Should a Catholic couple postpone marriage until they are ready to have children?

  • Thread starter Thread starter hamburglar
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

hamburglar

Guest
Should a Catholic couple get married, use NFP, and then have children when they are financially able to support the children, or should they postpone marriage until they can afford a house and a family, get married and have children right away?
 
Realistically, when a couple gets married they should be able to support a pregnancy immediately. That is just common sense–especially because it’s not always easy for newlyweds to use the strictest rules for avoiding pregnancy from the get-go. (I speak from personal experience here!)

This means different things depending on whom you ask.

To me, it doesn’t mean that you need to own a house, but that you should have a roof over your heads. It means that you need to have some sort of health care coverage so that mom can get prenatal care and can deliver however is best for her and the baby (in the hospital, a birthing center, or at home). These are the bare necessities.

How this plays out in a married couple’s life is different from person to person, and what one couple discerns to be acceptable circumstances for having a baby is probably different from what another might discern–even if objectively their situations look exactly the same.

A husband and wife (or, in this case, an engaged couple) must openly and prayerfully discern God’s will for their marriage. That’s really the only criteria the Church puts forth.
 
My husband and I chose the first option. We got married and we do know when we are going to start having children…but it isn’t right now.

While “no sex” can be a cause of frustration for some couples leading them to get married sooner than later, DH and I were blessed (or cursed depending on how you see it) with low sexual desire. So much so that we’d often say to each other jokingly “I can’t wait until the day I can sleep with you…literally”. Keeping the pants on just came naturally to us. It still does to some extent…though not as much as it used to.

This actually gave us a new batch of issues anyway. DH and I are…geeks. We like to attend…these conventions. But for the longest time we could only attend a con if his family was going as well (My family? Heck no. Only weirdos and geeks go to cons). So it was a cause of major frustration for us. We knew that we could could on a long weekend away together and even be in the same room and not have anything funny go on. But such a thing would cause scandal. My husband was of the “who cares what other people think? They’re making assumptions!” To be honest, I was frustrated as well. God knew what we were doing even if they had no clue. BUT it is still an understandable assumption. Especially in today’s society.

That’s a very specific example. Of course we didn’t marry so we could attend geeky conventions together. But in general, we did struggle with “avoiding scandal” far more than we EVER did with sex. Waiting until you can support a baby to have sex does make some sense and it is a responsible way to do things. But how long do you need to wait before you can *literally *sleep together?
 
Should a Catholic couple get married, use NFP, and then have children when they are financially able to support the children, or should they postpone marriage until they can afford a house and a family, get married and have children right away?
I think this is a situation that calls for some good old fashioned common sense.

It’s one thing if having a child would be inconvenient but the couple is is willing to take on the responsibilities of parenthood if necessary. But if couple is looking at life on the streets and be hard pressed to feed themselves (and I’m hard pressed to imagine such a situation but it is possible) then it would probably be better for the couple to wait to marry until circumstances are better.

And even if a couple is in a position where they start out the marriage with a house and money in the bank I think they are still justified in delaying childbearing for a brief length of time while they settle into married life.
 
I think they should just be aware that when they get married, they need to be open to children. Whether of not this happens right away is up to the couple and God.
 
I know I’ll draw a lot of flak for this, but I honestly think NFP wasn’t intended to let us get married when we want to, just so we can get all the “perks,” and do the baby-making stuff later. Having babies is part and parcel of what being married is about … so if you’re starting from the outset saying you’re going to wait years, you’re not doing all of your vocation as a married person.

This is my opinion, as a pregnant newlywed (conceived a month after the wedding), and I know not everyone will agree with me.

But on the practical side, I have known tons of people who got married with the plan of using NFP for a year or two because they couldn’t afford a baby, and next thing you knew they were pregnant! Most newlyweds do find NFP difficult, either because of their desires or because a woman’s body acts a little different when she’s married and she misses the signs. And there’s always that 1% failure rate … so unless you have the basic capacity to pay for the possible “mistake,” you shouldn’t get married.
 
I know I’ll draw a lot of flak for this, but I honestly think NFP wasn’t intended to let us get married when we want to, just so we can get all the “perks,” and do the baby-making stuff later. Having babies is part and parcel of what being married is about … so if you’re starting from the outset saying you’re going to wait years, you’re not doing all of your vocation as a married person.

This is my opinion, as a pregnant newlywed (conceived a month after the wedding), and I know not everyone will agree with me.

But on the practical side, I have known tons of people who got married with the plan of using NFP for a year or two because they couldn’t afford a baby, and next thing you knew they were pregnant! Most newlyweds do find NFP difficult, either because of their desires or because a woman’s body acts a little different when she’s married and she misses the signs. And there’s always that 1% failure rate … so unless you have the basic capacity to pay for the possible “mistake,” you shouldn’t get married.
There are people who, although fertile, for legitimate reasons can never have children. Does it mean they must never get married?

The Church teaches that people must be open to life via using NFP instead of birth control, not that they must have children.
 
There are people who, although fertile, for legitimate reasons can never have children. Does it mean they must never get married?

The Church teaches that people must be open to life via using NFP instead of birth control, not that they must have children.
I really don’t think that this was the point of the poster you quoted. I think she was cautioning about getting into a contraceptive mindset with the use of NFP.

That’s how I read it anyways.
 
I really don’t think that this was the point of the poster you quoted. I think she was cautioning about getting into a contraceptive mindset with the use of NFP.

That’s how I read it anyways.
Well, the case where someone can never have children (say because of a heart condition that would make pregnancy life threatening) is just a more extreme version of a young couple who is getting settled in life.

I gave that example because it illustrates the fact that the Church does not teach that all married couples must have children, there are in fact cases when it’s never appropriate to have children, and cases where it’s appropriate to wait to have children. This doesn’t mean that people shouldn’t get married until they can have children, as that would mean some people would never be able to get married.

As for whether a given couple should have a child at any one time (whether at the beginning of their marriage, or when they already have children) is up to them to prayerfully decide.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top