Where do I go from here?

[Be_Courageous]

My dh and I have a one year old and a three year old.I was recently diagnosed with breast cancer. I had a bilateral mastectomy and all glory be to God, the cancer was not invasive and I did not have to have any further treatments after the surgery. I just have to have reconstructive surgery. During the time of being diagnosed and then during the recovery, I realized how overwhelming life can be at times with two little children and my husband gets tired a lot. He is a heavy smoker (smokes outside) and he is addicted to energy drinks. He crashes hard especially after work, and then I feel like it is hard to get a break with the little ones because he is very tired and wants to take a nap. It seems like at times his smoking habit takes him outside at some of the most inopportune times when both children are fussing or when I really need an extra hand. DH works very hard for our family and he loves us and he wants to quit smoking and quit the energy drinks, but he just can’t seem to beat these addictions. I was given the okay that if we wanted to have more children, that research does not indicate that there is any reason why we couldn’t or shouldn’t since my tumor was removed. I am scared to bring anymore children into our family at this point. I love our children so much and they have blessed us so much. I would love to have more if I felt stronger and if my husband did not have the addictions he has. I am afraid at this point that we cannot handle anymore. I refuse to take birth control and I am very much open to NFP. However, my dh is not Catholic. He attends Mass with me and is fine with me raising our children Catholic, but he will not participate in NFP classes or read about it etc… He doesn’t even want to talk about it. He has said that we can do it, but I have to just tell him when we can have sex and that is all he wants to know about it. I am overwhelmed right now and afraid to have sex because I have not taken an NFP class. I just have one book and I have heard that the classes are very important. My OB doctor told me that my cycles are going to be all messed up for awhile since I had surgery recently and he doesn’t think NFP would work. He is Catholic too, however, he is okay with birth control. He was even trying to encourage me to take it and even said he has spoken with theologians who claim it is okay in these types of circumstances. I told him I didn’t agree and I would talk to a priest and pray about it. I haven’t made an appointment with a priest yet. Is this what I should do? I feel ver confused. Another part of all of this is that I am finishing the last step in a master’s program and I plan to graduate next December. I will be doing an internship part-time. I will be out of the house just 2 days per week and our family will be watching the kids. I feel like God has opened the doors for me to finish my education. I have felt a lot of peace about it. If I get pregnant in the next few months, I would have to put off school even longer and I am in the clinical phase as I am going to be a counselor and the continuity of my experience would be jeopardized. I don’t want to hurt my relationship with my husband by not having sex with him, but I am overwhelmed that I have to learn NFP all on my own and I am afraid to have anymore children at this point until his health gets better and he has more energy to help with them. They are very energetic and take all of my energy. I would love some insight, prayers, advice, anything- please!! Thank you so much and God bless!!

 

[Xantippe]

My dh and I have a one year old and a three year old.I was recently diagnosed with breast cancer. I had a bilateral mastectomy and all glory be to God, the cancer was not invasive and I did not have to have any further treatments after the surgery. I just have to have reconstructive surgery. During the time of being diagnosed and then during the recovery, I realized how overwhelming life can be at times with two little children and my husband gets tired a lot. He is a heavy smoker (smokes outside) and he is addicted to energy drinks. He crashes hard especially after work, and then I feel like it is hard to get a break with the little ones because he is very tired and wants to take a nap. It seems like at times his smoking habit takes him outside at some of the most inopportune times when both children are fussing or when I really need an extra hand. DH works very hard for our family and he loves us and he wants to quit smoking and quit the energy drinks, but he just can’t seem to beat these addictions. I was given the okay that if we wanted to have more children, that research does not indicate that there is any reason why we couldn’t or shouldn’t since my tumor was removed. I am scared to bring anymore children into our family at this point. I love our children so much and they have blessed us so much. I would love to have more if I felt stronger and if my husband did not have the addictions he has. I am afraid at this point that we cannot handle anymore. I refuse to take birth control and I am very much open to NFP. However, my dh is not Catholic. He attends Mass with me and is fine with me raising our children Catholic, but he will not participate in NFP classes or read about it etc… He doesn’t even want to talk about it. He has said that we can do it, but I have to just tell him when we can have sex and that is all he wants to know about it. I am overwhelmed right now and afraid to have sex because I have not taken an NFP class. I just have one book and I have heard that the classes are very important. My OB doctor told me that my cycles are going to be all messed up for awhile since I had surgery recently and he doesn’t think NFP would work. He is Catholic too, however, he is okay with birth control. He was even trying to encourage me to take it and even said he has spoken with theologians who claim it is okay in these types of circumstances. I told him I didn’t agree and I would talk to a priest and pray about it. I haven’t made an appointment with a priest yet. Is this what I should do? I feel ver confused. Another part of all of this is that I am finishing the last step in a master’s program and I plan to graduate next December. I will be doing an internship part-time. I will be out of the house just 2 days per week and our family will be watching the kids. I feel like God has opened the doors for me to finish my education. I have felt a lot of peace about it. If I get pregnant in the next few months, I would have to put off school even longer and I am in the clinical phase as I am going to be a counselor and the continuity of my experience would be jeopardized. I don’t want to hurt my relationship with my husband by not having sex with him, but I am overwhelmed that I have to learn NFP all on my own and I am afraid to have anymore children at this point until his health gets better and he has more energy to help with them. They are very energetic and take all of my energy. I would love some insight, prayers, advice, anything- please!! Thank you so much and God bless!!

