Should we respectfully leave the Church

[marywarfield]

You are clearly very brave. But i do not follow what part Faith takes in a decision to put ones life in genuine peril by choosing to conceive. If you already had a child , would you still have chosen this path?

Yes and I did. It’s not a matter of bravery. It’s a matter
of taking quite seriously the life proposed by
the church and the life proposed by the culture of
death. They are diametrically opposed. Therefore
one must be false. And one was.
We’ve gotten to a point medically where we can’t defy
the Church with the word “might”.
I might die if I don’t abort. The other side of that
is the baby will absolutely die if I abort.
What is a more reasonable under God?
To live life according to “mights” emanating
from the mouths of non believers or to live according
to Church teaching?

 

[Avocadomom]

I know that by nature we women give our husbands a certain authority over us by virtue of their higher natural need for sexual release, but a husband has a duty to also respect nature by accepting abstinence in marital life in favour of the wellbeing of his wife.

There are very few people that can’t find a high degree of confidence in NFP even if it is an extremely conservative form of NFP… and work that into the fabric of their love as husband and wife.

If we as wives simply accept that our husband is the type to have a hissy fit or carry on like a pork chop or even leave the marriage because we want to conform to Gods plan for our marriage, we are accepting an unsound marriage. If your husband was building your house and wanted to compromise the foundations in some way, he is in effect providing a harmful, unsound home for you and his babies. Insist on his best quality work or nothing.

Hmmm… I don’t really see my husband as having “authority over me.” We are an equal partnership. And I don’t even think he has a higher need for sexual release, as that is putting his need in a crass light. Intimacy with me is how he communicates his love and fidelity, it is where he is vulnerable and open to me, it is something he holds sacred to our relationship. Anyone can give him a hug or make him a sandwich, but only I can fulfill that part of his heart and soul that needs love, affection, approval, acceptance… That is what he “needs,” and while I as a woman can find those things in other areas to some extent - I think that for men (at least my husband), sexual intimacy is kind of IT. To take that away is not just taking away an outlet for sexual release, but taking away his way of communicating with me and showing his heart and soul to me.

He certainly hasn’t had a hissy fit or behaved poorly to me because of this. We both struggle with the answer. For him, he is very clear in what he believes and thinks. He simply believes that The Church has a rule in place that is not truly reflective of God’s love or law. He thinks it is anachronistic, enforced by old, celibate men who have to go to grandiose philisophical lengths to attempt to make a case for it. I do not necessarily agree, and I am terrified for both him, and our salvation. I am also, though, terrified for my life and terrified of leaving my children motherless.

My husband is not perfect, but he is an outstanding man, husband and father who would die for his family in a nanosecond. He is not a brute who demands daily sex, he is not threatening me, and he is not one who takes God lightly. He is extremely disciplined, industrious and deeply, deeply kind and good.

Again, this is not just about us wanting to scratch an itch whenever we please without any inconvenient consequences, or having selfish, flippant motivations.

 

[patsa]

Hmmm… I don’t really see my husband as having “authority over me.” We are an equal partnership. And I don’t even think he has a higher need for sexual release, as that is putting his need in a crass light. Intimacy with me is how he communicates his love and fidelity, it is where he is vulnerable and open to me, it is something he holds sacred to our relationship. Anyone can give him a hug or make him a sandwich, but only I can fulfill that part of his heart and soul that needs love, affection, approval, acceptance… That is what he “needs,” and while I as a woman can find those things in other areas to some extent - I think that for men (at least my husband), sexual intimacy is kind of IT. To take that away is not just taking away an outlet for sexual release, but taking away his way of communicating with me and showing his heart and soul to me.

He certainly hasn’t had a hissy fit or behaved poorly to me because of this. We both struggle with the answer. For him, he is very clear in what he believes and thinks. He simply believes that The Church has a rule in place that is not truly reflective of God’s love or law. He thinks it is anachronistic, enforced by old, celibate men who have to go to grandiose philisophical lengths to attempt to make a case for it. I do not necessarily agree, and I am terrified for both him, and our salvation. I am also, though, terrified for my life and terrified of leaving my children motherless.

