Can You Really Have Two Many Kids?

[TIME]

Often I read things from couples who want to limit the number of children so they can afford to give them college educations and send them to catholic schools.

On the other hand I’ve read that the church teaches that when considering how many kids to have, one should consider the best interests of your existing children as well as the interests of any future children you will have.

So how can you balance college educations with more little people to love and serve God? Is there any limit to how many kids you should have?

Even if you’re on welfare and you have 20 kids, thats 20 people to love life and love each other and love God. How can we even compare the chance at life with things like college? It’s not your fault if you have to go on welfare: the laws in our country don’t allow kids to work to help support the family.

We had three in under three years. The oldest turned three almost two months after the third was born. I thought we had traveled back to the 50’s or 60’s. No. 3 was conceived while breastfeeding No. 2. We went from being a close, hold hands, talk about dozens of things at night couple, after work, to ROBOTS cleaning and caring for babies. This lasted for about six years.

We were back on track to being a couple who could talk and take care of our marriage once again. Then one day on a cold, dreary day in the Fall, the Holy Spirit blessed us again and we were back in the baby business. Believe it or not, our marriage and we have lived to tell about it, but it has taken EVERY fiber in our being to get were we are today.

This is the time pray together, you have to see it to believe how wonderful and uplifting the Rosary and other prayers can be. Taking time to thank our Lord for your young family, you guys health, safety and asking for continued graces. Just do It.

As for us, given the status of culture in the US and world for that matter. We do have strong Catholic Schools and High Schools in our area so we made the commitment to send our Children. We had to beg and borrow to make it happen we have gotten our first to college.

With the pop-culture sewer that our child have to swim in everyday we feel like we have to put on their armor every morning to protect them, like the Crusaders & Knights of Templar. So we spend lots of time talking to them, being involved at the schools, having friends over, etc.

Academically our goals are to reflect closely the standards the Church ask of the Priest and Bishops, .ie. ultimately have our children prepared to complete a Masters or PhD. level curriculum. That is NOT to say that finishing at the high-school level is sub-par. That is just how we were taught in my high-school days and it was not buy Jesuits. We ask the Holy Spirit for leadership and have each one of them prepared for High-School Honors and AP curriculum. So we live in almost TV Free home, focusing every minute on raising our children, spiritually and academical and giving the remainder of the day to our marriage before we collapse into sleep.

My point is for us to raise a Mid-Large family, 4-6 children, is taking everything we have, with the Holy Spirit caring us on more days than I can count.

 

[AmberDale]

I think it depends on the family and how well they can manage their children.
If you practice NFP and get pregnant, that’s one more blessing. But you need to look at your current family and say “can I physically, mentally, emotionally, and financially care for more kids”. If not, then you need to become a darn good NFP practicer. But if one more did come along, then God will bless that child as well

As ABC is immoral then becoming the best NFP user around is the only way to not have more kids.

 

[TweetyBird]

God can cause good to come out of evil, such as a child coming out of immoral sex, but this does not mean that the sex should have occurred.

There are plenty of couples who are married and who have serious financial struggles. For them sex should occur. The Church does not require them to abstain.

Also, never conceived=/=aborted. For someone to never have been conceived is a neutral thing.

True. I haven’t seen anyone arguing that not conceiving is evil (when morally licit means are used, of course), so I’m not sure why you addressed it. However, what I understand Esther Rose to say is that once a person is here, why in the world should we wish they were not? I agree with Esther Rose that when we say “so and so should not have so many children” we are implying that they are not all unique, individual blessings, created in the image and likeness of God.

I would be perfectly happy with undoing my own existence if it meant that there would be more attention and a better life for my siblings.

God would not be perfectly happy with that. He created you (and me and everyone else) individually and uniquely. Every person that exists is, from the moment of conception, willed and created by God.

 

[TweetyBird]

The bottom line is that it’s really no one else’s business whether a particular couple has or should have 1 child or 20 children. It seems incredibly arrogant to me to be making judgments that certain people shouldn’t continue to reproduce. The Church does not require married couples to use NFP or employ any sort of abstinence at all. Likewise, the Church does not require a couple to have a ‘large’ family either. The issue of whether a particular couple parents responsibly is a different issue. You can be an irresponsible parent of 1 child, or of 20. My dad is one of 14 kids, and they were dirt poor. He doesn’t even believe in God, but I’m sure if I asked him whether there were ‘too many’ kids in his family, he’d most assuredly say ‘no’ (the siblings are very close - my dad is one of the younger ones at age 60).