How about sharing this with your husband? That for you to be able to have marital relations with him, you need his help learning NFP and helping you read your charts. If he can’t help you, there’s going to be unnecessary delay in getting back to marital relations.

I don’t know what book you have, but I really like Taking Charge of Your Fertility. (It is a secular book, so they mention artificial birth control as an option.) I expect you will have a fair amount of trouble with getting back to normal cycles. One reasonable fix is to do a conservative version of NFP, for instance, Phase 3 only, which would be only post-ovulatory, perhaps with an extra day of temperature rise for security. The only thing to watch out for in that case is the possibility of mistaking early illness for an ovulatory temperature rise, but if you make sure and do a cross check with cervical fluid, that should not be a problem. As your situation improves and your knowledge of your cycles improves, it will be possible to move toward less conservative NFP. There’s also the option of using a fertility monitor, but I’m less familiar with the ins and outs of that, and in your shoes, I’d personally stick with conservative Phase 3 NFP. But other people may have more advice about fertility monitors.

If you are ever unsure about your chart, you can just wait until your fertility signs are clearer, which will eventually happen. I don’t know about your particular issues, but 2 or 3 months often does the job for less serious problems.

 

[Jake_Hansen]

My OB doctor told me that my cycles are going to be all messed up for awhile since I had surgery recently and he doesn’t think NFP would work. He is Catholic too, however, he is okay with birth control. He was even trying to encourage me to take it and even said he has spoken with theologians who claim it is okay in these types of circumstances. I told him I didn’t agree and I would talk to a priest and pray about it. I haven’t made an appointment with a priest yet. Is this what I should do?

No this is not okay, not in any circumstance.

 

[1ke]

No this is not okay, not in any circumstance.

+1

your doctor needs to stick to medicine, because he stinks at theology.

 

[POJIUJH]

To be honest, although it is commonly spoken of in Catholic circles, and although it has (non-infallible) papal approval, I have severe doubts about it as although the intention is broader, it still fundamentally boils down to:

1. Contraception is intentionally removing procreation from the procreative act. It is immoral.
2. Instead of abstinence, NFP deliberately intends to remove procreation from the procreative act.
3. Therefore NFP is contraception.
4. Therefore NFP is immoral.

Where you will hear many comments of support for it in this thread, whether I am right or wrong in this, I would advise some healthy scepticism. Abstinence might be your calling. As one saint said, if we could choose our own Crosses we would gain nothing.

 

[Xantippe]

To be honest, although it is commonly spoken of in Catholic circles, and although it has (non-infallible) papal approval, I have severe doubts about it as although the intention is broader, it still fundamentally boils down to:

1. Contraception is intentionally removing procreation from the procreative act. It is immoral.
2. Instead of abstinence, NFP deliberately intends to remove procreation from the procreative act.
3. Therefore NFP is contraception.
4. Therefore NFP is immoral.

