Think Pink, Go Green

The month of October has been designated as Breast Cancer Awareness Month. As such, I've been hearing a lot about breast cancer and finding a cure. I know a few people who are involved in raising awareness through programs like this and this. Even the NFL has gotten in on the action. Breast cancer is an insidious disease. It has touched my own life through family members. Raising awareness and finding a cure for breast cancer is certainly a worthy cause and I don't want to diminish the time, money, and effort Americans put into cancer awareness programs. But I do want to shift the focus.

October is also Respect Life Month. Begun by the Catholic bishops in America in 1972, the Respect Life program stresses the value and dignity of human life from the moment of conception until natural death. Each year, the Catholic Church in America seeks to bring attention to any number of issues affecting the dignity of and infringing upon the rights of people. Here, you can read the bishop's statement launching this year's Respect Life Month. Many of these life issues are somewhat controversial in the minds of the public, but also among many Christians, as well. I would like to talk about one of these controversial topics, contraception, not only because it affects the dignity of women, but also because it might be causing them cancer as well.

Breast cancer awareness has taken up a huge block of media this month. The Lifetime Channel is integrating the subject in several of their programs. Because of all this attention, I thought I might check out the facts and statistics for myself. All of it is very confusing, to say the least. I did find out a few things though. A total of 2.4 million Americans die each year. Of those, cancer claims the lives of 560,000 people. Statistically, that is pretty significant. 23% of American deaths can be attributed to cancer. From all the media attention, I imagined that breast cancer might account for a large number of these cases, but I was wrong. The actual number of women who die from breast cancer each year is about 40,000. In other words, less than 2% of deaths in America are breast cancer related. In fact, more people die each year from kidney disease than from breast cancer. But I did discover something rather alarming while wading through the quagmire of statistics and research—breast cancer among young women is on the rise. What was once an "old woman" disease is now the leading cause of death in women under 50. Why? What has changed so dramatically in our culture or among women to bring about this plight? Has breast cancer always silently inflicted young women? Is there anything we can do about it? What, if anything, does any of this have to do with respecting life or Christianity?

I'm not certain that anyone will ever be able to definitively determine what causes breast cancer. Over the years lots of organizations have pinpointed the culprits—electromagnetic fields, cow's milk, and plastic. Some ideas get dismissed as quickly as rowdy customers in Walmart. Others, like this one, seem to linger as long as there is an agenda to promote. However, researchers have known for decades that a woman's lifetime exposure to estrogen is associated with her risk of developing breast cancer. That seems pretty straightforward to me. Considering that men make up less than 1% of breast cancer cases, it's probably likely that estrogen plays a fairly significant role in the disease. Normally, women have little control over their estrogen levels. Most young girls are caught by surprise when they first begin menstruating. Older women go through years of waning cycles before menopause. Estrogen is unpredictable. It makes us irritable. It makes us feel euphoric. It makes us emotional. It makes us fat. It gives us the ability to bring new life into the world. And, yes, it leaves us susceptible to breast cancer. None of this has changed in the last 50 years. But something has. More than 85% of women have used some form of hormonal contraceptive during their reproductive years. There is no doubt that widespread use of hormonal contraceptives has changed women. But it may be killing them, as well.

I don't want to go into a long, drawn out discussion on the origins of the oral contraceptive pill. It would take up most of this space and a lot of time. But a quick look at the history of the birth control movement will lead anyone straight to Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood. Her motives for controlling the births of babies are no secret. For 4 decades, Margaret Sanger dreamed of a "magic pill" that would suppress a woman's fertility. Her vision became reality when, in 1951, she met scientists who were willing to help her. The process of providing a contraceptive pill to the public was long and arduous. Reluctantly, the FDA granted approval to market the drug for limited use in 1960. In May of that year, oral contraceptives became the only drug marketed not to treat a medical illness. The safety issues with hormonal contraceptives at the time were dismissed and continue to be misrepresented or ignored all together. Hormonal contraceptives, whether in the form of pills, patches, or injections, continue to be prescribed to healthy women for long term use for the sole purpose of addressing a social issue. The introduction of a contraceptive pill was the beginning of one of the greatest social experiments of our time using women as guinea pigs.

