Reddit mentions of Man and Woman He Created Them: A Theology of the Body

To answer the question, one must consider all three components of the morality of the act: object, intent, circumstances. Object and intent alone can render an act morally good or evil, whereas the circumstances can only increase or diminish the goodness or evil of an act.

Placing all three components together and considering first a set of circumstances, then intent, and then object, will be particularly edifying as these last two are elements going to vary and what the question concerns.

As an example, consider a couple having sex in wedlock; these will be the circumstances, and the circumstances are certainly good.

Next, consider the couple wants to, for good reasons (more on this later), delay the onset of children; this is the intent, one which is good by itself without any other qualifiers.

Finally, there are two means to delay the onset of children, as previously discussed. These will be the object chosen. The first is chemical/barrier contraception, and the second is NFP.

Use of chemical/barrier contraception in this way is always objectively disordered. As a result, even a couple in wedlock (which is good) intending to delay the onset of children for good reasons (which is good) is doing wrong by using contraceptives (which is bad). Bl. Pope John Paul II's encyclical Familiaris Consortio aids in explaining why:

> 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 the inner truth of conjugal love, which is called upon to give itself in personal totality. emphasis ours

Use of NFP in this way is not objectively disordered. Why? He tells us in the very next paragraph:

> When, instead, by means of recourse to periods of infertility, the couple respect the inseparable connection between the unitive and procreative meanings of human sexuality, they are acting as "ministers" of God's plan and they "benefit from" their sexuality according to the original dynamism of "total" selfgiving, without manipulation or alteration.
emphasis ours

Self-giving can be literally understood as the transmission of seed from the male to the woman and her reception of the seed in the procreative process into her, or the accepting of fertility by the male and the giving of fertility by the female. As the female's fertility naturally includes periods of infertility, there is no frustration in this process (the acceptance and giving of one's fertility) due to periods of natural infertility.

However, a barrier method of contracepting frustrates this in an obvious way. A chemical method of contraception frustrates it in a less obvious but still substantial way, effecting the transmission/reception of seed or frustrating the natural cycle of egg implantation. Bl. John Paul II understands this type of self-giving in light of our being created in the Imago Dei; he saw the body as an expression of God's creation, and the relation between husband and wife mirroring the nature of the Trinity and the act of creation. This is a deep mystery and one better explored through a careful reading of his life's work, Man and Woman He Created Them. These works merit attention on their own accord, and can't be done "true" justice on reddit (not only because of reddit's space constraints, but given Bl. John Paul II's deep theology and philosophy rooted as they are in the Christian understanding). In this way, the sexual self-giving of the spouses utilizing contraception is a literal lie, as there is no self-giving; one or both spouses is withholding of themselves.

In bullet points, use of contraceptives:

• places a barrier (physical or chemical) between the spouses, whereby total self-giving is impossible
  
  
• refuses cooperation in the natural cycles of fertility which God has ordained
  
  
• abuses the sexual faculty, treating that which is healthy as diseased
  
  
• makes an object one or both of the spouses for use as a tool of carnal satisfaction
  
  
• weakens the bonds of charity by abandoning chastity
  
  Whereas NFP:
  
  
• unites the spouses in total self-giving
  
  
• preserves the natural moral order of creation
  
  
• treats the sexual faculty and human body as good
  
  
• emphasizes the dignity of the person through education and understanding of their bodies
  
  
• strengthens the bonds of charity by embracing chastity
  
  So, when does NFP become sinful? Very simply, when the process is abused; when the intent is no longer to delay the onset of children for good reasons, but selfish ones. Altering that aspect of the act flips many of the above bullet points and renders the action subjectively disordered.
  
  It is true that the intent of an individual is so hard to gauge; for this reason certain persons would attempt to set NFP as "equal" to chemical/barrier contraceptives as a result of this objective vs subjective component to morality. They are correct that intent is, largely, an interior motivation which we are unable to gauge; however, they are incorrect to assign as equals contraceptives and NFP given the substantive differences in application. The couple using NFP is just as accountable to God as the couple using contraceptives. Further, with recourse to the pastoral care of the Church in regards to the subjective intent of practitioners, this objection is eliminated.
  
  As to the specific "modes" of NFP, there are many natural methods of regulating conception and birth whose "success rate" rivals or surpasses that of artificial contraceptives, without the disastrous "side" effects of chemically-induced periods of infertility, which include cancer. They include the Billings Ovulation Method, Creighton Model FertilityCare System, and others. These systems were pioneered by health care professionals and scientists, are minimally invasive, very low-cost, and involve both spouses in monitoring periods of fertility. To learn more about which system may work best for you, please consult some of the links listed below.
  
