Husband or Children first, or equal

  • Thread starter Thread starter BIB_MT
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

BIB_MT

Guest
My question is about the priorities of family life. I’ve received different information from different sources. I’m really looking mainly for Church teaching (quotes from the CCC, Saints, Bible, etc) over personal opinion (although I don’t mind it added in there).

Awhile back, my husband and I were marriage sponsors. We used the Catholic marriage prep book “For Better and Forever” to sponsor another couple preparing to marry. In one of the chapters it had a quote and I don’t remember it exactly but it stuck with me that it said all the people in the family are of equal value/importance. Which made sense, since we’re all equals in God’s eyes. I recently bought an older edition copy to find this quote, but the older edition was worded a bit differently. In one part it said in the past, children were considered the primary purpose of marriage, and in more modern times people try to put the focus on the love between husband and spouse. Then it went on to say that:

“The Church teaches husbands and wives to give equal importance to the continuing development and deepening of their love for each other, and to their role as parents.”

Now, in a recent homily my priest gave on marriage, he affirmed that the “procreation and education of children” is the “primary purpose” of marriage. The concupiscence of spouses/ relationship between husband and wife is a secondary purpose of marriage.

I have heard many Catholics (lay people) say that children are not as important as spouses. They instead focus on the spouse and children come second. I’ve repeatedly had it said to me that if wives give too much to their children they don’t have anything left to give to the husband. I honestly don’t understand what they mean, because to me that just sounds like the spouse (husband in this instance) is being selfish (assuming there isn’t some special circumstance like a disability, etc). My husband has never, in our 8 years of marriage (6 of those as parents) put me in a situation where I have had to choose between him or my children. I asked him, and he said the same about me. We’re almost always all together when my husband isn’t working so we take care of each other together.

I tend to believe that the primary purpose of marriage is the procreation and education of children, as I have heard. And when both spouses are focused on the children, it naturally works out because no one is crying “what about me?” because we’ve put our own needs aside. Primarily. Not to say we don’t even have any time for ourselves or each other, but we’ve never needed to sacrifice the needs of the children in order to do so. This fits in with the spouses being secondary because adults, naturally, have less needs than children because children are so dependent for help. Adults have grown in self control, patience, can do things for themselves (feed themselves, clean, etc). T

I’ve heard the “spouse first” argument so much from Catholics, and such a different message from priests/materials, that I often doubt if our understanding is right and if our priests are wrong.

Any help?
 
Also, if the husband and wife are considered “one”, isn’t putting your spouse first the same as putting yourself first?
 
The human family is the closet imitation of the Holy Trinity that there is.

Which is more important in the Trinity: the Father, the Son, or the Holy Spirit? There is no more or less important.
 
In practice, I think our children’s needs ought to come first. (And this is reflected in our budget–we spend massively on their education.) And if my husband and one of our children were simultaneously in distress, I would regard it as my responsibility to help the child first.

However, in terms of family hierarchy, there’s a very clear difference. We are the parents, our relationship is the primary one in the household, and while we are happy to accept (name removed by moderator)ut from the kids, in the end, we make the major decisions for the kids.

To use an analogy, while restaurants exist to serve customers, the customers are not allowed to come back into the kitchen and dictate recipes and procedures. So, the customer comes first, but doesn’t get free rein.
 
Putting your spouse first and prioritizing that relationship and keeping it healthy and good is the absolute best thing you can do for your children.
 
I think a lot depends on what exactly is meant by “first or equal.”

There’s a tendency towards a sort of obsessive parenthood today, one that says you aren’t a good parent (especially moms) if you aren’t with your kid 24/7/365. It also says that if you teach your kids to conform to a loose schedule, you’re damaging them in some way by prioritizing your sleep/ability to get things done/etc over the kid. This can lead to serious marital neglect, and it really doesn’t do kids much good, IMNSHO, to be taught in the long term that they’re the center of the known universe.

It’s become a “thing” to never, ever leave your children with a sitter, not even with Grandma or an auntie. I’ve met people who brag about the fact that they’ve sacrificed their marriage by not having a date night in the three or four years since the youngest kid was born because “nothing’s worth not raising your kids yourself” and “we didn’t have kids just to pawn them off on someone else”–when really, unless we’re talking dysfunction here, spending an occasional evening hanging out with another adult who loves them isn’t going to do the kid anything but good. They’ll pair these statements with “we can always work on our marriage once the kids are grown,” but I honestly wonder if a marriage in which the adults never get adult alone time is going to last that long, especially when they both hate the situation.

