Catholic Dads

31 Responses to Can you have too many children?

1. Eric says:

   September 8, 2009 at 1:02 pm

   I appreciate the thought that you put into this, but I don't think that we can assume their motives. I think it's unsettling to most people because it's so far from our experience, but that doesn't mean that they're doing it thoughtlessly.

   As you appropriately point out, there is a unitive and a procreative aspect to sexuality. They clearly know what they're doing, and seem to have merged the two quite well.

   It's certainly not for everyone, but they seem to support themselves quite well. I take no issue with that.
2. semperjase says:

   September 8, 2009 at 3:10 pm

   It is wise not to presume motives but there is plenty of information about the Duggars out there. They are part of the Quiver Full movement. I updated the original post.

   Wikipedia has a good summary of Catholic objections: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiverfull#From_Cath…
3. Rob Kaiser says:

   September 9, 2009 at 12:57 am

   I had a couple thoughts to share:

   1. I don't thing the Duggars are mindless. They have made a clear and conscious choice. What is more, it appears that they can provide quite nicely for family materially and emotionally. There does not appear to be any coercion going on either. Though that is an assessment from the cheap seats (where we are all sitting).

   2. It is not un-Catholic or anti-Catholic to reject NFP (along with artificial "planning" which we are required to reject). The Church certainly does not require that people use NFP – it allows it, and only for grave reason. The Church does require that conscious decisions be made (certainly done with prayer). I know there are a lot of NFP users here. That is great. But not everyone who is Catholic and faithful has to use NFP. It is OK to be open to life – even if it doesn't fit our plans. While the Duggars are not Catholic, it seem that they have made a conscious thought-out decision. I don't see that their actions run counter to Church teaching at all.
4. John Jansen says:

   September 9, 2009 at 2:59 am

   I like what Rob said about the rest of us sitting in the cheap seats.

   I'm very leary about attempting to assess how well a given married couple is following God's will when it comes to deciding how many children to have — a topic I've addressed (in the context of talking about the Duggars, incidentally) on my blog here.
5. Todd White says:

   September 9, 2009 at 3:41 am

   Thanks to Rob for getting this response out there. There is nothing wrong with having children just as God drops them into your life. It is fun, it is challenging, and you don't have all the worries and unnecessary concerns that society says you should consider.

   I will work 5 lifetimes to afford my 8 children by popular standards–yet they all seem to be doing nicely, and the third one is half way through college now.

   I would offer that the "grave concern" that Rob mentions is a simple dodge for most–the vast majority–folks who use it. The average American is far wealthier than the rest of the people of the world–money isn't really the problem.

   Attitude is.
6. John says:

   September 9, 2009 at 8:59 am

   I wonder if Catherine of Sienna's parents were working against Church teaching (was Catherine the 23rd or 25th child? I can't remember.) Did the Church teaching change or are we trying to make it fit our beliefs?

   The Duggars might have been up against the wall financially, but God provided. Our God is an awesome God!
7. Andrew says:

   September 9, 2009 at 9:19 am

   From what I've seen and read, they never were in financial trouble. They own commercial real estate and that has been their primary income. Surely TLC pays well, too, but they built their house slowly and by hand and paid as they went without acquiring any debt along the way. My impression is that the TLC money has made things easier, perhaps, but they still live very frugally. As compared to Jon & Kate, for example, who recently bought that huge estate and nice cars and clothes, etc.
8. semperjase says:

   September 9, 2009 at 9:20 am

   I have to disagree with you there. The Duggars adhere to the Quiver Full belief that NFP is sinful. Even though it is not a required practice, referring to a licit practice as sinful is counter to Catholic teaching.

   Although the Duggars have made a conscious choice, statements they have made show that their choice is one of rejection of responsible parenthood as taught in Humanae Vitae. The ability to get pregnant does not make the decision to do so a responsible one. Fact is, sex has consequences. God gave us the intelligence to recognize that. Saying, "if we get pregnant, God must want it" rejects our gifts of human intellect that recognize the consequences of our actions.

