Why is "Natural Family Planning" ok when other contraceptive methods are not?

[Learning123]

I have friends who feel using NFP is always immoral. I have known others who worried that they might have over time begun to use it immorally. When I was concerned about the subject I talked with our parish priest. Granted you can get different answers that way, but they are available to offer counsel. One priest basically said once we have any children we have shown an openness to life, and thus NFP is fine indefinitely after that. That came across a little weird but did my best to work with the answer, reading more about NFP. Another child and change in parish priest later, I met with the new priest. I discussed with him our reasons for delaying for now–he responded that we were OK to delay and also asked what our response would be should we discover an unplanned pregnancy. Sure there would be a bit of fear initially, but we would be ecstatic.

Many a post has mentioned that NFP can be used to delay or to conceive. Many a post has mentioned that NFP can be used morally or perhaps immorally (i.e.-not a significant reason to delay/avoid conception). If you’re unsure about your own situation, perhaps seek a priest willing to talk with you.

God Bless.
PS-Thermal based methods indicated that I wasn’t even ovulating. Doctors used these methods to say to us that we wouldn’t be able to conceive. Thankfully they were wrong! We eventually found a mucous based method, and I’m grateful for it. Just my experience, my two cents.

 

[Tracy_Spenst]

PS-Thermal based methods indicated that I wasn’t even ovulating. Doctors used these methods to say to us that we wouldn’t be able to conceive. Thankfully they were wrong! We eventually found a mucous based method, and I’m grateful for it. Just my experience, my two cents.

The Sympto-Thermal Method (taught be Couple-to-Couple League) uses both basal body temp and mucus. I’m surprised there’s anyone out there who just uses a thermal method, though I’m wondering if it’s done more in Europe than here.

And I’m so glad you found something to help you get pregnant! This is a heavy cross for so many couples to bear.

Tracy

 

[Tracy_Spenst]

Rye,

Good morning! Sure is fun to wake up to a stimulating discussion!!

I would agree with your first point but for one thing - how then do explain why so many wind up pregnant while using birth control - I’ts happened to me as well as with NFP. It seems that (IMHO) God can allow anything to happen he likes.

Sure, that’s true. We can point to many instances in history where God has intervened in things thought impossible, both in ways we would consider positive and negative (from our perspective, anyway, God knows what He is about). However, when I asked Couple-to-Couple League’s main office folks how often that has happened, I was told they have found less than five instances in the last twenty years to be true surprises. Most of the time when someone says they have a “surprise,” they were not charting correctly or faithfully. I always figure if a couple is using the method correctly all the time and still get pregnant, then they should watch that child carefully because God has something amazing planned for him!

Also, you mention the children aborted through the pill, etc - I have read on the inserts that it “may” cause this- I still have yet to see one study that proved that this occured. I would be very happy to see one if you have it (and not just Catholic doctors saying they “know” it happens) - show me medical proof, then I will believe.

Well, you can always call the company themselves and ask. That’s what the friend who told me about the abortion-causing effect did. Or, rather I should say, her husband did because she insisted on using the Pill and he was against it. After hemming and hawing for awhile, the person admitted that, yes, it does work that way if the ovulation suppression doesn’t work. That was 16 or 17 years ago. I don’t think they’d even hem and haw about it anymore. As for studies, check out One More Soul’s website for that. However, a simple look at the hormones used in the Pill will tell you that it causes the womb to be inhospitable to new life. But, check out OMS’s site–they keep the most current on the info.

However, you already know that it’s true or else how could any woman get pregnant on the Pill? Besides, I know I ovulated on the Pill because I asked my doctor why I was having ovulation pain. He never answered me.

I guess I’m rather like St. Thomas needing to see

Maybe, but do you really want the reputation he’s lived with for the past 2000 years?!!

I’m really trying to pray about abc even though I’m allowed to use it because of medical reasons. (before someone says something - double effect comes into play with my condition)

What bothers me the most with it being used for a medical condition is that the Pill cures nothing!!! Whatever the underlying cause for the problem is simply ignored because the Pill is such a great band-aid. Band-aids don’t cure. But, if that’s your only option (and with some insurance companies it is–they won’t pay for more testing, etc. to find the cause), then you can still avoid the time when a breakthrough ovulation might occur. OMS or Priests for Life might have the info. on how that is figured. That way you are avoiding the possibility of abortion while still receiving the medical treatment.

God Bless
Rye

You, too!
Tracy

 

[ryecroft]

Rye,

Good morning! Sure is fun to wake up to a stimulating discussion!!

