Is NFP morally acceptable by the Catholic Church?

[St.Justin]

Livenotonevil, I quite like your post they always cause me to rethink my position and do research. I have always had an open mind and enjoy learning. Sometimes you come across pretty strong but so do we all from time to time. I would prefer you stay. but that is your call. I can never convert you if you leave.

It is not MeanGene's place to say who comes and goes or stays.

[Livenotonevil]

I'll stay, but I think I will regulate my visitations (not visit here often) and not try to proselytize myself.

However, if I find myself unable to do that (visit here not often), I will leave in order to cut myself away from temptation.

[St. Columba]

See, here's the thing - despite the fact that sex is very pastoral (under the guidance of the Priest) and contraception is heavily discouraged, one must realize that the intent and the outcome of both NFP and Contraception can be exactly the same.

It doesn't matter if I shoot a guy I don't like in the head or I stab him in the face - the intent and outcome is the exact same; that is, murder, death, and grave sin.

Likewise, reproducing with the express knowledge that there is no procreative purpose for your intercourse (from what I understand) is sinful and is purely mutual masturbation, regardless if you use "natural barriers" or not. You are still having sterile sex.

Thank you Livenotonevil, but I think you misunderstand my point. 

First, are you saying that sex in pregnancy is evil?  Because I sure am not.

What I am saying is that NFP, like sex during preganacy, is not deliberately closed to life on *our* part.  The man is not wasting his seed, because God (and nature) decided that He does not want the woman to become pregnant at those times.  On the other hand, contraceptive sex and mutual masturbation are sins on our end, because WE deliberately waste the seed on our end.  Huge difference.

And, in general, the ends do not justify the means.  How one goes about doing something matters a great deal, morally, even if the intention and outcome is the same. 

Thank you friend.

[MeanGene]

Livenotonevil, I quite like your post they always cause me to rethink my position and do research. I have always had an open mind and enjoy learning. Sometimes you come across pretty strong but so do we all from time to time. I would prefer you stay. but that is your call. I can never convert you if you leave.

It is not MeanGene's place to say who comes and goes or stays.

No it isn't, and I certainly don't claim that authority for myself. But if someone describes their activity on this forum as an attempt to "delude" themselves then it might be better for them to stop doing that, or at least limit their activity. Livenotonevil is certainly free to ignore any advice I give him.

[lauermar]

Sometimes a married couple has to abstain from intercourse for periods of time. Sometimes indefinitely. There may be illness, disability, or poverty. Spouses may be absent during war, or it may be occupational.  If both parties agree and have a stable marriage, abstinence is not a sin and never was.

But using abstinence to frustrate the sex act for no grave reason must surely be a sin. It isn't in keeping with tradition.

[Gardener]

Sometimes a married couple has to abstain from intercourse for periods of time. Sometimes indefinitely. There may be illness, disability, or poverty. Spouses may be absent during war, or it may be occupational.  If both parties agree and have a stable marriage, abstinence is not a sin and never was.

But using abstinence to frustrate the sex act for no grave reason must surely be a sin. It isn't in keeping with tradition.

abstinence != frustration of a sexual act; abstinence = lack of a sexual act.

[Chestertonian]

i think that the reason why you are supposed to have a grave resaon is not becase the marital act is being frustrated  (it isnt) but because children are a good and so the church wants to make sure parents dont deprive themselves of this great good for some frivolous reason.  I think there is also the idea of a duty to bring children into this world, although i dontthink that needs to be interpreted as a duty to have as many children as you possibly can

unfortunately God doesnt have annual reviews and theres no way to know how you're doing...He doesnt give us a magic number from the sky of how many children He wants us to have....which is frightening because we can fail to please Him without even knowing it.

[Greg]

By my calculations a married couple aged 22f and 28m following the no NFP, no sex during pregnancy and with enough wealth to buy an 8 bedroom house, and in good health, are going to enjoy orgasms about 30-50 times in the course of their entire married life.

