Part 3: Humanae Vitae 45 Years Later: Is it still relevant?

Part 3: Humanae Vitae in 21st Century Language

Bob & Gerri Laird

paulvi-e1309644693333-445x181This week marks national NFP Awareness Week as well as the 45th anniversary of the encyclical Humanae Vitae. Part 3 of this series explores Humanae Vitae’s arguments via the modern language of John Paul II’s Theology of the Body.

In his writings and talks, Blessed John Paul II gave us a new formulation for the Church’s teaching on human sexuality, a way that speaks to a world that accepts behaviors that are degrading to our dignity as human persons. He begins with the human person and how we are unique: persons with bodies, made in the image and likeness of God specifically so that there would be a visible expression of personhood in the world.

The late Rev. Richard M. Hogan explained: “But if we are made in God’s image and likeness, then the body does more than reveal ourselves. It also reveals God when we act as God acts, and express those acts outwardly in and through our bodies. In this case, the body becomes a physical image of God Himself.  The body then has a dignity and value in its own right.”[1]

Hogan further states that

Blessed John Paul II revealed two worlds to us:

the world as God created it and the Church accepts as reality – that we are each unique unrepeatable expressions of God, possessing a dignity beyond compare; and that the body is sacred and holy because it is an expression of the human person and even an expression of God Himself, or

the world where the body is a machine and everything is possible – but the human person becomes an object and a thing with no dignity or value at all, and in which all human rights disappear.[2]

This is what Pope Paul VI was trying to convey in HV and what Blessed John Paul II continued to teach through his various writings and talks.

If the body is a thing, a machine which each of us owns and operates, then we can do anything we want with it because we own the machine: Pornography, lust, masturbation, contraception, sterilization, in vitro fertilization, test-tube babies, homosexual behavior, fornication, adultery – everything and anything is possible – every teaching of the Church regarding sexual morality and reproductive technologies falls if we accept the premise that the body is just a thing.

But, a lot of other immoral behaviors become acceptable as well: If we own our bodies, then someone else can own them – slavery could become acceptable, and there would be nothing (no moral argument) to assail it.

Renting our bodies (with all that entails) is possible.  There should be nothing wrong then with prostitution or sex trafficking.  We are just using the thing (body) that we, or someone else, own.

Abortion is acceptable because the parents are the ones who “own” the baby since they “produced” him or her. If they produce “it,” they can destroy it.

Even child abuse becomes acceptable because the parents (or whoever owns the child) are not harming the person – just the exterior body that the person inhabits. (Rep. Chris Smith noted the current proposal by ethicists to allow after birth abortions.[3]  Since abortion is a more acceptable term than infanticide, the ethicists simply added the adjectives after birth. If abortion is okay, then after birth abortion should also be okay, and so would euthanasia.

Yet all of these are violations of the human person:

Pornography, lust, and masturbation involve the use of oneself (and sometimes another) as a thing for sexual gratification and thus violate the dignity of the entire person.

In vitro fertilization violates the dignity of husband, wife and child: each is manipulated; their bodies are treated as sources of biological material (much like vending machines).

Homosexual behaviors, fornication, and adultery all undermine marriage; while those involved may think they are in love, their actions violate human dignity because they are using another person as a thing and desecrating their own integrity as well.

Contraception and sterilization – the use of mechanical, chemical, or medical procedures to prevent conception from taking place as a result of sexual intercourse – involve the alteration of a healthy, major, functioning part of the body. They damage or destroy a healthy organ and treat the body as a thing or a machine.

Abortion is the deliberate termination of a newly conceived life – anytime after conception (not implantation) – and thus is the destruction of another person made in God’s image.

With regard to our sexuality, the Catholic Church teaches that we are male and female human persons made in the image and likeness of God. We are made to love, and we are made for love. The Church will defend behaviors that respect our dignity and oppose behaviors that do not.

*    *    *

In Part 4: Natural Family Planning (NFP) is knowledge that “reads” the “language” of the sexual powers. NFP enables married couples to make virtuous decisions regarding responsible parenthood.


