Recent Posts

Thursday, 21 June 2012

Oh my goodness, Cherie Blair again against Catholic culture....


Five post day because a very silly comment has come from the supposed Catholic Cherie Blair in today's Telegraph. Now, I do not get angry very easily, but his lady's comments are "just plain experatin'" and the girl from the Midwest shall take on the lady from London, but then I have many saints, the Teaching Magisterium of the Church, and experience on my side as well as the writings of the last 100 years of popes. Good company, this.

Ms. Blair  has basically undermined Catholic Culture, and the teaching of the Catholic Church, regarding the role of motherhood and the role of the wife in the home with modernistic and narrow-minded comments.  She obviously doesn't see statistics on stay-at-home mom kids, especially home schooled kids, who are MORE independent and secure than others.


Here are my comments on her points.


1. Women have a right to expect a husband to support them and their children at home. This is the traditional role of man, to be a decent bread-winner, and support a family. Current ideas have seen and pushed for the emasculation of men, many of whom no longer think they need or should support a family. The socialist agenda aids and abets this lie.  Also, the poor can marry, not only the rich, but a lower life-style must then be expected by all. There is nothing shameful in that. There is nothing wrong or immoral about being poor.


2. Home schooled children are more independent, get higher test scores, and succeed more than other children, and many statistics show this. At my son's college 25% of the students were from home schooled families in his year. All had scholarships.


3. The lady does not think that being a full-mom is a career. Wow. A stay-at -home mom, even if not the main educator, is the cook, cleaner, laundry-maid, house manager, chauffeur, social secretary, prayer leader, sometimes business clerk, counselor, disciplinarian, spiritual adviser, as well as friend and love of her husband. If there are pets, she is the animal manager as well. I, of course, refer to most moms in the middle-class and even poorer classes, and not those who have help at home.


4. We are supposed to raise our children in the Faith of the Holy Catholic Church and most schools in England which call themselves Catholic are not so. Mothers have more of a responsibility for passing on the Faith, with the dad, then ever before. This takes time and energy. I worked in a seminary, and most of the students there had not only stay-at-home moms, but came from large families. There is a connection.


5. We have an example in the Blessed Virgin Mary, who was not a victim of her time or a patriarchal-anti-feminist, regime of suppression, but the woman called by God from all eternity to have His Son and live under the protection of St. Joseph, and later St. John. These times still see a need, perhaps even more than in any other time, for men to protect women in the home. 


6. Society has caused, and her own political perference of socialism has caused the demise of the honoring of the stay-at-home mom by under-cutting the importance of the role of the family as the primary unit of society-a position not held by socialists, who see the material state as all. Her own party has caused more damage in history to the building up of the family, outside the communists, than any other ideology.


7. So, is her work as a lawyer and social commentator more important than that of a mum? No. (She doesn't seem like a happy, peaceful woman).


8. Should girls be educated for back-up careers in case of tragedy and the need to work? Yes, but not at the expense of the house, the children, the husband. This is what selfless love is all about-dying to self is part of motherhood and being a wife. I guess she missed that part of the message of Christ somewhere along the line. Girls should learn vocations and careers and many are called to do such.


"For all her smarts", as we say in the States, I have never been impressed with Ms. Blair's comments in the press all these years. She should just be quiet and maybe, stay at home awhile, learning some wisdom and gentility, two lost gifts of true womanhood.


Here is the article linked above.



Cherie Blair attacks 'yummy mummies' who choose children over careers

Cherie Blair has attacked “yummy mummies” who focus on raising their children at the expense of their careers, suggesting their children lack a sense of independence.




The wife of the former Prime Minister also accused some young women of seeking to “marry a rich husband and retire” instead of working.
Mrs Blair, a QC and mother of four, criticised women who “put all their effort into their children” instead of working. Mothers who go out to work are setting a better example for their children, she said.
Addressing a gathering of “powerful” women at one of London’s most expensive hotels, Mrs Blair said she was worried that today’s young women are turning their backs on the feminism of their mothers’ generation.
Some women know regard motherhood as an acceptable alternative to a career, Mrs Blair said. Instead, women should strive for both.
“Every woman needs to be self-sufficient and in that way you really don’t have a choice - for your own satisfaction; you hear these yummy mummies talk about being the best possible mother and they put all their effort into their children. I also want to be the best possible mother, but I know that my job as a mother includes bringing my children up so actually they can live without me.”
In fact, despite Mrs Blair’s worries about non-working mothers, official statistics show that the proportion of mothers who work has actually risen steadily in recent years.
According to the Office for National Statistics, 66 per cent of mothers are now in some form of paid work. In 1996, the figure was 61 per cent. The number of working mothers is now around 5.3 million, up from 4.5 million in 1996.
Speaking to Fortune magazine’s Most Powerful Women event in Claridge’s, Mrs Blair appeared to accuse some young women of lacking professional ambition, focussing on their prospective partner’s career instead of their own.
She said: “One of the things that worries me now is you see young women who say: 'I look at the sacrifices that women have made and I think why do I need to bother, why can’t I just marry a rich husband and retire?' and you think how can they even imagine that is the way to fulfil yourself, how dangerous it is.”
Mrs Blair said her view was informed by her own experience of her father abandoning her mother when she was a child. But she insisted that all women should make sure they can provide for themselves: “Even good men could have an accident or die and you’re left holding the baby.”
Often in the headlines during her husband’s premiership, Mrs Blair has taken a more active public role since he left office in 2007, setting up a charitable foundation to support women setting up their own firms in developing countries.
Mr Blair earlier this month told the Leveson Inquiry that his wife had been subjected to a “vendetta” by parts of the media, partly because she had attempted to maintain her career during his time in No 10.
Despite urging women to combine motherhood and work, Mrs Blair conceded that her advice can be taken too far.
“I did many foolish things that I wouldn’t encourage any young woman to do today, and I made no concessions to the fact that I was pregnant,” she said, “One way I got into trouble was ten days before my son was due to be born I was still working and they compulsorily hospitalised me as they said the baby wasn’t growing. It was rubbish – he was fine.”





Ms. Blair sounds like a member of the Gang of Four. I shall pray to St. Olga for her. 
And, she obviously does not know how to think like a Catholic, poor thing.

Unless you become like a little child....you will never be a real adult

Not deciding is deciding. How many times have we heard this. But, we need not to be afraid to decide on something, someone.

