The truth about NFP

[Allegra]

Yikes! Just out of curiosity, I looked up the current admission to Disney World. All I can say is, “Oh HECK no!” Silver Dollar City, here we come! Seriously! Who can afford that? I can guarantee that it didn’t cost that much when I was a kid! Unless through the power of Disney magic they’ve figured out how to air condition the whole park, there is absolutely nothing they have in there that is worth that much money! You have got to be kidding me! I say, let’s rent a pontoon boat, go out on the lake, drive in a circle really fast, and ride around on tethered inner-tubes in our own wake. If we really want, the kids can sing “Let it Go” in the background. It’ll be practically the same as Disney World except it won’t be sweltering hot you’re allowed to drink on the pontoon boat.

 

[CB_Catholic]

In my friend’s case, it’s a yearly trip to Disney World- no visiting of family. She also says that she likes having a new car (replaced every few years). And, no, it’s not for reasons of safety- she just likes new cars. But, like many people, she justifies this as just because SHE thinks it’s just.

I’ll definitely check out that book. Thanks for the recommendation.

In all honesty, it really is no one’s business if she likes a yearly trip to Disney world or a new car every few years. She does not have to justify to anyone, and judgement of this is better off left in the hands of the Lord. Why people use NFP or choose to limit family size is not our right to criticize or judge. That is my honest reply to your statement, and is intended as a general statement, not a slam at you.

But as far as the whole subject goes:

As I said in a previous post, this subject of NFP needs truth in advertising and should be approached honestly. Some will testify it is great and great for the marriages and brought them closer, etc. But that is them, and that should not be what is taught as applying to all. There are many, who don’t like it, have many problems, find their marriages are jeopardized, etc. Some of these keep up with it and are obedient to the Church, others find this too much to follow. It should be presented fully, the pro’s and cons. I listen to a lot of Catholic radio where this subject is discussed, and unless one entirely misses the programs, the presentation of NFP sounds like something out of a fairy tale, and this subject is discussed almost daily, and not objectively. Never have I heard a balanced presentation of this subject on the radio or TV. Instead I hear claims that the marriage is always stronger, the couple cooperate so well, they feel closer to God, and really, people who use ABC (not that I advocate that) suffer much in their intimacy, have poor marriages, etc. This is BS. It should stop. It puts unnecessary guilt on a couple for whom it does not work. That is not what the Church is about.

Besides which, I know plenty of Protestants who use BC, and their marriages and family life are fine, and they are very close to Jesus. I am not advocating ABC, I understand Church teaching, I think the pill is dangerous, but these claims that people who use ABC are selfish and just don’t have the most intimate and fulfilling marriages they could have are wrong, period. The Church does not teach that. People have added that one, including clergy.

So just tell it like it is, and let people be well-informed about it’s use, and not be judged by others for being honest about their problems with it.

 

[Regina7]

In all honesty, it really is no one’s business if she likes a yearly trip to Disney world or a new car every few years. She does not have to justify to anyone, and judgement of this is better off left in the hands of the Lord. Why people use NFP or choose to limit family size is not our right to criticize or judge. That is my honest reply to your statement, and is intended as a general statement, not a slam at you.

But as far as the whole subject goes:

As I said in a previous post, this subject of NFP needs truth in advertising and should be approached honestly. Some will testify it is great and great for the marriages and brought them closer, etc. But that is them, and that should not be what is taught as applying to all. There are many, who don’t like it, have many problems, find their marriages are jeopardized, etc. Some of these keep up with it and are obedient to the Church, others find this too much to follow. It should be presented fully, the pro’s and cons. I listen to a lot of Catholic radio where this subject is discussed, and unless one entirely misses the programs, the presentation of NFP sounds like something out of a fairy tale, and this subject is discussed almost daily, and not objectively. Never have I heard a balanced presentation of this subject on the radio or TV. Instead I hear claims that the marriage is always stronger, the couple cooperate so well, they feel closer to God, and really, people who use ABC (not that I advocate that) suffer much in their intimacy, have poor marriages, etc. This is BS. It should stop. It puts unnecessary guilt on a couple for whom it does not work. That is not what the Church is about.

Besides which, I know plenty of Protestants who use BC, and their marriages and family life are fine, and they are very close to Jesus. I am not advocating ABC, I understand Church teaching, I think the pill is dangerous, but these claims that people who use ABC are selfish and just don’t have the most intimate and fulfilling marriages they could have are wrong, period. The Church does not teach that. People have added that one, including clergy.

