Couple agree not to have children

[saintanne]

Hi could you kindly help,

My bestfriend and who's also my housemate is a devout Protestant.
She mentions that her friend who's already married, both she and her husband agree that they don't want to have children due to their age, etc. FYI, they don't use any contraception, and they don't agree with any of those.

I didn't think there's anything wrong if both husband and wife agrees not to have children because they're not ready or any other reason. Until I've overheard on a Catholic radio that a married couple can't even delay of having children because one of the purpose for marriage is procreation. Probably I've heard it wrong, and I'm hoping if anyone could help explain if that's true or not?

I've told my bestfriend about it and she ask me for a biblical proof, and she ask me not to quote from genesis. I guess because it's probably in the Old testament..
She also mentions about over population, and I myself also just learn about a carbon footprint and how human population contributes to those footprint.
Thus, there are two part of questions; first is what the bible/ church says about not having children and second how do we respond to the carbon foot print relation to over population.
Thank you so much for your help.

[Steven Barrett]

Welcome to the Forum Saintanne!

If you’re friend’s friends are non-Catholic, they they’re obviously not bound by our laws. And, if they’re in their forties, one can’t blame them for wanting to take a deep breath before having a few of the little ones whose voices at 4 a.m. aren’t necessarily quiet, nor singing beautiful Palestrina hymns. But it’s far from an impossible situation and God, let’s not forget, doesn’t put more on our plates than we can handle. There’s  lots of reasons why a new couple in their forties or fifties would find the prospect of becoming new parents in those relatively tender young age brackets (hey, I’m 58 and purposely growing younger before I ever mature! LOL) There’s also finances and the health of the couple. One of the two might have a congenital heart problem or who knows what he or she doesn’t want to pass along. But … if they don’t want children, they’ve got to remember to play by God’s rules, and His rules aren’t for the selfishly inclined, either.

Nor for that matter, intended to promote social timidity when it comes to maintaining our population rates and still providing responsible stewardship not only for the planet, but also fiscal stability for future generations. Germany’s reproduction rate is at an all time low. So is Italy’s and so forth. It’s one thing to be worried about overpopulation, but that’s the least of our problems when one really wants to look at long-term ramifications of wild swings in population trends and their effects on the environment. Who’s going to be around to take care of these pressing problems in fifty years or so? Younger people are worried about the stability of the social safety net  programs, most notably SSA, SSDI, “Obamacare,” this or that “care,” (by the time it’s all sifted and sorted out). How much will it cost and will it be worth putting their money into those programs or government program s in general if they feel they won’t get anything in return? Well…those are the questions being thrown out for discussion and sadly, also for manipulation and demagoguing.  On-air celebpundits making millions of dollars just love to tweak and proof-text statistics proving “inevitable” gloom and doom if X, Y and Z steps aren’t done by the next high-noon according to their “talking points.”  Well, they do frighten people. Lots of them and so long as they make their millions, it won’t be their nerves that are as frayed as those millions of their followers who swear by them and swear off having kids because they, or their ever-so-erudite guests have prognosticated the end of civilization as we know if yet another babe comes howlin’ into the world. I hope he or she does, LOUD AND CLEAR. Let us all hope so because a wise voice once said, “a baby’s birth is a sure sign that God hasn’t given up on us yet.”

My wife and I brought four children into the world, and we hardly … and I mean rarely-hardly … ever cracked the “above the poverty line” “ceiling,” much less all the other “ceilings” so many commentators are fond of uttering  public yearnings about breaking through. Aside from this couple your friend told you about, and I have no reasons to suspect their motives, I nevertheless become very wary and  can’t help feeling but more than a tad cynical whenever I hear people use “let’s go green” for reasons other than making sure we’re saving the world for future generations. There’s a lot of savings to be made and a lot of money to be earned through many companies and organizations that are deftly managing to both promote the ethic of “going green” and manipulate it to induce fear, guilt and timidity within a very pliant population that’s been softened up greatly.

The key moral issues here center on timidity and a loss of faith in God’s abundance and His willingness to help us benefit from it. I’m far less worried about global warming/freezing/whatever-ing, than I am about global appeasing Old Scratch.   

[Dave Armstrong]

Hi saintanne,

My bestfriend and who's also my housemate is a devout Protestant.
She mentions that her friend who's already married, both she and her husband agree that they don't want to have children due to their age, etc. FYI, they don't use any contraception, and they don't agree with any of those.

