Money and openness to life?

[Xantippe]

moon1234 said:

“It was meant more as a rhetorical question. Remove family member and insert complete stranger. When a bank loans money they want to secure their loan to make sure they get paid back. If a person does not have enough income to pay the loan, then the bank will not issue the credit.”

I really don’t like that banking analogy for marriage.

I wouldn’t loan money to an individual stranger, either. I do “loan” money to the bank at interest, but only in an FDIC-insured account. I really don’t think that has an analogy in marriage–except maybe something involving a prenuptial agreement. Yuck!

If a prospective spouses loses a job but has a reasonable plan in place for getting a new one, I think that’s good enough to marry on. If their plan is, I’m going to sit here and wait for somebody to offer me a job at least as good as my last one, that would be a deal breaker. I don’t think that is a money issue, so much as a character issue.

My husband and I married when he was 25 and I was nearly 23. We were each making around $10k a year at the time, as we were both graduate students (this was 15 years ago). If we had waited to marry until he had his first real job, that would have been another three years. If we had started a family right away, we would have been raising a family on $10k a year. As it happened, we used NFP, started trying for our first baby as soon as he got his first job offer, and had our first baby four years after we got married. My husband’s job (the only one he was offered) was in one of the most expensive parts of the country, and our rent for an (admittedly very nice) 2-bedroom apartment was $1560 a month. I didn’t realize it at the time because I was dazzled by how much more we were making than as graduate students, but we were very “apartment poor”. My husband has since managed to get a job in a much less expensive part of the country, thank goodness. We now have three children, one of whom (the first) has some minor special needs. We have a roomy house, but I expect to be living with pink formica for the next 5-10 years. It won’t kill me. It took us 15 years from the day we married to be able to afford buying our first house.

I’ve since known a bunch of graduate couples who have started raising families in grad school. They seem to do OK, but they are often on Medicaid.

I don’t think it is reasonable to tell everybody to wait to get married until they have all their financial ducks in a row. For one thing, just being married may lead them to a change of heart with regard to how quickly they want to have kids.

 

[moon1234]

moon1234 said:

“It was meant more as a rhetorical question. Remove family member and insert complete stranger. When a bank loans money they want to secure their loan to make sure they get paid back. If a person does not have enough income to pay the loan, then the bank will not issue the credit.”

I really don’t like that banking analogy for marriage.

I wouldn’t loan money to an individual stranger, either. I do “loan” money to the bank at interest, but only in an FDIC-insured account. I really don’t think that has an analogy in marriage–except maybe something involving a prenuptial agreement. Yuck!

It was not meant to be a direct comparison to marriage. It was to drawn attention to making plans before marriage to make sure the couple can support children if/when they come along. To not blindly enter marriage without a plan for how to pay for the needs of life.

If a prospective spouses loses a job but has a reasonable plan in place for getting a new one, I think that’s good enough to marry on. If their plan is, I’m going to sit here and wait for somebody to offer me a job at least as good as my last one, that would be a deal breaker. I don’t think that is a money issue, so much as a character issue.

The OP, which is what this topic is about, was asking for opinions on money BEFORE they were married. We can not control what happens to us in most instances once we are married, but we do have a choice BEFORE we are married. They need to do an assessment of their situation before they marry. If they can not afford children when they come, meaning they will go bankrupt and the state needs to pay for them (meaning the tax payer) then it might be best to not marry until they are in a better financial situation.

My husband and I married when he was 25 and I was nearly 23. We were each making around $10k a year at the time, as we were both graduate students (this was 15 years ago). If we had waited to marry until he had his first real job, that would have been another three years. If we had started a family right away, we would have been raising a family on $10k a year. As it happened, we used NFP, started trying for our first baby as soon as he got his first job offer, and had our first baby four years after we got married. My husband’s job (the only one he was offered) was in one of the most expensive parts of the country, and our rent for an (admittedly very nice) 2-bedroom apartment was $1560 a month. I didn’t realize it at the time because I was dazzled by how much more we were making than as graduate students, but we were very “apartment poor”. My husband has since managed to get a job in a much less expensive part of the country, thank goodness. We now have three children, one of whom (the first) has some minor special needs. We have a roomy house, but I expect to be living with pink formica for the next 5-10 years. It won’t kill me. It took us 15 years from the day we married to be able to afford buying our first house.

