When is NFP morally acceptable in marriage?

[vluvski]

“With regard to physical, economic, psychological and social conditions, responsible parenthood is exercised by those who prudently and generously decide to have more children, and by those who, for serious reasons and with due respect to moral precepts, decide not to have additional children for either a certain or an indefinite period of time.”

if i were reading this, and wanted to go by the letter… i’d probably
feel that waiting first would be wrong.

John,
I’ve noticed this as well, and if this is the final word on the matter, I must concede that my fiance has the proper understanding, and we will not try to delay pregnancy when we are married.

However, the CCC is often not a contiguous discertation on any one subject, simply because it covers so much ground very succinctly. Looking at the paragraph before and after isn’t sufficient to find what else the CCC has to say on the matter. Inconvenient, but I am always surprised when thumbing through the index at the breadth of topics covered- EVERYthing is in there, it seems! I can’t expect a work like that to be organized for my own convenience. Search engines are great in this situation!
It’s frustrating to me to think that an answer as simple as “if you think you have a serious reason to avoid pregnancy and you are not yet married, don’t get married til the reason is dealt with,” when nothing I’ve read makes it seem anywhere near that black and white. My fiance agrees that this is surprising given the church’s inhesitation to make definite statements that are equally hard to swallow. I know many faithful couples who interpret it both ways. We are genuinely seeking to do what’s right, trust me!
I’m just now getting to the part of the Christopher West talks on my CDs that deals specifically with “Fruitfulness.” I am eager to hear if he covers anything geared toward newlyweds in this set.
I have also ordered the book by JPII suggested by MariaGorettiGrl’s mom. I am eager to see what JPII has to say about this subject since she thinks there is something specific in there.

 

[Consecrated]

“Love and Responsibility” by JPII would seem to be a trusted source in this thread. This comes from chapter one “The Person and the Sexual Urge” (starting on page 66 in my wife’s copy)

It is interesting… PJII also mentions how mutuum adiutorium is often mis-interpreted as meaning “Mutual Love”

The book has a lot more to say… my feeble mind has a difficult time understanding much of it. For those who can… I recommend you pick up a copy. (My wife does say that its is a bit easier to understand than “Theology of the Body”)

God bless you and Mary keep you.

I have read “Love and Responsibilty” as well. If you read further in the chapter frogman80 is quoting from, you will find that JPII makes an interesting point about the role that the virtue of Love plays in a marriage. It seems to me (and I could be misunderstanding) that to some people admitting that procreation is the primary purpose of marriage seems to preclude the fact that Love is most important within that sacrament:

Prometheum_x:

It does not seem reasonable to say that a man and a woman become married simply so they can acheive the end of procreation by morally legitimate means.

Of course this is not reasonable. It is also not the complete picture of the Church’s traditional teaching on the subject. As JPII points out in the chapter mentioned above, such a reason for marriage would bring the marriage act down to a utilitarian level. He explains it better:

…it seems clearly indicated that the mutuum adiutorium mentioned int he teaching of the Chrch on the pirposes of marriage as second in importance after procreation must not be interpreted-as it often is- to mean ‘mutual love’. Those who do this may mistakenly come to believe that procreation as the primary end is something distinct from ‘love’, as also is the tertiary end, remedium concupiscentiae, whereas both precreation and remedium concupiscentiae as purposes of marriage must result from love as a virtue (my emphasis). There are no grounds for interpreting the phrase mutuum adiutorium to mean ‘love’. For the Church, in arranging the objective purposes of love in a particular order, seeks to emphasize that procreation is objectively, ontologically, a more important purpose than that man and woman should live together, complement each other and support each other (mutuum adiutorium), just as this second purpose is in turn more important than the appeasement of natural desire. **But there is no question of opposing love to procreation not yet of suggesting that procreation takes precedence over love
** (my emphasis).

