Oct

4

More on Natural Family Planning (NFP)

October 4, 2008 | 3 Comments

I copy here an entry from the Catholicism.org News Portal because it brings up the moral issue of NFP, but first, a few more general thoughts on the subject:

NFP, or Natural Family Planning, is a more scientific version of what used to be called the “Rhythm Method.” Under Pope Pius XI, the church tolerated the use of this kind of “planning” by married couples, but under very strict circumstances that involved grave dangers to health or serious poverty. There is today a very dangerous movement that virtually sacramentalizes NFP. The votaries of this movement make it a virtual obligation on all couples to learn NFP and practice it to some degree. This is an objectionable abuse of the tolerance previously allowed by the papal magisterium. Married couples that have serious problems of health or poverty ought to consult a priest formed in the traditional theology on this point. Under his direction, they may, in good conscience, temporarily utilize the infertile periods as provided for in the program of NFP.

Now for the news story:

On Friday, Pope Benedict send a message to the President of the John Paul II Pontifical Institute for the study of Marriage and the Family. The message was occasioned by an International Congress marking 40 years of Pope Paul VI’s encyclical Humanae Vitae. Both Vatican Radio and AFP have coverage of this story.

The tendentious journalism of the AFP report may not be trustworthy, but it contains this notable paragraph:

The 81-year-old pope’s message Friday to a seminar on the encyclical also reaffirmed that the rhythm method is an acceptable form of contraception for couples in “dire circumstances” who need to space their children.

If the Holy Father really restricted the use of infertile periods (he almost certainly would not have said “rhythm method”) to “dire circumstances,” then he is distancing himself from the increasingly liberal interpretations of the Church’s traditional tolerance of this practice. The “tolerance” was limited to highly restricted circumstances, and the practice of the method for putting off contraception was always seen to be temporary.

Print, Share, and Enjoy:
  • Print this article!
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • Digg
  • Sphinn
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google
  • blogmarks
  • Blogsvine
  • De.lirio.us
  • description
  • eKudos
  • Fleck
  • Furl
  • IndiaGram
  • laaik.it
  • LinkaGoGo
  • Live
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • Spurl
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • YahooMyWeb
  • BlogMemes
  • BlogMemes Cn
  • BlogMemes Fr
  • BlogMemes Sp
  • description
  • Fark
  • Gwar
  • Haohao
  • IndianPad
  • kick.ie
  • LinkedIn
  • Ma.gnolia
  • MisterWong
  • PlugIM
  • Slashdot
  • Webride
  • Wikio FR
  • Wikio IT
  • Yigg

Comments

3 Comments so far

  1. Sheila Kippley on October 4, 2008 6:33 pm

    Someday I hope the Pope will mention God’s plan for spacing babies through breastfeeding. John Paul II referred to natural child spacing in a talk once. Sheila Kippley, author of The Seven Standards of Ecological Breastfeeding: The Frequency Factor.

  2. James on October 11, 2008 9:23 am

    Well, this idea seems internally consistent with its view of contraception in general. I never understood the difference between using a condom versus a calendar. Both are fallible, and both involve the same intent.

    I’m not sure, however, if it’s reasonable to suggest that marital relations be kept for procreation only. Is the church honestly suggesting that married couples who engage in sex once every 2-3 years are exhibiting a healthy level of physical intimacy? Not that physical intimacy alone defines a marriage, but it can impact it.

    I think reasonable people can disagree on this: it’s certainly not a Scriptural mandate.

  3. Elizabeth on October 23, 2008 5:28 pm

    “The use of “infertile periods” in conjugal shared life can become a source of abuses if the couple thereby attempt to evade procreation without just reasons, lowering it below the morally just level of births in their family. This just level needs to be set by taking into account not only the good of one’s family and the state of one’s health as well as the means of the spouses themselves, but also the good of the society to which they belong, the good of the Church, and even of humanity as a whole.”

    John Paul II, General Audience of September 5, 1984.
    From: Page 636, Man and Women He Created Them, A Theology of the Body, Translation, Introduction and Index by Michael Waldstein

Name (required)

Email (required)

Website

Speak your mind