I understand that what I said, and just repeated what Pope Pius XII said, may be troubling to hear as you did exactly what Pope Pius XII said not to. It is why posting on controversial topics like NFP ignites so many passions as it hits very close to home for many people. Did you enter marriage with the express intention to limit sex to the sterile periods? If the answer is yes, then what Pope Pius XII said is that you contracted an invalid marriage. I did not write the scenario or the words, the Pope did.

I’ve since known a bunch of graduate couples who have started raising families in grad school. They seem to do OK, but they are often on Medicaid.

I don’t think it is reasonable to tell everybody to wait to get married until they have all their financial ducks in a row. For one thing, just being married may lead them to a change of heart with regard to how quickly they want to have kids.

Again my recommendation is just a repeat of what Pope Pius XII stated in his allocution to midwives. It was the Pope who stated what the proper intention of the couple should be before marriage, not me.

 

[Xantippe]

moon1234 said:

“Did you enter marriage with the express intention to limit sex to the sterile periods? If the answer is yes, then what Pope Pius XII said is that you contracted an invalid marriage. I did not write the scenario or the words, the Pope did.”

We married with the intention of waiting until it was prudent to start trying to have children. I think the “until” is the crucial element that you are missing. Of course it would be invalid to enter into a marriage with the intention of never, ever, under any circumstances attempting to have children (that is not controversial), but it is not invalid to enter into marriage with the intention of waiting to try to have children until it is prudent to do so. For instance, if one had a dangerous medical condition and entered into marriage with the intention of only trying to have children if medical science resolved the issue successfully, that marriage would nonetheless be valid.

Canon law nerds, am I right?

 

[thewanderer]

Moon1234

The passage you are referring to specifically says that it is only in denying the right to relations during the fertile times that one runs into problems, these same problems do not exist when denying the use. Thus, if a couple mutually decides and agrees to avoid using their marital rights during the fertile periods for serious/just/grave reasons, even from the beginning of marriage, their marriage will not be invalid as neither of them will have denied the other the right to marital relations during the fertile period. You are misapplying this passage.

 

[moon1234]

Moon1234

The passage you are referring to specifically says that it is only in denying the right to relations during the fertile times that one runs into problems, these same problems do not exist when denying the use. Thus, if a couple mutually decides and agrees to avoid using their marital rights during the fertile periods for serious/just/grave reasons, even from the beginning of marriage, their marriage will not be invalid as neither of them will have denied the other the right to marital relations during the fertile period. You are misapplying this passage.

I don’t think I am misapplying the passage at all, it is exactly as you have stated it. What Pope Pius XII stated was this if two people entered into a marriage with the express intention of only utilizing the sterile periods then two qualifications need to be looked at:

1. If one spouse is denying the other the right to have sexual relations during the fertile time, then the marriage would be invalidly entered into. If that is not the case and both partners are willing to use only the sterile periods then the marriage would be valid, but it would be subject to number 2.
2. The use of the sterile periods needs to have some just or serious cause for it’s use. The simple fact of being open to life is not enough to justify the use of NFP. The definition of just cause or serious matter is left to the couple to decide, but they are not allowed to just make up their own definition and expect that it is to be accepted. It must truly be a serious or just cause, otherwise their reasoning for using the sterile periods may not be moral or right.

I think I explained it well, but you were able to clarify that a little more and with some different words.

It is also important for the person doing the marriage prep to discern from the couple whether the intention to delay children is one that can be abrogated by either party at any time. If one spouse desires children and the other does not, the one that does not can not deny the other the right to have sex during the fertile period. This is a much harder test. One that I personally believe should be answered by both parties before they marry. It can very easily become a situation where one party is denied the use of the marriage right by the other with the statement “You agreed not to have children until X happens, etc.” and then sex is denied unless it is a sterile period.

Thank you.

 

[thewanderer]

I don’t think I am misapplying the passage at all, it is exactly as you have stated it. What Pope Pius XII stated was this if two people entered into a marriage with the express intention of only utilizing the sterile periods then two qualifications need to be looked at:

1. If one spouse is denying the other the right to have sexual relations during the fertile time, then the marriage would be invalidly entered into. If that is not the case and both partners are willing to use only the sterile periods then the marriage would be valid, but it would be subject to number 2.
2. The use of the sterile periods needs to have some just or serious cause for it’s use. The simple fact of being open to life is not enough to justify the use of NFP. The definition of just cause or serious matter is left to the couple to decide, but they are not allowed to just make up their own definition and expect that it is to be accepted. It must truly be a serious or just cause, otherwise their reasoning for using the sterile periods may not be moral or right.

I think I explained it well, but you were able to clarify that a little more and with some different words.

