Nfp (to Prevent Conception) For Newlyweds?

[Maggyie]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' post='1455147' date='Feb 3 2008, 11:51 PM']Lets not forget to put this important point on the table: the purpose of Marriage is to guide the other spouse to heaven. Children are the fruit. NFP used to delay the birth of a child is fine as long as it isn't for selfish motives. We're human beings, not animals who primarily mate for the survival of the species.[/quote]

Ah ha! We meet again, on another NFP thread! Like I said on the other one, I think that marriage IS for the propogation of the human race; the idea that husbands and wives are meant to guide each other to Heaven is a lovely idea but not IMO a theologically accurate way of describing the sacrament of matrimony. I wouldn't say that children are the "fruit" of the loving relationship, rather they are the primary end of marriage, "the supreme gift of marriage" as Gaudium et Spes says and the Catechism quotes. The unitive aspects, while obviously extremely important (we're not just breeders, as you point out) are not the main idea.

I would question the wisdom of getting married if you know you have to use NFP right from the start... just from a stand-point of being responsible. Accidents do happen. Getting married used to be a statement that you and hubby are grown-up, stable, and ready to start a family. If you and your would-be spouse can not financially or emotionally support a baby, it's DEFINITELY not a good idea to put yourselves in the position of possibly conceiving a child you're not ready for. Obviously God would provide. But I think many, many pastors and parents would consider it unwise and counsel against it.

[XIX]

[quote name='TheoGrad07' post='1455195' date='Feb 4 2008, 01:29 AM']Sure, it sounds the same if you wish to generalize and not be precise. Guiding each other to heaven/mutual help of the spouses is NOT only about sex - and children are (usually) the fruit of good sex.[/quote]
But he never said that is was only about sex. So again, I don't really understand your point of contention.

[TheoGrad07]

[quote name='Maggie' post='1455197' date='Feb 4 2008, 01:31 AM']Ah ha! We meet again, on another NFP thread! Like I said on the other one, I think that marriage IS for the propogation of the human race; the idea that husbands and wives are meant to guide each other to Heaven is a lovely idea but not IMO a theologically accurate way of describing the sacrament of matrimony. I wouldn't say that children are the "fruit" of the loving relationship, rather they are the primary end of marriage, "the supreme gift of marriage" as Gaudium et Spes says and the Catechism quotes. The unitive aspects, while obviously extremely important (we're not just breeders, as you point out) are not the main idea.

I would question the wisdom of getting married if you know you have to use NFP right from the start... just from a stand-point of being responsible. Accidents do happen. Getting married used to be a statement that you and hubby are grown-up, stable, and ready to start a family. If you and your would-be spouse can not financially or emotionally support a baby, it's DEFINITELY not a good idea to put yourselves in the position of possibly conceiving a child you're not ready for. Obviously God would provide. But I think many, many pastors and parents would consider it unwise and counsel against it.[/quote]


Excellently put - with references to authoritative sources!

[qfnol31]

There is a difference of emphasis between saying something is the fruit of an act and saying that something is the primary intention of that act. This is just my interpretation of what was said, and so I am open to the contrary, but to say that something is the fruit of an act is to say it is a result while you might intend something else first. However, to say that something is the intention of an act is to say that is what you want primarily.

I hold that the primary reason for the marital act is the procreation of children. I do not mean we are animals who simply must preserve our species: rather, we are to instruct our children about Our Lord and try to draw them close to Him as much as we are able as parents. We add a rational and truly good aspect to the marital act: i.e. we generate more people to know, love, and serve God which is why He created us in the first place. The more people to know, love, and serve Him the better!

[TheoGrad07]

[quote name='XIX' post='1455198' date='Feb 4 2008, 01:34 AM']But he never said that is was only about sex. So again, I don't really understand your point of contention.[/quote]


Children come from sex and procreation involves sex and we're talking about NFP - thus, in the context, we're talking a lot about sex.

