As a catholic..

[mclees8]

You guys can to take this the way you want to but man has always wanted to be his own god. God upon the earth if you will. The papacy tries to do just that. They can tell us what Gods standards are in hopes that one day they can enforce it from their throne on Vatican Hill. They are inbed with the world and its leaders. They meet with one another regularly. This is why they will go the way of antichrist. The great danger to the church today is that they are being more and more politically minded to inforce change through world government and religious unity. When the church goes this way  through one like the pope they will forget Christ to except antichrist.

Man has always wanted to be god, it is true, but it is this exact desire that so rails against actually having God's standards to live by, which is the impetus for all those who wish that the Catholic Church would have no influence whatsoever on secular society.  That way they can keep human standards which are quite low rather than the divine standards to which they are called by God to be saved.

The Catholic Church has an edict in place where no ordained person can hold public office.  Their desire is not to seek power to control directly but simply to influence for the greater good of society.  Through faithful lay Catholics living their faith, legislation can be justly influenced.  That is the right of people in a democratic society.  The gospel is a force that brings about the good of all people, which should be the goal of all government, so politicians rightly should use their Catholic faith as that which guides their principles for effecting just legislation.

Mike
We maybe setting a standard yes, because Gods word and the church is still a force in the world that calls all men to Christ. So we are a moral beacon true. What I said was we are not about political change. You said that no clergy can serve politically but to influence the grearter good and it does but that is not the actual purpose of the church but that we influence them to come to Christ not to make men better just because the church is here. The world is still coming to judgment. Jesus said what profits a man if he gains the whole world and loses his soul. There is something more we must see than the moral ills of the world to influence society. I would pray I had a better command of writing and saying what I am.
There is only one purpose for the church that Jesus founded, and that is to bring all men to Christ not just influence the greater good. As I said many times the more the church looks to political solutions to solve the moral problems of the world the more it looks to Antichrist and that is just what the papacy does. The RCC once was a marriage of church and state and that is just what her goals are today. Yes there are a lot of moral issues as there always has been but the church is not about influencing society for the greater good and wanting make government change. It won't because it is of the world and all that is antichrist. We are not of this world but heaven is our Home and this world will be corrupt until Jesus comes for His bride whom he has called out of the world. Our hope is no the world will change but that we look for Christ who alone will establish His kingdom after the judgment.  If I could say more simply.

Does anyone understand what I am talking about?  Anyone
I think Amo might

[Catholica]

You guys can to take this the way you want to but man has always wanted to be his own god. God upon the earth if you will. The papacy tries to do just that. They can tell us what Gods standards are in hopes that one day they can enforce it from their throne on Vatican Hill. They are inbed with the world and its leaders. They meet with one another regularly. This is why they will go the way of antichrist. The great danger to the church today is that they are being more and more politically minded to inforce change through world government and religious unity. When the church goes this way  through one like the pope they will forget Christ to except antichrist.

Man has always wanted to be god, it is true, but it is this exact desire that so rails against actually having God's standards to live by, which is the impetus for all those who wish that the Catholic Church would have no influence whatsoever on secular society.  That way they can keep human standards which are quite low rather than the divine standards to which they are called by God to be saved.

The Catholic Church has an edict in place where no ordained person can hold public office.  Their desire is not to seek power to control directly but simply to influence for the greater good of society.  Through faithful lay Catholics living their faith, legislation can be justly influenced.  That is the right of people in a democratic society.  The gospel is a force that brings about the good of all people, which should be the goal of all government, so politicians rightly should use their Catholic faith as that which guides their principles for effecting just legislation.

Mike
We maybe setting a standard yes, because Gods word and the church is still a force in the world that calls all men to Christ. So we are a moral beacon true. What I said was we are not about political change. You said that no clergy can serve politically but to influence the grearter good and it does but that is not the actual purpose of the church but that we influence them to come to Christ not to make men better just because the church is here. The world is still coming to judgment. Jesus said what profits a man if he gains the whole world and loses his soul. There is something more we must see than the moral ills of the world to influence society. I would pray I had a better command of writing and saying what I am.

The Gospel is given to us for the betterment of all men, not just individually but as a society as a whole.  The commandments are in place to help us to love our neighbor.  Societies which are stable will both realize that their authority is derived from God and that their laws need also to be derived from God's laws for the betterment of their society.  For the Church to not be a guide and seek to influence politicians would not be loving our neighbor.  Woe to us if we don't preach the gospel.  Society is going downhill precisely because they ignore the moral standards of God, and now we even have legalized mass human destruction in the form of abortion.  The world is coming to judgment YES!  And we are judged by how we loved our neighbor, by how we obeyed God's laws.  If we desire for our societies to be saved, we should welcome with open arms legislation that is in accord with the divine law and outlaw things that are in violation.  For the benefit of the judgment of all nations, there can be no better resolve than to order our laws around the moral teachings of the Catholic Church.  Period.

There is only one purpose for the church that Jesus founded, and that is to bring all men to Christ not just influence the greater good. As I said many times the more the church looks to political solutions to solve the moral problems of the world the more it looks to Antichrist and that is just what the papacy does.

There are two ways to effect order in the world: to influence men to choose what is right within themselves, and to enforce what is right through laws.  A country that contains people who don't do what's right by nature will require more outside force to make that society stable.  The Church seeks to help people choose it for themselves.  But in societies the reality is that laws need to be created and imposed to enforce things from without, with penalties and whatever means are necessary.  The Church has always been simply a guide for that process, which becomes necessary based on whether or not people in a culture are behaving that way from within.

The RCC once was a marriage of church and state and that is just what her goals are today. Yes there are a lot of moral issues as there always has been but the church is not about influencing society for the greater good and wanting make government change. It won't because it is of the world and all that is antichrist.

That is a ridiculous one-sided statement, that "the church is not about influencing society for the greater good".  That is exactly what the Church is about.  Governments are a necessity because people don't always change internally, and to avoid chaos external influence is mandatory.  That is what laws are about.  The Roman Catholic Church has realized the problems with true theocracy, which is where Church becomes the State.  It now has laws in place to make sure that doesn't happen even among individual priests. But definitely the RCC has seen that secular authority comes from God; that is in the Bible.  Thus it should be guided by God, and God established His Church to be that tangible guide on earth.

We are not of this world but heaven is our Home and this world will be corrupt until Jesus comes for His bride whom he has called out of the world.

