confused

[angell1]

guys, I’m really confused about something that feels like a bit of a contradiction

on the one hand, the church teaches that we don’t need to have as many children as possible but that large families are a blessing. I guess that the idea is that norm of cahotlic families are supposed to try and have large families/ and that small families are the exception?

there’s also question of the marital debt, you can use nfp or abstinence for just reasons but you’re not supposed to deprive the other spouse for too long and not really refuse sex when asked.

most of the time, everyone makes this sound like life and death situation, if you’re not realy gravely sick or financially struggling below the poverty line or some grave psychological disturbance.

what if you’re just overwhelmed even with a couple kids, or just tired after long days?

what would be bad reasons to use nfp?

and what are reasonable requests for marital debt obligations?

of course, today’s culture makes it sound like everyone f is crazy and sex-deprived if they don’t get it every day, especially for guys.

also, why do people make it seem like mothers are bad if they choose to work? what if they enjoy their job as well and it’s not strictly for financial purposes?

thoughts?

 

[1990Domer]

I get just as much–if not more-- grief for being a SAHM. I think children of big or small families are a blessing and should be left at that. Others are not conveying acts of kindness, which we truly lack in this society.

 

[jmjZelie]

This is all for the couple to prayerfully and thoughtfully to work out together. Everyone’s marriage and body and family life and resources and community support are different.

The reason why people give the impression that things must be life and death to use NFP or that working moms (or SAHMs) are bad is because people can be nosy and judgmental and can sometimes be incapable of imagining that someone else might have different struggles and challengesthan their own.

But there are also lots of good people who do not judge other couple or mothers for prudential choices that the Church leaves to each couple to discern.

 

[Vico]

guys, I’m really confused about something that feels like a bit of a contradiction

on the one hand, the church teaches that we don’t need to have as many children as possible but that large families are a blessing. I guess that the idea is that norm of cahotlic families are supposed to try and have large families/ and that small families are the exception?

there’s also question of the marital debt, you can use nfp or abstinence for just reasons but you’re not supposed to deprive the other spouse for too long and not really refuse sex when asked.

most of the time, everyone makes this sound like life and death situation, if you’re not realy gravely sick or financially struggling below the poverty line or some grave psychological disturbance.

what if you’re just overwhelmed even with a couple kids, or just tired after long days?

what would be bad reasons to use nfp?

and what are reasonable requests for marital debt obligations?

of course, today’s culture makes it sound like everyone f is crazy and sex-deprived if they don’t get it every day, especially for guys.

also, why do people make it seem like mothers are bad if they choose to work? what if they enjoy their job as well and it’s not strictly for financial purposes?

thoughts?

From Pope Pius XII:
The matrimonial contract, which confers on the married couple the right to satisfy the inclination of nature, constitutes them in a state of life, namely, the matrimonial state. Now, on married couples, who make use of the specific act of their state, nature and the Creator impose the function of providing for the preservation of mankind. This is the characteristic service which gives rise to the peculiar value of their state, the . The individual and society, the people and the State, the Church itself, depend for their existence, in the order established by God, on fruitful marriages. Therefore, to embrace the matrimonial state, to use continually the faculty proper to such a state and lawful only therein, and, at the same time, to avoid its primary duty without a grave reason, would be a sin against the very nature of married life.
Serious motives, such as those which not rarely arise from medical, eugenic, economic and social so-called “indications,” may exempt husband and wife from the obligatory, positive debt for a long period or even for the entire period of matrimonial life. From this it follows that the observance of the natural sterile periods may be lawful, from the moral viewpoint: and it is lawful in the conditions mentioned. If, however, according to a reasonable and equitable judgment, there are no such grave reasons either personal or deriving from exterior circumstances, the will to avoid the fecundity of their union, while continuing to satisfy to tile full their sensuality, can only be the result of a false appreciation of life and of motives foreign to sound ethical principles.
ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/P511029.HTM

 

[pianistclare]

guys, I’m really confused about something that feels like a bit of a contradiction

on the one hand, the church teaches that we don’t need to have as many children as possible but that large families are a blessing. I guess that the idea is that norm of cahotlic families are supposed to try and have large families/ and that small families are the exception?

