Archive for the ‘Priests & Parishes’ Category

1. Natural Family Planning: Preparation for Marriage and What Couples Have a Right to Know

Sunday, November 8th, 2015

Introduction
The Synod of Bishops is almost over.  We have good reason to hope that it will affirm the received teaching about marriage and Holy Communion.
However, that’s not the end of it.  Marriage and the family are in need of help.  What will be done to help?  To paraphrase a section of the Epistle of St. James —  What does it profit, my brethren, if the Church affirms the faith in a synod but doesn’t do anything to preach and teach it in the parish?  (James 2:14-17)

Preparation for marriage has to improve.  Pastors need to ask themselves a very basic question:  What do young couples need to know and have a right to know?  Within that context, I want to focus on seven things that can be done in the right kind of course on natural family planning.  

The new Evangelization
A theology of the marriage act that supports Humanae Vitae
Specific moral teaching
The call to generosity
All the common signs of fertility and infertility
The many benefits of breastfeeding
The Seven Standards of Ecological Breastfeeding as a natural way of spacing babies

John F. Kippley
(Fellowship of Catholic Scholars 2015 Convention, October 24, 2015; revised Oct. 30, 2015)
To be continued next week—-

Natural Family Planning or Sodomy

Sunday, August 16th, 2015

As the world knows, Obergefell vs Hodges, the recent case that was used by the U.S. Supreme Court to forbid states to ban same-sex “marriage,” originated here in Cincinnati. Mr. Obergefell wanted to be listed as the surviving spouse on the death certificate of his partner in “marriage.” When that was originally denied, he took it to the courts, and the rest is history.

You have probably seen various analyses of this decision; some of the best are the dissenting opinions of the dissenting Justices. Chief Justice Roberts emphatically pointed out that the decision was not rooted in the Constitution but simply in the personal preferences of the Majority. That is, this is another sad case of Court-imposed legislation.

The Majority decision listed the Griswold v Connecticut (1965) and Eisenstadt v Baird (1972) as precedents. Those decisions forbade States from banning the sale and distribution of contraceptives to, respectively, married and then unmarried persons. To understand the impact of these decisions and their relationship to Obergefell, it is helpful to remember that in his commentary on the Sin of Onan in Genesis 38, Martin Luther called Onan’s form of contraception—withdrawal—a form of sodomy. That applies to any and all forms of contraceptive behaviors. It obviously includes those married couples who engage in the same sort of anatomical sexual acts as homosexuals; it also includes those who use the Pill etc.   Thus Griswold told the American people that it is so acceptable for married couples to engage in sodomy as contraception that States could no longer have any laws against this behavior.

According to the current NIH “Family Growth” statistics, about one-tenth of one percent of couples, married or not, are using natural methods of conception regulation. Let’s say that these figures don’t fairly represent married Christians. After all, do YOU know anyone who has ever been surveyed? And if asked, would you tell the details of your personal life to some survey-taker? So let’s say that the survey results were off by a factor of ten, yielding a rate of one percent of all those surveyed. Let’s imagine that churchgoing-Catholics were not well represented, so let’s double that figure. That would estimate that two percent of Catholic churchgoing parishioners were not using unnatural methods of birth control.

Conversely, that means that among fertile-age people, 98 percent of Catholics and 99% of the rest of the heterosexual population are engaging in various forms of sodomy as their way of preventing pregnancy. Unfortunately, there are no data from the natural family planning community to help us think that more than two percent of Catholic married couples are using only natural forms of conception regulation.

It is quite imaginable that homosexuals in our culture might have been thinking, “Since those doing heterosexual sodomy are calling it marriage, why shouldn’t we?” From that perspective, it appears that Obergefell is both a logical and sociological consequence of Griswold. In other words, from heterosexual sodomy as marriage we now have homosexual sodomy as marriage.

Shortly before the day of the decision, I was receiving emails calling for prayer and predicting that the acceptance of sodomy as marriage would spell the end of our culture. I don’t disagree, but I think that we all need to realize that “marriage” was redefined by Griswold in 1965 and that Obergefell has simply made clear what contraceptive marriage is all about.

The question of the day is this: What will the leaders of the Catholic Church in the United States of America do about this? What will they do to educate church-going Catholics about the beauty and truth of Catholic teaching on love, marriage and sexuality? As Timothy Cardinal Dolan of the Archdiocese of New York has admitted, most bishops treated Humanae Vitae as a “hot potato,” i.e., something not to be handled. The result is in the statistics a few paragraphs above. The merciful Lord has given them another chance to get it right.

Also, this is certainly an opportunity for Protestants to realize that Luther was right about contraceptive behaviors as a form of sodomy and to return to the unity of teaching on this issue that prevailed until the Anglican revolution of 1930. After all, essentially Protestant state legislatures enacted the anti-contraception laws of the 1870s. Perhaps some or many will realize that the Catholic Church is the Guardian and authoritative teacher of the truth despite the failings of the majority of its Western laity and the laxity or timidity of too many of its clergy.

John F. Kippley

Natural Family Planning: John’s Plea to a Priest

Sunday, May 10th, 2015

Dear Father,

I called you Monday because I wanted to tell you about our Humanae Vitae apostolate.  In the face of low interest in natural family planning, a committee of American bishops in 1989 urged that every engaged couple ought to be required to attend a full course on natural family planning.  The bishops made it clear that this was not just a couple hours in a day-long pre-Cana course.  Interest seems to be even lower today, and that makes the bishops’ exhortation even more important.

