tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post3620304026195145802..comments2024-03-21T04:02:46.799-07:00Comments on Little Catholic Bubble: The sliding scale of "personhood": A license to kill?Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comBlogger378125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-51029998660982001812012-02-27T21:17:03.877-07:002012-02-27T21:17:03.877-07:00hi chrissy, im very sorry for your loss.
miscarr...hi chrissy, im very sorry for your loss. <br />miscarriage is heart breaking.<br /><br />i wanted to say i work in the donation industry. and there are a lot of people who dont have a heart beat, and are put on a ventilator so organ donation can occur.. and i think they're still a person. do you?maybhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03729888650736423722noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-27767213435914067802011-06-11T13:23:39.774-07:002011-06-11T13:23:39.774-07:00So if blue-eyed boy tries anything, NFP girl can r...<i>So if blue-eyed boy tries anything, NFP girl can respond by saying "look, I am fertile right now so any hanky panky will result in a baby, and unless you want to marry me and be financially responsible for a dependent human being for the rest of your life, maybe we can go to a movie instead."</i><br /><br />Great line! ha ha!Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-13568074095472392902011-06-11T12:26:36.653-07:002011-06-11T12:26:36.653-07:00Sorry the excommunication comment was Ru, not you ...Sorry the excommunication comment was Ru, not you CS. <br /><br />But your post brings up an interesting problem. I used NFP when I was having premarital sex. I got into using it before I was Catholic, but then after my confirmation I was still sexually active for awhile. (I got married after I found out I was pregnant). I know that probably makes me sound like a hypocrite, but believe me, if I can go back in time and slap myself I would. Nothing is more stressful than trying to pull off a wedding while 8 months pregnant, and I would give anything to have saved the romantic, passionate, heady feelings for my husband I had in the early part of our relationship (partly due to the influence of Oxytocin from sexual bonding) minus all of the stress, uncertainty, anxiety and jealousy that accompanied it because we barely knew each other at the time. <br /><br />Anyway, my point is, the NFP information I learned helped me even though I was not married. For one thing, it is very woman-centered (All the charting is done based on the woman's cycle since her fertility is the determining factor. Men are fertile all the time) It teaches women to understand what is happening with their bodies. My cycles have always been irregular partly due to my weight issues, thus I was able to finally figure out what the heck was going on. <br /><br />With NFP, men and women have to work together but ultimately the woman has the final say. So if blue-eyed boy tries anything, NFP girl can respond by saying "look, I am fertile right now so any hanky panky will result in a baby, and unless you want to marry me and be financially responsible for a dependent human being for the rest of your life, maybe we can go to a movie instead."Barbarahttp://intimategeography.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-41196733511359422542011-06-11T12:24:27.350-07:002011-06-11T12:24:27.350-07:00Not you personally on that last line, sorry. Just...Not you personally on that last line, sorry. Just meant it as an "everyone" type invitation. Came off wrongly.<br /><br />-NubbyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-55706478111473991462011-06-11T12:22:44.825-07:002011-06-11T12:22:44.825-07:00Excellent use of hockey lingo in your analogy, Bar...Excellent use of hockey lingo in your analogy, Barbara. Though I will see your point and raise you that excommunication is more like a season long suspension rather than a two minute minor; and the Church, unlike the NHL, has definite lines of what constitutes a definite intent to harm headshot (see various inconsistencies in refereeing this season). <br /><br />I will also say that it isn’t a player who excommunicates himself to the penalty box or suspension, where that IS mostly the case in the Church- where sinners separate themselves by choice from the body of Christ. They do this knowingly, though. They are aware of their committed sin.<br /><br />I will also second your Go Nucks, though I bleed Red and White. I’ll ride the Canuck bandwagon... until next season. <br /><br />Ru-<br />People can incur a latae sententiae to be sure. <br />In the 1983 Code of Canon Law (CIC) eight other sins carry the penalty of automatic excommunication: apostasy, heresy, schism (CIC 1364:1), violating the sacred species (CIC 1367), physically attacking the pope (CIC 1370:1), sacramentally absolving an accomplice in a sexual sin (CIC 1378:1), consecrating a bishop without authorization (CIC 1382), and directly violating the seal of confession (1388:1).