I think this slogan is sad. Why discourage people who need a valid way to postpone a pregnancy. And so many couples have used NFP to have a baby when they couldn't before. It makes Catholics sound stupid.

For some years now I've known folks hostile to Mr. Crocker, both for his neocon enthusiasms in the bad ol' days, and for suspecting him of tendentious inaccuracy in his book on the Church when he wrote that "the Benedictines established the classic medieval formula that to work is to pray," which he claims was later adopted by Opus Dei.
It is Opus Dei's formula, but of course the Benedictines established the rather different idea of ora *et* labora - work and pray. The difference can perhaps better be grasped if one applies it elsewhere - to sleep and study, for example, much as my son might wish otherwise, isn't quite the same as to sleep is study.
In light of his delightful insights into the glories of NFP, one hopes Mr. Crocker's Clintonesque delinquency about the word is will be promptly forgiven, even by his bride when they get a chance to talk.

While I disagree, I admire the author's use of humor and appreciate his enthusiasm for big families! On a more serious note, I do think that any discussion of NFP should (must) be specific about the method used - neither "rhythm" nor the book exerpt cited above describe my experience with the method I have used, either in terms of effectiveness, ease of use, or specific techniques. When all of these diverse (but Church approved!) methods are lumped into one category, comments about the effectiveness of "NFP" become too unspecific to have any practical relevance.

Thanks, Mr. Crocker, I needed that laugh! When I tell people I use NFP they laugh at me because I have 8 children. I believe I heard DR. Janet SMith say that part of the beauty of NFP is that it is negotiable every month. You have not done anything permanent or pharmacalogical to alter your fertility, so every month there can be a reevalution for your reasons for using NFP.

I will have to send this on to my husband. He is in Afghanistan now, but when he is home I imagine #9 won't be far away! Thanks be to God!

This old thing again. If any of the men in my family had dared to behave like the men in this article, their spouses would have made themselves widows by applying frying pan to skull, pronto.

We are just about to modify our 8-passenger Suburban for our 7th child; I wish we would have started earlier with child bearing because at 39, I'm too old for this! We avoided pregancy for 5 years after our wedding--enough time for mama to work and pay off college loans. This is what else I'd modify if I could do it again: I'd skip university, have enough kids to look like we're practicing NFP, get kids through schooling years, go to university, work and pay off the college loans. I guess I will just have to convince my daughters of this plan instead of the "pampered puppy" route.

I appreciate the author's use of humor, however, not every couple is capable of raising 10 children. I have seen a lot of people who cannot take care of themselves, much less a large number of children.

It is curious that the Church allows and even encourages NFP, but then some of its proponents seem to think it should not be taken too seriously. They seem to push it, but then appear to encourage people to not take it seriously. I even see Catholics who castigate couple who practice NFP "for the wrong reasons."

If the Church allows NFP, then it should be taken seriously, and not regarded as something to be avoided as soon as possible.

I don't know what I think of this article.

96% of married American Catholics use some form of artificial birth control (pill, barrier, sterilization, etc). I bet it's higher personally. More like 99.9%.

This train has left the station.

Ann:

Your statistic is in conflict with Crocker's, albeit only by a few percentage points. What's your source?

I'd like to know the reliability and meaning of all our information on the topic. I mean, let's say that some statistic is proffered saying, "95% of all Catholic married couples use artificial birth control." I'd like to know:

(1.) How was this measured? A poll? How were the questions asked? What were the questions? Did the respondents have a sense of privacy?

(2.) How did the poll determine if the respondent was Catholic? Self-described? By Baptism alone? Baptism and Confirmation? Was any distinction made between persons who actually believe and attempt to practice the faith, and persons who "grew up" Catholic and have, at most, a cultural attachment irrelevant to belief and practice?

(3.) Was a distinction made between couples who had previously used artificial birth control, and those who still did? A couple who had previously done so, and then repented in order to become faithful to the Church's teaching, belongs in a different category from those who previously did so, and then stopped because they wanted to conceive; and these are in a different category from those who simply never stopped.

(4.) Was a distinction made between persons who knew the Church's teaching, and persons who were mistaken about it as a result of poor (or dissenting, or entirely absent) catechesis? There probably are persons -- I can't guess how many -- who regard the Catholic teaching on artificial birth control as something commendable but optional, along the lines of praying the Rosary, and remain in ignorance about their actual obligations.

(5.) Was a distinction made between couples who don't use artificial contraception because they're obedient Catholics, and those who don't use it because they're post-menopausal or otherwise unable to conceive?

