Baby showers for pregnant teens?

[MilesXpisti]

I’m not sure how adding as much social stigma as you can would help the situation. Should everyone wear black at the birth too?

Of course not. Celebrating the birth of the child is something I consider independent of the physical act that conceived it. It is commemoration of the birth of someone innocent of particular sin, and with sacramental baptism a wonderful, new member of the Church.

Catholic_Mike:

Yes, more needs to be done in the way of moral guidance for young people. I’m sure there’s a way to do that and to support people who desperately need it.

I can think of nothing more loving that moral guidance, for as St. Paul wrote:

“For whom the Lord loveth he chastiseth: and he scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.” Ad Hebraeos, 12,6

 

[leonie]

One thing that really bothers me about this thread is that those of us who have taken the position that a shower would be inappropriate are being accused of being judgemental and unloving.

And that saying we would not attend such a shower (but, would bring a present later on after the birth), we are accused of shunning.

Isn’t that a little silly? Can’t you just state your opinion without calling those who disagree with you unempathetic, judgemental, etc.

No one is going to wear black to the birth. Every baby is a joy! But, by that logic we should encourage all unwed women and girls to go get pregnant so we can rejoice at all the new life. A baby born out of wedlock and reared by a single parent will not have the protection of the sacramental graces of matrimony. This a tragedy for the baby. It doesn’t make the baby less precious, it makes life harder for the baby.

Yes, love the mother–visit her daily if you want, and celebrate the birth at the time of the birth. But, a shower is public acknowledgement of the pregnancy, too. And. our whole society is suffering in this age because of the permissiveness of our culture.

As for providing for the baby, why not just register somewhere and quietly let the relatives/friends know so they can bring presents after the baby is born?

I could be wrong, of course, but I am giving my sincere opinion which I believe is rooted in charity. You may disagree with me, but don’t call me names, please.

 

[setter]

Oh yeah, that reminds me did’t the father of the prodigal son throw him a big party? I guess he was guilty of the sin of scandal for even considering it. I mean the guys blows all his dad’s money on wild living and when he comes home his dad throws him a party. Imagine that. I’m mean we really should only parties for those who preserve their virtue.

The Father was publically celebrating the return of his son from the death of sin to new life in sincere repentance. A baby shower is to celebrate the new life unfolding and forthcoming. It does not celebrate the act of sin which resulted in conception. How does one not confuse the two and end up sending a mixed message to the impressionable and possibly scandal in the situation that you presented? Do not both require a public pronouncement of sorts (public announcement of pregnancy/public announcement of repentance) in order to be publically celebrated? Something to consider, as “public” denotes that it is not a private matter and effects others than just the mother and child.

 

[mosher]

One woman was whining the she was pregnant with her fourth child out of wedlock and she was getting all the sympathy she could wish for. I did a search of the number of “never marrieds” who had children and I was shocked at the results.

And here is the result of being too empathetic - nothing changes. While we are always called to forgive and love no matter what the situation it is a great act of love to hold to and uphold truth above the emotional stability of an individual. Sometimes the better forms of medicine come with a sour taste.

Having a baby is not a sin either. The act that caused a child is the sin. Ordination isn’t a sin but the act that allowed this married man to be allowed to become a priest was once considered to be a very mortal sin just decades ago.

Nothing has changed about this. We don’t have annulment or divorce parties. This part of your opinion lacks basic understanding on the topics addressed and it would take a couple other threads to solve those errors and are not the focus of this thread. In short it is apples and oranges.

And a baby shower IS only meant for the baby. I was 17 when I had my first and not once did I feel the party was for me and nobody “showered” me with undue affection and in no way did I feel that anybody approved of our pre-marital relations. It also didn’t cause my friends to go out and get knocked up.

Again my point is being missed even though it has been clearly stated in almost every post that I have made. The issue is not about punishing the mother for her and the father’s sin. Rather it is about avoiding even the appearance of scandal. We are obliged under the banner of morality to avoid even the appearance of scandal and if this is not an appearance of scandal then I don’t know what is.

