Feminist ideals behind birth control

[kozlosap]

If I was sent another child, I would take it without hesitation, even in this situation.

I think what she was asking is whether you would use NFP or some other form of BC to stop having children at that point, not if you would accept the child if you were to become pregnant.

 

[Julianna]

But it is the business of priests to instruct the faithful so that we will know whether we should be receiving Communion or not. And the OP was making the point that many priests are not doing this. This is a legitimate concern. It is the business of the laity when our shepherds do not lead us as they should. There was nothing wrong with what the OP wrote.

While all this is true, it has nothing to do with the Church teaching. She does not teach that birth control is a sin because it is unhealthy. If this were the issue, then there would be no problem with condoms. (Also, if it is OK for you to share your personal experiences with birth control, it seems unfair to condemn another poster’s sharing of personal experiences as TMI.)

BC are unhealthy to some women and the side effects are enough to say thanks but no thanks.

BC and masturbation are degrees apart when it comes to TMI. Geez louise some of you are so obsessed with sex…

 

[floresco]

Just curious… would anyone like to respond? Regarding using NFP for a “grave” reason, would you consider a women who is 41 with 4 children, oldest being handicap to the point of needing 24/7 care, a good enough reason not to want anymore kids?

I think that a couple in that situation would need to pray about it and get advice from a sound priest. Determining what is a “grave reason” is not something that can be done well on online forums.

 

[Momofmyangels]

I think what she was asking is whether you would use NFP or some other form of BC to stop having children at that point, not if you would accept the child if you were to become pregnant.

Then no, I would not use NFP or any form of BC. But, that is me…what is “grave” for me may not be “grave” for others and vice-versa. A discussion with a good priest, I think is in order.

 

[dailey]

Thanks for the replies so far. I have talked to a priest and he said I was not committing a sin by using NFP. My husband is not Catholic (or any religion, for that matter) and does not want anymore children.

The thing about NFP is you always hear you can used it for a “serious/grave” reason…but every time someone mentions it on here, they are told (at least what I have read) that their reason is not “grave”? So who gets to determine this? If I got pregnant again, that would be okay. But I don’t want to purposely try to get pregnant at the same time.

 

[floresco]

BC are unhealthy to some women and the side effects are enough to say thanks but no thanks.

BC and masturbation are degrees apart when it comes to TMI. Geez louise some of you are so obsessed with sex…

The unhealthiness of birth control is irrelevant to the question of whether or not it is a sin. It is useful that worldly people can recognize that BC should be avoided, but Catholics should be more concerned about what it does to our souls than our bodies.

The other poster mentioned masturbation in a matter-of-fact way to make a point about a priest giving bad teaching. This does not look to me like obsession. You are the one with the emotional reaction to the topic.

 

[floresco]

The thing about NFP is you always hear you can used it for a “serious/grave” reason…but every time someone mentions it on here, they are told (at least what I have read) that their reason is not “grave”? So who gets to determine this?

The couple gets to determine this. However they have a responsibility to pray and to do their best they have a properly informed conscience on the question. It can be helpful for them to consult a priest.

 

[Dale_M]

Ok first of all I’m suprised at the responses I’m getting because I thought everyone in the traditional catholic forum agreed with Humanae Vitae.

I think you will find the overwhelming majority of active CAF members do agree with Humanae Vitae. And this is true throughout CAF, not just in the Traditional Catholicism forum. However, I think you are sabotaging your message by being needlessly combative and judgmental. This approach pushes away would-be allies. If your goal is to persuade, then you might consider writing with a calmer and more compassionate style.

I thought everyone agreed that even NFP must be used under a GRAVE reason- I didn’t invent that.

I believe you are right, but my memory is hazy. Could you cite the section which says this?

Second, you mention the expense of law school. With all due respect, what is more important, a law degree or welcoming another child into the world? What do you say to some of these Catholic families in Latin America or Africa who are raising children on literally $5 or less a day? Maybe we should learn something from their sacrifice?

