Dear Fr. Matthew @ the Abbey,

Hello, I’m a homemaker, married for 12 years with 3 daughters, 10, 8 and 7. I've had to do the whole diaper - bottle thing by myself because my husband refused to do it, i.e. it's "the woman's job." Now I help them with their homework, take them to and from school, attend all the school, extra-curricular and religious obligations by myself. Problem is, he's pressuring me for a son. My hands are more than full with what I have and I have no desire in my heart to have another baby. But he just won't let up. 

I feel I don’t have the patience to go through it again because he never helped with diapers or feedings 1st time around. He told me it was "my responsibility because he couldn't do that because he works and needs his rest." Do I do what he wants just to make him happy? S.

Dear S, 

You need to have a talk with your husband about the role of a father. He seems to be using Archie Bunker as his role model for fatherhood. Remember the TV series All In the Family? It is not enough for a father to beget a child and then claim that his only responsibility is to work a forty-hour week and bring home a paycheck. A father must get involved with his family.

You should tell him that while he is at work you are not sitting around idle, drinking coffee. Rather, caring for children is a constant occupation. If he is at an office job, he is seated with few disturbances. You, however, must get up every ten minutes to look after this or that concern of a little one, which is much more exerting. You could ask him if, after you put in your forty-hour workweek, you should stop and say "That's it for the week for me."

Parenting requires teamwork. Both parents must get involved with the family. That means everything: diapers, feeding, bathing, putting to bed, homework, school and religious obligations, and chauffeuring. 

Tell him you are exhausted because he refuses to do his share of the work of raising the family. If you received his support, then perhaps you would not be so exhausted, and would be disposed to have a fourth child. But before you can be certain of a change of heart on his part, he needs to give concrete evidence. He can start by bathing and putting the children to bed three times a week. On weekends he can do the chauffeuring and shopping. After six months of this, then you can reconsider your position.

What if the fourth child is another girl? Your husband should examine his motives for having a son. Does he want a trophy to demonstrate his virility? Or does he want to invest himself in the rearing of a boy into a young man? A child is God's gift to a marriage. We accept the gift God sends us.

There are consequences to child neglect, if the father is absent or distant from them. Children require the direct involvement of both mother and father.

You might consider taking a two-week vacation and have your husband take care of the children for those two weeks. Then he might appreciate all that you do much more.

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB 

To contact Fr. Matthew with a question on NFP, email him at mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

Dear Fr. Matthew,

I am a practicing Catholic; my husband is not currently affiliated with any religion. We have been married for 13 years, and have three children. Our youngest child is six years old, and we have used NFP successfully for those six years. Even though my husband is not Catholic, he has supported my decision to use NFP when we made the decision together to not have any more children -- until now. My cycle is very irregular, and sometimes we have to abstain for a couple weeks, because of uncertainty of fertility. My husband is becoming agitated, and I try to explain why this method is the only one we can use. But he argues that it’s a give and take relationship; that he has done it “your way” for our entire marriage so far. Now he wants me to do it “my way,” which he is suggesting should be a vasectomy for him.

I have protested, but he says he is not Catholic and doesn’t have to follow the same rules I have. We have a great marriage, and usually can openly discuss anything, but I am at a loss as to what I should do. I need someone to help me. I can’t forbid him to get a vasectomy, because I am so afraid it will harm our marriage. But on the other hand, if he gets one, the guilt I will have over it will harm me. I do know that we don’t want any more children, and we have valid reasons for making that decision. May husband is 34 and I am 31, so we still have quite a few years of fertility left in us. 

I am so confused. I want to be a good Catholic, and follow every teaching of my church. My faith has never been an obstacle in our relationship before. Our children are being raised Catholic, and my husband is usually so supportive of anything I do regarding my faith. Please help me. CF

Dear CF, 

I commend you for your strong faith. You instinctively realize that something is wrong with sterilization. You also must have a good marriage, and three beautiful children. And your husband is a vital part of this. 

God has a plan for human life, spousal love, marriage and family. It is His plan, not yours, not mine, and not your husband’s. The Ten Commandments are not just for Catholics, nor is the moral wrongness of contraception and sterilization meant only for Catholics. If you are a member of the human race, then they apply to you.

The question is: “What is wrong with sterilization, especially when so many people are doing it?” There are many things wrong with it. First of all, God is the author of all life. We are only stewards of the gifts of life and fertility, not masters. God wants us to be open towards, and to treasure, the gift of life, and never turn against it as something evil. Secondly, we are not to mutilate our bodies, or interfere with the integrity of our bodies, especially those sacred faculties that can procreate a new human person. These are serious violations of the 5th Commandment.

I think you would find it helpful to read the stories of couples who have been sterilized, realized the wrong they did, and then decided to have a reversal. I suggest that you read Sterilization Reversal – A Generous Act of Love – 20 Couples Tell Their Story. You can order it from One More Soul (www.OMSoul.com). 

I am sending you an audio CD by the Mortons on this topic. Be sure to listen to it. They tell their story in a deeply human way.

You need to read up on the immorality of sterilization.

1) Go to the Catechism of the Catholic Church and see #2297, 2398, and 2399. 2) Go to www.OMSoul.com, which has a great selection of materials on contraception, sterilization and NFP. Purchase their pamphlets on Tubal Ligations and Sterilization. 3) Get their booklet “Recent Statements of Popes on Sterilization.”

I can assure you that you and your husband will be called upon by other couples in the future to explain what you are now discovering for yourself.

Cordially yours,

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

To contact Fr. Matthew with a question on NFP, email him at mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

Dear Fr. Matthew,

In our scripture study class I said that when couples contracept by artificial means, many children were not permitted to come into being. Because of this, some people do not exist that God intended to be conceived. The opposition said that, yes, life begins at conception and some people do abort. But other than that, God does cause all those to be born that he had planned to be born. I think that God planned to create many more children, but He does not go around the barriers of contraception, or against the parents’ will. What do you think?

Thank-you in advance, S.

Dear S.

At conception, God gives life to a new human person, who will live forever. It is the intention of God that a newly conceived person has the opportunity to pursue a full normal course of existence on this earth, and then to be received into Heaven with Him for all eternity.

Abortion destroys the physical life of the unborn. Many forms of contraception are also abortifacient. When a mother decides to abort her child, she is clearly thwarting God’s plan for the life of her child. The soul of the aborted child continues to live.

God planned for every conceptus to be born and to move along the trajectory of life. Once God gives life, He does not take it back. This applies also to stillborn babies and miscarriages. Only God understand these mysteries, and all life is ultimately in His control. He seems to allow defects of physical nature to have their natural consequences. God provides for these premature deaths. Their souls continue to live.

Contraception prevents God from creating the full number of children He has always intended to give to a given couple. God knows how many children He has planned for every married couple. One of the evils of contraception, perhaps the greatest evil, is that it prevents God from being God, from being able to create new persons. The contracepting couple wants to be masters over life, instead of servants of life. \

“Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ … even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him” (Ephesians 1:3-4). From all eternity God has planned to call each of us into existence at a given time, from a given set of parents. We are very special to Him, and there are no accidents involved. He has numbered the very hairs on our head.

God decided to allow us to cooperate with him as pro-creators, as bodied-persons who are fertile. That always involves free will on our part. God allows us to abuse our freedom, as in the case of contraception and sterilization. But that is exactly the nature of sin: the abuse of our freedom.

By contraception, a couple refuses to allow God to create all the children he desires.

Cordially yours,

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

To contact Fr. Matthew with a question on NFP, email him at mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

Dear Fr. Matthew,

Please pray for my wife and me. We both acknowledge each other’s stance on family planning, but unfortunately we are on opposite sides of the NFP fence.

Do you know of any tools for working through the differences my wife and I have? We have a strong marriage … we pray together every day … but we keep coming up at odds on the issue of contraception. We both recognize this as the major issue of our marriage at the moment. In a sense it has made us both focus more on the marriage, which is good, but neither of us likes that we disagree on this issue. We are currently expecting our fourth (planned) child, so we have a few months left before the issue of NFP has an opportunity to be put into practice again. My wife is from the medical community; as such she regards NFP as a completely shoddy form of family planning.

“A house divided against itself cannot stand.” This quote scares me so. My wife and I are committed to working through this issue and to never let his ‘prophecy’ come true in our lives. We have both asked for intercession from the Holy Spirit in our marriage regarding this. Is there anything else we can to? Thanks for listening. God bless. –- M.

Dear M,

There are many good books, tapes, and pamphlets on what is wrong with contraception. You can find them easily at One More Soul ( www.OMSoul.com). Here is a brief list I would recommend to you and your wife: 

Birth Control and Christian Discipleship, by John Kippley (Couple to Couple League); 

Contraception: Why Not? A tape or CD by Dr. Janet Smith; 

New Perspectives on Contraception, by Donald DeMarco PhD (DeMarco explains how contraception separates people from their spouses, from God, and even from their own best interests); 

Physicians Healed (personal stories of 15 physicians who do not prescribe contraception);

and Rethinking Reproductive Medicine.

Your wife does not seem to be well informed about the advanced stage of the art of NFP. I suggest that she contact the Pope Paul VI Institute for the Study of Human Reproduction: 6901 Mercy Road, Omaha, NE 68106-2604. Tel: 402/ 390-6600.

To understand the moral evil of contraception, it requires a little reading and reflection. I am convinced that contraception and sterilization is the taproot of the culture of death. Keep reading in this area and you will discover why.

Cordially yours, Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

To contact Fr. Matthew with a question on NFP, email him at mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

Dear Fr. Matthew,

I have had 3 c-sections, in the past 5 years, two of which were only 1 year apart. It has been very painful for me. I had my son 5 months ago and I still feel the pain on my right side. My question then is how many more surgeries can my body take? My husband says he wants to sterilize himself because he doesn't want to see me in pain anymore and asks me what if something goes wrong next time; what about the kids? My doctor told me that one thing that could happen is that I could lose my uterus. And that makes me feel so scared that I want to tell my husband to go for it. But what holds me back from doing so is what does God want me to do? I do want another child but I'm too scared. What does then God want me to do? Should I have 1,2,3… more children and put my health at risk? I also know that sterilizing oneself is against the teachings of the Church. That's why I want to know more about NFP. Last time I tried to do it I got pregnant, but I never took the classes. I just went on an Internet medical journal. Thank you so much for your time, Father. I will pray for you.

Please pray for me.

 - L.

Dear L,

I commend you for your love of family and wanting to do what is right. Clearly, at the present time you are not in a condition for having more children. However, circumstances may change. In the future you may very well be in good health, and want to have more children. In the meanwhile, you should learn NFP thoroughly from a qualified teacher, and not haphazardly, so that you have a reliable and effective method of responsible parenthood. But there are many medical considerations involved with your case. I have asked Dr. Mary Martin, M.D., to address your situation. 

You are in my prayers. 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB 

--------

Dear L.

Bless you for wanting to do the right thing! God has given us the technology to recognize the fertile time and Church teaching allows us to avoid using the fertile time for a serious reason. Please learn NFP from a properly trained instructor. I recommend the Billings Ovulation Method to my patients because of its simplicity.

The number of caesarean sections is not limited to three or four or five. While your doctor is the best to advise you of future risk, remember that doctors have learned to avoid risk in fear of being sued for a bad outcome. Only you, your husband and God can determine the right number of children for your family. Sterilization is unnecessary and has side effects, sometimes painful. But most couples soon regret the decision.

Any pregnancy can result in loss of a uterus. I came very close to doing a caesarean hysterectomy last night on a patient delivering her first baby. The more pregnancies and the more caesarean sections, the greater the risk that the placenta will implant too low in the uterus or will grow through an old scar. If that is serious enough a risk for you to avoid conceiving another baby, you will be successful in using NFP if you are properly instructed and use the rules.

Sincerely,

Mary W. Martin, M.D.,FACOG

Dear Fr. Matthew

"This doesn't make any sense... if you take away methods of birth control, then people will abort more babies. It's not like if you take away an option for birth control, people will be like "Oh! Guess I won't have sex, then!" This is relatively contradictory... to oppose abortion and oppose contraception? Sex isn't illegal, it's only a religious view that it is wrong, and you can't impose that on society. Someone has to draw a logical line here. Contraception is the key to eliminating abortion. Which is more important, the virtue of sexual morality or the preservation of human life?" -- College Joe

Dear College Joe,

You are saying that if we want to reduce the number of abortions, then encourage greater use of contraception. [Contraception is sterile sex, thus you can have lots of sex and few conceptions and thus fewer abortions.]

That might sound good in theory, but it doesn’t work out that way in practice. Contraception is morally wrong, because it turns the truth of spousal love into a counterfeit, into a lie. The marital act was designed by its Creator, God, to be a sign of making the total gift of one’s self to your beloved: a total gift of one’s person, with no conditions and no reservations. Anything short of that is not spousal love; it is merely the pursuit of sexual pleasure; raw and impersonal sex. This leads to an increase of divorce, with all the heartbreaks that divorce brings.

Contraception does not reduce the number of abortions. Why? Because a contraceptive mentality leads directly to abortion. If a person takes an anti-life attitude towards their fertility, which is what contraception does, then they will consider a surprise conception to be a terrible mistake, for which abortion is the solution. The typical contraceptor takes the attitude: “I took the regular precautions by using contraception; it failed; so now I am entitled to have an abortion. 70% of women seeking an abortion were on some form of contraception.

Contraception has given many young people a false sense of security against becoming pregnant. They presume that contraception is foolproof. This, in turn, leads to greater and greater promiscuity. Instead of waiting until they are married, and can provide a real home for their children, a contracepting couple engage in the act reserved only for people who have made a deep commitment to each other through marriage. Contracepting unmarried couples pretend to be married, when they are not married. This is a serious deception to each other and to themselves. And when married couples contracept, they are withholding a major part of themselves in the gift of self which was meant to be unconditional and total.

When International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) goes into a Third World country and wants to abolish its laws against abortion, they always begin by promoting contraceptives. They know that increased use of contraceptives among the unmarried and the married always leads to a greater demand for abortion. IPPF demeans the sexual moral code of the local culture, while promoting sexual promiscuity as the “reproductive rights” of young people. This leads to a greater demand for all the products that IPPF sells, and in time creates a greater demand for legalized abortion. Contraception always leads to greater abortion.

The only way to reduce abortion is to retrieve a respect for the sanctity of all human life and of our sexual, procreative, powers. When young people understand that sex, babies and marriage go together, then you have a healthy society, strong marriages and healthy, happy families. When young people think that they can separate the life-giving dimension from the love-giving dimension of sex, then they open the way to the mess we now find ourselves in. And wherever there is a contraceptive mentality there will be more, not less, abortion. 

You should understand the difference between something being legally acceptable and morally unacceptable. The Supreme Court does not determine what is right and what is wrong. Remember the Dred Scott Case? And now the Roe v. Wade case? Only God determines the moral order as it pertains to all important matters like human life, love, marriage and family. It is a tragedy that unjust and immoral laws can be forced upon citizens by the courts and the government, if the people allow that to happen. And God has made his intentions and designs for sex and marriage clearly known.

It is a false contrast to say that we must choose between the virtue of sexual morality and the preservation of human life. We are never to do evil so as to allegedly accomplish the good. Moral evil is always harmful for whoever chooses to engage in it, and harmful for the broader society. Sexual promiscuity and contraception are morally evil and they harm, not help, those who engage in them.

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

Dear Fr. Matthew,

My wife and I are both Catholic. I guess what I’m trying to ask is, when we practice natural family planning, how sexually intimate does the Church allow a husband and wife to be without actually having intercourse? Can a couple engage in foreplay without having intercourse? During times of fertility, should a husband and wife abstain from all sexual activity? 

         Thanks, Kevin.

Dear Kevin,

Here is my brief answer to your question. According to God’s plan for human love, we are always to be open to the good of our fertility, since it is directly related to the procreation of a unique person, made in the image and likeness of God. We should never turn against the good of our fertility. Thus every marital act should be open to potential parenthood, since love and life go together. When a couple has good reasons for spacing their children, then NFP is a morally acceptable way, because it always respects these values.

If the objective is to space births, and not become pregnant at this point in time, then the couple is to respect the requirements of their own biology. In short, if you choose not to become pregnant, then refrain from those actions that lead to pregnancy. And now for the longer answer. It is taken from the Couple to Couple League’s handbook in Spanish, Panificacion Natural de Familia, written by Erick Carrero. It deals with “Creative Abstinence,” and I am translating it for you.

“Many couples feel very bad when they discover that NFP requires abstinence from marital relations. They think that their spouse is going to lose interest in them. They do not know that abstinence can be an opportunity to improve their marriage. To abstain means to deprive oneself of something to which you have a right, with the purpose of obtaining something of greater value. When one abstains from sexual relations during the fertile time, one does so in search of a greater good. It could be for the health of the wife, for the husband’s search for employment, or time for taking care of the children which they already have. There are different reasons which each couple should place before God to decide if this is the appropriate way for them, or not.

“But this deals not only with limiting sexual relations. The time during which the couple abstains is the best time to cultivate other dimensions of their marriage. It is for this reason that we call it CREATIVE ABSTINENCE.

“If you recall when you first got acquainted, both of you shared many things about your lives and your feelings which had nothing to do with sex. This time is a special moment to be together, to prepare a special meal for your husband, to give flowers or to say something romantic or special to your wife. Also you can go on a walk, to the movies, to the park, speak about things that you desire to do together in the future, etc.

“Going to Church during the week, or making some special prayers together can be a real help in difficult days. Yes, difficult days because in many moments abstinence can be difficult. But they should remember that we deprive ourselves of something in order to obtain a greater good. When at last a couple can continue their relations, these tend to reflect a love more mature and more committed between the spouses. The husband will know that his wife wants him because she loves him, and not because of pressure or obligation. The wife will feel greater respect for a husband who is disposed to wait for the good of all.”

Cordially yours,

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

Dear Fr. Matthew ,

I am going to be a physician assistant, and was wondering about the prescription of birth control. Would it be immoral for me to prescribe it? What about if it is to be used to make a menstrual cycle more regular? What would I do in a situation where I would be called to prescribe birth control? 

Thanks, DS

Dear DS,

Your question about prescribing birth control pills was forwarded to me by Fr. Daniel McCaffrey. I am a board-certified obstetrician/gynecologist practicing in Oklahoma City. I was reminded by a faithful priest about the Church's position on contraception and challenged, as my Penance, to research whether contraceptives are potentially abortifacient. In fact, they are. But more importantly, prescribing birth control pills or other forms of contraception for non-contraceptive reasons is just not good medicine.

In your example, for instance, of "regulating menstrual cycles" there is an underlying medical condition which causes abnormal cycles and deserves diagnosis. This is true for every potential use for contraceptives. Making a proper diagnosis from the outset prevents years of side-effects, symptoms and potentially life-threatening illness. Refusing to prescribe them leads to a better understanding of medicine and a more holistic approach to patient care. I can testify personally, that despite excellent medical training, I did not truly learn gynecology and obstetrics until I took the time to learn Natural Family Planning, and the Billings Ovulation Method in particular. Not only is it 99.5% effective (WHO and Chinese Health Ministry data) in delaying or preventing pregnancy, but its diagnostic significance makes prescribing contraceptives totally unnecessary.

I would urge your client to become familiar with NFP and the growing number of physicians and health care practitioners who do not prescribe or sterilize. A great resource is One More Soul , and the book Physicians Healed. OMS has a listing of all NFP-only providers with contact information. Practicing according to our faith is a liberating and extremely rewarding experience. There are daily affirmations for those who have the courage to do so.

Sincerely,

Mary W. Martin, M.D.,FACOG

Renaissance Physicians

Midwest City, OK 73130

Dear Fr. Matthew 

I am writing all the way from Sri Lanka. My daughter who studies in New Zealand is with us on holiday. She is doing a degree in Law and Computer Science. She will be 21 and has a very intelligent mind. She does not believe in abortion but was debating with me that natural family planning is another form of contraception.

I am afraid that I just could not convince her that it was not. She seems to have the opinion that natural family planning is only good in so far as it helps couples who are trying to have children understand the best time for pregnancy. But if it was to avoid pregnancy, it was another form of contraception. So why can’t other contraceptive aids, e.g., condoms, be used? Could you help me enlighten her please?

Love and prayers, Marianne

Dear Marianne,

Greetings! NFP is not "Catholic" contraception. The Church endorses NFP (as seen in Humanae Vitae), and condemns contraception as harmful. Why? Because NFP, when used correctly and for good motives, is a morally good expression of responsible parenthood. NFP is one of God's gifts to us in these times to help us space our children. Everyone knows that there are times when couples must space, or delay, a new pregnancy.

NFP is always open to the gift of life. Contraception turns against our fertility and tries to sterilize it. NFP recognizes God as the Author and Sovereign of all life, and during the woman's fertile period allows Him to decide if a new person shall be conceived. Contraception pushes God out of the picture, and attempts to take complete control over the possible procreation of a new person who will live forever. NFP takes advantage of the natural rhythms of fertility and infertility. Contraception suppresses and manipulates fertility, and refuses to practice periodic abstinence.

NFP couples must practice self-mastery and self-possession for the sake of the other. They understand that real love is always self-sacrificial. They learn to express their love with a full repertoire of acts of tenderness, verbal expression and demonstrate an appreciation for the presence of the other. Contraception ignores most of these, and concentrates upon the genital dimension of spousal love.

There is a world of difference between NFP and contraception.

I suggest that you read section 32 of Familiaris Consortio (The Role of the Christian Family in the Modern World) by Pope John Paul II. 

Read Christopher West's Good News about Sex and Marriage. 

Go to this website: www.ccli.org.

Cordially yours,

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB 

Dear Fr. Matthew

After sitting nervously in Church for a half hour, I summoned enough courage to enter the confessional and confess to the priest my on-going struggle to completely embrace NFP and to quit using barrier methods of contraception. My husband and I did not enter our marriage with the conviction that contraception is immoral; only after having children and falling in love with my faith have I come to understand this beautiful teaching. My husband is willing to use NFP for now, but I'm afraid he will get a vasectomy if we "accidentally" get pregnant. Anyhow, after discussing this with the priest, he responded: "Oh? Does that really work?" and "Large families are a burden" and "Just pray about it." I left the confessional thinking that the priest was giving me the green light to contracept!!! Now, knowing that the priest is acting in persona Christi, I've been driving myself crazy trying to figure this all out!!! I guess my question is/are: Is it a mortal or venial sin to contracept (I try to refrain from communion if we "slip"), will I go to hell, or is it ok since this priest, acting AS CHRIST, basically said it’s no big deal??? 

Thank you for your time! 

Anonymous

Dear Anonymous,

Believe it or not, there is confusion among some priests on moral issues like contraception and sterilization. The first thing to remember is that we priests do not determine morality, i.e., the rightness or wrongness of contraception and sterilization, or any other moral matter. Only God determines the moral order, and He teaches the moral order through his Church. The Church teaches that contraception and sterilization are seriously wrong, contrary to God's wonderful plan for spousal love. (See Humanae Vitae #11-14.)

We priests are not at liberty to contradict the teachings of the Church or even to pass over it in silence. We priests also must give an accounting to God for how we exercised our priesthood. We were ordained to proclaim God’s plan for human life, spousal love, marriage, and family. The people of God have a right to hear the authentic teachings of the Church from us at the pulpit, in the confessional, and in counseling. They really don’t want to hear our, or someone else’s, opinion on important matters.

I suggest that you:

Be sure to get good and thorough teaching about NFP. You can know exactly where you are in your cycle if you use the method correctly.

Read up more on the issue of contraception and sterilization. Read HUMANAE VITAE. The Couple to Couple League has many good things for you. Their website is www.ccli.org. See John Kippley's BIRTH CONTROL AND CHRISTIAN DISCIPLESHIP, and his SEX AND THE MARRIAGE COVENANT.

For a good audio tape on these issues, call One More Soul (800 307 7685) for a free copy of Dr. Janet Smith's talk on "Contraception, Why Not?"

You are in my prayers.

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB 

Dear Fr. Matthew @ the Abbey,

I am a single mom, and I am faced with total abstinence if I am to be consistent with the Church’s teaching on sex. This is a tough row to hoe, but certainly not impossible. Could you explain to your readers the witness value of faithful single people, and faithful single moms and dads? Thanks, S.

Dear S,

There are many people whose calling in life is to refrain from sex altogether. Think of all those called to live a single life, or a celibate life, or single moms and dads. Think also of all young people who are unmarried. They all make a great contribution to the Church and society, and are living normal, healthy lives. Having sex and experiencing sexual pleasure is not an absolute imperative for living a normal life. 

Spousal love, as God designed it, has a definite purpose. It was designed to be the expression of making the total gift of one’s self to a spouse, to whom you have committed yourself in a lifelong relationship. This gift of self involves both love and openness to life. Anything short of this is not spousal love. It is a sexual act, but it is not a spousal act.

Everyone is called to acquire the virtue of self-possession and self-control that is called chastity. Everyone is called to live out chastity according to his or her walk of life. There is also a marital chastity, which involves the avoidance of contraception and sterilization, a willingness to make the total gift of self and openness to new life and children. Chastity is the difficult virtue. Our sexual drives were designed by God to be powerful, so that couples would naturally be drawn to each other and that many new persons would be brought into this world and live forever in the world to come. We gradually grow into the virtue of self-possession. It requires self-understanding, self-discipline, persistence, the use of all the natural and supernatural helps to purity, and avoiding images and situations which would only aggravate our sexual impulses.

This is the universal experience of everyone in the human race. Either a person gives direction to his or her sexual impulses, or he does not. If he does, then he is virtuous and in possession of himself. If he does not, then he is not free, but becomes a slave to his passions. Lust dominates a person. Love, while it requires some self-sacrifice, frees a person to do what is good and beneficial for others.

A single mom, or dad, is a true witness to authentic love. Perhaps their spouse is dead, and they have decided not to remarry. Or perhaps they are separated, or civilly divorced, and cannot remarry because they are already married. Now they must be both mother and father to the children. And that can be difficult. They cannot rely upon the complimentary support of a spouse. They practice total abstinence. They provide a good example for the children by attending Mass on Sundays and receiving the sacraments regularly. They are there for their children, alone and self-reliant.

Single moms and dads are a witness to God’s promise to us that He will be faithful to each of us if we will be faithful to Him and His plan for marriage, spousal love and family.

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

Dear Fr. Matthew @ the Abbey,

Can you please give me some solid, straight-forward counsel on the topic of contraception with regards to the following situation? Can we use a condom during sexual intercourse until my wife is done 

breastfeeding and she can properly chart her menstrual cycle? 

My wife & I have 3 boys ages 5, 3 and 3 months. The 5 year old and 3 year old just had their birthdays in November. So all 3 boys are still very young. My wife has a herniated, bulging disc in her lower back which made the pregnancy very difficult. It also hinders her abilities to function on a daily basis depending on if the disc gets "aggravated". 

We are open to a new baby. But we would just prefer to wait for a while for my wife to recuperate. She is breast feeding right now. But she also was breast feeding with the first 2 boys and still had her menstrual cycle within 2 months after giving birth. She does the breast feeding all the time and the baby sleeps with us. This time she has gone 3 months and has not had a menstrual cycle yet. But she is scared to have any sexual intercourse with me because many women get pregnant at this time. A woman becomes fertile before the bleeding starts and there is no warning as to when fertility returns. 

We want to breast feed the baby because it is healthy for the baby. We could stop breast feeding so that she will return her menstrual cycle more rapidly, but the baby receives so many benefits from it that we really want to continue for about 6 to 9 months. Please write me back and thank you so much. God Bless, Chris ]

Dear Chris,

Your question has both a moral and a medical dimension. I will only address the moral aspect. Dr. Mary Martin OB/GYN will address the medical aspect.

Condoms are always immoral, since they deliberately turn against the fertility of the present marital act. They are always an immoral means to accomplish the ends of responsible parenthood.

The problem here is that you have legitimate reasons for spacing the next pregnancy, and you do not know when your wife’s fertility returns. I know that various NFP methods (Creighton model, CCL, BOM, etc.) are able to detect the signals of returning fertility during breastfeeding. You must consult the teachers of these models, and see what can be done to learn how to read your irregular patterns.

If there is uncertainty about when fertility is about to return, then the morally appropriate thing to do is to refrain from the marital act until you are able to know exactly where you are in your cycle. Now for the medical opinion:

Hi Chris,

Your question was referred to me by Fr. Daniel McCaffrey from NFP Outreach Ministries. I am a Board-certified Obstetrician Gynecologist practicing in Oklahoma City and your question is a common one. My patients are also very surprised to learn that Natural Family Planning is a more effective way to space pregnancies than traditional contraceptives. I practice in full compliance with the Catholic Church teaching and can reassure you that it is entirely possible to avoid conception even during breast feeding.

Although there are currently 6 methods of NFP taught in the US, I present the Billings Ovulation Method to my patients as a very simple way to determine potential fertility. There are only 4 rules and temperatures and digital exams are not used, making this acceptable to women of all cultures and within all times of reproductive life. In fact, the BOM is taught in 120 countries world-wide and is one of only three approved contraception methods in China. It is based on the fact that the pattern of a woman's vaginal discharge, whether changing, or unchanging, correlates precisely with the ovarian hormones. For more information, please go to www.boma-usa.com or www.woomb.org

I use the BOM to make gynecologic and infertility diagnoses. It is invaluable as a diagnostic tool but is 99.5% effective in delaying or preventing conception as well. Published data on the condom use has an effectiveness rate of only 85%. Even the 99% effectiveness rate advertised by the pharmaceutical companies for chemical contraceptives is actually only 90% in published data. The issue is that couples who use contraceptives are having sexual contact during the fertile phase because they have been taught erroneously that it is impossible to know when a woman is potentially fertile. My professional reputation is staked on the effectiveness of NFP. No pregnancies have occurred within my practice if the 4 rules were followed.

I will leave the moral issues of contraception to Fr. McCaffrey, et al.

God's blessings to you and your family,

Mary W. Martin, M.D.,FACOG

Dear Fr. Matthew @ the Abbey, 

I firmly believe in respecting life in all its forms from conception  to natural death and understand the church’s teaching on birth  control as it applies to God’s divine plan of life. However, as a  parent of a mentally challenged young adult, who would be unable to  care for a child, I would like to know how the church teachings on  birth control apply to this population and how it supports them in  making life choices. A pregnancy would not only be a physical,  emotional and mental challenge for my child, but a financial one as  well. The baby would have to be raised by someone other than my  child, who would not understand the process of pregnancy, child birth  or why the baby was taken away. Thank you for your insight.

K.C., Fort Wayne]

Dear K.C,

Your question is how does contraception, and sterilization, apply to a mentally retarded, or mentally challenged young adult? You point out that such a young person is not capable of dealing with the responsibilities which accompany marriage and children. Thus the question becomes “What can be done to insure that this young person will not become sexually active and run the risk of a pregnancy?”

I think it is important first of all to point out that that impaired condition of a person’s mind or body does not lessen the human dignity of that person. A mentally retarded, or physically handicapped, or a person suffering from a genetic disorder shares the same human dignity as a son or daughter of God, just as you or I. Every human person is created in the image and likeness of God, and thus has infinite value. In another world, in eternity, such a person will be freed of their mental, physical or genetic impediments, and be a perfectly normal individual.

Morality, including sexual morality, was designed for every man, woman and child who share in human nature. There are no exceptions here. If contraception is wrong for a normal person, it is equally wrong for an impaired person. The same applies to sterilization. 

You ask how does the Church support impaired persons in making life choices, since a pregnancy would become a challenge they could not do justice to. The Church applies the virtue of chastity to every group of human beings, according to their walk of life. If a person is single, then they are to be celibate, and not indulge in sexual behavior. The sexual act is a spousal act, and each act is always to be open to the goodness of the unitive and procreative dimension of human sexuality.

This means that parents, or guardians, are to explain God’s plan for human sexuality to their impaired son or daughter, according to their ability to understand. Every human being experiences his or her sexuality. What they need to acquire is an understanding of what it means, and how it is to be lived, according to God’s plan for us. Basic values, explained in simple terms, are understandable to everyone, including persons with limited intelligence.

Just as the single person is expected to be celibate, so also is the impaired single person. Genital sex is not a sine qua non for a fulfilled human life. Think of the millions of men and women who have been called to the celibate life over the centuries. This will require that the parent of a “child-like adult” will watch over him or her, and clearly discourage any form of immoral behavior. Gaining self possession and self mastery is part of the process of becoming human. There are no technological or medical substitutes for this.

Sterilization of an impaired person is just as much a form of bodily mutilation for them as it is for a normal person. We have no right to destroy our fertility. It is a God-given gift, and is always to be treasured as such.

A mentally or physically impaired person is a gift to a family and society, not a liability or an unqualified burden. They bring something unique and special to all who know them. They have a contribution to make to the world. They require special caring and guidance, but they repay that caring and guidance with the goodness and love of their person. 

We see something of the mystery of life here. A “perfect” human life is much more complex than the world understands it to be. Sexuality has only a limited role to play in human life. We are all totally dependent upon God. The impaired persons reveal this more clearly than others.

Cordially yours,

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

Dear Fr. Matthew,

I am a practicing Catholic who is married to a former Mormon. We have two children. I am afraid of having more children due to a childhood of terrible upbringing (partially caused by hereditary mental illness / instability) and the difficulties after the birth of our second child. My husband does not want to have any more children and wants to have a vasectomy. I want to do the right thing according to the Church teaching, but I don’t know what they are. I am very confused as to what this means for me morally. Would I be morally responsible if he gets this procedure? Part of me wants him to have it so that I don’t run the risk of becoming a harmful parent to my children (the more kids my parents had, the worse things became and the sicker they became), but I want to do the moral and proper thing. 

Please help, 

Sincerely, L.

Dear L,

What the Church teaches about vasectomy and sterilization is that it is seriously wrong. Humanae Vitae #14 teaches: “Especially to be rejected is direct abortion – even if done for reasons of health. Furthermore, as the Magisterium of the Church has taught repeatedly, direct sterilization of the male or female, whether permanent or temporary, is equally to be condemned.”

The Catechism of the Catholic Church reaffirms this in sections 2297 and 2388-9.

Natural Family Planning is a very effective, and morally good, method of practicing responsible parenthood, when there are urgent reasons. I encourage you and your husband to learn the method. Go to the Billings Method (www.boma-usa.org), or Couple to Couple League (www.ccli.org), or the Creighton Model (www.popepaulvi.com).

Children are a gift from God, not a curse, or something to be afraid of. Could it be that the child that will bring the greatest happiness to the two of you is yet to be born? God know how many children He wishes to give you. We want to do His will in these matters.

I recommend that you listen to the CD “Testimony of Healing: Sterilization Reversal – an Act of Love” by David and Nina Morton, available from One More Soul (1 800 307 7685).

Cordially yours,

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

Dear Fr. Matthew @ the Abbey,

If a couple wants to avoid children, why must there be a serious reason for doing so? 

Thank you, Howard. - L.

Dear Howard, We must examine the role of children in a marriage. What is God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family? All of these dimensions of human life are so important that we must look to our Creator, and the Designer of human nature, for their meaning and basic structure. This implies that we are not to simply reconstruct and redesign them according to contemporary trends and personal whims. 

Children are an integral part of marriage and the spousal act. Married couples find their completion as parents. With the exception of total infertility, marriage involves a family. The child is God’s greatest gift to a couple. The child enlarges their hearts, increases their capacity to give and receive love, and adds to the richness of their family life. An openness to children is a requirement for a valid marriage ceremony.

God’s plan for spousal love involves making the total gift of one’s self to their spouse. This total gift of self involves one’s fertility, one’s makeup as a bodied person. The Church teaches us, on behalf of Jesus, her founder, that every spousal act must contain these two dimensions: 1) a unitive (love-giving) one, and 2) a procreative (life-giving) one. This does not mean that every spousal act must result in a new pregnancy. But it does mean that every spousal act must remain open to the goodness of our fertility, and to the possibility that God may choose to create a new person, who will live forever. 

Parents are free cooperators with God. They freely make the decisions about the spacing and number of children. But they are to use morally good means to accomplish this end. Natural Family Planning provides us with such a morally good means. And they should have serious (versus trivial) reasons for avoiding more children. What is called for is responsible parenthood: having as many children as they can responsibly care for. God knows how many children He wishes to send into your marriage and family. It is for you and your wife to discover His plan for your family, and then to welcome it. 

I suggest that you read, or re-read, Humanae Vitae. 

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org 

Dear Fr. Matthew @ the Abbey,

After observing your "Natural Planning" website, I have  

one question that I need someone from your viewpoint to clarify for me.  Scenario: You are married. Your husband has HIV. How do you have sex? 

Thanks,  Robbie 

 Greetings, Robbie, 

I have not seen a definitive answer from the Vatican on the question raised by situation of a husband with AIDS. 

Here is my considered opinion on the matter.  This is only my opinion, but I have dealt with this problem in my extensive work throughout Africa.  I have made speaking tours, and given many talks and conferences in eight countries of Sub Sahara Africa. 

If a husband has AIDS, and he loves his wife, then the last thing he would want to do is infect her with a lethal disease.  Besides being immoral, condoms are ineffective in preventing AIDS.  Wherever condoms are use, they increase the incidence of new cases of AIDS because they give people a false sense of security. Even if the condom were 100% effective, which it is not, it would still be totally immoral to use one, because the condom involves all the immoral dimensions of contraception.

The only solution in the case of a husband with AIDS is to practice total abstinence.  He simply cannot afford the risk of passing a deadly disease on to the woman he loves.  After the marriage is consummated, there is not an absolute imperative that the spousal act must continue.  Under normal circumstances the spousal act should continue, and be a renewal of the marriage covenant.  But, in this case, it would be a betrayal of the love which the husband professes for his wife. 

There are many other expressions of tenderness and love which a couple can demonstrate besides the marital act. 

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org 

Dear Fr. Matthew @ the Abbey,

We were married in the 1980s. I think NFP was discussed during our marriage preparation classes, but I remember very little of that discussion. At that time, everyone used birth control and I dismissed the idea of NFP as a non-realistic option. I used the birth control pill for the first 15 years 

of our marriage. As I began to grow in my faith, I came to understand the Church's teaching on birth control and struggled to share with my husband reasons why I could no longer use it. Together, we took instruction on NFP, yet we have never come to totally trust its effectiveness. How do you counsel couples who want to move from birth control to NFP yet do not feel called to have more children because of age (mid-40s)? 

T. 

T, your questions were forwarded to me to answer. I am a Board-certified OB/GYN specializing in NFP and can assure you of two things: modern NFP methods are superior to current hormonal contraceptive methods, and your age dramatically decreases the chance of failure regardless. The failure rate of NFP is less than 3%. The method I personally teach, The Billings Ovulation Method, has a failure rate of 0.5% with usage data from 120 countries around the world, most impressively, China. Please take a course from a certified instructor (BOM has only 4 simple rules) and make your marriage truly open to God's plan for marriage. You only have potentially 96 hours of fertility per month and God gives us the technology to recognize those few hours if, after considering your resources and health, you and your husband choose not to use them.

Mary W. Martin, M.D., FACOG

Shortly after I stopped using the birth control pill, I became pregnant. The baby died due to miscarriage when I was 9 weeks along. I was told that the after effects of the pill may have made my womb inhospitable to a developing child. Can you explain the after effects of the pill on fertility and the ability to maintain a pregnancy? 

Thanks, T.

Dear T. The pill does not reliably stop ovulation. It has two additional mechanisms to prevent pregnancy: thickening the cervical mucus to impede sperm entry, and thinning the endometrium (uterine lining) to prevent implantation of a baby once conceived. The mucus thickening mechanism is a myth. If estrogen levels rise high enough for an egg to be released, the cervix responds to the rising estrogen by mucus which sorts, stores and conveys sperm. The cervix responds, regardless of the level of progestogen in the pill. 

The last mechanism is the most problematic. Chronic pill use can cause atrophy of the mucus glands in both the cervix and the endometrium leading to reduced fertility as well as a whole host of other side effects. Your pregnancy loss could well have been a chromosomal defect, however, so we will never know for certain whether it was your prior pill use or another problem which resulted in the loss of your baby. But another soul exists regardless!

Mary W. Martin, M.D., FACOG

 Dear Fr. Matthew @ the Abbey,

When I go to my doctor's office, I see ink pens, drug samples etc. left there by pharmaceutical companies. I work in a medical building and see very well dressed drug reps carting in their goods all the time and employees there say that these reps sometimes bring pizza etc. for all the staff in their office. 

With all this promotion and goodies, I doubt whether people are receiving good medicine. For instance I read that the birth control pill has many harmful side effects. Just how influential are these pharmaceutical companies on what doctors prescribe? 

What's really going on and how does this all fit together?

 Dear JB, 

Pharmaceutical companies are a tremendously powerful lobby. Merck, for instance, stands to profit from the legislative push to require all young girls to be vaccinated with its Gardasil vaccine designed against the four most common Human Papilloma Viruses which cause cervical cancer. The state of Texas passed such a mandate recently. Another such example is the promulgation of artificial contraceptives to treat gynecologic disorders despite the lack of studies which demonstrate efficacy and the many studies demonstrating the harmful side effects. 

Pharmaceutical companies fund medical education and most medical research studies. Medical students and residents are showered with text books, monographs, stethoscopes, pens and all types of office and diagnostic products which advertise drug products. This continues throughout the careers of physicians. Most continuing educational programs are sponsored by pharmaceutical companies as are meal educational programs and "drug lunches." The meals serve a purpose to educate physicians and staff about new medications, and there would be virtually no research or continuing medical education without pharmaceutical company sponsorship. 

Behind all of this is marketing. Medical professionals have an obligation to cast a jaundiced eye toward the impeccably dressed smooth-talking representatives ("drug reps") and think critically about the scientific data before being influenced by the sales pitch and the free lunch. The federal government has passed legislation limiting the monetary value of gifts, but the marketing gurus have come up with a new approach: direct advertising to the consumer in print and media now recruits patients to "sell" their own doctors on the merits of a particular drug or product. 

Mary W. Martin, M.D., FACOG 

 Dear Fr. Mattthew @ the Abbey,

I am 44 years old and came into the Catholic Church last year along with my husband. We have 2 children, aged 12 and 8. We are practicing NFP and have a question regarding "just reasons" for abstaining from intercourse while fertile. Is it a just reason to not conceive simply because of my age and the statistical probabilities associated with late-in-life pregnancies as they relate to birth defects? We have no other compelling reason to not be open to life.

 Thank you, 

 Amy.

Dear Amy, 

Your question was passed along to me by Fr. Dan McCaffrey of NFP Outreach Ministries for comment. God gives us many gifts and blessings, including our fertility. Only you and your husband can prayerfully consider whether stewardship of your resources is sufficient reason to avoid using your fertility. Let me assure you from a medical standpoint that God balances the increased risk of genetic defects and pregnancy loss with reduced fertility. Having said that, I have delivered beautiful perfect children to couples in their 40's and babies who are less than perfect to much younger couples. 

Hope this helps, 

Mary W. Martin, M.D., FACOG

In this NFP Q&A column I am using a remarkable column by Archbishop Joseph Naumann, of Kansas City, KS.  It is taken from The Leaven, and his previous columns are available at www.theleaven.com.  

  Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

At the November meeting of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, following the adoption by the whole body of bishops of the document “Married Love and the Gift of Life,” I was chosen to represent the Committee on Pro-Life Activities at a press conference. 

A reporter asked me why the bishops were issuing this statement on a matter where so many Catholics do not agree with the church’s teaching. 

I replied: “We [bishops] do not need to teach about doctrines everyone accepts. We need to devote much of our teaching to address those issues that many of our people are struggling to accept.” 

With this column, I conclude this series of my reflections on the Church’s teaching regarding artificial contraception and marital chastity. In issuing “Married Love and the Gift of Life,” the bishops acknowledged that part of the reason so many of our people do not understand and accept this moral doctrine has been our own failure to be effective teachers. With the experience of the past 40 years providing so much empirical data about the negative consequences of artificial contraception impacting young people, marriages and society, I believe we have arrived at a teachable moment. 

I chose to devote several columns to this issue because I believe that strong marriages are the foundation of st0rong families. Strong family life is essential for a healthy nation and society. 

Moreover, each Catholic family is a little church that serves as the foundation upon which our parishes, dioceses and the universal Church are built. 

During his pastoral visit to St. Louis in 1999, the late Pope John Paul II said: “As the new evangelization unfolds, it must include a special emphasis on the family and the renewal of Christian marriage. In their primary mission of communicating love to each other, of being co-creators with God of human life, and of transmitting the love of God to their children, parents must know that they are fully supported by the Church and by society. The new evangelization must bring a fuller appreciation of the family as the primary and most vital foundation of society, the first school of social virtue and solidarity. As the family goes, so goes the nation!”

Recently, I received a letter from a member in the archdiocese that, among other things, said: “It is ludicrous for celibate men to lecture caring, committed, prayerful married couples about what should and should not take place in their act of greatest intimacy.” This is very similar to much of the criticism directed at Pope Paul VI when he issued Humanae Vitae in 1968. Unfortunately, it was effective in silencing many bishops and priests from attempting to preach the fullness of the Church’s teaching. 

The reality is that marriage matters not just to the couple and not even just to their children, but to culture, society and the Church. The Church’s teaching about artificial contraception was not an innovation of Pope Paul VI, but it was the clear and consistent teaching of the Church throughout its history. It was also the teaching of every other major Protestant denomination until 1930. 

The Church’s teaching is premised on the reality that fertility is not an illness. Oral contraceptives are not medicines that combat disease, but are chemicals used to disrupt that which is healthy and normal. 

In the very first chapter of the first book of the Bible, we read:  

“God created man in his image, in the divine image he created him; male and female he created them.”  Part of the way in which we image our Creator is our capacity through love to create a new human life. 

Artificial contraception disrupts the design of the Creator. It has effectively disconnected the most powerful physical expression of human love with the power to conceive a new life. In so doing, it has disrupted the balance that God designed into the act of sexual intercourse. Severed from the ability to give new life, the fundamental meaning of sexual intimacy has been changed. 

I will not repeat the many manifestations of the social disaster that has ensued from this redefinition of the meaning of sexual intimacy. Suffice it to say, the widespread acceptance of artificial contraception has cheapened the meaning of sexual intercourse. It no longer needs be the physical expression of committed, faithful love, but can mean something far less. 

Even within the marriage covenant, the severing of the life-giving power from its love-giving capacity alters the significance of each expression of sexual intimacy.

Lest this be discounted as just the lecturing of an old male celibate, I want to conclude this series of articles by sharing some of the testimonies from married couples regarding their experience from living the Church’s teaching: 

“Natural Family Planning made our union different, more of a total giving. . . . Because we’re open to life, we’re giving everything.” 

“Natural Family Planning has helped me to mature, though I have a long way to go. . . . It has called me to cherish my wife rather than simply desire her.” 

“Natural Family Planning does require communication and commitment, but isn’t that what marriage is all about? We have gained so much by using Natural Family Planning and have lost nothing.”

Why are Catholic doctors, especially obstetricians-gynecologists, so hesitant to give their backing to natural family planning? I understand that only one percent of Catholic ob/gyns refuse to prescribe contraception and to do sterilizations. That means, does it not, that the others are contributing to the problem of so many Catholic women using the Pill, and all the moral harm that results from that? 

Thanks for your answer, 

                      D.

Dear D, 

You are correct in pointing to the fact that so few Catholic medical doctors promote NFP, and prescribe contraceptives instead. Why is this? There are many reasons. Let me provide just a few. 

Most doctors were never exposed to the merits of NFP when they went through medical school. The prevailing attitude is that NFP does not work, and that it is equivalent to the rhythm method. But this means that the med schools have not keep up with all the developments in refining the effectiveness of NFP. Doctors at the Pope Paul VI Institute at Creighton University, for one example, have advanced the science of NFP to the extent now that NFP can be used not only to effectively space pregnancies, but to overcome infertility. Naprotechnology (natural procreative technology) is three times more effective than standard treatments for infertility, less expensive, and without the dangers of hyper ovulation, in vitro fertilization, embryo transfer, and placing many embryos in the mother’s womb. Naprotechnology eliminates frozen embryo banks, where in this country alone there are 400,000 frozen embryos. 

Catholic ob/gyns and family practice doctors have told me that they experienced real prejudice against NFP in their training. Some were told that, if they could not in conscience prescribe contraception, then there was no place for them in the school. Many medical students do not have strong enough convictions about their faith to resist this kind of pressure. They reason, if the profession feels this way about NFP, who am I to think otherwise? 

Many medical students were never exposed to good courses in Catholic medical ethics. Thus, they do not understand morally why contraception is so harmful, and medically why NFP is so effective and beneficial. This means, of course, that Catholic colleges and universities that do not offer reputable courses in ethics have failed both the Church and people they serve. 

Still another consideration is the financial one. There is no money to be made in promoting NFP. In the case of the Pill, a doctor can routinely prescribe a monthly prescription, and collect his fee. But with NFP there is the initial teaching a couple in their own physiology, helping them to understand their sexuality, and encouraging them to acquire self-possession and self-mastery. A normal course in NFP requires usually 4-6 sessions. Once the couple masters the method, then there are no further expenses. NFP is very good medicine, but bad for business. However, there are other compensations. NFP couples usually seek out totally pro-life doctors for all their medical needs. Many pro-life doctors have built up a very good cliental of couples who seek out their services. 

A final consideration is the faith one. Many Catholic doctors have a split, or double, conscience. They use one conscience at Sunday Mass, and another one in their profession. They have not assimilated their faith into their profession. They take all their medical guidance from academia, which stresses expedience instead of morality. This has lead, in many instances, to making the customer always right. Medicine today is here to serve the wishes of the customer-patient. Doctors are not to “impose” their principles, or values, upon their customer-patients. This may provide good income, but it is not good medicine. 

What is the solution? Catholic doctors need to discover good expositions of medical ethics. I recommend Dr. William E. May’s Catholic Bioethics and the Gift of Human Life (Our Sunday Visitor Press, Huntington, IN: 2000). Then they must assume their role, their unique vocation, in the new evangelization of the Gospel of Life 

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

Mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

Father, I would like your recommendation on what book/booklet to purchase for my 20-year-old daughter that discusses how Natural Family Planning works. 

Thank you. 

Cathy 

Dear Cathy, 

Hello. My name is Kristie Wellman, and I work at One More Soul, a non-profit organization fostering God's plan for chastity, love, marriage, and children. I'm 24 and the Youth and Family Outreach Coordinator here. Stella from the NFP Outreach forwarded your e-mail to us for our suggestions. Here are a few different suggestions: 

For a simple overview of NFP -- but one that would basically teach your daughter the method, there is a small book called Love and Fertility that is on the Ovulation Method of NFP by Family of the Americas. It is short and to the point and easily understood. 

For another book that would actually teach your daughter the method, there is The Billings Method. This is a much longer book. It also teaches the Ovulation Method using a different methodology. The book does go into more detail and explanation than Love and Fertility.

If you are more interested in something that discusses NFP but isn't a book actually teaching the method, there are several other options: 

One More Soul's resource called "First Comes Love" is in newspaper format and full of testimonies, quotes, articles, and more on the Catholic Church's teaching on married sexuality -- the blessings of children, the harms of contraception, and how NFP can help marriages. It is very well put together and good for just picking up and reading bits and pieces at a time. 

There is also a book called Life-Giving Love by Kimberly Hahn that is excellent. It discusses the Church's teaching on NFP and openness to life. I love it because it is engaging to read and has stories of real-life people who either have or have not lived out this teaching in their lives and what happened. 

Finally, One More Soul has 2 CDs that come to my mind as relevant for what you are looking for. The first is "Contraception: Why Not?” by Dr. Janet Smith, which explains the advantages of NFP. The second is "It Brought Me Back to God," which is the testimony of a man who reluctantly agreed to switch from contraception to NFP in his marriage and had his life totally changed for the better in the process. 

You can obtain all of these resources from our website (www.omsoul.com) and most of them from other places (Catholic bookstores, etc.) as well. I hope that this is helpful but not too much information! May God bless you and your daughter. 

In Jesus, Kristie 

 In a recent exchange on the Hannity – Colmes show, Fr. Tom Euteneuer of HLI took Sean Hannity to task for his public rejection of the Church’s teaching on contraception. Hannity is a high-profile Catholic, and his dissent lends great support to the many Catholics who are contraceptors. In his defense, Hannity asked: “Would you not rather (prefer) that people use birth control than abortion?” 

Let us consider the implications of this question. It has the tone of a talk-show bravado, but it still deserves an answer. The question presumes that one should choose the lesser of two evils. But if both are easily avoidable, why choose either? It is something like asking, “Would you not prefer robbing a bank to killing the bank president?” One ought to reject either alternative as totally unworthy of a person. 

At the base of Hannity’s question is the presumption that couples cannot practice self-restraint in sexual matters. They are going to have sex regardless of the consequences. Some couples will simply abort the unwanted child. And Hannity is against that. But, he reasons, if they can use contraception, then they can prevent an unwanted pregnancy, and the temptation to use abortion as a backup to failed contraception. Contraception eliminates the need for self-possession and self-mastery. 

But some self-mastery and self-restraint is necessary for any commitment to a human relationship. No one is exempt from acquiring self-control in the area of human sexuality. To refuse to acquire the will power required for self-mastery is to refuse an inevitable requirement of human maturity. We all understand the need for discipline in sports, academics, and the business world. Why can’t we understand the need for self-discipline over the most powerful of human drives? 

Hannity uses the argument that he cannot force his beliefs, or values, upon others who do not share his religious beliefs. He can only urge them to follow his moral reasoning as far as they are willing to go. He thinks that calling contraception morally evil is only a Catholic thing. But this ignores what contraception is, and how it diminishes the richness of the spousal act. As God designed the spousal act, it was meant to be the total personal gift of one’s self to another person, to whom you have committed yourself for life. It accepts no conditions, no restrictions. It requires the total gift of self to another, and the acceptance of the other’s total gift of self to you. Contraception is the deliberate withholding of one’s fertility from the other, which results in a conditioned and reserved giving. That is what makes contraception harmful to any marriage, and thus morally evil. Contracepted sex is a sex act, but it is not a spousal act. It uses a person as an object for one’s pleasure, even if this is mutually agreed upon. 

Hannity cannot see the difference between contraception and NFP. He calls NFP simply another form of birth control, one approved by the Catholic Church. But NFP totally respects God’s plan for spousal love; it always remains open to the goodness of our fertility and does not turn against it. Contraception suppresses our fertility, and depreciates it. Contraception means that seeking one’s pleasure trumps all other considerations and values. 

The truth of the matter is that contraception leads to more and more abortion. 60% of women who have an abortion were using some form of contraception. The contraceptive mentality turns against the goodness of nascent human life, and helps one to accept abortion if the contraceptive fails. When International Planned Parenthood wants to change the laws of a country which forbid abortion, they begin their strategy by promoting every form of contraception. They know that contraception inevitably leads to a demand for abortion. 

Neither of the alternatives that Hannity suggests is morally acceptable. The only proper solution is to honor the God of all life by respecting His plan for marriage and spousal love. 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

"Talking about contraception and sterilization would scandalize the children in the congregation. Thus, I can’t deal with them at the pulpit.” 

But Jesus didn’t have such reservations. When he was addressing large crowds he talked about sexual sins. Recall the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:27). Children are not offended by a teaching on God’s plan for spousal love. Rather, they are the victims of silence at the pulpit. People get hurt when there is confusion about right and wrong, and there is a great confusion today about the moral evil of contraception and sterilization. Children do not understand the language we use when discussing capital punishment, euthanasia, or experimentation on human embryos. They take from a homily what they need. If they have questions, they can ask their parents for an explanation suited to their level of comprehension.

Refusing to address major moral issues at the pulpit, in effect, makes infants of the entire congregation, who often do not know that contraception and sterilization are wrong, and do not understand why they are wrong. Today we have many adults who are seriously immature in the development of their conscience.

"It’s okay to talk about these matters in RCIA, marriage preparation classes and to provide pamphlets on these issues in the vestibule, but not at the pulpit." 

But this approach misses the point. "These times call for people who will look the truth in the eye, and call things by their proper names, without yielding to convenient compromise or to the temptation of self-deception" (Evangelium Vitae 57). Important issues cannot be censored from the pulpit. If a message does not happen at the pulpit, it doesn’t happen. There is great ignorance among Catholics about the morality of contraception and sterilization. Very few understand why these choices and acts are immoral. Many people think that if a topic is not treated at the pulpit, where it is heard by all, then it is not important and can be ignored. RCIA classes, marriage prep classes, and the pamphlet rack are good ways to supplement teaching from the pulpit, but can never replace it.

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB 

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

"These issues are contentious. They will produce strife and discord."

But this means that the priest, as a moral guide, cannot provide moral guidance where it is most needed. If people already understand an issue, like slavery for example, and do not dispute it, then there is no need to address it from the pulpit. But if many people are violating the 5th and 6th Commandments, do not know it, and can’t understand why these acts are sinful, then we priests must address the issue. Not to address them is reprehensible negligence on our part. We must inform conscience by proposing moral truth. The approach we use is that of Jesus: we speak the truth in charity, and with conviction and forthrightness. If we allow the Gospel to be silenced because we refuse to accept criticism from those who reject Gospel values, then we fail in our priesthood. It is not our Gospel. We are not at liberty to decide what parts of the Gospel are “too hard to accept,” and can be ignored. Contraception and sterilization are serious matters, and they are causing much harm to our marriages, our families and to our young people.

"Collections will go down."

This is factually untrue. But beyond that, we members of the clergy must anticipate the criteria our Lord will use to evaluate our pastoral care of the flock entrusted to our care. The main criterion will not be "Did you get all the bills paid and have a smooth running operation?" Rather, it will be "Did you guide my people into a knowledge of my ways, my Gospel, and into a love for the splendor of the truth?" Paying bills is not high on the list of pastoral success criteria. The qualities of a CEO are not those of being a priest. Bringing people to the person, heart and mind of the Lord is what is essential. God does not demand success from us in terms of our people’s response to good moral teaching. He does demand that we faithfully propose and teach the values that comport well with our dignity as bodied persons. God’s plan for human sexuality, marriage and family are an essential part of the Gospel of Life in these times.

Priests who have consistently proposed the values of Humanae Vitae, Familiaris Consortio and Evangelium Vitaewill tell you that their collections have not collapsed. Instead, the parish has learned the meaning of a spirit of generosity, and that is reflected in parish contributions as well as volunteer service to various parish organizations. Couples who practice NFP are very often the most generous volunteers in the parish. Couples open to life are also open to giving their children to the priesthood and religious life. If they are caught up in the contraceptive culture, then they will very likely not be generous with God by accepting His invitation to their sons and daughters. 

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB 

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

"People will go to another church because they don’t want to hear this."

Sad to say, not every parish is on the same page when dealing with matters of sexuality, marriage and the family. Some parishes simply ignore whatever is politically incorrect. They allow dissenting elements within the parish to determine what parts of the Gospel can be proclaimed there. This, in turn, means that forces within the secular society exert an influence over some parishioners, who bring that to bear upon the entire parish. Instead of being counter-cultural, such a parish becomes a mere reflection of the secular culture.

But this is the land of the free and the home of the brave. What is there to prevent a clergyman from proclaiming God’s beautiful plan for human love, life, marriage and family? We are not to worry about those who may reject the truth and leave. Our Lord did not change his teaching about the Eucharist when many in His audience found this a hard saying and walked away. He respected their freedom, and let them walk. But they had to respect His freedom also and His responsibility to proclaim the message the Father gave Him, which is for the life of the world. If all the clergy were clearly teaching good moral principles, then our people would not go shopping for the preacher who suits their ears.

"When the bishop talks about it, I’ll begin to talk about it."

One can understand why a priest or deacon would hesitate to take the initiative in teaching values that have been largely ignored since 1968. We have a right to expect our spiritual fathers, the bishops, to lead by their example in addressing these serious matters. This is their duty as moral guides and spiritual leaders of a diocese. They are to be the good shepherd for the entire diocese. But what happens if they do not speak out? Is the pastor justified in keeping silent? When we priests die, the Lord will not ask you "What did the bishop do?" He will ask, "What did you do? You are the pastor of your people."

Our priesthood comes from the Lord, not from another human being. Our obligations go to the Lord, before they go to any of His human representatives. God holds us accountable for what we do, for our choices and actions, and taking responsibility for ourselves and our people. True leadership means that we address the real needs of our times, regardless of what others are not doing. Reprehensible negligence does not justify other reprehensible negligence. Perhaps what needs to be done in a diocese where the bishop chooses not to address these issues is to have many of the clergy give him their assurance that they will support his giving a public teaching. Perhaps the bishop is concerned that if he takes any initiative in these matters, then his clergy will publicly refuse to comply, as happened when Humanae Vitae was first promulgated. Everyone admires leadership, but where will leadership arise? We think that the good Lord expects all of us to be spiritual and moral leaders. 

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB 

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

"I’m not prepared to speak about these issues because I wasn’t trained in the seminary for this."

We find that many clergy are woefully unprepared to address these issues. They have not kept up with their reading and personal ongoing formation in the areas of human sexuality, chastity and marriage. But this is not an acceptable excuse. What other profession would be excused from professional ongoing formation, keeping abreast with contemporary developments in their profession? If medical doctors did not keep themselves updated, they would lose their license to practice medicine. Can it be any different for the clergy?

There are excellent materials available today to help us understand the beauty of God’s plan for human love, and especially marital love. There is Pope John Paul II’s Theology of the Body; there is Christian Personalism. There are the writings of reliable moral theologians. There are the writings, CDs and videotapes of Dr. Janet Smith. There are the testimonies of thousands of married couples that have discovered the blessings that these values have brought into their marriages and families. Two readily available sources for materials on Natural Family Planning and the harms of contraception and sterilization are One More Soul (www.OMSoul.com) and the Couple to Couple League International (www.ccli.org). CCL provides three-day clergy conferences twice a year at Covington, Kentucky. NFP Outreach helps design and conduct clergy conferences for entire dioceses on the topic of "How to Preach God’s Plan for Marriage and Spousal Love From the Pulpit." There are many good Catholic doctors who are willing to bring their expertise to these conferences. And there are hundreds of married couples that are willing to give their testimonies about the values of NFP in their marriages.

Ignorance was never a good excuse for justifying neglect. And it will not wash today in areas that are so vital to good marriages and happy families.

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB 

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

"The recent clergy sex scandals make it impossible for me to talk about sex today. I have no credibility."

The false perception “You have no credibility” is very much the intent of some forces in the secular society, which want to muzzle the pulpits on matters of sexual morality. They don’t want us to teach about God’s plan for human sexuality. But there is no such thing as a moral vacuum. If good morality is not being taught, then other varieties of sexual ideology will be taught. We see it today in the push for acceptance of single sex marriages, in advocating “safe” sex for our young people, and in trivializing committed relationships.

The clergy sex scandals call for greater, not less, emphasis upon sexual morality. If there had been greater clarity on these matters from the pulpit in the past, then everyone would know the standards, which apply to everyone, and we would have been spared much grief. Our young people would not have been victimized. Dioceses would not be in danger of bankruptcy. Respect for the clergy would not be at an all time low. Bishops would not be faulted for their lack of oversight. Scandals erupt when there is no clarity of moral teaching coming from the pulpit. Our times call for more, not less, moral teaching from the pulpit.

Both the clergy and the laity have to clean up their act. The abuse of young people by 1-3% of the clergy is indeed a scandal. The abuse of sexuality by 80% of Catholic couples that are using birth control, or are sterilized, is also a great scandal. Before one group can throw stones at the other, they must first clean up their act. God is chastising his people because of violations against His sexual code. He chastises the clergy by not providing vocations to religious life and the priesthood. He chastises the laity by weak marriages, a 50% divorce rate, lots of unhappiness, and children who bear the brunt of their parent’s selfishness. So both the clergy and the laity need to hold the other accountable. We are not beating up on each other; rather, we are confronting the truth together.

The responsibility of the clergy and the religious is to hand on the deposit of the Faith as preached by the Apostles, which includes teaching moral truths. Their duty is to explain why God’s plan is so good for us, and so deserving of our efforts to comply with it. The responsibility of the laity is to integrate good moral principles into their lives and actions. Then they are to take these values out into the broader society, and help shape the culture with these Gospel values. This is part of the new evangelization.

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB 

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

DISSENTERS FROM HUMANAE VITAE ASSURED US THAT MANY BENEFITS WOULD COME FROM THE ACCEPTANCE OF CONTRACEPTION. WHAT DO THE SOCIAL SCIENCES TELL US AFTER 35 YEARS OF WIDESPREAD CONTRACEPTION? D.M.

 Dear D.M.,

W. Bradford Wilcox wrote an article “Social Science and the Vindications of Catholic Moral Teaching.” He notes that some Catholic intellectuals, with substantial public platforms, have pronounced that the most compassionate route for the Church is to accommodate her moral teachings to the experience and practice of the people. Law must give way to grace, rules must give way to experience, and the pope must give way to the people. 

But there are real problems with this appeal for accommodation. The first problem is that this approach is based on bad social science. The shifts in sexual and familial behavior have been revealed in study after study as social catastrophes. The data has largely vindicated Catholic moral teaching on sex and marriage. The second problem is that moral laxity is most disastrous for the most vulnerable members of our society: the poor. The poor have paid the largest price for the cultural revolution that Andrew Greeley and Richard McBrien and others would like the Church to approve.

George Akerlof is a Nobel-Prize winning economist, and not a conservative. In two articles in leading economic journals, he provides data and advances arguments that vindicate Paul VI’s prophetic warning about the social consequences of contraception for morality and men. He asks why the U.S. witnessed such a dramatic increase of illegitimacy from 1965 to 1990 – from 24% to 64% among African-Americans, and from 3% to 18% among Whites. What happened?

With the arrival of contraceptives, traditional women could no longer hold the threat of pregnancy over their male partners, either to avoid sex or to elicit a promise of marriage in the event that pregnancy resulted form sexual intercourse. And “modern” women no longer worried about getting pregnant. The sexual revolution left traditional women who wanted to avoid premarital sex or contraception at a disadvantage because they could not compete with women who had no serious objection to premarital sex or to abortion. They could no longer elicit a promise of marriage from boyfriends in the event they got pregnant.

Thus, more of the traditional women ended up having sex and having children out of wedlock, while more of the permissive women ended up having sex and contracepting or aborting so as to avoid childbearing. This explains why the contraceptive revolution was associated with both an increase in abortion and illegitimacy.

In a second article, Akerlof argues that another result of the contraceptive revolution was the disappearance of marriage. Contraception and abortion allowed men to put off marriage. Thus the fraction of young men who were married in the U.S. dropped precipitously. In the 25 years between 1968 and 1993, the percentage of men 25 to 34 who were married with children fell from 66% to 40%. These young men did not benefit from the domesticating influence of wives and children. Instead, they could continue to hang out with their young male friends, and were more vulnerable to the drinking, partying, tomcatting and worse that is associated with unsupervised groups of young men. Substance abuse and incarceration more than doubled from 1968 to 1998.

The bottom line is this: the research of Nobel-Prize winning George Akerlof suggest that the tragic consequences of the contraceptive revolution were sexual license, family dissolution, crime, and poisoned relations between the sexes, and that the poor have paid the heaviest price for this revolution. The research suggests that the Church’s firm commitment to the moral law in the face of widespread and dramatic dissent from within and without is being vindicated in precincts that are not normally seen as sympathetic to Holy Mother Church. This research also suggests that the dissenting agenda by people like Fr. Andrew Greeley amounts to a false compassion. A sober look at our experience with contraception reveals that it is in fact contraception – not the magisterium – that is not in men, women, and children’s best interest.

The entire article can be found in The Church, Marriage & the Family, edited by Kenneth Whitehead, St. Augustine Press, 2007, pp. 330-40. For a direct link to the article, "The Facts of Life and Marriage," go to the Online archives of Touchstone Magazine here: http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=18-01-038-f

Dear Friend of Life, 

The April 2007 edition of the Journal of Reproductive Medicine -- a major mainstream OB/GYN medical journal -- has published our paper showing that tubal ligation is harmful to two key measures of the sexual function of women (Warehime, M. N., Bass, L. and Pedulla, D.  Effects of Tubal Ligation Among American Women; J Reprod Med 2007; 52:263-272).   

Using the Natural Health and Social Life Survey, an unimpeachable national health and sexual functioning survey authored by the University of Chicago, my colleagues from the University of Oklahoma Department of sociology and I found that women who have had a tubal ligation, as compared with women who had not had a tubal ligation, were more than 2 times as likely to report stress interfering with sex over the previous 12 months, and 1.79 times as likely to report having seen a physician about sexual problems within the previous 12 months.    

These robust results were likely not to be spurious because they persisted after controlling for a variety of potentially confounding demographic and health data, which also showed that the findings were not directly attributable to physical and/or medical complications of the sterilization procedure itself.  We speculate that tubal ligation alters the interpersonal bond between the marriage partners, probably through an interference with the type of interpersonal trust required for happy and secure spousal bonding in marriage.  Also, very consistent with the previously published literature, tubal ligation likely causes damage to a woman's body image. 

We naturally felt that this paper should have at least a significant impact on women's family planning decisions, and on the wider dialogue about women's health issues.  This notwithstanding, and despite securing the services of a skilled publicist, all of the major media our publicist contacted decided in the end not to report the publication of our study. One Wall St Journal writer even asked our publicist if the paper was religiously motivated!

Women should however learn the truth about these damaging and harmful procedures, and if they cannot learn it through the major media outlets, then perhaps we ourselves can disseminate the findings as widely as possible, thereby at least doing what we can to spread the news; we believe, good news. 

Please consider whether you feel called or can find the time to send this message to as many people on your list as possible.  Anybody with access to a medical library can order the paper directly as well.  I am grateful in advance for any help you can give, and can imagine that it will be enormously useful to the many women potentially dissuaded from harming themselves in the future through sterilization.  

Sincerely yours, 

Dominic M. Pedulla MD, FACC, CNFPMC, ABVM, ACPh

Associate Clinical Professor of Medicine, OU Health Sciences Center 

Medical Director, The Oklahoma Vein and Endovascular Center 

President, The Edith Stein Foundation.

A few years ago, rock historian Dawn Eden experienced a dramatic conversion to Christ.  Through a new book, The Thrill of the Chaste: Finding Fulfillment While Keeping your Cloths On, she aims to convince other single women that chastity is more fulfilling than free love.  What follows are several excerpts.  

“Through chastity – and only through chastity – can all the graces that are part of being a woman come to full flower in you.  In other words, it’s not about how you meet men.  It’s about who you are when you meet men.  Take care of the ‘who,’ and the ‘how’ will take care of itself.” 

How do you think premarital sex affects marriage?  With premarital sex, the act that is supposed to be bringing two people closer to one another ends up being the thing that pulls them apart.  When you’re being as physically intimate as you can possible be with another person, and you know that person can just walk out, then you have to build a wall and harden yourself to prepare for the possible break.  Even if you do get married later, you will have the added work of taking down those walls, because you can’t sustain a marriage with harness of heart and lack of vulnerability.  This is one of the reasons why the divorce rate is so much higher when couples cohabitate before marriage. 

How do you think premarital sex affects men?  In my opinion, it seems to make them feel hollow.  Many men will get very much into the romance and the novelty of each new sexual encounter.  But on a deeper level, they seem to be starved for real emotional intimacy. 

What would you say to those who balk at the Church’s “rules” about sexual behavior outside of marriage?  God knows how we are made and he knows what will make us happy.  His “rules” about the proper use of sexuality are not there to make our lives difficult, but exist to help us operate at our happiest and most fruitful. 

A woman cannot treat sex lightly:  “Men with depth quickly figured out I took sex far too lightly,” she explains in her book.  “Worse, I became so used to viewing myself and potential partners as objects of physical desire that I became unable to give of myself.”  This tendency to view oneself and others as objects is particularly harmful, Dawn believes, and is encouraged by the secular culture, which relentlessly puts forth the idea that lust is a way station on the road to love.  But having sex “like a man, with no strings attached” is simply not possible for women.  “Women are built for bonding.  We are vessels, and we seek to be filled.  For that reason, sex will always leave us feeling empty unless we are certain we are loved.” 

Saying Yes to Chastity:  Chastity is not strictly sexual abstinence, though that is part of it.  Instead, chastity is saying yes to the true meaning of sexuality: that we are made in the image of God and we are to be loved unconditionally as persons – not treated as objects to be used. 

Consequently, chastity has less to do about sex specifically and more to do with how we view all of life, Dawn says.  Single women in particular should avoid assessing the attributes of men and instead try to appreciate them as unique people.  She calls the practice of the virtue of chastity a “vocation” and in her book, encourages women to integrate it into their daily lives.  “Whether you practice chastity as a single woman or as a married woman, it bears the same spiritual fruit.”  That fruit is patience, fidelity, and self-mastery.  Women who cultivate these virtues by embracing chastity will necessarily weed out men not interested in a lasting commitment.  She will also give her marriage the best possible chance of success. 

For more information on Dawn Eden, go to Misty Mealey’s The NFP Messenger, April 07 at www.richmonddiocese.org/nfp.  Click on “diocesan NFP newsletter.” 

Promoters of a new pill claim that a woman’s periods can be eliminated forever.   But does it stop ovulation also?  Can a woman get pregnant?  Dr. Mary Martin M.D., FACOG explains: “ Of course there is ‘escape ovulation.’ No woman is perfectly compliant with medication. OCP's require the dose to be taken at the same time of day, every day and assumes that absorption and distribution of the drug will always be uniform. Admittedly, taking the pill for such long periods of time decreases the chance of pregnancy because of the chronic suppressive effects on ovulation, but the definition of when life begins has now been changed to facilitate the agenda of the contraceptive mentality. Chronic thinning of the endometrial lining will most likely prevent implantation if escape ovulation occurs. The potential to prevent just one life from coming to fruition should be reason enough to avoid Lybrel.” 

A New York ad promoting sales for the pill cites certain advantages.  Now a woman can avoid having a monthly reminder of her biological clock.  But this is part of a woman’s femininity.  A woman’s fertility expresses itself in a monthly cycle of ovulation and menstruation.  That is the way God designed Eve and all her daughters.  Fertility in a woman is one of her features which makes her so attractive to men.  It has been this way for millennia. 

Of course, every married woman wants some control over her fertility.  She wants to space her children responsibly, having as many children as she and her husband can provide for.  Good reasons exist for spacing pregnancies, and sometimes avoiding pregnancy for an indefinite period of time.  This is the role of NFP.  But to reject one’s fertility completely is contrary to the way God designed us. 

Our fertility is a good thing, not a bad thing; a sign of health, not of a disease.  It should be treasured as a part of our makeup as bodied-persons, as either a male-person or a female-person, fertile and sexual.  Just as we should not turn against our bodily health, so also we should not turn against our fertility.   

I am a celibate person.  As a Benedictine monk and a Catholic priest, my calling in life requires that I forgo having a spouse, enjoying the spousal act, and taking on the responsibilities of a husband and father.  Instead, God has asked me to be totally available to honor and glorify Him through a commitment of service to his people.  Celibacy is a gift God gives to some “for the sake of the kingdom.”  Already in this world the celibate gives a real (vs. symbolic) witness to what our status will be in Heaven, where there will be no giving and receiving as experienced now in marriage.  Celibacy is closely related to what Jesus asked Peter: “Do you love me, Peter? ... Then feed my sheep.”  As a celibate male-person, I experience the same desires and attractions of any healthy man.  But my calling in life requires total abstinence from the spousal act. 

A celibate person treasures the gifts of human fertility, spousal love and family life.  These are endowments of the human race, completely necessary for the continuation of the race.  A lot of my time as a priest, monk, and moral theologian is spent in helping others discover the value of their sexuality and fertility, and how to live it in a fully human manner.   

The New York ad asks: “Will this mean a whole new relationships with your boyfriend, your co-workers, your boss?”  Perhaps the ad is referring only to the “bad moods” frequently associated with PMS, the mood swings caused by powerful hormonal changes in the woman’s body.  But the ad is also suggesting that the “liberated” woman is now able to share her intimacies with whomever she chooses, since there will be no pregnancies.  Happily married young wives explain to me why this makes no sense.  A woman, as God designed her, wants to know that she is unconditionally accepted by the person to whom she gives herself completely.  She needs total unconditional acceptance of herself, just as God made her, which includes her fertility.   

A woman wants to be respected for her own dignity, for the person God designed her to be.  A career is part of the picture, but undeniably present are her powerful instincts to be a spouse and mother.  A woman wants to be appreciated as a woman, for her feminine genius, for the complementarity she brings to a successful marriage and family.  Asking a woman to sacrifice her fertility and much of her feminine mystique in exchange for a career is asking too high a price.  If the “new freedom” means easy availability for casual recreational sex, then it is full of illusions.  There is no dignity in easy availability.  There is no deep level emotional bonding in easy sex.  There is no satisfaction in a relationship which could end at any time when fickle moods and interests change.  And there is no freedom when a woman cannot just be herself as a female bodied-person. 

The new pill is a good example of the limits to technology.  We can develop new generations of pills which suppress fertility with an iron grip.  But we don’t have a clue about the correct use of this technology.  We can’t explain how and why these new contraceptives will make us 1) become nobler persons, 2) make us more capable of offering the total gift of ourselves to the one we love, or 3) satisfy our deeper hungers for bonding and intimacy. 

