When is NFP morally permissible?

[Shiann]

Black Jaque:

Shiann,

I can’t tell if you’re agreeing with me or not.

Your point is exactly why this tripe about when NFP is morally permissible is rubbish. Because if NFP is not inherently open to life, then the ABC argument that it is no different morally speeking is correct.

I can see your point. Though I’m not sure I agree, because statistically speaking, ABC is at least 5% open to life as well…

That’s why I brought up the other points used by pro-ABC’ers and the fact that both methods are morally equivalent when NFP was used inappropriately.

But each and every act of NFP is open to life. Therefore, no sin.

Again, I can see your point. But I just cannot take the leap that regardless of intent, it is never wrong to NFP to prevent children indefinitely. It seems like such an oxymoron to me. I can completely understand using NFP in some of the situations offered here on the thread- medical and financial both. But postponing because one only wishes to have 2 children for no good reason- just doesn’t seem like something God would be proud that I and my spouse were doing.

In fact, it seems like God is completely missing from that situation. And I guess that when we begin to make decisions without taking God into account FIRST- that’s when I believe the quality and morality of the decision starts to break down.

I’m not going to put lables like MORTAL or VENIAL or even SIN for that matter, on using NFP to prevent pregnancy. I’m certainly no theologian- but something just nags at the back of this argument that suggests this is very wrong. We should be willing to welcome children when able- and we should not be preventing pregnancies for an indefinate amount of time (again for no good reason). Maybe reading more dialogue and more debate will shake those thoughts loose for me.

But as of now, I offer you the point as I have no real evidence for my position.

You may be a covetous illigitimate, but you’re not sinning by using NFP.

Again, by using God’s design against Him, just seems wrong to me. I cannot think of any parallel arguments or evidence why- but it just feels like I’m moving against traffic on a one way street when I think of it.

Plus, for NFP to prevent pregnancy with 99% effectiveness you have to practice it 100% correctly. That’s not easy.

Not generally- but if you want it bad enough, anything is possible. I could probably set the time on my cycle so NFP to prevent pregnancy forever would work for me. Could things go awry one month? Certainly. And would that mean that I was open to life? Well my biology certainly is. I’m not doing anything to actively prevent conception if it occured at a time I did not expect. But my intent is still to prevent pregancy- forever if possible.

Look at it this way. People who are greedily pursuing a Mercedes Benz, along with the mansion and the white picket fence, are possibly hedonistic, and buying these things on credit anyway. What do you think the chances are that they will have the discipline to wait through the hottest part of the cycle?

Again, you are right on the money. But there are many conservative couples I know that aren’t the materialistic hedonists described here. But they have this negative impression of people with large families and for the sake of vanity or pride or whatever- just do not wish to be saddled with 4 or 5 or even 8 kids. It certainly isn’t that they cannot afford it, they most often don’t believe that they could handle it- and do not trust that God will provide (I don’t mean financially- but provide inner strength).

They are comfortable living in their larger homes, driving their nice cars (not full sized vans), and just don’t want to make the extra sacrifices necessary to freely allow the number of children God gave them. I think it a bit of a shame, but I can certainly understand them wanting to provide college educations and some of those other perks that wouldn’t probably be available with 4 or more kids in the family.

Again, my post wasn’t really to agree or disagree with any you or any of the other posters here (except those who are pro ABC ). I guess I was clarifying my own thoughts. But I was prompted by your post in particular, as I had never heard that perspective on NFP. It didn’t sit quite right with me, but not because of anything you said that was completely incorrect, but because of the seemingly inherent obstruction of God’s will if that logic was followed to it’s end.

Does it make it a sin to practice NFP for complete contraception? My guess would be that it was at the very least displeasing to God- but again, I’m no theologian so the nuts and bolts of it- I leave to them.

Good post!

 

[Ana]

Shiann:

If the fact that there is some portion of 1% statistical chance that one might become pregnant anyway- doesn’t discount the fact that the couple using NFP as a permanent method of contraception really isn’t doing anything different than those couples using other artificial methods.

