Quiverfull philosophy...who here practices?

[Quiver0f10]

I always find this confusing. Why do folks get so upset about a religious belief when its not one they follow? What does it hurt you if nobody's insisting you follow it, or even agree to it?

 

Excellent question!

[Myrrh]

I am sure I will get attacked for this but I *do* think that those who take bc pills (in particular) are not trusting in the Lord *in regards to children*. Why else would you take bc pills unless you did *not* want to get pg? And I *do* think they (bc pill users) are not doing what they should because bc pills kill unborn babies. This said, I also believe MANY (if not the majority) who take bc pills have NO IDEA what it does - they just know that it prevents them from having a baby (supposedly) and that it is "completely safe" because that is what our doctors say, sadly enough.

 

Point B) I'm not sure how you could be abused by being encouraged to let the Lord rule your family...however, I can see your point if you are speaking of people telling women that they must have large families (NOT WHAT QF IS, THOUGH).

 

I agree about the pill, since it is an abortifacient. I have spent a good deal of my life writing to support the pro-life cause, so I'm no stranger to being in the minority.

 

As for Point B, please see the comment I posted just before this.

 

To the person who asked if I am a Christian, I am and have been all my life. I have been the lone voice defending Christianity and Biblical values in many secular liberal institutions. That was basically my job before becoming a wife, mother, homemaker, and now homeschooler.

 

So talk about painting with a broad brush, that's exactly what you're doing when you lump me in with those who attack the faith, simply because I am responding to the Biblical call to be discerning, to watch doctrine, and not to trade in precious grace for legalism.

[mommaduck]

Again, Patriocentricity may HAVE quiverful as one of their stands, but they don't own it. I know Jewish, Islamic, and Mormons that are quiverful also...that leave their family size in "Gd/HaShem/Allah's hands" or "to Fate". It's how they believe. "Leaving it to Gd" is another way of saying that they are not doing anything to actively attempt or prevent conception. You are choosing to read offensive where none is intended.

 

 

Your argument is as bad as someone that wears skirts for modesty as saying anyone who doesn't wear skirts is immodest, when skirts is simply THEIR expression of modesty. One of many expressions throughout the world. "Leaving it to God" is one of many expressions or ways of trusting God. As a Jewish friend once told me, "it may be my mitzvah, but not your mitzvah" (talking about various practices in general and the variances you see in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam).

 

 

 

I came out of fundamentalism. I understand the battle from both sides. But there are people that make your arguments who are also being legalistic. I call it being a legalistic liberal. "You're being a legalist if you wear skirts, headcover, homeschool, are quiverful, and don't go swimming!!!" "You're a legalist until I see you put on pants, cut your hair, put your kids in public school, use birth control, and get a swimsuit on!" THAT is just as legalistic, because you are presuming a person's motives and insisting they be just. like. you.

Edited August 11, 2009 by mommaduck

[Quiver0f10]

Nice how no one actually addresses any of what I said and instead blacklists me. That is a huge red flag that people feel threatened.

 

Again, I say, my motives for posting were:

 

a) The language used to describe QF makes it sound as if though who don't hold to that theology are somehow not trusting the Lord, not putting him first, and otherwise disobeying the Bible. Now THAT is judgemental. And I have a right to defend the unrepresented position in a public forum.

 

b) My heart aches for the women and children who are being spiritually abused within this movement, and their stories need to be heard for the sake of others who may be in similar situations.

 

 

If you feel people are judging you because of their beliefs, that is how YOU feel. Doesn't make it true. You on the other hand are judging eveyone who is qf as being "better than though and abused." You can't have it both ways.

 

I personally could care less how you or anyone else believes @ birth control. I have my beliefs and thats all I need to worry about.

[LibraryLover]

Again, Patriocentricity may HAVE quiverful as one of their stands, but they don't own it. I know Jewish, Islamic, and Mormons that are quiverful also...that leave their family size in "Gd/HaShem/Allah's hands" or "to Fate". It's how they believe. "Leaving it to Gd" is another way of saying that they are not doing anything to actively attempt or prevent conception. You are choosing to read offensive where none is intended.

 

 

Your argument is as bad as someone that wears skirts for modesty as saying anyone who doesn't wear skirts is immodest, when skirts is simply THEIR expression of modesty. One of many expressions throughout the world. "Leaving it to God" is one of many expressions or ways of trusting God. As a Jewish friend once told me, "it may be my mitzvah, but not your mitzvah" (talking about various practices in general and the variances you see in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam).

