T
- Status
T
tonyrey
Guest
I agree but contraception need not entail suppressing a normal bodily function. It is justified if is the lesser evil.
F
ffg
Guest
This brings up an interesting point that might be obvious, but be good to clarify, and I won’t assume…
Could we get someone to confirm that all rites (if so called) in union with Rome share the contraception teaching? I would guess it’s true but my experience is with one.
With regard to potential unity of churches, just a guess that unity on this subject would be hashed out. It sounds to me like a sort of dispensation. Is this something that needs to be requested or is generally understood?
With regard to cost being a factor to not have kids, through experience, I don’t share the concerns that people have who are pre-kids or pre-‘a lot’ of kids, or I guess even post-‘a lot’ (though we’re not setting records), but to be fair there are other factors in play as well.
Everyone has different backgrounds so I understand the concerns and decision making. I guess looking back I could say we’ve been blessed each time we’ve had a kid. (Little secret, there’s a new one in the oven at the moment, but don’t tell the kids, they are going to be so excited)
Take care,
Mike
H
hydin
Guest
A couple components are missing from this discussion. One of the main reasons contraceptives for females are against church teaching is because they allow conception 8-12% of the time. The secondary action of the pill is to make implantation of the fertilized egg impossible. According to Church teaching that is a baby. It is aborted by the pills secondary action. Technology to understand this was not available until the early 1990’s. Until then it was thought the pill just stopped eggs. Maybe it was the Holy Spirit protecting our Church from having to go back and tell couples “we didn’t know”.
As far as condoms and their use the church explains that the marital act is an act of complete giving for each party. A male using a condom is telling the woman he wants all the good of the act with no chance of the act completing. Even if both partners agree it is still an act of selfishness for both and hold back from complete giving. Same reason the act always needs to finish where conception is possible. We are to give our bodies completely to the other. putting a barrier between the two is not in concert with that teaching.
On a personal note, when a couple contracepts (we did I am guilty and lived this) the only reason not to have sex is because one party “doesn’t want to.” NFP, when used for a serious reason (- which it always must be, wanting a BMW is not a serious reason) gives the partner wanting less sex a few days break without the guilt, since neither wants to complete the act during fertile days. Sometimes the church’s rules are pretty wise.
When the topic is sex most of the reasons are tied to giving of self and avoiding abortion or other unintended outcomes. Doing evil to gain a greater good is never OK. All sex must be open to life. NFP is only OK if it is for a serious reason. A list exists but I can’t remember the document. Only wanting two kids, wanting to go on a vacation, have a bigger house, or other allocation of available funds for a purpose other than kids is not a serious reason. Illness, income, living conditions (with parents) and similar issues that make having a baby at the time does allow for NFP use. Many abuse this as do those who contracept even though they know it is wrong. Just because many violate church teaching either intentionally or because they don’t understand it is not a reason to change the teaching to match popular opinion.
As far as condoms and their use the church explains that the marital act is an act of complete giving for each party. A male using a condom is telling the woman he wants all the good of the act with no chance of the act completing. Even if both partners agree it is still an act of selfishness for both and hold back from complete giving. Same reason the act always needs to finish where conception is possible. We are to give our bodies completely to the other. putting a barrier between the two is not in concert with that teaching.
On a personal note, when a couple contracepts (we did I am guilty and lived this) the only reason not to have sex is because one party “doesn’t want to.” NFP, when used for a serious reason (- which it always must be, wanting a BMW is not a serious reason) gives the partner wanting less sex a few days break without the guilt, since neither wants to complete the act during fertile days. Sometimes the church’s rules are pretty wise.
When the topic is sex most of the reasons are tied to giving of self and avoiding abortion or other unintended outcomes. Doing evil to gain a greater good is never OK. All sex must be open to life. NFP is only OK if it is for a serious reason. A list exists but I can’t remember the document. Only wanting two kids, wanting to go on a vacation, have a bigger house, or other allocation of available funds for a purpose other than kids is not a serious reason. Illness, income, living conditions (with parents) and similar issues that make having a baby at the time does allow for NFP use. Many abuse this as do those who contracept even though they know it is wrong. Just because many violate church teaching either intentionally or because they don’t understand it is not a reason to change the teaching to match popular opinion.
T
Tomdstone
Guest
Since the woman who is taking the pill can be guilty of many abortions, does that mean she is excommunicated for having an abortion?
F
ffg
Guest
It’s interesting that you ask that as this is the year of Mercy in the Church, there are about 1000 priests who were assigned ( perhaps more like blessed ) with a few extra powers that are typically reserved for higher up the chain of command.
I believe one of those is to absolve in cases of abortion. The priests at our church are a part of this group, the pastor explained what it meant for him.
I’m sure there is an official doc out there.
Take care,
Mike
F
ffg
Guest
Thanks!Congratulations, Mike. :clapping: I’m rather concerned the oven may get too hot…
F
ffg
Guest
Edit: I have no idea what I did, if I hit something to put that negative smiley face there, Just ignore it, if it’s something I did. If it’s something someone else did, it’s good to see I have an admirer!
Thanks for jumping in!
We have to be very careful with specifics when talking about NFP for other people.
Leaving it at serious reason is fine, but needs to be understood in light of 2 things - because people get confused thinking someone else is being authoritative where the responsibly lies with each couple -
~Not having sex is not a sin
~The resposibily and authority of evaluating the serious matter lies with the married couple. ( the church uses general buckets for guidance)
Certainly in evaluating, a married couple, or a couple planning to get married needs to understand a key reason of marriage is children. Taking this into consideration should help in evaluation. Kids are a ‘good’.
