Baby showers for pregnant teens?

[vern_humphrey]

If there is anything scandalous it is the shunning and rejection of a new mother. Should we have a different kind of shower, where we shave her head and make her wear a scarelt letter?

Talk about public scandal!! Pro-abortionists who accuse pro-lifers of not caring about the child after its born would have a field day with that!!

 

[BLB_Oregon]

Yes, I strongly disagree with the response given by the Apologist but that was not the reason for my question. My question was directed at the issue of treatment of different types of sins in different manners even to the point of making a public manifestation of repentance as is discussed in Canon Law when it refers to bringing the issue into the public forum. It seemed from your response earlier that you were advocating that all [mortal] sins were equal and all expiated through private confession - my question to you was in direct response to this error.

I think you have me confused with somebody else. I never said anything about all mortal sins being equal.

We aren’t discussing what happens if the girl goes to her confessor and her confessor requires her to either refuse a party or to publicly confess her sin. Unless I was made aware that her confessor had forbidden the party, that isn’t my fish to fry.

If we are not her confessor and not her confessor’s superior, it is not our business to decide that a public confession is in order. We don’t have that authority–at least, I would be very interested for you to find where in Canon Law it says that the laity has the right or the responsibility to wield that kind of authority.

Therefore, the question is whether we cause a scandal by giving gifts to a woman who is pregnant outside of marriage, not whether she gives scandal by being pregnant outside of marriage in the first place. The plain meaning of the Gospel indicates that there is a big difference between being a prostitute and consenting to sit down at dinner with one.

Jesus had dinner at the house of the Pharisee, too. Obviously, he did not equate going to somebody’s house for dinner with a blanket approval of their entire spectrum of life choices. The gifts he brought? Healing…offered to all who had the faith to ask. Always, always, that came with the forgiveness of sin, usually without the sin itself ever being confessed.

 

[AnneBOK]

Celebrate LIFE and honor those who choose it. However it came about - it is still LIFE. So many choose death these days. If we, as a society expect future generations to value life we need to back up our words “choose life - not abortion” with possitive action and not judgemental debates…The mother’s choice to have sex outside marriage is not what is celebrated at a baby shower. It is and should be about the baby (hence “baby shower” ). The mother will have a whole lot of trials and problems stemming from her choice - she does not need us making things harder by judging - that is up to God and God alone. With our love and encouragement maybe this mother will make possitive choices for her and her child and will make a choice to NOT have sex again before marriage.

Anne

 

[gmarie21]

That is a very good point. Now, help me with understanding how this relates to topic at hand. Perhaps this is what I am not seeing.

To attend or not attend a baby shower is not a sin. All that occurs at baby showers is food is eaten, drinks are drunk, and gifts are opened (with the occassional annoying baby shower game). Gifts are usually for the baby or the baby’s nursery. Sometimes a mother receives nursing pads, a healing gel (b/c of nursing issues), pumps and bags for breast milk, and on occassion, a massage, spa, hair, nails, gift certificate for relaxation before or after giving birth. So, the gifts do not promote sex outside of marriage (they don’t even condone sex ouside of marriage). That’s the basic of what the shower is all about and what occurs at the shower.

People are free to choose to attend or not for many reasons. Now, the scandal some see is that the mother is being rewarded for her sin (premarital sex = baby shower, they’re missing the whole becoming pregnant and a new life beginning part, which is a major factor). Many fail to remember that God has entrusted this woman (and the father) with this child to make a choice in doing what is best for the child. God made a miracle happen from a sin ( one of the sweetest lemonades from lemons).

Those who are concerned about scandal only look outward when discussing scandal (the mother and celebrants are causing scandal) without looking inward at the scandal they are/maybe causing as a result of their actions/words regarding said shower (or lack thereof). The pregnant woman would like for others to join her in celebrating the new life within her, not her sin. The person who is against this idea can choose to not attend without explaination to anyone for the reason they choose not to attend. However, one slip of the tounge and their reasoning can turn into scandal or even worse, sin (bear false witness against thy neighbor a.k.a. gossip).

Also, a complete lack of charity can (and a lot of the time, does) lead the sinner even further away from HE who is TRUTH and the Church HE founded. Taking an action or saying something that causes another to have a little more disgust for the Catholic Church IS SCANDAL (which is why the priest molestations are scandals in addition to sins, some who were not directly molested but found out about the scandals were disgusted with the Church to the point they left).