  ---
  
  Additional resources:
  
  Casti Connubii - "On Christian Marriage," Pope Pius XI, 1930 - an encyclical responding to doctrinal innovations by the Anglican communion concerning Christian marriage and the regulation of birth using artificial means
  
  Humanae Vitae - "Of Human Life," Pope Paul VI, 1968 - an encyclical reaffirming ancient Christian doctrine concerning the regulation of birth using artificial means and natural means
  
  Familiaris Consortio - "Of Family Partnership," Bl Pope John Paul II, 1981 - an encyclical concerning the Christian family, which addresses in part the harm contraceptives do to the marital union
  
  Pope Paul VI Institute for the Study of Human Reproduction - a health institute focused on Catholic teaching concerning the transmission of human life that provides an abundance of resources (educational material, points of contact, etc.) for couples interested in NFP
  
  Contraception: Why Not? - an informational talk given concerning the underlying reasons for our society's current acceptance of contraceptive use and the Catholic understanding and advantages of embracing Church teaching
  
  National Catholics Bioethics Center - a scientific institute dedicated to answering questions related to health, science, and the dignity of the human person, with additional resources concerning the Church's teaching on NFP and artificial contraceptives
  
  Learn NFP Online - online resource endorsed by the USCCB for instruction in some of the methods of NFP

It is absolutely laudable that you would explore the Catholic Church as an option for your faith. I hope and pray that the Lord grants you the grace to pursue this action fully.

>Questions:

The answer to your first two questions is a resounding, "No."

In your final question, you are correct. You would not be able to receive the Eucharist. There really is no, "But what else?" because the Eucharist is our Faith. If you do not have that, then what else is there to want?

You will damage your relationship with God, your communion with the Church, and quite possibly your relationship with your wife. More is to be said below.

>Issues

• Perceived Hypocrisy - I assume that you are referring to NFP versus contraception. If, as you see it, both methods are used to avoid conception, then why is the Church for one and against the other?
  
  This is an excellent question to have. You should keep in mind, however, that NFP should not be used with a contraceptive mentality.
  
  You see, in contraception, there are simply some logical psychological consequences with its use, which are primarily:
  
  
• The sexual embrace is no longer about the union of persons or the openness to life, but about "pleasure without consequences."
  
  
• Children are seen as an "unintended consequence" to sex (which makes no sense in the context of any creature who reproduces sexually), but also as something to be feared and avoided. They are a burden to the married life, and a threat to further sexual intimacy.
  
  With NFP, however, even if you have licit reasons for avoiding conception you are using the woman's natural fertility cycle to do so and you are still open to life. NFP is not only about avoiding conception, but also about achieving it.
  
  There are some consequences for the use of NFP as well:
  
  
• Couples must be open and communicate with each other more and more about the nature of their sexual intimacy. When the woman is learning about the beautiful cycle in her body, she has to communicate that information to her husband, and her husband has to be open to having a conversation about sexual intimacy. This can, quite often, lead to no sexual intimacy at all - but it also allows the couple to redirect their desires for other forms of intimacy.
  
  
• Children are still seen as the natural consequence of the act and, while (new) parents may have their own personal insecurities with the idea of becoming a mother or father, children are still seen as a blessing.
  
  In NFP there is an openness to life that takes various forms. In contraception, there is not.
  
  Here, it is important to talk about the nature of the sexual act. The Church uses natural law in addition to Scripture and Tradition to develop her moral philosophies.
  
  Natural law looks at the nature for which a thing was created or its purpose, its design. To put it very simply, the Church has professed that the sexual act has always and everywhere had a twofold purpose: (1) to be unitive and (2) to be ordered to procreation.
  
  If you remove one of those two aspects, you violate the nature of the act, and thus violate the nature of the person.
  
  
• Onan
  
  I am inclined to believe that you have read much non-Catholic literature on the subject of Onan and his sin. Suffice it to say that I have not seen many Catholic commentators deal with the subject specifically.
  
  Here are two articles that may help: How is NFP Different from the Sin of Onan? and NFP vs. Contraception.
  
  
• Girlfriend and Health
  
  That depends very much on what health "benefits" she is receiving from HBC. If it is primary dysmenorrhea, then I am afraid that will not suffice. If it is from bad acne, that is not a legitimate reason either.
  
  In fact, the only licit way she could use anything that acts as a contraceptive if it is for a legitimate, life-threatening health concern and there are absolutely no other alternatives for her to use as medication.
  
  I highly, highly, highly recommend reading The Theology of the Body by St. John Paul II and any commentaries you can find on the subject - primarily trusting in sources from Chris Stefanick, Jason Evert, and Fr. Robert Barron.

