C101,

I agree it is a mortal sin.

If you have been following this thread, you would know that whether or not it is a mortal sin isn't the issue.  The issue is:

Did Pius XII teach that a couple can deliberately avoid having relations during fertile periods with a grave reason?  (To which I answer, no he did not).

Is doing so a sin against nature, and the same sin that Pius XI described in Casti Conubii? (to which I answer it isn't).

There was an error in this post and it's too late to edit.  It should read:

"Did Pius XII teach that a couple can deliberately avoid having relations during fertile periods without a grave reason?  (To which I answer, no he did not)."

I have a burning question:  Why is it that bowler has so many "0" posts?  He's the only one that I see with this in their posts.

When the posts with quotes turn out not showing as they should, there is no way to fix them, but to substitute with something else while I have time to edit. That something else is for me is 0. I did another today and put in "edit".

Mithra,

This tread is about Pius XII, read the title. It's your choice if you want to remain here writing your own opinions and examples on Pius XII.

My thread is on Pius XI's Casti Connubii, and I just posted quotes from a book that I have from 1944 which addresses the infallible encyclical. This is material that people will not find by Googling on the internet. I had no inclination to have it diluted by a thread on the legitimacy of Pius XII.

If you don't see that, its your option, just like it is for everyone else.

If threads on CI rely on Bowler responding or Mithras posts , then CI is a waste of time. I hope there are more learned opinions reading than just you and I. I have better things to do than educate a non-existent audience. Obviously there is nothing I can say to you, since you believe that deliberately avoiding having intercourse during fertile periods is not deliberately frustrating nature. You are in denial my friend, and not even bringing a man back from the dead will convince you.

Contrary to some. Pius XII's "grave reasons" are heretical (although Pius XII may be excused from heresy). We know this is the case since Pius IX infallibly condemned all excuses and said that nothing justifies subordinating the primary end to the secondary (since the secondary always must be subordinated to the primary--which is not the case in NFP). This should be enough for an honest person to hear. But since they are faithless, or perhaps wants to practice NFP or excuse others who practise it, and since reject dogma, nothing is sufficient for them.

Below is the pertinent excerpt from Casti Connubii:

53. And now, Venerable Brethren, we shall explain in detail the evils opposed to each of the benefits of matrimony. First consideration is due to the offspring, which many have the boldness to call the disagreeable burden of matrimony and which they say is to be carefully avoided by married people not through virtuous continence (which Christian law permits in matrimony when both parties consent) but by frustrating the marriage act. Some justify* this criminal abuse on the ground that they are weary of children and wish to gratify their desires without their consequent burden. Others say that they cannot on the one hand remain continent nor on the other can they have children because of the difficulties whether on the part of the mother or on the part of family circuмstances .

54. But no reason, however grave, may be put forward by which anything intrinsically against nature may become conformable to nature and morally good. Since, therefore, the conjugal act is destined primarily by nature for the begetting of children, those who in exercising it deliberately frustrate its natural power and purpose sin against nature and commit a deed which is shameful and intrinsically vicious.

55. Small wonder, therefore, if Holy Writ bears witness that the Divine Majesty regards with greatest detestation this horrible crime and at times has punished it with death. As St. Augustine notes, "Intercourse even with one's legitimate wife is unlawful and wicked where the conception of the offspring is prevented. Onan, the son of Juda, did this and the Lord killed him for it."[45]

56. Since, therefore, openly departing from the uninterrupted Christian tradition some recently have judged it possible solemnly to declare another doctrine regarding this question, the Catholic Church, to whom God has entrusted the defense of the integrity and purity of morals, standing erect in the midst of the moral ruin which surrounds her, in order that she may preserve the chastity of the nuptial union from being defiled by this foul stain, raises her voice in token of her divine ambassadorship and through Our mouth proclaims anew: any use whatsoever of matrimony exercised in such a way that the act is deliberately frustrated in its natural power to generate life is an offense against the law of God and of nature, and those who indulge in such are branded with the guilt of a grave sin.

This does not say what you think it says (no surprise here).  

Quote

Pope Pius XII may have been excused from the charge of formal heresy for his teaching, but certainly he could not and would not have been excused if, after correction, he persisted in his erroneous, heretical teaching.

Is this not what he did , after speaking to the Midwives again in Nov of the same  year ? . The question becomes , Who is there who could or would  have corrected him ? Mmm..

No one needed to correct him, nor should have.  His teaching on this matter is infallibly safe, and does not contradict previous teaching as some pretend through a warped logical reasoning.  

This teaching has explicitly existed since the 19th century through the Sacred Penitentiary, and taught by Pius XI in Casti Connubii, then by Pope Pius XII with a very detailed and explicit explanation.

Do not allow yourself to be deceived by sophistries which will lead you to refuse to give your assent to authoritative and binding papal teaching.  Do not throw away your soul.  Trust Pope Pius XII, be as a child ready and willing to believe his father.

I trust Pius XII before i trust the prev poster.

Exactly.  True pope or random internet stranger?

Satan can quote the Church Fathers too.