When is it moral to practice NFP?

  • Thread starter Thread starter vluvski
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
V

vluvski

Guest
I am a female, 23 years old, engaged to be married next May. I have a stable, well-paying job as a chemical engineer, no debt, and respectable savings, and I am certain of my vocation to marriage and children with my fiance.
My fiance, also 23 years, is a student with negligible debt finishing his degree in computer engineering. He is actively pursuing a job in the area where I work, but as in all things, there is no guarantee that he will find something before our wedding date.
Fiance says we cannot morally practice NFP at the beginning of our marriage since we are healthy and in a good financial situation.
I say the emotional, spiritual, and yes, financial gains of delaying children constitute moral grounds for practicing NFP. I feel that the simple fact that we will be newly married and adjusting to eachother after a 15 month long-distance engagement is grounds to give ourselves some time to grow together.
  1. Does the church call for ‘grave’ or simply ‘just’ reason to practice NFP? Fiance says grave, I have read just.
  2. Is it possible that a couple in good physical, emotional, and financial health have a vocation to marriage without immediately having children?
  3. Since getting married requires a certain degree of ‘readiness’ to have children, is marriage appropriate for a couple who is ready and willing, but where one or both individuals would prefer to wait to have children? In other words, if one of us believes we have grave or just reason to avoid pregnancy from the get-go, do we have any business getting married in the first place?
  4. This question goes along with the previous, and assumes my fiance is right. Since the Church has never hesitated to make unpopular, definitive statements on controversial issues, why can I find nothing explaining that NFP is not to be practiced in otherwise healthy newlyweds because they oughtn’t be getting married if they have a grave enough circumstance to avoid pregnancy?
  5. Another related question: Why does/would the Church (or at least the ‘good’ parishes) promote NFP to engaged couples if very few of them could morally practice NFP at the beginning of their married lives? Would it not be more fitting to promote NFP more exclusively to those couples in dire financial circumstance or after already having the stresses one or more children? I have an extremely hard time believing the Church would turn a blind eye to the fact that engaged couples who embrace NFP are likely practicing it to delay having children at the beginning of their marriage. If that is the case, it just seems like we’re being equipped by the Church for immoral use of NFP since it is being recommended to engaged couples.
  6. Is it right to say, “If our vocation truly lies in childless parenthood, at least temporarily, God will not bless us with children until He sees fit?” This seems kind of like a cop-out, as if we don’t have a responsibility to discern that vocation with the intelligence and free will God has granted us. It’s like staring at a piece of cake and saying, “God, if you don’t want me to eat this piece of cake, make it disappear.” Eating the cake is not inherently evil, but perhaps you struggle with gluttony or have a weight probably and really shouldn’t eat the cake. It seems pretty similar to me.
I am more than happy to open a dialog on this subject, give additional background, or clarify my statements/questions.
 
Grave, or Just?! Well, all depends on you definition of the word! The Church has definite definitions for those words… we people tend to gum them up with our own vernacular. I could add “sensible reasons”, or “reasonable intentions”… but those also could be misunderstood! So how about this… you need a GOOD reason… You need a SERIOUS reason… You need a reason that is NOT SILLY!!! 😉

It will take a bit of discernment, but nothing overly complicated. So maybe this might help you wade through your vocation:

The primary purpose of marriage is to bear children and to raise them. The secondary purpose of marriage is mutual love and help between spouses. (Most happy couples do just fine with the secondary purpose!)

Looking at the primary purpose of the Vocation… what is needed in order for you to have children, and raise them? Don’t think about 20 years from now… think about right now. Do you have what you need to raise a baby?
I say the emotional, spiritual, and yes, financial gains of delaying children constitute moral grounds for practicing NFP
Click to expand...
In order for the first two (emotional / spiritual) to be moral grounds for postponing children… those same grounds would probably also prohibit you guys from getting married. And financial grounds… well that too needs to be fairly serious… most of the Chem-Es I know don’t fall into that category. Granted, you may not get to be a stay at home mother, but that alone is probably not a valid reason to postpone having children.

God will provide… this doesn’t mean you will also be financially rich… it might even mean that you will be financially “uncomfortable”!!! But he will still provide. Trusting God in this way is not the same as tempting God to catch you if you jump off a cliff, or tempting God to remove a temptation if He really doesn’t want you to do it. Having children is the main purpose of your vocation.

It is important that you and your husband are on the same page about this before you get married. Your vocation is about getting to heaven… having children will play a huge role in that… being financially comfortable probably won’t.
 
Excellent question. Have you read Humanae Vitae itself? Don’t waste any more time on hack opinions like ours before your read Pope Paul VI’s thoughts!

Now that you’re back, I would say you’ll need to decide for yourself if your “emotional and psychological” reasons are “serious” enough. Nobody here knows you well enough to decide that for you. But beware of the temptation of overstating the seriousness of your reason. We live in a culture that is HOSTILE to large families started young. Make sure the culture isn’t speaking to you louder than God.
 
