food and laugh at your jokes. because at the end of the day (and from the beginning of this thread several hundred posts ago) and without any objective standard or truth to measure or navigate by, you’re left with yourself as an inconsistent rule.
and if you are your only rule, then everything, (that’s EVERYTHING) Persuader, is all about you.
S
StillWondering
Guest
I just wanted to clarify and thank you. Yes, “would be fine” needs to be in quotes. It is just meant that she is doing the right thing. Denying sex for whom you are married to is is wrong unless there are grave reasons. That may sound strange, but when you make your Catholic marriage vows, you no longer own your body. Even before than God owns us. But there is a sense of us having rights to it. After the vows, your partner has your rights. The marriage covenant is an exchange of persons, not of civil rights. The civil rights comes in from the society we live in. Marriage is not a societal institution but an institution created by God, just like how He created sex, man, and woman.
As for a couple where a wife faithfully practices her duties to honor the dignity of her husband and her husband denies her with contraception; it is not easy. Think of Saint Monica who was married to an adulterous pagan. She continue to live dutifully her vows of marriage and prayed for him till she died. Her son learned from his father and grew up a bad man. But by the time he was 18 or so, he reformed his life and became Saint Augustine – one of the greatest saints ever.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monica_of_Hippo
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustine_of_Hippo
Either way, a relationship where the husband contraceptives despite the wife’s beliefs are extremely hard and very painful to the wife.
Hello Persauder, I have a quote form a very loving and insightful lady. This is not theological, so much as her own words to sum up her thoughts on NFP. You can read up her thoughts on pages 33 to 42 of Rome Sweet Home.
“Just as with food, there could be times when fasting was helpful; so there could be times when fasting from the act of marriage for prayerfully considered reasons could be helpful. Yet, apart from a miracle, one could barely survive while fasting most of the time. So, likewise, NFP was presented as a prescription for the difficulty rather than as a daily vitamin for general health”
These are her words in regards to using NFP as a means to delay pregnancy. In addition to this, NFP teaches a woman (and indirectly her spouse) what her body is going through and how her fertility works. This is something many women find vital, whether they are Catholic or not.
Lastly Persauder, you mentioned you and your gf never talked about NFP and Catholic teachings on sex. Did she know about them? Growing up, many Catholics in America were not taught. While parents should be knowledgeable and love their kids with good teachings, people are people and talking about sex with their children is not something most people do. However, the Church clearly teaches that parents are the first teachers of their children. It’s just so many don’t know that.
S
StillWondering
Guest
The interpretation has always been of true submission by both. The message just got lost along the way by fallen men of power.
Saint Paul teaches that we no longer can call our bodies our own for in marriage the man stake claims to the woman’s body and she to his. This is emphasized from the Early Church Fathers and along throughout the ages by speakers of truth. The concept that there is different levels of servitude in this dignity comes from man’s fallenness, not from Church teachings.
God’s words in Chapter 3 of Genesis are insightful here. He said to Eve after she has eaten the fruit: “Yet your urge shall be for your husband, and he shall be your master.” This is not God telling man to rule woman, but that sin will make men do this and women become victims.
To be clear, the husband is to the wife as Christ is to the Church: It’s head and its love. The man is to love as Christ loves: unto death. So he is to serve is wife with all his being and protect and sacrifice himself for his wife and her children with everything he has.
The wife is to be the Church is to Christ: It’s body. The Church is to be the arms and hands and feet and legs of Christ, bringing Christ words, his messages, and his love to the world. The wife is to be the man’s every being. To care for and support and to nourish the love he gives and return it back to him.
As for the word “obey”. It is a word, the meaning is what is important. My fiancee “obeys” me but hardly listens to what I say. In fact, she is the one that commands me quite often. But she is obeying the fact that I need her to command me to get things done
. She obeys the love I have for her, not the words I say. This is how I understand the Church obeys Christ. Though Christ is different from me because the words he says are always words of love. But if Christ says where are my sandels to his Church, I don’t think priests will repeat that at every Mass 
.
