Married member's of CAF, who comes second?

[BlueEyedLady]

But thats the thing, no one is putting the focus solely on the parents. No one is advocating neglecting children, or giving them less affection and attention than they need. However, there is still an ordering in the objective importance. Yes, children are a very important part of marriage for those who are able to conceive, but the fact that marriage can exist validly without children shows that the marriage itself is more foundational than any children that come from the marriage. Because of this the relationship to your spouse is more important, and so, in ranking, comes higher. Yes, your marriage can benefit through having children, but it does not rely on having children the same way that children rely on having parent’s with a healthy relationship.

Best post of the thread.

 

[RoseMary131]

But it’s not putting emphasis on the marriage at the expense of the children… it’s putting that emphasis there for the good of the children. The CCC defines it this way…

The gist being that marriage is a sacrament through which grace flows to build and sustain in the difficulties and burdens that will come in living together and raising children. So as with the airlines instructions to fit your oxygen mask before you fit your childs mask… there is a fundamental recognition of the value of your marital health in the health of the children.

While not answering the OP’s question: If God comes first, who comes second, but only making an observation…

Marriage makes a oneness of the spouses. The spouses “as one” form the basis of the family. The foundation of the home is the marriage of the two into one. The family is built on this Sacrament - this binding of spouses to each other.

Unraveled, the family begins to be unraveled. Twined together God, Husband, and Wife are far stronger than one spouse standing alone. This bonding in a valid marriage is only unbound through death.

The husband and wife are to love the other as loving their self.

Marriage is a Sacrament of service. That service begins first within the home. If children are a part of the Sacrament, that service of love first extends from the Spouses (Parents) to the children.

How the Spouses strengthen or weaken this bond of “God, Husband, and Wife” affects their love and care for their children.

 

[LongingSoul]

While not answering the OP’s question: If God comes first, who comes second, but only making an observation…

Marriage makes a oneness of the spouses. The spouses “as one” form the basis of the family. The foundation of the home is the marriage of the two into one. The family is built on this Sacrament - this binding of spouses to each other.

Unraveled, the family begins to be unraveled. Twined together God, Husband, and Wife are far stronger than one spouse standing alone. This bonding in a valid marriage is only unbound through death.

The husband and wife are to love the other as loving their self.

Marriage is a Sacrament of service. That service begins first within the home. If children are a part of the Sacrament, that service of love first extends from the Spouses (Parents) to the children.

How the Spouses strengthen or weaken this bond of “God, Husband, and Wife” affects their love and care for their children.

That is more beautifully worded than my rather crude analogy,RoseMary.

I might add also that children are protected by natural maternal/paternal instincts that can be observed in nature in general. People don’t often abandon their children when they are difficult and horrible little creatures… however marriages are sustained over time,primarily by love. Agape love and that takes work and effort and sacrifice that is often times purely gratuitous. Marriages can fall apart so easily once the animal attraction fades but ironically marriage is what makes us human beings made in the image of God and the gift of marriage to man marks the esteem with which God regards us. That’s why it takes an extraordinary attention.

 

[CarrieSpooner]

But thats the thing, no one is putting the focus solely on the parents. No one is advocating neglecting children, or giving them less affection and attention than they need. However, there is still an ordering in the objective importance.

Yes, many people did put the focus solely on the parents by only pointing out the importance of the marriage as it benefits the children and not at all mentioning that the importance of how children also benefit the marriage. Perhaps there is a cultural bias that blinds to that but I saw it all over this thread in various responses. I can’t find anything in Church teaching that states that spouses are ordered to objectively greater importance than their children. I believe such assertion is false. But I will gladly be corrected on the matter if anyone can provide evidence to the contrary.

Yes, children are a very important part of marriage for those who are able to conceive, but the fact that marriage can exist validly without children shows that the marriage itself is more foundational than any children that come from the marriage. Because of this the relationship to your spouse is more important, and so, in ranking, comes higher. Yes, your marriage can benefit through having children, but it does not rely on having children the same way that children rely on having parent’s with a healthy relationship.

Ah but I can turn this right around on you. One parent can also leave his/her spouse or one parent can also die, leaving the other to raise children alone. This proves that the raising of children does not rely on the parents having a healthy marriage. By the logic you’ve provided, the relationship to your child is more important because of this.

