Archive for the ‘Covenant Theology’ Category

Natural Family Planning: Why NFP International Is Needed

Sunday, July 26th, 2015

By the fall of 2004 it was becoming clear to us that the NFP organization we founded in 1971 was making changes or dropping the three main teachings we brought to that organization that had served people so well for the 32 years of our leadership.

These three main teachings are called the Triple Strand.  We think the Triple Strand is so good that it needs to be kept alive and spread– we think that everybody in the world has the right to know these things.  Further, we think that our two specific charisms (the eco-breastfeeding and the covenant theology) are special gifts from God and have been confirmed by the actions and words of St. John Paul II.  In addition, Dr. Konald Prem’s teaching of the sympto-thermal method is superior to other NFP methods and should continue to be taught.  Thus this was the main reason, among others, as to why we started NFP International.

Regarding ecological breastfeeding
In 1995 St. John Paul II co-hosted with the Royal Society of England a conference on breastfeeding at the Vatican.  In his talk, he endorsed the recommendations of UNICEF and the WHO for mothers to breastfeed for two years and beyond.  Frequent suckling is the only way that a mother will have a milk supply at 12, 18, and 24 months.  And the Seven Standards of Ecological Breastfeeding are a mother’s best assurance of frequent suckling. Some couples use only eco-bf to space their babies apart.  We know of two mothers who have written a series of blogs about the Seven Standards.  One’s website was called something like “Crunchy Lutheran Mom.”  The other wrote for her diocesan paper in Ireland.

Regarding the Covenant theology
In 1994, ten years after he completed his opus magnum of the Theology of the Body, the Pope wrote a short document titled “Letter to Families from John Paul II.”  In it he specifically endorsed the covenant theology.  “In the conjugal act, husband and wife are called to confirm in a responsible way the mutual gift of self which they have made to each other in the marriage covenant.”  This may be the first time a Pope has used such terminology.  Scott Hahn, a rather famous convert, told me that I am the first person (of whom he is aware) to put that concept into writing.  I can’t prove or disprove his opinion, but I take it seriously because he is the best-read person I know.  My book, Birth Control and the Marriage Covenant, was the occasion for him and his wife to learn this when they were married students in a Protestant seminary.  At the time, Scott considered himself the most anti-Catholic member of the student body.  I consider it divine Providence that another couple in their married student housing complex lent that book to his wife, Kimberly, whose father was the fairly well known pastor of a Presbyterian church in North College Hill.

Regarding the Prem STM
In 1976-1978 the US Bishops NFP organization persuaded NIH to conduct a study to compare the Billings mucus-only system with the cross-checking sympto-thermal system.  The results were so much in favor of the STM that the investigators stopped the study.  The difference was something like twice as many unplanned pregnancies in the mucus-only section.  It was a randomized study, and the investigators could no longer pretend that they didn’t know which half of the study was more effective in avoiding pregnancy.  Yet two of the principal mucus-only advocates put up such a fuss that these results are by and large ignored.  All too many mucus-only advocates have the diocesan NFP jobs.

Soooooo, in a nutshell, that’s why we feel obliged to do what we can to keep these ideas alive.

John and Sheila Kippley
Natural Family Planning: The Complete Approach
From July 19th to the evening of August 7th (NFP Awareness Week through World Breastfeeding Week) anyone can purchase the following printed books at a 40% discount at lulu:
Natural Family Planning: The Complete Approach
The Seven Standards of Ecological Breastfeeding: The Frequency Factor
Battle-Scarred: Justice Can Be Elusive
Breastfeeding and Natural Child Spacing

The Marriage Covenant

Sunday, March 30th, 2014

Sexual intercourse (The marriage act) is intended by God to be ( God has a plan for love, marriage and sex) at least implicitly (You don’t have to be thinking this explicitly) a renewal of the marriage covenant (I love you and I take you once again for better and for worse until death do we part).

A review of Sex and the Marriage Covenant by a non-Catholic Christian:
” Chapters 6-8 were very interesting and I think very good.