My point was simply to point out that to say children are THE FRUIT of guiding one's spouse to heaven seems to imply that sex is THE THING with which you're helping your spouse.

Perhaps his statement was a reference to St Paul's injunction that people marry rather than commit sins against purity ... I disagree with the interpretation that marriage is primarily to avoid sins against purity.

Edited February 4, 2008 by TheoGrad07

[XIX]

[quote name='Maggie' post='1455197' date='Feb 4 2008, 01:31 AM']Ah ha! We meet again, on another NFP thread! Like I said on the other one, I think that marriage IS for the propogation of the human race; the idea that husbands and wives are meant to guide each other to Heaven is a lovely idea but not IMO a theologically accurate way of describing the sacrament of matrimony.[/quote]
Why would you not want to guide your spouse to heaven?? Am I missing something?
[quote]I wouldn't say that children are the "fruit" of the loving relationship, rather they are the primary end of marriage, "the supreme gift of marriage" as Gaudium et Spes says and the Catechism quotes. The unitive aspects, while obviously extremely important (we're not just breeders, as you point out) are not the main idea.[/quote]
I must agree that "the supreme gift of marriage" is a better choice of words than "fruit." I think both words are accurate.

The unitive aspect is just about side by side with the procreative aspect aspect of mawwiage. For example, if somebody were to ask you for the purpose of sex, it is: procreative, and it is unitive.

I guess you could say that the procreative aspect of marriage is the #1 priority in a marriage, but unitive would have to be 1-B in my opinion. I think they are essentially side-by-side as far as priorities go. Besides, you really can't effectively have one without the other. Procreation is easily the best way to unite a couple. And obviously, a strongly bonded and in love married couple will have an easier time making babies than a couple that can hardly stand each other. Such a couple would also be much better at raising its children.

So I would not prioritize one ahead of the other, simply because the two should really come in a single package.

[quote]I would question the wisdom of getting married if you know you have to use NFP right from the start... just from a stand-point of being responsible. Accidents do happen. Getting married used to be a statement that you and hubby are grown-up, stable, and ready to start a family. If you and your would-be spouse can not financially or emotionally support a baby, it's DEFINITELY not a good idea to put yourselves in the position of possibly conceiving a child you're not ready for. Obviously God would provide. But I think many, many pastors and parents would consider it unwise and counsel against it.[/quote]
I tend to agree--I don't know if I would completely ban the idea, but I would strongly discourage getting married until you are ready to have a kid. I don't think it's necessarily immoral to start out a marriage on NFP, I just think it's not very wise and not healthy for the marriage. Whenever I become a newlywed, I don't even think I'll use NFP to help conceive a child. You're in love, for crying out loud. Be as spontaneous as possible. Let God throw a child as you whenever. That's my take.

[XIX]

[quote name='TheoGrad07' post='1455203' date='Feb 4 2008, 01:40 AM']Children come from sex and procreation involves sex and we're talking about NFP - thus, in the context, we're talking a lot about sex.

My point was simply to point out that to say children are THE FRUIT of guiding one's spouse to heaven seems to imply that sex is THE THING with which you're helping your spouse.

Perhaps his statement was a reference to St Paul's injunction that people marry rather than commit sins against purity ... I disagree with the interpretation that marriage is primarily to avoid sins against purity.[/quote]
Yeah maybe we should hold off on this conversation until Smm gets a chance to clarify his position.

Edited February 4, 2008 by XIX

[Maggyie]

Of course you would want your spouse to get to Heaven! But getting your husband or wife to Heaven is not what marriage is specifically [i]for[/i]. That idea is a very, very modern theological speculation, and while it is legit I do not think it is true.

The unitive aspect IS very important! Obviously spouses who hate each other will pretty much stink at raising kids. But the Church does officially put procreation above the unitive aspects. This teaching doesn't get a lot of press but it is very old and it is still there.