   Catholics should look at the entirety of Catholic teaching before holding the Duggars up as an example to follow, especially when they reject a portion of Catholic teaching.
9. semperjase says:

   September 9, 2009 at 9:32 am

   Eight children is much different than 19. The Duggars show by their actions and statements they have made that they are not merely accepting what God has given. They are actively trying to conceive as many children as they can.

   Yes, the issue of "grave concern" is a dodge for many who use it. That does not mean that grave concerns do not exist or excuse others of their moral obligation for responsible parenthood.

   It is great that Catholic Dads promotes the culture of life. We need to be careful that our reaction against abortion and contraception does not lead us to ignore the rest of Catholic teaching in being responsible.

   The entire Duggar story is yet to be written. Catholics need to be wise in whom they choose to elevate, especially when those they are elevating do reject Catholic teaching.

   Maybe they are being responsible. I do know that they are wrong in teaching others that responsible parenthood is not obligation when our own Church teaches that it is.
10. semperjase says:

    September 9, 2009 at 9:51 am

    The Duggars are disingenuous about their home. They claim that they built their current home as a family project. This is not entirely true.

    http://reality-tv.lovetoknow.com/Duggar_Family_Ho…
    "Through budgeting and saving, the Duggar family paid for a majority of the new construction and furnishings but received some sponsorship from the Campbell's Soup Company, Huggies Diapers, Home Depot, Sears and Home Decorations Collection among others."

    I recall seeing an admission from the producer from of the Duggars 18 and Counting special noting that the network helped them complete the house because they were worried about her pregnancy at the time. That story is now absent from TLC's website.

    I admire the Duggars refusal for public assistance. However, their refusal to recognize the private assistance they received is dishonest but it does promote their self interest. They have built a brand that portrays them as successful based on frugality and debt-free living. The benefits they have received from charitable donations does not support that portrayal, so they do not acknowledge it.
11. semperjase says:

    September 9, 2009 at 10:03 am

    Did Catherine of Sienna's parents teach that it was sinful to delay pregnancy for any reason? The Duggars do.

    The Catholic Church does teach that there valid reasons to delay pregnancy and couples are obligated to consider those reasons.

    God is awesome but I don't know that fame is a gift from him considering how many other people have been ruined by reality TV. Their story is not yet complete. We do not yet know if their fame was a gift or a temptation.
12. Dutchman says:

    September 9, 2009 at 11:46 am

    While I must concede that the ever prudent John Jansen is right, and that we out not to judge the Duggars, I think it is fair to compare out own experiences with theirs.

    We have three kids and, economically speaking, Wife-Mate and I are agreed that that's about all we can afford.

    Now, kids need a lot of attention, especially emotional attention, and I think that any parent would be hard pressed to meet the emotional needs of more than six kids.

    Nineteen kids? I cannot imagine being able to give emotional sustenance to anywhere near that number. I fear that they are very much at risk of being lonely, stunted, and without guidance.
13. Rob Kaiser says:

    September 10, 2009 at 2:21 am

    Dutchman, this idea that somehow children from large families are stunted is false. That is EXACTLY where the Catherine of Sienna example comes in – the 25th of 26 children. I flat out reject that there is only so much love to go around and that we need to ration it out.
14. Jason Gennaro says:

    September 10, 2009 at 2:38 am

    This is a very interesting post! My take:

    I don't think the Catholic understanding of "responsible parenthood" has been properly or fully presented.

    Pope Paul VI – in Humanae Vitae – says a fair amount about this:

    Responsible Parenthood

    10. Married love, therefore, requires of husband and wife the full awareness of their obligations in the matter of responsible parenthood, which today, rightly enough, is much insisted upon, but which at the same time should be rightly understood. Thus, we do well to consider responsible parenthood in the light of its varied legitimate and interrelated aspects.

    With regard to the biological processes, responsible parenthood means an awareness of, and respect for, their proper functions. In the procreative faculty the human mind discerns biological laws that apply to the human person. (9)

    With regard to man's innate drives and emotions, responsible parenthood means that man's reason and will must exert control over them.

    With regard to physical, economic, psychological and social conditions, responsible parenthood is exercised by those who prudently and generously decide to have more children, and by those who, for serious reasons and with due respect to moral precepts, decide not to have additional children for either a certain or an indefinite period of time.