Chapter 9 gave me a better understanding of what Infallible teaching is, because I had never heard of it before. I think that is helpful to have a deeper understanding of how Catholic teachings work.

Chapters 11 and 12 I would say are definitely important to those who are going to teach NFP.

Chapter 17 was very good and very relevant. I actually had that discussion here at work about whether Onan was sinning by spilling his seed or by his evil intentions. So chapter 17 provided a solid explanation of the biblical context of the account of Onan. I am glad I read it.”

Sex and the Marriage Covenant is now available as an e-book.

John Kippley

Natural Family Planning: The Right Kind of Course

Sunday, December 29th, 2013

I offer the following suggestions about the kind of NFP course that will assist the pastoral and teaching roles of the Church.  I stress the “right kind” of NFP course because an inadequate NFP course may lead to continued marital unchastity and a lack of appropriate generosity in having children.

1.  The right kind of NFP course must be education in Christian discipleship.  The course must place Jesus as the reason for fidelity to the Christian marriage covenant and all that it entails.  Mutual self-giving, fertility awareness, generosity, and chastity must all be taught in the light of Christian discipleship.  The right kind of NFP course must teach that Jesus is the reason for chastity within marriage as well as outside of marriage.  The Church cannot “sell” chaste natural family planning on purely natural grounds.  Yes, the natural methods are more than adequate as a form of birth control, but it takes more than fertility awareness to say NO to temptations to sexual sins during the fertile time.  It takes an open heart and a real spirit of Christian discipleship and self-control.

2.  The right kind of NFP course must be required as a normal part of preparation for marriage.  It is not sufficient to “encourage” attendance at an NFP course.  In the United States we have had 40 years of “encouragement” and the results are apparent.  About two-thirds of Catholic married couples were still obedient to Catholic teaching on birth control a few years prior to Humanae Vitae, but probably only two percent are currently faithful to that teaching today.

3. In the right kind of NFP course, the call to generosity in having children needs to be strongly affirmed.  Marriage is for family.  Having more than two children is not just “nice.”  In most cases it is obligatory for the practical survival of the Church.  Priest friends who went to Ars for the Year of the Priest also went to Paris, and one of them observed that the Arab women were carrying babies while the westernized women were carrying briefcases.  One of those priests recently closed his Catholic parish school, and he sent a letter to his parishioners and his bishop stating clearly that the practice of contraception, including sterilization, was the root cause of the school closure.  Parish-supported schools need sufficient numbers of tuition-paying students to have teachers.

4.  In the right kind of NFP course, the language of serious reason (seriis causis in H.V. 10 and gravia in H.V. 16) needs to be used.  In English, the language of justae causae easily becomes “just ’cuz,” that is, “just because” we feel like it.  Recognizing that the use of justae causae, probabiles rationes, and justae rationes in section 16 seem to soften the language of seriis causis, I suggest, and have used for many years, the term “sufficiently serious reason.”  I can witness that for many NFP-user couples, the most difficult part of using systematic NFP is making the decision about another child.  This problem does not exist or is greatly reduced among couples who decide to use ecological breastfeeding as their exclusive or primary means of spacing babies.

5.  In the right kind of NFP course, the anti-contraception teaching of Casti Connubii, Humanae Vitae, and the Letter to Families needs to be strongly affirmed.  Please note that in his 1994 Letter to Families Pope John Paul II did not suggest that ordinary couples study his massive Theology of the Body.  Instead he wrote: “In the conjugal act, husband and wife are called to confirm in a responsible way the mutual gift of self which they have made to each other in the marriage covenant. (12.12)” My wife and I have been teaching in our NFP instruction for forty years that “Sexual intercourse is intended by God to be at least implicitly a renewal of the marriage covenant.”  People of good will can and do grasp that simple statement almost intuitively.