I would agree with your first point but for one thing - how then do explain why so many wind up pregnant while using birth control - I’ts happened to me as well as with NFP. It seems that (IMHO) God can allow anything to happen he likes.

Sure, that’s true. We can point to many instances in history where God has intervened in things thought impossible, both in ways we would consider positive and negative (from our perspective, anyway, God knows what He is about). However, when I asked Couple-to-Couple League’s main office folks how often that has happened, I was told they have found less than five instances in the last twenty years to be true surprises. Most of the time when someone says they have a “surprise,” they were not charting correctly or faithfully. I always figure if a couple is using the method correctly all the time and still get pregnant, then they should watch that child carefully because God has something amazing planned for him!

Also, you mention the children aborted through the pill, etc - I have read on the inserts that it “may” cause this- I still have yet to see one study that proved that this occured. I would be very happy to see one if you have it (and not just Catholic doctors saying they “know” it happens) - show me medical proof, then I will believe.

Well, you can always call the company themselves and ask. That’s what the friend who told me about the abortion-causing effect did. Or, rather I should say, her husband did because she insisted on using the Pill and he was against it. After hemming and hawing for awhile, the person admitted that, yes, it does work that way if the ovulation suppression doesn’t work. That was 16 or 17 years ago. I don’t think they’d even hem and haw about it anymore. As for studies, check out One More Soul’s website for that. However, a simple look at the hormones used in the Pill will tell you that it causes the womb to be inhospitable to new life. But, check out OMS’s site–they keep the most current on the info.

However, you already know that it’s true or else how could any woman get pregnant on the Pill? Besides, I know I ovulated on the Pill because I asked my doctor why I was having ovulation pain. He never answered me.

I guess I’m rather like St. Thomas needing to see

Maybe, but do you really want the reputation he’s lived with for the past 2000 years?!!

I’m really trying to pray about abc even though I’m allowed to use it because of medical reasons. (before someone says something - double effect comes into play with my condition)

What bothers me the most with it being used for a medical condition is that the Pill cures nothing!!! Whatever the underlying cause for the problem is simply ignored because the Pill is such a great band-aid. Band-aids don’t cure. But, if that’s your only option (and with some insurance companies it is–they won’t pay for more testing, etc. to find the cause), then you can still avoid the time when a breakthrough ovulation might occur. OMS or Priests for Life might have the info. on how that is figured. That way you are avoiding the possibility of abortion while still receiving the medical treatment.

God Bless
Rye

You, too!
Tracy

Although the Doctor thinks we’re close to being able to try again - I have to stay well the next few months, I’m glad you mentioned this. I’m not just taking birth control to not have kids - I’m mainly taking it because it stops me from bleeding to the point of having transfusions - but some of the other answers are surgical and could prevent me from having children if they didn’t work 100% -

I’m not trying to offend, but with the studies unless I see a medical study with them, I take they use of the works “may cause” with a grain of salt - there are pro choicers who will quote anything that helps them (not necessarily always checking it out) - but I’ve also found that some of the ant abortion people will do this too to fire home or make things sound worse. I’ve done quite a bit of research on the whole birth control and abortion and breat cancer link and there are studies that show it to be a possibility (there was one, often quoted study for a while that I found had 12 participants - hardly what I would call a healthy, legitimate, large group)- while they had 95-100% showing a link between abortion and breast cancer, it can’t be taken seriously as a true medical study- - while I found this one that Janet Smith referred to in one of her talks or writting,s can’t remember if it was one or both, I will look at other studies to see if it can be taken seriuously- I was fairly pro choice - and I still am in situations where the mother may die (been there - almost did die trying to keep it going as long as possible)-after seeing the silent scream, it showed a 12 week gestation where the “fetus” was trying to get to the other side of the womb away from the instruments and had an increased heart rate. Anyway I’ll get off my soap box here- but I appreciate what you mentioned earlier.
God Bless
Rye

 

[chessmane4e5]

I should probably be clear about two things:

1. I was a cradle Catholic, left the Church in college and was Protestant for 10 years, and am now in the midst of a reversion.
2. I have used NFP in my marriage for 6 years, both to successfully avoid conception when desired, and to successfully conceive twice when desired. (Medical problems made other, more convenient contraceptive methods too risky). It was hard to learn, but I don’t find it hard to practice - in my opinion, this is one of the persistent myths of NFP that keeps people from giving it a try.