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

Dear Fr. Matthew,

As a recently baptized and confirmed Catholic gynecologist, I am trying my best to change my practice pattern as regards prescribing contraception. I am not overt however, about my conversion with my patients. They frequently ask about birth control pills and refills, and although I can talk a few of them out of using them, I cannot convince all, and so I do end up prescribing and refilling. I have talked about this to my priest and he says that as long as I am trying my best, the onus falls upon the patients, and I am not at fault, if I have to prescribe to some. What do you think? Is this a mortal sin? Again, please note that I try very hard to give them the other side, the medical side effects, the risks, alternatives such as nfp, etc. But some patients insist on their birth control.

Thank you, "Rita"

Dear Doctor Rita: 

Congratulations on your reception into the Catholic Church. 

Your concern about dispensing birth control pills for the purpose of contraception is commendable. The Holy Spirit must be enlightening you and nudging you to break away from this. 

The Church has consistently taught that contraception is intrinsically evil. Even non-Catholics seem to know this. That you instruct your patients not to engage is this behavior is indeed remarkable, but you must go a step further. Please do not concur in this evil by writing a prescription for these pills, even though you personally don't approve. If one should do this, moral theologians would label it as formal, implicit, proximate cooperation. Which, of course, is never permitted. So I think it erroneous to say that the onus is only on the patient. In this case it might be more on the doctor who should know better. Would a court of law exonerate one who knowingly writes a drug prescription for an addict? I don't think so. He/She could be charged for enabling and accountable for any possible injuries to the addict and others. It might even mean the loss of a medical license and jail time! 

A few other thoughts come to mind. Now that you are a Catholic, think of the scandal you might be giving to your peers, not to mention your patients. I believe this is the time to tactfully inform the staff where you stand on this matter. They will respect you for this even though they may not agree with your decision. You've just been Confirmed. Don't be afraid!! 

It is important, also, to consider the possible abortifacient consequences of the pill and the responsibility of one who facilitates its use. 

Dear Dr. Rita, many fine physicians have faced the same realization as you have and have chosen the narrow path; with God's help you will too. Should you wish, I could put you in touch with them. They might prove to be a great support for you at this time. 

If you'd like to discuss these issues at greater length please call me at 405-728-9644 or cell 405-823-2294. E-mail is all right also: nfpoutreach@nfpoutreach.org. 

Be assured of a daily remembrance at the Altar and in prayer before the Divine Physician. 

Faithfully yours in Christ, 

Fr. Daniel McCaffrey 

Archdiocese of Oklahoma City 

PS You might want to read the "Humanae Vitae" by Pope Paul VI. It converted Dr. Thomas Hilgers in Omaha. Paragraph 27 is addressed to doctors.  

Every couple wants a deeply committed marriage and a happy family. All of us want to reverse current trends in no-fault easy divorce, broken families, single moms, and fatherless families. But how? 

We can rediscover God’s plan for spousal love. If we do this, and use all the helps He provides to make this plan possible, then there will be a return to successful marriages, committed relationships, and healthy-happy families. 

That is why Karol Wojtyla wrote the Theology of the Body in the early 1970s, and then used it for the content of 128 Wednesday audiences during the first four years of his pontificate. He wanted to probe into what Jesus taught us about spousal love in divine revelation. To this, he added his own insights gleaned from his studies in philosophical ethics and moral theology, especially using Christian Personalism and phenomenology. John Paul wanted to provide us with a “total picture” of marriage and spousal love, using divine revelation, teachings of the Magisterium, and good reasoning. 

In many ways, the Theology of the Body (TOB) can be seen as providing a massive background for understanding the key teaching of Humanae Vitae, that every act of spousal love must be open to the unitive (love-giving) dimension and to the procreative (life-giving) dimension of the act. And this is highly important because spousal love is expressed most concretely and poignantly by the spousal act. 

The TOB concentrates upon the significance of the fact that we are bodied- persons, either male or female, endowed with fertility and sexuality. But there are many ways to be confused about this, and to miss the true meaning of spousal love. 

If we are bodied-persons, then how close to our core identity is our body? Modern trends, since Francis Bacon, Descartes and Kant, regard the human body as something sub-personal, not part of my real self. My real self, they think, is my self-awareness, consciousness, and the ability to think and communicate. My body is simply part of the material world, over which we have greater and greater control. Thus we see the trend to accept all sorts of interventions and controls over our bodies: contraception, sterilization, abortion, artificial procreation, cloning, eugenics and euthanasia. Michael Waldstein provides a good treatment of this in his extensive introduction to a new and more complete translation of the TOB. See pp. 34-77 of his Man and Woman He Created Them (Pauline Press, Boston: 2006). 

A true anthropology views the human person as a composite of an immaterial (and eternal) spirit united with a material body. My body is an integral part of my identity. I do not have a body; I am my body. What you do to my body, you do to me. We are bodied-persons, not disembodied spirits. We are incarnate spirits, and spirit-filled bodies. 

Thus we cannot view, or treat, our bodies as something extraneous to our very selves. We should not redefine sex as a mutual search for pleasure in intimacy while sterilizing its life-giving dimension. We should not reject the meaning God has written into spousal love and its most characteristic act, which is a language of total self-giving and fruitfulness. True human fulfillment in the sexual sphere can only be found by following this divine plan for human love. Authentic growth in learning how to love comes not by way of technology, but by way of personal gift and total surrender. 

In his Wednesday audience of 22 Aug 84 (TOB 123:7), Pope John Paul explains the essential evil of contracepted sex. “In the case of an artificial separation of these two meanings in the conjugal act, a real bodily union is brought about, but it does not correspond to the inner truth and dignity of personal communion, ‘communio personarum.’ This communion demands, in fact, that the ‘language of the body’ be expressed reciprocally in the integral truth of its meaning. If this truth is lacking, one can speak neither of the truth of the reciprocal gift of self nor of the reciprocal acceptance of oneself by the other person. Such a violation of the inner order of conjugal communion, a communion that plunges its roots into the very order of the person, constitutes the essential evil of the contraceptive act.” 

If we do not understand what the spousal act was designed to express and accomplish, then we will never arrive at a true understanding of spousal love, marriage, or a family. 

Cordially yours,

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

I will relate this question to condoms, contraceptives, and abortifacients. In a Dec 05 survey of US pharmacists, 69% of respondents said that they were against state laws that would require them to fill prescriptions for emergency contraception, such as for the morning after pill. 

A Catholic pharmacist should not be forced to violate his or her conscience by selling condoms, contraceptives or abortifacients. Someone may say, “These items are legal. I have a right to buy them, and you have a duty to provide them.” But simply because something is legal does not mean it is moral. 

When slavery was legal, should an auctioneer have been penalized for refusing to sell slaves? When racial discrimination against Blacks was legal, should a businessman who refused to discriminate against Blacks, by hiring them and paying a standard wage, have been penalized? When the Nazi Party began its open persecution of Jews, should the churches have cooperated in this because it was the law? 

An immoral law has no moral authority. It should be resisted and changed. 

Some may say that a pharmacist has no right to push his values upon the public. But, by the same token, the public has no right to force its immorality, or dis-values, upon a pharmacist. “Service, not Servitude” is their motto. 

A conscientious pharmacist stocks hundreds of legitimate products in his shelves, and by so doing provides a great service to the public. Our government should not penalize him for refusing to supply contraceptives or abortifacients. If clients insist upon buying them, then they can go to another pharmacy. When you go to McDonald’s you should not expect to buy beer. You can go elsewhere to find beer. No big deal. 

A conscientious pharmacist knows that condoms, contraceptives, and abortifacients are very harmful. Condoms and contraceptives trivialize sex. They destroy an act of spousal love, which requires total commitment and openness to life, and reduce it to a mere act of sex. All this contributes to the 50% divorce rate, lack of male responsibility, 35% of children born outside of marriage, dysfunctional families, and increased abortions. All chemical contraceptives have potential for abortifacient effects. 

If a pharmacist cannot convince the chain for which he works to honor his conscience with a conscience clause in his contract, then he should consider starting up his own business. I encourage them to contact Pharmacists for Life International (www.pfli.org, and pfli@pfli.org) and share information and experiences with them. There is much good information on this website. 

Since a Catholic pharmacist is a public person, like a doctor or politician, he must be conscious of the real possibility of public scandal. If he sells condoms or OCs, then he should not accept positions in his parish like catechist, extraordinary minister of Communion, lector, etc. There is a serious conflict between his Faith and his business. 

There are some evils in our society that will only change when enough conscientious people refuse to participate in them. Abortion and contraception are two of these. 

Speaking for myself, I cannot see how a Catholic pharmacist can justify staying in an offending pharmacy if there are other employment options available. And they are available: in 1) academia, 2) government, 3) private research/pharma, 4) hospitals, 5) managed care (PBMs) as a clinical pharmacist, 6) office-based practice that does medication therapy management in an agreement with physician(s) and is a non-dispensing role, and 7) medical science liaison for pharma. The same thing applies to Catholic doctors and nurses. 

Pro-life customers can help by refusing to patronize offending pharmacies, and by writing letters to the management explaining why they are taking their business elsewhere, and describing what kind of pharmacist they will patronize, viz., one with good morals and character, including a properly formed conscience. 

Would it be appropriate to teach NFP to singles in order to gain an appreciation of the natural cycle of fertility or a general ‘fertility awareness’? Some state that this would not be advisable because it may be used in a fashion similar to contraceptives. Others state that, if presented correctly, fertility awareness would give singles a new found sense of dignity and awareness that the total ‘gift of self’ in a sexual union within marriage which includes fertility (without holding this back by contracepting). – Marie 

Dear Marie, 

Remember the Socratic error? Knowledge, by itself, is virtue. We know that is not true, because virtue requires another indispensable element: will power. I must both KNOW what is right, and WILL (consciously choose) to do the right. Thus, giving good information to a young person about their bodies, as God designed them, must be accompanied with good morality. This means explaining the moral principles of chastity, and why they make such good sense. Then train the will by DOING virtuous acts. We grow into a virtue only by doing virtuous acts, e.g., the acts of self-denial which chastity demands. 

Take another error from the other extreme: ignorance is bliss. We know that this does not work in a world where sexual misinformation and disinformation is pervasive. If young persons do not have good knowledge about their sexuality, then they are easy prey. Parents know their sons and daughters best. Parents know when they are ready for more insights into their makeup as bodied-persons, male or female, fertile and sexual. 

The beauty of NFP is that it provides a rich understanding of our sexuality and fertility in the context of God’s magnificent plan for us as bodied-persons. NFP cannot stay at the level of simple biology. Behind the biology there is a meaning, a set of values, a plan that God has devised. This is where the Theology of the Body comes into play. The Theology of the Body helps us to understand God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family, as well as His plan for making us bodied-persons, male or female. 

Can knowledge be abused by putting it to doing wrong? Oh, yes! But that is part of our human condition as persons with free will. God gave us our sex drives and our free will, and we must learn how to give them good direction in ways that give glory to God and benefit ourselves. We always run the risk of abusing our freedom. That is what sin is. 

If you teach a young person how to shoot a gun, he or she may abuse that knowledge. Teaching the morality of using a gun is imperative. But a risk still remains. If you show a young person how to drive a car or truck, he or she may abuse that knowledge. Thus teaching the rights and wrongs (morality) about driving is imperative. Risks are involved, because they are never completely avoidable. 

Learning morality (good moral principles and their reasonableness) and developing the virtues (using our many talents correctly in pursuit of the good) is a lifelong task. Each stage of life has its tasks to be mastered. You see this especially in the area of human sexuality. 

Parents need to give their sons and daughters the knowledge and moral guidance they need to cope with a culture that is confused, indulgent, promiscuous and full of moral relativism. Some, perhaps many, parents are not well equipped to do this. Cardinal John J. O’Connor said that we now have two generations of catechetical illiterates. By that he meant that the catechetical programs since the 1960’s were very short on content and long on experiences and feelings. As a result, many parents are unsure about the sexual ethic. But not to fear! You cannot begin to learn any younger! Parents can benefit as much as their teenagers in learning the theology of the body, and NFP. 

Learning NFP allows the young woman to know how God put her together. Later on in life, she has the ability to help pinpoint problems in her gynecological system that she can take up with her doctor. This is a good reason for a woman not to get into the pills (hormones) that disguise the workings of her gynecological system. Diseases can progress and not be detected which can be fatal, whereas they could have been detected much earlier. They are detected too late because the symptoms were disguised with birth control pills and other unnatural birth control. 

Acquiring self-possession, self-mastery and chastity are a lifelong task, and there is massive ignorance about these matters out there. So let’s get started!

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

Mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

Many people ask “Why are there so few young priests and religious today? What happened?” People are concerned because they no longer have easy access to the sacraments. Some pastors say 4-5 Masses each weekend. Others cover 3-4 parishes. There are few Sisters to teach the faith to young people. Religious houses find it difficult to continue to provide the liturgy of the hours, retreats and their regular apostolates. 

After WWII there were 45,000 major seminarians and large ordination classes every year. Novitiates for religious orders were full. Many orders were expanding their motherhouses and formation houses. But all that changed. Now there are 4,500 major seminarians in this country. The USA and Canada have the smallest number of seminarians, proportionate to their populations, in the world. Novitiates are nearly empty. Some houses have not had a new member for twenty years. The profile of ages is no longer a pyramid (few at the top and many at the bottom); now it is an inverted pyramid. The ordination class for Chicago in 2007 was 14; 13 of whom were born outside of this country. 

What happened? There are many causes that have contributed to today’s shortage, e.g., confusion in seminaries and houses of formation as to the nature of the priesthood and religious life; the sexual revolution and its impact upon moral theology (the clergy sex scandal is one result of this), easy access to material comforts, materialism, consumerism, and a secularism that emphasizes rewards in this world to the neglect of another world. 

Behind all these there is one more basic cause that exerts a crippling influence. Today we are lacking a spirit of generosity, a spirit of high ideals, and a love that leads one to lay down his life for those he loves. This spirit of generosity is crucial to all human relationships, like friendship, marriage, family, community and patriotism. Without this spirit of generosity, strong bonds between human being cannot develop and thrive. 

We see what a stunted sense of generous self-giving does to a marriage and family. This deficit makes it almost impossible for couples to make vows “until death do us part.” A 50% divorce rate today implies that many couples entered their marriage with conditions, or escape clauses. There is an unwillingness to accept whatever challenges the future holds for a couple. They are not prepared to work out their problems together, relying upon the grace of God to cover what they lack. One’s personal good takes preference over the good of the marriage and the family. 

Generosity, the giving of myself for the benefit of others, is a quality in human relations that belongs most especially to marriage and family. A wife and mother must know she is loved for who she is and for all her labors for her family. A husband and father must know that he is needed and appreciated for his support and protection. Children need to experience the spirit of generosity in their parents, and within their family. 

This requires proper priorities: God over human trends, persons over things, the spiritual over the material, and morality over expedience. Some simple checkpoints come to mind. Does your family eat together every day, or do school and social events take priority? Do praying together and religious education continue every week? Do members of the family make sacrifices for each other? If young people do not see a spirit of generosity in their parents and family, then they do not know what it is. Unless they have shared in many efforts to build up the common good, expecting no other reward than seeing the good flourish, then they are unprepared to give of themselves. 

In a marriage, the greatest sign of total self-giving is the spousal act. In their special act as spouses, the couple is to bring the fullness of who they are, as bodied-persons, to each other. No conditions, no reservations, nothing held back. Openness to spousal love, as God designed it, means openness to the gift of new life in the form of a child. If a couple is not open unconditionally to each other in their spousal act, the act that expresses their committed union, then they cannot remain open unconditionally to each other in their marriage and family. 

Vocations to the priesthood and religious life have always come from families who live the spirit of generosity. Most vocations come from large families, where there was great opportunity to practice self-giving. And this makes very good sense. Jesus is the model for all priests and religious, because He is generosity and self-giving personified. If a young man or woman is to follow Christ “single-heartedly,” then they must already know something about generous self-giving. A calling to priesthood or religious life cannot survive without this. 

Do we see what contraception and sterilization have done to our marriages, our families, and now to the priesthood and religious life? 

The solution? Rediscover God’s plan for human love and human life. Rediscover Humanae Vitae.

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger , OSB

Mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

This reflection comes from Mary Shivanandan, STD. More information on NFP can be found at http://www.usccb.org/prolife/issues/nfp/intronfp.shtm1#6. 

Cordially yours,

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

Couples who adopt NFP to space the births of children find that it brings about many positive changes in their relationship and even becomes a way of life. It begins with acceptance, and even wonder, at the way the human body is made. As one woman noted, "Knowing and learning about what goes on inside of my unique body amazed me."* Women especially find this information empowering. The woman gains a new respect for herself and often finds that her husband has a new supportive attitude: "My husband respects me as a person in my own right. He accepts my fertility as part of me." This new-found confidence contrasts with what one woman explained about how she felt using contraceptives: "I was required to sacrifice my health ... I felt as if I were an object and not an equal partner in our marriage."

 

Couples using NFP accept their fertility not as a nuisance or even a disease, but as a gift. When the physical pleasures of sexual intercourse are a couple's primary focus, the woman can feel used. NFP treats the woman not as a sexual object, but as the unique person she is. NFP does not downplay the importance of sexual union and sexual pleasure. Through the practice of periodic abstinence NFP helps couples to find other ways in which to be attentive to each other in each cycle. These other ways may be through cooking a favorite dish, or bringing home flowers. NFP can reignite the romance of dating for a married couple. As couples who use NFP often say: "Every cycle we have a wedding night." When spouses love one another enough to abstain and be more considerate of each other, both become more secure in their relationship. 

 

Periodic abstinence is difficult at times. It also brings its own reward. Men find they can direct sexual urges in the service of love and not be controlled by it. Only if a man is in full possession of himself can he love his wife well. As one husband said, "NFP has challenged me to self-mastery so that I can freely give of myself." The nature of married love is total self-giving. If one is controlled by sex or withholds part of himself or herself (his or her fertility), that person cannot give totally to another. Self-mastery, on the other hand, can actually enhance sexual pleasure. Many couples explain: "Giving our whole selves to each other intensified the sensations of pleasure and the feeling of unity in this expression of our love." 

 

When NFP is adopted as a lifestyle, fertility is regarded as a gift and children are valued and welcomed. A sense of awe at their power to procreate strikes many couples during the fertile time. One couple remarked that "NFP opened our hearts to children ... Children are a gift, a blessing, not a burden." Others have remarked that the time of fertility comes to be viewed with "a tremendous reverence" because fertility "is the time God created us to create." When a couple knows the most fertile time in the cycle and tries to achieve pregnancy, it becomes a shared joy.

 

NFP instruction puts the emphasis on a couple's shared responsibility not only for having children, but also for managing their combined fertility. Taking joint responsibility for fertility means that both spouses accept the challenge of abstinence during the fertile phase if they wish to avoid pregnancy. NFP requires couples to communicate. It helps them to talk about many things that may have been difficult to talk about before, including their sexuality. Through charting their fertility, they have a starting point for discussing the intimate aspects of their life, such as their sexual feelings and desires and their hopes or fears about pregnancy. Good, substantive interpersonal communication strengthens a marriage.

 

Many couples say that an NFP lifestyle deepens their faith in God. "(NFP) involved us with the Truth ....We experienced ... the conversion point in our lives." "NFP is putting ourselves in God's hands, totally allowing Him to work spiritually in our lives." With so many rewards for those who persevere with NFP it would be surprising if there were not also challenges. As one husband says: "The reality is that NFP is challenging .... (But) it is clear to me that working together through the tough times strengthens and enriches our marriage." And as another spouse says: "The value I experience in NFP is in the long run .... It forces you to place your immediate choices in the context of spouse, children, family and Creator."
 

Mary Shivanandan, STD

Yes.  Most of them are too small.  That is because most of them do not understand God’s plan for life, love, marriage, family and children.  Not only have the majority rebelled against God’s plan by embracing contraception and sterilization, they have done so thinking that they are doing the best thing for their families, their society, their country and the world.  The culture has invaded the Church.  Hence, the people of God are taught by the culture and live by the culture, rather than live by God’s plan as taught by the Magisterium of the Church.  The culture is full of deceptions.  God’s plan is the complete loving truth.  The Magisterium proclaims that truth.  Often, it has difficulty finding people who will listen. 

First and foremost, God’s plan is a call for generosity in procreation.  “Be fertile and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it” (Gen 1:28) is the first commandment in the Bible.  So, we have two parents.  Let’s see…One times two (parents) equals two (children) and does not represent any growth whatsoever because the parents die, leaving just two.  Two times two (parents) equals four children and is a modest beginning at multiplication.  Three times two equals six…four times two equals eight (children).  This is simple multiplication – right?  By now the culture goes hysterical with its false accusations of over-burdening the family, irresponsible parenthood, placing burdens on society and overpopulating the world. 

The truth is that God never once warned about overburdening the family with children.  Nor did He ever warn about overpopulation.  The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) says,  “Sacred scripture and the Church’s traditional practice see in large families a sign of God’s blessing and the parents’ generosity.” CCC 2373. 

Generosity in procreation is one of the fundamental values of God’s plan.  He is generous.  He wants us to be generous and responsible.  What is responsibility?  Pope Paul VI provides the best definition in his famous encyclical on human life (Humanae Vitae):  “In relation to physical, economic, psychological and social conditions, responsible parenthood is exercised, either by the deliberate and generous decision to raise a numerous family, or by the decision, made for grave motives and with due respect for the moral law, to avoid for the time being, or even for an indeterminate period, a new birth.” 

Notice that the first component of responsible parenthood is generosity!  The second component is willfully restraining the procreative urges when there are compelling reasons to do so.  This is a fully balanced definition of responsible parenthood. 

God’s call for generosity in procreation is fully consistent with his desire for us to enjoy economic prosperity.  In Deuteronomy 10, Moses is addressing the Israelites after their long sojourn in the desert after leaving Egypt.  “The Lord, your God, has so multiplied you that you are now as numerous as the stars in the sky.  May the Lord, the God of your fathers, increase you a thousand times over, and bless you as he promised!”  How many people is Moses talking about?  Well, we know, because in the Book of Numbers, they took a census – twice.  There were about 600,000 men.  They wanted to know how many men were available for military service.  So, to keep things simple, let’s double that figure to 1.2 million to account for the men and women.  Moses prays that God will increase them a 1000 times over.  One thousand times 1.2 million is 1.2 billion.  It was no problem for Moses.  It’s no problem for God.  Today there are less than 5 million people in Israel. 

Large populations lead directly to prosperity because there is more labor at work creating a larger number and variety of goods and services.  This leads us into the number one concern that Catholics have about large families – economics.  So, to deal with this issue, we must depart from theology and study a little economics.  The culture teaches that large families are economically harmful and lead to poverty – not just poverty of the family but poverty of society.  God teaches that large families lead to prosperity.  Who is right?

Before one can understand poverty, one needs to understand the conditions that lead to prosperity.  I define prosperity as the abundance of food, shelter and clothing – not cars and yachts.  There are three fundamental things that are required for prosperity.  Can you guess what they are?  You will not find the answers in most economic books.  Some people say “education.”  No, many ancient civilizations had no education as we think of it and they prospered.  Some people say “natural resources.”  No, Japan and Hong Kong hardly have any.  The number one requirement for prosperity is healed human beings – human beings healed by the Spirit of God so that they stop killing each other and stop stealing from each other.  Such human beings will cooperate in generating economic activity.  When the North American Indians cooperated, they prospered.  When they became engaged in war, they disintegrated.   

The second requirement for prosperity is free markets.  Markets must be free for the exchange of goods and services at a fair price.  They must not be dominated by the government, by crime syndicates or by false religions.  To remain free of crime syndicates, they must be refereed.  The third requirement for prosperity is a large population.  The prosperity of the U.S. is a direct result of its large population – third in the world.  China’s population is 1.3 billion and China is now the “world’s factory” on its way to becoming a superpower.  India is overcoming the rampant bribery and corruption that held it down for centuries. 

Now that we have a fundamental understanding of what causes prosperity, what are the leading causes of poverty?  Number one is war.  Number two is lack of chastity.  Lack of chastity destroys the family, the fundamental economic building block.  Greed and many other causes of poverty follow behind. Children do not cause poverty! 

The high fertility and generous immigration policy that brought us the prosperity, that we enjoy today, has changed.  The fertility rate in the U.S., which was around 5.0 prior to 1950, is now below replacement rate.  The replacement rate is 2.1 children per woman.  In the U.S., the figure is 1.99.  Immigration is filling some of the void but we are already seeing shortages of labor, inability to meet military recruitment targets and inability to support retirement funds.  We are committing demographic suicide.   

This brings us back to the first question.  Are Catholic families too small? If Catholic families were as large as God planned them to be for the past 35 years, and if they were faithful to Gospel values, this is what may have happened.  Catholics would be over 50% of the U.S. population today, a democratic majority.  A democratic majority of faithful, sensible and responsible Catholics may have brought a quicker end to the scourge of abortion and the fiscal irresponsibility of the Social Security crisis.  A chaste Church may have recognized the disaster of the clergy sexual abuse crisis before it mushroomed.  As it was, an unchaste Church created an unchaste environment suitable for abusers to proceed un-noticed.  What is an unchaste Church?  It is a Church that practices contraception, sterilization, divorce and many other sins of impurity.  We can be sure of this:  When Christ returns, his chastened bride will not be an unchaste Church.  Realizing this truth, we should all beg the Lord for the graces needed to do our part to turn the situation around and we should work diligently to re-build a culture of life, first within the Church and then within the world. 

Brian Murphy 

Brian is married with five grown children.  He is the founder and Chairman of God’s Plan For Life (www.godsplanforlife.org) and CFO and Chairman of a business that he founded with his wife. 

We know that God has a plan for every important human affair, such as marriage, spousal love and family. We can know that plan. St. John teaches us: “We know that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, to know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life” (1 Jn 5:20). 

If we want to understand what it means to be a human being, to have a correct anthropology, then we need to look at the best model, or archetype, of our humanity. Gaudium et Spes 21:1 explains: “Christ, the new Adam, in the very revelation of the Father and of his love, fully reveals humanity to itself and brings to light its high calling.” God designed the human race, beginning with our first parents Adam and Eve. Then the totally unexpected happened. At the appropriate time in history, the Son of God came into our world as one of us. He reveals to us the inexhaustible mystery of God the Father, who is love and truth. And Jesus reveals to us our own dignity, the full richness of our humanity, what we are capable of becoming as bodied-persons, fashioned in the image and likeness of God. He reveals to us that our exalted destiny is to enter into God’s very own interior communion of love and life. 

There is another statement from Gaudium et Spes which explains a Christian anthropology, made famous by Pope John Paul II’s constant reference to it. “There is a certain similarity between the union existing among the divine persons and the union of God’s children in truth and love. It follows, then, that if human beings are the only creatures on earth that God has wanted for their own sake, then they can fully discover their true selves only in sincere self-giving” (GS 24:2). 

The bishops at Vatican II are teaching us that there are strong parallels, or similarities, between the union of the Divine Persons in truth and love, and the union of God’s children in truth and love. God is a communion of persons, and we are a communion of persons. Of all the things God created in the material universe, the most important, and of greatest value, are persons. Love was the motive that prompted God to create a material universe out of nothing. He wanted to offer His love and life to other persons, who are capable of understanding God’s goodness and love, and then are able to freely respond to that love in kind by returning it. 

In his Theology of the Body, Pope John Paul II probes more deeply into God’s plan for us, into a true Christian anthropology. He asserts that at the heart of God’s identity is reciprocal love. Each divine person (Father, Son and Spirit) completely and unreservingly makes the total gift of self to the others. The others accept this self-offering completely, and then respond to that great gift in kind, by making the total gift of themselves. When St. John says that God is love, this is what he is talking about. This is also the meaning behind the pope’s motto: Totus Tuus. 

Where do we find this “to fully discover their true selves only in sincere self-giving” most commonly in human events? We find it in marriage, between spouses. God’s inner life of interpersonal communion of love and life is the model (archetype) of the love of a husband and wife. Conversely, if we understand something of the beauty and richness of spousal love, then we have a clear insight into the inner life of God. “Two in one flesh” and a communion of persons have much in common. 

The model for all marriages is God’s love for us as His people, and Christ’s love for His bride, the Church. God is totally committed to His people and to His bride. He will never give up on her. He will always be giving more, and revealing more of Himself to her. Spousal love then has real meaning, shape and content. It is a precious human treasure that we are 1) to understand as God designed it, and 2) then we are to choose to grow in our ability to express it in our lives. 

If we want to know what God’s plan is for us as human beings, as bodied-persons, and a true anthropology, then we must meditate upon how He has designed us, and what His exalted destiny is for us, if we will only respond to His great love. 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

On 24 July 07, Pope Benedict XVI met with the clergy of the dioceses of Belluno-Feltre and Treviso, Italy. One of the questions dealt with how to deal with failures in marriage 

We are seeing an enormous increase in situations of divorced people who remarry, live together and ask priests to help them with their spiritual life. These people often come to us with a heartfelt plea for access to the sacraments. These realities need to be faced and the sufferings they cause must be shared. Holy Father, may I ask you what are the human, spiritual and pastoral approaches with which one can combine compassion and truth? Thank you. –Fr. Samuele 

Benedict XVI: Yes, this is indeed a painful problem and there is certainly no simple solution to resolve it. This problem makes us all suffer because we all have people close to us who are in this situation. We know it causes them sorrow and pain because they long to be in full communion with the Church. The previous bond of matrimony reduces their participation in the life of the Church. What can be done? I would say: as far as possible, we would naturally put prevention first. Hence, preparation for marriage becomes ever more fundamental and necessary. Canon Law presupposes that man as such, even without much education, intends to contract a marriage in harmony with human nature, as mentioned in the first chapters of Genesis. He is a human being, his nature is human and consequently he knows what marriage is. He intends to behave as human nature dictates to him. Canon Law starts from this presupposition. It is something compulsory: man is man, nature is what it is and tells him this. 

Today, however, this axiom, which holds that man prompted by his nature will make one faithful marriage, has been transformed into a somewhat different axiom. "Volunt contrahere matrimonium sicut ceteri homines". It is no longer nature alone that speaks, but the "ceteri homines": what everyone does. And what everyone does today is not simply to enter into natural marriage, in accordance with the Creator, in accordance with creation. What the "ceteri homines" do is to marry with the idea that one day their marriage might fail and that they will then be able to move on to another one, to a third or even a fourth marriage. This model of what "everyone does" thus becomes one that is contrary to what nature says. In this way, it becomes normal to marry, divorce and remarry, and no one thinks this is something contrary to human nature, or in any case those who do are few and far between. Therefore, to help people achieve a real marriage, not only in the sense of the Church but also of the Creator, we must revive their capacity for listening to nature. 

Let us return to the first query, the first question: rediscovering within what everyone does, what nature itself tells us, which is so different from what this modern custom dictates. Indeed, it invites us to marry for life, with lifelong fidelity including the suffering that comes from growing together in love. Thus, these preparatory courses for marriage must be a rectification of the voice of nature, of the Creator, within us, a rediscovery, beyond what all the "ceteri homines" do, of what our own being intimately tells us. In this situation, therefore, distinguishing between what everyone else does and what our being tells us, these preparatory courses for marriage must be a journey of rediscovery. They must help us learn anew what our being tells us. They must help couples reach the true decision of marriage in accordance with the Creator and the Redeemer. Hence, these preparatory courses are of great importance in order to "learn oneself", to learn the true intention for marriage. 

But preparation is not enough; the great crises come later. Consequently, ongoing guidance, at least in the first 10 years, is of the utmost importance. In the parish, therefore, it is not only necessary to provide preparatory courses but also communion in the journey that follows, guidance and mutual help. May priests, but not on their own, and families, which have already undergone such experiences and are familiar with such suffering and temptations, be available in moments of crisis. The presence of a network of families that help one another is important and different movements can make a considerable contribution. The first part of my answer provides for prevention, not only in the sense of preparation but also of guidance and for the presence of a network of families to assist in this contemporary situation where everything goes against faithfulness for life. It is necessary to help people find this faithfulness and learn it, even in the midst of suffering. 

However, in the case of failure, in other words, when the spouses are incapable of adhering to their original intention, there is always the question of whether it was a real decision in the sense of the sacrament. As a result, one possibility is the process for the declaration of nullity. If their marriage were authentic, which would prevent them from remarrying, the Church's permanent presence would help these people to bear the additional suffering. In the first case, we have the suffering that goes with overcoming this crisis and learning a hard-fought for and mature fidelity. In the second case, we have the suffering of being in a new bond which is not sacramental, hence, does not permit full communion in the sacraments of the Church. Here it would be necessary to teach and to learn how to live with this suffering. We return to this point, to the first question of the other diocese. 

In our generation, in our culture, we have to rediscover the value of suffering in general, and we have to learn that suffering can be a very positive reality which helps us to mature, to become more ourselves, and to be closer to the Lord who suffered for us and suffers with us. Even in the latter situation, therefore, the presence of the priest, families, movements, personal and communitarian communion in these situations, the helpful love of one's neighbor, a very specific love, is of the greatest importance. And I think that only this love, felt by the Church and expressed in the solidarity of many, can help these people recognize that they are loved by Christ and are members of the Church despite their difficult situation. Thus, it can help them to live the faith.

In 1976 the Catholic Theological Society of America endorsed the publication of a book on Catholic sexual ethics, entitled HUMAN SEXUALITY: New Directions in American Catholic Thought. It was authored by Fr. Anthony Kosnik and several others. Many seminaries used this as a text for sexual ethics during the 1980s and 1990s. You still find copies of it in rectory libraries. Notice that it received the endorsement of the CTSA, and that was taken as sufficient justification for using it in major seminaries. It helps us understand why there is such a reluctance among many of the clergy today to preach on God’s plan for marriage and spousal love. Its way of explaining Catholic sexual ethics is at great variance with what the Church teaches in her major documents. 

Kosnik finds the norms given in Casti Connubii, Humanae Vitae and the Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics to be too rigid and oppressive. He thinks that the Magisterium places too much emphasis upon concrete individual human acts, instead of upon the overall intentions indicated by a whole spectrum of choices and acts. Instead of using HV’s norm for the spousal act (unitive and procreative), he replaces this with a more squishy and elastic norm (creative growth and integrative). 

By using the greater elasticity provided by his new norms, Kosnik is able to justify instances of deviations from just about all of the norms of the traditional Catholic sexual ethic. This includes acts of contraception, sterilization, adultery, fornication, homosexual acts, and even bestiality! 

Pope John Paul II addressed the sources of morality (object of choice, intention, and circumstances) in his encyclical Veritatis Splendor and the Catechism. “But the consideration of these consequences, and also of intentions, is not sufficient for judging the moral quality of a concrete choice… The morality of the human act depends primarily and fundamentally on the ‘object’ rationally chosen by the deliberate will… Consequently, as the Catechism teaches, there are certain specific kinds of behavior that are always wrong to choose, because choosing them involves a disorder of the will, that is, a moral evil’” (CCC 1761) (VS 77-8). “There exist acts which per se and in themselves, independently of circumstances, are always seriously wrong by reason of their object. The Second Vatican Council itself, in discussing the respect due to the human person, gives a number of examples of such acts (GS 27)” (VS 79). 

Kosnik faults Pope Paul VI in HV 17 for predicting serious harmful results from the widespread use of contraception: a general lowering of morality, conjugal infidelity, loss of respect for the woman, and using one’s marriage partner as a mere instrument of selfish enjoyment. Kosnik opines: “Many sincere, respected, and experienced people, however, find it difficult to accept these effects as inevitable consequences. Quite the contrary, they contend that the use of such means can at times serve to preserve marital fidelity, deepened the mutual love and respect of the spouses, bring peace and healing, and raise the whole level of moral responsibility of the marriage partners. The overwhelming number and authority of those who have expressed such conviction as well as the intrinsic reasons that they offer to support their position are more than sufficient to render this divergent opinion as theologically solidly probably” (p. 122-3). 

Kosnik and his team are typical of the many Catholic moralists who promised us that the use of contraception would usher in a new age of marital bliss and happy families. After forty years of widespread contraception since HV, we now find these statistics in the USA: a 50% divorce rate, 80% cohabitation rate, 35% of all babies are born out of wedlock, 1 out of four unborn babies are surgically aborted (and many more by early on chemical abortion), 85% of Catholic couples are contracepting, and sterilization is the most popular form of birth control among Catholics. With the exception of abortion, most of these issues are not discussed from the pulpits. 

Is it not appropriate for Kosnik, and the other dissenters, to publicly acknowledge that Pope Paul VI’s prediction was accurate, and that theirs was only wishful thinking? None of the statistics cited above indicate a healthy state of marriage and family life. Think only of what a 50% divorce rate indicates. Couples experiencing growing pains and maturing pains do not think that going through necessary adjustments to a good marriage is the proper solution. Instead, they adopt the secular attitude that “things just didn’t work out,” “nobody was really at fault,” and “it would be best for everyone, including the kids, if we broke it off.” 

They are unable to see the connection between their choices to contracept and their inability to make the total gift of self-sacrificial love, which has now led to a divorce. Their children carry emotional scars from their parents’ divorce. The divorcees bring their unresolved problems to their second and third marriages. Many young couples, victims themselves of a divorce, do not think that a permanent commitment is possible, so they don’t bother to marry. 

If the moral reasoning of Human Sexuality has shaped the minds of many clergy, then we can understand their reticence at the pulpit. The solution to this is that they keep searching for the good reasons and the rationale that support the Church’s sexual ethic, and understand why her teaching of moral truth is so superior to dissenting theological opinion. 

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

May a husband engage in the marital act when his wife is using the Pill, even though he knows that contraception is wrong?

Would not the innocent spouse need to refrain from the marital act when the Pill or other hormonal contraceptives are involved because of the abortifacient capacity of these birth-regulating methods? --JMJ

Dear JMJ, 

This is a tough question, because there is clear teaching from the Church that contraception is intrinsically evil and sinful. Despite this, there is massive moral non-compliance among Catholics. 85 percent of Catholic couples of childbearing age are contracepting or sterilized. Yet many of these receive the Eucharist on a regular basis without using first the Sacrament of Reconciliation. Very seldom do Catholics hear anything from the pulpit about the moral evil of contraception. 

This leaves the impression that the teaching church is clear about the immorality of contraception, but is not prepared to put that teaching into pastoral practice. If there is silence from the pulpit, then the unspoken message is that couples can continue in their contraceptive lifestyle and not be concerned about the morality of what they are doing. 

A very different situation would arise if an entire diocese, with all the priests in a united front with their bishop, were to take a clear position on the immorality of contraception. Then all engaged couples would be strongly encouraged to learn NFP. The intention to use contraception would be grounds for a priest to refuse to marry a couple. For already married couples, pastors would teach that contraception is a serious moral evil, and must be confessed and repented of before receiving the Eucharist. All couples would be strongly encouraged to learn morally acceptable ways of planning their families. Some proportionate form of restitution would be recommended for those who have sterilized themselves. Catholic doctors would be warned that they cannot receive the Eucharist if they are prescribing contraception, performing sterilizations, or making referrals for these. 

It is in the present situation of massive moral non-compliance that I make my comments. What follow is not Magisterial teaching; rather, it is an informed theological opinion. I speak to what an innocent spouse can do on his own to rectify the abuses of his marriage. At this point in time, he is largely on his own, without the explicit public support of the clergy. 

The innocent spouse must continually pray and work for the conversion of the offending spouse. This requires understanding what the spousal act was designed to express and accomplish. It means talking about these important matters. It means making sacrifices for her. The innocent spouse should remind the other of the total immorality of contraception, and the possible abortifacient factor in using the Pill, and encourage her to move in the direction of NFP. A good husband should encourage his wife to transfer her trust away from the Pill and place it in God’s providence, in her husband’s willingness to share with her the burden of family planning, and in God’s inexhaustible love for us. 

Our Lord took people where they were, and pointed them in the direction they should be taking. He appealed to their good reason and to their better selves. He respected the freedom of their conscience. He proposed God’s plan for us, while never imposing it. He gave people, and continues to give us, a little time so that we could freely come to our senses. Eventually, however, the time will come when we will have to give a thorough accounting for all our choices and deeds. The Lord warned us that we are responsible for how we use our freedom. 

What can an innocent spouse do if the other refuses to move away from contraception? Could he decide to forego the marital act? Since we are not to cooperate with sin, and contraception is sinful, the innocent spouse has a right and a duty to refuse to cooperate with evil, insofar as that is possible. A contracepted act is not a marital act, since it has separated the unitive from the procreative dimension. Now it is simply a sexual act. It is an act of conditioned self-giving, with many reservations. Such an act does not enrich the relationship; rather, it tends to unravel the fabric of their bonding. Rather than make a lie with their bodies, a couple should simply remain silent. 

Such a choice will bring tensions to the marriage, but unnecessary tensions already exist. The only proper solution is to cease doing what is evil, and begin doing what is good. If nothing else, simply do nothing! 

Many divorces can be traced back to the damage done by contraception. The high divorce rates in this country took off at the same time that the Pill arrived. If we are to address the problem of a 50% divorce rate among Catholics, then we must get to the root cause. And if this requires a change of attitudes, values, and practices, then that is what must be done. 

Doing good for our neighbor also includes helping them resist evil. 

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

Dear Fr. Matthew @ the Abbey,

As a priest I am encountering with greater frequency the following situation:

In mixed marriages, the Catholic spouse often wants to be faithful to the Church’s teaching on sexuality and contraception but finds the non-Catholic spouse to be resistant and unwilling to cooperate. I am told this puts incredible strain on the marriage and the Catholic spouse will often “give in” and contracept; the effect, I am told again, is that it actually brings (at least a perceived) unity back to the couple.

I know this is objectively not the case. I am often told by the Catholic spouse in this situation that their sex life is now great and to practice NFP would (and did, they claim) cause extreme marital harm.

Can you offer some insight to help me? I want to lead couples to the freedom and beauty of Pope John Paul’s theology. But my sharing with the Catholic spouses in this situation is contradicted by the appeal to their own “experience.” (And we know that in our society “experience” is everything, even constituting the very canon of truth!)

Thanks in advance. Father X

Dear Fr. X, Thanks for writing. This is a very important question.

Yes, “experience” is the preferred “source for morality” today. Correctly understood, one’s experience, if it corresponds with reality, is an important factor for moral reasoning. But one’s “experience” is also subject to manipulation and to either subtle or massive self- deception.

My experience with cleaning showers (scrubbing down curtains, walls and floors) is that this is a real labor, and I don’t always like that. So that was a bad experience for me. But what does “experience” tell me about morality? Usually good works exact a price from us. The fact that this cuts into my comfort zone doesn’t really affect the morality of the act. Objectively speaking, it is a good thing to clean dirty showers on a regular basis. The good experience comes later, when I get to use a clean shower.

Morality is not determined by one’s experience. Rather, as the Catholic tradition teaches (CCC #1761 and Veritatis Splendor #77-9), morality is primarily determined by the object chosen (what I choose to do), and only secondarily by the circumstances and my intended ends.

Thus, if a couple chooses to contracept, i.e., to knowingly choose to separate in the marital act what God has designed to be together (the procreative dimension from the unitive), then they are choosing the following:

-- to separate the unitive dimension from the procreative ;

-- to assume the attitude that the conception of new person would be an evil, not a good thing;

-- to willfully restrict their total gift of self and refuse to make the total self donation to the other, and to refuse to accept the other’s total self donation to them;

-- to tell God to stay out of their bedroom and love-making (How bizarre it is for a couple not to realize that everything they have – their bodies, their sexuality, complimentarity, fertility, the marital act, and their love for each other – is sheer gift from God. They act as though they gave these things to themselves!);

-- to refuse to God the right to determine, if the marital act takes place during the wife’s fertile period, whether a new person of incalculable worth will be called into existence ;

-- to establish themselves as being in total control over the meaning of marriage and the spousal act. They are re-defining marriage and the spousal act.

How can we help couples come to understand the moral evil of contraception and sterilization? I think that it helps to appeal to the “experience” of the broader society. Look at the 50% divorce rate today. There is a clear correlation between contraception and divorce. Look at the 80% cohabitation rate today. Many young couples, victims themselves of divorced parents, have not experienced a good marriage and think that it is unattainable. Look at the abortion rate today: doctors abort one out of every four unborn babies, and there are many more uncounted early on chemical abortions due to abortifacient contraception. Contraception always leads to more, not less, abortion. Look at the 85-90% rate of contraception and sterilization among Catholic couples today. Can’t people see the connections? Or do they refuse to see, to interpret reality correctly?

Contraception does not bring about marital bliss, deep commitment, or a willingness to give self-sacrificial love to the other. Contraception is very selfish. It makes orgasm the primary value to pursue. It encourages spouses to place the focus upon him or herself, instead of upon the other. Contracepting couples close doors on God, on their fertility, and on themselves. If a couple cannot be totally present to each other, and surrender themselves unconditionally, in the marital act, then how can they do this in any other aspect of their marriage? Contraception turns against love, corrodes love like an acid.

NFP forces a couple to discover what real love is. It teaches them to understand their physiological complimentarity. Periodic abstinence forces a couple to work with the full gamut of expressing their affections, instead of using only genital ones. NFP requires self-sacrifice for the benefit of the other, their marriage, and their family. Living God’s plan for the spousal act, e.g., NFP, invites Jesus into their relationship. Now they are loving as Jesus loves His bride, the Church. “Greater love has no man, than to lay down his life for the sake of his beloved.”

So, good padre, it is the task of the clergy today to help couples discover God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and the family. Contracepting couples don’t know this. They have never experienced it. And their present “experience” is very inadequate. But they are experiencing the pain and heartbreaks of divorce, broken families, and shattered self- esteem.

We can point people in the direction of the truth. We can PROpose God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family to them, in the same manner in which Jesus himself taught. We do not IMpose God’s plan. We respect the freedom of the person in front of us. But the time will come when each person will be required to give a full accounting of how he used his freedom, of the choices he made, and of the acts he performed.

I have gone on too long, but your question is a very important one for these times. I recommend that you go to our website, www.nfpoutreach.org, and click on “Helps for Your Homily.” You will find many useful materials there.

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

 Very few men understand the stakes involved in a vasectomy. 

That vasectomy is an act of hostility, whether conscious or unconscious, is not my own idea but the idea of the famous psychologist Milton Erickson, who said precisely the same thing. He added that the "rational sounding" reasons such as prudent avoidance of childbearing, helping one's wife to avoid the risks of sterilization, or rationalizations simply camouflage the real and ugly reality. I have confirmed this through the years in clinical practice. One man confided to me, in a written testimony entitled "Can Manhood Be Lost?", that it was only when I brought up the long-term sequelae of vasectomy in front of his wife that for the first time years of resentment could escape to the surface, and he could express his anger at having been humiliated as a man through the experience of a vasectomy. And lest anyone think that this is an odd or idiosyncratic reaction peculiar to one individual only, be assured that it is not. This particular man was only lucky enough to be in a position to be consciously able -- because in the setting of a real conversion -- to admit the anger, shame, and self-loathing that the sin of vasectomy had engendered in him. It was the beginning of a real healing between him and his wife, something that usually is not possible in our society because the sin, fault, or injury is most often not consciously admitted. 

Vasectomized men experience unhappiness, because unless they can admit the existential, spiritual and bodily injury, they have to live in a life where they have rejected part of their own identity. Depression, sexual dysfunction, all kinds of hyper-masculine and hyper-macho acting out often takes place, and very many of these men cannot avoid expressing their anger. Still, they most often do not know the source of this anger unless they are fortunate enough, as my patient was, to learn the source and be able to repair (not "reverse") the damage. It remains true that many men undergo repair (again not "reversal"), not so much to achieve a pregnancy as to repair their manhood and restore their sense of themselves as men. If this cannot be done, then one can only expect an increased chance of infidelity, as his masculinity is propped up through the illusory acceptance of the act of adultery. There is an increased chance of divorce, as the man after a time cannot stand to be with the woman who required the loss of his manhood as a condition of their continued marriage relationship. 

For the same reasons, vasectomy often influences in an adverse way a man's relationship with his existing children. When the very source of a man's procreative powers is attacked or assaulted as it is with vasectomy -- no man should believe that vasectomies are anything less than this kind of self-violence – then he comes to loathe not only that source but the life that was generated from that source. This makes sense because the vasectomy has forced an illegitimate equation whereby either he is worthy or his procreative powers are, but not both! He will often resolve this difficulty by rejecting and loathing the idea of more children, which spills over to a rejection, at least in part, of his existing children as well. I have had personal experience with this in my practice, in a situation where two daughters born before their father's vasectomy learned that they were not valued and were rejected, and suffered all kinds of damaging mental and psychological anguish in their lives. They falsely concluded that they were in competition for their father's love. 

Finally, vasectomy has numerous health consequences at the purely physical level. Many men have chronic pain after the operation, which only is resolved with the repair. The occlusion of the tube causes spermatic "blowouts" or granulomas, and the abnormal immunologic reaction to spermatozoa suddenly and abnormally appearing in the bloodstream is an autoimmune reaction that can cause arthritis and autoimmune disease. Likewise, prostate cancer, probably chronic prostatitis, and heart disease (despite what you may read, this tendency towards heart complications has never been disproved) are all increased in frequency. 

After vasectomy wives suffer health complications too. The literature suggests increased rates of hysterectomies, abnormal menstrual bleeding, and even allergic reactions among women whose husbands have had vasectomies.

But perhaps the saddest thing is the closing off of a man's horizons to life, and to the joys that come with that. All of the complications in a marriage cannot compare with the joy of a new child, one's own child! 

Dominic M. Pedulla MD, FACC, CNFPMC, ABVM, ACPh 

Varicoseveins1@yahoo.com

Associate Clinical Professor of Medicine, OU Health Sciences Center 

Medical Director, The Oklahoma Vein and Endovascular Center 

President, The Edith Stein Foundation

Why do they do it, and how can this be changed? 

Female sterilization is the second most frequently used method of family planning among women between the ages of 15-44 in the United States. If you include the use of sterilization of the male partner in the equation, then sterilization becomes the number one method of family planning in the US, even exceeding the use of oral contraception. The pattern of sterilization use among Roman Catholic (RC) women in the US is not much different than the total population of US women. According to the data from the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG), the rate of ever use of female sterilization among US women was 15% and among RC-US women 14%, whereas male partner sterilization among US women and US-RC women was about 4%. 

In 2002, researchers form Marquette University analyzed trends in contraception use among RC-US women (using NSFG data) and found that from 1988 to 1995 the ever use of sterilization almost doubled. Marquette researchers recently analyzed the influence of religiosity on the use of contraception among US-RC women based on the data from the latest (2002 – Cycle 6)) NSFG. …. 

What is startling in these findings is that RC women who have frequent church attendance and who view their religion as very important had more frequent (38-69%) “ever use” of female sterilization. The use of sterilization might reflect the completion of the family size, an older population of women, and the decline of female fertility as women reach the age of 35-40. Women in this age range no longer wish to be using hormonal contraception and are probably tired of managing their fertility. Women at this age are also often confused by irregular cycles and are fearful of an unwanted pregnancy in this stage of their life. 

One reason that RC women who have frequent church attendance and believe that their religion is very important had more frequent use of sterilization could be because sterilization is a one-time event. Couples can have the sterilization surgery, confess to a priest, and then be back in the grace of God and the church. The constant use of the pill and/or condoms, on the other hand, requires either frequent confession or a guilty conscience. The sterilization and one-time forgiveness process was first speculated by Leslie Woodcock Tentler in her book Catholics and Contraception; an American History. 

Another reason for the use of sterilization among Catholic couples might be a lack of understanding of the Church’s teaching on family planning and sexual ethics. This reason is somewhat supported by findings showing that the subset of women with orthodox sexual ethics did not have a higher frequency of male (partner) or female sterilization. So too others have pointed out that there is an ignorance of the tenets of the faith system and/or a rejection of the Church teaching on moral issues altogether. Another possible reason is that, although RC couples know the Church’s teachings on contraception and sterilization, they view themselves as “autonomous” adults, and downplay or ignore the role of the church’s official teachings in forming their consciences on the issue of family planning. 

Although there seems to be some influence of religion on the family planning choices of RC women, it is still quite apparent that RC women (and men) have difficulty in either living with or accepting their fertility and that of their spouse. This is evident from the fact that their most frequent ways of dealing with fertility are to either suppress it with hormones or destroy it with surgery. Another implication is that although women and couples view their faith as very important, they may not have a good understanding of the faith and what it teaches, especially in the area of sexuality and contraception. This is further exacerbated by the lack of support from clergy and Catholic health professionals and Catholic health institutions in the area of family planning. Relatively few physicians, professional nurses, nurse midwives, and Catholic health facilities offer and promote the use of NFP. 

The findings of this study are encouraging in that there is a higher use of NFP in women who attend church services frequently and in those who report religion as very important, but discouraging that there is also a frequent use of surgical sterilization among this same group. This would seem to indicate a need for better catechesis, perhaps at a younger age, for Catholic men and women. However, further research would be helpful. In determining whether religious beliefs enter into the decision of women who are choosing a method of family planning at all. 

Another factor that might hold more influence in a woman’s or couple’s contraception decision making is the effects of sterilization on health and/or the marital and conjugal relationship. A recent study showed that women who have been sterilized had a greater likelihood or reporting that stress was interfering with sex and to have seen a physician for sexual problems. The autthors of this study speculated that somehow sterilization is interfering with the emotional bond between the partners. So too there is speculation that sterilization disrupts the woman’s self-esteem and body image, i.e., feeling less feminine and less a woman. Discussing these dynamics with physicians and other health professionals before a woman (or man) is sterilized would be important. In conjunction with discussing the possible effects of sterilization on the marital relationship is a discussion of God’s true design for marriage, the Theology of the Body, and strategies for living with one’s fertility. Hopefully, this would lead more women to reconsider sterilization and develop a newfound interest in living with fertility in accordance with God’s plan. 

(Reprinted with permission from Current Medical Research Summer/Fall 2007, Vol. 20, Nos 3&4, pp. 18-21, DDP/NFP, USCCB, Washington, DC. E-mail: nfp@usccb.org.) 

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB 

Former New York Governor Mario Cuomo, speaking in Washington at a Forum on Politics and Faith in America, made an extended application of his argument given at Notre Dame back in 1984. Then he defended the right of Catholic politicians to vote in favor of pro-abortion legislation. Now he claims that citizens, motivated by their religious beliefs, can consider that abortion, cloning, and embryo destructive research are wrong and they have religious freedom to take this position. By the same standard, thinks Cuomo, people whose religious beliefs allow them to abort unborn human babies, clone and do embryo destructive research also have a claim upon religious freedom to support them in their choice. Thus the pro-life politician cannot attack a pro-abortion politician who advocates abortion, because the right to religious freedom protects both the one and the other. Cuomo’s conclusion: If you deny the pro-abortionist’s right to pursue his agenda, then you also must deny the pro-lifer’s right to pursue his. 

How convenient a solution for Cuomo, the “great compromiser”! Since the life issues are simply matters of religious belief, a citizen can take any position he or she wants to with impunity, since civil law cannot support, or be influenced by, religious beliefs. The legislatures and the courts must back off from dealing with these issues. 

Of course, the reality is that the Supreme Court directly involved itself with making abortion legal at any stage of the pregnancy. It overturned the laws which most states had constructed precisely to defend the right to life of the unborn babies residing in their states. Roe V. Wade removed the protection of the law from the most innocent and most highly vulnerable member of our community. The Supreme Court depersonalized the unborn baby, and made its continued survival, its right to life, depend upon the whims and convenience of his or her mother. 

Cuomo’s position loses its plausibility when we hold it up to the light of reality. The reality of an unborn baby is not a matter of religious belief. The unborn baby is a new member of our race, whose physical development is completely self-directed, and whose natural birth after nine months of gestation, if left unmolested, is guaranteed. This is an observable reality upon which all unbiased people can agree. The need for health care of children, good nutrition, corrections for impaired hearing and seeing are not matters of religious belief. They are simple natural realities which everyone can recognize. Young persons have human dignity, and human rights, which flow out of their dignity. Corresponding to these rights, society has duties to address them. This is a matter of simple justice, not religious belief. 

Religious beliefs (sometimes called dogmas) generally refer to God and what He has done for us. Think of the twelve articles of the Nicene Creed. Since God remains hidden from our view, so as not to impede our freedom, we need divine revelation to know religious truths. When we appeal to religious truths, we simply confirm what we can already know by the use of good reason. Good reason can arrive at a true anthropology, that God designed us as bodied persons, endowed with a God-given dignity with all the human rights that flow from that dignity. Human reason can construct valid moral principles that guide our choices and direct our acts, that are coherent with our dignity as human persons. Anyone open to the use of good reason can arrive at these moral principles. 

The flaws in Cuomo’s thinking are easily seen when we apply his smokescreen to other moral issues like slavery, racial discrimination, genocide, infanticide and the exploitation of human labor. The injustice, and moral evil, of all these grievous offences against human dignity are not merely the results of religious beliefs. We need not appeal to divine revelation to understand what makes these choices abominable and highly destructive of human relations. We can figure these matters out on our own. Just observe what these practices do to their victims and to their perpetrators! Chattel slavery always was wrong, and always will be, for the same reasons. The same applies to genocide, racial discrimination, infanticide and the exploitation of human labor. 

Cuomo wants to create a smokescreen which promotes a specious cover for “politically correct” Catholic politicians and those who advocate legalized abortion. He wants a pro-abortion vote to appear to be a decent thing to do. He wants citizens, who have moral insights derived from their knowledge of the Creator of the human race, to stay out of the public square, where the important decisions are being formulated. This, in effect, would cancel their citizenship. He wants a climate of pluralism to prevail, where nothing directly contrary to human dignity and human rights can be ascertained and repudiated. He wants the status quo to continue, whereby only those who appeal to our baser instincts can continue to manipulate the democratic system so as to serve their special interests. Bad arguments, like smokescreens, should be identified, seen through and rejected. 

For a more extensive analysis of Cuomo’s argument by Robert George, see Voices, Vol. XXII: No 2, pp. 15-19. 

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

How do you answer a woman who is overly concerned about her physical appearance? Some worry about being too flat chested. Others worry about stretch marks resulting from pregnancies and childbirth. They think that implants and cosmetic surgery are the solution. Here is the answer given by a remarkable mom of seven children. 

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

Please don't think I am being prideful; there is a point I am trying to make. 

I have never been what I would call attractive by society's standards. I'd say 'average looking' at most, but I was 5'10 and 120 lbs when I got married. Twenty-two years and seven children later, I now weigh 195lbs. I'd like to shed about 20 of those, but my peri-menopausal body seems to be happy right where it is. 

I wear a size 14 and carry it well because of my height. I have never smoked or sunbathed, so I look younger than my 42 years. 

Why do I say this? Because at 42, I can look in the mirror -NAKED- and am content with what I see. My body has grown and nourished those 7 children. I don't have the body of a sweet young thing- I have the body of a woman. (Remember, too--our husbands no longer have the Adonis bodies WE married! :-) ) 

I look at myself- and despite the stretch marks from my chin to my knees and the extra weight- I am far happier with who I am and how I look than I was 20 years ago when I had the body many women try to have today. 

Last week I had someone new to our parish seek me out regarding the specific ministry I head. He was told to look for the beautiful tall (color of my hair)! I NEVER would have described myself as beautiful. 

I was joking about it with the parish secretary, she said that is how everyone described me when I first arrived at the parish- and everyone knew whom that meant. She said she knew I wouldn't describe myself like that, but.....HERE IS MY POINT>>>> it is a matter of HOW I present myself: she said I am obviously comfortable with myself and happy in what I am doing...and I radiate it. This lady who I consider exceedingly beautiful told me she thinks I am the most beautiful person she knows! I was floored. 

Angelina Jolie, Demi Moore, whoever....I wouldn't want their physical beauty for ONE SINGLE SECOND if it meant sacrificing the contentment I have with the person I have grown to be and the beautiful daughter of God I have always been- whether or not I realized it! 

True beauty is within you, and you don't want any man who doesn't realize it! 

-- Anonymous

I’ve been asked about these objections by a friend – that NFP is “sinful”. Please refute.

Pope Pius XI taught that married couples could use their marriage rights in the infertile periods of the wife (or when there is a defect of nature or age which prevents new life from being conceived). But he did not teach that they could designedly restrict the marriage act to the infertile periods to avoid a pregnancy, as in Natural Family Planning.

No reason, however grave it may be, can bring it about that something that is intrinsically evil can become good. NFP subordinates the primary purpose of the conjugal act (the procreation and education of children) to other things and is therefore forbidden.

NFP is condemned because it subordinates the primary PURPOSE of marriage and the conjugal act to other things. This makes the fact that NFP does nothing to obstruct the marriage act itself irrelevant, since the primary purpose is being frustrated. Natural Family Planning is sinful birth Control.

God bless, 

Peter

Dear Peter,

Here are some things for your friend to consider. 

Pope Paul VI’s encyclical Humanae Vitae completely endorses NFP as a morally good form of family planning, and condemns abortion, sterilization and contraception as intrinsically evil. The people who reject HV do so, not because they find NFP to be immoral, but because they do not accept the self- discipline that goes with periodic abstinence. 

Pope John Paul II also endorsed NFP completely, when used for the right reasons.

So also does Benedict XVI. They all recognize that NFP, when used for good reasons, respects God’s plan for marriage and spousal love.

Your friend does not entirely understand Pius XI’s encyclical Casti Connubii. Paragraph #53 reads: 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 circumstances. “Virtuous continence” = NFP; “frustrating the marriage act” = contraception.

Paragraph #54 explains further the evil of contraception: 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.

Paragraph #59 reaffirms periodic abstinence and NFP: …. Nor are those considered as acting against nature who in the married state use their right in the proper manner although on account of NATURAL REASONS EITHER OF TIME OR OF CERTAIN DEFECTS, new life cannot be brought forth. For in matrimony as well as in the use of the matrimonial rights there are also secondary ends, such as mutual aid, the cultivating of mutual love, and the quieting of concupiscence which husband and wife are not forbidden to consider so long as they are subordinated to the primary end and so long as the intrinsic nature of the act is preserved. “Natural reasons of time” = infertile periods; “or of certain defects” = after menopause or natural infertility.

The language of “primary ends” (procreation and education of children) and “secondary ends” (mutual aid, cultivating of mutual love, and the quieting of concupiscence) has undergone a legitimate development of doctrine. Gaudium et Spes #50 gives greater importance to the unitive, or personal, values of marital love: “Marriage to be sure is not instituted solely for procreation; rather, its very nature as an unbreakable compact between persons, and the welfare of the children, both demand that the mutual love of the spouses be embodied in a rightly ordered manner, that it grow and ripen. Therefore, marriage persists as a whole manner and communion of life, and maintains its value and indissolubility, even when despite the often intense desire of the couple, offspring are lacking.” Thus, the importance within marriage for the mutual love between the spouses endures even after the nest is empty, and the children have all left. This mutual love endures even if the couple is sterile, unable to have children. And this mutual love is meant to grow and deepen all throughout the marriage. Children do not replace this mutual love of spouses. Rather, they are the natural fruit of that love.

NFP is not an evil, or sinful. It is God’s gift to these times for parents who need a morally good means to help them plan their family responsibly. NFP can be misused, abused, if there are no compelling reasons for delaying the next pregnancy. But the fault there lies, not with NFP, but with the wrong intentions of the couple.

Cordially yours,

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

Would I be correct in saying that to look intentionally at beautiful women who are not one's wife (and you are married), and even possibly to feel sexual attraction for them -- that this would not be a sin? Or that this could be either not a sin or a venial sin of curiosity or immodest looks depending on circumstances? In other words, as he goes about the world, a man sees many attractive girls and often intentionally looks for a moment and feels the attraction and enjoys the beauty (but not to lust). This often would not be any sin but normal. But sometimes, due to circumstances -- looking too long, looking too often, or looking at someone who is just too overpoweringly attractive or is very immodestly dressed -- it could become a venial sin of immodest looks or curiosity. ???

Of course one should have custody of the senses -- but is there not a good 'seeing beauty' in other women? 

    -- KJ

Dear KJ, 

I hope that “KJ” does not mean “killjoy!” 

Should a man look at a beautiful woman? Yes. Not to appreciate the beauty and goodness that God has endowed her would be a sign of ingratitude on our part. For a man, one of the most beautiful things to see is a beautiful woman, and I think it works the same way for women with regard to men. The problem is not in the first look. 

But should a man continue to look, so that the look becomes a lascivious and wanton leer, or a provocative ogling? No. The problem is in the second look. 

What is the difference? The first look is simply knowing what is out there, a natural curiosity about who this person is. This glance sees the total person, the woman in the fullness of her femininity. 

The second look is where we get into trouble. Now the look does not do justice to the full richness of her person. Rather, now it reduces her to only one set of values, to her sex appeal. In doing so, we have reduced this woman, this daughter of God and this sister of ours, to a mere object of our pleasure. It is wrong to reduce a person down to the level of an object, to a plaything. In his Theology of the Body, Pope John Paul II has a lot to say about Jesus’ statement in Matthew 5:27-8: “You have heard it said, You shall not commit adultery. But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” I recommend to you his entire catechesis on the Sermon on the Mount, but especially the Wednesday audience of 17 Sept 80, “Mutual Attraction Differs from Lust.” 

I quote just one passage: “It is one thing to be conscious that the value of sex is a part of all the rich storehouse of values with which the female appears to the man: it is another to ‘reduce’ all the personal riches of femininity to that single value, that is, of sex, as a suitable object for the gratification of sexuality itself. The same reasoning can be valid concerning what masculinity is for the woman … The intentional ‘reduction’ is, as can be seen, primarily of an axiological nature. On the one hand the eternal attraction of man towards femininity (cf. Gn. 2:23) frees in him – or perhaps it should free – a gamut of spiritual-corporal desires of an especially personal and ‘sharing’ nature to which a proportionate pyramid of values corresponds. On the other hand ‘lust’ limits this gamut, obscuring the pyramid of values that marks the perennial attraction of male and female. 

“Lust has the internal effect, that is in the ‘heart,’ on the interior horizon of man and woman, of obscuring the significance of the body, of the person itself. Femininity thus ceases being above all else a (legitimate) object for the man; it ceases being a specific language of the spirit; it loses its character of being a sign. It ceases, I would say, bearing in itself the wonderful matrimonial significance of the body…” 

Pope John Paul has some very rich teachings on these matters. I encourage you to discover them. 

Cordially yours,

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

Most women do not know what the Pill does to their bodies. If they did, many would refuse to take it. The pharmaceutical industry and birth controllers promote the Pill as the great panacea for all problems. Professor Erik Odebald and Dr. Devin Hume give the unbiased results of their research on the effects of the Pill on a woman’s body. 

Oral contraceptives cause excessive development of G cells in the lower cervix, the crypts producing them being deeper and the bulging "grapes" larger. They may appear as a cauliflower-like structure.

While pregnancy counteracts the normal ageing process and actually has a rejuvenating effect on the cervix so that the cervix of a 33-year-old woman becomes like that of a 20-year-old, the Pill, especially after long-term use has a reverse effect: the cervix of a 33-year-old woman on the Pill becomes like that of a 45-year-old and the cervical canal becomes much narrower. The new lower dosage gestagen Pills produce similar effects.

While the present-day Pill contains progestagens in much lower dosage than previously, the fact is that they are much more powerful and they persist longer in the body.

The effect of progestagens in the Pill on the S crypts is to inhibit their activity and thus the biosynthesis of S mucus. Over a long period of Pill activity they undergo attrition from disuse. The ethinyloestradiol and mestranol in the combined Pill also have a more prolonged effect than natural oestrogens, the overall effect of this on the complicated intracellular events being unknown.

Restoration of the S and G crypts to normal, after discontinuing the Pill, takes considerable time. In fact the S crypts may be permanently damaged.

In a paper in preparation dealing with microsurgical approaches to cervical infertility (20), it is pointed out that the opinion about post-Pill infertility has, over a period of decades, changed from criticism to acceptance, or at least, to not denying the responsibility of its existence.

The cervix is a very complex organ which can be damaged by exposure to toxic substances such as the synthetic hormones in the Pill. There is extensive literature on side effects of the Pill. However, what is often overlooked is the intended effects of the Pill. The Pill deliberately assaults the physiology of female reproduction. In such an important area as human reproduction it is no wonder that Nature hits back.

Women, before consenting to take the Pill, should be aware of what the medication sets out to do. Its primary mode of action is sterilizing by inhibiting the hypothalamic-pituitary axis and thus preventing the initiation of events leading to ovulation. With the lower dose Pill now in widespread use, especially if a dose or two is missed, then breakthrough ovulation may occur. The secondary action of the Pill is to stimulate the G mucus secretary cells, presenting a contraceptive barrier to sperm. Finally the progestagen content of the Pill, whether the combined version or the progestagen only type (the MiniPill), results in an "out of phase" endometrium, which renders implantation (nidation) of the blastocyst less likely. This is an abortifacient action. These two latter effects also result fom Norplant progestagen implants or progestagen impregnated pessaries.

Many women are unaware of this ability of progestagens to induce early abortions. The "morning after" Pill, which consists of two double doses of the Pill 12 hours apart (often inducing nausea and vomiting, the two double doses being of toxic proportions) acts by inducing a withdrawal bleed. In other words the endometrium is shed, as in menstruation, leaving the embryo nowhere to implant if conception occurs. "Post-coital contraception" as this is called is thus not contraception at all but a process for initiating very early abortion.

For a woman who does not understand the process, she thinks she is just "seeing her period ear1y." The Pill, of course, results in a similar withdrawal bleed, which women are led to believe is a natural period, which it is not. It is induced by ceasing the course of the Pill. Because the bleed usually occurs regularly it is reassuring, merely "regulating the periods", which is nonsense. The normal menstrual cycle is obliterated by the Pill. The Mini Pill (progestagen only) is taken continually and often results in quite irregular bleeding. All in all, as already pointed out, oral contraceptive medication (or Norplant implants) represents a gross interference with the normal female physiology of reproduction. 

Final Comments 

It is apparent from the preceding presentation that Professor Odeblad's work does not give support for the use of the Pill. On the other hand, events normally occurring in the cervix regarding cellular functions, mucus structure and secretion patterns give full support for the Ovulation Method of Natural Family Planning developed by Drs. John and Evelyn Billings. In fact, nothing has come out which contradicts the rules or recommendations for using the Billings Ovulation Method (BOM).

[There are groups of women who encounter difficulties in learning and applying the BOM, especially the difficulty in achieving pregnancy because of a poor mucus symptom. They require extended in-depth teaching and assessment of their charts. The groups include women just coming off the Pill, women who have had different kinds of medication such as chemotherapy for malignant disease, women with continuous cervico-vaginal discharge (which may also be a post-Pill phenomenon), women with Cystic Fibrosis, Down's Syndrome and other hereditary diseases. It is therefore important that basic research on the fundamental biological mechanisms behind the mucus secretary patterns and their ranges of variations can continue, so that the BOM can be safely extended to more women and couples who want to use Natural Family Planning.] 

[We are indebted to Dr. Kevin Hume KSG who collaborated with Professor Erik Odeblad in the presentation of this summary of the recent advances of his work. For the full article, go towww.woomb.org/bulletin/vol25/no2/effects.shtml#Contraceptive%20Medication] 

Cordially yours,

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

"BE CAREFUL, IT MAY TURN YOUR LIFE UPSIDE DOWN" 

(Words of warning from a Bishop as he sends "'Prove It, God'...  And He Did" CDs to 24,000 families in his diocese!)

What is going on in the Diocese of Bismarck, ND? 

"This is Bishop Zipfel inviting you to listen to the incredible conversion story of an ordinary housewife who discovered what God’s call to holiness meant in her life. I pray that this story will touch your heart as it has touched mine, but be careful—it may turn your life upside down." So begins the introduction to a special version of Patty Schneier's CD presentation "'Prove It, God'...and He Did" recently sent to every Catholic home (those registered in a parish) in the entire Diocese of Bismarck, North Dakota.

How did this amazing project come about? Well, for those of you who have heard Patty Schneier's beautiful and powerful testimony of how God used the daily Mass readings to change her heart and mind about contraception, you may understand how a listener would want to share Patty's testimony with others. This is just how seminarian Russ Kovash felt.

Russ is a seminarian for the Diocese of Bismarck attending Kenrick-Glennon Seminary in St. Louis. He was given a copy of Patty's CD by his good friend Craig Holway, a member of Patty's home parish. One day on a long drive to a parish where he was helping out, Russ listened to the CD. He says that within the first ten minutes, he was hooked. Within twenty to thirty minutes he was crying, and by the time he reached the parish, he was weeping. "Patty's message resonated with me," he says. The beginning of her story doesn't even talk about the issue of contraception but is about the basic call to holiness that applies to each one of our lives. Patty and her husband's courage in opening their hearts to what God was saying about a difficult issue in their lives inspired Russ to relook at some issues in his own life that he says he had been tempted to brush aside like Patty: "I'm a good Catholic. Why doesn't God go pick on someone with more serious sins?"

Soon Russ was handing out copies of "Prove It, God," and he thought, "I wish every Catholic family could hear this!" The response of those to whom he gave the CD confirmed his own powerful experience of hearing Patty's testimony, which made him desire even more to share her story. One person to whom he gave a copy was his Bishop, the Most Reverend Paul Zipfel. The Bishop's thank you letter soon after called Patty's testimony "extraordinary" and commented: "Everyone needs to hear this message." This started the wheels in Russ' head turning. He and his vocations director Father Tom Richter, who had also been greatly moved by the CD, started brainstorming. At first their hope was to get a copy of the CD into the hands of every childbearing-aged couple in the diocese, but then Russ wondered, "Why only those of childbearing years? Everyone needs to hear this message. We are the mystical body of Christ and need to help each other out."

After calculating that to distribute the CD to each of the 24,000 Catholic households in the diocese would cost about $30,000, it was time to go to the Bishop. Russ asked him, "As the Shepherd of our diocese, if money were not an issue, would you like every family in the diocese to hear this message?" Bishop Zipfel's reply: "Yes, I would."

So Russ and Fr. Tom went to work raising funds. The response from those they approached was one of great support and enthusiasm, and, within two months, the pair and their helpers had raised $30,000, all from generous parishioners in the Diocese of Bismarck. Russ says that he was only a willing instrument of the Holy Spirit in a project that began snowballing and was confirmed every step of the way.

In October, thousands of CDs were mailed out of Bismarck with a letter and special audio introduction by Bishop Zipfel. Patty Schneier also came to speak the weekend before the mailing, first at a Catholic conference in Bismarck/Mandan and then in Russ' hometown of Dickinson. The Bishop even gave a tag for the flyer they used to advertise: "If you listen to the story of Patty Schneier you might find yourself challenged to wrestle with God…. Are you prepared?"

The response thus far from this mass mailing has been incredibly positive. A pharmacist who heard the message isn’t sure if he can continue dispensing contraceptives and asks for prayers for courage. A non-Catholic doctor who listened to the CD three times has said that it has contributed to his interest in becoming Catholic. One husband says that he has some tough decisions to make in his marriage. Two women in the diocese told their friend (a One More Soul customer who passed it on to us) that they’ve decided they need to start using NFP.

When asked if he was surprised at the response, Russ responded, "When we're given a counterfeit, we don't always recognize it as such. But upon realizing that the real deal is out there, I think people become hungry to grasp it and go after it." -- By Kristie Wellmann 

(For copies of this CD, go to www.OMSoul.com, or call 1-800 307 7685.) 

Cordially yours,

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

I am an NFP teacher but find very few Catholics interested in learning abut it. I think the reason is, with very few exceptions, a universal lack of clergy support . Our priests seldom, if ever, mention anything about contraception or sterilization from the pulpit. As a result people interpret this silence as condoning such immoral behavior. So why should they bother with NFP? I’m very discouraged and don’t know what to do.

-- Discouraged in New Mexico

Dear Discouraged,

What you mention is a common complaint we hear all over the country. If the clergy do not encourage couples to learn a morally good way to space their babies, while always remaining open to the great gift of their fertility, then there will be only an exceptional few couples seeking information about NFP. This must be discouraging to you as a teacher, who has gone to great lengths to prepare yourself to be a certified teacher of NFP for the benefit of a parish and the broader diocese. 

Please know that there are some bright spots on the horizon. Individual priests are strong promoters of the values surrounding NFP. We meet them in our work throughout the country. Many of our younger clergy bring with them a much better appreciation of the Church’s sexual ethic than previous generations. They received a better exposition of the Church’s teachings in the seminaries, and there are better materials available today on these issues. You should know that some dioceses are requesting that NFP Outreach provide clergy conferences on the topic “How to Preach God’s Plan for Marriage and Spousal Love from the Pulpit.” 

My advice to you is to refuse to become discouraged. It is precisely times like these that require people like you and me to be faithful to what we are called to do. We know that God’s plan for marriage and spousal love is the perfect formula for happiness, and that it is within the reach of everyone. No sensible person is happy with the present 50% divorce rate, 80% cohabitation rate, and an 85% contraception rate. Our efforts are needed more, not less, in these difficult times. God does bless these efforts. There will be breakthroughs. 

