Follow me on Twitter Part two of Michelle’s testimony of why they ditched contraception. This part includes more of their actual discovery of the Church teaching, the wonders of fertility, the horror of abortifacients, and the joy of desiring children.
What I think will resonate deeply with readers is the anger of never receiving this information, of being lied to by the medical community, and of never being invited to the beauty of the Church’s teaching–all too common of an experience.
I was angry because I found out that contraceptives had abortifacient properties. I was angry that those in the medical community had morphed the definition of the beginning of pregnancy to be when the embryo implanted, thereby negating the life that exists from conception. And I was angry that no one (save our priest during our pre-marriage counseling) had ever offered to us that NFP was a viable alternative. Our families, our friends, fellow Catholics…no one stepped forward and made us think about looking into Natural Family Planning. As a matter of fact…that anger still rises on occasion, because we do not have the support of some people close to us and we are looked down on…like we must simply not know any better…and we see disappointment in loved ones’ faces as we announce the pending arrival of another blessing.
Just found this testimony of a mother of four who is a fan of Natural Family Planning, which she learned with her husband in 2002. She published part one, “Why Do I Use Natural Family Planning” on her blog. I think it could more aptly be called “How I kicked the Pill and embraced the Church,” as we haven’t heard in-depth yet how she discovers NFP specifically, and why she chose to use NFP upon her reversion. Looking forward to part two.
Mark Shea, devotee of the Apostle of Common Sense, has birthed a mini-conversation at his blog, inviting conversation on the NFP witch hunt taking place here (with NFP being the witch hunted for–not myself, except for approximately two days per my cycle).
Some of my favorite comments (there are more):
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?
| Catholic PRWire
My friend Emily, the new Family Planning Coordinator in the Diocese of Madison, just emailed the link to this commentary on the TIME article and a little bit about my work in Madison. It was posted on Catholic.org by Catholic PRWire, which found it through a press release from Chicago CCL (promoting its classes). Thanks Chicago CCL for the mention! While I don’t exclusively endorse CCL, this is a great example of harnessing buzz about NFP to promote classes. Well done, Chi-CCLers.
Time Magazine Notes Another NFP Benefit: It Keeps the Rivers Clean
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
MEDIA ADVISORY
Catholic PRWire
GLENVIEW, IL (November 10, 2009) – Sexual morality isn’t the only attraction to draw couples to Natural Family Planning (NFP) these days. Those concerned with the environment are finding that NFP doesn’t pollute the waterways with synthetic hormones and other chemicals.
A recent Time magazine author related how NFP rates high for such reasons. “Like all good Catholics, my husband and I had to attend church-run marriage prep before we tied the knot last year,” wrote Kathleen Kingsbury in Time’s Oct. 26 issue.
“I was surprised, however, during the hard sell on natural family-planning, that this updated version of the rhythm method was being advertised not only as morally correct but also as ‘organic’ and ‘green.’ I was even more surprised when I found out that some of the most popular instructors of NFP — known in secular circles as the Fertility Awareness Method — are non-Catholics who praise it as a means of avoiding both ingesting chemicals and excreting them into rivers and streams.”
The article, sprinkled with terms such as phthalates and bisphenol, also looks into the use of chemicals in the makeup of sex toys and tracks a trend of earth-friendly production materials in these products.
The article also says that the Catholic Church is catching on to the organic trend. “People pay $32 for eye cream because they’re told it is good for them and the planet,” says Jessica Marie Smith, whom Time says repackaged the NFP program at the diocese of Madison, WI. “We figured we could do the same with NFP.”
Ingest, Poke and Patch
In an article on the Madison diocese’s website, “Green is the New Black: How NFP is good for your soul and the earth,” Smith, the diocese’s [former] family planning coordinator, says, “Doesn’t it seem interesting that we’ll go to great lengths to ensure our meat, dairy and other grocery products are ‘all natural’ and hormone free, but then we’ll turn around and ingest, poke or patch our bodies with all sorts of synthetic hormones, the ramifications of which we’re still discovering?”
Part two of the FertilityCare piece on Infertilty and alternatives to IVF.
The N
FP Facebook group has been one of several great NFP discussion places on the web, and now there’s a new group specifically for NFP Instructors. It’s new, but give a go, and check it out, NFP teachers/ practitioners.
