| Author | |
Angie Mc
Board Moderator
Joined: Jan 31 2005
Location: Arizona
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 11400
|
| Posted: June 11 2008 at 12:47pm | IP Logged
|
 |
|
Celeste, you are so kind and charitable. I'll be praying for you as you deal with sensitive family terrain. I, too, am very sensitive to the heartbreak of infertility. Please know that! I'm going to add this to the discussion...shouldn't we expect those who are defending IVF to be sensitive to our feelings, too? And if we are going to be truly charitable, shouldn't we be able to defend what we believe is right without being labled insensitive?
DominaCaeli wrote:
"Would it be better if Nicholas weren't here?" It just seems like such an honest and natural question, but I wouldn't quite know what to say. I mourn for them in the pain their infertility must cause them, and I feel like they deserve a fair answer, but I don't know what that answer is.
|
|
|
I don't think that this is an honest or natural question. I think it is an unfair and leading question, but I'm not accusing anyone of being deliberately unfair and leading, just confused. I would hope to answer something like this (if charity and circumstances called me to utter anything,) "This question isn't fair. Nicholas *is* here, he is a child of God, and I love him completely as is shown by my relationship with him. My love for him does not change the fact that IVF is wrong. Any act that goes against God's beautiful design for the marital embrace to be both unitive and procreative is wrong. IVF acts outside of the unitive embrace. The Catholic Church has many documents that do this difficult and sensitive subject much better justice than I can. I'll be happy to share them with you if you ask. Please don't put me in a position that questions my love for Nicholas or his value, that breaks my heart. I do love you all so much and want what is best for you. I hope you know that."
Love,
__________________
Angie Mc
Maimeo to Henry! Dave's wife, mom to Mrs. Devin+Michael Pope, Aiden 20,Ian 17,John Paul 11,Catherine (heaven 6/07)
About Me
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
DominaCaeli
Forum All-Star
Joined: April 24 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3711
|
| Posted: June 11 2008 at 3:45pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
After a couple of very busy days here, I'm finally getting back to this topic, which has been very much on my mind.
Angie Mc wrote:
I'm going to add this to the discussion...shouldn't we expect those who are defending IVF to be sensitive to our feelings, too? And if we are going to be truly charitable, shouldn't we be able to defend what we believe is right without being labled insensitive?
DominaCaeli wrote:
"Would it be better if Nicholas weren't here?" It just seems like such an honest and natural question, but I wouldn't quite know what to say. I mourn for them in the pain their infertility must cause them, and I feel like they deserve a fair answer, but I don't know what that answer is.
|
|
|
I don't think that this is an honest or natural question. I think it is an unfair and leading question, but I'm not accusing anyone of being deliberately unfair and leading, just confused. I would hope to answer something like this (if charity and circumstances called me to utter anything,) "This question isn't fair. Nicholas *is* here, he is a child of God, and I love him completely as is shown by my relationship with him. My love for him does not change the fact that IVF is wrong. Any act that goes against God's beautiful design for the marital embrace to be both unitive and procreative is wrong. IVF acts outside of the unitive embrace. The Catholic Church has many documents that do this difficult and sensitive subject much better justice than I can. I'll be happy to share them with you if you ask. Please don't put me in a position that questions my love for Nicholas or his value, that breaks my heart. I do love you all so much and want what is best for you. I hope you know that." |
|
|
Angie, I still feel that the hypothetical question is an honest and natural one--by that I mean that it naturally follows that Nicholas would not be here but for IVF. Particularly from the mind of the non-religious person, to question the method is to question the result; I think that is logical and to be expected. It is definitely unfair in some ways, but I have to admit its reasonableness from my aunt and uncle's perspective.
That said, I really do like your answer, and I think it would work well in an uncomfortable, awkward kind of family situation. It is a loving but honest response. If the opportunity arises for me to have an honest conversation with them about IVF(not just a debate), I will have to weigh whether it would be better for me to refer them to Church documents or to try and talk with them myself. Certainly, I don't think it's possible to explain to them the connection between God's will and ours in a way that will make this whole problem easier to understand--especially since I, obviously, don't even fully understand it myself! I think you're also right that we can expect a level of charity on "this side of the fence" as well.
cactusmouse wrote:
| But - your post, your question - Exactly!!! This is exactly what I was trying to say in the other thread - the exact point I was trying to wrestle with and work through. |
|
|
Laura, it was your line of questioning in that other post that really brought this whole situation to mind. I think you're right that there is no "real" answer. This is something that I personally am willing to accept as a Mystery...but I don't expect my aunt and uncle to be able to do that, which is why I'm trying to think it through without relying on Faith. I'm thinking more and more that that is impossible!
