Should Catholic Teenagers understand and be knowledgable of NFP?

[LongingSoul]

“Latin Rite” simply means “Roman Catholic,” as opposed to the other rites (Byzantine, Maronite, etc.) Most Catholics are Latin Rite Catholics, regardless of whether they normally attend EF or OF Masses.

Ok, sorry. I was thinking Latin Mass. I’m so used to hearing Roman rite to describe what you describe.

 

[pensmama87]

Ok, sorry. I was thinking Latin Mass. I’m so used to hearing Roman rite to describe what you describe.

Yeah, I was really confused the first time I heard it.

 

[UbiCaritas]

I don’t have access to the posted links but the wiki page for Madison diocese calls it Latin Rite diocese.

Most people know that Fr Z is a traditionalist Priest with traditionalist views.

There are no documents from any bishops conference or the Holy See that have ever used the term ‘contraceptive mentality’ in relation to NFP. It is an invention of traditionalists.

Here is a document from the USCCB.

usccb.org/issues-and-action/marriage-and-family/natural-family-planning/awareness-week/upload/Why-NFP-Differs-from-Contraception-JPII.pdf

Erm…

Nearly all the parishes and dioceses in the world are Latin Rite. The parish you attend, unless it’s Maronite or Byzantine or one of the other small half-dozen or so other rites under the Church’s umbrella, is Latin Rite. St. Peter’s Basilica is Latin Rite. Etc.

If Father Z is not a priest in good standing with the Diocese of Madison, please provide proof to that effect. And even if he weren’t, the mere fact that he’s in the area hardly means that anything coming from that locale is suspect. By that argument, I should ignore anything out of the archdiocese of Chicago, what with Father Phleger et all, or Los Angeles or San Francisco, given the…interesting…situations that so often occur out there, or…

 

[UbiCaritas]

“Latin Rite” simply means “Roman Catholic,” as opposed to the other rites (Byzantine, Maronite, etc.) Most Catholics are Latin Rite Catholics, regardless of whether they normally attend EF or OF Masses.

Duh! uch: Didn’t see this post–sorry for the duplicate below.

 

[UbiCaritas]

Something just occurred to me.

I generally refer to NFP as a tool, which is what it is: a system designed to help couples in certain circumstances avoid or achieve pregnancy. Like all tools, it’s not right for every situation; even the most all-in-one sort of gizmo simply isn’t going to fix every single thing in your house. That being the case, it’s not logical to assume that it can’t be used for bad reasons. If that were true, then it would be rather unique among all tools, whether physical (a wrench is very useful to have around for tight bolts, but whacking someone over the head with it is wrong) or spiritual (Ignatian spiritual exercises can be all kinds of helpful for some personalities, but can trigger scrupulosity in others), and I don’t see any reason why that would be the case.

While I think it’s harder, by the sheer nature of it (read: abstinence), to use NFP for the wrong reasons (ie, that “contraceptive mentality”), it surely isn’t impossible.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Something just occurred to me.

I generally refer to NFP as a tool, which is what it is: a system designed to help couples in certain circumstances avoid or achieve pregnancy. Like all tools, it’s not right for every situation; even the most all-in-one sort of gizmo simply isn’t going to fix every single thing in your house. That being the case, it’s not logical to assume that it can’t be used for bad reasons. If that were true, then it would be rather unique among all tools, whether physical (a wrench is very useful to have around for tight bolts, but whacking someone over the head with it is wrong) or spiritual (Ignatian spiritual exercises can be all kinds of helpful for some personalities, but can trigger scrupulosity in others), and I don’t see any reason why that would be the case.

While I think it’s harder, by the sheer nature of it (read: abstinence), to use NFP for the wrong reasons (ie, that “contraceptive mentality”), it surely isn’t impossible.

Absolutely!!!
That is a good observation.

 

[bitterhope]

Something just occurred to me.

I generally refer to NFP as a tool, which is what it is: a system designed to help couples in certain circumstances avoid or achieve pregnancy. Like all tools, it’s not right for every situation; even the most all-in-one sort of gizmo simply isn’t going to fix every single thing in your house. That being the case, it’s not logical to assume that it can’t be used for bad reasons. If that were true, then it would be rather unique among all tools, whether physical (a wrench is very useful to have around for tight bolts, but whacking someone over the head with it is wrong) or spiritual (Ignatian spiritual exercises can be all kinds of helpful for some personalities, but can trigger scrupulosity in others), and I don’t see any reason why that would be the case.