Now, don't get me wrong: I don't doubt at all that nearly all American self-described Catholic couples disobey the Church's teaching on contraception, at some time, and most do so regularly.

But I ask these questions because it seems to me that even if 100% of Catholic fertile couples were using artificial birth control, the non-fertile ones who have no reason to bother with any method of avoiding conception might drag the overall number down to 80%. And then you have to account for those who aren't using artificial birth control right now because they're actually trying to conceive, and are having difficulty. So the numbers sound a bit creaky to me.

Some of these numbers may be correct, of course. But when statistics involving contentious topics are involved, completely false assertions have been known to be so widely and confidently circulated that they went unquestioned. (Remember the old statistic that told us 1 in 10 persons was biologically gay?)

So I do wonder whether some of our numbers regarding Catholic practice of contraception are misleading...or merely extracted, with a dramatic flourish and an air of authority, from someone's hindquarters.

I liked this article! It's tongue in cheek. There's nothing wrong with making a point using humor, and if a reader can't see the humor, they're taking the article and themselves far too seriously. Lighten up and have fun with it!

We have eight. For the last four we tried NFP, so we knew she was ovulating and made the decision to have a baby. An outsider might say "See it doesn't work!", but it worked splendidly for us. I think the author was taking the presumed criticism of NFP and humorously making it a benefit. If the couple knows she's ovulating, and do the conjugal act, NFP is working just as well as if they refrain from the conjugal act.

Another article that leaves single people completely in the cold.

Interesting piece. The fact that the writer and his wife were at a Civil War dinner adds a dimension. I believe that contraception is the main practice that has divided the Church into two: The Tridentine Church (VERY small in number who are not contracepting), and the Novus Ordo "church", noted for balloons at "mass" and contraception, and enormous in number. Which group do you think will be saved? (From a father of seven).

Finally, someone speaks the truth about NFP! I just wish more reality would creep into the discussion of birth control by Catholics.

As St. Teresa of Avila would say, "Lord, deliver me from sour-faced saints!" Come on guys, this article is hilarious! We all take our NFP way too seriously. Why can't we have a good laugh at ourselves once in awhile? Life is too hard without it. I'm a 28-year-old mommy of 4 children aged 5 and under and think this is the funniest article Crises ever printed. Thank you for republishing it!

We abstain from marital contact--even touching, even passing objects from hand to hand--during the days of the woman's period and for seven "clean days" thereafter. This eliminates NFP as an option for us, as well as any artificial birth control methods involving the male (condoms, vascectomy) and, in practice, any female methods that would induce intermittent bleeding (often, the pill, the IUD). Some rabbinic authrities prohibit the diaphragm as well, althogh like NFP, it doesn't work too well anyway.

I can report similar frustrations, as well as similar satisfactions, albeit not those for which we started out looking, as well as five healthy kids, three of whom were entirely unplanned. See you at the obstetricians, and remember, we may be tired now, but 20 years down the road, we'll have fewer regrets. Probably. Blessings.

Great article. I think the humor is totally appropriate - it effectively makes the point that making people is way too serious to be taken seriously - or too serious a thing to be done with deliberate, cool-headed reflection, anyway.

And isn't that the point of the Church's teaching on birth-control, fundamentally? Sure, a couple who uses NFP to have deliberately sterile sex is not doing an intrinsically evil act, and sure, that's an important distinction. But the underlying truth about the natural order that makes contraceptive sex bad is the fact that babies are good, right? And in fact, that they're the proper good of sex.

So intrinsically speaking, conceiving a baby is better than not conceiving one. So it really shouldn't be a question each time, "Do we want to have a baby?" Even though it might be legit sometimes to say that we just can't handle it right now, once you make asking that question the norm, you've made procreation into a deliberate choice. The parent is then the chooser of his child, and the child a merely conditional good.

The article also raises a question for dedicated NFP-ers out there: what if the science improved so much that NFP were more precise than it is now, so that it did "work"? (Surely not a far-out thought experiment.) What if you could know with near certainty, within hours or minutes, that this act of intercourse will be fertile and that one won't? Would NFP still be okay? Would it be good for marriages? Would it be good for families?

When is Inside Catholic going to wake up and realize a lot of readers are single Catholics who will never have children because we are too old and STILL can't find husbands/wives.

Beyond a certain point, it is like a slap in the face when I have to read articles about other people having babies.

AAAAAAARGH!!! I've had my moment of pain. Now are you happy?