    Responsible parenthood, as we use the term here, has one further essential aspect of paramount importance. It concerns the objective moral order which was established by God, and of which a right conscience is the true interpreter. In a word, the exercise of responsible parenthood requires that husband and wife, keeping a right order of priorities, recognize their own duties toward God, themselves, their families and human society.

    From this it follows that they are not free to act as they choose in the service of transmitting life, as if it were wholly up to them to decide what is the right course to follow. On the contrary, they are bound to ensure that what they do corresponds to the will of God the Creator. The very nature of marriage and its use makes His will clear, while the constant teaching of the Church spells it out. (10)

    Note the "one further essential aspect of paramount importance": the couple's first duty is towards God and His will. Only then can the couple recognize the duties they have to each other, their family, and society. The couple is "not free to act as they choose in the service of transmitting life". God's will – as discerned by the couple – takes precedence over, for example, the couple's financial concerns, the other children's emotional needs (not sure how this is defined) and society's acceptance of the couple's decision. That's not to say those other things should not be evaluated, but if a couple believes – through prayer – that God wills more children, then so be it!

    We cannot assume that the Duggars have not thought about all of these things, and much more, in determining the size of their family. Yes, they reject NFP. So do many Catholics. Catholics do not need to follow NFP to be Humanae Vitae Catholics. In fact, Humanae Vitae says couples may – not must – resort to infertile periods when spacing births:

    Recourse to Infertile Periods

    16. Now as We noted earlier (no. 3), some people today raise the objection against this particular doctrine of the Church concerning the moral laws governing marriage, that human intelligence has both the right and responsibility to control those forces of irrational nature which come within its ambit and to direct them toward ends beneficial to man. Others ask on the same point whether it is not reasonable in so many cases to use artificial birth control if by so doing the harmony and peace of a family are better served and more suitable conditions are provided for the education of children already born. To this question We must give a clear reply. The Church is the first to praise and commend the application of human intelligence to an activity in which a rational creature such as man is so closely associated with his Creator. But she affirms that this must be done within the limits of the order of reality established by God.

    If therefore there are well-grounded reasons for spacing births, arising from the physical or psychological condition of husband or wife, or from external circumstances, the Church teaches that married people may then take advantage of the natural cycles immanent in the reproductive system and engage in marital intercourse only during those times that are infertile, thus controlling birth in a way which does not in the least offend the moral principles which We have just explained. (20)

    It is also important to note that Pope Paul speaks about "spacing births". Implied here is man's continued cooperation in the generation of life, that the couple always intends to love new children into being until God renders it impossible to do so.

    If that means 19 children, is that too many? I say no. So does Pope Pius XII. In 1958, he addressed the issue of The Large Family:

    With good reason, it has often been pointed out that large families have been in the forefront as the cradles of saints. We might cite, among others, the family of St. Louis, the King of France, made up of ten children, that of St. Catherine of Siena who came from a family of twenty-five, St. Robert Bellarmine from a family of twelve, and St. Pius X from a family of ten.

    Every vocation is a secret of Providence; but these cases prove that a large number of children does not prevent parents from giving them an outstanding and perfect upbringing; and they show that the number does not work out to the disadvantage of their quality, with regard to either physical or spiritual values.
15. Rob Kaiser says:

    September 10, 2009 at 3:30 am

    What they are doing is not wrong. Just because some quiver full folks believe any planning in all circumstances is wrong, doesn't make what they do wrong.

    Btw, I did not hold them up as an example to follow, but you did hold them as an example to condemn – and imply that they are "mindless". That is where we disagree. What they are doing is not de facto wrong nor mindless.

    You and I agree that there is no commandment to have sex all the time so that one can be sure to have as many kids as possible. Further the Church allows planning for serious reasons. Why do these have to be serious (sometimes translated grave) reasons? Because planning can provide a temptation to selfishness and a de facto closing to life. If our motives are not sufficiently serious, we are making a mistake, even sinning.

    Would you disagree that this is true? Is it impossible to imagine someone being selfish even to the point of sin in their motives?

