The Duggars

[FatherOfTwelve]

It’s different when you can send them home, it’s also different becuase she wasn’t responsible for the mental, physical or spiritual devolopement for the children. They were there for care. I’m not saying your mother didn’t add to their education but she was not there to be their parent.

There is a difference between 6 and 12 and 18. That’s six more people each with their own needs added. It was also different “back then” becuase there were the extra familial support systems that don’t exist anymore.

We get along fine…Don’t know what you mean by " It was also different “back then” becuase there were the extra familial support systems that don’t exist anymore."

Today is just as good for large families as back then, it’s all in how you go about life.

 

[MrsFlapjack]

Ok, so I just did a little reading about this family, and apparently they’re the types to teach that the world is only 6000 years old. I think that children are entitled to a quality education, and not indoctrination disguised as education. The more I learn about this family, the more it seems like a cult. They’re not Catholic–keep that in mind. I think Catholicism would have some real issues with how these kids are being raised, particularly the girls.

This link provides some alternate views on the Duggar lifestyle:
patheos.com/blogs/lovejoyfeminism/2012/02/carefully-scripted-lives-my-concerns-about-the-duggars.html

It’s not all rainbows and sunshine.

I just wanted to say that just about every Evangelical private school teaches the Earth is only 6000 years old. I was raised by strict Evangelicals and attended a Baptist private school, and yep, I was taught the Earth was only 6000 years old. The Beka Book company ,which is a extremely popular curriculum choice for private schools, teaches this. I’m just saying that hundred of thousands of kids are being taught that every day, not just the Duggar kids.

One of my best friends from high school is from a large family. She was the youngest of 12 kids. She loved it, and wanted a large family of her own. She had to stop at 6 kids though, because of health concerns and it really broke her heart. I have learned from communications with her, that there is one nice advantage of being from a large family. Loads of relatives to help out if needed. Need a babysitter? She has about 50 people she can call. Need help moving? She has brothers and nephews all over the place who have trucks and would love to help. I envy her sometimes.

 

[Veronica97]

But at the end of the day I think ANY reason is good reason to not pressure someone into doing something they don’t want to do.

Note that I said “without good reason”! In my opinion a good reason could also be that you are feeling upset or depressed or simply tired. It would be perfectly acceptable to say, "Honey, I’m just feeling so upset right now. Let’s talk about it later (or tomorrow or this weekend). If the spouse is agreeable (and should be if he/she is putting the other person’s needs about his/her own), then everything is fine. Likewise, the car can be uncomfortable and thus the spouse could say, “I’d feel more comfortable if we waited until we got home tonight.” The mortal sin part comes into play if the spouse is denied without good reason or denied over and over again because it could lead someone into an occasion of sin. St. Paul himself says not to deny one another except for a short time that has been agreed upon for fasting and prayer. Fasting and prayer could include discernment about whether or not it is a good time to add another child to the household. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES would it be right to “demand” relations from your spouse without regard to their feelings!!!

 

[In_Training]

The mortal sin part comes into play if the spouse is denied without good reason or denied over and over again because it could lead someone into an occasion of sin. St. Paul himself says not to deny one another except for a short time that has been agreed upon for fasting and prayer. Fasting and prayer could include discernment about whether or not it is a good time to add another child to the household. UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES would it be right to “demand” relations from your spouse without regard to their feelings!!!

I think we agree for the most part. But I think a lot of it is enabling. When a kid is born we don’t cut off his hands because he might use them to punch someone one day. We don’t take away a person’s stove because they might cook something unhealthy one day. How do you know what particular event will definitely lead to sin and what particular event will not? You don’t. Why would we say that a couple that’s not having sex all the time makes it more likely for them to be lead to sin, just because they’re abstaining for some reason, any reason?

Under no circumstances did I ever say I’m a model Catholic or that I’m right about everything. But if I get married, I’m gonna let my brain decide if and when and how many kids we would or wouldn’t have. I’m not gonna leave that up to prayer or other religious rituals. Sometimes I think as a Catholic I’m being told that it’s wrong to think for myself. I know I’m supposed to leave it up to God, but maybe God is telling me to use my brain and act a certain way to produce certain results. A childless couple is just as strong and important as a couple with many children. I won’t be told that the number of times my wife and I have sex or don’t have sex is a mortal sin. I’m not advocating for sexless marriages, but I believe each couple has the right to decide for themselves without it being a mortal sin. I was raised to believe that no means no and there doesn’t have to be a reason. You are arguing that yes, there has to be a reason, and it has to be good enough for me to accept or I’m gonna have sex with you anyway.