Currently, there are 6 types of hormonal contraceptives available to women in the U.S. Those hormones are either synthetic estrogen or progestin or a combination thereof. Most, if not all, of those hormones are listed in the 11^th Report on Carcinogens, a report issued periodically by the Department of Health and Human Services. This report identifies substances that are known to or are reasonably assumed to cause some form of cancer. It has been known for some time that estrogen causes blood clots, which increases the risk of stroke. There continues to be debate regarding birth control pills and heart disease. And new research continues to surface regarding synthetic progestin and breast cancer. There are also studies linking hormonal contraceptives to liver disease, migraine headaches, and a host of psychological issues. It has also been suggested that the use of hormonal contraceptives has a significant impact on women's partner selection. It seems that infertile women prefer boyish faces to chiseled profiles. It also seems that men actually find fertile women to be more attractive. Based on this information alone, I wonder how anyone could argue that the benefits of hormonal birth control outweigh the risk. And then it occurred to me. Our society, including Christians, is willing to overlook this evil in the name of practicality or pragmatism.

It's certainly reasonable to assume that controlling one's fertility has given women, and men for that matter, a considerable amount of freedom. Because they don't have to worry about pregnancy, women have much more power in their sexual relationships. They are able to satisfy their sexual needs without giving much consideration to their partners. Men and women are able to postpone marriage while enjoying an active sex life. Many couples choose to live together in "trial" marriages without making long term commitments. Couples who do marry are free to focus indefinitely on their emotional and financial needs without having children. Women are able to concentrate on their careers by remaining in the workforce for much longer periods of time. Because of this financial security, women are able to leave marriages where they are unhappy or uncomfortable. Yet this freedom women enjoy comes at a price. Men are able to delay their own adolescence because there is no real expectation that they will become fathers. Men are able to reduce women to sexual objects, a means to satisfy their own sexual desires, while disregarding her physical and emotional needs. Men no longer have to be committed in their sexual relationship, therefore leaving women feeling confused and vulnerable. Any pregnancy that results through contraception is, by nature, unintended by one person or the other. According to the Guttmacher Institute, nearly half of all pregnancies in the U.S. are unintended. In their report, 54% of women who had abortions were using some form of contraception. Surprisingly, a large number of these women are Christians. Many women who embrace their unintended pregnancy often find themselves raising children alone. The social ramifications of all these situations are only beginning to be understood.

Even though these social problems are only now coming to light, they were foreseen long ago when oral contraceptives were first made available to the public. In 1968, Pope Paul VI, almost prophetically, addressed these very issues in his Encyclical Letter, Humanae Vitae (On Human Life). He recognized the increasing demands society was placing on families, especially larger ones. He also recognized the changing of women's roles in that society. But in his wisdom, guided by the Holy Spirit, he also understood the intrinsic evil associated with the direct and deliberate practice of contraception. Although Pope Paul VI couldn't possibly have realized the medical difficulties women might face, he certainly was able to predict the breakdown of marriage, the loss of respect for women, and the general lowering of moral standards in our society. In spite of his words, Christians rejected the notion that ultimately God is in charge of the number of children they have. They instead eagerly embraced what has proven to be evil in order to accomplish what they viewed as a greater good. They dismissed the idea that men and women are called by God to gain mastery over their desires and emotions. They overlooked God's design of a loving marriage, two spouses responsible for each other's physical and emotional well-being. They pushed aside the realization that marriage requires commitment, responsibility, and sacrifice. And they ultimately rejected the understanding that life is a precious gift, given only by God, not left to the arbitrary emotions of mankind.

Prayer for Reverence of Life

All mighty God, giver of all that is good, we thank you for the precious gift of human life.

For life in the womb, coming from your creative power.

For the life of children, making us glad with their freshness and promise.

For the life of young people, hoping for a better world.