[1]Rev. Richard M. Hogan, “Theology of the Body as It Relates to Sexuality,” The Art of Natural Family Planning Student Guide®, Second Edition, 2007, 2011. The Couple to Couple League International, Inc.,  57.

[2]Rev. Richard M. Hogan, as stated in several of his talks on marriage, family, and Blessed John Paul II’s new theological construct.

Part 2: Humanae Vitae 45 Years Later: Is it still relevant?

Part 2: Prophecies Fulfilled

Bob & Gerri Laird

paulvi-e1309644693333-445x181This week marks national NFP Awareness Week as well as the 45th anniversary of the encyclical Humanae Vitae. Part 2 of this series points to how much Pope Paul VI’s prophetic vision has come true.

Why is HV significant today?

Humanae Vitae was prophetic. Pope Paul VI predicted grave consequences if methods of artificial birth control were accepted, and his predictions ring true today:

“Let [upright men] consider, first of all, how wide and easy a road would thus be opened up towards conjugal infidelity and the general lowering of morality. . . . It is also to be feared that the man, growing used to the employment of anticonceptive practices, may finally lose respect for the woman and, no longer caring for her physical and psychological equilibrium, may come to the point of considering her as a mere instrument of selfish enjoyment, and no longer as his respected and beloved companion.”[1]

In his 1999 book, The Decline of Males, Dr. Lionel Tiger proved (among other things) that when men are eliminated from the reproductive equation, it affects their sense of responsibility. He wanted to see how hormonal contraception affected male/female relationships, so he studied the effect of chemical contraception on male and female stumptail macaque monkeys. There were several writers awaiting the outcome of these experiments, as well as the results of his studies of human behavior, but he was unable to get much publicity once his negative conclusions were revealed. Although a skeptic when it comes to belief in God, Tiger concluded:  “Realities ignored are realities corrupted.”[2]

Rev. Richard Hogan summarized Tiger’s findings as follows:

“Two anthropologists, Lionel Tiger and Robin Fox, performed an experiment on a group of monkeys. The study included the head male, a number of other males, and some females. The head male, Austin, appropriated to himself three females and did not allow the other males to touch those three. Then, the scientists gave contraception to five of the females, including two of Austin’s three favorites. After these two of Austin’s favorites were medicated with contraception, Austin would still approach them, but not engage them as he had before. He found two other females who had not been medicated to replace the two who had been given the contraceptive medicine. With these two in addition to the one from the previous set of three who had not been contracepted, Austin formed a new set of three favorites. Of course, none of the other males were allowed to touch Austin’s favorites. Next, the scientists gave contraception to all the females. At this point, Austin became very confused, attempting rape and self-abuse. He would approach the females, but never engage them as he had before. When the scientists stopped giving contraception to the females, Austin re-established his relationship with the first set of three females and would not allow any of the other males to touch those three. The other males also re-established their relationships with the other females. Contraception caused the males to turn away from the females and toward deviant behavior.”[3]

Sadly, the prophecies inherent in HV were fulfilled in large part through the efforts of women. Feminism developed in the early 1900s as part of the movement toward liberalism, a strongly individualistic philosophy that is hostile to all authoritative religion. Individualism led to the degradation of the family because everyone was free and equal with no levels of authority as in a family. While liberalism offered women social opportunity as individuals, it also encouraged them to seek their success outside of the home.

The introduction of the birth control movement was an extension of this individualism: children were no longer a normative part of marriage unless they were wanted and planned. Unwanted children could be discarded through abortion. Spousal relationships embraced individual desires and needs rather than sacrifice and labor for the good of the marriage and the family. Women wanted reproductive freedom without consequences.

“Let it be considered also that a dangerous weapon would thus be placed in the hands of those public authorities who take no heed of moral exigencies. Who could blame a government for applying to the solution of the problems of the community those means acknowledged to be licit for married couples in the solution of a family problem? Who will stop rulers. . . from imposing. . . the method of contraception which they judge to be most efficacious?”[4]

And we are now faced with a Mandate to provide free contraceptives, sterilizations, and abortion-inducing drugs to all fertile women. The Obama Administration has drawn a line in the sand daring Catholics to practice their faith in the public square. If the government can require a religious organization to provide services clearly against its religious beliefs, it can also infringe on the rights of religious individuals or organizations in other ways.