Where you will hear many comments of support for it in this thread, whether I am right or wrong in this, I would advise some healthy scepticism. Abstinence might be your calling. As one saint said, if we could choose our own Crosses we would gain nothing.

NFP is abstinence (at least when used to delay pregnancy rather than to achieve it). If the OP uses NFP to delay pregnancy until she and her husband are healthy and her kids are more self-sufficient, she will be using abstinence to do so.

#2 is fallacious because NFP does not render any particular procreative act unprocreative. You use all the fertility that is available at that particular time.

 

[1ke]

1. Instead of abstinence, NFP deliberately intends to remove procreation from the procreative act.

This is not accurate, and therefore has led you to an incorrect conclusion.

NFP is information. It is not possible for information to be “immoral”. It is simply a set of facts.

With that information, people decide whether or not to be abstinent. Abstinence is not immoral.

Abstaining does not in any way “remove procreation from the procreative act”.

 

[Be_Courageous]

Thank you all for your thoughts. After I posted last night, I prayed and felt some peace about all of it. NFP seems very complicated to me and even more difficult that my dh isn’t interested in learning about it. However, abstinence may be our cross right now. I will keep praying, and thank you all for your insights. :hug1:

 

[Xantippe]

Thank you all for your thoughts. After I posted last night, I prayed and felt some peace about all of it. NFP seems very complicated to me and even more difficult that my dh isn’t interested in learning about it. However, abstinence may be our cross right now. I will keep praying, and thank you all for your insights. :hug1:

It’s not that complicated, but it will be easier with your husband’s help and support.

If you start faithfully charting temperatures and cervical mucus right away and gather a month or two of information while abstaining, you’ll be in a good position to go live with NFP and you’ll have a lot more confidence with NFP. You will be able to look at your chart and figure out at what point you were ovulating.

I’m not an NFP instructor, but I’ve done NFP for 16 years with a fair amount of success, and the usual pattern after menstruation is dryness, followed by an increasing level of wetness and stretchier and stretchier mucus. That is a sign of increasing fertility. A large, sustained temperature rise that is not caused by illness signals ovulation. Once you have that sustained rise, coupled with a sustained return to dryness, that’s your post-ovulatory infertility. Identifying post-ovulatory infertility is the key to conservative NFP. The rules in the books are genuinely rather complicated, but that’s the basic idea.

A fertility monitor is easy, but expensive, and might be the right answer for you right now.

(Come to think of it, in your case, you may not be ovulating quite yet, but once you are ovulating, post-ovulatory infertility is your best bet.)

Best wishes!

 

[POJIUJH]

This is not accurate, and therefore has led you to an incorrect conclusion.

NFP is information. It is not possible for information to be “immoral”. It is simply a set of facts.

With that information, people decide whether or not to be abstinent. Abstinence is not immoral.

Abstaining does not in any way “remove procreation from the procreative act”.

#2 is fallacious because NFP does not render any particular procreative act unprocreative. You use all the fertility that is available at that particular time.

Thank you for these answers, but I still have my doubts. I see you have both talked about two elements of NFP that we know aren’t sinful, but not the part I had mentioned. When we talk about NFP we refer to a particular practice, not information alone. Abstinence is not immoral, this is true.

It is the time of non-abstinence that I can’t help but doubt the validity of, as intentions denote sin, and during the times of non-abstinence the intention is to have the procreative act, only without procreation. This just seems to be different means to the same end, as this is identical to the intention of a person who commits sin by using contraceptives, only using a different thing to carry out the contraception. It would have to follow that this is still immoral.

 

[1ke]

the intention is to have the procreative act, only without procreation.

This is not true. The marital embrace is both unitive and procreative. Each act is properly ordered to unity and procreation when we engage fully in the act (vaginal intercourse) without altering the act. If the woman is naturally infertile (due to time in the cycle, pregnancy, post-menopause, or disease/defect) there is NO sin in engaging in the marital embrace.

This just seems to be different means to the same end, as this is identical to the intention of a person who commits sin by using contraceptives, only using a different thing to carry out the contraception. It would have to follow that this is still immoral.

Of course it is a different means to the same end. One is moral and one is not.

Just like robbing a bank and getting a job both procure money. The intention and end are the same: get money to feed family. The means are completely different.

