Replies

You still have to deal with Paul's statement in Corinthians...

I'm curious what it is about Paul's statement (especially in light of the rest of the Bible) that makes you think he was talking about NON-procreative sex. To me it seems to coincide easily with the notion of procreative sex, without a hint of Paul suggesting otherwise.

My thought process on Paul is that he's telling people who can't control their passions to get married so they won't fornicate.

If that's how you should interpret that passage, many such people would, IMHO, have to be characterized as not ready to take on the responsibilities that having children entails immediately after they marry. They can't (not won't, can't) abstain (noted by Paul), so saddling them with immediate parenthood would seem to prevent the necessary maturation from occuring and would be unfair (must be a better word) to the new child, who would be raised by immature parents. Enter NFP, and the belief that such a situation consitutes a "serious" reason to practice it. What also has to be considered is the unfortunate chance that a couple who can't abstain (there's that word again) will resort to artificial birth control if the NFP door is shut.

Now I'll admit as I did in 235, that I might be totally misreading Paul. But why did he make such a strong statement ("cannot control" and "should marry") if he didn't also expect that some marriages need a lot of work before a couple is ready to have children? I'll give the grace of the sacrament and the Holy Spirit a lot of credit, but I can't support a claim that they are always immediately transformative, especially on an immature couple.