Tag: big families

Holiness is a numbers game, you filthy relativist!

You never know what the morning will bring. I just got into a weird little skirmish with a fellow who believes that there is only one kind of generosity, and that is having as many babies as possible. (He can correct me if I’m misrepresenting his point of view.)

It began when someone wrote a nice review of The Sinner’s Guide to NFP, and this fellow — not having read the book, of course — said:

 

generosity fb screenshot

 

Yeah, I played the grandmultipara pregnancy card. So sue me.

It didn’t stop Mr. NFP Denier, anyway. He let me know that his wife is expecting theireleventh baby (eleven being a higher number than ten, you’ll note), and that his family was fruitful and multiplied just like God commanded, and they were therefore obeying the doctrine of the Church in what was obviously the only possible way, unlike people who use NFP, who are clearly disobeying the doctrine of the Church.

I said that generosity sometimes looks different from having another baby. Generosity can even look like deciding not to have another baby right now, even if you really, really want to. It depends on your circumstances. It’s different for different people, according to what God is asking of their specific lives. The Church teaches that we can use our hearts and our brains while prayerfully discerning intensely individual questions like family size.  It’s not a numbers game, where God judges our holiness by using His fingers and toes to tally up our family size.

But maybe my reader-who-doesn’t-need-to-read-my-stupid-book is onto something, with his accusation of relativism. It occurs to me that the scourge of relativism is nothing new. One very early example of a selfish woman trying to excuse her own flaws and call them virtues? Check out this chick:

And He looked up and saw the rich putting their gifts into the treasury, 2 and He saw also a certain poor widow putting in two mites. 3 So she said, “Truly I say to you, I, a poor widow, have put in more than all; 4 for all these out of their abundance have put in offerings for God,[a] but I out of my poverty put in all the livelihood that I had.”

See there? Relativism! The nerve of that lady, thinking that the gift of her dumb little pennies made her even more generous than the big bucks those other guys were pouring into the chest! If there’s one thing that Jesus tries to pound into our heads over the course of the Gospel, it’s that holiness is a numbers game, period.

Pff, relativists. I suppose they think they’ll somehow find their way into heaven anyway.

Well, you never know. I’ve heard God is fairly generous, too.

At the Register: Why busy parents should always go to midnight Mass

And it has nothing to do with “misery loves company!“

Lots of siblings = low divorce rate?

Interesting little tidbit on CatholicCulture.org:

Sociologists from Ohio State University have found that children from large families have markedly lower divorce rates.

The equation that emerged after a 40-year study, involving a sample of 57,000 American adults, was simple: The more siblings you had as a child, the less likely you were to be divorced as an adult. The researchers don’t offer an explanation for this phenomenon—in fact they seem to be stumped—but they know it’s not because the children from large families don’t marry. On the contrary, they’re more likely to marry, and more likely to stay married, than their small-family counterparts.

If there’s one thing I’ve learned from listening to smart people argue, it’s that no study ever actually tells you anything definitively — or at least, by the time the headlines trickle down to laymen, there’s no way of telling what actually happened or what it means.

But as someone with seven siblings, married to a man with seven siblings, whose children each have eight siblings, this study caught my eye.  CatholicCulture.orgmakes a blithe conclusion about the causation:

We already know that among married couples who don’t use contraceptives, the rate of divorce approaches zero. Obviously these couples are more likely to have multiple children. So by eschewing contraceptives, a married couple is taking a huge step to guard against divorce—not only for themselves, but for their children as well.

I think it’s got to be more complicated than that.  It’s not as someone’s Essure doohickey backfires on day and then BAM, their worldview is transformed.  There has to be some steps in between (a) not using contraception and (b) having a good marriage.

I have long held that the non-contraceptive marriage is long-lasting because the non-contraceptive marriage is likely to be founded on religious faith, and that that is what holds the family together.

And it’s not pretty to think, but there must also be some couples who don’t contracept, who are religious, and who stay together despite abuse and serious disfunction, just because their community of religious friends and family would shun them if they divorced (yes, even with a legitimate annulment.  I’ve seen it happen).

