Why the excessive interest in others' use of NFP?

[mrs_ahs]

I think it is a tough subject because NFP can appear to be a major shift in Catholic teaching on sexual morality in marriage. On the surface, the use of NFP to avoid can appear to be separating procreation for the marital act.

The existence of highly effective NFP makes it more challenging to understand and explain sexual morality. It is easier to explain when every act must be both open to life and between two people who are bonded for life to raise and nurture any life resulting from that act. I think that what happens with some folks (including me at times, although hopefully not directed at individuals circumstances) is that the more “conservative” one interprets the various teachings on NFP, the tighter sexual morality teachings fit together and the greater continuity with the Church teachings from the past.

It’s pretty hard to separate the unitive and procreative aspects of an act that is not taking place.

I don’t see a contradiction with the Church’s teaching. I just don’t understand why people don’t worry about their own family planning. I understand if people ask others and are seeking guidance. I’m referring to comments about how a couple would be selfish if they did this or that. There’s just no way to make blanket statements like that and have them be accurate.

Again, I feel like I’m not explaining myself clearly. I’m not referring to people who are giving solicited advice to people who come here with NFP questions, even though I think the “do I have a sufficient reason for avoiding?” question doesn’t belong anywhere but in a conversation with one’s spouse and God. I’m referring to people who go on and on about what others’ just reasons may or may not be, as though it’s any of their business, as though the Church has made a specific checklist, as though it’s anyone’s business but theirs.

 

[severus68]

It’s pretty hard to separate the unitive and procreative aspects of an act that is not taking place.

I don’t see a contradiction with the Church’s teaching. I just don’t understand why people don’t worry about their own family planning. I understand if people ask others and are seeking guidance. I’m referring to comments about how a couple would be selfish if they did this or that. There’s just no way to make blanket statements like that and have them be accurate.

Again, I feel like I’m not explaining myself clearly. I’m not referring to people who are giving solicited advice to people who come here with NFP questions, even though I think the “do I have a sufficient reason for avoiding?” question doesn’t belong anywhere but in a conversation with one’s spouse and God. I’m referring to people who go on and on about what others’ just reasons may or may not be, as though it’s any of their business, as though the Church has made a specific checklist, as though it’s anyone’s business but theirs.

Your first sentence made me smile.

You have explained yourself very clearly and you are absolutely right. Thanks for coming out and saying it directly.

 

[Walking_Home]

mrs ahs:

It’s pretty hard to separate the unitive and procreative aspects of an act that is not taking place.

I don’t see a contradiction with the Church’s teaching. I just don’t understand why people don’t worry about their own family planning. I understand if people ask others and are seeking guidance. I’m referring to comments about how a couple would be selfish if they did this or that. There’s just no way to make blanket statements like that and have them be accurate.

Again, I feel like I’m not explaining myself clearly. I’m not referring to people who are giving solicited advice to people who come here with NFP questions, even though I think the “do I have a sufficient reason for avoiding?” question doesn’t belong anywhere but in a conversation with one’s spouse and God. I’m referring to people who go on and on about what others’ just reasons may or may not be, as though it’s any of their business, as though the Church has made a specific checklist, as though it’s anyone’s business but theirs.

Your first sentence made me smile.

You have explained yourself very clearly and you are absolutely right. Thanks for coming out and saying it directly.

---

Ditto.

 

[whm]

It’s pretty hard to separate the unitive and procreative aspects of an act that is not taking place.

That is why I used the words “can appear” and “on the surface”. It absolutely can be viewed by others as a seemingly separation phrases like "catholic birth control’ come to mind’.

I don’t see a contradiction with the Church’s teaching.

I am glad. However, there some who do see it as a change in what they believe can’t be changed, and find it disturbing. I intentionally am not including some of the perceived changes as to not derail this thread.

