This is a good discussion and not terribly long at 6ish minutes.
This is a good discussion and not terribly long at 6ish minutes.
Approved English Text of Amoris Laetitia on-line @
Order it already printed and bound:
Before you print it, be aware that the pdf file is 264 pages long! Granted, they are short pages with big fonts and some blank pages, so it’s not nearly as much text as that suggests, but it’s still lots of paper that would need punching and a 3-ring binder.
I’m still working on Centessiumus Annus and Rosarium Virginis Mariae. I don’t think my brain can handle another papal document right now! LOL Fortunately, Jimmy Akin has a good summary article (7 pages) that I am going to print out and study.
The Pope’s New Document on Marriage by Jimmy Akin
Jonah Goldberg notes that a lot of Conservatives are blaming political correctness and cultural Marxism for the protests raging on campuses lately. Since both of these are decades old, he suggests they are unlikely culprits. He blames the rise in “helicopter parenting” and the epidemic of “everyone gets a trophy” education.
He’s right. I was graduated in 1976 and I experienced political correctness and cultural Marxism. Fortunately, I was already a strong Christian before I started college, so I thought they were both horrible and gratefully fled academia as soon as possible.
The Conservatives are also right. The parents of today’s bratty college students were educated in political correctness and cultural Marxism, the same as I was. But they swallowed it whole and then raised their kids accordingly. What we see today is the fruit of those twisted, poisonous philosophies.
I only dated my then-future spouse because he was a devout Catholic-Christian. I pissed off a number of guys for turning them down flat for even a first date, because I didn’t see the point in dating men who weren’t good Catholic daddy material.
One choice Dearest and I made was what we called “The Sieve Theory of Parenting.” From conception until some point in their infancy, babies need HEPA filter parents who provide the safest and most nurturing environment possible. At about six months, we made the holes bigger, say coffee filter-ish, and let the baby cry it out when we deemed we had met its needs and it was just being a bit of a demanding brat.
The day the kid smirked, cocked her eyebrow at me, and then threw her cereal across the room, we opened the holes to allow for the growth of rules, rewards and punishments. When they were able to understand the concept, we instituted a new “Responsibility and Freedom” for each child, as age appropriate, on landmark events like birthdays, or half birthdays, or start of a new school year.
For example, when our eldest started first grade, she received the new responsibility of remembering her lunch pail and the new freedom of an extra 30 minutes with her light on at night. The first time she accidentally forgot her lunch, the school fed her a cafeteria lunch. I raised the roof. She had very severe food allergies and was not to ever be permitted food that I had not sent in for her. The second time I suspect she accidentally-on-purpose forgot, because she had really liked that mac and cheese they’d given her. We didn’t have that at home, because she was allergic to every ingredient!
The teacher called and demanded I run right down with her lunch pail. I said no and gave her permission to give the kid an apple, to which she responded, “You’re going to let your daughter go HUNGRY?” “Yes, as a matter of fact, I am. It is her responsibility to remember her lunch pail, not my responsibility to disrupt my day when she forgets. Hunger will sharpen her memory for the future. And, she’ll be home in THREE HOURS, at which time she can then eat her lunch, which is sitting right where she left it.” The teacher was appalled. Our allergy doctor backed me up 100%.
We realized that our precious little darlings would become adults in the eyes of the law on their 18th birthdays. They’d be legal to go so deeply into debt that it would take years to get free. They’d be legal to join the military and get shot at in places they had never heard of before. They’d be legal to vote! (I am shuddering at the choices Pacifier Protesters will make … provided someone hands them a registration card and drags them out of bed on election day and drives them to their voting station.)
We felt strongly that, if we had not prepared them to actually have the life skills they needed to handle all this freedom and responsibility, then we had failed them.
Eighteen years goes by fast. I was teaching the kids how to balance the checkbook in third grade. It’s just adding and subtracting, after all. As soon as they could lift a load and reach the buttons on our washer-dryer, they got their own laundry baskets. I taught them to iron, sew, mend, cook and use my expensive Rainbow vacuum cleaner properly. Hubby taught them to take out the trash, shovel snow, and use the lawn mower safely. When we DIYed our garage into his new office, they learned to measure twice and cut once, to pound nails straight and put soap on the screws, to clean paint brushes properly and lay ceramic tile, and to wire an outlet so it worked without burning the house down.
