E
- Status
P
Peeps
Guest
It’s a good, thought-provoking article.
I do have one “hmm” in the article. Ms. Miller says, "Your kids will see that nothing will shake your faith, and—this is key— they will not expect you to change for them . This understanding earns respect, and the bonds of love can still remain (even if they leave, like the prodigal), because it’s based on the integrity of who you are .
The problem I see with this is that many of us DO experience the “shaking of our faith” not because our children declare that they are gay or sexually-active or using cocaine, but because of something else that happens to US, something that we never thought could possibly happen, and we get mad at God for not delivering us from the “something.”
I’ve seen parents’ faith shaken when they run into financial difficulties, often because one of the parents loses a good job and family budget take a big hit. Other “faith-shakers” include (1) one of the parents involved with porn or with an affair. (2) one of the parents diagnosed with a serious medical condition like Type II Diabetes that changes the lifestyle of the entire family (3) one of the parents diagnosed with a disease that in all likelihood will be fatal (4) dealing with the decline and death of THEIR parents (5) betrayal of trust by a close friend or by friends in their parish/church (6) death of one of their children (7) the loss of a “dream”, e.g., being turned down repeatedly by publisher over a novel that they have worked on since their college days, or experiencing a burglary that results in the loss of a prized possession.
I’ve even seen people lose their faith when a beloved pet dies!
So…I guess I just think the author should be careful and watchful–we may THINK we are secure in our faith and our children will never see us cave, but we also need to recognize our own weaknesses and realize that our children have to come to faith on their own–they can’t be “grandfathered in” by our faith. They have to choose righteousness not because WE are their pillar, but because God is.
I do have one “hmm” in the article. Ms. Miller says, "Your kids will see that nothing will shake your faith, and—this is key— they will not expect you to change for them . This understanding earns respect, and the bonds of love can still remain (even if they leave, like the prodigal), because it’s based on the integrity of who you are .
The problem I see with this is that many of us DO experience the “shaking of our faith” not because our children declare that they are gay or sexually-active or using cocaine, but because of something else that happens to US, something that we never thought could possibly happen, and we get mad at God for not delivering us from the “something.”
I’ve seen parents’ faith shaken when they run into financial difficulties, often because one of the parents loses a good job and family budget take a big hit. Other “faith-shakers” include (1) one of the parents involved with porn or with an affair. (2) one of the parents diagnosed with a serious medical condition like Type II Diabetes that changes the lifestyle of the entire family (3) one of the parents diagnosed with a disease that in all likelihood will be fatal (4) dealing with the decline and death of THEIR parents (5) betrayal of trust by a close friend or by friends in their parish/church (6) death of one of their children (7) the loss of a “dream”, e.g., being turned down repeatedly by publisher over a novel that they have worked on since their college days, or experiencing a burglary that results in the loss of a prized possession.
I’ve even seen people lose their faith when a beloved pet dies!
So…I guess I just think the author should be careful and watchful–we may THINK we are secure in our faith and our children will never see us cave, but we also need to recognize our own weaknesses and realize that our children have to come to faith on their own–they can’t be “grandfathered in” by our faith. They have to choose righteousness not because WE are their pillar, but because God is.
Last edited:
E
Elizabeth3
Guest
You are right. There are so many things that can test our faith and we don’t always come through with flying colors. It’s funny you mention this aspect. This author did write several years ago about how there was something suspicious that came back on her blood work. Her dr. ordered a scan and found something on her lung that he said could be a nodule or could be something more sinister but they were going to watch it and do another scan a few months later. It didn’t help that her cousin had recently been diagnosed with lung cancer (mid-forties, raising two daughters, non-smoker).
She talks about how terrified she was, how she would clutch her rosary to sleep at night, how she couldn’t get out of bed many days and was so convinced that the next scan was going to show that whatever it was was growing. She said she was practically catatonic at the dr.'s office waiting to hear the results. Her husband had to talk with the dr. because her fear was so great. She said she ended up turning to her cousin and it was her cousin who helped her and talked her through her fears etc and I think it was she that recommended a book about how to surrender to God and find peace. She ended up being fine (her cousin passed away) but she learned a lot about how weak her faith was. She didn’t lose her faith but it showed her lack of trust and how she wanted her will over God’s will. She grew a lot spiritually by the experience.