Good about the contraception. Presumably, then, if a child was conceived they would accept him/her and not resort to abortion.

Possibly they are too old, or have serious health or economic issues. The Church takes these into consideration, particularly for spacing and number of children. In our case, we were often very poor (as I have usually been doing apologetics and evangelism, both as a Protestant and Catholic) and my wife had serious health issues (very difficult pregnancies, post-partum depression, and miscarriages). Thus, we were perfectly within Catholic teaching to decide to stop having children after our first two. As it turned out, the Lord saw fit to bless us with two more children (my wife being particularly fertile!). But generally speaking, a married couple ought to at least be open to have a child if the Lord so wills, in the course of nature, because that is the primary and deepest (though not the only) purpose of marriage.

I didn't think there's anything wrong if both husband and wife agrees not to have children because they're not ready or any other reason.

According to the Church, there are permissible reasons to space children and wait a bit, but not to rule out children altogether. That can even be grounds for an annulment of a marriage. The Church in effect says, "if you don't want children, or are not open to having children, then there is not sufficient justification or reason to get married, and it is a sin to engage in sexual relations, because you have separated pleasure from procreation in a way that is contrary to God's will and even natural law."

Until I've overheard on a Catholic radio that a married couple can't even delay of having children because one of the purpose for marriage is procreation.

That goes too far. There are legitimate reasons for spacing and delay, as long as it is not a total exclusion of children. Pope Paul discusses these in his 1968 encyclical Humanae Vitae, that discussed birth control and contraception. The Catholic position is not "let nature take its course, period," or "have as many children as you possibly can, regardless of all other considerations,' but rather, "be open to having children if the Lord wills, and do not separate the unitive (pleasurable) function of sexuality from the procreative function."

Probably I've heard it wrong, and I'm hoping if anyone could help explain if that's true or not?

I did my best!

I've told my bestfriend about it and she ask me for a biblical proof, and she ask me not to quote from genesis. I guess because it's probably in the Old testament.. Huh?

I've compiled Scripture as to the wrongness of contraception and the blessing of many children:

The Biblical Evidence Against Contraception

Biblical Evidence Against Contraception and For the Blessing of Many Children

She also mentions about over population, and I myself also just learn about a carbon footprint and how human population contributes to those footprint.

Overpopulation is a myth. The entire world population could fit inside the state of Texas alone. What causes hunger is not lack of space or resources, but rather, human sin and greed, and totalitarian tyranny. The United States alone could easily feed every person in the world. Even China feeds its own people (over a billion). We were told that the world was gonna go nuts in 1975 due to overpopulation. It didn't. It's a myth.

Thus, there are two part of questions; first is what the bible/ church says about not having children and second how do we respond to the carbon foot print relation to over population. Thank you so much for your help.

You're welcome. I hope my answer was helpful. I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean by "carbon footprint."

[Steven Barrett]

Don’t worry Dave, I can barely make it all out because it seems to change as the proponents are continually trying to make it more “stomachworthy” of the public that’ll be paying for the shoes to this Jolly Green Giant whose big feet will squash a lot of, should I say, prospective investment, which will work against any economic gains thus giving much life to what the Church teaches about Social/Economic Justice. In other words, the Church teaches against doing anything that’ll come back to hurt the poor and people who can least afford all this trendy tinkering with one of the most delicately structured and endangered species among us: a working and just economy.

In plain English, a carbon footprint is an allegorical allusion used to measure what we as individuals, families, extended families and businesses, gov’t agencies, and of course, Catholic parishes and all other houses of worship use to heat, cook, wash dishes and heat our water for taking showers, etc.  One can imagine millions of lazy teens checking their parents carbon footprint sizes like stock investors (but for far less profitable reasons than your average investor.  Average teens who hate doing chores will be looking out for any approaches towards the “ouch, this is gonna hurt this month” zone to beg off on doing chores.

You mentioned the myth about “overpopulation,” and rightly so. This sure smacks of the old “Club of Rome” doom n’ gloom funereal nonsense all over again, only packaged in a new slicker image. Sigh, I’d be simply delighted to know how many innocent children we’ve sacrificed to the Baal of PRESENT DAY CONVENIENCE that’ll come around and bite future generations in their tushes when Social Security really goes belly up…no thanks to the past nearly half-century of 40 million abortions we’ve allowed in this nation. Anytime the people from the woe is always us and always gonna be us crowd  want to stop protesting and sticking their eyes on to microscopes they might just discover how underpopulated we are. Ah, but aren’t we too selfish for this kind of generational introspection?