However it’s also a myth that NFP is not effective. It is effective, and therefore in my mind we ARE “contracepting”. We conceive when we want, and don’t when we don’t want. I find it hard to understand the distinction that renders this “manipulation” of our union ok and “different” from other forms of contraception.

NFP can become a sin, like contraception, if it is used selfishly. What I mean is, if you have a good reason to not have children right now, then NFP helps you space your children. On the other hand, if you have always wanted only 2 children, and now you have them so you intend to use NFP to prevent any more kids, that would be a sin.

It is definitely a tricky road to walk. My wife and I talk and pray about it. All we can do is try not to be selfish and therefore use NFP like Birth Control.

 

[Tracy_Spenst]

I’ve done quite a bit of research on the whole birth control and abortion and breat cancer link and there are studies that show it to be a possibility

Well, Rye, the Lord is giving you a little more help today! Check out this link from Nat’l Catholic Register!

ncregister.com/blog/federal_study_confirms_contraception-breast_cancer_link/

I also understand being given the Pill to stop bleeding, but have you checked with the Pope Paul VI Institute in Omaha, NE? They’re had a lot of success helping women with a variety of cycle-related problems and all treatments are allowed by the Church.

Well, gotta go!
Tracy

 

[una_fides]

History shows us that Popes sometimes get it wrong. If NFP is used to prevent pregnancy, it IS being used as a contraceptive. How can you say the a method designed to prevent pregnancy is anything other than contraceptive?

The Church’s teaching on NFP is not an article of faith or dogma. It is certainly not an infallible teaching!

“NFP” is contraception, pure and simple- contraceptive in intent, and contraceptive in effect.

There is a difference when you really think about it between NFP and artificial contraception. The “method used to prevent pregnancy” is abstinence. Is abstinence a sin if you do it to avoid having children for a serious reason such as that you would be likely to die or that you are fairly certain the child would die? The only difference here is that the married couple is engaging in completely normal and unaltered intercourse during certain times. The act itself is completely normal and natural and if the couple were not paying attention to the cycle and likelihood of conception, they would still be doing the same act at the same time during the infertile periods.

The question is whether it is sinful to engage in the marital act if you know that the likelihood of having children at that time is greatly diminished or extremely unlikely or even impossible barring a miracle from God. The key I think in the distinction is that someone rightly using NFP would still be open to new life, but would be attempting to limit the possibility of conception by NOT engaging in the marital act at a certain time when conception is likely. They are married and as such have the right to engage in that act when they so choose or abstain when they so choose. The act of abstaining during certain times to prevent a pregnancy if a grave reason exists has been determined by the Church to not be sinful. The act of artificially imposing ways to alter the body or marital act in some way as to remove or reduce conception has been determined by the Church as being sinful.

Remember also what St. Augustine said:

"Before His suffering the Lord Jesus Christ, as you know, chose His disciples, whom He called Apostles. Among these Apostles almost everywhere Peter alone merited to represent the whole Church. For the sake of his representing the whole Church, which he alone could do, he merited to hear, I will give you the keys of the kingdom of Heaven (Matt 16:19)."
Sermons 295,2, 391 A.D.

"The Catholic Church is the work of Divine Providence, … When, then, we see so much help on God’s part, so much progress and so much fruit, shall we hesitate to bury ourselves in the bosom of that Church? For starting from the Apostolic Chair down through successions of bishops, even unto the open confession of all mankind, it has possessed the crown of teaching authority."
The Advantage of Believing, 391 A.D.

“Do you wish to be great? Then begin by being. Do you desire to construct a vast and lofty fabric? Think first about the foundations of humility. The higher your structure is to be, the deeper must be its foundation.”

“Do you wish to rise? Begin by descending. You plan a tower that will pierce the clouds? Lay first the foundation of humility.”

Though the Pope’s teaching concerning NFP doesn’t necessarily fall within the guidelines to be protected by infallibility, it is still a teaching of the Church’s ordinary Magisterium concerning morality, and as such is to be given religious submission of intellect and will. It is a definitive teaching regarding morals, and if one follows this teaching on nfp as coming from the Church’s authority then he could not possibly be guilty of sin.

 

[Tracy_Spenst]

History shows us that Popes sometimes get it wrong. If NFP is used to prevent pregnancy, it IS being used as a contraceptive. How can you say the a method designed to prevent pregnancy is anything other than contraceptive?

The Church’s teaching on NFP is not an article of faith or dogma. It is certainly not an infallible teaching!

“NFP” is contraception, pure and simple- contraceptive in intent, and contraceptive in effect.

So, out of curiosity, what is your solution for those who should not have children due to life-threatening issues?

