Archive for 2014

The Repentant Sterilized Couple: What About Periodic Abstinence?

Sunday, June 29th, 2014

The issue of what is required of the repentant sterilized couple can be clouded by all sorts of analogies, but the question remains.  Is abstinence during the fertile-time a moral “ought” or simply a suggested pious practice?  If we want analogies, consider the couple in an invalid marriage.  By the teaching of the Lord Jesus, they are living in adultery.  Imagine that the man sincerely regrets leaving his true wife for his current legal spouse.  Without getting into all sorts of additional details, the question before him is whether he is morally obliged to live as brother and sister or if such abstinence would just be a pious suggestion.

With regard to contraceptive sterilization, does repentance involve saying to oneself, “If I had it to do over again, I would not do it.”  To put it the other way, if a person says, “I regret what I did but I would do it over again,” is such a person repentant?  Regretful is not the same as repentant.

If a person/couple is truly repentant and would not do it over again, then the repentant sterilized person or couple is saying that they wish they were still fertile, and that means that they would be practicing periodic abstinence.  That is the moral norm.  I’m not saying it is easy to live out the moral norm.  It is frequently a daily cross, but that’s simply the price of Christian discipleship.  Periodic abstinence is no different for the sterilized couple than it is for the couple of normal fertility who think they have a sufficiently serious reason to seek to avoid pregnancy.

The widespread no-abstinence-required “pastoral approach” has reduced the moral norm to an optional pious practice, and the entire teaching of Humanae Vitae has been undermined.

John Kippley
Sex and the Marriage Covenant:  A Basis for Morality
A Catholic doctor’s response to this issue:

Dear John, Great chapter [in Sex and the Marriage Covenant] and your thoughts are definitely from one who has been in the thick of things. I think your thoughts on the role of true conversion of heart following a sterilization are an excellent example of how the laity can help enlighten clergy who, while observing the rigors of chastity, don’t live out our exact example of marital love.  For those who may not read the chapter, you state ,

“…I remain convinced that it is necessary for the repentant sterilized couple to refrain from sexual relations during the fertile time even if they cannot reverse the sterilization. First of all…I think it is psychologically impossible for a couple to enjoy sterilized sexual relations during the fertile time without reaffirming a contraceptive will. That refusal to practice the normal periodic abstinence of normally fertile couples (who have sufficiently serious reasons to avoid pregnancy) is a sign of “a perduring contraceptive intention”…It must be remembered that the whole purpose of sexual sterilization is to enable the sterilized couple to have dishonest intercourse – permanently contraceptive sex – at the normally fertile time. That purpose is pursued each and every time a sterilized couple have relations at the normally fertile time. In my opinion, the requirement that the sterilized couple refrain from relations during the normally fertile time is no different from that of Jesus to the woman caught in adultery: “Go and sin no more”.

I find your thoughts very true. Moreover, as you state elsewhere in the chapter, although couples may be forgiven their sin of sterilization and given a penance by the Priest, there is an ontological need, which you call metanoia, which calls the couple to live out their conversion with a desire to abstain during the fertile period. They may not realize this yearning for quite some time, and for those whom are “forgiven” and who don’t change their behaviour, they may never discover those hidden truths. For those of us who are not sterilized, and who practice NFP, we realize that the more we obey God’s Law on marital love, the more our hearts are conformed to pleasing Him. In other words, to deprive the couple of the opportunity to live out their penance in this way would actually probably hinder their appreciation of the very lesson they need to learn. But, I realize that some would consider this an “undue burden” on the couple.
Blessings,
Dr. Rebecca Peck, MD, CCD, ABFM, Marquette NFP Instructor

Natural Family Planning: What the Church Needs Today

Sunday, June 22nd, 2014

About a year ago, John received a Vatican newsletter about current events.  Below is his response to that organization in his effort to explain what the Church really needs.

JOHN:  Thanks for sending me the Newsletter.  What I really want to see in it some day is the announcement that the Holy Father has told all the world’s bishops that they need to require all engaged couples to attend a pre-marriage course that will include adequate instruction on ecological breastfeeding, systematic natural family planning in its different forms (all the fertility signs), and adequate teaching of morality and theology including the teaching of Humanae Vitae 10 and 16 about the call to generosity and the need to have a sufficiently serious reason to seek to avoid pregnancy.

The current growing acceptance of so-called same-sex “marriage” stems directly from the societal acceptance of marital contraception.  The conservative Anglican bishops argued in 1930 that acceptance of marital contraception would logically lead to the acceptance of sodomy, and unfortunately they were right.  The de facto acceptance of marital contraception by a huge majority of Western Catholics is having the same effect.

There may be better ways to reverse this, but the best way I know to reach most couples who want to marry in the Church, even though not regularly attending Mass, is through the right kind of preparation for marriage.  And such instruction has to be much more than just non-contraceptive “Catholic birth control.”
(John Kippley, May 27, 2013)

Sheila Kippley

Natural Family Planning: The New Evangelization

Sunday, June 15th, 2014

Many diocese are placing special emphasis on the New Evangelization.

I think that the program of NFP International is unique with its emphasis on the New Evangelization, ecological breastfeeding as a form of NFP, and a choice-oriented approach to systematic NFP.  

The New Evangelization.  We hear much about this but little that is concrete.  Early on it was defined as the effort to show that Jesus is the Author of the specific teachings of the Church, and that is what guided us in writing our NFP manual, Natural Family Planning: The Complete Approach.  In chapter 1, we connect the dots between Jesus and Humanae Vitae via the Last Supper and Nicea.  If you do not have a copy, you can obtain a printed copy and/or download it from the NFPI website.

The covenant theology was originally intended to be an agent of evangelization among our fellow Catholics, but it has also proved to be helpful for others.   Scott Hahn credits it with helping to persuade him and his wife to accept Catholic teaching on birth control when they were still Protestants.  This is also integrated into Chapter 1.

Ecological breastfeeding.  Every year there seems to be some new research revealing another benefit of breastfeeding, and most of these benefits are dose-related and duration-related.  Every style of breastfeeding conveys some benefits, but only ecological breastfeeding according to the seven standards has sufficient baby-spacing that it deserves to be taught as a form of natural family planning.  Chapter 6 of our manual is devoted to this subject.  Extensive research is found at the NFPI website.

This should not be a matter of controversy, but some are very resistant to teaching this.  As my wife and I see it, this is part of God’s plan for mother and baby.  It is part of his order of creation.  We didn’t invent the ecology.  All we have done is to describe it.  My wife’s research built upon previous research; her unique contribution was the seven-standards hypothesis.  She demonstrated it, and others have done the same.  Eco-breastfeeding according to the seven standards IS a form of natural baby spacing.

The big question for dioceses is this:  Does the diocese help to inform young people about this ecology or does it ignore it?  We believe ecological breastfeeding is simply a God-arranged plan that maximizes all the benefits of breastfeeding AND normally delays the return of menstruation and fertility for an average of 14 to 15 months among American mothers.  (In some cultures the duration of breastfeeding infertility is much longer.)  It is the latter reason that provides a compelling reason for teaching this as part of NFP instruction–especially when the instruction is required by the archdiocese or diocese.  We believe that everyone has a God-given right to know this information so that they can make an informed choice.  That means that Catholic educators, especially those preparing couples for marriage, should be teaching this information.

John F. Kippley