Catholics that say they'd never have any biological children for this reason

  • Thread starter Thread starter MakingMyWayBack
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
BioNerd said:
See the thing is…THERE IS NO CHILD THAT IS BEING ABORTED, BECAUSE THERE IS NO CHILD THAT HAS BEEN MADE. They chose to take in another child because they are aware of the fact that their gametes may produce a child with needs they decided they cannot handle. And now they’re apparently being selfish according to a bunch of people screaming “if so and so and past generations have done it, why the heck can’t you?!”.

And I could care less if they’re recognized or not by the catholic church because the more I read this discussion the more ludicrous it’s teachings are appearing to be. Marriage is not JUST about popping out kids. Neither should a couples generosity or selfishness be measured by how many and why they’re willing to pop them out. But according to the church rules are rules and at this point I’m starting to realize denominations are just denominations.

And by the way, why do y’all love bring homosexuals into every conversation and topic? You complain about the media this and the media that, yet…:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
You say a lot of sense above. However, a lot that has been said is not what the Catholic Church says but the opinions of individuals who pass them off as what the Church says or what God says.
 
Memaw said:
It covers both. Married love must always be open to the procreation of children as God ordained it to be. How WE view things can very well be wrong. It’s not our “view” that’s important here. God Bless, Memaw
Click to expand...
Only your views?
 
maryjk said:
If this were true, then couples that had previously had sterilization surgery would not be able to be married. Yet they are.

(Not consummating the marriage is a totally different situation. )
Click to expand...
Agreed and neither would couples where the wife is post menopausal.
 
I come back to the older, but not yet post menopausal couple, who desire marriage. Their thinking may likely be that they are in love and wish to live out their lives together. But they are also of the view that they are past the stage in life for having children. They would (only) intend to periodically abstain to give effect to that intent.

The canon law as I read it would say they may not marry. Of course, they can remain good friends. In some years time, when the woman has passed menopause, they will become free to marry.

So this part of the canon law,** in so far as eligibility for marriage is concerned,** boils down to “you must not be against having children if you are physically able”. And to comply, you must not methodically place limits on when you have sex, with avoidance the purpose.

Interesting.
 
Rau said:
I come back to the older, but not yet post menopausal couple, who desire marriage. Their thinking may likely be that they are in love and wish to live out their lives together. But they are also of the view that they are past the stage in life for having children. They would (only) intend to periodically abstain to give effect to that intent.

The canon law as I read it would say they may not marry. Of course, they can remain good friends. In some years time, when the woman has passed menopause, they will become free to marry.

So this part of the canon law,** in so far as eligibility for marriage is concerned,** boils down to “you must not be against having children if you are physically able”. And to comply, you must not methodically place limits on when you have sex, with avoidance the purpose.

Interesting.
Click to expand...
This thread has been very interesting. Here we are, talking about canon law and purpose of marriage. I am enjoying it!
 
Rau said:
You’re not being “sassy”, are you??🙂
Click to expand...
No. I am serious. This thread is causing all involved to look at and think about marriage, children, adoption, and why the Church teaches what it teaches. One thing that popped to me was that in the very beginning of this thread how the couple avoided was not really thought about as important. But as we can see from the discussion following and even another poster that posted about adopting children, there is a disconnect that many do not understand. I for one, have enjoyed delving into canon law. Something as a layperson I have always been hesitant to do because really it is not our place. But examining and studding the issue has increased my education about the mind of the Church in regards to several subjects we have discussed in this thread. They are all related and I will use all of them when engaging in apologetics on NFP, ABC, and even the marriage issue that faces our society today. I still am shocked and saddened by some Catholics who may not have an understanding of the issue or who let personal feelings and choices get in the way of growing in the faith. But I have to move beyond that. Especially given the state of the Church and society in general. I have to accept that certain things that seem like basic common sense fundamental Catholic teaching may not be reaching a large segment of not only our secular world but a Catholic one as well. I have always been amazed by whom people may vote for or statistics of who uses what to contracept. I can see now that the disconnect that many Catholics have is not uncommon. This thread has made me think of my loving life giving sacrificing marriage better, it has made me think even fonder of the choices we have made to bring forth life (as if that were possible to be even fonder of THAT.:D) And it has even made me so frustrated at times, that it may have been responsible for life affirming marital relations between me and my wife that were initiated to relieve frustration and receive confirmation on what I believe as a Catholic married man.:o