I do think she is right in how we should respond to children who have fallen and to let them know that we won’t condone serious sin but yes, we do have to be humble in acknowledging our weaknesses that we might not even be aware of until our faith is tested.
She talks about how terrified she was, how she would clutch her rosary to sleep at night, how she couldn’t get out of bed many days and was so convinced that the next scan was going to show that whatever it was was growing. She said she was practically catatonic at the dr.'s office waiting to hear the results. Her husband had to talk with the dr. because her fear was so great. She said she ended up turning to her cousin and it was her cousin who helped her and talked her through her fears etc and I think it was she that recommended a book about how to surrender to God and find peace. She ended up being fine (her cousin passed away) but she learned a lot about how weak her faith was. She didn’t lose her faith but it showed her lack of trust and how she wanted her will over God’s will. She grew a lot spiritually by the experience.
I do think she is right in how we should respond to children who have fallen and to let them know that we won’t condone serious sin but yes, we do have to be humble in acknowledging our weaknesses that we might not even be aware of until our faith is tested.
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself
Patron
Speaking as someone who was one of those children who commit some big sins while also doing a lot of other non-sinful things in my life, sins, even big sins, are usually not the sum total of a person’s activity, and an adult child is often not going to be announcing all his sins to his parents, just as parents usually don’t announce their sins to their kids.
It’s usually possible to love and be proud of the redeeming qualities your child has and the good things your child does, while simultaneously expressing that you aren’t happy or proud about what you perceive to be their sins and failings. That’s how God treats us and how he expects us to treat each other. I could see cutting your kid off if his or her life had become such a toxic trainwreck that you just couldn’t deal with it any more, but the vast majority of cases are not that extreme.
I also think the parent-child relationship is very personal to each parent and child. It’s almost like a spousal relationship in that regard. It’s not one-size-fits-all, and no author is an authority on it.
It’s usually possible to love and be proud of the redeeming qualities your child has and the good things your child does, while simultaneously expressing that you aren’t happy or proud about what you perceive to be their sins and failings. That’s how God treats us and how he expects us to treat each other. I could see cutting your kid off if his or her life had become such a toxic trainwreck that you just couldn’t deal with it any more, but the vast majority of cases are not that extreme.
I also think the parent-child relationship is very personal to each parent and child. It’s almost like a spousal relationship in that regard. It’s not one-size-fits-all, and no author is an authority on it.
Last edited:
E
Elizabeth3
Guest
Absolutely. I agree with both you and the author “Rejoice and affirm when your child does good, but be sorrowful when he offends God.”
This is true but even in those extreme situations the door should always remain open on the condition of repentance. Which is why I think the author is not calling for a cutting off so much as making sure your child knows they would be the one choosing to leave their parents, God and the truth when they choose a sinful lifestyle. They would understand that their parents can not and will not be unfaithful to God by supporting them in their sin but that the door to home is always open and a loving embrace waiting. It’s very much in line with how God deals with us as seen in the prodigal son. The Father in the story never had a door closed to the son. It was the son who chose to leave.
0
0Scarlett_nidiyilii
Guest
We had a case in our family where the mother had been a faithful Cathy Catholic despite perinatal loss, financial hardship, parenting special needs kids, spouse with serious mental illness, isolation.
And then one day her faith simply…collapsed. She entered into an illicit relationship and never set foot in a church again until the day she died.
Weirdly, the one last vestige if her Catholicism was an intensely pro life belief system.
The whole thing was shocking to the rest of us, but she was always a Stepford Smiler type, so she was good at hiding her pain
And then one day her faith simply…collapsed. She entered into an illicit relationship and never set foot in a church again until the day she died.
Weirdly, the one last vestige if her Catholicism was an intensely pro life belief system.
The whole thing was shocking to the rest of us, but she was always a Stepford Smiler type, so she was good at hiding her pain
Tis_Bearself
Patron
I’m honestly confused about what exactly this author is trying to say or who she is trying to say it to.