Admonishing the sin is a good thing, but if you aren’t a trusted person of the sinner, than you will do more damage, therefore causing scandal. Remember St. Paul stated that to convert the Jews one must become like the Jews, to convert the Gentiles, one must become like the Gentiles. HOwever, as he stated, one must do this without sinning. Scandal is not always sinful, sin is always scandalous.

 

[kim3260]

If there is anything scandalous it is the shunning and rejection of a new mother. Should we have a different kind of shower, where we shave her head and make her wear a scarelt letter?

Talk about public scandal!! Pro-abortionists who accuse pro-lifers of not caring about the child after its born would have a field day with that!!

Exactly when we shun her that’s a scandal. The pro-abortion people love this type of behavior.
In a perfect world every young person would wait for Marriage, and lets hope and pray they do. But when they fall, do we knock them down again and again or do we offer a loving and forgiving hand as God has taught us?

 

[vern_humphrey]

Exactly when we shun her that’s a scandal. The pro-abortion people love this type of behavior.
In a perfect world every young person would wait for Marriage, and lets hope and pray they do. But when they fall, do we knock them down again and again or do we offer a loving and forgiving hand as God has taught us?

I fully admit I don’t understand the attitude that says we should shun her. She is, after all, our problem – and people who don’t believe that ought to look at how much tax money goes to support single parent families. They should look beyond that to see the effects of single parent families on society – kids raised by only one parent are more likely to drop out of school, commit crimes, use drugs, and on and on.

So that tells us that we need to do something for this unwed mother – help her raise her child to beat the odds.

We can’t do that by shunning her and making her wear a scarlet letter!!

 

[mosher]

Sorry if my responses are a bit short or curt I am not feeling well so the mind is a bit fuzzy today.

I can assure you that no one will feel loved by someone who boycotted their baby shower.

It’s not about feeling loved it is about being loved.

I’m with you - anyone who knows you went to the baby shower would most likely know your opinion of premarital sex.

You are probably right that if an outside observer knows you they will know that you don’t support fornication but what about the person that doesn’t know you? That is the more important question.

If it were a case of attending a public event, with your picture in the paper, with only the information that you are a member of the Catholic Church, someone who doesn’t know you might think …

This is perhaps another thing that we are not communicating well. A public event ethically does not mean that it is in the paper etc. A public event is an event that is not private in that a private event only involves immediate family and is informal with no invitations. Once an event goes beyond that scope it is public. Just like a marriage or baptism no matter how small an event is still public and is never private.

If there is anything scandalous it is the shunning and rejection of a new mother. Should we have a different kind of shower, where we shave her head and make her wear a scarelt letter?

Talk about public scandal!! Pro-abortionists who accuse pro-lifers of not caring about the child after its born would have a field day with that!!

Your comment is absurd and has no relevance to the conversation as none are advocating this. It has already been discussed in the context of earlier posts.

People are free to choose to attend or not for many reasons. Now, the scandal some see is that the mother is being rewarded for her sin (premarital sex = baby shower, they’re missing the whole becoming pregnant and a new life beginning part, which is a major factor).

Yes it is a major factor but it is a mitigating factor? That is the question.

Those who are concerned about scandal only look outward when discussing scandal (the mother and celebrants are causing scandal) without looking inward at the scandal they are/maybe causing as a result of their actions/words regarding said shower (or lack thereof).

Scandal cannot come from morally correct actions. Hurt feelings are not the same as scandal.

Also, a complete lack of charity can (and a lot of the time, does) lead the sinner even further away from HE who is TRUTH and the Church HE founded.

Charity is not defined by acting nicely. As a good friend of mine used to say “nice people go to hell too.” His point was that when truth is supplanted by an over concern for feelings then violence has been done to Christ Himself who is Truth itself. Excommunication is an act of charity but it is not nice nor does it make a person feel good - but it is an act of charity.

Scandal is not always sinful, sin is always scandalous.

Did you even take the time to read the teachings on scandal? If you had you would not have said this.

 

[jmcrae]

You are probably right that if an outside observer knows you they will know that you don’t support fornication but what about the person that doesn’t know you? That is the more important question.

How would someone who doesn’t know you find out that you had attended, or even that a baby shower had taken place?

In the case of the one that I attended, the invitations were given by telephone. No one who was not invited could have known that it was even taking place, until after the fact.

Anyone who heard of my involvement afterwards would have heard of it in the context of the fact that I invited them to come to Mass, and that they got married, and then their baby got baptized at my church, which I think would indicate loud and clear that I was supporting the mother and her baby, but not the premarital sex.

 

[mosher]

How would someone who doesn’t know you find out that you had attended, or even that a baby shower had taken place?

