| Author | |
MicheleQ
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 23 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2193
|
| Posted: March 16 2006 at 7:58am | IP Logged
|
 |
|
Since the other threads were getting quite long I thought I should start a new topic with this lengthy excerpt from Msgr. Burke's book. Sorry it took me 2 days to get it posted. 
FAMILY PLANNING AND RELIGIOUS VOCATIONS
The decline in vocations to the priesthood and religious life has become one of the most critical problems facing the Church. The number of workers - in a vastly expanded harvest - has drastically shrunk, at least in developed countries, in many of which the number of yearly ordinations is one tenth or less of what it was a generation or two ago.
A variety of factors is advanced in explanation of the problem. Some refer to the "identity crisis" among priests and religious. A generation ago, this argument goes, vocations could almost always be traced back to a strong teenage admiration for some priest or nun whose dedicated life was obviously happy and purposeful. Insofar as a number of priests and religious today fail to reflect a comparable sense of purpose or happiness, it is natural that fewer young people should feel attracted to dedicate their own lives. Others point to the growth of materialism and the consumer mentality, or to the general decline of piety among the faithful. Whatever the truth in all of this, I think the root explanation is related to the family background, from which vocations tend to come.
It is above all from their parents and from the family atmosphere created by them that young persons acquire their deeper values. It is in the family that the basic dispositions making for a vocation are developed: faith, personal piety, trust in God, concern for others, loyalty, generosity, a readiness for sacrifice. Vatican II insists: "Inspired by the example and family prayer of their parents, children will more easily set out upon the path of a truly human training, of salvation, and of holiness" (Gaudium et spes, no. 48).
It is obvious that there have been many changes in home life over the past forty to fifty years. A major one is the decline in family unity; such unity is normally a first requisite for the emergence of a vocation. Homes broken through divorce and annulment have enormously increased in this period, and a vocation from a broken home is always an exception. Bishops and Superiors are slow to accept candidates from such a background because experience has taught that perseverance becomes particularly difficult in their cases.
The decline in the number of united homes, however, does not sufficiently explain the vocations crisis. After all, even if one reduces the number of relatively stable families to a half or a third of what it was a generation ago, this is still a sizeable number. How is it we are not getting that portion of vocations?
What is it that has changed within these stable families? Partly, I think, a decline in the spirit of other-centered sacrifice, but mainly the lessening of trust in God, which tends to result from family planning practiced without serious reasons. It is the place given to God in family outlook and affairs that has most changed.
Parents today work as hard as parents did some fifty years ago, some even harder. Yet their children often get little impression of generosity and concern for others in all that effort and sacrifice; it is too self-motivated. A spirit of sacrifice that is not truly centered on others is not likely to inspire generous attitudes. Self-forgetfulness in the service of something more important than self-"losing" one's life for the sake of the gospel-is a necessary disposition if a religious vocation is to be followed and is to flourish. The boy or girl who does not learn generosity at home is not likely to learn it effectively elsewhere. The setting for acquiring Christian values is created only when children sense that they are more important in their parents' eyes than income, relaxation, social life, career, or promotion.
What I would particularly like to put forward for your consideration is the possible connection between the vocations crisis and the virtual disappearance in our countries of the large family.
One hopes we have gotten over the rather thoughtless attitude of dismissing large families as "biological accidents." A generation ago, the parents of such families well understood the different forms of contraceptive methods available at the time, and also the existence of what was then commonly referred to as the rhythm method. If they did not have recourse to either, this represented no biological accident but rather the conscious choice to have a larger family: the choice that Paul VI, in Humanae vitae, was to name first among the ways of living responsible parenthood (no. 10).
I think it is accurate to say that, up to the 1960s, this represented a typically Catholic approach to marriage. Moreover, as just about every parish priest knew, this approach was being lived quite naturally by many couples who had basically placed the planning of their marriage in God's hands. Use of the rhythm method was considered an exceptional recourse, which, in accordance with Church teaching, was justified only if it corresponded to grave reasons, normally of a medical or financial nature.
It was no accident that many vocations to the priesthood and religious life came from large families, which were real schools of generosity. The give-and-take that necessarily characterizes family life among a sizable number of brothers and sisters teaches generosity and a concern for others in ways that remain unknown to the only child or to the boy or girl with only one brother or sister.
As teenagers of a generation ago matured in such a family, they gradually took account of the sacrifices their parents had gone through in order to bring the family up. Often too, they could draw a contrast between their family situation and other, smaller families around them, and understand that if their own family had fewer of the luxuries that other families could afford, it was because their parents had deliberately chosen to have children rather than comfort.
