Thank you for proving my point. On the one hand we have Greg Popcak with his extremely bizarre ideas, ideas which he admits he is only passing along from other NFP teachers who openly promote such strange nonsense. On the other hand, we have the imaginary error of "extreme trads," of which it is impossible to document even a single example.
Take your supposed example. First of all, this is not someone I've ever heard of before. They have never been published in any traditionalist magazine as far as I am aware. So if you go searching for internet nutcases, you would think that you could find just about anything. The reality, however, is that this internet site is right on target. They attack only 1 thing: using NFP with a contraceptive mentality. Here are some quotes.
Natural Family Planning may never be used with the contraceptive mentality (Humanae Vitae by Pope Paul VI). It may only be used when their is grievous reason to do so. To use NFP without proper reason is a mortal sin regardless of what you may have been told by any person, even a priest. No moral permission can ever be granted for the use of NFP with the contraceptive mentality.So the reality is that even the most extreme example you could locate on the internet does not support your accusation of error by traditionalists. They are simply defending the truth. Your on-the-one-hand-on-the-other-hand approach is not truly being fair, it is simply equating truth and falsehood.Dear Lorraine, The teaching of natural family planning without also teaching that it may be used only under certain limited conditions to temporarily, or under unusual conditions permanently, avoid birth is to teach the contraceptive mentality. Humanae Vitae expressly states that natural rhythms may only be used to avoid birth for grave reasons.
RESPONSE: The teaching of NFP and H.V. is not the problem. If the teaching is both morally advertised and presented then it is up to the couple to make the decision whether or not they are willing to offend God. The primal command of God must always be obeyed, "Be fertile and multiply." The exception concerning a woman needing a major operation with a preliminary period of her building up her physical condition in order to have the operation and a needed period of recuperation following the operation could be seen as valid reason for using NFP. There are of course other valid reasons for using NFP. The Couple to Couple League and others should a long time ago have drawn up a representative list of valid motivations for using NFP. The pope and bishops bear even greater responsibility in this regard.
The issue that started all this was Popcak's strange admonition to have brothers chart their sisters' cycles. It was one imprudent suggestion in a 200 page book.
Frankly, I tend to side with you; I think NFP is promoted far too often without the message I place front and foremost, which I have already posted here. Maybe I'm one of the few "trad" NFP instructors, in that I overemphasize the points you and I make here, and that I assume other NFP courses (CCL, Mother Teresa's nuns, HLI's efforts, etc.) do likewise.
That could well be the case, but unless extreme trads have sat through entire NFP courses, they have no way of knowing. Even sitting through a pre-cana or engaged class where NFP is promoted is not sufficient to evaluate whether the "grave reasons" issue is addressed in the context of the subsequent NFP course work. And the methods used to promote NFP to get folks in the door may well be silent on the "grave reasons" issues because they know it is not widely understood and needs to be addressed carefully and in depth inside the classroom. The error of extreme trads is their assumption that NFP is always taught in a moral theology vaccuum, which simply is not the case.
On the other hand, we have the imaginary error of "extreme trads," of which it is impossible to document even a single example.
"Extreme trads" consistently assume and/or contend that NFP is taught without teaching that there must be a grave reason for having recourse to it.
Unless they have personally sat through an NFP course or read the CCL self instruction manual, they have no basis for this accusation whatsoever! And I know for a FACT that this issue IS covered extensively in the CCL manual, as well as the NFP classes I personally teach or have attended. I have not attended a full CCL course, so I cannot say how strongly they emphasize the "grave reasons" issue. Yet neither can an extreme trad claim that CCL does NOT teach the "grave reasons" if they have not sat through a class.
Promotional materials, talks by NFP instructors or promoters, websites, etc. do NOT provide an objective basis to assert that "the NFP cult teaches it in a contraceptive manner."
That is the objection I have to the trads.