Why not live as brother and sister and adopt Ukrainian orphans?  That way you could marry an ugly woman who you liked for her personality?  She'd probably be a better cook, and mother, and companion too and she's not going to be forever tired, pregnant or have large medical bills.

What is the point of sexual attraction, if it averages out at 1 decent shag per year?  That's not a reward.  That is not any consolation.

It's like living in concentration camp, being fed watery gruel and being told by the guards, "Arbeit macht frei"

There's precious little sex in many marriages and your solution is to have even less of it?

Why have any?

[LausTibiChriste]

I could sooner mix oil and water than get Trads to have a normal outlook on sexuality.

[Livenotonevil]

By my calculations a married couple aged 22f and 28m following the no NFP, no sex during pregnancy and with enough wealth to buy an 8 bedroom house, and in good health, are going to enjoy orgasms about 30-50 times in the course of their entire married life.

Why not live as brother and sister and adopt Ukrainian orphans?  That way you could marry an ugly woman who you liked for her personality?  She'd probably be a better cook, and mother, and companion too and she's not going to be forever tired, pregnant or have large medical bills.

What is the point of sexual attraction, if it averages out at 1 decent shag per year?  That's not a reward.  That is not any consolation.

It's like living in concentration camp, being fed watery gruel and being told by the guards, "Arbeit macht frei"

There's precious little sex in many marriages and your solution is to have even less of it?

Why have any?

Why should we fast or abstain from meat if it feels good to eat food? Why should we avoid getting drunk when getting drunk feels good?

[Livenotonevil]

I could sooner mix oil and water than get Trads to have a normal outlook on sexuality.

Indeed, would you consider Christ's teachings - "normal?"
What is normal? To obey the urges of our fallen nature, or to fight against it for something greater?

[Jayne]

I could sooner mix oil and water than get Trads to have a normal outlook on sexuality.

Who decides what is the "normal outlook on sexuality"?  Secular culture? It is even more messed up than Trads are.  We live in a world that thinks that the sex act is about pleasure and is independent of marriage and of procreation.  It thinks that "gender is a social construct" and people choose to be male, female, or other options that I can not even keep track of.  Apparently sex with children is just fine unless a Catholic priest does it, in which case it proves Catholicism is evil.

One occasionally sees weird ideas about sex coming from Trads, but the weirdest among us is still doing better than secular culture.   And many of us are not weird at all.  Traditional Catholicism is one of the last bastions of sanity when it comes to sexuality.

[Chestertonian]

What is normal? To obey the urges of our fallen nature, or to fight against it for something greater?

Why should we fast or abstain from meat if it feels good to eat food? Why should we avoid getting drunk when getting drunk feels good?

im not really sure.  my wife is in the hospital right now for an eating disorder because eating food no matter how tasty it is, feels like torture to her so she lost a dangerous amount of weight.  Yet, clearly there is something wrong with this

ii think theres a difference between abstaining from food or sex because it's good, and eating a juicy ribeye and forcing ourselves to not enjoy every bite we take.  like...should we encourage our kids to feel guilty for every bite of chocolate they have on easter or every bite of food they have on christmas i dont know.  sometimes it seems like every second of our lives is supposed to be this horrible death march toward an unknown eternal destiny..... and every second of happiness we have here in this vale of tears is just going to send us further and further away from heaven

but then its hard to imagine why things like pleasure would exist at all except only to torment us.  and if that is the case it's like our bodies have temptation built in almost like the body is nothing but a booby trapped prison of temptation.  in order for the species to continue we have to eat and drink but without actually allowing it to make us feel one way or the other

I forget where i read that sex was a foretaste of heaven, but I think that was a JPIIism so...i guess the traditional approach would be that it is the opposite                                                                                                                                                                                                           

[Carleendiane]

I could sooner mix oil and water than get Trads to have a normal outlook on sexuality.

Indeed, would you consider Christ's teachings - "normal?"
What is normal? To obey the urges of our fallen nature, or to fight against it for something greater?

I have no problem with the statement above made by Livenotonevil....just the presence of a young man in this type of thread.

