\n<\/p>\n
Jul 21, 2025<\/p>\n
Get free PDF of New Questions, Old Answers: Catholic Morals Article on the marital debt The way Natural Family Planning is commonly Discussions of NFP often end up in confusion Given this moral doctrine, and given the The stakes of the question are low in the Moral theologian Eamonn Clark joins the This discussion will be spiritually and Eamonn Clark is a licensed moral theologian of DONATE to make this show possible! http:\/\/catholicculture.org\/donate\/audio<\/a><\/p>\n SIGN UP for Catholic Culture’s newsletter:\u00a0https:\/\/www.catholicculture.org\/newsletters<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\nand Natural Family Planning<\/em> https:\/\/profide.io\/nfp\/<\/a><\/p>\n
\nhttps:\/\/christianrenaissancemovement.com\/2023\/02\/23\/thoughts-on-the-marital-debt\/<\/a><\/p>\n
\ntaught does not adequately reflect the Church\u2019s perennial teachings
\non the purpose of marital relations, on sexual asceticism, and the
\ngood of continence. To be sure, critics of NFP are wrong when they
\nsay it is the same as contraception. The Church has deemed it
\nlegitimate to use under certain circumstances. Yet its typical
\npresentation in marriage prep programs and by popular Catholic
\nspeakers has ended up, in practice, encouraging couples toward
\nhabitual venial sin.<\/p>\n
\nbecause they fail to distinguish two separate moral issues: that of
\navoiding marital relations during fertile periods, and that of
\nengaging in them specifically during infertile periods. As to the
\nfirst issue, the Church has said we need sufficient reason to
\ndeliberately avoid procreating for a long period of time. But the
\nsecond issue involves a moral doctrine that is virtually never
\nheard of today: that there are particular ends which must be
\nintended in any act of marital relations, and in particular, that
\nit is a venial sin for married couples to have relations purely
\nfor pleasure<\/em> (solam voluptatem<\/em>, in Pope Innocent XI\u2019s
\nphrase). The latter is the teaching of all Fathers and Doctors of
\nthe Church without exception.<\/p>\n
\nChurch\u2019s (and St. Paul\u2019s) traditional encouragement of asceticism
\nwithin marriage, the question arises: may married couples engage in
\nrecreational<\/em> relations specifically while trying to
\navoid conception<\/em>? Answering this question involves questions
\nabout the intrinsic ends of sexual intercourse, questions about
\nwhat \u201cpurely for pleasure\u201d even means, etc.<\/p>\n
\nsense that this would generally be a matter of venial sin,
\nbut\u00a0<\/span> high in the sense
\nthat it bears on our understanding of the very purpose of marriage
\nand sex, and because habitual, deliberate venial sin is
\nincompatible with a marriage\u2019s growth in holiness.<\/p>\n
\npodcast to discuss his groundbreaking book (the first on this topic
\nsince the 1940s), New Questions, Old Answers: Catholic Morals
\nand Natural Family Planning<\/em>. His conclusions occupy a middle
\nground between the extremely strict position of some great Catholic
\nauthorities of the past, and the laxity and sensualism presented by
\nsome well-regarded and well-meaning popular speakers today.<\/p>\n
\nperhaps emotionally challenging to many listeners, but I urge you
\nto listen with an open heart, because even if you end up
\ndisagreeing with some of the specific conclusions, you will come
\naway better informed about Church teaching, and equipped to
\nconsider for yourself how you can seek greater holiness in
\nmarriage. In particular, I highly recommend Eamonn\u2019s book to anyone
\nwho is involved in running marriage preparation programs.<\/p>\n
\nthe Catholic Church \u2013 he has an STB and STL from the Pontifical
\nUniversity of St. Thomas Aquinas in Rome, where he is currently a
\nlay doctoral student researching the social teaching of Pope Pius
\nXI.<\/p>\n