 

 

I agree. For me there is a big difference between saying "This is how I choose to serve my god" and the dogmatic "This is how you serve God".

 

I also think it's possible that if there is a god, perhaps he would give some women the desire to have many, many babies, and he would give some the desire to serve him by becoming heart surgeons. A heart surgeon may not be able to have 10 or 17 babies as she studies & saves lives. If she can do both, god can be doubly pleased.

 

Owning it is exactly right.

Edited August 11, 2009 by LibraryLover

[Word Nerd]

I am *not* a troll but the fact that you would be so quick to label me that way merely because I present an alternate viewpoint (and exposing abuses within the other viewpoint) only further confirms the judgemental/holier-than-thou attitude which I have witnessed among some of QF camp.

 

 

 

Actually, you didn't merely present an alternative viewpoint but rather set yourself against and spoke condescendingly about those who practice QF from your very first post on this thread.

[Ginevra]

I am sure I will get attacked for this but I *do* think that those who take bc pills (in particular) are not trusting in the Lord *in regards to children*. Why else would you take bc pills unless you did *not* want to get pg? And I *do* think they (bc pill users) are not doing what they should because bc pills kill unborn babies. This said, I also believe MANY (if not the majority) who take bc pills have NO IDEA what it does - they just know that it prevents them from having a baby (supposedly) and that it is "completely safe" because that is what our doctors say, sadly enough.

 

Just FYI, the pill is also used for medical reasons.

I take pills and I do want more children, strangely enough. The thing is, it's not up to me alone to have more children, therefore, I am in the position of preventing children that I would gladly have. I do know what the pill does and I am aware that no medication is without potential health risks. And, actually, I have not heard any doctor say the pill is "completely safe", just that my particular risks are outweighed by the medical benefits it confers.

Edited August 11, 2009 by Ginevra
grammatical error

[kmacnchs]

Just FYI, the pill is also used for medical reasons.

I take pills and I do want more children, strangely enough. The thing is, it's not up to me alone to have more children, therefore, I am in the position of preventing children that I would gladly have. I do know what the pill does and I am aware that no medication is without potential health risks. And, actually, I have heard any doctor say the pill is "completely safe", just that my particular risks are outweighed by the medical benefits it confers.

 

Point taken...I was actually thinking of my friends in hs who took the pill to regulate their cycles...not to prevent conception...(when I was writing that) but if I wrote everything I was thinking...WATCH OUT!:D

 

Maybe it was just my doctor but I had to search out *anyone* who could help me understand what exactly the pill does...my mom didn't know, my pastor's wife didn't know...they just took it blindly...I told my friends as soon as I found out. I think it is important for people to be informed and I was (and am) upset that I was not from my doctor (who I completely trust).

[Myrrh]

I always find this confusing. Why do folks get so upset about a religious belief when its not one they follow? What does it hurt you if nobody's insisting you follow it, or even agree to it?

 

This is exactly the reasoning that gay marriage advocates put forth. In fact, it's a popular mantra in the world--you know the old saying, "as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else." We Christians argue that in fact the culture does affect others, including us. How much more than does what we as the body of Christ believe/practice affect other believers? The Bible exhorts us to have love, discernment and accountability.

 

This isn't a difference of religion, it's a matter of doctrine within one religion, and it's become that because of the QF movement. What should have stayed personal conviction (as outlined in Romans 14 and 1 Corinthians 8) has become a theology.

 

For some reason, the tables keep being turned on me in this discussion. I am not judging anyone's personal conviction/calling -- I am protesting the judgement of those without the same conviction being labeled (by inference) as not trusting God, not submitting to His will, etc.

[Ginevra]

For some reason, the tables keep being turned on me in this discussion. I am not judging anyone's personal conviction/calling -- I am protesting the judgement of those without the same conviction being labeled (by inference) as not trusting God, not submitting to His will, etc.

 

Myrrh, did you read my post a page back, where I endeavored to explain to you the basis for the QF belief? Perhaps you didn't, because we are paging ahead so fast, but I did try to show you where the belief stems from and how it has to do with not trusting God/submitting to his will.

[mommaduck]

This is exactly the reasoning that gay marriage advocates put forth. In fact, it's a popular mantra in the world--you know the old saying, "as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else." We Christians argue that in fact the culture does affect others, including us. How much more than does what we as the body of Christ believe/practice affect other believers? The Bible exhorts us to have love, discernment and accountability.

