Sunday, February 9, 2014

NFP Subculture: Don't Punish the Obedient

"I wish I liked Catholics more."
"They seem just like other people."
"My dear Charles, that's exactly what they're not--particularly in this country, where they're so few. It's not just that they're a clique--as a matter of fact, they're about four cliques all blackguarding each other half the time--but they've got an entirely different outlook on life; everything they think important is different from other people. They try and hide it as much as they can, but it comes out all the time."
- Brideshead Revisited Book I, Chapter 4
Last week John Zmirak at The Catholic Thing posted a stunningly fed-up rant about "the weirdness, bitterness, crankiness, and the general mediocrity that pervade the Catholic subculture," and how those negative aspects hinder evangelization, especially about Church doctrine on contraception. The Catholic population that actually believes and follows the Church's disapproval of artificial birth control is relatively tiny, and thus "as inbred as a pack of captive cheetahs, with all the dangers of deformity and disease that that implies."

Zmirak warns that "The Church as righteous subculture is unappealing to nearly everyone – including the kids who grow up inside it, who despite all those years of homeschooling and chapel veils frequently flee for what look like saner pastures ... We need to listen to [the secular world's] real questions and objections and do a much better job explaining ourselves. Or else that’s who we’ll go right on talking to – ourselves."

(*Edit: When I included this snarky soundbite, my intention was not to condemn the "homeschooling and chapel veils" set among whom I grew up and greatly respect. I seriously doubt the homeschooler apostasy rate is as high as Zmirak suggests. But I have also seen that no one pious practice is a magic bullet for sanctity and that intelligent young people indeed can be disillusioned by a lack of self-awareness in some traditional Catholic circles.)

It's true; self-righteous dismissal and distrust of Others isn't going to win any converts. It also endangers the few devout believers who do hold fast to beleaguered truths of the faith. Even if you are among the remnant that actually shuns contraception, there plenty of your compatriots ready to warn that you might be Doing It Wrong. Internet discussions about Natural Family Planning and childbearing are notoriously contentious. "Perfect love casts out fear," (1 John 4:18) but there is plenty of "bitterness, crankiness," infighting, and fearmongering in the NFP subculture. Look at any recent article about the morality and ethics of NFP, and you'll see several cliques all blackguarding each other:
  • Dire conspiracy theorists sure most people's reasons for postponing pregnancy aren't good enough 
  • Harried parents paranoid that they should be pregnant again or that they discerned poorly
  • Rival method loyalists engaged in combox brawls
  • Theologians insensitive to the emotional responses their coldly logical syllogisms elicit
  • Infertility martyrs who shame anyone with "lesser" sufferings for complaining
  • Glib spouters of the conventional wisdom that anyone struggling with NFP must be lazy and/or selfish, lustful, lacking in faith, or resisting God's will 
Is this really the alternative we want to offer the secular world? Instead of getting free birth control pills, you can be part of a tiny subculture that bickers about the minutiae of bodily functions and acts as the pregnancy thought police! Doesn't that sound life-giving and awesome? 

My own NFP experience has taught me how toxic fertility scrupulosity can be. Although I've been on board with NFP since I was a teenager, actually using it in my marriage has been a huge test of my faith. I had naively thought that obsessive charting would exempt me from those "lazy" user problems, but in reality the learning curve was steep. In our first months as newlyweds we dealt with much confusion, frustration, and loneliness. Had Theology of the Body cruelly duped us? Irregular charts made my body feel like an enemy and drove me into neurotic data tracking. I worried that God must be punishing us for some secret transgression and that I had failed as a wife. When I mentioned my spiritual conflict in confession, one priest told me this was none of his business and hinted I should just use birth control anyway. 

In reality, our problems were simply practical. Three methods, several hundred dollars of classes, and one minor surgery later, it's finally getting better. I now know what kind of charting works best for my personality and my body's habits. What helped me get through this difficult time was compassion from Catholic friends who acknowledged my suffering. Even if their own NFP stories were different, they trusted my judgement and encouraged me to persevere. I'm eternally grateful to the kind Franciscan confessor  in neon blue Crocs who told me "Yeah, this NFP stuff can be hard. Most priests have no clue."