In the case of the one that I attended, the invitations were given by telephone. No one who was not invited could have known that it was even taking place, until after the fact.

Anyone who heard of my involvement afterwards would have heard of it in the context of the fact that I invited them to come to Mass, and that they got married, and then their baby got baptized at my church, which I think would indicate loud and clear that I was supporting the mother and her baby, but not the premarital sex.

I would agree that in this situation that you describe the possibility was highly mitigated. And if it was handled with such discretion then I would have no problem going.

 

[Kendy]

It’s not about feeling loved it is about being loved.

You cannot reach someone to feel unloved so it’s irrelevant.

You are probably right that if an outside observer knows you they will know that you don’t support fornication but what about the person that doesn’t know you? That is the more important question.

I don’t know why it’s more important for me to worry about strangers who might pass judgement instead of providing support for someone who needs me.

This is perhaps another thing that we are not communicating well. A public event ethically does not mean that it is in the paper etc. A public event is an event that is not private in that a private event only involves immediate family and is informal with no invitations. Once an event goes beyond that scope it is public. Just like a marriage or baptism no matter how small an event is still public and is never private.

Your comment is absurd and has no relevance to the conversation as none are advocating this. It has already been discussed in the context of earlier posts.

Yes it is a major factor but it is a mitigating factor? That is the question.

Scandal cannot come from morally correct actions. Hurt feelings are not the same as scandal.

Charity is not defined by acting nicely. As a good friend of mine used to say “nice people go to hell too.” His point was that when truth is supplanted by an over concern for feelings then violence has been done to Christ Himself who is Truth itself. Excommunication is an act of charity but it is not nice nor does it make a person feel good - but it is an act of charity.

Did you even take the time to read the teachings on scandal? If you had you would not have said this.

 

[gmarie21]

Did you even take the time to read the teachings on scandal? If you had you would not have said this.

Um, I said that about scandal b/c if my dd’s dad and I attend mass together with our dd, then that is scandal (everyone thinks we’re married, but we’re not). However, it is NOT a sin for us to attend mass together. So there is at least one example how scandals aren’t always sins. This list can go on for quit awhile. I will take your comments as a result of your not feeling well. However, I am getting the hunch that you may be about all legalities and nothing about heart.

 

[vern_humphrey]

It’s not about feeling loved it is about being loved.

Ah. So we just make her think she’s not loved? So we’ll deprive her of support and inflict all the negative psychological consequences on her, but feel smug about it because we know we really love her?

Your comment is absurd and has no relevance to the conversation as none are advocating this. It has already been discussed in the context of earlier posts.

If you think that, you’ve not been active in the Proi-life movement, nor are you familiar with their propaganda. They will seize on things like this as proof that Catholics “really don’t care about the child once it’s born.” Count on it.

Scandal cannot come from morally correct actions. Hurt feelings are not the same as scandal.

Shunning an expectant mother, turning away from her, making her think she is unloved and has no support is not “morally correct.” The proper term for such action is “holier than thou.”

 

[gam197]

originally posted by jmcrae
In the case of the one that I attended, the invitations were given by telephone. No one who was not invited could have known that it was even taking place, until after the fact.

I have just received in the mail an invitation to a baby shower for an unwed mother.I am not concerned that I got the invitation in the mail… I will get invited to another shortly. Will there be people from her work? Yes Will there be people from her school? This girl had alot of friends and I am sure many will be invited and most will know she is having a shower. Showers are not private affairs. Am I totally comfortable? No.

Years back they use to have wakes for three days if someone died. That changed and now they have wakes for only one day with a burial. Is is not disreprectful to the elderly. No it is simply a change for all.

I agree all life should be celebrated. I took this thread to be a hypothetical question. No one wants to shun anyone.

My position was only that maybe it is possible to have a better way , a Baptismal/shower instead for all expectant mothers. **Apparently most on the thread feel that would not be a possible change. **That the only way it could be done is with a baby shower.

If the baby shower is the only possible way, then I would attend.

No, I would not make any comment about anything. That would only cause hurt feelings in the family.

Um, I said that about scandal b/c if my dd’s dad and I attend mass together with our dd, then that is scandal (everyone thinks we’re married, but we’re not).

That is not the scandal.

 

[gmarie21]

I have just received in the mail an invitation to a baby shower for an unwed mother.I am not concerned that I got the invitation in the mail… I will get invited to another shortly. Will there be people from her work? Yes Will there be people from her school? This girl had alot of friends and I am sure many will be invited and most will know she is having a shower. Showers are not private affairs. Am I totally comfortable? No.