So yes, I have enjoyed this thread. Perhaps if this thread keeps on going it could be directly responsible not for an adoption but a conception!!! And then you all could name the baby…:D:D
 
Every conception has the risk of birth defects or complications.
Click to expand...
This is the fallacy of equivocation. There are degrees of risk.
Suffering is inevitable in this life. The goal is not to avoid it, but to face it head on with confidence in god’s grace.
Click to expand...
It does not mean one must seek it out, either.

+Sebastian
 
40.png
57thDimension:
Quote:
Every conception has the risk of birth defects or complications.
This is the fallacy of equivocation. There are degrees of risk.

Quote:
Suffering is inevitable in this life. The goal is not to avoid it, but to face it head on with confidence in god’s grace.
It does not mean one must seek it out, either.

No argument with this, but how do your observations above influence you in respect of the questions being discussed in his thread?
 
Rau said:
Quote:
Every conception has the risk of birth defects or complications.
This is the fallacy of equivocation. There are degrees of risk.

Quote:
Suffering is inevitable in this life. The goal is not to avoid it, but to face it head on with confidence in god’s grace.
It does not mean one must seek it out, either.

No argument with this, but how do your observations above influence you in respect of the questions being discussed in his thread?
Click to expand...
To be honest, I wrote that response when the thread was a few pages long, and simply forgot to post it. I think it is (or should be) independent of whatever is/was written in this thread.

+Sebastian
 
Hoosier_Daddy said:
This thread has been very interesting. Here we are, talking about canon law and purpose of marriage. I am enjoying it!
Click to expand...
I’m wondering if Abraham 100 and Sarah 90 were past menopausal age, or Elizabeth and Zachariah, parents of John the Baptist? We humans think we are so smart, you know with science and all. Don’t we forget that nothing is impossible with God and if those two persons who are almost past menopausal age want to get married and abstain from relations for a time, that is permissible in my mind. As long as they don’t restrict the marital act at other times in other ways… Be open to God’s plans!
 
I have been reading this thread with interest…I will try to keep my post/questions as concise as possible.

My husband and I have been married a number of years. He has always been a Catholic, but only in the past few years has returned to being a practising Catholic. I have only recently joined the church through the RCIA process, having been raised a protestant.

For the first few years of our marriage, we used oral contraceptives, and although I don’t consider myself to be an ignorant person, I was ignorant of exactly what I was doing at the time. We have had a change of heart and have been using NFP when necessary.

We have been open to having children but haven’t actively tried for a family until recently. We have since stopped due to my husband’s health. My husband has taken very seriously ill in recent months, and this was very unexpected. We are currently abstaining from marital relations, mostly because it is not possible at this point in time. It turns out that his severe illness is a debilitating, and rare disease which would be passed on to any female children we should have.

We have fostered and now are adopting a sibling group of 3 children whom have lived with us for number of years. We are very welcome to children in our lives and they have been such a blessing from the moment they entered our lives, and although very hard work, they have been such a comfort during these hard times and helped to keep us going.

We are still a young couple in our 30s, and plenty of time to have biological children in theory. The thing is, I am struggling very much so as I will have to return to work, and already have 3 children as well as my husband to care for. My husband is now classed as disabled and is not able to work as normal.

