i got married!

[ToJesusMyHeart]

hello! i used to be a frequent poster here but have since moved on. i wanted to update, however, my new state in life!

i joined the sisters of life as a postulant in 2014 but decided to leave to marry. i got married 6 weeks ago!

my husband and i are now trying to have a baby. if you could pray for us to be successful in that endeavor, i would be grateful.

thank you!

p.s. i am trying to upload photos but it says my files are too large....how do i make them smaller so i can share photos of the wedding? thanks!

[Lilllabettt]

2 hours ago, ToJesusMyHeart said:

hello! i used to be a frequent poster here but have since moved on. i wanted to update, however, my new state in life!

i joined the sisters of life as a postulant in 2014 but decided to leave to marry. i got married 6 weeks ago!

my husband and i are now trying to have a baby. if you could pray for us to be successful in that endeavor, i would be grateful.

thank you!

p.s. i am trying to upload photos but it says my files are too large....how do i make them smaller so i can share photos of the wedding? thanks!

To post photos of your wedding, you'll need to use something like photobucket to host them and resize them. I know in the past Dust explicitly did not want the marriage vocation to feature on the vocation station, but he don't got an all seeing eye so ... you could slip through! I hope you do ... 

On another subject, did you really leave to marry .... I seem to remember you discerning religious life some time after that? I mean, ultimately you did leave and then marry ... it just didn't seem, from your posting here, that it was a eureka, I'm supposed to be married type of experience? 

Ps congratulations!

[Peace]

6 hours ago, ToJesusMyHeart said:

hello! i used to be a frequent poster here but have since moved on. i wanted to update, however, my new state in life!

i joined the sisters of life as a postulant in 2014 but decided to leave to marry. i got married 6 weeks ago!

my husband and i are now trying to have a baby. if you could pray for us to be successful in that endeavor, i would be grateful.

thank you!

p.s. i am trying to upload photos but it says my files are too large....how do i make them smaller so i can share photos of the wedding? thanks!

Marrying a nun? That's what's up. How can I pull that off without getting excommunicated?

[ToJesusMyHeart]

On 11/13/2019 at 1:00 PM, Lilllabettt said:

On another subject, did you really leave to marry .... I seem to remember you discerning religious life some time after that? I mean, ultimately you did leave and then marry ... it just didn't seem, from your posting here, that it was a eureka, I'm supposed to be married type of experience? 

Ps congratulations!

I left for many reasons, but primary among them was to have babies, which has as a prerequisite, marriage. 

[Lilllabettt]

2 hours ago, ToJesusMyHeart said:

I left for many reasons, but primary among them was to have babies, which has as a prerequisite, marriage. 

Not trying to give you a hard time or nothing - but that turn of phrase sounds backwards.  Reminds of someone thinking they have a vocation to wear a habit, therefore they must be called to consecrated life. Your husband is not a means to an end right .... although a desire for parenthood is often a good indicator of a call to marriage. They usually go together, but not always. Definitely Not Always. 

[ToJesusMyHeart]

22 hours ago, Lilllabettt said:

Not trying to give you a hard time or nothing - but that turn of phrase sounds backwards.  Reminds of someone thinking they have a vocation to wear a habit, therefore they must be called to consecrated life. Your husband is not a means to an end right .... although a desire for parenthood is often a good indicator of a call to marriage. They usually go together, but not always. Definitely Not Always. 

I think we have a different understanding of "vocation."

My understanding matches the sentiments in this helpful homily by a priest-monk at St. Michael's Abbey: http://104.236.240.51/helpful-homily

[Lilllabettt]

On 11/16/2019 at 1:58 PM, ToJesusMyHeart said:

I think we have a different understanding of "vocation."

My understanding matches the sentiments in this helpful homily by a priest-monk at St. Michael's Abbey: http://104.236.240.51/helpful-homily

Your article talks about an unmarried woman called to parenthood. And here in Chicago, I know of one priest who has adopted a foster child. And the reverse is true, too - plenty of people marry with the expectation or the hope of being parents, but God ultimately doesn't call them to that. 

I was blessed in that, when I got married, my husband was aware there was a decent chance we would never be parents. He discerned his vocation was to love me, fully, holding nothing back, the end. Whether that love led to kids or no kids. And that vocation, to love that way, when it is directed at another human being, is called marriage.  

My sister married in large part because she thought 'being a mom' was her calling. When they found she was barren, she asked her husband if he would have married her even knowing she couldn't conceive. He answered "I don't know." 

[ToJesusMyHeart]

2 hours ago, Lilllabettt said:

Your article talks about an unmarried woman called to parenthood. And here in Chicago, I know of one priest who has adopted a foster child. And the reverse is true, too - plenty of people marry with the expectation or the hope of being parents, but God ultimately doesn't call them to that. 