Is it sacrifice or is it suffering? And is it freely chosen? Do you think that most families in that situation would choose to live as they do if they were given the opportunity to live with the affluence of middle-class America?

Third, its not about people who agree/disagree with me. Its about following the teachings of the church and avoiding mortal sin. The Catholic Church teaches that using ABC, blowing of mass, pre-marital sex, masturbation etc. are mortal sins. Yet at least 80% of self-described Catholic married couples in this Country have no problem doing some of these things without confession and then taking communino on Christmas and Easter so obviously we have a very serious problem in the Church right now.

Yes, there is a real problem with US Catholics being both uninformed about Church teachings and with not following Church teachings. This didn’t happen overnight and will take time to fix.

Finally, in regard to my parents yes this is a serious issue. I am concerned about their salvation. I do not want them in hell!

This is something on which we can all agree. No one wants your parents to go to Hell, nor do we want our own parents there either. However, perhaps a little humility would help in making your point. Criticizing them in public is not respectful. Sometimes criticism of them is necessary, but in most cases it should be done humbly (and in private.) They are your parents and have sacrificed to raise you. I think many posters in their thread have interpreted your comment about them as needlessly harsh and ungrateful.

And that brings me back to my original point. I think many people in this thread are reacting less to what you have said, than the way you have expressed it.

 

[faithfully]

I have seen women post with empathy about this, so I do not think it is that hard for women to understand and appreciate the sacrifices of men. Nor do I think it is impossible for men to understand the difficulties that women face. I think that both sexes would be better off if more people were trying to do this rather than only thinking about their own problems.

You should not assume I don’t have empathy. I was just coming from my own experience. What is this “sacrafice”? It’s weird. My husband doesn’t think he’s sacraficed anything. Well, maybe, I guess it would have been fun for him to be a race car driver. You know, if he were smaller and had quicker reflexes. But really, he adores his situation. I’ve not met a more attentive father. He enjoys our kids. He loves his career. And well, I’m pretty sure he’s still in love with me! I just see my DH and I in the SAME boat. And we are both rowing. And for what I lack in power, I make up for in an excellent sense of direction.

The reason the term Dead Beat Dad exists and that we don’t hear about Dead Beat Mothers is that the media is biased against men. While there are some cases of irresponsible men, they are not as prevalent as we are led to believe. Nor are irresponsible women as rare.

SOME??? Wow, what part of the country are you living in? But I would agree, there are plenty of irresponsible women out there too! I’m just saying that men don’t have a monopoly on worry, and making sure their family is fed. If a family is in a financial crisis it’s the nutcase, brain-dead wife that is not worried, and who doesn’t step up to the plate to assist. Men need to leave their ego at the door. I think it’s an equal opportunity fear to make sure all is well on the home front.

That is a misleading figure. Actually women who don’t have children make more money than men of comparable age, education, etc… It is trying to combine a job with motherhood that impacts a woman’s earning ability.

While it’s true that young, single woman in some areas of the country are paid higher than same aged counterpart… You will find they are also WAY more educated. So, all variables ARE NOT equal. And that men with children still make more $$ than women with kids. And since this topic is with regard to children… Surely you don’t begrudge an unmarried, childless woman a way to feed herself? And well, the fact that she’s actually better at her job than most men…

Cities where Women out earn men…

National committee on Pay Equality

 

[JReducation]

I see several problems in the conversation. They are sort of related, but not a clearly as people think. This is just a synopsis. If you want in-depth information, go the USCCB and click on family life.

It is grossly inappropriate to say that NO priests do not counsel people on this matter. We don’t know what happens in the confessional or what happens in spiritual direction.

NFP is allowed for grave reasons. Grave is very subjective. If you want to understand what this means, a good piece of writing on this subject would be Cardinal Levada’s doctoral dissertation. It was on this very subject. Grave is different from one family to another.

Since he is the current Prefect for the Congregation of the Faith, I would take his word on this. He has not changed his teaching on the matter. Grave remains subject to the circumstance of the couple in question. The reasons for not having children, must be grave or in plain English, very serious ones. They must be conditions that are beyond human remedy. That part remains a constant. What can be remedied in one family may not be possible in another. What can be remedied tomorrow may not be today.