Like Helen mentioned earlier, I have always found that in the case of abortion, there is a logical way you can argue against it that doesn't require your listener to be religious. IVF seems so much more tricky. Since it is a sin against natural law, it isn't supposed to require a Catholic view to understand that it is wrong--that's why I was hoping that someone would supply the simple answer that I have been missing all these years. 
onemoretracy wrote:
Perhaps, the confusing aspect of trying to understand God willing a child in the midst of a sin (r*ape, IVF etc.) is that as humans we view and experience time as a line and of course God is not confined by time and space as we are. We can only look back and see how every choice and decision affected our present. God can actually 'see' forward though.
We can look to our past and think "If I had not done X, Y and Z I would not be in this situation" However, God knows and knew we would be here in this exact circumstance always and exercised His will according to His divine plan even in the midst of our free will. |
|
|
Tracy, I really appreciate your thoughts here--I think that God's being outside of time is really key to understanding all this. You've explained this really well, and I'm going to think on it more.
Oh, and just to put everyone at ease, I'm not planning on confronting them or anything like that. But I do like to be prepared. 
__________________
Blessings,
Celeste
Joyous Lessons
Mommy to six: three boys (8, 4, newborn) and four girls (7, 5, 2, and 1)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Helen
Forum All-Star
Joined: Dec 03 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2826
|
| Posted: June 11 2008 at 4:11pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
DominaCaeli wrote:
| Like Helen mentioned earlier, I have always found that in the case of abortion, there is a logical way you can argue against it that doesn't require your listener to be religious. IVF seems so much more tricky. |
|
|
Celeste, I'm glad to know that you undersood what i was trying to communicate!
__________________
Ave Maria!
Mom to 5 girls and 3 boys
Mary Vitamin & Castle of the Immaculate
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Angie Mc
Board Moderator
Joined: Jan 31 2005
Location: Arizona
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 11400
|
| Posted: June 12 2008 at 12:07am | IP Logged
|
|
|
I'm with you, Celeste. I wouldn't confront and I like to be prepared  . And please excuse me if I'm projecting my own encounters on your situation. You know your aunt and uncle best and I surely trust your judgement.
DominaCaeli wrote:
Angie, I still feel that the hypothetical question is an honest and natural one--by that I mean that it naturally follows that Nicholas would not be here but for IVF. Particularly from the mind of the non-religious person, to question the method is to question the result; I think that is logical and to be expected. It is definitely unfair in some ways, but I have to admit its reasonableness from my aunt and uncle's perspective.
... I think you're right that there is no "real" answer. This is something that I personally am willing to accept as a Mystery...but I don't expect my aunt and uncle to be able to do that, which is why I'm trying to think it through without relying on Faith. I'm thinking more and more that that is impossible!
|
|
|
I really do understand the question and where it comes from. I can see asking it, but perhaps I think it is unfair in the context of a particular relationship. For example, if it is known that I'm a Catholic, practice my faith, and share that IVF is wrong, then asking me this question just seems more than "gathering information." It seems to be leading me into a, "Yes, I'm happy Nicholas is here" which leads to "See, IVF is OK."
Another angle that I end up tying into these difficult and sensitive topics is, "Does the Church have the authority to pronounce that (fill in the blank, IVF, divorce, abortion, contraception, etc.) is wrong?" Not an easy topic to tackle, but when I get pushed into "leave religion out of this", I feel compelled to explain why the Church has authority and our best interests at heart.
Love,
__________________
Angie Mc
Maimeo to Henry! Dave's wife, mom to Mrs. Devin+Michael Pope, Aiden 20,Ian 17,John Paul 11,Catherine (heaven 6/07)
About Me
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Stephanie_Q
Forum Pro
Joined: Aug 25 2007
Location: Nebraska
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 479
|
| Posted: June 12 2008 at 7:59am | IP Logged
|
|
|
As I was cleaning out my inbox, this article from Vatican Information Service News caught my eye. I thought I'd add it to this discussion as food for thought:
TECHNOLOGY CANNOT SUBSTITUTE THE ACT OF MARITAL LOVE
VATICAN CITY, 10 MAY 2008 (VIS) - At midday today, Benedict XVI received participants in an international congress being promoted by the Pontifical Lateran University in Rome to mark the 40th anniversary of the promulgation of the Encyclical "Humanae vitae".
