Rhythm Method of Birth Control

[Charlemagne_II]

Exactly what is the rhythm method of birth control, and why is it not condemned by the Catholic Church along with other methods of birth control?

 

[1ke]

Exactly what is the rhythm method of birth control

it is a method of postponing or achieving pregnancy based on calendar averages of female fertility cycles. This method is no longer practiced. It has been superceded by more accurate fertility observation methods such as sympto-thermal, Creighton, Billings, and Marquette that observe actual fertility each day.

In all methods of natural family planning, the couple uses the information to determine whether or not they want to engage in intercourse or abstain. They can determine their most fertile time when trying to achieve, an they can avoid their most fertile time when needing to postpone for serious reassons.

and why is it not condemned by the Catholic Church along with other methods of birth control?

Because postponing a pregnancy through abstaining from intercourse has never been immoral. It has been utilized by couples from the dawn of time. Our modern medical insights allow us to do so with more precision. They also allow us greater ability to utilize this knowledge to help achieve pregnancy for couples with infertility issues.

Contraception is immoral. In contraception one attempts to engage in intercourse and sterilize the act. Contraception and abstaining from intercourse are not the same thing at all.

 

[john81]

it is a method of postponing or achieving pregnancy based on calendar averages of female fertility cycles. This method is no longer practiced. It has been superceded by more accurate fertility observation methods such as sympto-thermal, Creighton, Billings, and Marquette that observe actual fertility each day.

In all methods of natural family planning, the couple uses the information to determine whether or not they want to engage in intercourse or abstain. They can determine their most fertile time when trying to achieve, an they can avoid their most fertile time when needing to postpone for serious reassons.

Because postponing a pregnancy through abstaining from intercourse has never been immoral. It has been utilized by couples from the dawn of time. Our modern medical insights allow us to do so with more precision. They also allow us greater ability to utilize this knowledge to help achieve pregnancy for couples with infertility issues.

Contraception is immoral. In contraception one attempts to engage in intercourse and sterilize the act. Contraception and abstaining from intercourse are not the same thing at all.

Remember that avoiding children due to selfish reasons like “we’re not ready”, “we want to get our finances in order” “it’s too hard to raise that many kids!!” is immoral. You should always consult with your priest concerning reasons that justify using this method.

We don’t want to be hypocritical as Cathlolics and avoid the purpose of marriage, raising kids to populate Heaven, by not having kids and then saying that those who use contraceptives are acting immoral.

God bless!

 

[paperwight66]

Remember that avoiding children due to selfish reasons like " “we want to get our finances in order” "l.

God bless!

Good grief, I’d have thought getting finances in order before having children was absolutely essential (unless living on a farm with access to free food, of course).

We are called to live out the cardinal virtues, one of which is prudence.

 

[Corki]

Exactly what is the rhythm method of birth control, and why is it not condemned by the Catholic Church along with other methods of birth control?

The rhythm method is an older version of Natural Family Planning. It relied mostly on a calendar tracking of a woman’s fertiltiy cycles. “Birth control” is not condemned by the Church. Contraception is. NFP/the rythym method is not contraceptive.

Good grief, I’d have thought getting finances in order before having children was absolutely essential (unless living on a farm with access to free food, of course).

We are called to live out the cardinal virtues, one of which is prudence.

Well, you would have thought that a couple would get their finances in order before getting married too but it doesn’t always work out that way.

 

[anp1215]

The rhythm method is an older version of Natural Family Planning. It relied mostly on a calendar tracking of a woman’s fertiltiy cycles. “Birth control” is not condemned by the Church. Contraception is. NFP/the rythym method is not contraceptive.

Well, you would have thought that a couple would get their finances in order before getting married too but it doesn’t always work out that way.

Sometimes things happen in a marriage that can destroy finances, no matter how in order they were when the couple got married.

 

[Corki]

Sometimes things happen in a marriage that can destroy finances, no matter how in order they were when the couple got married.

And such a situation would be a good reason to use NFP. But the couple who gets married planning to postpone having children until they have saved “enough” or have purchased “enough” stuff *might not *be really ready to accept children lovingly from God.

 

[anp1215]

And such a situation would be a good reason to use NFP. But the couple who gets married planning to postpone having children until they have saved “enough” or have purchased “enough” stuff *might not *be really ready to accept children lovingly from God.

Right. And we all know that nowadays many people confuse wants and needs, thinking that needs include brand new cars, expensive vacations, etc.

But say, a couple gets married, has their finances in order, but then a family member becomes ill or has an accident and the couple is suddenly deep in debt because of medical bills. That would definitely be a good reason to avoid, not the fault of the couple for not planning ahead or something.

I think we’re in agreement. Sometimes accidents happen, we can try to prepare, but can’t predict the future.

 

[Corki]

I think we’re in agreement. Sometimes accidents happen, we can try to prepare, but can’t predict the future.

Yes, we are in agreement. The corner we have backed ourselves into as a Church is that, we are so happy when a couple wants to use NFP instead of contracepting, that we skip right over the conversations about just reasons. When I got married, I remember telling the priest doing our pre-cana that we wanted to both finish grad school, buy a house, get some money into savings and then we would *think about *starting on our pre-determined number of children (3). He never said a word. Looking back, I can see how we were completely backward in how we approached marriage and parenthood.

