Diabolical Family Planning, Part I

I’m trying to tie together a few Vortex episodes along with a Disney propaganda film from the ‘60’s to make a point here about the value of the family, and the desirability of letting God choose family size.

The August 5 Vortex episode was entitled “Obama- The Great Destroyer of Families”.  I’d like to make a few comments on it. See the script here.

In this episode, after acknowledging that Obama “holds nothing sacred except that which is evil”, Michael Voris goes on to say (all emphases mine):

But perhaps the most dangerous thing he has done – IS doing – is the total economic restructuring of the once most powerful economy in the history of the world. Not because money matters more than life or sexual morality, but because when you force, bend, twist, and mutilate economic realities, they have a “back up the chain” reaction with families, and [with] people’s abilities to have and provide for their families.

…Economies follow human life cycles, not the other way around. Ah, but in Obama’s case, he is attempting, with a large measure of success, to affect the human life cycle by screwing up the economy.

Consider his lie about taxes. On the campaign trail – each election – he said no one earning under $250,000 will pay any more in taxes. Then on January 1st of this year, the average full time American worker saw $40 more dollars yanked out his check than the year before; and last time I checked, the average American worker was not making above $250,000.

After providing some statistics, Voris summarizes by saying:

So what is the trend here – a smaller percentage of people working over all, and of those who are working, less and less full time jobs available. Something is rotten in the economy. And when you factor is that even many of the full time jobs that people secured were steps down from their previous jobs in terms of pay, hours and benefits – you can begin to see how the way is being paved for a total transformation of the economy.

Less and less people able to work the jobs they want and NEED. How come you never hear THIS story from the social justice squawkers in Catholic circles. Isn’t the dignity of man as worker a foundational concept in the Church?

… The Church upholds the family – the traditional family. Yet many of the heads of these households aren’t able to find either work or the necessary work to sustain their families. And as most people know, financial stressors are the leading cause of fights and arguments and lack of peace in the home. If you back Obama and call yourself a Catholic – consider what your vote for him has done to harm, hurt, and break apart the traditional family. The man supports evil – not only in the obvious forms of sodomy and child murder and contraception, but also – at the same time – by using his power over the economy to cripple families.

The destruction of family life was the very first goal of both the communists and the Nazis when they each came to power. If the state can get control over the family – it’s lights out.

Now consider this video – a propaganda piece created by Disney in the 1960’s at the height of the “population bomb” scare. LifeSiteNews ran it on August 2. I do not have a script for this video, but it is worth watching in its entirety to get the full effect.

A few points worth noting in the video is the message that families with few children means a “better” life for everyone – for the children, the parents, for the world! Having more children, the film tells us, means that the population is “out of balance”; there are too many people and not enough resources. The families with more children won’t have enough to eat, the family ox will starve and not be able to pull the plow, and mom will be ever so much more tired and cranky because she has to work so hard. (Eyes rolling.) And it is everyone's duty to do their part so that the world won't be overpopulated, and we will all live a life worth living. Blech. (If you believe any of that, please visit the Population Research Institute's educational video page and watch some of their videos.)

From “LesFemmes” blog:

And then consider the inherent racism of this video which was made during Paul Ehrlich population bomb hysteria period. A bunch of white elitists make a film showing a Hispanic couple labeled as "everyman." Then consider that most Hispanic countries are majority Catholic countries. This film was shot across the bow to the Catholic Church which encourages generosity in life giving. The battle has always been between the culture of death and the Lord of Life and His Church.

To me, the callous dismissal of potential children is…unbelievable. But then, really, many people have this attitude when they use birth control; they are not thinking about the life that didn’t have a chance – only that they will have a better life for themselves and their “existing” children if they limit the number of souls who come into their families.

LifeSiteNews also has made available an excellent paper, “The Inherent Racism of Population Control”, which you can view here.

Now back to another couple of Vortex episodes which fit into this theme. On August 6, the Vortex was “Phony Pat Robertson” (see the script here, but Robertson’s comments are not in the script – you’ll have to watch the video). 

A LifeSiteNews article also notes  Robertson’s comments that:

“That's the big problem, especially in Appalachia. They don't know about birth control. They just keep having babies.”

“You see a string of all these little ragamuffins, and not enough food to eat and so on,” he said, “and it's desperate poverty.”

 “I'd say yes, birth control is absolutely an important thing for people to use,” he added, saying contraception “is a very important part of humanity.”

Michael Voris responded:

Imagine calling children – Reverend Pro-Life – calling children ragamuffins – those unwanted, can’t-be-afforded children, disposable, should-never-have-been-born creations of Almighty God.