I also appreciate the conversation Simcha Fisher has started with her hilarious and insightful book The Sinner's Guide to Natural Family Planning. She reminds readers that coming to terms with one's fertility requires spiritual growth, but that doesn't mean the NFP crowd should feel "judged and judgey." Only God can analyze fully a couple's hearts and childbearing decisions. Since Simcha's book came out, it's been heartening to see many other Catholic bloggers reveal their own NFP struggles and concur that there is no one-size-fits-all solution.

The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. (Mark 2:27) It's senseless to be Pharisaical towards Catholics who sincerely believe and practice all the Church's teachings. It's illogical to tell people that following the rules with an imperfect mindset is just as grave a sin as breaking them altogether. If orthodox Catholics are a clique that suspects the worst of its own members, why would anyone in their right mind want to sit with us? 

25 comments:

  1. Compassion, compassion, compassion, right? This is a beautiful post, not just because of its honesty, but because it calls us all to the kind of charity Jesus calls us to - you know, the go ahead and cast a stone if you have no sin yourself. What? No stone throwers? Didn't think so.
    If the Body of Christ might just take a deep breath and stop the divisive pattern of judgement and arrogance (on every side) we might just get a chance to understand better how sacramental the body is, and how we are all given the gift of giving our hearts to one another in compassion, instead of our head-wagging in condemnation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks so much, Christine! Being this honest was a little scary, but it's been on my heart for a long time. My own NFP problems really made me re-examine what compassion means in this area.

      Delete
  2. I can't figure out what his criticism really is. There is lots to be said for the horrible witness that I have seen fellow Catholics give, with their self-righteous in-language and comfort with judgin other people's motives, BUT. What was his point? It was lost in wordiness and nattering on...Did he really say "white trash?"

    That people Zmirak's age and older don't like the anti-contraception thing seems to me to be the real issue. And so what?

    ReplyDelete
  3. The "white trash" comment was off-putting to me too. But I don't think he meant that the Church shouldn't oppose contraception - just that the bickering "Catholic bubble" tends to rely on broad stereotypes of the people who use it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm not a fan of John Zmirak, but I've read his work for a number of years, so I can probably explain what he means by the "white trash" comment.

      As you know, the official Church teaching does allow couples to postpone pregnancy for financial reasons. However, there are many Catholics who believe that no couple in the United States could possibly have financial reasons for postponing pregnancy. (Simcha Fisher once called their attitude, "Fill your empty bellies with rocks and start conceiving!) As a result, they tell couples on Medicaid and Food Stamps that they are sinning if they postpone pregnancy. I have seen people in comboxes advocate that couples go on Food Stamps and Medicaid IN ORDER to have more children. Couples who choose to postpone pregnancy rather than use government assistance for the rest of the mother's fertility, then they have a "contraceptive mentality" or "lack faith" etc.

      There is a group of Catholics who believe that contraception is not only A sin, but the ONLY sin. John Zmirak has argued in previous articles that, according to St. Thomas Aquinas, a father has a natural responsibility to provide for his children. For John Zmirak, this means that a man who CHOOSES to rely on Food Stamps and Medicaid rather than provide for children by the sweat of his brow are committing a sin.

      What does this mean for "white trash Catholics?" For John Zmirak, this means that a Catholic family who find themselves in a position where they must rely on Food Stamps and Medicaid may use those things. HOWEVER, he also believes that the father is MORALLY OBLIGATED to try to find a way to support his family through his own labor, AND that a couple SHOULD postpone having a child until they can afford to feed the child.

      John Zmirak believes that, for many traditionalist Catholics, fertility has become an idol. Some of them believe that every single Catholic family is morally obligated to have as many children as they possibly can. John Zmirak believes that this belief ignores key realities, namely,

      1 Parents (particularly Fathers) have a natural duty to provide for their children's material needs.
      2 Parents have a duty to educate their children, as well as procreate them.
      3 The end goal of a baby is to become a healthy, productive, adult citizen.

      For John Zmirak, a Catholic couple who intentionally have a child knowing full well that they cannot fulfill these three obligations, are white trash. He also believes that it does not look good to the general, non Catholic population when they see a family continue to have children even though they know full well that they cannot afford to feed them without government assistance. It's bad PR.

      As I said, I'm not a fan of his for a number of reasons, but I read his work because I think it's important to read a wide variety of views, including ones who are vastly different than my own.