Here is what Bishop Robert Vasa of Baker, OR, wrote in his diocesan newspaper, The Catholic Sentinel, on 5 May 06: “Rejecting the Church’s teaching on contraception has a profound impact on our ability to love God. The truth is that it is simply not possible to say on one hand, ‘I do love the Lord with my whole heart, mind and soul’ and at the same time to say, ‘My decisions about how to deal with the most marvelous God-given gift of fertility has nothing to do with God. 

“These sex-related sins have achieved a high degree of societal acceptability. This societal acceptability has given the impression to Catholics that God really has nothing of value to say about these life issues.” 

Bishop Vasa criticized Catholic leadership for failing to teach clearly the essential importance of obedience to the Church’s teaching on contraception. “The one question which stands … as a condemnation to all teachers and preachers within the Church is simply, ‘Why haven’t we been told this clearly and consistently?’ 

“The answer is as difficult as the question. I suspect that if we took some liberties with the Scripture we could envision Jesus saying: “You cannot love God and contraception at the same time. You will either love one and hate the other or be committed to one and despise the other.’ 

“If God is really saying, ‘If you love me then abide by my Commandments including my Church’s teaching about the sinfulness of contraception,’ then many in the Church are faced with the same conflict…. We cannot separate the concrete realities of our lives from the love of God. 

“It is not an easy thing to present this very personal and emotional subject in such direct black and white terminology, but the truth is that Jesus and His Church either include contraception in the list of prohibited practices, or they do not. There may be huge numbers of Catholics who reject this teaching but I do not know of any who deny that it is what the Church clearly and consistently teaches.” 

In his 6 Nov 07 column, Bishop Vasa wrote: “Many Catholic have erroneously determined that the path the should follow is to disobey while tying to convince the Church that Her teaching is erroneous. In choosing to disobey, they break faith with the Church. In that disobedience tremendous harm has been brought to many women. Tremendous harm to marriage. Tremendous harm to family life. Tremendous harm to society.” 

As the 40th anniversary of the encyclical looms, the Bishop says he hopes for a general renewal of instruction and faithfulness to its teachings. “I suspect, and pray, that there will be a very strong and concerted effort in the Church to engage in a comprehensive program of study and instruction surrounding this teaching.” 

Cordially yours,

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

What must I do to ensure that I will have a strong marriage and a happy family? The odds today are so high against that. What can I do to enhance my chances of success? 

-- Bob R.

Dear Bob, 

When God designed marriage for a man and woman, He had in mind a lifelong relationship that would bring fulfillment and happiness to the man, the woman, and all their children. God wants every couple to have a happy marriage, a strongly bonded relationship, and a healthy, happy family. He intends that their love for each other will deepen and mature. To catch a glimpse of God’s original design for marriage, read the first three chapters of Genesis, and then Hosea 2, Jeremiah 16, the Song of Solomon, and finally Matthew 19 and Ephesians 5. 

We can know both God’s original plan for marriage, and all the means that He provides to make a successful marriage possible. God designed marriage as the personal vocation for the vast majority of the human race. He will help each couple to achieve a good marriage, but He also leaves to each couple many things that only they can do make it happen. Created as persons with free will and intelligence, and graced with freedom, we must use these powers in a manner that freely cooperates with God’s plan. 

What is our end of the bargain? We must learn how to love. This means that we must move away from a self-assertive, self-grasping, and self-seeking expression of love (erotic love) and move towards a self-giving, self-sacrificial and self-emptying expression of love (agapaic love). Simply put, we must learn how to make the total personal gift of ourself to another. As we grow older, we are expected to leave former stages of life behind us and grow into more complex and richer stages. We understand this in physical terms, intellectual terms, and even emotional terms. But most important of all are the affective terms, the capacity for loving. 

A couple falls in love, almost unconsciously. But they must make repeated conscious choices to remain in that love and to carry their share of the burdens that will keep this love alive and growing. It is easy to fall in love, but keeping that love alive requires good choices, repeated acts of self-sacrifice for the benefit of others, and a willingness to do whatever is required for the welfare of those we love. 

Real love means that we place the welfare of those we love above our own comfort. We want what is best for them. We want what is truly good for them, all the goods that make them flourish as persons, even if that comes at a personal cost to ourselves. Thus, a man is most happy when his wife and children are surrounded by love and have the opportunity to develop themselves as full persons. The same is true for a woman, wife and mother. 

Making the total gift of self means that we must sometimes say “No” to our personal inclinations and preferences. My habits and recreations as a bachelor must yield to the needs of my marriage and family. This means giving up some of my previous forms of recreation. As a married man, I recognize that my wife and children have claims upon me that must be met. 

To have a good marriage, I must admit that I am no longer the center of the universe. Rather, I am now part of a new universe, which is my wife, our marriage, and our family. I will only be truly happy if they are thriving as persons who are open to all the gifts of love and life. My God, my marriage, and my family are the center of my universe. If relationships among these persons are not in good condition, then I cannot be happy, because those most important people in my life are not happy or healthy. 

A relationship, like life itself, is never static; it is always developing, like a flower that is unfolding. A relationship requires constant attention. We foster it by attending to what the real requirements are for the present day and present circumstances. A relationship, like real life, constantly brings new challenges. These challenges call for adjustments, greater maturity, and the willingness to find adequate solutions. Love finds a way. 

When there is a spirit of generosity and self-giving, then relationships flourish within a marriage and within a family. A person knows that he or she is loved when their real needs are being attended to. That is so characteristic of a home, and of a marriage. 

Parents learn self-discipline and self-sacrificial love. They must help their children to learn these values. Activities in a family that enhance family life are good and beneficial. Activities in a family that detract from family life are evil and harmful. Because contraception closes a person off from making the total gift of self in the spousal act, it is destructive of authentic spousal love. 

Every marriage, and every family is unique because the persons involved are unique. But there is a commonality to all successful marriages and families. They have all discovered God’s plan for authentic human love. They have learned that real happiness comes from generous self-giving, and not from self-taking. They have discovered that the greatest model for human love is the God-man, Jesus, who gave Himself completely for us, because that is what real love required of him. True love follows in the path of Jesus. 

If we bring these dispositions to marriage, then God will bless all our efforts with success. Spouses and children will know that they are loved just for being the persons they are. The child will be recognized as the greatest gift God can give to a couple. The spouses will understand that their love for one another comes from God, and that each spouse is the God-given complement to the other. They will know that every day God is drawing them closer to Himself and into his own communion of love and life. 

Cordially yours,

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

CHANGES IN OUR CULTURE 1950 TO 2000

In 1955, 30% of Catholic wives aged 18 to 39 admitted to using contraception

In 1965, 53% of Catholic wives aged 18 to 39 were presently using or had used contraception

…From Catholics and contraception: An American History: by Leslie Woodcock 

In 1995, 70% of all U.S. Catholic women of childbearing age used some form of contraception [17]

17] Data from the National Center for Health Statistics,

http://cathmedweek.blogspot.com/2007/03/on-contraception.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In 1960, 2.3% of babies were born out of wedlock.

By 1992, 22.6% of babies were born out of wedlock.

…..Prosperous Paupers and other Population Problems, Eberstadt

By 2005, 37% of babies were born out of wedlock. – Associated Press

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As late as 1960, married families made up 74% of all households; but by the census of 2000 they accounted for just 53 percent. (Professor H.S. Klein, Columbia University)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Between 1960 and 2000, the number of unmarried cohabiting couples increased by 1000%. In 2000 there were 11 million cohabiting people. (2000 Census)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The number of single mothers increased between 1970 and 2000, from 3 million to 10 million; over the same time frame, the number of single fathers increased also, from 393,000 to 2 million."—U.S. Census Bureau.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

23.6% of children from 2 parent families will have problems such as hyperactivity, behavioral, social impairment or in school.

40.6% of children from single–mother families have these problems.

(http://fathersforlife.org/divorce/chldrndiv.htm)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Approximately 60 percent of U.S. children living in mother-only families are impoverished, compared with only 11 percent of two-parent families.

(http://www.hec.ohio-state.edu/famlife/bulletin/volume.1/bullart1.htm)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In 1960 there were only 2 STD’s

In 2002 there were at least 50

(How Teen Sex is Killing our Kids. By Meg Meeker.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In the US in 2002 up to one quarter of sexually active teens were living with a sexually transmitted disease (STD). Each year over 15 million Americans will contract a new STD. Around a fifth of these will be teenagers. Indeed, while teens make up just 10 percent of the population, they account for 25 per cent of all STDs. That means every day in America 8000 teens will become infected with a new STD.

(How Teen Sex is Killing our Kids. By Meg Meeker.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

One in five people in the United States has an STD. 

Two-thirds of all STDs occur in people 25 years of age or younger. (http://www.coolnurse.com/std.htm)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fifty-four percent of women having abortions used a contraceptive method during the month they became pregnant. (Guttmacher Institute, 05/2006)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Forty eight percent of women that are having an abortion have had at least one previous abortion. (Guttmacher Institute, 05/2006)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Forty-three percent of women obtaining abortions identify themselves as Protestant, and 27% as Catholic. (Guttmacher Institute, 05/2006)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Black women are almost four times as likely as white women to have an abortion, and Hispanic women are 2.5 times as likely.  (Guttmacher Institute, 05/2006) 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

Our daughter is a newly married woman who does not have regular cycles, really unable to use NFP because of that, and has no other choice (in her mind) than to contracept. She knows NFP has worked for us; however I do know when I ovulate so NFP has been, thank God, very easy to do for us. How do you advise someone like that? There is no way she could pursue her PhD, and have a child right now. 

As her mother, I told her she needs to realize we must not take decisions like this into our own hands. It is not our place to decide when is the right time for us to bear a child. That is God's decision, and he will not give us anything we cannot handle. I explained giving birth is the closest she will ever be to God as she will be part of creating life and be a part of God's plan. Yet, the highly educated mind of hers researched the fact that NFP statistically doesn't work, mostly because she cannot tell when she is ovulating due to her irregular cycles, and she cannot successfully do this. I also told her God gave her free will as well. I cannot 'tell' her what to do but I told her how I felt about it, and she needs to pray about it. She talked to a priest before marrying. He told her in her circumstance she has no other choice, so in a way he told her that she has to do whatever she needed to do. I appreciate any advice you can give me. – A Distraught Mother

Dear Distraught Mother,

Thinking that NFP cannot work due to irregular menses is predicated on the old "Rhythm Method." Unfortunately, the pharmaceutical companies perpetuate this with their products designed to replicate the "normal cycle." Ovulatory cycles range from 26 to 35 days and do not obey calendars. 

The great news is that the same researchers who brought the birth control pill to the market in 1960 have spent their careers researching natural fertility regulation. Please recommend the WOOMB website to your daughter (www.woomb.org ) and click on the OMRRC (Ovulation Method Reference and Research Center) for the history and research behind the simplest and most scientifically pure NFP method. All women, despite their reproductive history or stage in life can easily identify the roughly 96 hours of fertility per month. The numerous studies cited will testify to the 99.5% effectiveness rate. Experts in my field quote a pregnancy rate of 10% with typical use of the pill (Trussell, Pearl Index). 

More importantly, if cycles are irregular, there is usually an underlying metabolic disorder which lies undiagnosed with typical gynecologic treatment. The Billings Ovulation Method chart is a bioassay of the ovarian hormones. This means that the charted changing or unchanging pattern of discharge is diagnostic and guides treatment. While there may be other NFP methods with varying detection methods, only the BOM chart reflects the actual production of estrogen and progesterone. One million hormonal assays and 55 years of research confirm this. 

Best wishes, 

Mary W. Martin, M.D.,FACOG

“All through the history of Christianity, contraception was considered, along with abortion, as an intrinsically evil undertaking, and if done with free will and sufficient reflection, always a mortal sin, placing one's salvation in eternal jeopardy. This was the consistent teaching of all the fathers and doctors of the Church, even in the doctrines and moral teachings of those Christians who, in the course of history, were separated from Rome and the See of Peter, as the Eastern Orthodox, and later, the various Protestant groups were. The teaching about the evil of contraception was maintained.” Bishop Fabian W. Bruskewitz Speech on Humanae Vitae, 2003 

1930: The Lambeth Conference. Anglican bishops approve use of contraception by married couples under certain circumstance. Other protestant denominations one by one gradually followed. 

1936: The United States Circuit Court of Appeals in the “United State v One Package” made it possible for Doctors to distribute condoms across State lines. Up until that time the “Comstock Act” in 1873 had made all forms of contraception illegal and it was a Federal offense to disseminate birth control through the mail or across State Lines. Soon after, 24 States enacted their own version of Comstock Laws to restrict contraceptive trade on the State level. 

1957: The Pill becomes approved by the FDA for the control of menstrual disorders and many women obtained prescriptions for it on that basis. Research to develop the pill had been started by Gregory Pincus in the early 50’s supported by donations from Katharine Dexter McCormick and Margaret Sanger. 

1960: The Pill is approved for Contraceptive use by the FDA. But, thirty six states still had the Comstock statutes on the books prohibiting or restricting the sale and advertisement of contraception. A new wave of Feminism was growing that seemed to be further sparked in 1963 by Betty Freidan’s book The Feminine Mystique. 

1965: Based on the Right to Privacy found in the Due Process clause of the 14th amendment, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the States Comstock Laws in the Griswold v Connecticut decision and the Pill as well as all contraception became easily accessible to married couples. Some states retained ineffective laws against distribution of contraceptives to unmarried persons. By 1965, 53% of Catholic wives aged 18 to 39 had used contraception of some form whereas that number had been 30% in 1955. - Catholics and contraception: An American History 

1968: Groups of theologians publicly refused to accept Pope Paul VI’s teaching of the immorality of contraception in Humanae Vitae. These theologians laid claim to a person’s “Conscience” as being the supreme subjective norm of morality and thus justified use of the Pill; even though the Church teaches that “Conscience” as a moral compass has to be educated to the level of understanding Divine Law and Natural Law and could otherwise be erroneous (Bishop Bruskewitz). Also, in the interim period between 1960 and 1968, many Catholics had assumed the Church’s position on the Pill eventually would be favorable based on the opinions of prominent outspoken Catholics. 

1972: In the Eisenstadt vs. Baird the U.S. Supreme Court extended its holding in the Griswold decision to unmarried couples, whereas the "right of privacy" in Griswold only applied to marital relationships. The argument for Eisenstadt was built on the claim that it was a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to deny unmarried couples the right to use contraception when married couples did have that right. 

1973: In the Roe v Wade and Doe v Bolton decisions, using the framework of the personal right to privacy of the 1965 Griswold decision, the Supreme Court legalized abortion throughout all nine months of Pregnancy. 

1992: In the Casey decision the Supreme Court reaffirms its support for abortion citing Stare Decisis (precedent of the Roe v Wade decision) and also citing the need to maintain the right to abortion, justified by the reliance of society on abortion as a backup to failed contraception. 

“Growing use of the contraceptive pill in the 1960s helped usher in an era of what proponents called “free love,” more accurately called “sex without regard for consequences.” The idea took hold that sexual activity could be separated from responsibility for children and pursued simply for pleasure. The result was an increase in premarital and extramarital sex, divorce, sexually transmitted disease, and (ironically) out-of-wedlock childbearing. The family that provides a fitting context for welcoming new life was weakened, and abortions increased.” The Prevention Deception: How not to Reduce Abortions: Richard Doerflinger, USCCB 2007 

An estimate for 1966 is that there were 125,000 illegal abortions in the U.S. that year (PhysiciansForLife.org). But now we have over one million Legal surgical abortions yearly as well as a much larger number of chemical abortions. 

Walt Hill: Placentia, CA, November, 2007

We should not take our bodies for granted.  My body is an integral part of my person.  My body and I are one.  We are composites of a material body and an immaterial soul: both are irreplaceable and indispensable.  My soul, when separated at death from the body, is in an unnatural state.  At the end of time there will be the resurrection of the body, and a new, glorified, body will become my new condition. 

It would be wrong to think that my real self is my self-awareness, or consciousness, and that my body is a mere appendage – a box I am trapped in – to which I can do anything I choose, e.g., sterilize, abuse with drugs, alcohol, smoking, obesity, clone, abort.  The body is not something sub-personal, something not to be identified with whom I really am.  What I do to your body, I do to you, e.g., a pat on the back, or a kick in the shins.  What you do to my body, you do to me. 

When we want to consider someone’s well being, we must take his or her body into consideration.  Think of how parents care for their child(ren): food, clothing, housing, exercise, recreation, and hygiene.  Our higher human needs still involve our bodies: the need for hearing, seeing, touching, tasting, well-coordinated movement; our need for affection, companionship. 

By means of our bodies we are present to one another.  We want to see and hear our friends in person, sense their presence, and not just read their letters, hear their phone calls, or recall memories.  By means of our voice, gestures and expression of emotions (body language) we enhance our communication with others. A person with multiple sclerosis has lost much of his ability to do this through his body.  We want to be with our friends.  Spouses want to be with each other.  Parents want to be surrounded by their children.  Even at a ball game, there is a certain thrill in being “part of the crowd.” 

Because God designed us as either male or a female-- a male-bodied person or a female-bodied person -- we are both sexual and fertile.  Adam complements / fulfills Eve, and Eve Adam.  All of this is part of God’s plan when He designed us in His own image and likeness.  We are capable of entering into a communion of persons.  Especially is this the case with spouses.  Because we are fertile as well as sexual, there is a life-giving dimension to this communion of persons.  The spousal act is inseparably love-giving and life-sharing. 

The angels, by contrast, have no bodies.  They are pure spirit-persons, and there are billions of them.  They have no fertility or sexuality.  They do not procreate “baby angels.”  They do not cooperate with God in the procreation of another person who will live forever. 

The highest human act is to love other persons.  Recall the two great commandments.  When we love, we choose to pursue the good, the best interests, of the one we love.  Think of the second great commandment.  When we love, we want to make the total gift of ourselves to the one we love.  Think of the first great commandment.  Making the total gift of self to another means that we reach deeply into the core of our selves, and give that away to the one with whom we want to share a communion of persons. The spousal act is the greatest expression of this gift of self that we have as bodied-persons.  This tolerates no reservations, no conditions, and no keeping one’s options open.  It also means that we accept the total gift of self from the beloved.  For a husband this means accepting his wife just as God made her: feminine, sexual and fertile. 

The celibate and single person make the total gift of self to God and to human beings in a non-genital manner.  This is also the way God makes the total gift of self in the Divine Communion of Persons, which is the archetype of all personal love.  And in heaven, this will be the manner in which all the blessed will make their gift of self-donation. 

While on this Earth, we all need to think about the meaning of our bodies, as male or female, fertile and sexual.  How do we, as bodied persons, advance in human maturity?  How do we learn to grow in our ability to love?  How can we reach more deeply into the inner core of our person and then offer this as our gift to others?   

Contraception is completely at odds with this. The Theology of the Body helps explain to us God’s plan for spousal love, and how contraception / sterilization deform and empty the meaning of this. 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB 

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

“If all the priests preached on the issue of NFP, teachers would not be able to handle the volume of people wanting to learn about it.  It would be a disaster!” – a clergyman in California 

What a felicitous disaster this would be!  Too many people wanting a good thing would lead to more couples volunteering to become trained teachers of NFP.   

I think it is true that, if more priests preached on God’s plan for spousal love, then more couples would be encouraged to live by that plan.  And there would be a greater demand for NFP classes.  More classes could easily be accommodated.  Most teachers of NFP across the nation complain of not having enough clients.  They went through the trouble and expense of getting themselves trained to be competent teachers, only to find that very few priests promote NFP, and make referrals to them. 

The teaching of the values and methodology of NFP is the task of the laity.  But then the laity are 99.9% of the Church.  They are a sleeping lion, just waiting to be summoned to active duty.  This is part of the apostolate of the laity. 

On the other hand, we should not exaggerate the ability of a priest to change his parish overnight from having 85% plus of its couples either contracepting, or sterilized, to become totally in accord with God’s plan for marriage and spousal love.  There has been massive contraception since the arrival of the Pill in the 1960’s, with little resistance offered from most pulpits over that time.  The culture, the media, the pharmaceuticals and the medical profession all promote this profitable product relentlessly.  Many Catholics think that self-control and chastity are obsolete virtues.   

The extensive damage done to couples by contraception and sterilization is becoming more obvious every year.  The utopian dream that the Pill would bring about strong marriages and happy, healthy families is now impossible to uphold. 

The 40th anniversary of Humanae Vitae in 2008 is a perfect time to resume teaching what the Catholic Church has taught for 20 centuries.  As God designed the spousal act, it can only be expressed authentically when there is a total openness to both love and to new life. 

I think that this is a very safe bet to make: if any priest is overwhelmed with requests for NFP classes as a result of his preaching on these values, and cannot find enough teachers, then NFP Outreach will help him have all the teachers he needs within six months.  

2) “The people are drowning in pornography.  We have to tackle this before we get to contraception and sterilization.”  -- Military chaplain in California 

Pornography is a huge problem today, including Catholics.  But pornography is just one of a cluster of problems surrounding marriage and family life.  All these problems have one thing in common: they are all violations of God’s plan for human sexuality.  The natural approach to all these problems is to clearly proclaim God’s plan for us as bodied persons, who are either male or female, fertile and sexual.  This is the reason Pope John Paul II wrote the Theology of the Body. 

Everyone wants to have a strong and loving marriage.  Everyone wants to have a happy, healthy family.  When these two essential components of their lives are impaired or missing, then people are hurting deeply.  

People need to hear God’s great plan for marriage, spousal love and family.  They need to know just how beautiful, and attractive, that plan is.  Couples need to know how they can achieve such marriages and families with the combination of God’s grace and their own efforts.  They need to know that there is no problem that they cannot face down, if they are drawing upon the grace of their sacrament and cooperating with it.   

Pornography is a violation of human dignity.  It injures both the guilty party and his or her spouse.  Contraception is a violation of a couple’s act of spousal love.  At the precise moment, which calls for total self-giving and self-surrender, a contracepting person instead expresses self-grasping and self-assertion.  Once a spouse understands what self-sacrificial love is, then he or she can understand what violates this love and therefore what must be resolutely rejected and brought under control. 

The violation of the act of spousal love strikes at the core of a marriage.  A 50% divorce rate today, due largely to contraception with all the reservations and conditions it brings to the relationship, is becoming too obvious to ignore.  It is increasingly more difficult to persist in massive denial about these realities. 

Therefore, padre, I encourage you to clearly address the moral evil of pornography.  But the solution to this is closely related to the solution for all the other violations of the marital relationship, where contraception and sterilization are predominant.  Go to the root of the problem. 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB 

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

WORKING WITH NATURE:

20 Years into Marriage, Couple Embraces NFP

By James DeCrane

Catholic Anchor Writer

catholicanchor@gci.net

The homilist at St. Elizabeth Ann Seton Church in Anchorage broached a sensitive topic last fall — one which is rarely heard from the pulpit.

Speaking that day, Deacon Ken Donahue felt obliged to encourage parishioners to embrace natural family planning (or NFP) as opposed to artificial contraception. 

As the only form of family planning in line with the teachings of the Catholic Church, NFP allows couples to conceive or avoid pregnancy by working with, rather than against, the designs of nature.

As might be expected, the deacon’s homily sparked considerable discussion throughout the parish. 

“I was honestly shocked,” said parishioner Lisa Leisle. “I thought there was more leeway (to use artificial contraception).”

After Mass that morning, Leisle went home and had a frank discussion with her husband David. His response was to read the Catechism of the Catholic Church for the final word. 

“We looked at (the Catechism) and decided that there isn’t a lot of leeway — especially when it uses words like ‘intrinsically evil,’” 

Lisa said, referring to the Catechism’s teaching on the use of contraceptives. 

After their discussion, the Leisles made a life-changing decision.

“It was the last day I took the pill,” said Lisa. “I went on-line in the next couple of days to find out about NFP — and we’ve been practicing it ever since.” 

Leaving room for God

Inspiration for the NFP homily occurred to Deacon Donahue after a number of conversations he had with couples in marriage preparation classes. “When I mention NFP, people look at me like I am an artifact from another age,” he explained. “It’s one of the principles of Catholic teaching that people don’t think applies to them.” But for many couples, including many Catholics, information about NFP is largely unknown or misunderstood. The teaching, however, is quite clear, Deacon Donahue said, adding,“there is no wiggle room.” The reasoning behind the principles of NFP is simple, he explained. It is the only type of birth control that allows God to have a hand in the purposes of human sexuality, purposes which God created. 

Allowing for discernment

Openness to life is a key component of Catholic moral teaching.

When the Leisles told their 15-year-old daughter they were practicing NFP, she worried that she might have a new brother or sister in the near future. 

The church, however, does not instruct couples to have as many children as biologically possible. “We explained that our intent is not to give up (contraception) so we can pop ‘em out till we are fifty,” David said. “But we are doing this in a natural way.” Deacon Donahue said it is important that couples prayerfully discern whether to have children. The Catechism affirms that there are just reasons for spacing pregnancies. It adds, however, that couples should be generous when determining their family size and not limit it for selfish reasons. 

Most effective birth control

In preventing pregnancy, NFP methods are more effective than contraceptive methods, said Pam Albrecht. Albrecht helps coordinate the Natural Family Planning office for the Anchorage Archdiocese and is a certified instructor in one form of NFP called the Billings Method.

“The statistics are about 99.5 percent effective for the Billings method,” she said. 

Australian doctor John Billings, at the request of his parish priest, developed the method in the 1950s. In using the Billings approach, women monitor their fertility cycles each month. Couples can use NFP methods to either help achieve or avoid pregnancy. 

Another effective NFP option, called the sympto-thermal method, tracks a woman’s fertility cycles based on changes in body temperature.

As Deacon Donahue explained, God designed human sexuality with NFP as a built in system. “In the wonder of his plan, he decided that there would be a time when the female was not fertile,” he said. It’s a proven method that works, he added, because it remains open to God’s will. 

At first, the natural method might seem daunting, but Albrecht and others in her office are committed to helping couples every step of the way. “We do two classes and then a follow up for as long as needed,” Albrecht said. Lisa Leisle said she was a bit overwhelmed, but quickly gained comfort with the method. “I know I could call Rachael (one of the instructors) right now for a cup of coffee if I had questions,” she said. “I feel very comfortable with it,” she said, adding that being on the pill required almost equal maintenance. 

Stronger marriages

The Leisles said they feel a sense of peace with their decision to practice NFP. “The best thing about it is that it keeps God in the marriage,” Lisa said. 

Deacon Donahue said NFP helps foster healthy marriages. “The divorce rate of people that practice NFP is about two percent,” he said. “That alone speaks volumes to the works of the practice.” Albrecht credits NFP for fostering greater communication between couples because they have to pay more attention to each other and the cycles of fertility, she said. 

“I call it the courtship and honeymooning stages,” Albrecht said in explaining the rhythm between a woman’s fertile and infertile times.

If a couple is trying to avoid pregnancy, they must avoid sex during certain times of the month. But this “courtship” stage provides unique opportunities, Albrecht explained. “The couple can do nice things for one another like when they were dating,” she said. Then, during the honeymoon phase, it helps to refresh the marriage, she added. Albrecht said many couples tell her they notice an increase in the amount of respect they have for one another, especially during the honeymoon phases. 

Growing in Numbers

Recently, Albrecht has noticed an increase in the number of couples signing up for NFP classes. “Mostly younger people are signing up. Some are doing it because they are required to take the class as part of the marriage prep,” she said. Several churches around the archdiocese require NFP classes as part of marriage preparation and that might soon expand to other parishes. 

In a Feb. 7 interview with the Catholic Anchor, Anchorage Archbishop Roger Schwietz said work is underway to explore a possible program to offer NFP courses throughout the whole archdiocese as part of marriage preparation. For now, however, the numbers of those practicing NFP are still low, both locally and across the country. Nation-wide less than one percent of the population uses natural methods, according to the 2005 Family Planning study by the Guttmacher Institute. [This is the research arm of Planned Parenthood, and is a very conservative estimate. Most NFP providers estimate 3-5 percent of Catholics use NFP – Fr. Matthew Habiger]

Albrecht hopes those numbers gradually increase and said teaching the method earlier in life might help. 

Lisa Leisle agrees. “I knew very little about NFP,” she said. “It’s kinda like everyone assumes you know, but where are you getting the information?”

Lisa applauded Deacon Donahue for his willingness to deliver a frank and honest homily. “We talk about abortion, we talk about the death penalty, but if we don’t talk about (NFP) then how are people going to know,” she asked. 

“I admire Deacon Ken for putting it out there.” 

(This article first appeared in the Catholic Anchor, 7 March 08. www.catholicanchor.org)

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB PhD

1)  The Problem Persists: Results of Rejecting Humanae Vitae 

Strong marriages and healthy, happy families are crucial to any healthy society.  They are the foundation of any society.  A society begins to unravel when the concept of marriage is redefined, when easy divorce is accepted and permanent bonding is rare, and when married couples are no longer committed to passing life on to the next generation. 

The world has always experienced troubled marriages and dysfunctional families.  In many countries today there is a 50% divorce rate.  This discourages any real sense of lifetime commitment.  Many young couples think that a lifetime marriage is impossible, so they dispense with marriage and cohabitate. 

Children suffer from the divorce of their parents.  They feel betrayed and sense a loss of security.  They carry emotional scars with them to their schools, to their youth groups, and to their faith. 

It is becoming increasingly clear that the root cause of the disintegration of strong marriages is the widespread use of contraception and sterilization.  Both of these interfere with the offering of the total gift of self in the spousal act.  Contraception means that there is always something held back; a fear of total intimacy, and a fear of the child.  When the marital act is compromised, it is not surprising that this leads to a weakening of the bond between the husband and wife.  When the essential commitment for the marriage is impaired, the bond between husband and wife begins to unravel. 

In 1968 it was more difficult for most people to acknowledge, or understand, the harms of contraception and sterilization.  But forty years later there is no difficulty in seeing the damage done. 

In the year 2008 we celebrate the 40th anniversary of Pope Paul VI’s prophetic encyclicalHumanae Vitae.  Over the past 40 years the Church has produced many good documents that explain the moral principles involved with human sexuality and procreation (e.g.,Familiaris Consortio, Donum Vitae, Evangelium Vitae, Veritatis Splendor, the Theology of the Body, etc.)  The Church has developed the theoretical rationale of these principles, drawing upon divine revelation, insights from various disciplines, and the use of good reason.  The theory is sufficiently developed.  What is lacking is an effective implementation of the theory.   

After a doctor discovers the problems of a patient, and interprets correctly the symptoms of the problem, and knows the healing properties of relevant medicines, then he must set up a program for attacking the malady and restoring good health.  The time has come for all members of the Church to find successful programs for directly confronting the evils of contraception, sterilization and abortion, and restoring the community to good health.  The healing medicine is the retrieval and re-presentation of God’s plan for marriage, spousal love, and families.  How will this be done? 

2)   God’s Plan for Marriage, Spousal Love and Family 

God has a plan for all major things and events.  His plan for the material universe can be seen in the laws of nature that mankind has discovered through the natural sciences like physics, biology, chemistry, astronomy.  Most assuredly, He has a plan for all major dimensions of human life, since a human person is the only thing in all material creation that He created for its own sake.  God has a plan for marriage, spousal love, and family.  He has a plan for every just society.  This plan can be known, understood, and then be put into practice.  We discover this plan both in divine revelation and through the use of good reason.  The teachings of the Church, as found in the Catechism, speed up for us the discovery process of these plans. 

Each of us is a unique individual person.  We are a composite of an immaterial soul and a material body.  As bodied persons, we are either male or female, fertile and sexual.  We have the gifts of intelligence, freewill and choice.  With the gift of freedom, we are free actors on the stage of life, and moral agents bearing full responsibility for the choices we make and the deeds we perform.   

As moral agents, we need to know God’s plan for the moral order, or for moral truth.  We need to know the various human goods that fulfill us as bodied persons, so that we can pursue them.  And equally important, we must know the disvalues, or evils, that frustrate our fulfillment and destroy us.  Such human goods are life and good health, truth, friendships and love, purposeful activity, and beauty.  We are to make choices and perform deeds that pursue all the various human goods, which is a lifelong task since these goods are inexhaustible.  As moral agents endowed with freedom, we have a duty to pursue the good, while exposing and resisting the evil.  At the end of our lives here on earth, we must give a full accounting of the exercise of our freedom. 

Marriage, spousal love and family are fundamental components of human life.  In a certain sense, the pursuit of all the other human goods depends upon the vitality of these three components.  God’s plan for marriage is that a man and a woman commit themselves to loving one another for their entire lives.  Their intimate communion of love and life is to be totally faithful, and remain open to life.  God’s plan for spousal love is that each spouse makes the total personal gift of self to the other, with no conditions, no reservations, with nothing held back.  This total self-surrender includes the gift of one’s fertility.  As God the Father has given the total gift of himself to us through his Son; and as Jesus has given the total self-sacrificial gift of himself to his bride, the Church, and thus to us, so also must we learn to make the unqualified gift of ourselves.  God’s plan for family is that each member senses that he or she is completely accepted for the unique persons they are, and will receive the nurture, guidance and support for developing their personalities and unique personal gifts.  A family is a school in deeper humanity.  A family is where each young person learns true values, acquires the theological, cardinal and civil virtues, and experiences unconditional love. 

3)   This is the Time for Putting Good Theory into Practice 

Once we know God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family, then the question arises: “How do we put this plan into practice?  Is it doable?”  We know that God never expects the impossible from us.  We know that His plan for us as bodied-persons is a good plan, with our best interests in mind.  We know that if God’s plan is to become a reality in people’s lives, then it must be taught, explained, defended when necessary, and encouraged.  It can only be proposed; and never imposed.  The Church must use the same approach to people that her Lord used.  She must appeal to the good will, the intelligence, and the best interests of her people. 

But where is this happening?  The Holy See has provided good teaching documents, and has fulfilled its obligations as a teacher for the universal Church.  But where have these documents been comprehensively taught and implemented?  Most people have never heard sermons on the values advocated in Humanae Vitae and Familiaris Consortio.  Most clergy feel inadequate and seriously unprepared to speak about these values.  This means that our moral leaders and spiritual guides are mute, and the people languish for not hearing the plan of God.   Catholics contracept and seek sterilizations as frequently as their counterparts in secular society.  They divorce as frequently.  Many Catholic babies are aborted. 

The time has come, and is overdue, for seminaries to provide future priests and deacons with the tools they need to become effective preachers and teachers of God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family.  Excellent writings and resources are available.  Good insights into a valid Christian anthropology abound.  The harms of sterilization and contraception are documented, while the benefits of NFP are clearly evident.  Ways of articulating the values of Humanae Vitae and Familiaris Consortio are available. 

This requires that seminaries and houses of formation recognize and reject all forms of dissent from the sexual ethic of the Church.  It requires that the books of dissenting moral theologians be exposed for their errors, and then dismissed.  It means that the moral principles taught by the Magisterium will be proposed and the rationale supporting these principles be explained to the students.  It means that the moralists and professors themselves in the seminaries are thoroughly grounded in the teaching and thinking of the Church. 

But it is insufficient to concentrate only upon the next generation of pastors and moral guides.  We cannot wait for them to replace an older clergy whose theological formation in these areas was sorely deficient.  Clergy conferences for present pastors need to be provided on the theme “How to Preach God’s Plan for Marriage and Spousal Love from the Pulpit.”  Bishops must take an active role in the on-going formation of their clergy. 

Most medical doctors and nurses do not understand God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family, because they never took courses in Catholic medical ethics.  A way must be found to correct this situation by providing these values to Catholics in the medical profession. 

Youth groups and catechetical programs, as well as Catholic private schools have many opportunities to announce and explain God’s plan for us as bodied-persons.  Young people are coping with the discovery of their sexuality, and naturally search for the meaning of these powerful drives.  If they are presented with God’s plan, and have it explained well, then these young people can become apostles to their peers by sharing with them what they have discovered for themselves.  They have the capacity to counteract the powerful forces that influence the secular culture. 

4)  The Division of Labor, and the Role of the Lay Apostolate 

Retrieving and implementing God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family is a Herculean task.  But there are many resources and helpers to draw upon.  This is a collaborative effort; the full burden does not fall upon the backs of any one group.   No one should feel that they would be overwhelmed by the weight of this project. 

There is a division of labor here.  The clergy and religious comprise only one tenth of one percent of the Church.  The laity comprises 99.9 percent of the Church.  We must think in these terms.  The vast majority of the labor for shaping the secular culture with the values of the Gospel will come from the laity.  This is the role of the lay apostolate.  They will also be the major artisans of a Catholic culture that will embrace God’s plan. 

The clergy has a very small, but extremely crucial, role to play.  They are to teach God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family.  They do this by teaching the moral principles that are firmly rooted in the Gospels.  They must retrieve the ability to teach morality from the pulpit, in the confessional, and in the private counseling.  Proclaiming God’s plan, and explaining its intrinsic goodness, is the task of the ordained minister.  They speak with a God-given authority when they announce the Gospel of marriage, spousal love and family. 

Then the laity assumes their role.  The laity receives God’s plan and then will find ways to implement this teaching and these values into the fabric of daily life.  They are to bring these values to their marriages, their families, their neighborhoods, communities and to the broader public.   Married couples will teach young couples preparing for marriage.  Well-trained couples will teach other couples the methodology of NFP.  Large segments of time must be given to the teaching of NFP, but then there are so many eligible couples to draw upon to become teachers.  Every couple who enjoys a good marriage wants to help newly weds discover what they have discovered.  When complications arise with the use of NFP, and the interpretation of charting, then trained Catholic nurses and doctors will lend their expertise to couples.  Marriage counselors, and coaching couples, will assist young couples through their difficulties in the early years of their marriage. 

The essential components to the retrieval of God’s plan are already in place.  There are several national providers of NFP, who provide training of teachers, publish journals, and do research in NFP.  The Pope Paul VI Institute trains doctors and nurses in the advanced techniques of naprotechnology, and how to address the various medical complications associated with responsible parenthood.  Many dioceses have family life directors and NFP coordinators who facilitate the training and distribution of NFP teachers.  Pope John Paul II’s theology of the body is a powerful tool for helping men and women to understand the richness of God’s plan for us as bodied persons.  Some Catholic high schools and colleges are promoting these teachings with enthusiasm.  The priests of NFP Outreach offer their resources to dioceses throughout the USA, and elsewhere in the world.  There are now seven Pope John Paul II Institutes for Marriage and the Family located throughout the world.  These institutes offer advanced degrees to young men and women who will assume leadership positions in diocesan chanceries and parish ministries for the family. 

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

5) Role of Bishops 

“We make this urgent request of you:  We ask all of you to take the lead with the priests who assist your sacred ministry and all your faithful.  With complete zeal and no delay, devote yourselves to keeping marriage safe and holy, so that the life of married couples may draw more closely to its proper human and Christian perfection.  Truly consider this as the greatest responsibility of your mission and the greatest work committed to you at the present time.”  -- Pope Paul IV in Humanae Vitae, To Bishops #30 

On the 40th anniversary of Humanae Vitae, we need to reconsider the irreplaceable role of the bishops in promoting these values.

Bishops have the crucial role of leadership to provide.  If there is weak leadership in a diocese, then it is not realistic to expect improvements from the malaise the diocese may be in.  The ineffectiveness of weak leadership is evident both in the secular world and in the Church.  Grace builds upon nature; it does not replace it.  If a bishop chooses to ignore these problems, or thinks that his clergy and his people are not ready for this message, or turns his attention to other less challenging projects that hold prospects of some measurable success, then there will be no change from the status quo.   

Most good Catholics will follow a good priest, and most good priests will follow a good bishop, but who will take the initiative and lead? 

A good leader addresses the problems among his people.  He analyses the root causes of these problems, and then searches for effective ways to address these causes.  The root causes for widespread contraception and sterilization among Catholics are several:  1) a great silence in the pulpits and diocesan newspapers while the culture strongly advocates these aberrations; 2) a lack of leadership from the bishop in teaching these values to his clergy and people; 3) an inability to defend the Catholic sexual ethic in the face of its critics and dissenters; 4) a lack of understanding about the merits and effectiveness of NFP as a means of responsible parenthood; 5) the inability to recruit an adequate supply of NFP teachers so as to make this easily available throughout the diocese; and 6) an unawareness of the role of the lay apostolate in the areas of promoting strong marriages, family life, supportive legislation, and a culture that is supportive of, instead of antagonistic to, these values. 

Some bishops are not reaching out to their natural allies in this effort.  They do not know how to reach their Catholic doctors and nurses.  They are hesitant to recruit good couples to become teachers of NFP, or to help with marriage preparation programs.  They seem to think that many of their clergy cannot be brought around to accept the teachings ofHumanae Vitae. They are hesitant to challenge young Catholics of high school and college age to acquire the virtue of self-possession and chastity.  They are reluctant to challenge all the teachers in Catholic institutions to advocate the Catholic sexual ethic.  But all of these people are the natural allies of the Church in promoting God’s plan. 

To reach their clergy and help them understand the values that support God’s plan, a bishop can offer clergy conferences.  NFP Outreach has given many of these conferences on the theme “How to Preach God’s Plan for Marriage and Spousal Love from the Pulpit.”  These conferences also show the priests and deacons where to find good resources for understanding these values, and how to articulate them.  There are many resources available today: CDs, books, articles, and websites.  NFP Outreach has a website (www.nfpoutreach.org) that provides sample homilies, “Helps for your Homily,” and “NFP Q&As” which could be used for parish bulletin inserts.

The first step in retrieving God’s plan is to reactivate the pulpit, where everyone hears the same message proclaimed with charity and clarity. 

To reach their professional medical people, a bishop can invite them, on a regular basis, to “An Evening of Reflection with the Bishop.”  This is relatively easy to arrange.  An invitation, over the bishop’s name, goes out to all the doctors, pharmacists and nurses.  A light desert is provided.  The bishop speaks to the group, encouraging them to become active artisans of the culture of life.  Then a doctor, trained in NFP or a related topic, makes a presentation and answers questions.  These gatherings place heavy emphasis upon Catholic medical ethics, and help the medical professionals understand how the Faith relates to their profession. 

To explain the Catholic sexual ethic, while answering questions and refuting dissent, a bishop can draw upon the help of competent moral theologians who sentire cum ecclesia. Weekly columns in diocesan newspapers, or a weekly hour on Catholic radio, are a strong support to the evangelization effort coming from the pulpits.  Many Catholics, upon hearing the Catholic sexual ethic, express their astonishment, not at the contents of the teaching, but at the fact that it is being addressed in their parishes and diocese. 

To promote NFP, a bishop can draw upon his resources within the diocese, keeping in mind the natural division of labor.  The clergy explain God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family from the pulpit, drawing heavily upon the Scriptures and major Church documents.  The actual teaching of NFP belongs to married couples who have been trained in depth.  This is the lion’s share of the work.  To recruit more teachers, a bishop can make a direct appeal to married couples.  This is part of their apostolate: to prepare young couples for a strong marriage and a healthy, happy family.  There are many couples waiting for a bishop who endorses NFP.  They want to lend their help to spreading the knowledge and use of NFP, if they have the support of their bishop. When medical questions arise, these are directed to NFP trained nurses and doctors.  Catholic medical doctors and nurses can explain the effectiveness of NFP, and how it accords so well with our physiology. 

To tap into the energy and talents of the laity is an important task for a bishop.  The laity must come to understand their role in the lay apostolate.  Since they are the vast majority of the Church, they will do the lion’s share of the work in bringing the values of the Gospel to the broader society.  At this point in time, they must also focus upon revitalizing the Catholic community with regard to marriage and family.  This will require encouragement and motivation from the bishop. 

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

6) Role of Priests and Deacons 

Most Catholics identify closely with their pastors and deacons, since they see and hear them on a regular basis.  Thus their role as spiritual leaders and moral guides is very important.  The priest and deacon are to bring God to the people and the people to God.  They bring God to the people by first coming close to God themselves through regular prayer, lectio divina and meditation.  They know the Father, Son and Holy Spirit as real persons in a relationship of love, and they gradually come to know the mind of God for His people.   

The priest and deacon have a prophetic (teaching) role, as well as a priestly (liturgical) and kingly (the service of authority) role to perform.  This prophetic role takes the shape of teaching the people the great plan of God for all major human affairs.  This teaching deals with both faith and morals.  The teaching includes everything God teaches in divine revelation and through His Church, without adding anything, or subtracting (or ignoring) anything.    The Catechism of the Catholic Church summarizes these teachings in the four pillars of the faith: 1) what we believe in our Faith; 2) the Sacraments which give us divine strength to live the Faith; 3) Morality which explains how we are to put out Faith into practice meeting the real challenges of life; and 4) how we celebrate and nurture our Faith in prayer and worship. 

Prime teaching time is pulpit time during the Sunday divine liturgy, when all the faithful are gathered together to hear the Word of God, and to learn how to apply it to their daily lives.  Priests need to re-examine how well they use this precious time.  What most Catholics know about their Faith comes from the pulpit.  Most Catholics do not read much Catholic literature.  Many get their information about the Church from secular sources, with its own distortions.  The pulpit is the only sustained source of Catholic teaching for most Catholics. 

The task of the preacher is to clearly proclaim the mind of God for His people for the living out of the Christian life.  The Word of God both consoles the afflicted, and challenges the comfortable.  The preacher allows God to speak through him.  Sometimes this can be difficult when man’s ways conflict with God’s ways. Sometimes the prophetic task enacts a certain price.  The preacher announces God’s plan for His people, not the preacher’s plan.  The preacher accepts the fact that God teaches us today through His Church, and that the faithful have a right to hear the Church’s teaching in its full richness.  It is not for the preacher to determine what the people are ready to hear, or do not want to hear, or what they do not need to hear.  The sole task of the preacher is to proclaim God’s Word, God’s plan for His people, using contemporary genres of expression and examples that help the people grasp this plan.  Then the power of God’s Word works its miracle. 

Preaching deals with both faith and morals.  When Jesus proclaimed the Gospel, He also explained how the Gospel applies to the challenges of daily life.  We are not only to hear the Word, but also to build our lives upon it.  Jesus teaches us how to pursue the good, and to become rich in the sight of God, while exposing and resisting the evil.  When dealing with evil, we are to use only the means that Jesus himself would allow.  Speaking the truth in charity is certainly one such means. 

Every age has its own set of problems, to which the preacher must apply the Word of God.  How does this apply to contraception, sterilization, abortion and widespread divorce?  The dynamic of preaching on these issues is the same as preaching on any other moral evil.  The moral guide proclaims God’s plan for us as human beings, as bodied-persons.  This involves a true understanding of a Christian anthropology.  What is a human person?  This plan includes such human events as marriage, spousal love, and families.  It involves many other things, e.g., works of charity, social justice, world peace, a just distribution of wealth, etc.  But the social gospel was not meant to replace the gospel for the individual.  The pulpit is not the place for political expediency, addressing only politically correct issues.  Morality deals directly with the individual, and only then with such abstractions as society, nations, and the world at large. 

When Jesus dealt with morality, He did so in terms of moral principles.  Examples of these are the Ten Commandments and the various principles drawn from them.  “What God has put together, let no man take apart” pertains directly to the indissolubility of marriage.   When the preacher today addresses morality, he also sets forth moral principles.  But he must also provide the rationale behind the principle, which explains its reasonableness.  Just as Jesus appealed to both the faith and reason of his audience, so also must his representative today.  Thus, if contraception is always wrong, then we must explain what makes it wrong, and so abhorrent in the sight of God.  This presupposes that we understand what God’s plan is for the spousal act within marriage, what it was designed to express and accomplish.  If we can grasp for ourselves, and explain to others, the full richness of God’s plan for spousal love, how fulfilling and beautiful it is, then people can easily see that any deprivation of this magnificent gift is wrong, and should be avoided and shunned. 

6) Role of Priests and Deacons (cont.) 

When Jesus dealt with morality, He did so in terms of moral principles.  Examples of these are the Ten Commandments and the various principles drawn from them.  “What God has put together, let no man take apart” pertains directly to the indissolubility of marriage.   When the preacher today addresses morality, he also sets forth moral principles.  But he must also provide the rationale behind the principle, which explains its reasonableness.  Just as Jesus appealed to both the faith and reason of his audience, so also must his representative today.  Thus, if contraception is always wrong, then we must explain what makes it wrong, and so abhorrent in the sight of God.  This presupposes that we understand what God’s plan is for the spousal act within marriage, what it was designed to express and accomplish.  If we can grasp for ourselves, and explain to others, the full richness of God’s plan for spousal love, how fulfilling and beautiful it is, then people can easily see that any deprivation of this magnificent gift is wrong, and should be avoided and shunned. 

God’s plan for the spousal act is that a husband learns how to make the total personal gift of self to his beloved, with no conditions, no reservations, and nothing held back.   This includes his fertility.  His wife accepts this magnificent gift.  Then she, in turn, makes the total self-donation of herself to her husband.  This is a total giving, total self-surrender, with no conditions or reservations.  And this includes her fertility.  Her husband accepts her exactly as God designed her, and the magnificent gift she offers to him.  The great model for all husbands is Christ, who gave himself totally to his bride, the Church.  Because of his great love for her, He spared nothing for her.  He laid down his life for her.  Genuine spousal love, then, requires self-sacrifice, desiring what is best for the other, and placing one’s self in the complete service of the beloved.  This is a portrait of real love.  This is what sex was meant to express. 

How does the preacher prepare himself for proclaiming this message from the pulpit?  First of all, he must come to know God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family comprehensively.  He does this by praying over the relevant Scriptures, immersing himself in the major documents of the Church on these issues, and studying the expositions and analyses of faithful theologians.  There is a wealth of good writings available on these issues.   (A 9-page listing of resources including books, articles, CDs, audiotapes and websites can be found at www.nfpoutreach.org. Click on “Some Resources.”)  The theology of the body is very useful in gaining a comprehensive grasp of God’s plan for us as bodied persons, and also for acquiring a language to use from the pulpit. Sample sermons and “helps for your homily” are also available from NFP Outreach’s website. 

There is certain pedagogy to be employed here.  Simply put, we lay a foundation, and then build upon that foundation.  The foundation is presenting God’s plan for morality.  At the foundation level, we present sermons on such topics as “What is Conscience, and how do we form it?” “What is a true sense of freedom, vs. license?”  “What is virtue, and how do we grow into it?”  “What is sin and vice, and how do we make a conversion away from them?”  The Catechism of the Catholic Church, Pillar III, has all the pertinent teachings necessary for these topics. 

A second level of homilies can then begin.  “What is God’s plan for marriage?”  Helpful resources are: The Catechism’s exposition of the sacrament of marriage, Gaudium et Spes #47-52, and related materials.  “What is God’s Plan for the Family?”  One great single resource is Familiaris Consortio, “The Role of the Christian Family in the Modern World.”  The task of the homilist is to assimilate the teachings of these documents for himself, and then find suitable ways to share this with his congregation. 

After a series of homilies on the above-mentioned topics, then the people have the tools they need to understand “What is God’s Plan for Spousal Love?”   Humanae Vitae and the Theology of the Body are very helpful here.  A synopsis of this is provided in FC #11.  Our people are more than ready to hear this message.  They will understand it immediately.  Usually their first comment, upon hearing a sermon on these topics, is “Why have we not heard this before?” 

The primary task of the clergy with regard to promoting God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family, is to provide clear teaching and pertinent homilies.  We explain God’s plan for these aspects of human life; we present the moral principles and explain their meaning.  We indicate how they are to be lived out in daily life, and the benefits that come from this.  Then the burden falls upon the laity, who are the vast majority of the Church.  It is the laity who will provide the factual teaching of NFP.  Couples teach other couples.  If there are medical problems, these are immediately referred to NFP trained nurses and doctors.  Couples also do the lion’s share of the work in preparing engaged couples for marriage.  But the laity is waiting for the announcement of God’s plan for these important issues, and encouragement from their clergy to assume the responsibilities of the lay apostolate. 

There is a clear division of labor here.  The clergy and religious have a very limited, but crucially important, role to perform.  They are to proclaim God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family.  That is their training and their competency.  Then the burden falls upon the laity, who are 99.9% of the Church.  They will do all the rest. 

7)   Catholic Doctors and Nurses 

The life issues belong to doctors and nurses in a special manner.  These professionals deal directly with bodily life and fostering human health.   People naturally look to them for good guidance in matters of biological life and health.  Thus it is imperative that they be actively engaged in the pro-life movement, and become active artisans of the culture of life.  They should be the natural allies of the pro-life movement. 

The reality is that many Catholic doctors reflect the values of their secular society instead of their faith.  Some clear examples of this are contraception and sterilization.  In the USA, only one percent of Catholic ob/gyns and family practice doctors are completely pro-life, which means that they refuse to prescribe contraception, perform sterilizations, use immoral methods of overcoming infertility, or make referrals to those who will.  The other 99 percent are contributing to the problem.   

This discrepancy becomes glaringly evident when a Catholic couple is faced with the contradiction between what the Church teaches about contraception and what their local Catholic doctor prescribes.  The typical couple will reason, “If my doctor, who is a devout Catholic, prescribes the Pill, and he is the medical professional, then why should the Church be against it?” And many couples follow the lead of the doctors.  Nor are these contradictions addressed from the pulpit. 

Most Catholic physicians do not understand the Church’s teaching on contraception and sterilization.  They never took comprehensive courses in medical ethics, aside from the secularized versions they found in state medical schools that justify contemporary trends.  Most Catholic doctors do not understand NFP, or how medically sophisticated it has become, or how superior Naprotechnology (natural procreative technology) is to other forms of overcoming infertility problems. 

There are several major deterrents to the conversion of Catholic doctors from prescribing contraception to endorsing NFP.  The first of these is financial.  There is no profit to be made in encouraging NFP, which requires several classes to learn the method, and then no further expense.  Placing their signature on regular prescriptions for the Pill, on the other hand, generates a steady income, sometimes accounting for 30-40% of a doctor’s income.  Many Catholic doctors are terrified at the thought of losing this percentage of their income. 

A second deterrent is the time factor.  It requires time to help a couple learn their physiology, to chart their cycles, and to accurately interpret the signals the body gives of approaching fertility.  Problems with irregular cycles will require consultations.  All this is very helpful in promoting sexual and reproductive health, but it is time consuming and without financial gains. 

A third deterrent is the pressure upon doctors to conform to the conventional norms of the medical profession. Pharmaceuticals place enormous pressure upon doctors to sell their products that are very lucrative.  Planned Parenthood and radical feminists push hard for easy access to “reproductive health,” and “safe sex,” which includes contraception and abortion.  Professional medical societies accept these pressures and make them part of their professional policy.  Medical schools accept these disvalues, and rigorously enforce them in their curriculum of courses. 

The financial factor (making profits) should not be allowed to override the moral factor.  But this will only change when Catholic doctors, and nurses, are given the rationale that supports the Church’s teaching about medical ethics.  Some dioceses are successfully reaching out to their doctors by providing regular (annual, or semi-annual) gatherings for their medical personnel.  A bishop will send out invitations to all the doctors and nurses for an evening gathering with a light desert.  The bishop speaks to them and encourages the doctors and nurses to become effective artisans of the culture of life.  Then a medical doctor makes a presentation on a pertinent medical topic, and explains the Church’s rationale that supports the relevant moral principles.  Objections and questions are answered.  Consciences are informed.  Conversions of mind and heart are encouraged. 

These gatherings, in effect, are classes in medical ethics.  They are the most effective way to bring our Catholic doctors and nurses back into the service of God’s plan for human life, sexual health, and the reality that we are all bodied-persons.  Without the support of our own medical personnel, it is unrealistic to expect the culture of death to be challenged.

9)  NFP TEACHERS 

The lion’s share of the work in retrieving God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family will be done by the laity, and especially by those who are trained teachers of NFP.  NFP is more than fertility awareness, or a morally good method for responsible parenthood.  It is a way of life that endorses all the values of God’s plan for marriage and spousal love.  There is much for engaged couples and newly wed couples to learn.  Couples who prepare engaged couples for marriage, and NFP teachers invest many hours of their time and much emotional energy for their student couples.  In effect, they are preparing their young charges to become witnesses to God’s plan for marriage and thus become counter cultural. 

Teachers of NFP should regard their work as a special vocation.  They are dealing with a central dimension of a young couples’ relationship.   A marriage is consummated by the spousal act, and each spousal act, in a certain way, is a renewal of the marriage covenant.  Learning NFP is only one part of learning God’s plan for spousal love.  It is not uncommon for a relationship of trust to develop between NFP teachers and their students.  When problems arise in a new marriage, the newly weds often appeal to their NFP teachers for coaching them through their difficulties. 

If we are to break through the 50% divorce rate syndrome, it will happen because many dedicated Catholic couples, who already enjoy a good marriage, are willing to help young couples discover what they have already discovered.  This will require a great investment of time, emotional involvement, and dedication. 

Most dioceses have a shortage of NFP teachers.  But this can be rectified when it becomes public knowledge that all the clergy are taking a clear stand for God’s plan for marriage and spousal love.   Then many faithful couples will seriously consider volunteering themselves to help with building up strong marriages and healthy, happy families.  This is the lay apostolate in its most obvious expression.  The laity is 99.9% of the Church.  There are abundant resources in every diocese to draw upon for additional NFP teachers. 

10)  Social Communications 

Catholic radio and diocesan newspapers have their own role to perform in the implementation of God’s plan.  Catholic radio broadcasts 24 hours a day, seven days a week.  It can bring well-informed resource people to the microphone, and make their message accessible to millions.  It has multiple opportunities to keep the values and issues related to NFP before the people of God.  These values need to be explained, and related to real life.  There are so many different facets to building a strong marriage and robust relationships.  There are so many complications to successful family planning.  Raising children and creating a healthy, happy family present thousands of new challenges.  All of these are very discussable on the airwaves by competent people. 

Catholic newspapers can run regular columns on these issues.  NFP Outreach provides a weekly column called NFP Q&As.  Each column approaches a different aspect of the benefits coming from NFP and the harms resulting from contraception and sterilization. 

In today’s world, the Christian is surrounded by a highly secularized culture that is promoted relentlessly by the secular media.  This must be counteracted by a culture that is permeated with the values of the Gospel.  Social communications are instruments that Catholics must employ to get their message out to their own people, as well as to defend their positions against critics and vilifiers.  At the same time, social communications can be used for the new evangelization, for bringing the values of the Gospel to the contemporary culture. 

Catholic Marriage Prep for marital success  

By John Gleason  (first appeared in the Denver Catholic Register, 2 April 08) 

Building a strong marriage takes desire, time and a commitment not just to the other person, but to the relationship on which the marriage is based. And if you were to ask Christian or Christine Meert what a marriage should be based on if it is to be successful the answer would be: Christ.  

The couple, who founded the nonprofit organization Catholic Marriage Prep Inc., which is fully dedicated to building strong Catholic marriages, say that many of the people who come to them often have a desire for religion, but lack a personal relationship with God. 

“What we do is help the couple build their spiritual relationship with Christ,” Christian said.  In today’s world, said Christian, couples don’t always think of God as being the cornerstone of their marriage, when in fact, he should be. 

Married since 1977, the Meerts, who are transplants from France, are the parents of five daughters. When they moved to Colorado in 1999 as part of a new religious community—the Community of the Beatitudes—Archbishop Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap., invited the community to begin a house of prayer in Denver. Eventually, the Meerts put together a marriage class from scratch. Today they are directors of the Marriage and Family Life Office in the Colorado Springs Diocese. Their marriage prep course offers sessions in both Colorado Springs and Denver. 

“We didn’t choose the ministry,” Christine said with a smile, “it chose us.” 

Marriage preparation must begin at least eight to 12 months prior to a couple’s anticipated wedding date. The Archdiocese of Denver divides this period into proximate (the first several months) and immediate (the last two months) preparation. During this time, couples prepare for their sacrament through steps of preparation as well as a manageable series of meetings with a priest, deacon, or marriage preparation minister. Catholic Marriage Prep Inc. is a four-night class, one night a week over a four-week period that orients couples toward a shared, Christ-centered life. Online classes are also available for people whose schedule doesn’t permit regular weekly classes. 

“We have discussions at every class and all couples have homework to finish before the group meets again,” Christine said. “In the online version, worksheets are involved; we want the couples to put a lot of thought and reflection into their answers. Often, couples don’t have a clear idea of what they want in their marriage. The worksheets focus their attention on what their future could be.” 

Classes address many aspects of marriage, including the rite of the sacrament, the vocations of both men and women, and tools for dealing with money, communication and children. The Meerts said they hope couples come away with an enriched understanding of the sacrament of matrimony.  

One of the challenges the Meerts face is cohabitating couples. They challenge the couples in their classes to sign cards pledging to abstain from conjugal relations until after the wedding takes place.  “It isn’t something we jump into from the beginning,” Christian said. “We discuss at length the importance of communication and forgiveness—many things that the couples otherwise may not have considered. Then we bring up the idea of (abstaining) until God has brought them together. We ask them to find the benefits of abstaining before their wedding and we commit to pray for them and we ask them to find the benefits of abstaining before their wedding.” 

According to the Meerts’ statistics, abstinence before marriage, even for those couples who have been living together, is a value their couples embrace. In numbers the Meerts have compiled, of 700 couples asked, 76 percent agreed outright to sign the pledge cards and another 22 percent said they would give the matter some thought. Christine sees this as a blessing and an overwhelming success for people who are looking to walk with the Lord in their married life. 

“Many who say ‘no’ at the beginning often change their decision after some reflection,” she said.  

Classes for Catholic Marriage Prep are $180 for the four-week program, $150 for online classes, which includes all materials for the course. All Denver area classes are held at Holy Family Parish, 4377 Utica St., on Monday evenings from 6 p.m. to 8:45 p.m. The next series begins April 28. For more information, call 1-866-425-7193 toll free, or visit online at www.CatholicMarriagePrep.com.  

“We simply want to teach couples to welcome God as part of their relationship,” Christine said. “That’s how they’ll find success in their marriage.”

2008 Commencement Address by William McGurn (Tuesday, May 20, 2008) 

The month of May is a time of many graduations. An exceptional commencement address was given at Benedictine College by Bill McGurn, former head speechwriter for President Bush, and now for the Wall Street Journal. My monastery, St. Benedict’s Abbey, is one of the religious sponsors of Benedictine College.

Peter Robinson, the man who wrote Ronald Reagan’s famous Berlin wall speech, wrote in the National Review the following: “I can make a prediction with utter certitude: No address on any campus in America will convey more genuine wisdom, more simply or memorably, than the address that Bill McGurn delivered last week at Benedictine College.”

I have reproduced the heart of McGurn’s address in this NFP Q&A 93, since it deals so well and so forthrightly with marriage, spousal love and family. 

As a professional speechwriter, I am painfully aware of the forms common for this occasion.  The clichés fall into a familiar pattern:  Dare to be different … do your own thing … and don’t be afraid to be a “rebel.”   

There is something false and cheap about all this.  It is well not to be afraid of being different, and it can be a form of courage.  But if we aim to be different only for different’s sake, the likelihood is that we end up as the ultimate cliché – rebels without a cause. 

That is not why men and women choose Benedictine.  Your alumni include highly talented CEOs, military officers, members of the clergy, leaders of great foundations, and even a Nobel Prize winner.  These people owe much of their success to the start they were given here.  And whatever their field of endeavor, I believe all would agree with me about three propositions that are easily forgotten and only painfully re-learned.   

First, who you marry is far more important than what career you choose.  Over the course of a life that has taken me across three continents, I have met many accomplished men and women.  And I have always been astonished by the number who give more thought to choosing the job they may hold for a couple of years than to choosing the spouse to whom they will pledge – before God and their friends – to remain with until death they do part.

Second, no professional achievement – no matter how extraordinary – can match the thrill of seeing the absolute love and confidence reflected in the trusting eyes of a child who calls you Mom or Dad.        

Finally, you will not find lasting happiness by pursuing it.  Happiness is the byproduct of a contented life.  And the surest path to a contented life is to put the needs of others before your own.

There was a day when such words would have been unspoken because their wisdom was unquestioned. 

Ours is a funnier world.  We live in a world where our schools ban cupcakes and distribute condoms.  Where we expect rock stars to attend G-8 Summits and advise us about global poverty – while politicians party away at nightclubs.  And where the same people who say the idea of a living Magisterium is beyond credulity will in the next breath tell you they read the New York Times because it is … “Authoritative.” 

Much of today’s silliness falls on sex.  Chesterton once said that the job of the church is to teach the unpopular virtue.  Let me rephrase that.  I confess that I have never been able to track down the source where Chesterton gave that remark.  So let me say that I am sure Chesterton would have said that the job of the church is to teach the unpopular virtue.  And judging from the unpopularity of this message, we all appear to be doing a bang-up job.

So today I would like to talk to you frankly about sex.  In my experience – and probably yours – whenever someone says this, it’s a sure sign he means that he wants to talk about intimacy in purely clinical terms.  As it happens, of all the ways to talk about it, this strikes me as the most impractical.  Sex is powerful because it is more than the merely physical.  It makes rational men and women irrational.  It ties us to people when we would rather be free. And in the right circumstances, it gives us a glimmer of the divine.

Do not take my word for it.  Ask any young man who has tried to weasel out of a relationship that changed in some indefinable way after a line was crossed.  Ask any young woman who has watched a man get walk out her room and wonder if she will get even a phone call.  And ask any of those who sit alone Saturday nights, wondering what happened to things they know about only from books and old movies:    moonlit evenings …candlelit dinners for two …and the thrill of a first kiss.

What happened, of course, is that restraint went out the window.  Romance feeds on possibility, and withers when the outcome is a forgone conclusion.  Romance also requires the drama that comes from the sense that what is at stake is something permanent – that the object of your affection may be the One meant for you and you only.  For so many people, unfortunately, physical intimacy has become the first step in a test whether a relationship should begin at all – rather than the culminating act of love and commitment.  And so those of us who speak fluent Audrey Hepburn find it difficult to communicate in a Sarah Jessica Parker world.

You know this.  You also know that sex and desire are as real here as they are in what preachers used to so charmingly call the fleshpots of the world.  But at Benedictine, you have been given something that so many of your peers have not.  You have been given a witness to a greater love – a witness that speaks from every brick on this campus.  You have been given the certainty that forgiveness is always there just for the asking.  And you have been given the gift of Christ himself – and therefore the truth about the dignity of the human person.  And now it falls to you to use these gifts to help bring to this world the hope that never disappoints.

Let me end with a little story.  It happened during Pope Benedict’s recent visit to the United States.  On the day before he returned to Rome, Benedict traveled to St. Joseph’s Seminary just outside Manhattan, where he was introduced to 50 handicapped children.  These children had been waiting patiently in the chapel for hours, some of them in wheelchairs.  Two of these children – 11-year-old Lauren Kurtz, and 7-year-old Caitlin Manno – were selected to walk up to the Holy Father to present him with a painting on behalf of all those in the room. 

Now, Lauren suffers from Down’s, and Caitlin from cerebral palsy.  Yet as these two handicapped girls approached the Holy Father in their Sunday dresses, something wondrous happened:  In their shining faces, the television cameras gave the world a glimmer of how Our Lord must see them:  innocent, trusting, radiant.  Lauren gave the Holy Father a big hug – and then observed that Caitlin had somehow been left behind at the bottom edge of the altar.  So Lauren Marie Kurtz stepped back to help her up.  And thus did these two girls approach the Vicar of Christ, with Lauren’s arm steadying her little friend.  For all who had eyes to see, this was the completely natural act of a pure heart whose only concern was for another.

My young friends, this is what our Lord meant when he told us that we must be as the children.  And this is my challenge to you as you take your place in our world:  Where you see innocence, protect it.  Where you see longing and loneliness, be the outstretched arm that breaks through the pain.  And in everything you do – as husband, as wife … as mother or father … as a friend or co-worker – let the world see a reflection of the grace and goodness of the humble man from Nursia whose name this college so proudly bears.

If you do these things, you may not end up rich or famous.  But you will bring joy to world in desperate in need of joy … you will love and you will be loved … and amid the noise and muddle and disappointment of whatever life throws your way, you will know what it means to hear the angels sing.    

Thank you for having me.  May God bless you, and may He bless this wonderful college.

Faithful Catholic doctors, trained in NFP, report that they hear from various priests difficult medical cases which would seem to justify using contraception.  “Surely God would not expect the impossible from a couple who find it extremely difficult to use NFP.  Would not then this hard case be an exception to the general rule?” some priests ask. This NFP Q&A looks at some of the factors involved in these requests.

HARD CASES 

Faithful Catholic doctors, trained in NFP, report that they hear from various priests difficult medical cases which would seem to justify using contraception. “Surely God would not expect the impossible from a couple who find it extremely difficult to use NFP. Would not then this hard case be an exception to the general rule?” some priests ask. This NFP Q&A looks at some of the factors involved in these requests. 

Case #1: A married woman has mental health problems and severe post-partum psychosis. She has one child, and claims that she suffered dramatically after childbirth and became suicidal just in dealing with the one child. Furthermore, she has an irregular cycle, and has difficulties monitoring her fertility through charting. She claims “The ramifications of bringing another child into the family too soon, or at all, could almost certainly cause my mental health to spiral out of control, causing death. 

“My mother’s pregnancy with me was very risky. She had three pulmonary emboli during the pregnancy, was hypertensive, and had gestational diabetes, just to name a few.” 

She continues: “I have an obligation to the child He has blessed us with; my son has a God-given right to have his mother, and my husband has a God-given right to a healthy wife. Because of these factors, we chose to use oral contraception, not for the goal of not having children, but because of the goal of maintaining mental health, and even life.” 

She then writes: “Therefore, I must choose to act in accordance with my conscience. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, #1786-88, states: ‘Faced with a moral choice, conscience can make either a right judgment in accordance with reason and divine law or, on the contrary, an erroneous judgment that departs from them. Man is sometimes confronted by situations that make moral judgments less assured and decision difficult. But he must always seriously seek what is right and good and discern the will of God expressed in divine law. To this purpose, man strives to interpret the data of experience and the signs of the times assisted by the virtue of prudence, by the advice of competent people, and by the help of the Holy Spirit and his gifts.’”

It is obvious that this wife and mother has very good reasons for delaying another pregnancy, perhaps indefinitely. If she is physically, and mentally, unable to cope with the natural challenges of another pregnancy, then she must respect her limitations. For most women, the child is a great blessing, not however without some hardships and challenges. 

But is contraception the answer? Did God make a mistake in teaching, through His Church, that contraception is an objectively moral evil which is to be avoided always and everywhere? Are there hard cases that would merit being considered an exception to the moral rule, and make contraception to be a good thing? 

From a medical perspective, Dr. Mary Martin, M.D., Ob/Gyn, observes: “Contemporary NFP is as, or more, effective than current contraceptives. This couple has prudent reason to avoid the fertile phase. But if called to have more children, the wife can be treated. Her mother’s medical problems are another reason for the wife to avoid chemical contraceptives, as there may be a heritable predisposition toward blood clots.” 

Thus, simply from a medical perspective, the Pill is not a panacea. It presents multiple potential side effects. Nor is it 100 percent effective as a form of birth control, unless it is also abortifacient. NFP is just as effective, or more, as any form of contraception in regulating one’s fertility. And NFP is totally morally good, because it never turns against the goodness of one’s fertility, and allows the couple to make the total gift of self to each other, as God designed the spousal act to be. 

NFP can effectively serve this couple. What is required is that they learn the method thoroughly, and then apply it methodically. The husband can help with the charting to compensate for his wife’s mood swings. The couple can use the more generous ranges of potential fertility in their calculations. Because NFP is both effective and responsible, it serves all their needs. 

From a moral perspective, it is wrong to think that God would present a couple with a catch-22 situation, with a problem that is impossible to resolve using morally good means. Our God is a reasonable, as well as a good and just God. He designed human nature, and He gave us our fertility. He knows all the complications that these can offer various couples. That is why the Catechism teaches that “Conscience, faced with a moral choice, must make a right judgment in accordance with reason and the divine law or, on the contrary, an erroneous judgment that departs from them” (#1786). Because God alone is the Creator, He alone determines the moral order, what is morally good and what is morally evil. We are not to presume that we can improve God’s moral order by redefining it according to our perceived needs and wants. 

It is a serious mistake to think that we are to consider all our options, make a sincere decision, and then consider that decision to be morally good, even if it flies in the face of divine law. That is pure subjectivism, and it drifts very quickly into moral relativism. 

It could very well happen that a couple is being asked by God to practice total abstinence. Think of the many spouses who are seriously ill, or confined to their beds. The ultimate expression of love and devotion for the healthy spouse is to devotedly take care of the other during the time of their needs. This is a fulfillment of the wedding vows, “I promise to love you, and care for you, … in sickness and in health, … all the days of my life.” 

Hard cases prove the general rule because they force us to probe more deeply into the values of the moral law.

It is evident from the above question, and many like it that come to us at NFP Outreach, that today's clergy have a serious obligation to be knowledgeable about basic information regarding natural methods of family planning and their underlying moral principles, if they wish to be relevant to the 21st century parishioner.

Cordially yours,

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

The Pill creates all kinds of problems for women’s health: physical, emotional, psychological, mental and reproductive health.  The evidence is becoming more and more compelling.

This data for this NFP Q&A, SOME HEATH HAZARDS OF THE PILL, is provided by Victor R. Claveau in his booklet, BIRTH CONTROL AND ABORTIFACIENTS.  Order from: The Evangelization Station, 14818 Ranchero Road, Hesperia, CA, USA, 92345.  Email: claveau@earthlink.net *www.evangelizationstation.com.  The supporting references and studies are given in the endnotes of this booklet.

Good morality leads to good health.  Bad morality leads to poor health, spiritual devastation and death.  Spread the word!

SOME HEALTH HAZARDS OF THE PILL 

According to the director of Planned Parenthood of England the birth control pill causes 150 different chemical changes in a woman’s body. Not one of these is beneficial. Abortifacient contraceptives are detrimental to a woman’s physical, emotional, psychological, mental and reproductive health. Over 10 million women in the US use the birth control pill today and about 4 million of those are under age 25. 

1) 98% of all women in the US who have had sexual intercourse have used at least one contraceptive method. 

2) Women who use a hormonal contraceptive for a minimum of four years prior to their first full term pregnancy have a 52% higher risk of developing breast cancer. 

3) Women who use a hormonal contraceptive for more than five years are four times more likely to develop cervical cancer. 

4) Since the advent of “the pill” in 1960, the average number of children in the American Catholic family has fallen from 5.5 to 2.1; the number of seminarians has fallen from 50,000 to 5,000; the number of religious teaching in Catholic schools has fallen from 100,000 to 10,000; and attendance at Sunday Mass has fallen from almost 75% to less than 25%. 

5) Prior to “the pill” there were known to be 5 sexually transmitted diseases; today there are more than 30. 

6) Today, for every US child born there are an estimated two children killed in the womb from surgical abortion and abortifacient contraceptives. 

7) By age 45, at least one partner in every two US marriages has been sterilized. 

8) Only one in three US couples now reaches their 25th wedding anniversary; only one in five reaches their 35th. 

9) The divorce rate for US couples who use natural family planning to space children is less than 1%. 

10) The “abortifacient action” in hormonal contraceptives is documented by pharmaceutical manufacturers themselves in package inserts. These devices are believed to be responsible for an estimated minimum of five times more abortions than surgical procedures. Since the advent of Roe v. Wade in 1973, the current estimated total number of abortions from hormonal contraceptives and surgical procedures combined is over 300,000,000 … one for every American man, woman, and child now alive. 

Other side effects of birth control pills are the development of high blood pressure, blood clots, stroke, heart attack, depression, weight gain, migraine, dark spots on the skin and difficulty with breastfeeding. Diabetics, who take oral contraceptives, may note increased sugar levels. Some women who atop taking the pill do not have a return of their menstrual cycles for a year or longer. Although the pill decreases ovarian and uterine cancer, it increases liver and cervical cancer. Studies have shown that the AIDS virus is transmitted more easily to women who are taking the pill and whose partner(s) has the HIV virus. 

* * * * * 

Good morality leads to good health. Bad morality leads to poor health, spiritual devastation and death.

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

 Dear brothers and sisters in Christ:

 My wife and I have been  practicing NFP for the last three months. Being able to live out a 

life that is faithful to Christ and Mother Church is a wonderful.

However, we've been experiencing problems. During the period of  abstinence, which runs for 2 weeks, I experience periods of extreme pain in my testicles. This can last for hours. Sorry to be so graphic, but that's the only way to describe my situation. The only way to relieve my self is to engage into the marital act with the wife and spilling my seed outside. I know this is wrong, but my pain is sometimes unbearable. Afterwards I feel guilty and at the next opportunity I go to confession. I don't know if other men have experienced a similar problem. Please respond.

God Bless. Bill 

Dear Bill, 

Greetings in the Lord! I am a clinical specialist in NFP and a practicing cardiologist, having published also a number of researcharticles in the medical peer-reviewed literature dealing with thesubjects of contraception and sterilization from the medicalstandpoint. My main research interest has been the negative impactcontraception and sterilization have on sexuality, women's well-being,and marital happiness. I also am to my knowledge the only physician inthis country who has operated an NFP clinic solely and completely dedicated to working to help couples leave the contraceptive lifestyle.