Many contracepting Christian couples have given the argument that NFP use is inherently NO different than artificial contraception. So why shouldn’t they be able to use ABC anyway? In substance, they are absolutely correct. There IS NO difference between indefinite NFP use and ABC when looking at the biological contraception aspect.

So there must be another difference that makes NFP morally superior to ABC.

NFPers say that it is ‘remaining open to life’. But how can a couple claim that when statistically speaking NFP is nearly as effective as abstinence? The fact remains that the intent of a couple practicing indefinate NFP without valid reasons is still contraceptive in nature. They are just choosing to use the biological pattern that God gave them to go against God’s creationary plan and avoid children indefinately for invalid reasons.

But there IS a difference. NFP is not contraception, because the conception is never prevented during the sexual act. Ideally speaking, when conception is possible, the couple wishing to not conceive ABSTAINS. Abstinance is not contraception. If by weakness, choice, inexperience etc., marital relations do occur on a fertile day, there is nothing preventing the possibility of conception. This is a FUNDAMENTAL difference that needs to be explained clearly to your friends.

The ends are the same (no baby), but the means (ABC vs. NFP) are not. NFP uses abstinance out of respect for the days which God has set aside as creationary, whereas ABC takes these days for pleasure while deliberately hindering God’s creationary process.

If a couple is using NFP for invalid reasons, it is the couple’s sin, not that NFP is sinful.

If I abuse food, I have commited a sin. Food is not in and of itself sinful. Only human beings are capable of sin. The sin lies with the person, the food is morally nuetral. An instrument to be used to serve ourselves or God. NFP is not in and of itself sinful, it is a recognition of a biological pattern. This can be used to serve oneself or God. Food and our biological patterns are NATURAL. Created by God who made all things good. It is we who misuse them. ABC is not. ABC takes the days God has set aside as His to create life if he so chooses, and rendering them hostile to the very One who created us that way.

That is why ABC (except for medical purposes) is ALWAYS sinful. In fact IF one is morally permitted to take the pill for medical purposes, the couple is still required to abstain on days of possible conception, because of the abortificiant qualities. In other words the couple would use NFP to allow for the therapuetic ends while PREVENTING the pill being used as a contraceptive.

I really struggled trying to be clear, I hope this made sense.

God bless!

 

[Shiann]

Ana:

But there IS a difference. NFP is not contraception, because the conception is never prevented during the sexual act. Ideally speaking, when conception is possible, the couple wishing to not conceive ABSTAINS. Abstinance is not contraception. If by weakness, choice, inexperience etc., marital relations do occur on a fertile day, there is nothing preventing the possibility of conception. This is a FUNDAMENTAL difference that needs to be explained clearly to your friends.

But abstinance within the context of a marriage IS contraception if done to specifically prevent pregnancy. There are, of course, situations where a couple may choose to abstain due to reasons other than trying to contracept. (Such as if the woman had a medical condition and sexual relations would be painful.) Here the initial reason for abstaining is for the comfort of the wife- a secondary result would be no babies.

I guess what I’m saying- is that if abstinence is used (AGAIN, for indiscriminate contraception) this just seems wrong.

The ends are the same (no baby), but the means (ABC vs. NFP) are not. NFP uses abstinance out of respect for the days which God has set aside as creationary, whereas ABC takes these days for pleasure while deliberately hindering God’s creationary process.

Agreed, I have used this point myself on several occassions to point out the differences between licit use of NFP and ABC. But when abstinence is used to contracept (indiscriminately) then we are taking control of the creationary process- and leaving God out of it; ironically, by using the very biological gifts God gave us. We abstain to prevent any/more children- we do not abstain to strengthen the family unit through financial or medical prudence.

Look at it this way: Is a couple doing something wrong if they use NFP to have NO children?

If a couple is using NFP for invalid reasons, it is the couple’s sin, not that NFP is sinful.

Yup, I don’t recall saying NFP was sinfull- in fact I completely support NFP. I have tried to be clear on that. And I also believe you are correct when you say that the error doesn’t fall with the process (NFP) but with the intent of the couple. It IS wrong for a couple to abstain when they have no good reason to.

