Theoretical providentialism and quiverfull movement? Catholic or not catholic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter fpt
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

fpt

Guest
I would like to get some information on:
  1. The theoretical providentialism. What is it exactly? Do you know if it is a doctrine (a teaching, a doxa) or a practice (a behaviour, a praxis) or both of them?
  2. The quiverfull movement. What is it exactly? Do you know if it is a doctrine (a teaching, a doxa) or a practice (a behaviour, a praxis) or both of them?
What are the compatibilities with catholic teaching on Natural Family Planning or responsible procreation? These approaches are they Catholic? Could I have any titles of books on these two topics?

By advance thank you,

In Domino,

fpt
 
I don’t know a great deal about these, but I do know some.

Both are practices, personal choices, of couples. They are based on a “I’ll let God decide” mentality, and couple who practices these generally have discerned that they can handle however many children God will send them without them having a need for any family planning, per se.

NFP is more where a couple discerns that they are ready for a baby and want to improve the chances of getting pregnant, or they can’t responsibly have a(nother) child right now and need to avoid conception for a time.

Both are compatible with Catholic Teaching because both involve discernment of the couple and do not employ the use of contraceptives.
 
I just looked more at the meaning of the quiverful movement:

This is the protestant version of providentialism and seems to be more rigid. For here, any family planning is seen as sinful, whether to postpone pregnancy or to even increase chances by taking fertility hormones. So, this would not fit into the Catholic teaching of responsible parenthood, per se.

Oh, and you asked for book titles: “Sex Au Naturel” by Patrick Coffin is a great one and is a fast read.
 
fpt said:
I would like to get some information on:
  1. The theoretical providentialism. What is it exactly? Do you know if it is a doctrine (a teaching, a doxa) or a practice (a behaviour, a praxis) or both of them?
  2. The quiverfull movement. What is it exactly? Do you know if it is a doctrine (a teaching, a doxa) or a practice (a behaviour, a praxis) or both of them?
What are the compatibilities with catholic teaching on Natural Family Planning or responsible procreation? These approaches are they Catholic? Could I have any titles of books on these two topics?

By advance thank you,

In Domino,

fpt
Click to expand...
The Church often teaches us the same way I taught my children to drive: don’t go too close towards the middle of the road… oops, don’t go too close to the edge of the road. IOW, the vices related to virtues are of *two *kinds: a deficiency, such as cowardice being a deficiency or lack or courage; and an excess, such as foolhardiness being an excess of courage (foolhardiness being when kids jump off a roof for no good reason.)

So I group these two movements in with those who claim that married couples should keep their charts (and even start before marriage) throughout their married and fertile lives so they can make a prayerful decision every month. To me, all these people are intruding into the lives of other families. The reason we don’t live in collectives is that the Church has taught us what we need to know and provides us with resources to discern whether or not to use NFP. Why would these groups, presumably of lay Catholics in the first case and of Protestants in the second, *presume *to intrude into the family matters of other families? The whole point of a family’s having a head is that families are autonomous (winthin the boundaries of moral behavior. These groups are all going further than what the Church teaches and presuming in making judgements which the Church Herself refrains from.

So I would (and do) disregard all these people. It is between the family and God.
 
ahs said:
I just looked more at the meaning of the quiverful movement:

This is the protestant version of providentialism and seems to be more rigid. For here, any family planning is seen as sinful, whether to postpone pregnancy or to even increase chances by taking fertility hormones. So, this would not fit into the Catholic teaching of responsible parenthood, per se.

Oh, and you asked for book titles: “Sex Au Naturel” by Patrick Coffin is a great one and is a fast read.
Click to expand...
If my understanding of your point of view is good, theoretical providentialism is probably catholic per se, but quiverfull movement is coming from evangelical protestant thinking, in consequence less catholic or so far away from catholic approach concerning responsible procreation. These are the great differences between them.

Thank you for the start of information
 
St_Francis said:
The Church often teaches us the same way I taught my children to drive: don’t go too close towards the middle of the road… oops, don’t go too close to the edge of the road. IOW, the vices related to virtues are of *two *kinds: a deficiency, such as cowardice being a deficiency or lack or courage; and an excess, such as foolhardiness being an excess of courage (foolhardiness being when kids jump off a roof for no good reason.)