<br /><br />No where in this canon law does it list miscarriage as a reason for excommunication. Excommincation is a call to healing. Come back and repent and be with the body of Christ again.<br /><br />-NubbyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-28022464273585140702011-06-11T06:44:52.688-07:002011-06-11T06:44:52.688-07:00college student, you are right. Virtue and truth a...college student, you are right. Virtue and truth and right order (and an appeal to them) can be exploited and used for nefarious gain. This is true of everything in life. Every good thing can be twisted and ruined, and that is the reality of this world. But I am glad you see the beauty in how things were meant to be. For what it's worth, it took me almost a decade from the time I learned these truths and the time I actually started living it. I'm just sorry it took me so long to implement it in my own life, for so many reasons. But, I finally got it and haven't looked back in 16 years. :)Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-34272954068721507402011-06-11T05:56:13.038-07:002011-06-11T05:56:13.038-07:00I think I Really understand the language of Npf......I think I Really understand the language of Npf... I think it sounds nice, very sexy intamate and romantic And it certainly would appeal to most people people especially in the moment. I whole heartedly agree with you that I hope it catches on w married couples to replace hormonal birth control... Because it's not good for women.<br /><br />I slight tangent though. Your message is meant for married People and I understand that but It worries me if iit gets in the hAnds of unmmarried people. I can already<br /> see the blue eyed 19 year old boy telling his girlfriend he doesn't want to use a barrier so when they make love they are one flesh and he doesn't mind if she's not on birth control because he embraces every part of her :) <br /><br />I understand you cAnnot dumb down your standards to appease unmarried people.... I can just see the principle abused that's allCollege studentnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-54265722705550132952011-06-10T21:34:05.116-07:002011-06-10T21:34:05.116-07:00Ru, I do think Giuseppe is correct that this claim...Ru, I do think Giuseppe is correct that this claim of excommunication for miscarriages seems like a real stretch, either a rogue bishop or an anti-Catholic canard (there are many!). I would be interested in the source. I also agree with JoAnna that a bad law is unfortunate and we don't want bad law. But the worst law yet was the one which said millions of unborn could be executed at whim. That law, I believe, killed the soul of our nation.<br /><br />Mary, I don't think for a minute that you are consciously "lying" with your body when you use contraception with your husband. I don't question your motive or your love. Whether you do it consciously or not, contraception makes your body tell a lie. Intercourse says, "I take all of you, I love you totally, I am in complete union with you." That is the language of sexual intercourse. Contraception speaks another language: "I love every part of you… well, but not your fertility. Not you in totality. I put barriers and chemicals between us <i>even while our bodies are speaking the language of oneness</i> so that your body does not touch mine, or made my own body chemically sterile."<br /><br />You can't have an action which says "total union of bodies and souls" and then have a counteraction which says "no, we don't accept each other's fertility". <br /><br />Again, I am not saying that you are conscious of this. I am just saying the body has a language.<br /><br />You wouldn't kiss with a carefully placed barrier between your two sets of lips, and that's because you know it is a contradiction to the act of kissing.<br /><br />I think I'm rambling now….Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-40625667590437470322011-06-10T21:04:12.739-07:002011-06-10T21:04:12.739-07:00College Student
Just a question: Where did you g...College Student<br /><br />Just a question: Where did you get the idea that Catholics in the Middle Ages excommunicated women for having miscarriages? Do you have a source on that? I am not a medieval scholar, but I know a little about the time period. (I'm particularly interested in the Marian cults that sprung up in the late middle ages in Spain) <br /><br />Modern Catholicism, as far as I know, only excommunicates the laity (non-clergy pew-potatoes) for very few things, most of which deal with procuring, financially supporting or encouraging someone to have an abortion. The majority of excommunications involve clergy, not lay people. Also, excommunication itself is like a Catholic penalty box (Sorry, still excited about the playoffs. Got hockey on the brain. Go Canucks!) You are unable to receive communion in the church until you procure a dispensation from the Bishop and make a full confession. That's pretty much it. It's not like getting kicked out of the Church or tattooed with a red A for Anathema, or anything like that.Barbarahttp://intimategeography.