"I am going to get rid of any other option and decide on this." The thing which makes us decide is courage.

If you have never made a decision, maybe you lack courage.

This is why going to college, entering a seminary, getting married and being open to life, are major decisions.

If we decide on one thing, if we decide on one thing or one place, or one person for life, we close other doors. But the open door is life.

And, once we make a decision, we must be committed. Commitment is the lost art of our time. Why do people cry at weddings? Because two people have decided on each other, but have closed the door to other alternatives -- people and things and even events are now decided one way and not another.

We want it all, sadly. We do not want to close doors. We are afraid. But, we are smart, we have reason. We can figure things out.

We want to get married, have children, have a career, and be holy. Wait a minute.

We cannot do it all. We cannot have it all successfully,  but we must decide.

How do we decide? We must have courage and we need to trust ourselves. Wow. We need to have confidence in ourselves in making (we do it-we "make") the decision.

Bonhoeffer wrote about this. He called it Costly Grace, as opposed to Cheap Grace.

Costly Grace means that we choose Christ and His Gospel and we choose the life-style which follows. Radical Christianity means we are counter-culture, people of the light in darkness, individuals who are signs of contradiction in the world.

If you make a right decision, if you choose peace as opposed to chaos, you will be that light in the darkness.

OK, love is blind, they say. Why do we not follow the signs of loving the right person. Sociologists call the ability to choose "adaptive intelligence". We go back and review how and why we decided on something. If we have a flaw, or an blockage, we can change, we can grow, we can be healed, in most cases, if not all.

Those of us who are older and have made mistakes in our long lives, either with jobs, careers, colleges, even with spouses, have to have more courage, as we have witnessed failure and need to go on and face other similar decisions.

One does not roll up into a ball and hibernate if one has failed in an area of life. No. We forgive ourselves and move on. We forgive others. We review how and why we erred. As a Catholic, I can state that grace and selflessness indicate a good decision. Peace follows a good decision

As a teacher of at-risk-students, I had to help students succeed who had failed, perhaps even many times. How did I help them get over the fear of failure, a real fear?

Here are some steps, which I employed.

One, I imparted confidence and helped them to have confidence in themselves. I emphasized their gifts, their strengths and not their weaknesses.

Two, I taught them discipline. This meant time management or good study habits. In other words, I gave them the tools for success. Simple tools are the best, and these tools led to discipline.

Three, I encouraged them when they succeeded, but pointed out how they failed, why they failed. Criticism helps people change, but not merely negative thinking, but constructive analysis, and most importantly, how to avoid failure again. Replacing good habits with bad habits could be part of this.

Four, I helped them choose for themselves. A teacher is a leader, a guide, a person who directs, but does not decide for the student. Choices are individual, and a teacher must help people make their own decisions, within the framework of courage, confidence and discipline.

Five, I never, never praised without due reason. Many children have been ruined by parents who say "You are the best girl in the world" without any requirements for praise. Praise is earned and for specific accomplishments. This is how children learn confidence-by doing something well, and the thing itself should give the confidence in and or itself.

I have Montessori training. As a Montessori directress, I barely praised anyone. The children learned confidence by doing. I showed them what and how to do something, they did it well and learned peace, confidence, trust, discipline. Confidence created motivation. Confidence creates independence.

Motivation, that is, self-motivatIon, is the key to learning to become a person. Maria Montessori said that it was the role, the duty of the child as created by God to become, to make, with God, the person that child was going to be. I know this is true.

This creates courage. If we have courage, we can make decisions. But, not to decide is the real failure of life. Decide, live, be not afraid.

Life and love follow. And, if one has failed, pray for God's healing graces. Go to daily Mass, go to Adoration. Learn to have confidence in God Alone, like a little child on her Father's knee.

This is my wish for all, including myself. "Verily I say unto you, Except ye turn, and become as little children, ye shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of heaven." DR Matthew 18:3


I pray to the Child Jesus and to Little Therese, the Greatest Saint of our time to help me and to help you. 

Choose life, always, and you will be saved. You may even be more happy and joyful than you have ever believed true in your life. I challenge you to have courage.

A four-post day....

Father Jordan Aumann, again, and others.....

A reminder regarding the sacraments...Again, something not-so-small to think about regarding the sacraments...

Ex operato applies not only to the priest or bishop who is giving the sacraments, but to those receiving the sacraments. Remember, "from the act done", that the merits of the person receiving these sacraments is also part of this teaching from the Council of Trent. For a grace to be efficacious, that is, to work, the recipient must be in the right disposition.

A person either "in" mortal sin or "living in" mortal sin cannot receive sanctifying grace, period.

A "disposition" is not merely an attitude of mind, but a state of the soul. See all the posts I wrote below on baptism, confirmation, and marriage. This post is another attempt to contradict the never-ending story of false and poor catechesis among the laity. For more on this, see Summa theologiae, III, q. 69, a. 8.

We cannot wish a thing to be true. That is relativism. With regard to the sacraments, these are not merely signs, but "signum sacro sanctum efficax gratiae"--showing forth that which is hidden, and doing that which is signed. "Ex opere operato"  does not mean that either the minister or the recipient must be entirely worthy, as that is impossible for all of us. Here is Leo XIII on the matter--"the Sacraments of the New Law, as sensible and efficient signs of invisible grace, ought both to signify the grace which they effect, and effect the grace which they signify" in  Apostolicae Curae.


By the way, several months ago, I wrote about the author, Father Jordan Aumann, O.P.  He is really good on these points. And, I just found his work online, a book which I have at home in a box! Here is the link. Please look him up when you have time.











Know Thyself--γνῶθι σεαυτόν--continuing the series on perfection


The Delphic Oracle and St. Catherine of Siena have something in common, which is not unusual, being that God works through many means to bring us all to perfection. Garrigou-Lagrange in the post yesterday, was examined as to the virtue of prudence. Leading from that infused virtue, the great author notes that St. Catherine of Siena, in The Dialogue, which I have not read in its entirety since 2009, relates what Christ says to all through her:



"Discretion...render to each one his due. Chiefly to Me in rendering praise and glory to My name, and in referring to Me the grace and the gifts which she sees and knows she has received from Me; and rendering to herself that which she sees herself to have merited, knowing that she does not even exist of herself....this founds the virtue of discretion on knowledge of self, that is, on true humility, for , were this humility not in the soul, the soul would be indiscreet; indiscretion being founded on pride, as discretion is on humility."