I expect, for example, that some people might think it utterly outrageous that we leave DD with my college-age sister for an evening out once in a while. A “girls’ evening” every few months spent eating pizza and ice cream and dancing to–shudder–country music doesn’t seem to have done DD permanent damage yet. Quite the opposite, judging by her squeals of glee when her auntie comes over.

It’s a sort of self-inflicted martyrdom: you aren’t a good parent unless you and your spouse are absolutely miserable in the process. Same thing for the parents I know who have three-year-olds who have never once slept through the night because they don’t want to. The parents are miserable and exhausted and hate parenting, and the kid is miserable and exhausted and isn’t really having much fun at all, but the parents are under the impression that telling Junior, “Kiddo, you are tired. It’s bedtime. We’ve done a bedtime routine, family prayers, and a bath. If you get out of bed, we’re putting you back in until you fall asleep.” is in some way abusive. And being miserable all the time does parents and kids no good.

(No, I’m not saying to put your kid on a tightly regimented schedule from 8 months’ gestation on. I’m saying figure out what works best for your family, and do it. Oftentimes, what’s best is rarely what the toddler wants at that particular moment, and that’s okay.)

When it comes down to it, I think successful families prioritize important needs over less important ones, period, not a particular person consistently over another. Sometimes this means that certain people get priority over others. If Kid #3 has autism and is getting into a new therapy program, it may mean that Kid #3 is going to take priority for a little while as he adjusts to all that that means. If Daddy is going through a rough week at work with a management transfer and his mom died two weeks ago so he’s also sorting through the estate madness, everyone should rally round as best they can to try to make it a little easier. That’s what families (good ones, at least) do: they take care of the people who need it. (Come to think of it, not a bad idea for communities at large–take care of the people most in need, and next week that might be you.)
 
lemongrass80 said:
Putting your spouse first and prioritizing that relationship and keeping it healthy and good is the absolute best thing you can do for your children.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

Personally I am not familiar with any official teaching of the church on this.subject or quotes from saints so all I can give is personal opinion,.but prioritizing the marriage is vital for the children`s health.

Personally I don’t.like the wording of anyone is/should.be more important than anyone, because giving mire importance to one person to me.sounds.like neglecting the other. It is about which relationship needs primary work so the entire household.can function. Of course kids are a responsibility and kids must have their needs.met. I cannot leave my two month old starving and dirty because I want to party with my husband,.and yes if.a.spouse wants to neglect a.child to be the focus of attention that is selfish, but that is not.what prioritizing a relationship means. What it means is giving the nurture it needs.to make it strong.because it is the base of the household. If you build a house on sand it will come down because the base is not strong. You need to have a strong base and if you neglect your marriage to be only focused on the child that marriage is not lasting.

I know too many women that when a child is born that is it for the marriage. The entire world. Revolves around the child and that is it. That besides creating a spoiled child has a terrible effect on the marriage and that is going to end.up on constant arguing and sometimes divorce that will affect the child.

So while you need to meet the needs of the child you must give priority to the marriage. Send the child once in a while with grandma so you can go out in a date. That will benefit the kid and the marriage!
 
UbiCaritas said:
I think a lot depends on what exactly is meant by “first or equal.”

There’s a tendency towards a sort of obsessive parenthood today, one that says you aren’t a good parent (especially moms) if you aren’t with your kid 24/7/365. It also says that if you teach your kids to conform to a loose schedule, you’re damaging them in some way by prioritizing your sleep/ability to get things done/etc over the kid. This can lead to serious marital neglect, and it really doesn’t do kids much good, IMNSHO, to be taught in the long term that they’re the center of the known universe.

It’s become a “thing” to never, ever leave your children with a sitter, not even with Grandma or an auntie. I’ve met people who brag about the fact that they’ve sacrificed their marriage by not having a date night in the three or four years since the youngest kid was born because “nothing’s worth not raising your kids yourself” and “we didn’t have kids just to pawn them off on someone else”–when really, unless we’re talking dysfunction here, spending an occasional evening hanging out with another adult who loves them isn’t going to do the kid anything but good. They’ll pair these statements with “we can always work on our marriage once the kids are grown,” but I honestly wonder if a marriage in which the adults never get adult alone time is going to last that long, especially when they both hate the situation.

