The Battle of Peer Dependency: Chapter Six- Part Two

Hello, buddies!

I had my appointment with my OB a few days ago.  While stating frequently that she was open to whatever decision I made about attempting another pregnancy, she was also very clear that she was very concerned that I would have another severe pre-eclampsia event leading to an early delivery.  She had had two previous patients with a similar case history as I had.  One patient had a later successful pregnancy; the other's next pregnancy ended in severe pre-eclampsia leading to delivery at 24 weeks instead of 30 weeks.

That was before explaining all of the additional issues that could come up from being 40 when pregnant to me and a baby.

Hearing all of this stung a bit - I don't think anyone likes hearing that they are an obstetric train wreck -  but my main thought was that I didn't want to bet everything our family has gained over the last four years against the off-chance of having a healthy pregnancy. 

I'm sad.  I'm angry at times.  I'm relieved as well; there were a lot of mild annoyances with pregnancy that I was not looking forward to at all.  

Right now, I would like to have another child in our family - I just don't think the kid will join us through biological means.   I'm going to take at least through the New Year off from planning how to expand our family to let myself think and feel whatever comes up about not having another biological child.

At the same time, I realized at my OB's office that I was much less afraid of having another medically complicated child in our family than I was the severe guilt I would have at causing a child to be medically complicated by choosing to get pregnant knowing that my odds of a healthy, term pregnancy are poor. 

Spawn's infancy and toddlerhood were so very hard in some ways - but I know a whole lot more about how to manage medical and developmental complications.   Like...I know now that I would have gotten a better response on my worries about his speech development from his neurodevelopmental pediatrician than I did through Early On.  Since his at-home special education treatment though our local ISD was a complete shit-show, I'd follow my gut instinct and keep him in Early On with therapists I liked and coordinate care through medical rehabilitation until he was old enough to transition to school-based therapy.

I suspect my husband and I will end up either pursuing adoption of a medically complicated infant (or a preemie of some kind) or doing foster care and/or doing foster-to-adopt when Spawn's a bit older.

Random subject change: let's talk about papal infallibility for a second. 

I'm Catholic and the Catholic Church as always been discussing the limits and rights of the Pope.  Off and on since at least the 1500's theologians have been proposing different ideas about if and when the believers of the Catholic Church can be certain that something taught by the Pope is correct.  Some popes have been very agreeable about theological limitations on their teaching authority; others have viewed any limitations on their power - temporal or spiritual - as a personal insult.   

Most fascinatingly, there's an apocryphal story in the Church that the definition of papal authority was set when a pope in the 1800's ended the ongoing debate by calmly declaring that the pope was, in fact, infallible.   This story is completely untrue - but it does fit the level of mild confusion and love of tradition that the Catholic Church is known for.   

In 1870 during the First Vatican Council, the definition of papal infallibility was set as occurring when the Pope speaks with all of the following conditions attached.  The Pope must be teaching ex cathedra which means as the leader of the Catholic Church.  He must be teaching on a point of faith or morals.  This point must be meant to be held by the entirety of the Church.

How often does the Pope issue a papally infallible teaching?  Very rarely.  There are two agreed upon statements about the Immaculate Conception and the Assumption of Mary that are viewed to be infallible that have happened in the early 1800's and 1950's.   There are a few others - like 10 others - that are agreed to probably be infallible that cover information about the nature of God and Jesus that were made between 400 AD - 1800AD.

Long story short: rarely a Pope makes a teaching on faith and morals that Catholics believe to be a true revelation from God based in tradition that we should accept.

Why am I bringing this up right now?   Well, in the next quote from Marina Sears' opus "The Battle of Peer Dependency", God gets really irritated with Marina for not raising her kids as if she's more infallible than the Pope:

One day, the battle between may son and me had become very grievous. After he left the house, I am ashamed to say, I stomped my foot and said to the Lord, " I only want him to love You with all his heart, soul, and might. Why doesn't he love You all his heart, soul, and might?

In my spirit the Lord answered me by saying, " Marina, why don't you love me with all your heart, soul, and might?"

" Me, Lord? I do love you with all my heart. You know how I have sacrificed so that I can rear these children. I have not sought a life of my own. I did it because I thought that was what you wanted me to do."

Then He said, "Remember when it was just the children, you, and Me. We would talk and spend time discussing the future for the children. You remembered that it was I who created them and knew the plans I had for them. You would ask me what curriculum to use or what Bible verses to memorize. When you became friends with all the other homeschooling families you began to ask them what they were using. You were caught up in the academic flurry of higher education rather than considering my higher plans. Marina, your children don't love me with all of their heart, soul, and might, because you don't!"

It was at that moment I realized what the Lord was saying was true. I have left the Lord for the esteem of others. It was more important for me to know that my friends thought I was a good homeschooling mom, rather than what the Lord thought of me. I myself had fallen into the trap of peer dependency. (pgs. 79-80)

Yup. God expects Marina to parent as if she's more infallible than the Pope.

When the pope speaks infallibly, he's making a statement that has been crafted in conjunction with information from bishops stationed around the world.  Generally,  the College of Cardinals has weighed in on the theological and practical ramification of the statement.  The work of theologians outside of the hierarchy of the Catholic Church is crucial to the formation of the statement.   

A infallible papal statement is a group effort with lots of moments of disagreement, discussion and reconciliation of ideas.   

Marina Sears, on the other hand, has ruptured her relationship with God by taking advice from experienced homeschooling parents.  

Does that even make sense from a Biblical perspective?  No, not at all!  Throughout the Bible, people are interacting with other people and taking really good advice from them.  Think of Ruth getting advice from Naomi about how to approach Boaz or Esther and Mordecai working to save the Jewish people or Elizabeth and Mary caring for baby John together.

Marina Sears' revelation that God wants her to only discuss homeschooling with Him is oddly aligned with her personal wishes, wants and desires - in spite of her much belated declaration that she had succumbed to peer pressure.

Most importantly of all is Mrs. Sears bald admission of her basic motive.   Marina Sears chose a highly restrictive way of raising her children that reduced her personal opportunities.   She made a completely valid choice - but she cannot expect that her children in return will remain dependent on her forever.  

After all. "I want my son to love You with all his heart, all his soul and all his body" has the unspoken clause of "which he will show by doing what I tell him to do for the rest of his life."

That's a problem.