In such families, too, parents were less likely to object, on grounds of family "economy," to one of their children "sacrificing" his or her life to God. If the parents had other aspirations for their children, there were always several others who could fulfill them. But of course the matter went deeper than that. Usually the parents of the type of family in question reacted very positively to the possible vocation of a son or daughter and were in fact often the first to encourage it. They were well disposed to the idea of giving one's life to God, because their own lives were already firmly placed in God's hands.
Today, large families are a rarity, while natural family planning has been spread far and wide among practicing Catholic couples. he there any grounds for establishing a relationship between family limitation and the decline in religious vocations? If there are, it seems important to take a close look at them.
Obviously, family planning in itself leads to smaller families and thus acts as a factor restricting the number of religious vocations. That, however, is a surface consideration. The heart of the matter is that natural family planning-when there are no serious reasons for it-works powerfully in the direction of the two factors we mentioned earlier. On the one hand, it is frequently the result of a lack of readiness for sacrifice, or of the channeling of sacrifice in the direction of personal self-affirmation or material comfort. On the other hand, and what is more important, it involves a basic attitude of reserve with regard to God's providence.
Children and the standard of life
Since about 1960, the choice of many couples to limit their family to two or three children has corresponded less and less to any exceptional difficulty offered by the prospect of a large family, and more and more to the simple desire to avoid the normal difficulties that such a family involves. All of this has tended to bring about a radical change in the way that marriage and the family are understood. Values have become less human and more materialistic.
People sacrifice themselves for the things they think worthwhile. The point is that fewer and fewer couples seem to feel that children-beyond one or two at the most-are worthwhile. Motor cars, country cottages, overseas holidays-these are all now part of one's standard of life and considered worth working for. The more one can have of these, the better off one is. Children are not part of one's standard of life: a family is not "better off" if it has more children. The materialistic, nonChristian standard operating here should be evident.
Until a generation ago, most Catholics would have had little difficulty in grasping the deep human truth behind the words that Pope John Paul II addressed to parents in Washington, D.C., in October 1979: "It is certainly less serious to deny their children certain comforts or material advantages than to deprive them of the presence of brothers and sisters, who could help them to grow in humanity and to realize the beauty of life at all its ages and in all its variety."4 Married couples today seem to find it harder to recognize that children are values of a totally unique order, that to deprive their present children, or themselves, of further members within the family marks a serious limitation or reduction in one's standard of living, and that one only devalues human effort and sacrifice if one works for comfort, prestige, or possessions rather than for one's children.
A family over-geared to material comfort is certainly not the best seedbed for a religious vocation. Youth always retains a natural idealism; but a soft atmosphere in the upbringing of children does not favor the serious flowering of ideals. It is almost impossible for a teenager to acquire a spirit of sacrifice unless he or she comes from a family where it has been present. And it will not be present in a family unless it has been lived first by the parents, who then inculcate it in their children. .
The consumer mentality, with its emphasis on possessions and money and calculation, does not favor vocations to religious life. Where the blessing of poverty of spirit is less present, people's hearts are less drawn to the service of the Kingdom of God.
Trusting God
"Three to get married" was an apt description of the approach of a large number of practicing Catholics of a generation ago, for whom marriage was an adventure whose eventual horizons were determined by God. Married happiness and God's will were inseparably connected. God's will overshadowed everything, and not least of all the family size.
The idea of being cooperators or "helpers of God" (I Cor. 3: 9) is what gives the Christian the sense of the fundemental meaning and dignity of existence. When imbued by this spirit, married people know that they too are "stewards of the mysteries of God" (I Cor 4: I), and that this implies not on responsibility but also a privilege. They are cooperating in a design that transcends all human measurements and reference points. When this spirit is present in their parents, children learn it almost without notice. When it is absent, their c lives are not likely to be stirred at the idea of embarking on an adventure of faith and generosity.
While other factors have certainly contributed to the lessening of the supernatural sense of life, family planning can do so, in a particular way. With the family-planning approach, divine plan of marriage is no longer unconditionally accepted. God, and God's will, are kept at a certain distance. The "three to be married" idea is no longer taken seriously. Christian marriage, like secular marriage all around, is reduced to a tandem affair: "just we two." God is no longer welcomed, from the outset, as the senior and more experienced part Couples still hope to be blessed with happiness in marriage but they no longer seem sure about who is going to do blessing or how it is to come about. Insofar as they hope or pray for God to do it, they are very reserved as regards extent to which he may wish to bless them with children. It is they, not God, who will decide how far children are to be considered a blessing.