I expect, for example, that some people might think it utterly outrageous that we leave DD with my college-age sister for an evening out once in a while. A “girls’ evening” every few months spent eating pizza and ice cream and dancing to–shudder–country music doesn’t seem to have done DD permanent damage yet. Quite the opposite, judging by her squeals of glee when her auntie comes over.

It’s a sort of self-inflicted martyrdom: you aren’t a good parent unless you and your spouse are absolutely miserable in the process. Same thing for the parents I know who have three-year-olds who have never once slept through the night because they don’t want to. The parents are miserable and exhausted and hate parenting, and the kid is miserable and exhausted and isn’t really having much fun at all, but the parents are under the impression that telling Junior, “Kiddo, you are tired. It’s bedtime. We’ve done a bedtime routine, family prayers, and a bath. If you get out of bed, we’re putting you back in until you fall asleep.” is in some way abusive. And being miserable all the time does parents and kids no good.

(No, I’m not saying to put your kid on a tightly regimented schedule from 8 months’ gestation on. I’m saying figure out what works best for your family, and do it. Oftentimes, what’s best is rarely what the toddler wants at that particular moment, and that’s okay.)

When it comes down to it, I think successful families prioritize important needs over less important ones, period, not a particular person consistently over another. Sometimes this means that certain people get priority over others. If Kid #3 has autism and is getting into a new therapy program, it may mean that Kid #3 is going to take priority for a little while as he adjusts to all that that means. If Daddy is going through a rough week at work with a management transfer and his mom died two weeks ago so he’s also sorting through the estate madness, everyone should rally round as best they can to try to make it a little easier. That’s what families (good ones, at least) do: they take care of the people who need it. (Come to think of it, not a bad idea for communities at large–take care of the people most in need, and next week that might be you.)
Click to expand...
Yes.

“We can always work on our marriage once the kids are grown.” Gah!
 
The primary purpose of marriage being children and “putting your spouse first” does not contradict each other. They are kind of 2 different, yet related and mutual things.

If a husband puts God first, wife, 2nd, kids 3. It does not mean proportional time to each. He honors God by loving his wife, and he honors his wife by loving his kids.

I don’t remember where this quote came from but, the best thing a father can do for his kids is to love their mother.

Kids have more needs for basic survival than adults, so time is spent more on them, however, the strength of the relationship between the spouses must be fundamental for a strong family and healthy children.
 
agapewolf said:
The primary purpose of marriage being children and “putting your spouse first” does not contradict each other. They are kind of 2 different, yet related and mutual things.

If a husband puts God first, wife, 2nd, kids 3. It does not mean proportional time to each. He honors God by loving his wife, and he honors his wife by loving his kids.

I don’t remember where this quote came from but, the best thing a father can do for his kids is to love their mother.

Kids have more needs for basic survival than adults, so time is spent more on them, however, the strength of the relationship between the spouses must be fundamental for a strong family and healthy children.
Click to expand...
Right.
 
Xantippe said:
In practice, I think our children’s needs ought to come first. (And this is reflected in our budget–we spend massively on their education.) And if my husband and one of our children were simultaneously in distress, I would regard it as my responsibility to help the child first.

However, in terms of family hierarchy, there’s a very clear difference. We are the parents, our relationship is the primary one in the household, and while we are happy to accept (name removed by moderator)ut from the kids, in the end, we make the major decisions for the kids.

To use an analogy, while restaurants exist to serve customers, the customers are not allowed to come back into the kitchen and dictate recipes and procedures. So, the customer comes first, but doesn’t get free rein.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that’s kind of how we do it. Children are children and their needs are more frequent and urgent, so as adults who know how to wait and attend to some things ourselves, sometimes we need to just deal.

At the same time, we try to remember that children are the fruit of our relationship, not that the relationship exists as a means simply to have the children.
 
