Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match! Sign Up for Free

error: Forum not initialized properly! Please check the link and try again.

A place to learn, mingle, and share

Discussion related to living as a Catholic in the single state of life. As long as a topic is being discussed from the perspective of a single Catholic then it will be on-topic.

Tobias and Sarah's story is from the Book of Tobit, and his journey is guided by Saint Raphael.
Learn More: Tobias & Sarah as led by Saint Raphael

Apr 22nd 2013 new

(Quote) Joan-529855 said: "If a married couple is having sexual relations hoping NOT to conceive a ch...
(Quote) Joan-529855 said:

"If a married couple is having sexual relations hoping NOT to conceive a child, although acceptable under NFP, there is part of me that finds that somewhat wrong. "




--hide--

Each to their own, whats wrong with enjoying Gods gift of intimacy between married couples.

Apr 22nd 2013 new
(Quote) Patrick-624504 said: When I worked in the Labour ward Im not sure I would totally agree, though maternal death is ...
(Quote) Patrick-624504 said:



When I worked in the Labour ward Im not sure I would totally agree, though maternal death is low n Western countries, its very high in the developing world, and I have seen seen some mothers in labour bleed out and die in my hospitals.



Medically child birth is the most dangerous event a women can undertake. But yeah big families, never said I was against them or anything like it

--hide--


I did not know that about it being so dangerous...I found labor and delivery exciting however, mine were very short...only a few hours so I feel for women whose labors last two or three days...

Thanks for the post.
Apr 22nd 2013 new
(Quote) Patrick-624504 said: Peter what you define as eugenics is why the Church condems it, and condems genetic engineeri...
(Quote) Patrick-624504 said:



Peter what you define as eugenics is why the Church condems it, and condems genetic engineering, as it implies GOD is wrong and Man can do better.



Remember eugenics was the main plank of the NAZIS, Serbians, Croats, Turks, and many other "racial cleansers". The Church has NEVER supported eugenics in any form. Permitte Deius cetera as Horace would say.

--hide--


Boys From Brazil with Gregory Peck and Laurence Olivier is about this very subject. Chilling movie.
Apr 23rd 2013 new

(Quote) Patrick-624504 said: When I worked in the Labour ward Im not sure I would totally agree, though maternal de...
(Quote) Patrick-624504 said:

When I worked in the Labour ward Im not sure I would totally agree, though maternal death is low n Western countries, its very high in the developing world, and I have seen seen some mothers in labour bleed out and die in my hospitals.

Medically child birth is the most dangerous event a women can undertake. But yeah big families, never said I was against them or anything like it

--hide--


Gee, I worked in the OB ward of 5 different hospitals for over 10 years and never felt that child birth was the most dangerous event a woman can undertake. I think this might be a man's view of labor and delivery but I don't think this to be a woman's view. There are very few men working on the labor and delivery ward, though there are more than a few male OBGyns, so I don't know exactly where the view that labor is a "dangerous event" came from. God intended for the woman's body to conceive, bear and give birth to children; it is a natural event.

Apr 23rd 2013 new

(Quote) Patrick-624504 said: Each to their own, whats wrong with enjoying Gods gift of intimacy between married cou...
(Quote) Patrick-624504 said:

Each to their own, whats wrong with enjoying Gods gift of intimacy between married couples.

--hide--


There is nothing wrong with enjoying Gods gift of intimacy between married couples. Did I say there was? God intended for sex within marriage to be enjoyable and through that moment of enjoyment he included the possibility of life.

Apr 23rd 2013 new

(Quote) Meg-920823 said: I did not know that about it being so dangerous...I found labor and delivery exciting however, min...
(Quote) Meg-920823 said:

I did not know that about it being so dangerous...I found labor and delivery exciting however, mine were very short...only a few hours so I feel for women whose labors last two or three days...

Thanks for the post.
--hide--

My first delivery lasted 18 hours. I had to hold the womans hand and rub her lower back for the whole time, she was a first time single mum aged 35. Long truamatic and tough, not for me but her, just long and my hand lost feeling, breech birth

Apr 23rd 2013 new

(Quote) Meg-920823 said: Boys From Brazil with Gregory Peck and Laurence Olivier is about this very subject. Chilling movie...
(Quote) Meg-920823 said:

Boys From Brazil with Gregory Peck and Laurence Olivier is about this very subject. Chilling movie.
--hide--

Yes great movie and showed what Mengele was doing at Auschwitz, very evil, but also why the US premarital blood test was introduced was for eugenics reasons

Apr 23rd 2013 new

(Quote) Joan-529855 said: Gee, I worked in the OB ward of 5 different hospitals for over 10 years and never fel...
(Quote) Joan-529855 said:


Gee, I worked in the OB ward of 5 different hospitals for over 10 years and never felt that child birth was the most dangerous event a woman can undertake. I think this might be a man's view of labor and delivery but I don't think this to be a woman's view. There are very few men working on the labor and delivery ward, though there are more than a few male OBGyns, so I don't know exactly where the view that labor is a "dangerous event" came from. God intended for the woman's body to conceive, bear and give birth to children; it is a natural event.

