Sadness over NFP misuse/misunderstanding

[Alexander_Smith]

Ummm… we’re talking about NFP, not mercy killing… right? I’m awfully confused.
Empathy can be applied to many different situations… limiting it isn’t wise.

Yes, but it seems as if people are telling me to have empathy for people’s situations, when I am only trying to say what the truth is, based on the Church’s teaching. It’s not that I don’t have empathy for people who choose to use NFP, it’s just that I can’t let any emotional response cloud what is right and what is evil.

Look at it this way. I’m not saying this is the case, but Pope Pius XII said that NFP used to avoid children was wrong, because it divorces the marital act from it’s primary purpose, which is create new life.

Listening to a teenager give out marital advice is like listening to a homeless man give out investment advice. At least a priest has training and life experience.

Plus, we can’t know a couple’s exact situation. I know if I were married, I couldn’t handle 12 kids. I would go insane. Or try to start a family singing group. And if I had to be married and celibate, I would go insane as well.

12 kids would be a heck of a lot to handle. I wouldn’t suggest a couple try and have the maximum possible number.

I would say, that having 6 kids in this family has been a huge blessing, as we generally work in pairs of 2 for schooling and other things, and sports games are great when you have even sides.

To add to my previous comments. This is something that a think some of you should consider:

A couple gets married, has 5 kids, and then uses NFP to avoid pregnancy for the rest of their married life.

Is there anything wrong with this?

 

[Onegin]

I agree that this CAN happen… theoretically.

But I highly doubt that a couple who is actually going to go through the steps of learning NFP, put it into practice by periodically ABSTAINING and using self-control, and openly communicate these thoughts and feelings with each other, is ACTUALLY falling into this mentality.
If 2 people are so committed to the idea in the first place to make holy choices, then there is a check-and-balance system of two people trying to keep each other holy. The chances that this incorrect mentality would overcome two people who went through the above steps at one point in their marriage… without them succumbing to ABC… is going to be a fairly SLIM percentage.

You’re really going down a judgmental path here.

I think our big point of contention is that you view NFP to avoid as a “holy” choice while I view it as an temporary necessity (either because serious reasons to avoid exist or because total abstinence isn’t working - i.e. threatening to lead one spouse or both to sin).

The bottom line is that NFP is a morally neutral bit of information that may be used in either a neutral or sinful manner. It is never virtuous. Also, I don’t buy the argument that NFP is this wonderful alternative to artificial means, because artificial means are gravely sinful and no Catholic should be using them anyways. That shouldn’t even be on the table. Normal marital relations or total abstinence are the options available to the Catholic and where either of those are not options (for good reason) then NFP may be used.

Of course, I think we can both agree that ^this is not what is being taught in pre-cana class. Why? Because Catholics don’t want to hear it and it is “too hard.” So instead, Catholics are being taught that NFP is somehow virtuous and holy when, in truth, it is nothing more than - at best - a morally neutral act.

If you want to call me judgmental for saying this, that’s fine.

 

[CountrySinger]

12 kids would be a heck of a lot to handle. I wouldn’t suggest a couple try and have the maximum possible number.

I would say, that having 6 kids in this family has been a huge blessing, as we generally work in pairs of 2 for schooling and other things, and sports games are great when you have even sides.

I’m shooting for more like 4 kids. With me probably not getting married until my 30’s, that is about how many I could handle without forgetting their names. And I want them spaced out (like 2 years apart). More often, and I would just break down mentally and emotionally.

 

[Em_in_FL]

Yes, but it seems as if people are telling me to have empathy for people’s situations, when I am only trying to say what the truth is, based on the Church’s teaching. It’s not that I don’t have empathy for people who choose to use NFP, it’s just that I can’t let any emotional response cloud what is right and what is evil.

Look at it this way. I’m not saying this is the case, but Pope Pius XII said that NFP used to avoid children was wrong, because it divorces the marital act from it’s primary purpose, which is create new life.

Can you explain how NOT engaging in the marital act (by abstaining prayerfully) divorces the marital act from procreation?

ABC does this… not NFP.

By the way… procreation is not the same as fertility.
Because if you are you saying that a couple who is infertile is divorcing the marital act from procreation (assuming it always produces life), then you’re opening up a new door of interesting backlash from infertile couples here…

 

[Onegin]

And isn’t the purpose of sex twofold: to unite a couple and make babies? It’s not just one or the other. Both are important. That is why IVF is immoral. If sex was just for babies, then IVF would be A-Okay!

