Sadness over NFP misuse/misunderstanding

[ac_claire]

Don’t you know that anyone who challenges the effectiveness of NFP as a contraceptive because they’ve gotten pregnant while practicing NFP to avoid gets written off entirely by the NFP educators as “not having practed NFP correctly?”
NFP data is just great, NFP is surely reliable, sure it is…
just as long as you’ve written off all those cases where it DIDN’T work as “these people did not practice NFP* CORRECTLY* because if they HAD practiced it CORRECTLY they would NOT have gotten pregnant!” It is laughable.
**If I had a dollar for every woman who practiced NFP correctly and got pregnant **and was written off as “not having practiced NFP correctly” I’d have a fat piggy bank!

How do you know that these women practiced NFP correctly? If you practice NFP to avoid correctly, then you will only have sex on days where conception would be very, very unlikely. Unfortunately, with the way so many women’s bodies are different and with how little so many couples understand about NFP, many of them will not practice it correctly and will “fail” to avoid conception.

Furthermore, God doesn’t want us to practice NFP as a “contraceptive” as you say.

There’s no way in any case that NFP is going to be 100% effective at avoiding conception. Same with ABC. The only thing that is 100% effective is complete abstinence. Personally I think that if a couple is serious about not coneiving due to some kind of life or death health circumstance, for instance, then they shuld practice abstinence. Maybe that’s off-topic though.

 

[Rach620]

God designed a full monthly cycle of fertile and non fertile periods. NFP only makes use of part of the cycle for the marital union. There is nothing inherent in God’s design to indicate this was what He intended His children to do.

It goes both ways: nothing inherent in God’s design shows that married couples must have sex at certain times and must not have sex at other times. Husbands and wives are free to decide for themselves when and how often they are going to have sex. They are under no divine mandate with regard to frequency or timing of intercourse.

Where does God command that married couples have sex at certain times? Where does His design indicate that they ought to have sex at certain times rather than others?

Exactly! His design did not make the fertile and non=fertile times inherently obvious. Perhaps it was not His intention that His children would be splitting up the month into sex / no sex periods instead of following the natural rhythym of their biologically driven desires.

There is a difference between “God’s design” and “God’s command”. They are not the same thing. There is latitude within which one can act in accord with God’s design of the fertility cycle and still follow His command for one flesh union. There is no command that says that married couples MUST observe His design and only behave in certain ways at certain times (and no NFP-using couple has said that couples MUST use it, just that it is permitted at certain times and for certain reasons).

Fertile and non-fertile times are pretty obvious…I’ve said before that NFP is not rocket science, and that is quite true. Female fertility is pretty mysterious, but it’s not totally un-observable. Perhaps if it were your argument would hold.

As it stands, what you’re saying is akin to saying that since the digestive and nutrient absorption process is not readily observable or inherently obvious to us, we should not try to figure out which types of food are most nourishing to our bodies and behave accordingly–instead, we should just eat what we want, when we want. I’m not sure when our “biologically driven desires” became the all-holy guide to live by–last I checked, we were supposed to be masters of our passions, rather than driven by mere biological/hormonal urges.

Here again a read of Wojtyla’s “Love and Responsibility,” this time on the subject of the sexual urge, would probably be helpful for your understanding of Catholic teaching on this subject.

Finally, what you are talking about–“intent” and “totality of actions” have NOTHING TO DO with the licitness of NFP. That is why the teaching documents on this topic speak of not frustrating the purposes of each per se act–each act IN ITSELF. A problem of “intention” and “totality of actions” can occur–every NFP “proponent” on this thread has admitted as such. But even a sin of selfishness or a lack of discernment on the part of an NFP using couple avoiding pregnancy does not affect the objective morality of NFP, nor does it suddenly transform NFP into ABC.

Since when has the Church ever divorced a person’s intent and totality of actions from morality? The insistence that having sex without a barrier or a pill, etc. somehow makes things OK IN ITSELF while ignoring the larger picture of what is actually going on is one of the things that I have been saying makes no sense. I don’t care if it’s what the Church teaches - I am saying that it IT MAKES NO MORAL SENSE. Insisting that the only licit way to have sex is without some barrier to conception while ignoring that the timing of NFP is also a barrier to conception IS INCONSISTENT on it’s face.