“ObamaCare” called for the Secretary of Health and Human Services to provide at no cost to women (said nothing about men) preventative services. Preventative services in traditional medicine include: blood pressure and cholesterol screening; counseling on obesity and tobacco cessation; routine immunizations; diabetes, cancer, and sexually transmitted infection screenings; etc.  These services emphasize the prevention of serious illness and/or disease and can provide an early warning to illness or disease. None of these services has negative side effects.

The Secretary of HHS then deferred to the Institute of Medicine (IOM) to determine what is included in “preventative services.” The IOM added “the full range of Food and Drug Administration-approved contraceptive methods, sterilizations procedures, and patient education and counseling for all women with reproductive capacity.” (Recommendation 5.5)  The Catholic Church responded initially by showing that contraception, sterilization, and abortion-inducing drugs are not preventative medicine because they are harmful to women, and thus are not health care at all.

The Catholic Church wants to protect women from becoming mere commodities whose reproductive systems are regulated by the government. This new HHS regulation treats women as things, and every time the government interferes with our ability to function as human persons, we are closer to becoming non-persons – things. Furthermore, the mandate pits women against men and against their own flesh and blood because it does not respect the unique power held by both men and women to create a new life.  This is also why the Catholic Church opposes health plans that force individuals to purchase coverage for male or female sterilization.

Anthony Picarello, Associate General Secretary and the General Counsel of the USCCB, in a press conference on February 16, 2012, raised the religious liberty issue, “We are now entering a new stage.  It has gone from that which is allowed by government; to that which is supported by government; to that which is mandated by government.  This latter step is what makes it a religious liberty issue.”

The government has issued regulations that do not exempt most religious organizations, or groups and businesses operating with religious principles, from these directives. The latest final rule, issued on June 29, 2013, did little to change what the HHS proposed in the past and what the U.S. Catholic bishops have called unacceptable. Furthermore, President Obama publicly changed the language of freedom of religion to “freedom of worship.”[5] The distinction is critical. Americans, under Obama, have the right to freely worship in the Church building, but such religious freedom does not exist beyond the walls of the Church.

In a recent press conference, Archbishop William Lori, the Chairman of the Ad hoc Committee on Religious Liberty, said, “We in the Catholic Church have never seen such a distinction between what we do within the walls of a church and how we serve our neighbors. The faith by which we worship on Sunday is the very same faith by which we act in the world the other six days of the week.”[6]


In Part 3: We should love people and use things. If we can use people as society and the government now defend under the guise of “human rights,” then all sorts of immoral behaviors (abortion, prostitution, sex trafficking, slavery, pornography, and homosexuality, etc.) will be permitted.

[1]Pope Paul VI, HV #17.

[2]Lionel Tiger, The Decline of Males, (1999), 265. Tiger was deeply involved in bridging the gap between the natural and social sciences.

[3]Rev. Richard M. Hogan, “A band of brothers,” Homiletic & Pastoral Review, March 2005, 49.

[4]HV #17.


Humanae Vitae 45 Years Later: Is it still relevant?

Part 1: The Setting

by Bob & Gerri Laird

paulvi-e1309644693333-445x181This week marks national NFP Awareness Week as well as the 45th anniversary of the encyclical Humanae Vitae. Part 1 of this series looks at the culture and context in which this famous document was introduced.

What is Humanae Vitae (HV)?

Humanae Vitae is the encyclical letter by His Holiness Pope Paul VI on the regulation of birth. It was issued on July 25, 1968.

What is the context in which Humanae Vitae (HV) was written?