For the life of the handicapped and disabled, teaching us humility.

For the life of the elderly, witnessing the ageless values of patience and wisdom.

Like the Blessed Virgin Mary, may we always say yes to your gift. May we defend it and promote it from conception to it's natural end and bring us at last, O Father, to eternal life, in Jesus Christ our Lord.

Amen.

It Ain’t About The Wedding, Babe

Every so often, movie night at our house begins with moans, groans, and sighs. It usually happens when my husband or one of the boys opens the Netflix envelope only to discover a chick flick. This week was especially vocal. The movie wasn't just some sappy love story, but it was actually about weddings. I've had weddings on my mind a lot lately. We celebrated our wedding anniversary this week. I've been dreaming about my niece getting married in a pink camouflage dress. If that weren't enough, our 5 year old daughter picked out her own Cinderella wedding dress while we were shopping. So I suppose it was fitting to watch Bride Wars this weekend.

Bride Wars (PG) is a romantic comedy starring Kate Hudson as Olivia "Liv" Lerner and Anne Hathaway as Emma Allen. The two twenty-something women have been best friends since childhood. Since seeing a wedding at the Plaza Hotel in New York, the girls have fantasized into adulthood about their own perfect Plaza Hotel weddings. Their love and support for each other quickly turns into jealously and spite as they discover their upcoming weddings have been booked for the same day.

We have an unspoken movie rule at our house—any movie rated PG or higher has to be previewed before the younger children can watch it. I'm glad we have this rule. Although they would have laughed at Liv's blue hair and Emma's orange skin, I think our young children would have been confused by the subject matter and sexual innuendo. Also, the scene with Anne Hathaway dancing at the bachelorette party is a bit too risqué for young children. Since the plot is rather juvenile, I suspect older children and teens will catch on rather quickly. They might even find some of this stuff to be hilarious. In spite of a few funny moments, I find the entire concept of Bride Wars to be problematic from a Christian standpoint. Christian parents shouldn't have any trouble recognizing this movie's flaws.

After I watched this movie, I wasn't certain I was going to blog about it. After all, this is a parenting blog. So I contemplated for awhile. Then I saw this clip on television. The last thing I want is for either of our sons to face Bridezilla on his wedding day. I also don't want our sons or daughters to realize at the last minute, like Emma, that they do not love the person in whom they have invested so much time. I suspect that most Christian parents concur. Even though parents can't choose their children's future spouse, I believe Christian parents can and should offer some direction. I believe it starts early and it starts with understanding.

Dating is a relatively modern concept, which is mostly about having fun. Very few young people, including Christians, consider that dating has another purpose. Dating, or courtship, is designed to help young men and women find a suitable spouse. If a young person is not ready to think about marriage, then dating really serves no useful purpose. In fact, it can become emotional and difficult. Once two young people fall in love, it can be really difficult for them to step back if the relationship is moving faster than anticipated or if it begins to crumble. That's where I think this really small tidbit of wisdom can be quite helpful.

Keeping these things in mind, I believe that parents can help their teenagers navigate dating and courtship successfully. Christian parents can begin the conversation early on, especially when they see their children becoming interested in the opposite sex. They should instruct their teenagers that dating is the vehicle to selecting a spouse. Now, I'm not going to suggest that there is a "magic" age for teens to begin dating. Christian parents are more than capable of discerning when the time is appropriate. I will only say that dating is serious business. Dating helps young people identify those who share their values. It can be an exciting, emotional time for teenagers. So under these circumstances, I compiled a list of important notes and helpful hints for Christian parents to pass along to their children.

• There is no such person as a "soul mate." God did not predestine each person to have one true love. Instead, God gave men and women free will along with the desire to love and be loved. Love is a choice.
  


• Christians should date only Christians. Christians who fall in love and marry non-Christians often face difficulties and unhappiness. This is certainly not God's plan for marriage.
  


• Have as many first dates as possible. Christians can never be sure what God's plan is for them, so keep an open mind. It is possible to miss out on God's perfect plan while waiting for Mr. or Miss Right.
  


