What if a couple disagrees on more kids?

[EasterJoy]

Just quoting myself, if anyone would be interested in reading the above.

She may not deceive her husband. That is off the table. She may object openly that he’s asking her to refuse him when she does not want to refuse him, for reasons she does not believe are serious enough to warrant avoiding pregnancy. She does not have to act as if she is OK with avoiding when she is not OK with it, nor does she have to act as if there is no moral problem when she believes that there is. Still, she would be very unwise to think that endangering her marriage is going to help her children, whether the ones she has or the ones she wants. Of course she can lobby for more children or at least to avoid sex much less, but it is not realistic to believe she might not do more harm than good to their sex life by trying to force the issue. She has to be sensitive to the unwanted side effects that might come from trying to do what she believes to be the right thing.

 

[EasterJoy]

If priests had wives then you could approach them, but they don’t so I see the point here…What about going to another priest? Could God in His mercy send someone to intervene on the wife’s behalf? I know that if there is physical abuse that a wife can go to the police…at least that is true in America. I still think that one solution is for husbands and priests to become more like Jesus. I think men not being like Jesus is a big problem that the Church needs to address and men, with God’s help, need to stop giving women reasons not to trust them.

I don’t think her issue is that the pastor is male, because a female such as the wife’s mother or grandmother or the deacon’s wife or a woman religious could also give mistaken advice. I think she means that the wife doesn’t need to find someone “official” who might or might not be correct when they advise her. The wife can follow what the Church teaches without looking for an authority figure, if she does not need the help of an authority figure to help her talk to her husband about this issue. That is not beyond her office within her own marriage.

 

[mommamaree]

Just quoting myself, if anyone would be interested in reading the above.

I did read it and I felt very sorry for the questioner and thought that the response was unnecessarily harsh. It may be a theologically correct answer but pastorally it left a lot to be desired.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

Now that you quoted yourself, I read it. I suspect the theologian/author’s response may have been different if the woman hadn’t spoken of deceiving her husband about her fertility. The deception part is highly troublesome. If she wants to “cut corners” on how tightly she reads and follows NFP, then her husband should be made aware of it. Also, beyond the issue of more kids, there were clearly other problems in that marriage. The suggestion offered to work on one issue at a time seemed good. I don’t think everything the author wrote to that particular woman with her circumstance should be applied to every couple that cannot agree on children. So, I generally agree with his suggestions to her.

BUT, I don’t agree with some of his interpretations and ideas.

He took some leaps in logic that I think took him off course, saying that Vatican II “implied” something that it did not explicitly say, while ignoring what it actually did say. He wrote, “Second, as Vatican II teaches, only the couple may decide about regulating births. This implies that the decision should be by the agreement of both spouses (see GS 50; LCL, 681–84). Their consensus is necessary because the new person emerges from his or her parents insofar as they are one, so that the child’s procreation presupposes the parents’ unity.” He jumped from “the couple should be on consensus in regulating births*” to “You, lady, should stop asking your husband for another baby and go volunteer at a daycare or something.” (I paraphrased and shared how it sounded to me.)

Many of us grew up in an era of error when Catholic teachers and theologians frequently said Vatican II implied things that it didn’t actually, so I have become leery of it. And I know personally know some Catholic theologians who aren’t orthodox, so…I read through the Vatican II document he sighted, Gaudium et Spes section 50. I did not see it anywhere saying or even coming close to implying what he said it implies. Moreover, in the next section (51), the document seemed to forecast some of the very types of intimacy problems this woman mentions. I don’t know what document he meant by LCL so I couldn’t check that original source.

Anyway, I spent way too much time and energy looking at that article and the original sources. I agree with his recommendations that she work on the matter of having her husband help with NFP and work on intimacy and address these issues slowly and over time. And like the author, I am troubled by the idea of a woman deceiving her spouse on such a matter as this. But unlike the author, I think that woman was being terribly wronged by her husband —and I especially didn’t like the patronizing attitude that a woman who wants another child when her husband doesn’t should basically drop the matter and go volunteer.

I didn’t read it that way. He does suggest for the wife to discuss her feelings with the husband, first in requesting more frequent marital relations and then for another baby.

He suggests counseling with a Catholic counselor who accepts Humane Vitae

He also qualified at the end, if the husband does not change his mind *and *she decides not to pursue having another child, that she could volunteer caring for infants and fostering babies

My fourth suggestion is that, if Greg remains unwilling to have another baby and you give up that idea, you should consider other ways of employing your maternal gifts for the benefit of one or more babies who need care. He might be agreeable to providing a temporary home for a series of babies who need foster parenting for brief periods. Or, perhaps, once all your children are in school, you could volunteer to help out in a nonprofit day care center, or even organize one, if your neighborhood has none. In any case, if you discern that the needs of some babies match up well with your gifts, you can assume that God is calling you to serve them, and that he will bless you for loving them tenderly even though you cannot cherish them as your own.

See, he doesn’t say, “If Greg remains unwilling to have another baby ***then ***you (should) give up that idea.” It doesn’t seem to me that he instructs her to just give up her desire and then volunteer.

Finally, the theologian, Germain Grisez is a very well respected theologian. He is the last surviving theologian involved with the preparation of Humane Vitae. Everything I have read about him indicates that he is orthodox.

He worked closely with another theologian, John C. Ford, SJ. I had one of his out of print books that unfortunately became destroyed.

In searching for a replacement I came across the Grisez website. I’m slowly trying to read his writings. I posted the link because the scenario was of one that had to do with the OP “What if a couple disagrees on more kids”. I wouldn’t post anything heterodox, I try to make sure anything I link to, to the best of my knowledge, is orthodox.

 

[EasterJoy]

I did read it and I felt very sorry for the questioner and thought that the response was unnecessarily harsh. It may be a theologically correct answer but pastorally it left a lot to be desired.

It is a very sad situation, and it doesn’t have an easy solution.