I just don’t understand why people don’t worry about their own family planning. I understand if people ask others and are seeking guidance. ** I’m referring to comments about how a couple would be selfish if they did this or that. There’s just no way to make blanket statements like that and have them be accurate.**

I agree

Again, I feel like I’m not explaining myself clearly. I’m not referring to people who are giving solicited advice to people who come here with NFP questions, even though I think the “do I have a sufficient reason for avoiding?” question doesn’t belong anywhere but in a conversation with one’s spouse and God. I’m referring to people who go on and on about what others’ just reasons may or may not be, as though it’s any of their business, as though the Church has made a specific checklist, as though it’s anyone’s business but theirs.

You did clearly ask why some people debate the justification etc for using NFP. I attempted to give you insight as to where some of them are coming from. I am afraid that perhaps you viewed my attempt to answer your question as an attack of some sort (that was not my intent) or as being off topic/non responsive

I have read dozen of these threads over the years, and many posters are coming from a traditionalist point of view. Some (not necessarily the same people) are concerned that the Christian life is hard with crosses to carry and that the Church is making everything easier (less holy days, less fasting, shorter masses etc). Anyway I am not trying to start an argument only trying to explain where I see some people are coming from. Knowing that may help people diffuse some of the situations you are referring to.

 

[mrs_ahs]

Ok, thanks for explaining.

 

[sainthumbert]

I also hear frequent mention of the hypothetical couple who “uses NFP just so they can go on fancy vacations, buy a fancy car, or have a jacuzzi.” Seriously? LOL. As someone who has practiced NFP for my entire marriage, the idea that abstinence in the fertile period can be continued for decades for frivolous reasons by anyone with half a sex drive is completely ridiculous. Of the many, MANY NFP couples I know, I have never met one of vacation/car/jacuzzi sorts. From what I can tell, they exist only in the imaginations of those who find NFP couples to be selfish. The people who avoid children for those reasons are contraceptors.

Essentially, you are stating that those who use NFP automatically have serious reasons. You say, those who use NFP, because of the restraint required during the fertile period, have serious reasons because they would not bother with NFP if they didn’t.

I disagree. Why would the Church, every time she discusses recourse to infertile periods, makes sure to point out that such practice requires a serious reason? In Humanae Vitae it states the following:

“If therefore there are well-grounded reasons for spacing births, arising from the physical or psychological condition of husband or wife, or from external circumstances, 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.”

If a serious reason was inherent in the use of NFP, why would the Pope make a point of saying there must be a serious reason. He said it because it needs to be said, not because he wanted to add a couple more sentences to his encyclical.

Posters who are concerned with frivolous reasons for using NFP aren’t in bad company, for example:

From Servant of God Fr John Hardon SJ - Birth Control - A frank statement of the Catholic attitude was expressed by the former secretary of state under Pius XII, and one who knew the Pope’s mind as perhaps no one else on the subject. He was critical of those, including priests and teachers, who talk about rhythm as though it were the normal thing to do. “We may wonder if nowadays too much interest is not shown in this question (of periodic continence) and if, in this way, we are not trying rather to encourage the limitation of births than their natural coming to light. We should speak more about their increase and less about their limitation. Too often selfishness tries to justify the reasons for limitation. And yet selfishness is what extinguishes life, fertility and love. We should like to see the Catholic family do its utmost to preserve its nobility as a source of fertility, where the children brought into the world are at once a tribute to the virtues of the parents and a sign of their role as procreators of life. A large number of children will proclaim their parent’s fidelity to one another, their love of God and faith in His providence, and their affection for the offspring which He gave.”

 

[ahs]

Essentially, you are stating that those who use NFP automatically have serious reasons. You say, those who use NFP, because of the restraint required during the fertile period, have serious reasons because they would not bother with NFP if they didn’t.

I think silicasandra put it more clearly (from another thread which is more on-topic to your post than this thread):

I agree with you - using NFP is not an absolute guarantee that a couple is not behaving selfishly. But if a couple is willing to use NFP, with the sacrifices that it entails, I definitely think it more likely than not that their reason to abstain is serious - even if it’s not something that I would have to deal with in my life. It may be an “absolute” in terms of how we apply it to others - if a couple says that they are using NFP (in a situation other than this forum where they are advice-seeking), the default should be to assume their reasons are in line with Church teaching.

(But then again, that’s just the same charity we should be extending in most situations.)