Every Baby Shower I ever attended (Including the one given for my daughter) was decorated in a way that was clearly for a baby. All the gifts given were for a baby. (Baby clothes, baby bed, baby blankets, rattles, baby first aid kits etc.) Invitations generally speak of weather the baby is a boy or a girl or unknown and when the baby is due to arrive. Even the stupid party games tend to revolve around the word “Baby” or around Diaper pins.

How is this focused on the mother and not on the baby? Which part of the traditional Baby shower focuses on the sex that helped create the baby and which part focuses on the mother?

See my response to Tabitha

It’s really heartbreaking to know that some of my brothers and sisters in Christ are looking at my ring finger and treating my son and I differently when they see that that finger of mine is bare.

None are looking at you differently I would hope. I know many unwed mothers and am going to shortly stand as god-father to two children of an un-wed mother. The issue of you and your children is not the issue.

God will take care of punishing an unwed mother for her sins if He deems it necessary. I can’t fathom why anybody would find it necessary to add upon her shame and burden by so much as a momentary disapproving glance or a tiny declined invitation. I am certain that all of the Saints in heaven rejoice at the creation of every little child, even if the circumstances of his conception disappointed them. We do not extend love toward an unwed mother just because she didn’t have an abortion–we do so because she is human. Attending a modest little party for her unborn child is an act of mercy.

But while judgment unto condemnation is the purview of God it is the responsibility of those on earth to not even tacitly approve of an act that is objectively evil. This has to be looked at from a disinterested view or else it gets muddled by the emotional response to the issue. In this case of public scandal it is an act of mercy to not have or attend the shower - it is false charity to do the opposite.

What if your past mortal sins were as plain as the nose on your face, for all to see? …]

This is a Church of sinners and I have no problem with making my sins manifest. Among my friends I don’t know of one that is not known. I do not judge people based on their sins as their dignity is much greater than their sins. However, we cannot confuse judgment with prudent decisions for the benefit of society.

We should take care that our pride does not become someone else’s stumbling block.

Correct, and it seems to me that make public acclimation out of public scandal is not consistent with the love of Christ which is not the same as empathy or affection. These are lesser aspects of love but are not love itself. Remember, to admonish the sinner is a Spiritual Act of Mercy.

 

[mosher]

After all, we aren’t going to change mosher’s mind on this subject.

That is not true at all. Rather, I have yet to see an argument that is based in objective morality that is superior to my point. If that comes along I will be more than happy to concede my opinion.

Been through this before. I was the child that was shunned as one poster put it.

But, I had a Catholic adult say that I was condemned to limbo because of my situation.

Your experience was unfortunate. I am always amazed when people condemn a child for any choice that their parents make. The situation you describe is definitely uncharitable.

I showed you how it can be, and often is, in a real life situation, and you reply to say that we should use that to try to bear witness to God. I don’t disagree, but how does that prove that a woman in this situation won’t have to deal with scorn for the rest of their lives?

In this you may be more correct than I. However, I don’t see anything wrong with it. There are consequences for the choices we make and some are more time intensive than others.

If you really think that a baby shower for this girl would be about her, and about her having premarital sex, then why wouldn’t you say that from that logic, you are also saying that any shower, including for married people, is about the lady and about her having sex? Sex really doesn’t enter my mind when I go to a baby shower. Why should a baby shower being twisted around so greatly until it is distorted enough to be considered evil in this specific case? You say you are fine with birthday parties, why not consider a baby shower as a 0 year old birthday party, or pre-birthday party as a child is not thrown a party on the day they are born, (its a busy enough day! )

On cannot be separated from the other. There is a baby and it had to come from somewhere. My central point is that it can be perceived as a tacit approval of her situation and that is a scandal.

you have yet to prove that believing baby showers are about the mother is a common, well known, overwhelming feeling.

Anecdotal evidence aside the reality is that the mother is the center of the occasion. Again while the games and decorations etc talk about the baby it is another one of “her days” It is like a Quincinera. Really it is about this girls commitment to God but in practice it is about a party for the girl, a nice dress and a party. Human nature is what it is and if we are not careful we can lead other into error by perception.

Isn’t this a place for people to be open to learning more about life/the faith?

See my previous post I addressed this issue.

Why not be involved in the showers so that the baby will be the focus? I’d really like to hear the details of how the party would be executed so it is about the baby and not the mom, since you seem so dead set that everyone does it wrong.