 

[sing]

There are plenty of couples who are married and who have serious financial struggles. For them sex should occur. The Church does not require them to abstain.

I said immoral sex, meaning sex between unmarried people. Esther Rose seemed to be at least indirectly addressing a situation of conception through sex out of wedlock. The Catholic position is that the sex should not have happened. The child is not a negative, of course, but the Church does not in any way condone the sex.

True. I haven’t seen anyone arguing that not conceiving is evil (when morally licit means are used, of course), so I’m not sure why you addressed it.

I understood Esther Rose to be referring at least partly to children conceived out of wedlock. This is a situation where two people are supposed to abstain. If Esther Rose did not refer to children conceived outside of wedlock, then I apologize for misunderstanding.

However, what I understand Esther Rose to say is that once a person is here, why in the world should we wish they were not? I agree with Esther Rose that when we say “so and so should not have so many children” we are implying that they are not all unique, individual blessings, created in the image and likeness of God.

You are free to focus on that aspect of it, and it is valid. But the Catholic Church does not require its members to reproduce as often as possible because parents need to be responsible. Thus, NFP is approved. It seems obvious to me that there can indeed be too much of a good thing.

 

[sing]

The bottom line is that it’s really no one else’s business whether a particular couple has or should have 1 child or 20 children. It seems incredibly arrogant to me to be making judgments that certain people shouldn’t continue to reproduce. The Church does not require married couples to use NFP or employ any sort of abstinence at all. Likewise, the Church does not require a couple to have a ‘large’ family either. The issue of whether a particular couple parents responsibly is a different issue. You can be an irresponsible parent of 1 child, or of 20. My dad is one of 14 kids, and they were dirt poor. He doesn’t even believe in God, but I’m sure if I asked him whether there were ‘too many’ kids in his family, he’d most assuredly say ‘no’ (the siblings are very close - my dad is one of the younger ones at age 60).

I don’t agree that it is “no one else’s business”. In some situations, if parents have children they cannot take care of and continue to have children, they are creating an abusive environment. This is an extreme, but it is why Children’s Services exists.

I just think people need to use common sense. Sorry if this offends anyone, but I think it shows bad judgment when a couple who already have 6 kids and are homeless become pregnant again. This is what my parents did. True, they were using NFP, but in such a drastic situation, maybe sex shouldn’t be a high priority. God didn’t force them to have sex.

 

[TweetyBird]

I said immoral sex, meaning sex between unmarried people. Esther Rose seemed to be at least indirectly addressing a situation of conception through sex out of wedlock. The Catholic position is that the sex should not have happened. The child is not a negative, of course, but the Church does not in any way condone the sex.

I understood Esther Rose to be referring at least partly to children conceived out of wedlock. This is a situation where two people are supposed to abstain. If Esther Rose did not refer to children conceived outside of wedlock, then I apologize for misunderstanding.

You are free to focus on that aspect of it, and it is valid. But the Catholic Church does not require its members to reproduce as often as possible because parents need to be responsible. Thus, NFP is approved. It seems obvious to me that there can indeed be too much of a good thing.

Right, NFP is allowed but not required. The Church neither requires its members to reproduce ad nauseum, nor does it require them to limit their family size.

 

[TweetyBird]

sing, I get what you’re saying. It sounds like the circumstances in which you grew up were pretty extreme. I guess what I am trying to say is that it really is up to God and the individual couple to determine their family size, and whether it is prudent to limit their family size or not. It just seems that all sorts of people have posted their own subjective criteria for judging what constitutes ‘too many’ children. Prudence and common sense are good things, for sure - if I were homeless with 6 kids, probably sex would be the last thing on my mind. But if I did have a child in that circumstance, that baby would still be a blessing and gift from God.

