Youcat commented through CCC – Question n. 421 – Part II.

YOUCAT Question n. 421 – Part II. Why are all methods of preventing the conception of a child not equally good?

(Youcat answer - repeated) The Church recommends the refined methods of self-observation and natural family planning (NFP) as methods of deliberately regulating conception. These are in keeping with the dignity of man and woman; they respect the innate laws of the female body; they demand mutual affection and consideration and therefore are a school of love.

A deepening through CCC

(CCC 2370 b) Thus the innate language that expresses the total reciprocal self-giving of husband and wife is overlaid, through contraception, by an objectively contradictory language, namely, that of not giving oneself totally to the other. This leads not only to a positive refusal to be open to life but also to a falsification of the inner truth of conjugal love, which is called upon to give itself in personal totality.... The difference, both anthropological and moral, between contraception and recourse to the rhythm of the cycle… involves in the final analysis two irreconcilable concepts of the human person and of human sexuality (FC 32).

   Reflecting and meditating 

(Youcat comment) The Church pays careful attention to the order of nature and sees in it a deep meaning. For her it is therefore not a matter of indifference whether a couple manipulates the woman’s fertility or instead makes use of the natural alternation of fertile and infertile days. It is no accident that Natural Family Planning is called natural: it is ecological, holistic, healthy, and an exercise in partnership. On the other hand, the Church rejects all artificial means of contraception—namely, chemical methods (the Pill), mechanical methods (for example, condom, intra-uterine device, or iud), and surgical methods (sterilization) — since these attempt to separate the sexual act from its procreative potential and block the total self-giving of husband and wife. Such methods can even endanger the woman’s health, have an abortifacient effect (cause a very early abortion), and in the long run be detrimental to the couple’s love life. 

(CCC Comment)

(CCC 2372) The state has a responsibility for its citizens' well-being. In this capacity it is legitimate for it to intervene to orient the demography of the population. This can be done by means of objective and respectful information, but certainly not by authoritarian, coercive measures. The state may not legitimately usurp the initiative of spouses, who have the primary responsibility for the procreation and education of their children (Cf. HV 23; PP 37). It is not authorized to intervene in this area with means contrary to the moral law.   

(The next question is: What can a childless couple do?)