My experience is only unique to me so I can’t tell others what is serious for them, but I can share my experience. We went into marriage knowing full well it’s key purpose and the fullness of our marriage would be to have kids. Even in the situation we were in - married during college, first kid a month after I graduated, no job. Wife still had a semester left, which she completed over a year while I temped for peanuts. Every step of the way we were happy and making it work, or rather God was providing. How we ate after rent and student loans considering the pay, is worthy of a loaves and fish award for God.
Even if you have a mom that taught NFP for decades and you knew how the billings method worked in 6th grade, it’s hard to fight the power of the beauty of marriage.
There seems to be a purpose, so if anyone asked, I just say, strive to do what’s right in the eyes of God and you’ll be happy.
Take care,
Mike
E
edlinked
Guest
I saw this video and thought it would be good to see it.
Dr. Alice von Hildebrand: Life-long Catholic - The Journey Home Program
youtube.com/watch?v=J4m_g87D8VI
Dr. Alice von Hildebrand: Life-long Catholic - The Journey Home Program
youtube.com/watch?v=J4m_g87D8VI
T
tonyrey
Guest
Congratulations, Mike.:clapping: My brother and his wife did the same having three daughters while they were still students but it was easier in those days - at least in the UK… Requiescant in pace…
Edit: I have no idea what I did, if I hit something to put that negative smiley face there, Just ignore it, if it’s something I did. If it’s something someone else did, it’s good to see I have an admirer!
Thanks for jumping in!
We have to be very careful with specifics when talking about NFP for other people.
Leaving it at serious reason is fine, but needs to be understood in light of 2 things - because people get confused thinking someone else is being authoritative where the responsibly lies with each couple -
~Not having sex is not a sin
~The resposibily and authority of evaluating the serious matter lies with the married couple. ( the church uses general buckets for guidance)
Certainly in evaluating, a married couple, or a couple planning to get married needs to understand a key reason of marriage is children. Taking this into consideration should help in evaluation. Kids are a ‘good’.
My experience is only unique to me so I can’t tell others what is serious for them, but I can share my experience. We went into marriage knowing full well it’s key purpose and the fullness of our marriage would be to have kids. Even in the situation we were in - married during college, first kid a month after I graduated, no job. Wife still had a semester left, which she completed over a year while I temped for peanuts. Every step of the way we were happy and making it work, or rather God was providing. How we ate after rent and student loans considering the pay, is worthy of a loaves and fish award for God.
Even if you have a mom that taught NFP for decades and you knew how the billings method worked in 6th grade, it’s hard to fight the power of the beauty of marriage.
There seems to be a purpose, so if anyone asked, I just say, strive to do what’s right in the eyes of God and you’ll be happy.
Take care,
Mike
H
hydin
Guest
We have to be very careful with specifics when talking about NFP for other people.
Leaving it at serious reason is fine, but needs to be understood in light of 2 things - because people get confused thinking someone else is being authoritative where the responsibly lies with each couple -
~Not having sex is not a sin
~The responsibility and authority of evaluating the serious matter lies with the married couple. ( the church uses general buckets for guidance)
I am not sure I understand your statement - not having sex is not a sin. If one uses NFP for a non-serious reason and because NFP shows it is a “risky” day a couple decides based on NFP not to have sex then it very well could be sinful. If it is not sinful then logic would say reserving NFP for serious reasons would be useless.
Your statement concerning the couple being the point of decision is not in keeping with Church teaching. I would say that evaluating a situation starts (HV is below showing explicitly it is not up to the couple alone) with the couple IF they have an informed conscience, which means they fully understand church teaching and use those teachings to guide their conscience. A Conscience that is informed can’t reach a decision that is against Church teaching. Of course the Catechism also covers what happens when someone doesn’t look into what the church teaches when they should. This is a perfect example of a situation where that may come up often. Since a couple is well aware that the NFP document say serious reasons if they choose to guess at serious reason rather than research and see what serious reasons are ( Serious reasons mean important, or non-trivial, reasons, deriving “from the physical or psychological conditions of husband and wife, or from external conditions” (HV 16). 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. (HV20) and in more detail here - which specifically says it is not up to the couple…
Responsible parenthood, as we use the term here, has one further essential aspect of paramount importance. It concerns the objective moral order which was established by God, and of which a right conscience is the true interpreter. In a word, the exercise of responsible parenthood requires that husband and wife, keeping a right order of priorities, recognize their own duties toward God, themselves, their families and human society.
From this it follows that they are not free to act as they choose in the service of transmitting life, as if it were wholly up to them to decide what is the right course to follow. On the contrary, they are bound to ensure that what they do corresponds to the will of God the Creator. The very nature of marriage and its use makes His will clear, while the constant teaching of the Church spells it out. (HV10) _ w2.vatican.va/content/paul-vi/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae.html sorry NFP’ers now you can’t say you do not know…
To make no mistake, misusing NFP is not as serious sin as the Pill or other methods. It would fall into the category of selfishness or disobedience… A decision to abstain from sex because you may have a kid when no serious reason is present is not being fully open to each other. It literally is saying… I don’t want to have sex because it may cause a baby. I also doubt saving up for a vacation, so you can upgrade your car to a BMW or afford a country club membership would be seen as serious reasons. I have had detailed discussions with a friend who has been his parish’s leader of NFP with his wife for 15 years who wasn’t clear on this. When he looked into it it was eye opening. Many are taught that NFP is always OK. That is incorrect and all approved literature for training includes the above language somewhere. (if it didn’t it would not be aligned with church teaching) Of course I was part of the marriage encounter generation of the 1980’s where well meaning priest actually told our group that the pill was fine, as long as we “wanted kids and had them later.” Hope this helps those making moral decisions.
- Status