JUST reasons, and children

[BingoBoy]

I don’t normally post here much, as I am more of an observer.

I have noticed all the Duggar threads out there recently and a question came to mind.

What exactly constitutes as “just” reasons for avoiding pregnancy? Some people seem to think that if you can afford cable TV, a nice house, and an annual family vacation, you don’t have enough children (unless there’s a health issue).

Is this what the Church teaches, or is this just a very conservative point of view?

Thanks.

 

[twoangels]

I don’t normally post here much, as I am more of an observer.

I have noticed all the Duggar threads out there recently and a question came to mind.

What exactly constitutes as “just” reasons for avoiding pregnancy? Some people seem to think that if you can afford cable TV, a nice house, and an annual family vacation, you don’t have enough children (unless there’s a health issue).

Is this what the Church teaches, or is this just a very conservative point of view?

Thanks.

This is left up to the couple to discern. The thing to remember is that the procreative end of marriage is a positive end. I’d say the contraceptive mentality can lead people to viewing the unitive end of sex as unimportant, and to view sexual pleasure as “something as evil as an unplanned pregnancy.” Its their negative view of pregnancy with their attempts at obedience to the letter of the law that makes them view sex overall as a negative thing.

Its important to understand that sex is important in a marriage. Ultimately you have to weigh our your need for unity with your need to space births. Its not all clearcut. When my husband and I married, my husband was working a temporary job at the census. We had thought having a wedding over a year after he graduated college would be plenty of time for him to find employment, but the economy took its downturn the semester before he graduated. We still married but planned on using NFP until he had stable employment. However, what we hadn’t expected was that consumating our marriage would be so difficult. I had to go through physical therapy and after some of the therapy and seeing the effects of abstaining from attempts during my fertile time, we prayed about it and decided to try to consumate our marriage on a fertile day. So there we were in a situation where my employer was having me work 50 hours a week, my husband’s job was scheduled to end in three months, and I had a condition that made vaginal checks or any type of penetration impossible. How could I safely go through the pregnancy if I couldn’t submit to some of the exams?

Well, it was a very tough year, but entirely worth it. Things worked out. God has indeed provided. I would have never imagined how my husband going from one temp part time job to another would be stable enough. He found full time permanant employment when my daughter was 4 months. He went through a few short weeks of complete unemployment but overall we were able to find ways to bring money in.

Seriously we are now in a situation where I work at a different company in the evenings part time. My husband works during the day. We don’t have daycare costs. Our daughter is the sweetest thing ever and we are so happy we did not wait. Had I not had my issues, we would have probably waited. But in the end this is something you have to discern between you and your spouse through lots of prayer. Let God guide you. Its not about arbitary rules.

 

[BingoBoy]

This is left up to the couple to discern. The thing to remember is that the procreative end of marriage is a positive end. I’d say the contraceptive mentality can lead people to viewing the unitive end of sex as unimportant, and to view sexual pleasure as “something as evil as an unplanned pregnancy.” Its their negative view of pregnancy with their attempts at obedience to the letter of the law that makes them view sex overall as a negative thing.

Its important to understand that sex is important in a marriage. Ultimately you have to weigh our your need for unity with your need to space births. Its not all clearcut. When my husband and I married, my husband was working a temporary job at the census. We had thought having a wedding over a year after he graduated college would be plenty of time for him to find employment, but the economy took its downturn the semester before he graduated. We still married but planned on using NFP until he had stable employment. However, what we hadn’t expected was that consumating our marriage would be so difficult. I had to go through physical therapy and after some of the therapy and seeing the effects of abstaining from attempts during my fertile time, we prayed about it and decided to try to consumate our marriage on a fertile day. So there we were in a situation where my employer was having me work 50 hours a week, my husband’s job was scheduled to end in three months, and I had a condition that made vaginal checks or any type of penetration impossible. How could I safely go through the pregnancy if I couldn’t submit to some of the exams?

Well, it was a very tough year, but entirely worth it. Things worked out. God has indeed provided. I would have never imagined how my husband going from one temp part time job to another would be stable enough. He found full time permanant employment when my daughter was 4 months. He went through a few short weeks of complete unemployment but overall we were able to find ways to bring money in.

Seriously we are now in a situation where I work at a different company in the evenings part time. My husband works during the day. We don’t have daycare costs. Our daughter is the sweetest thing ever and we are so happy we did not wait. Had I not had my issues, we would have probably waited. But in the end this is something you have to discern between you and your spouse through lots of prayer. Let God guide you. Its not about arbitary rules.