It also must be said that infertility is a defect, not the natural order. I don’t think this sets the bar for what is objectively important in a marriage. This is the same argument that many make in support of same-sex “marriage” and contraception. Church teaching makes clear that “Marriage and conjugal love are by their nature ordained toward the begetting and educating of children.” (quoted from my second link above).

 

[CarrieSpooner]

That is more beautifully worded than my rather crude analogy,RoseMary.

I might add also that children are protected by natural maternal/paternal instincts that can be observed in nature in general. People don’t often abandon their children when they are difficult and horrible little creatures… however marriages are sustained over time,primarily by love. Agape love and that takes work and effort and sacrifice that is often times purely gratuitous. Marriages can fall apart so easily once the animal attraction fades but ironically marriage is what makes us human beings made in the image of God and the gift of marriage to man marks the esteem with which God regards us. That’s why it takes an extraordinary attention.

25% of families in the US are single mothers raising children alone (and 6% are single dads). I would hardly say that people don’t often abandon their children. In fact, I’d argue that lack of focus on the children is a significant reason that parents chose to leave their families and pursue a new relationship. And I believe this attitude that children come second plays a big role in that. It’s so uncommon to allow children to “contribute very substantially to the welfare of their parents” because we don’t even consider that they would be capable of doing this for us. Because we are too busy thinking we do this for them. We have placed them at a lower value and elevated ourselves. It is the culture of death that has effected us all, even Catholics. Both marriage and the children take extraordinary attention and both contribute significantly to each others welfare. The problem is that we place too much importance on the spouse and not enough on the children.

Marriage is a reflection of the Trinity precisely because God loved us so much that he gave his only Son. Love gives life. That’s why marriage gives life. If we say the spouse is objectively more important than the life he gives then it’s almost as if we say God is more important than Jesus…or that God is more important than love. This is impossible.

 

[agapewolf]

25% of families in the US are single mothers raising children alone (and 6% are single dads). I would hardly say that people don’t often abandon their children. In fact, I’d argue that lack of focus on the children is a significant reason that parents chose to leave their families and pursue a new relationship. And I believe this attitude that children come second plays a big role in that. It’s so uncommon to allow children to “contribute very substantially to the welfare of their parents” because we don’t even consider that they would do this for us. We have placed them at a lower value and elevated ourselves. It is the culture of death that has effected us all, even Catholics. Both marriage and the children take extraordinary attention and both contribute significantly to each others welfare. The problem is that we place too much importance on the spouse and not enough on the children.

Marriage is a reflection of the Trinity precisely because God loved us so much that he gave his only Son. Love gives life. That’s why marriage gives life. If we say the spouse is objectively more important than the life he gives then it’s almost as if we say God is more important than Jesus…or that God is more important than love. This is impossible.

Has someone said the spouse is objectively more important? I didn’t see that.

Every life has objective equal value.

If we are talking about priorities with relationships though, read Ephesians 5 a few times. You’ll see there is no mention of children when describing the nature of the spousal relationship. That to me is pretty clear of how to place priorities. And if you read my earlier post, I’ll repeat it here: that does NOT mean direct time proportion. You honor your spouse by caring for children, and you honor God by caring for your spouse.

If we are talking about hard practical day to day living, the kids might just end up having to go without an activity or 2, or not get mom’s undivided attention sometimes, so that mom and dad can have some time to keep their relationship on solid ground–built on rock. The foundation. The relationship of the spouses is a sacrament. The relationship between a parent and a child is not.

 

[CarrieSpooner]

Has someone said the spouse is objectively more important? I didn’t see that.

Yes. Thewanderer states so in post #39.

Every life has objective equal value.

I agree!

If we are talking about priorities with relationships though, read Ephesians 5 a few times. You’ll see there is no mention of children when describing the nature of the spousal relationship. That to me is pretty clear of how to place priorities.

The Catholic Church teaches us not to pull out one verse of Scripture and use it to support our view but rather to consider Scripture in light of the whole Word of God and also in light of Church teachings. I have read and studied Ephesians quite a bit. When considering the cultural context of Ephesians 5, it takes on a different light from what you imply here. What Peter and Paul were doing was actually putting a radical spin on the Greco-Roman Household Codes. Once I discovered that, it read to me in a completely different way. Just as our Protestant brothers and sisters use Paul’s writings to dismiss works without realizing that he was specifically bashing works of the Mosaic Law.