By "not believe in birth control" I assume you mean "not believe contraception is moral". Obviously we believe that there exist pills that are referred to as "birth control" pills.

Contraception (verb) is immoral according to Natural Law philosophy, as well as Catholic Teaching.

It may seem like a hard pill to swallow (pun absolutely intended), but this is the teaching of the Catholic Church, and has been (albeit less formally) for almost 2000 years. In fact, up until about a century ago, this belief was held more or less universally by all Christians.

If you're interested in why contraception is immoral, I suggest reading:

• Humanae Vitae
  
• Love and Responsibility
  
• Theology of the Body

This is a long post, so I'm putting this up front; if you read nothing else I've said, read this: Not talking about this with him is the wrong response. You absolutely must talk to him about this. Clear communication is crucial to a healthy marriage, much less a good sexual relationship.

Now, from what you say, there are probably issues for both of you here. I can't talk too much about his motivations, because we haven't heard from him, only from you--but I'll make an effort from my perspective as a husband in a moment.

First, let's take a quick look at what you've said: you find sex with your husband tedious and dirty. "Dirty" is a problem--a significant one--because marital sex is anything but dirty. To live chastely within marriage is to have marital sex. Marital sex is a reflection of Christ's love for the Church, and the love within the Godhead. It's a sacramental act of unity and life. You absolutely must abandon this notion that sex with your husband is dirty, but it won't be easy. Labeling sex as "dirty" is an easy way we repel our sexual desire when embracing it is sinful (e.g., as teenagers and when we're engaged). Forget that label. Sex isn't dirty. Extramarital sex is sinful; sex within marriage is a gift from God to express love and intimacy with our entire selves (body and soul).

The tedium of sex may be tied to several different issues. I do want to ask about the frequency of your intercourse: from what you say, it sounds like you're having sex regularly (daily a few months ago, several times per week now). Does that mean that you are not practicing NFP and periodic abstinence? Are you instead trying to have children now, or are you using artificial contraceptives?

I ask because artificial contraceptives, aside from being sinful, are known to have detrimental side effects in your sex life. Condoms reduce sensation for both parties. Hormonal contraceptives reduce your sex drive and (based on studies in other primates) may reduce your natural desirability to your mate. If this is the situation, it could contribute to his disinterest and your boredom.

Are you experiencing painful intercourse? My wife struggled with intercourse for our first year of marriage because she had conditions called vaginismus and vestibulodynia, which caused the whole experience to be excruciating rather than pleasant. We made a joint, sincere effort using multiple methods to reduce those conditions and improve her experience for months before we saw any real progress. That can be another factor.

What is your general attitude toward sex? Have you ever found it remotely pleasurable? If not, have you spoken to your husband about your experience in the bedroom? Or are you treating sex like a solemn duty you must perform so that he feels fulfilled? The entire process of human marital sex is for both husband and wife to enjoy it. In a technical sense, neither one of you "must" enjoy it in order for the other to do so, but it is more enjoyable for both of you if you both enjoy it. If you have ever felt pleasure during intercourse, talk to your husband about that--ask him to pursue that before satisfying himself. Satisfying him sexually is easy; satisfying you sexually probably takes a little work, and that should be a worthwhile pursuit.

Now, on to him for a moment. My guess is that he loves you. If he was unchaste before dating you, then he didn't marry you just to have sex with you (because he didn't have to get married to have sex); from what you have said, he remained chaste while dating you and engaged to you, too. Which means he does love you, but he may not know quite what that means (or should mean). Again, talk to him about his actions, about how you feel, about how he feels. Talk to him about your marriage, about your future together.

On the pornography: it almost definitely predates your marriage and your relationship and is absolutely never your fault. That's on him. You didn't hold a gun to his head and force him to do it, and even if you had, he still shouldn't have done it. Never blame yourself for this. I know that's difficult to accept, but it's the truth. He, and only he, is responsible for his sins. If you're the coldest wife in the world who refuses sex for twenty years straight, watching pornography and masturbating would still be his sins.

The most important thing here is for both of you to come to a real, clear understanding of what married life within the Church is. You need to read about the Theology of the Body. Here is a short, relatively easy book on the subject. Here is the longer book behind that book. Here is a tome with the religious and philosophical underpinnings of it all. Here is a short video and here is a long one. Others will hopefully post other resources (podcasts, videos, books, etc.). This is critical. It sounds like you and your husband both are lacking important information about how marriage works in the Catholic Church.

The second most important thing is for you to improve your communication with your husband. Here is a box set of short books that can help with that (these significantly improved communication between my wife and I). I've also seen these at a local library.

