[Polycarp]

I would be careful accepting conclusions regarding the efficacy of NFP coming from any researcher embracing the contraceptive mentality. The facts raised in this British Medical Journal article, and my own observations as a doctor and an NFP instructor for 10 years trumps the pathetic comments of these researchers regarding the "Rhythm method."

So you agree with the "providentialists" and see as "inferior" those using NFP?

Using NFP is licit only for those clearly defined periods of time whereby a couple has grave reason for having recourse to NFP. Providentialism is NEVER illicit, because recourse to NFP is never demanded. Heroic virtue may eliminate any need of NFP, substituting heroic abandonment to Divine Providence. But heroic virtue is never demanded; only morally licit behavior is demanded. In certain cases where grave reasons for recourse to NFP exist, its use is no more nor less "moral" or licit than providentialism.

Any blanket condemnation of NFP is just as wrong as any blanket approval of NFP for any reason whatsoever.

We teach there are 4 main reasons for having recourse to NFP.

1--Physical/ mental health---a pregnancy could kill you or so physically impair you as to prevent your fulfillment of your duties in your state in life---NOT because of a widening wasteline or drooping skin! Or psychological health, i.e., mom would literally have a nervous breakdown if she became pregnant---not because she "just couldn't stand being home with the little kids all day without the personal fulfillment of her professional job..."

2--Financial constraints---your child will starve if you have another. Wanting a bigger house or designer SUV just does not cut it!

3--work on the mission fields by one or both spouses that would proclude having children temporarily

4--active persecution or war---i.e., you or your child likely to die by coercive abortion, in concentration camp, in acts of war, etc.

Clearly we say these reasons must be SERIOUS, not trivial. Only the couple and their confessor can truly decide what truly constitutes grave reason.

[Maximilian]

Using NFP is licit only for those clearly defined periods of time whereby a couple has grave reason for having recourse to NFP. Providentialism is NEVER illicit, because recourse to NFP is never demanded. Heroic virtue may eliminate any need of NFP, substituting heroic abandonment to Divine Providence. But heroic virtue is never demanded; only morally licit behavior is demanded.

This, and the rest of your post, was very well stated.