So I group these two movements in with those who claim that married couples should keep their charts (and even start before marriage) throughout their married and fertile lives so they can make a prayerful decision every month. To me, all these people are intruding into the lives of other families. The reason we don’t live in collectives is that the Church has taught us what we need to know and provides us with resources to discern whether or not to use NFP. Why would these groups, presumably of lay Catholics in the first case and of Protestants in the second, *presume *to intrude into the family matters of other families? The whole point of a family’s having a head is that families are autonomous (winthin the boundaries of moral behavior. These groups are all going further than what the Church teaches and presuming in making judgements which the Church Herself refrains from.

So I would (and do) disregard all these people. It is between the family and God.
Click to expand...
If I understand, theoretical providentialism is coming from catholic lay persons but there is a big pressure from clan (clanism of parishioners, group is more important than the family, there would be “spying” in mentality). Family without a great numbers of children would be de facto considered as wrong or not very in harmony with the God plan.

And about quiverfull movement (protestant life style and evangelical thought on procreation) is the same but stricter, more rigid…). The issues are on: 1. the primauty of communauty and the activisism with pressure on the couple. 2. The mentality that would be quite close of pharisianism.
 
fpt said:
If I understand, theoretical providentialism is coming from catholic lay persons but there is a big pressure from clan (clanism of parishioners, group is more important than the family, there would be “spying” in mentality). Family without a great numbers of children would be de facto considered as wrong or not very in harmony with the God plan.

And about quiverfull movement (protestant life style and evangelical thought on procreation) is the same but stricter, more rigid…). The issues are on: 1. the primauty of communauty and the activisism with pressure on the couple. 2. The mentality that would be quite close of pharisianism.
Click to expand...
That’s kinda how I see it, and I think you understood my thoughts on it very well. One thing to keep in mind is that not all “providentialists” will be in that “clan” mentality or “spying in” mentality. I have a brother who is “providentialist” in that he and his wife are very much hands-off in regard to family planning and will just take whatever God sends them without any effort one way or the other on their part. Yet, they don’t compare themselves to anyone else…like my wife an I who practice NFP, and don’t look down on us for planning our family by what we feel is responsible parenthood.

On the other hand, I someone else who is “providentialist” but tends to exemplify the “quiverful” mindset where he has said that NFP is wrong and his wife has commented to mine something to the effect that we don’t trust God enough because we practice NFP. So, their mentality tends towards believing that any planning is sinful…sort of…as though “providentialism” is a blond trusting while “quiverful movement” is a frame of mind that stems from the former and verges on getting in to other people’s business…so to speak.

At least that’s how I am understanding these right now.
 
Thank for your responses. About quiverfull movement that is coming from evangetical protestant communauty, what is the approach concerning conjugal sexual ethic:

1.Role of sexual pleasure (wife orgasm, husband climax, conjugal orgasm)
2.Sexual practice (non sexual foreplay, sexual foreplay, sexual afterplay, non sexual afterplay…etc, sexual positions).
3.Place of conjugal making love.
4. Time of conjugal act (conjugal sex during female periods, pregnancy, breastfeeding, after birth, after menopause, holy days, hours, during night, in the morning, in the afternoon, the evening…etc). see the ancient testament .
5. The initiation of sexual intercourses (from man or from woman or both of them), during this sexual intimacy, could the wife be active, must she be passive etc.

I would like to know more because from France this movement and approach is far away and may be I can have false ideas and prejudices.

What is quiverfull sexual ethic on these differents topics? What is the true teaching of this movement that from Europe can seem be quite strange, wierd and strict?
 
From what I’ve read the Quiverful Movement is simply against the use of any form of birth control / family planning - natural or artificial - leaving it to God. But as the adherents are for the most part conservative Christians they would probably share most of the broader moral beliefs of the Catholic Church (like regarding pre-marrital sex as sinful) although I’ve no idea how they stand on, for example IVF or chastity in marriage.

I think because they gererally are very conservative their belief on the role of women, modesty etc are often perceived as somewhat ‘extreme’ even by quite devout Catholic (especially feminist inclined women).
 
Do you know the links between quiverfull movement and the catholics in the USA? What are the doctrinal debates about natural issues of law ? What are the agreements and the disagreements on couple’s issues, family’ issues (the natural education — take care or education by who and how and what for—, role of wife, NFP, marital health, sexual health in the couple, job and family life…etc)
 
fpt said:
Do you know the links between quiverfull movement and the catholics in the USA? What are the doctrinal debates about natural issues of law ? What are the agreements and the disagreements on couple’s issues, family’ issues (the natural education — take care or education by who and how and what for—, role of wife, NFP, marital health, sexual health in the couple, job and family life…etc)
Click to expand...
Just a guess, but if you want to understand the quiverfull movement I suggest you read “The Bible and Birth Control” by Provan. Its based completely in scripture which should not be surprising considering its a Protestant movement. It has nothing to do with natural law.
 