The Church does not teach and never has taught that spacing children is immoral. The Church does teach that contraception is an immoral means of achieving that goal. Abstaining-- periodically or totally-- is not.

 

[POJIUJH]

This is not true. The marital embrace is both unitive and procreative. We are not disputing this and I don’t think I need to be told it. Under NFP, the point is that it allows the procreative act to be done while deliberately avoiding procreation.

Of course it is a different means to the same end. (We are on the same page on this so far) One is moral and one is not. (This is what I am not sure about).

Just like robbing a bank and getting a job both procure money. The intention and end are the same: get money to feed family. The means are completely different.

This is an example where the immorality would lie with the means, instead of the end. Not all things are this way, most immoral things that have to do with the end itself, like the deliberate killing of an innocent man, as one example, where regardless of the weapon, alibi, plan or motive, the intention is still murder and remains immoral regardless of the means.

The Church does not teach and never has taught that spacing children is immoral. (This is true, and neither would I think that it is immoral, providing it is by abstinence) The Church does teach that contraception is an immoral means of achieving that goal. (Indeed) Abstaining-- periodically or totally-- is not. (Also true. But I wonder why you say this again, as I mentioned in my last two posts that the problem I see isn’t with abstinence but with the periods of non-abstinence where nature itself is used as a means to contracept under the system of NFP.)

 

[1ke]

…

Contraception is an action a person takes to render the marital embrace sterile.

The couple takes no action at all to render the marital embrace sterile. It is that way naturally. Can you show any Church teaching that says it is immoral to engage in the marital embrace when you know it is naturally infertile?

NFP is just information. It isn’t an **action **at all. You have information about your body’s fertility at that time. You can then decide if you want to engage in the marital act or abstain from the marital act. If you engage in the act, you do not alter it in any way. You engage in the act fully. It is 100% ordered to unity and procreation because you have completed the act in the manner in which God designed it.

In the example of the bank robbery versus getting a job, yes it is the means that are different. That is true also with contraception versus abstaining. The end is the same. And the end is not intrinsically evil. The *means *of contraception are intrinsically evil. The means of abstaining are not intrinsically evil.

 

[1ke]

The choice isn’t between contraception and abstaining. Contraception is always wrong.

The choice is between abstaining totally and abstaining periodically. The Church teaches you can do either of these things. Some people require total abstinence due to serious circumstances. For those who can do so, periodic abstinence is a moral option:

Humanae Vitae 16: the Church teaches that married people may then take advantage of the natural cycles immanent in the reproductive system and engage in marital intercourse only during those times that are infertile, thus controlling birth in a way which does not in the least offend the moral principles which We have just explained.

and

Casti Connubii 59: Nor are those considered as acting against nature who in the married state use their right in the proper manner although on account of natural reasons either of time or of certain defects, new life cannot be brought forth. For in matrimony as well as in the use of the matrimonial rights there are also secondary ends, such as mutual aid, the cultivating of mutual love, and the quieting of concupiscence which husband and wife are not forbidden to consider so long as they are subordinated to the primary end and so long as the intrinsic nature of the act is preserved.

 

[POJIUJH]

Contraception is an action a person takes to render the marital embrace sterile. (The marital embrace under NFP is guaranteed to be sterile. Therefore the intention of the intercourse is so that it will be sterile, this is contraception surely, only with different means).

The couple takes no action at all to render the marital embrace sterile. (But, if they were not practising NFP they would be!) It is that way naturally. Can you show any Church teaching that says it is immoral to engage in the marital embrace when you know it is naturally infertile? (I don’t, but, you understand where I am coming from, this is not a guarantee that it is moral.)

NFP is just information. It isn’t an **action **at all. (Lets be honest, it is a practise). You have information about your body’s fertility at that time. You can then decide if you want to engage in the marital act or abstain from the marital act. (Therefore using natural cycles as a means of contraception) If you engage in the act, you do not alter it in any way. You engage in the act fully. It is 100% ordered to unity and procreation (but the intention is to have it without procreation) because you have completed the act in the manner in which God designed it.