I think equal, but there is a difference in needs and responsibilities. My children are young, their needs are first because they literally can’t do for themselves yet. My older one is just starting to be able to do a lot on his own. I expect this dynamic to change greatly as children age. I’ll be the first to say though we haven’t got it all figured out or anything. I don’t like the idea of saying I prioritize one relationship over the other, in my mind they should be equal, but yeah.

I’m pretty big on attachment parenting. We cosleep, we babywear, etc. However, I am PERFECTLY fine with leaving my oldest with grandparents to spend time with DH, even overnight! DD won’t take a bottle yet, but we are working hard to get her there so we can leave BOTH of them and really have our own time. I believe it is important for children to develop a good relationship with their grandparents, aunts, uncles, cousins, close family friends, etc.
 
UbiCaritas said:
There’s a tendency towards a sort of obsessive parenthood today, one that says you aren’t a good parent (especially moms) if you aren’t with your kid 24/7/365. It also says that if you teach your kids to conform to a loose schedule, you’re damaging them in some way by prioritizing your sleep/ability to get things done/etc over the kid. This can lead to serious marital neglect, and it really doesn’t do kids much good, IMNSHO, to be taught in the long term that they’re the center of the known universe.

It’s become a “thing” to never, ever leave your children with a sitter, not even with Grandma or an auntie. I’ve met people who brag about the fact that they’ve sacrificed their marriage by not having a date night in the three or four years since the youngest kid was born because “nothing’s worth not raising your kids yourself” and “we didn’t have kids just to pawn them off on someone else”–when really, unless we’re talking dysfunction here, spending an occasional evening hanging out with another adult who loves them isn’t going to do the kid anything but good. They’ll pair these statements with “we can always work on our marriage once the kids are grown,” but I honestly wonder if a marriage in which the adults never get adult alone time is going to last that long, especially when they both hate the situation.

I expect, for example, that some people might think it utterly outrageous that we leave DD with my college-age sister for an evening out once in a while. A “girls’ evening” every few months spent eating pizza and ice cream and dancing to–shudder–country music doesn’t seem to have done DD permanent damage yet. Quite the opposite, judging by her squeals of glee when her auntie comes over.

It’s a sort of self-inflicted martyrdom: you aren’t a good parent unless you and your spouse are absolutely miserable in the process. Same thing for the parents I know who have three-year-olds who have never once slept through the night because they don’t want to. The parents are miserable and exhausted and hate parenting, and the kid is miserable and exhausted and isn’t really having much fun at all, but the parents are under the impression that telling Junior, “Kiddo, you are tired. It’s bedtime. We’ve done a bedtime routine, family prayers, and a bath. If you get out of bed, we’re putting you back in until you fall asleep.” is in some way abusive. And being miserable all the time does parents and kids no good.

(No, I’m not saying to put your kid on a tightly regimented schedule from 8 months’ gestation on. I’m saying figure out what works best for your family, and do it. Oftentimes, what’s best is rarely what the toddler wants at that particular moment, and that’s okay.)

)
Click to expand...
Yes yes and a million yes to the above. There is an obsession with martyrdom motherhood now a days. I have had people frowned at me because I leave my two month old with her grandmother sometimes. Hellooooo is her grandmother, kids need interaction with other human beings! Or think I am an awful parent because she sleeps.on her crib. It is crazy. You don’t have to be a martyr to properly meet all the needs of your child.
 
BIB_MT said:
Any help?
Click to expand...
This is one of those things that Vatican II changed, except that it didn’t because Vatican II didn’t change anything, being a pastoral council and all.

The source for the Vatican II teaching is Gaudium et Spes 47-52 (see here). This teaching is reflected in the 1983 Code of Canon Law, canon 1055 §1:
The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life and which is ordered by its nature to the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring, has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament between the baptized.

There are many sources for the pre-Vatican II teaching, for example, Casti Connubii 11 and 19 (see here).

