A highly contested and widely disputed debate that splits people in opinion is the debate over contraception. The Catholic Church definitively and completely states that contraception is wrong. But, in the encyclical by Pope Paul VI, an alternative option is offered: Natural Family Planning (NFP). This method teaches to utilize the infertile parts of a woman’s cycle to prevent a pregnancy. In the Encyclical Humane Vitae , Pope Paul VI argues that this method is within the precepts of the church and is not wrong, because it observes the natural law, it allows for union and procreation, and is faithful to God’s design. This opinion can be disputed, but it is first necessary to understand Paul IV’s argument for this method.
Paul IV initially clarifies that sexual intercourse between a husband and wife is good and to be praised, because it complies with natural law. The naturally occurring phenomenon is not dependent on an artificial means to be successful. Rather, by observing a woman’s cycle, and choosing to abstain from intercourse during fertile times, couples are using a method which complements the natural cycles of the woman. Paul IV says this more directly, and describes NFP as “keeping with the end of human procreation.” Paul IV reinforces this by mentioning that infertility does not make the act any less good, as “God has wisely ordered laws of nature” . He argues that there are infertile times to space out pregnancies, and the conjugal act, whether performed in a period that is fertile or infertile still must remain pointed to procreation. Furthermore, this rotation of fertility and infertility shows how NFP is faithful to God’s design. Through this, married couples decide together how to space out pregnancies but remain open to God’s law, as Paul IV explains,” by so doing the harmony and peace of a family are better served.” This method also holds the sacredness of human life, and shows how the unitive side to the conjugal act. If the marital act was simply procreative, there would be no infertile periods. But because there are, it shows intercourse is meant to be unitive and procreative. Pope Paul VI’s argument does possess a flaw. His position that NFP is not contraceptive does not count the fact that one could practice NFP with the intent of not having a child. Paul IV’s says, “the married couple rightly use a faculty provided them by nature,” yet he does not account to the fact that this could lead to a contraceptive mentality, which would directly contradict the purpose of sexual intercourse. Paul VI said that the marital union has two inherent and necessary parts: the unitive part as well as the procreative part. By practicing Natural Family Planning with a purposeful and complete decision to avoid pregnancy simply for one’s own benefit, this destroys the beauty and true purpose of …show more content…
Performing the conjugal act during an infertile time, renders no procreation. This fails to comply with his first explanation that the marriage act has certain “inherent” needs. It must be unitive and procreative. As Paul IV said, “the unitive significance and the procreative significance…are both inherent to the marriage act.” This statement from Paul IV shows that the purposeful avoidance of procreation during a fertile period is wrong and contrary to God’s laws of nature. One should not chart their cycle, rather they should follow natural urges and accept whatever children procreated. Could not one, with the intention of not getting pregnant, have a contraceptive mentality while practicing …show more content…
Paul IV would likely answer that Natural Family Planning is not contraceptive because although the practicing couple avoids fertile periods, it is not completely effective. Any time a couple performs the martial act, while practicing NFP, without the use of any contraceptives, there is a chance of conception. In Humane Vitae, it directly states, “they use their married intimacy to express their mutual love and safeguard their fidelity toward one another.” This shows the idea that side of the marital act that is unitive. Although the couple may not procreate, the openness to this option through not artificially preventing conception shows their openness to procreation while allowing them to express their love to one another. This would mean that NFP is not contraceptive, and practicing it is within the teaching of the
Paul IV initially clarifies that sexual intercourse between a husband and wife is good and to be praised, because it complies with natural law. The naturally occurring phenomenon is not dependent on an artificial means to be successful. Rather, by observing a woman’s cycle, and choosing to abstain from intercourse during fertile times, couples are using a method which complements the natural cycles of the woman. Paul IV says this more directly, and describes NFP as “keeping with the end of human procreation.” Paul IV reinforces this by mentioning that infertility does not make the act any less good, as “God has wisely ordered laws of nature” . He argues that there are infertile times to space out pregnancies, and the conjugal act, whether performed in a period that is fertile or infertile still must remain pointed to procreation. Furthermore, this rotation of fertility and infertility shows how NFP is faithful to God’s design. Through this, married couples decide together how to space out pregnancies but remain open to God’s law, as Paul IV explains,” by so doing the harmony and peace of a family are better served.” This method also holds the sacredness of human life, and shows how the unitive side to the conjugal act. If the marital act was simply procreative, there would be no infertile periods. But because there are, it shows intercourse is meant to be unitive and procreative. Pope Paul VI’s argument does possess a flaw. His position that NFP is not contraceptive does not count the fact that one could practice NFP with the intent of not having a child. Paul IV’s says, “the married couple rightly use a faculty provided them by nature,” yet he does not account to the fact that this could lead to a contraceptive mentality, which would directly contradict the purpose of sexual intercourse. Paul VI said that the marital union has two inherent and necessary parts: the unitive part as well as the procreative part. By practicing Natural Family Planning with a purposeful and complete decision to avoid pregnancy simply for one’s own benefit, this destroys the beauty and true purpose of …show more content…
Performing the conjugal act during an infertile time, renders no procreation. This fails to comply with his first explanation that the marriage act has certain “inherent” needs. It must be unitive and procreative. As Paul IV said, “the unitive significance and the procreative significance…are both inherent to the marriage act.” This statement from Paul IV shows that the purposeful avoidance of procreation during a fertile period is wrong and contrary to God’s laws of nature. One should not chart their cycle, rather they should follow natural urges and accept whatever children procreated. Could not one, with the intention of not getting pregnant, have a contraceptive mentality while practicing …show more content…
Paul IV would likely answer that Natural Family Planning is not contraceptive because although the practicing couple avoids fertile periods, it is not completely effective. Any time a couple performs the martial act, while practicing NFP, without the use of any contraceptives, there is a chance of conception. In Humane Vitae, it directly states, “they use their married intimacy to express their mutual love and safeguard their fidelity toward one another.” This shows the idea that side of the marital act that is unitive. Although the couple may not procreate, the openness to this option through not artificially preventing conception shows their openness to procreation while allowing them to express their love to one another. This would mean that NFP is not contraceptive, and practicing it is within the teaching of the