 

This isn't a difference of religion, it's a matter of doctrine within one religion, and it's become that because of the QF movement. What should have stayed personal conviction (as outlined in Romans 14 and 1 Corinthians 8) has become a theology.

 

For some reason, the tables keep being turned on me in this discussion. I am not judging anyone's personal conviction/calling -- I am protesting the judgement of those without the same conviction being labeled (by inference) as not trusting God, not submitting to His will, etc.

 

 

Repeat:

 

#1 yes, you were very judgmental.

 

#2 people were stating THEIR PERSONAL CONVICTIONS...not saying EVERYONE else should do as they do. They were looking for LIKE MINDED people. You aren't one of them, point made. Why did you feel the need to make such a point on a thread looking specifically for like minded people? If you want to point out a contrasting view, debate it, what ever...then you could've started another thread.

 

 

You believe that Christ died for those that will follow Him. Should others that don't follow him take it personally that you are, by insinuation, excluding them?

[Geo]

Geo, of course I'm not referring to Mason. I do not see Mason as a good trade or a decent payoff for suffering the losses. It's nice that we did get to have him, but I don't see it as...."Well, if we had never lost the others, we wouldn't have had him." To me, I should have four children, because I gave birth to four children.

 

Also, I appreciate your sentiments about the "beauty" of being born into Heaven, but it's not adequate to make it alright. I don't imagiine any of us set out to have children so we can populate Heaven. If Heaven is so great for our children, then Andrea Yates is a saint and we who raise our children to adulthood are selfishly keeping them from bliss.

 

I hope you take my words in the way I intend them. I am not shooting down your attempt at being soothing. It's just that I'm sure I've heard it all before and really none of it is acceptable balm. It completely sucks to lose a child; it stinks and it makes no sense in any possible light. But I do give people credit for trying.

 

To Lovemy 7: Your sorrows are my sorrows; you said it well. Thanks for that.

 

 

I certainly didn't mean or believe (nor should you) that Mason was a "pay off" for your losses, just that your statement was broad and referring to

to embrace qf and that no good came out of it. I was just trying to clarify that you were speaking of the losses specifically not your wholesale experience with it, which would include Mason. I also did not intend to make it alright, just soften the focus. I am glad you saw my attempt to be a comfort, so sorry it didn't help. I know how that is like too. What comforts one, may not comfort another.

 

:grouphug:

Geo

[Ginevra]

I was just trying to clarify that you were speaking of the losses specifically not your wholesale experience with it, which would include Mason.

 

Well...actually, I did mean my wholesale experience with it, not just the losses. :tongue_smilie: It was such a strange and amazing way that I came to embrace to idea of having a large family. I am from a large family (well, 5 kids, that's kind of large) and into adulthood I carried a distaste for it. So, the events that made me change my mind were strange and amazing...I thought God was preparing me for a large family. So, to me, it was like God pulled a "bait and switch" on me. Sorry if that sounds horribly blasphemous as I'm sure it may. He said, "Here! This would be wonderful! Want this!" and then, "Psyche! I was just kidding! How 'bout now that you want it, I show you how you can't have the six kids!"

 

I'm sure I'm saying too much...

[Myrrh]

Myrrh, here is a way to perhaps see where QF thinking is coming from, even if you don't agree. There are two beliefs that are central to Christian theology. (At least mainstream Christian theology; I can't speak to every tangential group.)

1.) Every human being is expressly and purposefully created by God;

2.) God's will is always superior to human choices/planning.

 

Therefore, it logically follows that God would never make a child by accident or by default because two fertile people had s*x. I say this as a person who does not know - or is not convinced of - the two points above. I say this is as person who is using b/c.

 

By the logic you are using, we can jump off a building and if it is God's will that we live, He will cause a truck hauling a gigantic trampoline to drive by at just that moment, breaking our fall and preserving our life. :001_smile:

 

If "God is bigger than our choices", then you could throw away the birth control and God would never create another child unless it was in his Sovereign Plan.

 

The Bible is filled with examples of people second-guessing God, sure that He or they made a mistake, or meant something else. It is when they tried to "help" God's plan come to pass that they made a mess of things. (Read about Abraham conceiving Ishmael with Hagar.) True faith is to trust God when it makes no earthly sense. (Coming from someone who does not take this advice! :tongue_smilie:)

 

I know what you mean about certain QF "types" and the whole patriachy obsession. I'm not a fan of that and cannot call myself QF, but I see no reason to be offended that some people believe in such a fashion. It doesn't hurt you particularly for believing differently.

