Responsible procreation, NFP before Fall and just after?

  • Thread starter Thread starter fpt
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

fpt

Guest
When Adam and Eve, the first couple of the humanity, were in the Eden’s garden - Paradise on Earth - before the Fall, according to your knowledges of catholic teaching with his principles, his method of thinking, his philosophical approach, his theological approach, his conciliation between Faith and Reason, and then after his condamnations on some intellectual approaches (heresies - doctrines - and practices) do you know if the first couple had all the knowledges concerning the physiological of each one in order to practice the responsible procreation (I mean Natural Family Planning for spacing of children) in respect of Plan of God (God’s will for them).

Do you think Eve and Adam could know when exactly the conception could be (fertile periods and infertile periods) and/ or when the conception could take place?

And the same question after the Fall???
 
My understanding is that, prior to the Fall, man’s passions were totally subordinated to his intellect. As such, marriage was strictly speaking unnecessary as a remedy for concupiscence, because there was no concupiscence.
 
“Be fruitful and multiply”

That was the end all and be all of “responsible procreation” at the beginning.

They did not have some serious reason to avoid a new pregnancy…they had a very direct imperative to the contrary.
 
NFP for spacing wouldn’t be needed in the agricultural society that existed in the time you are speaking of. Until relatively recently (post-industrial revolution) having a large family was considered a blessing by nearly everyone.
 
Bookcat said:
“Be fruitful and multiply”

That was the end all and be all of “responsible procreation” at the beginning.

They did not have some serious reason to avoid a new pregnancy…they had a very direct imperative to the contrary.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Their directive was to populate the earth! There would have been no need for NFP!

Now, developed nations face declining fertility and a depopulation crisis. Perhaps the “be fruitful and multiply” directive needs to be re-emphasized.
 
Bookcat said:
“Be fruitful and multiply”

That was the end all and be all of “responsible procreation” at the beginning.

They did not have some serious reason to avoid a new pregnancy…they had a very direct imperative to the contrary.
Click to expand...
Bingo Bookcat!!

This is why I have a problem with NFP. When did this serious reason to avoid pregnancy come into play in the church. Certainly it is a man made law.
 
joclucsylv said:
Bingo Bookcat!!

This is why I have a problem with NFP. When did this serious reason to avoid pregnancy come into play in the church. Certainly it is a man made law.
Click to expand...
Reason was made by God 🙂 (As was woman and man and the reproductive system)
It came into being (or rather was realized) the very first time there came to be well…a serious reason.

Of course the ability to know so well when one the wife was fertile did not come about a later. But periodic continence is did not wait for the more fuller knowledge.
 
Bookcat said:
Reason was made by God 🙂 (As was woman and man and the reproductive system)
It came into being (or rather was realized) the very first time there came to be well…a serious reason.

Of course the ability to know so well when one the wife was fertile did not come about a later. But periodic continence is did not wait for the more fuller knowledge.
Click to expand...
God said…be fruitful and multiply. He didn’t say be fruitful and mulitply unless you have serious reason not to bring children into this world.

Which is my next question. What year did the church start saying that we could space children if there was serious reason to?
 
joclucsylv said:
Which is my next question. What year did the church start saying that we could space children if there was serious reason to?
Click to expand...
Periodic Continence has been a reality from the beginning…such as for the purpose of prayer.
 
Bookcat said:
Periodic Continence has been a reality from the beginning…such as for the purpose of prayer.
Click to expand...
ok…for purpose of prayer periodic continence was reality from the beginning. Periodic continence for prayer doesn’t translate into periodic continence for not having a child because a couple has good reason.

Once again I ask…when did the church start saying that a couple could have GOOD REASON not to have a child?
 
joclucsylv said:
ok…for purpose of prayer periodic continence was reality from the beginning. Periodic continence for prayer doesn’t translate into periodic continence for not having a child because a couple has good reason.

Once again I ask…when did the church start saying that a couple could have GOOD REASON not to have a child?
Click to expand...
AD 235 it was a Monday in March.

I do not have some date for ya… but periodic continence for spacing children (hey gee if we have marital relations so often we have more kids) was a reality prior to NFP.

A date does not matter – for even if it as 2012 it is the teaching of the Church – the discernment of the Authority established by Jesus Christ to clarify and teach such things.
 
Bookcat said:
AD 235 it was a Monday in March.

I do not have some date for ya… but periodic continence for spacing children (hey gee if we have marital relations so often we have more kids) was a reality prior to NFP.

A date does not matter – for even if it as 2012 it is the teaching of the Church – the discernment of the Authority established by Jesus Christ to clarify and teach such things.
Click to expand...
Good reason not to have children…Could that thought have come along with Vatican II??