 

[mrs_ahs]

Essentially, you are stating that those who use NFP automatically have serious reasons. You say, those who use NFP, because of the restraint required during the fertile period, have serious reasons because they would not bother with NFP if they didn’t.

I disagree. Why would the Church, every time she discusses recourse to infertile periods, makes sure to point out that such practice requires a serious reason? In Humanae Vitae it states the following:

“If therefore there are well-grounded reasons for spacing births, arising from the physical or psychological condition of husband or wife, or from external circumstances, 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.”

If a serious reason was inherent in the use of NFP, why would the Pope make a point of saying there must be a serious reason. He said it because it needs to be said, not because he wanted to add a couple more sentences to his encyclical.

Posters who are concerned with frivolous reasons for using NFP aren’t in bad company, for example:

From Servant of God Fr John Hardon SJ - Birth Control - A frank statement of the Catholic attitude was expressed by the former secretary of state under Pius XII, and one who knew the Pope’s mind as perhaps no one else on the subject. He was critical of those, including priests and teachers, who talk about rhythm as though it were the normal thing to do. “We may wonder if nowadays too much interest is not shown in this question (of periodic continence) and if, in this way, we are not trying rather to encourage the limitation of births than their natural coming to light. We should speak more about their increase and less about their limitation. Too often selfishness tries to justify the reasons for limitation. And yet selfishness is what extinguishes life, fertility and love. We should like to see the Catholic family do its utmost to preserve its nobility as a source of fertility, where the children brought into the world are at once a tribute to the virtues of the parents and a sign of their role as procreators of life. A large number of children will proclaim their parent’s fidelity to one another, their love of God and faith in His providence, and their affection for the offspring which He gave.”

I don’t have a problem with needing a just reason. But “just” is determined by the couple in question, and no one else. That is why I can’t wrap my head around why anyone else, other than the couple, would think it’s remotely any of their business. That’s why I can’t wrap my head around why anyone is even discussing other couples’ decisions in this arena (other than cases where said couple invites them to do so, as we’ve already discussed). That’s why I can’t wrap my head around this attitude that others feel they have any right to express any opinion about another NFP couple’s decisions. “Serious” does not mean you have to be dying, declaring bankruptcy, or all of your kids have to be in wheelchairs before you can avoid. And the Church says “just” reasons, by the way. Did you ever notice that the Church fails to give an explicit list of reasons that aren’t permitted? There is a vague guideline that couples are to be prayerfully guided by physical, mental, social, and economic reasons. That’s it. There’s a reason for that.

I know that posters who are concerned with this hypothetical “frivolous” use of NFP aren’t in bad company. Hence my thread.

“Speaking more about the increase of births” does not equal calling out people for their use of NFP because you think you know that they may not have a good reason. As far as Fr. Hardon (whom I love, btw) saying that too often selfishness tries to justify the reasons for the limitations, I don’t see any indication that he is not including contracepting couples in that assessment. If he was not, I find it absolutely astounding that he has personally met the vast majority of NFP couples on earth, and that they have shared with him their reasons for avoiding, if they are doing so. And “too much interest” according to whom? Again, the reasons for avoiding are left up to the couple, who administer the sacrament of marriage on each other. The reasons are not up to their neighbors, friends, relatives, people on the internet, their fellow parishoners, their priest, their bishop, or the pope. It’s up to the couple.

A large number of children do proclaim the parent’s fidelity to their faith. But frankly, I don’t get the point of the statement. Does a small family say the opposite? Do infertile couples or couples with small families proclaim the opposite? These sorts of statements can be hurtful.