Thanks for the answer.

It frustrates me when I see posts by Catholics here insinuating that if you’re in good health, can afford cable television, and don’t have 6+ children, you’re selfish.

I’ve even seen people use numbers and talk badly about people who only have 2-3 kids.

And that got me to thinking…

All women are different, and while some women would be perfectly happy and fulfilled having 6 children and being a stay at home mom, others would be a lot happier and more productive if they kept their careers and had 3 children. Being a SAHM to a bunch of little ones may not be the best thing for everyone, and I consider that a just reason to stop at 2-3.

Some people seem to have a very “one size fits all” mentality, but the truth of the matter is, we all have different gifts/talents to bring to the table. Some can stay at home and raise 10 beautiful children, others can have 2 children but save lives in their career as heart surgeon. One is not better than the other, in my opinion.

Any thoughts?

 

[JaneGrey]

Thanks for the answer.

It frustrates me when I see posts by Catholics here insinuating that if you’re in good health, can afford cable television, and don’t have 6+ children, you’re selfish.

I’ve even seen people use numbers and talk badly about people who only have 2-3 kids.

And that got me to thinking…

All women are different, and while some women would be perfectly happy and fulfilled having 6 children and being a stay at home mom, others would be a lot happier and more productive if they kept their careers and had 3 children. Being a SAHM to a bunch of little ones may not be the best thing for everyone, and I consider that a just reason to stop at 2-3.

Some people seem to have a very “one size fits all” mentality, but the truth of the matter is, we all have different gifts/talents to bring to the table. Some can stay at home and raise 10 beautiful children, others can have 2 children but save lives in their career as heart surgeon. One is not better than the other, in my opinion.

Any thoughts?

I have to agree with you. I cant help but resent the attitude that people, especially women, are only good, selfless parents if they stay at home, only work out of sheer necessity or have more than 4 children. Certainly many in those positions are great, selfless parents however I do not agree that that is automatically the case.

 

[Corki]

I don’t normally post here much, as I am more of an observer.

I have noticed all the Duggar threads out there recently and a question came to mind.

What exactly constitutes as “just” reasons for avoiding pregnancy? Some people seem to think that if you can afford cable TV, a nice house, and an annual family vacation, you don’t have enough children (unless there’s a health issue).

Is this what the Church teaches, or is this just a very conservative point of view?

Thanks.

The Church’s teaching is that the question to ask is not “should we have another child” but rather “why would we NOT want anther child (right now)”. The “default” so to say is another child. Of course the answers are going to be very personal to each couple but my own pastor’s advice was that a “just” reason is one that is not based on selfish reasons.

 

[1inICXC]

When does a plant get too much rain or the earth too much sun?

Children are a blessing to parents just as rain and sun are for the earth.in ALL honesty, if you believe children are truly a BLESSING from God, which is what the Bible says and the church teaches, it really wouldn’t make sense to say 2-3 is just enough.

Most people who say 2-3 are enough probably spend much time considering the “cost” and much less so the blessing.

Yes, excessive rain causes floods and too much sun scorches the earth just like a household can cave if it brings in more children than it can handle or not spaced enough. having said that, marriages fall apart because of the spouses’ weaknesses and NEVER because of the children.

If people truly collaborated with God we’d have more numerous families than small families and that’s a Biblical fact!

But, of course, there will always be couples who cannot conceive more or couples whose circumstances are indeed so dire as to not be able to responsibly accept more children but that is by no means the majority.

 

[Ana_v]

What exactly constitutes as “just” reasons for avoiding pregnancy?

I concur that in many instances, the “just” reasons will be specific to the couple in question. However, light can be shed on what you have asked, by giving an example of something that would NOT be a just reason.

Imagine a married couple who is perfectly capable having children, physically, psychologically, and financially. However, the woman has a fixation with being slender. Not that she’s anorexic or bulimic – she’s heathly, and puts a lot of effort into keeping in shape, and strongly dislikes the thought of gaining weight due to pregancy. For that reason, she postpones children or is set on never having them. That would be selfish.

 

[BingoBoy]

When does a plant get too much rain or the earth too much sun?

Children are a blessing to parents just as rain and sun are for the earth.in ALL honesty, if you believe children are truly a BLESSING from God, which is what the Bible says and the church teaches, it really wouldn’t make sense to say 2-3 is just enough.