Three articles on NFP one month and two articles with the very depressing onsies graphic (same picture--didn't you notice?) is just too much.

How about an article on what to do when God's plan for you apparently doesn't include family and children?

I'm sorry that some who are single didn't care for the article because it doesn't address their concerns, however a lot of us are married with children, and these do interest us.

It is not healthy to insist that the world revolve around oneself or be envious of the blessings of others, so perhaps instead of complaining that the article didn't address the complaints of single people, perhaps you can be happy for those who have been blessed and read something that does interest you.

I suppose this article was an attempt at humor.

The assumption seems to be that couples who don't have large families are all contracepting. No true.

My wife and I never have. We used NFP to try to concieve. But ultimately found out we will never have children of our own.

I didn't appriciate the implication that our marriage is not fulfulling its "primary purpose" to "bear and raise a lot of children".

I also didn't like the assumption by a previous poster that said "Novus Ordo" Catholics all contracept and only "Trinadine" Catholic do not.

Don't Assume!

I appreciate the humor in this article and yet disagree with what seems to be the assumption that kids, kids and more kids is the sole purpose of marriage. It's not the only thing that makes marriage meaningful nor is it the only way to bear fruit in marriage. And thank heavens for that because we need all kinds of marriages and families.

Sadly, infertile Catholics (and singles who long to be married) probably find themselves feeling at their worst among orthodox Catholics.

Oh come on, single folks ... there are dozens of articles on this site every week - a few "family-friendly" ones here and there is altogether appropriate for a Catholic site.

Onesies on a line are not depressing. The loss they might represent to you might very well be, but you can't put that off on Inside Catholic. That's you and your experience coloring how you see things. I am truly sorry that being reminded of children and other people having them is painful for you -- we married folks, when complaining of our trials, would do well to remember our single brothers and sisters who are carrying very different, yet also burdensome crosses of their own.

But anyway ... back to this article. I loved it when I read years ago and I love it still. People who find it offensive really ought to lighten up ... it's FUNNY! Glad to see it online!

A funny article! The writer has a good point worth making: that sex is ordered to procreation, even though it may not result in it (as in the terribly frustrating case of those who struggle with infertility). Married sex, ordinarily, should be considered, by Catholics, as that which may result in a child, although it does of course strengthen and unite the spouses, and that's a true good.

What "most" Catholics do -- if they do wrong, it doesn't matter that there are way more of them than those who aren't doing wrong. The Church isn't trying to rain on any parades, here. So NFP is what we have available when we want to try to space children without abstaining. But we shouldn't be surprised if nature does what it does, and that the Church should condemn violence to something as important in its nature as sexual love.

In other words, we as believing Catholics really don't have the option to "use something" that "works," for the same reason that we can't buy another human being to be our slave. After all, using a slave for heavy labor REALLY WORKS, and doing it ourselves is so hard, maybe even detrimental to our health! Everyone else is using slaves. And look -- they do it in the least obtrusive way possible! God gave us our intellect -- let's use it to make life easier!

Last, I think the reason we need so many of this type of article is that the family is the absolute front of the culture war right now, and those of us in it need a lot of reinforcement. Those who are struggling with infertility need our prayers and consideration too.

Blessings to all.

I have always found the attitude many Catholics have about NFP to be very ironic. Supposedly you are supposed to be promoting NFP as the only option for spacing children, but If I had only been exposed to NFP by Catholic sources, I would have never have chosen it because all I would ever hear is that it's so difficult, and so stressful, and so exhausting, and you'll end up with a huge family anyways. I am not Catholic, and I learned about NFP from my mom. She has used it her entire life, and I am her only child. She has only ever had good things to say about NFP. My husband and I use it, and we have no children, and definitely plan to stay that way for the foreseeable future. We've never felt negatively about it. We've never suffered through my fertile times, or accidently cut it close one month and spent two weeks worrying and waiting to take a pregnancy test. And apparently NFP is contagious, because I have spread it to many of my friends who feel that no other birth control method is suitable for whatever reason(s). I have yet to actually meet a large family who uses NFP. Don't you ever consider that maybe Catholics tend to have large families because children are so important to your religion, rather than because you are forced to use "unreliable" birth control? There actually is a NFP-community outside of the Catholic church, and the large-because-we-used-NFP-family just doesn't exist out here!

