On Clarifying the Licit Use of NFP

Because of the big brouhaha over the contraception mandate, there’s been a lot of news commentary the last few weeks on the subject of NFP (Natural Family Planning).

Prior to February 14, I would have applauded the coverage, agreed with it, promoted NFP in a few blog posts, and felt really good about the whole thing. I learned about NFP after I became Catholic, and by that time, I’d had myself sterilized, and was approaching the end of my child-bearing years anyway. What I read of NFP sounded very good for the relationship of spouses, and appeared to be “acceptable” to the mind of the Church. I regretted never having had the chance to use it in my marriage.

But that was then, and this is now, and my views on NFP have changed radically.

On February 14, I received an email from a friend with a link to a homily on “The Duty of Motherhood” (which I have since transcribed and posted here). The message said:

I don't know if NFP has risen to the level of "hot button" for you, yet, but some day it will. Theology of the Body and Natural Family Planning will, one day, be viewed from their rightful home in the trash bin of theological fads that did great harm to the Church and Her faithful.

Just ask yourself: "Can I picture Our Blessed Mother teaching young Jewish maidens to 'chart' so as to avoid conceiving a child (or "charting" AT ALL!) and can I hear TOB language coming from her mouth?" BOTH invite embarrassing forays into immodesty and impurity. The questions answer themselves, providing "insight" into what a pandering to our hyper-sexualized culture this has really been (under the guise of "spirituality" and "responsible parenthood").

I admit, I was a bit taken aback. I didn’t know there was something wrong with NFP! I did some thinking and some reading.

And I think NFP is…well…very much misused and misrepresented. And I suspect it is largely practiced from a contraceptive mindset, even by faithful Catholic couples who perhaps have not fully investigated their own motives or fears.

NFP is painted in glowing terms by its supporters: it strengthens marriage, it encourages “communication” between husband and wife, it’s correlated with a lower divorce rate, and it’s “healthy”. These claims may be true, but if NFP is being used for the wrong reasons, then these wonderful outcomes are not justified. It is not permissible to do evil that good may come of it.

NFP is also very often presented as “acceptable to the Church”. This is implied when parish marriage prep classes insist on the couple learning about NFP. Linking NFP so closely to marriage preparation sends a contraceptive message, I believe. Yes, I know that NFP can be used quite successfully to achieve pregnancy, but I’ll bet dollars to donuts that the vast majority of couples who put it into use do so in order to “space births” within their family. The message they’ve received is that it is fine and dandy to choose a family size and limit the number of children to be born based on perceived financial ability to support them, stress on the parents, medical concerns, and a variety of other reasons.

That does not speak of a great trust in God, does it? What about Divine Providence? Is God not capable of taking care of the problems we as human parents cannot?

An article from Catholic News Agency quotes Dr. Janet E. Smith on the subject of NFP. I’ve listened to Dr. Smith’s talk “Contraception: Why Not?” and found it very informative; however, I have come to disagree with her take on the validity of using NFP for the end of spacing births and limiting family size. According to the CNA article,

Smith told CNA on April 18 that Natural Family Planning (NFP) is not an obligation to “live without planning,” but a call to use reason while respecting the nature of human sexuality.

Supported by the Catholic Church, NFP is a method of spacing children by practicing periodic abstinence based on physical indicators of a woman’s fertility.

I think that it is a misrepresentation to say that NFP is “supported by the Catholic Church”. I think “tolerated” is a more accurate descriptor, if we want to be perfectly honest about what the Church teaches.

As I mentioned in a previous post, NFP or periodic continence can only lawfully be practiced without sin for serious reasons or "just causes", according to Pope Pius XII in his “Address to the Italian Catholic Union of Midwives" from 1951. [Fr. Ryan Erlenbush makes the point that these terms are often misstated by NFP opponents as “grave” reasons, and that in Humanae Vitae, the term used is the Latin phrase “justae causae”, or “just cause”.] Pope Pius XII mentioned and described “medical, eugenic, economic, and social” reasons for periodic continence. Pope Paul VI said that periodic continence could be justified if there are “well-grounded reasons for spacing births, arising from the physical or psychological condition of husband or wife, or from external circumstances” (HV, 16).

In the CNA article, Dr. Smith is noted to have said that

Despite the cultural assumption that Catholics are required to ceaselessly procreate, Pope Paul VI's 1968 encyclical “Humanae Vitae” clarified that there are “serious reasons” for which a couple may seek to avoid conception “for either a certain or an indefinite period of time.”

The spectrum of these reasons “is broader and perhaps more liberal than many think,” said Smith.

I think there is great danger in that kind of counseling, and I think that what passes for “serious reason” can vary depending on the trends of the times – because our human perception of “serious” is certainly conditioned by the circumstances in which we live.

She noted that the Church calls married couples to use prudence in examining their physical, psychological, and financial conditions as well as other factors when looking at the future of their families.

Couples should not be selfish in their decision, and they are called to look “beyond their own comfort and convenience,” but they can morally use NFP to prevent conception for a variety of reasons beyond mere health concerns, she said.

But Humanae Vitae makes mention several times of  the importance of seeking God’s will, not our own, in matters of limiting family size. For instance:

[Parents] are not free to act as they choose in the service of transmitting life, as if it were wholly up to them to decide what is the right course to follow. On the contrary, they are bound to ensure that what they do corresponds to the will of God the Creator. The very nature of marriage and its use makes His will clear, while the constant teaching of the Church spells it out. (HV, 10)

And here:

The Church is the first to praise and commend the application of human intelligence to an activity in which a rational creature such as man is so closely associated with his Creator. But she affirms that this must be done within the limits of the order of reality established by God. (HV, 16)

I will pause here, and call this “Part I” of a series on NFP. I think there is much to be discussed, and that it should be discussed by the well-meaning, faithful Catholics on both sides of the NFP issue. 

For now, I’ll leave you with this thought, a comment on the last post by Fr. William Gardner:

The truly Catholic alternative to contraceptive drugs, devices, surgeries is babies! All those with a priestly heart should pray for greater generosity among married couples in welcoming souls to "come to the threshold of life."

I hope to examine some of Fr. Gardner’s thoughts as reflected in his articles on the subject…next time.


Update: See Marital Chastity, Fruitful Multiplication...and NFP?

Related:
What's Wrong with NFP 
The Evil of Contraception: The Vortex

Contraception + Bishops = Fail: Vortex
Giving Life to Little Souls