[armydoc]

Correct. If there is no "specific act", then there is no sin. Abstention (i.e. no "specific act" takes place) during fertile periods is NOT sinful.

I am talking about the specific act of sex during a nonfertile period by a couple practicing NFP. By definition, procreation is not willed by this couple as a fruit of that specific act, correct?

[klossg]

"am talking about the specific act of sex during a nonfertile period by a couple practicing NFP. By definition, procreation is not willed by this couple as a fruit of that specific act, correct?"

No. NFP by design, always completes the sexual act and does nothing to impede fertility. Actually by abstaining, the man builds up sperm count, thus increasing the likelihood for conception. There is always potential for a baby with every sexual act in NFP. Yes, NFP users use their intellect to reduce that potential but they never thwart fertility or the sexual act. See post 58 by VeritatisSplendor.

I'd like to make a gentleman's bet. I bet that you ask this same question again. It is very clear by now that in your mind NFP is morally equivalent to contraception. That is understandable, seeing it from your point of view. So, as I have said twice before, if they are the same, use NFP. It is cheaper, doesn't pollute the environment and promotes dialog between husband and wife.

[Mrs. Don-o]

You wrote: "I am talking about the specific act of sex during a nonfertile period by a couple practicing NFP. By definition, procreation is not willed by this couple as a fruit of that specific act, correct?"

It is not morally required to "will" procreation when having sex. If this were the correct interpretation, it would be forbidden to have intercourse if either spouse were even temporarily infertile (e.g. during pregnancy, after menopause, etc.) This has never been the case. Therefore clearly this interpretation is based on a misunderstanding of the teaching.

[Wonder Warthog]

"I am talking about the specific act of sex during a nonfertile period by a couple practicing NFP. By definition, procreation is not willed by this couple as a fruit of that specific act, correct?"

Then you're talking about something that doesn't exist. The "act" under discussion is the "sex act", aka "intercourse". If that act is abstained from during the fertile period, there is no sin. The "sin factor" is having intercourse during the fertile period and interfering with the natural processes involved--condoms, pills, etc.

You're obviously trying to argue that "willing not to procreate" is the source of the sin, which it isn't.

[ninenot]

Wrong.

You conclude in accurately, insofar as the couple is OPEN to conception, even though it will (or most likely will) not occur.

Not the same as artificial contraception.

And, by the way, such practices are fully moral if practiced "for serious reason," which is another debate, but really that of the 'internal forum.'