Pope Francis: Opting not to have children a “selfish choice”

[TCEL]

My first child is six months old, and it’s been a constant mixture of joy and terror. Sometimes I think I could have a dozen, other times I think I can’t even do this one. Few things bring you to your knees quite like children. One thing is for sure though, I’m not the same person I was.

 

[Thorolfr]

This seems to make sense, though current society would not agree with it at all. I do know people who are married and say they never want children, and I marvel at it. One is inclined to wonder whether they chose the wrong vocation.

Maybe some people recognize that they would not make good parents. Not everyone is fit for whatever reason to be a parent and there are lots of people who probably should not have had kids and their kids have suffered because of it.

 

[3DOCTORS]

And should be. Some couples choose not to reproduce because they realize they would not be good parents. This, to me, is no failing, but a virtue…not everyone is meant to be a parent, and that fact should not sentence them to a life of loneliness or lack of intimacy.

I think we must be careful with this business of worrying about people being “sentenced to a life of (whatever).” It can so easily become an argument for entitlement to never have to sacrifice or persevere. It gets used to justify so many things: fornication, remarriage without an annulment, contraception, abortion, gay unions . . . and not just sexual or marriage issues either. It’s just one manifestation of the general human desire to seek pleasure and avoid pain and responsibility. It’s a trap of false compassion people who mean well fall into. Even the parent of a child who worries that not buying the candy bar or designer sneakers Junior pleads for is falling into this trap.

 

[TARRAT]

I really hope that a person thinking they might not be a good parent would NOT lead them to religious life. … As that is not what should be leading a person to the religious life. I’m thinking you meant that in another way?

People have this notion that the religious life people are ‘leftovers’ who don’t fit in society. This is not true. Religious orders do not take in just any one. Only a select few get in. Perfect health is one of the criteria. People who are ill often have to live lonely lives- religious orders do not let them in and few choose to marry them due to obvious reasons.

No I just meant that it could be one of the many things in considering the religious life. Actually I have met many priests and religious who would have made great parents. They work with children all the time and generally always at a certain stage of their life, perhaps a kindergarten teacher, where the children usually have the same issues.

There are probably many issues to consider when choosing religious life. I just mentioned that this could be one.

 

[thomasf]

From a catholic point of view I understand what the Pope is saying. However, when he says stuff like this, he offends people. Saying it is ‘selfish’ can be misunderstood and misconstrued by people who don’t understand the catholic view point. I have a non catholic friend who raised her husbands two sons and doesn’t have any children of her own with her husband. Raising those two kids were very hard on her and she married at an age where it would have been difficult to have children of her own. She is very hurt by this and frankly I can’t really defend what he said. I don’t think she’s selfish at all, she gave up a lot to raise children that weren’t her own.

I never had children of my own with my wife either. I raised her two daughters. That was extremely difficult. My wife is older than me and we couldn’t have children together. That wasn’t selfish. Me sacrificing for her children was the opposite of selfish.

Stuff like this is what drives the wedge between non catholics and the church deeper.

 

[Corki]

From a catholic point of view I understand what the Pope is saying. However, when he says stuff like this, he offends people. Saying it is ‘selfish’ can be misunderstood and misconstrued by people who don’t understand the catholic view point. I have a non catholic friend who raised her husbands two sons and doesn’t have any children of her own with her husband. Raising those two kids were very hard on her and she married at an age where it would have been difficult to have children of her own. She is very hurt by this and frankly I can’t really defend what he said. I don’t think she’s selfish at all, she gave up a lot to raise children that weren’t her own.

I never had children of my own with my wife either. I raised her two daughters. That was extremely difficult. My wife is older than me and we couldn’t have children together. That wasn’t selfish. Me sacrificing for her children was the opposite of selfish.

Stuff like this is what drives the wedge between non catholics and the church deeper.

I am sorry but does your friend really think her situation is AT ALL what the Pope was referring to? She didn’t make a decision to exclude children from her family. Nor does this, by any stretch of the imagination, apply to couples who can’t have children.

 

[Darryl1958]

In fact, the friend of thomasf opted to have children, as did thomasf.

 

[FollowChrist34]

From a catholic point of view I understand what the Pope is saying. However, when he says stuff like this, he offends people. Saying it is ‘selfish’ can be misunderstood and misconstrued by people who don’t understand the catholic view point. I have a non catholic friend who raised her husbands two sons and doesn’t have any children of her own with her husband. Raising those two kids were very hard on her and she married at an age where it would have been difficult to have children of her own. She is very hurt by this and frankly I can’t really defend what he said. I don’t think she’s selfish at all, she gave up a lot to raise children that weren’t her own.