A different sort of Christian family atmosphere is bound to result from this approach, which ultimately involves a radical skepticism about the idea that one's life is better off if left God's hands. This idea no longer seems prevalent among married couples. One plans one's marriage as one plans one's vacation.
Which parents, after all, most encourage their children put their trust in God? Those who practice family planning for trivial or self-centered motives, or those who welcome the children God sends them? What a deep Christian and human truth is expressed in those words of the Catechism, where, under the heading of "The gift of a child," it says: "Sacred Scripture and the Church's traditional practice see in large families a sign of God's blessing and the parents' generosity" (no. 2373, emphasis in original).
A vocation to the priesthood or dedicated life involves a whole-hearted response to what is seen as a divine plan for one's life. It is a free choice of a difficult way that appears both as a challenge and as a privilege. In former times, those deeply Catholic families, of the type we have mentioned, sensed the great privilege involved in a son's or daughter's religious vocation. This sense is what underlaid the expostulation one mother addressed to her own children on hearing the news that a neighbor's son was going on for the priesthood: "Will none of you give me that pride?" No matter how much one discounts the possibly over-human aspects of a comment like that, it clearly shows a priority of a Christian over a material or secular outlook: namely, the values of a parent who is convinced that it is Gods' will or providence, more than any human prudence or planning, that gives meaning to life.
If trust in God's providence is allowed to diminish in a family, things that are then lost include the vision of difficulties and hardship as being part of God's will and therefore as ultimately good and positive. The way things are seen in this respect has a big impact on the question of perseverance of seminarians and priests. So many priests, for instance, have formed their own idea of what service of God and his people should involve, and are frustrated and disheartened if the reality is different. They would be stronger if they had grown up in a family ready to expect anything of God.
A word could be added on how all of this is related to the Third World in particular. The link between economics, demography, and human happiness is not easily established. Some economists attribute the economic ills of the Third World to overpopulation. Others hold that burgeoning populations are essential to economic growth. For our purpose, I would rather bypass that unresolved debate and suggest two important considerations.
(I) Families in the Third World tend to be larger, poorer, and happier than those in the West. It is not easy for Westerners to appreciate the extent to which the people of the Third World, especially in Africa, firmly convinced that children are a blessing, have a natural resistance to family-planning ideas. But that resistance can be overcome, and many Western agencies -governmental and nongovernmental-are spending constant effort and enormous amounts of money so as to overcome it.
I have just said that Third World families tend to be larger, poorer, and happier than Western families. Of course, one finds exceptions, but these do not invalidate the overall fact. This fact leads to alternatives and suggests options. Which is preferable: "larger, poorer, and happier" or "smaller, richer, and less happy"? Each couple must make their choice; values are certainly put to the test in the choosing.
(2) The other point is that religious vocations, which are scarce in the West, are abundant in the Third World. And yet church agencies and other groups are indiscriminately promoting family planning in many Third World countries and thus fostering approaches to married or family life that have, arguably, had very much to do with the vocations crisis facing the West.
From long experience, I know how surprised Africans are when church sources (and not only secular agencies) methodically encourage them to the use of family planning. They find it hard to reconcile their natural sense that children are a couple's first riches with the contrary message coming to them, apparently with the claim of being. gospel-backed. It means placing an uncommon stress oil their faith and on the quality of their Christian family life.
The achievement of the Christian ideal in marriage, no less than in religious life or in the priesthood, depends on faith, on trust in God's fatherly care, on a loving acceptance of his will. The natural thing, when married people turn to priests or religious for guidance, is that they be encouraged along ways of generosity; in their hearts it is what they both expect and respect. It is no help to the solidity or happiness of their family life if they are encouraged, without serious need, to frustrate their normal longing for children and to blunt their natural readiness for generosity and sacrifice; nor does it augur well for the solution of the vocations crisis.
Cormac Burke, Covenanted Happiness pp. 58-65
__________________
Michele Quigley
wife to my prince charming and mom of 10 in Lancaster County, PA USA
http://michelequigley.com
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Elizabeth
Founder
Real Learning
Joined: Jan 20 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5595
|
| Posted: March 16 2006 at 8:39am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Lots of food for thought. Printing for dh. Thanks so much for doing this, Michele.