In the example of the bank robbery versus getting a job, yes it is the means that are different. That is true also with contraception versus abstaining. The end is the same. And the end is not intrinsically evil. The *means *of contraception are intrinsically evil. The means of abstaining are not intrinsically evil. (This is flat wrong, and I don’t think you need to be told it. It doesn’t matter what substance or material under God’s green earth that some person uses to contracept with, they are all natural substances in the end, it is the purpose they put them to that is immoral. The purpose being, as the purpose is for all contraception, to remove the possibility of procreation from the marital embrace, therefore taking it out of it’s intended and natural purpose and turning the embrace into an act of lust instead of procreation).

The choice isn’t between contraception and abstaining. Contraception is always wrong.

The choice is between abstaining totally and abstaining periodically. The Church teaches you can do either of these things. Some people require total abstinence due to serious circumstances. For those who can do so, periodic abstinence is a moral option:

Humanae Vitae 16: the Church teaches that married people may then take advantage of the natural cycles immanent in the reproductive system and engage in marital intercourse only during those times that are infertile, thus controlling birth in a way which does not in the least offend the moral principles which We have just explained.

and

Casti Connubii 59: Nor are those considered as acting against nature who in the married state use their right in the proper manner although on account of natural reasons either of time or of certain defects, new life cannot be brought forth. For in matrimony as well as in the use of the matrimonial rights there are also secondary ends, such as mutual aid, the cultivating of mutual love, and the quieting of concupiscence which husband and wife are not forbidden to consider so long as they are subordinated to the primary end and so long as the intrinsic nature of the act is preserved.

(Yes, but, as I have said previously, although these have received papal approval they are not infallible statements. These teachings are on the level of Merely Authentic Ordinary Magisterium. They are not infalible, but should be taken seriously they do not advocate sin or harm the faith. This is where I am, what I am trying to work out. There may be more to the practise that would render my argument moot that you do not know of to tell me, but so far as I understand and in what we have discussed it appears to me to be impossible to agree with on grounds of logic and morality.)

My questions would have to be then, if contraception is only wrong because of the means, then what makes the means immoral?

Does it have to be a natural or synthetic material used, is one moral and the other not?

Does it have to be immaterial, like circumstance, the way some people are born, such as infertility?

For instance, what if a man chooses intentionally only to marry an infertile woman for this exact purpose, does he do this in good conscience even though his intention is the same as every person that sins with contraception?

I think we both understand clearly that regardless of the means, when the marital act is rendered in such a way that it removes the possibility of procreation, then that act is defined as contraception, and contraception is immoral.

 

[Xantippe]

My questions would have to be then, if contraception is only wrong because of the means, then what makes the means immoral?

Does it have to be a natural or synthetic material used, is one moral and the other not?

Does it have to be immaterial, like circumstance, the way some people are born, such as infertility?

For instance, what if a man chooses intentionally only to marry an infertile woman for this exact purpose, does he do this in good conscience even though his intention is the same as every person that sins with contraception?

I think we both understand clearly that regardless of the means, when the marital act is rendered in such a way that it removes the possibility of procreation, then that act is defined as contraception, and contraception is immoral.

There isn’t such a thing as immaterial contraception–there’s always a device, a pill, a shot, a surgical procedure, etc. With NFP, there’s no device, pill, shot, or surgical procedure reducing existing fertility–there’s only information about the fertility that is or isn’t there.

I think the intentions can also be quite distinct. With NFP, one can genuinely will the thought, “I am embracing all of the fertility present on this occasion,” while with, say, a condom or a diaphragm, that obviously isn’t possible. (Although, I suppose it would be possible to do that with a surgical sterilization or a long-acting contraceptive shot–but that probably mean that one was beginning to repent of it.)

 

[POJIUJH]

There isn’t such a thing as immaterial contraception–there’s always a device, a pill, a shot, a surgical procedure, etc. With NFP, there’s no device, pill, shot, or surgical procedure reducing existing fertility–there’s only information about the fertility that is or isn’t there. (Yes, but, information can become the means to the method of contraception.)

I think the intentions can also be quite distinct. With NFP, one can genuinely will the thought, “I am embracing all of the fertility present on this occasion,” while with, say, a condom or a diaphragm, that obviously isn’t possible. (Although, I suppose it would be possible to do that with a surgical sterilization or a long-acting contraceptive shot–but that probably mean that one was beginning to repent of it.)