You are saying that the subjective reasons/intent of a couple using NFP suddenly transforms NFP itself (“per se”) into an **objectively **disordered and sinful action. This is simply not the case! There is no objectively disordered act occurring when an NFP-using couple engages in the marital embrace during the infertile period. NFP does not become ABC when a couple has insufficient reason to use it. NFP is not the problem; the selfishness of the couple is. Their sin would not be in having sex (which is always a good!) but in selfishness, disobedience to God’s plan, a lack of discernment, etc.

All we can look at is one act (object, intention, and circumstances) at a time and judge whether it is moral or immoral. In this case:
object: sexual union of husband and wife
intention: union of spouses; potential procreation of children
circumstances: mutually agreed-upon time, within the bond of matrimony

An overall attitude of “contraceptive intent” or a lack of serious reason to avoid pregnancy is a SEPARATE ACT and SEPARATE PROBLEM from the act of sex during the infertile period. The intention of a married couple using NFP, when they have sex (object) is NOT “avoiding of pregnancy”. It makes no sense to say that it is. An NFP-using couple, even with the worst intentions, never is doing anything that **objectively **frustrates the procreative purpose of sex, because they never are rendering the sex act infertile.

 

[Rach620]

You’re suggesting that by “timing” intercourse and engaging in periodic abstinence that married couples are trying to pull one over on God–“haha, God, you gave me these bulletproof means to accomplish my own will but still not be sinning!” Again, this is an unrealistic attitude and while I don’t want to harp on the experience thing, it’s clear that you’ve never practiced NFP. Rare (nonexistent?) is the couple that gleefully sits back and thinks “wahoo, only infertile sex for us! we get to have all the pleasure we want and none of those annoying babies…this NFP things is great for getting our own way!”. Abstinence. Requires. Sacrifice. Let’s say it again: abstinence requires sacrifice. ANY abstinence (this nonsense that periodic abstinence is somehow much lower on the holiness scale than prolonged periods of abstinence is absurd–as if there is some human weakness in coming together with one’s spouse) requires sacrifice that works well to purify one’s motives and force couples to seriously discern whether they have sufficient reasons to abstain, or if they really are in a place to welcome another child lovingly from God.

As Alexander pointed out a while back:
quote from #357
If therefore there are well-grounded reasons for spacing births, arising from the physical or psychological condition of husband or wife, or from external circumstances, the Church teaches that married people may then take advantage of the natural cycles immanent in the reproductive system and engage in marital intercourse only during those times that are infertile, thus controlling birth in a way which does not in the least offend the moral principles which We have just explained. (20)

The first part specifically states that the simple desire to space births is not enough reason to resort to NFP.** In other words, unless you have well-grounded reasons to space births, you cannot use NFP**. There must be an actual problem that would cause the couple to have to resort of NFP. This further reinforces my opinion that NFP is the exception, not the rule.

NO ONE on this thread who has been supporting NFP has disagreed with you on this point. This is why we have all repeatedly said that married couples who resort to periodic continence (NFP) must have just/serious/grave reasons for avoiding pregnancy.

As I wrote previously:

I believe NFP is the Church’s answer to a contraceptive minded and sexually obsessed culture which demands to control the number and spacing of children while still being able to enjoy sex only for pleasure and avoid prolonged periods of total abstinence.

Yes, it is the Church’s “answer,” but it is not a Church-approved way of “enjoying sex only for pleasure and avoiding prolonged periods of abstinence,” if that’s what you’re insinuating. People who think that NFP is this awesome ABC-like pleasure-fest clearly are not basing their opinions in reality.

IMO this is the reason for the inconsistency between the statement that the procreative and unitive aspects of intercourse should never be separated and the practical separation that occurs in NFP. The disconnect between the theology and the practice is obscured by the NFP philosophy that declares intentional and prolonged infertile sexual relations are “ordered to procreation” simply because there is no barrier to fertility in use with each carefully timed sex act, while ignoring the reality of the overall contraceptive practice taking place and the practical effect of separating the 2 aspects of intercourse.

This paragraph is where I lose you. I honestly don’t see where you are coming from here.

WHERE in the act of intercourse is there a “practical” separation of unitive and procreative by the NFP-using/avoiding couple? What about their intercourse, “practically speaking” is somehow NOT unitive or NOT procreative? Can you get specific in your answer, for clarity’s sake? I really don’t see it. They’re having sex. They’re offering all of their natural, God-given fertility to one another in that act. What else do you want of them?