Hi, I can answer many of your questions…seeing that we are both providentialism and quiverfull. We have 5 children, our oldest is 6 our youngest is 4 1/2 months. I can’t speak for all quiverful / providentialsm families, just our selves and what we have found with like minded friends and family 🙂
  1. Sexual intimacy is to be between husband and wife, so yes, premarital sex is NOT ALLOWED
  2. In regaurds to how when if to all the sex questions, the idea to keep in mind is that being QF simply means u and ur hubby have prayed and decided that Gos has put on your heart that He wishes you to except as many children as He will bless you with and all things that go with it (provide for your family ). I dont believe everyone is called to this, I believe some people are, and this should be thoughtfully prayed over and discerend.
  3. Leaving your family suize up to God means a) no birth control–this includes NFP
    b) no artificial means to conceieve…IVF included. You can however take medicine to helop sustain a preganncy…example…progesterone. If a woman had a hormonal imbalance and was conceiving but miscarrying d/t hormone imbalance of progesteroe, then she could take the hormoneto help susatin the preganancy, because the hoirmone its self is not causing a conception and acting as ‘God’ like IVF etc.
  4. we homeschool. (or at least all the ones I know) this comes from the idea that we are responsible for our precious babies little minds–their beliefs, values, morals, faith etc. My husband and I have chosen to homeschool ours ( our goal) is until the 7th or 8th grade, they will go to a private christian/catholic school for highschool.
  5. we are conservative by nature. In our home we have one small radio that only plays some country music that is appropriate. classical music and christian music. We have one TV without cable that is used for educational purposes during homeschool. I wear long dress as does all my baby girls, ( below the knee ) and tghey will for as long as they live under our roof. Our sons wear shorts below the knee and button/collard shirts. Boys have short hair ( a high n tight as known in militray) and girls wear hair long past shoulders. These all come from a bibical stand point. Make up is also worn fairly conservatively etc.
  6. daddy is the head of this house hold. He is the final say so in the gfoings on in where we live, how moneyis spent, etc. Mommy runs the day to day goings on of the inside of the house ( cleaning, cooking, child rearing, schooling etc) Daddy takes what I say into consideration always before making a decidion abiout somehting, but in the end what he says goes. and im OK with that, he is a Godly man who loves his family, and has served us well thus far. for more info look up patriarch house hold…however, I would disagree with much of the negative things said about this approach, then again my husdband is not a controlling abusive husband. he is gentle and kind and never takes advantage of my submissevness.
  7. this does not mean daddy doesnt halp with the house and children. On the contrary, he is the most hands on father i have ever seen or known. He helps with homeschjool, and cooking as well as cleaning. 👍
  8. most woman choose NOT to work outside the home–I do. I am a nurse and work 3 12 hour days fri-sun and spend the week home w the kids to teach them. hubby is self employed.which most QF husbands are.
In re: to all the sexual qs. Many QF adhere to OT teachings. We do not entirely. I was rasied by a very strict pre vatican 2 family , he was rasied by luke warm catholics. We have pretty much combined alot of catholic doctrine with protestant doctrine. For instance, we believe in saints, we pray the rosary and other prayers aside from just the Our Father. we go to Adoration, but do not go to Catholic Mass ( personal reasons i shall not get into) we read and study the bible ALOT. and we follow more NT VS OT. technically speaking conservative QF who folow OT would adhere to the doctrine to not have sex during a womans monthly cycle, and for 4 days after ( this is in OT) but NT doesnt speak of this. We choose to have sexual relations without regaurd to what time of month it is. They would also adhere to abstaining for a specific amount of days after the birth of a girl VS boy. we disreguard this as well…well not disrequard entriely…we r have tried to adhere to this, sometimes we do OK, other times we stumble…:o Sex should end with a man climaxing during the marital embrace…so fore play would be OK as long as it ended inside the wife…same belief as NFP. there is no rule/law re: submitting to husband, allowing whatever, or wife being able or not being able to enjoy sex etc. all the rules that apply to NFP are the same, except that we dont NFP. lol HTH! 👍
 