I know it is the teaching of the church. Every teaching of our church can be traced to the church fathers or the bible. The teaching of having good reason not to have a child however, where does that come from? It is a man made rule given to the people of the church because the people of the Church no longer wanted to have 20 kids. The church had to move with the world and had to give couples some sort of birthcontrol to use. NFP is contraception. It is against conception.
 
joclucsylv said:
ok…for purpose of prayer periodic continence was reality from the beginning. Periodic continence for prayer doesn’t translate into periodic continence for not having a child because a couple has good reason.

Once again I ask…when did the church start saying that a couple could have GOOD REASON not to have a child?
Click to expand...
What does it matter? The Church is protected from error; you aren’t.
 
joclucsylv said:
Good reason not to have children…Could that thought have come along with Vatican II??
Click to expand...
My research suggests that the question of the licitness of the rhythm method (as distinct from, but somewhat related to modern NFP) was first considered (and approved) by Pope Pius IX in 1853 (so over a hundred years before the second vatican council).

A bishop in France submitted this question to the Sacred Penitentiary:
Certain married couples, relying on the opinion of learned physicians, are convinced that there are several days each month in which conception cannot occur. Are those who do not use the marriage right except on such days to be disturbed, especially if they have legitimate reasons for abstaining from the conjugal act?
Click to expand...
Answer:
Those spoken of in the request are not to be disturbed, providing that they do nothing to impede conception.
Click to expand...
Short, succinct, to the point. Rhythm (and by extension, modern NFP) does not impede conception. It is not contraception. Couples do not sin in relying on the infertile days to have intercourse. Moreover, the original question presumes that couples might have legitimate reasons for abstaining from intercourse.

This issue could not have been raised before we had detailed knowledge of the menstrual cycle, which is why you are unlikely to find Clement or Justin Martyr writing about it. The Church addresses issues as they arise.
 
fpt said:
When Adam and Eve, the first couple of the humanity, were in the Eden’s garden - Paradise on Earth - before the Fall, according to your knowledges of catholic teaching with his principles, his method of thinking, his philosophical approach, his theological approach, his conciliation between Faith and Reason, and then after his condamnations on some intellectual approaches (heresies - doctrines - and practices) do you know if the first couple had all the knowledges concerning the physiological of each one in order to practice the responsible procreation (I mean Natural Family Planning for spacing of children) in respect of Plan of God (God’s will for them).

Do you think Eve and Adam could know when exactly the conception could be (fertile periods and infertile periods) and/ or when the conception could take place?

And the same question after the Fall???
Click to expand...
Do you know if the first couple had all the knowledges concerning the physiological of each one before the Fall? I am not totally sur, but it is probable that the answer be yes because Adam and Eve had the Divine knowledge of the each one body. In the Eden’s garden, they were so wise, fair and perfect. That is by the original sin, by the bad orientation of the thinking that day after day human beings lost the true knowledge of their own nature (body and soul). Just after the fall, the first couple had to deal with the original sin, but it had also the knowledge. And days after day because of the original sin and their sins (punishements of God, excessive behaviors…, their family and descendants lost the wise knowledge).

Today the medical sciences with the yes of the church understand the biological system of man and woman: human being is capable to refind what there were hidden by its own fault. When Church talks about natural law, she explains a situation that was created by God (it is a part of the Revelation).

Do you think Eve and Adam could know when exactly the conception could be (fertile periods and infertile periods) and/ or when the conception could take place? Thus my answer is yes.

About Responsible procreation, I think that God had a family plan for Adam and Eve. Procreation yes, reproduction certainly not. Reponsible procreation is written in the human heart. It is one of principles of marriage. NFP is only the application of natural methods for spacing or avoiding the baby, it is an element of the natural law that was present at the beginning of the creation.
 
ExGratia said:
NFP for spacing wouldn’t be needed in the agricultural society that existed in the time you are speaking of. Until relatively recently (post-industrial revolution) having a large family was considered a blessing by nearly everyone.
Click to expand...
Do you think really that the teaching of catholic church on responsible procreation and NFP was, per se, only objectively contextual??? For me, it is impossible.
 
JimG said:
Exactly. Their directive was to populate the earth! There would have been no need for NFP!

Now, developed nations face declining fertility and a depopulation crisis. Perhaps the “be fruitful and multiply” directive needs to be re-emphasized.
Click to expand...
Before all, couple (one man with one woman or one woman with one man, for respect the equality of the dignity of each one), then family is, per se, for God, for each one of spouse and for the fruit of love(children).

For the couple to have children is one of finalities, but each couple has not kids in the first time for the society; that is for the mix beetween God’s plan, for the couple, the family and then at the end the States, nations?

In my point of view, We do not have to emphasize too much procreation in order to protect the States. We must be moderated. How to define moderation???
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top