See, Mr. Robertson isn’t really pro-LIFE. He’s pro-BIRTH! As is everyone in the prolife movement who wants conceived children to be born, but allows for conception to be denied and blocked and hampered. How can you call yourself pro-LIFE? You aren’t.

Robertson also said that “birth control has always been permitted” by Protestant ecclesial communities, but this is patently false; only since 1930 have any Protestant groups condoned the practice. Michael Voris calls this

…the Protestant poison of birth control that huge numbers of Catholics have unfortunately consumed as well. As long as the pro-life movement is really nothing more than the pro-birth movement – you can expect the killing [abortion] to continue.

Further rebutting Robertson’s comments was the Vortex episode of August 8 entitled “Ragamuffin Response” (go here for the video and link to the script). Voris quotes from a comment left on the CMTV Face Book page:

And her comment is especially worth listening to – because she was one of those ragamuffin children. Her name is Ruth:

“Well, as someone from Appalachia and the tenth of 11 children whose parents' income was below the poverty line, I have to say most people are clueless when they talk about this.

"Ragamuffins" indeed! My parents had hoped for 12 children and the final child miscarried. Mom had ten in her family and Dad had 12 in his. No one starved to death. No one was cold or even hungry. The only ones who ever had trouble with that has been the current generation and only those that have cut themselves off from their Catholic faith and family.

While my family income was poverty level, we were working poor with 12 hour days and with farming abilities that we used well. Our work ethic was excellent. All 11 children in my family are college graduates – most with advanced degrees. Poverty is not an issue about a large number of children – we worked together for the good of the family.

True poverty is NOT about a lack of money. It is about a lack of (example of) work ethic, a lack of education (or lack of valuing education), a lack of family connections – broken families (no one to catch you when you fall), a lack of charity (charity should start with the family), a lack of the ability to work due to addictions (drugs and alcohol.)

Children in a stable, loving family are a way OUT of poverty for the whole family. I have seen it over and over here. Families more easily fall into poverty when there are few children.”

Ruth’s picture is a far cry from the depiction in the Disney propaganda film! And it is a far cry from some NFP advocates who insist that births must sometimes (often?) be limited so that the children “already born” can be cared for and educated properly.

What have the culture of death forces been doing over the last 50 years? They have been promoting “family planning” in one form or another. At the end of the Disney film, the woman asks whether “family planning” is “acceptable”, and whether others are using it. I suspect this is a veiled reference to Catholic Church teaching on artificial contraception. At any rate, she is assured by the narrator that there’s a method that is right for everyone. Ha! This sounds suspiciously like an ad for birth control that has appeared in our local newspaper:

Manipulation of the economy. Population control. Family planning. Culture of Death.

Really, our Church needs to do a better job of educating the faithful on these issues. And frankly, I do NOT think that means teaching NFP (surprise!).

Stay tuned for Part II, hopefully tomorrow. 

Only In Baker City, Oregon

This post has nothing to do with liturgy, NFP, or Catholic identity.

I just wanted to share these photos taken by my husband at the local Rite Aid store this morning...

Allow Children to Come Generously: Fr. Gardner

Fr. William M. Gardner left the following comment on another post, and I thought it worthy of sharing here as a post all on its own. Fr. Gardner is a great champion of “heroic” parenthood, and has published several papers extolling the virtue of generously responding to God's commandment that couples "be fruitful and multiply". (See, for example, Purity Honors Creativeness)

Fr. Gardner wrote:

Dear Dr. Boyd,
 

In an effort to reach out to that 90% group that accepts contraception, I recently sent this letter to our local newspaper:

Letter to the Editor,

Since I choose to have no Cable TV at the rectory, my brother forwarded to me a video of a recent TV commercial that appeared during the prime-time viewing hours. The commercial was sponsored by Huggies (disposal diapers) and it portrayed a couple that was elated to discover that they were now expecting (presumably) their first child. The husband joyfully declared to his wife, pointing to her womb: “There is a baby in here. There is a human being growing inside your stomach!”
 

May the Lord have mercy on this nation which legally sanctions the killing of its own children both before birth, and sometimes even during the very process of birth.
 

One congresswoman blasphemously declared that the killing of unborn children is the "sacred ground" of legal protection for a woman's right to choose the size of her own family. What a chilling disregard for little ones, more than half of which are probably little girls.
 