My husband is not perfect, but he is an outstanding man, husband and father who would die for his family in a nanosecond. He is not a brute who demands daily sex, he is not threatening me, and he is not one who takes God lightly. He is extremely disciplined, industrious and deeply, deeply kind and good.

Again, this is not just about us wanting to scratch an itch whenever we please without any inconvenient consequences, or having selfish, flippant motivations.

 

[Rau]

Yes and I did. It’s not a matter of bravery. It’s a matter
of taking quite seriously the life proposed by
the church and the life proposed by the culture of
death. They are diametrically opposed. Therefore
one must be false. And one was.
We’ve gotten to a point medically where we can’t defy
the Church with the word “might”.
I might die if I don’t abort. The other side of that
is the baby will absolutely die if I abort.
What is a more reasonable under God?
To live life according to “mights” emanating
from the mouths of non believers or to live according
to Church teaching?

I assert (confidently) no Church teaching advocated that you put your life in peril by seeking to conceive, much less risk depriving your family of you.

Is it the case that you would have sought to conceive regardless of the risks?

 

[marywarfield]

Hmmm… I don’t really see my husband as having “authority over me.” We are an equal partnership. And I don’t even think he has a higher need for sexual release, as that is putting his need in a crass light. Intimacy with me is how he communicates his love and fidelity, it is where he is vulnerable and open to me, it is something he holds sacred to our relationship. Anyone can give him a hug or make him a sandwich, but only I can fulfill that part of his heart and soul that needs love, affection, approval, acceptance… That is what he “needs,” and while I as a woman can find those things in other areas to some extent - I think that for men (at least my husband), sexual intimacy is kind of IT. To take that away is not just taking away an outlet for sexual release, but taking away his way of communicating with me and showing his heart and soul to me.

He certainly hasn’t had a hissy fit or behaved poorly to me because of this. We both struggle with the answer. For him, he is very clear in what he believes and thinks. He simply believes that The Church has a rule in place that is not truly reflective of God’s love or law. He thinks it is anachronistic, enforced by old, celibate men who have to go to grandiose philisophical lengths to attempt to make a case for it. I do not necessarily agree, and I am terrified for both him, and our salvation. I am also, though, terrified for my life and terrified of leaving my children motherless.

My husband is not perfect, but he is an outstanding man, husband and father who would die for his family in a nanosecond. He is not a brute who demands daily sex, he is not threatening me, and he is not one who takes God lightly. He is extremely disciplined, industrious and deeply, deeply kind and good.

Again, this is not just about us wanting to scratch an itch whenever we please without any inconvenient consequences, or having selfish, flippant motivations.

This is not something that can be resolved on an
online forum. It is a very personal decision for each
couple.
My husband was also not happy with years of abstinence
especially since “other types” of sexual release
and intimacy counseled by doctors were forbidden
by the Church. And years it was…
My husband went so far as to call the Bishop explaining
how unreasonable it was, spent time looking
for loopholes. I was very nervous through this.
But ultimately, he decided that even though he
disagreed with Church teaching, the problem
was in his own understanding and prayed
for the grace to submit to that which he did not
understand. He made a powerful number of trips
to Confession I can tell you that.
And we made it. Twenty two years later and there
is no longer any need for abstinence.
I’m not going to tell you it was easy. Or that we
all understand everything the Church puts forth.
I can just say I’m glad it worked out for us. It’s a
powerful example for our own daughter and her
husband who have something of the same problem.

 

[marywarfield]

I assert (confidently) no Church teaching advocated that you put your life in peril by seeking to conceive, much less risk depriving your family of you.

Is it the case that you would have sought to conceive regardless of the risks?

Yes. But it was only because I felt confident that it
wasn’t God putting me between a rock and a hard place.
It was the doctors. And doctors are fallible human beings.

 

[Rau]

Hmmm… I don’t really see my husband as having “authority over me.” We are an equal partnership. And I don’t even think he has a higher need for sexual release, as that is putting his need in a crass light. Intimacy with me is how he communicates his love and fidelity, it is where he is vulnerable and open to me, it is something he holds sacred to our relationship. Anyone can give him a hug or make him a sandwich, but only I can fulfill that part of his heart and soul that needs love, affection, approval, acceptance… That is what he “needs,” and while I as a woman can find those things in other areas to some extent - I think that for men (at least my husband), sexual intimacy is kind of IT. To take that away is not just taking away an outlet for sexual release, but taking away his way of communicating with me and showing his heart and soul to me.