When the Greeks and others in the ancient world approached the Oracle and saw the words imprinted on the forecourt of the Temple of Apollo, they would have stopped and pondered how wisdom, prudence, even sophia would lead them to self-knowledge. To the Greeks, humility, a particularly Christian virtue, may or may not have been part of the path to self-knowledge, except for the philosophers. But, wisdom, like prudence, lies in humility.

Humilitas is the motto of the Borromeo family, and therefore, of St. Charles Borromeo, whose chapel here in England in the Church next door to where I am today, stands as a witness to real humility. Here is a great saint, one of the greatest of the Counter-Reformation, who died at such an early age, 47, and gave up rank and status for the Kingdom of God. His humility lay in the fact of his personal holiness and his dedication to the Church he loved so much.

St. Catherine of Siena, although not of such a great house, did the same, that is, followed the way of obedience to the Church and to Christ. The humility of these two saints reminds us that prayer, fasting, self-denial, and truth guide one to Eternal Life, through self-knowledge.

Discretion, from humility, leads to mercy, kindness, forgiveness and charity. Without discretion, prudence would devolve into a self-seeking cleverness, a selfishness based on worldly concerns. Discretion allows us to relate to others with the Mind of Christ.


That the Oracle would give knowledge, either from a trance induced by vapors, or from a source less than godly, may be questioned. That God, through the infused virtues gives self-knowledge, to those who cooperate with grace, is the path of real wisdom and a such self-knowledge is a gift to those who want it. To be continued...







Wednesday, 20 June 2012

An Open Letter to My Readers...

Dear Readers,

I have been so humbled by comments on this blog, and in my e-mail, as there are so many great "supertradmums"  and supertrad-dads out there, as well as supertradsingles. I have heard from married women with tons of kids, home schooling and living the virtuous life at home; single women, some of whom are professionals, or struggling to find work, and some who are in third orders. I have heard from traditional dads and retired men, who are so fantastically Catholic, that I know there is a strong remnant out there, carrying on the Faith to the next generation.

I have heard from students, in law, in medicine, in the seminary, who want to follow Christ in perfect obedience to the Gospel and the Teaching Magisterium of the Church. That we all belong to the one, true, holy, Catholic and apostolic Church is too wonderful to even contemplate without joy.

Thank you, all my readers, as you keep me humble and in my place...You are the shock troops. I am merely the correspondent behind the lines.

Supertradmum

Female war correspondents in France during World War II. (Left to right): Ruth Cowan, Associated Press; Sonia Tomara, New York Herald Tribune; Rosette Hargrove, Newspaper Enterprise Association; Betty Knox, London Evening Standard; Iris Carpenter, Boston Globe and Erika Mann, Liberty magazine. Public Domain

Perfection Series Continued: "Such as a man is, such does the end seem to him"


I have lost track of how many posts I have written in my series on Perfection, and I apologize to those who wanted me to put them in one, neat section. I have not had time to do this, however excellent the idea is.

I am adding to this series today, working again in Garrigou-Lagrange's magnificent work The Three Ages of the Interior Life, from where the quotation in title is taken, as he quotes the ancient Greeks.


Today, I have been thinking about the virtue of Prudence and politics. a combination of thoughts which goes back to Aristotle and Aquinas. A footnote in Garrigou-Lagrange caught my attention. He states that "the politics of states rarely rise above the economic or material interests of the people, above the tangible, useful good; they give little consideration to the rules of true morality or the honest good, the object of virtue. Then morality disappears in the relations of nations; states sometimes permit enormous collective crimes which they could and should hinder by defending the oppressed and the persecuted. Thereafter, the nation must bear the punishment tor the terrible results of these unpardonable impudences and cowardly acts, which negate the moral law and right in order to maintain the primacy of power or of gold. To compensate for these faults there must be an intense interior life in certain souls who may the "the ten just" of whom the Scriptures speak and because of whom God show mercy."


To unpack this little footnote, one can see that all the nations of the world have fallen under the idolatry of gold, the preoccupation with money and finances to the point where there is little active prudence with regard to morality.

The "honest good", the object of virtue, which Garrigou-Lagrange notes here, and which is discussed in both Aristotle and Aquinas, has been set aside, or ignored, or worse, undermined by the powers that be, mainly because they themselves do not belong to the small group of "ten just men".

What has happened is the complete marginalization of morality in the political sphere. Those who are ambitious, who desire power and glory on earth, have exchanged their end, that is, eternal life, for material goods, such as wealth, popularity, power, influence, etc.

We have seen a lack of temperance in temperament in leaders in the last two centuries, as most have moved away from following the moral, natural law and merely followed what seems best to them. The list is long-Napoleon, Lenin, Stalin, Hitler and even some in our own day. 


Infused prudence, more than acquired prudence, given to us, as we all know and reiterated by Garrigou-Lagrange, in baptism, "grows with charity, through merit, the sacraments, Communion".


There are NO other ways to grow in infused prudence. Right reason follows grace. This movement of the Spirit of God is connected to one of my favorite themes on this blog, thinking like a Catholic. Just start in January and keep reading...


Infused prudence should be manifested somehow-it must be seen, observed, followed. Garrigou-Lagrange has an excellent small section on mediocrity as the following of negative prudence. Have we not seen that in our leaderships crises is both the Church and in nations?


Infused prudence is am impossible virtue without humility, chastity, patience, as the great priest tells us. One learns to be inclined, to follow a life of virtue, but with training...Parents, pay attention, please.

Prudence, according to the theologian, as one of the Cardinal Virtues, lies just beneath the Theological Virtues necessary for salvation. Quoting both Aquinas and Augustine, Garrigou-Lagrange notes that "The lower reason judges everything from the temporal point of view; the higher reason from the point of view of eternity."

What I find really interesting is what the author does with the explanation of false prudence, a communal prudence, merely gained by living in certain communities, merely conforming.

He states, "At certain times, for instance, during persecutions, the inadequacy of such a way of acting becomes evident." Garrigoug-Lagrange here infers  that only those who remember "the one thing necessary", like Mary at the feet of Christ, can managed to live a life of virtue under persecution.

I want to add a personal note to this meditation. Again, a footnote of Garrigou-Lagrange reminded me of Luke 16:10--"He that is faithful in that which is least, is faithful also in that which is greater."