    I believe, that the teaching on grave/serious reason is used as an excuse by some to justify a certain lifestyle. Note – I am not using words like all or every. Do you disagree with this?

    There is a real temptation to selfishness that can creep into planning. Perhaps it is living in Southern California (is the rest of America really so different), where so many sacrifice so much to mammon. We need to be careful that we don't use prudence as an excuse to serve a false god.
16. semperjase says:

    September 11, 2009 at 10:40 am

    I have heard a saying, love doesn't divide, it multiplies. I can see that.

    The problem can be that attention does divide.
17. Rob Kaiser says:

    September 11, 2009 at 11:48 am

    And yet, as Jason Gennaro points out, lots of saints come from large families. I think that maybe it has to do with letting go and trusting – "thy will be done". I certainly think my 4 are better off with 4 than with 2, and I wish I had twice that number.
18. Sherrill Kearns says:

    May 31, 2010 at 5:00 am

    I think large families are wonderful IF the parents can support them.

    I can't shake this feeling that the Duggars are "showing off". Perhaps they're trying to make the Guinness Book of Records? Can they afford to educate all those kids? What kind of job does the husband have that enables him to support all those children? Of course as long as they keep having kids they have the revenue of their boring reality tv show. They're religious, which is wonderful, but one time the father was teaching his kids certain stories from the bible that we know today are myths and not to be taken literally. I think this guy has a caveman's mentality. And the mother, with her little girl voice and simpering personality, comes across as Miss Goody-Two-Shoes of the decade. I can't believe these people are for real. If we all had 50 kids, we know we'd love them all, but isn't it irresponsible to produce kid after kid after kid? Apparently the mother enjoys being an incubator. I still say they do this mainly for attention and money.
19. semperjase says:

    May 31, 2010 at 6:22 am

    One thing is different with Catherine of Siena's family. Less than half of her siblings reached adulthood.
20. Rob Kaiser says:

    May 31, 2010 at 9:29 am

    So 12 is not too many? I guess this whole discussion is fruitless. You tell me, when is there "too many". I still say that the question comes down to selfishness and/or fear of not having enough. I stand by my point that God provides – whether the number is 2 or 4 or 8 or 12 or 17.
21. Rob Kaiser says:

    May 31, 2010 at 9:39 am

    I say BS. If you see a child in a big family – do you look with derision on the last one? Are they worth less? Or is it only the parents you judge?

    I find your judgment of them vulgar and disgusting. You think they are showing off or want money? WOW! And yet you say people should not have large families unless they can "afford" it. How inconsistent can you be.

    It is not the Duggars whom I find irresponsible – it is those who deride people with values other than money.

    Your attitude is the very disgusting attitude that people with as few as four or five children face.

    Finally, what Bible stories do you call "myth." This is a Catholic Christian site, and anti-Christian views are not tolerated on here.
22. semperjase says:

    May 31, 2010 at 2:33 pm

    There is no arbitrary number, but the Catholic Church does give us guidance on how to determine that for each family (see the original post). Keep in mind, the post was in the context of the Quiverfull movement. The more I find out about the them, the more leery I am. This movement is anti-Catholic.

    They reject the concept of maintaining control over our innate drives and emotions as taught in the quotes I cited in the OP above. This is just as important to human dignity as being open to life. Here is an example from a woman who left the movement: http://nolongerquivering.com/2009/03/12/to-those-…
23. Rob Kaiser says:

    May 31, 2010 at 10:39 pm

    Jason, I can't reply to the bottom of your reply above so I continue here. The blog you showed me does not tell me anything "wrong" with that movement. It does sound like someone who has lost her faith. Here is a video from a Catholic woman of 11 whose husband abandoned her, yet she remains a faithful Catholic.

    I am not defending some movement I don't belong too or know enough about, but I am answering your original question – NO you cannot have too many children. Period.

