Expert: Tom Schott - 6/24/2005

Question
Dear Tom,

I have some challenging questions regarding the Church's teaching on family planning and pray that you can give me some insightful answers.  (I'm also going to ask a couple of other experts here to get a few different perspectives)

I have a very clear understanding of what the church teaches regarding family planning so that is not the basis of my question.  It is more related to holding the teaching up to the light and making sense of it.  As a Catholic I would like to have conviction about church teaching but the more I seek and pray on this one the deep conviction is not there.  I have done extensive reading on the subject, both from orthodox and non-orthodox sources.  I am well versed on the typical answers given by avid NFPers so would prefer orginal answers.  Please no cutting and pasting or regurgitation of previously heard responses.  I am honestly seeking...

Anyway here goes:

In my travels in NFP circles these days something brought to the forefront is that due to advances in scientific understanding NFP (when used to the letter of the law) is more or as effective as artificial birth control in avoiding conception.
I have heard a number of NFP moms brag about how well they can avoid pregnancy (assume that to God their reasons are grave as only a couple is the one to determine that)  Exactly how is it that this makes them open to life?  At least part of the definition of open to life is open to conceiving a child.  They are 99.5% sure that conception is not a possibility and in fact this is their goal. They have intentionally and purposefully made sure that in fact no egg is present and conception will not take place.  But for holiness sake, they are open to life?!!!  Let's be honest with God and just admit that no we are not open to conceiving.  

Granted we could have a whole discussion on whether or not NFP is really 99.5% effective over a 15 year time span.  When in fact due to a variety of issues a couple may have this may not be true for every couple.  I know that those who believe ABC is always intrinsically evil are not able or willing to acknowledge this.


Frequently I see weaved in this theology is that if this couple does get pregnant (using NFP) it is because God somehow caused a miraculous ovulation and not that in fact the couple charted wrong.  Don't get me wrong I believe every conceived child is a precious gift of God regardless of the circumstances of their conception or the intention of the parents.  I just think a bit more critically on the subject and the biological process of conception.  

I am sure that science will advance further and in my lifetime and I will see fertility monitors that can with 99.5% accuracy predict the 6 day fertility window.  (Ones do exist already but are not yet that precise.)  This will certainly get rid of all the talk about NFP requiring more sacrifice and discipline than ABC.

Secondly, why is it that God would insist (according to the Catholic Church) that a woman,  to whom pregnancy is life threatening, must remain open to having a baby?  

I know I threw in a bit of rambling there but I hope you understand the heart of my questions.

Thanks,
Beth

Answer
Beth,

What a pleasure to receive a thoughtful question from an obviously thoughtful person. I have really wearied of questions about whether Revelation is literally true, when is the end of the world coming, etc. I don't think you rambled at all, by the way. I enjoyed reading what you had to say, and I'll be happy to share my thoughts with you.

Let me put all my cards on the table right up front: I think the Church's position on ABC is mistaken. If you start there, you are not going to be bothered by the intricacies of NFP. You probably know more about this than I do. But I'm a married man and I know many other married Catholics, so I'm not totally unacquainted with the issues you raise.

I cannot fault your reasoning about the people who practice NFP to avoid conception. You have quite accurately put your finger on exactly what any intelligent person could observe about the contradiction between the official Church position that all acts of married conjugation must be open to life and the practical effect of a near 100 percent certainty that life will NOT occur and the couple's intent.

This is not the only Church position that does not stand up to the logic test. The problem here is that the Church's position is based upon the supposed existence of some eternal moral truth that remains true despite the advance of human knowledge, human science, humanity's continuing encounter with the Divine. You have made this point quite well yourself, perhaps without exactly meaning to. Our own experience tells us to be skeptical of eternal truths that never change, especially truths that are only discernable to an all-male celibate clergy. Not mention the fact that these truths were discovered inside the historical process in some cases hundreds of years ago.

Remember this is the Church that had no problem with human slavery for centuries. And this same Church had a huge problem with Galileo. I could go on, but I'm sure you take my point.

So, given the above, your question about why God would demand that pregnancy override an existing human life is already answered. What kind of monstrous God would make this demand? Do you think He is more concerned with doctrinal purity than with the welfare of one of his own creation?

I trust my response meets your originality test. [I'll be happy to talk theology with you anytime. tom.schott@gmail.com] Don't let the right wing of the Church talk you into not thinking. God didn't give us minds simply to park hats on.