Dustin over at Engaged Marriage did a blog entry on the TIME piece, “Green Sex, anyone?”, which has yielded more than a couple comments, most profusely visited upon by commenter named crow who, among his many words, recommends natural abortafacients to his pro-life audience, copies and pastes from 4th-hand source web sites for his evidence and proof, and manages not to address the problem of falling fertility rates that are imploding the world’s economies.
I’d be much more interested in “dialogue” (generous term, Dustin–listening to crow is like trying to drink out of a fire hose spewing rocks) if commenters like crow 1) cited actual scientific sources, 2) addressed the issue of falling fertility rates, and 3) acknowledged that pro-fertility and pro-family people might actually know something about environmental causes and care about them.
Dustin’s more patient than I am. At this point, crow’s just being a combox rioter, throwing his links like rocks over the fence, not really caring what’s happening on the other side or who he’s inflicting with his myopic opinions. Hey, I’m all about recycling, buying locally grown food, sustainable construction, new fuel technologies, saving water and everything associated with being a good steward, but when you can’t even address what people are saying to you and listen–human beings, like yourself, born of a woman–that’s the end of the conversation and the continuation of prayer and fasting.
I guess I should do a little research before I joke...
A reader tipped me off that the TIME piece caught the attention of Jay Leno’s writers, evidently. Was he making fun of how…wait for it…how NFP is green, but be warned that your pregnancy test will be blue! People making fun of natural methods of family planning…both shocking and original. NOTE TO JAY: NFP IS NOT THE RHYTHM METHOD! Well, three cheers for the mention. All press is good press, right Nicole?
Join me if you wish in emailing the producers if you like once you see the video. Let it load for a sec, and the punchline’s at the 10 minute mark.
I’d like to draft a little script–a satire of of his segment Jaywalking, where he interviews average people and ask them easy questions (”What color is the White House?” or “Who’s the President?”), and they feature the people who can’t manage to get it right. Well, this version would be called J-Walking (play on my first name), and I would interview average talk show hosts about their jokes about NFP, and they would get it totally wrong!
The funny thing is that he used a badly-written article to fuel his punchline, but the joke’s on him! The Rhythm Method isn’t NFP! Hello? We’ve got a lot a work to do, friends, but in the mean time, have a laugh at Jay, and let his producers know he’s the worse case of J-walking yet!
I would hardly call one quote the big time, but you know, it’s a play on words.
This 700 word piece, “Sex & the Eco-City” on Time’s online addition [spoiler alert/warning to the uber-pious and sensitive souls--reverence for sex is sparse] by Kathleen Kingsbury, 04′ graduate of the Columbia School of Journalism and Catholic, is hardly a ringing endorsement for the benefits of natural methods of family planning, but at least it’s on the radar in a fairly positive way instead of the usual condescending and ignorant or halfway correct way.
I’ve read Kingsbury’s other work online at Time and elsewhere, and her work seemed fairly balanced and well written. Objectively, while I’m appreciative for the NFP mention (here’s a solo-feature spot on NFP), I’d hardly say it did NFP any justice. I know there wasn’t space for a full-on explanation, but she described NFP as the sympto-thermal method (fine, but incomplete), never mind that there are several other methods out there, and though the Church strongly endorses it under good circumstances, there are other NFP/FAM users out there. Not to mention the fact that many, many people use NFP to diagnose and treat infertility and women’s wellness issues with a higher success rate than mainstream methods and IVF.
Honestly, when she contacted my old work for an interview after she found the Go Organic brochure online, I received the impression that the piece was on green family planning options, not environmentally friendly sex toys. I probably would have thought twice before doing the interview if the opening pitch had been, “Hey, I’m doing a piece on alternative sex toys. Can I work NFP in, and then I’ll massage the message with unsubstantiated claims endorsing zero population growth?”
My guess is that the editors saw the original piece, and thought “This is too soft–can we sex it up a little, and since I don’t agree with the Catholic Church [never mind that fertility awareness isn't just a Catholic thing] about things, we’ll stick in some stuff on ZPG.”
Did you read the article? What did you think? I’m thinking of writing in (letters@time.com), but I’m not sure if it’ll do any good. Perhaps if they get enough emails. How would have *you* written a “Green Sex” piece?
