birth control in good ConscienceBirth Control in the Catholic Church
Junior Member
January 17, 2003, 09:46 AM
birth control in good Conscience
note from moderator: the use of "johnboy" by this guest post should not be taken as the same johnboy who hosts this web site. see johnboy's clarification below:

So is a catholic sinning that says they use birth control because they can't afford another child and only have 2, but live in a $300,000 house and drive brand new cars.

Or the ones that say they only want 1 or 2 kids so they can still go on trips and have nice things.

I would think these types of reason would fall under greed which is a sin.

any opinions

[This message was edited by moderator on January 24, 2003 at 08:59 AM.]
January 17, 2003, 07:25 PM
this is a very good question.

presumably, money is not the only important consideration in coming to such a decision. there are also factors such as the health of the the parents, the type of work they do, and so forth. there are many other ways for a couple to be generous with their lives than by having and raising children.

just a few thoughts off the top of my head. i'm eager to see what others reply.
January 19, 2003, 12:52 PM
Hello there,
Would they be sinning if they avoided having more children via NFP?
I don't think anyone can judge the conscience of a couple besides our Father in heaven.
Peace, momof3

January 20, 2003, 08:12 AM
Good question! NFP can certainly be used in a sinful manner, but it is NOT intrinsically evil like The Pill, Norplant, Condoms, etc, etc. (At least thats what the Church says!)
January 20, 2003, 11:37 AM
the issue of intrinsic evil is not the subject of this thread, the way i read it. see the 'crux of the matter' thread featured at the top for that discussion.

the issue is that the present teaching allows for the spacing of children for good reasons, and the thread is inquiring if maintaining an upper middle-class lifestyle would be considered such.
January 20, 2003, 10:00 PM
If I am understanding this correctly, johnboy believes that as long as a couple has the economic wherewithall to have as many children as possible they should continue to have them to avoid greed? What about contributing responsibly to the ecology of the planet and avoiding anything that would depleat our natural resources as good stewards? This has moral value as well and should be considered good, holy, and in some cases heroic. My wife and I are not concerned with material gain, but we do see the importance of caring for our limited resources. This is why we choose to limit our family size. Many areas in the coming decades will be surprised to find they do not have the water available to sustain their populations. This will have devastating effects. Even if we could all "fit into the state of Texas", we still will not have enough water (and other things, but I am keeping the model simple) overall to supply the entirety of humanity. Things like this need to be considered when speaking of family size.
January 24, 2003, 12:41 AM
May our good and merciful God, who can do infinitely more for us than we could ever ask or imagine, continue to bless all who visit here. I hope johnboy001 understands that it might confuse other participants by registering and posting here on a bulletin board system owned by another johnboy. I'll let her/him work that out with the moderator. I don't check in here too often because I don't have the time (and not much interest either, to be candid). Folks like James and Hugh do such a good job with their voices of moderation, I'd be a redundant resource anyway, if I could measure up to their scholarship Smile

pax, amor et bonum