While I think it’s harder, by the sheer nature of it (read: abstinence), to use NFP for the wrong reasons (ie, that “contraceptive mentality”), it surely isn’t impossible.

This is how I see it too. No, nobody should go around evaluating other people’s reasons, but it is important to evaluate your own (and help your spouse evaluate theirs).

The WHO, PP, and other secular organizations consider fertility awareness methods, with or without barrier methods, to be a form of contraception. Many secular couples use it as contraception. Some Catholics, including clergy, are able to realize this and caution against it. Personally it didn’t work for me, but I intended to use it as contraception. I know it happens. It’s really not that uncommon for it to happen.

The other poster asked if this is a term used by priests, bishops, etc. Yes, at least by some. And it is used in their pro NFP literature, so it isn’t meant to be a blanket statement against NFP. It isn’t meant to shame. It’s a call to evaluate yourself and to help you discern whether there truly is a just, serious, or grave reason for the use of NFP. It is a caution to not selfishly avoid a child or another child.

 

[LongingSoul]

Something just occurred to me.

I generally refer to NFP as a tool, which is what it is: a system designed to help couples in certain circumstances avoid or achieve pregnancy. Like all tools, it’s not right for every situation; even the most all-in-one sort of gizmo simply isn’t going to fix every single thing in your house. That being the case, it’s not logical to assume that it can’t be used for bad reasons. If that were true, then it would be rather unique among all tools, whether physical (a wrench is very useful to have around for tight bolts, but whacking someone over the head with it is wrong) or spiritual (Ignatian spiritual exercises can be all kinds of helpful for some personalities, but can trigger scrupulosity in others), and I don’t see any reason why that would be the case.

While I think it’s harder, by the sheer nature of it (read: abstinence), to use NFP for the wrong reasons (ie, that “contraceptive mentality”), it surely isn’t impossible.

Why not just call it what it is?.. a selfish mentality. What is the purpose of ascribing grave intrinsic evil to a person who has never interfered with the sex act in their life before? What if a women keeps getting pregnant based on providentialism although she has a high rate of spontaneous abortion in her later years? Could we call that a ‘murderous mentality’? After all she didn’t actually commit murder but she recklessly puts little babies lives at risk… That’s how people doing NFP are so horribly tarred by these characters.

 

[LongingSoul]

The WHO, PP, and other secular organizations consider fertility awareness methods, with or without barrier methods, to be a form of contraception. Many secular couples use it as contraception.

You’ll need to cite sources for this.

 

[jmjZelie]

jmjZelie, just to let you know, wikipedia says this is a tradiionalist parish and Fr. Z belongs to the area. Traditionalists don’t reflect the Church position accurately on a number of points and that is reflected by Pope Francis efforts to fix this problem.

In case I haven’t been clear about myself before, I am a Traditionalist. I attend the Tridentine Mass (I also attend the Novus Ordo Mass at my geographical parish and I volunteer as an assistant catechist), only use the traditional 15 decades of Our Lady’s Psalter, use the old catechisms in preference over the newest one, because of their precise and succinct wording that leaves no ambiguity in doctrine. I read Fr. Z’s blog regularly, as well as several other traditional Catholic sites. Traditionalist Catholics are NOT the problem. Heterodoxy is the problem. Modernism is the problem. Not Catholics who love the older expressions of the Faith and who are sounding the alarm about the heterodoxy and modernism that is creeping into the Church. The Bishops who teaching I seek out are Bishop Athanasius Schneider and Cardinal Raymond Burke, not Kasper and Danneels.

The fact that you would discount a legitimate source of bishop’s teachings because of the presence of Traditionalists is a fair warning to me that prejudice is at play here.

 

[UbiCaritas]

Why not just call it what it is?.. a selfish mentality. What is the purpose of ascribing grave intrinsic evil to a person who has never interfered with the sex act in their life before? What if a women keeps getting pregnant based on providentialism although she has a high rate of spontaneous abortion in her later years? Could we call that a ‘murderous mentality’? After all she didn’t actually commit murder but she recklessly puts little babies lives at risk… That’s how people doing NFP are so horribly tarred by these characters.

Well, sure, it’s a selfish mentality. That’s the root of most sins, come to think of it.

Insofar as a woman who gets pregnant frequently in later years despite frequent miscarriages: if she’s getting pregnant in order to have miscarriages, that’s disordered, but I hardly think it’s a common problem.