Yet please note the clearly practical implication for the above-mentioned diapers manufacturer that babies are consumers. Babies are consumers, in fact, not of superfluous luxury items or services (such as those that sustain the pet industry, or the gambling world, or the whole slimy spectrum of adult entertainment), but of the very basic items and services which favor productivity. In other words, children are not only consumers, they are moreover wealth generators. People bring prosperity to a community; and young people bring also their creativity and youthful resourcefulness.

On the contrary, abortion, contraception and those so-called “alternative lifestyles” bring short-term financial gain, but inescapable long-term decline. Only the Devil and his minions can be pleased by the more than 50 million babies who have been destroyed by abortion in this nation alone, and the countless souls who have never come into existence because of the obscene use of contraception and the absurd promotion of sterile loving.

As Americans decide to have fewer and fewer children they are actually allowing fewer and fewer babies to be born, which is restrictive, or stifling. But sexual relations are naturally ordered to fruitfulness, which implies growth and prosperity; and existence is always very good for the babies themselves!

God will not be outdone in generosity. So live modestly and chastely; marry youngish (preferably before the age of 25); allow children to come generously; flee far away from Sodom! Love mercy and “walk humbly with your God!”

Fr. William M. Gardner

The Feast of the Transfiguration

This is from the Office of Matins for the Feast of the Transfiguration of Our Lord.

From the Sermons of Pope St Leo the Great.

On the Transfiguration.

The Lord taketh chosen witnesses, and in their presence, revealeth His glory. That form of body which He had in common with other men, He so transfigured with light, that His Face did shine as the sun, and His raiment became exceeding white as snow. Of this metamorphosis the chief work was to remove from the hearts of the disciples the stumbling at the Cross. Before their eyes was unveiled the splendour of His hidden majesty, that the lowliness of His freely-chosen suffering might not confound their faith. But none the less was there here laid by the Providence of God a solid foundation for the hope of the Holy Church, whereby the whole body of Christ should know with what a change it is yet to be honoured. The members of that body whose Head hath already been transfigured in light may promise themselves a share in His glory.

For the strengthening the Apostles and bringing them forward into all knowledge, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias, that is, the Law and the Prophets talking with Him. Before five witnesses did His glorification take place, as though to fulfill that which is written: “At the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established” (Deut. xix. 15). What can be more certain, what can be better attested than this matter, which is proclaimed by the trumpets of both the Old and the New Testaments, and concerning which the witness of ancient testimony uniteth with the teaching of the Gospel?The pages of either Covenant strengthen one another, and the brightness of open glory maketh manifest and distinct Him Whom the former prophecies had promised under the veil of mysteries.

The unveiling of such mysteries roused the mind of the Apostle Peter to an outburst of longing for the things eternal, which despised and disdained the things worldly and earthly. Overflowing with gladness at the vision, he yearned to dwell with Jesus there, where the revelation of His glory had rejoiced him. And so he said, “Master, it is good for us to be here. If Thou wilt, let us make here three tabernacles, one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.”

 To this proposal the Lord answered nothing, this signifying, that what Peter wished was not wrong, but out of place, since the world could not be saved but by the death of Christ. And the Lord's example was to call the faith of believers to this, that albeit we are behoven to have no doubts concerning the promise of eternal blessedness, yet we are to understand that, amid the trials of this life, we are to seek for endurance before glory.

Homily by St John Chrysostom, (Patriarch of Constantinople.)
57 th on Matthew.

Since the Lord had spoken much concerning dangers, much concerning His Own sufferings, much concerning death, and the killing of His disciples, and had laid upon them many hard and grievous things, and since all these were in this present life, and already hanging over them, whereas the good things were matter for hope and waiting as, for example, that whosoever should lose his life for His sake should find it, for that the Son of Man should come in the glory of His Father, and reward every man according to his works. Matth. xvi. 25, 27. Therefore, to assure them by their own eyes, and show them what the glory is wherein He will come, He manifested and unveiled it to them, as far as in this life they were able to grasp it, lest they and especially Peter should grieve over their own deaths, or the death of their Lord.

Behold what He doth, when He treateth of heaven and hell. Where He saith Whosoever will save his life shall lose it, and whosoever will lose his life for My sake shall find it. And again He shall reward every man according to his works in these words He pointeth at heaven and hell. But although He speaketh concerning both, He giveth a glimpse of heaven only and not of hell. To see hell would have profited the brutish and stupid, but His disciples were upright and clear-sighted, and therefore for them it was enough to be strengthened by the better things. This was what suited Him the best. Yet He left not the other altogether undone. Sometimes He set the horrors of hell, as it were, before the eyes, as for instance in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, and that of him who was fain to wring the hundred pence from his fellow-servant.

