Y
Yours_Truly
Guest
Here’s a sermon that gives the Church teaching on NFP. It is from the FSSP.
audiosancto.org/aurss/20040718-Holy-Matrimony-and-NFP.mp3
audiosancto.org/aurss/20040718-Holy-Matrimony-and-NFP.mp3
- Status
K
Kearney
Guest
Oh not this site again. I have heard that pries tin person and, beleive me, his view are more then a little on the extreme side (unmarried people shouldn’t look at each other ect…) Is this the only site that someoen can post stating Catholic positions?
K
Kearney
Guest
Whats so wrong with hearsay? I have heard people tell me these things before and those who I heard them from are by no means unreliable. The FSSP is pretty much against NFP (ever been to one of their mass centers and taken a look at the congregants?) As for vieling, women have been either thrown out of repremanded for not wearing what is considered proper attire. I don’t know what I’m supposed to do, lie and say I didn’t hear these things?
Just because I don’t have video proof to post that these incidents occured doesn not mean that they did not happen.
Just because I don’t have video proof to post that these incidents occured doesn not mean that they did not happen.
S
Shin
Guest
I’m suddenly reminded of Padre Pio. Don’t backbite would you, and when people ask for a text about a rather extreme statement you made attributing it to Paul VI, go find it, OK?
Because frankly, I don’t believe for a second the way you presented what he may have said is the way he said it.
I.E. in such a way that it is a general rule for all people, a simple matter of choice, ‘I can choose the number of my children be zero.’ Far from it, that is not what people are allowed to do.
One could if one were in China for example, choose to -aim- to have only 1 child using NFP -because of forced abortions- IE, a grave reason ‘in danger of death’. But one would still be responsible to openness during the marital act even so.
But to suggest that ‘grave reasons’ are simply ones of financially tightening the belt, or one’s attitude, or similar would be quite wrong. Or to simply say, ‘I don’t want any more children’ would be wrong.
We can discuss our views on grave reasons and what ‘grave’ constitutes, but very often what it constitutes in the mind of the average person is a view that is contrary to the proper belief in Providence required by Faith and this is what has been addressed here.
We must trust in God to provide for us in every situation and to meet our needs. Else, all we would have to do would be some sort of anti-Mary, who when told she would be given the gift of Christ said, ‘No I have grave reasons why that would cause me problems.’
Because frankly, I don’t believe for a second the way you presented what he may have said is the way he said it.
I.E. in such a way that it is a general rule for all people, a simple matter of choice, ‘I can choose the number of my children be zero.’ Far from it, that is not what people are allowed to do.One could if one were in China for example, choose to -aim- to have only 1 child using NFP -because of forced abortions- IE, a grave reason ‘in danger of death’. But one would still be responsible to openness during the marital act even so.
But to suggest that ‘grave reasons’ are simply ones of financially tightening the belt, or one’s attitude, or similar would be quite wrong. Or to simply say, ‘I don’t want any more children’ would be wrong.
We can discuss our views on grave reasons and what ‘grave’ constitutes, but very often what it constitutes in the mind of the average person is a view that is contrary to the proper belief in Providence required by Faith and this is what has been addressed here.
We must trust in God to provide for us in every situation and to meet our needs. Else, all we would have to do would be some sort of anti-Mary, who when told she would be given the gift of Christ said, ‘No I have grave reasons why that would cause me problems.’
P
ProVobis
Guest
Progressio Populorum is what you’re referring to, I think. Many thought he would be leading to relax the rules on ABC, especially after he assembled a bunch of moral theologians to discuss the matter.
P
peregrinator_it
Guest
While I think a contraceptive attitude is a grave evil, and certainly desire as many children as God sees fit to bless me with when/if I am married, I think the statement above is false and does damage in this discussion.
NFP as such is simply information. It is neutral. Like any information it is open to misuse (even the Sacred Scripture is open to that.)
I think there is a great benefit to teaching women how to observe their own cycles. ( I note that the poster I’ve quoted is male and may suggest that I am women’s libber for putting forth this argument.)
Frankly, any woman who suffers from any sort of reproductive disorder that affects her daily life deserves to have the information provided by NFP, so she need not have to face the current contraceptive-pushing medical community with no ammunition.
Not everyone is so lucky to have access to a Catholic OB/GYN and in my experience contraception is offered and aggressively promoted as the only solution to any problem in the area of women’s health. A woman uses NFP to observe her own body is armed with information to combat this attitude and to seek treatment without recourse to artificial contraception.
NFP ought to be taught, not as a form of "birth control, " but as valuable women’s health information.