--hide--

Try going to Africa, India, Middle East and the Baltic/Black sea. Read the WHO stats on child and maternal mortality.

Apr 23rd 2013 new

(Quote) Patrick-624504 said: (Quote) Emmanuel-940296 said: I've been finding this discuss...
(Quote) Patrick-624504 said:

Quote:
Emmanuel-940296 said:



I've been finding this discussion to be fascinating, but am starting to be become confused by it as well. For a while I was getting the impression that as long as there was equal consent between a husband and wife on having sex, with the intent of having children during a point or some points during the marriage there wasn't anything wrong there. My sister had 3 children back to back, with her 3rd child likely being the last one she'll have in her life time.

According to some of the information being discussed in various posts, unless I'm misreading it, it would sound like she'd be a sinner if she indefinitely continued to use the NFP method throughout the rest of her marriage and never had another child, even if she was open to the possibility should the NFP method still ended with a child in that rare circumstance. My own parents had 3 children, from a financial stand point perhaps around the time they had me, maybe they could have afforded another child, but I find it to be a rather grey area, as I feel my father follows church teaching extremely well, and is a very holy man, does that mean for all the years following any sexual relations he had in his marriage would be considered sinful since there was an indefinite spacing?

I find it difficult to pin sinfulness on a couple using NFP who are in a loving marriage, and having sex consentually, along with the intent of having children, especially if they've had a couple children already and understand the fact that NFP isn't 100% effective.


No your sister is not a sinner. The Church teaches that the point of sex is children, thus limited to stable relationships that is marriage/family. The child is the living proof of the love of the parents for each other, in Human flesh, which is why the Church discourages premartial or unmarried sex in case a child results.

That said, that is procreation, unlike animals who act purely on instinct Man has a Brain, thought, feelings and emotions, we are not animals and so sex is the gift God gives as the ultimate form of love between couples. Therefore non procreational sex is the admission of a couple of their love for each other. The flip side is of course that a child may result if you are using natural protection, as supplied by God.

Rest easy, your sister is not sinning. Women produce 1 egg per month from age 13 to age 45 therefore, after menopause, if you follow the Right wing view expressed here all married couples older than 45 who have sex are sinners, in fact according to the initiator of the thread a Mortal Sinners because their sex is nonproductive, just intimate and enjoyable. This is total bollocks.

Your asumption in the last paragraph is correct, there is no sin being commited as the Church has blessed the union and a marriage is not legal unless consumated (not conception). This stands true in Civil as in Cannon Law.

--hide--

Sorry for the late reply, but I greatly appreciate the clarification Patrick, as it's given me a better understanding of what is exactly is right according to the church.

Apr 23rd 2013 new

(Quote) Patrick-341178 said: (Quote) Emmanuel-940296 said: I've been finding this discuss...
(Quote) Patrick-341178 said:

Quote:
Emmanuel-940296 said:



I've been finding this discussion to be fascinating, but am starting to be become confused by it as well. For a while I was getting the impression that as long as there was equal consent between a husband and wife on having sex, with the intent of having children during a point or some points during the marriage there wasn't anything wrong there. My sister had 3 children back to back, with her 3rd child likely being the last one she'll have in her life time.

According to some of the information being discussed in various posts, unless I'm misreading it, it would sound like she'd be a sinner if she indefinitely continued to use the NFP method throughout the rest of her marriage and never had another child, even if she was open to the possibility should the NFP method still ended with a child in that rare circumstance. My own parents had 3 children, from a financial stand point perhaps around the time they had me, maybe they could have afforded another child, but I find it to be a rather grey area, as I feel my father follows church teaching extremely well, and is a very holy man, does that mean for all the years following any sexual relations he had in his marriage would be considered sinful since there was an indefinite spacing?

I find it difficult to pin sinfulness on a couple using NFP who are in a loving marriage, and having sex consentually, along with the intent of having children, especially if they've had a couple children already and understand the fact that NFP isn't 100% effective.






I wouldn't say that is sinful and don't want to talk about anyone specifically. I can understand that large families aren't for everyone so there are legitimate circumstances for that. I come from a family of 3, and I am the youngest, 5 and 6 years younger than my sister and brother, respectively. I have never asked and never plan to whether or not there was intended spacing going on, and if there was, that is ok.


I just would like more couple to be tring to conceive more babies in more situations.

--hide--

I appreciate the input, and sorry to you as well for the late reply. I agree that it'd be nice to have more couples conceiving babies, as I think having at least 2 or 3, makes a big difference. Having grown up with an older brother and older sister looking after me meant a lot, and to this day I get along very well with them, and am the godfather for two of their children.

Posts 71 - 80 of 113