I’ve never known a parent, Catholic or otherwise, who went around “slavishly affirming” everything their kid did in life, even if it was something that wasn’t necessarily a sin but just a major difference of opinion, like the kid protested the Vietnam War, dropped out of school, or married somebody the parents didn’t like or approve of. There are a small percentage of “my kid can do no wrong” parents, but it’s not the norm.
This author seems to be writing like huge numbers of Catholic parents are just praising and affirming everything their kids do, when the reality is more like, Our kid is gay, or has a baby out of wedlock, or recreationally uses drugs, or is engaged to a divorced person with no annulment and they’re getting married at the non-denominational church on the beach, and we have to figure out some way to go forward as a family. Often these situations create a huge amount of turmoil within a family that they don’t necessarily call up outsiders like Leila and share.
I’ve never known a parent, Catholic or otherwise, who went around “slavishly affirming” everything their kid did in life, even if it was something that wasn’t necessarily a sin but just a major difference of opinion, like the kid protested the Vietnam War, dropped out of school, or married somebody the parents didn’t like or approve of. There are a small percentage of “my kid can do no wrong” parents, but it’s not the norm.
This author seems to be writing like huge numbers of Catholic parents are just praising and affirming everything their kids do, when the reality is more like, Our kid is gay, or has a baby out of wedlock, or recreationally uses drugs, or is engaged to a divorced person with no annulment and they’re getting married at the non-denominational church on the beach, and we have to figure out some way to go forward as a family. Often these situations create a huge amount of turmoil within a family that they don’t necessarily call up outsiders like Leila and share.
S
Sarcelle
Guest
I read a quote somewhere that God is a father not a grandfather.
T
ThomasMT
Guest
Charity without truth makes love not.
P
Peeps
Guest
Tis_Bearself, I agree with you. I think most regular folks continue to include their “wayward children” in the family gatherings and activities and give them plenty of love, practical help when needed, and affirmations of acceptance and love. Although they may express some disapproval (and sometime they do so with passive aggressiveness which just makes things tense IMO) , they don’t reject their child unless the child is a danger to themselves or other families members.
If the child is indulging in a sin like drug addiction or crime, which poses a danger to the child and to society, I’ve known parents to take more drastic measures.
But most parents just kind of sigh and pray a lot and continue loving their kids!
I think that there are celebrities, including Christian celebrities (even priests and religious) who have made it known that they are Catholics, but who have gone to fantastic lengths to justify their own or someone else’s (e.g. their children’s) choices to engage in behaviors that have traditionally been considered “sin” by the Church.
Some of them reference various “histories” of the Church that seem to teach that sins like sexual activity between two people of the same sex is actually part of God’s beautiful plan (e.g., interpretations of the Bible that claim the David and Jonathan were gay). Others put forth the argument that “love is of God and as long as there is love, I’m OK, you’re Ok.” Some claim that “God” is much much bigger and more inclusive than the historic Church, and that they have personally discovered the “full truth” about God and Christianity.
Whatever they say, it’s heresy. But because they’re celebs, regular folks sometimes listen harder and attempt to follow the same wrong path in order to deal with their children’s sin.
If the child is indulging in a sin like drug addiction or crime, which poses a danger to the child and to society, I’ve known parents to take more drastic measures.
But most parents just kind of sigh and pray a lot and continue loving their kids!
I think that there are celebrities, including Christian celebrities (even priests and religious) who have made it known that they are Catholics, but who have gone to fantastic lengths to justify their own or someone else’s (e.g. their children’s) choices to engage in behaviors that have traditionally been considered “sin” by the Church.
Some of them reference various “histories” of the Church that seem to teach that sins like sexual activity between two people of the same sex is actually part of God’s beautiful plan (e.g., interpretations of the Bible that claim the David and Jonathan were gay). Others put forth the argument that “love is of God and as long as there is love, I’m OK, you’re Ok.” Some claim that “God” is much much bigger and more inclusive than the historic Church, and that they have personally discovered the “full truth” about God and Christianity.