I was blessed in that, when I got married, my husband was aware there was a decent chance we would never be parents. He discerned his vocation was to love me, fully, holding nothing back, the end. Whether that love led to kids or no kids. And that vocation, to love that way, when it is directed at another human being, is called marriage.  

My sister married in large part because she thought 'being a mom' was her calling. When they found she was barren, she asked her husband if he would have married her even knowing she couldn't conceive. He answered "I don't know." 

the purpose of marriage is the procreation and education of children. if one knows they cannot do that, they should not endeavor to marry. i hope i am not infertile, but if i am, or if my husband is, we will foster/adopt. there will be children some way or another. i simply came back to phatmass to ask for prayers toward that end, not to argue about my definition of vocation. but let's go ahead.

marriage is a natural path, not a supernatural vocation. marriage is written in human nature. celibacy is not natural. To marry is good, but completely normal and expected (in sane times). A cause for joy, but still the normal thing to do. being celibate is abnormal, supernatural and the superior choice. 

from the Council of Trent: 

CANON X.-If any one saith, that the marriage state is to be placed above the state of virginity, or of celibacy, and that it is not better and more blessed to remain in virginity, or in celibacy, than to be united in matrimony; let him be anathema.

it is good to make the choice to marry. it is better to make the choice to consecrate oneself in celibacy to God. we choose our own vocation, it is not thrust upon us from God.

[Sponsa-Christi]

2 hours ago, ToJesusMyHeart said:

the purpose of marriage is the procreation and education of children. if one knows they cannot do that, they should not endeavor to marry.

This is one purpose of marriage; the other is what is called the "good of the spouses." Or in other words, mutual help in growing in virtue and holiness. Speaking as a canon lawyer, infertility is not an impediment to marriage. It is perfectly legitimate to marry even if one of the parties knows they are infertile (so long as they're open to life should a miracle happen or something.) 

 

That being said...I agree with Lilllabettt about the importance of realizing that biological children are never a guarantee. But I'm not sure that feeling called to be a mom, and then choosing to get married sort of secondarily, is always necessarily wrong. Even infertile married women are much freer to be "mothers" in a natural sense than religious Sisters (or even consecrated virgins "in the world") are. 

Even besides the possibility of adopting, a stable married couple is an ideal environment for foster care for children in need. Married couples are also often freer and better able than consecrated persons to mentor young people, to help out families with children that are facing some sort of crisis, to take on volunteer work that assists children and young people, etc. 

[Antigonos]

2 hours ago, Sponsa-Christi said:

This is one purpose of marriage; the other is what is called the "good of the spouses." Or in other words, mutual help in growing in virtue and holiness. Speaking as a canon lawyer, infertility is not an impediment to marriage. It is perfectly legitimate to marry even if one of the parties knows they are infertile (so long as they're open to life should a miracle happen or something.) 

What you have described is known in Jewish thought as "shalom bayit" [literally "peace of the home"] and is regarded as the essential reason for the establishment of the institution of marriage.  Indeed, in the blessings recited in a Jewish wedding, one concerns finding blessing and contentment in each other as a Divine gift; the birth of children, while a mitzvah, is not something any couple can ultimately be absolutely sure about [indeed, there's still, with all medical advances, approximately 20% of infertility which has no known cause] -- only God does.

There's a Jewish saying that God spent 6 days creating the world and ever since then, He's been arranging marriages.  It's pretty much a full time job <g>

[Lilllabettt]

15 hours ago, ToJesusMyHeart said:

the purpose of marriage is the procreation and education of children. if one knows they cannot do that, they should not endeavor to marry. i hope i am not infertile, but if i am, or if my husband is, we will foster/adopt. there will be children some way or another. 

marriage is a natural path, not a supernatural vocation. marriage is written in human nature. celibacy is not natural. To marry is good, but completely normal and expected (in sane times). A cause for joy, but still the normal thing to do. being celibate is abnormal, supernatural 

So, it is very common for people who haven't looked into it to think of adoption as something they can do just because they want to. Actually, no.

The number of people who want to adopt far exceeds the # available for adoption - and it typically costs tens of thousands of dollars. Even babies born addicted to drugs are very quickly adopted. Fostering is an option, but if you get through the rigorous application process, you'll be expected to sign on to working with the bio parents; to working with your whole heart to reunify any children you foster to their biological families.  And the vast majority of foster kids do "go back." Some foster families wait years before even getting a temporary placement. Older children are available for adoption but you must have the resources and profile to meet their special needs in order to be considered by a social worker, even before being chosen by the child. 

My point in telling you this, is that many people hoping to adopt wait years to be chosen to become parents. And some never are. So, you are incorrect to assume there will be children "one way or another." 