Yes, twofold but one is primary and the other is secondary. Not just sex but marriage. The primary purpose of marriage is the procreation and education of children. The secondary aspects involve unity, etc.

So, to get married without any intention of having kids is grounds for an annulment as you have thwarted the primary purpose of the sacrament at the outset.

 

[PaulinVA]

The idea of a couple using NFP long term with a contraceptive mentality is laughable.

 

[CountrySinger]

A couple gets married, has 5 kids, and then uses NFP to avoid pregnancy for the rest of their married life.

Is there anything wrong with this?

It depends on the reason. I know I wouldn’t want to have kids too old, or their health might be not great, or maybe just not being able to emotionally handle another child.
I was a surprise/unwanted baby, and it still hurts today. And it lead to abuse from my father, and then him leaving my mom. And I still feel the guilt from that.

 

[Em_in_FL]

To add to my previous comments. This is something that a think some of you should consider:

A couple gets married, has 5 kids, and then uses NFP to avoid pregnancy for the rest of their married life.

Is there anything wrong with this?

No… there are many very good (valid, just, serious, grave, whatever) reasons for this.

 

[Em_in_FL]

I think our big point of contention is that you view NFP to avoid as a “holy” choice while I view it as an temporary necessity (either because serious reasons to avoid exist or because total abstinence isn’t working - i.e. threatening to lead one spouse or both to sin).

Agreed.

The bottom line is that NFP is a morally neutral bit of information that may be used in either a neutral or sinful manner. It is never virtuous. Also, I don’t buy the argument that NFP is this wonderful alternative to artificial means, because artificial means are gravely sinful and no Catholic should be using them anyways. That shouldn’t even be on the table. Normal marital relations or total abstinence are the options available to the Catholic and where either of those are not options (for good reason) then NFP may be used.

Agreed… I never made the argument that NFP is an “alternative” to ABC. My argument was that there bigger and more grave sins that you can go out and attack other than the minuscule chance that a couple is actually going to use NFP under the wrong mentality. Like PaulinVA said… it’s LAUGHABLE to think this could happen long-term!

Of course, I think we can both agree that ^this is not what is being taught in pre-cana class. Why? Because Catholics don’t want to hear it and it is “too hard.” So instead, Catholics are being taught that NFP is somehow virtuous and holy when, in truth, it is nothing more than - at best - a morally neutral act.

If you want to call me judgmental for saying this, that’s fine.

I only went to one pre-cana weekend… so I don’t know what you experienced. If you’re noticing the class is being taught incorrectly in your diocese then do something to fix it. What I learned at my pre-cana weekend about NFP was very much in line with the church’s teachings… most couples CHOSE to ignore that.

 

[Onegin]

Yes, both are sinful.

ABC - is far more common, also physically blocks intimacy, also can induce abortion, blocks (not avoids) procreation, and inhibits true union between the couple.

NFP - does none of the above. It uses periodic abstinence under prayerful consideration. The statistical chances of it being used with this “contraceptive mentality” are minuscule.

Why minuscule? Let’s assume that you have Catholic couples that never consider the possibility of using artificial birth control in the first place because they already know that it is gravely sinful.

They know, then, that their only options are 1) normal marital relations, 2) total abstinence or 3) NFP to avoid. The couple really doesn’t want children right now but they have no serious reason to avoid pregnancy (other than family size preference). They decide to go with NFP to avoid.

Why does this scenario seem so unlikely? Even if the couple doesn’t ultimately choose 3) the temptation is going to be there. Satan is always tempting us to take the most convenient route, and if that means using NFP to avoid a pregnancy that would be “inconvenient” to one’s ideal family size, then so be it. We’re only human after all.

 

[Alexander_Smith]

No… there are many very good (valid, just, serious, grave, whatever) reasons for this.

Well there’s something we can agree on. But I do have to ask, what difference do you seen between using ABC to avoid pregnancy temporarily, and using NFP to avoid pregnancy temporarily, when the end result is still intercourse with the intention of completely avoiding pregnancy.

Not my opinion btw, I’m kind of playing devil’s advocate.

Can you explain how NOT engaging in the marital act (by abstaining prayerfully) divorces the marital act from procreation?

ABC does this… not NFP.

By the way… procreation is not the same as fertility.
Because if you are you saying that a couple who is infertile is divorcing the marital act from procreation (assuming it always produces life), then you’re opening up a new door of interesting backlash from infertile couples here…

No I’m not saying that. If I remember correctly, Popes have said before that there is NO sin in having intercourse during infertile times, because there is no deliberate intention of avoiding children.