To say that procreation is primary is not to belittle the place that “mutuum adiutorium” has, but simply to put it into perspective. Also, to say that procreation is primary is not to deny that the Love (Charity) between the man and woman is the reason for everything in the first place: from the “I do” to the marriage act, and everything inbetween

Based on everything written here so far, would it be fair to say, vluvski, that your reason for using NFP after marriage would be to strengthen your “mutuum adiutorium” first in order to be better parents to your offspring later? I would submit that it is possible (in what you have said of your economic and spiritual situation) to strengthen all aspects of your marriage without sacrificing any of them by simply (! ) working on and praying for a strenghtening in the virtue of Charity. Is this too simplistic? Like Fortiterinre said, I think people make NFP (or periodic continence) too hard. I think that if you’re a God-fearing, sacrametally oriented couple, as you are, that you just KNOW when the time comes, the same way that you just KNOW you’re called to marry your fiance and have a large family.

Be at peace in the Heart of Mary

 

[Prometheum_x]

Consecrated:

I have read “Love and Responsibilty” as well. If you read further in the chapter frogman80 is quoting from, you will find that JPII makes an interesting point about the role that the virtue of Love plays in a marriage. It seems to me (and I could be misunderstanding) that to some people admitting that procreation is the primary purpose of marriage seems to preclude the fact that Love is most important within that sacrament:

Of course this is not reasonable. It is also not the complete picture of the Church’s traditional teaching on the subject. As JPII points out in the chapter mentioned above, such a reason for marriage would bring the marriage act down to a utilitarian level. He explains it better:

To say that procreation is primary is not to belittle the place that “mutuum adiutorium” has, but simply to put it into perspective. Also, to say that procreation is primary is not to deny that the Love (Charity) between the man and woman is the reason for everything in the first place: from the “I do” to the marriage act, and everything inbetween

Based on everything written here so far, would it be fair to say, vluvski, that your reason for using NFP after marriage would be to strengthen your “mutuum adiutorium” first in order to be better parents to your offspring later? I would submit that it is possible (in what you have said of your economic and spiritual situation) to strengthen all aspects of your marriage without sacrificing any of them by simply (! ) working on and praying for a strenghtening in the virtue of Charity. Is this too simplistic? Like Fortiterinre said, I think people make NFP (or periodic continence) too hard. I think that if you’re a God-fearing, sacrametally oriented couple, as you are, that you just KNOW when the time comes, the same way that you just KNOW you’re called to marry your fiance and have a large family.

Be at peace in the Heart of Mary

Thank you for stating in a succinct fashion what I have been thinking and trying to express.

To recap in my own terms (that make sense to me), in terms of cause and effect:

Love is the cause, the purposes/ends are the effects, in their appropriate order.

Problems arise when we strive to put those ends in a different order.

 

[Mike_McG]

vluvski:

A repost from Family Life…

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.

 

[Mike_McG]

The primary purpose of marriage is to help lead each other to heaven in a more efficient manner than would otherwise be possible going it alone. Therefore if it is God’s will for a couple to marry then by all means the couple should pursue this vocation for the benefit of the couple’s spiritual health. Children also play a role in this quest of the couple,and of course the entire family, to help lead each other to God.
It is my understanding NFP could be used at any point in the marriage for serious reasons. Now comes the tricky part, what is a serious reason? If a couple is practicing NFP out of selfishness(ie. children will cramp the lifestyle that I desire, I don’t want to spend financial resources on children even though I am well off because I want to accumulate things for myself or hoard as much money as I can, or I don’t want the responsibility of taking care of a child because it’s too much work) then it is not morally acceptable and would be a mortal sin. It is my understanding a couple does not have to postpone marriage even if the couple has a valid reason for practicing NFP from the get go. Sacramentally the couple is better off married. Also the temptation to fall into mortal sin via fornication is a non issue. I hope this helps. God Bless

 

[TheRam]

This tread has wonderful topic needs, as i found it, wanted to read the whole thing. Rest ashured i got half way through and gave up. There were to many short forms used over and over, that were never described, and then the impact was lost. (Starting with NFP…the list then goes on) I wish i could have followed, as education should never be wasted.