So just tell it like it is, and let people be well-informed about it’s use, and not be judged by others for being honest about their problems with it.

So if a friend only attended mass once a month (not due to any reason besides mass interfering with football games) and said it’s not a sin, you’d say nothing? Just leave it up to God? The reason why rebuking the sinner is a spiritual work of mercy is because God knows that we all need help getting to heaven. We are not helping each other by saying nothing. The word judgmental gets thrown around like crazy! The whole gay rights platform was built on how we shouldn’t be judgmental.

As an example, years ago I seriously didn’t get the whole keep holy the Sabbath thing. We went to mass, then did whatever. A friend pointed out to me that maybe my daughter shouldn’t be taking an art class on a day meant for God and family. I seriously had no clue. I thank God that my friend had the courage to say something to me. And rebuking the sinner can, and should, be kind and loving. If my friend hadn’t said anything, our Sundays wouldn’t be as awesome as they are now.

 

[kptrs]

This is exactly my point. To you and me, a yearly luxury vacation is excessive. But to other people, it’s not. Some would say that hiring people for yard work is excessive (I don’t- no way I could handle my yard alone). Some people would say that spending money on healthy foods (organic, grass-fed meat) is excessive and shouldn’t inhibit more children. Some people think that they shouldn’t have more kids because then they couldn’t fully pay for university for kids. Each person has a great argument for why these are “just” reasons. And while most of us would say a luxury vacation and new cars are not just reasons, my friend disagrees. This is where a clearer definition of “just” would really be helpful.

That also may be why there is not a more specific definition of “just”. What one person values is different than what another person values, and as long as you’re not being selfish, the reason is “just”. My husband is vehemently opposed to hiring yard work help. We are perfectly capable of affording it, he just doesn’t perceive it as worth the expense. Others may perceive it as worth it so they have more time to spend with the wife and kids. On the other hand, my husband is an avid fan of organic, all natural, artificial-color-free food. Yeah, it’s expensive, but he reads about how bad pesticides and artificial colors are for the human body and finds the expense totally worth it. Others would scoff and say it would be better to have more kids than to spend extra money on organic food, but for people like my husband, they feel like spending the extra cash on organic food is important to the health of their families (this is not our reason for using NFP, I’m just making an example). It’s not like he’s blowing the extra dough on himself for his own enjoyment. He’s doing what he really thinks is best for his family. Another husband/father may not value organic food and choose to have another kid with the money saved on organic food, and that’s fine too.

So, I dunno, maybe your friend thinks the yearly trip to Disney World is of some inherent benefit to her family. It may look like a luxury, well… it is a luxury, but that doesn’t mean she’s doing it out of selfishness. She may be doing it for the good of her kids. That’s why there can’t really be a set definition of “just”. There are just too many factors in play to make a list of what is acceptable and what is not.

 

[CB_Catholic]

So if a friend only attended mass once a month (not due to any reason besides mass interfering with football games) and said it’s not a sin, you’d say nothing? Just leave it up to God? The reason why rebuking the sinner is a spiritual work of mercy is because God knows that we all need help getting to heaven. We are not helping each other by saying nothing. The word judgmental gets thrown around like crazy! The whole gay rights platform was built on how we shouldn’t be judgmental.

As an example, years ago I seriously didn’t get the whole keep holy the Sabbath thing. We went to mass, then did whatever. A friend pointed out to me that maybe my daughter shouldn’t be taking an art class on a day meant for God and family. I seriously had no clue. I thank God that my friend had the courage to say something to me. And rebuking the sinner can, and should, be kind and loving. If my friend hadn’t said anything, our Sundays wouldn’t be as awesome as they are now.

Regina, you don’t even KNOW your friend is sinning. There is nothing in what you have said (which, BTW, is hearsay because we don’t have proof of what she actually said) that would connote a sin on her part. You are only assuming you are right here. You need to understand that if you are going to approach anyone in this manner, you had better be sure they have actually committed a sin, not just opine that they have. Also, what your friend pointed out to you about Sunday is only her opinion–there are plenty of arguments against that interpretation, including some respected apologists and clergy, but that is off-topic and I am not even going there.

I fully well know the difference between judging a person’s sin and judging a person, but it is just as wrong to assume a person is sinning unless you KNOW they are, not just FEEL they are, and then approach them. This really is none of your business.

But I can see that you are not really open to any dispute on the matter, so I will not comment further on the subject.