I also have had a lot of experience answering these types of questions for the EWTN web site, and for the priests at NFP Outreach. 

Your symptoms sound very much like orchitis or prostatitis, the former being an infection or chronic inflammation of the testicles, and the latter being the same for the prostate gland. Either way, the approach you have taken to relieving your symptoms, besides as you say putting  you at odds with our Church's teaching and necessitating the sacrament of Reconciliation, is very likely contributing to making the problem even worse from a purely medical perspective. Very often, if there is genital stimulation or arousal in the setting of chronic orchitis or prostatitis, the increased secretions caused by the testicle and also by the prostate serve to worsen the pain and this will sometimes be partly relieved by ejaculation. But if the ejaculation takes place in a physiologically abnormal way (ectopic ejaculation outside the vagina) the secretions are not fully or physiologically emptied, and so they "sit around" in the affected gland, causing increased inflammation and what one might call a vicious cycle causing more pain in the end. So what you have come to associate with temporary relief of your symptoms might well be an exacerbating and contributing cause of the symptoms themselves -- in any event they are absolutely not medically helpful for your condition. 

One thing that I feel is too widely prevalent in average NFP instruction is the idea that during the days of abstinence it is good to cultivate intimacy in "non-genital" ways. However, often this is not a great idea, as this can put a great deal of tension and stress on a couple who for Godly and holy reasons has decided to prudently avoid pregnancy at least for a time. I think some of these couples would be better off, honestly, temporarily sleeping in separate beds, if only for that situation where physical proximity leads to at least some degree of arousal. This is especially the case when arousal leads to pain associated with orchitis or prostatitis. (Now you understand I am not here making this recommendation in a general way, for all couples). 

So to summarize: I see at least 2 problems complicating an otherwise laudable intent to follow the Church's teachings: first, there could be a degree of arousal occurring during the days of abstinence and this probably from a purely practical standpoint ought to be avoided; second, ejaculation should always be sought in the physiologically correct manner, with completed intercourse as the Church and due consideration for normal physiology would prescribe. Given the choice between risking a pregnancy and the risk of sin and the consequences of the aberrant sexual practice, long experience and wisdom with many couples would support normal intercourse as the best that could be chosen if true abstinence is not possible on days of fertility. At least this way, no moral or metaphysical norm is being violated, and no violence done to one's marriage and spouse. 

Finally, your condition needs the fairly urgent attention of a qualified urologist, because it is very likely that the syndrome will only be eradicated if properly diagnosed, and treated with probably six to eight weeks of antibiotics chosen by the urologist based on the results of urine culture, Gram stain, and analysis after prostate milking, which is a technique routinely used by urologists to properly diagnose these conditions. 

Sincerely yours, 

Dominic M. Pedulla MD, FACC, CNFPMC, ABVM, ACPh

Clinical specialist in NFP

Associate Clinical Professor of Medicine, OU Health Sciences Center

Medical Director, The Oklahoma Vein and Endovascular Center

President, The Edith Stein Foundation

Diocese updates marriage prep program 

By Misty Mealey

Bishop Francis X. DiLorenzo has approved a new diocesan-wide program recommended by a committee formed to review and recommend enhancements to the diocese’s existing marriage preparation process.

Engaged couples will still begin their marriage preparation process with the important initial meeting with their parish priest or deacon.

Under the new structure, however, that meeting will be followed by a pre-marital inventory to assess the couple’s strengths, as well as areas that need further exploration.

Additional components of the marriage prep process will provide engaged couples with a compelling and thorough catechesis on marriage and sexuality through a new program based on John Paul II’s “Theology of the Body,” as well as a full course in natural family planning.

These new additions will supplement and round out the marriage preparation gained through existing programs such as Engaged Encounter, Unitas, Christian Marriage Formation, and Catholic Charities.

A new curriculum to help standardize these programs also was approved by the Bishop. These curricular concepts and components will serve as a yardstick for the various programs to ensure quality preparation for the engaged couple.

“Marriage preparation was an area in our diocese that needed to be strengthened and updated, and this program does that,” Bishop DiLorenzo said in late July.

A Four-Step Process

The Bishop convened a committee of marriage prep leaders, laity, and clergy in January 2006 after several people approached him about the need to update and standardize marriage preparation in the diocese.

At the initial meeting, the Bishop asked committee members to accomplish four tasks:

1) create a demographic, psychological, and sociological portrait of modern engaged couples;

2) develop a standardized but flexible marriage preparation curriculum appropriate for that group;

3) recruit, train, and certify competent marriage prep facilitators;

4) implement the program across the diocese. 

Committee members charged with presenting a portrait of modern engaged couples seeking marriage in the Church found that today’s culture dominates much of their perspectives. When it comes to faith, they are more likely to describe themselves as “spiritual” rather than “religious.”

“Young people today have no problem cutting out the ‘middle man’ when it comes to faith, and we’re the middle man,” says Bishop DiLorenzo.

As a result, many of them feel little connection to the institutional Church and lack of attention to the sacraments is common.

In addition, an alarmingly high number of engaged couples are living at odds with the faith before they approach the altar. Premarital sexual activity, cohabitation, and contraception are normative for many couples.

After studying this portrait of engaged couples, committee members decided to take a multi-disciplinary approach and include theological, interpersonal, and practical training.

“We wanted to prepare couples not just for marriage, but for a sacramental, Catholic marriage,” said Jim and Sandy Dyk, from Richmond and with Catholic Engaged Encounter.

New Additions

The FOCCUS pre-marital inventory out of Omaha, Nebraska was recommended as the tool to help couples learn more about themselves and their unique relationship.

Already in use by many parishes in our diocese, this inventory is administered by a facilitator who then guides the couple through a process of identifying issues that may need to be addressed prior to marriage. 

To ensure couples are catechized thoroughly in the Church’s rich teachings on sacramental marriage and sexuality, committee members also recommended that every couple attend a new program titled “God’s Plan for a Joy-Filled Marriage.”

The program, developed by author and speaker Christopher West and a team of marriage preparation leaders, is comprised of two sessions. The first part, “Catholic Faith & Your Marriage,” provides an overview of Biblical teaching on marriage and explains the meaning and importance of the commitments made in the exchange of vows.

The second part, “Sacramental Sexuality,” draws from the scriptural foundation already laid to present the beauty and goodness of God’s plan for sexual union, explaining the “whys behind the what’s” of Catholic teaching.

The information gleaned from the God’s Plan program will prepare couples for another new marriage prep component: natural family planning (NFP) instruction. Under the new program structure, engaged couples will receive instruction in one of the many NFP methods taught in the diocese. Committee members recommended a full NFP course as a way to ensure couples have the tools they need to exercise responsible parenthood when they find it necessary to space their children.

Committee member Jamie Walker, an NFP instructor, was pleased that marriage prep leaders from across the diocese recognized the value of making NFP instruction normative for engaged couples.

“When couples see that NFP is not the rhythm method, but is healthy and effective, I’m certain more of them will choose to use NFP over contraception,” he says. “I wanted other couples to experience the benefits of NFP that my wife and I have, such as drawing closer to the Lord, experiencing increased communication and cooperation, and enjoying an increased awareness of our children as God’s gift to us.”

More time required

The new marriage prep structure will obviously require more time on the part of couples, but committee members pointed out that preparation for any sacrament requires a significant investment of time and resources.

“It may be a challenge for some couples to fit marriage prep into their schedule, but once they’ve completed this program they will better understand the value of being so well-prepared for their lives together,” Sandy Dyk said.

Committee members designed the program to be user-friendly for parishes. The committee is currently working on a brochure that will outline the steps for marriage preparation and include referral and schedule information for the various components.

“We wanted to offer as much support as possible for our priests and deacons,” says Jim Dyk.

Some components are already in place, while others will take time to implement. The committee foresees a three-year time line for full implementation of the program. In the months ahead, the diocese will begin recruiting individuals and couples to help implement the new program.

Facilitators for “God’s Plan for a Joy-Filled Marriage,” as well as NFP instructors, will be needed. Couples or individuals to administer and facilitate the FOCCUS inventories also will be needed in parishes or regions where it is currently unavailable.

Those interested in serving as inventory facilitators can contact Jim and Sandy Dyk at 804–320–8289 or jfreddyk@comcast.net

“I have been pondering what to do about prescribing contraception, and I would like any input from residents or people who have ‘been there.’”

----  A Young Doctor

The main question facing a young doctor beginning an ob/gyn internship is this: How do I help shape the culture of the medical profession with the authentic values of the Gospel? How do I bring my convictions, and values, to bear upon my chosen profession? Everyone must answer this question, according to his or her profession and circumstances. 

Specifically, how should a new doctor address the abortion, sterilization and contraceptive culture in modern medicine? 

Contraception and sterilization are serious matters. It is a false distinction to say that abortion is serious, but contraception and sterilization are only relatively serious. All of these are deadly to the soul, and are bad medicine. Abortion kills a perfectly healthy unborn baby. Sterilization destroys a perfectly healthy fertility system. Contraception turns against fertility, and temporarily sterilizes a sexual act which nature designed for procreation. The root cause of abortion is the abuse of sex; which is promiscuity and contraception. Contraception always leads to more abortion, not less. A principled doctor cannot play with any of these matters. They cannot present themselves as an accomplice to these deeds. 

“My program director stated that he would fully support me in whatever decisions I made.” This means that the intern can state his position: “I cannot perform abortions, sterilizations, or dispense contraception because they are bad medicine and because my conscience tells me that they are serious moral evils. There are thousands of other medical procedures I can perform, but I will not be an accomplice in these three.” 

He is a physician and therefore he should be healing people instead of putting harmful chemicals in healthy bodies. Prescribing contraceptives opens up the possibility of cooperating in giving abortifacients. This is both material and formal cooperation. 

Most patients look to their doctors for good medical advice. Doctors should take advantage of this and offer their reasons for encouraging people to stay away from the contraceptive culture. They could point to the multi-billion dollar industry the pharmaceuticals have created, and now promote through slick advertisements in the mass media. 

Doctors could explain the connection between contraception and their social consequences: greater promiscuity and infidelity in marriage, a 50% divorce rate, a lack of male responsibility, 35% of children now born outside of marriage, more single parent (and poor) families, dysfunctional families, an epidemic of STDs, lack of good male role models … Bad medicine has wide social and moral consequences. 

A Catholic doctor who sacrifices his principles, and violates his conscience, by making referrals to other doctors who will prescribe contraceptives and do sterilizations is giving bad example to other residents and patients. Their resistance to serious evils should be more than a token one. They should refuse to either prescribe contraceptives or make referrals. 

Pope Paul VI, in his encyclical Humanae Vitae, encourages doctors thus:

“Let us express our highest admiration for doctors and for those health professionals who, in their mission desire to safeguard what is compatible with their Christian vocation rather than what corresponds to some human advantage. Therefore let them constantly pursue only those solutions that are in accord with faith and right reason. And let them strive to gain the agreement and the compliance of their colleagues in this matter. Moreover, let them consider it their special mission to acquire all necessary learning in this difficult area (NFP). Thereby they may be able to give good advice to spouses seeking their counsel and to direct them along the right path. Spouses rightly seek such direction from them” (HV 27). 

If the pressure on a new doctor to conform to the contraceptive culture is too great, then he or she should go elsewhere and seek employment where he will not have to violate his conscience. More Catholic and pro-life doctors should consider starting up totally pro-life medical clinics. There are many successful examples of these around the country, and these doctors are very willing to share their experiences. These clinics give a powerful witness to Gospel values and good medicine. Many families seek them out. 

There are some evils in our society that will only change when enough conscientious people refuse to participate in them. Abortion and contraception are two of these. 

The life issues belong to doctors and nurses in a special way. The Church looks to them to take real leadership in bringing the values of the Gospel, and the light of Christ, to the medical profession. This will create some career problems and temporary tensions, but this is the price that witnesses to the Faith have always been asked to give throughout the centuries. 

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Dan McCaffrey

Dear Fr. Matthew @ the Abbey,

Hello, I’m a homemaker, married for 12 years with 3 daughters, 10, 8 and 7. I've had to do the whole diaper - bottle thing by myself because my husband refused to do it, i.e. it's "the woman's job." Now I help them with their homework, take them to and from school, attend all the school, extra-curricular and religious obligations by myself. Problem is, he's pressuring me for a son. My hands are more than full with what I have and I have no desire in my heart to have another baby. But he just won't let up. 

I feel I don’t have the patience to go through it again because he never helped with diapers or feedings 1st time around. He told me it was "my responsibility because he couldn't do that because he works and needs his rest." Do I do what he wants just to make him happy? S.

Dear S, 

You need to have a talk with your husband about the role of a father. He seems to be using Archie Bunker as his role model for fatherhood. Remember the TV series All In the Family? It is not enough for a father to beget a child and then claim that his only responsibility is to work a forty-hour week and bring home a paycheck. A father must get involved with his family.

You should tell him that while he is at work you are not sitting around idle, drinking coffee. Rather, caring for children is a constant occupation. If he is at an office job, he is seated with few disturbances. You, however, must get up every ten minutes to look after this or that concern of a little one, which is much more exerting. You could ask him if, after you put in your forty-hour workweek, you should stop and say "That's it for the week for me."

Parenting requires teamwork. Both parents must get involved with the family. That means everything: diapers, feeding, bathing, putting to bed, homework, school and religious obligations, and chauffeuring. 

Tell him you are exhausted because he refuses to do his share of the work of raising the family. If you received his support, then perhaps you would not be so exhausted, and would be disposed to have a fourth child. But before you can be certain of a change of heart on his part, he needs to give concrete evidence. He can start by bathing and putting the children to bed three times a week. On weekends he can do the chauffeuring and shopping. After six months of this, then you can reconsider your position.

What if the fourth child is another girl? Your husband should examine his motives for having a son. Does he want a trophy to demonstrate his virility? Or does he want to invest himself in the rearing of a boy into a young man? A child is God's gift to a marriage. We accept the gift God sends us.

There are consequences to child neglect, if the father is absent or distant from them. Children require the direct involvement of both mother and father.

You might consider taking a two-week vacation and have your husband take care of the children for those two weeks. Then he might appreciate all that you do much more.

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB 

To contact Fr. Matthew with a question on NFP, email him at mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

“I believe life begins the moment of conception, so what is wrong with using pills that prevent conception? Why is NFP so important? Being a woman myself, it takes a long time to really even know when it is “safe” and when its not "safe." Both NFP and this pill that prevents conception, aren't they doing the same thing? "  --Melanie

Dear Melanie, 

There is a world of difference between contraception and NFP.

What is most important here is to understand and appreciate God's plan for marriage and the spousal act. In God's plan, marriage is designed to endure "until death do us part," and it requires total fidelity. 

What is the spousal act supposed to express and accomplish, as God designed it? The Catholic Church teaches, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, that every spousal act must be open to a love-giving (unitive) dimension and also to a life-giving (procreative) dimension. In the marital act the spouses are renewing their marriage covenant. This calls for making the total gift of self to the other: no conditions, no reservations, nothing held back. This includes our fertility. 

When couples abide by God's plan for spousal love, then they have a strong marriage and a healthy, happy family. When they reject God's plan, and substitute their own plan (contraception, sterilization and abortion), then they fall into a cultural trap where today, in this country, there is a 50% divorce rate, a lack of male responsibility, 35% of children born outside of marriage, dysfunctional families, and increased abortions. 

NFP is completely different from contraception when used as a means to space your babies. 1) NFP respects God's plan. Contraception does not. 2) NFP respects human fertility, and never turns against it. Contra (against) ception does not respect your fertility. Instead, it sterilizes it, either temporarily of permanently. 3) NFP regards fertility as something good and natural. Contraception regards it as a disease. 4) NFP requires self-sacrifice and self-giving. Contraception wants instant gratification. 5) NFP compels a couple to take their relationship seriously. Contraception focuses everything on orgasm. 6) The divorce rate among users of NFP is less than 5%. For users of contraception it is 50% plus. 7) The Pill causes alls sorts of problems for a woman's body. Read a list of all the counter indications that come with the prescription. NFP is completely natural. It is God’s way, and nature’s way for spacing pregnancies responsibly in a morally good way.

I suggest that you read the encyclical HUMANAE VITAE. 

Let's spread the good word about NFP, so that it can benefit everyone.

Cordially yours,

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

Here is a newswire from LifeSiteNews which explains the latest effort of ACOG (the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists) to force pro-life OB/GYNs to prescribe contraceptives and either do or make referrals for abortion. ACOG’s Committee on Ethics that wrote the opinion, “The Limits of Conscientious Refusal in Reproductive Medicine,” gives the impression of being very professional, but their moral reasoning is seriously flawed. 

We can be very proud of the pro-life doctors who stand their ground and explain why they would refuse to comply with ACOG’s latest attempt to coerce them to comply with ACOG’s contraceptive and abortion agenda. 

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

Thousands of U.S. Doctors Ask Ob/Gyn College to Stop Forcing Physicians to Refer for Abortion 

WASHINGTON, DC, December 12, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The United States' largest faith-based association of physicians, the 15,000-member Christian Medical Association (http://www.cmda.org), joined other leading national organizations yesterday in challenging The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) to stop its attack on the conscience rights of pro-life physicians.  

 A letter, drafted by the CMA and signed by other national organizations, blasted ACOG's Committee on Ethics position statement, "The Limits of Conscientious Refusal in Reproductive Medicine." CMA's letter noted that the statement "suggests a profound misunderstanding of the nature and exercise of conscience, an underlying bias against persons of faith and an apparent attempt to disenfranchise physicians who oppose ACOG's political activism on abortion." 
 

CMA CEO David Stevens, MD said, "ACOG is not only out of touch with conscience-driven physicians, but also with our long-standing American tradition to protect the rights of citizens to not participate in conscience-violating actions-especially when those actions would take a human life. That American tradition rests on constitutional principles of religious freedom and speech." 
 

ACOG's position paper targets pro-life physicians, insisting that abortion-objecting physicians refer patients to get abortions and declaring that physicians who will not participate in conscience-violating procedures and prescriptions must actually move close to doctors who will.  

 Dr. Stevens added, "Many physicians had been realizing that because of their aggressive abortion lobbying, ACOG officials do not represent the values of most physicians and mainstream medicine. This statement goes a step beyond not representing our life-affirming values to actually advocating policies to prevent us from exercising those values. ACOG's attitude seems to be, 'If you don't toe the ACOG line on abortion, the 'morning-after pill,' and the application of reproductive technology, then you shouldn't be practicing obstetrics--and if you do, we're going to do everything in our power to force you to accommodate our abortion agenda." 
 

CMA Executive Vice President Gene Rudd, MD, an obstetrician and gynecologist, noted, "I have withdrawn my ACOG membership of over 25 years. My conscience can no longer support their lack of conscience. ACOG's strategy seeks to marginalize dissenting opinions. I as an obstetrician have a moral obligation not only to act in my patient's best interest, but also in the best interest of the developing baby, and of society as a whole."
 

See the CMA letter: 

http://www.cmda.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Right_of_Conscience&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&CONTENTID=11270

See the ACOG position statement:
http://www.acog.org/from_home/publications/ethics/co385.pdf

(c) Copyright: LifeSiteNews.com

This is the testimony of Tracy Doyle, who is a physical therapist. When her husband, Fletcher, converted to the Catholic Church, they were confronted with the Church’s teachings on birth control. Their journey of faith led them to NFP. They have two children.

When my husband and I married in 1980, using birth control seemed perfectly logical and reasonable. I was Catholic, and my husband was not. We went through a marriage preparation course at the Catholic Church, but I do not recall any instruction in methods of family planning or discussion about why the Church is against birth control. My husband’s Church had no problems with birth control, and since I could not articulate the Catholic position, we did not give it another thought. 

After seventeen years of marriage, I was shocked when my husband decided to enter the Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults (RCIA) in the Catholic Church. I had never pushed him about religion. He had attended Mass with me sporadically in the first years of our marriage and more frequently once we had children. 

RCIA met weekly from October until Easter, and in the last three months of instruction, sponsors were invited to attend the classes. I attended as Fletcher’s sponsor, and I decided to read all the information he had been given so I could keep pace with what he was learning. As I studied, I began to learn about my faith and experience the teachings in a very personal way. 

When my husband entered the Church, we were still not sure about the Church’s stance on birth control. Our RCIA program did not address this issue very well, and we were too embarrassed to ask the questions we needed answers to. 

Ultimately I talked to a priest, and he recommended that I read Humanae Vitae. The document was difficult to understand at first, but it got me thinking. I then sought more information about natural methods of birth regulation approved by the Church. 

One day I spotted a brief article in the newspaper that mentioned a state grant being offered to the NFP Office in our diocese. I didn’t even know there was such an office. I soon spoke to the director, and she told me how NFP could help me live the teachings of the Church within my marriage. 

I was so excited. I felt as if I could finally be completely honest with God. Now all I had to do was convince my husband. 

When I told Fletcher that I wanted to start using NFP, he was speechless. It was right around Lent, and we had decided to recite a rosary together daily as our Lenten sacrifice. I suggested we ask Mary, the mother of Jesus, for guidance. So one of our petitions in our daily rosary was whether participating in NFP would be pleasing to God. 

We laugh now at what Mary did with that prayer. Doors couldn’t open fast enough to lead us closer to NFP. Our hearts were changed almost overnight, and my husband became an ardent NFP supporter. 

I won’t say that it wasn’t difficult to make this change, but the blessings that have come from it are too numerous to mention. Most importantly, I felt that I was able to say yes to God completely for the first time in my life. I realized that I had not trusted God with my fertility. I had wanted him in every part of my life except the bedroom. When I finally surrendered my belief that I had control of my fertility, I was able to see God’s hand in everything. 

My husband and I began to appreciate life more. We came to see the dignity of all human persons in all states of life. We saw the blessing of children in a profound way – not just our children, but all children. 

A special blessing was that as we welcomed NFP into our lives, our young teenage daughter was coming to terms with her own sexuality. In school her mandated health education classes were teaching things with which we did not agree. Through NFP and audiotapes like Janet Smith’s “Contraception, Why Not” and Pam Stenzel’s tape on chastity, we taught her about the dignity of the body and how it could not be separated from the soul. We talked about the fact that our bodies are gifts from God and that he dwells within us. We told her that a true loving relationship involves mutual self-donation and love strong enough to be willing to create a new life if that is God’s will. Finally, we shared that we are all capable of self-control, despite contemporary teaching that we are not. 

My daughter just finished college, and these lessons have affected her deeply. She has a firm foundation in her faith and her sexuality, and she enjoys a real sense of her personal worth and dignity. My son is in high school, and we need to be an example for him too. 

With NFP I don’t have to say one thing and live another. The total surrender of my fertility to God has allowed me to surrender in other aspects of my life as well. I feel at peace with my faith and my sexuality, and I am happier than I have ever been. 

This testimonial, and 19 others like it can be found in Fletcher Doyle’s recent book, NATURAL FAMILY PLANNING BLESSED OUR MARRIAGE – 19 TRUE STORIES (St. Anthony Messenger Press, 2006). 

Cordially yours,

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

This is the testimony of Fletcher Doyle and his wife Tracy. Fletcher is a sports journalist in Buffalo, NY, and Tracy is a physical therapist. When Fletcher converted to the Catholic Church, they were confronted with the Church’s teachings on birth control. Their journey of faith led them to Natural Family Planning. They have two children.

I joined the Catholic Church in March 1997. When I told my wife I was joining the church into which she was born, it brought her great joy. But this decision also brought on a period of searching. 

As we devoured information about the faith, one thing we kept bumping into was the teaching on contraception. I kept averting my eyes in the hope that the issue would just go away. We had already been married for seventeen years. 

My wife, who had a head start on me in matters of faith, would not look away. She spotted an advertisement in our newspaper about a grant being given to our diocesan department of Natural Family Planning. She called the office and had a wonderful conversation. 

I had been in the church for almost two years when Tracy told me that she wanted to give up contraception and try NFP. Let’s just say that I suffered a mild shock. I was raised in the Presbyterian Church, and birth control wasn’t an issue. I was still digesting confession and devotion to Mary; contraception wasn’t even on my radar screen. Besides, I was forty-five years old. What if this didn’t work? Could I handle another child? 

We prayed about it during Lent, after which we went to our introductory session and learned the science behind NFP. Some quick figuring in my head as to how much abstaining this would require triggered another crisis: Can I manage this? 

I scheduled a meeting with a good priest to ask him why the Church is against artificial methods of birth control. I went to his residence on May 18, 1999, at 7 p.m. By 10 I had a lot of answers and another crisis: How could I not follow the teachings of this Church? 

Driving home from that meeting, I tried to gather my thoughts. Mt wife would, as always, expect me to reconstruct the evening’s conversation word for word. She was waiting when I arrived home, surprised that I had been gone so long. I settled in for a long discussion. 

The first thing I told her was that the Church had condemned contraception from its first days and that the Romans already had methods of birth control. That was enough for her; the discussion was over, and so was our use of contraception. 

This change of behavior brought about others in me. NFP requires a mental discipline that I lacked. I’ve heard that you are what you think about, and my mind was filled with the idols of money, sex and fame. These left me empty and unsatisfied. I was blessed in all areas of my life, but often I found myself wanting more. 

The things that were going through my head were sins against chastity, and chastity is required to get through the periods of abstinence required by NFP. You have to guard what you look at and what you think about. 

I heard someone say that your spouse should be your banquet table. The reasoning behind this became clear. Checking out women invites comparisons to your spouse, which is grossly unfair. I concluded that the idea that you can look at the menu as long as you don’t eat is false. 

Chastity is not abstinence only. Rather, it is the proper ordering of desires toward your state in life. In marriage I pledge to be faithful to my spouse, and that means in thought, word and deed. 

I also should never do something that reduces the dignity of someone else. Chastity allows me to refrain from using others, spouse or stranger, as sex objects, thereby maintaining their dignity as persons made in the image and likeness of God. 

This has brought about a profound change in the way I look at my wife, a woman I adored even before we heard of NFP. She became even more beautiful to me. Now, more than ever before, I had to consider her in her entirety as a human person and avoid the trap of thinking of her as someone to take care of my needs. 

In fact, when I see any beautiful woman now, I think of the benevolence of a God who brought women into the world so that men would not have to be alone. I see all women as made in the image of a God who is love, never to be used by me even in the privacy of my own mind. 

My life with my wife became more an act of giving rather than taking. When we threw out the contraception, I knew she trusted me to stand by her if she got pregnant again, even if this meant I would be attending my child’s high school graduation the same year I retired. Knowing this makes every act of intercourse even more special and leaves me in awe that this special woman will do this for me.

My appreciation for what I had in life increased exponentially, and I became fully aware of my blessings. This has brought me great peace. God really does know best. 

Once the wall of separation between Church and the state of my sex life tumbled, my faith life flourished. I began to see that the teachings of the Catholic Church were beneficial and not intrusions. And so I began the ongoing process of saying yes to them. 

My only regret with NFP is that I didn’t learn of it sooner. Then I wouldn’t have waited so long to experience the joy I now feel. 

This testimonial, and 19 others like it can be found in Fletcher Doyle’s recent book, NATURAL FAMILY PLANNING BLESSED OUR MARRIAGE – 19 TRUE STORIES (St. Anthony Messenger Press, 2006). 

Cordially yours,

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

 Contraception is not just a Catholic issue. Any thinking person would have problems with it for what it does to the individual, to the couple, to their relationship, to marriage and the family; and, in a broader sense, what it does to society. 

Consider the following statements: 

“Contraception is the one sin for which the penalty is national death, race death; a sin for which there is no atonement.” -- Theodore Roosevelt 

“The abandonment of the reproductive function is the common feature of all sexual perversions. We actually describe a sexual activity as perverse if it has given up the aim of reproduction and pursues the attainment of pleasure as an aim independent of it.” -- Sigmund Freud in Introductory Lectures in Psychoanalysis 

“Contraceptive methods are like putting a premium on vice. They make men and women reckless. Nature is relentless and will have full revenge for any such violation of her laws… If contraceptive methods become the order of the day, nothing but moral degradation can be the result. As it is, man has sufficiently degraded woman for his lust, and contraception, no matter how well meaning the advocates may be, will still further degrade her.” 

-- Mahatma Gandhi 

“By accepting contraception, the world is trying to form a civilized but non-Christian mentality. The experiment will fail, but we must be very patient in waiting its collapse; meanwhile redeeming the time so that the Faith may be preserved alive through the dark ages before us, to renew and rebuild civilization and save the world from suicide.” -- T.S. Elliot in Thoughts after Lambeth (1931) 

The questions we must ask ourselves are: why is the world rushing to the alluring left, when our great leaders are walking confidently to the right? Who has reshaped our thinking, so that what was once so obvious is now so far from being obvious? Is there money involved? Then follow the money trail. Is self-control and self-mastery difficult to acquire? Then be very suspicious of those who encourage us to yield to our lusts and sexual appetites. Has God’s plan for marriage and spousal love changed? If not, then how did we depart so far away from it? 

“The sexual urge is a vector of aspiration along which our whole existence develops and perfects itself from within.” -- Pope John Paul II in Love and Responsibility 

“I know that couples have to plan their family and for that there is natural family planning. The way to plan the family is natural family planning, not contraception. In destroying the power of giving life, through contraception, a husband or wife is doing something to self. This turns the attention to self and so it destroys the gift of love in him or her. In loving, the husband and wife must turn the attention to each other as happens in natural family planning, and not to self, as happens in contraception. Once that living love is destroyed by contraception, abortion follows very easily.” -- Blessed Mother Teresa of Calcutta at the National Prayer Breakfast, sponsored by the U.S. Senate and House of representatives on 3 Feb 1994

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

TEACHING CONTRACEPTION TO TEENAGERS IS WRONG APPROACH 

By Lisa Everett, co-director of the Office of Family Life for the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend. 

Planned Parenthood of Indiana has launched a campaign to push for “comprehensive” sexuality education in our schools, which would include instructing teens in the use of contraceptives. A recent editorial in the South Bend Tribune by the vice president for education and training for Planned Parenthood of Indiana made some misleading claims about the effectiveness of this “education.” 

The truth that Planned Parenthood has known for decades is that teens who learn about contraception in school are significantly more likely to become sexually active. According to a 1987 poll conducted for Planned Parenthood by Louis Harris, the rate of sexual activity among teens who took a “comprehensive” sex-ed course was more than one-third higher than among teens who either had no sex education in school, or who had taken a course that taught reproduction but left out the promotion of contraception. 

Going a step further, as Planned Parenthood does, and actually targeting teens for contraceptive “services” only makes the problem worse. Stan Weed, director for the Institute for Research and Evaluation, documented this fact in two separate studies that found that as the number and proportion of teenage family-planning clients increased, there was “a corresponding increase in the teen-age pregnancy and abortion rates: 50 to 120 more pregnancies per thousand clients rather than the 200 or 300 fewer pregnancies as estimated by researchers at the Alan Guttmacher Institute (the former research arm of PPFA). … In that same time period, when the size of the teen population was little changed, teen abortion went from 190,000 to 430,000.” Recent studies in England have reaffirmed that increased access to contraception for teens leads to higher pregnancy and abortion rates, as well as a dramatic increase in sexually transmitted disease rates among 10 to 19-year-old girls. 

The problem with “comprehensive” sex ed is that, even if abstinence is encouraged, teaching teens how to use contraception is like speaking out of both sides of one’s mouth. Simply put, teens who are taught in school how to use contraception believe that they are being given “permission” to have sex as long as they use “protection.” More teens having sex inevitably leads to higher rates of teen pregnancy, abortion and STDs because, to be highly effective, contraceptives have to be used correctly and consistently. 

According to a 1986 article in the journal Family Planning Perspectives, the “typical use” failure rate for teens using condoms to prevent pregnancy is over 18 percent, while the “typical use” failure rate for teens on the Pill is 11 percent. In addition, oral contraceptives do nothing to prevent the transmission of STDs, and have recently been classified by the World Health Organization as Group 1 carcinogens, causing breast, cervical and liver cancer in humans. Teenage girls are especially vulnerable to breast cancer risk from the Pill because their breasts are still growing and will not develop mature, cancer-resistant cells until they have had a full-term pregnancy. 

Even the evolution of Planned Parenthood’s own mission is evidence of the colossal “real life” failure of contraception. In the early 1960s, Planned Parenthood insisted that its mission had nothing to do with abortion. But having found that contraceptives are not always effective, and having assured their clients that their sexual activity would be pregnancy-free, PPFA became committed to providing a “back-up” to contraceptive failure, thus becoming the largest network of abortion providers in the world. That many people do use abortion as a back-up to failed contraception is shown by studies which have found that among women who have abortions, over 80 percent are experienced contraceptive users, and over half say they were using a contraceptive in the month they conceived. 

In addition, the Alan Guttmacher Institute published data in 2000, which clearly showed that states (such as New York and California) that ranked highest in access to contraception also had the highest abortion rates in the country. 

But the most significant problem with promoting contraception among teens is that it ignores the emotional and spiritual dimensions of sex. Recent research in the field of biochemistry has shown clearly that chemicals released during sexual activity, such as oxytocin and vasopressin, permanently alter body chemistry and promote strong emotional bonding between the partners. Once these bonds are established, disrupting them causes terrible distress. 

Surely we want to protect our teens from the kind of heartbreak that even many adults find devastating. And as William Bennett, former U.S. Secretary of Education, once wrote with his customary candor: “Sex education is about character and the formation of character. A sex-education course in which issues of right and wrong do not occupy center stage is an evasion and an irresponsibility.” 

Abstinence-only advocates are often criticized as not living in the “real world.” But in the real world, teens tend to live up to our expectations if we raise the bar high, and they tend to live down to our expectations if we lower that bar. 

Recent studies have found that the number of teens delaying sexual activity is responsible for a large part of the reduced abortion rate in recent years in our country. Surely in this most important area of education in sexuality, our teens deserve parents and teachers who raise the bar high and help them to reach it.

An Introduction to Stephen Patton’s remarkable talk 

One More Soul, which is probably the largest distributor of pro-NFP literature, has just released a remarkable new talk entitled, "Why Contraception Matters," by Stephen Patton, Family Life Director for the Diocese of St. Augustine. With compassion, insight and humor, Patton speaks to the majority of Catholics, priests and laity alike, who see abortion and divorce as huge problems of the modern age, but who don't see how contraception is any big deal. He shows how indeed the three are intimately interconnected. Here is how he begins his talk, which very well captures the confusion that dominates the modern Church. 

To get your copy of this remarkable CD, go to www.OMSoul.com. 

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

I’d like to tell you about three people: a priest and a married couple. They’re fictional characters, but in a sense they’re quite real. Each represents a composite of the views of many actual priests and married couples in the United States today. 

First, let me introduce you to Fr. Friendly. Fr. Friendly is loved and respected by his parishioners, and he loves and respects them. He knows all about the many temptations and tensions they face every day, and so he makes it a point to teach them often about God’s compassion and mercy. But of all the many issues that weigh down upon his flock, and so weigh down upon him, two stand out: abortion and divorce. 

While he’s not what you might call an activist pro-life priest, he knows that abortion is a grave crime against the unborn. He has even occasionally preached about it, although always with compassion. He knows that most women make that awful decision not so much as a free choice, but because they didn’t think they really had a choice. He wants to reach out to them, and he wants to keep anyone else from making that same terrible decision. He wishes he could pinpoint why it is that so many people, including so many seemingly good Catholics, still fall prey to this sin by the hundreds of thousands. 

He likewise grieves the epidemic of divorce. He has personally ministered to dozens of broken marriages and families. It saddens him deeply that this could happen to so many good couples, especially those who seemed to have it all together: regular church-goers, kind people, parents who love their children. He has preached about the sanctity of marriage, he has encouraged distressed couples to go to counseling, he promotes marriage enrichment programs. And yet the divorces continue to multiply. 

One topic Fr. Friendly has never preached about, though, is contraception. He knows use of it is against the official teaching of the Catholic Church, and he also knows that most Catholics don’t comply with that teaching. He doesn’t preach about this or bring it up in confession, though. He figures, with all the other burdens his flock is already carrying, he shouldn’t lay that one on them too. He suspects there is something wrong with contraception, but he’s always figured that it’s not really that big a deal, and that there are more important things to talk about. 

Now let me introduce you to Mr. & Mrs. Goodpeople. The Goodpeople’s are active, contributing members of Fr. Friendly’s parish, and in each of the areas I just mentioned their views are virtually identical to his. They know that abortion is wrong and they don’t think anyone should ever have one. They’re also saddened at the epidemic of divorce all around them, in their own family and among their closest friends. They just can’t understand what’s going on. They take their own marriage seriously and they wish every couple would do the same. 

But if they’re in tune with the teachings of the Church when it comes to abortion and divorce, they’re not when it comes to contraception. Mrs. Goodpeople has been on the Pill since she became sexually active as a teenager. No one ever told her there was anything wrong with this – not her parents, not her peers, not her teachers, not her doctors, not her priests. They’ve either said contraception was the good and responsible thing to do, or they’ve said nothing at all. For Mr. Goodpeople it was much the same. So, the two of them took this way of thinking into their marriage. Except for when they wanted to conceive, they’ve always used contraception. 

Every now and then they’ve heard something about the Catholic Church “frowning upon” contraception, or that it “disapproves of” it. But they’ve never heard that it’s a serious sin. It’s never been explained to them how it offends God and harms us. Somewhere along the line they’ve also heard rumors about something called NFP, but they’ve never looked into it. They don’t know anyone who takes it seriously, apparently including Fr. Friendly. The Goodpeople’s want to do the right thing, and they’d probably be open to learning about the church’s teaching if it was ever presented to them. But unless that happens they’re going to just keep on using contraception and eventually will probably also choose to get sterilized. 

It’s to all of you Fr. Friendly’s and Mr. and Mrs. Goodpeople’s out there that I offer these thoughts. I want to show you two things. First, I want to show you why contraception really is a big deal. I want to show you that no matter how passionate you or any of us might be about stopping abortion and divorce, until we start changing our own contraceptive views and practices, we’re never going to see an end to either of those two evils. 

Second, I want to bring all this home to us as a Church. What kind of effect, on us, does our complicity with the contraceptive mentality have? And what can we do about it? 

If we want to help our young people grow up into healthy adults, ready to assume the responsibilities of parenthood, then we must help them to live by God’s plan for marriage and spousal love.  Simply put, that means total abstinence before marriage, and total fidelity in marriage.  That is what Abstinence-Only Programs teach.

THE CASE FOR ABSTINENCE: Do ‘Plan B’ and other contraceptives shape society? Part I of 2 

By Fletcher Doyle 

Part 1

When the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported in December that the teen birth rate in 2006 had increased by 3 percent over 2005, reversing a 15-year trend in which it had decreased, the finger-pointing began. And in many media outlets, the fingers were pointed squarely at abstinence education.

To pick one example, a New York Times reporter wrote that the finding “fueled the debate about whether the Bush administration’s abstinence-only education efforts were working.” The president of Planned Parenthood assured the Times that it isn’t.

Given the fact that abstinence-only education has been around for several years and that this big change was sudden, it seems legitimate to ask if the right suspect has been fingered. And if abstinence- only education isn’t responsible, then what is? A case can be made that the culprit is something its supporters claim is the answer to unwanted pregnancies and abortions: Plan B— which also goes by the names emergency contraception and the morning-after pill.

To understand how this can possibly be, you have to look at the long-term effect on society of inexpensive and effective birth control, which is the element that makes comprehensive sex education different than abstinence- only. This is what Nobel Prizewinning economist George Akerlof, Janet L. Yellen and Michael L. Katz did in a 1996 paper titled “An Analysis of Out-of-Wedlock Childbearing in the United States.” They were searching for the reasons why there was a huge increase in illegitimate births, single motherhood and abortions after the mid-1960s. Some people blamed welfare, others the lack of jobs in some sectors of society. Akerlof et al put the onus on the pill and other new forms of contraception.

The pill’s big effect was on the relationship of men and women. Whereas men and women had always had premarital sex, before the advent of oral contraception there was an understanding that if the woman got pregnant the man would marry her. There was a study of birth and marriage records from the turn of the 20th century that showed that 30 percent to 50 percent of all first children were conceived before the wedding.

The pill, which became widely available in 1965, is called a “technology shock” that altered the relationship equation in several ways.

One is that if pregnancy is now the choice of the woman, then marriage and child support are now the choice of the man. Another is that the presence of women who will have premarital intercourse without an expectation of marriage — something the pill allows — puts women who wanted to wait until marriage to have sex at a disadvantage in the competition for mates.

Francis Fukuyama wrote in his book, “The Great Disruption,” that the primary result of the sexual revolution kicked off by the pill was that men were no longer responsible for the women they got pregnant.

Among the results documented by Akerlof and his co-authors was a jump by 1970 in sexual activity among girls under the age of 16, the end of the shotgun marriage, the almost total disappearance of virgins at the altar and the increase in illegitimate births, single motherhood and abortions.

Birth rates among teens climbed and then skyrocketed in the late 1980s, hitting a peak of more than 60 women per thousand, ages 15 to 19, in 1991. From there the numbers declined through 2005. In a July 2007 story trumpeting the drop in 2005, the Washington Post credited primarily a roughly 50 percent increase in the number of high school students using condoms on their last encounter (46 percent in 1991 versus 63 percent in 2005) and to a lesser extent a 13.3 percent decline in the number of teens who reported having had sexual intercourse that year (54 percent in 1991 versus 47 percent in 2005).

Manipulating statistics can be done to support any point of view, but there are a few things we know that make the Post’s conclusions seem dubious. We know that a sexually active girl who uses no birth control has a 90 percent chance of getting pregnant in one year. We know that contraceptive failure rates among first-year users — primarily the young — are far higher than among the general population.

An article published in Family Planning Perspectives, which is related to Planned Parenthood, reports that the failure rate for condoms for first-year users is 15 percent. It also reports that failure rates are highest among cohabiting and other unmarried women, the poor and African- Americans. Girls greatly reduce their odds of getting pregnant if they use a condom during intercourse, but their odds of getting burned are still only about the same as surviving Russian roulette.

Abstinence also has been blamed for the huge increase in sexually transmitted diseases among the young. However, if condoms are supposed to make sex safe and we have seen a large increase in condom usage among the young, then we would expect to see a drop in STDs. This clearly has not happened.

We also know that 54 percent of all women having abortions used contraception in the month they got pregnant; of the women using condoms, 14 percent were using them correctly. Imperfect usage is the primary cause of contraceptive failure. What we also know is that those teens who did not have sexual intercourse had a 100 percent chance of not getting pregnant. How many of these teens were affected by an abstinence- only program? We have no way of knowing. But to those who claim abstinence education doesn’t work, the Heritage Foundation published a list of 10 programs that significantly reduced, among other things, teen pregnancy, the age of first intercourse and sexual activity.

One example is the Not Me, Not Now program in Monroe County that targeted 9-to 14- year-olds. It recorded a drop in the sexual activity rate from 46.6 percent to 31.6 percent and a drop in the pregnancy rate for girls ages 15 through 17 from 63.4 pregnancies per 1,000 girls to 49.5 pregnancies per 1,000.

Part 2

There are reasons abstinence-only programs can’t be 100 percent effective. They are dwarfed in numbers by comprehensive sexual education programs, so their effectiveness is mitigated because girls are still under pressure to have sex in the competition for boyfriends. The reason three out of four teen girls (and half of teen boys) give for having intercourse is their boyfriends wanted them to. But this isn’t anything new.

What is new is the growing presence of Plan B. Newsweek reported in 2006 that “Planned Parenthood gave out about 1 million emergency contraceptives— most were Plan B— in 2004, up from 75,000 in 1999.” It also said that some college students were using it as their primary birth control and that having it on hand made them “less reliant on traditional birth control.”

This is a recipe for disaster. The Newsweek story said Plan B is 90 percent effective, which is way below the effectiveness levels of other oral contraceptives, but that rate is in question. A 2007 story in Gynecology and Obstetrics states, “the published efficacy figures — on average, approximately 80 percent — may overstate actual efficacy, possibly quite substantially. Clearly, if the method is weakly efficacious, it is unlikely to produce a major reduction in unintended pregnancy no matter how often women use it.

But if more young women are using it and it is far less effective at preventing pregnancy, we can expect to see an increase in unwanted pregnancies. Plan B is a sham in other ways. In that same article in Gynecology and Obstetrics, the man who claimed Plan B would reduce unwanted pregnancies by 50 percent, James Tressell, has “conceded that 23 published studies from 10 countries disprove his claim. According to every one of the 23 studies, published between 1998 and 2006, easier access to EC fails to achieve any statistically significant reduction in rates of unintended pregnancy and abortion.”

Here are a few things we know about girls under the age of 14 having sex. The organization Preventing Teen Pregnancy reports it is almost universally unwanted by the girls. A study of girls in California and the males who got them pregnant, by Mike Males at the University of California- Irvine, showed that the girls were vulnerable in that they “may want to become ‘adults’ more quickly to escape an unhappy or deprived home environment” and that the fathers were older men (the younger the mother, the larger the age group between her and the father).

Of the mothers from 11 to 15 years old, 91 percent of the fathers were older — not peers — and 50 percent of the males were beyond high school age. Among all teen mothers, 68 percent of the fathers were over the age of 20.

In a study published in the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology on the role of male sexual partners and relationships in determining whether women seek emergency contraception when needed, it was found that “factors measuring power dynamics, such as male dominant decision making and pressure for sex as well as a strong desire to avoid pregnancy on the part of the male partner have a significant association with the use of EC. However, relationship factors known to be associated with use of other contraceptive methods, such as communication, satisfaction and commitment, show no association with EC use.”

Plan B leaves vulnerable young girls, whose only weapon against the unwanted sexual advances of men is the fear of pregnancy, defenseless. The man can say, “Call me tonight and take two pills in the morning.” The problem is, those pills don’t work as well as advertised. Our society’s response to teen pregnancy has been to address the symptoms and not the cause. A middle school in Portland, Maine, responded to pregnancies among its students by making birth control pills available to girls as young as 11. Texas Gov. Rick Perry issued an executive order making it mandatory that all girls entering sixth grade in 2008 be vaccinated with Gardasil, which prevents some forms of cervical cancer that are caused by the STD human papilloma virus. This just keeps us on a path that is leading in the wrong direction, a path that is having a negative impact on the welfare of our country.

STDs have become epidemic and, according to a March 2006 article in Newsweek, are in part to blame for a 20 percent increase of infertility among the young since 2005. Suicide rates among sexually active teens are much higher than among those who abstain. And the incidence of single motherhood is increasing in all age groups.

The percentage of children born to unwed mothers has jumped from 5.8 percent in 1960 to 36 percent today. The percentage in the African- American community is nearly 80 percent. Single motherhood is the most common determining factor among those living in poverty, and with it comes a host of social problems and expenses.

Akerlof and his co-authors wrote that the pill, which carried such promise, led slowly to the feminization of poverty. But they also point out that turning back the clock on birth control would only exacerbate the problem, exposing women to men who, as cultural anthropologist Lionel Tiger put it, have come to expect uncommitted intercourse if only because that is their experience. Akerlof proposes mandatory child support as a way of forcing young men to take some responsibility for the children they father.

Recent headlines, in the wake of the pregnancy of 16-year-old Jamie Lynn Spears, have shouted that teen pregnancy has become cool. There is no longer any stigma attached to single motherhood. All of this is harmful to women.

We need to restore the sense of commitment between sexually active people that was the norm before the advent of the pill. To do that we need a commitment from all areas of society. It will take an effort on the scale of the no-smoking campaign and it will take time.

We have the 43 years since the start of the sexual revolution to undo. We have made smokers pariahs, banned them from public places and shown through graphic television commercials the physical effects of their behavior. We can do the same thing to attack teen pregnancy.

Call it abstinence, call it character-based, call it comprehensive, but it won’t succeed unless we find a way to instill a feeling of responsibility into young men toward young women, who have borne the brunt of our safe sex policies. We should teach men to respect women, and not have intercourse with them until they are ready to care for the life they may be creating.

Plan B won’t work. It’s time to come up with Plan A.

Fletcher Doyle is an editor in the sports department at The News. fdoyle@buffnews.com

Have you ever wondered how a priest could find himself in a position of promoting Humanae Vitae and NFP as his primary apostolate?   Marital Love, Naturally is the story of Fr. Dan McCaffrey, the founder of a group of priests called NFP Outreach.  It was written by Laura Nelson, and first appeared in the June 22-28 issue of the National Catholic Register.

Marital Love, Naturally 

BY LAURA NELSON 

June 22-28, 2008 Issue of the National Catholic Register   

As a retired military chaplain, Father Daniel McCaffrey has been on many missions in many parts of the world. But the operation closest to his heart has always been spreading the good news about Humanae Vitae (The Regulation of Birth) and natural family planning. 

The seeds of NFP Outreach Inc., the not-for-profit organization he founded a few years ago, were actually sown in 1973 in Fort Hood, the U.S. Army post in Texas. Father McCaffrey was chaplain to the servicemen stationed there and their families.  

"Humanae Vitae [Pope Paul VI's 1968 papal encyclical upholding the Church's teaching against contraception] had been out for five years," he says, "and people were questioning how they were going to plan their families if this was the Church's teaching."  

There was an uneasiness on the part of priests, he recalls, as well as the faithful. Couples who had serious reasons for postponing pregnancy felt they could not rely on the calendar rhythm method of natural family planning, and priests were at a loss as to how to guide them. Father McCaffrey "knew that the Church couldn't change her teaching" but he struggled to explain the teaching to a sometimes unreceptive audience.  

Later that year, Bishop Stephen Levin of San Angelo, Texas, suggested that Father McCaffrey attend an NFP seminar near Austin. There he discovered a new, scientifically based NFP method called the Billings Ovulation Method. "This was a medical breakthrough that allowed me to preach Humanae Vitae with a renewed vigor," he says. "I could now confidently tell my families, 'the Church has not abandoned you.' I knew that the Church hadn't abandoned me as a priest, either."

For the next 20 years Father McCaffrey promoted NFP at all the military posts where he was stationed. In 1993, he began preaching about NFP at parish missions with Dr. Thomas Hilgers of the Pope Paul VI Institute. Three years later he began work as a priest for the archdiocese of Oklahoma City, where he is still based. Archbishop Eusebius Beltran has blessed and encouraged his NFP Outreach work.

About six years ago, Father Richard Hogan and Benedictine Father Matthew Habiger joined NFP Outreach, which is now an official not-for-profit corporation and international apostolate.

"We travel all over the country [and in other countries including Canada, Pakistan and the Fiji Islands] preaching the good news of Humanae Vitae," says Father McCaffrey. "So many people don't know that it is good news! They haven't heard this message. They are getting their knowledge about family planning from CNN rather than the pulpit."

Primed for Truth

Father McCaffrey attributes three major problems the Church is presently facing to the use of contraception: "cafeteria Catholics" (who choose which Church teachings they want to believe), a 50% divorce rate among Catholics, and a precipitous decline in religious vocations. "It breaks my heart. I don't think the priests really understand this connection."

The three NFP Outreach priests give their message at clergy-education events, men's conferences, workshops at seminaries and, especially, at parish missions on the Catechism or on NFP.

"I will do the homily at all the Masses at a parish that invites me," explains Father McCaffrey. "I'll plant the seed about NFP and the Church's teaching. Then we'll have an information meeting in the church basement with an NFP user couple, an NFP instructor, and, if possible, an NFP doctor. Another format is a four-part mission on the Catechism. By the fourth night, they're ready to hear the Church's teaching on birth control in all its splendor."

Father Joseph Blonski, pastor of St. Joseph parish in Aztec, New Mexico (and Holy Trinity in Flora Vista), invited Father McCaffrey to speak to his parishioners last November. "I know many couples who have been sterilized," he says, "and it has harmed them in their ability to relate to one another."

He was surprised and pleased at how enthusiastically his congregation received Father McCaffrey's message. "He backed up everything he said with scientific facts," he says. "Many of my parishioners thanked me for bringing him in."  

In the short time since the NFP Outreach mission, Father Blonski has noticed a ripple effect. "I think it created a greater openness to the Church's teaching on life issues," he says, "I've seen conversions, couples giving up contraception, couples deciding to have another child."  

Michelle Kvech, a new NFP teacher in Father Blonski's parish, agrees.  

"Hearing the NFP mission put a fire under me. It changed my motivation for wanting to teach NFP," she says. "After listening to Father McCaffrey, I realized that I wasn't just saving babies [from chemical abortion], but I was also helping to save families and save souls." 

Parish couples began coming to her NFP classes after attending the mission.

"These couples don't come to class with a skeptical attitude like many other couples do," Kvech says. "They are more driven spiritually. They are there not just because NFP is good for their bodies, but because it's good for their souls." 

Ovations Erupt  

Sally Kennedy, an NFP instructor at St. James parish near Savannah, Ga., says NFP Outreach changed her life. She began her marriage using the birth-control pill, but soon found herself at one of Father McCaffrey's talks on the theology of NFP. With time, she learned that "the Church was not opposed to our joy, our freedom, but actually guarantees our joy and freedom."  

Kennedy says her relationship with her husband is more "multifaceted" now and that she has a husband who loves her unconditionally.

"I see it so clearly now, the wisdom of the Church," she adds. "And I attribute it all to that afternoon several years ago with Father McCaffrey." Since then she has attended several of NFP Outreach missions and has spoken at a few as an NFP instructor. "I've never been to a mission where Father McCaffrey doesn't get a standing ovation." 

She and her husband even named their son Daniel after him. "He has a lot of namesakes," she says. "I think he's a saint, the kind of person John Paul II was looking for. Wherever he goes, he brings this good news and changes lives forever."

Laura Nelson writes from Chicago, where she is both an NFP instructor and the Executive Director of WomenCare Services: 708 795 6000 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB 

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

Mike, a husband in your condition may not use the condom any more than an infertile couple or a couple beyond the childbearing age. The sperm must always be allowed to flow unimpeded. Dr. Martin's comments are attached. 

Fraternally, Fr. Dan

Dear Mike, 

Your question was forwarded to me by Fr. McCaffrey to answer. I am an NFP-only board certified obstretrician/gynecologist. While yeast infections during pregnancy can occur because of the decreased acidity of the vagina, intercourse is not associated with recurrences unless the husband is the one harboring the yeast. This is extremely unlikely for the following reasons: the ejaculate is actually very alkaline and helps to normalize the pH of the normally acidic vagina. Yeast may grow under a heavy foreskin in an uncircumcised male, but ordinarily has no reservoir in men. Yeast require a warm, wet environment with a plentiful source of glucose. 

It's likely that the vaginitis your wife has is not yeast, or is one of the non-candidal forms which are resistant to the over-the-counter medications. An immunoassay called Affirm, by Beckton Dickson, can diagnose yeast, bacterial vaginosis (an overgrowth of vaginal bacteria associated with preterm delivery) and trichomonas. The simple Q tip test takes 15 seconds and the results are available the same day. If yeast is confirmed, there are prescription meds which kill the resistant forms. Your wife's doctor should be able to request the test from the lab. If the test is negative for all three pathogens, then the likely diagnosis is either atrophy (decreased estrogen during pregnancy which causes irritation) or an overgrowth of normal lactobacilli in the vagina which lowers the pH too much leading to burning and irritation. This disorder is known as cytologic vaginosis (Doerderlein's Vaginosis) and can be treated by alkalinizing the vagina. Intercourse without a condom would be a great way to accomplish this. 

Finally, there is another medical concern with the use of condoms (I'll leave the theological comments to Fr. McCaffrey). The wife has a structure in the vagina which absorbs excess moisture, including seminal fluid, in order for her immune system to recognize "same." The marital act allows you to become "one flesh" in an immunologic sense. In doing so, a mother is less likely to recognize the child she is carrying as "other" and develop preeclampsia, a serious complication of pregnancy.

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB 

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

This Method has developed from the ground breaking research into natural fertility regulation, first conducted by Dr John Billings and Fr Maurice Catarinich in 1953.  They were later joined by Dr Evelyn Billings. 

The Billings Ovulation Method teaches women to identify the sensations at the vulva.  The scientific work of Professor Odeblad and Professor Brown prove this sensation is a   highly reliable indicator of the fertility or infertility of the woman on a day by day basis. 

Because the woman is taught to recognise infertility as well as fertility the Billings Ovulation Method applies to all phases of a woman’s reproductive life, including those times when ovulation is delayed such as: breastfeeding, pre-menopause, after ceasing chemical contraception, during times of stress and menarche.  

The Billings Ovulation Method is highly effective in assisting the sub-fertile couple to achieve a pregnancy.  In a recent trial conducted in Australia to assess the effectiveness of the Billings Ovulation Method in achieving a pregnancy there was  a success rate of 72.5%.  Many of the couples in the study were classified as sub-fertile. 

An understanding of the signs of fertility and infertility alerts the woman to any changes which may be indicative of pathology which may require medical help. 

The Billings Ovulation Method has undergone extensive scientific research and effectiveness trials  (see attached) and is now taught in most countries of the world.

The Billings Ovulation Method is taught throughout the world to people of all cultural and economic backgrounds many of whom are illiterate.  Illiteracy has never been a drawback of the Billings Ovulation Method.  Women using the Billings Ovulation Method need only coloured stamps or symbols to keep a record.  Symbols only require paper and a pen.  For those people unable to use these tools, there are many examples of charts using local symbols e.g. vine, twigs and flowers; hearth ash. 

Billings Ovulation Method is now accepted by the Chinese Family Planning Commission as a method of fertility control and has become one of the most favoured methods in China.  Up to May 2005

       39,319 Billings Ovulation Method teachers have been trained

       3,847,600 fertile couples use the BOM for avoiding pregnancy

        99% success rate.

In addition:

      16,650 of the 49,330 infertile couples achieed a pregnancy.

In certain localities where the BOM has been widely used, not only the birth rate but also the artificial abortion rate is significantly decreased. 

Summary

Billings Ovulation Method:

Based on sound scientific research

Applies to all phases of a woman’s reproductive life

Effective in helping the sub-fertile couple to achieve a pregnancy

Protects woman’s reproductive health

Simple to teach and use

Simple recording system

Can be taught to all people of cultural, economic or education status

Result of many Efficacy Trials resulting in a better than 99% success rate

Some Trials of the Billings Ovulation Method

Indian Council of Medical Research Task Force on NFP (1995)

States of Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Rajasthan, Karnataka and Pondicherry. 

Published:  Contraception 1996, Vol. 53 pp. 69-74.  

            2,059 women,    32,957 women months of use.

            0.86 Method related pregnancies per hundred women years in initiates. 

Jiangsu Family Health Institute, China (1997)

Dr. QIAN Shao Zhen 

Published:  Chinese Medical Journal 1998. 

            1235 women,    14,280 women months of use.

            No method related pregnancies in initiates.

      (5 user related pregnancies) 

Evidence-based method-related Pearl Index for BOM

is 0-2.2 p/hwy in initiates. 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB 

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

Humanae Vitae is a hard sell. Its values are crucial for our times, but are strongly resisted. Deep down, we know that true happiness can only be found by knowing God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family, and then living by that plan. But the world does not want to hear that message. 

I was recently at a parish in Rio Rancho, NM, giving an NFP Parish Weekend and then a public talk on HV Monday evening. The response of the people to my homilies and talk was receptive and warm. People know that the teachings of HV are valid. At the Q&A session, however, one gentleman asked why, after 54 years of being a Catholic he had never heard of HV until recently. He assured me that he reads Catholic literature, but until recently had never heard of it. If his experience is typical, then we must admit that the parishes he attended failed him. 

A society is only as strong as its families. If we have a 50% divorce rate, then we have a major problem with commitments and dedication among married couples. We then have children living in dysfunctional families, and not experiencing dedicated marriages and secure families. They are set up for future failed marriages. Contraception is directly related to divorce because it always places conditions and restrictions upon what was designed to be a total, unconditional, gift of self. If we want to retrieve strong marriages and healthy, happy families, then we must deal with the damage inflicted by contraception and sterilization. Locate the source of the problem and remove it. 

Remember how we brought smoking under control? Massive medical evidence piled up, and the medical profession took action. No one was forced to stop smoking; they simply saw the relentless evidence of its harmful effects. Gradually people understood the lethal effects of smoking, and then they freely chose to break their addiction to nicotine. Even the tobacco industry found ways to cooperate. 

This is a workable approach to contraception. The evidence of its harmful effects is mounting. It is very difficult to ignore or deny the evidence of failed marriages, broken families, widespread cohabitation, uncommitted relationships, trivialized sex, abortion used for failed contraception, an epidemic of STDs, and broken hearts. 

People usually do not respond well to moral principles or submit to God’s plan or us. Moral relativism and absolute autonomy have deep roots in our culture. But hard facts can’t be denied forever. Let’s work with them. Let’s keep asking the questions: “Is this the best we can hope for? What is the formula for a strong marriage and a happy family? What causes divorce? Why so much pornography? Why the fear of the child? Why do many Muslims abhor what they see in the movies and rap songs coming out of the West into their countries? How does a person become happy?” 

For Catholics there are more specific questions we can raise: “What is God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family? What is so wrong about contraception and so right about NFP? Why is a strong marriage possible for any couple who truly desires one? What are the helps and aids that God gives us to be able to live by His plan for us? How can we overcome our weaknesses? How do problems in a marriage help a couple to mature in their love and relationship? What is authentic spousal love? Where is a good writing and thinking on these issues? How can we advance the good and resist the evil? How can we bring this good news of God’s plan for us to others?” 

I have been a priest as many years as HV has been with us. In many ways it has shaped my priesthood, as I have been gently forced to understand it, and then help others discover what I have. One thing I have learned is that morality is a delicate thing to deal with. You can only help people discover it. They must come to understand the value and goodness of moral principles, and then freely choose to accept them. Our approach to people is that of Jesus: He would only propose God’s great plan to his followers. He never imposed that plan. And this is because God wants us freely, and intelligently, to choose to respond to His will for us. We choose to do the right and the good because we love God, and because we are convinced that He always wants what is best for us. 

Use the accumulating evidence. Let the questions begin.

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB 

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org 

A look at 40 year old message

By Allison LeDoux

In the 40 years since Humanae Vitae was released on July 25, 1968, it has become clear that this was a prophetic document. We can see that our culture has followed a path not unlike that of our ancestors in the faith. This quickly becomes evident when we recall what life was like when faith and family had priority, and when we see the effects of humanity’s rejection of God’s design manifest in today’s society.

Remember the days when doors were left unlocked at night? Cars were left running for a quick stop at the corner market? Families had both a mother and father in the same home and lived comfortably on one income? This safer, simpler world may seem like a fairy tale by today’s standards, but in fact, this was the norm, it was the reality of the majority of Americans. One needn’t look far to hear the common sentiment that the world seems to be going down hill.

But what does this have to do with the Church’s teaching on contraception? The connections become apparent when we look at the prophetic vision of Humanae Vitae.

What did Pope Paul VI say would happen if the use of contraception became widespread? He predicted that there would be a general lowering of morality in society, increased infidelity, a disregard for the integrity and well-being of the person because of the treating of our bodies as objects to be manipulated, and governments would use family planning programs for coercive purposes.

Over the last 40 years contraceptive use has become widespread; and this is the root of the breakdown of the family and society. By contradicting the unity inherent in the gift of sexuality and by separating sex from procreation, marriages are under assault. Increased rates of divorce, adultery, premarital sex, abortion, and a host of other social ills have been exacerbated by the acceptance of contraception. The sacredness of self-giving love, fidelity, and trust has been betrayed. This has left a trail of broken hearts and subsequently, broken families.

Science, too, has documented the harmful effects of contraception. People who viewed “the pill” as a means to have sex without consequences have experienced its side-effects. Studies have shown that the pill does not only suppress ovulation, but also creates a chemically hostile uterine environment, and can cause the death of a newly conceived baby in the first weeks of life. Consider the vast numbers of lives lost to these unintended silent abortions that women are not even aware are taking place within their own bodies, and the inevitable consequences of this violation of God’s love.

Contraception’s promise of “freedom” has instead become enslavement.

God wants to give us true freedom and wholeness. The Holy Spirit has guided the Church to teach this truth. While the message of Humanae Vitae may not be a popular teaching, we are nonetheless called to pay heed to these Spirit-inspired words. When we truly listen, we see that the Church’s teaching is reasonable, and corresponds with the deepest desires of the human heart.

Throughout the Scriptures, God sends His prophets to call His beloved people back. The history of Israel is also our history. When the people heeded the Lord’s words they were blessed and when they disobeyed they were cursed. As the Lord said through the prophet Isaiah: “This is the fasting I wish: releasing those bound unjustly…setting free the oppressed... and not turning your back on your own.” Our culture has been bound, broken, and oppressed and we have turned our backs on our own children in their earliest stages of life. Yet our Church has courageously proclaimed the message that we can be freed from brokenness and oppression. By his prophetic words in Humanae Vitae, Pope Paul VI can be seen as someone whom Isaiah called “repairer of the breach” for all who are mindful of his warnings. “…Then light shall rise for you in the darkness, and the gloom shall become for you like midday; … the Lord will guide you always…He will renew your strength and you shall be like a spring whose water never fails.” (Is. 58)

It is well worth taking the time to read the prophetic Humanae Vitae on this 40th anniversary of its issuing. Both Popes Paul VI and John Paul II have warned us of the culture of death and guided us toward its alternative: the Kingdom of God and eternal life.

– The complete text of Humanae Vitae can be found here.

Mrs. LeDoux is the director of the Respect Life Office and 
Office of Marriage and Family for the Diocese of Worcester.

 Taken from the CATHOLIC FREE PRESS

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB 

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

Steve Koob’s comments to Anne are in italics.) 

Hello! Thank you very much for your wonderful web site (www.OMSoul.com). My name is Anne and I am a 43 year old mother of two girls ages 11 and 9. My husband and I have been married for almost 19 years. I came into a "conversion" in 1999 at the age of 34 after receiving the Sacrament of the Sick at age 34. I had a disease called Peripartum Cardiomyopathy which is heart failure after a pregnancy. I almost died from the disease, but am happy to say am doing well and "cured". I was a "cafeteria Catholic" prior to my conversion in 1999 and did not understand the Church's reasons against contraception, but I do now. After I was healed from Congestive Heart Failure, I was told by several doctors not to have any more children. I was scared to death at the time, and my husband went ahead and had a vasectomy soon after I had recovered with the heart problem.  

My first question would be for the doctors.  If you are healed/cured, why should you not have any more children?  Many doctors these days have an ingrained anti-life mentality.  It 's the way they were trained, AND it supports an often very materialistic life style.  I have been questioning in the last few years whether the doctors were correct that I should not have any more children, and I have talked to my husband about having the vasectomy reversed, however he feels strongly that since he went to Confession (and myself, as well) that he does not want to have it reversed.  It is true that the Church does not require reversal of sterilization following confession and absolution.  However, some theologians would argue that when reversal is possible/feasible, it should be done.  We publish a book of 20 sterilization reversal stories that includes two appendices by such theologians.  The argument is quite simple:  The body created by God has been mutilated; justice demands that it be repaired, if possible.  Also, the fertility that God gifted to you and your husband has been stolen, forgiveness is not warranted until the gift is returned, again, if possible.   

 All 20 couples (all Catholics) saw their marriages tend toward failure after the sterilization;  all found their marriages healed after reversal.  Unnatural birth control, including sterilization, attempts to separate the two ends/purposes of sexual intercourse--bonding and babies. Any and all such attempts will cause damage to the relationship between the spouses and between them and God.  It is inevitable!! 

I have prayed about this, but now at almost 44 years old, I feel it may be too late to even consider having my husband "undo" the operation, since most likely I would not be able to conceive at this point due to my age. My mother was completely through menopause by age 48 and I am already going through a lot of the pre-menopausal symptoms at my age. My question for you is, if I have been to Confession and prayed on this issue, at this point, what else can I do? As we all know, you can't reverse the clock and change the past. We are loosely following NFP in order to honor the Church even though a baby will not be conceived. The other issue is my period is very irregular and it's a little challenging to follow NFP to the letter. So again, my question is, is there something else I can do for my own healing with this issue?   

I suppose it is obvious, based on what I have already said.  If you are healed of the heart problem, and there is no other serious reason to prevent conception, then you should be open to new life.  That is the essence of the act of sexual intercourse and the essence of the sacrament of marriage.  Yes, your husband should seek reversal, even if you are infertile or have limited fertility remaining.  That would be reversing the mistakes of the past, to the best of your ability.  Then, recognize that a child is the supreme gift of marriage for the parents and siblings, especially, but really for the entire universe--most obviously to your local  church and community.  That is my opinion, and I think it conforms to God's will, and following God's will always heals the heart and soul. 

      May God bless you abundantly. 

      Steve Koob, Director, One More Soul 

A Medical Opinion from Dr. Mary Martin M.D.:

I have managed patients with peripartum cardiomyopathy during subsequent  pregnancies without problems. Someone who undertakes such risk should be managed by someone with experience and with convenient access to high risk facilities. But having said that, NFP is satisfactory for someone seeking to avoid pregnancy for medical reasons.  

From a theological standpoint, restoring fertility to the marriage restores  the integrity of the marriage act and is essential for reparation unless his health or financial circumstances would prevent it. The wife's age makes future pregnancies less likely, but should not be used as an excuse for restoring fertility to the marriage. 

Mary W. Martin, M.D., FACOG

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB 

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

Humanae Vitae 40': Some Clergy determined to bring message to faithful

by James Rygelski, St. Louis Review Editor, 

July 25, 2008 

At the end of "Humanae Vitae," Pope Paul VI asked priests and their bishops to "to promote completely and clearly the teaching of the Church concerning marriage." 

Some priests of the St. Louis Archdiocese told the Review that’s an important message, acknowledge that it hasn’t been talked about much from the pulpit over the years but add that with the proper preparation and guidance of the Holy Spirit that priests can and should affirm the truth of "Humanae Vitae." 

Bishop Robert J. Hermann, administrator of the St. Louis Archdiocese until a new archbishop is named, said "We (priests) did not talk about it as much as we should have" over the years. But he said that priests who wanted to preach on it faced some challenges. In 1968, we didn’t know how to contextualize it with the Scriptures. (Priests) were afraid the message would be rejected." 

"I think today the climate has changed so much. ‘Theology of the body’ puts it into a scriptural context. It energizes this truth with the Word of God. Today people hunger for a deeper understanding of the mystery of sexuality," Bishop Hermann said. 

Father Michael Houser, recently ordained and an associate pastor at Holy Trinity Parish in St. Ann, is nevertheless well familiar with the teachings of "Humanae Vitae" and determined to bring its message to the faithful. 

"I was first aware of ‘Humanae Vitae’ when fairly young. My own family had great appreciation for Church teaching and was committed to it, as both my parents taught natural family planning with the Couple to Couple League. 

"As I grew older and was discerning my vocation, adherence to the teaching was important to me. I was aware it was not easy for Catholics and for priests to accept at the time," he said. 

It also meant a lot to him, he said, that his teachers at Kenrick-Glennon Seminary were "very committed to the Church’s teaching on marriage." He said he and fellow seminarians have gained a full awareness of NFP and NaProTechnology. 

During his transitional diaconate last year at St. Margaret Mary Alacoque Parish in Oakville, he wanted to preach on the topic during a Mass. "It’s a very sensitive topic that requires preparation to speak on. I was intimidated the first time. The most important thing was doing it, trusting in God to use your words however He wanted to do that. Clergy are called to be courageous even if what they do is not popular," he added. 

The readings for the Sunday in which he was to preach did not readily lend themselves to a discussion of "Humanae Vitae." But Father Houser used the Old Testament story in the first reading of Naaman’s gratitude to God at being cured of his leprosy to remind the congregation that gratitude for what they have been given by God should lead them to obeying His laws on such things as sex and contraception. "God is calling us to something higher," he said he told them. 

He was happily surprised by the reaction. "What I heard was that people were appreciative of the fact that I’d spoken about it. None of us can judge the hearts of people in pews. We say what needs to be said. It was very refreshing to me to be approached by certain parishioners and have them come up enthusiastic. It showed they were taking it seriously in their lives." 

A priest should preach on the subject — and on many other Church teachings as well — with regularity so that people "can kind of keep hearing about it and it stays before their consciences," Father Houser said. 

Father Jeffrey A. Maassen, ordained in 1997 and recently named pastor of St. David Parish in Arnold has spoken on the subject of contraception. He did so recently at the monthly Young Adult Coffee House at St. Monica Parish in Creve Coeur. 

"I had some trepidation on how it would be received," he said of his preaching on the subject over the years. "I certainly have talked about it, what our Church teaches being open to life." 

Father Maassen believes that disobedience to "Humane Vitae" has led to a number of ills within the Church as well as in the society overall. Support for contraception has led to increased disrespect for women by men, he said. 

"We’re all broken in this area of sexuality," he said. In the Church, the shortage of priests and dwindling attendance at Sunday Mass are among the offshoots of the rejection of "Humane Vitae."

"If I am contracepting and I know what Christ teaches through the Church but I continue to do it, that fosters disobedience and disrespect for authority. I won’t be listening to the Church’s authority on other things," he said in describing what he thinks is a prevailing attitude. 

"If families are contracepting there’s less of a pool for priests. There’s also less of a pool of scientists that could have cured cancer," he added.

In Matthew’s 23rd chapter, we find Jesus taking issue with the church leaders of his day, the Scribes and Pharisees. Seven times Jesus uses the phrase “Woe to you, Scribes and Pharisees …” “Woe to you” means that the person addressed will have to give a strict accounting for himself, for his words and his teachings. If he failed in the duties of his office, which is to clearly proclaim to the people God’s plan for all important human affairs, then God will hold him accountable for the failings of the people. “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge” asserts the prophet Hosea 3:6. “For the lips of a priest should guard knowledge, and men should seek instruction from his mouth, for he is the messenger of the Lord of hosts” says the prophet Malachi 2:7. 

Today we can presume that Jesus’ words are addressed to all bishops, priests and deacons, to Protestant ministers, Jewish rabbis and Islamic imams. God wishes that His word and His plan for us be given to every man, woman and child. Thus, his warning, “Woe to you,” continues to echo down through the centuries. 

Take just one of the serious warnings: “Woe to you, blind guides, who say, ‘If any one swears by the temple, it is nothing; but if any one swears by the gold of the temple, he is bound by his oath.’ You blind men! For which is greater, the gold or the temple that has made the gold sacred?” Is not Jesus alluding to the mistaken notion that gold and money are more important than God’s moral law, the moral law that is to be found in the Temple? What are we to think about the pastor who is more concerned about a possible drop in the weekly collection, than in proclaiming the full richness of God’s moral law? What are we to think about the pastor who arbitrarily decides for himself which parts of God’s plan for marriage and spousal love are safe to preach on, and which parts are not? Or perhaps even which parts of that plan are still valid, and which are not? Jesus is asserting that only God determines, and defines, the moral order and that it is the explicit duty of the “man of God” to proclaim His moral order. 

But teaching the moral order and bringing the moral values of the Gospel to the broader society is not just the responsibility of the religious leaders. To engage the culture with the values of the Gospel is largely the task of the laity, who are the vast majority of the Church. Archbishop Charles Chaput, of Denver, has been talking about this extensively, and recently published a book, “Render Unto Caesar: Serving the Nation by Living Our Catholic Beliefs in Political Life.” 

“Not only does religion have a place in the public square, a democracy needs the input of religious morals and convictions to remain healthy and strong,” he said. “Taking religion out of that plan is the fastest way to destroy a democracy.” 

“In the name of being good citizens, a lot of Catholics have bought into a very mistaken idea of the ‘separation of Church and state.’ American Catholics have always supported the principle of keeping religious and civil authority distinct. Nobody wants a theocracy, and much of the media hand-wringing about the specter of ‘Christian fundamentalism’ is really just a particularly offensive scare tactic. The Church doesn’t presume to run the state. We also don’t want the state interfering with our religious beliefs and practices – which, candidly, is a much bigger problem today. 

“Separating Church and state does not mean separating faith and political issues. Real pluralism requires a healthy conflict of ideas. In fact, the best way to kill a democracy is for people to remove their religious and moral convictions from their political decision-making. If people really believe something, they’ll always act on it as a matter of conscience. Otherwise they’re just lying to themselves. So, the idea of forcing religion out of public policy debates is not only unwise, it’s anti-democratic.” 

 May a husband engage in the marital act when his wife is using the Pill, even though he knows that contraception is wrong?

Would not the innocent spouse need to refrain from the marital act when the Pill or other hormonal contraceptives are involved because of the abortifacient capacity of these birth-regulating methods? --JMJ

Dear JMJ, 

This is a tough question, because there is clear teaching from the Church that contraception is intrinsically evil and sinful. Despite this, there is massive moral non-compliance among Catholics. 85 percent of Catholic couples of childbearing age are contracepting or sterilized. Yet many of these receive the Eucharist on a regular basis without using first the Sacrament of Reconciliation. Very seldom do Catholics hear anything from the pulpit about the moral evil of contraception. 

This leaves the impression that the teaching church is clear about the immorality of contraception, but is not prepared to put that teaching into pastoral practice. If there is silence from the pulpit, then the unspoken message is that couples can continue in their contraceptive lifestyle and not be concerned about the morality of what they are doing. 