Nay, the bride is not called out of the world.  The bride is called to be in the world but not of the world.  And when we are in the world, we influence the world by loving our neighbor and teaching our neighbors how to love as well.

Our hope is no the world will change but that we look for Christ who alone will establish His kingdom after the judgment.  If I could say more simply.

Does anyone understand what I am talking about?  Anyone
I think Amo might

Nay, the kingdom is already being established, in it's mustard seed form and is growing.  The fullness of the kingdom is reached upon Christ's return.  Until then we are to build the kingdom through God's grace.

Amo probably is of the same mind of you on this matter.  I wouldn't consider that a good thing.

[mclees8]

We are not of this world but heaven is our Home and this world will be corrupt until Jesus comes for His bride whom he has called out of the world.



Nay, the bride is not called out of the world.  The bride is called to be in the world but not of the world.  And when we are in the world, we influence the world by loving our neighbor and teaching our neighbors how to love as well.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike  >Bad choice of words and I know that I am being misunderstood.  You are right that is what it states in the Lords prayer for the disciples. Lets look at not being of the world. What do you think that means?  James says that friendship with  the world is enmity against God. 1st John 2:15 says Love no the world nor anything of it. if any man love the world the love of the Father is not in him. I know about loving you neightbor and that was the command long before the church had any influence politically or in society. Loving your neighbor is the Lord's commandment for all believers. It would be for the world if the world would come to Christ but it won't so it means little to the unbelieving world.  What do you think Jesus meant when He said I pray for the disciples. I pray not for the world. What are we being saved from. Sin is in the world and every corrupt thing of men along with corrupt government and the spirit of antichrist that is in the world. The world is Babylon  and in Rev 18 it describes what Babylon is and the call for his people to come out of her. So what are we being saved out of?

[AVZ]

Catholica,

Starting with fresh sheet instead of copying the long previous posts.

I fear the RCC is trying to take out the wrong evil.

You say:

A) Contraceptives also create the mentality in certain governments that birth is something that can be controlled, thus giving credence in government controlled population numbers
B) No one is saying that artificial contraceptives are always the impetus for abortion.  But they actually do make abortion more "necessary" so-to-speak, because the consequence is unexpected among the mind frame that it's use produces.  And this by itself makes them evil.

ad A)
Contraceptive do not create mentalities. Mentalities are already there, contraceptives are a tool to execute those mentalities.
You could also say that guns create a murderous mentality. That would be equally incorrect.

ad B)
I tend to agree with you. A pregnancy despite using contraceptives is always more prone to abortion.
But should we therefore "blame" contraceptives? Lets scrutinize this a bit.

- If contraceptives would be banned, the number of pregnancies would rise.
- The basic reason for abortion is that a baby is unwanted.
- Follows, without contraceptives the number of unwanted pregnancies would rise
- Hence, without contraceptives the number of abortions would rise.

From studies, available everywhere online, you can find that around 93% of abortions are done because of social reasons.
Like: I don't want a baby, I am not ready, I cant afford etc.

If we were to ban contraceptives, abortion would increase because people's mindsets are not changed.
Our enemy is not contraceptives...our enemy is mindset.

Another problem is that we already see a trend that abortion itself is being seen as a contraceptive.
Like: just do what you want, if you get pregnant just go and have it taken away.

Lets express this in numbers (USA only)
According to statistics about 50% of the Christians in USA say they are Protestant, and about 25% say they are Catholic. (WIKI)
There are about 1.4 Million abortions in the USA per year
About 37% of these abortions are done by Protestants
About 31% of these abortions are done by Catholics

Source: http://www.antiochian.org/node/16950

These are very scary numbers. 68% of abortions are done by Christians (or people who call themselves that)
That's 950,000 abortions.
Protestants -> about 520,000
Catholics -> about 434,000

Here is the real scary thing.
There are 2x as much Protestants in the USA than Catholics.
So in Catholic society the abortion ratio is 60% higher than in Protestant society per capita.

Now if I would to reflect these numbers off on doctrine, I see that in basis the doctrine of Protestants and Catholics do not differ.
Both churches take the same stance on abortion.

Where the two do differ is the doctrine on contraceptives.
Hence the question arises, is the Catholic doctrine direct or indirect reason for creating this large number of abortions?
It is quite remarkable (but not really surprising) that the group that has the largest problem with the use of contraceptives is also the group with the highest percentage of abortions.

I think what the numbers show us is the lack of sound doctrine in Protestant and Catholic churches.
We are to teach people that sexual relationships lead to offspring, and we are to take responsibility for the consequences.
Only there can we capture the problem.

[BlackSepulcher]

I don't think doctrine has anything to do with it. The majority of Christians, like the majority of any other religion, are undisciplined and do not do what their beliefs dictate.
If we gauged them commensurate to true Christians by their claim, Christianity as a whole would be indistinguishable from secularism.

[AVZ]

I don't think doctrine has anything to do with it. The majority of Christians, like the majority of any other religion, are undisciplined and do not do what their beliefs dictate.
If we gauged them commensurate to true Christians by their claim, Christianity as a whole would be indistinguishable from secularism.

BlackSep,

I had exactly the same thought when I started my responses here. But then I realized that we have no clue whatsoever which of the above mentioned Christians are not "for real".
Actually I fear that many of the persons we see in church so often have indeed these deep secrets that we never expect from them.
Doctrine, and sound teaching must be the basis. I do not see how a church could move people to step away from sin other than by sound teaching alone.

I was looking for an analogy. Take science for example.

For many years the church has tried to keep science away from the flock because it was so "dangerous" to doctrine.
We never realized that in many cases our teachings were flawed and science was right.
And whilst we tried to ban certain teaching scientific teaching from the church...the atheist embraced it and turned it into their propaganda.
Right now if you want to be a scientist and a Christian, you throw yourself at the lions.

So where historically the church desperately tried to keep science away from people and even ban it from the church, it has turned against us.
We have now figured out that science is not in conflict with Christianity, but we are too late.

Same goes for contraceptives. Contraceptives are not in conflict with Christianity.
What is in conflict is that contraceptives can be used in a wrong framework. People's mindsets are corrupted, and it is that part that the church needs to address.
What the church should preach is responsible use of contraceptives.

Right now, with the complete ban of contraceptives, we are not only doing something that is completely unnecessary, we hand another tool to the opposite side to ridicule Christianity.
And these tools are first of all handed to them by members of the Church, as Catholics themselves are not following the teaching of the Church.

