Catholic News Agency portal (December 20, 2025) presents natural family planning (NFP) as the Church’s alternative to artificial contraception, quoting the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (“USCCB”) and citing Paul VI’s Humanae Vitae. The article claims NFP respects “God’s plan for married love” by tracking fertility signs while avoiding contraceptive methods, with Jessica Vanderhyde testifying about improved communication through periodic abstinence.
Betrayal of Casti Connubii’s Uncompromising Standards
The article’s claim that NFP “honors the sacredness of the unitive and procreative aspects” constitutes theological deception. Pius XI’s encyclical Casti Connubii (1930) condemns any deliberate frustration of procreation, whether through artificial means or “natural” calculations:
“[…] 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.”
Modern NFP promoters commit heresy by suggesting that periodic abstinence during fertility constitutes virtuous behavior rather than venial sin. The Catechism of the Council of Trent teaches that spouses must always remain open to life, permitting marital relations only when procreation is possible. The sympto-thermal method and similar systems reduce sacramental marriage to biological engineering – contraceptive mentality masked as piety.
USCCB: Propaganda Arm of the Conciliar Revolution
Quoting the “USCCB” as authoritative reveals the article’s modernist foundation. This conciliar institution has no magisterial standing, having repeatedly contradicted pre-1958 doctrine through documents like Human Life in Our Day (1968), which illegally permitted birth limitation. When the article states that NFP “does nothing to suppress or block conception,” it embraces the conciliar lie that intention justifies circumventing procreation.
The true Church teaches otherwise: “It is intrinsically vicious to use matrimony in such a way as deliberately to frustrate its primary purpose” (Holy Office, 1944). Pius XII’s limited 1951 allowance for periodic continence applied only for grave reasons – a restriction abandoned by conciliarists who treat NFP as routine practice.
Naturalism Disguised as Holiness
Francis’ (“Leo XIV”) praise for the Billings method as promoting “tenderness” exemplifies modernism’s reduction of sacramental reality to emotional experience. The article’s focus on “building intimacy” and “improving communication” through NFP adopts the language of secular therapy rather than Catholic asceticism. Vanderhyde’s testimony about managing her husband’s “needs” through scheduled abstinence reduces the marital act to psychological transaction – the very contraceptive mentality condemned in Humanae Vitae 17.
This naturalistic distortion ignores the primary end of marriage – procreation and education of offspring – elevating secondary ends like “mutual aid” to equal status. As Pius XI warned: “This is not the Catholic doctrine on marriage” (Casti Connubii 11). The article’s omission of hell, judgment, or the necessity of grace exposes its anthropocentric worldview.
Humanae Vitae: Trojan Horse of the Sexual Revolution
By citing Paul VI’s encyclical as authoritative, the article commits apostasy. The true Church recognizes no authority in usurpers occupying the Vatican since John XXIII. Humanae Vitae itself contains poisonous errors, including the novel distinction between “artificial” and “natural” birth prevention – a dichotomy foreign to pre-conciliar theology.
The article’s statistic that NFP is “88% to 100% effective” in avoiding pregnancy proves its contraceptive essence. Such effectiveness rates match those of barrier methods, demonstrating that NFP serves the same anti-life agenda as chemical contraception. When Pius XII permitted periodic continence, he stressed it must not become “the usual way of married life” (Address to Midwives, 1951) – a warning ignored by conciliar “family planners.”
Silence on the Primacy of Supernatural Order
Nowhere does the article mention the duty to raise children for heaven or the eternal consequences of avoiding pregnancy for selfish reasons. The true Catholic teaching appears in Pius XI’s condemnation of those who “are carried away by some base and sordid motive” to limit children (Casti Connubii 54).
The absence of references to mortification, sacrifice, or the cross in the couple’s testimony reveals the bankruptcy of conciliar spirituality. Vanderhyde’s complaint about “frustration” during abstinence shows modern Catholics’ refusal to embrace redemptive suffering – a far cry from St. Gianna Beretta Molla, who died refusing treatments that would have killed her unborn child.
Conclusion: Rejecting the Contraceptive Mentality in All Forms
Natural family planning constitutes material cooperation with the culture of death when practiced without grave necessity. The article’s promotion of NFP as virtuous contrasts starkly with pre-1958 moral theology manuals like Noldin-Schmitt’s, which teach: “The intention to avoid offspring for selfish reasons, even through abstinence, is venially sinful.”
Until Catholics reject the entire framework of “family planning” – whether chemical or “natural” – and embrace generous openness to life, they remain complicit in modernity’s rebellion against Christ the King. As Pius XI declared: “Christian parents must understand that they are destined not only to propagate […] the human race on earth, but children who are to become members of the Church of Christ, to raise up fellow-citizens of the Saints and members of God’s household” (Casti Connubii 13).
Source:
CNA explains: What is natural family planning? (catholicnewsagency.com)
Date: 20.12.2025