Your use of the phrase “contraceptive practice” in this paragraph is inappropriate and misleading. We would all do well to stick with the terminology in use by the Church’s teaching documents on this topic, and in no way, shape, or form is periodic abstinence EVER considered a “contraceptive practice”. How do you think that it is? How does abstinence interfere with conception taking place if there is no sex taking place?

I believe the practical end result of NFP leads many Catholics to see it as a contraceptive practice and to reject as hypocritical the teaching that NFP is OK and ABC is not.

The “practical end result” being…avoidance of pregnancy and spacing of births? These things are acceptable according to Catholic teaching; responsible family planning is viewed as A GOOD. What we are talking about are licit and illicit forms of birth control. With just reasons, NFP is a licit form of birth control; ABC is always an illicit form of birth control, even in the same circumstances and with the same just reasons.

 

[momor]

Alright, I think I see why you are confused. The Church teaches that one may regulate births with “well grounded” reasons, The Church also teaches that you cannot separate the unitive and procreative purpose of the marital act. You see NFP (as always used?) as separating these too purposes by allowing the unitive without the procreative.*

Correct so far.
BTW, I have only been discussing NFP as a tool to avoid conception. I have no argument with it to achieve conception. In that case the couple is seeking to unify the aspects of intercourse as closely as possible.

Maybe it will help if we also state that the church views the marital act (in and of itself) as a good within marriage.

Yes

I understand that at no time you said that a couple must not have sex during the infertile phase and must have sex during the fertile phase.

Correct

But if we take your logic to its logical end, that is where we end up. If a couple has any knowledge of the woman’s cycle (which you don’t need to specifically need NFP*) they then they must either have sex during their fertile phase or not have sex at all that cycle in order to make sure they are not using that knowledge in a contraceptive manner.

It’s not that black and white. I think there is a middle ground between paying absolutely no attention to the woman’s physical signs or cycle and having intercourse anytime you want and the other end of the spectrum with NFP where some couples are doing everything in their power to figure out how many days they can have sex and avoid pregnancy and stressing over it in the bargain. I reject the notion that this is what HV teaches.

Or we could say that if a woman knew she was infertile she could never get married because she would never be open to life during her marriage, (which actually denies the direct intervention of God in the lives of Sarah and Elizabeth in the bible). Because she and her husband would be using sex (consummation is required in most marriages) only for the unitive and not the procreative purpose.

No. There is a difference between intentional infertility and the unintentional.

*If you read the catechism, it specifically defines “ordered to procreation” to mean within the specific act and uses this phrase which might be helpful “each and every marriage act must remain open to the transmission of life” CCC 2366. Open to the transmission of life is different than just being “open to life” or being “procreative” as you define it.

I don’t accept that what you have quoted above logically supports NFP if taken at face value. Or that transmission of life, open to life, ordered to life, or procreative mean (or should mean) anything other than their literal meaning. This is where we get into the subterfuge of NFP terminology meaning something other than the literal words.

*Before I even learned NFP I knew when I ovulated, ovulation in a woman is not unobservable (sorry about the double negative/ is observable) without a thermometer or any other specific NFP practice. Many women have “middlesmirch (sp?)” Where they have cramp like pains during ovulation. I had very noticeable mucus discharge associated with my ovulation, still others are very regular and could rely on just counting day to know when they ovulated.Therefore ovulation is inherently obvious in some women.

I agree some, but not all women have noticable signs.

I hope this helps.

 

[momor]

Furthermore, God doesn’t want us to practice NFP as a “contraceptive” as you say.

There’s no way in any case that NFP is going to be 100% effective at avoiding conception. Same with ABC. The only thing that is 100% effective is complete abstinence. Personally I think that if a couple is serious about not coneiving due to some kind of life or death health circumstance, for instance, then they shuld practice abstinence. Maybe that’s off-topic though.

I don’t think it’s off topic but I don’t think you will find many who agree with you here among the recent NFP proponents from what I have picked up from their posts. I could be wrong however.

 

[momor]

This paragraph is where I lose you. I honestly don’t see where you are coming from here.

WHERE in the act of intercourse is there a “practical” separation of unitive and procreative by the NFP-using/avoiding couple? What about their intercourse, “practically speaking” is somehow NOT unitive or NOT procreative? Can you get specific in your answer, for clarity’s sake? I really don’t see it.