As this study shows: http://www.google.com.sg/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&ved=0CDgQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fepublications.marquette.edu%2Fcgi%2Fviewcontent.cgi%3Farticle%3D1001%26context%3Dnursing_fac&ei=4ygYUu2ZH4SMrQf_3ICIDg&usg=AFQjCNEkkHuaWmJUXJvvjuylT4cj2q5IrA&sig2=li6aSuOIcstXeUx-o7pqDA&bvm=bv.51156542,d.bmk

In particular attention is needed to page 141:
"One reason that "faithful" RC women – those who frequent church and believe that their religion is very important – had more frequent use of sterilization (than less-faithful Catholics) is that sterilization is a one-time event.  Couples can have the sterilization surgery, confess to a priest, and then be back in the grace of God and the Church."

Scary isn't it? It is failure of doctrine and it is leading us nowhere.

[BlackSepulcher]

I don't think doctrine has anything to do with it. The majority of Christians, like the majority of any other religion, are undisciplined and do not do what their beliefs dictate.
If we gauged them commensurate to true Christians by their claim, Christianity as a whole would be indistinguishable from secularism.

BlackSep,

I had exactly the same thought when I started my responses here. But then I realized that we have no clue whatsoever which of the above mentioned Christians are not "for real".
Actually I fear that many of the persons we see in church so often have indeed these deep secrets that we never expect from them.
Doctrine, and sound teaching must be the basis. I do not see how a church could move people to step away from sin other than by sound teaching alone.

I was looking for an analogy. Take science for example.

For many years the church has tried to keep science away from the flock because it was so "dangerous" to doctrine.
We never realized that in many cases our teachings were flawed and science was right.
And whilst we tried to ban certain teaching scientific teaching from the church...the atheist embraced it and turned it into their propaganda.
Right now if you want to be a scientist and a Christian, you throw yourself at the lions.

So where historically the church desperately tried to keep science away from people and even ban it from the church, it has turned against us.
We have now figured out that science is not in conflict with Christianity, but we are too late.

Same goes for contraceptives. Contraceptives are not in conflict with Christianity.
What is in conflict is that contraceptives can be used in a wrong framework. People's mindsets are corrupted, and it is that part that the church needs to address.
What the church should preach is responsible use of contraceptives.

Right now, with the complete ban of contraceptives, we are not only doing something that is completely unnecessary, we hand another tool to the opposite side to ridicule Christianity.
And these tools are first of all handed to them by members of the Church, as Catholics themselves are not following the teaching of the Church.

As this study shows: http://www.google.com.sg/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&ved=0CDgQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fepublications.marquette.edu%2Fcgi%2Fviewcontent.cgi%3Farticle%3D1001%26context%3Dnursing_fac&ei=4ygYUu2ZH4SMrQf_3ICIDg&usg=AFQjCNEkkHuaWmJUXJvvjuylT4cj2q5IrA&sig2=li6aSuOIcstXeUx-o7pqDA&bvm=bv.51156542,d.bmk

In particular attention is needed to page 141:
"One reason that "faithful" RC women – those who frequent church and believe that their religion is very important – had more frequent use of sterilization (than less-faithful Catholics) is that sterilization is a one-time event.  Couples can have the sterilization surgery, confess to a priest, and then be back in the grace of God and the Church."

Scary isn't it? It is failure of doctrine and it is leading us nowhere.

It is not a failure of doctrine, it just seems so when one doesn't take in the entirety of the doctrinal structure within the Church. One thing, primarily, that you are forgetting is that the doctrine of Purgatory ensures that all sin is accounted for- even after forgiveness.
No doubt, sterilization is a very mortal sin, and so the context of 'being in the grace of God' takes on a bit different meaning. One is still subject to a purge, and more so when having vain sex thereafter the sterilization and confession.

The Church cannot allow birth control because it is self-evidently not of God. It's simply something that does not belong in true Christendom, as Christians are supposed to transcend that sort of worldly vanity. The Church has always taught the immoralities of sex, long before birth control was commonplace. And so of course she is going to condemn such and continue to do so- the way they see it, mankind is pleading with a consequence they themselves created, and now want Christendom to barter with them.
_and that is moving in the wrong direction. People should be asking Christ to forgive their wrongdoings, not try to make God seem like He sanctions their vain affairs.


The Church simply knows danger when she sees it. Like science, as you said- in the era of Galileo, not much of anything was known about the world and the universe. They knew that this would cause a lot of problems with Christianity, and so they acted as defenders of the religion. This actually still echoes today, there is a lot of disdain between creationists and atheists (and perhaps theistic evolution as well; ironically the Church tends to lean toward TE now)- so one can imagine the Middle Ages was far more severe with that issue.
But in that, you see that there really isn't much of a parallel between science vs creationism and Church teaching vs birth control. One is on theological grounds while the other is moral, and by extension, one is subject to change while the other is simply not- not if you believe in moral absolution.

[FireSword]

The way I see it, is that bringing a baby into the world should be a planned event. The Church position is one of live let live and live with the consequences. Contraceptives give control back to couples who desire to plan their family, and not just give birth because of a random passionate event, and afterward now they decide to make the most of having this unplanned baby, by making good of a bad situation. The problem is a lot of people cannot deal with that and so decide to abort or give away their baby, both are painful events that could have been avoided with contraceptives.

[BlackSepulcher]

The Abrahamic worldview in general dictates that in marriage, there should be no restraint on children. In the event that those in marriage didn't want more children, they simply stopped having sex all the time because they often had little choice- birth control just wasn't in the minds of most people, to say the least of it's primal technique if actually done.

Nobody in those eras had a problem with that, I wonder what causes modern society to struggle with it? It is easy to see that birth control is a vice on mankind collectively, it would be better to not even exist and yet here are Christians supporting it.   ?

[FireSword]

The Abrahamic worldview in general dictates that in marriage, there should be no restraint on children. In the event that those in marriage didn't want more children, they simply stopped having sex all the time because they often had little choice- birth control just wasn't in the minds of most people, to say the least of it's primal technique if actually done.

Nobody in those eras had a problem with that, I wonder what causes modern society to struggle with it? It is easy to see that birth control is a vice on mankind collectively, it would be better to not even exist and yet here are Christians supporting it.   ?

That's a different culture. Often they would get kids, just so that they can be looked after when old. Large families would help them win skirmishes, increase lands and riches. Today more kids means less wealth. People want to enjoy their retirement.