No I am saying it is unavoidable through perception and thus you don’t have a public celebration.

If it is for the baby, how can it be defined as scandalous then?

Because one cannot be separated from the other.

 

[mosher]

Consider that if we treat a pregnant girl as a pariah, we, too, might cause a scandal.

Correct, and that has not been advocated.

If you do not think the “religious” have not earned a reputation that is far from a loving one when it comes to sexual sins, you have not been listening. The jarring dischord between that and the way in which Our Lord treated those in sexual sin has been noticed in the world outside the Church. We’re supposed to be hated by the the people that hate Jesus. As it is, people read the Gospel, love Jesus, and then look at us and scratch their heads.

I chalk that up to Puritanical influence which was intrinsically uncharitable. Because of this influence there is an automatic bias against proper love as opposed to empathy and affection.

Teach? Oh, yes, punishment will teach her. It’ll teach her not to let mom and dad in on it when she screws up. It’ll teach her what all this talk about “unconditional” love adds up to.

I am not advocating punishment just not celebration. Unconditional love is not separate from consequences.

Any woman in this day and age who consents to welcome life deserves to have a party.

I strongly disagree. It seems that the fear of abortion is what drives the opinion that a celebration should be done. Fear is never a justifiable position for any action.

So if your children trust you enough to let you know they have been sexually active and have gotten pregnant, reward that trust with real help towards making amends and taking responsibility for what they do. Support them in the difficult decision of whether to raise the child themselves or to give the child to someone else who desparately wants it. Support them in the difficult journey of turning away from the habit of sex outside of marriage. But in all of that, let them know that we are all sinners before God. Our main job is to keep trying, to avoid both presumption and despair.

Exactly my point. There seems to be an error prevailing that I am advocating chastisement which I can only assume is from either an emotionally charged read of my posts or only a partial read of my posts. It is an error to think that I advocated any of the negatives you have listed so far in this post. My discussion thus far has stated this frequently.

I’m not sure how adding as much social stigma as you can would help the situation. Should everyone wear black at the birth too?

I am not advocating that in any way. Rather I am advocating a neutral position of non-celebration.

If there is some other circumstance involved (a live-in boyfriend or something) that might make attending seem like a vote against the Christian view of marriage, then maybe it makes sense not to go. But even then, I think care must be taken not to make it seem as though you view the child’s existance as something fundamentally bad.

Correct, it is the responsibility of the people around that child to do everything they can to support the child but at the same time avoid appearing to support the way in which that child came into this world. That is really my main concern. It is the issue of public scandal. We seem to be so jaded to scandal that we not only don’t avoid it at all instances but also many times we don’t recognize it when it exists.

 

[BLB_Oregon]

Correct, and that has not been advocated.

Whose perception counts on this: yours or hers? I’m here to tell you that if someone threw a baby shower for me and the Catholics in my circle refused to show up, I would feel shunned by the Catholics.

I chalk that up to Puritanical influence which was intrinsically uncharitable. Because of this influence there is an automatic bias against proper love as opposed to empathy and affection.

Proper love? How is it that you are the arbiter of what is proper love? “I have no emphathy for you, but I love you.” That doesn’t sound quite right, does it? Yet you’re saying that if someone calls you on that, they’re making you out to be a Puritan. Nobody called you that.

Now if you were talking about Grandma not taking over the parenting and letting “her little girl” go on with her life as if she did not have a child to be responsible for, I could see your point.

I am not advocating punishment just not celebration. Unconditional love is not separate from consequences.

How is having a baby as an teenager not a consequence?

I strongly disagree. It seems that the fear of abortion is what drives the opinion that a celebration should be done. Fear is never a justifiable position for any action.

You would be refraining from attending the shower because you fear that you might send the wrong message, aren’t you?

Exactly my point. There seems to be an error prevailing that I am advocating chastisement which I can only assume is from either an emotionally charged read of my posts or only a partial read of my posts. It is an error to think that I advocated any of the negatives you have listed so far in this post. My discussion thus far has stated this frequently.

Fair enough. I was speaking to a range of posts, not just yours, and didn’t make that clear enough.