      Delete
    2. Thanks for the explanation. I wasn't aware of this "go on welfare to have more kids" strategy, but I can see how extreme providentialism could lead to it. Zmirak's criticism makes sense, but calling people names doesn't seem particularly helpful.
      Using government assistance is complicated and really depends on the individual situation. Say, if a Catholic dad lost his job and couldn't find work, the government safety net could help the family out. What about poorer families where one parent collects disability benefits? Should they never have children? It's a whole other can of worms, but Zmirak has a point that Catholics with large families shouldn't set out to be welfare queens.

      Delete
  4. This goes for just about any Catholic "rule". So much of transmitting of the faith is as much how one says it as what is said. We get ourselves locked into our tiny Catholic corner and the implication sometimes is either "this is not worth struggling over" or "why aren't you perfect already?!" SO many people have given up on the church because of these Pharisaical attitudes. I honestly think that we as a church can be MUCH more welcoming in just about every area, than we are currently.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The struggle that comes with ongoing conversion is important to understand - that's why the sacraments are always calling us to repentance! I think this issue is particularly fraught because it deals with a part of people's lives that is so personal, private, and vulnerable, yet is so open to public debate.

      Delete
  5. You left one group of commentators out of your list: philosophers. The cause of the in-bred clique is unsound philosophy, badly peddled by theologians. Theology will not solve the NFP infighting, because it is not theology's job to iron out the action theory and ethical framework that will make statements about NFP coherent. Unknown to most everyone, this philosophical work _was_ carried out, 50 years ago, by Germain Grisez, but his book was buried by *Ta-da* philosophically ham-fisted (though well-meaning) theologians. I think you would like it a lot. "Contraception and the Natural Law," pdf is online.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I have always marveled about the bickering and fighting that goes on amongst the people most trying to do the will of God. And I do think it is a matter of lack of the right type of prayer, allowing the devil to influence us A LOT, and lack of faith in the church. The right type of prayer (not negating the importance of community or vocal prayer) is where you sit quietly and REALLY come face to face with your faults and preconceived notions. It is prayer where you are honest with yourself and you better who God is. Lectio Divina (Biblical spiritual reading) is a great way to learn better who God is - who Our Lord Jesus is. He is compassionate! So many of these arguments are fueled by the pride, arrogance or fear of others! Satan loves it! He has a field day!! That is not to mention the people who, sadly, are either in schism or are just plain heretical. They are cutting themselves off from Our Lord who is compassion so how are they to be compassionate?? So, I guess my advice for everyone - INCLUDIND MYSELF is pray more - definitely use the Bible - learn from the saints how to deflect the attacks of the devil.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It baffles me too! We all know the Truth and want to live in holiness, so why is there so much disagreement? Can't the Eucharist just smooth everything over? That is a great point about Satan attacking the faithful.

      Delete
  7. A big reason why "people Zmirak's age and older don't like the anti-contraception thing" is because older methods of NFP really were "Vatican roulette". Couples who followed Church teaching had a significant chance of either having a very large family or a very ascetic marriage. You found a solution for your situation, but many of these solutions weren't available even 10 years ago, much less in 1968. Even if solutions were available, information was much harder to find in the days before social media and Google.

    Sociologist Fr. Andrew Greeley noted years ago that on contraception the Vatican went one way and everyone else went the other, which was causing a crisis of faith in the Church. He also said that it was unlikely at the time (1980s) that the Church would convince couples of their position. Nevertheless, he also speculated that this crisis would be resolved when Church approved methods of family planning were good enough to used in the mainstream. Likewise, a more recent survey of Catholic women found that many were interested in learning more about Church teaching but are afraid that NFP isn't scientific and doesn't work to prevent pregnancy.

    For Catholics who DO support the teaching on contraception, the best way to promote Church teaching is to promote the science behind it. I find it frustrating that Catholics spend so much time on theology and philosophy (not to mention self-righteousness and in-fighting) when so many don't know the science behind NFP and how it really is good for women's health. Also "practical problems", like you describe are pretty common and couples who struggle need help finding solutions, not judgment or, worse, amateur-hour spiritual direction/couple's therapy.