Sorry I’m picking on you today.

 

[Veronica97]

Nah, you’re not picking on me. All I know is that I have seen “refusing spouse their marital right” listed as mortal sin on some examinations of conscience. I think the whole idea is for spouses to TALK and to try to reach an agreement. BOTH of them should be putting the others’ needs above their own (in all areas–not just this one) provided the needs are both reasonable and moral. Someone who is insisting on their marital right on a daily basis from an exhausted wife, is not putting her needs above his own and may have an addiction that needs to be addressed. On the other hand, a wife who wants to exercise her right once every couple of months and the husband does not agree, is setting herself up for marital problems and MAY lead him into sin. The sin would still be HIS sin but she would be an accomplice of sorts. (This is of course provided she is not ill, mentally or physically). As for prayer and discernment about children, well that’s a whole other ball of wax! I will just say as someone who had one child, I WISH I had at least been open to seeking God’s Will in the matter. Perhaps He would have still given me just one child; perhaps He would have given me the graces to accept more. I will never know because I decided MY will be done instead of HIS will. If we have GOOD reason not to have more children (health, can’t pay bills, emotionally overwhelmed), then it’s using common sense to use NFP to temporarily or permanently avoid more children. What we can’t do is enter into marriage saying we are closed to the idea of having children. That is against the definition of a Catholic marriage. If God chooses for us not to have children due to infertility that is another matter entirely–in that case we may still marry.

 

[In_Training]

All I know is that I have seen “refusing spouse their marital right” listed as mortal sin on some examinations of conscience.

That could have so many meanings! “Marital right” refers to sex but to so many other things as well, as in a right to a healthy marriage in general, and if one spouse takes away that right to a healthy marriage, and transforms it into an unhealthy marriage while making no effort to improve, then maybe** that **is the mortal sin. But I don’t think it’s a mortal sin for a spouse to simply not get his/her way every time.

On the other hand, a wife who wants to exercise her right once every couple of months and the husband does not agree, is setting herself up for marital problems and MAY lead him into sin. The sin would still be HIS sin but she would be an accomplice of sorts.

Right, he MAY sin and he MAY not. You’re also right when you say it would be HIS sin, HIS choice. What I disagree with is your opinion that she is an accomplice. I don’t believe anyone is an “accomplice” to sin - I think we all have the responsibility to make our own choices, and that we have to, in turn,** take **responsibility for our own choices. My parents won’t buy me a new car, so I’m not gonna be like, ‘well I wouldn’t have stolen that car if you would have just bought one for me!’ You can’t assume that just because someone is not getting something they want, that they will sin to get it anyway and that that is partly the fault of the person who did not give it to begin with. I don’t ask anyone to be partly responsible for my mistakes, and in turn I also don’t accept responsibility for anyone else’s mistakes. I don’t lead anybody to sin, and anyone who accuses me of such is probably just wanting an excuse to pass their sin off onto someone else.

For example, if a husband (yes, I’m switching gender roles, so roll with it here) seems like he’s hardly ever in the mood for sex anymore, and the wife gets frustrated and cheats on him, that’s not the husband’s fault, at all, not even partially. What the wife should have done was talk to her husband, express her concerns, and perhaps seek help to change some things in the relationship. The solution to any problem is never to sin, and I wouldn’t expect anyone to think they can or should because “so-and-so made me do it.” There are always other options and other ways to solve marital problems… I don’t take the role of “leading” anyone to sin and I don’t look at anyone else as someone who would “lead” me to sin. They don’t have that power over me - if I made a bad choice, that’s my fault. There is no accomplice.

What we can’t do is enter into marriage saying we are closed to the idea of having children. That is against the definition of a Catholic marriage.

I’m not closed to the idea of having kids, but I would not want my marriage defined by the number of children I do or don’t have. If I ever have kids I hope God knows what He’s doing.

 

[Veronica97]

I don’t ask anyone to be partly responsible for my mistakes, and in turn I also don’t accept responsibility for anyone else’s mistakes. I don’t lead anybody to sin, and anyone who accuses me of such is probably just wanting an excuse to pass their sin off onto someone else.