• Chastity is a Christian's personal responsibility. Young men and women should treat each other with respect. Lack of self control can leave both people emotionally and physically confused.
  


• Avoid becoming serious until marriage is possible. Long courtships can lead young people into sin. These couples eventually become involved sexually and often cohabitate. This can have devastating effects.
  

After I watched this movie, I really couldn't decide which bothered me more—brides fighting in the aisle or brides dancing in the aisle. I must admit, both make pretty good entertainment. Bride Wars did leave me with something, though. I've been having this crazy dream. Smurfette is getting married to an Oompa-Loompa while Bert Parks sings "There She Is, Miss America." Sounds like a wedding theme to me.

Love, American Style by Cindy Willmot

"For the husband is head of his wife just as Christ is head of the church." Ephesians 5:23

This weekend it rained, a lot. Sometimes, when it rains, I catch up on chores or read. But this week I decided it would be a good time to watch some of the movies we had from Netflix. We had two that were beginning to collect dust and I wanted to update our queue. One movie was peculiar. When I ordered Smother, I thought the plot sounded very modern and, possibly, worth blogging about. The movie was bad, actually. I was planning on forgetting about it until we started watching the second movie. The Odd Couple was pretty familiar. I remember watching re-runs of the TV show when I was a kid. I'm certain I never really understood the concept, but I thought it was funny. I had never seen the play or movie version and imagined I might have a better appreciation for it now that I'm an adult. I suppose it was only coincidence that both movies address the issue of divorce. Perhaps it's also coincidental that one movie referenced 1968 frequently and the other was set in 1968. Considering that I was born in the 1960s and that, last week, I used several recipes from the 1960s, I thought I should just review both movies in context of an idea that erupted from the 1960s—no-fault divorce.

Smother (PG-13) is a contemporary comedy about Noah Cooper (Dax Shephard) who loses his job, only to face pressure from his wife to have a baby. If that weren't enough, his mother decides to leave her husband and move in with the couple. Diane Keaton plays Marilyn, Noah's neurotic, insecure mother. The story revolves around Noah's attempts to placate his wife Claire's (Liv Tyler) needs and his efforts to get his Mom out of his house. The Odd Couple (G) is a comedy movie based on Neil Simon's play by the same name. The movie revolves around two newly divorced men, Oscar Madison (Walter Matthau) and Felix Ungar (Jack Lemmon) as they attempt to share an apartment together. This situation proves difficult because they have very different ideas about their new lifestyle and housekeeping.

Before I go any further, I want to say that Smother and The Odd Couple are not kid's movies. Both of these movies deal with adult themes entirely. Smother has several scenes with a scantily clad Liv Tyler trying to convince her unemployed husband to have a baby. There are plenty of sexual references. Some of these are quite graphic. There is also a scene with Diane Keaton's character smoking marijuana. While teenagers will probably think this material is funny, I don't believe it's appropriate even at this age level. The Odd Couple is fairly mild. While it would be acceptable for older children to watch, I suspect they might find the movie dated and boring. Neither of these movies, in my opinion, is worth watching as a family. I mention them here because I believe they highlight society's changing attitudes about marriage and divorce. These two movies, filmed 40 years apart, illustrate how the feelings and emotions associated with divorce have changed as divorce has become commonplace. I believe this topic is worth discussing, especially since Christians have divorce rates similar to non-Christians. So to change things up a bit this week, I am only going to reference these movies briefly. If you do watch them, I encourage you to view them in light of this discussion.