 

[Consecrated]

TheRam:

This tread has wonderful topic needs, as i found it, wanted to read the whole thing. Rest ashured i got half way through and gave up. There were to many short forms used over and over, that were never described, and then the impact was lost. (Starting with NFP…the list then goes on) I wish i could have followed, as education should never be wasted.

TheRam, Does this mean that you think the thread got off topic? Thank you!

 

[Feanaro_s_Wife]

TheRam:

There were to many short forms used over and over, that were never described, and then the impact was lost. (Starting with NFP…the list then goes on) I wish i could have followed, as education should never be wasted.

Please just ask for an explaination anytime you see acronyms that you are not familiar with. Sometimes we take them for granted and use them because (honestly? they are quicker to type ).

So I will start with NFP. It stands for Natural Family Planning.

I think I have also used the term STM here. It stands for Sympto-Thermal Method (a type of NFP)

I hope you can get everything cleared up so that you can learn as much as possible here!

Malia

 

[Feanaro_s_Wife]

Oh, and ABC stands for Artificial Birth Control.

 

[cynic]

Mike McG:

The primary purpose of marriage is to help lead each other to heaven in a more efficient manner than would otherwise be possible going it alone.

This is a cold, rational, impersonal view of marriage. Each person is ensuring their own spiritual interests…exsqueezme, which part of the Bible demands that spouses view each other solely in this manner?

Is it so hard to believe that genuine fondness and desire to please the other are good enough reasons to marry?

 

[johnnyjoe]

vluvski,

In general, you have good insight into the knot of this issue - the “serious reason” debate - and have been getting good advice and encouragement in this thread.

Let me offer a few comments as the lesser half of a NFP teaching couple for the Couple to Couple League. [www.ccli.org]](www.ccli.org])

First, Natural Family Planning (a term slightly derided above, and quite frankly is imprecise) is only the gathering of information. It has no moral value in and of itself, but rather reveals information that may be the causality for moral, or immoral, actions. The term appears to imply that this information is what is the “planning”, when in reality, it is only the source from which the planning arises. It may appear to be a distinction without a difference, but let me expound a bit further to illustrate.

NFP is not Catholic Contraception. The practice of NFP as a pattern of actions that constitute information gathering, takes no action that impedes the conception of a child.

Now a couple may use that information to commit a sin of selfishness by not engaging in the marital act when they don’t have a “serious reason”; or commit a sin of imprudence by engaging in the marital act when the conception of a child might cause difficulty for all involved - children & parents. Now defining these actions as “sins” is problematic, for what we can discuss in generality, cannot hold for the individual per se. Or more succinctly, it just depends.

I have known families where the conception of another child was percieved to be absolutely irresponsible, only to see the coming of this new life define not the couple who had the child, but those who held judgement against them for having more. I have known individuals who look at one of our student couples and make a comment to the effect that they were being selfish because they only had two children - I had to gently correct them by letting them know the couple in question were suffering great heartache with infertility and multiple miscarriages.

One of the great problems of modern NFP is it’s own success. We start to believe we are really in charge, and we can concieve a child whenever we like. There was a couple who wrote in the CCL “Family Foundations” magazine that they really were in a quandry on thier wedding night. They were in the fertile phase on their honeymoon, and were financially unprepared to start a family, but chose to consumate their marriage on thier honeymoon and trust in God. They concieved a son, and had never had another after 8 years of trying. How would thier lives be different if they had not trusted God on thier honeymoon.

I say learn NFP with confidence…get to know your body and your cycle, and listen for the small quiet voice of the Holy Spirit. Know your cycle that you might know what to expect - an exercise of prudence - and pray to the Holy Spirit that you might know his will - an exercise of openness to life. Otherwise, don’t wring your hands. Enjoy your youth and your energy and let the great irrationality of being a faithful Catholic take you on the exhilirating ride of LIFE!