K
Kearney
Guest
Well, you asked for it:
Populorum Progressio
vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_26031967_populorum_en.html
Finally, it is for parents to take a thorough look at the matter and decide upon the number of their children. This is an obligation they take upon themselves, before their children already born, and before the community to which they belong—following the dictates of their own consciences informed by God’s law authentically interpreted, and bolstered by their trust in Him. (39)
Populorum Progressio
vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_26031967_populorum_en.html
Finally, it is for parents to take a thorough look at the matter and decide upon the number of their children. This is an obligation they take upon themselves, before their children already born, and before the community to which they belong—following the dictates of their own consciences informed by God’s law authentically interpreted, and bolstered by their trust in Him. (39)
S
Shin
Guest
Perfect, considering the second sentence that was left out says it all. That is the context, as well as a letter discussing world hunger, and grave problems in the third and developing world.
That is the context, as well as a letter discussing world hunger, and grave problems in the third and developing world.
D
DavidPalm
Guest
That doesn’t say what you claimed it said, namely: “According to Pope Paul Vi, it is permitted for a couple to have zero children if they so desire.” Any encyclical has to be read in light of the perennial Catholic tradition and a fundamental aspect of a valid Catholic marriage is the willingness to have children. I agree with JKirkLVNV that a marriage in which the couple purposed from the start never to have children, even using NFP, would be invalid.
S
sonofourlady
Guest
The reason why NFP isn’t know that well is that most Priests don’t teach it or have its classes at the Parish. They are more comfortable having Catholic couples practice artificial birth control.
E
Extempore
Guest
I think that depends. The modern world has a much different idea of “economic security” than that of former generations. Today it is considered normal to have multiple cars, large houses, frequent vacations, a college fund for the kids, investment accounts and a wide variety of things that are not strictly necessary for survival.
So, when people say that they can’t “afford” any more children, it might require reading in between the lines a bit. Does this mean that they literally don’t have the financial means to be able to feed and care for any more children or does it mean that they won’t be able to maintain a certain standard of lifestyle to which they have become accustomed?
Y
Yours_Truly
Guest
But what if I am unable to contribute the full 6% to my 401K? What if another child would necessitate that I cut my contribution to, say, only 3%? Surely you aren’t implying that I be required to make this sacrifice, thereby putting the life style that I am accustom to in jeapordy during my retirement years - my most vulnerable years, are you? After all, calculating the compound interest that the 3% reduction to my 401K would make could literally cost me tens of thousands of dollars.
And what if another child was to reduce the number of vacation from 3 to only 1 per year! Surely this would justify the use of NFP, right? After all, we have to consider our emotional well being.
P
ProVobis
Guest
Exactly where does this “never” start? What if the couple decides to hold off having kids and then decides never to have them? This issue of validity could become very sticky, but may be grounds for annulment later if it comes to that.
P
ProVobis
Guest
It’s good that that is your only worry.
Y
Yours_Truly
Guest
“Never” would have to be present at the time of the wedding. I agree that if, at the time of the marriage, a couple intended to never have any children, this would invalidate the marriage since the primary purpose of marriage is the procreation and education of children. If their intent in entering marriage was to avoid this primary end, I don’t think the marriage would be valid.
E
Extempore
Guest
And, goodness knows, those tends of thousands would have been used for those darned kids you never had! Fortunately, you can take it with you when you die… right?
Aw, shucks.
L
latinmasslover
Guest
Every Roman Catholic priest is a “guardian of all things Catholic” including the people. It just seems like the trad priests do it more because they’re the *only *ones (for the most part) who are more concerned with souls than politics.
P
ProVobis
Guest
Now wait a minute. Yours Truly does have a point. His 10 kids (which he’d like to have) would like him to have a lot of money when he dies.
L
latinmasslover
Guest
Whatever happened to good old-fashioned (and secret) life insurance? There’s the jackpot!Now wait a minute. Yours Truly does have a point. His 10 kids would like him to have a lot of money when he dies.
Y
Yours_Truly
Guest
That reminds me of a joke I just heard…Now wait a minute. Yours Truly does have a point. His 10 kids (which he’d like to have) would like him to have a lot of money when he dies.
*Mrs Donovan was walking down O’Connell Street in Dublin when she met up with Father Rafferty. The Father said, “Top o’ the mornin’ to ye! Aren’t ye Mrs.Donovan and didn’t I marry ye and yer husband 2years ago?” She replied, “Aye that ye did, Father.” The Father asked, “And be there any wee ones yet?” She replied, “No, not yet, Father.” The Father said , “Well now, I’m going to Rome next week and I’ll light a candle for ye and yer husband.” She replied, “Oh, thank ye, Father.”
They parted ways; some years later they met again. The Father asked “Well now, Mrs.Donovan, how are ye these days?” She replied, “Oh, very well, Father!” The Father asked, “And tell me, have ye any wee ones yet?” She replied, “Oh yes, Father! Three sets of twins and 4 singles, **10 in all!” **
The Father said, “That’s wonderful!” How is yer loving husband doing?" She replied, "E’s gone to Rome to blow out that damn candle!”*
- Status