The sexual revolution was well underway within society, and the Second Vatican Council was in session (1962-1965). The mood within the Church was similar to the mood within the culture – everything was changing. In addition to concerns about the growing world population and available resources, living and working conditions, economic needs, and the education of children, the role of women in society was changing along with the value of conjugal love in marriage.[1]

In addition, the contraceptive Pill was developed and marketed in the early 1960s, and was promoted as a means to liberate women from the inconvenience of pregnancy and the pains of childbirth. Pope John XXIII (1958-1963) appointed a commission of bishops and experts to study the question of contraception with regard to the new Pill. Pope Paul VI expanded the commission, resulting in a majority report (favoring birth control) and a minority report (upholding Church teachings). With that incentive, Paul VI issued the encyclical “On Human Life.” The Latin name, Humanae Vitae, is taken from the first words of the document, “The most serious duty of transmitting human life, for which married persons are the free and responsible collaborators of God the Creator, has always been a source of great joys to them, even if sometimes accompanied by not a few difficulties and by distress.”[2]

Why did HV cause rebellion both within the culture and within the Catholic Church?

“Protest and the climate of change, combined with great expectation that the Church would change its teaching on the question of contraception, created a culture within the Church similar to that in the wider culture. When the encyclical was issued, it might well be compared to a man standing on a train track trying to stop a roaring locomotive at more than a hundred miles an hour. In a certain sense, Paul VI’s teaching, while prophetic and absolutely consistent with the Gospel, had almost no hope of a legitimate hearing.”[3]

Humanae Vitae addressed the issue of birth control on the basis of consistent authoritative Catholic teachings and Natural Law. Natural Law is “present in the heart of each man and established by reason, is universal in its precepts and [with an] authority [that] extends to all men. It expresses the dignity of the person and determines the basis for his fundamental rights and duties.”[4] This approach was objective, principled, and deductive; but the society was (and is) subjective, experiential, and inductive.

Thus, rather than turning to God to determine what behaviors are appropriate or inappropriate as human persons made in His image and likeness, individuals follow their own inclinations and/or those of others. As a result, sexual behaviors that were once considered immoral are now accepted as natural and permissible.

To illustrate this, consider the United States Supreme Court 1992 decision in Planned Parenthood vs. Casey: “At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.” Thus, society no longer considers life situations deductively and objectively by applying principled knowledge of right and wrong to determine what thoughts, words, and/or actions would be appropriate in any given situation. Instead, the culture is inductive – polls and votes decide personal beliefs and practices; subjective– reality is based on each individual’s perceptions and not on objective truth; and experiential – there are no set moral principles that apply to everyone. Individuals are now their own arbiters determining what is, and is not, acceptable human behavior.

Within the Church, priests, theologians, and even bishops rejected the encyclical; and outside the Church the document was considered to be “rather quaint and hopelessly outdated.”[5]

*    *    *

In Part 2: Pope Paul VI foretold that contraception is a dangerous weapon that can ultimately be imposed on women by governments. The Obama Administration has done just that by mandating free contraception, sterilization, and abortion-inducing drugs as part of preventative health care for women.

—      Bob and Gerri Laird have been a certified NFP teaching couple for the Couple to Couple League since 1984, and have written and spoken extensively on numerous topics related to family life, such as marital intimacy, natural family planning, parenting, chastity, post-abortion healing, reframing the abortion debate, and the HHS Mandate. 

[1]Pope Paul VI, Humanae Vitae (HV) [On Human Life], #2.

[2]HV #1.

[3]Rev. Richard M. Hogan, “Theology of the Body as It Relates to Sexuality,” The Art of Natural Family Planning Student Guide®, Second Edition, 2007, 2011. The Couple to Couple League International, Inc., 55.

[4]Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1994 (United States Catholic Conference, Inc.-Libreria Editrice Vaticana), no. 1956, 475.

[5]Hogan, The Art of Natural Family Planning Student Guide®, Second Edition, 55.


Sex & the City…Catholic style!

by Sarah S. Drew

Imagine if the wildly popular TV series “Sex & the City” were a book, only the main characters were morally-conscience Roman Catholics. That’s what “Style, Sex, & Substance” reminds me of. (Not that I’ve ever watched the show, of course.)

Ten women bloggers offer hilarious, heartwarming, real life reflections on topics ranging from identity and discipleship, style and beauty, marriage and motherhood, in fresh, candid, conversation as they each seek to answer the question: What does it mean to be an authentically Catholic woman?