S
StillWondering
Guest
I have ADD. And I probably never have went to a therapist and get medication if there was not someone else I needed to care for. My ADD does have both a good and bad side. The good side is the creativity. The bad side is that I make it hard for my love ones. So for some, taking ADD medication is a sacrifice, not necessary a choice, but a sacrifice that can bring about peace for their love ones.
P
Persuader
Guest
So it doesn’t look like I will understand this NFP business… At least not why it is ok, but other contraceptives is not. Lib says something is missing from my analogies. From your response, it doesn’t seem that way. You are just misunderstanding it. I am not saying that Ritalin (for instance) have the same consequences on the female body as hormonal contraceptives. To show this, is not the purpose of the analogy, and it is not even especially relevant since the CC is not only against hormonal contraceptives, but also non-hormonal contraceptives like condoms.
The purpose of the analogy is to get at why contraceptives is bad. Your answer to my points seems to be twofold. The first answer is to point to the consequences to the female body and psyche. This might be an acceptable answer if it were not for the fact that CC is also against non-hormonal contraceptives (although I would argue against it even if CC was fine with non-hormonal contraceptives). The other answer is to point to the primary consequence of the contraceptive (i.e. that it prevents pregnancy). This is where I am confused, because now that we have crystallized the issue, it is difficult to see why NFP would be different.
Digging deeper in to this, it seems like that the difference does not have anything to do with contraceptives or NFP at all. The types of couples using NFP have better intentions (according to the faith) than the couples using contraceptives. So then the problem isn’t really the contraceptive, but the morale of the people using it, or more precisely, how the contraceptive or NFP is being used. Give me a shout if I am on the right track with this
.
On the other points, what can I say? Look, some of you have a bad habit of making assumptions. You say my morals fluctuates, that I make moral decisions only based on feelings etc. This is not correct. In fact, I would challenge you to find one example on fluctuation on my part, or one example of how my morals are only based on feelings. I am sure you cannot, because it isn’t true.
Now, to develop what I said about relationships. I think it is acceptable to break off relationships if the love has gone. At least until you decide to settle down and have children. If you have children, it is very important to stay together. Let’s say I got married to my gf, and we had children. In this situation, I would be fighting for the relationship, and it would take a lot to break it up. I would only do it after trying my hardest, and even then, I would probably only do it to spare the children of witnessing a loveless relationship between their parents (which according to psychologists can be worse). I am, however, hopeful that I will choose the right partner to settle down with, and I actually think my gf could be a partner like that:
scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=this-is-your-brain-on-love-lasting-2009-01-06
The purpose of the analogy is to get at why contraceptives is bad. Your answer to my points seems to be twofold. The first answer is to point to the consequences to the female body and psyche. This might be an acceptable answer if it were not for the fact that CC is also against non-hormonal contraceptives (although I would argue against it even if CC was fine with non-hormonal contraceptives). The other answer is to point to the primary consequence of the contraceptive (i.e. that it prevents pregnancy). This is where I am confused, because now that we have crystallized the issue, it is difficult to see why NFP would be different.
Digging deeper in to this, it seems like that the difference does not have anything to do with contraceptives or NFP at all. The types of couples using NFP have better intentions (according to the faith) than the couples using contraceptives. So then the problem isn’t really the contraceptive, but the morale of the people using it, or more precisely, how the contraceptive or NFP is being used. Give me a shout if I am on the right track with this
.
On the other points, what can I say? Look, some of you have a bad habit of making assumptions. You say my morals fluctuates, that I make moral decisions only based on feelings etc. This is not correct. In fact, I would challenge you to find one example on fluctuation on my part, or one example of how my morals are only based on feelings. I am sure you cannot, because it isn’t true.
Now, to develop what I said about relationships. I think it is acceptable to break off relationships if the love has gone. At least until you decide to settle down and have children. If you have children, it is very important to stay together. Let’s say I got married to my gf, and we had children. In this situation, I would be fighting for the relationship, and it would take a lot to break it up. I would only do it after trying my hardest, and even then, I would probably only do it to spare the children of witnessing a loveless relationship between their parents (which according to psychologists can be worse). I am, however, hopeful that I will choose the right partner to settle down with, and I actually think my gf could be a partner like that:
scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=this-is-your-brain-on-love-lasting-2009-01-06
F
flyingfish
Guest
If I understand correctly you want to find a deep, underlying moral principle for why contraceptives are bad and NFP is okay, and that this principle should be something that carries over to other aspects of life.
