Blah, Blah, Blah. NFP, and this article is just mans way of justifying seeking their own pleasure, and the Church assisting them. IF using birth control is genuinely a sin, then so is NFP. ...plan, plan, plan...it is not for US to plan.
Scenario:
A Woman is undergoing a intensive pharmaceutical regimen (say, of Anti-Cancer drugs) which render her womb a chemically-hostile environment for any developing unborn baby.
For the sake of argument, we'll assume that the couple has a moral objection to Oral Contraceptives and/or Barrier Methods (Oral Contraceptives in particular are also dangerous to any child which might be conceived, in addition to interfering with the therapeutic effects of some Anti-Cancer drugs).
Which is the most Morally-Licit course of action?
- 1.) She should entirely deny her husband any of his rightful sexual privileges during the entire term of her pharmaceutical therapy.
- 2.) She should deliberately ignore any and all potential dangers to the unborn child presented by her biochemical condition, willingly introducing any conceived embryo into a chemically-hostile environment which could harm or kill the child.
- 3.) She and her husband should consider temporary abstinences on the occasions of her fertile periods during the term of her pharmaceutical therapy.
If I am correct in my understanding of Roman Catholic teaching, I believe that this type of scenario would describe the sort of "grave circumstance" in which the Pope has claimed the usage of NFP may be temporarily permissible and appropriate.
Well? What say you all??
Always Learning (or trying to, day-by-day), OP