Yes, we must consider what artificial birth control does to the body. It would be naïve not to do so. There is a difference between artificial contraception, which is a moral issue and the organic effects, which can be both, moral and biological.

As far as women having the right to a career, the Church has never denied this. In fact, some of our great saints have been wives, mothers and had careers of some kind. Our most modern one is St. Giana: wife, mother and physician. We had others. St. Elizabeth of Hungary: wife, mother and monarch. The issue is one of vocation. God calls men and women to holiness through different situations. Those situations often involve multiple roles. To negate one of those roles is a failure to comply with God’s call.

For the sake of example, a woman who is called to holiness by being a wife, mother and physician, must be the best wife, mother and physician that she can be. God expects no less from her. This is what Giana did.

I often wonder if we understand parenthood, for males and females. It is not the duty of the woman to be the parent and the man to be the provider. Both are called to be parents. Each parent does a part. To dump the sole responsibility of raising a family on the mother is contrary to God’s plan for parents. The best example that we have is the Holy Family itself. When Jesus gets lost and they find him in the temple Mary says, “You father and I have been looking for you.” It’s a shared responsibility. Joseph does not stand on the sidelines as a spectator.

Tradition (not Catholic Tradition), has often placed the children at the feet of the mother. I’m always afraid that we are not demanding that men step up to the plate and do their jobs as fathers. This failure places a very heavy load on mother. In the past, it limited the possibility for women to become involved in society. This is wrong. The salvation of the world is a joint venture between the sexes.

The feminist agenda is wrong too. It creates an antagonistic relationship between the genders, stripping both parts of their dignity and abrogating mutual responsibility for children, family and society.

I tell this to everyone who comes to me for spiritual direction. “Step up to the plate and do your job.”

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[FCEGM]

To sum an opposition to the compromising ideal I have read of some here :

Is Christ Jesus a liar ?

You know the answer.

And so if He commands us to love unconditionally, and have Faith, would he then abandon us in so doing ?

So what justification does someone who proclaims Faith in Christ have for not being obedient to Christ, and the law of the Gospel ? Are we not to be obedient, even unto death ? Is He not God ? Does He not know what world we live in now ? Does He not rightly remind us that even the lillies of the field are cared for by Him, and so we ought not worry about our needs, and specially not to worry about tomorrow ? So what reason do we then have to constrain our love, and our natural love of and for children ? Does not everything in nature compel a man and his wife toward bearing children ? Do they not fill us with meaning and purpose ? Do we not love them with a fire nothing on this earth could compare or equal ? Is not a child - even the idea of a child - good ? Does not every child bear within themselves a singular promise of Hope, even and especially a new Hope for tomorrow ?

God commanded us to be fruitful and fill the earth. “Economy” means “house rules,” and is that system or arrangement which prevails under the governing rules and beliefs of a society : not the other way around. If parents had children in abundance, and served families as their first priority above all things, the “economy” would obey, and adjust to suit, and as we see in history the most prosperous times of our nations were when they were prolific in child bearing, we have absolutely no logical or rational reason to believe that somehow, someway this natural law ceased to be at some unknown point of time : no, the refusal to be prolific in children is itself contrary to nature, and therefore creates unnatural consequences, multiplies woes, and so on, as all persistence in sin is wont to do.

Pax,
Tim

Thank you for this, Tim; eloquently stated!

 

[adstrinity]

“Standing On My Head: The Myth Of Pedophile Priests”

gkupsidedown.blogspot.com/2010/03/pedophile-priests.html

This is where I got my argument.

Anyway, if a priest WAS a pedophile, they would molest either sex, under 10, if their preferred gender/age was not avalible to them. That only boys are always molested (in the media’s presentation, anyway), show’s that this is an issue of homosexuality, as the OP stated.

 

[Julianna]

I see several problems in the conversation. They are sort of related, but not a clearly as people think. This is just a synopsis. If you want in-depth information, go the USCCB and click on family life.