As others have pointed out, you are missing some pieces in the Catholic Church's understanding of marriage. There is a section in the catechism: "the goods and requirements of conjugal love" that could help you with this. I will link you, just click and scroll to section five.  You are not the first person to enter marriage with an incomplete understanding of the Church's teaching, so don't worry about that part of it. http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s2c3a7.htm

Although you didn't come here to talk about your definition of vocation, maybe it was God's will that you get your understanding of what marriage is fleshed out.  Even if you never become a mom, your vocation to marriage will have purpose. As the catechism says: "spouses to whom God has not granted children can have a conjugal life full of meaning, in both human and Christian terms. Their marriage can radiate a fruitfulness of charity, of hospitality, and of sacrifice." 

[Kateri89]

On 11/13/2019 at 11:46 AM, ToJesusMyHeart said:

hello! i used to be a frequent poster here but have since moved on. i wanted to update, however, my new state in life!

i joined the sisters of life as a postulant in 2014 but decided to leave to marry. i got married 6 weeks ago!

my husband and i are now trying to have a baby. if you could pray for us to be successful in that endeavor, i would be grateful.

thank you!

p.s. i am trying to upload photos but it says my files are too large....how do i make them smaller so i can share photos of the wedding? thanks!

Congratulations!

[JHFamily]

When all else fails, go to the catechism.  In this case I'm using the Baltimore Catechism because it lays things out so succinctly and clearly:

Q. 1010. What are the chief ends of the Sacrament of Matrimony?

A. The chief ends of the Sacrament of matrimony are:
   1. To enable the husband and wife to aid each other in securing the salvation of their souls;
   2. To propagate or keep up the existence of the human race by bringing children into the world to serve God;
   3. To prevent sins against the holy virtue of purity by faithfully obeying the laws of the marriage state.

 

These are laid out in order of importance.  The primary end of marriage is the salvation of their souls.  Yet still, the others reasons are important enough to be enumerated.  Could the desire for children lead someone to marriage?  Yes, and even rightly so.  However, I pity the one who marries for this reason only and then never comes to have children.  It is a very heavy cross which I've seen several women have to carry.  It is much, much better when to marry because you think you can help your spouse attain salvation and vice-versa.

I do wish you every happiness and many children!  Often, children do help with the primary end!  I'm always happy to see someone who struggled to find his vocation to finally settle down and be happy where God calls him.

[Nunsuch]

3 hours ago, JHFamily said:

When all else fails, go to the catechism.  In this case I'm using the Baltimore Catechism because it lays things out so succinctly and clearly:

Q. 1010. What are the chief ends of the Sacrament of Matrimony?

A. The chief ends of the Sacrament of matrimony are:
   1. To enable the husband and wife to aid each other in securing the salvation of their souls;
   2. To propagate or keep up the existence of the human race by bringing children into the world to serve God;
   3. To prevent sins against the holy virtue of purity by faithfully obeying the laws of the marriage state.

 

These are laid out in order of importance.  The primary end of marriage is the salvation of their souls.  Yet still, the others reasons are important enough to be enumerated.  Could the desire for children lead someone to marriage?  Yes, and even rightly so.  However, I pity the one who marries for this reason only and then never comes to have children.  It is a very heavy cross which I've seen several women have to carry.  It is much, much better when to marry because you think you can help your spouse attain salvation and vice-versa.

I do wish you every happiness and many children!  Often, children do help with the primary end!  I'm always happy to see someone who struggled to find his vocation to finally settle down and be happy where God calls him.

The problem is that the current Catechism, and subsequent teachings by Popes John Paul II, Benedict XVI, and Francis, update these teachings to make conjugal love and support co-equal with procreation as a purpose of marriage. I don't have the time to look this up, but it is pretty clear.... So using a document that has been subsequently updated is not necessarily wise, "clear" as it may be.

 

Here, for example, is the USCCB's page on Marriage, which lists a variety of resources, including the CCC. It doesn't include the Baltimore Catechism, because it has been superseded.

http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/marriage-and-family/marriage/promotion-and-defense-of-marriage/church-documents-on-defense-of-marriage.cfm

[Lilllabettt]

1 hour ago, Nunsuch said:

The problem is that the current Catechism, and subsequent teachings by Popes John Paul II, Benedict XVI, and Francis, update these teachings to make conjugal love and support co-equal with procreation as a purpose of marriage. I don't have the time to look this up, but it is pretty clear.... So using a document that has been subsequently updated is not necessarily wise, "clear" as it may be.

 

Here, for example, is the USCCB's page on Marriage, which lists a variety of resources, including the CCC. It doesn't include the Baltimore Catechism, because it has been superseded.

http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/marriage-and-family/marriage/promotion-and-defense-of-marriage/church-documents-on-defense-of-marriage.cfm

I think by a lot of traditionalist standards, the procreation of children is pretty much the purpose of marriage, and the 'elevation" of the "good of the spouses" to a coequal purpose of marriage is an invention of Vatican II. That's why the Baltimore catechism citation is SO interesting to me because it does emphasize mutual help first. Of course salvation has always been the purpose of every vocation ... that's the point of Jesus after all .... just very interesting to see the traditionalist conception knocked back by a traditional teaching source.