__________________
Elizabeth Foss is no longer a member of this forum. Discussions now reflect the current management & are not necessarily expressions of her book, *Real Learning*, her current work, or her philosophy. (posted by E. Foss, Jan 2011)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
stefoodie
Forum Moderator
Joined: Feb 17 2005
Location: Ohio
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 8457
|
| Posted: March 16 2006 at 10:58am | IP Logged
|
|
|
thanks so much michele! we really need to get this book added to our library.
__________________
stef
mom to five
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Lisbet
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 07 2006
Location: Michigan
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2706
|
| Posted: March 16 2006 at 12:23pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Oh that was GREAT!!! Thanks so much for posting this.
__________________
Lisa, wife to Tony,
Mama to:
Nick, 17
Abby, 15
Gabe, 13
Isaac, 11
Mary, 10
Sam, 9
Henry, 7
Molly, 6
Mark, 5
Greta, 3
Cecilia born 10.29.10
Josephine born 6.11.12
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
JennGM
Forum Moderator
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17702
|
| Posted: March 16 2006 at 4:29pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Thanks, Michele, for doing all that work!
__________________
Jennifer G. Miller
Wife to  & ds1  '03 & ds2  '07
Family in Feast and Feria
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
amyable
Forum All-Star
Joined: March 07 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3798
|
| Posted: March 16 2006 at 4:31pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Thanks from me too Michele! I'm loving this book. I hope our discussion continues into the later chapters on child rearing! 
__________________
Amy
mom of 5, ages 6-16, and happy wife of
The Highly Sensitive Homeschooler
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Rachel May
Forum All-Star
Joined: June 24 2005
Location: Kansas
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2057
|
| Posted: March 17 2006 at 2:53pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
MicheleQ wrote:
FAMILY PLANNING AND RELIGIOUS VOCATIONS
A generation ago, this argument goes, vocations could almost always be traced back to a strong teenage admiration for some priest or nun whose dedicated life was obviously happy and purposeful. |
|
|
My #3 and #5 siblings both became seminarians at 18 yo. I do think part of this was from our family's always positive attitude toward my only uncle who was a priest and died when we were very young. We all knew the story of how his mother (our Nana) had converted after his ordination, and she was a very good and holy person and a great Catholic example. We also had many good examples of happy religious in our parish. They did make a vocation seem attractive.
Quote:
| A major one is the decline in family unity... |
|
|
I was thinking how modern electronics have played a role in this. In my husband's home growing up, there were 3 phone lines. At dinner, his mother called him and his father on their phones! Now with cell phones, computers, multiple TVs, etc, it is even easier to be isolated in your own home.
Quote:
| The give-and-take that necessarily characterizes family life among a sizable number of brothers and sisters teaches generosity and a concern for others in ways that remain unknown to the only child or to the boy or girl with only one brother or sister. |
|
|
A friend told me how difficult it had been for her to accept her pregnancy with #3 of her 6 surviving children. She attributed it to being an only child. She said it made her realize how selfish she had been brought up to be, how focused on appearances instead of what was important. She mentioned it to me because I was having a hard time understanding my husband's reaction to being the father of "a lot" (3).  He's an only too, and her insight helped me have a better perspective on how much more difficult this is for him than for me.
Wow! I could go on and on (surprise! ), but the kids need me. This is a really interesting discussion. Thank you, Michele.
__________________
Rachel
Thomas and Anthony (10), Maria (8), Charles (6), Cecilia (5), James (3), and Joseph (1)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Willa
Forum All-Star
Joined: Jan 28 2005
Location: California
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3881
|
| Posted: March 19 2006 at 2:23pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Michele,
Thanks for posting those excerpts. I have printed them out and have also just ordered the book.
I have a question that I have been curious about for a long time. In the eyes of the Church, is it ever a sin to NOT use NFP, given a legitimate grave and serious reason? Does that make sense? In other words, can it be sinful to have another child?
I know that the Church calls for "responsibility" and "prudence" as well as "generosity", but I have a difficult time discerning what those words actually mean to a given Catholic couple in our society. How do we discern when we are being imprudent and irresponsible in our "generosity"?
Most of the sources I've read seem to imply that you can actually be wrong-headed in choosing to be open to another child, in certain circumstances. But the actual details are left open and there don't seem to be any guidelines except for personal judgement. Which is fine, but HOW in that case does a Catholic couple gather the evidence and make the best decision?
Are there any resources or books or does anyone have any thoughts on this?