Since you specifically asked me to clarify I will do that even though I feel like I have expressed what I think about this already till my fingers hurt.

When a couple ONLY has sex on infertile days they are not being “procreative”, they are being contraceptive, the literal meaning being contrary to conception. How can you deny that NFP is contrary to achieving conception?

They’re having sex. They’re offering all of their natural, God-given fertility to one another in that act. What else do you want of them?

When you have sex ONLY on infertile days you ARE NOT offering all of your God given fertility to your husband. In fact, your fertility is being withheld. It may be by mutual decision but it is being denied/withheld nonetheless. You are attempting to make sure that your egg released during any given cycle never comes into contact with your husband’s sperm. How is that offering all of your fertility?
.

Your use of the phrase “contraceptive practice” in this paragraph is inappropriate and misleading. We would all do well to stick with the terminology in use by the Church’s teaching documents on this topic, and in no way, shape, or form is periodic abstinence EVER considered a “contraceptive practice”. How do you think that it is? How does abstinence interfere with conception taking place if there is no sex taking place?

I stated it was my opinion and I believe I have explained why above.

 

[former_Catholic]

How do you know that these women practiced NFP correctly? If you practice NFP to avoid correctly, then you will only have sex on days where conception would be very, very unlikely…

And so if you conceive, then you must have practiced NFP incorrectly, well obviously!
Unless of course your body is in a state of perpetual pseudofertility making it such that there were NO days whatsoever of conception being very, very unlikely.

NFP will never be an exact science guaranteeing “contraception.” We have growing chemical and hormonal pollution in the food chain… heck, we’ve got 13 year olds with ovarian cysts! I’ve seen 5 of them come through here in the last 10 years! These kids are babies for gosh sakes… babies with the gyn problems of old women! Ovarian cysts used to be completely unknown in women under 50 years of age! And now we’ve got 13 year olds with ovarian cysts…
we’ve got states of continual pseudofertility and states of continual infertility and miscarriage going on because of what people are being exposed to…
and women are being fed even more hormones to counteract both…(as though no one had ever heard of DES daughters… and DES daughters and sons are in their 3rd generation now…

 

[momor]

Ovarian cysts used to be completely unknown in women under 50 years of age!

This statement is incorrect and I just want to clarify that for anyone who might mistake this for fact. Ovarian cysts are normal following ovulation and secrete hormones for a time. They usually resolve normally. They can become problematic when they don’t resolve like they should. Therefore cysts are found in girls/women who are ovulating.

 

[former_Catholic]

This statement is incorrect and I just want to clarify that for anyone who might mistake this for fact. Ovarian cysts are normal following ovulation and secrete hormones for a time. They usually resolve normally. They can become problematic when they don’t resolve like they should. Therefore cysts are found in girls/women who are ovulating.

I’m talking about ovarian cysts sufficiently severe to require surgery to remove them in 13 year old girls. Nobody regards this as normal. It used to be unheard of in women under 50 and was regarded as an old woman’s disease.

 

[paperwight]

NFP isn’t periodic abstinence, it just happens to use it as part of the program. The aspect of NFP we are discussing is the use of the martial act during infertile times ONLY. Please do not confuse the issue, or we will get sidetracked.

Alexander, will you do me a favour and take care over your spelling of ‘marital’?

You keep spelling it ‘martial’ which gives quite the wrong impression.

 

[Julianna]

I had 5 kids using NFP correrctly. I almost died having the last one. My body does NOT meet any NFP model other than “your body is in a permanent state of pseudo-fertility.” As a nursing mother of 5 I refused to take natural or artificial hormones to force it to meet the model.
**My husband got himself sterilized rather than face complete abstincence for the rest of our lives at age 32 after I almost died in childbirth. ** The Catholic teaching hospital, the pastor, and the assistant pastor all advised it because there was ZERO chance that I would ever survive another pregnancy and I had 5 children under the age of 9 to raise. They all concurred that I had “more than proven” that I was “open to children in marriage” as the Church requires, and that I would be grossly irresponsible if I didn’t go along with my husband’s choice of sterilization.

I regard your arguments over what’s in the hearts and minds of theoretical people theoretically using NFP with theoretically lacking intentions as completely ridiculous.
**There is NO such thing as ANY “guaranteed infertile” period of time using NFP. **NFP uses theoretical models and comes up with odds of fertility based on those theoretical models, and they’re throwing out all data that doesn’t fit the model.