Your husband needs to commit to improving your marriage as much as you do. You must talk to him as soon as possible. Don't put it off. He should know that something is wrong, especially if he's choosing pornography over you.

More details will enable us to help you more, but nothing will help as much as clear communication with your husband and a dedication to building the best marriage possible.

Those aren't the Theology of the Body, rather summary explanations. The first link would indeed be the most updated of a very popular yet still scholarly explanation.

This, too my knowledge, is the most recent publication of the original TOB talks in book form:

https://www.amazon.com/Man-Woman-He-Created-Them/dp/0819874213/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1537279865&sr=8-1&keywords=man+and+woman+he+created+them&dpID=21R3P665NSL&preST=_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srch

That's certainly an opinion people have, but why don't you investigate the Church's position and then decide what you believe? I challenge you to see what the Church has to offer. This way you're at least addressing fully thought-out ideas instead of what lots of people think the Church teaches. Here are some resources. :)

/u/Mysterium-fidei - in case you weren't sure what this meant, "Theology of the Body" is a series of reflections made by Pope John Paul II and they are all available to read in their entirety online right now.
Links here:
From EWTN - https://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/JP2TBIND.HTM

Same links from USCCB but with a different resource for an introduction:
http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/marriage-and-family/natural-family-planning/catholic-teaching/theology-of-the-body.cfm


You can just jump right in to reading the actual sermons (there are 129 of them) or you could go for a summarizing type book. I made my suggestion of the Sri book, although that is a precursor to TOB.

Here is a link to TOB translated into book form, instead of the individual sermons (I haven't read this one):
https://www.amazon.com/Man-Woman-He-Created-Them/dp/0819874213

You can see in the links below the "Frequently Bought Together" section has a Beginners Guide and a Commentary Book that are often bought to help those who may need more than just the original text.

Are you academically, theologically minded? Then read this. or if you prefer video version, then watch these.

If you want to see what can be drawn from that one little line quoted by LouIchthys, give John Paul II's Theology of the Body a run for your money.

This is entirely a strawman argument. You're stating what you think the Catholic Church believes, which is incorrect, and then arguing against your mis-stated beliefs. You've either misinterpreted what you've been told, or those people are misinformed themselves.

>It doesn't ultimately matter to me what you (or the CC) want to call doctrine.

Yea, it really does. You can't debate something if you can't even define what it is you're debating.

>I can see something like abortion remaining forbidden indefinitely, but contraception and gay marriage? They're far too recent to be given any quality of immutability as regards the church's teaching on them.

Homosexuality is not a recent occurrence in human history. Engaging in homosexual activity has been consistently addressed as gravely disordered. The fact that people with homosexual tendencies want to now marry in recent years doesn't change anything.

>Catholicism has long upheld a tradition of faith and reason as regards moral issues; that is, they're not truths to be handed down, but rather must be arrived at by reason.

Once again, incorrect. Catholic moral teaching is informed by both revelation (sort of what you're calling faith) and also reason as we understand the natural law, that is, the order of purpose and dignity as God created it with respect to mankind and the world. Catholic moral theology isn't just "reasoned out" with no recourse to the revealed truth that has been handed down.

>This attitude is definitely part of the Catholic tradition.

Not in the way you just described it.

>I'm of the view that there exist no good arguments against gay marriage/contraception

The combined 1,000+ pages of sexual ethics written by John Paul II are apparently rubbish, but you're entitled to your opinion.
Theology of the Body |
Love and Responsibility

>Same goes for ordination of women, though perhaps that will last a little longer (which is mind-boggling, since the arguments against it are even worse than those against gay marriage/contraceptives) if only because PJPII abused his position in an attempt to silence all discussion on it, despite the findings of the Pontifical Biblical Commission on the matter.

The Pontifical Biblical Commission findings do not, themselves, carry any doctrinal weight. It is the Pope, in collegiality with the bishops of the Church that exercise the teaching authority of the Church. The Pope generally directs that discussion and has the prerogative to disagree.

I highly recommend the introductory essay to Theology of the Body by the translator Michael Maria Waldstein. The guy is incredibly brilliant and distills both the philosophical issues and the theological ones.

As far as JPII's other works, he was heavily influenced by the thomist theologian Matthias Joseph Scheeben. Mysteries of Christianity is a huge work, but its a great primer. Aside from that, I'd agree with /u/Pope-Urban-III, get familiar with St. Thomas first.

In so far as JP2 was a Phenomenologist, he christianized phenomenology; so getting a real solid foundation in phenomenology won't be as helpful as a thomistic foundation.

It is writings on JPII. Basically taking his Man and Woman He Created Them: A Theology Of The Body and making it accesible to mere mortals.