In response, I would like to link to something I recently wrote on Contraception (partly as a critique of Noonan's book on the subject). In it I honestly ask about something I can't figure out for the life of me: if the goal of using NFP is to make sure that people don't become pregnant, then how can you say that it's not contra conception (contraception)?
http://www.geocities.com/stainlesskings888/noonan.htmlIndeed, as even the flawed text of Noonan pointed out: "The method of contraception practiced by these Manichees whom Augustine knew is the use of the sterile period as determined by Greek medicine... In the history of the thought of theologians on contraception, it is, no doubt, piquant that the first pronouncement on contraception by the most influential theologian teaching on such matters should be such a vigorous attack on the one method of avoiding procreation accepted by twentieth-century Catholic theologians as morally lawful."
Justin
PS. Just so there's no confusion, I am speaking of general principles here, and not saying that there cannot be exceptions.
PSS. I should note that the text at the link is a rough draft, and am in the process of editing it (and will probably add something like 20% in content, including more quotes that actually deal explicitly with the contraception issue)