I never had children of my own with my wife either. I raised her two daughters. That was extremely difficult. My wife is older than me and we couldn’t have children together. That wasn’t selfish. Me sacrificing for her children was the opposite of selfish.

Stuff like this is what drives the wedge between non catholics and the church deeper.

Tell her to let it roll off her back. The Pope speaks spontaneously; he makes his points a little sharp sometimes, I agree, coupled with the fact that the media tend to emphasize (or enhance - even manufacture) juicy, controversial tidbits, often out of context. Remember the rabbits comment; the Pope I believe was sincerely dismayed at the fact that large families took offense. We 've gone through this it seems like a hundred times. (At least he is equal opportunity; I think by now pretty much everyone has received a dig, intended or not.)

He is speaking about people who use marriage for selfish reasons and deny the fundamental procreative aspect of it. I don’t see this as aimed at people who for reasons or circumstances not of their making don’t end up in this situation, i.e. married, healthy, at the age of procreation, etc.etc. Slightly different spin. And it is true - he has a point - many opt to either live together or not marry and postpone/not have children. Even I am surprised at how many do that these days.

 

[oldcelt]

I think we must be careful with this business of worrying about people being “sentenced to a life of (whatever).” It can so easily become an argument for entitlement to never have to sacrifice or persevere. It gets used to justify so many things: fornication, remarriage without an annulment, contraception, abortion, gay unions . . . and not just sexual or marriage issues either. It’s just one manifestation of the general human desire to seek pleasure and avoid pain and responsibility. It’s a trap of false compassion people who mean well fall into. Even the parent of a child who worries that not buying the candy bar or designer sneakers Junior pleads for is falling into this trap.

I do not subscribe to the idea of redemptive suffering. However, I do agree that choices must be made for personal and societal good.

 

[AnneElizabeth]

Maybe some people recognize that they would not make good parents. Not everyone is fit for whatever reason to be a parent and there are lots of people who probably should not have had kids and their kids have suffered because of it.

Who’s to judge though?

And people sometimes can’t even judge for themselves until they get right into it and find out they are handling it very well! Others think they don’t want to be parents and find out they love it.

 

[Corki]

So…for those using NFP…it’s okay to be “open” to children some of the time, but not all of the time?

Exactly how much and for how long and when is one allowed to be* less* open to having children when they use NFP?

.

Confusion of terminology.

Each sexual marital act must be ordered to procreation. The concept of “open to life” is misapplied when used to describe the sexual act.

A couple must be open to life throughout their marriage.

A couple may also use natural means to responsibly space children. NFP is one of those means. NFP does not make the couple unopen to life or less open to life- even temporarily.

 

[Lapey]

Confusion of terminology.

Each sexual marital act must be ordered to procreation. The concept of “open to life” is misapplied when used to describe the sexual act.

A couple must be open to life throughout their marriage.

A couple may also use natural means to responsibly space children. NFP is one of those means. NFP does not make the couple unopen to life or less open to life- even temporarily.

Well done Corki!!!

 

[Darryl1958]

But you are not answering my question, and what you are saying is all semantics.

If a couple wants to “responsibly” space children…how do you define that?
One year…two years…three years? More?

 

[Lapey]

But you are not answering my question, and what you are saying is all semantics.

If a couple wants to “responsibly” space children…how do you define that?
One year…two years…three years? More?
How far of a space is considered “responsible” and what does that depend on (money, number of children, health of parents, jobs, home, emotional situation in the family, etc, etc) and at what point does it cross the line to being “irresponsible” or “selfish”?

If a couple practices NFP for, say, five years…you would say they are still “open to life” as much as couple who does not practice it at all?
If a couple practices NFP for seven years, are they then “selfish”, as the pope says?

The motive in using NFP and is to continue having the “unitive” and physical part of sex, but trying not to pregnant–which is, of course, the same motive of using ABC.

When a couple uses NFP, they are basically saying they are trying not to get pregnant at that time.

How is that not “less open” to having a baby?

.

If you equate ABC with NFP, you have absolutely no idea what NFP is. Thats almost as ludicrous a statement as abortion is equal to a miscarriage.

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

It’s unfortunate the pope worded it this way…

Pope Francis has a style that is much different than his recent papal predecessors. It seems to me that his way of phrasing things can be unsettling to many.

Not sure I consider that a limitation of his or not. For me, I’m okay with being undecided regarding his approach to reaching the flock.

 

[Darryl1958]

In the end, people are responsible for the own choices. Catholics need to examine their own souls, and see if the words of Pope Francis are applicable to the reasons that they themselves have for not having children.

In a world where the Catholic populations of Europe have entered into a death spiral, and where abortion rates among Catholics mirror those of society at large, it is a relevant statement for the pope to be making.