I think it would be such a blessing to grow up in a culture that actually teaches and promotes NFP on a regular basis. Most women don't know that they have options that are healthy, that won't destroy their libidos, that won't give them headaches or make them gain weight, that leave their sex lives untouched by medicine, hormones, or an awkward cover of latex. It is rare for a non-catholic couple to even hear about NFP without doing excessive research or suffering on hormones for years before finally searching for something better. But for some reason, those who are lucky enough to have this method handed to them on a silver platter just take it for granted, ignore it, or ridicule it. WHY?

I am Catholic, but I grew up with NFP - my parents teach it, and my Dad's experience of NFP was positive enough that it was the starting point for his conversion to the Catholic Church. While I've had my share of NFP frustrations in the past 5 years of using it (mostly during post-partum return of fertility), it really isn't rocket science, and I personally am thrilled not to mess around with pills, latex, or whatever - and as a faithful Catholic, I am grateful that my options aren't "Abstain totally, or be always pregnant," especially during this difficult economic time. To use a local term, NFP is lagniappe for the faithful Catholic.

I am beginning to get the impression that strong NFP advocates lack a sense of humor. I am basing this on the last few articles and the comments that follow. Could someone please prove me wrong?

Is it the case that people who find it hard to laugh are people who find it scary to have ridiculous herds of children? The ups and downs of big family life do require the ability to NOT take things too seriously (or a lot of drugs, a straight-jacket, or a hearse.)

Kristin - I agree. I'm a convert to Catholicism and never knew anything about NFP (other than the rhythm method, which didn't look very attractive to me) until I started converting. This was after having been on the pill for years, unfortunately, ostensibly for medical reasons, though a non-hormonal treatment would have worked. I love knowing what my body is doing and think all women should have access to this knowledge, whether they use to achieve/postpone pregnancy or to track their reproductive health, or don't use it at all.

Lulu - I definitely have a sense of humour, and I would absolutely love to have a large family, God willing. My take on this article is really that it's hard enough to get this info to people, to get people to take it seriously. I believe the stats given in the article that a lot of Catholic use contraception, especially since it isn't discussed at all in my diocese. Speaking from personal experience, it can take a long time to come around to NFP after living in the mindset that the pill is fine. Humour is definitely great at introducing a subject, I agree, but if this had been my first exposure to NFP, I might have run in the other direction. Perhaps because it did used to scare me to think of having that large of a family, and the feeling of not being in control, so you do have a point with that.

Slave analogies? Oh why oh why.

"Which group do you think will be saved?" Violation of rule #3 of IC!

People expressing how this series of articles has caused them sadness (singles/infertiles) and getting blown off and told to man up. Nice. (And yes, a picture of a line of onesies can make someone feel depressed.)

To R.C. I can't find where I got my number, but yes, it is close to the author's 90%. It would be interesting to see a deeper analysis. I think we can all agree, according to the data out there, the number of American Catholics who don't use ABC is very, very low. Honestly, I think it would be close to 100% if we could get the true story, (including pill, barrier, withdrawal, sterilization).

I've expressed my opinion (this ship has sailed) but as many have noted on here, that doesn't make the teaching invalid or unimportant. Just makes these conversations almost entirely irrelevant to today's Catholics.

The question I have is as follows: What is the church going to do about these abysmally low numbers of Catholics following this teaching? I see nothing.

Hence, this ship has sailed.

I think our contraceptive culture is one of the reasons why teh infertile people ARE getting blown up....

The culture of contraception has definitely leaked into the church... so where once people without children were considered "barren" and were objects of prayer and sympathy, they're now considered selfish, people assume they're either using contraception or NFP with a contraceptive mentality, and we heap scorn and derision on them.

Look people. Being an Orthodox Catholic does NOT automatically protect you from imbibing our culture's sick attitudes. Do you find yourself thinking that that wealthy, childless couple at Mass is clearly living in mortal sin and has no right to be recieving communion???

Maybe they just don't know you well enough to give you the complete history of their long line of miscarriages, or her hysterectomy!! Maybe they're struggling to accept that God's will isn't theirs--that they desperately want children, but since they're unwilling to take immoral measures like IVF, they're stuck with parenting 'spirtual children' instead.

You really can't know from the outside. But you've drank deeply enough of the culture's tainted water that deep down, you believe fertility is a mechanism that can be turned on and off at will (either by contraception or NFP) and that if someone is 'off' it must be their will, not God's.

When a couple says "We're not planning on a baby right now," it's true that they could mean they're avoiding pregnancy. But often they mean "It would take a miracle for us to get pregnant right now, so we're trying to follow God's plan for us, and our medical history is none of your business."