**Catholics are called to accept children lovingly from God. Period.
if you get 1, you get one. If you get seven, you get seven. There is nothing that says we have to have as many kids as possible. That’s another religion. **

there’s also question of the marital debt, you can use nfp or abstinence for just reasons but you’re not supposed to deprive the other spouse for too long and not really refuse sex when asked.

This is something that a loving husband and wife work out based on their schedules and appetite, let’s say. Personally, I appreciate a husband that can take one look at me and say “poor girl…she’s exhausted. I’ll just hold her close tonight”. The fact that some people think they have to do it every single day is just nonsense. And vice versa. The "debt’ you owe is respect and consideration.

most of the time, everyone makes this sound like life and death situation, if you’re not realy gravely sick or financially struggling below the poverty line or some grave psychological disturbance.

**That would be the secular approach, yes. **

what if you’re just overwhelmed even with a couple kids, or just tired after long days?

**then your husband helps you. **

what would be bad reasons to use nfp?

**I can’t think of any. People have to do what’s best for their family situation. **

and what are reasonable requests for marital debt obligations?

**That’s between you and your husband. And the term marital debt is a pretty lousy one, btw. **

of course, today’s culture makes it sound like everyone f is crazy and sex-deprived if they don’t get it every day, especially for guys.

**Yes, that has been sold to youth for a couple of decades now. No one can tell someone what is right for them. That’s between spouses. **

also, why do people make it seem like mothers are bad if they choose to work? what if they enjoy their job as well and it’s not strictly for financial purposes?

**I don’t know anyone who does this. Most every mother I know works. And those who are home are CERTAINLY working.
**

thoughts?

**I think when you find a good man to be your husband, he will respect you if you keep good communication and good marriage prep. **

 

[St_Francis]

guys, I’m really confused about something that feels like a bit of a contradiction

on the one hand, the church teaches that we don’t need to have as many children as possible but that large families are a blessing. I guess that the idea is that norm of cahotlic families are supposed to try and have large families/ and that small families are the exception?

What’s a blessing? A gift from God, so babies, being gifts from God, are blessings.

This does not mean that we cannot decide that a particular time is a bad time for having a child, and declining, not the baby, but the marital embrace for a period of time.

there’s also question of the marital debt, you can use nfp or abstinence for just reasons but you’re not supposed to deprive the other spouse for too long and not really refuse sex when asked.

Right. in marriage, the spouses exchange rights to their bodies. This does not mean that spouses are able to be inconsiderats of each other, tho. Each has the right to refuse unreasonable requests.

most of the time, everyone makes this sound like life and death situation, if you’re not realy gravely sick or financially struggling below the poverty line or some grave psychological disturbance.

what if you’re just overwhelmed even with a couple kids, or just tired after long days?

what would be bad reasons to use nfp?

We are *not at all *in a position to judge what is happening in the marriages of others. A couple may have no children; this does not mean they are contracepting, they could be not conceiving despite their efforts, or miscarrying. I make it a rule never to even speculate about what is happpening in other marriages.

and what are reasonable requests for marital debt obligations?

This is probably something to work out in Pre-Cana as it will vary.

of course, today’s culture makes it sound like everyone f is crazy and sex-deprived if they don’t get it every day, especially for guys.

Yeah, that’s annoying!

also, why do people make it seem like mothers are bad if they choose to work? what if they enjoy their job as well and it’s not strictly for financial purposes?

thoughts?

It is wrong to make it seem bad if the mother works, because outsiders do not know enough to make that judgement. The way for a family to discern whether the mother shoudl work is by considering her state in life as a top priority. Her work should not interfere with her duties towards her family. Since a wife/mother’s state of life *usually *is more on the care side than the providing side, employment takes a back seat.