Well, that’s not exactly right. The one practising NFP doesn’t have any fertility present in their particular circumstance to embrace. They would more embrace the lack of fertility present. But beside the impossibility of this, you said it right that a person who is contracepting by means of a surgical sterilisation or long term contraceptive shot would be of the same intention, so this could not be distinct.

But another point just came to mind, so far the replies in this thread that in favour of NFP have argued that it is legitimate universally. By that I mean, that in any circumstance NFP would be legitemate, but although there is non-infallible support for this in the Church, this is one thing that is actually taught against. Pope Pius XII made clear that this practise had to be used only if a sufficiently serious reason existed.

There are at least a couple of problems that come from that. If a sufficiently serious reason had to exist in order to make something moral, then either:

1.) The thing itself would be immoral by it’s very nature - and if something is immoral by nature, then it cannot be used even in a serious situation, because the ends don’t justify the means. Cold blodded murder is immoral by nature, and regardless of situation it is still immoral and has to be avoided.

1. There is no other possible option - but another possible option exists, abstinence (total), and therefore this cannot apply to NFP.

It would surely follow that 1.) is correct.

But as well as this, if this practise that is currently accepted (non infallibly) by the Church is legitemate, then any argument in favour of it would have to do with sufficient reasons, as any attempted argument for the universal legitimacy of NFP would be going against the directives that the Church has given (non infallibly), and this would currently rule out everything that has been said in favour of NFP so far.

But, even if sufficient reasons were talked about, it would still be a fact that sufficient reasons can’t be argued with something that is immoral by nature, so it would seem that support for this practise is impossible in every which way.

 

[Xantippe]

Well, that’s not exactly right. The one practising NFP doesn’t have any fertility present in their particular circumstance to embrace. They would more embrace the lack of fertility present. But beside the impossibility of this, you said it right that a person who is contracepting by means of a surgical sterilisation or long term contraceptive shot would be of the same intention, so this could not be distinct.

But another point just came to mind, so far the replies in this thread that in favour of NFP have argued that it is legitimate universally. By that I mean, that in any circumstance NFP would be legitemate, but although there is non-infallible support for this in the Church, this is one thing that is actually taught against. Pope Pius XII made clear that this practise had to be used only if a sufficiently serious reason existed.

There are at least a couple of problems that come from that. If a sufficiently serious reason had to exist in order to make something moral, then either:

1.) The thing itself would be immoral by it’s very nature - and if something is immoral by nature, then it cannot be used even in a serious situation, because the ends don’t justify the means. Cold blodded murder is immoral by nature, and regardless of situation it is still immoral and has to be avoided.

1. There is no other possible option - but another possible option exists, abstinence (total), and therefore this cannot apply to NFP.

It would surely follow that 1.) is correct.

We need GOOD reasons for total abstinence, too. In that respect, there’s nothing special about NFP.

But as well as this, if this practise that is currently accepted (non infallibly) by the Church is legitemate, then any argument in favour of it would have to do with sufficient reasons, as any attempted argument for the universal legitimacy of NFP would be going against the directives that the Church has given (non infallibly), and this would currently rule out everything that has been said in favour of NFP so far.

But, even if sufficient reasons were talked about, it would still be a fact that sufficient reasons can’t be argued with something that is immoral by nature, so it would seem that support for this practise is impossible in every which way.