I have been accused of even "good Catholics" of being to scrupulous regarding certain, so-called "little" things, things such as tithing, being absolutely strict on fasting, abstinence, taxes, "little" white lies, and so on. I am taught by the Holy Spirit that Luke 16:10 is the only way to Eternal Life-we can cooperate with grace, or not do so. We can choose the harder, narrower road to perfection, or not do so. Infused prudence helps us make these good decisions, which seem daft to those who have not conformed their minds to that of Christ. May I add that there are many Ordinariate families of priests, who are suffering from a loss of life-style, pensions, and other perks, because they chose to come into the Church rather than wait with a worldly prudence. For such people is Eternal Life.

To be continued....

Feast of St. Alban

In England, today is the feast of St. Alban, the first martyr of these isles. May he pray for us to be strong in persecution, loving and open to whatever God allows.

St. Alban, pray for us.  Excerpt follows from the Catholic Encyclopedia online:


First martyr of Britain, suffered c. 304. The commonly received account of the martyrdom of St. Alban meets us as early as the pages of Bede's "Ecclesiastical History" (Bk. I, chs. vii and xviii). According to this, St. Alban was a pagan living at Verulamium (now the town of St. Albans in Hertfordshire), when a persecution of the Christians broke out, and a certain cleric flying for his life took refuge in Alban's house. Alban sheltered him, and after some days, moved by his example, himself received baptism. Later on, when the governor's emissaries came to search the house, Alban disguised himself in the cloak of his guest and gave himself up in his place. He was dragged before the judge, scourged, and, when he would not deny his faith, condemned to death. On the way to the place of execution Alban arrested the waters of a river so that they crossed dry-shod, and he further caused a fountain of water to flow on the summit of the hill on which he was beheaded. His executioner was converted, and the man who replaced him, after striking the fatal blow, was punished with blindness. A later development in the legend informs us that the cleric's name was Amphibalus, and that he, with some companions, was stoned to death a few days afterwards at Redbourn, four miles from St. Albans. What germ of truth may underlie these legends it is difficult to decide. The first authority to mention St. Alban is Constantius, in his Life of St. Germanus of Auxerre, written about 480. But the further details there given about the opening of St. Alban's tomb and the taking out of relics are later interpolations, as has recently been discovered (see Livison in the "Neues Archiv", 1903, p. 148). Still the whole legend as known to Bedewas probably in existence in the first half of the sixth century (W. Meyer, "Legende des h. Albanus", p. 21), and was used by Gildas before 547. It is also probable that the name Amphibalus is derived from some version of the legend in which the cleric's cloak is called an amphibalus; for Geoffrey of Monmouth, the earliestwitness to the name Amphibalus, makes precisely the same mistake in another passage, converting the garment called amphibalus into the name of a saint. (See Ussher, Works, V, p. 181, and VI, pg. 58; and RevueCeltique, 1890, p. 349.) From what has been said, it is certain that St. Alban has been continuously veneratedin England since the fifth century. Moreover, his name was known about the year 580 to Venantius Fortunatus, in Southern Gaul, who commemorates him in the line:
Albanum egregium fecunda Britannia profert.
("Lo! fruitful Britain vaunts great Alban's name.")
("Carmina", VII, iii, 155).
His feast is still kept as of old, on 22 June, and it is celebrated throughout England as a greater double. That of St. Amphibalus is not now observed, but it seems formerly to have been attached to 25 June. In some later developments of the legend St. Alban appears as a soldier who had visited Rome, and his story was also confused with that of another St. Alban, or Albinus, martyred at Mainz.

Please take part in the poll

I have a poll for a post today, so please take part in it.

I am interested in the demographics of my readers, if you do not mind.

The poll is on the right side-bar.

God bless.

Live in the Present Moment

Tell someone you love them today. If you love, show it, even in a little way.

Never regret passing up an opportunity for loving in Christ, through His Mother Mary.


Show respect, listen, do something small, love. Never let your heart grow so old that you cannot love freely.

From St. John's First Epistle: "I write unto you, little children, because your sins are forgiven you for his name's sake. I write unto you, fathers, because you have known him from the beginning. I write unto you, young men, because you have overcome the wicked one. I write to you, babes, because you have known the Father. I write to you, young men, because you are strong and the word of God abideth in you...."

Tuesday, 19 June 2012

Pray for Our Brothers and Sisters in Nigeria

Four post day--please pray for the people of Christ the King Church in Nigeria-martyrs.
Articles here and there. The main stream media insists on making both sides the same, whereas the Christians are being killed, and are not the aggressors. We have a right to defend ourselves, but the main stream media sometimes calls defense "revenge killings". Revenge is wrong, always a sin, but defense is necessary. No photo is needed.

from the CBS news source listed above:

The group known as Boko Haram said in an email that it was responsible for the attacks.
"Allah has given us victory in the attacks we launched (Sunday) against churches in Kaduna and Zaria towns which resulted in the deaths of many Christians and security personnel," the statement said in the local Hausa language.
Boko Haram, whose name means "Western education is sacrilege" in Hausa, is waging an increasingly bloody fight with Nigeria's security agencies and public. More than 580 people have been killed in violence blamed on the sect this year alone, according to an AP count.
.......The most deadly attacks seem to have targeted Christian holidays: An Easter Day blast in Kaduna left at least 38 people dead, and a Christmas Day suicide bombing of a Catholic church near Nigeria's capital killed at least 44. Boko Haram claimed responsibility for both attacks.

Alexis de Tocqueville and 2012: part one for early high school home schooling moms

If Catholics in the pew in any country of the West do not start working to save their own rights regarding religious freedom, they have only themselves to blame if they find themselves under totalitarian democracies. de Tocqueville, who I taught for years, spoke of the "tyranny of the mob". If you have not read his Democracy in America, which should be required for every early high school course, you must. His many insights have not been surpassed. He saw that Americans preferred equality to rights, an interesting comment. And, he was critical of an anti-intellectualism in which Americans preferred opinions to rational discourse.

Does this sound familiar? However, his greatest insight in my reading is that he foresaw the rise of the tyranny of the majority.  His view of the tendency for Americans to be conformists, which is true, led him to observe that a mob or a majority can not only be wrong, but force error on others. He was also aware of the possibility of the Government giving up power to money and using money to control the masses. Does this sound familiar? His concern was that the American dream of material well-being would cause a shadow to fall over the lofty ideals of the Constitutional government.