A very different situation would arise if an entire diocese, with all the priests in a united front with their bishop, were to take a clear position on the immorality of contraception. Then all engaged couples would be strongly encouraged to learn NFP. The intention to use contraception would be grounds for a priest to refuse to marry a couple. For already married couples, pastors would teach that contraception is a serious moral evil, and must be confessed and repented of before receiving the Eucharist. All couples would be strongly encouraged to learn morally acceptable ways of planning their families. Some proportionate form of restitution would be recommended for those who have sterilized themselves. Catholic doctors would be warned that they cannot receive the Eucharist if they are prescribing contraception, performing sterilizations, or making referrals for these. 

It is in the present situation of massive moral non-compliance that I make my comments. What follow is not Magisterial teaching; rather, it is an informed theological opinion. I speak to what an innocent spouse can do on his own to rectify the abuses of his marriage. At this point in time, he is largely on his own, without the explicit public support of the clergy. 

The innocent spouse must continually pray and work for the conversion of the offending spouse. This requires understanding what the spousal act was designed to express and accomplish. It means talking about these important matters. It means making sacrifices for her. The innocent spouse should remind the other of the total immorality of contraception, and the possible abortifacient factor in using the Pill, and encourage her to move in the direction of NFP. A good husband should encourage his wife to transfer her trust away from the Pill and place it in God’s providence, in her husband’s willingness to share with her the burden of family planning, and in God’s inexhaustible love for us. 

Our Lord took people where they were, and pointed them in the direction they should be taking. He appealed to their good reason and to their better selves. He respected the freedom of their conscience. He proposed God’s plan for us, while never imposing it. He gave people, and continues to give us, a little time so that we could freely come to our senses. Eventually, however, the time will come when we will have to give a thorough accounting for all our choices and deeds. The Lord warned us that we are responsible for how we use our freedom. 

What can an innocent spouse do if the other refuses to move away from contraception? Could he decide to forego the marital act? Since we are not to cooperate with sin, and contraception is sinful, the innocent spouse has a right and a duty to refuse to cooperate with evil, insofar as that is possible. A contracepted act is not a marital act, since it has separated the unitive from the procreative dimension. Now it is simply a sexual act. It is an act of conditioned self-giving, with many reservations. Such an act does not enrich the relationship; rather, it tends to unravel the fabric of their bonding. Rather than make a lie with their bodies, a couple should simply remain silent. 

Such a choice will bring tensions to the marriage, but unnecessary tensions already exist. The only proper solution is to cease doing what is evil, and begin doing what is good. If nothing else, simply do nothing! 

Many divorces can be traced back to the damage done by contraception. The high divorce rates in this country took off at the same time that the Pill arrived. If we are to address the problem of a 50% divorce rate among Catholics, then we must get to the root cause. And if this requires a change of attitudes, values, and practices, then that is what must be done. 

Doing good for our neighbor also includes helping them resist evil. 

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

“The body was not meant for immorality but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body.” What does this mean? How is our body meant for the Lord? How does the Lord fit into the picture of the sexual ethic? 

I think it helps to remember that God had a definite purpose for designing us as bodied-persons, which includes our fertility and sexuality. He made the angels to be completely spiritual persons. The angels have no hands, or legs, faces, or fertility. Their modus operandi is very different than ours. 

They live in heaven, and perhaps they travel at will throughout the material universe. 

God created human persons, by contrast, to be confined to the limits of the material universe. We have, and are, mortal bodies of flesh and blood. We have hands to work with, legs to carry us about, and voices to communicate our ideas. Human persons are one of only two genders which compliment each other. We naturally seek a communion of persons. We have sexual organs and sexual desires, which enable us to cooperate with God in the procreation of another immortal human person. And the sex drive is very prominent in any healthy, red-blooded person. 

“’All things are lawful for me,’ but not all things are helpful. ‘All things are lawful for me,’ but I will not be enslaved by anything.” Thus we are able to express our sexuality in many different ways, as the world provides ample witness. But not every form of sexual expression is good. We are not to become slaves to our passions. The pursuit of erotic sexual pleasure for its own sake makes us slaves to our passions and dehumanizes us. God has a higher plan for the gift of our sexuality. 

“Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I therefore take the members of Christ and make them members of a prostitute? Never! … But he who is united to the Lord becomes one spirit with him.” We know something about the physical intimacy that sexual union brings about. In marriage this is a very good thing because, as God designed it, in marriage “two become one flesh” through the spousal act. This spousal communion of persons leads to children and family. 

Jesus is the model for us as sexual persons. He is the world’s greatest lover. He loves us as bodied persons, in a way that enhances our personal dignity. He loves us chastely, as a celibate. All who met him knew that He loved them intensely and intimately. Think of Martha, Mary and Lazarus; the couple at Cana, the disciples, the women of the Gospel, the children, the beloved disciple and the sinners. Jesus loves us in a chaste manner. He wants what is truly good for us; He was willing to lay down his life for us so that we could escape the ravages of sin and enter into the fullness of life. He came to reveal how intense God’s love is for us. 

He wants us to discover a true communion of persons in all our relationships with others. We are to love children the way good parents love them. We are to love beautiful women the way their good fathers and brothers love and protect them. We are to love young men the way Jesus loved his disciples. The model for spousal love is the love Jesus has for his bride, the Church. We love others the way Jesus loves them. We acknowledge the entire rich repertoire of values that can be found in a human person, and we refuse to reduce a person to his or her sexual values. By the virtue of chastity we come into the possession of ourselves and achieve self-control over our unruly sexual appetites. Jesus teaches us that real love is self-sacrificial and agapaic. It completely transcends self-seeking erotic love. 

The body is meant for the Lord and the Lord is meant for the body. Our bodies are an extension of our selves. Jesus wants us, as boded persons, to form a communion of persons with him, with the Father and their Holy Spirit. Our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit within us, which we have from God. He who is united to the Lord becomes one spirit with him. Thus we are to choose to subordinate our sexual appetites to loving the full richness of other persons, and to loving the greatest good, the Summum Bonum, who is God. 

Jesus has made all this possible through his great act of love for us: his passion, death and resurrection. “You are not your own; you were bought with a price. So glorify God in your body.” 

“I appeal to you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship. Do not be conformed to this world but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that you may prove what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect” (Rom 12:1-2). 

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

Protestants Show Interest in "Wisdom" of Natural Family Planning

14-August-2008 -- Catholic News Agency 

Austin, Aug 13, 2008 (CNA).- Citing a desire to let their faith in God guide their sex lives and to trust Him in every aspect of their existence, some Protestants have become practitioners of Natural Family Planning (NFP). Eschewing contraceptives, some are now joining Catholics in fertility classes and returning to traditional Christian teaching.

The Austin American-Statesman reports that the number of NFP practitioners who are Protestants is difficult to quantify. However, Rev. Amy Laura Hall, a Methodist minister and associate professor at Duke Divinity School, says there appears to be growing interest.

She said that, as a Protestant scholar writing about reproductive issues, she frequently fields questions about family planning. Hall explained that some ask how to avoid preoccupation with finances and social advancement and instead welcome children as gifts from God even if children disrupt the parents’ life plans.

Historically, some Protestant perspectives grew from an antipathy towards Catholic and fundamentalist families, she claimed. The Anglican Communion, which includes the Episcopal Church in the U.S., in 1930 changed its teachings which formerly forbade contraception, while Methodist literature after World War II advocated limiting the number of children to an ideally two-child, sex-balanced family.

This history has not prevented all Protestants from considering using NFP.

Phaedra Taylor, 28, told the Austin American-Statesman that she ruled out taking birth control pills after reading claims that the pill can cause abortions by rendering the womb hostile to a newly conceived human life.

"I just wasn't willing to risk it," she said, explaining she wanted her faith to guide her sexual and reproductive decisions after her marriage, before which she had been abstinent. She added that her avoidance of artificial contraception is consistent with her efforts to eat seasonal, locally grown foods and to be a good steward for the Earth.

Her husband David Taylor, 36, who was arts minister at their nondenominational church Hope Chapel, said family planning reveals “a fascinating examination of God's sovereignty and human free will.”

“What does it mean to submit your physical bodies to God's sovereign care? ... God has given us power and freedom to exercise that decision. We can say, 'God, we're going to respect the rhythms you have given us.'”

Both spouses said the NFP method draws them closer, stating they want to wait a few months before trying to conceive.

Megan Tietz, a 31-year-old Oklahoman Baptist and a mother of two, told the Austin American-Statesman “…for me, using hormonal birth control indicates that I don't really trust God with every area of my life.”

“It is an effort on my part to control something that I really believe God can be trusted with," she continued.

Katie Fox, 31, is a member of Hope Chapel along with the Taylors. "I feel like it really works in harmony with the way that God designed our bodies to work," she commented. "In contrast with the pill, which works by altering and suppressing our natural systems, NFP works by supporting those systems in harmony with their functions. It goes with the flow, so to speak. There is a wisdom and a rightness to that which I really appreciate."

Fox has a 1-year-old daughter, explaining that NFP worked until she and her husband “got lazy” one month and had marital relations during her fertile period. She said the pregnancy helped remind them that God was ultimately in charge.

According to the Austin American-Statesman, experts say that, when used to avoid a pregnancy, NFP can fail at rates as low as one percent, though that rate rises to 25 percent when the method is not followed perfectly.

Hall said that some Protestant couples face difficulties when talking to their pastors about the spiritual issues of human reproduction with some, in Hall’s words, being told that they’re “crazy or irresponsible to consider not being on the pill.”

David Taylor agreed that pastors have difficulty addressing the issue, saying “My guess is that most churches are not talking about sexuality.” 

By Hilary White 

LANCASTER, UK, August 19, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Bishop Patrick O’Donoghue of the northern English diocese of Lancaster, has blasted the contraceptive mentality that has resulted, he said, in the dissolution of marriage as an institution, endlessly rising abortion and divorce rates, depressed and even suicidal children, and ultimately the degradation of an entire society.

"I am convinced that there must be profoundly damaging consequences for the family in a country where contraception and abortion are so wide-spread," he writes in a soon-to-be released document.

Artificial contraception, abortion, in vitro fertilisation, sterilisation and sex outside marriage, are contradictions to the very core of what it means to be human, Bishop O’Donoghue argues.

The attempt to demote sexuality to a mere recreation activity, removed from marriage, has degraded what he has called "the Law of Self Gift" - the "total physical self-giving which is only possible for a man and a woman who have committed themselves to one another until death, as husband and wife."

This Law of Self Gift is, he writes, the "reason why the Church is so adamantly against sterilisation, contraception, abortion and sex outside marriage.

These acts, because they contradict and negate the God given meaning of the human person, attack the very foundations of the human world."

In his lengthy and comprehensive document that is due for publication next week, "Fit for Mission? Church", Bishop O’Donoghue writes that sexuality is "not purely biological, but concerns the innermost being of each person." He warns that the Church needs to return to the truth of its teaching on sexuality and traces the increase in abortion and divorce, as well as depression and mental illness among young people, to the denial of the truth about contraception.

"These statistics," he says, "reveal the shocking depth and extent of the suffering and impoverishment of so many families and children due to the separation of the unitive and procreative nature of sexual love, and the wide-spread practice of pre-marital sexual behaviour."

Citing official 2006 statistics, Bishop O’Donoghue deplores the 193,700 unborn children killed through abortion that year, including the 2000 children killed who "may" have suffered some kind of disability and the 3,990 abortions carried out on girls under age 16 - the age of consent.

Fewer marriages, fewer children, and children raised in families without the inherent stability afforded by true marriage have undermined the happiness of children and ultimately of the whole nation, the bishop says. He notes the spiritual and emotional malaise of a society without strong families. More than one quarter of all children under 16 in Britain, he writes, "regularly feel depressed" and between 2006-2007, 4,241 children under 14 attempted to commit suicide.

No wonder so many children are suffering depression and mental illness in a country that is such a hostile environment for human life. No wonder divorce is so prevalent when family life is so often characterised by a lack of generosity or self-giving love."

The bishop has called on both clergy and laity, especially at the parish level, to defend and promote the Church's teaching against artificial contraception and the meaning of sexuality. "We, the Catholic Church, must be more confident and proactive in presenting our rich and fulfilling understanding of marriage, sexual love and the family."
 

 In the larger context of the 92 page document, Bishop O’Donoghue has asked Catholics for input on what they hope to see in the future of the Catholic Church in the Lancaster diocese and in England overall.

Bishop O’Donoghue received widespread plaudits from parents and other Catholics concerned by the erosion of Catholic teaching on diocesan schools earlier this year when he released his previous document "Fit for Mission? Schools." In that document he called for all the schools of his diocese to re-commit themselves to the teachings of the Catholic Church, especially on marriage, family and life issues.

He asked for crucifixes to be placed in every classroom, for "sex-education" to be based exclusively on the principles of chastity and the sanctity of marriage, that schools do no fundraising for anti-life groups and religious education be based firmly in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

This document resulted in his being hauled before a Parliamentary committee, secularist members of which demanded to know if the Catholic Church were returning to a previous "doctrinaire" or "fundamentalist" attitude towards its education system. Bishop O’Donoghue responded that teaching Catholicism in a Catholic school, their "prime duty", constituted neither "fundamentalism" nor "proselytism."

Read related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:

UK Catholic Bishop Before Parliament for Insisting on Crucifixes in Every Classroom and Truly CatholicSexEd
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/mar/08031206.html

To contact Bishop O’Donoghue,
Phone: (01524) 596050

Cathedral House,
Balmoral Road,
Lancaster, UK
LA1 3BT

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB 

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

Most people in the Western World today, including Catholics, approve of contraception and practice it as a way of controlling birth.  Young persons growing up in our culture for the most part consider contraception and intelligent way of coping with difficult problems; it is the “natural,”  “responsible” way to act.  They find the Catholic Church’s opposition to contraception a relic of a bygone age, unrealistic, impracticable. 

During his pontificate, John Paul II sought valiantly to show that contraception violates the “language of the body” and the love that spouses are to have for one another. Thus in Familiaris Consortio 32 he wrote: “When couples, by means of recourse to contraception, separate these two meanings that God the Creator has inscribed in the being of man and woman and in the dynamism of their sexual communion, they act as ‘arbiters’ of the divine plan and they ‘manipulate’ and degrade human sexuality – and with it themselves and their married partner – by altering its value of ‘total’ self-giving.  Thus the innate language that expresses the total reciprocal self-giving of husband and wife is overlaid, through contraception, by an objectively contradictory language, namely, that of not giving oneself totally to the other.  This leads not only to a positive refusal to be open to life but also to a falsification of inner truth of conjugal love, which is called upon to give itself in personal totality.” 

He also frequently noted that contraception is “anti-life” (e.g., in his Homily to youth in Kenya 17 Aug 85) and in Familiaris Consortio 32 he also wrote: “the difference, both anthropological and moral, between contraception and recourse to the rhythm of the cycle, is much wider and deeper than is usually thought.  It is a difference which, in the final analysis, is based on irreconcilable concepts of the human person and of human sexuality.” 

Here he had in mind the mentality rooted in a dualistic understanding of the human person that regards the “person: as the subject conscious of himself or herself and capable of relating to other conscious selves, and the human body as an “instrument” of the person.  This understanding of human persons and of human sexuality considers our biological fertility part of the sub-personal world over which the “person” has been given dominion, and as “persons” we have the right to suppress this fertility by using contraceptives should its continued flourishing inhibit our participation in the “personal” values of human sexuality. 

This mentality, as John Paul pointed out in Evangelium Vitae 19, is one of the bases for the “culture of death.”  On this view not all living members of the human species are “persons,” but only those who are capable of conscious awareness; the unborn, the severely mentally crippled, and those in the “vegetative” state thus do not count as persons, who alone are the subjects of rights that must be recognized by the state. 

From this it can be seen that contraception is the “gateway” to abortion and other grave offenses against the goodness of human life.  Contraception paved the way for abortion, which is frequently considered a backup to failed contraception.  All this explains why the Catholic Church is so opposed to contraception. 

When God made man, He did not make a subject aware of itself as a self and capable of relating to other selves to which He then added a body as an afterthought.  Rather, when He created man, “male and female He created them” (Gen 1:27), i.e., he created them as bodily, sexual beings, whose fertility is a blessing, not a curse. 

Moreover, when the eternally begotten Son of God, His “Word,” became man to show us God’s love for us and to redeem us, He became living flesh: “the Word became flesh” (Jn 1:14).  He becameincarnate. 

Thus the Church’s teaching on contraception goes hand-in-hand with the great truth that human persons are bodily persons and that every living member of the human species, the unborn as well as the born, the severely mentally impaired as well as the mentally gifted, is a person, a being of moral worth, a living image of the one and triune God. 

William E. May is the Michael J. McGivney Professor of Moral Theology at the John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family.  In 2009 Pauline Books & Media will publish his book, Pope John Paul II’s Teaching on the Person, Marriage and Family. He and his wife, Patricia, are the parents of seven, and grandparents of f fourteen.

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB 

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

Richard Fehring published a study on American Catholics and sterilization (”Trends in Contraceptive Use Among Catholics in the US: 1988-1995,” Linacre Quarterly, 68(2): 170-185). He produces figures that in 1995, 40.7% of Catholics of child-bearing age were sterilized. This compares with 38.6% for the American public at large. 29.1% of Catholic women and 11.3% of Catholic men are sterilized. In 1988, seven years earlier, 19.9% of Catholics were sterilized, compared against 39.2% for the public at large. Over these seven years Catholics reduced their use of the Pill from 35% to 29%. Only 3.2% of Catholics are using NFP. 

What is going on here? Catholics are achievers, but this is ridiculous! Why are Catholics taking the lead here? It is one thing to be an achiever, but we ought to be very careful about what we are achieving. Racing to be in the lead of those who have permanently destroyed their fertility is a sign of mental imbalance and low self-esteem. 

What makes sterilization morally wrong? Why is it against the 5th and 6th Commandments? Our fertility is a gift from God. When God created us male and female, as bodied persons, fertile and sexual, He chose to make us sharers with Him in the creation of other persons who would exist forever. Our fertility excels that of the animal kingdom by an infinite degree. Animals reproduce, live their lives and then die. End of story. But a human person created in the image and likeness of God, endowed with intelligence and free will, exists forever. God did not create us simply to occupy this planet for so many years. He created us so that we might have the opportunity to enter into his divine communion of love and life forever. We have a destiny and dignity that excels the entire material universe. 

The choice is ours. Either we can limit our attention to this short life on planet Earth, or we can recognize our dignity as sons and daughters of a loving God and Father, destined for the divine embrace of love and life forever, and act accordingly. 

Our fertility is connected with our sexual organs and with our sex drive, which is the natural attraction between the two sexes. God designed the sexual act to be pleasurable. But pleasure is not an end unto itself. That would be base hedonism, which is self-destructive. Sensual pleasure can become addictive, and any addiction reduces our freedom. Sexual pleasure helps to draw man and woman together, and encourages them to pass life on to the next generation. We are to understand the role of sexual pleasure and integrate it into our lives in such a way that it enhances the goods of marriage and family, without endangering these goods. 

When a person seeks a sterilization, he has made a decision that sterile sexual pleasure is his highest end, and that an unwanted pregnancy (the gift of the child) is a curse. Their hierarchy of values is confused and turned upside down. 

Sterilized spouses send unspoken signals to their children, to themselves, and to their God. To their children they say: “You were wanted, but your future brothers and sisters are unwanted.” To each other they say: “I don’t want to be open to the gift of life with you. Our fertility has served its purpose, and now it can be disposed of. Sterile sex is our sign of companionship from this time forward.” To God they say: “From now on we do not want to receive your gift of the child to us. We choose not to fully open our lives to you, and risk being procreators of a new person’s life with you. Your life-giving love is not welcome in our sexual union. We choose an orgasm, a tickle in the groins, in preference to making the total personal gift of ourselves to you and receiving the Holy Communion of yourself to us. We refuse to acquire the self-possession and self-mastery that marital chastity requires. Immediate gratification is a non-negotiable absolute in our lives.” We should not be surprised to find that there are major repercussions that result from these signals.

The choice for having a sterilization reveals a very flawed anthropology, or self-awareness. Such a person regards his or her body, with its fertility, as a sub-personal, non-essential, part of themselves, over which they have total control. This creates a dualism (the body and soul are separated entities) where there ought to be a composite whole (an integrated union of body and soul). This dualistic view identifies the real person with his consciousness, with his ability to communicate, and with his capacity for friendship and relatedness. The body is merely something sub-personal, sub-human; and as something coming from the earth and then returning to the earth, it belongs to an impersonal nature. We ought to have total control over our fertility, just as we have over raw nature. 

But this view fails to see that we are incarnate spirits, bodied persons, whose bodies reveal the presence, thoughts, wishes and affections of the unseen immaterial interior spirit. We do not have bodies (like we own something); rather, we are identified with our bodies. What you do to my body, you do to me. If I willfully destroy the integrity of my body through contraception or sterilization, then I am violating myself and attacking my own self-dignity. We did not design our human nature, or our bodies. That is God’s prerogative alone. 

We must recognize our true condition as bodied-persons and then choose to respect the limitations that our bodies impose upon us. One of these limitations is the need to acquire self-mastery over our sexual impulses. No one can force us to accept the truth about these matters. But no one can prevent the repercussions that such a denial of reality inevitably brings to our selves, to our marriages, to our families and to our relationship with God. 

It is very sad to say, but many Catholics now reject God’s plan for marriage and the spousal act. A 50% divorce rate, an 80% cohabitation rate, and an 85% contraception/sterilization rate (where 40% are sterilized) are clear evidence of this massive rejection. Some Catholics may not know God’s plan for these matters, since they never heard of them from the pulpit or in catechesis. But many Catholics do know the teaching and reject it. Dissenting theologians have contributed heavily to this disregard for good moral teaching. The secular culture, heavily influenced by Planned Parenthood, has been the “magisterium” for many Catholics. Medical doctors, the American Medical Association, the American College of Gynecologists and Obstetricians, driven by the pharmaceutical companies and big profits from the sale of contraceptives, have influenced attitudes of Catholics. Less than 1% of Catholic Ob/Gyns refuse to prescribe contraception/sterilization. The others received their medical ethics at state universities, and have no clue about the rationale which supports a Catholic sexual ethic. Moral relativism prevails: “I have my moral truths, and you have yours. So, don’t force yours upon me.” 

This environment explains the palpable hostility today to Humanae Vitae. All this makes it very difficult to appeal to Catholics to return to God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family. But massive opposition is not a good reason for despair and defeatism. In this world there will always be a battle between the forces of goodness and evil. The task of the clergy is to propose God’s plan and explain it goodness and inner logic. Truth always has its own appeal. Goodness always exerts its own attraction. Everyone wants to have a strong marriage and a healthy-happy family. Then the task of the laity is to understand that plan, and then freely choose to incorporate it into their lives. 

If God’s plan is proclaimed, and people freely choose to guide their lives by that plan, then all of these things are possible. If moral guides and spiritual leaders will not propose these values, then we can expect further deterioration in marriage and family life. This will come in the shape of same sex marriages, below replacement fertility rates, expanding euthanasia, fewer vocations to the priesthood and religious life, massive abortion used as a backup for failed contraception, greater promiscuity and more sterilization. 

Faith and persecution go together. The world is the better for the presence of the martyrs, whose lives point to the splendor of the truth that they were willing to suffer detraction and die for. It is the worse for their absence. 

Good resources on explaining how to deal with the problem of sterilization can be found at these websites: One More Soul ( www.OMSoul.com), the Edith Stein Foundation ( www.theedithsteinfoundation.com), NFP Outreach (www.nfpoutreach.org) and The Couple to Couple League ( www.CCLI.org).

Cordially your,

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

“Not everyone who says ‘Lord! Lord!’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father, who is in Heaven.” (Read Matthew 7:21-7.) 

This is the passage that concludes the great Sermon on the Mount, which encapsulates the preaching of Jesus. He is warning us against what today can be called the “sugar coated Gospel.” The sugar coated Gospel is one that stresses upbeat feelings, positive thinking, and looking out for yourself. There are lots of “Be nice to others, and to yourself,” and “God loves you just the way you are.” This gospel accommodates itself to the surrounding culture, and avoids being very far out of step with contemporary trends. This gospel places high value upon popularity rankings. But it does not prepare us for the real temptations that will inevitably come from the world, the flesh and the devil. It makes few demands upon us. 

A friend of mine in California described an RCIA program in his parish along these lines. The program mentioned abortion, but excluded the entire third pillar of the Catechism, which is about morality. There was nothing on the formation of conscience and the Ten Commandments. 

This kind of catechesis is something like a football coach placing more emphasis upon the new, sharp-looking, uniforms of his players than upon stressing basic drills and physical calisthenics. You can imagine what happens when his team faces some reality on the gridiron. 

Jesus assures us that “only he who does the will of my Father in heaven will enter the Kingdom of Heaven.” God has made his will known by revealing the Ten Commandments, and by explaining his plan for marriage, spousal love and family. That is what He expects of us. If people are not taught these things, then how will they be prepared to withstand the typhoons, cyclones and floods of worldly temptation? 

Young people today face some formidable odds in our society. They face a 50% divorce rate, and 80% cohabitation rate, and 85% contraception rate where 40% of Catholics of childbearing years are now sterilized. If future generations are to avoid the total collapse of their house, then they must take the words of Christ seriously. They must know what the Father wants and expects of us. This means they must first hear these things from pulpits. They must put the teaching of Jesus into practice. And they must place their full confidence in the help of the Lord. Heaven is within the grasp of everyone, but not without a real struggle with the temptations coming from a fallen world. 

We are called to continual conversion of mind and heart. That is why we cannot be content with our present condition in the sight of the Lord. The Gospel constantly challenges us to take the next step, to move closer to God and to relinquish the grip of the world upon us. This has clear implications for those who are trapped in the contraceptive culture. 

Too often the authentic Gospel is replaced with the “Sugar Coated” Gospel.

“Not everyone who says ‘Lord! Lord!’ will enter the Kingdom of Heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father, who is in Heaven.” 

Cordially your,

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

Eighty five year old Carl Djerassi the Austrian chemist who helped invent the contraceptive pill now says that his co-creation has led to a "demographic catastrophe." 

In an article published by the Vatican this week, the head of the world's Catholic doctors broadened the attack on the pill, claiming it had also brought "devastating ecological effects" by releasing into the environment "tons of hormones" that had impaired male fertility. 

The assault began with a personal commentary in the Austrian newspaper Der Standard by Carl Djerassi. The Austrian chemist was one of three whose formulation of the synthetic progestogen Norethisterone marked a key step toward the earliest oral contraceptive pill. 

Djerassi outlined the "horror scenario" that occurred because of the population imbalance, for which his invention was partly to blame. He said that in most of Europe there was now "no connection at all between sexuality and reproduction." He said: "This divide in Catholic Austria, a country which has on average 1.4 children per family, is now complete." 

He described families who had decided against reproduction as "wanting to enjoy their schnitzels while leaving the rest of the world to get on with it." 

The fall in the birth rate, he said, was an "epidemic" far worse, but given less attention, than obesity. Young Austrians, he said, were committing national suicide if they failed to procreate. And if it were not possible to reverse the population decline they would have to understand the necessity of an "intelligent immigration policy." 

The head of Austria's Catholics, Cardinal Christoph Schonborn, told an interviewer that the Vatican had forecast 40 years ago that the pill would lead to a dramatic fall in the birth rate in the west. 

"Somebody above suspicion like Carl Djerassi ... is saying that each family has to produce three children to maintain population levels, but we're far away from that," he said. 

Schonborn told Austrian TV that when he first read Pope Paul VI's 1968 encyclical condemning artificial contraception he viewed it negatively as a "cold shower." But he said he had altered his views as, over time, it had proved "prophetic." 

Writing for the Vatican daily, L'Osservatore Romano, the president of the World Federation of Catholic Medical Associations, Dr. Jose Maria Simon Castellvi, said research from his association also showed the pill "worked in many cases with a genuinely ... abortive effect." 

The Spanish doctor pointed to the Federation's recent document commemorating the 40th anniversary of Humanae Vitae, which "irrefutably shows that the most widely used anti-ovulatory pill in the industrialized world, the one made with low doses of estrogen and progesterone, in many cases works with an anti-implantation effect; that is, abortifacient [effect], because it expels a small human embryo." 

Castellvi also pointed out that "this anti-implantation effect is acknowledged in scientific literature, which shamelessly speaks of an embryo loss rate. Curiously, however, this information does not reach the public at large." 

He also pointed to the "devastating ecological effects of the tons of hormones discarded into the environment each year. We have sufficient data to state that one of the causes of masculine infertility in the West is the environmental contamination caused by the products of the 'pill'." Castellvi noted as well that the International Agency for Research on Cancer reported in 2005 that the pill has carcinogenic effects. 

After explaining that the "natural methods of regulating fertility [NFP] are the ones that are effective and that respect the nature of the person," Castellvi stated that "in celebrating the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Man we can say that the contraceptive methods violate at least five important rights: the right to life, the right to health, the right to education, the right to information (its dissemination occurs to the detriment of information about natural methods) and the right of equality between the sexes (responsibility for contraceptive use almost always falls to the woman)." 

After underscoring the importance of sexual relations within marriage for the union and growth in love of the spouses, Castellvi pointed out that “the doctrine of Humanae Vitae is largely ignored because, among other reasons, at the time doctors did not accept it.”

“The opposite question,” he continued, “can help us see how prophetic Paul VI was. If he would have accepted the ‘pill,’ would we today be able to know of its anti-implantation effects?” Castellvi wrote.

“A doctor’s prestige lies in being able to authoritatively offer to couples alternatives to contraceptives. The relationship between doctor and patient is so strong that it can only be broken with great difficulty, even if between the two it seems to be like a dissident theologian. Therefore it is necessary that we teach and inform doctors more and better about fertility,” he said. 

Castellvi said Catholic doctors would continue working for advancements in their profession but suggested that “the Holy See should respectfully create a special commission for Humanae Vitae.”  http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=11004

FROM: www.catholicnewsagency.com 

Washington DC, Jan 26, 2009 / 07:16 pm (CNA).- House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) in a Sunday interview tried to justify the inclusion of hundreds of millions of dollars in funding for contraceptives in the $825 billion economic stimulus package by claiming family planning services “reduce cost.”

Speaker Pelosi made her comments in an appearance on ABC’s This Week with host George Stephanopoulos. He asked how the expansion of “family planning services” could be considered an economic stimulus. The Speaker replied:

“Well, the family planning services reduce cost. They reduce cost. The states are in terrible fiscal budget crises now and part of what we do for children's health, education and some of those elements are to help the states meet their financial needs. One of those - one of the initiatives you mentioned, the contraception, will reduce costs to the states and to the federal government.”

Stephanopoulos responded, “So no apologies for that?”

“No apologies. No,” Speaker Pelosi replied. “We have to deal with the consequences of the downturn in our economy.”

Speaker Pelosi is a self-described Catholic. However, Catholic teaching considers contraceptive use an intrinsic evil.

The “family planning services” in the stimulus package “would expand federal funding for contraception through Medicaid, allowing those not poor enough to be currently eligible for Medicaid to nonetheless qualify for the contraception aid,” reports CNSNews.com.

The article goes on to explain that the Clinton administration created a program allowing individual states to “seek a waiver to offer Medicaid ‘family planning’ services to those who are otherwise not qualified for Medicaid.” Once the state receives the waiver, “the federal government matches state Medicaid family planning funds with $9 in federal money for every $1 the state spends.”

Under Pelosi’s provision, states would not need to apply for the waiver to receive the 9-1 federal contraception funding. CNSNews.com also reported that even the White House has backed away from Pelosi saying that the family planning provision was not President Obama’s idea.

Father Tom Euteneur of Human Life International also criticized Speaker Pelosi’s economic reasoning. “She presents as self-evident the idea that children are a hindrance to improving states' economies. Lies don't become truth by repeating them, they only become more acceptable,” he commented to CNA.

“The problem is, however, that it is sick. We must never reduce a human being to his or her economic value. The Speaker is no more ‘Catholic’ than she is an economic expert,” he charged.

“What she and her fellow anti-life crusaders are doing is trying to sneak their destructive ideology into law by convincing the ignorant that it is fiscally necessary,” he continued. “‘Never waste a crisis,’ is how Rahm Emmanuel, Obama's new Chief of Staff put it.

“When people are scared, they'll agree to almost anything that is presented as a solution to their problem, even if, as is the case here, it has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with economic stimulus. This is an insult to both the intelligence and the moral consciences of the people she is supposed to represent.”

According to Father Euteneur, Russian demographics provide a cautionary example. “Look at Russia, the birthplace of the progressive ideal of widely available contraception and abortion. Their birthrate is now the lowest in the developed world. There are more abortions than live births in Russia and they can't seem to change people's minds back to the idea of having children.

“Their society is crumbling as the few young people they have decide they don't want to pay for their elders' care, or they simply leave. Russia, once the bright light of the future for ‘progressives’, now is evidence of what this deep spiritual illness does when it is allowed to run amok in a formerly beautiful and rich Christian culture. Will we learn from their example and reject contraception and abortion as a solution to society's ills?”

He suggested that Planned Parenthood and its subsidies will be the obvious beneficiaries of the contraceptive funding. “You'll also see increased promotion of contraception in state hospitals and in ‘education’ to young people in our schools,” he predicted.

CNA also sought comment from Dr. William Luckey, former chairman of the Political Science and Economics Department at Christendom College and author of the CNA column “Indispensible Economics.”

Luckey asked how long Speaker Pelosi expects the recession to last. “Children conceived today will be born 9 months from now. Does she think that the economy will be in recession then? How can she tell? So even if these plans went into effect today, which is impossible given the time Congress takes to do anything, the economic downturn will probably be reversed by then.”

He also stated that Speaker Pelosi appears to think that children are an economic burden to society. He said the number of children who use public services must be considered, wagering that they are only “a small minority.”

In the long run, Dr. Luckey said, “most every child born now grows up to be a positive contributor to society. People, with rare exceptions, produce more than they consume. If you cut back on the population, you cut back on production.”

He told CNA that many European countries are suffering demographic decline from birth control policies.

Finally, he asked, “where is the logic that says that if you take money from me to give to others so that they can have sexual pleasure without taking responsibility for it, the economy will be helped? Why not just let me keep my money in the first place to spend on more valuable things for my family?”

He called the contraception initiative “immoral” and “completely based in ignorance.” “She is probably buying votes from the birth control lobby—and abortion will be next as a solution to our economic woes,” Dr. Luckey claimed.

Here is the situation: I am in graduate school to become a nurse-midwife. I plan to be an NFP-only practitioner upon graduation. However, I recently explained my position regarding artificial contraception to the director of my midwifery program, and she is insistent that while she will try to place me in NFP-friendly or NFP-only clinical sites, I must still gain the clinical skills of inserting IUDs, counseling for contraceptives, etc. She says that I cannot graduate from this program without doing so, as these skills are within the midwifery scope of practice and thus required for sitting for the boards. 

I can't imagine that they can force me to do these things (or kick me out of the program), but I need some information to go back to her with so that I can maintain my position AND graduate from the program. I would really appreciate any input that you might have on how to appropriately and respectfully fight this issue. In particular, I'd love to find some legal information regarding my rights as a student in the medical field. 

Thank you, Perplexed.

Dear Perplexed: This amounts to being forced against one's conscience, as there is no way to licitly agree to participate in providing contraceptive technology or IUD insertion, for contraceptive or sterilizing purposes. That would always involve formal or, at minimum, proximate material cooperation and therefore be unacceptable morally for the Catholic (or anyone). 

Further I don't think this imposition is legal either. It needs to be made clear that this is a non-negotiable issue and that you have a 2-fold responsibility to 1) respect your own religious and conscience-based preferences and beliefs; but just as important, 2) your honest convictions that these types of interventions represent doing harm to patients and therefore are never acceptable from that perspective as well. 

You must explain this calmly but assertively, using the analogy of poisoning of patients, something forbidden not only by our private religious convictions but also by an honest professional-moral sense as well. And you need to make it clear that you intend to vindicate your rights as well. In the end you must unfortunately draw a line somewhere; hopefully it can be amicable and the preceptor can listen to reason. I would love to talk with you about this, and hope you do not end up needing an attorney, but we know some good ones if it comes to that. 

You deserve better than this, and you deserve to be respected. There is nothing unreasonable about this -- it's as if the entire profession condoned cigarette chain smoking. You would still be right to discourage that even if you were the only one doing so. Indeed your counsel would in that instance be all the more needed! Call me because I can provide evidence-based data on contraception and sterilization that can help.

Please help me. I have an agnostic husband who wants to get sterilized. I am beside myself over this. Right now our marriage is in good shape. We have eight children, some of which are adopted. They are all beautiful children. My husband is a good provider. But he is terrified of the possibility of having another child to care for. He doesn’t trust NFP. What can I do to dissuade him from having a vasectomy? I know that this is against God’s plan for us, and that it will have many bad consequences.                                                                     Help!      

Dear Help, 

First of all you need to be very thankful for the blessings of a good marriage and eight wonderful children. You have a very rich marriage and family life. You and your children will learn much about love, generosity, commitment to one another and how to appreciate diverse personalities. Help your husband to count his blessings too. 

Regarding the vasectomy: you have no right to give him permission to do this. If you do give your permission, then you share in the evil deed as an accomplice.

If he does this on his own, despite your disapproval, then there is not much you can do to stop him. He has free will also, and wants to abuse it by turning against the goodness of his God-given fertility. 

Here is what I recommend: Tell him that you are not going to have relationships with him if he does that because he is not open to life and open to the way God instituted that act of love. And if he wants to live that way, that’s fine, but you need to put your foot down with him. 

The two of you need to take a thorough course in NFP. When learned well, and practiced correctly, NFP is 99% effective. If you come to the decision that you cannot support another child, then the thing for the two of you to do is to expand the times for periodic abstinence, and be on the safe side. 

The Church would not recommend NFP if it were not reliable as an effective means of spacing pregnancies. NFP is very reliable, if it is learned thoroughly and practices faithfully. Now the responsibility is in your court and that of your husband. 

Help your husband understand why every couple is to be open to the total goodness of love and to the total goodness of life in their spousal acts. Help him understand that the spousal act, as God designed it, requires that both spouses make the total personal gift of themselves to each other. That means no conditions, no reservations, and nothing held back. This includes your fertility. God has a magnificent plan for spouses and their spousal act. And He never asks the impossible from us. He only asks that we learn that self-sacrifice is part of real love. 

Help your husband understand that he shares the task with you of teaching your eight children the virtue of self-possession, self-control, and self-sacrifice. How can a sterilized father, or mother, do this? Their children know if their parents are contracepting or are sterilized. 

You are in my prayers. Ask the Holy Spirit to guide you. Ask the Holy Family to give you the strength to do what is right. 

Fr. Dan McCaffrey

NFP Outreach

A MODEL FOR PROMOTING NFP IN PARISHES THAT WORKS 

Here is a model that works for promoting NFP in a diocese. Consider how it can be applied to your diocese. 

Brian Murphy is a strong promoter of God’s plan for marriage and spousal love, as found in Gaudium et Spes and Humanae Vitae. Over the past ten years he and I have given many Humanae Vitae conferences for clergy in the southern California area. Only small groups of priests and deacons came (5-10), but this planted seeds of encouragement for preaching this message in dioceses where there is stiff resistance to Humanae Vitae. Brian recently organized a 9-day event in Los Angeles and Orange County, CA, which yielded remarkable results. Here is the plan. 

We set up two consecutive NPF Parish Weekends in nearby parishes, and split my airfare between them. That covered my traveling expenses. I then resided in the rectories over the weekends. Once in the Diocese, I was then available for a variety of events between the weekends. Brian and I form a good team to promote these issues in a variety of ways. 

On the weekend of 25-6 April 09, we worked at Saints Peter and Paul Church in Wilmington (Los Angeles Archdiocese) run by the Norbertine Fathers. About 4,000 families come to this parish, and there are eight Masses every weekend. I gave the homily at all the English Masses. Fr. Raymond Perez, O Praem, the pastor, gave a similar homily at all the Spanish Masses. The message was well received at all the Masses. A generous second collection was proof positive that a homily on God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family was greatly appreciated. 

At each Mass we invited couples, with their children, to come to a room in the parish hall to hear a brief ten-minute presentation by Brian on the merits and values of NFP. Couples came after each Mass, especially after every Mass for the Hispanics. We gave away free CDs related to NFP, in both languages, to everyone who came. We also provided copies of Humanae Vitae in both English and Spanish. Brian composed a list of NFP teachers within a 10-mile radius, so that couples could easily contact them for taking the course. You are very tired after doing this at eight Masses, but it is a very satisfied weariness. 

On Monday we offered a one-day clergy conference at the parish hall. The theme was “How to Preach God’s Plan for Marriage, Spousal Love and Family from the Pulpit.” Eight priests came, and gave us high marks of approval on the evaluation sheets (on a scale from 1-5, mostly 5s and 4s). We gave them many helpful resources, and assisted them in dealing with any doubts or hesitations that might interfere with their taking the initiative in preaching this message. These priests want to encourage other pastors to come to our next Humanae Vitae clergy conference. 

I was a houseguest at Brian’s home during the week. On Wednesday night we went to a weekly prayer group in Brian’s neighborhood. I gave a short teaching on the difference between true and false freedom, and how this relates to the exercise of conscience. We exposed the error of the “primacy of conscience” because we do not determine what is right and what is wrong. As Cardinal Newman said, “Conscience is never a teacher; it is always a pupil.” This was a good preparation for Friday’s event. 

On Thursday evening we went to St. Edward’s Parish in Dana Point, CA, to preach at the 5:30 PM daily Mass, and then offer a mini pro-life conference from 7pm to 9pm at the parish hall on the topic “The Truth About Being Pro-Life.” Fifty people came and received our message with enthusiasm. They know that we all must address the 50% divorce rate, 80% cohabitation rate, and an 85% contraception/sterilization rate among Catholics. Brian and I showed them their tools and offered our encouragment. Fr. Christopher Heath helped to make this event possible. 

On Friday morning we drove to St. Joseph Communications to cut two radio shows. This group feeds material to EWTN’s radio ministry, which is then sent out to over 130 Catholic radio stations across the country. Our first radio show was an expansion upon the nature of human freedom, and the role of conscience. The “primacy of conscience” does not mean that we can decide for ourselves what the moral order is, and then make decisions with the confidence that we are right. Our second radio show was on twelve contrasts between NFP and contraception. We explained where contraception goes wrong, and why there is a world of difference between this and NFP. 

The final event was the second NFP Parish Weekend at St. Boniface Church in Anaheim, CA. With over 8,000 families, this is one of the four largest parishes in the Orange County area. Here there are four distinct cultures: Anglo, Hispanic, Vietnamese and Filipino.

There are ten Masses each weekend: 1 in Vietnamese, 5 in English and 4 in Spanish. I preached at the English Masses, and Fr. Timothy Freyer, the pastor, preached a similar homily at the Spanish Masses. The Vietnamese were having a First Communion Mass that weekend, but their priest, Fr. Augustin Long Vu, will address these issues in the near future.

Many couples came to our short presentation after every Mass. The Hispanics showed the greatest interest: 30 to 70 people came after each Spanish Mass. We ran out of the Spanish CD, “Anticoncepcion, Porque No?” Forty couples signed their names to a list, and we will have more copies of this CD sent to the parish for them. It was obvious that the priests here have been preparing the soil for some time with this message. There must be other parishes in this area that are ready for the boost that our NFP Parish Weekends can provide for them. 

One cannot help but notice the vitality among the Hispanics, Vietnamese and Filipinos. Their Masses are packed with large families, with men and women, boys and girls of every age. They want to hear God’s Plan for marriage, spousal love and family.

By contrast, the Anglo Masses are not so filled, and there are fewer children. When we invited individual couples after their Masses to come to the conference, we often were told: “Oh, I have already taken care of that.” Forty years of silence from the pulpits and massive dissent have taken their toll. May the new immigrants be able to learn from the mistakes of their predecessors. It is clear where the future lies. 

For further details on the organizing of this model, contact Brian Murphy at

bgmurphy@cox.net 

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

I am at my wit's end.  

My husband and I have been happily married for 14 years and have 3 children (12, 9 & 7 years old).  We rarely argue and truly love being around each other.  The one problem we have is that he asks for sex non-stop. This is the first thing he says to me in the morning and usually the last thing he says at night.  He will argue that he does not mention it very often, but I counted 6 times yesterday - I know this was wrong and he was angry with me stating that he will just go without for a month.  He also says that I never start it - I have tried to explain to him that if he would give me a chance to, I might surprise him.  It is to the point that I don't really enjoy having sex because I feel I never get a break. I even dread it when we are home alone because I know he will expect sex. I would like to just sit and have a quiet conversation with him or go to dinner.  If we go to dinner, he will make remarks about getting home.  My doctor suggested that we have a date night or two each week.  This way he can count on my undivided attention and I can know that he can hug/kiss me without him trying to steer it further.  He did not like this idea.  His biggest argument was that my doctor is not Catholic and may not be promoting the right thing.  Please help or steer me to the right person.  This is starting to really become a problem.  I would love to have a healthy sex life with my wonderful husband. -- Frustrated 

Dear Frustrated,

You must be very happy to be blessed with a loving and dedicated husband, with your three children, and with fourteen years of rich married life. 

The problem seems to be that your husband is making too many demands upon you for sex (“He asks for sex non stop.”). 

How can we explain that anything can be abused by going to excess?  I think that any loving husband must take into consideration the legitimate needs of his wife.  She is his bride and soul mate for life.  But she is also a person who has her own unique personal needs and psychological makeup. 

Perhaps the best way to explain this problem is to refer to the principle that a person is always a subject, and should never be reduced to the status of an object (of one’s pleasure).  A person is always an “end,” and is “never to be used” as a  “means.”  A woman knows immediately the difference between being loved and being used.  If a husband truly loves his wife, then he wants to do what is best for her.  He will not force his will upon her to satisfy his personal desires.  He respects her dispositions, her emotional needs and her moods. 

The spousal act is designed to be a totally unselfish act, where each spouse makes the total gift of self to the other.  But if the wife is not prepared, or is indisposed, to engage in sex at a given moment, then a husband’s advances become, not an act of love, but an act of self will, a seeking after his own sexual satisfaction, a forcing himself upon his wife.

I think that the two of you need to reflect upon the requirements of the virtue of chastity, as this pertains to your marriage.  Chastity means that we give good, conscious and reasonable, direction to our passions.  We refuse to be slaves to our sexual drives. We make our sex drives serve the purpose for which God created them.   For the single and celibate person, this means total abstinence from the sexual act.  For the married person, it means periodic abstinence during those times when it would not be a loving, or responsible, act to do. 

If a wife is willing to exchange the spousal act with her husband several times a week, which is the norm for most couples, then she certainly cannot be accused of withholding herself from her husband.   You might talk with your married friends and ask what the norm is for them. 

One of the advantages of Natural Family Planning is that it requires periodic abstinence during the fertile periods.  This forces the couple then to find other ways to express their affection and to nurture their relationship.  It means going back to the time of dating: talking together, a special meal, sharing a special event together, praying together, getting to know the deep mystery of each other better.  Genital sex cannot possibly replace all these dimensions of a marriage relationship.  This is also a time to think about the possibility of having another child, or to discuss the reasons why this is not a good time for having another child. 

I suggest that you read two great documents: 1) Humane Vitae (Pope Paul VI, 1968), and 2) A Letter to Families (Pope John Paul, 1994), and reflect upon them. You can find them on GOOGLE. 

Here are two good passages from these documents: 

 From Humanae Vitae:  9.  Characteristics of Married Love 

This love is above all fully human, a compound of sense and spirit. It is not, then, merely a question of natural instinct or emotional drive. It is also, and above all, an act of the free will, whose trust is such that it is meant not only to survive the joys and sorrows of daily life, but also to grow, so that husband and wife become in a way one heart and one soul, and together attain their human fulfillment. 

It is a love which is total—that very special form of personal friendship in which husband and wife generously share everything, allowing no unreasonable exceptions and not thinking solely of their own convenience. Whoever really loves his partner loves not only for what he receives, but loves that partner for the partner's own sake, content to be able to enrich the other with the gift of himself.

 From John Paul II’s Letter to Families:  12.  Responsible fatherhood and motherhood:

There is however a need for more in-depth study, analyzing the meaning of the conjugal act in view of the values of the "person" and of the "gift" mentioned above. This is what the Church has done in her constant teaching, and in a particular way at the Second Vatican Council. 

In the conjugal act, husband and wife are called to confirm in a responsible way the mutual gift of self which they have made to each other in the marriage covenant. The logic of the total gift of self to the other involves a potential openness to procreation: in this way the marriage is called to even greater fulfillment as a family. Certainly the mutual gift of husband and wife does not have the begetting of children as its only end, but is in itself a mutual communion of love and of life. The intimate truth of this gift must always be safeguarded. "Intimate" is not here synonymous with "subjective". Rather, it means essentially in conformity with the objective truth of the man and woman who give themselves. The person can never be considered a means to an end; above all never a means of "pleasure". The person is and must be nothing other than the end of every act. Only then does the action correspond to the true dignity of the person. 

 Cordially yours,

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

 I am a family physician that recently came back to the Catholic Church. While I was away I had a vasectomy and am in the process of a reversal (7/22/2009 - pray for me please). I stopped prescribing birth control late last year and now would like to be more comfortable with NFP for both personal and professional reasons. I would like any information I can use for my office and my personal life that you would suggest. 

 ....  A. Doctor

Hello, Doctor, 

I am delighted to learn about your spiritual journey back to the Catholic Church and to God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family. 

You must realize that it was because of God’s grace that you were able to rediscover your faith and return back to the sacraments. Mere human efforts would never be strong enough to accomplish so great a thing. I rejoice with you and encourage you to stay close to the Lord, to his sacraments, to reading the Sacred Scriptures, and the life of the Church. That is the source of all our strength.

When you decided to stop prescribing birth control, you became a member of a very elite group of family doctors and ob/gyns. Only one percent of these Catholic doctors are following God’s plan for marriage and spousal love. The others are perpetuating, and adding to, the problem.

I encourage you to share your journey with other family doctors and ob/gyns. Help them to understand the values that you have rediscovered when you rejected contraception and sterilization and embraced God’s plan for spousal love. You will speak from personal experience, which is always very convincing. Explain simply in medical terms why you would never prescribe contraception again. 

Now I encourage you to learn NFP thoroughly so that you can recommend it to your many patients. There are several major providers of NFP in this country. The most medically advanced method is the Creighton model ( American Academy of Fertility Care Professionals - www.aafcp.org). It also requires the most training. It is especially helpful in dealing with women who are experiencing medical complications with their cycles and with infertility.

The Billings method is also very successful in helping with medical complications ( Billings Ovulation Method Association - USA - www.boma-usa.org). Worldwide, the Billings’ method is the most used one, since it is so simple and inexpensive.

In this country the most popular method is that of the Couple to Couple League, who provides both teacher training and training of local promoters (Couple-to-Couple League [Sympto-thermal method of NFP] - www.ccli.org). You can find the websites to many other groups at our website, www.NFPOutreach.org. Click on “NFP Links.” All three groups provide training for medical personnel.

 When you advertise yourself as a totally pro-life doctor, all the pro life people will come to you, as well as others your patients will recommend. Many pro-life doctors find it useful to advertise in Catholic parish bulletins. Pro-life couples are always looking for a totally pro-life doctor. 

You may find it helpful to be in contact with a moral support group of doctors who share your values. To locate those near you, go to One More Soul’s website: www.OMSoul.org click on “NFP DIRECTORY”, and then type in your ZIP code. Then all the MDs, nurses, and NFP teachers will appear, together with their phone numbers and addresses. You can also click on “DOCTORS BY SPECIALTY.” 

All three major providers provide literature that could be used in your clinic. Ask them for samples. One More Soul is a great resource for brochures, CDs, pamphlets and books on NFP, and the harms of contraception/sterilization.

Here are some more resources for you to consult:

Free downloads at One More Soul: http://www.omsoul.com/one-more-soul-publications.php 

An interview with Dr. Mary Martin 

NFP Q&A columns on our Website, especially #30

The NFP Professionals list: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/subscribe/nfpprofessionals 

Billings teacher training and conference in OKC in November Brochure

NFP is much more than a technique for spacing pregnancies. It is a marital spirituality, a way of life. It is a concrete expression of God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and marriage. When we promote NFP, we are promoting strong marriages and healthy, happy families. 

You are in my prayers, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

Why Dr. Mary Martin, M.D, Refuses to Prescribe Contraceptives (Part I of II) 

By Eileen Dugan, Sooner Catholic 

MIDWEST CITY- At least one Catholic doctor believes that the reason American society is obsessed with the contraceptive pill is because it has been brainwashed by big pharmaceutical companies. These companies have been successful in pushing their agenda into America’s medical schools. Doctors now prescribe the pill not only to prevent pregnancy but also to treat many gynecological problems. Unfortunately, the pill treats only the symptoms, not the underlying conditions, this natural planning doctor contends.

There are fewer than 50 natural family planning doctors in North America. The state of Oklahoma has two. One is in Tulsa; the other, Dr. Mary Martin, has been practicing in the Oklahoma City area since January 2004.  

Before coming to Oklahoma, Martin practiced obstetrics, gynecology, infertility, and Natural Family Planning (NFP) outreach in Hammond, Indiana, at Saint Margaret Mary Health Care.           

A job with Renaissance Physicians of Midwest City brought her here from Indiana. All Renaissance Physicians, including Martin, are Board Certified or board eligible.

The Renaissance Physicians were looking for someone to fill a niche for a more natural approach to fertility, gynecology, and childbirth, Martin said. She answered their call.           

Martin has not always been a supporter of NFP. Although a cradle Catholic, in 1995 when she started her practice in Warrenton, Virginia, she routinely prescribed contraceptives. In 1999, that suddenly changed as she underwent a conversion experience. She said a Catholic priest in the Confessional made it her penance to research whether contraceptive agents could cause abortions. Martin said she was shocked to find out that, yes, contraceptives do have the potential to do just that. She immediately stopped prescribing contraceptive agents for any reason.

Contraceptives Do Not Suppress Ovulation Reliably           

As part of her research, Martin observed first hand, via ultrasound, that contraceptive agents do not suppress ovulation, reliably. “The failure rate of the pill is roughly 10 percent,” Martin said. She cites the Trussel study from the 1995 National Survey of Family Growth.

When a woman, who is on birth control pills becomes pregnant, “the contraceptive makers always blame the woman and say she has not been careful enough in taking the medicines, but the data is clear,” Martin said. “I observed still developing follicles, (egg cells) and ovulation in women on the pill, as witnessed by ultrasound.”           

The contraceptive companies say that ovulation does not occur. And perhaps that was the case when the amount of hormones in contraceptives was much higher. But the amount of hormones in birth control pills has steadily decreased, and the new low-dose formulations certainly do not always suppress ovulation, Martin said.            

“Most troublesome is what it says on the package of contraceptives. It states that the endometrium [the lining of the uterus] is thinned by hormones in the contraceptives to prevent the implantation of a baby. [In other words, if ovulation does occur and results in pregnancy, the baby will be prevented from surviving.]

In my mind, this is the same as an early chemical abortion. If that only happened one time in my career, I wouldn’t want to be responsible,” Martin said.

Most Infertile Couples Are Never Properly Diagnosed           

Martin said she is also concerned about couples with infertility problems. “Most infertile couples are never properly diagnosed. They are simply told their best chance of having a baby is in vitro fertilization (IVF). IVF is not only prohibitively expensive, very invasive, and not covered by most insurances, but it is also morally suspect,” she said. 

Because of her Catholic faith teaching, Martin does not believe that physicians should insert themselves into the creative act. She believes that is exactly “what doctors do when they separate the marital act from fertilization by IVF and other assisted reproductive technology (ART). I respect the marital act. I’m not going to intrude on that,” she said.            

Typically, the doctor involved with in vitro fertilization asks the husband to collect a sperm sample, and then, the doctor retrieves the woman’s eggs through artificial means. The egg and sperm are combined in a test tube or Petri dish. The resulting embryos are graded and frozen or simply thrown away. “How are the husband and wife co-creators with God in this?” Martin asks. “It’s completely a laboratory procedure.”           

Unlike other obstetricians and gynecologists in the U.S., Martin uses the research of several doctors in Australia to help her treat infertility and other gynecologic disorders. One of these methods is the Billings Ovulation Method. 

Billings’ Ovulation Method           

“Brown’s Ovarian Monitor” was developed by Professor James Brown of Melbourne, Australia. He is an Australian PhD., bioengineer who has done foundational work in human reproduction,” Martin said. “He developed bioassays, which are a way to measure the hormones in the blood stream and urine.”           

Brown was associated with two other Australian physicians, Doctors Lyn and John Billings, a husband-and-wife team, also from Melbourne. A priest, Father Maurice Catarinich, had asked the couple if there were a scientific way to determine when a woman is fertile. The Calendar-Rhythm method of NFP was unreliable, and Father Catarinich hoped that a more dependable, natural method could be developed.

The Billingses had discovered in the early 1960s that changes in cervical/vaginal mucus indicated when ovulation had occurred, ovulation being the time in a woman’s cycle when she is most fertile. Dr. Brown, soon thereafter, developed bioassays. In the past 50-plus years, over one million of these hormone assays, or tests, have proven that, as the Billingses had discovered, changes in cervical mucus correlate exactly with ovulation.

In the 1960s, the Billingses and Dr. Brown joined with Dr. Erik Odelblad, M.D., PhD., who Martin said was considered the world’s foremost expert on the cervix and cervical mucus. His work tested what the Billingses had suspected and Brown had proved: it is the pattern of change in the mucus symptom that indicates that ovulation has taken place. Doctors can now use these findings to help parents plan families and aid women with infertility problems, without using IVF or artificial contraception,” Martin said. 

“Both Brown and Odelblad had been on pharmaceutical teams that developed the contraceptive pill,” Martin said. “Neither are Catholics, but both saw the potential for misuse of the birth control pill; Now, in their mid 80s, both are still actively researching. The Billingses, who are Catholics, put their lives into the science on which modern NFP is based,” Martin said.

Martin corresponds regularly with both Brown and Odelblad. These scientists do not publish in the United States; they prefer European journals, such as British Medical Journal and Lancet.

Odelblad, a Swede, prefers Acta Scandanavia, a Swedish journal.

Both Brown and Odelblad have collaborated with the World Health Organization throughout their careers, Martin sa

Why Dr. Mary Martin, M.D, Refuses to Prescribe Contraceptives (Part II of II) 

By Eileen Dugan, Sooner Catholic 

Read Part 1:

Martin corresponds regularly with both Brown and Odelblad. These scientists do not publish in the United States; they prefer European journals, such as British Medical Journal and Lancet. Odelblad, a Swede, prefers Acta Scandanavia, a Swedish journal. Both Brown and Odelblad have collaborated with the World Health Organization throughout their careers, Martin said.

 Why Have So Few Americans Heard of These Scientific Advances?

So, if the data concerning these findings from Australia (on NFP’s  high accuracy in tracing fertility) has been published, why have so few people in this country heard of these scientific advances? “It is because there is such a bias against these findings by the pharmaceutical companies,” Martin said.           

“The pharmaceutical industry has a huge stake in women’s health care. Not only are contraceptive products used for birth control but they are also marketed for the treatment of common gynecological problems.

“The pharmaceutical companies have brainwashed [the medical community in the United States against any methods other than their own]. They fund all the research published in textbooks and sponsor all the medical meetings, and so from the time we enter our training, we are inundated with their products.

 I No Longer Have To Rely On Contraceptive Agents To Practice Gynecology.           

“I learned, studying the work of Doctors Billings, Billings, Brown, and Odelblad, that I no longer have to rely on contraceptive agents to practice gynecology. I am now diagnosing and treating the underlying disorders. If a woman comes in to see me with a problem concerning irregular menstrual cycles, infertility, and/or pain, having learned the signs and symptoms of fertility, I can now make a diagnosis of why she is having the problem.”           

Polycystic ovarian syndrome, PCOS, is one example of an ovulation disorder Dr. Martin diagnoses. “PCOS affects a woman’s fertility, but her menstrual pattern is symptomatic of a disorder affecting her entire health and well being,” Martin said.

PCOS increases the long-term risk of stroke, diabetes, high blood pressure, and heart disease. Women with this condition have a 39 percent higher chance of miscarriage, infertility, and undesirable side effects: excess body hair, acne, central body obesity, irregular bleeding, and may have other underlying metabolic problems. 

“When you prescribe contraceptives for this disorder, you are not correcting the underlying condition,” Martin said. “If you simply cover it up, you never get to the reason for it. I can help women with ovulation disorders to determine the reason and correct it.

“If I can fix a woman’s damaged fallopian tubes or a uterine or an ovarian problem, I will do so, Martin said.

There Are Seven Fertility Monitors, but Only One Predicts Ovulation  

There are seven fertility monitors or hormone measurement tests on the world market. Of these seven, only “Brown’s Ovarian Monitor” actually predicts ovulation. The others spot-check estrogen or luteinizing hormone, but that does not accurately indicate whether or when ovulation will occur, Martin said. “With Brown’s monitor, we measure the exact amount of hormone produced by the woman’s ovaries via daily urine collection. The other fertility monitors only take snapshots of her ovaries by spot-checking her saliva and urine; these tests merely show that the amounts of the hormones, estrogen and progesterone have met an arbitrary cutoff. 

The other fertility monitors also use mathematical calculations to arrive at the time of ovulation. These calculations are not always correct, however.

With Brown’s method, the actual production of estrogen and progesterone is measured. When the amount of estrogen rises, it is the beginning of the woman’s fertile phase. When progesterone rises, that is proof that ovulation has occurred.

Not only does the Brown method exactly pinpoint ovulation, “it is affordable and morally consistent with our faith,” Martin said. “If the couple has a correctable fertility problem, I can help them in an affordable, non-invasive way.

“This is Brown’s life’s work. I felt I had an obligation to provide this technology to infertile couples. It can also help people with other metabolic disorders like PCOS, hypothyroidism, which is an under active thyroid, hyperprolactinemia, which is caused by a benign brain tumor, and other disorders of the thyroid and pituitary glands, and endometriosis,” Martin said.

Many Ob/Gyns Are Afraid to Stop Prescribing Contraception           

Martin said many currently practicing gynecologists and obstetricians “are afraid to stop prescribing contraceptives. “They fear their careers will suffer. I am proof that this is not the case.  I have had three successful practices in Virginia, Indiana, and here in Oklahoma to disprove this.           

“I would ask any woman currently on the pill, why she is on it?” Martin said. “What is her diagnosis? Does she have irregular bleeding? That is not a diagnosis. That is a symptom. What she needs to know are the underlying causes of her bleeding.

“We have, for too long, ignored the underlying causes of bleeding, infertility, or pain. I am interested in finding out what the underlying causes of these conditions are and treating them,” Martin said.        

In this short article, Tom articulates very well how a husband and father expresses his love and protection for his bride and family. I hope we can spread his message far and wide. --Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

When we first married, my wife, Misty, and I were the typical secular couple. We relied on hormonal contraception. Due to bad side effects, that didn’t last long. Misty found out about Natural Family Planning (NFP) through a Catholic friend. Admittedly, I was suspicious of all the “hocus pocus” involving thermometers at o’ dark-thirty in the morning and observations written down in cryptic symbols on the NFP chart. That would all change in surprising ways once we got into living the NFP lifestyle. 

Before having children, Misty had been an atheist and I had been an agnostic. With our first child, the miracle of life spurred a spiritual awakening in us. We realized the Holy Spirit had already led us into a Catholic life. Even after our conversion, however, NFP grew our relationship with each other and with God in ways we never expected. 

We studied Pope John Paul II’s “theology of the body” and became excited about living out our faith and sharing it. It was thrilling to learn the compelling reasons behind the Church’s beautiful teachings on sex and marriage. 

Much to my surprise, I also learned how grateful my wife was that I was willing to learn how her body worked. Sharing the family planning responsibility, as well as finding non-sexual ways of expressing affection and intimacy when we had good reasons to postpone pregnancy, strengthened our marriage and made me a better husband and father. 

When we became Catholic, I knew I wanted to be the spiritual leader of our family, but I didn’t understand what that entailed besides bringing our children to church on Sunday. Through NFP and Scripture, I discovered that I had a choice in the kind of man I was going to be. 

We often blame Eve for eating the forbidden fruit. But in Genesis, we learn that after taking a bite, she turned and offered the fruit to Adam, who was with her. Adam didn’t stop her and say, “This is a bad idea, let’s go.” He did not protect his wife, but stood by silently while the serpent convinced her to surrender her holiness and damage her relationship with God. 

Then there was St. Joseph. When Joseph obeyed the angel who told him to bring Mary into his home, he was accepting the public shame and embarrassment of a pregnant fiancée. He sacrificed his personal honor and reputation to obey God and protect Mary and Jesus.

The choice for a husband is clear: he can be his wife’s Adam or he can be her Joseph. A man can stand by silently and allow his wife to suffer the physical and spiritual consequences of contraception. Or he can defend her virtue, body, and soul by using NFP. Today, contraception is accepted and expected. Any man who forgoes it for NFP will likely be exposed to ridicule and criticism. But as St. Joseph taught us, there are some things more important than the opinion of others. May we husbands choose to be Joseph to our wives!                              

Tom and Misty Mealey have four children and live in the Diocese of Richmond 

A Note from Misty: 

We are happy to help you spread the good news about NFP. This article has really seemed to touch people; just recently, the Bishop of St. Augustine used it in an article to parishioners. He said it should "clarify" why couples should eschew contraception for NFP, particularly husbands. Denver is also including it in their marriage prep packets. 

In our years of promoting NFP as a couple, we've always found that challenging men to a more "chivalrous" role as the noble protector of their wives really resonates with them. Men are so degraded in our culture; as witnessed by TV, a man is either a buffoon to be dismissed, a chauvinist to be opposed, or a sensitive, pony-tail type to be dominated. A strong but sensitive and loving man is rarely depicted. Tom gives the men a redeeming, truly masculine vision to aim for, as opposed to those weak and undignified stereotypes. I think men are starving for someone to articulate what true masculinity is and how they can embrace it. 

I am blessed beyond measure with my husband and we are both so grateful for how far God has brought us. Good luck with the article! 

In Christ, 

Misty

Dear Fr. Matthew @ the Abbey,

I am a single mom, and I am faced with total abstinence if I am to be consistent with the Church’s teaching on sex. This is a tough row to hoe, but certainly not impossible. Could you explain to your readers the witness value of faithful single people, and faithful single moms and dads? Thanks, S.

Dear S,

There are many people whose calling in life is to refrain from sex altogether. Think of all those called to live a single life, or a celibate life, or single moms and dads. Think also of all young people who are unmarried. They all make a great contribution to the Church and society, and are living normal, healthy lives. Having sex and experiencing sexual pleasure is not an absolute imperative for living a normal life. 

Spousal love, as God designed it, has a definite purpose. It was designed to be the expression of making the total gift of one’s self to a spouse, to whom you have committed yourself in a lifelong relationship. This gift of self involves both love and openness to life. Anything short of this is not spousal love. It is a sexual act, but it is not a spousal act.

Everyone is called to acquire the virtue of self-possession and self-control that is called chastity. Everyone is called to live out chastity according to his or her walk of life. There is also a marital chastity, which involves the avoidance of contraception and sterilization, a willingness to make the total gift of self and openness to new life and children. Chastity is the difficult virtue. Our sexual drives were designed by God to be powerful, so that couples would naturally be drawn to each other and that many new persons would be brought into this world and live forever in the world to come. We gradually grow into the virtue of self-possession. It requires self-understanding, self-discipline, persistence, the use of all the natural and supernatural helps to purity, and avoiding images and situations which would only aggravate our sexual impulses.

This is the universal experience of everyone in the human race. Either a person gives direction to his or her sexual impulses, or he does not. If he does, then he is virtuous and in possession of himself. If he does not, then he is not free, but becomes a slave to his passions. Lust dominates a person. Love, while it requires some self-sacrifice, frees a person to do what is good and beneficial for others.

A single mom, or dad, is a true witness to authentic love. Perhaps their spouse is dead, and they have decided not to remarry. Or perhaps they are separated, or civilly divorced, and cannot remarry because they are already married. Now they must be both mother and father to the children. And that can be difficult. They cannot rely upon the complimentary support of a spouse. They practice total abstinence. They provide a good example for the children by attending Mass on Sundays and receiving the sacraments regularly. They are there for their children, alone and self-reliant.

Single moms and dads are a witness to God’s promise to us that He will be faithful to each of us if we will be faithful to Him and His plan for marriage, spousal love and family.

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

Here’s how to pave the way for an NFP-supportive practice in your community. 

-Kathleen M. Basi,  

Recruit teachers and promote NFP. The more people who use NFP, the more likely that some of our students will be doctors. And the larger the patient base, the easier it is for a doctor to choose not to prescribe birth control. 

Network with users of other NFP methods to create a presence in the local community. 

Evangelize your doctors. “If women and couples can be more courageous about saying, ‘We use NFP,’ there may be a doctor who is on the verge of conversion,” Dr. Kathleen Kobbermann, MD, said. “They can be a voice of hope and plant a seed.”

Sponsor an open-minded doctor to attend CCL’s physicians’ seminar. Since 2002, more than a 100 doctors have learned not only the method, but how to establish an NFP supportive practice. “We know of a couple cases where the seminar did encourage people to get off the fence,” said Rich Braun, CCL’s seminar coordinator.

Hit them in the pocketbook. Emphasize how many patients they could gain by supporting NFP. “When I stopped prescribing, I suddenly realized how many patients I had who didn’t (use birth control),” Kobbermann said. “The support that they gave me was phenomenal. People specifically switched to me because I wasn’t prescribing anymore.” 

Encourage your bishop. Bishops can make NFP a priority at a diocesan level. Also, “There are thousands of Catholic docs out there,” said Vince Sacksteder of One More Soul. “We think that direct contact with their bishop would turn most of them around.” 

Pray. 

Take political action. Although the period for public comment on conscience protection is now closed, future opportunities are likely to surface. As Dr. Brian Gosser said, “It takes good people doing nothing to result in problems.” http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml offers links to contact federal and state elected officials. 

Furthermore, there are many physicians who are supportive of NFP, but who also prescribe hormones as a method of birth control. Often, such physicians can read an NFP chart and provide sound counsel to women. If you cannot find an NFP-only physician in your area, seek one who fits this description. There are many instances in which these physicians eventually discontinued prescribing or recommending birth control, sterilization or abortion after seeing many patients who understand their fertility signs and apply NFP. Prayer and subtle encouragement are common actions that can lead to conversion.

 (Taken from Family Foundations, Sept/Oct 2009, p. 10)

There are different ways to promote the values of NFP. One very effective way is to form a team made up of an NFP Outreach priest and a local NFP teaching couple. 

In late October I was working in the Ogdensburg Diocese, in upper New York State, with Dave & Julie Cook, a delightful young couple who have been called to share what they discovered for themselves with other couples.

I preached an NFP Parish Weekend at Fr. Mark Reilly’s parish and missions. After each Mass, Dave & Julie made a crisp and brief presentation in the parish church on the merits of NFP. They provided brochures which listed names of local NFP teachers, contacts and resources. We also provided some relevant CDs. 

Here is the letter the Cooks sent to me after the event: 

Dear Fr. Habiger, 

We wanted to thank you again for taking the time and effort to visit Watertown last weekend. Also, thank Stella for us; her helpfulness and dedication were evident from the beginning, and she made the whole process a breeze. You have a staff worthy of your cause! 

Words can’t express how grateful we are for your work. Everything about this experience was wonderful. Your insight and suggestions for effectively promoting NFP in our area are invaluable, and we can’t imagine proceeding without them. It truly was divine providence that you touched our lives at this time. 

We now realize the value of a dual approach, with a priest and teaching couple promoting together. It’s the best possible combination because in the eyes of the congregation, what one can’t offer, the other can. Combining solid, credible theology with real, everyday people is truly a winning dynamic, and we can’t wait to practice it throughout our diocese. 

Again, thank you so much for your generosity and support. We will always remember this weekend with joy and gratitude!

God bless, -- Dave & Julie Cook

EVANS MILLS, NY MISSION: (Back Row) NFP Outreach's Fr. Habiger, Dave and Julie Cook from Watertown, NY,  (Front Row)  Angelo & Suzanne Pietropaoli, Father Mark Reilly, Pastor of St. Mary's Church - Link

The year beginning on 19 June 2009 is designated as “A YEAR FOR PRIESTS.” [from Vatican web site] The objective here is to help priests appreciate God’s noble calling, and to encourage them to live out their vocation as God wants it to be lived.

The people of God need Jesus, the Church, and the sacraments. The priest is the minister of God who makes the sacraments present to the faithful. This is his priestly/cultural role.

The priest is also a teacher of the ways of God. This is his prophetic role. God has a plan for all the basic components of human life like marriage, spousal love and family. This plan cannot be known if it is not taught. It cannot be lived if it is not known. Husbands and wives cannot be happy if they are not living their marriages and spousal love as God designed them to be.

A YEAR FOR PRIESTS is a time to reflect upon how to get important teachings back into the pulpit where everyone hears them. I suggest that this is a perfect year to bring God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family back into the pulpit. How is this to be done?

I think it is safe to say that there is still a great fear among many clergy to deal with the topics of contraception and sterilization at the pulpit. Some priests think that their people are too weak to break the habit of contraception. Others fear that they will be criticized and rejected; collections will decrease.

My experience is just the opposite. After Mass people thank me for proclaiming God’s truth. They often ask: “Why haven’t we heard this before?” Fr. Randy Moreau says that his collections actually go up.

Looking at the moral landscape around us should help us to see that something is seriously amiss. Half of our marriages today collapse. Lifetime commitments dissolve when couples run into difficulties in their relationship—difficulties that they are unwilling to face together.

Divorce does not solve a problem. Divorcees simply carry their unresolved problems with them to the next marriage. Children desperately want to live with their natural parents, and want to experience an example of unconditional love in their parents’ marriage.

An 80% cohabitation rate today among young couples who approach the Church for a wedding tells us something about how young people perceive marriage. When they see so many failed marriages among their families and friends, they conclude that making a lifetime commitment to a spouse is impossible for frail humanity. So they are reluctant to even try–they just cohabitate.

You must wonder why people living in such affluent times as ours find it so difficult to live by the Commandments. Sex is treated so casually, as simply a form of recreation, to which there are no corresponding responsibilities.

The popular culture promotes these attitudes relentlessly. We have all the potential for living good lives and doing much good, but something gets in the way and we are frozen in our tracks--paralyzed.

I cannot imagine any priest who is happy with the reality of a 50% divorce rate and an 80% cohabitation rate. He must want what is best for his people. But will he see the connection of these statistics with an 85% contraception rate (includes a 40% sterilization rate) among his couples?

How can anyone make the total gift of self when they are contracepting? How can a marriage bond endure when it is being systematically distorted and deformed?

Unless we bring God’s plan for marriage and spousal love back into the pulpit, we cannot expect things to improve. The good shepherd is willing to lay down his life for the welfare of his flock. The Cure of Ars would have no reservations in doing this.

Preaching God’s plan for marriage and spousal love is completely doable. God’s plan can be preached anywhere, anytime.

Fr. Dan McCaffrey and I are living proof of this. Each year we crisscross the country and offer NFP Parish Weekends. We preach all the homilies, and encourage couples to attend a short talk on NFP in the parish hall immediately after the Mass.

Couples who live NFP give the talk. We encourage couples to listen to one of several CDs (that we make available to the parish) on related issues. And we always receive a good reception. We could do this in your parish.

A YEAR FOR PRIESTS is a good time for every priest to learn how to preach God’s plan for these vitally important matters. It is so very doable. All the resources we need are readily available.

The people want to know what God expects of them, and why His plan is so good, not just for them, but for all of us. We offer clergy conferences on how to preach these values.

If you want to help priests discover the richness of their priesthood, then encourage them to address the great issues of our times. If you want couples to have strong marriages and healthy, happy families, then promote the teaching of God’s plan for these matters. 

Fr. McCaffrey and I are available to give clergy conferences on the theme: How to Preach God’s Plan for Marriage and Spousal Love. We are also available for NFP Parish Weekends. Contact us at nfpoureach@att.net, or call us a 405-942-4084. We also provide occasional missions on the Theology of the Body.

One final comment. Why is there such a shortage of priests today?

If you visit the website www.catholic-hierarchy.org you can find statistics for every diocese in this country.

In most dioceses there is a decreasing number of priests and an increasing number of Catholics. It is estimated today that 19% of priests in the USA are foreign born.

Thank God for the generosity of dioceses in Africa, India, the Philippines and Mexico in lending priests to this country.

But why is it that our families and parishes cannot provide an ample number of priestly and religious vocations to serve the needs of this country and elsewhere?

The impoverished quality of our marriages, spousal love and family life has something to do with the answer.

Cordially yours,

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

It is easy to see the social costs of fault free divorce in a time in our country when there is a 50% divorce rate, many single parent moms, 35% of all babies born to unmarried mothers, and the majority of poor children living in single parent families. 