What does she look like? What does she wear? How is her sex life? Does she have to be married with a house full of kids? Does she work outside the home? Does she have lots of friends? How does she present herself to the world and influence modern culture? Perhaps some of these questions seem superficial, but a reading of this book proves otherwise. The answers, the authors show, profoundly affect our self image.

It turns out most of the women had a vision of who the authentic Catholic woman is, and felt they didn’t measure up. More surprising, many of the women admitted that they didn’t think they were feminine enough. (Enough for what? I think in retrospect.) If you can relate to these feelings, you would benefit from reading this book.

Learn how Jennifer Fulwiler “fell out of her minivan and found herself”—a particularly funny story.  And how a cute dress inspired a complete 180 conversion for editor Hallie Lord. Personally, my favorite essay is Danielle Bean’s “We Said Yes.” Her exceptionally well written personal narrative on the joys and struggles of marriage had me laughing throughout and tearing up at the end.  You must read about what happened when her husband suggested she “get her hair done.” Enough said.

Clichés or not, it is no small feat striving for holiness in a fast-paced world where women are expected to juggle many tasks. I recommend this book for any Catholic woman, married or single, who has wondered who she is and if she is living up to some kind of standard she has set for herself.

Did I mention there’s a chapter for single ladies? Anna Mitchell offers up an honest portrait of the chaste single life. “Style, Sex, & Substance: 10 Catholic Women Consider the Things that Really Matter” is an entertaining, enlightening read. It will encourage you to look within and discover your unique, authentically Catholic womanhood.

Book Trailer: Style, Sex & Substance

— Sarah Drew is a Customer Service Representative for CCL in Cincinnati.

Family imagery at the conventions

by Mike Manhart, Ph.D.
Executive Director

I watched the President’s address Thursday night as I had watched Mitt Romney’s last week.  I’ll not dwell on the political positioning so masterfully orchestrated by both conventions, nor muse on how serious dialog on substantive issues has been supplanted by sound bites, straw men, and put downs.

What surprised me was the visual impact I felt at the families coming on stage after each candidate’s speech.

Last week, the Romney and Ryan clans filled the stage with young children more intent on grabbing balloons than posing for the camera. The hugs and embraces seemed genuine and warm. It was great to see young parents telling their dad he did a great job while keeping at least half their attention on their own kids scrambling underfoot. Call me old-fashioned, but it really felt to me like a Norman Rockwell painting celebrating what’s truly great about America — families.

When the same scene unfolded at the Democratic convention, I was surprised at my emotional reaction. To me, the Obama/Biden stage looked sterile and cold. The handshakes and hugs seemed more staged than genuine and it looked like a number of invited guests beyond family members came on stage…was this to get to the kind of numbers seen at the Republican convention?

My reaction took me by surprise because I fully understand how devoted President and Mrs. Obama are to their family, and the Bidens are clearly proud parents and grandparents. The Obamas certainly have a right to be proud of those daughters; they are growing into beautiful, composed, confident young women.

Why was my reaction to these two nearly identical scenes so totally different? Could it be because the Democratic scene showed love that was perhaps dampened by a cultural imposition of man’s will over God’s? I don’t doubt the depth and sincerity of the Obamas’ or Bidens’ love for their families, but I do wonder if this love doesn’t shine quite as bright because it is bound-up by secular ideas about the sanctity of life, the meaning of marriage and the idea that religion is only what happens in a building on Sundays and not what we carry with us every moment of every day.

Resources: Teaching kids about sexuality

Here are a few CCL-recommended resources for teaching children about sexuality.

An NFL quarterback who uses NFP?! You bet!

NFP in the NFL!

We are excited to announce that the September/October 2012 issue of Family Foundations features an exclusive and indepth interview with San Diego Chargers quarterback Philip Rivers and his wife, Tiffany, about their embrace of NFP and its impact on their marriage and family. Philip says people notice that their family is different: “People see how happy we are; it does stand out.”

