Laine’s Letter Part 2

In part two of Laine’s Letter I want to examine some of the scripture that she chose to explore as well as some others.

But let me try to explain to you what I have learned about our wombs. I hope this will be of some encouragement to you.
Here is a verse depicting the way children are physically born, showing the opposite for those who are children of God:
“Who were born not of blood, nor of the will of flesh, nor of the will of man (some versions say ‘nor of the will of a husband’), but of God.” John 1:13
Children can be born “by the will of man.”

The NAB puts it this way:
12
But to those who did accept him he gave power to become children of God, to those who believe in his name,
13
8 who were born not by natural generation nor by human choice nor by a man’s decision but of God.

I don’t think anyone is debating that man (and woman!) have something to do with the birth of children!

That is why the church teaches: “that God is a communion of three persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Our marriages can be a communion of persons, an image of the Holy Trinity, when we become one flesh in a way that is open to life. In this way, we are given the privilege of being co-creators with God of human life. This is why the Church considers sexual union to be holy.

Children are born definitely with our cooperation, but ideally within the bonds of marriage and as created by God.

“But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.” 1 Corinthians 11:3
A wife is under her husband’s headship.

But Christ is the head of every man. Therefore, it is incumbent on the man not to lean on his own understanding and isolated decision making, but rather to continue growing in wisdom in Christ. The Catholic church states that before we follow our consciences in anything, those consciences have to be formed. This is one of the reasons I am so opposed to one of the more destructive and permanent forms of birth control – sterilization. What looks like a sound and wise decision when you are 25, or 30 can seem hasty and foolish at 40 and 45. People mature, wisdom grows, situations change and faith can strengthen. How sad then that a decision like this is made because a couple is faced with one set of circumstances can never be reversed (or reversed with great expense, pain and difficulty) when circumstances, finances, health, minds and attitudes as well as faith changes.

This is also one of the things I applaud about Natural Family Planning as sanctioned by the Catholic Church. It allows for circumstances to change over time. It also makes allowances for reasoning, faith, and understanding to grow and mature. If one truly wants to point to “Children can be born by the will of man” there is no better example of this than a man who literally uses his free will to procreate or abstain.

“In the same way, you wives, be submissive to your own husbands so that even if any of them are disobedient to The Word, they may be won without a word by the behavior of their wives.” 1 Peter 3:1
Wives are to be submissive to their “own” husbands.

Again from the NAB with the next line:
1 Likewise, you wives should be subordinate to your husbands so that, even if some disobey the word, they may be won over without a word by their wives’ conduct
2
when they observe your reverent and chaste behavior.

If the husband does not want any more children he may be won over by his wife’s CHASTE behavior. This is not a verse to my mind that condones artificially preventing births.

So what I am trying to say? In a nutshell, this is it:
We are to submit to our own husbands. Our own husbands. Our own husbands. Not frightened by any fear.

I agree with that. But the onus is on the husband to study, pray, and to continue from his conscience so that he can do for his wife and his family what is holy in the eyes of God. An entire book could be written on the importance of marrying a Godly spouse.

And while we’re on the subject, what constitutes a quiver? Well, many would argue about this, but I believe it is the children God gives to you and your husband. And remember, as I shared with you before, your grandchildren are part of that quiver. Here are some quivers shared in the Word of God:

The verse technically refers to the quiver of a warrior going into battle. I read up on this a little bit. Not only would that be six or more arrows, but there would be additional arrows at the ready for the archer should the need arise. The psalmist was trying to make the analogy between the abundance and usefulness of having a lot of arrows and the blessing of children. Any other modern analogy for what constitutes a quiver just is nor being historically honest. Which is not to say that families with smaller families are not blessed – indeed they are. The psalmist was not trying to say that small families were not blessed! He was simply making an analogy with a different focus.