He certainly hasn’t had a hissy fit or behaved poorly to me because of this. We both struggle with the answer. For him, he is very clear in what he believes and thinks. He simply believes that The Church has a rule in place that is not truly reflective of God’s love or law. He thinks it is anachronistic, enforced by old, celibate men who have to go to grandiose philisophical lengths to attempt to make a case for it. I do not necessarily agree, and I am terrified for both him, and our salvation. I am also, though, terrified for my life and terrified of leaving my children motherless.

My husband is not perfect, but he is an outstanding man, husband and father who would die for his family in a nanosecond. He is not a brute who demands daily sex, he is not threatening me, and he is not one who takes God lightly. He is extremely disciplined, industrious and deeply, deeply kind and good.

Again, this is not just about us wanting to scratch an itch whenever we please without any inconvenient consequences, or having selfish, flippant motivations.

Your original post said that vasectomy and NFP had the same failure rate, that your husband was ok with some constraints on availability of sex, and NFP had the advantage of being supported by the Church.

Why then is it not the course you wish to pursue?

 

[Rau]

Yes. But it was only because I felt confident that it
wasn’t God putting me between a rock and a hard place.
It was the doctors. And doctors are fallible human beings.

You say you would have taken any level of risk? And you believe that would see you between a rock and a hard place - the rock being death, and the hard place being “childless”. But childless is not wrong in your situation - so that place can’t be called “hard” (perhaps “sad”).

Your statement that God did not put you there is right. The doctors only “put you there” if they are exaggerating. If they are right, you simply are there and you are called to make the best decision you can. While doctors are not infallible, they are, fortunately, risk averse too.

 

[Avocadomom]

Your original post said that vasectomy and NFP had the same failure rate, that your husband was ok with some constraints on availability of sex, and NFP had the advantage of being supported by the Church.

Why then is it not the course you wish to pursue?

What I meant by that was that they both have the same failure rate when used perfectly. My concern is that one month, some years down the line, but eventually - I will make an error, or my body will do something weird and I will miss the signs.

NFP seems great for those who would like to postpone, for 6 months or a year, or for those for whom it would not be such a big deal if they did conceive. I’m just not sure it’s appropriate, since there is SO much opportunity for user error, in a life vs. death situation.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

What I meant by that was that they both have the same failure rate when used perfectly. My concern is that one month, some years down the line, but eventually - I will make an error, or my body will do something weird and I will miss the signs.

NFP seems great for those who would like to postpone, for 6 months or a year, or for those for whom it would not be such a big deal if they did conceive. I’m just not sure it’s appropriate, since there is SO much opportunity for user error, in a life vs. death situation.

It seems to me that you owe it to yourself, your family, and especially God. who gave you life and sexuality to learn about NFP, more so you can make a better informed decision. NFP can and is used by many couples who have life threatening diseases if they become pregnant. The Church has indeed taken in your situation and in the 2000 year history of the Church with Billions of married couples that it is quite informed and also empathetic to your situation.

Why not become familiar with NFP.

I taught it for years and what you are saying about it does not ring true.

 

[marywarfield]

You say you would have taken any level of risk? And you believe that would see you between a rock and a hard place - the rock being death, and the hard place being “childless”. But childless is not wrong in your situation - so that place can’t be called “hard” (perhaps “sad”).

Your statement that God did not put you there is right. The doctors only “put you there” if they are exaggerating. If they are right, you simply are there and you are called to make the best decision you can. While doctors are not infallible, they are, fortunately, risk averse too.