Prior to 1970, obtaining a divorce was a difficult, complicated, and often expensive endeavor. A judge had to agree there was reason for the marriage to be dissolved. The reasons for divorce were fairly clear—cruelty, adultery, desertion, incarceration, or inability to consummate the marriage. Most married women at that time were homemakers. Those who did work outside their homes often worked part time in clerical, teaching, or retail positions. The movie Smother references this fact when Marilyn Cooper leaves her husband. When she is surprisingly hired at a carpet store, she mentions that she hasn't worked since before she was married. Only a very small percentage of married women were highly educated with professional careers. In fact, the sentiment at that time was that single women worked and married women stayed home. Under these circumstances, divorce was a last resort. Husbands and wives found ways to make their marriages work, if only for the sake of raising their children. Women did not want to suffer financially and men did not want to be losers. This thought is evident in both characters of The Odd Couple. Oscar expresses his personal disdain simply by being a slob. Felix is obviously emotionally dejected. In a brief dialogue in the movie, both men admit their failure and accept that they are unable or unworthy of being good husbands. However, as Americans embraced the feminism of the 1960s, attitudes about divorce slowly began to change.

In 1963, Betty Friedan published her book, The Feminine Mystique. As a highly educated woman, Mrs. Friedan found it difficult to reconcile her social status with her career aspirations. After interviewing many of her college classmates, she discovered they shared the same sentiment. Mrs. Friedan identified this anxiety as "the problem with no name." Rather than acknowledge that they had failed to adapt to their new roles, these suburban housewives accepted the notion that society had shortchanged them. Armed with their college degrees and the newly available birth control pill, married women began to postpone childbearing and join the work force. As eluded to in Smother, these women believed their accomplishments in the workforce would be more valuable than their responsibilities at home. Many women came to view home life as drudgery and a career as the ideal.

While young mothers were grabbing copies of Betty Friedan's book, another educated woman in California was working to change the laws that she felt were treating women unjustly. Herma Hill Kay, then a law professor at UC Berkeley, was advocating for women who, she felt, were trapped in marriages. She, along with other lawyers and judges, believed that women shouldn't be forced to remain in marriages where they were unhappy nor resort to perjuring themselves in court. Perhaps some felt men were being falsely accused of cruelty where none actually existed. In either case, by the end of 1969 no-fault divorce was introduced to the United States via California's Family Law Act of 1969, championed by Gov. Ronald Reagan. Other states soon followed suit, eventually eliminating the requirement of fault as grounds for divorce. By 1970, either spouse in a marriage could petition the court for a divorce based on irreconcilable differences, even if the other partner was opposed. For those seeking divorce, the stigma attached was now gone. As a result, divorce slowly became a viable alternative to men and women in unhappy marriages.

As September 4^th marks the 40^th anniversary of no-fault divorce, Christian parents might consider the connection between divorce and feminism. During the 1960s, feminists sought to free women from what they perceived as a male dominated society. They believed the prevailing attitude of the times was preventing women from reaching their full potential and causing unjust suffering. They concluded that, by reaching their career goals, working mothers were fulfilling their emotional needs, helping attain financial stability, and giving their children independence. Their commitment was the driving force behind the influx of mothers with young children joining and remaining in the workforce. These men and women worked diligently to ensure that married women could easily assimilate into the working community. They advocated for women to receive equal pay for equal work, access to leadership positions, full time day care, and better maternity benefits. These policies actually provided an avenue for wives to meet their financial needs independent of their husbands. With adequate income and no-fault divorce, women in unhappy marriages were able to move out on their own. Currently, many mothers cite fear of divorce as a reason for remaining in the work force. It would seem, then, that when women are able to care for themselves financially, they have less incentive to reconcile a marriage. It would also seem that when women fear their husbands can abandon them at will, they have a greater desire to work.

Both divorce and feminism are in complete opposition to Christian theology. The scripture is clear that God hates divorce. Divorce is rarely a viable option for Christians, especially if they are parents. The concepts of feminism are rather difficult to define and they do not always seem contradictory to Christianity. In fact many Christian men and women embrace egalitarianism—the idea that God created all men and women equal and all are free to use their God given talents in any capacity. This philosophy is very similar to equality feminism. Equality feminism holds that, even though men and women are biologically different, they should all have equal civil, social, and legal access. In other words, egalitarian Christians see no conflict with women in positions of power or authority. This type of feminism unavoidably leads to a new wave of feminism that purports the interchangeability of men and women. This modern form of feminism sees no conflict with mothers working full time careers and fathers caring full time for the children. Roles are purely a matter of choice and practicality. This idea, also, does not seemingly conflict with Christianity. Many Christians also believe that feminism is not problematic, as long as abortion is not part of the agenda. Feminism, however, in whatever form, most often leads in one of two directions—antagonism or denial. Both of these concepts invariably deny the dignity of the person and discredit God's complementary design for men and women.

