Responding to the apostate Fr. Cekada on NFP
By Bro.
Michael Dimond, O.S.B.
A letter has been circulated from Father
Anthony Cekada promoting Natural Family
Planning. Fr. Cekada
claims to be a “traditionalist” priest who runs a chapel in Ohio. Father Cekada was
quite upset with our first article on Natural Family Planning, so he made his
feelings known to us. During the course
of his entire letter, he was unable to refute any part of our article and the
many quotes contained within it.
We have an article clearly refuting his
endorsement of NFP entitled: Natural Family Planning
is Evil.
Fr. Cekada makes
a lot out of those he deems to be moral theologians. Fr. Cekada is not a
moral theologian, but a complete heretic who believes that Jews who reject
Christ can be saved. He is not remotely
Catholic. Further, we ask Fr. Cekada: was St. Caesar of Arles a moral theologian?
Saint Caesar of Arles: “AS OFTEN AS HE KNOWS HIS WIFE WITHOUT A
DESIRE FOR CHILDREN...WITHOUT A DOUBT HE COMMITS SIN.” (W. A. Jurgens, The Faith of The Early
Fathers, Vol. 3: 2233)
I guess not, according to Cekada, since St. Caesar condemns practices such as NFP as
sinful. Some argue that couples may use
Natural Family Planing for serious reasons. However, the teaching of Pope Pius XI leaves
no room for this idea (see the article “Natural Family Planning is Evil.”) In fact,
Pope Pius XI condemns this idea.
Moreover, who determines what is a serious reason? The priest? The couple? To allow the use of NFP for serious reasons
is to provide couples with a “blank check” that they may manipulate at their
own liberty. This type of liberty, as
Pope Pius IX explained in Quanta Cura, is a liberty of perdition. While complaining that this matter should be
left up to the priests, Father Cekada ironically
places it into the hands of the laymen, all the while denying the teaching of
Pope Pius XI.
Pope Pius
XI, Casti Connubii (#’s
53-56), Dec. 31, 1930:“But no reason,
however grave, may be put forward by which anything intrinsically against
nature may become conformable to nature and morally good. Since, therefore, the conjugal act is
destined primarily by nature for the begetting of children, those who in exercising it deliberately
frustrate its natural powers and purpose sin against nature and
commit a deed which is shameful and intrinsically vicious.
“Small wonder, therefore, if Holy Writ bears witness that the Divine
Majesty regards with greatest detestation this horrible crime and at times has
punished it with death. As St. Augustine
notes, ‘Intercourse even with one’s legitimate wife is unlawful and wicked
where the conception of offspring is prevented.’ Onan, the son of
Judah, did this and the Lord killed him for it (Gen. 38:8-10).”
In reality, the argument against Natural
Family Planning can be summed up very simply.
Catholic dogma teaches us that the primary purpose
of marriage (and the conjugal act) is the procreation and education of
children.
Pope
Pius XI, Casti Connubii (#
17), Dec. 31, 1930: “The primary end of marriage is the procreation and the education of
children.”
Pope
Pius XI, Casti Connubii (#
54), Dec. 31, 1930:
“Since,
therefore, the conjugal act is
destined primarily by nature for the begetting of children, those who
in exercising it deliberately frustrate its natural powers and purpose sin against nature and
commit a deed which is shameful and intrinsically vicious.”
Besides
this primary purpose, there are also secondary purposes for marriage, such as
mutual aid, the quieting of concupiscence and the cultivating of mutual
love. But these secondary purposes must always remain subordinate to the
primary purpose of marriage (the procreation and education of children). This is the key point to remember in the
discussion on NFP.
Pope
Pius XI, Casti Connubii (#
59), Dec. 31, 1930: “For in matrimony as well as in the use of the matrimonial
right there are also secondary ends, such as mutual aid, the cultivating of
mutual love, and the quieting of concupiscence which husband and wife are not
forbidden to consider SO LONG AS THEY
ARE SUBORDINATED TO THE PRIMARY END and so long as the intrinsic nature
of the act is preserved.”
Therefore, even though NFP does not directly interfere with the marriage
act itself, as its defenders love to
stress, it makes no difference. NFP is condemned because it subordinates
the primary end (or purpose) of marriage and the marriage act
(the procreation and education of children) to the secondary ends.