It is also important for the person doing the marriage prep to discern from the couple whether the intention to delay children is one that can be abrogated by either party at any time. If one spouse desires children and the other does not, the one that does not can not deny the other the right to have sex during the fertile period. This is a much harder test. One that I personally believe should be answered by both parties before they marry. It can very easily become a situation where one party is denied the use of the marriage right by the other with the statement “You agreed not to have children until X happens, etc.” and then sex is denied unless it is a sterile period.

Thank you.

Thanks for clarifying what you were saying. I misread you to be saying that if a couple uses NFP from the get-go to avoid then their marriage is necessarily invalid. I’m glad we’ve cleared up that misunderstanding.

 

[gardenswithkids]

How can a young married couple be open to life through NFP, and at the same time, not be worried about finances in the case of having children?

I’m going to be getting married sometime relatively soon I’d say, but I’m not sure how to go about being sexually active, and not concerned a little about not having too much money saved up for children.

Keep the perspective that children are blessings. Repeat it to yourself as often as needed, “Children are blessing, children are blessings, children are blessing…”

People using NFP to postpone pregnancy can recognize that children are blessings while still avoiding because they have discerned the matter in prayer. If you believe you have discerned the use of NFP in prayer and you still end up pregnant, remind yourself that God is the Author of Life and you wouldn’t be pregnant if He had not allowed it. And then, start counting your blessings.

While you are worried about things that haven’t yet happened, keep in mind that some couples struggle with infertility. If you happen to conceive before you actively try to, remember people who bear the cross of infertility would gladly trade places with you. And if, when you are ready to have a child you instead discover infertility, you will remember back about your fears of having a child with a completely different perspective.

“Children are blessings, children are blessings…” -keep saying it to yourself whenever you feel these worries coming on. Discern in prayer and with discussion with your husband about NFP, use prudence and then trust God to help you create the family that He has planned for you.

 

[SpeakKindly]

I don’t think I am misapplying the passage at all, it is exactly as you have stated it. What Pope Pius XII stated was this if two people entered into a marriage with the express intention of only utilizing the sterile periods then two qualifications need to be looked at:

1. If one spouse is denying the other the right to have sexual relations during the fertile time, then the marriage would be invalidly entered into. If that is not the case and both partners are willing to use only the sterile periods then the marriage would be valid, but it would be subject to number 2.
2. The use of the sterile periods needs to have some just or serious cause for it’s use. The simple fact of being open to life is not enough to justify the use of NFP. The definition of just cause or serious matter is left to the couple to decide, but they are not allowed to just make up their own definition and expect that it is to be accepted. It must truly be a serious or just cause, otherwise their reasoning for using the sterile periods may not be moral or right.

I think I explained it well, but you were able to clarify that a little more and with some different words.

It is also important for the person doing the marriage prep to discern from the couple whether the intention to delay children is one that can be abrogated by either party at any time. If one spouse desires children and the other does not, the one that does not can not deny the other the right to have sex during the fertile period. This is a much harder test. One that I personally believe should be answered by both parties before they marry. It can very easily become a situation where one party is denied the use of the marriage right by the other with the statement “You agreed not to have children until X happens, etc.” and then sex is denied unless it is a sterile period.

Thank you.

So, in your opinion, what do you believe about this scenario:

My fiancee and I are getting married within a year. We’ve agreed that we’re going to use NFP, and not use birth control or anything like that (because we agree with the Church’s teachings, and want to avoid the health risks too).

We’re open to the idea of a child coming at any time, though we’d obviously would prefer it when we’d feel more financially settled, than within a few months after marriage.

When we’re going to be sexually active, as far as I understand, we plan to have sex on the infertile days, to avoid children (due to financial reasons).

Personally, I’m getting a bit confused by the explanations that have been given about the intentions behind NFP - because I’ve understood it as a method to plan out children, meaning that the couple have decided when or when not to have sex, based on the fertile/infertile times.

It sounds like you’re against this idea?

 

[Xantippe]

SpeakKindly said:

“Personally, I’m getting a bit confused by the explanations that have been given about the intentions behind NFP - because I’ve understood it as a method to plan out children, meaning that the couple have decided when or when not to have sex, based on the fertile/infertile times.”

I’m kind of confused, myself. As far as I could understand him, moon1234 was saying that my marriage is invalid, as we married with the intention of only trying to have children when it was prudent.