If I abuse food, I have commited a sin. Food is not in and of itself sinful. Only human beings are capable of sin. The sin lies with the person, the food is morally nuetral. An instrument to be used to serve ourselves or God. NFP is not in and of itself sinful, it is a recognition of a biological pattern. This can be used to serve oneself or God. Food and our biological patterns are NATURAL. Created by God who made all things good. It is we who misuse them. ABC is not. ABC takes the days God has set aside as His to create life if he so chooses, and rendering them hostile to the very One who created us that way.

Exactly my point. Our free will gives us the opportunity to do good or do bad with the tools given to us by God. It seems wrong to me to use one of those tools- (our biological cycle for reproduction) - against God’s creationary process for illicit reasons.

That is why ABC (except for medical purposes) is ALWAYS sinful. In fact IF one is morally permitted to take the pill for medical purposes, the couple is still required to abstain on days of possible conception, because of the abortificiant qualities. In other words the couple would use NFP to allow for the therapuetic ends while PREVENTING the pill being used as a contraceptive.

Completely agree here too.

In the case of ABC, I am actively and purposefully using a foreign item to prevent babies. Like inviting God to the creationary process (by having sex) and then slamming the door on God’s face.

Using abstinence licitly- God is always welcome, but sometimes my spouse and I prudently decide to postpone the creationary process- but never indefinately.

Using abstinence illicitly- God is technically welcome to come, but we go out of our way to avoid inviting Him into the creationary process indefinitely. My spouse and I enjoy the marital embrace, but we choose to avoid the other half of the marital embrace (children). NFP isn’t at fault! It is the decision that I and/or my husband have made to indefinitely ignore God’s creationary plan in our lives which is wrong.

I really struggled trying to be clear, I hope this made sense.

God bless!

You were very clear And I agree with everything you’ve posted.

 

[Black_Jaque]

It IS wrong for a couple to abstain when they have no good reason to.

Would you be willing to admit that headaches simply cured by Tylenol do not fall under the category of “good reasons”? Tee-hee

But postponing because one only wishes to have 2 children for no good reason- just doesn’t seem like something God would be proud that I and my spouse were doing.

Right, but discerning the number of children a couple should have is like discerning your vocation. Is it a sin not to become a priest? It is if you’re called to be a priest. How do you know if you’re called to be a priest? Part of the discernment is if you desire to be a priest. So if a young man never wanted to be a priest gets married, should he worry about whether he sinned?

Likewise, how does a couple know if they are called to have more children? Well, if one spouse or both spouses desire more children that is a big sign.

I post my responses rather harshly because I can imagine people who are thinking about NFP can read threads like this and despair that being Catholic is hopeless. You’re damned if you do damned if you don’t. Or people will conclude that there is really no moral difference between NFP and ABC.

This entire discussion could achieve the same ends, and be a lot more constructive if the thread title was “How do you discern if you should have more children?” Same difference isn’t it?

Plus, we must give a lot of latitude for people who lack eloquence. A man who says, “I’ve already got two, that’s it! Finito!” Could just lack the eloquence to say, “The first two pregnancies nearly killed my wife. In my moments of solitude, I’ve thought this issue over, and I do not think God is calling us to have more children. But we will continue to use NFP, and if my discernment is inaccurate, I will trust God to put the desire for more children in our hearts.”

I know more than one man who says things as if he were shooting from the hip. But upon further inquiry, I’ve learned that his comments are well thought out, researched - just boiled down to be very concise, almost rash sounding.

Hence, when I say, “This whole debate about NFP being morally permissible is a bunch of rubbish!” Sounds harsh, and rash, but I don’t just throw that out thoughtlessly.

 

[char34]

“Likewise, how does a couple know if they are called to have more children? Well, if one spouse or both spouses desire more children that is a big sign.”

Are infertile couples sinning by not conceiving children they desire?

I was told it is never sinful if a couple chooses not to practice NFP, but it can be sinful if NFP is not used for serious reasons. God may very well intend for you to have a child whether you desire one or not…remember, God is ultimately in control.