How well he prophesied the ruin of American independence.

As a scholar and a Catholic, de Tocqueville realized the importance of both understanding history and the need for religion. He was painfully aware that Americans, even when he was observing them, were not as concerned with religion as perhaps they should have been, preferring to be so tolerant as not to be critical, even in a good sense. He wrote that, "The main business of religions is to purify, control, and restrain that excessive and exclusive taste for well-being which men acquire in times of equality."


How well he understood human nature and the American Experience.

When I taught American History, de Tocqueville was on the syllabus. He must be studied. Home schooling moms, please consider him seriously. 

Here are some long quotations from his writings from a website found here.  What follows is from that website.



"A great democratic revolution is taking place in our midst. "
--Alexis de Tocqueville
447px-alexis_de_tocqueville
(Wikimedia Commons)
On May 9, 1831, two young Frenchmen sailed into the harbor of Newport, Rhode Island and began a remarkable journey through the United States. Alexis de Tocqueville and Gustave de Beaumont, both minor French court officials, had been sent by their government to study new experimental prisons in America. However, even before leaving France, de Tocqueville and de Beaumont decided to spend most of their time observing American democracy in action. Both were excited by the prospect. America was such a young nation, and most Europeans had only a vague idea about its unique democratic system.
After traveling thousands of miles over a period of nine months, the young men returned to France. De Tocqueville spent the next eight years writing two volumes on his observations. In 1840 the two volumes became one book which de Tocqueville titled Democracy in America. Much more than a mere record of his travels, Democracy in America, in the words of one modern historian, turned out to be "perhaps the greatest commentary ever written about any culture by any person at any time."Alexis de Tocqueville was born into an aristocratic family in 1805, the year after Napoleon Bonaparte was crowned emperor of France. De Tocqueville's parents had been imprisoned earlier during the French Revolution. Both escaped execution, the fate of many aristocrats at the time.
De Tocqueville studied law and became a low-level judge in the French court system. Early 19th-century political events in France convinced de Tocqueville that aristocratic government in Europe was doomed, soon to be replaced by democracy. It was at this time that he and his fellow nobleman, de Beaumont, arranged their trip to America. From de Tocqueville's point of view, it would also be a journey into the future.

American Equality

During his travels which took him from the East Coast to the Mississippi River, de Tfocqueville filled 14 notebooks with his observations, thoughts, and interviews with over 200 Americans. De Tocqueville's relentless curiosity urged him to probe into every area of American culture, but it was the American people that interested him the most. Specifically, he wanted to find out about the role of the American citizen in this new democratic society. De Tocqueville set out to find the answers.
"No novelty," he wrote, "struck me more vividly during my stay there than the equality of conditions." Coming from a society still heavily influenced by its aristocratic heritage, de Tocqueville was astounded at how much equality had become a part of American life. It surprised him to see everyone shaking hands with one another. De Tocqueville marveled, and also worried, about a society where social class did not seem to matter and everyone expected to be treated the same.
From our point of view today, the United States in 1831 was far from being a society based on equality. The Indians were viewed as an alien people to be driven outside the bounds of civilization. Black slaves were considered the property of their masters. Women could not vote and were legally controlled by their husbands. "In America," wrote de Tocqueville, "a woman loses her independence forever in the bonds of matrimony."
In de Tocqueville's America, the idea of equality applied mainly to free white adult males. Full citizenship rights belonged only to this group. Yet, even this limited degree of equality made the United States radically different from the rest of the world and fascinated de Tocqueville.

Politics in de Tocqueville's America

"No sooner do you set foot on American soil than you find yourself in a sort of tumult," de Tocqueville wrote in his book. "A confused clamor rises on every side, and a thousand voices are heard at once, each expressing some social requirements." De Tocqueville was amazed at the large number of people active in public affairs. "All around you everything is on the move," he reported. De Tocqueville saw all kinds of people busily planning local projects, choosing representatives and assembling to criticize their leaders. He was especially impressed with New England town meetings where every citizen had the right to vote on public matters.
De Tocqueville thought it remarkable how often Americans joined together in various organizations which he called associations. "Americans of all ages, all stations of life and all types of disposition are forever forming associations," he wrote. "There are not only commercial and industrial associations in which all take part, but others of a thousand types-religious, moral, serious, futile, very general and very limited, immensely large and very minute."
De Tocqueville went on to observe that Americans naturally formed groups when they wanted to hold a celebration, found a church, build a school, distribute books or do almost anything else. "Finally, if they want to proclaim a truth or propagate some feeling ...they form an association. In every case, at the head of any new undertaking, where in France you would find the government ... in the United States you are sure to find an association."
"The people reign over the American political world as God rules over the universe," wrote de Tocqueville. Although property requirements for voting were still common, they were beginning to disappear. Elections were usually held every year for local and state offices. Those who had the right to vote did so and in large numbers. During the time that de Tocqueville toured America, 70% or more of the voters turned out on election day, compared to under 50% today.
The four-year cycle of presidential elections, which de Tocqueville called a "revolution ... in the name of the law," fascinated him. He wrote:
Long before the appointed day arrives, the election becomes the greatest, and one might say the only, affair occupying men's minds.... The President, for his part, is absorbed in the task of defending himself before the majority.... As the election draws near, intrigues grow more active and agitation is more lively and widespread. The citizens divide up into several camps.... The whole nation gets into a feverish state. . ..
With the election over, de Tocqueville reported, everything quickly calmed down like a river that only momentarily overflowed its banks. "But was it not astonishing," remarked de Tocqueville, "that such a storm could ever have arisen?"
At- the time of de Tocqueville's visit, political parties in America were undergoing great change as old ones died out and new ones emerged. The most significant development was the birth of the Democratic Party under the leadership of Andrew Jackson, elected president in 1828.
De Tocqueville observed a "constant agitation of parties," each attempting to draw voters over to its side. In his notes he wrote that a party candidate ". . . must haunt the taverns, drink and argue with the mob; that is what is called Electioneering in America."
De Tocqueville leveled some of his sharpest criticism against American political leaders themselves. He became convinced that outstanding men avoided elected office in order to pursue their private ambitions and careers. Those who did seek public office, he believed, were often poorly educated and open to corruption.
In one of his notebooks, de Tocqueville ridiculed Congressman Davy Crockett as a man "...who had received no education, could read only with difficulty, had no property, no fixed dwelling, but spent his time hunting, selling his game for a living, and 1pending his whole life in the woods." But de Tocqueville saved his sharpest barbs for President Jackson whom he described in his book as a "man of violent character and middling capacities." In his view, Jackson possessed few qualities for political leadership.