I Corinthians 7:5 says, “Do not refuse one another except perhaps by agreement for a season, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, lest Satan tempt you through lack of self-control.”

Obviously, complete abstinence as a married couple is not an option. What do you suggest?

Tracy

 

[Pixie_Dust]

So, out of curiosity, what is your solution for those who should not have children due to life-threatening issues?

I Corinthians 7:5 says, “Do not refuse one another except perhaps by agreement for a season, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, lest Satan tempt you through lack of self-control.”

Obviously, complete abstinence as a married couple is not an option. What do you suggest?

Tracy

It IS an option, and I’ve known couples to do so (or rather, NOT do so). Ensuring that when you decide to participate in the marital embrace at a time when you’re not fertile isn’t all that difficult. There are only a few days each month that a woman is fertile, anyway. That’s part of the beauty of NFP, is that you know exactly what your body is doing every day.

 

[Tracy_Spenst]

It IS an option, and I’ve known couples to do so (or rather, NOT do so). Ensuring that when you decide to participate in the marital embrace at a time when you’re not fertile isn’t all that difficult. There are only a few days each month that a woman is fertile, anyway. That’s part of the beauty of NFP, is that you know exactly what your body is doing every day.

Actually, I wholeheartedly embrace the use of NFP unless a couple has serious reason to avoid pregnancy. Quoeleth is the one who feels that the Pope is wrong for allowing its use. I was wanting to know what his solution was when pregnancy is life-threatening.

Tracy

 

[Fran65]

I would just like to clarify that it is possible for a married couple to abstain successfully over very long periods - perhaps for the rest of their lives. This can be the case where life threatening illness and/or disability occurs. I regard it as a part of the vocation of living with serious illness and/or disability. Many thousands of couples are living this way.

 

[budgie2]

I understand and respect the teaching that contraception interferes with God’s plan, and that to partake in his gift of sexuality without simultaneous openness to the creation of new life is to take only half of what God intended for us.

I’m having a hard time understanding, however, why it is that natural family planning (NFP) is ok when it is, in fact, a method of contraception. Modern symptothermal fertility awareness, complete with basal body temperature, cervical monitoring, luteinizing hormone assays, etc. make NFP more effective than condoms when used correctly. So there is less “openness” to new life, statistically speaking, with NFP and yet NFP is acceptable while condoms are not.

In a similar vein, intercourse during the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle can never result in pregnancy, and an NFP couple knows this well. Do they then sin having intercourse then, since there is no openness to new life at that time? What about intercourse when a woman is already pregnant - no chance for another pregnancy then, so no openness to creation there either. And intercourse after menopause - is that sinful?

 

[budgie2]

I understand and respect the teaching that contraception interferes with God’s plan, and that to partake in his gift of sexuality without simultaneous openness to the creation of new life is to take only half of what God intended for us.

I’m having a hard time understanding, however, why it is that natural family planning (NFP) is ok when it is, in fact, a method of contraception. Modern symptothermal fertility awareness, complete with basal body temperature, cervical monitoring, luteinizing hormone assays, etc. make NFP more effective than condoms when used correctly. So there is less “openness” to new life, statistically speaking, with NFP and yet NFP is acceptable while condoms are not.

In a similar vein, intercourse during the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle can never result in pregnancy, and an NFP couple knows this well. Do they then sin having intercourse then, since there is no openness to new life at that time? What about intercourse when a woman is already pregnant - no chance for another pregnancy then, so no openness to creation there either. And intercourse after menopause - is that sinful?

It is a sin to abstain if you don’t have serious reasons to do so, for example pregnancy imposes a serious risk to health, you’re in dire financial trouble or you’re going through a rocky patch in your life. If you abstain for the sake of it then it could break your marriage vows as you promised to cherish each other. Long periods of abstinence could increase the risk of adultery but if you’re charting, periods of abstinence should normally be short. It is sometimes in accordance with conscience to use a non-spermicidal condom during your fertile period if you have serious reasons to postpone pregnancy.

 

[una_fides]

It is a sin to abstain if you don’t have serious reasons to do so, for example pregnancy imposes a serious risk to health, you’re in dire financial trouble or you’re going through a rocky patch in your life. If you abstain for the sake of it then it could break your marriage vows as you promised to cherish each other. Long periods of abstinence could increase the risk of adultery but if you’re charting, periods of abstinence should normally be short. It is sometimes in accordance with conscience to use a non-spermicidal condom during your fertile period if you have serious reasons to postpone pregnancy.