I really admire those women. How they can take this constant questioning of their morality/fertility without bursting into tears or smacking someone is beyond me. They're hidden saints, the Sarahs and Elizabeths among us, and most of us treat them like dirt.

I've never used anything but NFP, and I thought this article was funny. I have extremely irregular cycles and confusing mucus due to PCOS, and both our kids were surprises. I also had a very dangerous complication with the last pregnancy (severe preeclampsia) and consequently we decided our second child will be our last (knock on wood). For people like me, who have found NFP extremely difficult and often a strain on their marriage, and who really do have a very serious reason to avoid pregnancy, and who would use birth control in a heartbeat if not for the fear of hell thing, we would go insane if we couldn't laugh about it.

Despite all that, I *am* grateful that at least I live in a time where we have NFP. NFP may be difficult for me, but the rhythm method would be impossible. I think if I had lived in the 50s I either would have ended up using birth control or just been a nun. I'm also grateful for my wonderful NFP-only Dr. who diagnosed me with PCOS and is working with me to help figure out my cycles. I just get tired of all the happy-clappy "NFP is so easy and wonderful" talk when for me it's been anything but.

It's great to read an article by someone who gets it!

For you sad and depressed single people who have been subjected to the indignity of not being the center of the universe for the time span it took you to read this article - and that time was surely blessedly short unless your cat or dog distracted you for a few seconds!

That is the idea. Go back and re-read the article. It's not about us, our feelings, our desires, our loneliness- go do something for someone else!

I started to realize NFP was a scam, being perpetrated by "Catholics" who did not want to have kids, or at least "too" many", when I found myself approached over and over again, often in Church, when it would become obvious that I was expecting another baby. The remonstrating always began the same, "Don't you know about NPF?" "Can I lend you a book on NFP?" "So and so are NFP teachers and have a class starting soon." "How will you EVER DO IT?" "Don't you need a break?" "Can you really take care of your children and your husband and all your other responsibilities?"

I learned not to be offended and just laugh.

This article, originally published in December 2004, is the reason we decided not to renew our Crisis Magazine subscription. Disappointed to see it reappear here.

I loved this post. When my husband and I took NFP before marriage, the instructor very much soft-pedaled the difficulties, thus leading to my resentment toward her and this method. For example -- when you are being awakened constantly during the night to nurse babies and tend to toddlers, the morning temperature is really not reliable. Also, nursing a baby can very much interfere with mucus signs. Therefore, we are left with the cervical sign, which does not give us too much advance warning about ovulation. (Also, in my opinion, it is pretty icky.) If somebody had given me a little talk about a proper attitude concerning openness to life and trust in the Lord's providence, I would have been much better prepared for marriage. God bless!

Folks, let's try to keep the decibel level to a moderate range here, but also address a basic problem.

Short of divine intervention, for which we fervently pray, a commitment to NFP means your chances for marriage in secular society are practically zero, and your odds even among Church-going Catholics aren't much better.

In response, the institutional Church must not abandon its principles but proclaim them. The Church needs to stand up and proclaim the fullness of its truth about NFP and marriage. Part of this involves helping singles who are well disposed to NFP to find marriage partners before the clock runs out. Right now a lot of single Catholics are feeling left high and dry.

If Protestant churches have marriage ministries, why not Catholics?

God bless you married folks. Please remember the rest of us in your payers.

OFF TOPIC:


Phil-- A lot of churches/Dioceses DO have singles groups--- The Archdiocese of Chicago had a really good one when I was in school.

The challenge is, of course, that to have a really good one, you need to get multiple parishes together-- but I have friends who've met their spouses at Theology on Tap, various volunteer things, book studies, etc.

If your diocese doesn't have a good singles ministry, have you considered getting together with some of your friends to START one?

Lulu said:
"Is it the case that people who find it hard to laugh are people who find it scary to have ridiculous herds of children?"

OK then let's be fair and spread the laughs all around; let's laugh at people who DO have ridiculous herds of children! Since we've all got to "lighten up", let's start with jokes for the non-nfp crowd...about the providentialists who rut like animals, whenever they get their urges and simply must, animal like, give in to them, because, hey, if you think about it, that's exactly what they're proposing! And then, when the baby comes and attaches to the breast 24/7, we can insert Bessy-the-cow jokes here, complete with mooing noises! Hahaha! Oh, it's all just so funny, and oh, wait, the post-14-pregnancies-body jokes are simply endless...stretchmark roadmaps to hell....belly-folds making the best hiding places...cellulite butts begging for a thick coat of spackle....now, that's funny!