 

[kptrs]

That also may be why there is not a more specific definition of “just”. What one person values is different than what another person values, and as long as you’re not being selfish, the reason is “just”. My husband is vehemently opposed to hiring yard work help. We are perfectly capable of affording it, he just doesn’t perceive it as worth the expense. Others may perceive it as worth it so they have more time to spend with the wife and kids. On the other hand, my husband is an avid fan of organic, all natural, artificial-color-free food. Yeah, it’s expensive, but he reads about how bad pesticides and artificial colors are for the human body and finds the expense totally worth it. Others would scoff and say it would be better to have more kids than to spend extra money on organic food, but for people like my husband, they feel like spending the extra cash on organic food is important to the health of their families (this is not our reason for using NFP, I’m just making an example). It’s not like he’s blowing the extra dough on himself for his own enjoyment. He’s doing what he really thinks is best for his family. Another husband/father may not value organic food and choose to have another kid with the money saved on organic food, and that’s fine too.

So, I dunno, maybe your friend thinks the yearly trip to Disney World is of some inherent benefit to her family. It may look like a luxury, well… it is a luxury, but that doesn’t mean she’s doing it out of selfishness. She may be doing it for the good of her kids. That’s why there can’t really be a set definition of “just”. There are just too many factors in play to make a list of what is acceptable and what is not.

I say this in the spirit of not really knowing people’s motives. To be honest, IMHO, having more kids wins out over Disney World. But as to whether she’s selfish or not, that is known only to God.

 

[CB_Catholic]

That also may be why there is not a more specific definition of “just”. What one person values is different than what another person values, and as long as you’re not being selfish, the reason is “just”. My husband is vehemently opposed to hiring yard work help. We are perfectly capable of affording it, he just doesn’t perceive it as worth the expense. Others may perceive it as worth it so they have more time to spend with the wife and kids. On the other hand, my husband is an avid fan of organic, all natural, artificial-color-free food. Yeah, it’s expensive, but he reads about how bad pesticides and artificial colors are for the human body and finds the expense totally worth it. Others would scoff and say it would be better to have more kids than to spend extra money on organic food, but for people like my husband, they feel like spending the extra cash on organic food is important to the health of their families (this is not our reason for using NFP, I’m just making an example). It’s not like he’s blowing the extra dough on himself for his own enjoyment. He’s doing what he really thinks is best for his family. Another husband/father may not value organic food and choose to have another kid with the money saved on organic food, and that’s fine too.

So, I dunno, maybe your friend thinks the yearly trip to Disney World is of some inherent benefit to her family. It may look like a luxury, well… it is a luxury, but that doesn’t mean she’s doing it out of selfishness. She may be doing it for the good of her kids. That’s why there can’t really be a set definition of “just”. There are just too many factors in play to make a list of what is acceptable and what is not.

I can not find anywhere in Church teaching that we cannot allow ourselves some luxury. Of course we should be sure that our commitment to those less fortunate is taken care of, and that our family’s and parish needs are met first, but where does it say we can’t have a bit of a luxury if we have the means??? It is not sinful to take a nice vacation, or buy a nice car, or whatever as long as our need for material goods does not overwhelm our lives and put God in the back seat and we become greedy and self-centered.

 

[Regina7]

That also may be why there is not a more specific definition of “just”. What one person values is different than what another person values, and as long as you’re not being selfish, the reason is “just”. My husband is vehemently opposed to hiring yard work help. We are perfectly capable of affording it, he just doesn’t perceive it as worth the expense. Others may perceive it as worth it so they have more time to spend with the wife and kids. On the other hand, my husband is an avid fan of organic, all natural, artificial-color-free food. Yeah, it’s expensive, but he reads about how bad pesticides and artificial colors are for the human body and finds the expense totally worth it. Others would scoff and say it would be better to have more kids than to spend extra money on organic food, but for people like my husband, they feel like spending the extra cash on organic food is important to the health of their families (this is not our reason for using NFP, I’m just making an example). It’s not like he’s blowing the extra dough on himself for his own enjoyment. He’s doing what he really thinks is best for his family. Another husband/father may not value organic food and choose to have another kid with the money saved on organic food, and that’s fine too.

So, I dunno, maybe your friend thinks the yearly trip to Disney World is of some inherent benefit to her family. It may look like a luxury, well… it is a luxury, but that doesn’t mean she’s doing it out of selfishness. She may be doing it for the good of her kids. That’s why there can’t really be a set definition of “just”. There are just too many factors in play to make a list of what is acceptable and what is not.