It is grossly inappropriate to say that NO priests do not counsel people on this matter. We don’t know what happens in the confessional or what happens in spiritual direction.nor should we, excellent point.

NFP is allowed for grave reasons. Grave is very subjective. If you want to understand what this means, a good piece of writing on this subject would be Cardinal Levada’s doctoral dissertation. It was on this very subject. Grave is different from one family to another.That is a “given” that I don’t believe the OP quite understands.

Since he is the current Prefect for the Congregation of the Faith, I would take his word on this. He has not changed his teaching on the matter. Grave remains subject to the circumstance of the couple in question. Example… a poster on this thread stated she has a child with severe problem that needs care 24/7. This is an example of “grave” for “her” family. The reasons for not having children, must be grave or in plain English, very serious ones. They must be conditions that are beyond human remedy.A child with a severe medical condition…that is beyond human remedy is a concern. That part remains a constant. What can be remedied in one family may not be possible in another.I am glad you see that families are not “cookie cutter” alike. What can be remedied tomorrow may not be today.My husband has MS…he had a great week last week. Tomorrow he may not be able to walk without holding on to the wall. You never know.

Yes, we must consider what artificial birth control does to the body. Thank you…and it does…I thought I was losing my mind. It would be naïve not to do so. There is a difference between artificial contraception, which is a moral issue and the organic effects, which can be both, moral and biological.

As far as women having the right to a career, the Church has never denied this. In fact, some of our great saints have been wives, mothers and had careers of some kind. Our most modern one is St. Giana: wife, mother and physician. We had others. St. Elizabeth of Hungary: wife, mother and monarch. The issue is one of vocation. God calls men and women to holiness through different situations. Those situations often involve multiple roles. To negate one of those roles is a failure to comply with God’s call.

For the sake of example, a woman who is called to holiness by being a wife, mother and physician, must be the best wife, mother and physician that she can be. God expects no less from her. This is what Giana did.

I often wonder if we understand parenthood, for males and females. It is not the duty of the woman to be the parent and the man to be the provider. Both are called to be parents. Exactly Each parent does a part. To dump the sole responsibility of raising a family on the mother is contrary to God’s plan for parents. The best example that we have is the Holy Family itself. When Jesus gets lost and they find him in the temple Mary says, “You father and I have been looking for you.” Mary keeps me sane. I don’t think I could ever fill her shoes. She is my hero. A strong woman if there ever was. She took on a lot with grace and strength…She was no push-over by any means. It’s a shared responsibility. Joseph does not stand on the sidelines as a spectator.

Tradition (not Catholic Tradition), has often placed the children at the feet of the mother. I’m always afraid that we are not demanding that men step up to the plate and do their jobs as fathers. This failure places a very heavy load on mother. In the past, it limited the possibility for women to become involved in society. This is wrong. The salvation of the world is a joint venture between the sexes.Perhaps you are on to something there, JR. Maybe feminism in it’s ugly state…would have never become so…had women not believed that the heavy load of motherhood and the limits involved in society were not pushed. My dad worked, came home…dinner at 5, Cronkite at 6, to bed at 10. Never asked how my mother’s day went…never asked about what we did at school…never asked her “what would you like”. Gee…no wonder the ugly side of feminism was so attractive. Not just in Catholic families…but a lot of mainline Protestant religions have this belief system… or tradition. Women are to be seen and not heard.

The feminist agenda is wrong too. It creates an antagonistic relationship between the genders, stripping both parts of their dignity and abrogating mutual responsibility for children, family and society.Yes, the ugly side of feminism does that. I don’t hate men as some may think.

I tell this to everyone who comes to me for spiritual direction. “Step up to the plate and do your job.”

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Wow! JR…usually I am at odds with you…but your words lifted my spirits! This to me, for what it is worth “IS” the “spirit of the law”.

 

[kozlosap]

I see several problems in the conversation. They are sort of related, but not a clearly as people think. This is just a synopsis. If you want in-depth information, go the USCCB and click on family life.