[Talithacumi]

Overpopulation is a myth. The entire world population could fit inside the state of Texas alone. What causes hunger is not lack of space or resources, but rather, human sin and greed, and totalitarian tyranny. The United States alone could easily feed every person in the world. Even China feeds its own people (over a billion). We were told that the world was gonna go nuts in 1975 due to overpopulation. It didn't. It's a myth.

I agree. I live in a fairly rural area of Ohio. And Ohio probably has more urban areas per capita than a lot of other states. In Ohio you don't need to go very far before you're bound to run into a town or city, whereas other states could have miles and miles between urban areas. But even so, there is a lot of unused, fallow land even here in Ohio. Any idiot scientist who says this earth can't sustain enough food to feed the planet is full of, well, let's just say they're full of the stuff that can help grow the crops that we use for the food that they claim this earth can't produce enough of. I mean, all you have to do is take a drive and look out on the empty fields that could be plowed and planted. And no one is going to convince me that all those fields I see are being kept fallow out of necessity - not when they're not being used year after year after year. The soil here is rich and fertile, as it is in many places. This old earth is more than able to produce enough food to feed our planet. All I can figure is that these oh-so-intelligent scientists must be city boys who have never been outside of their labs.

Besides, didn't God tell Adam and Eve to "be fruitful and multiply and FILL the earth"? Who are we to go against God's command?

Just my two cents' worth...

JMJ
- Cheri

[Steven Barrett]

Cheri, be fully rest assured my good friend...you still have PLENTY BEAUCOUP ROOM in the Buckeye State to take in all the doomers n' gloomers with their sheepskins piled high n' deep. If the argument about overpopulation could be reduced to the relative number of eggheady folks, (well, let's "down it" to boneheady) ... Massachusetts would be BURSTING FAR MORE AT THE SEAMS THAN THE ENTIRE PLANET, SOLAR SYSTEM AND ALL THE REST OF GOD'S CREATIONS COMBINED -- AND THEN SOME.

Oh, don't worry, I'm not saying we're gonna put 'em all on the Mass Pike (I-90) and send 'em all out your way...YET...but if Ohio wants at least half of 'em, just point 'em to Columbus not Steubenville or Athens or Cinn or Dayton. I know you'll want to be generous to Cleveland and Toledo (Akron might be a little too close.) Just wave at 'em as they're passing by in their mandatory status symbols on wheels: SNAABS & Volvos. But to really protect your part of the state, make sure you put up signs saying "Tenure Hard To Come By In These Parts." That way you'll be doing your best to keep the your area from becoming overpopulated with boneheads; not to mention how happy you'll make all the folks in the EPA happy while they happen to be dealing with the new kind of "footprints": left by the latest British Invasion of Reddish blobsterbacks. Now, THAT'S worth getting riled up in the mornin' about, as I'm sure our old friend Cajunrick must be!

[saintanne]

Thank you very much Steven, Dave and Cheri for the reply and comment.

The key moral issues here center on timidity and a loss of faith in God’s abundance and His willingness to help us benefit from it.

 
Yes, I agree I too often limit His ability and forget about God's infinite grace.

Possibly they are too old, or have serious health or economic issues. The Church takes these into consideration, particularly for spacing and number of children. In our case, we were often very poor (as I have usually been doing apologetics and evangelism, both as a Protestant and Catholic) and my wife had serious health issues (very difficult pregnancies, post-partum depression, and miscarriages).

I'm sorry about your wife's health issue. I'm sure it must be hard for both of you, but I can see God's grace shines through your faithful heart. My sister's family deliver my cute nephew 8 months ago and at the same time they are struggling with financial difficulty which many American families are facing now. However, it is so much joy to see my nephew grows and he is a blessing to our family, which money can't buy.
Regarding the economic condition, I am an Indonesian, and as in the case of many third world countries, many Indonesian lives below the poverty line. One of our priest say that for Indonesia Rome gives special permission for the use of contraception. I don't know how to check whether our priest's statement is correct or not.
I am surprised but I somehow I can understand where this comes from, because when I was in school I often hear that we are over populated with many people live below poverty line. After I came to the US, I learn that this is very contradict to Church's teaching.

