When is NFP licit?

[mpi]

Zero. Nil. Zilch. There is no minimum.

Being open to life and having a minimum number of children are not the same thing.

I have four children. We are, of course, open to more, but are not actively trying.

In fact, being open to life and actively trying are not the same thing, either,

I am, for the most part, passing moral judgement on a group of people, not individuals within the group.

 

[PaulinVA]

I am, for the most part, passing moral judgement on a group of people, not individuals within the group.

Yes, but groups are made up of individuals.

What is your motivation for calling American Catholics demented? Are you expecting them each have a baby and name him/her mpi?

I don’t get it.

 

[b_ulmen]

In the grand scheme of things, I agree that NFP can be abused.

~ Red Beard

How can abstaining from sex be abused?

 

[PaulinVA]

How can abstaining from sex be abused?

Some people say that if you know that this is a fertile day, you don’t have a serious reason not to conceive, and your reason for abstaining is to not conceive, then you are wrong.

 

[StAnastasia]

Some people say that if you know that this is a fertile day, you don’t have a serious reason not to conceive, and your reason for abstaining is to not conceive, then you are wrong.

What if you don’t want more children? Is there still a duty to go at it on a fertile day?

 

[Red_Beard]

What if you don’t want more children? Is there still a duty to go at it on a fertile day?

Why don’t you want more children?

 

[bookgirl32]

I say many Catholics practicing NFP bring their “culture of death” attitude to it. It is not licit based on their motivations

Although NFP can be used illicitly, the practice, by definition, can never be part of the “culture of death”. Not having sex at all cannot be part of the “culture of death”, it is simply irrelevant to it. Having sex with no artificial barrier and finishing inside the woman is leaving all possibility for life open, and therefore not a part of the “culture of death”.

 

[b_ulmen]

Some people say that if you know that this is a fertile day, you don’t have a serious reason not to conceive, and your reason for abstaining is to not conceive, then you are wrong.

I never would have thought I’d hear that NOT having sex was wrong. Isn’t NOT having sex to avoid pregnancy one of the things we tell children under 18yo?? The logic seems convoluted to me.

 

[StAnastasia]

I never would have thought I’d hear that NOT having sex was wrong. Isn’t NOT having sex to avoid pregnancy one of the things we tell children under 18yo?? The logic seems convoluted to me.

Convoluted? It seems positively Byzantine.

 

[PaulinVA]

What if you don’t want more children? Is there still a duty to go at it on a fertile day?

This is the hundred dollar question for Catholics. No, the bazillion dollar question.

Can we, as Catholics, say that we are “done” having kids and use NFP to avoid, and do this for years, until menopause.

 

[Red_Beard]

Some people say that if you know that this is a fertile day, you don’t have a serious reason not to conceive, and your reason for abstaining is to not conceive, then you are wrong.

“Some people” are the Magisterium of the Church.

Find me something that can’t be abused. Abuse of abstinence is not limited to fertile days.

Remember, Marriage is the Sacrament, not of man and woman doing dishes together, but of sex. Marriage is supposed to be for the perfection of the spouses; a remedy to concupiscence or the inclination to sin. It is certainly good for spouses to learn self mastery through abstinence, but they receive graces for the married state through sex, the restatement of their marriage vows. Married love shares, represents, and witnesses the love of Christ for the Church.

Sex is for making children and uniting the spouses, and not only when you’re “in the mood.” If you have a just reason for avoiding making a child, you have a just reason for avoiding sex. Very few reasons come to mind why spouses would avoid uniting, helping perfect, and receiving grace, and therefore avoid sex.

The Church encourages the frequenting of all the Sacraments that are available to us.

God bless,
Red Beard

 

[TAS2000]

“Some people” are the Magisterium of the Church.

Find me something that can’t be abused. Abuse of abstinence is not limited to fertile days.

Remember, Marriage is the Sacrament, not of man and woman doing dishes together, but of sex. Marriage is supposed to be for the perfection of the spouses; a remedy to concupiscence or the inclination to sin. It is certainly good for spouses to learn self mastery through abstinence, but they receive graces for the married state through sex, the restatement of their marriage vows. Married love shares, represents, and witnesses the love of Christ for the Church.

Sex is for making children and uniting the spouses, and not only when you’re “in the mood.” If you have a just reason for avoiding making a child, you have a just reason for avoiding sex. Very few reasons come to mind why spouses would avoid uniting, helping perfect, and receiving grace, and therefore avoid sex.

The Church encourages the frequenting of all the Sacraments that are available to us.

God bless,
Red Beard

You have got to be kidding me, or else i don’t understand your post. So you are saying that the magesterium teaches that we must have sex everyday, unless we have a serious reason not to? That’s preposterous. Marriage IS about more than dishes, but its more than just sex too. Its getting up early and going to bed late and working your butt off in between taking care of you home, your souse, your kids, your job, your church, and everything else. ALL of that is marriage. The sacrament of mariage is more than just sex with your spouse. saying you didn’t have sex yesterday so you are missing out on the sacrament of marriage is ludicrus.

 

[Red_Beard]

You have got to be kidding me, or else i don’t understand your post. So you are saying that the magesterium teaches that we must have sex everyday, unless we have a serious reason not to? That’s preposterous. Marriage IS about more than dishes, but its more than just sex too. Its getting up early and going to bed late and working your butt off in between taking care of you home, your souse, your kids, your job, your church, and everything else. ALL of that is marriage. The sacrament of mariage is more than just sex with your spouse. saying you didn’t have sex yesterday so you are missing out on the sacrament of marriage is ludicrus.

No, I am not saying that the Magisterium teaches that a married couple must have sex every day unless they have a serious reason not to.

