On another thread, one of the million or so about NFP, some people recommended the book Open Embrace. Then someone else said that the authors were no longer advocates of NFP and that the book should not be recommended.
I was curious, so I checked into it. They have put a statement on their website about the evolution of their thinking and why they changed their minds about NFP.
There was one statement in particular that caught my attention.
Cyclical periods of realistic abstinence can be great for deepening communication and creating a honeymoon effect. But it’s a theological attack on women to always require that abstinence during the time of the wife’s peak sexual desire (ovulation) for the entire duration of her fertile life, except for the handful of times when she conceives.
Now, as a self-confessed struggler with this whole topic, and I should really be more honest and call myself pretty much a complete failure on it, I have to say this statement really resonated with me. I completely relate to what they are saying here.
So, I thought it would be interesting to bring it here for discussion. I am aware that there are several arguments that will come up, so let me get them out of the way first:
**“They are Protestant, so their theology is flawed.”
“Anyone who thinks this does not have the right spirit about self-sacrifice in the service of God.”**
“Oh, give me a break. Sex is not necessary to a happy life or a happy marriage!”
There, now that that’s done… What is your first, gut reaction when you read that? I have to be honest… I found a lot of personal truth there.