If she’s getting pregnant in and of itself, though, isn’t the problem: she’s not deliberately putting kids’ lives at risk, her body is. By that argument, a woman who does have a history of miscarriage would have to use either NFP or total abstinence for the rest of her life. In fact, since about a quarter of pregnancies end in miscarriage anyway, an argument could be made that any behavior that could result in pregnancy must be a “murderous mentality,” but it’s not.

And why, for that matter, is contraception gravely, intrinsically evil, but selfishness isn’t? Seems to me that contraception can be a situation of the wrong thing done for the right reasons (see: a woman whose doctor has told her not to get pregnant for XYZ amount of time lest she endanger her or the baby’s life), but selfishness is never right.

 

[jmjZelie]

Seriously, it is stretch to disregard something because it comes from either a traditionalist parish (whatever the specific term is defined as) or a more modern parish (whatever that is).

Not once has the Pope said “disregard everything Traditionalists say.”

Take the teaching on its merit and agree or disagree based on Catholic teaching. They are both dioceses in good standing full of faithful Priests. Simply arguing the Church has never endorsed a particular phrase is silly. Saying they oppose it is not. There are nuances within dioceses that are guided by their Shepherds, to meet the needs of their flock. That is their role.

Honestly, the argument over semantics seems silly. The Church is currently rife with imprecise wording, and yet we usually told not to get “hung up on it”.

I have always assumed the NFP with a contraceptive mentality implied the existence of those who believe simply using NFP abrogates them of the responsibility for discernment about God’s call for their family, its size, and makeup. While the act itself is morally licit, the phrase to me always implied that its use required prayer and discernment about God’s desire for each of us.

A couple could use NFP without ever once thinking about God or His will, and while they would not strictly be using contraception, they would not be fulfilling God’s ultimate desire in His relationship with them.

Admittedly, selfish motives for avoiding children DO exist. The Church is not going to go line by line on these, because at the same time, these motives are personal and need to be examined with a well-formed conscience. But the Church is not going to disavow that there are couples who can avoid children for selfish reasons, but as we see on here, it becomes a dicey proposition to say who is or isn’t guilty. The Church leaves it to us to determine, and if we do not, we may be able to convince those on the internet or in real life, but God is never fooled. He knows what is in each couple’s hearts.

Beautiful post, Maximilan. Just wonderful!

 

[jmjZelie]

Ok, sorry. I was thinking Latin Mass. I’m so used to hearing Roman rite to describe what you describe.

So what is the objection to the Latin Mass? Why would you see Latin Rite and think Latin Mass, and therefore find it worthy of dismissal. I also find it strange that the phrase Latin Rite unfamiliar.

 

[LongingSoul]

So what is the objection to the Latin Mass? Why would you see Latin Rite and think Latin Mass, and therefore find it worthy of dismissal. I also find it strange that the phrase Latin Rite unfamiliar.

Well that must be because I am a heretic.

 

[jmjZelie]

Why not just call it what it is?.. a selfish mentality. What is the purpose of ascribing grave intrinsic evil to a person who has never interfered with the sex act in their life before? What if a women keeps getting pregnant based on providentialism although she has a high rate of spontaneous abortion in her later years? Could we call that a ‘murderous mentality’? After all she didn’t actually commit murder but she recklessly puts little babies lives at risk… That’s how people doing NFP are so horribly tarred by these characters.

Whoa.

There is NO selfishness in allowing conception to occur if miscarriage is likely. ZERO. There is NO sin there whatsoever.

Really, LongingSoul, why do you come out so hard against women who allow themselves to become pregnant many times?

In another thread you referred to us as breeders and now you say such women who has repeated miscarriages (not a freely chosen act) has a murderous mentality???

NOBODY is saying that people who practice NFP have contraceptive mentality. Some people are saying it is possible to be that opposed to procreation that some people, though they choose a licit means, have an unholy intention that correlates to the mentality of those who make use of contraception.

And it is true, medical literature and organizations all over the world group all natural family planning methods under contraceptive methods. It has no moral judgement attached to it in the way they use it. The Church has a finer distinction between the two, and demonstrates why contraception is an intrinsic evil and why NFP is a licit means to avoid pregnancy, but only if a couple has just reasons. If no just reasons exist, it is a grave sin against the sixth commandment, as is adultery and fornication and contraception. The type of sin may be different, but the commandment broken is the same. It is a misuse of marriage. So the Church teaches this, but the world’s medical literature and organization do not reflect that difference in understanding.

