Why isn't Natural Family Planning sinful?

  • Thread starter Thread starter hamburglar
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
NFP is an eco and bio friendly alternative to the contraceptive pill. Couples still control when they want to have children and can have children to suit themselves. It is not necessarily the same as accepting God’s will although it has a certain amount of approval in the Church. NFP has a nice name, but dodgy morality.
 
If anything, NFP is more sinful than contraception since the periods of abstinence it requires are directly forbidden by the Pauline epistles.
 
NFP is an eco and bio friendly alternative to the contraceptive pill. Couples still control when they want to have children and can have children to suit themselves. It is not necessarily the same as accepting God’s will although it has a certain amount of approval in the Church. NFP has a nice name, but dodgy morality.
Who is the authority in this matter?
 
Its actually NFP every time throughout history a woman ‘counted’ her days & then knew whether she could engage in relations or not

Who said she had sex when she could, if she were not having babies. I don’t think the Catholic Church was going to save the baby and say to heck with the woman. She may be reminiscent of Eve, but even our FSSP priest says, sarcastically, “Thanks Adam”, when talking about our fallenness issues. Besides, did it think less of St. Bernadette or St. Lucia, though the latter was early 20th century? I can tell you men care less about them now. They just say women’s rights to mislead us into thinking they do.

I cannot see how a man releasing his seed, when it won’t affect anything, is like spilling it. Maybe an open to life and never to artificial means or pulling out intention saves it from being intrinsically evil, but not from mass psychology. Even the devout should be very restrictive about doing NFP. Even then, however, who knows if one ends up doing it more for the pleasure? It could be like when the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man pops into Ray’s head. If entertained long enough, it could become a mortal sin and who could stop the act, then?. I think NFP is best left as theoretically theologically possible and abstinence till baby-making is the best route to take.
 
Who is the authority in this matter?
The Church has the authority & it has indicated that NFP is an acceptable means of post-poning children for just reasons. The Church has also indicated that in some situations it is entirely acceptable to definitively avoid children for just/grave reasons. Read the Catechism… Even do internet research on it!

The Pope Paul VI Institute has created the one method of NFP (Creighton). As far as I know they are in full compliance w/ the Church & the Pope (one & the same?!). Their method emphasizes communication, prayerful discernment, and health. Actually, I think their method originated primarily not on preventing births, but on acheiving births &/or health for the woman. In a way, the prevention of births is a side-effect of knowing when you’re able to conceive best.

popepaulvi.com/about.htm
creightonmodel.com/background.htm
creightonmodel.com/advantages.htmcreightonmodel.com/advantages.htm
creightonmodel.com/intercourse.htm
 
Here are some direct quotes from Humanae Vitae (Pope Paul VI, July 25, 1968) Vatican .
Paragraph 24: To Men of Science
We wish now to express our encouragement to men of science, who “can considerably advance the welfare of marriage and the family, along with peace of conscience, if by pooling their efforts they labor to explain more thoroughly the various conditions favoring a proper regulation of births.” It is particularly desirable that, according to the wish already expressed by Pope Pius XII, medical science succeed in providing a sufficiently secure basis for a regulation of birth, founded on the observance of natural rhythms. In this way, scientists and especially Catholic scientists will contribute to demonstrate in actual fact that, as the Church teaches, “a true contradiction cannot exist between the divine laws pertaining to the transmission of life and those pertaining to the fostering of authentic conjugal love.”

Paragraph 27: To Doctors and Medical Personnel
We hold those physicians and medical personnel in the highest esteem who, in the exercise of their profession, value above every human interest the superior demands of their Christian vocation. Let them persevere, therefore, in promoting on every occasion the discovery of solutions inspired by faith and right reason, let them strive to arouse this conviction and this respect in their associates. Let them also consider as their proper professional duty the task of acquiring all of the knowledge needed in this delicate sector, so as to be able to give to those married persons who consult them wise counsel and healthy direction, such as they have a right to expect.

Some quotes from Evangelium Vitae (Pope John Paul II, March 25, 1995).
Paragraph 88: For a New Culture of Human Life
Many are the means towards this end which need to be developed with skill and serious commitment. At the first stage of life, centres for natural methods of regulating fertility should be promoted as a valuable help to responsible parenthood, in which all individuals, and in the first place the child, are recognized and respected in their own right, and where every decision is guided by the ideal of the sincere gift of self.

Paragraph 97: For a New Culture of Human Life
The work of educating in the service of life involves the training of married couples in responsible procreation. In its true meaning, responsible procreation requires couples to be obedient to the Lord’s call and to act as faithful interpreters of His plan. This happens when the family is generously open to new lives, and when couples maintain an attitude of openness and service to life, even if, **for serious reasons and respect for the moral law, they choose to avoid a new birth for the time being or indefinitely. The moral law obliges them in every case to control the impulse of instinct and passion, and to respect the biological laws inscribed in their person. It is precisely this respect that makes legitimate, at the service of responsible procreation, the use of natural methods of regulating fertility. **From the scientific point of view, these methods are becoming more and more accurate and make it possible in practice to make choices in harmony with moral values. An honest appraisal of their effectiveness should dispel certain prejudices which are still widely held, and should convince married couples, as well as health care and social workers, of the importance of proper training in this area. The Church is grateful to those who, with personal sacrifice and often unacknowledged dedication, devote themselves to the study and spread of these methods, as well as to the promotion of education and the moral values which they presuppose.

The bolded areas are my emphasis, but you should all be able to see that the Pope(s)himself encouraged development of natural methods to regulate births. It is also of utmost importance for doctors to foster human interest and health in their patients. So where’s the confusion about NFP?
 
I think psychology of people makes the hopeful thinking of NFP not enough to go on. I think people will subconsciously use it to have the pleasure of the act without the primary purpose of it. Just because it’s technically OK doesn’t make something a good idea. Contraceptors can be open to life, even if their methods aren’t. They’re just not open to it when they don’t want a baby.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top