 

[Em_in_FL]

Why minuscule? Let’s assume that you have Catholic couples that never consider the possibility of using artificial birth control in the first place because they already know that it is gravely sinful.

They know, then, that their only options are 1) normal marital relations, 2) total abstinence or 3) NFP to avoid. The couple really doesn’t want children right now but they have no serious reason to avoid pregnancy (other than family size preference). They decide to go with NFP to avoid.

Why does this scenario seem so unlikely? Even if the couple doesn’t ultimately choose 3) the temptation is going to be there. Satan is always tempting us to take the most convenient route, and if that means using NFP to avoid a pregnancy that would be “inconvenient” to one’s ideal family size, then so be it. We’re only human after all.

Why does this scenario seem so unlikely?
Because your first assumptions are laughable! A couple that “never considers the possibility of using artificial birth control” is only going to be those with the strongest and most well-formed consciouses!
Why? Because we’re INUNDATED with ABC in this world… it’s the most logical answer to most people. When girls go to the doctor as teenagers now, they’re asked if they’d like to start birth control. They’re sold on the idea that it makes their periods lighter. Parents comply because they aren’t well catechized themselves and they believe it’s for “medical purposes” (because that’s the easy answer)…
You want to talk about CONVENIENCE!?!
That’s the easy answer.
The chances of a couple (yes, I’m talking about everyday Catholics!) actually getting married in this day and age, and walking into marriage without any history of using birth control and assuming it’s actually “gravely sinful” is LAUGHABLE… and yes, minuscule.

 

[Em_in_FL]

Well there’s something we can agree on. But I do have to ask, what difference do you seen between using ABC to avoid pregnancy temporarily, and using NFP to avoid pregnancy temporarily, when the end result is still intercourse with the intention of completely avoiding pregnancy.

Not my opinion btw, I’m kind of playing devil’s advocate.

No I’m not saying that. If I remember correctly, Popes have said before that there is NO sin in having intercourse during infertile times, because there is no deliberate intention of avoiding children.

NFP is NOT having intercourse… it’s ABSTAINING.
ABC IS having intercourse… despite fertility.
NFP respects that fertility… and requires self-control.

EXTREMELY different.

 

[Alexander_Smith]

Why does this scenario seem so unlikely?
Because your first assumptions are laughable! A couple that “never considers the possibility of using artificial birth control” is only going to be those with the strongest and most well-formed consciouses!
Why? Because we’re INUNDATED with ABC in this world… it’s the most logical answer to most people. When girls go to the doctor as teenagers now, they’re asked if they’d like to start birth control. They’re sold on the idea that it makes their periods lighter. Parents comply because they aren’t well catechized themselves and they believe it’s for “medical purposes” (because that’s the easy answer)…
You want to talk about CONVENIENCE!?!
That’s the easy answer.
The chances of a couple (yes, I’m talking about everyday Catholics!) actually getting married in this day and age, and walking into marriage without any history of using birth control and assuming it’s actually “gravely sinful” is LAUGHABLE… and yes, minuscule.

I’ve already devoted a lot of my time arguing with people I know over ABC. My worry is that people who are trying to be good Catholics will do something wrong, believing it is the proper alternative to the clearly sinful use of ABC, when in fact NFP falls under the same restrictions as abstinence.

NFP is NOT having intercourse… it’s ABSTAINING.
ABC IS having intercourse… despite fertility.
NFP respects that fertility… and requires self-control.

EXTREMELY different.

NFP is only partly not having intercourse. NFP is also about having intercourse only on days where the woman is infertile.

Would it be wrong to use ABC on infertile days?

 

[PaulinVA]

My wife and I had a rough time with babies. Our first had a severe birth defect. The next was a screaming “Me-me”. When we were discussing whether or not to work on the next, I was a government contractor. Our contract was being recompeted, and I might have been out of a job. We figured , “Hey, if I lose my job and we can’t feed us, what’s the problem not being able to feed one more?” So, we had another. And another.

That’s the mentality of people practicing NFP to conceive and to avoid. It really is, “Is it time to have another yet?”

And, if there is a grave/just/serious reason to avoid after two, three, four, eight, whatever, then that is acceptable.

 

[Momofmyangels]

The chances of a couple (yes, I’m talking about everyday Catholics!) actually getting married in this day and age, and walking into marriage without any history of using birth control and assuming it’s actually “gravely sinful” is LAUGHABLE… and yes, minuscule.