Researchers have found there are many benefits for men, women and children when couples have a healthy marriage as compared to an unhealthy one. Here are some of the benefits of a healthy marriage. 

Men and women generally are:

Wealthier

Physically and emotionally healthier

Less likely to commit suicide

More satisfied with their relationship

More likely to live longer

 Children are:

Less likely to be raised in poverty

Physically and emotionally healthier

Less likely to abuse drugs or alcohol

Having fewer problems in school

More likely to go to college

Less likely to end up divorced

 Communities have:

Decreased need for social services

Higher rates of educated citizens

Lower domestic violence rates

Lover crime rates

Lower teen pregnancy rates

Lower rates of juvenile delinquency

Higher rates of home ownership

Healthy marriages take hard work and commitment. 

There are many resources out there to help you create and maintain a healthy relationship, including a wonderful Web site from the National Healthy Marriage Resource Center, www.healthymarriageinfo.org. 

Strong marriages and healthy, happy families, is that not what everyone wants?  From a purely economic standpoint, is that not what every taxpayer wants? 

If we could return to a time when the Churches and the dominant culture emphasize the importance of committed relationships, with reduced emphasis upon the self and self satisfaction, and increased emphasis upon a marriage and family as more important than what pleases either one of the spouses, then certain benefits would happen automatically. 

Children would be happier and more well developed because they receive the attention they need from those who love them most, their parents.  Our costs for social welfare would drastically reduce.  There would be a greater receptivity to the gift of the child, and larger families.

This, in turn, would reduce the pressures upon social security, which is scheduled to go bankrupt in 2037, or sooner.  America would no longer lead the world in incarcerated prisoners, because young men and women would now receive the moral guidance they desperately need from their parents.  Poor families would be pulled out of their plight by parents who are working together to benefit their families. 

Would not all taxpayers be interested in this? 

Cordially yours, 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

Some resources: 

      1) Linda Waite and Maggie Gallagher, The Case for Marriage:  Why Married People are Happier, Healthier and Better Off Financially

      2) Glenn Stanton, Why Marriage Matters:  Reasons to Believe in Marriage in Postmodern Society

BLUEPRINT FOR AN NFP-FOCUSED PARISH 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB and Fr. Dan McCaffrey

Part I of II

In this article we wish to explain why every parish, or cluster of smaller parishes, needs to have several trained NFP teachers. 

Both of us have been ordained for over forty years, and have acquired an extensive amount of experience with marriage and family life.

We have dealt with college students, soldiers in the military and their families, with Newman chaplaincies, with marriage prep programs and with countless married couples. We have considerable experience with all the major NFP providers throughout the world. We have been pastors of parishes, and now visit hundreds of parishes where we give NFP weekends, parish missions, Theology of the Body seminars and clergy conferences. We both have doctorates in moral theology, and we wish to bring this background to the service of contemporary viable parishes. 

Why should there be a focused concentration upon building strong marriages in all parishes today?

Because half of marriages among Catholics today end up in a divorce. Catholics today reflect the mores of the surrounding secular culture more than the teachings of their Church. We live in a fault free divorce culture, where either of the spouses can initiate a divorce and carry it to completion despite the objections of the other spouse. 

Think of what this does to the spouses and their sense of commitment to God’s plan for marriage. Consider the trauma and pain inflicted upon their children. Think of the impact of this upon family life.

A nation’s life is only as strong as its family life. If our marriages lack irrevocable commitment to marriage and spousal love, then there is not a strong foundation for healthy, happy families and a healthy society. 

That is why we must give serious attention to the retrieval of God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family in all our parishes. Of what value are the many and various programs in a parish, if their marriages are falling apart and their families are fractured? 

We promote Natural Family Planning (NFP) because it encapsulates all the many values that go into strong marriages and healthy, happy families. Of itself, NFP is a method of spacing pregnancies. But it presupposes an understanding, and an active pursuit, of God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family. 

We now live in a contracepted society. The practice of contraception leads to the fading of the perception that the sexual act has anything to do with the procreation of children. The act is deliberately manipulated to exclude the possibility. When contraception fails, the resulting baby is likely to be aborted. This is particularly true when contraception takes place outside marriage, in which case there is no proper provision for the upbringing of the child. 

The perception that sexuality is not connected to reproduction, gives rise to the concept of “recreational sex.” Sexual intercourse is regarded primarily as a source of pleasure. Since “nothing can happen,” i.e., no baby can be conceived, sexual activity is not confined to marriage. This leads to increased promiscuity, adultery and prostitution, and to perverse sexual practices, including homosexual practices, which are even proclaimed as ideal because they are 100% sterile. All these practices lead to the spread of sexually transmitted diseases, including AIDS. 

If there can be sex without babies, there can be babies without sex. The separation of the procreative from the unitive aspects of the sexual act through contraception has prepared the way for artificial reproduction.

The first step was IVF. Further steps followed quickly: selective reduction of embryos, the implantation of embryos from third person, surrogate motherhood, experimentation with surplus or deliberately produced embryos, pre-implantation diagnostics and cloning. 

Abortion and artificial reproduction leads to contempt for life, which opens the way for euthanasia. 

In the practice of contraception the spouses do violence to one another in that they tend to regard one another as a source of pleasure. The mutual rejection of fertility implies a (subconscious) personal rejection of each other.

This burdens the marriage and often leads to divorce, which in its turn means suffering for the children. Society becomes dysfunctional and violence proliferates.

Non-traditional “families,” such as single and divorced women with children, families with children from two or even three sets of parents, and same-sex unions with children, become acceptable, hence weakening the traditional family. 

Husband and wife no longer regard each other with awe as a gift of God, entrusted to one another for life, but as a source of pleasure, which can be manipulated as required. Children are no longer seen as gifts and blessings of God, but as objects, which we have a right to destroy. It is presumed that children can be produced, selected, rejected, killed, cloned and designed to order. The Creator is rejected and man arrogantly arrogates to himself the place of God. It is blasphemy, which cries to high Heaven and which will one day lead to disaster.

The healing of society requires the abolition of the widespread practice of contraception and sterilization. The Catholic Church is the only body which consistently opposes contraception, so it should be a priority for bishops and priests to promote chastity both outside and within marriage. If this is done consistently, it will eventually have an effect on society as a whole. We should be aware that contraception is being vigorously promoted for commercial and ideological reasons. 

The regulation of conception can be achieved by means of the natural methods, which are highly reliable and have none of the above-mentioned disadvantages, and on the contrary foster a positive attitude towards children, build marriages and preserve faith. (See “The Contracepted Society” by David Prentis, Population Research Institute Review, Sept-Oct 05, pp. 5 & 10.) 

This is why every parish, or cluster of small parishes, needs a set of NFP teachers. If we are to begin to cut into the 50% divorce rate among our people, then we must address the 85% contraceptive rate, and now 40% sterilization rate, among Catholic couples of childbearing age. This will be a massive effort, and will require the cooperation of many parties. Fortunately, this is a team effort, and there are many players available.

 We priests, and now Deacon Rick and Jenny Condon, at NFP Outreach are available to help you get these programs started.

You can reach us at our website (www.nfpoutreach.org), by phone: 405 942 4084, or by email: nfpoutreach@att.net. Let the healing of our marriages and the strengthening of family life begin!

BLUEPRINT FOR AN NFP-FOCUSED PARISH  Part 2 of 2

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB and Fr. Dan McCaffrey

This is why every parish, or cluster of small parishes, needs a set of NFP teachers.  If we are to begin to cut into the 50% divorce rate among our people, then we must address the 85% contraceptive rate, and now 40% sterilization rate, among Catholic couples of childbearing age.  This will be a massive effort, and will require the cooperation of many parties.  Fortunately, this is a team effort, and there are many players available. 

Pastors will have to take the initiative here.  The life of Faith is lived and promoted primarily at the parish level.  Either the Faith is fostered at the parish level, or it simply does not happen.  Thus pastors cannot push off these responsibilities to the chancery.  The chancery exists to serve the needs of the parish.  It cannot replace the pastor.   

The retrieval of a pro-marriage, pro-spousal love and pro-family culture in a parish begins with the efforts of the priests.  Pastors have a vital, role to play.  They were ordained to proclaim God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family to their people, and to provide the Sacraments.  The people must hear God’s remarkable plan from the pulpit, where everyone hears the same message.  Preaching God’s plan with conviction is a pastor’s first responsibility in promoting strong marriages.  There is a wealth of material available for this pulpit work. 

We priests need to recall Pope Paul VI’s reassuring challenge to us in Humanae Vitae #29: “So beloved Sons, preach with full confidence and be certain that the Holy Spirit of God, who guides the Magisterium in its teaching, will illuminate the hearts of the faithful and invite them to give their assent.”  This means that God is the primary power at work in all faithful preaching, and that we can be assured He will not disappoint us if we are his faithful laborers.   

This is the Year of the Priest, and St. Jean Vianney is held up as our model.  We recall that the Cure d’Ars did not wait for signals from his chancery office to begin his focused preaching and sacramental ministry.  Nor did he depend upon the approval of surrounding parishes to sustain him in his God-given vocation.  The Spirit of Jesus guided him and sustained him throughout all his heroic efforts.  Pope Paul VI reminds us: “Refusal to compromise anything concerning the saving doctrine of Christ is an outstanding act of charity to souls; yet at the same time it is necessary always to combine this with   patience and goodness” (HV 29). 

If the pastor is not with the program, then there is no program.   Without his initiative, and his sustained encouragement, nothing will happen and the status quo continues.  The pastor must see the clear connection between contraception and divorce, between contraception and the breakdown of marriage.  That should motivate him to seek ways to address the root of the problem. 

A pastor has great resources at his disposal in the parish.  There are many gifted and faith-filled couples who will respond to the need, once they are convinced that the parish is making a serious effort to build up strong marriages and happy families.  A pastor has only to reach out to these couples and invite them to become NFP teachers.  A typical parish needs several NFP teaching couples, as we shall explain shortly.  These couples should have a strong marriage, be relatively young, living their faith, and be willing to witness to this. 

NFP teaching couples need to be thoroughly trained in the art of NFP.  They can seek their formation from any of the major providers of NFP in this county.  (See our website for contact information: www.nfpoutreach.org.) The parish should cover all their expenses incurred while becoming certified teachers.  This will become their apostolate.   The very least the parish can do is to cover their expenses for becoming certified instructors.  They become excellent assets to the parish program in a vital area. 

One NFP teaching couple cannot possibly do all the work that is needed in a parish.  There is more to be done than working with the young couples in the marriage prep program.  Here is what is involved in a contemporary viable parish: 

The marriage preparation program needs the full program of NFP.  It is not enough to simply provide an introductory session on NFP during the marriage prep program.  The pastor should explain to young couples, “If you are contracepting, I’m not going to marry you in the Church.  A contracepting arrangement is not a consummated marriage.  I don’t want to enable you to sin.  If you don’t believe in this, then you are not a Catholic.” 

This means that any couple preparing for marriage must be prepared to use a morally good means of spacing pregnancies, when there are justifying reasons for doing this.  If they do not understand NFP, then they will immediately resort to using the Pill.  This leads right into the contraceptive culture, which, in turn, leads to a 50% divorce rate. 

RCIA people need to hear about the remedy for contraception.  RCIA candidates should affirm the Church’s teaching on contraception, or not be brought into the Church.  This issue must be clarified.  Nationwide, there is a 60% dropout rate among RCIA people received into the Church.  What is the advantage of providing an incomplete RCIA program, with such a dropout rate?  This issue needs to be clearly addressed.  This means that RCIA couples of childbearing age must also learn NFP by taking the prescribed 4-5 classes. 

Juniors and seniors in the parish religious education program should know the basics about NFP and chastity.  Fertility awareness and appreciation is very important especially for this age group.  This means more work for the parish NFP teachers.  Contraception reaches into our high schools and middle schools.  If our teenagers do not appreciate God’s plan for sex and marriage, and why sex is to be saved for marriage, then they become easy victims of the dominant culture. 

Less than 5% of Catholic couples practice NFP.  This means that the vast majority of Catholic couples knows almost nothing about NFP, and will need to find instruction when they realize that contraception is seriously sinful and must be repented of.  That means more work for the parish NFP teaching couples, and for the priests who must evangelize them. 

It should be obvious that one NFP teaching couple cannot do all the work for the parish.  Building strong marriages and healthy, happy families is a herculean task.  There are many people in the parish who can help with the task.  They need to be recruited and encouraged.  Retrieving and restoring God’s plan for marriage and spousal love is largely the work of the laity, but then the laity is 99.9% of the Church.  There are plenty of workers for the vineyard.  This is heavily the work of the lay apostolate.  Many parishioners will be involved with marriage prep programs, RCIA, religious education, and marriage enrichment programs. 

This is a joint effort.  The laity can’t do the priest’s work, nor can the priest do the laity’s work.  The pastor must proclaim God’s plan for marriage and spousal love.  The people must see that their pastor passionately believes in this.  In his preaching the pastor must explain the rationale of NFP, the beauty of God’s plan for human love and sexuality as provided in Humanae Vitae and Familiaris Consortio, and draw upon some of the helpful insights in the Theology of the Body.  Then the people will become more open to God’s plan.   Only then can the NFP teachers teach the methodology of NFP to a receptive audience. To bring about the obedience of Faith, both aspects, the theological and the methodology, must be applied. One cannot function without the other. 

It is our experience that couples who practice NFP are very generous people.  They demonstrate generosity in their marriage and their families.  They become the parish’s best and most sustained volunteers.  They are generous contributors to the collections.  Most vocations to religious life and the priesthood come from these families.  It is all to a pastor’s advantage to encourage his people to abide by God’s plan for spousal love.  It will revolutionize the parish. 

We priests, and now Deacon Rick and Jenny Condon, at NFP Outreach are available to help you get these programs started. 

You can reach us at our website (www.nfpoutreach.org), by phone: 405 942 4084, or by email:nfpoutreach@att.net.  Let the healing of our marriages and the strengthening of family life begin! 

STERILIZATION HOMILY 2010

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB, PhD & Fr. Dan McCaffrey STD

NFP Outreach

 This is a homily that is long overdue. It deals with a problem that is all too prevalent among Catholic couples today, and that is the problem of sterilization. It is estimated that 85% of couples of childbearing age are using some form of contraception today. Among these couples, 40% are now sterilized. And among this group, 70% are women. These percentages apply now both to the general American public and to Catholics.

You have not heard about this from the pulpit, and that is part of the problem. Why, you may wonder, have the clergy been so quiet on this topic? Let me try to explain. When the anovulent Pill arrived in the 1960s, many people thought that we now had a technological solution for spacing pregnancies and babies. Now we could separate sex from having babies, and separate the marital act from fertility. But the question arose: Is this morally right? The Church had to determine if the contraceptive Pill could be reconciled with God’s plan for marriage and spousal love. 

The Church has always taught throughout the centuries, that turning against the goodness of one’s fertility is contrary to God’s plan, and is morally wrong, that is, sinful. This means that all forms of contraception are morally wrong. Sterilization, which is permanent contraception, is morally wrong. When God gave us the gift of our fertility, He intended it to be always treasured as a great good, as an integral part of our human nature. It is wrong to take something that is good, and regard it as something evil.

This means that married couples should always use morally good means in their efforts to responsibly plan their families and space their pregnancies. They should never turn against the goodness of their fertility. They should never sterilize their life giving powers, either temporarily (by contraception) or permanently (by sterilization).

Since the 1960s, there has been remarkable progress made in our understanding of human fertility. Biologists and doctors have learned much about a woman’s reproductive cycle, as God designed it. Advances in Natural Family Planning have made it possible for a married couple to know almost exactly where they are in their cycle of fertile periods and infertile periods. Now we know that the woman’s body gives clear signals of oncoming fertility. Even if the woman experiences irregular cycles, she can still know where she is in her present cycle. 

The Church teaches that if a couple has good reasons for postponing the next pregnancy, then they are to practice periodic abstinence during their fertile periods. This is completely doable. And there are many benefits that come from the self-discipline and self-mastery that NFP requires. You should know that couples who practice NFP have a divorce rate of less than 5%. Compare that with the present 50% divorce rate within the general public, and now among Catholics.

The encyclical, Humanae Vitae appeared in July of 1968. Pope Paul VI restated the clear teaching of the Church on the issue of contraception and sterilization. He taught that when God designed the spousal act, or the marital act, He determined that there would always be two inseparable dimensions. There would be a unitive, love-giving dimension, and there would be a procreative, life-giving dimension. All love is life-giving. All love is open to the goodness of life, and never turns against the goodness of life.

There was a massive rejection of this teaching throughout the 1970s and 1980s. Some said: “We have the technology, so why not use it?” Others opined “There are too many people in the world, and we must reduce the number of babies coming into the world by attacking fertility.” Some theologians predicted that if the Church would just change her teaching on contraception then so many good benefits would result. Couples would be happier and under less stress. They would have stronger marriages. There would be happier, healthier families. There would be fewer divorces. We could have greater control over our bodies, our lives, and our future. Everyone would benefit. And a lot of Catholics bought into these arguments and promises.

Abe Lincoln once said: “You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.” Some clergy were mesmerized. They quietly, sometimes openly, promoted the use of contraception and sterilization. More principled clergy attempted to teach and promote God’s plan for marriage and spousal love, but were severely criticized and even ostracized.

The sexual revolution of the 1960s, the incessant drumbeat of the secular media, the encouragement of Planned Parenthood and the pharmaceuticals all conspired together and were much better at shaping the popular culture than was the Church. As a result, many clergy decided that the sexual ethic was one area where they would get not cooperation from the laity. So they went mute and the pulpits were silent.

Here we are in the year 2010. The benefits the dissenting theologians and sociologists promised us did not materialize. A contraceptive society has brought some very bitter results to us. Today we have one of every two marriages ending in divorce, one of every four unborn babies killed by surgical abortion, 85% of couples of child bearing age contracepting, of which 40% are now sterilized. Nationally there is an 80% cohabitation rate among young Catholic couples. 35% of all babies today are born to unmarried mothers, with all the economic disadvantages that entails. Today we have many very weakened marriages, or no marriages, emotionally scarred children from divorced parents, and high levels of sexual promiscuity among our youth. Today 1% of our population is incarcerated. The majority of these are men, who never experienced the guidance and presence of a father.

If these are the advantages of a contracepted society, then I shudder to think what the disadvantages might be.

What are we to do? Jesus described our condition when he said: “Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written ‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me, teaching as doctrine the precepts of men.’ You leave the commandment of God, and hold fast the tradition of men.” (Mk 7:6-7).

What are we to do? We must do what mankind has always done when they deviated from God’s plan for the human race. We must rediscover God’s plan, God’s commandments, and come to an understanding of why God’s plan makes such good sense and is so good for us. We must repent of our evil choices and evil deeds, by which we rejected God and his commandments. We must ask for his forgiveness in the sacrament of reconciliation, and then make a firm purpose of amendment that we will change our ways. This is part of our ongoing conversion, our turning away from evil and turning towards goodness, and life, and love, and truth.

Having a sterilization is a serious matter. It directly attacks our fertility and our bodily integrity. It tarnishes us as fertile and sexual persons made in the image and likeness of God. Sterilization turns us into sterile and incomplete persons. Sterilization tells God that we do not accept the marital act as He designed it. In the spousal act, the spouse is to make the total personal gift of self to the other. This is to be a total gift of self: no conditions, no reservations, and nothing held back. Sterilization tells God that we do not recognize that there are absolute limits we cannot pass in what we can do to our bodies. It rejects the reality that every person must come into the possession of himself, or herself, in giving good direction to our sexuality, through the virtue of chastity.

Many people today have their sterilization reversed. Modern medical technology has made this possible. Reversals now are frequent, effective and half the price. Restored pregnancy rates are now between 50 and 70% (See “Sterilization and Its Reversal in Women: A Medical Description” by Lorna Cvetkovich, M.D., in Ethics & Medics, Nov 02, Vol. 27, #11 pp. 1-3.) Thus, the possibility of restoring one’s fertility is very real. I highly recommend that a sterilized person look into the possibility of being restored to his or her original condition as a complete and fertile person. Once they are restored, then they are to use NFP if they choose to space their pregnancies. This is what is expected of every married couple.

God does not expect the impossible. If the original operation damaged the organs beyond repair, or if one’s health will not permit another procedure, or if one cannot afford the reversal, then there is good reason for not having the reversal. But some form of restitution should be made. But it stands to reason that a contrite couple would want to restore, as best they can, their original integrity and fertility. Although not required by the Church, some couples inspired by the Holy Spirit, strive for this wholeness by practicing periodic abstinence during their fertile periods.

Brothers and sisters, we have deviated a long way from God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family. Returning to God’s plan will require some firm decisions, and some difficult efforts on our part to turn away from a contraceptive mentality and to return to a virtuous way of life. Difficult, but not impossible. With God’s help, all things are possible. If we will cooperate with all the helps and aids that Jesus makes available to us (prayer, the Eucharist, the Sacrament of Reconciliation), then we can strengthen our marriages, we can build up healthy, happy families, and we can reduce this horrible divorce rate. 

I encourage you to seriously reflect upon these matters. I encourage you to read up on these issues. One More Soul has many good materials, pamphlets, books and CDs, on this topic. Go to their website: www.OMSoul.com. I am available to help you as a moral guide and spiritual father.

Life and fertility is always a gift to us. Jesus said: “I came to bring you life and more abundant life” (Jn 10:10). There was a time when we thought that we could improve upon God’s plan for marriage and spousal love. We were seriously mistaken. There was a time when we clergy thought that the prudent thing was to remain silent while our people abandoned God’s plan. We were seriously wrong. Now the devastating evidence of our bad judgment is clearly available. Now the jury is in. 

As did the prodigal son, let all of us return to our loving Father, ask for his forgiveness, and then take up our duties and responsibilities as a people who want to achieve integral human fulfillment by following the path Jesus came into our world to teach us. May we retrieve the ability to make the total personal gift of ourselves to our God, and to our life’s companion. May the Lord of all life and the Source of all love watch over and guide us.

* * * * 

FOR MORE INFORMATION ON STERILIZATION AND NFP, GO TO OUR WEBSITE: www.nfpoutreach.org. We provide sample homilies, articles, and many NFP Q&As. The Q&As make for good parish bulletin inserts. All this is free and copy ready.

The website for One More Soul is www.OMSoul.org.

STERILIZATION HOMILY 2010

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB, PhD & Fr. Dan McCaffrey STD

NFP Outreach

 This is a homily that is long overdue. It deals with a problem that is all too prevalent among Catholic couples today, and that is the problem of sterilization. It is estimated that 85% of couples of childbearing age are using some form of contraception today. Among these couples, 40% are now sterilized. And among this group, 70% are women. These percentages apply now both to the general American public and to Catholics.

You have not heard about this from the pulpit, and that is part of the problem. Why, you may wonder, have the clergy been so quiet on this topic? Let me try to explain. When the anovulent Pill arrived in the 1960s, many people thought that we now had a technological solution for spacing pregnancies and babies. Now we could separate sex from having babies, and separate the marital act from fertility. But the question arose: Is this morally right? The Church had to determine if the contraceptive Pill could be reconciled with God’s plan for marriage and spousal love. 

The Church has always taught throughout the centuries, that turning against the goodness of one’s fertility is contrary to God’s plan, and is morally wrong, that is, sinful. This means that all forms of contraception are morally wrong. Sterilization, which is permanent contraception, is morally wrong. When God gave us the gift of our fertility, He intended it to be always treasured as a great good, as an integral part of our human nature. It is wrong to take something that is good, and regard it as something evil.

This means that married couples should always use morally good means in their efforts to responsibly plan their families and space their pregnancies. They should never turn against the goodness of their fertility. They should never sterilize their life giving powers, either temporarily (by contraception) or permanently (by sterilization).

Since the 1960s, there has been remarkable progress made in our understanding of human fertility. Biologists and doctors have learned much about a woman’s reproductive cycle, as God designed it. Advances in Natural Family Planning have made it possible for a married couple to know almost exactly where they are in their cycle of fertile periods and infertile periods. Now we know that the woman’s body gives clear signals of oncoming fertility. Even if the woman experiences irregular cycles, she can still know where she is in her present cycle. 

The Church teaches that if a couple has good reasons for postponing the next pregnancy, then they are to practice periodic abstinence during their fertile periods. This is completely doable. And there are many benefits that come from the self-discipline and self-mastery that NFP requires. You should know that couples who practice NFP have a divorce rate of less than 5%. Compare that with the present 50% divorce rate within the general public, and now among Catholics.

The encyclical, Humanae Vitae appeared in July of 1968. Pope Paul VI restated the clear teaching of the Church on the issue of contraception and sterilization. He taught that when God designed the spousal act, or the marital act, He determined that there would always be two inseparable dimensions. There would be a unitive, love-giving dimension, and there would be a procreative, life-giving dimension. All love is life-giving. All love is open to the goodness of life, and never turns against the goodness of life.

There was a massive rejection of this teaching throughout the 1970s and 1980s. Some said: “We have the technology, so why not use it?” Others opined “There are too many people in the world, and we must reduce the number of babies coming into the world by attacking fertility.” Some theologians predicted that if the Church would just change her teaching on contraception then so many good benefits would result. Couples would be happier and under less stress. They would have stronger marriages. There would be happier, healthier families. There would be fewer divorces. We could have greater control over our bodies, our lives, and our future. Everyone would benefit. And a lot of Catholics bought into these arguments and promises.

Abe Lincoln once said: “You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.” Some clergy were mesmerized. They quietly, sometimes openly, promoted the use of contraception and sterilization. More principled clergy attempted to teach and promote God’s plan for marriage and spousal love, but were severely criticized and even ostracized.

The sexual revolution of the 1960s, the incessant drumbeat of the secular media, the encouragement of Planned Parenthood and the pharmaceuticals all conspired together and were much better at shaping the popular culture than was the Church. As a result, many clergy decided that the sexual ethic was one area where they would get not cooperation from the laity. So they went mute and the pulpits were silent.

Here we are in the year 2010. The benefits the dissenting theologians and sociologists promised us did not materialize. A contraceptive society has brought some very bitter results to us. Today we have one of every two marriages ending in divorce, one of every four unborn babies killed by surgical abortion, 85% of couples of child bearing age contracepting, of which 40% are now sterilized. Nationally there is an 80% cohabitation rate among young Catholic couples. 35% of all babies today are born to unmarried mothers, with all the economic disadvantages that entails. Today we have many very weakened marriages, or no marriages, emotionally scarred children from divorced parents, and high levels of sexual promiscuity among our youth. Today 1% of our population is incarcerated. The majority of these are men, who never experienced the guidance and presence of a father.

If these are the advantages of a contracepted society, then I shudder to think what the disadvantages might be.

What are we to do? Jesus described our condition when he said: “Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written ‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me, teaching as doctrine the precepts of men.’ You leave the commandment of God, and hold fast the tradition of men.” (Mk 7:6-7).

What are we to do? We must do what mankind has always done when they deviated from God’s plan for the human race. We must rediscover God’s plan, God’s commandments, and come to an understanding of why God’s plan makes such good sense and is so good for us. We must repent of our evil choices and evil deeds, by which we rejected God and his commandments. We must ask for his forgiveness in the sacrament of reconciliation, and then make a firm purpose of amendment that we will change our ways. This is part of our ongoing conversion, our turning away from evil and turning towards goodness, and life, and love, and truth.

Having a sterilization is a serious matter. It directly attacks our fertility and our bodily integrity. It tarnishes us as fertile and sexual persons made in the image and likeness of God. Sterilization turns us into sterile and incomplete persons. Sterilization tells God that we do not accept the marital act as He designed it. In the spousal act, the spouse is to make the total personal gift of self to the other. This is to be a total gift of self: no conditions, no reservations, and nothing held back. Sterilization tells God that we do not recognize that there are absolute limits we cannot pass in what we can do to our bodies. It rejects the reality that every person must come into the possession of himself, or herself, in giving good direction to our sexuality, through the virtue of chastity.

Many people today have their sterilization reversed. Modern medical technology has made this possible. Reversals now are frequent, effective and half the price. Restored pregnancy rates are now between 50 and 70% (See “Sterilization and Its Reversal in Women: A Medical Description” by Lorna Cvetkovich, M.D., in Ethics & Medics, Nov 02, Vol. 27, #11 pp. 1-3.) Thus, the possibility of restoring one’s fertility is very real. I highly recommend that a sterilized person look into the possibility of being restored to his or her original condition as a complete and fertile person. Once they are restored, then they are to use NFP if they choose to space their pregnancies. This is what is expected of every married couple.

God does not expect the impossible. If the original operation damaged the organs beyond repair, or if one’s health will not permit another procedure, or if one cannot afford the reversal, then there is good reason for not having the reversal. But some form of restitution should be made. But it stands to reason that a contrite couple would want to restore, as best they can, their original integrity and fertility. Although not required by the Church, some couples inspired by the Holy Spirit, strive for this wholeness by practicing periodic abstinence during their fertile periods.

Brothers and sisters, we have deviated a long way from God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family. Returning to God’s plan will require some firm decisions, and some difficult efforts on our part to turn away from a contraceptive mentality and to return to a virtuous way of life. Difficult, but not impossible. With God’s help, all things are possible. If we will cooperate with all the helps and aids that Jesus makes available to us (prayer, the Eucharist, the Sacrament of Reconciliation), then we can strengthen our marriages, we can build up healthy, happy families, and we can reduce this horrible divorce rate. 

I encourage you to seriously reflect upon these matters. I encourage you to read up on these issues. One More Soul has many good materials, pamphlets, books and CDs, on this topic. Go to their website: www.OMSoul.com. I am available to help you as a moral guide and spiritual father.

Life and fertility is always a gift to us. Jesus said: “I came to bring you life and more abundant life” (Jn 10:10). There was a time when we thought that we could improve upon God’s plan for marriage and spousal love. We were seriously mistaken. There was a time when we clergy thought that the prudent thing was to remain silent while our people abandoned God’s plan. We were seriously wrong. Now the devastating evidence of our bad judgment is clearly available. Now the jury is in. 

As did the prodigal son, let all of us return to our loving Father, ask for his forgiveness, and then take up our duties and responsibilities as a people who want to achieve integral human fulfillment by following the path Jesus came into our world to teach us. May we retrieve the ability to make the total personal gift of ourselves to our God, and to our life’s companion. May the Lord of all life and the Source of all love watch over and guide us.

* * * * 

FOR MORE INFORMATION ON STERILIZATION AND NFP, GO TO OUR WEBSITE: www.nfpoutreach.org. We provide sample homilies, articles, and many NFP Q&As. The Q&As make for good parish bulletin inserts. All this is free and copy ready.

The website for One More Soul is www.OMSoul.org.

Marriage

The man said, "This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, for she was taken out of man." For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh. Genesis 2:23-24

This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church. However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband. Ephesians 5:32-33

In Scripture, the creation of man and woman, and their one-flesh union as husband and wife, is the crowning achievement of God’s creation. In the transmission of life and the nurturing of children, men and women joined as spouses are given the great honor of being partners with God Himself.

Marriage then, is the first institution of human society—indeed it is the institution on which all other human institutions have their foundation. In the Christian tradition we refer to marriage as “holy matrimony” to signal the fact that it is an institution ordained by God, and blessed by Christ in his participation at a wedding in Cana of Galilee. In the Bible, God Himself blesses and holds marriage in the highest esteem.

Vast human experience confirms that marriage is the original and most important institution for sustaining the health, education, and welfare of all persons in a society. Where marriage is honored, and where there is a flourishing marriage culture, everyone benefits—the spouses themselves, their children, the communities and societies in which they live. Where the marriage culture begins to erode, social pathologies of every sort quickly manifest themselves.

Unfortunately, we have witnessed over the course of the past several decades a serious erosion of the marriage culture in our own country. Perhaps the most telling—and alarming—indicator is the out-of-wedlock birth rate. Less than fifty years ago, it was under 5 percent. Today it is over 40 percent. Our society—and particularly its poorest and most vulnerable sectors, where the out of-wedlock birth rate is much higher even than the national average—is paying a huge price in delinquency, drug abuse, crime, incarceration, hopelessness, and despair. Other indicators are widespread non-marital sexual cohabitation and a devastatingly high rate of divorce.

We confess with sadness that Christians and our institutions have too often scandalously failed to uphold the institution of marriage and to model for the world the true meaning of marriage. Insofar as we have too easily embraced the culture of divorce and remained silent about social practices that undermine the dignity of marriage we repent, and call upon all Christians to do the same.

To strengthen families, we must stop glamorizing promiscuity and infidelity and restore among our people a sense of the profound beauty, mystery, and holiness of faithful marital love. We must reform ill-advised policies that contribute to the weakening of the institution of marriage, including the discredited idea of unilateral divorce. We must work in the legal, cultural, and religious domains to instill in young people a sound understanding of what marriage is, what it requires, and why it is worth the commitment and sacrifices that faithful spouses make.

The impulse to redefine marriage in order to recognize same-sex and multiple partner relationships is a symptom, rather than the cause, of the erosion of the marriage culture. It reflects a loss of understanding of the meaning of marriage as embodied in our civil and religious law and in the philosophical tradition that contributed to shaping the law. Yet it is critical that the impulse be resisted, for yielding to it would mean abandoning the possibility of restoring a sound understanding of marriage and, with it, the hope of rebuilding a healthy marriage culture.

It would lock into place the false and destructive belief that marriage is all about romance and other adult satisfactions, and not, in any intrinsic way, about procreation and the unique character and value of acts and relationships whose meaning is shaped by their aptness for the generation, promotion and protection of life. In spousal communion and the rearing of children (who, as gifts of God, are the fruit of their parents’ marital love), we discover the profound reasons for and benefits of the marriage covenant.

We acknowledge that there are those who are disposed towards homosexual and polyamorous conduct and relationships, just as there are those who are disposed towards other forms of immoral conduct. We have compassion for those so disposed; we respect them as human beings possessing profound, inherent, and equal dignity; and we pay tribute to the men and women who strive, often with little assistance, to resist the temptation to yield to desires that they, no less than we, regard as wayward. We stand with them, even when they falter. We, no less than they, are sinners who have fallen short of God’s intention for our lives. We, no less than they, are in constant need of God’s patience, love and forgiveness.

We call on the entire Christian community to resist sexual immorality, and at the same time refrain from disdainful condemnation of those who yield to it. Our rejection of sin, though resolute, must never become the rejection of sinners. For every sinner, regardless of the sin, is loved by God, who seeks not our destruction but rather the conversion of our hearts. Jesus calls all who wander from the path of virtue to “a more excellent way.” As his disciples we will reach out in love to assist all who hear the call and wish to answer it.

We further acknowledge that there are sincere people who disagree with us, and with the teaching of the Bible and Christian tradition, on questions of sexual morality and the nature of marriage. Some who enter into same-sex and polyamorous relationships no doubt regard their unions as truly marital. They fail to understand, however, that marriage is made possible by the sexual complementarity of man and woman, and that the comprehensive, multi-level sharing of life that marriage is includes bodily unity of the sort that unites husband and wife biologically as one. This is because the body is no mere extrinsic instrument of the human person, but truly part of the personal reality of the human being. Human beings are not merely centers of consciousness or emotion, or minds, or spirits, inhabiting non-personal bodies.

The human person is a dynamic unity of body, mind, and spirit. Marriage is what one man and one woman establish when, forsaking all others and pledging lifelong commitment, they found a sharing of life at every level of being—the biological, the emotional, the dispositional, the rational, the spiritual—on a commitment that is sealed, completed and actualized by loving sexual intercourse in which the spouses become one flesh, not in some merely metaphorical sense, but by fulfilling together the behavioral conditions of procreation. That is why in the Christian tradition, and historically in Western law, consummated marriages are not dissoluble or annullable on the ground of infertility, even though the nature of the marital relationship is shaped and structured by its intrinsic orientation to the great good of procreation.

We understand that many of our fellow citizens, including some Christians, believe that the historic definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman is a denial of equality or civil rights. They wonder what to say in reply to the argument that asserts that no harm would be done to them or to anyone if the law of the community were to confer upon two men or two women who are living together in a sexual partnership the status of being “married.” It would not, after all, affect their own marriages, would it?

On inspection, however, the argument that laws governing one kind of marriage will not affect another cannot stand. Were it to prove anything, it would prove far too much: the assumption that the legal status of one set of marriage relationships affects no other would not only argue for same sex partnerships; it could be asserted with equal validity for polyamorous partnerships, polygamous households, even adult brothers, sisters, or brothers and sisters living in incestuous relationships.

Should these, as a matter of equality or civil rights, be recognized as lawful marriages, and would they have no effects on other relationships?

No. The truth is that marriage is not something abstract or neutral that the law may legitimately define and re-define to please those who are powerful and influential.

No one has a civil right to have a non-marital relationship treated as a marriage. Marriage is an objective reality—a covenantal union of husband and wife—that it is the duty of the law to recognize and support for the sake of justice and the common good. If it fails to do so, genuine social harms follow.

First, the religious liberty of those for whom this is a matter of conscience is jeopardized.

Second, the rights of parents are abused as family life and sex education programs in schools are used to teach children that an enlightened understanding recognizes as “marriages” sexual partnerships that many parents believe are intrinsically nonmarital and immoral.

Third, the common good of civil society is damaged when the law itself, in its critical pedagogical function, becomes a tool for eroding a sound understanding of marriage on which the flourishing of the marriage culture in any society vitally depends.

Sadly, we are today far from having a thriving marriage culture. But if we are to begin the critically important process of reforming our laws and mores to rebuild such a culture, the last thing we can afford to do is to re-define marriage in such a way as to embody in our laws a false proclamation about what marriage is.

And so it is out of love (not “animus”) and prudent concern for the common good (not “prejudice”), that we pledge to labor ceaselessly to preserve the legal definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman and to rebuild the marriage culture.

How could we, as Christians, do otherwise?

The Bible teaches us that marriage is a central part of God’s creation covenant. Indeed, the union of husband and wife mirrors the bond between Christ and his church. And so just as Christ was willing, out of love, to give Himself up for the church in a complete sacrifice, we are willing, lovingly, to make whatever sacrifices are required of us for the sake of the inestimable treasure that is marriage.

April 14, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The contraception revolution has, contrary to its image, shifted wealth and power away from women and is in effect "deeply sexist," according to one economist's analysis.

In the essay, entitled "Bitter Pill" and appearing in the latest edition of First Things magazine, economist Timothy Reichert argues that the case against contraception can be effectively articulated "using the language of social science, which is the language of the mainstream." Rather than framing the debate as "a case of faith and reason talking past each other," those who oppose contraception can frame the debate in terms of the objective societal damage contraception causes.

According to Reichert, a major source of the problem is that contraception separates the traditional mating "market" into two separate markets: a market for marriage, and a market for free sex, created thanks to the significant cost reduction of sex uncoupled from pregnancy. But, he says, while this situation is not intrinsically bad from an economic standpoint, if there are “imbalances” in the two markets then “the 'price' of either marriage or sex tilts in favor of one or the other gender."

Whereas in the past, he says, "the marriage market was, by definition, populated by roughly the same number of men as women, there is no guarantee that once it has been separated into two markets, men and women will sort themselves into the sex and marriage markets in such a way that roughly equal numbers of each gender will inhabit each market."

As it turns out, Reichert maintains, women end up entering the marriage market in greater numbers than men, due to their natural interest in raising children in a stable household. Meanwhile, the economist notes that men, who can reproduce much later in life than women and are required by nature to invest much less in the childbearing process, face far fewer incentives to move from one market to the next.

"The result is easy to see," writes Reichert. While women have higher bargaining power in the sex market as the "scarce commodity," he writes, "the picture is very different once these same women make the switch to the marriage market": "The relative scarcity of marriageable men means that the competition among women for marriageable men is far fiercer than that faced by prior generations of women. "Over time, this means that the 'deals they cut' become worse for them and better for men."

Marriage as an institution, he writes, subsequently loses its contractual character to foster women and their children, becoming instead something that is "more frail and resembles a spot market exchange." The result is that "men take more and more of the 'gains from trade' that marriage creates, and women take fewer and fewer."

Reichert enumerates some of the damaging fallout of this redistribution, including higher divorce rates, a housing market driven up by two-earner households, easier infidelity, and an increased demand for abortion.

Regarding the abortion increase, Reichert says that women who have invested in a future career will predictably "demand abortions" if contraception happens to fail. 

"The cost today of an unwanted pregnancy is not a shotgun wedding," he writes. "Rather, the cost is the loss of tremendous investments in human capital geared toward labor-market participation during the early phases of one’s life. This increases the demand for abortions (which prevent the loss of that human capital)."

The impact on children, he contends, inevitably mirrors the impact on their mothers: "Given that women’s welfare largely determines the welfare of children, this redistribution has in part been 'funded' by a loss of welfare from children," writes the economist. "In other words, the worse off are women, the worse off are the children they support. On net, women and children are the big losers in the contraceptive society."

Reichert concludes that contraception's redistribution of welfare is "profound—and alarming."

"Societies are structured around many objectives, but one of their chief reasons to be is the protection of the weak," he writes. "This means the old, the young, and childbearing and childrearing women. Contraception undermines this fundamental imperative, and, in so doing, undermines the legitimacy of the social contract."

"When the social fabric of a society is geared to move welfare from the weak to the strong, rather than the other way around, it cannot survive in the long run."

The essay will be available online later this week. (http://www.firstthings.com/feature-archive)

URL: http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/apr/10041510.html

In reply to the case of co-habiting couples with no intent to marry, who want to learn how to use NFP to postpone a pregnancy, I recommend:

The NFP teaching couple should explain their position to the couple:

NFP is not just a method of spacing pregnancies. It presumes a whole set of values about marriage, spousal love and family. It is a way of life, and a marital spirituality. It is really God’s plan for all of these matters that we are dealing with here.

Every child has a right to be conceived by an act of love between his/her father and mother, who are committed to each other in marriage, and to be received into a home that will provide for their needs as a young person growing into maturity. 

The NFP teaching couple are presenting values which are very important since they deal with the great mystery of love and life. 

We do not live in a perfect world, however, and sometimes we must accept situations that are less than ideal. Many young couples today have not experienced a strong, committed marriage in their own families as they grew up. They grew up in a contraceptive society, a society that does not understand marital chastity. 

If a co-habiting couple is drawn to learning NFP, even for less than perfect motives, then the teaching couple has an opportunity to teach them the true values of marriage, spousal love and family. Who knows what might happen? With God’s grace, during the instruction the co-habiting couple may discover the beauty of God’s plan for these matters and experience a conversion.

In China, there are over 35,000 NFP teachers using the Billings method. In China the main intent of using NFP is to prevent abortions, since the brutal one child policy is still mandatory there. But spacing pregnancies, or avoiding pregnancies, using morally good means is still a good thing.

In so many words, we take other people where they are, but we do not leave them there. There are definite expectations and requirements that go with the teaching and learning of NFP. If the co-habiting couple comes to appreciate human fertility, and wants to learn the marital chastity that NFP requires, then continue teaching them. Hopefully this will lead them to a committed marriage. If the co-habiting couple decides that periodic abstinence is impossible for them, they will drop out on their own accord. 

The good Lord deals with us as flawed human beings. He constantly summons us to move in the direction of light, away from darkness; in the direction of goodness, away from evil.

NFP teachers are usually not dealing with situations of total light or total darkness. Rather, they deal with various shades of grey. When dealing with shades of grey, we are to always move towards the light, and never towards the darkness.

NFP teachers are not expected to violate their conscience to accommodate the clearly sinful wishes of their clients. But they should leave room for the possibility that God’s grace will move the hearts of their clients. The Holy Spirit will guide them in discerning what they should do.

Cordially yours,

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

Second Sunday in OT 17 Jan 10

Is 62:1-5 Ps 996 1 Cor 12:4-11 Jn 2:1-11

St. Benedict’s Parish, Atchison, KS

GOD’S PLAN FOR MARRIAGE AND SPOUSAL LOVE

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

Early on in Jesus public ministry he went with his mother and his disciples to a wedding in Cana. Here we see that Jesus is blessing marriage, and reinforcing it with his presence at the wedding of Cana. It is here that he performs his first miracle. He changed (you could say “transubstantiated”) six containers of water, each holding twenty or thirty gallons, into choice wine. 120 gallons of choice wine! That is a lot of spirit! The wedding reception must have been a lively one!

God designed marriage and spousal love. He has a definite plan for marriage and spousal love. Since marriage is so important to each one of us, and to the human race, we need to reflect upon it. When God created the human race, he designed us to be bodied persons, male and female.

The first man, Adam, isolated and left to himself, was incomplete. Adam yearned for a soul mate, a person who could fulfill his yearnings for companionship, love and intimacy. Then God created the first woman, Eve, to be the perfect complement to Adam. “Male and female He created them in His own image and likeness.” As persons, both Adam and Eve had the ability to make the total, personal gift of self to the other. That is the distinctive quality of a human person: the ability to make the total, unconditional, without any reservations, total self surrender to another.

Genesis teaches “male and female He made them, in His own image and likeness” (Gen 1:27). A man and a woman reflect God, image God, by their ability to make the total personal gift of self to the other, just as the three persons of God totally give of themselves in the Blessed Trinity.

In Isaiah 62 we read: “For the Lord delights in you, and your land shall be called married … And as the bridegroom rejoices over the bride, so shall your God rejoice over you” (Is 62:5). Here we see that God uses the image of marriage to express his great love for us.

This total and personal gift of self is most clearly seen in the marital act, the great spousal act. “For this reason a man shall leave his parents and cleave to his wife, the two shall become one flesh” (Gen 2:24). Our God is a God of both love and life. When He designed marriage, He made it to be an intimate communion of love and life between a husband and wife. And when God designed the marital act, He designed it to have two inseparable dimensions: a unitive, or love-giving dimension, and a procreative, or life-giving dimension.

Love and life: they always go together. All love is life giving. Real love is never intentionally made sterile. Sterilized love is completely unnatural and dehumanizing.

Marriage, in God’s plan, has still other dimensions. It is free, total, faithful and open to life. Love, and married love, cannot be forced. It must be freely given. Married love is the total, unreserved gift of self. As God designed it, marriage vows endure until the death of one of the spouses. It is “until death do us part.” It calls for absolute fidelity. And marriage is always open to the goodness of life: a happy, healthy family is the fulfillment of a marriage.

Sadly, we have strayed a long way from God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family. The situation of today makes a mockery of God’s plan. Today we find that one out of two marriages end up in a divorce. This includes Catholics. Today we live in a fault free divorce society, where either one of the spouses can initiate a divorce, and the law will accept that, regardless of the wishes of the other spouse who wants to save the marriage. Today the prevailing attitude is: “If major problems appear, we split.” 

Think of what this attitude does to any sense of commitment to marriage vows and permanency. Consider the pain and damage done to the children of a divorce. Perhaps this is why so many young couples put off marriage and simply cohabitate. Today, nationwide, there is an 80% cohabitation rate among young Catholic couples. Easy divorce and lack of commitment has led to many single parent families, usually with single moms. It should be easy to see the devastation that contraception and sterilization are wrecking upon our marriages today.

New research reports that the percentage of United States’ adults who are married has dropped from 78% in 1970 to 57% in 2008, according to the recently released report, “The Marriage Index.” Even more concerning, 40% of all American children today are born out-of-wedlock and 71% of African American children are born without married parents. Research also shows that single mothers have only one-third the financial assets as married mothers. Children not brought up by both a mother and father have lower graduation rates, higher incidence of incarceration, and lower performance in school.

Jesus does not bless this state of marriage. Jesus does not give his approval to this abandonment of God’s plan for marriage and spousal love. Jesus wants his plan for marriage and spousal love to be taught from the pulpits, and shouted from the rooftops. He wants it to be part of the new evangelization for the 21st century. He wants people to understand the beauty and goodness of mature spousal love and a total commitment to marriage. He wants us to understand that it takes a lifetime to live and develop a spousal relationship. You can’t do this in ten or fifteen years. Jesus wants us to understand that the child is the greatest gift God can send to married couples. Children are their greatest treasure.

This is why we must all return to God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family. Whenever I meet couples celebrating their 50th golden anniversaries, I always ask them: “What is the secret to your staying married?” Their answer is always the same. They say, “Well don’t think that we didn’t have our share of problems. We had just as many problems as anyone else. But we made the decision to face our problems together and work them out. Our problems did not break us. Rather, working with our problems in the marriage and family helped us to mature and discover what real love is.” Then they add, “And we are still working at it.”

Last November, the American Bishops released their pastoral letter, “Marriage: Love and Life in the Divine Plan.” It is very readable, and very good teaching. I encourage you to read it. Just go to your computer and type on your search engine “Marriage: Love and Life in the Divine Plan.” Our bishops understand the seriousness of the present state of marriage.

Following closely the teaching of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the pastoral letter first discusses marriage as a natural institution essentially linked to male-female complementarity and ordered to the good of the spouses and the procreation of children. The letter views marriage as an institution facing “fundamental challenges” from contraception, homosexual unions, divorce and cohabitation.

On contraception the bishops teach: “Deliberately intervening, by the use of contraceptive practices, to close off an act of intercourse to the possibility of procreation is a way of separating the unitive meaning of marriage from the procreative meaning. This is objectively wrong in and of itself and is essentially opposed to God’s plan for marriage and proper human development.”

On same-sex unions the bishops teach: “The legal recognition of same-sex unions poses a multifaceted threat to the very fabric of society, striking at the source from which society and culture come and which they are meant to serve. Such recognition affects all people, married and non-married: not only at the fundamental levels of the good of the spouses, the good of children, the intrinsic dignity of every human person and the common good, but also at the levels of education, cultural imagination and influence, and religious freedom.”

On cohabitation the bishops teach: “Social science research finds that cohabitation has no positive effects on a marriage. In some cases, cohabitation can in fact harm a couple’s chances for a stable marriage. More importantly, though, cohabitation involves the serious sin of fornication. It does not conform to God’s plan for marriage and is always wrong and objectively sinful.”

The bishops’ letter then turns to “Marriage in the order of the new creation.” Here it discusses marriage as a sacrament, as a reflection of the life of the Blessed Trinity, as the foundation of the domestic church (which is the family), and as a vocation in which spouses are called to grow in chastity and gratitude.

The American bishops help us to retrieve a clear picture of God’s plan for the beauty of marriage and spousal love and family. They point to the many helps and tools we can use to strengthen our marriages, and how we can encourage other couples experiencing problems with their marriage. I encourage you to read the pastoral letter “Marriage: Love and Life in God’s Plan.” Meditate upon it!

When Jesus appeared on Earth, and began teaching and performing his great miracles, he went to the wedding feast at Cana. Here he elevated marriage, from simply a natural institution to the dignity of a divine sacrament. A sacrament is an outpouring of divine life and grace.

Why is the Church so confident that all married couples can measure up to the standards of God’s plan for their marriage and spousal love?

Because with God’s grace everything is possible; nothing is impossible. If a couple will draw upon the grace of their sacrament, and cooperate with it, they can overcome any difficulty, any disappointment, and any hurt feelings. 

May the healing of our marriages begin! May Jesus, the divine Bridegroom, help us to revitalize our marriages, spousal love and families.

Cordially yours,

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

 MARY ST. PIERRE  of the Florida Catholic staff

ORLANDO — In looking from an ethical perspective, today’s Catholics are faced with increasingly complicated issues related to health care decisions and the challenges of staying constant in their faith. Beginning with this edition, theFlorida Catholic hopes to help readers find a clear path in the medical maze with the introduction of “The Catholic Doctor is In,” a monthly column written by physician members of the Catholic Medical Association.

“There are people out there struggling to practice the ‘Culture of Life’ that we were exhorted to by Pope Paul VI in ‘Humanae Vitae’ (‘Of Human Life’) and Pope John Paul II in‘Evangelium Vitae’ (‘The Gospel of Life’),” said Dr. Rebecca Peck, a Catholic practitioner and member of Prince of Peace Parish in Ormond Beach. “Through this column, we want Catholics to be able to engage in open moral-ethical discussions, so they are able to come to peace with decisions they have to make, or have made.”

The Catholic Medical Association (CMA) is comprised of Catholic physicians of the United States and Canada who work to uphold the principles of the Catholic faith in the science and practice of medicine. As Catholic doctors and health care workers, members of CMA are well versed in the ethical and social teachings of the Church, and work to build up a culture of life.

On the medical front Peck and her CMA member colleagues hope to bring an educated understanding to many of the misconceptions Catholics have about medical treatments, research, pain management, end-of-life care, legislation, stem-cell research, the effects of artificial birth control, abortion, natural family planning, and other medical arenas. Readers are invited to submit questions or comments on material seen in the monthly column or questions relevant to health concerns and care.

One of the principles guiding Catholic health care is respect for the sanctity of human life from its beginning to its natural end, and not everyone respects this ethically grounded approach. Peck said that often, in the secular world today, the people receive medical information that is void of any terminology that includes God. This information gives the impression that the Catholic faith is opposed to or rejects proper scientific development. Quite the contrary, Peck emphasized, providing three examples of adult stem-cell research, conception and the effects of artificial birth control.

“The sanctity of life has become muddled in so many areas and we have to maintain an absolute consistency in our faith and in what is the truth under these pressures,” Peck said.

Looking at the misunderstood topic of abortion, which will be one of the focus areas of the column, thoughts can get scrambled. Peck referred to the ongoing secular debate as to when life begins. For Catholics, that has always been from the time of conception. Now, many pro-choice doctors and scientists will say it does not begin at conception, but rather at implantation into the wall of the uterus. Yet, Peck pointed out, even with the implantation theory, which occurs around six days after ovulation, most abortions happen much later.

“There is no rational argument to say an embryo of three days or seven weeks is pre-human, and at 16 weeks it becomes a human,” Peck said.

It’s often very challenging, Peck said, for Catholics to understand that the health care decisions and treatment they are providing their loved ones, is taking away from the objective of good health. Helping Catholics understand the moral side of medicine and fully understand the “fine print” in the choices they make will mean better mental, physical and spiritual health.

“If we look at Jesus, our divine physician, and remain congruent with our faith, we will have healthy families and live more successfully,” said Peck. “As individuals, we all want to live our Catholic faith so we can progress on our journey and become holier. We don’t want to make decisions based on something that is going to impair our journey to the ultimate sanctification.”

ENDNOTE: Readers are invited to submit questions for consideration to the Florida Catholic at mstpierre@thefloridacatholic.org.

 -----------------

The Catholic Doctors Are In

Question: My husband and I are both Catholics. We know that we are not supposed to use artificial birth control, but we worry NFP (natural family planning) is not an effective method of preventing pregnancy. During this recession and money is so tight, we just can’t afford another child right now. As Catholic doctors, what would you advise? Sincerely, Married and Scared of Catholic Roulette

Dear Married and Scared,

Your question is a very important one to both of us. As married Catholic physicians and parents of five children, we too have struggled with this very same issue. As a young couple we knew the Church’s teaching on marriage and family, but were uncertain how it applied to us in our own personal and professional lives. We hate to admit it, but we were “cafeteria Catholics,” picking and choosing which teachings were acceptable to us. As we became more involved in parish life, we were challenged to learn more about our faith.  

As we studied the Catechism and the encyclical “Humanae Vitae,” our eyes were opened to the sad consequences of our contraceptive culture. The more we saw its applications in our own lives, the more we were struck by the frequency it was showing up in our own exam rooms. We saw so many families in crisis. It now dawned on us why couples who use birth control or were sterilized have divorce rates above 50 percent. It struck us to the core.

To help our practice’s brokenhearted adults and their children, we would have to show them a better way. Further study of Pope John Paul’s Theology of the Body convinced us contraception and sterilization goes against the very nature and language of our human bodies. Finally, we became convinced our wise Church had been right all the time. We immediately stopped prescribing contraceptives in our medical practice and resolved to learn as much as possible about the only Church-approved method of family planning — natural family planning (NFP). NFP encompasses a variety of modern methods of fertility awareness.

All methods of NFP allow a woman to confidently determine her fertility status. By daily observing easily identified changes in her body — such as temperature and/or cervical mucus — a woman can know if she is fertile or infertile on any particular day. She can then use this information to achieve or avoid a pregnancy. NFP is inexpensive, easy to learn and does not have any harmful side effects. Studies show that couples using NFP have much stronger marriages, with divorce rates less than 1 percent.  

In avoiding a pregnancy, NFP — in actual usage — is just as effective as the birth control pill. Great statistic, but they pale compared with our own experience in our medical practice. Our couples are using and enjoying NFP in their marriages. Their families are healthy and strong. These couples have the joy-filled marriages we all were intended to experience. NFP has enhanced our marriage — and those marriages in our practice — in so many ways. The ultimate vocation of marriage is to bring each other to mutual holiness and sanctification. We know that NFP has helped move us forward on this journey. Why would God want us to use anything else?

--Drs. Ben and Rebecca Peck, Peck’s Family Practice in Ormond Beach.

To learn more about Natural Family Planning, contact the Office of Family Life in your diocese for a complete listing of classes.

To find this and future articles, go to www.thefloridacatholic.org

Cordially yours,

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

mhabiger@kansasmonks.org

 The wisdom of this design is real wisdom, something that can be considered apart from questions properly dealing with issues of right and wrong, and questions of sin, because it is a design intended to lead to human happiness and well-being. Normally, we don’t understand and appreciate such a design in its totality until it is fractured and destroyed by deliberate sin, and the results become obvious. Until that time, it is like a skillful referee in an athletic contest. If he is doing his job correctly, he is hardly noticed. 

For instance, considering the mother-child relationship, it is very easy to see that sexuality’s design favors the well-being of both, since the conjugal act is a moment of deep unconditional choosing of the other, and the acceptance of the other at a deep level of being but, this is not possible without also choosing to remain open to life, at least according to the normal design of sexuality. This type of “anthropology” favors the woman’s self-esteem and her ability to incorporate and integrate the baby into her sense of who she is as a woman, i.e. a mother not just the woman. Additionally, if she is not contraceptive, the acceptance of her procreative potential as part of her normal sexual identity ensures also that she cannot be had “on the cheap” or to put it positively, that the man must accept her in her totality.

From the standpoint of the baby, nature has seen to it that the deepest and most intimate, unconditional surrender of love cannot happen apart from dealing with the question of openness to a potential baby. God wanted the moment of choosing new life to be one and the same moment as that of choosing one’s soul-mate and spouse at a very deep level.

The two types of choosing are now locked together inseparably and this is what I mean when I say is not just a question of right or wrong, but rather a question of the way we are in our natures, an arrangement the acceptance of which is necessary to avoid causing inevitably deep discord in marriage and society. Thus abortion follows contraception like the night follows the day, and it is because of the deep personal de-valuing or de-personalization that first comes in the contraceptive act, where the woman is not accepted in her totality – no, that’s too mild a description; it’s more than that, it’s that she is betrayed actively because of betrayal of trust -- an act where her totality is laid bare in a kind of existential or psychological nakedness (The physical nakedness is a kind of outward sign of this more existential nakedness).

After contraceptive de-personalization, the abortion choice is or can be viewed as, at least in part, a desperate attempt at re-personalization by “blanking out” or denying the humanity of the fetus. In other words, the fetus is de-personalized in a desperate and impossible attempt to re-personalize herself, and this is the foundational basis, examined existentially, of recourse to induced abortion.

And our study moreover found that tubal ligation causes sexual dysfunction in the same way that women experience sexual dysfunction surrounding intercourse outside of marriage. Of course it does, because it is like a “de-composing” of the constitutive or component elements of her total acceptance, so that now (and this is what people used to intuitively understand when they said women shouldn’t be used and they should have respect for themselves and for their bodies) a sham kind of acceptance that is really rejection at a deep level takes place, fueling as contraception does the drive for divorce, and if not divorce then the hostility that inevitably creeps into these marriages.

Today we have a real problem with marriage. Half of our marriages now end up in a divorce. This indicates that something is very wrong with the way we view marriage. We are not reaping the benefits of a stable relationship where the couple has lifelong security and the children have a place to grow up in a normal family with their own father and mother.

There are many advantages that flow from a marriage-for-life mentality. There are many serious disadvantages coming from an easy divorce mentality. Have you noticed that every young couple, when they are preparing for marriage, wants their marriage to last forever? They are deeply in love, and they want that love to endure for the rest of their lives. No couple takes the attitude: “This is a five year arrangement, and then we split.”

Children and family go together. A marriage is not complete until the love of a husband and wife ripens into fatherhood and motherhood. (Sterility is a real consideration today, but even then many of these couples opt for adoption.) Children are the natural fruit of marital love. But it takes at least 18-20 years to bring a child to that level of maturity when he or she is prepared to face life on his or her own. The child is God’s greatest gift to a couple and their marriage, but the child also requires unwavering commitment from his parents. For their emotional stability, children need parents whose marriage is tightly bound together. Children learn about the rich complimentarity between men and women by watching their parents as they pass through their growing up years. Children discover what committed love and marriage look like by the example their parents give. Indeed, it is in a strong, committed family where young boys and girls acquire all the natural and civil virtues they will need to become useful citizens.

The family antedates the state and society. The family arrived on the scene first. Only later did such human inventions as the governing state or community arrangements appear on the scene. Society and the state depend upon strong marriages and healthy families to provide them with resourceful and well-balanced citizens. Indeed, the health of a society depends upon the well being of its families and family life. Thus, society and the state have a natural interest in promoting an environment where strong marriages and healthy, happy families can flourish. The state exists for the family; the family does not exist for the state.

We see that everyone wants strong, committed marriages: the couples, the children, and society. Everyone wants this, but it is not happening. What is frustrating these natural desires?

Many things could be mentioned here: a turn towards absolute autonomy, a reluctance to deal with problems in a relationship and the temptation to run from them; self-love in preference to self-sacrificial love; lack of support from the churches, the secular media and the government …

We need to concentrate our attention more on why marriage, by its very nature, is for life and why it requires an unbreakable commitment between a man and a woman.

First off, we need to realize that we did not design marriage. The institution of marriage is greater than any of the couples who enter it. We do not design marriage; marriage designs us. Marriage has endured over the many centuries of human history, and it will continue on when we are gone. This is because God designed it, when He decided to create the human race, composed of men and women, as bodied persons, who are both sexual and fertile. Marriage is God’s plan for the vast majority of the human race.

This means that marriage has certain features, recognizable contours, a discernable nature that can be described by laws and principles. God has a plan for marriage, and that plan can be known, put into practice, and his plan can produce its benefits for everyone who abides by it.

Why is marriage a lifetime commitment between one man and one woman? The simple answer is that it takes a lifetime to fully realize the potential of a marriage. You cannot exhaust a marriage in only 10 to 20 years. At their silver anniversary, a couple should be entering into the best years of their relationship.

The more complex answer is that a permanent, irrevocable commitment is the only place where two entirely different people, a man and a woman, can pursue the tasks that every marriage contains. Any relationship presents problems. The deeper the relationship, the greater the potential there is for more complicated problems. Marriage is the most profound, and all-inclusive relationship we know. Two completely different persons, a man and a woman, with their unique personalities, their different set of talents, likes and dislikes, strengths and weaknesses, set out on a journey of life where there are no guaranteed outcomes. Marriage draws each partner into all the network of relationships associated with the other spouse. This is the perfect formula for guaranteed problems, challenges and frustrations. This is real life. This is what every marriage involves.

To live is to change, Cardinal Newman once said, and to be perfect is to have changed often. Every life sees many changes. In marriage, the couple multiplies that by two, because now they are involved with the “other self” as well as their own. A new problem, an unexpected change of events, a new pregnancy, a shortfall of income, successes, failures, … all these require patience and persistence. 

When a husband and wife are deeply committed to each other, to their marriage, and to their family, then they function in a framework where they can consistently and successfully address their problems. They know they can rely upon the other. They need not face the world alone. They draw upon each other’s strengths and protect each other’s weaknesses. They do not know exactly how the problem under consideration will be resolved, but they are certain that together they can handle it.

Marriage forces a couple to mature, to remove themselves from the center of the universe, and to find their true position in the human universe. They discover that real love means to serve, and not always to be served. They discover the true role that sex plays in their relationship. They progress away from an erotic, self-grasping love, and move towards an agapaic, self-sacrificing love. They soon learn that they have to make sacrifices, die to self, for the benefit of something greater than themselves, which is their marriage and their family. They learn that true happiness comes only from pursuing what is best for others, especially for their loved ones, instead of doing what is most satisfying for themselves. 

Marriage and family are the schools where everyone deepens in their humanity. No one is exempt from the demands of these schools. If they do exempt themselves, then they stunt their development as full persons, develop bad habits which become flaws in their character, and then carry these immaturities with them wherever they go for the rest of their lives. 

It is a good thing for couples to experience real problems in their relationship. Having a problem is a signal that something important is missing from the relationship, and it must be addressed and corrected. Real love does not demand perfection in the other; it only demands that a person tries his or her best to address the problem. In a successful marriage, couples do not defend their inadequacies, or pretend that they do not exist; rather, they address them and work with them. That is the normal way we grow into the natural virtues, which give meaning and satisfaction to this life. Problems force us to move beyond our present comfort zones, and aspire to higher levels of maturity.

Marriage is an irrevocable, indissoluble commitment. Marriage requires a lifetime for its completion. It is until death do us part. This is God’s plan for marriage, right from the beginning (Mt 19:4). Once a couple enters into a relationship with God and themselves, then that relationship continues for the rest of their life together. The love they first discovered in one another was meant to continue throughout the marriage. People do not fall in love, and then fall out of love. If there was authentic love there in the beginning, then it can be rediscovered and sustained, if both parties work at it. 

When you talk to couples married for 50 years, and ask them for the secret to their happy marriage, they will inevitably tell you things like: “Place your trust in God and the grace of the sacrament.” “Take each day as it comes, and keep working at it.” “Marriage is not a 50-50 proposition; usually it seems to be a 90-10 proposition. Learn to be very generous.”

Doesn’t everyone want a strong marriage, and a happy, healthy family? Well, that is what God wants for all of us too. And this is possible for every couple who is willing to work with marriage as God designed it to be. In addition to the natural helps and aids to making a marriage work, God gives us additional spiritual helps. These are the sacraments, especially the Holy Eucharist and the Sacrament of Reconciliation. Couples draw upon the grace of their special sacrament of Marriage. Other divine helps are prayer, the Gospels, and the teachings of the Church on marriage and the family. 

NFP is another great help, both on the natural and the supernatural levels. Contraception is the great enemy of a successful marriage. In contraception, a woman soon discovers the difference between being loved and being used. In contraception, the emphasis is upon release of sexual tension and orgasm, not on self-surrender and total gift of self. In contraception there is a fear of the child, a rejection of the child instead of a welcoming embrace of the child. The child is perceived be an unwanted, uninvited intruder into his parent’s lives, instead of being God’s greatest gift to them. In contraception there is a refusal to sacrifice one’s self for the betterment of the marriage and family. It is a selfish focus upon my immediate wants and needs, here and now. Contraception does not regard our fertility as a great gift bestowed upon us by God. Rather, our fertility is an obstacle to our immediate gratification. Contraception attempts to reduce our fertility to something subpersonal, something subhuman, over which we have total control. Contraception and sterilization are our attempts to redefine human nature, to destroy a perfectly healthy and normal functioning organ of our bodies.

If you want to take out a good marriage insurance policy, then learn NFP, which is God’s way and nature’s way of planning your family. If you want to play Russian roulette with your marriage, then allow contraception to work its devastation upon your relationship. With the arrival of the Pill in the 60’s, divorce rates began to skyrocket. By contrast, the divorce rate of NFP users is less than 5%.

God designed marriage to be permanent, irrevocable and a source of great happiness and completion. He knows what is best for us. He never asks the impossible. He always gives us the means we need to live by his wonderful plan for us. Jesus is the model for all husbands in unlimited self-giving love (Ephesians 5, Philippians 2). The choice is ours. Choose to have a strong committed marriage, and a healthy happy family.

To the Editor;

I was disappointed, but not altogether surprised, by the omission of a few critical facts in Melinda Beck’s review of contraceptive technology (“The Birth Control Riddle” Tuesday April 20, 2010).

First, while she mentioned a reduced risk of ovarian and cervical cancer with long- term use of hormonal contraceptives, she failed to point out the significant increased risk of the far more common cancer of the breast. This risk is greatest among long- term users who have not yet a child, which is a large segment of consumers of these drugs today. This is not new news. In 2005 the International Agency for Research on Cancer (an arm of the World Health Organization) declared the combined estrogen-progestin oral contraceptive a carcinogen based on the committee’s finding of “substantial evidence of carcinogenicity in humans.” Subsequent carefully controlled studies have continued to document this. Despite this, millions of uninformed women are encouraged to consume these carcinogens every day.

Second, Ms. Beck failed to mention that one mechanism of hormonal contraceptives is to “impede implantation in the endometrium.” Despite the semantic nuances the American College of Obstetrics & Gynecology may employ to obfuscate this by defining the pregnancy as beginning only after implantation, the truth is this mechanism of action is a direct abortion of a 5- to 10-day-old human embryo. For women using progestin-only formulations, FDA labeling indicates this mechanism may be in play in as many as half of all cycles. Women deserve to be told this.

But the larger concern that permeates Ms. Beck’s article is the pervasive approach to treat fertility as a disease or nuisance to be rid of rather than the magnificent gift it truly is. Contraceptives are the only drugs designed to render healthy body systems non-functional. So long as sex is viewed as little more than a mildly aerobic, recreational contact activity instead of the unifying, life-giving act between a husband and wife that reconfirms their unconditional acceptance, support, and commitment to each other exactly as they are, for the rest of their lives, we will continue to be disappointed in our attempts to control our fertility.

There is an alternative: contemporary methods of Natural Family Planning are well-documented to be 99% effective, don’t carry the dangers inherent in most artificial methods, and often improve the overall relationship between husband and wife. NFP involves teamwork, and it is common for couples to report better communication, higher respect for each other, and a deeper relationship. Married couples who want to plan their families deserve better than what pharmaceutical companies are dishing out. 

Respectfully,

Michael D. Manhart PhD

Executive Director,

Couple to Couple League International

 Dear Ms. Beck,

As a married, woman physician with 5 children, I would like to answer your riddle. But first, I have some of my own to ask your audience.

Why was the pill first introduced by Dr. John Rock back in 1960? Wasn’t it to help women make their lives a little easier? Wasn’t it to strengthen marriage? Wasn’t it to make abortion a rare occurrence? And, wasn’t it to improve society in general?

And now, 50 years later, have those objectives been achieved? No, on all counts.

The birth control pill category has one of the most serious list of side effects that I have ever prescribed, including death, pulmonary embolus, blood clots, stroke, migraines, increased rates of cervical cancer, increased sexual transmitted diseases (including HPV, Herpes and HIV), and prolonged infertility, including a whole host of minor symptoms which can become severe, such as depression. Where are the Ralph Naders of the world, who criticize every cholesterol medicine that comes out despite the obvious merits of such pills, yet remain mysteriously quiet regarding the deathly oral contraceptives – another riddle.

Oral contraceptives, since 2005, have been on the WHO’s (World Health Organization’s) list of known carcinogens list. Their cousin compounds, postmenopausal HRT (hormone replacement therapy, such as Prempro) was shown to definitely cause an increase in breast cancer after 5 years of use. Yet, the birth control pill contains much higher doses of estrogen and progestins, and are given to younger women, with much more susceptible breast tissue, for longer periods of time, and the medical community doubts that this is not causing the astronomical increase in breast cancer rates we are currently experiencing? We throw these compounds at teenagers, while their breast tissue is still immature and developing, for minor medical problems like acne and dysmennorhea, and we tell them it is safe, and then we look the other way when those women at aged 40 or 50 develop hormone positive breast cancer?

We wonder why certain studies seem to prove that oral contraceptive use, especially before a woman’s first pregnancy, do show a significant increase in breast cancer, but then seem puzzled when larger studies, funded by the overflowing coffers of the pharameutical industry seem to show no relationship. Yet another riddle. We also wonder why agencies that promote contraceptive pills and devices are linked to agencies that supposedly fight breast cancer – wouldn’t one think that is a conflict of interest? And what about the monetary incentives physicians have for prescribing the pill, performing sterilizations and abortions? More riddles.

We wonder why the pill doesn’t work all the time in preventing pregnancy. Could it be because the pill actually works several ways and only one of these ways actually prevents ovulation? The other methods change cervical mucus and prevent the baby from implanting into its mother’s womb. Could it be because ever since the pill’s inception, the drug companies have been ratcheting down the dosages of the estrogens because of the high cardiovascular risks of the drugs, and by decreasing the estrogens, this leads to higher rates of “breakthrough ovulation”. And of course, the pill in actual usage, depending on the population using it, is much lower than its touted 99% theoretical effectiveness rate. In young teenage girls, it can be as low as 70% due to multiple missed doses.

We wonder why surgical abortion rates have increased not decreased. And, as mentioned above, regarding the abortifacient nature of the pill (it prevents the tiny baby from implanting into the wall of the uterus), these “medical” abortions are too numerous to count. We wonder why certain Colleges of Physicians had to redefine when life begins from fertilization to implantation? Was this maneuver accomplished in order to evade the abortifacient nature of the pill? Another riddle.

We wonder why marriages are crumbling, instead of being strengthened. Why single parents are raising children instead of a mother and a father raising children as a team, and how this is in anyone’s best interests? In the race for women’s liberation, our selfish quest for freedom and control over our bodies has made casualties of the unborn and of the children who get a single mother exhausted by work and the overwhelming burdens of raising a child alone.

We wonder why there are never articles touting the benefits of fertility awareness or NFP (Natural Family Planning). Well, these methods are free, easy to use, 98% effective, good for marriages, and good for the environment. Couples that use NFP have a divorce rate of 1-5% contrasted with contracepting or sterilized couples who have rates over 50%.

Ms. Beck, the answer to your riddle, is that unplanned pregnancies are happening because birth control is not the panacea it was made out to be 50 years ago. I stopped prescribing the pill 3 years ago in part, because I couldn’t stand to see one more stroke victim, one more STD, one more cervical or breast cancer case, or one more “backup abortion” for failed contraceptive. The main reason, though, that I stopped prescribing and using birth control, was because I understood through my Catholic faith, Humanae Vitae and Theology of the Body, that birth control is bad for women because it is against God’s plan for human sexuality and marriage. The answer to your riddle is that birth control has failed miserably on all counts, and it is my sincere hope and prayer that American women wake up very shortly.

Dr. Rebecca Peck, M.D./Pecks Family Practice/Ormond Beach, FL 32174 rbamer2@yahoo.com

The Superstition of Divorce

Lecture XXXIII

By Dale Ahlquist

In 1918, Chesterton wrote a series of articles called "The Superstition of Divorce" for the New Witness. The essays were published as a collection under the same title in 1920. He said it wasn't supposed to be a book, but a pamphlet, and the object of a pamphlet is to be out of date as soon as possible. "It can only survive when it does not succeed."

Unfortunately, it survived. Chesterton's warnings about the rise of divorce have gone unheeded, warnings best summed up in his prophetic line: "The obvious effect of frivolous divorce will be frivolous marriage. If people can be separated for no reason they will feel it all the easier to be united for no reason."

In this book, Chesterton for the most part does not talk about the sacramental and religious nature of marriage, but rather focuses on the practical and historical and social reasons for it. His main point is that if the family breaks apart, the whole society will break apart.

Divorce, by any account, is a failure. But the modern world has begun to portray divorce as a freedom. This comes as no surprise to Chesterton. The modern world, he says, specializes in two forms of freedom: suicide and divorce. "In a dreary time we listen to two counsels of despair: the freedom from life and the freedom from love." In our society, he says, where every real freedom has been curtailed, the two doors of death and divorce stand open. But just as we should not accept a system that drives men to drown and shoot themselves, we should not accept a system that produces so many divorces. He insists that we admit that divorce is a failure and that it would be much better for us to find the cause and cure rather than allow divorce to complete its destructive effect.

But freedom means the freedom to make a vow, not break a vow. A vow, says Chesterton, "is a tryst with oneself." Divorce, he argues, is a superstition. In fact, it is more of a superstition than sacramental marriage itself. The advocates of divorce believe that a vow can be undone by a mere ceremony, disposed of by a mysterious and magical rite. The superstition also applies to the idea of re-marriage, that the mere ceremony will undo a vow so that the vow can be made vow again. Chesterton says they want to have their wedding cake and eat it, too. And we have now created a system where this is possible. We now reward a man for deserting his wife by letting him have another wife. We never encourage him to go back to the woman he first chose from all the women in the world.

But besides the horrible problem of disloyalty, there are other enemies, both philosophical and practical, attacking marriage and the family. This revolt against the family is utterly unnatural, a revolt against nature itself and the natural attraction between father and mother. This natural attraction, says Chesterton, is called a child. It is a simple truth that the modern world insists on ignoring.

A family is of course the best way to create, to protect and to raise children. Besides this obvious truth, Chesterton also argues that the family must be kept intact because the home is the greatest refuge of freedom in the world.

Divorce is not an act of freedom. On the contrary, it is an act of slavery. A society where vows can be easily broken is not a free society. A free society cannot function without volunteers keeping their commitments to each other. When the most basic unit of society, the family, breaks apart, some other institution will try to replace it and restore order, and will then become more important than the family.