 

[drafdog]

“Too many” is more a function of psychological, spiritual and physical capacity than of financial. The times that I have seen families with “too many” children, I have seen abusive behavior among family members: parents toward children, siblings toward one another. When bringing up and providing for children becomes such a burden that love and tenderness is lost, you have too many. When the material provision for children reduces a father and mother to the point of begging for aid just to provide clothing and food, there are too many children.
It’s sad, but you can’t avoid the strain of sheer numbers. Mother always said the amount of noise generated by a group of children was proportional to the square of the number of children. (Can you tell that she taught math?) That goes for everything that stresses a family.

Matthew

 

[TIME]

Is it not a parents responsibility to do their utmost to get the child’s soul to heaven? Given the sewer our children are living in today it would take some level of focused communication several times per week, if not daily, between the parent and their children. I know it is different for families in different cities and situations but you still have to spend time with each child several time a week or daily.

How just is it, if you have children you can not take care of their spiritual needs and then ask God to do His will. Should we ask God to micromanage our lives and family? Should we ask God to do all the hard work while we say it is God’s will and he will provide for us.

 

[anna1978]

OP: I think it depends per family. My dh and I both suffer from periodical depression, anxiety and panic attacks. For us, a very large family would probably not be God’s Will. Especially as in the past 6 years my dh has not been able to work full-time and only now is he getting back on his feet . Both mentally and financially we have our hands full with the 2 children we have, and whom we love very much!

But, dh’s aunt and uncle who live in Ireland, brought up 11 children, who all turned out wonderful young adults and both financially and in other ways they managed admirably. For them 11 was NOT too much!

So, it depends…My great-grandfather (who lived from 1849-1932) outlived 4 wives, and had a total of 22 living children with these 4 wives. They all became labourers, carpenters, day-workers, farm-workers, maids and wives and had families of their own. My grandfather always maintained it was a happy home! So, for that family 22 children was not ‘too much’…

For me, 2 is all I can handle right now, but if a 3rd came along, we’d manage somehow

Anna x

 

[puzzleannie]

since I spend a lot of my time with children, some of it with their parents and watching them interact (actually I could base my observations solely on how children behave at Mass or in Walmart parking lto) and this is strictly my opinion, but the reason many women don’t want more children is, and I see the statement many times here:

I can’t handle the children I have.

I believe it is true, but it should read
I WON’T handle the children I have properly because I refuse to learn to discipline properly, to teach self control, deferred gratification, self-reliance, and virtue, and I refuse to apply the principles of teaching discipline if I do learn them.

I think larger families of the past functioned better when kids had more duties, fewer rights, and a lot less possessions, and the benefit of real discipline.

 

[TIME]

Annie, What you say is true and in some places today it may still be quite true. “I think larger families of the past functioned better when kids had more duties, fewer rights, and a lot less possessions, and the benefit of real discipline.”

But, this really the first time in human history that society has been so anti family and anti Christian with so much reach. Even the Roman Empire at it’s hight could not bring the poison in the home, the way, the Internet, TV and Radio have today. Our society, our families, our children are bombarded almost every waking min. with pure poison from magazines, newspapers, the Internet, TV, Radio, cell phones, etc. That’s what makes the reach of Satin so dangers and parenting, not business as usual.

We have a med-large family, live in a pretty conservative city of about 500,000 and we still feel it is a daily duty to protect them, their are only two parents and so many minutes in a day. It just takes a different strategy in today’s world. Thank goodness for the gifts of The Rosary and Catholic Catechism to defend our families with.

 

[Katie1723]

Have all the children you want. Just be sure you can support them. I work in an in hospital birth center and I can’t begin to tell you all the times I hear " If I have more kids, I get more money".
I wish they would just stop expecting me to help them.
Down on your luck is one thing…ignorance is something else.

Kathy

 

[mizznicole]

I think the church is pretty clear on the definition of marriage: 1 man and 1 woman for the procreation AND education of children. If you cannot properly educate your children, then having more is not prudent, in my opinion. Education does not mean college, but virtue. If your family has a lot of dysfunction going on, it would seem best to get on the right tracks spiritually before bringing more little souls into it.

 

[TIME]

This is interesting from CCC:

2367 Called to give life, spouses share in the creative power and fatherhood of God.154 "Married couples should regard it as their proper mission to transmit human life and to educate their children; they should realize that they are thereby cooperating with the love of God the Creator and are, in a certain sense, its interpreters. They will fulfill this duty with a sense of human and Christian responsibility."155

So it is well documented that Education is a top responsibility of the parents.