We printed family money (“goobers”) with which we paid them for doing community services, like washing dishes or cleaning a shared space. (Their own personal spaces were their own personal responsibilities. If I didn’t want to see their messes, I closed the doors.) They used goobers to buy things like rides to the mall and cash to shop with. They also got a family credit card, briefly. They ran them up to the (very low) limit, paid only the interest for a while, and quickly realized what a slippery sloped pit that credit card thing can be.
In grade school, they were at colander level. If they had school problems, we talked with the teachers and made a plan. In high school, with only two or three years left before the big One Eight, we opened up the holes in our parenting sieve to compost level. If they forgot their homework or missed the bus, they got to choose one of two consequences — i.e., accepting whatever the teacher or school imposed or paying a parental unit muy goobers to make a special trip in the car.
When they had problems, we talked with them about how they wanted us to handle the situation. When one of the girls got into an academic hole, I asked, “Do you want me to talk to your teacher and micro-manage your homework? Or do you want us to back off and let you sort this out on your own, being well aware that if you don’t sort it out, you will be going to summer school?” She chose door number two. It took her a while, but she learned how to learn and will be awarded a Master of Art degree next month. 🙂
I dunno about hubby, but I know I got a fair amount of crap for “not caring enough.” I stuck to my guns, because we had a plan that made sense to us. Personally, I think the fact our kids turned out so great is testament that we cared just the right amount.
Veruca Salt – I Want It Now (Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory)
My brother gave me a great lesson in parenting when I was pregnant with the first. He recounted when his eldest was tippy toeing along the baseboard, clinging to the frame of the picture window. His fil said, “Shouldn’t you get her? She’s going to fall.” Bro said, “No. She’s only 3 inches up, the floor is carpeted and she’s wearing a diaper besides. I think a small tumble will teach her some valuable caution.”
So at each stage, dh and I identified the threat level and either swooped in to save the kid from disaster or backed off and let a relatively safe, natural consequence occur. For example, I figured flunking a high school class and learning responsibility through the pain of summer school was better than not learning to study properly, then flunking a college class and wasting thousands of dollars in tuition.
I think it’s likely that the parents of these whiny college protesters had moms and dads who parented with a coffee filter for 18 years. It’s natural for their offspring to believe that everyone in the whole world should similarly provide for their every want and make them feel good about themselves at all times.
NOVA SCOTIA (October 2015) — Two homosexual men recently “divorced” under Canadian law so that they could include a third man in their relationship, and now plan to have their sisters serve as surrogates to bear their children.
“We just want to say that love is love. It should be multiplied not divided,” Adam Grant told the Daily Mail. “It shouldn’t matter if you’re in a three-way or a four-way relationship.”
Adam Grant and Shayne Curran married in 2011. In 2012, they decided they “wanted to have a little more fun”, “be open to seeing others” and “experiment with multiple partners.”
I know. Marriage can be so dull. I mean, a whole year with only one person to bang? Sheesh.
They met Sebastian Tran at a nightclub in shortly after then, oh my goodness, they all decided they had “feelings” for each other, so Adam and Shayne got a divorce so they could add Sebastian to their whatever-it-is.
They have attorneys working toward getting polygamy legalized in Canada so they can be bound to each other “in the eyes of the law.”
They also want to have children.
Has anyone told them that parenting is even harder than marriage? I shudder to think what these fun-loving sexual experimenters might do when they find their three-some is boring, parenting is hard, and decide to spice things up by raping their children.
Polygamy is gaining societal support. (Where is my surprised face?) Obviously, if it is bigoted to oppose same-sex marriage, then it must also be bigoted to oppose polygamous marriage. Ditto incestuous marriage, interspecies marriage, and marriage between humans and plants or humans and inanimate objects.
And if I can marry my brother or my sister, then why can’t I marry my parent or my child? In fact, let’s skip the marriage thing altogether and just say yes to sex with whatever and whomever you choose, no matter how young, vulnerable, or incapable of giving consent that someone may be.