__________________
AMDG
Willa
hsing boys ages 11, 14, almost 18 (+ 4 homeschool grads ages 20 to 27)
Take Up and Read
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Elizabeth
Founder
Real Learning
Joined: Jan 20 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5595
|
| Posted: March 19 2006 at 3:31pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
WJFR wrote:
| I have a question that I have been curious about for a long time. In the eyes of the Church, is it ever a sin to NOT use NFP, given a legitimate grave and serious reason? Does that make sense? In other words, can it be sinful to have another child? |
|
|
Wow, Willa, you DO have a much more difficult discernment process than the rest of us. I have no answers and no resources, though I can think of a local priest who would be wonderful at directing you, though you're not exactly local.
All I can offer is my prayers.
__________________
Elizabeth Foss is no longer a member of this forum. Discussions now reflect the current management & are not necessarily expressions of her book, *Real Learning*, her current work, or her philosophy. (posted by E. Foss, Jan 2011)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Willa
Forum All-Star
Joined: Jan 28 2005
Location: California
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3881
|
| Posted: March 20 2006 at 11:44am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Your prayers ARE a resource, Elizabeth.
Yes, it is a difficult discernment. Msr Burke talks about NFP as a privation and I appreciated him putting into words what I feel by instinct. Learned instinct or grace, because I certainly didn't feel that way when we first married... I was a Protestant and dead scared of the prospect of having 15 or 20 children (!)
We as moms and dads accept many privations in the course of family life; obviously ALL of us come to a point where we have had our last child. We sacrifice health, financial advantages and other things. WE give our children in marriage or to the Church.
But those are incidental in a way, not of the "essence" of what marriage is about.... they are outcomes or associated effects. On the other hand, this privation -- of our unitive and procreative faculties -- seems to be a direct blow; to me, it feels similar to one of us having a major disability only it involves the marriage ITSELF as the separate thing over and above us, which unites us under God. You know, like what Stephen Covey says in a different context about synergy being something in itself that transforms the different parts.
NFP, though no doubt holy and certainly acceptable to the Church, does handicap that perfect natural expression..... like a poetry that can't be uttered. Yes, I do think poetry not uttered can be holy and proper and sublime -- like all the canticles Our Blessed Mother DIDN'T leave for posterity, when she was capable of uttering the Magnificat.
Come to think of it, she and St Joseph are a beautiful model for generous transcendant unity/procreation of marriage without the natural privilege of conjugal expression or fruitfulness. Hmm.. have to think about that one.
But I think the "silence" of purposeful non-procreation IS a silence, and our society doesn't help us think of it this way. It tells us to be practical and makes us feel that married fruitfulness is sort of a rank overgrowth.
Sorry, I know this is a downer and I certainly don't want to bring the discussion to an uncomfortable halt but I stretched myself a bit to write it out, because
(1) I'd really like to know if the Church or trusted priests have spoken out on the details of what is REALLY an unsurmountable hard case -- when IS openness to life an actual sin or imprudence, and
(2) to encourage others to really value their procreative privilege as a unique sanctifying and generative gift.
__________________
AMDG
Willa
hsing boys ages 11, 14, almost 18 (+ 4 homeschool grads ages 20 to 27)
Take Up and Read
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
MicheleQ
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 23 2005
Location: Pennsylvania
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2193
|
| Posted: March 20 2006 at 1:34pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
WJFR wrote:
Michele,
Thanks for posting those excerpts. I have printed them out and have also just ordered the book. |
|
|
Oh you are certainly welcome. It seems like quite a few people have ordered the book. Maybe we could have an informal study of it?
WJFR wrote:
| I have a question that I have been curious about for a long time. In the eyes of the Church, is it ever a sin to NOT use NFP, given a legitimate grave and serious reason? Does that make sense? In other words, can it be sinful to have another child? |
|
|
With all the reading I have been doing of Church documents and discussing it with dh, I haven't come up with anything from the Church that seems to indicate it would ever be sinful for a couple NOT to use NFP. Everything I've read is along the lines of saying couples "may" use it or that it is "licit" (again for serious motives - which of course you certainly have) but never is there a "must" or "should". Also, I was listening to a Kimberly Hahn talk last night and she states emphatically that NFP is NEVER required, even in the case of life of the mother. I know there are those who disagree with that but I think she's right.