[BlackSepulcher]

The Abrahamic worldview in general dictates that in marriage, there should be no restraint on children. In the event that those in marriage didn't want more children, they simply stopped having sex all the time because they often had little choice- birth control just wasn't in the minds of most people, to say the least of it's primal technique if actually done.

Nobody in those eras had a problem with that, I wonder what causes modern society to struggle with it? It is easy to see that birth control is a vice on mankind collectively, it would be better to not even exist and yet here are Christians supporting it.   ?

That's a different culture. Often they would get kids, just so that they can be looked after when old. Large families would help them win skirmishes, increase lands and riches. Today more kids means less wealth. People want to enjoy their retirement.

We were just talking today in church that the morals of Christianity is a constitution. I think it is a shame that people change the biblical constitution and all is fine, yet it's basically an affront to all humankind if, let's say, the US Constitution is even touched.

That in itself is evidence to everything I have stated thus far on this thread.

[FireSword]

The Abrahamic worldview in general dictates that in marriage, there should be no restraint on children. In the event that those in marriage didn't want more children, they simply stopped having sex all the time because they often had little choice- birth control just wasn't in the minds of most people, to say the least of it's primal technique if actually done.

Nobody in those eras had a problem with that, I wonder what causes modern society to struggle with it? It is easy to see that birth control is a vice on mankind collectively, it would be better to not even exist and yet here are Christians supporting it.   ?

That's a different culture. Often they would get kids, just so that they can be looked after when old. Large families would help them win skirmishes, increase lands and riches. Today more kids means less wealth. People want to enjoy their retirement.

We were just talking today in church that the morals of Christianity is a constitution. I think it is a shame that people change the biblical constitution and all is fine, yet it's basically an affront to all humankind if, let's say, the US Constitution is even touched.

That in itself is evidence to everything I have stated thus far on this thread.

Actually I'll contradict myself by saying more kids can dramatically increase wealth, by taking over businesses, towns and cities. This is how criminal organizations take over city.

[broach972]

No.  I agree with the teachings of the Church on this matter.

[AnnaM]

Would you use birth control? ...why/why not?

All forms of birth control are evil. Those who practice birth control are sinning mortally.

NFP: A Birth Control Deception

[Helen]

All forms of birth control are evil. Those who practice birth control are sinning mortally.

Yup, using our heads is sinning.....right.....

You do know that abstinence is a form of birth control, right?

[Catholica]

All forms of birth control are evil. Those who practice birth control are sinning mortally.

Yup, using our heads is sinning.....right.....

You do know that abstinence is a form of birth control, right?

Clearly the intent of this topic is considering artificial birth control.

Abstinence is not sinning, nor is it artificial birth control.

Artificial birth control separates the marital act from it's natural consequences.  It is therefore a violation of the natural law and a sin.

Furthermore, AnnaM's post should not be taken as indicative of Catholic teaching.  The video is not Catholic but rather a breakaway group of self-appointed "brothers" who are sedevacantist. 

[AnnaM]

The intent of this topic is clearly stated in the OP: "Would you use birth control... why/why not?" There is no mention that it's limited to Artificial birth control.

Opinions mean nothing when they're not in conformity with truth. The fact is the video is Catholic, is produced by Catholics, and shows the Catholic position on birth control. Since you so boldly assert otherwise, could you point out precisely what in the video is contrary to Catholic teaching? Have you even viewed the video?

[Catholica]

The intent of this topic is clearly stated in the OP: "Would you use birth control... why/why not?" There is no mention that it's limited to Artificial birth control.

How does one "use" birth control that is not artificial?  Does not one practice natural birth control methods?  You have to take into context the reality of our times today.  I think it is safe to assume that the author meant artificial birth control, because that is the common understanding of birth control today.

Opinions mean nothing when they're not in conformity with truth. The fact is the video is Catholic, is produced by Catholics, and shows the Catholic position on birth control. Since you so boldly assert otherwise, could you point out precisely what in the video is contrary to Catholic teaching? Have you even viewed the video?

The video dose utilize some Catholic teachings (I don't have time to watch the whole thing), but the producers are Sedevacantists, not Catholics.  Merely claiming the title of Catholic while observing Catholic traditions does not make one Catholic.  Being in communion with the validly appointed bishop of Rome, currently Pope Francis, is one prerequisite to being called Catholic.  And the Dimond brothers are not Catholic.

The title is "NFP: A Birth Control deception".   That itself is contrary to Catholic teaching.

Within the first two minutes, the narrator refers to the document Casti Connubii.  He quotes Casti Connubii:

(56) any use whatsoever of matrimony exercised in such a way that the act is deliberately frustrated in its natural power to generate life is an offense against the law of God and of nature, and those who indulge in such are branded with the guilt of a grave sin.

However also in Casti Connubii Pope Pius XI also states:

53. And now, Venerable Brethren, we shall explain in detail the evils opposed to each of the benefits of matrimony. First consideration is due to the offspring, which many have the boldness to call the disagreeable burden of matrimony and which they say is to be carefully avoided by married people not through virtuous continence (which Christian law permits in matrimony when both parties consent) but by frustrating the marriage act.

Pope Pius XI proclaims that virtuous continence is acceptable in matrimony.  The context on Casti Connubii is in response to the Lambeth Conference, through which the Anglican communion was the first Christian sect to proclaim that artificial contraception was acceptable under certain circumstances.   Pope Pius XI explicitly states what I wrote above (paragraph 53, emphasis added).

The narrator then goes on to state the goal of his presentation as a "fact", that NFP "is" birth control.  OK.... 

NFP, when used appropriately (and it can be abused) is in full accord with the natural law AND with the virtue of prudence.  It is also in accord with the words of St. Paul concerning "abstaining from relations for a time" to paraphrase.

Unfortunately some people use NFP without discernment, and therefore abuse it, using it as a natural way to simply limit family size to something more convenient to them.  But NFP can be used prudently.  For instance, when the health of the mother is at risk.  Prudent reasons should be discerned with the help of a faithful priest.

The author rightly lambasts the concept that people use it as a natural form of artificial birth control.  Well-meaning people within the Church do tout it as such.  But that is not the Church's teaching.  NFP can only be used when there exist serious motives, such as the physical or psychological health of the husband or wife.