But how can we tell when something is selfish? I think that pretty much anything can be justified, right? Like I’m not being selfish when I spend 10K each year for vacation…because I could spend 20K- now that would be selfish! And a person spending 20K says only spending more than that is selfish. I think we all can trick ourselves into seeing a benefit when it’s truly selfishness. I’m guilty of it too. That’s why 1) we need people to hold us accountable and 2) the Church should be more clear. Using merely the word “just” is just too ambiguous. This way, everyone uses their own version of the word to justify avoiding pregnancy- some of these reasons are just, while others clearly aren’t. But without clearer guidelines, there is no real answer.

 

[pensmama87]

I say this in the spirit of not really knowing people’s motives. To be honest, IMHO, having more kids wins out over Disney World. But as to whether she’s selfish or not, that is known only to God.

Very small point, but in general people who tend to vacation in one place pick up a lot of tricks on how to do so for significantly less than “sticker price.” I know someone who used to work for Disney and yes, they went every year, and it was amazing what she knew about discounts etc.

Same goes for other “luxurious” purchases like cars, etc. Unless someone is telling you “Yes, I spent $25,000 on a cruise last year,” you have no idea.

 

[PhiloMed]

So if a friend only attended mass once a month (not due to any reason besides mass interfering with football games) and said it’s not a sin, you’d say nothing? Just leave it up to God? .

I would serve as a good witness to my faith by attending church weekly. Maybe asking my friend to come along.

Telling her that the way she lives their life is wrong is not my place and, frankly, if that was my routine I’d be lucky I had any friends at all. Then I would be a witness to nobody.

And the example you gave makes no sense. If you polled 100 different priests on taking an art class on a Sunday you would probably get a 50/50 split of it’s ok…if that even.

 

[Regina7]

I can not find anywhere in Church teaching that we cannot allow ourselves some luxury. Of course we should be sure that our commitment to those less fortunate is taken care of, and that our family’s and parish needs are met first, but where does it say we can’t have a bit of a luxury if we have the means??? It is not sinful to take a nice vacation, or buy a nice car, or whatever as long as our need for material goods does not overwhelm our lives and put God in the back seat and we become greedy and self-centered.

Luxury is not bad when, like you said, it doesn’t overwhelm us and put God in the back seat. But saying “I will not have more children BECAUSE I like luxury” is not really the way it should be, is it? Isn’t God being relegated?

 

[Xantippe]

I can not find anywhere in Church teaching that we cannot allow ourselves some luxury. Of course we should be sure that our commitment to those less fortunate is taken care of, and that our family’s and parish needs are met first, but where does it say we can’t have a bit of a luxury if we have the means??? It is not sinful to take a nice vacation, or buy a nice car, or whatever as long as our need for material goods does not overwhelm our lives and put God in the back seat and we become greedy and self-centered.

I don’t have time to look this up, but my husband says that in traditional Catholic ethics, one’s “station in life” gets considered.

(I did a brief google–not turning up anything.)

 

[Xantippe]

But how can we tell when something is selfish? I think that pretty much anything can be justified, right? Like I’m not being selfish when I spend 10K each year for vacation…because I could spend 20K- now that would be selfish! And a person spending 20K says only spending more than that is selfish. I think we all can trick ourselves into seeing a benefit when it’s truly selfishness. I’m guilty of it too. That’s why 1) we need people to hold us accountable and 2) the Church should be more clear. Using merely the word “just” is just too ambiguous. This way, everyone uses their own version of the word to justify avoiding pregnancy- some of these reasons are just, while others clearly aren’t. But without clearer guidelines, there is no real answer.

Is there an appropriate amount of charitable giving happening?

That would be my first question.

Also, what’s the income?

If you make a $1 million a year, a $20,000 vacation would represent only 2% of your total yearly income and you might (if you give 10% of income) be giving $100,000 away.

 

[Regina7]

I would serve as a good witness to my faith by attending church weekly. Maybe asking my friend to come along.

Telling her that the way she lives their life is wrong is not my place and, frankly, if that was my routine I’d be lucky I had any friends at all. Then I would be a witness to nobody.

And the example you gave makes no sense. If you polled 100 different priests on taking an art class on a Sunday you would probably get a 50/50 split of it’s ok…if that even.

I didn’t say that the way to do it is frankly speaking about it. There are subtler and loving ways. My sister doesn’t attend mass every week. I didn’t go to her and say “Sinner!” I said something about how I had to get off the phone to get to mass. I made a joke about how I didn’t need another sin to confess. Her response: “Uh, what? That’s a sin?” There’s many ways to rebuke a sinner charitably.