What causes hunger is not lack of space or resources, but rather, human sin and greed, and totalitarian tyranny. The United States alone could easily feed every person in the world.

I agree with this too, This is what happens in Indonesia, there are too many corruptions there.

I did my best!

I've probably heard it wrong as I didn't listen to the whole conversation in the radio.
Thank you so much you help a lot, and you've answered my questions just right with many resources for biblical evidence.

That goes too far. There are legitimate reasons for spacing and delay, as long as it is not a total exclusion of children. Pope Paul discusses these in his 1968 encyclical Humanae Vitae, that discussed birth control and contraception. The Catholic position is not "let nature take its course, period," or "have as many children as you possibly can, regardless of all other considerations,' but rather, "be open to having children if the Lord wills, and do not separate the unitive (pleasurable) function of sexuality from the procreative function."

So, does this mean that couple can agree to temporarily postpone having children after they got married?

You're welcome. I hope my answer was helpful. I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean by "carbon footprint."

According to the website http://www.carbonfootprint.com "A carbon footprint is a measure of the impact our activities have on the environment, and in particular climate change. It relates to the amount of greenhouse gases produced in our day-to-day lives through burning fossil fuels for electricity, heating and transportation etc." In my opinion this also relates to your comment on human sin and greed. If we are being wise and not greedy in using our natural resources, I'm sure together we will definitely reduce individual carbon footprint. We or at least I can say for myself I can be overly consumptive. Some of the suggestions are to eat less meat (which is perfect for Lent), share vehicles, use more natural product and less package food. These suggestions I think are in line and in the essence of Christian living. By taking care of our environment, we are not only take care the earth that God has entrusted to us, but also help our children to enjoy the gift of life on earth from God. Do you agree?
Thank you Dave, your answer is very helpful. Take care everyone.

[David W. Emery]

Hello saintanne. So as not to confuse you, I am the “other David.”

One of our priests says that for Indonesia Rome gives special permission for the use of contraception. I don't know how to check whether our priest's statement is correct or not.

The priest’s statement is not true. The statement about the world being overpopulated was disproved long ago. Having a low income excuses no one. Contraception is immoral for the whole human race, not just part of it.

So, does this mean that couple can agree to temporarily postpone having children after they got married?

Agreement to postpone is not sufficient by itself. A family must have a serious reason that is in line with Church teaching (yes, a low income may be such a reason, if it is a temporary condition, but not if it is a permanent or chronic condition; otherwise, it would be better for people not to marry, and this is false). Also, the family must use a moral means of postponing, not artificial contraception. Abstention from marital relations or (what amounts to the same thing morally) Natural Family Planning (click on the blue words for a link to a definition) is the only moral means.

In my opinion this (the wasteful use of natural resources) also relates to your comment on human sin and greed. If we are being wise and not greedy in using our natural resources, I'm sure together we will definitely reduce individual carbon footprint.

This is true. However, environmentalist activists can be overzealous and extremist about it. One should remain reasonable in all things.

David

[Talithacumi]

Cheri, be fully rest assured my good friend...you still have PLENTY BEAUCOUP ROOM in the Buckeye State to take in all the doomers n' gloomers with their sheepskins piled high n' deep. If the argument about overpopulation could be reduced to the relative number of eggheady folks, (well, let's "down it" to boneheady) ... Massachusetts would be BURSTING FAR MORE AT THE SEAMS THAN THE ENTIRE PLANET, SOLAR SYSTEM AND ALL THE REST OF GOD'S CREATIONS COMBINED -- AND THEN SOME.

Oh, don't worry, I'm not saying we're gonna put 'em all on the Mass Pike (I-90) and send 'em all out your way...YET...but if Ohio wants at least half of 'em, just point 'em to Columbus not Steubenville or Athens or Cinn or Dayton. I know you'll want to be generous to Cleveland and Toledo (Akron might be a little too close.) Just wave at 'em as they're passing by in their mandatory status symbols on wheels: SNAABS & Volvos. But to really protect your part of the state, make sure you put up signs saying "Tenure Hard To Come By In These Parts." That way you'll be doing your best to keep the your area from becoming overpopulated with boneheads; not to mention how happy you'll make all the folks in the EPA happy while they happen to be dealing with the new kind of "footprints": left by the latest British Invasion of Reddish blobsterbacks. Now, THAT'S worth getting riled up in the mornin' about, as I'm sure our old friend Cajunrick must be!