 

[mrs_ahs]

I’ll give you an example. When I got married, I wanted 10 kids. (or more!) I still want that many. We were open from our wedding day on, and used NFP after the first two for just a few months, by following the rules VERY loosely because we weren’t that motivated to avoid. By our 7th anniversary, we were expecting #4. After my 4th baby, who was a c-section delivery due to a car accident (not my fault according to police report) in which I was struck and my placenta abrupted. When my water broke 2 weeks later and there was blood everywhere and we rushed to the hospital, we thought our baby was dead. She is now 9 months old and fine, praise God. I am still in massive amounts of pain every day of my life. Every step I take, every day of my life, is filled with pain. (I can handle pain, I had 3 9 lb. babies at home with no drugs at all. But this is awful.) I still feel pain where they cut me. (Yes, I’ve been to the dr. and there is nothing “wrong.”) My joints and ligaments are SHOT. I have seen 3 different chiropractors for help with my issues. It never gets better, only worse. I have been advised not to exercise to allow my body to heal. (Yeah, right. Rest, with 4 kids and homeschooling. Riiiight.) Therefore I cannot lose my baby weight, which makes my problem worse and contributes to feeling down about myself. I had post partum depression and the first few months were horrible. I cried every day. My house is in chaos, it’s like a tornado came through here, and that also contributes to me feeling down. This is a problem with a baby who is now mobile and puts everything in her mouth. No money for any sort of domestic help, no family nearby to help. Financially we are really struggling. I am an RN and planned to start working one day a week (after being off work for almost 4 years) but I physically cannot do it so we are hoping we can stay out of debt, but it’s not looking good. Budget is bare-bones (no cable, no eating out, garage sale clothes/hand-me-downs for kids, cars are 13 years old and paid for, etc.)

Many people seem to struggle with whether they can handle another one. If even just my health issues went away, I’d be open to having 5 or 6 more. I’d be fine being poor if I could take care of my kids. I want that huge Catholic family. I’ve always wanted it. I want to show the world that children are wonderful and bring glory to God. That they are a blessing. But my body won’t have it. I can barely take care of my kids as it is, let alone do everything around the house that I am required to do. I can barely walk. Now, none of these reasons are things that casual observers, or even friends or family members can see. I walk slightly slower than I used to, but most people don’t seem to notice. If we never have more babies, which is looking more likely by the day, people will probably think we are just selfish. They don’t have a CLUE. I want a huge family. I want it bad. Not being able to have it is MY cross.

So everyone, the next time you think you know what someone else’s reaons are, remind yourself that you don’t. You really don’t. And if they tell you and it sounds selfish, maybe they just gave you a quick answer to shut you up. SINCE IT’S NONE OF YOUR FREAKING BUSINESS. Worry about yourself, and, unless they invite you to be involved, let others take care of their own avoiding/achieving decisions. It does not involve you, no matter how much you think it does.

 

[Walking_Home]

I’ll give you an example. When I got married, I wanted 10 kids. (or more!) I still want that many. We were open from our wedding day on, and used NFP after the first two for just a few months, by following the rules VERY loosely because we weren’t that motivated to avoid. By our 7th anniversary, we were expecting #4. After my 4th baby, who was a c-section delivery due to a car accident (not my fault according to police report) in which I was struck and my placenta abrupted. When my water broke 2 weeks later and there was blood everywhere and we rushed to the hospital, we thought our baby was dead. She is now 9 months old and fine, praise God. I am still in massive amounts of pain every day of my life. Every step I take, every day of my life, is filled with pain. (I can handle pain, I had 3 9 lb. babies at home with no drugs at all. But this is awful.) I still feel pain where they cut me. (Yes, I’ve been to the dr. and there is nothing “wrong.”) My joints and ligaments are SHOT. I have seen 3 different chiropractors for help with my issues. It never gets better, only worse. I have been advised not to exercise to allow my body to heal. (Yeah, right. Rest, with 4 kids and homeschooling. Riiiight.) Therefore I cannot lose my baby weight, which makes my problem worse and contributes to feeling down about myself. I had post partum depression and the first few months were horrible. I cried every day. My house is in chaos, it’s like a tornado came through here, and that also contributes to me feeling down. This is a problem with a baby who is now mobile and puts everything in her mouth. No money for any sort of domestic help, no family nearby to help. Financially we are really struggling. I am an RN and planned to start working one day a week (after being off work for almost 4 years) but I physically cannot do it so we are hoping we can stay out of debt, but it’s not looking good. Budget is bare-bones (no cable, no eating out, garage sale clothes/hand-me-downs for kids, cars are 13 years old and paid for, etc.)