We need faithful Catholics within the Church to fully restore the Church's true teaching, which is that for grave reasons (not selfish reasons) NFP is acceptable.  But some outside critics are not going to do anything, especially when they put in pictures intentionally selected to mock the new mass through someone's liturgical abuse.  That, friend, is an example condescending pride, uncharitable, and not done with the intent of helping another to make reparation for sins.  It is reminiscent of the pharisee, and statement thanking God that he is not like that sinner publican.  It is a tool of the devil: derision.  Derision in this case is being used to manipulate it's audience.

I encourage you to consider this teaching on NFP, which is actually faithful to the Catholic religion.
http://www.audiosancto.org/sermon/20120212-The-Sanctity-of-Marriage-The-Duty-of-Motherhood-Versus-the-Abuses-of-NFP.html

[AVZ]

The intent of this topic is clearly stated in the OP: "Would you use birth control... why/why not?" There is no mention that it's limited to Artificial birth control.

How does one "use" birth control that is not artificial?  Does not one practice natural birth control methods?  You have to take into context the reality of our times today.  I think it is safe to assume that the author meant artificial birth control, because that is the common understanding of birth control today.

Opinions mean nothing when they're not in conformity with truth. The fact is the video is Catholic, is produced by Catholics, and shows the Catholic position on birth control. Since you so boldly assert otherwise, could you point out precisely what in the video is contrary to Catholic teaching? Have you even viewed the video?

The video dose utilize some Catholic teachings (I don't have time to watch the whole thing), but the producers are Sedevacantists, not Catholics.  Merely claiming the title of Catholic while observing Catholic traditions does not make one Catholic.  Being in communion with the validly appointed bishop of Rome, currently Pope Francis, is one prerequisite to being called Catholic.  And the Dimond brothers are not Catholic.

The title is "NFP: A Birth Control deception".   That itself is contrary to Catholic teaching.

Within the first two minutes, the narrator refers to the document Casti Connubii.  He quotes Casti Connubii:

(56) any use whatsoever of matrimony exercised in such a way that the act is deliberately frustrated in its natural power to generate life is an offense against the law of God and of nature, and those who indulge in such are branded with the guilt of a grave sin.

However also in Casti Connubii Pope Pius XI also states:

53. And now, Venerable Brethren, we shall explain in detail the evils opposed to each of the benefits of matrimony. First consideration is due to the offspring, which many have the boldness to call the disagreeable burden of matrimony and which they say is to be carefully avoided by married people not through virtuous continence (which Christian law permits in matrimony when both parties consent) but by frustrating the marriage act.

Pope Pius XI proclaims that virtuous continence is acceptable in matrimony.  The context on Casti Connubii is in response to the Lambeth Conference, through which the Anglican communion was the first Christian sect to proclaim that artificial contraception was acceptable under certain circumstances.   Pope Pius XI explicitly states what I wrote above (paragraph 53, emphasis added).

The narrator then goes on to state the goal of his presentation as a "fact", that NFP "is" birth control.  OK.... 

NFP, when used appropriately (and it can be abused) is in full accord with the natural law AND with the virtue of prudence.  It is also in accord with the words of St. Paul concerning "abstaining from relations for a time" to paraphrase.

Unfortunately some people use NFP without discernment, and therefore abuse it, using it as a natural way to simply limit family size to something more convenient to them.  But NFP can be used prudently.  For instance, when the health of the mother is at risk.  Prudent reasons should be discerned with the help of a faithful priest.

The author rightly lambasts the concept that people use it as a natural form of artificial birth control.  Well-meaning people within the Church do tout it as such.  But that is not the Church's teaching.  NFP can only be used when there exist serious motives, such as the physical or psychological health of the husband or wife.

We need faithful Catholics within the Church to fully restore the Church's true teaching, which is that for grave reasons (not selfish reasons) NFP is acceptable.  But some outside critics are not going to do anything, especially when they put in pictures intentionally selected to mock the new mass through someone's liturgical abuse.  That, friend, is an example condescending pride, uncharitable, and not done with the intent of helping another to make reparation for sins.  It is reminiscent of the pharisee, and statement thanking God that he is not like that sinner publican.  It is a tool of the devil: derision.  Derision in this case is being used to manipulate it's audience.

I encourage you to consider this teaching on NFP, which is actually faithful to the Catholic religion.
http://www.audiosancto.org/sermon/20120212-The-Sanctity-of-Marriage-The-Duty-of-Motherhood-Versus-the-Abuses-of-NFP.html

Planning sex based on the infertile schedule is as much "sex without the consequences" as the use of artificial birth control.

[Catholica]

Planning sex based on the infertile schedule is as much "sex without the consequences" as the use of artificial birth control.

No it's not.

[AVZ]

Sure it is. You want to have sex and no children.
That simply is satisfying your carnal desire for sexual pleasure.
And its exactly the same satisfaction the person who uses birth control seeks, and its for exactly the same reason.

[chosenone]

AVZ that is something that I have pointed out before. Its still family planning just by a different means, as is the withdrawal method that some catholics use.
You are avoiding getting pregnant.

[chosenone]

Would you use birth control? ...why/why not?

All forms of birth control are evil. Those who practice birth control are sinning mortally.

NFP: A Birth Control Deception

In your opinion of course.................

[Catholica]

Sure it is. You want to have sex and no children.
That simply is satisfying your carnal desire for sexual pleasure.
And its exactly the same satisfaction the person who uses birth control seeks, and its for exactly the same reason.

No it's not.  By using NFP legitimately you:

1. Give yourself completely as a free gift to your spouse, holding nothing back, thus growing in intimacy with your spouse.  (Consequence)
2. Receive your spouse completely as a loving gift, thus growing in intimacy with your spouse. (Consequence)
3. Still are willing to accept God's will, even under the difficult situation that you are in (using NFP legitimately) and accept children if they should come.  (Consequence)
4. Grow in virtue over the practice of self-denial and become in control of your sexual functions (Consequence)
5. Obey God in observing his divine law, through the natural law, of which all laws flow from the divine (Consequence)

AVZ, you see the marital act from merely the point of view of a means for pleasure.  The Catholic Church sees it as so very much more than that.  It is a very sacred thing, a gift from God, not to be used selfishly.  If one sees the sexual act as pure selfishness then all things related to sex will appear selfish.  The sexual function is a grave duty and calling, and it must always be in accord with the natural law and open to the accepting of life, no matter what the circumstances.  Physical and psychological reasons make it prudent to avoid pregnancy for a time, and in order to do that, one still can obey God's natural law AND grow in virtue AND preserve the marriage.   