Canon lawyer Ed Peters has the following interesting comment on the issue (see here):
Or, consider Canon 1055, opening the 1983 Code’s treatment of marriage. One of the most hotly debated questions arising under Canon 1055 is the degree to which the Johanno-Pauline Code accepts? modifies? rejects? the Pio-Benedictine Code’s assertion that marriage has three hierarchic and subordinated ends in contrast to the two co-equal ends of marriage that are clearly reflected in the revised law. It is an important question with significant implications for everything from parochial marriage preparation programs to tribunal cases being plead before the Roman Rota. But to consult only Code Annotated, one would not know there was even a debate in this area. The Spanish author of this section presents marriage as being ordered to the procreation of children. Period. No allusions to the presence of differing discussions on this topic are offered, not even an acknowledgment that the words of the canon itself seem to be using decidedly “co-equal” terminology. Of course, a scholar is free to argue a “hierarchic ends” interpretation of Canon 1055, but to present such an unnuanced reading of the law as if it were the only position conceivable might lead the uninitiated to assume that the matter is settled, when it is not.
 
UbiCaritas said:
I think a lot depends on what exactly is meant by “first or equal.”

There’s a tendency towards a sort of obsessive parenthood today, one that says you aren’t a good parent (especially moms) if you aren’t with your kid 24/7/365. It also says that if you teach your kids to conform to a loose schedule, you’re damaging them in some way by prioritizing your sleep/ability to get things done/etc over the kid. This can lead to serious marital neglect, and it really doesn’t do kids much good, IMNSHO, to be taught in the long term that they’re the center of the known universe.

It’s become a “thing” to never, ever leave your children with a sitter, not even with Grandma or an auntie. I’ve met people who brag about the fact that they’ve sacrificed their marriage by not having a date night in the three or four years since the youngest kid was born because “nothing’s worth not raising your kids yourself” and “we didn’t have kids just to pawn them off on someone else”–when really, unless we’re talking dysfunction here, spending an occasional evening hanging out with another adult who loves them isn’t going to do the kid anything but good. They’ll pair these statements with “we can always work on our marriage once the kids are grown,” but I honestly wonder if a marriage in which the adults never get adult alone time is going to last that long, especially when they both hate the situation.

I expect, for example, that some people might think it utterly outrageous that we leave DD with my college-age sister for an evening out once in a while. A “girls’ evening” every few months spent eating pizza and ice cream and dancing to–shudder–country music doesn’t seem to have done DD permanent damage yet. Quite the opposite, judging by her squeals of glee when her auntie comes over.

It’s a sort of self-inflicted martyrdom: you aren’t a good parent unless you and your spouse are absolutely miserable in the process. Same thing for the parents I know who have three-year-olds who have never once slept through the night because they don’t want to. The parents are miserable and exhausted and hate parenting, and the kid is miserable and exhausted and isn’t really having much fun at all, but the parents are under the impression that telling Junior, “Kiddo, you are tired. It’s bedtime. We’ve done a bedtime routine, family prayers, and a bath. If you get out of bed, we’re putting you back in until you fall asleep.” is in some way abusive. And being miserable all the time does parents and kids no good.

(No, I’m not saying to put your kid on a tightly regimented schedule from 8 months’ gestation on. I’m saying figure out what works best for your family, and do it. Oftentimes, what’s best is rarely what the toddler wants at that particular moment, and that’s okay.)

When it comes down to it, I think successful families prioritize important needs over less important ones, period, not a particular person consistently over another. Sometimes this means that certain people get priority over others. If Kid #3 has autism and is getting into a new therapy program, it may mean that Kid #3 is going to take priority for a little while as he adjusts to all that that means. If Daddy is going through a rough week at work with a management transfer and his mom died two weeks ago so he’s also sorting through the estate madness, everyone should rally round as best they can to try to make it a little easier. That’s what families (good ones, at least) do: they take care of the people who need it. (Come to think of it, not a bad idea for communities at large–take care of the people most in need, and next week that might be you.)
Click to expand...
This is really true, especially the part of taking care of the people who need it.

Growing up we used to ask our mom who her favorite was (meaning who she took the “best” care of). She would tell us that whoever needed her the most at that moment was the one she took care of first and if that made that person her favorite then her favorite would change depending in the situation and circumstance. Each of us at some point in time was mom’s “favorite”. Sometimes it was one of the kids, dad, or even herself. Life works best when we view things moment by moment instead of arbitrarily choosing an either/or in most situations.
 