Stephen,

Don't you dare even think about sending any of your Massachussetts boneheads to Ohio!  We have enough of our own, thankyouverymuch. 

But I don't want to completely go off topic here... I was about to write something in response to Saintanne's comment about lowering our "carbon footprint," but David E. summed it up nicely in one short sentence when he agreed with her but went on to add: "...environmentalist activists can be overzealous and extremist about it. One should remain reasonable in all things."

Isn't that the truth? And if we had "reasonable" politicians, maybe we wouldn't have all these stupid issues about overpopulation and so on. Incidentally, if there is a problem with "not enough food" it's precisely because the politicians in our government do stupid things like subsidize the farming industry so that farmers will not grow certain crops or produce enough milk or whatever, just so they can claim a shortage and have an excuse to raise prices. I know this happens - or at least it has in the not-so-distant past. I've heard it from farmers in my little area of the world. But I guess we're not supposed to get into politics here... still, despite their supply and demand economic strategies to make more money for our government, wouldn't you think that these politicians could see that, if nothing else, all that extra food that could be grown would at least be able to help feed the poor?

JMJ
- Cheri

[Dave Armstrong]

Hi saintanne,

David W. answered several questions as I would have. Just one addition:

I'm sure together we will definitely reduce individual carbon footprint.

Thanks for the explanation. I have probably heard that term before, but forgot.

Some of the suggestions are to eat less meat (which is perfect for Lent), share vehicles, use more natural product and less package food. These suggestions I think are in line and in the essence of Christian living. By taking care of our environment, we are not only take care the earth that God has entrusted to us, but also help our children to enjoy the gift of life on earth from God. Do you agree?

I do agree, and I personally do all four of the things you mentioned, though not for this reason alone, and have long been a critic of excessive greed and materialism (esp. in American society). I try to live as simply as I can, in accordance with these beliefs.

There is a lot of extremism and distortion of facts, however, in environmentalist circles. They exaggerate the problems and always make out that the earth is worse off than it is. They have a political agenda (left-leaning). As a general point of view, though, I am what used to be called a "conservationist" a la John Muir. I passionately love nature, wish to preserve as much of it as we can unspoiled, oppose unnecessary pollution, etc., and believe that Christians have a responsibility to be good stewards of God's creation.

And these are all good Catholic positions. 

[Steven Barrett]

Cheri,
Take heart:   latest I heard is that instead of crossing through PA towards your way, they're going all the way on I-90 and taking a (permanent detour towards Michigan.) Sorry Dave, but Ann Arbor's more of a nutty-crunchy kind of "collegetown" than Columbus. But I'm sure they'll stay clear of you and Cheri lest they hear of ways to feed the world AND avoid having to worry about over population or stomping all over it with their fat-footed carbon footprints. (WOW, and wouldn't that be like taking dancing lessons from Al Gore! ) WHAT IT ALL COMES DOWN TO IS THE QUINTESSENTIAL WORD OF THEM ALL: F A I T H.

I've never forgotten the story I heard about Kate's Kitchen, run by the Sisters of Providence in Holyoke, MA. During their first year, they were always running on a full tank of gas filled with fears of running short on food...and "always" usually meant daily! One day, with zilch in their cupboards, they though it was over until a little aging nun came in saying one morning, "God always provides" and the others, the admi nistrators of the program couldn't see how they were going to open at noon. SUre enough, a small little grocery, owned by a poor Puerto Rican family inside a baseme of an apartment "flat" in Holyoke's Sacred Heart Parish wards," gave the nuns e n ough hotdogs and r olls to keep it going for that day and it's been runn ing for a good thirdy years plus ever since. FAITH AND HOT DOGS, NOT PH. D'S and dissertations.

[saintanne]

Thank you David , Cheri and Dave for the reply.

There is a lot of extremism and distortion of facts, however, in environmentalist circles. They exaggerate the problems and always make out that the earth is worse off than it is. They have a political agenda (left-leaning).

Noted, I'll keep in mind of these extremist, because I realize I can get influenced by their message and do not see their hidden agenda.

and believe that Christians have a responsibility to be good stewards of God's creation. And these are all good Catholic positions. 

Love  to hear this !!   

[Steven Barrett]

Just a quick plug for "Environmental Stewardship: in the Judeo-Christian Tradition" by the Acton Institute, with a foreward by Fr.  Robert Sirico and introduction by Jay W. Richards.
http://www.acton.org/