Deirdre

This is very much on topic.

I have been to singles groups galore. Even the National Catholic Singles Conference.

Pretty much every singles group has been deeply disappointing. Theology on Top is a promising development, but it still skews very young.

The notion that a "singles group" in the Church basement is all you need, I think, is one of the biggest problems.

"Singles" and "young adults" capture a lot of people that are frankly not ready to marry. There is also a huge chasm between the under 25s and the over 30s.

But enough of this. My point stands. The Church would do a lot better promoting NFP if it had an unambiguous marriage ministry helping single Catholics who will practice NFP meet suitable partners.

The church basement for singles and a stack of NFP pamphlets in the back of the church--usually NOT put in the pamphlet rack by the pastor--will not get the job done.

Navel gazing about NFP serves no purpose if the Church isn't willing to put some commitment behind it.

Lulu-- Fear of babies, sadly, is not ridiculous. It's Ominous.

I mean, sure, on one hand it's funny to think that two big adults are frightened of a little 8 pound person who can't even move without help.....

But on the other hand, the bible gives us famous examples of grown men who feared babies: Pharoah and Herod.

Having a child IS scary. You can't imagine how someone will SURVIVE if they have to depend on you for all their needs. But once you have a child, you realize parenthood is not the impossibility it seems. And having another child is scary--you've just gotten used to the new state of your family, and a new baby is another upheaval....except, really, they tend to fit in somehow... even if it's not exactly how you expected.

I think one problem with modern society is that we're addicted to planning. We think it's possible to plan. Planning makes us feel like we're in control.

But we're not in control. We can't know what the future will bring. Sometimes that guy who ate healthy and exercised and followed doctor's orders drops dead of a heart attack anyway. Sometimes the job you planned the next 10 years around fires you. Sometimes the stock market wipes out your perfectly planned retirement.

Sometimes your "planned baby" turns out not to fit in with your plans for him, and forces you to change everything, and sometimes your "unplanned child" slides seamlessly into life.

The problem with so many people today is that they're afraid, desperately afraid. They hold tightly to their illusion of planning and control like a toddler clings to a favorite stuffed bear. But haven't we all been told to "Fear Not?" Sometimes you just need to take a deep breath, pray "God, I trust you even though I am afraid," and take the jump.

The humorous and contrarian approach of this article is just what is needed to deal with the subject of NFP because so much of our NFP promotion nowadays is factually correct but attitudinally misaligned. An earlier poster pointed out that the contraceptive mentality has crept into the Church enough that some of us assume couples without the "right" amount of kids must be up to no good. But the attitude has crept much farther than that. NFP is often marketed precisely as Catholic birth control; it's what Catholics use when they want to avoid the (financial/physical/psychological) burdens of another child. Our marketing of NFP too often says "yes, the culture is right about children being a negative and fertility being a condition requiring control - but even though people make fun of the only way we have of controlling this, c'mon it actually works very well."

We very much do need to get back to the basics. 1) Children are good. 2) The not-sole-but-nevertheless-absolutely-PRIMARY end of marriage is the procreation and education of children. 3) Couples who, unfortunately, face a grave obstacle to their reception of another child from God do have a licit means of "making their voices heard" on the matter, but this must play a clearly background role to 1 and 2.

In a related aside, our modern marriage culture, even within the Church, undermines our bimillenial tradition on the primary end of marriage. How so? It's commonplace to hear that so-and-so is(/are) not ready for marriage because of immaturity or not knowing the intended spouse sufficiently well. But in our day and age we very seldom hear that so-and-so is not ready because he and his spouse will not be able to support children. The natural assumption seems to be that a couple will get married, use NFP for the first few years while straightening out finances/education - things which are felt to make them "unready" for children - and only then work on starting a family. But how odd is that logic? Let's a say that joining a womping team means becoming part of a group whose primary purpose is to womp (and pursue womp-related interests). Who would ever say that "Billy is not ready to womp, but of course he's ready to join the womping team"? That would be ridiculous. And yet we don't see anything odd about saying "Billy is not ready to have kids, but he's ready to enter a relationship whose primary purpose is to have kids." Refer to points 1 and 2 above.

Anyone who answered this with a diatribe missed its main, humorous point.

The 'divided church' comment of Trid vs. Novo Ordo was way way way out of bounds. Such a person is creating division which I have sadly seen too many times. I'd ask which of your several seven kids you will train in Latin and send to Africa on a lifelong mission to restore the church.