UbiCaritas said:
It’s become a “thing” to never, ever leave your children with a sitter, not even with Grandma or an auntie. *I’ve met people who brag about the fact that they’ve sacrificed their marriage by not having a date night in the three or four years since the youngest kid was born because “nothing’s worth not raising your kids yourself” and “we didn’t have kids just to pawn them off on someone else”–when really, unless we’re talking dysfunction here, *spending an occasional evening hanging out with another adult who loves them isn’t going to do the kid anything but good. They’ll pair these statements with “we can always work on our marriage once the kids are grown,” but I honestly wonder if a marriage in which the adults never get adult alone time is going to last that long, especially when they both hate the situation./QUOTE]

Kids are naturally narcissistic. When they start to see mommy putting daddy first, and vice versa, they realize the world does not revolve around them. A “date night” is a strong way of showing this. Parents whose world centers around their children will only raise children who think the world centers around them. Parents whose world centers around the good of the whole family will raise children who think the world centers around family, not just them.
Click to expand...
 
BIB_MT said:
My question is about the priorities of family life. I’ve received different information from different sources. I’m really looking mainly for Church teaching (quotes from the CCC, Saints, Bible, etc) over personal opinion (although I don’t mind it added in there).

Awhile back, my husband and I were marriage sponsors. We used the Catholic marriage prep book “For Better and Forever” to sponsor another couple preparing to marry. In one of the chapters it had a quote and I don’t remember it exactly but it stuck with me that it said all the people in the family are of equal value/importance. Which made sense, since we’re all equals in God’s eyes. I recently bought an older edition copy to find this quote, but the older edition was worded a bit differently. In one part it said in the past, children were considered the primary purpose of marriage, and in more modern times people try to put the focus on the love between husband and spouse. Then it went on to say that:

“The Church teaches husbands and wives to give equal importance to the continuing development and deepening of their love for each other, and to their role as parents.”

Now, in a recent homily my priest gave on marriage, he affirmed that the “procreation and education of children” is the “primary purpose” of marriage. The concupiscence of spouses/ relationship between husband and wife is a secondary purpose of marriage.

I have heard many Catholics (lay people) say that children are not as important as spouses. They instead focus on the spouse and children come second. I’ve repeatedly had it said to me that if wives give too much to their children they don’t have anything left to give to the husband. I honestly don’t understand what they mean, because to me that just sounds like the spouse (husband in this instance) is being selfish (assuming there isn’t some special circumstance like a disability, etc). My husband has never, in our 8 years of marriage (6 of those as parents) put me in a situation where I have had to choose between him or my children. I asked him, and he said the same about me. We’re almost always all together when my husband isn’t working so we take care of each other together.

I tend to believe that the primary purpose of marriage is the procreation and education of children, as I have heard. And when both spouses are focused on the children, it naturally works out because no one is crying “what about me?” because we’ve put our own needs aside. Primarily. Not to say we don’t even have any time for ourselves or each other, but we’ve never needed to sacrifice the needs of the children in order to do so. This fits in with the spouses being secondary because adults, naturally, have less needs than children because children are so dependent for help. Adults have grown in self control, patience, can do things for themselves (feed themselves, clean, etc). T

I’ve heard the “spouse first” argument so much from Catholics, and such a different message from priests/materials, that I often doubt if our understanding is right and if our priests are wrong.

Any help?
Click to expand...
Like anything else in life, it is all about balance. I personally think if you devote all your time to one (either spouse or children) to the detriment of the other you are bound to have problems.
There may be some times in a family, where one particular member, whether it is the spouse or the child, will require most of the attention due to a number of factors for eg. health problems, school problems etc. Or as you stated in the early stages of development, the family resources (time, money) may be focused on the children because they are so dependent.
Instead of saying spouse first or child first, I would rather say, make sure that a balance is achieved. I don’t think it is as straight forward as most say it is. In some cases the spouse’s needs will have to have to take precedence while in other cases the childrens’ will be the deciding factor. It just varies from family to family.
 
bitterhope said:
This is really true, especially the part of taking care of the people who need it.

Growing up we used to ask our mom who her favorite was (meaning who she took the “best” care of). She would tell us that whoever needed her the most at that moment was the one she took care of first and if that made that person her favorite then her favorite would change depending in the situation and circumstance. Each of us at some point in time was mom’s “favorite”. Sometimes it was one of the kids, dad, or even herself. Life works best when we view things moment by moment instead of arbitrarily choosing an either/or in most situations.
Click to expand...
👍👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top