People use NFP to figure out their bodies and the relative odds of achieving pregnancy at any given time so that they can make joint decisions ****about intercourse considering the needs and feelings of both spouses, particularly the needs and feelings of women, which have been traditionally subjugated to the needs and feelings of men.
If you come from a family that hasn’t modeled partnership between spouses such that you have no experience with spouses making joint decisions and taking joint responsibility for things, NFP will of course look like some sort of strange science experiment to you compared to “the traditional method” of child spacing.

Under the traditional method of child spacing, after so many kids the wife’s health and sanity demanded complete abstinence and so the husband traditionally would nightly go down to the tavern and take up drinking, with occasional incidences of frustrated wife beating and marital rape, and/or visiting the local prostitutes. That has been the traditional family planning method for the last 2000 years.
If you and your spouse are good with that one, heck, who’s to challenge it? Go for it. You said you wanted to do things just like your parents did and as all the generations past.
Likewise, if couples get together and discuss their bodies and charts and want to make joint decisions on their intimacy, as you say their “science experiment”… who’s to challenge it?

I don’t think some people get it. In this case you had 5 children, and your body was failing. There are many who would say…“keep going”. You and your husband decided what was best for your health, the health of your children and the survival of your family. Sterilization was the way to go for him and I totally understand and applaud your efforts. I totally agree about artificial hormones. I was on the pill in my early 20’s when I met my DH…I turned into someone I did not know. I was a screeming meamie, a psychotic…I gained 20 lbs…I was a wreck. Turns out my aunt was hospitalized in the 60’s and the cause was birth control pills the hormones nearly drove her crazy. I had a hysterectomy at 31 (due to fibroids) and have never looked back. I don’t miss my monthly gift for sure. Two kids were perfect for us. They are grown now.

My parents practiced the rhythm method (aka Vatican roulette) and it worked up until 6 yrs after my sister was born, my brother was born.

Each couple has to discern what is financially and emotionally and healthy for them in spacing children.

Say what you want…couples using NFP are using it as natural birth control. It is not a guarantee…I get that. Just have a look see at the couples with 2-3 children walking out of Mass year after year…and watch the kiddo grow into teenagers and adults over the years…and that same couple…only two children…yeah…somebody is practicing some form of birth control…call is spacing…call it natural…call it chemical (not for me)…whatever…it’s not rocket science. There are still 2-3 children.

 

[Alexander_Smith]

It goes both ways: nothing inherent in God’s design shows that married couples must have sex at certain times and must not have sex at other times. Husbands and wives are free to decide for themselves when and how often they are going to have sex. They are under no divine mandate with regard to frequency or timing of intercourse.

No they are not. If they were, than there would be nothing wrong with using NFP to avoid pregnancy for the entire marriage.

If the husband and wife are aware of the so-called fertile and infertile times, than they are obligated to not purposefully avoid the fertile times without well-grounded reasons to do so.

Alexander, will you do me a favour and take care over your spelling of ‘marital’?

You keep spelling it ‘martial’ which gives quite the wrong impression.

Oops. Sorry about that. Martial is a real word too, so my spell check doesn’t help much.

And so if you conceive, then you must have practiced NFP incorrectly, well obviously!
Unless of course your body is in a state of perpetual pseudofertility making it such that there were NO days whatsoever of conception being very, very unlikely.

NFP will never be an exact science guaranteeing “contraception.” We have growing chemical and hormonal pollution in the food chain… heck, we’ve got 13 year olds with ovarian cysts! I’ve seen 5 of them come through here in the last 10 years! These kids are babies for gosh sakes… babies with the gyn problems of old women! Ovarian cysts used to be completely unknown in women under 50 years of age! And now we’ve got 13 year olds with ovarian cysts…
we’ve got states of continual pseudofertility and states of continual infertility and miscarriage going on because of what people are being exposed to…
and women are being fed even more hormones to counteract both…(as though no one had ever heard of DES daughters… and DES daughters and sons are in their 3rd generation now…

I am genuinely confused right now. What are you arguing against?