(By the way, I have to add that if you do know NFP, it eventually becomes such second nature that a woman can judge very roughly whether or not she is fertile, just based on stuff like feeling warm or having lots of cervical fluid. It’s not good enough for high-risk cases, but it does become very intuitive. Once you know that, you can’t un-know it, so I think a woman who knows NFP can’t really act as though she doesn’t.)

 

[KimberlyCat]

Children are a blessing and a gift from God. They are not something to be planned for when it is “convenient” for you. Always be open to having children. They will bring you more happiness than you could ever imagine in your wildest dreams. Forget about NFP and don’t worry about finances at all. Our Father in heaven knows all of your thoughts, actions and concerns about money. He will provide for you.
May God Bless You

 

[gardenswithkids]

So, in your opinion, what do you believe about this scenario:

My fiancee and I are getting married within a year. We’ve agreed that we’re going to use NFP, and not use birth control or anything like that (because we agree with the Church’s teachings, and want to avoid the health risks too).

We’re open to the idea of a child coming at any time, though we’d obviously would prefer it when we’d feel more financially settled, than within a few months after marriage.

When we’re going to be sexually active, as far as I understand, we plan to have sex on the infertile days, to avoid children (due to financial reasons).

Personally, I’m getting a bit confused by the explanations that have been given about the intentions behind NFP - because I’ve understood it as a method to plan out children, meaning that the couple have decided when or when not to have sex, based on the fertile/infertile times.

It sounds like you’re against this idea?

We certainly can confuse people here.:whacky:

You can use NFP if you and your spouse discern in prayer that you have a serious/just/grave reason to postponing children. (It’s translated several ways-and the Church hasn’t formally provided a list of reasons.) If one or both of spouse entered into marriage with the idea of always using NFP and never having normal relations during the fertile time because he/she doesn’t want children, that would raise cause for concern. But that is not what you said. It sounds like you plan to welcome children during your marriage at some point, God willing.

The other point to note is that abstaining from the normal marriage act with each other should be a mutual decision. If a couple is going to postpone pregnancy, they must both agree.

Sometimes I’ve read it suggested that couples who immediately feel they need to use NFP to postpone children may not be ready for marriage, but that is personal opinion and not Church teachings. It’s my personal opinion that couples getting married are often far more ready for babies than they realize. Newlyweds might be wise to largely ignore the culture around us tells them to “wait” until they have a lot of things that babies don’t really need. But I do understand that it’s a little scary taking a major life change like getting married and a little scarier to think about adding another major life change like a baby a short time later. Someone very wise said, “Be not afraid!”

Whether you and your future husband use NFP or not, don’t be afraid of life.

 

[moon1234]

SpeakKindly said:

“Personally, I’m getting a bit confused by the explanations that have been given about the intentions behind NFP - because I’ve understood it as a method to plan out children, meaning that the couple have decided when or when not to have sex, based on the fertile/infertile times.”

I’m kind of confused, myself. As far as I could understand him, moon1234 was saying that my marriage is invalid, as we married with the intention of only trying to have children when it was prudent.

(By the way, I have to add that if you do know NFP, it eventually becomes such second nature that a woman can judge very roughly whether or not she is fertile, just based on stuff like feeling warm or having lots of cervical fluid. It’s not good enough for high-risk cases, but it does become very intuitive. Once you know that, you can’t un-know it, so I think a woman who knows NFP can’t really act as though she doesn’t.)

I don’t think I said you contracted an invalid marriage, if that is what it said or construed then I am sorry. What the Pope said is that if one person contracts marriage with the intention of not granting the other spouse the right to have sex when requested, then the marriage is invalid.

If you stated to your husband to be, “I will only have sex with you during the infertile periods for the first two years of our marriage. I will not marry you unless you agree to this” then you would have contracted an invalid marriage as the right to have sex with your spouse is permanent and absolute. It is what is meant by the passage “… and the two will become one flesh”.

If, on the other hand, you did not restrict the right to have sex, but rather you both planned to avoid having children for a serious reason, but the right to have sex during the fertile times was left open, then the marriage would be valid. It is why I said that marriage instructors or those who teach NFP or other child spacing methods should ALWAYS make sure that both spouses are clear that either of them can request sex during the fertile periods. If one spouse is NOT onboard with this, then there is a defect in the marriage vows.

 

[Xantippe]

moon1234 said:

“If you stated to your husband to be, “I will only have sex with you during the infertile periods for the first two years of our marriage. I will not marry you unless you agree to this” then you would have contracted an invalid marriage as the right to have sex with your spouse is permanent and absolute.”