It is grossly inappropriate to say that NO priests do not counsel people on this matter. We don’t know what happens in the confessional or what happens in spiritual direction.

NFP is allowed for grave reasons. Grave is very subjective. If you want to understand what this means, a good piece of writing on this subject would be Cardinal Levada’s doctoral dissertation. It was on this very subject. Grave is different from one family to another.

Since he is the current Prefect for the Congregation of the Faith, I would take his word on this. He has not changed his teaching on the matter. Grave remains subject to the circumstance of the couple in question. The reasons for not having children, must be grave or in plain English, very serious ones. They must be conditions that are beyond human remedy. That part remains a constant. What can be remedied in one family may not be possible in another. What can be remedied tomorrow may not be today.

Yes, we must consider what artificial birth control does to the body. It would be naïve not to do so. There is a difference between artificial contraception, which is a moral issue and the organic effects, which can be both, moral and biological.

As far as women having the right to a career, the Church has never denied this. In fact, some of our great saints have been wives, mothers and had careers of some kind. Our most modern one is St. Giana: wife, mother and physician. We had others. St. Elizabeth of Hungary: wife, mother and monarch. The issue is one of vocation. God calls men and women to holiness through different situations. Those situations often involve multiple roles. To negate one of those roles is a failure to comply with God’s call.

For the sake of example, a woman who is called to holiness by being a wife, mother and physician, must be the best wife, mother and physician that she can be. God expects no less from her. This is what Giana did.

I often wonder if we understand parenthood, for males and females. It is not the duty of the woman to be the parent and the man to be the provider. Both are called to be parents. Each parent does a part. To dump the sole responsibility of raising a family on the mother is contrary to God’s plan for parents. The best example that we have is the Holy Family itself. When Jesus gets lost and they find him in the temple Mary says, “You father and I have been looking for you.” It’s a shared responsibility. Joseph does not stand on the sidelines as a spectator.

Tradition (not Catholic Tradition), has often placed the children at the feet of the mother. I’m always afraid that we are not demanding that men step up to the plate and do their jobs as fathers. This failure places a very heavy load on mother. In the past, it limited the possibility for women to become involved in society. This is wrong. The salvation of the world is a joint venture between the sexes.

The feminist agenda is wrong too. It creates an antagonistic relationship between the genders, stripping both parts of their dignity and abrogating mutual responsibility for children, family and society.

I tell this to everyone who comes to me for spiritual direction. “Step up to the plate and do your job.”

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

JR, I agree with Jullianna - an awesome, wonderful, thoughtful post! Thank you so much for penning something that I have a hard time explaining!

 

[Rence]

1.) This type of thinking that diminishes sacrifie is so hypocritical. How can you ask a heterosexual priest to give up marriage, children, and sex for life when the married couple cannot sacrrifice a degree of “mental, social, and physical ability?”

I don’t ask such things of priests. However 1) they voluntarily give up marriage, children and sex for their vocation, no one is forcing them, and 2) I think priests should be married anyway.

I only state this because I am discerning the priesthood but the issue of ABC being defined as a MORTAL sin and NFP only being allowed in a GRAVE circumstance is tearing me apart.

I don’t really understand what you mean by the above, but that’s a conversation you should be having with your priest anyway.

2.) I am not judging my parents I am concerned about their eternal salvation. I am pretty confident they did use ABC and part of the reason why was because my mother has a full-time job which allowed us to live pretty comftorably. The other reason why they used ABC is because they went to a liberal novus ordo parish taught by feminine priests who never mentioned it and I’m sure even some said it was ok.

Then pray for them.

 

[Rence]

1.) You say thankfully that wont happen will again. So are you implying that are grandparents, great-grandparents, and all the generations before us were “suffering” because the mother stayed at home?

Many women suffered because they didn’t have the freedom to pursue their dreams of other vocations. To deny that is just silly. Some women thrive on running a household and do it quite well (in any generation), and others are better suited to working outside the home. I can’t even imagine living in a world where I didn’t have a choice and was bound by what a man decided for me. Actually, no offense, and with a respect, the thought of the men in my life having a say over my futre just disgusts me. I thank God every day for the freedoms I enjoy and the choices I have at my disposal, and the opportunities that are open to me that would not have been 50 years ago.