Law and Citizenship

De Tocqueville found a deep respect for the law in America. The reason, he felt, was that the American citizens themselves held the ultimate power to change any laws they disliked.
On the other hand, those who chose to violate the law were immediately branded as outcasts by the law-abiding majority. In Europe, de Tocqueville observed, the people merely watched as the authorities tracked down a criminal, while in America "...everyone thinks he has an interest in furnishing proof of an offense and in arresting the guilty man."
De Tocqueville wondered how American citizens learned about the law and their rights. Public schools, even at an elementary level, hardly existed outside of New England. Newspapers helped to inform the public, but the majority of Americans could not read. De Tocqueville discovered that the courtroom and jury actually served as a "free school" for civic education. "I do not know whether a jury is useful to the parties involved," de Tocqueville wrote, "but I am sure it is very good for those who have to decide the case." De Tocqueville also declared that juries "...make all men feel that they have duties toward society and that they take a share in its government."

"Tyranny of the Majority"

A number of things bothered de Tocqueville about democracy. One of them was that in a society made up of equal citizens, the majority is always right. To de Tocqueville, a majority of equals, just like a single all-powerful ruler, could abuse its power. In a democracy, de Tocqueville argued, this abuse becomes the "tyranny of the majority."
De Tocqueville did not claim that the tyranny of the majority as yet existed to any great degree in America. Still, he saw evidence of it developing. For example, de Tocqueville found that in the North, free black males who had the right to vote often were discouraged from voting by the white majority.
De Tocqueville maintained that even freedom of speech, guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, was affected by majority opinion.
"I know no country," he wrote, "in which, generally speaking, there is less independence of mind and true freedom of discussion than in America." He added that the lack of great writers in the United States was due to the absence of "freedom of spirit" brought on by a majority intolerant of minority views.
"If ever freedom is lost in America," de Tocqueville warned, "that will be due to the ... majority driving minorities to desperation...." De Tocqueville did identify certain elements at work in American democracy which checked the formation of a tyranny of the majority. Among these elements were the large number of independent associations, the press and the courts.




I used a great site called the de Tocqueville Project when I was teaching in the classroom and at home. I hope you moms can find it. The site provided activities for students as well as excellent commentary. I am off to Mass and cannot write more this morning. God bless you all and remember, when a right is given up, it is lost forever.




Mysterious China Clouds

No real explanation, but locals in Beijing, China claim these clouds were connected with a chemical plant malfunction. Two people have been arrested for false rumors. What do you think?



Monday, 18 June 2012

Vocations, lost, blocked, unanswered

The vocations crisis to the priesthood and religious life looks as if it is abating, slowly but surely. Numbers are up in several countries in the West and some seminaries are full enough not to be able to take in any more young men this year. The seminaries for older vocations have seen a rise in students as well. The Bade in Rome, I have been told, is full as well as such seminaries in the States.

However, there is another vocation crisis which has not been highlighted as much in the Catholic press and that is the vocation to marriage. Marriages among Catholics are at an all time low, with many couples either leaving the Church or cohabitating without marriage. The larger issue are the number of young people who are not even considering getting married, as well as older men and women who are living a single, unconsecrated and secular life.

I believe there are three reasons for the lack of marriage vocations, which may apply to those of the priesthood and religious life.

The first is what some people in conversation call the "lost vocation". A friend of mine, a young man in his thirties, claims he is a lost vocation, as does another friend of mine in his early forties. What they mean is that they applied and were refused by one bishop and did not try another diocese. Why, I do not know, as I do know some seminarians and even ordained priests, who when refused by one bishop, or vocations director, went on to apply elsewhere, were accepted and are now either in the seminary or ordained--good men all.

A "lost vocation" in marriage could mean that a man asked one woman to get married and she said no or that a woman was never asked. This does happen. Unrequited love is the stuff of history as well as novels. A mystery surrounds the concept of unrequited love, such as, can one fall in love with the wrong person? I think not. Therefore, let us move on to the other categories.

A blocked vocation to marriage (or even to the priesthood or religious life) is a personal psychological or even spiritual bar to the acceptance. For example, I know many young people under thirty-five, who have been raised in such an individualistic atmosphere, or who are afraid of intimacy, or who do not want children, who have refused to consider marriage as a vocation. I wrote about this with regard to the Japanese on this blog many months ago.
http://supertradmum-etheldredasplace.blogspot.co.uk/2012/01/narcissism-is-destroying-japan.html

Many young people and not-so-young have blocks to marriage which have been caused by trauma, unhappy home lives, or confusion about their own lives. A trauma could be the divorce of parents, the early death of a parent, (a mom's early death is a common story in the lives of the saints, by the way), alcoholism, drug abuse, or even physical or sexual abuse. Unhappy homes wherein a young person witnessed and lived with parents who did not learn to love each other could be another blockage. These events could cause a fear of intimacy, as intimacy requires risk and an openness to existential pain as well as love. M. Scott Peck, in one of his excellent books, wrote about a young woman who was depressed, but so afraid of love and a relationship, that she said "no" to her vocation. This type of blockage is more and more common in today's fragmented world.

There can even be an inordinate fear of the world, or the future leading to an unwillingness to engage in the world through marriage and children, or to be involved in history, the future. One young lady told me years ago that she was not going to get married or have children because the world was so bad. How sad, as she denied herself and the world, love and life.

Individualism can also lead to selfishness and the unwillingness to share a life with someone else, but I think this is a rare situation, but may be growing in our societies of entitlement philosophy. "Why should I get married", a young person stated, "I have everything I need and want". The older son at home is an example of this type of "peter pan" syndrome, which I have written about in two previous blogs found here below on the links. I have a few other references to this theme in other blogs are teaching boys to be men, but these are the main ideas:





http://supertradmum-etheldredasplace.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/protectors-predators-and-peter-pans.html




http://supertradmum-etheldredasplace.blogspot.co.uk/2012/01/lost-boys-lost-civilizations.html


Men and women have to decide to grow up.

