Spouses obligation to having more children

[Doc_Keele]

Now you are backing off your ridicule? It is what we have been saying from the start. It would seem your statement in post 54 where you admitted to not knowing the church’s teaching was correct afterall, later denial notwithstanding.

And of course, you sudden inspiration should be obvious to most, if it is not done for selfish reasons, it stands to reason that for most people, there is some “serious reason” behind it. But that would require thought on your part, and you don’t seem to interested in that (since I have tried to point that post out to you 2 or 3 times before and you wouldn’t even go back and read).

Which “we” is this? Listen if you want me to go back into ridiculing mode I will happily do so - I suggesting winding your neck in a little

Your dichotomy between selfishness and seriousness is not logical. It doesn’t “stand to reason” at all, and most reasons for not having more children could be shown to be selfish if you thought about it (if you’re interested in that).

There is a clear difference between not knowing and not understanding BTW.

Don’t start flaming me tafan. You really wouldn’t want a flame war:thumbsup:

 

[Doc_Keele]

I must correct part of that last post - it’s not that the dichotomy isn’t “logical”, but it’s certainy problematic.

If the problem has to be genuinely serious, then the threshold would be high enough that most women would be forced to be baby factories. If the threshold is low, then I would question that the reason is “serious”. I know people have offered “interesting” re-definitions of what serious means, but it smacks of linguistic gymnastics. Most reasons for not having children could be postulated to be down to selfishness, big families were commonplace before the advent of contraception when people were less materially wealthy and most families coped.

 

[Seatuck]

Married love is a reflection of the love within the Trinity which is generative. That is why all acts of married love must be open to life. Along with the unitive end the natural end of married love is to create a child. Married couples are expected to be generous and selfless -that’s the one of the virtues of being married.That is how the sacrament of matrimony transforms us and gets us to heaven.

The church does not give a list of reasons, resources or income. The couple is expected to use the gifts of the holy spirit given to them at Confirmation and so forth to determine God’s will in their life. It’s an ongoing conversation that exists throughout all the years of a marriage. It is by analysis ,discussion and prayer that they decide if now is a good time to cooperate with God and create a child to welcome into their home.

vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html

 

[Bookcat]

That’s what I thought, but it seems there’s always someone who will argue that a couple’s judgement is made without a “serious” enough reason Thanks for reinforcing what I thought. I guess for every one person empathetic to another’s hardships, there will always be another someone who will be uncharitable to throw confusion in the mix.

they may be …lets say well meaning.

There are times of course where it may come up or something in conversation…and one can help another form their conscience etc…

but we should not go around trying to figure out if such and such couple have serious reasons! Besides there is also the problem of infertility out there!

We need to always give the benefit of the doubt…

From the Catechism:

477 Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury.277 He becomes guilty:

• of rash judgment who, even tacitly, assumes as true, without sufficient foundation, the moral fault of a neighbor;
• of detraction who, without objectively valid reason, discloses another’s faults and failings to persons who did not know them;278
• of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them.

2478 To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor’s thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way:
Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another's statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it. And if the latter understands it badly, let the former correct him with love. If that does not suffice, let the Christian try all suitable ways to bring the other to a correct interpretation so that he may be saved.279

 

[Doc_Keele]

Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another’s statement than to condemn it

Amen to that! Well said Bookcat

 

[tafan]

There is a clear difference between not knowing and not understanding BTW.

:

I suppose so. I can see how not understanding does not imply not knowing. I cannot see how not knowing does not necessarily imply not understanding. So when you said you did not know what the church positions was, it is safe to say you did not understand., You sir, are the one doing verbal gymnastics.

Give me an example of something that is not serious and not selfish with respect to not having kids.

 

[Doc_Keele]

Tafan, you’re in antler rattling mode.
If you or anyone else would offer a definition of what “serious reasons” is, that would be a start - after all it’s you that subscribes to the position?

 

[BLeev]

Tafan, you’re in antler rattling mode.
If you or anyone else would offer a definition of what “serious reasons” is, that would be a start - after all it’s you that subscribes to the position?

I suppose I’ll be the anybody else. This is a lengthy thread - anyways - I always direct people to the reasons given by Pope Paul VI in Humanae Vitae.