And if you read my earlier post, I’ll repeat it here: that does NOT mean direct time proportion. You honor your spouse by caring for children, and you honor God by caring for your spouse.

If we are talking about hard practical day to day living, the kids might just end up having to go without an activity or 2, or not get mom’s undivided attention sometimes, so that mom and dad can have some time to keep their relationship on solid ground–built on rock. The foundation. The relationship of the spouses is a sacrament. The relationship between a parent and a child is not.

And sometimes spouses may have to go a day or 2 without an activity and maybe dad doesn’t get mom’s undivided attention sometimes so that mom can attend to baby’s needs. It goes both ways. I would disagree that one relationship is sacramental and the other isn’t.

 

[thewanderer]

Yes, many people did put the focus solely on the parents by only pointing out the importance of the marriage as it benefits the children and not at all mentioning that the importance of how children also benefit the marriage. Perhaps there is a cultural bias that blinds to that but I saw it all over this thread in various responses. I can’t find anything in Church teaching that states that spouses are ordered to objectively greater importance than their children. I believe such assertion is false. But I will gladly be corrected on the matter if anyone can provide evidence to the contrary.

Ah but I can turn this right around on you. One parent can also leave his/her spouse or one parent can also die, leaving the other to raise children alone. This proves that the raising of children does not rely on the parents having a healthy marriage. By the logic you’ve provided, the relationship to your child is more important because of this.

It also must be said that infertility is a defect, not the natural order. I don’t think this sets the bar for what is objectively important in a marriage. This is the same argument that many make in support of same-sex “marriage” and contraception. Church teaching makes clear that “Marriage and conjugal love are by their nature ordained toward the begetting and educating of children.” (quoted from my second link above).

Again, no one intended to say it is good to neglect children and only focus on your spouse but I guess I must leave it up to them to clarify for you if you still believe this is what they meant to imply.

As for my point about the fundamental ordering, you have missed the point. Yes, a childless couple has some sort of defect of the ideal of marriage, however, it is still a legitimate and valid marriage. Why is this true? Because while children are a very important aspect of the sacrament of matrimony, they are not the fundamental aspect of it. I am not merely saying that since you can have married couples without children couples are more important. Because of this you can’t try to just turn it around by saying “but you also can have children without happily married couples”. The fact that sterile people are permitted to marry, and do indeed contract valid marriages, shows that one’s spouse is inherent to a marriage in a way that children aren’t. Yes, children are still unbelievably important to marriage, but in a different way. The relationship between the spouses is the marriage, the children are supposed to spring forth from that relationship and be a sign of the love** in** that relationship. There is a specific ordering here that comes from the nature of marriage itself.

 

[thewanderer]

agapewolf;11416414:

Has someone said the spouse is objectively more important? I didn’t see that.

Yes. Thewanderer states so in post #39.

Every life has objective equal value.

I agree!

Would you care to show me where I said that one person is objectively more important (ie their life has a greater objective value) than another? If you think that is what I said you are seriously mistaken. I explained that there is an objective and inherent ordering within marriage by virtue of the nature of marriage itself. Those are two very different statements.

 

[thewanderer]

And sometimes spouses may have to go a day or 2 without an activity and maybe dad doesn’t get mom’s undivided attention sometimes so that mom can attend to baby’s needs. It goes both ways. I would disagree that one relationship is sacramental and the other isn’t.

Of course you will often have to put your children before your spouse. However, that does not make the parent-child relationship into a sacrament. The Church teaches that there are seven, and only seven sacraments. One of which is marriage. When the Catechism speaks about marriage as a sacrament it explains that it is the covenant between the husband and wife which has been raised by Christ to the level of a sacrament. This covenant, this sacrament, will usually lead to children, however, children and the relationship to ones children just are not a sacrament. You would either have to redefine the sacrament of matrimony or claim the church got it wrong and there are actually 8 sacraments to make such a claim. The relationship between parent and child is unbelievably important and sacred, but it is not a sacrament.

 

[LongingSoul]

25% of families in the US are single mothers raising children alone (and 6% are single dads). I would hardly say that people don’t often abandon their children. In fact, I’d argue that lack of focus on the children is a significant reason that parents chose to leave their families and pursue a new relationship. And I believe this attitude that children come second plays a big role in that. It’s so uncommon to allow children to “contribute very substantially to the welfare of their parents” because we don’t even consider that they would be capable of doing this for us. Because we are too busy thinking we do this for them. We have placed them at a lower value and elevated ourselves. It is the culture of death that has effected us all, even Catholics. Both marriage and the children take extraordinary attention and both contribute significantly to each others welfare. The problem is that we place too much importance on the spouse and not enough on the children.