Most people who say 2-3 are enough probably spend much time considering the “cost” and much less so the blessing.

Yes, excessive rain causes floods and too much sun scorches the earth just like a household can cave if it brings in more children than it can handle or not spaced enough. having said that, marriages fall apart because of the spouses’ weaknesses and NEVER because of the children.

If people truly collaborated with God we’d have more numerous families than small families and that’s a Biblical fact!

But, of course, there will always be couples who cannot conceive more or couples whose circumstances are indeed so dire as to not be able to responsibly accept more children but that is by no means the majority.

Posts like these are the reason why I made this thread.

You make it sound like everyone should have a TON of kids unless they have extremely grave reasons not to. You make it sound like every women should love being a stay at home mom to 6+ kids.

And then you make the bold claim that 2-3 children is never enough.

Some people are perfectly happy with 2-3 children. Some women find they have more to offer to the world besides children. Some women prefer having 2 kids so that she can use her gifts and talents outside the home.

Does the Church teach that doing so is wrong? Or is that your own personal belief?

Sure, most biblical families were large, but that was thousands of years ago! A lot of things have changed and the life style now is completely different. So I don’t think using that as a basis is reliable.

 

[Castello]

God is the same, blessings are the same. Our society has become so twisted that we see children as burdens. Having a snazzy career might bring happiness, but, having children brings joy. We are to be faithful in everything, that includes generosity of spirit in welcoming God’s blessings.

 

[BingoBoy]

God is the same, blessings are the same. Our society has become so twisted that we see children as burdens. Having a snazzy career might bring happiness, but, having children brings joy. We are to be faithful in everything, that includes generosity of spirit in welcoming God’s blessings.

Here’s another thing that bugs me.

People here assume that just because someone may want 2 kids instead of 6, that they view children as burdens, and not as gifts from God.

And that “snazzy career” may very well be a heart surgeon that saves lives.

 

[Corki]

Here’s another thing that bugs me.

People here assume that just because someone may want 2 kids instead of 6, that they view children as burdens, and not as gifts from God.

And that “snazzy career” may very well be a heart surgeon that saves lives.

Of course, not everyone should have a TON of kids.

But, also of course, 6 is not exactly a TON either. It’s a medium sized family.

There are many people who put career ahead of family. In fact, that has almost become the norm. All people are saying is that there must be a sense of balance and also self-awareness. Career can certainly be a consideration. However, if you aren’t going to really accept children lovingly from God, that’s a problem.

Whether to have another child is something you pray about and re-consider regularly. Some months, the answer will be “no” but a time may come when what looked like a permanent reason to avoid another child doesn’t seem so serious.

PS The question of being a stay-at-home mom and the one of having more than 2 or 3 children are very different issues. I know quite a few moms of 5 or more children with successful careers.

 

[Castello]

Here’s another thing that bugs me.

People here assume that just because someone may want 2 kids instead of 6, that they view children as burdens, and not as gifts from God.

And that “snazzy career” may very well be a heart surgeon that saves lives.

Why does being a doctor exclude welcoming children? Seem to remember a certain Saint who was both a doctor and a mother…

 

[gardenswithkids]

…All women are different, and while some women would be perfectly happy and fulfilled having 6 children and being a stay at home mom, others would be a lot happier and more productive if they kept their careers and had 3 children. Being a SAHM to a bunch of little ones may not be the best thing for everyone, **and I consider that a just reason to stop at 2-3. **

Some people seem to have a very “one size fits all” mentality, but the truth of the matter is, we all have different gifts/talents to bring to the table. Some can stay at home and raise 10 beautiful children, others can have 2 children but save lives in their career as heart surgeon. One is not better than the other, in my opinion.

Any thoughts?

The Church leaves it up to the husband and wife to decide what is a “just reason”. If you and your spouse reached that decision together in prayer and you use Church approved means to avoid conception, then that’s fine.

However, I object to the reasoning you used. We’re not just called to be happy–we’re called to be holy. These are matters to be prayed over and not decided simply by what we think would make us “happiest.” God wants us to be happy, and I’m not saying that our happiness doesn’t matter to Him–but we need to ask what God wants rather than what would make us happy.

 

[BingoBoy]

Why does being a doctor exclude welcoming children? Seem to remember a certain Saint who was both a doctor and a mother…

Give me a break!