The fear of commitment lies in the psychological fears from such events as partially listed here. Blockages can be removed, as I have witnessed this is peoples' lives, through prayer, healing, the frequent reception of the sacraments, especially Holy Communion, and the life of the virtues.

It is our duty as adults to let God remove blockages in our lives and be healed in order to be what He intended us to be, as a vocation is not about DOING, but about BEING. See my long series on Love and the Pope's Encyclical Deus Caritas Est. I did a long examination of this just weeks ago, and you can follow the series below, starting here:

http://supertradmum-etheldredasplace.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/on-love-and-answer-to-socialism-part.html . 


As adults, our way to God is determined by God in our call, our vocation. To say "yes" to a vocation to marriage is to say "yes" to God, humbly recognizing that He made us to be a certain person for His Honor and Glory.

In fact, others rely on us fulfilling our vocations in the world. The Kingdom of God is advanced by adults deciding to cooperate with God in His Plan for the Church and for us individually.

Like concentric circles in a pond, our affirmations of our vocations touch the lives of others in the Church and in the world.

That blockages can and must be removed, with suffering, of course, is the hope of all Christians. To be what we are called to be forms a cooperation with grace. Only life and joy can result.

The last point covered today is the unanswered vocation. As long as a person is confused, he or she cannot answer the call from God. Confusion is only one reason for the unanswered vocation, however. I separate this category from the first two, lost and blocked, as this could be simply an act of the will wherein one says "no" to God. I have met both single persons and married persons who refused to have children, preferring to live a contracepting lifestyle. This is a huge negative decision, impacting their souls, the Church, and, indeed, the world. That a healthy, comfortable person would say "no" to God in a vocation or to a vocation to marriage is almost as serious as the unforgivable sin of denying the works of the Holy Spirit. Fear is part of the first two reasons for negation, but the last reason, in the unanswered vocation, is rebellion. No is an answer, however.

I appeal to all youth and even those who are older and still confused about their vocations to pray through to a resolution and not merely "let things happen" by chance. We have free will and are meant to use it in conformity with a well-trained conscience. God wants us to be happy and to be the person He created.

Do not be afraid, I say to all. Be open to others. Do not live in isolation. Let God be God in your lives. Choose life, not death. Choose love; to love and be loved. That is the call of Christ in your lives.

A Pat Buchanan Article Worth Reading, (as usual)

If you have not read Pat Buchanan for awhile, I recommend this article on his website. http://buchanan.org/blog/dress-rehearsal-for-a-mideast-war-5101?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+PatrickBuchanan+%28Pat+Buchanan+Update%29

The thinking man's commentator....

The Age of the Martyrs


Talking with young people this weekend, I was convinced in my initial view that the John Paul II Generation of Catholics in America is a great phenomenon which did not happen in Great Britain. Many reasons caused this lack of inspiration by Blessed John Paul II, which obviously occurred in the States, where many young people born under his long reign have been inspired to either answer the vocation to the priesthood or religious life, or following a traditional mode of Catholic marriage-that is, avoiding contraception, being involved in homeschooling, and the married women deciding to be stay-at-home moms.

Several reasons may be postulated as to why Blessed John Paul II did not have the impact on the previous generation of youth here, now in their forties, whereas Benedict XVI is influencing the youth now, here, in a more specific manner. Both popes visited Great Britain and the World Youth Days were popular, but the reactions nationally were polls apart.

Some of the reasons are merely that Blessed John Paul II as an Eastern European appealed to those from similar backgrounds in the States. His style, open and media-friendly, was, shall we say, very "American". Benedict is very European in his personality and manner. His gentleness and gentility have attracted the attention of youth here.

However, I put forward another main reason for Benedict's influence over John Paul II in Great Britain-the British Church, until very recently, has had a long history of intellectual Catholicism and Benedict has rekindled that Catholic intellectualism by his constant appeal to Faith and Reason.

Now, one does not have to be an academic to be an intellectual, but the new generation of twenty and thirty somethings, who are either coming into the Church, or pursuing vocations in the Church in Great Britain are highly intelligent and intellectual youth. These are not youth who merely follow an experiential type of faith-not Neo-Catechumenates, or Charismatics, which some in the States in the John Paul II Generation were and still are.

Great Britain, particularly England, is the intellectual home of Blessed John Henry Newman, St. Edmund Campion, St. Thomas More, and other intellectuals not canonized, such as Christopher Dawson, Hilaire Belloc (French but living and working here), Chesterton and others.

These bright lights laid the foundation, and built on the longer, older tradition of Catholic intellectualism in England. The list is too long to put in this post, but we have Sts. Anselm and Bede for earlier examples. The joining of Faith and Reason appeals to this heritage. Benedict appeals to this heritage in a very European and urbane manner. He is the man of the hour, just as John Paul II was for the Americans.

I am impressed by those youth who are weaned from the emphasis on experiential religion, a fault of the Charismatic Renewal here, which has been divorced from solid catechesis for too long.
The Benedict XVI generation reads, knows the CCC inside and out. They are preparing themselves for missionary work, a real New Evangelization a la Benedict. They can see that commitment needs catechesis, and not merely prayer and experience. They desire to know and teach doctrine.

The two movements which have impressed me are the Evangelium and the Faith movements, both presenting Faith and Reason to the youth; and the youth are responding. Faith is not new, but is attracting young people more than from their parents' generation, which is interesting. The same thing is happening with the pro-life movement here. Younger people are stepping into a void, which was filled by the earlier generation in the States. These movements are attracting the Benedict XVI Generation.

I am prejudiced against the Charismatic Renewal in Great Britain, as I think it is doing more harm than good at this point, with a mixture of false ecumenism and anti-intellectualism at its base. At some point, one must learn what one believes, not just rely on experience. A young person told me that today, about herself. She has left the Charismatics and joined other groups which study the Faith and spread it. This emphasis on study is gaining ground, thank goodness. I do not see vocations coming out of prayer groups anyway, as I am seeing vocations arising out of inspiration from Pope Benedict's writings and example, as well as the influence of the work of Blessed John Paul II, but, after his death.