I don’t think some people get it. In this case you had 5 children, and your body was failing. There are many who would say…“keep going”. You and your husband decided what was best for your health, the health of your children and the survival of your family. Sterilization was the way to go for him and I totally understand and applaud your efforts. I totally agree about artificial hormones. I was on the pill in my early 20’s when I met my DH…I turned into someone I did not know. I was a screeming meamie, a psychotic…I gained 20 lbs…I was a wreck. Turns out my aunt was hospitalized in the 60’s and the cause was birth control pills the hormones nearly drove her crazy. I had a hysterectomy at 31 (due to fibroids) and have never looked back. I don’t miss my monthly gift for sure. Two kids were perfect for us. They are grown now.

My parents practiced the rhythm method (aka Vatican roulette) and it worked up until 6 yrs after my sister was born, my brother was born.

Each couple has to discern what is financially and emotionally and healthy for them in spacing children.

Say what you want…couples using NFP are using it as natural birth control. It is not a guarantee…I get that. Just have a look see at the couples with 2-3 children walking out of Mass year after year…and watch the kiddo grow into teenagers and adults over the years…and that same couple…only two children…yeah…somebody is practicing some form of birth control…call is spacing…call it natural…call it chemical (not for me)…whatever…it’s not rocket science. There are still 2-3 children.

Please tell me you did not just condone the use of deliberate sterilization.

Humanae Vitae:
“(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)”

 

[Julianna]

No they are not. If they were, than there would be nothing wrong with using NFP to avoid pregnancy for the entire marriage.

If the husband and wife are aware of the so-called fertile and infertile times, than they are obligated to not purposefully avoid the fertile times without well-grounded reasons to do so.

Oops. Sorry about that. Martial is a real word too, so my spell check doesn’t help much.

I am genuinely confused right now. What are you arguing against?

Please tell me you did not just condone the use of deliberate sterilization.

Humanae Vitae:
“(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)”

You’re young honey child…just wait. You don’t live the life the poster just spoke about. Her other choice was death. Would like to pitch in and raise her 5 children?

Again…watch the 2-3 child walking out of Mass. It doesn’t take a Rhodes Scholar to figure out what is going on…whether it’s NFP or chemical.

The poster is a former Catholic…it’s in her post. They did what was best for their family…I understand that.

As for me, I wasn’t willing to “wait and see” if the fibroids grew back…and they do…become cancerous or wrap around my other organs and kill me. The hysterectomy decision was an easy one and my priest didn’t have a problem with it. I had two children under the age of 5 at the time. When you get a wife and “her life” is on the line if she becomes pregnant again…you may have different tune.

 

[momor]

You’re young honey child…just wait. You don’t live the life the poster just spoke about. Her other choice was death. Would like to pitch in and raise her 5 children?

Again…watch the 2-3 child walking out of Mass. It doesn’t take a Rhodes Scholar to figure out what is going on…whether it’s NFP or chemical.

The poster is a former Catholic…it’s in her post. They did what was best for their family…I understand that.

As for me, I wasn’t willing to “wait and see” if the fibroids grew back…and they do…become cancerous or wrap around my other organs and kill me. The hysterectomy decision was an easy one and my priest didn’t have a problem with it. I had two children under the age of 5 at the time. When you get a wife and “her life” is on the line if she becomes pregnant again…you may have different tune.

Do you realize other people in Church may be judging you on your 2 children as well? How would that make you feel if they were gossiping about you and making all kinds of speculations? I’m sure you don’t wear a sign telling them you had a hysterectomy and why. Church should be about worshiping God, not counting children and speculating on people’s sex lives.

 

[jilly4ski]

Again…watch the 2-3 child walking out of Mass. It doesn’t take a Rhodes Scholar to figure out what is going on…whether it’s NFP or chemical.

This is terribly uncharitable, you don’t know that some of those couples may be trying to have another baby but can’t because of fertility issues. My mother always wanted a very large family, and she did have six (though with only 5 pregnancies), but she also lost 3 and had a difficult time getting pregnant. She was unable to carry a pregnancy to term after the birth of my youngest twin siblings at the age of 38. Or maybe they were like you and had to get a hysterectomy because of a serious medical condition and can not longer have children, regardless of their desire to have more.

 

[jilly4ski]

No they are not. If they were, than there would be nothing wrong with using NFP to avoid pregnancy for the entire marriage.

If the husband and wife are aware of the so-called fertile and infertile times, than they are obligated to not purposefully avoid the fertile times without well-grounded reasons to do so.

Umm, no. This leads to those illogical conclusions we have been talking about. Like it being a sin to have marital relations during the infertile times and it being a sin to not have relations during the fertile time, or that an infertile couple must never have marital relations after they discover their infertility.