I think you misunderstand. When a woman goes to
a doctor already pregnant after being told she was
not capable of conception in the first place and gets
told she must now abort that baby or she and the
baby will die- that is the rock and the hard place.
I don’t advocate women going around deliberately
putting their lives at risk.
At the same time God does not enact
miracles (conception in the face of infertility) on
a whim or just changes His mind with a whoops
sorry about that- wrong woman conceiving here.
At some point in the pro abortion, pro euthanasia
society we live in every Catholic needs to sit down,
take a deep breath and ask themselves? Is this
scenario reasonable? Is this really how God behaves?
The tendency these days is to assume the Church is wrong-
that psychotic old celibate men who hate women hand
down rules people can’t live with.
Catholics in general these days need to think clearly
about the culture their doctor is coming from instead.
My doctors came from a culture that says abortion is
not only okay but preferable to other risks.
However for me the idea that I and the baby might
die was ONLY a risk where in having an abortion
the death of the baby was a certainty not just a risk.
There are literally two cultures at play. One is death
and one is life. A doctor might have the best of intentions
with his “risk adversity” as you call it but nevertheless
we have to ask ourselves- from which culture is he
really operating from?

 

[Avocadomom]

It seems to me that you owe it to yourself, your family, and especially God. who gave you life and sexuality to learn about NFP, more so you can make a better informed decision. NFP can and is used by many couples who have life threatening diseases if they become pregnant. The Church has indeed taken in your situation and in the 2000 year history of the Church with Billions of married couples that it is quite informed and also empathetic to your situation.

Why not become familiar with NFP.

I taught it for years and what you are saying about it does not ring true.

I have taken a course in the STM and Billings.

With my last pregnancy, I got pregnant on day 5 of my cycle with no symptoms that the 5-day-rule should be voided.

I am definitely willing to look into the other methods mentioned, if they can offer more accuracy/protection.

 

[Rau]

I think you misunderstand. When a woman goes to
a doctor already pregnant after being told she was
not capable of conception in the first place and gets
told she must now abort that baby or she and the
baby will die- that is the rock and the hard place.
I don’t advocate women going around deliberately
putting their lives at risk.
At the same time God does not enact
miracles (conception in the face of infertility) on
a whim or just changes His mind with a whoops
sorry about that- wrong woman conceiving here.
At some point in the pro abortion, pro euthanasia
society we live in every Catholic needs to sit down,
take a deep breath and ask themselves? Is this
scenario reasonable? Is this really how God behaves?

I may have misunderstood your scenario. I thought you sought conception despite advice of great risk to your life.

Here you speak of being pregnant, and being advised to abort - which is not an option, and not the scenario I thought we were discussing.

 

[marywarfield]

I may have misunderstood your scenario. I thought you sought conception despite advice of great risk to your life.

Here you speak of being pregnant, and being advised to abort - which is not an option, and not the scenario I thought we were discussing.

I spent nine years trying to get pregnant. When I did
finally I had a stillborn at term. I was told I could not
get pregnant infertile etc and if I did it would be
disastrous. We were told to adopt.
In the meantime I got pregnant twice in quick succession
without any real effort, were told to abort, refused, had miserable pregnancies,
had a stroke in labor with the second and my children
and I both survived nicely thank you.

After the stroke my husband and I decided to not
put God to the test and we abstained until menopause.
What I’m saying is whenever a Catholic goes to
a doctor re: reproduction or terminal illness, it is
incumbent upon that Catholic to think HARD about
which culture he is going to follow.

 

[bitterhope]

I feel for you and honestly I don’t know what I would do in your situation. Please talk with more knowledgeable people than strangers here on the internet. I can assure you that NFP does not have the same effectiveness for all people and I can also tell you that in no way should you or your husband do anything permanent at this time. Right now is not the time to make long term decisions because you are still in the early post partum stage, you are stressed with the health issues, you are grieving the loss of your child bearing years and everything is in crisis mode right now. You both must stand back and take some time to breathe before any long term solution is made. I will be praying for your family and your health. It is also possible that you may find more information down the road that is helpful for you health wise that might put all this in a better light. I have no answers, but I don’t believe anyone else here does either. Find counsel in real life from people who are trained to help in these situations. Ask your priest for a list of available resources.

 

[Rau]

…
What I’m saying is whenever a Catholic goes to
a doctor re: reproduction or terminal illness, it is
incumbent upon that Catholic to think HARD about
which culture he is going to follow.

I agree. Contemplating abortion would be to toy with the culture of death. Avoiding pregnancy with serious reasons is of course unrelated.