I’d call that sexual abuse, but what do I know? I’m just a bigoted Christian.
“Since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper.” -Romans 1:28
On September 8, the Holy See released a pair of documents by Pope Francis which reform the way in which the Church handles annulments.
1) What is an annulment? Is it the same thing as a divorce?
A CHURCH annulment (formally known as a “declaration of nullity”) is a ruling that something was so gravely wrong at the time of the wedding that no SACRAMENTAL marriage came into existence. A CIVIL divorce dissolves a CIVIL marriage.
2) Why are annulments an important issue in the Catholic Church?
Jesus Christ expressly taught that if two people divorce and then remarry, they are committing the grave sin of adultery (Mark 10:11-12). Because of this teaching, the Church cannot simply give divorced people permission to remarry. To do so would be to give them permission to commit adultery.
3) How does the annulment process work?
When a man and a woman have divorced, they can contact the appropriate diocese and have their marriage investigated to see if it was valid. This process could be simple or lengthy, depending on the nature of the case and the forms of evidence available. A SACRAMENTAL marriage is only valid if both man and woman were free of coercion and fully capable of fully committing to the union at the time the vows were made. Pregnancy might be one reason a couple felt coerced. Addiction might be one reason a couple was not capable.
4) What has Pope Francis done?
He has issued two motu proprio documents. A motu proprio is somewhat similar to a presidential executive order in that it is issued on the pope’s initiative for the purpose of establishing or clarifying matters of church administration. Just as a presidential executive order is not supposed to create or change federal law, so too does a motu proprio not deal with church doctrine.
5) Why has Pope Francis done this?
He did so out of a desire to make the annulment process more efficient. In many parts of the world, the process has been notoriously slow and difficult.
6) What changes did Pope Francis make to the process?
Unless you’re familiar with the annulment process, you wouldn’t understand the significance of the changes. But if you care, you can read more at the link below. These changes take effect December 8, 2015, which will be the Solemnity of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary.
Recent history is rife with examples of Christians being vilified as “slippery slope” straw man haters.
But each time, we have been proved right.
When “The Pill” was made available to the public in 1964, Christians warned it could lead to promiscuity and a rise in children living in broken and single parent homes.
When abortion was made legal throughout all nine months of pregnancy in 1973, Christians warned that it would not save women’s lives, but would instead lead to devaluing all human life, especially children’s lives.
When euthanasia was legalized in Oregon and other states, Christians warned that the non-terminally ill and eventually the mentally handicapped, or simply the unwanted, would be killed in the name of mercy.
This is happening.
When gay marriage was legalized in all 50 states, Christians warned it would lead to demands for legalizing polygamy.
Life Site News reports that most Catholic bishops across the country followed the lead of Archbishop Joseph Kurtz, president of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), who responded to the high court’s ruling with assurances directed toward Catholic faithful.
“The nature of the human person and marriage remains unchanged and unchangeable.”
I searched my own diocesan website (Rochester, NY) and its newspaper’s Facebook page. I found nothing … NOT ONE WORD … about the SCOTUS decision or gay marriage. I am sickened by this.
In 2010, Naomi Cahn and June Carbone published a book on family life and political culture called “Red Families v. Blue Families” in which they argued that politically conservative families were more likely to embrace outmoded views about sex, gender, and marriage that are ill suited to the new economy and the more egalitarian world that we now live in. By contrast, blue America emphasizes education, delayed parenthood, and gender egalitarianism, all values that are supposed to equip its citizens to build comparatively stronger and more stable families in twenty-first-century America.
BUT … Cahn and Carbone used state-level statistics to support their claim and many blue states have many, many red counties. A new study using county-level statistics flips Cahn and Carbone on their pointy little heads.
W. Bradford Wilcox of the University of Virginia studied the 470 largest counties in the United States. They account for about two-thirds of the U.S. population. He found that red counties “have a higher share of their population that is married. This is true with and without controls for region, education, race, and age at the county level (and weighting for population size).” Wilcox attributes this phenomenon to higher levels of religious participation and “normative support” for marriage.