Quote:
| I know that the Church calls for "responsibility" and "prudence" as well as "generosity", but I have a difficult time discerning what those words actually mean to a given Catholic couple in our society. How do we discern when we are being imprudent and irresponsible in our "generosity"? |
|
|
I wonder if the confusion comes from not understanding or rather not applying "responsible parenthood" in the broader sense as the Church intends? When you read Church documents about responsible parenthood there is really very little focus on the issue of regulating births and much more focus on raising children responsibly. And I can say with confidence that I certainly don't see that as an issue with you Willa.
Quote:
| Most of the sources I've read seem to imply that you can actually be wrong-headed in choosing to be open to another child, in certain circumstances. But the actual details are left open and there don't seem to be any guidelines except for personal judgement. Which is fine, but HOW in that case does a Catholic couple gather the evidence and make the best decision? |
|
|
Well we all know how important prayer is but I really and truly think that it may be a case of having too many opinions to sift through and not being able to listen to the longing in our hearts which is so often the way the Holy Spirit speaks to us.
I have to run now but will try to add more of my thoughts later.
God bless!
__________________
Michele Quigley
wife to my prince charming and mom of 10 in Lancaster County, PA USA
http://michelequigley.com
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Elizabeth
Founder
Real Learning
Joined: Jan 20 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5595
|
| Posted: March 20 2006 at 2:11pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
WJFR wrote:
But those are incidental in a way, not of the "essence" of what marriage is about.... they are outcomes or associated effects. On the other hand, this privation -- of our unitive and procreative faculties -- seems to be a direct blow; to me, it feels similar to one of us having a major disability only it involves the marriage ITSELF as the separate thing over and above us, which unites us under God. You know, like what Stephen Covey says in a different context about synergy being something in itself that transforms the different parts.
NFP, though no doubt holy and certainly acceptable to the Church, does handicap that perfect natural expression..... like a poetry that can't be uttered. Yes, I do think poetry not uttered can be holy and proper and sublime -- like all the canticles Our Blessed Mother DIDN'T leave for posterity, when she was capable of uttering the Magnificat. |
|
|
This is so beautifully put Willa. I think I know enough details of your situation to run it by my priest, if you like.
I do agree with Michele where Kimberly Hahn is concerned. I think she would tell you to go for it and to be ever so grateful for a husband who researched and so was instrumental in saving Patrick's life. No one can overstate the toll the last two children have taken on you, Kevin, and your family.No one can overstate the blessing. Their stories are intricatley woven into the charism of your family and the souls of each of your children. And I can think of no couple where generosity is so personified. If there is a grave or serious reason, you certainly have one. If there is a way to bear witness to faith, conception would be one. St. Therese has been so good to your family. It strikes me that she could be invoked this time with the specific request for confidence. Whatever you do, I pray you will do it with all confidence in the goodness of God and His blessing on your decision.
__________________
Elizabeth Foss is no longer a member of this forum. Discussions now reflect the current management & are not necessarily expressions of her book, *Real Learning*, her current work, or her philosophy. (posted by E. Foss, Jan 2011)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Bridget
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: Michigan
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2198
|
| Posted: March 20 2006 at 4:11pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
WJFR wrote:
I know that the Church calls for "responsibility" and "prudence" as well as "generosity", but I have a difficult time discerning what those words actually mean to a given Catholic couple in our society. How do we discern when we are being imprudent and irresponsible in our "generosity"? |
|
|
I have been hesitant to add anything to this because it really is not an easy situation. But when Willa posted the question I thought of this reading from Sunday Mass. Not being a Bible scholar I'm not sure if you can apply it in this situation but here it is. I can't stop thinking about it.
1 Corinthians 1: 22 - 25
------------------------------------------------------------ ------------
22 For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom,
23 but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles,
24 but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.
25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
------------------------------------------------------------ ------------
__________________
God Bless,
Bridget, happily married to Kevin, mom to 8 on earth and a small army in heaven
Our Magnum Opus
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
gwendyt
Forum Rookie
Joined: Feb 24 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 90
|
| Posted: March 21 2006 at 8:34am | IP Logged
|
|
|
So I have a friend who I've been discussing this with, and she is really having a hard time looking at things from the perspective Msgr.Burke is presenting. She is healthy and has four children, all healthy - probably (as she admits) no serious reasons to contend with. Both her and her husband are very serious about following Church teachings and obeying God. They have used NFP their whole marriage, although initially because of health reasons, not church teaching, then probably as "birth control" at times (she says), and now she likes to think they grew into using it prudently. She feels it has been a blessing in their marriage, and while hard at times, this has only brought them closer with a greater respect and understanding for each other. If looked at from the view of Covenanted Happiness, it seems as though they really shouldn't be using NFP - she is really struggling with this, and not necessarily because they wouldn't be open to more children. This issue is bugging her, so she called our diocesan NFP coordinator and explained all this and referenced our discussion thread and this book. The lady said that this man is just a Msgr., not the Church, and that she really should just stick to church documents (esp. Humanae Vitae) and that her and her husband are perfectly okay to use NFP. My friend replied to me that she felt better after the discussion with her, but did admit that she has read Humanae Vitae and it doesn't really answer her concerns fully. She still feels confused.