 

[Ana]

“Likewise, how does a couple know if they are called to have more children? Well, if one spouse or both spouses desire more children that is a big sign.”

Are infertile couples sinning by not conceiving children they desire? .

I think he was assuming they were fertile.

*"*I was told it is never sinful if a couple chooses not to practice NFP, but it can be sinful if NFP is not used for serious reasons. God may very well intend for you to have a child whether you desire one or not…remember, God is ultimately in control.

It is from our desires that we know what we want to do. It’s a matter of discerning whether a particular desire is rooted in God, the devil, or our flesh.

St. Thomas Aquinas advises to bring our desires before God in prayer, asking Him to grant our desire IF it is His Will, and to remove this desire from us if it is not.

I disagree that to not use NFP is NEVER sinful.

This is a true scenario using psuedonyms. I am privy to the details of this family by the closeness of our relationship.

Fran and Stan have been married for 7 yrs. Stan is in a wheelchair, has been diagnosed with bipolar disorder, and has an extremely high pressure job (similar to an air traffic controller). He is not Catholic. Fran is a devout Catholic. She remains open to life and refuses to use NFP (she believes those who do, do not “trust God”). She is sincere and sacrifices much to stay home with her numerous children and she also homeschools. She is a wonderful and sincere woman (but we all know one can be sincerely wrong). Stan for a long time has been overwhelmed even to the point of being committed in the recent past due to a mental breakdown. He frequently voices his frustration and feelings of being overwhelmed to his wife.

But because she believes that she should allow GOD ALONE to decide how many children she has, she completely disregards her husbands desires and needs and insists on “free falling.” But in my opinion, it is not God alone who is deciding how many children they have, but nature. And the husband is certainly being discluded from any sort of decision making as to how many children they have. In my eyes he is almost being victimized by being forced to accept more children that he desires, with no active part in the decision making process (except to refrain from marital intercourse from his wife, and without NFP it would have to be complete abstinance which loses the unitive aspect of sex along with the proceative).

IMO she is being uncharitable and unloving in NOT taking her husbands emotional state into account, and use NFP to allow her husband (while praying for him) to catch his breath and make some changes in his life that might perhaps free him to be open to more children. God gave us free will precisely because he desires us to love, obey and serve Him FREELY. He does not FORCE us. He is merciful and patient.

To not use NFP and hide behind “trusting God” to the EXCLUSION of the other spouse’s needs I believe certainly CAN be sinful.

Trusting God is no excuse to be lazy. I can trust God that I will find employment, but I am still required to use ALL WITHIN MY MEANS to find employment while I am trusting to Him the outcome.

Fran has no excuse to be so utterly disregarding of her husbands feelings, discrediting them in her heart because he is not Catholic (he is still her husband, and Catholic or not he has a right to be part of the decision). Not when there is a moral way to be receptive to his needs and respectful of his rightful authority as her husband, as well as being obedient to the Church. There would be no sin involved in this instance by charitably and lovingly using NFP out of love for her husband stemming from her love of God. But it certainly seems sinful to be selfish and insist on a large family in spite of her husbands valid reasons for wanting to postpone having children indefinitely … FORCING him to do so.

The result has been an increasing amount of resentment on the part of the husband and the wife, and an increasing amount of marital discord. cont.

 

[Black_Jaque]

Are infertile couples sinning by not conceiving children they desire?

Duh! No, of course not.

God may very well intend for you to have a child whether you desire one or not…remember, God is ultimately in control.

Right, if this was the case (where a couple didn’t desire pregnancy but God did), do you think God would keep silent? What sorts of ways do you think He’d use to get his message across?

 

[Ana]

To the eyes of one reading this couples tax return, (married with a large number of children) those who presume to know God’s Will and believe EVERYONE that is PHYSICALLY able should have as many children as nature will allow, will probably self satisfyingly smile to themselves in admiration of this wonderfully holy family. But a walk past an open window of their home belies the truth.

I wonder if an accurate presenting and living of the Church’s teaching (which allows NFP) would help to break down some of his animosity towards the Church. As of now, the false Church teaching he is being shown by his wife, he has a right to feel resentful and resistant towards the lie he is being FORCED to live because of the wife’s prejudice (and ultimately dissenting from the Church’s teaching which allows NFP for serious reasons).