Years back they use to have wakes for three days if someone died. That changed and now they have wakes for only one day with a burial. Is is not disreprectful to the elderly. No it is simply a change for all.

I agree all life should be celebrated. I took this thread to be a hypothetical question. No one wants to shun anyone.

My position was only that maybe it is possible to have a better way , a Baptismal/shower instead for all expectant mothers. **Apparently most on the thread feel that would not be a possible change. **That the only way it could be done is with a baby shower.

If the baby shower is the only possible way, then I would attend.

No, I would not make any comment about anything. That would only cause hurt feelings in the family.

That is not the scandal.

According to my confessor, that is scandal.

As for the baby shower, they are usually given before the baby and the mother usually receives gifts that are needed for the baby immediately (like the car seat that is needed to take the baby home from the hospital, a crib and sheets, etc.) which a baptism is too late to receive these items. Most unwed mothers are not in a position to purchase all the required supplies they need for their baby’s immediate release from the hospital. I know that I wasn’t, but thank God that my family was able to supply my dd with the things immediately after birth and for the first two months before her baptism. Baptismal gifts should pertain to spiritual growth of the child, not toys IMHO or anything that is of need for the child’s physical being.

 

[mosher]

You cannot reach someone to feel unloved so it’s irrelevant.

Feeling loved and being loved are two different things. Feeling has not grounding in reality but only on the frivolity of the emotions of which love is not one. Let us not confuse love with affection.

I don’t know why it’s more important for me to worry about strangers who might pass judgement instead of providing support for someone who needs me.

Not more important but rather equally important.

Um, I said that about scandal b/c if my dd’s dad and I attend mass together with our dd, then that is scandal (everyone thinks we’re married, but we’re not). However, it is NOT a sin for us to attend mass together. So there is at least one example how scandals aren’t always sins. This list can go on for quit awhile. I will take your comments as a result of your not feeling well. However, I am getting the hunch that you may be about all legalities and nothing about heart.

First I don’t know what a dd is. In my world it means District Deputy so I can’t reply to the substance of your post. However, on the other issue I am not about legalities but rather morality. Nothing in heaven or earth can abrogate morality as it stems from the very Creation of God and God Himself.

Ah. So we just make her think she’s not loved? So we’ll deprive her of support and inflict all the negative psychological consequences on her, but feel smug about it because we know we really love her?

Have you even read the whole of this discussion? Your comment has no relavence since it has already been discussed and answered. We don’t need to rehash old false accusations.

If you think that, you’ve not been active in the Proi-life movement, nor are you familiar with their propaganda. They will seize on things like this as proof that Catholics “really don’t care about the child once it’s born.” Count on it.

On the contrary I am quite active in the pro-life movement. I have worked on many fronts of the pro-life movement including counseling those who have been effected by the culture of death on various levels including single mothers.

Shunning an expectant mother, turning away from her, making her think she is unloved and has no support is not “morally correct.” The proper term for such action is “holier than thou.”

Incorrect, holier than thou is the disposition that one has when they believe that they are more righteous than another. Further, none are speaking about shunning a young lady in this situation. Rather, the concern that is being expressed is about what is the proper way to express love and not only to her and the child but also to the whole of society. Vern, please take the time to read the whole thread and you may get a different feel for this discussion.

 

[vern_humphrey]

On the contrary I am quite active in the pro-life movement. I have worked on many fronts of the pro-life movement including counseling those who have been effected by the culture of death on various levels including single mothers.

Then you surely know how the proponents of abortion will seize on any shred to “proove” we “care nothing about the child after it’s born.”

Incorrect, holier than thou is the disposition that one has when they believe that they are more righteous than another.

and in the end, that’s what this is about – how we are more righteous than the expectant mother, and how it would be scandalous to give her a baby shower.

Further, none are speaking about shunning a young lady in this situation.

Abraham Lincoln asked, “if you call a tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have?”

The answer is, four. It doesn’t matter what you call it, a tail is not a leg.

Rather, the concern that is being expressed is about what is the proper way to express love and not only to her and the child but also to the whole of society. Vern, please take the time to read the whole thread and you may get a different feel for this discussion.

The way to do that is to treat her like any expectant mother with slim resources, and neither shun nor embarass her.

“Judge not, lest ye be judged.”

 

[mosher]

Then you surely know how the proponents of abortion will seize on any shred to “proove” we “care nothing about the child after it’s born.”