Perhaps all of this has to do with the times. Two students I spoke with this weekend believe they are in the generation of martyrs. They are quite sane, and open about the possibility of shedding blood in persecution for the Faith. These are bright and talented youth, who love the Church and are willing to die for the Truth. I think that the present Pope's war on relativism and immorality, his fearless discussions on Islam, his condemnation of abortion, contraception, homosexual life-styles, civil marriage, and his emphasis on clarity, hope, and love have inspired a new generation of Catholics. This Pope has been very direct, and has even pointed out the "enemy within the Church" as recently as last Advent. This generation knows that spiritual warfare becomes physical persecution. This will be the generation of the martyrs, which I have known and taught openly as early as 2000-in America. These British youth see things in the clear light of day-good and evil-and they are not afraid. They are sophisticated, smart and ready. This is the Benedict XVI Generation-the Age of the Martyrs.




And in France, a crash may be inevitable

Another interesting Telegraph article from Sunday. French government pursuing socialist plans may cause another crisis, which could have been avoided-if Sarkozy was elected. I cannot understand why the French populace is pursuing this headlong spending spree by voting in the socialists.

Greek electorate narrowly decide against disaster-Conservatives in

and updates....http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/greece/9336240/Greek-election-despatch-no-panic-no-fear-no-hope.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/greece/9337683/Greece-election-vote-leaves-Euro-in-balance.html


From the Telegraph, June 17th 22.21 Tomorrow's front pages are starting to emerge. The FT has gone with the headline: "Samaras leads in Greece poll", which will likely change for the final edition, while The Daily Telegraph has opted for: "Greek vote leaves euro in balance".
 

Sunday, 17 June 2012

Happy Father's Day

Happy Father's Day to all fathers, especially to God, Our Father, Abba, Who sent us Christ in order that we might know Him, love Him and serve Him in this world, and be happy with Him in the next.

Happy Father's Day to my father, who is 89.

We are so fortunate to belong to a Church, the one, true religion, to which a loving Father-God has revealed Himself. We are His children by baptism, and the heirs to heaven. Thank Him for His great Mercy in giving us life, the Church, His Son and the Holy Spirit. Also, thank Him for giving us each other, our brothers and sisters in Christ.

At the Courtauld in London, God the Father by the Master of Castello

On Gramsci and Education


I wonder if it is a lack of perfection to write about Gramsci on a Sunday post? Well, I have not mentioned him for awhile and unless I lose my Post-Post-Modernists, I thought I should reveal some more of his copious notebooks. A very learned friend of mine said two weeks ago that she thought Gramsci should be considered a "professional radical".

Here is food for thought from Notebook 7 (1930-1931) Section 104, page 226 of collection.


"History of the intellectuals. Struggle between church and state." 


"This struggle assumed a different character in different historical periods. In the modern phase, it is the struggle for hegemony in the education of the people; at least, this is its most salient characteristic, to which all others are secondary. It is therefore a struggle between two categories of intellectuals, a struggle to subodinate the clergy, as a typical category of intellectuals, to the directives of the state, that is, to the directives of the dominant class (freedom of teaching--youth organizations--women's organization--professional organizations)."


Can't have a Gramsci quotation without him mentioning hegemony.


Taken as an institution created by Christ on earth to lead men and women to eternal life, there is a hegemony, the dirty word of the Marxist, given to the Church. This rule, this imperial rule of men's hearts and minds finds its roots in the Old and New Testament-the Kingdom of Israel was a real place, just as the Kingdom of God, the Church, is a real place.

Now, as this hegemony is spiritual and interior, Gramsci's argument is flawed, as his only reference is materialism. So, the power struggle for him is purely historical and physical, not being able to see or believe in the invisible realm of spiritual warfare. But, Gramsci correctly sees that the Church is in a battle for the cultural and mental dominance of mankind.

This dominance, we know, is connected to our assent of belief and rests in free will.

Obviously, he does not believe that and merely sees the subjugation of humans to imperialistic powers. He knows and explains that hegemony must be over all aspects of life: education, literature, music, morality, ethics (not the same thing), military, political and governmental life. Hegemony of one class over another is always decided by the Marxist. Which group controls the other groups is based on the type of Marxism--Gramsci wanted to develop an intellectual working class. He thought that such a group would counteract the hegemony of the Church.

Hegemon is, as you can see, a Greek word meaning "leader" or "superior state", hearkening back to the dominance of one city-state over another in the ancient Greek world.

States within states include the Church, but those who do not believe that the Church is the foremost and only divine institution (sorry, monarchists, but even the ancient prophets tried to talk the Jews out of a monarchical system). The radical feminists use the term as in "hegemonic masculinity", seeing patriarchies as threats to real freedom, as in gender studies, the male always is the suppressor of the female. I am sure some of this philosophical/sociological jargon will be bandied about the upcoming synod in GB.

Why the Church is a threat to the State is behind Gramsci's entire argument concerning which hegemon should be in power at any given time. Part of his argument lies in the fact that the Church sided with either emperors or kings in the 19th century as against atheistic rebellions in Italy and France, as well as Austria. Gramsci mentions several times that he likes the Church in a defensive role against the liberal, and new states, as in the movements in Italy and Spain.

My emphasis, as an educator, is always going to be on education and the hegemony theory.

Here is Gramsci again, in Notebook 7, section 89, page 216.


"Past and present. Religion in the schools."


"This is why, following the Gentile reform, the new school curricula assign art and religion solely to elementary school, whereas philosophy is entrusted for the most part to secondary school. In the philosophical rationale of elementary curricula, the words 'teaching of religion is considered to be the foundation and the summit of all primary education' mean precisely that  religion is a necessary but lower category that education must pass through because, according to Hegel's notion, religion is a mythological and lower form of philosophy that corresponds to the mental capacity of the child, who is not yet capable of rising to the level of pure philosophy--into which, at a later stage, religion must be absorbed and resolved. Let us point out straight away that in fact this idealist theory has failed to pollute the teaching of religion in the elementary school by having it treated as mythology. It has failed because the teacher either do not understand or they do not care for such theories and also because Catholic teaching of religion is intrinsically historical and dogmatic and the curricula, texts and teaching are externally supervised and directed by the church. Furthermore the words, 'foundation and summit' have been accepted by the church in their obvious meaning and repeated in the concordat between the Holy See and Italy, according to which....religious instruction is extended to the middle schools. This extension is now thwarting the aims of idealism, which wanted to exclude religion from the middle schools, where philosophy alone would predominate--a philosophy destined to supersede and absorb the religion learned in the elementary schools."


What the Gramscians did not accomplish, Dewey and the liberal element of the Catholic Church did.

Ponder, please. This is why I home schooled, as even Catholic schools have succumbed to these ideals.