Chesterton knew that the proponents of divorce would object to his characterization of divorce as being an act of slavery. But he reminds them that anyone who's ever read Uncle Tom's Cabin knows that one of the oldest and simplest charges against slavery was that it broke up families.

Chesterton said that the two greatest enemies to freedom in our society are big government and big business. And they are also enemies of the family. Families are a nuisance to businesses that have to provide a living wage, health care plans, maternity leave, and have to put up with employees coming in late or going home early because a child is sick or missed the school bus. And families are a nuisance to the State because they interfere with regulation, standardization, officialism, and the secularization of everything sacred. Traditionally, the State has been subordinate to the family, but when the family loses its strength, the government gains extraordinary power over people's personal lives. Chesterton says that without the family we are helpless before the State.

The solution? Instead of rejecting marriage, we have to reject the poisonous modern philosophies and get back to the primary things, the permanent things. We have to honor the family above the State, and more importantly, above the office or the factory. And we begin to honor the family by honoring marriage.

Chesterton says quite frankly that anyone who believes that marriage is a divine institution would not believe in divorce. But he is not asking anyone assume the worth of his creed, but simply to consider the worth of the claims made by modern society. He asks those who are so caught up in defending divorce: what do they really finally expect for themselves and for their children?

Father-mother-child, says Chesterton, form a sacred triangle that cannot be destroyed. It will only destroy the civilization that disregards it. And the Church has held up a mystical mirror to that sacred triangle in which the order of the three things is reversed, the Holy Family of Child, Mother, and Father.

You can find this Lecture XXXIII at: http://chesterton.org/discover/lectures/33superstitionofdivorce.html

If you would like to purchase this book, it is available in Vol.4 of the Collected Works.

Last week was the 50th anniversary of the Food and Drug Administration’s approval of the birth control pill in the United States. Newspapers and magazines around the country ran stories on this, mostly extolling the social and medical benefits of the pill. This theme was bolstered by a recent communiqué from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) which noted: “The pill remains one of the safest and most popular forms of contraception in the U.S.” (Office of Communications, ACOG, May 6, 2010)

I find it disturbing that after nearly 50 years, both the media and the medical establishment have failed to give a true airing to one of the pill’s most dangerous side effects; namely, that “dirty little secret.” What’s that? One need only check the Mayo Clinic Proceedings-the major medical publication of the Mayo Clinic-to find our little-known study, which showed that the pill increases the risk of premenopausal breast cancer substantially when taken at a young age (see Mayo Clinic Proceedings: October, 2006: available to the public on line). In October, 2006, we reviewed the medical literature and combined data in an analysis (referred to as a meta-analysis): we found that 21 out of 23 studies showed that using oral contraceptives prior to a woman’s first birth resulted in a 44% increased risk in premenopausal breast cancer. Our meta-analysis remains the most recent study in this area and updates the previously analysis (the Oxford-analysis published in 1996) which relied on older data with older women (two-thirds of whom were over age 45); unfortunately, the Oxford study continues to be quoted by ACOG, textbooks, the National Cancer Institute, the American Cancer Society and most researchers and obstetricians, claiming that oral contraceptives carry little breast cancer risk especially ten years after last use.

I continue to be amazed at the discordance between the medical literature and public/medical awareness. To my dismay, after our meta-analysis was published, the Mayo Clinic sent out a press release to all major media in the country. The response?: ( ). The blank space between the parentheses is purposeful. Although our meta-analysis received scant internet coverage, almost no major media covered this study, which is shocking, given the fact that about 40,000 women in the U.S. get premenopausal breast cancer annually, oral contraceptives are an elective risk factor and our study is the most recent meta-analysis to date on the oral contraceptive-breast cancer link. 

In addition to our meta-analysis, it’s important to note that the World Health Organization classified oral contraceptives as a Class I carcinogen in 2005 (ie, the most dangerous classification). Even more data has come forth recently in a paper by several researchers-one of whom is a major researcher of the National Cancer Institute-which not only cited our meta-analysis, but found that oral contraceptives increase the risk of triple-negative breast cancer in women under forty by 320 percent (triple-negative breast cancers are extremely aggressive) . (Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention; April, 2009)

Few in the medical establishment or the public are aware of these data, or if they are, young women almost never hear about them. It’s been almost four years since the publication of our study in the Mayo Clinic Proceedings; I am beginning to think that our study has been effectively “buried.” Breast cancer and the pill-that dirty little secret? Some day perhaps someone in the media and/or medical establishment will dust a little dirt off those pink ribbons and let young women hear all the facts so they can finally make truly informed decisions.

Chris Kahlenborn, MD

(Dr. Kahlenborn is the lead author of the Mayo Clinic Proceeding’s article cited above. He has testified before the FDA in June, 2000 regarding the link between oral contraceptives and breast cancer)

Taken from: Coming Home

Dr. Gerard M. Nadal: Science in Service of the Pro-Life Movement

http://gerardnadal.com/

Today in the calendar of the Church we celebrate the Solemnity of The Most Holy Trinity. It is a great feast day for the pro-life movement.

In our understanding of the Trinity, the Father gives Himself totally to the Son, and the Son gives Himself totally to the Father. In this reciprocal act of radical self-donation made in Love, the Holy Spirit of God is generated. The Church holds out sacramental marriage as an icon, a window, into the inner life of the Trinity.

The mutual submission of husbands and wives to one another of which Saint Paul speaks is not the servile condition that radical feminism would have us believe. It is rather the same total emptying of self, the same radical self-donation as characterizes the inner life of God. In that complete giving and receiving of self between spouses, there can be no barriers. In that self-donation, new life is generated as the product of spousal love.

The Church teaches contraception as an intrinsic evil precisely because it is an assault on our imitation of the inner life of the Trinity, because it is an assault on our fertility, of our capacity to generate new life as the expression of our love. It is a barrier that is out of sync with the natural rhythms of human fertility and its cycles. Natural Family Planning takes into view those cycles and does not erect such barriers as to make of marital union a mere plaything devoid of openness and responsibility.

Sterile marriages, marriages that are parsimonious in their approach to love and its fullest expressions beyond the bedroom, that are even hostile to life, are marriages that reject the paradigm of the inner life of the Trinity. The four Gospels are nothing, if they are not one long revelation into the inner life of the Trinity. As Jesus said, “As the Father has loved me {completely}, so I have loved you {completely}.” and “Love one another as I have loved you,” which is to say, completely and selflessly.

So God gives us marriage that we might have a vehicle through which we learn to love, mirroring the example set by the inner Life of the Trinity. God is truly three persons in one entity because that oneness comes about through radical, mutual self-donation. That’s how the two become one in marriage: two persons, one in mind and heart, and even almost in being. And in those best of marriages where self-donation comes closest to perfection, we have reflected for us the inner life of the Trinity.

This is what Jesus was getting at in His prayer to the Father in John 17:20 ″My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, 21 that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: 23 I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me. 24 ″Father, I want those you have given me to be with me where I am, and to see my glory, the glory you have given me because you loved me before the creation of the world. 25 ″Righteous Father, though the world does not know you, I know you, and they know that you have sent me. 26 I have made you known to them, and will continue to make you known in order that the love you have for me may be in them and that I myself may be in them.”

This model of the Trinity in our lives works when we ask the Holy Spirit of God to move in us, in our marriages. It works when we ask the Spirit to teach us wisdom and love, when we are prepared to abandon sin and empty our lives of all impediments that lead us to parsimony, rather than openness.

Especially openness to Life.

BIO

Dr. Nadal holds a Bachelor of Arts degree in Psychology with a minor in Philosophy, Master of Science in Cellular and Molecular Biology, Master of Philosophy in Biology, and Ph.D. in Molecular Microbiology from Saint John’s University, New York City. Between his B.A. and M.S. studies, Dr. Nadal studied for a year in Seminary and then Post-baccalaureate Science for three years at Columbia University, New York City.

Recently, Dr Nadal has joined the Center for Morality in Public Life as Editor and columnist, as well as columnist for Headline Bistro, an online news and opinion source for Roman Catholics published by the Knights of Columbus.

He has a very good website: http://gerardnadal.com/

Even more important than preaching about the damage of contraception is teaching about the immorality of sterilization. Too many folks have sterilizations with way too little thought - even folks who know that the church is against birth control pills seem to think that sterilization is OK - or at most a venial sin, easily confessed and forgiven - not the actual mutilation of both body and soul that it turns out to be.

I see a lot of middle aged women who bemoan that they have no desire for their husbands (or anyone, actually) any more - well over 95% of them had a tubal ligation. I can't prove a connection, but I also see lots of post menopausal women that have very satisfying love lives with their husbands - and I can't help but wonder if there is a connection between the tubal ligation and the decreased desire.... --Alicia Huntley

The reduced libido phenomenon was common (maybe even universal) to the 20 Catholic couples that shared their stories in 'Sterilization Reversal: A Generous Act of Love' published by One More Soul, but no longer in print. Sterilization destroyed intimacy; reversal restored it. Truly amazing!

I suspect that some couples see sterilization as a pro-life thing to do in that there is no longer a risk of abortion from hormonal or IUD birth prevention methods. They need a deeper understanding of God's gift of fertility and the sacredness of the body. Rare is the homily on abortion; rarer on contraception; and absent on sterilization. --Steve Koob

You're right Alicia--check out April 2007 Journal of Reproductive Medicine, Warehime, Bass, Pedulla, "Tubal Ligation among American Women". We proved the correctness of what you're surmising. Previous studies let women color their answers (on sexual functioning after tubal sterilization (TS) by their subjective sense of whether TS helped their sexuality or not. American women are conditioned to look at their TS in such glowingly, unrealistically, optimistic terms that this rosy over-optimism about it overpowers any negatives they might otherwise have had, and the insight to attribute that to the TS. That TS “improves sexual function” seems an automatic, unreflective conclusion flowing from the fiat acceptance of benefit of any and all things that "unencumber" sexuality by detaching it from conception.

And of course the like-minded authors/investigators never critically analyze this false equation, having deeply imbibed "the kool-aid" themselves. A good example was Costello in the NEJM I think, from 1998 or so. They simplistically and rather clumsily asked women whether their TS was a net positive or negative influence on their sexual function, without any independent objective data analysis checking that out.

We took the NHSLS dataset (Laumann, U of Chicago) which had TS and measures of sexual satisfaction/function as independent variables so the women merely reported the incidence rather than conceptually or attributionally connecting the two.

Women after TS were 150 to 200 percent more likely to report "stress interfering with sex" or "go to a doctor for help with sexual function", and this was independent of any pain, physical complaints, or post-TS medical complications. 

Powerful stuff! No doubt the majority would have judged their TS helpful to sexuality, even despite these contrary data, because these falsely rosy views are based on strongly pro-TS prejudice, one powerfully reinforced in our "sterilization society".

So you are indeed right.

--Dominic Pedullah, MD

Medicine that Makes You Sick 

By Robert F. Conkling, MD, NFPMC, FCP practices family medicine in Virginia and is the co-founder of FertilityCare of the Capitol Region.

Recently three major health stories appeared in the Washington press in less than two weeks that were an occasion to pause and reflect.

First, the Potomac Conservancy made headlines about the contamination of rivers and drinking water in major metropolitan areas, including Washington, DC. Contaminants include not only bacteria, industrial chemicals and agricultural pesticides but also potentially endocrine-active pharmaceuticals, such as anti-depressants, contraceptive sex hormones, antibiotics and personal care products.

Next came the report of the US Preventive Services Task Force, an independent body which studies mortality from common diseases, issuing new guidelines for mammography screening for early detection of breast cancer. Breast cancer remains the second highest cause of mortality of American women since it began to rise in the 1970s.

Finally, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reported the annual statistics for sexually transmitted diseases. In 2008, there was a record number of new cases of Chlamydia—a whopping 1.2 million new cases; a rise in the number of new cases of syphilis; and an all-time record of 19 million total cases of all forms of STDs.

To connect the dots between these stories one has to ask: Could steroid–based sex hormone contraceptives be a common thread?  Hard to believe until you consider the evidence.

A Pill is Born

The first sex hormone-containing pill, a synthetic steroid called Norethindrone, was developed by organic chemist Carl Djerassi in Syntex Laboratories in Mexico City. Djerassi was developing a synthetic progestin for menstrual irregularities. His product turned out to be a powerful inhibitor of ovulation, but he had not anticipated that the estrogen-with-progestin combination oral contraceptive pill (COCP) would have other effects upon women. Only after many years was this combination suspected as the culprit in many unexpected side-effects, including blood clots, diabetes, depression and anxious emotional states experienced by women.

That some of these side-effects can be serious is confirmed by a new report of conclusive evidence for significant loss of bone mineral densitywhen a woman uses Depo-Provera (a long-acting injectable form of a progestin-only contraceptive) for more than two years.

In 2005, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), an arm of the World Health Organization, estimated that worldwide more than 100 million women were using some form of COCP. In developed countries, the current usage was estimated at 16 percent, while the “ever used” rate was as high as 80%. Although there appeared to be extreme variability between countries, the evaluation found that most contraceptives were used by women of younger age and with higher educational achievement.

After an earlier evaluation, the IARC had classified oral contraceptives as a Group 1 carcinogen: “There is sufficient evidence in humans for the carcinogenicity of combined oral estrogen-progestogen contraceptives,” it said in 1999. The weight of evidence indicated an increased risk for breast cancer, which was greater for women who were under age 35 at the time of diagnosis and who had begun using contraceptives before their 20th birthday. This was reaffirmed by the 2005 review.

In 2006 the Mayo Clinic Proceedings published a meta-analysis of 23 studies done in several countries about breast cancer risk and use of oral contraceptives. Dr Chris Kahlenborn, one of the principal authors, stated that “if a woman takes combined oral contraceptive pills before her first full-term pregnancy, she risks a 44% increased chance of developing pre-menopausal breast cancer when compared to women who have never taken an OCP.” Kahlenborn also found that “if a woman takes OCPs for 4 years or more prior to her first full-term pregnancy, she suffers a 52% increased risk.”

Kahlenborn also uncovered that the commonly used contraceptive Depo-Provera was reported by the WHO and a New Zealand study to be associated with a statistically significant 190% increased risk for breast cancer when Depo-Provera was taken by a woman for more than 3 years prior to the age of 25.

Drinking Water Contamination

In 2002, the US Geological Survey found one or more pharmaceuticals in 80% of the streams it had tested. In 2006 the Los Angeles Times reported that sewage contained traces of medications like antibiotics, anti-depressants, birth-control hormones, Viagra, Valium and heart drugs. Shane Snyder, lead toxicologist at the Southern Nevada Water Authority, said, “There is no place on Earth exempted from having pharmaceuticals and steroids in its wastewater. This is clearly an issue that is global, and we are going to see more and more of these chemicals in the environment, no doubt about it.”

The Potomac Conservancy found similar drinking water conditions in Washington, DC. Mirroring other regions of the country where biologists have found frogs contaminated with Prozac, insects on anti-seizure drugs and algae killed by antibiotics, the waterways draining the Shenandoah Mountains and tributaries flowing into the Potomac River have witnessed fish kills since 2002. The unexpected observation was that most of the dead male fish had inter-sex characteristics and that there was a disproportionate number of female fish. Further examination by the US Geological Survey of the Potomac tributaries revealed that 80% of the male fish had the inter-sex condition.

Although the concentrations of some of the pharmaceuticals found in drinking water sources, including estrogens and fertility drugs, are in the parts per trillion, comparable to putting a few drops in an Olympic-sized pool, the effects this may have on humans remains unknown. What is known is that on the level of endocrine systems, fish and humans function in very similar ways. What happens to fish may be signaling future disorders for humans.

Contraceptives: A Form of Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals

In 2009, the world’s leading professional association for endocrinologists, the Endocrine Society, issued a strong statement on endocrine-disrupting chemicals. The evidence suggests that exposure to multiple endocrine disrupting chemicals at developmental stages has the potential to affect any hormone-sensitive body systems, including the breast and the hypothalamic-pituitary-ovarian system in women, and the testes and prostate gland in men. The Endocrine Society appealed to the precautionary principle stating, “This principle is key to enhancing endocrine and reproductive health, and should be consulted to inform decisions about exposure to and risk from any potential endocrine disruptor.” And, “The public may be placed at risk because critical information about potential health effects of endocrine disrupting chemicals to which Americans are exposed is being overlooked in the development of federal guidelines and regulations.”

The Pill’s Link to STDs

Are there any strong associations between use of steroid-based OCPs and sexually transmitted diseases? The CDC’s answer is yes. A review of 83 studies published in the journal Contraception in 2006 found that the use of combined oral contraceptives and Depo-Provera generally had a positive association with cervical chlamydial infections. Chlamydia infections and other inflammatory STDs such as syphilis or genital herpes are reported by the CDC to increase the risk for transmission of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) infection. Chlamydia is well-known as the leading preventable infection that can cause a severe condition called Pelvic Inflammatory Disease (PID), which if not treated, can result in female infertility.

The recent STD report for 2008 from the CDC stated that adolescent girls between the ages of 15-19 account for 27% of the total new cases of Chlamydia and gonorrhea. Although acknowledging that adolescent boys have a similar prevalence of STDs, the CDC insisted that because of “biological differences” young women have a greater potential to suffer consequences to their health than young men.

Depressing Sex

What was most surprising to Dr. Meg Meeker, pediatrician and adolescent medicine specialist, was her observation that many of her adolescent female patients who had begun to engage in sexual encounters were showing signs of clinical depression. In her book, “Strong Fathers, Strong Daughters” (2007), she said, “Kids get depressed when they experience a loss for which they cannot express a healthy emotion. This is very common with sexual activity. When a girl has sex, she loses her virginity and very often loses her self-respect with it.”

This clinical observation of one pediatrician is supported by findings of researchers interested in any association between teenage sexual experimentation, drug use and depression. Denise Hallfors and colleagues found that for girls even modest involvement in sexual experimentation or substance use elevated depression risk. In contrast, boys exhibited little added risk of depression with sexual experimental behavior, although binge drinking and frequent use of marijuana contribute substantial risk.

Thanatos Syndrome Revisited

In Walker Percy’s 1987 novel The Thanatos Syndrome, Dr. Tom More returns to his home town and family to restart what remains of his practice of psychiatry after serving a felony conviction for selling prescriptions for narcotics. After a few weeks of re-establishing contact with some of his former patients, he notices a profound change in his patients, with unusual mood changes, increased ability to recall the location of obscure names of places and the ability to make complex numeric calculations. In addition, his patients all seem to have become hyper-eroticized, exhibiting outlandish sexual advances that persons with intact higher-order self-control would recognize as outside the range of socially acceptable behavior.

He postulated that something had changed his patients. With the help of an epidemiologist, More learned that toxic, radioactive sodium had been released from a nearby nuclear power plant and that the water with the heavy sodium was being deliberately channeled through an unauthorized and hidden pipe into the drinking water supply. Behind this scheme were some of More’s medical colleagues, who discovered that dosing the water supply with low concentrations of heavy sodium had the effect of suppressing the cognitive functioning of antisocial types like alcoholics, drug addicts, prostitutes or those confined to the local jail. The docs felt justified in what they were doing. They wanted Dr. Tom to join them when they discovered he knew their tactics. But, Dr. Tom knew better.

It appears that for the last 50 years, something similar has been happening to America. The contraceptive pill was sold as the scientific panacea for ultimate sexual liberation. Its real-time effect has been a form of “lobotomy” of reason and good judgment, both of users and prescribers. It is time the medical establishment recognized its complicity and returned to the simple principle for which it gained the respect and autonomy of action it merited as an advocate for the unprotected and unknowing: “Above all, do no harm.”

This article was originally published by the online journal  "Mercatornet.com".

Intention to Contract Valid Marriage Must Be Certain

WASHINGTON, D.C., JULY 14, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Here is a question on bioethics asked by a ZENIT reader and answered by the fellows of the Culture of Life Foundation.

Q: Can you tell us what is the latest Church teaching about couples seeking a Catholic marriage, wherein one or both of the spouses are impeded from having children by a tubal ligation and/or vasectomy? Can a priest assist at such a marriage, if he were to know about the situation? Or is it enough that he ask them to consider a reversal? Seems like these cases are becoming an epidemic, and every priest seems to be handling this question differently. -- Fr. I.S. Belleville, New Jersey, USA 

E. Christian Brugger and William E. May offer the following response.

People who sterilize themselves in order to prevent conception commit a grave offense, but their condition of itself does not prevent the validity of a marriage. Catholic Canon Law teaches: “Sterility neither prohibits nor invalidates marriage” (can. 1084, no. 3).

To contract a valid marriage, one must possess the capacity and the will to enter into a permanent and procreative-type of union. (The procreative part requires only that one be capable of having true intercourse, not that that intercourse must be fertile. More on this below.) If a priest knows that a person requesting marriage in the Church has sterilized him or herself, he should seek moral certitude that the person intends to contract a valid marriage. But if he knows the person is unrepentant, then he has a reasonable ground for questioning whether that person has a will to enter a procreative-type of union. In our judgment, he should not marry persons who say with an intractable will, “I’m sterilized and I’m not sorry.”

How can sterilized persons intend a procreative-type of union (i.e., be morally "open to life"), since knowing they are sterile they cannot intend to have children? Two things are required for openness to life. First, they must repent of the sin of sterilization. Sincere repentance undoes the moral self-determination against life that they realized in themselves when they chose to be sterilized. To repent of a serious sin such as sterilization requires sacramental confession.

Second, having repented, their conjugal acts remain "open to life" (i.e., are marital acts) insofar as they are: 1) chosen in a “human manner”; and 2) are “per se apt for the generation of a child” (canon 1061, no. 1), although the condition of sterility may make such generation impossible (or at least unlikely). The act is chosen in a “human way” insofar as it’s chosen freely (i.e., is not the result of physical or moral coercion). And it is “per se apt for the generation of a child” insofar as it is an ejaculatory act of sexual intercourse between a man and a woman, which is the kind of act from which procreation could follow if couples are fertile. (Faithful moral theologians [and canon lawyers] disagree on the question of whether an intentionally contraceptive act of intercourse [e.g., using chemicals or barriers] is “per se apt for the generation of a child." We believe it is not.)

An external sign that a person has repented is that he or she seeks to reverse the vasectomy or ligation. A reversal is not required in order to marry in the Church. And if attempting a reversal were to cause serious burdens (e.g., grave financial difficulty or threat to health), then the attempt would not be morally obligatory. But in the absence of serious burdens, we believe a sterilized man or woman for the good of the marriage should attempt a reversal. This of course would not apply to couples who are past childbearing age.

* * *

E. Christian Brugger is a Senior Fellow of Ethics at the Culture of Life Foundation and is an associate professor of moral theology at St. John Vianney Theological Seminary in Denver, Colorado. He received his Doctorate in Philosophy from Oxford in 2000.

William E. May, is a Senior Fellow at the Culture of Life Foundation and retired Michael J. McGivney Professor of Moral Theology at the John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family at The Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C.

ZE10071407 - 2010-07-14
Permalink: http://www.zenit.org/article-29892?l=english

Weekday Homily 23 July 10

Jer 3:14-17 Ps Jer 31:10-13 Mt 13:18-23

 Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

THE WORD OF GOD IS HIS PLAN FOR ALL BASIC DIMENSIONS OF HUMAN LIFE

Jesus explains the meaning of the parable of the sower and the seed.  The seed is the Word of God, and that is the same as saying God’s plan for the basic dimensions of human life.  God has a plan for how people are to live together in peace and harmony.  God has a plan for marriage, for spousal love and for family.  He has a plan for the single life, for religious life, and for the priesthood.

Jesus came to teach us his plan for living a good human life.  Whether or not that plan takes effect in our lives and succeeds, depends upon our openness to that plan, our receptivity, and our willingness to embrace that plan and commit ourselves to it.

This year is the 50th anniversary of the Pill.  The pharmaceuticals and radical feminists extol the merits of the Pill to the heavens.  The Pill separates sex from fertility, and places a barrier between love and life.  It gives women greater control over their fertility, and allows them to pursue a career.

But the Pill goes completely contrary to God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family.  Now we have a 50% divorce rate, and couples don’t know what it means to make an irrevocable commitment, “until death do us part.”  Now we have couples who are afraid to make the total gift of themselves to each other, which includes their fertility.  Now we have many children who bear the scars of divorced parents, or live in single parent families, or have two mommies or two daddies.

The Pill has affected the priesthood and religious life.  As I travel around this country I discover that there are very small ordination classes, and a small number of these men are native sons.  Our families and our parishes are not producing vocations.  They are sterile.  Instead, we look to Africa, India and the Philippines for priests to serve us.  In religious communities you find many retired members (I refer to them as our three legged members), and very few full time employed members.  Communities cannot support themselves; they must rely more and more upon donations and fundraisers.

What is the solution?  May the Lord find more “sowers of the Word,” men and women who will boldly proclaim God’s plan for marriage, spousal love, family, and how people are to order their lives together.  May the word of God, and the plan of God be proclaimed clearly, and applied to our times.

In the first reading, God speaks through his prophet Jeremiah thus: “Return, O faithless children, says the Lord; for I am your master….  And I will give you shepherds after my own heart, who will feed you with knowledge and understanding” (Jer 3: 14-15). 

May the Lord embolden his priests and religious, and all faithful Catholics today to clearly proclaim his Word, his great plan for every important dimension of human life.  And may we hear God’s word, God’s plan, and then commit ourselves to keeping it alive and operative in our lives.

May we all become hearers of the Word, doers of the Word, and confident proclaimers of the Word.

By Fr. Damian Richards

(taken from The Register of the Salina Diocese in Kansas, 23 July 10)

I was interviewing Dr. Amy Hogan, MD, for the upcoming Salina Diocesan council of Catholic Women’s Convention, which is August 28 at St. Andrew’s Church in Abilene, KS.

On the same day I interview Dr. Hogan, a Salina-area fertility care specialist, about her work, I ran across an Internet article, “Is Being Childfree by Choice Selfish?”

But I realized that this article on the pleasures of “no children” is symptomatic of the problems Dr. Hogan encounters in her work to promote a Catholic approach to fertility care. She told me about the ministry of her work and the struggles she encounters to get people to recognize how fertility is a gift from God.

“If people can understand their body, they can recognize the beauty of nature,” she said. “And if they can see the beauty of nature, then they can see the beauty of God, who created nature.”

This is in contrast to the “Childfree by Choice” crowd. “The decision not to have kids is a movement that seems to be catching on,” the article began. “There are environmental, religious, medical and professional reasons for not having children.”

Fertility care instills discipline. It increases self-awareness of what is going on in the body. “It also enhances chastity,” Dr. Hogan said, referring to the fact that periodic chastity is necessary if you want to avoid a pregnancy. “And chastity is lacking in our culture.”

Chastity leads to self-discipline. Self-discipline makes you a stronger person. This means that fertility care builds stronger relationships, which leads to healthy families, which leads to a stronger society.

The article was very defensive on this point of children leading to a stronger relationship. Every one of the childless-by-choice couples insisted that their relationships were very strong and a benefit to society.

But even while arguing they aren’t selfish, the self-centeredness came through. “We like that we get to live a bit more whimsically without children,” one wife in the article said. “We travel a lot, and we go out even more than we did when we were single.”

The article even tried to turn around the fact that having children draws you out of yourself and forces you to focus on the well being of someone else. “People having children could be deemed equally ‘selfish,’” the article said, “since they include factors of personal satisfaction and improved social status that parents may gain for themselves.”

The desire for children is deeply ingrained in us. “My medical practice, while valuable, isn’t the most important thing to me,” Dr. Hogan says. “It’s being a wife and mom.”

The article quoted a childless-by-choice couple justifying their decision to not have children by saying, “We’ve chosen to go the dog-and-cat route.” Instead of having children because their relationship doesn’t need children, they “go the cat-and-dog route,” which means they pretend the dog or cat is a child. The desire is there, but they don’t recognize it.

The theme for the SDCCW convention is “Discipline and Virtues: The Gospel of Life.” Dr. Hogan’s work encouraging couples to rejoice in their fertility and to practice the discipline necessary to make it truly fruitful is a natural fit for the upcoming convention.

Fr. Damian Richards, moderator of the Salina Diocesan Council of Catholic Women, is pastor of SS. Peter and Paul Parish in Cawker City and St. Boniface Parish in Tipton.

Prisoners of the pill

Carolyn Moynihan, and MercatorNet.com

Mother’s Day in the United States (and some other countries) had an ironic twist to it this year: the powers that be chose to observe May 9 as the fiftieth anniversary of the public debut of the contraceptive pill, the twentieth century’s chief weapon against motherhood as a serious vocation.

Articles marking the occasion have been largely celebratory in tone, reminding women that their lives have been powerfully transformed -- for the better -- by the pill. We have been liberated from biology to extend our education, engage in paid work, carve out public careers and achieve financial independence. Hooray.

True, there has been the odd complaint about this wonder drug. “I hate the pill,” declares Geraldine Sealey at Salon. “Hormonal contraception, which covers birth control pills and nearly every other highly effective method on the market, murders my libido.” Still, she can’t stop herself patting contraceptive pioneers such as Margaret Sanger on the back.

The Wall Street Journal wonders why, at this late stage of the game, almost half of US pregnancies -- about 3.1 million a year -- are unintended. It turns out that a lot of people who are having sex but don’t want a baby are not responsible enough to use contraception. How surprising. Then there are all the women who miss taking their pill -- so many that Princeton’s birth control expert James Trussell says we should forget the pill and steer women towards long-acting contraceptives such as implants and IUDs. (Women may be liberated, you see, but they can be, er, not smart.)

Fail-safe birth control is not the only thing the era of the pill has not delivered. Elaine Tyler May, author of a new book on the pill, admits that ending poverty, curing divorce and eliminating unwed pregnancies were “promises the pill could never keep”. Indeed, all those things have flourished during the past 50 years and societies have stopped even trying to encourage marriage and discourage divorce. Poverty is the only thing that has not been rationalized, but then its link with contraceptive culture is not even recognized.

Still, we are meant to rejoice that women have the world at their feet, because, even if their contraceptive device or their willpower fails, there is always abortion to ensure that they can keep their job, if not their husband. All in all, then, women should be happier than they were when their energies were largely consumed by looking after a husband and three or four kids.

Declining female happiness

Are they? No. Much quoted research by Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers of the University of Pennsylvania shows that there has been a marked decline in women’s happiness in the industrialised countries over the past 35 years. In an article last year they wrote:

The paradox of women’s declining relative well-being is found across various datasets, measures of subjective well-being, and is pervasive across demographic groups and industrialized countries. Relative declines in female happiness have eroded a gender gap in happiness in which women in the 1970s typically reported higher subjective well-being than did men. These declines have continued and a new gender gap is emerging—one with higher subjective well-being for men.

Stevenson and Wolfers stress the power of this decline by equating it to the misery resulting from an 8.5 per cent rise in unemployment, or to having missed out entirely on the gains from economic growth since the 1970s.

A paradox? A mere coincidence that female happiness has been eroded at same time as the pill was bringing liberation? Denver economist Timothy Reichert does not think so. In a recent article in First Things (“Bitter Pill”, April, 2010) he says that, contrary to the rhetoric of the sexual revolution, contraception is deeply sexist in nature. It has shifted wealth and power away from women, and away from their childrearing years when they need it most. It has also, for that reason, made children on the whole worse off.

Reichert arrives at these conclusions by doing a market analysis of sexual relationships under the influence of what is still known as “efficient contraception”. To my mind, he makes a highly plausible case.

How women lose: a market analysis

Fifty years ago, he argues, there was a single “mating market”, populated by men and women in roughly equal numbers and who paired off in marriage. By lowering the cost of premarital and extramarital sex (pregnancy, shotgun marriage) contraception allowed a separate sex market (apart from prostitution) to form. That would not have affected either sex adversely if the numbers of men and women in both markets remained roughly equal, but of course, they did not.

Because of limits to their fertility, women have to move out of the sex market and into the marriage market earlier than men. This makes them relatively scarce in the former and abundant in the latter, able to negotiate better “deals” in the first but worse deals in the second where there is a scarcity of marriageable men.

(As an aside, this dilemma puts me in mind of Lori Gottlieb’s much-bruited willingness to give up the quest for romantic love in her forties and “settle” for a husband who will put out the garbage bin and fix the leaky taps.)

Under these conditions, says Reichert, men take more and more of the “gains from trade” and women take fewer and fewer. He comments:

This produces a redistribution of bargaining power and, ultimately, of welfare from the later childrearing phases of a woman’s lifetime toward the earlier, and in my view less important, phases. This redistribution has some very concrete, very undesirable consequences for women—and for the children that they bear.

What are these consequences? Reichert points out four.

More divorce. Striking “bad deals” in an imbalanced marriage market makes divorce more likely. Reduced commitment creates a “demand” for divorce even before the marriage begins (pre-nups). At the social level women allow the stigma of divorce to erode and they support no-fault divorce laws. They compensate for these trends by developing relatively more market earning power, and invest less in family relationships, the moral formation of their children, and community activism. In doing so, they become more like men, and the couples become less interesting to one another. “Sameness begets ennui, which begets divorce.”

Inflation of household costs. As wealthier two-earner households bid up the price of homes, more women are forced into the labor market. With this comes a redistribution of welfare from younger to older generations, and from a family’s younger, child-rearing years to its later childless years (when they could sell the $500,000 house). This redistribution “rests largely on the backs of the women in the labor force who support the higher housing cost and, ultimately, on the children who otherwise would have had the benefit of their mothers’ time.” And perhaps another sibling.

Infidelity. This increases because the cost -- detection -- is lowered. The sex market provides the opportunity, and here married (successful, older) men are more attractive to younger women, than older women are to younger men. This, again, is to the detriment of women.

Abortion. Before the pill the cost of an unwanted pregnancy was often borne by the man in the form of a shotgun wedding. Now it is borne by the woman: contraception is her business and so, therefore, is the unintended pregnancy. If she keeps the baby she forfeits opportunities in the labor market; if she has an abortion (which around one million women in the US do each year) she usually pays the money cost and always the emotional costs.

To repeat Reichert’s conclusion:

Contraception has resulted in an enormous redistribution of welfare from women to men, as well as an intertemporal redistribution of welfare from a typical woman’s later, childrearing years to her earlier years.

Further, given that women’s welfare largely determines the welfare of children, this redistribution has in part been “funded” by a loss of welfare from children. In other words, the worse off are women, the worse off are the children they support. On net, women and children are the big losers in the contraceptive society.

And this fits with the Stevenson and Wolfers finding of declining happiness among women.

The big question is, then, why do they put up with it?

The prisoner's dilemma

Reichert explains it as a “prisoner’s dilemma” -- a concept from game theory. This posits a situation where all parties have choice between cooperation and non-cooperation, and where all would be better off if they chose cooperation. However, because the parties cannot effectively coordinate and enforce cooperation, all choose the best individual choice, which is non-cooperation.

Applying this to young women in a contraceptive culture Reichert suggests that those who don’t enter the sex market miss out on the “higher prices” paid there (presumably he means things like more attention from men, more likelihood of a partner, a sense of wellbeing and a “good” image) but they also remain at a disadvantage in the over-subscribed marriage market. Their “optimal decision” therefore is to “to enter the sex market and remain there for as long as possible, despite the fact that the new equilibrium may be worse, over the total life cycle, for women.”

Only very powerful social mores or laws can break prisoner’s dilemmas like this, and laws we are surely not going to get. Reichert, a Catholic, sees the church’s moral authority in this area being woefully under-utilized and calls for a movement of “new feminism”. But while the beginnings of such a movement can certainly be found in the Catholic Church and other religious groups, there seems to be no corresponding secular insight into the role of contraception in female misery.

In a piece in The Atlantic magazine this week Caitlin Flanagan, enfant terrible of contemporary feminism, bewails the hook-up culture that girls reluctantly endure while they hope, like girls in every other era, for a real boyfriend and romance. She then talks about her mother and other “forward-looking” older women who helped Planned Parenthood promote birth control to teenage girls 20-something years ago.

As progressive as they were, says Flanagan, they would have been horrified by hooking up: "all of them, to a woman, believed in the Boyfriend Story. This set wasn’t in the business of providing girls and young women the necessary information and services to allow boys and men to use and discard them sexually."

Oh, but they were. That is exactly what they were doing, albeit unwittingly. And that is what continues to draw girls into the prisoner’s dilemma at ever younger ages. When are people like Flanagan going to stop groping around this elephant and take their blindfolds off?

Carolyn Moynihan is deputy editor of MercatorNet.

This article is published by Carolyn Moynihan, and MercatorNet.com under a Creative Commons license.

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

1) We start with the IMPACT OF CONTRACEPTION UPON THE INDIVIDUAL

Contraception destroys the natural connection between love and life, between sex and babies. Sterilized sex is unnatural sex; it is technological sex. Sex is meant to be expressed by a man and a woman who are deeply in love and committed to each other. The marital act has profound meaning. It means that the man and woman engaged in this act intend to make the total personal gift of self to the other. They are totally open to the goodness of the other person. This includes their life-giving powers, their fertility. That is what the language of the body means and what it accomplishes during the marital act.

Contraception reduces all this to the level of recreational sex. There are only two restrictions: 1) don’t get pregnant; and 2) don’t catch a sexually transmitted disease. Fidelity and the possibility of a new pregnancy are all part of marital commitment. If there is no possibility of a pregnancy, then people begin to think that there is no reason to commit themselves to just one mate. That leads to extra marital sex, and pre marital sex. The technical terms for these are adultery and fornication. Contraception changes loving a person into using a person; it degrades love into lust.

If sex only means the pursuit of intense genital pleasure, then why tell young people to save sex for marriage? Today we find young people experimenting with sex at ever earlier stages. Instead of encouraging young people to grow into the virtue of self-mastery and the virtue of chastity, Planned Parenthood encourages them to yield to their inclinations and become promiscuous. They call this comprehensive sex education, where every form of sex and contraception, except chastity, is explained. The accurate description of Planned Parenthood is the “corruption of our youth.” A promiscuous person is not preparing himself, or herself, for marriage and a lifetime commitment to one’s spouse. Rather they are preparing themselves for many partners, and divorce.

There is a direct connection between contraception and abortion. Abortion is the remedy to failed contraception. The culture of death says: “If you want fewer abortions, then use more contraception.” But that is very deceptive language. Contraception always leads to more abortion, not less abortion. When International Planned Parenthood wants to change the laws of a country so as to bring in legalized abortion, it always begins by promoting every form of contraception. They know that more contraception leads to more promiscuous sex, and this, in turn, leads to an inevitable greater demand for abortion. I have seen this again and again the Third World, where most people live.

What led to the infamous 1973 Supreme Court ruling, Roe V. Wade, which withdrew the protection of the law from the unborn child? It was the appearance of the Pill in the 1960s which led to greater sexual promiscuity, the rejection of the child, and a demand for abortion as a backup for failed contraception.

In addition, you should know that the Pill has three effects. The first is an attempt to prevent ovulation. But there is always breakthrough ovulation, and then the risk of conception. The second effect is to prevent the migration of sperm from the vagina to the fallopian tubes. This does not always succeed. The third effect is to deal with the reality of an unwanted conception. The Pill reduces the lining of the uterus, the endometrium, and thus makes it impossible for the little conceptus to attach itself to the mother’s uterus. This leads to an early on, chemical abortion. One out of four unborn babies is killed by surgical abortion in this country. But there are many more unrecorded early-on chemical abortions. Women are aborting their children and do not even know it.

Human life begins at conception. Then the 23 chromosomes of the mother combine with the 23 chromosomes of the father, and a completely unique and unrepeatable human person is called into existence. All the genetic information is now present, to guide the new life through all of its various stages of life. All the DNA is there for the entire life of the new person. Notice that at every stage of life, a person’s physical body is perfectly integrated. You should know that the medical profession has now changed the definition of conception, to facilitate easy access to chemical abortion. The medical dictionaries now define conception as the time when the tiny zygote implants itself in the mother’s endometrium, at implantation. That is entirely dishonest. The child is now already several days alive, since the moment when the father’s sperm met the mother’s ovum.

Contraception has not improved the life of individual persons; it has greatly harmed it. It diminishes the ability of one person to become deeply committed to another in marriage. It is the abuse of sex, and leads to promiscuity. When the inevitable unplanned pregnancy comes, then abortion follows. All this is devastating to the wellbeing of the individual.

--------------

(2) Then we move to the impact of contraception upon marriage.

There is a direct connection between contraception and divorce. In our society today one out of two marriages ends in a divorce. Our society thinks in terms of a fault free divorce, where no one is at fault, and where either party can initiate the divorce, regardless of how much the other party wants to save the marriage. 39% of all babies born today in the United States are born to single moms. In the Black community the rate is up to 75%. The greatest source of poverty today is single parent families, usually unmarried moms. Think of what this does to single mothers and their children.

Because of the high divorce rate, many young couples today don’t believe in marriage. They live together, and some have babies, without making commitments to each other. They can split anytime. Because there is a certain fear of the child, many couples do not want to have children. The total percentage of people who are married in this country continues to decline.

What is the connection between contraception and divorce? Why is it that divorce rates began to skyrocket when the Pill arrived in the 1960s? The main reason is that contraception interferes with the bonding of the couple, with their commitment to each other. The marital act is designed to renew the marriage covenant that the couple made at their marriage. Contraception interferes with the total self-donation that the marital act requires. It rejects the goodness of their fertility, and their openness to new life. Now their love is always conditioned, with reservations. Now the emphasis is upon the pursuit of pleasure with the hope that this will enhance their intimacy. Now there is a demand that the woman always be available for the man when he wants her. The woman begins to feel more used than loved. There is no shared responsibility in spacing the pregnancies. The woman is told to take the required medications. It is “her” problem. Or the husband sterilizes himself. One out of every six men in the United States over the age of 35 has had a vasectomy. Contraception is like a corrosive acid working on the bond between the couple. 

By contrast, did you know that the divorce rate among couples who use Natural Family Planning (NFP), which requires periodic abstinence during the couple’s fertile periods, is less than 5%? NFP couples know God’s plan for marriage and spousal love. Their respect for this plan brings them greater intimacy, better communications, a more satisfying sexual life and much happiness. Just look at their low divorce rate.

Everyone wants to have a strong marriage where there is much love, devotion and commitment. How do you get such a marriage? By discovering God’s wonderful plan for marriage, spousal love and family, and then embracing it. This demands a rejection of all the false substitutes for that plan, which block it and sterilize it.

-------------

(3) What is THE IMPACT OF CONTRACEPTION UPON CHILDREN, FAMILY LIFE AND THE BROADER SOCIETY?

Consider what divorce is doing to our young people. Every young person wants to have a loving mother and father, brothers and sisters, and cousins. You take any of these away, and a young person has additional problems to cope with. 39% of babies today are born to unwed mothers. Think of the additional financial and emotional burdens that are thrown upon that little family. Many fathers today are not involved with their children. This leaves a real gap in the psyche and emotional life of children. Today over 1% of our population is incarcerated, the majority of which are young men who never experienced the supervision, tough love and support of their fathers. Divorce is the obvious factor here, but behind the divorce is the distortive reduction of the marital act caused by contraception.

Children of a divorced family do not experience a normal marriage of their parents as they grow up during their formative years. If they are not to repeat the cycle, then they must learn on their own what a normal marriage looks like, and how to build one. Children of contracepting parents will not be guided into the virtue of chastity by their parents. Contracepting parents cannot teach chastity to their children. And teenagers know if their parents are contracepting. About all such parents can say is: “Be good, but if you can’t do that, then at least be safe. Be sure to carry a condom with you.”

4) What is the impact of contraception upon the broader society?

It stands to reason that a nation’s life is only as strong as its family life. If marriage and family life are weak, then patriotism will also be weak. If good marriages and healthy, happy families are not producing strong and well balanced individuals, then a country will not have the fountains that supply mature and capable citizens. The basic unit of any society is the family. If the family is in trouble, then that society has real problems. The state exists for the family. The family does not exist for the state. The family predates the state by centuries. Any healthy state will do everything possible to promote strong marriages and healthy, happy families. Contraception and abortion destroy the morals of youth; they foster divorce; they destroy family life and a respect for human life. They destroy youth, which is the greatest asset any country has.

Contraception has changed the way we view many things today. Contraception implies that we have a new “right” today, the right to recreational sex. This means that the pursuit of sexual pleasure trumps everything; nothing can be allowed to interfere with that pursuit. Not even the unborn baby. Contraception is available to everyone today. Thus also is recreational sex. More and more promiscuous sex leads inevitably to more unwanted pregnancies. Thus the pressure upon the legislatures and courts for legal abortion and widespread contraception and sterilization. Pro-abortion forces insist that contemporary life styles, using massive contraception, require easy access to abortion.

If promiscuous sex is accepted by society, then pornography must be accepted. Pornography is presented as harmless entertainment. It is also a multi billion-dollar industry. Patrick Trueman, the former chief of the U.S. Department of Justice Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section, expressed strong concern for the direction of America due to the prominence of pornography. “Since the advent of the internet, pornography has flooded homes, businesses, public libraries, and even schools. The results have been devastating to the social and family fabric of America,” he said. “Pornography, in other words, is altering minds, destroying taboos, and reordering society.” Addiction to pornography, Trueman noted, is now common among men, women, and even many children, bringing life-long consequences. Pornography use is a significant factor in divorce, a contributing cause of the spread of prostitution and the sexual trafficking of adults and children. He has a website for sound research, news articles and opinion pieces demonstrating the harm from pornography. It is called Pornography Harms.

What about human trafficking of young boys and girls? Is this not a horrible violation of their human dignity and their right to live a normal childhood? Should not every effort be made to stop sex tours by wealthy Americans and Europeans in Thailand and Indonesia? What fuels this trafficking in human bodies? It is sex out of control. Is that not what contraception is?

There is a strong connection between contraception and population control. Population controllers, beginning with Paul Erhlich and his The Population Bomb, want to scare us into believing that there are just too many people in the world. We in the First World cannot maintain our present high material standard of living if more people in the developing countries demand more energy resources like oil, more mineral resources like uranium, and more food. What is their solution? Their solution is to make people in the developing countries believe that their babies are the source of the problem. Their babies are taking all their money and resources, which could be used for economic development. Therefore, restrict the size of poor people’s families. In China there is a one child policy and then mandatory abortion. 

There are many international agencies, IPPF, USAID, PCUN that will provide developing nations with millions of dollars for every form of contraception, and abortion, but will provide little money for such basic needs as clean water, basic medical care, protection against malaria, good roads, schools, etc. Population controllers forget that babies come not only with mouths for eating, but also with minds for finding solutions to problems, hands and arms and legs for doing the work of the nation, and big hearts with which to love. Contraception and abortion are not the solution to economic development. Rather, they destroy a nation’s greatest asset, which is their youth. They are the taproots of the culture of death. (For good analysis of population myths see PRI, Population Research Institute.)

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

4 Examples in the USA.

Archdiocese of Denver: The archdiocesan norms, What God Has Joined, were written by the Office of Marriage and Family Life in conjunction with the office of Archbishop Charles Chaput. It includes a discussion of NFP. The norms were inspired and based on the document Preparation for the Sacraments of Marriage by the Pontifical Council for the Family. In addition, in his pastoral letter, Of Human Life, Archbishop Chaput directed the archdiocese to require adequate instruction in NFP as part of all marriage preparation programs. During the formulation of the norms, the Presbyteral Council was engaged in the process. Throughout the process, the tribunal staff provided key insights and reviewed proposed changes to the norms. The documents were bound as one resource and promulgated with a letter from the Archbishop to all priests and deacons

Couples are required to complete a full course of NFP instruction prior to the wedding. In order to learn NFP, it takes several months of tracking a woman's monthly cycle. The intent is to allow time for a couple to grow in their appreciation of NFP, rather than simply to understand the Church’s reasoning for encouraging NFP. The time needed for this is usually between three and six months. Exceptions are allowed at the discretion of the priest or deacon working with the couple.

Diocese of Fargo: The Diocese of Fargo had an extensive approach to implementation. Before the Diocese of Fargo implemented its policy, from 2003 until its implementation in September 2005, clergy and laity were prepared for the change in diocesan policy through workshops for clergy, married couples, and college students. Articles about fertility appreciation were featured in the diocesan newspaper. Mailings were sent to priests and NFP teachers with particular emphasis on National NFP Awareness Week. After this thorough educational effort, Bishop Samuel Aquila set the stage for introducing the new policy through a Fertility Appreciation Seminar held for all priests and deacons.

During the seminar, Bishop Aquila introduced the policy. The Fargo Diocesan NFP Coordinator explained the procedural points of the policy.  Fr. Richard Hogan (from NFP Outreach) provided teaching on the Theology of the Body. Representatives from the Couple to Couple League explained the practice of the Sympto-Thermal Method of NFP. A second day (optional) included a NaPro Technology medical conference with Dr. Thomas Hilgers. At deanery meetings throughout the diocese, teachers and clergy had an opportunity to get to know each other and ask questions. From the outset, Bishop Aquila was and continues to be actively involved in the education and formation of priests and deacons regarding Natural Family Planning and the Theology of the Body.

All couples preparing for marriage receive an introduction to the Church’s teaching on conjugal love, modeled on the Theology of the Body. Couples are required to attend a full course of instruction in a method of NFP. Special consideration is given to couples who are entering a second marriage. But if they are within child-bearing years, it is expected they will attend a full series of instruction. Couples who are beyond childbearing years or where one or both have been sterilized are to receive instruction in the Theology of the Body.

Diocese of Phoenix: Bishop Thomas Olmsted expressed his goals for NFP within a month of being installed as Bishop of Phoenix. They included: education and formation of priests on NFP andTheology of the Body; diocesan acceptance of all recognized and Church approved methods of NFP; commitment to increasing the number of trained and certified NFP teachers; meeting with Catholic OB/GYN physicians to discuss NFP and the moral practice of reproductive medicine; and establishment of an NFP representative in every parish.

Bishop Olmsted took responsibility for the education of priests, deacons, lay leaders and the laity. He began with a 5-part series in the diocesan newspaper which concluded with his plan to require NFP classes of all engaged couples in the diocese. Bishop taught the priests during in-service days, retreats and through the diocesan education department. He required all deacons to take a Theology of the Body class. He established a Theology of the Body department under the leadership of Katrina Zeno, who is available for workshops to parishes, youth groups, and adult education, etc. Bishop Olmsted has met with physicians.

Currently there are three NFP-only OB/GYN physicians in the dioceses as well as four supportive physicians in Family Medicine and others in a variety of medical specialties. Recruitment of parish NFP resource couples has already begun. Some pastors have begun to require the full series of classes for couples marrying in their parishes. This has created an opportunity for study.

After about 2 years of this practice, the parishes have received few complaints. The time line for full implementation of the policy was approximately six years with recruitment and training of teachers perceived as the biggest challenge.

To facilitate and to coordinate its own educational efforts, the Diocese of Phoenix established a new diocesan office, the John Paul II Resource Center for Theology of the Body and Culture. This department provides workshops and education for parishes, youth groups, and adult education. The Diocese of Phoenix also established an NFP Center over thirty years ago.

The Phoenix Natural Family Planning Center is an independent 501(c) (3) non-profit corporation established to meet the needs of the Diocese of Phoenix butoperating independently of the diocesan structure. In July of this year, the well-established work of the Phoenix Natural Family Planning Center was incorporated into the diocese, and their employees were hired to form the Diocese of Phoenix Office of Natural Family Planning.

Presently the only diocesan requirement is an introduction to NFP, provided by a certified NFP teacher. It is anticipated that the full course of instruction will be implemented in approximately 2 years, allowing time to recruit and train new teachers.

Diocese of St. Augustine: In March 2006, the Diocesan Pastoral Council approved a motion to survey priests and deacons on the matter of implementing a full course of instruction in NFP as a requirement for marriage preparation. The results of the survey indicated a split between those clergy who wanted the requirement, those who did not want the requirement, and those who were undecided.

In January 2007, the Presbyteral Council was asked for approval of the formation of an ad-hoc-committee to study the issue in greater depth. Approval was given and the ad-hoc-committee was comprised of three priests who were undecided, one deacon in favor of the policy and one opposed, an NFP teacher at whose parish the proposed policy had been piloted, and the Family Life director/NFP coordinator who served in a non-voting, advisory capacity. The rationale for the choice of members of the ad-hoc-committee was that they would proceed cautiously. After the ad-hoc-committee studied the matter, it was decided that the full course of NFP requirement was desirable. Bishop Victor Galeone then proceeded with plans to develop and implement the requirement.

The NFP education requirement for marriage preparation became effective for all marriages scheduled after January 1, 2008, that is, whose prenuptial papers were not filled out until after that date. Only couples of childbearing age are required to take the NFP course. It is required only of those couples who are preparing for marriage in the Diocese of St. Augustine. It is not required of couples fromanother diocese who will be married in the Diocese of St. Augustine, but who are doing their marriage preparation in their home diocese.

By the same token, it is required of a couple to be married in another diocese, but doing their marriage preparation in the Diocese of St. Augustine. Should there be a special circumstance, such as the prior sterilization of one of the engaged, or should a couple simply refuse to participate, the priest or deacon preparing the couple for marriage must inform the chancellor that circumstances preclude completion of the requirement. The circumstances need not be specified.

Couples may also fulfill this requirement by taking their NFP course online. The online version is not the preferred option, but it may be used in cases of necessity. All couples required to take the course must give the priest or deacon witnessing their wedding a certificate of having successfully completed the course. Scholarships are available for those couples experiencing difficulty in paying the modest fee for materials.

The full report, REQUIRING A FULL COURSE OF NATURAL FAMILY PLANNING INSTRUCTION IN MARRIAGE PREPARATION, can be found at

http://www.nccbuscc.org/prolife/issues/nfp/report_requiring_%20NFP_%2008.pdf

Dear Catholic and Confused on Contraceptives,

There are many ways to answer your question. As a woman physician who has used birth control herself, and now practices in a NFP-only, contraceptive-free practice, I do have much to say on this matter. First of all, from a Catholic perspective, our

Catechism clearly states that “every action which, whether in anticipation of the conjugal act, or in its accomplishment…whether as an end or as a means to render procreation impossible is intrinsically evil” (CCC 2370).

As a physician who helps couples manage and live with their fertility through teaching and encouraging NFP (Natural Family Planning), I am always amazed at the striking difference between NFP couples and contracepting couples. It seems that spiritually, there are marked differences between couples that use NFP and couples that contracept.

Contracepting couples seem to have far more marital problems, increased rates of substance abuse, alcohol abuse, pornography addiction, infidelity and increased divorce rates. My experience has been documented in a large study by Mercedes Wilson showing that NFP couples have divorce rates of 1%, in contrast to our national average, which is about 50%. So clearly, spiritually, there is something different going on in the NFP couples.

Regarding the medical safety of contraceptives, we in the medical community have long known of the harms and risks of oral contraceptives (OCPs). The NSFG (National Survey of Family Growth) indicates that the number of women continuing on OCPs is only 68% after one year. This shows that despite the apparent ease of just taking one pill per day to suppress the woman’s fertility, there are many side effects that cause her not to want to continue. However, there are many serious risks of the pill that are not routinely discussed in doctors’ offices or mentioned in the main street media.

There are hundreds of research articles that show serious risks of oral contraceptives regarding increased cardiovascular risks, increased risks of breast and cervical cancers, and increased risk of liver tumors. In women who are older, who smoke, or have one of many possible silent gene mutations (like Factor V Leiden, for example), these women are all at  increased risk of cardiovascular events, up to 10 times the risk of noncontracepting women.

Recently, since 2002, there have been 3 major randomized control studies showing that the estrogen and progesterone in postmenopausal women’s hormones cause an increased risk of breast cancer. The IARC (International Agency for Research on Carcinogens) declared estrogen and progesterone Class 1 carcinogens in 2005.

There are many studies that show the same risks for younger women who take birth control pills for extended periods of time. Dr. Chris Kahlenborn, M.D. was one of the first physicians to show the increased risk of breast cancer, through his meta-analysis published in the Mayo Clinical Proceedings. His article reviewed more than 34 case-control studies and found that the use of OCPs was associated with an increase in PREmenopausal breast cancer, and especially in young women who used OCPS before their first full term pregnancy, and also for women who had used OCPs for more than 4 years.

Why are we, the medical community, warning older women of the risks of hormones, but not routinely cautioning younger women of these same risks? Some young women start OCPs in their teens, while their breast tissue is highly susceptible to the effects of carcinogens. According to Dr. Angela Lafranchi, M.D., breast surgeon, the breast goes through a series of phases whereby tissue matures and develops.

It is not until the woman has her first full term pregnancy and her milk develops, that those breast cells become fully matured. After the breast cells have matured to this level, they are “protected” to some extent against carcinogenic influences. Therefore, exposing young womens’ breasts to years of carcinogenic hormones, before they have their babies, is VERY harmful.

As a Catholic physician, I am always amazed to see how God displays his wisdom through natural law. When we engage in activities that are against His moral law, we can see that the effects of these practices are not going to be good for human beings. Nowhere can that be seen more clearly than regarding oral contraceptives.

Theologically, spiritually, and medically, contraceptives are harmful to the individual women that use them. There may be a very small percentage of women who have to use OCPs to alleviate certain medical conditions, but these women should represent a small minority of the total population. Oral contraceptives are the number one choice of family planning in the regular population AND Catholic population. Clearly, we have to educate all women on the risks of OCPs and look for alternative ways to live with and manage our God-given gift of fertility. NFP and abstinence are two ways that our Catholic faith has given us. Don’t they deserve another look?

A full list of over 60 research articles documenting the increased risks of OCPs

can be obtained by emailing Dr. Rebecca Peck, M.D. at rbamer2@yahoo.com

Yes there is and you can download and print a flyer for it here:

Click to download  (pdf)

This is the question Jenna Tosh asked the people of Orlando Florida as she assumed her new position as CEO of Planned Parenthood. "I mean we expected a fight over abortion, but we never expected this about birth control" said the new CEO. What is the big deal indeed?

First, it is always a big deal in America when the government tries to force people to violate their conscience, or religions to violate their own beliefs.

What’s the big deal?

Ask the late Charnette Messe who developed breast cancer in 2002 from early use of Depo Provera, the birth control pill and an abortion while still an adolescent. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2KrbM5x2kk). I am sure SHE would have thought this was a “big deal.” Charnette says that if she knew that these things could cause breast cancer years later, when she was married with children, she never would have chosen them in the first place. Unfortunately, she doesn't get another chance, and neither do her husband and children who now have no wife or mother.

But the issue of properly obtaining informed consent for medications like birth control (which means doctors fulfill their duty of telling patients all the risks and harms) is largely absent in current medical practice. And, that is why simply listing petitions from women who supposedly want their birth control is disingenuous. 

Ask the thousands of women each year who are harmed by birth control and abortion. Ask all the women who discontinue using the Pill, or the 62% of women who are dissatisfied due to its side effects. You see, Jenna, we as doctors, do consider the birth control pill a “big deal,” even if you paraprofessionals at Planned Parenthood do not.

While there are some symptoms which can be alleviated by oral contraceptives, there are also less harmful treatments available. Just recently, a study indicated that using oral contraceptives for symptoms like dysmenorrhea (painful periods) could mask undiagnosed disease and lead to more serious problems for women later in life.

The overwhelming percentage of women use the artificial birth control pill to prevent birth of children. But once again, their providers do not even notify them of another healthy alternative, natural family planning, which has been shown in many medical studies to be efficacious and with NO harmful side effects. Why didn’t HHS include natural methods in the current mandate? 

Birth control has substantial costs as well, not only the doctors visits and drug costs, but a whole long list of ripple effects from its use. The cost of treating increased sexually transmitted diseases (from encouraged rampant early sexual activity outside the protection of marriage), breast and cervical cancers, cardiovascular complications (like leg clots, lung clots and strokes), and other problems (like liver tumors and osteoporosis) make birth control a "big deal".

What about the rising divorce rates and single parenthood? The saddest women I see in medical practice are single women, depressed and exhausted from trying to work and fulfill the role of mother and father. Children are neglected. Poverty and violence are increasing. The traditional family is becoming a thing of the past but don’t worry, women have their birth control and abortions and it's really NO Big Deal. 

We could continue because the list of harms from birth control go on at great length but you see Jenna, when something so bad has to be forced upon people it IS a Big Deal. A VERY Big Deal.

Catholics believe that the unitive and procreative ends of sexual intercourse should not be separated, and that to do so causes individual medical, spiritual and societal harms. And, the fact that the government doesn’t even mention options for women that are free, healthy and good for families, (such as Natural Family Planning) is the ultimate farce. That is the Biggest Deal of them all.

Dr. Rebecca Peck, MD, Family Physician, Marquette NFP Instructor Wife and Mother of 6 children

Catholic Marriage Preparation Statistics History and Methodology

Christian J. Meert, Director

Office of Marriage and Family Life

Diocese of Colorado Springs

Click to download  (pdf)

To the Editor:

I am a family physician, who has provided care to women and their families, to include obstetrics and gynecology, for more than 20 years. Throughout my career, and after 23 years of marriage and four daughters, I have acquired the utmost respect for women, and have worked to protect the right of each woman, including my many patients as well as my wife and daughters, to make informed decisions about her body.

In light of the recent Health and Human Services mandate requiring employers to provide contraceptive coverage and the Susan B Komen foundations decision to continue to fund Planned Parenthood, many in the media especially have been expressing their outrage at any person (Rick Santorum) or institution (the Catholic Church) that would dare object to universal access to contraceptive coverage.

Though Catholic, I did not always observe the teachings of the Catholic Church in my practice, particularly as related to women’s health care. As a biology teacher, I introduced a curriculum on contraception in a Catholic High School in New York in 1982. I taught other physicians how to prescribe the “ideal” oral contraceptive for each woman. Although my wife and I have successfully used and taught others natural methods of family planning (NFP), I was not ready to withhold oral contraceptive from my patients. However, as I began to introduce the option of NFP to women, I heard more and more women expressing their dissatisfaction with the side effects of artificial methods and their desire for a natural option for birth control.

At a women’s health conference in 2003, I asked the OB/Gyn from Columbia University why he did not address the fact that use of oral contraceptives increases the risk of cervical cancer, and he answered, “Let’s keep that to ourselves” which he then qualified by briefly reviewing the many “health benefits” of oral contraceptives – first of which, was of course, pregnancy prevention.

Therein lies the dirtly little secret that has pervaded the field of women’s health care for more than 50 years that we physicians who provide care for women, working under the guidance of The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Centers for Disease Control must do all we can to ensure that women of reproductive age embrace contraception regardless of the potentially dangerous side effects.

We present to women these options. Either get on the pill (or the shot, the patch , the IUD) or face the “disease” known as pregnancy and children. We tell women only of the many supposed “health benefits” of the pill while ignoring and/or covering up the many known increased risks of cancer (cervical and breast) and vascular disease (blood clots, stroke and heart disease) associated with long-term use of artificial contraceptives (not to mention he abortifacient action of several of these methods).

The Catholic Church has seemingly stood alone in its undaunted defense of the dignity of the individual person. While the government, the CDC and even ACOG have chosen to take paternalistic, utilitarian approaches to the care of women and their bodies, the church has actually defended the right of women to make their own informed decisions about their reproductive health.

While Planned Parenthood (funded in part by the government and also by Susan B. Koman foundation) continues on a daily basis to hide the facts about contraceptives from their customers, the church has tried to encourage women of all ages to try to live a life that is in keeping with the Natural Law, by teaching a “theology of the body” and not a theology that places the immediate sexual gratification of men ahead of the woman’s wellbeing. 

The Catholic Church asks women the question: are you truly willing to put your body at risk just so your male partner can find sexual pleasure? And the church asks married couples to consider a method of family planning that increases communication about sex and develops sexual self-control in both partners.

In 1968 in the face of growing acceptance of artificial contraception, one courageous, prescient man wrote the following: “it is also to be feared that the man, growing used to the employment of anti0conceptive practices, may finally lose respect for the woman and, no longer caring for her physical and psychological equilibrium, may come to the point of considering her as a mere instrument of selfish enjoyment, and no longer as his respected and beloved companion.” These are the words of Pope Paul VI.

I daresay we in our great nation have come to see this loss of respect for women become a reality. I certainly see it each day in my practice of family medicine and women’s health care, not to mention the media.  And I truly pray that our society will not fall prey to those who continue to embrace a culture of death for the sake of “the greater good.”

If is time for all of us who truly care for women to take off our blinders and speak the truth to all who will listen.  It is time, we can all agree, to begin to respect all women, allow all women to learn all the facts about all methods of birth control, so as to make truly informed decisions about their own bodies, and thereby ensure the protection of reproductive freedom – as freedom, which the government try as it might, cannot take away.

Dr. John Littell, M.D., Family Practice, Kissimmee, FL

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

Nov 2011

It is estimated that among Catholic Ob/Gyns in the United States only one percent are fully with the Church’s program of promoting NFP and rejecting all forms of contraception and sterilization. This means that the other 99 percent are part of the problem. How can we reach them? The life issues belong especially to those in the medical profession. If they are not supporting the value of human life in all its dimensions, then we are lacking the support of our natural allies in the huge effort of building up a culture of life. Contraception is chemical warfare upon a woman’s fertility. Sterilization is surgical warfare upon a man’s fertility. Both contraception and sterilization contradict the meaning of the spousal act as making the total personal gift of self to one’s spouse.

Most doctors did their studies in State medical schools where there was no exposure to Catholic bioethics. In many cases, Catholic bioethics was ridiculed. The medical ethics they received were a variety of pragmatism, utilitarianism and cost effectiveness. The “quality of life” ethic was stressed more than the “sanctity of life” ethic. Many Catholic doctors have no understanding of the Church’s rationale for her positions on contraception, sterilization, in vitro fertilization, and other artificial forms of treating infertility. Many of them still equate NFP with the antiquated rhythm method. They are baffled when presented with the charting of women who use NFP, and do not know how to interpret them. 

If they were informed about the highly effective rate of NFP as a morally good means of spacing pregnancies, and its full cooperation with a woman’s fertility system, they could be won over to our side. If they understood the physical harmful side effects of contraceptives on their female patients, and the even more devastating spiritual damaging effects upon their patients and their marriages, then they would take on the convictions of NFP trained doctors. They would never again regard contraception as good medicine.

One major reason why the pro-life movement is so sluggish and crawling is that 99% of our own doctors are working against us. When a good pastor preaches against contraception and sterilization, and a couple goes to their “practicing Catholic” doctor who prescribes the Pill, then there is a moral dilemma. What usually happens is that the couple decides that the doctor knows his medicine, and if this goes contrary to Church teaching, then the doctor is right and the Church is wrong. In effect, this means that Catholic doctors pull the rug out from under faithful pastors who preach God’s moral law regarding marriage and spousal love.

Doctors are heavily influenced by the income generated by their prescribing contraception. The pharmaceutical companies exert enormous pressure upon doctors to use their products, and the doctors reap financial rewards for doing so. This pressure begins in the medical schools. Many Catholic doctors are terrified by the prospect of losing the steady income that comes from their prescribing contraceptives.

Fr. Dan McCaffrey and I travel the entire USA. We meet many people and hear about the heavy pressures that a faithful Catholic doctor suffers when he or she attempts to be true to their conscience. Faithful Catholic family practice doctors and Ob/Gyns are frequently shunned by their peers. If they are in a clinic, their peers try to marginalize them. One such doctor in Philadelphia has been forced to take a 1/3rd reduction in his salary because of his moral stance, despite the fact that he founded the clinic. Other doctors are severely criticized by their colleagues because they are offering an alternative to their patients, which is not financially rewarding. The NFP only doctor’s very presence in the clinic introduces doubts and moral uncertainty among the clientele.

A common complaint we hear around the country from pro-life couples is how difficult it is to find an NFP trained doctor or nurse. The entire diocese of Philadelphia has only 2 such doctors (for 1.5 million Catholics); the huge archdiocese of Los Angeles has only 3 such doctors (for 4.1 million Catholics). Only 1% of the Catholic Ob/Gyns in this country are faithful to Catholic medical ethics.

This situation cannot continue. The New Evanglization for the 21st Century must address this problem forthrightly and without compromise. What can be done? Obviously, many bishops do not know how to draw their doctors into a faithful practice of Catholic medical ethics, or the situation would be very different. Just as obviously, many priests do not know how to deal directly with the doctors in their congregations. 

The most important ingredient to the solution is good preaching from the pulpit. Everyone needs to hear God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family. They need to hear the Church’s constant, unchanging, teaching over the centuries on these matters. They need to know why contraception is so harmful, a serious sin that must be repented of, confessed, and avoided with a firm purpose of amendment. Doctors need to hear from the pulpit that if they are prescribing contraception, then they must confess it, with a firm purpose of amendment. If they reject the clear teaching of the Church on these matters, and persist in their immoral ways, then they should not receive the Holy Eucharist, since they have separated themselves from the Body of Christ, and have rejected God’s plan for spousal love.

Now, many priests feel intimidated, and are afraid to preach these values from the pulpit clearly and unambiguously. Some priests may think that their medical doctors know more about God’s plan for human sexuality than the Church does! Other priests simply do not want any form of confrontation, and are willing to accept the fact that 85% of their couples contracept, among whom 40% are sterilized, and they are prepared to allow the 50% divorce rate to continue.

Catholic doctors who have converted to NFP only tell us that what forced them to come to grips with their conscience was the preaching of a good priest. The word of God, announced from the pulpit, has its own penetrating power. The word of God works on the human heart and mind and will like nothing else can. People come to Mass to hear the Word of God, and to have it interpreted and applied to our culture in these times.

The task of the pastor is to proclaim clearly and unambiguously God’s plan for all the major dimensions of human life: love, life, marriage, spousal love and family. Preachers do not present their plan for these matters. They have no authority to present themselves as self-appointed teachers. We proclaim God’s plan, and we help our people understand why it is such a good plan, even when it is counter-cultural and requires some self-discipline and self-sacrifice.

When a doctor asks to speak privately with his pastor on these matters, then there is an opportunity to give the doctor the relevant documents of the Church. Eventually, the doctor must seek out the moral support of his peers who have acquired the medical and scientific background that underlies NFP. He must take the training that is required to become an NFP trained doctor. He must come to understand why the Church’s teaching in spousal love is both good morality and good medicine.

Bishops can do much more than they are presently doing. Some dioceses offer an annual White Mass for doctors, which is similar to the annual Red Mass for lawyers. Here the bishop has the opportunity to announce unambiguously what God’s plan is for marriage, spousal love and family. He can explain why contraception is so wrong and harmful to the relationship of married couples, and why NFP enhances and supports that relationship. Faith and reason go together. Doctors are reasonable people. The Catholic sexual ethic is eminently reasonable. But it must be proposed, and encouraged.

Since most Catholic doctors do not understand Catholic bioethics, they need to be taught. Here is a simple formula for a bishop to use in his diocese. He sends a personal invitation to all the doctors in his diocese. He provides a bi-monthly, or quarterly, Saturday afternoon (or evening) workshop for them in his residence, or at a convenient venue. He brings in a qualified speaker to address the moral aspects of one or two medical issues that are of current interest. The speaker draws into his/her presentation all the relevant Church documents that pertain to the issue at hand.

At the Q&A period, the bishop and his speaker answer questions. The whole emphasis here is upon morality. He recommends good books and journals that go deeper into the issues under discussion. I suggest William E. May’s CATHOLIC BIOETHICS AND THE GIFT OF HUMAN LIFE, the National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly, and the Linacre Quarterly.

Fr. Dan McCaffrey and I have considerable experience working with doctors. We are willing to lend our expertise to this effort.

The objective here is twofold: 1) to draw the Catholic doctors back into practicing their profession in accordance with solid Catholic medical principles; and 2) to encourage them to bring their values back into their clinics and influence their peers in the medical profession.

This is a simple and inexpensive formula for evangelizing the medical personnel of a diocese. Use very simple refreshments, e.g., coffee and cake. Ask for a free will donation to cover the stipend of the speaker. Why should the diocese be expected to pay for what the doctors should have learned on their own? Keep the emphasis focused on the moral principles that guide the practice of medicine.

If the doctors ignore the bishop’s appeal to them, then he has a pastoral challenge to meet. He must help them understand the moral obligation they have to understand how the faith pertains to their profession, and why they have a responsibility to both understand and live their faith. They must understand why it is a public scandal for a Catholic doctor to engage in contraception, sterilization, artificial methods of treating infertility, euthanasia, and the use of human embryos for research and harvesting for stem cells.

Our approach in these matters is always that of the Lord. He always proposed moral truth; He did not impose it. He respected the freedom of the person, but He also warned them that they will be held responsible for how they exercised their freedom, for all the choices they made and the deeds they preformed. At the present time, many Catholic doctors do not know how the values of the Gospel relate to their profession. They have never been confronted with moral truth. A bishop can, at the very least, do that much for his doctors.

Think of the sea change that would happen if only ten percent of our Catholic doctors were on board with us. We cannot be satisfied with the present status quo. We must address the problem and move in the direction of a solid correction.

Good News from Marriage Preparation Programs

The number of marriages in the Catholic Church dropped by 63% from 1975 to 2008 (Kenedy Official Catholic Directory). Sometimes the Church seems afraid to ask 'too much' from couples, afraid that it will scare them away. (Less than ten dioceses in the United States require complete NFP formation and almost none outside the USA. Most of the couples have never heard about NFP and/or do not know where to find NFP courses even if they are convinced.)

Couples asking to get married in the Church are also asking the Church to give them the Truth. They hunger for it, and want lifelong marriages. Most couples have low expectations from the Church, thinking they will be lectured. When the teachings of the Church are well-explained and presented in a respectful, non-judgmental environment, couples are inclined to accept them and make them their own. The way the program is taught and presented is as important as the content of the teachings; otherwise we could just give them a book or a series of DVD's. 

Numbers speak by themselves for couples who completed the interactive, one-on-one Catholic Marriage Preparation classes (www.CatholicMarriagePrep.com). Below are results from over 1,500 couples in the USA who went through the online Catholic Marriage Prep classes in 2010.

ABSTINENCE: Did you decide to abstain from sex until your wedding day as required by God through the Church, in the goal of giving sex its true meaning which is to authenticate your consent and receive each other from God in an act of trust?

- Yes or Maybe = 97.0% (Yes: 81.0%, Maybe: 16.0%)

- No: 3.0%

NFP: Do you plan to practice Natural Family Planning in your marriage out of respect for God's natural laws and trusting that they are for your greater happiness and holiness?

- Yes or Maybe = 93.0% (Yes: 61.0%, Maybe: 32.0%)

- No: 7.0%

Our duty is to feed them well, not to make them feel well.

—Submitted by Christian Meert, Co-Director

Diocese of Colorado Springs

To order this video please write to : bgmurphy@cox.net

Catholic Marriage Preparation Statistics History and Methodology

Click to download

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB PhD Nov 2011

The occasion for these reflections is the 2011 book Sex, Celibacy & Priesthood, by Lou A. Bordisso.

The author has gathered and published the statements of 59 priests who are self-described as heterosexual, homosexual or bi-sexual.   For the most part, each priest attempts to justify his decision to abandon the 6th Commandment, and the Church’s requirement that all priests in the Western Rite be celibate.  Since the unspoken intention of the book is to force a change in the discipline of the Church regarding celibacy for the ordained priest, it requires an analysis and a refutation.   

Bordisso avoids using any moral judgments regarding the sexual lives of the priests he covers.  For him, a priest is either celibate or non-celibate, and he thinks that there are as many definitions of celibacy as there are priests. 

The primary flaw of all the arguments offered throughout the book is the refusal to obey God and his 6th Commandment, which regulates the sex drive. 

Many of the priest contributors have rejected the Church’s requirement that the priesthood in the Western Rite is for celibate men, with few exceptions (e.g., Anglican married priests who have come into the Catholic Church).  If they can redefine the 6thCommandment and the requirements for the

Sacrament of Holy Orders, then they can do the same with all the Commandments and with all the Sacraments.  Today we find a strong push to redefine marriage.

 The 6th Commandment forbids any form of genital sex outside of marriage.  Many of the contributors have abandoned that Commandment, and consider themselves to be exceptions.  The Commandment, they claim, does not apply to them.

 Many contributors have rationalized their rejection of celibacy by their reliance upon very liberal theologians or students of scripture who are very clever in reinterpreting the pertinent passages in the Old and New Testament that condemn homosexual behavior.  They reject Church teaching, and accept dissenting theological opinion. 

Some of the contributors acknowledge that they are chronic masturbators.  Some use homosexual forms of pornography.  By reinforcing their strong addictions to these bad habits, they are choosing to place formidable barriers between themselves and their growing into the virtue of self-possession and chastity.

 Many complain of loneliness.  Part of the maturing process is learning how to deal with loneliness.  Every priest has the opportunity to deal with 1,000s of people.  He can form many friendships, but all of these are to be fostered in a manner that is chaste and respects the dignity of the individual.  There are boundaries that are not to be crossed.  Christ is the model for all friendships and all expressions of love.

Every person has the task of coming into the possession of his or her sex drive, once they pass through puberty and their sexuality awakens.  There are no exceptions to this.  God’s plan for sex is total abstinence before marriage, and total fidelity within marriage.  Some contributors seem to think that it is impossible to live a normal life without having regular orgasms.  Since this has become an absolute for them, they then feel justified in having sex in a wide variety of ways: anonymous sex, group masturbation, etc.