AngelEyes4Jesus said:
Hi, I can answer many of your questions…seeing that we are both providentialism and quiverfull. We have 5 children, our oldest is 6 our youngest is 4 1/2 months. I can’t speak for all quiverful / providentialsm families, just our selves and what we have found with like minded friends and family 🙂
  1. Sexual intimacy is to be between husband and wife, so yes, premarital sex is NOT ALLOWED
  2. In regaurds to how when if to all the sex questions, the idea to keep in mind is that being QF simply means u and ur hubby have prayed and decided that Gos has put on your heart that He wishes you to except as many children as He will bless you with and all things that go with it (provide for your family ). I dont believe everyone is called to this, I believe some people are, and this should be thoughtfully prayed over and discerend.
  3. Leaving your family suize up to God means a) no birth control–this includes NFP
    b) no artificial means to conceieve…IVF included. You can however take medicine to helop sustain a preganncy…example…progesterone. If a woman had a hormonal imbalance and was conceiving but miscarrying d/t hormone imbalance of progesteroe, then she could take the hormoneto help susatin the preganancy, because the hoirmone its self is not causing a conception and acting as ‘God’ like IVF etc.
  4. we homeschool. (or at least all the ones I know) this comes from the idea that we are responsible for our precious babies little minds–their beliefs, values, morals, faith etc. My husband and I have chosen to homeschool ours ( our goal) is until the 7th or 8th grade, they will go to a private christian/catholic school for highschool.
  5. we are conservative by nature. In our home we have one small radio that only plays some country music that is appropriate. classical music and christian music. We have one TV without cable that is used for educational purposes during homeschool. I wear long dress as does all my baby girls, ( below the knee ) and tghey will for as long as they live under our roof. Our sons wear shorts below the knee and button/collard shirts. Boys have short hair ( a high n tight as known in militray) and girls wear hair long past shoulders. These all come from a bibical stand point. Make up is also worn fairly conservatively etc.
  6. daddy is the head of this house hold. He is the final say so in the gfoings on in where we live, how moneyis spent, etc. Mommy runs the day to day goings on of the inside of the house ( cleaning, cooking, child rearing, schooling etc) Daddy takes what I say into consideration always before making a decidion abiout somehting, but in the end what he says goes. and im OK with that, he is a Godly man who loves his family, and has served us well thus far. for more info look up patriarch house hold…however, I would disagree with much of the negative things said about this approach, then again my husdband is not a controlling abusive husband. he is gentle and kind and never takes advantage of my submissevness.
  7. this does not mean daddy doesnt halp with the house and children. On the contrary, he is the most hands on father i have ever seen or known. He helps with homeschjool, and cooking as well as cleaning. 👍
  8. most woman choose NOT to work outside the home–I do. I am a nurse and work 3 12 hour days fri-sun and spend the week home w the kids to teach them. hubby is self employed.which most QF husbands are.
In re: to all the sexual qs. Many QF adhere to OT teachings. We do not entirely. I was rasied by a very strict pre vatican 2 family , he was rasied by luke warm catholics. We have pretty much combined alot of catholic doctrine with protestant doctrine. For instance, we believe in saints, we pray the rosary and other prayers aside from just the Our Father. we go to Adoration, but do not go to Catholic Mass ( personal reasons i shall not get into) we read and study the bible ALOT. and we follow more NT VS OT. technically speaking conservative QF who folow OT would adhere to the doctrine to not have sex during a womans monthly cycle, and for 4 days after ( this is in OT) but NT doesnt speak of this. We choose to have sexual relations without regaurd to what time of month it is. They would also adhere to abstaining for a specific amount of days after the birth of a girl VS boy. we disreguard this as well…well not disrequard entriely…we r have tried to adhere to this, sometimes we do OK, other times we stumble…:o Sex should end with a man climaxing during the marital embrace…so fore play would be OK as long as it ended inside the wife…same belief as NFP. there is no rule/law re: submitting to husband, allowing whatever, or wife being able or not being able to enjoy sex etc. all the rules that apply to NFP are the same, except that we dont NFP. lol HTH! 👍
Click to expand...
I would like to be sure that:

QF means Quiverfull;
OT means The Old Testament or The Old Covenant;
NT means The New Testament or The New Covenant;
VS means what, may be Versus???;
 
Yes, you are correct in your assumptions. QF means quiverfull. NT is new testament, OT old testament, VS is versus 👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top