Many people seem to struggle with whether they can handle another one. If even just my health issues went away, I’d be open to having 5 or 6 more. I’d be fine being poor if I could take care of my kids. I want that huge Catholic family. I’ve always wanted it. I want to show the world that children are wonderful and bring glory to God. That they are a blessing. But my body won’t have it. I can barely take care of my kids as it is, let alone do everything around the house that I am required to do. I can barely walk. Now, none of these reasons are things that casual observers, or even friends or family members can see. I walk slightly slower than I used to, but most people don’t seem to notice. If we never have more babies, which is looking more likely by the day, people will probably think we are just selfish. They don’t have a CLUE. I want a huge family. I want it bad. Not being able to have it is MY cross.

So everyone, the next time you think you know what someone else’s reaons are, remind yourself that you don’t. You really don’t. And if they tell you and it sounds selfish, maybe they just gave you a quick answer to shut you up. SINCE IT’S NONE OF YOUR FREAKING BUSINESS. Worry about yourself, and, unless they invite you to be involved, let others take care of their own avoiding/achieving decisions. It does not involve you, no matter how much you think it does.

---

QFT —

 

[sainthumbert]

So everyone, the next time you think you know what someone else’s reaons are, remind yourself that you don’t. You really don’t. And if they tell you and it sounds selfish, maybe they just gave you a quick answer to shut you up. SINCE IT’S NONE OF YOUR FREAKING BUSINESS. Worry about yourself, and, unless they invite you to be involved, let others take care of their own avoiding/achieving decisions. It does not involve you, no matter how much you think it does.

Unless they invite you to be involved, let others take care of their own avoiding/achieving decisions. Agreed. Have you found this to be the case, that people question others motives aloud, outside of forum posts that ask questions about serious reasons? I haven’t. Quite the contrary; all I hear is that there is something freaking wrong with you if you have more than one kid every three years and any more than 2.2 in total.

 

[sainthumbert]

“Speaking more about the increase of births” does not equal calling out people for their use of NFP because you think you know that they may not have a good reason. As far as Fr. Hardon (whom I love, btw) saying that too often selfishness tries to justify the reasons for the limitations, I don’t see any indication that he is not including contracepting couples in that assessment. If he was not, I find it absolutely astounding that he has personally met the vast majority of NFP couples on earth, and that they have shared with him their reasons for avoiding, if they are doing so. And “too much interest” according to whom? Again, the reasons for avoiding are left up to the couple, who administer the sacrament of marriage on each other. The reasons are not up to their neighbors, friends, relatives, people on the internet, their fellow parishoners, their priest, their bishop, or the pope. It’s up to the couple.

John Hardon was talking specifically about NFP, not contraception"

“On the other hand, it is possible for Catholics to be swept along with the tide and seriously to look upon rhythm as a kind of ‘Catholic birth control:’ They may forget that birth control is the abuse, periodic continence is the non-use, of conjugal rights. If family limitation is sought in both cases (as it would be even among celibates), the means are totally different. The one is always sinful, while the other is morally indifferent.
A frank statement of the Catholic attitude was expressed by the former secretary of state under Pius XII, and one who knew the Pope’s mind as perhaps no one else on the subject. He was critical of those, including priests and teachers, who talk about rhythm as though it were the normal thing to do. ‘We may wonder if nowadays too much interest is not shown in this question (of periodic continence) and if, in this way, we…’” therealpresence.org/archives/Moral_Theology/Moral_Theology_007.htm

If a prominent Catholic revealed his tax return and assets and charitable contributions that showed he owned $100 million in assets and made $10 million per year and gave $200 to his Catholic Church during the year and no other contributions… and a non-Catholic asked you if that was the Catholic way, what would you say? Now suppose the suppose that same prominent Catholic said he was using NFP to delay children until he became a billionaire, and for no other reasons. A non-Catholic asks, is that the Catholic way? Could there be some reasons that are so frivolous that they are rightly called out as such?