Hymn:

(English translation below, following the Latin.)

Quicumque Christum quaeritis,
Oculos in altum tollite:
Illic licebit visere
Signum perennis gloriae.

Illustre quiddam cernimus,
Quod nesciat finem pati,
Sublime, celsum, interminum,
Antiquius caelo et chao.

Hic ille Rex est Gentium,
Populique Rex judaici,
Promissus Abrahae patri,
Ejusque in aevum semini.

Hunc et prophetis testibus,
Iisdemque signatoribus
Testator et Pater jubet
Audire nos et credere.

Jesu, tibi sit gloria,
Qui te revelas parvulis,
Cum Patre et almo Spiritu,
In sempiterna saecula.
Amen.

All ye who would the Christ descry,
Lift up your eyes to him on high:
There mortal gaze hath strength to see
The token of his majesty.

A wondrous sign we there behold,
That knows not death nor groweth old,
Sublime, most high, that cannot fade,
That was ere earth and heaven were made.

Here is the King the gentiles fear,
The Jews' most mighty King is here
Promised to Abraham of yore,
And to his seed forevermore.

'Tis he the prophets' words foretold,
And by their signs shown forth of old;
The Father's witness hath ordained
That we should hear with faith unfeigned.

Jesu, to thee our praise we pay,
To little ones revealed today,
With Father and blest Spirit One
Until the ages' course is done.
Amen.

WYD Adoration: Musical Misstep

It’s all the rage: Matt Maher’s performance during Adoration at WYD. Sigh. Listen at your own risk - especially when you consider that this was sung at Adoration! The fact that he sang on his knees still does not make this sacred music, nor does the fact that Mr. Maher is Catholic give the music a Catholic identity.

Somehow I fail to see how the words of Maher’s song in any way approach the depth of the hymns Verbum supernum prodiens (from whence we get O Salutaris Hostia) or Pange lingua (from whence we get Tantum ergo):

Lord, I come, I confess

Bowing here I find my rest

Without You I fall apart

You're the One that guides my heart

Chorus

Lord, I need You, Oh, I need You

Every hour I need You

My one defense, my righteousness

Oh God, how I need You

Verse 2

Where sin runs deep Your grace is more

Where grace is found is where You are

And where You are, Lord, I am free

Holiness is Christ in me

Bridge

Teach my song to rise to You

When temptation comes my way

And when I cannot stand I'll fall on You

Jesus, You're my hope and stay.

There’s a lot of emotionalism present in both the words and the music of Maher’s song. And, in typically Protestant manner, it's egocentric: it's all about Jesus-n'-me. None of that messy Church stuff (very weak on an ecclesiological perspective), ergo unsuitable for liturgical worship.

It also fails to meet Pope St. Pius X's criteria for "sacred music".

Compare Maher's song to O Salutaris Hostia

O saving Victim, opening wide 

The gate of heaven to all us below:
Our foes press on from every side;
Thine aid supply, Thy strength bestow.

To Thy great Name be endless praise,
Immortal Godhead, One in Three!
O grant us endless length of days
With Thee in our true country.
Amen.

Here's O Salutaris sung in a different melody; this fellow is also on his knees!




Here’s Pange Lingua in English:

Of the glorious Body telling,
O my tongue, its mysteries sing,
And the Blood, all price excelling,
Which the world's eternal King,
In a noble womb once dwelling
Shed for the world's ransoming.

Given for us, descending,
Of a Virgin to proceed,
Man with man in converse blending,
Scattered he the Gospel seed,
Till his sojourn drew to ending,
Which he closed in wondrous deed.

At the last great Supper lying
Circled by his brethren's band,
Meekly with the law complying,
First he finished its command
Then, immortal Food supplying,
Gave himself with his own hand.

Word made Flesh, by word he maketh
Very bread his Flesh to be;
Man in wine Christ's Blood partaketh:
And if senses fail to see,
Faith alone the true heart waketh
To behold the mystery.

Therefore we, before him bending,
This great Sacrament revere;
Types and shadows have their ending,
For the newer rite is here;
Faith, our outward sense befriending,
Makes the inward vision clear.

Glory let us give, and blessing
To the Father and the Son;
Honour, might, and praise addressing,
While eternal ages run;
Ever too his love confessing,
Who, from both, with both is one.
Amen.

There is true Catholic identity evident in those "old-fashioned" Latin hymns. There is reverence and awe. There is a turning toward the Lord, as opposed to the focus on “me”, and how “I feel” about Jesus, who is my buddy.