Humanae Vitae #16 If therefore there are well-grounded reasons for spacing births, arising from the physical or psychological condition of husband or wife, or from external circumstances, the Church teaches that married people may then take advantage of the natural cycles immanent in the reproductive system and engage in marital intercourse only during those times that are infertile, thus controlling birth in a way which does not in the least offend the moral principles which We have just explained. (20)

Neither the Church nor her doctrine is inconsistent when she considers it lawful for married people to take advantage of the infertile period but condemns as always unlawful the use of means which directly prevent conception, even when the reasons given for the later practice may appear to be upright and serious. In reality, these two cases are completely different. In the former the married couple rightly use a faculty provided them by nature. In the later they obstruct the natural development of the generative process. It cannot be denied that in each case the married couple, for acceptable reasons, are both perfectly clear in their intention to avoid children and wish to make sure that none will result. But it is equally true that it is exclusively in the former case that husband and wife are ready to abstain from intercourse during the fertile period as often as for reasonable motives the birth of another child is not desirable. And when the infertile period recurs, they use their married intimacy to express their mutual love and safeguard their fidelity toward one another. In doing this they certainly give proof of a true and authentic love.

Physical reasons: Are they healthy enough to have another child?
Psychological reasons: Are both spouses healthy enough mentally to bring another child into the world and to raise it?
External reasons (Economical or Social): Does the couple have the financial means to afford bringing another child into the world and enough money to raise it? Does the couple live in a place where births are being monitored and some being destroyed because of gender preferences (China)?

In addition to those, if I’m right, the spouse is to give the other the right to have children. It is a part of their vocation to each other. So the decision definitely rests on the couple once they have established that they do not fit into any of the physical, psychological, economical or social reasons, and that it comes down to the other spouses feeling about having another child. After all, NFP is also there so that the couple communicates to one another more openly about that area of their vocation, not the other way around.

Hope that helps

 

[Rence]

they may be …lets say well meaning.

There are times of course where it may come up or something in conversation…and one can help another form their conscience etc…

but we should not go around trying to figure out if such and such couple have serious reasons! Besides there is also the problem of infertility out there!

We need to always give the benefit of the doubt…

From the Catechism:

477 Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury.277 He becomes guilty:

• of rash judgment who, even tacitly, assumes as true, without sufficient foundation, the moral fault of a neighbor;
• of detraction who, without objectively valid reason, discloses another’s faults and failings to persons who did not know them;278
• of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them.

2478 To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor’s thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way:

Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another's statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it. And if the latter understands it badly, let the former correct him with love. If that does not suffice, let the Christian try all suitable ways to bring the other to a correct interpretation so that he may be saved.279

I wish more were like you Bookcat

 

[tafan]

Tafan, you’re in antler rattling mode.
If you or anyone else would offer a definition of what “serious reasons” is, that would be a start - after all it’s you that subscribes to the position?

There have been lots of examples given of possible serious reasons on this thread. I gave a couple of examples in post #56 addressed directly to you. I could find several others on this thread. You do not seem to care for logic and reasoned argument. You simply don’t know what the church’s position is and then choose to ridicule it. You do not seem interested in honestly exploring what that position is. Antler rattling mode? I don’t know about that, but it seems to be a common occurance among those who disent from church teaching that they really don’t want to understand what that teaching is. You have been a poster-child for that approach. I am simply trying to highlight it.

 

[Doc_Keele]

I suppose I’ll be the anybody else. This is a lengthy thread - anyways - I always direct people to the reasons given by Pope Paul VI in Humanae Vitae.

Physical reasons: Are they healthy enough to have another child?
Psychological reasons: Are both spouses healthy enough mentally to bring another child into the world and to raise it?
External reasons (Economical or Social): Does the couple have the financial means to afford bringing another child into the world and enough money to raise it? Does the couple live in a place where births are being monitored and some being destroyed because of gender preferences (China)?

In addition to those, if I’m right, the spouse is to give the other the right to have children. It is a part of their vocation to each other. So the decision definitely rests on the couple once they have established that they do not fit into any of the physical, psychological, economical or social reasons, and that it comes down to the other spouses feeling about having another child. After all, NFP is also there so that the couple communicates to one another more openly about that area of their vocation, not the other way around.

Hope that helps

Yes, thank you - the Church usually doesn’t leave these issues “hanging in the air” and this list is very helpful.

 

[Doc_Keele]

Tafan - blah blah
You’re not even making sense anymore, so I’ll leave you to think about the contradictions in your last post

 

[choose_to_love]

Doc: punting - - sorry, American football term. I meant that you were choosing not to elaborate as to what criteria you would suggest should be considered by a couple in determining whether to have a(nother) child.