I am not advocating that in any way. Rather I am advocating a neutral position of non-celebration…it is the responsibility of the people around that child to do everything they can to support the child but at the same time avoid appearing to support the way in which that child came into this world. That is really my main concern. It is the issue of public scandal. We seem to be so jaded to scandal that we not only don’t avoid it at all instances but also many times we don’t recognize it when it exists.

Might you find an instance in which Jesus did what would keep from causing scandal to those who insisted on purity in observance of the law? I can name the times he did what would cause scandal: talking with the woman at the well (who would have only been at the well by herself at noon precisely because she did live such a scandalous life), refusing to condemn the woman caught in the act of adultery, sitting down to eat with tax collectors (who collaborated with the Roman oppressors) and prostitutes (another class of scandalous women).

Please find one, then maybe we’ll talk about staying at home from baby showers.

While I’m at it, though, let me make myself clear: I don’t think that anybody here is suggesting that they wouldn’t go to a baby shower because the girl is such a bad girl and they couldn’t have contact with her. I think they’re trying to speak to the behavior and only to the behavior.

Let’s remember, though, that we’re talking about a pregnant girl, someone who is hormonal and probably scared about what she’s facing. I think we really need to error on the side of compassion.

 

[YinYangMom]

I think we really need to error on the side of compassion.

That pretty much sums up this thread.

Reading through it there is scriptural support for both arguments.

Yes, throwing and attending a shower for an unwed mother (regardless of the age) can be considered approval of and participation in a scandal. No doubt about that as the woman is pregnant as a result of scandalous behavior on her part (but let’s not forget the guy, here, either).

Mosher has repeated one can show their compassion for the young woman privately by supporting her during her pregnancy, during the birth and after the birth. This can include providing her with medical care, clothing for her and the child, buying food, diapers, babysitting.

If I’m understanding Mosher correctly it is the public celebratory display of support which lends itself to participation in scandal, but I could be wrong.

However, there are plenty of passages in scripture which support public and private displays of compassion for sinners. Those of us who may not have the opportunity to be of assistance to the young woman except through the invitation to this shower would not be wrong to attend or at least send a gift with a card.

I don’t know how Jesus will judge either side in the end, and the Church is not clear on matters such as these, so for me, I side with BLB and would rather err on the side of compassion than of strict interpretation of the law. Strict interpretation always makes me nervous because of the way Jesus chastized the Pharisees for such an attitude. Besides, I don’t understand a lot of the nuances of church teaching - tat catechism is great but teaches in a round about way leaving too much room for interpretation for my own comfort.

I believe, however, that if one behaved as Mosher suggests, do not attend the shower but make a point to reach out to this young woman in private ways, they would be acting as a good Catholic within the law and the spirit of that law.

The puritanical approach BLB mentions is a Catholic who not only does not attend the shower, but has no intention of supporting the woman at all - before, during or after the baby is born - and makes a point of trying to discourage others from supporting her as well…especially if they go around calling everyone a sinner for helping the girl. I don’t get the impression that was what Mosher was suggesting.

 

[AnnaTherese]

I would say absolutely yes, give her a shower. You are not celebrating the fact that she had premarital sex. You are celebrating the fact that there is a new soul in our midst, and no one needs financial help (via baby gifts) more than a teen mother.
We should be thankful they aren’t getting an abortion and support them through this difficult time in every way we can. They will learn their lesson. Would you skip the baptism celebration too, just because the fact that a baby is getting baptized means that someone had sex at the wrong time? Come on, be reasonable.

 

[Jeanette_L]

Oh yeah, that reminds me did’t the father of the prodigal son throw him a big party? I guess he was guilty of the sin of scandal for even considering it. I mean the guys blows all his dad’s money on wild living and when he comes home his dad throws him a party. Imagine that. I’m mean we really should only parties for those who preserve their virtue.

And who was the one who ended up looking bad in this story? The one who complained about the party.

 

[thechrismyster]

Come on, be reasonable.

don’t expect more than your audience can deliver.

 

[boppaid]

I’m sorry. I don’t mean to sound mean, but I think that no one should ever ever ever ever EVER be forced to give up their child. I think adoption is a wonderful thing, but to force someone to give up their child is (imo) very damaging…to the mother, but even moreso possibly to the child …especially in an open adoption.