Marriage is a reflection of the Trinity precisely because God loved us so much that he gave his only Son. Love gives life. That’s why marriage gives life. If we say the spouse is objectively more important than the life he gives then it’s almost as if we say God is more important than Jesus…or that God is more important than love. This is impossible.

That’s a strawman. I never did say that "the spouse is objectively more important than the life he gives’. The position that is very much in keeping with Church teaching is that nurturing the marriage first and foremost will in turn nurture the children in the most natural and healthy way. Nurturing the marriage means the mutual tending of each other needs as husband or wife. Think of it in the way of a tree. You can water and polish each individual apple all day long but it will starve eventually. But if you water and fertilise the tree, protecting the tree from insects and frost and root rot… the fruit grows plump and luscious.

 

[RoseMary131]

One can place the importance or value of one relationship over another relationship without placing the value of individual persons or individual life over another.

One can place the importance of one relationship at a higher level, while placing more energy and time on other relationships.

One can feel their marriage relationship has a higher importance than their relationship with their children. Yet, see the value of each person - the spouse and individual children as equal value of life, of persons.

More energy and time may need to be expended to take care of a child or children, than energy and time needed with the spouse. Yet, the person may feel their relationship with their spouse is at a higher level than with their child.

The parent - child relationship ebbs and flows - depending on the age and needs of the child. The infant becomes a child, a teen, an adult - the parent is no longer essential to the relationship for emotional or physical needs of their offspring.

The parent’s heart may even break more with the death of a child than with the death of a spouse. Yet, the relationship of the spouses may have felt to them to be next after God.

A parent can raise children alone, but the design is for husband and wife to raise the children within the Sacrament of Marriage. The “ideal” setting is within Marriage.

In the book of Genesis, God sees something that is not good.

Gen 2:18
The LORD God said: “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a suitable partner for him.”

Gen. 2:21-24
So the LORD God cast a deep sleep on the man, and while he was asleep, he took out one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh.

The LORD God then built up into a woman the rib that he had taken from the man. When he brought her to the man, the man said: “This one, at last, is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; This one shall be called ‘woman,’ for out of ‘her man’ this one has been taken.”

That is why a man leaves his father and mother and clings to his wife, and the two of them become one body.

old.usccb.org/nab/bible/genesis/genesis2.htm

Each person looks at their own life and determines what areas of their lives they place first, etc. That is their own feelings, emotions, and thoughts. Each person feels what they feel, which is neither right nor wrong - but their true emotions for that moment. They don’t have a need to prove to anyone why they feel as they do, they can explain if they wish, but they should not deny to their self true feelings or emotion. They can also change how they feel, their emotions and their thoughts based on changes in their lives.

A spouse who places their spouse after God and before other relationships, can do so without being selfish. This relationship can be the most important to them and one of the hardest to maintain.

Here is a quote on the importance of Marriage on Family Life through World Wide Marriage Encounter.

Family Life

The relationship between husband and wife is the foundation of the family. When a couple shares greater love, joy, intimacy, understanding, spirituality and communications, the children are the first to notice and feel the affect.

Our children are the seeds and our Sacraments of Matrimony are the soil they fall on. By nurturing and cultivating our Sacraments we provide rich soil for our children to grow, flourish, and blossom in.

 

[EasterJoy]

We all know God comes first, but in your life, who comes second? Is it your spouse, kids, the church? Just looking for everyone’s personal view. Thanks.

Your kids will be the best off if you and your spouse put each other first to make a unified whole, a whole that is there to take care of your children. They will be the best off if you do everything you can to not only treat them fairly but to give them the appearance of fairness. Not sameness, but fairness. After that, your children need you to treat your family as a unit that serves others. That means that the family sacrifices so that the family can do the job of the salaried worker, the family can do the job of the scholar, the family can do the job of service to the parish and the poor and so on. We each go out and do our thing with the support of the family, so in a sense the family is not put second. The family, rather, goes with us in spirit as we go out.