Sorry, I got lost.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

My dh and I have a one year old and a three year old.I was recently diagnosed with breast cancer. I had a bilateral mastectomy and all glory be to God, the cancer was not invasive and I did not have to have any further treatments after the surgery. I just have to have reconstructive surgery. During the time of being diagnosed and then during the recovery, I realized how overwhelming life can be at times with two little children and my husband gets tired a lot. He is a heavy smoker (smokes outside) and he is addicted to energy drinks. He crashes hard especially after work, and then I feel like it is hard to get a break with the little ones because he is very tired and wants to take a nap. It seems like at times his smoking habit takes him outside at some of the most inopportune times when both children are fussing or when I really need an extra hand. DH works very hard for our family and he loves us and he wants to quit smoking and quit the energy drinks, but he just can’t seem to beat these addictions. I was given the okay that if we wanted to have more children, that research does not indicate that there is any reason why we couldn’t or shouldn’t since my tumor was removed. I am scared to bring anymore children into our family at this point. I love our children so much and they have blessed us so much. I would love to have more if I felt stronger and if my husband did not have the addictions he has. I am afraid at this point that we cannot handle anymore. I refuse to take birth control and I am very much open to NFP. However, my dh is not Catholic. He attends Mass with me and is fine with me raising our children Catholic, but he will not participate in NFP classes or read about it etc… He doesn’t even want to talk about it. He has said that we can do it, but I have to just tell him when we can have sex and that is all he wants to know about it. I am overwhelmed right now and afraid to have sex because I have not taken an NFP class. I just have one book and I have heard that the classes are very important. My OB doctor told me that my cycles are going to be all messed up for awhile since I had surgery recently and he doesn’t think NFP would work. He is Catholic too, however, he is okay with birth control. He was even trying to encourage me to take it and even said he has spoken with theologians who claim it is okay in these types of circumstances. I told him I didn’t agree and I would talk to a priest and pray about it. I haven’t made an appointment with a priest yet. Is this what I should do? I feel ver confused. Another part of all of this is that I am finishing the last step in a master’s program and I plan to graduate next December. I will be doing an internship part-time. I will be out of the house just 2 days per week and our family will be watching the kids. I feel like God has opened the doors for me to finish my education. I have felt a lot of peace about it. If I get pregnant in the next few months, I would have to put off school even longer and I am in the clinical phase as I am going to be a counselor and the continuity of my experience would be jeopardized. I don’t want to hurt my relationship with my husband by not having sex with him, but I am overwhelmed that I have to learn NFP all on my own and I am afraid to have anymore children at this point until his health gets better and he has more energy to help with them. They are very energetic and take all of my energy. I would love some insight, prayers, advice, anything- please!! Thank you so much and God bless!!

Of course ABC is never ok for contraception. But I want to focus on your husband for a minute. He has to quit smoking and start being healthy now. immediately. How can a man watch his wife have a life threatening condition of cancer and then light up.
What kind of husband is that!?

Now you and I and most of the posters are informed that ABC is never ok but I am currious as to your husband telling you he thinks it is ok for you to do. That he would endanger your soul like that is concerning. If he really believes that he can put on a condom and take the sin on himself. Why would he try to convince his wife to further medicate or undergo surgery to a body that has already been through too much? Why is your husband not buying a box of Trojans?

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Well, that’s not exactly right. The one practising NFP doesn’t have any fertility present in their particular circumstance to embrace. They would more embrace the lack of fertility present. But beside the impossibility of this, you said it right that a person who is contracepting by means of a surgical sterilisation or long term contraceptive shot would be of the same intention, so this could not be distinct.

But another point just came to mind, so far the replies in this thread that in favour of NFP have argued that it is legitimate universally. By that I mean, that in any circumstance NFP would be legitemate, but although there is non-infallible support for this in the Church, this is one thing that is actually taught against. Pope Pius XII made clear that this practise had to be used only if a sufficiently serious reason existed.

There are at least a couple of problems that come from that. If a sufficiently serious reason had to exist in order to make something moral, then either:

1.) The thing itself would be immoral by it’s very nature - and if something is immoral by nature, then it cannot be used even in a serious situation, because the ends don’t justify the means. Cold blodded murder is immoral by nature, and regardless of situation it is still immoral and has to be avoided.

1. There is no other possible option - but another possible option exists, abstinence (total), and therefore this cannot apply to NFP.

It would surely follow that 1.) is correct.

But as well as this, if this practise that is currently accepted (non infallibly) by the Church is legitemate, then any argument in favour of it would have to do with sufficient reasons, as any attempted argument for the universal legitimacy of NFP would be going against the directives that the Church has given (non infallibly), and this would currently rule out everything that has been said in favour of NFP so far.

But, even if sufficient reasons were talked about, it would still be a fact that sufficient reasons can’t be argued with something that is immoral by nature, so it would seem that support for this practise is impossible in every which way.

This is an interesting NFP post…