Yes and as usual they would be wrong just as when they claim that support for a just war or the just use of the death penalty invalidates the pro-life position. They would be wrong as they are wrong with everything. However, what they do is not my concern. It is futile to fight against propaganda but rather you work for the good in true understanding of what is our moral obligation on all aspects. We cannot make moral equivalents where there are none.

and in the end, that’s what this is about – how we are more righteous than the expectant mother, and how it would be scandalous to give her a baby shower.

Not at all. It is about protecting others from scandal while at the same time caring for the mother and child.

Abraham Lincoln asked, “if you call a tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have?”

The answer is, four. It doesn’t matter what you call it, a tail is not a leg.

That is very true but it does not relate to this point as the two things are quite different.

The way to do that is to treat her like any expectant mother with slim resources, and neither shun nor embarass her.

“Judge not, lest ye be judged.”

It is actually “judge not lest ye be judged by the same measure in which you judge.” This changes the exegisis dramatically from the way in which you are trying to use it.

As I said there is more than just the mother and child to be concerned about and all have equal precedence.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Yes and as usual they would be wrong just as when they claim that support for a just war or the just use of the death penalty invalidates the pro-life position. They would be wrong as they are wrong with everything. However, what they do is not my concern. It is futile to fight against propaganda but rather you work for the good in true understanding of what is our moral obligation on all aspects. We cannot make moral equivalents where there are none.

But they will try – and the bruises inflicted by the club you gave the enemy will hurt as much as any others.

Not at all. It is about protecting others from scandal while at the same time caring for the mother and child.

I doin’t see any protection. All I see is humiliating and rejecting someone who needs help.

That is very true but it does not relate to this point as the two things are quite different.

A leg is a leg. Shunning is shunning.

It is actually “judge not lest ye be judged by the same measure in which you judge.” This changes the exegisis dramatically from the way in which you are trying to use it.

Actually, it changes in my favor. How would any of us like to be judged and shunned this way? Are we not all sinners?

As I said there is more than just the mother and child to be concerned about and all have equal precedence.

You betcha – and those other people are those who might choose to keep a child, but are turned away by the self-righteous.

 

[gmarie21]

1 Corinthians
Chapter 13
1
1 If I speak in human and angelic tongues 2 but do not have love, I am a resounding gong or a clashing cymbal.
2
And if I have the gift of prophecy and comprehend all mysteries and all knowledge; if I have all faith so as to move mountains but do not have love, I am nothing.
3
If I give away everything I own, and if I hand my body over so that I may boast but do not have love, I gain nothing.
4
3 Love is patient, love is kind. It is not jealous, (love) is not pompous, it is not inflated,
5
it is not rude, it does not seek its own interests, it is not quick-tempered, it does not brood over injury,
6
it does not rejoice over wrongdoing but rejoices with the truth.
7
It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
8
4 Love never fails. If there are prophecies, they will be brought to nothing; if tongues, they will cease; if knowledge, it will be brought to nothing.
9
For we know partially and we prophesy partially,
10
but when the perfect comes, the partial will pass away.
11
When I was a child, I used to talk as a child, think as a child, reason as a child; when I became a man, I put aside childish things.
12
At present we see indistinctly, as in a mirror, but then face to face. At present I know partially; then I shall know fully, as I am fully known.
13
5 So faith, hope, love remain, these three; but the greatest of these is love.

Love is first and foremost. If your intention of not participating in a baby shower is for avoiding scandal, then you are not loving. A pregnant, unmarried woman NEEDS LOVE AND SUPPORT. Her feelings DO matter. It isn’t about the premarital sex, it’s about the health of the baby, which is directly affected by the health (both mental and physical) of the mother. YOu may not like that fact, but that is the reality. Start to live in the real world that needs Christ’s love.

 

[mosher]

Love is first and foremost. If your intention of not participating in a baby shower is for avoiding scandal, then you are not loving. A pregnant, unmarried woman NEEDS LOVE AND SUPPORT. Her feelings DO matter. It isn’t about the premarital sex, it’s about the health of the baby, which is directly affected by the health (both mental and physical) of the mother. YOu may not like that fact, but that is the reality. Start to live in the real world that needs Christ’s love.

Ok, let’s stop discussing this without understanding love.

Love is to desire the highest good for the other. It is exactly because of love that scandal has to be avoided and not against love. For some reason you seem to believe that we must love the mother over others. This is not correct. All people deserve equal treatment and equal love. Further, it may not be an act of love to have a shower for an unwed mother depending on the circumstance but instead not having one would be a greater act of love. I would suggest some time trying to understand what love actually is as opposed to the way the current American culture posits love. A good beginning would be the encyclical Deus Caritas Est.