God's design for men and women can be found in Genesis. The second part of the Creation story begins in Chapter 2. God created man and placed him in the Garden to work and tend to the animals. Not one of the animals was able to ease Adam's loneliness. As a result, God created a help mate, a partner, for him. God created male and female to exist for one another. In accordance with God's will, men and women were created with equal dignity, yet they were created physically, psychologically, and spiritually different. Human sexuality cannot, therefore, be reduced to a simple biological function. As the Scripture illustrates, men and women's relationship to one another was good from the beginning. Once sin entered into the world, God's original plan of equality, love, and respect was lost. Feminism seeks to exploit that deficit further. In a response to men's abuse of power, women respond by seeking power. Rather than complementing each other, men and women fight against each other, denying the dignity and value of the other person's unique qualities. In an effort to avoid being dominated, both men and women attempt to deny their sexual differences all together. They minimize sexual differences and place a greater emphasis on cultural norms. Once again, this attitude denies the dignity of the human person and elevates the rights of one person over another. Neither of these concepts is theologically sound.

I recently had a conversation with a friend who believes that it is not possible for men and women to have a traditional marriage. This is a sad reflection of our society. Christians should be able to reject this. Christian men should uphold the femininity of women. Christian women should respect the masculinity of men. Feminism does not offer a Christian any means to do that. Men and women are made for each other, to rely on each other, to help each other. This was God's design from the beginning. Modern society often has its own ideas about equality and justice. More often than not, these ideas are not compatible with Christianity. Many ideas that have become commonplace are often accepted by mainstream Christians as well. Feminism and divorce are fully embedded in contemporary culture. Now, they are slowly taking a stronghold on Christianity. It is my prayer that Christian parents begin to reject these modern concepts and return to the Christian example of marriage. Our future depends on it.

Christian Parenting Begins with Marriage

A few short decades ago, people who wanted to have children got married, and people who did not want to have children did not get married. Today, this is not necessarily the case. According to government statistics, almost 40% of children were born out of wedlock in the U.S. in 2007. It is unclear how many of these were born to Christian mothers, but the number is likely to be significant. Similarly, in the past, couples who got married expected to remain married for a lifetime. This, too, is not necessarily an expectation of today's married couples. According to Barna research in 2008, 33% of Born-Again non Evangelicals chose to divorce their partners, leaving the children to be raised by unmarried or remarried parent(s). It would seem that marriage no longer has the significance it once held. Divorce, once a taboo in Christian communities, is now often considered a rite of passage. An ever increasing number of Christian couples are deciding to forgo having children at all. Many online Christian bulletin boards now host groups for "Childfree Christians." Both of these trends--raising children without the benefit of married parents and marrying without the benefit of having children--seem far removed from a Biblical view of marriage and family.

The Scripture is clear when discussing Christian marriage. God created males and females and designed them to become "one body" when they marry (Genesis 1:27; 2:24). Jesus affirmed this in the Gospel (Matthew 19:4-5). In spite of the obfuscation in our culture today, human sexual anatomy is fairly simple to comprehend. Furthermore, God created men and women with sexual desire so that when they marry they want to spend all of their time loving and pleasing one another. In time, the married couple becomes so closely bonded that they are as one person. Biologically, their union leads to the possibility of childbirth. Sociologically, their binding forms the basis of a stable social unit that is the foundation for raising children. Of course, God never commanded Christians to get married, though marriage is preferable for couples who have strong sexual desires. Paul addressed this subject in his letter to Corinthians, when he advised that, though some may find celibacy an attainable commitment, most people should marry (1 Corinthians 7:8-9). Essentially, marriage is a covenant between one man and one woman who, through their sexual desires for one another, form an indissoluble bond that is open to God's blessing of fertility. Many of today's Christians, however, are confused about, misinformed about, or rebellious towards the Truth about marriage.