Did you know that divorce between people who practice NFP is less than 1%?  NFP, when used in a non-selfish, but virtuous and prudent way, is a gift from God and those who practice it receive God's blessings on the marriage in a real, tangible, even measurable way.

[chosenone]

Anyone who reads song of songs(and looks into its REAL meanings), can see that sex between a married couple is far far more than just getting pregnant.
God made sex for us as married couples to enjoy, and the benefits of sex are massive, spiritually, emotionally, and physically.
There is some thinking in a small number of believers, that sex is somehow sinful, so unless we are only having sex to have children, then we must NOT enjoy it, or even DO it.
Hense the follow on that Mary and her husband Joseph cant POSSIBLY have had sex after Jesus was born, because its so sinful, for getting that Mary would have been disobeying God Himself if she has refused sex with her husband.
Very sad.

[chosenone]

Sure it is. You want to have sex and no children.
That simply is satisfying your carnal desire for sexual pleasure.
And its exactly the same satisfaction the person who uses birth control seeks, and its for exactly the same reason.

No it's not.  By using NFP legitimately you:

1. Give yourself completely as a free gift to your spouse, holding nothing back, thus growing in intimacy with your spouse.  (Consequence)
2. Receive your spouse completely as a loving gift, thus growing in intimacy with your spouse. (Consequence)
3. Still are willing to accept God's will, even under the difficult situation that you are in (using NFP legitimately) and accept children if they should come.  (Consequence)
4. Grow in virtue over the practice of self-denial and become in control of your sexual functions (Consequence)
5. Obey God in observing his divine law, through the natural law, of which all laws flow from the divine (Consequence)

AVZ, you see the marital act from merely the point of view of a means for pleasure.  The Catholic Church sees it as so very much more than that.  It is a very sacred thing, a gift from God, not to be used selfishly.  If one sees the sexual act as pure selfishness then all things related to sex will appear selfish.  The sexual function is a grave duty and calling, and it must always be in accord with the natural law and open to the accepting of life, no matter what the circumstances.  Physical and psychological reasons make it prudent to avoid pregnancy for a time, and in order to do that, one still can obey God's natural law AND grow in virtue AND preserve the marriage.   

Did you know that divorce between people who practice NFP is less than 1%?  NFP, when used in a non-selfish, but virtuous and prudent way, is a gift from God and those who practice it receive God's blessings on the marriage in a real, tangible, even measurable way.

Thats because they are not allowed to divorce. I bet there are many annulments though.

  You are still trying to avoid a pregnancy that way.

[Catholica]

Anyone who reads song of songs(and looks into its REAL meanings), can see that sex between a married couple is far far more than just getting pregnant.
God made sex for us as married couples to enjoy, and the benefits of sex are massive, spiritually, emotionally, and physically.
There is some thinking in a small number of believers, that sex is somehow sinful, so unless we are only having sex to have children, then we must NOT enjoy it, or even DO it.

Quite a tale.  I don't know who you are talking about, however.

Hense the follow on that Mary and her husband Joseph cant POSSIBLY have had sex after Jesus was born, because its so sinful, for getting that Mary would have been disobeying God Himself if she has refused sex with her husband.
Very sad.

That would be a very bad reason for believing that very real truth that Mary and Joseph never did have relations, and Mary never had to deny relations to her husband.  This is probably because Mary was either a consecrated virgin entering into a caretaking marriage, or that Mary and Joseph both realized how very Holy Mary's body had become, having conceived God, and Joseph respected that God had made Mary's body his own.

[Catholica]

Sure it is. You want to have sex and no children.
That simply is satisfying your carnal desire for sexual pleasure.
And its exactly the same satisfaction the person who uses birth control seeks, and its for exactly the same reason.

No it's not.  By using NFP legitimately you:

1. Give yourself completely as a free gift to your spouse, holding nothing back, thus growing in intimacy with your spouse.  (Consequence)
2. Receive your spouse completely as a loving gift, thus growing in intimacy with your spouse. (Consequence)
3. Still are willing to accept God's will, even under the difficult situation that you are in (using NFP legitimately) and accept children if they should come.  (Consequence)
4. Grow in virtue over the practice of self-denial and become in control of your sexual functions (Consequence)
5. Obey God in observing his divine law, through the natural law, of which all laws flow from the divine (Consequence)

AVZ, you see the marital act from merely the point of view of a means for pleasure.  The Catholic Church sees it as so very much more than that.  It is a very sacred thing, a gift from God, not to be used selfishly.  If one sees the sexual act as pure selfishness then all things related to sex will appear selfish.  The sexual function is a grave duty and calling, and it must always be in accord with the natural law and open to the accepting of life, no matter what the circumstances.  Physical and psychological reasons make it prudent to avoid pregnancy for a time, and in order to do that, one still can obey God's natural law AND grow in virtue AND preserve the marriage.   

Did you know that divorce between people who practice NFP is less than 1%?  NFP, when used in a non-selfish, but virtuous and prudent way, is a gift from God and those who practice it receive God's blessings on the marriage in a real, tangible, even measurable way.

Thats because they are not allowed to divorce. I bet there are many annulments though.

This is counting civil divorces.  If "divorce" meant Church divorce, then the number would be 0%, not 1%.  To get an annulment, one must first get a civil divorce.  So you lose your bet.

  You are still trying to avoid a pregnancy that way.

Yes, you are exercising prudence within God's laws and avoiding pregnancy for a very grave reason.  But you are not avoiding any consequences.

[AVZ]

Sure it is. You want to have sex and no children.
That simply is satisfying your carnal desire for sexual pleasure.
And its exactly the same satisfaction the person who uses birth control seeks, and its for exactly the same reason.

No it's not.  By using NFP legitimately you:

1. Give yourself completely as a free gift to your spouse, holding nothing back, thus growing in intimacy with your spouse.  (Consequence)
2. Receive your spouse completely as a loving gift, thus growing in intimacy with your spouse. (Consequence)
3. Still are willing to accept God's will, even under the difficult situation that you are in (using NFP legitimately) and accept children if they should come.  (Consequence)
4. Grow in virtue over the practice of self-denial and become in control of your sexual functions (Consequence)
5. Obey God in observing his divine law, through the natural law, of which all laws flow from the divine (Consequence)

AVZ, you see the marital act from merely the point of view of a means for pleasure.  The Catholic Church sees it as so very much more than that.  It is a very sacred thing, a gift from God, not to be used selfishly.  If one sees the sexual act as pure selfishness then all things related to sex will appear selfish.  The sexual function is a grave duty and calling, and it must always be in accord with the natural law and open to the accepting of life, no matter what the circumstances.  Physical and psychological reasons make it prudent to avoid pregnancy for a time, and in order to do that, one still can obey God's natural law AND grow in virtue AND preserve the marriage.   