 

[TweetyBird]

This is interesting from CCC:

2367 Called to give life, spouses share in the creative power and fatherhood of God.154 "Married couples should regard it as their proper mission to transmit human life and to educate their children; they should realize that they are thereby cooperating with the love of God the Creator and are, in a certain sense, its interpreters. They will fulfill this duty with a sense of human and Christian responsibility."155

So it is well documented that Education is a top responsibility of the parents.

Yes, but “education” does not mean an advanced college degree. It doesn’t, in the context quoted above, mean any kind of formal degree at all. Perhaps you did not mean a formal college education, but I just wanted to clarify.

 

[TIME]

Yes, but “education” does not mean an advanced college degree. It doesn’t, in the context quoted above, mean any kind of formal degree at all. Perhaps you did not mean a formal college education, but I just wanted to clarify.

That is correct I do not believe the reference to education means college or advanced degrees. See my other post above. Some education can be by example but a lot of it is spending physical minutes and hours with each child weekly if not daily. How many children can two parents have and still educated them responsibly? It is a question we all need to answer with great gravity.

However it is interesting to note the Church puts high standards on the clergy, our Diocesan Priest have an education between a Master and almost a PhD. Our family simply tries to follow the Churches model for education. We have four girls as well and to educate them Spiritually and Academically, and have a shred of time left for our marriage is taking every once of our Being. That’s with my wife staying at home.

 

[TweetyBird]

That is correct I do not believe the reference to education means college or advanced degrees. See my other post above. Some education can be by example but a lot of it is spending physical minutes and hours with each child weekly if not daily. How many children can two parents have and still educated them responsibly? It is a question we all need to answer with great gravity.

However it is interesting to note the Church puts high standards on the clergy, our Diocesan Priest have an education between a Master and almost a PhD. Our family simply tries to follow the Churches model for education. We have four girls as well and to educate them Spiritually and Academically, and have a shred of time left for our marriage is taking every once of our Being. That’s with my wife staying at home.

TIME, you’ve already said in a number of posts that you and your wife value advanced formal education and that in your opinion a parent should spend copious amounts of individual time with each child in order raise them properly. You are free to hold that opinion. I disagree that your approach is necessary to raise smart, solidly educated, well-formed Catholic kids. IMO, there are always teachable moments in everyday family life. Life is messy, and I guess I just don’t place emphasis on the same things you do. I prefer to go with the flow and not worry so much over activities, individual attention and advanced formal education. Interestingly, I read an article recently that said that one-on-one time and parent-child play are pretty much novelties that are not typically seen in traditional cultures, with some interesting implications. IMO, in today’s world of smaller families, kids just don’t get the socialization that they would have typically had in the past. We also (in most of the U.S.) no longer interact with neighbors and extended family on a daily basis. I think this has a huge effect on our ability to parent more kids, since we no longer have our ‘villages’ to offer help and support. IMO a support network of trusted friends and family is more important in raising children than academics or one-on-one time per kid.

My experience is that my kids keep each other company, and of course they get plenty of education, correction and love from me and my husband, but we don’t need to spend time alone with a particular child to be able to do that. Two of my kids are of school age and both are well-adjusted and academically capable.

I do think some type of college education or vocational training is prudent in order to be able to earn a living in the economy in which we live. It is an unfortunate fact of life that a high school education is no longer sufficient to obtain a decent paying job most of the time. There is nothing inherently superior about having X number of years of formal education. There is nothing wrong with pursuing advanced levels of higher education either, but it is not a priority for me that my children do so for its own sake. If one of them is fired up about a particular profession or graduate program, then I would fully support them in that pursuit, but in the grand scheme of things, I just don’t think advanced formal education is all that important in terms of happiness in life or fulfilling our vocations as Catholics.

You are free to emphasize what you feel is important in parenting, but I don’t think your standards apply to all families.

 

[TIME]

TweetyB, I apologize, if my response was too strong and I absolutely concur, that college or post graduate degrees do not, in any way guarantee a successful life or entry to Heaven. Just sharing our family philosophy/strategy for us and how the Holy Spirit guided us. As I said, in a post earlier, high school education for those who chose that route, is not sub par.

Between your post, mine and others, we have shown a wide breath of family philosophy’s. Hopefully it has been helpful to others.