 

Obviously God calls us to make choices--I'm merely saying that his will overrides ours--isn't this true Calvinism? One of my favorite verses is Romans 8:28, that God works all things to the good of those who love him. We are of course to make our choices based on what the Bible says, but there are many areas where the Bible does not specifically say "do this" or "don't do that". That's where individual conviction comes in. The Bible speaks of us having liberty in the passages I quoted earlier from Romans and Galatians--that certain things depend upon our own conscience.

 

What I have experienced with QF is not just people claiming individual conviction, but actually trying to persuade others to their belief that this is a Biblical mandate. There is pressure. Not from everyone who holds this conviction but usually from those who are part of a the larger patriocentric movement.

 

The only way I even came to know about any of this was because two friends gave me the Pearls' books (without talking to me first about it). It was like they were evangelists for their particular method of parenting and marriage. What I read I found disturbing, so I did further research. I also came across some hostility in the blogosphere when I explained my personal reasons for not wanting a large family. The reproach came from the QF camp.

 

I feel like I'm turning blue in the face, but I'm not saying that everyone who chooses to not limit their family size is judgemental or in an abusive family. What I'm saying is that we need to caution against the attitude of superiority and legalism which has already evolved out of this theology and other patriocentric ones, that together constitute practically a separate sect of Christianity...and it looks something pretty close to being Amish.

 

So there are the QFers and there are those who believe that unlimited reproduction is God's will for their family. I resist the theological bent of the first and I applaud the second for standing firm in their conviction, while not looking down on those who hold to a different conviction.

 

I apologize if my tone has sounded harsh--I am a passionate person and I care deeply about following the Lord, so I am sensitive to language which implies that those within the Body of Christ who don't hold to this view are somehow not loving or obeying God fully.

[kmacnchs]

This was said to me today:"God is sovereign over/in spite of our choices but He does give us the right to choose. Because I choose to sin, does that mean God is not sovereign over the outcome? No. Does it mean that it was what I was supposed to do/what God's desire is? No!" What we were talking about had NOTHING to do with this post but I think it applies, don't you?

[sagira]

Whew. What a thread. It's funny how I find myself agreeing with Myrrh, and Quill, but I also understand the Quiverfull's people position and how they may be offended. So, :grouphug: to everyone.

 

To answer the first, OP's question, no. I don't consider myself quiverfull (QF), but do think a lot about how much we determine and how much is God's plan. I have been very fortunate in that I wanted a son first, and I had a wonderful son (conceived that very first try). Then I wanted a daughter (four years later, after practicing Natural Family Planning), and I had my beautiful daughter, three months later. God has been infinitely good, kind, generous and patient with me. I always marvel at God's generosity and wisdom.

 

At the same time, now that I have ds and dd, I don't feel like having any more children. Children are a blessing, indeed, but they are also exhausting, time-consuming, privacy-stealing and noisy :tongue_smilie: I feel bad saying this, but as an only child, I crave solitude sometimes and all the noise drives me a bit crazy sometimes. Before our marriage, I wasn't even sure I wanted children, as I believe in only having children when one is truly committed, responsible and serious about taking good care of them and loving them as they deserve to be loved. I didn't know if I had what it takes. I take having children and parenting very, very seriously. Dh didn't care either way -- he was very much in love with me (and still is) and said that it was up to me. He would have been happy being childless. He wouldn't know what he was missing if he didn't have kids. I waited three years, during which regretfully I did use birth control (mother, doctor and the powers that be conspired to convince me). I did not find out until later that birth control contradicted my beliefs in letting life happen. Remember, this is MY belief, and I don't oppose anyone using birth control. Nor do I run a crusade. It was just not the way that I wanted to do it.

 

However, I feel that now it's time for us -- for dh and I and our present children, not more babies. I do feel strongly that, in my case, it's about quality, and not quantity.

 

I'm saying this as someone who:

 

- is still breastfeeding her two-year-old

- had breastfed her oldest until he was 3 and a half

- co-slept and is still sharing a bed with a two-year-old

- has put and will always put the children first, together with dh (he does this willingly)

- has never used a babysitter for longer than a few hours -- and babysitter was grandparents or 16-17-year-old sister-in law

- has never let either of the kids cry it out

- is a La Leche League Leader

- is a Certified Childbirth Educator

 

I believe in high-investment parenting, and I feel I can only invest so much of myself. Two children is all I think I know how to handle, and I feel no desire to have more children. That said, as a Catholic, I believe God may have a different plan, and I'm curious as to what that is. And open to it. If dh wants me to have one more child, I told him I would consent to one more child. If God wants me to have more children, God will put the desire into my heart and/or into dh's, and make it happen.