Did you know that divorce between people who practice NFP is less than 1%?  NFP, when used in a non-selfish, but virtuous and prudent way, is a gift from God and those who practice it receive God's blessings on the marriage in a real, tangible, even measurable way.

See, 1,2 & 4 are also exercised when using birth control.

But here is where you go way off track

3. Still are willing to accept God's will, even under the difficult situation that you are in (using NFP legitimately) and accept children if they should come.  (Consequence)
So what are you saying here. God is going to work a miracle especially for you, if He wants you to become pregnant after all?
Well, then why would God not work a miracle similarly when I use birth control? I mean, if God has to use a miracle...then we may as well make it a big one huh?

5. Obey God in observing his divine law, through the natural law, of which all laws flow from the divine (Consequence)
Which "law" would that be? Go and multiply? Well, I have multiplied already, so now may I assume that I have obeyed the law and now birth control is ok?


The biggest problem of course is that you spread out this holier than thou attitude that somehow you follow God's commands.
You just make it a bit more difficult for Him. Like, I totally put the size of my family in the hands of the Lord. But just to be certain that it doesn't get out of hand, I only do it during the unfertile period.

Did you forget what NFP stands for? Natural Family Planning
That means YOU plan. And the fact that it is YOU who makes the plan here renders all your points moot.

Oh, and with regards to percentages...that's really a dumb one...sorry for that.
You know if nobody would practice NFP what the divorce percentage would be? 0%!!!
The fact that the 1% is so low is because hardly any Catholic practices NFP, or alternatively they go for abortion instead of divorce.
We already know that the abortion ratio in USA under Catholics is about double of that under Protestants.
This 1% is rather a reflection of how little Catholics really care about this birth control thing.
You know what would be a good reflection? If you show me that the total number of divorces under Catholics are below the average. Now that would be impressive.

[Catholica]

Sure it is. You want to have sex and no children.
That simply is satisfying your carnal desire for sexual pleasure.
And its exactly the same satisfaction the person who uses birth control seeks, and its for exactly the same reason.

No it's not.  By using NFP legitimately you:

1. Give yourself completely as a free gift to your spouse, holding nothing back, thus growing in intimacy with your spouse.  (Consequence)
2. Receive your spouse completely as a loving gift, thus growing in intimacy with your spouse. (Consequence)
3. Still are willing to accept God's will, even under the difficult situation that you are in (using NFP legitimately) and accept children if they should come.  (Consequence)
4. Grow in virtue over the practice of self-denial and become in control of your sexual functions (Consequence)
5. Obey God in observing his divine law, through the natural law, of which all laws flow from the divine (Consequence)

AVZ, you see the marital act from merely the point of view of a means for pleasure.  The Catholic Church sees it as so very much more than that.  It is a very sacred thing, a gift from God, not to be used selfishly.  If one sees the sexual act as pure selfishness then all things related to sex will appear selfish.  The sexual function is a grave duty and calling, and it must always be in accord with the natural law and open to the accepting of life, no matter what the circumstances.  Physical and psychological reasons make it prudent to avoid pregnancy for a time, and in order to do that, one still can obey God's natural law AND grow in virtue AND preserve the marriage.   

Did you know that divorce between people who practice NFP is less than 1%?  NFP, when used in a non-selfish, but virtuous and prudent way, is a gift from God and those who practice it receive God's blessings on the marriage in a real, tangible, even measurable way.

See, 1,2 & 4 are also exercised when using birth control.

No, they aren't.  Birth control creates a barrier between bodies, a barrier between accepting everything the other person has.   4 is never practiced.

But here is where you go way off track

3. Still are willing to accept God's will, even under the difficult situation that you are in (using NFP legitimately) and accept children if they should come.  (Consequence)
So what are you saying here. God is going to work a miracle especially for you, if He wants you to become pregnant after all?
Well, then why would God not work a miracle similarly when I use birth control? I mean, if God has to use a miracle...then we may as well make it a big one huh?

No, I am saying that NFP properly practiced, always keeps in the mind of the couple that conception is a very real possibility, even with the difficulties which the couple has discerned necessitated NFP, and the couple stays open to accepting that child in spite of the very real, difficult sacrifices that it may entail.

Artificial birth control requires no discernment of what if.  There is the false belief that no baby will come.  With the pill, there is also the false notion that babies are not conceived.  But babies can be conceived and artificially aborted by the hormones in the pill.

5. Obey God in observing his divine law, through the natural law, of which all laws flow from the divine (Consequence)
Which "law" would that be? Go and multiply? Well, I have multiplied already, so now may I assume that I have obeyed the law and now birth control is ok?

The natural law, which is evident in our bodies.  In this case, we know through our bodies that the marital act was intended and has as it's primary end the conception of children.  We also know by the natural law that only at certain times is that likely to occur. 

The biggest problem of course is that you spread out this holier than thou attitude that somehow you follow God's commands.
You just make it a bit more difficult for Him. Like, I totally put the size of my family in the hands of the Lord. But just to be certain that it doesn't get out of hand, I only do it during the unfertile period.

None of this has anything to do with me.  I don't think that I am holier than anyone for doing this.  I just believe that it is right, and so I proclaim it. 

Did you forget what NFP stands for? Natural Family Planning
That means YOU plan. And the fact that it is YOU who makes the plan here renders all your points moot.

Planning in this case means discerning prudence with God's help.  We are always co-workers with God.  Even when we conceive.  It's called procreation as we take part in the creative process, with God.

Oh, and with regards to percentages...that's really a dumb one...sorry for that.
You know if nobody would practice NFP what the divorce percentage would be? 0%!!!
The fact that the 1% is so low is because hardly any Catholic practices NFP, or alternatively they go for abortion instead of divorce.

We already know that the abortion ratio in USA under Catholics is about double of that under Protestants.
This 1% is rather a reflection of how little Catholics really care about this birth control thing.

The 1% is of Catholics who practice their faith AND practice NFP.  It's not 1% for all Catholics.  In short it means that 99% of Catholics who practice their faith and NFP never seek a civil divorce.  There are lots of Catholics who practice their faith and get a civil divorce.  But only 1% of those Catholics also practiced NFP.