I never said anything about “welcoming children!”

Of course each and every child that came into the world would be welcomed from the moment of conception. And I never said anything about having NO children at all. I was talking about having 2 children and being a working woman vs having about 6 and being stay at home mom.

 

[BingoBoy]

The Church leaves it up to the husband and wife to decide what is a “just reason”. If you and your spouse reached that decision together in prayer and you use Church approved means to avoid conception, then that’s fine.

However, I object to the reasoning you used. We’re not just called to be happy–we’re called to be holy. These are matters to be prayed over and not decided simply by what we think would make us “happiest.” God wants us to be happy, and I’m not saying that our happiness doesn’t matter to Him–but we need to ask what God wants rather than what would make us happy.

What’s wrong with my reasoning? Some women weren’t meant to be SAHM’s. For some women, being forced into it would leave them feeling very bitter, moody, and unhappy.

Absolutely, I think it’s important to be happy. It is important to our health and makes us better, more productive people in ALL aspects of our lives. If having 6 kids and giving up a career to stay home full time is going to be detrimental to a person, then yes, I absolutely think that’s a just reason to avoid.

Not every woman is the same, and not every woman would do well being mother hubbard. What is so wrong with that??

 

[kristacecilia]

The truth of the matter is, no one KNOWS ahead of time how many kids they are called to have. No one.

We are called to be open. “Can we be generous enough to welcome one more?” should be our monthly consideration. Sometime the answer is no, we can’t. There are legitimate health issues, financial issues, psychological issues, etc.

But if we say, “No,” the reason better not be, “because I don’t want to.”

 

[Joannm]

One of my cousins always said she wanted a large family. But after she got married and had a child her husband started to drink. She had two more kids and he got worse and no counseling seemed to help. She really felt the desire to stop having kids after the three because of the situation with her husband. They ended up with 7 kids and then her husband left her, practically destitute and saying he could not afford child support. So that would have been a good situation to stop. But then again she was “under his thumb” so to speak and he wouldn’t practice NFP because he wanted it when he wanted it. I would think if I was in the situation where my husband drank and was always angry I would stop at 2 or 3 simply for my own sanity and not to bring children into a dysfunctional family. She is doing a little better now but is still in financial hardship.

That is an extreme situation. But there are women who just can’t handle big families. I have 3 kids and while it would have been nice to have more, 3 was just about all I could handle. They gave me a really hard time in their teen years and I could not imagine handling more than the three. I admit part of it was my fault because I was not a good disciplinarian and they would drive me crazy. I think there may be a lot of women like this out there. We just don’t limit our families because we want more material things. We lived (and still do) in a tiny house, went only on camping vacations, and didn’t lavish ourselves or our kids with expensive things. We paid for college cash, no loans so our kids would not be strapped with paying back loans when they were just starting out as adults. Now that they are older I sometimes think how nice it would be to have had more, but then I always go back to thinking about those teen years and am very happy with my three.

 

[gardenswithkids]

What’s wrong with my reasoning? Some women weren’t meant to be** SAHM’s**. For some women, being forced into it would leave them feeling very bitter, moody, and unhappy.

Absolutely, I think it’s important to be happy. It is important to our health and makes us better, more productive people in ALL aspects of our lives. If having 6 kids and giving up a career to stay home full time is going to be detrimental to a person, then yes, I absolutely think that’s a just reason to avoid.

Not every woman is the same, and not every woman would do well being mother hubbard. What is so wrong with that??

I agree that not every woman is the same. And there’s nothing wrong with wanting to be happy. But several things is wrong with your reasoning–and I bolded those things stood out to me. For one, you assume that a woman who is the mother of more than 2-3 children must be a SAHM. Those are separate decisions. I know mothers of large families who have careers, and I know families where the woman works while the dad stay at home, and I know women who stay at home with small familes.

There was a time when my husband and I only wanted 2-3 children. Very few people go from 2-3 children to 6+ children overnight. Babies usually come one at a time (sometimes two, rarely 3). Some women cannot have more than 0-3 even if they want and actively try to have a large family.

Once we decide to marry, we’re suppose to be open in our marriage to the number of children that God wants us, not just the number than we decided we wanted earlier at some point in our life. Our personal happiness isn’t always found in getting what we want; sometimes we really have no idea of what will make us truly happy, but God does.