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-34895249596182584362011-06-10T20:05:47.570-07:002011-06-10T20:05:47.570-07:00Ru, I too have problems with that Georgia bill. I...Ru, I too have problems with that Georgia bill. It's well-intentioned but the ramifications to women who miscarry are troubling. As far as I can tell, it is stuck in committee and will likely not get out. <br /><br />Regardless, it doesn't change the fact that an unborn child is a unique human being from the moment of conception and should not be directly killed. Prior to Roe v. Wade, when abortion was illegal in most states, miscarriages weren't criminalized or any of the dire predictions that pro-abortion advocates make.<br /><br />Do you have any proof to back up your assertion that the Catholic Church used to excommunicate women who miscarried? I'm interesting in knowing how you came to believe something so far-fetched.JoAnna Wahlundhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09942928659520676271noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-48418240599253995322011-06-10T19:51:48.915-07:002011-06-10T19:51:48.915-07:00One of the reasons I am expressly concerned about ...One of the reasons I am expressly concerned about <i>legally</i> defining life as beginning at conception was because of a bill introduced in Georgia earlier this year (the bill in its entirety can be read here: http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/20112012/108128.pdf). For those who don't want to read all of it, the summary is that in addition to defining life as beginning at conception, it also legally treats an unborn life as if it were the life of a born person--including what to do in case of death. The bill defines a miscarriage as a pre-birth death in which it can be ascertained that there was "no human involvement whatsoever" (except in cases of extreme medical procedure, in which the physician "makes a medically justified effort" to save both lives but cannot).<br /><br />What bothers me is that the wording presumes that a fetal death is a murder unless it can be ascertained no human was involved. The sad fact is that it is nigh impossible to verify the cause of some miscarriages, in which case the mother-to-be is in a very, very unfortunate guilty-before-being-proven-innocent situation while she may be mourning the death of her child. For an unfortunate example, a woman who does not know yet that she is pregnant could engage in vigorous physical activity (which is sometimes credited with triggering miscarriages), and according to the bill she would be guilty of manslaughter. As my law-school boyfriend would say, judges unfortunately can't let common sense rule their decisions; they have to follow the law. This hearkens back to what I said before about miscarriages and excommunication. Way back in the Middle Ages, many times it was assumed that having a miscarriage was the result of personal sin or witchcraft. If it's a sin bad enough to kill your child, clearly you must be so guilty you need to be kicked (at least temporarily) out of the church. While we understand better now due to advances in the medical field, the prejudice is still out there and manifests itself, such as in this bill. Those of you who have found a supportive community are extremely lucky.<br /><br />However, I think that I should be clear that while I speak against legally defining life as beginning at conception at this time, I am <i>not</i> speaking against spreading the pro-life message. The ideology behind this bill is not anti-woman at all; I am sure the state senator in question did not mean to target mothers who have miscarriages whose source cannot be traced. Yet writing a law to enforce that belief cannot protect women as well as children. This is a matter that is entirely beyond earthly laws.Runoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-86753653652802545652011-06-10T19:22:00.331-07:002011-06-10T19:22:00.331-07:00Ru,
My guess is that you probably read some cont...<b> Ru, </b><br /><br />My guess is that you probably read some contemporary writer quoting some very obscure medieval source in order to make the claim that miscarriages resulted in excommunication.<br /><br />This certainly was never Church teaching. Even if one or two bishops went rogue and heretical and weren't caught or reprimanded, it doesn't mean it was common place or, again, Church teaching. All a rogue bishop teaching weird things means is that a rogue bishop taught weird things independent of the Truth of the Church.Giuseppe Ambrosehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15825109896111176650noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-66190496260397015602011-06-10T17:02:45.507-07:002011-06-10T17:02:45.507-07:00Ru,