Where I think you stand:
Since NFP is okay, it must be okay for a couple to deliberately make choices that allow them to enjoy sex while doing what they can to eliminate the risk of pregnancy.
Since it’s okay to modify the naturally occuring variation in human beings (like say in the example of some hyperactivity disorders, which aren’t always diseases to be corrected but modification to improve quality of life, or even the simpler example of shaving and getting haircuts), why isn’t it okay to modify the naturally occuring fertility in human beings to improve the quality of a couple’s sex life?
So by this reasoning, those are out as the fundamental principle you’re looking for.
What are your thoughts about the “complete gift of self” during marriage and the martial act?
It’s good to hear she’s doing better by the way
G
Godloves13
Guest
Hi,
I would like to say to OP that I truly believe that you are sincerely looking at how you can help your GF regain her faith, considering how you take the time to respond to all. For that I do appreciate the effort you have made to con’t to search for answers.
There are some things I was wondering, and am in no way asking you to answer them for me, rather for yourself.
Regardless of your belief, do consider that you are a special person (this is not a ego question, just bear with me)? If so, would you consider that for you to be with a person (ie a r’ship) you are a gift to the person. In the same way, do you consider your GF a gift? If you do consider her a gift, than all of her including her virginity is a gift. I hope we are in agreement in this, at least for now.
So if her virginity is a gift, you have by not resisting her, accepted this gift of hers; bearing in mind that she can’t ever give this gift to another person. In the same way you did so, with the first lady you had sex with.
According to your earlier post, you mentioned that the first person you had sex with, you thot you loved and later realised it is not so. But you have given her a gift, ie your virginity that you can no longer give anyone else. Now this applies to your GF too.
Assume after a year or so, you realised that you do not love your GF (just as you discovered that about the first lady you had sex with) and you guys break up. You have already “taken” from her a gift that she can no longer give anyone else. And suppose you finally meet the lady in your life that you want to marry and she shares the same view as you, ie it is alright to have sex with anyone we are “in love with”.
Both of you will never be able to give this gift of “virginity” that belongs to 2 individuals who love each other; because you believe you have loved the lady before and this current lady and so on. So what is love? and who do you really love?
My point is, there would be many people that you will meet you in your life and along the way a few special people that you will “fall in love” with. But unless you are chaste (ie stop have sex with whoever, since the mistake has already been done) how can you preserve yourself for the ONE that you will finally say “I do” to. And how will you know if you will fight for your marriage (your most recent post about staying married if there are children) if you do not practice self-control. Because there will always be more attractive ladies around, with a “hot bod”.
So unless you start to practice self-control NOW, you will learn the art of self-control. It is the same as studying, unless you start studying your courses early, then the more prepared you are to sit for your exams.
I apologise if this is very long-winded. I do understand and appreciate what you are going through, and somehow what the others are saying seem to be unrealistic to you. And understand that you come from a culture deems it is alright to have sex as long as both parties are agreeable (as you mentioned "friends with benefits).
Just some of my thots, that I hope that will help you think through what you are doing, regardless of your beliefs. Hopefully, reminding you that you are a very special person, as your current GF is, and that both of you are gifts. And regardless of how much you love her, you can’t con’t to “enjoy” her gift (ie have sex with her), the same way you do not open a Christmas gift before Christmas.
I would like to say to OP that I truly believe that you are sincerely looking at how you can help your GF regain her faith, considering how you take the time to respond to all. For that I do appreciate the effort you have made to con’t to search for answers.
There are some things I was wondering, and am in no way asking you to answer them for me, rather for yourself.
Regardless of your belief, do consider that you are a special person (this is not a ego question, just bear with me)? If so, would you consider that for you to be with a person (ie a r’ship) you are a gift to the person. In the same way, do you consider your GF a gift? If you do consider her a gift, than all of her including her virginity is a gift. I hope we are in agreement in this, at least for now.