 

[SwizzleStick]

Good grief, I’d have thought getting finances in order before having children was absolutely essential (unless living on a farm with access to free food, of course). …

Not to derail the thread, but you are not a farmer, are you? Do you know any farmers? The “free” food comes with quite a bit of work, with planting, weeding, tilling, watering when necessary, harvesting, preparing for preservation, actual preserving, so the food is not entirely “free.” The price is labor.

Now, back to your regularly scheduled thread.

 

[anp1215]

Yes, we are in agreement. The corner we have backed ourselves into as a Church is that, we are so happy when a couple wants to use NFP instead of contracepting, that we skip right over the conversations about just reasons. When I got married, I remember telling the priest doing our pre-cana that we wanted to both finish grad school, buy a house, get some money into savings and then we would *think about *starting on our pre-determined number of children (3). He never said a word. Looking back, I can see how we were completely backward in how we approached marriage and parenthood.

I know, it is very sad. It should be that welcoming any children is the default option, then NFP if you really need to use it for just reasons, and never ABC.

Instead for many couples it’s ABC as the default, NFP for the devout Catholics, and welcoming children all the time is like a foreign concept.

NOT saying all couples are like that, but it seems to be the mindset of many clergy and laity.

 

[Qoeleth]

In fact, it is not permitted for contraceptive purposes. It may only be permitted to improve the timing, and potential well being, of children.

Augustine condemned it as a contraceptive. I am with him.

I you have sex, you must pay the natural consequence of the act- which is the possibility of children.

I think the Church needs to state its teachings again more emphatically and clearly. The majority do not seem to understand it, and do not get beyond a rather unsophisticated distinction between ‘abstaining’ and ‘action’.

 

[etmom]

Well, you would have thought that a couple would get their finances in order before getting married too but it doesn’t always work out that way.

Goodness, my last two children themselves have put us seriously in debt with complicate pregnancies, emergency csections, lengthy NICU stays and funeral expenses for our youngest child. We have 4 other children besides. Open to life can come with hefty medical debt, more than the average couple can handle

 

[Portrait]

Remember that avoiding children due to selfish reasons like “we’re not ready”, “we want to get our finances in order” “it’s too hard to raise that many kids!!” is immoral. You should always consult with your priest concerning reasons that justify using this method.

We don’t want to be hypocritical as Cathlolics and avoid the purpose of marriage, raising kids to populate Heaven, by not having kids and then saying that those who use contraceptives are acting immoral.

God bless!

Dear john,

Cordial greetings and a very good day.

Jolly well said, my sentiments entirely. We need more solid stuff like this nowadays, given the very unspiritual mindset that is so prevalent in the contemporary Catholic Church.

God bless.

Warmest good wishes,

Portrait

Pax

 

[Dan_Grelinger]

In fact, it is not permitted for contraceptive purposes. It may only be permitted to improve the timing, and potential well being, of children.

Augustine condemned it as a contraceptive. I am with him.

I you have sex, you must pay the natural consequence of the act- which is the possibility of children.

I think the Church needs to state its teachings again more emphatically and clearly. The majority do not seem to understand it, and do not get beyond a rather unsophisticated distinction between ‘abstaining’ and ‘action’.

For clarification: Is periodic abstinance a contraceptive? If so, am I always contracepting when I am not having conjugal relations with my wife? Like now?

Not conceiving because one did NOT act at a specific time whould seem to be sin of omission? We should have, but we did not? By what guide do we figure out when we SHOULD have, to avoid this sin of omission?

Or is the sin in gathering the information in order to determine probable fertility? Therefore the sin is in the gathering of natural knowledge?

Or is the sin in abstaining during assumed infertile times one of intent?

I am not sure I agree with the tone of the statement about paying the natural consequence of the act? I believe that all children are gifts from God, and that would seem to be inconsistent with your statement.

 

[LilyM]

In fact, it is not permitted for contraceptive purposes. It may only be permitted to improve the timing, and potential well being, of children.

Augustine condemned it as a contraceptive. I am with him.

I you have sex, you must pay the natural consequence of the act- which is the possibility of children.

I think the Church needs to state its teachings again more emphatically and clearly. The majority do not seem to understand it, and do not get beyond a rather unsophisticated distinction between ‘abstaining’ and ‘action’.

Yes one should be prepared for the consequences IF one chooses to have sex. Ain’t nothing in that to say that one cannot choose at times to not have sex.

In fact I don’t know of any married couples who have sex every day without fail, even when they can do so.

That being the case, one can then legitimately, per Church teaching, after prayerful discernment, decide at least sometimes to coincide those times of choosing not to have sex with the times when the couple are most likely to conceive.

 

[kalbertone]

Yes one should be prepared for the consequences IF one chooses to have sex. Ain’t nothing in that to say that one cannot choose at times to not have sex.

In fact I don’t know of any married couples who have sex every day without fail, even when they can do so.

That being the case, one can then legitimately, per Church teaching, after prayerful discernment, decide at least sometimes to coincide those times of choosing not to have sex with the times when the couple are most likely to conceive.

The church(which is the people of god) have long rejected this nonsense about contraception being immoral.Popes thru the centuries hailed sex in marriage as a necessary evil tainted with sin.Aquinas supported celibacy for priests so they can celebrate the sacraments undefiled(no sex with their spouse).Augustine held sex in marriage a necessary evil tainted with sin.This is all ridiculous & laughable.why not defend “church” teachings of centuries before that slavery does not go against natural law or charging interest on a loan is grave sin.Catholics are called to form their conscience & in the end it is the conscience not a bunch of celibates that decide.