1flesh.org
is a new website that seems to be all the rage amongst some NFP promoters. It
has a lot of good information about the massive problems with artificial
contraception. The problem I have with it is that the focus seems to be on sex
as an end in itself. This organization bills itself as “A
grassroots movement in opposition to the use of artificial contraception,
dedicated to bringing great sex to the entire universe”. That makes me wince.
I realize the targeted
audience is really young people, and I am not one of those. But what is the site teaching? Sure, I want
young people to know the dangers of artificial contraception – both physical
and moral. But I don’t want them to be encouraged any more than they already
are to focus on sex per se. I also want
them to know something about marriage
– like its primary purpose, for instance.
Recently, 1flesh.org has
released a video
“letter” to Melinda Gates. The message seems to be, “Yes, we really need to
help women in third world countries control births. But let’s not give them
contraception; let’s teach them NFP instead!”
Now, try telling me that
that’s not using NFP with a contraceptive mindset. Can you really do that and
keep a straight face?
Consider the following
conversation, reported by the author of an article
at C-FAM, which took place at the
Summit on Family Planning in London earlier this month (my emphasis):
“What are women’s attitudes
toward children,” I asked a representative from a Sierra Leone family planning
organization.
“Before the war, they were
negative. Now they are positive.”
“Do they want children?” I
clarified.
“Yes, they want children. They need to learn their rights. When they learn their rights, they won’t
want children.”
The battle to introduce
widespread contraception and abortion in countries that don’t want it has
become vicious. Countries like the Philippines have resisted; African nations
have resisted; but the pressure from Planned Parenthood and other groups is
intense. The goal is, ostensibly, to lower maternal and infant mortality rates,
and increase the standard of living, I guess. But the effects of birth control
are starting to be felt quite keenly in nations where the fertility rate has
dropped non-replacement levels – like Japan, for example. There aren’t enough
babies…not enough people. So…we want to foist the problem onto other nations,
too?!
In an article by Carey J.
Winters, I found this thought:
Satan is well aware that the
easiest way to rid the world of Catholicism is to rid it of Catholics. [Solange]
Hertz maintains that
…the abomination of desolation
is contraception … particularly as practiced by His own people in the guise of
so-called "natural family planning" … Standing poised in the holy place
to destroy souls and bodies at the very source of life in the Christian family,
contraception is proving to be the apex and consummation of that old Master
heresy from which all Christian heresies have derived. By its means Lucifer
hopes to terminate the Church as we know her. (Beyond
Politics, p 200)
Both contraception and NFP
can be used for evil purposes, and Satan chortles when people say that NFP is “approved”
by the Church.
When 1flesh.org suggests
that we teach women NFP instead of giving them artificial contraception, it is
supporting the same agenda as contraception: limiting the number of children
conceived and born. What if the people want
to have large families? Why can’t we aim at increasing maternal and infant
health and raising the standard of living in countries through other means than
limiting births?
1flesh.org’s video also
says that there’s no “moral objection” to NFP. Wrong. Despite what the
USCCB website section on NFP might lead one to believe, 19 centuries of Catholic
Church teaching have said, time and time again, first, that birth control is
wrong; and second, more recently, that NFP should only be used for “serious
reasons”. NFP is not meant to be “Catholic contraception”. Unfortunately, however,
that seems to be what it is becoming.
Yes, I know all the reasons given for why NFP is technically not the same
as artificial contraception. I know NFP is licit. But I agree with Dr. Anthony Caruso,
a former IVF doctor who, having realized the harm that was being done by that
practice, is now working to establish a center for reproductive health
that follows “the model set forth by the Magisterium of the Catholic
Church". He says (my emphasis):
It is not that NFP is not
licit. Nor that it is not a great means of becoming aware of the female cycle.
However, all too often, in the quest for spacing, we forget that it is
important to cooperate with God. Too
much reliance on NFP is no different than any other contraceptive device.
Just think about it.
Let’s go back to “serious reasons” for NFP – that oft-neglected
qualifier that many want to leave to the discernment of the couple, because “their
reasons may be serious to them” –
which, I’m sorry, just sounds like moral relativism to me.
Anyway, the reason for the reluctance to give some
guidelines for "serious reasons" for using NFP is that many bishops and
priests don't have the courage to say "No" to anything...except the
EF Mass, perhaps.
They are so worried about hurting anyone's feelings, that
they don't want to even suggest that "I don't want to be pregnant for my
sister's wedding" is not a good
reason to avoid pregnancy. They hem and haw and say, “Well, just follow your
conscience.” They don't want to set limits. And there are probably too many
priests (still) who won't condemn contraception, for the same reasons.
Let’s face it; we just don’t hear much about sin in general
these days. At least, I don’t.
Neither do I hear much talk about marital chastity, except from
those who seem to believe that "marital chastity means that you are
faithful to your spouse". That is not
what it means! That would be fidelity,
would it not?!? Chastity means that and a lot more…which I will address at some
other time.
It seems to me that few want to talk about what marital
chastity really means. There seems to
be an underlying philosophy for many married Catholics that, as long as you're
married, "anything goes" as far as sex is concerned, and it's all
good. If it feels good, do it! Since God made it feel good, He must want us to do it…a lot! Like, whenever
we want, and without fear of getting
pregnant. (It is possible to consider oneself open to life, to have several
children, and to still have this
philosophy. We are not always completely aware of the forces that have shaped
our actions.)
And
for heaven's sake, priests and bishops, don't talk about having a large family!
That’s so old-fashioned, and not reflective of responsible parenthood. And anyway, don’t Humanae Vitae and Gaudium
et Spes say that couples themselves should determine how many children they
want to have? Never mind the qualifiers; the liberal forces got their way with
that loose language. And look where it's gotten us!
The Church has always taught that the primary end of marriage
is the procreation and education of children; and that the unitive end is both
subordinate to and inseparable from the procreative end. As Carey Winters
notes:
The relationship between this
understanding of the primary end of marriage and the prohibition of
contraception is intrinsic. That they could be licitly divorced – and an intentionally
sterile marriage act facilitated solely for the pleasure of the
spouses – was unthinkable.
But that “divorce”, and the “intentionally sterile marriage
act” that results is exactly what Melinda Gates hopes to achieve by making
contraception widely available.
And that same “divorce” appears to be what 1flesh.org is
advocating in the way it promotes NFP.
Click on the NFP tab at the top of the page for
a list of other NFP posts on this blog.