 

As of now, if it were for me, I would practice abstinence until I went into menopause, but since dh has a say in this too.. oh well. He knows this too. Dh is my best friend too and has always known I've never been interested in sexual intercourse except when it came to procreating. I can't unlink the two, and find it ridiculous that people can have sex without thinking about having a child.

 

That was my piece, and peace to all :)

Edited August 11, 2009 by sagira

[Myrrh]

Repeat:

 

#1 yes, you were very judgmental.

 

#2 people were stating THEIR PERSONAL CONVICTIONS...not saying EVERYONE else should do as they do. They were looking for LIKE MINDED people. You aren't one of them, point made. Why did you feel the need to make such a point on a thread looking specifically for like minded people? If you want to point out a contrasting view, debate it, what ever...then you could've started another thread.

 

 

You believe that Christ died for those that will follow Him. Should others that don't follow him take it personally that you are, by insinuation, excluding them?

 

Others do in fact take it personally. But the parallel you draw is rather telling in itself. I am suspicious of any mindset which promotes exclusivity WITHIN the body of Christ.

 

I addressed your previous points in my earlier comments and I'm getting tired of repeating myself.

 

I am disappointed that what could have been a dialogue--I would have welcomed that--has become marked with hostility. If any of the way I have expressed myself has caused that, then I am sorry. I have tried to communicate the truth in love, but obviously it was not received that way. I'm still not entirely sure why, except that there are obviously tender feelings on all sides of this delicate issue...but to me, that only confirms the fact that there is judgement going both ways.

 

In closing, I respect and support all of you (both husband and wife) who are convinced in your hearts, minds, and spirit that the Lord wants to you to have as many children as you can conceive and birth. In return, I hope you will affirm me in my decision to stop having children for what I also believe are Godly, Biblical reasons. If your viewpoint doesn't leave room for the latter, then we cannot adhere to the Scriptural admonitions of mutual edification in the faith.

 

One of the most comprehensive resources I've seen on the subject:

 

http://christianity.wikia.com/wiki/Quiverfull

[kmacnchs]

In closing, I respect and support all of you (both husband and wife) who are convinced in your hearts, minds, and spirit that the Lord wants to you to have as many children as you can conceive and birth.

 

Oh my goodness! Talk about being tired of repeating oneself! Just look in my past threads and MANY others...we've been saying again and again - it is not about the #, it is about the heart (the Lord leading your family). I understand you feel attacked and I am sorry; I tried to respond to your points, not attack you personally. However, I feel like your feeling attacked has kept you from seeing what has been said about QF...what it is meant to be, not how people have used it to abuse.

[mommaduck]

Oh my goodness! Talk about being tired of repeating oneself! Just look in my past threads and MANY others...we've been saying again and again - it is not about the #, it is about the heart (the Lord leading your family). I understand you feel attacked and I am sorry; I tried to respond to your points, not attack you personally. However, I feel like your feeling attacked has kept you from seeing what has been said about QF...what it is meant to be, not how people have used it to abuse.

:iagree:

 

 

 

Myrrh, you made several references to Calvinism. Are you a Calvinist?

[Myrrh]

Oh my goodness! Talk about being tired of repeating oneself! Just look in my past threads and MANY others...we've been saying again and again - it is not about the #, it is about the heart (the Lord leading your family). I understand you feel attacked and I am sorry; I tried to respond to your points, not attack you personally. However, I feel like your feeling attacked has kept you from seeing what has been said about QF...what it is meant to be, not how people have used it to abuse.

 

My husband had a vasectomy. Does that mean my heart and his are not submitted to God? If so, where is the Scriptural basis for it?

[Myrrh]

:iagree:

 

 

 

Myrrh, you made several references to Calvinism. Are you a Calvinist?

 

I said I was way back in the initial comment where I brought up Calvinism.

[TravelingChris]

I have three children and won't have any more natural children. I believe that this was God's plan for my family. He knew that not only that I have several chronic illnesses, but in his infinite knowledge, He knew my children would each one have serious medical problems that I would need to address and take care of and that more children would have lead to big problems for them, for me, or for the whole family. In His infinite kindness, He lead me for a much earlier age to have older interests that I get to do now as my children are older. I haven't had many regrets about more children.