In terms of Catholics who faithfully practice NFP and get an abortion, that number is extremely low.  I couldn't find exact statistics, but just by nature, people who practice NFP are more open to life.


Here are some interesting statistics for you:

http://www.physiciansforlife.org/content/view/193/36/

[chosenone]

Sure it is. You want to have sex and no children.
That simply is satisfying your carnal desire for sexual pleasure.
And its exactly the same satisfaction the person who uses birth control seeks, and its for exactly the same reason.

No it's not.  By using NFP legitimately you:

1. Give yourself completely as a free gift to your spouse, holding nothing back, thus growing in intimacy with your spouse.  (Consequence)
2. Receive your spouse completely as a loving gift, thus growing in intimacy with your spouse. (Consequence)
3. Still are willing to accept God's will, even under the difficult situation that you are in (using NFP legitimately) and accept children if they should come.  (Consequence)
4. Grow in virtue over the practice of self-denial and become in control of your sexual functions (Consequence)
5. Obey God in observing his divine law, through the natural law, of which all laws flow from the divine (Consequence)

AVZ, you see the marital act from merely the point of view of a means for pleasure.  The Catholic Church sees it as so very much more than that.  It is a very sacred thing, a gift from God, not to be used selfishly.  If one sees the sexual act as pure selfishness then all things related to sex will appear selfish.  The sexual function is a grave duty and calling, and it must always be in accord with the natural law and open to the accepting of life, no matter what the circumstances.  Physical and psychological reasons make it prudent to avoid pregnancy for a time, and in order to do that, one still can obey God's natural law AND grow in virtue AND preserve the marriage.   

Did you know that divorce between people who practice NFP is less than 1%?  NFP, when used in a non-selfish, but virtuous and prudent way, is a gift from God and those who practice it receive God's blessings on the marriage in a real, tangible, even measurable way.

Thats because they are not allowed to divorce. I bet there are many annulments though.

This is counting civil divorces.  If "divorce" meant Church divorce, then the number would be 0%, not 1%.  To get an annulment, one must first get a civil divorce.  So you lose your bet.

  You are still trying to avoid a pregnancy that way.

Yes, you are exercising prudence within God's laws and avoiding pregnancy for a very grave reason.  But you are not avoiding any consequences.

Firstly a legal annulment in the UK means that you do not need a divorce, and secondly avoiding pregnancy through one means of birth control is no better or worse then any other, Wearing a condom is no worse than deliberately avoiding the fertile time of the month. You are still trying to avoid pregnancy. If you still get pregnant no matter what means you use, you need to accept that child as special of course.

I would far far rather have 2 or 3 planned and wanted children, than children who were conceived even though I was trying desperately NOT to conceive. How awful for that child. 
You do realise that nearly all Catholics in the west limit their families to 2 or 3 like everyone else dont you. Its only in the very poor countries that they have loads of kids who live in poverty and sickness and need.

[Catholica]

Sure it is. You want to have sex and no children.
That simply is satisfying your carnal desire for sexual pleasure.
And its exactly the same satisfaction the person who uses birth control seeks, and its for exactly the same reason.

No it's not.  By using NFP legitimately you:

1. Give yourself completely as a free gift to your spouse, holding nothing back, thus growing in intimacy with your spouse.  (Consequence)
2. Receive your spouse completely as a loving gift, thus growing in intimacy with your spouse. (Consequence)
3. Still are willing to accept God's will, even under the difficult situation that you are in (using NFP legitimately) and accept children if they should come.  (Consequence)
4. Grow in virtue over the practice of self-denial and become in control of your sexual functions (Consequence)
5. Obey God in observing his divine law, through the natural law, of which all laws flow from the divine (Consequence)

AVZ, you see the marital act from merely the point of view of a means for pleasure.  The Catholic Church sees it as so very much more than that.  It is a very sacred thing, a gift from God, not to be used selfishly.  If one sees the sexual act as pure selfishness then all things related to sex will appear selfish.  The sexual function is a grave duty and calling, and it must always be in accord with the natural law and open to the accepting of life, no matter what the circumstances.  Physical and psychological reasons make it prudent to avoid pregnancy for a time, and in order to do that, one still can obey God's natural law AND grow in virtue AND preserve the marriage.   

Did you know that divorce between people who practice NFP is less than 1%?  NFP, when used in a non-selfish, but virtuous and prudent way, is a gift from God and those who practice it receive God's blessings on the marriage in a real, tangible, even measurable way.

Thats because they are not allowed to divorce. I bet there are many annulments though.

This is counting civil divorces.  If "divorce" meant Church divorce, then the number would be 0%, not 1%.  To get an annulment, one must first get a civil divorce.  So you lose your bet.

  You are still trying to avoid a pregnancy that way.

Yes, you are exercising prudence within God's laws and avoiding pregnancy for a very grave reason.  But you are not avoiding any consequences.

Firstly a legal annulment in the UK means that you do not need a divorce

A legal annulment is a secular statement.  It is different from a Church annulment.  A Church annulment is a statement by the Church that a marriage never happened because it was entered into validly according to Church precepts.  I am not talking about legal annulments.

and secondly avoiding pregnancy through one means of birth control is no better or worse then any other, Wearing a condom is no worse than deliberately avoiding the fertile time of the month. You are still trying to avoid pregnancy. If you still get pregnant no matter what means you use, you need to accept that child as special of course.

It is, in fact, worse.  You just can't see it.  You haven't practiced NFP, you have no idea.  You have no witness.  I do.

I would far far rather have 2 or 3 planned and wanted children, than children who were conceived even though I was trying desperately NOT to conceive. How awful for that child.

People who practice NFP validly are not trying desperately to not conceive.  And what you want is of very little consequence in the grand scheme of God's plan.  It is the wrong attitude altogether.

You do realise that nearly all Catholics in the west limit their families to 2 or 3 like everyone else dont you. Its only in the very poor countries that they have loads of kids who live in poverty and sickness and need.

I am aware that faithful Catholic families don't limit their families in such a way.  Of our family friends, one has 10 children.  Two families have seven children, one has six with one on the way.  We have three children with one on the way (due to a long period of necessary NFP).  None of our friends have only three kids.  They all value life highly and love having kids and have showed a great openness to life.   And no one is pressuring anyone to have more kids.  They just love having kids.  And they love making them.  And they love Jesus.  You wouldn't believe the love that these kids exude for God and their neighbor.  It is caught from their parents.