 

[Incomplete]

All I can offer is prayers, and you have those!

 

[FLCathMom]

I have taken a course in the STM and Billings.

With my last pregnancy, I got pregnant on day 5 of my cycle with no symptoms that the 5-day-rule should be voided.

I am definitely willing to look into the other methods mentioned, if they can offer more accuracy/protection.

I believe the most conservative use of STM is to abstain for all of Phase 1 and 2 and then wait for 3 days after ovulation has been confirmed. I know that doesn’t leave very many days left.

 

[NFPWife]

What I meant by that was that they both have the same failure rate when used perfectly. My concern is that one month, some years down the line, but eventually - I will make an error, or my body will do something weird and I will miss the signs.

NFP seems great for those who would like to postpone, for 6 months or a year, or for those for whom it would not be such a big deal if they did conceive. I’m just not sure it’s appropriate, since there is SO much opportunity for user error, in a life vs. death situation.

I think others have said this but I’ll reiterate, the Marquette Method is a great method for medical risk and breastfeeding.

I have a condition that makes pregnancy life threatening for me and a child and my husband and we started with STM, then moved to Billings (which we teach) then were asked to participate in an early phase of research on the Marquette Method. At the time, we couldn’t participate, but they were kind enough to send the protocols and Dr. Fehring and I communicated via email a few times to get us up and rolling with the method. (We participated in some later Marquette research.) We’ve done Marquette for close to 10 years.

With Marquette, if you abstain until three days after confirmed peak, there’s not really room for user error. Peak is right there on the monitor screen. You’ll have fewer available days, obviously, but not that many fewer. When I consider some of the early day rules of Billings, for instance, I’d guesstimate that we lose 2-3 days for higher reliability.

You said your husband doesn’t mind some abstinence, I think the conservative rule for Marquette would make a lot of sense for both of you.

I can see that your husband is afraid of losing you and wants to do the most conservative thing to protect you. His intentions are noble and come from a place of love (and fear ) I think getting him in front of a Marquette instructor, or getting him that info could help him see that this is a way to protect his wife and follow Church teaching. He could even keep the chart/ records. Working together also reduces user error. My husband is pretty helpful with all things NFP. There are mornings I’ve stumbled to the bathroom groggy and forgotten to get a stick and yelled to him to get me one and he bolts up and has one unwrapped and in my hands in seconds.

Know that you’re in our prayers.

 

[Avocadomom]

I think others have said this but I’ll reiterate, the Marquette Method is a great method for medical risk and breastfeeding.

I have a condition that makes pregnancy life threatening for me and a child and my husband and we started with STM, then moved to Billings (which we teach) then were asked to participate in an early phase of research on the Marquette Method. At the time, we couldn’t participate, but they were kind enough to send the protocols and Dr. Fehring and I communicated via email a few times to get us up and rolling with the method. (We participated in some later Marquette research.) We’ve done Marquette for close to 10 years.

With Marquette, if you abstain until three days after confirmed peak, there’s not really room for user error. Peak is right there on the monitor screen. You’ll have fewer available days, obviously, but not that many fewer. When I consider some of the early day rules of Billings, for instance, I’d guesstimate that we lose 2-3 days for higher reliability.

You said your husband doesn’t mind some abstinence, I think the conservative rule for Marquette would make a lot of sense for both of you.

I can see that your husband is afraid of losing you and wants to do the most conservative thing to protect you. His intentions are noble and come from a place of love (and fear ) I think getting him in front of a Marquette instructor, or getting him that info could help him see that this is a way to protect his wife and follow Church teaching. He could even keep the chart/ records. Working together also reduces user error. My husband is pretty helpful with all things NFP. There are mornings I’ve stumbled to the bathroom groggy and forgotten to get a stick and yelled to him to get me one and he bolts up and has one unwrapped and in my hands in seconds.

Know that you’re in our prayers.

Thank you. I’ve been looking at the Marquette Model site. It doesn’t seem to have a way to find a local teacher. I searched on our archdiocese website and the CCL, and there are no longer ANY NFP instructors within 50 miles of my home. None, not for any method. Is Marquette something you just have to “teach yourself?”