Whatever they say, it’s heresy. But because they’re celebs, regular folks sometimes listen harder and attempt to follow the same wrong path in order to deal with their children’s sin.
B
Bahzell
Guest
Damian243 - your argument has numerous fallacies.
You also are using a false analogy. A better analogy than race or gender would be alcoholism. The Catholic Church does not teach that suffering from same sex attraction is a sin, nor does it teach that having an addiction to alcohol is a sin. Instead, the Catholic Church teaches that both individuals are responsible for their actions, and their actions (homosexual sex, drinking) may be sinful. Your proposed analogy to race or gender lacks a distinction between a state of existence and an associated activity.
Your statement here represents a strawman argument and a false dilemma. You have illegitimately broadened Catholic teaching to advocate for forcing people to wear a bag to hide their race or gender. Please cite authoritative Catholic teaching to show this is the case, otherwise your argument can be discarded. It appears that you are trying to claim a direct analogy between race, gender, and sexual orientation. You state as undisputed fact that you cannot choose your sexual orientation, a statement which has not yet been proven and needs to be proven for your argument. Even if your assumption holds, you are comparing apples to oranges. Race and gender are recognized as not moral issues; sexual activity has always been a moral issue. You are conflating expression of sexual orientation with sexual orientation; the Catholic Church does not teach that sexual orientation is inherently sinful, but that particular sexual activity is sinful.
You also are using a false analogy. A better analogy than race or gender would be alcoholism. The Catholic Church does not teach that suffering from same sex attraction is a sin, nor does it teach that having an addiction to alcohol is a sin. Instead, the Catholic Church teaches that both individuals are responsible for their actions, and their actions (homosexual sex, drinking) may be sinful. Your proposed analogy to race or gender lacks a distinction between a state of existence and an associated activity.
Here you are stating the end result of your argument as facts, without providing any justification. These statements, therefore, are meaningless.
Where do you get the authority to determine what represents a “hate group” and “bigotry”? I could equally declare that your argument represents anti-Catholic bigotry, with more justification. Your argument was to assert that your beliefs are true (without proof). Therefore, anyone who disagrees with you must be a bigot.
Tis_Bearself
Patron
It’s pretty obvious that this is not Catholic teaching, and that this post is another case of a non-Catholic coming into a thread about a Catholic question/ Catholic issue (in this case, Catholic parenting) and giving some non-Catholic, in this case “Secular Humanist” view of the matter, usually for the case of criticizing the faith.
These sorts of responses are not helpful or productive because all they do is derail the thread. This isn’t a thread on “what other people don’t like about Catholic belief”, it’s a thread specifically about Catholic parenting. If you want to discuss your issues with a Catholic belief, please start a new thread and don’t derail threads where someone else obviously wants to discuss from a Catholic perspective.
B
brown_bear
Guest
That means that if they decide to quit going to Mass while under your roof, that won’t fly; they will go to Mass or leave your home.
It’s a joke, isn’t it?
If it isn’t, don’t tell me.
It’s a joke, isn’t it?
If it isn’t, don’t tell me.
P
phil19034
Guest
I think this is a very important point you bring up.
To be clear, I don’t think the author mentioned anything about cutting off your kid. But far too many people unfortunately do think cutting off their kid is the appropriate response.
Instead of cutting off the child, the author mentioned things like “I will not visit your house,” “I will not attend an invalid wedding ceremony,” etc.
She never says shut the child out of your life and cut them off. But she does tell us to make sure our kids understand from a very young age what we will accept and not accept.
I think this is a great point. If the kids know at age 12 that mom & dad will never attend an invalid wedding (whether a gay wedding or a Catholic marrying outside the Church without permission), they will not be shocked.
I think a big problem we make as parents is that we always think our children are too young for us to discuss the “sensitive issues,” like abortion, fornication, masturbation, homosexuality, porn, etc. So we put it off until well after our kids have already been taught by society & their friends.
By then, it’s almost too late to mold them.
Overall, I felt this article was very good & very thought provoking - and your point was very spot on too.