Why do we seem to find it necessary to dumb down the faith for our youth? Why do we try to “compete” with the Protestants by simply using Protestant music and theology? There is so much more to our Catholic faith!

We are letting down the youth of our Church by this approach, and we are failing to evangelize the culture. Rather, the (Protestant) culture has evangelized us.

Modesty and Chapel Veils

I received a very informative email from a reader, Inara, concerning the wearing of chapel veils by Catholic women.  Inara is a contributor to a website entitled “The Purity Crusade of Mary Immaculate”, where you will find many good resources on modesty.

The following is an email she sent to the parochial vicar of her parish, just prior to the EF Mass being celebrated weekly at her parish.

   

** ** ** ** ** **

Dear Father,

Thank you for your support! It seems many good priests understand at least some of the theology behind veiling (as a sign of being under authority in God's natural order, as a component of modesty, a symbol of the holiness of purpose of woman's body, etc.), but the disagreement seems to come in when trying to determine if the Church still considers it binding.

Please forgive my boldness, but I think it may be the case that the Church does actually still require it (though a woman's culpability may be mitigated, since the rebellion against it has been so great in Western culture). The argument to the contrary seems to be "it was in the 1917 Code, but was not included in the 1983 Code, therefore the Church no longer requires it." This would seem to make sense, if we are talking about a juridical topic; however, head coverings for women is a liturgical issue. In the chapter summaries of every Catholic Bible I have examined, Paul's discourse beginning in 1 Corinthians 11 on veiling is classified as part of "answers to liturgical questions."

Canon 2 of the 1983 Code states, "This Code for the most part does not define the rites that are to be observed in celebrating liturgical actions. Therefore, current liturgical norms retain their force unless any of them are contrary to the Canons of this Code." Since head coverings for women:

were required by 1917 Code, canon 1262 & there is no canon in the new Code which is contrary to it,

supercede canon law by virtue of being an Immemorial Custom (see canon 26 & 27),

are mandated in Scripture by St. Paul, with no exceptions or allowances (plus an appeal to Natural Law),

it seems clear that they are a liturgical norm which retains force. Even the Canonical Defender himself, Dr. Edward Peters, says on his blog, "Faithful with liturgical questions probably ought not look to the 1983 Code for answers because, with a few important exceptions, Canon law does not treat liturgical matters."

We also have a concrete statement from a much more recent source than the 1917 Code. In June of 1969, Annibale Bugnini (later named Archbishop), Secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship, and head of the Liturgical Commissions under Popes Pius XII, John XXIII & Paul VI, when asked about his comment from a month earlier that veils were "not on the agenda" of the current reforms (which was incorrectly reported as veils were "no longer required"), said,"The rule has not been changed. It is a matter of general discipline."  

Even if one were not convinced that the above evidence is enough to compel women to cover their heads at a Novus Ordo Mass, there still seems to be a case for doing so at the EF. At least one eminent opinion agrees: "It is the expectation that women who assist at the Mass according to the Extraordinary Form cover their heads." ~ Raymond Cardinal Burke, April 2011 (in a letter responding to precisely this question, archived on EWTN.com)

Whether "expectation", "rule", "force", "discipline", etc. = "binding under pain of sin" can be debated, I suppose, though St. Paul's strong words seem indisputable, especially since he leads with this topic when addressing problems occurring within the assemblies at Corinth. After all, how can we simply ignore a command of New Testament Scripture? Is that not a dangerous precedent? I think he was clear this was a non-negotiable issue precisely because he understood how timeless it was. Appearing before the Lord uncovered is actually full of impudent, modern feminist symbolism..."I can stand before my God bareheaded, same as you, mister!" (which is why he says it offends the angels present at Mass...even they cover themselves in the presence of the Lord)

At any rate...I certainly did not expect you to come dashing out of the gate tonight yelling "cover your heads, you brazen hussies!" As you said, there is much catechesis necessary if newcomers (including me!) are to appreciate & immerse themselves in the riches the EF contains. I only wanted you to have resources to refer to in case you were posed this question. I thought this might be likely to happen, especially if those fond of the EF from around the diocese attend this evening with mantillas galore! :o) This is such a beautiful part of our Catholic identity that has been lost, and I hope more women will seek to understand & embrace it. As a convert who later was prompted by the Holy Spirit to investigate this custom (despite no one else at my parish doing so), I can attest to the beneficial spiritual effect it can have. There is something very comforting about overcoming your own will to submit to a practice you know in your heart is pleasing to God.

Humbly yours,

Inara

Home Again, Home Again

Thunder clouds made for a beautiful drive home yesterday.