why is NFP allowed if all contraception is wrong?

  • Thread starter Thread starter phoenix1950
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

phoenix1950

Guest
Hello all šŸ™‚
First of all I am not married but this question bugs me.
How can contraception(I am logically talking only about non abortive here like condom or pulling out) and oral sex be wrong and NFP be right if they have the same goalā€¦to not get preagnant.
Both are used to avoid pregnancy. Also why would every single sexual act have to be with man ejacuating inside vagina,it makes no sense especially if woman is allready bearing a child or is infertile.

I am having hard time accepting this teaching and it is better to learn about it now than later in marriage (I donā€™t wish to lead my wife to sin).
 
With contraception, youā€™re still having sex. With NFP, youā€™re not (if youā€™re trying to avoid conceiving.) Youā€™re not disrupting or changing anything about the bodyā€™s natural functioning or how sex works. Youā€™re just not having it. šŸ¤·
 
God designed human biology. Contraception seeks to thwart Godā€™s design. NFP works within Godā€™s design.
 
NFP is just information.

It only tells you when your ovulating. Itā€™s not a deliberate act to prevent pregnancy. A condom is a deliberate act to avoid pregnancy that thwarts Godā€™s design.

NFP can be used to avoid pregnancy or achieve pregnancy. If you want to get pregnant you figure out when you are ovulating and have sex on those days. If you donā€™t want to get pregnant you figure out when you are ovulating and avoid those days.

You are working with Godā€™s design and not against it.
 
My friends who were doing exactly as the previous posters describe, were accused like this. In my observation such accusers like to assume bad will on the part of others.
 
phoenix1950 said:
Hello all šŸ™‚
First of all I am not married but this question bugs me.
How can contraception(I am logically talking only about non abortive here like condom or pulling out) and oral sex be wrong and NFP be right if they have the same goalā€¦to not get preagnant.
Both are used to avoid pregnancy. Also why would every single sexual act have to be with man ejacuating inside vagina,it makes no sense especially if woman is allready bearing a child or is infertile.

I am having hard time accepting this teaching and it is better to learn about it now than later in marriage (I donā€™t wish to lead my wife to sin).
Click to expand...
1: Oral Sex is a form of sodomy. Itā€™s not a form of ā€œcontraception.ā€ Itā€™s not a kin to using a condom or onanism (the ā€œpullout methodā€)
  1. NFP and contraception do not have the same goal.
The goal of contraception is to have sex but not get pregnant.

The goal of NFP is to refrain from sex so not to get pregnant.

The whole concept regarding contraception is it allows you to have sex during the fertile time of the month without getting pregnant.

A woman cannot get pregnant 30 days out of the month. She can only get pregnant during a select window, when the egg is in the fallopian tube.
  1. Having sex during the non-fertile times of the month is not sinful. Nor is it sinful to have sex with a non-fertile spouse. Sex is scared to Catholics because it serves two functions: procreate life and itā€™s a uniting act for husband & wife. But sex is profaned when one of the two reasons
  2. contraception is sinful because Christian Marriage is supposed mirror the love God the Father has for the Second Person of the Holy Trinity. That love creates the Third Person of the Holy Trinity - The Holy Spirit. The love a husband shares with his wife is supposed to create a third person too, their child (and then multiple children). When we use contraception, it is theologically a kin to God the Father & Jesus deciding NOT to send us the Holy Spirit.
  3. When we use contraception, we are being selfish because we are saying, we want to engage is sex but we want to rid ourselves of the responsibilities that come with it. When we refrain, we are not having sex, and we are not ridding ourselves of the responsibilities. We are simply attempting to responsibly space our children or refrain from having children for family reasons.
  4. NFP requires sacrifice: refraining from sex
    Contraception requires no sacrifice and frankly becomes lustful because the consequences have been removed (or greatly reduced) and the act is not made in true love.
  5. True love is the love God The Father has for God The Son. Making love requires true love and true love is open to having children, just has the Love The Father has for The Son creates The Holy Spirit.
  6. So if true love is open to life, then when you use contraception, you are not open to life and thus it is not true love. Sexual acts which are not made in true love are lustful.
I pray this makes sense.

God Bless!
Phil
 
To properly address your question, we need to understand what the church teaches about contraception. The Catechism addresses the Love of Husband and Wife in paragraphs 2360-2363, noting the spouses union is oriented both towards the good of the spouses as well as the transmission of life. In discussing the fecundity of marriage (the orientation of spousal union towards procreation) in paragraphs 2366-2379, the Catechism notes that periodic continence (the method of birth regulation based on self-observation and the use of infertile periods) is an acceptable method for the spouses to utilize to space the birth of their children. This method is in conformity with the objective criteria of morality for it is done in cooperation with Godā€™s divine plan. If NFP is utilized for purely selfish reasons, however, and not done through an appreciation of parenthood, its use places the spouses in a state of grave sin.