 

[ahs]

Fr, John Hardon (the parts that someone forgot to mention):

The morality of using rhythm depends on a number of factors, namely the circumstances and intention that make it either permissible or illicit. Since the issue is often raised, it is important to recognize periodic consequences as in itself morally indifferent. Husband and wife do not interfere with the normal physiological process of generation freely set in motion by coition. Only the positive and direct interference with this process of reproduction constitutes the essential sin of using contraceptives. When a couple practice rhythm they have normal sex relations and fully respect the laws of nature which they initiate by having intercourse. Certainly they profit from their knowledge of the periods when the wife is fertile or sterile, and they restrict relations to the infertile times. But this is not immoral, no more than it is wrong to eat beyond the exact minimum which the body needs for sustenance.

Having said this, however, rhythm does not become automatically good. Both husband and wife must first agree to practice periodic continence, and especially the wife should not too easily assume that the husband goes along with her desire to abstain from relations during her fertile span. The marriage vow assumes that each has a right to the other’s body…Any grave threat to the harmony between spouses is a sign that periodic continence is not for them…

Moreover there must be sufficient reason for the use of periodic continence, either to increase one’s chances of pregnancy or to reduce its possibility…

Generally, though, rhythm is used to avoid or postpone pregnancy, and then the reasons must be correspondingly more demanding. Apart from these reasons, the exclusive use of the so-called “safe period” over a long space of time is sinful. Catholic moralists differ on the seriousness of the sin, and some even teach that no sin would be committed…

What are these serious reasons which justify the temporary or prolonged practice of rhythm? They were spelled out by Pius XII in a famous address he gave to the Catholic Union of Midwives in 1951. “There are serious motives,” the Pope said, "such as those arising from what are termed medical, eugenic, economic and social ‘indications,’ that can exempt for a long time, perhaps even the whole duration of the marriage, from the positive and obligatory carrying out of the act. From this it follows that observing the non-fertile periods alone can be morally lawful; and under the conditions mentioned it really is so." (37)…

Finally Catholics are asked to bear in mind that they are the salt of the earth, whose example of a selfless married love is badly needed by millions for whom marriage is anything but a life of sacrifice and obedience to the will of God. There are plenty of books and pamphlets on the subject of rhythm sponsored under Catholic auspices, and no one can deny the importance of a clear understanding of periodic continence for meeting the challenges of modern secularism. On the other hand…[here is where the previous quote was begun], it is possible for Catholics to be swept along with the tide and seriously to look upon rhythm as a kind of “Catholic birth control:” They may forget that birth control is the abuse, periodic continence is the non-use, of conjugal rights. If family limitation is sought in both cases (as it would be even among celibates), the means are totally different. The one is always sinful, while the other is morally indifferent. [In proper context…he is saying contraception is a sin, periodic continence is morally indifferent…as he stated above…and then he launches into some philosophy and his personal thoughts about the direction he sees things possibly going…]

…Too often selfishness tries to justify the reasons for limitation. And yet selfishness is what extinguishes life, fertility and love. We should like to see the Catholic family do its utmost to preserve its nobility as a source of fertility, where the children brought into the world are at once a tribute to the virtues of the parents and a sign of their role as procreators of life. A large number of children will proclaim their parent’s fidelity to one another, their love of God and faith in His providence, and their affection for the offspring which He gave. (39) [Notice he does not accuse anyone of selfishness…he is making a general observation…no where does he link NFP’rs to being selfish. I love this last part…]

By the same token, those who believe that God will not be outdone in generosity will not ask how little but how much they can do to prove their confidence in His help, without which all the talk about birth control is so much rhetoric. In the last analysis it takes complete trust in Providence to remain true to the mandate in Genesis, “increase and multiply,” when the whole tempo of modern civilization in a country like America is geared to keeping the family down to an absolute minimum; where the size of apartments and the amount of a man’s wages, and even the conditions for renting a home are such that only faith and more faith will resist the attraction of following the crowd and falling into the ways of those, like Bertrand Russell, who oppose Christianity as the great enemy of self-indulgence and Christ Himself as an obstacle to the enjoyment of pleasure.

So, who decides if a couple is being selfish and who decides what a “serious” reason is?

 

[kdub432]

Im often puzzled by the same thing as the OP when browsing this forum… Its like the internet seems to give people carte blanche in discussing normally private matters!