I'm so sorry to hear about your mother...Ru,<br /><br />I'm so sorry to hear about your mother's miscarriages and the lack of support she received from friends, family, and especially her church. I just miscarried a twin a couple of weeks ago and can tell you with certainty, that is not the attitude I've been getting from my fellow Catholics, both lay and clergy. They have been for me (and are in most cases) very supportive and realize that a human life was lost and that women truly grieve the loss of their child. I don't know why your mother's experience was any different, but I am sincerely sorry for her.<br /><br />Like Leila, I have never heard of the excommunication for miscarriages thing, and will echo what she said about it being comparable to being excommunicated for a disease you can't help getting! It's just not Catholic teaching, and I'd love to see a source for that claim.<br /><br />As for the "not treating the woman as equally human" idea, I'm not sure what you're referring to and how you have come to that conclusion. Catholics, and the general pro-life community, certainly DO recognize the woman as a child of God. Go back and read TCIE's comment (via Leila) at 11:13am. She details how the pro-life community values women wholly, just as much as they value the child.Nicole Chttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09115556585264141565noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-43490336050229297162011-06-10T17:00:38.783-07:002011-06-10T17:00:38.783-07:00Ru,
See my latest post. Link dropping now...
htt...Ru,<br /><br />See my latest post. Link dropping now...<br /><br />http://www.acceptingabundance.com/2011/06/my-tautologous-thoughts-on-being-open.html<br /><br />I've given that some thought. Read to the end. Listen to Leila! The Church sees what's there.Stacy Trasancoshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14638075878905614981noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-79123480235617188492011-06-10T16:53:26.272-07:002011-06-10T16:53:26.272-07:00Ru, forgive me for my confusion. I just have not e...Ru, forgive me for my confusion. I just have not ever heard of any woman being devalued for having a miscarriage. All I have heard is compassion and understanding, and sympathy. But maybe you can give me an example of what you mean? I don't see it in my circles. No one blames women for miscarriages. <br /><br />Help?Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-75552416084588231462011-06-10T16:50:26.582-07:002011-06-10T16:50:26.582-07:00Ru, I don't think we can ever dehumanize or de...Ru, I don't think we can ever dehumanize or devalue one group of humans by holding up all humans as having inviolable dignity. If the unborn are lifted up as human beings with full dignity, made in the image of God, then their mothers are similarly lifted up.<br /><br />That is why the pro-life movement, and the Church is truly pro-woman, as well as pro-child. Because she is pro-human. The dignity of mother and child are upheld. <br /><br />I have never in my life heard of excommunications for miscarriages, but that would be like excommunications for getting cancer or having an accident and breaking bones. Seems highly dubious. I would love your source for that. <br /><br />But don't worry, the Catholic Church is huge, huge, huge on the dignity of ALL people, including the dignity of women. As a woman, I can promise you this is true. So can any of the Catholic women here. It is the Planned Parenthood view of women that is demeaning and small.Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-69875946614840676512011-06-10T16:41:30.281-07:002011-06-10T16:41:30.281-07:00It may be more common among abortion advocates to ...It may be more common among abortion advocates to say that children who die in utero for whatever reason were never alive, but I know some women who are not abortion advocates who have had to see things that way. My mother lost four children to miscarriage before having my sister and myself, and she is firmly against abortions in all but the absolute rarest of life-threatening cases. Yet the only way she was able to deal with that loss and the subsequent total lack of support from her family and community, even the community through church (where apparently the head of the ladies' association kept insinuating that my mother didn't actually want to be a mother), was to tell herself that her pregnancies were just pregnancies and not lives. How to cope with natural pre-birth deaths, as I heard one person call miscarriages, is not a question people like to contemplate.