[Ginevra]

Obviously God calls us to make choices--I'm merely saying that his will overrides ours--isn't this true Calvinism?

 

Well, I'm not a Calvinist, but yes, I think the idea of God being Sovereign is that one acknowleges God can/does override our choices to support His Plan. I would also agree that there is no scripture that says, "Thou shalt not use birth control", and so we can point to no scripture that speaks specifically to it. However, creation of life is the natural course and preventing it through medicine or inventions is not the natural course. So, it would seem to me that not using birth control would be the default of allowing God to create life. To use birth control is to disrupt what God put in place as the natural biology. To use birth control and say, "Well, if He wants to, He can supercede our attempts to thwart the natural biology." seems back-a**wards to me. It's like refusing food and then saying if God wants to save you, He'll miraculously nourish your body and keep you from starving to death. Eating is the default, natural course. Not eating is superceding the natural course.

 

What I have experienced with QF is not just people claiming individual conviction, but actually trying to persuade others to their belief that this is a Biblical mandate. There is pressure. Not from everyone who holds this conviction but usually from those who are part of a the larger patriocentric movement.

 

The only way I even came to know about any of this was because two friends gave me the Pearls' books (without talking to me first about it). It was like they were evangelists for their particular method of parenting and marriage. What I read I found disturbing, so I did further research. I also came across some hostility in the blogosphere when I explained my personal reasons for not wanting a large family. The reproach came from the QF camp.

 

 

That does sound annoying. And I'm not in favor of pushing beliefs like this on others. But here is another view. I came to know of the QF view through a totally unlikely series of events which began because a Catholic friend of a friend gave a tape to my friend which explained abortificients and the Pope's view against sterilization. I am not Catholic and none of this *should* have been relevant to me. My friend who received the tape was very upset and offended, in the same vein as you said you were. She felt her friend was judging her for choosing sterilization. But strangely, God used my bystanding this event to open my own eyes. If no one ever said what they believe and why, we would have no opportunity to learn from one another. If your friend were convinced of what she read from the Pearls, she I'm sure believes she's serving to bring you the truth and rescue you from conformity to the world. See? There's nothing wrong with someone saying, "I see the scriptures as meaning this." and you saying, "Okay. I don't."

 

but I'm not saying that everyone who chooses to not limit their family size is judgemental or in an abusive family. What I'm saying is that we need to caution against the attitude of superiority and legalism which has already evolved out of this theology and other patriocentric ones, that together constitute practically a separate sect of Christianity...and it looks something pretty close to being Amish

 

I didn't see the attitude of superiority and legalism in this thread that you seemed to be reacting to in your first post or two. I have seen people who believe several things (QF, dresses only, patracentric, girls don't go to college and so on) who also hold to a very narrow view of what is "correct" Christian theology. But...so? You've got your black-and-white thinking in every group. I don't see any need to particularly be up at arms against anyone who claims to be QF.

[mommaduck]

I said I was way back in the initial comment where I brought up Calvinism.

 

I'm sorry. I have 7 kids; they sucked out some of my brain cells ;) I tend to ask rather than presume a possible wrong answer and get called out for presuming wrong.

 

I was actually trying to be courteous to you by asking :glare:

 

 

You are aware that Calvinism sometimes causes exclusivity within the Unity of Christ on various issues as well, yes? Much the same manner as statements made by Catholics can. Or Orthodox. Each have their various issues and comments. Unless you're a Universalist...then still, they don't agree with the rest of us.

[Quiver0f10]

My husband had a vasectomy. Does that mean my heart and his are not submitted to God? If so, where is the Scriptural basis for it?

 

NO, that means for you and yoru husband you made a choice that was between you, your husband and God. It doesn'tmake you better or worse than anyone else. Just because someone chooses to be qf doesn't mean they are better, it means they made a choice for their own family and it has zip to do with YOU. How you feel or react to their choice is your own issue to deal with.

[mommaduck]

NO, that means for you and yoru husband you made a choice that was between you, your husband and God. It doesn'tmake you better or worse than anyone else. Just because someone chooses to be qf doesn't mean they are better, it means they made a choice for their own family and it has zip to do with YOU. How you feel or react to their choice is your own issue to deal with.

:iagree:

[Myrrh]

Quill, Mommaduck, and Quiverof10, I'm appreciative of what each of you just posted. Thank you for sharing your hearts and trying to help connect with my perspective.