Please excuse the offense I can not avoid, and find somewhat a result of what I have to say. I have absolutely no reason to desire to offend you, livenotonevil. Truly, what I need to ask here is about something that bothers me about this type of thread.

The beauty of this forum is the anomnimity. We are free to say things in public because of that. Unless you are a dumbbell like me and use your real name  .

Anyway, I must ask this, to gain a bit of peace about this type of thread.

What in the world would motivate a young man, no where near marriage, I assume..still in college, to participate in conversation about the marital act. I do understand the importance of being well versed in matters of our position about all things related to life. That being said, the discussion about the marital act, licit pleasure to be had between hubby and wife, open to life, but not possible due to already pregnant, or beyond child bearing. A discussion I would never broach or participate in with my own children, or anyone who is not on the cusp of marriage. And even then I would refer them to a priest.  I find absolutely no benefit in this discussion with a young man, unless he is seriously preparing for priesthood, to be a confessor, or to counsel couples before and even after marriage. Other than that, we are carrying on a discussion that is to be no part of a young Christian man's life, thoughts, or formation at this time in his life.

Am I wrong to be looking at it this way? Maybe prudish and seeing weird when there is no weird? Truly, someone explain to me how this is even appropriate, because I am just not seeing it.

Maybe we need a subforum for married couples.Ya think? Of course I can just step aside and shut up. Yep, I can do that. Or, should the young and single not even participate? I find very twisted ideas about sex in this type of thread when it is open to all. What can a single young man contribute, to such things as sex during pregnancy, sex for the mere pleasure of it. Sex between oldsters. Seriously, these thoughts, qualified by quoting St Augustine, St. Thomas,  etc., quoting the Saints, does it open the door to improper conversations therefor, making them proper?

I am in earnest and I apologize ahead of time for making Livenotonevil or anyone else feel uncomfortable.

[Chestertonian]

I could sooner mix oil and water than get Trads to have a normal outlook on sexuality.

Indeed, would you consider Christ's teachings - "normal?"
What is normal? To obey the urges of our fallen nature, or to fight against it for something greater?

I have no problem with the statement above made by Livenotonevil....just the presence of a young man in this type of thread.

Please excuse the offense I can not avoid, and find somewhat a result of what I have to say. I have absolutely no reason to desire to offend you, livenotonevil. Truly, what I need to ask here is about something that bothers me about this type of thread.

The beauty of this forum is the anomnimity. We are free to say things in public because of that. Unless you are a dumbbell like me and use your real name  .

Anyway, I must ask this, to gain a bit of peace about this type of thread.

What in the world would motivate a young man, no where near marriage, I assume..still in college, to participate in conversation about the marital act. I do understand the importance of being well versed in matters of our position about all things related to life. That being said, the discussion about the marital act, licit pleasure to be had between hubby and wife, open to life, but not possible due to already pregnant, or beyond child bearing. A discussion I would never broach or participate in with my own children, or anyone who is not on the cusp of marriage. And even then I would refer them to a priest.  I find absolutely no benefit in this discussion with a young man, unless he is seriously preparing for priesthood, to be a confessor, or to counsel couples before and even after marriage. Other than that, we are carrying on a discussion that is to be no part of a young Christian man's life, thoughts, or formation at this time in his life.

Am I wrong to be looking at it this way? Maybe prudish and seeing weird when there is no weird? Truly, someone explain to me how this is even appropriate, because I am just not seeing it.

Maybe we need a subforum for married couples.Ya think? Of course I can just step aside and shut up. Yep, I can do that. Or, should the young and single not even participate? I find very twisted ideas about sex in this type of thread when it is open to all. What can a single young man contribute, to such things as sex during pregnancy, sex for the mere pleasure of it. Sex between oldsters. Seriously, these thoughts, qualified by quoting St Augustine, St. Thomas,  etc., quoting the Saints, does it open the door to improper conversations therefor, making them proper?

I am in earnest and I apologize ahead of time for making Livenotonevil or anyone else feel uncomfortable.

so.... Wait

you never had "the talk" with your kids?  The birds and the bees?