What is so confusing for contemporary Christians about marriage? Today's families hear mixed messages about marriage and sexuality coming from different Christian communities. Those from more traditional backgrounds often hear or come to believe that sexual desire is inherently evil. Consequently, they misunderstand the appropriateness of sexual desire within the context of marriage. Because the topic of sexual desire is so taboo for these Christians, it may be difficult for them to recognize,talk about, and cope with their sinful nature. On many occasions, traditional Christians are surprised to face unwed pregnancies themselves or with their children. At the same time, more progressive Christians are taught or become convinced that sexuality should be celebrated rather than prohibited. These Christians, too, misunderstand the design of sexuality within marriage. They may mistakenly conclude that God encourages His people to experience their genuine sexuality, with few limitations. These communities are more accepting and perhaps encouraging of homosexuality, cohabitation, and unwed pregnancy. Indeed, most Christians are no longer instructed that abstinence, either for a short time or long term, is practical or even possible.

Just as modern Christians receive mixed messages about sexuality, they also are inundated with differing ideas regarding marriage and divorce. An increasing number of Christians believe or accept that there is an exception clause, adultery, that allows for divorce (Matthew 5:32). They also believe that if their marriage is disolved, they are also free to marry again if they so desire. In an effort to support these individuals, church communities establish divorce ministries to aid families, particularly with children, through the often painful transition from one family to another. Both traditional and progressive Christians, at times, struggle with the breakup of one marriage, the emotional well being of the children involved, and the social implications of starting a new family with another spouse--all, in their mind, with God's blessing. A growing number of Christians have adopted the idea that marriage itself is simply "ceremonial" and have resolved themselves not to marry but cohabitate instead. Few Christians, these days, accept that marriage is for life or that, if a divorce is necessary in special circumstances, remarriage is unacceptable.

If ideas regarding marriage and divorce are so relaxed, what must Christians think of their fertility? Most Christians agree that the Bible is silent on matters of fertility such as family size, contraception, and fertility treatments. Because the Scripture does not clearly delineate the specific behaviors that are prohibited, these Christians assert that God gives them latitude in fertility matters. For them curtailing family size with contraception, foregoing childbearing altogether, or subjecting oneself to dangerous medical treatments for infertility are permissible. These couples resoundingly believe that, regardless of the techniques they use to avoid or achieve pregnancy, if they conceive or not, God willed it. A growing number of modern Christians are beginning to question this contemporary approach to fertility. These couples see their fertility as a blessing from God and, in spite of social restraints, are rejecting contraception and dangerous fertility treatments. These Christians welcome the children they have naturally or accept childlessness with humility and thankfulness.

How did modern Christians reach this point where their ideas of marriage and family are contrived and artificial---far removed from Biblical Truth? Christians, like the secular world, are susceptible to a logical fallacy that we call the "two percent trap." People fall into the "two percent trap" by believing that the exceptional cases are the norm. These modern Christians look at sexuality in terms of deviant behavior and then assume that all people, including other Christians, are unable to control their sexual passions and feelings. They see a small percentage of individuals struggling with sexual orientation and conclude that alternative sexual orientations are another norm that should be explored. Likewise, they consider divorce, which once was a rare occurrence, a viable option for an unhappy marriage. In a similar way, as the average family size gradually shrinks, modern Christians simply re-adjust their view of what it means to be married and to have children. In other words, rather than have the Scripture challenge and shape their conception of the world, many Christians allow their understanding of the modern world to distort their understanding of the Bible and the Truth found therein.

(Thanks to Te Deum laudamus! for the beautiful photo above.)

http://te-deum.blogspot.com/2008/01/first-tridentine-wedding-at-grotto-in.html