<br /><br />This is a question I've had to seek the answer to myself, and while I know my mother cannot be right, I don't know how much my own confusion or urge to not blame myself is inhibiting my search for the truth. Will ideologically establishing the personhood of the unborn child make it easier for the parents and family to cope, or will it criminalize mothers who are just as much victims as their children were? Historically speaking (by which I mean Middle Ages-ish), women who were unfortunate enough to have miscarriages were often excommunicated. While this should not be a reason to deny someone their rights (I mean, we got rid of segregation in this country even though many whites felt uncomfortable with it because it was the right thing to do), it does bother me that, when we acknowledge the personhood of the unborn at all stages of development, society tends to forget that the mother too is a child of God.Runoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-18362822191939040432011-06-10T16:06:18.163-07:002011-06-10T16:06:18.163-07:00By the way, I was a many-years-long Pill-popping, ...By the way, I was a many-years-long Pill-popping, condom using gal, so I have lived both sides. There is a <i>huge, huge</i> difference in how one perceives marriage, children and sex when one moves away from "arming for battle" and instead makes love the way God intended. Trust me, it's worth taking the leap. :)Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-18861091480755768822011-06-10T16:03:53.944-07:002011-06-10T16:03:53.944-07:00No time for long comments as I've got a crazy ...No time for long comments as I've got a crazy night, but college student, I hope you read this previously, which should answer your questions about NFP vs. condoms:<br /><br />http://littlecatholicbubble.blogspot.com/2011/03/important-follow-up-to-natural-family.html<br /><br />(Wearing a condom might diminish a man's pleasure, but he is not sacrificing sex, by the way! Although the couple using a barrier does not become "one flesh" in the way God design and described it. Can you imagine kissing someone with plastic wrap between you? Yet married love is respected and exalted by use of a condom?)<br /><br />I do think it's beating a dead horse in one sense. But I am glad for any lurkers to be able to get both sides. Hopefully, someone out there is seeing the very real distinctions.<br /><br />God did not get it "wrong" when He designed sex. His design is not flawed, and condoms and pill are not an improvement on His beautiful plan for the union of spouses and the propagation of new life.<br /><br />Use of contraception implies that God didn't get things *quite right* when he designed healthy fertility.<br /><br />Back later!Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-19045208558573529862011-06-10T15:10:48.211-07:002011-06-10T15:10:48.211-07:00College Student,
I understand why you're perpl...College Student,<br />I understand why you're perplexed. I'm sure others will offer explanation as well, but I'll throw some info out there. :)<br /><br />It is not intrinsically wrong to avoid having children. There are many factors that can come into play when considering whether or not another child is prudent at a given time (finances, health, etc) There are valid reasons to avoid conception; this is the teaching of the Catholic Church. Intention to avoid conception can be fine, but then we have to deal with the issue of the how we avoid-aka the means.<br /><br />Natural Family Planning does nothing to actively separate sex and babies. It does not attempt to thwart that biological reality, in fact, it works with the biological reality of a woman's natural cycle of fertile and infertile times. Spouses who have a reason to avoid conception simply don't have sex during fertile times (this can sometimes be difficult for couples, but it can bring them closer emotionally and it also helps them to always reevaluate their reasons for avoiding children). There is nothing morally wrong with NOT having sex. In fact, I am not having sex right now, and God is fine with that. :) Those same spouses who wish to avoid conception may choose to have sex during the woman's infertile time, which God designed, because they most likely won't conceive. So they have intercourse, they bond with one another (the unitive aspect of sex, as others have mentioned). The sex they have is just as it would be were they trying to conceive-they change nothing about it (no barrier, no hormones, no withdrawal, etc). What is different is WHEN they have it, which is according to the woman's cycle.<br /><br />But here is the difference in mindset: with NFP, you are working WITH biology, not denying it. With such an understanding, there is an underlying respect and acknowledgment that there could be conception, even if you believe you've avoided during the fertile times. With, what many refer to as, a "contraceptive mentality" there is no respect for biology. People believe that they ultimately can control their bodies and their reproductive capabilities by working against them. Then, suddenly, if a pregnancy occurs, there is little recognition of biology, as if it is a phenomenon that the result of sex was a baby, and little responsibility taken in cases where abortion is then chosen as the "cure" for what should have been understood as a natural consequence of sex.Meg @ True, Good and Beautifulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10507070127764766394noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-70502937426378735042011-06-10T14:58:53.952-07:002011-06-10T14:58:53.952-07:00The dealy-o with the whole 'condom wearing man...The dealy-o with the whole 'condom wearing man is unselfish' rhetoric is that the whole concept of "openness to life" is lost on the man and woman in this example.