Where did you hear such a thing? “In accordance with conscience” meaning that you don’t feel guilty but objectively speaking it is an intrinsically evil action to use artificial contraception, which would mean a condom. Regardless of the reasons why, the Church has said that their use is always wrong. You can abstain during a fertile period, but you cannot use a condom.

 

[Vico]

Openness to children is not demonstrated over time, but is a disposition that must be present in each conjugal act. A contraceptive barrier is not equivalent to abstinance since it modifies the conjugal act (and abstinance does not), which is an attempt to be the master of the sources of life rather than acknowledge that God is that master. With serious cause abstinance is appropriate in marriage, but not the use of a barrier to prevent pregnancy.

Search for “mastery” here in this document by the USCCB: usccb.org/laity/LoveandLife/MarriageFINAL.pdf

 

[PaulinVA]

It is a sin to abstain if you don’t have serious reasons to do so, for example pregnancy imposes a serious risk to health, you’re in dire financial trouble or you’re going through a rocky patch in your life. If you abstain for the sake of it then it could break your marriage vows as you promised to cherish each other.

Huh? It can never be a sin to not have marital relations. How could that be? I do agree that if you abstain year after year by using NFP with no serious reason then you are not open to life.

Long periods of abstinence could increase the risk of adultery but if you’re charting, periods of abstinence should normally be short. It is sometimes in accordance with conscience to use a non-spermicidal condom during your fertile period if you have serious reasons to postpone pregnancy.

Uhm, no. You may never use a condom during the fertile time is you have serious reasons to postpone pregnancy. Firstly, you can’t use condoms because they are artificial birth control. Second, you’re an idiot to trust a condom during the fertile time - during the fertile time a failure could result in a pregnancy, and they fail frequently.

 

[una_fides]

Huh? It can never be a sin to not have marital relations.

Actually I would argue that it could be a sin to deny your partner relations if the partner so desired to engage in the relations. It needs to be mutual to engage in abstinence. Granted one partner could convince the other, but if one partner wants to then the other partner needs to consent. To deprive the other of such is of grave importance because it can lead him or her to fall into serious sin. But in the context, you likely meant this statement that it can never be a sin to mutually abstain from marital relations… I would say generally you are right, but if the motivations are bad for doing so then it could be a sin, such as you don’t engage in marital relations because you hate kids or are selfish, etc.

 

[PaulinVA]

Actually I would argue that it could be a sin to deny your partner relations if the partner so desired to engage in the relations. It needs to be mutual to engage in abstinence. Granted one partner could convince the other, but if one partner wants to then the other partner needs to consent. To deprive the other of such is of grave importance because it can lead him or her to fall into serious sin. But in the context, you likely meant this statement that it can never be a sin to mutually abstain from marital relations… I would say generally you are right, but if the motivations are bad for doing so then it could be a sin, such as you don’t engage in marital relations because you hate kids or are selfish, etc.

Yes, of course. I was referring to a couple deciding mutually to not have relations on any given day.

If it’s part of a pattern of not being open to life, that’s the sin - the pattern of not being open to life, not the instance of abstinence.

 

[Vico]

Abstinence can lead to a weakening of affection or a risk of impurity, yet here are some situations where refusal (abstinance) is ordered, even if not mutually agreed upon:

1. if the spouse has been unfaithful to the extent of adultery (until forgiveness of
   the injured party).
2. if there is a danger of the infection of disease.
3. if the request is unreasonable.
4. if it be under conditions that are genuinely harmful and distressing.
5. if a pregnancy would be fatal or highly dangerous.
6. if it is going to be abused by the sin of onanism.

Re: Section V. Obligation, in **T.G. Wayne - Morals and Marriage, **published in 1936, EWTN has the document in their library:

ewtn.com/library/MARRIAGE/MORMAR.txt

 

[una_fides]

Abstinence can lead to a weakening of affection or a risk of impurity, yet here are some situations where refusal (abstinance) is ordered, even if not mutually agreed upon:

1. if the spouse has been unfaithful to the extent of adultery (until forgiveness of
   the injured party).
2. if there is a danger of the infection of disease.
3. if the request is unreasonable.
4. if it be under conditions that are genuinely harmful and distressing.
5. if a pregnancy would be fatal or highly dangerous.
6. if it is going to be abused by the sin of onanism.

Re: Section V. Obligation, in **T.G. Wayne - Morals and Marriage, **published in 1936, EWTN has the document in their library:

ewtn.com/library/MARRIAGE/MORMAR.txt

Good point.