Yes, marriage is about more than sex. But please understand me rightly. One still has to take care of one’s home, job, church, and everything else whether single, married, or consecrated. The thing that sets marriage apart from every other relationship and responsibility is sex. Sex, with the power to make children and unite two into one.

The Church makes weekly Mass and yearly Confession our duty. But we can, and should, receive either of these Sacraments more often and get the graces to help perfect us. She has not “obliged” married couples to have a certain quantity of sex. Yet, married couple can, and should, often take part of the Sacrament that gives them the graces specific to their state in life.

The responsibilities the come with being Catholic, being above the age of reason, or being married, like witnessing to the Gospel, confessing my sins to a priest, and providing for my family are not the defining marks of a Sacrament. Having water poured over me and hearing the words “I baptize you. . .,” saying “Amen” and receiving the Eucharist in the state of grace, being absolve of my sins, and giving my self totally to my wife, are what define the Sacraments.

Yes, the gift of self is made in other ways besides sex. The gift of self that belongs solely to the married state is sex. So, I do think you can miss out on the Sacrament of marriage by not having sex.

God bless,
Red Beard

 

[StAnastasia]

Yet, married couple can, and should, often take part of the Sacrament that gives them the graces specific to their state in life.

What if the couple physically can’t stand each other, but don’t want to get divorced. What if they are physically repelled by each other? What if a gay man or woman has gotten married for convention, but has no sexual feelings for her or his spouse, but doesn’t want the children to be emotionally scarred by fighting. In these cases, can’t they cohabit in the same house and the same bed, without having sex? Or must they have sex because they are married?

 

[Red_Beard]

What if the couple physically can’t stand each other, but don’t want to get divorced. What if they are physically repelled by each other?

Then their marriage is not what God intended. It is not as good as it is supposed to be and they don’t love each other as they should.

What if a gay man or woman has gotten married for convention, but has no sexual feelings for her or his spouse, but doesn’t want the children to be emotionally scarred by fighting.

Then they lied when they stood up and took their wedding vows and therefore are not actually married. Please note, this is for the Church to decide, not the individual.

In these cases, can’t they cohabit in the same house and the same bed, without having sex? Or must they have sex because they are married?

There is nothing about the married state in life that says that you must have sex. That being said, if you are married and you don’t have sex, chances are that there is something disordered about your relationship. The lack of sex is probably a manifestation of some deeper disorder. Each of the examples you have described involve very serious and very obvious disorders.

God bless,

Red Beard

 

[Red_Beard]

“Some people say that if you know that this is a fertile day, you don’t have a serious reason not to conceive, and your reason for abstaining is to not conceive, then you are wrong.”

This is pretty hard to follow so lets go in detail.

1. It is a fertile day
2. No serious (we should probably work on defining this term, there is a lot more leeway than it seems to imply on the surface) reason to avoid pregnancy
3. You are abstaining simply to avoid pregnancy, not out of some other reason such as lack of desire, lack of intimacy, etc. (I took this to mean that sex is regularly occurring in phase 1 and phase 3.)

Given these, your act of “failing to do good” can be speaking to a lack of openness to life and a desire to have all of your spouse except for their fertility. This can be a method of using your spouse similar to the way that ABC is using your spouse.

If you are using your spouse for your own pleasure then sex is no longer an act of love. I’m not sure what “part” of the whole situation counts as the sin, it may just be the mindset and attitude rather than any particular “act” of abstinence.

Any way you slice it, if you are not having sex with your spouse merely because you don’t want to accept your spouse completely or because you don’t want to give yourself completely to your spouse, then something is wrong.

Does this make sense to anyone else?

God bless,

Red Beard

 

[maryjk]

I am, for the most part, passing moral judgement on a group of people, not individuals within the group.

PaulinVA:

Yes, but groups are made up of individuals.

And for at least part of it, you (mpi) are passing moral judgment on individuals.

So you are looking at small families and figuring that they are in sin.

Might want to take the plank out of your eye.

Oh, and by the way, we have one child. And it isn’t really any of your business why we have an only child. The Lord knows why, and it is between my Lord, my husband and me. You really don’t figure into it.

 

[mpi]

And for at least part of it, you (mpi) are passing moral judgment on individuals.

So you are looking at small families and figuring that they are in sin.

Might want to take the plank out of your eye.

Oh, and by the way, we have one child. And it isn’t really any of your business why we have an only child. The Lord knows why, and it is between my Lord, my husband and me. You really don’t figure into it.

The only individuals I am judging are those many couples that I personally know who use NFP to avoid pregnancy even though there are no circumstances in their life that would be “grave” enough to avoid having further children.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

The only individuals I am judging are those many couples that I personally know who use NFP to avoid pregnancy even though there are no circumstances in their life that would be “grave” enough to avoid having further children.

Even if you know them personally, and you think you might know their reasons…the reasons they have are probably something they don’t broadcast to everyone. You can’t know what is in their hearts.

 

[maryjk]

Even if you know them personally, and you think you might know their reasons…the reasons they have are probably something they don’t broadcast to everyone. You can’t know what is in their hearts.

Exactly my point.

mpi:

The only individuals I am judging are those many couples that I personally know who use NFP to avoid pregnancy even though there are no circumstances in their life that would be “grave” enough to avoid having further children.

Just by looking at me, you would not see a “grave” reason.

Problem is, the Church says serious, not grave. And just because you can’t see a problem, doesn’t mean there isn’t one. And just because I don’t tell you the problem, doesn’t mean there isn’t one. And the problem I tell you may not be the real problem. Since it really isn’t any of your business.