<br /><br />You can't honestly compare that to a couple who uses no barriers, no mechanisms to inhibit life. There's a clear distinction btwn which couple is truly unselfish toward each other (and perhaps a baby) and which are not.<br /><br />I realize this is a totally opposed world view in terms of thinking about relationships and sex, and the Catholic teaching is huge to wrap heads and hearts around. The grace to understand it comes and then .... the acceptance.<br /><br />-NubbyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-48767133590644893372011-06-10T14:44:30.977-07:002011-06-10T14:44:30.977-07:00College Student-
Catholics believe sex does make ...College Student- <br />Catholics believe sex does make babies. Derr... I'm lost on the rest.<br /><br />Catholics believe that sex is a gift to be shared even without wanting kids at that particular time in a marriage. It is easily shared by avoiding the small window of fertility each month.<br /><br />It's pretty black and white and this poor horse is more than dead from all the kicking it's received. Leila and others have truly spelled out the meaning of sex (Catholic meaning) and the science of sex, which we all know = babies, whether wanted or unwanted.<br /><br />-NubbyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-88154130595284940382011-06-10T14:43:39.595-07:002011-06-10T14:43:39.595-07:00I also think it's very interestig that you thi...I also think it's very interestig that you think husbands who are willing to curtail their pleasure by abstaining through Npf are always great because they are willig to sacrifice for their wives and families by not making a child that they cannot support or the wife doesn't want. <br /><br />Yet the same man who wears a condom, who Sacrifices his pleasure to avoid a child that the woman doesn't want and he can't take care of isn't selfless at all.. He's selfish he's a user.<br /><br />I also do have one question. What does the church or you personally think of a woman who insists her husband wears a condom after he was caught cheating ?College studentnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-39848019756918837542011-06-10T14:40:12.258-07:002011-06-10T14:40:12.258-07:00"I really do feel that it is good and correct..."I really do feel that it is good and correct that some good mothers follow their desire to have lots of babies and raise them well, but I think many devout Catholic moms are lying to themselves just a little. They say, "I am open to God's plan, even if that means 10 children." but the women I know well enough to know, were women who always wanted large families of their own biological children. Conveniently, this went along with Catholic teaching. "<br />Mary says<br />--------------------<br /><br />Maybe it's convenient in terms of teaching lining up with their heart's desire, but it's not convenient to yield to that calling.<br /><br />The desire has to be there, yes. So does the calling. As a practicing Catholic (I don't like to use 'devout'), I have to decide how to discern and weigh what I want vs what God is asking of me in my marriage, in any given instance, moment, month, year, whichever.<br /><br />Desires ebb and flow. Calling is pretty steady. You'll know what God is asking of you and your spouse (talking spiritually here) when it comes to family size based on a number of factors. <br /><br />What looks wreckless to us or insane or impossible is quite possibly a grace filled calling. That being said, we should always be wise in stewardship. That's where good spiritual discernment between the spouse and a good priest helps.<br /><br />-NubbyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-240447238522390484.post-81626717523747859242011-06-10T14:35:29.519-07:002011-06-10T14:35:29.519-07:00Just a quick comment because I am on my iPhone .
...Just a quick comment because I am on my iPhone .<br /><br />I am forever perplexed by your idea of natural family planning and how you endorse it and tout it's effectiveness yet also vehemently sAy that sex makes makes babies and trying to separate sex from baby making is horrible and impossible...when it seems you have ready acknoedged what I say over and over again that it is very possible to be sexually active and not get pregnant <br /><br />It's like u say: sex can make babies itCollege studentnoreply@blogger.com