Here is an excerpt from this 8-page feature story:

Committed to the Game Plan

Also in this issue:

  • Witness Talk: NFP orients couple to each other
  • Promoting NFP: How CCL chapters are successfully spreading the word
  • The birds & the bees: NFP families reflect on teaching children about sexuality
  • CCL makes a new push to promote NFP: How CCL is not taking the contraception mandate sitting down.

Award-winning publication

If you are not receiving our award-winning magazine, what is stopping you?! Family Foundations is unique in spotlighting issues of concern and providing relevant information to couples practicing NFP. Most readers are grateful to have the connection with other NFP users that the magazine brings.

Six times a year Family Foundations is received by all those who are members of CCL. If you do not currently receive our magazine, consider becoming a CCL member to get this helpful resource in your home. A gift membership is also a great way to introduce others to the NFP lifestyle!

Learn more and review sample issues here. For gift memberships, contact the CCL office at 800-745-8252.

Select issues available for sale

Select issues of Family Foundations – including the current issue featuring the Rivers interview! – are available for sale ($3.00 each plus shipping) in CCL’s online store:

Order single issues



Just one more

Real-life vignettes of welcoming the unexpected

(You read the vignettes that appear in the July/August 2012 issue of Family Foundations here.)

When my husband lost his job and we were facing a second move in less than two years, I immediately concluded (without much prayer or reflection, I’m sorry to admit) that this  was clearly not the right time to conceive another child. Even though my husband quickly secured another job, our financial future was uncertain and we were stressed to the max as we prepared to move to another town — something that is physically demanding on anyone, especially a pregnant lady!

But the abstinence was extremely difficult during such an unsettling time in our lives. We wanted and needed to feel the security of the sacrament of our marriage. We began to question why we were fighting what felt good and right during this time. After all, didn’t God create man and woman to desire to be together, especially during a time when He can unite with us to create new life? I was still a bit anxious about our situation when the thought struck me square between the eyes, “Why are you trusting God with everything else in your life right now except your fertility?”

I told my husband about this revelation, and that clinched it for us. We turned everything over to God.

That final level of trust was the missing puzzle piece. Our house sold, God provided us with a new place to live, and, yes, we welcomed our son, Henry, into the world nine months later. That is the beauty of NFP. God weaves it into our lives in ways we would least expect, challenging us to choose the path that will lead most directly to Him.

As I reflect upon this time in our lives, I realize that my husband’s job loss was not an excuse to not have another child, but actually God’s catalyst to bring another life into this world. That anxious and difficult time in our lives deepened our faith and strengthened
our marriage — two elements we certainly drew on later when we found ourselves in the NICU for one week after Henry’s premature birth. Perhaps God’s plan all along was to build us up into the parents Henry would need us to be. Denying God’s calling to welcome Henry into this world would be like denying God another opportunity to shape my husband and I into stronger, more faithful, more loving people.

Since turning our lives over more fully to God, our family has been blessed with grace that has grown exponentially. We still have to watch our budget, but there is always food on the table and everyone is clothed. More importantly, our spiritual lives reach new depths  every day. Our children are happy and joyful (most of the time) and my husband and I continue on our journey to heaven together.

We’ve come to the conclusion that God never wants us to dismiss a window of fertility lightly. God the Father and God the Son never refuse us the fruits of their eternal exchange of love — the Holy Spirit. In the same way we are called to listen for God’s calling to create new life from our marital exchange of love and answer Him with a resounding “Yes!”

– Charisse Tierney, Newton, Kan.

*    *    *

Ginny and I have been married for 21 years and have three children, ages 13, 11, and 9. We have embraced and enjoyed NFP for our entire marriage. I was baptized and received into the Catholic Church three years ago, and NFP has become the center of our marriage.
Ginny experienced some serious neck problems a few years ago, at which time we decided that three children were probably enough.