Artificial contraception, on the other hand, is intrinsically evil for it attempts to not cooperate with the natural rhythm of fertility but rather serves as an impediment to Godā€™s plan by rendering procreation impossible.
 
phoenix1950 said:
why is NFP allowed if all contraception is wrong?
Click to expand...
It is not ā€œall contraceptionā€ that is wrong. It is artificial contraception that is wrong. ā€œNFPā€ expands to ā€œnatural family planning,ā€ and the keyterm there is ā€œnatural.ā€
 
I believe the extremely short answer is: when tracking NFP, the marital act is always open to life.
 
phil19034 said:
  1. contraception is sinful because Christian Marriage is supposed mirror the love God the Father has for the Second Person of the Holy Trinity. That love creates the Third Person of the Holy Trinity - The Holy Spirit. The love a husband shares with his wife is supposed to create a third person too, their child (and then multiple children). When we use contraception, it is theologically a kin to God the Father & Jesus deciding NOT to send us the Holy Spirit.
Click to expand...
catholiceducation.org/en/culture/catholic-contributions/the-origin-of-the-holy-spirit.html
  • the correct word is ā€˜proceedsā€™. šŸ™‚
Agreed. šŸ‘
 
If one would use NFP to track the fertile phase and abstain from sex during it, but would use a barrier method in the non-fertile days, why would that be wrong? You would still make the sacrifice of refraining from sex. What makes NFP open to life, the fact that it can easily fail?
 
Starbelle said:
If one would use NFP to track the fertile phase and abstain from sex during it, but would use a barrier method in the non-fertile days, why would that be wrong? You would still make the sacrifice of refraining from sex. What makes NFP open to life, the fact that it can easily fail?
Click to expand...
Itā€™s not failure rate. Itā€™s that the nature of the sex act is not being changed with NFP. Thatā€™s why using a barrier during an infertile period is not acceptable. It changes the nature of the action. Whereas with NFP, the action simply doesnā€™t happen.

Edited for bad swype
 
I have addressed this on my personal blog. Here is a piece :
The use of contraception denies and rejects the totality of the person, only seeking pleasure and wanting the ā€œmatterā€ to satisfy your out-of-control concupiscence. It rejects and insults Godā€™s creation of the capabilities of conception. It is to hate your spouse, hating their capabilities and possibility of conception, wanting just a part of their body, separating love from sex and participating in a lustful feast of the devil.
Click to expand...
 
I have heard it said that NFP is also sin. I think it depends on which type of Catholic you ask.

I have heard it said that the church allows it as a mercy, but that its not really supposed to be ā€˜okā€™.

Then again, Iā€™ve also heard it said that a couple can freely use it, that its perfectly fine.
Code: 
I do think its a fact that it was in the past considered sinful.   (Sounds a lot like the sin of Onan to me actually!)   I have no documentation on that it in the past being considered a sin, but that's all just off the top of my head-  so, take it with a grain of salt.   

I'd go with what St. Paul said... Romans 14: verse 23: ā€œBut he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because he does not eat from faith; for whatever is not from faith is sin.ā€
That is, if you consider something a sin, then donā€™t do it. You violate your conscience, and this damages moral character. Its compromise, and compromise has a way of ruining things, making other things slide into oblivion.
 
Compendium issued by Pope Benedict XVI (with emph)
  1. When is it moral to regulate births?
2368-2369
2399

The regulation of births, which is an aspect of responsible fatherhood and motherhood, is objectively morally acceptable when it is pursued by the spouses without external pressure; when it is practiced not out of selfishness but for serious reasons; and with methods that conform to the objective criteria of morality, that is, periodic continence and use of the infertile periods.
  1. What are immoral means of birth control?
2370-2372

Every action - for example, direct sterilization or contraception - is intrinsically immoral which (either in anticipation of the conjugal act, in its accomplishment or in the development of its natural consequences) proposes, as an end or as a means, to hinder procreation.

vatican.va/archive/compendium_ccc/documents/archive_2005_compendium-ccc_en.html
 
AnneElizabeth said:
I have heard it said that NFP is also sin. I think it depends on which type of Catholic you ask.
Click to expand...
Meaning - depending on if the Catholic you ask knows what the Church Teaches or not!..

Periodic Continence (NFP) can be yes rightly used - such is the teaching of the Church.

(see next post)
 
Compendium issued by Pope Benedict XVI (with emph)
  1. When is it moral to regulate births?
2368-2369
2399

The regulation of births, which is an aspect of responsible fatherhood and motherhood, is objectively morally acceptable when it is pursued by the spouses without external pressure; when it is practiced not out of selfishness but for serious reasons; and with methods that conform to the objective criteria of morality, that is, periodic continence and use of the infertile periods.
  1. What are immoral means of birth control?
2370-2372

Every action - for example, direct sterilization or contraception - is intrinsically immoral which (either in anticipation of the conjugal act, in its accomplishment or in the development of its natural consequences) proposes, as an end or as a means, to hinder procreation.

vatican.va/archive/compendium_ccc/documents/archive_2005_compendium-ccc_en.html
 
DaveBj said:
It is not ā€œall contraceptionā€ that is wrong. It is artificial contraception that is wrong. ā€œNFPā€ expands to ā€œnatural family planning,ā€ and the keyterm there is ā€œnatural.ā€
Click to expand...
Iā€™m sorry Dave, this is not correct.

Contraception is intrinsically evil. It is always wrong.

NFP is not contraception.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top