Recalling that the Encyclical was published by Pope Paul VI on 25 July 1968, the Pope highlighted how "the document soon became a sign of contradiction", and pointed out that "it constitutes a significant show of courage in reiterating the continuity of the Church's doctrine and tradition".
"The truth expressed in 'Humanae vitae 'does not change", he said, "quite the contrary, in the light of new scientific discoveries its teaching becomes more relevant and stimulates reflection on the intrinsic values it possesses".
The Holy Father affirmed that "in a culture suffering from the prevalence of having over being, human life risks losing its value. If the practice of s*xuality becomes a drug that seeks to enslave the partner to one's own desires and interests without respecting the times of the beloved, then what must be defended is no longer just the concept of love but, primarily, the dignity of the person. As believers we could never allow the power of technology to invalidate the quality of love and the sacredness of life".
Natural law, he said, "deserves to be recognised as the source inspiring the relationship between a married couple in their responsibility to generate children. The transmission of life is inscribed in nature and its laws stand as an unwritten norm to which everyone must refer".
Nascent life, said the Pope, "is the fruit of a love capable of thinking and choosing in complete freedom, without allowing itself to be overly conditioned by the sacrifice this may require. From here emerges the miracle of life which parents experience in themselves as they sense the extraordinary nature of what is achieved in them and through them. No mechanical technique can substitute the act of love that husband and wife exchange as a sign of the greater mystery, in which they are protagonists and co-participants of creation".
After recalling the sad episodes that sometimes involve adolescents "whose reactions display their incorrect appreciation of the mystery of life and of the dangerous implications of their actions", the Holy Father expressed the hope that young people "may learn the true meaning of love and prepare for it with appropriate sexual education, not allowing themselves to be distracted by superficial messages that prevent them appreciating the essence of the truth at stake".
"Freedom must join with truth, and responsibility with strength of dedication to others, also through sacrifice. Without these principles the community of man does not develop and there is a risk of being trapped in oppressive selfishness".
__________________
Stephanie dh 6.01
dd 6.02, dd 8.03, ds 3.05, ds 12.06 at Catholic school.
dd 12.09 at home.
Baby boy due 10.13
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
DominaCaeli
Forum All-Star
Joined: April 24 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3711
|
| Posted: June 12 2008 at 9:51am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Angie Mc wrote:
| I really do understand the question and where it comes from. I can see asking it, but perhaps I think it is unfair in the context of a particular relationship. For example, if it is known that I'm a Catholic, practice my faith, and share that IVF is wrong, then asking me this question just seems more than "gathering information." It seems to be leading me into a, "Yes, I'm happy Nicholas is here" which leads to "See, IVF is OK." |
|
|
I understand what you are saying, Angie--you are right. I mostly envision having this discussion with my aunt (she is the in-law, but she is also the most inquisitive), and when I think of this question coming from her, I see it asked with a genuine feeling of confusion and lack of understanding about the Church. She is not hostile to religion; she is just totally uneducated on its teachings and doesn't see the importance of it at all. I'm sure there would be some hurt underlying this question too, but I don't think she would be purposely trying to manipulate me by asking it. She is more the kind of person that Sally described earlier--someone who perhaps vaguely knows that the Church considers IVF wrong but has no clue why that would be and doubts that anyone else does either. Anyway, I'm talking about all of this in the context of my own family, though, so it may not be relevant here.
Angie Mc wrote:
| Another angle that I end up tying into these difficult and sensitive topics is, "Does the Church have the authority to pronounce that (fill in the blank, IVF, divorce, abortion, contraception, etc.) is wrong?" Not an easy topic to tackle, but when I get pushed into "leave religion out of this", I feel compelled to explain why the Church has authority and our best interests at heart. |
|
|
I think this is a great way to steer this kind of discussion--it always comes down to the authority of the Church, doesn't it?
And thank you too, Stephanie, for the article!
__________________
Blessings,
Celeste
Joyous Lessons
Mommy to six: three boys (8, 4, newborn) and four girls (7, 5, 2, and 1)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Angie Mc
Board Moderator
Joined: Jan 31 2005
Location: Arizona
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 11400
|
| Posted: June 12 2008 at 4:01pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I woke up to this article at the Catholic Exchange called, Trying to Fly with One Wing Part 20: Question Begging and Leading Questions . It fits with what I posted yesterday...but the author is way smarter .
Love,
__________________
Angie Mc
Maimeo to Henry! Dave's wife, mom to Mrs. Devin+Michael Pope, Aiden 20,Ian 17,John Paul 11,Catherine (heaven 6/07)
About Me
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
|
|
4Real Forums : Mothering and Family Life
Topic: How to talk to family about IVF?