 

[Mike_McG]

cynic:

This is a cold, rational, impersonal view of marriage. Each person is ensuring their own spiritual interests…exsqueezme, which part of the Bible demands that spouses view each other solely in this manner?

Is it so hard to believe that genuine fondness and desire to please the other are good enough reasons to marry?

 

[TheRam]

Consecrated:

TheRam, Does this mean that you think the thread got off topic? Thank you!

No, i was interested in the topic…but could not understand the terminology because they were in shortforms…using innitials. Simply put, i started off interested in what was acceptable and my ears were perked. So i read on…after half the thread…i still did not know what was acceptable (“NFP”) in a marriage. I really do want to try to understand, but i am so GREEN to the terminology.

 

[TheRam]

Would this be the right thread to ask how i fall into this catagory if my husband has had a vasectomy and wants no other children ever!

I have to admit that i would fear another pregnancy with him, as i have been deserted in more ways than one. How can one try and stay on ones path with the Lord if the opposite party in a marriage refuses to even acknowlege faith, morality…or me!

Needles to say, Four years of marriage, and only shared intimacies 3 times. I must tell you that my 2 children by him were concieved outside of a marriage. I fought to change my patterns, return to god, and start to answer every call i heard wispered in my ears or heart. I was married, and since then…my husband is no longer interested, as i am a financial catastrophe. (Do i need to tell you that he severely has his head in the sand and goes to great lengths to keep me away…like not bathing, and the list goes on)

I have struggled to communicate, but have found it all fall on deaf ears.

Thanks, by the way for the definitions guys…i am glad i wandered in here!

 

[Mike_McG]

CCC 1601 "The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring;

CCC 1641"By reason of their state in life and of their order,(Christian spouses) have their own special gifts in the People of God." This grace proper to the sacrament of Matrimony is intended to perfect the couple’s love and to strenghten their indissoluble unity. By this grace they “help one another to attain holiness in their married life and in welcoming and educating their children.”

Of course fondness and the desire to please one another are not sufficient reasons to marry. Love between the couple is presupposed. By love I do not mean some whimsical feeling that is subject to change at any given moment in time. I mean a conscious decision of the will to desire the best thing possible for the spouse (ie. heaven). Characteristics of this love should echo Christ’s love for us and include permanence, self-sacrifice, and forgiveness. This type of committed love will not only satisfy us, but more importantly will please God. Such a love is hardly cold and utilitarian.

I have referenced the Catechism of the Catholic Church. If you are Catholic it will likely be an acceptable source, if you are not then you may have a problem with it. As the couple helps each other attain holiness they are leading each other to Christ. Hope this helps clarify my post. God Bless

 

[seeker63]

I’ve sort of skimmed this thread, but admit I was led to believe NFP was 100% okay for Catholic couples, without any reservations or conditions.

When I was in RCIA last year they devoted a lot of time to marriage, divorce, sex, NFP, cohabitation, annulments, etc., material which frankly didn’t interest me as much as the other things covered, since I’m 41 and unmarried and with no prospects on the horizon. Anyway, NFP was presented as a legit technique, though the old rhythm method was regarded as pretty much useless.

Don’t kill the messenger–I’m just reporting.

 

[Consecrated]

seeker63:

I’ve sort of skimmed this thread, but admit I was led to believe NFP was 100% okay for Catholic couples…

Yes, this is true.

seeker63:

…100% okay for Catholic couples, without any reservations or conditions…

The second part is not. There needs to be a serious reason why a couple decides to purposely postpone having children. Since procreation is the primary purpose of marriage, interfering with this for the wrong reasons, or without reason at all will take away from Marriage.

 

[frogman80]

Mike McG:

The primary purpose of marriage is to help lead each other to heaven in a more efficient manner than would otherwise be possible going it alone.

According to the Church, JPII, and some of the Fathers of our Faith… “Mutual Assistance” is the secondary purpose of marriage.

 

[YinYangMom]

TheRam:

Would this be the right thread to ask how i fall into this catagory if my husband has had a vasectomy and wants no other children ever!