It is true that we are all responsible for our OWN sin! No doubt about it. However, let’s go back to the Garden of Eden and see that while Adam and Eve are BOTH responsible for sin, Eve TEMPTED Adam to sin. She didn’t CAUSE him to sin, but by her prodding, she increased the chances that he would sin. It IS a serious sin in and of itself to “willfully lead another into serious sin.” If someone is considering suicide, and I say, “Well, I think you should go ahead–God will understand.” I AM sinning by leading the person that much closer to committing suicide. Or I can take the opposite approach and try to talk the person out of it, thus decreasing the chances. If I say/do nothing, then I am guilty of the sin of omission. I think we may have hijacked this thread about the Duggars! The original question was whether or not Jim Bob and Michelle would be justified in using birth control, and I say “no” but do say they are VERY justified to use NFP considering her health and age and the number of children they already have. Since I have heard Jim Bob say that he would stop having children if Michelle wanted to stop (she doesn’t) and seeing how in love they appear to be, it doesn’t seem to me that either one of them would want to deny the other OR force the other to do something against his/her will. It’s just a tv show, and we don’t really know them, but that is my impression. God judges the heart and I think their hearts are in the right place even if I wouldn’t make the same choices.

 

[In_Training]

I don’t ask anyone to be partly responsible for my mistakes, and in turn I also don’t accept responsibility for anyone else’s mistakes. I don’t lead anybody to sin, and anyone who accuses me of such is probably just wanting an excuse to pass their sin off onto someone else.

It is true that we are all responsible for our OWN sin! No doubt about it. However, let’s go back to the Garden of Eden and see that while Adam and Eve are BOTH responsible for sin, Eve TEMPTED Adam to sin. She didn’t CAUSE him to sin, but by her prodding, she increased the chances that he would sin. It IS a serious sin in and of itself to “willfully lead another into serious sin.” If someone is considering suicide, and I say, “Well, I think you should go ahead–God will understand.” I AM sinning by leading the person that much closer to committing suicide. Or I can take the opposite approach and try to talk the person out of it, thus decreasing the chances. If I say/do nothing, then I am guilty of the sin of omission. I think we may have hijacked this thread about the Duggars! The original question was whether or not Jim Bob and Michelle would be justified in using birth control, and I say “no” but do say they are VERY justified to use NFP considering her health and age and the number of children they already have. Since I have heard Jim Bob say that he would stop having children if Michelle wanted to stop (she doesn’t) and seeing how in love they appear to be, it doesn’t seem to me that either one of them would want to deny the other OR force the other to do something against his/her will. It’s just a tv show, and we don’t really know them, but that is my impression. God judges the heart and I think their hearts are in the right place even if I wouldn’t make the same choices.

If I recall correctly, when God asked Adam why he took the apple, he didn’t say “I knew it was wrong but did it anyway, I apologize for my indiscretion” … instead, what he said was, “Well, the woman told me I could…” AGH, what a sell-out!! At least admit you screwed up, don’t try to blame it on peer pressure. I still believe that there is no accomplice, but we’ll probably never agree on that.

A few months ago my mom told me she was gonna sell me to the Duggars to get me to stop cursing. Just the threat of that seemed to work. I don’t know if that’s a compliment or an insult to the Duggars. That Jessa one is kinda hot.

 

[fpt]

The conjugal fideism, the conjugal puritanism, the conjugal neo-puritanism, the conjugal victorianism, the conjugal neo-victorianism, the conjugal jansenism, the conjugal theoretical providentialism, the conjugal clanism, the conjugal sectarianism, the conjugal patriarchalism… seem to be very existing in this family.

 

[TheRealJuliane]

The conjugal fideism, the conjugal puritanism, the conjugal neo-puritanism, the conjugal victorianism, the conjugal neo-victorianism, the conjugal jansenism, the conjugal theoretical providentialism, the conjugal clanism, the conjugal sectarianism, the conjugal patriarchalism… seem to be very existing in this family.

Do you get that show over in France?

 

[fuzzypjs]

From what she has said she has no idea when she’s fertile. They don’t know when to abstain but if they did I don’t think they’d abstain or use NFP the way most Catholic do. I teach NFP and tell my clients that they’re either to use NFP or nothing. The Duggars use nothing and I think that’s great!