Dear Maximilian,
"Using NFP is comparable to getting an annulment. Both can sometimes be legitimate,..."
Then we agree that the use of NFP is not intrinsically evil, right? NFP is a moral means, apart from the question of the end.
I believe that Prolifeconservative is having problems distinguishing between moral and immoral means in this question.
Finally, I don't think that folks who employ NFP are actually employing a whole lot of NFP. Thinking in my head, I only know of two families who use NFP with fewer than five children. One of these families has only three, but the wife is, I think, 31, and I think it's likely by the time she's 40, there will be a few more.
The other is my own family, we have two sons. We're 45, I'm not sure there are any more on the way. I'm not Oprah, and I'm not on her show, so I will leave that part of the discussion at this: It wasn't our intention to have but two, but we treasure that we were permitted the two we have.
Beyond these two families, I know a few families with five, more with six, a bunch with seven, and still others with more. Some of the "smaller" families (five, six, or seven) may not be at "full strength" yet because the husband and wife aren't very old, yet.
I suspect this is a significant problem in getting others to forego artificial contraception, as they believe that they will wind up, using NFP, with six, eight, twelve children. I suspect their fear is rational.
I think many of them would would, indeed, wind up with large families, although not because NFP is "ineffective."
My own personal opinion, based on my own experiences of people, is that most couples who employ NFP wind up with the attitude of "the more the merrier." We have one 45 year old friend who is quite sad that it appears that she may have no more than five.
sitetest
Yes, we agree, except to this extent: I contrast "NFP" with "periodic continence." The phrase "periodic continence" appropriately describes the means and implies appropriate ends. "Natural Family Planning," in contrast, while in theory it should be identical, has instead morphed into a cult of its own. So when I attack "NFP," what I am opposing is not the method of periodic continence, but the propaganda enterprise which has misled Catholics into believing that "providentialism" is a bad thing.
Here is the kind of thing I have in mind:
Chris Ferrara re "The Mysticism of Charting"
Thinking in my head, I only know of two families who use NFP with fewer than five children... I know a few families with five, more with six, a bunch with seven, and still others with more. Some of the "smaller" families (five, six, or seven) may not be at "full strength" yet because the husband and wife aren't very old, yet.
I suspect this is a significant problem in getting others to forego artificial contraception, as they believe that they will wind up, using NFP, with six, eight, twelve children. I suspect their fear is rational.
Yes, I agree with you here also. I haven't mentioned it on this thread, although I've often stated similar things here on FR in the past, but my belief is that "The only good thing about NFP is that it doesn't work." I'm with Crocker when he says that the statistics for NFP effectiveness only apply if the husband is stationed at sea for long periods of time. Or perhaps, like Crocker, I'm just too excessively virile for NFP to work.
My own personal opinion, based on my own experiences of people, is that most couples who employ NFP wind up with the attitude of "the more the merrier."
While I agree with the general thrust of your comments, I have to draw a distinction here. I see a very different reality in NFP users. What I find is that they end up having a bunch of children, but they are not truly joyful about it. They feel perpetually cheated. They have never come to accept complete surrender to God's divine providence. There is a continual discontent.
If only those same people could have the same children, but it do it in a spirit of joyful acceptance of God's will for them, their graces would be infinitely multiplied.
I gotta tell ya though, this whole bit about PUBLICLY speculating about the intent of others - ESPECIALLY in PRIVATE MATTERS is the antithesis of Tradition.
I see that Chris Ferrara has been cited in re this. Good grief...
T'Heck is Traditonal speculating about the sexual practices of your Christian brothers and sisters.
The Church Teaches. As adults, we are expected to follow His Church Teachings. Period (pun intended).
I'll stop posting on this thread once I make it known I think folks ought to keep their noses out of other peoples most intimate acts.