I can imagine how difficult must have been but at the same time how wonderful to know you all were blessed with three beautiful children. The health of your wife is more important than anything else.
I would like to have seven, I have two so far and I hope the Lord blesses me with health and strength. I always dreamed with a big family.
I think the having of children is a very personal decision between a couple and the Lord, as most have stated. For myself, being able to afford children should be a last consideration. A womans health and the marriage relationship are far more important things to consider. I used to wish for more than one child, despite the fact that my pregnancy was not easy. My wishes, however, were not the most important thing to consider. My husband is not a member of the Church and does not understand the plan as the Lord has set forth. In his mind, bringing lots of children into the world, as is is now, is not wise or prudent. He sees the evil in the world and doesn't want to subject his children to it. This is the difference of what an eternal perspective and knowledge of Gods plan can bring to us. I understand his reasoning and understand that to the Lord, my marriage relationship is the most important thing. For me, one child was right and I feel blessed to have her.
Two angles on this.
Financial
While I understand the logic to this argument in restricting the number of offspring, I cannot understand this in the context of faith. When do we cross the line and begin to lean too much on the "arm of flesh," as opposed to confidence in God's ability to provide for us in our hour of need as we obey His commands? Couldn't you make the same argument for tithing, that we should not obey tithing because financially it would result in our ruin? Yet we never advise that.
I think LDS's position is closer to that required by a person of faith.
(I know, however, the strength of the argument in preventing people with little means from having so many children that others must provide support for those kids.)
Spiritual
Now here's the rub. I can find various instances in scripture where it appears that God has ordered us to use sex to multiply and replenish the Earth. He seems to make it clear that we should never "waste" the seed. So Catholics and Protestants took from that scripture the requirement that birth control was immoral. And it seems logical that was the same basis upon which early LDS leaders also provided the prohibition.
Now, we are told it's a personal decision between the family and the Lord. So is this a revocation of earlier commands? Or is this recognition by the Lord's servants that we are not up to the task, and meant as counsel for the weak?
QUOTE (Tortdog) |
...opposed to confidence in God's ability to provide for us in our hour of need as we obey His commands? |
QUOTE |
Now, we are told it's a personal decision between the family and the Lord. So is this a revocation of earlier commands? Or is this recognition by the Lord's servants that we are not up to the task, and meant as counsel for the weak? |
QUOTE (jb) |
One can say... well, just do not have sex, but then how would that affect a marriage? Will it not only be contradicting the law of creation anyway? Another thing I have heard some couples do is to have sex only on days when it is least likely for the wife to become pregnant. |
QUOTE (jb) |
It could be that it is just for the weak, but then it could also be that the Church cannot litigate every situation. |
QUOTE (jb) |
Tortdog, if you were in a war situation where bombs were going off, there was barely enough food for your children to eat, shelter was dismal and you were always hiding... would you still be having children year after year? |
Rather off topic, but... I'd like more info on the Church prohibiting vasectomies. I don't see it as a topic, and it seems a bit off for this thread (though maybe it's not). Thoughts? |
A desire to have a vasectomy is valid input here. Did you read page three of this Thread where one of our Members did that? I can also add... wouldn't that be like the ultimate condom? How can one say using a condom is wrong, but then choosing to have a vasectomy?
NOTE: I am not saying a vasectomy is wrong, I am question when one compares other methods of birth control.
Tortdog:
QUOTE |
Nope. But I probably wouldn't be thinking about sex either. In fact, I would likely find someway to get my family out of the area (or all of us entirely) and so it would be a non-issue. |
QUOTE |
"We seriously deplore the fact that members of the Church would voluntarily take measures to render themselves incapable of further procreation" (p. 11-5). |
QUOTE |
Surgical sterilization should only be considered (1) where medical conditions seriously jeopardize life or health, or (2) where birth defects or serious trauma have rendered a person mentally incompetent and not responsible for his or her actions. Such conditions must be determined by competent medical judgment and in accordance with law. Even then, the person or persons responsible for this decision should consult with each other and with their bishop"¦and receive divine confirmation through prayer [General Handbook of Instructions, 11-15]. |
I saw that, but I have learned that just because one person brings something up does not mean it's safe.
And that's where I got my question to have answered. What info is out there by the Church saying vasectomies are wrong? A friend of mine in a bishopric stated that he had seen material in CHI-1 that indicated something along those lines.
QUOTE (jb) |
How can one say using a condom is wrong, but then choosing to have a vasectomy? |