6.  In the right kind of NFP course, ecological breastfeeding needs to be explained and encouraged during the preparation for marriage as part of a required NFP course.   God Himself made woman in such a way that frequent suckling by her baby at her breasts postpones the return of fertility for more than a year in most cases.  This is not an old wives tale.  We have done the research and have published the results.  Mothers who practice the seven standards of ecological breastfeeding experience an average of 14.5 months of breastfeeding amenorrhea (the absence of menstruation).  That means that if they get pregnant during the first complete cycle, they will average about two years between childbirths.  Of course, an average is an average, and there is a range from very short to very long durations of amenorrhea.  Only seven percent experience less than six months of amenorrhea, and one-third were still in amenorrhea at 18 months.  About 70 percent experienced between 9 and 20 months of amenorrhea.  On the other hand, breastfeeding-in-general with its cultural components of pacifiers, bottles, babysitters, early introduction of other nourishment, and infrequent suckling episodes has almost no effect on the delay of fertility.  That is why we stress that the seven standards of ecological breastfeeding must be taught, as follows:
1. Breastfeed exclusively for the first six months of life.
2. Pacify your baby at your breasts.
3. Don’t use bottles and pacifiers.
4. Sleep with your baby for night feedings.
5. Sleep with your baby for a daily-nap feeding.
6. Nurse frequently day and night and avoid schedules.
7. Avoid any practice that restricts nursing or separates you from your baby.

These are simple-to-grasp maternal behaviors, but they can be difficult to practice in certain cultural and socio-economic conditions.  Nevertheless, they need to be taught so that the couples can make a more fully informed decision about the form of baby care they will give their children.

7.  In the right kind of NFP course, all the common signs of fertility and infertility need to be taught.  God Himself made woman in such a way that she experiences a discharge of cervical mucus and physical changes in the cervix before ovulation and an elevated temperature pattern after ovulation.  All of them are important.  Couples must be given adequate information about all the signs so that they can make an adequately informed choice.

8.  The right kind of NFP course must teach explicitly against the sins of marital unchastity to which couples will be tempted during times of abstinence.  I refer specifically to masturbation, whether mutual or solitary, and to marital sodomy whether by oral or anal copulation.  Please bear in mind that oral-genital copulation during the fertile time has been recommended by a secular book on natural birth control.  Please also be aware that according to a survey of U.S. east coast teenagers, almost half had engaged in that perversity.  Since some of those same people may find themselves in a diocesan-sponsored NFP course, it is truly imperative that such courses teach the sinfulness of such activities.  People have witnessed to us that before they took our instruction, they were using their own form of “NFP” with mutual or solitary masturbation during the fertile time.  One couple who took an NFP course taught under Catholic auspices but with no mention of marital chastity practiced mutual masturbation for eight years before they read our book and changed.  It is easy to teach against withdrawal and condoms on the practical grounds of the risk of pregnancy, but only spiritual motivation will help the couple to avoid the other sins of unchastity.  I have been informed by a well placed source that most of the teachers in most of the NFP programs in the United States do not feel comfortable talking about these sins of marital unchastity.  These sins are definitely not my favorite subject either, but we can teach what needs to be taught in only a few lines of text, as one can see from our manual listed below.

9.  The right kind of NFP course must affirm the role of the Magisterium in teaching the truth and the need for Catholics to practice the obedience of the Lord in accepting the teaching of the Church on love, marriage, sexuality and responsible parenthood.  In some quarters, obedience is downplayed as if all we need is fertility awareness or as if obedience doesn’t apply to adults.  On the other hand, while the Lord Jesus practiced all the virtues, the only virtue of Jesus that is specifically mentioned in Sacred Scripture, to the best of my knowledge, is obedience.  Further, he showed us that obedience is not only applicable to dependent children but also to mature adults even at the price of life itself.

10.  The right kind of NFP instruction needs an adequate text that incorporates all of the factors listed above.  Our manual, Natural Family Planning: The Complete Approach, was written to fulfill these requirements.  (part of letter, October 19, 2010)

John F. Kippley