And this is only one of many true examples I could present by those who do not actively and prayerfully discern how many children God is calling their particular family to have, but instead allow nature to choose.

With more knowledge comes responsibility. We have made great strides in the medical field. This knowledge should not be ignored, but used to serve God in ever closer conformity to His Will.

To not use NFP when there is a serious and valid reason to avoid pregnancy, I believe can not only be sinful but also at best lazy and at worst presumptious.

We are not passive puppets in the act of conception, and we should use whatever knowledge God in His perfect timing allows to be revealed, to better rise to our dignity and live our vocation as CO-creators of His children.

.

 

[Ana]

Black Jaque:

This entire discussion could achieve the same ends, and be a lot more constructive if the thread title was “How do you discern if you should have more children?” Same difference isn’t it?.

:yup: You hit the nail on the head!

 

[Ana]

Shian,

The Church declares in order for a couple to be married in the Church they MUST be open to children. But as to how many, this same Church declares that is up to the husband and wife to generously and prayerfully discern before God HOW MANY to have.

We cannot judge even others who claim they don’t think they can handle another child. We must assume that they know better than we (knowing much more about there own family than we do) whether or not it would be prudent to seek or avoid pregnancy.

And if they say never … so what … it doesn’t necessarily mean never, as black jacque pointed out. God can change anyones heart, and if they are close enough to God to care enough to use NFP, a method which involves much more effort and self sacrifice, than they are certainly a helluva lot better off than those who add to sin by taking up weapons used by the culture of death.

God bless!!

 

[stadre]

Our reason for NFP use is not listed in the poll. We are trying to conceive. We have been trying for the last 5 1/2 years (with the exception of the three months I was pregnant before I miscarried).

It is also possible to use NFP for medical reasons. (ie. Finding the right time to take progesterone to avoid PMS.)

 

[Shiann]

Black Jaque:

Would you be willing to admit that headaches simply cured by Tylenol do not fall under the category of “good reasons”? Tee-hee

Some would say yes LOL

Right, but discerning the number of children a couple should have is like discerning your vocation. Is it a sin not to become a priest? It is if you’re called to be a priest. How do you know if you’re called to be a priest? Part of the discernment is if you desire to be a priest. So if a young man never wanted to be a priest gets married, should he worry about whether he sinned?

It’s funny you bring that up. As I’ve been pursuing this train of thought, discerning vocations kept coming to mind. Because both are focused on God’s Will in our lives.

You are completely correct, that part of the discernment IS a desire to be a priest. Obviously if one does not feel called to it, it wouldn’t seem to be displeasing to God. And he should certainly never worry about it if he should marry.

But we are talking about people who have CHOSEN the marriage vocation. Inherent in that vocation is the openess to God Will regarding children. If a single person does not feel compelled to have any children- it isn’t a sin for them to never marry! But it would seem to me, that same person is doing some wrong by entering into a marriage and then going against God’s creationary will for that marriage by purposefully avoiding children indefinately.

Likewise, how does a couple know if they are called to have more children? Well, if one spouse or both spouses desire more children that is a big sign.

That is a difficult discernment. And this is where prayerfull contemplation is absolutely necessary.

I post my responses rather harshly because I can imagine people who are thinking about NFP can read threads like this and despair that being Catholic is hopeless. You’re damned if you do damned if you don’t. Or people will conclude that there is really no moral difference between NFP and ABC.

Agreed. I very rarely ever go this deep into this debate (in a forum setting). I am always worried that something I might write may be misinterpreted, and sway someone away from NFP.

But on the other hand, there really are duties involved with each of the vocations and children ARE a part of the married life vocation. Those who were married in the Catholic Church should have become aware of that during their marital preparation, and those who are looking into Catholicism should be aware of the philosophy as well.

This entire discussion could achieve the same ends, and be a lot more constructive if the thread title was “How do you discern if you should have more children?” Same difference isn’t it?

It is indeed.