 

[boppaid]

I just typed my previous post without reading the entire thread. I can honestly say that after all the threads and posts I have read on the internet in the last 7 years, none have made me want to vomit as much as this one has. It makes me so sad. And we wonder why girls think abortion might be a way out.

 

[Jeanette_L]

I just typed my previous post without reading the entire thread. I can honestly say that after all the threads and posts I have read on the internet in the last 7 years, none have made me want to vomit as much as this one has. It makes me so sad. And we wonder why girls think abortion might be a way out.

I agree with you completely. I have been to a many, many baby showers for single and married mothers, and I can tell you that the intent of the showers was to celebrate the coming child and to show the mother-to-be that she was not alone in her motherhood, but had the love and support of a community of friends and family. No one was asked to make a statement as to whether they thought the circumstances were proper for the conception of this new life, we came together to say “we are here for you, we are a community that you can count on as you raise this child.”

I can see if some here resent being asked to make that kind of committment and don’t want to attend, I can’t however understand them using the excuses they use to cover it. You cannot know the heart of a person, as to whether they have repented of sin or not. Some may seem to and not, others may seem not to and have. This cannot be the determining factor, as we cannot know. But to be a Christian in every sense of the word, means to see Jesus in this person, and respond to them as if we were responding to Jesus himself. And in doing this, I cannot understand the attitude that this person does not deserve to be treated with dignity and compassion and love. Leave the judgement and punishment to the Judge.

Mother Teresa would be very sad indeed if she were reading this stuff. She showed us above all other people that we are to see Jesus in every face, especially those who are suffering, for any reason.

 

[mosher]

That pretty much sums up this thread.

Reading through it there is scriptural support for both arguments.

Yes, throwing and attending a shower for an unwed mother (regardless of the age) can be considered approval of and participation in a scandal. No doubt about that as the woman is pregnant as a result of scandalous behavior on her part (but let’s not forget the guy, here, either).

Mosher has repeated one can show their compassion for the young woman privately by supporting her during her pregnancy, during the birth and after the birth. This can include providing her with medical care, clothing for her and the child, buying food, diapers, babysitting.

If I’m understanding Mosher correctly it is the public celebratory display of support which lends itself to participation in scandal, but I could be wrong.

However, there are plenty of passages in scripture which support public and private displays of compassion for sinners. Those of us who may not have the opportunity to be of assistance to the young woman except through the invitation to this shower would not be wrong to attend or at least send a gift with a card.

I don’t know how Jesus will judge either side in the end, and the Church is not clear on matters such as these, so for me, I side with BLB and would rather err on the side of compassion than of strict interpretation of the law. Strict interpretation always makes me nervous because of the way Jesus chastized the Pharisees for such an attitude. Besides, I don’t understand a lot of the nuances of church teaching - tat catechism is great but teaches in a round about way leaving too much room for interpretation for my own comfort.

I believe, however, that if one behaved as Mosher suggests, do not attend the shower but make a point to reach out to this young woman in private ways, they would be acting as a good Catholic within the law and the spirit of that law.

The puritanical approach BLB mentions is a Catholic who not only does not attend the shower, but has no intention of supporting the woman at all - before, during or after the baby is born - and makes a point of trying to discourage others from supporting her as well…especially if they go around calling everyone a sinner for helping the girl. I don’t get the impression that was what Mosher was suggesting.

I think your post sums up the issue very well and that there are different ways to approach the situation and clarity is difficult.

I would like to note however that my position is not an interpretation of the law but is rather an interpretation of the moral law. While the Pharisees observed the law to the exclusion of charity the natural moral law teaches us what charity is. My read is that such an event is a scandal and should be avoided. However, I may be wrong, yet as you put it well, the clarity of this issue is murky at best.

 

[mosher]

Whose perception counts on this: yours or hers? I’m here to tell you that if someone threw a baby shower for me and the Catholics in my circle refused to show up, I would feel shunned by the Catholics.

Both equally.