    (FWIW: My wife is a "homeschooling apostate" of the Evangelical sub-culture she was raised in. Inbred, insular culture is not exclusive to Catholics, and, dare I say, such a culture is more Protestant than Catholic, but I digress. Let's just say Zimrak makes some very good points on this.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I understand your point, but the science itself will never tell us why contraception is intrinsically wrong, since lots of things which risk health (i.e. driving a car) aren't intrinsically wrong. It is theology's job to identify, announce, and safeguard. It is philosophy's to argue.

      Delete
    2. The biggest concerns with the NFP are practical ones. When discussions of NFP come up among Catholics who don't follow the Church's teaching, the objection to the teaching is almost always "NFP doesn't work". Issues of theology and philosophy simply never come into play.

      Couples often do have serious reasons to avoid pregnancy and need a good way of doing that. If the practical problems aren't addressed, couples simply aren't going to listen to either the philosophy or the theology. When the NFP instructor has 7 kids and talks more about being open to life and the evils of contraception than about the science of the method (not that there is anything wrong with having a large family), couples are going to run the other way.

      Delete
    3. I very much agree with your comments James. I must add that when all of the written material/websites out there for NFP has lots of smiling babies on it and couples holding hands, it doesn't help matters.

      Delete
    4. Yeah, there needs to be a balance between assuring couples that NFP is reliable but also acknowledging that there is room for the science to improve. There are so many examples of women whose cycles didn't exactly fit the norm and had to deal with absurdly prolonged abstinence. Until we find a way to predict the exact day of ovulation, there's always room for more research.

      Delete
    5. Jamie, I agree. Many of the approaches are terrible. They try to do too much at once and do all of it badly. Pictures of babies are great—if you're talking about TTC.

      Zmirak mentioned that the community is "intellectually inbred" and this shows in the advertisements. There are a lot of fears of "misuse" in the NFP community, it used to be that unmarried women would use it for immoral purposes, now it's that couples would use it to avoid pregnancy so that they can have new cars and a boat. In the real world, most couples just use contraception. I think this greatly overblown fear of misuse is making the advertisements very cautious and unfocused and they are largely missing the target.

      Perhaps this is because it's a non-US site, but the Billings Method's Australian site is pretty good.

      Delete
  8. Sarah:

    Thank you for writing this. As a husband, Dad, and deacon I can relate. Great thoughts.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you so much. It means a lot to know there members of the clergy who can appreciate the struggles of NFP.

      Delete
  9. Uh, you may be interested in this very long, heartbreaking thread:http://caelumetterra.wordpress.com/2011/07/17/is-natural-family-planning-really-natural/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Umm yeah, that was heartbreaking. Pretty much a microcosm of the NFP culture debates. Also lots of good examples there of how NFP accuracy has room for improvement.

      Delete
  10. Would you want to consider sharing your experience/story on the website 'Conversations with Women' ?http://www.conversationwithwomen.org/

    ReplyDelete
  11. As far as "getting the most" out of NFP, one of the best pieces of advice that I received when I got engaged, from at least two married women, was to start charting NOW. Without condemning anyone that doesn't do so, I would give that very advice to anyone engaged couple - and they should work on it together, as a couple. I believe that this helped us once we got married.

    First, we had a "baseline" from which to work and make comparisons. We were more experienced and at ease once we were married. It gave us a chance to ask questions of our instructor without stress, to change methods (without being in "emergency" mode) if one or more hadn't worked for us. We had a great instructor, who has also been a great source of support and prayer since we got married, but if she hadn't worked out for us, we would have had the opportunity to find someone who did. Our confidence with the method once we were married, with all the variables that come with marriage, came more quickly. That's not to say that we don't sometimes look at the chart together and say, "I don't know!", but we are more at ease discussing it, see things more easily, and have fewer questions now that things are "riding" on accurate charts. When we have questions, we ask. In addition, if we hadn't been able do this and talk about it when the pressure wasn't on, perhaps that would have been a sign that we shouldn't get married? I don't know.

    I also think that each couple has to find what method works for them. That may entail different aspects of a number of methods. So what? As long as it works, you are comfortable with it, and the two of you can discuss it!

    Actually, I would even recommend that all women should chart even if before getting engaged or even if they are not dating. If nothing else, it helps a woman know her body and observe/address any issues, even if she never married. I have an unmarried friend who has been able to discover a serious health issue by charting her cycle.

    In the end, we need God's grace. The support, prayers, and love of others doesn't hurt either! ;)

    ReplyDelete