How are you so confident that this generation is right and all the other generations were in the dark ages?

In matters of women having equal opportunities, yes, absolutely. I am positive that I have it better than my oppressed grandmother and great-grandmother.

2.)“Women deserve to be happy in their chosen careers just like men.” The problem with that is women are not like men- equal dignity but seperate nature.

Women can do any job that a man can do. To say they can’t is just immature. Women make just as good lawyers, doctors, nurses, mechanics, engineers, teachers, police officers, etc. as men. Their nature makes them just as able as a man to work outside the home.

3.) Don’t you see a societal breakdown where women work and childcare is being pushed to day-care companies when it should be the mother herself if economically possible?

No, I see good socialization oppportunities in daycares if that’s the choice the parents make for their children. Just like home-schooling and stay-at-home-moms, it all has it’s place in the appropriate home. There is no one way to have and manage a family.

 

[Rence]

1. An example of suffering on this earth would be a priest who can’t have sex, a married couple who can’t use artificial birth control, a young single man who can’t touch himself in the morning, an engaged couple who can’t cohabitate. Doing all of these things is hard, but the church teaches we must follow them in order to avoid mortal sin and save our soul.

What is to you “suffering” is to me, a “choice”. Suffering to me is living through the pains of cancer, broken bones, and poverty. Not choosing to not to have sex, or choosing to not touch one’s self, or choosing to not take ABC.

 

[Rence]

2.) A couple doesn’t choose how many children to have- the holy spirit is also involved.The Church teaches that couple needs to be open to life unless there is a GRAVE reasons. These are not my teachings- these are the Chruch’s teachings. Read Humae Vitae. Also read from Fr. Thomas Euteneur Head of Pro-Life International.
.

This is something that I never understood: the claim that by taking charge of one’s fertility is taking the holy spirit out of it. How can one believe in an all-powerful God who is duped by NFP or even ABCs? Look around at all the failed attempts to not get pregnant

 

[Rence]

Let me get this straight - because it’s the “Traditional Catholic Forum” you think that all self proclaimed traditional Catholics are going to agree with you? We all have a right to our opinions here at CAF, all of us. This forum is set up for discussion and debate, we are not always going to agree with each other’s views on different topics. As an adult and parent, you have to decide how you want your children to be raised. In these economic times it is expensive to raise children so they have the opportunities in life you want them to have. My daughter went to a well known Catholic University and graduated in 2006. The tuition and room and board was (at that time) $42,000 a year. She is now a third year law student and the tuition is a little bit higher. How many couples can afford to send ten or twelve kids to college and make sure they live in neighborhood where the public schools are decent or the Catholic school has tuition that is affordable? The median price for a house here in Northern California is $350,000 and that is a basic 3 bedroom. I think that if a family can afford to have unlimited children then that is wonderful, however, most of us don’t make $500,000 a year. I also have a real problem with you judging your parents for only having 3 children - that is beyond presumption. You are truly throwing the baby out with the bathwater by thinking that people who don’t agree with you are doomed to hell. What a very sad way to view the world. Most people really do have fully formed consciences’…

Ok, this is where you are wrong: apparently you weren’t supposed to provide an education for your daughter, because she doesn’t deserve the opportunities of her brothers, and should not work anyway, should get married and have a baby a year until menopause, or else she will burn in hell for all eternity for not making more of what is in our CCC or Scriptures or encyclicals.

Didn’t you get the papal notice of women not being allowed to be educated, or work outside the home, and instead directing them to stay at home and make many babies? Apparently, it didn’t hit my address either so don’t feel bad.

 

[Julianna]

This is something that I never understood: the claim that by taking charge of one’s fertility is taking the holy spirit out of it. How can one believe in an all-powerful **God who is duped by NFP **or even ABCs? Look around at all the failed attempts to not get pregnant

I never thought about that before…but yeah…correct