Proper love? How is it that you are the arbiter of what is proper love? “I have no emphathy for you, but I love you.” That doesn’t sound quite right, does it? Yet you’re saying that if someone calls you on that, they’re making you out to be a Puritan. Nobody called you that.

Love is the desire of the highest good for the other. Empathy is the attempt to share in the emotional distress of another. These are two very different things. I don’t feel that I am being accused of being a Puritan. However, I do think that our cultures can’t see the line between Love and empathy or Love and affection because of the Puritan and Jansenist influence.

How is having a baby as an teenager not a consequence?

It seems like it is all part of the package.

You would be refraining from attending the shower because you fear that you might send the wrong message, aren’t you?

Yes in part. My concern is not the mother so much as it is the perception of others. For the mother I would be there every step of the way to assist in a private way. However, I think that the public nature of a baby shower can cause public scandal.

Might you find an instance in which Jesus did what would keep from causing scandal to those who insisted on purity in observance of the law?

This is different in that the instances that you describe had to do with the law. My argument is not based on some legalistic observance but rather the natural moral law of which Christ never violated. These situations in Scripture do not speak to this type of situation. If my concern were only about social norms then they would be appropriate.
BLB_Oregon;1619997:

While I’m at it, though, let me make myself clear: I don’t think that anybody here is suggesting that they wouldn’t go to a baby shower because the girl is such a bad girl and they couldn’t have contact with her. I think they’re trying to speak to the behavior and only to the behavior.

Thank you. Speaking for myself I know that this is definately wraped up with my issue.

Let’s remember, though, that we’re talking about a pregnant girl, someone who is hormonal and probably scared about what she’s facing. I think we really need to error on the side of compassion.

You may be correct. I am not saying that I know with absolute certitude that I am correct on this issue. I think perhaps the different perspectives come from the nature of the concern. For me concern over the mother must be balanced with concern for society.

 

[gam197]

I think catholics may have more showers than others?? I have been to so many things in our family including birthday parties for 40 year olds, etc.
These are not small events.

I don’t see this going on in the protestant family that I am related to. They have rarely had anything. Even the church weddings have been small not $25 thousand dollar weddings that many in my catholic family seem to think is so important.

Maybe we should just do away with showers in general but still give nice gifts for these occassions as the cultures has changed dramatically. Years ago people would not have had a shower. Even when a couple got married without a pregnancy but didn’t have any money, they would have quietly married and had it blessed. Young prople have sex before marriage often with many partners and then live together. They don’t care. It is so excepted. In many European countries; they don’t marry anymore. It seems we are headed that way. According to the news, 10% of all US households are now living together unmarried.

 

[BLB_Oregon]

Thank you. Speaking for myself I know that this is definately wrapped up with my issue.

You may be correct. I am not saying that I know with absolute certitude that I am correct on this issue. I think perhaps the different perspectives come from the nature of the concern. For me concern over the mother must be balanced with concern for society.

I have to point out on your behalf that you have been very clear that you would bring a gift and speak to the mother privately, that you would try to let her know that you think she is doing the right thing, and that you would try to support her as a mother…just in a way that you discern to be more in keeping with your desire to not appear to give tacit approval to pre-marital (or, heaven forbid times two, extra-marital!) sex.

I would be willing to concede that there will be times when discernment of the actual situation on the ground would impel someone to take your tack over mine.

In fact, I would also remind anyone who is placed in this situation to ask the mother-to-be if she is comfortable with the idea of a shower. There are women who, under the circumstances, would not welcome the attention. We should not presume to know.

 

[Saint_Michael]

We can’t be pro-life then condemn pregnant teens and look down on them, at least they didn’t compound the sin by abortion. The shower is to help her and the child out with stuff they can’t afford, not to pass forth some self-righteous moral statement. Go to the shower and support the poor girl and the baby.

 

[kage_ar]

This is my best friend’s daughter and ofcourse I will go. But one of her family members chastised my friend for even considering it. She said she was rewarding her for getting pregnant.

This type of reaction always baffles me - to these pharisees think that teenage girls just lie awake at night dreaming of a diaper genie and car seat. "Oh how, oh how can I get my hands on my VERY OWN breast pump, let me see - I’ll get pregnant - then they will HAVE to give me one… "

Go to the shower - give her a hug for me, mom too!