One contributor admitted that he and his girlfriend (who was married) had a son who is now 12 years old.  Where is this man’s sense of responsibility to his son?  Every son wants to be loved, cared for and wanted by his natural father.  Once a person excuses himself from the normal restraints of chastity, then it becomes very easy for him to exempt himself from more and more restraints. 

Most of the priests who are guilty of sexually abusing young men (and some young women) are those with homosexual orientations.  Their destructive behavior has brought about catastrophic results: young men who have been abused and still suffer from this traumatic experience; a serious scandal which has brought public scorn upon the priesthood; billions of dollars in lawsuits brought against dioceses and religious orders who did not give sufficient oversight to these offending priests; and creating more obstacles for normal young men who might be considering a vocation to the priesthood. 

All of these disastrous consequences can be traced back to priests with homosexual leanings who refused to be chaste.  It is time for unchaste homosexual clergymen to admit the great damage they have brought about, take responsibility for it, and cease to extol their sexual orientation as a great blessing.

Several contributors mentioned the prevalence of homosexual behavior during their years in the seminary or in houses of formation.  This means that their superiors are responsible for their lack of oversight, or for their complicity in these moral degeneracies.  This includes vocation directors, rectors of seminaries, faculty, formators, spiritual directors and bishops who did not give sufficient oversight to their seminaries and houses of formation.   There was a period of time when homosexual behavior was approved of, or sympathized with, by many who were involved with seminary formation.  We are now reaping the whirlwind of these seriously wrong-headed choices of candidates and their rejection of morality and Church discipline.

No priest can live by a double standard: be chaste wherever he performs his priestly duties, and be unchaste in his private life while away from the parish or scene of his duties.  We have only one conscience, and we carry it everywhere we go.  It is to be applied correctly wherever we are.  No one is exempt from the dictates of the Commandments.  God’s plan for morality applies to everyone, everywhere.

No normal male would choose to enter a seminary, or join a diocese, or religious order if he discovered a strong homosexual dimension there.  This is a self-inflicted wound brought about by the officials of a diocese or religious order.  These are barriers to good potential candidates that various officials of a diocese or religious order have chosen to allow.

What is to be done with unchaste homosexual priests?  They are human beings, and have their God-given dignity, which all must respect.  They also have freewill and intelligence, and they are fully responsible for their choices and deeds.  If they refuse to accept chastity and the discipline of celibacy, which accompanies the priesthood and religious life, then they should be required to resign their active priesthood.  Their on-going scandalous behavior makes them unsuitable and ineligible as functioning priests.  The same standard applies to unchaste heterosexual clergymen.

If an unchaste priest is willing to actively pursue the virtue of self-possession, self-mastery, self-discipline and chastity, then he should enter a well-supervised program of growth in the virtues, such as COURAGE.  If he is unable to cope with this, then he too must be required to leave the active ministry. 

The priesthood is not a sanctuary of refuge for the unchaste homosexual, or heterosexual, or bi-sexual individual.  The priesthood exists to serve the people of God as Jesus designed it to be.  The priest actsin persona Christi capitis.  If a man is unwilling, or unable, to accept the duties and responsibilities of the priesthood, then he is unsuited and incapable of serving the people of God in the capacity of an ordained priest.

If a cleric is unchaste, then he has no credibility as a moral guide or as a spiritual leader.  In addition, he will almost invariably refuse to address these moral issues from the pulpit, and will actively discourage other priests from doing so.  This is another huge blockage to the proclamation of God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family.  This is both shocking and scandalous.

The dioceses in this country that have a generous number of seminarians are those who love Christ and faithfully strive to keep his Commandments.  The dioceses that suffer from great shortages of priests and religious are often characterized by a homosexual culture, or by a culture that openly dissents from Church teaching on morality.  All of us are called to ongoing conversion.  All of us are called to evaluate our situation accurately and truthfully, and then take the necessary measures to correct any abnormalities and deviations from God’s moral code.

The virtue of chastity applies to everyone: singles, the married (no contraception or sterilization), widows and widowers, heterosexuals, bisexuals and homosexuals.  There are no exceptions.  Our bodies have a nuptial meaning.  By means of our bodies, we are able to make the total personal gift of ourselves to others.  We do this in a chaste manner, as becomes our vocation in life.  We respect the total dignity of other persons. 

This excludes such acts as fornication, adultery, masturbation and sodomy.  The spousal act is reserved to spouses who have committed themselves to each other in an irrevocable bond of marriage, which is totally faithful and open to the goodness of life.  Only in marriage does the spousal act express and accomplish what it was designed to express and accomplish.

As God designed it, the spousal act belongs only to a husband and wife irrevocably committed to each other, open to both the goodness of love and to the goodness of life.  Sex outside of marriage is always conditioned, always with reservations, and withholds something from making the total personal gift of self.   We are never to use another person as the object of our pleasure.

Unchaste clergy are making a serious error of judgment of their own status before God.  They are blaming their duplicitous condition on “outmoded Church teaching” or “Church discipline” rather than looking directly at Divine Revelation to see how their status appears in the eyes of God.  I cannot judge them.  However, for their sake and the sake of God’s Church, I will remind them of God’s judgment, which of course applies to me and to all of us. 

I begin with “Everyone who looks at a woman lustfully, has already committed adultery with her in his heart…And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away.  It is better for you to lose one of your members than to have your whole body go into Gehenna” (Matthew 5:27-30). 

 The context of these admonitions is chastity.  The passage from Matthew is a clear reference to the sin of masturbation.  What else can it be?  Shoplifting?  It could, and in fact does, apply also to shoplifting, but shoplifting is totally out of context, and so shoplifting is not the main focus.  Does it apply to manual rude gestures?  Smoking? Punching someone in the face? 

Again, it could, and in fact does, apply to any manual compulsive behavior that is grave enough to lead to condemnation.  Masturbation has to be at the top of the list because the context is chastity.  Also, masturbation is in essence a “prayer” to be unchaste, leads to more and more unchaste behavior, resulting in a host of societal disorders and therefore is gravely immoral. 

So, the standard set by our Lord Jesus Christ is clear.  This is not “Church discipline.”  This is the standard of chastity, based on the sixth Commandment, by which we will all be judged.  This is the standard of obedience versus disobedience.

 What will happen to the disobedient?  “…but whoever disobeys the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God remains upon him”  (John 3:36). 

What will happen to the unchaste?  “But as for cowards, the unfaithful, the depraved, murderers, the unchaste, sorcerers, idol-worshipers, and deceivers of every sort, their lot is the burning pool of fire and sulfur, which is the second death” (Rev 21:8).  This is God’s judgment – not just Roman Catholic teaching, interpretation, Magisterial pronouncement, or Church discipline, or culture.

 The standards that the unfortunate unchaste clergy have set for themselves, the majority admitting to masturbation and various types of intermittent sexual encounters, would not be chaste, even if they were married.  Everyone can empathize with their struggles.  However, repentance and change must come quickly, before they die or else the outcome for them at Judgment Day is unlikely to be a happy one.

In the meantime, how can they be credible moral guides for their people?  They cannot. They should humbly recognize that they cannot and take appropriate action – repent or resign.

The self-discipline that the virtue of chastity requires is a good thing.  It forces us to come into the possession of self, and gain mastery over our sex drive.  It forces us to acquire will power, self-control over our passions.  The virtue of chastity forces us to remove ourselves from the center of the universe, and find our proper place in the human community. 

The struggle to gain mastery over our sex drives forces us to choose God’s plan for us as bodied persons in preference to satisfying our desire for instant gratification.  Every man, woman and child must go through the process of acquiring the virtue of chastity.  There are no exceptions.  Our human maturity, integral fulfillment and ultimately our salvation depend upon it.

[The August 2011 issue of THE LINACRE QUARTERLY (Journal of the Catholic Medical Association) has many fine articles on the theme:  Responding to the Abuse Crisis.]

We say that contraception is very bad medicine, in addition to being morally repugnant and harmful. But this becomes credible only when practicing physicians make this claim, and then provide clear evidence that this is so.

Dr. Rebecca Peck, MD, provides a strong testimony about this. It makes for a great parish bulletin insert. Look for ways to take advantage of this. This is an example of the right to religious freedom put into practice.

Catholic Physicians Don’t Prescribe Birth Control For Patients--

Now Must Provide Birth Control to Employees

Dr. Rebecca Peck, MD, CCD, ABFM, Marquette NFP Instructor

My husband and I have a Catholic family medical practice. Even though we do not prescribe oral contraceptives(OCPs) or abortion-causing drugs for our patients, we are now being forced to purchase insurance which includes these items free of charge for our employees. 

Our practice is truly Catholic in nature. When patients enter our practice, they are greeted by a statue of the Blessed Virgin Mary. We give out Miraculous Medals to patients, pray with patients, and provide indigent care. Over the years, I have seen a lot of women. When I began my practice over 12 years ago, I initially did prescribe oral contraceptives. However, about 6 years ago I just had to stop. My conscience was really bothering me about this whole issue. I realized that women using contraceptives were suffering from a whole host of problems. Some were medical (induced by the pill) and some were spiritual (from their own angst about being on OCPs). I studied my Catholic faith, Scripture, and Magisterial documents (encyclicals like Humanae Vitae, Theology of the Body and the Gospel of Life) and discovered that these were not God’s plan for marital love. After hearing me out, my patients were surprisingly accepting of my decision not to prescribe OCPs. They realized that if I was willing to provide ethical and well-researched reasons, then this meant that I was exactly the kind of provider they wanted when the chips were down. 

I have seen alot of oral contraceptive-induced diseases in the women I have treated over the years. I have had patients with strokes, pulmonary emboli, deep vein thrombosis, cervical cancer, Human Papilloma Virus and breast cancer. All of these diseases INCREASE when women take the pill. In fact, it was these young women who developed breast cancer at young ages that really started haunting me. I started investigating their histories and found almost universally that their only risk factor for cancer was that they took oral contraceptives for several years before their first pregnancy. I started researching the medical literature and indeed found this to be true, based on several studies (1).

I discussed it with several oncologists in town and realized that they had been seeing this trend also. About this same time, the well-known postmenopausal Women’s Health Initiative and Nurses Health Studies proved that estrogen and progesterone used in older women’s hormone preparations definitely caused breast cancer. In addition, in 2005, the IARC declared Estrogen and Progesterone Class I carcinogens. I explained these developments to my patients and provided them with other options for their family planning needs, and became certified in the Marquette method of Natural Family Planning.

It is disturbing to me that our government is now calling these carcinogens (oral contraceptives) “preventive health care”. Firstly, they are not preventive care. To call birth control preventive care would mean that pregnancy is a disease state or that children are so odious that they should be prevented. This is an insult to a child, and also to a woman struggling with the disease of infertility. An infertile woman’s happiest day is when you tell her that her infertility is “cured” and that she is pregnant with a child!

Secondly, by making these carcinogens free to all patients means that the usage of these things will go up. Do we really want more breast cancer, more cervical cancer, and more cardiovascular events in our young women? How is this “women’s health” if these compounds cause such morbidity? And why is it fair that the government gets to make women’s contraceptives “free” but cancer patients or diabetic patients have to pay for their medicines? Whose value judgement puts contraceptives first on the free list?

Thirdly, pro-contraception feminists make much of the fact that birth control lowers some cancer rates (such as ovarian cancer) but never mention that birth control increases breast and cervical rates. They also tout the “many” medical uses of the pill, but neglect to inform women that many (if not all) of these uses can be treated just as well by far less harmful substances. Do we really want to use Class I carcinogens to treat acne, for example? The government should not be in the business of telling insurance companies to mandate harmful drugs for questionable medical uses. Furthermore, the government has made these contraceptives free because of their contraceptive actions, NOT their medical uses.

As an employer, I should have the same right of conscience in refusing to purchase an insurance plan which contains objectionable “treatments”, as I have in my capacity as a physician who refuses to prescribe these drugs. This is not just about a physician who doesn’t want to prescribe something for a religious reason. I can make BOTH a religious AND medical case against prescribing oral contraceptives. Both should be equally valid in allowing me the right to refuse to participate in procedures and drugs which I feel are detrimental to my patients. If you examine the harms of oral contraceptives, one can cite spiritual, medical, societal and environmental harms from these agents. There are also harmful consequences for women choosing sterilizations and abortions. Moreover, these procedures harm society, by reducing children, which are a social “good”. As such this mandatory law, should be considered unjust, which of course it is.

Physicians must be allowed to retain the right of conscience in practicing medicine, or the whole field of medicine will devolve into an unprincipled and unethical profession. Patients will lose confidence in their providers, which will negatively impact their care. By advocating immoral practices, medicine and government will suffer, and patients and providers alike will succumb to moral decay.

Finally, this mandate creates a “slippery slope” whereby other objectionable practices, like euthanasia and assisted suicide may soon advance, based upon new euphemisms like “cost containment” or the like. I think it is no accident that we are now seeing sex-selective abortions, same sex marriage laws and POLST (Physician Orders of Life Sustaining Treatments). We can only hope and pray that America wakes up quickly and stands up to these various affronts. 

(1) Peck, R., Norris, C. “Why OCPS Should Not Be Part of a Preventive Care Mandate” Linacre Quarterly, Feb 2012

We say that contraception is very bad medicine, in addition to being morally repugnant and harmful. But this becomes credible only when practicing physicians make this claim, and then provide clear evidence that this is so.

Dr. Rebecca Peck, MD, provides a strong testimony about this. It makes for a great parish bulletin insert. Look for ways to take advantage of this. This is an example of the right to religious freedom put into practice.

Catholic Physicians Don’t Prescribe Birth Control For Patients--

Now Must Provide Birth Control to Employees

Dr. Rebecca Peck, MD, CCD, ABFM, Marquette NFP Instructor

My husband and I have a Catholic family medical practice. Even though we do not prescribe oral contraceptives(OCPs) or abortion-causing drugs for our patients, we are now being forced to purchase insurance which includes these items free of charge for our employees. 

Our practice is truly Catholic in nature. When patients enter our practice, they are greeted by a statue of the Blessed Virgin Mary. We give out Miraculous Medals to patients, pray with patients, and provide indigent care. Over the years, I have seen a lot of women. When I began my practice over 12 years ago, I initially did prescribe oral contraceptives. However, about 6 years ago I just had to stop. My conscience was really bothering me about this whole issue. I realized that women using contraceptives were suffering from a whole host of problems. Some were medical (induced by the pill) and some were spiritual (from their own angst about being on OCPs). I studied my Catholic faith, Scripture, and Magisterial documents (encyclicals like Humanae Vitae, Theology of the Body and the Gospel of Life) and discovered that these were not God’s plan for marital love. After hearing me out, my patients were surprisingly accepting of my decision not to prescribe OCPs. They realized that if I was willing to provide ethical and well-researched reasons, then this meant that I was exactly the kind of provider they wanted when the chips were down. 

I have seen alot of oral contraceptive-induced diseases in the women I have treated over the years. I have had patients with strokes, pulmonary emboli, deep vein thrombosis, cervical cancer, Human Papilloma Virus and breast cancer. All of these diseases INCREASE when women take the pill. In fact, it was these young women who developed breast cancer at young ages that really started haunting me. I started investigating their histories and found almost universally that their only risk factor for cancer was that they took oral contraceptives for several years before their first pregnancy. I started researching the medical literature and indeed found this to be true, based on several studies (1).

I discussed it with several oncologists in town and realized that they had been seeing this trend also. About this same time, the well-known postmenopausal Women’s Health Initiative and Nurses Health Studies proved that estrogen and progesterone used in older women’s hormone preparations definitely caused breast cancer. In addition, in 2005, the IARC declared Estrogen and Progesterone Class I carcinogens. I explained these developments to my patients and provided them with other options for their family planning needs, and became certified in the Marquette method of Natural Family Planning.

It is disturbing to me that our government is now calling these carcinogens (oral contraceptives) “preventive health care”. Firstly, they are not preventive care. To call birth control preventive care would mean that pregnancy is a disease state or that children are so odious that they should be prevented. This is an insult to a child, and also to a woman struggling with the disease of infertility. An infertile woman’s happiest day is when you tell her that her infertility is “cured” and that she is pregnant with a child!

Secondly, by making these carcinogens free to all patients means that the usage of these things will go up. Do we really want more breast cancer, more cervical cancer, and more cardiovascular events in our young women? How is this “women’s health” if these compounds cause such morbidity? And why is it fair that the government gets to make women’s contraceptives “free” but cancer patients or diabetic patients have to pay for their medicines? Whose value judgement puts contraceptives first on the free list?

Thirdly, pro-contraception feminists make much of the fact that birth control lowers some cancer rates (such as ovarian cancer) but never mention that birth control increases breast and cervical rates. They also tout the “many” medical uses of the pill, but neglect to inform women that many (if not all) of these uses can be treated just as well by far less harmful substances. Do we really want to use Class I carcinogens to treat acne, for example? The government should not be in the business of telling insurance companies to mandate harmful drugs for questionable medical uses. Furthermore, the government has made these contraceptives free because of their contraceptive actions, NOT their medical uses.

As an employer, I should have the same right of conscience in refusing to purchase an insurance plan which contains objectionable “treatments”, as I have in my capacity as a physician who refuses to prescribe these drugs. This is not just about a physician who doesn’t want to prescribe something for a religious reason. I can make BOTH a religious AND medical case against prescribing oral contraceptives. Both should be equally valid in allowing me the right to refuse to participate in procedures and drugs which I feel are detrimental to my patients. If you examine the harms of oral contraceptives, one can cite spiritual, medical, societal and environmental harms from these agents. There are also harmful consequences for women choosing sterilizations and abortions. Moreover, these procedures harm society, by reducing children, which are a social “good”. As such this mandatory law, should be considered unjust, which of course it is.

Physicians must be allowed to retain the right of conscience in practicing medicine, or the whole field of medicine will devolve into an unprincipled and unethical profession. Patients will lose confidence in their providers, which will negatively impact their care. By advocating immoral practices, medicine and government will suffer, and patients and providers alike will succumb to moral decay.

Finally, this mandate creates a “slippery slope” whereby other objectionable practices, like euthanasia and assisted suicide may soon advance, based upon new euphemisms like “cost containment” or the like. I think it is no accident that we are now seeing sex-selective abortions, same sex marriage laws and POLST (Physician Orders of Life Sustaining Treatments). We can only hope and pray that America wakes up quickly and stands up to these various affronts. 

(1) Peck, R., Norris, C. “Why OCPS Should Not Be Part of a Preventive Care Mandate” Linacre Quarterly, Feb 2012

We need to find ways to explain the teachings and values of Humanae Vitae.

If you go to the site below, you will find an article by Dr. Charles Norris, M.D., which is his summary of Pope John Paul II's Reflections on Humanae Vitae, found at the end of his Theology of the Body. The title of the article is “Pope John Paul II, Humanae Vitae, and the Theology of the Body,” and it is published by the Homiletic and Pastoral Review. 

Charles W. Norris, M.D. is a retired Obstetrician/Gynecologist and a graduate of the Georgetown University School of Medicine, class of 1957. He can be reached at chazno@comcast.net.

http://www.hprweb.com/2012/02/pope-john-paul-ii-humanae-vitae-and-the-theology-of-the-body

“ You have captured the essence of Pope John Paul II's theology of the body in a concise way in your article in Homiletic and Pastoral Review. I am sure that there are many Catholics who share your view. Human sexuality is complicated and you have made it clear and simple, not an easy task.”

-- Chester Gillis, Dean, Georgetown College

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

NFP Outreach[The August 2011 issue of THE LINACRE QUARTERLY (Journal of the Catholic Medical Association) has many fine articles on the theme:  Responding to the Abuse Crisis.]

Dr Rebecca Peck's forthcoming February 2012 Linacre Quarterly article, "Significant Risks of Oral Contraceptives (OCPs): Why This Drug Should NOT Be Included In a Preventive Care Mandate" (co-authored by Charles Norris, and incuding 72 references) will be a powerful tool for us. Her open letter (below) is a very practical extension of her Linacre Quarterly article that you have her permission to use as you wish.

Steve Koob and Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

Download article, click here. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Friends,

I just wanted you to see this thread of a discussion on some points related to the HHS mandate. 

Although the religious liberty issue is universally compelling, another crucial point is that birth control is NOT preventative care (see below). The current administration wants this to be about the Catholic Bishops denying women their "women’s health".  

This is why I feel our recent research article is so timely and important right now (1).  The pill is not a warm little fuzzy harmless object.  It causes significant harm and the American people have been deceived for long enough. 

As a practicing physician, I see the fallout every day—young women with blood clots in their legs, strokes, early breast cancer, HPV, and cervical cancer.  This is NOT about women's health; it is about preventing and killing babies.  The present administration will try to pit US Bishops against women and try to portray the bishops as a bunch of old men that don't want women to have their "women's health" options, but this has no credibility.

Every day, I, my husband Benjamin, and other doctors like us do TRUE preventative care. We do pap smears looking for cervical cancer, perform breast exams looking for breast cancer, refer for mammograms, order colonoscopies looking for colon cancer, and give immunizations to prevent pneumonia and influenza.  These time-tested measures are very different from prescribing a pill to prevent a CHILD.  A child is not a disease. Pregnancy and fertility are not disease states; they are normal physiological processes of the human body.

The point also needs to be hammered home that we are not just talking about insurance mandated contraception—we are talking sterilizations, “morning-after” pills, and abortions.  Christians and Catholics can come together on the abortion issue.  Accordingly, the way the pill causes abortions needs to be explained in a coherent manner (2). 

Manufacturers of the current birth control pill formulations have reduced estrogen content in an attempt to reduce some of the risks cited above.  But, reducing the estrogen increases the likelihood of ovulation.  The pill’s "backup" mechanism then comes into play by preventing implantation of the several day old embryo into the uterine wall.  Since life begins at conception, the layperson can understand that this necessarily means that the new life is aborted.

Finally, regarding the recent decision of Komen to reinstate support for PP, the hypocrisy of this must be exposed.  Birth control and abortion—PP's 2 major lines of business—INCREASE the risk of breast cancer (3).

All people of integrity want women to have options regarding their family planning, but why are the only discussed options those that are contrary to the Catholic Church's teaching?  Fertility awareness and modern methods of Natural Family Planning—over a dozen distinct methods—cause NO harms at all!  All have wonderful benefits for women that empower them, strengthen their families, and work with their bodies in the natural way God created them.

Blessings,  

Rebecca Peck, MD

PS  It should also be pointed out that HAVING children and BREASTFEEDING—a woman using her body as it is designed—actually protect a woman's health. Pregnancy is not a disease; pregnancy PREVENTS disease.

(1) Peck, R; Norris, C. "Why OCPs Should Not Be Part of a Preventative Care Mandate: Significant Risks and Harms of OCPs", Linacre Quarterly, Feb 2012 (forthcoming)

(2) Stanford, J; Larrimore, W. "Postfertilization effects of OCPs" www.polycarp.org

(3) Kahlenborn, C. http://www.polycarp.org/overviewbreastcanceroralcontraceptives.htm

 and http://www.polycarp.org/overviewabortionbreastcancer.htm

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

July 2012

One major component of modern life that is missing is an understanding ofcommitment.  What does it mean to be committed to a person, or to a great cause?  

The fault-free and high divorce rate today is a clear example of the lack of commitment. The scarcity of vocations to the priesthood and religious life is another clear example of this lack.

To commit yourself to another person means that you are making a deep and wide-ranging decision to be associated with that person, as in a marriage.  Since we don’t know all that the future holds, we accept the terms of commitment: “for better or worse, in good times and bad, in good health and sickness … I will remain committed to you, until death do us part.”

Some people ask, “Why should we ever make a commitment?  There are too many contingencies in life.  Situations change and people change.  How can I be committed to any one person, or to a single cause?”  These attitudes are very prevalent today.  We make commitments because that is the way God designed human nature. 

Our freedom must be exercised by making many choices.  There are good choices and bad choices; there are even horrible choices (“freedom of choice”).  We are obliged to learn how to make good choices, which always advance the good, while exposing and resisting the bad.  

There are small choices that we make everyday, and huge choices, made only infrequently, which encompass thousands of smaller choices.  Examples of huge choices are: one’s major work or career in life, e.g., as an educator, professional or career person, as a priest or religious; which person I shall marry for my lifetime partner, which religious denomination I affiliate with, etc.  These are all commitments with wide ramifications.

Why is it good to make a commitment?  

Because a commitment forces me to exercise my freedom at its deepest level.  Small choices operate at the surface level of one’s consciousness.  Commitments operate in the depth of one’s consciousness and permeate the entire personality.

Our choices and our human acts determine us in our character.  In this way we are self-determining.  By my many and repeated choices I become the person I am.  If we do not make far-reaching and profound choices, then we remain as a shallow person. We become the persons of our many choices, and especially of our primary commitment.

Commitments force us to deepen our humanity.  Being a husband, father and family man forces a man to enter into many relationships and to deal with a wide variety of problems.  These demand adjustments, patience, and a spirit of generosity.  All this is character building.  As a relationship grows, so also do the friendship and the joys that follow.  If a person refuses to make a commitment, then he refuses to enter into the great mystery of life, which is full of unforeseen challenges, but also full of unexpected joys and successes.

When we face new problems, then we are forced to step out of our comfort zones and develop new dimensions of our personality.  We become richer, more mature, more fully developed human persons.

Some people refuse to make commitments because they do not want to close off all their options.  “What if someone/thing better comes along?”  This means, in effect, that you refuse to make the total personal gift of self here and now.  You refuse to respond to the real good that is present to you, waiting for your response.

It is good for parents to commit themselves to their sons and daughters.   A child needs unconditional love.  A child discovers his/her personal worth and dignity by this.  He feels loved, cherished just for the being the unique person he is, and that is the basis of his security, his self-esteem.

A growing boy or girl will make mistakes, will embarrass his parents, or simply will try their patience.  This is par for the course of human relations in a family.  But the young person learns from his/her mistakes and corrections.  The parents learn how to parent and also something about patience.  Real love is often self-sacrificial.  You suffer something when you do what is best for another.

Raising a young person to adulthood is a great achievement, both for the parents and for the young adult.  This takes at least eighteen years, and demands consistency and reliability.  We commit ourselves to long-term goals.  The commitment carries us through the many obstacles along the way.

It is good for spouses to commit themselves to each other.  The only proper response to a person is love.  Love is seen in one’s willingness (choice) to be totally devoted to another person.  To love means to regard the good (well-being) of the other as one’s own personal good.  In marriage, a man and a woman become spouses – two people, of complimentary sexes -- who are totally devoted to each other.  There is no greater form of friendship than true marriage.

When a couple “falls in love” and wants to share their lives together into the unknown future, then they make a choice to marry.  This is a lifetime commitment.  There is an emotional component to this, but the dominant components are full knowledge and full consent. 

Love is a choice.  Marriage is a decision, and this decision is renewed day after day.  The original glow of emotions will fade away, but the core of the marriage, that is their relationship based upon a choice, endures.  As God designed marriage, the relationship is meant to grow, deepen and ripen throughout the entire lifespan of the couple.  The relationship is to get better as the years progress.

When a man and a woman are committed to their relationship, then remarkable things happen.  They can sustain jolts and unforeseen crises because they are confident that each one is dedicated to their relationship, and to doing whatever it takes to sustain it. They confidently rely upon God and the support He promised them at their wedding vows. 

It takes a lifetime to fully complete the potential of a marriage.  What sustains the marriage is the commitment they make during the wedding vows, and then renew every day with little acts of tenderness and caring.

Why make a commitment?  

We were designed by God to make commitments.  They assist us in becoming fully developed, rich persons.  That is why we should make them.

[For more NFP Q&As, go to www.nfpoutreach.org and click on NPF Q&A.]

NEWS RELEASE:

Ethics and Public Policy Center

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: August 31, 2012

CONTACT: Mary Rice Hasson, Fellow in Catholic Studies, at mhasson@eppc.org

New Data Shows Catholic Women's Views on Contraception More Nuanced Than Reported. Twenty-seven Percent of Young, Weekly Church-goers Support Church Teaching on Contraception.

Washington, D.C. - A new report, "What Catholic Women Think About Faith, Conscience, and Contraception," co-authored by Mary Rice Hasson, a Fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center in Washington, D.C., and Michele M. Hill, offers surprising new data about the views of church-going Catholic women, ages 18-54, on faith, conscience, and contraception.

Highlights from the groundbreaking research include the finding that while only 13% of church-going Catholic women completely accept the Church's teachings on family planning, acceptance doubles (27%) among young women (18-34) who attend Mass weekly. It climbs still higher, to 37%, among women who both attend Mass weekly and have been to confession within the past year.

Further, a strong plurality of church-going women (44%) express a nuanced view of Church teachings on family planning, accepting "parts" but "not all" of those teachings. Many of these women, including 53% of weekly Mass-goers who accept "parts" but "not all" of Church teachings on family planning, say they are receptive to learning more about them. In particular, women express interest in learning about the health and relationship benefits of natural family planning as well as its effectiveness.

"The data show that the more plugged-in a woman is to the Church and the Sacraments, the more likely she is to accept Church teaching on family planning," says study co-author Mary Rice Hasson. "But our research also uncovered a hidden opportunity. There are many Catholic women out there who don't fully accept the Church's teaching but are open to learning more about it. Two-thirds of these women are already involved in parish life. In short, they are receptive and reachable. This is good news."

The report contains troubling news as well, however. Overall, 85% of Catholic women believe they can be "good Catholics" even if they do not completely accept the Church's teachings on sex and reproduction. Similarly, 53% of women who reject the Church's teaching on contraception claim a personal "right" to decide the issue. And up to one-third of Catholic women are simply mistaken about what the Church actually teaches about family planning. Hasson notes that the Church is missing a prime opportunity to communicate persuasively its teachings on family planning: although 72% of church-going Catholic women rely on the Sunday homily as their primary source of learning about Church teaching, just 15% of these women fully accept Church teaching on contraception.

Even so, notes report co-author Michele Hill, "Nine out of ten Catholic women say their faith is important to their daily lives. They want to be good Catholics. And they are a far more diverse group than they are given credit for. Many of them will be receptive to Church teaching, given the right message and the right approach. I can't encourage our priests enough to present the Church's beautiful teachings-gently, but with conviction."

Survey research, conducted by the polling company, inc./WomanTrend of Washington, D.C., is based on a nationwide online survey of 824 church-going Catholic women, ages 18-24. Margin of error is + 3.5%.

The Report, "What Catholic Women Think About Faith, Conscience, and Contraception," contains a full discussion of survey results and is available here http://www.eppc.org/docLib/20120828_Catholicwomenandcontraception.pdf

On the Ethics and Public Policy Center website.

http://www.eppc.org/docLib/20120828_Catholicwomenandcontraception.pdf

It is also available at whatcatholicwomenthink.com and www.womenfaithandculture.org

For further information, please contact Mary Rice Hasson by email: mhasson@eppc.org

IThis is the Year of Faith and of the New Evangelization. It is a time to reflect upon how to get important teachings back into the pulpit where everyone hears them. I suggest that this is a perfect year to bring God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family back into the pulpit. How?

HELPING PRIESTS BRING GOD’S PLAN FOR MARRIAGE AND SPOUSAL LOVE BACK TO THE PULPIT 

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

The people of God need Jesus, the Church, and the sacraments. The priest is the minister of God who makes the sacraments present to the faithful. This is his priestly/cultural role.

The priest is also a teacher of the ways of God. This is his prophetic role. God has a plan for all the basic components of human life like marriage, spousal love and family. This plan cannot be known if it is not taught. It cannot be lived if it is not known. Husbands and wives cannot be happy if they are not living their marriages and spousal love as God designed them to be.

This is the Year of Faith and the New Evangelization. It is a time to reflect upon how to get important teachings back into the pulpit where everyone hears them. I suggest that this is a perfect year to bring God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family back into the pulpit. How is this to be done?

I think it is safe to say that there is still a great fear among many clergy to deal with the topics of contraception and sterilization at the pulpit. Some priests think that their people are too weak to break the habit of contraception. Others fear that they will be criticized and rejected; collections will decrease. My experience is just the opposite. After Mass people thank me for proclaiming God’s truth. They often ask: “Why haven’t we heard this before?” Fr. Randy Moreau says that his collections actually go up.

Looking at the moral landscape around us should help us to see that something is seriously amiss. Half of our marriages today collapse. Lifetime commitments dissolve when couples run into difficulties in their relationship—difficulties that they are unwilling to face together. Divorce does not solve a problem. Divorcees simply carry their unresolved problems with them to the next marriage. Children desperately want to live with their natural parents, and want to experience an example of unconditional love in their parents’ marriage.

An 80% cohabitation rate today among young couples who approach the Church for a wedding tells us something about how young people perceive marriage. When they see so many failed marriages among their families and friends, they conclude that making a lifetime commitment to a spouse is impossible for frail humanity. So they are reluctant to even try – they just cohabitate.

You must wonder why people living in such affluent times as ours find it so difficult to live by the Commandments. Sex is treated so casually, as simply a form of recreation, to which there are no corresponding responsibilities. The popular culture promotes these attitudes relentlessly. We have all the potential for living good lives and doing much good, but something gets in the way and we are frozen in our tracks--paralyzed. 

I cannot imagine any priest who is happy with the reality of a 50% divorce rate and an 80% cohabitation rate. He must want what is best for his people. But will he see the connection of these statistics with an 85% contraception rate (which includes a 40% sterilization rate) among his couples? How can anyone make the total gift of self when they are contracepting? How can a marriage bond endure when it is being systematically distorted and deformed?

Unless we bring God’s plan for marriage and spousal love back into the pulpit, we cannot expect things to improve. A good shepherd is willing to lay down his life for the welfare of his flock. The Cure of Ars would have no reservations in doing this.

Preaching God’s plan for marriage and spousal love is completely doable. God’s plan can be preached anywhere, anytime. Fr. Dan McCaffrey and I are living proof of this. Each year we crisscross the country and offer NFP Parish Weekends. We preach all the homilies, and encourage couples to attend a short talk on NFP in the parish hall immediately after the Mass. Couples who live NFP give the talk. We encourage couples to listen to one of several CDs (that we make available to the parish) on related issues. And we always receive a good reception. We could do this in your parish.

The Year of Faith and the New Evangelization is a good time for every priest to learn how to preach God’s plan for these vitally important matters. It is so very doable. All the resources we need are readily available. The people want to know what God expects of them, and why His plan is so good, not just for them, but for everyone. We offer clergy conferences on how to preach these values.

If you want to help priests discover the richness of their priesthood, then encourage them to address the great issues of our times. If you want couples to have strong marriages and healthy, happy families, then promote the teaching of God’s plan for these matters. 

Fr. McCaffrey and I are available to give clergy conferences on the theme: How to Preach God’s Plan for Marriage and Spousal Love. We are also available for NFP Parish Weekends. Contact us at nfpoureach@att.net <mailto:nfpoureach@att.net> , or call us a 405-942-4084. We also provide Parish Missions on the Theology of the Body.

One final comment. Why is there such a shortage of priests today?

If you visit the website www.catholic-hierarchy.org, you can find statistics for every diocese in this country. In most dioceses there is a decreasing number of priests and an increasing number of Catholics.

It is estimated today that 19% of priests in the USA are foreign born. Thank God for the generosity of dioceses in Africa, India, the Philippines and Mexico in lending priests to this country.

But why is it that our families and parishes cannot provide an ample number of priestly and religious vocations to serve the needs of this country and elsewhere? The impoverished quality of our marriages, spousal love and family life has something to do with the answer.

Most Reverend Paul S. Coakley 

Archbishop of Oklahoma City

16 December 2012

When the controversy first erupted over the HHS mandate, I joined my fellow bishops in stating that our fundamental objection to this unjust government mandate is its disregard for the rights of conscience and religious liberty. It remains so.

Much of the press, many politicians and pundits attempted to distort the matter and shift the focus to the Catholic Church’s opposition to contraception. It was a shrewd tactic given the Church’s counter-cultural but consistent teaching on the illicitness of contraception is an easy target for ridicule in a very secular culture. Even amongCatholics our teaching is widely misunderstood, seldom taught clearly and in too many cases widely disregarded.  

With so much national attention focused on the mandate’s requirement forcing many Catholic institutions and employers to pay for insurance that includes morallyobjectionable services (such as contraception, sterilization and abortion-inducing drugs), this has become a teachable moment. The silver lining may be that the HHS controversy, still unresolved, offers an opportunity to state clearly the Catholic teaching on the sacred transmission of human life. I want to seize this timely opportunity.  

The year 1968 was a tumultuous year. It was a time of war, civil unrest and social ferment around the world. On July 25 of that year, Pope Paul VI published his prophetic encyclical Humanae Vitae (Of Human Life). Best known for upholding the Church’s constant moral teaching on the illicitness of contraception, Pope Paul VI reminded Catholics and all people of good will that something as sacred as the transmission of human life cannot be cut loose from its moorings without grave consequences for individuals, for marriages and families and for society. Human life and married love re sacred and ought to be revered and protected.  

The moorings which preserve due respect for the dignity of human sexual love are rooted in God’s plan for marriage. The conjugal act (sexual love between spouses) has a meaning which comes from the Creator. It is enshrined in our bodies which God created as male and female. As a sign of the covenant between spouses, every conjugal act ought to be both unitive (a true act of mutual self-giving) and procreative (open to the transmission of life).

In other words, every marital act has both a love-giving and life-giving dimension. To separate these two prevents the marital act from realizing its divinely intended purpose. Contraception does precisely that. To engage in sexual activity outside of marriage, or with members of the same sex, or for selfish purposes, or while interfering with the natural fruitfulness of the act by contraception is a rejection of God’s intended meaning and purpose. It is sinful.  

The widespread dissent and disregard of this teaching following the publication ofHumanae Vitae were symptomatic. The secular mentality says that human beings, rather than God, are the measure of all things. Right and wrong are determined on the basis of what is practical rather than what is true. This worldview values results over reason. This radical secular humanism has affected even many in the Church.

Many Catholics have sought to accommodate Church teaching to the wisdom of the world. This attempted compromise is a capitulation to error. It eliminates the necessary tension that will always exist between the spirit of the Gospel and the spirit of the world. The result is a “contraceptive mentality” which wrests control and dominion from God and places it in the hands of men and women. This mentality is anti-gospel and anti-faith. With this mentality the salt loses its savor — (Mt.5:13).  

Pope Paul VI was prophetic in recognizing the grave consequences that would follow if Catholics and others failed to consider where the acceptance of artificial birth control would lead society. A contraceptive mentality would lead inevitably, he said, “toward conjugal infidelity and the general lowering of morality.” It would be disastrous for marriage and families and would lead to loss of respect for women, “to the point of considering her as a mere instrument of selfish enjoyment, and no longer as his (man’s) respected and beloved companion.” He saw the danger of contraceptives being employed as a tool of government in imposing its will over its people. Who would say that these prophetic words have not been fully realized even beyond what was imagined in 1968?  

Many family problems and social ills can be linked to this widespread contraceptive mentality which separates sexual love from its proper context in the divine plan for marriage. Skyrocketing divorce, premarital sex, marital infidelity, homosexual activity, abortion and a host of other problems

follow in its wake. The loss of respect for God’s plan for marriage, for the dignity of human sexuality and the gift of life has contributed to the explosion of pornography asa multibillion-dollar industry. It prepared the way for society’s slide toward embracing euthanasia, embryonic stem cell experimentation, and finally human cloning. Today theSupreme Court of the United States is preparing to rule on whether marriage will even continue to be recognized and protected as a unique union between one man and onewoman.  

However unpopular it may be in some quarters, and admittedly difficult, the Church cannot change its teaching on the immorality of artificial contraception. The Churchdoes not create the moral law, but is only its guardian and interpreter. Ultimately, contraception is morally unacceptable because it is contrary to the true good of the human person and marriage as inscribed in our human nature.  

Catholics who strive to live according to the Church’s teaching find divine assistance through recourse to the sacraments, especially the Sacrament of Penance and theEucharist. We draw strength from God’s grace through prayer and the cultivation of virtue, particularly the virtue of chastity.  

A priceless gift is also available through the scientifically proven methods of Natural Family Planning.  NFP is a benefit to married couples because they can use it to help them either to achieve or to avoid pregnancy. (Even Planned Parenthood acknowledges that when used correctly, NFP is 95 to 99.6 percent effective in avoiding pregnancy.)

Natural Family Planning methods are healthy, reliable, teachable and inexpensive means of family planning which enable couples to cooperate with God and one another in spacing pregnancies in a way which actually strengthens their relationship. It involves shared decision-making and shared responsibility. It fosters communication and self-discipline. Couples who use NFP regularly seldom divorce. It builds rather than undermines marriages! Contrast these fruits to the harm Pope Paul foresaw coming in the wake of widespread acceptance of contraception. So what’s wrong withcontraception? A tree is judged by its fruits.

Publisher Ray Dyer

Editor Cara Koenig

Photographer/Special Projects Brianna Joyce

Office Staff

Sooner Catholic Newspaper

7501 Northwest Expressway

Oklahoma City, OK 73132

(405) 721-1810 Fax:(405) 721-5210

e-mail: rdyer@archokc.org

Mailing Address: P.O.Box 32180 Oklahoma City, OK 73123

Visit us online through the Archdiocesan Web Page at www.archokc.org

The Sooner Catholic (USPS 066-910) is published biweekly except for once in July and twice in December by the Archdiocese of Oklahoma City.

The newspaper is not responsible for unsolicited material.

Copyright © 2012 Sooner Catholic

Subscription rate:$20 per year for all who are not members of the Archdiocese of Oklahoma City.

Periodical postage paid at Oklahoma City, OK 73125.

Volume 34, Number 24

Dear Fr. Habiger,

I wanted to let you know that Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted, Diocese of Phoenix, has written a letter to all US Bishops which included a copy of our new NFP video.

In it he urges his fellow bishops to use this critical teaching moment in our country’s history to bring a sharp focus in  highlighting Catholic teachings on human sexuality. 

He lets them know about our diocese’ Three Year Marriage Initiative which went into effect on Jan 1, 2010, mandating a full NFP course for all couples preparing for marriage in our diocese and the strategic plan that was used to put it into effect. The letter includes the link to a beautiful new webpage, Find Us Ready, Lord <http://www.diocesephoenix.org/find-us-ready.php> , which was designed to be a digital version of Bishop Olmsted’s letter and includes the strategic plan and supporting resources.  

Our department has received many phone calls from other dioceses asking us to share resources, provide information on how we made the changes, and what all our steps were. Being able to point them to all available resources will save them time and be something to which they can refer as they move towards implementing more robust NFP education in their own diocese. 

Bishop Olmsted is leading US Bishops in this area and we applaud all his efforts to share our diocese’  blessings with other dioceses. Feel free to share this link widely. 

http://www.diocesephoenix.org/find-us-ready.php

In His Service,

Cindy Leonard

Coordinator

Office of Natural Family Planning

Diocese of Phoenix

400 E. Monroe St.

Phoenix, AZ 85004

602-354-2123

cleonard@diocesephoenix.org

nfp_admin@diocesephoenix.org

www.phxnfp.org

"The body itself speaks, ... by means of its masculinity and femininity. It speaks in the mysterious language of the personal gift...the body speaks the truth through fidelity and conjugal love.” ( JPII)

2011 Fall Clergy Conference: “God’s Plan for Marriage”

October 17-20, 2011

Spiritual Life Center

Monday, October 17, 2011

10:00 a.m.           Registration begins at the Spiritual Life Center (Atrium)

11:15 a.m. – 4:30 p.m.   

“The Revised Roman Missal: Praying, Preaching and Singing for God’s Glory and Our Holiness” (Note:  This workshop is separate from the 2011 Clergy Conference).

4:45 p.m.             Break

5:00 p.m.             Evening Prayer

5:30 p.m.             Dinner

6:30 p.m.             Clergy Conference Begins Session One with Fr. Matthew Habiger, OSB

                                                “Introduction to the Theology of the Body”

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

7:00 a.m. – 10:00 a.m.    Health Screenings and Flu Shots at scheduled times

8:00 a.m.              Breakfast

8:45 a.m.              Morning Prayer

9:15 a.m.              Session Two with Fr. Dan McCaffrey and Fr. Matthew Habiger, OSB

                                                “Various Themes from the Theology of the Body”

11:15 a.m.           Mass

12:00 p.m.           Lunch

3:00 p.m.             Session Three with Dr. Ron Ferris

                                                “Modern Medicine Can Handle Any Problem Encountered by NFP”

4:30 p.m.             TOGETHER Vision update

5:30 p.m.             Social

6:00 p.m.             Jubilarian Banquet

(Evening free for the priests after the banquet.  Fr. McCaffrey will be presenting to lay leaders who are involved in marriage preparation, enrichment and healing in the Main Assembly from 7:00 – 8:30 p.m.)

Wednesday, October 19, 2011

8:00 a.m.            Breakfast

8:45 a.m.              Morning Prayer

9:15 a.m.              Session Four with Fr. Matthew Habiger, OSB

                                                “How to Preach God’s Plan for Marriage”

11:15 a.m.           Mass    

12:00 p.m.           Lunch

                                Afternoon Free for Priestly Fraternity and Socializing

5:00 p.m.             Evening Prayer

5:30 p.m.             Dinner

6:30 p.m.             Session Six with Fr. Dan McCaffrey

                                                “Blueprint for an NFP Focused Parish”

Thursday, October 20, 2011

8:00 a.m.              Breakfast

8:45 a.m.              Morning Prayer

9:15 a.m.              Session Seven with Fr. Dan McCaffrey and Fr. Matthew Habiger, OSB    

“Sample Homilies”

11:15 a.m.           Mass

12:00 p.m.           Lunch and Dismissal

Time To Take Off The Blinders 

by Dr. John Littell, M.D. BOMA Instructor

To the Editor:

I am a family physician, who has provided care to women and their families, to include obstetrics and gynecology, for more than 20 years. Throughout my career, and after 23 years of marriage and four daughters, I have acquired the utmost respect for women, and have worked to protect the right of each woman, including my many patients as well as my wife and daughters, to make informed decisions about her body.

In light of the recent Health and Human Services mandate requiring employers to provide contraceptive coverage and the Susan B Komen foundations decision to continue to fund Planned Parenthood, many in the media especially have been expressing their outrage at any person (Rick Santorum) or institution (the Catholic Church) that would dare object to universal access to contraceptive coverage.

Though Catholic, I did not always observe the teachings of the Catholic Church in my practice, particularly as related to women’s health care. As a biology teacher, I introduced a curriculum on contraception in a Catholic High School in New York in 1982. I taught other physicians how to prescribe the “ideal” oral contraceptive for each woman. Although my wife and I have successfully used and taught others natural methods of family planning (NFP), I was not ready to withhold oral contraceptive from my patients. However, as I began to introduce the option of NFP to women, I heard more and more women expressing their dissatisfaction with the side effects of artificial methods and their desire for a natural option for birth control.

At a women’s health conference in 2003, I asked the OB/Gyn from Columbia University why he did not address the fact that use of oral contraceptives increases the risk of cervical cancer, and he answered, “Let’s keep that to ourselves” which he then qualified by briefly reviewing the many “health benefits” of oral contraceptives – first of which, was of course, pregnancy prevention.

Therein lies the dirtly little secret that has pervaded the field of women’s health care for more than 50 years that we physicians who provide care for women, working under the guidance of The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Centers for Disease Control must do all we can to ensure that women of reproductive age embrace contraception regardless of the potentially dangerous side effects.

We present to women these options. Either get on the pill (or the shot, the patch , the IUD) or face the “disease” known as pregnancy and children. We tell women only of the many supposed “health benefits” of the pill while ignoring and/or covering up the many known increased risks of cancer (cervical and breast) and vascular disease (blood clots, stroke and heart disease) associated with long-term use of artificial contraceptives (not to mention he abortifacient action of several of these methods).

The Catholic Church has seemingly stood alone in its undaunted defense of the dignity of the individual person. While the government, the CDC and even ACOG have chosen to take paternalistic, utilitarian approaches to the care of women and their bodies, the church has actually defended the right of women to make their own informed decisions about their reproductive health.

 While Planned Parenthood (funded in part by the government and also by Susan B. Koman foundation) continues on a daily basis to hide the facts about contraceptives from their customers, the church has tried to encourage women of all ages to try to live a life that is in keeping with the Natural Law, by teaching a “theology of the body” and not a theology that places the immediate sexual gratification of men ahead of the woman’s wellbeing. 

The Catholic Church asks women the question: are you truly willing to put your body at risk just so your male partner can find sexual pleasure? And the church asks married couples to consider a method of family planning that increases communication about sex and develops sexual self-control in both partners.

In 1968 in the face of growing acceptance of artificial contraception, one courageous, prescient man wrote the following: “it is also to be feared that the man, growing used to the employment of anticonceptive practices, may finally lose respect for the woman and, no longer caring for her physical and psychological equilibrium, may come to the point of considering her as a mere instrument of selfish enjoyment, and no longer as his respected and beloved companion.” These are the words of Pope Paul VI.

I daresay we in our great nation have come to see this loss of respect for women become a reality. I certainly see it each day in my practice of family medicine and women’s health care, not to mention the media.  And I truly pray that our society will not fall prey to those who continue to embrace a culture of death for the sake of “the greater good.”

If is time for all of us who truly care for women to take off our blinders and speak the truth to all who will listen.  It is time, we can all agree, to begin to respect all women, allow all women to learn all the facts about all methods of birth control, so as to make truly informed decisions about their own bodies, and thereby ensure the protection of reproductive freedom – as freedom, which the government try as it might, cannot take away.

Dr. John Littell, M.D., Family Practice, Kissimmee, FL

To NFP or not to NFP? That is the question for married couples. 

David Foppe

My wife and I have been promoting Natural Family Planning (NFP) for more than eight years through the Couple to Couple League. Before God knit us in the womb, He planned for us to promote NFP. In living out His plan, I have learned to segue many a conversation to the goodness of NFP. It is this goodness that married couples experience when they choose to use NFP. However, it is just a small foretaste of the ultimate goodness that awaits us in heaven.

You now know how my wife and I have answered the question that entitles this article. However, this is not an article contrasting NFP to the intrinsic evil of contraception. I have known many couples who fervently adhere to the Church's teachings on sexuality. Usually within two minutes, they know I am a promoter of NFP. Sometimes I would get a reply catching me off-guard, such as: "I know the pope teaches that is OK, but we trust in God's providence," or "we have chosen the greater of the two goods." Let me first say that I am grateful and appreciate the candor in which these persons, whom I greatly admire, have expressed their resolve to "seek first the kingdom of God."

However, these comments illustrate misconceptions about NFP made not only by our culture but also by our own brothers and sisters in Christ.

NFP is not outside God's providence. In his encyclical "Humanae Vitae," Pope Paul VI states: "Married persons are the free and responsible collaborators of God the Creator" for the most serious duty of transmitting human life. NFP wedges opportunities in this very busy culture we live in to collaborate with God the Creator on the specific plan He has for each married couple.

NFP encourages these opportunities because ingrained in the practice of NFP is a period of abstinence either during the woman's fertile or infertile phase of her ovulation cycle. It goes unsaid that this abstinence comes about by conditioning the will over what is instinctual. As Dr. Janet E. Smith says, this abstinence steers the couple to ask the questions: "Why are we or why are we not having babies?" and "Is this what God wants of us?"

I once had a priest share with me his reservations about promoting NFP: "I want married couples to have large families. It is not good for the Church that so many married couples are having small families by using contraceptives or NFP." I reassured him that one of the beauties of NFP is that if a couple is not wanting children for selfish reasons they are reminded of those reasons once a month and the NFP encourage the couple to listen to the voice of God within themselves.

Just as fasting from food brings about spiritual and physical fruits, the periodic fasting of the martial act also brings about spiritual and physical fruits. The discipline developed from periodic abstinence allows the spouse to love the other in a deeper and more beautiful way. Anyone can run the violin bow along the strings, but it takes discipline and practice to create the beautiful sounds for which the violin was created. The other spouse who is loved through this formed discipline is not the only beneficiary. The NFP couple becomes better conditioned to choose the good of their neighbor over worldly pleasures. In other words, NFP makes the couple better Christians, and the data supports this. Not only do studies show NFP couples to have less than a 1-percent divorce rate, but NFP couples are more likely to be better stewards in their parish.

Whether married couples choose to NFP or not NFP, let us all be a beacon of light to this misguided culture of relativism that makes contraception a mandated right towards "women's health."

David Foppe is a member of Our Lady of Grace Church in Greensboro, N.C. 16 August 2012 

For more information, go to: http://catholicnewsherald.com/50-news/roknewspager-viewpoints/2208-to-nfp-or-not-to-nfp-that-is-the-question-for-married-couples

4th Sunday of Easter 2013

Acts 13: 43-52 Ps 100 Rev 7:14-17  Jn 10:27-30

St. Benedict’s Parish, Atchison 20 April 2012

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

ARE WE CATHOLIC AMERICANS OR AMERICAN CATHOLICS?

We want to be in the flock that hears the voice of Jesus, and then follows him.  We place our trust in him because he is God, and he has demonstrated his unconditional love for us by his Paschal Mystery.

We trust in God in a way we would never trust a human being.  Human creatures are good, but flawed and prone to make mistakes.  God transcends all human weaknesses.

Today there is a great emphasis upon the New Evangelization.  God wants His person and His message to be brought to every man, woman and child. And God chooses to work through many human instruments, like Paul and Barnabas, like you and me.

There is a real problem with Evangelizing that we must deal with.  Russell Shaw explains this in his book, American Church: the Remarkable Rise, Meteoric Fall and the Uncertain Future of Catholicism in America.  The problem is this.  We are both Catholics and Americans.  But can we be both fully Catholic and fully American? Is it possible to remain faithful to the person and teachings of Jesus, as found in the Roman Catholic Church, and still feel comfortable in our attempt to accommodate ourselves completely to the dominant American culture?

We are to carry our Faith everywhere, and bring it to bear upon everything that we do.  This means we are to engage the American culture with the values of the Gospel.  We are not to allow ourselves to be absorbed into the dominant culture, at the risk of watering down our moral principles and deeply cherished beliefs.  Our loyalties belong first to God, and only secondly to any human organization. We are Catholic Americans, not American Catholics.

How has that worked out in the recent past? Since the Second World War there has been a steady erosion of loyalty to the values and teachings of the Church. At the same time, many Catholics have allowed the dominant secular American culture to dominate their values and decisions.

Some examples illustrate this.  We know that Jesus strongly condemns divorce. But Catholics today imitate the American culture with a 50% divorce rate. We know that the Church condemns contraception and sterilization as completely contrary to God’s plan for spousal love. Yet Catholics imitate the secular culture with an 85% rate of contraception and a 40% rate of sterilization.  In our country there are fewer and fewer marriages. That is reflected in the 63% drop in numbers of Catholic marriages over the past 40 years.  

God condemns abortion as a horrible crime, but many Catholics vote for pro-abortion candidates, as though this were an insignificant matter.  The US government is now crossing the line drawn by the 1st Amendment, dealing with the free exercise of religion.  Think of the recent efforts to force religious organizations (Catholic hospitals, colleges, and charitable organizations) and private businesses to comply with the HHS mandate, compelling them to offer free contraception, sterilization and abortifacient pills to all their employees.  

Brian Benestad, in his book Church, State and Society, summarizes some of the subtle, but real, deviations that liberal democracy has injected into American Catholics. He says:  “In sum, liberalism tends to promote individualism, the separation of rights from duties, the loosening of commitments in families and at work, undue sympathy for the principle of autonomy and the ‘culture of death,’ more deference to reigning opinionsthan to Church teaching authority, the reception of revealed religion as opinion, and understanding morality more in terms of rights and values than virtues” (p. 435).

Francis Cardinal George, in his book The Difference God Makes: a Catholic Vision of Faith, Communion and Culture, sums up the overall situation (p. 181): “We have to recognize what we are up against.  The world is both friendly and unfriendly, both holy and demonic.  The world will welcome some of our criticisms and will do everything it can to contest others.  When we hear the demands of the world, which we have to hear, lest we fail to attend to the signs of the times, the great missionary challenge then is to discern what the Church must adapt to and what is incompatible with the faith.”

Clearly, loyal Catholics who wish to be part of the flock that hears the voice of Jesus, its only pastor, must be able to discern between what is true and authentic, and what is false and counterfeit in the dominant secular American culture.  Loyal Catholics, like the loyal flock, must strive to create its own subculture where it can live, and defend, a high Catholic identity.

Catholic Americans must take a fresh, creative look at the role of the laity.  The greatest failure of the post Vatican II Church, Cardinal George says, has been a failure “to call forth and form a laity engaged in the world politically, economically, culturally and socially, on faith’s terms rather than on the world’s terms.  If perhaps we paid less attention to various Church ministries, and more to its mission or purpose, then we might recapture the sense of what should be genuinely new as a result of the Council” (George, Difference, 180).

[[Shortly before the Conclave that elected Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio the new Pope, the then Cardinal Bergoglio gave a speech on Evangelizing Implies Apostolic Zeal.  He said: “Evangelizing pre-supposes a desire in the Church to come out of herself.  The Church is called to come out of herself and go to the peripheries, not only geographically, but also to the existential peripheries: the mystery of sin, of pain, of injustice, or ignorance and indifference to religion, of intellectual currents, and of all misery. “Put simply, there are two images of the Church: the Church which evangelizes and comes out of herself … and the worldly Church, living within herself, of herself, for herself.  This should shed light on the possible changes and reforms which must be done for the salvation of souls.”]]

Brothers and Sisters, Jesus is our Pastor, and we are his flock.  The flock knows the voice of the Pastor and they follow him.  Jesus leads his flock to eternal life. He and the Father will protect the flock, but this does not mean that it will be spared trials and difficulties.  In the first reading today, from the Apocalypse, there was a large crowd who experienced a great tribulation.  They washed their cloaks in the blood of the Lamb, and the Lamb of God (Jesus) will lead them to the sources of living water.  We all want to be in that crowd of witnesses.

We need to remind ourselves that in this world we must deal with forces of wickedness and evil.  There are forces at work in this world that are determined to do us harm and injury.  There are not only demonic forces, but also wicked people who take delight in harming others (think of modern day terrorists).

It is something like our physical bodies. We all want good health, yet we know that there are many factors working against our bodies’ good health. Our bodies have an immunity system, and white corpuscles to fight off harmful bacteria and viruses.  We avoid certain rich foods and drinks because of what they do to our circulatory system.  We resist some comforts and laziness, because we know we must regularly use all our muscles and exercise all our joints if our bodies are to stay agile and healthy.  If we don’t do these things, then our bodies get flabby, our joints get stiff, and our arteries become sclerotic.  And think of how we protect ourselves against smoking, even secondary smoke.

It is the same way with our Faith, which is the most precious gift we have.  We are to exercise and protect our Faith, our relationship with God.  We are to resolutely resist anything that would do damage to our Faith, as we resist evil temptations.  Using the values of our Faith, we are to influence the world for the good.  We overcome evil with goodness.  We strenuously resist evil forces from undermining our Faith.  If a person does not know that there are people out there who want to harm, lead astray, and even destroy him, then he is in double jeopardy.  

We are citizens of two worlds, of this world for 70-80 years, and then we must die.  We are citizens of another world where we have an invitation to live forever, sharing in the intimate love and life of God.  Jesus is our guide.  We are his followers.  He teaches us the truth, and gives us the strength we need to live according to the truth. In this world we have freewill and must make many choices.  May we make good choices, well-informed choices, always advancing the good, while exposing and resisting the evil.

We are Catholics because we want to honor our God.  We are Americans and we want to honor our country.  The best way to be good American citizens is by being strong Catholics, by bringing our Catholic values and principles into the public square, to give guidance to the life of the community and of the nation.  This is primarily the task of the Catholic laity, the 99.9% of the Church.   We are Catholic Americans, notAmerican Catholics.

A twenty minute audio-visual introduction to NFP is now available online, provided by the Billings Ovulation Method. Go to our website video library here: www.nfpoutreach.org/library/video-library.htm . It's the first item there.

This is a great service to couples who are beginning to explore the various natural methods. It helps pastors to grasp the basic methodology of one of the available methods. It explains how any woman can become aware of the naturally occurring signs and symptoms that a woman’s body provides, that tell her when her fertility begins and ends each cycle. 

The Billings Method is an extremely effective and a morally good means of spacing pregnancies (99.5+% for postponing pregnancies when the four simple rules are correctly used). It is completely natural, and provides an understanding of a woman’s fertility. It fosters collaboration and a shared responsibility. It can be used to overcome infertility. It is also a means of monitoring gynecologic health. Other advantages, particular to the Billings Method include:

• Easy to Learn
• Accurate, scientific, simple method of regulating fertility
• Simple to Use
• No Drugs or Devices
• No Side Effects
• Reliable
• Morally Acceptable to All Cultures
• Increases knowledge, understanding and respect for fertility
• Develops couple communication and relationships

We encourage you to share this information with your circle of contacts and friends.

Fr. Matthew Habiger OSB

Natural Family Planning Outreach

3300 NW 56th Street, Suite 200

Oklahoma City, OK 73112-4401

Director: Rev. Daniel McCaffrey, S.T.D.

Assistant Director: Rev. Matthew Habiger, O.S.B., Ph.D.

Associates: Deacon Rick & Jenny Condon

(405) 942-4084

(888) 637-6383 

Fax (405) 609-1090

Ranking high among the most important decisions a couple will make during their married life, is the number of their children.  Marriage and family go together.  If a child has not arrived after two years of marriage, the couple begins to feel that something is missing in their relationship. 

Infertility problems can cause great duress.  The couple desperately wants to enjoy the blessing of their own children, but they cannot.  Today about 20% of young couples experience some form of infertility.  Natural Family Planning (NFP) is a great help in overcoming infertility in a morally good, and effective, way.

Many people think that this decision is left entirely to the discretion, or whims, of the couple.  A short reflection upon this will indicate that this is not true.  Yes, ultimately only the couple can decide upon the size of their family.  But, No, they are not absolutely autonomous in making these decisions. By far, the most important treasures for a husband and wife are their gift to each other, and the gift of their children.  Everything else, e.g., money, property, status, luxury items, etc., completely pale in significance to those very special persons, called children, the progeny of your own flesh and blood.

As a monk and priest, the good Lord has asked me to remain celibate.  The celibate is called to be single hearted in his/her focused devotion to the Lord, and in the service of His people.  But I assure you, the celibate person has the same longings as anyone else for the intimacy of marriage, and for the joy of holding and hugging his/her own children. 

In other words, everyone instinctively recognizes the goodness of marriage, spousal love and family.  Part of a priest or religious’ role is to strengthen marriages and to foster healthy, happy families.  In my work with NFP Outreach, I am constantly reminded of this.  We do this by teaching God’s plan for marriage, spousal love and family, and helping people see the beauty of that plan.

A child is both a gift and a challenge.  A person is the most complex thing that God created.  We can enter into relationships only with other persons, our peers, who share the same God-given human dignity.  Any relationship will bring challenges with it.  When a couple chooses to have a baby, they are making an 18-20 year commitment to that person.  That is how long it takes to bring a child to self-sustaining maturity.  This is a huge commitment!  But it is also very rewarding. 

Simply reflect upon the delight that each of us has experienced from the constant and devoted care that our parents gave us as we were growing up, and when our personalities were taking on their definitive contours.  Each of us can recall many examples of times when we presented real challenges to our parents’ patience, understanding and ingenuity. 

We were constantly changing, experimenting with new ideas, forming new relationships – all of which required some monitoring and guidance from our parents. We went through different moods; we defied authority and resisted well-deserved criticism; we gave precedence to numero uno.  All of this gives proof to the doctrine of Original Sin.  Our parents were always there to guide us through these perilous moments.  The older we became, the more complex and challenging our difficult moments were for our parents.

Yes, bringing a son or daughter to the level of maturity that equips him to deal with the normal perplexities of life is a great accomplishment.  It required a lot of sweat, tears, worry and determination on the part of our parents, all of which was motivated by love.  In our chastened opinion, we think that we deserved all this nurture from our parents.  And, in truth, this is part of the joy of parenting.  Real love is always self- sacrificial.  That means that love can be very demanding at times.

Mothers tell you that they never stop worrying about their children, no matter how old they are.  That is what mothers do, because that is the way God designed them. Fathers, in their own way, are also always concerned about the welfare of their children.  Grandparents love their grandchildren, because in them they see a continuation of the community of love and life they fist formed in their marriage.  It is very likely that young parents only begin to appreciate all that their parents did for them as children, when they begin to nurture and parent their own children.  Some insights come late in life.

Why should a young couple be open to having a large family?  God has a plan for all the important mattes in our lives.  He knows exactly how many children He wishes to send to a given couple.  He already knows the names of these children.  He knows that the greatest gift He can bestow upon a couple is the gift of the child.  Couples with large families understand this. God’s plan for marriage is that a man and woman fall in love, and then commit themselves to sharing their lives together into the unknown future. 

Marriage is an intimate communion of love and life.  Spousal love, as God designed it, is always open to the goodness of love and to the goodness of life.  These two dimensions are part of every spousal act.  Because God designed spousal love this way, these two dimensions are inseparable.  “What God has united, let no man take apart.”  All love is life giving. It is never intentionally made sterile.  All marital love is modeled upon God’s love within the Trinitarian communion of divine persons.  And God’s love is always life giving.  It is never sterile.

The happiest couples are those who are consciously open to doing the will of God in their marriages. That is why NFP couples have such a small divorce rate.  They know God’s plan for them, and they consciously choose to direct their lives according to that plan. True, real life brings its tensions and crosses. But these inescapable realities prepare the couple for attaining deeper levels of their relationship in love and devotion. When you are open to life, you become a very generous person. Your horizons are expanded beyond your wildest expectations.  Your capacity to give and receive love exceeds anything you thought possible.

We need to keep in mind that there are some very generous people at heart, who carry heavy burdens.  They have grave reasons for postponing another pregnancy.  Perhaps they are financially strapped, or have health problems, and are just doing the best they can in their present circumstances.  NFP is there precisely to help people with just reasons.  For such a couple, having another child at this point in time is NOT God's will for them, and they should wait until they are better prepared to take on additional responsibilities.  They cooperate with God’s will for them, and use good prudential judgment.

There are some couples whose infertility cannot be changed.  The Catechism teaches: “The Gospel shows that physical sterility is not an absolute evil.  Spouses who still suffer from infertility after exhausting legitimate medical procedures should unite themselves with the Lord’s Cross, the source of all spiritual fecundity.  They can give expression to their generosity by adopting abandoned children or performing demanding services for others” (CCC 2379).

Too many couples today take their criteria for the size of their family from the social propriety of the present moment.  But does this make sense?  Major decision in your life should not be based on popular trends, today’s popular talk shows, the Green People, cultural élites who shape public opinion, population myths and those skeptics who think that God is incapable of providing for the material needs of all His people.  I am baffled to find Catholics who are more influenced by secular trends on this issue, than by their Faith and their relationship with God.

Perhaps couples don’t have much of a relationship with God.  That can be rectified.  Begin associating with couples who have found God and who delight in discovering His will for them and their marriage.  Ask them how they do this.  Begin to use all the helps and graces God has given us by means of His Church.  Get to know the Author of all life, the Source of all love, the Designer of marriage, spousal love and family, and the Creator of all that exists.  Get into a relationship with God.  He has been waiting for us a long time.

Perhaps couples do not know their Faith.  That can be corrected.  Read the Catechism of the Catholic Church.  Read the 16 documents of Vatican II, especially The Church in the Modern World, sections 48-51.  Read Paul VI’s Humanae Vitae and John Paul II’sThe Role of the Christian Family in the Modern World, and his Letter to Families.

If children are a blessing from God, then it makes sense that we should maximize these blessings.  Surveys show that couples using NFP usually have more sex, and enjoy it more, than couples who contracept.  They also have more to show for their conjugal life.  The first Commandment in the Bible is “Increase and multiply!”

On a purely natural plane, small and child-deprived families cause many of our social problems today.  The shortage of young workers and taxpayers now imperils social security and pension plans.  Look at Japan, Russia, China and Western Europe.  Families are the greatest consumers.  If you want an economy to thrive, then don’t discourage your best customers and greatest consumers.  A vibrant nation requires the energy and talents of its youth. 

Do not support groups that discourage parents from having their families, and guide them to shift their focus to their own comfort and luxury.  A vibrant Catholic community needs many moral guides and spiritual leaders, e.g., priests and religious.  These invariably come from generous families who are strong in the Faith. The present crisis in priestly and religious vocations is directly related to child-deprived families, contraception and sterilization.  

How many children should you have?  This is a very important question.  It deserves your best and sustained thinking.  Before you close the door to accepting a new life into your family -- your intimate communion of love and life -- ask God what He wants for you, for your marriage and family.  If you ask, He will tell you. Remember, your children will exist forever.

Many men with large families have told me, “I can’t imagine my life without all my children.”  Would it not be a great tragedy if a couple were to come to the end of their lives, and wonder what it could have been if they had been more generous with their God and His plan for them? 

How many children? The choice is yours.  Make it a good, and generous, choice.

The reach for women’s votes makes a linkage of women’ health care with contraception and abortion. Really? How can any one say that women’s health depends upon easy access to contraception, sterilization and abortion?

These methods of birth control facilitate a life style of convenience and pleasure, in contrast to the values of commitment and treasuring the gift of human life. But are they health care?

The opposite of health is sickness. Is a healthy fertility now a disease? Tell that to an infertile woman, or couple, who anxiously want to have a baby. Contraception is the only interference that medicine makes with a perfectly normal human organ.

Good health means that our bodies function the way they were designed. This means that a male is always fertile after passing through puberty. For a woman it means 40 some yeas of fertility after achieving puberty, with cycles of fertility and infertility. It is healthy and natural to be fertile. It is unhealthy and unnatural to be sterilized and infertile.

A healthy body demands good care: regular exercise, good diet and sufficient sleep. All this requires some self-discipline and understanding how our bodies function.

Since our sexual organs enable us to pass life on to the next generation, we need to respect them and realize that sex and babies go together. If we dismiss this obvious connection, then we should not express surprise with the results: 45% of babies now born to single moms without the benefit of a supporting husband; increasing levels of uncommitted, recreational sex (promiscuity) with increased STDs.

We should see the connection between contraception and a devastating 50% divorce rate. Contraception always carries with it a holding back, reservations, and a refusal to make the total personal gift of self to one’s spouse.

We should see the obvious (yet often denied) connection between contraception and abortion. If there is no high regard for the results of sex, which is a new human life, which embodies a person, then abortion is simply used as a backup for failed contraception. We talk about greater inclusion within the safety net of our concern for others. Why then do we attempt to exclude our youngest, and most vulnerable, members from that safety net of our compassion?

Contraception is already easily available to anyone who wants it. Why should the government force people to pay for it in insurance policies when this violates their values in conscience? Why does a law student, like Sandra Flukes, who will be earning a 6-digit salary, demand to have free contraception in her insurance coverage?

Let us be transparent and accountable here. The loudest proponents of contraception, sterilization and abortion are the providers of these products, and who profit from them.

If we want to return to strong marriages, happy families, and healthy sex, then we will rediscover the basics of good relationships and good health. Don’t women want a strong marriage, healthy families, respect and commitment? You won’t find it by equating women’s health care with contraception.

Several people recently have asked me what is so wrong with in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF and ET).  Couples with infertility problems naturally want to have children.  We have the technology to create human life in a laboratory (combining human sperm and ovum in a Petri dish) and then to transfer the embryo into the woman’s uterus.  “So why not use it?” they ask. 

This question forces us to probe more deeply into God’s plan for creating a new, and unrepeatable, human person.  Science and technology can perform various procedures, but they have no sense of value or morality.  We have the hydrogen bomb.  But should we ever unleash its horrendously destructive power? 

We see this moral confusion in hospitals where, in the same complex of buildings, there is a nursery to care for newborns, an abortuary where babies are mercilessly killed, and labs using artificial means to overcome infertility.  The operative principle here is “The customer is always right.  Give them whatever they can pay for.”  The prevailing attitude today is that if we can do something, then we have a compelling right to do it. 

There are various layers to the answer.  We begin with several more easily understood reasons why IVF and ET are totally immoral.  We are speaking here of homologousartificial conception (involving only a husband and wife) and not heterologousconception (involving a third party sperm or egg donor). 

Sperm is usually procured by an act of masturbation.  This could be surmounted by the retrieval of sperm from a perforated condom, after a normal marital act. 

The woman is hyper ovulated.  Drugs stimulate her ovaries to produce ten, or more, ova.  Then many embryos are formed by a technician, who combines sperm with ovum in a Petri dish.  Surplus human embryos are stored in a refrigerated tank, in case the first attempt to implant embryos in the woman’s uterus fails.  If the frozen embryos are not wanted, then eventually they are destroyed. 

In the USA today there are over 400,000 frozen human embryos in storage tanks.  Each of these embryos is a human person at his or her earliest stage of bodily life.  This is an example of technology run amok.  Today many of these human embryos are used as Guiney pigs for stem cells, or various experiments.

Usually several embryos are placed in a woman’s uterus, just in case some do not implant successfully in her endometrium, the lining of her womb.  Sometimes all the embryos implant and thrive.  Then the question arises whether to carry all of them to term.  If the decision is “No,” then there is a search and destroy mission to eliminate the unwanted human embryos.  There is no greater example of reducing a human life to a mere commodity than this. 

A human embryonic person has been reduced to a mere object, over which his or her parents and medical technicians claim to have total control.  This ignores the huge difference between an animal and a human person.  We can validly do things to animals (such as animal husbandry) that we should never do to a person, endowed with a God-given human dignity.  Yes, we are members of the animal kingdom, but we are animals of a very special kind.  Animals die and that is the end of the story.  Every human person has an immortal destiny, called by God to share in His own interpersonal communion of love, life, beauty, truth and goodness.  An unborn baby, as well as a human embryo, has the same God-given human dignity as you or I.

 Widespread abortion has calloused the general public’s attitude towards the unborn baby.  This same callousness now extends to the process of conception.  People claim the “right” to destroy, or manufacture, human life.  These alleged “rights” are groundless, and are destroying the fabric of a society where people instinctively treasure the gift of human life.

 Now we move into more complex and profound reasons for the immorality of IVF and ET.  They require some reflection and analysis.  The best articulation of these reasons is given in the Vatican document DONUM VITAE.  The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued this document in 1987 as the “Instruction on Respect for Human Life in Its Origin and on the Dignity of Procreation.”  Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was the Prefect of the Congregation at that time. 

Space does not allow for a full treatment of these deeper reasons.  You can GOOGLE the document and read it in its entirety.  I shall simplify the moral argument.  God designed our human nature, as bodied persons, male and female, sexual and fertile.  We are a composite of a spiritual soul and a physical body.  He has a plan for marriage, for spousal love and for the family. 

Every marital act is to be open to the goodness of love (the unitive dimension) and to the goodness of life (the procreative aspect).   Only in the context of an act of spousal love is a new human person to be conceived.  A child has a right to be conceived by an act of love between his/her mother and father, who will then provide a loving home for the rearing of that child.  This alone does justice to all the various goods and values involved in the procreation of a new human person.

Here is one short quotation.  “… The procreation of a person must be the fruit and the result of married love.  The origin of the human being thus follows from a procreation that is ‘linked to the union, not only biological but also spiritual, of the parents, made one by the bond of marriage.’  Fertilization achieved outside the bodies of the couple remains by this very fact deprived of the meanings and the values which are expressed in the language of the body and in the union of human persons.”

There is a morally good use of medical technology in overcoming infertility.  “Homologous artificial insemination within marriage cannot be admitted except for those cases in which the technical means is not a substitute for the conjugal act, but serves to facilitate and to help so that the act attains its natural purpose.”  If the technical means facilitates the conjugal act or helps it to reach its natural objectives, it can be morally acceptable.  If, on the other hand, the procedure were to replace the conjugal act, it is morally illicit.

Couples experiencing infertility problems can find great consolation in knowing that Natural Family Planning (NFP) can also be used as a very effective, and morally good, way to overcome infertility.  NFP helps a couple locate their optimal times of fertility.   The daily charting, which is part of NFP, provides the Ob/Gyn with the gynecologic history he needs to diagnose where the deficiencies are in the woman’s fertility.  Then these can be corrected by working with nature, instead of replacing it. 

NFP trained Ob/Gyns have a remarkable record of helping couples overcome their infertility.  Using natural, and morally good, measures, they are three times as successful as methods of artificial conception, and only a fraction as expensive.  The moral approach is always the best approach.

I encourage you to get a copy of DONUM VITAE and to study it.  You will be favorably impressed with the magnificent design God has for us in cooperating with him in the act of continuing creation, which we call procreation.  Such a profound privilege demands our full respect.  We are never to presume that parents have an absolute right to a child, using any means possible to achieve this. 

The child, from its very first moment of existence, has an inviolable human dignity that is equal to his parents’ dignity.  We are never to abuse that dignity.  We are always to stay within the boundaries of God’s designs for human life.  We allow God to be God, and we acknowledge our status as his creatures, called to share love and life with other persons.