But as I said before, each family is different, so the balances of needs will be different, as well as the resources. Each family has to make these descisions prayerfully and prudentially, according to the varying needs of each member of the family as well as the needs of the family as a whole. This will also change a lot from year to year.

 

[angell1]

What’s a blessing? A gift from God, so babies, being gifts from God, are blessings.

This does not mean that we cannot decide that a particular time is a bad time for having a child, and declining, not the baby, but the marital embrace for a period of time.

Right. in marriage, the spouses exchange rights to their bodies. This does not mean that spouses are able to be inconsiderats of each other, tho. Each has the right to refuse unreasonable requests.

We are *not at all *in a position to judge what is happening in the marriages of others. A couple may have no children; this does not mean they are contracepting, they could be not conceiving despite their efforts, or miscarrying. I make it a rule never to even speculate about what is happpening in other marriages.

This is probably something to work out in Pre-Cana as it will vary.

Yeah, that’s annoying!

It is wrong to make it seem bad if the mother works, because outsiders do not know enough to make that judgement. The way for a family to discern whether the mother shoudl work is by considering her state in life as a top priority. Her work should not interfere with her duties towards her family. Since a wife/mother’s state of life *usually *is more on the care side than the providing side, employment takes a back seat.

But as I said before, each family is different, so the balances of needs will be different, as well as the resources. Each family has to make these descisions prayerfully and prudentially, according to the varying needs of each member of the family as well as the needs of the family as a whole. This will also change a lot from year to year.

I don’t really mean the ‘need’ to work persay, what about just the desire

like someone who went through medical school or law school for example and really wants to invest in these professions. I guess I just don’t really know how someone would do that if they end up having a bunch of kids

 

[pianistclare]

Hoosier Daddy’s wife did just that. He’s pretty up front about their happy marriage. He’s a stay at home dad. Works for them.

 

[angell1]

**I think when you find a good man to be your husband, he will respect you if you keep good communication and good marriage prep. **

well, I would say that getting one and choosing to just stick with one is not quite the same thing

and it seems like the traditional iew is that, at least, most north americans, probably don’t have just reasons to just stick with having one.

plus when you’re an only child, everyone thinks that you’re just automatically spoiled and selfish and dont’ know how to share with others. ugh

 

[St_Francis]

I don’t really mean the ‘need’ to work persay, what about just the desire

like someone who went through medical school or law school for example and really wants to invest in these professions. I guess I just don’t really know how someone would do that if they end up having a bunch of kids

So much of this depends on the individuals involved and their particular situations. This is why the Church gives guidelines but not rules.

There are mothers who work as doctors or lawyers part-time, and that works for their families. Sometimes they even do “need” to work–to pay back student loans or to keep their hands in so they will be able to resume working at a later time. But whatever they do, they need to remember that their first commitment is to caring for their family, and they need to keep an eye on that…

As long as the fsmily is functioning well, there is a lot of flexibility.

 

[PaulfromIowa]

I don’t really mean the ‘need’ to work persay, what about just the desire

like someone who went through medical school or law school for example and really wants to invest in these professions. I guess I just don’t really know how someone would do that if they end up having a bunch of kids

There are many practicing female lawyers and physicians with several children. In any case, the vocation of motherhood is more prestigious to a Christian than secular vocations.

 

[pianistclare]

well, I would say that getting one and choosing to just stick with one is not quite the same thing

and it seems like the traditional iew is that, at least, most north americans, probably don’t have just reasons to just stick with having one.

plus when you’re an only child, everyone thinks that you’re just automatically spoiled and selfish and dont’ know how to share with others. ugh

I meant a husband, not a child.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

I don’t really mean the ‘need’ to work persay, what about just the desire

like someone who went through medical school or law school for example and really wants to invest in these professions. I guess I just don’t really know how someone would do that if they end up having a bunch of kids

My wife works and has several degrees. She is an amazing wife, mother, scientist and business woman. I stay home with the children. We have 5. So what is your question about how someone could do that if they “end up having a bunch of kids”?