I suspect that once you add “for the first two years of our marriage,” then you are changing the substance of the situation. I think “I will only have sex with you during the infertile periods” and “I will only have sex with you during the infertile periods for the first two years of our marriage” are quite distinct.

Consider the related statement: “I will not have sex with you until two years after our wedding.” If the marriage is duly consummated two years after the wedding, I do not see why that should be an impediment to a valid marriage. A fortiori, if it is legitimate to plan to totally abstain for two years, it is legitimate to plan to abstain on fertile days for two years.

 

[moon1234]

moon1234 said:

“If you stated to your husband to be, “I will only have sex with you during the infertile periods for the first two years of our marriage. I will not marry you unless you agree to this” then you would have contracted an invalid marriage as the right to have sex with your spouse is permanent and absolute.”

I suspect that once you add “for the first two years of our marriage,” then you are changing the substance of the situation. I think “I will only have sex with you during the infertile periods” and “I will only have sex with you during the infertile periods for the first two years of our marriage” are quite distinct.

Consider the related statement: “I will not have sex with you until two years after our wedding.” If the marriage is duly consummated two years after the wedding, I do not see why that should be an impediment to a valid marriage. A fortiori, if it is legitimate to plan to totally abstain for two years, it is legitimate to plan to abstain on fertile days for two years.

Actually the time period does not matter as the right to the others body is permanent and absolute. If one partner say NO when the other person requests the right, say two weeks into the two year period, then they have denied the other spouse the marriage right. The time period does not matter. If the marriage was entered into with this mindset, then the marriage is invalid and there is ample grounds for an annulment. It is exactly what Pope Pius XII stated.

NFP can only be used with the consent of both spouses and with a serious/just reason. If one spouse no longer consents, then NFP can not be used/forced on the other person. If the other spouse refuses to have sex and it has been this way since marriage, then again there is grounds for annulment as the marriage vow was not actually taken.

It is odd that a serious issue would exist between two healthy sexually capable adults that would require their use of the sterile periods for years after marriage. We are not talking about health issues here, but rather a desire to put off children until we are “ready”. If they are not “ready” to welcome children and there are no health issues, then they are not ready for marriage. Virtuous continence is very different in that NO sex is taking place vs NFP in which sex is desired without or with a minimal risk of children. The first is always morally licit, the second requires ongoing serious/just reasons.

 

[Xantippe]

moon1234 said:

“The time period does not matter. If the marriage was entered into with this mindset, then the marriage is invalid and there is ample grounds for an annulment. It is exactly what Pope Pius XII stated.”

I don’t think that your quotes included anything about a time limit. I think the time limit makes a very substantial difference.

“We are not talking about health issues here, but rather a desire to put off children until we are “ready”. If they are not “ready” to welcome children and there are no health issues, then they are not ready for marriage. Virtuous continence is very different in that NO sex is taking place vs NFP in which sex is desired without or with a minimal risk of children. The first is always morally licit, the second requires ongoing serious/just reasons.”

Are we so sure that the continence would be virtuous? That’s a major consideration here–marrying earlier and practicing NFP can safeguard the couple’s chastity, which might be endangered if they need to wait through five years of grad school, three years of law school, however many years of medical school and residency, etc. Obviously, it very good to be able to marry and have children immediately, but it is also obviously better to marry and practice NFP than to not marry and to sin. As St. Paul says, “It is better to marry than to burn.” I imagine that if we had St. Paul here in the comment box, he would come down very hard in favor of early marriage and NFP.

 

[maryjk]

Children are a blessing and a gift from God. They are not something to be planned for when it is “convenient” for you. **Always be open to having children. **They will bring you more happiness than you could ever imagine in your wildest dreams. **Forget about NFP **and don’t worry about finances at all. Our Father in heaven knows all of your thoughts, actions and concerns about money. He will provide for you.
May God Bless You

It would be nice if everyone could do that.

But sometimes NFP is needed.

I am glad that God and the Catholic Church has made this available to couples.

 

[Kelfa28]

It would be nice if everyone could do that.

But sometimes NFP is needed.

I am glad that God and the Catholic Church has made this available to couples.

Exactly.

I wish my husband and I could be totally open to having tons of children from the moment we got married to the day my fertility ends.

Unfortunately…we just can’t. It’s just not possible. Serious health and financial reasons dictate otherwise.

We are not willing to remain totally celibate for the next 5-6 years…therefore we will practice NFP.

I’m glad that the Church teaches this is okay and not a sin.