Not to mention no where in church teaching is this view espoused. If it is I would like to see a direct quote.

 

[momor]

Umm, no. This leads to those illogical conclusions we have been talking about. Like it being a sin to have marital relations during the infertile times and it being a sin to not have relations during the fertile time, or that an infertile couple must never have marital relations after they discover their infertility.

Not to mention no where in church teaching is this view espoused. If it is I would like to see a direct quote.

Please note that he said “without well-grounded reasons”. I think this was a direct quote out of HV or the CCC. Can’t remember the specifics but it was a Church document. Other NFP users here have also said this was part of the teaching in their classes.

 

[jilly4ski]

Sorry about the serial posting.

Momor, thank for taking the time to read and respond. Yes, I know we are only talking about NFP used to avoid, that is why I didn’t clarify. Oh and the CC quotes on married sexuality was to support my assertion that the marital act is a good within marriage, just so people didn’t think I was just making things up to prove my point.

QUOTE=momor;6849768]

It’s not that black and white. I think there is a middle ground between paying absolutely no attention to the woman’s physical signs or cycle and having intercourse anytime you want and the other end of the spectrum with NFP where some couples are doing everything in their power to figure out how many days they can have sex and avoid pregnancy and stressing over it in the bargain. I reject the notion that this is what HV teaches.

To your second point about the middle ground, I am not sure how that would work. If a couple practices NFP to avoid there are specific rules they must follow. In sympo-thermal the couple must limit the sexual activity to every other day in phase I (which is also the start of menses) and then stop all sexual activity during phase II. The start of phase II can be as early as day 6 or 7 when menses hasn’t even stopped yet. Some couples are uncomfortable engaging in the marital act during this time (or if there is a very serious reason to avoid) the couple might abstain through all of phase I to avoid confusing signs and phase II (which is always considered fertile). In a female with a classic 28 day cycle ovulation occurs sometime around day 14, the rule is that one must wait peak day plus 4. So if you can could day 14 as peak (usually day 15 would be peak) then you would have to wait until day 18 to engage in marital relations which, if they are lucky and had clear signs, leaves 10 days. Now if the couple has a busy schedule and children, the chances that they will engage in marital relations on everyone of those days is quite slim, before it starts all over again.

Do you see how difficult it would be to practice this without prayer/discernment, mutual consent, and a very grave reason. People who don’t have a grave reason are going to cut corners and by cutting corners they are saying well, I am not ready for a child right now but I am open to the possibility since I am not following NFP in the strictest sense.

No. There is a difference between intentional infertility and the unintentional.

 

[jilly4ski]

Please note that he said “without well-grounded reasons”. I think this was a direct quote out of HV or the CCC. Can’t remember the specifics but it was a Church document. Other NFP users here have also said this was part of the teaching in their classes.

Yes, but what does “obligated to not purposefully avoid” mean. Does it mean that if a wife knows she is fertile because it is the middle of the month that she must ask for relations or schedule it in. If her husband doesn’t know she is fertile is she required to tell him, even though he is not particularly interested at the moment.
Purpose could have different meanings, it could mean that she says “No sex because I am fertile,” but it could also mean that she doesn’t seek it out when she is fertile.

Well grounded reasons is a direct quote but “obligated to not purposefully avoid” is not.

 

[Julianna]

Do you realize other people in Church may be judging you on your 2 children as well? How would that make you feel if they were gossiping about you and making all kinds of speculations? I’m sure you don’t wear a sign telling them you had a hysterectomy and why. Church should be about worshiping God, not counting children and speculating on people’s sex lives.

totally missed the point. That is why I said “coming out of the Church” vs. “during Mass” and where your attention should be. It is a “casual observation”. When I read about have children, a dozen, or more…and it’s bad to use NFP as birth control and it’s even worse to use chemical birth control…but when you “casually” look around…what do you see? Two and 3 children.

No…I don’t think gossiping about ones sex life is a good idea…but there are a few on CAF that love the sex threads for some reason

No, I don’t wear a sign…most of my friends “at that time”…that attend Mass with me, “know” that I did.

As for what people “say” about me…well…when any one of them pay my mortgage, pay my medical bills and other bills…“then” and only “then” do they have say…other than that I don’t pay them any mind.

Did I want more children…sure…about 2 more…but it wasn’t to be. So I moved on.