What does CAF think of Fr Ripperger?

  • Thread starter Thread starter SacredHeartBassist
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
As (name removed by moderator) said, it IS a birth control, and it CAN be used long term for a “just” reason. The reason for a couple choosing to use it is frankly between them and possibly their priest. It’s not your business to decide whether NFP is being “abused” or not when you are not privy to the personal circumstances of everybody who is using NFP or choosing to abstain for sex entirely for some period of time.

If your real issue is that people are getting married without being open to life, in the sense of not wanting to have any children, ever, then that is something that we need to clarify in the teaching to young people getting married. I believe this is already addressed in the pre-Cana.
 
Okay. Haven’t been to CAF in a while and now I am remembering why.

It is hard to say much or make a comment without it being misinterpreted.

I agree NFP is good. All I am saying is, in out contraceptive culture, we need to explain and help people understand, it is to be used for particular reasons and
not be abused. Abuse of the method can happen.

There are many people in our world who have not been well catechized, do not understand Catholic teaching and thus are confused about Catholicism.

Again, NFP is great. I think it is great that we can understand our bodies well enough to make it work and it does work. I have used NFP myself.

Do they explain it well at pre-Cana, yes, but maybe not everyone goes or pays attention at pre-Cana or maybe they hear what they want to hear or maybe they just don’t want to follow Church teaching.

God bless
 
Pre-Cana is, AFAIK, a requirement for people who want to be married in the Church.

If people don’t want to pay attention to church teaching, or hear it and choose not to follow it, then that’s just mankind’s sinful nature. Not much we can do about it, except issue brotherly corrections where we feel it’s necessary. This applies to every teaching of the church, not just NFP or ABC.

I have no understanding of why this thread would cause you to leave CAF. The discussion has been civil. Not everyone shares your view that this is so all-fired important or that we can do much more about it, considering that it concerns the private business of other people.
 
The first priest we dealt with told us Pre-Cana was not required, btw. The second priest had us watch videos, answer a few questions and bam. We were married in the Church. Just FYI. Each situation is different.

It’s quite possible there are couples who don’t take Pre-Cana at all and quite possible some Pre-Cana courses don’t touch on these subjects (the videos we watched didn’t say anything about NFP and, in fact, told us that birth control is acceptable - something we didn’t believe or pay attention to).
 
Last edited:
I didn’t say I was leaving CAF but I have in the past.

“If people don’t want to pay attention to church teaching, or hear it and choose not to follow it, then that’s just mankind’s sinful nature. Not much we can do about it, except issue brotherly corrections where we feel it’s necessary.”

Pretty much sums up what I have been saying.
 
Pre-marriage prep is required by the USCCB for all Catholics who want to be married in the Church in USA. It takes different forms and isn’t always called “Pre-Cana” (We did Engaged Encounter and had prep sessions with the priest) but my point is, couples should be told before the wedding, and generally are told, that they’re expected to be “open to life”. In other words, most people do not get married thinking that artificial birth control or deciding to never have kids is okay with the Church. Even if they claim they missed that part of the teaching, or forgot it, or chose to ignore it, it’s generally told to them at some point in the 6 months before they get married.
 
Last edited:
And I’m saying we were told by one priest it wasn’t required at all and then the course we DID take said that birth control was acceptable.

Of course in our vows we promised to be open to life but leading UP TO our vows it wasn’t brought up. We KNEW this because we are involved in the faith and learned on our own.

So if that happened with me I’m sure it happens with others who perhaps aren’t as involved in their faith.
 
Your priest had you watch a video as part of your marriage prep that said artificial birth control (not natural birth control) was acceptable?

From your past posts, it seems like you had a lot of weird situations with the priests handling your marriage. I would just add that onto the pile of weirdness.
 
LOL! Yeah, they did. I wish I still had the videos so I could name and shame but we had to give them back.

I just think if this weirdness happened with us, why wouldn’t they happen elsewhere? Honestly until I came to this forum I thought everyone WAS like us and had the same experiences! It’s only this forum that made me realize there are more … appropriate ways of doing things in parishes.
 
But really, only the couple has the ability to determine the rightness and wrongness of their reasons. The reasons are unique to the couple – for one woman, the psychological burden of many children might be too much to handle; for another, no problem.
 
MagdalenaRita said:
I agree NFP is good. All I am saying is, in out contraceptive culture, we need to explain and help people understand, it is to be used for particular reasons and
not be abused. Abuse of the method can happen.
Click to expand...
And that’s all fine. Part of me feels like it’s a solution in search of a problem, though. I mean, the people who aren’t paying attention or who don’t care to follow Church teaching are going to also be the ones who just use artificial contraception because it’s easier than NFP.

Not to say that it’s impossible that there are people who abuse NFP. It seems improbable to me that it would be a large number, though.

My concern with people making a large point about it is that it seems more likely to me to make a good Catholic couple feel guilty and selfish for using NFP at all rather than churning out kids as fast as physically possible. Either that, or it will make non-Catholics feel like the stereotype that the Catholic Church teaches we must have the maximum number of children is 100% true.

Not that the point can’t ever be made. It’s certainly good to take stock of why we do things and make sure we are doing things for the right reasons.
 
There is a very, very good reason the Church does not define what a “just” reason is for responsible, natural family planning (despite the wishes of some people apparently) . It is an incredibly important and personal decision for families, and so many things factor into it, so many different variables. What is good for one family may not be for another.
 
Last edited:
"(name removed by moderator), post:142,
“was roundly excoriated by many of the ladies on the forum”

Yes, I can imagine.

So, as I have said, I agree with what you are saying and yes it is up to each individual couple that they are following Church teaching and why they need to use it and it is never our place to judge another person or a couple for what they do but I am sure you would agree, as a deacon, that we can look at a particular action and decide if it is right or wrong.

With that being said there could be a circumstance, albeit a very very rare one, way, way out there, where a couple just uses NFP, (something I have said is great that we have), because they just aren’t open to life and just do not want children but do not want to use ABC.

And that being said, I think I will end here because that is all I have been trying to say.

God bless.
 
Last edited:
As I listen to him, he makes sense because he backs up what he says with traditional sources, but at the same time, perhaps his interpretation of those sources is a bit too strict. For example, in the talk linked above, he explains that moral education of children and taking care of the home is a woman’s grave obligation, but I think it’s a leap to suggest as he did that neglecting dishes is a venial sin and putting children in daycare without serious need is a mortal one. One can meet their obligation to educate children and take care of the home while working- it’s up to each couple to determine how best to meet these obligations, and he seems to suggest not only that there is one way that’s best for most families, but that deviating from this one way without good reason is a sin. I think that’s going too far, and I’m what some would consider a “traditionalist.”
 
That post doesn’t have anything substantial.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top