On a more positive note, here are a few other things which must contribute to the longevity (and, it is to be hoped, the strength and happiness) of marriages between people with lots of siblings, religious or not:

There’s the example of other married couples.  If no one you know is married, what are you gonna do when you’re not getting along with your spouse?  Freak out, assume the marriage was a horrible mistake, and split up.  But if you’ve seen other people — people who are sort of like you, because they’re family — get past bad stuff, and if you can get their advice, then that’s invaluable.

There’s babysitters and other kinds of help.  Of course this assumes that your siblings are willing and able to help; but if there are lots of them, chances are someone will pitch in if you need something — a babysitter, a short loan, some baby clothes, an extra set of hands painting the house, or whatever.  Marriages always do better when there is help available.

And there’s the example of the long view of what marriage is for.  Very often, I hear married people with a very young family talking as if raising a family is some kind of 18-year project, where you spend X amount of dollars to achieve a satisfactory outcome.  That they’re doing something important but temporary when they have a child, and that they will be able to get back to their real lives once the kid leaves home.

It’s a lot harder to fall for this crap if you go to a huge family reunion where there is a big, unwieldy mess of cousins, aunts, and uncles; maybe your mother is pregnant at the same time as one of your sisters; maybe your niece is pregnant at the same time as her mother.  Maybe one family is staying with another family.  Some people are doing well, some not so great; some are following their plans, and others have blown so far off course, they can’t even recognize their former lives.  But they’re okay.  You see the family spread out in what my father used to refer to, in tones of mock horror, as “the rich tapestry of life.”

Once you see that, it’s a lot easier to remember that you’re in this for the long haul.  Not for your personal satisiaction, not to produce a successful offspring like a science project that you can fold up and put away at the end of the day . . . but because having a family is what people do, overall.

Well, what do you think? What have I missed?  I know I have an especially close and supportive family.  If you’re from a large family, what effect do you think it’s had on your marriage, for good or bad?

It does happen.

family reunion of a couple of years ago, when there were only 33 cousins

I posted this on Facebook this morning, and it got 218 likes in 38 minutes.  So I figured it was something people need to hear!  From our trip to the beach yesterday:

Lady at the beach:  “Are these ALLLLL your children?”
Me:  “No, actually, I have two more at home.”
Her:  “Two more!  So how many in all?”
Me: “I have nine children.”
Her:  “OH, GOD HAS BLESSED YOU!  MOTHER MARY IS WITH YOU! YOU’RE DOING A BEAUTIFUL JOB!”
Did not see that coming!
Several FB friends mentioned that they make a special effort to say friendly, encouraging things to parents with lots of kids.  I guess because we live in small town New England, it’s pretty rare that I get nasty, sneering comments (although it’s fun to have snappy comebacks at the ready); but lots of big (and even “big”) families get nothing but scowls and horrified gasps when they set foot outside the door.  So if you have something nice or encouraging to say, say it!  Or at least give a big smile.  Some moms really need to know there’s someone on their side.
Also, the nice lady at the beach told me that she “only has two kids,” and I was quick to tell her that there is no such thing as “only” two kids!  People with smaller families often seem to feel like they need to apologize or explain their family size.  No need, no need.  My children are not a statement, and I remember all to well how difficult it was to have two children.  We’re all fighting our own battles, and the last thing Catholics need is to get into fertility contests with each other.

Christmas Group Shot

Silly me, I thought we would never get around to taking a group photo this year, but there we all are!  I guess this is God’s way of telling us to slow down and have ourselves a streppy little New Year.  Also, He hates us.

Oh, just kidding!  If He hated us, the pharmacy would have run out of penicillin before our order was complete.  Oh, wait, it did.

Meh, it could be worse.  My husband isn’t working this weekend, so we can all have one last chance to enjoy a good old-fashioned family vacation together, sitting around the fire and sipping our disgusting pink medicine, trading good old stories about what we imagined we saw on the ceiling when the fever was at its peak, and tapping out the rhythm of our favorite old songs.  Can’t sing.  Throat hurts.

Really, really, it’s not that bad!  The worst part is the crushing guilt I feel when I think about all those friends and family eating all that fudge and peanut brittle and buckeyes I made with my own, two, plague-ridden hands. . .