I have to admit that i would fear another pregnancy with him, as i have been deserted in more ways than one. How can one try and stay on ones path with the Lord if the opposite party in a marriage refuses to even acknowlege faith, morality…or me!

Needles to say, Four years of marriage, and only shared intimacies 3 times. I must tell you that my 2 children by him were concieved outside of a marriage. I fought to change my patterns, return to god, and start to answer every call i heard wispered in my ears or heart. I was married, and since then…my husband is no longer interested, as i am a financial catastrophe. (Do i need to tell you that he severely has his head in the sand and goes to great lengths to keep me away…like not bathing, and the list goes on)

I have struggled to communicate, but have found it all fall on deaf ears.

Thanks, by the way for the definitions guys…i am glad i wandered in here!

Yours is a whole other issue, Ram, as your husband isn’t even trying to maintain sexual relations with you.

How would you fear another pregnancy by him if he’s had a vasectomy?

In any case…on the off chance his vasectomy didn’t work and he can still get you pregnant…because you are married, you’re wondering if you’re obliged to remain open to another child with him…

From your description, your marriage is unstable, at best. You already have two children by him, you mention you are a financial catastrophe, and that your husband doesn’t bathe, etc. while living with his head in the sand.

I don’t see the love there that would produce a child. If relations occured between you too, I would be concerned it was out of lust and not mutual love and praise for God, so I would think your practicing NFP would almost be a requirement, not just an option. At least until you get your marriage back on track.

When you get a moment, sit down and speak to the priest who married you two…you could use some real support.

 

[TheRam]

YinYangMom:

I don’t see the love there that would produce a child. If relations occured between you too, I would be concerned it was out of lust and not mutual love and praise for God, so I would think your practicing NFP would almost be a requirement, not just an option. At least until you get your marriage back on track.

When you get a moment, sit down and speak to the priest who married you two…you could use some real support.

I have to thank you for not telling me everything i did to not be accepted in Gods arms. It is hard to trust enough to tell the truth and hope it falls on truth delivered with love.

As for my marriage, yes it is on the rocks terribly. But i made a prommise to God, and i will eventually work this out. I have to take responsibility for choosing my own path, instead of choosing it with God. I am sure i would have done things differently. I do not wish my babes away ever, but i will try more now to do things with the Lord.

I have chosen to stand back, and totally disconnect with my husband. The more my acts of being a Good Christian came, the further he became connected. He has chosen to completely disreguard anything we say, speeks over us, comes and goes when he pleases, drinks and drives, does not come home from work (drunk), and hated what my oldest son of a previous marriage, represented and was very hurtful to his self esteme.

I fought many times about the unfairness of his actions, and he seemed to thrive on them, as he felt he was in controle of his subordinates…his family. I lost this prescious older son a year and a half ago, just before his 19th birthday…my husband wanted him in a rental casket. I think that was when i mentally snapped. I fell apart with this loss, he laughed at me, told me to get over it and walked away. He was sucking the life out of me.

So i decided to move away from the damage he was doing. That meant disconnecting from him. I want to get closer to God, strengthen my mental and spiritual health, make going back to school to re-educate myself a priority (half days, as i have a family to) and totally live as if his oppinion does not count. It has unnerved him. I reafirm to him when he asks a question, that it is my business, a seperate entity to him. It will not be discussed, because i do not value his oppinion.

I am no longer on the floor crying all the time, my life is willing to place the lord at a much better perspective in my life…but i am knowlegeable in the getting close to the lord, experiencing the holy spirit, but i am very green on the actual facts and traditions of my own faith…so i look here!

Once i did this daily with my son, but i have no one to do it with anymore. There are no christian people i know, as my life is very secluded in the small farm town community. My priest has sent me packing several times refering me to a church 45 min drive from here. He was a good administer of the church, but did not have the skills to sheppard. But after 7 years, we finally got a new priest…i am so happy, as there is hope!