 

[jmjZelie]

Well that must be because I am a heretic.

I assume that is sarcasm?

I can’t tell what you are doing in this thread, LongingSoul.

What are you really railing against?

 

[LongingSoul]

Whoa.

There is NO selfishness in allowing conception to occur if miscarriage is likely. ZERO. There is NO sin there whatsoever.

Really, LongingSoul, why do you come out so hard against women who allow themselves to become pregnant many times?

In another thread you referred to us as breeders and now you say such women who has repeated miscarriages (not a freely chosen act) has a murderous mentality???

For the record, I don’t think that. I used it as a ‘what if this was said’. Use it against me if you like. I’ve got you clocked now.

NOBODY is saying that people who practice NFP have contraceptive mentality. Some people are saying it is possible to be that opposed to procreation that some people, though they choose a licit means, have an unholy intention that correlates to the mentality of those who make use of contraception.

And it is true, medical literature and organizations all over the world group all natural family planning methods under contraceptive methods. It has no moral judgement attached to it in the way they use it. The Church has a finer distinction between the two, and demonstrates why contraception is an intrinsic evil and why NFP is a licit means to avoid pregnancy, but only if a couple has just reasons. If no just reasons exist, it is a grave sin against the sixth commandment, as is adultery and fornication and contraception. The type of sin may be different, but the commandment broken is the same. It is a misuse of marriage. So the Church teaches this, but the world’s medical literature and organization do not reflect that difference in understanding.

Well I see that you already have your opinion set in stone about the evils of NFP as judged by CAF. I had that suspicion when you first posed the question that it was not really about learning. Anyway, I know now that anything I say will be attacked and dismissed as wrong so I’m bowing out of your thread.

 

[bitterhope]

For the record, I don’t think that. I used it as a ‘what if this was said’. Use it against me if you like. I’ve got you clocked now.

Well I see that you already have your opinion set in stone about the evils of NFP as judged by CAF. I had that suspicion when you first posed the question that it was not really about learning. Anyway, I know now that anything I say will be attacked and dismissed as wrong so I’m bowing out of your thread.

Not a single poster has said NFP is evil. No one. Not once in this thread. At all.

Some of us just don’t happen to agree that NFP is ALWAYS the ideal or that NFP can NEVER be used in a way that isn’t in line with the Church’s teaching.

 

[jmjZelie]

For the record, I don’t think that. I used it as a ‘what if this was said’. Use it against me if you like. I’ve got you clocked now.

Well I see that you already have your opinion set in stone about the evils of NFP as judged by CAF. I had that suspicion when you first posed the question that it was not really about learning. Anyway, I know now that anything I say will be attacked and dismissed as wrong so I’m bowing out of your thread.

Seriously there is so much prejudice in this post. I do not use any terms you find objectionable (I even abandoned the use of a term which many people find perfectly acceptable simply because you say it means something not Catholic). I asked for clarification of the meaning of another person’s turn of phrase, as I have seen it before. How in the world do you square all your accusations against me considering the fact that I have used NFP in the past and have been discerning whether or not to abandon the method this time around.

This is not my thread at all. Your suspicions against me and the accusations have grown old, LongingSoul. Where have I attacked you? Where have I used rude terms or prejudices against you?

I just do not understand what you are really railing against. Is it perhaps that this is a form of shadow boxing and various groups are getting in the way of your punches? Or do you really mistrust Traditionalist Catholics, and couples who hand over their fertility to God, that much? We are not going to Latin Mass or having babies AT you. We are merely living out our vocation in the way God has called us to.

 

[bitterhope]

Seriously there is so much prejudice in this post. I do not use any terms you find objectionable (I even abandoned the use of a term which many people find perfectly acceptable simply because you say it means something not Catholic). I asked for clarification of the meaning of another person’s turn of phrase, as I have seen it before. How in the world do you square all your accusations against me considering the fact that I have used NFP in the past and have been discerning whether or not to abandon the method this time around.

This is not my thread at all. Your suspicions against me and the accusations have grown old, LongingSoul. Where have I attacked you? Where have I used rude terms or prejudices against you?

I just do not understand what you are really railing against. Is it perhaps that this is a form of shadow boxing and various groups are getting in the way of your punches? Or do you really mistrust Traditionalist Catholics, and couples who hand over their fertility to God, that much? We are not going to Latin Mass or having babies AT you. We are merely living out our vocation in the way God has called us to.

Thank you. May God help you find peace and the answers that you are seeking.