Are we wrong to consider using NFP permanently? We would, of course, welcome any children we would conceive, but I’m not sure it is right for us to seek to have biological children. Our 3 adopted children, as well as this situation with his health, have pushed me to limits that I didn’t think I would ever cope with. I don’t think I could cope with a baby as well…but I am sinning? Am I not trusting God enough? Helpful answers please, please do not judge me as I really am seeking advice and to follow God’s plan, but I am struggling with everything just now x

If you could all pray for our family…particularly my husband who is especially struggling to see God’s plan in all of this.
 
Let’s take another hypothetical Catholic couple, say they are also predisposed to produce offspring requiring special needs. Let’s say the first five times a pregnancy goes to term, a child requiring special needs is produced, and they decide to give each child up for adoption after earnestly discussing their suitability of being reasonably good special needs parents.

Would this couple’s marriage be judged invalid based on this single datum?

Is this couple behaving more in line with Church teaching than the couple described in the OP?

Does the answer to either of these questions depend on whether the hypothetical couple is aware of their genetic legacy?
 
“Are we wrong to consider using NFP permanently? We would, of course, welcome any children we would conceive, but I’m not sure it is right for us to seek to have biological children. Our 3 adopted children, as well as this situation with his health, have pushed me to limits that I didn’t think I would ever cope with. I don’t think I could cope with a baby as well…but I am sinning? Am I not trusting God enough? Helpful answers please, please do not judge me as I really am seeking advice and to follow God’s plan, but I am struggling with everything just now x”

You don’t need to make any permanent decisions right now. You can keep reconsidering and reweighing this periodically from now until menopause. The only thing you can be sure of is that things are going to keep changing. You’ll be getting older, but at the same time, your adopted children will also be getting older and more capable. Also, there may well be some medical breakthroughs that will change either your husband’s situation or your hypothetical biological children’s situation. Don’t feel like you need to decide now and forevermore what you’re going to be doing for the next 10 years–you don’t have to do that.

Best wishes!
 
TiberSwimming said:
…
We have been open to having children but haven’t actively tried for a family until recently. We have since stopped due to my husband’s health. My husband has taken very seriously ill in recent months, and this was very unexpected. We are currently abstaining from marital relations, mostly because it is not possible at this point in time. It turns out that his severe illness is a debilitating, and rare disease which would be passed on to any female children we should have.

We have fostered and now are adopting a sibling group of 3 children whom have lived with us for number of years. …

We are still a young couple in our 30s, and plenty of time to have biological children in theory. The thing is, I am struggling very much so as I will have to return to work, and already have 3 children as well as my husband to care for. My husband is now classed as disabled and is not able to work as normal.

Are we wrong to consider using NFP permanently? We would, of course, welcome any children we would conceive, but I’m not sure it is right for us to seek to have biological children. Our 3 adopted children, as well as this situation with his health, have pushed me to limits that I didn’t think I would ever cope with. I don’t think I could cope with a baby as well…but I am sinning? Am I not trusting God enough? Helpful answers please, please do not judge me as I really am seeking advice and to follow God’s plan, but I am struggling with everything just now x
Click to expand...
I believe there would be no sin whatsoever in adopting NFP for so long as your circumstances remain as you describe. NFP is recognised by the church as the proper means of regulating births.

Just in case it is not clear, the essence of this thread (when it kicked off) was about a couple who, prior to being married, declared that (in given circumstances) “they would never have children”, and then going ahead to get married. The Church says that if you intend never to have children, you should not get married. This is clearly not your situation.
 
Rau said:
I believe there would be no sin whatsoever in adopting NFP for so long as your circumstances remain as you describe. NFP is recognised by the church as the proper means of regulating births.

Just in case it is not clear, the essence of this thread (when it kicked off) was about a couple who, prior to being married, declared that (in given circumstances) “they would never have children”, and then going ahead to get married. The Church says that if you intend never to have children, you should not get married. This is clearly not your situation.
Click to expand...
Agreed! They should talk to their priest and let him help them, not us. Prayers for sure! God Bless, Memaw
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top