Plus, we must give a lot of latitude for people who lack eloquence. A man who says, “I’ve already got two, that’s it! Finito!” Could just lack the eloquence to say, “The first two pregnancies nearly killed my wife. In my moments of solitude, I’ve thought this issue over, and I do not think God is calling us to have more children. But we will continue to use NFP, and if my discernment is inaccurate, I will trust God to put the desire for more children in our hearts.”

I know more than one man who says things as if he were shooting from the hip. But upon further inquiry, I’ve learned that his comments are well thought out, researched - just boiled down to be very concise, almost rash sounding.

Hence, when I say, “This whole debate about NFP being morally permissible is a bunch of rubbish!” Sounds harsh, and rash, but I don’t just throw that out thoughtlessly.

Point taken

 

[Shiann]

Ana:

Shiann,

The Church declares in order for a couple to be married in the Church they MUST be open to children. But as to how many, this same Church declares that is up to the husband and wife to generously and prayerfully discern before God HOW MANY to have.

Agreed.

We cannot judge even others who claim they don’t think they can handle another child. We must assume that they know better than we (knowing much more about there own family than we do) whether or not it would be prudent to seek or avoid pregnancy.

I’m not proposing that we go around telling people that they are sinning in some way because they choose to limit the numbers of their children for any reason!

But that does not discount the fact that each and every married couple has an obligation to not practice abstinence to avoid children if they have no good reason to do so.

I am certainly not going to shun anyone who only has 2 kids- any more than I would those who have none or 10! Nor would I contemplate their eternal destination. We are forbidden from that kind of judgment- and they deserve my prayers more than condemnations anyway.

But having children is a part of a faithful married life, and the OP asked for advice.

And if they say never … so what … it doesn’t necessarily mean never, as black jacque pointed out. God can change anyones heart, and if they are close enough to God to care enough to use NFP, a method which involves much more effort and self sacrifice, than they are certainly a helluva lot better off than those who add to sin by taking up weapons used by the culture of death.

Ok… but I’m speaking of those people still making the decision, not what may or may not happen after. I do not believe it is pleasing to God for people to limit the number of children through abstinence for no good reason. What “good reason” is- is different for everyone and must be regularly determined by the spouses, God and a spiritual director if necessary.

I agree, a couple using NFP is probably more prayerful, and WAY more open to life than those using ABC. But again, when an NFP couple “just doesn’t want kids right now”- it seems to go against the very philosophy they practice.

 

[Black_Jaque]

But again, when an NFP couple “just doesn’t want kids right now”- it seems to go against the very philosophy they practice.

Yep. Zactly. And man cannot serve two masters. Trust God, their hearts will change.

But that does not discount the fact that each and every married couple has an obligation to not practice abstinence to avoid children if they have no good reason to do so.

Hmmm. I think we agree on the concept, but disagree on the semantics. How 'bout, “each and every married couple has an obligation to obey God if he’s calling them to have more children?”

This takes us away from judging whether “I don’t want any more” is a good enough reason, and moves us to “In what ways could God be speaking to me about this?”

 

[char34]

Ana, I am afraid we cannot know the details of what that family is going through, that is quite a story however! Did the wife try to have as many kids as possible, or just open to having more? Why didn’t the husband insist on ABC then if he was a non Catholic? Perhaps the fact that he went along with his wife being open to life WAS God’s will. You must admit that situation is very unusual, even most Catholics use ABC! It seems miraculous how my personal life turned out considering how it began, I doubted my husband would have agreed to anything other than ABC. He eventually converted and agreed to NFP…but it didn’t work as “planned”. The difference with us is we DID attempt NFP many times but it didn’t work as well as it seems to with others…which was probably the way God wanted it. We were way to stubborn to consider more than 2 or 3, I guess God “forced” more kids on us! All I know is I don’t think God ever regrets any of his creations, even if all of us are suspicious. Who are we to say certain people should never have been born? Unfortunately we try to analyze things so much, thinking we know better than God.

 

[char34]

Right, if this was the case (where a couple didn’t desire pregnancy but God did), do you think God would keep silent? What sorts of ways do you think He’d use to get his message across?