Plus, the nursery rhyme character, Mother Hubbard hardly reveals the image of a happy SAHM. Since Old Mother Hubbard was old, maybe additional pregnancies weren’t a concern. But if it was, since her cupboard was bare and she didn’t have a bone to feed her dog, I’d say she had just reason for avoiding pregnancy, (if she and her husband prayed and agreed on it.) The rhyme doesn’t say if Mother Hubbard had a large family or not, and she may have been retired from a career for all we know. Do you have Mother Hubbard confused with the Old Woman Who Lived in a Shoe? That lady had so many children, she didn’t know what to do! Again, hardly the image of a happy SAHM. Not a happy stay-in-the-shoe mom either. She would have “just reason” for avoiding future pregnancies, (if she and her husband prayed about it and agreed.)

It seems that your image of mothers of large families is based on old nursery rhymes and stereotypes of us.

 

[Jennifer_J]

I agree that not every woman is the same. And there’s nothing wrong with wanting to be happy. But several things is wrong with your reasoning–and I bolded those things stood out to me. For one, you assume that a woman who is the mother of more than 2-3 children must be a SAHM. Those are separate decisions. I know mothers of large families who have careers, and I know families where the woman works while the dad stay at home, and I know women who stay at home with small familes.

There was a time when my husband and I only wanted 2-3 children. Very few people go from 2-3 children to 6+ children overnight. Babies usually come one at a time (sometimes two, rarely 3). Some women cannot have more than 0-3 even if they want and actively try to have a large family.

Once we decide to marry, we’re suppose to be open in our marriage to the number of children that God wants us, not just the number than we decided we wanted earlier at some point in our life. Our personal happiness isn’t always found in getting what we want; sometimes we really have no idea of what will make us truly happy, but God does.

Plus, the nursery rhyme character, Mother Hubbard hardly reveals the image of a happy SAHM. Since Old Mother Hubbard was old, maybe additional pregnancies weren’t a concern. But if it was, since her cupboard was bare and she didn’t have a bone to feed her dog, I’d say she had just reason for avoiding pregnancy, (if she and her husband prayed and agreed on it.) The rhyme doesn’t say if Mother Hubbard had a large family or not, and she may have been retired from a career for all we know. Do you have Mother Hubbard confused with the Old Woman Who Lived in a Shoe? That lady had so many children, she didn’t know what to do! Again, hardly the image of a happy SAHM. Not a happy stay-in-the-shoe mom either. She would have “just reason” for avoiding future pregnancies, (if she and her husband prayed about it and agreed.)

It seems that your image of mothers of large families is based on old nursery rhymes and stereotypes of us.

Thank you for summing up my own thoughts so well.

 

[kristacecilia]

I agree that not every woman is the same. And there’s nothing wrong with wanting to be happy. But several things is wrong with your reasoning–and I bolded those things stood out to me. For one, you assume that a woman who is the mother of more than 2-3 children must be a SAHM. Those are separate decisions. I know mothers of large families who have careers, and I know families where the woman works while the dad stay at home, and I know women who stay at home with small familes.

There was a time when my husband and I only wanted 2-3 children. Very few people go from 2-3 children to 6+ children overnight. Babies usually come one at a time (sometimes two, rarely 3). Some women cannot have more than 0-3 even if they want and actively try to have a large family.

Once we decide to marry, we’re suppose to be open in our marriage to the number of children that God wants us, not just the number than we decided we wanted earlier at some point in our life. Our personal happiness isn’t always found in getting what we want; sometimes we really have no idea of what will make us truly happy, but God does.

Plus, the nursery rhyme character, Mother Hubbard hardly reveals the image of a happy SAHM. Since Old Mother Hubbard was old, maybe additional pregnancies weren’t a concern. But if it was, since her cupboard was bare and she didn’t have a bone to feed her dog, I’d say she had just reason for avoiding pregnancy, (if she and her husband prayed and agreed on it.) The rhyme doesn’t say if Mother Hubbard had a large family or not, and she may have been retired from a career for all we know. Do you have Mother Hubbard confused with the Old Woman Who Lived in a Shoe? That lady had so many children, she didn’t know what to do! Again, hardly the image of a happy SAHM. Not a happy stay-in-the-shoe mom either. She would have “just reason” for avoiding future pregnancies, (if she and her husband prayed about it and agreed.)

It seems that your image of mothers of large families is based on old nursery rhymes and stereotypes of us.

Very nice, Gardens.