NFP

[Extra ecclesiam nulla salus]

how come trads are agianst natural family planning?

Dominus Vobiscum,

sam

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='Extra ecclesiam nulla salus' date='Sep 7 2005, 06:58 PM']how come trads are agianst natural family planning?

Dominus Vobiscum,

sam
[right][snapback]714779[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

What do you mean by Trads? Traditionalist are a much broader group than the term would indicate.

Those that are agianst NFP for birth control find that it is still an attempt to manipulate sex so that one gets the pleasure of sex without truely being open to life, it is a matter of intentionallity. The intent of NFP is often to not have children( it can of course be used to have children) and Traditionalist Catholics often oppose it on the grounds that it defies the meaning of sex and Divine Providence.

[qfnol31]

I agree with that.

[Brother Adam]

Orthodox Catholics would be against the misuse and abuse of NFP as nothing more than the intent to have some form of contraception. The use of NFP to have children and to naturally space them for the health of the mother and the children is good.

Why are schismatic Traditionists against it? I don't know, perhaps it is just one more way for them to be disobediant to the Bride of Christ.

[Don John of Austria]

[quote name='Brother Adam' date='Sep 7 2005, 07:56 PM']Orthodox Catholics would be against the misuse and abuse of NFP as nothing more than the intent to have some form of contraception. The use of NFP to have children and to naturally space them for the health of the mother and the children is good.

Why are schismatic Traditionists against it? I don't know, perhaps it is just one more way for them to be disobediant to the Bride of Christ.
[right][snapback]714828[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


You can narutally space them by simply not having sex for a year or so, you don't have to manipulate the ovulation of the women, so that you can have your cake and eat it too.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

*sees a Catholic vs. Catholic argument brewing*

Personally, while I will advocate NFP as long as the Magisterium does, and I will probably use it myself, I have always taken it solely on trust, as I don't see a moral reason to allow it over the other possibilities which are allowed.

I suppose it's this:

[b]Procreation with reckless abandon: make love whenever, have children whenever[/b]

Pros: Total abandonment to God

Cons: While it doesn't ever seek to postpone children, it also doesn't seek especially to have them, and so children may be left out of the minds and hearts of the couple completely; may not be suitable for the family life for health reasons (although the trust in God kinda answers this concern).

[b]NFP[/b]

Pros: Allows a couple to take responsibility and self-mastery over their sexuality; allows for healthy spacing; keeps children freshly in the mind of the couple; allows for increased knowledge of sexuality.

Cons: Can be used with contraceptive mentality; speaks less to the abandonment to God

[b]Abstaining[/b]

Pros: Allows for spacing

Cons: Probably not psychologically or spiritually healthy (married couples NEED to express their love sexually...temptations and occasions to sin are likely multiplied under this); doesn't embrace the gift of sexuality properly, but rather shuns it, treating it in a way which is not respectful of the vocation.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Sep 7 2005, 08:59 PM']You can narutally space them by simply not having sex for a year or so, you don't have to manipulate the ovulation of the women, so that  you can have your cake and eat it too.
[right][snapback]714830[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I know VERY few married people who would give up making love for a year or so.

[Brother Adam]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Sep 7 2005, 08:59 PM']You can narutally space them by simply not having sex for a year or so, you don't have to manipulate the ovulation of the women, so that  you can have your cake and eat it too.
[right][snapback]714830[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I cannot find any way in which it would not be sinful to be married and withhold for a year.

manipulate the ovulation for women? What is it you are talking about? I'm totally confused, because they call it natural for a reason. Do you even have any clue what Natural Family Planning is?

Since it is clear you condemn what the Church has embraced, do you consider yourself a schismatic traditionalist?

[Thy Geekdom Come]

It is a greater virtue to embrace the teachings of the Magisterium on trust than on understanding.

[qfnol31]

Don John hasn't made it clear he doesn't agree with the Magisterium.

You've read too much into his words. I still agree with all he has said here.

[IcePrincessKRS]

[quote name='qfnol31' date='Sep 7 2005, 11:07 PM']Don John hasn't made it clear he doesn't agree with the Magisterium.

You've read too much into his words.    I still agree with all he has said here.
[right][snapback]714988[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Agreed. I believe he simply clarified both sides of the issue. I am sure DJ knows what NFP is, too. I think its pretty obvious that when DJ said "manipulate" he meant knowing when ovulation occurs and using that time to your advantage. I don't see why it must be a sin to abstain for a year, either. I can think of plenty of reasons why a couple might have to do that which don't include sin. Illness, seperation (because of a job or something, military families are a good example of that), etc. I can imagine for some people it is just easier to abstain for a couple months than it is to chart. And if they go into it, both in agreement, they can always reassess and decide that the conditions are right for having a child then they can go ahead and have sex. Thats part of what NFP is, constantly reassessing your motives for trying to conceive or avoid pregnancy. Alot can happen in a year. Alot can happen in a month.

Furthermore, its not just schismatics who think that NFP shouldn't be used. I know plenty of people who are orthodox who don't agree with it, or think that you must have one foot in the grave and another on a banana peel in order to use NFP to avoid pregnancy. Its not dogma.

[popestpiusx]

I do not like NFP. I have trouble seeing the point, as well as the moral justification for it. However, the Churh has said it is ok in certain grave circumstances. To borrow from another hot debate, I think such circumstances are 'rare, if not practically non-existent'.

To accuse those who disaprove of NFP of being schismatic is quite rediculous and displays a certain deficiency in one's understanding of the term 'schismatic'.

[Benedict]

[quote name='popestpiusx' date='Sep 8 2005, 04:50 AM']To accuse those who disaprove of NFP of being schismatic is quite rediculous and displays a certain deficiency in one's understanding of the term 'schismatic'.[/quote]
He did not say that those who disapprove of NFP are schismatic. He said the schismatics disapprove of NFP.

The two are rather different statements.

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='Don John of Austria' date='Sep 7 2005, 07:59 PM']You can narutally space them by simply not having sex for a year or so, you don't have to manipulate the ovulation of the women, so that  you can have your cake and eat it too.
[right][snapback]714830[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

How do you "manipulate ovulation"?

The Pill "manipulates ovulation" but unless there's a magic on/off switch I'm not aware of, NFP does not manipulate ovulation.

Edited September 8, 2005 by homeschoolmom

[qfnol31]

[quote]He did not say that those who disapprove of NFP are schismatic. He said the schismatics disapprove of NFP.

The two are rather different statements.[/quote]

[quote]Since it is clear you condemn what the Church has embraced, do you consider yourself a schismatic traditionalist?[/quote]