In our case, I always thought we were “called” to avoid, so we tried yet conceived anyways. I think I was too influenced by society telling us we must stop at 2 or 3, so maybe I never prayed about it enough so God found a way. In our case, this was not following NFP rules correctly! For others, it can even be as simple as the inability to abstain at a particular time, having the opportunity and no interruptions? Sometimes the desire is greater than the need to avoid.

 

[Ana]

char34:

Ana, I am afraid we cannot know the details of what that family is going through.

I do she is my best friend.

char34:

Did the wife try to have as many kids as possible, or just open to having more? Why didn’t the husband insist on ABC then if he was a non Catholic?.

The wife takes a passive approach and allows nature to choose how many children she has.The husband did not insist on NFP because he does not even know it exists (as most). Alll he knew was that Catholicism condems ABC. I mentioned in the story that the wife believes NFP is a sign of distrust in God. So, there was no reason in her mind to bring it up as an option before her husband.

char34:

Perhaps the fact that he went along with his wife being open to life WAS God’s will…

The husband had no choice. ALL things are in God’s permissive will, but not necessarily His particular will. For instance, we cannot say that abortion is God’s particular will, but we can say that is is within His permissive will, and trust that in His might, He can bring good from ALL things (even consequences of sin), but that He never directly wills sin, only allows it. The fact that the husband has stuck around and not sought divorce is indicative of God’s grace, esp. because the husband has no spiritual incentive for avoiding divorce.

char34:

You must admit that situation is very unusual, even most Catholics use ABC.

It is unusual in the fact that she sees the truth of the evils of contraception. But unfortunately, it is not so unusual among the families who use the excuse of “trusting God” to completely disregard thier husband’s needs and feelings. I know another woman, whose husband is Catholic and begged his wife to use NFP, but like the other woman, she thought it was sinful, and never even considered her husband’s desires. They have eight beautiful children and their marriage is hanging by a thread.These people by seeing NFP as sinful when the Church has said it is not, are dissenting. I did not imply that their children should not have been born, only that by dissenting from the Church, they are losing opportunities for graces that might have otherwise been had, in that particular area of their lives, the relationship between husband and wife. I am not arguing the beauty and dignity of the children born. As all of us do in areas of our lives that we sin. Can God bring a greater good, yes. I also know of many beautiful large families, that are a result of the wife and husbands MUTUAL desire to have many children. The husband and wife relationship is glorius to behold.

char34:

All I know is I don’t think God ever regrets any of his creations, even if all of us are suspicious. Who are we to say certain people should never have been born? Unfortunately we try to analyze things so much, thinking we know better than God.

God certainly has repented of making man, as Scripture tells us, but His love for us is stronger.I was pregnant at fifteen. Should I have been engaging in premarital sex? No. Was my baby a result of sin? Yes. Should my baby have not been born? God allowed it to happen, and gave my baby a soul, because He is so good. He also has a treasure of graces for this child and myself because He is so good and has promised us He will never leave us. But He did not WILL that I engage in premarital sex, He allowed me to exercise my free will. In His creationary plan, He made it so that sexual encounters can result in a baby (even rape). ANYONE that is able to conceive, may have a baby as a result of a sexual encounter. And because God is so good, we can trust that He will keep His promises. I don’t believe anyone has said that no one should have been born, except for the pro-choicers.

 

[Ana]

char34:

Unfortunately we try to analyze things so much, thinking we know better than God.

I am not over analyzing, at least I don’t think I am … or am I? The Church teaches that there are ALWAYS consequences to sin, temporal and eternal, and that these consequences damage our relationship with God, as well as our relationship amongst eachother. To witness the consequences of sin in our own life as well as others, is a fact of life. We are not forbidden from discerning a behavior or choice as sinful, only from judging the person. Although, it is prudent to refrain from judging behaviors that are not in and of themselves sinful without being privy to the details, by virtue of a close relationship or a sharing of details by the person(s) in question.