 

I wanted to reply to several others who posted in this thread (I read every comment) but alas, I've got to get offline and do our bookkeeping, set up our homeschool room, etc...you know the drill! :)

[Quiver0f10]

Quill, Mommaduck, and Quiverof10, I'm appreciative of what each of you just posted. Thank you for sharing your hearts and trying to help connect with my perspective.

 

I wanted to reply to several others who posted in this thread (I read every comment) but alas, I've got to get offline and do our bookkeeping, set up our homeschool room, etc...you know the drill! :)

 

 

I just got our room set up this week too. I still need to make copies and get the binders set up but then we will be ready. Summer went by way too fast!

[mommaduck]

Quill, Mommaduck, and Quiverof10, I'm appreciative of what each of you just posted. Thank you for sharing your hearts and trying to help connect with my perspective.

 

I wanted to reply to several others who posted in this thread (I read every comment) but alas, I've got to get offline and do our bookkeeping, set up our homeschool room, etc...you know the drill! :)

 

Certainly do! :lol: I'm setting up this week also. When the kids start "playing school" you know you're close to getting back at it.

[Garga]

No, but they did look to surrogates via handmaidens

 

Geo

 

Oh, like THAT was a good idea! Honestly! Aren't they still fighting over that in the middle east some few thousand years later? :001_smile:

[mommaduck]

Oh, like THAT was a good idea! Honestly! Aren't they still fighting over that in the middle east some few thousand years later? :001_smile:

:lol:

[BakersDozen]

So, the events that made me change my mind were strange and amazing...I thought God was preparing me for a large family. So, to me, it was like God pulled a "bait and switch" on me. Sorry if that sounds horribly blasphemous as I'm sure it may. He said, "Here! This would be wonderful! Want this!" and then, "Psyche! I was just kidding! How 'bout now that you want it, I show you how you can't have the six kids!"

 

I'm sure I'm saying too much...

You are saying what is your heart and I love your openness (sp?) and honesty. I've thought about you all day and hope you know that there is a total stranger out there who gets it. :grouphug:

[justamouse]

Why yes, our quiver is full and we are blessed by our three children...but no, we don't subscribe to the one-verse theology which says that having a full quiver means not being proactive in limiting family size. I find it offensive when people describe "quiver full" as allowing God to decide how many children you have (see the first few posts in this thread), and putting God in control...not just offensive to me, but to our awesome and sovereign Creator. The God I believe in (the one of the Bible) is bigger than any of our choices. Haven't we all heard the stories of children conceived despite the pill, the condom, etc.? I even know several people who had children after having vasectomies (there's a 1 in 1600 chance of it growing back).

 

And to be consistently "quiver full", couples would be obligated to always do the deed during the woman's fertile period every month. Not just whenever they feel like it.

 

I get pretty fired up about this issue because of the abuses it can cause. It is part of the larger hyper-patriarchy movement which has various branches--as has been mentioned by others in this thread, Bill Gothard and ATI is one (I didn't realize the Duggars were part of that), Vision Forum is another, and I believe the Pearls as well. I'm not sure about Doug Wilson but he is part of the patriocentric movement.

 

The hyper-patriarchal people are also often hyper-calvinists. I'm a calvinist but am wary of the legalistic direction I've seen many in the Reformed camp going.

 

Here are some of the sites dealing with the controversy of QF and the spiritual abuse of patriocentricity (I've amassed a number of them and intend to blog it all out eventually):

 

http://quiveringdaughters.blogspot.com/

(oldest daughter raised in a QF family, details spiritual abuse)

 

http://truewomanhood.wordpress.com/

(this is the motherlode of discussion threads)

 

http://www.thatmom.com/

(experienced older homeschooling mom who has become something of an authority on patriocentricity--search her blog for "quiver")

 

 

WHOA, what great links. I pretty much agree with everything you said. And I thought so about Vision Forum, but I wasn't sure. All I knew about what I was reading in their catalog was that it freaked me out and I was NOT letting my daughters read those books. Nor my boys.

 

I have seven that I was on BC for. Now we're playing with fire *g*. We don't want any more, and we're trying to NOT have them, but if I got pregnant again I wouldn't cry. To be honest, my heart is in adopting more. Not because I believe the QF religion, but because I love kids. And I'd want to adopt older ones. For now I'm believing that if that's our path, God will change Dh's heart toward adoption.

 

Let me also say that I believe God puts the desire in our hearts and it's not there without an answer.