The most orthodox Layman I know of was my Charismatic father of fourteen.

STOP dividing the Church on Latin/Novo lines - it contradics our Lord's prayer 'that all may be one as the Father and I are one'. In this way, we won't have to wonder if Latin speaking Pharisees will be saved....

I loved this article then, and I still do. Thanks for re-posting it.

To those complaining - really? Do you take yourselves so seriously?

I use NFP in my marriage, and I liked the piece. But I would like to point out that the view of marriage presented here seems to belong more to Thomistic philosophy than it does to the Christian tradition as a whole. Take the New Testament, for example. There, marriage is talked about as a one flesh convenant, one that images the spiritual convenant of Christ and his Church (Matt. 19; Ephesians 5). It is discussed as a remedy and non-sinful outlet for the needs of the flesh(1 Cor. 7). There is no mention, however, of the procreation and education of children. Children, in fact, are not mentioned at all.

Harry Crocker if you're out there!--

Where is the follow-up to The Old Limey?!

I think there are many variables that need to be taken into account regarding children and generational changes in particular. My grandparents had six kids. We would say wow! six kids. BUT they didn't go to any of their kids' sports games and things like that.

Mary - this is an incredibly uncharitable comment. How about a little understanding and kindess toward folks who are struggling with their lot in life...loneliness. And take care, Mary, that your sharp, insensitive tongue doesn't end up being the cause of some loneliness in your own life one day.

I was moved by Arrgh's comment - and that of other single Catholics here. You are right! I think we Catholics devote a lot of byte to discussions of fertility and babies and marriage - an important but, by no means, critical part of living faithful lives in Christ. I think Mulieris Dignitatem, http://tinyurl.com/ypj5b, beautifully describes the "feminine" God's given us women - and it is a perfect a gift to women with or without marriage and/or children.

Dear H.W. Crocker: Thanks for giving me a laugh.

When my husband sent me the link I said, "Are you sure YOU didn't write this?" He was a Navy submariner and loves to tell people the reason we have ten kids is because the Navy nuclear power program teaches you the best way to develop your skills is to practice often (or words to that effect).

Loved it! (C'mon guys, lighten up...)

Although it's a bit off-topic, I wanted to say that I concur wholeheartedly with both people quoted here. The needs of singles in the Church are very, very overlooked. IC, here's your chance to minister to a population hardly anyone in the Church even thinks about!

I speak from experience: My husband and I married when I was 37. I can't describe the agony of being single through my 20s and most of my 30s. And agony ISN'T too strong a word.

Posters: Please show charity to those folks around you who struggle with the loneliness and frustration of being single. All we hear about in the Church are religious and married folks -- as though those two vocation encompassed Christ's will for everyone. To add insult to injury, the world expects singles to join the "hook-up" culture. Truly Catholic singles have a terrible time! Truly, it's so.

I thought Crocker's article was laughing at/with those of us with ridiculous herds of children (or herds of ridiculous children)...and I liked it. I can even laugh at all the things you imagined were going to sting the likes of me. Heck, if that's all you can come up with, you are a very nice person. We moms and dads of many have heard much worse than that.

As to the singles who are bored by this topic: I don't get it. You don't have to read it. And if your single state is painful to you, then you presumably wish to be married, and the subject should interest you at least slightly.

Ann - I agree it's very sad that so many Catholics use ABC. I've found that, in my area, very few people even know about NFP. So I'm becoming an instructor and trying to get the word out. It's slow going, but maybe if I pester the diocese enough I'll get somewhere. ;-)

Marla - charting postpartum and during breastfeeding is the most confusing time to chart. You're right that temperature isn't as accurate because you're being awakened by a baby. The cervical mucus sign can still be reliably used (speaking from experience), but it's best to have a good instructor to help you with that part. Billings even has online instructors, which has been helpful for me.

I think JP2 did a fair bit of writing on the single life as a vocation--not necessarily a permenant one, but one that most Catholics will experience--- maybe someone remembers where that was?

I have a lot of single friends. The happiest are the ones who, while praying for a spouse, don't do the 'singles thing.' Instead, they take classes, volunteer, spend nights out with friends, go to Adoration, hang out in museums and bookstores, etc. The singles circuit is HORRIBLE (I remember) and not a great way to meet people. Lasting friendships are a better investment......

But yes, it stinks to be single. It's a hard cross to bear. And it's hardest for those who ardently want a family. We should all add prayers for the single seeking spouses to our regular rounds, I think.....