I hope I don’t annoy anyone by saying this… but it’s always moral to practice NFP!

(What? She doesn’t know what she’s saying!)

Couples can use Natural Family Planning to with the intention to postpone or acheive pregnancy. It’s not just Catholic birth control or something. I know that when most people talk about practicing NFP, they are thinking about avoiding or postponing pregnancy, but it ruffles my feathers just a little whenever I hear NFP equated with that. It encourages the mentality that Catholics just have a special form of birth control called NFP, so how is that different from the pill or condom or whatever.

The idea that NFP is just about not getting pregnant, in my experience, can also contribute to the mindset that postponing/avoiding pregnancy via NFP is almost never morally licit and that only ungenerous or untrusting Catholics use NFP for this reason.

This reminds me of why we cancelled our subscription to Crisis: this article where the author completely disses NFP while assuming that anyone using NFP is trying like mad to avoid children - for the wrong reasons. The article really made me sad - my husband and I were planning on buying his parents a gift subscription at the time (of course they got *This Rock * instead).
 
40.png
leahbrahms:
I hope I don’t annoy anyone by saying this… but it’s always moral to practice NFP!

(What? She doesn’t know what she’s saying!)

Couples can use Natural Family Planning to with the intention to postpone or acheive pregnancy. It’s not just Catholic birth control or something. I know that when most people talk about practicing NFP, they are thinking about avoiding or postponing pregnancy, but it ruffles my feathers just a little whenever I hear NFP equated with that. It encourages the mentality that Catholics just have a special form of birth control called NFP, so how is that different from the pill or condom or whatever.

The idea that NFP is just about not getting pregnant, in my experience, can also contribute to the mindset that postponing/avoiding pregnancy via NFP is almost never morally licit and that only ungenerous or untrusting Catholics use NFP for this reason.

This reminds me of why we cancelled our subscription to Crisis: this article where the author completely disses NFP while assuming that anyone using NFP is trying like mad to avoid children - for the wrong reasons. The article really made me sad - my husband and I were planning on buying his parents a gift subscription at the time (of course they got *This Rock *instead).
Click to expand...
Could NOT have said it better myself!!!👍
 
40.png
leahbrahms:
I hope I don’t annoy anyone by saying this… but it’s always moral to practice NFP!

(What? She doesn’t know what she’s saying!)

Couples can use Natural Family Planning to with the intention to postpone or acheive pregnancy. It’s not just Catholic birth control or something. I know that when most people talk about practicing NFP, they are thinking about avoiding or postponing pregnancy, but it ruffles my feathers just a little whenever I hear NFP equated with that. It encourages the mentality that Catholics just have a special form of birth control called NFP, so how is that different from the pill or condom or whatever.

The idea that NFP is just about not getting pregnant, in my experience, can also contribute to the mindset that postponing/avoiding pregnancy via NFP is almost never morally licit and that only ungenerous or untrusting Catholics use NFP for this reason.

This reminds me of why we cancelled our subscription to Crisis: this article where the author completely disses NFP while assuming that anyone using NFP is trying like mad to avoid children - for the wrong reasons. The article really made me sad - my husband and I were planning on buying his parents a gift subscription at the time (of course they got *This Rock * instead).
Click to expand...
:clapping:
 
It’s always moral to practice NFP. A pope, several decades ago, predicted that artificial birth control would cause women in society to be viewed more as objects. His prediction came true.

I’m going to do something rare, and talk about what a sleeze I was a decade ago in college. I was very promiscuous in college. And I can say beyond doubt, that had there been no such thing as various birth control, I would not have been so promiscuous. While my judgment was sorely lacking, I was very careful not to concieve a child. When birth control of some form was absent, I would pass up an opportunity (for lack of a better term).

By the grace of God, I changed several years ago. I have a wonderful wife, and we practice NFP. We want to wait until after May to have children, because of plans that month. But we know that every time we are intimate, we know that there is a chance for pregnancy. Most people with any sense won’t take that chance unless it is with someone they love and have a life-commitment to. And there is no fear.

Maybe this isn’t exactly what you were looking for. But my take is that NFP is wonderful because its something that should only be practiced in marriage, and it limits sex to being within the marital covenant. The closeness is remarkable, because when there is a reasonable risk of pregancy it is seldom, if ever, a mere physical act.

Anyways, NFP is always moral in marriage. We don’t have to try for pregnancy, nor do we have to avoid it, we just have to be open to it – without that, it can become a mere physical act and can lose its meaning.

Blessings.
 
Enlighten me, I thought NFP was always morally acceptable in marriage? I thought God gave us sex for two reaons, pro-creation, and bonding…sex is the most loving act, so why not bond with your spouse and have sex, without the children…yes you should have children but isnt NFP God’s way of saying you two love eachother fully, and I give this act to you to express your love to eachother?
 
There is much more of this discussion in the category “Moral Theology” under a similar name.

Hope to see you there!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top