After all, with the Trinity does humanity come before God? That cannot be. Yet God was sacrificed for humanity. God redeems us, God’s will is accomplished, and in the end we put God first. That is not because God is “selfish”, but because it is just and right to give God all glory, honor and praise. Just so, when we are in right relationship, we don’t have “winners” and “losers”, or even “first” “second” and “third”. Christ, after all, gave the example by putting himself last when to be first was his rightful place. On account of that, he is beyond all. In the economy of grace, both the giver and the one who receives are “winners”. That is the way families need to work, too: that is, the family needs to imitate Christ, and imitate the Trinity.

 

[MJJean]

That’s a strawman. I never did say that "the spouse is objectively more important than the life he gives’. The position that is very much in keeping with Church teaching is that nurturing the marriage first and foremost will in turn nurture the children in the most natural and healthy way. Nurturing the marriage means the mutual tending of each other needs as husband or wife. ** Think of it in the way of a tree. You can water and polish each individual apple all day long but it will starve eventually. But if you water and fertilise the tree, protecting the tree from insects and frost and root rot… the fruit grows plump and luscious.**

You win 1000 internets.

 

[fontgoddess]

The best thing you can do for your children is to love your spouse and nurture that relationship. NOBODY here is advocating neglecting your children’s needs. But the spousal relationship has to come first. The analogy above of caring for the tree so that the fruit will flourish is spot on.

I can’t tell you how many couples I know where one or the other (sorry, but it was usually the wife), focused all the love and energy on the kids and then was shocked to find out their spouse had become a stranger, and a resentful one at that.

 

[Sarabande]

That’s a strawman. I never did say that "the spouse is objectively more important than the life he gives’. The position that is very much in keeping with Church teaching is that nurturing the marriage first and foremost will in turn nurture the children in the most natural and healthy way. Nurturing the marriage means the mutual tending of each other needs as husband or wife. Think of it in the way of a tree. You can water and polish each individual apple all day long but it will starve eventually. But if you water and fertilise the tree, protecting the tree from insects and frost and root rot… the fruit grows plump and luscious.

 

[CarrieSpooner]

Would you care to show me where I said that one person is objectively more important (ie their life has a greater objective value) than another? If you think that is what I said you are seriously mistaken. I explained that there is an objective and inherent ordering within marriage by virtue of the nature of marriage itself. Those are two very different statements.

Sure, I would be happy to. As I stated, it was in post #39. Here is a direct quote:

However, there is still an ordering in the objective importance. Yes, children are a very important part of marriage for those who are able to conceive, but the fact that marriage can exist validly without children shows that the marriage itself is more foundational than any children that come from the marriage. Because of this the relationship to your spouse is more important, and so, in ranking, comes higher."

 

[thewanderer]

Sure, I would be happy to. As I stated, it was in post #39. Here is a direct quote:

However, there is still an ordering in the objective importance. Yes, children are a very important part of marriage for those who are able to conceive, but the fact that marriage can exist validly without children shows that the marriage itself is more foundational than any children that come from the marriage. Because of this the relationship to your spouse is more important, and so, in ranking, comes higher."

That does not say that one person is objectively or inherently of more worth.

 

[CarrieSpooner]

That’s a strawman. I never did say that "the spouse is objectively more important than the life he gives’. The position that is very much in keeping with Church teaching is that nurturing the marriage first and foremost will in turn nurture the children in the most natural and healthy way. Nurturing the marriage means the mutual tending of each other needs as husband or wife. Think of it in the way of a tree. You can water and polish each individual apple all day long but it will starve eventually. But if you water and fertilise the tree, protecting the tree from insects and frost and root rot… the fruit grows plump and luscious.

Can you please show me where Church teaching says that the marriage should be nurtured first and foremost? The mutual tending to each others needs should be done for each family member according to his/her level of need, not according to whether they are spouse or child. That’s what the Church teaches. You speak of fertilizing plants but that’s NOT how the Church teaches marriage and family to be. We are not trees. The Church teaches that children contribute significantly to the welfare of the parents, not only the other way around as is the case for trees. We are not trees, we are people.

 

[CarrieSpooner]

That does not say that one person is objectively or inherently of more worth.

You said the relationship to the spouse is objectively more important. How does that differ from the spouse being ore important? I’m not seeing a distinction there. It’s either/or for me. If you’d like, I can go back and add “relationship” along with where I typed spouse. If that distinction is important to you. My points still stand.