Edited August 12, 2009 by justamouse

[Cindy in C-ville]

 

On adoption . . . we started to adopt b/f my daughter was born. We sent in the papers on a Friday and on Sunday we took the pregnancy test. So, alas, we stopped the adoption process. A couple of years ago we considered adoption again through Catholic Charities but their cut-off age is 45 which is how old my husband was at the time. Gey aggrivating as you can imagine but my husband was outraged. He is a good husband, wonderful family man, has a good job and is healthy. But he was 45. We considered looking into another organization but decided not to. My husband won't even really talk about it now so I guess that opportunity has passed.

 

.

 

Do you feel that if you adopt you must adopt through Catholic Charitites? There are plenty of other possibilities that don't require the parents to be under 45.

[Impish]

NO, that means for you and yoru husband you made a choice that was between you, your husband and God. It doesn'tmake you better or worse than anyone else. Just because someone chooses to be qf doesn't mean they are better, it means they made a choice for their own family and it has zip to do with YOU. How you feel or react to their choice is your own issue to deal with.

:iagree:

[justamouse]

\|||/

(o o)

,----ooO--(_)-------.

| Please |

| don't feed the |

| TROLL's ! |

'--------------Ooo--'

|__|__|

|| ||

ooO Ooo

 

That is beyond rude and you just proved her point.

[Geo]

Oh, like THAT was a good idea! Honestly! Aren't they still fighting over that in the middle east some few thousand years later? :001_smile:

 

Never said it was a good idea, just that some did it.

 

Geo

[HeatherLynn]

This was the post that started this thread. It implies that those who are not QF are not putting their family size in God's hands and not building their families as God sees fit. There have been more posts after it which continue on in that vein.

 

QF by itself is not abusive, but it is often part of a larger theological context which I mentioned earlier called Patriocentricity. Earlier, I linked to some websites substantiating that, including this one:

 

http://quiveringdaughters.com/About_the_Author.html

 

Also, the original poster said she was wondering where she could go. It wasn't stated that this thread was the place. Stifling dialogue, particularly in a homeschooling forum, seems like the antithesis of what we're here for.

 

I would have stayed away from this thread if the original post said "I believe that my family is personally called not to attempt to limit the size of our family. I would like to meet others who have that same conviction, so I have set up this thread for us to discuss what it's like to practice this way of life."

 

Okay, I didn't word it as wordy as you, or as PC. I tend to step away from being PC anyhow, so I am not surprised someone found fault with my wording. Yes, I believe that in *my* definition being quiverfull is allowing God to determine your family size. If you are doing something to prevent it outside of Biblical direction, you very well could be interfering with God's plans for your family. Therefore, you are not following allowing God to fully control your life. I never once said I believe YOU have to feel this way. It is a personal decision that one comes to with their spouse and the Lord. I just wanted to know who else believes in the same alignment with me, and asked if they could direct me somewhere with like-minded believers. If you don't like it, don't post. I didn't ask for anyone except QF or those who allow God to determine their family size to post.

 

I never imagined this subject would ring out such debate in people. What does it matter to YOU if someone wants to take birth control or sterilize themselves? It is between them and God. Also, what does it matter to you if others of us feel it is a Biblical to allow God control over this area in our lives? I am not preaching at you telling you to change or be ****ed. I just wanted to talk with the like minded, because frankly this world is inundated with those who are not. Excuse me for looking for fellowship where I knew I could find it, on this board.

[elfinbaby]

It seems these kind of debates on subjects that people feel strongly about are inevitable whether it's invited or not. It happened to me with a bfing query.

 

Anywho, I posted before but I'll add to it. We are not quiverfull although we do have a large family by society's standards - 4 children. I didn't know what qf was until about 2 yrs. ago! I joined a Bible study group w/some qf mamas. We studied Nancy Campbell's Power of Motherhood. I also heard Nancy speak that fall. I enjoy her ministry very much even though we aren't qf. It's called Above Rubies. She is inspirational and has helped me see the importance of my work at home as a wife and mother.

 

The ladies in my groups are lovely with beautiful families. My family choices vs. theirs has never been debated. The group is very welcoming to all who want to study the Word and grow in their relationship with Christ - however they define it.

Edited August 12, 2009 by elfinbaby
nevermind

[pocjets]

We're thinking about it....interesting thread. Thanks

[HeatherLynn]

 

The ladies in my groups are lovely with beautiful families. My family choices vs. theirs has never been debated. The group is very welcoming to all who want to study the Word and grow in their relationship with Christ - however they define it.

 

That is how it should be.