By Gerard E. Sherry

A great deal is being said and written these days about family limitations and birth control. Furthermore, it is not confined to the secular periodicals. Just recently, several Catholic magazines have had articles and letters on the subject with the size of Catholic families being one of the bones of contention. Here are some views on the subject which I have been looking for an opportunity to express.

One of the greatest difficulties in this area of discussion has been the inability of many priests and laity to face the fact that while the principle end of marriage is the propagation of life, there are two other essential ends to it, that of mutual help between the spouses and the quieting of concupiscence (Civardi - Christianity and Social Justice).

The pulpit stress on the “principle end” had led many lay people to the false impression that the only good Catholic families are those which contain a large number of children. It further implies that those who have small families are somehow not quite Catholic enough. Very little is heard from the pulpit of the many other considerations that must come into the regulation of Christian families. Continence, for instance, can be a virtue in marriage, yet is seldom suggested, except for those with medical or economic difficulties. Furthermore, the rhythm method is often treated as if it was just above the level of sin, and inexcusable for most healthy couples. The usual advice to couples worried over their inability to care for or to face the prospects of a large family is to leave it to God and His plans for them. Father John O’Brien of Notre Dame, a recognized expert in the theology of this subject, recently commented on this line of reasoning. He said, “How does a couple know God’s plan? By using the intelligence with which God has endowed them. In the ordinary course of the divine economy, Providence does not suspend the laws of nature nor work in other miraculous ways. When a fertile couple continues the conjugal relationship into the fertile period, they must assume the responsibility for the resulting pregnancy and not thrust it upon God.” “This is elementary Catholic theology and it is high time our religions in schools and priests in pulpits should make this unmistakably clear. When a couple regulates the number of offspring with true Christian prudence, largeness or smallness is totally irrelevant.” Father O’Brien’s comments bring into focus a problem which is daily being faced by Catholic couples. There does not appear to be enough consideration of it among the groups to which Catholics must look for help and guidance. The Family Life Bureau of the National Catholic Welfare Conference

seems to emphasize its position on the problem. Its annual Family Life award always goes to one of the nation’s large Catholic families. Maybe the Bureau’s interpretation of “family life excludes small families; but I think they make a big mistake. There must be a better standard of judgement than that. While many couples do regulate their families -- and in conformity with the Church’s teaching -- they are not necessarily less deserving or virtuous than those of large families. There are even childless couples, unable to have children for a variety of valid reasons, who must still be considered among good Christian families.

Another group which has always bothered me is the Christian Family Movement. We were once associated with one of its units, but after awhile decided to quit -- not that we disagreed with many of its aims. Alas, the main symbol of membership in this unit appeared to be that one’s wife constantly pregnant. I am not trying to be funny here, but that is the way it was. I know that officials of the CFM will deny that the movement is so narrow in its aims; but here again I can only go by experiences I have had. Certainly, the broad aims of the CFM cover all aspects of family life. There should be an end to the propagation of the false idea that there is an official Catholic position on the size of families. The sanctity of marriage is too important to establish a numbers norm. To quote a recent letter in America by Richard A. McCormick, S.J.:

“The Church has too much respect for the sanctity of marriage, the happiness and sanctification of the individual couple, the individual conscience, the operation of the Holy Spirit and the well being of the children to propose an absolute, quantitative norm of largeness or smallness as something to which all or most couples should aspire. This absolute mentality would compromise the very values she regards as essential to both marriage and conjugal love.” “Rather than propose a quantitative ideal, the Catholic Church explains all aspects and values of Christian married life and love, and proposes these as the essential structure within which the individual couple should make its own decisions. The Church does not and cannot make the decision for the couple. But from an enormous experience she realizes that the characteristic threat to such a decision is an inversion of values, and her emphasis often reflects this awareness.” Responsible parenthood demands that whatever decision a couple makes, whether to have a large or small family, it must always be a decision resulting from Christian prudence. My main point about the whole matter is that, while there may be virtue in having large families, one should not, therefore, conclude that those with small families are shirking their Christian duty. There are extremists at both ends of this problem.

Neither should these reapings be taken as an attack on large families. It is more a defense of the many small families who face not so subtle criticism by those who stress only one facet of family life. Catholics cannot accept the secular answers to their marriage problems; but they do look to the Church for more sympathetic hearing, and better instruction, in fulfilling their moral obligations.