NFP
subordinates the primary end of marriage to other things, by deliberately attempting
to avoid children (i.e., to avoid the primary end) while having marital
relations. NFP therefore inverts the
order established by God Himself. It
does the very thing that Pope Pius XI solemnly teaches may not lawfully be
done. And this point crushes
all of the arguments made by those who defend NFP; because all of the arguments
made by those who defend NFP focus on the marriage act itself, while they
blindly ignore the fact that it makes no difference if a couple does not
interfere with the act itself if they subordinate and thwart the primary
PURPOSE of marriage.
Also
interesting is the following teaching:
“THE ACT OF MARRIAGE EXERCISED
FOR PLEASURE ONLY IS ENTIRELY FREE OF ALL FAULT AND VENIAL DEFECT.” (Denz. 1159) -Condemned by Pope Innocent XI.
Despite this Magisterial teaching which
condemns Natural Family Planning, simple logic will tell Catholics that it is
wrong. If the Church has condemned
artificial contraception because it prevents the conception of offspring, why
would it be permissible to do the same thing by means of a different
method? Fr. Cekada,
read the testimony of various women who used NFP (in our article “Natural
Family Planning is Evil”); read what they saw so clearly which you, in your
blindness, do not: that they were practicing sinful birth control.
Natural Family Planning also involves a
lack of faith on the part of those who use and promote it. Even the heretic Cardinal Ottaviani
acknowledged this:
“Cardinal Ottaviani
spoke on the following day. ‘I am not
pleased,’ he said, ‘with the statement in the text that married couples may
determine the number of children they are to have. Never
has this been heard of in the Church.’
He was the eleventh son in a family of twelve children, he said. ‘My father was a laborer, and the fear of
having many children never entered my parents’ minds, because they trusted in providence.’” (Fr.
Ralph M. Wiltgen, S.V.D., The Rhine flows into the Tiber- A History of Vatican II. Tan Books, 1985, p. 269.)
Do the couples who use NFP, or the priests
who promote it, possess supernatural faith in the providence of God? Do they believe that God is the one who sends
life? Does God need Father Cekada, and other “moral theologians,” to tell him how many
children couples should have? Does
anyone have a right to have 3 children when God willed them to have 10? Father Cekada, you
have no right to tell people that they can limit their families. God is perfectly aware of each couple’s
needs, and he knows precisely what they can handle.
Father Cekada, LEAVE SUCH MATTERS TO GOD – and leave faithful
Catholics alone.
Those with the true Catholic Faith should
be totally unconcerned with charts and calendars. These are all unnatural instruments which
frustrate God’s will. Disregard this
nonsense and accept the fact that God will not send you any children that you
cannot handle. He will not burden you
with anything too heavy, for His yoke is always easy and His burden always
light.
If NFP’ers had
their way, there wouldn’t be any families with over 10 children, nor the many
saints who came from these families (e.g., Saint Catherine of Siena, 23rd child
of 25). Ironically, Fr. Paul Marx, one
of the world’s biggest supporters of NFP, was the 15th of 17 pregnancies (Fr.
Paul Marx, Letter to Friends, March,
1999). He would never have been born if
his parents had used NFP.
Unfortunately, besides Father Cekada, most “traditional” groups support “Natural” Family Limitation. The SSPX, the SSPV, the C.M.R.I., Servants of
Jesus and Mary (Nicholas Gruner’s Apostolate), and
many others will all tell you that couples can use “Natural” Family Planning
for certain reasons. It is very sad to
see that most “traditionalists” have also denied the true and unchanging
Catholic faith in one way or another, and it harkens back to the words of Jesus
Christ: “But yet the Son of Man, when he
cometh, shall he find, think you, faith on earth?” (Luke 18:8).
Priests who promote “Natural” Family Limitation , and couples who use it, are guilty of serious
sin. It is contrary to the teaching of
the Church, and it is contrary to the natural law. It is an insult to the providence of God, and
it is an utter lack of faith. We implore
all priests and laymen to accept the Church’s teaching on this topic, and
regain faith in God’s providence. If you
have been convinced by Father Cekada or anyone else
that this method was okay, repent and confess your sin.
One must beware of these wolves in sheep’s
clothing. And one must pray for these
priests that they may see the truth of God on this issue, and avoid the
eternity of Hell that awaits them if they continue to encourage family
limitation.
www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com