So if her virginity is a gift, you have by not resisting her, accepted this gift of hers; bearing in mind that she can’t ever give this gift to another person. In the same way you did so, with the first lady you had sex with.
According to your earlier post, you mentioned that the first person you had sex with, you thot you loved and later realised it is not so. But you have given her a gift, ie your virginity that you can no longer give anyone else. Now this applies to your GF too.
Assume after a year or so, you realised that you do not love your GF (just as you discovered that about the first lady you had sex with) and you guys break up. You have already “taken” from her a gift that she can no longer give anyone else. And suppose you finally meet the lady in your life that you want to marry and she shares the same view as you, ie it is alright to have sex with anyone we are “in love with”.
Both of you will never be able to give this gift of “virginity” that belongs to 2 individuals who love each other; because you believe you have loved the lady before and this current lady and so on. So what is love? and who do you really love?
My point is, there would be many people that you will meet you in your life and along the way a few special people that you will “fall in love” with. But unless you are chaste (ie stop have sex with whoever, since the mistake has already been done) how can you preserve yourself for the ONE that you will finally say “I do” to. And how will you know if you will fight for your marriage (your most recent post about staying married if there are children) if you do not practice self-control. Because there will always be more attractive ladies around, with a “hot bod”.
So unless you start to practice self-control NOW, you will learn the art of self-control. It is the same as studying, unless you start studying your courses early, then the more prepared you are to sit for your exams.
I apologise if this is very long-winded. I do understand and appreciate what you are going through, and somehow what the others are saying seem to be unrealistic to you. And understand that you come from a culture deems it is alright to have sex as long as both parties are agreeable (as you mentioned "friends with benefits).
Just some of my thots, that I hope that will help you think through what you are doing, regardless of your beliefs. Hopefully, reminding you that you are a very special person, as your current GF is, and that both of you are gifts. And regardless of how much you love her, you can’t con’t to “enjoy” her gift (ie have sex with her), the same way you do not open a Christmas gift before Christmas.
S
StillWondering
Guest
Yes, if you use NFP because you do not want children, you do not respect life and you don’t believe that children are gifts (from God only), it is just as bad as contraceptives.
All sins require intention. Here is the section on Sin by the Catechism of the Catholic Church. They are in order, so you can click on any of them or just click on one and go next or previous. This is a little deep and not always easy to make sense of at first reading.
All sins require intention. Here is the section on Sin by the Catechism of the Catholic Church. They are in order, so you can click on any of them or just click on one and go next or previous. This is a little deep and not always easy to make sense of at first reading.
A
agapewolf
Guest
This is absolutely NOT catholic teaching, and this is also not the thread to be pushing this agenda.
B
BrokenFortress
Guest
How is it not? A marriage according to the Catholic faith must be open to life. If you go into the marriage not wanting children, then that’s wrong. So if you’re using NFP with the intention of never getting pregnant it can be just as bad as using contraceptives. It’s the same mindset.
A
agapewolf
Guest
You didn’t say “never”. You said if you use nfp because you don’t want children, you don’t respect life.
That is NOT church teaching.
It is perfectly within church teaching to avoid children for a time, for just/serious reasons.
S
StillWondering
Guest
Agape,
What I wrote is correct I believe. I said “do not want” as a declarative. It means do not want. Not wish to delay for just reasons. NFP is not meant for the average family as a way to “not have babies”. It is meant for 1) a couple to use their financial, intellectual, time, and material resources wisely for the greatest good for children who are blessings for the Lord and 2) for those families, who due to serious reasons, cannot have children such as dangerous healthy complications or serious financial difficulties.
In the first case, it is not mean for those that “do not want” children. You are never meant to go into a relationship not wanting children or even not wanting anymore children unless it is a serious (and serious means serious) reason. If it was a serious reason, it would go into the second category. Let’s say you have five kids and you are making ends meet but barely. You can use NFP to not have kids, but you cannot use NFP because you don’t want anymore kids. You are using it *despite *the fact that you want kids; you feel it is not wise and would accept them if God blesses you.
