Natural Family Planning

Do you belong to the “NFP cult”?

Blogger and Seattle acquaintance Mark Shea recently gave NFPworks a little nod in a post, which has attracted a clergyman in the combox who snarkily calls (and implies that I think this) NFP the “8th Sacrament” and a sympathetic commenter implies that NFP fans are (or can be) “worshippers” of the “NFPcult.”

Now [taking a deep breath]. If you listen to this homily by Fr. Chad Ripperger, FSSP, which isn’t the priest in the combox, but it seems that they must be on the same page. (I’d really like to hear Fr. Perroni affirm this.)

Anyhow, the homily, unlike most watered-down, feel good verbosity is actually catechetical, and really quite decent. I appreciate the frank approach to catechesis that doesn’t underestimate his congregation. (Though I have a feeling this homily wasn’t given in the average suburban parish–I’d like to see that!)

“Contraception is against every category of ‘natural inclination’.” [Amen.]

I like how he begins by explaining the natural law, quoting St. Thomas, giving examples, and then speaks at length about Holy Matrimony and the Nuptial Act. I like what he has to say–even the part where he strongly emphasizes that NFP is only to be used for just, serious and grave reasons! Despite what Fr. Perroni and friends might think of this, I agree! I may not hit people over the head with my “grave reasons stick” when I begin a conversation with a Catholic (or non-Catholic) on contraception, but I believe what HMC teaches, and stick to it.

“Provided you have the right intention…it’s a morally licit thing.” [Amen.]

Then he goes on to articulate that artificial insemination and In Vitro Fertilization violate the unity of meaning of the nuptial act, meaning that they separate the unitive (by diminishing or eliminating the need for a physical union) from the procreative (the openness to children and hopefully conception).

“Some Catholics mistakenly believe that because the Church is pro-family and pro-children, that somehow that means that any means whatsoever is okay to attain having children, and that’s not true. The Church doesn’t allow us to do that precisely because she does not want us to violate the rule of God, and ultimately for us to lose our souls as a result of it.” [Amen.]

But he quickly transitions to his discussion of the Church’s only approved method of postponing pregnancy (as well as achieving pregnancy and diagnosing women’s wellness issues, the latter which he omits, either for brevity or lack of knowledge on this): NFP. Here’s where we transition to a more reactionary slippery slope:

“It is a mortal sin to use NFP without a sufficient reason.” [Well...yes and no. Debatable.]

Diocesan Family Life Offices & NFP Instructors: OUCH.

“The teaching of NFP , however, has become a bit problematic as of late. In addition to the fact that some people treat it like it’s the 8th Sacrament, and somehow or another if you’re not practicing NFP when you’re married that you’re committing sin–it’s silly, and quite frankly, it’s insulting to people’s intelligence.”

“It’s okay to teach philosophy or the philosophical and theological dimensions to NFP in a common group–I don’t have any problem with that; it’s a good thing. (And by common group we mean mixed company, and things of that sort.)”

“But there are practices that have arisen in virtually every diocese in this country in which detailed anatomical descriptions and even pictures of the two genders is given to people in mixed company. Now let me set this up as a scenario: you have  people who are about to get married. The struggle for chastity is extreme already. And then they put pictures in front of them, and then they wonder why they’re fornicating. Hello!? The fact of the matter is that this is putting people in the proximate occasion of sin. It’s mortally sinful to be doing this….But to actually give anatomical details to people before they’re married in mixed company is utterly inappropriate.“

“It’s mortally sinful to be doing this [giving NFP classes to couples before they're married in mixed company]…It’s a sin against modesty!”

Soo…..where to begin?

First, I don’t think being part of the NFP Movement–either by using it, promoting it or teaching it, that it makes one a de facto member of the “NFP cult.” (See my newly revised “About” section to know where I stand on this.)

However, Father does have a point that some people become so devoted to Natural Family Planning, and are so eager to “convert” contraceptive users, that they pitch NFP in such a way as to present it as “Catholic Birth Control” or “Catholic Contraception.” This is wrong, and I hint at this a bit in my “7 Habits” post. It’s true. Sometimes in our enthusiasm for the Church’s teaching against contraception, we give the impression that NFP is a requirement to be holy, and that it’s a given in marriage, when, in fact, NFP (if you’re Catholic), is to be used only to achieve pregnancy, postpone pregnancy for just, serious or grave reasons, or to identify, diagnose and treat women’s wellness issues, including infertility.

Second, I also believe modesty is a vital virtue, one that’s lost on our generation nearly completely. However, to essentially equate an NFP class (and therefore–GASP! Anatomy diagrams!) to pedalling pornography IS RIDICULOUS! Further to accuse nearly every diocesan program (and therefore the individuals running the program, and their bishops!) who sponsors NFP Instruction for the engaged (for most it’s optional, and a few mandatory) OF MORTAL SIN WITHOUT EXCEPTION OR MITIGATION scandalizes me, frankly.

Father clearly leans towards concupiscence with his mention of the “scandal of NFP instruction,” but it seems to me he may not be aware of who the average couple getting married in the Church is. (Now that I think about it, he probably does know and wouldn’t witness the vows of most of the people getting married today.) Diagrams which enable them to learn about and appreciate God’s gift of fertility most likely don’t scandalous those going through NFP Instruction, and certainly wouldn’t scandalize the average couple who frankly are largely already sexuality active and cohabitating.

Prudence is the key to chastity and modesty. Obviously, if a couple has a sensitivity to things sexual or a tendency to lust, and their purity is strong and sensitive, then heck no–stay away from the NFP classes! But by and large, these are not the couples who are going through Engaged Formation in Diocesan programs.

Kyrie Eleison. I’ve gone on long enough. There’s a balance between the “cult of NFP” and the reactionary extremism of aforementioned brands of providentialism as fostered by certain clergy.

What do you think the balance is?