I continue to work in the NFP apostolate because of what Leon Cardinal Suenens wrote in his book, Love and Control.   “The sins of omission and laziness of those who, for whatever reason, have the job of giving sex instruction will weigh heavier on the last day than the sins of the men and women who were never sufficiently instructed to meet their obligations.”

The immediate reason for my phone call was to show you a photograph that appeared on the front page of the Wall Street Journal weekend edition (Jan 3-4).  It showed a young boy doing a skateboard trick in a former Catholic church.  The caption reads, “The former Roman Catholic Church of St. Joseph in Arnhem, Netherlands, one of hundreds of decommissioned churches, was turned into a skate park.”

This is an all too visible result of the rejection of Humanae Vitae.  The Dutch and German bishops were perhaps the most obvious in the world in their non-acceptance of the 1968 encyclical of Bl. Pope Paul VI that reaffirmed the teaching of Casti Connubii, which in turn had reaffirmed the Tradition of some 1900 years condemning the sin of marital contraception.  In section 26, Humanae Vitae also encouraged the teaching of NFP by user couples to other couples.

I also wanted to point out a few passages in our NFP manual, Natural Family Planning: The Complete Approach, that can help priests and deacons evangelize their engaged couples.  I use “evangelize” here in the sense of the “new” evangelization—showing that Jesus is the ultimate Author of the truths taught by the Church including its moral teachings considered so difficult in the minds of many Catholics who certainly need this sort of instruction.

Several things distinguish our NFP program, Natural Family Planning International, from other programs.  One is our teaching of Ecological Breastfeeding.  We cannot force this on anyone, but we know how appreciated it is by many.  It not only maximizes all the dose-related benefits of breastfeeding, but it also provides an extended time of natural infertility.  On January 13, Sheila received an email from a wife and mother who was emphatic in her thanks.  She and her husband used ecological breastfeeding for spacing, and it worked wonderfully, providing two to three years between each of their six children.

Sometimes this teaching has evangelical effects as witnessed by this:

The Kippleys’ teaching about ecological breastfeeding was instrumental in my conversion, not only to the fullness of Church teaching on marriage but also to the Catholic faith itself.  I was a 30-something, “childless-by-choice”, nominal Protestant when I encountered it, and my heart was so changed that I became Catholic within a year, AND became pregnant with my first child.  My husband and I used ONLY ecological breastfeeding to space our three children going forward, and our marriage and family life have been immeasurably enriched.  [Those] who encourage this teaching are truly evangelizing in a desperately needed way in today’s world.  — Pam Pilch, Virginia

Others are helped by another unique feature of the NFP International teaching—the covenant theology we use to support the teaching of Humanae Vitae.

My wife and I found the biblically based renewal-of-your-marriage-covenant theology so luminous and compelling that it helped us to accept Catholic teaching on birth control when we were still Protestants.  —Scott Hahn, commenting on John Kippley’s book, Sex and the Marriage Covenant: A Basis for Morality.

I want to thank you for running announcements of the NFPI courses, and I also want to encourage you to rethink the idea of requiring the NFPI course as a normal part of preparation for life-long marriage, not just the wedding.  The right kind of NFP course can help you evangelize your parish, encourage couples to think in terms of families larger than the cultural norm of one or two children, and thus save your school and eventually your parish.  (We have a priest friend in Illinois who recently closed his parish school.  He told his bishop and his parishioners that contraception and sterilization forced this closure.)

Lastly, for couples whose schedule makes course attendance very difficult, we have a Home Study Course that many couples have greatly appreciated.  For both the classroom course and the Home Study course we request a donation of only $70, about the cost of the bouquet the bride will toss at the reception.  Couples who adopt ecological breastfeeding will save $1,500 to $3,000 with each baby by not having to buy any formula, and both mother and baby will most likely experience better health.

I really don’t want to see our beautiful churches turned into recreation parks or, worse yet, mosques.  But the Church needs its couples to have at least three children to survive as a church and about five children to provide sufficient vocations and to fulfill its role in the culture.

Humanae Vitae is not just “nice” or an “ideal.”  It is absolutely necessary.  The Dutch and German churches are suffering greatly because of their non-acceptance of this teaching, and the same holds true for most of the European countries.  The Church in this country is not far behind, and it will not be saved just by Latin American immigrants, many of whom fall victim to the cultural bias towards contraception and sterilization, and many of whom are poorly catechized and fall victim to secularism or join a non-Catholic religious community.

Please rethink the idea of requiring engaged couples to attend our course.  It will be one of the greatest favors you can do for them, and many will be very grateful.  I wish that “encouragement” was sufficient.  In practice, however, when everything else is required for marriage preparation and the Humanae Vitae course is only encouraged, what comes across is that the pastor doesn’t think the latter is important, and typical couples, many already contracepting, are all too ready to agree.

Thank you for reading this.  I hope it has been less unpleasant for you to read it than for me to write it.  In many ways, I would like to quit.  But I have no reason to think that the Church has erred in its teaching about love, marriage and sexuality, and I have no reason to use either age or health as an excuse.  If you would like to discuss this further, please phone or contact me at the email address in the letterhead.

In His service,
John F. Kippley
[John received no reply of any kind.]