Tis_Bearself
Patron
There’s also a good number of kids whose parents make a concerted effort to mold them, and it doesn’t take. Not because the kid doesn’t love his or her parents, not because the kid is trying to rebel, not because the parents did a bad job of training. It just doesn’t take, because whatever forces are working inside that kid are stronger than what dear old Mom and Dad said or the example that they set.
This seems to be what happened with St. Augustine. His parents tried very hard to raise him up right, his mother taught him the Christian faith, but he went off and sinned anyway,. The stuff he did was somewhere between questionable and very bad by the standards of Christianity at that time, but acceptable or pretty tame by the standards of the secular culture in which he lived. His parents continued to have a parental relationship with him and be close to him and encourage him but I think his mother made her disapproval pretty clear. Eventually he came around on his own.
It’s not always the parents’ fault.
This seems to be what happened with St. Augustine. His parents tried very hard to raise him up right, his mother taught him the Christian faith, but he went off and sinned anyway,. The stuff he did was somewhere between questionable and very bad by the standards of Christianity at that time, but acceptable or pretty tame by the standards of the secular culture in which he lived. His parents continued to have a parental relationship with him and be close to him and encourage him but I think his mother made her disapproval pretty clear. Eventually he came around on his own.
It’s not always the parents’ fault.
P
phil19034
Guest
This is true. However, I don’t think that was the article’s point. I think the article was focused on how parents today are too quick to accept a child’s sin as a part of who they are.
P
Peeps
Guest
The philosophy that my husband used with raising our daughters was (from Dr. Dobson) that by the age of 16, a person should be capable of functioning as an adult. That means that they can drive (or use public transportation if that’s the norm in the city where you live), make their own doctors/dentist appointments and keep them, prepare their own food when necessary (e.g., school lunches), keep their area of the house clean to their own standardes, do their schoolwork without being reminded, work in paying job (babysitting is fine) and use the money wisely, interact in a coureous way with all kinds of people, attend church or practice the religion that they have chosen with the (name removed by moderator)ut of their parents, etc.
BUT…in the U.S., 16-year olds are still minors, and parents are not legally allowed to ask that child to “leave their home.”
Respect of the law of the land (as long as it is just) is part of Catholic/Christian teaching.
I think any parent who kicked a child out of their house because they refuse to attend Mass is actually disregarding Catholic teaching. Also, I think they are behaving very foolishly, and may well be doing something that will estrange them from their child(ren) for many years, if not forever.
One of the guidelines (again, Dr. Dobson) that my husband and I followed was to be very careful to have only a few rules, and make them reasonable.
To begin with, recognize that a 16-year old is essentially an adult–in many countries,16-year olds do adult work, get married and have children, go to war, etc. In the U.S. we give them a few more years, but that doesn’t change the fact that a 16-year old is essentially an adult.
I think that requiring a child to attend Mass is a reasonable rule, but the child MUST be allowed to express their disdain for the Mass if they feel that way, and the parents must respect their adult child’s choice, even if it breaks their heart.
IMO, one reason why a child would choose to stop attending Mass is that they are angry with their parents’ overbearing hyper-righteousness and controlling method of raising children.
Finally, I think that the BEST way a parent can demonstrate the importance of Mass to an adult child is to give them their freedom when it comes to religion, meanwhile showing through their loving behavior and daily life that the Mass is good. A child will be influenced by behavior and loving actions more than words and ultimatums and harsh punishments.
0
0Scarlett_nidiyilii
Guest
And what safeguards are you fighting for to make sure “gender clinics” don’t go giving hormones to confused young people who really need antidepressants? Who will be subjected to sterilization procedures.
You list yourself as “secular humanist”, but I’m afraid your religion has a despicable track record of eugenics and human experimentation.
Which religions fought tooth and nail against.
0
0Scarlett_nidiyilii
Guest
You personally?
You personally are a HCP at a gender clinic?
0
0Scarlett_nidiyilii
Guest
You claimed to be “doing something” to ensure safeguards against teenagers being enticed into sterilizations.
Naturally, I assumed you are a HCP
- Status