Why in any way would that be laughable. Premarital sex is a sin, and those that have no history of it or of using birth control before marriage should be laughed at? Am I misunderstanding your point here, because to laugh at such a sincerely pure
(and holy) way of behaving is incomprehensible to me. Please clarify if this was not your intent, and I apologize if I read it wrong.

 

[Jennifer_J]

Well there’s something we can agree on. But I do have to ask, what difference do you seen between using ABC to avoid pregnancy temporarily, and using NFP to avoid pregnancy temporarily, when the end result is still intercourse with the intention of completely avoiding pregnancy.

Not my opinion btw, I’m kind of playing devil’s advocate.

No I’m not saying that. If I remember correctly, Popes have said before that there is NO sin in having intercourse during infertile times, because there is no deliberate intention of avoiding children.

ABC interferes with the natural act, it does something to the act to make it sterile. NFP doesn’t interfere with the natural act. The act is completed as God intended. Whether the woman is naturally fertile or infertile or not, the ACT is OPEN to PROCREATION. ABC is never OPEN to PROCREATION as it’s very use is to BLOCK PROCREATION.

While it is theoretically possible to use NFP in a selfish way, it is NOT the same thing as contraception. NFP isn’t some easy, pie in the sky, thing to follow. If spacing of babies is needed, then it is sacraficial to not have relations. The use of NFP CAN help couples grow in virtue–doesn’t all sacrifice do this?

 

[Em_in_FL]

I’ve already devoted a lot of my time arguing with people I know over ABC. My worry is that people who are trying to be good Catholics will do something wrong, believing it is the proper alternative to the clearly sinful use of ABC, when in fact NFP falls under the same restrictions as abstinence.

And a very good worry to have… but again, when put into ACTUAL PRACTICE, it doesn’t work that way. It has a natural way of weeding out the abusers by bringing a ton of other issues to the surface, because if people are going to have to abstain it’s not easy.

NFP is only partly not having intercourse. NFP is also about having intercourse only on days where the woman is infertile.

Would it be wrong to use ABC on infertile days?

Ah yes… see your following down my path just like I’d hoped.

As we both agree, intercourse for infertile couples isn’t a problem, right?
So, why is ABC wrong? Because it harms the TWOFOLD nature of sex within marriage… it’s BOTH *procreative *and unitive in nature.
The word “procreative” means “done in a fashion that could bring about life” - in more vulgar layman’s terms… the husband MUST finish INSIDE the wife and nothing about that act can be done to restrict life from coming about (ie chemical through the pill, or using a condom, etc).

ABC during the infertile phases of a woman’s cycle still blocks this twofold nature, though. That “block” (chemical, barrier, whatever) is still there, regardless of the woman’s *fertility *at that moment.

 

[Em_in_FL]

Why in any way would that be laughable. Premarital sex is a sin, and those that have no history of it or of using birth control before marriage should be laughed at? Am I misunderstanding your point here, because to laugh at such a sincerely pure
(and holy) way of behaving is incomprehensible to me. Please clarify if this was not your intent, and I apologize if I read it wrong.

Yes you read it wrong, and I forgive you.

The CHANCES of this happening in this day and age where we are inundated by ABC is very very small (“laughably” small)…

I’m arguing that those who actually make the HOLY choice of using NFP in the first place are *RARELY *going to be using it with a “contraceptive mentality”… because they are some of the “minuscule few” (“laughably small” percentage) that make this choice in the first place… those with the most well-formed conscience anyway.

Hope that clarifies?

 

[Middleman]

I’ve obviously taken some issue with a thing or two that Alexander’s said, but I also take issue with the “until you’ve lived it, shut your mouth” argument.

Should you have to be a schizophrenic to offer psychiatric care to one? Does a priest need to go and get married and have kids to offer you advice on how to live a Godly marriage? Do I need to be tempted to have gay sex before I can offer someone advice on how to overcome the temptations to gay sex?

I could go on and on with examples, but I think you get the point. Shooting the messenger is rarely indicative of anything but contempt for the message. If you disagree with what he’s saying, try and point your disagreement in the right place- the message -rather than him.

You should at least be out of your teens and have had some real life experience, wouldn’t you agree?

The poster has no life experience other than childhood, and is in the thows of idealist and arrogant youth. I’ve been there myself. He has not, however, been where I stand. I know more about life than he.