I am a single aged 45 and I will never need to think about NFP, thank you, which is something I note only with great sadness. That may be the "point" that Mom of Nine doesn't get.

Those who are blissfully married shouldn't assume that single people are all silly teenagers or selfish yuppies.

As other commenters have observed, we have to deal with loneliness, childlessness, and infertility. We want to be less "selfish," but it's hard to think of something useful to do when your life is perpetually on hold until such time as you are not-single. As you get older, it is harder and harder to just hang out and socialize. If you work in a professional field, you don't have time to volunteer. You feel increasingly out of place at family events. You feel horrible going out with married friends. You want a home and you can't have one. Not in this world, anyway.

http://www.4marks.com/audio/details.html?audio_id=692

www.sensustraditionis.org/webaudio/Sermons/Disk5/Contraception.mp3

I'm still thinking, so I may very well say something stupid here. I'll try to force myself no to.

1. I use NFP, and find this article funny.
2. If married people write articles about being married and having kids they aren't trying to hurt people who are unhappy being single or infertile any more than a priest who discusses his celibate life is trying to hurt unhappy married people.

That said, I feel great sympathy for those who are alone. I can't stand to be alone, even for a day, so I don't know how they bear it. On the other hand, I don't know how so many parents are able to survive the sleepless nights and other challenges of parenthood (for me, lack of sleep is the biggest). I guess we all have to struggle to accept the lot that God has given us (Right now I'm struggling to write this while my toddler is trying to steal the mouse and keyboard).

Some of my good friends are single or infertile. I will admit that this creates some difference in experience that give us less in common, but if we are all faithful Catholics, I think we can work to transcend these differences.

I am, in fact, currently working on developing Church programs/ministries with one of my major hopes being to lessen the loneliness of parishioners. Why should we be lonely when we are brothers and sisters in Christ?

I believe we divide ourselves too much, each locked in his own home, maybe joined by the Internet, but separated from real human contact. I pray that we can change this.

God Bless!

Before someone tears me to pieces, I want to note that the part where I said, "Right now I'm struggling to write this while my toddler is trying to steal the mouse and keyboard," was mostly a joke (thought it was true at the moment).

It wasn't really a serious spiritual struggle. But, I will note, that it is related to a spiritual struggle I have. I do have trouble when my daughter insists on interrupting what I am doing, especially when I'm writing, since I lose my train of thought.

I am still getting used to the fact that I no longer have much control over my free time. Okay, she's back, gotta go.

45, please know that you were specially included in my prayers today.

Why not take an approach that speaks to the heart of troubles with artificial birth control? The artificial means is not a language of love. See the Chicago chapter of Couple to Couple League's new video on YouTube on the link here.

The article is not funny to some of us who can't lighten up because we find ourselves very often defending the Church's teaching to many who think that no matter what NFP is contraception. And defending the idea of having more than two kids to others.Many of us who are accused of doing NFP right if we have no children, or 3 spaced more than two years a part, or those who of us who God has afforded 10 chilren to by not needing to postpone at all.Young couples should be challenged in their engagement to be generous, they should learn the ins and outs of Pope Paul VI's Humanae Vitae. They should also learn NFP, Pope John Paul II said so in Familiaris Consortio. The Gospel of Life would be another fine letter to read.In fact lets all reread those: at http://www.vatican.va/ (Or you can find them at EWTN's website.) The Chair of Peter wisely counsels us all. Let us remember to share church teacing and not flaming arrows of judgement at any family of any size. Once I was wisely advised to not judge a couple's openess to life by its size. "A couple with one child may be, in their heart more open than a family of 6. And a family of 8 also more open than that family of 6. Can you know the circumstances of each family? Multiple miscarriages? Contraception? Abortion? The point being that in each of those families, all could have been 'doing it right or wrong.' How long have they been married? What are their health problems? Are they living in poverty? Are they unemployed? Is one of the couple struggling with severe alcoholism and still in the early stages of treatment? Is one of them bi-polar? Born with a severe spine deformity that makes pregnancy life threatening? Did they for those serious reasons use the natural observations to postpone? Did they use natural observations for frivolous reasons such as the fanciest newest furniture line? Really, do we know? No. It is ours to teach the Church's teachings on the matter, when the opportunity arises. It is hopefully being taught by the parish priest. True, it may not be. But it is the the Holy Spirit that should prompt us to say something to someone else about these matters, and not our own judgements.
And humor that seems to belittle God's design of nature, and the Church's wise motherly counsel, by saying Try it it doesn't work does not clear things up.