I didn’t clarify about the art class- sorry. It was an all-day art class. She went with friends. I would go sit with the other moms at a cafe for several hours. Dh stayed home and watched football. This was MANY Sundays where daughter was one place, I was another, and spouse was another. All day. Repeatedly. We treated Sunday as any other day of the week, just with mass.

 

[Xantippe]

Very small point, but in general people who tend to vacation in one place pick up a lot of tricks on how to do so for significantly less than “sticker price.” I know someone who used to work for Disney and yes, they went every year, and it was amazing what she knew about discounts etc.

Same goes for other “luxurious” purchases like cars, etc. Unless someone is telling you “Yes, I spent $25,000 on a cruise last year,” you have no idea.

That is a very good point.

 

[Regina7]

I don’t have time to look this up, but my husband says that in traditional Catholic ethics, one’s “station in life” gets considered.

(I did a brief google–not turning up anything.)

What do you mean?

 

[Regina7]

Is there an appropriate amount of charitable giving happening?

That would be my first question.

Also, what’s the income?

If you make a $1 million a year, a $20,000 vacation would represent only 2% of your total yearly income and you might (if you give 10% of income) be giving $100,000 away.

Something like this would be helpful coming from the Church. All I know is that 10% should be tithe.

My friends case- 10k represents about 10-15% of yearly income. And, yes, she told me. This friend reveals lots of personal info

 

[pensmama87]

Luxury is not bad when, like you said, it doesn’t overwhelm us and put God in the back seat. But saying “I will not have more children BECAUSE I like luxury” is not really the way it should be, is it? Isn’t God being relegated?

I think the important thing is to be on guard for that attitude in your own thinking. I know I’m busy enough working on that than to worry if other people are secretly being selfish too.

I do have the blessing of good priests who stress generosity and selflessness, availability of the sacraments, especially confession, and who offer frequent reminders about the importance of prayer. I, and lots of other people, are receiving these “nudges” from God and His servants on earth all the time. He knows that if I could hear him with all the muck in my life, so can other people.

 

[Xantippe]

What do you mean?

I don’t have my husband around to ask, but roughly speaking, in Catholic ethics, the person’s station in life is considered when figuring out what their moral duties are.

It’s kind of a hard thing to google, but here’s a short snippet that might help:

“Writing in the 1920s on “minimum and maximum
standards of living,” [Monsignor John A.] Ryan identified three levels of wealth and income: first, the “minimum necessary for decent livelihood,” second, “those things needed to maintain one’s current station in life,” and third, “income, goods, and services superfluous to maintaining that station.” Christians had the right to the first and second levels;
everything beyond this was superfluous, and should be used to alleviate neighbors’ needs.
Does 21st century Catholic social teaching maintain this right to a standard of living in
accordance with one’s station in life? If so, how can we interpret our station and its
limits in a consumerist economy wherein “standard of living” is a continually moving
target, and “superfluous income” often a virtually meaningless category? What,
concretely, does Catholic teaching and Christian discipleship require of we who are nonpoor, and called to solidarity with our neighbors in need?”

wwwdev.villanova.edu/content/villanova/mission/theoinstitute/conference/pastconferences/_jcr_content/pagecontent/download_5/file.res/2007.abstracts.pdf

That’s from a paper by Christine Firer Hinze
entitled “A Standard of Living in Accordance With One’s Station” and the Demands of
Solidarity: Tough Questions for 21st Century Disciples."

It’s an interesting problem, especially as it interacts with family size.

 

[Regina7]

I think the important thing is to be on guard for that attitude in your own thinking. I know I’m busy enough working on that than to worry if other people are secretly being selfish too.

I do have the blessing of good priests who stress generosity and selflessness, availability of the sacraments, especially confession, and who offer frequent reminders about the importance of prayer. I, and lots of other people, are receiving these “nudges” from God and His servants on earth all the time. He knows that if I could hear him with all the muck in my life, so can other people.

Yes, I, like everyone, need to be on guard for selfishness.

But it’s not friends “secretly” being selfish. I didn’t google the cost of Disney, look on public records for my friends salary, house cost, etc. My friend is the one who divulged all this.

I don’t know if it’s just the people I know, but it seems that many people are very open about their reproductive choices. A woman I barely knew told me that her husband just had a vasectomy. People are so open about these things (some times too open IMO). So it’s different when a person wonders, “Why doesn’t so and so have more kids? You know they just went to Disney! Hmmmm…” Versus someone voluntarily giving that info.