Isaac: 2 sonsReuben: 4 sonsAsher: 5 sons and 1 daughterJoseph: 2 sonsJudah: 5 sons (2 killed by the LORD because they were evil)Boaz & Ruth: 1 recorded sonNaomi: 2 sons (both died)Jephthah: 1 daughterSamson: no childrenMiriam: no recorded children or marriageIbsan: 30 sons and 30 daughtersAaron: 4 sons (2 killed by the LORD for offering profane fire)Moses: 2 sonsJacob: 12 sons and 1 daughter

Wonderful examples of small bible families. Catholics and Orthodox would even mention the Virgin Mary as an only child, and even Jesus himself.

But what I see as interesting here is that none of these families deliberately and with forethought TRIED TO PREVENT THE CONCEPTION AND BIRTH of further children. Laine almost touches on it with Judah when she mentions his two evil sons. One of his sons, Onan, commits the only contraceptive act in the bible, and he is slain for it. I think that is quite significant.

Now here is the interesting part. Remember your grandchildren are your children, so you are not done raising children, even if you are unable to have any more children. Your quiver is not quite full yet. ~Smile~

Yes, that is wonderful news. But here’s the kicker. If your children grew up in a household that was not welcoming to new life, that indeed celebrated its contraceptive mentality (“I’m done” can I tell you how many times that has been said to me in front of the speaker’s own children?!) don’t expect them to jump into marriage thinking of children as a blessing instead of a burden either. Children learn from what they have been taught and what they have witnessed.

The rest of Laine’s letter is about the gift of grandchildren and it is a nice and inspiring read, as well as some more admonishment not to gossip or be nosy. Please read her entire letter here.

I do think there are certain situations that require that we speak up and where even being silent could potentially be sinful, but that’s an entirely different post.

*********WhenI changed to halo scan I lost these comments from John Kippley  and Anne Basso:

Anne Basso has left a new comment on your post “Laine’s Letter Part 2“:

Elena, your exegesis leaves a lot to be desired. I like that you use this post to point out the dangers of artificial birth control, but that doesn’t appear to be what the author is discussing at all. I know many couples successfully avoiding pregnancy using NFP as sanctioned by the church. The point this author is making is that it’s none of our business.

And the sin of Onan isn’t birth control itself. The sin of Onan is in his treatment of his sister in law. Under the traditions and laws of the time, she would not have inherited anything without a son. Onan‘s job was to provide her with a son to carry on her late husbands name, thus giving her an inheritance and allowing her to be cared for. Onan‘s sin is his selfishness. He takes what he wants and deprives her of the chance to be cared for. His sin is in his disobedience to God. It was accomplished through the use of the withdrawl method. Now, I certainly will be first in line to agree that the Church does not allow withdrawl as artificial birth control, and in my opinion, makes a very good case for why not. But Onan is a very poor proof text.

Feel free to delete my comment, but it just irks me when people use the story of Onan as a proof text regarding birth control when that’s such a limited view of what Onan‘s sin really was.

Elena has left a new comment on your post “Laine’s Letter Part 2“:

Was I somehow unclear that Laine’s letter is being used as the free-pass to sterilize and contracept on several blogs I have read this summer? That is where I first heard of it. That is why I chose to address it. I think it’s very clear in my first paragraph of part 1.

If my “exegesis” is poor, then I am in great company. But hey don’t take the word of an unworthy one! Check out these links and let the “irking” begin!

Dave Armstrong on Onan

The Bible and Birth Control

Sin of Onan revisited

What Was the Sin of Onan?

Catholic Answers

John K has left a new comment on your post “Laine’s Letter Part 2“:

Anne Basso has unfortunately been influenced by erroneous footnotes in some Bibles. The punishment for Onan‘s violation of the Law of the Levirate is clearly spelled out in Deut 25:about 5-10. For a recent article, see my “Sin of Onan” that appeared in Homiletic and Pastoral Review this spring. http://www.nfpandmore.org/2007%20May%20%20SIN%20OF%20ONAN.pdf

Or go to the website in my signature, click on NFP Resources, then Articles, and you will see it.

John F. Kippley
www.NFPandmore.org