I was offering an opposing argument on your statement that to not use NFP is NEVER sinful, and drawing on my own experiences, the experiences of others whom I am privy to details, and Church teaching to support it. Do you agree that in this particular situation the wife is being uncharitable in NOT considering NFP as an option? Especially since the Church declares, it is up to the wife AND husband before God to discern how many. She is leaving out a NECESSARY part of the equation … her husband.

char34:

It seems miraculous how my personal life turned out considering how it began, I doubted my husband would have agreed to anything other than ABC. He eventually converted and agreed to NFP…but it didn’t work as “planned”. The difference with us is we DID attempt NFP many times but it didn’t work as well as it seems to with others…which was probably the way God wanted it. We were way to stubborn to consider more than 2 or 3, I guess God “forced” more kids on us!.

God did not FORCE children on you. You and your husband had marital relations on a day that conception was possible (natural law), as He foreknew you would, and had already made provisions to provide all the graces your family will need to go to Heaven. Conversions are ALWAYS miraculous. God bless your family, and I am so grateful God in His Mercy moved your husband to conversion. He did the same with my husband, so I share your joy.

God bless!

 

[Ana]

Shiann:

I’m not proposing that we go around telling people that they are sinning in some way because they choose to limit the numbers of their children for any reason! .

Of course not! That would be hoity-toity!

Shiann:

But that does not discount the fact that each and every married couple has an obligation to not practice abstinence to avoid children if they have no good reason to do so. .

Absolutely, so saith the Church!

Shiann:

I am certainly not going to shun anyone who only has 2 kids- any more than I would those who have none or 10! Nor would I contemplate their eternal destination. We are forbidden from that kind of judgment- and they deserve my prayers more than condemnations anyway…

Shian, I hope that my post didn’t imply I thought you were being judgemental. I don’t think that at all!

Shiann:

But again, when an NFP couple “just doesn’t want kids right now”- it seems to go against the very philosophy they practice.

Add in, “without a serious and valid reason” and I think we are in complete agreement.

Now that I think about it, I wonder if not wanting kids right now would be the result of an underlying reason, not the reason itself? Even if they state that as their reason, I mean there has to be a reason they don’t want kids right now, and I think that would be where the opportunity for sin is, with not having kids being the consequence.

God bless!

 

[Island_Oak]

alessandro:

I guess I am confused by the ‘vagueness’ of the term serious. I also find it difficult to accept that it is left up to the general public to discern whether or not they have a serious reason to use contraception (and by that, I mean NFP).

Since the “general public” pick their own spouses, decide when or if to get married, how any children they do have will be educated, disciplined or medicated; assume the responsibility to support/feed/clothe/house any children they create, it only makes sense that the “general public” directly responsible should be making the decisions of just how many children they can reasonably handle–whether or not you agree with their reasons.

What I fear is that, because of the loose language, some people will use NFP for the wrong reasons. Take the example from the poll, above, of the couple wanting to save up to buy a new car. Is this a ‘serious’ reason? No doubt it depends on the circumstances (for example, if a new car means being able to move to a new area, or school district, or commute to a new job, that might be ‘serious’). But what if a couple just wants a new Mercedes for more materialistic reasons… They might rationalize the choice toward contraception, thinking, “A new car is a serious reason,” when to others, in this particular case, a new car would not be a legitimate reason.

You offer a rather silly example in order to make a point. Serious reasons require serious consideration by serious adults. Unfortunately, we all know a lot less is involved in bringing a baby into the world and that not all “parents” take this or other parenting issues seriously–and that we can’t control.

And worse still, this attitude (“We don’t want a new baby, and we’re actively working against that possibility”) may even become an air of supercilious contempt à la Holier-Than-Thou, when the couple judges others: “They’re using condoms? Well, we’re using NFP!” While I agree that there is an important moral difference between the various forms of contraception (from NFP or the rhythm method, to condoms, to OCP, to sterilization procedures, to frank-out abortion), if used for the wrong reasons, NFP can also be morally wrong.

Methinks you are spending too much valuable time pondering acts, conversations and decisions made in the privacy of other marital bedrooms. Get out and about, take a deep breath and stop worrying about what goes on behind closed doors that you have absolutely no power to affect or change.