    If you have a beef with the quiver full movement but not my answer, then the post had the wrong title. If you think there is "too many" even if not part of that movement, then we are in substantial disagreement.
24. Joyce says:

    June 21, 2010 at 10:14 am

    First off, I believe the people in the Catholic Church are teaching error on Natural Family Planning…Catholic's do not, nor ever did plan their Children..It is rooted in tradition and you can't change what has already been defined and explained by the Early Church Fathers, and Popes encyclicals before Vatican ll. Vatcian ll and any encyclicals after MUST only explain more in depth the Teaching…..but NEVER to change it and the GIFT of CHILDREN always was and always will be the PRIMARY reason for marriage…not unitive. That's where the unclear teaching has caused many to use NFP as an alternative to Birth Control and without GRAVE REASON…it is to be exercised only by speaking to a holy priest, not one that will agree with your not so grave reason, and with prayer…and then only to be used during the duration of the GRAVE REASON, if the GRAVE REASON, persist, than with both spouses approval

    must abstain forever, offering up this great sacrifice to God and for the marriage. Prayer must be the root of their lives. For apart from God they will not be able to do it. Also,

    when you have to chart, take temperatures, plan when and not when to procreate or not to procreate….there is nother NATURAL about Natural Family Planning!

    Instead of teaching constantly about NFP, the people in the Church should be teaching the Blessings of Children and that with a deepening of Faith, one can rely on the Providence of God to give them all the necessary graces to raise a big family, if God chooses to give a married couple many, many children.

    We have taken the Trust In God and replaced it with Trust in ourselves.

    …The word Responsible Parenting, is not Catholic either…for a Catholic is responsible only when He listens and obeys the TRUE TEACHINGS of the ancient Fathers of Our Catholic Faith. We must test anything modern that the people in the Church, including the hiearchy with TRADITION and if it isn't the same, we must pray for the Catholic Church to get back to the TRUE TEACHINGS and correct these errors when we are give the opportunity, like now.

    I pray that married Catholic Couples start to embracing the TRUE teachings that have been handed down for over 1,960 years before Vatcian ll or the Protestant reformation, that Children are a gift from God …who is the source of all Blessings whether we think they are or not.

    Kudo's to the Duggers, for they are more Catholic than the majority who say they are Catholic!
25. Dawn Jacquelyn says:

    May 28, 2011 at 11:17 pm

    The Duggars, sadly, lost a child. Upon studying their bible, they came to the conclusion that God had punished them, causing this particular child's death, because they'd been using birth control. From then on, they decided to never use any form of birth control again, and to keep on having children no matter what that number of children would eventually amount to.

    I find this egregiously arrogant. THEY personally "interpreted" God's will; they "knew" God had taught them a lesson. They have, and are displaying, an image of a god who will kill your children as punishment if you use birth control for any reason. This is not only irresponsible, but sheer lunacy. Their example portrays God as a vengeful, uncompromising monster Who thinks nothing of killing innocent babies. Who in their right mind could love a god like that?

    Then there's the fact that a network and some companies built them a house. This is self-sufficiency? And if they didn't have the income from their sensationalism, they could not support themselves and all those children. This is CHARITY.

    I watched the show only a few times. During one episode, the father was telling some of the kids the biblical account of Noah's Ark. If they believe all of that story literally, then they must be Fundamentalists. They should be educating their children with facts, e.g., evolution. I happen to believe in what is known as Theistic Evolution, meaning God did it, but through evolution. After all, God had all the time in the world, right? If one really thinks about it, the story of Noah's Ark is just that – a story. If it is not, then how did Noah get to Australia, for example, to find a pair of kangaroos? I won't go into this further as I consider it a waste of time.

    I believe children are God's greatest gift, but I also believe God gave us brains and common sense with which we are to be responsible.

    Who's going to support the Duggars if tv decides to drop them?
26. Dawn Jacquelyn says:

    May 29, 2011 at 12:10 am

    I hit the unsubscribe thingy and it's not working. A Catholic friend of mine had recommended this site to me to begin with. I was under the impression one could express his/her opinion, respectfully of course, but I find this place to be too argumentative and not a good site for me to learn from, which had been my intent. I want out. Kindly get me OFF your subscription list. ASAP, thank you.

27. Pingback: mytradetwiti.com

28. Pingback: How to Lose Thigh Fat

29. Pingback: about fauna

30. Pingback: Credit Facts Blog

31. Pingback: Vibe X the home of gossip