I, in turn, thought I'd try to find our more about Msgr.Burke for her to see if that would help at all. After all, if we use the argument he's "not the Church", how would we ever benefit from the wisdom of the Saints or contemporaries like the Hahns? Well, in my search I found an interview with Msgr. Burke about Covenanted Happiness and this is what he said re: his book:
"Everyone wants happiness; but it is not come by automatically or without an effort; it has to be earned. Life in general, and human relationships in particular, have their own in-built laws of happiness. If you follow these laws, you can be happy; if you do not, you certainly will not. If you demand happiness on your own terms, life may not deliver it.
Covenanted Happiness seeks to present arguments, based on natural reasoning, showing how this applies to marriage. It is not a work of theology, but a reflection on some of the vital options -- for or against personal happiness -- facing married people today. The thesis of the book is simple: a very particular promise of happiness attaches to marriage, a promise that can be fulfilled by trying to live the married relationship in its natural integrity. Live marriage according to its laws, and it can bring happiness. Violate these laws -- as is done through contraception, divorce, and (on a broader level ) abortion -- and happiness comes increasingly under the threat of selfishness, and can be completely lost. This is no doubt a debatable thesis; but, I repeat, it is not based on any dogma, Catholic or otherwise, and it certainly is not theological.
If the debate is about rights, I maintain that the 'rights' in question are wrongs -- also to the person exercising them. It seems to me however that the more fundamental debate is about happiness. Those who exerciese 'rights' that are wrongs also make themselves unhappy. Not everyone will agree; but then I think the public is entitled to hear their arguments showing that contraception, divorce, abortion, make people happier."
Based in light of his comments on his "thesis", I'm wondering if we indeed are putting too much emphasis on his thoughts. Don't get me wrong, it is giving me much food for thought, and I appreciate the viewpoint very much. I'm concerned leaning too much on this book may be detrimental since he himself admits it is not theological or based on any dogma? Just trying to be discerning on how much I use his viewpoint to help us at our parish in deciding how to format some of our marriage programming. What do you all think?
__________________
Wendy
Married to DH Joe 18 yrs., 8 beautiful children - 2 girls, 6 boys (14,12,9,7,5,3,1,newbie born 3/1/2010)
A Little of This, A Little of That
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
JennGM
Forum Moderator
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17702
|
| Posted: March 21 2006 at 8:45am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Wendy,
Although the interview says it wasn't a "work of theology", and the "arguments, based on natural reasoning," his arguments are all based on the Church's teaching. Nothing is contradictory...he's not posing an opinion outside of the Church lines, or trying to be "holier than thou" In fact, that's the beauty of our Church -- so many of our "laws" are merely the extension of natural law or reasoning.
From MicheleQ's first quote we find it chock full of Church document references: Married love and children
It is worth recalling that Church teaching on family planning hinges on two essential principles or requirements: it must be carried out through natural methods, and there must be serious reasons to justify it.
This second requirement, that family planning must respond to serious reasons (confirmed by Humanae vitae, nos. 10, 16), appears once again in the Catechism of the Catholic Church: "For just reasons, spouses may wish to space the births of their children. It is their duty to make certain that their desire is not motivated by selfishness but is in conformity with the generosity appropriate to responsible parenthood" (no. 2368). Nevertheless, it has been questioned or ignored in recent years as if it represented a dated norm derived from an institutional view of marriage that takes no account of modem personalist insights and the legitimate aspirations of married love. A very different conclusion emerges from a due consideration of the Vatican II teaching that children are the natural fruit of conjugal love and the most important factor underlying their parents' fulfillment and happiness. "Marriage and married love," says Gaudium et spes (no. 50), "are by nature ordered to the procreation and education of children. Indeed children are the supreme gift of marriage and greatly contribute to the good of the parents themselves" .