During Easter Week in 2010, Ginny suggested that we forgo alcohol during Holy Week. I thought this was some extra push before Easter, but on Saturday she called me at work to tell me that she had confirmed her suspicions and was pregnant with our fourth child. I was quietly excited! I had wished for more children and welcomed the challenge to have another baby after seven years. Ginny, on the other hand, didn’t share my initial  excitement. She was understandably mad (we, of course, thought we had followed all
of the rules) and worried about the effect this would have on her body and health. Our children were thrilled when we shared the news with them.

We had been planning a trip to Disney World in Florida the next year and decided, on short notice, to schedule the trip that May so the kids could enjoy the trip before all of the changes that would come with our family’s expansion. That trip was wonderful; we had so much fun anticipating the arrival of our newest family member.

Ginny and I had heard the baby’s heartbeat before the trip, so after the trip we decided to bring the whole family to the next check-up. Our doctor brought the ultrasound machine into the room, and what happened next will be forever etched in my memory. I saw that the doctor was having trouble finding the baby’s heartbeat, and after some hurried searching she sent the children out of the room. She was shaken and continued to search, but she could never locate it. Slowly, the reality of the situation started to envelop us. How could this be happening? Our first three pregnancies had been perfectly normal.

We entered the hospital the next day at 7:00 a.m., hoping to avoid a D&C and instead deliver our baby naturally. We were blessed to have Catholic doctors to help us through this process. We started the day with prayer and proceeded to labor and deliver our son Isaac later that day. He was about 18 weeks old, a beautifully-formed baby; only God knows what happened.

It had taken us some time to embrace the blessings this child would have brought to our family. To then have to totally change and realize that was not what God had in mind for us was very difficult, and sent each of us into a personal quest with God. We had a beautiful private service and our priest came to the cemetery to lay our son to rest. This experience has brought our family closer and has given us a new appreciation for the children we do have.

We love the freedom of true expression that NFP gives us, and hope that every couple realizes the blessings and power they possess when they let God lead.

– Chad Knutson, Brainerd, Minn.

‘Are we done?’ July/Aug magazine tackles responsible parenthood

Family Foundations, July/August 2012

It is often the hardest part of practicing NFP: discerning whether you have a sufficiently serious need to postpone the next pregnancy while balancing that against the call to be generous in the service of life. In our latest issue, we look at responsible parenthood from several angles:

      • What does the Church say: grave vs. serious
      • Why doesn’t the Church just make a list?
      • When spouses differ
      • Balancing generosity & prudence
      • Welcoming the unexpected
      • ‘The end’ with NFP

Also included:

  • Witness Talk: The freedom of NFP
  • Religious Vocations: How the NFP lifestyle opens the door
  • Fact Check: Cohabitation; breastfeeding & intimacy
  • Chart Review: Is your medication affecting your fertility signs?

Award-winning publication

Family Foundations was recently again honored for excellence in 2011 by the Catholic Press Association. We received three awards for writing, two for the work of Kathleen M. Basi (also a CCL teacher!), and one for writer Matt Doffing. You can read their winning pieces here.

If you are not receiving our award-winning magazine, what is stopping you?! Family Foundations is unique in spotlighting issues of concern and providing relevant information to couples practicing NFP. Most readers are grateful to have the connection with other NFP users that the magazine brings.

Six times a year Family Foundations is received by all those who are members of CCL. If you do not currently receive our magazine, consider becoming a CCL member to get this helpful resource in your home. A gift membership is also a great way to introduce others to the NFP lifestyle!

Learn more and review sample issues here. For gift memberships, contact the CCL office at 800-745-8252.

It’s Your Turn!

by Kathleen Basi

I love writing for Family Foundations. You know why? Because I get to talk to people throughout our fine organization, to pick their brains and get great ideas I can use in my own work as mother, parent, and NFP advocate.

But have you ever noticed how many of our sources are teachers and promoters?

Don’t get me wrong–I love talking to our volunteers! But I’d love to hear from the general CCL membership and other NFP couples, too. And here’s your chance:

If you are a second-generation CCLer, or the parent of a 2nd generation NFP user/s, I would love to talk to you! And I’m sure the entire national membership would love to know your “secret”!

Whether you’re a teacher, promoter, or just a faithful NFP user, please email me at I look forward to hearing from you!