Note, you can never say " I do not want kids". Which is the wording that I used before. You do not need a “never”. You can say “I do not think it’s a good idea to have kids now.” There is a subtle difference, but this is important to be clear on the intention. In general, people are not exact and they may use “I do not want” to mean “I don’t think it’s a good idea”. The intention is not “I do not want” so that’s okay. However, the words literally mean “I do not want” not “I do not think it is wise”. I strongly avocate using words correctly, not to be snobbish or to be a stickler, but to protect our integraty.
As for the second category, if two people get married and want kids at the day of their vows they are fine and those vows are valid unless they are dishonest in some way. Now if that evening they have relations (for the first time) and find out a serious medical condition, they can choose not to have kids anymore using NFP as long as that serious condition still exists. The same with extreme financial burden. However, if it’s a temporary situation and they know it’s temporary, they need to think of it as being wise for the children’s sake. Not deciding what they “want” is what is truth.
What I wrote is correct I believe. I said “do not want” as a declarative. It means do not want. Not wish to delay for just reasons. NFP is not meant for the average family as a way to “not have babies”. It is meant for 1) a couple to use their financial, intellectual, time, and material resources wisely for the greatest good for children who are blessings for the Lord and 2) for those families, who due to serious reasons, cannot have children such as dangerous healthy complications or serious financial difficulties.
In the first case, it is not mean for those that “do not want” children. You are never meant to go into a relationship not wanting children or even not wanting anymore children unless it is a serious (and serious means serious) reason. If it was a serious reason, it would go into the second category. Let’s say you have five kids and you are making ends meet but barely. You can use NFP to not have kids, but you cannot use NFP because you don’t want anymore kids. You are using it *despite *the fact that you want kids; you feel it is not wise and would accept them if God blesses you.
Note, you can never say " I do not want kids". Which is the wording that I used before. You do not need a “never”. You can say “I do not think it’s a good idea to have kids now.” There is a subtle difference, but this is important to be clear on the intention. In general, people are not exact and they may use “I do not want” to mean “I don’t think it’s a good idea”. The intention is not “I do not want” so that’s okay. However, the words literally mean “I do not want” not “I do not think it is wise”. I strongly avocate using words correctly, not to be snobbish or to be a stickler, but to protect our integraty.
As for the second category, if two people get married and want kids at the day of their vows they are fine and those vows are valid unless they are dishonest in some way. Now if that evening they have relations (for the first time) and find out a serious medical condition, they can choose not to have kids anymore using NFP as long as that serious condition still exists. The same with extreme financial burden. However, if it’s a temporary situation and they know it’s temporary, they need to think of it as being wise for the children’s sake. Not deciding what they “want” is what is truth.
L
Liberanosamalo
Guest
Funny thing is, people don’t always even know what they want. Or that could change overnight. Or people might want something today and not want it tomorrow. The biggest problem comes for those who choose sterilization and then something happens (death of a child or children, divorce and marriage to another, death of spouse and remarriage) and they want another child.
Never is a word people need to be very careful about.
Never is a word people need to be very careful about.
A
agapewolf
Guest
Still wondering, I get your point, but if I misundestood you, then so did many others…including folks here who obviously do not understand the teaching to begin with.
It was very unclear the way you phrased it, and the way it came across was as if you didn’t believe NFP could ever be used to avoid children. There are folks on this forum who believe that.
N
newbetx
Guest
I’m afraid debating intentions with NFP are not helpful to this discussion. Anyone that thinks that fornication is a good thing certainly will either not care or will be unable to grasp the concepts behind the error of contraception. Please get back on topic.
Persuader, I find some of your comments and arguments in past posts very familiar. I would like to pursue the perspective on life you have a bit further but I’m a bit consumed with some other issues at this time. I do hope you continue the dialogue with us as we do care much about you and your girlfriend and your future. And I really don’t think one has to believe in God in order to understand some of the concepts we’ve learned that make the lives of those we love better.
Persuader, I find some of your comments and arguments in past posts very familiar. I would like to pursue the perspective on life you have a bit further but I’m a bit consumed with some other issues at this time. I do hope you continue the dialogue with us as we do care much about you and your girlfriend and your future. And I really don’t think one has to believe in God in order to understand some of the concepts we’ve learned that make the lives of those we love better.
- Status