__________________
Jennifer G. Miller
Wife to & ds1 '03 & ds2 '07
Family in Feast and Feria
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Elizabeth
Founder
Real Learning
Joined: Jan 20 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5595
|
| Posted: March 21 2006 at 8:55am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Another thing I think we need to consider is his position on the tribunal [I don't have the book in front of me; someone please provide the official title.] This is a man, who in his official role for the Church, has witnessed the suffering of countless failed marriages. He really knows the stuff of which he speaks. Such a volume of modern experience is invaluable. And it was the Church who put him in that role. Those are important things to consider when we look at whether his advice on this topic is worthy.
__________________
Elizabeth Foss is no longer a member of this forum. Discussions now reflect the current management & are not necessarily expressions of her book, *Real Learning*, her current work, or her philosophy. (posted by E. Foss, Jan 2011)
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
JennGM
Forum Moderator
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: Virginia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17702
|
| Posted: March 21 2006 at 9:03am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Elizabeth wrote:
| Another thing I think we need to consider is his position on the tribunal [I don't have the book in front of me; someone please provide the official title.] |
|
|
Auditor (judge) of the Roman Roata, the highest appeal court in the Catholic Church, since 1986.
When I first read it, I thought he was a layman, because there was no "Msgr." in front of his name.
__________________
Jennifer G. Miller
Wife to & ds1 '03 & ds2 '07
Family in Feast and Feria
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Bridget
Forum All-Star
Joined: Feb 07 2005
Location: Michigan
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2198
|
| Posted: March 21 2006 at 9:22am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Everyone goes through this journey differently. And everyone will not arrive at the same place. You can't argue someone there who isn't almost ready to be there.
You could disregard Msgr. Burke's writing and just look at official church documents.
(I'm sorry, I don't have time to link.)
Casti Cannubi talks extensively about the procreative aspect of marriage. The CCC uses the term "just reasons" to space or postpone children with NFP. Humanae Vitae uses the term "grave reasons".
The Bible is full of references to the blessings of children and the beauty of the marital act.
He combines it all and adds his experience.
I gotta go , my 2 year old is dismantleing his dad's favorite ball point pens!
__________________
God Bless,
Bridget, happily married to Kevin, mom to 8 on earth and a small army in heaven
Our Magnum Opus
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
gwendyt
Forum Rookie
Joined: Feb 24 2005
Location: Wisconsin
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 90
|
| Posted: March 21 2006 at 12:27pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
[QUOTE=jenngm67]
Although the interview says it wasn't a "work of theology", and the "arguments, based on natural reasoning," his arguments are all based on the Church's teaching. Nothing is contradictory...In fact, that's the beauty of our Church -- so many of our "laws" are merely the extension of natural law or reasoning.
QUOTE]
I do agree that it is not contradictory and that natural law and reasoning, properly looked at, reflect Truth, BUT he is elaborating on the church teaching, is he not? Not that I think this is bad or that he's wrong, but if I'm going to present sources to people - church documents are going to hold more weight than this book. I'm going to go back and read Casti Conubii and Humanae Vitae to double check, but I think outside of the terms we've mentioned here (ie. serious/just/spacing of children/etc) there is no mention of what he's elaborating on in the church documents (I'm esp. thinking of the "privation" vs "privelege" aspect), so how can we gain credibility in getting people to really listen/ponder what he's saying? I think that Elizabeth's mentioning his post and experience within the Church is the best way to do this - that IMO should count for something! I will pass on his role/experience to my friend.
The other thought that keeps coming back to me is that the CCC talks about the "regulation of births" and using "just reasons" for spacing births - NOT "just reasons" for NOT having children and thus not having any births to regulate! Now, that being said, when I go back and reread those encyclicals I suppose it may say more along those lines, but this point just keeps sticking out to me.
Also, as Bridget said, I agree that you can't argue someone there BUT even if we end up in different places due to our specific situations, wouldn't the ultimate goal still be to be in unity of thought on this subject?
__________________
Wendy
Married to DH Joe 18 yrs., 8 beautiful children - 2 girls, 6 boys (14,12,9,7,5,3,1,newbie born 3/1/2010)
A Little of This, A Little of That
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
kingvozzo
Forum All-Star
Joined: March 28 2005
Location: Maine
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2653
|
| Posted: March 21 2006 at 3:54pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
My copy just arrived in the mail today  Although, I have a ton of work to catch up on tonight, so I'll have to put off reading till tomorrow 
__________________
Noreen
Wife to Ed
Mom to 4 great kids and 10 sweet ones in Our Lady's arms
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
|
|
4Real Forums : Mothering and Family Life
Topic: More excerpts from "Covenanted Happiness"
