songbird
Reputation: 515
(Likers: 0 / Critics: 0)
Posts: 778
|
this is what I am speaking of. Just take the knowledge of mucus signs, which God has given. Forget any opinion and stay away from the groups that have wrong thoughts. Sympto thermal groups, in my opinion go to far and are prideful that their ways are of the best and work the best, That is the attitude I am speaking oIt is a very bad attitude. The knowledge is good to have for fertility signs. Mucus that goes on could be a cyst on the ovary. Signs of mucus and no pregnancy. Time from ovulation to menstrual maybe signs of a tube that is not working. Signs that God give to us are good. Some women can only ovulate once a year and that is not abnormal, but normal for them. When breastfeeding the signs are there to show you are fertile again. So, take the knowledge of God and throw out the secular terminology and the pridefulness of these groups.
|
|
| Posted Jul 25, 2012, 3:12 pm |
|
Ignored by: 0
|
|
|
PenitentWoman
Reputation: 1004
(Likers: 0 / Critics: 0)
Posts: 790
|
| songbird said: | | this is what I am speaking of. Just take the knowledge of mucus signs, which God has given. Forget any opinion and stay away from the groups that have wrong thoughts. Sympto thermal groups, in my opinion go to far and are prideful that their ways are of the best and work the best, That is the attitude I am speaking oIt is a very bad attitude. The knowledge is good to have for fertility signs. Mucus that goes on could be a cyst on the ovary. Signs of mucus and no pregnancy. Time from ovulation to menstrual maybe signs of a tube that is not working. Signs that God give to us are good. Some women can only ovulate once a year and that is not abnormal, but normal for them. When breastfeeding the signs are there to show you are fertile again. So, take the knowledge of God and throw out the secular terminology and the pridefulness of these groups. |
Good post. :)
I've never had any issues, so I just do not see, as a single woman, why I would I want all this knowledge. I thankfully didn't drink much hormone-filled cow's milk when I was a kid, and I've never taken any hormonal contraceptives. I've never had thyroid/iodine problems, I drink red raspberry-leaf tea, remain fit (but don't over exercise) and try to eat well. Nothing is ever guaranteed, but I'm protecting my health, and I'm not going to anticipate fertility problems just because, nor will I ever get married if I have a "reason" to not get pregnant.
The sugarcoating of Catholicism that happens in the NO in becoming more and more obvious to me everyday. I'm sure it is viewed as the lesser of two evils when most Catholics are fine with contraception, but it is a slippery slope. It is almost like they are tricking themselves into self-extermination by promoting and applauding a concept that is potentially more reliable than contraception at preventing pregnancy. Are non-traditional Catholic families any bigger than any other families? Doubtful.
|
.........................
~For we are saved by hope. But hope that is seen, is not hope. For what a man seeth, why doth he hope for? But if we hope for that which we see not, we wait for it with patience. ~ Romans 8:24-25
|
| Posted Jul 25, 2012, 9:28 pm |
|
Ignored by: 0
|
|
|
JohnGrey
Reputation: 353
(Likers: 0 / Critics: 0)
Posts: 448
|
| MaterDominici said: | Give me your feedback on this thought...
It's been said of the EF Mass that's it's "good on the way up" as in it should be encouraged among NO parishioners and discouraged among Trads already attending Masses of the uncompromised sort.
Would you say the same would be true for NFP? Should it be encouraged among those who would otherwise only choose artificial birth control?
I'm not talking about classes and websites and other "public" information sources. I'm talking one-on-one advice whether it be from a priest directly to a couple or from one person to another. |
I would say no on this. As espoused by HH Pius XII, NFP is only licit in those situations where there is sufficiently grave reason that it be employed. Now, "sufficiently grave reason" is a fairly loose term, and I've never seen a concrete list as to what qualifies. Myself, I have always counted only one reason of truly sufficient gravity to retard the fecundity of the marital act and that is if, though conception is possible, it is reasonably certain that the women will not be able to nurture the child to term (for instance because of medical conditions such as endometriosis) and as a result one or more children will depart this world eternally deprived of Beatific Vision.
Since the example you game comes not from a sufficiently grave reason or licit reason, but simply to see one's will done contrary to God's intended purpose of the conjugal act, while seeking to avoid the just penalty for contraception, the intention of the act is still willfully and wholly bent toward rebellion against God and natural law. Therefore, I'd argue that it's merely a riskier form of contraception.
The desire to proselytize is just, but perverting an example God's mercy as a means of abetting those that have not humbled themselves sufficiently to truly desire to conform God's law, simply to make it more palatable is a terrible injustice to the individual in question and to Christian society as a whole.
|
|
| Posted Jul 25, 2012, 11:00 pm |
|
Ignored by: 0
|
|
|
|
|
